For warranty, lending & risk teams

Construction risk intelligence before exposure becomes loss.

Separate eligibility, integrity and project conditions so the right evidence drives the right operational action.

Request a design-partner pilot Open workspace

One contractor. Three different questions.

Stop treating every risk signal as the same kind of risk.

A compliance failure can make a contractor ineligible without implying fraud. An integrity concern can matter even when paperwork is current. Project risk can change after onboarding.

ELIGIBILITY

Can they participate?

License, qualifier, standing and required policy conditions.

INTEGRITY

What deserves scrutiny?

Evidence-backed patterns relevant to nonperformance, diversion or serious loss.

PROJECT

What changed?

Milestones, payments, permits, evidence and project-state deterioration.

Operational policy

The output is an action your team can defend.

DOCUMENTPreserve context without interrupting the workflow.

VERIFYResolve a defined uncertainty before the next milestone.

HOLDPause progression until material conditions are resolved.

STOPDo not proceed under the current evidence and policy state.

Development evidence

20 / 22

The current method surfaced an actionable pre-outcome signal in 20 of 22 selected residential adverse cases in the blinded retrospective Utah benchmark. Median warning lead among residential hits was 28.5 days.

Retrospective benchmark only. This does not establish prospective commercial performance, avoided claims, avoided litigation or guaranteed savings. The next validation standard is a prospective design-partner pilot.

Design partner

Bring us a real workflow. We’ll measure what changes.

For warranty providers, structural warranty teams, construction lenders and adjacent risk organizations.