FreedomDev
TeamAssessmentThe Systems Edge616-737-6350
FreedomDev Logo

Your Dedicated Dev Partner. Zero Hiring Risk. No Agency Contracts.

201 W Washington Ave, Ste. 210

Zeeland MI

616-737-6350

[email protected]

FacebookLinkedIn

Company

  • About Us
  • Culture
  • Our Team
  • Careers
  • Portfolio
  • Technologies
  • Contact

Core Services

  • All Services
  • Custom Software Development
  • Systems Integration
  • SQL Consulting
  • Database Services
  • Software Migrations
  • Performance Optimization

Specialized

  • QuickBooks Integration
  • ERP Development
  • Mobile App Development
  • Business Intelligence / Power BI
  • Business Consulting
  • AI Chatbots

Resources

  • Assessment
  • Blog
  • Resources
  • Testimonials
  • FAQ
  • The Systems Edge ↗

Solutions

  • Data Migration
  • Legacy Modernization
  • API Integration
  • Cloud Migration
  • Workflow Automation
  • Inventory Management
  • CRM Integration
  • Customer Portals
  • Reporting Dashboards
  • View All Solutions

Industries

  • Manufacturing
  • Automotive Manufacturing
  • Food Manufacturing
  • Healthcare
  • Logistics & Distribution
  • Construction
  • Financial Services
  • Retail & E-Commerce
  • View All Industries

Technologies

  • React
  • Node.js
  • .NET / C#
  • TypeScript
  • Python
  • SQL Server
  • PostgreSQL
  • Power BI
  • View All Technologies

Case Studies

  • Innotec ERP Migration
  • Great Lakes Fleet
  • Lakeshore QuickBooks
  • West MI Warehouse
  • View All Case Studies

Locations

  • Michigan
  • Ohio
  • Indiana
  • Illinois
  • View All Locations

Affiliations

  • FreedomDev is an InnoGroup Company
  • Located in the historic Colonial Clock Building
  • Proudly serving Innotec Corp. globally

Certifications

Proud member of the Michigan West Coast Chamber of Commerce

Gov. Contractor Codes

NAICS: 541511 (Custom Computer Programming)CAGE CODE: oYVQ9UEI: QS1AEB2PGF73
Download Capabilities Statement

© 2026 FreedomDev Sensible Software. All rights reserved.

HTML SitemapPrivacy & Cookies PolicyPortal
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Solutions
  4. /
  5. HIPAA-Compliant Software Development: PHI Security & Access Controls
Solution

HIPAA-Compliant Software Development: PHI Security & Access Controls

Custom HIPAA-compliant software engineering — encryption at rest and in transit, role-based access controls, audit logging, Business Associate Agreements, and breach notification workflows — from a Zeeland, MI company that builds healthcare software the way OCR auditors expect to see it. We handle the Privacy Rule, Security Rule, and Breach Notification Rule so your technology does not become a liability.

FD
20+ Years Healthcare Software
HIPAA Security Rule Specialists
NIST Cybersecurity Framework
Zeeland, MI

The Real Cost of Non-Compliant Healthcare Software: OCR Fines, Breach Notifications, and Lost Contracts

The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has collected over $142 million in HIPAA enforcement actions since the enforcement program began. These are not theoretical penalties. Anthem Inc. paid $16 million after a breach affecting 78.8 million individuals. Premera Blue Cross paid $6.85 million. Banner Health paid $1.25 million after a breach affecting 2.81 million patients. The common thread in nearly every major enforcement action is the same: technical safeguards that were either absent, improperly implemented, or never tested. Software systems that stored Protected Health Information without encryption. Access controls that gave every employee full access to every patient record. Audit logs that either did not exist or were not reviewed for years. These are not exotic failure modes — they are the default state of healthcare software that was built without HIPAA compliance as an architectural requirement from day one.

HIPAA's penalty structure under the HITECH Act operates on four tiers. Tier 1 covers violations where the covered entity was unaware and could not have reasonably known — $100 to $50,000 per violation with an annual maximum of $25,000 for identical violations. Tier 2 covers violations due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect — $1,000 to $50,000 per violation with a $100,000 annual cap. Tier 3 applies when there is willful neglect that is corrected within 30 days — $10,000 to $50,000 per violation with a $250,000 annual cap. Tier 4 is willful neglect that is not corrected — a flat $50,000 per violation with an annual maximum of $1.5 million per violation category. The per-violation structure is critical to understand: a single database with 10,000 unencrypted patient records is not one violation, it is potentially 10,000 violations. At Tier 4, that is $500 million in theoretical exposure from a single unencrypted database.

