Insights
J.S. Held Strengthens Forensic Accounting and Financial Investigations Expertise and Expands Suite of Services in Canada with Acquisition of ADS Forensics
Read MoreWhen documents are requested for review on a project, it is common for the contractor to provide a non-native (i.e. Portable Document Format, or “.PDF”) file of project schedule information rather than the native schedule file which originates from the scheduling software that produced it. Contractors may have a variety of reasons for doing so, but the information presented on a non-native file format such as a PDF is not always sufficient for clearly or completely discerning the necessary information on project activities to allow an analysis.
The purpose of this paper is to discuss:
In order to understand why it is important to have native schedules, one must first understand how a schedule works. Let’s start with the basics:
Project Schedule
This is the plan for construction of the project which is typically created by the construction manager or general contractor and depicts the means and methods of construction, sequence, and duration of activities, typically in Bar Chart or “Gantt” chart format. In native format, the project schedule is the program or electronic data file using scheduling software such as Oracle’s Primavera (P6 native file extension “.XER”) or Microsoft Project (native file extension “.MPP”).
Critical Path
The critical path of the project is the longest continuous chain of events which establishes the minimum overall project duration.
Total Float
This is the amount of time that an activity can be delayed from its early start date without delaying the project finish date.
An example of a schedule can be seen below in Figure 1:
In the example above, the critical path is indicated by the red colored bars and each activity has a total float of 0 days. Additionally, there are several activities that have a total float that is greater than 0, which indicates that they are not critical.
Logic -- Predecessors and Successors
For a project schedule to calculate correctly, schedule activities must be connected by schedule logic--predecessors and successors. The activities that precede an activity in a logic sequence are called predecessors, and those that come after an activity in the logic sequence are call successors. The schedule logic represents the contractor's planned sequence of activities to complete the project. The activities in a schedule must be logically tied into the schedule to be accurately included in the overall float calculations. The analysis of a schedule will include the review of the activities that are logically tied to a given activity through predecessor or successor relationships.
These relationships are shown in Figure 2.
In Figure 2, the arrows represent the logic ties between activities. Therefore, in the schedule above, Excavation & Foundations is a predecessor and Roofing is a successor to Superstructure & Exterior Framing.
A construction schedule represents the contractor’s plan to construct the project. It lays out each activity needed for the project and links them together with predecessors and successors, indicating the order in which activities are to be completed based on the contractor’s means and methods. Often a PDF of a schedule is provided when documents are requested for review on a project. However, the information presented on a PDF is subject to the person creating the report and, therefore, it may not include columns such as total float, which are necessary to determine the critical path of a schedule. Additionally, it is not always possible to determine the definitive driving activities for the critical or sub critical path of the project without being able to see the logic ties (predecessors and successors) for activities. Alternatively, the color-coding of the activities also indicates if an activity is considered critical or not—typically, red denotes critical activities, with green as “in-progress” or “future” (but non-critical) activities. However, the settings can be changed so that the PDFs received may not include all of the necessary columns for an analysis. They may have also been copied in black and white. See Figure 3 below:
The PDF example shown above essentially only provides a listing of project activities and does not provide any of the detail necessary to analyze the planned flow of construction, interaction between activities, and the criticality of certain activities. As a result, utilizing this data alone it is not possible to determine what impact certain events or changes would have on the overall schedule.
The native version of the schedule includes transparency into the necessary detail and allows the schedule analyst to filter and analyze individual “paths” of work, or a specific sequence of activities.
Figure 4 (below) shows a schedule that has been filtered to show the longest/critical path of the project:
Using the native schedule, the schedule analyst can choose an activity and determine its predecessor and successor:
Figure 5 (above) is the same example, but with the cursor highlighting activity “A1110 – Electrical Work." As shown in the screenshot above, the predecessor for the electrical work is activity “A1100 – Mechanical Work,” and the successor is activity “A1140 – Interior Finishes” (see “Relationships” tab at bottom of graphic).
The examples that have been discussed are basic examples of the visibility that a schedule analyst will have into the CPM schedule details when using a native project schedule. If a native schedule is provided, there is a wide range of other tasks that the schedule analyst can perform to gain a greater understanding of how the project is performing, such as:
Ultimately, the native schedule provides the necessary transparency into the schedule details and allows the forensic schedule analyst to eliminate potential assumptions in an analysis associated with the review of a PDF schedule because they are able to properly analyze the full detail of the schedule and understand the contractor/owner’s plan for the construction of the project.
