An Introduction to Delphi, Our Work, and Our Vision for an Integrated Future
Welcome to the first in a series of strategic insight sessions from Delphi. I’m Lia Mix, founder and CEO of Delphi, and I’m delighted to share our perspective on what it will take to move psychedelic therapies from promise to practice within our healthcare system, as well as Delphi’s unique role in this critical endeavor.
We dedicate this first session to Amanda Fielding, an elder who recently left this Earth, but whose resonance is carried in all who knew and loved her. Amanda’s life’s work will continue to infuse millions of lives with goodness and grace, just as she did in life. Truly, our work at Delphi would not be possible without the courageous work of the many who have come before us. Thank you, Amanda, for all your blessings. You will be dearly missed.
Today’s session is an introduction to Delphi: our view of what it will actually take, behind the scenes, for psychedelic therapies to make this transition, and Delphi’s unique role in navigating this complex landscape.
A little about my background: as a licensed behavioral health clinician, I spent twelve years providing direct service in community mental health. I then worked in the commercial health insurance industry for over a decade, bringing new behavioral health treatments into the healthcare system and getting them adopted into coverage at scale. In 2016, I began working in the field of psychedelics, helping to build the infrastructure needed for these therapies to be integrated. Two of these projects were the Board of Psychedelic Medicines and Therapies, a certification board, and Enthea, a health plan administrator, or “insurance company light”, that allows employers to cover psychedelic healthcare for their employees.
My message to the field of psychedelic medicine has been consistent from the start: the field must become coherent and trustworthy to the incumbent systems if psychedelic therapies are to reach all who can benefit from them, safely and affordably.
Many of you are tracking the momentum around FDA approvals. While last year’s seeming setback with MDMA was disappointing, it’s also given the industry a chance to recalibrate and lay stronger foundations for a more thoughtful rollout. Of course, approval alone doesn’t equal access. At Delphi, we focus on the work that often goes unseen, such as the recalibration of infrastructure within insurance, government, and healthcare delivery. We think of our role as creating the “connective tissue” needed to increase coherence between the incumbent systems and the field of psychedelics. This ensures these therapies are not only available but also equitable, effective, and scalable.
To that end, we are decidedly focused on generating the information that decision-makers need to ensure these treatments can move through approval, to insurance and healthcare system adoption, and ultimately have global reach. The truth is, if we want psychedelics to move forward in ways that are mutually beneficial for all stakeholders, we will need many people, especially those with influence over resources and policy, many of whom may have no specific prior interest in psychedelics, to make good decisions about them.
Today, I’m excited to highlight some of our current and future projects aimed at potentiating these positive outcomes, and the individuals and organizations that make our work possible.
Our Origin, Vision, and Mission
Much like the ancient holy site in Greece where the Oracle of Delphi offered divine insight, Delphi Consultancy was founded on the recognition that psychedelic therapies can’t succeed without the material infrastructure to support them. They have the potential to transform lives, but only if the systems around them are ready to receive them.
Our vision is a future where psychedelic therapies are integrated into the broader healthcare system in ways that are safe, equitable, and effective.
Our mission is to bridge the gap between this emerging field and the complex realities of insurance, policy, economics, and care delivery. We do that by developing the data, education, and relationships that make systemic change possible.
True to this mission, Delphi’s first client three years ago was the U.S. government. I am proud to say that we have grown organically since then, without marketing or fanfare. We’re not here to advocate for psychedelic therapies as a concept. We’re here to help make their safe and meaningful adoption a reality. Stone by stone, brick by brick, until the infrastructure supports the true potential of these ancient technologies for the benefit of humanity, and the need for access to them is self-evident.
Our Approach: Building Bridges Intentionally
At Delphi, we are guided by Buckminster Fuller’s assertion that existing systems can evolve through willing adoption of beneficial upgrades without the friction of forced change. Therefore, our approach is very intentional:
- Non-Advocacy Position: We’re not here to push a particular compound or modality. Instead, we’re focused on practical implementation: helping decision-makers understand what’s real, what’s possible, and what needs to happen next. We do not offer readings from a crystal ball; we offer facts and expert analysis tailored to leadership’s needs.