Beyond OCR fines, the operational cost of a HIPAA breach is devastating. The Breach Notification Rule under 45 CFR §§ 164.400-414 requires covered entities to notify every affected individual within 60 days of discovering a breach. For breaches affecting 500 or more individuals, you must also notify the HHS Secretary and prominent media outlets in the affected state. The average cost of a healthcare data breach in 2024 was $9.77 million according to IBM's Cost of a Data Breach Report — the highest of any industry for the fourteenth consecutive year. That figure includes breach notification costs, forensic investigation, legal fees, regulatory fines, credit monitoring services, and the revenue lost when patients and partners lose trust. Health tech startups that cannot demonstrate HIPAA compliance lose enterprise healthcare contracts before they even reach a technical evaluation. Hospitals, health systems, and insurance companies require Business Associate Agreements before any software system touches PHI, and those BAAs require documented technical safeguards, not a checkbox on a marketing page.

State attorneys general add another enforcement layer. Under Section 13410(e) of the HITECH Act, state AGs can bring civil actions for HIPAA violations on behalf of their residents. Connecticut, Indiana, Minnesota, and Massachusetts have all pursued independent HIPAA enforcement actions. The result is a multi-layered enforcement environment where a single breach can trigger OCR investigation, state AG action, class action lawsuits, and CMS sanctions for Medicare-participating providers — simultaneously.

OCR enforcement actions averaging $1.5M+ per resolution, with penalties up to $1.5M per violation category annually under Tier 4

Breach notification requirements within 60 days for all affected individuals, plus HHS and media notification for breaches affecting 500+

Average healthcare data breach cost of $9.77M — highest of any industry for 14 consecutive years

Health system and payer RFPs that disqualify vendors who cannot document HIPAA technical safeguards in writing

State attorney general enforcement under HITECH Section 13410(e) creating parallel liability exposure

Business Associate Agreement requirements that demand specific technical controls, not vague compliance claims

Need Help Implementing This Solution?

Our engineers have built this exact solution for other businesses. Let's discuss your requirements.

  • Proven implementation methodology
  • Experienced team — no learning on your dime
  • Clear timeline and transparent pricing

HIPAA-Compliant Software Outcomes: What Our Healthcare Clients Achieve

0
OCR findings in client compliance audits
100%
ePHI encrypted at rest (AES-256) and in transit (TLS 1.2+)
6+ years
Immutable audit log retention satisfying § 164.530(j)
<60 days
Breach notification readiness with automated workflow tooling
SOC 2 + HIPAA
Dual compliance achieved for health tech startup clients
$2M–$5M
Enterprise healthcare contracts won with compliant software documentation

Facing this exact problem?

We can map out a transition plan tailored to your workflows.

The Transformation

HIPAA-Compliant Software Architecture: Privacy Rule, Security Rule, and Breach Notification Rule Built Into the Code

HIPAA compliance is not a feature you bolt onto software after development. It is an architectural pattern that must be present in the data model, the authentication system, the authorization layer, the encryption pipeline, the audit logging infrastructure, the backup procedures, and the deployment environment from the first commit. The Security Rule under 45 CFR § 164.312 defines four categories of technical safeguards that every system handling electronic Protected Health Information (ePHI) must implement: access controls, audit controls, integrity controls, and transmission security. Each category has required and addressable implementation specifications. 'Required' means non-negotiable — you implement it or you are out of compliance. 'Addressable' does not mean optional — it means you must implement the specification or document in writing why an equivalent alternative measure is reasonable and appropriate for your environment.

FreedomDev builds HIPAA-compliant software systems for covered entities (healthcare providers, health plans, healthcare clearinghouses) and business associates (any organization that creates, receives, maintains, or transmits PHI on behalf of a covered entity). We implement every required technical safeguard specified in the Security Rule: unique user identification (§ 164.312(a)(2)(i)), emergency access procedures (§ 164.312(a)(2)(ii)), automatic logoff (§ 164.312(a)(2)(iii)), encryption and decryption of ePHI (§ 164.312(a)(2)(iv)), audit controls that record and examine activity in systems containing ePHI (§ 164.312(b)), mechanisms to authenticate ePHI and confirm it has not been altered or destroyed (§ 164.312(c)), and transmission security including integrity controls and encryption for ePHI transmitted over electronic networks (§ 164.312(e)). These are not marketing bullets — they are specific regulatory requirements with specific section numbers that OCR auditors check against.

