Premium Reports
Contact KLAS
 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report    Zoom in charts



Related Series

MEDITECH Consulting
A Provider's Guide to MEDITECH Consulting Firms

Related Articles

 End chart zoom
MEDITECH Implementation Services 2021 MEDITECH Implementation Services 2021
* A page refresh may be necessary to see the updated image

MEDITECH Implementation Services 2021
How Well Do Firms Drive Successful Implementations?

author - Kaleb Harris
Kaleb Harris
author - Jennifer Hickenlooper
Jennifer Hickenlooper
author - Doug VanWagenen
Doug VanWagenen
October 28, 2021 | Read Time: 6  minutes

When implementing a MEDITECH EMR, provider organizations must use a firm that is certified by MEDITECH (i.e., READY-certified). There are many READY-certified firms in the market, and MEDITECH has recently joined the competition by offering their own implementation services. To help provider organizations navigate their options, this report seeks to share which firms consistently provide high-quality services and provides an early look at the client experience with MEDITECH’s implementation services.

Navin Haffty & Huron Seen as Experienced, though Client Satisfaction Varies

overall performance score and respondent bed sizeOf the firms in this report, Navin Haffty (a Tegria company) and Huron serve the widest breadth of clients, implementing MEDITECH systems for organizations that range greatly in bed size. Clients see them as experienced firms that align well with organizational goals and deliver satisfactory results. Highly satisfied Navin Haffty cliants perceive the firm as a partner and collaborator. Project managers are described as willing to go above and beyond; in some cases, consultants helped clients with other projects that had gone awry. A few smaller clients say the firm provided advice that was misguided or too high level. Huron clients report the firm provides knowledgeable staff and leaders and delivers outcomes. When the firm temporarily paused one respondent’s project due to financial concerns, the client saw that as a testament to their partnership. Two other clients struggled when the pandemic forced their resources to work remotely. One of the two reported their project improved once their resource returned on-site.

MedMatica and Santa Rosa Staffing were recently acquired (January 2021) and rebranded to form medSR, which focuses on midsize to large MEDITECH implementations. Clients speak highly of their consultants’ ability to communicate well and finish projects on time. A few clients mention that project scoping issues resulted in nickel-and-diming, and some feel the consultants don’t always offer strategic guidance.

Early MEDITECH Clients Report Above Average Performance

MEDITECH, whose EMR customers typically engage with third-party firms for implementations, has started offering their own implementation services over the last few years. Previous KLAS research shows that software vendors who implement their own software see mixed results and often struggle with large, complex projects due to a lack of subject matter expertise. However, early data from three clients (half of MEDITECH’s implementation services client base at the time of data collection) indicates that MEDITECH’s performance is above average for MEDITECH implementations. All respondents speak positively about the firm’s resources, saying they were collaborative and kept the project on track when issues arose. Two clients mention they had some complications with their resources—one had to replace a resource, and the other had to intervene when a consultant caused technical difficulties. MEDITECH may not always provide their own resources; in a KLAS Decision Insights survey (not part of this research sample), a prospective client relayed that MEDITECH would find a resource from another READY-certified firm if they couldn’t provide a resource of their own. As a result, the prospective client selected a different firm.

† Since 2017, KLAS has been gathering information as to which vendors are being replaced, considered, and purchased and what factors drive these decisions. This data—called KLAS Decision Insights—is intended to help provider organizations understand which vendors have market energy and why.

market average scoreboard vs meditech scorecard

Consistent Execution from Engage & ettain health Drives High Satisfaction for Small Clients

overall satisfaction vs engagement executionEngage (a Tegria company) and ettain health primarily serve organizations with less than 100 beds. Engage clients consistently report positive experiences with the staff’s strategic knowledge and expertise. Resources are available when needed and quick to understand clients’ needs. They also keep projects organized and on track, resulting in clients reporting a quality firm partnership. One unsatisfied respondent noted struggles with miscommunication during their project. Clients of ettain health (limited data) appreciated the firm’s early pre-implementation planning and both their clear communication and strategic guidance throughout the project. Clients report developing a great relationship with the firm. One client wishes ettain health had provided more pushback during the planning phase of the project. Clients of Healthcare Triangle (limited data) report varied satisfaction. Those that are satisfied perceive the firm as engaged, knowledgeable, and supportive. In general, projects were completed within budget, causing clients to feel Healthcare Triangle’s services were worth the money. One client reports missing their deadline and not being able to participate in much of the project planning.

Pre-Implementation Planning Highly Important to Overall Project Satisfaction

how would you rate the quality of the pre implementation planningRespondents were asked to rate the quality of their firm’s pre-implementation planning, their firm’s effectiveness in driving the project, and the quality of the building/testing period. Early data shows that of these three factors, the quality of the firm’s pre-implementation planning most influences a client’s overall satisfaction with the project. Client ratings for pre-implementation planning vary across firms, and all firms have at least one client that struggled with the pre-implementation planning. Clients report it is important for firms to establish expectations up front, and some wish they received more pushback during the planning phase. Additionally, respondents sometimes experienced a lack of guidance, communication, and clarity around timelines.

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 over the last 18 months using KLAS’ standard quantitative evaluation for healthcare services, which is composed of 9 numeric ratings questions and 3 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 five customer experience pillars—loyalty, operations, relationship, services, and value.

customerexperience pillars services

In late 2020, KLAS also began asking respondents who rate an implementation services firm to answer three supplemental questions specific to the implementation market. These questions ask respondents to rate (1) the quality of their firm’s pre-implementation planning, (2) their firm’s effectiveness in driving the project, and (3) the quality of the building/testing period. These questions will continue to be asked on an ongoing basis. Early results are shared above.

Sample Sizes

about this reportUnless otherwise noted, sample sizes displayed throughout this report (e.g., n=16) represent the total number of unique client organizations interviewed for a given firm or service. However, it should be noted that to allow for the representation of differing perspectives within any one client organization, samples may include surveys from different individuals at the same organization. Ratings from these individuals are aggregated in order to prevent any one organization’s feedback from disproportionately impacting a service’s score. The table below shows the total number of unique organizations interviewed for each firm or service as well as the total number of individual respondents.

Some respondents choose not to answer particular questions, meaning the sample size for any given firm or service can change from question to question. When the number of unique organization responses for a particular question is less than 6, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 3, no score is shown. Note that when a firm has a low number of reporting sites, the possibility exists for KLAS scores to change significantly as new surveys are collected.

author - Sarah Hanson
Sarah Hanson
author - Natalie Jamison
Natalie Jamison
author - Natalie Jamison
Project Manager
Natalie Jamison
 Download Report Brief  Download Full Report

This material is copyrighted. Any organization gaining unauthorized access to this report will be liable to compensate KLAS for the full retail price. Please see the KLAS DATA USE POLICY for information regarding use of this report. © 2024 KLAS Research, LLC. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: Performance scores may change significantly when including newly interviewed provider organizations, especially when added to a smaller sample size like in emerging markets with a small number of live clients. The findings presented are not meant to be conclusive data for an entire client base.