RFP Development
It is critical that an RFP for BIM-enabled team members includes detail, to make sure to avoid “Hollywood BIM”. Q5 can work with you to integrate BIM into your existing RFP format or put together an addendum. Q5 can also review responses to validate capabilities.
Phil Bernstein, FAIA on “Asking for BIM”
Since we at Q5 have been so much about our own lessons learned, we decided that we had to reach out to a few others in the industry to get their perspective. Here is what Phil Bernstein, FAIA, Vice President, Industry Strategy and Relations at Autodesk AEC Solutions, had to say:
As both a project client and technology provider we continue to wrestle with the question of the owner’s role in BIM adoption. Much like implementations (alleged and otherwise) on the designer side, we see project owners asking for BIM-based deliverables in a variety of flavors. “Hollywood BIM” demands seem to treat the approach as a marketing ploy; someone in the owner’s structure thought that it would be cool to specify that BIM is required without much thought as to the underlying reasoning. On the other end of the continuum, some owners choose to specify in detail the structure, organization and format of their BIM demands, and may include an evaluation of the project team’s BIM competencies just to understand the likelihood of success, if such a thing can be predicted.
But much of the intersecting innovation around BIM, sustainability and IPD is about shifting the focus of building from fixed, non-coordinated scopes and budgets to outcome-based processes. That means that, in my view, the best BIM demands that can be made by owners in this time of rapid innovation should be the same: stipulating, without lots of detail, the desired outcomes of a BIM-based approach, rather than elaborating the specific characteristics of data, files, or outputs. Asking for models that support space management, energy monitoring, even certain types of cost estimating—and the aspects of information outcome anticipated—makes much more sense than taking the time to nail down specifics when both processes and support technology are moving quickly. That approach for owners would be a best practice, from my perspective.
US Army Corps of Engineers’ Organized BIM Requirement
Last week, a few members of the Q5 team attended the Bentley BE Conference, in Philadelphia PA. Although we attended mostly software workshops at the conference, some of the most interesting sessions were those that focused on US Army Corps of Engineers’ BIM requirement for design-build work. As Van Woods, the USACE Northwest Regional BIM Coordinator, repeated throughout several of the presentations, “For USACE, BIM is a means to an end.” To USACE, that end is continuous improvement of the building process – using BIM to reduce cost and schedule.
From what we saw, USACE was one of the first owners to require BIM in an organized fashion – complete with BIM uses, software requirements and standards, BIM-driven deliverables and level of detail. This is done through USACE’s Project Execution Plan (PxP) template, based loosely on the Penn State BIM Execution Plan, selected because of its owner-driven perspective. The PxP requires the team to state BIM uses, but more importantly to prove that they have a functional process in place to achieve BIM uses. The PxP is currently a post-award deliverable. Once awarded, the team fills out the PxP, which becomes a contract addendum.
However, there are key limitations that USACE needs to overcome before it starts to experience the real ROI of BIM utilization:
- USACE BIM goals rely significantly on the design team’s ability to meet BIM goals without putting any true requirement on construction execution. Until USASE requires some level of model derived fabrication, layout and control, it will not consistently see the fruition of the front-end coordination and optimization during design.
- Since the PxP is a post-award deliverable, a team can win a contract without ever having to show their BIM capabilities. USACE has found that everyone promises BIM during the RFP stage and then most only deliver Hollywood BIM at best. Therefore, they are working to change the PxP as a pre-solicitation (or pre-award) deliverable, so that it becomes part of the selection criteria.
- Although there are some project-types where USACE doesn’t specify a particular BIM software, its standard is Bentley’s BIM platform. While it is critical for owners to take a stand and require something that delivers them long-term value, USACE may be compromising the value it can see in the short-term by limiting their applicant pool. This may not be anything that USACE can, or is willing to, change, but needs to be acknowledged as a limitation.
- Most importantly, USACE has not built an efficient BIM accountability program, by checking throughout the project to make sure that the team is delivering the requirements. Currently, USACE has a centralized group to collect and check the BIM, but that doesn’t occur until post-project. Although that helps USACE improve its overall program, it doesn’t add value to individual projects.
Despite our critique of USACE’s current BIM requirement, it is one of the best that we’ve seen , public or private. It has set up a standard platform (the PxP) for BIM requirement to build on, which is infinitely better than requiring “5 lbs of thinly sliced BIM”. We imagine anticipate USACE will be introducing iterations of its BIM requirement and creating a robust implementation shortly.
BIM Specified: Q5..or equal
As mentioned recently after the project award, we were selected to facilitate construction-BIM utilization for Pier A, a renovation project for Battery Park City Authority (BPCA). As our involvement in the project grows deeper and deeper, we have learned more about the client and their excitement about BIM.
BPCA was first educated on the benefits of BIM from H3 Hardy Collaboration Architecture, who began the project with a laser scan and conversion to BIM. With H3’s counsel, the owner focused on a few project-specific benefits:
- Coordination between existing building and new systems
- Improved implementation of design intent and maintenance of historic intent
- Coordination between new systems, expediting schedule
- Accurate as-built model, enabling future fitout and renovations
More important than the benefits of BIM, is how Pier A asked for BIM in a way to achieve the desired outcomes. H3 included a BIM requirement in specification section 013300-5 Submittals, requiring contractors and prime subcontractors to:
- prepare a BIM to a specific LOD
- perform clash detection and resolution
- extract coordination and shop drawings from the BIM.
Section 013300 also included required level of detail and reference to access to design BIMs
An interesting (and self-serving) note is how H3 specified the quality of work for BIM. Since most of the contractors bidding on the project were “deer in headlights” with regard to BIM, H3 instructed them to select a BIM Facilitator or Consultant to fulfill the requirements. To set the standard for completion of the work and indicate a preferred facilitator, H3 named Q5.
Selecting IPD Team Members
One of the challenges that comes up initially in any IPD discussion is core team select. Here is what one owner is doing:
A number of builders and architects were selected to qualify for the project. Each are asked to put together a response to the RFQ that is 5 pages or less. The RFQ only contained questions. Sample questions from the builder RFQ are below:
Is your firm a builder first? How do you add value during space planning? What are three project mistakes you’ve made, how did you correct them and what lessons do you take from them?
From there, the owner will pick 8 builders and 8 architects, who will be put into a pool to select partners. Each team will then submit a joint RFP, answering another set of questions. The top three teams will participate in a 4 hour working session with the owner in lieu of a formal interview.
This is an interesting approach that private owners could look to as they embark on their own IPD projects.
Wisconsin Mandates BIM
The Wisconsin Division of State Facilities recently issued a statement requiring design teams to utilize BIM on all public projects with a total budget of $5M or more and all new construction with a budget of $2.5M or more. With that statement, the Division also published its research and report on BIM and its standards. Standards include model requirements at each stage of design, new deliverables and a new compensation schedule, reflecting that within a BIM process more work is done upfront.
For owners, developing standards is critical to the utilization of BIM on a project. Although standards will evolve, it ensures that all of the models for your building projects will be compatible. If you intend to require BIM, you must include BIM guidelines and standards in the RFP. These standards can be project-specific or enterprise-wide, and should be developed in a BIM Execution Plan.
The Wisconsin Division of State Facilities is off to a great start, but to achieve value to need to follow this requirement with model reviews, to ensure that models are being built and used to their standards and requirement of construction utilization of BIM, to achieve full potential value of BIM utilization.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Feb | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | |||