NIBS USNBP ImplementationPlan 2022

U.S.
National BIM Program:

Implementation Plan
The Foundation for Digital Transformation of Capital Facilities and
Infrastructure
1
September 2022 | Version 1.1
Foreword
The mission of the National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) is to bring industry
stakeholders together, and build consensus on challenging topics to advance the
construction industry. One critical issue within the construction industry is the low level
of digitalization, which prevents it from transforming lifecycle work processes to be
more efficient, less expensive, more resilient, and safer to build and maintain. The U.S.
National BIM Program will focus on achieving this critical digital transformation of the
industry. It will be successful through collaboration between the public and private
sectors, across industry sectors (e.g., buildings and infrastructure), and across the
diversity of project stakeholders (owners, designers, constructors, suppliers, vendors,
and other involved parties).
The U.S. construction industry has been a leader in implementing Building Information
Modeling to support activities in delivering projects, and NIBS has supported this effort
by developing BIM standards and guidelines at the U.S. national level. However, this
effort has not accrued comparable benefits to asset owners to transform their building
programs and operations. At the same time, many international initiatives focus on BIM
standardization to support digital transformation throughout the entire life cycle of
designing, constructing, and operating the built environment. It is important to
recognize that while the U.S. construction industry has tremendous capabilities related
to digital technology it has not consistently taken a leading role in setting the digital
standards and practices needed to transform the delivery and operational approaches
for built assets.
This planning document outlines a strategy to rapidly expand standardization efforts,

including expanded roles in partnerships with organizations worldwide. The focus is on
developing practice-oriented standards that can be adopted into contracts to support
information management processes. There needs to be a focus on providing
information to owners to enable significantly improved operations and maintenance of
built assets. The project team members need to be supported with efficient approaches
to plan, design, and construct built assets. This will require next-generation standards,
education and training solutions, and a legal framework that supports the efficient
adoption of information management standards.
i
Throughout the development of this plan, a valuable partnership was leveraged with the
Centre for Digital Built Britain, a leader in national transformation programs adopting
standards-based BIM, along with many other volunteers including the National BIM
Program (NBP) Steering Committee members. Leading subject matter experts have also
been leveraged in BIM adoption in infrastructure and buildings who have shaped this
national strategy. NIBS is excited and grateful to the team of volunteers who devoted
their time and expertise throughout the development of this strategy, and looks forward
to significantly growing the efforts. Your support is needed to do so.
Salla Eckhardt Stephen Ayers

Chair, U.S. NBP Steering Committee Interim CEO
Microsoft National Institute of Building Sciences
ii U.S. National BIM Program Plan

Executive Summary
The foundation of the U.S. economy and society relies upon having a high-quality and
resilient built environment, including the infrastructure people use and buildings that
support their daily activities. Information is the lifeblood that supports the delivery and
operations of built assets. Unfortunately, the consistent creation and use of information
throughout the built asset industry has traditionally relied upon paper or unstructured
digital documentation. This is clearly starting to change based upon the increased
adoption in the U.S. of Building Information Modeling computer applications to support
the overall design and construction of built assets. But, the transition to full adoption is
slow, and the construction industry is widely known as an industry that lacks digital
maturity. In fact, McKinsey Global rated the construction industry as next to last in the
level of digitalization out of 22 industries evaluated.
Action is needed by increasing efforts on the efficient, consistent digitalization of

information and significantly improving the processes used to capture, create, store, use,
and maintain this information. This can be achieved by adopting structured, open
Building Information Management practices. While the U.S. has been one of the clear
global leaders in the development and implementation of BIM for focused use cases
during project delivery, e.g., aspects of design and construction, the U.S. has more
recently lagged other countries in the definition and adoption of standards to ensure
the efficient delivery and operations of projects leveraging structured asset information.
The industry must transition to digital delivery and operations of buildings and
infrastructure. The foundation for this digital transformation lies in managing digital
information throughout the life cycle of assets. Unfortunately, there is currently a
significant ‘information deficit’ within the industry, with minimal structured digital
information about the built environment. This information deficit is causing an
increasingly significant financial burden on the industry. Some recent estimates show
that poor digitalization levels cost the global construction industry as much as $1.85
trillion in 2020 alone (FMI 2021). These losses are attributed in part to poor decision-
making and ineffective stakeholder communication. It is more difficult to innovate
because digitalization is a prerequisite for adopting many technologies. It is much more
challenging to optimize operations of assets because data is not available to support
iii U.S. National BIM Program Plan
optimization. Ultimately, it will not allow us to achieve our vision of a ‘digital twin(s)’ of
the built environment that allows for real-time monitoring of assets, improved
performance modeling for predictive energy, social and sustainability performance, and
reduced overall lifecycle costs through efficient delivery and operation.
To achieve a new level of industrial efficiency, the industry must be digitally

transformed. This plan outlines a collaborative approach led by NIBS to develop a U.S.
National BIM Program (the Program) to accelerate this transformation.
The Program will be structured around six overlapping Workstreams to organize efforts
to address critical industry initiative areas:
1) Owner Leadership
2) Project Team Implementation
3) Standards and Guidance
4) Stakeholder Engagement
5) Education and Training
6) Legal and Insurance.
iv U.S. National BIM Program Plan

The next step is to commence the U.S. National BIM Program by initiating the Program
organizational structure within NIBS, identifying Program Partners, and securing the
resources to meet the mission successfully (e.g., time, talent, and funding). During the
initial phase, the focus will be on creating a consistent, coordinated message to attract
core stakeholder organizations and gain support throughout the industry while
developing foundational BIM standards. A targeted portfolio of high-value sponsored
development projects will be pursued across six Workstreams using both volunteer,
staff, and sponsored participants during this phase. These initial projects will form the
foundation for continued efforts to transition the construction industry through digital
transformation.
v U.S. National BIM Program Plan

Table of Contents
Foreword ........................................................................................................................................................................ i
Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................... iii
Table of Contents......................................................................................................................................................... vi
1 Why is a U.S. National BIM Program Needed? ................................................................................................. 1
1.1 What Is Building Information Management (BIM)? ....................................................................... 2
1.2 The Value of BIM throughout the Life Cycle of an Asset ............................................................. 3
2 Achieving the Vision through the U.S. National BIM Program ....................................................................... 4
3 Developing the U.S. National BIM Program ..................................................................................................... 8
4 Workstream Plans ............................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1 Owner Leadership Workstream .......................................................................................................... 10
4.1.1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................................... 10
4.1.2 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................................................... 10
4.1.3 Proposed Solutions ............................................................................................................................................... 10
4.2 Project Team Implementation Workstream ................................................................................... 13
4.2.1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Standards and Guidance Workstream ............................................................................................. 16
4.3.1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................................... 16
4.4 Stakeholder Engagement Workstream ............................................................................................ 22
4.4.1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................................... 22
4.5 Education and Training Workstream ................................................................................................ 28
4.5.1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................................... 28
4.6 Legal and Insurance Workstream ...................................................................................................... 30
4.6.1 Scope .......................................................................................................................................................................... 30
5 U.S. National BIM Program Roadmap ............................................................................................................. 33

5.1 Year 1: Building the Foundation ......................................................................................................... 35
vi U.S. National BIM Program Plan

