Sections 1 to 3 carry the finding and the evidence for it: what moved, when it moved, and what pattern the movements make. Section 4 is the interpretation a reviewer should take from that pattern.
Appendix A is the revision register — every revision, its data date, its forecast finish and the cause recorded for the movement. Appendix B attributes each period's slip to the activities that produced it.
Every revision in this window has pushed the completion date later. No period recovered time. The drift is monotonic — the pattern that most reliably precedes a serious overrun.
R9 through R12, covering four consecutive monthly submissions.
Against the R10 baseline of record the movement is +18 days.
Was 22 October 2027 at R9, the reference revision.
Range +8 to +10 days. The consistency matters more than the size.
A programme that slips and recovers is being actively managed; the noise is evidence of control. A programme that slips every single period by a similar amount is not absorbing anything — each month's problem is being passed forward intact. Four periods is enough to distinguish the two, and this is the second pattern.
At the observed rate the completion date reaches mid-January 2028 by R15 with no new events at all. That extrapolation is not a forecast; it is what the current behaviour produces if nothing changes.
Forecast completion by revision, expressed as days later than the R9 forecast of 22 October 2027. The dashed line is the R10 baseline of record against which the contract position is measured.
Delay added in each reporting period, accumulating to the +28 day net position. Attribution is to the period in which the movement first appeared in a submitted revision, not to the period in which the underlying event occurred.
R10 was procurement, R11 was an information delay, R12 was construction rework plus a disclosure correction. Three different root causes in three periods, each producing a similar amount of slip, points away from a single fixable problem and towards insufficient float in the plan as a whole: whatever happens, there is nothing to absorb it, so it lands on the completion date.
Part of the R12 movement is not new delay. Closing open-ended logic on the MEP rough-in chain revealed 6 days that were already lost but were not visible while those activities had no successors. This improves the programme's honesty and worsens its date, and both should be recorded as such.
The programme is not absorbing disruption. Each period's events reach the completion date substantially intact, which means the plan carries no effective contingency at the point where it is needed.
The 19 November 2027 date should be read as the earliest credible completion on current behaviour, not as a balanced forecast. A date produced by a network that has passed forward four consecutive periods of slip is not a date with symmetric risk around it: the observed distribution of outcomes over this window has been entirely one-sided.
Produced from fictional project data for illustration. No real schedule, client or contractor data is used or implied.
Every revision in the window, with the movement it introduced and the cause recorded for it. Cumulative is measured from R9, the reference revision.
| Rev | Data date | Forecast finish | Period slip | Cumulative | Delay introduced by |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R9 | 30 Nov 25 | 22 Oct 27 | — | 0d | Reference revision |
| R10 | 31 Dec 25 | 1 Nov 27 | +10d | +10d | Structural steel procurement re-sequenced (Grid G package) |
| R11 | 31 Jan 26 | 9 Nov 27 | +8d | +18d | Level 3 pre-pour held pending RFI-214 (employer) |
| R12 | 28 Feb 26 | 19 Nov 27 | +10d | +28d | Grid G erection rework + MEP logic closed |
| Net drift over the window (R9 → R12) | +28d | +18d* | *versus R10, the baseline of record | ||
| Period | Movement | Direction | Recovery declared in the submission |
|---|---|---|---|
| R9 → R10 | +10d | Later | None |
| R10 → R11 | +8d | Later | None |
| R11 → R12 | +10d | Later | 18d applied but not declared — see Appendix B |
Three periods, three movements, all in the same direction. This table is the whole of the trend finding stated without a chart.
The activities responsible for each period's slip, matched across revisions on activity ID. Movement is measured on the driving path.
| Period | Activity | Description | Move | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| R9→R10 | A1390 | Steel delivery release 1 — procurement re-sequenced | +10d | Contractor |
| R10→R11 | A1733 | Level 3 pre-pour inspection — held pending RFI-214 | +8d | Employer |
| R11→R12 | A1422 | Erect columns Grid G, L4–6 — rework after steel re-issue | +18d | Contractor |
| R11→R12 | A1801 | MEP rough-in Zone A — open-ended logic closed | +6d | Disclosure |
| R11→R12 | A2110 | Curtain wall North — run parallel with cladding | −12d | Mitigation |
| R11→R12 | A1390 | Steel delivery release 2 — additional fabrication shift | −6d | Mitigation |
| Net movement across the window | +28d | |||
The two mitigation rows in R11→R12 total 18 days recovered. They were applied in the programme but not declared in the submission narrative, which is why the period still reads as +10d rather than as active management of a +28d gross event.
Every report in the set is built from a Primavera P6 or Microsoft Project file, parsed in your browser. Nothing is uploaded and nothing is retained.