IBJNews

Startup VoCare Inc. might move to find venture capital dollars

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
On The Beat Industry News In Brief

A Lebanon-based startup wants to build a call center here and add up to 300 jobs, but state and local officials are struggling with a big obstacle to keeping the company here: a lack of early-stage venture capital.

VoCare Inc. has designed a service that can provide 24-hour-a-day remote monitoring and live communications between home-bound seniors and their primary care doctors. It is trying to raise $4 million in capital to launch its service.

Since it can provide the service from anywhere in the country, VoCare is mulling a move to South Carolina, Florida or Texas. But the company is also talking to economic officials in Indiana, said company spokesman Tim Tuttle.

“It really is a national program. So they could put it anywhere,” Tuttle said. But, he added, VoCare founder Steve Peabody “would truly like to stay in the Indianapolis area.”

VoCare recently signed a pilot partnership with Indianapolis-based American Health Network, a 200-physician practice, and researchers at Indiana University, who will help test its TeleHealth System. Also participating in the pilot is Wisconsin-based Marshfield Clinic.

In a statement, VoCare officials said they would make a location decision in the next 120 days.

“We have strong ties to Indiana and the Midwest, but we need to look at all options in determining the best place for our business,” Peabody said in the statement. “We need to operate in the most cost-effective environment possible to keep the cost of our VoCare TeleHealth System affordable.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. John, unfortunately CTRWD wants to put the tank(s) right next to a nature preserve and at the southern entrance to Carmel off of Keystone. Not exactly the kind of message you want to send to residents and visitors (come see our tanks as you enter our city and we build stuff in nature preserves...

  2. 85 feet for an ambitious project? I could shoot ej*culate farther than that.

  3. I tried, can't take it anymore. Untill Katz is replaced I can't listen anymore.

  4. Perhaps, but they've had a very active program to reduce rainwater/sump pump inflows for a number of years. But you are correct that controlling these peak flows will require spending more money - surge tanks, lines or removing storm water inflow at the source.

  5. All sewage goes to the Carmel treatment plant on the White River at 96th St. Rainfall should not affect sewage flows, but somehow it does - and the increased rate is more than the plant can handle a few times each year. One big source is typically homeowners who have their sump pumps connect into the sanitary sewer line rather than to the storm sewer line or yard. So we (Carmel and Clay Twp) need someway to hold the excess flow for a few days until the plant can process this material. Carmel wants the surge tank located at the treatment plant but than means an expensive underground line has to be installed through residential areas while CTRWD wants the surge tank located further 'upstream' from the treatment plant which costs less. Either solution works from an environmental control perspective. The less expensive solution means some people would likely have an unsightly tank near them. Carmel wants the more expensive solution - surprise!

ADVERTISEMENT