Inventory by building
Each site with its facilities and equipment, which lets you know what’s there and in what condition, not just how much it’s worth.
Public administration
The estate is vast and scattered, and the budget has to be justified
Schools, sports centers, cultural venues, administrative buildings, street lighting and street furniture. Spread across the whole municipality, largely maintained by contractors, and with an obligation to account for how the money was spent.
Who it’s for
For town and city councils, provincial authorities, public bodies and public companies that manage their own buildings and infrastructure, and for the contractors awarded municipal maintenance contracts. Both sides of the same contract have the same problem: one needs to prove what was done, and the other needs to verify it.
What complicates municipal maintenance
More the split of responsibilities than the technical work itself.
- The estate is inventoried for accounting purposes, but not for maintenance purposes.
- Reports come in through the registry, by phone, over social media and from a council member.
- Much of the work is carried out by different contractors, each with its own way of reporting.
- When a contract ends, the knowledge of what was done leaves with the outgoing company.
- Spending has to be justified by building and by budget line, and that information doesn’t exist in one place.
What it solves
A useful inventory, a single reporting workflow, and real control over contractors.
Every report, one queue
Wherever they come from, they all land in the same list with an owner and a deadline. Including what comes in by email.
Contractors, brought in
Each contractor logs in through a scoped portal, receives their jobs and records what was done. The report stays with the council.
Mandatory checks, planned
Regulatory inspections for each building with their frequency and their proof, instead of relying on the contractor to remember.
Spend by building
Cost charged to its site and its asset, which is how the budget gets justified and how next year’s gets prepared.
The documentation stays
Certificates, reports and manuals attached to the building. When the contractor changes, they’re still there.
A contractor change is the moment of truth
Every few years the maintenance contract goes out to tender and a new company comes in. If the history lived in the outgoing company’s system, the council starts from zero: nobody knows what was inspected last year, which equipment gave trouble, or where the certificates are. That loss isn’t inevitable — it’s a consequence of where the information was kept. When the contractor works inside the owner’s system, a contractor change stops being an amnesty and becomes what it should be: a change of supplier over an estate that stays documented. It’s also what lets the new company start knowing what’s actually there.
Shall we look at it with your way of working?
Leave your details and we will get in touch to see whether we fit. No commitment, no lock-in period.
A citizen’s report is also a report
A burnt-out streetlight reported by a resident and an inspection of a school’s boiler are very different things, but both end up as work someone has to do and account for. Putting them through the same workflow — with a type, a priority and an owner — enables two things that are hard to get today: responding to the citizen with more than an acknowledgment receipt, and knowing how much of the service’s effort goes to reactive requests versus what was planned. That breakdown is usually the strongest argument when it comes to defending a request for more resources.
The history outlives the contract
In public administration, maintenance is usually delivered by a contractor for a few years, then handed to another. That cycle has a consequence that always surfaces too late: if the system recording the work belongs to the contractor, the history leaves with them. The administration is left with the invoices and the reports it was handed, and loses the one thing that actually lets it manage the estate long-term — knowing what has been done in each building and each facility over the last ten years. When the system belongs to the owner and the contractor works inside it, a change of contractor stops being a loss of memory: the incoming company finds the real state of the facilities on day one instead of rebuilding it over six months.
Annual budgets and maintenance don’t fit together on their own
The annual budget cycle sits awkwardly with maintenance, which is an ongoing activity with needs that don’t respect the fiscal year. The usual result is familiar: work and replacements bunched up at year-end so as not to lose the allocation, and whole months where only urgent issues get attention. What helps isn’t changing the cycle, which is out of anyone’s hands, but going into budget preparation with data instead of last year’s figure plus a percentage. Knowing which facilities absorbed the most spending, which equipment is showing signs of wearing out, and which mandatory inspections come due next year turns an inherited line item into a request that can be defended and, above all, justified.
Frequently asked questions
Can it coexist with the procurement platform and the municipal ERP?
Yes, and that’s the usual setup: each system keeps its own domain. The case file and the invoice live where they belong, and the maintenance system holds what neither of the other two does — the state of the facilities and the history of what’s been done to them. When data needs to travel between them, they get connected.
Does it work if maintenance is carried out by contractors?
Yes, and that’s the most common case. Each contractor logs in through a portal scoped to their own jobs and records what was done inside the system, so the history and documentation stay with the owning administration.
What happens when the contractor changes?
Nothing gets lost, which is exactly the problem this solves. The inventory, the intervention history and the certificates stay in the owner’s system, and the incoming company starts out knowing what’s there.
Can I justify spending by building?
Yes. Hours, materials and travel are charged to their site and their asset, so cost per building and per period comes straight out of the system instead of being reconstructed by hand.
Can citizen reports be collected?
They can be brought into the same incident workflow, with a type and a priority, including ones that arrive by email. That way you can respond with the real status and measure how much effort unplanned work consumes.
Is it accredited for public procurement?
We don’t make claims about accreditations or compliance with a specific tender: that depends on each procurement process and is assessed by the contracting authority. If you need technical documentation for a file, we can provide it.
Start with a handful of buildings
In the demo we set up a couple of sites with their facilities and see what contractor oversight would look like.