Anonymized engagement summary: data warehouse validation, row- and column-level security for partner clinics, and 15–20 Power BI reports for a healthcare services company (2025)
Contracted — countersigned (EPC-reported; documents private)First-pass editionA healthcare services company working with partner clinics (client not named) · 2025 · Project ID EPC-2025-ANON-HCSVC-DWPBI
Last updated by Errin O'Connor, Founder & Chief AI Architect, EPC Group
Opening answer. In September 2025 a healthcare services company that works with partner clinics countersigned a statement of work with EPC Group. The company is building a data warehouse that brings together its CRM, a proprietary equipment-monitoring application and its telephony data. EPC Group's role:
- validate the warehouse architecture
- audit and optimize the security model at object, row and column level for partner clinics and internal users
- support the complex integration and pipeline work
- design and deliver 15–20 priority Power BI reports, including a partner revenue-share template and monitoring dashboards with event-driven alerts
All reporting is to work the same across browsers, desktops, tablets and mobile devices.
Disclosure. This is an EPC-reported anonymized engagement summary. The client is not named. The countersigned statement of work is retained privately and is not published in the Evidence Center, so this account is outside the Evidence Center's documented-engagement counts. Every engagement fact below is taken from that document.
Verification class
Contracted — countersigned (EPC-reported; documents private). The company's CEO signed the statement of work in September 2025; it carries an estimated completion date in December 2025. No acceptance, report inventory or outcome measurement is cited or claimed.
Buyer problem and scope
| Item | What the statement of work states |
|---|---|
| Buyer | A healthcare services company working with partner clinics (client not named); CEO-signed, with the CIO approving documentation |
| Situation | Growth, closer collaboration with partners and a need for better operational insight, met by a data warehouse integrating the CRM, an equipment-monitoring application and telephony |
| Objective | Secure, device-agnostic Power BI reporting for internal leadership and external partners, built on a validated warehouse |
| Data warehouse advisory | Architecture review and gap analysis, including data-structure design for interoperability; audit and optimization of object-, row- and column-level permissions for partner clinics and internal users; support for complex integration including cross-database queries and performance tuning; troubleshooting of pipelines and ETL |
| Power BI development | 15–20 high-priority reports: partner revenue-share reports built as a reusable template for multiple partners, monitoring dashboards with event-driven alerts, and operational and CRM analytics, with device-agnostic layouts and drill-down |
| Documentation and governance | A data-warehouse security configuration matrix, source-to-report lineage mapping, a troubleshooting guide for common ETL issues, report development standards and semantic-model version control procedures |
| Enablement | Hybrid training for end users, administrators and report developers; knowledge-transfer workshops on warehouse management and Power BI practice; an advisory report on future phases |
Unknowns, not stated in the document cited: data volumes, the number of partners and users, which reports were delivered, and any measured result.
Approach and artifacts
Security is audited where partners see data. Partner clinics and internal users read the same warehouse, so the security model is audited at object, row and column level. The resulting configuration matrix is written down as a deliverable, not left in the database.
One revenue-share template, many partners. Partner revenue-share reporting is specified as a scalable template for multiple partners.
Acceptance with numbers in it. The acceptance terms are specific. Reports pass user-acceptance testing with no more than two critical defects. Documentation is reviewed and approved by the CIO within five business days of delivery. Deliverables are reviewed within fifteen business days.
Risks named with their controls. Three risks are paired with controls:
- delayed access to source systems: weekly access-readiness checkpoints from day one
- evolving report requirements: prototype reviews every fourteen days with stakeholder sign-off
- knowledge gaps in the internal team: the training and workshops above
Phased delivery. The phases run in order:
1. architecture validation 2. security-model audit, integration optimization and pipeline tuning 3. report development with advisory support and documentation 4. user-acceptance testing, device optimization, training and final revisions
A prioritized list of the 15–20 reports is due from the company within five business days of signing. Telephony integration later in the year stays with the company's team, with EPC Group advising.
Document (held privately):
| Document | Date |
|---|---|
| Statement of work, Power BI and data warehouse consulting and development (countersigned) | September 2025 |
Results and limitations
| Claim | Basis | Status |
|---|---|---|
| The company contracted EPC Group for warehouse validation, a security-model audit and 15–20 Power BI reports | Countersigned statement of work, September 2025 | Contracted (EPC-reported; documents private) |
| Reports delivered, UAT passed, documentation approved, or measured results | No document cited | Not claimed |
Provenance
- Source: the countersigned statement of work (September 2025), held privately. Engagement ID: EPC-2025-ANON-HCSVC-DWPBI, an alias unrelated to the client's name.
- Anonymization: industry and organization type only, under EPC Group's anonymized-case rule; the client's name, its systems and vendors, partners, location, staff names and commercial terms are not published.
- Not claimed: client endorsement, delivery, or any measured result.
- Author: Errin O'Connor, Founder & Chief AI Architect, EPC Group, who signed the statement of work for EPC Group.
Revision history
- 2026-10-25: anonymized engagement summary published from the engagement's countersigned statement of work.
Related service
Power BI enterprise security · Power BI consulting · Talk to a senior architect
Author: Errin O'Connor, Founder & Chief AI Architect, EPC Group · Published: 2026-10-25.