 (seconds) Clicks Time (seconds) Clicks % time saved seconds Front door Finding a Safety Plan 180 14 17 5 91% Early Help Finding a Safety Plan 180 14 20 5 94% Adoption Finding a Safety Plan 180 14 15 5 94% Leaving care Finding a Qualification 180 13 15 5 94% Table 8: Table to compare time and clicks from pilot workshops In this small sample of four tests, the reduction in terms time in seconds for data retrieval tasks was over 90% in all cases. 4.4.3 Evidence - Children’s Networks In the pilot workshops an activity designed to test and validate ecomaps was conducted. The goal was to compare and demonstrate how many person entities the AI could identify against a manual process. Work was also undertaken to assess the quality and accuracy of the autogenerated ecomaps. The task involved asking attendees to identify people in a child’s network by examining the documents and case notes available in the source system within a time limit of ten minutes. This was then compared with the autogenerated ecomaps, that are available instantly. Team Number of unique person entities identified via manual search Number of person entities identified via tool Number of unique person entities via tool* % increase in unique person entities identified - manual vs. tool Front Door 6 537 63 950 Early Help 10 616 24 140 Adoption 6 537 63 950 Leaving Care** 10 3,765 32 220 Table 9: Table to compare manual and autogenerated ecomaps *no data matching *for this work the confidence score was set to one **attendee worked with person for 9 years 33 OFFICIAL - SENSITIVE An example from the Front Door Team. The tool was able to identify 63 person entities, who were mentioned 537 times. For clarity, the ecomap visualisation does not list 537 entities, where there are duplicates the node visualisation is 