Evidence file · pilot deployment
Two facilities. 90 days. Three compound failure risks identified before they became emergencies.
Rivolq's first live deployment surfaces what buyers want most: hidden risk made visible, capital priorities made defensible, and teams leaving with outputs they can actually use.
The value came from interaction effects.
None of these issues were invisible in isolation. The difference was modeling how age, weather, maintenance history, and system dependencies changed the actual decision.
Aging chiller risk was being materially understated.
The system was operating beyond expected lifecycle, but the real exposure only became clear after condition, weather context, and dependency data were modeled together. Isolated condition notes missed the compounding effect.
Generator failure carried a hidden sequencing dependency.
Drainage and outage sequencing made one storm-season failure scenario materially more disruptive than maintenance history alone suggested. The risk was invisible without the interaction model.
Deferred maintenance was compounding across system boundaries.
What looked like separate mechanical issues was actually a reinforcing pattern across HVAC, drainage, and generator systems that changed replacement timing priorities and total capital exposure.
What the team received.
STATUS: DELIVERED ✓The project did not end with a dashboard. It ended with a decision package — outputs operators, leadership, and finance could each use to move forward.
Executive risk summary
3 compound risks surfaced
Capital recommendation stack
$2.1M defended
The numbers the pilot delivered.
Clearer top-three intervention list before storm season
Stronger board narrative for capital timing
Shared view between operators and leadership on urgency
Reusable reporting format for future decisions
Pilot cadence
From first facility walk to executive-ready output in 90 days.
A Rivolq pilot is scoped to deliver something real, not a theoretical assessment. Each phase ends with a tangible artifact your team can use — and a decision about whether to expand to the next facility, the next building, or a portfolio-wide deployment.
Days 1–15
Scope and ingest
Identify pilot facilities, ingest existing maintenance records, condition assessments, and asset registries. Define the decision question the pilot needs to answer.
Deliverable
Scoped pilot charter
Days 16–45
Model and validate
Build the compound risk model on pilot data. Validate scoring against what the facilities team already knows — the model earns trust by agreeing where operators agree and surfacing what they suspected but could not prove.
Deliverable
Asset-level risk scores + confidence bands
Days 46–75
Sequence and explain
Translate risk into capital priorities. Model replace-now, defer, and monitor scenarios. Build the executive narrative that finance and leadership will actually read.
Deliverable
Ranked capital stack + scenario comparison
Days 76–90
Decide and expand
Final review with the pilot team, finance, and leadership. Decision on the next facility, the next building, or a portfolio-wide rollout. The reporting format becomes a reusable template.
Deliverable
Board-ready recommendation package
The real win was the shared view. Before Rivolq, facilities, finance, and leadership had three different stories about which buildings needed capital first. After the pilot, we had one ranked list everyone could defend — and the conversation with the board moved from “trust us” to “here is the evidence.”
Facilities Director
Pilot lead · Multi-building campus · Quote shared under NDA
Pilot customer names and affiliations are shared under NDA during exploratory conversations. Specific results, methodology details, and reference calls are available to qualified teams evaluating a pilot.
Want a similar outcome for your facility?
The sample pack shows what a real pilot delivers: executive summary, risk rankings, capital priorities, and scenario comparisons — redacted but complete.