Two vendors are involved in this program — one being onboarded (active contract, ongoing SLA management) and one being offboarded (the platform this program replaces). Both need different artifacts, which is why they're handled as separate documents rather than one generic vendor page.
Purpose & Scope
This plan governs how both vendors are managed for the life of the program: how performance is tracked, who owns the relationship day to day, how issues get escalated, and what happens if either vendor underperforms. Vendor selection itself (RFP, evaluation, contract negotiation) happened before program start and isn't repeated here — this plan picks up from signed contract onward.
Vendors on This Program
PulseConnect
HIPAA-compliant video visit SDK, licensed for the life of MedConnect Mobile and beyond.
- Contract type: Annual SaaS license + support SLA
- BAA executed during vendor selection (pre-program)
- Managed via: SOW Summary & Performance Scorecard
Vantix Health Systems
Vendor of CareLink Classic, the legacy telehealth platform this program replaces.
- Contract type: Legacy per-seat license, expiring on the announced end-of-life timeline
- Managed via: Legacy Vendor Offboarding Plan
Vendor Lifecycle on This Program
| Stage | PulseConnect (Incoming) | Vantix (Outgoing) |
|---|---|---|
| Onboarding | BAA and SaaS contract executed pre-program; SDK integration spike run in Sprint 1 (see WBS 1.2.5) to validate fit before broader build | N/A — already in production; program's job is the exit, not the entry |
| Steady-state management | Monthly SLA review against the Support SLA; technical point of contact (A. Singh) triages integration issues directly with PulseConnect support | License held at current per-seat terms through cutover; no changes negotiated mid-program |
| Exit / offboarding | Not applicable during this program's life — license continues post-cutover | Data export, license termination, and deletion certification per the Legacy Vendor Offboarding Plan, sequenced after Release 2 cutover |
Performance Management & Review Cadence
PulseConnect is the only vendor with an ongoing performance relationship during the program (Vantix is being wound down, not managed for performance). Reviewed monthly against the signed Support SLA:
| Metric | SLA Target | Review Cadence | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| P1 issue response time | ≤ 4 hours | Monthly rollup; any P1 miss reviewed same-week | A. Singh (Eng Lead, Anchor) |
| P2/P3 issue response time | ≤ 1 business day | Monthly rollup | A. Singh (Eng Lead, Anchor) |
| Platform uptime | ≥ 99.9% | Monthly rollup | A. Singh (Eng Lead, Anchor) |
| Overall contract health / renewal outlook | — | Reviewed at each Steering Committee cycle | C. Tyrrell (PO & Delivery Lead) |
Actuals against these targets are tracked in the SOW Summary & Performance Scorecard — PulseConnect met or exceeded every target through both releases, with one minor, non-recurring SLA miss.
Escalation Path
| Level | Trigger | Owner |
|---|---|---|
| 1 — Working level | Routine support tickets, integration questions | A. Singh ↔ PulseConnect support |
| 2 — Program level | Missed SLA target, recurring issue, or anything with schedule/cost impact | C. Tyrrell (PO & Delivery Lead) ↔ PulseConnect account manager |
| 3 — Sponsor level | Contract change, renewal decision, or an issue that puts program scope/budget at risk | M. Delacroix (Sponsor) — e.g. CR-01's staging environment addition |
Vendor Risk & Contingency
Single-vendor dependency on PulseConnect for video-visit infrastructure was accepted as a program risk at vendor selection (pre-program) rather than re-litigated here — there's no qualified second video-SDK vendor integrated in parallel. If PulseConnect were to materially underperform (sustained SLA misses, security incident, or BAA non-compliance), the response would be: (1) formal escalation per the path above, (2) Compliance (T. Brannigan) reassessment of the BAA and data-handling posture, and (3) if unresolved, Sponsor-level decision on contract remedy or vendor replacement — which would be a significant program change requiring its own Change Request, not a routine action. No such event occurred during this program.
Vendor Governance Roles
| Role | Responsibility |
|---|---|
| C. Tyrrell (PO & Delivery Lead) | Owns the vendor relationship at the program level — escalation point, SLA review cadence, contract renewal decisions |
| A. Singh (Engineering Lead, Anchor) | Technical point of contact for PulseConnect's SDK integration and support tickets |
| T. Brannigan (Compliance) | Owns BAA compliance for PulseConnect and data-handling/deletion certification for Vantix offboarding |
| M. Delacroix (Sponsor) | Approves any vendor contract changes with budget impact (see Change Control Log, CR-01) |
Why Two Different Vendor Artifacts
An incoming vendor needs ongoing performance management — SLA tracking, support responsiveness, renewal planning. An outgoing vendor needs a one-time, checklist-driven offboarding — data export, license termination, deletion certification. Treating both the same way would either under-manage the active relationship or over-engineer a one-time wind-down. Keeping them as separate documents matches how they're actually managed.