We build Agents. You build the Future.
● B2B offer — Non-profits & the social economyThe AI agent for non-profits & the social economy: answer members, lighten the admin
Members’ requests arrive through every channel, and they are often the same questions. Your agent answers them from the sources you have approved, finds the information in your document reference and prepares the handover of whatever needs a person. It does not handle subscriptions, accounts or human resources: those are separate agents you can add. Hosted in France, architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity.
Updated on
Deployed in a few weeks
Non-profit assistant · hosted in France
Fictional simulation — not a client result
A member is asking whether they can claim tax relief on their subscription and when the next general meeting is. Can you answer?
Yes. As your organisation is recognised as being of general interest, subscriptions and donations give entitlement to 66% tax relief, up to 20% of taxable income — a tax receipt will be sent to them in January.
The next ordinary general meeting is set for 14 March at the village hall, and the notice is already scheduled.
⛓ Sourced · your constitution + the membership records + the internal calendar
The next ordinary general meeting is set for 14 March at the village hall, and the notice is already scheduled.
⛓ Sourced · your constitution + the membership records + the internal calendar
Perfect. Can you also list the members who have not yet paid their 2026 subscription and prepare a reminder?
23 members have not paid the 2026 subscription (out of 187 active). I have prepared a personalised reminder by email, warm in tone, with the payment link and a note of the deadline.
Nothing has been sent: the list and the message are ready for you to read over.
✎ Action · reminder ready to read over — the treasurer approves the send
Nothing has been sent: the list and the message are ready for you to read over.
✎ Action · reminder ready to read over — the treasurer approves the send
Data hosted in France · sovereign model as an option
Data hosted in France
Hosted in FranceAI model called at its publisher, except with the Sovereign model option
Member data protected
GDPR & AI Act: governed deploymentTraceability & human oversight
TurnkeyDesigned, installed and operated for you
The organisation decidesThe agent carries out what you have authorised
For an organisation established outside the European Union, the law of its own country applies; at its request, we put equivalent safeguards in place (human review before any action, a log of the criteria, information for the people concerned).
✦ In brief
In a non-profit or a social-economy organisation, a Blue Lemon Agent agent automates the repetitive tasks — replies to members, subscription reminders, volunteer coordination, preparing grant applications — and takes the pressure off teams that are often small. Data hosted in France; the AI model is called at its publisher, except with the Sovereign model option. With that option, the data of members, donors and beneficiaries is never exposed to a foreign service, architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity. The time gained is redirected to the social mission. Live within a few weeks, from a monthly subscription, all inclusive. It also follows what is addressed to you online: messages and comments received on your Facebook page, where your members and volunteers write to you, on your Instagram professional account and on your LinkedIn page, for your partners and funders. These are third-party platforms whose interfaces change without notice: the agent prepares, the board approves, and any access fees they charge are passed on at actual cost, with no margin, outside the subscription.
100%
hosted in France in the target architecture
0
transfer outside the EU with the Sovereign model option (target architecture)
3
uses ready to deploy on this scope
0
decision with a legal or significant effect taken by an agent
Reference points describing our offer, not results measured at a client. The scale of the gain is confirmed by a pilot on your own scope.
Indicative estimate, to be confirmed by a pilot on your real files (general terms of sale, article 4).
Pricing
One package, one agent
An agent for answering members and handling administration, installed and operated for you. Suited to the resources of social-economy organisations.
Agility
Setup + controlled subscription
2,315 € excl. VAT setup
then 264 € excl. VAT/month — you invest at installation and pay a reduced subscription. Ideal for keeping the cost under control over time.
- Installation, configuration and training for your teams
- Operation, human oversight, updates and support
- Hosting in France, a dedicated and isolated resource
The simplest
Serenity
All inclusive, no setup fee
394 € excl. VAT /month
all inclusive, immediate start. No upfront investment: a single subscription. Ideal for starting quickly and simply.
- Setup included (installation, configuration, training)
- Operation, human oversight, updates and support
- Hosting in France, managed end to end
100% Sovereign
On site, you own it
4,140 € excl. VAT setup
then 364 € excl. VAT/month · + hardware from 1,058 € (one-off purchase, in addition) — a sovereign computer installed on your premises, maintained remotely. Models run locally, your data returned at the end of the contract.
- Hardware installed on your premises (you own it)
- French / European AI models run locally
- Secure remote maintenance (Pro support included)
Included in the package: hosting and AI consumption up to the volume of your capacity tier, in documents, exchanges, tokens and storage; beyond that, re-invoiced at real cost with no margin, tracked in your client area as usage statements are issued. Maintenance and supervision subscription for an initial term of 12 months for the Agility package, 24 months for the Serenity package and 36 months for the 100% Sovereign package, renewable; support levels (SLA 72 h / 24 h / 4 h) optional. Bespoke development, additional integrations or exceptional volumes are quoted separately. Support Monday to Friday, 9am to 6pm. Prices exclude VAT.
AI model:
none of the AI models offered currently carries a fixed surcharge. When the selected model carries a cost, that cost is shown when you choose it, before you order, and re-invoiced at the cost incurred, with no mark-up; usage is billed at the publisher's price. Publishers' prices are published in US dollars: the amount re-invoiced is the amount in euros actually borne by Blue Lemon Agent on the publisher's invoice, at that invoice's exchange rate, with no commission or mark-up.
Included components and additional components Components included in the base offer: the Blue Lemon Agent software foundation, the AI models listed in the order journey, the standard channels (Microsoft Teams, Slack, WhatsApp Business, email, website chat, calendars, Microsoft 365 / Google Workspace, file storage, market VoIP telephony, professional social-media pages and accounts, Google Business Profile), hosting for the package chosen, in France by default, backups, supervision, updates and support. If adapting the AI agent to your constraints, your needs or your requests requires other paid components — a third-party publisher's software licence, paid API access to one of your applications, hosting of health data, for which French law requires an HDS-certified host (art. L. 1111-8 of the French Public Health Code), SecNumCloud-qualified hosting, a speech synthesis service, particular hardware —, they are offered to you as an option or on quotation and re-invoiced at the cost incurred; nothing is committed without your written agreement. Where the artificial intelligence model you choose entails an additional cost, that cost is shown to you before you order and re-invoiced to you at the cost incurred, with no margin.
