For PE-backed portfolio companies

The sponsor’s questions arrive on a schedule. The answers should too.

You close several entities against a cadence somebody else set. Covenants get tested whether or not the reporting is ready, add-ons arrive with their own chart of accounts, diligence lands with two weeks’ notice, and the audit committee has started asking what the AI touched and who approved it.

Book a Close Teardown Run the free Diagnostic

What it does

The modules that matter when the entities are subsidiaries

Each one runs a real workflow, in the order it runs. Every step that reaches the ledger stops at a named person.

Close cockpitgenerate the period → assign → verify against live data → complete → hard lock A checklist generated for each period with dependencies and due dates, assigned to named preparers, auto-verified against the live ledger, and locked once the period closes.

The close stops being a workbook one person carries and becomes a process with a visible state.

Covenantsdefine a formula over your COA → compute live → pass, warn or breach Built with a formula builder over your actual chart of accounts and computed from the ledger between reporting dates, with a standard senior-loan template as a starting point rather than an inference.

You watch headroom tighten in week two, not on the compliance certificate.

Thirteen-week cashopen AR and AP → place by entity DSO and DPO → weekly grid → override a cell Open invoices and bills placed into weekly columns using each entity’s own collection and payment behaviour, with a pattern-based fallback for payroll and rent, and saved overrides where you know something the ledger does not.

The weekly cash question is answered from the ledger rather than reassembled every Monday.

FP&A and LBO modelsdrivers from trailing-twelve actuals → scenarios → debt tranches → exit returns Forecast models seeded with drivers pulled from the actual books, scenario assumptions, a debt structure, and exit-return computation.

The model the sponsor reads and the books it describes start from the same numbers.

Entity onboardingread the new company’s books → build a plan → review → apply A new company’s accounts, calendar and starting configuration planned from its own ledger, reviewed, then applied — rather than configured by hand from the last one.

The next add-on gets onboarded in the same shape as the last one, in days rather than a quarter.

PBC checklist and evidence bindercreate the request → add lines → attach evidence → assemble the binder Audit and diligence requests tracked as lines with their evidence bound to them, assembled into a binder on demand.

The PBC list stops being an email thread with forty attachments and a spreadsheet nobody owns.

Work graph and handoff packagesfederate every kind of open work → one queryable state → who owns the next step Done, remaining, blocked and owned in a single view without copying any source row — and a durable handoff assembled from it, carrying blockers, missing evidence, stale conclusions and the decisions still owed.

A departure, a vacation or an interim controller stops being a reconstruction project.

Modules you do not need are switched off rather than shipped as clutter. What each one does in your close — your entities, calendar, chart of accounts, materiality thresholds and approvers — is configured during the build, against your books.

The rule, before the modules

One rule holds across every workflow above

The AI retrieves, analyses, drafts and proposes. Deterministic code calculates and checks. An authorised person approves anything that reaches the ledger. There is no unsupervised posting, and no setting that turns it on.

Four-tier action gate

Every action is classified into exactly one side-effect tier. Ledger and customer-facing writes are proposal-first, human approval only. An unrecognised action fails closed into the most-gated tier.

Preparer and approver

Review policy set per entity, with role floors and per-check materiality overrides, and separate preparer and approver roles wherever the control requires segregation.

Readable proposals

Each proposal carries before and after, its source data, risk level, the role required to approve it, a content fingerprint, an expiry, and its execution record.

One audit chain

The prompt, the run, each tool call, the proposal, the approval or rejection, the sync — recorded as one chain you can walk backwards.

Circuit breaker

When a task’s accuracy degrades, the system revokes that task’s autonomy and alerts. It can only demote. It can never promote itself.

Grounded answers

Answers cite period, basis, source reference and sync timestamp. Prose claims are verified against facts captured at the tool boundary; anything unverified is marked.

How an engagement is bought

Four rungs. You can stop after any of them.

The Run is monthly; nothing else here is. Nothing renews against your will, nothing commits you to the next rung, and each one ends with something written down that you keep — the last of them the source itself.

Free·45 minutes·five a month

The Close Teardown

Not a demo and not a discovery call. You bring your close — the checklist, the calendar, the entity you argue with most — and we go through it together.

Book a teardown →

You leave withOne written page about your own close, sent afterwards, whether or not anything else happens.

$7,500·one close cycle

The Pilot

Pick the process that costs you the most every month — the intercompany reconciliation, the flux commentary, the board pack, the covenant certificate. We run it. Not a report about running it: the thing itself, on your calendar, against your books, delivered in the month you would have delivered it anyway.

What the pilot covers →

You leave withThat month’s output delivered on time, the evidence pack behind it, and a written read on what the next two processes are worth. Yours whether or not anything follows.

$5,000 a month·three months to start

The Run

We keep running it, then the second process, then the third. An evidence pack every close — what ran, what it proposed, who approved it, what changed. The second process costs less than the first, because the control layer it needs is already standing.

You leave withA close that arrives on the date it is due, and a written record of every judgment inside it.

At twelve months

The Handover

After a year of it running, your team takes it in‑house — the source, the training, and support while they settle into it. This is the plan from the first day, not the thing the contract is written to avoid.

You leave withThe source, on your own infrastructure and your own model keys. Nothing to renew, and no login to lose.

If you would rather own it outright from the start, we build it that way instead — scoped against what your close actually is, so it carries no published price. Most people do not start there. The teardown is where you find out whether you should.

Where to start

Find the layer that is least ready to carry it.

Twelve questions across six control layers. About six minutes, and the result stays on your screen — sharing it is optional.

Book a Close Teardown Run the free Diagnostic

Not quite you? Fractional CFOs → Accounting firms and CAS teams →