Our take on health tech

As we meet companies, leaders and technologists in the healthcare technology space, we will share monthly thoughts on the current state and future of the industry.

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
October 16, 2025

The Long Game: CMS's Primary Care VBC Strategy & the Role of Technology

Many primary care providers (PCPs) are missing incentives to transition to value-based care (VBC). After more than a decade of pilots and iterations, CMS has finally created two programs (both for traditional Medicare) that could be impactful for smaller practices.
5 min read

While the healthcare industry braces for potential cuts to Medicaid and Medicare Advantage due to regulation like the Big Beautiful Bill (BBB), there's a silver lining that many primary care providers (PCPs) are missing, incentives to transition to value-based care (VBC). I wanted to understand more about these programs to think through how vendors like NeuroFlow or Ilant Health might take advantage of them. I hope this is helpful to others as well.

After more than a decade of pilots and iterations, CMS has finally created two programs (both for traditional Medicare) that could be impactful for smaller practices: Making Care Primary (MCP) and ACO Primary Care FLEX. Here's why PCPs should pay attention—and how to get started.

The Programs That Actually Work for Small Practices

Making Care Primary (MCP) - CMS's new 10-year flagship model

  • Direct payments of $25-40 per patient per month to practices, paid at the beginning of each month
  • For a 1,000-patient Medicare panel: $300K-480K annually
  • No ACO required—perfect for independent practices
  • Gradual ramp into risk-based contracts

ACO Primary Care FLEX - Add-on for existing Medicare ACOs

  • $15-25 PBPM for qualifying low-revenue practices
  • $180K-300K annually for 1,000 Medicare patients
  • Focuses on practice transformation within ACO structure

Where to Invest These Dollars for Maximum Impact

CMS explicitly encourages spending on:

🧠 Behavioral Health Integration - The biggest cost multiplier across all conditions

(Great news for a vendor like NeuroFlow)

  • Collaborative care models
  • On-site mental health clinicians
  • Substance use disorder screening

🏠 Health-Related Social Needs

  • Community health workers
  • Transportation coordination
  • Housing and food security partnerships

📱 Remote Patient Monitoring

  • Cardiac, respiratory, and metabolic monitoring
  • Chronic disease management
  • Post-discharge follow-up

👥 Enhanced Staffing

  • Care coordinators
  • Population health nurses
  • Data analysts

A Strategic Roadmap for PCPs

Phase 1: Quick Wins (Low resource, fast ROI)

  • Close preventive care gaps
  • Standardize hypertension/diabetes protocols
  • Risk-stratify your patient panels

Phase 2: Build Infrastructure (Moderate investment)

  • Hire care coordinators
  • Implement behavioral health screening
  • Launch telehealth for follow-ups

Phase 3: Advanced Integration (Higher investment)

  • Full behavioral health integration
  • Comprehensive remote monitoring programs
  • Social determinants interventions

The Technology Enablement Opportunity

For healthcare IT companies, this represents a massive market opportunity. The dollars don’t go far if programs rely on staffing alone. PCPs will need:

  • Patient engagement and registry solutions like DocResponse
  • Analytics platforms for population health like HealthEC
  • Remote monitoring technologies such as Caption Care & NeuroTrack
  • Care navigation & other wrap-around services like Ilant Health, Sylvan Health
  • Behavioral health integration tools like NeuroFlow

The key is understanding that these practices need turnkey solutions—not just software, but services and support to transform their care delivery models.

Why This Time is Different

Unlike previous pilots like CPC+ (which NeuroFlow supported at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital back in 2019) that were too complex or aggressive for smaller practices, MCP and FLEX are designed with accessibility in mind. They provide:

  • Upfront cash flow for transformation
  • Multi-payer alignment reducing fragmented incentives
  • Gradual risk progression
  • Direct support for practice-level changes

So, Now What?

While the broader healthcare landscape faces uncertainty, primary care providers have a clear path forward. The question isn't whether to embrace value-based care—it's how quickly you can get started.

For PCPs: The infrastructure investment made today with these dollars will position practices for success regardless of what happens with traditional fee-for-service models.

For healthcare technology companies: The practices entering these programs will need partners who understand both the clinical and business transformation required.

Despite some short-term challenges for value-based care, especially due to the BBB, these programs are worth looking at to drive investment.

October 2, 2025

The Home Care Market: Is Hospice Outperforming Home Health Right Now?

