What January’s Medicare telehealth deadline means for small healthcare practices

With less than 30 days until Medicare’s temporary telehealth flexibilities expire on January 30, 2026, small and mid-sized practices face a critical decision point. This isn’t about predicting whether Congress will extend the deadline again – it’s about understanding which parts of your telehealth infrastructure remain solid regardless of policy changes, and which depend on temporary waivers.

For organizations with 2-50 practitioners, the next month requires clear-headed assessment, not speculation. What actually expires? What stays? And how should practices prepare for February 1st, whether the deadline gets extended or not?

What actually expires on January 30th (and what doesn’t)

The confusion around Medicare telehealth stems from multiple policy layers. According to CMS guidance, three key flexibilities end January 30, 2026:

Expiring flexibilities:

• Geographic restrictions lift: Currently, Medicare covers telehealth from anywhere. After January 30, many services revert to originating site requirements (rural areas, certain facilities)
• Home as originating site: The broad permission for patients to receive telehealth at home expires for most services
• Expanded service codes: Many services added during the pandemic return to restricted coverage

Permanent coverage (not expiring):

• Behavioral health services maintain home coverage permanently, as detailed in Baker Donelson’s analysis
• Remote patient monitoring (RPM) services remain covered
• Certain chronic care management services continue
• Audio-only visits for behavioral health persist

The distinction matters. A primary care practice relying on virtual visits for hypertension follow-ups faces different constraints than a mental health clinic providing therapy sessions.

The behavioral health exception: why mental health telehealth survives

Mental health providers have stability their primary care colleagues lack. Medicare permanently covers behavioral health telehealth from the patient’s home, regardless of January’s deadline.

This policy recognition reflects clinical reality. As data from CIVHC shows, behavioral health represents 58% of all telehealth visits, with general anxiety accounting for 18% of diagnoses. The care model works, patients prefer it, and outcomes support it.

For behavioral health practices, platform decisions focus less on policy risk and more on operational efficiency. The question isn’t “will telehealth remain viable?” but “which platform best supports our clinical workflows?”

Real-world scenarios: three practice types and their February 1st reality

Scenario 1: Primary care group practice (12 providers)

Current state: 30% of visits conducted via telehealth, primarily follow-ups for chronic conditions and minor acute issues. Patients appreciate home-based convenience.

February 1st impact: If flexibilities expire, many routine virtual visits require patients to travel to qualified originating sites (often rural health clinics or hospitals). Home-based telehealth coverage narrows significantly.

Platform consideration: Does your white label platform support hybrid models? Can you quickly adjust scheduling rules based on visit type and coverage? Organizations using flexible platforms can pivot workflows within days rather than rebuilding infrastructure.

Scenario 2: Behavioral health clinic (8 therapists)

Current state: 75% of sessions conducted virtually, with patients joining from home. Clinical outcomes match or exceed in-person care.

February 1st impact: Minimal. Behavioral health maintains permanent home coverage. Practice operations continue largely unchanged.

Platform consideration: With stable policy foundation, focus shifts to patient engagement, provider productivity, and growth. Battle-tested platforms serving large patient populations (1M+) demonstrate reliability for scaling virtual care.

Scenario 3: Multi-specialty practice (25 providers across primary care, endocrinology, cardiology)

Current state: Mixed model with 20% telehealth utilization, varying significantly by specialty.

February 1st impact: Complex. Behavioral health services continue, endocrinology and cardiology follow-ups may face restrictions, primary care virtual visits likely limited.

Platform consideration: Specialty-specific workflow configuration becomes critical. Generic video platforms struggle with nuanced coverage rules. Purpose-built healthcare platforms with customizable visit types and automated eligibility checking reduce administrative burden.

The build vs. wait dilemma: platform investment under policy uncertainty

Some practices delay telehealth platform decisions, waiting for policy clarity. This approach carries hidden costs.

According to HHS telehealth policy updates, Medicare telehealth extensions have occurred multiple times since 2020, each time creating planning uncertainty. Organizations that built infrastructure anyway now serve patients others cannot reach.

