Construction Quality Reviews
Construction Quality Reviews
-
In a Construction Quality Review, our specialist will visit up to two sites, depending on location. They will undertake a site walk with attendees, focusing on areas of concern. Discussions will centre on common defects, the NHBC six-point scoring system, current build stage performance and practical measures that can be implemented to improve quality, consistency and overall site performance.
-
- Third-party, independent, unbiased view of build quality, providing an unrivalled industry/business-level quality metric.
- Additional layers of quality control, eg instant warnings of key issues/root causes before a defect manifests.
- Ensures issues have been rectified and learning has occurred (via NHBC inspection observations and close-out reports).
- Provides a communication platform for the site teams to express root causations associated around buildability of designs, suitability of materials, etc.
- Provides educational opportunities for site staff from a build quality specialist.
- Provides clear focus and direction with regards to build quality at a product, build element, site, business and industry level.
- Improves and tracks build and finish quality.
-
Blanket/company-wide CQRs at business level provide additional quality assurance and a platform to cover all sites every six months. The process enables businesses to track quality on a rolling six-month basis, providing alignment with half/full-year ends/potential city updates. It also provides further support from our build quality specialists.
All visits will be included within our reporting and provide additional quality-related intelligence. This will enable you to benchmark site performance against group performance, completion/industry trends on a rolling six-month basis. -
A focus CQR visit on selected site(s) or specific build stage(s), called a Build Quality Inspection (BQI), can offer additional support to a site team. Inspection helps provide direction on strengths and weaknesses beyond regular inspections without affecting overall results. It can also be used as a post-CQR quality audit and additional reassurance to senior management. Any scores on a focus CQR/BQI are excluded from normal reports.
-
No, the CQR reports are recorded at a site level only. Plot numbers are stipulated in the free-text field on a photo but not recorded in our database; only hyperlinks at a site level. Therefore, any NHBC homeowner system database search requests for a specific plot should not return a CQR report.
-
To protect individuals/companies from any reference to poor workmanship associated around a subcontractor and or product performance, NHBC doesn’t allow sharing of a full CQR report. This is reinforced by the note included on the front cover of all CQR reports. We do support use of positive CQR statistics and publishing at a build stage/extract level on social media (assuming all parties included in the extract have agreed to the publication). Such extracts tend to provide a good impression around the product, a thirst/hunger to improve quality and perpetuate the positive. If in doubt, please email ConstructionQuality@nhbc.co.uk for further guidance/approval.
-
We have a CQR consistency strategy comprising various levers.
- A bespoke Construction Quality team undertaking CQRs, all members will have the required key competencies and have completed the in-depth six-month induction program upon joining the team. Their annual training includes CPD and a training schedule.
- Communication platforms - Bi-monthly NHBC Construction Quality Consistency group/Bi-weekly Construction Quality team consistency huddle/live Microsoft Teams consistency channel.
- Bi-annual 'Consistency Day', concentrating on build stage structure, simple build stages (max score of 4), scoring, root causations and site visits.
- Field base Bi-annual site monitoring days, 'pairing' of extreme reviewers on same sites.
- Peer review of CQR reports (minimum of 5%).
- Continuous analysis of intelligent CQR score/build stage allocation reporting by region/builder/reviewer.
- Customer escalation/report moderation and reviewer feedback process.
-
1. Any enquiries should be discussed and, where possible, resolved directly with the reviewer on the day prior to them leaving site.
2. If an enquiry is identified after the visit, it should be raised by email within 15 working days of the CQR publication date. Emails should be sent to CQR@nhbc.co.uk. An acknowledgement email will be sent within three working days with further details.
3. Enquiries covering several sites, and or a reviewer/Construction Quality Manager should be raised to the Senior Construction Quality Manager by emailing CQR@nhbc.co.uk. As before, an acknowledgment email will be sent within three working days with further details.
-
No, not always. Although CQRs and Pride in the Job (PiJ) use the same scoring mechanism and logic, there are subtle differences that may result in sites with a good CQR score not gaining a PiJ site manager nomination/award, or vice versa.
