Manage · Steering

You will find out. The only question is how early.

Manage is the steering level: where a portfolio's early decisions get made. AI watches every project's numbers against the thresholds you set — cash, funding cover, benchmark deviation — and surfaces the ones that matter as a warning with a named owner and a decision deadline, while the decision is still cheap.

Supercharge your current ERPPROBIS connects instantly to SAP, Yardi, Oracle, MS Dynamics, and Datev to pull the insights you need without disrupting your workflow.

Book a demo
Portfolio board — 3 of 9 projects · live · PROBIS Manage
PortfolioWarningsDecisionsCash flow
Projects9
Portfolio budget$1.36B
Open warnings7
Decisions due6
Riverside Tower IIChicago$203.1M
Cost
Time
Qual
Harbor DistrictBaltimore$233.2M
Cost
Time
Qual
Peachtree Galleria RefitAtlanta$106.0M
Cost
Time
Qual
Within tolerance Threshold approaching Warning raised · owner assigned
Early
Cash Flow · Liquidity · Benchmarking · AI Report Builder

Four ways to know before it's a problem.

Steering is a small number of decisions taken early enough to matter. Manage resolves to four blocks — the cash going out, the funding behind it, what the number should have been, and the report that proves it. Each one raises a threshold breach as a warning with a named owner and a deadline, before the decision gets expensive.

Cash FlowPortfolio draw and peak funding, recomputed from live cost data
  • Monthly cash-out curve per project, rolled up to program and entity
  • Peak funding point and finance cost recomputed as the forecast moves
  • Planned against actual draw variance, raised with an owner
  • Committed and uncommitted spend separated in every period
  • Cash view generated in the format the lender’s monitor expects

Cash flow for the lender →

Portfolio cash-out — next 6 months9 projects · $M
MonthPlannedActualVarianceCover
Sep45.348.2+2.9Drift raised · A. Sullivan
Oct49.15.1 months
Nov52.74.8 months
Dec50.94.6 months
Jan47.44.3 months
Feb43.74.1 months
Six-month cash-out289.148.2+2.9Peak Nov
LiquidityFunding cover month by month, against committed facilities
  • Equity requirement per month against committed facilities rather than a flat percentage
  • Months-of-cover per project, entity and portfolio
  • Cover thresholds raise a warning before the shortfall month
  • Facility headroom visible per tranche
  • Scenario view showing what a four-week slip does to the funding requirement

Liquidity for the lender →

Funding cover — Riverside Tower IIMonths of cover · $M
MonthRequirementAvailableCoverStatus
Month 22 · Sep8.450.25.0Within
Month 23 · Oct9.241.84.5Within
Month 24 · Nov10.132.64.2Within
Month 25 · Dec10.822.44.1Within
Month 26 · Jan11.111.73.8Below threshold · A. Sullivan
Month 27 · Feb10.30.60.1Advance 7 required
Remaining facility50.25.0Covenant ≥ 6 flagged
BenchmarkingBy UNIFORMAT cost group, after regional and index adjustment
  • Compare like with like after regional, index and standard adjustment
  • The difference broken down cost group by cost group, not a single number
  • Outliers flagged where one cost group drives the gap
  • Comparison sets saved and reused across the portfolio
  • Benchmarks feed pricing in Calculate and bid evaluation in Contract

See a benchmark comparison →

Villa A vs. set average$/SF · regionally adjusted
Cost groupVilla ASet avgDelta
Superstructure123102.5+19.9%
Interior Finishes9071.8+25.3%
Services6158.6+4.1%
Total $/SF369321.8+14.7%
AI Report BuilderLive at JLL and Stadt LudwigshafenDescribe the report once; it compiles itself and stays live
  • Create any report using a prompt, powered by the data sources of your choice
  • Pick the projects, cost estimates, contracts and invoices it draws on
  • Compiled from scratch and ready to send, with no template to maintain
  • Stays live — it updates as soon as new cost data comes in, never regenerated
  • Every figure traceable back to the transaction it was compiled from
Monthly variance report — 3 projectsLive · last updated 2 min ago
"Monthly variance report for Riverside Tower II, Harbor District and Seaport Block E5 — budget vs. forecast by cost code, with change orders over $250K called out."
Cost estimatesContractsInvoices
ProjectBudgetForecastVarianceStatus
Riverside Tower II203.1206.2−1.5%Compiled
Harbor District233.2243.0−4.2%Compiled
Seaport Block E5295.1318.1−7.8%Compiled
Three-project total731.4767.3−4.9%Auto-updating

See audit and governance →

Cash Flow + Liquidity · for the lender

Can you verify the draw before you release it?

Every drawdown answers three questions. Are the funds going where the financing plan says? Are the conditions for this tranche met? Does the report hold up in committee? PROBIS answers all three from a record the bank owns, not from the borrower's spreadsheet.

