This is a format demonstration, not a real readout. Riverbend Recovery is a fictional organization, and every figure on this page is drawn from a mock respondent and the simulated 2026 dataset. No real survey data appears here. Live readouts are produced only from a respondent's own answers, and are never shared.
Your organization, benchmarked against 100 US behavioral health providers on the six measures that define community performance — community meaning the whole circle: clients from the day they commit, alumni after discharge, and families throughout. This document is yours to keep and to use, with your team, your board, or your payers. It contains your answers, the field's distribution, what the top quartile does differently, and the three moves your own numbers argue for. No pitch lives in these pages. That is the founding-cohort promise.
Read each row as your value, the field median (solid tick), and the top-quartile line (dotted tick). Your early engagement is real. Almost none of it is being converted or measured.
Your survey band was 25–49%. The midpoint sits below the field median, and well below the top quartile line.
Your band was 5–14%, against the 25% best-practice benchmark. 40% of the top quartile clears 25%.
0.5 FTE across 480 discharges. Top-quartile organizations run roughly four times your coverage, and 92% of them have a dedicated owner against 37% of the rest.
You share this answer with 46% of the field. 28% of the top quartile measures systematically, against 4% of everyone else.
“Multiple times” places you among the 22% most exposed organizations in the benchmark.
You sit with the 46% plurality: leaning in, not yet equipped. Only 6% of the field holds a value-based contract, so this race has not started.
One more answer worth flagging: your family involvement is informal. That is the field's norm — only about one in five organizations runs structured family programming — and it is the most under-deployed high-evidence lever in behavioral health. Family-training approaches engage reluctant clients into care at five times the rate of standard referrals in randomized trials. It pairs naturally with the first move in section 04.
At 30 days you reach more alumni than the field median: the Facebook group, the email list, and your events are doing honest work while memory is fresh. Then between 90 and 180 days your reach falls from roughly 37% to roughly 17%, twice the field's rate of loss over the same window. And at one year you answered “we don't track this,” which puts you in the fifth of the field flying fully blind at the horizon where relapse risk is still live.
Your tooling explains your curve almost exactly. Consumer social groups hold attention for 90 to 100 days post-discharge and then decay; your strong 30-day number and your 180-day break are the textbook signature of a Facebook-group program run by a committed but part-time coordinator. The field's data says this is not a motivation problem. It is an infrastructure problem.
Scaled to your roughly 480 annual discharges and commercial-heavy mix, the three gaps your survey surfaced carry the following conservative annual values. Halve every estimate and the ranking does not change.
Assumptions: ARS from ~9% to 20% (still under the 25–30% published benchmark) on ~480 admissions at $18K average net revenue = ~53 incremental admissions. Re-engagement: ~230 alumni encounter significant struggle in-year (mid-range published recurrence); capture into step-down care improves from ~10% to 30% at ~$6K average. Evidence: you reported multiple lost-day events at a 120 census with PHP in the mix; estimate uses roughly half of a single documented facility case ($339K protected). Investment: one full-time alumni owner plus platform, events, and measurement tooling. These are planning figures, not projections.
These three map one-to-one onto your weakest rows.
You run 0.5 FTE against 480 discharges; 92% of the top quartile has a dedicated owner. Your strong 30-day engagement says the raw material is there and being dropped for lack of hands. The incremental cost of a full-time owner is a rounding error against the $950K referral prize alone. What good looks like: one accountable owner, a weekly rhythm, and reach tracked as a number someone reports, not a feeling someone has.
You answered “occasionally, ad hoc” on the ask and “wouldn't know” on 30-day referral recency, which together explain a 9% referral share sitting under real engagement. The top quartile asks systematically (40% against 5%) and would know. Your own curve says when to ask: in the first 90 days, while your reach is above the field's. What good looks like: referral and review invitations built into 30/60/90-day milestones, source attribution recorded at every admission, and referral share on the monthly dashboard.
You collect no structured post-discharge outcomes, and you told us you want payers to fund post-discharge engagement — the field's most-wished payer capability. Those two answers cannot both stay true: the funding follows the measurement. A validated brief instrument at 30, 90, and 365 days, delivered inside whatever community channel you keep, converts your value-based interest into something a plan can sign. What good looks like: post-discharge outcome visibility above 40% within two quarters, and your lost-authorization story rewritten with between-session evidence, which your “multiple times” answer prices at roughly $200K a year.
This readout is yours regardless of what you do next. If it is useful, two doors are open. The first: a 45-minute working session on your alumni P&L, your team and ours, where we build the referral and re-engagement math above into a plan with your real numbers instead of survey bands. The second: nothing at all, and we will see you in the 2027 benchmark, where the most interesting question will be whether your 180-day number moved. Founding-cohort respondents get year-over-year tracking free, forever. That is the deal, and it is the whole deal.
Complete the twelve-minute survey and opt in, and a readout like this one is built from your own answers.
Take the survey →Every founding-cohort respondent who opts in gets a private thirty-minute readout built from their own answers. Fielding closes Friday, October 9.
