Health care providers of all types face unique challenges presented by an extremely complex and ever-changing regulatory environment. Ryan’s practice focuses on helping clients achieve their business objectives in a manner that clears these regulatory hurdles and allows providers to do what they do best: care for their patients. Ryan’s practice with Polsinelli focuses on:

  • Resolving complex regulatory compliance issues to promote clients’ business, patient care, and community goals, including development of compliance plans, policies, and procedures, navigating Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement and enrollment questions, provider-based facility operational compliance, and health care fraud and abuse review (Stark Law, AKS, CMP, and state-specific laws);
  • Responding to government and third party investigations, audits, subpoenas, and other inquiries, including overpayment demands, Provider Reimbursement Review Board appeals, Medicare and Medicaid certification, enrollment, and reimbursement disputes, and state licensure issues; and 
  • Developing, structuring, and implementing provider-focused business arrangements, including physician contracting and alignment initiatives, corporate practice of medicine compliance, professional and facility licensure, and other organizational and operational strategies to meet client business objectives, grow operations, and provide valuable services to the provider’s communities.

Education

  • University of Colorado Law School (J.D., 2013)
    • Dean's List; Journal on Telecommunications and High Technology Law, Articles Editor
  • Southern Adventist University (B.A., summa cum laude, 2010)
    • History

Bar Admission

  • Colorado, 2013

Professional Affiliations

  • Colorado Lawyers Committee - Chair of the Young Lawyers Division Board
  • American Health Law Association
  • Colorado Bar Association, Health Law Section
  • Denver Bar Association
  • Health Care Compliance Association

Recognition

  • Named to 5280 Magazine’s “Denver’s Top Lawyers” list for Health Law, 2026
  • Selected for inclusion in Best Lawyers in America® for Health Care Law, 2026
  • Named one of Best Lawyers: Ones to Watch® in America in Health Care Law, 2022- 2025
Publications
The Work Behind the Work Requirement: CMS Imposes Sweeping Medicaid Community Engagement Rule
Key Takeaways On June 1, CMS released an interim final rule implementing the new Medicaid community engagement requirement (i.e., work requirement) as a condition of Medicaid eligibility for adults aged 19-64 with access to Medicaid coverage as a result of Medicaid expansion under the Affordable Care Act. States will need to build and pay for substantial operational infrastructure, eligibility system modifications, verification processes, outreach materials and reporting mechanisms before the January 1, 2027, implementation deadline. While the rule is directed at state Medicaid agencies, health care providers, managed care organizations, community-based organizations, and other entities serving Medicaid populations should prepare for increased rates of uncompensated care as impacted beneficiaries face additional eligibility and enrollment hurdles. Medicaid eligible adults who are medically frail face increased
Read More
CMS Proposes Caps on Medicaid State Directed Payments and Fee for Service Supplemental Payments, Further Cutting Federal Funding of Medicaid
Key Takeaways: On May 22, 2026, CMS published a proposed rule (Proposed Rule), building on (and going beyond) the requirements of H.R. 1, outlining its plan to reduce both state directed payments (SDPs) and fee-for-service supplemental payments for Medicaid providers. SDPs – a common Medicaid financing tool that requires Medicaid managed care plans to make specific payments to certain provider types in order to advance Medicaid policy objectives (access to care, quality, parity, etc.) will largely be capped at a percentage of Medicare payments limiting a common rate structure tied to average commercial reimbursement.  This change impacts nearly all SDPs, not just the historical emphasis on services tied to academic medical centers. The Proposed Rule also targets fee-for-service supplemental payments, subjecting them to the
Read More