Build kit · companion to the Atlas

NachoLOS — the loan manufacturing system

A point-of-sale system persuades. A loan origination system manufactures. This is the build kit for the back office: the file enters at one end and leaves insured, delivered and purchased — with every station owned, gated and stamped. Built from Sharon LittleJohn's operational notes, the existing codebase, and the POS Atlas it has to join.

261features

65new vs blueprint

22screens

13Atlas parts

34kAtlas words

19open decisions

Start here

⏱The 5-minute briefIf you have one meeting slot: the talk track, the four numbers to memorise, and what to say when they push back. ▣ScreensTap through all 22 — desktop frames, with phone companions where they genuinely belong. ⇢The lineEvery station, who owns it, what gates it, and what fires next. ◆CompeteWhat we're replacing and what we have to beat — evidence, not opinion. ◐UI kitThe design standard — density rules, the three-pane layout, colour, language, and the stopwatch. ⚙ArchitectureIntegration map, the POS↔LOS seam, and the credential checklist CLEAR must supply. ☰BacklogAll 261 features, filterable by tier and phase. Generated from the Atlas, never hand-typed.

What makes this different

Four sources, one document

Sharon's raw operational notes (11,129 words, verbatim — including Maddie's dictated frustrations), the blueprint built from them, a source-level review of the existing NachoLOS codebase, and the POS Atlas. Where they disagree on how the shop runs, Sharon's notes win — she is describing a licensed operation that exists.

Compliance as controls, not categories

The blueprint lists check names inherited from a competitor's published coverage summary. This maps every rule to the control that satisfies it — and says out loud that coverage copied from marketing copy is not a compliance control.

The QC module that was one line

Sharon supplied pages of agency QC requirements — FHA's sampling split, VA's 13-point review, Fannie's prefunding selection. The blueprint carried a single catalog row. Rebuilt here as nine features, including reviewer independence the system can actually enforce.

The seam, written down

Ownership table, push contract, event contract, stage mapping, adapter interface — so the developer merging the two volumes doesn't invent the boundary. Including the one conflict three documents disagree on: who sends disclosures.

An honest mobile position

Not "fully responsive." Named lists of what belongs on a phone and what must never move there. Where a screen is desktop-only it shows a useful read-only view and says why — rather than a broken miniature nobody uses.

Ten omissions, catalogued

Ten things in Sharon's own notes that the blueprint dropped — the brokered channel (10–15% of volume), the QC program, TX A(4), the veteran property-tax exemption, PACER, representative-score logic, pre-AUS validations, her closing checklist, the KPI framework, credit supplements. Each verified by direct search, each now has a home.

⭐ A gap-analysis pass against the real code

Appendix H runs the Atlas against the actual NachoLOS codebase and a full LOS+sales checklist. It adds 25 features (eClose/eNote/RON, OFAC screening, wire-fraud control, the LO pricing & scenario tool, compensation) — and, most valuable of all, lists what the code already ships so the dev team doesn't rebuild it: the AI Control Center, the loan program engine, the 235-item manufacturing checklist, SSO.

Read the honest parts first

This kit is deliberately loud about what it does not know. The regulatory citations need compliance-counsel confirmation before build. The competitive comparison is being rebuilt on real evidence rather than impressions. The Excel formulas behind the worksheet library have not been handed over yet — not a blocker for the framework, required before that feature ships. A specification that hides its uncertainty is harder to build from than one that maps it.

⭐ For Sharon — read this first

This is a starting point for the development team, not a finished scope. It is built on your operational notes, so on any question about how the shop actually runs, your judgment outranks anything written here.

Two requests: tell me where I have your process wrong, and add to Appendix F — the list of what is still to be written. Appendix B is the short version: the ten items from your own raw notes that the current blueprint did not carry forward.

Already known to be still coming — named so you can tell an omission from an oversight: per-screen field lists for the non-marquee screens · the Excel worksheet formulas · brokered-channel depth · per-service field maps · state expansion beyond Texas · the DPA/bond program list · the saved-report library · the training/SOP surface · the rest of the competitive teardown · a real cost model. Full list in Appendix F.

The decision that outranks the rest

D-02 · Who owns disclosure generation and delivery. Sharon says all disclosures are sent in the LOS. The blueprint says the LO sends from the POS. The POS Atlas assumed POS-side delivery. Three documents, three answers — and whoever owns delivery owns the three-business-day deadline. This has to be settled by a person, not by whichever developer writes the code first.