  • Use of funds controlled by financing phase, with equity contribution evidenced automatically against the agreed sequence.
  • Conditions and covenants as a live register, with the document behind each condition and every waiver recorded.
  • Construction progress measured against disbursement, so funds released never run ahead of work in place.
  • Reporting generated at any cut-off date with the documents attached, not re-keyed.
Draw package · advance 6 — Riverside Tower II
Sources and uses · $MGenerated Sep 8, 2026 · monitor copy
SourceFacilityDrawnThis advanceRemainingVerification
Equity61.661.60.0Verified · equity-first
Senior debt123.286.29.427.6Within LTC 68.4%
Mezzanine17.64.413.2Undrawn
Progress against disbursementWork in place vs. funds released
Work in place44.1%
Funds released42.6%
PositionBehind draw · clear
Covenants tested this month3 tested · 1 flagged
Loan-to-cost ≤ 70%Actual 68.4%Within
Equity-first sequenceFully contributedWithin
Funding cover ≥ 6 monthsActual 5.0 monthsFlagged · A. Sullivan
Every line traceable to the invoice it was drawn against Export monitor package
There are systems on the market that produce financing reports. They are produced in the borrower's environment. PROBIS sits on the bank's side.
Benchmarking, in detail

Compare like with like, then explain the difference.

The output is not a number, it is an argument. Villa A costs 13% more per square foot than Villa B , and you can see it is entirely in superstructure and interior finishes, because that is where the comparison breaks it down.

Choose your comparison set.
Adjust for reality.
Break it down.
Save and reuse.
Export it.

A raw $/SF comparison is worthless until it is adjusted

  • Cost adaptation by regional factor and construction cost indexation
  • Base-date adjustment so older projects remain comparable
  • Comparison by cost group, usage type, asset class and quality standard
  • Project selection by region, drawn on a map or by filter
  • Comparison against total average, peer group average, or a benchmark set you define
Benchmark adjustment — Villa Ridgeview → Sonoran Villas Ph.2
Regional factorNew York 1.00 → Phoenix 0.78
Construction cost indexBase 2022 → 2026 · +14.2%
Asset classResidential · villa
Quality standardPremium → Premium
Source · as built$374per SF · New York · 2022 · UniFormat B+C
Adjusted · comparable$320per SF · Phoenix · 2026 · same scope
0.78 regional × 1.142 index × 0.96 standard Apply to estimate

Benchmark set · Residential villas, Northeast + Southwest, 2022 onward

$/SF · Net · Regionally adjusted · Index 2026
Cost group (UNIFORMAT)Villa AVilla BVilla CTownhouse ATownhouse BVilla A vs. set avg
Substructure 42 41 41 37 38 +5.5%
Superstructure 123outlier 101 103 92 94 +19.9%
Interior Finishes 90outlier 71 73 62 63 +25.3%
Services 61 59 62 55 56 +4.1%
Sitework 21 23 20 16 15 +10.5%
Professional Fees 32 31 32 27 28 +6.7%
Total $/SF 369326331289294 +14.7%
Set average $321.8/SF · 5 projects · adjusted to New York 2026 Two cost groups account for 82% of Villa A's excess

Benchmarks feed into Calculate → when you price a new project, and into Contract → when you evaluate a bid.

Audit & governance

Would this survive an audit without a reconstruction project?

Most cost data is audit-ready only in retrospect: someone spends three weeks rebuilding how a number came to be. Manage keeps that history as it happens, and reports the same figures under more than one statutory regime — US GAAP, IFRS and the German HGB — which is what tells an auditor the system was built to a standard rather than to a preference.

GAAP, IFRS and HGB reporting

Cost is reported under US GAAP for your own books, and the same underlying figures satisfy IFRS and the German HGB. Two separate statutory regimes run off one data set — which is the point for an auditor: the system has already been held to more than one standard, not just yours.

Capitalization

Capitalized versus expensed is decided by rule at the transaction level, not reconstructed at year end. Interest during construction, fees and soft costs carry their treatment with them, so the asset value you hand to accounting is already defensible.

Revision security

Every value keeps its author, timestamp and prior state. Nothing is overwritten silently and no figure exists without the movement that produced it — so any number in any report can be walked back to its origin.

Auditor suitability

Read-only auditor access with a defined scope, a complete change history, and reports reproducible as of any prior date. The auditor works in the system rather than in a folder of exports assembled for them.

Investor reporting

Investor and board packs are generated from live figures on a fixed cycle, in the format each investor asked for — the same numbers the project is steered on, not a separately maintained set.

How it works

01

Define the frame

Set standards, thresholds, templates, roles and escalation paths.

02

Onboard the projects

Each project inherits the standard and keeps its own detail.

03

Watch continuously

Indicators are recomputed from live transactions, not from submissions.

04

Raise and route

Breaches become warnings with an owner and a deadline.

05

Decide

Decision templates present options and consequences; the outcome is recorded.

Why problems arrive as surprises

Today

  • Each project reports in its own format, on its own cycle, at its own level of optimism.
  • Portfolio review is a slide pack assembled by the people being reviewed.
  • Risk registers are maintained separately from the financial data, and go stale within a month.
  • Escalation depends on someone choosing to escalate.

With PROBIS

  • Every project is steered against the same thresholds, so a breach means the same thing everywhere.
  • The review pack is generated from live data, so preparing it is not an opportunity to reframe it.
  • Reports are compiled from the financial data itself and stay live, so they cannot go stale.
  • Comparison is like-for-like after regional and index adjustment, so a gap is an argument rather than an assertion.

