IntakeOS vs SimplyConvert: how they compare in 2026

Waypoint is the model driven part of IntakeOS. It reads each completed intake and returns a numeric score, a breakdown by category such as case value, liability, evidence quality and urgency, a written summary and red flags. The criteria come from the firm, written in plain language in a criteria editor. Separate rubrics cover mass tort, workers' compensation and personal injury work, and prebuilt sets cover active torts such as Roundup and hair relaxer. Waypoint calls OpenAI with the firm's own API key. The intake chatbot runs on Microsoft Bot Framework and Azure Cognitive Services, and optional Whisper transcription turns recorded calls into text for quality review. A read only connector lets Claude answer staff questions about leads, scores, timelines and documents. Around the models sit branching forms, live transfer, electronic signatures, SMS and email nurture, referral tracking, MDL portfolios and CMS sync, all of which run without them. Case Compass calls the product an operating system for intake rather than a chatbot.

An intake engine and case management platform driven by rules, with AI framing on top. The Instant Case Evaluator runs on criteria written by lawyers, which is authored logic rather than learned judgment, and the vendor describes its conversations as criteria based. The CRM, referral management, drip marketing, call center integration and litigation filing workflow are all rule based. The vendor does say AI qualifies cases and notifies lawyers, and the Boy Scout TDP Quantifier and the Camp Lejeune claim work featured on NBC News involve real analytical modeling of settlement value and claim evidence. Without the models, a working criteria engine, CRM and litigation platform remain, which is what a firm buys.

IntakeOS cites no legal authority and runs no legal research. Its legal content belongs to the firm: the branching questions and the Waypoint criteria, which can cover exposure windows, diagnoses and statutes of limitations. Waypoint's output is an assessment of a claimant's case, with a summary and flags that staff use to decide which leads to work first. No accuracy figure, error rate, test set or comparison against case outcomes is given for those assessments. A March 2026 release describes faster and more reliable scoring with better handling of edge cases, without a measure. Case Compass's own AI principles say models trained on patterns can miss unusual case types, edge fact patterns and jurisdictional nuance, and that AI can miss the human context behind an intake. Prebuilt tort criteria come from Case Compass, and only one set names a reference standard, NIH benchmarks for a uterine cancer screen. The chatbot's answers to visitors carry no accuracy statement either.

Nothing published, and one product makes the omission serious. The Boy Scout TDP Quantifier is stated to capture the detail of a survivor's account and apply it to maximize settlement value under a trust distribution procedure, which is a quantitative valuation of an abuse claim, and the Camp Lejeune platform substantiates claims for an administrative filing regime. Both produce outputs on which a claimant's recovery depends and both are testable in principle. No accuracy figure, no validation methodology, no error rate, no evaluation and no statement of how a quantifier output is checked are published for either. The vendor states criteria based conversations deliver instant legal guidance, and nothing describes how the guidance is bounded or verified.

The chatbot and webforms run unattended around the clock, and the firm's branching rules decide which questions each prospect sees and which leads move on. Waypoint applies the firm's criteria to every submission and presents the result for staff review. It does not accept or decline a case. Case Compass's design principle puts the firm's team in charge: full visibility, override authority and final judgment, with the decision to take a case never left to AI alone. The review points are concrete. Each score arrives with category reasoning and a written summary, and the full transcript stays on the lead. A live transfer queue shows every prospect waiting for an agent, and an agent can take over a bot conversation from the inbox. Automation also reaches the retainer. An April 2026 guide says a lead can go from intake to signed retainer without a person in the loop. When no agent is free, the platform can send the retainer for signature and book a callback. No point is set at which a person must review a lead before a retainer goes out; that depends on how each firm configures its timeline.

The setup is highly autonomous, stated plainly and bounded nowhere. The vendor says the platform automatically retains qualified clients and automatically rejects unqualified leads. Automatic rejection turns a person away with no human in the path. Automatic retention matters just as much, since retaining a client creates a relationship with professional duties from that moment. Nothing describes a threshold, escalation path, human review of rejections, appeal, or what a rejected person is told. Lawyers write the criteria in advance, and staff doing manual intakes get real time guidance rather than being replaced, but writing the rules is not oversight of an individual decision.

Case Compass reports three customer results for IntakeOS. Stern & Cohen reports a 75% chat to client conversion rate. McCune Law Group reports a 70% increase in conversions. An unnamed nationwide mass tort firm reports a 90% reduction in case acquisition costs. None of the three carries a date, a baseline or a measurement period, and each is labeled as a reported result that varies by implementation. Across the company, the platform has handled tens of thousands of intakes in mass torts, mass arbitration and personal injury. Waypoint is in use for mass tort, workers' compensation, personal injury and landlord and tenant matters, and the active campaigns named include Roundup and personal injury mass torts. The Clio app directory still lists the product under the Gideon name, describing matter creation in Clio Manage with chat conversations saved as documents. The product lineage runs to February 2017, when Gideon launched; its founder presented it at a Stanford CodeX meeting that May.

