Change Orders: Causes and Preemption

By Richard Fanelli, AIA, CFM, IFMA Fellow

Recently Fanelli McClain polled a group of general contractors specializing in commercial projects. Seventeen responded to the survey. Based on their thoughts, it was determined the most common causes of change orders were as follows:

• 58% caused by client-initiated changes
• 17% due to errors and/or omissions in the drawings and/or specifications
• 17% due to field conditions
• 9% due to any number of other situations, including permit or code compliance issues, differences between bid drawings vs. the final construction drawings, and substitutions of materials due to lead time and value engineering.

Change orders are usually costly and can create delays in the construction completion schedule. Many can be avoided by focusing the entire project team on a singular goal: the client’s satisfaction. Secondly, it is important to establish quality control procedures early in the process. Here are some best practices that can be implemented:

1. Get the end users to sign off on space plans, finish selections and construction documents. Keep these on file, in case you have to refer to them at a later date. Inform the end-user that any changes or increases to the scope of work will be charged back to them and will affect the completion date. This includes A&E fees as well as construction costs. They may think twice before suggesting any changes.
   
   Errors and omissions in A&E drawings can be drastically reduced by increasing the communication between the architectural and the engineering teams. Insist that engineers get involved early in the design process so the engineers can have input in the space design. This can be done with a simple project kickoff meeting among the facility manager, architect and engineers. This should occur after the programming is completed and before the space planning is finalized. Just this step alone could save on construction costs—ensuring the proper floor space is allocated for electrical and mechanical equipment. The A&E team should then have a follow-up meeting after the engineering design intent package is completed by the architects. The engineering package includes the power and communications plan, the lighting plan, the equipment plan and the plan indicating the placement of slab to slab partitions.
   
   Another second A&E coordination meeting is advisable when the drawings are at 80 to 90 percent complete. The A&E team should “walk” the facility manager and all of the team through the drawings.  It helps to distribute the drawings a day or two before the review meeting, so that a list of questions and concerns can be developed.
   
   
2. Most common field condition problems, or hidden conditions, are hard to avoid without exploratory demolition. The majority of facility managers do not want to disrupt the space prior to the overall demo phase. As-built drawings provided by the building owner or building engineer are rarely accurate and reflect the actual “as-Built” conditions. To properly verify the existing conditions you must do the following:

• Field-verify overall measurements and measurements between fixed elements. Check above ceiling tiles to view obstructions that may prevent achieving the required clearances.
• If the building’s original base building construction documents are available, review them carefully.  It is amazing what field conditions easily can be uncovered with minimal research.

4. Permit and code issues can be avoided, in general, by conducting a preliminary code review of the space plan by conferring with the fire marshal. Prepare a meeting report documenting the resolution to the issues so that you can refer to it, should the need arise. Of course, the field inspector will always have the last word on how the A&E drawings address the code requirements. Take a hard look at any issues that typically come up in the plan review process such as ADA compliance, egress issues and life safety upgrades.
5. Beware of general contractor’s substitution of materials and equipment. Make sure that the alternate selected is of equal quality. If it is inferior to the original specification, and you are willing accept it, make certain that you receive a fair credit. Value engineering doesn’t necessarily have to mean “job cheapening”.                 

Richard Fanelli, AIA, CFM, IFMA Fellow, is a principal with Fanelli McClain Design Studios, Inc.,
Fairfax, VA. On the Web: www.fmstudios.com