Survey of Executed Works and Condition Report: The Document That Unlocks a Stalled-Project Restart

How to survey executed works and prepare a condition report for a stalled public work: existing condition, quantities, quality, measurements, deterioration and remaining scope.

Check it out!

In a stalled public work, the survey of executed works and the condition report have the purpose of technically reconstructing the project’s actual condition. The document must show, with verifiable evidence, what was executed, where it is located, in what quantity, its state of preservation, which design requirements should have been met, which quality records exist and how much of that work can effectively be reused in the restart.

This work is different from simply copying the latest measurement bulletin. Measurement represents contractual recognition of certain services at a given date and under specific criteria; the condition report represents the physical and documentary condition found at the time of the new assessment. Between those two moments, deterioration, loss of traceability, vandalism, undocumented changes, component exposure, warranty expiration, preservation failures or discoveries may have occurred that change the classification of what appeared to be complete.

There is also no single universal model for a “construction report.” Depending on the objective, the work may involve an existing-condition survey, verification inspection, comparative compliance analysis, specialized inspections, testing, assessment of defects and deterioration, physical-financial reconciliation and, when technical determination of causes or responsibilities is required, forensic engineering activities with their own methodology. The scope should be defined by the problem the Administration needs to solve, not by the generic name of the document.

For a restart, the expected result is an existing-condition baseline robust enough to support subsequent decisions: preserve or replace elements, correct defects, review the design, quantify the remaining scope, update the cost estimate, structure the procurement, plan inspection and define tests and acceptance criteria. Without this baseline, the new contract tends to receive uncertainties that should have been eliminated before returning to market.

What a condition report must demonstrate in a stalled public work

A condition report should not be a collection of photographs accompanied by generic observations. It must establish a chain of evidence linking planned scope, condition found, verified quantity, demonstrated quality and recommended decision.

The logic is similar to that applied in Diagnostic Engineering: first identify the object and the technical question; then collect evidence; next assess condition, anomalies and constraints; finally convert the findings into recommendations. In a stalled public work, however, there is an additional layer: each conclusion must relate to the contract, designs, measurements, costs and future remaining scope.

An item recorded as “100% executed” in the contractual history may end the survey in very different conditions. It may be intact and fully reusable; it may be executed but lack sufficient documentation; it may require testing to confirm performance; it may have localized repairable damage; or it may have lost its reusable condition and need to be redone. The report should therefore avoid turning a measured percentage into an automatic conclusion about condition.

A basic matrix may use the following fields:

Field	Question to be answered
Identification	Which item, system, area, work front or WBS code is being assessed?
Design reference	Which drawing, design narrative, specification or revision defines the requirement?
Contract quantity	How much was provided for in the contract or current baseline?
Measured quantity	How much was previously recognized in measurements?
Verified quantity	How much was actually verified in the field?
Condition	Intact, degraded, incomplete, damaged, inaccessible or not located?
Compliance	Is there sufficient evidence that the requirement was met?
Evidence	Photo, test, certificate, RDO, measurement, report, label, serial number or other record?
Reusability	Can it remain, or must it be verified, repaired, replaced or executed?
Impact on remaining scope	Which service, quantity or cost must be included in the restart?

The value of the document lies precisely in connecting these dimensions. A photograph without a location reference is of little use for estimating; a spreadsheet without field evidence is weak; a test unrelated to the specification does not demonstrate acceptance; and a quantitative survey without quality analysis may overstate reusable progress.

Condition report, building inspection, survey, forensic engineering and acceptance are not the same thing

A recurring mistake is to contract a technical service simply because its name sounds close to the need. For stalled public works, correctly defining the object avoids both excessive and insufficient scope.