What to expect
Go-live
2 to 3 weeks
Agent designed, channels connected, team trained.
Steady state
4 to 7 weeks
After a few weeks of real use, once the agent's behaviour matches what you expect.
Indicative estimate, adjusted to the options you keep. It is not a delivery commitment.
Use cases
The uses of AI in a non-profit or a social-economy organisation
What the agent does in a non-profit or a social-economy organisation, and the neighbouring agents we deploy for the rest. The agent carries out by itself what you authorise it to do; you decide what it does on its own and what it submits to you.
Included in your agent
The 3 capabilities essential to this promise are included, at no extra cost.
From 264 € excl. VAT / month
Replies to members
Answer members’ requests from the sources the organisation has approved, citing the source. Anything not covered is flagged, never invented. Approval required before any reply that commits the organisation.
The organisation’s document reference
Search and return information from the reference set the organisation has supplied: quoted extract, document reference, version date, and a flag on documents that are out of date.
Qualifying and escalating a request
Qualify a request against your rules and prepare its handover to the right volunteer or member of staff: reason, handover file, dated task. Commits no spending and grants no entitlement.
Controls and safeguards
These 2 controls are built into the agent: they frame what it does, whatever plan you pick. They are not chosen and are not added to your order.
Human oversight, costs, quality, incidents and safe stop
Data protection, rights and human oversight
What the agent must be connected to
These 2 connections are required for the agent to work. They concern your information system and are scoped during the audit.
Handoff contracts, least-privilege permissions and shared context
Integration with existing tools without double entry
Need to go further?
These agents handle a different business process, with their own owner and their own price. They are added to this one.
AI knowledge base agent
The information exists in your company — but it is scattered across procedures, contracts, an intranet and the memory of a few people.
Document agent (FAQ, knowledge base) from 353 € excl. VAT / month Discover the agent →AI agent for debt collection
Late payments weigh directly on cash flow, and chasing is a task nobody enjoys — so it often gets put off, forgotten, or done clumsily.
Debt collection agent (multichannel sequences) from 307 € excl. VAT / month Discover the agent →AI agent for human resources
Leave, payroll, procedures, onboarding, HR documentation: a sovereign AI agent, hosted in France, answering staff around the clock in confidence.
HR agent — employee support, onboarding and HR documents from 348 € excl. VAT / month Discover the agent →AI accounting agent
Bookkeeping entry is repetitive, time-consuming and seen as adding no value — yet it has to be exact.
Accounting agent (summaries, anomalies) from 406 € excl. VAT / month Discover the agent →
Does your need fall outside this?
Build your agent
In 30 minutes we identify the most relevant agent — without oversizing the project.
Demonstration
See the agent at work
5 everyday situations, taken from those that come up most often. Pick one: the exchange unfolds as it would in your organisation.
A scripted demonstration. These exchanges show how the agent behaves — its sources, its refusals, what it leaves to your teams. Nothing is sent from this page, no model is queried here, and the matters named are fictional. That is precisely what we promise your data. The behaviours shown here — monitoring, automation rules, routing and reminders — are configured with you during deployment, from your tools, your rules and your thresholds. The architecture points named in these exchanges — location, local execution, isolation, encryption, role-based access, logging — are not a guarantee attached to the demonstration: they are those of the architecture set out in your quotation, and verified before commissioning.
Non-profit assistant · hosted in France
Fictional simulation — not a client result
Four flags this morning, with no request from you.
· The financial report on the €24,000 grant is due in 11 days. The agreement provides for it at article 6; nothing has been started.
· The insurance certificate for the venue hired on 12/09 is not on file. The hire contract requires it on handover of the keys.
· The treasurer's term ends at the general meeting of 26/09 and no call for candidates has gone out. Your constitution requires thirty days.
· Three volunteers are supervising minors with nothing on file evidencing the checks your internal rules require before any supervisory activity. morning-watch_4-flags.pdf4 flags · document and deadline
⛓ Source · grant agreements, contracts, constitution and internal rules, volunteer records
· The financial report on the €24,000 grant is due in 11 days. The agreement provides for it at article 6; nothing has been started.
· The insurance certificate for the venue hired on 12/09 is not on file. The hire contract requires it on handover of the keys.
· The treasurer's term ends at the general meeting of 26/09 and no call for candidates has gone out. Your constitution requires thirty days.
· Three volunteers are supervising minors with nothing on file evidencing the checks your internal rules require before any supervisory activity. morning-watch_4-flags.pdf4 flags · document and deadline
⛓ Source · grant agreements, contracts, constitution and internal rules, volunteer records
The grant report — is it really urgent? We have always been late with it.
It is, and for a reason that is not the lateness itself.
Article 6 of your agreement makes payment of the balance — €7,200, or 30% — conditional on producing this report on time. It is not an end-of-file formality: it is the last condition of a payment your budget is counting on.
And article 8 provides for repayment of all or part of the grant if the use of funds is not evidenced. Lateness does not trigger that; an absent report does.
I have started the document: spend by heading matched against your accounts, income, people reached, and the indicators the agreement names specifically.
One point stops me, and it had better stop you too: €3,400 has been charged to the funded project while the paperwork attaches it to another activity. I have not moved it — it may be a coding error, it may be an allocation key I do not know about. financial-report_in-progress.pdfThree-quarters complete · 1 gap of €3,400
⛓ Source · agreement, art. 6 and 8 · project accounts
Article 6 of your agreement makes payment of the balance — €7,200, or 30% — conditional on producing this report on time. It is not an end-of-file formality: it is the last condition of a payment your budget is counting on.
And article 8 provides for repayment of all or part of the grant if the use of funds is not evidenced. Lateness does not trigger that; an absent report does.
I have started the document: spend by heading matched against your accounts, income, people reached, and the indicators the agreement names specifically.
