What must settlement-program software prove?
It must show the authority, approved use, funding source, budget, contract, provider, service, population, expense, measure, evidence, decision, and public report behind each material use of funds.
Opioid settlement structures and approved-use processes vary. A product should store the controlling agreement, state or local rule, decision, and effective date and route ambiguous use to the authorized legal, financial, program, or oversight owner.[1][2]
Which settlement records should stay connected?
Connect program and financial evidence while maintaining appropriate separation. A participant service note should not become a detailed public spending record, and a budget line should not be treated as service evidence.
| Criterion | How to evaluate it |
|---|---|
| Authority | Settlement documents, state and local requirements, governing decision, approved use, restrictions, period, and legal owner. |
| Allocation | Award, contract, budget, category, amount, amendments, approvals, procurement, and responsible organization. |
| Delivery | Provider, program, peer, population, service, site, date, units or reach, and source record. |
| Spending | Invoice, expense, payroll or allocation source, approval, payment, adjustment, and financial-system reconciliation. |
| Results | Output, outcome, experience, equity, denominator, method, limitation, and review. |
| Transparency | Public report, aggregation, suppression, narrative, decision record, correction, retention, and accessible publication. |
How should settlement reporting be tested?
Trace one appropriation or allocation from authority through contract, service, invoice, result, approval, financial reconciliation, and public report without exposing unnecessary participant information.
| Workflow moment | What good looks like | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Approved use | Current source and authorized interpretation support the program | Citation, effective date, owner, and decision |
| Budget and contract | Amount, period, deliverables, restrictions, procurement, amendments, and payment terms align | Executed and approved records |
| Service evidence | Truthful participant or aggregate service activity supports deliverables | Minimum necessary source linkage |
| Financial evidence | Invoices and payments reconcile to approved costs and accounting records | No unsupported allocation or duplicate reimbursement |
| Public result | Spending, reach, outcome, limitations, and corrections are understandable and appropriately protected | Reconcile published totals |
What should settlement buyers ask vendors?
Ask how the product handles different state and local rules, mixed funding, public reporting, provider submissions, corrections, retention, and long-term access after a time-limited award.
- Can every configured approved-use rule link to its controlling source, jurisdiction, owner, decision, and effective dates?
- How are settlement funds separated from grants, contracts, donations, Medicaid claims, and other funding without double counting?
- Can providers submit standardized evidence while keeping participant-level access limited and local systems authoritative where appropriate?
- Can public dashboards suppress or aggregate sensitive and small-cell information while retaining auditable internal detail?
- What happens to records, definitions, public reports, and correction capability after funding or the software agreement ends?
What should settlement software never decide alone?
It should never decide that an activity is an approved use, resolve a legal interpretation, approve procurement, validate a financial allocation, or authorize public disclosure without the responsible person.
Use software to preserve sources, route approval, connect evidence, prevent obvious conflicts, and make reporting reproducible. Obtain qualified state and local legal and financial review because settlement agreements, statutes, court orders, memoranda, and oversight structures differ.
Frequently asked questions
Are all peer support costs approved settlement uses?
Do not assume so. Confirm the exact settlement, state and local authority, approved-use process, budget, contract, program design, and responsible legal or financial interpretation.
Can settlement and Medicaid funding support the same program?
Potentially, but the organization must prevent duplicate payment and follow each funding source's eligibility, allocation, documentation, billing, cost, and reporting rules.
Should public reports include participant-level data?
Usually public accountability can be served with appropriately aggregated information. Any participant-level disclosure needs a specific authority, purpose, minimization, privacy, security, and legal analysis.
Can software replace an accounting system?
Not necessarily. Define whether the platform manages program evidence, budgeting, allocation, invoices, or reporting and how authoritative financial records reconcile with it.
Sources and product pages
Government sources establish the legal and program requirements covered here. Official vendor pages document the product capabilities and positioning used in this guide.
- Core Competencies for Peer Workers in Behavioral Health Services: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Federal framework for recovery-oriented peer work, role clarity, and person-centered practice.
- Understanding Confidentiality of Substance Use Disorder Records: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Official federal overview of 42 CFR Part 2 applicability, consent, use, disclosure, and breach obligations.
- The HIPAA Security Rule: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Official federal overview of safeguards for electronic protected health information.
- Understand: Dashboards, Outcomes, and Reporting: Peerakeet. Peerakeet dashboards, outcome measures, exports, and funder reporting.