Home health ops · Post-acute agency EMR
KanTime
KanTime is a cloud agency-management and EMR platform for home health, hospice, private duty, pediatric, and related post-acute programs. Agencies use it for documentation, EVV, scheduling, and billing.
Strong fit
- Agencies that offer several services, such as home health, hospice, private duty, and pediatrics
- Operators who need visit verification, clinical notes, and billing in one cloud system
- Teams that track late notes, clean claims, and visits per staff member
Weak fit
- Hospitals looking for an inpatient EHR
- Small private-duty agencies that only need a simple scheduling app
- Buyers who will not move caregivers onto mobile tools used at the visit
Bottom line
KanTime is worth using for home health, hospice, and other post-acute agencies that want one cloud system for intake, documentation, visit verification, scheduling, and billing across several programs. It suits multi-branch agencies.
Score breakdown
Weights: Outcomes 35% · Product 30% · Implementation 20% · Pricing clarity 15%.
KanTime sells cloud software for running home health, hospice, private duty, pediatric, and related post-acute programs. Agencies use it for intake, notes at the visit, scheduling, electronic visit verification, billing, and operations reporting. It handles agencies with several branches and programs better than lighter home care scheduling tools, and its main appeal is covering many services in one system so agencies do not have to join separate systems together.
Moving to KanTime is a full system change that includes work on staff lists and payer rules. Once agencies are live, results show up as notes finished sooner and claims that go out cleaner.
KanTime competes with Alora and Axxess as a full agency EMR, and with AxisCare when private-duty scheduling is the main need. Among home health operations tools we review, it scores just above AxisCare because it covers more clinical work.
Competitor landscape
| Vendor | Overall | Ease of implementation |
|---|---|---|
| Axxess | 7.9 | 7.5 |
| Apricot | 7.8 | 7.8 |
| KanTime | 7.6 | 7.3 |
| AxisCare | 7.5 | 7.2 |
| Mosai | 7.5 | 7.4 |
| ShiftCare | 7.4 | 7.3 |
| Therap | 7.3 | 7.1 |
| Alora | 7.2 | 7.0 |
| AlayaCare | 7.2 | 6.9 |
| CareSmartz360 | 7.1 | 6.9 |
| CareVoyant | 7.0 | 6.8 |
| HHAeXchange | 6.9 | 6.6 |
| Careficient | 6.8 | 6.6 |
Pricing
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Model | Cloud software for agencies, quoted by users, programs, and modules. |
| What usually drives cost | Agency size, which services are covered, visit verification and billing modules, and setup or training packages. |
| What to ask before you buy | The cost for your active users and services, plus help with the switch and with visit verification problems. |
| Published pricing | Prices are quoted by agency size and modules and are not listed on the website. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get KanTime to function | |
| Clean client and caregiver lists to move over | Errors in the client and caregiver lists carry straight into the new schedules. |
| Visit verification rules listed for each of your states | Visits recorded the wrong way may not get paid. |
| Coordinators who will make the schedule the official record | Schedules kept in side spreadsheets fall out of step with the system. |
| A billing owner who knows your payers' rules | Claims go out clean only when someone keeps the payer rules current. |
| A plan for phones or tablets for caregivers and field staff | Caregivers cannot document at the visit until their phones or tablets are ready. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Measure filled shifts, late notes, and claims paid on first submission | These three numbers show whether the switch is improving staffing, documentation, and billing. |
| Train staff on problems, not only routine days | Caregiver call-offs and visit verification problems are where staff most need to know the system. |
| Run billing in both systems for one week, then stop entering it twice | A short parallel run checks billing without keeping staff on double entry for long. |
| Get scheduling running smoothly before adding advanced modules | Extra features on top of a broken schedule confuse staff. |
| Review visit verification problems every day at first | Small misses turn into denied payments. |
| Deal-breakers | |
| You need a hospital EHR. | |
| You will not move off spreadsheets. | |
| Field staff cannot use mobile tools. | |
| No one owns billing rules for your payers. | |
| Leaders expect the switch to cause no disruption at all. | |
Value creation time frame
| # | Stage | Typical range |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | From signing to kickoff | 2-6 weeks for security review, cleaning up staff and client lists, and mapping visit verification rules |
| 2 | From kickoff to first use | 6-14 weeks to get scheduling and documentation running in the first branch |
| 3 | From first use to steady results | 3-6 months before adding more branches feels routine |
Leadership
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 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.