Construction Contract Administration

Our Knowledge Community Board engages with the AIA community periodically throughout the year. During these engagements we frequently get requests for guidance or information. A recent request was to provide a field observation checklist.

While field observations need to be customized per project and respond to job specific needs to preserve and protect the design intent, there are some common things that should be reviewed in all projects.  We will be releasing a series of field observations checklists categorized by different building components. 

Continuing from previous post's, this week's category is metal studs:

Metal Studs

·        Are metal stud kickers/ braces installed per the dwgs. and terminated to the deck properly?

·        Is cold rolled channel bracing installed per areas noted on dwgs?

·        Is a deflection track required vs standard metal stud runner?

·        Is a fire track or other rated top of wall assembly installed at fire-rated walls?

·        Is wood / metal blocking installed & sized properly to support fixture loads (ie, light shelves, large light fixtures, wall cabinets)?

·        Are door/window headers installed as specified or detailed? (ie, box header vs. metal stud runner)

·        Was acoustic sealant installed between the runners and substrate if specified?

·        Is each stud secured/fastened to the track?

We are aware that it is impossible to create a comprehensive checklist and that in the process of attempting to do so it could easily turn into a CM/General contractor's quality control manual which is not the purpose of periodic site observation. However, we are all products of our experience and there is value in sharing as a profession as a way to expand our perspective.

What other considerations should be added to the list?

Sean Catherall has responded accurately to Ms. Day's post and others that purport to require their firm's CA administrators essentially perform "inspections" rather than observations in accordance with the requirements of the AIA A201. I would, however, extend Mr. Catherall's statements to advise that if a firm has such a document in its office procedures manual detailing this level of "inspection" that they are vastly extending their risk as such procedures are discoverable in litigation. If an administrator fails to identify a defect that should have been identified pursuant to its procedures manual, then it may not be able to rely on being shielded by the established Standard of Care. Further, PL insurance may deny coverage.

Procedures for performing CA observations should closely follow the Architect's contractual obligations set forth in the A201 and rely on experience to generally identify nonconformity.

Our Knowledge Community Board engages with the AIA community periodically throughout the year. During these engagements we frequently get requests for guidance or information. A recent request was to provide a field observation checklist.

While field observations need to be customized per project and respond to job specific needs to preserve and protect the design intent, there are some common things that should be reviewed in all projects.  We will be releasing a series of field observations checklists categorized by different building components. 

Continuing from previous post's, this week's category is metal studs:

Metal Studs

·        Are metal stud kickers/ braces installed per the dwgs. and terminated to the deck properly?

·        Is cold rolled channel bracing installed per areas noted on dwgs?

·        Is a deflection track required vs standard metal stud runner?

·        Is a fire track or other rated top of wall assembly installed at fire-rated walls?

·        Is wood / metal blocking installed & sized properly to support fixture loads (ie, light shelves, large light fixtures, wall cabinets)?

·        Are door/window headers installed as specified or detailed? (ie, box header vs. metal stud runner)

·        Was acoustic sealant installed between the runners and substrate if specified?

·        Is each stud secured/fastened to the track?

We are aware that it is impossible to create a comprehensive checklist and that in the process of attempting to do so it could easily turn into a CM/General contractor's quality control manual which is not the purpose of periodic site observation. However, we are all products of our experience and there is value in sharing as a profession as a way to expand our perspective.

What other considerations should be added to the list?

Thank you Sharon and others for sharing thoughts on what to look for while on site, very helpful. There seems to be some push back about what is an "inspection" vs "observation" and how that opens up an architect to liability...which is a shame because it seemingly relegates an architect to being a warm body on site just so they can check a box saying, "yep I was on site as required by my agreement" while providibg minimal value to the client out of fear of getting sued for "looking too closely at something". Most industries try to expand their knowledge base and value added to clients with stuff like these lists to help fill in gaps in knowledge...not sure why the pushback by some folks. 

Keep on sharing the info Sharon!

Sean Catherall has responded accurately to Ms. Day's post and others that purport to require their firm's CA administrators essentially perform "inspections" rather than observations in accordance with the requirements of the AIA A201. I would, however, extend Mr. Catherall's statements to advise that if a firm has such a document in its office procedures manual detailing this level of "inspection" that they are vastly extending their risk as such procedures are discoverable in litigation. If an administrator fails to identify a defect that should have been identified pursuant to its procedures manual, then it may not be able to rely on being shielded by the established Standard of Care. Further, PL insurance may deny coverage.

Procedures for performing CA observations should closely follow the Architect's contractual obligations set forth in the A201 and rely on experience to generally identify nonconformity.

