Analysis of Federal Design-Build Request for Proposal Evaluation Criteria

Abstract

This study’s objective is to identify the benefits federal owners are seeking through the design-build process by analysis of research data gathered from 110 requests for proposal (RFP) evaluation plans issued for $1.5 billion of federal work by 11 different agencies. The output from this study was then compared to a 1996 study whose authors sought to analyze the reasons cited by owners to use design-build project delivery. That study included a survey of 108 owners of public and private projects, which represented over $12.5 billion of construction. The goal of comparing the 1996 survey with the results of the new research project is to discover correlations between owner attitudes and the selection criteria identified in government RFPs. The comparison produced some interesting results. First, although owners in 1996 cited schedule as the most significant reason for selecting design-build delivery, the federal RFP content analysis found it to carry a very low average weight. Another finding shows that federal RFPs give price a very heavy weight in the government selection processes, again differing significantly from the previous survey of owner attitudes. Finally, the current study found that the qualifications of the firms and individuals that formed the design-build team were significantly more important than the proposed technical design approach. Thus, this paper concludes that the typical federal agency was looking for a low price from a well-qualified design-build team.