Andi Assess

AI-generated draft

Independent living assessment report

General wellbeing review using independent living sensor data

Across the 22 days with usable data, the sensor evidence shows regular activity throughout the home every day, with kitchen-area activity detected on every one of those days and no clear overall change in the amount of detected activity between the first and last week of coverage; the most notable pattern for wellbeing review is that the times at which daily activity began and ended varied widely from day to day.

Assessment at a glance

RAG shows priority for professional review. Confidence shows the strength of the observation.

Green Moderate confidence

Overall activity and movement around the home

Activity was detected in all monitored areas every day, concentrated in daytime and evening hours with clear busier periods late morning, arou...

Amber Moderate confidence

Daily routine timing

Start and finish times for detected daily activity were markedly variable, which may matter for wellbeing because irregular daily rhythms can ...

Amber Low confidence

Overnight activity and quiet periods

Overnight bathroom-area activity was infrequent, while the longest continuous period without any detected activity was typically short; on 18 ...

Amber Moderate confidence

Bathroom-area activity

Bathroom-area activity was frequent but consistently brief, and the daily count decreased by about 13% between the first and final week of cov...

Grey Low confidence

Areas that cannot be assessed by this installation

The gaps in what this installation can measure limit how completely the general wellbeing question can be answered, particularly in relation t...

Red prompt review · Amber discuss or check · Green no notable adverse change identified · Grey not assessable or not reportable

Service-user reference: SU002
Assessment period: Requested 20 April 2026 to 30 May 2026 (Europe/London). Usable data covers 30 April 2026 to 21 May 2026, giving 22 days with usable data out of 41 requested calendar days; 19 requested days contain no telemetry.
Generated: August 04, 2026

Executive summary

To describe what the independent living sensor data can and cannot say about the individual's general wellbeing at home, focusing on daily activity, routine timing, overnight patterns and bathroom-area activity, so that professionals can decide what to explore next.

Detected movement was recorded across all monitored areas on every day with usable data, averaging around 103 room-area activity periods and about 39 movements between monitored areas per day.

The time of the first activity each day varied considerably around an average of 08:29, and the time of the last activity each day varied even more widely around an average of 23:29; day-to-day patterns were only moderately alike from one day to the next.

Overnight, detected activity was limited: across 20 analysed nights there was an average of 0.6 bathroom-area activity periods per night, no night had three or more, and 12 nights had none at all.

Bathroom-area activity averaged about 10 short periods per day, all of them under three minutes, with none longer than ten minutes.

Kitchen-area activity was detected on every day with usable data, averaging about 85 minutes of detected kitchen-area activity per day, with busier periods around late morning, midday and early evening.

Changes over time

Comparing the first seven days with usable data (30 April to 6 May) with the last seven (15 to 21 May), average daily detected activity moved from about 101 to about 97 activity periods per day, a change of about 4%, which the supplied comparison categorises as stable.
Bathroom-area activity averaged about 10.7 periods per day in the first seven days and about 9.3 per day in the last seven, a decrease of about 13% that meets the configured 10% comparison threshold; this does not in itself establish that the change is meaningful in practice, particularly given the incomplete coverage at the end of the period.

Overall interpretation

The available evidence is consistent with an active daily pattern at home, with regular kitchen-area and bathroom-area activity and little overnight movement, and no clear adverse change in the overall amount of detected activity. The most important limitation is coverage: 19 of the 41 requested days contain no telemetry, the final days of coverage show reduced counts, and property exit data cannot be assessed at all because no confirmed door or exit sensor was identified. The next matters for professional exploration are the wide day-to-day variation in when activity starts and finishes, and whether the individual is able to leave the property and maintain outside contact, which this installation cannot evidence.

Assessment finding

Overall activity and movement around the home

Green Moderate confidence

What was detected

Detected movement averaged around 103 room-area activity periods and about 39 movements between monitored areas per day across the 22 days with usable data, with daily totals ranging from 27 on the final partial day to 188 on 8 May.
Kitchen-area activity accounted for about half of all detected room-area activity periods and around 85 minutes of detected activity per day, and was present on every day with usable data; living room and bedroom areas each averaged around an hour of detected activity per day.

