What a practice-level tracker should do
A Companies House deadline tracker for an accounting practice is a working view across the companies it monitors. It should identify each company and obligation, explain where the date came from and how recently the information was checked, and make exceptions visible enough to decide what to do next. Checking one company answers a particular question; reviewing a portfolio helps the practice choose where to spend its attention.
The useful distinction is between seeing a date and understanding the work behind it. A passed internal target, an uncertain filing period and a confirmed statutory deadline tomorrow need different responses. A tracker should help you recognise that difference without relying on the person who originally entered the row.
This guide sets out evaluation requirements and explains where the current Obnexo workbook fits. Requirements for a robust practice process are not a promise that one product supplies every control.
Questions the tracker should help you answer
Evaluate the tracker using a small, representative set of company records, including one straightforward case and one uncertain case. Ask someone who did not prepare the data to explain what they would review first.
- Which companies are in scope? You need a recognisable company list with stable company numbers. Reconcile that list with the practice's agreed responsibilities; a saved company is not evidence of an engagement.
- What is overdue or approaching? Check what is due and whether the date is a Companies House deadline or your own internal target. Missing an internal target does not by itself mean a statutory filing is late.
- What needs review? Look for explicit uncertainty, missing source facts, period questions and relevant source corrections. A blank date must not quietly read as nothing to do.
- Are we using an internal date? A reviewer should see the practice target alongside the source deadline and understand why the practice chose it.
- What changed and how current is this? Distinguish a changed source record from a difference between your target and the source date. Check whether the latest source check succeeded and when, not just when the sheet was opened.
- What happens next? A review prompt can direct investigation. The practice still needs to decide the actual action, responsible person and evidence needed to close the matter.
Reminders versus a portfolio workflow
Companies House reminders and calendar alerts can be useful parts of a filing process. A reminder identifies a date; a portfolio workflow helps the practice decide what deserves attention and why. That includes uncertain information and any earlier internal target the practice has chosen.
Consider an illustrative morning with an accounts reminder for Cedar Example, a query about a confirmation statement for Harbour Example and an internal review date for Northstar Example. Three notifications do not establish an order of work. The reviewer needs the source position, the reason for each internal date and any unresolved issue before deciding priority. These names are fictional.
A portfolio workflow provides that context in a recurring review. More notifications may simply distribute the same uncertainty across more inboxes. When evaluating a tracker, ask how it supports a review when no reminder has arrived, and what it shows when the source cannot be checked. Obnexo's current workflow uses a user-started refresh; this guide does not describe an Obnexo alert service.
The minimum information a tracker should show
Use this checklist when comparing a spreadsheet with a dedicated tracker. The last column distinguishes verified Obnexo information from controls the practice should maintain separately. Field availability does not establish that the underlying fact is complete or current.
Scroll the table horizontally to compare all columns.
| Information | Why it matters | Current Obnexo / separate control |
|---|---|---|
| Company number and name | Identify the correct entity despite name changes or similar names. | Implemented company identifiers and names. |
| Obligation and period | Keep separate filings and relevant periods understandable. | Accounts and confirmation statements within supported scope; period uncertainty can require review. |
| Source date / statutory calculation | Show what was reported or how a date was derived. | Reported Companies House deadlines for covered obligations; separate calculators explain their own date calculations. |
| Practice target / working date | Plan an earlier operational target without relabelling the source deadline. | Your internal target and the date used to plan work are shown separately in the Data tab. |
| Days and review state | Find approaching work and information needing investigation. | Days remaining and explanations of what needs attention, labelled Days to working deadline and Review reasons. |
| Source check and time | Distinguish available, unchecked and failed source information. | Whether the check succeeded and when, labelled Source check and Last successful CH check in the Data tab. |
| Next action and owner | Make the operational response clear. | Suggested next step offers review guidance; allocate the actual work in your existing practice records. |
| Completion evidence | Distinguish an attempt from an accepted outcome. | Filing completion is Unknown; check acceptance elsewhere. |
Keep source dates and practice dates distinct
A practice may deliberately target submission before a statutory deadline. Moving that internal target changes the work plan, not the legal date. Retain both values and the reason for the choice. If a source correction affects a saved target, investigate the effect rather than choosing whichever date gives more time.
The date shown for planning work is your saved internal target when one exists, otherwise available Companies House date information. The workbook calls this the Working deadline. An earlier target alone does not trigger a review warning. A target later than the checked Companies House deadline, or a relevant source correction affecting a saved decision, can require review.
A short weekly-review outline
Confirm the monitored list, refresh or verify relevant information, then inspect overdue internal targets and source dates and near-term obligations. Investigate uncertain records alongside urgent ones: a missing source date can conceal a matter that deserves attention. Reconcile source information with practice targets and decide the next action.
Close the review by recording who will act and when an unresolved matter will be revisited. Verify filing acceptance separately where required. These are recommended practice steps; Obnexo does not automatically perform the whole routine. The routine should be repeatable even when the usual reviewer is absent.
Apply the short four-week test
Could another authorised person understand the current compliance position if the usual reviewer were unavailable? Give them an approaching obligation and an unresolved date. Ask them to locate the company, explain where the date came from and identify the next action without an oral briefing.
If the answer depends on a private inbox or an unexplained colour, the practice has found a handover gap. That finding can be useful even when the tracker itself is working correctly. Access, professional authority and backup arrangements need their own attention.
Where Obnexo fits
Obnexo brings accounts and confirmation-statement information together in desktop Google Sheets. Add company numbers through Edit tracked companies, then start a refresh from the add-on. The workbook keeps your internal targets and matters needing review distinct from Companies House information.
Start with the portfolio overview in Dashboard, check each company in Companies and examine individual filing matters in Obligations. For more detail, the Data tab shows dates, checks and review reasons. To save an internal target or a date decision, select the relevant row and use the Inspector panel; typing over a displayed value does not save that decision.
Check whether Companies House information was obtained successfully and when. In Data, these fields are labelled Source check and Last successful CH check. A failed or unavailable check needs attention even if an older successful-check time is visible. Refreshing does not guarantee a fresh successful check for every row.
Portfolio
Company numbers define the tracked list. Dashboard and Companies give context.
Obligations
Review supported accounts and confirmation-statement records separately.
Dates and decisions
Use Data to see when information was checked; save an internal target through the Inspector panel.
When a tracker is not enough
A practice may need fuller practice-management software when its main difficulty is allocating work between staff, managing detailed approvals or maintaining granular permissions. Billing, CRM, capacity planning and integrated client communication also need capabilities beyond a date tracker. Choose against the work you actually need to control.
A spreadsheet view can still sit alongside those systems if each has a clear purpose. Decide where the authoritative work assignment and client correspondence live, and avoid maintaining conflicting task lists. Obnexo's saved date decisions and suggested review steps should not be presented to staff as a complete task-management system.
Limits and professional responsibility
A tracker supports attention and planning. It does not replace Companies House or HMRC, establish that every obligation is covered, or replace professional judgement. Current Obnexo workbook coverage described here is accounts and confirmation statements, not a complete company tax calendar. Unsupported and unusual cases need separate checks.
An internal date never becomes a statutory deadline merely because it controls the working view. A passed date does not prove non-filing, and a cleared review prompt does not prove acceptance. Obnexo does not file documents; its current Filing completion field remains Unknown. Check filing acceptance separately using the official record or acknowledgement.