Stefan Hansen ← All work

Multifamily Dashboard Real estate — multifamily asset management 2026

Ownership stopped depending on the firm being measured for the numbers.

Daily operating numbers for a four-building apartment portfolio. The management firm's reports are reconciled every night and reach ownership's phone before the working day starts, with a written brief on what changed.

Role

Product direction · Strategy · Brand and visual design · Interface design · Editorial direction · Information architecture · Build direction · Data reconciliation and quality assurance · Ongoing operation

Client

Nelson Construction & Development

One property top to bottom on a phone: occupancy, rent against market, the lease-expiration calendar, maintenance signal and turnover.
One property top to bottom on a phone: occupancy, rent against market, the lease-expiration calendar, maintenance signal and turnover.

The problem

Ownership has four apartment buildings, run day to day by an outside management firm. The numbers arrived once a week, in a meeting, presented by the firm being measured. Anything off the agenda meant asking for a report by hand, and the data sat in reports that did not connect to each other. Nothing accumulated, so the basic questions went unasked.

The portfolio page on a phone: the brief first, then the building cards.
The portfolio page on a phone: the brief first, then the building cards.

The numbers are reconciled before anyone sees them

Ownership cannot hold two versions of the same figure and trust either, so every report was matched row by row against the firm's own exports. That found one report returning less than half its records, and another hiding most of the maintenance history behind an undisclosed filter. Most now match exactly; the ones that do not say so on screen.

Vacancy broken out, with units on notice kept separate from units actually empty.
Vacancy broken out, with units on notice kept separate from units actually empty.
In-place rent against current market rent, rolled up by unit type and by building.
In-place rent against current market rent, rolled up by unit type and by building.

A written brief arrives before the meeting does

At half past five each morning the system reads the whole portfolio and writes three or four observations in plain language, each labelled an observation or a hypothesis, with a confidence level and the figures behind it. It connects signals sitting in different reports and compares buildings against each other.

An observation can be dismissed with a reason and does not come back, or pinned instead. It is read on a phone before the weekly meeting rather than during it.

The morning brief: each item labelled observation or hypothesis, with a confidence level.
The morning brief: each item labelled observation or hypothesis, with a confidence level.
Maintenance across all four buildings: median days to close, close rate, cancel rate.
Maintenance across all four buildings: median days to close, close rate, cancel rate.

It knows nothing about the residents

No resident names, email addresses, phone numbers or personal identifiers are stored. Personal fields are stripped at collection, leaving anonymous identifiers that let the system see a unit renewed twice without knowing who lives there.

Two things keep that claim accurate: property addresses are stored, needed to identify a unit, and a handful of columns hold staff and agent names, who are not residents but are real people.

A single building top to bottom: occupancy, expirations, rent against market, maintenance.
A single building top to bottom: occupancy, expirations, rent against market, maintenance.

The rest of it

  • Routine turnover is not maintenance. Much of one property's apparent work-order volume was turnover paperwork raised at every unit change, so high turnover read as poor maintenance. It is counted on its own now, and retail space is excluded.
  • Rent against what the unit would get today. Every occupied unit against current market, by unit type and by building, with a named renewal list sorted by widest gap. Subsidised and programme-rate units are excluded, because they are not priced against the market.
  • The same measures, four times. Put side by side, the buildings stop being four separate reports and start being a comparison — one closing far more of the work it opens than another, one cancelling enough to point at intake rather than at repair. Manager-initiated work is counted apart from work a resident had to report.
  • Every number opens. Vacancy to the empty units with days vacant and asking rent, units on notice kept separate; maintenance to individual tickets; expirations to a rolling calendar at four, twelve, twenty-six or fifty-two weeks.
  • Pricing by tool beat pricing by hand. At one building, units priced by the firm's automated pricing tool leased in a fraction of the time taken by units priced by hand — a gap nobody had been in a position to see.

What changed

  • Ownership no longer depends on the management firm for operating numbers. The reports are reconciled overnight and on a phone before the working day starts.
  • Most of the maintenance history had never been visible. Now it is complete, and it goes back.
  • Where a report does not reconcile, the page says so rather than presenting a figure it cannot stand behind.
  • Rent against market is measured per unit and per building, so a renewal conversation starts from what the unit would get today.
  • Maintenance is comparable across buildings, which it had never been while each arrived in its own report.
  • Turnover stopped being counted as maintenance, removing a false conclusion about a building.
  • A written brief arrives every morning.

The portfolio page in full: the morning brief, occupancy, and four building cards.
The portfolio page in full: the morning brief, occupancy, and four building cards.