CMGC

Colorado DOTFebruary , 2012

Construction Manager General Contractor

1

CMGC

Content• Definition of CM/GC• Contractual relationships• Comparison between CM/GC, D-B, and D-B-B• Timeline Comparison• CM/GC Benefits• Risk Theory• Costs

A Project Team consisting of three components:• An Owner• A Contract with a Designer• A Two Phase Contract with a General contractor

Phase one – A “Construction Management” consulting contract to help with design

Phase two – A “General Contracting “ contract to build the project

3

What is CMGC?

™ © 2011, All rights reserved, CMGC Institute

Phase 1: Construction Management

Designer

• Owner

• A Contract with a Designer

• A Two Phase Contract with a General contractor

Phase one – A “Construction Management” consulting contract to help with design

Phase two – A “General Contracting “ contract to build the project

OverviewCMGC Contract Structure

4

Owner

CMGC

Phase 2: General

Contracting

A Project Team consisting of three components

1

2

3

1

2 3

Design Phase

Construction Phase

OneRFP

™

CMGC Process

OWNER

Plan

Build

Design Consultant

Design

Contractor

Bid Build

Contractor

Bid/Explain/Agree

OWNER

6

Design Team Selection Phase

7

Transition to Construction (Negotiation or Bid)

™8

High Level CMGC Process

Procurement Design Process with CM Services “GMP Ready”

GMP Accepted Explain/Agree?

Construction Contract Awarded to CM

Alternate Deliveryof Project

Yes

Yes

No

GMP – Guaranteed Maximum PriceCM – Construction Manager

1. Technical2. Price

GMP Submission

No

FHWA’s EDC Project Delivery InitiativesDesign-Bid-Build CMGC Design-Build

9

Contracting Types

Leverage Current process

™ © 2011, All rights reserved, CMGC Institute 10

Key Finding FHWA Utah Peer Exchange 2011:

CMGC/CMAR project delivery “is a less radical shift in procurement culture than design-build…”

Owner retains control of the design

Designer is true owner’s representative

CMGC Highlights

49


Research done in 2009 (NCHRP Synthesis 402)• Five states were using CMGC/CMAR – AK, OR,

UT, FL, AZ• Six additional States have legislative authority

Quick look at current conditions (2011)• Now Using/ working on CMGC/CMAR: MI, CO,

CFL, MTO, ME, WFL and NV • EDC follow ups to EFL + 9 others

Who is Using CMGC/CMAR?

1158

NCHRP Synthesis 402Construction Manager-at-Risk

Project Delivery for Highway Programs - 2009

New Research 10-85 -“ A Guidebook for CMGC contracting for Highway projects” – 2012

New Research 15-46 – “Design-Management Guide for Design-Build and Construction Manager/ General Contractor Projects” - 2013

• The process is not the vertical world of CM@Risk – similar but different

• Transportation industry projects are different and require a process of their own Self-performance requirements are

typical Subcontractor procurement process is

different CMGC relies on best-value selection GMP timing

13

CMGC is not CM@Risk


With CMAR:

Negotiated prices vs. “BID”

Very little owner involvement during construction

Contractor selection is QBS vs. Best Value

Focus is on Quality vs. Risk and Price

CMGC is not CMAR

1446

• Collaboration

• Risk Theory

• Schedule

• Model to Implement Innovation

15

BIG Picture Theories with CMGC

CMGC is an integrated team approach to the planning, design and construction of highway projects.

CMGC Contracting


Contracting Types ComparedRisk Theory

Contractor RiskOwner Risk

Higher HigherLower

Primary bearer of Risk: Owner ContractorShared

Relative Level of Risk

Drivers of Risk: Disconnect between design and construction leads to suboptimal design decisions and construction delays.

Collaborative design process leads to readily constructible plans, faster construction times, and innovative approaches.

