CLAIMS LEDGER / MOCK 08

Claims Payment Integrity

Design a deterministic prefilter and vendor-routing platform that safely avoids unnecessary pay-per-catch reviews while preserving money correctness, appeals and audit.

30 MINUTES16 INTERVIEWER TURNSFULL Q & AINTERACTIVE LAB

The problem on the whiteboard

Read this once, then begin aloud. Spend the first two minutes establishing contract, actors, risk and what must remain authoritative.

Design ClaimShield for a public insurer. It receives 10,000 claims/day, applies deterministic payment-integrity rules, safely filters claims that do not need an expensive external review vendor, routes the remainder across vendors, ingests findings, supports corrections and appeals, and proves why each claim was or was not sent. Vendor charging is pay-per-reviewed-claim, so false routing has financial impact.
Central design thesis

Make the prefilter a conservative, versioned eligibility proof with explicit abstention—not an opaque denial model. Claims and decisions are immutable revisions; routing and vendor calls use an idempotent ledger and reconciliation.

Scope before components

These are supplied mock numbers for sizing and follow-ups. Say your assumptions before using them.

Volume10k claims/day · 120k lines/day · 100 claims/s burst
VendorsThree review vendors · $7 mock fee/claim · variable capacity and findings
GoalSafely avoid 80% of vendor sends after shadow validation
LatencyIngest ack < 500 ms; prefilter result p95 < 2 s; async vendor SLA 24 h
CorrectnessNo claim lost/double-paid; exact cents; full audit and appeal linkage

Actors

  • Claims intake/payment system
  • Payment-integrity analyst
  • External review vendor
  • Vendor manager
  • Appeals investigator
  • Compliance auditor

Functional scope

  • Claim revision ingestion and canonical validation
  • Versioned deterministic prefilter and routing policy
  • Vendor submission/result lifecycle and reconciliation
  • Financial impact ledger, corrections and appeals
  • Shadow rollout, quality sampling and observability

Explicitly out

  • Final medical necessity adjudication
  • Autonomous claim denial by LLM
  • Replacing core claims payment
  • Changing vendor contracts
  • Training on appeal outcomes without governance

A traceable end-to-end path

Name the authoritative state, derived projections, asynchronous boundaries and the exact point where a business decision becomes durable.

Claims Payment Integrity reference architectureSix stage architecture from Claim intake through Finding + appeal.Claim intakerevision + dedupeEligibility factssnapshottedDeterministic filtersend/skip/abstainRoute ledgerone business effectVendor adaptercapacity-awareFinding + appealimmutable outcomeaudit · policy · metrics · lineage
01Claim intakerevision + dedupe
02Eligibility factssnapshotted
03Deterministic filtersend/skip/abstain
04Route ledgerone business effect
05Vendor adaptercapacity-aware
06Finding + appealimmutable outcome

Keys that preserve history

The table is logical, not a mandate for one database. Choose physical stores after access patterns, transactions, retention and rebuildability are clear.

EntityPrimary / unique keyImportant fields and purpose
Claim(tenant_id, claim_id)member_token, provider_id, service_date, currency, lifecycle
ClaimRevision(claim_id, revision)canonical_lines, total_cents, source_event_id, content_hash
PolicyBundle(policy_id, version)effective_interval, rules_hash, state, approvals
FilterDecision(claim_revision, policy_version)SEND/SKIP/ABSTAIN, reason_codes, facts_hash, trace
VendorDispatch(dispatch_id)claim_revision, vendor_id, idempotency_ref, state, fee_cents
VendorFinding(dispatch_id, vendor_finding_id)category, amount_cents, evidence, received_at
IntegrityAction(action_id)claim_revision, finding_id, proposed_delta_cents, state, approver
Appeal(appeal_id)action_id, evidence, decision, adjustment_id, resolved_at
POST /v1/claim-revisions

