A schedule delay analysis is a forensic comparison of the as-planned critical path against what actually happened in the field. You need it when a project misses substantial completion, when change orders extend the schedule, or when you must prove entitlement to an extension of time. The analysis isolates compensable delay, contractor-caused delay, and concurrent delay, then measures how each event consumed total float and pushed the completion date. We apply the critical path method and the method described in AACE International Recommended Practice 29R-03, which is recognized in standard construction contracts such as AIA A201 and ConsensusDocs 200.
- Deliverable
- Excel estimate + marked-up PDF plans
- Organized by
- CSI MasterFormat section
- Turnaround
- 24–48 hours for most projects
- Pricing
- ZIP-code-adjusted material and labor pricing
- Software
- Bluebeam Revu, PlanSwift, RSMeans data
We build the analysis from the same records a claims reviewer will ask for: the approved baseline schedule, every monthly update with its data date, daily reports, superintendent logs, request for information and submittal logs, change order registers, and weather records. Each delay event is inserted into the schedule at the point it occurred, not retroactively, so the critical path at the time of the event is preserved. We run impacted as-planned and collapsed as-built scenarios, and where the record supports it, a fragnet for each discrete event. Force majeure and differing site conditions are tagged separately so the other party cannot merge them into one bucket.
Our deliverable is organized by CSI MasterFormat Division 01 — 01 32 16.23 Time Impact Analysis and 01 32 16.29 Schedule Delay Analysis — with a marked-up plan set, a written narrative, and an Excel workbook showing each activity's start, finish, duration, float, and delay attribution. Turnaround is 24–48 hours for most projects. If you need a baseline schedule built first, see our CPM Scheduling Services or Primavera P6 Scheduling Services. For projects in Texas, California, Florida, New York, or North Carolina, we apply ZIP-code-adjusted labor and equipment rates to time-related cost roll-ups. For MS Project files, see MS Project Scheduling Services; for a full view of our scheduling work, see Construction Scheduling Services: CPM, P6, MS Project and Delay Analysis.
What the Delay Claim Analysis Covers
We analyze the schedule records you provide and produce a time impact analysis that ties each delay event to specific activities, dates, and float consumption. The scope follows the contract's notice and documentation requirements, typically under 01 32 16.23 and 01 32 16.29.
Baseline Validation
Review approved baseline schedule for logic ties, constraints, calendars, and critical path validity before any delay analysis begins.
Activities · Logic ties · CalendarsUpdate Analysis
Analyze each monthly update with data date, percent complete, remaining duration, and actual start/finish dates.
Updates · Data dates · Percent completeAs-Built Reconstruction
Rebuild as-built schedule from daily reports, inspection records, and superintendent logs to establish actual sequence and durations.
Days · Activities · Work hoursCritical Path Tracking
Identify critical and near-critical paths at each update, tracking total float and free float consumption by activity and responsible party.
Float days · Paths · ActivitiesTime Impact Analysis
Insert each delay event into the schedule at the point it occurred, measuring impact on completion date and entitlement.
Delay days · Events · Completion dateWindow Analysis
Bracket analysis periods between consecutive schedule updates to isolate delay causes and apportion responsibility.
Windows · Periods · DaysConcurrent Delay Evaluation
Evaluate overlapping owner and contractor delays, apportioning impact using standard industry methods and contract terms.
Days · Parties · ApportionmentTime-Related Cost Roll-Up
Build time-related general conditions costs by period, including supervision, temporary facilities, and equipment standby.
Months · Cost periods · Line itemsWhat every schedule delay & time impact analysis takeoff includes
- Baseline schedule review and validation of logic ties and constraints
- Monthly update analysis with data date, percent complete, and remaining duration
- As-built schedule reconstruction from daily reports and inspection records
- Critical path and near-critical path identification at each update
- Total float and free float consumption by activity and responsible party
- Time impact analysis for each compensable and excusable delay event
- Window analysis periods bracketed by consecutive schedule updates
- Concurrent delay evaluation and apportionment between parties
- Weather day analysis against contract allowance and abnormal weather records
- Suspension and stop-work period documentation with affected activities
- Acceleration and mitigation measure review, including added crews and overtime
- Time-related general conditions cost buildup by period
How We Perform Time Impact Analysis Services
- Collect and validate recordsWe start with the approved baseline schedule and every monthly update in native format — P6 XER or MS Project MPP. We check that each update has a data date, actual start and finish dates, remaining durations, and percent complete. Missing updates are flagged because gaps in the update sequence weaken the window analysis and may force assumptions that reduce recoverable delay days. We also verify that activity IDs and calendars are consistent across updates so that logic ties can be traced.
