january 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the construction manager to...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
January 24, 2012
![Page 2: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
…a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed
Maximum Price (GMP).
![Page 3: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
CMR offers the following:◦ Reduces Owner Risk (Does not eliminate it!)
CMR holds contracts / accountable for budget and schedule
◦ Potential Cost Savings to the Project Reduce Change Orders Reduce Claims Eliminates Value-Engineering / Re-Bidding
◦ Minimizes Potential Schedule Delays Less Coordination
![Page 4: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
CMR is similar to CM Agent, except for the following:◦ The CMR holds all trade contracts, instead of the
Owner – no approval of trade contracts by the Commission
◦ The CMR assumes majority of project risk associated with cost, coordination and schedule
◦ The negotiation of the GMP for the entire project will replace the individual negotiations of consultant contracts today
◦ The CM can self-perform work◦ Successful Negotiation of a GMP is a requirement
![Page 5: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Agency Model (current)◦ Separate CM/AE Selection◦ Owner’s Risk
More Owner Control Claims / Schedules Multiple Point Coordination Contingency / COs
◦ Multiple Trade Contracts◦ Contractor Selection Based
on Lowest Responsible Bidder
At-Risk Model◦ Joint CM/AE Selection◦ CMR Risk (GMP)
Less Owner Control Claims / Schedules Single Point
Coordination Contingency / COs
◦ Single Contract ◦ Contractor Selection
Based on Best Value Process
![Page 6: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Each District/Project is Unique in Some Fashion◦ Construction Experience ◦ Knowledge of Program◦ Community Involvement◦ Decision Making◦ Scope◦ Complexity◦ Schedule
![Page 7: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Owner Familiarity with Construction Programs & Process
Owner Availability of Staff (Moderate Level)◦ Small Group of Decision Makers
Owner Risk Tolerance (Moderate Level) Owner Level of Control (Moderate Level)
◦ Original Design vs. Project Changes Level of Changes to Original Scope
◦ Original Schedule vs. Project Changes Level of Changes to Original Schedule
![Page 8: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Medium to Large Projects (> $2 million) Moderate to High Complexity of Projects
◦ Design & Schedule Aggressive Schedule Expectations
![Page 9: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
![Page 10: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Establish and Procure Project Funding Determine CMR Delivery is best method Selection of A/E – RFP/RFQ process Selection of CMR – RFQ/BVS process
Two Step Selection Process Negotiation of GMP
Occurs between SD & DD Phase Re-Confirmation of GMP to Design Intent
Bidding Pre-Qualification of Potential Bidders by CMR CMR bids and awards Contracts, may perform work
Construction & Closeout
![Page 11: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Architect Co-Selection of A/E even if already selected Occurs after funding is procured RFP/RFQ Selection
CMR Co-Selection of CMR even if a CM is already selected Occurs after funding is procured RFQ/BVS Selection
![Page 12: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Occurs between SD and DD Design Phases Small, Select Group from District & OSFC Accurate Cost Estimate from A/E
Includes Design Intent and Hard & Soft Costs Conduct Facilitated Session for Negotiation Upon GMP Agreement, Design Intent is
revisited
![Page 13: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Experience◦ Financial condition◦ Performance on previous projects◦ Facilities◦ Management skills◦ Ability to contract properly
Goals◦ EDGE etc.
Affirmation of non-violations past (5) years Proof of licenses to perform work Self-Performance
![Page 14: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
INTERMISSION
![Page 15: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
A small district in northwestern Ohio. Master plan of $47 million Pk-12 facility (renovation and addition of
their existing MS/HS, plus Career Tech space). Additionally, the high school was originally built in 1911 and the attached middle school building was built in 1936. Both were fully renovated in 1995. The school is in the center of a residential area.
The District recently completed a new athletic complex project. The board President and current Treasurer were involved in the 1995
renovation project. Local levy took (5) times to pass with many different iterations of the
master plan. District administration indicated that many local contractors helped
the district pass their levy. A board member is also an electrical contractor. The board is very concerned about the quality of construction and is interested if there are any opportunities to ensure that qualified contractors build their school.
No consultant selections (A/E or CMR) yet made.
![Page 16: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Why is this project a candidate for a CMR delivery method?
![Page 17: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
A small district in northwestern Ohio. Master plan of $47 million Pk-12 facility (renovation and addition of
their existing MS/HS, plus Career Tech space). Additionally, the high school was originally built in 1911 and the attached middle school building was built in 1936. Both were fully renovated in 1995. The school is in the center of a residential area.
The District recently completed a new athletic complex project. The board President and current Treasurer were involved in the 1995
renovation project. Local levy took (5) times to pass with many different iterations of the
master plan. District administration indicated that many local contractors helped
the district pass their levy. A board member is also an electrical contractor. The board is very concerned about the quality of construction and is interested if there are any opportunities to ensure that qualified contractors build their school.
No consultant selections (A/E or CMR) yet made.
![Page 18: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
A small district in northwestern Ohio. Master plan of $47 million Pk-12 facility (renovation and addition of
their existing MS/HS, plus Career Tech space). Additionally, the high school was originally built in 1911 and the attached middle school building was built in 1936. Both were fully renovated in 1995. The school is in the center of a residential area.
The District recently completed a new athletic complex project. The board President and current Treasurer were involved in the 1995
renovation project. Local levy took (5) times to pass with many different iterations of the
master plan. District administration indicated that many local contractors helped
the district pass their levy. A board member is also an electrical contractor. The board is very concerned about the quality of construction and is interested if there are any opportunities to ensure that qualified contractors build their school.
No consultant selections (A/E or CMR) yet made.
![Page 19: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
A suburban district in central Ohio. The scope of the project is a new $9 million Elementary
School. Interested in 21st Century concepts, District
administration has established a planning committee of 48 teachers, students and parents. The committee determined that they will remain involved during the design process to make sure that their planning intent is realized in the final design.
Previous project experience (multiple prime) produced “mixed results” and schedule delays. The District is in favor of any alternative that could simplify the contracting process.
The local levy passed, through a recount, by 4 votes. The selected A/E has worked with the District on
previous projects, and the CM was selected in the 2009 CM selection.
![Page 20: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Why is this project a candidate for a CMR delivery method?
![Page 21: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
A suburban district in central Ohio. The scope of the project is a new $9 million Elementary
School. Interested in 21st Century concepts, District
administration has established a planning committee of 48 teachers, students and parents. The committee determined that they will remain involved during the design process to make sure that their planning intent is realized in the final design.
Previous project experience (multiple prime) produced “mixed results” and schedule delays. The District is in favor of any alternative that could simplify the contracting process.
The local levy passed, through a recount, by 4 votes. The selected A/E has worked with the District on
previous projects, and the CM was selected in the 2009 CM selection.
![Page 22: January 24, 2012. …a delivery method which entails a commitment by the Construction Manager to deliver the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP)](https://reader034.vdocument.in/reader034/viewer/2022051401/56649eba5503460f94bc2069/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
A suburban district in central Ohio. The scope of the project is a new $9 million Elementary
School. Interested in 21st Century concepts, District
administration has established a planning committee of 48 teachers, students and parents. The committee determined that they will remain involved during the design process to make sure that their planning intent is realized in the final design.
Previous project experience (multiple prime) produced “mixed results” and schedule delays. The District is in favor of any alternative that could simplify the contracting process.
The local levy passed, through a recount, by 4 votes. The selected A/E has worked with the District on
previous projects, and the CM was selected in the 2009 CM selection.