One point stops me, and it had better stop you too: €3,400 has been charged to the funded project while the paperwork attaches it to another activity. I have not moved it — it may be a coding error, it may be an allocation key I do not know about. financial-report_in-progress.pdfThree-quarters complete · 1 gap of €3,400
⛓ Source · agreement, art. 6 and 8 · project accounts
How did you spot all that? And who do you tell?
I watch, continuously, what you have opened to me: your agreements and their deadlines, your contracts and the documents they require, your constitution and internal rules, the member and volunteer records. A contractual deadline running, a document missing from a file, a constitutional period approaching — I say so, I do not wait to be asked.
Routing follows your organisation, and takes account of the fact that most recipients are volunteers: the report to the treasurer and the director; the insurance to whoever signed the hire; the call for candidates to the chair, because the period is constitutional; the three volunteers to the youth activities lead. One message per person per week, grouped — somebody who gives two evenings a month will not read four alerts.
With a chase: 72 hours, not 24 — that is the real rhythm of an association, not that of a company. Then a monthly summary to the committee: flagged, dealt with, unanswered.
And I do not stop at the flag: all four files are already built. The grant report is drafted in the form article 6 requires, spending reconciled line by line, the €3,400 set aside pending your allocation key, and the €7,200 balance stays secured if the filing goes out within the eleven days. The request to the broker is written, named, timed to the 12/09 handover of keys. The call for candidates is ready in the form your constitution sets, dated to hold the thirty days before 26/09. And the three volunteer files carry, line by line, the checks your internal rules require.
What is left to you comes down to a signature. A filing, a payment, a document issued commit the association through a named person's hand: that is what makes them enforceable, and that is why that gesture stays yours. You read and sign in ten minutes; the drafting and the chasing, I have already done.
And I read what you have opened to me, role by role, every access logged and withdrawable on a word: nothing leaves your walls, and you can see at any time who saw what.
✎ Proposal · watch and chases to be configured — you set the thresholds
Routing follows your organisation, and takes account of the fact that most recipients are volunteers: the report to the treasurer and the director; the insurance to whoever signed the hire; the call for candidates to the chair, because the period is constitutional; the three volunteers to the youth activities lead. One message per person per week, grouped — somebody who gives two evenings a month will not read four alerts.
With a chase: 72 hours, not 24 — that is the real rhythm of an association, not that of a company. Then a monthly summary to the committee: flagged, dealt with, unanswered.
And I do not stop at the flag: all four files are already built. The grant report is drafted in the form article 6 requires, spending reconciled line by line, the €3,400 set aside pending your allocation key, and the €7,200 balance stays secured if the filing goes out within the eleven days. The request to the broker is written, named, timed to the 12/09 handover of keys. The call for candidates is ready in the form your constitution sets, dated to hold the thirty days before 26/09. And the three volunteer files carry, line by line, the checks your internal rules require.
What is left to you comes down to a signature. A filing, a payment, a document issued commit the association through a named person's hand: that is what makes them enforceable, and that is why that gesture stays yours. You read and sign in ten minutes; the drafting and the chasing, I have already done.
And I read what you have opened to me, role by role, every access logged and withdrawable on a word: nothing leaves your walls, and you can see at any time who saw what.
✎ Proposal · watch and chases to be configured — you set the thresholds
Fictional simulation — not a client result
Verel has paid us €5,000. Issue the tax receipt.
No. Not for that payment.
What I found on file alongside the transfer: an agreement signed on 12/05 providing, in exchange, for Verel's logo on all communications for the event, a ten-minute speaking slot, a stand, and ten invitations to the gala dinner.
Those benefits have a value, and it can be costed — your own price list values them at around €3,100, close to two thirds of the payment.
I recite no tax threshold from memory, and I am not going to give you one: these rules have a body of doctrine, it changes, and an association that relies on an approximate figure is precisely the one that gets reassessed.
But here the threshold question does not arise. With benefits at that level, this payment looks like a purchase of visibility — sponsorship — and not a gift. A tax receipt issued on sponsorship exposes the association, not the company. benefits-analysis_Verel.pdf4 benefits · costed line by line
⛓ Source · agreement of 12/05, association price list
What I found on file alongside the transfer: an agreement signed on 12/05 providing, in exchange, for Verel's logo on all communications for the event, a ten-minute speaking slot, a stand, and ten invitations to the gala dinner.
Those benefits have a value, and it can be costed — your own price list values them at around €3,100, close to two thirds of the payment.
I recite no tax threshold from memory, and I am not going to give you one: these rules have a body of doctrine, it changes, and an association that relies on an approximate figure is precisely the one that gets reassessed.
But here the threshold question does not arise. With benefits at that level, this payment looks like a purchase of visibility — sponsorship — and not a gift. A tax receipt issued on sponsorship exposes the association, not the company. benefits-analysis_Verel.pdf4 benefits · costed line by line
⛓ Source · agreement of 12/05, association price list
They are insisting, they have asked twice. What do we do?
We refuse them nothing: we give them the right document. And the right document is better for them than they think.
Sponsorship is invoiced, with VAT where applicable, and the spend is deductible from the company's profit as advertising. Verel loses nothing — it is a different route, not a closed door. That is the argument to give them, and it is stronger than a legal explanation.
Two documents are ready: the sponsorship invoice, and a one-page note explaining the difference, to go with it.
A third route exists and I flag it without recommending it: split the payment — part as a gift with no benefits, part as sponsorship. It is possible, it means rewriting the agreement, and it is done with your accountant, not with me.
And an observation that goes beyond this file: I have found four other tax receipts issued since January on payments with benefits agreements on file. Two look like this one. I can flag every receipt request relating to a payment tied to a benefits agreement, before the receipt goes out. A flag, not a block: the association issues what it decides to issue — it simply knows it as it does. sponsorship-invoice_Verel.pdfWith a one-page explanatory note tax-receipts_to-review.pdf4 receipts · benefits agreements on file
✎ Action · sponsorship invoice ready · 4 earlier receipts to review
Sponsorship is invoiced, with VAT where applicable, and the spend is deductible from the company's profit as advertising. Verel loses nothing — it is a different route, not a closed door. That is the argument to give them, and it is stronger than a legal explanation.
