Skip to main content
URBAN ECOTOPIACLIMATE INTELLIGENCE · LONDONCheck pilot fit
SERVICE / PROPOSED PILOT

SITE HEAT EVIDENCE REVIEW

One live decision, made easier to investigate and defend.

A fixed-scope sprint for London development and estate teams deciding where heat adaptation deserves further investigation. The service prepares a traceable evidence pack for professional review; it does not automate design or compliance decisions.

01 / THE CONTRACT

WHAT THE TEAM BRINGS

A bounded site question before a dataset.

  1. 01An authorised site boundary and current design information
  2. 02One live concept-design, pre-application or investment decision
  3. 03A deliberately limited set of adaptation options
  4. 04A named deadline, current alternative and accountable reviewer

WHAT THE SPRINT RETURNS

A versioned pack, ready to be challenged.

  1. 01Historic surface heat and vegetation baseline
  2. 02Candidate intervention screening map
  3. 03Assumptions, limitations and evidence gaps
  4. 04Source and method manifest
  5. 05Technical annex for professional review
  6. 06Monitoring specification for later implementation
02 / ESCALATION LADDER

MODEL ONLY WHEN THE DECISION EARNS IT

Screen broadly. Escalate deliberately.

Each step requires more detailed inputs, validation and professional authority.

  1. 01Screen

    Historic EO and site context identify where evidence warrants attention.

  2. 02Compare

    Candidate options are compared within the agreed question and assumptions.

  3. 03Investigate

    Targeted modelling is considered only where scale and inputs support it.

  4. 04Assess

    Detailed design or compliance work remains with the appropriate specialist.

03 / QUALIFICATION CONTRACT

A CONVERSATION IS NOT CUSTOMER EVIDENCE

Define the buying and review route before accepting site files.

The first conversation establishes whether there is a real decision and accountable route to use the work. A generated brief remains self-declared and unverified until an authorised person responds and the evidence is retained privately.

ECONOMIC BUYER
Named organisation and role with a plausible budget or procurement route
ACCOUNTABLE USER
Named role responsible for using or reviewing the evidence in a live workflow
CURRENT ALTERNATIVE
What the team would do, buy or defer without this review
DECISION DATE
The date by which the evidence must be useful
EVALUATION
A pre-agreed usefulness endpoint and reviewer response
04 / BUYING AND ACCEPTANCE

TWO ROUTES TO TEST · NEITHER VALIDATED

Enter through the accountable project workflow.

  1. 01Direct site commission: the owner or developer is the economic-payer hypothesis, with an internal planning, energy or sustainability lead using the review.
  2. 02Adviser subcontract: an appointed planning, energy or sustainability adviser is the contracting-channel hypothesis and brings the review into the existing project workflow.

A REVIEWABLE DEFINITION OF DONE

Accept the evidence boundary, not a promised outcome.

  1. 01Freeze the site boundary, decision question, option set and evaluator before analysis.
  2. 02Trace every released output to approved sources, methods, rights, spatial support and uncertainty.
  3. 03Compare matched with-EO and without-EO arms against a pre-registered usefulness endpoint.
  4. 04Record the qualified reviewer’s accepted, rejected or conditional use and the agreed liability boundary.
05 / COMMERCIAL STRATEGY

SCALE FROM ONE LIVE DECISION

Route to specialist value through disciplined onboarding.

  1. 01Pilot delivery

    One bounded London site, one decision and one live reviewer from the accountable programme team.

  2. 02Portfolio pilots

    Parallel pilots by sector and portfolio cohort where rights, specialist cost and data quality are pre-aligned.

  3. 03Adapter marketplace

    An evidence spine with explicit contracts for insurers, lenders and advisory teams.

COMMERCIAL ROUTING HYPOTHESIS

Entry points aligned to existing procurement routes.

