Exclusion List Solutions: 6 Options Compared for 2027

Exclusion list solutions: the short answer

Exclusion list solutions range from a free federal lookup to monitoring platforms and outsourced screening services, and most small healthcare teams need one that re-checks the full roster every month and keeps a dated record. An exclusion check asks whether a person or company appears on the HHS Office of Inspector General's List of Excluded Individuals/Entities (LEIE), the federal System for Award Management list (SAM.gov), or a state Medicaid exclusion list, and a monitoring solution repeats that check over time.

TL;DR: Use the free LEIE if your roster is short and someone checks it on a schedule. Choose a monitoring platform if you need monthly re-screening with an exportable audit trail. Expect most vendors to quote a price rather than publish one.

Key Takeaways

• The LEIE is free to search, so the purchase decision is about workflow: list coverage, re-screening, match review, and records.

• Monthly re-screening is the working standard. OIG recommends it, and a 2014 law-firm guide says CMS encourages it without mandating it.

• SAM.gov and state Medicaid lists are where small teams most often have gaps, so ask every vendor to name them.

• Only Accountable HQ publishes plan prices that include exclusion screening. Four of the six options are quote-based.

• The audit record matters as much as the match: you need the date, the list version, the result, and who reviewed it.

• Zapier and n8n can run the checks, but you own retries, escalation, access controls, and upkeep.

Who this is for

This guide is for an owner or operations lead at a small healthcare business who must show that every employee, contractor, and vendor was checked against exclusion lists before being hired or paid. It fits clinics, home health agencies, billing companies, and practices that bill federal programs. It is less useful if you already run a credentialing or compliance platform that performs a documented monthly screen and has someone assigned to review matches.

Red flags: nobody has been named to review potential matches, you cannot produce a dated record of past checks, or screening happens only at hiring and never again.

How we evaluated these tools

We read each vendor's public product and pricing pages in November 2026 and compared only what those pages state. The weights below are our judgment for a small team, not a published standard. We could not open the OIG's own pages during research, so LEIE details here come from secondary sources that describe the list. We left out Experian, ExclusionSentry, and Compliancy Group because we could not open pages that showed their product scope.

The weights are our analysis. Lists and audit records carry 45 of the 100 points because a cheap tool that screens only the LEIE, or keeps no dated record, does not answer the question an auditor will ask.

Federal exclusions: 1,212 in six months to March 2026 according to ProviderTrust (2026). That total mixes individuals and entities, so read it as a signal of volume rather than a head count. It also explains why cadence matters: a roster checked once at hiring can miss a later exclusion.

What each product publishes

This matrix records what each vendor says publicly. "Not stated" means the pages we read did not say; it does not mean the product lacks the feature.

State lists: more than 40 states keep their own according to Verisys. A federal-only tool therefore leaves state gaps unless the vendor names the state sources it checks.

Our read: ProviderTrust and Verisys state the broadest federal and state coverage on these pages. Accountable HQ states LEIE coverage and says state lists are still planned. Streamline Verify names state databases but not SAM.gov as a screened list. GCheck's blog centers on the LEIE, so confirm its other lists before you rely on them.

Pricing: what is public and what is quote-based

Pricing checked November 12, 2026.

Plus plan: $3,048 a year billed annually according to Accountable HQ (2026). On that same page, the Basic HIPAA plan is $2,028 a year and the Pro plan is $8,148 a year, and a 7-day free trial comes before any billing.

The pricing page lists exclusion screening on Plus and Pro, and its Basic feature list ends at audit log. The federal screening page conflicts with that, saying exclusion screening is "included at no additional cost with every Accountable subscription," according to Accountable HQ (2026). Get the plan scope in writing before you choose a tier.

GCheck publishes per-check prices for background checks: $18.95 for its Basic package, $39.95 for Standard, and $49.95 for Advanced, according to GCheck (2026). The page shows no exclusion-only price, so read those figures as a background-check benchmark rather than a monitoring quote.

Streamline Verify, ProviderTrust, Verisys, and LW Consulting did not show prices on the pages we read, so their pricing is Quote-based.

Six options, profiled

Each profile separates what the vendor publishes from our read, and links to the pages we opened.

Accountable HQ

Published: The federal screening page describes automatic monthly screening of all employees, contractors, and vendors against the LEIE, with instant alerts and an audit trail covering who was checked, when, and the result. State lists are not yet included. SAM.gov does not appear on the pages we read. Source: Accountable HQ federal exclusion screening.

