On the Responsibilities of Architects and Engineers and Their Clients in Federal Facilities Development (1994) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
4. RECENT EXPERIENCE OF A&E FIRMS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
4. RECENT EXPERIENCE OF A&E FIRMS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
Pages 39-56
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 39... ...
Nevertheless, participants in study meetings and workshops, both government agency personnel and members of the A&E community, express concern that responsibilities, of both A&E firms and their clients, in federal design are too frequently not being met. Sometimes these concerns are reflected in "horror stories" told by A&Es or agency personnel tales of unfair management, poor judgment, or bungled communication.
|
From page 42... ...
These operating personnel may not understand why it routinely takes nine months to hire an A&E firm for design. Yet, if one wants to achieve quality facilities, this customer, the user, must be adequately represented in the facility process.
|
From page 43... ...
responsibility.3 Federal policy requires that, in setting these requirements, the agencies concern themselves with such matters as energy conservation and environmental compliance, as well as life safety and health. Because compliance must be documentecI, such issues may then take on relatively greater importance than they would in similar projects for private sector owners.
|
From page 44... ...
What can be done to avoid diverting agency staff attention to the task of explaining technical design details to congressional staff? There is no clear accountability in such decisions.
|
From page 45... ...
from initial advertising of the project to project start. The Brooks Bill procedures are applied in five steps: (1)
|
From page 46... ...
. Also, the Office of Federal Procurement Policy of the Office of Management and Budget in December 1992 solicited public comment on a proposed policy letter to require agencies to use past performance information in selection of government contractors (56 FR 63988~.
|
From page 47... ...
to have professional staff sit idle for the nine months (anct sometimes more) it can take for a government agency to execute a contract with the firm, and agencies are unwilling to pay the costs of such delay.
|
From page 48... ...
These agency professionals claim that changes are needec] to get the job clone right the first time.9 A&E FIRM PERSPECTIVES PRESENTED A&E professionals participating in the workshop noted that it is popular today to talk about facility development as a collaborative process.
|
From page 49... ...
more than just the general framework have made enough changes that an A&E firm must give careful attention to the government documents to ensure that a special feature is not missecl. Of course, these commercial models (lo use product trade names.
|
From page 50... ...
The National Institute of Building Sciences sells a database of agency specifications on compact disk media (CD-ROM) , under the names Construction Criteria Base and SPECINTACT, that can be used by any A&E firm with the proper computer hardware ant!
|
From page 51... ...
experience with the workings of the design profession and does not have responsibility for project completion. This contract specialist clepencIs on a government technical representative for his or her understanding of the particular tasks and effort involves!
|
From page 52... ...
the consequences of those mistakes. Some people assert that an A&E professional, as a professional, should be expected routinely to design according to the scope of services; that if the professional is negligent in that work, he or she shouIct be hell!
|
From page 53... ...
of care for A&E firms seems even less well defined in government practice than in the commercial worId.~2 SHORTCOMINGS OF A&E FIRMS AND GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Reviewing such anecdotal and impressionistic evidence as that presented in the BRB workshop and summarized in the preceding two sections in light of their own experience, the members of the study committee concluded that problems of A&E responsibilities are generally the result of faults in both A&E Fins and government agency staff and procedures. There are unquestionably cases of inadequate performance and sometimes unprofessional behavior by A&E firms, but many of the agencies' complaints are relatec!
|
From page 54... ...
In general, A&E firms should welcome competent review of their work, so long as preparation for review does not consume excessive resources. However?
|
From page 55... ...
constructability consequences of ~ Design criteria and guide specifications intermediate decisions differ from commercial standards · Designer fails to learn or conform to · Institutional rigidity and "turf" protection agency design criteria and guide from one agency to another (e.g., "do it specifications our way") · Excessively tight restrictions on A&E Final design · Design subcontractors poorly coordinated activities, undermine ability to manage and · Drawings and specifications incomplete, sense of responsibility inaccurate, inconsistent, or unclear; leads to · Inadequate staff review of work in costly delays progress leads to more- substantial · Completion schedule not met comments and changes at each submission stage Construction · Inadequate understanding find analysis of Low bid procurements without constructability Requalification lead to selection of less · Inadequate review of construction bid qualified constructor submissions · A&E firm not involved in construction to interpret and maintain design intent Commissioning (No specific problems cited)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.