Direct answer
A strong investor intake should collect enough information to answer four questions before anyone starts dispatching contractors:
- What outcome does the property need?
- What do we actually know about the current condition?
- What must still be verified before scope or pricing can be trusted?
- What constraints will affect execution, approvals, access, permits, or timing?
The checklist below is designed as a working intake artifact. It should produce a usable project record, not a pile of disconnected notes.
1. Property identity
- ☐ Property address
- ☐ Unit / building / suite if applicable
- ☐ Ownership entity or investor name
- ☐ Internal property ID if one exists
- ☐ Property type
- ☐ Approximate year built if known
- ☐ Occupancy status: vacant / occupied / under contract / turnover / other
- ☐ Current property-management contact if applicable
- ☐ HOA / condo / association involvement if relevant
- ☐ Gate, lockbox, key, or access notes
Notes:
____________________________________________________________
2. Why is work being considered now?
Choose the closest trigger.
- ☐ Acquisition due diligence
- ☐ Post-close rehab
- ☐ Rental turnover
- ☐ Active maintenance issue
- ☐ Deferred-maintenance catch-up
- ☐ Insurance / inspection follow-up
- ☐ Preparing property for sale
- ☐ Value-add improvement
- ☐ Emergency / damage response
- ☐ Portfolio-standard upgrade
- ☐ Other
Describe the trigger in one sentence:
____________________________________________________________
3. Define the intended outcome
Avoid starting with a contractor category when the real need is an outcome.
Examples:
- “Make this unit rent-ready to our portfolio standard.”
- “Turn this inspection report into a contractor-ready rehab scope.”
- “Stop the active leak, determine damage extent, and restore affected finishes.”
- “Prepare the house for resale while keeping optional upgrades separate.”
- “Replace recurring-failure components and document the new baseline.”
Required outcome:
____________________________________________________________
What would make the project clearly complete?
____________________________________________________________
4. Current-condition evidence
Check what is already available.
- ☐ Inspection report
- ☐ Seller disclosure
- ☐ Property-manager report
- ☐ Tenant report
- ☐ Photos
- ☐ Walkthrough video
- ☐ Prior repair invoices
- ☐ Prior scope of work
- ☐ Prior contractor proposals
- ☐ Permit / inspection records
- ☐ Equipment model / serial information
- ☐ Moisture / leak / diagnostic report
- ☐ Engineering or specialist report
- ☐ No meaningful evidence yet
Evidence links / file names / locations:
____________________________________________________________
5. Known conditions
List the conditions that are already sufficiently documented to become scope inputs.
| Area / system | Known condition | Evidence source | Initial disposition |
|---|---|---|---|
| repair / replace / review / defer | |||
Do not mix verified conditions with guesses.
6. Unknown or unresolved conditions
List anything that could materially change scope, price, schedule, or provider type.
| Unknown | Why it matters | What would resolve it? | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|
| photo / measurement / site visit / specialist | |||
Examples:
- extent of concealed water damage;
- subfloor condition under failed finish;
- electrical-panel condition requiring licensed review;
- roof age or leak source;
- HVAC repairability versus replacement;
- exact flooring quantity;
- permit history;
- association approval requirement.
An intake is stronger when it preserves uncertainty instead of forcing every line into a fake fixed answer.
7. Work already believed to be in scope
Area / package 1
Location or system: ________________________________
Requested work: __________________________________
Known quantity / size: _____________________________
Material / finish standard: _________________________
Known exclusions: __________________________________
Open decisions: ____________________________________
Area / package 2
Location or system: ________________________________
Requested work: __________________________________
Known quantity / size: _____________________________
Material / finish standard: _________________________
Known exclusions: __________________________________
Open decisions: ____________________________________
Repeat as needed.
8. Existing contractors and preferred relationships
OttoServ should not assume every investor wants new vendors.
- ☐ Investor has preferred GC
- ☐ Investor has preferred handyman / maintenance provider
- ☐ Investor has preferred electrician
- ☐ Investor has preferred plumber
- ☐ Investor has preferred HVAC contractor
- ☐ Investor has preferred roofer
- ☐ Investor has preferred cleaning / turnover team
- ☐ Investor wants help filling gaps only
- ☐ Investor wants a complete fulfillment path
Names / companies / contact notes:
____________________________________________________________
9. Regulatory and specialist flags
This section does not determine legal requirements. It tells the project team what needs verification.
