uLab Systems — Implementation Playbook (DSO)

uLab Systems Implementation Playbook

AI-Powered Treatment Planning for DSOs

---

1. Executive Summary

What uLab Systems Does

uLab Systems is an AI-powered clear aligner and treatment planning platform that enables orthodontists and general dentists to design, visualize, and manufacture custom clear aligners in-house or through uLab's lab services. The platform uses advanced AI algorithms to automate tooth segmentation, treatment staging, and outcome prediction—reducing treatment planning time from hours to minutes while maintaining clinical precision.

Why DSOs Benefit from AI-Powered Treatment Planning at Scale

Standardization Advantage: uLab's AI ensures consistent treatment planning quality across all providers and locations, regardless of individual orthodontic experience levels. This creates predictable patient outcomes and reduces variability that often plagues multi-location operations.

Scale Economics: Centralized treatment planning workflows enable DSOs to leverage orthodontic expertise across the entire network. A single orthodontic director can review and approve plans from 30+ locations, dramatically improving specialist utilization.

Data Aggregation Power: With unified treatment data across all locations, DSOs gain unprecedented visibility into treatment acceptance rates, average case complexity, provider efficiency, and patient outcomes—enabling data-driven decisions about training, pricing, and growth.

Competitive Differentiation: Offering in-house aligner services with AI-powered precision positions DSOs against direct-to-consumer competitors while capturing margin typically lost to external labs.

Expected Timeline: Decision to Full Deployment

Phase	Timeline	Scope
Pre-Implementation	Weeks 1–2	Infrastructure, stakeholder alignment, baseline metrics
Pilot Wave	Weeks 3–6	2–3 locations
Wave 2 Expansion	Weeks 7–12	5–8 locations
Full Deployment	Weeks 13–20	Remaining locations
Optimization	Weeks 20–28	Network-wide refinement

Total Timeline: 5–7 months for a 15–50 location DSO, depending on infrastructure readiness and change management velocity.

---

2. Pre-Implementation Checklist (Weeks 1–2)

Technical Requirements

Hardware Requirements (Per Location)

☐ Intraoral scanner compatible with uLab (iTero, 3Shape TRIOS, Medit, Carestream) — verify model and firmware version ☐ Workstation with minimum specs: Intel i7 (or equivalent), 16GB RAM, dedicated GPU, SSD storage ☐ Minimum 24" monitor (27" recommended) for treatment visualization ☐ Reliable internet: minimum 50 Mbps download/10 Mbps upload per location

Software Requirements

☐ Current version of Practice Management System (PMS) — document version numbers ☐ CBCT viewing software (if applicable) — confirm DICOM export capability ☐ Updated operating system (Windows 10/11 or macOS 12+) ☐ Modern browser (Chrome, Edge, or Safari — latest version)

Network Requirements

☐ Firewall configured to allow uLab cloud connections (specific ports/domains to whitelist) ☐ VPN compatibility verification if using centralized IT infrastructure ☐ SSL/TLS 1.2 or higher enabled ☐ Static IP addresses for locations requiring enhanced security protocols

🔵 Vendor Onboarding Steps

Step	Owner	Timeline	Deliverable
Execute enterprise BAA	Legal + uLab	Day 1–3	Signed BAA
Complete MSA and pricing schedule	Procurement + uLab	Day 1–5	Executed contract
Assign dedicated Customer Success Manager	uLab	Day 3	Named contact
Receive enterprise admin credentials	IT + uLab	Day 5	Admin portal access
Schedule technical kickoff call	IT + uLab	Day 5–7	Integration roadmap

Key Contacts to Establish

Role	Purpose	Typical Response Time
Customer Success Manager	Strategic alignment, escalations	4 hours
Technical Integration Specialist	API, SSO, PMS connections	8 hours
Clinical Training Lead	Provider education, workflow design	24 hours
Support Tier 1	Day-to-day troubleshooting	2 hours
Support Tier 2 (Engineering)	Complex technical issues	24–48 hours

Data/Access Prerequisites

☐ Enterprise SSO configuration (SAML 2.0 or OAuth 2.0) — coordinate with uLab technical team ☐ API keys for PMS integration — request from PMS vendor ☐ Imaging archive access credentials (PACS or imaging software) ☐ Provider credentialing data (NPI numbers, state licenses) for each clinician ☐ Historical patient scan data for migration testing (de-identified sample set)

