Home · Solutions · IT & services

Solution · IT & services

Every door into the office lands in one register, with the delivery evidence attached

e-Doręczenia handled like post, not like a second inbox

Correspondence from every channel is registered, evidenced and proposed for routing automatically; a person still decides which unit takes the case.

DepartmentalMicrosoft TeamsHuman in the loopDeterministic automation
4,800times a month somebody in this illustrative city office writes down by hand what arrived, from whom, and where it should go next.

Executive summary

Challenge

Four intake channels, one register typed by hand, and delivery evidence filed after the fact.

What changes

We build one intake for the whole office.

Business value

Everything that arrived is registered on the day it arrived, in one list, whatever door it came through.

Systems involved

the correspondence register and case files in the case system; the SharePoint evidence archive; Power BI

Business problem

Public correspondence

A correspondence register is not administrative decoration. It fixes the moment an item reached the authority, and the deadline on a case, the proof that a resident was answered and the answer to an audit question all hang off it. Offices still register post by hand because the entry carries legal weight.

What changed is the number of doors. Since the transition period ended on 1 January 2026 the electronic delivery service runs beside paper, e‑mail and the traffic that still arrives through ePUAP, which has not been switched off. KPMG's practice note on the change lists three effects: parallel platforms confuse the people writing in, an authority need not tell a sender that the channel they chose was wrong, and a filing made the wrong way is left without consideration. Volume followed. The Ministry of Digital Affairs announced on 5 August 2026 that e-Doręczenia had passed 100 million items, more than 50 million of them since the start of that year.

The mail room registers and does not decide. The person who assigns cases, usually the secretary or a head of unit, decides and is interrupted all day doing it. Heads of unit receive items that were never theirs and send them back. On the way out, a clerk uploads a signed letter and files the delivery evidence later, if the day allows.

How it works today

This is the intake routine we find in most offices, whatever case system sits underneath it.

  1. PersonA clerk opens the electronic delivery mailbox, saves each message with its attachments, and types the sender, subject, date of receipt and enclosures into the register
  2. SystemPaper and counter deliveries are scanned in a second pass, in a different order, by a different person, into the same register
  3. WaitingRegistered items wait for the routing round; anything arriving after it waits for the next working day
  4. PersonThe secretary or a head of unit assigns each item to an organisational unit and, where one exists, to a case
  5. Risk of errorAn item sent to the wrong unit returns through the register, and the days it spent travelling belong to nobody
  6. PersonSigned outgoing letters are uploaded to the delivery mailbox by hand, and the delivery evidence is filed to the case later
PersonSystemWaitingRisk of error

Why the current process costs more than it appears

The budget shows headcount, not what it is spent on.

  • Registration is visible work and routing is not. An item that reaches the wrong unit comes back quietly, and the days it loses are never charged to the process that lost them.
  • Evidence collected by hand goes missing. A receipt confirmation saved to a personal folder, or not saved at all, is the difference between proving a date and arguing about one.
  • Because each channel has its own routine, the office keeps several registers in practice and reconciles them in conversation. A question as ordinary as how much arrived yesterday costs somebody an afternoon.
  • Outgoing post carries the same weakness in reverse: a dispatch with no delivery evidence on the case file is a letter the office only believes it sent.

Cost of inaction

One budget year of registering post by hand≈ €127,680
The same intake desk across a four-year term of office≈ €510,700
If the electronic channel takes intake to 6,400 items a month≈ €170,200

The units, not the mail room, are where this actually lands. They give up an hour here and there to return an item that was never theirs, and they open cases a day or two after the date the register records. Neither cost has an owner, and both grow with the electronic channel rather than instead of it.

The exposure that has a date on it is evidence. A dispatch whose delivery proof was never filed looks exactly like a dispatch that was never made, and the difference matters on precisely one day: an appeal, a complaint about inaction, an inspection. Answering that from folders is a bad afternoon. Answering it from the case file is a query.

Illustrative scenario

A plausible organisation with realistic proportions. The figures are there to be recalculated on your data; they are not a client result.

