Assessments

Scored project assessments

A calculator answers a bounded question. An assessment scores a whole position, interprets it against bands, and tells you what to do next. Everything runs in your browser.

This assessment scores a single project's adherence to the Construction Management Excellence Framework — six performance domains, each with a defined cadence, a measurable output and a single named owner. Read the framework.

Assessment context
65.31MATURITY
MANAGED65.31
OPTIMISING
85100
MANAGED
6584
DEFINED
4064
INITIAL
039
Points lost
34.69
out of 100 available
Biggest drag
Baseline integration model
−4.14 points
Categories below 65
5
of 12 categories
To reach next band
19.69
points to OPTIMISING
Weighted contribution
Charter & stakeholder definition4.68
Mobilisation & first-30-day cadence3.90
Baseline integrity9.02
Baseline integration model4.86
Pull planning & look-aheads6.39
PPC tracking & field reporting5.22
EVM cadence & forecast at completion8.36
Change control & cash flow5.58
Live register & leadership review6.21
Independent assurance triggers3.15
Commissioning, snag closure & sign-off5.84
Lessons-learned capture & embedding2.10
Shortfall34.69
Domain roll-up
Initiation & Mobilisation
Weight 12%
71.5
MANAGEDdelivering 8.58 of 12

Weakest: Mobilisation & first-30-day cadence (65)

Planning & Controls
Weight 20%
69.4
MANAGEDdelivering 13.88 of 20

Weakest: Baseline integration model (54)

Delivery & Production
Weight 18%
64.5
DEFINEDdelivering 11.61 of 18

Weakest: PPC tracking & field reporting (58)

Cost & EVM
Weight 20%
69.7
MANAGEDdelivering 13.94 of 20

Weakest: Change control & cash flow (62)

Risk & Assurance
Weight 16%
58.5
DEFINEDdelivering 9.36 of 16

Weakest: Independent assurance triggers (45)

Handover & Lessons
Weight 14%
56.7
DEFINEDdelivering 7.94 of 14

Weakest: Lessons-learned capture & embedding (35)

Score each category · 0–100
Initiation & Mobilisation · 12%
Charter & stakeholder definition6%

Charter agreed, stakeholder map live, decision rights named

4.68 / 6
weighted
MANAGED
1.32 pts
Mobilisation & first-30-day cadence6%

Mobilisation plan executed; reporting rhythm established from day one

3.90 / 6
weighted
MANAGED
2.10 pts
Planning & Controls · 20%
Baseline integrity11%

Schedule, cost and risk baselines exist, are approved and are under change control

9.02 / 11
weighted
MANAGED
1.98 pts
Baseline integration model9%

The three baselines are linked — a slip moves the forecast automatically

4.86 / 9
weighted
DEFINED
4.14 pts
Delivery & Production · 18%
Pull planning & look-aheads9%

Six-week look-ahead with constraint analysis, run by the people doing the work

6.39 / 9
weighted
MANAGED
2.61 pts
PPC tracking & field reporting9%

Percent Plan Complete measured weekly; daily field reporting is actually used

5.22 / 9
weighted
DEFINED
3.78 pts
Cost & EVM · 20%
EVM cadence & forecast at completion11%

EVM run on a fixed cadence; EAC rebuilt, not extrapolated

8.36 / 11
weighted
MANAGED
2.64 pts
Change control & cash flow9%

No work without instruction; cash flow forecast maintained against the programme

5.58 / 9
weighted
DEFINED
3.42 pts
Risk & Assurance · 16%
Live register & leadership review9%

Register current, owners named, triggers defined, reviewed weekly at leadership level

6.21 / 9
weighted
MANAGED
2.79 pts
Independent assurance triggers7%

Defined events that force an independent check, and evidence they have fired

3.15 / 7
weighted
DEFINED
3.85 pts
Handover & Lessons · 14%
Commissioning, snag closure & sign-off8%

Staged commissioning, verified snag closure, statutory approvals tracked to issue

5.84 / 8
weighted
MANAGED
2.16 pts
Lessons-learned capture & embedding6%

Captured with owners, and the target standard or template actually amended

2.10 / 6
weighted
INITIAL
3.90 pts
Weakest areas

Ranked by points lost, not by raw score

A 62 on a 20%-weighted category costs more than a 54 on a 10% one — weight decides where the effort goes.

  1. 1
    Baseline integration model
    score 54 · weight 9%
    4.14
    DEFINED
  2. 2
    Lessons-learned capture & embedding
    score 35 · weight 6%
    3.90
    INITIAL
  3. 3
    Independent assurance triggers
    score 45 · weight 7%
    3.85
    DEFINED
  4. 4
    PPC tracking & field reporting
    score 58 · weight 9%
    3.78
    DEFINED
Generated recommendations

15 actions from this scoring

Baseline integration modelMEDIUM
DEFINED — 54/100

Some linkage exists but it is manual and periodic. Define how a schedule change propagates to the cost forecast and the risk exposure, and who performs it.

