Build Blueprint · Whitfield & Marsh LLP

Sample · IllustrativeWhitfield & Marsh is a fictional nine-attorney employment firm built to show the deliverables start to finish. No client data, no client results.

Build Blueprint: Whitfield & Marsh LLP

Firm Operating System · 6 Systems · Foundry · Fixed Scope, Fixed Price

Engagement Overview

Columbus, OH · 9-attorney employment-law firm

This fictional Blueprint illustrates a proposed build for Whitfield & Marsh LLP, a Columbus, Ohio practice with 9 attorneys and 2 support staff. Foundry is both the audit recommendation and the firm's illustrated election: $29,750. Six systems comprise four workflows (Document Production, Intake & Routing, Meeting Intelligence, Follow-Through) plus Verification Gates and Knowledge Layer. The latter two support the workflows and receive no separate recovery credit.

Agreed fictional scope: 3 document types (demand letter, position statement, severance review); 1 jurisdiction pack (Ohio employment matters, with applicable federal law); 4 named reviewer placeholders; and 5 integrations (Clio, OneDrive, Outlook, HubSpot, Calendly). No additional recording or transcription connector is included.

Reviewer assignments: Reviewer A: document-production lead; Reviewer B: intake and meeting-review lead; Reviewer C: authority and knowledge-standard lead; Reviewer D: follow-through lead and review backup. Reviewer A–D are fictional named-reviewer placeholders, not real attorneys. Real agreements identify individual reviewers before kickoff.

Sample only: All source figures, firm details, reviewer identities, dates, targets, and examples are synthetic and illustrative, not results from an accepted actual engagement. Acceptance examples use synthetic fixtures, never real client-matter tests.

Where it lives: Every workflow runs inside the firm's own accounts, under the firm's own credentials and access controls, within the approved client boundary. Nothing is hosted by Synapse Forge. The firm controls the on/off switch at every step. Authorized staff manually place consent-documented transcripts in the firm's OneDrive intake folder; no AssemblyAI, Teams, or Zoom connector is included.

Approval rule for all six systems: Every client-facing communication, including follow-ups and calendar invitations, requires an authorized reviewer to affirmatively approve its current content and recipient before sending. Unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, or edited-after-approval drafts never send. Content or recipient edits invalidate approval and require fresh review. Expired review windows trigger only internal reminders; silence never approves a send. Internal reminders are separate from client-facing drafts. Approval does not authorize unrelated actions.

What the firm owns at the end: The scoped workflows, prompts, templates, connection configurations, and operating documentation are handed over at acceptance in every band. Continuing operation does not require Synapse Forge care, but it does depend on the firm's access controls, its own upkeep of its accounts and tools, applicable software licenses, and approved providers.

Illustrative schedule: 5 weeks from kickoff to acceptance. Synapse Forge builds run 4 to 6 weeks from kickoff depending on complexity; this six-system fictional plan illustrates five, not a guaranteed deadline. Kickoff is the next business day after the agreement is signed, the signing payment has cleared, the Client Access Checklist is complete, and access is verified. Signing alone does not start the clock or authorize live provisioning.

Systems

5 wks

Illustrative Build Timeline

$29,750

Fixed Build Price

100%

Firm Owned

System Scope

All six systems have separate written acceptance criteria

Document Production

Drafts demand letters, position statements, and severance reviews from approved templates and authorized Clio matter inputs; synthetic fixtures illustrate the workflow, and attorney review remains required

What It Does

Reads the active matter in Clio (parties, key dates, claim type, prior correspondence)
Selects the matching firm template from OneDrive
Drafts the document from authorized matter inputs; Verification Gates flag missing support and block unsupported facts or citations from release pending reviewer resolution
Queues the draft in a firm-controlled folder for attorney review before any client-facing release; authorized processing stays within the approved boundary
Logs the draft and version to the Clio matter notes

Firm Inputs Required

Clio connection authorized through its official flow with least-privilege scopes for the agreed read and write actions
Approved template library in OneDrive: demand letter, position statement, severance review (minimum one template per document type)
Reviewer A: document-production lead for all 3 types; Reviewer D: review backup
Designation of which matter types trigger each template