ABNT NBR 16747:2020 addresses building inspection as an activity aimed at the systemic assessment of the conservation, functioning, use, operation and maintenance conditions of buildings. Technical materials from IBAPE Nacional emphasize that this inspection has its own purpose and should not be confused with forensic engineering or with handover and acceptance inspections. This matters for a restart: a building-inspection methodology may provide useful concepts for condition assessment, but it should not automatically be presented as if it were the specific normative instrument for accepting a stalled public work or determining responsibilities.

ABNT NBR 13752:2024, in turn, addresses forensic engineering in civil construction. IBAPE technical references on the 2024 revision distinguish inspection modalities, including verification, comparative compliance analysis and causality analysis. When the Administration’s question is only to record the existing condition, the required methodology may differ from that needed to determine cause, causal nexus or responsibility for a failure.

Contract acceptance is another activity. Article 140 of Law 14,133 governs acceptance of public works and services and provides for verifications, inspections, tests and other evidence required to assess satisfactory execution. A report produced for a restart may support acceptance of portions or decisions about reusability, but it does not automatically replace the formal acts assigned to the competent public officials.

A condition report should also not be confused with an As-Built. The engineering As-Built records the configuration actually constructed; the condition report adds assessment of condition, evidence, compliance and reusability. In a stalled project, the two may be complementary: first reconstruct what exists; then assess the condition of that existing work.

This distinction is decisive for contracting. If the problem is “we do not know exactly what was built,” the scope needs an existing-condition survey. If it is “we know what exists, but we do not know whether it is intact,” inspections and tests are required. If it is “there is a dispute over cause and responsibility,” forensic engineering may be necessary. If it is “we need to define the balance for a new contract,” physical condition, quantities, design and cost estimate must be integrated.

Start with the right document: the survey must be decision-oriented

Before going to the field, the team should define which decisions the work must support. This changes how data are collected.

A survey intended only to record physical progress may be limited to quantities. A survey intended to contract the remaining scope must also identify repairs, interfaces, temporary works, tests, missing documentation and risks that will need to be transferred or retained by the Administration. A survey intended to discuss contractual responsibility requires more rigorous preservation of the chain of evidence.

The initial stage should map:

• contract, procurement notice, Terms of Reference and attachments;
• designs and revisions issued during construction;
• bill of quantities and calculation memoranda;
• contract amendments, administrative adjustments and scope changes;
• contract schedule and approved revisions;
• measurement bulletins and measurement calculations;
• Daily Construction Reports;
• inspection reports;
• RFIs, field instructions and change records;
• Inspection and Test Plans;
• test reports and certificates;
• nonconformity records and their dispositions;
• materials and equipment documentation;
• partial As-Built, redlines and markups;
• preservation and conservation records during the stoppage.

The RDO helps reconstruct when and under what conditions certain services were executed. The Measurement Bulletin shows how the contract recognized progress. Records of QA/QC in construction, in turn, indicate whether inspections, tests and treatment of nonconformities took place.

The absence of a document is also a finding. If piping was installed but there is no record of the required leak test; if a cable was installed without certification; if structural concrete lacks traceability of batches and tests; if equipment is in the field without receiving and preservation documentation, the lack of evidence must enter the decision matrix.

How to structure the field survey without losing traceability

On small projects, photographs organized by area may be sufficient for part of the work. On complex projects, a coding structure must be created before the inspection.

The database may use the project WBS, design codes, discipline, system, subsystem, room, floor, area or work front. The principle is simple: anyone reading the matrix later should be able to return to the location, identify the element and verify the associated evidence.

A photograph should include, whenever applicable, date, location, orientation, item identification and relation to the field sheet. Equipment should record manufacturer, model, serial number, tag, installation condition and storage condition. Linear elements need start point, end point and length. Services distributed over areas should be quantified in a manner compatible with the unit in the contractual bill of quantities.

When the existing condition differs greatly from the drawings, the Existing-Condition Engineering Survey becomes a central part of the assessment. Technologies such as 3D Laser Scanning can accelerate geometric capture and facilitate comparisons, especially in dense environments, but they must be combined with technical inspection: geometry alone does not reveal adhesion, torque, insulation, leak-tightness, strength, operation or internal integrity.