- Reconstruct the as-built scheduleFrom daily reports, superintendent logs, concrete pour tickets, steel erection reports, and inspection records, we build an as-built schedule showing actual start and finish dates for each activity. We reconcile discrepancies between the update files and field records, then document which source controls. For example, if an update shows a concrete pour complete on March 15 but daily reports show it finished March 20, we use the field record and note the variance. This step ensures the as-built critical path reflects actual field progress.
- Identify delay events and noticeWe log each delay event from RFIs, change directives, submittal logs, and meeting minutes. For each event we record the date of notice, the contract notice period, the affected activities, and the predecessor-successor logic. Events without timely notice are noted separately because they may affect entitlement. We also cross-reference the event to specific drawing sheets or specification sections to tie the delay to a definable scope item, such as a late structural steel shop drawing for grid lines B–F.
- Perform window analysisWe divide the project into windows bracketed by consecutive schedule updates. In each window we compare the as-planned critical path to the as-built critical path, then insert each delay event to measure its impact on the then-current critical path. This preserves the critical path at the time of the event rather than at the end of the project. For example, a delay event in window 5 is inserted into the schedule as it existed at the start of that window, not into the final as-built schedule.
- Quantify float consumptionFor each delay event we calculate total float and free float before and after the event. We identify whether the event consumed float, pushed the critical path, or both. Float ownership language in the contract is applied — some contracts treat float as owned by the project, others by the owner. We document the float values at each update and show how many days of total float and free float were consumed by each party's delay events.
- Evaluate concurrent delayWe compare owner-caused and contractor-caused delays that occurred in the same window. If both affected the critical path simultaneously, we apportion the delay using the method specified in the contract or the method most defensible for your jurisdiction. Concurrent delay can reduce or defeat recovery. We document the specific activities, dates, and float consumption for each concurrent event and show the apportionment calculation in the workbook.
- Roll up time-related costsWe build a daily or monthly time-related cost for extended general conditions: supervision, temporary facilities, equipment rental, and field office. These costs are tied to the delay periods and separated from original contract work. ZIP-code-adjusted rates are applied for labor and equipment. For example, a 30-day delay may include 30 days of superintendent salary, 30 days of temporary power, and 30 days of crane rental, each priced at local rates.
What We Need From You
- Baseline scheduleThe approved baseline CPM schedule in native format (P6 XER or MS Project MPP) with approval date and any revisions.
- Monthly updatesEvery monthly schedule update from notice to proceed through the last available data date, including native files and PDFs.
- Daily reportsSuperintendent daily reports showing manpower, equipment, weather, and work locations for the delay period.
- RFI and submittal logsComplete logs with dates of issuance, response, and any impact on schedule activities.
- Change order registerLog of all change orders and directives with dates of notice, pricing, execution, and time extensions granted or requested.
- Weather recordsDaily weather observations from an on-site station or nearest NOAA reporting location for the project duration.
- Contract documentsGeneral conditions, supplementary conditions, and any special scheduling specifications including float ownership and notice provisions.
- Meeting minutesOwner-architect-contractor meeting minutes that document delay discussions, directives, and schedule status.
