Safety, Risk & Compliance 2023
Purchase Energy High as Organizations Seek to Increase Visibility & Address Risk

Both Net-New & Existing RLDatix Customers Select RLDatix Solutions; Most Frustrated Respondents Are Replacing Non-Primary Products with Other Vendors’ Solutions

RLDatix is both the most considered and most selected vendor in recent decisions thanks to their widespread brand recognition (their customer base—the largest in this report—is growing via multiple product acquisitions) and attractive bundled offering, RLDatix Solutions. This offering includes RL6 Solutions and PolicyStat; organizations that chose this offering highlight the broad capabilities, robust functionality, and user-friendly interface. About half of RLDatix’s wins are net-new customers, and the others are existing customers planning to move from one of RLDatix’s non-primary solutions (Datix, SRM, or the Verge Health solutions) to the bundled offering. These existing customers cite the improved technology, increased customization options, and easier-to-use reporting as reasons for selection. Those who are moving away from RLDatix mostly use the vendor’s non-primary products and are frustrated with their support, reporting, mobile device compatibility, and lack of certain features (e.g., patient tracking and notifications). Prospective customers who ultimately didn’t choose RLDatix Solutions say other vendors have more customization options, better integration capabilities, and the ability to provide custom risk-scoring systems. The cost of RLDatix Solutions is also seen as a barrier, particularly by smaller organizations.

For symplr, Compliance Platform Sees Purchase Energy while Some Midas Customers Leave Due to Aging Technology

symplr Compliance, which has a smaller customer base, was selected by four organizations thanks to the price and technology that can be used enterprise wide. symplr Midas Safety and Risk Solutions—which has the second largest customer base in this report thanks to its broad functionality—is also considered. The Midas platform was selected by two organizations: one wanted to consolidate to a single platform across their health system, while the other has previous experience with the platform and is optimistic about what the vendor can do with it. Those who are replacing symplr are all Midas customers. These respondents perceive the user interface as aging and want to move to an updated solution with capabilities that can better meet their needs.

Origami Risk & Riskonnect Often Chosen by Acute Care Organizations Thanks to Comprehensive Offerings; Some Don’t Select Due to Cost

Origami Risk is most often considered by midsize and large acute care hospitals because of the solution’s up-to-date features and robust reporting. Additionally, prospective customers say the platform feels comprehensive with its various modules and integration capabilities. Reasons for selection include the strong reporting that provides visibility into pertinent information. The platform is also considered because it is perceived as highly customizable and easy to use, and users can add and create features without incurring additional fees. However, Origami Risk’s overall cost prevents some prospective customers (particularly smaller organizations) from selecting. Riskonnect is also primarily considered by large acute care hospitals because of widespread brand recognition, the perception of solid support, and the scalable solution—which is seen as well integrated, easy to use, and up to date. Though frequently considered, Riskonnect is chosen by fewer organizations. Those who select appreciate how comprehensive the platform is and believe it will meet their specific needs. Some also anticipate that Riskonnect will offer better customer service than past vendors. Other highlights include the vendor’s culture, service, communication, and industry knowledge they bring to the sales process. For organizations who consider Riskonnect without selecting, cost (noted by smaller organizations) and the lack of needed functionality (e.g., customization) are cited as reasons.

Small & Midsize Organizations Frequently Consider & Select Performance Health Partners

In this data sample, Performance Health Partners is chosen as often as they are considered, and those who select are often small to midsize hospitals and ambulatory, post–acute care, and behavioral health organizations. Organizations say the system appears easy to use, and they appreciate the simple interface and customization capabilities (e.g., custom reporting). Also, Performance Health Partners’ healthcare focus is seen as a strength, and respondents view the vendor as flexible, helpful, responsive, and willing to accommodate specific needs. The competitive pricing is also frequently mentioned as a reason for selection; respondents report that the vendor often submitted the lowest bid during the RFP process and that the product suits their organizations’ budgets while still providing all necessary functionality in one integrated platform.

Functionality the Top Driver in Purchase Decisions

Vendor Bottom Lines

Vendors ordered by overall performance score; data in this section comes from KLAS performance data only and does not include data about purchase decisions

Performance Health Partners

2023 Best in KLAS winner for safety, risk, and compliance management. Seen as a high performer that is mostly validated in small to midsize hospitals and ambulatory, post–acute care, and behavioral health organizations. Customer respondents say vendor provides a high level of support and easy-to-use technology for a reasonable price. Training is seen as strong, though a few respondents feel additional ongoing training would help them better utilize the solution.

