Reconcile. Automate. Elevate.
Consolidara connects the software your company already runs on — your ERP, accounting, operations, projects and spreadsheets — and makes it produce one set of reliable numbers. Then we automate the manual work that grew up around the gaps. AI comes last, once there is something solid to build it on.
Systems we work around
If it has a database, we can work with it. These are simply the ones we see most often.
01The problem
Most established companies are not short on information. They are short on a way to trust it that does not consume three people and weeks of spreadsheet reconciliation every month.
Two departments, two spreadsheets, and a meeting spent arguing about which one is right.
A close that should land in the first days of the month instead drags on for weeks — most of it spent chasing figures that should already match.
A receipt keyed in the field, keyed again in the office, and keyed a third time into a budget workbook.
By the time the report is assembled, the decision it was meant to inform has already been made.
Four symptoms, one root cause: the data a company already owns is never in a form anyone can trust. Get that right once, and everything built on top of it gets easier — and cheaper.
02How it works
Three stages, always in this order. Projects in this space fail when the order is reversed.
We connect read-only to the systems you already have and make their numbers agree — proving every figure against a report your controller already trusts before anything is built on it.
Reporting your team will actually use, and automation of the hand-offs that should never have been manual. One source of truth in place of a pile of workbooks — on infrastructure you own.
With a verified foundation underneath, AI can answer questions, flag exceptions and forecast — and be held to a standard.
A job number, a receipt and a budget line. Straightforward — except the receipt is entered in one system, the budget is kept in another, and someone in the office reconciles them by hand every week to report how the job is really performing.
Consolidara makes that match run automatically, then proves the resulting totals against the figures the controller already knows to be correct. From that point, current job performance is something management reads — not something someone has to assemble.
03Capabilities
The same method, applied to the four areas where established companies feel the cost soonest.
Finance
Month-end reporting, reconciliations, cash / AR / AP visibility and management packages — with the books kept CPA-ready through the year instead of rebuilt each January.
Faster close. Defensible numbers.
Operations
Job cost, committed versus actual, budget variance, forecasting and project performance — while the job is still running, not six weeks after it closes.
Managers off the spreadsheets.
Workflow
Duplicate entry eliminated, recurring reports assembled on their own, hand-offs between systems and administrative routines that no longer need a person in the loop.
Hours back, every week.
Intelligence
Plain-language questions, exception detection, analysis and forecasting — offered only once there is trusted, reconciled context for it to run on.
Answers you can stand behind.
04Common questions
The short answer: any repeatable hand-off between two systems, or between a system and a person, once the numbers underneath it can be trusted. The longer answers are below.
The repeatable hand-offs. The ones we see most often:
No — to either. We work around the systems you already run: your ERP, accounting package and field tools stay exactly as they are, read-only, with the new layer sitting beside them on infrastructure you own. The same goes for your reporting — we do not replace Excel or Power BI, we make them right. The usual first deliverable is the spreadsheet you already use, fed by verified data instead of typed in: same layout, same figures your controller expects. For companies weighing a migration this is usually the cheaper, safer route — and if you do migrate later, the reconciled layer comes with you.
Yes — but only on top of a data layer that has been reconciled and proven first. A dashboard is only as trustworthy as the numbers behind it; built on data nobody has verified, it just makes the wrong figure look official. Once the foundation ties to the books, the surface on top — a dashboard, a portal, a live report — is the straightforward part.
It is the normal case. Most mid-market systems keep their data in a database — SQL Server, an Access file, a hosted instance — and that is what we read. If it has a database, we can work with it. Old is not the obstacle; untrusted is, and that is what gets fixed first.
Security is a design decision, not an afterthought. We work read-only and at least privilege — the narrowest access that does the job. Your existing data is never deleted, moved or changed; we only ever read from it, so nothing we do can break or undo what is already there. Your data is protected throughout, access can be withdrawn at any time, and every hand-over is documented. The specifics — the controls and the agreements around them — are part of the first conversation.
Only at the end, and only where it earns its place. The first two stages are ordinary, deterministic automation — the numbers come from code you can read and check, not from a model that might guess. AI comes last, once the data underneath it has been verified, and only for what it is genuinely good at: answering questions in plain language, flagging exceptions, forecasting. It is built on a foundation you can already trust — not bolted on in place of one.
The assessment takes days, not months — we read the database overnight and spend the time with your people confirming what it shows. The first working piece typically follows within weeks of the assessment. We would rather ship one report that ties to the penny than a dashboard nobody trusts.
Fixed fees, agreed before work starts — no hourly billing. It begins with a fixed-fee assessment, half of which is credited toward the first build. Everything after that is scoped and priced up front, once you have seen the method work on your own data.
05On AI
It is a fair question, given how the category is being sold right now. The difference is sequence, not capability.
Dropped onto data nobody has reconciled, it does not signal uncertainty. It returns a confident, well-worded answer that happens to be wrong — and the error surfaces several decisions later. Tools bought before anyone has mapped how the work is really done tend to sit unused within a quarter.
The numbers are made correct first, inside the systems you already own. What is built on top is then accurate, shaped to how your organization actually operates, and adopted — because it extends work that was already paying for itself.
Same destination, opposite direction. Consolidara is the bridge between the systems you have and the answers you want from them.
06How we start
No one is asked to commit to a large program on a projection. Work begins with a fixed-fee assessment and expands only on demonstrated results.
A fixed-fee review of your systems, the manual work around them, your reporting needs and the numbers nobody quite trusts. You keep the written map whether or not we continue.
One high-value workflow, built and proven against figures you already trust. Contained enough to be low-risk, real enough to show the method working on your own data.
Reporting and automation built outward from the proven core, extended only as far as it keeps paying for itself. AI layered in later, where it earns its place.
Fixed fees, agreed before work starts — never by the hour. Half of the assessment fee is credited toward the first build, and everything after it is scoped and priced before it begins.
07The firm
Consolidara is an independent data and automation practice. The work is deliberately narrow: making the systems a company already runs produce trustworthy operating data, and building the reporting and automation that data makes possible. We have no software to sell you and no license to renew.
Engagements are principal-led. The person who scopes the work is the person who performs it and remains accountable for the result — which, at this size of company, is the difference between a system that gets adopted and one that is quietly abandoned.
We work read-only inside client systems, deliver onto infrastructure the client owns, and will say plainly when a proposed piece of work is not worth doing.
08Contact
A twenty-minute conversation about where the manual work sits and which numbers are not trusted is usually enough to tell whether there is something worth fixing.