Our Analysis Methodology
How ScheduleLens assesses construction schedule quality — grounded in published industry standards.
Analysis Approach
ScheduleLens performs an automated assessment of construction schedule files against published industry standards. Each finding in the report traces to a specific rule in one or more recognised standards.
The analysis is deterministic — the same file always produces the same results.
The tool identifies quality issues; it does not determine fault, entitlement, or cause of delay.
What We Check
Ten categories of schedule quality assessment, each grounded in published standards.
Logic Completeness
Verifies every activity is connected by predecessor and successor relationships.
Gaps in logic mean the schedule cannot properly calculate the critical path.
DCMA 14-Point, AACE RP 29R-03, PMI Practice Standard
Relationship Quality
Assesses the distribution of relationship types and identifies unusual patterns such as Start-to-Finish links or excessive lag.
Unusual relationships can mask real schedule behaviour and mislead stakeholders.
DCMA 14-Point, AACE RP 29R-03, PMI Practice Standard
Float Analysis
Examines total float distribution to identify activities at risk, near-critical paths, and potential missing logic.
Understanding float is essential for prioritising management attention on at-risk activities.
DCMA 14-Point, AACE RP 29R-03, PMBOK Guide
Constraint Audit
Identifies hard constraints that override logic-driven dates, potentially masking true schedule risk.
Constraints can hide the real critical path and give a false sense of schedule health.
DCMA 14-Point, AACE RP 29R-03, SCL Protocol, PMBOK Guide
Calendar Validation
Checks for calendar anomalies, cross-calendar relationships, and configuration issues that can distort working-day calculations.
Calendar errors silently corrupt duration and date calculations across the entire schedule.
AACE RP 29R-03, PMI Practice Standard, PMBOK Guide
Critical Path Integrity
Validates that the critical path stored in the schedule matches an independently traced longest path.
Discrepancies indicate stale or unreliable data that cannot support delay analysis.
DCMA 14-Point, AACE RP 29R-03, PMBOK Guide
Duration Checks
Flags activities with zero remaining duration while in progress, and activities with unusually long planned durations.
Duration anomalies indicate data entry errors or activities that should be decomposed.
DCMA 14-Point, PMI Practice Standard
Progress Assessment
Identifies activities that are behind their planned finish or have started without recording progress updates.
Missing progress updates mean the schedule no longer reflects reality on site.
DCMA 14-Point, SCL Protocol, PMBOK Guide
Out-of-Sequence Detection
Flags activities that have progressed before their predecessors completed, which distorts the schedule's calculated dates.
Out-of-sequence progress undermines the reliability of forecast dates.
AACE RP 29R-03, PMI Practice Standard
Redundant Logic
Identifies relationships that have no scheduling effect because a longer path already exists.
Removing redundant logic simplifies the network for clearer analysis and reporting.
AACE RP 29R-03, PMI Practice Standard
Reference Standards
The published standards that inform our analysis checks.
| Standard | Full Title | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| AACE RP 29R-03 | AACE International Recommended Practice 29R-03: Forensic Schedule Analysis | Delay analysis methodologies, schedule quality indicators |
| DCMA 14-Point | US Defense Contract Management Agency 14-Point Schedule Assessment | Schedule quality metrics and thresholds |
| PMBOK Guide | PMI — A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge (PMBOK® Guide), 8th Edition, 2025 | Schedule Performance Domain (§2.3) |
| PMI Practice Standard | PMI — Practice Standard for Scheduling, 2nd Edition, 2011 | Schedule model construction, network logic, calendars |
| CIOB Guide | CIOB Guide to Good Practice in the Management of Time in Major Projects | Schedule management best practices |
| SCL Protocol | Society of Construction Law Delay and Disruption Protocol, 2nd Edition | Delay analysis, concurrent delay, EOT assessment |
What We Don't Do
- We do not perform a full critical-path method recalculation.
- We do not assess contractual entitlement or determine fault.
- We do not replace the judgement of a qualified delay analyst.
- Reports are analytical output, not expert opinion or legal advice.
- We recommend professional review before relying on findings for formal submissions.
References to published standards are bibliographic citations indicating the analytical basis for each check. ScheduleLens is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or certified by AACE International, the Project Management Institute, DCMA, the Chartered Institute of Building, or the Society of Construction Law.