Hollowmere Care Group / BB-Demo – Discovery
Callcompleted
Hollowmere Care Group: documents · 2026-02-03 13:45
Discovery call with Hollowmere's Head of Data and its CFO. Natasha wants an evidence trail per home for commissioners. Graham set conditions early: a break clause, no payment ahead of a milestone, quarterly billing. Proposal figure is £150,500.
What was said
What this says
Current to 11 Oct 26Discovery call with Hollowmere's Head of Data and its CFO. Natasha wants an evidence trail per home for commissioners. Graham set conditions early: a break clause, no payment ahead of a milestone, quarterly billing. Proposal figure is £150,500.
What happened: Matteo Ricci ran discovery on 3 Feb 2026 with Natasha Pryor and Graham Rowntree. Expected close was stated as 27 Mar 2026.
Customer view: Natasha wants commissioner and regulator questions answered per home without a week of manual pulling. She wants to start with a handful of homes and widen later.
Commercial: Matteo quoted £150,500 on the proposal as the package total with implementation inside it, not an annual price. Graham said he would not sign without a break clause conversation and would not pay ahead of a milestone.
Watch: Natasha needs security answers for her board's risk committee, and Enterprise was named as the level in view. The evidence does not show a timeline for the security review or any answer on the break clause.
Themes
Current to 9 Oct 26Theme
Evidence trail per home
Importance
neutral
Sentiment
mixed
Voice
decision-maker
Who was there
BB-Demo
CRMmade from
Them
CRMmade from
Follow-up
Next steps
Current to 9 Oct 26- Natasha to send a rough list of homes and systems that week.
- Matteo to send the proposal split into implementation and subscription, a per-home view and the quarterly billing option.
- Matteo to reply in writing on the break clause and the security review process.
Risks
Current to 9 Oct 26- Graham will not sign without a break clause conversation and will not pay ahead of a milestone.
- The £150,500 proposal figure includes implementation and may be misread as an annual price until the split is sent.
- Security review feeds a board risk committee, and no timeline was committed.
Opportunities
Current to 9 Oct 26- Enterprise tier fits a regulated buyer needing an audit trail of who asked what.
- Starting with a few high-pressure homes gives a phased route to wider rollout.
Transcript
Matteo Ricci NoneGood afternoon, Natasha, good afternoon, Graham. Thank you both for making the time. Can you hear me properly?
Natasha Pryor NoneYes, all fine here. Graham, you're muted, I think.
Graham Rowntree NoneApologies. Yes. Good afternoon. Before we start, can you tell me the cost and the term? I'd rather have the shape of it in my head first.- Matteo Ricci NoneOf course, and I would rather you heard it from me early. Let me restate the timeline first, because it frames the rest. We're hoping to reach a decision by 27 Mar 2026, which is the date I have as the expected close. Today is discovery, so it's about understanding what you need. The figure on the proposal so far is £150,500. That is the total for the package as currently scoped, with implementation inside it, so please don't read it as an annual price. I'll confirm the split in writing.
- Graham Rowntree NoneUnderstood. So we don't have a per home, per month number yet.
- Matteo Ricci NoneNot yet, no. I can build that view once we know how many homes are in scope and which systems you'd connect. Natasha, perhaps you could tell us what you're trying to solve, and we'll come back to the numbers.
- Natasha Pryor NoneYes. So the problem I want solved this month is simple. Our commissioners and the regulator ask us questions about individual homes, and right now answering them means pulling from family contact logs, the incident system and the finance system, by hand, home by home. I've done this before, at my last organisation, and I know it can be done properly.
- Matteo Ricci NoneThank you. And that previous experience is useful to know. When a commissioner asks a question, what does it typically look like? Can you give me a recent example, without naming anyone?
- Natasha Pryor NoneYes. A commissioner asked about a home where there had been a run of incidents and a complaint from a family, and wanted to know whether the fee invoice had been affected and what contact we'd had. It took the team most of a week to assemble. What's the evidence trail? That's what they want, and we couldn't give it quickly.
- Graham Rowntree NoneAnd in finance terms, what that means is fee income per home is hard to tie to what happened in that home. If there's a dispute, I can't see it until it's too late.
- Matteo Ricci NoneThat's very clear. So three sources: family and commissioner contact, incidents, and the fee invoices per home. Are those in three separate systems today?
- Natasha Pryor NoneBroadly, yes. Contact is in the case system, incidents in a separate log, and invoicing is in the accounting system. Plus a lot of spreadsheets that people keep because they don't trust the other three.
- Matteo Ricci NoneThat's very common. Just so I'm precise: the brain would sit inside your own Snowflake account, and connect to those systems. Do you already have Snowflake, or would that be new?
- Natasha Pryor NoneWe have it, in a small way. My team set it up for performance reporting. It's not huge, but it's there.
- Matteo Ricci NoneGood, that makes this a shorter conversation. And because you are a regulated buyer, what does your regulator need to see about where the data lives and who can access it?
- Natasha Pryor NoneMostly that it stays within our control and that there's an audit trail of who asked what. I'll need to take your security answers to our board's risk committee. I won't oversell it to them, I'll tell them what we've seen.
- Matteo Ricci NoneThat is exactly the right approach. At the level you're looking at, the Enterprise tier, there is a security review, and we support that process as part of the implementation. I would not want to commit to a timeline for it today, because it depends on your questions. Let me confirm that in writing.
- Graham Rowntree NoneI'll say now that I won't sign anything without a conversation about a break clause. And I wouldn't pay ahead of a milestone. Quarterly billing suits us, that's how our cash cycle runs.
- Matteo Ricci NoneNoted, thank you, Graham, and I'm glad you said it now rather than later. Quarterly billing is something we can offer on request. The break clause and the milestone question I will take away and come back to you on in writing. I'm not going to improvise an answer on a call.
- Graham Rowntree NoneFine. What does that do to the margin, in the first year? That's what I'll be asked.
- Matteo Ricci NoneI understand. If I give you the proposal broken into implementation and subscription, and a view by home, you'll be able to answer that. I'll send it with the timeline.
- Natasha Pryor NoneCan I add something on scope? Let's start with the homes that shout loudest. I don't want to connect everything on day one. A handful of homes where we have the most commissioner pressure, prove it works, then widen.
- Matteo Ricci NoneThat's sensible, and it helps me with the plan. I'd want to understand which homes, and which of the three systems matter most for those. Could you send me a short list of the homes and the systems, even roughly?
- Natasha Pryor NoneYes, I can get that to you this week. I'll keep it rough, and we can tighten it.
- Matteo Ricci NoneWonderful. So to summarise: Natasha sends the homes and systems list this week. I send a breakdown of the proposal, with implementation and subscription separated, a view per home, and the quarterly billing option. I also come back on the break clause and the security review process, in writing. And we are aiming at 27 Mar 2026. Have I missed anything?
- Graham Rowntree NoneNo. That covers it. Graham Rowntree, CFO, thanks.
- Natasha Pryor NoneNothing from me. Thanks, Matteo.
- Matteo Ricci NoneThank you both. Best regards, Matteo. Have a good afternoon.
Callsmade from