These are the numbers we intend to test in the pilot, published now so nobody has to ask. If they turn out to be wrong we will say so and change them.
per clinician, per month
About a quarter of one session fee. A six clinician practice is $3,240 a year, small enough to be decided by a principal rather than a committee.
per seat, per year
Roughly 30 percent below the monthly rate in exchange for an annual commitment, which suits how these organisations actually budget.
per year, depending on seat count
For Primary Health Networks, the 31 independent regional bodies the federal government funds to commission mental health services, and for large multi-site programmes. Sized to sit inside a commissioning budget that already exists, rather than requiring new money to be found.
permanently, not a trial
Not a freemium ladder and not a trial that expires. A record a person can lose is not a record they own, so charging for it would break the thing that makes Contexa worth building.
For context, Australian practice management software typically runs $30 to $90 per clinician per month, and a private psychology session is usually $200 or more.
No. It is a hypothesis. We have no paying customers yet, so these numbers come from what practices already pay for software and what a session is worth, not from what anyone has agreed to. The pilot will tell us whether they are right.
Yes, and it is worth explaining why rather than just promising. The whole argument for Contexa is that the record belongs to the person and travels with them. If it disappears when they stop paying, it was never theirs, and the company has no thesis left. Charging individuals would not be a pricing change, it would be a different company.
The practice loses access to the portal. Every client keeps their own account and everything in it, unchanged. Nothing a person wrote is held hostage to a service's subscription.
No setup fee on any tier. Private practice is monthly and can be cancelled at any time. Community and programme tiers are annual because that is how those organisations budget, not because we want to lock anyone in.
No, and we do not intend to. Per client pricing would give a service a financial reason to limit who gets connected, which is exactly the wrong incentive.
Yes, that is the current priority. We are looking for a small number of practices to run a measured four week pilot. Pilot pricing is a conversation, not a rate card.
The prototype is open, with no form in front of it.