Alleva publicly markets its CRM module; the technology underneath has historically been provided by Dazos. The exact commercial structure (white-label, OEM, partnership, etc.) varies and is not always disclosed in customer-facing materials. The practical question for facility operators is what contracts they're signing and what contracts the platform they're running depends on. That's a question worth asking Alleva directly during procurement, and worth asking your counsel to verify.

Three reasons. First, contract exposure: the terms of the underlying Dazos relationship can flow through to your CRM-layer use, including the clauses that have made the Dazos agreement controversial — see the VProGo vs Dazos comparison page. Second, vendor-lock complexity: changing CRMs is harder when your CRM provider doesn't own the underlying tech. Third, pricing opacity: you're paying through one vendor for technology owned by another, which makes negotiation and renewal less transparent than a single-vendor relationship.

Not always. Best-of-breed multi-vendor stacks have legitimate strengths — specialization, flexibility, less single-vendor risk. The trade-off shows up in coordination cost: more contracts, more support relationships, more migration complexity. For behavioral health facilities specifically, the multi-vendor coordination cost is high because admissions workflow spans CRM, EMR, billing, and patient engagement — and those vendors typically don't share data well. VProGo's single-vendor stack collapses the coordination cost. Whether that's worth more than best-of-breed flexibility depends on facility size, IT capacity, and how much coordination tax you're currently paying.

It depends on how you're using Alleva today. If Alleva is primarily your EMR and CRM, VProGo can replace the CRM layer while you keep Alleva for clinical (Alleva integration is in development). If you want to move off Alleva entirely, VProGo provides CRM, RCM, patient engagement, and marketing natively, and integrates with your next EMR. The transition can be sequenced — VProGo first as the operations layer, EMR change later if you want to.

Alleva has used variations of its branding ("Hello Alleva," "Alleva," etc.) over time. The underlying platform and the underlying CRM technology relationship are the same regardless of brand presentation. This page uses "Alleva" generically to refer to the platform.

One MSA, one Order Form, one Business Associate Agreement, one accountable party. The full MSA is published in summary form in /compare/vprogo-vs-dazos and available in full on request. Key terms: Year 1 month-to-month, mutual 12-month liability cap, $0 self-service data export, signed amendments required for any change to the BAA or SLA, mutual 12-month non-solicit at actual damages only. No transitive vendor exposure because there is no underlying vendor.