Quarrington Care Network / BB-Demo – Onboarding
Callcompleted
Quarrington Care Network: documents · 2026-05-07 14:45
Onboarding call fixed what the brain may see: referral, CRM, liaison calls and contracts, with patient ticket fields excluded. Trent Nakamura found CRM referral counts above his report, so liaisons see nothing until numbers tie.
What was said
What this says
Current to 11 Oct 26Onboarding call fixed what the brain may see: referral, CRM, liaison calls and contracts, with patient ticket fields excluded. Trent Nakamura found CRM referral counts above his report, so liaisons see nothing until numbers tie.
What happened: Marisol Vega stated the scope and Ollie Pearson agreed it. Patient fields on intake tickets are excluded by allow-list, and referral stages from the admissions system are held back as a change request.
Customer view: Trent said the CRM referral extract does not tie to his report. Danielle Okonkwo accepted that liaisons wait for checked numbers.
Commercial: Hollie Grieve confirmed Growth at forty users and £50k a year, and Danielle agreed. Trent said forty is tight, but Danielle is not committing anything further and said it is not her call alone.
Watch: The reconciliation and Marisol's written review gate the first liaison view.
Themes
Current to 9 Oct 26Theme
Data scope and reconciliation
Importance
neutral
Sentiment
positive
Voice
champion
Who was there
BB-Demo
CRMmade from
Them
CRMmade from
Follow-up
Next steps
Current to 9 Oct 26- Ollie Pearson to send the scope document with the allow-list today and a sample load early next week.
- Trent to send the admissions and helpdesk field lists tomorrow and the reconciliation list by the end of next week.
- Danielle Okonkwo to check contract exhibits by Friday and set up the liaison session for next week.
Risks
Current to 9 Oct 26- The first liaison view waits on Trent Nakamura's reconciliation of CRM and report referral counts.
- Marisol Vega will not sign on the call alone, so connectors stay off until her written review.
- A read-only audit view for Marisol is unconfirmed and could become a sticking point.
Opportunities
Current to 9 Oct 26- Trent says forty users is tight if liaisons, leadership and some patient services staff all join.
- Retiring repeated one-off referral report requests gives a measurable value case.
Transcript
Hollie Grieve NoneHi everyone. Can you hear me alright? I can see Danielle and Trent, so we're just waiting on Marisol and Ollie, I think.
Trent Nakamura NoneHear you fine. Hi Hollie.
Ollie Pearson NoneAfternoon all. Sorry, I'm here. My headset decided to update itself at the worst moment. Can you hear me?
Danielle Okonkwo NoneLoud and clear, Ollie. Hey, everybody. Okay, before we start, quick win from the field. One of our liaisons in Wisconsin sat down with a physician group this week and they've agreed to send us their discharge referrals first. She'd been chasing that for months. So the liaisons are fired up, and that's why I want this to land properly.- Hollie Grieve NoneThat's brilliant, well done to her. Is Marisol on her way, do we know?
Marisol Vega NoneI'm here, I was on mute. Good afternoon. Before we begin, I would like to confirm what data is in scope for this session, because that is what I have been asked to sign off. Is any PHI in scope?- Hollie Grieve NoneThat's exactly the right place to start, and honestly it's the whole point of today. So the plan for the next forty minutes or so is this. Ollie walks through each source we intend to connect, and where it matters, field by field. Marisol, you tell us what stays in and what stays out. Trent, you're the admin, so you're the one living with whatever we agree. Danielle, you're here for the business need. Sound fair?
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneFair. Short version from me. Liaisons need one view per referrer. Referral volumes, the calls with the hospital, what's in the contract. That's it. I don't need anything clinical in there. Nothing.
- Marisol Vega NoneThank you, Danielle. I would like that stated plainly in the record, because it is minimum necessary in practice. Ollie, please go through the sources.
- Ollie Pearson NoneSure. Let me share my screen. Give me a second. Right, can you see the list?
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneYep, I see it.
- Trent Nakamura NoneSame here.
