Put intake follow-up into a clear sequence
Plan intake in Clio Grow with forms, emails, appointments, status changes, and manual tasks.
Tools in the source
Practice relevance
Cross-practice idea · A general operational method. Review the stated tool and jurisdiction limits before use.
The problem
A small firm must keep up with intake calls, forms, scheduling, and manual checks.
Why it matters: An inquiry can stall when forms, appointments, and follow-ups have no clear owner. A reviewed sequence makes the next administrative step visible while keeping conflicts and engagement decisions with the firm.
Sources & evidence
Method documented by the vendor. Our law-firm adaptation and starter prompt have not been tested.
What’s been verified
The source describes a method or feature. It does not provide a verified outcome for this exact law-firm adaptation.
What to measure: Manual steps completed, failed steps detected, and time waiting between approved intake stages.
- Clio Grow: automated workflow guide ↗Original vendor documentation supports the workflow method, including prepared resources, manual steps, and failures.
- r/LawFirm: a solo firm launch update ↗May 4, 2025 · A self-described founder reports calls, intake, and administrative workload. This is separate pain evidence, not proof of a Clio result.
Source checked: October 15, 2026. Pain evidence is separate from method documentation. We wrote these prompts. The adapted workflow hasn’t been tested.
The source method
Start when: A staff member starts an approved intake workflow for an eligible matter.
- Clio explains how to build or customize workflows with prepared forms, emails, appointments, and matter statuses.
- The guide separates automated steps from manual tasks.
- It also explains how to track progress and failures. Staff still need a process for checking them.
Limits and review
The assistant drafts or reports only. Check source records and review the output before a human performs any separately approved send or change. No automatic legal decision, money movement, account connection or publication is included.
Who reviews it: The firm reviews eligibility, communication templates, privacy, and manual checkpoints before enabling any client-facing action. Conflict checks and engagement remain lawyer decisions.
What you need
Your firm-approved AI assistant
- Existing authorized access to the correct source account and records; no new login, credentials, installation or permission grant is included.
- Responsible lawyer/operations reviewer approves scope, definitions and any later action.
- AI optional; use only approved minimized data and retain originals separately.
- Use synthetic inputs first. Keep real data in firm-approved accounts and processing, with appropriate access, confidentiality and retention controls. Aliases alone do not anonymize records. Never paste credentials, API keys or unnecessary client details.
How to use
Documentation-checked component path; proposed workflow, not tested
- Workflow design is a proposed spec. Current reports cannot replace timestamped workflow evidence.
Check access and setup
- The live account, entitlement, exact headers, records and field coverage have not been observed.
Read actual Grow workflow states and available assets
Clio Grow · Settings > Automated workflows; Matters > selected matter > Intake process > Automated workflows > expand workflow
Capture existing template steps and approved form/email/appointment/task choices. In a bounded sample, manually record in-progress/completed timestamps and errors from the expanded workflow. Do not apply a workflow or alter its state.
- Expected output
- Native workflow-state capture plus approved step inventory.
- Next step
- Prepare an ApprovedSteps text inventory of existing supported step types and actual form/template/appointment IDs, a CurrentWorkflowEvidence ledger of observed state/timestamps/source refs, and a full Scope note. Include all three labeled sections in the minimized packet passed to Acrobat; missing assets or history remain blocked.
- Check before continuing
- Applying a published workflow starts its first step. Assign task waits for completion; form and appointment steps advance on their documented event. No bulk workflow log export is claimed.
Export intake context only if needed
Clio Grow · Reports > Matter revenue report > filters > View report > Columns > Download CSV
For current intake/source context, use the actual report and preserve its selected columns/date scope. Do not enable shared contacts just to run it; if not already configured, the export route is blocked and manual matter inspection remains available.
- Expected output
- Native current intake rows; not the workflow event log.
- Next step
- Only administrative columns needed for the sequence enter the analysis packet.
- Check before continuing
- Grow/Manage refresh timing differs; no Grow arbitrary data-query chat is claimed. The support AI cannot access matters or billing.
Draft from the approved source packet
Acrobat PDF Spaces / AI Assistant, optional · Acrobat home > PDF Spaces > Create a PDF Space > Paste copied text > Add to PDF Space > chat
Paste only the approved nonconfidential packet, source IDs and full Scope note. Paste the exact prompt into the Space chat. Do not upload raw client records; this is a downstream drafting assistant, not an AI in the source application.
- Expected output
- A supported-step sequence with human gates and exception tests.
- Next step
- Copy reviewed output into an internal review document or the named downstream tool, preserving evidence IDs.
- Check before continuing
- No form/email/appointment template or policy can be invented to complete the chain.
Human review and final action
Final human reviewResponsible firm reviewer · Internal Review worksheet / review document
Administrator reviews the spec and client-contact permissions. A later authorized build goes to Settings > Automated workflows > New template > Create my own, choosing supported items, then Save draft & exit. Publishing and applying require separate approval.
- Expected output
- Approved draft build brief; no Grow account change.
- Next step
- Human builder gets the exact step/input map and validation checklist.
- Check before continuing
- Published workflows cannot simply be edited in place; cancel/recreate behavior must be considered before changes.
What you’ll get
A workflow plan and draft wording for review. The prompt does not configure Clio Grow or send messages.
Try with the sample files
Follow the tool steps above and use the inputs named in each step. Where provided, native-* files are blank scaffolds and NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING explains their fields. Original examples and the optional full review prompt use a separate prepared-input schema. Keep them separate unless the mapping explicitly connects them. Downloading a kit does not connect accounts or prove the workflow works.
Download inputs and checklist 10 files
Instructions, blank templates and separate synthetic examples; these files do not install an automation. Blank templates still need verified source data.
- Download starter kit All inputs, synthetic examples and review notes in one ZIP. No automation is installed.
- Start here: get the sources and prepare the review Documentation-checked acquisition, explicit manual mapping, exact prompts and human review limits
- Input preparation checklist Collect the actual recipe inputs without inventing product export headers
- Synthetic example and expected result Exercise the important safety and data-quality boundary
- Intake plan inputs template Editable recipe-specific setup input
- Setup and review checklist Use the original recipe with the provided preparation files
- Native input scaffold: ApprovedSteps Approved text input for ApprovedSteps; complete from verified evidence and include in the AI-visible packet
- Native input scaffold: CurrentWorkflowEvidence Approved text input for CurrentWorkflowEvidence; complete from verified evidence and include in the AI-visible packet
- Native input scaffold: Scope Approved text input for Scope; complete from verified evidence and include in the AI-visible packet
- Native input mapping and scope guide Old-file-to-native-input compatibility map, acquisition requirements, privacy and blocking gates
Optional full review prompt for prepared inputs
Prepared-input review prompt with Your firm-approved AI assistant
Editorial adaptation · untested. This prompt uses the original prepared-input schema shown in the sample test. Step prompts may use different tables. Follow NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING where supplied; do not mix the original examples with native-step inputs without mapping and checking every field.