About
About Tuskamind
The story where it all began.
Last updated: 2026
TuskaMind did not begin as a software idea.
It began as an idea out of frustration. I am a psychotherapist, clinical supervisor, group-practice owner, and someone with a degree in technology. I understand clinical work, but I also naturally think in terms of systems: how information moves, where bottlenecks happen, what can be automated, and why a workflow breaks down.
For years, I lived inside the same problems many behavioral health practice owners deal with every day. I used traditional EHR systems, I worked around their limitations, paid for add-ons, dealt with billing friction, and this was the most painful part! I watched clinicians struggle with workflows that should have been simple. And eventually I reached the point where I stopped asking: How do I make this software work better for my practice? and started asking: Why isn’t there a software designed around the way a real behavioral health group practice actually operates? That question became TuskaMind.
I did not come to behavioral health technology from the outside.
One of the most important things about TuskaMind is that it was not designed by someone who studied behavioral health from a product requirements document. I have lived it. I run a behavioral health group practice, I supervise clinicians. I understand the operational realities of working with licensed and pre-licensed providers. I know what happens when documentation is late. I know what happens when claims are rejected or denied. I know what happens when insurance information is wrong. And I know what happens when all of those problems eventually land on my desk. That perspective shaped TuskaMind from the beginning.
My technology background changed how I looked at the problem.
One of the most important things about TuskaMind is that it was not designed by someone who studied behavioral health from a product requirements document. I have lived it. I run a behavioral health group practice, I supervise clinicians. I understand the operational realities of working with licensed and pre-licensed providers. I know what happens when documentation is late. I know what happens when claims are rejected or denied. I know what happens when insurance information is wrong. And I know what happens when all of those problems eventually land on my desk. That perspective shaped TuskaMind from the beginning.
The more I ran my practice, the clearer it became:
The problem was not that behavioral health practices were disorganized. The problem was that too many EHRs expected people to manually connect workflows the technology should have connected for them. I also discovered that these EHRs are built by software engineers who do not actively use the platform to solve a group practice's problems.
My experience with TheraNest became a major turning point.
TheraNest gave my practice many of the core tools an EHR is supposed to provide. It handled scheduling, documentation, billing, client records, and other basic practice functions. And I want to be fair about that. TheraNest is an established platform, and many clinicians and practices have used it successfully.
But as my practice grew, my experience became increasingly stressful. The problem was not one dramatic failure. It was accumulation. Another feature meant another charge. Another workflow that needed a workaround and another separate process. Another place where staff needed help meant another question that came back to me. Another task that should be simple but somehow required more clicks, more follow-up, or more manual intervention.
At a certain point, the software itself was creating cognitive load. And when you are running a group practice, cognitive load matters. Every unnecessary step becomes someone’s responsibility. Usually the owner’s, mine.
My experience with TheraNest became a major turning point.
This was one of the biggest lessons I learned from running my own practice. An EHR can look affordable on paper and still be expensive to operate.The true cost includes: staff time billing cleanup training manual follow-up duplicate work outside tools add-ons supervision workarounds claims management owner oversight and the mental energy required to make disconnected systems behave like one system That last part is difficult to quantify.
But practice owners know exactly what it feels like.
It is the constant background noise of: Did that claim submit? Did that note get signed? Did the client update their insurance? Does the supervisor need to review this? Why is this session still unbilled? Why did this payer reject the claim? Who was supposed to follow up? Why can’t this user see what they need to see? Those questions add up.
I wanted and needed software that answered more of them before someone had to ask.
I started designing the system I wanted to use.
TuskaMind began from that perspective. If a client schedules an appointment, what information should flow from that? If the clinician documents the session, what should happen next? When supervision is required, how should the system know? When the session is ready to bill, what should happen automatically? That is how I think about TuskaMind. Not as a collection of screens or tabs. As a whole system.
I started designing the system I wanted to use.
Users may not attempt to gain unauthorized access to another user or organization's information, interfere with platform security, misuse patient information, introduce malicious software, abuse platform resources, reverse engineer protected components where prohibited, or use TuskaMind in a manner that violates applicable law, privacy obligations, or contractual requirements.
TuskaMind was architected around connected workflows.
