Construction Information Technology Blog

Fairness in the Procurement Process

Posted by Dave Robertson on Oct 2, 2013 9:36:00 AM

Is it important to be fair to all bidders when you are calling for bids or proposals? Of course it is. It’s not only important; it’s supported by many years of case law that all bidders must be treated fairly and equitably. Whether it is for a case of toilet paper, 10 tons of pipe, engineering services or a construction project the principles of fairness need to be part of the process. When a person or company makes the decision to spend their resources to respond to a bid or proposal call in a competitive environment they expect a fair process. Nobody wants to be used to keep someone else ‘honest’ or to have their price leaked to another bidder who is given the opportunity to beat it. The more subjective process of proposal calls can be even more challenging as there are typically many judgement calls in the evaluation process leading to a ‘best value’ decision.

court cases

A key aspect of conducting a fair bid or proposal call is the actual submission process itself. Utilizing a process that eliminates potential unintended negative consequences of process errors is demonstrably better for both the submitter and receiver. A quick review of the 5 articles in the court cases section of this blog demonstrates some of the simple process based issues that can cause both parties lost opportunities and extra costs. While these cases refer to construction related submissions the same principles apply to all procurement processes.

Topics: Risk management, Construction bidding

What makes construction procurement different?

Posted by Dave Robertson on Jun 17, 2013 8:20:00 AM

If you are looking to buy a computer, a chair, or a car you can typically see it, touch and try it before you make the decision to part with some of your hard earned money and make the purchase. That is one of the key factors making purchasing construction so different. The purchaser has a vision and a plan for a built asset and needs to find an efficient way to buy a complex custom fabricated piece of work that doesn’t exist yet.

The next significant difference when buying construction is the many varied contractual methods to work through including; stipulated or lump sum pricing, unit price contract, design build, construction management, construction management at risk, design-build-operate contracts and many other possible contractual variations. And of course, once you begin to look at contracts it is very important to understand the legal environment related to the various contract provisions. For example: Does the entity purchasing the constructed asset have a duty to treat all the bidders equally? Can the entity have a preferred constructor but get pricing from others to ‘keep the preferred constructor honest’?

traditional construciton procurementThe common requirement for bid security is another key factor distinguishing construction purchasing. The requirement for submitting bid bonds or other bid security is primarily a construction related activity. Like everything else in this complicated process it has to be done on time and be done right as large sums of money are at stake.

Now, just to add a little excitement to the process, add in the fact that in most construction projects there are a multitude of consultants, contractors, subcontractors and suppliers all bound together through a web of bid submissions and the resulting contracts. In many cases the entire pricing/bidding process occurs in a time restricted environment that adds just a bit more pressure to the entire procurement.

Today the vast majority of this activity happens in the traditional, error prone paper based submission process. However, there is change in the wind. Online technologies offer impressive new tools that bring enormous value and efficiency to this entire process. The inherent risks of errors and omissions are significantly reduced or in many cases eliminated. It is only a matter of time until this ‘new way’ of managing the bid submission process becomes the standard. 

construction procurement2

Topics: Construction documents, Risk management, Construction bidding, Construction industry

Construction Bidding Court Case #5 – Alternate Prices

Posted by Dave Robertson on May 24, 2012 9:45:00 AM

Learn how PlanSource could help construction professionals to significantly reduce the risk of costly delays or claims arising from errors or omission from real court cases.

The traditional bidding process for construction projects involves a considerable amount of paperwork and information being shared between owners, contractors, and sub-contractors. Typically, bid documents and various addenda are issued during the bidding process before the bid closing date. Instructions provided in these documents are specific and require each bidder to comply implicitly or their bid submission will be rejected as non-compliant.

At times however, the issuance and distribution of addenda can cause uncertainty or misunderstanding among bidders as to the proper procedure or requirement for completion of the bid form. The following court case illustrates how such uncertainty created by a poorly issued addendum caused the bidders to be non-compliant with the language governing the submission of the bid:

  • The Instructions to Bidders required submission of complete package in sealed envelope.

  • The project was for the construction of an apartment building

  • Bid documents were distributed to the bidders and then various and numerous addenda were issued for both general and mechanical items.