Organisation

A city office of about 320 staff in 14 organisational units, with four subordinate units, a case system holding the register and the case files, and Microsoft 365. Routing sits with the secretary and the heads of unit.

Volume

About 4,800 items of correspondence a month: roughly 45% through the electronic delivery mailbox, 30% paper and counter deliveries, 20% e‑mail, the rest residual ePUAP traffic and web forms.

Current process

Every channel is opened separately, every item is typed into the register by hand, receipt confirmations are downloaded into folders, and routing happens in one daily round the afternoon post misses.

Bottleneck

About seven minutes of registration and routing per item, plus the returns, the reconciliation between channels and the searches for evidence nobody records as work.

Solution

Robots collect every channel into one queue, write the register entry with the receipt evidence attached, propose a heading and a responsible unit, and place one routing card in Microsoft Teams. Outgoing documents leave through the electronic channel and their delivery evidence returns to the case.

Potential outcome

Registration becomes confirmation, everything that arrived is visible on the day it arrived, and the evidence for both directions sits on the case. The figures are a model for the scenario above, not an outcome measured anywhere.

Proposed solution

We build one intake for the whole office. A robot collects the electronic delivery mailbox on a schedule and queues each message with its attachments and its receipt evidence; scanned paper, counter deliveries and the shared e‑mail account arrive in the same queue through standard connectors. Every item produces one register entry whatever door it came through: sender, moment of receipt, subject, enclosures, and a link to the stored evidence.

On top of the entry sits a proposal, not a decision. A rule table the office owns maps senders, form types and subject patterns to a heading and a responsible unit, and a letter quoting an existing case reference joins that case by exact match. One card in Microsoft Teams per item lets the person who assigns cases confirm or change it in seconds, and anything nobody confirms escalates. Outbound closes the loop: a signed document leaves the case file through the electronic channel and its delivery evidence returns to the same case. No AI is used here on purpose, because every step is a rule, a lookup or an exact match that an office can explain to an auditor and change itself.

Native capabilities used

UiPath Orchestrator queues, schedules, retries and audit log; UiPath Integration Service connectors for Microsoft Outlook 365 and Microsoft OneDrive & SharePoint; UiPath Action Center actionable notifications completed in Microsoft Teams; Microsoft SharePoint versioned libraries; Power BI

What we build

The intake workflow for all four channels, the register entry rules, the proposal table for heading and unit, the routing card and its escalations, the dispatch flow, and the filing of delivery evidence

Custom integration

The connection to the authority's e-Doręczenia mailbox and to the correspondence register and case files of the case system, built against the interfaces they publish

How the automated process works

  1. AutomationA robot collects the electronic delivery mailbox on a schedule and queues every new message with its attachments and its receipt evidence
  2. AutomationScanned paper, counter deliveries and the shared e‑mail account enter the same queue, so one list holds everything that arrived today
  3. AutomationEach item produces one register entry: sender, moment of receipt, subject, enclosures and a link to the evidence in the document library
  4. SystemRules propose a heading and a responsible unit; an item quoting an existing case reference joins that case by exact match
  5. PersonThe person who assigns cases opens one card in Microsoft Teams per item, confirms or changes the unit and the heading, and the item is routed under their name
  6. AutomationA signed document is dispatched through the electronic channel, the dispatch is recorded on the case, and the delivery evidence is filed back to it on arrival
AutomationSystemPerson

Human-in-the-loop model

Automation handles

  • Collecting every channel, writing the register entry and storing the receipt evidence with it
  • Proposing a heading and a responsible unit, and joining an item to an existing case on an exact reference match
  • Dispatching signed documents, filing the delivery evidence, and escalating items nobody has confirmed

People decide

  • Which unit takes the item and under which heading; the robot proposes, a person confirms, and the assignment carries that person's name
  • Everything about the case itself: how it is handled, what is decided, who signs and who answers for the decision
  • What the mail room may confirm alone, and the content of the rule tables, which the office owns and changes after go-live

Before and after

BeforeAfter
Registration and routing per item~7 minunder a minute for most items
Time from receipt to a named unitup to 2 working dayssame day
Registers in useone per channel, reconciled in conversationone, whatever the channel
Receipt and delivery evidencedownloaded by hand, filed laterattached as the entry is created

Systems and integrations

The stack is deliberately short: one engine, one execution layer, one place where a person decides.

