About
I'm the person who does the work — reviewing submissions, fixing rejections, and building the workflows agencies use to onboard clients without starting from scratch every time.
My background
I've worked inside two software companies supporting messaging platforms at scale — handling API troubleshooting, campaign vetting, and escalation management. That's where I built the SOPs, streamlined the onboarding workflows, and resolved the edge cases that typically block registrations or impact deliverability.
I focus on how messaging systems actually behave in production: how campaigns get approved, how messages get filtered, and where processes break down. If something isn't working, I don't just point it out — I trace it back to the root cause and provide a clear path to fix it.
Why agencies
Every client is a different intake conversation. Every campaign submission is a different set of corrections. Nothing carries over from the last one. That's not an A2P problem — it's a workflow problem. I fix it.
Talk to me about your setupWhat agencies deal with
One client has a clear use case and clean opt-in flow. The next has a website that won't pass compliance review, a use case description that's too vague, and sample messages that contradict the campaign type they registered. Without a standard intake process, you're diagnosing these from scratch every time.
Use case descriptions. Opt-in disclosure language. Sample messages. Privacy policy language that actually references SMS. These corrections show up repeatedly across clients — because most clients don't know what carriers require. Without a template or checklist, your team absorbs that rewrite work manually every engagement.
One rejected campaign holds up a client's entire messaging launch. If it's your first time seeing that rejection reason, the diagnosis takes time. If you've seen it before, you still have to apply the fix manually. A documented rejection-to-resolution workflow cuts this time significantly.
Five clients in registration at the same time. Two waiting on TCR feedback. One approved but implementation isn't finished. One rejected and waiting for a website fix from the client. Without a dashboard or status tracking system, that information lives in your inbox.
What I do
I review and standardize client submissions before they go to TCR. That means cleaning up use case descriptions, rewriting opt-in language that doesn't meet carrier standards, fixing sample messages that contradict the registered campaign type, and flagging missing information before the submission is complete. The goal is a registration-ready submission, not a resubmission cycle.
I audit each client's website against TCR and carrier requirements: Privacy Policy, Terms of Service, opt-in form language, SMS disclosures, and site content. Website failures are one of the most common rejection causes — and one of the easiest to miss during intake if there's no structured review.
I document a repeatable intake, vetting, and submission workflow your team can run for every client. The output is a set of checklists and process documents you own — not a dependency on me for every engagement. One structured process instead of ad hoc review every time.
I design a monitoring view for campaign status, delivery rates, and compliance signals across your client accounts. Know where each client stands — approved, pending, rejected, or live and delivering — without digging through logs or inbox threads.
How it works
Ready to standardize your process
Send me a description of your current intake and registration workflow. I'll review it and tell you where the gaps are and what a repeatable process would look like for your team.