  • The instructions to bidders contained the following instructions:
    • “Base Bids on strict compliance with Drawings and Specifications and include all costs for the project.”
    • “Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any Bid may be rejected for being incomplete including completion of the Appendices, …, having alternative or separate prices omitted …, failure to use specified materials or systems or installers or installation methods, … or any other non-conforming, non-responsive and conditional Bids.”

  • 4 days before bid close two new addenda were issued:
    • The first addendum asked to: “Provide alternate pricing for Metal fence that is shown and detailed on the drawings listed above. … List original fence design price in the Itemized Prices section and list the alternative in the Alternative Prices section”
    • Mechanical Addendum #1 changed the sanitary risers schematic drawing. In that changed drawing, a note provided:
      • BASE BID: INCLUDE UTILITY ROOM FLOOR DRAINS
      • ALTERNATE BID: DELETE UTILITY ROOM FLOOR DRAINS

  • The problem with the issued addenda is that they did not include changes in the Alternative Prices section of the bid form for the bidders to enter the information required by the addenda for either fence or drains.

  • non compliant bidsContractor 1 having not received any bids for  the requested alternates wrote “TBA” for prices.

  • Contractor 2 did not provide alternate prices either and eventually it was awarded the contract.

  • Contractor 1 sued the Owner for awarding to a non-compliant bidder.  The Court agreed that the fact that the bid form was not amended to allow for the requested alternate prices did not change the requirement of the bidder to respond to the request and the Owner did award to a non-compliant bidder.  However, since Contractor 1’s bid was also non-compliant for failing to include the requested alternate prices there was no legal remedy.


In this illustration the Owner created the setting for the bidders to fail by not including an area in the bid from to provide their alternate prices.  This caused a conflict with the bid form and the instructions and both bidders failed to comply with the requirements of the instructions.

Today’s solution:

Using the PlanSource Online Bidding module, the Owner is able to enforce the Alternative Price requirement and bidders would not be able to submit their bids until they responded as directed.  This eliminates the ability to submit a non-compliant bid and avoids the costly and time consuming court action that resulted in this example.
 

Click here to learn more about the PlanSource online bidding module.

Our thanks to Mike Demers, Partner with the Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada law firm of Jenkins Marzban Logan for providing the synopsis of this court decision. Mike’s practice at JML is focused on construction related matters. This includes advising clients on tendering, construction contract drafting, dealing with on-going project disputes, builder’s liens and, finally, the resolution of claims through trial, mediation or arbitration proceedings. Mike also provides advice on non-union employment matters for both employers and employees and general corporate and commercial litigation services.

Topics: Construction documents, Risk management, Construction bidding, Court cases

Construction Bidding Court Case #4 – Bid Package

Posted by Dave Robertson on Feb 21, 2012 9:45:00 AM

Learn how PlanSource could help construction professionals to significantly reduce the risk of costly delays or claims arising from errors or omission from real court cases.

Submitting a bid requires that bidders ensure even the most minute detail is addressed or their bid could be deemed non-compliant and all of the cost and effort put into the creation of a competitive bid is lost – even if you are the low bidder.  Bid submissions can get complicated and may require the completion and submission of many forms with the bid.  Even if an owner specifies that you sign the bid form in pink ink, failure to do so can result in your bid being disqualified as non-compliant.

The example below involves the requirement to attach a document to the bid.  In this case, the bidder argued they complied with the bid requirements and the owner took the position that while the bidder did submit the required attachment, it was not complete and therefore the bid was non-compliant:

  • The Instructions to Bidders required submission of complete package in sealed envelope.

  • Included in the package was a 10 page breakdown of unit prices, with the last page showing rolled up stipulated sum, including taxes

  • case4 construction bid packageThe Contractor prepared their bid, confirmed all 10 pages of the breakdown unit prices was in the package, placed the contents in an envelope, sealed the envelope, and delivered the bid on time

  • At the bid opening, the Owner opened the envelopes, announced and recorded all bidders’ prices, and then took all the bids to their office to review for completeness, etc.

  • Upon review the Owner says that the Contractor’s unit price breakdown only had only 9 pages and declared the bid non-compliant.

  • The Contractor sued claiming they had submitted all 10 pages of the unit price breakdown.

Although the bid that was submitted on time and with the required attachment, it was deemed ineligible simply because of a missing page. It is further unfortunate that both the owner and the bidder spent considerable time, effort and money in court on an issue that can be effectively eliminated.

