The document summarizes a meeting between Acumen, an advisory firm, and Project Time & Cost (PT&C), a consulting firm, to discuss project scheduling standards and best practices. It outlines PT&C's experience and services in program cost, schedule, and risk consulting. It then details various government and non-government scheduling standards, including the Government Accountability Office's 10 best practices for project scheduling and the Defense Contract Management Agency's 14-point assessment criteria. The document proposes using a Schedule Maturity Framework and Acumen Fuse software to review and analyze project schedules.

1. Mee#ng
Project
Schedule
Compliance
Standards
Dr.
Dan
Pa:erson
&
Brad
Arterbury,
Acumen
Mike
Nosbisch,
PT&C

2. Introduc#ons
• Acumen
– Dr.
Dan
Pa:erson
• President
&
CEO
• Formerly
Pertmaster
principle
– Brad
Arterbury
• Federal
Government
Business
Development
• Project
Time
&
Cost,
Inc.
(PT&C)
– Mike
Nosbisch,
CCC,
PSP
• EVM
Prac#ce
Lead
• President
of
AACE
Interna#onal
• Formerly
with
SM&A

3. Outline
I. Introduc#ons
II. Project
scheduling
standards
and
best
prac#ces
– Government
agency
– Non-­‐government
specific
III. Recommenda#ons
for
reviewing/analyzing
project
schedules
– Using
a
Schedule
Maturity
Framework
– Using
Acumen
Fuse
to
review
&
analyze
projects
IV. Conclusion

4. PT&C
Overview
• Our
mission
is
to
help
clients
reduce
program
risk
through
applica#on
of
sustainable
business
prac#ces,
project
management
techniques,
and
effec#ve
cost
analysis
&
engineering
principles
• We
have
over
28
years
experience
providing
government
and
private
sector
clients
with
high-­‐quality
professional
consul#ng
services
in
support
of
capital
construc#on,
environmental
projects
&
programs,
and
large-­‐scale
civil
works
projects
• We
deliver
independent
program
cost,
schedule,
and
risk
consul9ng
services
to
ensure
comple#on
of
milestone
requirements,
successful
funding,
and
execu#on
of
high-­‐visibility
programs
&
projects
• We
have
extensive
government
agency
experience,
most
notably
with
the
Department
of
Defense
(DoD)/U.S.
Army
Corps
of
Engineers
(USACE),
and
Department
of
Energy
(DOE)

5. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
• Government
agency
– Government-­‐wide
– Department
of
Defense
(DoD)
• Non-­‐government
specific
– AACE
Interna#onal

6. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• Government
agency
– Government-­‐wide
• Government
Accountability
Office
(GAO)
– DoD
• Defense
Contract
Management
Agency
(DCMA)
• Na#onal
Defense
Industrial
Associa#on
(NDIA)

7. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• Government
agency
– Government-­‐wide
• GAO
– Independent,
nonpar#san
agency
repor#ng
directly
to
Congress
» Conducts
audits
to
evaluate
economy,
efficiency,
and
effec#veness
of
government
programs
» Assesses
program
schedules
in
rela#on
to
“scheduling
best
prac#ces”
contained
in
GAO
Cost
Guide

8. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• GAO’s
10
Scheduling
Best
Prac#ces
1.
Capturing
all
ac9vi9es:
Schedule
should
reflect
all
ac#vi#es
in
program’s
WBS
(government
and
contractor)
2.
Sequencing
all
ac9vi9es:
Ac#vi#es
sequenced
in
the
logical
order
they
are
to
be
carried
out
in
using
dependencies
3.
Assigning
resources
to
all
ac9vi9es:
Schedule
should
reflect
what
resources
(i.e.
labor,
material,
and
overhead)
are
needed
to
do
the
work
4.
Establishing
dura9on
of
all
ac9vi9es:
Schedule
should
realis#cally
reflect
how
long
each
ac#vity
will
take
to
execute
using
same
ra#onale,
data,
and
assump#ons
used
for
cost
es#ma#ng
5.
Integra9ng
schedule
ac9vi9es
horizontally
and
ver9cally:
Schedule
links
products
and
outcomes
associated
with
already
sequenced
ac#vi#es,
and
traceability
exists
among
varying
levels
of
the
schedule

9. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• GAO’s
10
Scheduling
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
6.
Establishing
cri9cal
path
for
all
ac9vi9es:
Cri#cal
path
should
be
iden#fied
so
that
any
delay
on
it
can
be
examined
for
effects
on
schedule
end
date
7.
Iden9fying
float
between
ac9vi9es:
Schedule
should
iden#fy
float
#me
so
that
schedule
flexibility
can
be
determined
8.
Conduc9ng
schedule
risk
analysis:
An
SRA
should
be
used
to
predict
level
of
confidence
in
mee#ng
a
program’s
comple#on
date
9.
Upda9ng
schedule
using
logic
and
dura9ons
to
determine
the
dates:
Schedule
should
use
logic
and
dura#ons
in
order
to
reflect
realis#c
start
and
comple#on
dates
for
program
ac#vi#es
10.
Crea9ng
a
baseline
schedule
(new)

10. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• Government
agency
– DoD
• DCMA
– As
DoD’s
“execu#ve
agent”
for
EVMS,
responsible
for
performing
EVMS
valida#on
reviews
for
contracts
mee#ng
policy
thresholds
» An
integrated
master
schedule
(IMS)
is
required
by
policy
when
EVMS
is
required
» Uses
14
Point
Assessment
to
perform
“an
objec#ve
and
thorough
analysis
of
the
IMS”

11. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• DCMA’s
14
Point
Assessment
Criteria
1.
Logic:
Helps
iden#fy
how
well
or
poorly
schedule
is
linked
together
2.
Leads:
Use
of
leads
distorts
total
float
in
schedule
and
may
cause
resource
conflicts
3.
Lags:
Cri#cal
path
and
any
subsequent
analysis
can
be
adversely
affected
by
using
lags
4.
Rela9onship
Types:
Finish-­‐to-­‐Start
(FS)
rela#onship
type
provides
logical
path
through
program
and
should
account
for
at
least
90%
of
rela#onship
types
being
used
5.
Hard
Constraints:
Using
hard
constraints
will
prevent
tasks
from
being
moved
by
their
dependencies
and,
therefore,
prevent
schedule
from
being
logic-­‐driven

12. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• DCMA’s
14
Point
Assessment
Criteria
(cont’d)
6.
High
Float:
If
percentage
of
tasks
with
excessive
total
float
exceeds
5%,
network
may
be
unstable
and
may
not
be
logic-­‐driven
7.
Nega9ve
Float:
Tasks
with
nega#ve
float
should
have
an
explana#on
and
a
correc#ve
ac#on
plan
to
mi#gate
nega#ve
float
8.
High
Dura9on:
Helps
to
determine
whether
or
not
a
task
can
be
broken
into
two
or
more
discrete
tasks
rather
than
one
9.
Invalid
Dates:
Tasks
should
have
forecast
start
and
forecast
finish
dates
that
are
in
the
future
rela#ve
to
status
date
of
IMS
10.
Resources:
Provides
verifica#on
that
all
tasks
with
dura#ons
of
at
least
one
day
have
dollars
or
hours
assigned

13. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• DCMA’s
14
Point
Assessment
Criteria
(cont’d)
11.
Missed
Tasks:
Helps
iden#fy
how
well
or
poorly
schedule
is
mee#ng
baseline
plan
12.
Cri9cal
Path
Test:
If
project
comple#on
date
(or
other
milestone)
is
not
delayed
in
direct
propor#on
to
amount
of
inten#onal
slip
(600
days
~
3
years)
that
is
introduced
into
the
schedule
as
part
of
this
test,
then
there
is
broken
logic
somewhere
in
network
13.
Cri9cal
Path
Length
Index
(CPLI):
Measures
cri#cal
path
“realism”
rela#ve
to
forecasted
finish
date
14.
Baseline
Execu9on
Index
(BEI):
Measures
number
of
tasks
that
were
completed
as
a
ra#o
to
those
tasks
that
should
have
been
completed
to
date
according
to
original
(baseline)
plan

14. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• Government
agency
– DoD
(cont’d)
• NDIA
– Industrial
Council
for
Program
Management
(ICPM)
» Program
Planning
and
Scheduling
Subcommi:ee
(PPSS)
§ Planning
&
Scheduling
Excellence
Guide
(PASEG)
• Generally
Accepted
Scheduling
Principles
(GASP)

15. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• Government
agency
– NDIA’s
Generally
Accepted
Scheduling
Principles
(GASP)
1. Complete:
Schedule
captures
en#re,
discrete,
authorized
project
effort
from
start
through
comple#on
2. Traceable:
Schedule
logic
is
horizontally
and
ver#cally
integrated
with
cross-­‐references
to
key
documents
and
tools
3. Transparent:
Schedule
provides
visibility
to
assure
it
is
complete,
traceable,
has
documented
assump#ons,
and
provides
full
disclosure
of
program
status
and
forecast
4. Statused:
Schedule
has
accurate
progress
through
status
date

16. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• Government
agency
– NDIA’s
GASP
(cont’d)
5.
Predic9ve:
Schedule
provides
meaningful
cri#cal
paths
and
accurate
forecasts
for
remaining
work
through
program
comple#on
6.
Useable:
Schedule
is
an
indispensable
tool
for
#mely
and
effec#ve
management
decisions
and
ac#ons
7.
Resourced:
Schedule
aligns
with
actual
and
projected
resource
availability
8.
Controlled:
Schedule
is
built,
baselined,
and
maintained
using
stable,
repeatable
and
documented
process

17. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• Non-­‐government
specific
– AACE
Interna#onal
• Professional
associa#on
dedicated
to
furthering
concepts
of
cost
engineering
and
total
cost
management
(TCM)
– “TCM
Framework”
developed
that
encompasses
scheduling
within
overall
project
lifecycle
– Created
and
currently
administers
“Planning
and
Scheduling
Professional”
(PSP)
cer#fica#on
– Has
published
14
“Recommended
Prac#ces”
(RPs)
related
to
project
scheduling

18. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• AACE’s
Scheduling
Recommended
Prac#ces
– 14R-­‐90:
Responsibility
and
Required
Skills
for
a
Project
Planning
and
Scheduling
Professional
– 23R-­‐02:
Iden#fica#on
of
Ac#vi#es
– 24R-­‐03:
Developing
Ac#vity
Logic
– 27R-­‐03:
Schedule
Classifica#on
System
– 29R-­‐03:
Forensic
Schedule
Analysis
– 37R-­‐06:
Schedule
Levels
of
Detail:
As
Applied
in
Engineering,
Procurement
and
Construc#on
– 38R-­‐06:
Documen#ng
the
Schedule
Basis

19. Project
Scheduling
Standards
/
Best
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
• AACE’s
Scheduling
Recommended
Prac#ces
(cont’d)
– 45R-­‐08:
Scheduling
Claims
Protec#on
Methods
– 48R-­‐06:
Schedule
Constructability
Review
– 49R-­‐06:
Iden#fying
the
Cri#cal
Path
– 52R-­‐06:
Time
Impact
Analysis:
As
Applied
in
Construc#on
– 53R-­‐06:
Schedule
Update
Review:
As
Applied
in
Engineering,
Procurement,
and
Construc#on
– 54R-­‐07:
Recovery
Scheduling
-­‐
As
Applied
in
Engineering,
Procurement,
and
Construc#on
– 57R-­‐09:
Integrated
Cost
and
Schedule
Risk
Analysis
Using
Monte
Carlo
Simula#on
of
a
CPM
Model

20. Reviewing
/
Analyzing
Project
Schedules
• Role
of
Project
Time
&
Cost
– Currently
provides
schedule
support
services
to
government
agencies
and
government/commercial
contractors
• AACE
cer#fied
staff
with
in-­‐depth
knowledge
of
industry
standards/best
prac#ces
presented
earlier
– Through
partnership
with
Acumen,
can
provide
staff
experienced
in
the
use
of
Fuse
• Can
assist
in
development
of
related
procedures
and
training
materials
• Can
augment
func#onality
of
Fuse
in
performing
SRA
that
is
called
out
by
GAO

