Regisseur · Product Walkthrough

An annual recertification that chases, waits, and decides only what it must

From the first notice to a closed, audit-ready file — including what happens when a document is missing, when an employer never answers, and when the rules themselves change partway through.

Captured live from real, automated runs 16 screens shown, all captured live
16
Screens shown, all captured live
3
Households run to a closed case
2
Human decisions, across all three
0
Fabricated screens

About this walkthrough

Every screen below is a real screenshot from automated, end-to-end runs of Regisseur against a real, working deployment — not a mock-up, not staged data. The company, property, and people shown (Northwind Residential, Tailspin Terrace Apartments, Priya Manning, Deshawn Ellery, Wide World Importers) are fictional demo identities. All outbound email was routed to a single test inbox for recording purposes.

Three certifications ran in this recording. One went straight through with no decisions from a person at all. The other two each needed exactly one: which verification method to accept once an employer stayed silent, and what to do after three separate notices went completely unanswered. Both are shown below. In this recording, the time a person spent on each of those two decisions was a matter of seconds; the case itself stayed open for minutes. The platform's own record keeps those two figures — time a person spent deciding, and time the case was open — separately and honestly, rather than blending them into one number.

Three things were compressed or simplified for the recording, and are stated rather than hidden. Notice timing was compressed (the real policy runs on a 120/90/60-day HUD calendar, not minutes) — the documents, deadlines, calculations, and signatures are the real production path. The tenant's secure link was opened directly by the recording harness rather than by clicking it inside the notice email; the link, the upload page, and the record it writes are the real ones a tenant would use. And one step in every case — the household's HUD income report — is a policy-mandated upload by staff, never a system integration; the walkthrough shows it that way rather than implying otherwise.

Part 1 of 7

Before anything happens: the whole process, and who is in it

One map for every certification, and the household named on the case with exactly what they are allowed to do.

1
An annual recertification, mapped out as one process
Every certification starts from the same process map — every step from the first notice to a signed, submitted file laid out before anything happens. What follows is that map, run for real, three times.
An annual recertification, mapped out as one process
2
The household is named on the case, with exactly what they can do
Before any notice goes out, the head of household is recorded on the case with a defined set of permissions: see status, receive explanations, supply information, view their own documents, and sign. Nothing more. Every link the tenant later receives is scoped to exactly that list, and the contact details are marked unverified until something proves them.
The household is named on the case, with exactly what they can do
Part 2 of 7

The tenant's side: a link, a file, a tap

No account, no password, no app. What the household actually sees, and the one step staff still do by hand.

3
The tenant opens a secure link and sees one clear ask
The first notice carries a secure, single-purpose link. The tenant opens it on any device — no account to create, no password, no app to install. The page says who it is for, what is needed, and which formats are accepted, and nothing else.
The tenant opens a secure link and sees one clear ask
4
They pick the file
A pay stub chosen from a phone or a computer. The page shows the filename back before anything is sent, so the tenant can see they picked the right one.
They pick the file
5
One tap, and the document is on the case
The confirmation is instant, and by the time it appears the platform has already filed the pay stub against the right step of the right case. The link was single-use, so it cannot be replayed. The tenant does this once more for the bank statement and is finished — nobody on staff touched an inbox.
One tap, and the document is on the case
6
The one step a staff member must do by hand, shown as exactly that
HUD's own income report for the household is something staff must pull and upload themselves; no system is permitted to fetch it. The platform treats that report as a plain upload on the case, attached by a person, and never as something it decided. It is shown here as it is, not dressed up as an integration.
The one step a staff member must do by hand, shown as exactly that
Part 3 of 7

When a document is missing

The second household sent pay stubs but no bank statement. The platform noticed, chased, and closed the gap itself.

