For Canadian & U.S. Public Infrastructure

Defensible infrastructure decisions. Built on facts.

A verifiable, longitudinal record of the mechanical and energy systems inside public housing, government-owned buildings, and civic facilities. Built for Canadian and U.S. governments stewarding infrastructure across decades, administrations, and program cycles — an audit-grade record that produces the Infrastructure Disclosure Report™ capital planning and procurement run on, grounded in real condition rather than age estimates.

Book a Conversation → See How It Works

$150B+

🇨🇦 Canada's Infrastructure Deficit

Canada's infrastructure deficit is estimated at a minimum of $150 billion — with some estimates approaching $1 trillion. Public housing and civic buildings are squarely inside that gap.

Source: University of Toronto School of Cities, 2026

~$100B

🇺🇸 U.S. Public Building Backlog

U.S. states face close to $100 billion in deferred maintenance for publicly owned buildings, with roughly $50 billion more across the federal GSA portfolio alone.

Source: The Pew Charitable Trusts; Public Buildings Reform Board

3–5×

The Cost of Not Knowing

Failure-driven replacement costs several times more than the same work planned in advance. Without lifecycle data, budgets on both sides of the border absorb that premium every cycle.

Source: U.S. Dept. of Energy, reactive vs. planned maintenance

The Stewardship Gap

Public infrastructure runs for decades. Its records rarely survive a single change.

Governments steward mechanical and energy systems across public housing, office buildings, courthouses, schools, and civic assets. The buildings are documented. The financial position is known. But the equipment inside — the part citizens depend on — is governed by records that fragment with every administration, contractor change, and program transition.

Reactive Capital Planning

Budgets built on assumptions

Without lifecycle data, capital budgets rest on age-based depreciation and best guesses. Failures drive spending decisions rather than evidence — and emergency replacement dwarfs planned replacement.

Documentation Resets

History lost at every transition

Records fragment across departments, operators, and contractors. Each procurement change, staff turnover, and program handoff resets the documentation. The institutional memory of the asset is effectively erased.

Governance Exposure

Audits start from scratch

Auditors General, oversight committees, and accountability reviews increasingly demand infrastructure documentation. Fragmented records undermine fiscal defensibility precisely when scrutiny is highest.

The real estate is surveyed. The useful life is modeled. The infrastructure inside is the part nobody can see — and where the capital actually goes.

How It Works

Audit-grade identity, persistent across administrations.

HMIN and HEIN are permanent identifiers assigned at install or first service. Identity attaches during normal install and service activity — no platform replacement, no new workflow for the agencies or contractor networks involved.

New capital projects or existing portfolio assets. Every system gets a permanent identifier — serial, model, contractor, warranty — structured and persistent from day one of registration.

Identity persists through change

When operators change, contractors rotate, or management transfers, the record stays with the asset. Nothing is lost across procurement changes, departmental restructuring, or governmental transitions.

History accumulates

Standardized service checklists, signed technician records, and contractor documentation layer onto each system's record. The longer the program runs, the more defensible the data becomes.

Capital becomes forecastable

Across a regional housing authority or an entire province, aging systems surface, replacement waves become visible, and reactive spending gives way to planned, defensible investment — packaged as an Infrastructure Disclosure Report, the building-level summary capital plans, procurement diligence, and audit responses are built on.

How It Fits Your Stack

It doesn't replace your operations software. It's the record layer beneath it.

Government facilities teams already run operations and maintenance management systems for tenants, work orders, and accounting. Harmelo doesn't compete with those — it sits underneath them as the neutral, persistent identity layer they read from. The two answer different questions.

Category	Operations / Management Software	Harmelo
Core layer	Operations	Infrastructure identity
Focus	Tenants, leases, accounting	Equipment, systems, lifecycle
Data ownership	Platform / operator dependent	Asset-bound, persistent
Continuity	Breaks across changes	Survives changes
Role	Workflow + management	Governance + record layer
Replacement?	—	No — sits underneath your existing system

No rip-and-replace. No new operator workflow. Identity attaches during the install and service activity already happening across your portfolio.

