A Software Engineer at UF Health plays a pivotal role in bridging the gap between advanced technology and life-saving healthcare services. In this position, you are not just writing code; you are building, maintaining, and optimizing the digital infrastructure that supports clinical workflows, patient care, and cutting-edge medical research. The systems you develop and support directly impact doctors, nurses, researchers, and patients, making data accessibility and system reliability a matter of critical importance. The work environment is highly collaborative and mission-driven, spanning various departments within one of the Southeast's premier academic health centers. You will contribute to a diverse ecosystem of applications, ranging from patient-facing portals and clinical research databases to complex integrations with Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems. This requires a unique blend of technical expertise, regulatory awareness, and a passion for solving problems that have a tangible, positive impact on human lives. Working at UF Health offers the intellectual challenge of navigating complex, large-scale enterprise systems while operating under strict security and compliance standards like HIPAA. As a, you will collaborate closely with clinical staff, IT administrators, and peer developers to deliver secure, scalable, and highly available software solutions.
Phone Screen
reportedInitial phone screen that is highly conversational.
What to demonstrate
- Initial phone screen that is highly conversational
- Depth in Interview Communication (Active Listening)
How to prepare
- Be able to walk your CV end to end in two minutes, and say why this company specifically.
- Have your salary expectations, notice period and location constraints ready, and ask for the rest of the loop in writing.
In-Person Panel Interview
reportedIn-depth evaluations with the engineering lead and team members.
What to demonstrate
- In-depth evaluations with the engineering lead and team members
- Depth in Interview Communication (Active Listening)
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you approach database design and optimization when dealing with large datasets?
- Answer aloud and timed: What experience do you have with API integration, and how do you ensure secure data transmission?
Peer Reviews
reportedOpportunity for team members to assess team chemistry and culture.
What to demonstrate
- Opportunity for team members to assess team chemistry and culture
- Depth in Interview Communication (Active Listening)
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: Describe a time when you had to explain a complex technical concept to a non-technical colleague, such as a clinician or administrator.
- Answer aloud and timed: Tell me about a successful project you completed as part of a development team, and what your specific contribution was.
Online Technical Assessment
reportedTechnical evaluation conducted online to assess software knowledge.
What to demonstrate
- Technical evaluation conducted online to assess software knowledge
- Depth in Interview Communication (Active Listening)
How to prepare
- Answer aloud and timed: How do you handle a situation where a peer disagrees with your technical approach or code architecture?
- Answer aloud and timed: Can you share an experience where you had to manage multiple competing priorities under a tight deadline?
PracHub editorial advice for the preparation topics above.
Prepare for conversational interviews
Since some rounds can be highly conversational, practice structuring your answers using the STAR method (Situation, Task, Action, Result) to keep your responses concise, focused, and impactful.
Highlight healthcare interest
Even if you do not have prior healthcare experience, demonstrate an understanding of the unique challenges in healthcare IT, such as data security, compliance, and the importance of system reliability.
Ask thoughtful questions
Use the opportunity at the end of each interview to ask insightful questions about the team's current projects, their technology stack, and how they measure success for this role.
Be patient and professional
Healthcare environments can be busy, and interviewers may occasionally face unexpected clinical or operational demands. Remain patient, adaptable, and professional if scheduling changes or interruptions occur.
Choose a category, try a prompt, then open its approach, worked solution or follow-up when you need it.
Diff a projection against the primary without per-row point reads
The listing projection has drifted and some rows show a stale version. The primary holds 40,000,000 resource rows across 12,000 tenants while serving 1,200 writes and 14,000 reads per second. The obvious repair, reading each resource row and comparing its version against the projection, is correct and would eventually finish. Explain precisely why it is unacceptable here, then give a diff that finds the differing rows, state its complexity, and make it safe to run against a live primary. Replication lag is usually under 100 ms and is not bounded.
Approach
- Quantify the naive cost rather than calling it slow: 40,000,000 point reads at even 0.5 ms each is over five hours serialised, and the only lever is concurrency, which is exactly what you cannot spend. The primary's pool is sized for the write path, and 40,000,000 random reads evict the buffer cache that sustains the 85 percent cache hit rate, so the audit degrades the system it is auditing.
