The Proof Loop
How to stop repeat work in aged AR by turning “we sent it” into “we know.”
A lot of aged AR doesn’t stay old because the work isn’t being done.
It stays old because nobody can tell what’s true.
The note says “submitted.”
The team assumes it’s moving.
Then days later someone checks again and realizes… we don’t actually know if the payer received it, if it landed in the right place, or who owns it now.
And that’s exhausting.
Not because people aren’t working, but because they keep having to rebuild the same story.
So the work gets repeated.
Another call. Another resend. Another “just checking.”
Not because the team is careless — because the record doesn’t carry certainty.
And nobody feels good about that. People want progress, not more busywork.
That gap is where time leaks.
A simple habit that helps is what I call the Proof Loop.
It’s not a new system. It’s not a bigger report.
It’s just a way to finish each touch with proof that the account can move.
What the Proof Loop is
The Proof Loop is a short loop you complete after any key action (submission, appeal, documentation, reconsideration, corrected claim):
- Send it
- Confirm receipt
- Confirm owner
- Confirm next work date
- Write it down in one clear line
Most teams do step 1.
A few teams do step 2.
Almost nobody does steps 3 and 4 consistently.
And those two steps are where certainty comes from.
Because “received” is not the finish line.
An account only becomes safer when someone can answer:
- Who owns it now?
- When will it be worked?
- What is the next move if it doesn’t move?
Why this reduces repeat work
Repeat work usually happens for one of three reasons:
1) Receipt isn’t real
Something was uploaded, faxed, or emailed — but it’s not in the payer’s workflow.
2) Ownership is unclear
The account is “in process,” but no one knows which team is holding it or whether it’s stuck in intake.
3) Timing is missing
Without a work date, people follow up based on anxiety, not process.
That’s how you end up touching the same account five times with no new information.
Aged AR improves faster when follow-up is designed to produce certainty, not just contact.
The Proof Loop forces the missing pieces into the open.
The two questions that matter most
If you only change one thing, change the questions.
After you submit something, your follow-up should aim for these:
- “Who owns it now?”
- “When should it be worked?”
Not “can you check?”
Not “can you update me?”
Not “what’s the status?”
Those questions often lead to vague answers.
Owner and date leads to clarity.
Even if they can’t give an exact date, you can usually get a range:
- 3–5 business days
- 7–10 business days
- “it’s in appeals review”
- “it’s waiting for indexing”
That’s enough to set a real next step and stop duplicate work.
What to write in the note
The Proof Loop only works if the record becomes easy to trust.
Keep it short. One strong line beats a long paragraph.
Proof Line format:
- Sent: what + where + date/time
- Receipt: confirmed yes/no + reference if available
- Owner: team/queue/person
- Next date: expected work date or follow-up date
- Next step: what you’ll do if it misses the date
Example:
Sent: Appeal uploaded 01/31
Receipt: Confirmed (ref #12345)
Owner: Appeals Intake Queue
Next date: Expected review within 7 business days
Next step: If no update by 02/10, escalate to supervisor line
That’s it.
Now if someone else opens the account, they don’t restart it.
They continue it.
The quiet shift this creates
When teams adopt the Proof Loop, something changes.
They stop treating follow-up as “more touches.”
They start treating follow-up as “closing certainty.”
That protects time.
It protects energy.
And it keeps aged accounts from turning into a guessing game.
Because the goal isn’t to do more work.
It’s to stop doing the same work twice.
At Zybex, we help teams build practical workflows like this so aged AR stops depending on memory and starts moving with proof. If you want the future posts in this series, sign up with your email using the form below.