One in every three healthcare dollars isn't touching a patient. It's funding the administrative machinery that surrounds care — prior authorizations, claims denials, payment delays, and compliance overhead. A new AHA report puts a hard number on the problem for the first time in years.
What the AHA Said
The 25–35% figure isn't new research — it's consistent with a range of studies going back to the NEJM's landmark 2019 analysis. What's different is the context: the AHA is citing it in June 2026, after two years of operating margin compression, as part of a broader argument that healthcare affordability cannot be solved by squeezing hospital prices alone.
That framing is significant for RCM leaders because it shifts the conversation. The AHA isn't talking about administrative waste in the abstract — they're talking about payment friction imposed on providers by payers. Prior auth delays, unnecessary denials, and payment timing games are the mechanisms. Revenue cycle is where those mechanisms make contact with your organization's cash flow.
The practical read: every denial your team works, every prior auth your staff chases, every payment your AR team follows up on 45 days post-service represents real money inside that 25–35% range. Some of it is recoverable. A lot of it isn't.
The AHA's report identifies prior authorization as a core administrative burden driver. This isn't news to anyone running an RCM operation — but the scale framing is useful. When 25–35% of all health spending goes to administrative overhead and prior auth is explicitly named as a structural driver, the implication is that your prior auth denial and appeal rate isn't just an operational problem. It's a systemic tax.
Teams that have invested in prior auth automation — real-time eligibility, automated submission to payer portals, and AI-assisted medical necessity documentation — are capturing real margin. Teams still running manual prior auth workflows are funding both sides of the problem: their own staff costs and the payer's administrative burden simultaneously.
The AHA is careful to qualify: these are administrative costs that don't improve patient outcomes. That distinction matters when you're defending your denial appeal strategy internally. Payers deny at rates that exceed what clinical variation would justify. The denial work your team does — tracking, appealing, resubmitting — is not improving care. It's recovering revenue that was correctly earned and incorrectly withheld.
At the current scale of administrative overhead, organizations with denial rates above 6–8% are not outliers with fixable problems. They're experiencing the structural friction the AHA is describing. The difference between a 5% denial rate and a 9% denial rate at a $500M revenue organization is roughly $20M in write-offs or appeal work annually. That's the range where denial management software and vendor partnerships have clear ROI cases.
Delayed payments are listed alongside denials and prior auth as the third pillar of administrative cost. This is the working capital problem that most CFOs understand but few have structurally addressed. When payers slow-walk payments — through complex billing requirements, hold periods, or reconciliation backlogs — providers absorb that cost through extended AR cycles, line-of-credit usage, and staff time.
Days in AR above 45 is where the carrying cost becomes material. At the 25–35% administrative overhead figure, a significant portion of what drives extended AR isn't billing error — it's deliberate payment timing by payers who have asymmetric incentives to hold float as long as possible.
The AHA report won't change payer behavior directly. It will, however, give RCM leaders and CFOs a credible data point when advocating for administrative simplification — with payers in contract negotiations, with legislators pushing for prior auth reform, and internally when making the business case for RCM technology investment.
The AHA citing this number in its 2026 Costs of Caring report signals that hospital advocacy is shifting toward a "structural cost" argument. Expect this figure to appear in prior auth reform legislation, CMS rulemaking comments, and payer contract negotiations over the next 12 months. Know it. Use it.
For RCM operations, the practical implication is simpler: if administrative costs represent 25–35% of total spend and your organization's RCM operation is cost-optimized at a fraction of that, there is margin to be recovered that doesn't require patient volume growth or price increases. It requires tighter denial management, faster prior auth resolution, and shorter AR cycles.
That's not a new insight. But having a current, AHA-sourced number to anchor it matters when you're trying to move budget.
One dollar in three going to administrative overhead is not an efficiency failure — it's a system design outcome. The AHA is naming the mechanism clearly: prior auth, denials, and payment delays impose costs on providers without clinical benefit. RCM leaders already know this from the inside. Now there's a headline number to anchor the conversation externally.
Use it in your next contract negotiation. Use it when building the ROI case for automation. Use it when explaining to leadership why your denial rate matters as much as your charge capture rate.
RevCycleAI covers the data, policy shifts, and vendor moves that matter to RCM teams. Daily intelligence, no noise.
Reaching RCM decision-makers? Advertise with RevCycleAI →
Denial trends, payer policy moves, vendor intel — delivered every morning. Free.