🟣 Internal Stakeholder Alignment

Stakeholder Alignment Map

Stakeholder	Role in Implementation	Information Needs	Approval Required
Board/Investors	Strategic oversight	ROI projections, competitive positioning, timeline	Budget approval, strategic direction
CEO/President	Executive sponsorship	High-level milestones, risk summary	Go/no-go at wave gates
Chief Dental Officer	Clinical validation	Treatment quality standards, provider training plan	Clinical protocols, outcome metrics
VP of Operations	Implementation ownership	Detailed playbook, resource allocation, KPIs	Rollout sequence, staffing
CFO	Financial oversight	Cost model, ROI tracking framework	Capital expenditure, vendor terms
CTO/IT Director	Technical execution	Infrastructure requirements, security review	Architecture, integrations
Regional Managers	Field execution	Location-level plans, timeline, escalation paths	Location staffing, schedule adjustments
Office Managers	Local coordination	Training schedules, workflow changes, daily checklist	Local resource allocation
Providers	Clinical adoption	What changes for them, how AI assists (not replaces)	n/a (but critical buy-in)

🟣 Approval Milestones

☐ Budget approval for enterprise license and implementation resources ☐ IT architecture approval for cloud integration and data flows ☐ Clinical protocol approval from CDO for AI-assisted treatment planning ☐ Legal/compliance sign-off on BAA and data governance ☐ HR approval for training time allocation

Baseline Metrics to Capture BEFORE Go-Live

⚠️ Critical: Establish standardized measurement methodology across all locations BEFORE implementation. Inconsistent baseline data makes ROI measurement impossible.

Metric Standardization Protocol

Metric	Definition	Data Source	Measurement Frequency	Standardization Notes
Clear Aligner Case Acceptance Rate	Cases accepted ÷ Cases presented	PMS	Monthly	Ensure consistent "presented" definition across locations
Treatment Planning Time	Time from scan to patient-ready treatment plan	Manual tracking or PMS timestamps	Per case, reported weekly	Start/stop points must be identical
Revenue per Clear Aligner Case	Total collections ÷ Started cases	PMS + Accounting	Monthly	Include all associated fees
Case Turnaround Time	Days from scan to aligner delivery	PMS + Lab tracking	Per case	Lab vs. in-house cases tracked separately
Treatment Modification Rate	% of cases requiring mid-treatment plan changes	PMS or clinical notes	Monthly	Define what constitutes "modification"
Provider Utilization Rate	Clinical hours on aligner cases ÷ Total clinical hours	Schedule + PMS	Monthly	Critical for ROI calculation
Patient NPS for Aligner Cases	Standard NPS methodology	Patient survey	Ongoing	Consistent survey timing (post-delivery)

Baseline Capture Checklist

☐ Deploy standardized metric definitions to all locations (create one-page reference guide) ☐ Verify data capture capabilities in current PMS ☐ Pull 3-month historical data for each metric ☐ Identify data gaps and implement manual tracking where needed ☐ Create baseline report template for cross-location comparison ☐ Store baseline data in centralized repository (not local spreadsheets)

Enterprise-Level Requirements

Network Standards Across Locations

☐ Document current network configurations for all locations ☐ Identify locations requiring network upgrades ☐ Establish minimum bandwidth standards (50 Mbps down/10 Mbps up) ☐ Create network upgrade project plan for non-compliant locations

Hosting Decision: 🟣 Centralized vs. Location-Level

Factor	Centralized	Location-Level
Recommended for	DSOs with robust central IT, desire for unified data	DSOs with weak WAN connectivity, high location autonomy
Advantages	Single admin console, unified reporting, simplified updates	Lower WAN dependency, location-specific customization
Challenges	WAN dependency, single point of failure	Fragmented data, more admin overhead

Recommendation: For 15–50 location DSOs, centralized hosting with local caching provides the best balance of control and reliability.

SSO Configuration

☐ 🔵 Request SSO technical requirements from uLab ☐ Configure identity provider (Okta, Azure AD, Google Workspace) ☐ Test SSO with pilot user accounts ☐ Document SSO troubleshooting procedures ☐ Plan for SSO-exempt break-glass accounts

Centralized Credentialing

☐ Compile provider roster with NPI, state licenses, specialties ☐ 🔵 Submit credentialing data to uLab for bulk account creation ☐ Define permission tiers (treatment planner, reviewer, approver, admin) ☐ Establish provider onboarding workflow for future hires ☐ Create offboarding checklist for departing providers

---

3. Location Readiness Assessment

Scoring Framework

Score each location on the following factors (1–5 scale), then calculate composite score.

