Healthcare Consulting

We review your technical safeguards against HIPAA Security Rule requirements — access control, audit controls, integrity, authentication and transmission security — and document where the current state falls short, with a remediation plan ranked by risk rather than by ease. Worth being clear on scope: this is a technical assessment, not a legal opinion or a certification. HIPAA compliance is an organisational programme covering policies, training and business associate agreements, and the technical layer is one part of it.

By separating what is genuinely differentiating from what is merely necessary. Necessary-but-undifferentiating capability — scheduling, billing, document storage — is usually cheaper and safer to buy, even when the fit is imperfect. Building is justified where the workflow is genuinely specific to how you deliver care, or where no product handles it without extensive configuration that will itself need maintaining. We also cost the ongoing ownership, not just the initial delivery, because that is where build decisions most often turn out badly.

Yes, and the sequencing is where these succeed or fail. The pattern that works is incremental: an API layer in front of the legacy system, functionality moved outward in slices, both running in parallel until the old path carries no traffic. A single cut-over date for a system clinicians use daily is a risk profile most organisations should refuse. We also map the data migration honestly, including what will not carry over cleanly — historical records with inconsistent coding are the usual casualty and are better surfaced early.

Establishing which data needs to move, between which systems, at what latency, and what each vendor will actually expose — which is frequently less than the sales material implies. From there it is a FHIR adoption plan, a decision on whether to run an interface engine or point-to-point integrations, and a view on CMS interoperability and patient-access requirements. The vendor timelines are the part organisations most often underestimate; app registration and approval processes can add months before a line of code matters.

Starting with the regulatory question, because it determines everything downstream: does the intended use put this in FDA Software as a Medical Device territory? Beyond that, a governance framework covers model validation against representative data, bias evaluation across the populations you actually serve, defined human oversight in the clinical workflow, monitoring for drift after deployment, and a documented position on what the model does when it is uncertain. Organisations that skip this stage usually discover the gap during procurement or an audit.

No, and the deliverables are written on that assumption. A roadmap that only your author can execute is a sales document, not advice. Clients regularly take our assessments to their internal teams or to another partner, and that is a legitimate outcome. If you do want us to implement, that is a separate commercial conversation held after the assessment, not bundled into it.

Most assessments run two to four weeks depending on the size of the estate and how many stakeholders need interviewing. Cost depends on scope and duration, and we scope it against a specific question rather than selling a fixed package — pricing is agreed in writing before work starts. If the question is narrow enough that a short conversation resolves it, we will tell you that rather than proposing an engagement.

Senior engineers who have built and integrated clinical systems in production, not a dedicated consulting layer that has never shipped one. You meet the people who will do the work before committing. We are careful not to overstate credentials: our value here is engineering experience across many healthcare estates, and we will say plainly when a question needs a clinical, legal or regulatory specialist we are not.