21. Acumen
Introduc#on
•
Project
analy#cs
leader
World
Renowned
• Author
of
Acumen
Fuse
Risk
Assessment
• Oracle/Microsoq
Partner
Workshops
• Pertmaster
“go-­‐to-­‐
resource”
Oracle
accredited
• PT&C
partnership
Training
Partner
• HQ
in
Aus#n,
TX
• Europe,
Asia
&
Australian
local
Acumen
Fuse®
resellers/partners
Metric
Analysis
&
Visualiza#on

22. Introducing
a
Schedule
Maturity
Framework
• Non-­‐Cri9qued
S1
• Non-­‐validated,
buffered?,
ques#onable
realism,
target
driven?
• Cri9qued
Schedule
using
Metric
Analysis
S2
• Structurally
sound,
no
built
in
con#ngency,
sound
logic
• Risk-­‐Adjusted
Schedule
S3
• Es#mate
uncertainty,
risk
events,
calculated
con#ngency
• Op9mized
Target
Scenario
S4
• Reduced
hot
spots,
lower
cri#cality,
higher
confidence
• Team
Validated
Op9mized
Model
S5
• Buy-­‐in
on
S4
op#mized
model
Acumen S1 > S5TM Maturity Model

23. S1
>
S5TM
Schedule
Maturity

24. Who
Should
Conduct
Schedule
Analysis?
• Internal
(contractor)
– External
compliance
Planning
– Internal
valida#on
• External
(gov.
agency)
– Compliance
Closeout
Execu#on
– Trending
• Metrics/thresholds
vary
for
each

25. Introducing
Acumen
Fuse
Enterprise Project • Metric
Analysis
• Schedule
quality
Analysis & Visualization •
•
Cost/Performance/EV
Compliance
• Logic
Analysis
• Missing
or
redundant
• Mul#
Project
• Forensics
• Variances
• Trending
• Snapshot
comparison
• Visualiza9on
• Ribbons
• Dashboard
• Analyst
repor#ng
Integra#on
with
MSP,
Primavera,
Open
Plan,
Cobra,
Excel,
Ares,
Pertmaster,
UNCEFACT

26. Metric
Analysis
• Analyze
schedule,
cost,
risk,
performance
– “What
>
So
What
>
Now
What…”
• Objec#ve
of
pinpoin#ng
issues,
shortcomings
and
failed
tripwires
– Comparison
against
benchmarks/thresholds/baselines
• Trending
over
#me
– Comparisons,
performance
improvements
• Advanced
metrics
– Beyond
standard
‘schedule
check’
e.g.
logic
densityTM
• Fuse
Metric
Library
– Over
225
metrics:
DCMA
14
Point,
GAO,
EV,
Risk,
Baseline
Compliance
• Metric
Editor
– Only
commercial
product
to
allow
you
to
create
your
own
criteria
7/5/11 Slide 26

27. Fuse
Metrics
Slide 27

28. Baseline
Compliance
• Used
to
determine
how
close
a
schedule
is
planned
and
executed
against
it’s
baseline
• Measure
of
well
the
plan
is
being
executed
• More
than
just
date
comparison
• Looks
at
period-­‐compliance
• Library
included
in
Fuse
2.1

29. Compliance
Scenarios

30. Compliance
Metrics

31. Example
Compliance
Analysis
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%

32. Path
Analysis
• Network
analysis
between
any
two
ac#vi#es
• Valida#on
of
true
con9nuous
path(s)
• Insight
into
dura#on,
cost
&
risk
along
paths

33. Analyzing
Risk
Exposure
Back-­‐end
risk
exposure

34. Conclusion
• Benefit
of
mee#ng
project
schedule
compliance
– More
than
just
“passing
the
test”
– Gives
visibility
into
the
project
– Drives
schedule
maturity
– Breeds
more
realis#c
#me/cost
forecas#ng
• Effort
involved
can
be
extensive
–
Make
the
process
repeatable
– Automate
but
retain
intelligence
– Consider
internal
compliance
metrics

35. Ques#ons?
• Dr.
Dan
Pa:erson
dpa:erson@projectacumen.com
• Brad
Arterbury
barterbury@projectacumen.com
• Mike
Nosbisch
mike.nosbisch@ptcinc.com