Corepoint

• Their pricing model works well for us, we can buy a ‘pack’ of 25 connections and use them throughout the year as needs arise.
• Corepoint is very transparent on their cost. It is easy to budget and plan for changes. Also, they always understand that our priority is servicing our patients and have demonstrated flexibility on one or two occasions to allow us to meet implementation deadlines while our accounting was still processing increased licensing charges.
• Licensing charges seem steep, but the product is well worth it.

Cloverleaf

• The annual support contract has jumped, percentage wise, more than other vendors we have contracts with. When we contacted Infor to negotiate a lower increase, we were rebuffed. Our parent company is moving away from Cloverleaf to another platform to reduce costs. To move away when you already have so much invested in the platform speaks volumes.
• If you add additional modules, the TCO jumps rapidly.
• Costs: every new purchase has increased the TCO.
  Effective: switching to enterprise licensing helped significantly.

Rhapsody

• Cost is good. The difficult part is the pricing model of the communication points. If you are budget constrained, you really need to optimize your route development. That has created a cost in development and time, but I believe our structure has become solid because of it.
• It is cost effective and ROI is high.
• The TCO has gone up in recent years. This product used to be an excellent value as it scaled up and down well and could support large scale implementations at a reasonable cost. The licensing model was straightforward and easy to understand. Now the vendor seems more focused on larger implementations without adding the support to handle these implementations out of the box (like clustering or federation or consolidated monitoring) and at the same time has adopted higher prices and convoluted pricing models.

Mirth

• As far as HL7 interfacing goes, the costs seem inline with what we we expected.
• Open source. Support and DR costs reasonable.
• It is not very expensive.

Ensemble

• All the costs in the initial proposal were what our hospital paid. No other costs were incurred. It is cost effective due to the reliability, scalability, and absence of ongoing costs.
• There were no surprises. Not cheap, but exactly what they said it would be, and it included everything we needed. We didn’t buy a bunch of components we didn’t need, but we had everything we needed to complete all the interfaces that our company would need.
• You get what you pay for.