1
Q
In addition to the scope transfer, can you please explain what other VM/VE options were considered?
A
Some of the items we considered as part of the value engineering was:
Explored:
- Exposed ceiling system instead of a suspended ceiling (making sure acoustic requirements are not affected + price of full height partitions won’t impact the VE Option) .
- Different suppliers for high value items - i.e. acoustic supplier, Treetops instead of Rockfon.
Approved:
- Recycled RAF tiles (£80,000)
- Painting walls instead of the feature walls / cladding. (£20,000 saving - approved)
- Omitting glass and glazed doors and just using timber with vision panels. (£35,000 saving - approved)
- Using different branded furniture than the specification provided. (C. £25,000 saving approved)
2
Q
How did your cost plan compare with the contractor’s sum?
A
The contractor’s sum was C.£13m, which when combined with the risk register and other project additions came to about £16.7m, so C.£300k cheaper than the budget and 50k over the revised cost plan value once the MEP elements of 5-6 were removed.
3
Q
You mention there was a 3% risk allowance in your cost plan to cover for the premium of a non-competitive tender; how did you get to this conclusion?
A
Benchmarking.
Within the London team, there have numerous examples of fitout projects that have started as negotiated tenders but were non-viable, and then when re tendered they have shown a trend of between 2%-5% construction costs savings.
4
Q
What other risk allowances did you include in your cost plan?
A
There was a fully costed risk register. The big ticket items were the employer change allowance, a general inflation allowance and supply chain default.
5
Q
What contract mechanism did you advise the client to engage the contractor and their supply chain earlier?
A
We used a PCSA to engage with the contractor in order to gain insight on stage 3 design, costs, buildability etc.
The reason we used a PCSA even though we were direct awarding was because the university still needed a mechanism for aborting the project if the cost exceeded their budget.
6
Q
How did you advise your client on procurement? What other procurement options did you consider?
A
I advised the client about the inflexibility of direct awarding but the decision had been made at an earlier stage. As part of my advice relating to the key issue I offered to the client, we explored other competitive methods but it prolonged the programme and affected the occupation date.
7
Q
Why was NEC Option A selected over JCT D&B?
A
- Client experience was greater with JCT.
- Programme was tight, NEC has the programme as a contractual document, allowing for greater control and certainty.
- NEC Option provides a greater degree of customization.
- NEC places more emphasis on collaboration and proactive management.
8
Q
You talk about proactive cost management, what do you mean by this?
A
Proactive cost management involves anticipating, planning, and controlling costs throughout a project’s life cycle to ensure financial efficiency and prevent cost overruns.
- Early budgeting and planning, including producing estimates and allocating appropriate levels of budget to different phases of the project.
- Continuous monitoring and control, monitor costs constantly and look to analyse variances between budgeted costs and actual costs.
- Risk management, identifying potential cost related risks and developing mitigation strategies.
- Change management, implementing a strict change control process in order to control changes to the scope and ensure they are viable within the project budget.
9
Q
How did you report value for money when directly appointing a main contractor?
A
On Brent Cross the main two ways I reported value for money was through comparing contractor costs to rates from benchmark schemes in London, as well as to the rates used on the sister scheme in Sheffield once location and inflation had been accounted for.
10
Q
What was the justification for choosing Option A over Option B or C?
A
The project was simple, with a well defined scope and a low risk profile, so it was more suited to an Option A or Option B than a C.
Option A was chosen as it has the simplest payment process, providing greater cost certainty and less risk than Option B as it is not re measurable, the contractor is at risk for incorrectly measuring the quantities.
11
Q
What is the purpose of the alliance contract between SHU and BAM?
A
The NEC4 Alliance Contract is designed to foster close collaboration among all parties involved in a construction project.
It introduces shared goals, integrates teams, encourages long term relationships, promotes more efficient risk management, promotes transparency as all parties sign up to a single set of terms.
It is usually employed on large projects with multiple stakeholders and parties, such as by Highways England for the conversion of hard shoulders into smart motorways.
12
Q
Why did you recommend a design and build contract over a traditional one?
A
I would use a D&B contract where the client wished for the contractor to be responsible for the design. Usually this is because the client will benefit from the contractor’s knowledge and can increase the buildability of the design, whilst also transferring the design risk on to the contractor.
13
Q
You mentioned the splitting the MEP installation between the floors in order to reduce costs, can you explain some of the issues this may cause?
A
- Student impact - when re-linking MEP in second phase as parts of floor would have to be sectioned off.
