Developing an Accountable Budget Baseline for Infrastructure Projects: A Consolidated Cost and Schedule Estimation Framework and Maturity Assessment
Abstract
Organizations frequently rely on multiple international references for cost estimating and schedule development, yet these references use different terminology, levels of detail, and emphases, which can leave budgeting stage estimation fragmented and difficult to audit. This paper develops a consolidated, stepwise framework by synthesizing prescriptive practices from PMI, AACE, NASA, and GAO, and applies the framework as an auditable process maturity assessment instrument. A benchmarking synthesis approach was used to screen candidate references for capital project relevance and explicit guidance for cost estimating and schedule development. Process steps were extracted, harmonized across sources, and consolidated into two aligned end to end process frameworks for cost estimating and schedule estimating. The consolidated steps were converted into assessment items, rated on a five level maturity scale, and summarized using achieved versus maximum scoring. Application to PT Pertamina Patra Niaga (PPN)’s budgeting stage practices indicates that the current cost estimating process reaches 56/70 (80%) maturity, while the current schedule estimating process reaches 46/90 (51%). The previous cost estimating process scores 43/70 (61%). The most prominent gaps relate to the formal documentation of ground rules and assumptions, typically captured in a Basis of Estimate, and to schedule model discipline, particularly coding, logic structure, and systematic schedule quality checks. Overall, the findings show that the framework is practical to implement and supports evidence based prioritization of process improvements toward more transparent, accountable, and reliable budgeting baselines for capital and infrastructure related investments.
References
AACE International. (2010). 27R-03: Schedule classification system. AACE International.
AACE International. (2020a). 18R-97: Cost estimate classification system—As applied in engineering, procurement, and construction for the process industries. AACE International. https://web.aacei.org/docs/default-source/toc/toc_18r-97.pdf
AACE International. (2020b). 91R-16: Schedule development. AACE International.
AACE International. (2021). 106R-19: Basis of estimate—As applied in engineering, procurement, and construction for the process industries. AACE International.
AACE International. (2022). 122R-22: Quantitative risk analysis maturity model. AACE International.
AACE International. (2024). 132R-23: Schedule risk analysis maturity model. AACE International.
Bartelheimer, C., Löhr, B., Reineke, M., Aßbrock, A., & Beverungen, D. (2025). Workarounds as a Cause of Mismatches in Business Processes— C. Bartelheimer et al. Business & Information Systems Engineering, 67(3), 339-356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12599-025-00943-5
Coteț, F. A., Ferenci, S., Lakatos, E. S., & Szabó, L. (2026). The AI-Driven Hydrogen Community: A Critical Review of Design Strategies for Decentralized Integrated Energy Systems. Designs, 10(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/designs10010012
Crawford, J., & Jabbour, M. (2024). The relationship between enterprise risk management and managerial judgement in decision‐making: A systematic literature review. International Journal of Management Reviews, 26(1), 110-136. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12337
De Meyer, A., Loch, C. H., & Pich, M. T. (2002). Managing project uncertainty: from variation to chaos. MIT Sloan management review, 43(2), 60.
Eugenio-Gozalbo, M., Zuazagoitia, D., Ruiz-González, A., Corrochano, D., Hurtado-Soler, A., & Talavera, M. (2022). Implementing citizen science programmes in the context of university gardens to promote pre-service teachers' scientific literacy: a study case on soil. International Journal of Science Education, 44(10), 1619-1638. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2022.2088877
Fardous, M. (2025). Predictive analytics for working capital management: Machine learning applications in cash flow and liquidity forecasting. American Journal of Scholarly Research and Innovation, 4(01), 662-694. https://doi.org/10.63125/xrfrsz89
Gonzalez, A., August, T., Bailey, S., Bobiwash, K., Boersch-Supan, P. H., Burgess, N. D., ... & Williams, D. R. (2026). From data to decisions: toward a biodiversity monitoring standards framework. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 123(10), e2519347123.
Government Accountability Office. (2015). Schedule assessment guide: Best practices for project schedules (GAO-16-89G). U.S. Government Accountability Office. https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-16-89g.pdf
Government Accountability Office. (2020). Cost estimating and assessment guide: Best practices for developing and managing program costs (GAO-20-195G). U.S. Government Accountability Office. https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-20-195g.pdf
Hriday, M. S. H. (2022). Quantitative risk assessment of rail infrastructure projects using Monte Carlo simulation and fuzzy logic. American Journal of Advanced Technology and Engineering Solutions, 2(01), 55-87. https://doi.org/10.63125/h24n6z92
Hriday, M. S. H., & Rehman, A. (2025). Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications in construction project management: Enhancing scheduling, cost estimation, and risk mitigation. International Journal of Business and Economics Insights, 5(3), 30-64. https://doi.org/10.63125/jrpjje59
Hriday, M. S. H., & Rehman, A. (2025). Artificial intelligence and machine learning applications in construction project management: Enhancing scheduling, cost estimation, and risk mitigation. International Journal of Business and Economics Insights, 5(3), 30-64. https://doi.org/10.63125/jrpjje59
International Organization for Standardization. (2018). Work breakdown structures for project and programme management. https://www.iso.org
International Organization for Standardization. (2021). ISO 21500:2021 Project, programme and portfolio management—Context and concepts. https://www.iso.org/standard/71636.html
International Project Management Association. (2015). IPMA individual competence baseline for project, programme and portfolio management (ICB4). https://www.ipma.world
Jafary, P., Shojaei, D., Rajabifard, A., & Ngo, T. (2026). AI-augmented construction cost estimation: An ensemble natural language processing (NLP) model to align quantity take-offs with cost indexes. International Journal of Construction Management, 26(8), 1508-1526. https://doi.org/10.1080/15623599.2025.2558070
Kerzner, H. (2025). Project management: a systems approach to planning, scheduling, and controlling. John Wiley & Sons.