Inputs

  • the authority's e-Doręczenia mailbox
  • scanned paper and counter deliveries in the document library
  • the shared e‑mail account in Outlook
  • documents signed in the case system

Automation layer

  • UiPath Orchestrator
  • UiPath Robots
  • UiPath Integration Service
  • UiPath Action Center

Target systems

  • the correspondence register and case files in the case system
  • the SharePoint evidence archive
  • Power BI

Human touchpoints: routing cards in Microsoft Teams; the daily arrival register in a Teams channel; Action Center tasks for items the rules cannot place

the authority's e-Doręczenia mailboxUiPath OrchestratorUiPath Robotsthe correspondence registerrouting cards in Microsoft Teams

Technologies used

UiPath Robots + Orchestrator

collect the channels, queue every item, retry, and log each registration and dispatch with its account and timestamp

A
UiPath Integration Service (Microsoft Outlook 365, OneDrive & SharePoint connectors)

read the shared mailbox and the scan library, write documents and evidence into the tenant

A
UiPath Action Center in Microsoft Teams

routing cards confirmed without leaving Teams, escalation of unconfirmed items, and the daily arrival register in a channel

A
Microsoft SharePoint

versioned archive for messages, attachments, receipt confirmations and delivery proofs

A
Power BI

volumes by channel and unit, time from receipt to routing, evidence completeness

A
Custom integration layer for the e-Doręczenia mailbox and the case system

intake, register entries and dispatch of outgoing documents

C
Averified product capability (vendor documentation)Cillustrative model — the figures on this page

Illustrative economic model

Numbers you can check against your own data.

Illustrative model
4,800 items of correspondence × 7 minutes of registration and routing= 560 h / month
560 h × €19 fully loaded hourly cost of an administrative post= €10,640 / month
× 12 months≈ €127,680 / year
Administrative capacity released in a year (illustrative)≈ €127,680

Public money buys the hours in this table, so it is worth saying plainly what they are. Seven minutes covers registering one item and getting it to a unit, averaged across a two-line e‑mail and a scanned paper file with enclosures; €19 is a fully loaded hourly cost of an administrative post. Nothing here was measured in any office, and the arithmetic shows capacity returned to the authority, not a saving to be taken out of it.

Run the numbers on your data

hours released per month
of annual capacity released

An illustrative estimate from your own inputs. It models released capacity; it is not a promise of savings.

Business benefits

  • Everything that arrived is registered on the day it arrived, in one list, whatever door it came through
  • The clock on a case starts from a recorded moment of receipt with the evidence attached, not from a folder
  • Routing becomes a confirmation of seconds instead of a decision reconstructed from a subject line, and a person's name is still on it
  • Correspondence is treated alike whoever sent it: an item from a resident with no electronic address joins the same queue, on the same clock, as a digital one
  • Dispatch and its delivery evidence become one operation, so the case file can answer without a search whether a letter left and when it arrived

The management view

  • Capacity that goes into typing today returns to the organisational units, and the office can show where it went
  • Every routing decision carries a name, a moment and a reason, which is the record an audit of case handling asks for
  • Growth in the electronic channel stops being a staffing question, because intake capacity no longer scales with people

Board-level KPIs

items registered on the day of receipthours from receipt to routingshare of items routed at the first attemptdispatches with delivery evidence on the case fileitems unassigned after one working day

Security and governance

Trust in automation is built on the audit trail, not on a promise.

