Population health & analytics · Population health services
Syra Health
Syra Health is a public healthcare company with a population-health analytics and services segment serving government and community health programs. It is not an EHR or hospital capacity-optimization tool.
Strong fit
- State and community programs that need population-health analytics and related health services with published financials
- Buyers who will measure program outcomes and contract delivery after go-live
- Teams comparing smaller public-company population-health vendors rather than enterprise ACO suites
Weak fit
- Hospital OR capacity buyers (LeanTaaS lane)
- FQHCs that only need a boutique analytics dashboard with no services wrap
- Organizations shopping an EHR
Bottom line
Syra Health earns a Recommend for buyers that want a smaller population-health analytics and services vendor with public financial reporting rather than an opaque private ACO platform. FY2025 filings show about $7.2M total revenue with population-health revenue near $5.3M after sharp segment growth - inside our preferred band. Outcomes depend on whether program delivery and analytics actually move contract metrics. Product depth is narrower than Lightbeam or Persivia on enterprise VBC suites and different from Azara's FQHC quality stack. Implementation mixes software and services. Pricing is custom. Recent CEO transition (Gregory Alexander in early 2026 after prior leadership changes) is ordinary diligence. Score sits just under Azara on our population-health board for transparent mid-market scale.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
Syra Health is a public healthcare company whose population-health segment provides analytics and related services for government and community health programs.
Compare Azara for FQHC quality suites, Olio for post-acute care coordination, and Persivia or Lightbeam for broader enterprise VBC platforms.
Score reflects solid mid-market transparency marks on our population-health board.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Syra Health | 7.4 | 7.1 |
| Azara Healthcare | 7.6 | 7.2 |
| Olio | 6.9 | 6.7 |
| Persivia | 7.4 | 7.1 |
| Relevant Healthcare | 6.8 | 6.6 |
| Trella Health | 7.3 | 7.0 |
| Lightbeam Health Solutions | 6.8 | 6.5 |
| Elligint Health | 6.9 | 6.6 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Custom population-health analytics and services contracts; public company financials available via SEC filings. |
| What usually drives cost | Program scope, analytics modules, and professional services. |
| What to ask in diligence | Contract value for your population and which deliverables are software vs services. |
| Published pricing | Public list price: not published. Company reports segment revenue in SEC filings. |
FY2025 company-reported revenue about $7.2M with population-health segment about $5.3M (SEC/press materials).
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get Syra Health to function | |
| Named population-health or quality owner with authority over care-gap work | Dashboards without owners become wallpaper. |
| Clean attributed-lives or panel definition agreed with finance | Vague denominators erase savings claims. |
| EHR, claims, and ADT feed inventory documented | Missing feeds recreate blind spots. |
| Care-manager or partner capacity to act on lists | Unworked lists are not outcomes. |
| Contract metrics chosen before kickoff | Moving goalposts erase the engagement. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Track gap closure, readmissions, or utilization weekly for 90 days | Login counts are not outcomes. |
| Start with one population or partner network first | Narrow wins beat empty enterprise banners. |
| Retire duplicate spreadsheet lists after parallel month | Dual entry doubles cost. |
| Review unworked high-risk or transition patients in a standing huddle | Silent queues hide failure. |
| Publish a quarterly outcomes digest to clinical leaders | Hidden backlogs surprise board reviews. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You have no value-based, quality, or post-acute program to act on. | |
| Nobody will own follow-up work. | |
| You refuse any EHR or claims data sharing. | |
| You expect an EHR replacement from a population-health layer. | |
| Leadership will not measure outcomes. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Scope & data | 4–8 weeks — Lives, feeds, success metrics. |
| 2 | Integrate | 2–4 months — Claims/EHR/ADT; validation. |
| 3 | Pilot | 1–2 months — One contract, site, or partner cohort. |
| 4 | Expand | Ongoing — More lives; care-ops tuning. |
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.