Schedule / Milestone Progress Verification

Description

the evidence system camera footage, time-lapse sequences, and the compare/snapshot tool are used alongside the project programme to visually verify whether work on site is tracking to plan — identifying delays, confirming milestone completions, and generating footage-backed evidence for EOT or prolongation claims.

Trigger

A scheduled programme review meeting, a reported or suspected delay to a critical-path activity, a milestone payment point approaching, or a subcontractor's completion claim that needs visual verification against the programme.

Activity

Reviewing preserved footage, time-lapse, or snapshot comparisons against the planned programme to confirm whether work has progressed at the expected rate and build a contemporaneous visual record to support schedule-related claims.

Conclusion

The programme review is completed with visual evidence either confirming on-schedule progress or identifying and quantifying a delay, incorporated into the programme update or a formal EOT claim package.

Role detail

the evidence system camera footage, time-lapse sequences, and the compare/snapshot tool are used alongside the project programme to visually verify whether work on site is tracking to plan — identifying delays, confirming milestone completions, and generating footage-backed evidence for EOT or prolongation claims.

Steps (10)

1. 1A programme review trigger occurs — a scheduled review, a delay reported by the site manager, an approaching milestone payment date, or a subcontractor's completion claim.
2. 2PM or planning engineer identifies specific activities in the programme that need visual verification and notes the relevant date ranges and site areas.
3. 3the evidence system recordings or time-lapse accessed for the relevant periods and camera views covering the work areas in question.
4. 4Footage reviewed to assess actual progress — what was built, when work started and stopped, worker numbers deployed, plant and materials on site.
5. 5Compare/snapshot tool used to generate before-and-after images of key areas at milestone dates, enabling a rapid visual assessment of progress increment.
6. 6Time-lapse sequences reviewed at accelerated rate to assess activity patterns — identifying periods of inactivity, slow mobilisation, or weekend working.
7. 7Observations documented and compared against the baseline programme. Delays quantified in days.
8. 8Where a delay is identified, footage evidence used to notify the relevant subcontractor, build an EOT/prolongation record, or brief senior management.
9. 9If subcontractor underperformance is identified, footage triggers a formal written notice of delay or a recovery plan discussion.
10. 10Visual record archived as part of contemporaneous project documentation, available for future claims or disputes.

Evidence (3)

• “They are using time-lapse and recordings to monitor subcontractor progress against the programme and to identify delays for EOT claims.”

  Anonymized evidence record 2.1

• “Camera footage used to compare planned vs. actual progress at milestone dates — screenshot comparison provided visual proof of delay quantum for the client.”

  Anonymized evidence record 2.2

• “Used recordings to verify that the concrete sub was not delivering the agreed number of pours per week — used as basis for formal delay notice.”

  Anonymized evidence record 2.3

ROI model — Template A

Evercam replaces or reduces physical site visits with remote viewing. The baseline cost is the number of visits × cost per visit. The saving is the proportion of visits that Evercam eliminates.

saving = visits_per_week × project_duration_weeks × visit_cost × evercam_reduction_pct

Notes

This workflow sits at the intersection of programme management, commercial management, and claims. The key distinction from Workflow 1 (Remote Monitoring) is intentionality: this workflow begins with a specific question about programme compliance and ends with a documented answer.

Tags