Our equity investment model is very similar to the YC/Start Fund relationship. KPCB, Mohr Davidow Ventures, and Mayo Clinic fund the companies we select with a $100,000 convertible note, at the same terms of an existing/pending seed round, or on flexible terms up to an uncapped note. We're different from YC in the sense that Rock Health itself takes no equity in the companies. We try to be extremely entrepreneur-friendly, and ultimately, the convertible note is entirely optional. For companies that don't want the note, we write non-dilutive grants up to $20,000.

In terms of whether we help our companies get funding (or not), our companies have raised more than $100M[1] from investors including Collaborative Fund, Felicis, First Round, Floodgate, Founders Collective, Founders Fund, General Catalyst, Khosla Ventures, NEA, The Social+Capital Partnership, SV Angel, True Ventures, and USVP, just to name a few (for context, our first cohort of companies finished at Rock Health in November 2011).

[1]http://rockhealth.com/about/annual-report/

Lack of a ROI focus and accountability for spending at an organizational level at care delivery organizations is the problem.

Consumer apps can sidestep some of the backwards thinking in care delivery, but if you follow the cost drivers systemically, real innovation that moves the cost needle can be as simple as reducing redundant labor costs, or increasing patient self-service at care delivery interfaces. Nothing that can't be done with circa 1996 web technologies.

Unfortunatelty, human/political organizational barriers to such changes protect entrenched interests and prevent game changing innovation.

That said, I am seeing some minimal attention to real change as accountable care/quality metrics become more front and center due to MU2. Let's hope it doesn't degrade into more subsidies for entrenched vendors to maintain the status quo.