How to Choose an IME Provider: A Checklist for Employers, Carriers, and TPAs

The IME provider you choose shapes the quality of the medical evidence your claims decisions rest on. These are the questions worth asking before you send the first referral.

Ask about evaluator credentials, specialty match, and oversight. A network is only as strong as the individual clinician who sees your claimant. Look for named clinical leadership: someone identifiable who stands behind documentation standards, rather than an anonymous panel.

For psychological evaluations, the credential questions get specific. The evaluator should be a licensed psychologist or psychiatrist, licensed in the jurisdiction of the exam, with training in forensic or medico-legal assessment, not just clinical treatment. Ask whether they administer standardized testing with embedded validity measures themselves, whether they are familiar with the applicable edition of the AMA Guides when an impairment rating is in play, and whether they maintain an active evaluation practice rather than doing occasional IMEs as a sideline.

Red flags are just as concrete. Be wary of an evaluator who cannot name the test battery they use or why, who reaches causation conclusions without addressing pre-existing history, whose sample reports state opinions without the reasoning behind them, who never administers validity testing, or whose reports read the same regardless of the referral questions. An evaluator who is defensive about these questions before the engagement will not hold up well under cross-examination after it.

Request a redacted sample report. Check whether it answers referral questions directly, shows the reasoning behind each conclusion, and reads clearly to a non-clinician. If the sample is vague, your reports will be too.

An excellent report that arrives after the decision deadline is a wasted spend. Ask for typical scheduling lead times and report delivery timelines, and how the provider communicates when a case needs more time. Predictability is worth as much as raw speed.

Workers talk to their attorneys about how an exam felt. Evaluations conducted with dignity and clear communication produce better cooperation, fewer disputes about the exam itself, and findings that stand on firmer ground. Respectful treatment is not a courtesy; it is a quality control.

Ask how referrals are submitted, how status is communicated, and whether telehealth options exist for evaluation types that support them. A partner that fits your workflow saves adjuster hours on every file.

Empower welcomes this checklist, so here are our own answers. Our network includes 250+ licensed providers working under named clinical leadership, with in-person evaluation coverage in 43 states and telehealth reach nationwide where jurisdictions permit. The team has completed 50,000+ evaluations, with documentation standards built for medico-legal review from the start.

Specialty depth is where Empower differs most from generalist panels. Our roots are in behavioral health, so psychological and neuropsychological evaluations are handled by evaluators who do this work as a specialty, alongside physical IMEs, functional capacity evaluations, impairment ratings, and return-to-work assessments across the workers' compensation spectrum.

On turnaround, we commit to a delivery timeline at the point of referral and communicate proactively when a case needs more time, so adjusters are never guessing at report status. Referrals are submitted through a single intake path with status updates along the way. If you want to verify any of this, ask us the same five questions above; we will answer them specifically, with a redacted sample report to match.