Republic of the Philippines

Polytechnic University of the Philippines

REACTION PAPER: INTEGRATED PROJECT DELIVER 101

Presented to the College of Architecture, Design, and the Built Environment

Polytechnic University of the Philippines

Sta. Mesa, Manila

In partial fulfillment of the Requirements in

SPECIALIZATION 1: CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT (ARCH 40023)

Submitted to

Ar. Reynaldo Ventura, UAP

Submitted by

Nepomuceno, Angelo A.

BS Architecture 4-2

October 2022
 This webinar introduced the fundamentals of integrated project delivery (also known

as alternative delivery), including industry terminology like design-build, construction

manager at risk, design-bid-build, and owners advisor. It will be delivered by Shawn Sock

and Joe Willich, PE, PMP, Brown and Caldwell. Design-bid-build alternatives that encourage

quicker project delivery, build in greater quality, and lower project costs will be taught to

municipal decision-makers and project delivery staff.

Collaborative project delivery- the idea is for working together, openly sharing

informations to each other between the owner, designer, builder, or any other stakeholders

in an integrated design and construction process. They are working together to bring the

best ideas for the project.

Teaches the meaning of IDP, which is “integrated project delivery”, which means a

project delivery method in which there is a contractual agreement between an agency and a

single participating entity for the design, construction, alteration, operation, repair,

improvement, demolition, maintenance, or financing or any combination of these services,

for a public project.

He mentioned a state law which is “public projects act” which means a single

participating entity for the design, construction, or any combination of services. So this is a

very wide range of definition for public agencies in delivering project under this delivery

method.

Also to take note that any agency may award and IPD contract for a public project. So this is

available and can be given by the state law

Also as stated by the speaker, the act talks about the procurement process. So in the

procurement process it is known as a two-step process where you go out and do a request
for qualification, you do evaluation criteria and select the best firms, which is typically called

shortlists to go on and receive a request of proposal. So these are all allowed by the state

law. It also calls out proposals that must be evaluated on price as well as design and

technical approach, past performance, etc. The law also allows what most advantageous to

the agency and is the best value for the project. The law also says that you can select

proposal on basis other than solely the lowest cost.

So he also introduced methods on Spectrum of collaborative project delivery options,

which are the traditional method, collaborative delivery method, and design-build method.

The traditional method is typically known as design bid-build (DBB), then goes to collaborate

delivery, which begins in construction management at risk commonly known as CMAR. AND

Lastly goes to design-build which talks in two different delivery options, one is called

progressive design-build and the other one is fixed-price design-build.

So he also talked about the good reasons of design-build, which he highlighted

questions in knowing more about the said method. He also showed survey results which

goes on the three reasons people cited on using design-build which directly from the project

managers. So as for the survey, it is shown that the schedule effectiveness of design build is

far more effective than the design bit-bill. In innovations and cost-effectiveness it is also far

more effective. Innovation and quality factors are cited as major advantages of using design-

build and CMAR delivery. Larger majorities reported that the innovative ideas used in their

projects saved money and time, and improved project quality.

So design bid-build is the starting point of projects and public works procured today

and projects have been procured for the better part of the century at least is traditional and

involves a cast of characters in terms of architects, engineers and contractors. So technically

it is very well-established and is much defined linear process that is proven to work.
 A lot of owners, construction industry, promote a variation on traditional delivery

which is much more collaborative, called “construction management at risk”. This is a

fundamentally traditional delivery method but it changes up the order of things a bit, is still a

separate contracts between an owner and a designer or an architect, and construction

company who delivers work in the field. However, it does change the bid time line instead of

bidding a project after design is done contractors hired a concurrent with the design process

and most seem are the best practices actually recommend that the contractor be hired as

early in the design process as possible. So this model is electro lined with traditional

delivery it can be faster because contractor can be involved earlier. They can actually start

construction on parts of the design that are more advanced than others. It also does allow

traditional selection of consulting engineer or architects. And it does allow much expanded

effort and value engineering because the contractor are there during the design process

creating engagement. It then it still had two contracts with the owner.

