For practices of 10 to 50
Standardise it before the next ten people learn it wrong.
FigsFlow is practice management software for chartered accountants running practices of 10 to 50 people. Proposals, engagement letters, AML checks, jobs, deadlines, time and invoices all sit on one client record, with practice-wide templates and review gates — so the process lives in the system rather than in one partner’s head.
Practice-wide templates, review gates and real capacity visibility — so a practice of forty produces work as consistent as a practice of four used to.
Twenty minutes, screen-shared, with your own services on the screen.
281 reviews from
Read on G2
Read on Google
Verified reviews
Around 150 UK and Ireland practices already run onboarding on FigsFlow.
Hartley & Co Ltd
Proposal · Priced by the engine at £4,200. Sent 18 Aug, accepted 21 Aug.
- Maker checklist complete
- Reviewer sign-off
- Partner review — open
Trusted by the best
Overview
The practice at forty, running on one record
Three minutes, no slides. What changes when the process stops living in one partner’s head.
Transcript
Most practices of this size don’t have a software problem. Watch what happens when a year-end job is created from the template instead of from memory: the steps are already there, the reviewer is already named, and the checklist stops the job closing with something still open underneath. Then look at the capacity view — the same week, the same team, and for the first time the partner can see where the load actually sits.
Platform · Growing practices
Click through the platform a growing practice actually runs on
No sales call, and no “we’ll schedule an implementation.” Twenty-odd people, three partners, and one process everybody follows — here is every part of it.
CRM and pipeline
Interactive previewEvery enquiry owned by someone, visibly
Onboarding suite
Interactive previewPriced, proposed and signed as one unit
Pricing and quoting
Interactive previewThe practice's fee, not the quoter's
Proposals
Interactive previewBuilt from the library, not from last year's file
Engagement letters
Interactive previewAssembled from a governed clause library
AML and client due diligence
Interactive previewCDD and risk on the client record, evidenced
Compliance calendar
Interactive previewEvery obligation tracked per client, chased on its own
Companies House tracking
Interactive previewVerification status and deadlines per director and PSC
Audit trail and evidence
Interactive previewWho did what, when, and on whose authority
Jobs and workflow
Interactive previewStep, task, sub-task — nothing closes with something open underneath
Service templates
Interactive previewThe blueprint every job is copied from
Your daily list
Interactive previewOne prioritised queue per person, escalated when it sits
Timesheets
Interactive previewTime against the job, not against a memory
Follow-ups and chasing
Interactive previewEvery outstanding commitment, tracked to whoever owes it
Client portal
Interactive previewOne place clients send things and approve things
Information requests
Interactive previewSent, answered step by step, chased automatically
Email hub
Interactive previewClient threads attached to the client, not to an inbox
Forms
Interactive previewStructured answers instead of a reply-all thread
Client surveys
Interactive previewAsk after the work, not at renewal
Microsoft 365 and Outlook
Interactive previewYour mail stays where it is
SharePoint documents
Interactive previewDocuments in your tenant, under your retention policy
Xero and QuickBooks Online
Interactive previewThe ledger keeps its job
Payments
Interactive previewFees collected on a link, not a chase
Open API and webhooks
Interactive previewYour data, reachable
Capacity planning
Interactive previewWho is overloaded, before it becomes a write-down
Realisation and WIP
Interactive previewBudget versus actual, per job and per person
Practice dashboards
Interactive previewThe partner view, without the Friday spreadsheet
Seen enough of it? See it running on your own services.
Book a demoTen to fifty people, two or three partners, and a process that grew rather than got designed? You’re in the right place.
Fifty-plus, or more than one office? See how it works at that scaleThe problem
Five people, five ways of doing the same job
Most practices of this size don’t have a software problem. They have a process that lived in three people’s heads and then hired twelve more. Work gets done well, but differently every time — and the cost shows up as partner review time, write-downs, and a letter that went out with last year’s fee on it.
You know the pattern, because you can name the day it started.
-
The bottleneck
The partner is the bottleneck, because everything routes through their review and it always has. They are the only person who knows which of the four accounts templates is the current one, and they are reviewing at ten at night because that is the only time nobody is asking them something.
-
The gut-feel quote
The proposal went out at whatever the last similar job was billed at, less a bit because the client asked. Three people would have priced it three ways, and none of them wrote down why. The write-down arrives in June and surprises everyone.