- Ollie Pearson NoneSo, four areas. Referral data first: the referrer, the facility, the dates, the referral source and the status. Then the CRM, so the organisation records, the contacts and the notes the liaisons write. Then call data, which is the recordings and transcripts from the call recorder. And contract data, the agreements with each referring hospital and physician group. Those are the four we scoped at the start.
- Marisol Vega NoneAnd the helpdesk? I saw intake tickets in the draft.
- Ollie Pearson NoneYes, and this is the one I wanted to flag. Patient services use the helpdesk for intake, so the tickets are linked to referrers, which is why they were included. But the tickets can carry patient fields, in the body and in some custom fields.
- Marisol Vega NoneWhich fields, specifically? I need names, not categories.
- Trent Nakamura NoneI pulled the field list this morning. So, bullet points. Patient name. Date of birth. Member ID. The diagnosis note. And there's a free-text box that people paste things into, which I can't vouch for.
- Marisol Vega NoneThe free-text box is the problem. I never accept 'we don't store that' without evidence, and a free-text box is precisely where people store what they were told not to.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneYeah, I've seen what gets pasted in there. Let's not go near it.
- Ollie Pearson NoneAgreed. So my proposal is we exclude the patient fields on intake tickets entirely, including the free-text box, at the connector. Only the ticket metadata comes through: the referrer it's linked to, the category, the status, the dates. The excluded columns are never pulled, so they never reach the index.
- Marisol Vega NoneNever pulled, or pulled and then hidden? Those are different controls, and I will want to know which one I am signing.
- Ollie Pearson NoneNever pulled. The connector works from an allow-list of fields. Anything not on the list isn't requested in the first place. I'll write it down so you can check it, and we can show you a sample load afterwards so you're not just taking my word for it.
- Marisol Vega NonePlease do. I want the allow-list in writing, and I want that document to be the record. Document the control.
- Hollie Grieve NoneSo we'll put it in the scope document. Ollie drafts, I review, and Marisol signs off before the helpdesk connector is switched on. Nothing goes live on that source until she has.
- Marisol Vega NoneThat is acceptable.
- Trent Nakamura NoneCan I ask something on the allow-list? If the helpdesk admin adds a new custom field next month, does it just flow through?
- Ollie Pearson NoneNo, and that's the benefit of an allow-list. A new field isn't on it, so it doesn't come through until somebody adds it deliberately. And adding it would be a change to the scope, which goes through Marisol.
- Marisol Vega NoneWhich is the answer I wanted. Scope creep must be challenged, and that makes it visible. Now, let me ask about the other sources. Does the call data include any recordings of patient calls?
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneNo. These are liaison calls with referrers. Hospital case managers, physician offices. The patient-facing calls aren't in that recorder at all.
- Marisol Vega NoneI believe you, Danielle, but a liaison on a call with a case manager may well mention a patient by name. That is the realistic risk.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneOkay, fair. That does happen. Somebody says a first name, a room number. I can't promise it never does.
- Trent Nakamura NoneWhich is a training point as much as a data point, honestly. We can brief the liaisons.
- Ollie Pearson NoneThere are two things we can do there. One, we only connect the calls from the liaison team, not every recording in the account. Two, the transcripts are searchable but they aren't edited by us, so the control is really the selection of whose calls come in. I'd suggest we scope it to the liaison team's calls and leave it there.
- Marisol Vega NoneThen I would like that written precisely: the calls of the referral relations liaisons only. Not the patient services team, not the wider recorder.
- Hollie Grieve NoneNoted. Ollie, can you capture that in the same document?
- Ollie Pearson NoneYep, adding it now. Liaison calls only.
- Ollie Pearson NoneSorry, bear with me, I'm just typing it up while you talk. Go on, carry on.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneWhile Ollie types. Marisol, I know you won't love this question, but is the contract data okay? Those are agreements with the referring hospitals. It's all business terms.
- Marisol Vega NoneContracts between Quarrington and referring organisations are not my concern, provided they do not attach patient information. Do any of them attach patient lists or case examples?
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneNot that I know of. I'd say a couple of the older ones might have an exhibit with sample cases. I'd have to check.
