CMS ACCESS approved-applicant roster — competitor check inside the 150

Verdict (one line)

No 3/3 competitor in the ACCESS Model accepted-applicant list. The 150+ roster is published on cms.gov (and partially enumerated in trade press coverage from mid-April 2026). The list is dominated by VBC enablers, behavioral health, food-as-medicine, AI-native chronic care, and consumer wellness brands. Zero participants are positioning on patient-data-sovereignty / patient-as-data-principal / patient cash-payout-from-savings-share — the white-space conclusion from the 2026-05-11 parent brief survives full roster inspection.

The question

CMS ACCESS approved-applicant roster. When does the full participant list publish, and does any 3/3 competitor exist inside the 150? (StatNews flagged "150+ approved" but didn't enumerate.)

This is a derivative question from the 2026-05-11 patient-data-sovereignty competitor scan. The parent brief concluded "clean white space" against 12 named candidates but flagged that the StatNews piece announcing "150+ approved" didn't enumerate, leaving an open risk that a 3/3 competitor was hidden inside the unpublished roster.

What we already know (from the vault)

• [[~/rdco-vault/06-reference/research/2026-05-11-patient-data-sovereignty-competitor-scan.md|Patient-Data-Sovereignty + Outcome-Procurement competitor scan (May 11)]] established the 3-leg scoring rubric: DS (patient-as-data-source-of-truth) + VBC (value-based contract with payer) + PI (patient cash payouts from savings). 12 named candidates scored, none hit 3/3. Closest were Hu-manity (1.5/3 in thesis, 0.5/3 in execution) and Embleema (2/3 in form, 0/3 in outcome-tied substance). Aledade is the strongest VBC operator (1/3, contract leg only) and is positioned as a partner shape rather than competitor.
• [[~/rdco-vault/06-reference/research/2026-05-10-healthcare-outcome-procurement-pioneering-provider.md|Healthcare Outcome Procurement + Pioneering-Provider wedge]] is the parent thesis. Mentions ACCESS Model directly as one of the CMS innovation models that could host the bet.

What the web says

The list is published.

• The ACCESS Model accepted-applicants list is live at cms.gov/priorities/innovation/access-model-accepted-applicants. CMS confirms more than 150 organizations accepted; applications continue to be reviewed on a rolling basis. (CMS ACCESS Model overview)
• Initial application deadline was extended from April 4 to May 15, 2026 for the July 5, 2026 model launch; applications after May 15 considered for January 1, 2027 start. (AHA News 2026-04-14, Healthcare Dive, Fierce Healthcare)
• StatNews (Apr 13, 2026) called out only categorical descriptions in the public-facing portion — "mental health apps," "wearable device makers," "a life sciences company tied to Google," "startups that help large health systems manage heart failure patients." Full named enumeration is behind STAT+. The CMS page itself is the canonical source.

The named participants, aggregated across trade-press coverage:

Approximately 40 specific organizations have been named across the surveyed coverage (Healthcare Dive, Fierce Healthcare, Behavioral Health Business, Medical Economics, Longyear Health Substack 2026-04-16, DistilINFO):

Total enumerated: ~50 of the 150+. Remaining ~100 not publicly named in the trade-press coverage but visible on the CMS roster page (the full PDF/HTML list is what CMS maintains as canonical).

Patient-data-sovereignty / consent-platform positioning inside the named subset: zero. No company in the enumerated subset positions its core value proposition as patient data ownership, patient as data principal, or patient cash payout from savings share. All participants pitch some flavor of technology-supported chronic care delivery or outcomes-based contract management.

Convergences and contradictions

Convergences

• Three independent trade outlets (Healthcare Dive, Fierce Healthcare, Behavioral Health Business) name the same core consumer / VBC / behavioral participants — the roster is consistent across sources.
• Longyear Health's analysis explicitly frames the participant pool as "technology-supported chronic care delivery at scale" — matches CMS's own positioning of the model and confirms no sovereignty-positioned company in the named subset.
• The May 11 parent brief's "clean white space" conclusion holds: every named ACCESS participant scores at most 1/3 on the (DS + VBC + PI) rubric — VBC leg present (or implied by acceptance into ACCESS itself), DS and PI legs absent.

