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. It is not a hospital inpatient EHR.
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. Agencies that mainly need private-duty scheduling may prefer AxisCare.
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. Its pitch is covering many services without joining separate systems together.
Results show up when notes are done sooner and claims go out cleaner.
Moving to KanTime is still a full system change, with work on staff lists and payer rules. List prices are not published.
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 | KanTime does not publish prices. Expect a quote based on agency size and modules. |
Prerequisites for purchase
| Need | Why it matters |
|---|---|
| What you need to get KanTime to function | |
| Clean client and caregiver lists to move over | Bad data turns into bad schedules that stay bad. |
| 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 | Side spreadsheets wipe out the return. |
| A billing owner who knows your payers' rules | Operations software still needs someone who owns billing. |
| A plan for phones or tablets for caregivers and field staff | The app fails if phones are left until last. |
| What will maximize your value | |
| Measure filled shifts, late notes, and claims paid on first submission | Real results matter more than feature lists. |
| Train staff on problems, not only routine days | Caregivers calling off and visit verification problems are the real test. |
| Run billing in both systems for one week, then stop entering it twice | Entering everything twice doubles the work. |
| 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.