What happens after the first call.
Your primary contact is Tim Sims. We walk the property, read the soil correctly, build the recommendation around the ground in front of us, and stay close enough to adjust when conditions change.
Step by step
Here is what the visit looks like, what the report shows, and how the recommendation stays active through the season.
It starts on your property, not in a spreadsheet.
The first visit is there to understand the ground, the current plan, and the real problems before any recommendation gets made.
We call back within 24 hours of first contact. The field visit gets scheduled for a time that works, usually within the week during the season and sometimes the next day if something is pressing.
The visit usually takes two to three hours on a typical 18-hole course. We walk the property with the superintendent. Not a clipboard audit. An actual walk, looking at turf density, color consistency, traffic patterns, drainage behavior, irrigation coverage, and the areas already showing up on the superintendent’s list.
We pull soil cores from multiple greens, a representative tee or two, and at least one fairway. If there are repeat trouble spots, we pull from those too so the samples reflect the actual pressure on the property.
We also look at the current lineup, including product inventory, application rates, and seasonal timing. Not to judge it. To understand the logic behind it. Every plan has reasoning, even when the results are not where they need to be.
There is no cost for the first visit and no commitment after it. The recommendation is only worth something if we understand the operation first.
Ana-Lync tells you what belongs and what doesn’t.
The soil analysis goes deeper than a standard fertility test. The value is not just the numbers. It is the regional benchmark and the explanation that ties each number back to a practical decision.
Within two to three weeks of the field visit, the full Ana-Lync soil analysis comes back. This isn’t a basic pH and N-P-K readout. It is a broader chemistry profile that shows what is carrying the plan and what is working against it.
Every parameter is benchmarked against 30,000+ regional soil profiles, which means the recommendations are calibrated to the conditions we actually work in, not national averages built around completely different soil types.
The report doesn’t stop at the number. It explains context. If calcium is low, we explain what that means for structure and rooting. If sodium is climbing, we explain where that pressure is likely showing up in drainage or performance. If organic matter is out of line, we explain what that does to how the rest of the season behaves.
We go through the findings with the superintendent, either on-site or by phone, and tie every recommendation back to a specific reading. Nothing stays in the lineup because that is what people usually do.
A 12-month plan built around what the soil says.
The deliverable is not a loose recommendation list. It is a seasonal agronomic plan calibrated to the property, the grass types, the stress points, and the budget.
The recommendation covers fertility, plant protection, soil amendments, and the cultural practices that support the turf through the year. Every part of it gets anchored to the property’s chemistry, grass types, problem areas, and operating pressure.
For every product in the plan, we explain what it does, why it is there, and what the data says about whether it is needed. If something can come out without affecting results, it comes out. If something needs to be added, we explain the cost and the expected return.
The superintendent makes the decisions. We provide the data, the framework, and the logic behind the recommendation so the plan is easier to defend internally.
Pre-emergent timing based on soil temperature and GDD tracking, starter fertility, and the first disease-prevention windows.
Foliar nutrition for stress periods, fungicide timing based on actual pressure, and irrigation-management guidance when conditions go sideways.
Aeration timing, overseeding rates and varieties, fall fertility, and the amendment work that makes the next season easier.
Program review, pricing locks for next year, and planning adjustments built from the season that just happened.
The plan adjusts. That’s the point.
Weather does not follow the plan. The value is that the recommendation can move with conditions instead of becoming stale the first time the season turns.
Monthly check-ins keep the plan honest. We stay in touch to see how the turf is responding, whether the surfaces are tracking where the season expected, and where disease pressure or stress is building faster than planned.
Mid-season changes are part of the job. When July hits hard, a wet stretch drags on, or a tournament window adds pressure, we decide what to move up, what to delay, and what to stop carrying.
That is the difference between a distributor who writes something in February and disappears, and a team that is reading the same weather, surfaces, and budget pressure as the superintendent all season.
Monthly check-ins
We check how the turf is tracking against the plan, where pressure is building, and what is starting to drift from expectation.
Mid-season adjustments
When heat, rain, disease pressure, or traffic change the job, the plan moves with conditions instead of staying frozen on a February spreadsheet.
On-site when it matters
If greens are under stress, a tournament window is coming up, or something shows up after an application, we come out and look at it with you.
Phone and text access
Tim’s cell is the number. If a superintendent texts a photo at 6 AM, we give a read before the morning mow whenever that is what the day requires.
Year one sets the baseline. Year two gets sharper.
The process doesn’t reset from zero every winter. The end-of-season review is where the chemistry, spend, and performance get measured against what actually happened.
In late October or November, we pull fresh samples to see how the chemistry shifted over the season. Did the calcium work move the needle? Is pH trending in the right direction? Has organic matter changed enough to affect the next cycle of decisions?
The season review covers what worked, what didn’t, and what should change for next year. First-year programs often require bigger corrections. Mature programs usually move into smaller refinements, tighter timing, and less waste.
The compounding effect is real. Year two is usually sharper than year one because the program is working from current data rather than habits carried forward from a previous season.
Fresh late-season samples show what the chemistry actually changed over the year.
The review covers what worked, what didn’t, and what needs to shift before next season.
Programs in year one often need bigger corrections. Mature programs usually move into smaller refinements.
Early-order purchasing during the fall review helps lock pricing for the next year.
If the process makes sense, the next step is still a field visit.
The plan gets better once it is anchored to your actual property, your soil chemistry, and the pressure you are managing this season.