Understanding how home health, hospice, and palliative care intersect (and compete) reveals a complex landscape where payment models and regulatory approaches vary wildly despite serving overlapping patient populations
5 min read

While at an Alliance for Care at Home conference in Chicago a few weeks ago, someone told me it's a better time to be in the business of hospice than home health. This surprised me, because hospice is a small niche within the broader home health and home care sector.

Digging in deeper, I've learned that these two sectors, as well as palliative care, show a range of different economic trajectories, and the policy environment is creating some surprising dynamics. Understanding how home health, hospice, and palliative care intersect (and compete) reveals a complex landscape where payment models and regulatory approaches vary wildly despite serving overlapping patient populations.

Hospice may have some extra advantages right now, but all three areas are still growing and will continue to grow for a while. Before diving in, let’s make sure we know what these services really are.

The Patient Journey: Where These Services Intersect

For a Medicare beneficiary facing serious illness, the care journey might look like this:

🏥 Physician diagnoses complex/serious illness
→ ➕ Goes through treatment for the diagnosed condition
→ 🏠 May receive home health care, especially post-acute
→ ♥️ Can access palliative care for comfort measures and care coordination
→ 💊 When prognosis is 6 months or less, hospice care begins

What's remarkable is how differently these overlapping services are funded and regulated, creating potentially perverse incentives throughout the continuum of care.

Market Growth: Speed vs Stability vs Emergence

Home Health: $162.3B (2024) → $284.3B (2030) | CAGR ~9.8%
Hospice: $29.9B (2024) → $39.1B (2030) | CAGR ~4.6%
Palliative Care: $15.1B (2024) → $26.8B (2030) | CAGR ~10.1%

Home health's nearly 10% growth rate reflects massive demographic tailwinds. The 65+ population will grow by 70% through 2060. Add in remote monitoring technology and Medicare Advantage expansion, and you have a sector riding multiple growth waves simultaneously.

Palliative care shows the highest growth rate as health systems increasingly recognize its value in reducing hospital readmissions and improving quality of life. However, reimbursement complexity remains its biggest challenge.

Hospice's steadier 4.6% growth signals market maturation. With hospice penetration among Medicare decedents already above 50%, growth comes mainly from longer lengths of stay and continued preference shifts toward home-based end-of-life care.

Policy Paradox: 2025 Payment Environment

Here's the paradox my conference acquaintance was referring to: the fastest-growing sectors face the most reimbursement uncertainty, while the mature market enjoys favorable policy winds.

Reimbursement Reality Check

To understand the economic incentives, imagine your Medicare-covered relative becomes seriously ill:

Home Health: If homebound and needing intermittent care, Medicare covers nursing, PT/OT, social services, and equipment. However, costs can be high for patients without Medigap coverage, especially for durable medical equipment. The 0.5% rate increase barely covers inflation while providers navigate expanded value-based payment models.

Palliative Care: Traditional Medicare often excludes care coordination and comfort medications, which are the very services that define palliative care. Medicare Advantage plans may offer better coverage, and health systems increasingly cover costs to reduce expensive hospital readmissions. But navigating what's covered remains a maze for families, creating market friction despite growing demand.

Hospice: Medicare fully covers the final 6 months via flat daily rates, including all equipment and medications. While comprehensive for patients, the payment model can incentivize early enrollment of healthier (less expensive) patients and potential under-treatment of complex cases. The 2.9% rate boost provides welcome margin relief.

Economic Timeline - How It Might Play Out

Short-term (2024-2026): Hospice wins on margins and regulatory relief. Home health faces cost pressures as administrative burdens rise faster than reimbursement. Palliative care sees rapid growth but struggles with reimbursement standardization.

Medium-term (2026-2028): Palliative care reimbursement models mature as CMS and Medicare Advantage plans recognize ROI from reduced hospital utilization. Home health technology investments in remote monitoring start paying efficiency dividends.

Long-term (2027-2030): Demographics drive the story. Home health's massive addressable market expansion from aging baby boomers overwhelms near-term policy headwinds. Palliative care becomes integrated throughout the care continuum. Hospice growth becomes constrained as market penetration approaches natural limits—there's only so much room to expand end-of-life services.

Investment Implications

For investors evaluating these opportunities:

Home Health: Accept near-term margin compression for superior long-term growth. Best suited for growth-oriented investors comfortable with 2-3 years of policy-induced volatility. Technology investments in telehealth and remote monitoring create competitive moats.

Palliative Care: Highest growth potential but requires navigating complex reimbursement landscape. Early movers who crack the payment model puzzle could capture outsized returns as the market standardizes.