5.2 Years 2 and 3: Early Wins ...................................................................................................................... 36
5.3 Years 4 and 5: Advanced Transformation ...................................................................................... 37
5.4 Beyond Year 5: Embedded Change ................................................................................................... 38
5.5 Program Schedule ................................................................................................................................... 39
6 U.S. NBP Governance Structure....................................................................................................................... 41
7 Program Budget and Sponsorship Model ......................................................................................................... 43
7.1 Program Budget ....................................................................................................................................... 43
7.2 Recommendations for Obtaining Program Support .................................................................. 44
7.3 Industry Organization Partnerships................................................................................................... 45
References ................................................................................................................................................................... 47
Definitions and Terms ................................................................................................................................................ 49
Appendix A: Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. 51
vii U.S. National BIM Program Plan

1 Why is a U.S. National BIM Program Needed?
The U.S. Construction Industry is a significant contributor to the U.S. economy, employing over 7
million people to create or renovate nearly $1.4 trillion in buildings, infrastructure, and other
built assets each year. But the construction industry has yet to enjoy the productivity
improvements of the digital age, averaging only 1% productivity growth in the past 20 years1.
The industry has been noticeably very slow to leverage digital delivery and operations. Building
Information Management (BIM) provides the foundation for this transformation. Leading
owners, designers, and builders throughout the United States have been global innovators in
BIM adoption. Still, the lack of a consistent digital delivery framework and the supporting
infrastructure for funding and implementation, have limited advancement to the next stages of
BIM and digital transformation.
Historically, the U.S. has been a leader in initiating digital innovation in construction with some
very significant examples of virtual design and construction. But the U.S. lags in the definition of
a common, industry-wide approach to consistently create and deliver structured asset data and
information to Owners of buildings, roads, bridges, and other infrastructure projects. There are
clearly leaders in the industry, yet workflows and tools across the industry lack common
standard workflows, organizational approaches, and data formats for open data exchanges.
Other countries throughout the world, including European and Asian nations, have invested
significant resources into the development of common standards, implementation resources,
and training to support BIM adoption and use based upon BIM standards. There is a need and
opportunity for the U.S. to leverage and build upon open information management standards to
support higher levels of information development and use.
The development, adoption, and implementation of common BIM standards within the U.S. will:
• Increase the clarity of data and information exchanged along the project value chain by
creating a common language.
1
“Reinventing construction through a productivity revolution”, McKinsey Global Institute, February 2017.
1 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

• Enhance cooperation between owners, designers, and builders by connecting processes.
• Drive efficiency of delivery by eliminating ambiguity and repetitious information
generation and coordination.
• Accelerate the effectiveness of the supply chain by reducing friction and confusion in
communicating clear requirements.
• Empower informed decision-making by providing valuable information when it is
needed by the key decision-makers.
• Integrate buildings and infrastructure for seamless management of the built
environment to benefit safety, security, resilience, and sustainability.
• Enable innovation through the existence of high-quality, structured data regarding the
built environment.
This document outlines a strategy for creating a U.S. National Building Information Management
Program to develop and deploy implementation resources, advanced digital standards, and the
social and legal foundation to support adoption in the U.S., aligned with and learning from the
lessons of global approaches.
1.1 What is Building Information Management (BIM)?
The term BIM is frequently used throughout the construction industry with various meanings.
Some reference BIM as a Building Information Model, which is an intelligent digital model of a
facility or asset (a BIM product). Others define it as a process, Building Information Modeling,
used to create the information-rich model. A more comprehensive view of BIM encompasses
the overall information management process for the planning, design, construction, and
operation of assets (both buildings and infrastructure) in the construction industry. In fact, all
three of these definitions were embedded into the U.S. National BIM Standard (NBIMS-US).
Throughout this document, BIM will specifically be referred to as Building Information
Management, focused on the overall digital information management workflows and data
sharing to support the entire asset lifecycle process, from project delivery (planning, designing,
and constructing an asset) to the asset management during the operations of a facility or
infrastructure. Specifically, Building Information Management has been defined in the U.S.
National BIM Standard, Version 3 (NBIMS-US) as:

“… the organization and control of the business process by utilizing the information in the
digital prototype to affect the sharing of information over the entire life cycle of an asset.”
BIM is a collaborative process that relies upon structured, digital data. It is also a process that
requires detailed planning by both the owner (to define what they need) and the project team
(to create, use and transfer valuable digital data to the owner). It is a process that can only be
achieved at a high level by leveraging standard workflows and data structures to enable
efficiency and data quality.
1.2 The Value of BIM throughout the Life Cycle of an Asset
The use of BIM in the construction industry can provide many benefits, both in the initial delivery
of the constructed assets and in the management and operations of assets. There are a number
of studies that demonstrate the value of BIM adoption for the initial delivery of an asset, with
various estimates of the value of BIM adoption and the return on investment (ROI). There are
fewer studies that demonstrate the lifecycle value of developing a digital twin approach to
operating and maintaining facilities and assets, e.g., buildings, roads, bridges, and other
infrastructure. Due to the existing limitations in the level of digital transformation of the
industry, the full potential benefits have not yet been seen of effective building information
management throughout the entire asset life cycle. Several forward-looking studies have
projected the potential impacts of a broad digital transformation of the industry. With digital
transformation, Boston Consulting Group (2016) estimates construction cost savings of 10 to
25% for vertical construction and even higher rates of 15 to 25% for infrastructure projects.
One additional critical challenge the construction industry must address is a rapid decline in the
U.S. construction labor force. McKinsey Global Institute (2020) projects that by 2031, 41% of the
construction workforce will retire, and so there is a need to shift construction methods to more
industrialized approaches leveraging digital information to enable effective delivery of quality
assets with a smaller workforce. McKinsey (2017) also estimates that the industry could increase
overall productivity by 50 to 60% through design-to-manufacturing processes supported by
digital information.

There are already initial estimates of the impact that digital transformation can produce in the
construction industry from countries that have adopted a broad BIM strategy. The U.K.
estimates that it has seen an overall reduction in public construction costs of 15 to 20% through
the adoption of a BIM mandate on all public projects (U.K. Government Construction Strategy
2011). Other targeted case studies have shown significant benefits from open BIM adoption on
projects, including reduced costs, improved quality, and reductions in overall delivery schedule.
These savings in initial project cost and delivery speed can be small compared to the potential
significant value gained in the overall asset quality, which is more difficult to measure
quantitatively. Ultimately, if an owner can manage and maintain their asset data throughout the
entire life cycle, they can yield significant benefits during the operational phase of a project.
The information deficit needs to be addressed throughout the entire life cycle of projects by
leveraging BIM to develop interactive, digital twins of built assets. A digital twin is defined as ‘a
digital replica of a real-world physical entity’ (El Saddik 2018). To truly leverage digital asset
information, that information should be used to create an operational digital twin that contains
facility asset information along with integrated real time sensor data and predictive capabilities.
2 Achieving the Vision through the U.S. National BIM

Program
The National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) initiated the U.S. National BIM Program (NBP
or Program). The Program concept has evolved over the past several years through
conversations and collaborations with leading organizations and communities, involving both
the public and private sectors, spanning a diverse cross-section of asset/project types. This
effort has recently accelerated though collaborations with the U.K. Department of Business,
Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) and the Centre for Digital Built Britain (CDBB), combined
with significant increases in interest from the owner community throughout the U.S., including
both building and infrastructure owners.