- Cost impact - increased BWIC due to when the services are capped off at the risers, the contractor will need to box out some of the columns & floors to where those pipes will go into floors 5&6 which will then needs redoing when MEP works for these two floors recommence
- Programme impact -
14
Q
You said that you maintained continuous communication with both the contractor and the client team, what form did this take?
A
I maintained continuous communication through various forms.
Re-occurring teams meetings, progress, risk, etc.
Regular calls and emails.
Site visits.
15
Q
What was your total construction cost?
What was your total contingency?
What was value of partitions?
A
£13m Construction Cost
£390k (3%) non-competitive pricing risk
£1.235m risk contingency remaining
£2m professional fees
£350k SHU Estates resource
Biggest package in construction was partitions and ceilings at £4m, circa 30% of cost.
16
Q
What was the project duration? What was the start date? What was the longest activity on the programme?
A
December 2025 - July 2026 (26 weeks)
17
Q
What was the ratio’s for design?
A
Net to gross = 10,670 (NIA) / 13,392m2 (GIA) / = 80%
18
Q
How did you ensure that the client was protected from sub-contractors going into administration?
A
- Credit check on frame supplier.
- Type of contract - NEC Option A, contractor is only paid for amounts 100% complete.
- Contract Conditions -
- Performance Bond (X13), Retention (X16).
19
Q
What is CLT?
A
CLT is a subcategory of engineered wood panel product made from gluing together at least 3 layers of solid-sawn lumber.
20
Q
What are the benefits of using this material over another?
A
- CLT is made from wood, a renewable source and the manufacturing also requires less energy than concrete / steel.
- CLT generates minimal waste material as panels are available in wide range of shapes and size.
21
Q
What are the negatives of using CLT?
A
- CLT is more expensive than more traditional materials.
- It is not as readily available in all regions in comparison to traditional materials.
- Prone to swelling or warping if exposed to moisture for too long.
22
Q
Why did the client go with a direct award when funding was a concern?
A
The synergies of using BAM.
Already familiar with the building, previous good working relationship with the contractor, constructed sister scheme in Sheffield.
23
Q
What did you do as part of managing the tender process?
A
- Organise tender documents
- Included in tender documents – form of tender, ITT, prelims documents, contractor design portion in the scope (clause for CDP), pre-construction information pack, contract data part 1, pricing doc (activity schedule).
- Definitions, scope, CDP – performance related criteria.
24
Q
What is CAT A? What is CAT B? What is CAT A+?
A
- A CAT A fit out provides a basic level of finish above what can be expected from a shell and core. This could include raised floors, suspending ceilings and internal surfaces along with basic M&E services.
- A CAT B fit out provides a workplace that’s ready to move into, so all finishes, furniture, power outlets etc.
- A CAT A+ fitout is the midpoint between the traditional specifications of Cat A and Cat B fit outs.
25
You mentioned the inefficiency of re-connecting the M&E systems of floors 1-4 and 5-6 at a later date, how did you advise the client on this?
26
You mention giving advice in design team meetings - can you please provide an example of what advice you gave to the client?
I gave cost based advice based on options raised by design team. Gave some suggestions such as exposed instead of suspended ceilings but clarified it was not direct design advice as this is outside of my scope.
27
You received a detailed quote from a supplier so the university could offer cyber security courses. Did you review the quote from the specialist supplier? Were alternative quotes obtained? What was your advice to the client?
Yes, I reviewed the quote.
I compared the quote from others obtained on other mace projects and calculated a rough £/m2, which showed it was line.
I did suggest to the client the option of seeking other quotes to improve the price but they were happy to go with their existing supplier and were happy once i had validated the cost.
28
As this was a specialist system (cyber security) how did you satisfy yourself that the client was receiving value for money?
- Quote was reviewed by myself, an M&E consultant with experience in providing cyber security rooms, and compared to benchmark figures.
29
You state that the MEP package was being designed by the contractor - how was the contractor monitored to ensure that the client was receiving the product that they wanted and the systems were not being overdesigned?
The client design team who had designed the scheme up until stage 3 were employed as TA's who had meetings with the contractor's design team, provided input/comments during their design phase. This ensured the design was fit for purpose and specific.
30
What is the difference between traditional procurement with CDP and Design & Build?
- CDP is usually specific trade packages that are designed after tender.
- D&B is usually more wholesale design requirements and relies on contractor involvement at an early stage.
31
What typical CDP elements may an employer wish to transfer?
Frame/Structural design.
M&E systems.
32
You state in your achievements that the project benefited from a reduced construction programme which allowed for more float - can you please advise who owned this float?
