Why Delivery Method Matters in Public Procurement

When government agencies plan capital projects, choosing the right delivery method is essential to balancing cost, schedule, quality, and accountability. Two of the most common construction delivery methods for government construction are Design-Build and Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR).

This guide provides a side-by-side comparison to help public sector decision-makers and AEC professionals understand how each method works—and how to choose the right one.

What Is Design-Build?

Design-Build is a project delivery method where a single entity handles both design and construction under one contract. It offers streamlined communication and faster delivery timelines.

How the Design-Build Process Works

• The owner issues an RFP for a design-builder.
• The selected team manages all phases from schematic design through construction.
• Design and construction activities can overlap to reduce time.

Roles and Responsibilities

• Owner: Oversees the contract and ensures the project meets public goals.
• Design-Builder: A single contract holder responsible for all aspects of project delivery.

Learn more about Design-Build from DBIA

What Is CMAR (Construction Manager at Risk)?

Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) is a delivery method where the owner contracts separately with the architect and the construction manager. The CM provides preconstruction services and later assumes the risk for delivering the project within a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP).

How the CMAR Process Works

• Owner hires a design firm and a CM early in design.
• CM offers constructability reviews, cost estimating, and scheduling support.
• CM provides a GMP and manages construction risk after design is finalized.

Roles and Responsibilities

• Owner: Maintains contracts with both design and construction teams.
• Architect: Focuses exclusively on design.
• CM at Risk: Acts as an advisor during design and a contractor during construction.

Read CMAA’s Guide to CMAR Projects

Key Factors to Consider When Choosing a Delivery Method

1. Project Complexity

Use CMAR for projects requiring complex phasing, stakeholder engagement, or deep technical coordination—such as courthouses or public safety buildings.
Design-Build works well for standard facility types with repeatable requirements.

2. Budget Control

Design-Build can offer value-engineering opportunities and reduced change orders.
CMAR provides transparent pricing with owner involvement before GMP is finalized.

3. Schedule Sensitivity

Need to fast-track construction? Design-Build is often the faster path.
For projects where programming and stakeholder input are still evolving, CMAR offers more design flexibility.

4. Stakeholder Involvement

CMAR allows detailed coordination with user groups throughout the design phase.
Design-Build limits this somewhat to preserve schedule and cost goals.

5. Regulatory Environment

Always check your state and local procurement rules—some jurisdictions limit which delivery methods can be used.

Example: Texas Government Code Chapter 2269 outlines allowed procurement types.

Practical Guidance for Design-Build vs CMAR for Government Construction

Whether you’re building a new police station, upgrading public infrastructure, or launching a courthouse expansion, choosing the right delivery method can set your project up for success.

Questions to ask before deciding:

• Do we have in-house staff to manage multiple contracts?
• Is our schedule more important than full design control?
• How important is early cost certainty?
• Are we prepared for collaborative design sessions?
• What are our jurisdiction’s procurement limitations?

Looking for examples of successfully delivered government projects? Explore our project portfolio for case studies and past experience.

Further Resources on Public Procurement and Construction Delivery

• Design-Build Institute of America (DBIA)
• Construction Management Association of America (CMAA)
• U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Procurement Guidance
• GSA Construction Acquisition Guide

Design-Build vs CMAR for Government Construction: Making the Right Choice

Both Design-Build and CMAR offer viable paths for government construction delivery—but their effectiveness depends on your agency’s goals, resources, and regulatory environment. Don’t default to what’s been done before. Align your delivery method with your project priorities.

• If you need an integrated team to move fast, Design-Build may be the answer.
• If you need collaborative preconstruction input and flexibility, CMAR could be a better fit.

Need help evaluating your delivery method? Contact Prime Architects to discuss how our team supports public owners through every phase of design and construction.