- Marisol Vega NoneThen that is an open item. Danielle, please check before the contract connector is enabled. If an exhibit contains cases, we exclude the exhibits.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneI need this by Friday, so I'll get my team on it today. I'll have the answer for you well before then.
- Hollie Grieve NoneLovely. And just so we're all clear, that's Danielle's action, with Marisol as the approver.
- Marisol Vega NoneCorrect. Now, so that I have it exactly right, let me state the scope as I understand it, and you will correct me. In scope are referral data, CRM data, call data limited to the liaison team, and contract data subject to the exhibit check. Patient fields on intake tickets are excluded, including the free-text box. Anything outside that list requires a written change to the scope, and it comes to me. Is that accurate?
- Ollie Pearson NoneThat's exactly it. I'll put your wording into the document so it matches.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneWorks for me. Clear and simple.
- Trent Nakamura NoneYep, good for the admin side too. It's the first time anyone has written down what the brain can and can't see here, so that's useful in itself.
- Hollie Grieve NoneGreat. Then I'll say that's the main thing done, and we've got a fair bit of time left, so let's use it. Trent, I think you had something.
- Trent Nakamura NoneI do, and I should have led with it. Okay. When I looked at the referral extract against my own report, it doesn't tie to my numbers. The referral count by hospital for last quarter in the CRM is higher than what my report shows, for a handful of the bigger referrers. Not wildly, but enough that I noticed.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneHigher in the CRM, so the liaisons are logging more than the report counts?
- Trent Nakamura NonePossibly. Or the CRM has duplicates, or my report only counts referrals that reached admission. I don't know yet, and I don't want to guess. Which source wins? That's the question.
- Ollie Pearson NoneThat's a good one to raise now rather than after go-live. The brain doesn't pick a winner on its own. It shows what each source says, and it can tell you where they disagree. But somebody at Quarrington has to decide what a referral is, and which system is the record for it.
- Trent Nakamura NoneRight. So I'll reconcile it. I'll take the quarter, line up the CRM against the admissions report by referrer, and list every mismatch. Then we can see whether it's duplicates, definitions or timing.
- Marisol Vega NoneTrent, one point on that. Is any PHI in scope for the reconciliation extract itself?
- Trent Nakamura NoneNo. It's at referrer level. Counts by hospital or physician group and by month. No patient rows. If I ever need to go down to individual referrals I'll do it inside our own environment and not send it anywhere.
- Marisol Vega NoneThank you. I would like that recorded as well.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneOkay, but let me be the business voice for a second. What's the referral trend? Because that's what the leadership team asks me every single week, and right now it takes the team days to answer, and then we argue about which number is right.
- Hollie Grieve NoneAnd that's precisely the problem we want to take away. Once Trent's reconciliation is done and you've agreed the definition, the liaisons and the leadership team ask the brain and everyone gets the same answer. Until then I'd be careful about quoting anything out of it.
- Trent Nakamura NoneAgreed. I don't want to overstate what the data shows yet. For now I'd treat the CRM as showing activity, and my report as showing referrals that converted. Two different things, and we've been calling them both referrals.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneHuh. Okay. That's actually a useful way to say it. Let's loop in the liaisons on the definition, because they're the ones who log it.
- Hollie Grieve NoneGood idea. Maybe we do a short session with a few of them, and Trent brings the list of mismatches so they can say what really happened on each one.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneYes. Next week, let's do it next week. I'll set it up.
- Ollie Pearson NoneSorry, I've just gone through the scope draft again and I want to check one thing with Trent. On the referral data, which table are the referrals in? Is it the admissions system or the CRM?
- Trent Nakamura NoneBoth, annoyingly. The referral record starts in the CRM when the liaison logs it, then the admissions system holds the later stages. They join on a referral reference. That reference is also what my report is built on.
- Ollie Pearson NoneOkay, that helps. So for the first connection I'd suggest we bring in the CRM side and the admissions side for referrals, and keep the join on that reference. Then your reconciliation and the brain are looking at the same keys.
