You asking: why is the all-data calculation for SVI and CPI index only taken up to September as

the project is up to October?

First, you need to understand that even the project is up to October the project has only been to the
month of September only, meaning the project has just finished it’s September month work and
while looking the project it is seemed to be going delayed so they had to do the Earned value
analysis to find out what is causing that.

Let’s see the data of Technical Infrastructure:

This is planned expenses which is up to October.

You can see the cash burn data is up to September only.

Same goes for actual performance, which is also only up to September.

Technical Infrastructure Monthly plan May June July August September October Average
Plan BCWS $120,000 $192,000 $192,000 $192,000 $192,000 $60,000
Monthly status Actual burn ACWP $120,000 $215,000 $192,000 $216,500 $170,000
Actual Perfrom BCWP $120,000 $170,000 $173,000 $190,000 $185,000
Plan BCWS $120,000 $312,000 $504,000 $696,000 $888,000 $948,000
Rolling status Actual burn ACWP $120,000 $335,000 $527,000 $743,500 $913,500
Actual Perfrom BCWP $120,000 $290,000 $463,000 $653,000 $838,000
SV $0 -$22,000 -$41,000 -$43,000 -$50,000
Schedule Impact SPI 1.00 0.93 0.92 0.94 0.94 0.95
Rolling Ratios CV $0 -$45,000 -$64,000 -$90,500 -$75,500
Cost Impact CPI 1.00 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.92 0.91
Control ratio CR 1.00 0.80 0.81 0.82 0.87 0.86

So, for the calculation of SPI, CPI, CV, SV and CR of October we need the data of cash burn and
actual performance of October month which is not given because the project has not been through
October. The Project has just completed September month and they found that the project wouldn’t
get completed in October so they are doing this EVA.

If you are wondering why I take the SPI value of September because that’s the last month’s SPI
value which is telling by how much the Schedule has been overall impacted and how many more
days, we need to complete the project.
And my friends have done by not considering rolling status and will it be necessary to include?

I don’t know why did they have done so but you can clearly see that in the template provided in
case study it is asking to have the rolling status too.

Let me show you what will happen if you don’t consider rolling status.

SV $0 -$22,000 -$19,000 -$2,000 -$7,000

Schedule Impact SPI 1.00 0.89 0.90 0.99 0.96
Rolling Ratios CV $0 -$45,000 -$19,000 -$26,500 $15,000
Cost Impact CPI 1.00 0.79 0.90 0.88 1.09
Control ratio CR 1.00 0.70 0.81 0.87 1.05

This is the data when we don’t consider rolling status.

SV $0 -$22,000 -$41,000 -$43,000 -$50,000

Schedule Impact SPI 1.00 0.93 0.92 0.94 0.94
Rolling Ratios CV $0 -$45,000 -$64,000 -$90,500 -$75,500
Cost Impact CPI 1.00 0.87 0.88 0.88 0.92
Control ratio CR 1.00 0.80 0.81 0.82 0.87

And this is when we consider the rolling status.

You can clearly see when we don’t consider rolling status the technical infrastructure component
is seemed to performing within budget which is not true. It is performing well in September but in
overall months it has performed poorly.

So, the reason to consider rolling status is to see the effect of each month on one another because
delay in month June may causes delay in other month too even other months work is done within
time. But when we don’t consider rolling status, we are only calculating individual months effect
on project, but we need the overall effect of all months up to September and overall delay of
project.