Our read: Best fit for a practice that also needs HIPAA compliance software and wants exclusion screening inside the same subscription. It is not enough on its own if you must screen SAM.gov or state Medicaid lists now.

Disqualifier: A state Medicaid obligation with no other tool covering it.

Choose it if: you need HIPAA software and exclusion screening together and can get the plan scope confirmed in writing.

Implementation: The trial is 7 days. The pages we read do not describe roster upload formats.

Streamline Verify

Published: Verify Professional is a self-managed portal, and Verify Enterprise is the full-service option. The Professional page describes a tool that "screens & auto-resolves potential matches on the spot," with automatic monthly re-screening and real-time monitoring available. PDF reports are the only export format named. No prices appear. Source: Streamline Verify Professional.

Our read: The tagline says "auto-resolves," but the body describes compliance staff who review, verify, and document each match. Budget reviewer time before you assume matches clear themselves.

Disqualifier: A team with no one to review matches should not buy Professional expecting automatic clearance.

Choose it if: you want to run screens in-house now and move to a managed service later.

ProviderTrust

Published: The product is continuous monitoring rather than point-in-time screening. It names the OIG LEIE, SAM.gov, all state Medicaid exclusion and sanction lists, the CMS Preclusion List, and OFAC lists. It says every suspected match is reviewed by a dedicated data oversight team before it reaches the customer. Monitored groups include vendors and first-tier, downstream, and related entities. No price appears on the page, and the only call to action is a demo request. Source: ProviderTrust exclusion monitoring.

Our read: The broadest named list set on the pages we read, with human review before alerts reach you. The limits are visibility: no price, and no export format or API described for this product.

Disqualifier: If you need a self-serve tool with a visible price, this will not fit.

Choose it if: you need vendors and referring physicians monitored continuously, not just once a month.

Verisys

Published: Verisys states that "Both OIG and SAM databases must be checked for complete federal coverage," lists the CMS Preclusion List, and offers integration "via API, portal, or file exchange." Its page describes alerts when exclusion status changes and "audit-ready reports" without naming formats. It does not itemize which lists its exclusion product includes, and it shows no price. Source: Verisys on exclusion screening.

Our read: Suited to an organization that also verifies credentials and licenses in the same system. You will need to request list-by-list coverage and monitoring frequency in writing.

Disqualifier: A small team that wants a simple monthly list check, without a credentialing program, will find the scope broader than it needs.

Choose it if: credential verification is already on your agenda.

GCheck

Published: GCheck sells background checks that include OIG exclusion screening. Its Risk Monitoring section lists OIG and FACIS sanctions monitoring with the line "Surface new records the moment they're filed," and the article gives no cadence for it. Per-check prices appear in the pricing section above. Source: GCheck exclusion screening guide.

Our read: Fits a team that already needs background checks and wants exclusion screening on the same order. The per-check price is a background-check unit, not an exclusion-only quote.

Disqualifier: If you need exclusion checks only, on a roster you already hold, a per-background-check price is the wrong unit.

Choose it if: you are hiring and want background and exclusion checks together.

LW Consulting (LWEnSCheck)

Published: LWEnSCheck searches "99 different sanction and licensure sources" according to LW Consulting. The page names SAM.gov, the LEIE, and "many state exclusion lists." It describes a "monthly exclusion process" without stating the tool's own schedule, and it offers subscription and outsourcing options with no figures.

Our read: A reasonable choice when you want consultants to run the monthly process instead of your staff. The pages do not show an export format, an API, or a monitoring cadence for the tool.

Disqualifier: If you need a log you can export yourself, the page does not show one.

Choose it if: you would rather outsource the monthly run and accept a written quote before you commit.

Building it yourself, or a proposed design

Many small teams will compare these vendors against a build: a free LEIE download, a spreadsheet, and a workflow tool. That path can work, and it deserves a fair comparison.

Zap run data guaranteed: up to 60 days according to Zapier. Within that window, Zapier's run history shows each run's status and the data each step received and sent, so export it if you need longer records. n8n's error handling documentation says an error workflow must start with an Error Trigger, and its default payload includes the execution ID, error message, and stack trace. The page we read does not cover Retry On Fail settings, so check those before you rely on them.

