Prime cost contract
Prime cost contracts (such as JCT PPC 11) are sometimes called cost plus contracts or cost reimbursement contracts.
Prime cost contracts are used where an early or immediate start on site is required even though design information is not complete.
This method of procurement is not generally recommended, but it can be useful under particular circumstances where an immediate start on site is necessary (for example for urgent alteration or repair work, or if there has been a building failure or a fire, requiring immediate reconstruction or replacement of a building so that the client can continue to operate their business).
Tendering proceeds based on an outline specification, any drawings and an estimate of costs. The contractor is paid the prime cost (the actual cost of labour, plant and materials) and a fee for overheads and profit. The fee can be agreed by negotiation or by competition, and may be a lump sum (which it may be possible to adjust if the actual cost is different from the estimate), or a percentage of the prime cost (which it may be possible to revise if the client changes the nature of the works).
Other basis for payment are possible, including combinations of lump sum and percentage fees. For example, it might be possible to fix some elements of overheads whilst applying a percentage to other elements and to profit.
This is a high risk form of procurement for the client as they are reliant on the contractor working efficiently and procuring sub-contracts economically. Sub contracts may be procured competitively, but there may be little incentive for the contractor to secure or select economic bids. Some of these difficulties can be mitigated if a partnering relationship has been established between the client and the contractor.
NB: Some people consider that a cost reimbursable contract or cost plus contract is one in which the client takes all the risk, whereas a prime cost contract is one in which the cost of the works packages (the prime cost) are reimbursed but the main contractor takes a risk on staffing, overhead costs and profit which might be tendered on a fixed price.
[edit] Related articles
Featured articles and news
Not buildings. Happy holiday from DB.
Future Homes Standard: Industry calls for more ambition
As the Government FHS consultation finally closes.
Improving government projects with data and AI
Enabling better outcomes, efficient modern delivery and influential leadership on government projects.
BSRIA Living Laboratory Innovation Challenge
Final days for submission, closing March 29.
Windows, their frames, forms, factors and functions.
The hidden subtleties of U-Value calculations
Different contexts and what to include as variables.
A brief run down with related articles.
Electrical sector calls for safer public EV charge points
Serious concerns about electrical safety in the public domain.
Building Blocks manifesto presented to parliament
Architects Declare call in for support of five critical policies.
The four elements of project management with APM
Analysis, expectations, collaborative communication and partnerships.
City of London launches Heritage Building Retrofit Toolkit
Empowering owners to initiate necessary adaptations.
Guidance on RAAC in listed buildings
Published by Purcell, endorsed by IHBC, SPAB and C20.
Learning from the past.
Reluctance to hire people with criminal convictions revealed
Employing People with Criminal Convictions Report.
Tackling unconscious bias; Women's History Month
Personal reflections, as the last week of March approaches.
Comments
For small alternation project of 8 storey building, what is the advantage of using prime cost contract?
Unless an immediate start is needed - for example if there is some danger or urgency, it is difficult to see what the advantage would be over a traditional contract.