symplr Provider 2026: Benefits, Features & Pricing

I like the tiered access level feature. Also the Dashboard features and Mapping to documents and video tutorials. Have to say trainers are really good too.

Most times it feels as though everything has an additional cost. From trainings offered to modules needed. In addition, there seems to be a great deal of required customization with fields and how to store data needed.

The product is easy to use one you get it. The integration process took one month since their was a lot of intense training to be provided about the system. Hard at first, easy when you understand it.

The Intergration took long but we are glad we did it. Hard at first but very easy when you master everything. I like everything about Symplr

Trainers are good and so is support, but the initial build of the system and clean up from conversion is the client's responsibility - very time consuming.

-LEMM (web crawler) only works for MD/DO state licensure boards, it will not perform web crawls for DPM, DDS, etc. Also, the LEMM "bucket" (after it has performed a webcrawl and results sent back) has to be cleaned out daily. It's like having another email inbox to manage, and saving the results to the system for each individual provider. Very time consuming. -OIG/SAM query - you can do a monthly sweep of the entire medical staff, but it will not provide a report to show evidence of completion. -Mass uploads - when large groups renew malpractice insurance, you can only do a mass update to change the expiration date, you cannot mass upload the certificate of insurance (COI) to each provider in the group. It's a manual process to save the COI to each practitioner's file. -Uploading documents - what symplr refers to as images - you can click on a PDF file from your computer and drag it over into the system, but you cannot click/drag/drop a PDF from an email attachment. You have to save the email attachment to your computer, then click/drag/drop. Extra step. -Primary Source Verification - you can go to various Board, NPI, etc. websites and the system will create a PDF to be saved to a practitioners file; however, this feature will not work for AMA/AOIA website. Same extra step as above. -Letters -have to create your own letters and forms (affiliation, peer reference) within the system-functionality is the same as Microsoft Word, but it's not Word-very cumbersome.

I like the overall visual layout. I like being able to populate and move from name to name in the left hand, blue sidebar.

I have offered these some of these suggestions in the past, but nothing has seemed to change. 1. I wish that information viewing "boxes" say, in Specialties/boards, would have the capability to expand, versus being fixed and using a slider bar. This applies to several of the different "instances". 2. There are far too many redundant keyboard "clicks" required. I make my choice and then a screen comes up asking "am I sure" and I have to verify my choice. When I make a choice, don't ask me to verify. Another wasted extra keyboard click is when dropping a PDF into "images" on the toolbar of the credentialing instance. I move the document in, then a screen comes up that I have to click on stating "An image has just been added...". Every time that pops up I say to myself, "No, s#*t. I just purposefully added it." 3. When I enter a "from" date, I would like the cursor to automatically jump to the "to" date box, (like it used to do in visual cactus), instead of having to press "tab". 4. When I enter, let's say, a new license on the licensing screen, I would like for it to automatically go and populate into the credentialing instance, versus having to go to the credentialing set up, to click on the yellow icon to approve the entry. Again, I purposefully entered it. Trust that I wanted to do it. Don't make me have to do yet another verification of my actions. 5. Re: "Packets" they don't work the way they were explain to us,and sought clarification/direction 2x

No one likes trying to challenge the government and all their in's and out's but this does help a lot.

This program does not change as fast as the government. But that really is it's only limitation I would say.

1. CAQH module (extra fee to have implemented) 2. NPDB Malpractice information loaded and able to copy in Visual CACTUS but not in Web Based. 3. Queries we can run for our specific needs 4. More cost effective for our needs than our IT component building something similar.

1. Customer service has decreased drastically since being taken over by Symplr. 2. We put Web based CACTUS into test 4 years ago and still have not put it into production due to the functionality not meeting our needs or what we have in Visual CACTUS today. 3. Delayed implementations, ie NPDB that required us to manually input provider data into NPDB vs using CACTUS autofill process resulting in more time to process applications. 4. We always test the product before implementation and feel like we find problems for them and we would rather have a partnership where we could test prior to the release. As stated earlier we have been testing Web based CACTUS for 4 years.

Dashboard, creating queries is easier (except one issue - note in Cons), it looks pretty. The pros do not outweigh the cons - a lot of functionality and speed was lost with Web Cactus. We have 18 entities, most of whom refuse to use web Cactus. We have put in requests with issues and even a few enhancement requests, which I've listed in the Cons below.

Cannot view multiple forms at the same time, VERY slow due to web-based, Reports keep breaking, queries come out funky sometimes - extra almost-blank lines (does not happen in Visual Cactus), sections that collapse can be "dangerous" - accidentally collapse something and a whole section is forgotten, excessive mouse usage - VC allowed us to tab and use arrow buttons to move around and use space bar to toggle checkboxes on and off, Running reports and documents is excruciatingly slow, editing Word documents is buggy, adjusting the light/dark contrast must be reconfigured every day, attaching documents to specialties is too complex, Updated crystal reports in Web Cactus does not carry over to VC and vice-versa, Fields in Web Cactus were moved around and even renamed which makes the transition from Visual to Web very painful, Verification Date and Verified By disappear when the Verified checkbox is unchecked, we are not able to delete NPDBs from Web Cactus which come back as an error - It works fine in VC.

The software has a lot to offer in terms of maintenance however, it's difficult to look at pros right now considering my comments below. There are some good tracking options and I do like that we can call for support although lately the support has fallen short.

Overall, the software is good, but there are numerous glitches such as making an entry in the cred verification screen can affect other screens and roll back dates which wipes out the new entry. I am not able to send an email through cactus which I was able to do previously and support has not been able to fix this after hours on the phone with them. Lastly, we should be able to go from one screen and function to another without having to close out each time. For example, if I a running some documents from cactus and I need to check an address of a provider, I cannot just minimize that and look, I have to close out the documents. This is time consuming and frustrating. Overall too many glitches and this makes one not trust the software - the support team needs to be better! A few are knowledgeable but lately the ones I've dealt with don't know how to address and fix it. Too much wasted time on the phone and I was told they would get back with me with a resolution and no one ever called me back---very disappointing and poor customer service.

Visual Cactus was great. Cactus was able to customize the product to suit our needs. Customer support WAS great too.

Web Cactus has fallen short of the mark for us. Important customizations that we had in visual were not included in Web. It took over six months to get one customization in Web. We could not function in Web until the customization was complete. We have had issue after issue. Reports will all of a sudden start pulling in bogus information, the new version of iResponse has been a nightmare and we have had plenty of problems with iPrivileges too. The support has gone down hill. You may hear back from them the following week. And they have a lot of new people who dont know the system, so it takes months to get an issue resolved. I do not feel that we are valued as a customer.

Easy application to use and adjustable to meet our needs with user defined fields Customer support for process within the application and reporting is excellent

None identified at this time Once you learn more about the capabilities issues usually correct themselves.