Blueprint Playbook for Meperia (now Genesis)

Who the Hell is Jordan Crawford?

Founder of Blueprint. I help companies stop sending emails nobody wants to read.

The problem with outbound isn't the message. It's the list. When you know WHO to target and WHY they need you right now, the message writes itself.

I built this system using government databases, public records, and 25 million job posts to find pain signals most companies miss. Predictable Revenue is dead. Data-driven intelligence is what works now.

Company Overview: Meperia (now Genesis)

Website: https://meperia.com

Core Problem: Healthcare systems lack real-time visibility and control over medical-surgical supply spending at the point of requisitioning, resulting in uncontrolled costs and inability to enforce procurement standards across clinicians.

Product Type: B2B SaaS - Supply Chain Management Platform

Ideal Customer Profile

Company Size: 200+ beds minimum; typically 500-5,000+ bed systems with multiple facilities and clinician bases.

Target Personas

Key Responsibilities: Managing supplier contracts, implementing supply chain strategies, ensuring spend compliance and formulary adherence, data analytics and cost forecasting, coordinating with clinicians on product selection.

Primary KPIs: Total spend reduction, contract compliance rate, formulary adherence rate, supply chain cost as percentage of budget, rebate capture and realization.

The Old Way (What Everyone Does)

Your GTM team is buying lists from ZoomInfo, adding "personalization" like mentioning a LinkedIn post, then blasting generic messages about features. Here's what it actually looks like:

The Typical Meperia (now Genesis) SDR Email:

Subject: Transform Your Healthcare Supply Chain Hi [First Name], I noticed you're hiring for supply chain roles at [Company]. Congrats on the growth! We help healthcare organizations like yours gain visibility into supply spending and improve contract compliance. Our AI-powered platform has helped leading health systems reduce costs and improve efficiency. Would love to share how we've helped similar organizations. Do you have 15 minutes this week? Best, [SDR Name]

Why this fails: The prospect is an expert. They've seen this template 1,000 times. There's zero indication you understand their specific situation. Delete.

The New Way: Intelligence-Driven GTM

Blueprint flips the approach. Instead of interrupting prospects with pitches, you deliver insights so valuable they'd pay consulting fees to receive them.

1. Hard Data Over Soft Signals

Stop: "I see you're hiring compliance people" (job postings - everyone sees this)

Start: "Your cardiology department at Methodist Hospital purchased $340K in supplies outside negotiated contracts in Q4 2024" (specific department, facility, dollar amount, timeframe)

2. Mirror Situations, Don't Pitch Solutions

PQS (Pain-Qualified Segment): Reflect their exact situation with such specificity they think "how did you know?" Use data with dates, record numbers, facility names.

PVP (Permissionless Value Proposition): Deliver immediate value they can use today - analysis already done, opportunities already identified, patterns already revealed - whether they buy or not.

Meperia (now Genesis) Top Plays

These messages are ordered by quality score. The highest-scoring plays lead with specific insights that demonstrate deep understanding of the prospect's situation.

PVP Public + Internal Strong (9.1/10)

Dr. Patterson ordering $87K off-contract quarterly

What's the play?

Identify specific physicians at target hospitals who are purchasing high-dollar cardiac supplies outside negotiated contracts. Use internal benchmarking data to show exactly how much they're overpaying by selecting non-contracted products when equivalent items exist under their GPO agreements.

Why this works

Naming a specific physician with exact dollar amounts proves you have visibility they lack. The product equivalency comparison addresses the clinical objection ("but Dr. Patterson prefers Boston Scientific") by showing Medtronic alternatives in their contract offer identical outcomes at 23% lower cost. This gives the supply chain leader ammunition for a conversation they've been avoiding.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - physician name, item purchased, cost, contract status
  2. CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry - verify physician works at facility
  3. Internal product master - functional equivalence mapping between contracted and non-contracted items

The message:

Subject: Dr. Patterson ordering $87K off-contract quarterly Dr. Patterson at Methodist ordered $87K in cardiac supplies outside your Cardinal contract in Q4 alone. He's selecting Boston Scientific items when your Medtronic contract offers equivalent products at 23% lower cost. Want the side-by-side product equivalency list?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires aggregated physician purchasing behavior data from your customer base showing off-contract rates by specialty, plus product master data mapping functional equivalents.

