If the Circles test (costing one Check) were successful, I’d most likely give the first Healer test by the NPC freely–it might turn out cowards or might turnout successes. If the entire patrol were getting treatment, I would describe the obligation to compensate the provider, but I wouldn’t absolutely require that as Resources; I would let the patrol mates discuss and describe how they work out compensation–might be a Resources test is the best way to handle that.
If the Circles test were unsuccessful, I would likely use Enmity Clause or a Twist; in both ways, they meet a care provider who will give one free Healer test, and they’ll need to think of compensation, but the Twist would give me agility to delay or defer additional Healer tests until the Twist is dealt with–it could be anything. Using that Twist in the Player Turn means it will probably cost one or more Checks to resolve the Twist and return to the care provider. The Enmity Clause would give me the flexibility to test once for Healer, then emphasize the obligation, or debt, owed to this unwanted benefactor; that would be about the extent of the scene. It still offers flexibility to extend care to additional patrol mates to bring more of them into the obligation.
If one Check were spent to test Circles, I would not also call a Resources test associated with the same Check scene. Table chatter would determine if a Resources test is proper, and that would require an additional Check. Table chatter might indicate Haggler, Resources, foraging, or maybe other tests are appropriate to handle the obligation owed.
Think about the example of Martin or of Loretta from Deliver the Mail. Martin is interested in making a request with such intent that he would engage in a Conflict, like Negotiation or Argument, to get the patrol convinced to serve his request. How the patrol mates fulfill an agreement (if an agreement comes about) might create the basis for an entire mission, a complex obstacle, or a simple obstacle. Table chatter becomes a force for determination. Loretta doesn’t make a request of the patrol mates; she just tends to stand out from the crowd of mail recipients; the patrol mates could ask her about what’s up or not. If a GM wants to pressure some Checks, this might be a moment in which a single Persuader/Manipulator test is warranted, or even a Negotiation or Argument Conflict to convince Loretta of something–maybe she doesn’t want to accept an escort; because she feels it will bind her to an obligation to the Guard and Lockhaven that she does not want or could not fulfill. Perhaps she is just really shy and doesn’t feel her social position warrants asking for assistance from the Guard. Table chatter is a determining element.
So, short answer: one Check should provide one test of an Ability or Skill for the player character–even if the NPC could do additional things that do not provide advancement for the player character. (I mean, that test for advancement is my primary logic in giving one Check = one test; because even if they launch a Conflict, the rules provide them only one logged test for advancement).