Sample Construction Schedule Analysis Output
The table below shows how we present each delay event with its schedule reference, quantity of delay days, and the source document. Quantities are illustrative.
| Section | Line item | Qty | Unit | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01 32 16.23 | Owner-caused delay — late structural steel shop drawings | 12 | WD | RFI-047 |
| 01 32 16.23 | Owner-caused delay — delayed permit for MEP rough-in | 8 | WD | CO-012 |
| 01 32 16.29 | Contractor-caused delay — insufficient crew for concrete pours | 5 | WD | Daily 2024-03-15 |
| 01 32 16.29 | Concurrent delay — weather and owner access conflict | 3 | WD | Weather log |
| 01 32 16.33 | Float consumed — electrical rough-in near-critical path | 7 | DA | Update 14 |
| 01 32 16.36 | Acceleration — added second shift for drywall | 6 | WD | CO-019 |
| 01 32 16.23 | Owner-caused delay — late release of elevator cab design | 10 | WD | RFI-052 |
| 01 32 16.29 | Contractor-caused delay — rework of fireproofing at Level 3 | 4 | WD | Daily 2024-04-02 |
| 01 32 16.33 | Float consumed — HVAC ductwork near-critical path | 5 | DA | Update 16 |
| 01 32 16.36 | Acceleration — overtime for curtain wall installation | 7 | WD | CO-022 |
Units and Measurement Basis
Delay analysis uses time-based units tied to schedule activities and contract milestones. The table below shows how each unit is measured and where it appears in the analysis.
| Item | Unit | How it's measured |
|---|---|---|
| Calendar days of delay | DA | Elapsed days from original completion date to actual or forecast completion |
| Work days of delay | WD | Working days per contract calendar, excluding weekends and holidays |
| Total float | DA | Days an activity can slip without delaying project completion |
| Free float | DA | Days an activity can slip without delaying its successor's early start |
| Critical path length | WD | Longest continuous path of activities from start to completion |
| Activity duration | WD | Original or remaining duration in working days per update |
| Time-related cost | USD | Daily or monthly general conditions cost during delay period |
| Earned value | USD | Budgeted cost of work performed against planned value at data date |
Worked Example: Time Impact Analysis for a Late Structural Steel Shop Drawing
This example is illustrative. Dimensions, dates, and quantities are invented to show the calculation sequence, not a real project.
Scenario: A 4-story office building. The approved baseline schedule shows structural steel erection on the critical path. The owner's structural engineer returns the shop drawing for grid lines B–F 12 work days late. The contractor's erection crew is delayed.
Step 1 — Establish the baseline critical path.
- Baseline schedule: steel erection activity 2,400 LF of beams and columns, duration 20 work days, total float 0.
- Baseline start: March 1. Baseline finish: March 28 (working days only).
Step 2 — Insert the delay event at the time it occurred.
- Shop drawing submitted: February 1.
- Contract review period: 10 work days. Required return: February 15.
- Actual return: March 3. Delay = 12 work days.
- The delay event is inserted into the schedule as it existed on February 15, not into the final as-built schedule.
Step 3 — Measure float consumption.
- At the February 15 update, steel erection had 0 total float and 0 free float.
- The 12-day shop drawing delay pushes steel erection start from March 1 to March 17.
- Float consumed: 0 days. Critical path impact: 12 work days.
Step 4 — Check for concurrent delay.
- Daily reports for February 15–March 3 show the concrete foundation at grid B–F was also 4 work days late due to a contractor-caused rework of anchor bolts.
- Concurrent delay = 4 work days.
- Apportionment: owner-caused delay = 12 − 4 = 8 work days; contractor-caused = 4 work days.
Step 5 — Convert work days to calendar days.
- Contract calendar: 5 work days per week.
- 8 work days ÷ 5 = 1.6 weeks = 11.2 calendar days. Round to 12 calendar days.
Step 6 — Roll up time-related costs.
- Extended general conditions: superintendent $1,150/day × 12 days = $13,800.
- Temporary power: $85/day × 12 days = $1,020.
- Tower crane rental: $950/day × 12 days = $11,400.
- Total time-related cost = $26,220.
Step 7 — Document the source.
- RFI-047, shop drawing transmittal log, daily reports February 15–March 3, and the February 15 schedule update.
Result: 8 work days of owner-caused delay, 4 work days of concurrent contractor-caused delay, 12 calendar days of time extension, and $26,220 in time-related costs. The same method applies to each delay event in the window analysis.
