# Prepare follow-up for unacknowledged referrals Canonical page: https://agents.paretoid.com/workflows/prepare-follow-up-for-unacknowledged-referrals/ Category: CRM & Follow-up Practice relevance: cross-practice. A general operational method. Review the stated tool and jurisdiction limits before use. Jurisdiction/provider scope: Check referral acknowledgments and prepare only authorized reference-based drafts. Status: Proposed / not tested. The public source describes the problem. Documentation supports only the stated method components; no result from this recipe has been verified. Verification: Source methods and reported problems have been reviewed. We have not run the adapted workflow. The sample below describes expected behavior on synthetic data, not a customer result. ## The problem Check referral acknowledgments and prepare only authorized reference-based drafts. Why it matters: A referral can disappear from view after it is sent. Checking acknowledgment and approved follow-up dates helps staff spot open handoffs while protecting client information and leaving recipient and sharing decisions to the firm. ## Sources and evidence - pain: [Pain evidence: Public discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/LawFirm/comments/1vz3690/new_law_firm/) first-person comment by Feeling-Attorney4301, 2026-08-27. This criminal-practice participant says “we lost quite a few referrals just for failure to follow up with the person we had sent it to.” The separate multi-location family-firm commenter is not the source of this pain. Older than 30 days; recent supportive thread replies are not substituted for the date of this pain. - method: [Method: Official method documentation](https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699954-tracking-referrals) documents referral contact attribution; documents owner/due-date tasks. Native inbound referrer tracking does not establish an end-to-end outbound-referral integration. - method: [Method: Official method documentation](https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699821-creating-tasks-for-users) Additional official capability reference. The complete adapted recipe has not been tested. Source checked: October 15, 2026. Pain accounts are self-reported. Documentation supports components; this adapted recipe and prompt have not been tested. ## Suggested approach Start when: Staff records an authorized referral 1. record destination, sent date, acknowledgment status and next check 2. Keep source references and report unknowns instead of filling gaps. 3. The responsible reviewer checks the report before any separately approved action. ## What you need - 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 - No native end-to-end outbound-referral export is established. The register is a manually evidenced editorial input. Access and setup: - The live account, entitlement, exact headers, records and field coverage have not been observed. ### 1. Locate the real outbound-referral evidence Tool: Lawmatics / firm’s existing referral register Location: Matter > Details / Activities / Tasks; existing approved outbound-referral register Read the existing register or maintained custom fields, sent-event evidence, receiving-party acknowledgment, staff owner and follow-up date. Keep recipient identity and client-sharing authorization in restricted records. No inbound-referrer report is substituted. Expected output: A bounded staff-verified outbound-referral ledger, or a missing-ledger blocker. Next step: Assign referral/destination aliases and evidence refs; pass only administrative state downstream. Check before continuing: Lawmatics Source=Referrals and Campaign/Referrer track inbound referral attribution. They do not prove a referral was sent out or accepted. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699954-tracking-referrals https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699825-matter-profile-overview https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10738648-completing-and-editing-tasks ### 2. Make the checked, minimized handoff Tool: Excel / source-record reviewer Location: Restricted original workbook > separate analysis workbook > Scope worksheet For each staff-nominated outbound referral, verify whether it was sent, what administrative information may be shared, whether an acknowledgment exists, and the already assigned next-check date. Keep untouched original exports/screenshots and the identifying source map in restricted firm storage. Build a separate minimized analysis file; do not hide raw client data on another tab. Include the complete Scope/coverage note in the AI-visible workbook or prompt. Use aliases and administrative metadata only. Unknown is not zero, false, completed or absent. Expected output: Referrals(referral_alias,destination_alias,sent_at,acknowledged_at,owner_alias,next_check_at,sharing_scope_verified,evidence_refs) Next step: Format each approved range as a named table. Carry source-row references and coverage into the analysis workbook. Check before continuing: Every field has an observed source or an explicit missing reason; staff assignments are marked editorial, not native. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/excel/merge-queries-power-query https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10738648-completing-and-editing-tasks ### 3. Ask AI to inspect the checked inputs Tool: Excel Copilot, optional Location: Analysis workbook > Copilot icon at lower right > Chat only Open the minimized workbook containing the named tables and Scope. Paste the exact prompt; if unavailable, perform the same rule checks manually. Prompt: ```text Use Referrals and Scope. Flag missing acknowledgment, missing owner or missing staff-assigned next-check date. Do not invent deadlines or conclude nonresponse from incomplete correspondence coverage. Require sharing_scope_verified=true; false, unknown and missing values are blocked for any draft using sharing facts. Draft an internal status-check request using only referral_alias and approved administrative facts; no case narrative, legal opinion, recipient selection, fee negotiation or sending. ``` Expected output: Internal follow-up queue and minimal draft requests. Next step: Copy checked results into a new Review sheet, retaining source references and unresolved blockers. Check before continuing: Acknowledgment is distinct from accepting representation; client permission is a human-verified prerequisite. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/excel/copilot/get-started-with-copilot-in-excel ### 4. Human review and final action Tool: Responsible firm reviewer Location: Internal Review worksheet / review document Lawyer confirms destination, sharing permission and the specific draft before any external contact. Save the internal queue with the source references. Expected output: Reviewed queue; no external transmission. Next step: If requested and approved, staff contacts the verified recipient in the existing channel. Check before continuing: No marketplace posting or new integration is needed. Execution status: Public official documentation checked 2026-10-15; no login, export, live query, import, installation, configuration, message or client workflow was executed. Step documentation: https://help.lawmatics.com/en/articles/10699954-tracking-referrals ## What you will get referral-followup.csv: referral_id, acknowledgment_status, followup_due, missing_permission_or_recipient_evidence, owner_alias, proposed_next_step; status-request-drafts.txt: reference-only drafts for approved records ## Human review and limits No representation promises, legal fee-sharing recommendations or sensitive disclosures. Referral suitability and client consent remain with the lawyer. 