Evaluate PerilScore with your team

Start with a defined workflow

Choose a small set of properties that reflects the work your team handles. Include a mix of complete and incomplete submissions, and record what your current process needs from each file. Use addresses and records that your organization is authorized to evaluate.

Review the same questions on every property

For each property, check that the address and building match, compare key COPE and valuation details with your submitted evidence, and note where the report identifies sourced, estimated, or unavailable information. Review natural-peril results with the displayed factors and use the 0–10 scale as triage context. Keep crime as separate area context.

Record corrections and follow-up needs. Ask whether the report helps your team identify the next useful question and prepare a clearer underwriter handoff. Do not treat a score as a quote, a coverage decision, or a substitute for your normal review.

Include the right reviewers

Have a broker or submission specialist assess data entry and handoff, and have an underwriter assess whether the factors and limitations are understandable in context. If you evaluate an integration, include the person responsible for your API or SOV workflow. Agree on the fields, sources, and review criteria before comparing results.

Choose a low-friction starting point

Open the sample report and read the SOV field guide. You can also run an address through the free score flow.

For team or integration questions, contact [email protected]. Include your workflow, approximate evaluation scope, and the people who need to review. Email opens a draft in your mail app; this page does not send a message.

Updated September 29, 2026 · PerilScore Editorial