CEF for Large Projects

Instructional Guide V2.1

September 2009

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Department of Homeland Security
500 C Street, SW
Washington, DC 20472
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS...............................................................................................................iv

SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................1-1
1.1 Federal Assistance for Disaster Damage ............................................... 1-1
1.2 The Cost Estimating Format ................................................................. 1-2
1.3 Eligible Work and Cost ........................................................................ 1-3
1.4 Applicability and Limitations ............................................................... 1-4
1.5 Credentials of CEF Users ..................................................................... 1-5
1.6 Updates to the CEF............................................................................... 1-5
SECTION TWO THE COST ESTIMATING FORMAT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS.............................2-1
2.1 Step 1 – Qualify Projects for the CEF ................................................... 2-1
2.2 Step 2 – Identify Disaster-Specific Factors and Unit Cost Data............. 2-3
2.3 Step 3 – Determine the Eligible Scope of Work .................................... 2-5
2.4 Step 4 – Complete the CEF Spreadsheet ............................................... 2-5
2.5 Step 5 – Complete the Project Worksheet ............................................. 2-6
2.6 Step 6 – Reconcile Costs When Project Is Completed........................... 2-6
2.7 Step 7 – CEF Project Reporting ............................................................ 2-7
2.8 Summary of PA Group Supervisor and Project Specialist
Responsibilities .................................................................................... 2-8
SECTION THREE COMPLETING THE CEF SPREADSHEET ..................................................................3-1
3.1 CEF Fact Sheet..................................................................................... 3-1
3.2 CEF Notes............................................................................................ 3-3
3.3 Part A – Base Costs for Construction Work In Trades .......................... 3-3
3.4 Summary for Uncompleted Work ......................................................... 3-3
3.5 Summary for Completed Work............................................................. 3-3
3.6 Total Project Summary ......................................................................... 3-4
SECTION FOUR PART A: “BASE COSTS” FOR CONSTRUCTION WORK IN TRADES ...................4-1
4.1 Background .......................................................................................... 4-1
4.2 Part A Spreadsheet ............................................................................... 4-1
4.3 Scope of Work...................................................................................... 4-1
4.4 Organization of “Base Costs” ............................................................... 4-2
4.5 Repair vs. Replacement ........................................................................ 4-4
4.6 Hazard Mitigation................................................................................. 4-5
4.7 Force Account Work ............................................................................ 4-6
4.8 A.1: Estimate for Permanent Work ...................................................... 4-6
4.9 A.2: Estimate for Non-Permanent, Job-Specific Work ......................... 4-8
4.10 Methods for Preparing the “Base Cost” Estimate .................................. 4-8
SECTION FIVE PART B: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND GENERAL CONDITIONS...................5-1
5.1 B.1: General Requirements................................................................... 5-1
5.2 B.2: General Conditions ...................................................................... 5-2
SECTION SIX PART C: CONSTRUCTION COST CONTINGENCIES/UNCERTAINTIES
(DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION) ................................................................................6-1
6.1 C.1: Standard Design Phase/Scope Definition Contingencies............... 6-1
6.2 C.2: Facility or Project Constructability ............................................... 6-2

September 2009 i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
6.3 C.3: Access, Storage, and Staging Contingencies................................. 6-3
6.4 C.4: Economies of Scale...................................................................... 6-4
SECTION SEVEN PART D: GENERAL CONTRACTOR’S OVERHEAD AND PROFIT..........................7-1
7.1 D.1: General Contractor’s Home Office Overhead Costs ..................... 7-1
7.2 D.2: General Contractor’s Insurance, Payment, and Performance
Bonds ................................................................................................... 7-1
7.3 D.3: Contractor’s Profit ....................................................................... 7-1
SECTION EIGHT PART E: COST ESCALATION ALLOWANCE ............................................................8-1
SECTION NINE PART F: PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT COSTS ..........................9-1
9.1 F.1: Plan Review Fees ......................................................................... 9-1
9.2 F.2: Construction Permit Fees.............................................................. 9-1
SECTION TEN PART G: APPLICANT’S RESERVE FOR CONSTRUCTION ...................................10-1
SECTION ELEVEN PART H: APPLICANT’S PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN COSTS .........11-1
11.1 H.1: Applicant’s Project Management – Design Phase........................11-1
11.2 H.2: A&E Design Contract Costs........................................................11-1
11.3 H.3: Project Management – Construction Phase..................................11-3

Figures
Figure 1: Development and Processing of a CEF Estimate ..................................................... 2-1