Factor 1: IT Infrastructure Maturity (Weight: 25%)

Score	Network Speed	Hardware Age	PMS Version	Overall IT
5	100+ Mbps, redundant	< 2 years	Current version	Full-time IT support
4	75–100 Mbps	2–3 years	1 version behind	Dedicated IT contact
3	50–75 Mbps	3–4 years	2 versions behind	Shared IT support
2	25–50 Mbps	4–5 years	3+ versions behind	Minimal IT support
1	< 25 Mbps, unreliable	5+ years	Unsupported version	No IT support

Factor 2: Staff Tenure and Adaptability (Weight: 20%)

Score	Average Tenure	Annual Turnover	Tech Comfort	Training History
5	5+ years	< 10%	High (tech-forward culture)	Regular tech training
4	3–5 years	10–15%	Above average	Some tech training
3	2–3 years	15–25%	Average	Basic training only
2	1–2 years	25–35%	Below average	Minimal training
1	< 1 year	> 35%	Low	No training history

Factor 3: Patient Volume (Weight: 15%)

Score	Monthly Patient Visits	Clear Aligner Cases/Month	Interpretation
5	800+	20+	Highest impact but requires robust support
4	600–800	15–20	High impact, manageable risk
3	400–600	10–15	Moderate impact
2	200–400	5–10	Lower impact
1	< 200	< 5	Low volume, may not be worth early prioritization

Note: For pilot selection, score 3–4 is ideal (meaningful volume without overwhelming complexity).

Factor 4: Existing Tech Stack Compatibility (Weight: 25%)

Score	PMS Integration	Imaging System	Scanner	Other Integrations
5	Native uLab integration	Direct DICOM export	uLab-preferred scanner	Clean tech stack
4	Supported integration	Standard export	Supported scanner	Minor workarounds
3	Partial integration	Manual export needed	Compatible scanner	Moderate complexity
2	Limited integration	Complex export	Limited compatibility	Significant workarounds
1	No integration path	No digital imaging	Incompatible scanner	Major tech debt

Factor 5: Local Champion Availability (Weight: 15%)

Score	Champion Profile	Availability	Influence
5	Tech-forward provider + engaged office manager	Dedicated time allocated	High respect from team
4	Either provider or manager champion	Partial time available	Good team relationships
3	Willing participant, not a driver	Limited time	Neutral influence
2	Reluctant participant	Very limited time	Minimal influence
1	No champion identified	No time commitment	Potential resistor

Composite Score Calculation

Formula: (IT × 0.25) + (Staff × 0.20) + (Volume × 0.15) + (Tech Stack × 0.25) + (Champion × 0.15)

Composite Score	Readiness Tier	Recommended Wave
4.0–5.0	Tier 1	Wave 1 (Pilot)
3.0–3.9	Tier 2	Wave 2
2.0–2.9	Tier 3	Wave 3
< 2.0	Tier 4	Remediation required before deployment

Rollout Sequence Recommendation

Wave 1 Selection Criteria (2–3 Locations)

☐ Composite score 4.0+ ☐ At least one location representative of your "average" practice profile ☐ At least one location with strong champion who can become train-the-trainer ☐ Geographic diversity if possible (tests support logistics) ☐ NOT your highest-volume flagship (too risky for pilot) ☐ NOT your most troubled location (pilot needs to succeed)

Wave 2 Selection Criteria (5–8 Locations)

☐ Composite score 3.0–3.9 ☐ Locations that will benefit most from learnings from Wave 1 ☐ Regional clustering to enable efficient training deployment

Wave 3 Selection (Remaining Locations)

☐ All remaining locations with composite score 2.0+ ☐ Locations with score < 2.0 require remediation plan

Remediation Planning for Low-Scoring Locations

For each location scoring below 2.0, create a remediation plan addressing: ☐ Infrastructure upgrades needed (timeline, budget, owner) ☐ Staff training prerequisites ☐ Champion recruitment or development ☐ Target date to achieve score 3.0+

---

4. Rollout Strategy

Recommended Wave Structure

For a 15–50 location DSO, we recommend a 3-wave rollout with built-in learning loops:

Wave 1 (Pilot)     Wave 2 (Expansion)     Wave 3 (Scale)
2–3 locations  →   5–8 locations      →   Remaining locations
Weeks 3–6          Weeks 7–12             Weeks 13–20

Wave 1: Pilot Locations (Weeks 3–6)

Purpose: Validate integration, refine workflows, identify failure points, create training assets.

