You're watching the finish date drift. You know why — late RFIs, design changes, access restrictions, owner holds. But knowing it and proving it are different things. Without a forensic analysis tying each delay to a specific cause and a specific responsible party, an Extension of Time claim is a conversation. With one, it's a documented entitlement.
That's the gap CPP fills.
Five patterns that surface again and again on slipping projects. If one of them describes the project on your desk right now, the next step is the same — a defensible analysis tying delays to causes, not a folder of intuition.
The monthly updates show drift, but nobody's traced the critical-path shifts back to specific events. A windows analysis across your update chain will tell you — window by window — what moved the finish date, how much it moved, and who's responsible.
Common. Usually fixable. The most frequent rejection reasons are logic density failures, excessive hard constraints, missing relationships, and calendars that don't match the contract. A DCMA-14 health check identifies every deficiency in 10 seconds. A schedule review engagement fixes them.
Read: Construction Schedule Rejected by Owner — What to Do Next →Cumulative productivity loss from owner-caused changes, access restrictions, and design deficiencies. This is a measured-mile disruption claim, not a CPM delay claim — different methodology, different proof structure. CPP does both.
That's exactly what the Preliminary Assessment is for. Two weeks, fixed fee, clear go/no-go recommendation with the analysis behind it. You spend $5,000 to find out instead of $25,000.
Call today. Notice provisions are contractual deadlines — miss them and the strongest analysis in the world may not save the claim. CPP can advise on notice requirements and begin the preliminary assessment immediately.
A CPP engagement gives you the documentation package your claim needs to survive — not a vague opinion, not a consultant's "assessment," but a forensic analysis with named methodology, traceable math, and exhibits ready for the contract administrator, mediator, or arbitrator.
DCMA-14 assessment of your baseline and current schedule. The diagnostic that tells you whether your schedule data is strong enough to support a claim — or whether it needs repair first.
Per-window attribution across your entire update chain. Which delays are owner-caused, which are contractor-caused, which are concurrent. Every finding tied to a specific schedule update and a specific critical-path shift.
Cover letter, per-event exhibits, forensic workbook, mitigation documentation. Indexed, cross-referenced, ready to submit on the contract's required medium.
CPP is a one-analyst boutique forensic practice. The day job is building and defending schedules on active projects — the same work you're doing.
Dana Fitkowski runs a one-person scheduling department at a general contractor covering four operating companies. The day job is building and defending schedules on active projects — the same work you're doing. CPP is the forensic practice that applies that field experience to delay claims.
The difference between CPP and a consulting firm that only does forensic work: the analyst reading your schedule also builds schedules for a living. He knows what a real schedule looks like, what a manipulated schedule looks like, and what an honest schedule that just ran into trouble looks like. That matters when the analysis needs to tell the difference.
Twenty-five years in construction project controls and planning. Twenty inside nuclear and energy programs — refurbishment, new build, and ongoing maintenance outage planning at facilities where the schedule is a regulator-facing document, not just a project-management tool. AACE-method work across nuclear, energy, municipal infrastructure, mining, and commercial sectors — Windows Analysis (MIP 3.3), Time Impact Analysis (MIP 3.7), Collapsed As-Built (MIP 3.8), DCMA-14, SCL Protocol 2nd Edition, and Monte Carlo schedule risk per AACE 122R-22 QRAMM.
Read Dana's full background →The Preliminary Assessment is designed for exactly this moment — you think you have a delay claim but you're not sure, and you don't want to commit to a full forensic spend to find out. Clear go/no-go recommendation with the underlying analysis attached.