- Decision-Maker Focused: Our work targets payers, policymakers, regulators, and systems leaders—the people responsible for determining what gets covered, regulated, adopted, and scaled.
- Deeply Grounded in Expertise: We’ve built a team that understands both the psychedelic field and the incumbent systems with which it needs to integrate, with expertise across healthcare innovation, policy, reimbursement, systems design, economics, and more.
- A Bridge Between Systems: We translate across sectors—from emerging psychedelic models to legacy healthcare, from grassroots energy to government structures. Our job is to make those connections functional and generative.
Our Current Projects: Laying the Groundwork
Our HOPE, HEAL, and LANDSCAPE projects are key examples of the bridge-work we’re doing.
The HOPE Project: Health Outcomes and Psychedelic Economics
HOPE is an economic analysis project designed to speak directly to those who hold the purse strings, including CMS and commercial health insurance payers, legislators, and the Office of Management and Budget. Our goal is to quantify how much the U.S. healthcare system stands to gain financially if psychedelic therapies are FDA-approved and covered by insurance.
The project brings together leading health economists through the Collaborative for the Economics of Psychedelics at UC Berkeley, led by Dr. Elliot Marseille, and leading healthcare claims analytic experts at MSide Solutions, led by Dr. Sylver Quevedo. They evaluate promising psychedelic therapies and model their potential economic impact, helping to answer not just whether these treatments are effective, but whether they’re worth investing in at scale. As part of this work, we’ll also contribute a comprehensive review of efficacy data to the public domain—a much-needed resource.
This work began after conversations with Representative Lou Correa and Representative Jack Bergman’s offices, leaders of the congressional Psychedelics Advancing Therapies (PATH) Caucus. Their staff agreed that this financial modeling is essential to bring other legislators to the table and move legislation forward. When we presented this proposal at the Psychedelic Medicine Coalition’s summit in Washington, D.C., the response was remarkable. One senior lobbyist even told Dr. Marseille, “You’re doing God’s work.” HOPE is designed to deliver data that gets decisions made, fundamentally shifting the financial outlook for the industry and enabling safe, scalable access.
The HEAL Project: Healthcare Economics & Access for Ibogaine
HEAL brings a similar economic lens to the potential for state governments to lead in ibogaine therapy development, starting with public investment in research, as seen in Texas. The HEAL proposal takes the national economic case to the state level, demonstrating potential savings from funding research and scaling treatment infrastructure.
Additionally, HEAL includes a non-advocacy education component for state-level decision-makers, aiming to clarify misinformation and provide a clear, science-based foundation for informed policy decisions regarding ibogaine. The goal is not to persuade, but to inform, so states can make thoughtful, evidence-based choices. By combining rigorous economic modeling with clear education, HEAL creates a strong foundation for psychedelic therapies to be understood on the merits of data, science, and real-world impact.
The LANDSCAPE MAP: Navigating the Psychedelic Ecosystem
One challenge we often hear, especially from those outside the field, is that the psychedelic industry is “too messy” or hard to understand. The Landscape Map aims to change that by providing a structured, accessible view of the ecosystem; its key components, functions, stakeholders, and their relationships.
The goal is twofold:
- Help outsiders (government, healthcare, finance) understand how this emerging sector is organized and where it fits.
- Help the ecosystem itself become more self-aware, identify overlaps or fragmentation, and find opportunities for collaboration.
Our Landscape Mapping creates shared visibility for greater clarity, connection, and coherence. We are fortunate to have a robust and highly synergistic partnership with them.
These projects highlight our bridge work at the intersection of psychedelics and the existing systems of government, healthcare, and finance, focusing on non-advocacy education, economic insight, and ecosystem coherence.
Our Future Projects: Addressing Gaps and Opportunities
Our future projects reflect where we see significant gaps and opportunities for the healthy scaling of psychedelic therapies:
- Europe Reimbursement Action Plan: Leveraging Blossom’s initial 200-page roadmap for reimbursement in Europe, Delphi is building a comprehensive action plan for stakeholders in multiple countries. Interestingly, we’ve noticed striking parallels between U.S. and European needs for access, potentially opening avenues for international collaboration.