Review Gate + Deliverables

Attorney review gate is mandatory. No draft reaches a client or opposing counsel without an authorized reviewer affirmatively approving its current content and recipient. Edits invalidate approval; unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, or stale drafts never send.
Deliverable: working document workflow connected to Clio + OneDrive, draft queue folder, usage guide

Attorney Gate: Required

Intake & Routing

Inquiry capture from phone callbacks, email, and web form, with qualification and a Clio intake stub before approved active-matter creation

What It Does

Captures inquiries from the firm's web form through existing connected tools and email inbox; authorized staff manually place consent-documented phone-callback transcripts in OneDrive. No additional connector is included.
Runs a qualification checklist (employment matter, jurisdiction, conflict check flag) and scores the inquiry
Creates a Clio intake stub and a HubSpot contact with authorized intake context. The stub is not an approved active matter; Reviewer B must confirm conflict clearance and assignment before it advances.
Routes to the correct attorney based on matter type and current workload flag
Prepares a Calendly intake invitation if the inquiry qualifies and the attorney has availability; booking or any outbound invite waits for authorized reviewer approval of its current content and recipient

Firm Inputs Required

Clio connection authorized through its official flow with least-privilege scopes for the agreed write actions
HubSpot connection authorized through its official flow with least-privilege contact scopes
Calendly connection authorized through its official flow with least-privilege scopes and intake calendars configured per attorney
Firm's qualification criteria in writing (minimum employment threshold, conflict check process, geographic limits)
Routing rules: which attorney receives which matter type

Review Gate + Deliverables

Reviewer B confirms the conflict check before the workflow proceeds past the Clio stub. Conflict clearance is not send approval. Calendly invitations, confirmations, reschedules, cancellations, and other client-facing messages require separate affirmative approval of current content and recipient; unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, or edited-after-approval drafts never send.
Deliverable: intake workflow, routing logic, Clio and HubSpot integration, approval-gated Calendly intake scheduling, usage guide

Conflict Clearance + Invite Approval

Meeting Intelligence

Consent-documented transcripts summarized for review, filed to the matter after confirmation, with action items surfaced and assigned

What It Does

Detects consent-documented transcripts manually placed by authorized staff in the OneDrive intake folder and matches them to authorized matter context
Reads only the authorized transcript file in OneDrive; no automated recording or transcription integration is included
Produces a structured summary: matter context, client statements, commitments made, next steps
Queues the summary for Reviewer B; after confirmation, appends it to the Clio matter note and tags it by date and attendees
Prepares internal Clio action-item tasks with proposed attorney and due date for reviewer confirmation

Firm Inputs Required

OneDrive transcript-intake folder access; Calendly and Outlook scheduling context
Clio connection authorized through its official flow with least-privilege scopes for the agreed write actions
Designation of which call types to capture (intake, status, settlement discussion)
Documented consent, authorized manual transcript placement in OneDrive, and matter-matching rules; no recording-service credentials

Review Gate + Deliverables

Reviewer B confirms summaries before they become Clio matter records and confirms action-item tasks. Internal task approval does not authorize a calendar invitation or client-facing message: each requires affirmative approval of its current content and recipient. Unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, or edited-after-approval drafts never send.
Deliverable: meeting-to-matter workflow, Clio task integration, usage guide

Note Review: Attorney Confirms

Follow-Through

Deadlines and unanswered threads monitored; status-update drafts queued for affirmative review, with internal reminders kept separate

What It Does

Monitors open Clio tasks and matter deadlines for approaching due dates
Flags email threads in Outlook that have not received a reply within the firm's defined response window
Prepares client status-update drafts at defined intervals (e.g., after 10 business days without movement); every send requires affirmative approval of current content and recipient
Surfaces a daily digest to the responsible attorney listing items needing attention that day

Firm Inputs Required

Clio connection authorized through its official flow with least-privilege read scopes
Outlook connection authorized through Microsoft's official flow with least-privilege access to agreed email thread status
Firm's response window policy in writing (how many days before a thread is flagged)
Approved status-update templates; template approval never substitutes for approval of each current draft and recipient
Reviewer D: follow-through lead and daily-digest recipient; designated authorized backup

