PlainDoctor

2026 NPPES data Nurse Practitioner NPI 1285635706 FNP
Verify on CMS →

Laura Eisenberg, FNP

Nurse Practitioner in Austin, Texas.

This profile is drawn from the federal National Provider Identifier Registry (CMS NPPES), which lists more than 7 million U.S. healthcare providers - including 89,808 in Nurse Practitioner, and covers specialty classification, practice address, and Medicare Part D prescribing data when reported. According to CMS, every field reflects the provider's official federal registration, see our methodology.

Federal data, no proprietary rating. We show these CMS records as-is - no composite score, no star rating, no editorial opinion layered on top.
Prescribing volume
2K
Medicare Part D claims · 217 beneficiaries · Nurse Practitioner avg: 1K
Generic prescribing
97%
generic claims · 3% brand-name · higher generic rates reduce patient out-of-pocket costs
MIPS score
64.8/100
▼ 19 pts below national avg 83.5 · Mid-tier
Verify NPI on CMS Methodology
Compiled from official public sources by the editorial process.

What the federal data shows

Laura Eisenberg, FNP reported a CMS MIPS final score of 64.8/100 - below the 83.5 national average - and filed 1,526 Medicare Part D claims in 2024.

64.8/100
MIPS score · -19 vs avg
2K
Part D claims, 2024
97%
generic prescribing
≥7th
pct among measured MIPS (lower-bound band)

Every figure on this page comes straight from federal CMS records (NPPES, Medicare Part D, MIPS, Open Payments) - no proprietary rating or editorial opinion is applied.

Federal trust snapshot

What official records show about Laura Eisenberg, FNP

Federal records show an active NPI with both Medicare prescribing volume and a measured CMS quality score — objective registry data, not patient reviews.

  • Verified

    NPI registry status

    Active listing in the CMS National Provider Identifier Registry (NPI 1285635706), first enumerated 08/09/2005.

    Source: CMS NPPES

  • Reported

    Medicare Part D participation

    Filed 1,526 Medicare Part D prescription claims in the 2023 CMS public use file — indicates active Medicare prescribing participation.

    Source: CMS Part D Prescriber PUF

  • Reported

    CMS quality reporting (MIPS)

    Reported a CMS MIPS final score of 64.8/100 in the Quality Payment Program — a federal quality measure, not a patient review.

    Source: CMS Quality Payment Program

  • State context

    State board disciplinary context

    Texas statewide board action statistics are published annually — these figures describe aggregate state activity, not Laura Eisenberg, FNP's individual license status. Verify directly with the state medical board.

    Source: TMB annual report 2023

  • Not in federal data

    Individual sanction lookup

    PlainDoctor does not publish per-provider disciplinary determinations. Confirm current license and any individual actions through the state medical board or FSMB verification service.

    Source: State medical board / FSMB

This trust snapshot summarizes only what appears in federal CMS/NPPES public records. It is not a composite score, star rating, patient review, or clinical recommendation. PlainDoctor never fabricates reviews or AggregateRating schema.

CMS NPPES provider registry desk

NPI 1285635706 · Nurse Practitioner

NPI-10 · ENUM-LEGACY · TAX-MEGA · MIPS-LOW · RX-MID · BOOK-LIGHT · PHOTO-FINISH

  • NPI-10 1285635706
  • ENUM-LEGACY 2005
  • TAX-MEGA 90K Nurse Practitioner
  • MIPS-LOW 64.8/100
  • RX-MID 1,526
  • BOOK-LIGHT 4,912 in Texas
  • PHOTO-FINISH Hailey Aguiar · ±0.0

MIPS final-score neighbourhood

Same-specialty nationwide peers by CMS final score, not geographic proximity

MIPS pts

What this shows Nearest measured MIPS peers for this NUCC specialty (2023 performance year).