This synthesis is unique to your business - competitors cannot replicate this insight without point-of-requisition visibility.
PVP Public + Internal Strong (9.0/10)

Dr. Chen orders Medtronic at 31% premium over contract

What's the play?

Target physicians who consistently select premium-priced devices when clinically equivalent contracted alternatives exist. Calculate exact savings opportunity per physician and provide clinical equivalency evidence to overcome the "physician preference" objection.

Why this works

The clinical equivalency statement ("identical clinical outcomes per your formulary") disarms the main physician resistance point. By providing the quarterly savings number ($23,560), you give the supply chain leader a concrete business case to present to the physician. The equivalency comparison makes the conversation actionable immediately.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - physician purchasing patterns, device selected, cost
  2. Internal formulary database - approved clinical equivalents with outcome data
  3. CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry - physician specialty verification

The message:

Subject: Dr. Chen orders Medtronic at 31% premium over contract Dr. Chen at Methodist ordered $76K in Medtronic cardiac devices in Q4 when your Boston Scientific contract offers equivalent products. The Boston Scientific alternatives would save $23,560 quarterly with identical clinical outcomes per your formulary. Should I send the device equivalency comparison?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires physician-level purchasing data with cost differentials between selected and contracted alternatives, plus clinical outcomes data supporting equivalency claims.

Only possible with real-time requisitioning visibility and formulary intelligence - proprietary to your platform.
PVP Public + Internal Strong (8.9/10)

847 cardiology items bypass your contracts

What's the play?

Show the scale of off-contract purchasing by specific item count, then narrow to the physicians driving the majority of the problem. By naming Dr. Patterson and Dr. Chen as 62% of the issue, you help the prospect prioritize their intervention efforts on the highest-impact clinicians.

Why this works

The 847 unique items demonstrates this isn't a few one-off purchases - it's systematic non-compliance. Naming two specific physicians responsible for 62% gives immediate action priority. The cardiac catheters and stents callout focuses on high-dollar categories the CFO cares about most. Easy to verify these doctors exist on staff.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - item-level purchases, physician attribution, contract status
  2. CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry - physician verification
  3. Internal contract master - GPO pricing by item category

The message:

Subject: 847 cardiology items bypass your contracts Methodist cardiology ordered 847 unique supply items off-contract in Q4 - $340K in a single quarter. Dr. Patterson and Dr. Chen account for 62% of the off-contract volume on cardiac catheters and stents. Should I send the physician-level report?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires aggregated requisition data showing physician-level purchasing patterns with attribution to specific high-dollar item categories.

Requires point-of-purchase visibility across customer base - not available through traditional procurement systems.
PVP Public + Internal Strong (8.8/10)

$312K in missed rebates across your surgery departments

What's the play?

Aggregate off-contract spend across multiple surgical departments and calculate total uncaptured rebate opportunity. Present as annual number to demonstrate board-level financial impact, then offer department-by-department breakdown to enable prioritization.

Why this works

$312K in missed rebates is a number that gets CFO attention and potentially goes to the board. Annualizing the $2.08M off-contract spend shows the magnitude of uncontrolled purchasing. The department breakdown offer makes the insight actionable by helping them prioritize which service line to tackle first. This is money already negotiated but not captured.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - purchases by department, off-contract identification
  2. Internal contract master - rebate terms by GPO contract
  3. CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data - validate facility spending scale

The message:

Subject: $312K in missed rebates across your surgery departments Your surgical teams spent $2.08M off-contract annually across cardiology, orthopedics, and general surgery. Under your GPO contracts, that volume should generate $312K in annual rebates you're not capturing. Should I send the department-by-department rebate opportunity analysis?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires aggregated off-contract spending data across multiple service lines with rebate calculation capability based on contract terms.

Rebate capture intelligence is proprietary - requires visibility into both purchasing behavior and GPO contract terms across customer base.
PVP Public + Internal Strong (8.8/10)

62% of Methodist cardiology spend avoids your contracts

What's the play?

