Skip to content
Kairos scheduling handbook

Monthly schedule update review lab

Inspect a fictional monthly update, separate supported changes from forecast-integrity concerns, and issue a defensible disposition.

Fictional practice case. Enable JavaScript for interactive classification and scoring, or work through the evidence and model explanation below.

The scenario

project
Harbor Operations Center (fictional)
reporting Period
May 2026 update
data Date
31 May 2026
contractual Finish
18 December 2026
protocol
For this training case, material status or calculation conflicts require correction and resubmission before acceptance.

Evidence register

cutoff / Status cutoff

Prior: 30 April 2026

Current: 31 May 2026

Support: Daily reports and the signed status sheet both close on 31 May.

future-actual / EXT-260 actual finish

Prior: In progress

Current: 3 June 2026 actual finish

Support: The schedule data date is 31 May; no approved correction note accompanies the file.

new-constraint / COM-700 completion milestone

Prior: No constraint

Current: Finish On or Before: 18 December 2026

Support: The change log does not identify or authorize a new constraint.

duration-reduction / ELEC-420 switchgear fabrication

Prior: 28 working days remaining

Current: 14 working days remaining

Support: No supplier commitment, production record, or recovery action supports the reduction.

path-change / Longest path

Prior: Enclosure to interiors

Current: Electrical procurement to commissioning

Support: The narrative states that the critical path is unchanged.

open-end / TURN-900 training and turnover

Prior: Linked to contractual completion

Current: No successor

Support: No approved scope deletion or resequencing note explains the open end.

calendar / Project calendar

Prior: Five-day calendar

Current: Five-day calendar with Memorial Day exception

Support: The approved calendar register and schedule narrative identify the same exception.

shipping-lag / PROC-315 carrier handoff

Prior: Two-workday lag

Current: Two-workday lag

Support: The relationship note identifies carrier transfer time; no value changed this period.

Model review

The status cutoff is internally consistent.

The schedule, daily reports, and signed status sheet use the same period end.

This is a verified control, not a deficiency. A reviewer should record that the period reconciles and continue to the activity-level checks.

An actual finish falls after the data date.

EXT-260 is recorded as actually finished three days beyond the status cutoff.

Actual dates beyond the data date conflict with the schedule status boundary unless the data date or actual is corrected and documented.

A new completion constraint is unexplained.

The contractual completion milestone gained a Finish On or Before constraint without change-log support.

A new constraint can change late dates and float. The reviewer needs its authority, purpose, and effect before treating the resulting schedule metrics as comparable.

Remaining duration was halved without evidence.

The controlling procurement activity improved by 14 working days without a supplier or recovery record.

A remaining-duration reduction is a forecast assumption, not progress by itself. It needs contemporaneous support and narrative disclosure.

The narrative contradicts the calculated path.

The current longest path runs through electrical procurement while the narrative reports no path change.

A material path change must be explained so decision-makers understand the current driver and the changes that moved it.

Turnover is no longer tied to completion.

TURN-900 lost its successor and can no longer transmit delay to the contractual finish.

An unexplained open end weakens network integrity and may understate completion risk. The logic should be restored or the approved sequence documented.

The calendar exception is documented.

The Memorial Day exception appears consistently in the calendar register and narrative.

A disclosed and approved calendar exception is expected schedule maintenance. The reviewer should confirm it, not create a deficiency merely because it changed.

The short shipping lag is unchanged and explained.

The two-workday carrier handoff remains supported by a relationship note.

This lag is visible, stable, and tied to a described handoff. It can remain subject to the project standard without becoming a new monthly comment.

Model disposition and closeout

Revise and resubmit

The corrected submission should reconcile the future actual, explain or remove the completion constraint, substantiate the remaining-duration change, reconcile the narrative with the current longest path, and restore or justify turnover logic. The reviewer should compare the corrected native file with this submission to confirm that no unrelated model changes were introduced.

All practice labs