This in theory was terminal float as it increased the duration between planned completion and the completion date, but as the contract has not been signed it is just theoretical.
33
The award for various reasons went directly to BAM, how did you manage the lack of commercial leverage with the incumbent contractor? Was it simply adding 3% to the prices?
The commercial leverage was the use of the sister scheme as a benchmark.
The 3% was an over and above risk allowance.
34
The client felt that the potential loss for money would be mitigated by the synergies that could be gained... what were these synergies?
The synergies were:
- The existing relationship between BAM and SHU.
- The fact the contractor was constructing the base build, meaning they were already intimately aware of the building, thus lowering design risk.
- The contractor is currently constructing a sister scheme in Sheffield with similar design and specification, offering LL.
35
Why was it prudent to draw down £100K of the design development (risk allowance) to partially fund the changes?
The design development risk allowance is supposed to be used during design phase, so prudent to use now, but also wanted to save the majority of it during stage 4 when BAM would take over design responsibility.
36
You mention leaving some risk funds allocated in the future, how would you do this exactly?
As a contingency fund, I would look to use bench marking early on to provide an appropriate figure (10% of construction cost). I would then look to allocate the contingency into specific risk allowances where known through risk workshops. I would also look to leave some as un-allocated to account for unforeseen risks.
37
You mention leveraging combined project experience. Who was present at these workshops and why?
The project team so:
- Designers, i.e. architects, mechanical engineers, electrical engineers.
- Project management, planners.
- Contractor and their pre-construction team.
38
How did you communicate to the client the cost difference of the partitions from Stage 2 to Stage 3?
I explained that the previous cost consultant had made assumptions about the floor height and had included these in the assumptions section of the estimate, so the whole project team had seen these and missed them.
39
How were the risk register items formulated and how were they costed?
The risk register items were formulated through risk sessions with the project team. We were able to use the risk register from the sister scheme as a base point. Early on we used percentage addition and benchmarked costs from the sister to cost, but as design and project info increased, we were able to use quantitative techniques such as EMV or a monte carlo.
40
What were some specific risks on your risk register, and how did you mitigate them?
- Supply chain default -> Financial checks undertaken before entering into contract and throughout project duration.
- Basebuild delay -> Delay damages inserted into the AfL, as well as rent obligation only starting when building is completed.
- Challenge of interface between Sheffield and London Team -> Financial allowance for sheffield members to make trip to london, and employment of Mace PM to bridge gap.
41
You mention that the contractor was involved in the value engineering option. How were they appointed and had they commented on the cost plan?
They were appointed under a PCSA.
I had shared the cost plan with them, and they had agreed with the costings in accordance with the intention of using the benchmark scheme with the location and inflation factors.
42
You’ve noted that the client decided to engage the incumbent contractor on a direct award basis, to manage risk. How did you offset the risk to cost and value for money due to the direct award?
The way I mitigated the risk of value for money due to direct award was by using the sister scheme as a benchmark in negotiations, as well as having the 3% pricing premium factored into the cost plan.
43
When you advised the client to use £100k of the £300k design development allowance to cover the cost increases mentioned, how did you validate and assure the client that the remaining £200k allowance would be sufficient for Stage 4?
I sat down with the design team to discuss the quantum of possible design development left at RIBA stage 4, and they advised that the architectural design was at RIBA stage 3+ meaning minimal if any development was expected. They stated the M&E could see some minor potential design such as;
- additional distribution boards
- increased underfloor data cabling containment size
- increased cooling provisions for data cupboards.
44
Was it possible to determine why the budget produced for Phase 2 works at £6.5m was so much lower than the initial budget of £8.5m?
The £8.5m budget was set by a bench-marking report published at RIBA stage 1.
The subsequent £6.5m cost was reached as design information and other project information was refined and became more detailed.
45
In your lessons learnt for procurement and tendering, what other routes would you have discussed with the client if you’d have been involved at an earlier stage of the project?
I would have single stage traditional with CDP procurement.
- This would have allowed them to gain competitive pricing
- the design risk is minimal as the scope is well known and limited to fitout, and both the contractor and client are familiar with the design.
- Due to the limited and simple nature of the works, the speed of the procurement could be relatively quick despite being traditional
46
Why did you not do VE whilst developing out the cost plan?
I discussed potential VE options but due to the architect becoming delayed in issuing their design information but the client remaining insistent on me meeting my deadline to issuing the stage 3 cost plan, I didn't have the time to devote the necessary resource to explore these options in further detail.
47
What % of contingency did you allow for on the project?
We started with a budget of 11%, including the 3% of non-competitive premium pricing risk allowance.