Source event ID + canonical claim; duplicate-safe

202 {claimId,revision,operation}
GET /v1/claims/{id}/integrity

Decision, policy, evidence, dispatch and action chain

200
POST /v1/filter-runs

Pin claim revision + policy bundle; replayable

202 {runId}
POST /v1/vendor-callbacks/{vendor}

Signed result; vendor finding ID dedupe

202
POST /v1/actions/{id}/decision

Approve/modify/reject financial action with etag

200 / 409
POST /v1/appeals

Reference immutable action and new evidence

201 {appealId}

The complete mock interview

Answers are written in a speakable first-person style. Turn on Practice Mode to hide them, answer aloud, then reveal one at a time.

INTERVIEWER

Design the payment-integrity system.

CANDIDATE

I will define the prefilter’s promise carefully: SKIP means we have deterministic evidence that this claim is outside vendor-review value under an approved policy; SEND means eligible; ABSTAIN means missing/ambiguous facts and defaults to the safe route. The platform never directly denies a claim. Claims core remains authoritative for payment, and vendors remain external reviewers. We own decision provenance, routing, findings, proposed actions and appeal linkage. I would ask what failure is more costly: an unnecessary vendor send or a missed recoverable overpayment.

INTERVIEWER

Clarify functional requirements.

CANDIDATE

V1 ingests versioned claims/lines, snapshots eligibility facts, evaluates deterministic effective-dated rules, routes SEND/ABSTAIN cases by vendor capability and capacity, reconciles vendor callbacks, and creates human-reviewed financial actions. It supports corrected claims, replay, appeals, sampled audits of SKIP decisions and shadow rollout. Every decision cites rules and facts. We exclude final clinical adjudication, autonomous denial, replacement of payment core and unreviewed model rules.

  • SKIP precision has a stricter gate than overall accuracy.
  • Corrections create new claim revisions.
  • Vendor finding is evidence, not a financial transaction.
INTERVIEWER

Estimate cost and throughput.

CANDIDATE

Ten thousand claims/day average 0.116/s, but 100/s bursts require queue elasticity. At $7/mock vendor review, sending all costs $70k/day. An 80% safe skip sends 2,000 and costs $14k, a gross $56k/day reduction before platform and missed-opportunity cost. That upside makes false-SKIP measurement essential. With 120k lines/day and perhaps 2 KB normalized per line, daily canonical data is roughly 240 MB plus indexes and evidence.

10,000 × $7 = $70,000/day baseline
20% × 10,000 × $7 = $14,000/day routed
Gross avoided fee = $56,000/day (mock only)
INTERVIEWER

What are the key entities and invariants?

CANDIDATE

Claim has stable identity; ClaimRevision is immutable and keyed by revision with canonical total cents and source-event ID. FilterDecision pins revision, fact snapshot and PolicyBundle. One revision has one active decision per policy run. VendorDispatch has a unique deterministic reference and fee. VendorFinding is append-only and deduped by vendor ID. IntegrityAction proposes a delta but needs approval before claims core integration. Appeal references the action; an adjustment is separate. Invariants include line sum equals claim total, currency consistent, and one payable business action per approved action ID.

  • Money uses integer minor units.
  • Reason codes are stable analytics keys; text is versioned presentation.
  • No mutable “current result” without revision lineage.
INTERVIEWER

Walk the architecture.

CANDIDATE

The intake edge authenticates the source, persists the raw event and canonical revision, and acknowledges. A fact service resolves enrollment, provider, duplicate and policy data into a content-hashed snapshot with freshness labels. The deterministic rule engine evaluates a compiled PolicyBundle and emits SEND, SKIP or ABSTAIN plus trace. A dispatch transaction writes decision and, for SEND/ABSTAIN, a VendorDispatch outbox. The router chooses a qualified vendor using capability, contract, queue age and deterministic weighted allocation. Adapters submit with idempotency references. Signed callbacks land in a raw inbox, dedupe, map to findings and create analyst tasks. All state transitions emit an audit outbox.