-
The stale letter
The engagement letter that went out last month was copied from the last one that looked similar. It carried last year’s fee. Nobody noticed until the client did.
-
The twice-asked client
The new client sent their passport to one person and was asked for it again by another a week later. Both checks were done properly. Neither knew about the other, and the client now thinks the practice doesn’t talk to itself.
-
The orphaned deadline
And the deadline nobody owned was owned, once, by someone who left in March. It was in their head and their calendar, and both of those have gone.
None of that is a competence problem. It is what happens when a practice grows faster than anybody writes anything down.
How FigsFlow works
One record, from first enquiry to final invoice
In FigsFlow a client is one record from the first enquiry onward. The enquiry becomes a proposal at a price the system computed, the accepted proposal becomes the engagement letter, the signed letter creates the jobs, and the finished job becomes the invoice. Nothing is re-typed at any handover, because there is nothing to re-type it into.
-
An enquiry arrives.
From your website, a referral, or an email. It becomes a record with an owner and a next step, and it stays one.
-
A proposal goes out at the practice’s price.
The pricing engine computes it. Nobody quotes from memory, and nobody quotes below the floor you set.
-
The engagement letter assembles itself.
From the services the client actually accepted, using clauses from your governed library — not from whichever letter was nearest.
-
AML runs before the letter is sent.
CDD, risk assessment, evidence on the record. A referred result pauses the letter and routes to your MLRO, who decides.
-
Signing creates the work.
Jobs from your service templates, deadlines loaded, the right people assigned, the client portal opened.
-
Finishing the work raises the invoice.
Time against the job, fee as agreed, paid on a link. Then the survey goes out on its own.
One record, six handovers, nothing typed twice.
See the whole platformThat is the whole path. Twenty minutes to see it on your services.
Book a demoBefore and after
What changes when it’s one record
Not a comparison with other software — a comparison with the way it works now. Your Excel working papers and your Outlook aren’t going anywhere; they connect.
| Situation | How it works now | On one record |
|---|---|---|
| A new job starts | Somebody remembers how the last one went | Copied from the service template, every time |
| The letter | Last year’s, edited, fee sometimes updated | Assembled from what the client accepted |
| Review | Whenever the partner gets to it | A gate the job cannot pass without |
| Who’s overloaded | You find out when something is late | You can see it this week |
| Where the file is | Someone knows | In your SharePoint, on the client’s record |
| What a job cost | Worked out afterwards, if at all | Budget against actual, while it’s running |
Connected, not replaced
It sits on top of what you already run
FigsFlow connects to the tools a UK practice already has rather than replacing them. Mail stays in Outlook. Documents stay in your own SharePoint, under your own retention policy. The ledger stays in Xero or QuickBooks Online. FigsFlow is where the work, the deadlines and the client record live.
Hover an integration to see what stays where.
- Microsoft 365
- Outlook
- SharePoint
- Teams
- Xero
- QuickBooks Online
- Stripe
Pricing
What it costs, and what’s live today
FigsFlow is priced per user per month, and a practice of 10 to 50 typically sits on the Practice tier at £39 per user. There is no implementation fee and no minimum term beyond the one you choose.
Live now
- Proposals and pricing
- Engagement letters
- AML and client due diligence
- Jobs, workflow and service templates
- Timesheets, invoicing and payments
- Client portal and information requests
- Capacity planning and realisation
- Xero and QuickBooks Online sync
Coming — not live
- AI-assisted proposal assembly · phase 2
- Native mobile enhancements · phase 2
- In-portal calls · phase 3
Practice tier10–50 people
- Priced per user per month
- No implementation fee
- No minimum term beyond the one you choose
- Every module in the explorer above, on one client record
Proof
Practices that standardised before they scaled
Four short clips. One question each, answered by the people who lived it.
FigsFlow was built inside working practices, by people who had to run them. Every workflow in it started as somebody’s problem on a Tuesday.
Their practice looked like yours eighteen months ago.
Book a demoProof
Built inside working firms
FigsFlow was built in practice, not in a lab, by people who had to close a month themselves.
- 4.8Capterra132 reviews
- 4.7G288 reviews
- 4.9Google61 reviews
Your numbers
What does the inconsistency actually cost you?
Two things leak money in a practice this size: partner hours spent reviewing work that should have arrived right, and fees written down because a job ran past what it was quoted at. Put your own figures in and the page works out what a year of that is worth.
a year, at the figures you entered
This is a model based on the figures you entered. It is an illustration of current cost, not a projection of savings, and it is not advice.
