UCDP & Collateral Underwriter

CoesterVMS maintains integrations with the leading service provides to expedite UCDP submissions as a lender agent. In addition to its proprietary Quality Control tools, CoesterVMS systems utilize data received from UCDP submissions to route reviews to specific staff members.  The information below details the routing criteria and subsequent workflows.


CoesterVMS systems analyze UCDP findings and direct appraisals based on the following criteria:

Title Description
Submission Status Overall status of Submission Summary Report (SSR). 
CU Risk Assessment Score (CU Score) Score, on a scale of 1 to 5 (low to high risk), generated by CU to indicate the level of risk associated with the appraisal report. 
Findings Count Number of findings reflected on the SSR.  Systems apply this figure against a predetermined threshold to supplement CU scores.


Based on these criteria, systems designate appraisals into three risk tiers. The table below describes the metrics which apply to each tier:

Title Description
Low Risk CU Score less than 2 and Findings Count does not exceed threshold
Medium Risk CU Score between 2 and 4 and Findings Count does not exceed threshold CU Score less than 2 and Findings Count exceeds threshold
High Risk CU Score Greater than 4 CU Score between 2 and 4 and Findings Count exceeds threshold Report Unscored by CU, indicated by code “999” Submission Unsuccessful


CoesterVMS Systems allocate appraisals in each risk tier to Quality Control Specialists possessing the appropriate level of experience and expertise.  Once assigned to a specialists’ queue, the appraisal is reviewed accord to the following workflow:

CoesterVMS conducts routine analysis of aggregate Quality Control metrics and CU Scores.  Routing Criteria and workflows remain actively manageable to allow CoesterVMS adjust based on trends in data.