Find the workflow worth fixing first.
Name the leak, owner, tools, and whether to touch it now.
I look at how your firm actually runs, pick the workflow worth automating first, and build it inside the tools you already use: intake, document follow-up, status updates, billing, and handoffs.
Free · 15 minutes · Tuesdays and Thursdays. Quick fit check only. No deliverable.
The Field Diagram
A real 1099 chase, before and after the workflow is automated and handed back.
Itemized Pains
Start where small firms usually lose the week: document chase, onboarding, and tools that disagree.
The same document reminder, written again.
Portal setup, letters, tasks, and records repeated by hand.
Practice management, billing, documents, and inbox all tell different stories.
Recent Filings
Real project patterns, shown without private client names unless they are cleared. The shape of the work is the proof: accounting workflows, AI-assisted review loops, booking paths, and owned handoff.
For an accounting operator who needed sharper weekly prep without letting AI run loose. The workflow gathers evidence, checks the right records, drafts only from fresh signal, and keeps human approval in the loop.
A service-business site had useful work buried under generic copy. The refresh made the audience, offer, proof, and booking action obvious without turning the page into a template.
A conference payment flow moved from manual status chasing to an owned portal with Stripe payments and a cleaner admin ledger.
The Engagement
A timeline, a receipt, and optional details only if you open them.
Name the leak, owner, tools, and whether to touch it now.
Real data paths and Looms while the flow takes shape.
Live in accounts you control. My access is removed at handoff.
If the delivered workflow breaks in the first 30 days, I fix it. New features or bigger changes are scoped separately, the same fixed-price way.
Some firms want a short monthly read on what ran, what failed, and what needs an owner's decision. Typical range: $400 to $1,200 per month, never automatic.
Use these as sizing notes. The right build is usually smaller than the problem feels.
Best when the leak is obvious
One automated flow. For example document chase, status updates, or intake.
Scope the fix →Best when handoffs cross tools
Several connected workflows. For example onboarding plus intake plus handoff.
Map the handoffs →Best when clients need a front door
A client-facing portal or a legacy-system bridge.
Plan the front door →Unsure where it lands? Book a 15-minute Fit Check. I'll find the smallest honest scope, even if that means leaving it alone for now.
If the free Fit Check is too small for what you need, book a paid working session. These are not open-ended coaching calls. Each one has a narrow accounting-firm problem, a clear boundary, and a practical next move.
The Editor's Letter
Yours in workflow,
Antonio
MomandPop.AI is a one-human systems practice. I spent 20+ years in enterprise integration, then started solving those same handoff and workflow problems for small firms.
I decide what is worth automating, build it, test it, and hand it over working. I can work in English or Spanish. If your week is full of tools that almost fit, that is usually the first fix.
The Reader's Index



From the Correspondence
"More visible, more automated, and ultimately more profitable."
"Explain everything clearly and provide solutions."
"He was easy to work with. He delivers on what he promises."
Q & A
Common projects include client onboarding, document reminders, status updates, proposal to job handoffs, recurring task creation, billing follow-up, and practice management integrations. If your team repeats the same steps every week, it is usually a good fit for automation.
Start with the repeated workflow that creates the most interruptions and has the clearest rule set: document follow-up, intake, billing follow-up, or status updates. On the Fit Check, I help pick the smallest workflow worth fixing before anything is built.
Usually no. Most projects are built around the tools your firm already uses. If part of your stack is causing the problem, I'll tell you plainly, but the default approach is to improve what you already have before suggesting a switch.
Sometimes, yes. If the workflow needs to read, draft, summarize, classify, or help your team make a first pass, we choose the right AI model before the build starts. That might be Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, OpenAI, or a tool already inside your software. The point is not more bloat; it is one controlled workflow your team can review and own.
You own the workflows, logic, forms, portals, documentation, and connected accounts that are set up for the project. There is no retainer required to keep access to what was built.
Not by default. Anything sensitive, including client emails, status updates, and follow-ups, runs through an approval rule you set. You decide what sends automatically and what needs a one-click human check.
By default, you do. You own the code, credentials, logs, and SOP. If you want someone watching it with you, the optional Monthly Workflow Review covers that. Most firms do not need it for the first six months.
Most projects take 1 to 3 weeks. Smaller fixes can be finished in a few days. Larger builds with multiple systems, approvals, or client-facing steps can take longer.
This is a strong fit for small firms, usually teams of 2 to 25 people. That is where custom automation can remove real admin work without turning into a long software project.
Fit CheckThis is constrained on purpose: Tuesdays and Thursdays only, fifteen minutes, no deliverable. We decide whether there is a useful next step, or you leave with a clean "not a fit."
Prefer to write? antonio@momandpop.ai
Start with a constrained Fit Check. If the problem needs deeper paid thinking, the scoped advisory options are above.
Book a 15-Min Fit Check →Not ready to talk? Open the free automation checklist.