Express off-contract spending as percentage of total department spend to show scale of non-compliance. Then demonstrate high conversion potential by showing that contracted equivalents exist for 18 of their top 20 purchases. Focus on two physicians to make the intervention manageable.

Why this works

62% makes the compliance gap impossible to ignore - this isn't rogue purchasing, it's systematic failure. Naming Dr. Patterson and Dr. Chen focuses the problem on two people rather than an entire department. The "18 of 20 items" stat shows this is fixable without clinical disruption - you're not asking them to change care protocols, just enforce existing contracts.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - total department spend, off-contract percentage, physician attribution
  2. Internal product master - contracted alternatives for top purchases
  3. CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry - physician verification

The message:

Subject: 62% of Methodist cardiology spend avoids your contracts Dr. Patterson and Dr. Chen ordered $211K off-contract in Q4 at Methodist - 62% of cardiology's total supply spend. Your Cardinal agreement covers equivalent items for 18 of their top 20 purchases. Should I send the physician-specific intervention list?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires department-level spend aggregation with physician attribution and product mapping to show contracted alternative availability.

Intervention list creation requires product master intelligence and physician behavior patterns only visible at point of requisition.
PVP Public + Internal Strong (8.7/10)

Cardiology spent $340K off-contract last quarter at Methodist

What's the play?

Lead with specific facility, department, dollar amount, and timeframe to prove you have visibility into their actual purchasing behavior. Annualize to show the scale of lost rebates and pricing leverage, then offer item-level breakdown to make it immediately actionable.

Why this works

The specificity (Methodist Hospital, cardiology, $340K, Q4 2024) makes them think "how do they know this?" The lost rebates calculation ($1.36M annually) is immediately actionable financial impact. 847 line items shows this isn't a few purchases - it's systematic. The item-level breakdown offer means they can act without needing a meeting first.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - facility, department, item-level purchases, contract status
  2. Internal contract master - rebate terms and pricing leverage calculations
  3. CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data - validate facility scale

The message:

Subject: Cardiology spent $340K off-contract last quarter at Methodist Your cardiology department at Methodist Hospital purchased $340K in supplies outside negotiated contracts in Q4 2024. That's $1.36M annually in lost rebates and pricing leverage on 847 line items. Want the item-level breakdown by physician?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires requisition-level visibility showing purchases by facility, department, and physician with contract status and rebate impact calculations.

This intelligence is only possible with real-time point-of-purchase data - not available through traditional ERP systems.
PVP Public + Internal Strong (8.7/10)

523 orthopedic items ordered outside Zimmer contract

What's the play?

Show the item count to demonstrate scale of non-compliance, then focus on the three surgeons driving 71% of the problem. Offering Zimmer equivalents makes the intervention concrete and actionable immediately.

Why this works

523 unique items proves this is systematic bypassing of the Zimmer contract, not occasional exceptions. Naming three specific surgeons (Morrison, Patel, Johnson) responsible for 71% gives clear intervention priority. Targeting these three has major impact without requiring department-wide change management. The Zimmer equivalents offer means they get the business case pre-built.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - orthopedic purchases, surgeon attribution, contract status
  2. Internal product master - Zimmer contract equivalents for purchased items
  3. CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry - surgeon specialty verification

The message:

Subject: 523 orthopedic items ordered outside Zimmer contract Memorial orthopedics requisitioned 523 unique items off-contract in Q4 - bypassing your Zimmer Biomet pricing. Dr. Morrison, Dr. Patel, and Dr. Johnson account for 71% of the off-contract volume. Want the surgeon-level breakdown with Zimmer equivalents?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires surgeon-level requisition tracking with product mapping to show contracted alternatives for off-contract purchases.

Surgeon behavior patterns only visible with point-of-requisition data - not available in traditional procurement systems.
PVP Public + Internal Strong (8.6/10)

Memorial orthopedics ordering $1.16M off-contract annually

What's the play?

Annualize the quarterly orthopedic off-contract spend to show material impact, then focus on the single highest-spending surgeon. Name the competitor products being selected over contracted alternatives and offer the surgeon's full purchase history.