“The executive leadership team and our account representative have been very engaged from beginning to end. The outcome of having that involvement is knowing that we have a leader that is standing by their product and their brand. That makes us feel good. We have somebody who is just as engaged and involved as we are in terms of making sure that we have a quality product. The vendor is a partner and is not just here to collect money and leave us high and dry. The product is awesome. We thoroughly appreciate the partnership and the collaborative nature in which the vendor has worked with us. Most importantly, we appreciate the vendor’s ability to be available to meet our needs.” —Chief compliance officer, current customer

“The product requires a bit of a learning curve. The vendor can improve the implementation and training by providing more support in terms of live training. The training can even be virtual, but it needs to be live. Once the system goes live, we want more training sessions with the trainers.” —Analyst, current customer

Riskonnect

Product is seen as stable and reliable, with many customers saying it is one of the most robust offerings available. There is mixed feedback about support. Satisfied respondents say their account managers are helpful and responsive, while dissatisfied respondents are frustrated with having to use the pay-by-the-service-hour model after surpassing their contracted hours—consequently, these respondents feel they can’t get the support they need. Both new and longtime customers often note implementation issues that led to further complications. As a result, some customers are still struggling, even years later, to fully utilize the solution.

“Riskonnect does a very good job at what they do. I really like the program. We have reports set up that will run automatically for us, and that is helpful. It is easy to track and trend data in the system, and the system is easy for our staff to use. When we see that we have a trend based on our patient safety events, then we usually do a deeper dive to figure out what is going on. Doing that has allowed us to change different systems and processes to improve patient safety.” —Quality coordinator, current customer

“During the implementation of Riskonnect’s system, every little thing had to be explicitly asked for in order to fix a problem. We did not feel like the transition was overseen from a higher level where the vendor looked at the whole picture and how the platform was performing. They would make one change and then ask us what else was broken without looking at it themselves.” —Safety and risk specialist, current customer

VigiLanz

Offers broad technology suite for pharmacy surveillance and infection control and moved into the safety, risk, and compliance market in 2018. Has 12 customers using safety, risk, and compliance product, with some being very large organizations. Solution is seen as intuitive and easy to use, though there are some limitations with reporting—some customers are working with VigiLanz to expand reporting capabilities to meet their needs. Respondents feel vendor is supporting and partnering with customers to enhance solution’s capabilities and development. 63% of respondents would buy the product again, and all but one plan to use it long term.

“What VigiLanz did to help us implement their solution went above and beyond the scope of the application build. VigiLanz has a good product. We certainly push the envelope of what their product does, and the vendor is willing to make changes to the application for us. The people we work with on their team are very experienced and knowledgeable concerning the application. They understand the workflow, so we do not have to explain things to them. VigiLanz is so willing to work with us to enhance the application. We have a process where we request enhancements, and they tell us honestly whether something is possible and how much time it will take to implement. We can look at the overall scope of our project and find out whether it is within our time frame.” —Senior project manager, current customer

“The vendor keeps their promises, but we are not totally satisfied with some things. The product is not horrible, but it is not everything we are looking for. The product works as promoted, but maybe not to the quality we had expected. Our big problem is not with reporting but with day-to-day usage. We have a ton of reports and only so many people covering those reports. When our people come in every day and open the VigiLanz system, there is no way for them to request not to see a report for seven more days. They have to literally wade through every report that has been opened for them every day. For some folks, there are 25 pages of reports; they can’t get through that many pages in a day. We are told that there is no way to fix the problem and that VigiLanz is not going to fix it. In a previous product, we had a way to manage the workload on a daily basis, and that is very difficult with this product.” —Director of safety and risk, current customer

Origami Risk

Customers are often midsize and large health systems. Most respondents feel product works well and includes desired capabilities, even as vendor has expanded into other markets. Support quality is often mentioned; customers say vendor closely collaborates to meet customer needs. In the midst of Origami Risk’s recent rapid growth, a few customers point to misses with newer account representatives, and almost one-quarter of respondents say that because vendor hasn’t been tracking costs very well, they have started nickel-and-diming for the number of hours included in service contracts.

“A strength of Origami Risk is the support that we get from the staff that work there. We have routine meetings with them. They do a phenomenal job of rolling out the latest things that the platform can do. They put out a newsletter, and sometimes it is just pages and pages of things that the vendor has done as upgrades or enhancements to the program. That is a big plus for them. Another strength is their willingness to understand what our end point is and where we are trying to go, maybe in regard to a particular report or particular project. They then assist our staff in knowing how we can get there. That may be them teaching us something that gives us the capability of doing it, or it may be something that we have to rely on them for. Their support is their number-one strength.” —VP, current customer

“Origami Risk has admitted to struggling with missing charges for the service hours they were supposed to have been tracking for us. Our account person has been tracking multiple things, and because of that, they have noticed that some things have been falling through the cracks. All kinds of things have not been getting monitored closely. Origami Risk has worked with us to try to move forward with things. The vendor has been growing as a company, and we have had to experience that growth with them. If the vendor had been monitoring the hours closely themselves, they could have reached out and told us that we were going to go over before that happened. But by the time they noticed the hours, we had gone way over.” —Director, current customer

RLDatix

Vendor has largest customer base by far compared to other vendors in report. Customer respondents of RL6 Solutions and PolicyStat (the vendor’s go-forward products, which are part of the bundled offering RLDatix Solutions) highlight the products’ broad capabilities. Many satisfied respondents plan to expand use of RLDatix’s technology, mentioning the vendor’s engaged leadership and solid development road map. Though perceived negatively in the past, support is now seen by some as proactive and helpful. Still, dissatisfied respondents point to challenges around support and training, saying the newly implemented ticketing hub isn’t responsive enough. Some mention poor training has impeded product utilization.

“Using RL6 Solutions, we have achieved the ability to identify trends in events within the organization. We can look at the location and type of an event and its specifics. The system provides all the information I use for my patient safety committee and our drill down and management of events. The solution supports the whole event reporting process. I train all my employees on it, and it is our only information-gathering system that everyone has access to.” —Quality and safety manager, current customer

“We can’t send any more emails to the vendor about issues; instead, we have to work through the vendor’s ticket hub. The hub is perfectly fine, and we can track our issues through it. But we put tickets in the hub, and a couple of weeks will go by without us receiving a response. We have to go back and ask again before several different people will respond. That gets very frustrating. Our account executive should be able to solve problems; that person works with one module from RLDatix, is very familiar with a specific area of the module, and is actually quite helpful in that area. But I don’t think that individual is taking the time to learn anything about the platform that the module for root cause analysis is on. Any of our questions regarding RL6 Solutions get redirected, and we are told to submit tickets. That is the issue. We don’t have someone who understands the platform, so we can’t really do anything but fill out hub tickets.” —Senior director of risk management, current customer

symplr

After 18 months since symplr’s acquisition of Midas Safety and Risk Solutions, customer respondents are starting to feel optimistic about symplr improving the solution, including the user interface. Most validated customers have been using the solution for over a decade thanks to its broad capabilities. Some are leaving the vendor, saying the solution falls short due to the aging user interface and vendor not enhancing the product quickly enough. symplr Compliance sees mixed reviews. Those most satisfied often talk about being able to design the system to meet their needs. Respondents often say support is responsive but sometimes slow to resolve issues. Also, many feel that upgrades are slow to happen.

Compliance

“symplr’s support team is good. When I have trouble with something, the vendor is very responsive and does a really good job of solving things for me.” —VP, current customer

“Ever since symplr took over, getting in touch with someone has been a nightmare. I don’t know whether they have been trying to make any improvements because nobody has been communicating with us.” —Chief compliance officer, current customer

Midas Safety and Risk Solutions

“In terms of functionality, there is room for improvement, but there isn’t much that symplr can’t handle. symplr is definitely showing great improvement in technology. We are on an upswing because Midas is owned now by symplr. Because of that new relationship, symplr has certainly reprioritized the system and their investment into development. We are excited about where the vendor is headed. Things are more promising than what we have seen in recent years in terms of system enhancement, improvement, and response to clients’ needs. There is a new emphasis in the market on customer excellence, patient safety, EMR integration, and usability.” —Manager, current customer

“The solution is outdated. The vendor’s IT support for critical problems is seriously slow and lacking. I won’t give symplr two thumbs up. They are working on things, though, and they have a good infrastructure team. My account managers and contacts outside of the actual help department are very easy to get ahold of and talk to. However, their hands are tied because of the transition. They aren’t able to leap into a whole new help desk. A lot of that is because the vendor’s third-level support is located overseas. We have heard that the vendor has received a lot of complaints about that. It isn’t fair to give symplr a bad review just because they bought the system. The vendor is aware that there are issues, and they are trying to fix them. However, the system isn’t a solid program. It has been pieced together. Things don’t flow smoothly in the system.” —Clinical support analyst, current customer

About This Report

Data for this report comes from two sources: (1) KLAS Decision Insights data and (2) KLAS performance data.

KLAS Decision Insights Data

All references in this report to organizations’ purchasing motivations come from KLAS’ Decision Insights data. Since 2017, KLAS has been gathering information as to which vendors are being replaced, considered, and purchased and what factors drive these decisions. KLAS Decision Insights data does not represent a comprehensive census or win/loss market share study. Rather, it is intended to help organizations understand which vendors have market energy and why. The data set in this report comes from 51 organizations that are making or have recently made a safety, risk, and compliance purchase decision validated by KLAS from May 2021 to May 2023.

KLAS Performance Data

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 12 months 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.

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 below 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. 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.