- Replace random access with one ordered pass per side. Both sides can be read in (tenant_id, resource_id) order, which is a sequential scan on each and a merge join in O(n) time and O(1) memory. For a dense diff that is the whole answer, and it reads the primary once instead of 40,000,000 times.
- For the expected sparse case, compare range hashes instead of rows: partition the key space, compute per range an order-independent aggregate over hash(resource_id, version), compare aggregates, and descend only into ranges that differ. With d differing rows and branching factor B, at most d ranges mismatch per level, so the drill-down examines O(d log_B(n/d)) ranges and reads full rows only in mismatching leaves.
- Aggregate with a sum modulo 2^64 or a multiset hash, never XOR. XOR is order-independent but self-cancelling, so two rows wrong in the same way, or a row duplicated on one side, leave the range aggregate matching and the range is declared clean.
Follow-up
- The diff reports 900 stale rows. How do you decide between patching those rows and rebuilding the projection from resource_revision?
- Same job, but the projection lives in a search index that cannot be scanned in key order. What changes?
Merge partitioned event streams into one ordered feed with bounded lateness
The read-model service consumes 64 log partitions carrying about 4,000 events per second in total. Each partition is ordered within itself, but partitions drift by up to 30 seconds, and the activity feed must present a tenant's events in occurred_at order. Produce the merge. State its complexity, the buffer it requires in events and in bytes, what happens when one partition is idle, and what you do with an event that arrives after you have already emitted its position. Payloads average 1 KB.
Approach
- Merge with a min-heap over the 64 partition heads keyed on (occurred_at, event_id): O(log P) per event and O(n log P) overall. The tie-break on event_id is what makes the output deterministic when two partitions carry the same millisecond, which matters because the feed is paginated and a non-deterministic order reorders pages under the reader.
- Emitting the heap head is only correct once every partition has produced everything up to that timestamp, so the emit condition is a watermark: the minimum across partitions of the highest occurred_at seen, less the allowed lateness. Events are held until the watermark passes them, which is what turns individually ordered streams into a jointly ordered one.
- Size the buffer from the lateness rather than guessing: 4,000 events per second times 30 seconds is 120,000 buffered events, and at 1 KB each about 120 MB of heap. That number is the real price of the ordering guarantee and belongs in front of whoever asked for it.
- Handle the idle partition explicitly, because it fails the feed rather than corrupting it: a partition with no traffic never advances its own maximum, so the watermark freezes and output stops entirely. Either every partition emits a periodic idle marker carrying the broker's current time, or the watermark falls back to wall clock for a partition silent beyond a threshold.
Follow-up
- The lateness budget is raised to five minutes. What is the new buffer, and what besides memory changes?
- The consumer restarts. Where does it resume from, and what does the feed look like for the first 30 seconds?
Track a rolling failure rate per destination for circuit decisions
The egress service delivers about 1,500 webhooks per second across roughly 40,000 destinations, each call bounded by a 10 second timeout. Maintain, per destination, the failure rate over the trailing 60 seconds so a caller can ask before dispatch whether the circuit should open. Attempts arrive as (destination_id, finished_at_ms, outcome). Requirement: amortised O(1) per attempt, with total memory bounded by the destination count rather than by traffic. Give the structure, its exact memory, and the rule that stops a destination with three attempts from opening a circuit.
Approach
- Name the exact-deque version and then reject it as the default. Holding timestamps and advancing a tail pointer past anything older than now minus 60 seconds is a correct two-pointer window at amortised O(1) per attempt, but its memory tracks in-window traffic, so one destination in a retry storm holds hundreds of thousands of entries while thousands of quiet destinations hold none.
- Use a ring of 60 one-second buckets per destination, each bucket a pair of counters for attempts and failures. On an attempt, advance the ring by the elapsed whole seconds, zeroing at most min(elapsed, 60) buckets, then increment the head. That is amortised O(1) with a fixed footprint per destination.
- State the footprint: 60 buckets times two 4-byte counters is 480 bytes of payload per destination, so 40,000 destinations is roughly 20 to 25 MB with per-entry overhead, bounded by the catalogue rather than by the rate. The cost is granularity, since the oldest bucket ages out in whole seconds, which is far tighter than the decision needs.
- Require a minimum sample before the circuit may open. A destination with three attempts and three failures reads as 100 percent and is not evidence; a floor of roughly 20 attempts in the window makes the ratio meaningful, and below that floor use a run of consecutive failures as the trigger instead.