Selection Criteria:

• Highest readiness scores (4.0+)
• Engaged local champion
• Representative patient mix
• Not the flagship or highest-risk location
• Geographically accessible for hands-on support

Timeline:

Week	Activities
Week 3	Technical setup, integration testing, staff training
Week 4	Go-live, daily check-ins, intensive support
Week 5	Workflow refinement, issue resolution
Week 6	Pilot assessment, documentation of learnings

🟣 Go/No-Go Criteria: Wave 1 → Wave 2

Criterion	Threshold	Owner
System uptime	> 99% during pilot	CTO
Integration stability	Zero data sync failures in Week 5–6	IT Director
Training completion	100% of pilot staff certified	Training Lead
Treatment plan quality	CDO approval of sample plans	Chief Dental Officer
User satisfaction	> 3.5/5 staff satisfaction score	VP Operations
Treatment acceptance rate	No decline vs. baseline	Regional Manager
Critical bugs resolved	Zero P1 issues open	uLab CSM

⚠️ Common Wave 1 Failure Points:

• Integration issues discovered late in Week 3 (mitigate: earlier testing)
• Key staff member out during training week (mitigate: backup training dates)
• Champion leaves organization (mitigate: backup champion identified)
• Patient scheduling disruption (mitigate: buffer time in schedule during go-live week)

Wave 2: Expansion (Weeks 7–12)

Purpose: Scale validated workflows, test train-the-trainer model, stress-test support infrastructure.

Location Selection:

• Next tier of readiness scores (3.0–3.9)
• Regional clustering for efficient training
• Mix of practice profiles (GP-heavy vs. ortho-focused)
• Include at least one "challenging" location to test support model

Timeline per Location Cluster:

Week	Activities
Week 7–8	Technical setup for Wave 2 locations (can parallel)
Week 9	Train-the-trainer certification for new champions
Week 10	Go-live for first Wave 2 cluster (3–4 locations)
Week 11	Go-live for second Wave 2 cluster (2–4 locations)
Week 12	Wave 2 stabilization and assessment

🟣 Go/No-Go Criteria: Wave 2 → Wave 3

Criterion	Threshold	Owner
Wave 2 system stability	> 98% uptime across all Wave 2 locations	CTO
Train-the-trainer model validated	Champions successfully trained their teams	Training Lead
Support infrastructure scaled	Average issue resolution < 4 hours	VP Operations
Cross-location consistency	Workflow variation < 10%	Regional Managers
ROI trajectory	On track per projections	CFO
Provider adoption	> 80% of providers actively using	CDO

Wave 3: Full Deployment (Weeks 13–20)

Purpose: Complete network rollout, transition to steady-state operations.

Approach:

• Deploy in regional clusters (4–8 locations per week)
• Champions conduct all training with central team oversight
• Reduced hands-on support (champions handle first-level issues)
• Focus on consistency and documentation

Timeline:

Week	Activities
Weeks 13–14	Wave 3 Cluster 1 deployment
Weeks 15–16	Wave 3 Cluster 2 deployment
Weeks 17–18	Wave 3 Cluster 3 deployment
Weeks 19–20	Final locations + remediated Tier 4 locations

Rollback Plan

Trigger Conditions for Rollback

• System uptime < 95% for 48+ hours
• Data integrity issues (patient data corruption or loss)
• Integration failure causing PMS disruption
• Clinical safety concern identified by CDO
• Provider refusal rate > 25% at a location

Rollback Procedure

Per-Location Rollback (does not affect other locations):

1. CDO or VP Ops makes rollback decision
2. Notify uLab support immediately (escalation to Tier 2)
3. Disable uLab integration at the location
4. Revert to previous workflow (manual treatment planning)
5. Communicate to location staff (use prepared script)
6. Document all issues in detail
7. Schedule post-mortem within 48 hours
8. Create remediation plan before re-attempting

Wave-Level Rollback (pause entire wave):

