About SenterME

Built to see what healthcare
couldn't see before.

SenterME was founded on a single observation: by the time health system leaders see the data, the structural moment to act has already passed. We built Santi to change that.

The Founder

Built by someone who understands
both sides of the gap.

Charlotte C. Louis, Founder and CEO of SenterME
Charlotte C. Louis
Founder & CEO · SenterME

Charlotte C. Louis is the Founder and CEO of SenterME — the first real-time Structural Health Intelligence platform for healthcare. She built SenterME to solve a problem she observed across health systems: the leaders most responsible for workforce stability are structurally the last to know when that stability is under threat.

A former financial advisor, corporate trainer, and entrepreneur with more than 20 years of experience, Charlotte has built her career at the intersection of business precision and human systems. Her work is grounded in a foundational insight: organizational dysfunction is not random — it is structural, measurable, and preventable when you have the right sensing layer in place.

Charlotte leads SenterME's mission to make Structural Health Intelligence standard infrastructure for health systems — giving CNOs, CNIOs, and operational leaders the visibility to act before the damage gets expensive. She was the first to frame this as a category, and she intends to define it.

The Founding

It started with a question
nobody could answer.

In 2024, Charlotte Louis began what she thought would be a straightforward research effort. She wanted to understand why organizations kept losing their best people — not to other jobs, but to exhaustion, invisibility, and a system that couldn't see what was happening until it was too late.

She started talking to leaders. CNOs, nurse executives, COOs, people operations directors, culture leads — and the managers, charge nurses, and team leaders in the middle who were holding everything together. She asked them all the same question: what do you need to see that you currently cannot? The answer was the same, every time — and in every industry she entered.

They could feel it. They could see the edges of it in hallway conversations and brief hesitations and the faces of managers who were carrying too much. But they had no instrument. No system that read the coordination layer where pressure actually forms. Just a long wait for the survey data to arrive after the damage was already done.

So she built one. After 160+ conversations with leaders across industries and levels — and arriving at the one place where every answer pointed.

"The problem is not that leaders don't care. The problem is that they have no way to see it coming."
The founding insight · 2024
160+
Leaders consulted across industries before writing a single line of product code
2
Disciplined pivots before arriving at Structural Health Intelligence
1
Category created. Nothing like it existed anywhere else.

What We Found

The middle layer is the most
vulnerable — and the most
consequential — part of any organization.

The middle layer — the nurse managers, charge nurses, floor coordinators, frontline supervisors, and team leads who sit between executive leadership and the people delivering care — was the defining finding across 160+ conversations spanning industries, roles, and levels. Leaders described what they were witnessing in their organizations — and whether they knew it or not, they were all describing the same structural truth.

Nurse managers and team leads absorb pressure from every direction
When the middle struggles, the teams underneath feel it first
The same middle layer, when supported, stabilizes everything
No one had built the instrument to see any of this in real time
"
When you take care of the people, the people take care of the work.
People Leader · Healthcare Operations

The Build

Built by being more willing
to be incomplete than falsely certain.

2024 — Discovery begins
160+ conversations. The same gap. Every time.
2025 — Trust architecture validated
Middle managers and frontline leaders chose to show up. Voluntarily.
2025 — Category defined. Santi architected.
Structural Health Intelligence™ is named. Santi's governance is built.
2025 — Healthcare validation
System CNO approval secured at a top-30 U.S. health system.
2026 — Santi v1 ships
A live product. A new category.
Why we exist — and where we are going
Our Mission

To close the gap between what health system leaders are held accountable for and what they can actually see — delivering real-time Structural Health Intelligence so that stability can be guided instead of recovered.

Our Vision

A world where no leader who carries people is left without the visibility to protect them — where Structural Health Intelligence is standard infrastructure, and stability is built in, not recovered from.

Frequently Asked Questions

Questions people ask
about SenterME.

