Moderator: Hello, everyone. Thank you for joining us for today’s webinar, “Building a Bridge: How Health Plans Unify Data and Care for High-Need, High-Cost Members.” Before we begin, I’ll walk us through a few quick housekeeping instructions. 

We will begin today’s webinar with a presentation, and we will have time at the end of the hour for a question-and-answer session. You can submit any questions you have throughout the webinar by typing them into the Q&A box you see on your screen. 

Today’s session is being recorded and will be available after the event. You can use the same link you used to log in to today’s webinar to access that recording. 

If at any time you have issues with audio or visuals, just try refreshing your browser. You can also submit any technical questions into the Q&A box, and we are here to help. 

With that, I am pleased to introduce our speakers for today. We have Kristi Carney, Director of Behavioral Health for the CareSource Indiana market. 

She is a behavioral health leader with more than twenty-five years of experience in care coordination, program leadership, quality improvement, and community-based services. She currently serves as Director of Behavioral Health for the Indiana market at CareSource, where she leads strategy, clinical oversight, quality performance, and behavioral health system partnerships. 

Kristi’s career spans managed care, state government, higher education, and nonprofit leadership, with deep expertise in Medicaid, behavioral health operations, regulatory compliance, and integrated care. She is passionate about improving outcomes for vulnerable populations and strengthening systems that support members, providers, and communities. 

We also have Dr. Nishi Rawat, Chief Clinical Officer and GM of Care Navigation at Bamboo Health. She leads the development of technology solutions that bridge health care silos and advance whole-person care, with a focus on behavioral health. 

A former emergency medicine and critical care physician at Johns Hopkins, she founded OpenBeds to expedite access to behavioral health and crisis care, which Bamboo Health acquired in 2018. 

Thank you, Kristi and Dr. Rawat, for being here today, and I’ll now turn the floor over to you to get us started. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Great. Thank you for the introduction. 

Let’s walk through the agenda first. Today, we are going to cover the following: behavioral health challenges facing Medicaid populations today. We’ll then explain how Bamboo Bridge tackles these challenges with technology-enabled care navigation. And then we’re going to share a real case study from our work with Kristi and team at CareSource Indiana. 

Next slide, please. 

First, let’s talk about the behavioral health landscape for Medicaid populations today. 

Generally, I would say that the behavioral health segment is challenging for health plans for many reasons, all largely stemming from the challenges that these members face in accessing quality care in a timely way. For example, Medicaid currently mandates a ten-day wait time standard for behavioral health. But in most markets, that standard is rarely met, especially when a member wants in-person care as opposed to virtual care. 

And behavioral health providers are often poorly integrated with the networks that are delivering physical health care. 

So the end result is that access issues push people into more costly settings of care. These are settings that they should really never need, only when their condition has deteriorated significantly. 

There’s real opportunity here too. If we can ensure longitudinal care for this population, this can drive about $1,400 in in-year cost savings per newly diagnosed individual. Now, Kristi, you have a lot of experience in your capacity leading behavioral health at CareSource Indiana. What are some other observations that you want to add? 

Kristi Carney: I think our behavioral health members often touch many parts of the health care system, but a lot of times those parts don’t always communicate well with one another. 

Oftentimes it shows up when a member is at the emergency department, discharged from an inpatient behavioral health admission, referred to outpatient care, and still faces barriers like transportation, phone access, housing instability, or confusion as to where to go next. 

I think the challenge is not just finding a provider. It’s helping the member move from one setting to the other without them falling through the cracks. We see this as a care coordination issue, not a member failure. 

When the care is fragmented, a lot of times members may return to higher-cost settings when actually community-based care is more appropriate, would meet their needs. Some care… priorities for CareSource are really focused on timely access, care coordination, follow-up after a BH acute event, and reducing avoidable ED and inpatient utilization. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Yeah. I really like the way you put that, that this is not a member failure. This is a care coordination issue. 

Now, speaking of members, next slide, please. I’m sure that the statistics you see on this slide are familiar to many of you. So now between twenty percent to thirty percent of the overall US population has underlying mental health and substance use disorder needs. I’m using behavioral health to encompass the two. 

That’s about a quarter of the commercial population, a third of the Medicare population as you see in this graph, and about forty percent of the Medicaid population. We’re seeing this driven by, number one, social media, isolation, stigma, as well as challenges in accessing care. Though we are seeing some promising responses by industry emerge, like integrated care models as well as virtual care. Kristi, what else would you add about some of these trends in the market? 

