Client Portal - live preview

Good morning, Marta

Three documents are waiting for you and one invoice is due next week.

New documents3since 28 August

Open requests2avg reply 4 hours

Outstanding$12,400due 08 September

Next milestone12 SepPhase 2 handover

For your attention

3 items

Phase 2 specification ready for sign-offShared 31 Aug - handover blocked until approvedAction

Invoice INV-4412 due 8 September$12,400 - 30 day termsDue

Monthly report, AugustShared 01 Sep - no action neededNew

Documents

Everything shared with you, with versions and who has read what.

Shared with you

Document	Type	Version	Shared	Read	Status
Phase 2 specification	Deliverable	v3	31 Aug 2026	No	Awaiting sign-off
Monthly report, August	Report	v1	01 Sep 2026	No	New
Phase 1 handover pack	Deliverable	v2	18 Jul 2026	Yes	Signed off
Master services agreement	Contract	v1	04 Feb 2026	Yes	Signed
Data processing addendum	Contract	v2	04 Feb 2026	Yes	Signed

A superseded version stays visible so a decision made against v2 still makes sense later.

Requests

What you asked for, who owns it, and when to expect a reply.

Your requests

Reference	Request	Type	Raised	Owner	Target	Status
RQ-2214	Add two users to the reporting module	Change	31 Aug	Sara Duarte	04 Sep	In progress
RQ-2211	Question on the August invoice	Billing	01 Sep	Finance	03 Sep	Open
RQ-2202	Export of Q2 data	Data	18 Aug	Sara Duarte	22 Aug	Complete
RQ-2196	Additional training session	Change	04 Aug	Sara Duarte	18 Aug	Complete

Every request type has a published response time, so nobody has to ask whether it was received.

Invoices

What has been billed, what is paid, and what is outstanding.

Your invoices

Invoice	Issued	Description	Net	Total	Due	Status
INV-4412	08 Aug 2026	Phase 2, milestone 1	$10,333	$12,400	08 Sep 2026	Due
INV-4388	11 Jul 2026	Phase 1 completion	$18,667	$22,400	10 Aug 2026	Paid
INV-4361	12 Jun 2026	Phase 1, milestone 2	$14,000	$16,800	12 Jul 2026	Paid
INV-4340	08 May 2026	Phase 1, milestone 1	$14,000	$16,800	07 Jun 2026	Paid

Every invoice links to the milestone it was raised against.

Milestones

What is agreed, what is done, and what is waiting on you.

Project milestones

Milestone	Phase	Due	Owner	Status
Phase 2 specification sign-off	Phase 2	05 Sep 2026	Client	Waiting on you
Phase 2 handover	Phase 2	12 Sep 2026	Us	Blocked
Phase 2 acceptance	Phase 2	26 Sep 2026	Client	Not started
Phase 1 handover	Phase 1	18 Jul 2026	Us	Complete
Phase 1 acceptance	Phase 1	01 Aug 2026	Client	Complete

Milestones waiting on the client are shown as such. Most delivery slippage is not a build problem.

Clients

Every client account, its activity and what is outstanding.

Active clients426 onboarding

Open requests142 breaching

Portal adoption68%logged in last 30 days

Client book

Client	Owner	Open requests	Outstanding	Last login	Status
Kowalski Digital	Sara Duarte	2	$12,400	01 Sep 2026	Active
Halden Group	Sara Duarte	1	$0	28 Aug 2026	Active
Bracken Retail	Tom Ellery	4	$8,900	22 Aug 2026	Busy
Kelso Logistics	Tom Ellery	0	$0	14 Jun 2026	Dormant
Ashby Media	Elena Fischer	3	$4,200	31 Aug 2026	Active
Cardan Systems	Elena Fischer	0	$0	-	Never logged in

A client who has never logged in is still getting their updates by email, which is the thing the portal was meant to replace.

Request queue

Everything clients have asked for, by target date.

Open across all clients

14 open

Bracken Retail - 4 open requestsOldest is 9 days against a 5 day targetBreaching

Kowalski Digital - billing questionWith finance since yesterday, target todayDue

Ashby Media - data export requestRaised this morning, target FridayOpen

Kowalski Digital - add two usersIn progress, target 4 SeptemberIn progress

Access control

Who at the client can see what, and who invited them.