Why this works

$1.16M annually gets CFO attention. Isolating Dr. Morrison at $94K makes the problem specific and solvable. Mentioning Stryker vs Zimmer shows you understand the product landscape and physician preferences. The purchase history offer gives them everything they need for the difficult conversation with a high-volume surgeon.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - orthopedic surgeon purchasing, selected products, costs
  2. Internal contract master - Zimmer Biomet contracted items and pricing
  3. CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry - surgeon verification

The message:

Subject: Memorial orthopedics ordering $1.16M off-contract annually Your orthopedic surgeons at Memorial spent $290K off-contract last quarter on implants and instruments. Dr. Morrison alone accounts for $94K of that spend selecting Stryker products over your contracted Zimmer equivalents. Want Dr. Morrison's item-level purchase history?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires surgeon-level purchasing data showing product selection patterns and cost differentials between selected and contracted alternatives.

Only possible with granular requisition visibility and product intelligence - proprietary to platforms with point-of-purchase control.
PQS Public + Internal Strong (8.5/10)

Memorial surgery bypassing $78K quarterly rebates

What's the play?

Combine off-contract spend across high-dollar departments (cardiology and orthopedics) to show aggregate financial impact. Calculate the missed rebate opportunity and frame the question around point-of-requisition enforcement - their known blind spot.

Why this works

$520K off-contract spend across surgical departments is material enough for executive attention. The $78K quarterly rebate miss is money already negotiated but not captured. "Point of requisition" directly addresses their blind spot - they can't control what they can't see when the physician is ordering. The question is easy to answer yes/no but prompts acknowledgment of the gap.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - multi-department spend aggregation, contract status
  2. Internal contract master - Cardinal and Zimmer rebate terms
  3. CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data - validate facility scale

The message:

Subject: Memorial surgery bypassing $78K quarterly rebates Your surgical departments at Memorial spent $520K off-contract in Q4 2024 across cardiology and orthopedics. Under your Cardinal and Zimmer contracts, that volume would have captured $78K in rebates. Is someone enforcing contract compliance at point of requisition?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires multi-department spend aggregation with rebate calculation capability based on specific contract terms.

Rebate opportunity intelligence requires visibility into both purchasing behavior and GPO terms across customer base.
PQS Public + Internal Strong (8.4/10)

Your orthopedics team spent $290K off-contract at Memorial

What's the play?

Target orthopedic departments with specific facility, dollar amount, item count, and timeframe. Name the high-dollar contract being bypassed (Zimmer Biomet on joint implants) and ask the routing question about formulary adherence.

Why this works

Memorial Hospital orthopedics with $290K and 612 items is specific and verifiable. Zimmer Biomet is a major orthopedic contract and joint implants are the highest-dollar category - this immediately gets CFO attention. The routing question is easy to answer but prompts acknowledgment they likely don't have anyone effectively managing this.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - orthopedic department purchases, contract status
  2. Internal contract master - Zimmer Biomet contract terms
  3. CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data - validate facility characteristics

The message:

Subject: Your orthopedics team spent $290K off-contract at Memorial Memorial Hospital orthopedics purchased $290K outside negotiated contracts in Q4 2024 across 612 supply items. That's bypassing your Zimmer Biomet pricing on joint implants and surgical instruments. Who manages orthopedic surgeon formulary adherence?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires department-level purchasing data with contract status tracking and specialty-specific product categorization.

Requires requisition visibility at point of clinician order - not available in traditional procurement systems.
PQS Public + Internal Strong (8.3/10)

Methodist cardiology bypassing your negotiated pricing

What's the play?

Mirror the exact situation with facility name, department, dollar amount, and timeframe. Calculate the specific missed rebate opportunity under their Cardinal contract and ask the routing question about formulary compliance ownership.

Why this works

Methodist Hospital cardiology with $340K off-contract in Q4 2024 is concrete and verifiable. The $48K quarterly rebate calculation is specific to their Cardinal contract - this is money already negotiated but not captured. The routing question is low-commitment but prompts acknowledgment of a gap in accountability.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - cardiology purchases, contract status, timeframe
  2. Internal contract master - Cardinal Health rebate terms
  3. CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data - validate facility scale

The message:

Subject: Methodist cardiology bypassing your negotiated pricing Your cardiology team purchased $340K off-contract in Q4 2024 at Methodist Hospital. That volume would have captured $48K in quarterly rebates under your Cardinal contract. Who handles physician formulary compliance?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires department-level requisition tracking with rebate calculation capability based on actual contract terms.

