Connecting the Work to the Records
On this site, the field assessment has a particular purpose: it tests what the quality records say. If the records show an area was inspected and passed, does the work in that area conform? If the deficiency log shows an item was corrected, does the correction hold up? If no records exist, what does the work itself show about whether it was checked? The answers often decide quality disputes.
Requirements and Tolerances
Before evaluating quality, Paul identifies the requirement for each item: the specification section, approved submittal, manufacturer instruction, finish level or tolerance that applied. Tolerances matter. Construction is never perfect, and most specifications and references allow some variation in flatness, alignment, gaps and finish. The question is whether the work falls within the allowed range for that material and level of quality, not whether it is flawless.
Field Assessment Method
- PlanIdentify the areas, items and requirements to be assessed, and any sampling approach.
- ObserveExamine the work, using tools such as levels and straightedges where tolerances apply.
- RecordPhotograph and locate each condition, noting how it was observed.
- CompareCompare each condition with its requirement and tolerance.
- CorrelateCompare the findings with the quality records for the same areas.
Sampling and Representativeness
Large projects cannot always be assessed item by item. Where sampling is used, Paul explains how the sample was chosen and what it represents, and avoids extending findings beyond what the sample supports. Where conditions vary widely across a project, that variation is itself a finding about the consistency of quality control.
Scope of the Assessment
Paul's workmanship quality assessments cover interior construction, carpentry and millwork, doors and hardware, drywall and finishes, flooring and transitions, and fixtures and accessories, along with the contractor practices that produced them. He does not perform materials testing or engineering evaluation. Where a quality question requires either, he identifies the need. See deficiency and punch list review and construction inspection failures.
Comparison Areas
Where the same work was installed correctly elsewhere on the project, Paul documents those areas for comparison. Comparison areas help show that a requirement could be met under the project's conditions, and they help a fact finder see the difference between acceptable and deficient work. They can also show the reverse: that a condition complained of in one area is consistent with accepted work throughout the project.