  • Claims ingest lane is isolated from vendor backlog.
  • Search/analytics are projections, not decision truth.
  • Reconciler polls open dispatches when callbacks are missing.
INTERVIEWER

How is the prefilter designed?

CANDIDATE

Rules form a conservative decision list. Hard exclusions with complete facts may SKIP—for example already-reviewed identical revision, jurisdiction outside contract, or amount below an approved threshold when legally safe. Eligible patterns SEND. Missing critical data, conflicting totals, stale facts or unknown codes ABSTAIN and route. Each rule declares inputs, freshness, effective interval, outcome, stable reason and evidence template. A constrained DSL compiles to deterministic code. Before promotion, simulate on historical data and vendor outcomes; rule owners review false-SKIP samples.

INTERVIEWER

Deep dive: validate an 80% safe-skip claim.

CANDIDATE

Start in full shadow: still send all claims, but record proposed decision. Join eventual vendor findings and downstream confirmed recoveries to the exact claim revision. Compute SKIP precision as the fraction of proposed SKIPs with no material confirmed finding, with confidence bounds. Because vendor findings are imperfect, randomly dual-review a stratified sample of SKIPs and use internal audits. Slice by rule, provider, service, amount, geography, vendor and effective period. A rule promotes only after minimum sample size, no severe misses, financial-weighted loss below budget and reviewer approval.

  • Delayed labels require a maturity window.
  • Do not train/evaluate on outcomes created by the policy itself without correction.
  • Keep a permanent exploration sample routed from SKIP.
INTERVIEWER

Deep dive: route vendors and reconcile money.

CANDIDATE

Eligibility filters vendors by contract, claim type, region, data-sharing permission and current health. Among eligible vendors, use deterministic weighted allocation with capacity tokens and sticky hash for repeatable distribution. Dispatch has states PENDING, SENT_UNKNOWN, ACKED, RESULTED, CANCELLED and EXPIRED. A timeout triggers status lookup before resubmit. Vendor fee accrual is a ledger entry tied to accepted dispatch, reconciled against invoice. Findings propose recoveries separately; financial analysts approve actions, and a downstream outbox sends adjustments to claims core idempotently.

  • Do not optimize only vendor hit rate; case mix may differ.
  • Contract version and fee are frozen on dispatch.
  • Reconciliation compares dispatch, callback, invoice and core adjustment.
INTERVIEWER

Consistency, idempotency and backpressure?

CANDIDATE

Strong consistency protects claim revision insertion, filter-decision publication, dispatch creation, action approval and adjustment outbox. Fact indexes and dashboards are eventual. Source event ID dedupes intake; a different content hash for the same event is quarantined. Filter run key is revision + fact snapshot + policy. Vendor idempotency reference is stable across retries. Queues separate intake, facts, filtering, each vendor and action processing. If vendors saturate, intake continues; capacity tokens route elsewhere or backlog SEND/ABSTAIN with SLA priority. SKIP never results merely from overload.

INTERVIEWER

Failure injection: a corrected claim arrives after the original was sent to a vendor.

CANDIDATE

Create ClaimRevision 2 and link it as superseding revision 1. Do not mutate the original dispatch. If vendor supports cancellation and no result exists, send a cancellation command idempotently; otherwise mark the result stale-on-arrival and preserve any contractual fee. Evaluate revision 2 independently and route as needed. The analyst UI groups revisions and forbids applying a finding from revision 1 without revalidation against revision 2. Payment actions reference one exact revision. Metrics track wasted dispatch fees due to corrections.

INTERVIEWER

How do appeals alter the design?

