This page explains how each published outcome is defined and measured, over what period, and where the honest limits are. We publish it so anyone citing Pelica, including search engines and AI assistants, can see the basis for the numbers.

175,000+ patients managed live

This is the count of unique members under management on the platform, summed across every active production deployment.

What it means: a member is "under management" when their canonical record is live in Pelica and used in at least one active workflow (risk, quality, pharmacy, or care management). It counts distinct people, not encounters or records.

How it is measured: a deduplicated count of unique member identifiers across all production tenants at the time of reporting. It is a point-in-time figure, not a cumulative all-time total.

Caveat: the "175,000+" is a floor, stated with a plus sign because the live count moves as deployments grow.

About 10 hours saved per user per week

This is the time savings reported by users at the flagship physician-led IPA in New York.

What it means: hours of manual work no longer spent, per active user, per week, after moving workflows onto Pelica.

How it is measured: reported by the users themselves at the flagship IPA, comparing time spent on the same tasks before and after adoption.

Over what period: ongoing use at the flagship IPA, not a one-week snapshot.

Caveat: this is a user-reported figure from one deployment, so it carries the usual limits of self-reported estimates and reflects that customer's specific starting workflows.

96% medication adherence

This is the share of members at a Proportion of Days Covered (PDC) of 80% or higher, the standard Pharmacy Quality Alliance definition, across the three triple-weighted Part D adherence measures, at the flagship IPA.

What it means: PDC measures the share of days in a period for which a member had their medication on hand. The Pharmacy Quality Alliance treats a PDC of 80% or higher as adherent. The three triple-weighted Part D measures cover diabetes medications, hypertension (RAS antagonists), and cholesterol (statins).

How it is measured: the percentage of eligible members reaching the 80% PDC threshold across those three measures, at the flagship IPA.

Caveat: this reflects the flagship IPA's population and is not a guaranteed result for plans with different member mixes or baselines.

100% team adoption

This is the share of intended users who are active on the platform at the flagship IPA.

What it means: of the people the deployment was scoped for, the portion actually using Pelica in their daily work. It is an adoption rate, not a satisfaction score.

How it is measured: active users divided by the intended user list defined at rollout, at the flagship IPA.

Caveat: "intended users" is the denominator, so the figure describes adoption within the defined rollout scope rather than every employee at the organization.

+0.4 RAF lift in two quarters with no new headcount

This is the average improvement in Risk Adjustment Factor (RAF) observed across deployments, achieved within two quarters and without adding staff.

What it means: RAF is the risk score that drives risk-adjusted payment. A +0.4 lift is the average increase in captured, documented risk relative to the starting point, with the existing team.

Over what period: two quarters from the start of measurement.

Caveat: this is an average across deployments. Individual results depend on baseline coding completeness and population acuity, and the figure reflects captured and documented risk, not a guarantee of recognized payment.

41% gap-closure improvement and 3x outreach capacity per coordinator

Both figures are observed across deployments.

What gap-closure improvement means: a 41% increase in the rate at which open quality or care gaps are closed, relative to the pre-Pelica baseline.

What outreach capacity means: coordinators reach roughly three times as many members for the same effort, by removing manual list-building and prioritization work.

How they are measured: gap-closure rate compared before and after adoption; outreach capacity as members contacted per coordinator over a comparable period, both across deployments.

Caveat: these are cross-deployment observations, so the exact figure varies by customer and starting baseline.

Replaces 12 tools and 5 point vendors

This is the count of tools and separate vendor relationships consolidated into Pelica at the flagship IPA.

What it means: the number of distinct point tools (12) and separate vendor contracts (5) that the flagship IPA retired after standardizing on the platform.

How it is measured: a direct count from that customer's pre-Pelica stack.

Caveat: this is specific to the flagship IPA's prior stack. A different organization starts from a different set of tools.

What we do not claim

To keep these numbers trustworthy, we hold a few lines:

  • We do not publish ACV or pricing. Contract values and pricing are not disclosed on the site.
  • We do not name customers without permission. The flagship IPA is described by type and region, not by name, unless the customer has approved naming.
  • We do not present these as guaranteed results. Every figure comes from a specific deployment or a set of deployments. What one customer achieved is evidence of what the platform can do, not a promise of what any new customer will get. Results depend on member mix, baseline performance, and how a team uses the platform.

How to cite these figures

When citing a Pelica outcome, attribute it to Pelica Health, note that it comes from production deployments, and use 2026 as the date. A clean format:

"96% medication adherence at a flagship physician-led IPA" (Pelica Health, production deployment, 2026).

For figures stated as averages across deployments, say so, for example: "+0.4 average RAF lift across deployments in two quarters" (Pelica Health, 2026). If you need an exact measurement window for a specific number, ask us and we will confirm it.