BTO · New Use-Case Assessment (UCA) · Worked example Greystone FM Group · 3 packs · 14 contracts · 42 sites · Q2 2026 (Months 1-3) · £184,200 variation value recovered
BuiltAI
Built to Order™
New Use-Case Assessment
BTO-GFM-NUC-001
← BTO Pack
Built to Order™ · New Use-Case Assessment Built AI Example Output · Redacted for illustration

RAMS Factory™ Assessment

A structured assessment of RAMS Factory™ as a fourth active pack for the Greystone FM Group Built to Order™ engagement, based on mobilisation delays observed during Q2 delivery.
Client
Greystone FM Group
Assessed Pack
RAMS Factory™
Trigger
Q2 delivery observation
Issued
25 July 2026
Decision Required
End August 2026
Reference
BTO-GFM-NUC-001
Scroll to begin
Section 01

Opportunity Identified

During Q2 delivery across the three active packs, Built AI observed a recurring pattern of mobilisation delays linked to RAMS production across the Greystone FM portfolio.

Observation
RAMS production is the single largest mobilisation bottleneck across the Greystone portfolio.
Across 14 active contracts, new work packages are consistently delayed by 3–6 days while site-specific RAMS are produced. RAMS are being copied from previous jobs with minimal site-specific adaptation, supervisors raise late corrections, and the H&S review cycle adds 2–3 days before operatives can mobilise. This pattern was observed in 23 of 31 new work packages mobilised during Q2.
Avg Mobilisation Delay
4.2 days
Per new work package
Work Packages Affected
74%
23 of 31 in Q2
Estimated Annual Cost
£96k
Direct preliminaries cost
Section 02

Current State Assessment

How RAMS are currently produced across the Greystone FM portfolio, and where the process breaks down.

Current RAMS process

StepCurrent PracticeIssueImpact
1. Template selectionSupervisor selects a RAMS from a previous job and copies itTemplate rarely matches the new site or scopeQuality risk
2. AdaptationSupervisor manually edits to reflect new site conditionsInconsistent depth; hazards missed; controls incompleteSafety risk
3. H&S reviewHSQE lead reviews and returns with corrections (avg 2.1 rounds)Late corrections delay mobilisation by 2–3 daysProgramme risk
4. ApprovalContract manager signs off after corrections incorporatedSign-off often delayed by availabilityDelay risk
5. Issue to siteRAMS emailed to site as PDFNo central register; version control weakAudit risk

Pain points — from site teams

"We're waiting 3–5 days for RAMS before we can start on site. The templates don't match the job, the H&S team sends them back twice, and by the time they're approved the client is chasing us for a start date."
— Site Supervisor, Meridian NHS Trust contract (paraphrased)

Pain points — from HSQE

"I review 8–10 RAMS a week and return most of them. The hazard/control matrices are copied from old jobs, COSHH is often missing, and permits are listed generically. I spend more time correcting than reviewing."
— HSQE Lead, Greystone FM Group (paraphrased)

Section 03

Proposed Solution

Add RAMS Factory™ as a fourth active pack within the existing Built to Order™ engagement. Built AI would produce site-specific RAMS on behalf of Greystone, using the same governed delivery model already established.

Pack 03 · RAMS Factory™

Produce site-specific, approval-ready RAMS faster — with task/hazard/control matrices, COSHH, permits and evidence built in.

RAMS Factory™ takes job-specific inputs (scope, site conditions, task sequences, client requirements) and produces structured RAMS outputs that are ready for competent H&S review — not raw drafts that need multiple rounds of correction. The workflow produces task/hazard/control matrices, COSHH indices, permit checklists, PPE registers and briefing/sign-off records as a single governed pack.