Two documents are ready: the sponsorship invoice, and a one-page note explaining the difference, to go with it.
A third route exists and I flag it without recommending it: split the payment — part as a gift with no benefits, part as sponsorship. It is possible, it means rewriting the agreement, and it is done with your accountant, not with me.
And an observation that goes beyond this file: I have found four other tax receipts issued since January on payments with benefits agreements on file. Two look like this one. I can flag every receipt request relating to a payment tied to a benefits agreement, before the receipt goes out. A flag, not a block: the association issues what it decides to issue — it simply knows it as it does. sponsorship-invoice_Verel.pdfWith a one-page explanatory note tax-receipts_to-review.pdf4 receipts · benefits agreements on file
✎ Action · sponsorship invoice ready · 4 earlier receipts to review
Fictional simulation — not a client result
A volunteer asks whether she can claim her travel costs, and whether that entitles her to anything.
Answer prepared, and it comes in two parts because her question does too.
On the claim: yes, and your rules are written down — your resolution of 14/02/2024 sets the rates, the procedure and the paperwork. I have pulled the three useful points, with the form.
On "entitles her to anything": her question is really about waiving the reimbursement in order to claim tax relief as a donor. That mechanism is real, and it assumes the reimbursement is due to her first: you cannot waive what you never claimed.
What I do not write into my answer: the rate, the ceiling, the exact formalities of the waiver. Those rules have a body of doctrine and I do not recite it. I tell her the association will confirm the steps, and I pass the question to the treasurer.
One organisational point: four volunteers have asked the same question since January. None has had a written answer. volunteer-answer_expenses.pdfRates + form · 1 question passed on
⛓ Source · resolution of 14/02/2024 · requests received since January
On the claim: yes, and your rules are written down — your resolution of 14/02/2024 sets the rates, the procedure and the paperwork. I have pulled the three useful points, with the form.
On "entitles her to anything": her question is really about waiving the reimbursement in order to claim tax relief as a donor. That mechanism is real, and it assumes the reimbursement is due to her first: you cannot waive what you never claimed.
What I do not write into my answer: the rate, the ceiling, the exact formalities of the waiver. Those rules have a body of doctrine and I do not recite it. I tell her the association will confirm the steps, and I pass the question to the treasurer.
One organisational point: four volunteers have asked the same question since January. None has had a written answer. volunteer-answer_expenses.pdfRates + form · 1 question passed on
⛓ Source · resolution of 14/02/2024 · requests received since January
Write the note for everyone then.
Note prepared, and one point stopped me while writing it.
Your 2024 resolution sets rates that your 2026 reimbursements do not follow. Of eleven reimbursements this year, seven applied a different amount — higher in five cases, lower in two.
A note does not settle that: either the resolution needs updating, or the reimbursements need correcting. That is a committee decision, and publishing a note announcing a rate that practice contradicts would be worse than publishing nothing.
So the note is ready with the rate box left blank, and the comparison in an appendix.
A proposal for what follows, if you approve it: every claim can be matched against the rate in force at the date of the expense, and any gap flagged to the treasurer — not to the volunteer. A volunteer should not discover a rate discrepancy in an automated message: that is the kind of message that loses you a volunteer, not the kind that wins you compliance.
And a quarterly summary to the committee: how many claims, how many in line, how many gaps, in which direction. volunteer-expenses-note_rate-to-set.pdf1 blank box · 7 gaps in appendix
✎ Proposal · matched against the rates — the gap goes to the committee, never to the volunteer
Your 2024 resolution sets rates that your 2026 reimbursements do not follow. Of eleven reimbursements this year, seven applied a different amount — higher in five cases, lower in two.
A note does not settle that: either the resolution needs updating, or the reimbursements need correcting. That is a committee decision, and publishing a note announcing a rate that practice contradicts would be worse than publishing nothing.
So the note is ready with the rate box left blank, and the comparison in an appendix.
A proposal for what follows, if you approve it: every claim can be matched against the rate in force at the date of the expense, and any gap flagged to the treasurer — not to the volunteer. A volunteer should not discover a rate discrepancy in an automated message: that is the kind of message that loses you a volunteer, not the kind that wins you compliance.
And a quarterly summary to the committee: how many claims, how many in line, how many gaps, in which direction. volunteer-expenses-note_rate-to-set.pdf1 blank box · 7 gaps in appendix
✎ Proposal · matched against the rates — the gap goes to the committee, never to the volunteer
We get around forty messages a week on the contact inbox and nobody knows who picks up what.
The week's 43 messages are qualified and routed by your rules, not mine.
Qualification follows the five reasons your board wrote down: membership and dues, activities and sign-ups, donations and receipts, volunteering, complaints. 29 fall under a reason your documents already answer — I reply, I quote the document and its version, the record stays with you. 14 are escalated, because they commit the association.
An escalation is not a forwarded message, and that is where the time is won. Each one carries four things: the reason chosen and the rule that chose it, the handover file — the member's history, documents already received, what is missing —, the right person under your organisation chart, and a dated task bearing the deadline that applies.
· 6 to the treasurer: refunds and instalment requests on dues. The arithmetic is done, no spending is committed and no instalment is granted: the decision is hers.
· 4 to the activities lead: two sign-ups beyond capacity, two requests for a slot.
· 3 to the chair: a complaint about a refused refund, a partnership offer, a press question.
· 1 is left with no recipient, and I show it rather than assign it at random: a federation asks for the membership list. Nobody is named for that subject in your organisation chart — it is a board decision, not a routing.
What qualification cost me: over the first four weeks, 7 messages out of 172 went to the wrong place, all under the same reason — filed as "activities" when they were complaints. The rule read the subject line and not the body. It now reads both: over the following three weeks, one message out of 129 had to be moved. Every re-routing is shown to you and can be reversed with a word.