- Trent Nakamura NoneI like that. It means I'm not rebuilding a second version of it.
- Marisol Vega NoneIs the admissions system a new source? It was not on the original list I reviewed.
- Ollie Pearson NoneGood catch, and no, I shouldn't have said it so casually. It's not in the scope. What's in the scope is the referral data, and that's what I'm describing. If the admissions stage fields live in a different system then you're right, that's a change.
- Marisol Vega NoneThen I would ask that we do not widen the list in the middle of a call. Trent, please confirm which system holds the referral stages and what fields would be needed. We will treat it as a change request.
- Trent Nakamura NoneFair enough. I'll put it in writing. And I'll tell you now, it's only status and dates, no patient identifiers, but you'll want to see the field list, so you'll get the field list.
- Marisol Vega NoneThat is what I want.
- Hollie Grieve NoneRight, so that's a good example of the process working. Ollie, can you note it as an open change request, not part of the first load?
- Ollie Pearson NoneDone. First load is the four areas as Marisol stated them. Referral stages from the admissions system are held back pending her review.
- Hollie Grieve NoneOkay. Let me move us to people, because we've talked a lot about data and not much about who's going to use it. Danielle, who are the first users?
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneThe liaisons first. They cover hospitals and physician groups across Illinois, Indiana and Wisconsin, and they're the ones who'll walk into a meeting with one view of the referrer. Then my leadership team, who just want answers fast. And then the patient services team, but only for the referral side, not the intake stuff.
- Hollie Grieve NoneThat fits. Just so we're all on the same numbers, you're on Growth, so that's forty licensed users, and the order form is £50,000 a year.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneYes, forty seats, fifty thousand a year. That's what I took to leadership. Good, I just wanted to hear it said so I'm quoting it right.
- Trent Nakamura NoneForty's tight if we go with every liaison and the leadership team and a few from patient services. I'll count heads. If it's more than that we'll know early.
- Hollie Grieve NoneNo problem at all. Let's see real usage first. If you get close to the limit, come back to me and we'll talk about it. No pressure from my side.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneRight. I'm not committing anything further today anyway. That's not my call alone.
- Hollie Grieve NoneUnderstood, and not asking.
- Marisol Vega NoneHollie, may I raise access and audit? I am content to discuss users, but I will not discuss commercial matters.
- Hollie Grieve NoneOf course, please. That's why I stopped there.
- Marisol Vega NoneThank you. I will need to be able to show an auditor who asked the brain what, and when. I need an audit trail. And I need that to be reviewable by me, read-only, without having to ask Trent to export it each time.
- Ollie Pearson NoneSo the usage history is available to admins, so Trent can see it. Whether we can give you a read-only view directly is something I want to confirm rather than promise. I'll check what the options are and come back to you in writing.
- Marisol Vega NoneThat is the right answer. I would rather wait for an accurate one.
- Trent Nakamura NoneFrom my side, I'd like to see the same thing. If someone asks a strange question I want to know who it was before I get a call about it.
- Hollie Grieve NoneFair. Ollie, that's on your list too.
- Marisol Vega NoneAnd one more. The business associate agreement. It is in place, and I want it kept current. If the scope changes in any way, I will expect to see the agreement reviewed against the change, not afterwards.
- Hollie Grieve NoneUnderstood. Any change to scope triggers a review of the agreement before anything is switched on. I'll make sure that's written into how we run this.
- Marisol Vega NoneThank you.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneCan I ask a practical one? When do the liaisons actually get to see anything? Because I've told them it's coming and they keep asking me.
- Ollie Pearson NoneSo the order is: the scope document gets signed off, then the connectors are switched on one at a time, starting with the referral and CRM data, then the calls, then contracts once the exhibit check is done, and the helpdesk last, when Marisol's approved the allow-list. The liaisons would see the first pages once the CRM and referral data have loaded and Trent's checked they match.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneSo they won't see it until Trent's happy with the numbers.
- Trent Nakamura NoneThat's my preference, yes. If the first thing a liaison sees doesn't tie to the report they've used for years, they stop trusting it and we never get that back.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneOkay. I hate waiting, but you're right. A wrong number in front of a hospital is worse than no number. What do I tell them for now?