Field planning should also account for what cannot be observed. Covered structures, embedded installations and inaccessible components require indirect verification methods, sample openings, nondestructive testing or use of historical documentation. The report must state these limitations explicitly.

Technical sheet by item or system

A consistent sheet may contain:

1. element identification;
2. discipline and system;
3. reference design/revision;
4. measurement unit;
5. planned, measured and verified quantity;
6. visual condition;
7. observed anomalies or damage;
8. available documentation;
9. existing tests and additional tests required;
10. compliance classification;
11. reusability recommendation;
12. action required before restart;
13. impact on remaining scope;
14. associated photographic and documentary evidence.

This level of traceability allows the same data to be reused in the revised design, cost estimate, recovery plan, inspection and subsequent handover.

Executed quantity is not the same as reusable quantity

This is the distinction that most changes the restart cost estimate.

Consider 1,000 m² of a certain finish recorded as executed. The survey may confirm 1,000 m² physically present, but identify that 150 m² have lost adhesion and 50 m² must be removed to execute an interface that was not originally foreseen. Physical execution remains 1,000 m², but the reusable quantity may be only 800 m². The remaining scope will not consist only of what was missing from the original contract: it will include corrections and reinstatement.

The same applies to equipment. Delivered and installed equipment may have been measured, but after a long period without preservation it may require manufacturer inspection, replacement of consumable components, firmware update, a new start-up or even replacement. The reusability decision must consider performance and residual service-life risk.

For this reason, the matrix should distinguish at least:

Class	Meaning for the restart
Executed and accepted	remains without significant intervention
Executed and reusable with documentary issue	requires reconstruction of records, but not necessarily physical rework
Executed and conditional on testing	counts as reusable only after verification
Executed with repair required	remains after the defined intervention
Executed and not reusable	must be removed, replaced or redone
Not executed	directly forms part of the physical balance

This classification avoids two opposite errors: paying again for something that is already adequate, or failing to contract repairs and replacements because the item appeared as “executed.”

How to assess deterioration caused by the stoppage

Idle time does not affect every element in the same way. Exposure should be analyzed according to deterioration mechanism and system criticality.

Structures and envelopes may be affected by water, thermal variation, corrosion, cracking, carbonation, chemical attack or failure of temporary protections. Electrical installations may present moisture, oxidation, insulation degradation, contamination, mechanical damage or battery deterioration. Hydraulic systems may accumulate contaminants, experience seal drying or corrosion. Mechanical equipment may require preservation, lubrication, alignment and storage-condition verification.

The report does not need to turn the entire project into a testing campaign. The strategy should be risk-based. Critical elements, items without evidence or items showing signs of anomalies justify deeper investigation. Low-criticality elements in clearly satisfactory condition may be handled with compatible inspection and documentation.

The decision on testing should indicate:

• which technical question the test resolves;
• which requirement or specification will be used for comparison;
• which sample is representative;
• which safety and access conditions are required;
• how the result changes the reusability classification.

For systems that will later undergo commissioning, this stage is especially valuable. The objective is not to anticipate the entire commissioning of buildings and facilities, but to prevent degraded or untraceable components from advancing to final testing as if they were ready.

Reconcile the survey with measurements and payments

After surveying the physical condition, the findings must be compared with the contractual history. This reconciliation should be technical and cautious.

A difference between verified quantity and measured quantity may have several explanations: measurement by event or stage, design change, work subsequently removed, registration error, inability to access the element, progress performed after the latest measurement or an actual inconsistency that requires clarification. The report should not jump from a discrepancy to an accusation.

The analysis should identify:

1. original contractual quantity;
2. current quantity after changes;
3. cumulative measured quantity;
4. quantity paid when this information is within scope;
5. quantity verified in the field;
6. technically reusable quantity;
7. difference requiring clarification;
8. effect on the remaining balance.