✎ Framework · the five reasons written by the board, the organisation chart you supplied
Qualification follows the five reasons your board wrote down: membership and dues, activities and sign-ups, donations and receipts, volunteering, complaints. 29 fall under a reason your documents already answer — I reply, I quote the document and its version, the record stays with you. 14 are escalated, because they commit the association.
An escalation is not a forwarded message, and that is where the time is won. Each one carries four things: the reason chosen and the rule that chose it, the handover file — the member's history, documents already received, what is missing —, the right person under your organisation chart, and a dated task bearing the deadline that applies.
· 6 to the treasurer: refunds and instalment requests on dues. The arithmetic is done, no spending is committed and no instalment is granted: the decision is hers.
· 4 to the activities lead: two sign-ups beyond capacity, two requests for a slot.
· 3 to the chair: a complaint about a refused refund, a partnership offer, a press question.
· 1 is left with no recipient, and I show it rather than assign it at random: a federation asks for the membership list. Nobody is named for that subject in your organisation chart — it is a board decision, not a routing.
What qualification cost me: over the first four weeks, 7 messages out of 172 went to the wrong place, all under the same reason — filed as "activities" when they were complaints. The rule read the subject line and not the body. It now reads both: over the following three weeks, one message out of 129 had to be moved. Every re-routing is shown to you and can be reversed with a word.
✎ Framework · the five reasons written by the board, the organisation chart you supplied
Fictional simulation — not a client result
A member's request came in yesterday, and your constitution does not answer it — it has not gone unanswered for that.
What is being asked: a member who resigned on 14/03 asks for three quarters of her €60 subscription back. She had paid it on 8 January, at the annual call.
The rule to apply here has not yet been defined: your constitution and your internal rules set the amount and the date of the subscription call, and neither says what becomes of it when someone leaves mid-year. So I have answered nothing on my own — and the member's file is complete.
Three ways forward. Answer that the subscription is annual and not refundable, as the association has always done: that has been the constant practice since 2019, and it is written nowhere — a member asking for it in writing would have nothing to read. Refund pro rata: it is fair and easily understood, and it creates a right your constitution does not provide for and that your 412 members will be able to invoke. Refund nothing and open a carry-over of the unused part against rejoining within two years: nothing leaves the bank account, the person is not sent away empty-handed, at the cost of one line to add to the internal rules.
I recommend the third. What is missing here is not an answer, it is a written rule — and the carry-over is the only one of the three the committee can decide alone, with no change to the constitution and no effect on the approved budget.
You can also give me another rule of your own — for instance: a pro rata refund above an amount the committee sets, and a carry-over below it.
Shall I remember it for the next requests? Of your 412 members, 19 resigned mid-year over the last three years, and 6 asked for a refund — three received an answer, three never did. If you approve the rule, I will answer the next ones that way, and I will give you the count at each committee meeting.
⛓ Source · request of 10/08, constitution and internal rules, membership register (412 members), 19 mid-year resignations over three years
What is being asked: a member who resigned on 14/03 asks for three quarters of her €60 subscription back. She had paid it on 8 January, at the annual call.
The rule to apply here has not yet been defined: your constitution and your internal rules set the amount and the date of the subscription call, and neither says what becomes of it when someone leaves mid-year. So I have answered nothing on my own — and the member's file is complete.
Three ways forward. Answer that the subscription is annual and not refundable, as the association has always done: that has been the constant practice since 2019, and it is written nowhere — a member asking for it in writing would have nothing to read. Refund pro rata: it is fair and easily understood, and it creates a right your constitution does not provide for and that your 412 members will be able to invoke. Refund nothing and open a carry-over of the unused part against rejoining within two years: nothing leaves the bank account, the person is not sent away empty-handed, at the cost of one line to add to the internal rules.
I recommend the third. What is missing here is not an answer, it is a written rule — and the carry-over is the only one of the three the committee can decide alone, with no change to the constitution and no effect on the approved budget.
You can also give me another rule of your own — for instance: a pro rata refund above an amount the committee sets, and a carry-over below it.
Shall I remember it for the next requests? Of your 412 members, 19 resigned mid-year over the last three years, and 6 asked for a refund — three received an answer, three never did. If you approve the rule, I will answer the next ones that way, and I will give you the count at each committee meeting.
⛓ Source · request of 10/08, constitution and internal rules, membership register (412 members), 19 mid-year resignations over three years
The third. But the carry-over must be written into the answer to the member, with its expiry date — not just “we keep the credit”. And yes, keep it.
Written exactly as you just said it, and it carries your correction.
The rule, in one sentence: a subscription remains the association's when someone leaves mid-year; the unused part is carried over against rejoining within two years; the answer states the amount carried over and its expiry date; and the carry-over is recorded in the membership register in the person's name.
Why your correction matters more than it looks: a credit with no written date is a credit nobody claims and the treasurer carries indefinitely. With its date, it becomes a reason to come back, and it leaves the accounts by itself after two years.
What it changes today: the answer to the member is ready — €45 carried over, valid until 14/03/2028, with the line of the internal rules that now provides for it. The draft committee resolution is attached, one line to vote on 26/09.
What lets you undo it: the rule is written into the internal rules under its own name, with its date, the committee that will have voted it and the request that gave rise to it. You remove one line, and these requests go back to the committee one by one.
✎ Rule approved · internal rules, entry “subscription and mid-year departure”, draft resolution for the committee of 26/09
The rule, in one sentence: a subscription remains the association's when someone leaves mid-year; the unused part is carried over against rejoining within two years; the answer states the amount carried over and its expiry date; and the carry-over is recorded in the membership register in the person's name.
Why your correction matters more than it looks: a credit with no written date is a credit nobody claims and the treasurer carries indefinitely. With its date, it becomes a reason to come back, and it leaves the accounts by itself after two years.
What it changes today: the answer to the member is ready — €45 carried over, valid until 14/03/2028, with the line of the internal rules that now provides for it. The draft committee resolution is attached, one line to vote on 26/09.
What lets you undo it: the rule is written into the internal rules under its own name, with its date, the committee that will have voted it and the request that gave rise to it. You remove one line, and these requests go back to the committee one by one.