What Drives the Cost and Outcome of a Delay Claim
Relative impact on a typical estimate for this trade, based on estimator judgment. Select a bar for details.
Record quality
The single biggest driver is whether the baseline schedule and every monthly update exist in native format. Missing updates force assumptions that weaken the window analysis and may reduce recoverable delay days. Daily reports that log manpower and weather by location are equally important. For example, if daily reports show 20 electricians on site but the update shows 10, we must reconcile the discrepancy and document which source controls.
The single biggest driver is whether the baseline schedule and every monthly update exist in native format. Missing updates force assumptions that weaken the window analysis and may reduce recoverable delay days. Daily reports that log manpower and weather by location are equally important. For example, if daily reports show 20 electricians on site but the update shows 10, we must reconcile the discrepancy and document which source controls.
Contracts require written notice within a set number of days after a delay event. If notice was late or missing, the analysis must address waiver and estoppel arguments. We document notice dates against the contract requirement for each event. For example, if the contract requires notice within 7 days and the RFI was issued on day 10, we note the late notice and its potential impact on entitlement.
Some contracts state that float is owned by the project, others by the owner, and some are silent. The ownership language determines whether a delay that consumes float but does not push completion is compensable. We apply the contract language and note where it is ambiguous. For example, if the contract says float is project-owned, a delay that consumes 10 days of total float but does not delay completion may not be compensable.
When owner-caused and contractor-caused delays overlap on the critical path, recovery can be reduced or eliminated. The method of apportionment — day-by-day, window, or gross — affects the result. We apply the method most defensible for your contract and jurisdiction. For example, if both parties delay the same activity in the same window, we may apportion the delay equally or based on the actual days each party caused.
Monthly updates are standard. Less frequent updates create longer windows with less precision. If updates are missing, we may need to reconstruct intermediate windows from daily reports, which increases analysis time and cost. For example, if updates are quarterly, we may need to reconstruct two intermediate windows per quarter using daily reports and inspection records, adding several days to the analysis.
Native P6 XER and MS Project MPP files allow full logic and float analysis. PDF-only schedules limit us to visual critical path review. Excel schedules are workable but often lack predecessor-successor logic and constraints. For example, a PDF-only schedule may show a bar chart but not the logic ties, so we cannot calculate float consumption or trace the critical path with certainty.
The contract's scheduling specifications dictate the required analysis method, notice periods, float ownership, and submission requirements. We review these provisions to ensure the analysis meets the contract's technical requirements. For example, if the contract requires a time impact analysis for each change order, we perform a separate TIA for each event rather than a single cumulative analysis.
Common Gaps That Weaken a Schedule Delay Claim
Most delay claims fail not because the delay did not happen, but because the records do not support the analysis. These are the gaps we see most often and how we address them.
- Missing baseline schedule approval: the baseline is not signed or dated, so the starting point is disputed. We search meeting minutes and transmittals for approval evidence and note the gap.
- Undated RFIs and submittals: logs without dates cannot establish notice periods or response delays. We cross-reference transmittals and email records to reconstruct dates where possible.
- Float ownership ignored: the contract says float is project-owned but the analysis treats it as available. We apply the contract language and show the impact on recoverable days.
- Updates treated as as-built: monthly updates show planned dates, not actual. We reconcile actual start and finish dates from daily reports before building the as-built schedule.
- Concurrent delay missed: contractor-caused delays in the same window are not documented, so the owner argues the delay was on the contractor. We identify and apportion concurrent delay.
- Weather records missing: general statements about bad weather are not enough. We require daily observations from an on-site station or nearest NOAA location.
- Out-of-sequence progress: activities shown as complete in updates actually started late or out of order, masking the true critical path. We compare update logic to field records to detect it.
- No daily resource loading: daily reports that lack manpower and equipment counts make it difficult to verify productivity and delay impacts. We request detailed logs and cross-check with payroll records.
- Missing as-built drawings: without marked-up as-built drawings, we cannot verify actual installation dates and locations. We request red-line sets and compare them to schedule updates.