- PiJ is a site manager award based on reviews gained over several visits from a building inspector level to a Supreme Award tour that provide an overall view of quality (highs and lows). The award can transfer sites with the site manager. CQRs provide a third-party, unbiased view of quality covering the full build journey, scored as seen on the day of the visit for the given site. A CQR is a 'moment in time' review, whereas PiJ is judged over a much longer period.
- The PiJ competition starts at a regional level. CQRs are nationally based, with consistency driven through a central team irrespective of region. CQRs are nationally based, with consistency driven through a central team irrespective of region.
- The PiJ scoring process takes into consideration the speed of build, the complexity of build, the level of support for the site manager, site organisation, health and safety, general site setup and control. It's scored against 39 build stages and nine build sections over a period of time/visits. CQRs will refer to this within root causations, but not within the score. The score is based purely on build quality and the severity of any issues, covering up to 38 build stages and eight build sections on the given day of the visit.
-
No, not always. Although CQRs and Quality Common Scoring use the same scoring mechanism and logic, the Quality Common Scoring system is against 4-7 key stage inspections (depending on build) while the CQR scoring system is against up to 38 build stages. Quality Common Scoring will therefore typically apply to a group of build stages as part of an inspection; for example, a pre-plaster key stage inspection covers up to 21 CQR build stages.
-
A minimum of 24 hours' notice is required, with a maximum notice period of up to five working days. In certain circumstances, this may extend to 10 working days.
-
Yes, extreme scores will be confirmed to the site manager prior to submission.
-
This depends on the amount of build in progress. Normally, time on site is around three hours, and not more than four hours.
-
Reviewers aim to publish a report within five working days from the site visit. This is extended to 10 working days if awaiting further technical information, root causations or moderation.
-
Where possible, finalled plots should be avoided. For second fix, surface finishes and external works where there is no other option available, a finalled plot may be used. If an error is identified, the reviewer will speak with the inspection manager and building inspector to make them aware so they can work with the site to rectify matters.
-
The Inspection Team is notified automatically.
- All calendar invites are sent to the building inspector and inspection manager, giving both the opportunity to attend the visit.
- Building inspectors and inspection managers receive copies of the findings.
The Construction Quality team is notified:- through the site record book
- by attending Building Inspection team meetings twice per calendar year
- local-level communications, with the reviewer and inspector sharing local knowledge on a regular basis.
-
An item of work is deemed work in progress (WIP) if it is yet to be completed. (For example, if the build has not proceeded past the subject area or onto the next stage of construction.) This follows established good practice and normal build sequence.
WIP should be included in the build stage summary as an observation but excluded from the scoring.
If a site manager provides up-front information on issues prior to undertaking the review, suggesting it is work in progress (WIP):- product defect-related issues – providing that the work has been clearly marked/damaged at a site level so that it’s impossible to use for the end product, and that there is clear third-party evidence that remedial works are in progress, the reviewer can deem the issue as WIP for CQR purposes.
- installation, site storage/workmanship-related issues – there is a rework cost involved (hidden factory cost). This will be scored down within a CQR in accordance with the normal scoring logic.
- design-related issues – quality assurance processes should be in place to prevent issues/rework occurring. The drawing(s)/detail(s) should have been correct from the outset and should have been checked prior to commencing the work. There is a rework cost involved (hidden factory costs). This will be scored down within a CQR in accordance with the normal scoring logic.
-
Yes, it's recommended and encouraged that the site team shadows the reviewer for educational purposes. However, they should not lead or direct at any point.
-
Find out more about how we can help at nhbc.co.uk/CQS.
-
Builder CQRs and Trade CQRs serve different but complementary purposes. Trade CQRs focus on specific trades, such as groundworks or bricklaying, providing detailed assessments of individual build stages and targeted feedback to help improve trade performance. Builder CQRs take a broader view, assessing overall construction quality across the entire development, from groundworks through to final finishes. They are designed to provide developers with an independent measure of overall site quality and consistency across all stages of construction.
Builder CQRs also enable developers to benchmark performance against industry peers, monitor year-on-year improvement, and recognise site management teams that consistently achieve high standards. Improvements identified through Trade CQRs can contribute directly to stronger Builder CQR performance, helping drive quality improvements at both trade and site level.