The vision of the U.S. National BIM Program is to accelerate the digital transformation of the
built asset industry to achieve optimal economic, environmental, and functional performance
of the U.S. built environment.
The mission of the Program is to transform the lifecycle information management practices
by creating and advancing the consistent adoption of next-generation information management
standards and practices to significantly improve the built environment delivery and operations
processes.
The Program will be guided by the following Core Values:

To achieve this mission, the following Program Goals will be accomplished:
To achieve the full lifecycle value of adopting BIM, it requires the collaboration of all team
members during both the delivery and operations and maintenance of a project. This requires
that team members speak in a common language that is consistently organized and openly
available (a common BIM framework) and that team members have education and training.
Countries within the European Union adopted a common Strategic Framework for Public Sector
BIM Programs (REF EU BIM Handbook) which leveraged four core areas (see Figure 1 from
Matthews (2016)), including:
1) Grow industry capacity
2) Foundation of public leadership
3) Communicate vision and foster communities
4) Build a common, collaborative framework.
This BIM framework provides insight into the critical areas for improvement to advance the role
of BIM industry-wide within a country. These areas provide a strong foundation for the creation

of a comprehensive program focused on all aspects of adoption, from people, processes, and
technology.
Figure 1: Strategic Framework for Public Sector BIM Programmes (Matthews 2016)
A core foundation of the Program development is to comprehensively address the impediments

to the next level of BIM adoption within the industry. The Program includes initiatives aimed at
the core elements of People – Process – Information – Technology:
1) People: Evolving the roles and responsibilities of team members and providing the
education and training to meet the changing demands;
2) Process: Establishing standardized workflows that enable information management
efficiency with a focus on the use of open data standards;
3) Information: Defining open data standards to support ease of use across processes and
delivery to owners; and
4) Technology: Creating common information exchanges that enable technology providers
to develop new and innovative technologies.

3 Developing the U.S. National BIM Program
In 2021, NIBS convened a series of meetings and workshops, along with stakeholder interviews
to define the initial focus of the Program. A Steering Committee, composed of 14 prominent
leaders representing major client and service provider organizations, focused on digital
transformation of the industry, was created. This Committee met frequently to guide and review
the development of this Program plan. In addition to the Steering Committee, a core team of
volunteers and staff led the authoring of content for this planning document. This included the
core authoring team along with members of six Workstreams.
To advance the U.S. adoption of BIM, the Program established focused Workstreams to identify
and implement initiatives related to the Program. The six Workstreams include: Owner
Leadership, Project Delivery Implementation, Standards and Guidelines, Stakeholder
Engagement, Education and Training, and Legal and Insurance.
These Workstreams align with, and can be mapped to, the strategic framework of BIM programs
as shown in Figure 2, with the foundation of leadership originating through the public/private
NBP initiative.

Project Team Implementation
Standards and Guidance
Legal and Insurance
Education and Training
Owner Leadership
Stakeholder Engagement
Figure 2: U.S. NBP Workstreams mapped to Strategic Framework for public sector BIM Programmes
4 Workstream Plans
A U.S. National BIM Program Roadmap has been developed through the identification of needs
and focused initiatives within targeted areas organized by the Workstream area. For each
Workstream, an initial panel of experts was convened to identify the most important initiatives
for the U.S. market within the focus area. These Workstream teams explored the definition of
the scope needed for their area; defined the fundamental problems focused on what is holding
them back; and then identified the highest value initiatives to advance the digital transformation
of the industry. This chapter identifies the Workstream scope, problem statements, and
initiatives for each of the six Workstreams, along with the general sequence and timeframe for
addressing each initiative. The Workstream plans will evolve through an annual planning cycle
as progress is made toward the Program goals.

4.1 Owner Leadership Workstream
4.1.1 Scope
The Owner Leadership Workstream will focus on defining the specific needs and engagement
activities to support the expansion of owner adoption and implementation of BIM, with a focus
on setting consistent BIM requirements and obtaining quality information from project delivery
to support the operations and maintenance of assets. This Workstream will include approaches
for public and private sectors and address building and infrastructure owners. It also includes
fostering innovation through supporting investments in research and development (R&D) and
supporting project teams that agree to work together to explore innovations in project delivery.
4.1.2 Problem Statement
Owners need to overcome a series of challenges to adopt BIM throughout the project life cycle
successfully. First, they need to implement a collaborative process that engages all project
stakeholders with the appropriate organizational structure and training. They also need to
develop standard work procedures that enable efficient and secure sharing of data across new
and existing software applications. Finally, they must gain the support needed throughout the
organization to enact the required changes.
4.1.3 Proposed Solutions
The Owner Leadership Workstream will focus on initiatives to support owner adoption using the
People, Process, Technology, and Data framework to overcome these challenges. Core
Workstream initiatives are shown in Figure 3.
People
To embed BIM throughout an owner organization, there is a need to gain executive

leadership support for digital transformation within the organization at every level. This
requires leadership to commit to a vision for digital transformation and persist in pushing
for that vision. Maintaining commitment to transformation benefits from clear case study
evidence of BIM impacts on projects, along with approaches to benchmark the status of
BIM adoption within the organization. The Program will provide common benchmarking

and a common business case documentation structure, focusing on the early stages of
the project, with the intention to document the impact of expanding BIM use within an
organization. A clear roadmap to support expanded BIM uses will be developed to
support the change management required for BIM adoption. Also, a clear definition of
roles and responsibilities of BIM professionals within each organization, along with a
career pathway, need to be defined.
Process
Owners need clear and consistent procedures for implementing BIM. Owners must
participate in the standards and guidelines initiative to identify opportunities to
standardize approaches across all participants. In addition to project delivery workflows,
owners will also investigate approaches for leveraging the model as the contract
document, along with addressing the challenges for gaining permits and approvals from
modeled content.
Technology
Many owners have legacy information systems that will require significant effort to
connect with and/or transition to a more interoperable, data-centric approach. The
Owner Workstream will need to focus on approaches for an owner to progress through
various stages of maturity related to information systems in order to achieve their overall
goals, allowing for value to be derived across the process and not just at some end state.
Data
A core part of gaining success from BIM is to have clearly defined information delivery
requirements. These should be associated with common BIM Uses (as defined by Penn
State University and in the U.S. National BIM Standard) recognizing the common
elements of BIM within all organizations. BIM Uses offer a way for Owners to plan and
implement BIM incrementally, gaining value along the way while envisioning where they
want to be in the future. The Owner Workstream will work with the Standards and
Guidelines Workstream to identify and define the best approaches for developing,
cataloging, and issuing common data requirements for various asset/facility types.

Figure 3: Owner Leadership Initiatives by Plan Phase
Figure 4: Timeline for Owner Leadership Workstream Initiatives

4.2 Project Team Implementation Workstream
4.2.1 Scope
Identify the needs and resources to support designers, constructors, suppliers, consultants, and
technology vendors who will implement BIM to deliver projects and support owner adoption.
Inconsistency in how BIM is applied to project delivery limits the benefits to all
stakeholders. From a project implementation standpoint, the ability to work with each other and
build trust requires a level of confidence that everyone is working towards the same goal to
provide value to the owner.
To address these challenges, advancing the implementation of BIM project execution through 5
key initiatives is prioritized in the order proposed below:
Document Value Potential with Clear Metrics:

Establish a project lifecycle path for BIM-enabled project delivery including value potential
and metrics.
Moving away from a traditional project break-down of cost by phase, which is based on
number of sheets issued, is still a challenge. Stakeholders in project implementation view
value potential very differently. When value comes in the way of efficiency for the project
team as a whole, it may increase the effort required of one or more stakeholders in the
process. Additionally, the case for value potential that revolves solely around compensation
does not always resonate equally. Showing which aspects of implementing BIM practices and
for whom they have value potential would be helpful to early-stage project planning
conversations. This is when decisions can be made to invest in one approach over another
and to ensure that stakeholders are compensated accordingly. This can also enable the
project team to find new ways of collaborating using digital processes across the project life
cycle and beyond to the project owner.