Hospice: Stable margins and predictable growth appeal to yield-focused investors. Limited upside but lower execution risk. Consolidation opportunities as smaller providers struggle with compliance costs.

Consumer Takeaway

As someone with aging boomer parents, the lesson is clear: dig deep into insurance coverage for all three service types and understand provider incentives. The fragmented payment system means the "best" medical decision isn't always the most financially sensible one, a reality that shouldn't exist but defines today's healthcare landscape.

In Summary

Three sectors, different speeds, one destination: integrated, value-based home care. Home health trades short-term pain for long-term demographic destiny. Palliative care offers rapid growth for those who can navigate reimbursement complexity. Hospice provides stability, but it faces growth constraints as its addressable market matures.

The ultimate winners will be providers who can seamlessly deliver services across this continuum, optimizing for patient outcomes rather than payment silos.

Sources: Grand View Research, CMS Final Rules 2025, Research & Markets, Axxess, Axios, National Academy of Medicine

October 2, 2025

Should You Sell Your Business? A Framework for Evaluating Your Options

5 min read

As a small business owner, you've built something from scratch. The thought of selling might feel wrong—like you're giving up. But sometimes selling is the smartest way to actually get where you want to go.

Many successful founders reach a point where going solo starts working against them. If you're spending more time on admin work than growing your business, facing unexpected costs that strain your resources, or finding it harder to compete with larger players, you're not alone. These challenges often signal that you've reached the natural limits of what one person can handle. And that's not a failure, it's just the next decision point.

What's the Hidden Cost of Total Independence?

Complete control can feel appealing, but there are some rarely discussed trade-offs:

You're carrying all the risk: Every crisis, every unexpected expense, every staffing challenge lands on your desk. There's no shared burden or backup system.

You're paying premium prices: While larger competitors benefit from volume discounts, you're often paying retail for the same services. It creates a structural disadvantage.

You're focused on operations: Time spent on administrative tasks means less time with customers or developing the business. You naturally become the bottleneck.

Which Path Gets You Closer to Your Goals?

When you're ready to make a move, you've got four main choices:

Stay Independent

This maintains everything we just discussed. You keep control, along with all the challenges.

Sell to a Bigger Company

They'll often pay well because they can integrate your customers and products into their existing systems. The trade-off is that your team may face redundancy as roles overlap, and your culture typically gets absorbed into their corporate structure. Your business becomes a department within their organization, and may not be top priority.

Traditional Private Equity

Many PE firms are composed of financial specialists rather than experienced operators. They typically leverage debt financing, focus on cost-cutting for ~3 years, then sell. The associate they assign to work with you may have strong analytical skills but limited hands-on experience in your industry. They may not grasp the operational nuances that make your business work.

Work With an Operational Partner

This approach involves partnering with someone who has direct experience in your industry. They've built and run similar businesses, understand your market dynamics, and know what it takes to succeed. The partnership typically involves longer hold periods focused on sustainable growth rather than quick financial optimization.

Why Do Experienced Operators Often Choose the Partner Path?

This approach isn't perfect, as you're still transferring control. But there are compelling reasons why it appeals to seasoned business owners:

You're working with someone who understands your reality: Rather than someone who learned about your industry from research, you're partnering with someone who's actually built and run businesses like yours. They understand your customers, your competition, and your daily challenges.

They take a longer-term view: 5-10 year hold periods allow new company leadership to invest in what actually drives sustainable growth, such as developing your people, building genuine customer relationships, and improving your systems. The focus isn't on meeting next quarter's numbers.

They preserve what works: Experienced operators recognize that culture drives business performance. They're not incentivized to make dramatic staff cuts to hit predetermined financial targets or flip to hyper-growth strategies.

Your team benefits from the partnership: Instead of viewing employees as cost centers, they invest in development, better compensation, and career paths. Engaged employees typically create better customer experiences and stronger business results.

You can diversify while staying invested: You can take some money off the table to reduce your personal risk while participating in the upside from future growth. It's a balanced approach to wealth management.

How Can You Identify The Right Partners?

Anyone can present well in initial meetings. Here's how to assess whether they'll deliver on their promises:

  • Do they stick to their initial offers? Or do they "discover" new issues and try to renegotiate the price?
  • Is their due diligence process straightforward, or do they keep moving the goalposts?
  • Can they show you actual examples of people they've promoted and developed at other companies?
  • Do their other acquired companies actually grow and thrive, or do they just get stripped and sold or neglected?

