Ground Stasis

Construction lenders have a blind-spot problem: between scheduled draw inspections, they can't easily tell whether a project has stalled. Physical inspections are slow, costly, and infrequent — so portfolio risk builds up unseen, and a stuck project is often discovered only when a draw request looks wrong.

Ground Stasis closes that gap with satellite imagery. It builds a monitoring area around each financed site and reads recent imagery on a schedule, surfacing sites that show no visible progress over time (stasis). The optional Construction Draw Intelligence add-on compares the milestone a lender reported against the evidence the satellite observed, and raises a cautious, confidence-rated finding when they don't line up. Reported and observed are always kept separate — the system never fabricates a completion percentage.

Lenders only hear from it when something changes: findings arrive by email with a secure link to a per-site workspace. Entry is deliberately low-friction — a one-time $9 satellite check of a single site, with no commitment, that ascends into continuous monitoring at $19/mo (1 site), $49/mo (3 sites), or $99/mo (10 sites); Construction Draw Intelligence is $15/site/mo on top.

What Ground Stasis is careful not to claim: it does not verify work quality, value, or draw eligibility, and it doesn't replace underwriting. It's an early, remote risk signal — a way to know a project is moving without sending anyone to look.

Key features

• Satellite stall detection (stasis): flags financed sites showing no visible progress over time
• Construction Draw Intelligence (add-on): compares reported milestone vs. observed satellite evidence
• Continuous remote monitoring: recurring reads on a schedule — alerts only when imagery changes
• $9 one-time site check: pay-per-look satellite read before committing to monitoring
• Portfolio tiers: monitor 1, 3, or 10 sites; self-serve billing
• Secure per-site workspace (magic-link access, no heavy login)
• No truck rolls: cuts the cost and delay of dispatching inspectors
• Conservative, auditable findings: reported vs. observed kept separate, confidence-rated