The Privacy Rule under 45 CFR § 164.502 governs who can access PHI, under what conditions, and with what patient authorizations. In software terms, this translates to role-based access control matrices that enforce minimum necessary access — the principle that workforce members should only access the minimum PHI necessary to perform their job function. A billing coordinator should not see clinical notes. A nurse should not see financial records. A lab technician should see lab orders and results for their department, not the entire patient chart. The software must enforce these boundaries at the application layer with granular, configurable permission models — not just 'admin' and 'user' roles. We build multi-dimensional RBAC systems that control access by role, department, facility, patient relationship, data category, and purpose of use.

The Breach Notification Rule under 45 CFR §§ 164.400-414 requires a response infrastructure that most software teams never think about until it is too late. When a breach occurs — and the OCR presumption under 45 CFR § 164.402(2) is that any unauthorized acquisition, access, use, or disclosure of PHI is a breach unless you can demonstrate a low probability of compromise through a four-factor risk assessment — you have 60 calendar days from discovery to notify every affected individual by first-class mail or email (if the individual has agreed to electronic notice). For breaches affecting 500 or more residents of a state or jurisdiction, you must also notify prominent media outlets in that state. For breaches affecting 500 or more individuals total, notification to the HHS Secretary must occur simultaneously with individual notification. Business associates must notify the covered entity within 60 days as well, and the covered entity's 60-day clock starts when the BA knew or should have known of the breach. Software that handles ePHI must include breach detection mechanisms — anomaly detection in access logs, data exfiltration monitoring, integrity verification — and workflow tools that support the notification timeline.

AES-256 Encryption at Rest & TLS 1.2+ in Transit

Every field containing ePHI is encrypted at rest using AES-256, the encryption standard accepted by NIST and referenced in the Security Rule's encryption implementation specification at § 164.312(a)(2)(iv). Data in transit between client applications, APIs, and databases is encrypted using TLS 1.2 or 1.3 — no exceptions, no fallback to unencrypted connections. Database-level encryption covers the storage layer, but we also implement application-level encryption for sensitive fields so that database administrators with direct table access still cannot read PHI without application-layer decryption keys. Key management follows NIST SP 800-57 recommendations with automated key rotation, split-knowledge key custodians, and hardware security module (HSM) integration for production environments.

Role-Based Access Control with Minimum Necessary Enforcement

The Privacy Rule's minimum necessary standard at § 164.502(b) requires that access to PHI be limited to the minimum necessary to accomplish the intended purpose. We implement multi-dimensional RBAC that controls access by user role, department, facility, care team membership, data sensitivity category, and intended purpose of use. Emergency access ('break the glass') procedures satisfy § 164.312(a)(2)(ii) with full audit trail capture — every emergency access event is logged with the user identity, timestamp, patient record accessed, and stated justification. Automatic session termination after configurable inactivity periods satisfies § 164.312(a)(2)(iii).

Comprehensive Audit Logging (§ 164.312(b))

The Security Rule requires audit controls that record and examine activity in information systems containing ePHI. Our audit logging infrastructure captures every access event, modification, deletion, export, print, and query against PHI-containing records. Logs are immutable — written to append-only storage that cannot be modified or deleted by application administrators. Each log entry includes user identity, timestamp, action performed, record accessed, source IP address, and device identifier. Logs are retained for a minimum of six years per § 164.530(j) to satisfy the documentation retention requirement. Automated log review surfaces anomalies: unusual access patterns, off-hours access, bulk record access, and access to records outside a user's normal scope.

Business Associate Agreement Technical Compliance

Under 45 CFR § 164.502(e) and § 164.314, covered entities must have BAAs with every business associate that handles PHI. These agreements are not just legal documents — they require specific technical capabilities: the ability to return or destroy PHI upon contract termination, the ability to make PHI available to individuals exercising their right of access under § 164.524, the ability to account for disclosures under § 164.528, and breach notification mechanisms. We build software with BAA-supporting features: PHI export and deletion workflows, individual access request portals, automated disclosure accounting, and breach detection and notification infrastructure.

Integrity Controls & Data Validation (§ 164.312(c))

The Security Rule requires mechanisms to authenticate ePHI — confirming that data has not been improperly altered or destroyed. We implement cryptographic checksums on PHI records, database-level integrity constraints, application-level validation rules, and change tracking that maintains a complete version history of every PHI-containing record. Digital signatures on clinical documents prevent undetected tampering. Automated integrity verification runs on configurable schedules, comparing stored checksums against computed values and alerting on any discrepancy.