Kristi Carney: I would add that Medicaid members are especially impacted because of their complex clinical and social needs. 

Mental health and SUD members are impacted by medication adherence, their chronic diseases, maternal health, ED use, member engagement with preventable care. For example, we may have a member living with schizophrenia who may need additional support to understand and manage their complex chronic condition and treatment regimen, but it also contributes to the gaps in taking medication for conditions such as hypertension. We know that integrated care, provider engagement, behavioral health data sharing, prevention, early screening, and care coordination are important. 

That is why early intervention is what helps connect members to the right level of support before a crisis becomes the front door to care. We’re looking for better warm handoffs, better data, stronger provider partnerships, and timely follow-up. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Great. And, you know, that’s what we’re looking at from the patient outcomes or member outcomes perspective. From a cost perspective, if we move to the next slide, we know that Medicaid members with a mental health or substance use disorder cost three and a half times more per member per month than the general Medicaid population. In addition to that, forty percent of all adults enrolled in Medicaid experience a mental health condition or substance use disorder, and about ten percent of non-elderly adults on Medicaid experience serious mental illness. These numbers tell us that addressing both mental health and substance use disorder conditions is central to managing total cost of care within Medicaid. 

Kristi, again, you know, how do some of these statistics relate to what you’re seeing in your market in Indiana? 

Kristi Carney: Well, I think the high cost shown here is important, but I think the human story is important, more important. 

Members with mental health and SUD needs may be managing, like I said in our previous slide, chronic conditions, medication challenges, social drivers of health, and have limited access to coordinated outpatient care. So our starting point is ensuring members are connected to timely, appropriate care. Better outcomes and lower avoidable utilization are the clearest signs that the model of care is working as it intended to be. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Yeah. I completely agree with that. And, you know, speaking of those signs, here are some more cost data. Now, some of these data may surprise a few of you. 

But, you know, we know generally that untreated mental health and substance use disorder conditions exacerbate medical conditions. And as a result, the medical spend tends to be the majority of the total spend. But what may be surprising to some of you is that this is the case even in the scenario of serious mental illness. In this table, you can see that the percentage of attributable spend to behavioral health climbs across commercial, Medicare, and Medicaid. 

But medical spend still dominates the total in every case. The takeaway here is important. When mental health and substance use disorder conditions go untreated or are undertreated, it doesn’t just drive behavioral health costs, it drives medical costs too. Now, Kristi, I know you said we’ve got to focus on the member outcomes and then the rest will follow, but do you have anything more to add here? 

Kristi Carney: I would just say that integration matters. If we only focus on the behavioral health, we’re going to miss the broader clinical picture. 

Behavioral health should not be separate from that whole-person care. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Yeah, you know, completely agree. And yet often it’s completely separate, right? So if we move to the next slide, it’s completely separate and, like I said, often undertreated and under-assessed, which, like you mentioned, leads to worse member outcomes. 

Again, speaking of it being completely separate, if you look to the right-hand side of the slide, and I know that the text is very small here, but that’s because there are 43 distinct behavioral health service types listed here, which, again, underscores how complex this isolated care continuum really is. And it’s in part why it’s hard for the health care system generally to address mental health conditions. There are other reasons, right? The fact that in the primary care setting, there’s often not enough time in a short visit to conduct a full assessment. 

And frankly, if a provider does a screening, they’re then on the hook to treat that member, which can sometimes discourage screening in the first place. We hear this a lot from our provider customers and partners. In addition, emergency departments and inpatient settings aren’t designed, nor are they resourced, to manage mental health and substance use disorder conditions. So clear handoffs to longitudinal care are uncommon, and these individuals cycle right back into the emergency department or inpatient setting. 

And then across these care settings broadly, the sheer number of levels of behavioral health care to even refer someone to, as you see there at the right-hand side, it’s enormous. And that just leaves people, individuals, and caregivers frustrated with the lack of timely access. 

Kristi, anything to add in terms of what you see in your market as it relates to access, levels of care, and provider capacity? 

Kristi Carney: Yes. I will echo some of your comments. We often see behavioral health members go undetected until there’s a crisis. 

Opportunities for early intervention in primary care, OB-GYN, and EDs are sometimes missed. We see members discharged from inpatient admissions without timely follow-up, and that increases ED visits. It increases readmissions. It increases relapse and overdose. 