✎ Rule approved · internal rules, entry “subscription and mid-year departure”, draft resolution for the committee of 26/09
The 19 resignations over these three years — is there anything to take from them?
Yes, and it is not on the refund side.
What I looked at: the 19 mid-year resignations, their date, the reason recorded in the register, and each person's last attendance at an activity.
What comes out of it: 14 of the 19 fell between January and March, within ten weeks of the subscription call. And for those 14, the last attendance at an activity was more than nine months earlier. The call went out to people who had already stopped coming.
What that produces every year, and it is volunteer time: 61 members have attended no activity for more than six months. Last year, 43 of them received the 5 January call and then two chasers: 129 mailings for 12 renewals, and 4 h 20 spent by the treasurer on unpaid chasers.
What I propose, and it is one mailing to add before the call: a renewal message to members with no attendance for six months, sent fifteen days before the subscription call. One question asked once, instead of a call followed by two chasers.
What it is worth: the 12 renewals are still won — they answer the first question — and the other 31 stop receiving three mailings for nothing. And the March resignations arrive in December, before the treasury counts on a subscription that will not come.
The decision is yours: the subscription call timetable belongs to the committee, and I send nothing before they have voted it.
✎ Proposal · 19 mid-year resignations, 14 within ten weeks of the call, 61 members with no attendance for six months, 129 mailings for 12 renewals, 4 h 20 of chasers — the timetable belongs to the committee
What I looked at: the 19 mid-year resignations, their date, the reason recorded in the register, and each person's last attendance at an activity.
What comes out of it: 14 of the 19 fell between January and March, within ten weeks of the subscription call. And for those 14, the last attendance at an activity was more than nine months earlier. The call went out to people who had already stopped coming.
What that produces every year, and it is volunteer time: 61 members have attended no activity for more than six months. Last year, 43 of them received the 5 January call and then two chasers: 129 mailings for 12 renewals, and 4 h 20 spent by the treasurer on unpaid chasers.
What I propose, and it is one mailing to add before the call: a renewal message to members with no attendance for six months, sent fifteen days before the subscription call. One question asked once, instead of a call followed by two chasers.
What it is worth: the 12 renewals are still won — they answer the first question — and the other 31 stop receiving three mailings for nothing. And the March resignations arrive in December, before the treasury counts on a subscription that will not come.
The decision is yours: the subscription call timetable belongs to the committee, and I send nothing before they have voted it.
✎ Proposal · 19 mid-year resignations, 14 within ten weeks of the call, 61 members with no attendance for six months, 129 mailings for 12 renewals, 4 h 20 of chasers — the timetable belongs to the committee
Fictional simulation — not a client result
Are proxy votes allowed at the general meeting? Somebody said they are not.
Your constitution says they are. And that is where it gets complicated.
Two versions are in circulation in your documents, and they do not say the same thing on this point:
· Version filed with the authorities (2019), art. 11 — each member may hold two proxies.
· Version circulating internally, art. 11 — each member may hold five. That version is marked "amended at the 2022 general meeting".
I looked for a trace of that amendment. The minutes of the 2022 meeting do record a vote on the constitution, but their appendix is missing and no amending declaration appears in your files.
What separates the two hypotheses, and I have already prepared it: amendment voted and never declared, or internal text changed without a vote? One document settles it: the missing annex to the 2022 minutes. It has three possible homes — the register of resolutions, the meeting secretary's copy, and the notice pack sent to members — and the request is written for all three, four lines each, ready to go out under your signature. If none of them produces it, that settles it too: a vote with no record cannot be proved.
The only version that can be relied on is the one that was filed — that is a fact, not an opinion. constitution_2-versions-compared.pdf9 differences · art. 11 first
⛓ Source · two versions of the constitution, 2022 minutes, filing records
Two versions are in circulation in your documents, and they do not say the same thing on this point:
· Version filed with the authorities (2019), art. 11 — each member may hold two proxies.
· Version circulating internally, art. 11 — each member may hold five. That version is marked "amended at the 2022 general meeting".
I looked for a trace of that amendment. The minutes of the 2022 meeting do record a vote on the constitution, but their appendix is missing and no amending declaration appears in your files.
What separates the two hypotheses, and I have already prepared it: amendment voted and never declared, or internal text changed without a vote? One document settles it: the missing annex to the 2022 minutes. It has three possible homes — the register of resolutions, the meeting secretary's copy, and the notice pack sent to members — and the request is written for all three, four lines each, ready to go out under your signature. If none of them produces it, that settles it too: a vote with no record cannot be proved.
The only version that can be relied on is the one that was filed — that is a fact, not an opinion. constitution_2-versions-compared.pdf9 differences · art. 11 first
⛓ Source · two versions of the constitution, 2022 minutes, filing records
Are there other differences between the two?
Nine in all, and three matter for the meeting on 26 September.
· Article 11 — number of proxies (two or five).
· Article 9 — quorum: one third of members in the filed version, one quarter in the other.
· Article 13 — length of board terms: three years, or two.
The other six concern the objects, the registered address and drafting points with no bearing on a vote.
Why this is urgent: a meeting held under a quorum that is not the one in the operative constitution produces challengeable decisions — including the election of the treasurer whose term ends that day.
What I have prepared, and nothing more: the table of nine differences, the list of documents to gather in order to reconstruct what was voted in 2022, and the amending declaration form, blank.
I file nothing and I do not choose the version. That choice belongs to the committee, and probably to the meeting itself — which is precisely the knot. constitution-fix_documents-to-gather.pdf9 differences · 3 blocking for the meeting
✎ Support · documents gathered — putting it right belongs to the association
· Article 11 — number of proxies (two or five).
· Article 9 — quorum: one third of members in the filed version, one quarter in the other.
· Article 13 — length of board terms: three years, or two.
The other six concern the objects, the registered address and drafting points with no bearing on a vote.
Why this is urgent: a meeting held under a quorum that is not the one in the operative constitution produces challengeable decisions — including the election of the treasurer whose term ends that day.