48
Was it a two stage project?
Yes, there was a PCSA used towards the end of stage 3, which allowed for the contractor to take over design for stage 4 and provide a price.
49
Why did BAM not provide budget cost advice if they know they were selected from Stage 1?
We were in dialogue with BAM and agreed to price using the sister scheme as a benchmark where possible. However, BAM did not become contractually involved until RIBA stage 3.
50
If BAM agreed to use the sister scheme as a benchmark, why was the 3% necessary?
Whilst the sister scheme was similar, it wasn't perfectly identical, so the the 3% protected the client from any BAM deviations.
51
How did you know the cost plan was right?
I knew the cost plan was right from conversations with the contractor and the agreement to use the sister scheme as a benchmark.
52
What did you advise contractually on the Brent Cross Project?
- To go with an Option A
- Delay Damages
- Sectional completion
- Contractor Design clause
53
Why did you not value engineer as you were cost planning?
- VE discussions were had but the Architect missed their deadline to supply me with all necessary information, this meant my window for producing the cost plan was shortened. However, the client still wanted to maintain the programme due to strict deadlines, i.e. aligning with the base-build PC date and student cohort starting in September.
- This meant whilst VE discussions were had, I didn't have the resource to facilitate full workshops and follow up proposals in the detail needed to ascertain their suitability, i.e. lead time, cost impact, performance impact, re-design impact etc.
54
How do you ensure that you are carrying out your proper scope of service / maintaining client care then if you are forgoing business-as-usual activities?
- This was something I raised directly with the client, stating that failing to adjust my deadline could lead to a higher cost but they were adamant that I issue my cost plan within the deadline and accepted that VE could be done after the cost plan had been issued.
55
Why didn't you request more resource internally?
I did request additional resource to assist in measuring drawings for the production of the cost plan. However, I believed that bringing someone new on at this stage of the project to assist in VE wouldn't have yielded results due to the nature of VE requiring intimate knowledge of the scheme and it's design evolution.
56
Why did you not value engineer as you were cost planning?
There was VE discussions held, but due to a combination of:
A) my reduced time period to reduce the cost plan as a result of the architect missing their deadline to supply with me all the necessary design information.
B) VE held at previous RIBA stages
C) the fitout nature, eliminating the ‘easier’ VE wins that are usually held in the external façade/envelope of the building – these discussions yielded no tangible savings. It was only when I had adequate time after the cost plan had been issued that I could organise and devote the necessary resource to an extensive VE workshop.
57
What did you do in these VE discussions?
- Raised the idea of the exposed ceiling in lieu of the suspended system. Asked acoustic engineer to advise difference in acoustic performance. Asked architect to highlight where partitions were finishing at suspended ceilings so i could use additional m2 needed for partitions to omit against savings of the swap.
-
58
Why did you not review M&E design in that time period?
M&E design was being reviewed by the M&E consultant. They reviewed ideas like:
- swapping from a seperate heating and cooling system
- reviewing firestopping solutions to less expensive (hilti rewirable fire sleeves).
- Subsitute of CAT6A to CAT6 backbone cable.
59
What was included in your scope of services for Brent Cross?
- Produce cashflow forecast based on programme options, considering developer contribution to the works
- Lead on procurement exercise, supporting the collation of contract documentation and Scope for the works. Engage with preferred suppliers through the tender exercise and evaluate commercial aspects of the tender
- Lead on value engineering exercise as required
- Review existing cost plan information and produce revised cost plan for end of RIBA 3.
- Advise on the likely effect of market conditions on the scheme.
- Advise on the cost of the professional teams proposals, including effect of site usage, shape of the building(s), alternative forms of design, procurement and construction etc.
- Advise on any cost variances to allowances contained in the cost plan.
- Measure net (lettable) floor areas.
- Confirm the scope of the building contract to the client and advise on any additional works required by third parties, as appropriate.
- Produce cost estimates on optioneering as required through RIBA 3 process, including benchmarking data review
- Liaise with the professional team and establish the structure and procedures for cost management, including the review, approval, variations and reporting procedures and submit to the client for sign off/approval.
60
What advice would you give a client who is considering using a known contractor through a negotiation agreement?
- Do the project characteristics line up? I.e. is the project a fitout and the contractor you're using a tier 1 main contractor?
- Does this procurement route align with your key drivers? I.e. speed and quality may be known with a preferred contractor but cost tends to be higher with a non-competitive route.
- Do the benefits outweigh the risks? I.e. is the contractor team very good? Is the strength of relationship likely to outweigh potential premium in pricing?
