I wanted to ask a question about the use of 1, 2, and 349 as the "grouped codes" for insurance. 1 & 2 make sense (Medicare & Medicaid). I question 349 though, although I have a feeling I know why it might have been chosen by someone not familiar with the actual layout of the Source of Payment Typology Code Set. While 349 is labeled "other", that is a poor label unfortunately, and I'll show why here. While the codes may appear to be "numerical", they are really a numeric "tree"... 1 is MEDICARE 2 is MEDICAID 3 is OTHER GOVERNMENT (Federal/State/Local) (excluding Department of Corrections) etc Then, there is no 10. Why? Because as stated, this isn't a numerical system, it is a "tree" system. You shouldn't sort the code numerically, you should sort "alphabetically". For example, the start of the "1" (MEDICARE) tree is: 1 MEDICARE 11 Medicare Managed Care (Includes Medicare Advantage Plans) 111 Medicare HMO 1111 Medicare Chronic Condition Special Needs Plan (C-SNP) 1112 Medicare Institutional Special Needs Plan (I-SNP) 112 Medicare PPO 113 Medicare POS 119 Medicare Managed Care Other And so on. So, when we look at 349, it is unfortunately labeled "other", and someone unaware would look at that and go "that means 'any other insurance type completely'", but that isn't the case: 3 is OTHER GOVERNMENT (Federal/State/Local) (excluding Department of Corrections). So, 349 is actually under the tree for 3, specifically: 34 HRSA Program 341 Title V (MCH Block Grant) 342 Migrant Health Program 343 Ryan White Act 344 Disaster-related (includes Covid-19) 349 Other 349 really should be labeled as "Other HRSA Program" (which if it was, 349 wouldn't have likely been chosen for this is my guess). I doubt this forum is the place to try to get that changed in that ValueSet (if someone knows where to ping about that, I'm happy to start something there). So, what should be being used instead of 349? Probably 9 - which is the "top level" MISCELLANEOUS/OTHER. If we wanted to truly go deeper maybe: 99 No Typology Code available for payment source 9999 Unavailable / No Payer Specified / Blank So, from a "testing" standpoint, at this point, is it very "important"? Maybe not. And maybe this is a "known" thing put in early on, and now just "accepted" from the testing community? But if this is supposed to reflect what people would actually likely use, I'd guess 349 is actually a code that is rarely used (or should be rarely used... if someone wants to say "Because of this poor 'other' label, lots of people use 349 in the real world now", I guess I can buy that, but "ick". I'd say the Cypress testing should change 349 to one of the others above... or possibly even 5 which is "PRIVATE HEALTH INSURANCE", which would be likely at least the broad category most "payers" would be in, if not Medicare or Medicaid? Thoughts?