Follow-up
- The fleet is 30 instances and each sees roughly a thirtieth of a destination's traffic. Where does the rate actually live, and what does a per-instance answer get wrong?
- A destination answers in 9.5 seconds and succeeds. It is not failing but it is consuming your per-destination concurrency. What signal should open the circuit here?
Explain why the owner filter ignores the listing index
The only index on resource is (tenant_id, status, updated_at DESC, resource_id DESC). A new endpoint returns one user's resources across all statuses, newest created first: WHERE tenant_id = $1 AND owner_user_id = $2 ORDER BY created_at DESC LIMIT 20. On a tenant with 2M rows it takes 900 ms and EXPLAIN shows a sort above a large scan. Explain precisely why the existing index cannot serve it, give the index that can, and state which of these the new index still will not help: owner_user_id alone across tenants; the same query ordered by updated_at. PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Separate the two jobs an index does. For filtering, a composite btree is seekable only on a left prefix, so with no predicate on status the scan can at best range over tenant_id and test owner_user_id per row; PostgreSQL 16 has no btree skip scan to jump the unconstrained column.
- For ordering, the index is sorted by (status, updated_at) within a tenant and not by created_at, so the LIMIT cannot stop early: every matching row is read and then sorted. That is the 'Sort Method: top-N heapsort' line, and it is why the plan reads 2M rows to answer with 20.
- Derive the replacement from the access path — equality, equality, then the ordering column: CREATE INDEX CONCURRENTLY ON resource (tenant_id, owner_user_id, created_at DESC). The scan seeks to the (tenant, owner) range and walks 20 entries in order, so the Sort node disappears along with the row-read.
- Treat INCLUDE (title, status) as conditional, not free. An index-only scan still visits the heap for any row whose page is not marked all-visible, so on a table taking 1.2k writes/second the win depends on autovacuum keeping the visibility map current, and the wider index costs more on every insert.
Follow-up
- 90% of rows are status='active'. Would a partial index WHERE status = 'active' change your answer, and for which of the three queries?
- A dashboard runs this for 40 owners in one page load. What changes about the design?
Find version gaps and relay lag with window functions
outbox_event holds event_id, aggregate_type, aggregate_id, aggregate_version, event_type, payload, status ('pending','published','dead'), attempts, created_at, published_at. A projection is missing rows and you must decide whether the relay skipped events or the consumer dropped them. Write three queries over the last seven days: one listing every aggregate_id whose published aggregate_version sequence has a hole, one giving per-day counts with a running total, and one returning the newest published event per aggregate. For each, say where the window function is evaluated relative to WHERE and LIMIT. PostgreSQL 16.
Approach
- Gaps: compute lead(aggregate_version) OVER (PARTITION BY aggregate_id ORDER BY aggregate_version) in a subquery, then filter next_version <> aggregate_version + 1 in the outer query. Window functions are evaluated after WHERE, GROUP BY and HAVING and before the outer ORDER BY and LIMIT, so the predicate cannot sit in the same WHERE clause and PostgreSQL 16 has no QUALIFY.
- Say what the seven-day filter does to the answer: it truncates every partition, so the first row per aggregate has no predecessor inside the window and a hole spanning the boundary is invisible. Widen the window, or join to resource.version as the authority for the true maximum.
- Running total: SELECT date_trunc('day', created_at) AS d, count() AS n, sum(count()) OVER (ORDER BY date_trunc('day', created_at) ROWS UNBOUNDED PRECEDING). An aggregate inside a window call is legal because grouping runs before windowing. The grouping key is unique per row here so ROWS and RANGE agree, but write the frame anyway — over ungrouped rows with tied timestamps the default RANGE frame pulls in every peer row and the total jumps.
- Newest per aggregate: DISTINCT ON (aggregate_id) ... ORDER BY aggregate_id, aggregate_version DESC is the cheap PostgreSQL-only form when an index matches that order; row_number() OVER (PARTITION BY aggregate_id ORDER BY aggregate_version DESC) = 1 is the portable form and needs a subquery for the same evaluation-order reason as the gap query.
Follow-up
- Relay failover redelivers events. Does a duplicate break the gap query, and how would you detect one from this table alone?
- Turn the gap check into a continuous monitor rather than a query someone runs after an incident. What does it watch?
