XenHirely

Personalized ROI view for Your Facility

ROI Calculator

This view presents XenHirely’s hiring economics in a simple, facility-ready format. It shows where savings come from, how delivery timelines are structured, and why effort-based hiring bands can outperform salary-linked search fees.

Facility Name

Facility Type

Number of Beds

Recommendation summary

This summary keeps ROI, delivery promises, and the XenHirely band story in one visual language so Sales can walk Your Facility through cost savings, value protection, and why the committed model is different.

Traditional Search Spend

Modeled from benchmark compensation and salary-linked healthcare search fees.

Salary-based model

XenHirely Spend

Band-based pricing tied to execution effort and defined delivery windows.

Effort-based model

Direct Recruiting Savings

Savings from replacing percentage-based fees with fixed hiring-capacity bands.

Direct value

Vacancy Value Protected

Modeled upside when higher-impact Band 3 roles are filled faster through a defined process.

Protected value

Total annual economic impact and ROI profileClosed by default ▾

Total annual economic impact

Combined impact from direct recruiting savings plus modeled vacancy economics protected on Band 3 roles.

ROI profile

What drives the ROI

How savings are created

XenHirely prices the execution effort required to deliver interview-ready candidates rather than charging a percentage of compensation. That means rising salary levels do not automatically inflate the recruiting fee.

Modeled facility profileBenchmark defaults ▾

Facility benchmark assumptions

Role and fee defaults

Executive summary

Value comparisonVisual economics view ▾

Modeled economics

What this means for the buyer

Role-level economicsBand-level detail ▾

Role band	Modeled hires	Avg comp	Traditional fee	Traditional spend	XenHirely fee	XenHirely spend

How XenHirely differs from traditional recruitingModel comparison ▾

Traditional contingency recruiting

Pricing basis

Usually 18–30% of salary, so fee increases with compensation even when effort does not.

Payment timing

Pay on hire.

Delivery promise

No defined delivery-window guarantee.

Buyer risk

The buyer still absorbs timeline uncertainty and process variability.

Retained search

Pricing basis

Still commonly linked to compensation level and milestone activity.

Payment timing

Milestone payments across the search.

Delivery promise

More structure than contingency, but cost still follows salary inflation.

Buyer issue

Higher control, but salary-linked economics remain difficult to explain internally.

XenHirely effort-based model

Pricing basis

Execution effort required to deliver interview-ready candidates.

Payment timing

Committed or contingent commercial structure, based on risk-sharing.

Delivery promise

Committed model includes guaranteed windows and a 25% future-search credit if delivery is missed.

Buyer advantage

Clearer economics, stronger accountability, and a more stable pricing story.

Issue with today’s search agenciesStructural story ▾

Market issue 1

Resume speed over interview-ready quality

Facilities often receive submission volume, not calibrated submitted candidates. Screening burden stays on the buyer.

Market issue 2

No defined delivery accountability

When the fee depends on success alone, there is usually no guaranteed interview-ready timeline tied to the search.

Market issue 3

High fees with limited process clarity

Healthcare teams may pay premium percentages without visibility into search discipline, calibration quality, or dedicated capacity.

Delivery windows and commitment structureProduct structure ▾

Committed model

What is included in both models

Benchmark footnotes and source attributionReading the assumptions ▾

Benchmark assumptions and reference points

Traditional healthcare recruiting fees commonly range from 18–25% of salary for RN and Allied roles and 25–35% for APP and Physician roles, depending on market conditions and search complexity.

Recruiting activity benchmarks typically reflect 8–25 candidate submissions per hire and 5–8 interviews per hire in traditional agency-led models.

Vacancy impact in healthcare is often more financially material than recruiting fees, particularly for clinical leadership, APP, and physician roles where delays directly affect operations, revenue, and care continuity.

Physician contribution can be modeled separately to reflect daily revenue exposure from extended vacancy, which significantly exceeds search cost differences in most scenarios.

These benchmarks are derived from commonly referenced industry research and reports, including: American Hospital Association (AHA), NSI National Healthcare Retention & RN Staffing Report, Staffing Industry Analysts (SIA), Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), and Merritt Hawkins Physician Recruiting Review.

This model uses these ranges to provide a directional comparison. Final hiring mix, compensation, timelines, and service levels should be validated for each facility before a formal proposal.

XenHirely

ROI Snapshot

FacilityYour Facility

TypeAcute Care Hospital

Beds modeled120

Annual hires modeled0

Total annual economic impact

Combined impact from direct recruiting savings plus modeled vacancy value protected on Band 3 roles.

ROI profile

Traditional spend

XenHirely spend

Direct savings

Vacancy value

How XenHirely creates savings at the facility level

Role-level economics

Delivery timeline promises and model structure

Committed model

Guaranteed delivery window

Milestone payments reserve hiring capacity. If submitted candidates are not delivered within the defined window, 25% of the search fee is credited toward the next search when role scope, compensation, and client SLAs stay unchanged.

Contingent model

Flexible but no timeline guarantee

Paid on success. Pricing carries a 30% premium because XenHirely takes the full outcome-based compensation risk and the delivery window is not guaranteed.

Included in both

Submitted candidates, dedicated search pod, market mapping, and standard replacement protection.

Why it is different

Traditional contingency and retained search both remain tied to compensation. XenHirely keeps pricing tied to real delivery effort instead.

Benchmark ranges reflected in this model align to commonly referenced healthcare recruiting and workforce research, including AHA, NSI, SIA, MGMA, and Merritt Hawkins. Traditional search fees are modeled using market ranges of 18–25% for RN and Allied roles and 25–35% for APP and Physician roles, with vacancy value shown separately to reflect operating exposure from extended vacancy. Validate actual hiring mix, compensation, timelines, and service levels before issuing a final proposal.