Review Gate + Deliverables

Client-facing follow-ups and status updates remain blocked until an authorized reviewer affirmatively approves their current content and recipient. Unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, or edited-after-approval drafts never send; content or recipient edits require fresh approval. Review-window expiry triggers internal reminders only, never release. Approval does not authorize unrelated actions.
Deliverable: deadline monitoring workflow, unanswered-thread flagging, approval-gated status-update draft queue, separate internal daily digest, approval-state log, usage guide

Status Updates: Explicit Approval

Verification Gates

Source checks and affirmative release controls shared by all four workflows; no separate recovery credit

What It Does

Checks facts, required fields, authority references, and approved-client-boundary matches against authorized inputs
Flags missing or conflicting support for reviewer resolution; unsupported material is not released
Tracks current draft content, intended recipient, reviewer decision, and edits; blocks sends without a valid affirmative approval

Firm Inputs Required

Reviewer C: authority-standard lead; Reviewer D: review backup
Written verification standards for the 3 document types and the Ohio employment pack with applicable federal law
Authorized source material and synthetic approval-state fixtures; no Lexis automation or credentials

Review Gate + Deliverables

Unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, or edited-after-approval drafts never send. Review-window expiry creates only internal reminders.
Deliverable: verification checklist, exception queue, content-and-recipient approval controls, decision log, and usage guide across all four workflows

Unapproved Sends: Blocked

Knowledge Layer

Approved firm templates, source material, and standards in OneDrive support all four workflows; no separate recovery credit

What It Does

Organizes approved templates, authority references, and workflow standards with source and version labels
Limits retrieval to authorized sources within the approved client boundary and jurisdiction pack
Flags missing, stale, or conflicting material and visible uncertainty for review; grounded drafts and source checks reduce errors but cannot eliminate them

Firm Inputs Required

Reviewer C: knowledge-standard lead; Reviewer D: review backup
Approved OneDrive materials for demand letter, position statement, and severance review
Ohio employment matters with applicable federal law; source permissions and version standards in writing

Review Gate + Deliverables

Reviewer C approves knowledge changes. Knowledge or template approval never authorizes an outbound send; each current communication and recipient requires separate affirmative approval. Approved knowledge corrections update the source library, not model training.
Deliverable: versioned knowledge library, retrieval boundaries, source register, update checklist, and usage guide using the existing OneDrive integration

Knowledge Changes: Reviewer Approves

Acceptance Criteria

Final payment is due only after all criteria are met

How Acceptance Works

This sample describes proposed acceptance tests using synthetic fixtures only; it reports no completed test or actual client-matter deployment. Reviewer A covers Document Production; Reviewer B covers Intake & Routing and Meeting Intelligence; Reviewer C covers Verification Gates and Knowledge Layer; Reviewer D covers Follow-Through and serves as review backup. Individual authorized reviewers are identified in real agreements. Development and regression testing also use synthetic fixtures. Any operational activation requires separate written scope, client permissions, and documented consent; signing or payment alone does not authorize real-matter use. Acceptance is confirmed in writing for each system. The $13,750 final payment is not due until all six systems are accepted.