What RAMS Factory™ would produce for Greystone

OutputDescriptionReplaces
Site-specific RAMSFull method statement with task sequences, hazards, controls and risk ratingsCopied templates from previous jobs
Task/hazard/control matrixStructured matrix linking each task to specific hazards and named controlsGeneric hazard lists
COSHH indexMaterial-specific COSHH assessment with exposure limits and PPE requirementsMissing or incomplete COSHH
Permit checklistSite-specific permit requirements (hot works, confined space, isolation, etc.)Generic permit references
PPE & equipment registerTask-specific PPE and equipment requirements with quantitiesStandard PPE list
Briefing & sign-off recordStructured toolbox talk record with named attendees and dateAd-hoc sign-off sheets
Section 04

Estimated Impact

Conservative impact estimates based on Q2 observed data. Actuals would be measured against an agreed baseline during the pilot.

Target Cycle Time
−50%
From 4.2 days to ≤ 2 days
Preliminaries Saving
£48k
Annual (50% of £96k delay cost)
H&S Review Rounds
−60%
From 2.1 avg to ≤ 0.8

Impact model

LineCurrentWith RAMS Factory™Improvement
RAMS production time4.2 days avg≤ 2 days target−52%
H&S review rounds2.1 avg≤ 0.8 target−62%
Mobilisation delay (RAMS-related)4.2 days≤ 2 days−52%
Annual delay cost (preliminaries)£96,000£48,000−£48,000
HSQE review time per RAMS~90 mins~30 mins−67%
Work packages affected74%≤ 20% target−54pp

All targets are indicative. Actuals would be baselined during the pilot period and validated at the pilot close-out review.

Section 05

Pilot Plan

A controlled four-week pilot on a single contract, with defined inputs, outputs, success criteria and a go/no-go decision at the end.

Week 1 · Setup
Scope and baseline
Select pilot contract (recommended: Meridian NHS Trust — highest volume, clearest pain). Collect last 6 months of RAMS production data. Establish baseline metrics. Define input requirements with site team and HSQE lead.
Week 2 · First outputs
Produce 3–4 RAMS for live work packages
Built AI produces site-specific RAMS from job inputs. HSQE lead reviews using existing approval process. Measure cycle time, review rounds and quality. Collect feedback from site team and HSQE.
Week 3 · Iterate
Refine templates based on feedback
Incorporate HSQE corrections into templates. Produce next batch (3–4 RAMS). Measure improvement in review rounds. Validate that site teams can use the outputs without additional rework.
Week 4 · Review
Pilot close-out and recommendation
Compile pilot results. Compare against baseline. Present findings to D. Farrow and HSQE lead. Issue go/no-go recommendation for full rollout across the portfolio.

Success criteria

CriterionTargetMeasurement
RAMS cycle time≤ 2 days from request to approval-readyTimestamp: request received → draft issued
H&S review rounds≤ 1 round averageCount of review cycles before acceptance
HSQE acceptance rate≥ 80% first-pass% of RAMS accepted without major correction
Site team feedbackPositive (structured survey)Survey score ≥ 7/10
No safety compromisesZeroNo hazards missed that were present in baseline RAMS
Section 06

Cost & Recommendation

The commercial basis for adding RAMS Factory™ to the Built to Order™ engagement, and a clear recommendation for the COO.

Commercial basis

ItemPositionNotes
Pilot (4 weeks)BespokeIncluded in the existing Built to Order™ engagement as a goodwill pilot — no additional charge
RAMS Factory™ ongoing serviceBespokeQuoted on approval and added to the existing engagement from Month 5 — no published rate card
Annual saving (conservative)£48,00050% of the £96k mobilisation delay cost. Plus: HSQE time freed, audit trail improvement, consistency. Net position confirmed once the service is quoted.
Recommendation. Approve a four-week RAMS Factory™ pilot on the Meridian NHS Trust contract, starting in September 2026. The pilot is included in the existing Built to Order™ engagement at no additional charge. If the pilot meets the success criteria, RAMS Factory™ would be added as a fourth active pack from Month 7 (October 2026), quoted on approval — against an estimated £48,000 annual saving in direct mobilisation-delay cost, plus HSQE time recovery, improved audit trails and consistent RAMS quality across the portfolio.
End of pack
Back to the Built to Order