- Hollie Grieve NoneI'd tell them it's being set up carefully because of how sensitive the data is, and that the first view is coming once the numbers have been checked. I can put a few sentences together for you if that helps.
- Danielle Okonkwo NonePlease. Short ones. Thanks, that would help.
- Trent Nakamura NoneAnd once it's running I'd like to retire a few of the one-off report requests. At the moment I get asked for the same referral cut every other week. That's the thing I want to get rid of.
- Hollie Grieve NoneThat's a good measure of success. We can look at it at the first check-in. How many of those requests are still coming to you.
- Trent Nakamura NoneI like that. I'll keep a tally from now so we have a before.
- Ollie Pearson NoneLet me read back what I've got in the document so we're not relying on memory. Scope: referral, CRM, liaison calls and contracts, with the exhibit check outstanding. Excluded: patient fields on intake tickets, including the free-text box, by allow-list at the connector. Held back: referral stages from the admissions system, pending Trent's field list and Marisol's review. Open: audit view for Marisol.
- Marisol Vega NoneThat matches my notes. I would add that I will review the document in full before signing and will not sign on the basis of this call alone.
- Hollie Grieve NoneOf course. You'll get it in writing, and you take the time you need.
- Marisol Vega NoneI will. I would also like a sample of the load from the helpdesk, with the excluded columns visibly absent, before I confirm that control.
- Ollie Pearson NoneSure. I'll run a small sample in a test area, nothing in production, and send it over with the allow-list so you can see the columns aren't there.
- Marisol Vega NoneGood.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneCan I just say, I came in a bit nervous about this call. I thought Marisol would shut it down. This was actually really constructive.
- Marisol Vega NoneI do not intend to shut it down. I intend to make sure it is done properly. They are different things.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneHa. Noted. Message received.
- Hollie Grieve NoneI think that's the right way round, honestly. It's much easier to build it carefully at the start than to unpick it later.
- Trent Nakamura NoneAgreed. Fewer surprises for everyone.
- Hollie Grieve NoneOkay, let's pin down next steps so nobody leaves unsure. Ollie, you send the scope document with Marisol's wording and the allow-list, plus the sample load. When can that be with us?
- Ollie Pearson NoneThe document I can send today, after the call. The sample load by early next week, as long as I can get the field list from Trent.
- Trent Nakamura NoneI'll send the field list for the admissions stages and the helpdesk tomorrow. And the reconciliation list by the end of next week. I'll reconcile it and tell you what I found, even if the answer is that my own report was wrong.
- Hollie Grieve NoneWhich is a perfectly good outcome.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneI'll check the contract exhibits by Friday and set up the liaison session for next week. And I'll send Marisol whatever I find, not the other way round.
- Marisol Vega NoneThank you, Danielle. I will review the scope document when it arrives and respond in writing, with any questions listed, within a few working days.
- Hollie Grieve NoneAnd from me, the short note for the liaisons, a summary of today's decisions for everyone, and I'll look into the read-only audit view with Ollie so that Marisol has a firm answer.
- Ollie Pearson NoneYep, I'll check that with the team and come back with an answer rather than a maybe.
- Hollie Grieve NoneAnything we've missed? Anyone got anything they want to raise before we go?
- Trent Nakamura NoneOnly that the scope statement should be the first page of whatever we send around. So if someone asks later what the brain can see, it's the first thing they read.
- Ollie Pearson NoneGood shout. Making it page one.
- Marisol Vega NoneI have nothing further for now.
- Danielle Okonkwo NoneNothing from me. This was great, thanks all. Really good progress. Thanks, Danielle, and I'll speak to you all next week.
- Hollie Grieve NoneBrilliant. Thanks, everyone. I'll send the notes this afternoon. Speak soon.
- Trent Nakamura NoneCheers all. Trent.
- Ollie Pearson NoneThanks all. Bye for now.
- Marisol Vega NoneGood afternoon. Thank you.
Callsmade from