Construction Staking Scopes?

Could it be just an open T&M for whatever they need done?

A contract with an ambiguous scope is a recipe for financial loss.  If the client doesn't adequately define the scope, it's incumbent upon the surveyor to do so. 

Simple and clear is best, with as much detail as is required to cover all the possibilities with significant economic impact.

I stopped bidding on construction staking projects due to this, the general race to the bottom concerning pricing, the opportunity costs, and the low frequency of repeat business from contracts awarded. Before I'd established enough relationships with quality-focused GCs who had my back when things went weird, I would just contact the bidding GC and ask what they anticipated they'd need from me. After a handful of projects, patterns emerge regarding what staking is generally required. I find that what is needed is less difficult to figure out than when it's needed (other than they'll always need staking when one of my guys is on vacation or sick). All my contracts are based on a set number of site mobilizations with tasks clearly defined for each individual mobilization. A key to the construction game is that a vague lump sum contract works in the GC's favor. Counter this by being very specific in terms of mobilizations, quantities, timing (in terms of when you'll receive plans and revisions, and when you can be ready to mobilize), and deliverables. Often, they'll force you to use their bidding system that may only allow entry of a lump sum fee. If there's no way of including PLS contract details, again you may be able to reach out to the contractor and find a way to protect yourself, but sometimes you need to pass or throw a big number at it.

One other bit of wisdom that was hard won. Don't ever let the GC get behind on paying their invoices. I blew it big on one of my first large construction projects. The GC was super nice, polite, and punctual. We were being paid very well to stake electrical duct banks. The invoices remained unpaid for three cycles and I continued sending surveyors thinking that my good faith actions would be reciprocated. Boy, was I wrong. They refused to pay more than the invoice totals minus the attorney fees required to enforce the contract. Lesson learned: GC says, "I need your guys out there first thing Monday", Me: "Absolutely, just contact your accounting team and get them to wire us payment for your overdue invoices by close of business Friday."

Construction staking became more of an accounting nightmare, so I revised my proposals for certain jobs. Be extremely specific on what tasks you're going to do, then how many times each task will take. Then I added a 25% holdback charge into any bids if the job is structured that way. There is nothing more annoying in modern day surveying than waiting 2 years for a 10% holdback. If they're going to apply that, I'm going to get 25%. If I don't want the job, I simply show that as a charge on my bid. So far, no takers. 

I even had one out of state contractor call and chew on me cause I declined to bid his job. The specs for it were insane. Each beam in the building had to be certified within 1/4" before the next phase could continue. I told him I didn't have time to do that, nor did I have crews to do that. He said, "Oh we won't do those certifications". I said, "It's in the bid package and it's only one thing that makes me stay away from this job". Never heard from him again. 

Posted by: @jflamm

↑

Could it be just an open T&M for whatever they need done?

That was my first inclination.  I tried that with 1 or 2 projects and one estimator emailed back with "All I see here is a T&M price, can I get your estimate?" 🤦‍♂️  I guess they don't trust me to not milk the clock or something.

Posted by: @jim-frame

↑

A contract with an ambiguous scope is a recipe for financial loss.  If the client doesn't adequately define the scope, it's incumbent upon the surveyor to do so. 

Simple and clear is best, with as much detail as is required to cover all the possibilities with significant economic impact.

I've been going through the plans and picking out stuff that I think they will probably ask to have staked and then itemize that with a lump sum price and then say anything not on this list is T&M.  I won a project doing it this way, but I'm not a fan of this method.  It worked out since I got the project, but if I did this estimator's work for him AND didn't win it I'd be really irritated.

Even when I do the takeoff as quickly and efficiently as I can I feel like I'm flushing time down the toilet.

GC's rarely provide a comprehensive scope for layout needs.  Based on several decades of experience, I prepare a very detailed proposal listing every item I think will be needed down to the number of stakes.  Everything gets it's own line item.  I also make sure to quantitate the maximum number of site visits.  I make note in my assumptions that line items can be deleted or added with the cost adjusted prior to contracting.

Fortunately, my larger construction clients just send me a PO with a T&M number I'm not ever going to reach.  These are the ones that know we might be one of the most expensive crafts on the site but our cost to benefit ratio is priceless. 

@bstrand While it does take a fair amount of work, you can get a fair amount of the info out of the specifications.  They usually include an itemized list of things the contractor will be building.  As for not getting the jobs, that is just part of the game and part of the reason for overhead.  Only halfway through the year & I have been on the loosing end more often than not.

@john-putnam Nice.  I'm 2 for 2 this year on staking projects.  I don't count the T&M ones since my estimating effort matched their scoping effort.   😏

I think I need to raise my price.  I don't think I'm cheap by any means, but if no staking scope is gonna be the norm I think I need to jack up the price to make it worth my time.

Most projects do not include a staking scope and the few I've seen have been stupid. So count yourself lucky to not have to deal with one. As John said, write your own. You are the expert. Tell them what they are going to need. 

Some supers want a lot of handholding, others not so much. Some crews need a lot of guidance, others will build from next to nothing and do it well.  

Mostly, they want an estimate for their budgeting. And the assurance that you know what they need, and can deliver it in a timely manner.  If the services you provide keep their crews working without interruption there will be no questions about the hours you charge T&M.

Posted by: @john-putnam

↑

Fortunately, my larger construction clients just send me a PO with a T&M number I'm not ever going to reach.  These are the ones that know we might be one of the most expensive crafts on the site but our cost to benefit ratio is priceless. 

You have to define the scope you are going to provide. You have to put up with a lot of frustrating crap and GC's for about 2 or 3 years. After that time you will know what is needed on a construction project. You will have established a reputation as reliable and professional. When that occurs you end up with clients like the quote above from john-putnam.

Currently there are a hand full of GCs that either write us a contract for 10k and then continually approve change orders for our work that ultimately ends up being 6 figures or they write a contract for a number that we are never going to exceed and pay submitted invoices out of that.

But you have to go through the bidding crap until you have clients that trust and only want to use you for their projects.

Posted by: @norman-oklahoma

↑

You are the expert. Tell them what they are going to need.

Expert in survey things, sure, not building things.  I don't know why the GC is even there if they can't provide a scope.  They should be responsible for getting with the other subs and asking them exactly what survey they need and then pass that along to me.

I don't think it's reasonable at all to be expected to be an unpaid mind reader.

Posted by: @bstrand

↑

They should be responsible for getting with the other subs and asking them exactly what survey they need and then pass that along to me.

That may be your desire but things are getting built everywhere without that happening. Until they can't get things built, it won't change.

Posted by: @lurker

↑

Until they can't get things built, it won't change.

Probably right about that.

While the GC's vague requests are annoying, I'll give them more of a break than the project engineers. It's just wrong that contractors and surveyors have to use Bluebeam or whip out a ruler to figure out how many LF of curb or LOD, etc. are included in the plans. In 2026, PEs should be required to send CAD files and should be required to list all quantities within their certified construction plans. The PE's slice of the pie is big enough to warrant the expense and liability of isolating a CAD layer and adding up the polyline lengths.

@murphy I tend to agree, but linear feet of curb doesn't really tell me how many PCs and PTs are out there.

Posted by: @bstrand

↑

.... linear feet of curb doesn't really tell me how many PCs and PTs are out there.

No, but the plans do. I wouldn't attempt even a rough estimate without the plans in hand.