Copy last project’s RAMS. Change the project name. Hope nobody notices the wrong site address.
RAMS production is the most under-systematised compliance workflow in construction and FM. Method statements that don’t reflect the task, hazards missed because the library lives in someone’s head, stale COSHH sheets. Principal contractors reject the pack the night before mobilisation. SHEQ signs off without reading, because review can’t keep up with production.
Five stations, one line — job card to issued RAMS.
Click any stage to expand · inputs / outputs / time / human role
Job Card
Define the task, location, programme constraints, site context, project type. Surface the right template, hazard library and controls library.
- COLLAPSEThe Method
Generate first-draft method statement from task definition and selected template. Identify dependencies, isolations, permits required before start.
+ EXPANDThe Matrix
Apply the hazard taxonomy to the method sequence. Hierarchy of control respected. Reference applicable standards, ACoPs and regulations.
+ EXPANDThe Toolbox
Schedule plant with inspection / certification status. Specify PPE per step. Pull current COSHH assessments. List required permits with issue authority.
+ EXPANDSign-Off
Author, reviewer, competent-person sign-off. Audit trail with version, supersession, briefing record, induction record. Output formatted to PC template requirements.
+ EXPANDCompetent-person judgement and sign-off — a named person from your firm approves every document.
Pricing judgement — rates, margins and commercial positions are yours, never generated.
Every document carries a named approver from your firm. Nothing is issued unsigned.
Your documents stay confidential — processed by the team you deal with, never training data.
Don’t take the workflow’s word for it. Read the RAMS it produced.
Illustrative build ledger · a working day reconstructed, not live telemetryThe Northwind Pharma drainage replacement is a complete, audit-grade worked example: a confined-space drainage task taken from task brief to CP-approved pack. Read it end to end, or browse the whole library.
Worked example — fictional project, real output formatthe full Northwind drainage RAMS
Every hazard on the task, traced to a control.
Illustrative hazard model · worked example (Northwind drainage), not a site registerToggle the controls off and every chip climbs back into the red it started in. Residual is what the method actually removes — and where the consequence can’t fall, the likelihood does.
Eighteen hazards, forty-seven controls, six permits — the drainage task’s whole picture in one grid. Hover any cell to trace its hazards to the controls that hold them down.
Northwind Pharma · drainage replacementFourteen Structured Deliverables. The site pack, and the paper trail behind it.
First draft in under an hour. PC accept first time.
Audit-ready by default.
Illustrative model · targets, not measured client resultsMethod statement drafted from task brief, hazard library and method library, under an hour.
Format, detail and sequencing right by default. Principal contractors accept on the first submission.
CHAS, SafeContractor, Achilles, ISO 45001, the documentation chain holds at renewal.
Author, reviewer and competent person recorded on every RAMS, with version and supersession baked in.
AI has just turned RAMS drafting — the method sequence, the hazard matrix, the supporting schedules — from a copy-and-edit chore into a production process. The contractors who put that process under governed competent-person review first will draft at machine pace while their SHEQ capacity goes where it belongs: on review, not retyping.
The audit chain that holds at CHAS, ISO 45001 and tender qualification is built on the production line, not the night before renewal.
Built with working SHEQ managers, competent persons and site teams. Pilot results will be published named, or not at all.
The Factory drafts. Your competent person decides.
BuiltAI assembles the method sequence, the hazard matrix and the schedules from your libraries. Whether a control suits this site, whether the sequence is safe to put to work, and whether the pack is fit to issue are competent-person judgement calls — your SHEQ team makes them, and every RAMS records who did.
Reads and structures task definitions, project documents, contract requirements and existing RAMS libraries
Generates first-draft method statements based on task type, drawing on a maintained method library
Applies the hazard taxonomy to method steps consistently
Selects controls from a maintained controls library aligned to the hierarchy of control
Cross-references applicable standards: HSE guidance, ACoPs, regulations, British Standards
Replace the competent person, that’s the SHEQ manager / appointed competent person under the regulations
Approve RAMS for issue, that’s the competent person and project manager
Make CDM duty-holder decisions, that’s the principal designer / principal contractor
Certify operatives’ competence, tickets, training and refresher cycles stay human
Replace site-specific risk assessment when site reality differs from the brief
BuiltAI is run by Dominic Hobson, who has spent his career in construction and M&E delivery — the packs exist because he needed them.
Send us the RAMS that came back rejected by the principal contractor.
Thirty minutes. Your task brief. We hand back a structured method statement, hazard / risk / control matrix and permits checklist, formatted to your principal contractor’s template, ready for CP review.
Priced as an annual licence by company size, plus usage credits — the pricing page explains the model. How the pack is priced →
You'll deal with Dominic Hobson, Founder, BuiltAI — not a sales team.
Under NDA if you want one. Your document is seen by the team that processes it, is never training data, and is deleted on request.