Proposed participation
One residential aged-care team examines one non-urgent reporting workflow. Start with a scope conversation, baseline and synthetic demonstration. Participation does not imply endorsement, procurement or a national pilot.
Provider commitments to agree
Sponsor; frontline lead/deputy; protected staff time; workflow access; approved baseline collection; finance reviewer; oversight; fallback and stop authority. Identify capacity before dates are promised.
Information handling
Keep resident and confidential operational records within the provider’s authorised environment. Agree legal roles, purpose, access, retention, incident response and approved aggregate publication before operational testing. No uploading care records to the movement website or visitor assistant.
Evaluation and publication
Agree measures before testing, reviewer independence, publication rights, handling of negative findings and permissions for names/logos. Do not publish recognisable information or small-group summaries that could identify people.
Costs and interests
Cost software, integration, backfill, training, support and evaluation. Record donated work. The convenor has interests in the named software portfolio. Compare alternatives and document procurement/conflict arrangements independently.
Scope decision record
Provider: ____ Sponsor: ____ Workflow: ____ Capacity: ____
Required approvals: ____ Budget and funding restrictions: ____
Approved start: ____ Stop authority: ____ Publication permissions: ____
Use Help joining & contributing to offer a setting. This pack is a scoping aid; any binding arrangement needs a separate agreement.