Page 86

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

APPENDIX B

Individual Survey Responses

The tables in this appendix contain blank cells, which indicate no responses for survey respondents. Additionally, the responses to all open-ended questions are contained verbatim in Chapter 3.

Page 87

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 5 Question 6

Page 88

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 7 Question 8

Page 89

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 9-Number of PDB projects awarded?		Question 10-Number of successfully negotiated CMGC work packages or mini-contracts awarded?
State DOT	Number	Number
Arkansas	1	1
Caltrans	0	Numberless
Colorado	0	130+
Delaware	0	5
Florida	2	1
Georgia	0	0
Idaho	0
Illinois	Nothing yet.	Nothing just yet.
Kansas	1	0
Kentucky	4	0
Louisiana	0
Maine	0	10
Maryland	1	5
Michigan	First PDB contract award is in process	25-30
Minnesota	0	16
Montana	0	8
North Carolina	0	50
Nebraska	0	0
Oregon	1	0
Ohio	3	0
Rhode Island	0	1
Tennessee	0	5
Utah	5	50
Virginia	1	0
Vermont	0	7
Washington State	2	2

Page 90

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 11 Question 12

Page 91

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 14 and 15 Question 16

Page 92

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 17

Page 93

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 18

Page 94

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 19-Motivations for selecting to negotiate rather than fix the construction cost prior to awarding the construction or DB contract.
State DOT	Motivation
Arkansas	Construction complexity
Colorado	Collaboration on the pre-construction mitigates errors and omission changes during construction, resulting in a more accurate representation of the scope. Which provides opportunity for a higher initial cost but lower final cost.
Illinois	More flexibility with delivery options, with scopes and comfort levels.
Minnesota	The motivation is typically tied to budget/cost certainty and risk. Some projects have risks, both threats and opportunities, that are difficult to define and properly allocate w/o collaborating with industry partners before establishing a price. And some projects have budget/fiscal constraints that make negotiating costs based on informed decision-making highly beneficial to the project’s success.
Ohio	Risk sharing and new technologies are the main reason Ohio DOT is pursuing PDB as small pilot projects.
Rhode Island	none
Utah	In certain context nearly all of the items mentioned in item 18 could make a negotiated price approach an attractive approach to project delivery.

Page 95

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 20

Page 96

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 21-Approach to determining what items will be negotiated after awarding the CMGC or PDB contract.
State DOT	Approach
Colorado	We often challenge means and methods to ensure we are only including essential scope and not scope of convenience.
Minnesota	My agency does not use PDB so my answers to question 20 apply to CM/GC only. And my answers represent what MnDOT currently does, not what could be done. For instance, MnDOT defines in the CM/GC RFP a fair/reasonable construction services fee, represented as a markup, for profit and home office overhead. MnDOT doesn’t have to do that, but we’ve found that defining this markup has minimized contractor gamesmanship that we’ve found to be counterproductive to reaching agreement on a fair and reasonable price.
Rhode Island	none
Utah	Everything is negotiable but quantities and home office overhead are objective enough to not require negotiation.
Washington State	Other than commercial terms, mostly anything could be negotiated if it has a significant bearing on the cost.

Page 97

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 22 Question 23

Page 98

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 24 Question 25

Page 99

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 26 Question 27

Page 100

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 28

Question 29-Agency’s approach to determining profit in open-book negotiations.
State DOT	Approach
Arkansas	Should be Fair Market Value; is typically in 12-13% range.
Colorado	See comments for Construction services fee.
Michigan	A percentage is discussed and negotiated at each milestone. At final negotiation, the ICE provides the owner with a recommended profit based on all elements of the cost model (risk, contingency, etc.). Final negotiations are based lump sum for total project cost.
Minnesota	MnDOT specifies a markup for profit in the CM/GC RFP. This markup applies to the negotiated construction price, which for MnDOT CM/GC contracts typically consists of standard MnDOT bid items paid for based on unit prices and quantities established by the project team (designer, contractor, MnDOT) during the project’s design development. This markup for profit should not be confused with margin or a guaranteed profit.
Ohio	Overhead and Profit are competitively bid at a range between 8% to 16%.
Rhode Island	rolled into construction services fee
Utah	Same as before.
Washington State	This is the only competed cost item in the RFP between the shortlisted teams. However, if the selected team’s percentage is too high, WSDOT has the ability to negotiate or move to the second highest proposer prior to award.

