FTA Logo
Skip Navigation

Last Updated: January 30, 2007

Site Map | Web Accessibility | FAQs | United We Ride | Contact Us
About FTA
News & Events
Planning & Environment
Grants & Financing
Legislation, Regulations & Guidance
Research, Technical Assistance & Training
Civil Rights & Accessibility
Reports & Publications
Safety & Security
Regional Offices Regional Map of United States
Click on the Region to view each page.
You are here:Home |Grants & Financing |Third Party Procurement |Frequently Asked Questions: Third Party Procurement | CM At-Risk

CM At-Risk



Q. A local agency has an RFP out for a CM At-risk Project, which is very similar to a design-build project in that it requires a team composed of an AE and General contractor. The RFP caps the overhead rate at 2.4. Is that legal under FTA circular 4220.1E? Please refer to the following web site under RFPs, page 16 of the General Provisions defines the Cap. http://www.mta.net/projects_plans/exposition/default.htm.

A. At this time the Federal Government (GSA, FTA, etc.) does not treat CM At-Risk procurements as A-E (Brooks Act) procurements. The current policy is to treat this kind of contract as one for construction (or, if you prefer, as Design-Build where the preponderance of the work is construction, not A-E services). Thus the Federal approach is to use a negotiated competitive RFP (pursuant to FAR Part 15) with price proposals from the CM At-Risk offerors. This being true, there doesn't appear to be a problem with the overhead cap, as there would be if this were an A-E procurement.



Submit a Question or Suggestion/Issue
Submit a Technical Issue on this page
Home | Related Links | FOIA | DOT.gov | WhiteHouse.gov | USA.gov | OIG Hotline | Regulations.gov | FTA Web Policies | Privacy Policy | No FEAR
Adobe Acrobat Reader | MS Word Viewer | MS Excel Viewer | MS PowerPoint Viewer
Region I Region II Region III Region IV Region V Region VII Region VI Region VIII Region IX Region X Region X Region IX LMRO