Client users

User	Client	Role	Invited by	Last login	Status
User 4412	Kowalski Digital	Full access	Sara Duarte	01 Sep 2026	Active
User 4408	Kowalski Digital	Billing only	Sara Duarte	22 Aug 2026	Active
User 4402	Halden Group	Full access	Sara Duarte	28 Aug 2026	Active
User 4396	Bracken Retail	Documents only	Tom Ellery	22 Aug 2026	Active
User 4371	Kelso Logistics	Full access	Tom Ellery	14 Jun 2026	Dormant
User 4340	Former client	Full access	Tom Ellery	12 Feb 2026	Revoked

Client records are isolated at the row level, so one client can never reach another's documents.

Audit log

Every share, download and access change. Retained for seven years.

Events

When	Actor	Action	Target	Source
01 Sep 09:10	Sara Duarte	Shared document with client	Monthly report, August	web
31 Aug 16:40	Sara Duarte	Shared document, sign-off required	Phase 2 specification v3	web
31 Aug 14:20	User 4412	Raised request	RQ-2214	portal
22 Aug 11:00	Lena Brandt	Revoked access for a former client user	User 4340	web
18 Jul 09:30	User 4402	Signed off milestone	Phase 1 handover	portal

Marchetti Trust

One client, their people and what those people can see.

Active4 people can see everythingCLI-0412 · Marchetti Trust · client since 2022 · 3 live engagements

Marchetti Trust

Eleven people from the client have portal accounts. Four of them were given full access in 2022 and two have since left the organisation.

Live engagements3$412,000 contracted

Portal users114 with full access

Open requests6oldest 18 days

Documents shared28496 in the last month

Who can see what

Fabiola MarchettiFull access · still thereCorrect

Henrik SandvikFull access · left in MarchShould be gone

Ada WeissFull access · left in JuneShould be gone

Bram VermeulenFull access · joined finance in 2024Too much

Seven othersEngagement level · correctCorrect

Two people who left can still open every document on this client. Nothing here noticed, because nothing tells a supplier when a client employee leaves.

Engagements

Migration$184,000 · delivery 14 NovemberAt risk

Advisory retainer$96,000 a year · renews JanuaryLive

Training programme$132,000 · completeComplete

The at-risk one has an unraised change request against it. The client sees the milestone dates and not the reason they are slipping.

Recent activity

Invoice INV-4412 viewedFabiola Marchetti · 2 days ago

Migration plan downloadedAda Weiss · 11 days agoLeft in June

Request raisedBram Vermeulen · 18 days ago · unansweredOverdue

Document shared by usAstrid Vang · 3 days ago

The second row is a former employee downloading a project plan eleven days ago. It is in the log and nobody reads the log.

Add a client

Who they are, who gets in, and what they will see.

The client

OrganisationTypeOwner

What the portal shows them

DocumentsEverything sharedTheir engagements onlyNothing yet

InvoicesAllPaid and outstandingNone

MilestonesDates and statusDates onlyNone

Milestone status is the one that matters. Showing a date without whether it will be met is how a client finds out about a slip on the day it happens.

Access review

Review every 6 monthsOwner confirms each userDefault

Review on engagement closeAccess narrows automaticallyDefault

Dormant 90 daysFlagged, not removedDefault

We are told when someone leavesNever happensAssume not

No supplier is told when a client employee leaves. Every control here exists because that notification does not arrive, and pretending otherwise is how two people kept full access for six months.

The first user invited becomes the client administrator and can invite the rest.

REQ-1841

One request, who raised it and what it is waiting on.

Open18 days, unansweredREQ-1841 · Marchetti Trust · raised by Bram Vermeulen · 20 August

Can we see the migration cost breakdown?

A finance question, raised through the portal, routed to nobody. It has sat in an unassigned queue for eighteen days while the engagement it asks about went $44,000 over.

Age18 daystarget is 2 working days

Replies0nobody has responded

Assigned toNobodyno routing rule matched

Client views7they keep checking

Why nobody has it

CategoryFinance · no rule for this clientGap

FallbackUnassigned queue · nobody owns itGap

EscalationNone configured past 5 daysGap

Client seesReceived · nothing sinceHonest

Three configuration gaps and one honest status. The client has checked seven times and each time been told it was received.

What it is really about

The engagement is $44,000 overChange request never raisedRelated

They are asking before invoicingWhich is the good outcomeOpportunity

Eighteen days of silenceWhich is notCost

A client asking for a cost breakdown before the invoice arrives is doing the supplier a favour. Eighteen days of nothing turns that into a dispute.

Document sharing

What was shared, with whom, and who opened it.

