You own the design and the construction. When a coordination conflict surfaces in the field, there is no design team to issue an RFI to. InspectMind gives your team an independent check at every phase transition so those conflicts are found in the documents, not in the work.
First $100 covered · 5+ issues or full refund · From $50 per upload after
Trusted by 2,000+ customer accounts including
Architects · Engineers · GCs · Developers · Owner's Reps · Plan Checkers · Insurance
The same firm that produced the drawings is checking them. That is not a process failure, it is a structural condition of integrated delivery. Reviewer blind spots are built in by design, not by accident. An independent check before GMP is the one backstop in your process that is not produced by the same team that produced the documents. Internal review catches most issues. It rarely catches all of them, particularly the cross-discipline conflicts that only appear when you read three sheets simultaneously against a specification section.
Design and construction overlap. Issues discovered after construction begins on a scope are not discovered in design. They are discovered in the field, at field rates, with field schedules. Constructability review before each phase release gives your team a view of what the drawings say the field will encounter, before the field encounters it. The gap between what a detail shows and what a crew can build is not always visible to the designer. It is visible to a reviewer who is reading the drawing against installation constraints.
Assumptions embedded in your GMP become change order exposure when the full CD set reveals what was not yet coordinated at pricing. A structural penetration that was not sized, a mechanical equipment selection that was not confirmed, a spec section that conflicts with the drawing note. Each one is a priced assumption that may not hold. Catching coordination gaps before GMP converts those assumptions into confirmed, priced scope before the number is locked. One issue found before GMP is set costs a fraction of the same issue found after the contract is signed.
Most document review tools are built for the permit submission. Design-build delivery does not work that way. InspectMind runs at each phase transition, bridging documents, each design development (DD) release, and each construction document (CD) package as it comes out. The AI compares each release against the previous one, surfacing what changed and what conflicts emerged between phases. That comparison capability matters on fast-track projects. Coordination that held at DD can break when structural sizing is updated, when a subcontractor's shop drawings feed back into the design, or when a scope package is released ahead of the disciplines that coordinate with it.
Plan Check validates that the owner's program criteria and the proposed design approach are on a viable code path before your team invests in full design development. A code compliance gap identified at bridging is a conversation with the owner. The same gap identified at CD review is a redesign. The checker flags occupancy classification conflicts, egress configuration issues, and use-group inconsistencies tied to specific sheet references and code sections.
Constructability Checker reviews your DD documents for details that comply on paper but create field problems at the labor and material rates in your budget. A dimension that is technically achievable but requires a non-standard pour, a mechanical routing that works on the drawing but conflicts with the structural framing depth. These are the issues your subcontractors will price as risk, or price as exclusions. Finding them at DD means your design team resolves them. Finding them at bid means your subcontractors carry contingency you will not see until change orders arrive.
Spec and Drawing Coordination systematically compares specification sections against drawing notes, schedules, and details. It finds the mismatches between what the designer wrote and what the builder will install. This includes material callouts that contradict spec sections, finish schedules that reference discontinued products, performance requirements that are not reflected in the drawings. On design-build projects, those mismatches are your liability. Resolving them before the CD set goes to trade contractors removes a significant source of field RFIs and change order exposure.
Architectural Checker reviews each progressive release against prior packages to confirm that coordination maintained across the full set as scopes are added. When a structural update in one package changes conditions for mechanical or electrical in a later package, the checker flags the conflict before the affected trade receives the drawings. That gap between what structural updated and what MEP was told is one of the most common sources of field rework on fast-track design-build projects.
Upload your design-build teams drawings. Eligible work emails get a first $100 covered ($100 credit). Results in hours.
Cold Summit Development: 153 Issues on a Cold Storage Facility|Compare AI plan check tools
5+ issues or full refund · No demo required
These reviews ran on real project documents. The issues found were found in the documents, not in the field.
Aaron Bass, Director of Construction at Cold Summit Development, used InspectMind early in the design phase on a cold storage project and recovered specific, actionable findings before field work began. "InspectMind helped us catch real meaningful issues," Bass noted. "Using it early in the process is going to absolutely help out in the field. It immediately caught real issues like wood vs HDPE blocking conflicts and specs vs drawings mismatches." On a design-build delivery, those are the exact conflicts that generate change orders after GMP is set.
Read full case studyA healthcare facility structural review returned 159 issues across a facility type where design-build delivery is common and cross-discipline coordination is dense. Healthcare projects carry higher code and life-safety compliance requirements than most project types, and the volume of findings reflects how many coordination issues can exist in a set that has passed internal review. Catching 159 issues before construction starts on a healthcare facility is not incremental improvement; it is a different category of risk management.
Read full case studyA K-12 school plan review returned 375 issues across a complete construction document set. That volume illustrates how many findable coordination issues can exist in a large project even after the design team has completed their own QC. For a design-build team pricing that scope, 375 unresolved issues in the CD set represent a material gap between the assumptions in the GMP and the actual coordination state of the documents.
Read full case studyDesign-build teams that review their documents at each phase transition catch conflicts when they are still design problems, not field problems. Upload your current phase documents and get back a complete issue report before your next milestone.
Start with $100 credit5+ issues or full refund · No demo required
