Know which referral arrangements are worth consultation time
Ask about federal program billing, referral or ownership interests, and any past audit or investigation notices right in the intake, then attach existing agreements or agency correspondence before it lands in your CRM.
The exact intake your stark law and anti-kickback compliance leads complete
This is the real 8-question guided intake for Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Compliance — the same flow your customers finish before you ever pick up the phone.
What a qualified stark law and anti-kickback compliance lead should tell you
Legal review of financial and referral relationships between healthcare providers, facilities, and referral sources to spot Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Statute exposure, including compensation arrangements, ownership interests, and any related government inquiries.
- Healthcare Provider, Clinic, Hospital,
- Bill, Or Plan Bill,
- Asking Help Reviewing Or
- There Any Arrangement Where
- (Or Doctor Owner/Investor In
- Organization Received Complaint, Audit
- Issue Involve Conduct Within
- Identify People Or Companies
The questions your team needs answered
Every stark law and anti-kickback compliance intake asks these — and why each one matters.
| Question | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| Are you a healthcare provider, clinic, hospital, lab, pharmacy, medical device company, or other healthcare business in the United States (or acting for one)? | Confirms the submitter is actually a healthcare provider or acting for one, screening out unrelated business inquiries before they reach the CRM. |
| Do you bill, or plan to bill, Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, or other federal healthcare programs? | Federal program billing determines whether Stark Law itself applies, versus a state-law or private-payer kickback issue that scores lower. |
| Are you asking for help reviewing or setting up payments, discounts, free services, gifts, marketing arrangements, referral relationships, or profit-sharing with other healthcare providers or companies? | A yes here confirms the lead needs actual compensation-arrangement work, not just a general healthcare business question. |
| Is there any arrangement where someone could benefit financially from sending patients, tests, prescriptions, or medical equipment business to another party? | Identifies whether a referral-based financial incentive exists, which is the core trigger for both Stark Law and Anti-Kickback exposure. |
| Do you (or a doctor owner/investor in your business) have a financial interest in a lab, imaging center, hospital, surgery center, home health, DME supplier, or other entity that receives referrals from you or your organization? | An ownership or investment interest in an entity receiving referrals is the classic Stark Law 'financial relationship' fact pattern. |
| Has your organization received a complaint, audit request, subpoena, or investigation notice from a government agency or payer related to referrals or payments? | A prior complaint, audit, or subpoena means the matter needs immediate response rather than proactive review, and carries the highest weight in scoring. |
| Did the issue involve conduct within the last 6 years (or is it ongoing)? | Conduct within the last six years or ongoing aligns with typical lookback periods for federal healthcare fraud claims, affecting how actionable the matter is. |
| Can you identify the people or companies involved in the arrangement (even if you do not have all documents yet)? | Being able to name the people or companies involved lets the firm start a conflict check as soon as the lead lands in the CRM. |
How Cliont scores stark law and anti-kickback compliance leads
Every answer is weighted automatically — no manual review required.
Value signals
- Healthcare Provider, Clinic, Hospital,: yes
- Bill, Or Plan Bill,: yes
- Asking Help Reviewing Or: yes
- There Any Arrangement Where: yes
- (Or Doctor Owner/Investor In: yes
- Organization Received Complaint, Audit: yes
See the lead your team receives
Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Compliance Lead
From first click to qualified lead
Follow people and businesses seeking counsel through one smooth, guided flow.
They land & meet you
Your video greeting plays instantly — a real face instead of a blank form.
They explain the matter
Smart questions adapt to their matter and capture the full scope.
They share the documents
The facts, dates, and any paperwork come attached, so you can assess the matter before the consultation.
You get a ready lead
Scored and qualified — waiting for you to win it.
Built for stark law and anti-kickback compliance workflows
| Cliont capability | Stark Law And Anti-Kickback Compliance application |
|---|---|
| Weighted lead scoring | Automatically ranks a lead with an active audit or subpoena above a routine referral-arrangement review, so investigation-stage matters surface first. |
| Conditional question logic | Only surfaces the ownership/financial-interest question when the submitter has already flagged a referral or compensation arrangement, keeping the intake short for non-referral inquiries. |
| Secure document upload | Lets prospective clients attach agency subpoenas, audit letters, or existing compensation agreements without emailing sensitive healthcare business documents. |
| CRM routing with lead context | Pushes the answers on federal program billing, referral relationships, and any government notice into your CRM so intake staff can run a conflict check before the first call. |
Common stark law and anti-kickback compliance lead scenarios
Active government audit
A hospital or lab reports it has already received a subpoena or audit request tied to referrals or payments, and the conduct is ongoing. The intake flags this as the highest-priority matter needing immediate attorney review.
New referral compensation review
A group wants a proposed marketing or profit-sharing arrangement with referring physicians reviewed before it launches, with no government inquiry involved yet. This scores high on financial-relationship risk but without the urgency of an active audit.
Physician ownership in referral entity
A physician owner discloses a financial interest in an imaging center, surgery center, or DME supplier that receives their referrals. This triggers the core Stark Law financial-relationship test the intake is built to surface.
Cash-pay practice, no federal billing
A practice confirms it does not bill Medicare, Medicaid, or TRICARE. Stark Law exposure is lower here, so the lead scores below federal-billing arrangements even if a referral question is still worth a look under state law or private-payer rules.
Non-healthcare business inquiry
The submitter isn't a healthcare provider, clinic, or related business and isn't acting for one. The intake screens this out as a poor fit before it reaches your calendar.
Connect Cliont to your workflow
Send leads
HubSpot, HighLevel, Salesforce, JobNimbus
Book matters
Google Calendar, Outlook Calendar, Calendly
Notify your team
Email, SMS, Slack
Automate follow-up
Zapier, Webhooks, API
Simple, transparent pricing
Choose the plan that works for your business.
Professional
Unlimited intake forms and leads for your growing business.
- Unlimited intake forms
- Custom video greetings
- AI-powered voice bot
- English + Spanish support
- Automatic lead scoring
- Digital estimates & e-signatures
- Photo, video & file upload
- Advanced analytics dashboard
Pay Per Lead
Only pay when you receive a qualified lead.
- Unlimited intake forms
- Custom video greetings
- AI-powered voice bot
- English + Spanish support
- Automatic lead scoring
- Digital estimates & e-signatures
- Photo, video & file upload
- Charged only for submitted leads
More healthcare law intake templates
Stark Law and Anti-Kickback Compliance lead-intake FAQs
How does the intake separate a real Stark Law or Anti-Kickback matter from a general healthcare business question?
The intake asks directly whether the person needs help reviewing or setting up payments, discounts, referral relationships, or profit-sharing with other healthcare providers, and whether anyone could benefit financially from directing referrals. A 'no' to both signals a general question rather than a compliance matter.
What happens if the prospective client hasn't started billing Medicare or Medicaid yet?
The intake still captures the arrangement details, but a 'no' on federal program billing carries a lower weight since Stark Law specifically applies to federal program referrals. The lead can still be worth a follow-up if state kickback law or private-payer risk is in play.
Can the intake tell me if a lead already involves a government investigation?
Yes. The catalog question about prior complaints, audit requests, subpoenas, or investigation notices carries the highest weight in the scoring model, so any 'yes' pushes the lead straight to High Priority.
Does the intake collect the names of everyone involved in the arrangement?
It asks whether the prospective client can identify the people or companies involved, even without full documentation yet. That answer tells you how quickly a conflict check can start once the matter reaches your CRM.
Will this intake filter out businesses that have nothing to do with healthcare?
Yes. The first question confirms whether the submitter is a healthcare provider, clinic, hospital, lab, pharmacy, device company, or acting for one. A 'no' answer carries a minimal weight and keeps unrelated inquiries out of your pipeline.
How does the intake handle timing questions like the statute of limitations?
It asks whether the conduct happened within the last six years or is ongoing, which lines up with typical False Claims Act and Anti-Kickback lookback periods and helps you gauge whether the matter is still actionable.
Turn stark law and anti-kickback compliance visitors into qualified cases
Give every stark law and anti-kickback compliance visitor a guided intake instead of a dead contact form — and get a scored, qualified lead before you book a consultation.