Tables
Table A.1: CSI Divisions ....................................................................................................... 4-3
Table A.2: ADA Compliance Allowance for Category E Facilities......................................... 4-7
Table C.2: Constructability Factors ........................................................................................ 6-3
Table C.4: Economies of Scale............................................................................................... 6-4
Table D.3: General Contractor’s Profit ................................................................................... 7-2
Table E.1: Estimated Design and Construction Times Based on Project Cost ......................... 8-3
Table G.1: Applicant’s Reserve for Construction.................................................................. 10-1
Table H.3: Project Management – Construction Phase.......................................................... 11-3

Appendices
Appendix A CEF Spreadsheet V2.1
Appendix B Examples of Completed CEF Spreadsheets
Example 1 Category C – Roads and Bridges – Simmonds Arch Bridge
Example 2 Category F – Utilities – River Park Elevated Water Tank
Example 3 Category E – Buildings and Equipment – Planning Commission Office –
Repair vs. Replacement Analysis
Appendix C CEF – Large Project Report
Appendix D Hazard Mitigation Measures for Large Projects

September 2009 ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Appendix E Standard Operating Procedure – CEF for Large Projects
Appendix F Guidelines for Selecting Values CEF Parts B through H
Appendix G Checklists – PA Group Supervisor, Project Specialist, and Part A
G.1 – PA Group Supervisor Checklist for CEF Implementation
G.2 – Project Specialist Checklist for CEF Implementation
G.3 – Part A Checklist for CEF Implementation – Eligible Scope of Work

September 2009 iii

 Acronyms and Abbreviations

A&E Architect and Engineering

ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
BCI Building Cost Index
CCI Construction Cost Index
CEF Cost Estimating Format
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CSI Construction Specifications Institute
DOT Department of Transportation
ENR Engineering News Record
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
JFO Joint Field Office
PA Public Assistance
PAC Public Assistance Coordination
PW Project Worksheet

September 2009 iv
 Introduction

SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION

1.1 FEDERAL ASSISTANCE FOR DISASTER DAMAGE

The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (PL 93-288, as amended)
authorizes the Federal government to assist State and local governments with recovery from
disasters. In accordance with this legislation, which is referred to as the Stafford Act, State and
local governments may receive financial assistance to restore disaster-damaged public facilities
and other infrastructure components. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), in
partnership with State governments, is responsible for managing the provision of this assistance
under the Public Assistance (PA) Program.
Through the PA Program, FEMA pays the Federal share of the cost of repair, restoration, or
replacement of a facility as it existed prior to the disaster. The estimate of this cost is determined
by a team of Federal and State technical specialists working in cooperation with a representative
of the State or local government entity applying for the assistance (the applicant).
The applicant and Public Assistance Coordination (PAC) Crew Leader work together to develop
a complete scope of work and cost estimate for each project. These projects are documented on
a Project Worksheet (PW), which is the basis for PA Program funding
For large projects1, this estimate is used to determine the initial Federal obligation of funds for
the work, but it is not necessarily the final cost that will be approved for the project. Rather, the
final cost is based upon the reasonable, actual costs incurred by the applicant in completing the
eligible scope of work. Actual costs are determined through a reconciliation process initiated by
the State when the work is complete. Discrepancies between the initial estimate and the final
cost are addressed through the obligation (or de-obligation) of Federal funds.
The Federal-State team typically prepares the initial construction estimate using the best
available unit cost data for the elements of the facility. These unit costs (also referred to as
construction costs) represent the itemized breakdown of construction work activities for
completing the project. The unit costs usually do not include project design and management
costs, contractor overhead and profit, fees, cost escalation due to inflation, and other factors
affecting the overall cost of the project. These costs (also referred to as non-construction costs)
are addressed through the reconciliation process once the project is complete. While the
applicant may eventually receive reimbursement for these costs, the final amount of the grant is
unknown at the time of construction. Further, the grant is subject to review during the
reconciliation process, and the outcome of this review can affect the amount. To provide the
applicant with a better representation of actual costs at the beginning of the assistance process,
FEMA developed the Cost Estimating Format (CEF).
This Instructional Guide describes the CEF process and how it fits into the PA Program. This
guide also describes each of the factors that make up the CEF, how the factors are to be applied
to the base construction cost estimate, and how to use the CEF spreadsheet in the estimate

1
The Stafford Act provides for separate grant processes for small and large projects and set the minimum threshold
for large projects at $35,000 when it was passed in 1988. FEMA adjusts this amount at the beginning of each
Federal fiscal year to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. For Federal Fiscal
Year 2009 (ending September 30, 2009), the large project threshold has been set at $64,200.
September 2009 1-1
 Introduction

calculation. The teams using the CEF will be comprised of engineers, architects, and other
construction professionals who have managed key engineering projects or have extensive
experience in the construction industry, and who have experience in developing parametric or
conceptual estimates without the benefit of complete project documents.