Design-Bid-Build Design-BuildCMGC

Total Amount of Risk

Owner relinquishes control of design and construction to gain speed of delivery

Lower Risks


Contracting Types ComparedScheduling/Timeline perspective

Contractor

Owner

Designer

Pre-design

Design

Selection

Construction

Design-BuilderOwner Pre-design

Design

Selection

ConstructionDesign Review

CM/GC

Owner

Designer

Pre-Des.

DesignSelection

Construction (GC)

Design

Design (CM)

Design Review

Design-Bid-Build

Design-Build

CMGC

CMGC Achieves faster project delivery through increased concurrence of activities

Faster Schedules

19

Model to Implement Innovation


OverviewKey Benefits of CMGC

1. Constructability

2. Collaborative Design Process

3. Competitive pricing

4. Reduced Risk

5. Relationship Building

6. Speed of Delivery


What does an owner expect?

• Better Designs• Better, Faster schedules• Lower risk• Lower costs

Savings in design Savings in constructability Savings in innovation

21

Scope

Schedule Budget

Can all of these be improved?

™

Contract Components

22

Project Delivery Method• DBB; CMGC; DB

Procurement Procedure• Low Bid; Best Value; Qualifications-based;

Sole SourceContract Payment Provision

• Lump Sum; Guaranteed Maximum Price; Cost Plus Fee; Cost Reimbursable; Unit Prices

• Doug Gransberg Phd. Iowa State.

™

Contract ComponentsWhere are we now?

23






™

Contract ComponentsWhere is CMGC?

24






Evolution of Technical Proposal Scoring Criteria

25


EDC Initiative

61


FHWA’s Long Term Project Delivery Goals

• All contracting agencies should have a project delivery “toolbox” including: – Design-bid-build– Design-build– Construction Manager General Contractor

(Construction Manager at-Risk)– Alliance Contracting– Performance Contracting– ID/IQ contracting– Other

™

New Zealand Selection Model

Complexity, Risk, Potential for Innovation, Flexibility Required, Client Involvement, Supply vs Demand, Program Constraint*P10-0274: Design Build Contracting using a Competitively Negotiated Design by Eric Scheepbouer

Dol

lars

DB

CM/GC

Alliance

DBB M&V

DBB LS DBB Cost+

CMGC

may be appropriate

28

™

CMGC Contract

Technical Cost

PlansSpecs

SHOPDRWG As

Builts

Collaborative Deliverables

Doug Gransberg, Phd, Iowa State

™

What do Owners want from CMGC?

Contractors ideas for difficult projects

Cost savings

Time Savings

Interviews with Senior DOT MGRs, Fall 2011, Gransberg - McMinimee


What owners want - Innovations to Reduce Total Time

CMGC/CM at Risk Design Build

Lane Rental

A+B

ABC

Total closure

APC


New Business Model

• New paradigm• Lowest construction cost to lowest project cost• Societal costs minimized• Public praise• Political capital


What Does industry get from CMGC?

• Better Designs – Hard to Quantify – Contractor satisfaction with plans, CO’s

• Better schedules- Exceeded expectations• Lower costs

– Savings in design- preliminary savings indicated 40% of design costs

– Savings in constructability- preliminary savings indicated 8% of total project combination with innovation

– Savings in innovation- preliminary savings indicated 8% combination with constructability


CMGC in ActionThe Bottom Line

Cost experience for UDOT, based on 18 state projects$330 million dollar program

CMGC has delivered 15-16% cost savings and lower change orders for Utah

Lower Costs

36

Stakeholders' OVERALL Satisfaction With Project Results(1=not satisfied, 7=very satisfied)

5, 2.80%

6, 18.30%

7, 76.10%

1, 0.00%

2, 0.00%

4, 1.40%3, 1.40%

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Bottom Line:CMGC is a good option for many

transportation projects where the qualifications and cooperation of

the contractor are critical to the success of the project.

CMGC Contracting

Documents

CMGC