Correlate Objectives with BIM Uses and Methods:
Package/define objectives and means to achieve specific BIM Uses.
To promote consistency and clarity and develop digital ways of working, provide a clear
correlation between the BIM Uses, outcomes, and guidelines for standard implementation.
This exercise would closely relate to the BIM Uses effort underway as a part of the NBIMS-US
V4 work group.
Demonstrate Process:
Demonstrate a BIM-enabled process to highlight value/applicability throughout the project
life cycle.
Identify a means to facilitate or promote sharing of demonstration projects and reference

implementations to help illustrate successful and consistent outcomes from complete and
consistent implementation. Where have stakeholders realized the benefit? Was it aligned
with what they expected from early planning? What open standards were used and what
data was exchanged and was it received and usable by the owner?
Demonstrating the process is aimed at building trust in future workflows and processes. Yet,
the trust needed is really reinforced by the ability to validate what has been shared between
the stakeholders and ultimately with the owner.
Identify Global BIM Enabled Delivery Practices:

Establish a repository of best global BIM deliverable practices.
Recognizing that BIM has taken hold in many places and in many ways throughout the
globe, there are potential lessons learned by sharing those stories. The U.S. marketplace has
been leveraging BIM in varying degrees over the past two decades. A proper survey would
be helpful to understand how things might be done better and learn from what has been
done both at home and abroad. What may be working well, not-so-well, and what it might
mean in translation to the U.S. marketplace.

Recognize Successes:
Recognize projects that successfully leverage open standards and innovative/best practices.
To encourage and support open standards, it is important to motivate practitioners as well as

technology providers to improve the way in which open standards are supported and projects
successfully delivered. This effort can leverage recognition programs of other organizations and
can be good press for both the participants and the National BIM Program/BIM Council.
Figure 5: Project Team Implementation Initiatives by Plan Phase

Figure 6: Timeline for Project Team Implementation Workstream Initiatives
4.3 Standards and Guidance Workstream
4.3.1 Scope
Adapt and extend national and international BIM standards and guidance resources to support
the consistent, open, and verifiable integration of BIM throughout the project life cycle.
Many owners of buildings and infrastructure do not have clear, detailed BIM requirements that
are consistently applied to the delivery and operations process. For owners who have high
quality requirements, they are not aligned with any industry standard approach to support
efficient delivery. Having common standards would enable the industry to leverage the data to
support greater levels of integration between design and manufacturing, along with increasing
the opportunities to implement innovative design and construction solutions.

A national BIM roadmap for standards and guidelines will be developed with the clear
identification of core initiatives, organizations to develop and review content, and the formatting
and publishing of the content. This roadmap will be developed through a collective effort
during a U.S. BIM Standards Summit with participation from the NBIMS-U.S. Planning
Committee and other BIM standards organizations, with anticipated participation from AASHTO,
buildingSMART USA, BIM Forum, Digital Twin Consortium, Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC),
AIA/AGC, Construction Specifications Institute (CSI), large owners and delivery partners, and
leading academics.
This Workstream will coordinate across the existing and future standards and guidelines
including the following solutions:
a) Continue to develop and expand NBIMS-US as needed.
b) Work with ISO on reviewing and participating in ISO/TC 59/SC13, the Organization and
digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works, including building
information modelling (BIM).
c) Integrate ISO 19650 into the U.S.
d) Coordinate with other organizations to ensure comprehensive standards for BIM adoption,
and others as identified in the proposed workplan and Figure 7.
A description of envisioned activities in these categories is included in the following sections.
Develop and Expand NBIMS-US
At this time, the National BIM Standard Project Committee within NIBS is completing version
4 of the U.S. National BIM Standard (NBIMS-US), which is expected to be released in 2022.
This new version of NBIMS-US will be structured into various modules focused on different
content areas. In particular, NBIMS-US Version 4 will be composed of:
1) Introduction with a Common Framework: The introduction and framework will

define the overall structure of NBIMS-US and describe how the standard, guidelines,
and template content can be used for BIM adoption.

2) Core BIM Requirements: A set of common requirements that can be used by
Owners to more easily specify the required BIM implementation on a project.
3) BIM Execution Planning (BEP): A standard defining the elements and information
that is either required or optional for the development of a BEP on a project at various
phases. The BEP will define
4) BIM Use Definitions: A standard approach to document a BIM use on a project
along with definitions for the most commonly adopted BIM uses.
5) Construction to Operations Building Information Exchange (COBie): A standard
information exchange for building operational data along with guidelines for
implementation.
There are a significant number of opportunities to expand NBIMS-US with additional

valuable content. This includes: the detailed definition of requirements for common BIM
uses across the various domains of infrastructure and buildings; the expansion of
requirements for information requirements to the owner and other project data sharing; and
the definition of new standards to support operational digital twins.
ISO TC 59/SC13 Participation
ISO TC 59/SC 13 is focused on the organization and digitization of information about

buildings and civil engineering works, including Building Information Modeling (BIM). This
ISO subcommittee is focused on both international information exchanges and BIM
process standards. It is critical that the U.S. has a diverse group of BIM experts actively
participating on this subcommittee. ASHRAE is the U.S. Standards Body that is the
representative for ISO TC 59/SC 13. This workstream will have formal representation on
the ASHRAE Technology Advisory Group and will ensure that the U.S. is actively engaged
in the international standards discussions.
Integrate ISO 19650 into the United States Market
ISO 19650 (Organization and Digitization of Information about Buildings and Civil
Engineering Works, Including Building Information Modeling (BIM) - Information

Management Using Building Information Modeling) is an international process standard
that defines the common project and owner organization tasks that need to occur to
successfully implement BIM. It is not specific to a particular project type or owner
category. The process provided within the ISO 19650 Standard provides a high-level
framework to support U.S. BIM adoption, and is leveraged by U.S. National BIM Standard
activities. The U.S. needs to formally adopt ISO 19650 to provide consistency with the
international community and value to facility owners.
Coordinate with Other Organizations Involved in BIM Standards Development and

Adoption
It is critical for the Program to help coordinate between the many U.S. organizations that are
actively engaged in developing and adopting BIM standards and guidelines. Several core
organizations that will be prioritized include:
A. ASHRAE who is the ISO TC 59/SC 13 representative for the U.S. along with a close
partner with NIBS on the development of the SPC 224 Standard focused on BIM
implementation by owners.
B. BuildingSMART USA who is the U.S. chapter of BuildingSMART International (BSI). BSI
is focused on the development of information exchange standards using open
exchanges. They are the originator of the Industry Foundation Classes (IFC) data
schema and standard information exchange definitions.
C. Contract Document template authors such as the American Institute of Architects and
the ConsensusDocs organizations to ensure consistent specification of the standards
and requirements.
D. Other standards organizations who are developing BIM and related digital standard
solutions such as AASHTO, BIM Forum, product manufacturers, CSI, and OGC to name
a few.

