Named contact
One person at CGL/CRS
A named contact to answer workflow questions, confirm local boundaries and help shape the continuity protocol for the CGL/CRS intake pathway.
You signed me up
in an emergency.
Annie wrote the letter. Rak backed me up.
Two people held the thread when I had nothing left. You know better than anyone how often people cycle back without it ever holding. OTOS is the infrastructure that changes that.
What I remember about walking through your door
You didn't ask if I was sure. You just helped.
I walked into CGL in an emergency. I didn't have the language, the energy or the clarity to explain myself properly. Annie wrote the referral letter. Rak backed me up. Two keyworkers held the thread when the system was giving me nothing to hold onto.
That kind of holding is exactly what OTOS is trying to make visible and receipted — so the next person has the same experience of continuity without depending on two specific individuals being on shift.
You've seen what happens when the thread doesn't hold. People cycle back. The same crisis. The same intake form. The same question: "have you been with us before?" You already know the answer.
"OTOS doesn't replace Annie and Rak. It makes sure the thread they picked up doesn't get dropped when they're not in the room."
What I'm asking: not for CGL to change how it works. Just to let OTOS wrap around what you already do — so the next-step referral is visible, receipted and trackable across the whole pathway.
What OTOS would change
- Emergency intake becomes a receipted entry point into the continuity thread
- Keyworker handoff is logged — visible to the next service before contact is lost
- Waiting-list silence triggers a continuity signal, not a dropped case
No new burden
OTOS does not add clinical burden. It does not require case management access. Keyworker involvement is the 30-minute scoping call — after that, OTOS runs alongside your existing work.
What OTOS needs from CGL / CRS
Three things. None of them clinical.
Entry point visibility
Intake as a thread start
When someone presenting with ADHD-relevant risk enters CGL/CRS, the thread starts there. Not a clinical decision — just a logged, visible handoff point.
Scoping conversation
Thirty minutes together
Map the pathway, agree the boundaries, design the safest route in. No commitment required beyond that conversation.
What OTOS will never do
- ✕Access or interface with Caspian or any case management system
- ✕Create clinical records or share identifiable information
- ✕Add keyworker workload beyond the initial scoping call
- ✕Make clinical decisions or automate care decisions
- ✕Replace any existing CGL/CRS safeguarding or crisis protocol
Questions to resolve together
- ?What is the right point of identification within the CGL/CRS intake?
- ?Who is the named contact — and what is their capacity?
- ?What governance or information-sharing agreement is needed?
- ?How does OTOS interact with CRS's community recovery model?
"We are not asking the system to change. Only to connect."
Ready when you are.
One note. One conversation. That is all it takes to start.
Your support note — ready to edit and send
Draft note — CGL / Cambridgeshire Recovery Service
"I've been briefed on OTOS Continuity™ — a non-clinical communications layer connecting services for adults with co-occurring ADHD and addiction. I understand it is not a clinical service, does not require keyworker time beyond an initial scoping call, and does not access any case management system. CGL/CRS plays a central role in the proposed pathway and I'd like to explore our involvement in the 12-week pre-pilot."
Edit as you see fit. Two minutes to send. No commitment beyond the note.
Send this note →