One structure across every project

  • Project traffic lights on progress, quality and cost, computed from live data
  • Standard report templates applied across the portfolio
  • Multi-project steering views, with drill-through into Control for the transaction behind a number
  • Configurable roles, teams and permissions per project and per entity
Standard project report — all projects, one structure
Portfolio · 12 projectsShowing 6 of 12 · template PF-01
ProjectStageBudgetForecast var.StatusUpdated
Riverside Tower IIConstruction203.1M−1.5%On trackToday
Harbor DistrictConstruction233.2M−4.2%WatchToday
Peachtree Galleria RefitFit-out106.0M+0.4%On trackToday
Seaport Block E5Construction295.1M−7.8%WarningToday
Northside Block CDesign82.4M−0.2%On trackYesterday
Marina DistrictConstruction155.9M−2.1%WatchToday
Every column computed from the same transaction model Drill down to transaction

Process with accountability attached

  • Project-specific workflows with teams assigned per step
  • Automatic triggers and batch workflow options
  • Task overview per user, with elapsed time visible
  • Full decision history for audit and for turnover
Task overview — 6 decisions pending across the portfolio
Pending steps4 of 6 · sorted by time waiting
Change order NA-14 · releaseSeaport Block E5
VP Construction
22 days · escalated
Quality gate · facade mock-upHarbor District
Technical Lead
11 days
Budget revision v9 · approvalMarina District
Director of PM
11 days
Award recommendation · bid package 400South Medical Center
Procurement
4 days
Escalation fires automatically at 21 days Full decision history

Steering, not just reporting

  • Decision templates generated from live project data
  • Scenario comparison at portfolio level
  • Threshold and tolerance management per project and per program
  • Integrated commentary and team communication against the numbers
Decision template — Seaport Block E5 · facade package
Façade supplier insolvent — three ways forwardBoard decision · due Sep 4
Option AAssign the subcontract
Cost
+$2.6M
Cash
+$1.0M
Schedule
+6 wks
Option BRebid the remaining scope
Cost
+$1.8M
Cash
−$0.4M
Schedule
+11 wks
Recommended
Option CSplit package across two trades
Cost
+$3.4M
Cash
+$1.9M
Schedule
+4 wks
BasisForecast v8 · live
Contingency left$5.4M
OutcomeRecorded on decision
InOut
PROBIS manage Live
All project data from Calculate, Contract, Control and Rent & Sell
Loan agreements and covenants
Schedule data
Facility agreements and draw schedules
Warning feed
Board and investor reports
Lender draw packages
Decision templates
Portfolio dashboards
project data warnings decisions covenants drawdown schedule board pack cash flow dashboards

Also in Manage

Program-level roll-up

Several projects treated as one financial object.

Entity and client separation

Multiple companies in one tenant, cleanly divided.

Custom KPIs

Define what your organization steers on.

Milestone trend analysis

Schedule slippage as a cost signal.

Audit-ready history

Every value, author and timestamp retained.

Board and investor reporting

From live data, on schedule.

Team and role management

Impact levels and project scope per team.

Notification rules

Who hears about what, and how quickly.

Snapshot comparison

This month against any prior version.

110 William Street, New York
Case study · Historic office modernization

Steering a 32-story Manhattan landmark, week by week.

110 William Street is a historic 32-story office tower in Lower Manhattan, built in 1918 and expanded in 1959, now undergoing comprehensive modernization to prepare over 640,000 square feet for the New York City Administration for Children's Services. PROBIS supports the redevelopment with its digital monitoring platform — giving stakeholders a transparent, real-time view of budget and schedule across the project's lifecycle.

Read the full project profile
Original construction1918
Building height32 stories
Space modernized640,000+ sq ft

Frequently asked questions

What can the AI Report Builder actually produce?

Any report you can describe: monthly variance across a set of projects, a change-order summary above a threshold, a cash-out view for a lender. You name the projects and the sources — cost estimates, contracts, invoices — and it compiles the report from scratch, then keeps it current as new data arrives.

Are reports regenerated, or do they stay live?

They stay live. A report is a standing query against the same transactions that drive the cost report, so it updates as soon as new cost data comes in — there is no regeneration step and no version that quietly goes stale.

Can we run different standards for different parts of the business?

Yes. Standards, workflows, thresholds and permissions can be defined per entity, per client or per project type, while still rolling up into a single portfolio view.

How does this support lender reporting?

Draws, equity verification and funding cover are handled in Cash Flow and Liquidity, and the monitoring view given to a lender or construction loan monitor is generated from the same data the project runs on — which is what makes it verifiable rather than assembled.

How do Cash Flow and Liquidity here relate to the Control module?

Manage holds the steering layer — thresholds, funding cover with a named owner, and the roll-up across every project in the portfolio. Control holds the underlying transactions and the detailed cash model each of those figures is computed from, so a warning raised here opens directly onto the movement that caused it.

How early would you have known?

Bring a project that went wrong. We'll show you where the signal was, and when it would have been raised.