In Summary

You didn't get this far by accident. You built something real through hard work, skill, and surrounding yourself with great people. The question isn't whether you can keep grinding it out at your current scale, but rather it’s whether that's actually going to get you where you want to be. Selling might mean finding the right partner who actually understands what you've built and wants to help you take it further.

If you're tired of carrying all the weight yourself, maybe it's time to see what a new approach could do for you and your business.

October 2, 2025

Healthcare at a Crossroads: Key Insights from RISE Conferences

Healthcare at a Crossroads: Key Insights from RISE Conferences
5 min read

The RISE conferences in Scottsdale last week showcased promising healthcare innovations alongside the realities of an industry grappling with policy uncertainty and implementation challenges. Just as leaders and technologists met to discuss the future of value-based care (VBC), home health, and quality measurement, the "big beautiful bill" was winding its way through Congress.   Five key themes emerged that could reshape healthcare—though their ultimate impact remains to be seen.

AI Seeks Its Healthcare Role

While AI's potential in healthcare is significant, organizations are still working through fundamental challenges around implementation. The many AI-focused conversations at RISE centered around identifying practical applications that can actually improve patient outcomes while navigating complex security requirements, data cleanup and provider resistance. Promising developments in predictive analytics and diagnostic tools are emerging, such as those provided by Accorded Health, but meaningful adoption across healthcare systems will likely take years as organizations work through workflow integration and trust-building with clinical staff. Some key leaders at the conference included Parakeet Health and Confido.

Value-Based Care Lingers in Experimentation Mode

The transition to value-based care continues to challenge healthcare organizations as they restructure around new payment models. Independent Practice Associations (IPAs) such as Yuvo Health, Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), and Management Services Organizations (MSOs) are experimenting with new approaches, often leveraging technology like Arbital Health for contracting and collaboration, but many are struggling with the complexity of adoption and the funding environment. While the theory of prioritizing outcomes over volume is compelling, the practical implementation often reveals gaps that take considerable resources to address. Interoperability between systems continues to be one of the greatest challenges.

Home Care Shows Promise with Limitations

The expansion of home-based healthcare services represents both opportunity and challenge. Hospital-at-home programs, hospice care, and primary care services are demonstrating the potential to deliver care in patients' homes, supported by advancing technology like portable diagnostics, remote monitoring, and even mileage tracking (e.g. provided by Everlance). However, significant barriers remain around reimbursement complexity, regulatory hurdles, and the infrastructure needed to support clinical care outside traditional settings. Experts from organizations such as Medically Home, myLaurel Health, and HCCI, shared their thoughts of the present opportunities and challenges, and a vision for the future.  

Prevention Technologies Seek Market Fit

New screening technologies are emerging that could shift healthcare toward prevention, including at-home EEG screenings, dementia detection tools, and comprehensive disease profile tests. Examples at RISE included Caption Care for heart disease and Neurotrak for Alzheimer’s. While these innovations show promise for early detection and intervention, questions remain about their payment models and integration into existing care pathways. The shift from reactive treatment to proactive prevention aligns well with value-based care principles, but widespread adoption will depend on proving real-world outcomes and navigating complex reimbursement landscapes.

Policy Uncertainty Creates Winners and Losers

The conference occurred against the backdrop of the ongoing Congressional debate over the "big beautiful bill" that could substantially reduce Medicaid enrollment and impact hospital economics nationwide. While some attendees saw this as creating opportunities for innovation, such as enabling Medicaid adoption, the reality is that reduced coverage will  strain healthcare businesses that serve vulnerable populations. Payors face the challenge of maintaining services with reduced funding, and many smaller healthcare organizations may struggle to survive the transition.

The Reality of Transformation

The RISE conference highlighted how these themes are interconnected, with AI supporting value-based contracts, VBC creating incentives for home care, and policy pressures accelerating innovation. However, the transformation of healthcare is complex and slow. While the vision of integrated care networks that blend virtual and physical care is compelling, the practical challenges of implementation—from regulatory compliance to provider adoption to patient engagement—suggest that meaningful change will be measured in years, not months. We can still believe in a healthcare future that looks dramatically different: integrated care networks that blend virtual and physical care, leverage AI for prediction and prevention, and keep patients healthy in comfortable settings. As usual, working in health tech requires patience and persistence.

July 7, 2025

Why Small Tech Companies Should Acquire Even Smaller Ones

When it makes sense for smaller companies to acquire even smaller companies.
5 min read

Hello, and welcome to the Brydon Health blog, Our Take on Health Tech. We explore broad trends we discover while meeting with healthcare technology companies, often diving into specific topics that matter to leaders in our space. We hope you find this valuable and continue to read along.

