Our Services

The Problem

Contractors submitting unrealistic, poorly resourced, or contractually non-compliant programmes face immediate risk from day one of the contract — and limit their ability to recover delays or claim additional time.

Our Approach

We develop logic-linked, resource-loaded tender programmes that reflect the construction methodology, access constraints, and procurement sequences — presenting a credible and contractually compliant programme submission.

The Problem

Post-award programmes that fail to comply with contract requirements — under NEC, JCT, FIDIC, or bespoke forms — expose contractors to contractual risk and reduce their ability to demonstrate delay entitlement.

Our Approach

We convert the tender programme into a fully compliant contract baseline, incorporating contract dates, sectional completions, and all programme acceptance requirements specified under the contract.

The Problem

Poorly planned resource and cashflow profiles lead to underbidding, cash-negative periods, and labour peaks that cannot be met — feeding directly into programme risk and commercial exposure.

Our Approach

We build resource-loaded schedules tied to the baseline programme and derive cashflow profiles that support tender pricing, interim valuation forecasting, and financial planning.

The Problem

Without structured progress measurement, teams lose visibility of float consumption and critical path shifts until delays are already embedded — by which point recovery is costly and entitlement may be lost.

Our Approach

We establish progress measurement systems aligned to the contract programme, using activity completion percentages, earned value, and physical measurement to track performance against the baseline.

The Problem

Static, infrequently updated programmes give project teams a false sense of control and fail to identify trends early enough to allow corrective action.

Our Approach

We produce regular schedule updates with a structured narrative explaining performance against the baseline — identifying critical path changes, float consumption, and delay trends with supporting analysis.

The Problem

Reporting from multiple systems in spreadsheets is inefficient, inconsistent, and fails to provide the real-time visibility that project leadership needs to make informed decisions.

Our Approach

We build integrated Power BI dashboards that pull from P6 schedule data, progress reports, and commercial data to present a single, live view of project performance — accessible to the whole team.

The Problem

Delay claims without rigorous forensic analysis are vulnerable to rejection, reduction, or reversal in dispute proceedings — leaving contractors without the recovery they are contractually entitled to.

Our Approach

We apply the most appropriate SCL Protocol and AACE-recognised methodology — Window Analysis, TIA, or As-Built vs As-Planned — to the specific circumstances of the delay, producing a structured forensic report that quantifies employer-caused delay and establishes causation.

The Problem

EOT claims lacking a structured programme analysis, causal link between events and delays, and contractually compliant presentation are routinely rejected — even where genuine entitlement exists.

Our Approach

We prepare comprehensive EOT submissions that establish the factual chronology, identify relevant events under the contract, demonstrate critical path impact through forensic analysis, and present entitlement in a format aligned with the contract mechanism.

The Problem

Legal teams require programme delay evidence presented in a form that is technically rigorous, independently defensible, and accessible to non-scheduling specialists — including arbitrators and judges.

Our Approach

We support legal teams and expert witnesses by providing programme analysis, delay quantification, and programme narrative suitable for expert reports, adjudication submissions, and arbitration proceedings.