Map each revenue and expense line to the ledger account behind it, keep the reconciliation between two regimes the NCAA itself says may not match, and hand the president a pack to certify.
A transaction is coded in the ledger, and its mapping to an athletics reporting category is written beside it.
02
A category drifts toward the share of total revenues at which the accountant's procedures stop being waived.
Reason
03
A contribution lands, and its position against the year's contributions total is recomputed as the year closes.
04
A revenue-share payment is booked, and its treatment is read against the current guide edition, not last year's.
05
A collective is scoped in or out on a stated basis, and that basis is filed where the accountant can test it.
Decide
06
A deadline nears on two clocks, and neither the association nor the Department grants an extension.
07
A federal duty splits under 34 CFR 668.41(g) — publication first, then submission to the Secretary.
Out
08
A difference between the two reports is carried as a standing explanation, not produced when somebody asks.
09
Execute write actions only inside the approval boundaries agreed during implementation.
→Product statement
The agent maps and reconciles; the chancellor or president certifies the association report, and a named employee locks and transmits the federal survey.
Example workflow
One category, ledger to certification
AgentHuman
1Reporting period closesGeneral ledger, athletics subledgers, gift records and payroll allocations
2Mapping assembledEach revenue and expense category tied to its source accounts, with the rationale written out
3Reconciliation drawnThe association figure, the federal figure and the explanation for each difference
4Controls appliedProvenance checks, waiver-threshold monitoring, request-list tracking and completeness confidence
No human action required
Stages 1 to 4 run unaided, and nothing is certified or filed at any of them — the agent is mapping, and the business-office lane opens at the completeness gate.
5DecisionBranches at the completeness gate
Pack complete
Goes to the business office to release.
Anything unexplained
Adds an independent-accountant read first.
Certification review
The pack is held with its mappings, its rationales and the open exceptions.
Approve · Attach rationale · Send to accountant
Released — the president certifies it▼
6Reporting record updatedOnly where write access and reporting policy allow it
7Outcome evaluatedMapping provenance, unexplained differences, accountant exceptions and what a later review found
Corrections
Every accountant correction is counted in the evaluation.
What should not run autonomously
Human approval stays in control
Outside the boundary — human approval required8 items
Certifying the association financial report.
Locking or transmitting the federal survey.
Deciding which category a transaction belongs in.
Deciding that a collective falls outside the report.
Automation boundaryAgent acts unaided
✓Map each reported category to the source ledger accounts behind it.
✓Write the classification rationale before the accountant asks for it.
✓Hold the reconciliation and an explanation per difference.
✓Track the request list, the open items and both clocks.
Nothing here is certified or filed — named humans do both, inside agreed boundaries.
Signing, or standing behind a figure.
Performing the agreed-upon procedures.
Deciding whether a violation must be reported.
Changes to category mappings or reconciliation rules.
Example output
One category, annotated
A mapping that survives certification is already in a report the president signed, and the federal cut of the same money went months earlier.
Reporting pack · single categoryIllustrative example
Category
Mapped from
Basis
Source of record
Confidence
Certified by
Contributions, Division I
Athletics-designated gift accounts and pledges recognised in the year
Fiscal year
Advancement ledger
Open exception
The president, by name
As receivedTaken from the ledger and the gift records — nothing on this side is classified by the agent.
What the mapping showsThe source accountsThe rationale writtenThe basis of the year
Why this stays openThe disclosure test runs on the year's total contributions, not on any single gift.
ActionApproveAttach rationaleSend to accountant
What the score decidesBelow the configured threshold the pack picks up an accountant read before.
Value
Where AI adds value
The same four claims, placed at the point in the workflow where each one applies.
Where the value landsValue 01 – 04
Every categoryFrom the general ledger
03Mapping
Reconciles reports, not deals
Our NIL agent defends the price paid for a deal; this defends the number in the report the president signed.
01Approved path
Two reports, two clocks
Not one filing seen twice — different recipients, different periods, and neither regime grants an extension.
02Human review
Where the exposure actually sits
Not on the reviewed report the president certifies — Title IV limitation, suspension or termination and per-violation civil fines attach to the federal survey.
04Build an evidence trail
The line, the ledger it maps to and the president who certified stay on the report.
Integrations
Typical integrations
Five system groups connect to the same agent. Which of them are in scope is decided in discovery.
General ledger and ERPWorkday · Oracle Cloud Banner · Ellucian · PeopleSoft
An institution-level mapping-provenance figure can read clean while one category absorbs most of the exceptions. Nestack reports the accountant-exception rate by category, not only in total.