System	Criterion	Measurement
1. Document Production	Demand letter, position statement, and severance review each drafted from a synthetic matter fixture and accepted by Reviewer A without structural revision	Proposed demonstration on 3 consecutive synthetic fixtures, one per agreed document type
1. Document Production	Draft queue populated with correct fixture fields and source references; zero manual re-keying required to populate those fields	Reviewer A checks all fields in 3 of 3 synthetic runs; legal and release approval remain human work
2. Intake & Routing	10 consecutive synthetic inquiries captured from at least 2 channels (web form and email), with Clio matter stub and HubSpot contact created without manual re-typing	Proposed fixture run observed by administrator and Reviewer B; no real inquiry data
	Qualified synthetic inquiries routed per written rules in 10 of 10 cases; conflict clearance required before advancing past the stub	Reviewer B checks fixture routing and conflict-state logs
	5 qualified synthetic intake invitations prepared; Calendly booking and outbound invitations occur only after Reviewer B approves current content and recipient	Synthetic dispatch log must show zero sends for unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, or edited-after-approval invitations; content or recipient edits require fresh approval
3. Meeting Intelligence	Structured summary queued against the correct synthetic Clio matter after authorized manual transcript placement in OneDrive; filed only after Reviewer B confirms	5 consent-documented synthetic transcript fixtures; upload and queue timestamps checked; human review time is separate
3. Meeting Intelligence	Action-item tasks assigned to the correct proposed attorney and due date in 5 of 5 synthetic cases; reviewer confirms accuracy before reliance	Reviewer B checks each synthetic task set; any calendar invitation or client-facing message requires separate current-content-and-recipient approval
4. Follow-Through	Unanswered synthetic email threads flagged within 1 business day of exceeding the response window, with zero false positives on replied threads over a simulated 5-day period	Reviewer D and administrator check synthetic Outlook thread logs
	Separate internal digest prepared by 8:30 AM on 5 simulated business days, containing all tasks due with zero omissions	Reviewer D compares digest to synthetic Clio task lists; internal reminders are not client-facing sends
	Client-facing follow-ups require affirmative approval of current content and recipient; silence or review-window expiry never releases a draft	Reviewer D checks synthetic unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, edited-after-approval, and approved states; only currently approved content to its approved recipient may send. Expiry produces internal reminders only.
5. Verification Gates	Source, required-field, and boundary checks block unsupported or mismatched fixture output pending reviewer resolution across all four workflows	Reviewer C checks seeded missing-support, conflicting-fact, and wrong-client synthetic fixtures; exception and decision logs retained
5. Verification Gates	Send controls reject unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, and edited-after-approval communications, including calendar invitations and follow-ups	Synthetic state tests must show zero unauthorized sends; content or recipient edits invalidate approval. A positive case requires affirmative current-content-and-recipient approval, with unrelated actions still blocked.
6. Knowledge Layer	The 3 agreed document types and 1 Ohio employment/federal pack retrieve only approved, versioned sources within the approved client boundary	Reviewer C checks synthetic fixtures for each type, source labels, permission boundaries, and missing or stale-source flags
6. Knowledge Layer	Knowledge changes require Reviewer C approval and propagate to the four workflows without granting send permission	Synthetic approved, unapproved, and stale-version cases checked; version register and update guide handed over

Price & Milestones

Original build price is fixed. Added scope requires a separate written order.

$29,750

Foundry recommended and elected: $29,750 fixed for the six-system scope stated here, before signing. The fictional Systems Audit values 35 recoverable hours per week at $148,750 annually; this is modeled capacity, not guaranteed cash savings. Verification Gates and Knowledge Layer add no separate recovery credit.

Your agreed build scope has a fixed price. Rework needed to pass its written acceptance criteria is included. New scope is separately quoted and approved in writing before work begins; it does not re-price the original build. Added-scope module orders use 30% at signing and 70% at acceptance, separate from the original milestones.

If Synapse Forge cannot pass the acceptance criteria for any system, rework continues at no additional charge until the criteria are met or the parties agree in writing to a modified criterion. This acceptance rework is not charged to care hours.

The final payment of $13,750 is withheld by the firm until all six systems pass written acceptance. The original $29,750 build remains fixed; optional care and separately approved added scope have their own charges.

Milestone 1 · At Signing

$9,000

Due when this Blueprint is signed and returned. Kickoff is the next business day after the agreement is signed, the signing payment has cleared, the checklist is complete, and access is verified. Signing or payment alone does not authorize live provisioning.

Milestone 2 · Mid-Build Demo

$7,000

Due after the mid-build demonstration at the end of Week 2. In this fictional plan, the firm watches systems 1 and 2 run on synthetic fixtures, supported by systems 5 and 6, before this payment is due.

Milestone 3 · At Acceptance

$13,750

Due only after all six systems pass their written acceptance criteria. No acceptance, no final payment.