Source CMS Quality Payment Program (MIPS) As of 2023

Laura Eisenberg, FNP's MIPS score vs every measured U.S. clinician

CMS Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) final score, 2023, the federal quality measure. Clinicians whose score CMS assigned without scoring any category are excluded.

65 ≥ 7th percentile 7% of 454,083 measured providers are in lower value bands

0–10: 8,684 measured providers (2%). Below this entry. 10–20: 3,008 measured providers (1%). Below this entry. 20–30: 3,069 measured providers (1%). Below this entry. 30–40: 2,746 measured providers (1%). Below this entry. 40–50: 2,928 measured providers (1%). Below this entry. 50–60: 5,882 measured providers (1%). Below this entry. 60–70: 13,906 measured providers (3%). This entry sits in this band. 70–80: 94,570 measured providers (21%). Above this entry. 80–90: 129,887 measured providers (29%). Above this entry. 90+: 189,403 measured providers (42%). Above this entry. This provider 0 100 every measured MIPS clinician, bucketed by value

Each bar is a band; taller bars hold more measured providers. The dashed line + filled bar mark this entry. Hover or tap any bar for its full count, share, and where it sits relative to this entry.

The percentile is a conservative whole-score-point band: it counts only measured clinicians in lower score bands. A CMS MIPS metric is not a recommendation or a clinical-quality rating by PlainDoctor. See methodology § corpus placement.

Source CMS Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) · 2023

Where Laura Eisenberg, FNP sits

This provider among nurse practitioner peers

Across the 13,205 nurse practitioner providers who report both Medicare Part D prescribing and a MIPS quality score, Laura Eisenberg, FNP writes more Part D claims than 79% of them and scores higher on MIPS quality than 4% - placing this provider in the high-volume, lower-quality quadrant. Volume reflects patient-panel size and specialty, not quality; the two axes are independent.

Lower volume · High qualityHigh volume · High qualityLower volume · Lower qualityHigh volume · Lower quality0255075100024.148.372.496.6Part D claim volume, percentile in specialtyMIPS quality, percentilePoint, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 50 · MIPS quality, percentile: 58Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 17 · MIPS quality, percentile: 63Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 28 · MIPS quality, percentile: 37Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 68 · MIPS quality, percentile: 90Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 32 · MIPS quality, percentile: 25Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 3 · MIPS quality, percentile: 92Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 90 · MIPS quality, percentile: 60Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 83 · MIPS quality, percentile: 75Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 13 · MIPS quality, percentile: 33Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 53 · MIPS quality, percentile: 92Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 85 · MIPS quality, percentile: 65Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 42 · MIPS quality, percentile: 38Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 80 · MIPS quality, percentile: 78Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 87 · MIPS quality, percentile: 85Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 2 · MIPS quality, percentile: 5Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 67 · MIPS quality, percentile: 55Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 45 · MIPS quality, percentile: 40Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 3 · MIPS quality, percentile: 67Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 18 · MIPS quality, percentile: 42Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 37 · MIPS quality, percentile: 27Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 100 · MIPS quality, percentile: 87Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 55 · MIPS quality, percentile: 22Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 3 · MIPS quality, percentile: 10Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 35 · MIPS quality, percentile: 92Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 93 · MIPS quality, percentile: 92Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 88 · MIPS quality, percentile: 92Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 70 · MIPS quality, percentile: 23Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 48 · MIPS quality, percentile: 75Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 58 · MIPS quality, percentile: 60Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 43 · MIPS quality, percentile: 2Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 63 · MIPS quality, percentile: 17Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 12 · MIPS quality, percentile: 70Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 82 · MIPS quality, percentile: 72Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 47 · MIPS quality, percentile: 28Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 62 · MIPS quality, percentile: 52Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 8 · MIPS quality, percentile: 32Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 65 · MIPS quality, percentile: 92Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 75 · MIPS quality, percentile: 15Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 28 · MIPS quality, percentile: 88Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 52 · MIPS quality, percentile: 73Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 13 · MIPS quality, percentile: 20Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 8 · MIPS quality, percentile: 13Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 23 · MIPS quality, percentile: 8Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 22 · MIPS quality, percentile: 30Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 98 · MIPS quality, percentile: 53Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 72 · MIPS quality, percentile: 80Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 38 · MIPS quality, percentile: 48Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 20 · MIPS quality, percentile: 3Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 78 · MIPS quality, percentile: 0Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 40 · MIPS quality, percentile: 43Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 0 · MIPS quality, percentile: 50Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 73 · MIPS quality, percentile: 33Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 27 · MIPS quality, percentile: 57Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 92 · MIPS quality, percentile: 12Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 60 · MIPS quality, percentile: 18Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 25 · MIPS quality, percentile: 47Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 57 · MIPS quality, percentile: 82Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 33 · MIPS quality, percentile: 68Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 95 · MIPS quality, percentile: 83Point, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 97 · MIPS quality, percentile: 45Laura Eisenberg, FNP, Part D claim volume, percentile in specialty: 79 · MIPS quality, percentile: 4
Part D claim volume vs MIPS quality, by specialty percentile