- Patient Registry Framework: Well-designed patient registries are a foundational gap. We are developing a proposal for a registry framework with common data standards, flexible implementation models, and collaborative research infrastructure to support quality care, safety, outcomes, and clinical excellence at scale.
- Care Delivery Design & Value-Based Payment Models: The behavioral healthcare system lags in payment innovation. Psychedelic therapies offer an opportunity to align financial incentives with patient wellbeing, not just symptom management. We’re exploring partnerships to model new care delivery frameworks built around improved outcomes and value-based payment.
This sample provides a “look under the hood” at the essential work Delphi is undertaking to support the healthy growth of the psychedelic industry and its relationship with incumbent systems.
Acknowledging Other Key Healthcare Organizations
While proud of our work, we’re not alone. I want to acknowledge three organizations also doing meaningful healthcare and policy bridge work:
These organizations are advancing key efforts like clinical practice guidelines, standards of care, accreditation, certification, and CPT code development, foundational pieces for any new area of medicine. We’re grateful for our collaborations. We will also provide a link to a presentation explaining the U.S. healthcare payer system and why these organizations’ work is so important.
Our Foundation: Team, Experts, and Partners
What started with just Floris Wolswijk and me three years ago has blossomed into an extraordinary team. It’s a privilege to work with these deeply experienced, committed, and values-driven individuals. Their emotional intelligence is the “secret sauce” of our high-performing team, fostering creativity, collaboration, and quality.
Behind our core team is a growing brain trust of expert advisors from diverse disciplines, including healthcare, insurance, economics, law enforcement, public policy, and more. Their decades of experience ensure our work is grounded, strategic, and relevant.
Collaboration is key to systemic change. We’re honored to work with partners across public, private, and nonprofit sectors who share our values and are essential to our shared mission. To everyone who’s walked this path with us: thank you.
Conclusion & Looking Ahead
Thank you for joining us. We hope this session offered meaningful insights into Delphi—the work we do, why we do it, how we do it, and our role in bridging psychedelic therapies into the systems that shape policy, funding, and access. At the heart of it all is our commitment to building infrastructure that allows this field to flourish with integrity, leading to a system upgrade willingly adopted for the betterment of all.
This is the first in a series of insight sessions. We’d love for you to join us again. If there’s a topic you’d like us to explore, or if you’d like to connect more directly about our work, please reach out.
Q&A with Lia Mix, Moderated by Floris Wolswijk
Q1: Psychedelic Registry Clients and Scope
What clients do you plan to serve with the psychedelic registry? Is it particularly focused on the clinical population and research? Is there interest in incorporating state-regulated models?
Lia Mix: Those are excellent questions currently being explored in the framework development. For those with a vested interest in how these registries are designed and who they serve, we invite you to be in touch with us. We want to optimize the framework with community and stakeholder input. We are at the very beginning of this process, so your input is welcome.
Q2: Interplay Between State and Federal Approaches
We’re doing work at both the federal and state levels (e.g., PATH Caucus, HEAL proposal in Texas). How do you see the interplay between state and federal approaches? Is there a risk of a patchwork system?
Lia Mix: This is a crucial opportunity. We need to coordinate state and federal efforts to create as many pathways for access as possible. Yes, it can get messy—look at our current U.S. healthcare system. Our goal is to be intentional and look across federal and state activities to find synergies and address potential tensions. I visualize access (medicalization, state-level therapeutic use, religious use) as wedges in a pie chart. The interesting part is not just the wedges themselves, but their intersections. We need to go deeper there to coordinate and create the broadest possible access.
Q3: FDA Approval vs. Broad Insurance Reimbursement
Given that FDA approval hinges on safety/efficacy while insurance coverage is driven by cost-effectiveness/clinical guidelines, how do we address the potential disconnect between FDA approval and broad insurance reimbursement?
Lia Mix: A wonderful question. The safety component is also very important for insurance coverage. Insurers can keep an FDA-approved treatment on “experimental” status indefinitely. That’s why our HOPE project tackles this by making the economic case and by contributing a comprehensive review of efficacy and safety data to the public domain. This builds on previous work by organizations like ICER. We need to work hard, even after FDA approval, to ensure that the stamp of approval on safety translates to decision-makers in insurance companies and CMS. It’s not a done deal; much groundwork is needed now.