Schedule File Formats and Record Sources
The comparison axis for delay analysis is the schedule file format and the records you provide. Each format limits or enables different parts of the analysis.
| Schedule file format | What it enables | What it limits | Records needed to supplement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Primavera P6 XER | Full logic, float, constraints, calendars, and resource loading analysis. | Requires P6 software or conversion; large files may need cleanup. | Daily reports, RFI logs, change orders, weather records. |
| MS Project MPP | Logic ties, float, and critical path review; easier to open and share. | Resource loading and multiple calendars may be simplified. | Same as P6; plus baseline approval transmittals. |
| Excel schedule | Activity dates, durations, and simple float calculations. | Often lacks predecessor-successor logic and constraints. | Daily reports and meeting minutes to reconstruct logic. |
| PDF bar chart | Visual critical path and milestone review only. | No logic ties, no float calculation, no schedule file manipulation. | Native files if available; otherwise daily reports and updates. |
| No schedule at all | Requires reconstruction from daily reports and inspection records. | Cannot calculate float or critical path with certainty; assumptions needed. | Daily reports, inspection logs, concrete tickets, steel erection reports. |
Codes and Standards That Affect Delay Analysis
Model codes
Delay analysis is not a code-compliance service, but model codes affect the schedule activities and inspection hold points that appear on the critical path. The IBC and IRC set inspection requirements for structural, electrical, plumbing, and mechanical work; each inspection is a schedule activity with a predecessor and successor. The IECC adds envelope and mechanical commissioning activities that can extend the schedule. NEC, IPC/UPC, and NFPA 13 govern electrical, plumbing, and fire protection installations, each with its own rough-in and final inspection sequence. Confirm the adopted code edition with the local building department because inspection durations and sequencing change by edition.
Industry standards
AACE International Recommended Practice 29R-03 is the primary forensic schedule analysis standard. It defines the method, the use of as-planned versus as-built schedules, and the window analysis technique. AACE 38R-06 covers delay analysis documentation. The Construction Industry Institute (CII) publishes best practices for schedule management. The Project Management Institute (PMI) PMBOK and practice standards for scheduling provide definitions for total float, free float, and critical path. ASTM E2921 covers schedule delay analysis terminology. These standards do not set legal entitlement but define the technical method a claims reviewer expects.
Specification sections
Read Division 01 scheduling specifications before starting the analysis. 01 32 16 Construction Schedule defines the baseline and update requirements. 01 32 16.23 Time Impact Analysis specifies the method for each delay event. 01 32 16.29 Schedule Delay Analysis defines the as-built and window analysis requirements. 01 32 16.33 Schedule Float states float ownership. 01 32 16.36 Schedule Acceleration covers acceleration and mitigation. 01 32 19 Schedule of Values ties payment to schedule activities. Each section changes the analysis scope, notice periods, and submission requirements.
Local amendments
Adopted code editions vary by state and municipality. Some jurisdictions adopt the IBC with local amendments that change inspection sequencing or add requirements for fire-rated assemblies. Others adopt the IRC for residential work with different inspection hold points. Local amendments can also affect permit issuance timelines, which are common owner-caused delay events. Always confirm the adopted code edition and any local amendments with the local building department before finalizing the schedule activities and delay analysis.
Who Uses This Analysis
General contractors
To support time extension requests and defend against liquidated damages. The analysis ties each delay event to the critical path and quantifies float consumption, giving you a defensible position in negotiations or claims.
Subcontractors
To show that your work was delayed by others and to support pass-through claims. The analysis isolates delays caused by the prime or owner that affected your scope and quantifies the time impact on your activities.
Owners and developers
To evaluate contractor time extension requests and determine whether delays are compensable. The analysis separates owner-caused, contractor-caused, and concurrent delay so you know what you are paying for.
Attorneys and claims consultants
To build or rebut a delay claim with a schedule-based analysis that follows AACE 29R-03. The workbook and narrative provide the technical foundation for expert reports and depositions.
Architects and construction managers
To review schedule updates and assess whether the critical path is accurately represented. The analysis highlights logic gaps, out-of-sequence progress, and float consumption that affect project completion.