Where change orders leak
The dispute risk in most change orders is not whether the work was done — it is whether the approval was captured. Verbal go-aheads on the job site, texts that get buried, emails that were never formally acknowledged: these are the paper trails that go missing when a project sours.
By the time the dispute surfaces, both sides have a different account of what was agreed to and when. The contractor who documented their changes on the record has leverage. The one who relied on the relationship does not.
What this can recover
One subcontractor on a public construction thread described losing roughly $4,000 in a single month to unbilled T&M work — vague texts from the field, scribbled notes that arrived two weeks late, GCs denying change orders because the documentation missed the deadline. On one crew that is $48,000 a year.
Across the broader contractor population, change-order documentation chaos is widely cited as 3–4% of margin lost per project. The audit names the specific points in your workflow where approvals are slipping off the record.
What you send
Recent change order documentation samples in whatever format you currently use — emails, PDFs, handwritten logs, software exports. A short description of your current approval workflow: how you initiate a CO, who approves it, and what constitutes a confirmed approval in your process.
What you get back
A written PDF audit of your documentation practice, identifying the specific gaps that create dispute exposure, the scenarios where your current workflow leaves approvals unconfirmed, and recommended changes to capture approvals on the record. Delivered within 5 business days of intake.
Who this is for
GCs and subs running active projects with regular change activity — particularly those who have experienced a disputed change order or suspect they are undercharging because verbal approvals are not making it into formal documentation. Most useful for firms where the PM or super is handling change orders alongside everything else.