Platform, configuration and devices
Tiers, entitlements and commercial features
Prices scale by tier; contact us for pricing.
How to read status labels: In the pilot (v0.2.0, synthetic data) Simulated in the pilot Coming (Wave 2, rolling out) Designed, not yet built Open decision Not offered / no claim made Planned partner integration
C0853Does the software track which pricing tier a customer is on?
No. The specification describes it, but the pilot does not include it. For reference, REQ-3601 (a high-priority requirement, all three tiers) says the system must implement entitlement records for the small, medium (period still open) and large (period still open) tiers. Check: entitlement drives feature flags; billing period is a config value. Parts of it are explicitly marked as open in the specification.
C0854How is the roughly 20-patient limit for the small tier enforced?
The small tier must be designed for about 20 patients maximum; how the limit is enforced (hard cap, soft alert) is (still an open decision). That is REQ-3602, a medium-priority requirement for the small tier only. Not yet. It is designed in the specification and not built in the pilot. Test in the specification: usage metering shows patient count vs cap; enforcement mode is a parameter. Parts of it are explicitly marked as open in the specification.
C0855Does a cheaper tier mean weaker legal-minimum privacy or security?
The pilot covers part of this. The rest is designed, not built. In the pilot: Privacy/security floors are locked invariants in the manifest validator and in effectiveCaps; tier/entitlement metering not built. REQ-3603 says Tier must not reduce legal-minimum privacy or security controls. Its acceptance check: feature matrix shows security controls identical across tiers.
C0856Will small clinics have to pay a support fee or reserve?
REQ-3604 is a lower-priority requirement for the small tier only: support-reserve or support fee for small tier is (still an open decision); the software must support recording a support fee if adopted. This is on the design side of the line. Nothing in v0.2.0 does it. To verify it, the specification says fee field exists, defaults empty. Parts of it are explicitly marked as open in the specification.