What I have prepared, and nothing more: the table of nine differences, the list of documents to gather in order to reconstruct what was voted in 2022, and the amending declaration form, blank.
I file nothing and I do not choose the version. That choice belongs to the committee, and probably to the meeting itself — which is precisely the knot. constitution-fix_documents-to-gather.pdf9 differences · 3 blocking for the meeting
✎ Support · documents gathered — putting it right belongs to the association
And when a member asks something our documents already answer, how do you find it?
I look for it in the document repository you supplied, and I return the extract rather than a summary.
The association's document repository currently holds 146 documents: constitution and internal rules, board resolutions, grant agreements, insurance policies, sign-up procedures, minutes of meetings. Each carries its version and its date.
What an answer contains, all four every time: the extract in quotation marks, the exact reference of the document — title, article, page —, the date of the version it comes from, and the name of the person who supplied it. An answer missing any of the four does not go out: it comes back to you awaiting a source.
Out-of-date documents are flagged, not deleted. 19 of the 146 are. 11 superseded resolutions, 5 documents whose validity has lapsed — including the insurance certificate from earlier —, and 3 duplicate constitutions, among them the two versions of article 11. Where the answer can only come from an out-of-date document, I still give it, and I give it dated: "here is what the 2019 version says, nothing has replaced it on this point". An association that waits for its documents to be updated before answering its members stops answering.
What I can do tonight if you say so: file the 11 superseded resolutions behind the ones that replaced them, with the replacement date on each. The 3 duplicate constitutions, no — which one stands is established with the authorities, not inside a repository.
⛓ Sourced · 146 supplied documents, each with version and date
The association's document repository currently holds 146 documents: constitution and internal rules, board resolutions, grant agreements, insurance policies, sign-up procedures, minutes of meetings. Each carries its version and its date.
What an answer contains, all four every time: the extract in quotation marks, the exact reference of the document — title, article, page —, the date of the version it comes from, and the name of the person who supplied it. An answer missing any of the four does not go out: it comes back to you awaiting a source.
Out-of-date documents are flagged, not deleted. 19 of the 146 are. 11 superseded resolutions, 5 documents whose validity has lapsed — including the insurance certificate from earlier —, and 3 duplicate constitutions, among them the two versions of article 11. Where the answer can only come from an out-of-date document, I still give it, and I give it dated: "here is what the 2019 version says, nothing has replaced it on this point". An association that waits for its documents to be updated before answering its members stops answering.
What I can do tonight if you say so: file the 11 superseded resolutions behind the ones that replaced them, with the replacement date on each. The 3 duplicate constitutions, no — which one stands is established with the authorities, not inside a repository.
⛓ Sourced · 146 supplied documents, each with version and date
Data hosted in France · sovereign model as an option
Your case is not here? That is exactly what a 30-minute conversation is for. Discuss your project →
How it works
The stages of your AI agent project
1
Audit & scoping
30 minutes to target the use case with the best return.
2
Quote or direct sign-up
A catalogue offer is bought online; a specific need gets a costed quote.
3
Design
We design the agent and its guardrails.
4
Integration & testing
We connect your tools to the agent, which is itself hosted in France.
5
Rollout
Going live and training your team.
6
Operation
Continuous supervision and improvement.
The context
Why AI matters to non-profits — and why they hesitate
Social-economy organisations face a growing administrative load with constrained resources: few paid staff, volunteers available intermittently, and funders ever more demanding on reporting. Time spent on administration is time taken from the mission.
! The issue
The organisation is caught between a growing expectation of service from its members and beneficiaries, and human resources that are limited and often voluntary. Yet most consumer AI tools amount to entrusting membership records, donor data and information about people who are sometimes vulnerable to a third party, often hosted outside Europe and subject to the Cloud Act.
✓ Our answer
AI is only of interest to a social-economy organisation if it is sovereign and confidential by design. Local inference or an isolated resource hosted in France, systematic human oversight, the decision reserved for the team: time given back to volunteers and staff is never paid for in lost confidentiality. The aim is not to take the humanity out of the organisation, but to give time back to the mission.
The decisive point
Confidentiality of members' data: sovereignty & compliance
A non-profit handles personal data that is sometimes sensitive — members, donors, beneficiaries. Here is how the architecture of our agents protects it.
Local inference
With the 100% Sovereign package, the agent runs on a machine belonging to the organisation: no data leaves the network, nothing passes through a cloud.
Hosting in France
Otherwise, with the Agility and Serenity packages, a dedicated, isolated resource hosted in France, under French law: data hosted in France; the AI model is called at its publisher, except with the Sovereign model option.
Reduced extraterritorial exposure
For members' data, the architecture aims to reduce exposure to the Cloud Act and FISA 702; being located in France or in the European Union does not, on its own, guarantee immunity: the American hyperscalers have no access, even when hosted in Europe.
One isolated resource per organisation
No pooling of records: an environment strictly dedicated to your organisation.
Encryption & controlled access
Encryption in transit and at rest, role-based access (RBAC), strong authentication and logging.
AI Act: governed deployment
The agent carries out what you have authorised; nothing is sent and no decision is taken automatically; traceability and human oversight from end to end.
What depends on the architecture chosen These points are not general guarantees: they are settled deployment by deployment, in the quotation.
- The applicable location is that of the architecture set out in the quotation and verified before commissioning.
- Local execution is announced only for the configuration explicitly described and accepted in the quotation.
- The applicable isolation depends on the deployment mode set out in the quotation; no dedicated isolation is presumed.
- The encryption mechanisms in transit and at rest, their components and key management are those documented for the architecture chosen.
- Roles and permissions are configured and accepted for the identities and systems actually connected.
- The events logged, their content, their retention period and who may access them are defined for the deployment chosen.
For the most sensitive data (vulnerable groups, social work), SecNumCloud and HDS health-data hosting are options depending on how demanding the requirements are. A single architecture is designed to answer both the GDPR and extraterritorial exposure. Designed for deployment in line with the GDPR and the AI Act, after the processing, roles and context-specific risks have been assessed.