Our Knowledge Community Board engages with the AIA community periodically throughout the year. During these engagements we frequently get requests for guidance or information. A recent request was to provide a field observation checklist.

While field observations need to be customized per project and respond to job specific needs to preserve and protect the design intent, there are some common things that should be reviewed in all projects.  We will be releasing a series of field observations checklists categorized by different building components. 

Continuing from previous post's, this week's category is metal studs:

Metal Studs

·        Are metal stud kickers/ braces installed per the dwgs. and terminated to the deck properly?

·        Is cold rolled channel bracing installed per areas noted on dwgs?

·        Is a deflection track required vs standard metal stud runner?

·        Is a fire track or other rated top of wall assembly installed at fire-rated walls?

·        Is wood / metal blocking installed & sized properly to support fixture loads (ie, light shelves, large light fixtures, wall cabinets)?

·        Are door/window headers installed as specified or detailed? (ie, box header vs. metal stud runner)

·        Was acoustic sealant installed between the runners and substrate if specified?

·        Is each stud secured/fastened to the track?

We are aware that it is impossible to create a comprehensive checklist and that in the process of attempting to do so it could easily turn into a CM/General contractor's quality control manual which is not the purpose of periodic site observation. However, we are all products of our experience and there is value in sharing as a profession as a way to expand our perspective.

What other considerations should be added to the list?

Chris,

Not true at all. The Architect's role is crucial, but it's the Contractor's duty to build the Project in accordance with the Contract Documents. The Architect is not on site every day and sometimes not even every week and, therefore, cannot perform as an inspector. When on site, the Architect should very diligently observe the Work in progress and report its observations. It should also identify any required correction of Work it observes to not be in conformance.

The point is, unless retained for full time on site services, the Architect (and its Consultants) cannot see everything. Therefore, its duties cannot rise to the level of assuring that Project is being constructed EXACTLY per the Documents.  My point and, I believe, Mr. Catherall's point was that such checklists may inadvertently raise that standard and, therefore, the Architectural firm should be careful not to promise in any way that it will endeavor to identify any and all defects during the course of construction. (Also, the Owner may retain inspection agencies if inspections of every element of the construction is desired.) Any firm procedures for such observations should be carefully constructed to not limit the Architect's careful observation but also not REQUIRE checking ("inspection") of every element.

Personally, I take my CA obligations on site very seriously and perform vigorous and thorough observations and still cannot confirm that every bolt and screw or other elements are correctly in place. I carefully observe the progress and details, and endeavor to assure that the Work, when completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents.

The key is experience. CA personnel should best be highly experienced, and young architects should intern under the tutelage of such veterans for many years until they fully understand their role and responsibility, and, most importantly, understand the construction.

Thank you Sharon and others for sharing thoughts on what to look for while on site, very helpful. There seems to be some push back about what is an "inspection" vs "observation" and how that opens up an architect to liability...which is a shame because it seemingly relegates an architect to being a warm body on site just so they can check a box saying, "yep I was on site as required by my agreement" while providibg minimal value to the client out of fear of getting sued for "looking too closely at something". Most industries try to expand their knowledge base and value added to clients with stuff like these lists to help fill in gaps in knowledge...not sure why the pushback by some folks. 

Keep on sharing the info Sharon!

Sean Catherall has responded accurately to Ms. Day's post and others that purport to require their firm's CA administrators essentially perform "inspections" rather than observations in accordance with the requirements of the AIA A201. I would, however, extend Mr. Catherall's statements to advise that if a firm has such a document in its office procedures manual detailing this level of "inspection" that they are vastly extending their risk as such procedures are discoverable in litigation. If an administrator fails to identify a defect that should have been identified pursuant to its procedures manual, then it may not be able to rely on being shielded by the established Standard of Care. Further, PL insurance may deny coverage.

Procedures for performing CA observations should closely follow the Architect's contractual obligations set forth in the A201 and rely on experience to generally identify nonconformity.

Our Knowledge Community Board engages with the AIA community periodically throughout the year. During these engagements we frequently get requests for guidance or information. A recent request was to provide a field observation checklist.

While field observations need to be customized per project and respond to job specific needs to preserve and protect the design intent, there are some common things that should be reviewed in all projects.  We will be releasing a series of field observations checklists categorized by different building components. 

Continuing from previous post's, this week's category is metal studs:

Metal Studs

·        Are metal stud kickers/ braces installed per the dwgs. and terminated to the deck properly?

·        Is cold rolled channel bracing installed per areas noted on dwgs?

·        Is a deflection track required vs standard metal stud runner?

·        Is a fire track or other rated top of wall assembly installed at fire-rated walls?

