Practice staffing · Specialty-pod VAs
Staffing For Doctors
Staffing For Doctors places specialty-trained remote medical administrative professionals for billing, prior authorization, scheduling, referrals, and patient coordination. It is virtual staffing, not practice-management software.
Strong fit
- Practices that want specialty-experienced remote admins (billing, prior auth, scheduling, referrals) at a published flat hourly rate
- Groups that value a U.S. account team coaching the placement after hire
- Buyers who want HIPAA infrastructure bundled into the published rate rather than sold as a higher security tier
Weak fit
- Buyers chasing the absolute lowest published hourly in the category
- Teams that need a consumer telehealth clinic or EHR product
- Organizations that only need a one-week temp with no specialty match
Bottom line
Staffing For Doctors earns a Recommend for practices that care more about specialty-matched remote admins than about winning the lowest hourly headline. Co-founder and CEO Danny Nabavi markets specialty-pod virtual professionals for billing, prior authorization, scheduling, referrals, and patient coordination at a published about $14 per hour, with HIPAA controls described as included rather than upsold as a separate facility tier. Outcomes look strongest when the practice defines the specialty workflow up front and uses the account team for coaching after placement. Product depth is narrower than MEDVA on secured-facility EMR access marketing and younger than HelloRache on brand scale; pricing clarity is strong because the hourly is public. Revenue claims sit in a multi-million early-company band, well under the hard cap. Score sits fourth on this board.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Staffing For Doctors is a Los Angeles-based virtual medical staffing company that places specialty-trained remote administrative professionals with physician practices.
It is staffing, not software. Compare DocVA and HelloRache when a lower published hourly is the buy, and MEDVA when SOC 2 and secured-facility EMR access are procurement gates.
Score reflects solid specialty-pod positioning and published pricing, below the top three on overall outcomes and brand scale.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| MEDVA | 7.8 | 7.4 |
| DocVA | 7.6 | 7.8 |
| HelloRache | 7.5 | 7.6 |
| Staffing For Doctors | 7.1 | 7.3 |
| Portiva | 6.9 | 7.0 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Published flat hourly for dedicated full-time-equivalent remote medical staff; no setup or recruiting fees marketed on comparison pages. |
| What usually drives cost | Hours, specialty pod, and role mix (billing, prior auth, scheduling, referrals). |
| What to ask in diligence | Confirm the $14/hr all-in scope for your specialty, replacement terms, and what the U.S. account team covers in month one. |
| Published pricing | About $14 per hour (company-published marketing as of research date). |
Company comparison pages publish $14/hr as the all-in rate including HIPAA infrastructure.
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Staffing For Doctors to function | |
| Practice owner or office manager named for the VA relationship | Unowned placements drift and churn. |
| Written task list for phones, scheduling, charting, billing, or prior auth | Vague 'help with everything' fails onboarding. |
| EHR / PM access path and BAA timeline agreed | Assistants cannot work without secure access. |
| HIPAA and privacy training expectations confirmed with the vendor | PHI handling is not optional. |
| Hours, time zone overlap, and escalation rules written before day one | Silent queues recreate the staffing gap. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Measure phone answer rate, charting lag, or prior-auth turnaround weekly for 90 days | Seat occupancy is not an outcome. |
| Keep one dedicated assistant on the same task set for the first month | Rotating seats erase training. |
| Retire the temporary workaround (personal cell, after-hours charting) after parallel week | Dual paths hide whether the VA worked. |
| Review incomplete work queues with the assistant daily in week one | Silent failure modes hide in inboxes. |
| Document EHR click-paths and templates the assistant must follow | Tribal knowledge does not transfer. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You need an EHR or patient-engagement product, not a person. | |
| Nobody on-site will train or review the assistant. | |
| Legal will not sign a BAA or approve remote PHI access. | |
| You expect a prescribing or care-delivery network rather than admin staffing. | |
| Leadership refuses to define which tasks move off the in-office team. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scope & match | 3–10 days — Role, hours, specialty, candidate shortlist. |
| 2 | Access & BAA | 1–2 weeks — Credentials, VPN/EHR access, privacy paperwork. |
| 3 | Shadow week | 1–2 weeks — Parallel coverage with a practice trainer. |
| 4 | Steady state | 30–60 days — Metrics review; task expansion or replacement. |
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category actually buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.