Project Review Meeting Agenda and Checklist

Construction Execution

February 7, 2024

Key Points

• Effective project review meetings are essential to oversight and control of projects.

• A consistent, enterprise-wide approach improves the overall quality of project reviews and

facilitates the identification of enterprise risks and performance issues.

• Each project carries its own special challenges and requirements, which will dictate more

attention and more in-depth reviews of particular aspects.

Introduction

A previous Executive Insight addresses the importance of project review meetings and how they benefit

from a well-developed agenda and checklist to ensure consistent, complete, and comprehensive

coverage. This Executive Insight presents a suggested project review meeting agenda and checklist for

both engineering and construction projects.

The nature of the review will be influenced by the role of the particular company as well as the form of

the contract. The various nuances associated with each of these have not been laid out and as such the

suggested agenda and checklist that follow should be regarded as starting points.

Additionally, each project carries its own special challenges and requirements, which will dictate more

attention and more in-depth reviews of particular aspects. Similarly, as the project progresses, emphasis

will shift from initial design activities to those more construction focused. In all cases, effective regular

and meaningful project reviews are essential to project success.

The use of a common project review agenda complemented by a standard project report template

fosters organizational consistency and expectations.

Project Review Meeting Agenda and Checklist

1. Confirmation of project review meeting scope — Many projects, in particular large complex ones,

may involve performance of work under multiple distinct contracts, projects, or tasks. It is important

to understand the limits of the particular review, which may include only one project or a grouping

of related contracts. Whatever the scope of the review meeting, it must be supported as a minimum

by a project report that covers the elements of the project outlined later in the agenda.

2. Reaffirming the baseline — Any effective project review begins by assessing performance against

the established baseline. It is essential to ensure that the project review is being conducted against

the then-current project baseline. This reaffirmation should be reflected in the project report,

typically on a title page listing client and project details; project description and relevant scope of

work; contract type and approved value; and schedule, including key milestones. It is important that

the entire review team is aligned and that no assumptions about what is being discussed are

unclear. As trivial as this may seem, the author has witnessed project review meetings where

various participants had different perceptions of what was being reviewed (for example, partial

project vs. complete project).

3. Safety moment and performance — The importance of safety must be emphasized continuously

and at all levels. Selection of safety topics should reflect upcoming safety challenges the project is

likely to face. Relevance is key. At this point, safety performance from the prior period, planned

upcoming safety actions, or areas of concern should be laid out.

4. Action items — Any action items identified from the prior meeting should be brought up and their

current status reviewed. Completed actions should be formally closed out and completion

subsequently communicated as appropriate. Actions that are overdue should be examined for cause

of delay, effectiveness of management and project team efforts, and requirements and resources to

complete. Impacts of delayed completion should be assessed and any systemic issues noted for

additional follow-up and resolution. There should also be a discussion of the Decision Log,

identifying what decisions have been made since the last update, who made them and why, what

alternatives were considered, and who was informed.

5. Issues and concerns — A summary of the key issues the project team is facing should be discussed

as well as any significant concerns of the project manager. This acts to frame the rest of the project

review meeting. It allows the reviewers to agree with or challenge the project manager’s

assessment. It also helps identify other areas of concern. The status of relationships and

communication with the client and other key stakeholders should be highlighted as well as any

potential impacts on the project.

6. Value creation or value improvement — Often this discussion follows the safety moment. The

author, however, finds it to be more effective when presented in the context of the challenges and

concerns the project is facing. If a formal value improvement program is involved, including value

engineering, then that program should be discussed here and should highlight the improvements

and value (cost savings) created to date.

7. Project manager’s narrative on upcoming activities — Understanding where the project needs to

go in the short term, as presented by the project manager, should proceed the more detailed

performance review of the various project elements to date. This helps highlight the relative

importance of any deviations from planned accomplishments.

8. Changes to the baseline — It is essential to understand how the baseline has changed since the last

review meeting and from inception to date. The review team should confirm that changes were

formally approved by the client and the required contract changes received. Approved changes not

yet reflected by a formal contract change should be examined, communicated, and confirmed with

the client. Unapproved changes should not be reflected in the project baseline. Anticipated future

changes to the baseline should be discussed and those requiring timely notice confirmed. The

review team should seek to identify common drivers of change and elevate discussions as

appropriate, including subsequent management team conversations with the client. Scope control is

essential to project control.

