Our JCT Contract Administration Approach

We set the project up to run cleanly under the JCT Standard Building Contract. The goal was simple: remove ambiguity, keep change controlled, and protect programme and cost without theatrics.

Contract drafting and amendments
We produced a tailored Schedule of Amendments to fit the risk profile: clear design responsibility splits (including the rigid inclusion methodology and testing), defined information-release milestones, and unambiguous procedures for instructions, variations, extensions of time, and loss and expense. Insurance options, performance security, warranties, and third-party rights were locked down early so nothing drifted once works commenced.

Governance and communication
A tight governance model prevents noise. We issued a communications matrix, standardised instruction and confirmation templates, and set up a common data environment for submittals, RFIs, and change logs. RFIs carried response SLAs; submittals followed a gate process with hold points tied to the inspection and test plan. Weekly technical meetings, fortnightly commercial reviews, and monthly progress boards generated an audit trail that stands up to scrutiny.

Programme control
We accepted a logic-linked baseline programme and required short-interval look-ahead planning to keep the critical path visible. When risk emerged (weather windows, airside interfaces, supplier lead times), we used structured risk reviews to agree mitigation before it bled into delay. Where Relevant Events arose — for example, instructed change or late information — we assessed entitlement promptly and issued extension-of-time decisions with reasons. No decision drift, no surprise time bars.

Change management
Variations were priced and agreed against a transparent rule set: measured work, defined preliminaries, and evidence-based rates. We kept provisional sums quarantined and converted them through instructed change only when scope was fixed. Contractor’s Valuation Instructions were acknowledged but always followed by formal Architect/Contract Administrator Instructions to keep the record clean.

Payments and commercial hygiene
Interim valuations were evidence-led: progress photographs, measured take-off, agreed milestones, and contemporaneous records. We issued Interim Certificates on time, managed Pay Less Notices where required, and kept retention, bonds, and insurances aligned with the contract. Loss and expense claims were tested against causation and records — legitimate entitlement was certified; padding was removed.

Quality, compliance, and safety
We tied the ITP to contract hold points, ensuring inspections happened before works were covered up. Statutory approvals, CDM 2015 duties, testing regimes, and materials compliance sat on a single tracker owned by the delivery team and checked at every board. Non-conformances were closed quickly with corrective actions logged in the CDE.

Records that matter
Minutes, instructions, change logs, risk registers, and certification formed a single chain of evidence. If a dispute ever arose, the file would speak for itself. That’s the point of disciplined JCT contract administration: the contractor knows the rules, the client keeps certainty, and progress is bankable — week in, week out.

Risk, Change and Payment Control under JCT

Risk has to be owned, not admired. We started with a live risk register aligned to the JCT Standard Building Contract obligations and our Schedule of Amendments. Ground risk (managed through rigid inclusions), weather exposure on a coastal site, supply-chain lead times, and airside interfaces were all given clear owners, triggers, and mitigations. JCT isn’t NEC — there’s no early warning clause — so we enforced notice discipline instead: timely RFIs, prompt notification of Relevant Events/Matters, and documented mitigation so entitlement could be fairly assessed.

Change control was kept tight. Every change moved through a single route: Architect/Contract Administrator’s Instruction issued, scope described unambiguously, drawings/spec updates referenced, and valuation basis stated. We used measured work and agreed rates as the default; dayworks only when unavoidable and always evidence-backed. Provisional sums were quarantined until scope crystallised; then converted via formal instructions so the audit trail stayed clean. We separated design development from change to stop scope creep masquerading as a variation.

Programme is where cost lives. We accepted a logic-linked baseline showing the critical path to sectional and overall completion. Short-interval look-aheads (two to four weeks) were mandated so resource and access clashes surfaced early. When delay risk emerged — for example, weather windows for slab pours or procurement pressure on long-span steel — we agreed resequencing before it bit the critical path. For Relevant Events (instructed change, late information, statutory undertaker constraints), we assessed entitlement quickly and issued reasoned Extension of Time decisions. Concurrency was treated consistently: genuine parallel delay meant time but not necessarily money.

Payment control was evidence-led and by the book. Applications hit a fixed cycle; we validated progress with site records, measured quantities, photos, and milestone evidence. Interim Certificates were issued on time; where deductions were required, Pay Less Notices were clear, reasoned, and within the statutory window. Materials on site and off site were only certified against proof of title and storage; vesting certificates were mandatory for off-site items. Retention, bonds, insurances, and warranties were tracked on a single commercial register so nothing lapsed in the background.

Loss and expense claims were tested properly. We looked for causation, contemporaneous records, and demonstrated impact — not just cost summaries. Legitimate entitlement was agreed and certified; padding was stripped out. Fluctuations, if applicable, followed the contract option selected; no back-door price protection was entertained beyond the agreed mechanism.

Stakeholder coordination underpinned all of this. Technical meetings drove decisions; commercial boards locked change and cost; monthly progress reports tied programme, risk, and cashflow together so HeliOperations had a single source of truth. The record set — instructions, minutes, change log, payment certificates, risk register — forms a defensible chain of evidence. If a dispute ever landed, the file would speak first and loudest.

Result: predictable cashflow, controlled change, and a programme that stays credible. That’s disciplined JCT contract administration — transferable to any complex build, not -just aviation.

Delivery Highlights: Rigid Inclusions and Airside Works

Ground engineering first, because it set the tempo. Site investigation showed variable made ground over softer coastal strata — not ideal for a long-span hangar with tight settlement limits. Rigid inclusions were the right answer: high-stiffness columns installed on a grid, capped with a load transfer platform to spread loads to the treated ground. The benefit is speed and predictability. Compared with traditional deep piling, installation was faster, less noisy, and created far less spoil — important on a coastal site with environmental sensitivities.

