Critically evaluate the main differences between JCT and NEC3 standard forms of contracts.

 

Civil Engineering contract administration

Description

Assessment Description

Your work must be structured in the following way:

A cover page, setting out a title of your work and including your SID number

References in ARU Harvard format.

Project Scenario

Anglia Ruskin University (ARU) is to build a new School of Medicine on its Chelmsford campus. The £20 million project has been in development since 2014 and awaiting approval from the General Medical Council and the allocation of places from the Government for opening by September 2023.

The Essex-based medical school is a significant development in the region and is viewed by stakeholders as part of the solution to the ongoing issues faced by the region.

ARU has worked closely with a broad range of partners across the regional health economy in planning the School.

The proposed project will include the construction of state-of-the-art skills facilities, specialist teaching space, lecture theatre, and a cadaveric anatomy suite.

ARU being a public body procures its major projects through the SCAPE Procure, a national framework designed to achieve measurable time, quality, cost and community benefits on every public sector project.

Both SCAPE and ARU are reasonably familiar with both NEC3 and JCT Contracts and are confident of being able to prepare their own tender document, but would like you to develop a contract strategy that ensures timely completion of the project, minimise confrontations and provide best return on the investment.

Develop a contract strategy for the project, and based on it write a short report to advise ARU on the most suitable procurement system and form of contract for the project.

Tasks

The report should not exceed 1500 words, and has to:

Develop a contract strategy which include procurement plan, a flow diagram mapping the tendering process, a schedule of tender documents to be supplied to interested bidders and tender evaluation criteria to be used.

Critically analyse procurement routes to justify selection of the most suitable procurement for the project.

Critically evaluate the main differences between JCT and NEC3 standard forms of contracts.

Draw succinct but clear conclusions that justify recommendations for the contract strategy that ensures timely completion of the project, minimized confrontations and best return on the investment to ARU

Credit will be given for argument supported by reference to relevant clauses from the Conditions of Contract. Credit will not be given for copying out clauses from the Conditions of Contract without evidence that you understand their relevance to the problem under consideration.

While some parts of the contract strategy could benefit from using table and illustrative figures, justifications need to be clearly discussed and supported by compelling evidence from research and practice. Excessive use of bullet points may affect the flow of your arguments thereby affecting the quality of the report.

Marking scheme, criteria or rubric

Marks are awarded as follows:

Fully developed contract strategy (30%)

Analysed and justified recommendations for procurement routes (20%)

Critical evaluation and comparison of JCT and NEC contract and their suitability for the project (20%)

Conclusion [Clearly drawn conclusions that justify the recommendations for the contract strategy] (20%)

Presentation [clear structure, logical flow and compliance with ARU Harvard referencing] (10%)

Last Completed Projects