Documents shared2,840across 34 clients

Never opened41215% of everything shared

Opened by former staff9in the last 90 days

Shared with everyone188no engagement restriction

Recently shared

9 opened by former staff

Document	Client	Shared with	Opened	Last opened by	Risk
Migration plan v4	Marchetti Trust	All 11 users	8 of 11	Ada Weiss, left in June	Former staff
Invoice INV-4412	Marchetti Trust	Finance only	1 of 2	Bram Vermeulen	Fine
Retainer contract	Halvorsen Group	All 6 users	2 of 6	Never	Over-shared
Rate card 2026	All clients	Everyone	184 of 284	Various	Intended
Cost breakdown	Ostervall Retail	All 9 users	0 of 9	Never	Over-shared

Sharing with everyone is the default nobody changes. Three of five rows here went to more people than needed to see them.

A document shared with everyone and opened by two people was not a sharing decision, it was the absence of one. The column that shows this is who opened it, not who could.

Access review

Who still has an account, and whether they should.

Client users284across 34 clients

Not signed in for 90 days9634% of accounts

Full access4817% of accounts

Reviews overdue14clients, 6-monthly

By client

14 overdue

Client	Users	Full access	Dormant 90 days	Last reviewed	Status
Marchetti Trust	11	4	3	Never	Overdue
Halvorsen Group	6	1	4	March 2026	Due
Ostervall Retail	9	2	1	July 2026	Current
Nordvik Foods	4	1	0	August 2026	Current
Calderon Group	18	6	9	Never	Overdue

Dormant and full access together is the combination worth looking at. Two clients here have never been reviewed at all.

Dormant accounts are flagged and not removed, because a client who logs in twice a year is not a security problem and locking them out at renewal is. The review is a person looking, and it is the only control that works.

Reports: activity

Volume and throughput, by owner and by category.

Client users284across 34 clients

Opened this month188against 162 closed

Median age4.2 daystarget is 2 days

Owned by nobody11oldest is 18 days

Volume over time

12 weeks

Requests raised through the portal per week. Volume is healthy; what is not is how many of them land in a queue with no owner.

By category

This quarter

Document request84

Question about work62

Invoice query41

Access request28

Complaint9

By client owner

This quarter

Client owner	Open	Closed	Median days	Overdue
Astrid Vang	9	62	2.1	1
Bruno Salgado	11	54	3.4	3
Hedda Nilsen	8	46	4.8	4
Jonas Weiss	10	38	6.2	6
Unassigned	11	0	-	18

Median days is raised to first reply. The unassigned row is eleven requests with no routing rule, and the oldest has been visible to the client for eighteen days.

Reports: performance

Against target, with the gap named.

Against target68%answered within 2 working days

Best client ownerAstrid Vang91% within target

WorstUnassigned0%, no rule routes them anywhere

Trend-4 ptson last quarter

Against target by category

100 is the target

Astrid Vang91

Bruno Salgado78

Hedda Nilsen66

Jonas Weiss54

Unassigned0

Every unanswered request is visible to the client, who can see the date they raised it. This is the one report where the subject of the measurement is watching it happen.

What moved

Rule-derived

Response within target down 4 pointsEntirely in requests with no routing ruleDown

Nine documents opened by former client staffNothing tells a supplier when somebody leavesWatch

Access reviews overdue on 14 clientsTwo have never been reviewed at allDown

Threshold rules over the figures above, not a model. Each line names the number it came from so you can disagree with it.

Reports: exceptions

What breached, what is late and what nobody owns.

Breached14access reviews overdue

At risk96inside 48 hours

Unassigned11no owner at all

Reopened11closed then raised again

Exceptions

14 open

Client	Problem	People	Since	Fix
Marchetti Trust	2 former employees with full access	2	March and June	Review now
Calderon Group	Never reviewed, 6 full-access users	6	2023	Review now
Marchetti Trust	Request unanswered 18 days	1	20 August	Assign it
Halvorsen Group	4 of 6 users dormant 90 days	4	June	Confirm with the client
Ostervall Retail	Cost breakdown shared with all 9, opened by 0	9	July	Narrow the share

Access problems and service problems are on the same list because a client experiences them as the same thing: a portal that is not being looked after.

Nothing tells a supplier when a client employee leaves. Every control here exists to work around that, and the six-monthly review is the only one that has ever actually caught anything.

People

Who has an account, and what they own.