The speaker also pointed out a discussion that is often left out is that it is a traditional

delivery method is two contracts and both design-bid-build and CMAR rely on the concept of

standard of care by the designer and so ultimately design discrepancies errors and

emissions days flow back to the owner. When something is not right with the design and

despite of all collaboration it hasn’t been caught yet the change order potential from the

contractor is the same.

So in collaborative delivery that is design-build as a delivery model has a lot of

different flavors and names and variations. Fundamental to design-build is that is a single

entity which as an owner a single contract with design-builder that can be a purpose-built

team, a consortium, partnership, a joint venture or a single company in many instances that

does that the professional services and deliver the construction.

design and construction through one contract with the owner. In the progressive design build

model, develops the design detail and constructive as construction estimate iteratively

between the owner and the design builder. In progressive design-build gains a pretty

significant schedule opportunity because you can do many activities concurrently shifted

from a very linear process at the design-bid-build model to a much more fast-tracked or

overlapping process where you can start many phases of construction before the rest of the

design is complete. Generally the design builder is selected in this model based on

qualifications and fee which is not a fixed price. It is very similar to the CMAR model except

in doing a single procurement with the designer and design builder and if you are using a

very much professional services model to make that selection as the other speaker have

said is often two-phased selection process with qualifications and then a shortlist and then a

proposal. And the worked through the design process arrived on the dotted puzzle piece,

these were very much like CMAR. There is a point in time where all of the projects are

converted or phase of the project to a guaranteed maximum price. Many of these contract

models for progressive design-build keep the books open after construction starts that is the

GMP option and as cost are accrued and allocated through the project if there is anything

left over are often shared and there is a mutual incentive for the design builder to work below

the agreed upon price and either add scope to the project or share the saving to the owner.

All of these models generally have what is called an off ramp. So in the off-ramp, lets

you as the owner make the choice that you do not actually agree on the price that seem the

contractor or the progressive design builder in this case is coming up with and so if you get

far advanced in the design process and the cost are not accruing to the budget or it is not

believable that the subcontractor bids are competitive or that the design builder is being

forthright in their open book pricing. It do have an option to pull the plug take the off ramp

and finish the design in a traditional manner bid out the work through a standard hard bid
contracting process. That makes everybody honest on developing cost an incentive to get to

the GMP on a forthright basis. One of the key thing to remember when doing one of this

design-build single contract model is that when you do get construction there is a

commitment to the performance of the project there is an embedded ability to hold the

design builder responsible for what the output of the projects or the form of the project is

supposed to be and if the project does not meet those contractual performance criteria it is

on the design-builder to fix it. That is the critical shift that are now made from a CMAR model

to a progressive design build model that is the analogy of using in the earlier, which is the

difference between being room mates versus being fundamentally married and responsible

internal to the team as a design builder to deliver the project and any disputes around

discrepancy between the characterization of the design and how it is implemented in the

field and built in the field. Those are issues that have to be adjudicated internal to that team

whether it is a joint venture or some formal relationship between a construction company

and engineer it becomes not the owners problem at the point.

The progressive design-build is a model that was evolved out of the design-build

toolbox, to allow the owner to stay involved in the design process. One of the big differences

of this model and fixed price is that you do not enter a relationship between the design

builder without a full scope of the project done yet or nor a fixed price for construction and

with that allows is for the owners to participate in the decision making and the prioritization

during the design process and it allows the owner to make and participate in the tough

budget decisions as the design done iteratively whenever the scope goes above what you

have to spent the project can be realigned and it is essentially a design to budget exercise,

but the owner is involved in that process throughout. So for owners who want to maintain

control this is the way to go, it is also a good way to go if you have a complex permitting

process where you need a lot of iteration in multiple design iteration to permit.
 And finally we got to pick fixed price design-build, this is what most people think of

