Case study·Build-to-rent

Make-ready and void-loss control

From slipping make-ready dates — to a priced void-day forecast every morning

38%
Average make-ready varianceDown vs the pre-pilot baseline
“It showed the cost of every late handoff in pounds, not anecdotes.”
Operations Director · BTR multifamily operator
UK BTR / multifamily operator·1,200 units across 3 pilot assets·8-week pilot·United Kingdom
Talk to us about this workflowTry Unify
01Pilot envelope
Pilot length8 weeks
First signal10 days
First ROI45 days
Team alongside5 seats · 3 colleagues

8-week pilot across vacant units; connected move-out, maintenance and leasing calendars; created void-day risk forecast and make-ready SLA taxonomy.

02What it owns
Reports toOperations Director, dotted line to Finance on the daily rent-at-risk number.
Owns
  • Daily void list — every unit in make-ready with its SLA, current step and rent at risk
  • Make-ready SLA taxonomy — common job types, expected durations, escalation thresholds
  • Contractor schedule reconciliation — one timeline across portal, calendar and access logs
  • Available-from date — single source of truth for leasing, only published when snagging closes
  • Void-day risk forecast — next 14 days of expected vs at-risk void days for finance review
Does not do
  • Capex approvals — major repairs route to the Operations Director
  • Contractor commercial terms — surfaces variance, never renegotiates rates
  • Listing copy and pricing — leasing owns the listing once the unit is published
Done looks like

Site managers walk into the morning with a sequenced void list and a number for the rent at risk today. Finance reviews variance mid-cycle, not after the month closes.

03The team
AI teammates3
TessOwns the live void list, sequences make-ready milestones against rent-at-risk and flags any unit drifting past its SLA.
MarcoReconciles work orders, contractor calendars and Salto access codes against the unit's make-ready plan, and re-sequences when a slot slips.
LenaHolds the available-from date, publishes the unit to leasing only when snagging is closed, and pre-warns the leasing team of slipping handovers.
Human team5
  • Operations DirectorLeadership
  • 4 Site managersOperations
  • 5 Maintenance techniciansMaintenance
  • 4 Leasing associatesLeasing
  • 2 Finance analystsFinance
04Connected stack
OneSiteContractor portalInventory HiveSalto SystemsOutlookPower BI
05What it returned
38%Average make-ready varianceDown vs the pre-pilot baseline
96Void days avoidedAcross 3 pilot assets in 8 weeks
GBP 41kGross rent protectedVoids closed earlier than the pre-pilot trend
  • Day 0
    Co-ordinator sessionOperations Director, site managers and finance agreed scope, the SLA taxonomy and the rent-at-risk definition in one call.
  • Day 10
    First signalMove-out, contractor and inventory data joined; Tess produced the first reconciled void list and surfaced four units already drifting past SLA.
  • Day 18
    Read-only goes liveDaily void list circulated to site managers; Marco corrected a handful of contractor calendar mappings against the portal.
  • Day 32
    Approval-gated actionsLena began holding the available-from date; leasing only listed units the make-ready team confirmed snagged.
  • Day 45
    ROI reviewFinance signed off the make-ready variance, void-days avoided and rent-at-risk numbers against the pre-pilot baseline.
  • Week 8
    Pilot close-outSponsor approved the SLA taxonomy as the operating standard and extended the workflow to a fourth asset.
↗Get started

Want this for your team?

Each design-partner pilot starts the same way: one workflow, the minimum useful context, and a first ROI signal measured in days.

Talk to us about this workflowTry Unify