Hi hal and welcome to the forum.
Your problem sounds a little odd here. If FACILITY is going wrong but it is part of the DETAIL record extraction I'm wondering how it can go wrong. Do PAID DATE and TYPE OF BILL not change as well?
It's tricky to suggest much without seeing the report structure but I am wondering if the detail template you have should be the detail in this case.
I may be struggling to to get a V5 system functioning but I should be able to run in V6 so if you can make a sample file and model available off-line via email I would be pleased to have a look at it and see if I can identify the problem.
Send me a PM if you want to do that and I will provide you with an email address to forward the files to.
I know I can't get a V5 system going, but I am familiar with the Medicare 835 and PC Print. Since V7 I have extracted data from a prn file. I have a detail template that gets all of the data for each account and an append template to get the provider number, voucher date and page number. I don't remember if V5 allowed a multiple line trap, but if it does, I can share mine if you are interested. I has worked well for the last 4 years.
Grant and Berry,
After reading a couple other posts regarading multiple templates, and Grant's suggestion to take the lowest level for the detail I got my model to work. Instead using facility in the detail I put it in an append. The detail I used dollar value fields. I also have one other append for patient demographics. Thank you both again for your help on this.
I am going to request that the company upgrade to the latest version of Monarch. However, there are not that many users here so it may not happen.
Hal /b[/quote]Hi hal,
Great that you found a way to make the model work as you needed it to.
Given that Monarch is clearly a very important tool for so many Healthcare market companies I'm sure it should be possible to put together a very strong proposal for an upgrade with one aim being the spread of Monarch into other parts and functions in your organisation in order to extend the benefits available to the business.
For that purpose the recently released Version 9 will allow you to migrate your existing V5 models quickly and easily (no work required in fact though a managed transition may prove to be a good opportunity to gather and re-group existing models). It also offers tremendous potential for existing key users to share their work readily and managably with new users as well as between their existing user colleagues.
As you probably expect there are some significant updates carried through the versions from 6 to 9 and the benefits should provide a sound argument for a return on the investment. (Note that this observation comes from me as an independent consultant. I'm sure Datawatch can provide further well documented assistance should you require it.)
Good luck with your proposal.