The shift gets logged. The report writes itself from the logs.
Staff record what actually happened on shift. At the end of the week ELSA drafts the report from those records and cites every line back to them. A week nobody logged is refused rather than written plausibly. That is the whole point: a report nobody can trace is worth nothing to an inspector.
What this replaces today
- Somebody senior spending Friday afternoon reading back through a week of handover notes, trying to remember what happened on Tuesday.
- A weekly report written from memory, in a hurry, that reads well and cannot be substantiated if anyone asks where a particular sentence came from.
- Statutory records living in a different place from the daily notes: a Regulation 44 visit in a folder, a missing episode in an email, a keywork session in somebody's notebook.
- Sending a commissioner a document as an email attachment and losing all control of it the moment you press send.
How it works
Staff log the shift
A daily log records when something happened, not just when it was typed, so a note written eight hours after the event is visible as exactly that. The raw text a worker dictated is kept permanently beside the version that was accepted, so nothing is quietly rewritten.
ELSA drafts from the logs, and only the logs
The gathering is done by code, not by the model: the week's logs are collected, the model is asked to narrate them, and any sentence citing a log it was never shown is dropped before you ever see it. With no logs at all the model is not called: the request is refused.
A human signs it off
The first draft is frozen and kept beside the version you edit, so the difference between what ELSA wrote and what your manager approved is always visible. Target scores arrive as proposals and stay proposals until somebody accepts them.
What you get
22 record types, and the right ones per home
Incidents, risk assessments, safety plans, keywork sessions, missing episodes, body maps, health assessments, placement plans, complaints, independent living skills. A children's home also gets Regulation 44 visits, Regulation 45 reviews, LAC reviews and personal education plans. A supported living scheme is never offered those, because they are children's home statute and offering them would be wrong.
Ofsted and CQC are not the same thing, and ELSA knows it
A children's home is regulated by Ofsted under the Children's Homes (England) Regulations 2015; 16+ supported living sits with CQC. You tell ELSA which a unit is, and that decides the records, the language and the reporting cycle. A children's home records an Ofsted URN, not a CQC location ID.
Monthly reports built from signed-off weeks
The monthly report draws on the month's approved weekly reports, not on ninety raw log entries. Drafts and reports still in review are excluded on purpose: a month built on unreviewed material would launder an unchecked claim into a commissioner's document. Where a week is missing, the report says which.
A restraint register that needs no extra data entry
Physical intervention is a field on the incident record, so the register is a view over records you already keep: the last twelve weeks against the twelve before it. Nobody maintains a second spreadsheet.
Admitting somebody creates the record and the placement together
There is no separate profile to fill in afterwards and no way to end up with a person who exists in one place and not the other. Occupancy is worked out from the placements rather than being a number somebody remembers to update.
Share with a placing authority without losing control
A share link carries a mandatory expiry, capped at ninety days, and an optional PIN. Repeated failed attempts revoke it automatically. Expired, revoked and never-existed all look identical from outside, so a stranger with a guessed link learns nothing, while you can see exactly what happened in the access log.
What stops it going wrong
A week with no evidence is refused, not invented
Zero logs returns an explicit refusal and the model is never called. This is the single most important line in the feature: an AI that writes a plausible week from nothing is worse than no AI at all, because somebody will sign it.
Coverage is stated out loud
The report says "five of seven days logged" rather than writing smoothly around the gap. If your recording was thin that week, the document says so, which is also the fastest way to find out that it was.
Other people in the home are redacted
When a report is shared externally, the names of other residents are removed consistently. A report about one young person should not tell a placing authority who else lives there.
Attachments never reach the search index
A document attached to a record is never embedded, never indexed and never retrievable by the chat assistant or the bid writer. Downloads stream through the same permission check every time rather than behind a link that would outlive it.
Who it is for
Every paid plan
Built for children's homes and 16+ supported living schemes: the services where a week of shift records has to become a document somebody else will read and rely on.
If you deliver domiciliary or residential adult care, the equivalent is Care Plans with Visits and Reporting, which follows the same evidence rules in adult CQC language.