A health data company that happens to run your practice.
Handling the paperwork means the reason for every decision gets written down as it happens, rather than reconstructed later or lost entirely. After a few months you can answer questions about your own practice that you could not answer before, and negotiate with payers from evidence rather than assertion.
What a record that keeps reasons can answer
Other systems log what happened. This one logs why, which turns a compliance audit from a quarterly project into a single query.
Evidence you can take to a payer
Screeners collected on schedule, scored, and linked to a diagnosis, a plan objective, and the intervention delivered. Over time that becomes contractible evidence.
Response, more than activity
Not how many sessions were delivered. How many patients measurably improved, in how many sessions, at what cost in clinician hours.
What actually predicts it
In real panels, weekly rhythm matters more than almost anything else. One finding with clinical, operational, and contractual power.
Benchmarked honestly
Where you sit against comparable organizations of similar size and case mix, and the specific practices that separate the top quartile.
Verifiable, not asserted
A payer can audit source screener scores read-only. That is what converts an outcome claim from marketing into contractible evidence.
Benchmarks: Your position, and the adjacent action
Anxiety & Depression Outcomes · 31 Peer Organizations
You see your percentile position and cohort spread, never another practice by name. Groups under 12 are hidden.
Grading: Not all value is the same kind of thing
Most software sums up recovered money, saved hours, and growth it takes credit for into one inflated figure. We separate them, explain how each was counted, and leave out the ones we cannot defend.
| Tier Classification | Accounting Definition & Rationale | Demonstrated Value | Auditor Audit Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Verified | Observable in someone else's record A remittance, a payer response, a state acceptance. Nobody has to take our word for it. | $33,000 reprocessed claims and overturned appeals | Counted |
| Would have gone | Money that was about to leave Discounted by your own historical lapse rate of 11%, not assumed at 100%. Assuming everything would have lapsed is the most common way these numbers get faked. | $62,800 authorizations renewed before lapsing | Counted |
| Avoided | Cost not incurred, against a real baseline Measured from a number captured before go live. Without that, improvement can only be asserted. | $9,400 denial rate 8.1% down to 5.1% | Counted |
| Attributed | A judgement about which touch produced it First touch on sub-minute responses, with no control group. Presented as a judgement, because that is what it is. | $37,200 admissions following fast response | Counted |
| Not claimed | Plausible, and we will not count it Clinician turnover fell eight points in a quarter when you also changed pay. We cannot separate the two, so it stays out. | — excluded, confounded | Excluded |
A baseline number, before we change anything
A baseline captured after go-live is not a baseline. Without a before-number, improvement can only be asserted. Denial rate, days in AR, no-show rate, inquiry response time, minutes per prior auth. Two hours at the start, impossible afterwards.
Cost per outcome, calculated and not exportable
It exists in your workspace and you can see it. You cannot send it anywhere, because it does not yet adjust for acuity. Unadjusted, it rewards treating easier patients. A measure that rewards the wrong behavior is worse than no measure, so it stays blocked until acuity adjustment is validated.