Q4: Insurance Comparators for Psychedelic-Assisted Therapies
When talking to insurance decision-makers, which expensive treatments paid for by insurance today feel most similar to how psychedelic-assisted therapies (PAT) might be paid for? Outpatient surgery, residential SUD treatment, or something else?
Lia Mix: Psychedelic therapies are broad, so it’s a big question. We advocate for the field itself to develop standards to present to insurers. Comparators could include Applied Behavior Analysis (outpatient, involves a technician) or medication-assisted treatments like Suboxone. The drug-therapy combination in behavioral health is somewhat unprecedented, so we must work diligently to make it coherent for insurers, coordinating the behavioral healthcare side (therapy approval) and the pharma side (medication approval).
The ideal scenario is the lowest level of care that is also safe and effective. For MDMA or psilocybin, this might be a therapist’s office. For ibogaine, with its medical concerns, it would likely require a facility with more medical oversight. The field still needs to answer and agree upon many questions to inform the system for infrastructure and payment. We welcome continued dialogue on these intelligent questions.
Q5: Ibogaine Quality of Care, FDA/Insurance & Holistic Frameworks
As ibogaine is discussed in medical/regulatory contexts, I’m concerned FDA approval tied to insurance reimbursement might reduce the quality of care, especially around critical adjunct therapies, given ibogaine isn’t a plug-and-play pharmaceutical. How can FDA/insurance models accommodate the necessary holistic framework (preparation, integration, aftercare)?
Lia Mix: An awesome question, and a major focus of my work. Firstly, the FDA does not regulate therapy; they might issue some REMS related to the drug. Like other medical fields, it’s up to practitioners to develop standards of care and clinical practice guidelines. These articulate to the system (including payers) what the standard is. This involves creating structures the system recognizes, like professional associations (e.g., Psychedelic Medicine Association) and certification boards (e.g., BPMT).
If the field had shown up at the FDA committee meeting with established certification boards and professional associations, demonstrating self-regulation and consumer protections, it might have influenced the outcome. This is the maturing the field needs. When the field makes these decisions, translates research into real-world practice, defines required services and CPT codes, then we can determine necessary reimbursement. There is a way to do this; it has been done by other specialties. We share your concern and are working to bridge the gap between the psychedelic ecosystem and incumbent systems for optimal patient care outcomes.
Q6: Engagement of National Social Work Organizations in Guidelines
Have national organizations like the NASW (National Association of Social Workers) been engaged in developing guidelines or standards?
Lia Mix: That’s a great question. I’d direct it to the Psychedelic Medicine Association, BrainFutures, and BPMT. As far as I understand, there have been conversations. The most significant work on clinical guidelines has been done by BrainFutures and the former American Psychedelic Practitioners Association (APPA). Those guidelines are available.
Q7: Talking to Skeptics & Addressing Preconceptions
Many here are advocates. When talking to skeptics outside the psychedelic ecosystem—decision-makers—what preconceptions or common concerns do you encounter, and how do you respond or suggest we respond when outside our “bubble”?
Lia Mix: It’s vital to recognize that in the US, anyone over 40 was likely indoctrinated with fear-based education around psychedelics. This is often the default. If this isn’t undone and replaced with fact-based, science-based education, you’ll hit problems in decision-making. We saw this fear operating in the recent FDA decision.
When I came from commercial health insurance, my knowledge was “hippies in tie-dye.” It’s hard for those within the psychedelic ecosystem to grasp how much of a bubble we’re in. It’s crucial to reach people outside this bubble based on their motivations: science, mental health treatment, and finances.
When I worked in commercial insurance, I explained the legal, moral, and financial trifecta to large companies for covering new treatments. Most decision-makers, even if not personally impacted, will make good decisions if given the right information in the right way and timeframe. We use a theory of change called motivational interviewing (Prochaska & DiClemente’s stages of change: pre-contemplation, contemplation, preparation, action, maintenance). We orient our information for those in the first three stages—those not yet thinking about it, or just starting to. This is how we develop information for decision-makers, even those without a personal investment in psychedelics.