1. 🟣 CEO/CDO approval required
2. Pause all in-progress deployments
3. Stabilize existing live locations (do not roll back if stable)
4. Conduct emergency post-mortem
5. Communicate to all stakeholders
6. Revised timeline within 5 business days

Isolation Architecture

• Ensure Wave 2 and Wave 3 deployments are technically isolated from pilot
• Location-level issues should not cascade to other locations
• Central dashboard should remain operational even if individual locations fail

---

5. Configuration & Integration (Weeks 2–3)

Step-by-Step Integration: Practice Management Systems

Dentrix Enterprise Integration

Step	Action	Owner	Duration	Vendor Involvement
1	🔵 Request Dentrix API credentials from Henry Schein	IT	3–5 days	None
2	🔵 Obtain uLab integration module from uLab	IT	1–2 days	uLab provides
3	Configure Dentrix server for external API access	IT	2–4 hours	None
4	🔵 Install uLab connector on Dentrix server	IT + uLab	2 hours	uLab support
5	Map patient data fields (name, DOB, chart#)	IT	1 hour	None
6	Map provider credentials	IT	30 min	None
7	⚠️ Test patient sync with sample data	IT	2 hours	None
8	Configure appointment type triggers	IT	1 hour	None
9	Enable production sync	IT	30 min	None
10	Document configuration for other locations	IT	1 hour	None

⚠️ Common Dentrix Integration Failures:

• Firewall blocking outbound API calls (verify whitelist)
• Dentrix version incompatibility (verify minimum version with uLab)
• Incorrect field mapping causing patient mismatch
• Appointment triggers not firing (check trigger configuration)

Eaglesoft Integration

Step	Action	Owner	Duration	Vendor Involvement
1	Verify Eaglesoft version (19.0+ required)	IT	30 min	None
2	🔵 Enable Eaglesoft API module (may require Patterson activation)	IT	1–3 days	Patterson support
3	🔵 Download uLab Eaglesoft connector	IT	30 min	uLab provides
4	Install connector on workstation/server	IT	1 hour	None
5	Configure database connection string	IT	30 min	None
6	Map required data fields	IT	1 hour	None
7	Test bidirectional sync	IT	2 hours	None
8	Configure automatic sync schedule	IT	30 min	None
9	Validate sync in production	IT	1 hour	None

Open Dental Integration

Step	Action	Owner	Duration	Vendor Involvement
1	Enable Open Dental API (Setup > Misc > API)	IT	15 min	None
2	Create API user credentials	IT	15 min	None
3	🔵 Enter Open Dental API credentials in uLab admin portal	IT	30 min	None
4	Configure eConnector settings	IT	1 hour	None
5	Map patient/provider fields	IT	30 min	None
6	Test patient search and sync	IT	1 hour	None
7	Enable treatment plan writeback	IT	30 min	None
8	Validate end-to-end workflow	IT	1 hour	None

Note: Open Dental's open architecture typically makes it the easiest PMS integration.

Imaging System Integration

Scanner Integration (iTero, 3Shape, Medit)

Scanner	Integration Method	Setup Time	Notes
iTero	Direct cloud sync via Align Technology	2–4 hours	🔵 Requires iTero cloud account linkage
3Shape TRIOS	3Shape Communicate export	2–3 hours	Configure auto-export to uLab
Medit	Medit Link direct export	1–2 hours	Most straightforward setup
Carestream	STL file export	1 hour	Manual or semi-automated workflow

Scanner Setup Checklist

☐ Verify scanner firmware is current version ☐ 🔵 Obtain scanner cloud credentials (if cloud-based export) ☐ 🔵 Link scanner account to uLab (instructions vary by scanner) ☐ Configure export format (STL preferred, open bite scan protocol) ☐ Test export with sample scan ☐ Train operators on scan-to-uLab workflow ☐ Document scanner-specific workflows per location

CBCT Integration (If Applicable)

☐ Configure CBCT software for DICOM export ☐ 🔵 Verify uLab accepts your CBCT DICOM format ☐ Test upload workflow with sample CBCT ☐ Document integration for applicable locations

Test Environment Setup

🔵 Centralized Test Environment (Recommended for DSO)

☐ Request dedicated test tenant from uLab ☐ Configure test tenant to mirror production settings ☐ Create test patient records (use synthetic data) ☐ Link test PMS environment (if available) ☐ Document test environment access credentials ☐ Restrict test environment to IT and implementation team only

