Frequently asked questions about Boardmate.

Boardmate helps board support teams turn meeting materials, board packs, transcripts, and reviewer feedback into formal minutes, with Word output, controlled regeneration, and audit history. It is built for the workflow around the minutes as much as the first draft itself.

The primary users are board support teams, fund administrators, corporate service providers, chairs, directors, and governance professionals who need formal records across many entities or meetings. IT, legal, compliance, and procurement teams usually become involved when confidential material or wider rollout is being considered.

Lite is for clearing historic minutes backlogs. It takes the meeting list and supporting material, drafts formal minutes, coordinates review, keeps the chair in control of changes, then exports Word, PDF, actions where available, and audit history.

Full carries the record into the live board cycle: fund records, agendas, board packs, report requests, annual compliance tasks, service provider status, meetings, actions, approvals, reminders, and governance memory.

For Cayman fund portfolios, Full can help teams keep recurring board cycle work visible: CIMA fee status, economic substance, annual return work, audited accounts and FAR support, FATCA/CRS tasks, AML training, annual governance review, service provider reporting, approvals, and follow-up where applicable. Boardmate does not replace advisers or filing portals.

No. Boardmate is focused on formal minutes: source material, house style, reviewer feedback, chair decisions, Word and PDF output, actions where available, and audit history.

No. Reviewer comments are review input. The chair or delegated board support owner decides which feedback becomes source material for regeneration.

Typical inputs include a meeting list, transcripts or recordings, board packs, support notes, attendance details, apologies, known exceptions, and separate report files where needed. The board pack usually contains the agenda, previous minutes, reports, and supporting papers sent to attendees.

No, but gaps should be visible. A useful import marks missing transcripts, revised packs, weak recordings, duplicate files, old style examples, excluded confidential material, and late support notes before the draft is judged.

Yes. Private reviewer links let attendees or service providers read the relevant draft, comment on selected passages, upload support, or confirm no comments while board support keeps workspace control.

Reviewer comments are part of the controlled review record for the relevant workspace and draft. Board support and the chair or delegated owner can see activity and decide what becomes accepted feedback. External reviewers do not need broad workspace access.

DOCX remains the practical working file. PDF gives a stable reading copy. Action extraction, where supported by the source material, and audit history help explain how the source folder became the final record.

Prior approved minutes, recurring wording, defined terms, and chair decisions give Boardmate the style reference. The first sample is the place to check whether the draft reads like the organisation's own record.

Yes. Five to ten representative meetings is usually enough to test ordinary drafting, a complex meeting, a short or adjourned meeting, source gaps, reviewer behaviour, and house style.

Compare Boardmate against the real current process: source collection, first drafting, email chasing, reading scattered responses, manual redrafting, chair approval, DOCX handling, PDF circulation, actions, filing, and carry-forward into the next meeting.

A good evaluation leaves a decision note. It should say what meetings were tested, what source material was missing or added, whether the drafts were reviewable, how reviewers behaved, what the chair accepted, how useful the exports were, and what still needs security, style, or product follow-up.

A CSV meeting list, recordings or transcripts, board packs, support notes, known exceptions, any separate report files, and the person who decides which reviewer feedback changes the draft.

Before real confidential files move. The first conversation can cover workspace access, reviewer links, data flow, subprocessors, retention, deletion, exports, and security review questions.

The website stays close to the workflow and the controls Boardmate can explain. Current security, data-flow, retention, deletion, contractual, and subprocessor detail can be provided for a formal review.

No. The website uses curated screenshots and workflow descriptions. Customer material remains in the authenticated Boardmate app or an agreed evaluation workspace.

No. The contact form is for starting the conversation. Real sample material belongs in the agreed evaluation workspace after confidentiality, data handling, access, retention, and the sample meetings are settled.

The security, data-flow, access-control, privacy, and terms pages explain the usual first questions. Current security review detail comes from the Boardmate team on request.

Boardmate Limited is a private limited company incorporated in England and Wales. The company number and registered office are listed in the footer for procurement notes.