I want to share my experience attempting to establish care with this clinic, as it raised serious concerns about transparency, professionalism, and how “inclusivity” is practiced in reality. Before contacting the office, I did my due diligence as a patient. I obtained a list of in-network chiropractors directly from my insurance company and also spoke with my insurer beforehand to confirm accuracy, knowing that provider directories are not always updated in real time. Because I have complex medical needs, identifying a provider who might be a good fit took a significant amount of time, energy, and effort- hours to narrow down a provider who might be a good fit. When I contacted the clinic, I explained that I was looking to establish care with a new chiropractor and specifically asked about Dr. Levi. I was immediately asked what insurance I carry. After I shared this information which is also an insurance plan that is also listed on the clinic’s own website as accepted, I was told, “Sorry, we don’t take that anymore” and are out of network. I explained that I had just received their information directly from my insurance company and had spoken with a representative who confirmed the clinic had an active in-network contract. At that point, the staff member laughed and said something to the effect of, “Yeah, they’re really bad at keeping that updated and are often incorrect.” There was also no offer to see a patient outside out of network Or offer for a self-pay rate. Absolutely nothing. Because this response was dismissive and concerning, I contacted my insurance company again. After a thorough review, they confirmed that this provider is still actively in-network. When my insurance company contacted the clinic directly, the explanation changed entirely and it was now described as a “misunderstanding,” and the clinic stated they simply have a long waitlist for new patients. That is a fundamentally different explanation than “we don’t take your insurance.” Telling a potential patient inaccurate information while providing a different account to the insurance company is troubling and undermines trust before care even begins. All because they know that by stating this they are in direct conflict with their contracts. What makes this especially frustrating is that this clinic publicly promotes itself as inclusive and community-oriented. Inclusivity is not just branding…. it is reflected in how access to care is handled. Intentionally misrepresenting insurance status or blocking access because a clinic is dissatisfied with reimbursement rates - or whatever their issue may be, is not inclusive. Many patients, particularly those with chronic illness or disabilities, rely on their insurance coverage to access care at all. I understand the strain the current healthcare system places on clinics. However, if a clinic chooses not to accept certain plans or limit new patients, that decision should be communicated honestly and directly. Transparency is the BARE minimum standard. Unfortunately, this initial interaction made it clear that the values being promoted publicly do not align with how potential patients are treated privately which is concerning on a completely different level. We often hear that insurance provider directories are inaccurate, and while that can be true, accountability goes both ways. Inaccurate information is not always solely the fault of the insurance company. Clinics also have a responsibility to communicate honestly about their contracts, panel status, and access to care. At some point, providers must take ownership of how they participate in AND contribute to the broken system, rather than placing the burden entirely on patients who are doing their best to navigate it, all while being directly lied to.
Amanda Ursry · February 6th, 2026