Slice performance — reported separately, not only in aggregateIllustrative example
Slice
Failure rate
Lift
Lift vs. threshold
Status
Institutional revenue share
7.6%
3.6×
Review
Contributions and gifts
5.4%
2.6×
Review
Multi-team coach salaries
3.4%
1.6×
Watch
Settled operating categories
1.2%
0.6×
Normal
Bar: accountant-exception-rate lift vs. settled-operating-category baseline · scale 0–4.0× · tick marks the 2.0× review threshold2 of 4 slices over threshold
Evidence-linked improvement
The difference is the deliverable
The loop shuts when the unexplained divergence is a regression case. That suite is what the next report certified is measured against.
Improvement cycle · five stagesSwitchback — the path turns at Improve and returns at Learn
01Detect
Accountant-exception rate rises in one category.
02Diagnose
The category that sat in two reports and matched in neither is read back until one cause remains.
03Improve
Any change ships with a number, and the categories attach to it.
04Verify
One category case still failing is enough to hold the release.
05Learn
One case enters the suite, one line enters the reporting record.
Learn → DetectThe return edge. The next report is measured against a suite one case longer.
Typical build scope
Twelve workstreams across six weeks
The build scope read against the delivery timeline. Week structure follows the six-week plan — discovery, sources, pack assembly, evaluation, integration, then production validation and handover.
WorkstreamWeek 1Week 2Week 3Week 4Week 5Week 6
01Reporting workflow discovery and boundary definition.
02Ledger and subledger source assessment.
03Category, rationale and reconciliation mapping.
04Ledger ingestion and normalisation.
05Mapping logic and rationale binding.
06Completeness scoring and exception routing.
07Certification pack workflow.
08Ledger and reporting-system integration.
09Category and reconciliation cases.
10Guardrails and certifying controls.
11Category-trail instrumentation.
12Deployment, documentation and Agent Care handover.
12 workstreams · 6 weeks · bar shows the weeks a workstream is active — several run in parallelFinal scope and sequence confirmed in discovery
Engagement tiers
What each tier includes
Rows are the capabilities named in each tier's scope. Higher tiers include everything below them.
Capability✓ in scope · — not at this tierPilotOne institution, one yearProductionProduction ledger systemsAdvancedMultiple entities / divisions
Introduced at Pilot
Mapping to your ledger and taxonomy✓✓✓
President gating✓✓✓
Mapping-provenance baseline✓✓✓
Introduced at Production
Reporting by category—✓✓
Review workflow in your systems—✓✓
Approved write-back—✓✓
General-ledger integration—✓✓
Introduced at Advanced
Complex multi-entity structures——✓
Multi-stage institutional approvals——✓
High transaction volume——✓
Multi-regime reporting controls——✓
Build priceFrom $5,000From $8,000Custom quote
Final build priceConfirmed after discovery based on integrations, workflow complexity, transaction volume, approval controls and deployment requirements.
Separate from buildBuild pricing is separate from recurring Agent Care, which covers managed monitoring, evaluations, incidents and verified improvements after launch.
What we need from you
What you bring, and what we build with it
Each input maps to a piece of build scope and a week in the delivery timeline.
You bringWe build with it
01Your athletics chart of accounts and subledgers→Ledger ingestion and category mappingWeek 1
02Representative packs behind past reports→Mapping baseline, rationale and source bindingWeek 2
03Your taxonomy edition, periods and named certifier→Category, rationale and reconciliation mapping, and the boundaryWeek 1
04Access to relevant APIs, feeds or exports→Ledger, gift and payroll assessment, then integration setupWeek 2
05Reports you would not want compared→Divergence cases and the evaluation suiteWeek 4
06What no certification may leave unexplained→Completeness scoring, exception routing, guardrails and gating controlsWeek 3
07Named business-office staff and the certifier→Certification pack workflow, then pilot and production validationWeeks 5–6
Nothing else is requiredDeployment, documentation and Agent Care handover are ours.
Delivery timeline
Four phases across six weeks
A band is exactly as wide as the weeks that phase demands, so week five legitimately holds a pair.
PhaseW1W2W3W4W5W6
DiscoveryW1
BuildW2 – W3
EvaluateW4 – W5
Pilot & LaunchW5 – W6
Week focusW1Reporting discovery, category mapping and the automation boundaryW2Source integration and the mapping baselineW3Pack assembly, reconciliation logic and provenance controlsW4Evaluation suite, divergence cases and failure-mode testingW5Reporting-system integration, pilot categories and targeted correctionsW6One reporting year run under the president, then Agent Care handover
Reading the bandA bar spans only the weeks its own work is named in. The shared fifth week is real work, not padding.
At the end of W6Once the report validates, Agent Care assumes the agent.
DurationSix-week plan shown · typical delivery 4–6 weeks depending on scope confirmed in discovery.
Next step · Sports & Fitness agent
Build a disclosure agent around the two reports that will not match.
Show us your athletics ledger, your category mappings and who certifies. Ask which of the two reports carries the federal exposure and the answer is the unreviewed one, the survey no chief executive approves.
