What we build.

The Problem

Federal interagency commands receive sophisticated pre-season fuel modeling, real-time perimeter analytics, and post-fire BAER assessment. Small fire districts, rural counties, and conservation landholders receive a public MODIS feed and the regional dispatch radio.

When a fire ignites, they have minutes to decide which structures to defend and which to evacuate. They do not have an analyst on staff. They have a chief, a deputy, and a planning officer pulling a fourteenth shift.

What We Deliver

• Pre-season fuel-load surfaces overlaid on county parcel and structure data, prioritized by defensible-space risk
• Continuous hotspot triage during active fires, prioritized by structures-at-risk within a configurable radius
• Burn perimeter tracking with sub-daily revisit during incidents
• Post-fire damage proxy maps within 72 hours of containment, suitable for FEMA and state recovery filings
• Optional 24-hour on-call analyst availability during declared fire season

The Problem

Climate TRACE, Carbon Mapper, and MethaneSAT publish operator-level attribution at a continental scale. That is excellent for headlines and aggregate climate accounting. It is not actionable for a state DEQ writing an enforcement letter, a plaintiff-side firm building a record, or an ESG fund engaging a portfolio company.

Bridging the gap between satellite plume and operator-level evidence requires synthesis, methodology documentation, and defensibility — not another dashboard.

What We Deliver

• Plume detection and attribution at facility and operator level, with confidence intervals
• Time-series quantification with anomaly flagging at configurable thresholds
• Cross-reference against EPA EIS/AQS, state air-quality networks, and FAA flight-track records
• Expert-witness-ready methodology documentation suitable for regulatory or judicial submission
• Quarterly briefings written for non-technical audiences (commissioners, trustees, juries)

The Problem

BLM districts, county code enforcement, state lands divisions, and large private landholders are tasked with monitoring acreage at a scale that no field staff can physically traverse on a weekly cadence. By the time illegal grading, an unpermitted structure, or a dump site is reported by a neighbor, the damage is done, restoration is expensive, and the perpetrator is gone.

The cure is continuous observation. The cure is also impossible without automation.

What We Deliver

• Weekly disturbance reports across a defined area of interest, with new incidents prioritized by size, proximity to sensitive habitat, and parcel ownership
• Before/after image packets ready for citation, court filing, or restoration estimate
• Optional drone follow-up tasking for high-priority incidents requiring ground-truth resolution
• Quarterly trend reports aggregating incident patterns by jurisdiction
• Configurable thresholds — we calibrate to the actual operational threshold for action

The Problem

Commercial maritime intelligence platforms — Spire, Windward, Pole Star, MarineTraffic Pro — start at five figures monthly and scale aggressively. Their seat licenses assume a standing intelligence team. Sanctions-focused NGOs, ESG compliance teams, investigative journalists, and commodity-trading risk desks do not have that standing team. They have a specific question and an investigation timeline.

What they need is targeted forensics, not a software subscription.

What We Deliver

• Per-investigation dossiers covering vessel histories, port-call timelines, ownership traces, and beneficial-owner identification
• SAR-derived dark-vessel maps for periods of AIS gap or transponder manipulation
• Cross-reference against OFAC, EU, UK, and Five Eyes sanctions lists with timestamped match documentation
• Quarterly retainer option for portfolio monitoring across a defined vessel or operator set
• Optional rapid-response engagement for breaking-investigation timelines (5–10 business days)

The Problem

Private credit funds, mezzanine debt providers, and construction insurers underwrite billions of dollars in projects spread across geographies they cannot routinely visit. Draw schedules are approved on borrower-submitted reports and photographs. Independent verification requires either a costly site visit per draw event or a leap of faith.

Misalignment between reported and actual progress is one of the largest sources of preventable loss in construction lending. It is also one of the easiest to detect, given the right pipeline.

What We Deliver

• Monthly project status reports with quantified progress against contracted milestones
• Draw-event verification packets timed to the lender's pre-funding workflow
• Anomaly alerts for stalled work, out-of-sequence work, or work inconsistent with permits filed
• Optional drone-tasked detailed verification for high-value or high-risk draws
• Portfolio-level dashboards for lenders monitoring multiple projects simultaneously

The Problem

Operators and regulators of substations, water treatment plants, pipelines, and rail rights-of-way face a watching problem at unmanageable scale. Federal guidance from CISA, FERC, and TSA is clear about what should be monitored. The analytic capacity to act on that guidance is rarely staffed at the utility cooperative, regional authority, or midstream-operator level.

Physical encroachment, suspicious construction adjacent to easements, unusual visitor patterns at remote sites — these are detectable signals if anyone is looking.

What We Deliver

• Asset-level dashboards across a defined infrastructure portfolio
• Encroachment, construction, and disturbance alerts with confidence ratings
• Monthly executive briefings written for security committees and boards
• Coordination workflow with the operator's existing physical-security and SOC functions
• Strict NDA-first engagement; we do not market specific clients