when they say design build. This is a single contract model. The design detail and

construction, the come in as a fixed price as part of the proposal process, as you might

imagine the proposal process is much more complex, because if we are asking the

competitors to perform a significant amount of design as part of their submittals to the point

that they can price it on a committed fixed price way these are almost always done in a two-

phase process because if you want to have a short list and have a few bidders give you a

number it does lengthen the procurement process but it reduces the delivery time

considerably because once that design builder is selected what they are going to build for

you is as bid and they go do it and so a lot of owners use this when they don’t care

necessarily to be involved in detailed design, they get design submittals as part of the

process, they pick one and go forth and it is essentially design competition and it can include

operation maintenance in many cases it can even include financing. This would be the

foundation of a P3 delivery as well and so you see a larger complex projects and

infrastructure using this model. It is a little complex sometimes for smaller projects. You can

also use it to get going quickly once the design-builder is selected.

We had also tackled about the advantages and disadvantages of IPD. So the five top

concerns in managing design build projects where discussed, so these are anticipating

unknowns, completing on budget on schedule, the concern of the design control, many

owners are concerned that they have incomplete design-build knowledge and proper risk

allocation.

We had also tackled about the advantages and disadvantages of IPD. So the five top

concerns in managing design build projects where discussed, so these are anticipating

unknowns, completing on budget on schedule, the concern of the design control, many

owners are concerned that they have incomplete design-build knowledge and proper risk

allocation.
 So in proper risk allocation, project design can be transferred as a risk to design to a

design builder. So there is schedule is an opportunity for risk transfer to a design builder.

They are going to sign up to a scope and a price whether it is a GMP or lump-sum and they

are going to agree to provide the project in a certain time frame and can hold them

responsible for that =. Some permits and approvals can be transferred this is an area where

some permits or some approvals are going to be best controlled and managed by the owner.

It is difficult to shift those to necessarily a design builder and really that just leads into a

discussion of which permits which approvals belong to which party. One of the great

opportunities for transferring risk is you know if you are talking about project that is facility is

transferring the output in terms of quantity and quality, in other words if you have a

wastewater treatment plant and the criteria might be that the output must meet your nippies

permit, you can hold that design builder accountable for what they have designed and built is

going to effectively treat the effluent to meet those permit requirements. Cost the

construction project that is a primary risk transfer and then also facility performance and

accept this testing you know when you think back to what left and describe for design-bit-bill,

the owner hires a designer they design it, the owner then hires bids out and a contractor

builds the project. A contractor is not responsible facility performance that’s based on the

design done by the designer. So if the build it correctly according to the construction specs

and construction drawings, and it does not perform really that is the owner and the designer

trying to figure out what to do about it. In a design-build project really you have to transfer

that risk to the design builder. Also to expand you can look at lifecycle costs including

operations maintenance repair and replacement. So there is an opportunity for risk transfer

there too, so you get the right balance of capital investment versus maintenance cost and

reliability of the system.

So in delivery methods, there are summary key attributes. So when we look at the

design bid build versus CMAR vs the design build options, the traditional role kind of a
traditional role. Steps to successful Design-build projects are also tackled, so these are

clearly define goals and objectives of the project. Evaluate project, cost, schedule, and risk

during initial project planning and devise ways to mitigate identified risks. Determine the

delivery method that suits the specific project characteristics. Network with other owners who

have used DB on similar projects. Get help from independent consultants with DB

experience. Choose project members who are fully engaged and follow organization’s

culture, and select design-builder based on relevant DB qualifications.

So at the end of the webinar, I have learned many benefits in knowing this

application, one is Performance requirements, cost, and schedule requirements with the

inherent collaborative approach are accommodated through the contractual

obligations of the parties. Early communications and transparent costing help to build the

foundation of trust from the outset. One also is cost certainty. It is also suitable for complex

projects and/or fast track projects. Suitable for uncertain or developing scope.