St Helens piloted Beam's Magic Notes AI tool (Nov 2024-Jan 2025) for EHCP and care-assessment drafting, then rolled it to 450 staff: 71% faster reports, 3.7 hrs saved weekly. Self-reported, echoed by an independent NICE-framework study of the same tool elsewhere.
17 practitioners
Practitioners in initial pilot (Nov 2024–Jan 2025)
3.7 hours/week
Average weekly time savings per practitioner (pilot)
71 %
Faster report submission (pilot)
450 staff
Frontline staff using Magic Notes after rollout
over 5,000 recordings
Recordings made since rollout
249 EHCPs
EHCPs drafted via the Reports function
48 %
Independent (Kent) average administrative-time reduction, same underlying tool (Kent County Council evaluation)
6.8 to 9.1 out of 10
Independent (Kent) conversation-quality rating improvement (Kent County Council evaluation)
Details
Maturity
Scaling
Promoter
St Helens Borough Council
Period
2024-2025
Keywords
local government, special educational needs, EHCPs, social care administration, generative AI
Context
England's Education, Health and Care Plan (EHCP) system — the statutory documents that set out support for children with special educational needs — has faced growing national backlogs, with many councils struggling to complete assessments within the 20-week legal deadline. St Helens Borough Council, in Merseyside, piloted a generative-AI note-taking and report-drafting tool called Magic Notes (built by vendor Beam) from November 2024 to January 2025 to help caseworkers draft reports faster.
Activities
In the pilot, 17 practitioners across Occupational Therapy and Adult and Children's Social Care used Magic Notes to turn recorded conversations, documents and handwritten notes into draft assessments and case notes, including EHCPs. Following the pilot, St Helens rolled Magic Notes out to 450 frontline staff. By the time of the council's published update, staff had made more than 5,000 recordings, and 28 practitioners had used the tool's 'Reports' function to draft 249 EHCPs.
Results
The council reported average weekly time savings of about 3.7 hours per practitioner and reports submitted 71% faster than before. These figures come from the council's own published account; no independently audited evaluation of St Helens' specific results was found. A separate, methodologically independent evaluation of the same Beam product at Kent County Council — using the NICE Evidence Standards Framework, for adult social-care assessments rather than EHCPs — validated a more conservative but still meaningful 48% average reduction in administrative time and an improvement in conversation-quality ratings from 6.8/10 to 9.1/10.
Conclusions
That external validation of the same underlying tool lends plausibility to St Helens' self-reported gains without directly confirming them; St Helens' own figures remain self-reported process metrics, with no published data on outcomes for children, appeal rates, or EHCP plan quality.
Implementation
Indicative cost
Medium (€50k–€500k)
Time to results
Short (< 1 year)
Staffing & skills
St Helens Borough Council — 17 pilot practitioners (Occupational Therapy, Adult and Children's Social Care), later 450 rolled-out frontline staff, Beam (vendor, Magic Notes product)
Conditions for success
tool turns recorded conversations, documents and handwritten notes into draft assessments and case notes, reducing manual drafting time
independent validation of the same underlying product at a different council (Kent, using the NICE Evidence Standards Framework) lends cross-site plausibility
Common failure modes
St Helens' own figures are self-reported by the council; no independently audited evaluation of St Helens' specific results was found
no data has been published on outcomes for children (e.g. EHCP quality, appeal rates) — only staff-facing process metrics
Where it fits
Governance type
local government (borough council)
Scale
local authority (England), scaled from a 17-person pilot to 450 staff
Income level
high-income country (United Kingdom)
Commonly funded by
National / regional programmes
Indicative funding routes for practices of this type — always check each programme's current calls and eligibility rules.
Replication kit
Reusable artefacts from this practice — as published by their sources.