"We get involved very early and think about what this program or this technological solution needs to do, ultimately, for the beneficiaries or the stakeholders of the system, and how we’re actually going to measure that," said Candace Charlton, vice president, solutions architect at Maximus.
Candace Charlton frames a new bar for federal health IT
On Federal News Network’s Federal Monthly Insights – Health IT 2026 webcast, Candace Charlton described a shift in how federal health agencies assess information-technology efforts. Where success was once tallied by deliverables or fidelity to a specification, Charlton says agencies are now measuring success by the outcomes those systems produce — problems solved and citizens helped. That redefinition reflects an era in which agencies are accountable as "careful stewards of public funds," she said, and must justify investments through demonstrable impact rather than completed checklists.
Outcomes-based contracting changes the architect’s role
Charlton traces this change to the broader move toward outcomes-based contracting. Rather than receiving a fixed list of requirements and executing to spec, solution architects are being asked to participate earlier in program design. That early involvement, she said, shifts the work from implementation alone to problem definition and measurement: aligning technical choices with what a program needs to accomplish for beneficiaries and stakeholders, and establishing how success will be quantified.
This site is the portfolio.
OSINTSights runs on Cloudflare Workers, D1, R2, and Vectorize, with an AI pipeline on Hetzner ARM. Nubivance designed, built, and operates it. We do the same for clients.
See what we buildWhy a "healthier population" is not a drop-in metric
Charlton cautions that mission-aligned outcomes in healthcare are often abstract. "An outcome like a healthier population isn’t a metric you can just pull from a database," she said. The implication is practical: agencies and architects must translate high-level public-health goals into observable, recordable proxies — measurable signals that can be instrumented, tracked, and analyzed to indicate progress toward mission objectives.
Practical proxies Charlton uses and how they combine
Charlton lists examples of the proxies her teams use: "whether people resolve issues more quickly, whether systems reduce unnecessary steps, or whether agencies can better coordinate services." Individually, she notes, none of those metrics "alone gives much insight into mission alignment or successful outcomes." Together, however, they create a composite view of whether a program is advancing public health goals. The approach is modular: pick proxies you can measure, then evaluate them in combination to infer movement toward broader outcomes.
AI as an "assist" in stitching proxies into a verdict
Charlton raises AI as a practical aid in the synthesis of disparate proxies. When combined and analyzed — "especially with an assist from AI," she said — the ensemble of indicators can demonstrate whether a program is meeting goals and advancing public health. The framing positions AI not as a substitute for mission-focused design but as a tool that helps interpret complex, multi-source signals and turn them into evidence of impact.
What this means for solutions architects, federal health agencies, and beneficiaries
- Solutions architects: Expect earlier engagement. Charlton’s account emphasizes design work that ties technical choices to mission outcomes and measurement strategies, rather than late-stage implementation constrained strictly by pre-written requirements.
- Federal health agencies: Procurement and program success will hinge on outcome definitions and proxy selection. Agencies must specify what success looks like in measurable terms and adopt analysis approaches — including AI-assisted synthesis — to validate outcomes.
- Beneficiaries and stakeholders: The shift aims to make systems easier to use and better at coordinating services. The metrics Charlton cites — faster issue resolution, fewer unnecessary steps, improved coordination — are intended to produce more tangible and navigable experiences for people accessing benefits and care.
Charlton's conclusion is straightforward: healthcare IT modernization will remain complex, but the combination of early, human- and mission-centered design work and targeted measurement provides a strategic advantage as agencies move into an era where success is judged by outcomes, not outputs. The practical challenge she leaves on the table is operational: choose measurable proxies, instrument them, and then use analysis — augmented by AI where appropriate — to prove that public investments have produced the improvements they were meant to deliver.