Each dot is one nurse practitioner peer from a representative sample of 60; the gold marker is Laura Eisenberg, FNP. Source: CMS Medicare Part D Prescriber data and the CMS Merit-based Incentive Payment System, 2023.

What does the federal data show about Laura Eisenberg, FNP?

Below national average

NPI registry status

Active

Issued 08/09/2005

NPI 1285635706

Primary specialty

Nurse Practitioner

High-volume

89,808 US NPIs in this specialty

Medicare Part D claims

1,526 33% vs specialty avg

2024 prescription claims

Specialty avg: 1,144

MIPS final score

64.8/100 18.7 pts vs avg

Mid-tier band

vs 83.5 national avg

Specialty distribution in Texas

How Nurse Practitioner compares to other specialties among Texas providers

Texas providers
Behavior Technician6%Student in an Organized Heal…5.3%Family Nurse Practitioner4.5%Professional Counselor4.4%Pharmacist4.3%Speech-Language Pathologist3.9%Nurse Practitioner1.1%
Largest specialties in Texas (% of in-state providers)

Medicare quality performance, MIPS

Laura Eisenberg, FNP's 2023 MIPS final score plotted against the Nurse Practitioner national average

Below national average
MIPS Final Score
64.8/100
vs 83.5 national avg · 2023 performance year
0%100%National avg84%64.8%
MIPS final score (Nurse Practitioner) - 64.8/100 vs national avg 83.5
How MIPS and board certification work

The Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) scores providers 0–100 across four performance categories: Quality, Cost, Promoting Interoperability, and Improvement Activities, weighted under 42 CFR §414.1380. Reporting is voluntary for many small practices, so absence of a MIPS score is not a quality signal.

Board certification through an ABMS or AOA member board signals voluntary post-licensure examination plus continuous Maintenance of Certification cycles. Verify any individual provider's status through certificationmatters.org (ABMS) or osteopathic.org (AOA).

Practice Address

3215 STECK AVE
Austin, TX 78757
(512) 476-3556

Provider Details

NPI 1285635706
Specialty Nurse Practitioner
Credentials FNP
Gender Female
NPI Issued 08/09/2005

CMS Quality Score (MIPS)

Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) scores from CMS, 2023 performance year.

64.7778
Final Score
Measured-score avg: 83.5
80.5883
Quality
32.0044
Cost
64
Promoting Interoperability

Reporting: Group practice

License & disciplinary context - Texas TMB 2023 annual report

Aggregate state board data only, NOT a determination of any individual provider's status. The figures below describe statewide disciplinary activity across all ~77K Texas medical licensees in 2023 - they are NOT specific to Laura Eisenberg, FNP. To verify Laura Eisenberg, FNP's current license status, search the TMB public license lookup directly, or check the Federation of State Medical Boards (FSMB) verification service.

