You paid for a DCMA schedule health check. You got back a 15-page PDF with tables, a compliance score, and a list of failed criteria. You forwarded it to your project team. Nobody read past page 3. The PDF is now buried in a SharePoint folder where it will never be opened again.
Sound familiar? This is the standard deliverable across the entire schedule consulting industry — and it's a waste of your money.
The Problem with Static Reports
A traditional DCMA assessment report gives you a snapshot frozen in time. It tells you what failed. It might tell you how many activities are affected. But it doesn't let you explore the data, drill into specific criteria, see which activities are driving each failure, or understand the relationships between problems.
It's like getting blood work results without being able to ask the doctor questions. You know your cholesterol is high. You don't know which specific foods are causing it, how it compares to last quarter, or what the trend looks like.
A static report gets read once and filed. An interactive dashboard gets used in every OAC meeting, every schedule review, every delay discussion. The report that sits in a drawer has zero ongoing value — no matter how much you paid for it.
What Your Analysis Should Actually Look Like
The CPP engine delivers a fully interactive HTML dashboard that runs in any browser — no software required, no P6 license needed.
Executive Summary panel. Overall compliance score, pass/fail count, and every key finding with specific action items. The headline in seconds — no flipping through pages to find the conclusion.
Drill-down on every criterion. Click on "Logic & Flow" and see exactly which activities are missing predecessors, with activity IDs, names, and specific fix recommendations. Click on "Resources & Progress" and see which activities need resource assignments. The data is explorable — your team can use it in real time during schedule review meetings.
Risk and predictive analytics layer. Beyond the standard 14 criteria, the dashboard includes baseline comparison with variance analysis, risk scoring across Schedule/Scope/Resource/Execution dimensions, predictive completion dates, delay probability calculations, and scenario analysis showing Best Case, Most Likely, and Worst Case outcomes.
The fastest way to see the difference is to drop your own XER into the live engine and compare the dashboard you get back to the static PDF you'd normally pay $3,000+ for. Try It Live →
Static PDF vs Interactive Dashboard
| Feature | Static PDF | Interactive Dashboard |
|---|---|---|
| View failed activities | Listed in appendix (if included) | Click to expand per criterion |
| Share with non-P6 users | Email attachment | Open in any browser |
| Use in OAC meetings | Print and distribute | Screen share, drill into live data |
| Baseline comparison | Separate report (if available) | Built-in variance analysis |
| Risk analysis | Usually not included | Multi-dimensional risk scoring |
| Predictive analytics | Never included | Completion forecasts + scenarios |
| Export options | It's already a PDF | HTML, DOCX, Excel |
| Shelf life | Read once, filed | Referenced throughout project |
The Cost Comparison
Most schedule consulting firms charge $3,000–$5,000+ for a DCMA assessment that delivers a static PDF. Enterprise SaaS platforms like SmartPM run $57,000–$135,000 per year for automated schedule analysis.
The CPP engine is free to try at mcp.criticalpathpartners.ca/try. Same DCMA 14-point methodology. Drop your XER, get the interactive dashboard back in 60 seconds. The hard part — interpretation, expert testimony, deposable opinions — that's what you book a consult for.
See it on your own schedule
Drop your baseline + current XER. Get a fully interactive Schedule Health Dashboard in 60 seconds. No login, no payment, no file storage.
Try It Live →