Schedule_Class_Delay Analysis Tutorial to learn
- 1. Schedule Delay Analysis Jack A. Lazarczyk, CPA, CCC Senior Consultant
- 2. Types of Construction Delay Basic Distinctions: • Excusable and Non-Excusable • Compensable and Non-Compensable • Concurrent and Non-Concurrent • Critical versus Non-Critical
- 3. Types of Construction Delay Excusable Delays: • General labor strikes • Fires, floods and other natural disasters • Owner directed changes • Errors and omissions in the plans and specifications • Differing site conditions or concealed conditions • Lack of action by government bodies • Intervention by outside agencies
- 4. Types of Construction Delay Excusable Delays (defined): “Excusable delays are caused by conditions that are reasonably unforseeable and not within the contractor’s control” Note: Always check the particular construction contract documents for valid delay factors and limitations.
- 5. Types of Construction Delay Non-Excusable Delays: • Late performance of subcontractors • Late performance by suppliers • Faulty workmanship by the contractor or subcontractors • A project specific labor strike caused by either the contractor’s unwillingness to negotiate or by unfair job practices
- 6. Types of Construction Delay Non-Excusable Delays: Again: Verify the particular contract language for definitions and limitations!
- 7. Categories of Delays Is the delay excusable? compensable nonexcusable Is the delay compensable noncompensable excusable Assess delay
- 8. Critical Documentation As Planned Schedule: • Detailed Critical Path Method schedule; or • Bar chart schedule; or • Narrative schedule
- 9. Critical Documentation As Built Schedule: • Final as-built CPM schedule with periodic updates; and • Project daily reports; • Meeting minutes; • Inspection reports by the designer, owner, bldg inspector • Correspondence • Memos to file
- 10. As Planned Schedule (Sample Project)
- 11. As Built Schedule (Sample Project)
- 12. Schedule Analysis Methods 1. As Planned versus As Built Comparison 2. The Impacted As Planned Method 3. Collapsed (But for) As Built Method 4. Contemporaneous Period (Windows) Analysis
- 13. As Planned versus As Built Comparison
- 14. As Planned versus As Built Comparison Benefits: • Simple to Prepare: 168 actual days – 112 planned days = 56 delay days Shortcomings: • No information on particular delay events; • Similar to “Total Cost” approach
- 15. Impacted As Planned Method • Begin with As Planned Schedule • Add Owner or Contractor Delays • Compute Owner caused delay and Contractor caused delay
- 16. As Built with Delays
- 17. As Planned with Owner Delays
- 18. As Planned with Owner Delays • Total duration of As Built = 168 days • Total duration of As Planned with Owner Delays = 154 days • Total duration of original As Planned = 112 days • The Owner is responsible for the difference between impacted and the original as planned: 154 – 112 = 42 days • Contractor is responsible for the remaining difference: 168 – 154 = 14 days
- 19. As Planned with Contractor Delays
- 20. As Planned with Contractor Delays • Total duration of As Built = 168 days • Total duration of As Planned with Contractor Delays = 140 days • Total duration of original As Planned = 112 days • The Contractor is responsible for the difference between impacted and the original as planned: 140 – 112 = 28 days • The Owner is responsible for the remaining difference: 168 – 140 = 28 days
- 21. As Planned Method Discussion Benefits: • Relatively simple to implement • Allows for mitigation of delays Shortcomings: • Highly subjective • Assumes as-planned (baseline) logic holds.
- 22. Collapsed (But For) As Built Method • Begin with As Built Schedule, including; • Owner and Contractor Delays. • Remove Owner (Contractor) caused delays. • Resulting schedule shows when Contractor (Owner) would have finished “but for” Owner (Contractor) delays.