What specific software applications and programming languages do you have the most experience with?
What specific software applications and programming languages do you have the most experience with?
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
How do you approach database design and optimization when dealing with large datasets?
How do you approach database design and optimization when dealing with large datasets?
Approach
- Fix the scope first: who calls this, how often, and what they do when it fails.
- Name the read and write paths separately; they rarely have the same bottleneck.
- Choose a partition key and say what query it makes expensive.
- State the consistency you need, and where you are willing to be stale.
Follow-up
- What breaks first when traffic grows ten times?
- How does this behave when that dependency is down for an hour?
What experience do you have with API integration, and how do you ensure secure data transmission?
What experience do you have with API integration, and how do you ensure secure data transmission?
Approach
- Say who the caller is and what they do when the call fails halfway.
- Define the identity of a request so a retry cannot double-apply it.
- Separate accepted, pending, failed and confirmed; they are different facts.
- Design the error taxonomy before the success shape; callers branch on it.
Follow-up
- What happens if the caller retries after a timeout?
- How does a client discover it is on an old version of this contract?
How do you ensure your code is secure and compliant with data privacy standards?
How do you ensure your code is secure and compliant with data privacy standards?
Approach
- Clarify what is being asked and what a complete answer contains.
- State your assumptions explicitly before working the problem.
- Say what you would check first and why it is the highest-information step.
- Work from the requirement backwards to the design.
Follow-up
- What assumption would you test first?
- How would you know your answer was wrong?
Walk me through your troubleshooting process when a critical production system goes down.
Walk me through your troubleshooting process when a critical production system goes down.
Approach
- Establish what changed and when, before forming any theory.
- Pick a bisection that eliminates candidates whichever way it turns out.
- Check the instrumentation before believing the symptom.
- Separate the trigger from the cause; the deploy is rarely the bug.
Follow-up
- What would you look at first, and what would it rule out?
- How would you tell a cause from a coincidence here?
Built from the rounds and topics Uf Health candidates report.
Prepare, practise & reflect
One practical outcome each day. Spend longer where you need it.
0 / 7 done01Map the Uf Health loop
- Write out the reported sequence: Phone Screen, In-Person Panel Interview, Peer Reviews, Online Technical Assessment.
- For each round, write one sentence on what it is judging, from the description above, and mark the one you are least ready for.
Deliverable: A one-page map of the 4 reported rounds, with the weakest marked.
02Work Interview Communication (Active Listening)
- Spend the session on Interview Communication (Active Listening), which Uf Health candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Interview Communication (Active Listening) and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Interview Communication (Active Listening).
03Work Interview Question Responsiveness
- Spend the session on Interview Question Responsiveness, which Uf Health candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Interview Question Responsiveness and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Interview Question Responsiveness.
04Work Professionalism in Interviews
- Spend the session on Professionalism in Interviews, which Uf Health candidates report being tested on.
- Write one worked example in Professionalism in Interviews and time yourself on it.
Deliverable: One timed worked example in Professionalism in Interviews.
05Answer out loud: Technical & Software Familiarity
- Answer aloud, timed: What specific software applications and programming languages do you have the most experience with?
- Answer aloud, timed: Can you describe a time when you had to learn a new development tool or framework on the job?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Technical & Software Familiarity question(s), under time.
06Answer out loud: Behavioral & Collaboration
- Answer aloud, timed: Describe a time when you had to explain a complex technical concept to a non-technical colleague, such as a clinician or administrator.
- Answer aloud, timed: Tell me about a successful project you completed as part of a development team, and what your specific contribution was.
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Behavioral & Collaboration question(s), under time.
07Answer out loud: Problem-Solving & Adaptability
- Answer aloud, timed: Walk me through your troubleshooting process when a critical production system goes down.
- Answer aloud, timed: How do you ensure your code is secure and compliant with data privacy standards?
Deliverable: Spoken answers to 2 reported Problem-Solving & Adaptability question(s), under time.
Expand any day for tasks and deliverables. Your progress is saved on this device.
Behavioural rounds judge the decision you made and what it cost.
Can you describe a time when you had to learn a new development tool or framework on the job?
Can you describe a time when you had to learn a new development tool or framework on the job?
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
Describe a time when you had to explain a complex technical concept to a non-technical colleague, such as a cl
Describe a time when you had to explain a complex technical concept to a non-technical colleague, such as a clinician or administrator.