7
The pay stubs arrived, the bank statement did not — so the platform chased it, on the record
For the second household, both pay stubs came in but the bank statement never did. The platform noticed the gap itself, re-sent a secure link, saw the tenant open it, and followed up with a second reminder — each step recorded with who it went to, when, and how it was delivered. This view is the case's full message history at the end of the run, so the employer request and reminder from the next chapter are visible here too.
The pay stubs arrived, the bank statement did not — so the platform chased it, on the record
8
The missing bank statement arrives through the same link, and the case moves on
Same tenant page, same one-tap upload. The moment it lands, the chase closes itself and the case continues to income verification. Nobody checked a spreadsheet or marked anything received.
The missing bank statement arrives through the same link, and the case moves on
Part 4 of 7

Verifying income with an employer who never answers

A request goes out unattended, a deadline passes, and a person is asked exactly one question.

9
A verification request goes out to an employer — with no approval step first
When a household's income needs verifying with an outside employer, the platform drafts the request, sends it, and opens a tracked, dated follow-up — automatically, with no one having to approve the send first. Here it is still waiting on the employer's own payroll department, on a deadline the platform set and is tracking without being asked.
A verification request goes out to an employer — with no approval step first
10
When the employer never answers, the platform moves the case forward by itself
Nobody clicked anything to make this happen. When the deadline the platform itself had set simply passed with no reply, the platform recognized that on its own and routed the case to the next step.
When the employer never answers, the platform moves the case forward by itself
11
The one decision this household's case needed — laid out in full, with the reasoning behind it
With the employer silent, the platform lays out the complete reasoning and the specific verification methods still available, and asks a person to choose. This is the entire decision this case requires: which method to accept for verifying income now that the employer never responded.
The one decision this household's case needed — laid out in full, with the reasoning behind it
12
The decision is recorded, and the case resumes on its own
The moment the decision is made, it is on the record and the platform picks the case back up immediately — no separate step needed to hand it back into motion.
The decision is recorded, and the case resumes on its own
Part 5 of 7

The rules change partway through

New income figures take effect on a date. The platform applies them only to the certifications that date governs.

13
New income-limit rules, applied automatically to the certifications they actually govern
This household's case was opened under one set of income rules. Partway through, the platform's rule set was updated to the figures taking effect January 1, 2027 — and every certification with an effective date on or after that day is computed under the new figures automatically, even though it was opened earlier under the old ones. On this exact household, that update mattered: the interest rate credited on savings toward income rose from 0.06% to 0.38%, the deduction allowed per dependent rose from $480 to $525, and the savings balance that triggers counting extra imputed income rose from $5,000 to $54,898 — which, on this household's own $6,200 in savings, changed the calculation from counting that extra income to not counting it at all.
New income-limit rules, applied automatically to the certifications they actually govern
Part 6 of 7

When nobody answers at all

Three notices, no reply. The rules leave one question open, and only that question reaches a person.

14
When nobody answers any notice, the platform still knows exactly what the rules require — and what is left for a person to decide
Before this screen appeared, three separate notices had already gone out on schedule to a third household — the last one naming the exact rent that would apply and stating plainly that it would also serve as the legal notice ending assistance and raising the rent, with no further notice required. When none of the three drew any response, the platform recognized on its own that the final deadline had passed and moved the case forward, the same way it did for the silent employer. Ending the household's assistance at that point is not a choice the rules leave open. What IS left to a person is the one real question this case has: whether there is a good reason to make an exception before that takes effect — shown here with the complete rule citation and the full notice history behind it.
When nobody answers any notice, the platform still knows exactly what the rules require — and what is left for a person to decide
Part 7 of 7

The record

A plain-language summary above every case, and a calculation that names its own rule version.

15
Every case carries a plain-language summary, and the full record behind it
Above every case, the platform writes a short, plain-language summary of exactly where things stand — including that the file was submitted and the case closed — backed by the complete record in the tabs beneath it. Nothing about the case exists only in someone's head.
Every case carries a plain-language summary, and the full record behind it
16
The closing scene: the calculation names its own rule version, its effective date, and why
The math behind every certification names, on the record, the exact version of the rules it used, the date that version took effect, this certification's own effective date, and — in plain terms — why that version, and not an earlier one, is the one that applies.
The closing scene: the calculation names its own rule version, its effective date, and why