Pattern identified

Activity was detected in all monitored areas every day, concentrated in daytime and evening hours with clear busier periods late morning, around midday and in the early evening; this is consistent with a person moving around their home and using kitchen facilities regularly, and no clear adverse change was identified across the coverage period.

Why this may matter

Detected kitchen-area activity indicates movement in that area and should be explored alongside what the individual reports about preparing food and drinks; it does not evidence meals prepared or eaten.
The count of detected activity periods for an area is affected by sensor placement and sensitivity and should not be read as time spent there or as the individual's main activity.

What to explore

Does the individual's own description of a typical day match the daytime and early-evening pattern seen in the data?
Are there aspects of daily living the individual finds harder that would not generate sensor activity, such as shopping, laundry or managing correspondence?

What the data cannot tell us Room-area activity is detected movement in a monitored area, not a confirmed visit, task completed or time spent there., Coverage is incomplete, so daily averages are based only on the 22 days with usable data., and Appliance-based activity periods were recorded as zero throughout, so cooking or appliance use cannot be assessed from this evidence.

Assessment finding

Daily routine timing

Amber Moderate confidence

What was detected

The first activity of the day averaged 08:29 and the last activity of the evening averaged 23:29, but the timing of both varied widely from day to day rather than clustering around those averages.
Comparing each day with the days that followed, the shape of daily activity was only moderately alike from one day to the next.

Pattern identified

Start and finish times for detected daily activity were markedly variable, which may matter for wellbeing because irregular daily rhythms can affect eating, medication routines and social contact; the available evidence describes the variation only and does not indicate why it occurs.

Why this may matter

Variation in timing may be consistent with lifestyle preference, shift-like patterns, visitors, or periods of being away from home, and should be explored alongside the individual's own account.
Late-evening activity was recorded in the hours around and after midnight on some days, which may simply reflect a preferred routine.

What to explore

How does the individual describe their usual getting-up and settling times, and are these by choice?
Do any care, medication or mealtime arrangements depend on more predictable timing?

What the data cannot tell us The evidence cannot determine whether variable timing reflects preference, health, care visits or time spent away from the property. and First and last activity times are derived only from days with usable telemetry and may be affected by missing data.

Assessment finding

Overnight activity and quiet periods

Amber Low confidence

What was detected

Across 20 analysed nights, bathroom-area activity averaged 0.6 periods per night, 12 nights had none, and no night had three or more.
The longest period without detected activity each night had a middle value of about 40 minutes, an average of 57 minutes, a shortest value of 14 minutes and a longest single night value of 197 minutes on 1 May.

Pattern identified

Overnight bathroom-area activity was infrequent, while the longest continuous period without any detected activity was typically short; on 18 of the analysed nights the longest such period was under two hours. Short continuous quiet periods can arise from either frequent movement or from ongoing low-level sensor activity, so this should be checked against other information rather than read as an indication about sleep.

Why this may matter

The pattern should be explored alongside what the individual reports about their nights, and alongside any information about continence, pain, medication or ambient conditions.
Sensor placement and sensitivity in the bedroom and hallway can influence how often overnight activity is detected.

What to explore

How does the individual describe their nights, and do they report getting up during the night?
Is there any reported daytime tiredness that should be considered alongside this pattern?

What the data cannot tell us Overnight movement and periods without detected activity cannot confirm sleep, waking, sleep quality or any disturbance of sleep. and Only 20 nights could be analysed, and absence of a detected event does not prove that an activity did not occur.

Assessment finding

Bathroom-area activity

Amber Moderate confidence

What was detected

Bathroom-area activity was detected around 10 times per day on average, with an average duration of 43 seconds, a longest single period of 146 seconds and no period longer than ten minutes; the busiest hour for these periods beginning was around midday.
Daily counts ranged from 1 on 20 May to 34 on 1 May, with most days between about 5 and 14.