Today’s solution:

All bids submitted through the PlanSource Online Bidding module are copied to a 3rd party verifier.  The copy is a mirror image of what was submitted by the bidder.  So in the event of a dispute as described above, the owner can retrieve the copy bid from the 3rd party verifier to determine exactly how many pages were submitted by the bidder.  This process eliminates the “he said – she said” argument between the owner and the bidder and quickly verifies what was contained in the bid.  No dispute – no costly law suit.
 

Click here to learn more about the PlanSource online bidding module.

Our thanks to Mike Demers, Partner with the Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada law firm of Jenkins Marzban Logan for providing the synopsis of this court decision. Mike’s practice at JML is focused on construction related matters. This includes advising clients on tendering, construction contract drafting, dealing with on-going project disputes, builder’s liens and, finally, the resolution of claims through trial, mediation or arbitration proceedings. Mike also provides advice on non-union employment matters for both employers and employees and general corporate and commercial litigation services.

Topics: Risk management, Construction bidding, Court cases

Construction Bidding Court Case #1 – Faxed Bid Amendments

Posted by Dave Robertson on Jan 9, 2012 9:00:00 AM

Learn how PlanSource could help construction professionals to significantly reduce the risk of costly delays or claims arising from errors or omission from real court cases.

As technology has evolved, owners have amended the bid submission process to accommodate bidders to ensure they (owners) receive the most competitive pricing within the specified time period. A prime example of such an accommodation is the advent of the fax machine and the subsequent adaptation of accepting amendments to a bidder’s submission by fax. In this situation the bidder would submit a completed bid form in a sealed envelope as per the instructions to bidders well in advance of the specified closing time. This would ensure the bid is submitted on time. The bidder then continues to work on their bid and make last minute adjustments to their price. Once they reach their final price, the bidder adjusts the bid previously submitted by sending an amendment by fax to a number designated in the instructions to bidders.

However, this process is not without its tribulations as the following Court decision illustrates:

The [Owner] sent out Invitations to Bid containing the following language with respect to faxed amendments:

  • "Bids must be received before 2:00 p.m., local time, Monday, December 12, 2011 at the reception office of [Owner].  Bids received after the closing time will be returned unopened."

  • "Revisions will be accepted by signed letter either delivered to the address stated in the Invitation to Bid or faxed to the fax number given in the Invitation to Bid."

  • "For faxed revisions, the clock used for the official bid closing time shall govern. Where a faxed amendment is received at the fax number designated in the Invitation to Bid and the time of receipt is deemed valid, this faxed amendment will be accepted even if said fax is not at the location where the bids are opened."

  • bid package fax number The bid form in the Bid Package contained a standard Faxed Bid Amendment Form as Appendix F. That Faxed Bid Amendment Form contained a pre-printed fax number (250-555-1234). That was the fax number at the location where all bids which were not faxed were required to be delivered.

  • The Bid Package included a Contact List, where the Owner contact was listed as Mr. Greg Z. Bidders were provided with an address, a phone number, and fax number (250-555-9876). The fax number was a fax at Mr. Z’s office.

  • [Contractor] sends in hard copy bid the day before and, a few minutes before close, faxes in a revision – To the 9876 number, not 1234 number.

The Court concluded that the bid revision was not sent to the proper fax number
and therefore was invalid.


So, the unfortunate result of this owner’s effort to accommodate bidders to ensure he receives competitive bids, is that they lose the lowest bid because the bidder is confused by the instructions to amend his bid by fax. A more unfortunate result is that both the owner and the bidder spent considerable time, effort and money on an issue that can be effectively eliminated.

Today’s solution:

Fortunately, technology continues to evolve and PlanSource’s online bidding module allows bidders to amend their bids right up to closing time without worry.  The online bid form is created by the owner and made available to bidders.  Bidders complete the form and submit it through the PlanSource application.  Bidders are able to withdraw their bids at any time prior to closing.  The withdrawn bid is returned to “draft” mode, changed and re-submitted.  This bid can be withdrawn and re-submitted any number of times prior to the bid closing time.

Benefits

Amendments can be made quickly and easily right up to closing time.  Bids are ALWAYS located at the designated closing location (online in the PlanSource application).  Bidders can submit their most competitive pricing and owners will never have to reject a low bidder because of a clerical mistake by the bidder.