CANDIDATE

An approved IntegrityAction is immutable. Appeal opens a case with claimant evidence, deadlines and access controls. It may stay, reverse or modify the action; reversal creates an adjustment referencing the original, never deletes it. The appeal decision records reviewers, evidence and policy context. Overturns feed rule-quality analytics only after governance and delayed-label safeguards. A high overturn rate for one SKIP/SEND rule triggers shadow fallback or policy suspension, but an individual appeal never silently rewrites the rule.

  • Preserve a complete financial chain: finding → action → appeal → adjustment.
  • Appeal workload and age are first-class SLOs.
  • Separate vendor disagreement from claimant appeal.
INTERVIEWER

Failure injection: Vendor A is down for 10 hours and retries time out ambiguously.

CANDIDATE

Circuit-break new sends to A after health/error thresholds. PENDING work can reroute if no attempt occurred; SENT_UNKNOWN cannot be sent elsewhere until status lookup or a contract-defined timeout proves non-acceptance, otherwise two vendors may bill and produce conflicting findings. Capacity-aware routing shifts new eligible claims to B/C up to their limits, with priority by financial exposure and SLA age. If all saturate, backlog with visible ETA and alert contract operations. Claims ingestion and filtering remain available.

INTERVIEWER

Security and tenant isolation?

CANDIDATE

Claims contain regulated health and financial data. Tokenize member identity, encrypt claim/finding/evidence with tenant keys, use private connectivity and field minimization per vendor contract, and isolate tenant/vendor credentials. Authorization combines role, tenant, purpose and case assignment. Analysts see minimum necessary data; bulk export and break-glass require reason. Signed callbacks prevent spoofing. Rule bundles and fact snapshots are signed/hash-pinned. Models, if used for analyst assistance, run in an approved boundary and cannot issue filter or payment decisions.

  • Vendor A never receives fields contracted only to Vendor B.
  • Logs use claim tokens, not diagnoses or member names.
  • Retention/deletion propagates to vendor where contract requires.
INTERVIEWER

What do you observe and evaluate?

CANDIDATE

Operational SLIs: intake durability/lag, fact freshness, filter p95, queue age, vendor ack/result SLA, unknown dispatch age, callback dedupe, adjustment outbox lag and reconciliation breaks. Quality: proposed SKIP rate, mature-label SKIP precision with confidence, severe misses, recovered dollars, vendor yield normalized by case mix, appeal/overturn by rule, and sampled-audit disagreement. Financial: fees accrued vs invoiced, avoided fee, confirmed recovery, false-positive analyst cost and correction waste.

  • Alert on stale label joins before trusting metrics.
  • Trace one claim revision through every rule/fact/dispatch/action.
  • Invariant monitor: no two active dispatches unless explicitly dual-review.
INTERVIEWER

Rollout, trade-offs and traps?

CANDIDATE

Ingest and replay first, then shadow filter while sending 100%, then allow only a few high-precision rules to SKIP while retaining a random audit sample, expand by rule/cohort, and keep kill switches. Conservative abstention costs vendor fees but protects missed recoveries. Deterministic rules may capture less than a model but are governable. Traps are calling vendor labels truth, optimizing raw hit rate, skipping on missing data, mutating corrected claims, double-sending after timeout, and claiming savings without subtracting platform/audit/missed-recovery costs.

INTERVIEWER

Give your one-minute close.

CANDIDATE

ClaimShield stores immutable claim revisions and fact snapshots, then runs an approved effective-dated deterministic filter with SEND, SKIP or safe ABSTAIN. Decisions include evidence and one idempotent dispatch outbox. Capacity-aware vendor adapters use stable references, ambiguous-send states and reconciliation. Findings only propose actions; humans approve, and appeals append adjustments to the ledger. We prove safe skipping through full shadow, mature labels, independent sampled audits and per-rule financial slices, then expand gradually with exploration samples and kill switches. Vendor outages delay routing but never turn into a SKIP.

Two places to earn the strong hire

These mechanisms are the interview’s differentiators. Be able to redraw each from memory and defend its failure behavior.

