CentralReach vs Tebra

CentralReach is a healthcare software company founded in 2012 and headquartered in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. They specialize in serving organizations that provide applied behavior analysis (ABA), autism therapy, and developmental disability services. Their platform offers a unified solution that combines clinical data collection, scheduling, billing, payroll, telehealth, and ongoing staff training, all designed to meet the complex needs of therapy-focused practices. One of their standout features is their customization capabilities, allowing users to build tailored clinical programs and data forms. They also offer CR Institute, a built-in learning management system that supports CEUs and certification prep for RBTs and BCBAs. CentralReach’s tools are built to accommodate a wide range of service settings, including in-home, school-based, and clinic care. While customer feedback is largely positive about the platform’s functionality and impact, some users report a steep learning curve and inconsistent support responsiveness. They maintain a BBB profile, have been featured on the Inc. 5000 list, and continue to grow within their niche. For organizations exploring practice management solutions in the ABA and therapy space, CentralReach presents a compelling, specialized option worth a closer look.

Tebra, formed from the 2021 merger of Kareo and PatientPop, offers an all-in-one, cloud-based EHR and practice management platform tailored for independent healthcare providers. Their suite includes AI-assisted charting, telehealth, automated billing, and patient engagement tools like online scheduling and reputation management. Notable features such as “Same-as-Last-Time” (SALT) documentation and robotic process automation aim to streamline workflows and reduce administrative burdens. The platform is ONC-certified and HIPAA-compliant, emphasizing security and compliance. Tebra’s flexible pricing model, with no long-term contracts, appeals to small practices seeking scalability. However, their user reviews are mixed, with many commending their intuitive interface and efficiency, while others report challenges with customer support and occasional system downtimes. Despite some criticisms, Tebra maintains a strong presence in the market, serving over 150,000 providers and managing 190 million patient records. For independent practices aiming to modernize operations without sacrificing affordability, Tebra presents a compelling option. However, potential users should weigh their strengths against reported service inconsistencies. A thorough evaluation, including a demo and consultation, is recommended to determine their fit for specific practice needs.