Many of our counties in Indiana have shortages of psychiatrists, particularly child and adolescent and addiction psychiatrists. 

According to… I pulled up a report today, the Bowen Center for Health Workforce Research and Policy report. And in Indiana, all 92 counties are federally designated mental health workforce shortages. So, you know… and we know what happens. 

I think for Indiana specifically, untreated mental illness is estimated to cost Indiana $4.2 billion annually. So because of these shortages, oftentimes primary care, like you mentioned, Nishi, they are left managing the complex behavioral health conditions. 

A large part of Indiana is rural, and we have limited BH capacity. So many of our members may have to travel distances for services to receive care, or they don’t receive care until they experience a crisis. So we try and encourage telehealth when appropriate, especially in those rural areas. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Got it. And, you know, despite those capacity constraints, there’s an expectation to deliver quality care. So let’s switch gears and talk about quality. There are several measures related to access to care as well as medication adherence that Medicaid plans are held accountable to. And, of course, it varies state by state, but these are the main measures. 

Now plans, I would say, generally find it challenging to move the needle on these measures, and these are largely process measures. There’s also skepticism as to whether these measures are sufficient to really gauge care quality when it comes to mental health as well as substance use disorder care. Now, Kristi, I know you look at these metrics all the time for CareSource Indiana. How do you and your team, your quality team included, try to impact these metrics and move the needle? 

Kristi Carney: Many of the metrics that you have on your slide are HEDIS measures that we have interventions and strategies for right now. 

It’s difficult because, like you mentioned, they’re episodic. So they have very tight turnaround times, and providers have to have real-time data to make an impact, especially for the follow-up measures. Like, for example, FUH, that’s follow-up after hospitalization for mental illness, and that’s gonna require seven days after discharge. That can be really cumbersome for a provider, especially if there are provider shortages. It can be hard for a member as well. That’s a really tight turnaround for those measures. 

For example, we support providers right now. We try to give them gaps-in-care reporting, or data that is actionable, so they can make a real impact on those measures to help. But I will say not all providers have the same level of understanding of HEDIS. 

They don’t understand sometimes how they’re calculated. They don’t understand how their day-to-day actions or workflows impact the HEDIS performance. 

And so we hear often that, you know, it’s more of a health plan issue. We see it as… it’s all of it. It takes all of us. It’s a care coordination issue where we all have to work together to really look at workflows and documentation and how they can make an impact on these measures. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Great. Now, you know, we’ve worked together now to tackle some of those metrics and the challenges that we spoke of earlier using Bamboo Bridge. Now, before I get into a description of Bamboo Bridge and the work that we did with CareSource, first, a little bit about Bamboo Health. 

For about fifteen years now, Bamboo Health has been providing data and tools at the point of care to clinicians as well as health plans to support the management of both mental health and substance use disorder conditions. Now, many know us for our nationwide network of ADT alerts, admission, discharge, transfer feeds, emanating from about 3,000 hospitals and 9,000 post-acute care facilities. We also support prescription drug monitoring across 50 states and territories. And then we have our OpenBeds behavioral health closed-loop referral system that supports 14 states, and several of those states with crisis care management as well. 

Now, with the increase in the prevalence of mental health and substance use disorder conditions, this is since the pandemic, along with the increasing recognition of their expenses we just detailed, our payer and provider customers have been saying, “Look, can you help us do more to manage these populations?” And so in response, we stood up a tech-enabled care navigation service that leverages our data that are emanating from our products as triggers to identify those in need of urgent access to both mental health and substance use disorder care. And then we drive action to the desired outcomes that Kristi spoke of earlier, at scale. 

I’ll go more into detail about how it works on the next slide. 

So our data and analytics identify what we call pivotal moments. This is a member being discharged from the emergency department after an overdose, a member being discharged from the inpatient psychiatric setting, if they’re calling into a crisis line and then in need of follow-up care after being stabilized or de-escalated, or if members are using controlled substances in a risky way. We see all those data firsthand. And what’s critical is using these real-time data signals to identify and help that member at their time of need, when we can influence their outcomes and guide them, again, to that next best action. 

Now, we pull data from a broad set of data sources: the EHR, utilization management, HIEs, again, admission, discharge, transfer feeds directly from hospitals, referrals from our OpenBeds system, and pharmacy dispensation data that comes from our PDMP. We also get justice-involved data from jails as well as prisons. And then we can take action on those data signals in a timely way through assessment, clinical triage, and navigation, again, to drive the next best care action. 

