myEvolv

Cons

Honestly I can't point to many negatives , there really isn't much about this system that bothers me.

Cons

Everything is a mess, it crashes multiple times/day, isn't simple or user friendly, has many glitches and is awkward to use. I can open only one chart at a time, can't access charts from calendar, can't save notes in progress, can't review charts during open come across s and more.

Cons

Even though the clinical documentation looks spotless, I've found that those pristine notes can quickly turn into rejected or 'junk' claims because myEvolv/Netsmart struggles to correctly apply billing rules and their promised fixes are always scheduled for the 'next upgrade' which never arrives in time, meanwhile we end up manually correcting claims by hand in RevConnect (another Netsmart product) which creates extra work and frustration and I can't spend hours detailing every shortcoming here but trust me, with these solutions you never truly know when something will break and their support for financial and billing issues is, in my experience sorely lacking.

Cons

From the outset the implementation was handled poorly and I found the data conversion especially troubling because crucial fields that were meant to be transferred according to the documentation were missing as a result we had to manually open every chart and enter basic information that I'd already supplied to Netsmart but which never made it into the system. Post go-live there was scant guidance or meaningful training and what little training occurred left me feeling unprepared and unsupported. The system itself lacks sophistication in several fundamental areas, notably the workflow configuration required for the new OASAS 820 regulations which makes tracking compliance , a necessity for credentialing , difficult and unreliable. Reporting is another weak spot: exports to Excel are messy, dumping all available fields into a spreadsheet so that you spend most of your time deleting irrelevant columns instead of analyzing data efficiently, when Netsmart suggested we use Data Insight reports as a workaround, that only helped the technically savvy because if you don't know SQL it's essentially unusable and even then you can't share the reports broadly , only staff with Data Insight access can see them. The KPI feature shows promise but it's still under development and many reports that I need simply cannot be built yet. The OASAS admission (PAS 44) and discharge (PAS 45) forms are supposed to populate for batch submissions, however the forms in Netsmart lack the conditional logic necessary to guide clinicians through correct responses which means batch submissions fail and the whole process becomes pointless. Group management is clunky: clients who are discharged remain listed in groups with no prompt to remove them, creating headaches when trying to assign end dates and causing the roster to bloat with names that should have been cleared. Treatment plan configuration is similarly unfriendly, requiring many clicks and steps to accomplish tasks that ought to be simple. Overall my experience with this system has been problematic from the beginning, no matter what function I'm trying to perform there are always issues and until these fundamental problems are addressed it's hard to recommend this product for clinical workflows.

Cons

I've found that Netsmart, despite being a large organization, suffers from very poor inter-departmental communication, too many operate in silos and don't exchange crucial information with others working on the same initiative which frequently results in configuration calls that end with a Netsmart representative telling me that I need to reach out to another rep to get the problem fixed. On top of that, the product itself lacks several basic capabilities: the triggers or 'workflows' meant to enforce required documentation are unreliable which effectively prevents me from using Quality Assurance reporting and there are no out-of-the-box 'canned' reports for common tasks , every report must be built from scratch and then cannot be shared among users. Documenting group services is labor-intensive and the KPI and Data Insight modules are so technically complex that most behavioral health agencies I know would struggle to make practical use of them. Implementation felt slow and difficult to me, with no single Netsmart person taking ownership of the process and overall project management appeared poorly defined and inconsistent.

Cons

We've had this solution in place for over two years and still struggle to use it efficiently, particularly on the billing side where workflows remain difficult, I truly believe it can do everything we require but obtaining the support needed to diagnose and fix issues has been a real challenge. Over the past six months I've noticed an uptick in support availability and responsiveness, however that improvement has come at an additional cost and hasn't completely eliminated the hurdles we've faced.

Cons

However, I'm disappointed by customer service, the formulas often fall short of what I need and there isn't enough detail about the specific services expected.

Cons

Although it has useful features, it doesn't precisely meet my requirements in certain areas, particularly when I need to handle billing to MCOs which creates a shortfall for how I use it.