Implementation services · HCIT staffing & delivery
Morgan Hunter Healthcare
Morgan Hunter Healthcare provides healthcare IT staffing and consulting for EHR implementation, optimization, go-live, integration, and revenue-cycle support across Epic, Oracle Health, MEDITECH, and related systems. It is not a software product.
Strong fit
- Health systems that need Epic, Oracle Health, MEDITECH, or revenue-cycle consultants on project or legacy support
- CIOs who want a staffing-plus-delivery partner rather than a pure marketplace
- Programs measuring resource quality and responsiveness over brand scale
Weak fit
- Buyers seeking a single firm to own a multi-year Epic install with hundreds of ATE workers
- Organizations that will not assign internal application owners
- Groups looking for software products instead of consulting
Bottom line
Morgan Hunter Healthcare earns a Recommend for mid-market HCIT staffing and delivery across major EHR vendors. Public client notes emphasize candidate quality, revenue-cycle Cerner support, and responsive account handling. It is less of a turnkey megaprogram SI than Tegria. Pricing is resource and SOW based. Score sits just under HPG for a broader vendor mix with a staffing-forward posture.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Morgan Hunter Healthcare provides healthcare IT staffing and consulting for implementation, optimization, go-live, integration, and revenue-cycle support across Epic, Oracle Health, MEDITECH, and related platforms.
It is a services partner, not software. Compare HPG when Oracle Health depth is the buying reason, and ReMedi when physician-led personalization is the priority.
Score reflects a solid mid-market staffing-plus-delivery firm with ordinary rate opacity.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Speed to go-live |
|---|---|---|
| Morgan Hunter Healthcare | 7.1 | 6.9 |
| HPG | 7.3 | 7.1 |
| ReMedi Health Solutions | 7.5 | 7.3 |
| Ellit Groups | 7.5 | 7.2 |
| MedSys Group | 7.3 | 7.0 |
| Impact Advisors | 7.1 | 7.2 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Healthcare IT consulting, direct hire, and staffed project support sold on resource rates and SOWs. |
| What usually drives cost | Skill mix, vendor certification, duration, and whether work is implementation, optimization, or legacy support. |
| What to ask in diligence | Rate card for the modules you need, with mark-up clarity and replacement terms if a consultant turns over mid-project. |
| Published pricing | Public list price: not published. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Morgan Hunter Healthcare to function | |
| Written skill profiles for each open role | Vague asks produce mismatched resumes. |
| Internal hiring or engagement owner with decision rights | Slow feedback loses candidates. |
| Clear Epic versus Oracle versus MEDITECH priority | Scattershot searches waste weeks. |
| Budget range and expected duration | Misaligned rate cards stall offers. |
| Onboarding path for consultants (VPN, EHR access) | Day-one idle time burns money. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Interview for module depth, not only years on a resume | Cerner scheduling is not Cerner RevCycle. |
| Set weekly status on fill risk | Silent pipelines surprise go-live dates. |
| Require knowledge-transfer notes each sprint | Staffing without transfer is rent. |
| Keep a short bench for sudden attrition | Single points of failure are common. |
| Measure time-to-productive after start | Start date is not value date. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You need a single SI to own a 500-person Epic install alone. | |
| No internal owners will manage consultants. | |
| Skill needs and EHR vendor are undefined. | |
| Budget cannot support mid-market consulting rates. | |
| You want software, not people. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Search kickoff → first shortlist | 1-3 weeks for common modules |
| 2 | Offer → consultant productive | 2-5 weeks including access |
| 3 | Steady delivery | Ongoing for the SOW term |
Methodology
| Weight | Factor | What it measures |
|---|---|---|
| 35% | Customer outcomes | Whether buyers get measurable operational or clinical-workflow results after go-live |
| 30% | Product | Capability depth, reliability, and fit for the job the category actually buys |
| 20% | Implementation | How hard it is to stand up, integrate, train, and stabilize |
| 15% | Pricing clarity | Whether a buyer can model total cost without a mystery quote |
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Highly recommend | Strong outcomes and product with manageable caveats |
| Recommend | Solid fit for the right buyer; know the tradeoffs |
| Conditional | Only with a specific use case or heavy caveats |
| Not recommended | Avoid for most buyers in this category |
Read our full methodology for how we weight scores and assign recommend labels.