Weight 9% · costing 4.1 points · act this month
Lessons-learned capture & embeddingHIGH
INITIAL — 35/100

Nothing is being captured, and the knowledge leaves when the team does. This is the cheapest item in the framework and the only one that cannot be recovered later — book the first session this month.

Weight 6% · costing 3.9 points · act this month
Independent assurance triggersMEDIUM
DEFINED — 45/100

Assurance triggers are defined but have never fired, which usually means the thresholds are set where nothing reaches them. Review whether the triggers are real or decorative.

Weight 7% · costing 3.9 points · act this month
PPC tracking & field reportingMEDIUM
DEFINED — 58/100

PPC is measured but not acted on. A falling PPC trend predicts the slip weeks before the master programme shows it — put the trend in front of leadership, not in an appendix.

Weight 9% · costing 3.8 points · act this month
Change control & cash flowMEDIUM
DEFINED — 62/100

Change control exists on paper but is bypassed under time pressure. Every bypass becomes an entitlement argument later — enforce the threshold or lower it to one people will actually use.

Weight 9% · costing 3.4 points · act this month
Live register & leadership reviewLOW
MANAGED — 69/100

Register discipline is good. Test the top three exposures against remaining contingency — that reconciliation is what turns a register into a control.

Weight 9% · costing 2.8 points · monitor
EVM cadence & forecast at completionLOW
MANAGED — 76/100

EVM cadence is solid. Rebuild the EAC bottom-up at least quarterly and reconcile it against the trend — where they diverge, the trend is usually optimistic.

Weight 11% · costing 2.6 points · monitor
Pull planning & look-aheadsLOW
MANAGED — 71/100

Pull planning is working. Push the constraint analysis further out so constraints are removed before they bite, not logged as they do.

Weight 9% · costing 2.6 points · monitor
Commissioning, snag closure & sign-offLOW
MANAGED — 73/100

Closeout is under control. Split claimed-complete from verified-complete — the gap between the two is where the final inspection surprises come from.

Weight 8% · costing 2.2 points · monitor
Mobilisation & first-30-day cadenceLOW
MANAGED — 65/100

Cadence is established and holding. Test whether the outputs are actually read — a report nobody uses is cadence without control.

Weight 6% · costing 2.1 points · monitor
Baseline integrityLOW
MANAGED — 82/100

Baselines are sound and controlled. Verify the schedule baseline still reflects the actual construction methodology, not the tender assumption.

Weight 11% · costing 2.0 points · monitor
Charter & stakeholder definitionLOW
MANAGED — 78/100

Charter and stakeholder map are in place. Refresh the stakeholder map at each stage change; the influential parties at consent are not the ones that matter at handover.

Weight 6% · costing 1.3 points · monitor
Cross-cuttingHIGH
Baselines exist but do not talk to each other

Baseline integrity is good while the integration model is weak — three well-kept records in three separate places. A schedule slip that does not move the cost forecast means the integration model is decorative. This is the highest-value fix available to this project.

Pattern detected across two or more categories
Cross-cuttingHIGH
Pull planning without measurement

The collaborative planning is happening but nothing measures whether the plan is achieved. PPC is what converts the ritual into a control — without it you have well-attended meetings, not a production system.

Pattern detected across two or more categories
Cross-cuttingHIGH
Nothing is checking the checkers

Assurance triggers are the mechanism that catches the other five domains failing. Below this level every other score on this page is self-reported. Restoring assurance is the single highest-leverage action in the framework.

Pattern detected across two or more categories
Calculation

How this score was produced

CategoryScoreWeightWeightedPoints lostStatus
Charter & stakeholder definition786%4.681.32 MANAGED 78
Mobilisation & first-30-day cadence656%3.902.10 MANAGED 65
Baseline integrity8211%9.021.98 MANAGED 82
Baseline integration model549%4.864.14 DEFINED 54
Pull planning & look-aheads719%6.392.61 MANAGED 71
PPC tracking & field reporting589%5.223.78 DEFINED 58
EVM cadence & forecast at completion7611%8.362.64 MANAGED 76
Change control & cash flow629%5.583.42 DEFINED 62
Live register & leadership review699%6.212.79 MANAGED 69
Independent assurance triggers457%3.153.85 DEFINED 45
Commissioning, snag closure & sign-off738%5.842.16 MANAGED 73
Lessons-learned capture & embedding356%2.103.90 INITIAL 35
Total100%65.3134.69

Weighted score = Score × Weight ÷ 100. Final = sum of all weighted scores. Points lost = Weight × (100 − Score) ÷ 100.