Click here to learn more about the PlanSource online bidding module.

Our thanks to Mike Demers, Partner with the Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada law firm of Jenkins Marzban Logan for providing the synopsis of this court decision. Mike’s practice at JML is focused on construction related matters. This includes advising clients on tendering, construction contract drafting, dealing with on-going project disputes, builder’s liens and, finally, the resolution of claims through trial, mediation or arbitration proceedings. Mike also provides advice on non-union employment matters for both employers and employees and general corporate and commercial litigation services.  


Topics: Online bidding, Risk management, Court cases

A Planroom is a Planroom is a Planroom

Posted by Dave Robertson on Jun 27, 2011 6:00:00 AM

Everybody knows what a planroom is whether you call it a planroom, plansroom or plan room. It is a central repository where prospective bidders go to access documents and information for construction project opportunities. Groups of Contractors through Construction Associations and Builders Exchanges that they established were the historical originators of the practice of using planrooms some 100 or so years ago. Over the years some private enterprises got into the business and built up substantial physical infrastructure across North America to service this market.

In the marketplace today there are many players in the planroom business. This is particularly true since the major transition to working with digital files has taken place. The new players include software companies with new digital services, reprographic firms who are working to maintain a share of the printing market they have serviced for many years, FTP and other file management services as well as printer and scanner manufacturers. They’re everywhere!

planroom technology solutionsThe critical thing to consider when evaluating what your business is going to do to respond to the changes in the planroom business is to make sure that the solution you select doesn’t simply replace the traditional paper workflow with a digital one. Rather it is essential that you look for technology solutions that can improve the workflow, reduce your overall costs and effort and not the least solutions that reduce the inherent risks in the process. There are few things less productive than winning a contract and then entering into claims battles with Subs and Suppliers over what is actually included in the contract. Having the right technology can help you make sure you get better, more complete bids along with an ironclad audit trail that ensures the claims battles are avoided.

Topics: Electronic document management, Risk management, Online planroom

How to avoid problems with the Bidding process

Posted by Dave Robertson on Mar 10, 2011 9:37:00 AM

Most contractors find themselves needing to stay well informed of the twists and turns of current bidding laws (also known as tendering law in Canada) as new cases wind their way through the court systems changing the precedents and seemingly establishing new standards. The issues being litigated can be the very finest of points. I have personally been an expert witness on a bidding related question to answer the question of when is 2:00. One of the parties seemed to be arguing it was a period of time rather than an instant in time. You be the judge.

The specifics of the cases are different but there is a very common thread in a great many cases. Someone feels aggrieved and believes they were not treated fairly. So ... avoiding problems is easy ... just treat all bidders fairly. Operating a clear and efficient process that all bidders understand and that treats all bidders equally eliminates the vast majority of process based disputes.

As this is a technology blog it is worth asking whether technology can help. The simple answer is yes. Some of the many benefits of using a secure online bidding system include:

online bidding central project access

 

1.  A single repository of all bid documents equally available to every bidder so everyone has exactly the same information – guaranteed.

 

online bidding audit trail2.  A complete and detailed audit trail of exactly who saw what and when that eliminates the potential for errors or omissions in recording and tracking the distribution of information to bidders.

 

online bidding form validation3.  Detailed bid forms that cannot be submitted unless the bidder has completed all the mandatory elements of the bid eliminating incomplete bids that have to be declared non-compliant.

 

online bidding countdown clock4.  A single reverse countdown clock that displays exactly the same time to every bidder coupled with an automated closing that ensures no bids can be submitted after the specified closing time eliminates any question related to whether a bid was received on time.

 

online bidding less paper5.  Using an online process makes it easy for all bidders to complete the bid form without the added risk and pressure of having to deliver the physical copy to the closing location. It also eliminates the need to separately receive and reconcile faxed amendments eliminating the potential for incomplete or late bids.


After 35 years in the industry I know better than to suggest that online bidding is the panacea for all the ills of the competitive bidding process but all that experience does help me conclude that it is much fairer than most of the paper based process in place today.

