Level:
Intermediate
TCM Section(s):
6.4. Forensic Performance Assessment
9.2. Progress and Performance Measurement
Venue: 2022 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: At the onset of a forensic delay analysis, it has become almost a ritual for delay experts to initially focus on the substantial completion milestone. Experts track the milestone’s slippage and/or recovery from update to update, and ultimately measure the actual date that substantial completion was achieved against the contractually required date to determine the overall as-built project delay. However, this approach may not be applicable in all cases. For instance: if the contractor is terminated and substantial completion is never met, and/or the schedules were not regularly maintained throughout the course of construction. In these instances, it begs the question: How does a delay expert calculate delay damages?
The purpose of this paper is to present a case study where substantial completion was never achieved due to contractor termination. A window analysis was performed, and the case study presents three review periods that demonstrate alternative approaches to conducing a forensic delay analysis in the absence of monthly schedule updates. Specifically, Review Period #1 will highlight the implementation of a window analysis method as detailed in AACE International Recommended Practice 29R-03: Forensic Schedule Analysis. This method quantified delay durations by analyzing activity-level variance in a retrospective actual (hindsight) mode and using progress data from contemporaneous project schedule updates. Then, Review Periods #2 and #3 will illustrate how progress reported in the contractor’s payment applications can be used to perform an earned value analysis for the purpose of quantifying progress delays.
TCM Section(s):
6.4. Forensic Performance Assessment
9.2. Progress and Performance Measurement
Venue: 2022 AACE International Conference & Expo
Abstract: At the onset of a forensic delay analysis, it has become almost a ritual for delay experts to initially focus on the substantial completion milestone. Experts track the milestone’s slippage and/or recovery from update to update, and ultimately measure the actual date that substantial completion was achieved against the contractually required date to determine the overall as-built project delay. However, this approach may not be applicable in all cases. For instance: if the contractor is terminated and substantial completion is never met, and/or the schedules were not regularly maintained throughout the course of construction. In these instances, it begs the question: How does a delay expert calculate delay damages?
The purpose of this paper is to present a case study where substantial completion was never achieved due to contractor termination. A window analysis was performed, and the case study presents three review periods that demonstrate alternative approaches to conducing a forensic delay analysis in the absence of monthly schedule updates. Specifically, Review Period #1 will highlight the implementation of a window analysis method as detailed in AACE International Recommended Practice 29R-03: Forensic Schedule Analysis. This method quantified delay durations by analyzing activity-level variance in a retrospective actual (hindsight) mode and using progress data from contemporaneous project schedule updates. Then, Review Periods #2 and #3 will illustrate how progress reported in the contractor’s payment applications can be used to perform an earned value analysis for the purpose of quantifying progress delays.