60% complete: what does that tell me about the next drawdown?
I need the calculation behind the percentage, the day it describes, and the document that connects it to the funding terms.
The progress report says the works are 60% complete.
Before I multiply that by a contract price, I want to know how the report reached 60%. A percentage can describe the work observed, a share of a budget, or a share of scheduled payments. The label alone does not tell me which.
I use 60% as the question for this lesson. I have constructed the two documents below to explore it, with invented rows, weights, milestone shares, dates and roles. They let us follow a calculation without opening anybody's project files.
In this example I can reproduce the reported percentage. I still cannot calculate the next drawdown from it.
01Synthetic documents
Two schedules, with different things in the denominator
Schedule M records cumulative payment shares at named milestones. Worksheet W records progress weighted by a direct-works budget. The excerpts do not state how W is to be used under M or under a loan facility.
M · Payment milestones
This invented schedule assigns a cumulative share of the construction contract price to each named event. It does not assign a percentage of physical completion to those events.
- Document
- Payment schedule M · revision A · section 2
- Document date
- 2030-04-02 · synthetic
- Basis
- Construction contract price. Each figure is cumulative, not the amount for one period.
| Named event | Cumulative payment share |
|---|---|
| Site established | 12% |
| Foundations and below-ground structure complete | 28% |
| Frame complete | 46% |
| External walls and roof complete | 72% |
| Services commissioned | 90% |
| Handover | 100% |
60 lies between 46 and 72 on this payment scale. That numerical position does not establish that either event has occurred, or create an entitlement to interpolate between them.
W · Weighted progress
For this example only, the worksheet defines overall completion as the sum of each budget weight multiplied by that category's reported completion.
- Document
- Progress worksheet W · revision C · section 1
- Prepared by
- The borrower's cost consultant · synthetic role
- Observation date
- 2030-04-18 · synthetic
- Issue date
- 2030-04-22 · synthetic
- Basis
- The example's direct-works budget. The weights total 100%; land, professional fees and tax are excluded.
| Work category | Budget weight | Reported completion | Contribution · percentage points |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enabling works, foundations and below-ground structure | 15% | 100% | 15 |
| Frame | 25% | 100% | 25 |
| External walls, roof and services | 40% | 50% | 20 |
| Commissioning and handover | 20% | 0% | 0 |
Weighted completion60%
15% × 100% + 25% × 100% + 40% × 50% + 20% × 0% = 60%. Half of the third category contributes 20 percentage points. The category list is not a timeline: it does not say that work must finish in this order.
What I need to connect W to payment
W's 60% is weighted progress against its own budget. M's figures are cumulative payment shares against a contract price. Even if both tables ended at 100%, that would not make their denominators or purposes the same.
W reports the frame as 100% complete, so I might read it as having reached M's ‘Frame complete’ event and its 46% payment share. Before using that reading, I would need two things missing from these excerpts: a definition showing that W's frame category covers the same scope as M's event, and a record that the event has occurred. Even with both, 46% would describe a cumulative share of the contract price. It would not give me the next drawable amount.
The excerpts contain no mapping between the categories and the payment events, no rule for part-completed milestones, and no facility term that converts W's result into a drawdown. I would record those missing references. I cannot supply them by choosing whichever schedule looks more convenient.
02Dates and authorship
Keep the observation date and issue date beside the percentage
W was issued on 22 April, but describes observations on 18 April. I would keep both dates beside the percentage. Calling it the position on 22 April would move the observation date forward by four days. This example has no record of the work in between.
W identifies the preparer's role as the borrower's cost consultant. It does not tell me who observed each category, or what measurement records support the reported completion. Those are further questions. Reproducing the weighted sum does not establish that the work exists on site.
03Lender monitoring
What I would ask before using it in a drawdown assessment
RICS treats the financial review and the programme review separately. Section 3.4.4 discusses spend against budgets and construction payments alongside actual facility drawdowns. Section 3.4.5 discusses progress against the programme and the sequence of activities. Those are source summaries [1, 2]. The weighted formula above is my invented example, not a RICS formula.
My question is therefore: where do the funding documents say how this calculation enters the drawdown assessment? I would look for the relevant term and its version, the period being assessed, previous drawdowns and evidence for any conditions the term requires. This is a reading method, not a universal drawdown formula.
I would also keep the IMS's technical assessment for the lender separate from certification of value due to the contractor. That wording follows the role distinction in section 3.4.2 [3]. It is not a request for the monitor to choose an attachment and certify the contractor's payment.
04A question to take back
Ask for the reference that connects the two
I would write: ‘For the 60% reported in W with an observation date of 18 April, please identify the calculation worksheet and budget version, the records supporting each category's completion, and the provision that explains its use in this period's drawdown assessment.’
If the reply supplies a worksheet but no funding reference, I have learned how the percentage was calculated. Its use in the drawdown assessment remains undocumented in what I have received. I would keep that distinction in the file rather than turn a missing reference into an amount.
05Limits
What this page cannot establish
This lesson does not establish physical completion, interpret a real contract, certify payment or authorise a drawdown. Pactbeam presents evidence and the places where it is missing. The accountable person still decides.
The documents and arithmetic are synthetic. The formula is defined for this example only. The RICS references concern UK lender monitoring; they do not prescribe a Taiwan private-contract payment method or a Maharashtra Form 3 calculation.
These excerpts are enough to reproduce the example's 60%. They are not enough to establish the next drawable amount, or to say that either document is wrong or that anybody is in breach.
06Sources and construction
What comes from a source, and what I made for the lesson
The source notes paraphrase the cited sections. The reading method is my inference. The schedules, their weights and milestone shares, dates and roles were constructed for the lesson, with no claim to describe a real project.
- Source · 1RICS, Lender's independent monitoring surveyor, section 3.4.4: financial reporting considers budgets, payments and actual facility drawdowns.§3.4.4 · pp. 39–40
- Source · 2The same publication, section 3.4.5: programme review considers progress of activities and their technical sequence.§3.4.5 · p. 41
- Inference · 3I use the role distinction in section 3.4.2 to frame a question about the lender's drawdown assessment. I do not ask the IMS to select a schedule for certifying value due to the contractor. The individual appointment still matters.§3.4.2
- Synthetic exampleThe lesson starts with a 60% question. M and W were constructed for it, with invented rows, weights, milestone shares, dates and roles. Checking the denominator, dates and connecting provision is the author's reading method, not a prescribed professional procedure.
When you use a completion percentage in a drawdown assessment, where is its calculation basis, observation date and connection to the funding terms recorded?
I would like to hear which document you look for next. Write to me with the document names and roles; please do not send real project files or identifying details.