- 23. As Built with Delays
- 24. Collapsed As Built without (but for) Owner Delays
- 25. Collapsed As Built without (but for) Owner Delays • Total duration of As Built = 168 days • Total duration of Collapsed As Built without Owner’s Delays = 147 days • Total duration of original As Planned = 112 days • The Owner is responsible for the difference between collapsed as built and the as built schedules: 168 – 147 = 21 days • The Contractor is responsible for the remaining difference between collapsed as built and as planned: 147 – 112 = 35 days
- 26. Collapsed As Built Discussion Benefits: • Very good accuracy Shortcomings: • No allowance for mitigation of delays
- 27. Contemporaneous Period Analysis (Windows) • Begin with As Planned Schedule; • Select periods (windows) to analyze; • Enter actual progress and delay activities using contemporaneous project documents; • Calculate the schedule; • Repeat the process for the next window
- 28. CPA Method – Window 1
- 29. CPA Method – Window 1 • The first update is compared to the original schedule. • Delays in that period are analyzed using “but for” method. • The first update becomes the new baseline for subsequent window. • Evaluation of non-excusable, compensable and non- compensable delays performed at each update Update Schedule Project Delay Delays Number Date Completion During Non Excusable Excusable Comments (Week No.) (days) Period Excusable Noncompensable Compensable 0 0 112 0 0 0 0 1 4 133 21 0 0 21 Unforseen site condition
- 30. CPA Method – Window 2
- 31. CPA Method – Window 2 • No delays during 2nd window • Note activities that were supposed to start by now. Update Schedule Project Delay Delays Number Date Completion During Non Excusable Excusable Comments (Week No.) (days) Period Excusable Noncompensable Compensable 0 0 112 0 0 0 0 1 4 133 21 0 0 21 Unforseen site condition 2 8 133 0 0 0 0 No delay
- 32. CPA Method – Window 3
- 33. CPA Method – Window 3 • Two overlapping delays • 2 weeks charged to concurrent delay (excusable and non-compensable) • 1 week charged to contractor (non-excusable) Update Schedule Project Delay Delays Number Date Completion During Non Excusable Excusable Comments (Week No.) (days) Period Excusable Noncompensable Compensable 0 0 112 0 0 0 0 1 4 133 21 0 0 21 Unforseen site condition 2 8 133 0 0 0 0 No delay 3 12 154 21 7 14 0 Subcontractor left job; Owner changed window design
- 34. CPA Method – Window 4
- 35. CPA Method – Window 4 • Contractor-caused delay not on critical path. • As long as the delay is within available float there is no effect on the final completion date. Update Schedule Project Delay Delays Number Date Completion During Non Excusable Excusable Comments (Week No.) (days) Period Excusable Noncompensable Compensable 0 0 112 0 0 0 0 1 4 133 21 0 0 21 Unforseen site condition 2 8 133 0 0 0 0 No delay 3 12 154 21 7 14 0 Subcontractor left job; Owner changed window design 4 16 154 0 0 0 0 Garage walls delay; not on critical path.
- 36. CPA Method – Window 5
- 37. CPA Method – Window 5 • Owner’s delay of 4 weeks in Garage door revision. • Net change to the project is only 2 weeks; other 2 weeks absorbed by available float. Update Schedule Project Delay Delays Number Date Completion During Non Excusable Excusable Comments (Week No.) (days) Period Excusable Noncompensable Compensable 0 0 112 0 0 0 0 1 4 133 21 0 0 21 Unforseen site condition 2 8 133 0 0 0 0 No delay 3 12 154 21 7 14 0 Subcontractor left job; Owner changed window design 4 16 154 0 0 0 0 Garage walls delay; not on critical path. 5 20 168 14 0 0 14 Owner's revision to Garage doors TOTALS 56 7 14 35
- 38. Contemporaneous Period Analysis (Windows) Discussion Benefits: • Most accurate results • Considers dynamic nature of the critical path Shortcomings • Time consuming • Costly to prepare
- 39. Comparison of Results Delays Method Non Excusable Excusable Excusable Noncompensable Compensable Comparison Method (Total Time) 1 56 (0) 0 (56) Impacted As-Planned (Owner Delays) 14 42 Impacted As-Planned (Contractor Delays) 28 28 Collapsed As-Built (But For) 35 21 Contemporaneous Period (Windows) Analysis 7 14 35 1. Schedule comparison itself does not indicate which party is responsible for the delay.
- 40. Method Selection Criteria METHOD Data Required Effort/Cost Accuracy Expected Comparison Method (Total Time) Low $ Poor Impacted As-Planned (Owner Delays) Moderate $$ Good Impacted As-Planned (Contractor Delays) Moderate $$ Good Collapsed As-Built (But For) Above Moderate $$$ Very Good Contemporaneous Period (Windows) Analysis Extensive $$$$$ Excellent