The technology is selected.
Now make it work.
You have signed — or are weighing — an AI, patient-access, or revenue-cycle solution. The contract is in place. The readiness gap is not. Threshold Health closes that gap, names the owners on both sides, and stays through go-live and stabilization until adoption is measured against cell six of the Rules of Engagement.
What turns a signed contract into a deployment without measured adoption.
These are not vendor problems — they are operating problems, surfaced during health-system deployments where the named client-side owner was either late or absent. Each one is the same shape: a tool goes live on a procurement timeline, not on a workflow timeline.
Signed contract, no measurable adoption.
Tools go live on procurement timelines — not on workflow readiness. The question is not “did it deploy” but “are the named owners moving the cell-six number on the operating rhythm the integration partners are using.” Adoption is measured, not declared.
Vendor stack fragmented.
A point solution lands clean in isolation — and breaks the operating cadence against the EHR, scheduling, and prior-auth workflows it sits next to. Cross-vendor coordination is where readiness stalls, quietly, off the deployment page.
Go-live as finish line.
Live is the moment work begins — not the moment work ends. The threshold we measure against is adoption: frontline usage, throughput, error rate, financial clearance, owned by a named leader who stays after we leave.
Push the rollout from signed to measured.
Leadership changes. Vendors change. The critical workflow doesn’t get to stall — we hold it steady.
The intake is four fields, two minutes. The form is pre-tagged “For health systems” so the engagement team reads it with the right context. We respond within two business days with a named Threshold Health lead and the date for the first engagement call.
Four fields, two minutes. The intake is monitored by the Threshold Health engagement team — not a routing bot.