For its Waterford, Conn., Cancer Center, a comprehensive treatment facility affiliated with Dana-Farber Community Cancer Care, Lawrence + Memorial Hospital decided to try something new: true three-party Integrated Project Delivery.
The contractual agreement covered L+M, architecture/engineering firm TRO JB, and construction manager Suffolk Construction, with programming, design, and construction all informed by Lean principles.
To further extend the collaborative theme, this three-party project management team invited three trade partners to participate in an incentive compensation layer, involving a pool consisting of at-risk potential profits.
TRO JB, Suffolk, and three handpicked HVAC/plumbing, electrical, and site work subs would participate in the ICL. If the project came in over budget or exceeded the schedule, the ICL profit pool would be tapped to pay the penalties. If the facility came in under budget or ahead of schedule, the ICL group would get the profit pool plus 50% of the savings, with the hospital pocketing the remaining savings.
Bronze Award
Project SummaryLawrence + Memorial Hospital Cancer Center
Waterford, Conn.BUILDING TEAM
Submitting firm: Suffolk Construction (GC/CM)
Owner/developer: Lawrence + Memorial Hospital
Architect, MEP/FP: TRO JB
Structural: Simpson Gumpertz & Heger
Civil: DiCesare-Bentley EngineersGENERAL INFORMATION
Project size: 47,000 sf
Construction cost: $24 million (IPD contract value $34.5 million)
Construction period: May 2012 to September 2013
Delivery method: Tri-party integrated project delivery
Early collaboration on the design, schedule, budget, and quality goals was a must for making the plan work. Using 3P (Production Preparation Process) Lean design and pull planning tools, the Building Team was able to make key decisions efficiently. Input from about 70 Cancer Center stakeholders—including administration, medical staff, support staff, patient advocates, and partners from Dana-Farber—was solicited in an intense three-day 3P charrette, which resulted in schematic draft floor plans.
Only minor changes were needed after this point, testifying to the effectiveness of the event. (The most significant contract alteration, requested by L+M as a value-added item, was a geothermal well field system that will pay for itself in just a few years.)
A co-location center set up in two of L+M’s hospital conference rooms was made available to the Building Team for the duration of the project. This home base proved crucial to ensuring efficient communication and also provided a convenient setting for stakeholder evaluation of mockups.
As a result of the collaborative efforts, the overall project schedule was reduced by six months, and the facility came in $1.2 million under budget. Actual construction was completed in only 10 months, meeting a “stretch goal” previously set by the client. Streamlined front-end decisions played an important role, including an RFI process that was 80% shorter than the client had previously experienced.
Building Team Awards judges were impressed with the participants’ ability to weigh wants and needs and craft a facility that achieved ambitious goals. The client has engaged Suffolk and TRO JB for a second IPD contract, this time to renovate a three-story medical office building. As with healthcare itself, new ideas about delivery are proving indispensable to positive outcomes.
Related Stories
| Jul 22, 2013
School officials and parents are asking one question: Can design prevent another Sandy Hook? [2013 Giants 300 Report]
The second deadliest mass shooting by a single person in U.S. history galvanizes school officials, parents, public officials, and police departments, as they scrambled to figure out how to prevent a similar incident in their communities.
| Jul 22, 2013
Competitive pressures push academia to improve residences, classrooms, rec centers [2013 Giants 300 Report]
College and university construction continues to suffer from strained government spending and stingy commercial credit.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top K-12 School Sector Construction Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
Gilbane, Balfour Beatty, Turner top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest K-12 school sector contractors and construction management firms in the U.S.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top K-12 School Sector Engineering Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
AECOM, URS, STV top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest K-12 school sector engineering and engineering/architecture firms in the U.S.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top K-12 School Sector Architecture Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
DLR, SHW top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest K-12 school sector architecture and architecture/engineering firms in the U.S.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top University Sector Construction Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
Whiting-Turner, Turner, Skanska top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest university sector contractors and construction management firms.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top University Sector Engineering Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
Affiliated Engineers, URS, AECOM top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest university sector engineering and engineering/architecture firms in the U.S.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top University Sector Architecture Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
Cannon, Perkins+Will, Stantec top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest university sector architecture and architecture/engineering firms in the U.S.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top Office Sector Construction Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
Turner, Structure Tone, PCL top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest office sector contractors and construction management firms in the U.S.
| Jul 22, 2013
Top Office Sector Engineering Firms [2013 Giants 300 Report]
AECOM, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Jacobs top Building Design+Construction's 2013 ranking of the largest office sector engineering and engineering/architecture firms in the U.S.