That is the number. Twenty minutes to see what changes it.
Rollout
What a practice of this size sets up first
Standardisation at 10 to 50 people is real work, because you are writing down decisions nobody has written down before. The order that works: templates for your three highest-volume services, then review gates, then client migration, then capacity. Most of the effort is deciding what the practice’s way actually is — not configuring it.
The configuration is days. The deciding is longer, and it is the part nobody can do for you. Practices that try to template all fourteen services at once stall; practices that template three and start using them don’t.
We don’t quote a go-live date, and we won’t. The deciding sets the pace, and it is yours. What we can describe is the order that works.
Case studies
The longer version
Two or three practices, in their own words, with the numbers attached.
Marsh & ElderLeeds · figure confirmed by the practice, June 2026
Answers: what the review bottleneck was costing, and what a gate changed.
What was hardAgreeing what “the practice’s way” actually was took five weeks longer than the configuration did.
Hollins PartnersBristol · figure confirmed by the practice, April 2026
Answers: where the write-downs were coming from, and how budget-versus-actual caught them.
What was hardMigrating four years of client history was abandoned in month two. This quarter’s obligations went across first; history followed.
Kerr WhitfieldGlasgow · figure confirmed by the practice, February 2026
Answers: who is allowed to change a clause, and what consistency across forty staff looks like.
What was hardTwo partners kept “their” letter templates until the first fee error the gate caught. Then they didn’t.
Resources
Take the thinking with you
Most practices this size look at three or four systems over a couple of months. These are useful whichever way that goes.
The standardisation audit
Ten questions, scored, results emailed. The same tool as the audit button at the top of the page, for the reader who scrolled past it.
Partner business case
One page: the problem, the numbers from the calculator above, and the rollout ask. Written to be forwarded upward.
Service template starter set
The structure of a standard accounts and tax job, as a document — useful even on paper.
Choosing practice management software
A buyer’s guide. Category-level questions to ask any vendor, no competitor names.
Not ready to book? Take the audit instead — ten questions, no call.
Take the standardisation auditFAQ
Questions practices of this size ask
How do we standardise workflows across staff who all do it differently?
You build a service template for each service you deliver — the steps, the tasks, who does them by default, and what paperwork attaches at each stage. Every job of that type is then created from the template, so the process is the same whoever picks it up. Changing the template changes it for everyone from the next job onward, rather than requiring an email nobody reads.
How do review and approval gates work — and can a partner override one?
A job moves through maker and reviewer stages with a quality checklist attached. The maker ticks the items, the reviewer signs off, and anything they find is classified as an error and routed back for correction rather than fixed silently — so you can see what keeps going wrong. Partner review sits on top for services that need it. A job cannot be marked complete while anything underneath it is still open.
Who can change templates, prices and letters?
Whoever you give the permission to, and nobody else. Pricing sits behind approval limits, so a quote below your floor needs sign-off rather than a conversation. Engagement letter clauses come from a governed library rather than free text. This is usually the single biggest change for a practice arriving from Word and email.
How does capacity planning work across a team of this size?
Work is assigned with an agreed timeline, so the system knows what is committed and to whom. Capacity shows you where the load is concentrated and where it is not, and work that sits untouched escalates to a line manager on its own rather than waiting to be noticed. It needs about a month of real data before the picture is worth acting on.
Does FigsFlow file our clients’ returns?
No. FigsFlow tracks every obligation per client, chases what is needed to meet it, and holds the evidence that it was met — year ends, VAT staggers, confirmation statement dates, MTD quarterly updates, self assessment. The filing itself happens in your tax and ledger software. FigsFlow runs the practice; your tax and ledger software do the filing.
Does it handle our AML obligations?
It runs and evidences the process. CDD and risk assessment sit on the client record, screening results are held with the file, and the audit trail shows who did what and when. The obligations under MLR 2017 remain your practice’s, and every decision — including anything referred — stays with your MLRO. FigsFlow gives them the evidence and the workflow to make it; it does not make it for them.
What happens when we pass fifty people, or open a second office?
The same record model carries over — that is when delegated permissions by office, group structures and cross-office realisation reporting start to matter. There is a page for it: practice management at 50+ and multi-office →
No question matches that. Bring it to the demo — it is a working session.
Still deciding? Bring the awkward questions — the demo is a working session, not a pitch.
Book a demo