Page 101

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 30 Question 31

Page 102

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 32-How does your agency handle the establishment of design costs in a PDB project?								Question 33-If you chose other in the previous question, please explain how your agency handles the establishment of contingencies in a CMGC or PDB project below.
State DOT	Negotiated single lump sum contingency controlled by the agency in the GMP	Negotiated single percentage contingency controlled by the agency in the GMP	No response	Other	Separately negotiated agency and contractor contingencies in the GMP	Separately negotiated agency and contractor contingencies: contractor contingency in the GMP and agency contingency outside the GMP	The agency holds the project contingency outside the GMP
Arkansas							✓
Colorado					✓	✓
Delaware				✓				For standard unit of measure pay items, we pay actual quantities, so a separate contingency to cover any overruns is established and held by the owner. For other types of risks, we develop a risk register with risks, costs, triggers, and mitigation measures that is included in the contract. The contractor gets paid only if the risks are triggered.
Florida					✓
Kansas		✓
Maine							✓
Maryland				✓				As a policy we do not have project specific contingencies.
Michigan				✓	✓		✓	Contract price includes a GMP and additional unit price items outside of the GMP that are anticipated. Additional contingency items may be negotiated during preconstruction that are added after contract award via change order. Final contract price includes GMP, plus unit-price items based on final quantities, plus any contingency items added via change order.
Minnesota						✓	✓	Contractor includes contingency in their bid for risks allocated to them. MnDOT and contractor discuss these risks and the contractor provides assessments, including cost, of these risks during the project’s pre-construction phase. Risks that are allocated to MnDOT are part of an owner-controlled contingency that is carried outside the contractor’s bid.
Montana		✓
North Carolina						✓		We use the risk register to establish costs.
Nebraska	✓						✓
Ohio	✓
Rhode Island							✓
Tennessee					✓
Utah	✓							The total lump sum amount is built up from distinct negotiated items.
Virginia						✓
Vermont						✓
Washington State				✓			✓	Contingencies are evaluated both for GMP and Lump Sum. In GMP, contingencies are controlled by Design-Builder but savings are shared. In lump sum, DB owns all agreed upon risks and contingencies. WSDOT owns any uncontrollable/Differing Sites or any other agreed upon risks.

Page 103

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 34 Question 35

Page 104

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 36 Question 37 Question 38

Page 105

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 39-Please check all of the those activities covered by the ICE’s contract below.
State DOT	AR	CA	CO	DE	FL	GA	IL	IN	KS	KY	ME	MD	MI	MN	MT	NC	OR	TN	UT	VA	VT	WA
Assist during price negotiations	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Assist in value engineering analysis			✓	✓		✓	✓		✓	✓				✓		✓				✓
Identifying and managing risks	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓		✓
Constructability reviews		✓		✓			✓			✓		✓	✓	✓		✓		✓
Conform quantities of work	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓			✓		✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓		✓		✓
Coordinate with the contractor	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓		✓	✓		✓	✓		✓			✓
Develop scope, schedule, and budget.	✓															✓
Attend design/preconstruction meetings	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Prepare a competing bid	✓	✓		✓					✓	✓		✓		✓	✓	✓			✓	✓		✓
Independent schedule.		✓	✓	✓	✓		✓		✓	✓		✓		✓	✓	✓			✓	✓	✓	✓
Produce independent OPCCs	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
ICE deliverables per precon schedule.	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓		✓
Financial management services	✓
Develop alternative approaches	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓			✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓			✓
Provide negotiation support		✓	✓	✓					✓	✓			✓		✓		✓	✓	✓	✓		✓
Production-based contractor-style estimates	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Provide risk management support		✓	✓	✓					✓	✓			✓		✓		✓	✓	✓	✓		✓
Discuss assumptions	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Solicit quotes.	✓		✓	✓		✓				✓		✓	✓	✓	✓				✓	✓
Validate contractor-developed cost model.	✓	✓		✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓		✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓				✓

Question 40-Agency’s approach to employing an ICE in CMGC and PDB projects.
State DOT	Approach
Caltrans	ICE occasionally solicits quotes for some critical elements of the work to independently validate the cost.
Utah	The ICE plays a critical role in the successful negotiation of the construction price.

