QME Panel Request

When a medical dispute in a California workers' compensation claim needs an independent opinion, the parties do not simply pick a doctor. A panel is requested, and the Division of Workers' Compensation Medical Unit issues a list of three qualified medical evaluators. One of those three will ultimately perform the evaluation.

The panel is issued for a requested medical specialty, and the evaluators on it are assigned with reference to a geographic area near the injured worker. That geographic rule exists for a practical reason: the person being evaluated has to be able to attend the appointment.

The single most important distinction in this process is whether the injured worker is represented by an attorney. The represented and unrepresented processes are not the same, and the steps that follow the panel differ accordingly.

In represented cases, the parties may strike names from the panel — each side removes a name, and the remaining evaluator becomes the QME for the case. In unrepresented cases, the process by which the evaluator is settled on is different, and the injured worker's role in the selection is different too.

Because the mechanics differ, the practical advice differs as well. Confirm which track a claim is on before assuming what the next step is, and check the current DWC rules and forms rather than relying on recollection of how a previous case ran.

The specialty requested shapes the whole evaluation. An orthopedic question, a neurological question, and a pain-management question can produce very different reports on the same underlying injury. Matching the specialty to the disputed issue — rather than to the most obvious body part — is one of the highest-value decisions in the process.

Where a claim raises more than one distinct medical issue, think through whether one evaluator can properly address all of them, or whether the questions genuinely sit in different disciplines.

Once an evaluator is settled on, the practical work begins: scheduling the appointment, assembling and serving the records the evaluator will review, and framing the questions the report needs to answer. Each of these steps affects how long the report takes and how useful it is.

Records should be organised and complete. A file that arrives late, in fragments, or without a clear index slows the evaluator down and increases the chance of a report that does not squarely address the dispute. Questions should be specific: an evaluator can only answer what is asked.

See what to expect at the exam for how the appointment itself runs, and reports and timelines for what happens afterwards.

A panel is not the only path to an independent opinion. In represented cases, both sides may instead agree on an Agreed Medical Evaluator. Where the parties can reach that agreement, it removes the panel and striking steps entirely. The trade-off — including a different fee basis — is set out in the QME vs AME comparison.

We coordinate the parts of the process that sit outside the panel issuance itself: matching the case to an appropriate evaluator in our network, scheduling the appointment in a location that works for the injured worker, managing records intake, and following the report through to delivery. We work with law firms, third-party administrators, employers, and corporate clients, and we do not work directly with claimants.

Our network covers medical specialties across California, including areas that are harder to serve, and we can coordinate travel where an appropriate evaluator is not local to the injured worker.