Topics: Online bidding, Electronic document management, Risk management, Construction bidding

How to reduce the risk of errors and legal action in your construction bidding process

Posted by Dave Robertson on Mar 3, 2011 8:44:00 AM

The traditional paper based process of receiving bids from contractors for construction projects has proven itself fertile ground for claims and litigation. The people responsible for managing the bidding process attempt to eliminate the potential for problems by using strict protocols and processes. Why then are there still so many claims, delays and lawsuits that arise from this phase of a project? I suggest it is the complexity and manual nature of the process that creates the risk of problems. If we examine how to deal with some of the common issues that arise, a clear and obvious solution emerges.


Eliminate delays and gaps in the flow of information

All bidders need to be treated the same with no preference or advantage given to any of them. Having one easily accessible common source for all project documents and information that is equally accessible by all bidders eliminates the potential for errors or omissions in distributing them. Complaints like “I did not receive that Addendum” are eliminated.

 

Eliminate the fax from your amendment process

Allowing bids to be amended via fax has become a common practice. Physical problems like jammed paper feeds, delayed transmissions, busy signals, wrong numbers often result in late or incomplete bids. The ideal bid submission is one that contains all the required information in the prescribed format with no amendment required. This also eliminates the potential for errors or omissions arising from the need to receive the amendments, record the time received, match the correct amendment with the correct bid and then perform the calculations required to incorporate them.

 

Eliminate the ability of bidders to miss mandatory requirements    

Non-compliant bids are a constant source of challenges. It may be that a relatively minor (or major for that matter) clerical error by a bidder of a mandatory requirement could be the cause of rejection for what would otherwise have been a competitive bid. Lawyers have spent countless hours drafting clauses that provide an owner with discretion in the errors or omissions that they choose to overlook or declare insignificant. That hasn’t stopped bidders and the courts from looking deeper into the issue of fundamental fairness of process resulting in expensive legal action and in many cases expensive conclusions.

 

Eliminate the potential for errors in tracking bidder activity

It is essential to accurately know who received what information and when it was received. Tracking and recording this information completely and accurately relies on the diligence of the persons managing the bidding process. In the event of a claim or legal action this information has to be produced to prove that no errors or omissions were made.

 

Eliminate the need to synchronize clocks

The bid closing time is a critical milestone in the bidding process. Many legal actions have arisen to dispute various aspects of when a bid call actually closes. Language like “up to”, “at”, “on or before” a specified time are used to describe the same thing which is the instant in time that the bids must be received by. Whose clock is used to determine the time? What if the clock used has the incorrect time? All fodder for the courts. The ideal situation is one where the bidders and the bid recipient are all working off of the exact same clock with the exact same understanding of when the closing time is.

 

Eliminate the separation of the bond submission from the bid submission

In an attempt to create a more efficient process some owners permit the bid to be submitted separately from the bid bond. This creates an administrative requirement on the part of the bid recipient to accurately record the reception of both documents and then match them appropriately to the bid. In circumstances where the bond is misplaced, received via fax or is received late there is the ever present risk of legal action or other problems. The bond and the bid should always be received as one submission.

 

Eliminate manual transposition of bid results

Evaluating and comparing bids requires some form of organization or tabulation. Doing this manually introduces the risk of errors or omissions in the transposition of the bid results which can cause expensive evaluation errors or create the risk of legal action. Automatically receiving the results in a fully tabulated format eliminates the problem and makes it easy to provide bidders with the results of the process.

 

A quick search of the court records in virtually any jurisdiction will reveal the extent to which problems and legal action arise from competitive bidding practices. Even the most skilled and diligent administrators can end up dealing with issues that are not of their making. There is a new option available for bid administrators that addresses every one of the issues discussed here. It is the advent of our online bid submission technology specifically designed for the procurement of construction services. Using this technology provides these benefits:

  • online bidding risk managementOne easily accessible common source for all project documents and information that is equally accessible by all bidders
  • All bids submitted contain all the required information in the prescribed format with no amendment required.
  • No ability for bidders to submit non-compliant bids arising from incomplete submissions
  • An automated audit trail that automatically records all relevant activities relating to the bid documents and the bid submission
  • The bidders and the bid recipient are all working off of the exact same clock with the exact same understanding of when the closing time is
  • The bond and the bid are always received as one submission.
  • All bid results are automatically received in the identical format and the results are available individually or in an automatically tabulated format

Making use of this new technology eliminates many of the challenges inherent in the bidding process for construction services while reducing the risk of errors and legal action.

Topics: Online bidding, Electronic document management, Risk management, Construction bidding

How much does it cost to take your bidding systems online?