National broadcast coverage of the product in use, and named litigations rather than named customers. The vendor's AI work substantiating Camp Lejeune claims was featured on NBC News, which can be checked independently. The deployments are tied to the Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Litigation and the Boy Scouts of America trust distribution procedure, both real proceedings with public dockets. Published figures: up to 400 percent more engagement than live chat, and an audit finding that up to 75 percent of paid live chat leads were unreachable or had already hired other counsel. No law firm customer is named, no case study with a method exists, and both figures carry up to qualifiers with no sample, baseline or period, the engagement claim being the weaker.

No customer agreement or data processing addendum is public, so the confidentiality position comes from the security page, the privacy policy and product posts. Waypoint sends intake data to OpenAI under the firm's own API account, so claimant data does not flow through Case Compass's AI infrastructure. Case Compass says that data never trains a shared or third party model, is never pooled with other customers' data, and that the firm keeps audit rights over its own OpenAI account. Requests are isolated to each customer account, and staff reach leads through role based access. Intake forms, signed retainers and case notes count as client data entered by the firm under the privacy policy, and the firm can ask for that data to be deleted. The policy also keeps a right to build aggregated, anonymized insights to improve the platform. Privilege and work product are not addressed, nor is the treatment of a prospect's account when the firm declines the matter. The chatbot runs on Microsoft's Azure services, and nothing covers what Microsoft keeps from those conversations.

Nothing was found, on a platform holding extremely sensitive intake content. The Boy Scout TDP Quantifier is said to capture every detail of every survivor's story, paired with a Trauma-Informed Client Outreach service, so the platform takes in detailed accounts of childhood sexual abuse at first contact. The Camp Lejeune platform holds health and service history. Nothing published addresses confidentiality, encryption, access control, privilege or work product for any of it. Trauma informed outreach describes how survivors are approached, not how their data is protected.

Case Compass's statement on AI treats the decision to take a case as a legal and business judgment. AI can inform it with scores, flags and summaries, the statement says, and should never make that call alone. The same page says a fully automated experience can feel cold to people seeking help, and that a handoff to a person at the right time matters. That position concerns the firm's own decision. Nothing addresses what the chatbot may tell a prospective client about the merits of a claim, or whether visitors are told they are talking to software. Supervision of the scripts and criteria that drive each conversation by the firm's lawyers is not addressed either. Agent scripts can carry the compliance disclosures a firm writes for each practice area, and those words are the firm's. No bar rule or ethics opinion on advertising, solicitation, prospective clients or AI use is named. No published terms say who may use the product or set its limits, and no jurisdiction is named.

Not located, and the vendor's own language states the exposure directly. The platform is described as delivering instant legal guidance through criteria based conversations, and separately as auto retaining qualified clients. Providing legal guidance to a member of the public and forming an attorney client relationship are both acts with professional consequences, and the vendor describes its system doing both without a lawyer in the interaction. Nothing published states that the guidance is not legal advice, addresses what the chatbot may say when a potential client asks a substantive question, describes who is responsible for an auto retention decision, or engages any bar authority. Guidance and retention are both automated in the same flow.

Under the heading of its approach to AI, Case Compass sets out where it thinks AI helps and where it does not. The help column covers speed at volume, consistent screening, pattern recognition and routine logistics. The shortfall column covers nuance and context, novel situations, final case decisions and client trust. The stated design principle is human in the loop as the architecture, with transparent scores, configurable criteria and nothing treated as a black box. No owner, review body, release testing, monitoring or bias evaluation sits behind those principles. Waypoint applies the same written criteria to every claimant, which Case Compass presents as a consistent and defensible standard. No review of how scores fall across claimant groups, case types or languages is offered. Age based rules, added in March 2026, let criteria screen claimants on an age computed from date of birth, for case types with age eligibility requirements. No guidance on how firms should use them accompanies the feature. ISO 42001 and the EU AI Act are not mentioned.

Nothing published, and no fairness evaluation exists for a product that assesses prospective clients. Two systems here make the untested risk concrete rather than structural. Auto rejection means the qualification model determines which injured people are turned away from a firm entirely, and nothing indicates whether rejection rates have been examined across any population. The Boy Scout TDP Quantifier assigns value to an abuse survivor's account under a trust distribution procedure, so a model is scoring the compensable weight of a person's trauma, and no bias testing, validation methodology, evaluation, model card, governance body, AI policy, ISO 42001 or EU AI Act positioning is published for it or for anything else on the platform. The vendor states the quantifier was developed with sex abuse trauma specialists, which is subject matter expertise in its construction and is not an evaluation of its output.