Breach Detection, Risk Assessment & Notification Workflows

When an unauthorized access or disclosure occurs, the four-factor risk assessment under § 164.402(2) determines whether notification is required: the nature and extent of PHI involved, the unauthorized person who used the PHI or to whom it was disclosed, whether PHI was actually acquired or viewed, and the extent to which risk has been mitigated. We build breach detection systems that flag potential incidents automatically — anomalous access patterns, failed authentication spikes, data exfiltration indicators, unauthorized API calls — and workflow tools that guide your privacy officer through the risk assessment, documentation, and notification process within the 60-day regulatory window.

Want a Custom Implementation Plan?

We'll map your requirements to a concrete plan with phases, milestones, and a realistic budget.

  • Detailed scope document you can share with stakeholders
  • Phased approach — start small, scale as you see results
  • No surprises — fixed-price or transparent hourly
“
We needed to pass a health system's security assessment to close a $3.2 million contract. FreedomDev rebuilt our access control layer, implemented field-level encryption, and produced the technical safeguard documentation our prospect's legal team required. We passed the assessment on the first attempt and closed the deal within 60 days.
CTO—Health Tech Startup, Grand Rapids, MI

Our Process

01

HIPAA Gap Analysis & PHI Data Mapping (2–3 Weeks)

Before writing code, we map every element of Protected Health Information in your system or planned system. PHI is defined under 45 CFR § 160.103 as individually identifiable health information — this includes the 18 HIPAA identifiers (names, dates, SSN, MRN, device identifiers, biometric identifiers, full-face photographs, and any other unique identifying number). We document where PHI is created, received, stored, transmitted, and disposed of. We assess your current state against every required and addressable implementation specification in the Security Rule (administrative, physical, and technical safeguards) and produce a gap analysis that identifies exactly what must be built, configured, or remediated. If you are a business associate, we assess your obligations under your existing BAAs. Deliverable: PHI data flow map, Security Rule compliance gap analysis, remediation roadmap with prioritized implementation plan and cost estimates.

02

Security Architecture & Access Control Design (2–3 Weeks)

We design the technical architecture that satisfies the Security Rule's technical safeguard requirements. This includes the encryption strategy (at-rest encryption algorithm, key management architecture, TLS configuration), the access control model (RBAC role definitions, minimum necessary matrices mapped to job functions, emergency access procedures, automatic logoff policies), the audit logging infrastructure (log storage, retention periods, review procedures, anomaly detection rules), integrity controls (checksums, digital signatures, version tracking), and the transmission security layer. For systems that interact with external parties — insurance companies, labs, pharmacies, health information exchanges — we design the secure communication channels and authentication mechanisms. Architecture documents are reviewed against § 164.312 section by section before development begins.

03

Compliant Development with Continuous Security Testing (6–16 Weeks)

Development follows secure coding practices aligned with OWASP healthcare application security guidelines. Every feature that handles PHI includes access control enforcement, audit log generation, input validation, and encryption verification as part of the acceptance criteria — not as a separate security sprint after the feature is 'done.' We run automated security scanning on every build: static application security testing (SAST) to catch vulnerabilities in source code, dynamic application security testing (DAST) to test running applications, and dependency scanning to identify vulnerable libraries. PHI test data uses synthetic records — never real patient data — generated to match production data patterns for realistic testing. Code reviews explicitly check for HIPAA-relevant patterns: PHI in log files, PHI in error messages, PHI in URLs, unencrypted PHI in caches, and access control bypasses.

04

Security Risk Assessment & Penetration Testing (2–3 Weeks)

The Security Rule at § 164.308(a)(1)(ii)(A) requires an accurate and thorough assessment of potential risks and vulnerabilities to the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of ePHI. We conduct a formal security risk assessment following the NIST Cybersecurity Framework and HHS guidance, documenting every identified risk, its likelihood, its potential impact, and the controls in place to mitigate it. Independent penetration testing simulates real-world attack scenarios: authentication bypass attempts, privilege escalation, SQL injection, cross-site scripting, API abuse, session hijacking, and data exfiltration. Findings are remediated and retested before go-live. The risk assessment document becomes a living artifact that satisfies the Security Rule's ongoing risk analysis requirement.

