Construction claims: delay analysis (part 2 of 3)

We are delighted to be joined by Matthew Klinefelter BSc IEng MICE MCIArb, who is Director – Forensic, Planning & Expert Services at Planetal Limited. We regularly work with Matt and the Planetal Limited team and always find that our aim to deliver high-quality professional services is met by the Planetal Limited team. We have worked together on some really complex issues and brought entitlement, delay and quantum together to the satisfaction of our respective clients.

This article is the second of three parts looking at as-planned programmes and as-built programmes before concluding with critical path analysis. These articles are intended to be bite-sized, five-minute reads, so we won’t go into too much detail, but we aim to provide you with some top tips and practical guidance that will help you in your day-to-day role.

This article will cover as-built programmes: what they are, how they are useful, and the purpose they serve in managing and evidencing project delivery.

First of all, you do not need to wait until the end of a project to have an as-built programme. This is a common pitfall many fall into. Ideally, you should be conducting regular programme updates throughout the project lifecycle. These updates should capture actual progress, and in doing so, gradually build a reliable as-built programme over time. When updated consistently and accurately, these records become a powerful tool to show precisely when works were carried out.

Emphasising actual progress is important for several reasons. On larger or more complex projects, it is often necessary to forecast progress by one to two weeks or just to allow enough time to complete the update itself. This means that part of what is recorded as as-built data is actually a forecast, which can later prove to be inaccurate. To create a robust and reliable as-built programme, these forecasted entries must be verified regularly and corrected to reflect actual delivery. Additionally, some projects only record percentage complete against activities. If this is your approach, always try to link it to a measurable metric rather than relying on estimates or visual judgements, which are often inaccurate and hard to substantiate later.

A well-structured and clearly presented as-built programme is a significant asset when dealing with delay claims or retrospective analysis. It provides an objective and visual record of how the works were actually delivered. A detailed and evidenced as-built programme can serve as the foundation of a claim or analysis, offering clarity on the sequencing and duration of key events. The timing of when work was undertaken should be a matter of fact, not something open to debate.

It is, of course, possible to prepare an as-built programme after the event by relying on site records, daily diaries, or other documentation. However, reconstructing a timeline in hindsight can be time-consuming, costly, and sometimes less accurate. Capturing the data contemporaneously during the works results in a much more robust and credible programme. This not only saves time and resources but also strengthens your position in any future discussions or disputes.

As with any formal project record, the programme should be easy to interpret, even by someone with no direct involvement in the project. Avoid shorthand or vague references and instead use full descriptions for locations, activities, or milestones. What may seem obvious at the time can become ambiguous months or years later. These programmes are often used long after completion, sometimes in legal or commercial discussions, and may be reviewed by people who were not part of the original team. If someone unfamiliar with the project can follow it clearly, then those who were involved certainly will be able to.

Final Reflections

An as-built programme is a factual record. Ideally, it should be developed in real time through regular and accurate updates, but it can also be assembled after completion if needed, provided that reliable records are available to support it. The closer you can get to real-time documentation, the better the outcome will be.

Having a completed as-built programme at hand positions you strongly for any retrospective delay analysis. It allows you to establish when works actually occurred, removing uncertainty and helping to separate fact from theory. These records become especially valuable when disputes arise or when a clear project narrative is required for internal or external stakeholders.

For added value, consider embedding reference documents or linking evidence directly within the as-built programme. This could include progress photographs, inspection records, or sign-off sheets, any of which can serve as proof that activities were completed or stated. This is something we routinely include when producing an as-built programme from site records. Ultimately, while the as-planned programme is a projection of future intent, the as-built programme stands as a clear and evidenced account of what actually took place.

In next week’s article, we will focus on critical path analysis.

Back to articles