Purpose To compare non-physician healthcare professional and radiologists' survey responses regarding attitudes and current practices, policies, and procedures related to the follow-up of nonemergent actionable incidental findings (AIF). Materials and Methods The American College of Radiology (ACR) developed a survey with input from a technical expert panel (TEP). Survey items were developed by TEP members, refined by an ACR market research expert, and were examined for face and construct validity. The survey was distributed among ACR membership and various medical professional organizations. Responses from non-physician responders and radiologists were analyzed and compared using descriptive statistics. Results The analysis included 375 responses, 247 from radiologists and 128 from non-physicians. All respondent groups stated that radiology follow-up recommendations are evidence-based. Both respondent groups indicated that there is up to moderate risk associated with AIF follow-up. Both respondent groups similarly favored that the accountability for communicating AIF lies first with the ordering provider, followed by primary care providers, then the patient, and lastly an automated process that is managed by a staff member and/or the radiologist. All respondent groups indicated that tracking processes were more commonly funded by the healthcare system than through the radiology budget. Conclusion There is alignment between non-physicians and radiologists regarding the implementation of tracking systems that assure completion of radiology follow-up recommendations. Building tracking systems represents an opportunity for multi-disciplinary collaboration to address care transition communication and process gaps.