Consider the build vs. buy calculation under uncertainty:

Custom development timeline: 12-18 months minimum White label deployment: 1-2 weeks for standard implementation

If Congress extends flexibilities again in late January (as has happened repeatedly), practices that spent 2024-2025 “evaluating” while planning custom builds remain 12+ months from deployment. Meanwhile, competitors using proven platforms already serve patients virtually.

The faster path isn’t necessarily more risky. Platforms serving 1M+ patients and processing 5M+ appointments demonstrate production reliability. You’re not betting on unproven technology – you’re deploying what already works at scale.

Five questions every practice administrator should ask this month

1. Which of our telehealth services definitely remain covered after January 30?

Map your current virtual visit types to permanent vs. temporary coverage. Behavioral health, RPM, and certain chronic care management continue. Understand your stable foundation.

2. What percentage of our telehealth volume depends on temporary flexibilities?

If 80% of virtual visits rely on expiring waivers, you need contingency plans. If most volume comes from permanently covered services, your operational risk is lower.

3. Can our current platform adapt quickly to policy changes?

Whether using a white label platform, custom build, or generic video tool, test your ability to modify visit types, coverage rules, and patient communications within 48 hours. Policy changes don’t wait for IT projects.

4. What’s our backup plan if flexibilities expire and we can’t pivot in time?

Patient communication strategy, provider schedule adjustments, facility capacity for returning in-person visits. Hope for extension, plan for expiration.

5. If we don’t have telehealth infrastructure yet, is February too late to start?

For platforms deployable in weeks, no. For custom development projects, yes. The decision tree depends on what “starting” means for your organization.

Why single-tenant platforms matter more when policy gets uncertain

Policy uncertainty creates operational risk. When coverage rules change overnight, your platform needs to adapt immediately.

Multi-tenant platforms serve hundreds of organizations with shared infrastructure and standardized workflows. When policy changes affect different specialties differently, one-size-fits-all configurations struggle. You’re requesting changes in a queue with other customers, implementing workarounds, or manually managing exceptions.

Single-tenant architecture provides dedicated infrastructure per organization. When Medicare rules change, you adjust your instance’s visit type configurations, coverage logic, and patient intake flows without affecting anyone else or waiting for vendor prioritization.

Organizations evaluating white label options often compare features first, architecture later. In unstable policy environments, the order should reverse. Architecture determines adaptation speed. Features matter only if you can configure them to match evolving requirements.

What smart practices are doing right now

Rather than predicting congressional action, experienced administrators focus on what they control:

Document current state: Which services use telehealth, what coverage supports them, which depend on temporary waivers. Clinical leaders and billing staff should align on this assessment.

Test platform flexibility: If policy changes tomorrow, how quickly can you adjust? Run tabletop exercises with your platform team.

Communicate with patients: Explain potential changes without creating panic. “We’re monitoring policy developments and have plans to maintain your access to care regardless of what happens in Washington.”

Evaluate platform options if needed: If you’re on generic video tools or planning custom builds, compare timelines against policy uncertainty. Proven platforms deployed in weeks create optionality custom development cannot match.

Leverage permanent coverage: For practices offering behavioral health, RPM, or chronic care management, build on stable foundations. These services aren’t going anywhere.

The practices navigating this best aren’t the ones predicting policy outcomes. They’re the ones with operational flexibility to adapt regardless of what January 30th brings.

Looking beyond January 30th

Whether Congress extends flexibilities or lets them expire, one pattern is clear: telehealth policy remains in flux. Organizations succeeding long-term build on permanent coverage foundations while maintaining flexibility for temporary provisions.

This means choosing platforms that can adapt quickly, workflows that accommodate multiple care models, and technology proven at scale rather than experimental. When policy changes every 6-12 months, your infrastructure needs to keep pace.

For small and mid-sized practices, the next 30 days aren’t about predicting congressional action. They’re about understanding your operational reality, knowing which telehealth services remain viable regardless of policy, and ensuring your technology can adapt when rules change.

The question isn’t whether to invest in telehealth infrastructure – patient demand and clinical effectiveness have already answered that. The question is which approach provides stability when policy doesn’t.

If your practice needs telehealth infrastructure that can pivot as quickly as policy does, explore platforms with proven track records. Request a demo to see how single-tenant architecture and flexible workflows support adaptation in uncertain regulatory environments.

---