Technical inspection of public works and measurement records are essential sources for this reconstruction. When the public body lacks enough staff to review a large volume of evidence, a technical support service can organize samples, calculation memoranda, field records and discrepancy matrices to support the legally responsible officials.

Law 14,133 preserves the responsibility of public officials for decisions within their authority. The consultant does not formally ratify previous payments or replace the contract inspector; it provides technical support, identifies inconsistencies and structures evidence for administrative, legal or control analysis when necessary.

Stored materials and equipment are also part of the report

It is common for restart efforts to focus on what is incorporated into the work and overlook stored materials. These may represent a significant portion of the investment and future scope.

The inventory should record ownership, origin, fiscal documentation where relevant, receipt, storage conditions, lot, expiration, warranty, packaging, identification, quantity and condition. For equipment, tags and serial numbers should be included.

Simply being present in the warehouse does not prove that an item can be installed. Preservation conditions prescribed by the manufacturer, exposure to moisture, temperature, dust, impacts, storage duration and any maintenance requirements during the stoppage must be verified.

Obsolete items deserve additional analysis. In electronic systems, automation, telecommunications and security, equipment originally specified may already be discontinued or incompatible with current software versions and components. In that case, the problem goes beyond preserving the existing item and involves system compatibility and possible design revision.

The report must result in a map of the remaining scope, not merely a diagnosis

To unlock a restart, the conclusion must be actionable. The final product must allow a transition from findings to a map of the remaining work.

Each assessed item should end up associated with an action: retain, document, test, repair, replace, remove, complete or redesign. These actions feed the new bill of quantities directly.

A good report therefore creates a bridge to Cost Engineering. Recovery services need to be quantified; dismantling and temporary access need to enter the estimate; additional testing generates costs; remobilization and re-establishment of the site must be considered; equipment that has lost usable condition must be replaced.

The Construction and Engineering Services Cost Estimate must start from the technical balance, not merely the financial balance of the original contract. Subtracting payments from the contracted value does not, by itself, produce the cost to complete the project.

This difference is why the condition report frequently “unlocks” the restart: it reduces the uncertainty that prevents design, estimating and procurement from advancing.

How to structure the final document

The organization should support both executive and technical reading. A typical structure may include:

1. Objective, scope and limitations

Define the technical question, covered areas, disciplines, documents received, access restrictions and excluded activities. If no test was performed, do not imply that one was. If an area could not be accessed, record the limitation.

2. References and documentary baseline

List the contract, designs, revisions, measurements, reports, specifications, standards, amendments and other documents actually used.

3. Methodology

Explain coding, sampling, instruments, surveys, classification criteria, quantification method and method of comparison with documents.

4. Condition found

Present findings by discipline, system, area or WBS, with photographs and traceable evidence.

5. Anomalies, nonconformities and items pending verification

Separate what is demonstrably inadequate from what merely requires additional investigation. This distinction reduces premature decisions.

6. Physical-documentary and physical-financial reconciliation

Show differences among planned, measured, verified and reusable quantities, with qualifications and issues requiring administrative analysis.

7. Reusability matrix

Consolidate each item into a decision class and required action.

8. Preliminary remaining scope

Identify repairs, replacements, missing services, revalidations, designs and tests required for continuation.

9. Risks and recommendations

Prioritize interventions and identify dependencies that must be resolved before a new mobilization.

10. Attachments and evidence

Include field sheets, photographic records, marked-up drawings, quantity tables, certificates and test results.

The final documentation should be compatible with a future Technical Audit of the Data Book and final documentation. The better the traceability created during restart, the less effort will be required to demonstrate compliance at closeout.

What to contract when the project condition is unknown

When the public body still does not know the exact condition of the project, contracting should avoid excessively narrow scopes. “Prepare a report” is insufficient because it does not define the decision, disciplines, depth or deliverables.