In any type of forensic schedule analysis, whether it be for an insurance claim, contract dispute, or part of owner’s representation responsibilities, native schedule files are of vital importance, and experts should request access to them. In cases when a client is someone other than the insured or is not the general contractor (i.e. the client is the developer), the client may be told that native files are not available. This can be true if a particular schedule update was not completed. However, if a PDF of a schedule was provided, then the native file does exist and should be made available or should be obtainable through the project record. Providing native schedule files is no more difficult than sending any other file type and does not come at any additional expense.
At times, the general contractor may express concern over the proprietary nature of their schedules and may cite this as a reason for not providing them. Typically, an insured’s concern with providing native schedules is that the logic within their schedules is part of their strategic implementation of a project, or, in other words, provides their “competitive edge” and could become publicly available. Professional consulting firms and their experts, however, do not wish to compromise their reputation by passing on any confidential information received as part of work performed on behalf of their clients. Furthermore, to ease contractor concerns, reputable firms typically sign Non-Disclosure Agreements as necessary as it relates to any request for information a client or contractor deems sensitive.
As discussed above, native files are important to forensic schedule analysis work for clients and are critical to any determination of delay and business interruption. Without native files, consultants are limited in their ability to make a definitive determination of delay. Having access to the native files provides greater transparency into schedule details and project status and can eliminate the need to provide a range of delay or interruption, which could result in a less favorable settlement negotiation than in a situation where a more conclusive determination of delay was able to be made.
All parties should understand the importance of the native schedule files to a project and to any schedule delay analysis. Maintenance of native schedule files should be required in the project contract general conditions and is an industry-recognized recommended practice for project controls procedures. The key points developed in this paper include:
We would like to thank Jan Inguagiato, Melissa Impastato, and Andrew Hennemuth for providing insight and expertise that greatly assisted this research.
Jan Inguagiato is a Senior Managing Director in J.S. Held’s Builder's Risk Practice. Jan is a construction expert specializing in project scheduling, delay, cost, and project management. Jan’s experience includes a range of energy, transportation, industrial, hotel/condominium, residential and commercial projects. Jan has over 22 years of experience in the construction field, both as a consultant for large, complex insurance losses, with a concentration on construction scheduling and cost evaluation and as a project manager for a large global design and construction company. In addition, Jan works with both developers and construction companies to assist with scheduling, cost reviews and project management.
Jan can be reached at [email protected] or +1 407 707 5008.
Melissa Impastato is a Managing Director in J.S. Held’s Builder's Risk Practice. She has been a construction professional for nearly 20 years and has extensive experience with project management, general contracting, and construction operations. Melissa’s area of expertise concentrates on construction planning and scheduling, cost evaluation, and business planning. Prior to joining J.S. Held, Melissa was a Vice President of Operations for Urban Investment Partners (UIP), a vertically integrated owner/developer/contractor specializing in multi-family investments. She also spent 15 years at Clark Construction Group, one of the nation’s top contractors as well as the largest privately held general contractor.
Melissa can be reached at [email protected] or +1 202 315 1648.
Andrew Hennemuth is a Senior Managing Director in J.S. Held’s Builder's Risk Practice. He has been a construction professional for over 17 years and has extensive experience with project management, general contracting, and construction consulting. Andrew has consulted on a variety of complex projects throughout the United States and Canada with a concentration on construction scheduling, cost evaluation, and project planning. Andrew’s background demonstrates a field-tested, hands on knowledge of construction. With J.S. Held, Andrew has consulted on multiple large complex builder’s risk projects, physical damage claims, and construction defect claims.
Andrew can be reached at [email protected] or +1 202 765 2933.
While there are some similarities between Builder’s Risk and Property Damage claims, there are also numerous differences in the way they are managed and evaluated. Some questions that often arise when a claim occurs on...
In an ideal world, the insurer will be notified of a builder’s risk loss in a timely manner and prior to completion of repair work. This allows for discussions with the contractor on appropriate methods...
Measuring delay from a loss under a builder’s risk insurance policy is perhaps the most complicated of all time element measures in the claims world. Setting aside the numerous complex issues of coverage, builders risk...