Posted by Dave Robertson on Oct 21, 2010 9:47:00 AM

Well ... how long is a string? Of course a real answer to this takes a lot more specifics about what systems and how you want to organize them. This is a question I am asked often and I can for the most part confidently say, “it won’t cost anything, in fact you will save money overall.”

The activities I am referring to in this case as bidding systems include; maintaining an accurate list of trade contractors and suppliers, issuing invitations to bid, distributing bidding documents, distributing addenda, quantity takeoff, tracking bid coverage and receiving and tabulating bids from contractors and suppliers. The current transition that is underway from doing much of these activities using paper based systems to digital systems is well underway. The result is a need for an effective way to perform these activities using digital systems that support the old paper based requirements when needed. If your online solution can achieve this then you are well positioned to experience some significant efficiencies.

cost of online biddingSo ... back to the question. How much? In the case of our company I can say that the expense line will range from zero to a few dollars per month per user of the system depending upon the features that you require. It is essentially volume based and you only pay for what you use. The part of the equation we rarely see addressed is what the value of the efficiencies is. How much would it have cost to print and distribute paper? What is the value of the time savings from being more efficient? What higher value work could be done by the personnel who used to manage processes that are now automated? What is the potential cost of claims, delays and other problems that arise after the fact if your systems don’t properly track who had access to what information and when?

The obvious moral of the story here is that the answer is only possible to determine if you have already done the work to determine the existing cost of the potential time, expense and risk avoidance. Our experience is that few people have done this and actually have a clear understanding of what it really costs to do all these activities. Do your firm a favour and give this some thought.

Topics: Construction documents, Online bidding, Electronic document management, On screen takeoff, Risk management, Construction bidding, Saving money, Saving time, Online submittal

IPad’s on the Construction Site

Posted by Dave Robertson on Oct 14, 2010 8:35:00 AM

I have been watching with interest an ongoing conversation with a group of construction professionals about the utility of the new iPad device for the construction site. It’s safe to say that of the 120 or so posts so far the reviews are all over the map. The hawkers of technology and software that can run on the iPad are extolling the virtues. The onsite personnel like Superintendants seem to think it belongs 6 inches deep in their next concrete pour. The majority are in the middle recognizing that there are some benefits but that it will be some time yet before it is a commonplace tool.

The applications talked about provide access to project documents, RFI’s, shop drawings, change orders, punch lists and any number of other pieces of information and forms that are used onsite. Other than its physical size and undeniably cool interface what is the difference between this device and a laptop (ruggedized or otherwise). Not much. A laptop is slightly more difficult to pack around, but really who has a laptop on their person at all times when on the site?

If you are considering using online technology to improve access to information on site the device is a secondary consideration. There are several key factors to consider before picking a device:

  • ipad constructionDoes the software application you intend to use actually make your process better? Is it faster; more reliable than paper; does it automate routine but important activities; does it create an audit trail or some other form of log that can help reduce or eliminate claims? Why are you going digital in the first place?
  • If you are using it to access documents online, will it actually work? Are the documents properly prepared for the internet or are the file sizes so large that they will take forever to download? Would it be better to carry them on the hard drive of your laptop or on a DVD instead? Does the technology help ensure only the latest versions of documents are available? Are they organized well enough that you can easily find what you need?
  • Is it likely that your onsite personnel will carry a mobile device with them and find it easier to work with and use than paper? If it is a schedule, punch list, change order or other document can it practically be viewed on a small device?
  • If you actually need or want paper copies can you print them or order them to be printed?

If you know the application has merit then it is time to think about the right device. It will need reliable and fast internet connectivity; it will need lots of memory; it will need to be rugged enough to be on site in all weather conditions. You should be able to print from it. The device is of limited use if it can only be used in the site office.

Not to be misunderstood here, I am a big advocate of using online technologies to create efficiencies for the construction industry. There are many processes and activities that can be dramatically improved by going online. The key is the process has to be better. Introducing technology in the office or on the site is a waste of time and money unless there is an identifiable benefit. There are clear and definable benefits in the office environment but I am not convinced that the job site is quite ready for the iPad. It’s time will come no doubt, just not yet.

Topics: Construction documents, Electronic document management, On screen takeoff, Risk management, Online tools, Software management, Construction industry