  • Robots sign in with their own accounts, scoped to the delivery mailbox, the document library and the register operations they perform. Every entry and dispatch records the account, the moment and the source channel.
  • Documents, attachments and evidence stay in the authority's own Microsoft 365 tenant and case system. The robots that move them run from the EU region of UiPath Automation Cloud.
  • A proposal is stored as a proposal. The heading and unit a rule suggested are kept apart from the assignment a person confirmed, and the confirmed assignment carries that person's name.
  • Personal data in incoming correspondence is not copied into a parallel database; the entry points at the document rather than reproducing it. Rule tables are versioned, and the office changes them after go-live.

Why now

01

The transition period ended on 1 January 2026 and the electronic channel is no longer the small one. The Ministry of Digital Affairs put e-Doręczenia past 100 million items on 5 August 2026, more than 50 million of them in that year alone. An intake desk designed for paper is now the constraint on the fastest-growing door.

02

The 560 modelled hours a month are administrative hours the office already pays for and cannot redeploy, and they rise with the electronic channel rather than instead of it.

03

The connection points are ordinary now. EZD RP offers an API and is maintained by NASK on behalf of the Minister of Digital Affairs, and the Outlook, SharePoint and Teams connectors are standard.

Relevant executive roles

Secretary of the municipality

Routing stops being an all-day interruption and becomes a confirmed queue, with unclaimed items visible before they turn into complaints about inaction

Director of the office

One honest number for what arrives, where it goes and how long it waits, in a form that survives an audit question

IT lead

A documented, account-based integration with the delivery mailbox and the case system instead of shared logins and manual downloads

Common questions and objections

Will a robot decide where a case goes?

No. The rules propose a unit and a heading and attach the evidence; a person confirms or changes it, and the assignment carries their name. Nothing about who decides a case changes, only how fast the case reaches them.

Our case system was not built to be automated.

Most are not, and it is the first thing we check. Where it publishes an interface we use it, where it publishes an import route we use that, and where neither exists the robot prepares the entry for a clerk to commit.

Half our post is still paper. Doesn't that undo the benefit?

Paper is the reason the register matters. NIK's audit of digital exclusion found 15% of people in Poland had never used the internet against 9% across the EU, so the paper door stays open; the point is that it opens onto the same register as the digital one.

When this is not the right solution

  • Small offices handling a few hundred items a month, where one experienced person and a good routine cost less than an integration
  • Offices where responsibilities between units are genuinely disputed, because routing rules would freeze the argument rather than settle it
  • A case system due to be replaced within months, where the sensible order is to build the intake against the system you intend to keep

A question for the next management meeting

Everything that reached this office yesterday, through every channel: is it in one register today, and does each item have a named unit against it?

Implementation approach

A scope without ambiguity, before anything is signed.

We deliver

  • A read of one month of your correspondence: items by channel, where each was routed, and how often items came back
  • The intake workflow bringing the delivery mailbox, the scan library, the shared e‑mail account and the counter into one queue and one register entry
  • Proposal rules for the heading and the responsible unit, built from your own file plan and routing history, and owned by your office afterwards
  • The routing card in Microsoft Teams, the escalation of unconfirmed items, and the daily arrival register in a channel
  • Dispatch through the electronic channel, the automatic return of delivery evidence, and a Power BI view of volumes, time to routing and evidence completeness

We need from you

  • One month of register data with the routing that followed, and a sample of the items that had to be re-routed
  • A named owner for the proposal rules, normally the secretary, and the current file plan
  • Technical accounts for the delivery mailbox, the case system and the document library, with the rights the process needs

Stages

Discovery

One month of correspondence read channel by channel with the mail room and the secretary

Design

Register entry content, proposal rules, routing card, escalation horizons and the security model

Build

Intake, dispatch and evidence flows against your case system and your delivery mailbox

Validation

A parallel run on live post, the office comparing every proposal against its own decision

Go-live

One channel first, then the rest, with the manual routine kept as a fallback

Departmental. Effort is driven by how many channels have to be brought in, whether the case system exposes an interface for register entries and dispatch, and how settled the file plan and the division of work between units already are.