The Numbers Add Up

$9,000 at signing + $7,000 at mid-build demo + $13,750 at acceptance = $29,750 total. These milestones cover the complete original build fee. Optional care and separately quoted, written added-scope orders are separate; neither re-prices the original build.

Written Scope & Pre-Signing Trade

The audit recommends a band; you choose the band you build. The blueprint states the price and the scope in writing before you sign, and nothing is re-priced after. Two firms that choose the same band get the same build.

In this fictional elected scope, 3 unused document types and 2 unused jurisdiction packs carry $6,750 gross catalog value. A written pre-signing trade allocates $4,000 to HubSpot and Calendly, in addition to the base Clio, OneDrive, and Outlook integrations: 5 integrations total, with no cash surcharge to the $29,750 build.

The remaining $2,750 noncash add-on credit is available at acceptance and valid for 12 months afterward. It is nonrefundable and cannot pay care invoices. No credit is treated as earned or spent by this sample.

Optional Care, Costs & Responsibilities

Current optional care is $1,500 per month with 8 included hours for monitoring, correction, verification, and refinement of existing accepted capabilities. Additional care time is $250 per hour, preapproved in writing; no unapproved overage is billed. Original acceptance rework remains included in the build. Care covers monitoring, tuning, and corrections within agreed hours. Work directly with the founder. Send care requests anytime. Routine requests receive a response within one business day. Business hours: Monday-Friday, 9 a.m.-6 p.m. Eastern Time (America/New_York), excluding U.S. federal holidays. System-blocking incidents take priority, with best-effort assistance outside business hours. A response acknowledges the issue and establishes the next step; it is not a resolution deadline. Resolution depends on the issue and any upstream provider. This is not a 24/7 staffing guarantee. Included care hours and prior written approval for additional work still apply.

A new document type, integration, or post-close sequence outside the original acceptance criteria is added scope, not care. It requires a separately quoted written module order before work begins, with 30% at signing and 70% at acceptance. Any permitted add-on credit use must be expressly approved; it cannot offset care.

The build is a one-time fee. Synapse Forge's ongoing care plan is optional. Existing software subscriptions and any cloud or usage charges are separate; the blueprint lists the costs that apply to your build.

SF build: Firm pays Synapse Forge $29,750 once under the original milestones.
Optional SF care: Firm pays Synapse Forge $1,500 per month for 8 included hours; additional time is $250/hr only with prior written approval.
Existing SaaS and LLM tools: Firm pays applicable vendors. Amounts are not established in this fictional example, not assumed to be zero.
Cloud, inference, and processing usage: Client-billed separately. Amounts are unknown here; the usage estimate and approved providers must be recorded before commitment.
Module orders and cancellation: Added scope is separate, with only expressly approved noncash credit use. Ending care does not cancel software licenses, provider dependencies, or vendor bills.

This ledger separates SF fees from unknown operating costs; it is not a total operating-cost calculation.

Build Timeline

Illustrative 5-week plan within the 4 to 6 weeks from kickoff. Kickoff is the next business day after signed agreement, cleared signing payment, complete checklist, and verified access; not from inquiry or signing alone.

Pre-Kickoff (Before Week 1)

Access & Credentials

Firm completes the Client Access Checklist
Synapse Forge verifies authorized access and the five agreed integrations, and records gaps; access approvals may add elapsed lead time
Kickoff is the next business day after the agreement is signed, the signing payment has cleared, the checklist is complete, and access is verified; live activation still requires the written permissions and consent above.

Week 1

Systems 1 & 2 Build + Verification & Knowledge Foundations

Map Clio matter schema and the 3 agreed templates for the 1 Ohio employment/federal pack
Build document production workflow and draft queue folder structure in OneDrive
Build intake capture from web form and email, connect to Clio and HubSpot
Configure qualification logic, routing rules, and approval-gated Calendly invitations per written criteria
Build System 5 verification and approval-state controls plus System 6 versioned OneDrive knowledge library; test all four initial systems with synthetic fixtures

Week 2

Synthetic Fixture Tests + Mid-Build Demonstration

Systems 1 and 2 run against synthetic matter and intake fixtures under reviewer supervision; systems 5 and 6 supply verification and approved knowledge
Firm administrator and Reviewers A, B, and C observe illustrative fixture tests; no real client-matter testing is claimed
Defects logged for correction and re-test against written acceptance criteria; the illustrated week is not a resolution guarantee
Mid-build demonstration call held at end of Week 2. Second payment due after this call.

