I don’t find the survey to be a “jackass” survey. It is the only significant source of information about the business of the industry that exists. All surveys of this type are voluntary and only include the reponses submitted. The same can be said of polls and other industry surveys as well.

1 in 30 seem slike a random number. On what is that based? Also, what is the source used to generate the information included in the inspector database?

Guys who went out of business should not be a consideration in determining a Master level credential.

I don’t have any of the inforamtion used to produce that number, but I would venture a guess that the number of newbies required to get E&O by their state contributed to the total number.

I am not sure that purchase of E&O is so much an indicator of being serious about the business as it is covering oneself when liability may be the greatest (least amount of experience).

I guess - in the end - I don’t think that a Master level certification should equate to a label saying “I survived in business for 3-4 years”. Seems kind of…typical. Not the stuff of a Master.

The number of NACHI Inspectors who submit their 100 reports for verification purposes certainly supports many of the %'s quoted here.

To use your math:

Dividing the number of inspections by 77,000 gets about 160 inspetions per year on average.

You indicate that as much as 80% of that 77,000 are not active inspectors or perform very few inspections. This means that established inspectors are very likely performing the 250+ as indicated by the ASHI survey.

It is probable that most inspectors will achieve 1000 inspections plus CE hours sometime in years 3 or 4.

So, if (as you have convinced yourself) 3-5% make it 5-6 years, a greater percentage make it to 3-4 years. (10-20% would probably be a fair estimate).

The SBA indicates that the failure rate for small businesses is 50% for Year 1, and 95% for year 5. This information is skewed as business which change names, change owners, or expand are considerd “failed” when it is more likely that they have been very successful.

The BLS indicates that typical suvival rates for all business are between 50-70 percent for year 2, and 30-50 percent for year 4, depending on industry.

All of that is to say that somewhere between 10 - 30 percent of all inspectors (using even the gloomiest, somewhat inacucurate data available) are likely to make it to years 3 or 4 when they will all qualify for the CMI desigantion.

Not the stuff of a Master, IMO.

One hell of an argument, if you ask me.:wink:

When I first went into business I bought a HomeTeam franchise. The two previous attempts in my area lasted 6 months and 8 months respectively. Neither owner performed more than 33 inspections.

Glad to hear it. I think that a mjority of NACHI Inspectors are not even aware that they have to submit 100 for verification, and of those that are vaguely aware of the requirement, even fewer do (or can find the proper place to do so).

So, using that - the percentages are almost surely much higher than indicated by the verification process.

So, by this standard, that would make you a Master. They failed immediately as a large number do, and you survived to at least year 3 (puts you in the top 33% at Month 9!!). Congratulations - this makes you a Master!

Only 11 years and I dunno, 5000+/- inspections. I’m not a master yet, I’m still learning daily.

I was pointing out an example of the failure rate. It is very high.

Joe M. writes:

Exactly. 95% failure rate by year 5 means that only 5% make it to year 5. And that’s counting outright business failures in the 95%.

The point I am trying to make is:

A Master should be more than any guy who makes it through 3-4 years in the business, which is what the current CMI formula rewards.

Yes, there does need to be a line drawn for qualifying, but the allowance of lifetime ed credits waters down the qualifications.

Consider that a Texas newbie with zero inspections and NO “lifetime credits” is about 1/2 way to being a Master. With lifetime ed credits, and a background in construction or engineering, they could be a master without ever performing a single inspection.

Setting a lookback deadline of 3-5 years (or any arbitrary number) for allowing previous education credits could strengthen the designation.


Do you see a need to change the current formula and/or procedure for qualifying a CMI?

It’s also counting the most successful businesses as “failed” becuase of their definition of failed. The inaccuracy of the SBA number has been challenged and proven inaccurate. The more accurate indicator is offered by the Bureau of LAbor Statistics (BLS) figures.

Also, is has been established that most inspectors will qualify for the CMI well before year 5 at the pace of 250+ per year (epecially given lifetime CE credits), so the figure of inspectors who could be CMIs is greater than 5%.

Ultimately the 5% is just an arbitrary number anyway. You can make it anything you want. I am just trying to make the point that the more lifetime credits are involved, the lower the bar really is.

With the schools pumping out new inspectors and guys just going in to the business without schooling, there are about 25,000 new inspectors going into the business every year. So CMIs are already in the top 10% of our industry when compared to mere newbies and we haven’t even included the entire exisitng industry!

OK. Whatever. It seems clear that you will use your own math to reach whatever arbitrary target you set anyway.

I was just trying to offer a suggestion that could add some weight to the deisgnation.

Unatainability doesn’t add weight. If the average inspector did 250 inspections his first year why does ASHI have so many candidates? All their candidates should be full members their first year.

Fact is… 1,000 is a high number in our industry. And 5 or 6 years is a long time in our industry.

Read your SBA quote above.

1000 is not the number of inspections required. It is the number, minus the allowance for training and lifetime CE credits which lowers the bar substatially - even for newbies ( cuts it in half in some cases in Texas).

So your 5-6 years is actually more like 3-4 years. In many cases the lifetime credits make it more like 1-2 years.

The 250 per year is an average (as you know). You do less in year one than in years 2 and 3, and so on. Many inspectors would qualify to be CMIs in year 3 or 4.

When every 3 or 4 year inspector is considered a “Master” the designation is not deserving of the title “Master.” Maybe you can change the M to “Mediocre”…

Here is another factor to help ruin the formula of
“what makes a good inspector or even a CMI”.

I know of a boat load of inspectors who have been
doing inspections for many years and are
sleeping with the Realtors everyday. They report
in such a way to help the deal sell for the Realtor,
and thus get more repeat business in return.

I wish there was a way to filter out these guys
from becoming CMI’s.

They have the years, inspections, CE’s, pass the
background check and have good knowledge.

But, they bend their reporting to help them get
repeat business from the Realtors.

My God…

Can you think how low the percentage would be,
for the inspectors left in business, if they did not
bend their inspection reporting to please the
Realtors? I have read that as much as 70-80%
of all inspections come through Realtor referrals.
(I cannot backup that number). But I know it
is not off by much.

I am glad that more people are finding inspectors
on the internet today than it was a few years ago.

I just had another Realtor call me a few minutes
ago who never uses me. But today, he wants
to buy his own house. He said he does not
want to use his regular inspector for that.

And how will the Realtor reward me? Why, he
will never call me again. But today… I will inspect
his house.


You summed it up succintly. That is what I am finding in my area. Membership in an association does not guarantee scruples aka ethics.


How many Nachi members are actively inspecting full time and how many are part time and how many are not even practicing?

I do not believe an inspector starting up the first year will do anywhere near 250, nor in the second year, maybe even the third. Unless they are favoured by a lot of agents.

I also believe everyone (well okay not all) :wink: inflates their numbers as to how many inspections they do in a year for competitive reasons. I cannot for the life of me believe that some are doing 2-3 inspections 24/7. Not to mention committments to life, et al.