What we actually do when we prepare and file an application

It is worth being specific about this, because "done for you" covers a wide range of things and most of the range is not worth paying for. Here is the actual scope, and equally importantly, what is outside it.

What we do not claim

Start here, because it frames everything else.

We do not decide applications. LegitScript does, and we have no influence over that decision, no relationship with the certifier and no ability to promise an outcome or a date. Anybody offering you a guaranteed approval is describing authority they do not have.

What we can commit to is our own half of the work: a complete application prepared and submitted in under two weeks, and requests for information answered the day they arrive. Those two weeks are our preparation clock. The review clock is separate, it starts when we submit, and it belongs to LegitScript.

What we can report is a record. Applications we prepared and filed have been approved in as little as 3 days, and roughly two weeks from submission to a decision at the outer end. Those are observed outcomes across completed applications, not typical results and not a commitment.

The work, in the order it happens

Discovery. The full domain estate from the registrar rather than from memory, the corporate structure, the clinical model, the pharmacy relationship, and what is currently at risk: suspended processing, a blocked ad account, a launch date. What is at risk changes the sequencing more than anything else.

The domain decision. Which domains are certified, which redirect, which retire. This is the decision with the largest cost consequence and it is made before anything is filed, because certification attaches to a website rather than to a company.

The website audit. Every page a patient can reach, read against what the product actually is. Claims, comparisons, implied outcomes, testimonials, provider disclosure, subscription and cancellation terms, privacy documents, tracking on clinical pages. The output is a fix list and a claims allowlist per product, and the allowlist outlives the application because it is what stops the next landing page reintroducing the problem.

Reconciling the record. Application, website, public record and partners made to say the same thing about ownership, prescribing and fulfilment. Most avoidable requests for information are generated by a difference between those four rather than by anything wrong with the business.

Assembly and filing. Corporate documentation, provider roster and state licensure, the pharmacy entity and its registration, the agreement, the domain list. Filed as one complete submission rather than as a form with attachments to follow.

Correspondence. Every request for information answered the day it arrives, completely, with the document attached rather than described. This is the part that most changes the timeline, and it is the part a business running the application as a side project is least able to do.

Handover. The claims allowlist, the fix list, the document set and the maintenance obligations, in a form the operator can run without us. Certification is a state you maintain rather than a certificate you file, and a handover that leaves nobody owning it is a handover that fails six months later.

What we need from you

Three things, and the engagement is materially faster when they exist on day one:

• Access to the registrar account, or somebody who has it.
• A named person who can approve website changes and get them deployed.
• The pharmacy relationship, including who to ask for documents.

The third is the most common bottleneck, because it depends on a third party with their own priorities.

What is genuinely outside the scope

We do not write your clinical protocols. We do not act as your medical director, your pharmacy or your lawyer. We do not obtain your state licences. We do not run your ad accounts, though we will tell you exactly why the platform certification is a separate application and what will cause it to be declined.

And we do not promise that a business which cannot be certified will be certified. Where discovery finds a structural problem rather than a presentation one, the honest answer is to say so before anything is filed, because a denial is expensive and the application fee is spent regardless of outcome.

Who this is not for

A single domain, a simple model, no live processing at risk, no deadline, and a founder who enjoys detail: file it yourself. The self-filing case is real and we would rather say so than sell against it.

The case for having it done is a multi-domain estate, a compounded product category, something already blocked, or the absence of anybody who can own correspondence for the duration of a review.

What the first conversation is for

Not a pitch. Five questions, and the answers decide whether there is an engagement worth having at all.

• What is blocked, and by when? Suspended processing with settlement held is a different problem from a launch date in the spring, and it changes the sequencing more than anything else does.
• How many domains are there really? Pulled from the registrar rather than from memory. This is the answer that most often surprises the business, and it decides the scope of everything downstream.
• What is in the catalogue? Compounded preparations, controlled substances and supplements sold beside prescriptions each pull the file into a different kind of review.
• Who can get a website change deployed? Not who owns the relationship with the agency. Who can put a fix in a sprint this month.
• Can you produce the pharmacy entity, its registration and its state licensure today? If that takes a fortnight now, it will take a fortnight during a review, when the clock is running.

Two of those answers regularly end the conversation. A single-domain business with nothing blocked and a founder who enjoys detail should file it themselves, and we would rather say so on the first call than take the work. A business with a structural problem in its model should fix the model, because the application fee is spent whatever the reviewer decides.

How an engagement is sequenced

Week one is discovery and the domain decision, because everything downstream depends on how many websites are actually in scope. The registrar list comes out, the corporate and clinical documents get requested, and the pharmacy paperwork is chased first because it depends on somebody else's calendar.

The website audit starts on the same day, because it is the long pole in every engagement. It produces two documents: a fix list with owners, and the claims allowlist that stops the fixes being undone by the next landing page.

Filing happens when the fix list is closed rather than when the calendar says so. An application filed over an outstanding fix list is an application that generates the request for information you already knew was coming.

After filing, the work is correspondence and monitoring: requests answered the day they arrive, with the document attached rather than described.

Where an engagement usually gets stuck

Two places, and neither is the paperwork.

The first is the website fix list, when it needs engineering time that belongs to a roadmap. The fix is to size it early and get it into a sprint rather than treating it as a favour.

The second is the pharmacy documentation, when the partner is slow or when the dispensing entity behind a fulfilment platform is hard to establish. That one is worth starting on day one for exactly this reason, and it is covered in why your pharmacy partner is part of your application.

Neither is a reason to delay filing indefinitely. Both are reasons to know about them in week one rather than in week four.