Next slide, please. 

Here’s what we do, again, one step down, in greater detail. Our full suite covers identifying individuals in need, again, at that critical moment using our data; engaging them; assessing their needs and triaging them, doing clinical triage to the appropriate level of care, largely outpatient care; matching them to a curated network of high-quality providers. Now, typically, when we work with plans, we build on that plan’s network, like we did with CareSource Indiana. We fill gaps with our partners as necessary, and then we measure the quality of those providers using operational metrics, utilization metrics, and patient-level outcomes. We do that prospectively. 

We facilitate referral, scheduling, connection to social needs care, and then we follow up after the appointment with check-ins with the member as well as the treatment provider. One of the most important aspects about Bamboo Bridge is that it’s built to supplement existing health plan and care infrastructure, not replace it. We also coordinate directly with the PCP or care manager to close the loop. We also direct people into primary care in addition to mental health and substance use disorder care. 

And then we keep monitoring for what we call new critical moments even after that first episode is resolved, and we monitor that largely through the admission, discharge, transfer feeds. With Kristi, a secondary objective beyond, you know, impacting FUH and some of the metrics you see there was driving people into longitudinal care management when applicable. So, again, every one of those steps that I just described that you see here on the slide ties back to a metric that matters to health plans: FUH, FUM, the FUA rates, speed to care, appointment attendance, ED and inpatient utilization, readmissions, growth in members connected to longitudinal care management, and then diagnosis coding as well. 

Kristi, maybe you can describe how CareSource was thinking about some of these metrics before starting the Bridge program. 

Kristi Carney: Well, I appreciate you mentioning the Bridge program and how it supplemented what we were doing, because I think that’s exactly it. We focused a lot on the behavioral health core measures that we’ve mentioned throughout this presentation. We had strategies around them, but I think adding the Bridge program was viewed as a navigation and engagement solution that supported our work and performance on these measures by identifying members at critical moments, facilitating referrals, supporting appointment attendance, like you mentioned, and helping close the loop between inpatient, outpatient, care management, and community providers. We focused on gap closure, and on that connection to a long-term behavioral health provider, while moving to a shared workflow where the member experienced one coordinated path that was seamless. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Next slide, please. 

Now, with what Kristi just described, we achieved some great results, and I’ll show you those in a moment. But before we get there, what we’ve done now is use generative AI to scale our results and impact. 

So, again, with the advent of generative AI over the past eighteen months, we really saw the opportunity to supercharge what we’re doing, our impact, twenty-four seven. So right now, we’ve started to use generative AI for non-patient-facing or non-member-facing activities. For example, summarizing data for our care navigators from disparate sources, scheduling with mental health and substance use disorder providers as well as with primary care providers. And now we’re stair-stepping very judiciously into member-facing activities, including intake and screening. And we’re doing so with a heavy human in the loop, monitoring all of these activities. Kristi, anything to add here? I know we have not used AI with you all to date. 

Kristi Carney: I’ll just add from our perspective that AI and technology, I think it can help identify patterns. I think it can prioritize outreach and support timely engagement, but we can’t forget the human element, as you mentioned, and that specialized expertise. I think that was key in the success of this project. Just, we had multiple connections. We had referrals, like you mentioned, back to care management, rescheduling of missed appointments, confirmation of appointment attendance. 

So I think the right combination of outreach with that human navigation can make all the difference in the world. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Yeah. No. I totally agree. 

Well, with that, Kristi, why don’t you walk us through what this looks like for CareSource Indiana? 

Kristi Carney: Okay. At CareSource Indiana, we prioritize… we address mental health and substance use disorders, and we have four key strategies. We partner with providers to improve access and outcomes. We share and use data across systems of care to ensure quality and compliance. 

Real-time data is very important, like we’ve mentioned previously, so that providers can help us with timely access. 

We run care coordination programs that engage members in care and retention in treatment. We know that the longer they retain in treatment, the better their outcomes are. And we promote prevention and education initiatives and approaches that reduce potential harm. 

Our goal for CareSource is not simply just to pay for a service. It’s to create a coordinated system of care that helps providers deliver better outcomes, to support our members navigating complex behavioral health conditions, and reduce preventable crises. 

Okay, on this slide, we’re going to talk about Indiana and the Bamboo Health partnership. 

