A Signallamp alternative, on a flat fee.
Signallamp Health, now part of Tellihealth, runs the closest model to ours: real nurses, embedded remotely, working in your own record. Two things differ, and one of them is how the vendor gets paid.
Signallamp Health is the closest thing to a direct analogue of the TULQ care management model that we are aware of: real nurses, embedded remotely, working inside the client's own electronic health record rather than selling a platform. If you like our model, you should look at theirs.
What Signallamp is
Per its own published materials, Signallamp describes "remotely-embedded care management" delivered by nurses who are "100% U.S.-based and licensed in the same state as your patients," with the emphatic addition: "No call centers!" It highlights nurses who "operate directly in your own EHR," with no additional software, integrations, or workflow changes, and a four to six week launch.
Its published client list leans to health systems and large groups, including UPMC, Temple Health, and Tampa General Hospital, and it publishes outcome figures including a 63 percent reduction in emergency department utilization and better than 90 percent patient retention.
One thing a buyer should know before shortlisting: Signallamp Health has become part of Tellihealth, and its chronic care management service now runs as signalCCM, powered by Tellihealth. That is not a criticism, but continuity of team and contract through a transition is a fair question to ask, and you should ask it.
TULQ is launching in 2026. We do not have an operating history, call volume statistics, or client references at scale, and a comparison that implied otherwise would be worth nothing to you. What you can evaluate today is the clinical model, our director's credentials, licensure, protocol standard, escalation design, and pricing structure. If a multi-year track record is a hard requirement for your decision, the incumbent is the right answer and we would rather you knew that now.
Side by side
| Signallamp | TULQ | |
|---|---|---|
| Model | Remotely-embedded nurses, no software sold | The same model |
| Nurses work in your EHR | Yes | Yes |
| State-licensed to the patient | Yes | Yes, compact plus single-state where needed |
| How the vendor is paid | Described as a revenue-share against existing CPT codes | Flat fee per enrolled patient, never a percentage |
| Typical customer | Health systems and large groups | Small, rural, and independent practices |
| Operating history | Established, with published outcome data | Launching 2026 |
| Corporate status | Now part of Tellihealth; CCM runs as signalCCM | Independent, nurse-led |
| After-hours nurse triage | Not the core offering | A standalone service on Schmitt-Thompson protocols |
| Annual wellness visits | Not published as a service line | Telephone AWVs, priced per completed visit |
Choose Signallamp if
- You are a health system or a large group, which is where their published references sit.
- Published outcome data matters to your evaluation, and a vendor with none is disqualifying.
- A revenue-share suits your finance team better than a per-patient fee, and you have taken your own view on the compliance posture.
- You want remote patient monitoring devices alongside care management, which the Tellihealth platform offers and we do not.
Choose TULQ if
- You are small, rural, or independent, and national vendors have quoted you a floor you will never reach.
- You want a flat fee per enrolled patient rather than a share of your Medicare collections.
- You want after-hours triage and annual wellness visits from the same nursing team, not just care management.
- You would rather contract with an independent nurse-led company than with a brand mid-transition.
The questions that actually decide it
Ask every vendor the same six, write the answers down, and compare them side by side:
- Who employs the people doing the clinical work, and what licensure do they hold in our patients' states?
- Does the documentation land in our record, or in yours?
- Are you paid a flat fee, or a share of what we collect?
- Are your staff compensated per enrollment?
- Who verifies each month that no other practice is billing that patient?
- What happens to our program, our data, and our patients if we leave you?
Questions people ask
What is actually different, if the model is the same?
Two things. Size of customer, and how the vendor gets paid.
Signallamp's published references are health systems and large groups. We are built for the practice with a few hundred Medicare patients that every national quote has treated as too small to bother with.
The second is the one worth arguing about. A revenue-share ties the vendor's pay to your Medicare reimbursement. We charge a flat fee per enrolled patient instead, and our nurses are never paid per enrollment, because tying vendor compensation to the volume or value of federal healthcare business is precisely the arrangement that draws scrutiny. Reasonable people structure this differently and a revenue-share is not unlawful, but you should understand which one you are signing.
Does a revenue-share not align our incentives better?
It aligns them toward enrollment, which is not always the same as toward the patient. Our answer is to be month to month after an initial term: if patients are not actually enrolled and actually managed, you stop paying us. That gives you the same alignment without tying our fee to your Medicare receipts.
They publish a 63 percent reduction in ED utilization. What do you publish?
Nothing, because we have nothing yet. TULQ is launching in 2026, and borrowing an industry figure to imply it is ours would be the first dishonest thing on this site. If published outcome data is what decides your evaluation, that is a real point in their favour and you should weigh it.
Sources
Competitor information is summarized from each company's own public website and was accurate as reviewed; services, pricing, and positioning change without notice. This page is written by TULQ and is not independent analysis. Verify anything that matters to your decision directly with the vendor.
Ask us the same questions.
Put the same evaluation questions to us that you put to everyone else and compare the answers. That is more useful than taking any vendor's comparison page at face value.