The build partner for Employee Navigator,
and the orchestration around it.

Implementation

Employee Navigator. Implementation is done by your broker at every renewal. The platform itself is well-regarded; operators on r/humanresources call it "a great benefits enrollment tool, very easy to use both on the admin and employee side." The catch is in the line right after that: "you'll need your broker to help configure it though for each renewal and manage the EDI feeds." Your experience with EN is bound to your broker's competence. Operators say it plainly: "Your success and enjoyment of it comes down to your brokers ability to implement" (Q12).

Inevi Solutions. We're the build partner who implements EN the way it's supposed to be operated, and we run the systems around it. If you've got a broker who can't get the EDI feeds clean, we either work with them or we are the broker-equivalent technical implementation arm. Either way, the EN configuration, the EDI loops and segments, the renewal cadence, the carrier handshakes, and the connections back to payroll and your HRIS all sit on one team. Fixed price, 4-16 weeks, fully managed afterward.

Bottom line. Choose Employee Navigator on its own if your broker is sharp and your HRIS is feeding it cleanly. Choose Inevi if you've outgrown what a broker alone can implement, or if the configuration breaks every time someone changes teams or states.

Broker dependency

Employee Navigator. The broker is the operating model. Renewals, EDI feeds, plan design changes, broker-to-broker handoff — all of it runs through whoever holds the broker relationship. When that works, it works. When it doesn't, history breaks: "This was my first year using it for open enrollment, and it didn't go smoothly — primarily because the previous OE was with a broker who used it, the current broker uses it, but employees still had to register to enroll. Their history was there — they just had to start new accounts" (Q13).

Inevi Solutions. We don't compete with your broker. We work alongside or under them — co-delivery or white-label, your call. For benefits admins burned by broker handoffs, we build the orchestration layer that survives the transition: a canonical employee record, a versioned plan-design document, and migration tooling that preserves history across broker changes. The broker keeps the relationship; the system keeps the truth.

Bottom line. Choose EN-via-broker if your broker is your single point of orchestration. Choose Inevi if you need the system to outlast any single broker.

HRIS integration and source-of-truth model

Employee Navigator. EN is honest about what it is. As the same r/humanresources operator put it: "It is not a full HRIS though and shouldn't be used that way. You'll need to update it from your source of truth — either your actual HRIS or your spreadsheet with employee data changes, including new hires and terms" (Q11). It works best with a real API connection upstream: "It works best when you have an API connection established with your payroll vendor, which is your source of truth to feed employee demographic information to EN, and EN will subsequently feed employee deductions back to payroll" (Q12). The whole model assumes the source of truth lives somewhere else and is well-maintained.

Inevi Solutions. This is the gap we build into. The pain operators describe — "What's given me PTSD is the lack of consistency of our internal info. A person will transfer teams or move states, or switch from contractor to FTE and then changes need to be made across payroll/benefits/everything in between" (Q5) — is exactly what an Inevi orchestration system absorbs. We build the canonical employee record (HRIS, payroll, EN, app permissions, PBM, TPA, all reconciled), the agentic workflows that propagate a change to all four-plus places automatically, and AI employees created by your detailed SOPs to handle the exceptions without burying your benefits team.

Bottom line. Choose EN if you already have a clean upstream HRIS. Choose Inevi if "4 places our team needs to update info" sounds like a normal Tuesday (Q7).

Compliance posture

Employee Navigator. Standard HIPAA-aware benefits enrollment platform. BAAs are signed where applicable. Compliance heavy lifting is a shared responsibility between EN, the broker, the carriers, and the employer.

Inevi Solutions. BAA-ready before the engagement starts. Human-in-the-loop on every consequential action. Audit log on every read, write, and AI-employee decision. Liability terms scoped and documented in the MSA. We don't restrict our AI employees to clinical workflow, and in healthcare admin, neither should anyone. The "who do we sue if it's wrong" question gets a documented answer up front (Q34).

Bottom line. EN's compliance is fine for what EN is. Inevi's is built for the broader operating layer where PHI moves between HRIS, payroll, plan documents, PBM, and TPA, and where one missed reconciliation costs a self-funded employer real money.

Ongoing operations

Employee Navigator. Day-to-day operation lives with your broker and your HR/benefits team. Vendor support is well-rated for what it covers. Anything outside the EN box — a custom report, a non-standard carrier feed, an app-permission sync — is yours to figure out.

Inevi Solutions. Fully managed. We host, monitor, patch, optimize, and stay on call. Renewal cycles, carrier feed exceptions, plan-design changes, employee-record reconciliation runs — we operate them. You get a single point of contact and a system that keeps running without your team becoming the human integration layer between vendors.

Bottom line. Choose EN if your team has the bandwidth to operate the gaps. Choose Inevi if your CFO is asking why reports don't reconcile and you don't want it on your performance review (Q6).

Will you sign a BAA?

Yes, before any PHI touches a system we build or operate. We don't engage in healthcare admin without one. Our standard BAA covers data handling, breach notification, audit access, and termination obligations. If your legal team has redlines, we work them.

How does Inevi integrate with Employee Navigator?

We use the standard integration points EN supports: API where available, EDI where it isn't, and operator-driven workflows where neither is appropriate. The orchestration sits between your HRIS or payroll system and EN, plus connects EN data outward to app permissions, PBM, TPA, and reporting layers. Specific integration scope and timeline come out of the free assessment, not a generic promise of easy integration.

Who owns the data?

You do. Every system we build is deployed in your cloud environment or a tenant we operate on your behalf with an explicit data-control clause in the MSA. No data lock-in. You can take it and go.

What happens if an AI employee makes a mistake?

Three things. First, every AI-employee action is logged with the source data, the prompt, and the decision. Reproducible. Second, every consequential action requires sign-off from a human on your team, which means the licensed person catches the mistake before it ships. Third, liability terms are scoped and documented in the MSA before launch. The 'who do we sue' question gets a written answer that fits your engagement, not a blanket marketing-page promise.

Do you replace our broker?

No. We work alongside or under your broker. Co-delivery (you and us in front of the client) or white-label (we operate behind your broker brand), your choice. The broker keeps the client relationship and the renewal motion. We handle the technical implementation and operation.

How long does this take?

4-16 weeks from signed proposal to live system, depending on scope. The free assessment scopes timeline before you commit. Timelines are contractual.

What does it cost?

Proposal-based after a free assessment. We don't publish pricing because every benefits stack is different. What matters is the platform pays for itself in 4-12 months for the operators we build for. The free assessment includes a written proposal with fixed price and timeline, no obligation to move forward.