61
What advice would you give to a client who is developing outside their normal operational area?
- Specifically, in the first instance, my advice would focus on the cost aspect, so difference in costs - location and inflation factors, procurement and supply chains in the area, budgeting for setting up a local team or accounting for a regional team to visit.
- If they required more advice on processes, developing a team etc, I would point them in the direction of Mace's PMO department.
62
Explain a current issue on your project?
There are no issues on the project currently.
63
What is the cost per m2 for your project?
C.£2300
7300m2 / £16.65m
7300m2 / £13m = C.£1800 £/m2
64
Explain why this project falls outside the of the client BAM framework?
Project is a simple fitout, and much lower value than the projects that have been constructed via the alliance framework. The level of contractual admin, risk sharing and open book approach were considered unnecessary for this project.
65
Explain the implications of carrying out fitout works to a CLT frame building?
There was none that i was aware of on this project. I have worked on wooden structures before that required earlier finishes to check the frame for evidence of charring.
66
What advice did you give the client when the Stage 3 cost plan exceeded the approved budget, and how did you ensure your recommendation aligned with their objectives?
I firstly advised to use some of the employer change risk to mitigate the overspend, then advised the client to transfer scope from Phase I to Phase II to cover the rest of the overspend. This meant the project being back under budget, with the quality and risk profile remaining the same and the programme shortening.
67
How did you identify the risk allowances in the cost plan, particularly for non-competitive tendering and employer change?
For both of those allowances, I benchmarked from similar projects. Some others were built up specifically or first principles, i.e. delays built up by prelims.
68
What was it about the change from normal to cyber security classroom that added to costs?
Increased server costs, more expensive software's, increased power computers, more expensive cooling costs.
69
How could procurement flexibility have benefited the project?
Procurement flexibility could have benefitted the project in allowing the client to consider using a competitive route to potentially achieve cost savings.
70
How did you facilitate and structure the VE workshops, and what criteria did you use to evaluate the proposals?
1. Briefed the team on the issue.
2. Set up in person meetings to brainstorm ideas, focusing on the overweight packages.
3. Evaluated the solutions against the value criteria, in this case reducing cost without impacting quality or programme.
4. Explore the solutions further to check for knock on effects in design or lead time etc.
5. Repeat until enough of a saving achieved.
71
How come you didn't continue with the VE exercise rather than subject the client to increased costs of transferring the scope?
Although we only had £150k left to go, the exercise was already 2 weeks in and the design had gone through VM process at the beginning and subsequent VE exercises at every stage of design. Also, this was a fitout so the easy routes to VE in terms of external packages were not available to me.
72
What were some of the assumptions and exclusions included in your stage 3 cost plan for Brent Cross?
Assumptions:
- Assumed current design was statutorily compliant.
- Assumed design was signed off by landlord
Excluded:
- any making good costs associated with returning the space to a certain state specified by landlord.
- financing costs
- planning costs
73
Can you elaborate on the different types of VE undertaken?
- Spec reduction.
- Scope reduction / transfer.
- Design economics was unavailable due to it being a fit out.
74
What governance steps should be taken to justify a direct award and mitigate audit risk?
- Prepare a procurement strategy document outlining the reasons for the direct award, such as the programme constraints and the existing relationship.
- Obtain client approval and maintain transparency for audit compliance.
75
What did being responsible for the change control process look like?
- Ensuring all parties are aware of the process, particularly the client.
- Ensuring some standard documents are in place such as a change request form.
- Recording all change requests in a register.
- Carrying out an impact assessment of the change - including assessing it against the scope, budget, quality, re-design and resources.
- Implementing an approval governance process.
- Regular monitoring of changes and their execution.
76
What were some items that were included in brent cross that were not included in the sister scheme?
Rewireable hilti fire sleeves - emerged as a lesson learnt from Blocks A-D. Cost was higher than what we had seen on similar projects.
QS APC 2025
flashcards
Decks in class (23)
# Cards
-
Construction Technology46
-
Project Financial Control & Cost Reporting34
-
Case Study76
-
Procurement & Tendering46
-
Contract Practice46
-
Quantification & Costing36
-
Design Economics & Cost Planning47
-
Risk Management20
-
Contract Administration7
-
Ethics and Rules of Conduct109
-
Accounting Principles27
-
Conflict Avoidance24
-
Client Care17
-
Health & Safety24
-
Data Management2
-
Business Planning13
-
Client Care4
-
Communication & Negotiation6
-
CPD12
-
Sustainability15
-
Diversity, Inclusion and Teamworking4
-
Inclusive Environments2
-
Summaries of Experience9