The gain
How much time can a non-profit recover?
By automating replies to members and subscription reminders, an organisation can aim for a reduction by half in administrative time on repetitive tasks — reinvested in the mission and in the human connection.
A reminder campaign for unpaid subscriptions
Preparing a general meeting (notices, documents)
Answering a member's recurring question
Qualitative, non-contractual comparison: the proportions shown illustrate the shift of the work towards review, they represent no measurement. Every output of the agent is reviewed and approved by a competent person.
Indicative estimate, to be confirmed by a pilot on your real files (general terms of sale, article 4).
Our commitment
Four guarantees that matter to a non-profit
With 100% Sovereign, members' data never leaves the organisationData hosted in France on an isolated resource; the AI model is called at its publisher, except with the Sovereign model option. With that option, no file entrusted to a foreign third party.
Data in France, under French lawNative location and minimisation for members' data; architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity.
The team keeps the decisionThe agent prepares replies, reminders and documents that can be checked; nothing is sent automatically without approval.
Human oversight & traceabilityReplies to members: every change to the service is logged.
Frequently asked questions
Your questions, our answers
Can AI really answer in place of our volunteers?
For recurring questions, yes. An AI agent answers everyday requests instantly — joining, subscriptions, event dates, tax receipts, the status of an application — from your constitution and your records. Your volunteers concentrate on the exchanges with more human value and on situations that call for real support.
Is our members' and donors' data protected?
Yes. Membership, donor and beneficiary records are personal data, sometimes sensitive: our agents run locally within the organisation or are hosted in France, with the deployment objective of processing and access operated within the European Union and an architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity.
Can the agent handle tax receipts and subscription reminders?
Yes. The agent tracks subscriptions due, prepares personalised reminders and can set out the rules that apply to tax receipts. Nothing is sent without approval: the list and the messages are put to your treasurer or the team before anything goes out.
Do we have to change our membership software?
No. The agent connects to your existing tools (membership software, accounts, email, document management) and complements them, without forcing a migration. Your members and donors reach it on WhatsApp Business, your website chat or by email, with no account to create; your volunteers and staff query it from Microsoft Teams, Slack or their email. These connections rest on open standards, including the MCP protocol, and are included in every plan, at no extra cost, within the number of connections set out in your agent's quote; the catalogue grows without a surcharge. Only the fees charged by third-party platforms — WhatsApp Business bills per conversation — are passed on to you at cost, without margin, outside the subscription.
Our organisation is small: is this really for us?
Yes. The offer is designed to fit the resources of social-economy organisations, with no installation fee, and suits a small volunteer group just as well as an employer with several members of staff.
How long does it take to deploy an agent?
A few weeks as a rule, after a 30-minute meeting with our sales team that identifies the most valuable use, then a phase of design, integration and testing before going live and training your volunteers and staff.
Does the agent follow our Facebook page and what is said about us online?
Yes, whenever it makes sense for you. The agent works on the accounts you own: your Facebook page, where your members and volunteers write to you, your Instagram professional account, your LinkedIn page for your partners and funders, and the Google Business Profile of your premises when you welcome the public. It flags what has just been posted, ranks it by urgency and drafts a reply in your association's voice. For an association, what is said online weighs on memberships and donations: the agent prepares, the board approves. Two things need saying plainly. These are third-party platforms: they belong to others, their interfaces and their rules change without notice, and the connection follows those changes. And publishing in your name stays under your control: the agent prepares and proposes, and you decide what goes live. Some of these platforms charge for their own access: those fees are passed on to you at actual cost, with no margin, outside the subscription. The exact set of connected platforms is settled during the design phase.
Available agents
26 AI agents Blue Lemon Agent deploys for this scope
Medical secretariat support (reports, letters, coding) →
Strictly in support (administrative). Health data: HDS requirement settled at scoping. The clinician approves the coding…
Minutes, correspondence and executive diary →
Transcription and minutes; letters, notes and summaries; diary and briefing files; the management's memory; plain langua…
Document agent (FAQ, knowledge base) →
RAG on 20–50 docs, 1 language, dialogue in Microsoft Teams, Slack, WhatsApp Business or by email.
Web research assistant →
Sourced summaries.
Recurring appointment scheduling assistant →
Diary, reminders.
Community moderation agent →
Rules, reporting.
Activity report assistant →
Templates, frequency.
HR agent — employee support, onboarding and HR documents →
HR base, 1–2 integrations.
Document processing agent (OCR, extraction) →
OCR + indexing pipeline.
Medical administrative assistant (letters, coding) →
Reinforced confidentiality.
Logistics / round planning agent →
Constraints, simple optimisation.
HR document management agent →
Staff files, compliance.
Business document management agent (large RAG) →
100+ docs, several sources.
Legal document agent (litigation) →
RAG, deadlines.
Logistics planning & optimisation agent →
Constraints, optimisation.
Sovereign AI document management platform →
Massive RAG, governance.
Pre-assessment of applications (benefits, grants, permits) →
Consistency check. Final decision by a human.
Sorting, indexing and routing incoming mail →
Paper and digital mail.
Assisted drafting of official acts and letters →
Orders, resolutions, notes, standard letters. Human approval.
Automatic minutes of meetings and councils →
Transcription + record of decisions.
Help with replies (parliamentary questions, letters from elected members, complaints) →
Sourced first drafts.
Sourced business document search →
Regulatory and legal bases, doctrine.
Forecasting and planning →
Footfall, demand for benefits, resource allocation.
Administrative and documentary support in customs →
Strictly in support (administrative). No operational or targeting use.
Qualification, meeting notes and follow-up of open cases →
Request qualification with explicit prioritisation; structured meeting notes; list of cases left unanswered.
Drafting of municipal acts and correspondence →
Drafting of acts and letters; plain language and easy-read, under the public officer's validation.
Related industries
Other organisations with similar challenges
Let's talk
Let's size up the potential in your organisation
30 minutes to identify the most useful use case — hosted in France, supervised, with no commitment.