Figure 7: U.S. BIM Standards, Guidelines, and Contracts Framework
The primary projects that are envisioned for this Workstream are shown in Figure 8. These
projects and their priorities will be refined through the Standards Summit meeting.

Figure 8: Primary Initiatives for Standards and Guidance Workstream
A description of these initiatives by Program Phase is included in Figure 9.
Figure 9: Timeline for Standards and Guidance Workstream

4.4 Stakeholder Engagement Workstream
4.4.1 Scope
The Stakeholder Engagement Workstream seeks to identify and support the coordination of
activities among all industry stakeholders, including a clear definition of the business case
(answering ‘why is NBIMS essential and how to get involved?’) and an overall roadmap.
• Industry communities are dispersed across various organizations. There is a need to bring
them together in a common setting.
• Current resources are committed to many other projects or efforts. Needed activities tend
to be delayed, missing opportunities for timely action and communication. Some agreed
upon tasks are delayed to the point that they are no longer relevant.
• Industry is saturated with conferences, content, and communications. For researchers
and product/service providers, having multiple uncoordinated and non-prioritized topics
and problem statements from different parties across the industry leads to fragmentation
and ineffective investment of limited resources.
• U.S. government agencies do not currently have a way to jointly invest in common BIM
standardization and adoption needs, leading agencies to spend taxpayer dollars in a
fragmented and duplicative manner with limited success. Mature solutions for one
agency do not effectively benefit all other agencies in an open source coordinated
evolution fashion.
The Workstream identified four main initiatives to address Stakeholder Engagement. The
Workstream recommends these four initiatives be fully funded with dedicated resources to
perform the work. This will ensure professionals can provision the appropriate amount of time to
develop and execute the initiatives. The Workstream emphasizes it is important to avoid utilizing
volunteers, personnel already committed to other work, or personnel that would have to learn
new skills or technology to complete the initiatives, as this will likely cause delays or reduce

quality due to competing responsibilities. Timeliness and professionalism are extremely
important with regard to communications and stakeholder engagement.
Although the initiatives are framed as projects below, the ongoing efforts of the Workstream
would immediately start developing the initial, high-value communities prior to starting or
completing each initiative. Additionally, while not necessarily within the framework of a project,
developing Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with Partner Organizations and ongoing
participation in their events are keys to successfully engaging various stakeholders. The four
main initiatives are a Market Research Study, a Stakeholder Value Matrix, a Communication
Strategy, and a Communication Channel.
Market Research Study
Before undertaking any substantial change, a front-end analysis is recommended. It is

important to better understand the current position before setting out on a new
destination. The Workstream suggests the initial project should be a market research study
effort to better determine the current state of BIM adoption in the U.S. A
professional research firm with expertise in the construction industry should be contracted to
identify what other organizations have done, coordinate their efforts, and perform the
resulting survey. Aims of the research should include investigating:
1. Where has true progress been made in terms of BIM standards and adoption?
2. What has worked well to enable the success?
3. What efforts have not worked so well and why?
For each stakeholder group there is a need to better understand:
1. How do they currently implement BIM in their organization?

2. What are their challenges implementing BIM?
3. What do they value most from their specific perspective?
4. How can value be added?
5. What are their preferred communication modes and frequencies?
The research project is estimated to last 9 to 12 months. The project should include the
development of specific research instruments that will yield decision-making information to

the steering committee. The research firm should engage industry subject matter experts in
the development of the interview instrument. The project should also include some level of
formative feedback during the first 5 years as well as summative feedback after the first 5
years to gauge the efficacy of the NBP initiatives.
Stakeholder Value Matrix
The Workstream members believe effective communication must be relevant to specific

stakeholder groups to promote engagement. The Workstream began exploring the idea
of identifying all the stakeholders in the industry. Many stakeholders could be lumped
together in major groups but still have specific needs and interests; therefore, they
also needed to be split into minor (sub)groups. A preliminary stakeholder matrix that
captures major groups and minor groups was developed. For example, designers
constitute a major group and architects, engineers, and space planning constitute a minor
group. The matrix also documents the general value of BIM as well as the specific value
the NBP could bring to both major and minor groups.
The Workstream suggests an ongoing project will be to

continually develop the stakeholder matrix where distinct stakeholder groups can be
identified with specific benefits. This can serve as a means of summarizing survey data
from the front-end analysis. It also serves as a guide for a communications specialist to
ensure that the messaging aligns with the recipients’ perceived needs and values. This
initiative should not require a funded role beyond the project manager.
Communication Strategy
The Workstream recommends developing a comprehensive communication strategy.

Components of this strategy would include harnessing relationships with existing industry
member organizations. Over 30 organizations have been identified, many of which
communicate frequently with their constituency through websites, digital newsletters,
other media channels, hard copy mailings, continuing education materials, and
conferences. It is suggested that the NBP initially engage in existing conferences and
channels. They should also develop and utilize official social media channels. The

Workstream recommends designating sufficient funding for the services of a professional
communication specialist to develop and execute the communication strategy.
Communication Channel
The Workstream recommends developing an official communication channel for the

NBP. The channel would be the official source of information for all things NBP. The
channel should be free from identifiable affiliation with an overarching parent
organization to promote participation (see Figure 10). The Workstream recommends
allocating funds for the planning, design, development, and maintenance of the channel.

Figure 10: Stakeholder Group Communications Channel Concept Map

Figure 11: Primary Initiatives for Stakeholder Workstream
Figure 12: Primary Initiatives for Stakeholder Workstream

4.5 Education and Training Workstream
4.5.1 Scope
Define the needs for education and training about BIM standards, and provide
recommendations for the identification, coordination, management, and development of
educational programs and potential certifications, as appropriate.
Industry needs a cohesive movement toward BIM education and training for owners, project
teams, and users. NIBS is in a unique position to provide a comprehensive plan which
incorporates the lifecycle view. There is currently no organization providing a
comprehensive standard approach to training which would include academic and professional
education with training, as well as multi-discipline/multi-phase guidance. Such an approach
would provide guidance for organizations and instructors to develop the scope and expectations
around BIM education and training.
The solution includes the development of a comprehensive curriculum standard/guide to be

utilized as a training document (similar to those provided by LEED, PMI, OSHA, and others)
along with supporting focused training initiatives. This Workstream will focus on positioning the
Program to provide a clear definition of curriculum standards. After defining the curriculum
standards, a clearinghouse for training and education that meets these standards will be
created. Therefore, an initial education survey of curriculum content needs will be developed in
the initial phase, which will guide future curriculum development activities. Then, the curriculum
guide(s) will be developed for identified areas. Ideally, the guide will lead to a form of
credentialing, but this will be explored following the development of the more detailed
strategy. The Workstream will also place an emphasis on raising awareness for education and
training.