- ☐ Electrical work or concern
- ☐ Plumbing work or concern
- ☐ HVAC / mechanical work or concern
- ☐ Roofing work or concern
- ☐ Structural concern
- ☐ Gas work or concern
- ☐ Flood-zone / floodplain concern
- ☐ Wind / opening-protection concern
- ☐ Water intrusion / mold / indoor-environment concern
- ☐ Association approval may be required
- ☐ Permit may be required
- ☐ Existing unpermitted work suspected
- ☐ Jurisdiction has not yet been confirmed
Required follow-up:
____________________________________________________________
10. Schedule and access constraints
- ☐ Closing date
- ☐ Lease-end date
- ☐ Target listing date
- ☐ Target occupancy date
- ☐ Property must remain occupied during work
- ☐ Utilities are off
- ☐ Limited access windows
- ☐ HOA / building work-hour restrictions
- ☐ Material lead time already known
- ☐ Insurance / inspection deadline
- ☐ Seasonal / storm consideration
Hard dates:
____________________________________________________________
Flexible dates:
____________________________________________________________
11. Budget framing
Do not turn a target budget into a claim that the scope can be completed for that amount.
Record separately:
Owner target / ceiling if one exists: ______________________
Known priced scope: ______________________________________
Allowances: ______________________________________________
Known unknowns: __________________________________________
Owner-held contingency: __________________________________
Items intentionally outside current budget: _______________
The project record should distinguish a planning target from verified pricing.
12. Approval rules
Define what can proceed without another phone call.
- ☐ All changes require owner approval
- ☐ Routine work within defined scope may proceed
- ☐ Minor additional work may proceed below owner-defined threshold
- ☐ Emergency property-protection work has separate authority
- ☐ Material substitutions require approval
- ☐ Schedule changes require approval if they affect target date
- ☐ Hidden-condition work requires evidence before approval
Approval contacts:
____________________________________________________________
Escalation rule:
____________________________________________________________
13. Evidence expectations
Choose only evidence that will actually improve project control or property history.
- ☐ Initial condition photos
- ☐ Initial walkthrough video
- ☐ Before-concealment evidence
- ☐ Milestone photos
- ☐ Change-condition evidence
- ☐ Permit / inspection documents
- ☐ Equipment labels / serial numbers
- ☐ Final-condition photos
- ☐ Final walkthrough video
- ☐ Receipts / warranties / manuals
- ☐ Deferred-condition record
Special evidence instructions:
____________________________________________________________
14. Closeout definition
Before work begins, decide what must exist at the end.
- ☐ Scope reconciled to complete / deferred / excluded / changed
- ☐ Punch items closed or explicitly accepted
- ☐ Approved changes reconciled
- ☐ Final condition evidence captured
- ☐ Permit / inspection status documented if applicable
- ☐ Equipment / warranty information retained
- ☐ Access returned or reset
- ☐ Final invoice / payment status reconciled
- ☐ Deferred conditions have future trigger
- ☐ Property history updated
Intake readiness test
Before moving from intake into pricing or dispatch, ask:
- ☐ Can a reviewer explain the intended outcome in one sentence?
- ☐ Are verified facts separated from assumptions?
- ☐ Are important unknowns visible?
- ☐ Is it clear what evidence is missing?
- ☐ Is the likely execution path understandable?
- ☐ Are regulated / specialist concerns flagged?
- ☐ Are access and schedule constraints recorded?
- ☐ Are owner approval rules known?
- ☐ Is the next action explicit?
If several answers are no, the project is not ready to be treated as a clean contractor request.
What this tool should produce
A completed intake should hand off into one of four next states:
- Ready for scope development
- Needs additional evidence
- Needs specialist / regulated review
- Already defined well enough to begin pricing or execution planning
That state should be explicit.
How OttoServ fits
This is where a Services-first model starts to feel different from a lead form.
The useful intake is not:
name + phone + “what service do you need?”
It is:
property → outcome → condition → evidence → unknowns → scope → execution constraints → approvals → closeout standard
That structure gives OttoServ, the investor, contractors, and later AI/retrieval systems a shared project model instead of a paragraph that everyone interprets differently.