Case Compass hosts IntakeOS on AWS with all data in United States data centers and least privilege access to infrastructure. Data in transit uses TLS 1.2 or later, data at rest uses AES 256 encryption, and keys rotate on a regular schedule. Users sign in with multifactor authentication and see only what their role allows. Backups run daily with point in time recovery and are kept for 30 days, encrypted. Lead access, intake submissions, user changes and API calls are logged and kept for compliance review, with no log retention period given. A privacy policy effective 1 January 2025 keeps information as long as needed to provide the service, meet legal duties and resolve disputes, and lets a firm ask for client intake data to be deleted. Data about minors gets heightened controls, collection limited to what the service needs and parental review and deletion rights. No subprocessor list is public beyond the providers the security page names, and no incident response or breach notice commitment appears.

No data stewardship position was found. Nothing says whether intake conversations, survivor accounts, health and service records, claim form data or qualification outcomes are used to train or improve models, no retention period is published, and no deletion right is described. The vendor says it securely maintains data for real time analysis, which names no mechanism and describes a use of the data rather than a limit. The content is highly sensitive: accounts of childhood sexual abuse, military service and health histories, and claim documents for administrative filing.

Case Compass offers no public customer agreement, terms of service or service level commitment for IntakeOS. The website has no terms page, and the privacy policy is the only legal document linked from it. No warranty covers chatbot answers or Waypoint scores, and no indemnity, liability cap or remedy is set out. The rebrand note tells existing customers that their agreement with Case Compass is unchanged, since the contracting entity is the same, and that agreement is private. A firm learns how loss is allocated, including for a prospect turned away by its own criteria or a retainer sent without review, only in a negotiated contract. On risk, the privacy policy carries only a statement that no system is completely secure and that Case Compass cannot guarantee absolute security.

No published position located on liability for AI output, warranty, service levels or remedy, and the exposure is sharp because the system makes final decisions. An auto rejected potential client is turned away without a human review, and in mass tort litigation with filing deadlines and trust distribution procedures with claim windows, a wrongly rejected claimant may lose the claim entirely rather than simply going to another firm. Nothing published addresses who carries that. A quantifier output that undervalues a survivor's claim produces a lower settlement with no described correction path. And auto retention creates a client relationship by machine, with no published statement of what happens when it retains someone the firm should not have taken.

Signed cases and intake data move one way, from IntakeOS into the firm's systems, and the integrations page says what each connection carries. Litify receives practice areas as case types, marketing campaigns, the originating URL, lead status, intake answers and Waypoint scores, with webform leads labeled as such. Filevine matters receive intake answers, lead status, attribution and scores. Lead Docket receives new leads with full answer mapping, scores and referral partner attribution. In Clio, an accepted intake can create a matter in Clio Manage with fields mapped, contacts sync to Clio Grow, and chat conversations are saved as documents. HubSpot, Zapier, CallRail and RingCentral connect as well, and a WordPress plugin and a JavaScript embed place forms inline on any site without an iframe. Setup steps are spelled out for RingCentral, from dial mode to inbound number and call recording, but not for the case management connections. Leads export to CSV, and the Claude connector offers read only access through an MCP endpoint at api.casecompass.io.

One integration category is named, and no system is. The vendor cites call center integration and replacement of live chat and contact forms, which describe how the platform connects to or replaces intake channels, and the product is itself a CRM and case management system through to filing, so less handoff is needed than for a point solution. No case management system is named: no Filevine, Litify, SmartAdvocate or CASEpeer connector, though those are what mass tort firms run, and no API or export documentation was found. A firm with an existing case management system cannot tell whether SimplyConvert connects to it or replaces it.

IntakeOS runs as a hosted service on AWS, with all data stored in United States data centers. Firms reach it in the browser at app.casecompass.io, and intake forms embed in the firm's own website. Processing happens in more than one place. Chatbot conversations run through Microsoft Bot Framework and Azure Cognitive Services, with no Azure region named. Waypoint sends intake data to OpenAI under the firm's own account, so processing location and retention at OpenAI follow the firm's own agreement with OpenAI. Optional Whisper transcription also runs through OpenAI. No single tenant, private cloud or on premises option is offered, and no region outside the United States. Users outside the United States may have their information transferred to and processed in the United States, according to the privacy policy.

