Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
This article covers the pricing of construction management agreements (CMAs), including the fee of the construction manager, general conditions costs, subcontract costs, contingency and insurance. Note: Where appropriate, we will make distinctions between "cost-plus" and guaranteed maximum price (GMP) CMAs.
|Generally speaking, a construction manager (CM)'s fee consists of two components: a preconstruction services fee and a construction phase fee. The preconstruction services fee covers the CM's services (if retained during the design phase of the project) for working with the owner and its design team on such items as constructability, site logistics, subcontract and general conditions costs budgeting, and scheduling. The fee for these services can be based on a monthly fee, a fixed fee for the anticipated duration of the preconstruction phase or actual personnel costs. Often, owners will request a cap on these fees, which would be a function of duration. Owners may also ask that the preconstruction services fee be credited against the construction phase fee once work begins.
During the preconstruction phase, the CM may also be requested to perform "early start work" (ESW), such as abatement, demolition and excavation. A separate fee for ESW would be negotiated and might be based on a percentage of the cost of the ESW, including related general conditions costs. The CM might also be requested to provide a lump sum for the cost of the ESW.
The second component of the fee covers the construction phase and is usually based on a negotiated percentage of subcontract costs and supervisory and other general conditions (GC) costs. The CM would also charge a fee on change orders at the same rate as first established; however, we usually request a "dead band," meaning that there is no additional fee on the first "X" dollars of change orders, on the theory that the owner should be given some grace amount before additional fee is due. Often, CMs ask that the fee also be based on liability and subcontract default insurance costs. We uniformly object to this and seek to limit the fee to subcontract and GC costs on the basis that insurance costs are merely pass-through costs; the CM is not at risk for these payments.
Under a guaranteed maximum price (GMP) scenario, the CM may be entitled to additional compensation as a result of "shared savings" due to the expenditure of costs less than guaranteed by the CM. The owner would share these savings, on a negotiated ratio, with the CM.
|On a cost-plus form of construction management agreement (CMA), all subcontract costs are fully reimbursed to the CM by the owner, whereas on a GMP form of CMA, the CM guarantees the total subcontract cost (but has access to a "contingency," discussed below). Regardless of the form of CMA, the owner must scrutinize the bids of the subcontractors and attempt to obtain a fixed price for the particular subcontractor's scope of work. Care should be taken to analyze all assumptions, clarifications and qualifications in order to eliminate the likelihood of change orders for additional costs. One particular area of concern is allowances, where the construction documents (particularly finishing details) are not complete. The use of allowances can be a blank check to increase subcontract costs and should be accepted only with care. Indeed, a GMP rampant with allowances is not a GMP at all.
|Generally speaking, GC costs consist of the CM's personnel and laborers and related expenses, supplies, small tools and field office costs. Also, under the term "general conditions" may be included "general requirements," consisting of site safety, security, scaffolding and snow removal. Under a cost-plus scenario, these costs are passed through to the owner, generally without a cap or limitation; under a GMP, the costs would also be passed through, but subject to, the overall GMP.
An alternative to this pricing would be a lump sum or "GC Cap," under either a cost-plus or GMP scenario. Under a lump sum, the CM would provide a fixed sum for GCs and general requirements and would charge the owner on a percentage of completion basis. A GC Cap is a separate limitation on these costs, which would be billed as incurred by the CM, subject only to the GC Cap. (GC costs are also charged on change orders and we try to limit them to actual costs incurred as a result of the change.)
|Included within insurance costs are liability costs (general, automobile and excess) and, where applicable, subcontractor default insurance (SDI) costs, also known by the brand name "Subguard." Liability insurance can be provided through a "corporate" policy of the CM, by a project policy provided by the owner which covers both the owner and the CM or a "wrap-up" policy covering the owner, CM and substantially all the subcontractors. A wrap-up policy can either be an Owner Controlled Insurance Policy (OCIP) or a Contractor Controlled Insurance Policy (CCIP). In all cases the cost of insurance is borne by the owner and is paid either directly by the owner to the carrier or through the CM to the carrier based on a percentage of the cost of enrolled subcontracts and GC costs and, in certain cases, the CM fee.
SDI insurance is determined by a percentage markup of enrolled subcontractors. Under SDI, the CM bears initial responsibility for a defaulting subcontractor but may file a claim with the SDI carrier costs arising from the default. The CM is responsible for deductibles and co-payments, which are first funded by the owner through the SDI markup. Under both liability insurance and SDI, the initial premiums paid by the owner are estimates, and are subject to true ups on the completion of the project. Markups for insurance and SDI are also applied to change orders.
|Under a GMP form of CMA, an amount is established for the CM's exclusive use to provide funds in the event the CM finds itself responsible for subcontract or GC costs which may result in surpassing the GMP, a GC lump sum or a GC Cap, although there is usually a limitation on the amount of the contingency which can be used for GC cost overruns. The need for contingency funds could occur through missed trade buys, overtime or additional costs incurred because of delays for which the CM is responsible, subcontract defaults not covered by SDI, unanticipated market conditions or other costs for which the CM is responsible. The amount of the contingency is usually a percent of the subcontract and GC costs at the time the GMP is determined, plus savings from the finalization of the final subcontracts thereafter.
|The foregoing represents our approach and that of our developer clients to pricing of CMAs. There are no hard and fast rules and each term is subject to negotiation based on the nature of the project and the bargaining power of the parties.
*****
Kenneth M. Block and Joshua M. Levy are partners of Tannenbaum Helpern Syracuse & Hirschtritt. This article also appeared in the New York Law Journal, an ALM sibling of Commercial Leasing Law & Strategy.
|ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.