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
Tell me about a successful project you completed as part of a development team, and what your specific contrib
Tell me about a successful project you completed as part of a development team, and what your specific contribution was.
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
How do you handle a situation where a peer disagrees with your technical approach or code architecture?
How do you handle a situation where a peer disagrees with your technical approach or code architecture?
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
Can you share an experience where you had to manage multiple competing priorities under a tight deadline?
Can you share an experience where you had to manage multiple competing priorities under a tight deadline?
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
Describe a time when project requirements changed midway through development, and how you adapted.
Describe a time when project requirements changed midway through development, and how you adapted.
Approach
- Pick a story where you made the decision, not one where you watched it.
- State the situation in two sentences and spend the rest on the reasoning.
- Give the blast radius: what could have broken, and what you measured.
- Name the disagreement and how you resolved it with evidence.
Follow-up
- What would you do differently if you ran that again?
- How did you know your change caused the improvement?
- 01
Can you describe a time when you had to learn a new development tool or framework on the job?
- 02
Describe a time when you had to explain a complex technical concept to a non-technical colleague, such as a clinician or administrator.
- 03
Tell me about a successful project you completed as part of a development team, and what your specific contribution was.
- 04
How do you handle a situation where a peer disagrees with your technical approach or code architecture?
How technical is the initial phone screen?
The initial call is often highly conversational and focused on your background, overall experience, and general familiarity with specific software. While technical topics will come up, the deeper technical evaluations typically occur in subsequent rounds, such as the panel interview or online assessment.
Uf Health Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What should I expect during the peer interview?
The peer interview is designed to evaluate team fit and collaboration. You will meet with fellow developers who will ask about your day-to-day working style, how you handle code reviews, and your experience with specific development tools. It is also a great opportunity for you to ask them about their daily workflows and team culture.
Uf Health Software Engineer candidate reports ↗How long does the entire hiring process take?
On average, the process takes about three weeks from the initial application to the final decision. However, this timeline can vary depending on scheduling, team availability, and the specific needs of the hiring department.
Uf Health Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Is there a technical coding assessment?
Yes, candidates are typically asked to complete an online assessment after the panel interview stage. This assessment is designed to evaluate your problem-solving abilities, coding skills, and familiarity with software engineering concepts.
Uf Health Software Engineer candidate reports ↗How can I best demonstrate culture fit during the interview?
Show a genuine interest in UF Health's mission of improving patient care and supporting medical research. Emphasize your collaboration skills, your ability to communicate with non-technical stakeholders, and your adaptability in a dynamic, fast-paced environment.
Uf Health Software Engineer candidate reports ↗What topics does Uf Health test in interviews?
Uf Health interviews most often cover Business Analysis, Interview Communication (Active Listening), Program Analysis, Interview Question Responsiveness, and Legacy System Awareness. The exact emphasis depends on the specific role you apply for.
Uf Health Software Engineer candidate reports ↗Sources & methodology 3 sources ↗
No official company page is cited. Rounds and questions come from candidate reports and PracHub editorial material; each source shows the date it was read.
- 01Uf Health Software Engineer candidate reports ↗
Company-reported rounds, questions and FAQ.
Candidate reports · Accessed 2026-09-22 - 02PracHub Software Engineer practice ↗
PracHub practice material, not company-reported.
PracHub page · Accessed 2026-09-22 - 03PracHub preparation framework ↗
PracHub preparation guidance.
PracHub page · Accessed 2026-09-22
Explore related engineering environments and compare the preparation focus.
Cognition Software Engineer Interview Guide
What Cognition asks Software Engineer candidates, from reported rounds and questions.
Vercel Software Engineer Interview Guide
Debugging practice for Vercel software engineer prep built on a reproduction you trust, narrowing to the smallest failing input, and changing one variable per run so the result stays attributable.
Together Ai Software Engineer Interview Guide
Failure-handling practice for Together Ai software engineer candidates: requests whose outcome a timeout leaves unknown, where a retry is safe, and deduplicating at the receiver instead of assuming exactly-once delivery.
Spotify Software Engineer Interview Guide
Timed practice for Spotify software engineer candidates who lose time to the clock: short problems taken end to end, then reviewed against a written rubric rather than a passing test run.