Validation Checklist

Test Case	Expected Result	Pass/Fail	Notes
Patient sync from PMS	Patient appears in uLab within 5 minutes
Scan upload from scanner	Scan appears in uLab within 10 minutes
Treatment plan creation	AI generates plan in < 15 minutes
Plan modification	Changes save and display correctly
Plan approval workflow	Approval status updates in PMS
Provider assignment	Correct provider linked to case
Multi-user concurrent access	No data conflicts or locks
Offline mode (if applicable)	Graceful degradation
Report generation	Reports generate accurately
Audit log capture	All actions logged

Data Migration (If Applicable)

Historical Case Migration

⚠️ Important: Not all DSOs need to migrate historical data. Evaluate cost/benefit.

Migration Decision Criteria:

• Active treatment cases (in progress): Must migrate
• Recently completed cases (< 6 months): Recommended for reference
• Older completed cases: Usually not worth migrating

Migration Steps (if proceeding)

☐ 🔵 Request data migration template from uLab ☐ Extract patient/case data from current system ☐ Transform data to uLab import format ☐ Validate data integrity (spot check 5% of records) ☐ 🔵 Submit data to uLab for import ☐ 🔵 Verify import in test environment ☐ ⚠️ Validate migrated data with clinical team ☐ Approve migration to production

Security and HIPAA Compliance Verification

Enterprise-Level HIPAA Checklist

Requirement	Action	Owner	Status
Business Associate Agreement	🔵 Execute BAA with uLab	Legal	☐
Data Encryption at Rest	Verify uLab's encryption standards (AES-256)	IT/Security	☐
Data Encryption in Transit	Confirm TLS 1.2+ for all connections	IT	☐
Access Controls	Configure role-based access in uLab	IT	☐
Audit Logging	Verify comprehensive audit trail capability	Compliance	☐
Data Retention Policy	Align uLab retention with DSO policy	Compliance	☐
Data Deletion Procedures	Document process for patient data deletion requests	Compliance	☐
Breach Notification	Confirm uLab's breach notification procedures	Legal	☐
Subcontractor Management	🔵 Review uLab's subcontractor list	Legal	☐
Physical Security	🔵 Request SOC 2 report from uLab	IT/Security	☐
Disaster Recovery	🔵 Review uLab's DR/backup procedures	IT	☐

Data Governance Framework

☐ 🟣 Define data ownership policy (DSO owns patient data) ☐ Document data flow architecture (where data resides, how it moves) ☐ Establish data access request procedures ☐ Create data breach response playbook ☐ Assign data governance owner (typically Compliance or IT)

Configuration Standardization

Standardized Configuration Template (Apply to ALL Locations)

Setting	Standardized Value	Rationale
Treatment complexity tiers	Use uLab defaults (Simple/Moderate/Complex)	Enables cross-location comparison
Approval workflow	CDO or designated ortho reviews all complex cases	Quality control
Notification preferences	Email + in-app for treatment approvals	Consistency
Export format	PDF + STL	Universality
Retention period	10 years	Compliance
Audit log level	Full (all user actions)	Compliance
Default treatment views	Standardized 4-view layout	Training consistency

Location-Specific Configuration (May Vary)

Setting	Variability Allowed	Approval Required
Provider assignments	Based on local staffing	Office Manager
Operating hours for notifications	Per location schedule	None
Scanner model settings	Based on equipment	None
Specialty case routing	Based on provider capabilities	Regional Manager
Patient communication templates	Minor localization	Marketing approval
Local administrator permissions	Based on management structure	VP Operations

---

6. Team Training Plan

Train-the-Trainer Model Overview

Structure

Central Training Team → Regional Champions → Location Champions → Location Staff

Champion Selection Criteria

Criterion	Weight	Evaluation Method
Technical comfort	25%	Self-assessment + manager input
Communication skills	25%	Observation, peer feedback
Respect from team	20%	Manager assessment
Availability	15%	Schedule review
Tenure (> 1 year preferred)	10%	HR data
Interest/enthusiasm	5%	Volunteer basis preferred

Champion Responsibilities

☐ Complete champion certification training (8 hours) ☐ Train all location staff on uLab workflows ☐ Serve as first point of contact for questions ☐ Participate in weekly champion check-ins ☐ Report issues to regional manager/central team ☐ Train new hires ☐ Provide feedback to central team on workflow improvements