Referral completeness checker
Completeness checks separated from clinical triage.
- For
- Referral coordinators at specialist practices
- Solves
- Missing administrative details delay referral processing.
- Delivers
- Referral preparation pack and missing-item list
- Built in
- about 6 weeks of creation time, MVP in 7 days
- Investment
- $11,500 for the MVP, $47,500 for the full product
- Run it
- Inside your business, or as part of your offer to clients
What it does
For referral coordinators at specialist practices, turn referral forms and clinic-defined intake requirements into referral preparation pack and missing-item list.
- Extract patient identifiers.
- Check required attachments.
- Identify duplicates.
- Flag unreadable fields.
- Draft clarification requests.
- Prepare staff handoff.
What goes in, what comes out
- Referral forms
- Clinic-defined intake requirements
AI drafts, people review. Client intake portal and staff exception queue.
- Referral preparation pack
- Missing-item list
How it works
The workflow
- InStart with
Referral forms and clinic-defined intake requirements
- 1
Choose the request type
- 2
Collect declared facts and required documents
- 3
Extract relevant fields
- 4
Show missing or inconsistent information
- 5
Let the submitter correct it
- 6
Route the complete package to an authorized reviewer
- OutFinish with
Referral preparation pack and missing-item list
AI does the heavy lifting, people stay in charge
Classify submitted material, extract candidate fields and draft clarification questions. Deterministic rules test required fields and formats. Keep uncertain extraction visible and preserve the original statement. Do not infer missing material facts.
What your team sees
Key screens: Referral queue, missing fields, sender follow-up. Give submitters a mobile-friendly step-by-step form with document uploads and a visible completeness checklist. Staff see a queue with missing items and extracted fields. Place the original document beside each uncertain value. Show submitted, clarification required and ready-for-review states. In this product, the first view is referral queue, followed by missing fields and sender follow-up.
Accounts and administration
Secure uploads, configurable checklists, progress saving, duplicate handling, reviewer assignments, clarification threads, deadlines and submission history.
Integrations and data access
Clinic-approved content and administrative exports. Clinical integrations require separate assessment. Case management, customer records, document storage and notification systems. Begin with an exportable review pack before automating destination writes. These are candidate integration categories, not verified supported connectors.
How we build it
We build with our own AI software development factory, so most implementations take days to a few weeks of creation time, not months. You see working software at every step, and exact timing depends on availability.
- 1
Scoping call
Day 1Thirty minutes on your process, your data and how you want to run it: for your own team, or for your clients. You get a fixed scope and price for the MVP.
- 2
MVP
7 daysOne buyer segment, one recurring use case; first modules: extract patient identifiers; check required attachments. Manual review in the loop. Built by our AI software factory.
- 3
Paid pilot
8 daysAccounts, roles, review states, audit trail and the first integration, hardened for two to three paying pilot customers.
- 4
Full product
3 weeksRemaining modules: flag unreadable fields; draft clarification requests; prepare staff handoff. Self-serve onboarding, billing, monitoring and the wider integration set.
- 5
Run and improve
MonthlyWe host, monitor and improve it for a fixed monthly fee, or hand it over to your team. How the retainer works.
Why we start with an MVP
An MVP, or minimum viable product, is the smallest version that your users can actually work with. It is not a cheap version of the full solution. It is a test, built to answer the questions that decide whether the rest is worth building.
- Pick the riskiest assumption. Here: will referral coordinators at specialist practices use it to solve "missing administrative details delay referral processing"?
- Build only what tests it. One team, one use case, a few core modules. People do the rest by hand for now.
- Run a paid pilot. Process a bounded set of historical and new submissions.
- Measure, then decide. Track complete referrals and administrative turnaround. Then expand, change course or stop, with evidence instead of opinions.
MVP scope for this solution. Begin with referral coordinators at specialist practices and one recurring use case. Build the first two modules: extract patient identifiers; check required attachments. Provide operator assistance for the third module: identify duplicates. Deliver referral preparation pack and missing-item list through a manual review queue. Perform other necessary full-scope functions manually during the pilot. Include all applicable access, accuracy and professional-review controls from the start.
After the MVP. After paid pilots establish value, automate the remaining modules: flag unreadable fields; draft clarification requests; prepare staff handoff. Add one validated source integration, reusable customer configuration and recurring delivery. Expand to additional teams, document formats or languages only after testing the new scope.
