CHAPTER 4.

SELECTION OF THE CIVIL ENGINEER

The selection of a civil engineer is an important decision to be made for an engineering project to
come to fruition.
4.1 BASIS FOR SELECTION
Basic questions that a client needs to be answered when selecting the most appropriate civil
engineer are:
1. How is this civil engineer’s reputation? How has the engineer dealt with its previous
clients?
2. Is the civil engineer duly registered?
3. What is the civil engineer’s field of expertise?
4. How about its staff? Are they able to provide my needs given the size of their group?
5. Can the civil engineer finish the project with its financial capability and resources?
The questions above are mostly applicable to projects of the private sector. For government
projects, E.O. 164 and PD 1594 (to be discussed in the future) apply to procurement of consulting
services and selection of contractor.
4.2 QUALIFICATION-BASED SELECTION (QBS) PROCEDURE
Below are the steps that the client should undertake when selecting the civil engineer.
1. By invitation or by public notice, state the general nature of the project, the services
required, and request statements of qualifications and experience from civil engineers who
appear to be capable of meeting the project requirements. The client may issue a Request
for Qualifications (RFQ) or Request for Proposals (RFP). RFQs – if you are looking for
an engineer well versed in a certain area of expertise; RFPs – if you are looking for a civil
engineer with a good project proposal.
2. Prepare a budget for the staff time and costs that can be expected from potential civil
engineer prior to receipt of the RFQs and RFPs.
3. Evaluate the statements of qualifications received. Select at least three civil engineers or
firms that may appear to be best qualified for the specific project.
4. Write a letter to each civil engineer describing the proposed project in detail, including a
project scope and outline of services required, and asking for a proposal describing in detail
the civil engineer’s plan for managing and performing the required services, the personnel
to be assigned, the proposed schedule, experience with similar projects, office location in
which services are to be performed, financial standing, present workload, and references.
Each civil engineer or firm should have an opportunity to visit the site, review all pertinent
data and obtain clarification of any items as required.
5. On receipt of proposals, invite the civil engineers or firms to meet individually with the
selection committee for interviews and discussions of the desired end results of the project
and the engineering services required.
6. Check with recent clients of each civil engineer or firm to determine the quality of their
performance. This check need not be limited to references listed by the civil engineer.
 7. List the civil engineer or firms in order of preference, taking into account their approach
and understanding of the project, reputation, experience, financial standing, size, personnel
available, quality of references, workload, location, and other factors pertinent to the
project being considered.
8. Invite the civil engineer considered to be best qualified to develop a detailed scope. List of
deliverables and schedule, and to negotiate fair compensation for the services.
9. The compensation proposed by the civil engineer should be evaluated on the basis of the
client’s experience and budget estimate, taking into account the range of charges reported;
giving consideration to the project’s special characteristics and the scope of services agreed
upon. Fair and reasonable compensation to the civil engineer is vital to the success of the
project since it will enable the consultant’s expertise to be fully utilized.
10. If satisfactory agreement is not reached with the first civil engineer, the negotiations should
be terminated and the civil engineer or firm be notified in writing to that effect. Similar
negotiations should then be held with the second civil engineers or firm, and, if necessary,
with the third civil engineers or firm. If no accord is reached, the client should seek outside
assistance before continuing with the selection process. Such a procedure will usually result
in development of a satisfactory contract. All such negotiations should be on a strictly
confidential basis, and in no case should the compensation discussed with one civil
engineer be disclosed to another.
11. When agreement has been reached on scope, schedule, and compensation, the client and
selected civil engineer should formalize their agreement in a written contract.
4.3 SELECTION PROCEDURE FOR “LEVEL OF EFFORT” CONTRACTS
A “level of effort” type of contract for engineering services is a contract procedure used to
supplement a client staff, either by providing an extension to existing disciplines and capabilities
already on board or by adding special disciplines not available on the client’s staff.
As applied to “level of effort” contracts, the QBS procedure sets forth the general nature of services
to be rendered, the types of specialists required and the estimated number of hours required during
the contract period for each type and grade of specialist and then requests proposals from qualified
firms. Proposals usually state the experience of the firm as it pertains to the given scope of services,
and the backgrounds of the specialists available to work on the project. After narrowing the
proposals to those which best meet the experience qualifications, the client negotiates an
agreement as described in paragraphs 9-11 above.
Bidding
Professional engineering and architectural societies recognize QBS as the preferred method for
procurement of professional services. In fact, the NEDA guidelines require the procurement of
professional engineering and architectural services only by a process similar to that described in
QBS above.
Selection of civil engineers and related service professionals, including consultants and sub
consultants on construction projects, should result from competition based on the qualifications
and resources best suited to complete a project successfully in terms of performance quality and
cost-effectiveness. Qualifications and resources, including training, professional licensing
experience, skills, capabilities, special expertise personnel, and workloads, are paramount
considerations in engaging engineering services. Costs of these services, while important and
meriting careful negotiations and performance accountability, are a small portion of overall project
costs and should be subordinate to professional qualifications and experience.
There are many reasons why bidding for consulting civil engineering services often produces
unsatisfactory results for the client. Principal among these are:
1. Bidding does not recognize professional judgment, which is the key difference between
professional services and the furnishing of products. Judgment is an essential ingredient in
quality engineering services.
2. It is virtually impossible to completely detail in advance the scope of services required for
an engineering project especially for the study and preliminary phases without lengthy
discussions and negotiations with the selected firm. Lacking specifics, the bidding firms
must submit a price for the least effort envisioned. The resulting service performed is likely
to be tailored to fit the minimal requirements of the bid documents and will not necessarily
suit the client’s needs or expectations.
3. In-depth studies and analyses by the consulting civil engineer are not likely to be
performed. The consulting civil engineer selected by lowest bid will often provide only the
minimum services necessary to satisfy the client’s scope of services.
4. The consulting civil engineer’s ability to be flexible and creative in meeting the client’s
requirements is severely limited.
5. The engineering designs are likely to be minimal in completeness with the details left to
the contractor. This produces a lower first cost design but tends to add to the cost of the
completed project. The lack of design details can also lead to a greater number of change
orders during construction and to contractor claims at a later date.
Two-Envelope System
The two-envelope system involves submission of a technical proposal in one envelope and a price
proposal in a second envelope. The client then evaluates the technical proposals and selects the
best qualified civil engineer based on that consulting civil engineer’s technical proposal. At this
point in the selection procedure, the client opens the price proposal submitted in the second
envelope and uses this as a basis for negotiation of contractual scope and fees. The second
envelopes submitted by the unsuccessful proposers are returned unopened.
If the client follows this procedure, the net effect is outlined it QBS provided that the client and
best qualified consulting civil engineer have extensive discussions to reach full agreement on the
scope of services. This allows the client to utilize the knowledge and experience of the consulting
civil engineer in establishing the scope of services. Upon agreement of scope, the price of services
should be negotiated to reflect changes from the original scope used for obtaining proposals.
If both envelopes of all proposers are opened at the same time, a bidding process is initiated with
attendant disadvantages. Procedures should be established to provide confirmation that the second
envelope is opened for only the successful proposal.
The two-envelope system is not recommended. If used as intended, it is similar to the
recommended QBS procedure except that the added cost to prepare a comprehensive scope and
price discourages some consulting civil engineers from participating. The costs to prepare a proper
price proposal are considerable to the firms not selected, which increases the overall business costs
of consulting civil engineering and ultimately of the clients.