340B Management Systems 2024
Are Vendors Driving Savings in a High-Energy Market?

Verity Solutions & PharmaForce Drive Savings & High Customer Satisfaction; PharmaForce’s Acute-Care Focus Results in More Variability for Ambulatory Customers

2024 Best in KLAS winner Verity Solutions serves a variety of covered acute and ambulatory care entities and sees the highest customer satisfaction among vendors in this report. In particular, acute care customers of all sizes feel the solution is reliable, drives savings, and improves compliance. While ambulatory care customers previously reported less satisfaction and less ambulatory care expertise from the vendor, the three ambulatory customers interviewed in this data set report an improved experience more consistent with that of acute care customers. Overall, respondents report strong relationships with Verity Solutions and feel that they get their money’s worth from the solution (see charts below). Respondents using Verisave—the vendor’s purchasing optimization analytics solution—in conjunction with the 340B management solution are especially pleased with the cost savings they have realized.

PharmaForce has historically been viewed as a vendor who serves mostly small ambulatory customers, but they have expanded to acute care in recent years. Both small and large acute care customers report excellent experiences and highlight the vendor’s proactive service. On the other hand, interviewed ambulatory customers (representing almost two-thirds of validated FQHCs in this report) report more mixed experiences, with their average customer satisfaction score being 12.5 points lower (on a 100-point scale) than that of acute care respondents. Many ambulatory respondents feel the vendor has shifted too much focus to acute care, reporting less development of new technology for their space, missed timelines, long turnaround times for fixes, and less hands-on service. Still, both acute and ambulatory customers highlight the strong value they receive from the solution and note savings from the initial switch to PharmaForce as well as increased savings on drug costs.

Verity Solutions & RxStrategies* Provide Strong Account Management; Some Macro Helix Customers Deciding to Leave due to Support Challenges

Quality of support is top of mind for healthcare organizations in the 340B management space as they consider their technology investments—in the last year, the most-cited reason for replacing a 340B management solution is support challenges. Similarly, staff turnover is a frequently mentioned problem across the market, and a differentiator for customers is how well their vendor manages that turnover. Overall, Verity Solutions respondents report the most consistent support experience, and the vendor has been chosen as a replacement multiple times in the last year due to their strong reputation for consistent, prompt support. Respondents note there has been very little turnover within the organization; when turnover of an account manager is mentioned, it is often the result of internal promotion within Verity Solutions, so customers are able to retain their point of contact.

Interviewed RxStrategies* customers report strong experiences with support, an improvement after previous respondents noted that the support people were pleasant to work with but not empowered to fix problems. Now, the support people are often highlighted as knowledgeable, empowered, and responsive. While respondents report some support turnover, they have enjoyed working with the account managers they have had and feel the vendor has maintained consistency through the changes.

Historically, Macro Helix customers have said that the vendor relationship felt transactional and that they wanted more of a strategic partnership. In the last year, interviewed Macro Helix customers have reported multiple replacements due to support challenges. Several respondents feel turnover (one of the support challenges) has led to a lack of knowledge and expertise on the support team. Additionally, Macro Helix receives the lowest score for their level of proactive service. While some respondents note that the support team tries to help when customers reach out, the team is often slow to respond and solve tickets.

*Limited data

The Craneware Group Customers See Less Value for Solution’s Cost; Macro Helix Customers Appreciate Multiple Options for Pricing Structures, Some Feel Nickel-and-Dimed 

The Craneware Group is most validated in use by DSH organizations but also sees use across a range of care settings and covered entities. Many interviewed customers feel the solution is expensive, and 29% of respondents say the vendor charges for every little thing—about twice as much as respondents report for other vendors. Additionally, several feel The Craneware Group is falling behind in product development. Despite these challenges, most are likely to stay with the vendor for the long term, noting hesitancy to change due to the pain of switching vendors. Additionally, there has been growing optimism around promised future developments since The Craneware Group acquired Sentry Data Systems in 2021. In that time, customer satisfaction has increased from 66.5 to 77.3 (on a 100-point scale), driven largely by improved support and increased consistency in the implementation process.

