For practices tired of paying for data collection and a practice management system.

Your data collection shouldn’t stop at the graph.

Q: Is Wilma a good Catalyst alternative?

Yes, if what you actually want is one system rather than a data-collection tool plus a separate practice management system. Catalyst is strong at data collection specifically; Wilma covers data collection, notes, scheduling, authorizations and billing on one record at flat published pricing.

Q: What is Catalyst, and who owns it now?

Catalyst is an ABA data-collection application originally built by DataFinch. DataFinch was acquired by Therapy Brands, which has since rebranded as Ensora Health, and Catalyst is now sold as Ensora Data Collection. See our Ensora ABA alternative page for the wider suite.

Q: Does Catalyst do billing and scheduling?

No. Catalyst is a data-collection product — practices pair it with a separate practice management and billing system. That is the central difference: with Wilma, data collection and billing are the same system, so nothing has to be re-entered or reconciled between vendors.

Q: Is Wilma’s data collection as good as Catalyst’s?

Catalyst is mature and we will not pretend otherwise. Wilma supports trial-by-trial, frequency, duration, interval and task-analysis data with live graphing, offline capture in the field, and a direct path into the note and the claim. The trade-off is a specialised tool versus one platform that carries the data all the way to payment.

Q: How does pricing compare?

Tools in this category have historically been priced per client, so the bill scales with caseload. Wilma publishes flat pricing: $30/user/month Core, +$20 AI, +$10 phone. You can budget it up front without a sales process.

Q: Can I migrate from Catalyst to Wilma?

Yes. Client records, authorizations, historical data and documentation transfer during onboarding. For billing, most practices run out open AR in their prior system while new claims start clean in Wilma. Most practices are live in 1–2 weeks (smaller teams faster).

Q: Is Wilma HIPAA compliant?

Yes. End-to-end encryption, role-based access, full audit logging, and BAAs standard with every customer agreement.

Catalyst (now sold as Ensora Data Collection) is a capable, widely-used data-collection tool — but it is only data collection. Scheduling, notes, authorizations and billing live in another system you also pay for. Wilma does all of it on one record, so the data a BCBA takes in session is the same data that drafts the note and scrubs the claim.

Why operators compare them

Why practices choose Wilma® over Catalyst.

One system instead of two subscriptions.

Catalyst is a data-collection product. To actually run a practice you pair it with a separate practice management and billing system, then pay for both and reconcile between them. Wilma is one platform: data collection, notes, scheduling, authorizations, billing and payroll tracking on a single record, one bill, one login.

The data becomes the note and the claim.

When data collection is a separate product, the note is retyped and the claim is assembled by hand from whatever made it across the integration. In Wilma the session data drafts the note, checks the authorization and feeds the claim — because it never left the system.

Flat, published pricing you can model.

Data-collection tools in this category have historically been priced per client, which means your bill grows with your caseload. Wilma publishes flat per-user pricing — $30/user Core, +$20 AI, +$10 phone — so you can budget from headcount, not census.

We’ll be fair about Catalyst.

Catalyst is mature, well-known and trusted by a lot of clinicians — we are not claiming to out-collect it on raw data-collection depth. The argument for Wilma is that data collection is one part of running a practice, and the other parts should not be a second vendor.

Side by side

Wilma® vs Catalyst, feature by feature.

Capability	Wilma	Catalyst
Data collection	✅ Native, included	✅ Mature, specialised
Scheduling	✅ Native	❌ Separate system
Billing / claims	✅ Native + in-house	❌ Separate system
Authorization tracking	✅ Native	❌ Separate system
Payroll tracking & exports	✅ Native	❌ Separate system
Built-in phone & IVR	✅ Native	❌ Not offered
Telehealth	✅ Zoom / Teams / Meet integration	❌ Not offered
Pricing model	✅ Flat $30/user, 10 min	⚠️ Historically per client
Published pricing	✅ Yes	❌ Quote-only

Comparison based on publicly available information as of August 2026. Ensora Health, Therapy Brands, WebABA, AccuPoint, Catalyst and DataFinch are trademarks of their respective owners.

What you get on Wilma

What changes on one agentic platform.