A restart-assessment contract may combine modules:

• document review: reconstruction of baseline, revisions and gaps;
• existing-condition survey: existing geometry and configuration;
• multidisciplinary technical inspection: apparent condition, damage and incompleteness;
• specialized inspections and tests: confirmation of integrity and performance where necessary;
• quantity reconciliation: contract, measurement and field;
• reusability matrix: retain, test, repair, replace or execute;
• remaining-scope quantification: basis for cost engineering;
• recovery and design recommendations: actions before restart;
• document structure: evidence organized for inspection and control.

An Engineering Technical Due Diligence is appropriate when the need goes beyond physical verification and involves risks, liabilities, documents, costs, compliance and alternatives. The Existing-Condition Survey is appropriate when the built configuration itself must be reconstructed. An Engineering As-Built becomes relevant when the validated condition must be incorporated into engineering drawings and documentation.

In public contracts, the Terms of Reference should make the consultant’s role explicit. The contracted company may collect evidence, conduct inspections and tests, prepare technical opinions, reconcile information and recommend actions; acceptance acts, contractual decisions and the duties of the contract inspector remain with the legally competent public officials.

Criteria for selecting the consulting firm

In addition to the qualification required by the procurement process, technical capability should be consistent with the complexity of the asset. In a multidisciplinary project, an exclusively civil team may not be sufficient to assess electrical and mechanical installations, automation, electronic security, telecommunications or mission-critical systems.

The scope should define responsible technical professionals, disciplines, instruments, sampling criteria, reporting requirements, evidence handling and interfaces with designers and inspection staff. Where litigation potential exists, the methodology for documentation and evidence preservation deserves additional attention.

It is also advisable to separate field pricing from unquantifiable uncertainties. An initial survey phase may reveal a need for additional tests. The consulting contract should contain a technically clear mechanism for authorizing complementary activities without turning every discovery into informal work.

How the report connects to restart, contracting and acceptance

The condition report should not end up archived. It needs to feed the next project deliverables.

If the assessment identifies that the design does not represent existing work, the next step is to update the survey and design. If the remaining scope is undefined, the reusability matrix feeds quantities and the cost estimate. If nonconformities exist, they enter the correction and inspection plan. If systems require revalidation, the tests are incorporated into the restart plan. If the asset is approaching delivery, the evidence must be organized for technical handover and acceptance.

This continuity is what distinguishes an isolated inspection from solution-oriented consulting. The document is a link between inherited liabilities and the next contract.

The manager should be able to use the product to answer:

• what the real and reusable physical progress is;
• which items need additional verification;
• which defects or losses must be corrected;
• which services are missing;
• which design must be revised;
• which quantities will feed the cost estimate;
• which risks must be included in the contract;
• which evidence must be produced during the new execution;
• which criteria will define final acceptance.

When these answers exist, the next contractor receives a clearer scope and the market can price it better. When they do not, uncertainty tends to reappear as contingency, RFIs, amendments, claims or another interruption.

Final considerations

The survey of executed works and the condition report play a strategic role in restart: turning a partially known project into a measurable, traceable and contractable technical condition.

The work must go beyond recording what exists. It is necessary to separate executed from reusable work, compare field conditions with design and measurement, assess deterioration, identify evidence gaps and convert each finding into action. The output should enable design review, quantification of the remaining scope, cost-estimate update, structuring of the contract and definition of controls for the new execution.

When the document is contracted with this objective, the Administration stops discussing restart on the basis of historical percentages and begins deciding on the basis of a current baseline. This is the point at which the condition report ceases to be merely a verification report and becomes an engineering instrument for recovering governability over the project.

Technical references

[1] BRAZIL. Law No. 14,133, of April 1, 2021. Public Procurement and Administrative Contracts Law. Available at: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2019-2022/2021/lei/l14133.htm.

