How does the platform track capital projects from approval through depreciation?

The problem

Capex projects start with an approval and end with an invoice. Whether the project finished on budget, whether the asset is on the books, and whether depreciation is correct are three separate questions answered by three different people.

How the platform runs it

Every capex project carries an approved budget, a vendor, a schedule, and an asset ledger. Invoices apply to the project; budget burndown is visible as source data is accepted. On completion, asset capitalization is prepared for finance approval with the correct useful life and depreciation schedule. Disposals and impairments flow through the same governed workflow.

On the shift

The kitchen renovation at Property A is on the capex board: approved budget $312K, vendor selected, scheduled completion mid-March. Three invoices have applied, budget burndown is 41%, on track. When the project completes, the asset capitalizes automatically with the right useful life and depreciation schedule; the GL entry and the asset register reconcile by construction, not by quarterly cleanup. The capex roll-forward for the audit pulls in under an hour.

What the outcome looks like

Capex overruns surface weeks earlier, fixed-asset registers reconcile to the ledger without quarterly cleanup, and audit prep on PP&E drops from days to hours.

What goes wrong without it

On a fragmented stack, capex is a spreadsheet, the asset register is a different spreadsheet, and the GL is a third source. Overruns are discovered at completion. The asset that should have a seven-year life gets depreciated over ten because someone copied the wrong column. The audit prep on PP&E becomes a week-long exercise of tying three sources to each other.