The architecture grew around the real lifecycle of behavioral health care:
client intake → scheduling → session → documentation → supervision → billing readiness → claim submission → payer response → remittance → client balance → clinician compensation
Each stage creates information that should inform the next stage. Traditional systems often treat these as separate functions. TuskaMind treats them as one operational chain. That distinction became one of the most important architectural decisions in the platform.
Supervision could not be an afterthought.
This was especially important to me because supervision is not a niche issue in behavioral health. For many group practices, it is fundamental to how the organization operates. A supervisor does more than co-sign a note. There are relationships between supervisors and supervisees. There are documentation responsibilities. There are billing requirements. There are clinical oversight responsibilities. There are payer rules. There are different roles throughout the organization.
So TuskaMind was designed with supervision as part of the core architecture rather than something bolted on later. Something that is called supervisory billing. It took me years to learn billing and claims yet I had not found an EHR that provided this feature. I ended up doing something about it.
Billing had to become part of the clinical workflow too.
I also wanted to eliminate the artificial wall between clinical work and billing. A claim does not suddenly become a billing problem the moment someone clicks Submit. Billing problems often begin earlier. Missing documentation. Incorrect insurance information. A provider issue. A coding issue. A payer issue. A small mistake upstream can create hours of work downstream. So TuskaMind connects clinical and billing workflows much more closely. That has changed the way I think about revenue-cycle management. The best claim correction is the one that never becomes necessary.
Then AI changed what was possible.
As AI matured, another layer became obvious. Why should staff have to manually interpret every piece of information the system already has? Why should a biller have to dig through payer responses to understand why a claim is stuck? Why should a clinician have to search through a chart to identify missing information? That is where Nellie AI became part of TuskaMind. The goal was never to replace clinical judgment or human authority. The goal was to make the system more intelligent about the work happening inside it. AI could help explain, flag, summarize, review, prioritize and recommend the next step. That is a very different use of AI from simply generating a progress note.
TuskaMind also became personal.
At some point, TuskaMind stopped feeling like just software. It became the platform I wished I had years earlier. I was no longer imagining what it might be like to use it. My own practice is using it. My clinicians are working inside it, claims are moving through it, workflows that used to frustrate me are easier, and instead of paying another company to tolerate limitations, I am improving the system itself. That shift is enormous. The result? I work 4-5 hours a day, on an average work week day. It still fees weird to have so much freedom, and I'm ok with feeling weird.
I built TuskaMind without an investor-backed machine behind me.
TuskaMind was not born out of a venture studio. There is no giant product department handing me market research. There is no committee deciding what clinicians supposedly needed. I designed it from years of direct experience running a practice and living with the operational consequences of bad software decisions. That has made the development process intense. I am involved in the details. I think about workflows, I review features, work with developers, look at billing logic, think about supervision, think about what a clinician sees, what a biller sees, and what the owner needs to know. That involvement is demanding. But it is also why TuskaMind feels the way it does. It is shaped by the person who actually needs it.
The goal was never to create another EHR.
Behavioral health already has EHRs. The world did not need another electronic filing cabinet. I wanted something closer to an operating system for behavioral health practices. A platform where: clinical care supervision billing administration telehealth claims payments AI and practice operations could function as parts of the same system. That is what TuskaMind is.
My frustration became the architecture.
Looking back, I am almost grateful for the stressful experiences that led me here. Every unnecessary click taught me something, every billing headache taught me something. Every time I thought, “Why does this have to be this difficult?”, I was identifying another design problem. TuskaMind came from those moments. It came from running a real practice. It came from understanding technology. It came from knowing what clinicians need. And it came from being unwilling to accept that behavioral health software had to remain fragmented, expensive, and exhausting to operate.
TuskaMind exists because I got tired of adapting my practice to the software.
So I designed software that adapts to the practice instead. And that is still the standard I use when deciding what belongs in TuskaMind:
Does this make the work clearer, easier, more connected, and less burdensome for the people actually doing it?
If the answer is yes, it belongs. If not, it probably doesn’t.
I am proud to share a product, a platform that eases the stress of managing a group practice. If you are interested reach out to me [email protected] for a free demo. Because your freedom and peace of mind is priceless.