AccAnalysisAccAnalysis
Healthcare & Social Care

Shifts, volunteers and patients on one schedule that bills correctly

A care provider was coordinating support teams, volunteers and patients across on-site and off-site care by hand, then translating that into a government funding claim. We delivered AI-supported scheduling with activity tracking and compliant billing exports.

At a glance
Status
Delivered
Region
Japan
Engagement model
Dedicated team

Status: Delivered. Described from our own delivery records. Client identity, brand and commercial terms are withheld. Figures, where given, cover the period stated and nothing beyond it.

The organisation

Context

A healthcare provider delivering care both on its own premises and in the community. Its workforce mixes employed support staff and volunteers, with different availability rules, qualifications and constraints.

Its funding comes through a government scheme that requires activity to be evidenced in a specific format.

The brief

The problem

  • Shifts had to reconcile staff availability, volunteer availability, qualification requirements and patient need — a combination too complex to hold in a spreadsheet.
  • On-site and off-site care were scheduled differently but had to appear as one picture.
  • Activity was recorded separately from the schedule, so the two disagreed.
  • Preparing the funding submission meant reconstructing what happened from several sources.
  • A scheduling error was not just an inconvenience; it could mean a care visit not happening.
The work

What we built

An AI-supported scheduling and shift-management system

Proposing assignments against availability, qualification and location constraints, with a human making the final decision.

Full activity tracking

Tied to the schedule, so what was planned and what happened are the same record rather than two.

Compliant billing exports

In the format the national funding system expects, generated from the activity record rather than assembled by hand.

Method

How we delivered it

  1. 1

    Map the constraint set

    Who can do what, where, when, and under which rules.

  2. 2

    Foundation

    Data model for staff, volunteers, patients, sites and activities.

  3. 3

    Scheduling core, then the assistive layer

    With proposals always reviewable before they take effect.

  4. 4

    Activity tracking

    Wired so completion updates the schedule rather than a parallel log.

  5. 5

    Billing export

    Validated against real submissions before go-live.

  6. 6

    Pilot on one team

    Through a full funding period.

Sequence

How it was phased

PhaseDurationWhat happens
1Discovery
2–3 wks

Constraint set, funding requirements, care patterns

2Foundation
2–3 wks

Data model, environments, access control

3Scheduling & assignment
4–6 wks

Rosters, constraints, assistive suggestions

4Activity tracking
3–4 wks

On-site and off-site capture tied to the schedule

5Billing export
2–3 wks

Format compliance, validation against real submissions

6Pilot period
3–4 wks

One team through a full funding cycle

Indicative phasing for work of this shape. Actual duration varies with data quality, access and decision speed.

Hand-over

What the client keeps

  • The production system
  • The constraint and qualification model
  • The billing export specification and its validation cases
  • Source in their own repository
  • Operational runbooks
Stack
PythonScheduling optimisationWeb applicationPostgreSQLCloud hosting
Keep reading

Related

Related case studies

Tell us what your current system can't do, and we'll tell you what it would take to change that.