Evidence Report · Software Valuation
Non-profit community project website for The Ember House Project — mission-driven public resource serving at-risk and homeless populations. Includes a 24/7 AI SMS crisis hotline landing page, a 6-substance evidence-based addiction taper guide with interactive charts and auto-rotating recovery testimonials, and a youth boxing empowerment program. Live at emberhouseproject.org.
The Defensible Quartet
Traditional Build Cost
Low: $158,625 · Mid: $234,000 · High: $309,375
What a normal web-software shop charges to research, design, and build a public-service site of this scope and content depth.
Engineering Effort
Mid estimate from two independent models (productivity model + COCOMO II post-architecture). Reflects 7,643 lines of real PHP, JavaScript, and CSS — not filler or boilerplate.
Team & Schedule Replaced
2 engineers working for ~9 months — the conventional staffing to produce content of this depth, interactivity, and polish on a normal agency schedule.
Build Speed
Shipped in ~3 calendar weeks vs the 9-month conventional schedule. Fully deployed and live, with 5 distinct pages, 6-substance content depth, and animated interactive features.
The Hard Evidence — counts straight from the codebase (no git repo; file mtime basis)
| Code (LOC, non-blank, non-comment) | 7,643 |
|---|---|
| ↳ PHP | 6,362 |
| ↳ CSS | 3,270 |
| ↳ JavaScript | 1,281 |
| ↳ HTML | 871 |
| ↳ JSON / config | 198 |
| Files | 17 |
| Git commits | n/a — not a git repository |
| Calendar span (file mtimes) | ~0.59 months (~3 weeks) |
| Defects tracked / resolved | 0 / 0 (not tracked in console) |
| Regression tests | 0 |
| Data files (JSON) | 6 per-substance success story datasets |
What's Actually in It — feature enumeration from the source
How We Costed It — methodology
Model. The same model with the same constants is applied to every project in this portfolio — there are no per-project complexity multipliers and no schedule compression applied. The generator is console/backend/tools/evidence_merge.py.
Low bound. Productivity model — 7,643 lines of production code ÷ 25 finished LOC per developer-day ÷ 21.7 work-days per month = 14.1 person-months (1.2 person-years). The 25 LOC/day figure is the conservative industry baseline for finished, tested, reviewed code (McConnell, Code Complete); it excludes generated scaffolding and build artifacts.
High bound. COCOMO II post-architecture — PM = 2.94 × (7.64 KLOC)1.0997 = 27.5 person-months (2.3 person-years). Applied nominally, with no effort-adjustment multipliers, so the ceiling is not inflated.
Mid (reported). The arithmetic mean of the two models: 20.8 person-months = 1.7 person-years. This is the figure quoted throughout this report.
Rate assumption. $135,000/year fully-loaded blended developer (salary, benefits, overhead) = $11,250 per person-month. Applied uniformly to all three effort bounds: low $159K, mid $234K, high $309K.
Calendar. No git history; calendar taken from file mtimes = 0.59 months. COCOMO's schedule equation gives the calendar a conventional team would need: TDEV = 3.67 × 20.80.28 = 8.6 months at a sustainable 2.4 engineers. Speed advantage = 8.6 ÷ 0.59 = 14.6×.