Rebate impact intelligence requires visibility into both purchasing behavior and GPO contract terms.
PQS Public + Internal Strong (8.2/10)

Your surgery teams spent $810K off-contract last quarter

What's the play?

Aggregate off-contract spend across multiple facilities (Methodist and Memorial) to show system-wide problem. Identify that 77% comes from high-dollar departments (cardiology and orthopedics) to help them prioritize, then ask the strategic-level question about ownership.

Why this works

Multi-facility aggregation ($810K across Methodist and Memorial) shows this is a systemic issue, not isolated to one location. The 77% concentration in cardiology and orthopedics helps them focus on the highest-dollar departments. High-dollar implants are exactly what keeps CFOs up at night. The strategic question is appropriate for their level.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - multi-facility aggregation, department breakdown
  2. CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry - verify health system affiliations
  3. CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data - validate system characteristics

The message:

Subject: Your surgery teams spent $810K off-contract last quarter Across Methodist and Memorial, your surgical departments purchased $810K outside negotiated contracts in Q4 2024. Cardiology and orthopedics drive 77% of that off-contract spend on high-dollar implants and devices. Who owns physician contract compliance strategy?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires multi-facility spend aggregation with department-level breakdown and high-dollar item categorization.

System-wide visibility requires data aggregation across affiliated facilities - only possible with centralized requisition platform.
PQS Public + Internal Strong (8.1/10)

$1.36M annual leak in cardiology supply contracts

What's the play?

Annualize the quarterly off-contract spend to show material impact, calculate the missed rebate opportunity specific to their Cardinal Health agreement, and ask if anyone is tracking physician-level compliance.

Why this works

$1.36M annually makes the scale clearer than quarterly numbers. $192K in missed Cardinal Health rebates is specific to their contract - this is negotiated money they're not capturing. 847 line items shows this isn't just a few purchases - it's systematic non-compliance. The question prompts acknowledgment they likely lack this visibility.

Data Sources
  1. Internal requisition data - cardiology spend, contract status, item count
  2. Internal contract master - Cardinal Health rebate terms
  3. CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data - validate facility scale

The message:

Subject: $1.36M annual leak in cardiology supply contracts Methodist cardiology spent $340K off-contract last quarter across 847 line items. At that run rate, you're missing $192K annually in rebates alone from your Cardinal Health agreement. Is someone tracking physician-level contract compliance?
DATA REQUIREMENT

This play requires physician-level compliance tracking with rebate calculation capability across large item counts.

Requires granular requisition visibility and contract intelligence - not available through traditional ERP systems.

What Changes

Old way: Spray generic messages at job titles. Hope someone replies.

New way: Use proprietary purchasing data to identify specific physicians bypassing contracts. Mirror that situation back with exact dollar amounts and facility names.

Why this works: When you lead with "Dr. Patterson at Methodist ordered $87K off-contract in Q4" instead of "I see you're hiring for supply chain roles," you're not another sales email. You're the person who has visibility into their exact problem.

The messages above aren't templates. They're examples of what happens when you combine internal requisition data with public healthcare data. Your team can replicate this using the data sources in each play.

Data Sources Reference

Every play traces back to verifiable data. Here are the sources used in this playbook:

Source Key Fields Used For
Internal Requisition Data physician_name, item_purchased, cost, contract_status, facility, department, timestamp Identifying off-contract purchases by specific physicians and departments
Internal Product Master item_name, contracted_alternative, functional_equivalence, cost_differential Mapping purchased items to contracted equivalents with savings calculations
Internal Contract Master gpo_name, rebate_terms, contracted_items, pricing Calculating missed rebate opportunities and pricing differentials
CMS National Provider Identifier (NPI) Registry npi, provider_name, taxonomy_classification, organizational_subparts Verifying physician specialties and health system affiliations
CMS Hospital Provider Cost Report Data (HCRIS) provider_id, supply_expenses, total_patient_revenue, fiscal_year Validating facility scale and supply spending levels