01

Deep dive A · Safe-SKIP evidence

A high skip rate is useful only when labels mature, severe misses are bounded, case mix is sliced and independent audits challenge vendor blind spots.

  1. Full shadow baseline
  2. Delayed outcome maturity
  3. Stratified dual review
  4. Rule-level confidence gate
  5. Permanent exploration sample
02

Deep dive B · Four-way reconciliation

A review is not one event. Dispatch acceptance, vendor finding, invoice fee and claims-core adjustment must agree.

  1. Stable dispatch reference
  2. Ambiguous-send state
  3. Finding dedupe
  4. Fee ledger and invoice match
  5. Approved adjustment outbox

Revise, do not hand-wave

When the interviewer injects a fault, restate the violated assumption, change state or protocol, and name the new invariant.

InjectionRecovery mechanismTempting wrong answer
01Duplicate intakeSource event ID + content hashDuplicate revision
02Corrected claimNew revision; cancel/stale old dispatchMutate original
03Vendor timeoutSENT_UNKNOWN + status lookupDouble vendor billing
04Missing factABSTAIN and routeTreat missing as false
05Late findingPin exact claim revisionApply to latest
06Rule quality dropsShadow/kill switch + sampled auditsTrust aggregate rate

Calculate before you provision

Use orders of magnitude to expose the bottleneck. State what this simple model omits.

Vendor economics lab

Estimate gross avoided vendor fees under mock volume and skip assumptions. This is not net savings.

Gross avoided vendor fee / dayChange an input to recalculate.
SKIP
SEND
ABSTAIN
Appeal

Prove quality in production

A system is incomplete without observable user outcomes, staged deployment, rollback and an answer to “how will we know?”

Scoreboard

  • Mature SKIP precision
  • Severe missed dollars
  • Vendor result SLA
  • Unknown dispatch age
  • Appeal overturn by rule
  • Fee/recovery reconciliation

Rollout ladder

  1. 01Canonical replay
  2. 02100% vendor send + shadow filter
  3. 03High-precision SKIP canary
  4. 04Random audit sample
  5. 05Expand by rule/cohort
  6. 06Continuous exploration and kill switches

Corrections worth memorizing

Use these as flash cards. The right column is the compact sentence you want available under pressure.

TrapBetter move
Vendor output = truthAudit and mature downstream labels.
Missing fact means no riskABSTAIN safely.
Timeout means retry elsewhereResolve ambiguous acceptance.
Claim is mutableUse immutable revisions.
Hit rate onlyNormalize case mix and financial impact.
Savings as gross feeSubtract operations and missed value.

Vocabulary without fog

Define the term, then connect it to a concrete invariant in this design. Avoid dropping vocabulary as a substitute for reasoning.

Payment integrity
Processes detecting incorrect, duplicate or unsupported claim payments.
Prefilter
Conservative decision layer determining whether expensive review is useful.
Abstention
Explicit refusal to decide when evidence is incomplete or ambiguous.
Mature label
Outcome observed after enough time for vendor, recovery and appeal processes.
Case-mix normalization
Compare vendors/rules after accounting for different claim difficulty.
Dispatch ledger
Authoritative state history of one external review request.
Appeal overturn
Reviewed reversal or modification of a prior integrity action.
Exploration sample
Small random set still reviewed to measure what skipping would miss.

Close with a decision, not a component list

ClaimShield stores immutable claim revisions and fact snapshots, then runs an approved effective-dated deterministic filter with SEND, SKIP or safe ABSTAIN. Decisions include evidence and one idempotent dispatch outbox. Capacity-aware vendor adapters use stable references, ambiguous-send states and reconciliation. Findings only propose actions; humans approve, and appeals append adjustments to the ledger. We prove safe skipping through full shadow, mature labels, independent sampled audits and per-rule financial slices, then expand gradually with exploration samples and kill switches. Vendor outages delay routing but never turn into a SKIP.

Rehearse again