  • Developer or estate management owner is the economic payer, with internal energy or sustainability lead commissioning the review.
  • Planning, engineering, valuation, risk advisory or insurance partner is the commercial route into an existing workflow.
  • Climate and credit teams consume the evidence layer as a pre-modeling screen for concentration, sensitivity and disclosure preparation.
06 / INSURANCE, DISCLOSURE AND SCALE

INSURANCE-READY EVIDENCE, NOT A PRICE OR RATING OUTPUT

Insurance climate-risk is scoped to evidence support first.

The pilot can provide screening, exposure and uncertainty outputs that are useful for specialist underwriting conversations. It does not produce premium, reserve or rating decisions.

  1. 01Screening not pricing

    Location and option-level physical-risk screening against approved hazard layers and site context.

  2. 02Portfolio triage

    Concentration, vulnerability and unresolved-evidence views that support risk governance conversations.

  3. 03Specialist handoff

    Risk scoring, premium impact, claims uplift and capital implications remain with qualified actuarial and underwriting teams.

  4. 04Traceability

    Every output keeps source, method, assumptions, uncertainty and review state for audit-ready handoff.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE SUPPORT

Structured evidence for climate-linked financial review.

The service prepares a reviewed draft package for finance and risk governance teams. The accountable owner still owns final wording, approval and filing.

  1. 01Scenario dictionary

    Named scenario set, assumptions and temperature/time window are declared before any sensitivity output.

  2. 02Exposure ledger

    Asset-level exposure registers connect site decision outputs to geography, climate mechanisms and source maturity.

  3. 03Control evidence

    KPI packs, data lineage and limitation notes are exported as a reviewable draft for finance and governance owners.

  4. 04Accountability boundary

    Disclosure wording and statutory filing remain with the accountable legal or finance owner; our layer prepares structured evidence only.

SCALING STRATEGY

Specialist adapter marketplace for insurer, valuer and advisory workflows with a single evidence-spine.

SCALE GUARDRAIL

Scaling starts from evidence quality gates, not from output volume.

Near-term path: One authorised site and one live decision.

Growth path: Parallel pilots across similar portfolio cohorts where rights, budget and specialist capacity are confirmed.

REMAINING EXCLUSIONS

Commercial boundary for scaling and external use.

  • We do not produce pricing, reserve, solvency or capital adequacy outputs.
  • We do not generate regulatory filings, audit opinions or statutory approvals.
  • We do not make underwriting decisions, accept/reject recommendations, or definitive loss projections.
07 / VALUE CONTRACT

NO ASSUMED SAVING · NO PROMISED OUTCOME

Value is the measured difference from the current route.

The pilot first records what the team does today. It then tests whether the proposed review changes effort, evidence quality or a pre-agreed decision need on the same case.

BASELINE REQUIRED

What happens without the review

  • Current workflow steps and elapsed staff time
  • External evidence or specialist cost where available
  • Decision delay, unresolved evidence gap or work deferred
  • The information currently used to prioritise further investigation
PROPOSED SERVICE

What the review adds

  • One bounded comparison linked to the live decision
  • A matched with-EO and without-EO evaluation
  • Traceable sources, rights, methods, uncertainty and limitations
  • A recorded professional response to usefulness and permitted use
  1. UTILITYDid the pack meet the pre-agreed decision need?

    A qualified reviewer records accepted, rejected or conditional usefulness.

    VALIDATION OPEN
  2. EFFORTDid the review change staff effort, delay or external cost?

    The retained current-workflow baseline is compared with the delivery record.

    BASELINE REQUIRED
  3. TRACECan every released output be inspected and challenged?

    Source, rights, method, spatial support, uncertainty and release state remain attached.

    METHOD DEFINED
  4. EODid Earth observation earn its place in the decision?

    Matched arms use the same non-EO evidence; a changed ranking alone does not pass.

    VALIDATION OPEN

APPROPRIATE USE

Supports prioritisation, briefing and further investigation.

NOT ESTABLISHED

Does not establish compliance, feasibility, realised cooling or planning approval.

Inspect the working proof Build a pilot brief