The primary projects envisioned for this Workstream are outlined in Figure 13. These projects
and their priorities will be refined following the BIM Educational Needs Survey which will be
performed in the first year of the program.
Figure 13: Primary Initiatives for Education and Training Workstream
Figure 14: Primary Initiatives for Education and Training Workstream

4.6 Legal and Insurance Workstream
4.6.1 Scope
Identify the approaches to adapting legal and insurance strategies to support model-based
delivery of projects. As these are developed, the efforts of this Workstream could be expanded
to also address regulatory matters associated with requiring and contracting for BIM.
There is a need for a clear, consistent approach for Owners and project team members to
incorporate BIM into contracts for delivery products and services. It is also important to clearly
communicate the impact of BIM on overall project risk(s) so that the financial impacts of BIM on
lowering risk can be factored into the risk management costs and impacts.
A core focus of this Workstream will be to define an approach to integrate BIM throughout the
contracting and risk management practices within a project. An initial stage will include the
development of a BIM Legal and Insurance Summit to convene leading experts who will define
the core issues, current status, and future tasks needed to support the broad adoption of
modeled content and data into the contractual language used by public and private owners
across industry sectors. The following initiatives are envisioned as core challenges to be
addressed within this Workstream, and they will be refined depending upon the results of the
Summit and any further planning based upon partner feedback.
NBIMS-US Contract Resources
A core initiative of this Workstream will be to develop guidance regarding the

incorporation of the Program Standards (ISO 19650, NBIMS-US, and others) content into
core contracts for projects. This will include the development of guidance documents for
public agencies, private owners, and project participants (e.g., construction managers,
general contractors, and design firms).

An ultimate goal for this initiative will be to provide guidance for various levels of reliance
on modeled content, including adopting the model as the basis for the contractual
design documentation provided to the constructor. This will require collaboration with
various organizations who are addressing issues related to permitting, professional
certification of designs, and model data security.
Coordination with Key Contract Development Partners
There are two template contract document providers for many projects within the U.S.,
including the American Institute of Architects (AIA) Contract Documents and the
ConsensusDocs template contracts. The NBP will aim to work with these organizations to
support the incorporation of core NBIMS-US standards into the contract language when
appropriate.
Risk Impact Study
A third initiative will focus on the identification and quantification of the change in risk
profiles for projects delivered with varying levels of BIM adoption and incorporation into
contracts. This initiative will identify case study projects across sectors and evaluate the
detailed risks, benefits, and challenges associated with adoption of BIM into the core
contracting requirements. Results will highlight the impact of BIM on overall project risk
along with additional impediments that remain on projects.

Figure 15: Primary Initiatives for Legal and Insurance Workstream
Figure 16: Primary Initiatives for Legal and Insurance Workstream

5 U.S. National BIM Program Roadmap
The Workstream activities will be closely integrated to achieve the Program vision. The
initiatives have been arranged into a comprehensive roadmap. The roadmap will also aim to
align with collaborative initiatives throughout the industry that are resourcing and advancing
important aspects of BIM. Of particular note are initiatives from the Federal Highway
Administration through their BIM Roadmap (FHWA 2021), along with active pooled fund
initiatives supported by AASHTO, including the Bridge pooled fund and the upcoming Road
pooled fund.

Figure 17: NBP Roadmap with Core Initiatives across Workstreams
5.1 Year 1: Building the Foundation
The structure for the Program will be put into place during the first year. This will include the
identification of a Program Director and securing the financial support needed to successfully
fund the initiatives. This critical year will set the course for building the program out in
subsequent years. It will help determine resources that can be funded, which will in turn impact
the pace of the program.
From a project perspective, the initial year will include a series of exploratory initiatives to
identify and further define the critical issues to address in future projects and efforts. This will
include projects such as the Market Research Study, the BIM Educational Needs Survey, a BIM
Legal and Insurance Summit, and the U.S. BIM Standards Roadmapping Summit. An additional
focus on the formation of core industry communities will occur with the formation of the owner
and project delivery team communities.

Figure 18: Initiatives across Workstreams in Year 1
5.2 Years 2 and 3: Early Wins
Years 2 and 3 will focus on the initial development projects along with defining the future needs.
Activities identified in Years 2 and 3 are included in Figure 19.

Figure 19: Initiatives across Workstreams in Years 2 and 3
5.3 Years 4 and 5: Advanced Transformation
Years 4 and 5 will focus on gaining additional adoption of the products developed in the initial
years of the Program, along with continuing to focus on additional high-value products.
Activities identified in Years 4 and 5 are included in Figure 20.

Figure 20: Initiatives across Workstreams in Years 4 and 5
5.4 Beyond Year 5: Embedded Change
While this plan focuses on the initial five years, the NBP will continue beyond five years.
Refinement of the core activities needed beyond year five through additional strategic planning
initiatives during the earlier program years will be addressed. Figure 21 shows potential
Initiatives after Year 5.

Figure 21: Potential Initiatives across Workstreams beyond Year 5
5.5 Program Schedule
The comprehensive initial schedule for the Program activities, combining all Workstreams and
program management, is shown in Table 1.

Table 1: NBP Plan and Schedule

6 U.S. NBP Governance Structure
The U.S. National BIM Program will be developed through a broad coalition with representation
from federal, state, and local agencies; private facility owners; designers, constructors, and
operators; software and information management vendors; and other suppliers and stakeholders
to the facility lifecycle process. The program will be administratively housed within the National
Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS). Established by the U.S. Congress in 1974, NIBS is a non-
profit, non-governmental organization with a mission to serve the public interest by advancing
building science and technology to improve the built environment. For many years, NIBS has
been a leader in the development of information management standards for the built
environment, including the National BIM Standard - United States® (NBIMS-US™) and the United
States National CAD Standard®, along with guidelines for BIM adoption including the National
BIM Guide for Owners (NBGO). NIBS is currently working with ASHRAE to develop the NBGO into
an ASHRAE standard on BIM for Owners and participating in the ISO process through ASHRAE’s
role as the U.S. Technical Advisory Group (TAG) member of ISO Technical Committee 15
Buildings and civil engineering works, Subcommittee (SC) 13 Organization and digitization of
information.
The National BIM Program will include a series of project partner organizations. A collaborative
panel of Program Partner representatives along with the U.S. NBP Steering Committee will guide
the future Program activities and be housed within the NIBS Building Information Management
(BIM) Council. NIBS will reach out to organizations across the industry to gain support through
strategic Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with stakeholder groups across industry
disciplines and facility sectors, e.g., buildings, infrastructure, and industrial sectors. The Program
will also seek partnerships with public and private sector participants who will sponsor the
program at various levels. The Program Partners working with the Steering Committee (SC) will
prioritize the projects that are recommended from each Workstream during a given year.
The SC will play a leading role in this process, along with continued review of the ongoing
initiatives. The SC members will help identify and provide the definition of needs and
opportunities they wish to capitalize on, including the development of future BIM standards and

guidelines, a legal framework to support standards adoption, educational initiatives, stakeholder
engagements, and research and data collection. NIBS BIM Council’s Project Teams (existing or
newly formed) will implement the research, development, educational, and outreach activities
through the volunteer Workstreams and workgroups along with defined project sponsorships.
The U.S. National BIM Program Steering Committee will maintain broad and diverse
membership and include representatives from all industry stakeholder groups. A core principle
of the program will be to develop content through open and transparent approaches to secure
high levels of participation and adoption. The envisioned organizational structure is shown in
Figure 22.
Figure 22: Organizational Structure of the National BIM Program within NIBS

7 Program Budget and Sponsorship Model
7.1 Program Budget
The Program will require funding to support both NIBS personnel and external parties to
perform defined initiatives. An initial budget for the Program is shown in Table 2. This budget
includes general support for the overall program management staff and resources, along with
an annual budget developed by estimating the best current assessment of the quantity of work
to be completed. The budget for the initial year is lower than subsequent years to account for
initial time to hire employees and time needed to initiate the project process for the
Workstreams. Funding levels will likely vary dependent upon the year and workload balance
between the Workstreams and as the Workstream plans are refined through the planned
workshops and research in year one. The projects and initiatives identified in the initial
Workstream plans will be further refined over time and additional details regarding a budget will
be developed and shared with Program Partners each year.

