Structured templates
Reporting period, report type, intended destination, and narrative are explicit instead of buried in an email.
SOMB, court, and probation reporting
Reporting that refuses to guess or send itself.
Build structured treatment-progress reports while keeping clinicians accountable for the content, a second authorized reviewer accountable for approval, and staff accountable for verifying the intended recipient.
Evaluate the reporting workflowHuman review is part of the product
Court-directed and regulatory reporting carries a different risk profile from ordinary practice administration. An incorrect narrative, reporting period, client match, or destination can materially affect a person. ASL Therapy therefore creates reports in a review required state. The author cannot serve as the required second reviewer, and approval does not automatically transmit the document.
The system records operational events—who drafted, who approved, when the state changed, and whether a destination fingerprint was present—without copying the report narrative into the audit history. Delivery integrations can be added later, but only behind explicit authorization, destination verification, and acceptance testing.
Second-person approval
The author cannot approve their own report, preserving a meaningful review boundary.
Fail-closed delivery
A draft or approval never silently becomes a transmission to a court or referral source.
Auditable states
Operational evidence supports supervision and investigation without duplicating sensitive content.
Colorado focus, reusable discipline
The first use case reflects Colorado SOMB and court/probation workflows described in the founding report. The underlying review model is broader: it can support other treatment programs, jurisdictions, payers, and referral sources that require accurate, authorized, traceable reporting. Each deployment still requires qualified review of its templates, disclosure authority, retention rules, and recipient process.