One-step design-build procurement

One-step design-build procurement is an approach seeking to deliver design as well as construction under a single contract with one responsibility. Under the approach, a request for proposal (RFP) is usually issued for a given project. This request for the proposal described as full and open procurement is normally issued to an infinite number of participants, and all the parties can respond to this RFP using a proposal. The value that is believed to most lucrative to the government from both technical and cost aspects is then determined (Washington, 2015).

Advantages

The approach allows an integrated contractor contribution the project planning and designs.  Besides, the employment of an integrated procurement system allows for the overlapping of design and construction, and this often results in improved communication created between the contractors and the client (Blaťák, 2016). This two feature results in a shorter period for the completion of the project and efficiency of the project management is improved. Since it makes the client’s requirements to be accurately specified, the final costs of the project can then be attained, and this cost is usually less than when utilizing other procurement methods (Washington, 2015).

Disadvantages

One-step design-build procurement is unlikely to lead to high-quality work since procurement officials while trying to winnow the filed are most likely to concentrate on price instead of the value in choosing one winning teach from a huge pool (El Wardani et al., 2006). Another limitation is that when owners recurrently take part in the onerous one-step process the most qualified and experienced firms are less likely to compete for the work(Blaťák, 2016). In another term, one-step design-build procurement approach reduces completion affecting the price to taxpayers.  Design-build teams going for one-step design-build procurements are unable to judge the prospects for success(Jackson, 2010). Usually, completion suffers since many qualified and experienced teams would avoid the large costs associated with submitting technical and costly proposals where may be at least 20 teams can offer (Ramsey et al., 2016). With decreased completion, price to taxpayer automatically increased. Another demerit is that one-step design-build procurement approach delays the procurement process of the government. Under this approach, a federal agency could as over 20 proposals. Before making the final selection, the agency is forced to thoroughly review as well as evaluate all the proposals, some that might be from inexperienced and unqualified teams(Ramsey et al., 2016). Lastly, the approach disproportionately discourages the participation of small businesses. Small business is unlikely to risk using their limited cash on costly and technical design materials for the proposal. The unpredictability nature of the method drives away small businesses (Washington, 2015).

The two-step design-build procurement approach

Under this process, companies submit their qualifications, and the procuring agency winnows the field just to handful of companies, that compete for the project based on design and price. Under two-step phase-build, procurement involves both a request for RFP phases and qualifications (RFQ)(Blaťák, 2016). The approach allows firms to submit (moderately inexpensively) information associated with technical experience, specialized experience, past performance, teaming arrangement, performance capability, or other detailed requested in step-one approach(Blaťák, 2016).  Based on the information the selection authority source chooses a limited number of most experienced and qualified firms to advance to the competition and are afterward invited to submit technical and price proposals for evaluation during the second stage.

Advantages

Unlike the traditional procurement, the contractor is not required to price the unidentified as well as make allowances for risks, which might or not happen since there is a quite more significant opportunity for a detailed evaluation of the project before finalizing the contract process (El Wardani et al., 2006).  At stage one, the firm is only required to supply a fixed price for preliminaries, as well as a percentage for profit and over-head (Jackson, 2010). It thus makes tender production quite less resource intensive, and hence inexpensive to prepare thus decreasing abortive costs. Another benefit is that collaboration between the design team, contractor, and employers during the pre-construction stage may create a less adversarial, more productive relationship during the construction phase. Another advantage associated with the approach is that the contractor can begin creating solutions to problems that are expected to emerge during construction and this might result in a shorter project duration(Jackson, 2010). Lastly, pricing undertaken in the second phase is most likely to reflect the actual project costs since it is based on more complete information, implying the employer has a higher certainty of cost, as well as lower claims probability.

Disadvantages

The second-phase design-build procurement process leads to longer procurement duration due to the two stages involved. The employer is forced to pay an extra fee for the contractor to perform the pre-construction services. The fee may not be incurred in the single-stage design-build process. In the case parties fail to adopt a co-operative approach, the second phase can be tricky for the employer since the contractor is in a strong negotiating position.

Why does DBIA strongly support the Two-Phase Design-Build Selection Procedure?

DBIA strongly advocated for two-phase design-build method since it achieves the best value, especially for design and construction processes. The processes enable the contracting officers to balance technical competency, quality, and the design-build team past performance with cost.  The method has been proven to allow the government easily exceed or attain project goals as well as complete the project on specified time with little if any adversarial disputes, litigation or claims (Design-Build Institute of America, 2014).

Why is it significant that a two-phase selection procedure remains the Corps’ highly preferred method for acquiring design-build services?

They believe the process results in settling on the most experienced and competitive contractor to complete the project within the set project period. They argue that the one-step process has more limitations and the procurement time is long because the number of proposals is limited thus procurement officials are forced to go through all the proposals thoroughly, and hence consume time (Hines, 2012).

References

Blaťák, I. (2016). Potential of Using Design-Build in Public Procurement. Applied Finance And Accounting, 2(2), 77. doi: 10.11114/afa.v2i2.1708

Design-Build Institute of America. (2014). Federal, State, and Municipal “Lowest Price Technically Acceptable” Procurement.

El Wardani, M., Messner, J., & Horman, M. (2006). Comparing Procurement Methods for Design-Build Projects. Journal Of Construction Engineering And Management, 132(3), 230-238. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2006)132:3(230)

Hines, S. (2012). Design-Build Institute of America Applauds Adoption of New Procurement Policy by United States Army Corps of Engineers. Retrieved from https://www.dbia.org/news/press/Pages/DBIA-Applauds-Adoption-of-New-Procurement-Policy-from–U.S.-Army-Corps-of-Engineers.aspx

Jackson, B. J. (2010). Design-build essentials. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar.

Ramsey, D., El Asmar, M., & Gibson, G. (2016). Quantitative Performance Assessment of Single-Step versus Two-Step Design-Build Procurement. Journal Of Construction Engineering And Management, 142(9), 04016033. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)co.1943-7862.0001145

Washington, L. (2015). Design-Build Institute of America Partnering with Associated Schools of Construction in Support of Construction Education: Design-Build Done Right™ for the Next Generation. International Journal Of Construction Education And Research, 11(1), 2-3. doi: 10.1080/15578771.2015.992693

Do you need high quality Custom Essay Writing Services?