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. What to measure: In a synthetic pilot, count correctly found exceptions, false alarms, and unresolved inputs. No time or cost saving is assumed. ## Original prepared-input schema referrals.csv: referral_id, recipient_alias, authorized_at, sent_at, acknowledgment_at, next_check_at, owner_alias, sharing_scope recipient-verification.csv: recipient_alias, verified_channel, verification_ref, verified_at; followup-policy.txt: as-of time, acknowledgment interval, approved administrative fields, reviewer and no-send boundary Synthetic example input: ```text Synthetic inputs are included in the starter kit. referrals-example.csv recipient-verification-example.csv referral-followup-example.csv followup-policy-example.txt status-request-drafts-example.txt ``` Expected synthetic output: ```text RF1 is unacknowledged and overdue with evidence permitting a reference-only draft. RF2 lacks authorization, recipient verification and next-check date, so external drafting is held. RF3 is acknowledged with a future check and excluded from exceptions. ``` Failure check: No representation promises, legal fee-sharing recommendations or sensitive disclosures. Referral suitability and client consent remain with the lawyer. Missing recipient verification or sharing permission must block even a reference-only draft. ## Starter files Native blank scaffolds and original synthetic examples may use different schemas. Follow NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING where supplied. These files do not connect accounts or install automation. - [Download starter kit](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21-starter-kit.zip) — All inputs, synthetic examples and review notes in one ZIP. No automation is installed. - [Start here: get the sources and prepare the review](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/START-HERE.txt) — Documentation-checked acquisition, explicit manual mapping, exact prompts and human review limits - [Input template: referrals.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/referrals.csv) — Header-only input template; preserve exact names and order - [Synthetic input: referrals.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/referrals-example.csv) — Fabricated sample rows for an offline manual trial - [Input template: recipient-verification.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/recipient-verification.csv) — Header-only input template; preserve exact names and order - [Synthetic input: recipient-verification.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/recipient-verification-example.csv) — Fabricated sample rows for an offline manual trial - [Output template: referral-followup.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/referral-followup.csv) — Header-only output template; preserve exact names and order - [Expected output: referral-followup.csv](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/referral-followup-example.csv) — Hand-authored synthetic expected result; not an executed workflow result - [Policy/input template: followup-policy.txt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/followup-policy.txt) — Required source/policy preparation scaffold; not populated with firm instructions - [Synthetic policy/input: followup-policy.txt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/followup-policy-example.txt) — Fixture-only context; not an approved production policy - [Draft scaffold: status-request-drafts.txt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/status-request-drafts.txt) — Blank output scaffold; no message, form or appeal is sent - [Synthetic expected draft: status-request-drafts.txt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/status-request-drafts-example.txt) — Hand-authored draft or blocked-output example for fixture review - [Synthetic fixture expectations](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/fixture-expectations.txt) — Acceptance targets and failure checks; no claim of workflow execution - [Review prompt](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/starter-prompt.txt) — Copyable offline review prompt; no executable automation - [Setup and prerequisites](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/README.txt) — Recipe-specific setup, evidence sources and usage boundaries - [Native input scaffold: Referrals](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/native-referrals-template.csv) — Empty editorial table for Referrals; populate from verified source evidence after reviewed mapping; not a native export - [Native input scaffold: Scope](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/native-scope-template.txt) — Approved text input for Scope; complete from verified evidence and include in the AI-visible packet - [Native input mapping and scope guide](https://agents.paretoid.com/assets/starter-kits/g21/NATIVE-INPUT-MAPPING.txt) — Old-file-to-native-input compatibility map, acquisition requirements, privacy and blocking gates ## Optional original prepared-input prompt Destination: Your firm-approved AI assistant · prepared files This original prompt uses its own prepared-input schema. Do not mix it with native-step tables without the supplied mapping. ```text Review this anonymized outbound-referral ledger. Identify referrals missing an acknowledgment or a staff-assigned follow-up date. Draft a brief status request only when the supplied evidence verifies the recipient, sharing permission and allowed administrative fields. Include only the approved reference ID and permitted administrative information. If any permission or recipient evidence is missing, return a blocked-for-review record and no draft for that referral. Do not send, share a case narrative, select counsel or negotiate referral fees. INPUTS referrals.csv: referral_id, recipient_alias, authorized_at, sent_at, acknowledgment_at, next_check_at, owner_alias, sharing_scope recipient-verification.csv: recipient_alias, verified_channel, verification_ref, verified_at; followup-policy.txt: as-of time, acknowledgment interval, approved administrative fields, reviewer and no-send boundary OUTPUT referral-followup.csv: referral_id, acknowledgment_status, followup_due, missing_permission_or_recipient_evidence, owner_alias, proposed_next_step; status-request-drafts.txt: reference-only drafts for approved records Use only these synthetic or firm-approved inputs and preserve source row/page IDs. Keep missing or conflicting evidence unresolved. Return a draft for the named reviewer. Do not send messages, connect accounts, change records or permissions, move money, or make legal decisions. Keep source files unchanged. List missing prerequisites before continuing. ``` Proposed / not tested · editorial prompt Published by Law Firm Agents. Proposed adaptation; not tested. Not legal advice.