A plan and cost review should connect the proposed scope, design information, contracts, budget, schedule, approvals, and project-specific risks before the loan begins funding.
Define the assignment around the loan decision
Before the review begins, the lender and consultant should confirm the project, borrower, intended users, reliance, applicable lender scope or template, review standard, delivery schedule, and the decisions the report must support. A lender may also have thresholds or specific requirements for contingency, plan completion, contracts, permits, insurance, geotechnical information, environmental work, accessibility, or other project conditions.
The report should state the information received and the effective period of the review. Projects continue to change during closing, so updated plans, contracts, budgets, schedules, approvals, and borrower responses need a controlled route into the final report.
Read the plans for scope and coordination
Plans and specifications are reviewed to understand the proposed work, level of development, apparent coordination, major systems, site and building conditions, and material information still required. The consultant is not replacing the project architect or engineers and does not perform a complete code or design review unless the engagement expressly says so.
The decision value lies in material relationships: whether the budget carries the work shown, whether contracts and procurement cover the intended scope, whether major design or existing-condition questions remain, and whether information gaps could affect cost, schedule, approvals, or execution.
Reconcile the budget with how the project is bought
The development budget, construction contract, schedule of values, subcontractor buyout where available, allowances, alternates, exclusions, owner-furnished work, contingency, soft costs, and other sources and uses should be read together. Arithmetic accuracy is necessary, but reconciliation is the larger task.
The review should identify scope that appears missing, duplicated, carried as an allowance, excluded from the contract, based on an early estimate, or dependent on future design and procurement. The report should also distinguish known gaps from residual uncertainty so contingency is not asked to cover both without explanation.
Test whether the schedule matches the project record
A useful schedule review considers overall duration, major milestones, procurement, approvals, utilities, sitework, enclosure, systems startup, testing, turnover, and other project-specific dependencies. The schedule should be read with the design and procurement status rather than as a stand-alone bar chart.
The consultant should make material assumptions and constraints visible, including owner decisions, long-lead items, phased work, occupied conditions, public approvals, seasonal work, or unresolved scope. A scheduling opinion remains limited by the level of detail and evidence available at review.
Turn the closing report into a monitoring baseline
The final report should separate material findings, borrower or design-team responses, items resolved before closing, conditions expected after closing, and information that remains unavailable. It should also state the limits of the review and identify further specialist work where appropriate.
The approved budget, contract structure, contingency, schedule, plans, major assumptions, and open items become the baseline for later construction monitoring. When a draw, change, delay, or cost question arises, both lender and consultant should be able to see what was originally understood and what has changed.