SeniorCRE is the operator-controlled operating infrastructure for senior housing & care. It is designed to govern definitions, source authority, reconciliation, and lineage across the systems an operator already runs, and can carry selected system-of-record functions where the operator chooses. Govern first. Replace only by choice.

How is SeniorCRE different from PointClickCare?

PointClickCare is a clinical EHR. Operators can keep PointClickCare; SeniorCRE is designed to govern definitions and source authority above it. Where an operator chooses, SeniorCRE can assume selected system-of-record functions. Govern first. Replace only by choice.

How is SeniorCRE different from Yardi Senior Living Suite?

Yardi Senior Living Suite is a property-management and accounting system. Operators can keep Yardi Senior Living Suite; SeniorCRE is designed to govern definitions and source authority above it. Where an operator chooses, SeniorCRE can assume selected system-of-record functions. Govern first. Replace only by choice.

How is SeniorCRE different from MatrixCare or ALIS?

MatrixCare or ALIS is a clinical and community-management system. Operators can keep MatrixCare or ALIS; SeniorCRE is designed to govern definitions and source authority above it. Where an operator chooses, SeniorCRE can assume selected system-of-record functions. Govern first. Replace only by choice.

How does SeniorCRE approach HIPAA and security?

SeniorCRE signs Business Associate Agreements and is designed with the administrative, physical, and technical safeguards applicable to its role under HIPAA. SOC 2 in progress.

Who is SeniorCRE for?

Senior housing & care operators, REITs, and capital partners. Our operator beachhead is organizations running 10 to 40 communities; larger portfolios are served through a separate Strategic Enterprise engagement.

How much does SeniorCRE cost?

Pricing and implementation fees are set in the applicable order form.

How long does SeniorCRE take to implement?

Deployment is gate-based and operator-specific; SeniorCRE publishes no standard implementation duration.

The Decision Suite

Start here — the fragmentation cost model.

One governed assumption record. One primary model. Five supporting models built from the same operator-entered assumptions, so a committee packet can show exactly which inputs governed each calculation.

Sourced range for a similarly sized portfolio: $292,428–$17,109,400 / year, modeled, sourced as of August 2026. Every input and its source is documented on the Assumptions & Sources page.

For the magnitude question on its own — what a portfolio is carrying today, computed from public CMS and BLS inputs with the formula published in full — see the published method and range.

In short

The problem: Committee packets carry numbers built from different assumptions, so two slides in the same deck can disagree and no one can tell which is right.
Who it’s for: CFOs, analysts, and anyone assembling a decision packet that has to survive questions.
Why now: Operators are being asked to run AI and answer to lenders, surveyors and boards using numbers no one has formally declared authoritative. That declaration has to exist before the decisions are made, not after they are questioned.
What you’d declare: You would be able to declare which system is authoritative for each number and under whose definitions — and what is kept is the reasoning and the lineage back to source behind every decision.
What to do next: Enter your own assumptions once, then read the models built from that governed assumption record.

See the assumptions and sources

Step one — the assumption record

Communitiescount

Operating communities in scope for the evaluation.

Units / bedscount

Occupancy%

Revenue per occupied unit$ / month

Revenue leakage% of revenue

Acuity capture and reconciliation latency, as a share of revenue.

Agency premium$ / year

Caregiver turnover% / year

Manual reporting hourshours / week

Time salaried staff spend assembling and reconciling reports.

Loaded hourly cost$ / hour

Systems of recordcount

Distinct systems that currently claim to hold operating truth.

These values stay in this browser. Nothing is transmitted, and no model output is a forecast, guarantee, or audited result.

Start here — the primary model

Fragmentation Tax

$1,916,400

Modeled annual cost of a fragmented stack

Revenue leakage (acuity + reconciliation latency): $1,531,200
Agency premium over baseline labor: $250,000
Manual reporting and reconciliation hours: $135,200
Per unit, per year: $3,833

Does not claim: Assumes the entered leakage rate is attributable to reconciliation latency rather than pricing or census policy.

Open the detailed model

Supporting models, same assumptions

These derive from the same governed assumption record as the primary model above. They exist to answer narrower questions — clinical documentation exposure, workforce exposure, migration sequencing — not to compete with it for the headline number.

Stack Penalty (TCO)

$112,667

Modeled annual reconciliation overhead attributable to stack count

Systems claiming operating truth: 6
Pairwise integration surfaces to keep agreeing: 15
Reconciliation overhead beyond a single record: $112,667
Per community, per year: $9,389

Does not claim: Counts coordination cost only. It excludes license, hosting, and professional services fees, which vary by contract.

Open the detailed model

Operating ROI

$799,400

Modeled annual operating impact at the stated recovery rates

Leakage recovered (50% of entered leakage): $765,600
Reporting load recovered (25% of entered hours): $33,800
As a share of annual revenue: 2.61%

Does not claim: Recovery rates are stated assumptions shown on their face, not measured platform results.

Open the detailed model

Clinical Documentation Exposure

$612,480

Modeled annual exposure tied to documentation and acuity capture

Occupied units in scope: 440
Documentation-dependent share of entered leakage: $612,480
Per occupied unit, per year: $1,392

Does not claim: Survey and enforcement outcomes are not modeled. Regulatory exposure is not reducible to a dollar figure.

Open the detailed model

Workforce Exposure

$507,400

Modeled annual turnover and agency exposure

Planning caregiver count (1 per 4 occupied units): 110
Annual separations at entered turnover: 50
Replacement load (80 loaded hours each): $257,400
Agency premium over baseline labor: $250,000

Does not claim: Staffing ratios differ by care level, state minimum staffing rules, and census mix. Treat the ratio as a planning placeholder.

Open the detailed model

Migration & Cutover

$28,080

Modeled internal effort cost across the cutover sequence

Waves at up to 6 communities each: 2
Elapsed schedule: 12 weeks
Internal effort: 432 hours
Internal effort at loaded cost: $28,080

Does not claim: Sequencing depends on source-system export capability and contract timing. Treat the schedule as a planning frame, not a commitment.

Open the detailed model

Where every number above comes from

Every input carries a low/high range, a named public source, and the date it was checked.

Open Assumptions & Sources

One document

The brief carries the assumption record and its sources, the primary model, the supporting models, and what each model deliberately does not claim.

Request an Executive Briefing

These tools produce directional ranges from operator-entered assumptions. They are not forecasts, guarantees, or audited results, and they do not constitute investment, accounting, clinical, or legal advice.

Start here — the fragmentation cost model.

Sourced range for a similarly sized portfolio: $292,428–$17,109,400 / year, modeled, sourced as of August 2026. Every input and its source is documented on the Assumptions & Sources page.

For the magnitude question on its own — what a portfolio is carrying today, computed from public CMS and BLS inputs with the formula published in full — see the published method and range.

Start here — the primary model

Fragmentation Tax

$1,916,400

Modeled annual cost of a fragmented stack

Revenue leakage (acuity + reconciliation latency): $1,531,200
Agency premium over baseline labor: $250,000
Manual reporting and reconciliation hours: $135,200
Per unit, per year: $3,833

Does not claim: Assumes the entered leakage rate is attributable to reconciliation latency rather than pricing or census policy.

Open the detailed model

One document

The brief carries the assumption record and its sources, the primary model, the supporting models, and what each model deliberately does not claim.