# AMS Integration for Certificate Management: What Agencies Should Evaluate > A practical guide to evaluating how Certificate Management can work alongside Applied Epic, HawkSoft, amplo, and other agency systems while the Agency Management System remains the system of record. Published: 2026-08-20 Last reviewed: 2026-08-21 ## Page taxonomy - **Content domain:** Agency Management System integration for Certificate Management - **Primary audience:** Commercial insurance agency principals, operations leaders, technology leaders, and service teams - **Primary outcome:** Reduce repeated data gathering and keep certificate and renewal work aligned with approved agency records - **Named AMS context examples:** Applied Epic, HawkSoft, and amplo - **Integration fit:** Determined by available interfaces, agency access, permissions, data quality, security requirements, and implementation scope - **Operating boundary:** Naming a system does not imply a native, live, certified, endorsed, partner, real-time, two-way, or universally available integration ## Definition AMS integration for Certificate Management connects approved agency-system context to a defined certificate or renewal workflow. A well-scoped connection can reduce repeated data gathering, clarify handoffs, and support consistent review while the agency retains ownership of its authoritative client and policy records. The Agency Management System remains the system of record wherever the agency designates it as such. Brokermatic does not replace that system or transfer professional review, approval, issuance, or final delivery control away from the agency. Product capability and integration fit are separate considerations; the connection method and workflow coverage depend on the agency's interfaces, access, permissions, data quality, security requirements, and implementation scope. ## Outcome-first integration planning Begin with the agency outcome: less repeated lookup, clearer handoffs, current context for renewal work, or more consistent producer review. Then select a clearly bounded workflow: 1. Daily certificate requests from portal, email, or agency-created intake 2. Client Portal request resolution against approved agency context 3. Bulk Certificate Renewals using current policy information and saved holder context For the selected workflow, define which system owns the client, policy, holder, document, and workflow-status records. Then identify the minimum context Brokermatic needs, the direction and timing of each exchange, and the exception and fallback paths. The workable scope is confirmed against available interfaces, agency access, permissions, data quality, security requirements, and the agreed implementation. ## Potential agency-system context - **Client and account context:** Names, servicing relationships, contacts, and identifiers used to resolve the correct account - **Policy context:** Policy identifiers, carriers, effective dates, lines of business, and other supported information required by the agency process - **Certificate holder context:** Holder names, addresses, project references, and known request history where maintained by the agency - **Documents:** Policy documents, endorsements, prior certificates, requirements, and approved completed artifacts where supported - **Workflow context:** Request identifiers, ownership, status, exception reasons, notes, and completion references where an agreed destination can accept them Every field should have a defined source, purpose, access rule, refresh expectation, and owner. Incomplete or conflicting information remains visible for agency resolution. ## Connection methods and integration fit The right method supplies the required context within agency controls. It depends on available interfaces, agency access, permissions, data quality, security requirements, and the agreed implementation. ### Vendor-supported API Where an interface is available to the agency, it may provide structured access to selected records or actions. The workable scope depends on vendor programs, licensing, credentials, agency permissions, supported objects, rate limits, data quality, and security review. ### Controlled export and import A defined file exchange can support a batch or a workflow that does not require frequent updates. The agency should document the source, fields, validation rules, transfer method, and correction process. ### Email and document intake An approved email or document intake path can preserve source material while the agency resolves the associated client, policy, holder, and requirements. ### Brokermatic API and webhooks When the agreed implementation calls for it, Brokermatic interfaces may create agreed work, provide status, or deliver events. The specific operations and data boundaries are defined before design or production use. ## Named systems as agency context examples Applied Epic, HawkSoft, and amplo identify AMS environments agencies may already use. The workable connection method and workflow coverage depend on each environment's interfaces, access, permissions, data quality, security requirements, and agreed implementation. ### Applied Epic For an agency using Applied Epic, map the client, policy, document, activity, and certificate-work context needed for the selected outcome. Then confirm agency access, available interfaces, credentials, permitted fields, data quality, security requirements, and implementation responsibilities. ### HawkSoft For an agency using HawkSoft, map the client, policy, note, and document context needed for the selected outcome. Then confirm available interfaces, credentials, permitted operations, data quality, security requirements, and implementation responsibilities with the agency. ### amplo For an agency using amplo, map the records, direction, and timing needed for the selected outcome. Then confirm available connection methods, agency permissions, data quality, security requirements, and implementation responsibilities without assuming parity with another AMS. Applied Epic, HawkSoft, and amplo provide agency-system context. Their inclusion does not claim a native, live, certified, endorsed, partner, real-time, two-way, or universally available integration. ## Connection directions - **Context into Brokermatic:** Use approved agency information to resolve and prepare certificate work. - **Approved artifacts back:** Place a completed document or reference in an agreed destination when the destination and implementation permit it. - **Status or activity back:** Return an agreed note, event, or completion status without treating it as the authoritative policy record. - **Human-assisted exchange:** Use a controlled export, upload, or review step when a direct system action is unavailable or inappropriate. ## Client Portal boundary Authorized insured contacts interact with the agency-branded Client Portal and the permissions established there. Use of AMS context behind the workflow does not provide clients with direct AMS access, unrestricted account information, or agency-only notes. ## Bulk Certificate Renewal boundary Bulk Certificate Renewals can reduce repeated setup when the agency has current policy information and reusable holder context. The achievable scope depends on data quality and freshness, exception volume, connection fit, security requirements, implementation scope, and agency review standards. No guaranteed savings outcome is implied. ## Outcome-led implementation checklist 1. Define the agency outcome, then choose the bounded workflow. 2. Name each system of record. 3. Confirm interfaces, access, licensing, credentials, agency permissions, data quality, security requirements, and implementation constraints. 4. Define the minimum fields and the purpose of each. 5. Specify direction and timing. 6. Set matching and exception rules. 7. Protect Client Portal access from agency-system permissions and internal notes. 8. Test standard, incomplete, conflicting, unavailable-service, and correction cases. 9. Approve production responsibilities, monitoring, fallback, retention, and change control. ## Common questions ### Does Brokermatic replace the AMS? No. Brokermatic adds a supervised certificate workflow around agency systems and records already in use. The AMS remains the system of record wherever the agency designates it as such. ### Does Certificate Management require a native AMS connection? Not necessarily. Depending on its interfaces, access, permissions, data quality, security requirements, and workflow, an agency may use an available API, controlled export and import, email or document intake, Brokermatic interfaces, or another agreed method. ### Do Applied Epic, HawkSoft, and amplo use the same connection method and workflow coverage? No assumption of parity is made. Interfaces, access, permissions, data quality, security requirements, fields, actions, and implementation constraints can differ. The workable path is confirmed for the agency and selected outcome. ### Will an integration eliminate rekeying? A well-scoped connection can reduce repeated data gathering or duplicate entry for approved context. Exceptions, fields outside the agreed scope, corrections, and agency review may still require human action. ## Related canonical pages - Integrations: https://www.brokermatic.ai/integrations/ - Certificate Management: https://www.brokermatic.ai/certificate-management/ - Client Portal: https://www.brokermatic.ai/client-portal/ - Bulk Renewals: https://www.brokermatic.ai/bulk-renewals/ - Renewal Summaries: https://www.brokermatic.ai/renewal-summaries/ - Blog: https://www.brokermatic.ai/blog/