We locked the methodology into the contract: design responsibility boundaries, testing requirements, and handover criteria were explicit. Hold points covered trial panels, installation tolerances, and verification testing (e.g. modulus/plate load checks and integrity verification where specified). No test, no cover-up. Installation records, as-built grids, and LTP compaction results were submitted through the CDE and tied to Interim Certificates. Provisional sums for ground improvement were quarantined until scope crystallised, then converted via instruction with a clean valuation trail. That avoided scope drift and kept entitlement transparent.

Transition to superstructure and airside works relied on disciplined interfaces. Steelwork erection and craneage were planned against wind thresholds and safe radii, with temporary works design approved up front. We enforced submittal gates for connection design, temporary bracing, and lifting plans — not to slow things down, but to stop rework. With a coastal environment, corrosion protection and coating inspection were non-negotiable; inspection and test plans captured DFT checks and cure windows so quality didn’t get sacrificed to programme pressure.

Airside infrastructure was upgraded in parallel to maintain momentum. Apron works included pavement build-up improvements, drainage upgrades with pollution control (silt and hydrocarbon separators), and bases for lighting and navigational aids as required by the design. Works sequencing avoided stranded areas and protected access routes. Hazard management was handled bluntly: no work started without permits, isolations, and RAMS that matched the actual task. Where the works interfaced with live operations, the contractor planned possession windows and briefed them properly — the only way to keep safety and programme intact.

Utilities, fuel systems, and comms infrastructure were managed as critical path risk rather than afterthoughts. We required early surveys, clear diversion strategies, and evidence of supplier lead times. Anything with long procurement (hangar doors, specialist MEP) was tracked on a visible register, so excuses didn’t appear four weeks before delivery.

Environmentally, the site demanded adult behaviour. Run-off control, dust suppression, and noise management were specified and measured, not wished for. Waste movements stayed lean thanks to the rigid inclusion method, and materials were certified for compliance before we recognised any value against them.

What mattered is this: the engineering was sensible, the paperwork was disciplined, and the sequencing made sense in the real world. That is how you keep a complex hangar build moving — fewer surprises, fewer claims, and a programme you can trust.

Outcomes, Value, and Transferable Lessons

The value here isn’t glossy renders — it’s control. The project is progressing through early construction with enabling works and rigid inclusions completed to plan, providing a stable platform for steelwork, envelope, and airside interfaces. Cashflow is predictable, change is audited, and programme credibility is intact because the contract is being administered as written — not as vaguely remembered.

For the client (HeliOperations), the benefits are straightforward:
• Cost visibility: variations priced against evidence, provisional sums quarantined until scope lands, and no mystery allowances.
• Time certainty: baseline accepted, look-ahead planning enforced, and Extensions of Time reasoned — not haggled.
• Risk handled, not parked: ground risk treated up front via rigid inclusions; long-lead items tracked openly; access and safety managed before work starts.
• Compliance by design: statutory duties, approvals, and ITP hold points tied to progress and payment so quality isn’t traded away.

For HeliOperations, the outcome is a facility that actually fits operational need: a long-span, steel-framed hangar with supporting training and admin spaces, delivered on an historic airfield with coastal constraints and airside interfaces. The design choices (rigid inclusions, robust coatings, apron and drainage upgrades) were made to perform over the long term — not just to look good at handover.

Regionally, the project sustains skilled jobs and strengthens Dorset’s aviation capability. The site’s location supports low-level overwater training and SAR skills retention — a direct boost to safety and capability. Investment flows to the local supply chain, and the former Royal Naval Air Station continues to serve aviation rather than sit idle.

Transferable lessons for any sector using JCT:
• Write what you mean. Tailor the Schedule of Amendments to allocate risk clearly (design splits, information release, testing responsibility) and lock it before mobilisation.
• Run a clean file. Instructions, decisions, and valuations need a single source of truth. If it’s not recorded, it didn’t happen.
• Separate design development from change. Don’t let scope creep masquerade as a variation.
• Treat the programme as a management tool, not a poster. Short-interval planning exposes clashes early; resequence before delay bites.
• Pay fairly, fast, and with evidence. You’ll get better cooperation and a calmer site.
• Ground solutions like rigid inclusions can de-risk at pace. Faster installation, less spoil, and controlled settlement often beat traditional piling where soils allow.

Bottom line: disciplined JCT contract administration is portable. Whether it’s an aviation hangar, a healthcare facility, or a heavy industrial build, the same habits deliver the same outcome — fewer surprises and a project you can actually steer.

Conclusion

This project proves the point: write a clear JCT contract, administer it without flinching, and you get predictable delivery. The HeliOperations hangar is moving from ground engineering into superstructure with controlled change, evidenced payments, and a programme that still means something. That’s not luck — it’s governance. If you need the same discipline applied to a complex build, bring the contract into focus early and keep it there through practical completion. The rest follows.

FAQs

Q: What does a Contract Administrator do under a JCT contract?
A: They draft and administer the contract, issue instructions, manage change, certify payments, assess extensions of time, and keep the project compliant and auditable.

Q: Why choose JCT for complex builds?
A: JCT provides clear roles, change control, and payment mechanisms. With disciplined administration, it delivers predictability on time, cost, and quality.

Q: How are extensions of time handled under JCT?
A: The CA assesses Relevant Events, looks at causation and concurrency, and issues a reasoned decision. Time may be granted without automatic entitlement to money.

Q: What are rigid inclusions and why use them?
A: High-stiffness columns installed in weak soils to improve bearing capacity and control settlement. They’re faster and less disruptive than traditional piling where suitable.

Q: How do you keep change from spiralling?
A: Single instruction route, clear scope, evidence-based valuation, and a clean log. Separate design development from true variation and agree rates up front.