344
Total board actions, Texas 2023
Across 334 cases
4.47
Actions per 1,000 licensees
Texas statewide rate
probation
Most common action type
94 cases

TMB publishes annual disciplinary statistics as part of public-record reporting under each state's Administrative Procedure Act. See the full breakdown by action type and year on the Texas disciplinary trends page. Cross-checked against FSMB U.S. Medical Regulatory Trends.

Brand vs generic prescribing mix · Generic-heavy

Laura Eisenberg, FNP - brand share 3.0%
Nurse Practitioner average

3% brand-name claims vs 97% generic, on 1,526 2024 Medicare Part D claims.

The federal Medicare Part D Generic Dispensing Rate national benchmark sits near 90% generic / 10% brand for primary-care prescribers, per CMS Office of the Actuary 2024 estimates. Higher brand share is common in specialty prescribing where generic equivalents are not available.

Medicare Part D Prescribing Data

CMS Medicare Part D prescriber-level data for calendar year 2024.

1,526
Total Claims
$60K
Total Drug Cost
217
Medicare Beneficiaries

Prescribing Breakdown

30-Day Fills
3,120.667
Total Day Supply
93,163
Brand vs Generic
3% brand / 97% generic
Brand Drug Cost
$15K
Generic Drug Cost
$45K

Patient Demographics

Average Patient Age
78.2 years
Avg HCC Risk Score
1.54
Gender Split
75% female / 25% male

Top Prescribed Drugs (Medicare Part D)

Top drugs by claim count for calendar year 2024. Based on Medicare Part D data only.

What Laura Eisenberg, FNP prescribes most

Top Medicare Part D drugs by claim count, 2024

claims
Source CMS Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use File As of 2024
Drug Claims
Desvenlafaxine Succinate Er
Desvenlafaxine Succinate
181
Bupropion Xl
Bupropion Hcl
93
Trazodone Hcl
 89
Escitalopram Oxalate
 83
Duloxetine Hcl
 69
Alprazolam
 67
Sertraline Hcl
 63
Bupropion Hcl Sr
Bupropion Hcl
60
Lamotrigine
 53
Gabapentin
 49

* Counts below 11 are suppressed by CMS for patient privacy. Generic names shown where available from CMS Part D data.

More Nurse Practitioner in TX → All providers in Texas → Compare specialties →

Nurse Practitioner Overview

How Laura Eisenberg, FNP fits within the Nurse Practitioner landscape nationally.

89,808
Nurse Practitioner Providers in US
56
States with Nurse Practitioner
1,144
Avg Claims per Provider

Laura Eisenberg, FNP's 1,526 claims are above the specialty average of 1,144.

Nationwide Nurse Practitioner peers with similar MIPS or enrollment year

Two federal-record peer sets for Eisenberg, both outside Texas so the neighborhoods are not geographic containment.

Similar MIPS final score

Nearest same-specialty clinicians by CMS MIPS final score (64.8 here).

Hailey Aguiar 64.8 FL Rafael Alonso 64.8 FL Yaqueline Arjona 64.8 FL Priya Bhatt 64.8 FL

Same NPPES enumeration year (2005)

Same-specialty clinicians who entered the NPI registry in the same calendar year, outside this state.

Kim Miller Mt Zion, IL Susanne Mlsna Viroqua, WI Patricia Mader Louisville, KY Heather Lacross Hudson, FL

Nearby Nurse Practitioner Providers in Texas

Other clinicians with the same primary specialty enrolled in Texas, drawn from the same CMS NPPES roster as Eisenberg.

One of 4,912 Nurse Practitioner providers enrolled in Texas, 5 are shown here.