Week 3

Systems 3 & 4 Build + Shared Verification & Knowledge Controls

Configure OneDrive intake for consent-documented transcripts manually placed by authorized staff; no recording or transcription connector
Build structured summary and action-item extraction
Build deadline monitor, unanswered-thread flagging, and daily digest
Build status-update drafts that never send without affirmative current-content-and-recipient approval; expired review windows trigger internal reminders only
Synthetic tests on systems 3 and 4 plus shared systems 5 and 6; cover unreviewed, rejected, canceled, expired, and edited-after-approval states with zero unauthorized sends

Week 4

Six-System Integration + Synthetic Refinement

All six systems run together on synthetic fixtures, with Reviewers A–D reviewing outputs and shared controls daily
Template and routing refinements from reviewer edits fed into the workflows and versioned Knowledge Layer; content or recipient edits invalidate send approval
Permission scopes, approved-client boundaries, source versions, and approval logs verified across all six systems
Synthetic edge-case tests: intake surges, malformed inquiries, calendar conflicts, stale sources, and expired approvals; no calendar invitation releases without affirmative approval

Week 5

Acceptance Testing + Handover

All six systems run through every written acceptance criterion using synthetic fixtures with their assigned Reviewer A–D placeholders; no actual acceptance is asserted
Defects corrected and re-tested against the written acceptance criteria; no fixed resolution deadline is implied
All six systems' documentation, prompts, verification logs, knowledge-source register, and connection configurations handed over in OneDrive; credentials remain firm-controlled
Recorded 1-hour walkthrough of scoped operation, review gates, pause controls, and the runbook; staff readiness depends on role, access, and practice, not a promise of independent operation after one hour
Final payment due only on written acceptance confirmation for all six systems

Client Access Checklist

Each row lists access, templates, reviewers, an owner, and a synthetic hands-on effort estimate; permissions and readiness affect preparation

Clio authorized connection for agreed matter actions Use Clio's current official authorization flow. The firm administrator approves only required scopes and verifies the connection securely; do not send credentials in chat, email, or the inquiry form.

Firm administrator

~15 min

OneDrive shared folder with template library Minimum: one demand letter template, one position statement template, one severance review template, in Word format.

Managing partner or paralegal

~1–2 hrs

Outlook shared mailbox or delegation access for intake inbox Use Microsoft's current official authorization flow for the agreed inbox with least-privilege scopes. Verify actual read and send permissions before activation; development tests use synthetic fixtures. Send permission alone never authorizes release: each current message and recipient still need affirmative reviewer approval.

IT or office manager

~30 min

HubSpot authorized connection for agreed contact actions Use HubSpot's current official secure connection flow, with only the scopes required for the agreed contact actions. The administrator verifies access; no deal-write scope is assumed and no secret is sent in chat.

HubSpot admin

~20 min

Calendly authorized connection and intake calendar link per attorney Use Calendly's current official secure connection flow with least-privilege scopes. Each attorney's intake event duration and buffer follow firm policy. Client-facing invitations, confirmations, reschedules, and cancellations remain blocked until current content and recipient are affirmatively approved.

Each attorney + office manager

~1 hr

Firm's intake qualification criteria in writing Minimum: which matter types you accept, jurisdictional limits, and the conflict-check process the workflow should flag.

Managing partner

~1 hr

Attorney routing rules in writing Routing by matter type, with authorized individuals identified before kickoff. Reviewer B is the fictional intake/meeting lead; Reviewer D provides review backup. Routing is separate from send approval.

Managing partner

~30 min

Four named reviewer placeholders assigned across six systems Reviewer A: Document Production; Reviewer B: Intake & Routing and Meeting Intelligence; Reviewer C: Verification Gates and Knowledge Layer; Reviewer D: Follow-Through and review backup. Fictional placeholders only; real agreements identify individual reviewers before kickoff.

