CA: Formal Request to Revoke American Zurich MPN

CA: Formal Request to Revoke American Zurich MPN

In October, daisyBill formally petitioned the California Division of Workers’ Compensation (CA DWC) to revoke approval for the Medical Provider Network (MPN) that American Zurich Insurance Company forces injured daisyBill employees to use.

Insisting that the CA DWC address this MPN goes beyond looking out for our own employees. The MPN system is a statewide quagmire that needlessly impedes care for injured workers (and reimbursement for providers).

The American Zurich MPN is a dysfunctional tangle of vendors that fails even the most basic compliance standards. Instead, it forces injured workers onto a convoluted, obstacle-laden path for seeking care that’s almost guaranteed to delay or prevent appropriate treatment.

Our petition, pursuant to state Labor Code (LAB) Section 4616, demands the CA DWC revoke approval for the CCMSI / First Health CompAmerica Select Network (Zurich’s MPN, ID #2385). This MPN is a catalog of non-compliance, which:

  • Fails to provide a way for an injured worker to identify MPN physicians
  • Has no discernible connection to the insurer, American Zurich, which is responsible for maintaining its MPNs
  • Has no functioning website with a provider roster or contact information for Medical Access Assistants (MAAs)
  • Fails to maintain verifiable written consent from physicians to participate in the MPN
  • Fails to update its provider roster

American Zurich’s dozens of MPNs are mostly defunct. The CA DWC should immediately add one more to the list.

Over three weeks ago, daisyBill submitted the MPN revocation petition to CA DWC Administrative Director George Parisotto, as required by California law. The petition is published below (we encourage all applicant attorneys to review it and protect your clients accordingly).

As of this writing, the CA DWC’s response to this petition has been on-brand: Silence.

American Zurich’s MPN Anarchy

CA LAB § 4616 states (emphases ours):

Any person contending that a medical provider network is not validly constituted may petition the administrative director to suspend or revoke the approval of the medical provider network.”

If there were ever an MPN that wasn’t “validly constituted,” it would be the American Zurich MPN within which all daisyBill employees must seek care: CCMSI/First Health CompAmerica Select Network, ID #2385.

On its online MPN list, the CA DWC lists Third-Party Administrator (TPA) Cannon Cochran as the applicant for this MPN. However, as we reported recently, when a daisyBill employee received a DWC 7 form outlining their rights in the event of a work injury, the form listed:

  • Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc. is the claims administrator
  • American Zurich Insurance Company is the insurer

The DWC 7 form does not explain why TPA Cannon Cochran is the MPN for American Zurich. Moreover, the form does not:

  • Provide the MPN website where an injured employee could find MPN doctors.
  • List the MPN phone number to reach a Medical Access Assistant (the form featured a number, but for Sedgwick’s main business line).

Adding to the confusion, the CA DWC online MPN list includes a website for this particular MPN at a Coventry URL.

Unbelievably, until recently, the Coventry website offered public access to the required MPN acknowledgments, which document each provider’s consent to participate. Any random person could have accessed these acknowledgments and affirmed or declined MPN participation on a physician’s behalf.

Altogether, this MPN is a tangled mess of vaguely associated entities that fails to meet basic legal standards and does nothing to facilitate care.

daisyBill to CA DWC: Revoke American Zurich MPN Now

On October 10, 2025, daisyBill submitted a formal petition (below) to revoke approval for the CCMSI/First Health CompAmerica Select Network MPN (ID #2385).

In addition to submitting the petition to CA DWC Administrative Director George Parisotto, we forwarded the petition to:

  • The insurer, American Zurich Insurance Company
  • American Zurich’s TPA, Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc.
  • The MPN applicant, Cannon Cochran Management Services, Inc.

The petition details how this MPN violates California law, specifically LAB § 4616, as outlined in the table below.

LAB § 4616 Requirement

 Violation

Injured workers must be able to identify and select MPN physicians.

Neither American Zurich’s DWC 7 form nor the MPN website listed by the CA DWC offers a provider directory.

The insurer or employer must maintain the applicable MPN.

American Zurich delegated MPN management to a trio of vendors:  Sedgwick, CCMSI, and Coventry/Enlyte.

The MPN must have a public-facing website with a provider roster and MPN and MAA contact information.

The website listed is a marketing site with a portal for providers’ MPN acknowledgements.

MAAs must be available Mon–Sat, 7 a.m.–8 p.m., at a toll-free number, to assist workers in getting an appointment.

American Zurich’s DWC 7 lists the main number for Sedgwick as the MAA number.

MPNs must have written acknowledgements from each provider confirming their willingness to participate.

American Zurich relies on an unsecured Coventry website where anyone can access and alter providers’ MPN acknowledgements.

MPN physician rosters must be updated quarterly.

It appears as though American Zurich/CCMSI has not updated the roster since at least November 2023.

California’s MPN system is broken, arguably beyond repair.

However, as long as the MPN system remains in place, the least the CA DWC can do is uphold a bare minimum standard of compliance. That starts with eliminating egregiously non-compliant networks like this one.

Our full petition to the CA DWC is below.


daisyBill takes the hassle out of workers’ comp billing, so your practice can say “yes” to injured workers. Click below for a closer look:

BILL BETTER: DAISYBILL

0 Reader Comments
There are no comments for this article. Be the first to comment!

DaisyBill provides content as an insightful service to its readers and clients. It does not offer legal advice and cannot guarantee the accuracy or suitability of its content for a particular purpose.