Nothing located. No hosting provider is named, no region or data residency commitment is published, and no deployment options are described. The vendor states that it securely maintains data, which addresses neither location nor tenancy. The gap matters here in a specific way: the Camp Lejeune platform performs administrative filing for a federal claims process and holds military service and health records, and nothing states where that material is processed or stored.

No SOC 2 report, ISO 27001 certificate, penetration test summary or named auditor is offered for IntakeOS or for Case Compass, and there is no trust center. The security page cites AWS's SOC 2 Type II certification for the hosting layer. That is Amazon's attestation for its own infrastructure rather than an audit of Case Compass. The controls themselves are described in prose, among them TLS 1.2 or later in transit, AES 256 at rest, rotated keys, multifactor authentication, role based access, audit logging and encrypted daily backups. Case Compass invites a firm's IT team or compliance counsel to contact it for a walkthrough of its security posture, with no report or questionnaire offered in advance.

No certification, attestation, trust center or security page was found: no SOC 2, ISO 27001, HIPAA statement, business associate agreement, named auditor, penetration testing partner or encryption statement. The only security language is that the platform securely maintains data for real time analysis, which names no standard and cannot be checked. The missing HIPAA statement stands out because the Camp Lejeune platform handles health and service records for a claims process.

Three providers are named. Waypoint uses OpenAI through the firm's own API key. Whisper from OpenAI handles optional call transcription for quality review. Microsoft Bot Framework with Azure Cognitive Services carries the chatbot conversations. Because the firm supplies the key, Waypoint traffic is governed by the firm's direct agreement with OpenAI, and the firm can see what was sent, audit usage with OpenAI and revoke access. No model family or version is named for Waypoint or the chatbot. AWS hosts the platform. RingCentral carries calls when a firm connects its own account. Nothing commits Case Compass to notifying customers when a provider or model changes, and no subprocessor list exists to track such a change.

Nothing located. No foundation model provider, model family or version is named, no distinction is drawn between proprietary and third party models, and no subprocessor list was found. The vendor names its development team composition, being lawyers, sex abuse trauma specialists and award winning legal technology developers, which describes who built the products and identifies nothing in the processing chain. Email marketing automation and call center integration both imply third party service providers and neither is named. For a platform holding survivor accounts and health records, the identity of every processor is a question a firm's own diligence would ask and none can be answered from public material.

IntakeOS is priced after a demo. No price, plan name, tier or unit of charge is public, so nothing shows whether cost follows seats, leads, conversations or signed cases. A few terms of the deal are described. Onboarding is included: the Case Compass team builds the first intake flow and the Waypoint criteria, and most firms go live within a week. RingCentral calling uses the firm's existing RingCentral plan with no added licensing from Case Compass. Some features are described as available on all plans, but no plan is named. Case Compass's 2026 intake guide quotes general market ranges for intake software, from $50 a month for simple tools to $500 to $2,000 or more for full platforms, without placing IntakeOS in either. Dwellex, the company's landlord and tenant product, carries public per case pricing that does not apply to IntakeOS.

No pricing is published at any level: no price, range, tier or unit of charge, and nothing on whether the platform is priced per firm, seat, qualified lead, litigation or claim, which are very different models for a product spanning a chatbot, CRM, referral management and filing platforms. No independent estimate was found. The vendor's own case against live chat is about cost, that firms could not quantify it and up to 75 percent of paid leads were wasted, yet it discloses no cost of its own, so a buyer cannot make the comparison it invites.

IntakeOS is built for high volume plaintiff firms. Personal injury, mass torts and MDL campaigns, mass arbitration, class actions, workers' compensation and consumer litigation are the named practices, and the intake guide adds social security disability. Waypoint ships with prebuilt criteria for active torts and supports custom rubrics for any plaintiff case type. Mass tort firms group claimants into named MDL portfolios with lead counts, score distributions, status breakdowns, deadline tracking and plaintiff fact sheet mapping. Referral partners, including cocounsel and marketing partners, get their own portal. The product sits between marketing and case management and replaces neither, so firms are expected to keep a CMS such as Litify, Filevine or Clio. Every named market is plaintiff work, and defense, transactional and in house use are not mentioned. No jurisdiction limits are given. Landlord and tenant practices are served by a separate Case Compass product, Dwellex, and specialty medical practices by Torvana.

Coverage is stated at the level of named litigations, not just practice areas. The focus is personal injury and mass tort, with the platform built by a mass tort lawyer and Mass Torts 360 as a dedicated product. It ships a Camp Lejeune Water Contamination Litigation platform covering intake, data management and administrative filing for that proceeding, and a Boy Scout trust distribution procedure quantifier built for that settlement's claim structure. A firm can check those against its own docket. No jurisdiction or firm size is stated, and nothing says how quickly new litigations are supported or how many are covered beyond the two named.