ATS pricing comparison: subscription vs per-hire, for UK care providers
TL;DR: For a typical UK care provider hiring 10–20 people per month, outcome-based pricing (pay per successful hire) works out significantly cheaper than per-seat or flat-rate subscriptions — especially once you factor in agency fees that subscription ATS products don't replace. Here's a full side-by-side.
The four pricing models
| Model | How it works | Typical UK price | Good for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Per-user / per-seat | £ per user per month | £50–£300 / user / mo | Small teams, steady hiring |
| Per-job / requisition | £ per active vacancy per month | £50–£500 / role / mo | Low, predictable hiring volume |
| Flat-rate / enterprise | Fixed £ per year, all-in | £20k–£100k / year | Large, complex organisations |
| Outcome-based (per hire) | £ per successful hire | £99–£300 / hire | Care providers hiring regularly |
Side-by-side worked example
Scenario: a 5-site residential care provider hiring 15 care workers a month. 4 managers using the system.
Option A — Per-seat ATS + agency
- 4 seats × £150 / month = £600 / month (£7,200 / year)
- 7 hires via agency × £4,500 per placement = £31,500 / month (£378k / year)
- Implementation: £5,000 year one
- Training: 2 days, £1,500
- Year one total: ~£392k
Option B — Flat-rate enterprise ATS + agency
- £3,000 / month platform = £36,000 / year
- 7 hires via agency × £4,500 per placement = £378,000 / year
- Implementation: £15,000 year one
- Year one total: ~£429k
Option C — Lily End to End (£300 per hire)
- 15 hires / month × £300 = £4,500 / month (£54,000 / year)
- Implementation: included
- Training: included
- Agency spend: £0 (Lily replaces most of it)
- Year one total: ~£54k
Numbers are illustrative, based on typical UK agency placement fees for care workers (£3,750–£6,250) and published ATS pricing.
Why subscription ATS costs so much more in practice
The hidden line is agency spend.
A subscription ATS is a filing cabinet. It doesn't actually source or screen candidates at scale. Most care providers using a subscription ATS still pay agency fees because they still can't reliably fill vacancies direct. The ATS bill is small; the agency bill is enormous.
Outcome-based pricing bundles the full pipeline into one per-hire fee. Sourcing, screening, scheduling, compliance, onboarding — all included, paid for only when a hire starts.
Other factors worth comparing
- Implementation time. Subscription ATS: 1–6 months. Enterprise: 6–12 months. Lily: under 1 week.
- Admin time. Subscription ATS: still need to run phone screens manually. Lily: phone screening is automated.
- Audit trail. Varies widely. CQC-ready records are default in Lily, extra work elsewhere.
- Lock-in. Most enterprise ATS contracts are 2–3 years minimum. Lily has no minimum term.
When subscription still makes sense
For organisations hiring a small number of senior, complex, or highly specialised roles, per-seat subscription ATS products are still fine. For high-volume, time-sensitive, compliance-heavy hiring — i.e. UK care — outcome-based models almost always win.
Frequently asked questions
Do you discount for volume?
Lily's End to End plan is a flat £300 per successful hire regardless of volume. There's no fee for unfilled roles.
What about the Screening-only plan?
£99 per candidate screened. Good if you want to keep your own ATS and just use Lily for phone screening.
Can I switch from a subscription ATS to Lily mid-contract?
Yes. Most providers run them in parallel for a month during migration.
Is there a minimum spend?
No. You pay when you hire.
Next step
Sources: Sonderwell 12-month case study. UK agency placement fee benchmarks (Skills for Care, REC 2024). Published ATS vendor pricing.
Get care sector hiring insights straight to your inbox
Join care providers across the UK who read our practical guides on recruitment, retention, and compliance, delivered straight to your inbox.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.