Engagement Packages

One registry. Scaled to your portfolio.

Harmelo engages with governments through models scoped to portfolio size, program priorities, and procurement structure. Pilot conversations precede commercial structures — pricing is shaped to the engagement, not pre-set.

Pilot

Begin with one region, housing authority, or facility type — and prove value in a defined fiscal window.

Infrastructure identity deployment across the pilot portfolio
Asset registry baseline — what exists, where, how old
Lifecycle continuity layer that survives transitions
Portfolio baseline mapping across facilities
Standardized asset documentation across operators

Discuss a pilot

Program

Everything in Pilot, plus the intelligence layer that turns records into capital planning.

Everything in Pilot, plus:
Infrastructure Disclosure Report — the building-level capital & procurement document
Lifecycle intelligence across facilities and regions
Replacement forecasting across the portfolio
Cohort aging analysis — surface clustered replacement risk
Capital planning intelligence for defensible budgets

Discuss a program

Portfolio

Everything in Program, plus governance-grade intelligence for province, state, and large institutional portfolios.

Everything in Program, plus:
Portfolio intelligence across regions and programs
Capital wave forecasting to smooth budgets in advance
Risk & governance alignment — audit-ready traceability
Policy-level analytics for funding & modernization decisions

Discuss a rollout

Use Cases

Built for how governments actually manage infrastructure.

From public housing portfolios to cross-agency coordination, the same registry serves every layer of public stewardship — across Canadian and U.S. governments alike.

Public Housing Portfolios

Capital planning

Track mechanical and energy infrastructure across housing portfolios spanning thousands of units and multiple regions. In Canada alone, federal programs have supported the repair of over 146,000 social-housing units and the maintenance of more than 314,000 — exactly the equipment Harmelo registers. Monitor aging systems, forecast capital replacements, and reduce reactive maintenance across the public housing stock.

Government-Owned Buildings

Audit-readiness

Offices, courthouses, schools, and civic facilities. A consistent, audit-grade record of every system that survives staff turnover, departmental restructuring, and political transitions — the same record auditors and oversight bodies draw from.

Multi-Agency Coordination

Shared record

Housing authorities, public works, and energy programs rely on the same underlying equipment data. One registry, accessible across departments and tiers of government, reduces duplicated systems and creates a shared source of truth.

Targeted Incentive Programs

Program delivery

Modernization and electrification incentive programs often deploy outreach and advertising broadly, without granular data on which buildings actually qualify. Geographic and equipment-level data lets governments direct outreach and incentive dollars to the specific regions and assets where upgrades produce the intended outcome — instead of spending program budget on a general audience.

Why It Matters

Public stewardship. Defensible decisions.

Governments are accountable to taxpayers, auditors, and future administrations for decisions made on infrastructure that operates long after any single budget cycle.

Persistent identity strengthens every layer of that accountability — from the line-item defensibility of a multi-year capital plan to the public's ability to see the condition of the buildings they depend on.

Capital planning grounded in real condition

Reserve studies and replacement forecasts move from age-based assumptions to data-anchored decisions. The Infrastructure Disclosure Report makes multi-year budgets defensible at the line-item level.

Audit-ready by default

Documentation that survives staff turnover, restructuring, and political transitions. Oversight reviews draw from the same persistent record the agency plans from.

Program outcome measurement

Electrification and modernization programs require infrastructure data over time. Persistent identity creates the longitudinal record that lets governments measure what investments actually produced.

Next Steps

Start with a scoped pilot.

Begin with one region, housing authority, or facility type — existing assets or new construction. Persistent identity deployed at a scale that demonstrates value within a defined fiscal window, before broader rollout. Pilot conversations precede commercial structures; engagement is scoped to your portfolio and procurement process.

Book a Conversation → Explore the Live Demos