Forensic Scheduling - Guide to the Forensic Scheduling Body of Knowledge

Services Offered

Forensic Scheduling
Guide to the Forensic Scheduling Body of Knowledge

Fast Facts

Provides new approaches to improving methods that use as-built information.

Addresses the nuances of floating delay vs. pacing as well as the modeling of gain, which is the other side of the coin of delay.

Also, addresses the modeling of serial delay and weather delays, and how failure to recognize such can produce misleading or incorrect results.

About the Guide
This Guide is not a primer on forensic scheduling. Rather, it is a deep dive into the practice, intended for use by practitioners with an advanced knowledge of the profession and the technical nuances associated with it. It is highly annotated compared to other texts on forensic scheduling and includes contributions from attorneys and researchers. The Guide brings together a body of knowledge accumulated from more than 40 years of prior retrospective schedule analyses using the critical path method (CPM).

In June 2007, AACE International initiated a paradigm shift when it released Recommended Practice No. 29—Forensic Schedule Analysis (RP 29), indicating that the time had arrived to signal forensic scheduling as the knowledge successor to delay analysis. The Guide to the Forensic Scheduling Body of Knowledge recasts existing and emerging principles, techniques, and methods into a body of knowledge responsive to this standard. To do justice to this mission, the work underpinning the body of knowledge entails a detailed examination of RP 29, the Society of Construction Law Protocol, and many referenced texts and technical papers on delay analysis. The Guide articulates proven forensic schedule analysis guidance responsive to the Daubert standard and brings reasonably provable improvements, new approaches, and innovations to experts.

This Guide is a must read for...

Scheduling professionals seeking to further their knowledge in forensic schedule analysis.

Expert forensic schedulers who must stay current on the latest developments to be better prepared to deal with Daubert challenges.

Attorneys who guide the selection of, present, and challenge forensic scheduling analyses prepared by experts.

Researchers seeking to advance the art of forensic scheduling.

Software purveyors whose perspective can facilitate or hinder forensic schedule analysis.