Laban, P., Schnabel, T., & Neville, J. (2026). LLMs corrupt your documents when you delegate. arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.15597. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.15597
Mincu, M. (2022). Why is school leadership key to transforming education? Structural and cultural assumptions for quality education in diverse contexts. Prospects, 52(3), 231-242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11125-022-09625-6
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2015). NASA cost estimating handbook (CEH). National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2020). NASA schedule management handbook (1st ed.). National Aeronautics and Space Administration. https://www.nasa.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/nasa_schedule_management_hand_book.pdf
Odarushchenko, O., Odarushchenko, O., Striuk, O., Shamanskyi, V., & Hroza, P. (2025). Automating requirements traceability in project documentation using TraceTrend tool: model, design and application. Radioelectronic and Computer Systems, 2025(4), 236-246. https://doi.org/10.32620/reks.2025.4.16
Office of Government Commerce. (2009). Managing successful projects with PRINCE2 (5th ed.). The Stationery Office.
Önder, M., & Zengin, Ü. N. (2022). A framework for comparative analysis: Public administration across the globe. In The Palgrave handbook of comparative public administration: Concepts and cases (pp. 51-76). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore.
Project Management Institute. (2006). Practice standard for work breakdown structures. Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (2011). Practice standard for scheduling. Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (2017). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK® guide) (6th ed.). Project Management Institute.
Project Management Institute. (2019a). Practice standard for project estimating. Project Management Institute. https://www.pmi.org
Project Management Institute. (2019b). The standard for risk management in portfolios, programs, and projects. Project Management Institute.
Rahimpour, S., Tarzamni, H., Kurdkandi, N. V., Husev, O., Vinnikov, D., & Tahami, F. (2022). An overview of lifetime management of power electronic converters. Ieee Access, 10, 109688-109711. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3214320
Raj, M. W. Z., & Islam, M. M. (2022). PREDICTIVE ANALYTICS FOR RISK AND COMPLIANCE IN IT-ENABLED PROJECT MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS. Review of Applied Science and Technology, 1(01), 71-120. https://doi.org/10.63125/nvtcen22
Rojas, L., Hernandez, B., & Garcia, J. (2025). A systematic review of intelligent agents, language models, and recurrent neural networks in industrial maintenance: Driving value creation for the mining sector. International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 2025(1), 9953223. https://doi.org/10.1155/int/9953223
Rosson, D. (2026). Rigorous Software Quality Assurance. In Systems Engineering in Agile Software Development (pp. 167-183). Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-14613-7_7
Roy, S., Mandal, B., & Das, B. K. (2025). Quality assurance in laboratory practices and equipment maintenance: Ensuring precision, reliability, and compliance. In Laboratory Techniques for Fish Disease Diagnosis (pp. 79-103). Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-4620-3_5
Sadeanu, M., Candea, S., & Bodea, C. (2017). ISO 21500:2012 vs. other project management standards. In IPMA E&T Board (Ed.), ISO 21500 project management standard: Characteristics, comparison and implementation (pp. 1–19). Shaker Verlag.
Silvianita, Novega, A. S., Rosyid, D. M., & Suntoyo. (2017). Project delay analysis of HRSG. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 79, 012036. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/79/1/012036
Silvianita, Sari, D. P., Mulyadi, Y., & Dhanistha, W. L. (2018). A comparison of application of the project scheduling using precedence diagram method (PDM), line of balance (LoB), and position weight method (RPWM) to construct circulating close cooling water system. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology, 9(13), 342–355.
Szwarcfiter, C., Herer, Y. T., & Shtub, A. (2023). Balancing project schedule, cost, and value under uncertainty: A reinforcement learning approach. Algorithms, 16(8), 395. https://doi.org/10.3390/a16080395
Tarek, J. H., & Rahman, W. (2022). Advanced Cybersecurity Architectures for Resilience in US Critical Infrastructure Control Networks. Review of Applied Science and Technology, 1(04), 146-182.
Zargaran, Z., & Ghorbanpoor, M. (2026). Assessing the Assessors: A Study of UTAS Level 2 EFL Teachers’ Perspectives and Practices in Writing Evaluation and Its Impact on Students' Writing Scores. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Applied Literature: Dynamics and Advances, 14(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.22049/jalda.2026.30804.1842
Zilikram, M. F. (2023). Benchmarking Indonesia's downstream oil and gas construction: Evaluating project scheduling and cost estimating processes against global best-tested and proven practices. PM World Journal, 12(10).
Copyright (c) 2026 Journal La Multiapp

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.



