VIP SUPPORT SERVICES SOS Verified
3925 MARTIN LUTHER KING BLVD 208, NORTH LAS VEGAS, NV 89032
NPI Number
1316468069
Practice location · View on Google Maps
SOS Verification: Verified
Entity Name: Oak Support
Entity Number: E40550022024-7
Entity Type: Domestic Corporation
Entity Status: Active
Formation Date: 2024-05-13
Status Changed: 2024-05-13
Name Match: 80%
Registered Agent
Name: Kim Martin
Type: Non-Commercial Registered Agent
Address: 11700 W. Charleston BLVD, SUITE 170-770, Las Vegas, NV, 89135
Mailing: 11700 W. Charleston BLVD, SUITE 170-770, Las Vegas, NV
Officers / Principals
| Title | Name | Address | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| President | Kim Martin | 11700 W. Charleston BLVD, SUITE 170-770, Las Vegas, NV | Active |
| Secretary | Kim Martin | 11700 W. Charleston BLVD, SUITE 170-770, Las Vegas, NV | Active |
| Treasurer | Kim Martin | 11700 W. Charleston BLVD, SUITE 170-770, Las Vegas, NV | Active |
| Director | Kim Martin | 11700 W. Charleston BLVD, SUITE 170-770, Las Vegas, NV | Active |
Campaign Contributions
$1,579Total Contributed
4Candidates Supported
Officer / Individual Matches
Kim MartinProbable Match
Matched via officer: Kim Martin (President)
$560 across 5 contributions
| Candidate | Office | Party | Total | Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aaron Ford | Attorney General | Democratic Party | $560 | 5 |
Kim MartinProbable Match
Matched via officer: Kim Martin (President)
$800 across 2 contributions
| Candidate | Office | Party | Total | Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yianna Albertson | District Court Judge, District 8, Department 11 | Unspecified | $800 | 2 |
Kim MartinProbable Match
Matched via officer: Kim Martin (President)
$200 across 1 contribution
| Candidate | Office | Party | Total | Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elaine Marzola | State Assembly, District 21 | Democratic Party | $200 | 1 |
Kim MartinProbable Match
Matched via officer: Kim Martin (President)
$19 across 1 contribution
| Candidate | Office | Party | Total | Count |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tanya Flanagan | State Assembly, District 7 | Democratic Party | $19 | 1 |
Data Notice Campaign contribution matches are based on automated name matching against Nevada Secretary of State campaign finance records. Corporate matches compare registered business names. Officer matches compare individual names and may include false positives due to common names. Contributions are to Nevada state and local candidates only.
Total Medicaid Payments
$1,327,771
+5% vs specialty average
Patients Seen
1,382
Total Claims
4,975
$ Per Patient
$961
Specialty avg: $227
Specialty Rank
#87 of 392
Community/Behavioral Health providers in Nevada
Peer Average
$1,269,573
Average total for Community/Behavioral Health
Claims per Patient
3.6
Average visits / services per person
Payments by Year
How much Medicaid paid this provider each year. Large jumps can indicate changes in practice volume or billing patterns.
| Year | Total Paid | % of Max |
|---|---|---|
| 2018 | $1,327,771 |
Procedure Code Breakdown
The specific medical services this provider billed Medicaid for. Each HCPCS/CPT code represents a different type of visit, test, or treatment.
| HCPCS Code | Description | Claims | Paid | % of Total | Avg per Claim |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S9480 | Intensive outpatient psychiatric program — structured daily mental health treatment without staying overnight | 1,578 | $801,267 | 60.3% | $508 |
| H0034 | Medication training and management (learning to take medications correctly) | 1,086 | $240,797 | 18.1% | $222 |
| 90876 | Individual psychophysiological therapy — biofeedback training | 2,010 | $201,864 | 15.2% | $100 |
| H2011 | Crisis intervention — emergency help during a mental health crisis (per 15 minutes) | 262 | $79,938 | 6.0% | $305 |
| 90791 | Mental health evaluation — first visit with a therapist or psychiatrist | 39 | $3,905 | 0.3% | $100 |
About This Data
This data comes from the HHS Medicaid Provider Spending dataset (opendata.hhs.gov). It shows payments made through Nevada Medicaid from 2018–2024. High payments do not mean a provider is doing anything wrong — some specialties naturally cost more, and busy providers see more patients. But unusually high numbers compared to peers can be worth a closer look.