[2] BRAZILIAN ASSOCIATION OF TECHNICAL STANDARDS. ABNT NBR 13752:2024 — Forensic engineering in civil construction. 2024. Available at: https://www.abntcatalogo.com.br/cft/.

[3] BRAZILIAN INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING APPRAISALS AND EXPERTISE. IBAPE Building Inspection Standard 2025. 2025. Available at: https://biblioteca.ibape-nacional.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/norma-de-inspecao-predial-ibape-2025-1.pdf.

[4] BRAZILIAN FEDERAL COURT OF ACCOUNTS. Half of federally funded public works are stalled. 2025. Available at: https://portal.tcu.gov.br/imprensa/noticias/metade-das-obras-financiadas-com-recursos-federais-estao-paradas.

Frequently asked questions

What is a condition report for a stalled public work?

It is a technical document that records and assesses the current condition of existing services, systems, materials and equipment, relating them to designs, measurements and applicable requirements to indicate what can be reused, what must be tested or repaired and what should form part of the remaining scope.

Does the latest measurement bulletin replace a current project survey?

No. Measurement records contractual recognition at a given time and under specific criteria. The current survey verifies the physical and documentary condition after the stoppage and may identify deterioration, loss of evidence, removals or discrepancies.

Are building inspection and a restart condition report the same thing?

Not necessarily. ABNT NBR 16747 has its own purpose for building inspection of occupied buildings. A restart assessment may use inspection concepts, but it must be structured according to the decision required and may need existing-condition surveys, inspections, tests, quantity reconciliation and other activities.

When is forensic engineering required?

When the objective involves questions requiring forensic methodology, such as formal verification, comparative compliance analysis, investigation of causes or other technical questions with a specific purpose. The scope should be defined by a qualified professional and according to applicable standards such as ABNT NBR 13752:2024.

How is the reusable percentage of a stalled public work calculated?

There is no universal formula. Executed items must be classified by condition, compliance, evidence, tests and repair needs. The reusable percentage results from consolidating these assessments and may differ from the physical or measured percentage.

Are stored materials included in the survey?

Yes. They should be inventoried and assessed for quantity, identification, ownership, validity, warranty, storage, traceability, preservation and actual usability in the restart.

Can the condition report be used to prepare the remaining-works estimate?

Yes, provided it contains sufficient quantification and classification. The reusability matrix can convert items to be repaired, replaced, completed or executed into services that feed the new cost estimate.

Which services should be contracted when the actual condition of the project is unknown?

Depending on the case, the scope may include Technical Due Diligence, existing-condition surveys, multidisciplinary inspections, testing, physical-financial reconciliation, As-Built, cost engineering and technical support for structuring the restart.

Supplementary technical materials

Related solutions

• Document Governance and Document Management System
• Engineering Document Management: GED, EDMS, Revisions and Traceability
• Requirements, Evidence and Acceptance Criteria Management
• Outstanding Items, RFIs and Nonconformities Management
• Contracts, Scope and Deliverables Management

Related services

• Existing-Condition Engineering Survey
• Engineering Technical Due Diligence
• Engineering As-Built
• Construction and Engineering Services Cost Estimating
• Technical Audit of Data Book and Final Engineering Documentation
• Technical Support for Public Works and Engineering Contract Inspection

Main content on the topic

• Diagnostic Engineering: Inspection, Diagnosis and Action Plan
• Technical Due Diligence of Assets and Facilities
• 3D Laser Scanning Applied to Engineering
• Technical Inspection of Public Works and Engineering Services
• Works Measurement Bulletin
• Complete Guide to As-Built Engineering

Related technical content

• As-Built Engineering Framework
• Quality Dossier in Engineering
• Engineering Data Book
• Inspection and Test Plan — PIT/ITP
• QA/QC in Construction
• Complete Guide to Cost Engineering and Estimating
• Technical Handover Framework for Works and Systems
• Commissioning of Buildings and Facilities