Your engineers are maxed out reviewing 20,000+ plans per year with 10–14 day turnaround. AI delivers same-day results, checks against your data sheets and loss prevention standards, and scales without capacity limits.
Used on 1,600+ projects by 600+ companies
Your team reviews thousands of construction plan submissions per year. The volume exceeds what any fixed headcount can handle within acceptable turnaround windows. Plans queue, turnaround stretches to 10–14 days, and some resubmissions do not get a second look. Every document that moves through underwriting without a complete technical review is unreviewed risk on your books. Hiring more engineers does not solve the structural problem. It raises fixed costs while the submission volume continues to grow. The capacity ceiling moves, but it does not disappear.
On a portfolio of 20,000+ reviews per year, review consistency is not achievable through headcount alone. The engineer with 15 years of loss prevention experience and the engineer with 18 months read the same set differently. On a tight day, the senior reviewer does not have time to check structural-to-MEP coordination on a 300-sheet submission. AI runs the same check against the same standards on every submission, every time. The output does not depend on who was available or how full the queue was. Your custom guidelines and standards are applied consistently across every review without exception.
Construction defect claims frequently trace back to drawing errors that were present before construction started. Those errors were findable at the time of underwriting if the review had been systematic enough to surface them. Catching coordination failures, code violations, and constructability gaps at the commitment stage reduces downstream claim exposure in a way that claims handling cannot. The connection between underwriting review quality and long-term claim frequency is direct. Construction insurance and litigation risk follows exactly this pattern. A review systematic enough to surface what is actually in the documents changes what you are committing to.
InspectMind checks construction plans against your proprietary data sheets, loss prevention standards, and compliance checklists, in addition to IBC, state codes, and local amendments. Upload your internal standards as a PDF once. AI applies them to every subsequent review, the same way, every time. Where manual review depends on an engineer knowing your internal requirements from memory, InspectMind applies your criteria to every line item in every submission. The findings are returned with specific sheet references and code citations so your engineers can focus on judgment calls, not line-by-line document reading.
When clients submit plans for underwriting review, AI runs the initial check against your data sheets and building codes before your engineers touch the file. Your team handles the judgment calls that require professional discretion. Same-day results on every submission means the 10–14 day backlog clears without adding headcount. The queue does not grow faster than your capacity to review it.
The Structural Checker and Building Codes Checker check power distribution coordination, cooling redundancy, fire protection, and FM Global requirements on data center submissions. Data centers are high-value, high-complexity projects where infrastructure coordination failures carry outsized claim exposure. AI surfaces critical issues before commitment so your underwriting decisions are based on what the documents actually show.
The Constructability Checker identifies design details that create known construction failure modes. Code violations, coordination conflicts, and constructability gaps that increase claim risk are flagged with documented evidence, specific sheet references, and applicable standard citations. That documentation supports defensible underwriting decisions and provides a clear record of what the review covered.
InspectMind is hosted on AWS with zero data retention after review completion. Client construction documents are data-segregated, and deletion on request is supported. The platform is NDA-ready before any data exchange. A public API is in development for direct integration with internal dashboards and workflow tools. Review enterprise data security for the full technical model.
Same-day AI review against your data sheets and building codes means the 10–14 day turnaround becomes a same-day result, at any submission volume. InspectMind also offers Field Reports for Insurance, where adjusters and inspectors capture damage with photos and voice for water, wind, hail, and fire claims, drafted into your firm's claims report format on-site. Contact us to discuss enterprise volume pricing and API integration.
Upload your commercial insurance carriers drawings. Eligible work emails get a first $100 covered ($100 credit). Results in hours.
The same class of issues your engineers review appears in every complex document set. These reviews show what AI surfaces when the check is systematic rather than time-constrained.
InspectMind has flagged more than 187,000+ potential issues across 600+ companies reviewing real construction documents before submission. The issues span code violations, structural-to-MEP coordination failures, spec-to-drawing conflicts, and constructability gaps. At volume, this represents the category of unreviewed risk that moves through underwriting when review capacity is the limiting factor.
Read the case studyA single healthcare facility structural review returned 159 issues in the document set. Healthcare construction carries the highest construction defect claim frequency of any project type, and the issues surfaced here were present in the drawings before construction started. A review systematic enough to catch 159 issues on a single facility changes the risk profile of the commitment.
Read the case studyA K-12 school plan review returned 375 issues across a single submission. That number represents the scale of undiscovered risk that exists in typical construction documents when review is constrained by time or capacity. Each of those issues was present at the time the documents were submitted. A carrier reviewing that set manually under a 10–14 day turnaround constraint would not surface 375 issues.
Read the case studyEach review runs on the same engine and returns findings cited to the sheet and code section.
Data Center Projects
Data Center Projects
Loss Prevention and Risk Engineering
Drawing sets are sensitive. We treat them that way, with clear commitments on training, retention, and access.
We don’t train public AI or third-party models on your documents, and you can opt out of our own model improvement anytime.
Request deletion of any project, any time. NDAs are available for sensitive work.
Files live in secure cloud infrastructure with customer segregation.
Straight answers before your first check.
