Partnership Standards
A practical baseline for partners that integrate, deliver or co-market with MDS, designed to protect patient trust, data, operational quality and accountability.
These standards define how MDS works with partners. They are not certification, accreditation or clinical endorsement.
A healthcare ecosystem needs operating controls, not just integrations.
The exact depth changes by category, but every partner relationship is reviewed through the same five lenses.
Clinical safety boundaries
Clear role boundaries, no unsupported medical advice and governed escalation when workflows touch patient-facing communications.
Security & privacy
Least-privilege access, data minimization, contractual readiness and auditability where appropriate.
Interoperability
Documented APIs, predictable integration behavior, testing, versioning and change control.
Delivery quality
Named owners, QA, support paths, handover assets and service expectations appropriate to scope.
Brand & claims
Approved proof usage, responsible healthcare claims and written co-marketing permissions.
What needs to exist before co-delivery starts.
The goal is not paperwork for its own sake. It is clear ownership, safe access and predictable delivery.
Named owner, implementation SOPs, escalation path and change approval process.
Secure-by-default architecture, access controls, secrets management and vulnerability management practices.
Data minimization, retention alignment and contractual readiness when handling lead or patient data.
API documentation, versioning, test approach, change notices and rollback planning where relevant.
Delivery plan, QA checklist, support model, incident path and handover artifacts.
Metric definitions, data-source clarity, event taxonomy and attribution-friendly handling.
Claims discipline, proof permissions, media rights and brand asset governance.
What these standards are not
Not a public certification or accreditation program.
Not an approval of clinical quality or medical outcomes.
Not permission to use MDS branding, logos or case studies without written approval.
Access should be scoped before systems are connected.
Integration reviews focus on minimum necessary access, clear data ownership, documented interfaces, test environments where appropriate and a known rollback or incident path.
A six-stage path from application to ongoing governance.
Review depth should match the risk and integration surface. A content partner and a data platform should not go through an identical technical review.
Application
Capability, category and delivery footprint.
Fit check
Healthcare context and operating model.
Standards review
Security, privacy, integration and claims as relevant.
References & proof
Validate delivery evidence and claims.
Pilot or onboarding
Agree scope, pilot or onboarding plan.
Ongoing governance
Change control, reviews and permissions.
Co-marketing is permissioned, contextual and evidence-aware.
No implied endorsement
Ecosystem participation must not be described as certification, clinical approval or blanket endorsement.
No outcome guarantees
Published healthcare results and claims need context, evidence and written approval before reuse.
Written brand permission
MDS names, logos, screenshots, case studies and client assets require explicit permission.
Consent for testimonials
Testimonials need permission, context and disciplined editing.
Licensed media only
Partners should publish only media they own or have the right to use.
Change review
Material changes to integrations, claims or delivery scope should go through the agreed review path.