SAMPLE REPORT — Illustrative company and figures. No live research was performed, actual agent executions: 0, MAX Not run, Guardians not run (built · integration pending). Human decisions remain required.
Sample Report 6 · Construction
Construction Company — Why Are Projects Over Budget?
Ridgeview Builders (sample) · Sample results only
Client assignment
Five active projects are running over budget. The owner wants the causes ranked, owners assigned and margin recovery options.
How the client assigns it to TED: The owner shares sample budget-to-actual reports for five projects with TED and asks where the money went. TED confirms the analysis will separate recoverable from sunk cost.
Executive summary
The five projects are $970K (7.2%) over a $13.5M combined budget. Materials and labor explain 60% of the overrun; $220K of change orders were performed but not yet billed and are the fastest recovery opportunity.
$13.5M
Combined budget
Five projects
$970K
Total overrun
7.2% over budget
$220K
Unbilled change orders
Fastest recovery
Key findings
1. Project 3 is the worst by percentage
15% over on a $1.2M budget.
2. Materials price drift
$310K, mostly from purchase orders placed late at higher prices.
3. Change orders not billed
$220K of approved field changes lack signed client paperwork.
Budget to actual by project (illustrative)
Variance = actual − budget.
ProjectP1
- Budget
- $2.00M
- Actual
- $2.18M
- Variance
- $0.18M
- %
- 9%
ProjectP2
- Budget
- $3.50M
- Actual
- $3.71M
- Variance
- $0.21M
- %
- 6%
ProjectP3
- Budget
- $1.20M
- Actual
- $1.38M
- Variance
- $0.18M
- %
- 15%
ProjectP4
- Budget
- $4.00M
- Actual
- $4.12M
- Variance
- $0.12M
- %
- 3%
ProjectP5
- Budget
- $2.80M
- Actual
- $3.08M
- Variance
- $0.28M
- %
- 10%
ProjectTotal
- Budget
- $13.50M
- Actual
- $14.47M
- Variance
- $0.97M
- %
- 7.2%
Overrun by cause and mitigation owner
Shares of the $970K total.
CauseMaterials
- Amount
- $310K
- Share
- 32%
- Owner
- Procurement lead
CauseLabor
- Amount
- $270K
- Share
- 28%
- Owner
- Superintendents
CauseChange orders (unbilled)
- Amount
- $220K
- Share
- 23%
- Owner
- Project managers
CauseSchedule / general conditions
- Amount
- $110K
- Share
- 11%
- Owner
- Operations director
CauseProcurement expediting
- Amount
- $60K
- Share
- 6%
- Owner
- Procurement lead
Options & decision table
Margin recovery options
Illustrative.
OptionDocument and bill change orders
- Potential recovery
- Up to $220K
- Timing
- 30 days
OptionLock remaining material buys early
- Potential recovery
- Limits further drift
- Timing
- Immediate
OptionRe-sequence crews on P3 and P5
- Potential recovery
- Reduces labor overrun
- Timing
- 60 days
Prioritized action plan
- 1Assemble signed backup for every unbilled change orderProject managers · 2 weeks
- 2Buy remaining materials at locked prices where cash allowsProcurement lead · 30 days
- 3Weekly labor productivity review on P3 and P5Superintendents · Ongoing
Success metrics
- Change orders billed within 14 days
- No project overrun above 8% at completion
- Weekly cost-to-complete forecasts
SOCRATEE's Perspective
Sample text, not generated
Assumptions to test
- Clients will accept change-order billing
- Budgets were realistic at bid
What deserves questioning
- Is the estimate, not execution, the real problem?
- How much overrun is still ahead?
Sources & evidence
Illustrative assumptions (not evidence)
- All project figures are sample data
Verified data needed before deciding
- Job cost ledgers
- Signed change orders
- Supplier quotes and contracts
Verified evidence attached: none. No citations are provided because no research was performed.
Safeguards
- Contract and billing decisions reviewed by management and counsel where needed
Report status · Research & Review Record
- Actual agent executions: 0
- MAX independent grade: Not run
- 18 Guardians: Built · Integration Pending; no review occurred
- Live research: None performed
- Final decision: Always a human decision
Specialist roles (role definitions · not executed)
- TED — Coordinator: would scope the assignment, route work and assemble the report.
- RES — Would collect cost records and supplier pricing.
- KNOLLY — Would reconcile ledgers to project budgets.
- Project Controls Analyst (role definition) — Would build variance and cost-to-complete analysis.
- SOCRATEE — Would question the original estimates.
- LIBBY — Would check contract terms before billing.
- MAX — Potential independent grader. Not run; no grade exists.
- 18 Guardians — Potential oversight layer. Built · Integration Pending; no review occurred.
How AI Team One Works — Step by Step (prewritten)
Stage 1
The assignment
The owner asks why five projects are over budget.
Stage 2
TED coordinates
TED routes variance analysis by project and by cause.
Stage 3
Specialist responsibilities
A Project Controls role builds variance, KNOLLY reconciles ledgers, LIBBY checks contract terms.
Stage 4
Oversight design
Oversight here would center on whether estimating or execution is at fault: SOCRATEE would test whether the bid estimate, not jobsite execution, is the real driver, LIBBY would route contract and billing questions to management and counsel rather than deciding them, MAX could grade the variance roll-up, and the Guardians could review the owner assignments. In this sample none of that ran: MAX Not run, Guardians not run (built · integration pending).
Stage 5
The executive report
The result would look like "Construction Company — Why Are Projects Over Budget?": findings, options, a prioritized action plan and the data still needed. Prewritten sample content; actual agent executions: 0.