Pattern identified

Bathroom-area activity was frequent but consistently brief, and the daily count decreased by about 13% between the first and final week of coverage; the variability across days and the incomplete final week mean no sustained change can be established from this evidence alone.

Why this may matter

Short detected periods may be consistent with brief entries into the area as well as with using facilities, and should be explored alongside any information about continence, hydration or personal care support.
The consistently short durations mean this evidence gives no indication about washing or bathing activity.

What to explore

Does the individual report any change in bathroom use, urgency or continence over the period reviewed?
Is any support currently provided with personal care, and does the individual find the bathroom accessible?

What the data cannot tell us Bathroom-area activity is detected movement in that area and cannot evidence toileting, washing or any specific care task. and The decrease between comparison periods is based on two seven-day windows within incomplete coverage and is not established as a sustained change.

Assessment finding

Areas that cannot be assessed by this installation

Grey Low confidence

What was detected

Average property exits per day could not be checked because the required evidence metric is unavailable; no confirmed front-door or exit sensor was identified, so exits and time away from the property cannot be assessed.
A large volume of in-period telemetry retains an unknown classification, and 19 of the 41 requested assessment days contain no telemetry.

Pattern identified

The gaps in what this installation can measure limit how completely the general wellbeing question can be answered, particularly in relation to leaving the home and to the earliest and latest parts of the requested period.

Why this may matter

If community access or social isolation is a concern, information will need to come from the individual, family or other records rather than from this evidence.
Sensor installation continuity has not been independently verified, so a review of the installation may be useful before any repeat comparison.

What to explore

How often does the individual leave the property, and with what support?
Can the reason for the 19 days without telemetry be established before any repeat assessment?

What the data cannot tell us Hallway activity alone cannot be used to derive property exits. and Findings apply only to the 22 days with usable data and cannot be generalised to the missing days.

Potential anomalies

Patterns for closer review

On 1 May, bathroom-area activity was recorded 34 times, well above the typical daily range of about 5 to 14, alongside 158 detected activity periods and the longest single overnight period without detected activity in the series (197 minutes).

A single busier day may be consistent with visitors, household activity, an unsettled day or sensor behaviour, and no explanation can be drawn from this evidence.
This was the second day of usable coverage, so it may also reflect early installation or settling effects.

Question for review Is anything known about 1 May 2026, such as a visit, appointment or period of feeling unwell, that would help interpret the higher activity on that day?

Detected activity fell towards the end of coverage, with 56, 58 and 27 activity periods on 19, 20 and 21 May and only 1 bathroom-area activity period recorded on 20 May, before telemetry ceased entirely after 21 May.

Reduced counts immediately before telemetry stops may be consistent with partial data capture, a connectivity or equipment issue, or a genuine change in activity; the available evidence cannot distinguish between these.
The individual may have been away from the property or less active for other reasons.

Question for review Can the data feed after 21 May 2026 be checked, and is anything known about the individual's whereabouts or wellbeing on 20 and 21 May?

Review and limitations

Professional review

Questions for professional review

Does the individual's own account of their daily routine, sleep and appetite align with the varied start and finish times seen in the data?
How often does the individual leave the property and see other people, given that this cannot be measured by the current installation?
Should the sensor installation and data feed be checked, in view of the 19 days without telemetry and the drop in coverage after 21 May 2026?
Is any change in bathroom use or continence reported that should be considered alongside the reduced bathroom-area activity in the final week of coverage?

Quality warnings

Average property exits per behavioural day could not be checked because the evidence metric is unavailable.
19 assessment days contain no telemetry.
49594 in-period telemetry events retain an unknown classification.

Data limitations

Passive telemetry describes detected events and behavioural patterns; it cannot establish diagnosis, subjective experience, intention or causation.
The evidence can describe overnight activity and quiet periods but cannot confirm sleep, waking, sleep quality or restorative sleep.
Sensor installation continuity and like-for-like coverage across comparison periods have not yet been independently verified.
Absence of a detected event does not prove that an activity did not occur.

This AI-generated draft supports professional judgement and requires human review. It does not diagnose, assess clinical risk, determine eligibility or recommend changes to care.