BPH prepares tender and construction programmes, updates live progress and explains what has changed, why it matters and what needs to happen next. We also support methodology, site logistics, recovery planning and programme analysis for extensions of time and claims.
Take one of these on its own, or as a continuing appointment from tender through to completion.
A credible operational plan for the tender, showing how the project will be mobilised, sequenced and delivered.
A properly structured programme that connects design, procurement, approvals and construction activities.
An accurate record of where the project stands, what has moved and what requires action.
A practical route back to the required dates when progress has slipped.
Programme evidence that explains what happened, when it happened and how it affected the works.
The programme should develop with the project. Updates need to reflect actual progress, design information, procurement, access, instructions and the decisions affecting the critical path. BPH combines the programme with the project records so reporting explains the position rather than simply moving bars on a chart.
Each stage of this service is distinct: tender-stage programming supports the bid, live construction programming manages delivery, progress reporting tracks what has actually happened, recovery planning responds if the programme slips, and programme analysis supports extensions of time and claims if delay needs to be evidenced.
A price on its own does not show a client or a main contractor how the project will actually be built. The tender programme, methodology and logistics proposals set out the operational story behind the number: sequencing, phasing, access, and the assumptions the price depends on.
Without a credible operational plan, a tender submission can look unconvincing even when the price is right, and assumptions that should have been stated plainly end up disputed later instead.
In practice: your tender needs a construction programme and methodology statement alongside the price, and it needs to stand up to scrutiny at interview.
A baseline programme is more than a bar chart with dates on it. It needs logic links, a genuine critical path, and clear connections between design information, procurement, approvals and construction activities.
Without that structure, a programme cannot show what is actually driving completion, and any later discussion about delay or change has nothing reliable to test against.
In practice: the contract has just been awarded, and the baseline needs to link design, procurement and construction properly rather than simply listing dates.
Progress reporting means updating the programme against a fixed baseline and explaining what has actually moved, not restating last month's dates with a new cover sheet.
Without that discipline, a client or board sees a programme that never seems to change until it changes all at once, and the decisions that could have kept things on track get made too late.
In practice: monthly reporting needs to explain what has actually moved on site, rather than repeat last month's programme with a new date on the front.
When progress has slipped, a recovery programme sets out a realistic sequence back towards the required dates: what changes, what is prioritised, and who is responsible for each action.
A recovery programme sets out a practical route back towards the required dates. It does not guarantee that the original completion date will be recovered, since that depends on matters outside the programme itself, including resource, access and further delay.
In practice: the programme has slipped and the site team needs a tested, realistic route back towards the dates, not an aspirational new completion date.
This is programme and delay analysis supporting extensions of time and claims: reviewing the baseline and updated programmes, building a cause-and-effect chronology against the contemporaneous records, and identifying what actually drove the critical path.
This is not formal forensic delay expert evidence or expert witness delay testimony, and it does not guarantee any particular contractual entitlement. It is prepared to support the commercial and contractual position, working alongside your notices and correspondence.
Where programme analysis forms part of a wider extension of time, loss and expense or adjudication matter, BPH can coordinate it with the commercial claim and contractual records. See Construction Contracts & Disputes.
In practice: a delay has happened, and the extension of time submission needs to be built on proper programme analysis rather than an assertion.
Construction programming is the planning and scheduling work that sits behind a project: tender programmes, baseline and construction programmes, and the updates that track progress against them. Some clients also search for this as construction planning services, which covers the same ground.
Yes. Programmes can be produced and issued in Asta Powerproject where that is required by the contract or the client, alongside clear reporting for anyone who does not use the software directly.
Yes. We review the existing baseline and any updates already issued, then continue reporting from an agreed point rather than starting again from nothing.
No. A recovery programme sets out a realistic route back towards the required dates. It cannot guarantee that the original completion date will be recovered, since that depends on matters outside the programme itself, including resource, access, information and further delay.
No. This is programme and delay analysis supporting extensions of time and claims, prepared to help the commercial and contractual position. It is not formal forensic delay expert evidence or expert witness delay testimony, and does not guarantee any particular contractual entitlement. Where a matter is heading towards adjudication or a wider dispute, this work is coordinated with BPH's Construction Contracts & Disputes service.
BPH provides experienced commercial and programming support, from the tender programme through to delay analysis.