Cornelia Abanobi
NP
Tomball, TX
Patricia Abbott
FNP-C
San Antonio, TX
Malika Abdelfettah
A/G NP
Garland, TX
Muntaha Abdelhadi
R.N., C.P.N.P.
Dallas, TX
Guelbert Abellana
N.P.
Houston, TX

Compare Nurse Practitioner nationally: see state-by-state distribution →

Frequently Asked Questions

What is Laura Eisenberg, FNP's specialty? ▼
Laura Eisenberg, FNP specializes in Nurse Practitioner and practices in Austin, Texas. Credentials: FNP.
How much does Laura Eisenberg, FNP prescribe under Medicare Part D? ▼
In 2024, Laura Eisenberg, FNP wrote 1,526 Medicare Part D claims totaling $60K in drug costs for 217 beneficiaries.
What is Laura Eisenberg, FNP's Medicare quality score? ▼
Laura Eisenberg, FNP has a CMS MIPS Final Score of 64.8/100 (Quality: 80.6, Cost: 32). The average MIPS Final Score across the 454,083 clinicians with at least one published category score is 83.5; clinicians whose score CMS assigned without scoring any category are excluded from that average. Source: CMS Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) 2023.
Where is Laura Eisenberg, FNP located? ▼
Laura Eisenberg, FNP is located at 3215 STECK AVE, Austin, TX, 78757. Phone: (512) 476-3556.
What is Laura Eisenberg, FNP's NPI number? ▼
Laura Eisenberg, FNP's National Provider Identifier (NPI) is 1285635706, issued on 08/09/2005.
Does Laura Eisenberg, FNP prescribe more brand-name or generic drugs? ▼
Laura Eisenberg, FNP's prescribing is 3% brand-name and 97% generic drugs by claim count, with $15K in brand drug costs.
How many Nurse Practitioner providers are there in the US? ▼
There are 89,808 Nurse Practitioner providers across 56 states in the US. The average Nurse Practitioner provider writes 1,144 Medicare Part D claims per year.
What drugs does Laura Eisenberg, FNP prescribe most often? ▼
Based on 2024 Medicare Part D data, Laura Eisenberg, FNP's most frequently prescribed drugs include Desvenlafaxine Succinate Er, Bupropion Xl, Trazodone Hcl. This reflects Medicare Part D prescriptions only and does not include commercial insurance or other payer types.
Does Laura Eisenberg, FNP accept Medicare? ▼
Laura Eisenberg, FNP appears in CMS Medicare data with 1,526 Part D claims and 217 Medicare beneficiaries in 2024. Contact the provider's office directly to confirm current Medicare enrollment and accepted plans.
How can I verify Laura Eisenberg, FNP's credentials? ▼
Laura Eisenberg, FNP's NPI is 1285635706 with credentials FNP. You can verify this through the NPPES NPI Registry, check state medical board records, and confirm board certification through the ABMS or AOA.

Data Sources

View source datasets and methodology notes
Provider Directory
CMS National Plan and Provider Enumeration System (NPPES), download.cms.gov/nppes, updated monthly. Contains NPI, specialty, credentials, and practice location.
Specialty Classification
NUCC Health Care Provider Taxonomy (nucc.org), the industry standard for classifying provider specialties in Medicare and Medicaid billing.
Prescribing Data
CMS Medicare Part D Prescriber Public Use File (2024). Includes claims, drug costs, beneficiaries, and opioid prescribing rates.
Quality Performance
CMS Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) - 2023 performance year.
Limitations
Provider data is self-reported to CMS. Prescribing data reflects Medicare Part D only and does not include commercial insurance, Medicaid, or cash prescriptions. Claims below 11 beneficiaries are suppressed by CMS for privacy.

See our complete data methodology for details on how we collect and process government data.

Data as of August 2026 (NPPES) / 2024 (Medicare Part D). Source: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).

Disclaimer: Data from CMS NPPES and Medicare Part D. PlainDoctor does not rate or rank providers. Provider information is self-reported and may not be current. Always verify information directly with the provider. About · Methodology

Compiled from official public sources by the editorial process.

Every figure on PlainDoctor is rendered directly from the federal CMS NPPES registry, Medicare Part D, MIPS, and Open Payments records, no number is typed in by an editor. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of August 2026.