Underwrite Construction Risk With Visibility Into the Plans.
Pre-construction AI plan review surfaces coordination risk before the loan closes — a data point that’s been invisible until now.
You underwrite cost certainty and schedule certainty. Construction loans default on overruns of both — and both are downstream of coordination errors you have no way to see at the moment of underwriting. The plans are what they are. The question is whether they’ve been coordinated.
What you’re up against
Your loan-loss exposure on a construction loan is correlated with coordination quality, but coordination quality is invisible at the document level. You get told the plans are coordinated. You have no instrument to verify that claim.
Industry research puts roughly half of all rework on coordination and data failures. On a $100M project, that’s low-single-digit millions of latent cost risk frequently sitting inside the issued documents at the moment the loan closes.
Phase 1 environmental, peer structural review, third-party cost estimate — you commission independent diligence on every other dimension of project risk. Coordination quality has been the gap. Until now there hasn’t been an instrument that produces a comparable diligence artifact in a comparable timeline.
Here’s what changes
Independent pre-construction review as a condition of close.
Commission it the same way you commission a Phase 1 environmental or a peer structural review. The borrower delivers the plan set, we deliver a severity-rated conflict report on a same-day timeline. The output goes in your file.
Severity-rated conflict report as a diligence artifact.
An objective measure of design coordination quality at the moment of underwriting. Comparable across the portfolio. Comparable across asset class. Comparable across borrower.
Findings describe what’s in the documents, not who’s at fault.
The report cites sheets and conflicts. It doesn’t allocate blame between architect, MEP consultant, or contractor. That makes it useful for underwriting — and acceptable to a borrower who would otherwise resist a designer-blame artifact in your file.
The numbers
Autodesk & FMI 2022
Autodesk & FMI 2022
Catenda & United-BIM
Catenda benchmark
What we review
On a $100M project, undetected coordination issues frequently represent low-single-digit-millions of latent cost risk. Make it visible at the underwriting table, not in month nine.
Make coordination risk visible.
Let’s talk about how Flikt fits into your construction-loan diligence. Custom inquiries welcome.