Contradictions / surprises

• Hu-manity.co is NOT in the named subset of the ACCESS list. Given Hu-manity's stated thesis (patient data sovereignty), one might expect them to have applied. Their absence supports the parent brief's secondary conclusion that Hu-manity is no longer an active 2026 competitor on this thesis. (See companion brief: 2026-05-18-hu-manity-co-zombie-status.md.)
• No blockchain / Web3 patient-data platforms in the list (Embleema, Health Wizz absent from the named subset). Consistent with their not pursuing the payer-contract pathway.
• Datavant, PicnicHealth, Seqster, Particle Health — none in the named subset. All infra-tier patient-data plays — sells to enterprise, not to payers, not directly at risk on outcomes. Reinforces the wedge: data infra companies aren't trying to operate at-risk panels.

Synthesis for RDCO

The roster check closes the open risk the parent brief flagged. The patient-data-sovereignty + outcome-procurement wedge survives this check. ACCESS Model launch participants are operationally clustered in 5 categories — all of them executing "technology-supported chronic care delivery" with some form of outcome-tied reimbursement. None are restructuring patient-as-data-principal economics. None are paying patients cash from savings.

This has two strategic implications for the bet:

1. ACCESS Model as venue, not crowded field. The wedge can be operationalized inside the ACCESS Model — RDCO (or a partner operator) applies for the next intake window (Jan 1, 2027 start, applications post-May 15 2026 cohort), and uses ACCESS's outcome-based payment structure as the VBC leg of the wedge. The patient-data-sovereignty (DS) and patient cash payout (PI) legs are layered on top of ACCESS's contract substrate. The roster confirms no one else is structuring it this way — the wedge would be net-additive, not redundant.

2. Partner candidates surfaced. Aledade (largest VBC enabler, 150+ contracts, ~2M lives), Evergreen Nephrology, TailorCare, and Cadence Health all have the VBC infrastructure mature. If RDCO pursues a partnership shape rather than building the operator stack from scratch, the ACCESS list narrows the partner search. Aledade especially — they're a partner shape, not a competitor shape, and they're already in ACCESS. Strive Health (kidney VBC, ~$550M raised; not on the named subset but operates under KCC) is the comparable for cardiometabolic verticalization if the bet goes vertical-operator.

Concrete next step (recommend, do not auto-execute): before the May 15 ACCESS application deadline for the July 2026 launch passes — which it will have by the time the founder reads this overnight summary — file the ACCESS Model accepted-applicants list URL into the bet architecture doc as a monitored asset. Pull the full CMS-hosted roster (HTML or PDF), check the unnamed ~100 against the 3-leg rubric, and confirm no 3/3 competitor lurks outside the trade-press enumerated subset. This is a 1-hour task, not a research brief, and it should sit on the task board, not in the research backlog.

Open follow-ups

• Pull the full CMS-hosted roster (the WebFetch timed out twice during this brief — try a direct curl or the Wayback Machine snapshot). The named ~50 subset is sufficient for the white-space conclusion but the unnamed ~100 is the residual risk.
• Re-run this check after the Jan 1, 2027 ACCESS cohort is announced (post-May 15 2026 applications). The wedge is most exposed if a 2026 sovereignty-positioned competitor applies in the second window.
• Check the LEAD Model and EOM PY2026 accepted-applicant lists for the same 3-leg rubric — the parent thesis identifies these as adjacent CMS innovation venues, and competitors may pick them instead of ACCESS.
• Aledade-as-partner deep-dive: pricing, partnership terms, what they actually require from a co-applicant or downstream-risk-takeover operator. This was flagged in the May 11 brief and is still open.

Sources

• CMS ACCESS Model Accepted Applicants page (canonical) — WebFetch timed out twice during this brief; URL confirmed live via trade-press references.
• CMS ACCESS Model overview
• StatNews — Access granted (Apr 13, 2026) (paywalled past lede)
• Healthcare Dive — CMS accepts 150+ providers, digital health firms for ACCESS
• Fierce Healthcare — CMS taps 150 participants for ACCESS Model, extends deadline
• AHA News (Apr 14, 2026)
• Behavioral Health Business — Early Participants of CMS ACCESS Model
• DistilINFO — CMS Selects 150 Organizations for ACCESS
• Longyear Health Substack — Analyzing the CMS ACCESS Model Participants List (Apr 16, 2026)
• Medical Economics — Clamoring for ACCESS
• [[~/rdco-vault/06-reference/research/2026-05-11-patient-data-sovereignty-competitor-scan.md|Patient-Data-Sovereignty Competitor Scan (May 11, parent)]]
• [[~/rdco-vault/06-reference/research/2026-05-10-healthcare-outcome-procurement-pioneering-provider.md|Healthcare Outcome Procurement + Pioneering-Provider Wedge]]