In the beginning, we partnered to tackle access to care after an inpatient hospitalization and enhance our current strategies. We actually talked about several measures. There were a lot of measures that we wanted to improve timely access on and enhance our strategies. We talked about FUA, which is follow-up after ED visit for SUD. We talked about FUM, which is follow-up after ED visit for mental health. And then we decided that we would focus on follow-up after hospitalization for mental illness. And the reason that we kind of chose this measure is because it is challenging to connect and engage with members. 

They tend to have difficulties following up after a hospital stay because of their disease, and there are other obstacles, such as social drivers of health, that I think get in the way. So with this partnership in particular, we focused on meeting and exceeding performance standards. We focused on achieving a strong level of performance on follow-up after hospitalization, and then supporting relationships with key partners in the market, with our treatment providers. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Great. Thank you. I just had to get off mute. 

Now let’s look at the results of what we achieved together. 

So, again, as Kristi said, we focused on managing inpatient discharges from freestanding psychiatric hospitals subject to the FUH HEDIS measure, again, with the goal of improving that measure performance there, the seven- and thirty-day measures; decreasing inpatient and ED utilization; total cost of care, which follows; and offloading the upfront transition-to-care work for the CareSource team. In terms of results, again, Kristi, you and team, your quality team, crunched these for us for 2025. You see here that we achieved the ninetieth percentile, just over the ninetieth percentile, for the seven-day measure. Again, over the ninetieth percentile for the thirty-day measure, with a 16% decrease in readmissions in-year for those patients whom we navigated. This is compared to those patients whom we did not navigate. Kristi, anything else to add here? 

Kristi Carney: I think in our partnership, we focused on an integrated team to help our members. 

We really focused on improving outcomes for these members because, historically, they are a very difficult population to engage. 

Like I said on the previous slide, we focused on strengthening our partnerships and relationships with providers in the market. And I think this slide also really demonstrates outcomes of a navigation model, how it can influence scheduled appointments, attended appointments, and the seven and thirty days, and reduce readmissions. I think the value of the partnership was not just making a phone call. The value was supporting the member through these difficult transitions and making sure that they got the follow-up appointment that they might have missed. When we partner with providers, we actually see them as a partner, as an extension of our member-facing team, and we see them as one team. And I think that’s why the partnership, as you can see on this slide, why the results that Bamboo received for the follow-up after hospitalization exceeded the performance. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Yeah. I mean, you’ve brought this up many times, in that you believe that the success there was, I would say, in no small part due to the strengthening of the relationships with all the behavioral health providers across the state, and those are the CMHCs for the most part, as well as the referring organizations, or the freestanding psychiatric hospitals. 

Kristi Carney: This was actually a quote from one of our large hospital systems that we wanted to share about the partnership and the project. 

And I think what I appreciated most about our work is that it was practical. It focused on the member. It focused on discharge follow-up, connection to ongoing care. 

We’ve heard from providers that when navigation works well, it can make their lives easier, their work easier, and it improves the member experience. 

Some of the things I’d like to add is just, like, when we work with providers, we appreciate the ease of working with them when they can easily pivot if we need to make adjustments to, like, workflows. We appreciate providers who come and work with us who don’t tell our providers how to do their work. Instead, they ask the provider, “How can we fit into your existing workflows?” We see better outcomes when the health plan and the provider partner and the facility and our care management team and the outpatient providers all work together. Instead of working in separate lanes, we’re all working together. We see better outcomes. 

And I’ll turn it back over to Nishi. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Yeah. Well, great. Well, thanks for that, Kristi. 

I’m gonna finish now with what’s on tap for us on a go-forward basis, and this is for Bamboo Health. Right now, we’re continuing to expand our partnerships across the country with both health plans as well as providers. So, for example, with Tufts Medicine, a large health system in urban Boston, we serve about 600 patients a month across commercial, Medicaid, and Medicare populations, as well as the inpatient and outpatient primary care settings. We’ve made a significant impact on ED and inpatient utilization for their value-based care cohort of lives. With Privia, you know, a physician enabler across the US, I think in 15 markets and counting, we’ve been working with them across the state of Georgia for two years, and we’ve consistently seen a decrease in inpatient and ED utilization on the order of twenty percent, with about half of the engaged patients attending three or more post-discharge behavioral health visits. 

