Finance Case Studies
Record to ReportClose OrchestrationMulti-Entity ConsolidationSponsor Reporting
R2R

Confidential Client

Sponsor-Owned Outpatient Healthcare Platform

The close went from fourteen days to five.

~€450M revenue · 180 sites · 40+ legal entities across three countries · 30+ bolt-ons in four years

A healthcare platform built through thirty-plus acquisitions closed its books in Excel, one entity at a time. We built a semantic layer across every entity and put close orchestration agents on top of it — eliminations proposed, exceptions surfaced, variance narrative drafted each morning. The sponsor now sees board-ready numbers on day six.

An ERP sat at the center — but the consolidation finished in Excel. Month-end was a manual relay: intercompany eliminations chased over email, entity trial balances pasted into a master workbook, variance commentary written from scratch every period. There was no exception view, so errors surfaced only at review. The sponsor never saw clean numbers until week three of the following month.

14→5
Business days to close
Day 6
Board-ready numbers
~3 FTEs
Redeployed to analysis
Weekly
Reforecasts, up from monthly

The Calendar

Nine days of the close were mechanics. They didn't survive contact with the layer.

The Close Calendar

14 business days5 business days
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Day 6 · Board-ready numbers with the sponsorNine days of manual relay, compressed out. What's left is review.

The Foundation

Forty entities. Three countries. One layer underneath all of it.

Before any automation, we built the map: how every entity relates, how every local chart of accounts translates to the group's, which balances mirror each other across borders. It was built by sitting with the controllers and analysts who own each number — not inferred from exports. Everything the agents do stands on it.

40+ Legal Entities · Three Countries

ONE SEMANTIC LAYERENTITY MAP · ACCOUNT TRANSLATION · INTERCOMPANY GRAPHELIMINATIONSTOLERANCE FLAGSFLUX NARRATIVE

What We Built

01

Eliminations that propose themselves

The agents watch the ledgers as entities post. Intercompany balances auto-match across the group — management fees, loans, recharges — and the eliminating entries arrive proposed, not chased. What used to be an email thread across three countries is a queue the controller clears before lunch.

Every proposed entry is logged, reversible, and attributable. The controller stays in control — the mechanics just stop being theirs to carry.

02

Exceptions surface the morning they happen

Accounts breaching tolerance get flagged the day they breach — with the entity, the amount, and the likely cause attached. Errors used to hide until review in week two. Now there is one exception view for the whole group, and it’s empty more mornings than not.

The close stopped being a search for what’s wrong. The system brings what’s wrong to the people who can fix it.

03

Commentary the controller edits, not writes

Each morning of the close, the flux and variance narrative is already drafted — grounded in the actual movements, written in the house style, with the numbers cited. The controller’s job becomes judgment: sharpen the story, kill the noise, sign off.

Writing commentary from scratch every period was the quiet tax on the whole team. It’s gone.

04

Bolt-ons onboard into the layer, not into chaos

This group buys companies. Every acquisition used to reset the close — new accounts, new mappings, new spreadsheet tabs. Now a new entity gets mapped into the layer once, and the agents treat it like every other entity from its first month-end.

The buy-and-build machine keeps running. Finance no longer sets the pace of integration — it absorbs it.

Close Morning

What the controller sees at 07:12 on day three

Group Close · Day 3 · 07:12
Live

Entities closed

34 / 42

Eliminations proposed

12

awaiting review

Tolerance flags

5

open

Proposed Eliminations

Entity 07 ↔ Entity 19

Management fee · €1.24M

match 98%

Entity 03 ↔ Entity 31

Intercompany loan interest · €412K

match 96%

Entity 12 ↔ Entity 26

Shared-services recharge · €188K

match 99%

Tolerance Flags

6400 · Agency staffing

Entity 22 · +€212K vs. tolerance ±€75K

breach

7010 · Site rent

Entity 09 · +€96K vs. tolerance ±€40K

breach

4200 · Payor receipts

Entity 34 · −€310K vs. tolerance ±€120K

breach

Flux Narrative · Draft

Drafted 06:58 · awaiting controller edit

“Group revenue closed 2.1% above plan, driven by higher visit volume across the southern region and two sites annualizing ahead of schedule. Staffing costs breached tolerance in Entity 22 — agency usage up €212K on unfilled clinical rosters, consistent with the pattern flagged in the prior period…”

One view for the whole group. Everything proposed, nothing posted without a person.

Close speed is a board-control metric, not a back-office one. A sponsor flying blind for three weeks can't act.

The Impact

Finance stopped assembling the numbers and started reading them

The close runs in five business days, and the sponsor holds board-ready numbers on day six — two weeks earlier than before. Roughly three full-time roles' worth of mechanical work moved to analysis: variance investigation, site economics, deal support.

Reforecasts run weekly now, up from monthly — because the numbers are trustworthy enough, early enough, to forecast against. Pricing moves, staffing decisions, and capital allocation happen inside the month they're needed, not after it.

And the next acquisition doesn't threaten any of it. New entities onboard into the layer — the close stays at five days no matter how many logos join the group.

40+
Legal entities on one layer
100%
Proposed entries logged & reversible
30+
Bolt-ons mapped into the layer

Ready to build something like this?

We design and deploy AI-native systems for companies moving fast in competitive markets.

Talk to LightCI