Table 2: U.S. National BIM Program Summary Budget
7.2 Recommendations for Obtaining Program Support
The Program will seek support through multiple funding approaches:
1) Public Sector Funding with Private Sector Contributions
The ideal core funding approach would be through a large contribution from the public sector
to initiate and sustain the funding for the Program. This funding could be augmented with
additional organizational funding or in-kind contributions. This approach aligns with the
funding structure advanced by many other countries that have supported a coordinated,
national-level BIM adoption strategy through public support, including the United Kingdom,
many European Nations, Singapore, and others. While ideal, it is acknowledged that this

approach is more challenging in the U.S. without a central entity with responsibility for buildings
in the U.S. Government. Potentially, funding through the 2021 Infrastructure Bill directed to the
Federal Highway Administration may be a candidate combined with support from individual
agencies.
2) Organizational Consortium Funding
A complementary approach is to focus on an organizational sponsorship/partnership model

along with potential funding of grants and projects. The specific model with funding levels and
benefits will be refined by NIBS staff working with the Stakeholder Engagement Workstream.
The initial focus will be on larger organizations who will gain significant benefit through the
activities of the Program, along with their involvement in the Program. The Program will seek an
annual funding level of approximately $2 million per year starting in Year 2, with an initial target
of $1 million for Year 1 support. Partners could provide direct funding and/or in-kind resources.
The funds raised through the partner program will support the operational expenses of the
Program activities within the BIM Council, including the identification of a new U.S. NBP Program
Director along with staff to support the effort at NIBS. Additional funds will support projects to
develop standards, educational content, and other activities needed to meet the goals of the
Program.
The Program partner model will recognize organizational contributors who make a significant
financial contribution to the Program. Partners will also have the opportunity to contribute to
the prioritization of projects through a Program Partners committee.
In addition to the financial support from sponsors and partners, broad participation of
volunteers will be sought to contribute to program activities while gaining valuable adoption
partners throughout the industry.
7.3 Industry Organization Partnerships
A core part of the success of the Program will be the expansion of collaborative relationships
and initiatives with industry organizations. NIBS will reach out to key organizations and aim to
develop mutually beneficial MOUs outlining collaborative initiatives. NIBS has collaborative
MOUs in place with the U.K. Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS), the

Center for Digital Built Britain, ASHRAE and BIM Forum related to BIM standards development.
NIBS will seek to develop additional MOUs with the following organizations, at a minimum:
buildingSMART USA, buildingSMART Canada, the American Institute of Architects, Associated
General Contractors, American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials,
Construction Industry Institute / CURT, Construction Specifications Institute, Design-Build
Institute of America, the Digital Twin Consortium, and the Open Geospatial Consortium.
Although not specifically identified here, it will also be important to work closely with key
building product manufacturing organizations. These relationships will start to be developed in
the second year of the program. This list of collaborators will continue to be expanded in the
future, and any organizations interested in joining this Program are welcome.

References
Advancing BIM for Infrastructure: National Strategic Roadmap, Available at:

https://doi.org/10.21949/1521637, Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway Administration, 2021.
A Report for the Government Construction Client Group Building Information Modelling (BIM)
Working Party Strategy, Paper by the U.K. Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. July
2011.
BIM Beyond Design Guidebook by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine. Available at: https://doi.org/10.17226/25840. Washington, D.C.: The National
Academies Press, 2020.
Building Information Modeling by the UK Government. Available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/building-information-modelling. London, England
U.K.: The Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) Ref: BIS/12/1327, 2012.
Building Information Modeling (BIM) Practices in Highway Infrastructure FHWA Global

Benchmarking Program Report, RPT NO FHWA-PL-21-024, Washington, D.C.: Federal Highway
Administration, 2021.
Digital in Engineering and Construction: The Transformative Power of Building Information

Modeling. Retrieved from http://futureofconstruction.org/content/uploads/2016/09/BCG-Digital-
in-Engineering-and-Construction-Mar-2016.pdf . The Boston Consulting Group (BCG), 2016.
“Digital Twins: The convergence of multimedia technologies.” IEEE MultiMedia, 25 (2), 87–92. By
El Saddik, Abdulmotaleb. 2018.
Handbook for the Introduction of Building Information Modelling by the European Public Sector:
Strategic action for construction sector performance: driving value, innovation, and growth.
Available at http://www.eubim.eu/handbook/. EU BIM Task group. 2018.
“Governments can lead construction into the digital era”, Available at

https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Capital%20Projects%20and%20Infrast
ructure/Our%20Insights/Governments%20can%20lead%20construction%20into%20the%20digit

al%20era/Governments-can-lead-construction-into-the-digital-era.pdf. McKinsey and Company.
April, 2019.
Harnessing the Data Advantage in Construction by Bowman, Jay (FMI), Thomas, Eric (Autodesk).
2021.
Imagining construction’s digital future. Retrieved from https://www.mckinsey.com/business-

functions/operations/our-insights/imagining-constructions-digital-future. By Rajat Agarwal,
Shankar Chandrasekaran, & Sridhar, M. 2016.
ISO (2018a). ISO 19650:1-2018 Part 1- Organization and digitization of information about
buildings and civil engineering works, including Building Information Modeling (BIM) —
Information management using building information modeling — Part 1: Concepts and
principles. International Standards Organization.
ISO (2018b). ISO 19650-2:2018(en) - Organization and digitization of information about

buildings and civil engineering works, including Building Information Modeling (BIM) —
Information management using building information modeling — Part 2: Delivery phase of the
assets. International Standards Organization.
ISO (2020). ISO 19650-3:2020 – Organization and Digitization of Information about

Buildings and Civil Engineering Works, Including Building Information Modeling (BIM).
Information Management Using Building Information Modelling Operational Phase of The
Assets. International Standards Organization.
“Modular construction: From projects to products”, Available at

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/modular-construction-
from-projects-to-products. McKinsey and Company, June, 2019.
“Reinventing construction through a productivity revolution”, Available at

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/reinventing-
construction-through-a-productivity-revolution. McKinsey Global Institute, February, 2017.

“Reimagining infrastructure in the United States: How to build better”, Available at
https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/reimagining-
infrastructure-in-the-united-states-how-to-build-better. McKinsey and Company, July 2020.
“The next normal in construction: How disruption is reshaping the world’s largest ecosystem”,
Available at:
https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/McKinsey/Industries/Capital%20Projects%20and%20Infrast
ructure/Our%20Insights/The%20next%20normal%20in%20construction/executive-
summary_the-next-normal-in-construction.pdf. McKinsey and Company, June, 2020.
U.S. National BIM Standards – Version 3, Available at https://www.nationalbimstandard.org.

Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Building Sciences, 2015.
“Why the time is right to reinvent capital-project delivery”, Available at

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/operations/our-insights/why-the-time-is-right-
to-reinvent-capital-project-delivery. McKinsey and Company, November, 2020.
Definitions and Terms
Asset: An item, thing, or entity that has potential or actual value to an organization. An asset
may be fixed, mobile, or movable. It may be an individual item of a plant, a system of connected
equipment, a space within a structure, a piece of land, an entire piece of infrastructure, or a
whole building or portfolio of assets. (Source: BS ISO 55000:2014) (Additions from ISO 19650 –
Note 1)
Building Information Management (BIM): The organization and control of the business
process by utilizing the information in the digital prototype to affect the sharing of information
over the entire life cycle of an asset. The benefits include centralized and visual communication,
early exploration of options, sustainability, efficient design, integration of disciplines, site control,
as-built documentation, etc.–effectively developing an asset lifecycle process and model from
conception to retirement. (Source: NBIMS-US Version 3, 2015)

Building Information Model: The digital representation of physical and functional
characteristics of a facility. It serves as a shared knowledge resource for information about a
facility, forming a reliable basis for decisions during its life cycle from inception onwards.
(Source: NBIMS-US Version 3, 2015)
Building Information Modeling: A business process for generating and leveraging building
data to design, construct, and operate a building during its life cycle. BIM allows all stakeholders
to have access to the same information at the same time through interoperability between
technology platforms. (Source: NBIMS-US Version 3, 2015)
ISO 19650: An international consensus standard that documents a standard approach for
information management using Building Information Modeling. The formal title of the standard
is Organization and digitization of information about buildings and civil engineering works,
including Building Information Modeling (BIM) — Information management using Building
Information Modeling. There are currently four published parts to ISO 19650 and one additional
part under development within the International Standards Organization.
U.S. National BIM Standards (NBIMS-US): A series of standards, guidelines, and template
resources defining standard practices to adopt Building Information Modeling on a project and
within an organization. The initial version of NBIMS-US was published by the National Institute
of Building Sciences in 2007, and Version 3 was published in 2015. NBIMS-US Version 4 is
currently under development.
Implementation Plan Change Log
July 2022, V1.0 - Initial Release Version

September 2022, V1.1 – Minor corrections to Acknowledgments

Appendix A: Acknowledgements
Many people contributed to the development of this Implementation Plan. Thanks to the
following participants and apologies if anyone was missed:
NBP Steering Committee:
• Salla Eckhardt, Chair, Microsoft

• Paul Audsley, NBBJ
• Sandra Benson, Procore Technologies
• Luciana Burdi, Massachusetts Port Authority
• Angle A. Dizon, III, Coordination and Support, Bureau of Overseas Building Operations,
U.S. Department of State
• Jason Fairchild, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
• Charles G. Hardy, U.S. General Services Administration, Public Building Service
• Michael Kennerly, Iowa Department of Transportation
• Hannu Lindberg, DPR Construction
• Jagannath Mallela, WSP
• Russ Manning, Kaiser Permanente
• Katherine Petros, Office of Infrastructure Research and Development, Federal Highway
Administration
• Will Sharp, HDR
• Grace Wang, Google
Workstream Team Members
Owner Leadership: Grace Wang (Google) (Lead), Luciana Burdi (Massport), Michael Carancho
(Smithsonian Institute), Philip Kretzmer (Columbia University), Russ Manning (Kaiser
Permanente), Allen Melley (PennDOT), Swetha Sadananda (Kaiser Permanente), Sanne Worthing
(Disney Imagineering)
Project Delivery Implementation: Rachel Riopel (HDR) (Lead), Mariangelica Carasquillo-

Mangual (USACE CAD BIM Center), Eric Cylwik (Sundt), Brok Howard, AIA NCARB (dRofus),
Shannon Lightfoot (McCarthy Building Co), Alexa Mitchell (HDR).

Stakeholder Engagement: Johnny Fortune (formerly BTA/Prime AE) (Lead), Paul Audsley
(NBBJ), Cindy Baldwin (VDCO Tech), Sasha Reed (Procore), Will Sharp (HDR), Brian Sripac (DBIA)
Standards and Guidelines: Carrie Dossick (University of Washington) (co-Lead), John Messner
(Penn State, co-Lead), Roger Grant (NIBS), Jen Lather (University of Nebraska), George Lukes
(Utah Department of Transportation), Jagannath Mallela (WSP), Erik Poirier (ÉTS Montréal), and
Paul Shillcock (Operam).
Education and Training: In memoriam of Glenda Mayo (University of North Carolina,

Charlotte) (Lead), Carrie Dossick (University of Washington), Richard Lane (Centre for Digital Built
Britain), Tammy McCuen (University of Oklahoma), T.J. Meehan (CADD Microsystems), Dana
‘Deke’ Smith (DKS Information Consulting).
Legal and Insurance: Robert Middlebrooks (AIA) (Lead)
NBP Plan Development Team: Roger Grant (NIBS, Program Manager), Adam Matthews
(Centre for Digital Built Britain & BEIS), Phil Bernstein (Yale), John Messner (Penn State), Nancy
Novak (Compass Datacenters), Stephen Hagan (formerly GSA), Robert Middlebrooks (AIA),
Rachel Riopel (HDR), and Van Woods (USACE)

NIBS USNBP ImplementationPlan 2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

NIBS USNBP ImplementationPlan 2022

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NIBS USNBP ImplementationPlan 2022

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

U.S.

National BIM Program:

This planning document outlines a strategy to rapidly expand standardization efforts,

Salla Eckhardt Stephen Ayers

ii U.S. National BIM Program Plan

Action is needed by increasing efforts on the efficient, consistent digitalization of

To achieve a new level of industrial efficiency, the industry must be digitally

iv U.S. National BIM Program Plan

v U.S. National BIM Program Plan

5 U.S. National BIM Program Roadmap ............................................................................................................. 33

vi U.S. National BIM Program Plan

vii U.S. National BIM Program Plan

1 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

1.1 What is Building Information Management (BIM)?

2 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

1.2 The Value of BIM throughout the Life Cycle of an Asset

3 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

2 Achieving the Vision through the U.S. National BIM

4 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

The Program will be guided by the following Core Values:

5 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

6 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

A core foundation of the Program development is to comprehensively address the impediments

7 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

8 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

Standards and Guidance

Legal and Insurance

Education and Training

9 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

4.1.2 Problem Statement

4.1.3 Proposed Solutions

To embed BIM throughout an owner organization, there is a need to gain executive

10 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

11 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

Figure 4: Timeline for Owner Leadership Workstream Initiatives

12 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

4.2.2 Problem Statement

4.2.3 Proposed Solutions

Document Value Potential with Clear Metrics:

13 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

Identify a means to facilitate or promote sharing of demonstration projects and reference

Identify Global BIM Enabled Delivery Practices:

14 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

To encourage and support open standards, it is important to motivate practitioners as well as

Figure 5: Project Team Implementation Initiatives by Plan Phase

15 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

4.3 Standards and Guidance Workstream

4.3.2 Problem Statement

16 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

A description of envisioned activities in these categories is included in the following sections.

Develop and Expand NBIMS-US

1) Introduction with a Common Framework: The introduction and framework will

17 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

There are a significant number of opportunities to expand NBIMS-US with additional

ISO TC 59/SC13 Participation

ISO TC 59/SC 13 is focused on the organization and digitization of information about

Integrate ISO 19650 into the United States Market

18 U.S. National BIM Program Plan

Coordinate with Other Organizations Involved in BIM Standards Development and