This article is sponsored by Sunwave. It is based on a discussion with Melissa McCarthy, Co-founder and Managing Partner of The Reprieve, Michael Frisby, the Chief Growth Officer at Sandstone Care, and Lindsay Beasley, Director of Solutions Engineering at Sunwave. This discussion took place at the Behavioral Health Business VALUE Conference. The article below has been edited for length and clarity.

Behavioral Health Business: I’m going to introduce our panelists here. I’ve got Michael Frisby, the Chief Growth Officer at Sandstone Care; Melissa McCarthy, Co-founder and Managing Partner at The Reprieve; and Lindsay Beasley, Director of Solutions Engineering at Sunwave. I’m going to sit down and enjoy the conversation with you all. Take it away.

Michael Frisby: Great. Can you hear us okay? When they scheduled us for this time slot, I figured one of two things would happen: either you’d all be on your third cup of coffee like me and we’d get a lot of energy in the room, or it’d be a bit of a snooze session because we’re fresh off lunch. We’ll try to keep it energetic and fun. Big thanks to Sunwave for giving us the chance to talk about something we’re passionate about: value-based care and technology. We hope you walk away with some practical takeaways you can apply to your organization.

Let’s jump in. Melissa, to start us off—you’re a provider. You know this is a direction you want to go in. What’s that starting point look like?

Melissa McCarthy: Yes, absolutely. We’ve geared this presentation toward providers who’ve likely experienced one of two things: Either you’re reviewing your overhead costs and need better rates, and the payer says, “Sure, but only if you’re willing to enter a value-based agreement,” or you’re out-of-network trying to go in-network, and that conversation doesn’t go anywhere unless you’re open to incorporating value-based metrics.

On top of that, regulatory environments in various states are beginning to factor value-based care into their provider network requirements. This isn’t something we can afford to ignore—financially or operationally.

Frisby: Right. Financially and clinically, we can’t ignore it. This is the path forward. But it’s understandable to feel some apprehension. There are concerns—some obvious, others more nuanced. We’ll touch on a few key ones today.

There’s the financial risk: How will this impact revenue or cash flow? Then there’s measurement—it’s difficult to define success when success itself is still a moving target. Value is abstract in our space. What does it mean for your specific organization?

There are also data and technology barriers—interoperability issues, aggregation, reporting. Labor is another challenge: Can your care team deliver data-informed care? Do you have the staffing to support that? And last, your infrastructure may simply not be built for this.

So what can you do today? First, run financial models. Look at revenue and cash flow projections. Identify where you currently measure care—and where you don’t. Most people start with basics like readmission rates, PHQ-9s, GAD-7s, but those expectations will evolve.

And ask: Can your current technology support a data-driven partnership with a payer? Because ultimately, this is a partnership. You’re not just signing a contract—you’re collaborating over years. I heard someone earlier say to expect a two-year ramp-up. This is not a quick play.

Let’s say the payer gives you a boilerplate value-based contract. Melissa, what happens next?

McCarthy: If you’re at this conference, you’re either seriously considering a value-based contract, unsure how to begin, or already advanced—like some of the folks we’ve heard from today with deep experience in value-based models across behavioral or primary care.

If you haven’t yet reviewed a boilerplate VBC contract, we’ve outlined some common metrics: PHQ-9s, GAD-7s, and readmission rates to your facility—not emergency departments or hospitals, which are trickier since those patients may disappear and not answer your calls.

If you do receive a boilerplate, test it. Go back to your organization and try to pull the reports they’re asking for. If you haven’t seen a VBC contract, use the common metrics we shared. The only way to understand your risk is to know your baseline.

Frisby: Yes, and once you’ve got some baseline metrics, start pressure testing your system. Can you easily pull progress notes from the entire treatment episode, or is it a manual lift? Can you stratify risk—look at med compliance, appointment attendance, follow-ups?

If not, you may need a tech upgrade. And is your system secure? Is it future-proof? You want a tech partner who can evolve with you.

From a billing standpoint—are you still set up for fee-for-service only? Can you handle alternative payment models? If the answer is no, that’s another risk to flag.

You’ve tested your system. Melissa, what might you learn?

McCarthy: Well, you might learn that you’re collecting a lot of data—but you can’t easily aggregate it. You can get a snapshot of a patient, but can you track how they progress over time? Can you show measurable outcomes?

Maybe you find that your technology is fragmented. Maybe it takes someone manually pulling everything together. Maybe the data doesn’t make sense because it’s not being collected consistently across locations.

Testing helps you see if you have the data—and if you can access and use it effectively. And if you can’t just hire a big analytics team—because most of us can’t—then it’s time to look at your tech.

Frisby: Right. If your checklist ends up being more “no” than “yes,” you need to evaluate your options. Do you spend more to develop new capabilities, or do you make a bigger change?

If you decide to change, then the question becomes—change to what?

Lindsay, that’s where you come in. What’s the difference between an integrated tech stack and a unified one? And why does that matter?

Beasley: Absolutely. I’m going to stand so I’m not talking to the top of the room. So—let’s talk about two houses.

The first house is an integrated tech stack. That means you’ve got separate systems for your CRM, EMR, and RCM. Those systems don’t talk to each other well. You end up with missing or incomplete data.

The second house is a unified tech stack. One system, under one roof. Information flows seamlessly—what’s in the CRM is also in the EMR and the RCM. That gives you cleaner data, fewer errors, and a more complete view of the patient.

What does that look like in practice?

In the siloed house: You’ve got inconsistent data, revenue leakage, billing issues, and inefficiencies that burden your team and affect patient care.

In the unified house: You get better reimbursements, greater efficiency, improved patient outcomes, and data-driven decisions.

We looked at organizations that moved to a unified stack with Sunwave. On average, they increased value-based care revenue by $2.4 million, cut operational costs by 27%, and reduced patient relapse by 21%. That’s significant.

So think—what house do you want to live in?

Frisby: Thank you, Lindsay. That was a great explanation.

Let’s wrap up. Whether you’re trying to go in-network or looking for better rates, payers are asking for value-based models. You’ll need to overcome internal concerns—financial, operational, and technical.

You can start by pressure testing your systems. Identify gaps. If you can’t fill them internally, it may be time to change your tech stack. We recommend a unified approach.

This is an evolving process. It’s not one-size-fits-all. There are trade-offs—but also real opportunities if you’re prepared. Too often, providers jump in without the infrastructure in place. That’s a hard lesson to learn.

We hope what we shared today gives you a solid starting point.

Sunwave Health empowers behavioral health treatment centers with comprehensive software solutions. The platform is designed to streamline every aspect of your operation, enhancing efficiency and driving healthier outcomes for your patients. To learn more, visit: https://www.sunwavehealth.com/.