We’re now going live with an MCO, quite a large organization in Virginia, launching care navigation for about 120,000 Medicaid and D-SNP members across two regions under an outcomes-based agreement. And then we are also expanding quickly to Oklahoma, South Carolina, Iowa, and Texas with two national payers and a national Medicaid MSO. Again, for these partners, we’re targeting FUH, FUM, FUA, and the readmissions, or PCR, quality metrics, and we’re doing so at scale. Again, using our data assets, those pivotal moments, and AI to reach their members at these pivotal care moments and then, ideally, you know, drive down unnecessary utilization and readmissions. 

Alright. This concludes our core presentation, but I do believe we have some time for questions. 

I’ll turn it over to Becker’s to facilitate. 

Moderator: Fantastic. Thank you, Kristi and Dr. Rawat, for a wonderful discussion. We will now begin today’s Q&A. So, audience, please feel free to submit your questions into the Q&A box on your screen, and we’ll get started with the first question. 

What were some of the lessons learned in implementing this model? 

Kristi Carney: For us at CareSource, the lessons learned through the partnership, I think, really will help us strengthen any future collaborations to build a successful model. One key takeaway was maintaining a higher meeting cadence and continuing daily huddles. So when we started the project, we had a very high meeting cadence, and then we had, like, a daily huddle throughout the pilot. And during that implementation, it included our transitions of care, our care management, Bamboo, and our three participating facilities. And we used those meetings to establish workflows, clarify roles, create a seamless process. 

As the project matured and our workflows became pretty established, the frequency of those meetings naturally decreased. 

But looking back in retrospect, I would have maintained regular touchpoints for a longer period of time, because I think those provided additional opportunities to enhance things, share best practices, and further strengthen our collaboration. In particular, the daily huddles were really valuable. I think they fostered relationships and trust and camaraderie among our teams and across our organizations. Nishi, I’m not sure how you feel about the meeting cadence, but that’s just a little about what I thought. And I also enjoyed our steering committee meetings. I felt like those were really valuable. We had leadership in those meetings, and we were able to focus on outcomes, member experience, and areas of needed improvement, if there were any areas we could easily pivot. 

Dr. Nishi Rawat: Great. Yeah. Nothing to add. 

Moderator: Wonderful. Thank you both. Next question we have here: How did it compare to implementing other behavioral health initiatives? 

Kristi Carney: I think what stood out for me was just the flexibility of working together. When we raised something in steering committee that we wanted to try, it happened quickly. We really appreciate vendors and provider partners who can pivot when needed, when we look at the processes or opportunities that can improve outcomes for our members. One of the things during steering committee that we talked about was maybe we needed to expand hours to better meet our members’ needs in the evening. So we tried it, and we really appreciate provider partners who just are very flexible and who can build relationships with our internal teams and our providers and our hospital systems and just, you know, try something different, you know, just to see if we maybe can improve a process or improve the outcome for the member. 

Moderator: Awesome. Next question we have here: For plans trying to move toward a whole-person care model, where does behavioral health navigation fit in the broader care management architecture? 

Kristi Carney: I see it as an extension of our care management program, not a separate program. So our goal is to create a seamless experience for members and providers, by connecting behavioral health, physical health, and social need support. 

So when we’re reaching out to members, it feels like it’s coming all from one care team with a shared understanding of their needs, rather than multiple people reaching out to the member, or multiple organizations; that we’re working together instead of independently. 

For providers, I think it means integrating navigation systems into existing workflows and tailoring those processes to fit the needs of the provider, rather than us telling the provider, “Hey, you need to adapt to this model.” We are asking you how you would like us to fit into your model. 

I think behavioral navigation works best when it serves as a bridge between members, providers, and care management. 

And just making sure that we’re getting the member connected to the right service and supports at the right time. 

Moderator: Awesome. I think we have time for one more question here: How do you avoid creating another point solution? 

Kristi Carney: Again, I think I have to stress that integration. 

Integration, not addition. We have to align navigation services with care management, provider workflows, and shared outcome measures, so that they function as part of a coordinated strategy rather than a separate program. And I just think the success depends less on technology and more on how it’s integrated into care management workflows, provider partnerships, and member engagement strategies. 

Moderator: Fantastic. Well, thank you both. That is all the time we have for today, unfortunately. I want to thank Kristi and Dr. Rawat for an excellent discussion, as well as Bamboo Health for sponsoring today’s webinar. Thank you all for joining us, and we hope you have a wonderful rest of your day.