Interviewed Macro Helix customers report varying degrees of satisfaction (see next section). Overall, respondents feel the solution is an inexpensive option in the acute care space. This is mostly due to the bundled contracting for medications with McKesson, which can help decrease drug spending and make ordering easier. Respondents appreciate the vendor’s different pricing structures that provide cost savings tailored to both large and small organizations, including the ability for small organizations to pay per use. That said, the per-use pricing structure leads to some feelings of being charged for every little thing.

Across Vendors, Customers Want More Help Navigating Drug Manufacturer Restrictions; Automated Tools & Strong Service Are Highlighted for Easing Provider Burden 

Drug manufacturer restrictions are a pain point for customers of all 340B management vendors, as they make it more complex and difficult for a healthcare organization to realize savings. Respondents understand that restrictions are out of the vendors’ control and appreciate the base level of communication received from vendors—all 340B management vendors are reported to send emails informing customers of new drug restrictions. Still, while expectations vary between organizations, respondents generally desire vendors to do more than they are currently to aid them in navigating the restrictions.

PharmaForce, Verity Solutions, and RxStrategies respondents report the most satisfaction with their vendor’s help in navigating restrictions, with customers noting regular email communication from the vendors. PharmaForce  and RxStrategies* customers appreciate the benefits of having an automated tool that blocks the purchasing of restricted drugs, making it easier to navigate those restrictions. Verity Solutions is highlighted for their strong support and regular calls that aid provider organizations in navigating restrictions. One respondent mentioned that the vendor provides teams of subject matter experts they can rely on when restrictions occur. Macro Helix and The Craneware Group both provide email communication as well as a tool for customers, but respondents of both vendors feel development has been slow and that the manual nature of the tool requires too much work on their end. The Craneware Group is reported to have recently started providing an additional service to help navigate restrictions; early users are satisfied with this service, though some are frustrated that it comes at an extra charge.

*Limited data

A note about Wellpartner: Wellpartner is CVS’s exclusive 340B management partner for contract pharmacy. Wellpartner is not being used broadly outside of CVS contracts, though KLAS has validated a limited amount of split billing and referral management work as well. As such, data is not included for Wellpartner in this report.

About This Report

Each year, KLAS interviews thousands of healthcare professionals about the IT solutions and services their organizations use. For this report, interviews were conducted between June 2023 and June 2024 using KLAS’ standard quantitative evaluation for healthcare software, which is composed of 16 numeric ratings questions and 4 yes/no questions, all weighted equally. Combined, the ratings for these questions make up the overall performance score, which is measured on a 100-point scale. The questions are organized into six customer experience pillars—culture, loyalty, operations, product, relationship, and value.

To supplement the standard evaluation, KLAS asked the following supplemental questions specific to the 340B management market:

1. How satisfied are you with your 340B management vendor’s efforts to help you navigate drug manufacturer restrictions?
2. What are you using your 340B management vendor for?
3. What covered entity types are you managing with your vendor?

Sample Sizes

Unless otherwise noted, sample sizes displayed throughout this report (e.g., n=16) represent the total number of unique customer organizations interviewed for a given vendor or solution. However, it should be noted that to allow for the representation of differing perspectives within any one customer organization, samples may include surveys from different individuals at the same organization. The table shows the total number of unique organizations interviewed for each vendor or solution as well as the total number of individual respondents.

Some respondents choose not to answer particular questions, meaning the sample size for any given vendor or solution can change from question to question. When the number of unique organization responses for a particular question is less than 15, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 6, no score is shown. Where textual content relies on limited data, the vendor name is marked with an asterisk. Note that when a vendor has a low number of reporting sites, the possibility exists for KLAS scores to change significantly as new surveys are collected.