9. Project risks — These should include current assessments of risks related to safety, cost, schedule,

quality, sustainability (environmental and social), and contract. Risks that have emerged to date and

their associated costs and impacts should be compared to the established risk reserves and

decisions made as to whether any portions of the risk reserve should be released. Risks likely to

emerge in the near term should be discussed to ensure adequate risk reserves are available and

sufficient management and mitigation measures have been taken. Opportunities should be

discussed similar to those described for project risks. Assumptions should be confirmed, and any

assumption migration assessed for impacts.

10. Master schedule review — The influence of time (schedule performance) and cost on project

outcomes cannot be overstated. Review of the schedule before detailed performance and cost

reviews of various project elements helps provide context for particularly impactful areas and

identifies areas requiring alternative execution approaches. The master schedule review should

reflect both overall major milestones as well as those specific to the project being reviewed. All

phases of the project should be considered—engineering, procurement, construction, and startup

and commissioning. Engineering deliverables touch all phases of the project. The focus on phases

and areas of emphasis will change. Reviews should highlight schedule progress, ensuring the correct

schedule performance index is being used. Forecasts should be challenged where measurable

improvements in productivity or other performance rates are assumed.

11. Element performance reviews — This series of detailed examinations of the various project

elements includes:

a. Engineering (discipline- or task-focused)

b. Procurement (long lead; high value; supply chain challenges)

c. Construction (site; early works; major trades; specialty trades)

d. Commissioning and startup

Reviews will consider staffing and labor-related performance as well as any specialty equipment and

its performance (e.g., tunnel boring machine). Various review elements are discussed subsequently.

12. Engineering — Engineering reviews should include:

a. Planned vs. actual engineering staffing (by discipline as appropriate). This

should include any lead engineering office and any secondary engineering

locations, including any specialty engineering subcontractors. Support staff

should be similarly reviewed for appropriateness and level.

b. Forecast staffing needs and a review of any issues or concerns related to

staffing.

c. Engineering performance and progress for each location and discipline. Any

performance issues should be examined with respect to cause and

strategies to address. Earned value or other performance factors for

engineering efforts should be compared with planned and forecast factors.

Persistent shortfalls in performance should not be allowed to distort

anticipated future performance (forecast must reflect likely realities).

d. The status of engineering reviews and quality approvals should be examined

and any quality assurance trends discussed.

e. Client review and approval status should be examined and impacts on

performance delay and approach to improvement reviewed.

f. Delayed inputs from clients, vendors, or others should be reviewed, tracked,

and resolution of outstanding items discussed.

g. The level and nature of engineering holds should be reviewed.

h. Issued for procurement or issued for construction (IFC) should be reported,

including an assessment of project impacts.

i. The nature and types of requests for information (RFIs) received should be

reviewed to identify any potential engineering quality issues.

j. Status of Building Information Models (BIMs) should be reviewed for

current and intended use, such as construction planning, progress

assessment, and completeness for client asset management usage.

13. Procurement — procurement and fabrication reviews should be conducted for both the final project

site as well as any module or fabrication yards or facilities. Staffing profiles and performance should

be reviewed similar to that described for engineering labor. Specific focus and review should be

placed on:

a. Owner Furnished Equipment — availability, timing, adequacy for intended

purpose; operating or warranty limitations.

b. Mechanical equipment — vessels, tanks, pumps and other rotating

equipment, heat exchangers, and heaters. Progress should be reviewed

against plan and any holds resulting from client or other approvals;

engineering holds or unaddressed RFIs; or material or subcontractor issues.

Potential impacts should be discussed. Vendor shop loads should be

reviewed as appropriate and current progress against the plan assessed.

Status of equipment lists should be confirmed.

c. Electrical equipment and instrumentation progress should be reviewed

against tag status and any delayed items discussed with respect to potential

construction impacts. Any common vendor quality issues should be

highlighted.

d. Bulk materials — aggregate, concrete, steel (excluding specialty steels or

custom shapes), piping (excluding specialty piping but including status

against line lists), and electrical bulks and instrumentation bulks.

e. Specialty materials — specialty steels and custom shapes; specialty piping

and other specialty items that may impact overall project execution. Ensure

overall material and testing status and documentation.

f. Valving — status of procurement against valve lists.

g. Logistics and expediting — export/import permit status; shipping, special

transporters (e.g., self-propelled modular transport, SPMT), traffic and

logistics; and warehousing (other than site).