People

312 accounts

Name	Role	Practice	Last active	Status
Ingrid Faber	Administrator	Operations	7 minutes ago	Active
Astrid Vang	Client owner	Delivery	25 minutes ago	Active
Bruno Salgado	Client owner	Delivery	1 hour ago	Active
Fabiola Marchetti	Client administrator	Marchetti Trust	2 days ago	Active
Bram Vermeulen	Client user	Marchetti Trust	18 days ago	Active
Ada Weiss	Client user	Marchetti Trust	11 days ago	Should be disabled

Deactivating somebody prompts you to reassign what they own rather than doing it silently, because an unowned record is how a register rots.

Roles

What each role is scoped to and what it may approve.

Roles

5 roles

Role	Type	People	Scope	Can approve to	Status
Administrator	Built in	2	Everything	No limit	Active
Client owner	Built in	9	Own clients	Shares documents	Active
Team member	Built in	17	Assigned engagements	Answers requests	Active
Client administrator	Custom	34	Own organisation	Invites their people	Active
Client user	Custom	250	Their engagements	-	Active

A role carries a scope and an approval ceiling. Both are enforced on the server; hiding a button is not access control.

Recent changes

Client administrators can now disable their own leaversIngrid Faber · 6 SeptemberLogged

Six-monthly access review made mandatoryIngrid Faber · 2 AprilLogged

Role changes sit in the same audit log as record changes, because both change what somebody can do.

Why custom roles exist

A client administrator invites and disables their own people, which is faster than asking us and is the only route that knows about a leaver
A client user sees their engagements, not the whole relationship
A team member answers requests and cannot change what is shared
Nobody outside this firm can see another client, ever, by any route

Permissions

Every capability against every role, as enforced.

What each role can do

10 capabilities

Capability	Administrator	Client owner	Team member	Client admin	Client user
See a client record	Yes	Own	Assigned	Own org	Own org
See another client	Yes	No	No	No	No
Share a document	Yes	Yes	No	No	No
Download a shared document	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Permitted
Raise a request	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Answer a request	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No
Invite a client user	Yes	Yes	No	Own org	No
Disable a client user	Yes	Yes	No	Own org	No
See an invoice	Yes	Yes	No	Own org	Permitted
Read the access log	Yes	Own	No	Own org	No

Enforced per query rather than by hiding controls. A scoped "yes" means the row exists but is limited, which is why some actions need a second person.

A client administrator can disable their own leaver. That is the only route in this table that knows somebody has left, which is why it was opened up rather than kept as a support request.

Notifications

What the system sends, to whom, and when.

What is sent

Request unanswered 2 working daysTo the client ownerOn

Request with no routing ruleTo operations, immediatelyOn

Document opened by a dormant accountTo the client ownerOn

Access review dueTo the client owner, 30 days beforeOn

Client user dormant 90 daysTo the client administratorOn

Every message names the record it is about, so a reply lands somewhere.

Quiet hours

No routine notifications20:00 to 07:00, local to the personOn

Urgent overridesA complaint raised through the portalOn

Weekly digestMonday 08:00On

A notification that waits until morning is one that did not work, so the override is explicit rather than a setting nobody finds.

Notification rules are yours to set. What is here is a starting point drawn from how the queue actually behaves.

Integrations

Connected systems and their sync history.

Connected

3 connected

Document storeFiles, versions and who opened themConnected

AccountingInvoices and payment statusConnected

Project systemMilestones and their real statusConnected

Single sign-onClient identity from their own directoryNot connected

EmailRequests raised by replyingNot connected

What breaks without them

Without single sign-on a leaver keeps their portal account until somebody here notices, which is the root of half this application exception list
Without the project system milestone status is typed in and goes stale
Without email a client has to remember the portal exists
The portal still works; it just stops knowing who people are

Sync history

Last 24 hours

When	Source	Records	Result
Continuous	Document store	2,840 documents	Live
06:00 today	Accounting	188 invoices	Current
06:00 today	Project system	34 engagements	Current
06:00 yesterday	Document store	2,812 documents	Live

A sync that half-succeeded is listed as such rather than as a failure, because the records that did land still changed something.

Import and export

Bulk load and extract, with per-row validation.

Import

WhatIf a row already exists

Validated before anything is written. A file with one bad row imports the rest and tells you which line failed and why.

Export

WhatFormat

RangeEverythingThis yearFiltered view

Recent imports and exports

Last 30 days

When	What	Rows	Result	By
2 Sep 10:00	Import	34	Complete	Ingrid Faber
1 Sep 18:00	Export	284	Complete	Ingrid Faber
24 Aug 15:20	Import	96	Complete	Astrid Vang

Every import is kept with its source file, so a bad load can be traced rather than argued about.