AI Services

Bespoke AI built for one job, done properly

When the off-the-shelf product is 70% right, the last 30% is usually the part that matters - your rules, your evidence standard, your systems of record. We build that part, and we build it so it can be maintained without us.

  • Human sign-off by default
  • Evaluated before it ships
  • Source and documentation handed over
Bespoke AI Solutions in practice
When bespoke is the right call

The product nearly fits, and nearly is expensive

Bespoke is not always the answer. These are the situations where it genuinely is.

  • The workflow depends on rules or evidence standards no product implements
  • The data cannot leave your estate, so a hosted product is off the table
  • Per-seat pricing has stopped making sense at your volume
  • Three products, each doing a third of the job, with a person copying between them
  • You need the output to be explainable and auditable, not merely correct
What we build

The systems clients ask for most

Different domains, one pattern: a specialist system that does a real job end to end, with a person in the loop where judgement belongs.

Document and case processing

Intake, extraction, classification and drafting against your templates and rules - with the source passage cited next to every extracted value so a reviewer can check it in seconds.

Multi-agent workflows

A supervised chain of specialist agents that plan, act and check each other's work across your tools, stopping at a human gate before anything is filed, sent or paid.

Knowledge assistants

Answers grounded in your own policies, contracts and handbooks, with citations and an honest "not in the source material" when that is the truth.

Decision support

Systems that assemble the evidence, show the reasoning and recommend - while the decision, and the accountability for it, stay with your named officer.

Internal tooling

The unglamorous systems that remove the most hours: triage queues, reconciliation, quality sampling, report assembly.

Evaluation harnesses

The test suite that tells you whether a change made the system better or worse. We build this before we build the feature.

In practice

What working with us looks like

The engagement runs with the people who do the work, not around them. Sessions are short, scheduled around delivery, and every stage ends with something you can act on.

You get a named consultant for the whole engagement - the person in the room is the person doing the work.

An engineer working on code at a laptop
Photo: Unsplash
How we deliver

Prove it small, then build it properly

1

Define the job

One workflow, one measurable outcome, and a written definition of what "good" looks like on real examples from your organisation.

  • Success criteria agreed on your own data
  • Accountability and sign-off points named up front
2

Prototype

Two to three weeks to a working system on real inputs. If it will not clear the bar, this is where we find out - cheaply.

  • Real data, real users, no staged demo
  • A clear stop/continue decision at the end
3

Build and evaluate

Production build with the evaluation suite running on every change: accuracy, refusal behaviour, cost per run and latency all tracked.

  • Human-in-the-loop gates on anything consequential
  • Full audit trail of inputs, outputs and approvals
4

Handover

Deployment into your environment, documentation, runbooks and training for whoever will own it. Support afterwards is optional, not structural.

  • Source code and models are yours
  • No lock-in to CedarPro to keep it running
Deliverables

What you leave with

What you get

  • A working system deployed in your environment
  • Source code, prompts, configuration and infrastructure definitions
  • Evaluation suite and the baseline results
  • Audit logging of every run, input, output and approval
  • Runbooks, architecture notes and admin documentation
  • Training for the team who will operate it
  • Optional support and improvement retainer

How we keep it honest

Nothing consequential happens without a person. Filing, sending, paying, refusing, sign-off - those stay human, and the system's job is to make the human's decision fast and well-evidenced.

Every build has an evaluation harness before it has features, so "is it better?" is a question with an answer rather than an opinion.

We build on models we can swap. Providers change pricing and deprecate versions; your system should survive that without a rewrite.

Work we can name

CedarGuard: a bespoke build, taken all the way to a product

CedarGuard is a risk and compliance operating system for UK social housing delivery, built to the point where it is a live product at cedarguard.co.uk rather than a pilot that ended at a demo.

It is the pattern on this page at full size: one job defined precisely, an evaluation-led build, human sign-off on anything consequential, and a system its owners run themselves.

Read the CedarGuard case study

What it does

  • Matches statutory obligations to the project from a maintained regulations library
  • Generates a first-pass risk register for a named owner to accept or reject
  • Quantifies exposure as gross and residual Annual Loss Expectancy, in pounds
  • Tracks every risk against the organisation's stated risk appetite
  • Keeps an evidence trail built for the moment a regulator asks
  • Refuses to publish a project until a person has completed and confirmed setup
Where this fits

Related services and sectors

Questions

Questions about bespoke ai solutions

You do - code, prompts, configuration and data. It is written into the contract, and we hand over a repository you can give to another supplier tomorrow.
A prototype is usually a few weeks of effort; a production system for a single workflow is commonly a two to three month engagement. We scope and price per phase, and the prototype gives you a real stop/continue point before the larger commitment.
Usually yes, and often that is the cheaper answer. If your Microsoft, Google or sector platform already does 80% of the job, we build the missing part and integrate rather than replacing what you have paid for.
The evaluation suite catches it. Because we keep the model behind an interface and test every change against a fixed set of your own examples, swapping or upgrading a model is a controlled change, not an incident.

Bring us the workflow that keeps breaking

The audit identifies where a bespoke build earns its cost - and, just as usefully, where it does not.