One record, end to end.

The trial data a BCBA takes at 10am is the same record that drafts the note, checks the authorization and builds the claim. No integration to babysit.

Priced per user, not per client.

Grow your caseload without your software bill growing with it. Flat per-user pricing you can model on one line.

Agentic AI on top of your own data.

Notes drafted from the session data and claims scrubbed before submission — always human-approved.

One vendor to call.

When data collection and billing are the same system, there is no argument about whose side the problem is on.

Pricing and reviews

Comparing Catalyst pricing and reviews? Start with the buying questions.

Bottom-funnel buyers usually need three answers: what it costs, what real operators say after implementation, and whether the platform owns the workflow or depends on add-ons.

Pricing clarity

Wilma publishes flat pricing: Core is $30/user/month with a 10-licence minimum, so an account starts at $300/month, plus optional AI and Phone add-ons. Use that as the baseline when a Catalyst pricing page or quote requires a sales process.

Review signals

When reading Catalyst reviews, separate ease-of-use praise from operational outcomes: clean claims, authorization control, onboarding speed, support responsiveness, and whether teams still need extra tools.

Native vs integrated

The strongest reviews usually come when scheduling, notes, billing, data, EVV, phone, and AI share one record. Every separate vendor adds another support path and another place work can drift.

FAQ

Questions operators ask before they switch.

Is Wilma a good Catalyst alternative?

What is Catalyst, and who owns it now?

Does Catalyst do billing and scheduling?

Is Wilma’s data collection as good as Catalyst’s?

How does pricing compare?

Can I migrate from Catalyst to Wilma?

Is Wilma HIPAA compliant?

See data collection that reaches the claim.

Bring a real program and a real authorization. We’ll show you the whole path — session to submitted claim — in 30 minutes.

Evaluating the switch

What to check when you move off a data-collection-first system

Catalyst is a long-established ABA data collection product. Practices usually look past it at the point where the clinical data is fine and everything downstream of it is still manual.

1Where does the session go after the data is collected?A data-collection tool ends its job when the trial is scored. Somebody then re-keys that session into a note, and the note into a claim. That re-keying is the actual cost of a best-of-breed setup, and it scales linearly with volume — every new client makes it worse.Red flag: A billing workflow that starts with exporting a spreadsheet.
2Can you prove a billed session was delivered?When data and billing live in separate systems, nothing structurally prevents billing a session whose data never got collected. On one record that claim cannot be built. On two, it is caught in an audit rather than at submission.Red flag: No link between the session record and the claim line beyond a date and a client name.
3What happens to your historical clinical data?Years of program data, graphs and mastered targets are the thing you cannot recreate. Ask exactly what transfers, in what structure, and whether graphs remain readable — not whether an export exists.Red flag: Export offered only as CSV of raw trial rows, with program structure lost.
4Does the replacement actually match the measurement you run?Do not trade a strong data tool for a weak one. The replacement must run duration, latency, interval recording and momentary time sampling with prompt level as a structured field — otherwise you have solved billing and broken measurement.Red flag: Prompt level stored as a free-text note rather than something you can graph.

Before you sign

Questions worth asking on the demo

Show me a session going from trial data to a signed note to a submitted claim without anyone retyping a number.
What exactly transfers from my current data tool, and does program structure survive?
Which measurement types can an RBT run without leaving the session screen?
Can I run both systems in parallel during a transition, and for how long?
What happens to open accounts receivable in my current billing setup?

Glossary

The terms you will hear

Single record: Scheduling, data collection, notes and billing reading and writing the same rows, rather than separate systems reconciled on a schedule. It is what makes an unbillable session impossible to bill rather than merely reportable.
Integration seam: The join between two vendors' systems. Where data is copied rather than shared, the seam is where records drift apart and where neither vendor owns the failure.
Clean claim rate: Share of claims paid on first submission with no correction. The clearest single measure of whether the billing half of a platform is actually working.
Authorization units: Billable 15-minute units a payer approved over a date range. Sessions decrement the balance; delivering past it usually means the service is not reimbursable.

Keep reading

Related guides on running an ABA practice — the same operation, from a different angle.