This page is a working preview of the workshop, not a slide deck. A 96-unit sample property goes from T-12 and rent roll to normalized NOI, a red-flag list, and a draft IC memo. Every step shows the exact prompt, the context it was given, and what comes back, so your team can lift the prompts and run them on a real deal the same afternoon.
The OM math is real arithmetic on the trailing twelve months. The question a buyer pays for is what those twelve months hide. That is where the chain below starts.
The monthly detail hides a one-time repair, a mid-year insurance repricing, taxes on a stale assessment, and no management fee. The prompt makes Claude find them, classify them, and show its arithmetic.
You are underwriting a 96-unit multifamily acquisition. Attached: the trailing 12 month operating statement with monthly detail, and our purchase assumptions (price $11,850,000; county tax rate 2.05 percent with reassessment at sale; market management fee 3 percent of EGI; insurance renewed in month 9 at the current rate). Build a normalized year 1 operating statement: 1. Flag any month where a line item deviates more than 25 percent from that line's trailing median. Classify each flag as one-time or recurring, with reasoning. 2. Remove one-time items. Annualize repriced contracts at the current rate. 3. Restate taxes at the reassessed basis. Add the market management fee. 4. Return an adjustments table (item, direction, dollar impact, reasoning) and normalized NOI. Show your arithmetic. Do not round intermediate steps. If anything needed is missing, list it as an assumption instead of inventing a figure.
| Item | Reasoning | Impact on NOI |
|---|---|---|
| T-12 NOI as shown | Broker arithmetic verified | |
| Remove month 7 re-pipe | R&M spikes 6x its median once; slab leak repair is capital, not recurring | |
| Insurance at renewed rate | Repriced up 32 percent in month 9; a full year at the new premium costs more than the T-12 shows | |
| Taxes at reassessed basis | T-12 reflects the old assessment; the county reassesses at sale (2.05 percent of price) | |
| Market management fee | Owner-managed at zero; underwrite 3 percent of EGI | |
| Normalized NOI | Cap at ask: |
The rent roll answers questions the T-12 cannot: how far in-place rents sit under market, who can leave next month, and which units quietly produce nothing.
Attached is the rent roll for the same 96-unit property (unit, type, square feet, market rent, in-place rent, status, lease type, resident balance). Audit it as an acquisitions analyst: 1. Loss to lease: total and percent, occupied units only, in-place vs market. 2. Exposure: month-to-month leases, count and percent of units. 3. Non-revenue units: anything vacant, down, or offline. Quote the status label used. 4. Delinquency: total resident balances and how concentrated they are. 5. List anything that contradicts the T-12 or the OM narrative, one line each. Return a summary table first, findings after. Show counts so I can verify them.
And the cross-check finding that earns its keep: concessions in the T-12 triple in the final quarter while marketing spend rises. The roll's market rents deserve skepticism until leasing traffic confirms them. That question goes on the management call agenda, and Claude drafted it.
Due diligence means reading documents at a volume nobody enjoys. The same discipline applies: give Claude both sources, demand citations, verify a sample by hand.
Compare the attached lease abstract for unit 3117 against its rent roll line. List every discrepancy and every non-standard term. For each: quote the exact language from the lease, state what the rent roll shows, and give the annualized dollar impact where it applies. Then state what you could NOT verify from these two documents. Do not summarize the lease. I only want discrepancies, non-standard terms, and open questions.
The memo is where the chain pays off: every number below traces to steps 1 to 3, and the format is a template your team fills for every deal. Claude drafts, the deal lead judges.
Draft an investment committee memo from the normalized underwriting, rent roll audit, and DD findings above. Use our house format: RECOMMENDATION (one paragraph, a decision, not a summary) DEAL SUMMARY (asset, price, per unit, in-place vs normalized cap) NORMALIZED UNDERWRITING (the adjustments table, then debt: 65 percent LTV, 6.4 percent, 30 year amortization, DSCR) KEY RISKS (ranked, each with the number that makes it a risk) OPEN ITEMS (what DD must resolve before a revised bid) Rules: every figure must come from the analysis above. If a figure is not in the analysis, write TBD rather than estimating. Flag any place where you are interpreting rather than calculating.
