Mitigation vs rebuild splitter

Under IICRC S500 conventions, removing wet, unsalvageable materials — flood cuts, wet insulation, saturated pad — is part of mitigation: it stops ongoing damage and enables drying. The rebuild starts where new material goes in. But carrier programs differ on where demo lands for O&P and invoicing, which is why this tool makes it a toggle instead of a silent assumption. Whichever way the program calls it, calling it consistently across the whole estimate is what keeps the split defensible.

Because money treats them differently. Mitigation is emergency work often billed on its own invoice, frequently by a different contractor, and commonly paid without O&P; rebuild is planned reconstruction where O&P and permits live. Some carrier programs require separate submissions; deductibles and coverage can apply differently; and disputes stay smaller when each scope stands alone. One undivided line list forces someone — usually the reviewer — to do the split anyway, and their version may not favor the file.

Usually not — mitigation is typically performed by a single specialty contractor without general-contractor coordination, so the customary O&P justification doesn't attach. Rebuild is where multiple trades converge and O&P earns its place (see the three-trades discussion in the O&P calculator). That's exactly why the split matters: leaving mitigation lines mixed into the rebuild subtotal inflates or deflates the O&P base depending on direction, and either error is a review finding waiting to happen.