Consider an illustrative clinic with 140 names on its roster: staff, contractors, vendors, and referring physicians. Checking each name by hand against two lists, at an assumed two minutes per list, takes 560 minutes, or 9.3 hours a month and about 112 hours a year. A configured version still needs a person to review matches; at an assumed 20 minutes a month for that review, the recurring human time falls to about 4 hours a year. The HubSpot webhook event contact.propertyChange could start a single-record re-check when a license field on a referring physician's contact changes, per the HubSpot webhooks guide, but each subscription watches one property, so each field needs its own subscription. These are assumed inputs, not measured results, and build time is not counted.

Assumed inputs, not measured results.

A proposed US Tech Automations design would run on a monthly schedule. It would export the roster from your HR or credentialing system as a CSV, match each row on name and, where present, NPI against the downloaded LEIE file and a SAM.gov exclusions extract, and write a dated results file plus one review item per potential match. The prerequisites are a roster export with stable identifiers, a versioned copy of each list file, and a named reviewer. The reviewer confirms every match, and the workflow does not remove anyone or stop payments on its own.

Between monthly runs, US Tech Automations could configure a second path on HubSpot. When a watched property changes, such as a license number on a referring physician's record, the workflow re-checks only that record and writes a note with the date, list version, and result. The prerequisites are a HubSpot private app with the crm.objects.contacts.read scope and a webhook endpoint you control. The review point stays the same: a person decides what happens to any match.

When not to use US Tech Automations: skip a configured build if your roster is small enough that a free LEIE search and a dated spreadsheet meet your needs. Skip it if a payer or state specifies a report format that a vendor already produces. Skip it if the exclusion module in a platform you already pay for re-screens monthly and exports its audit record. In each case a simpler existing tool wins, and the vendor list above is the better starting point.

Glossary of terms used here

• LEIE: The OIG's List of Excluded Individuals/Entities, the federal list of people and companies barred from federal health care programs. It is free to search.

• SAM.gov: The federal System for Award Management, a government-wide list that includes exclusions taken by agencies other than OIG.

• State Medicaid exclusion list: A list kept by a state Medicaid program. It can exclude someone the federal lists do not.

• Potential match: A record that resembles a listed person or entity and needs a human decision.

• Re-screening: Running the same roster against current lists again, on a schedule or when a record changes.

• Audit trail: A dated record of what was checked, against which list version, and what the result was.

• Civil monetary penalty: A federal penalty that can apply when a provider submits claims for items or services furnished by an excluded person.

Decision checklist

• Do you have a complete roster of staff, contractors, vendors, and referring physicians?
• Can the tool show a dated record of each check, the list version used, and the result?
• Are SAM.gov and your state Medicaid lists covered, confirmed in writing?
• Who reviews potential matches, and within what time?
• Is the price published, or do you hold a written quote with a stated scope?
• Can you export your own records if you switch vendors?

Frequently asked questions

Is the LEIE free to check?

Yes, the LEIE is free, and a 2014 law-firm guide says all providers have free access to it, according to Reinhart (2014).

Do I have to screen every month?

Monthly screening is the practical standard, and OIG recommends it, according to Arnold & Porter (2026). The same 2014 Reinhart guide says CMS encourages monthly checks without mandating them, and names New York and Massachusetts as states that require them.

Do I need SAM.gov as well as the LEIE?

Yes, plan on both, because Verisys states that both OIG and SAM databases must be checked for complete federal coverage. Confirm what your payer contracts require as well.

Do I need state Medicaid lists too?

Yes if you bill a state Medicaid program, because state exclusion lists are separate from the LEIE and SAM.gov. Confirm in writing that your vendor covers each state you bill.

Should I choose a workflow tool over a vendor?

Choose a workflow tool only if someone on your team will own retries, escalation, access controls, and upkeep, because the tools supply the parts and you supply the design. The n8n error handling documentation shows that error routes have to be built on purpose. If nobody will own those tasks, a vendor with a dated audit record is the safer choice.

Where to go from here

Start with the category decision: a free LEIE check for a short roster, a monitoring platform for monthly re-screening with a record, or a managed service if no one on your team will review matches. Then ask each vendor for list-by-list coverage, monitoring frequency, export formats, and a written price, and compare those answers before comparing headline figures. If you want to see how a configured monthly roster check and a single-record re-check would be set up against your own identifiers, see how US Tech Automations configures this.