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
We're expanding our collaborative mission by launching DB Intelligence, an exclusive market research advisory panel. Built environment professionals can now get paid to share their expertise on industry trends, products and services.
Panel members receive direct financial incentives for participating in research projects like short surveys, 1-2-1 interviews and focus groups. Register today to shape the future of the construction sector.
Building Control Independent Panel final report
A precis of a key report led by Dame Hackitt with full recommendations and link to the government response.
Guide to ISO 19650 for Architecture Firms (2026)
A user gives their low down.
A UK training and membership provider for mould remediation professionals.
Building Safety recap April, 2026
A short and longer run-through of the month, with links to further information and sources.
CIAT May 2026 briefing.
Independent NSI and BAFE study exploring how organisations are changing the way they buy fire safety services.
From medieval scribes to modern word art.
ECA welcomes crackdown on late payment and push for clean energy, whilst CIOB seek fixed cladding removal timeframes.
Cyber Security in the Built Environment
Protecting projects, data, and digital assets: A CIOB Academy TIS.
Managing competence in the built environment
ITFG publishes new industry guide on how to meet the ICC principles.
The UK's campaign to reduce noise pollution: Mythbusting, articles and topic guides.
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.