1. Method objective
The method makes known conditions and source records easier to find, distinguishes documentation from statements and observations, connects open items to possible decisions and responsible verifier categories, and prepares a more specific human or authority review. It does not rank construction systems or recommend buying, building, financing, or insuring a project.
2. Unit of analysis
The unit is a project question for a stated parcel context, not the parcel as an approved or rejected whole. A documented utility response does not resolve zoning. A survey does not approve a foundation. A photo of a road does not establish route approval.
Typical questions include whether the responsible land-use authority is identified, whether a current survey exists, whether a utility provider has confirmed service information, whether route restrictions are documented for the applicable requirement, whether a geotechnical report matches the site and scope, and whether the source of a local design input is identified for a licensed reviewer.
3. Information domains
- Project context: intended use, unit-count band, land status, general location, and next decision.
- Authority and land records: AHJ, zoning or land use, survey, private restrictions, and written review information.
- Access and staging: road, turns, grades, gates, clearances, posted limits, unloading, lifting, and work area.
- Terrain, water, and soil: slope, drainage, mapped or observed indicators, geotechnical status, and foundation-document status.
- Utilities: electric, water, wastewater, other routes, easements, crossings, equipment, and responsibilities.
- Local design inputs: source and reviewer status for applicable environmental inputs.
- Documents and decision: source, date, version, scope, conflict state, target date, and the category of question to clarify.
4. Evidence states
V — Verified authority
A current written record from the authority or licensed professional responsible for the question, used only within its stated property, scope, date, and limitations.
P — Project document
A current project record with an identifiable source, date, version, and scope. It may not be authoritative for every conclusion.
O — Observed indication
A dated photo, map, measurement, or field observation that indicates a possible condition. Observation does not equal approval.
C — Customer-stated
Information supplied without supporting evidence. It can guide discovery but remains unverified.
U — Unknown
No usable answer or evidence is available.
X — Conflicting or expired
Sources conflict, appear stale, are illegible, cannot be matched to the question, or fall outside validity.
N — Not applicable, pending review
The item may not apply, but exclusion requires a reason and reviewer.
5. Required evidence metadata
Where available, record source type and owner, date, version or jurisdiction, parcel or project scope under appropriate access controls, the question informed, evidence state, reviewer and review date, limitations or conflicts, and public-release state. A useful private record is not automatically authorized for public use.
6. State-transition rules
- Repeating a customer statement does not make it verified.
- A public map is generally an observed indication unless the responsible authority defines it as determinative for the stated question.
- A project document becomes verified authority evidence only when issuer, scope, currency, and responsibility support that classification.
- Conflicting evidence is not averaged into a pass.
- An expired document remains expired even if its conclusion appears favorable.
- Not applicable requires a recorded reason and reviewer.
- No evidence state creates a permit, professional approval, supplier acceptance, contractual release, or construction authorization.
7. Completeness model
The tool may summarize documented questions, answered but unverified questions, unknown questions, conflicting or expired records, and information completeness by domain. Proposed bands are early information, partially documented, and review-ready for named questions. The last label means only that specific questions can be routed; it does not mean the project is ready to build.
The exact weighting and thresholds require usability and legal review. The method must not produce a buildability, approval probability, structural safety, product compatibility, cost, savings, schedule, lender, or insurer score.
8. Decision-dependency tags
An open item may be tagged for authority or land-use review, survey or boundary review, access or transportation review, site planning, environmental review, geotechnical or foundation review, utility review, architectural or engineering review, supplier or carrier review, scope or contract clarification, or an owner decision. Tags route a question; they do not predict impact.
9. Privacy model
The initial flow should collect the minimum information needed. City or county and state are enough for the general checklist. Exact address, parcel ID, contact details, photos, documents, filenames, metadata, and free text are restricted. Restricted values must not be sent through URLs, UTM parameters, analytics dimensions, page titles, or public reporting.
Checklist use, human contact, marketing contact, and public case-study or aggregate-data use are separate decisions. Consent must not be bundled. Retention, deletion, internal access, subprocessors, and transfer rules require approval before restricted information is collected.
10. Source and licensing rules
Public authority, parcel, map, utility, environmental, hazard, and third-party sources can support discovery. Discovery is not authorization to republish or form a definitive project conclusion. Each source requires review of issuer, currency, geographic and decision scope, terms of use, attribution, known limitations, and whether site-specific confirmation remains necessary.
11. Human-review standard
A future human response should identify the documents or statements reviewed, exact questions addressed, evidence states and conflicts, missing records, the responsible next-verifier category, items outside scope, and response date and version. It must not imply an approval that has not occurred.
12. Analytics and CRM boundaries
Permitted events may include start, non-sensitive domain completion, result view, human-review click, consent, and lead submission. Payloads must not contain contact details, exact location, parcel identifiers, documents, filenames, or free text. A qualified residential lead is a human-reviewed CRM state, not an automatic completeness result.
13. Change control
Each public method version should record its effective date, approved field dictionary, evidence definitions, completeness rules, disclaimer and privacy version, source changes, reviewer, release owner, and material changes. Sitemap lastmod should change only when the public page changes materially; a changed date is not a substitute for a version record.
14. Limitations
Site conditions, records, codes, authority interpretations, utility capacity, supplier requirements, professional findings, contracts, and project decisions may change. The Scorecard cannot identify every condition or replace visits, measurements, tests, professional judgment, authority review, written supplier requirements, inspections, or agreements. No result should be the sole basis for buying land, selecting a product, authorizing design, committing funds, ordering materials, scheduling delivery, beginning site work, obtaining financing or insurance, or starting construction.
15. Related residential decisions
Use the method within its boundary. The Scorecard organizes evidence and open questions. It does not replace a responsible authority, licensed professional, supplier, carrier, utility, contract, permit, inspection, or project-specific review.
Use the Lot Readiness checklist
For the broader home-planning context, visit the residential planning path. To discuss the information you already have, call +1 234-564-0112 or email inquiry@kkdatasvc.com.