Page 106

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 41 Question 42

Page 107

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 43,44-Does your agency have a mandated percentage variation of the proposed GMP from the ICE or state’s estimate that must be met to award the construction?
State DOT	Yes	No	If yes, what is the percentage?
Arkansas	✓		10%
California		✓	The percentage variation is not mandated, but based on engineering judgement.
Colorado	✓		2%-10%
Delaware	✓		Generally 5%
Florida		✓
Georgia	✓		10%
Illinois		✓
Indiana		✓
Kansas	✓		2
Kentucky		✓
Maine		✓
Maryland		✓
Michigan	✓		10%
Minnesota		✓
Montana		✓
North Carolina	✓		roughly 10%
Nebraska	✓		5
Oregon		✓
Ohio		✓
Rhode Island		✓
Tennessee	✓		10%
Utah	✓		Less than 10%
Virginia		✓
Vermont	✓		10%
Washington State		✓

Page 108

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 45

Question 46

Page 109

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 49-Which of the following were “trigger points” for exercising the off-ramp in your CMGC and PDB contracts?
State DOT	Inability to agree on pricing, production rates, means and methods, and other elements of the GMP direct costs	Contractor’s price exceeds an allowable range from the ICE’s Estimate	Contractor’s price exceeds available funding	Failure to achieve required percentage of difference after a specified number of attempts	Inability to acquire required right of way in a timely manner to support the contractor’s proposed schedule	Inability to comply with federal mandates imposed by the Buy America Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, etc. within the contract period	Evidence of bad faith during GMP negotiations	Other	Scope of work is increased due to unforeseen events such as changed legislation, tighter environmental constraints, failure to consummate third-party agreements with railroads, utilities, etc	Contractor’s proposed schedule exceeds the project’s required delivery date due to material and/or labor	Contractor’s price exceeds an allowable range from the Engineer’s Estimate
Arkansas	✓	✓
Caltrans	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Delaware			✓
Illinois	✓							✓
Kansas	✓		✓		✓	✓	✓		✓	✓
Kentucky								✓
Maine	✓
Maryland	✓		✓
Michigan	✓	✓	✓
Minnesota	✓	✓	✓	✓			✓		✓		✓
Montana	✓	✓				✓	✓
Nebraska	✓	✓	✓				✓				✓
Oregon	✓		✓		✓		✓	✓
Ohio	✓		✓		✓	✓			✓
Tennessee	✓	✓	✓	✓							✓
Utah								✓
Virginia	✓		✓				✓		✓
Washington State								✓

Page 110

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.

Question 50-Please provide information where the researchers can obtain documentation that reflects your agency policy and procedures for open-book negotiations in CMGC and PDB.
State DOT	Approach
Arkansas	https://www.ardot.gov/divisions/alternative-project-delivery/
Caltrans	Office of Innovative Design and Delivery
Delaware	https://deldot.gov/Business/drc/pdfs/projectmanagement/cmgc_procedures.pdf?cache=1708361009149
Illinois	Draft manual and appendices are available on our main website under the Doing Business and Innovative Project Delivery tabs. Then scroll down to Resources.
Kentucky	We have not exercised an off ramp on any of our projects.
Maryland	The RFPs at this link outline the CMAR (CM/GC) procedures for price negotiation. https://www.roads.maryland.gov/mdotsha/pages/Index.aspx?pageID=866 The single PDB project that we have done also includes the procedures that were followed for negotiations. https://www.roads.maryland.gov/ohd2/MO0695172_RFQ_RFP-Addendums1-4.pdf
Michigan	Projects and guidance are available on the public website at https://www.michigan.gov/mdot/Business/Contractors/innovativecontracting
Minnesota	MnDOT’s CM/GC website: https://www.dot.state.mn.us/const/innovative-contracting/construction-manager-general-contractor.html)
North Carolina	https://connect.ncdot.gov/letting/Pages/Design-Build.aspx
Oregon	contract documents
Ohio	Contact either Eric.Kahlig@dot.ohio.gov or Chase.Wells@dot.ohio.gov
Tennessee	https://www.tn.gov/tdot/alternative-delivery/construction-cm-gc-services.html; CMGC Standard Guidance Document forthcoming soon. PDB Standard Guidance Document forthcoming within the year.
Utah	This is under development
Washington State	WSDOT has not yet exercised an off ramp. However, the off-ramp may be exercised in cases where Contractor’s estimate exceeds a certain range from ICE’s estimate or if the agency did not have the necessary funding.

Page 111

Suggested Citation: "Appendix B: Individual Survey Responses." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2025. Open-Book Pricing Practices for Construction Manager/General Contractor and Progressive Design-Build Projects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/29084.