B

Parent Care Facility Checklist

3.70

Derivation Chain

Step 1 Parent care coordination
→
Step 2 Post-care-grade service selection
→
Step 3 Information asymmetry in facility selection after deciding between home care vs. facility transition

Problem

After a parent in their 80s receives a confirmed long-term care grade, adult children aged 50-58 who have decided on facility admission face a problem: the National Health Insurance Service's 'Find Long-Term Care Facility' tool only filters by address and care grade. Critical information—whether night nurses are on-site, availability of dementia-specific programs, detailed out-of-pocket costs, and wait times—requires calling each facility directly. On average, families call 5-8 facilities and visit 3-4, taking 2-3 weeks, during which they must continue providing unpaid caregiving.

Solution

Users input their parent's care grade, conditions, and preferred residential area. The tool lists matching care facilities and auto-generates a must-ask checklist for each (night staffing, meal plans, programs, actual costs, contract considerations). It provides a facility comparison table for on-site visits, and when users record post-visit evaluations, it calculates a final recommendation ranking.

Target: Ages 50-58, parent aged 80+ with confirmed long-term care grade 1-3, immediately after deciding on facility admission, in the first week of facility search
Revenue Model: Free checklist + 3-facility comparison, facility comparison Report PDF (10+ facilities) $7.50, facility-side Premium profile listing (B2B) $37.50/month
Ecosystem Role: Consumer
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
3.0/5
U Urgency
4.0/5
M Market
3.0/5
R Realizability
4.0/5
V Validation
4.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
SaaS N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20 Senior N=.25 U=.25 M=.05 R=.30 V=.15

Feasibility (65%)

Tech Complexity
24.0/40
Data Availability
20.8/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (58/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
16.0/20
Revenue Signals
10.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
10.5/15
Solo Buildability
7.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Frontend [medium] Backend [medium] Data Pipeline [medium]
Dashboard