05

Deployment, BAA Documentation & Ongoing Compliance (Ongoing)

Production deployment uses HIPAA-compliant hosting infrastructure — encrypted storage, network segmentation, access-controlled administrative interfaces, and backup procedures that satisfy § 164.308(a)(7) contingency plan requirements including data backup, disaster recovery, and emergency mode operation plans. We provide the technical documentation your legal team needs to execute Business Associate Agreements: a description of technical safeguards, encryption specifications, access control procedures, audit log capabilities, breach notification mechanisms, and PHI return/destruction procedures. Ongoing compliance maintenance includes quarterly access control reviews, annual security risk assessment updates, continuous monitoring with automated alerting, and patch management for security vulnerabilities. Maintenance engagements run $2,000–$5,000/month depending on system complexity and PHI volume.

Before vs After

MetricWith FreedomDevWithout
HIPAA Architecture ApproachCompliance built into data model, auth, and encryption from day oneCompliance added as an afterthought — checkbox audits after development
PHI EncryptionAES-256 at rest + TLS 1.2+ in transit + application-layer field encryptionDatabase-level encryption only (admins can still read PHI)
Access Control GranularityMulti-dimensional RBAC: role, department, facility, care team, data categoryTwo roles: admin and user. Everyone sees everything.
Audit LoggingImmutable append-only logs, 6-year retention, automated anomaly detectionApplication logs that admins can modify or delete
Security Risk AssessmentNIST-aligned formal SRA with penetration testing before every releaseAnnual questionnaire filled out by a project manager
Breach Notification ReadinessAutomated detection, four-factor risk assessment workflow, 60-day timeline trackingManual incident response — 'we will figure it out if it happens'
BAA Technical DocumentationDetailed safeguard documentation ready for covered entity legal review'We are HIPAA compliant' on the website with no supporting documentation
Ongoing ComplianceQuarterly access reviews, annual SRA updates, continuous monitoringNo compliance maintenance after launch

Ready to Solve This?

Schedule a direct technical consultation with our senior architects.