Do not proceed at the ask. Normalized NOI of prices the asset at at our threshold. Revisit if the seller engages near that basis or hard evidence caps the tax reassessment.
The tax regime, the renewal month, the fee convention: they go in the prompt. Claude does arithmetic and pattern-finding; your team supplies the facts of the deal and keeps the judgment. Prompts that skip context produce confident, wrong answers.
Every prompt above dictates the shape of the answer (an adjustments table, a summary-then-findings order, a house memo format). Structured output is what makes a prompt repeatable across every deal instead of a one-off conversation.
"Show your arithmetic" and "write TBD rather than estimating" are in the prompts for a reason. AI output goes into your model only after a check. This page holds itself to that: the button below recomputes every figure from the raw data.
Generic versions of the pack. In the engagement they get rewritten around your actual T-12 format, memo template, and reporting calendar.
You are underwriting a [UNIT COUNT]-unit multifamily acquisition. Attached: trailing 12 month operating statement with monthly detail, plus assumptions: price [PRICE], tax regime [RATE AND REASSESSMENT RULE], market management fee [PCT] of EGI, [ANY KNOWN CONTRACT REPRICINGS]. 1. Flag months deviating more than 25 percent from the line's trailing median; classify one-time vs recurring with reasoning. 2. Remove one-time items; annualize repriced contracts at current rates. 3. Restate taxes at the reassessed basis; add the management fee. 4. Return an adjustments table (item, direction, impact, reasoning) and normalized NOI. Show arithmetic; no rounding of intermediate steps. List missing information as assumptions, never invent figures.
Attached is a rent roll ([COLUMNS]). Audit it as an acquisitions analyst: 1. Loss to lease, occupied units only, total and percent. 2. Month-to-month exposure, count and percent. 3. Non-revenue units (vacant, down, offline); quote status labels verbatim. 4. Delinquency: total, and concentration by unit. 5. Anything that contradicts [THE T-12 / LAST MONTH'S ROLL / THE OM]. Summary table first, findings after, show all counts.
Compare the attached [LEASE / ESTOPPEL / CONTRACT] against [THE RENT ROLL LINE / THE OM CLAIM]. List every discrepancy and non-standard term. For each: quote the exact source language, state what the other document shows, and give the annualized dollar impact where it applies. Close with what you could NOT verify from these documents. No summaries; discrepancies, non-standard terms, and open questions only.
Draft an investment committee memo from the analysis above, in our house format: RECOMMENDATION (a decision, one paragraph), DEAL SUMMARY, NORMALIZED UNDERWRITING (adjustments table plus debt at [LTV / RATE / AMORT] and DSCR), KEY RISKS (ranked, each with its number), OPEN ITEMS. Every figure must come from the analysis above; write TBD rather than estimating. Flag anywhere you are interpreting rather than calculating.
Attached: this month's operating statement, last month's, and budget for [PROPERTY]. 1. Table of every line where actual deviates from budget by more than [PCT] or [DOLLARS]. 2. For each, a one-sentence draft explanation IF the statements support one; otherwise write "needs property manager input" rather than guessing. 3. Draft the owner-report variance paragraph in our voice: factual, no adjectives, numbers first. I will edit, not rewrite: stay under 200 words on the narrative.
Context windows, what to attach and how, model choice, and the data-handling ground rules your compliance side will ask about. Ends with the firm's own do-and-don't list.
The four steps on this page, run live on a deal like this one. Interactive: your analysts drive, we fix weak prompts together and watch the answer change.
Monthly variance narratives, budget season prep, lender and investor reporting, document review at scale. Same three habits, applied to owned assets.
Each participant turns one recurring task into a saved, structured prompt before we close. The pack leaves the room bigger than it arrived.
The raw rent roll (96 rows) and the monthly T-12 are embedded in this page. This button re-derives every displayed figure from them in JavaScript, independently of the analysis that produced the page, and reports any deviation.