The M&A Question Every Healthcare CEO Faces

As Chief Product Officer at NeuroFlow, a mental health technology company, I was tapped by the CEO to lead our mergers and acquisitions (M&A) strategy. At first, I was skeptical—I was focused on organic growth through our core roadmap. But then I remembered words from my favorite product leader, Elad Gil: "Most companies wait too long before making their first acquisition."

In healthcare, this timing question is especially complex. Beyond financial and strategic fit, you need your target company to align on security, mission, and technology. So when is the right time?

Three Critical M&A Moments

1. Early Stage (Series A-B)
Consider acquiring other companies when lacking critical market-entry capabilities or when rapid competitor consolidation threatens survival. However, conducting M&A as an early startup is relatively rare.

2. Growth Stage (Bootstrapped or Series B-C+)
M&A becomes especially attractive when you've hit market saturation in core segments, face prohibitive customer acquisition costs, or encounter platform limitations that would require massive R&D investment versus acquiring existing solutions. At NeuroFlow, our first acquisition of Capital Solution Design (CSD)—which I led end-to-end—focused on customer acquisition costs, as we bought a company with pre-existing VA contracts.

3. Market Timing
Regulatory changes creating consolidation opportunities, technology shifts requiring new capabilities (AI, cybersecurity), or favorable capital conditions can trigger M&A consideration. We're currently in a period of rapid technical innovation, so opportunities abound.

Where the Action Is

Today, acquirers prioritize companies with strong data assets and proprietary technology, evidenced by billion-dollar deals for platforms with large user bases (e.g., CentralReach and Alto Pharmacy).

Digital health is heating up with a fascinating trend: "tapestry weaving"—healthtech startups acquiring other healthtech startups. In Q1 2025, 67% of M&A deals involved digital health companies buying peers, up from 53% in 2024. Examples include H1 purchasing Ribbon Health, Hone Health purchasing Ivee, and Hims & Hers acquiring Trybe Labs.

Another significant trend: 20-30% of deals are now driven by distressed companies seeking exits due to financial pressures, investor fatigue, and consolidation needs following the pandemic-era funding boom.

Consider how these trends and tailwinds could make M&A sensible for smaller, bootstrapped, or early-stage companies too.

Why Buy vs. Build?

Healthcare companies choose M&A for several compelling reasons:

  • Roadmap acceleration: Building capabilities takes 3-5 years; acquisition provides immediate market presence (though integrating new capabilities still requires time)
  • Regulatory shortcuts: Acquiring existing FDA approvals or HIPAA-compliant infrastructure can save years
  • Customer relationships: Healthcare buyers are risk-averse and sticky—existing relationships provide instant credibility and growth opportunities
  • Scale economics: Healthcare has high fixed costs; M&A can spread these across larger revenue bases more efficiently
  • Defensive positioning: When competitors consolidate, staying independent often becomes unsustainable

At NeuroFlow, our primary motivation was acquiring customer relationships, but we also dramatically increased roadmap speed and scale across four target company acquisitions. Some brought new algorithms, IP, and analytics capabilities; others contributed technical infrastructure; and some added complementary services to our technical offerings.

Getting It Right

Having successfully completed four M&A transactions at NeuroFlow, I've learned quite a bit about sourcing, transacting, and integrating. Here are the essential elements:

Strategic sourcing: Find acquisition targets through continuous relationship building. The best deals happen through existing networks—several of our acquisitions were nurtured at industry conferences.

Rigorous selection: When evaluating fit, we focused on customer overlap, technology compatibility, HIPAA compliance, service quality, and cultural alignment—especially critical in mission-driven healthcare environments.

Careful integration: Starting during due diligence (not after closing), we built go-to-market plans, roadmaps, and organizational charts. Healthcare integrations take 50-100% longer than typical software M&A due to regulatory requirements and customer sensitivity.

I'm extremely proud of NeuroFlow's M&A strategy, especially our CSD acquisition. After only a few years as a combined entity, contracts have grown exponentially due to sales alignment, complementary technology and security capabilities, team scaling, and strategic roadmap integration.

The Bottom Line

Healthcare M&A isn't just about growth—it's often about survival in an increasingly consolidated market. The key is treating it as a specialized discipline aligned with your company's core growth and R&D strategies, requiring deep domain expertise and extended timelines.

What stage is your company at, and what strategic challenges are you facing? Have you considered M&A yet? We'd love to hear from you.