Audits & readiness assessments

Home
> What we do
> Project recovery
> Audits & readiness assessments

TacminMadini’s Audits and Readiness Assessments provide an objective, defensible view of a project or operation’s true condition before recovery, expansion or improvement is committed. By examining commercial structures, delivery systems, technical foundations, and resource, infrastructure and throughput capability, we replace assumption with evidence and give owners, boards and investors a clear baseline for risk-managed decision-making. This disciplined assessment exposes constraints, highlights vulnerabilities and identifies practical opportunities for stabilisation and uplift, safeguarding capital, strengthening governance and enabling decisive, targeted action with confidence.

Why it matters	Commercial risk rarely announces itself upfront. It sits quietly in tender assumptions, pricing logic, scope boundaries, incentive structures and contractual obligations that appear sound on paper but fail under operational pressure. Once execution begins, these weaknesses surface as claims, cost overruns, misaligned behaviours and governance breakdowns — often too late to correct without material loss.
Our focus	We test whether tenders, contracts and commercial frameworks are genuinely fit for execution. This includes reviewing tender evaluations, pricing and schedule logic, risk allocation, obligations, incentives and governance structures against how the project will actually be delivered. Drawing on decades of IPD, EPCM and contracting experience, we identify gaps between commercial intent and operational reality, whether pre-award, pre-mobilisation or mid-execution.
Outcome	A clear, defensible commercial position that supports delivery rather than undermines it — reducing exposure to claims, strengthening governance, aligning incentives, and giving owners confidence that contracts will perform as intended under real project conditions.

Project recovery

Audits & readiness assessments

Commercial & Contract Assurance

Delivery & Execution Integrity

Technical & Operational Performance

Resource, & Infrastructure Readiness

Why it matters	Many projects fail not because the plan was wrong, but because it was never deliverable under real site conditions. Schedules that ignore mining realities, progress controls that don’t reflect actual work completed, and coordination models that fracture under pressure quickly translate into cost creep and schedule drift. By the time these issues are visible, recovery options are limited and expensive.
Our focus	We assess whether execution systems are genuinely capable of delivering the plan. This includes auditing planning discipline, progress measurement, field coordination, decision pathways and alignment between strategy and on-site execution. Drawing on extensive experience in mining construction, large-scale delivery and distressed-project recovery, we test where systems will hold — and where they will fail — before delays escalate.
Outcome	A clear, honest view of execution capacity, identifying whether the project is ready to move from strategy to stable delivery or whether targeted intervention is required — protecting schedule, cost and management credibility before issues become entrenched.

Why it matters	Technical underperformance rarely shows up as a single failure. It emerges quietly through mismatched designs, optimistic assumptions and operating parameters that don’t translate into real production conditions. Haulage profiles that don’t suit equipment, cycle times that cannot be achieved, impractical ramp geometry or inefficient plant settings all erode productivity, reliability and compliance — often without being immediately visible in reports.
Our focus	We review the full technical chain from engineering intent through to day-to-day operational performance. This includes testing design assumptions, production logic, operating parameters and interfaces against how the mine or facility actually behaves. Drawing on decades of mine engineering, operational delivery and benchmarking experience, we identify where technical decisions are enabling performance — and where they are quietly restricting it.
Outcome	Clear, evidence-based insight into where technical alignment is protecting value and where targeted corrections are required — improving productivity, strengthening reliability, supporting compliance and safeguarding investment before underperformance becomes embedded.

Why it matters	Projects and operations rarely fail because strategy or intent is wrong. They fail when people, equipment, facilities, and material flow cannot support what the plan demands. Increasing capacity without validating downstream handling, logistics, and dispatch capability often amplifies delays, cost pressure, and operational friction rather than improving performance. Once execution begins, these constraints become expensive and difficult to correct.
Our focus	We assess whether resources, infrastructure, and throughput are genuinely fit for purpose. This includes reviewing workforce capability, equipment and fleet suitability, fixed and mobile infrastructure, material handling systems, yard or site layout, and logistics interfaces against planned production or delivery requirements. By analysing how capacity and flow interact across the system, we identify bottlenecks, misalignments, and latent constraints that limit performance. Our approach tests not only what assets exist, but how effectively they work together under real operating conditions.
Outcome	A clear, evidence-based understanding of true delivery capacity, highlighting where alignment, reconfiguration, or targeted investment is required. This provides leadership with confidence that increased output, mobilisation, or expansion can be absorbed reliably — protecting cost, schedule, and operational credibility before commitment is locked in.