·        Is wood / metal blocking installed & sized properly to support fixture loads (ie, light shelves, large light fixtures, wall cabinets)?

·        Are door/window headers installed as specified or detailed? (ie, box header vs. metal stud runner)

·        Was acoustic sealant installed between the runners and substrate if specified?

·        Is each stud secured/fastened to the track?

We are aware that it is impossible to create a comprehensive checklist and that in the process of attempting to do so it could easily turn into a CM/General contractor's quality control manual which is not the purpose of periodic site observation. However, we are all products of our experience and there is value in sharing as a profession as a way to expand our perspective.

What other considerations should be added to the list?

Chris,

Not true at all. The Architect's role is crucial, but it's the Contractor's duty to build the Project in accordance with the Contract Documents. The Architect is not on site every day and sometimes not even every week and, therefore, cannot perform as an inspector. When on site, the Architect should very diligently observe the Work in progress and report its observations. It should also identify any required correction of Work it observes to not be in conformance.

The point is, unless retained for full time on site services, the Architect (and its Consultants) cannot see everything. Therefore, its duties cannot rise to the level of assuring that Project is being constructed EXACTLY per the Documents.  My point and, I believe, Mr. Catherall's point was that such checklists may inadvertently raise that standard and, therefore, the Architectural firm should be careful not to promise in any way that it will endeavor to identify any and all defects during the course of construction. (Also, the Owner may retain inspection agencies if inspections of every element of the construction is desired.) Any firm procedures for such observations should be carefully constructed to not limit the Architect's careful observation but also not REQUIRE checking ("inspection") of every element.

Personally, I take my CA obligations on site very seriously and perform vigorous and thorough observations and still cannot confirm that every bolt and screw or other elements are correctly in place. I carefully observe the progress and details, and endeavor to assure that the Work, when completed, will be in accordance with the Contract Documents.

The key is experience. CA personnel should best be highly experienced, and young architects should intern under the tutelage of such veterans for many years until they fully understand their role and responsibility, and, most importantly, understand the construction.

Thank you Sharon and others for sharing thoughts on what to look for while on site, very helpful. There seems to be some push back about what is an "inspection" vs "observation" and how that opens up an architect to liability...which is a shame because it seemingly relegates an architect to being a warm body on site just so they can check a box saying, "yep I was on site as required by my agreement" while providibg minimal value to the client out of fear of getting sued for "looking too closely at something". Most industries try to expand their knowledge base and value added to clients with stuff like these lists to help fill in gaps in knowledge...not sure why the pushback by some folks. 

Keep on sharing the info Sharon!

Sean Catherall has responded accurately to Ms. Day's post and others that purport to require their firm's CA administrators essentially perform "inspections" rather than observations in accordance with the requirements of the AIA A201. I would, however, extend Mr. Catherall's statements to advise that if a firm has such a document in its office procedures manual detailing this level of "inspection" that they are vastly extending their risk as such procedures are discoverable in litigation. If an administrator fails to identify a defect that should have been identified pursuant to its procedures manual, then it may not be able to rely on being shielded by the established Standard of Care. Further, PL insurance may deny coverage.

Procedures for performing CA observations should closely follow the Architect's contractual obligations set forth in the A201 and rely on experience to generally identify nonconformity.

Our Knowledge Community Board engages with the AIA community periodically throughout the year. During these engagements we frequently get requests for guidance or information. A recent request was to provide a field observation checklist.

While field observations need to be customized per project and respond to job specific needs to preserve and protect the design intent, there are some common things that should be reviewed in all projects.  We will be releasing a series of field observations checklists categorized by different building components. 

Continuing from previous post's, this week's category is metal studs:

Metal Studs

·        Are metal stud kickers/ braces installed per the dwgs. and terminated to the deck properly?

·        Is cold rolled channel bracing installed per areas noted on dwgs?

·        Is a deflection track required vs standard metal stud runner?

·        Is a fire track or other rated top of wall assembly installed at fire-rated walls?

·        Is wood / metal blocking installed & sized properly to support fixture loads (ie, light shelves, large light fixtures, wall cabinets)?

·        Are door/window headers installed as specified or detailed? (ie, box header vs. metal stud runner)

·        Was acoustic sealant installed between the runners and substrate if specified?

·        Is each stud secured/fastened to the track?

We are aware that it is impossible to create a comprehensive checklist and that in the process of attempting to do so it could easily turn into a CM/General contractor's quality control manual which is not the purpose of periodic site observation. However, we are all products of our experience and there is value in sharing as a profession as a way to expand our perspective.

What other considerations should be added to the list?