Managing partner

~10 min

Consent-documented manual transcript intake confirmed Authorized staff manually place consent-documented transcripts in the OneDrive intake folder. Confirm permissions and matter-matching rules; do not request AssemblyAI, Teams, Zoom, or other recording-service API credentials.

IT or office manager

~30 min

Checklist Effort Is Not Elapsed Lead Time

The nine current rows total 315 to 375 minutes, or 5 hours 15 minutes to 6 hours 15 minutes of combined hands-on person-time: 15 + (60 to 120) + 30 + 20 + 60 + 60 + 30 + 10 + 30 minutes. Each row is counted once across its owners, not once per person. These are synthetic preparation estimates, not observed client results. Waiting for access approvals, template agreement, or reviewer availability adds separate elapsed calendar lead time. Build participation, reviews, and the walkthrough are additional client effort. Use official secure authorization flows with least privilege; any required secret stays in the approved secure connection channel, never chat or the inquiry form.

Data & Privacy Commitments

Applies to all work performed under this Blueprint

Where Data Lives

All six systems operate within the firm's approved processing boundary, using the five agreed integrations (Clio, OneDrive, Outlook, HubSpot, Calendly) under firm-controlled credentials and access controls. Transcript ingestion is manual placement of consent-documented files in OneDrive, not an additional connector. Client-owned accounts alone do not establish provider processing or retention terms.
No client content leaves the client project for testing, evaluation, monitoring, or diagnostics; only synthetic fixtures may be used outside it. Builder access is least-privilege and revoked at handover; firm-owned operational connections remain. Optional care requires separately authorized, limited access. All development and regression testing uses synthetic fixtures.
No firm data is stored on Synapse Forge infrastructure. Before activation, authorized integrations and providers must meet the agreed data requirements; actual provider, region, retention, and training terms must be verified and documented in the blueprint. This sample has no verified processor inventory; that approval record remains an owner decision.

Use of Data

Synapse Forge does not pool, resell, or use client data for model training. Authorized provider processing must stay within the documented, approved boundary; this is not a claim that no third party processes data.
Selected providers' retention and training settings require verification before use. Firm-approved knowledge corrections update the source library; they are not model training. No unverified provider-wide guarantee is made.
The build is designed to support the firm's confidentiality obligations, including its assessment of ABA Model Rule 1.6(c). The firm approves data requirements and reviews the actual provider terms; no blanket compliance or privilege guarantee is made.
An NDA is available before confidential discussion. Connection authorization uses official secure flows; credentials never belong in chat or the inquiry form.

Ownership Terms

Your scoped assets stay yours. Software licenses and provider dependencies remain separate.

Standard Handover in Every Band

All workflow files and configurations for all six systems, stored in the firm's OneDrive folder, in a format that can be read and modified without Synapse Forge's involvement.
All prompt and instruction files used by AI-assisted steps, documented in plain language for the firm's designated operators and reviewers.
Operating documentation and a runbook for the scoped systems, included in every band: how to trigger, pause, or disable workflows; edit routing rules or templates; maintain approval gates; and identify the internal owner of access controls and escalation. This is standard handover, not an upgrade.
A 1-hour recorded walkthrough of scoped operation, review gates, pause controls, and the runbook, saved to OneDrive for reference. It does not promise that every staff member can operate independently after one hour.

What Happens If the Care Plan Ends

Ending care does not disable the firm-owned workflows. Synapse Forge controls no remote kill switch or required license server. Continued operation depends on maintained access, applicable software licenses, providers, and the firm's own upkeep; ending care does not cancel vendor bills.
The firm owns the connection credentials, workflow files, verification controls, knowledge library, and documentation outright. Ending optional care does not affect those assets or weaken approval gates. Separate care access is revoked when care ends; firm-owned operational connections remain.
If a connected tool (Clio, Outlook, etc.) updates its API in a breaking way after the care plan ends, the firm has the documentation needed to identify what changed. A one-time repair engagement is available at a flat rate scoped at that time, separately quoted and approved in writing before work; it does not re-price the original build.