14. Construction — review of labor, materials, and equipment; review of construction progress,

considering both earned value and schedule performance index.

a. Labor reviews should include staffing levels by trade vs. plan; overtime and

shift work usage; productivity, trends, and factors impacting productivity;

safety performance; retention rates; indirect labor; and subcontract labor

and performance.

b. Material reviews — receipts; quantities installed and installation rates;

inventories; wastage; forecast needs and any likely receipt shortfalls; and

quality testing results.

c. Construction equipment usage (hours); fuel and fills consumption;

maintenance status and schedule; specialty equipment requirements; and

equipment release dates.

d. Indirect Field Costs

e. Construction progress by account — civil, concrete, structural steel,

buildings, mechanical equipment, piping, electrical, instrumentation,

painting, insulation, scaffolding, and others.

f. Status of key subcontracts – staffing, performance, progress, change orders,

claims, and payments.

g. The appropriateness and effectiveness of construction technology used

should be reviewed.

h. Compliance reviews to address both Buy America(n) and any project labor

agreements as well as any social programs such as minority-owned or

disadvantaged individuals-owned business enterprises (MBE/DBE)

requirements.

15. Startup and commissioning — plan completion, staffing, system turnover, including associated

system testing and overall plant startup. Specific review items should include:

a. Startup staffing levels.

b. Startup document status, including operating and maintenance manuals.

c. Mechanical completion and turnover.

d. Overall startup progress.

16. Quality Management System — review of project quality performance, including quality system

audits, discipline audits, construction audits, and project closeout audits.

17. Project administration — performance of project systems, including human resources (HR), project

administration, document management, IT (project cybersecurity; appropriate use of artificial

intelligence), and site security.

18. Overall project financial status — essentially consolidates costs from a client perspective and

forecasts cost to complete. This is reviewed against client budgets and contractual commitments

(e.g., not-to-exceed price).

19. Company project financial status — a review of the commercial performance of the project.

Principal aspects of this review include:

a. Contract status

i. Approved and unapproved changes

ii. Open “notices”

iii. Claims and disputes

b. Revenue

i. Client furnished materials (CFM)

ii. Payments received

iii. Revenue reserves (advanced payments; payments in dispute)

iv. Unbilled amounts (earned but not yet billed)

c. Cost

i. CFM

ii. Labor

iii. Materials

iv. Equipment

v. Subcontracts

vi. Indirect field costs

vii. Commissioning and startup costs

viii. Cost reserves (contingency breakdown and analysis)

ix. Risk reserves

x. Event risk reserves

xi. Bonds and other financial costs

d. Cash

i. Cash balance and forecast (anticipated receipts and bills coming

due)

ii. Invested cash

iii. Receivable status and aging

iv. Outstanding mobilization payments

e. Available incentives — earned, unearned, forfeited; likely amount at

completion. These are often related to project Key Performance Indicators

(KPI)

f. Remaining risks

g. Profit & Loss (P&L) – comparison to project plan (as-sold values/as

contracted values) and forecast at completion

i. Gross project margin

ii. General & Administrative (G&A) and overhead including unbillable

expenses

iii. Earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT)

20. Project audits — review of findings and status of corrective actions; focus on any systemic issues

identified.

21. Completion and closeout — status review

22. Action items — document action items from meeting and assign responsibilities and due dates.

23. Prepare meeting minutes — after meeting and distribute.

Summary

Effective project review meetings are essential to oversight and control of projects. A consistent,

enterprise-wide approach (project report; project agenda) improves the overall quality of project

reviews and facilitates the identification of enterprise risks and performance issues.

About the Author

Bob Prieto was elected to the National Academy of Construction in 2011. He is a senior executive who is

effective in shaping and executing business strategy and a recognized leader within the infrastructure,

engineering, and construction industries.

Although the author and NAC have made every effort to ensure accuracy

and completeness of the advice or information presented within, NAC

and the author assume no responsibility for any errors, inaccuracies,

omissions or inconsistencies it may contain, or for any results obtained

from the use of this information. The information is provided on an “as

is” basis with no guarantees of completeness, accuracy, usefulness or

timeliness, and without any warranties of any kind whatsoever, express

or implied. Reliance on any information provided by NAC or the author is

solely at your own risk.