What the build depends on. Secure upload handling, reliable extraction, versioned completeness rules, submitter identity and staff routing. Third-party checklist changes require maintenance.
Investment
A planning range to start the conversation, not a quote. You pay per phase, so you can stop after the MVP.
- Phase 1
MVP
One buyer segment, one recurring use case; first modules: extract patient identifiers; check required attachments. Manual review in the loop.
- Phase 2
Paid pilot
Accounts, roles, review states, audit trail and the first integration, hardened for two to three paying pilot customers.
- Phase 3
Full product
Remaining modules: flag unreadable fields; draft clarification requests; prepare staff handoff. Self-serve onboarding, billing, monitoring and the wider integration set.
Indicative total, MVP to full product$47,500about 6 weeks of creation time · start with the MVP from $11,500
Running costs per month
A rough indication of monthly hosting and AI model costs once it is live, not tested. Real costs depend on usage, file sizes and the models chosen.
| Stage | Hosting and infrastructure | AI usage | Total per month |
|---|---|---|---|
| MVP and paid pilotabout 3 customers | $50–$100 | $40–$90 | $90–$190 |
| Full productabout 50 customers | $190–$380 | $280–$560 | $470–$940 |
Run it or resell it
For your own team
Referral coordinators at specialist practices run it inside the business: referral forms and clinic-defined intake requirements in, referral preparation pack and missing-item list out, reviewed by your people.
As part of your offer
Agencies, consultancies and software companies can offer it to their own clients under their brand. We build and maintain it; you sell and deliver it.
Your brand, or this one
Run it under your own brand, or start from this concept style.
- primary
#279131 - accent
#c354c9 - surface
#e4f1e6 - ink
#22201e
- Headings
- Manrope
- Text
- Manrope
- Voice
- Careful, kind, clinically plain
Selling it to your own clients: the go-to-market playbook
Pricing to test
Test USD 500-2,000 setup plus USD 150-750 monthly for one form family and a capped submission volume. Quote specialist review and unusual document formats separately. Prices are experimental.
Message to test
Referral completeness checker for referral coordinators at specialist practices. Completeness checks separated from clinical triage. Demonstrate the claim through an anonymized referral completeness audit.
Where to find buyers
Specialist practice administrators
Lead magnet
An anonymized referral completeness audit
The first 30 days
- Week 1: interview five prospective buyers in this segment: referral coordinators at specialist practices. Ask to see a recent example of the problem and their current process.
- Week 2: prepare this demonstration using authorized or synthetic material: an anonymized referral completeness audit.
- Week 3: present it through specialist practice administrators and seek one narrowly scoped paid pilot.
- Week 4: review complete referrals, administrative turnaround, total delivery effort and a concrete renewal decision before increasing scope.
Paid pilot
Process a bounded set of historical and new submissions. Include missing, duplicate and unreadable documents. Compare complete submissions and clarification effort with the current intake method. For this solution, use referral forms and clinic-defined intake requirements and evaluate referral preparation pack and missing-item list. Agree success thresholds with the buyer before starting; collect a baseline for complete referrals, administrative turnaround. A positive signal is payment and repeat use with acceptable quality and delivery cost, not a favorable demo reaction alone.
Success metrics
Complete referrals, administrative turnaround
Retention and expansion
Review incomplete submissions and simplify recurring friction. Expand to another form or document family after the first workflow reliably produces review-ready cases.
Why clients would pick it
Document-type expertise, tested completeness rules and a low-friction client experience embedded in a repeat administrative process. For this solution, build around completeness checks separated from clinical triage. This advantage requires execution and accumulated customer trust; the base model alone is not a defensible asset.
Alternatives and positioning
Email collection, generic web forms, spreadsheets and existing case management systems. Differentiate on this specific proposed advantage: completeness checks separated from clinical triage. Test it against the buyer's current method on the same task. Competitor coverage and uniqueness have not been established.
Main delivery costs
Document processing, storage, exception review, support, checklist maintenance and customer-specific integration work.
Safeguards
Begin with administrative scope or clinician-reviewed material. Minimize sensitive patient data, restrict access and obtain required organizational review before connecting clinical systems. Validate source access and reviewer availability during the pilot. Maintain customer-level access, data deletion controls and a record of final approvals.