Explore More

Compliance ManagementAPI IntegrationCustom Software DevelopmentHealthcare

Frequently Asked Questions

What does HIPAA-compliant software actually require technically?
HIPAA-compliant software must implement the technical safeguards specified in 45 CFR § 164.312 of the Security Rule. There are four categories. Access controls (§ 164.312(a)) require unique user identification so every user has a unique identifier, emergency access procedures for obtaining ePHI during emergencies, automatic logoff after periods of inactivity, and encryption and decryption of ePHI at rest. Audit controls (§ 164.312(b)) require hardware, software, and procedural mechanisms that record and examine activity in systems containing ePHI — in practice, this means immutable audit logs that capture every access, modification, and deletion event with user identity, timestamp, and action detail. Integrity controls (§ 164.312(c)) require mechanisms to authenticate ePHI, ensuring it has not been improperly altered or destroyed — cryptographic checksums, digital signatures, and version history tracking. Transmission security (§ 164.312(e)) requires integrity controls and encryption for ePHI transmitted over electronic networks — TLS 1.2 or higher for all data in transit. Beyond technical safeguards, the Security Rule also requires administrative safeguards (risk analysis, workforce training, incident response procedures, contingency plans) and physical safeguards (facility access controls, workstation security, device and media controls). The Privacy Rule adds requirements for access control policies that enforce minimum necessary access. Building all of this into software from the architecture phase is dramatically cheaper than retrofitting it after development.
How much does HIPAA-compliant software development cost?
The cost depends on whether you are building a new system with HIPAA compliance from the start or retrofitting compliance into existing software. For new development, building HIPAA compliance into the architecture adds 20–35% to the development cost compared to non-compliant software. A custom healthcare application that would cost $150,000 without compliance requirements will cost $180,000–$200,000 with full HIPAA technical safeguards built in. That premium covers encryption infrastructure, RBAC implementation, audit logging, breach detection, and security testing. For retrofitting existing software, the cost is significantly higher because compliance requirements often conflict with existing architectural decisions — unencrypted database schemas need migration, monolithic access control needs to be replaced with granular RBAC, and audit logging needs to be added to every data access path. Retrofits typically cost 40–60% of the original development cost. A $200,000 application might cost $80,000–$120,000 to bring into compliance. Ongoing compliance maintenance — quarterly access reviews, annual security risk assessments, continuous monitoring, vulnerability patching — runs $2,000–$5,000 per month. The comparison point is the cost of non-compliance: average breach cost of $9.77 million, OCR penalties up to $1.5 million per violation category annually, and the loss of enterprise healthcare contracts that require documented compliance.
What is a Business Associate Agreement and does our software need one?
A Business Associate Agreement is a contract required under 45 CFR § 164.502(e) and § 164.314 between a covered entity (healthcare provider, health plan, or healthcare clearinghouse) and any business associate that creates, receives, maintains, or transmits Protected Health Information on the covered entity's behalf. If your software company builds, hosts, or maintains software that stores or processes PHI for a healthcare organization, you are a business associate and you need a BAA. If you are a health tech startup selling software to hospitals, clinics, or insurers, every customer will require a BAA before PHI enters your system. The BAA is not just a legal formality — it creates specific technical obligations. You must implement safeguards to prevent unauthorized use or disclosure of PHI. You must report breaches to the covered entity within 60 days. You must make PHI available to individuals exercising their right of access. You must return or destroy PHI when the contract terminates. You must make your practices available to HHS for compliance audits. Your software must technically support all of these obligations. FreedomDev builds the features that satisfy BAA technical requirements: PHI export and deletion workflows, individual access request portals, disclosure accounting, and breach notification infrastructure.
What are the HIPAA penalty tiers and how are fines calculated?
HIPAA penalties under the HITECH Act are structured in four tiers based on the level of culpability. Tier 1 applies when the covered entity or business associate did not know and could not have reasonably known of the violation — penalties range from $100 to $50,000 per violation with an annual maximum of $25,000 for all identical violations. Tier 2 applies when the violation was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect — $1,000 to $50,000 per violation with a $100,000 annual maximum. Tier 3 applies when the violation was due to willful neglect that was corrected within 30 days of when the entity knew or should have known — $10,000 to $50,000 per violation with a $250,000 annual maximum. Tier 4 applies when the violation was due to willful neglect that was not corrected within 30 days — a flat $50,000 per violation with an annual maximum of $1.5 million per violation category. The per-violation calculation is critical. Each affected individual record can constitute a separate violation. A database breach exposing 50,000 unencrypted patient records represents 50,000 potential violations. OCR also considers the duration of the violation — if a system was non-compliant for two years before the breach, every day of non-compliance can be a separate violation. In practice, OCR resolution agreements (settlements) have ranged from $100,000 for small entities to $16 million for large-scale breaches. State attorneys general can impose additional penalties under HITECH Section 13410(e).
How do you handle PHI in development and testing environments?
Real patient data never enters development or testing environments. This is a Privacy Rule requirement — using PHI for software testing constitutes a use of PHI that must be authorized and must comply with minimum necessary standards. In practice, using real PHI for testing creates unnecessary risk and complicates your compliance posture. We generate synthetic test data that mimics the structure, volume, and edge cases of production PHI without containing any actual patient information. Synthetic data generators create realistic patient demographics, clinical observations, medication records, lab results, and insurance information using randomized values that match production data patterns. For integration testing with external systems (labs, pharmacies, health information exchanges), we use sandbox environments provided by those systems with their own synthetic data sets. Production environment access is restricted to authorized personnel with documented business need, multi-factor authentication, and full audit logging. Database exports for debugging never leave the production environment — developers diagnose issues using anonymized log data and sanitized error reports. When a production issue requires access to specific records, the access is logged under the audit control requirements and follows the emergency access procedures defined in the system's access control policy.
What is the difference between HIPAA compliance and HITRUST certification?
HIPAA is a federal law with specific regulatory requirements but no official certification process. There is no government-issued 'HIPAA certified' designation. When a vendor claims to be 'HIPAA compliant,' they are self-attesting that their practices align with the Privacy Rule, Security Rule, and Breach Notification Rule — but no independent body has verified that claim. HITRUST (Health Information Trust Alliance) is a private certification framework that incorporates HIPAA requirements along with controls from NIST, ISO 27001, PCI DSS, COBIT, and other frameworks into a single certifiable standard called the HITRUST CSF (Common Security Framework). HITRUST certification involves a formal assessment by an authorized external assessor, evidence collection across hundreds of controls, and a certification decision by HITRUST. It is the closest thing to a recognized HIPAA certification in the industry. Many large healthcare organizations and health plans now require HITRUST certification from their vendors rather than accepting self-attested HIPAA compliance. FreedomDev builds software that satisfies both HIPAA technical safeguards and HITRUST CSF control requirements. For clients pursuing HITRUST certification, we structure our development process to produce the evidence artifacts (access control documentation, encryption specifications, audit log samples, risk assessment reports, penetration test results) that the HITRUST assessment requires, reducing the time and cost of the certification process.

Stop Working For Your Software

Make your software work for you. Let's build a sensible solution.