How disruptive is this to our clinical teams?
Zero workflow disruption. The signal capture interface is a mobile app used voluntarily by participating leaders and their teams — outside of clinical workflow, with no EHR integration, no patient data, and no change to any clinical system. Onboarding, participation support, analysis, and the executive readout are managed entirely by SenterME. Your team's involvement is limited to one executive kickoff conversation and the readout itself.
What happens if participation is lower than expected?
Signal participation stability is a primary success metric — not an assumed baseline. We have direct behavioral evidence of sustained voluntary participation without notifications or incentives. If participation falls below the 70% stability threshold during the observation window, the diagnostic will flag this transparently and we will work with your team to understand the structural reason before asserting any downstream intelligence claims. The engagement is structured to validate before it asserts.
How does this relate to Joint Commission NPG 12?
Joint Commission NPG 12, effective January 1, 2026, reinforces nurse executive oversight of the staffing plan and requires staffing adequacy to be evaluated through performance-improvement activities. The 90-Day Diagnostic is designed to support that work by giving leadership earlier visibility into aggregate strain patterns that may inform staffing review, workforce oversight, and internal documentation during the observation period. It is not presented as a substitute for legal, accreditation, or regulatory determination.
Can we exit the engagement if it's not working?
Yes. The engagement is fully reversible. SenterME is a layer alongside your existing systems — not a replacement for anything. If the diagnostic does not validate the core question, you keep everything produced — the Structural Health Baseline, the Middle layer dynamics data, and all leadership snapshots — and pay nothing more. The risk is structured in your favor by design. We earn continuation through evidence, not contract terms.
How is this different from what we already do with rounding and engagement surveys?
Rounding tells you what people are willing to say in a moment. Engagement surveys tell you what people reported weeks ago. Neither reads what the structural conditions are showing continuously. SenterME measures the coordination layer — not individual sentiment. It detects where load is concentrating, how it behaves over time, and whether the conditions are stabilizing or compounding — before any of that shows up in a survey score, an HRIS flag, or a manager escalation. These are different instruments, answering different questions.
What does the path from diagnostic to enterprise look like?
The 90-day executive readout explicitly defines what an expanded engagement would test to move from validated evidence to operational action. If the diagnostic validates the core question, leadership receives a clear, internally defensible investment case for continuation — with the evidence already in hand. The diagnostic is designed to make the expansion decision easy, not to create it.
Why would staff actually share honest signals?
Because the signal experience is lightweight, anonymous, and aggregate-only. Staff are more likely to answer honestly when they know responses are not traceable back to them individually and are used to detect shared patterns, not evaluate personal performance. The system is architecturally incapable of associating any signal with a specific individual — that is not a policy commitment, it is a structural one.
Why should I believe anonymous aggregate patterns reflect real operational risk?
Because SenterME is not interpreting isolated sentiment. It detects repeated aggregate patterns only when participation reaches a minimum threshold and signal behavior persists over time. That reduces the chance that leaders are reacting to one-off frustration or a small, unrepresentative sample. Patterns must be consistent, sustained, and statistically sufficient before Santi surfaces them as findings.
Why should I trust Santi's interpretation enough to act?
Because Santi is a governed decision-support system, not an autonomous decision-maker. It detects aggregate patterns using defined thresholds and governed interpretation rules, and human review remains part of how findings are validated and used. SenterME helps leaders see earlier — it does not replace leadership judgment. Every finding the diagnostic produces is reviewed through structured interpretation before it is presented to executive leadership.
What exactly do I get at the end of 90 days that is better than what I have now?
At the end of 90 days, leadership gets four things they do not have today.

1. A shared structural baseline. A quantified view of how strain, load, and stabilization are behaving across participating units during the observation period, so leadership is working from a common operating picture rather than fragmented impressions.

2. A validated view of where middle-layer strain is concentrating. The diagnostic localizes where pressure is building across manager and team-leader roles, shows how that strain behaves over time, and distinguishes between contained strain, cycling strain, and compounding strain.

3. Interim leadership interpretation at 30 and 60 days. Two structured check-ins help leadership stay oriented as patterns emerge, without forcing premature action before the evidence is mature enough to trust.

4. A 90-day executive diagnostic readout. A consolidated, decision-ready view of the structural baseline, middle-layer strain patterns, validated thresholds, and the specific conditions under which an expanded deployment or targeted intervention would make sense.

The instrument exists.
See it in your system.

Start with a 30-minute demo call. We'll walk through how SenterME works, what the 90-day diagnostic produces, and whether your health system is a fit. No pitch deck. Just a real conversation.

Book a Demo →

No PHI · No individual identification · No surveillance