1.2 THE COST ESTIMATING FORMAT

The concept of the CEF was first developed for use at the Northridge Long-Term Recovery Area
Office in Pasadena, CA. Repair and replacement costs for facilities damaged during the 1994
Northridge earthquake were estimated using a version of the CEF and final grant offers were
made to applicants on the basis of those estimates. A revised version has since been developed
for all types of infrastructure damage in all types of disasters. This version has been tested
against data from large project closeouts and has undergone a peer review by an independent
group of industry experts who evaluated the methodology, substantiated component factors, and
recommended improvements necessary to apply the CEF nationally.
The CEF provides a worksheet, called Part A, that allows the user to estimate the base
construction costs. The user then applies a series of factors (Parts B through H) that represent
potential additional eligible project costs, including general contractor and applicant costs
potentially not captured in the base construction costs. These costs can reasonably be expected
to be incurred because they are construction-related costs usually encountered during the course
of a project. Parts B through H are applied to the Part A base construction costs to estimate the
total cost of completing the project. This “forward-pricing” methodology provides an estimate
of the total eligible funding at the beginning of the project. This estimate, which is used to
obligate the funds for the project, allows the applicant to more accurately manage the budget
with a greater degree of confidence.
The CEF provides a more uniform method of estimating costs for large projects. While the CEF
accounts for costs incurred across the entire spectrum of eligible work (from design to project
completion), it is not a final cost settlement instrument. Eligible costs will be reimbursed on the
basis of actual expenses incurred by the applicant; that is, approved grant funds will be
reconciled against actual costs after project completion and the grant amount adjusted
accordingly. The cost reconciliation process is described in Section 2.6.
The factors of the CEF, which are described in greater detail later in this guide, are listed below.
• Part A is the estimated sum of construction costs required to directly complete the
eligible scope of work, referred to in this guide as the base cost.
• Part B includes construction costs for work that facilitates execution of the eligible work,
but are not typically itemized in Part A. Part B includes such costs as the general
contractor’s field supervision costs and job site costs, including temporary services and
utilities, safety and security measures, and quality control and administrative submittals.
• Part C reflects construction estimate uncertainties and is designed to address budgetary
risks associated with project unknowns and complexities in determining the scope of
work. Part C factors are determined on the basis of the amount of design work completed
at the time the estimate is prepared, the complexity of the project, and the degree of
difficulty for site access, storage, and staging.

September 2009 1-2

 Introduction

• Part D accounts for the contractor’s home office overhead, insurance, bonds, and profit.
These costs are typically not used for projects completed using the applicant’s labor,
equipment, and materials (referred to as “force account” work).
• Part E accounts for cost escalation over the duration of the project and is based upon an
inflation adjustment from the time the estimate is prepared until the mid-point of
construction for the eligible scope of work.
• Part F includes fees for building permits, plan checks, and special reviews.
• Part G is the applicant’s reserve for potential change orders related to eligible work and
differing site conditions.
• Part H accounts for the applicant’s cost to manage the design and construction of the
project. These costs are not part of the statutory administrative cost allowance provided
to the applicant to manage the overall recovery effort. The administrative allowance,
which is authorized by the Stafford Act and is intended to defray the cost of requesting,
obtaining, and administering Federal assistance, does not account for project management
costs.
These factors are described in detail in subsequent sections of this guide and were developed
using guidance available from the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) and the RSMeans
Company. The factors were verified using data from closed-out grants for large projects
nationwide. The CEF spreadsheet (in Microsoft Excel format) is used to apply the factors in
Parts B through H, to the Part A estimate. An electronic copy of the CEF spreadsheet is
available from the FEMA Web site (www.FEMA.gov).
Typically, an applicant (the owner or party responsible for repairs) utilizes a general contractor
and a number of subcontractors to complete a large construction project in a competitively bid
environment. The structure of the CEF mirrors the applicant-general contractor-subcontractor
relationship for eligible work in that:
• Part A costs are representative of the construction efforts required to directly and
specifically complete the defined eligible work. Typically, Part A represents the trade or
subcontractor(s) costs.
• Parts B, C, D, and E represent the general contractor or equivalent costs; they can be
considered as components of “as-bid” costs and represent the costs of completing the
work.
• Parts F, G, and H represent the applicant’s non-construction project costs, including
preparation of design or contract documents, plan review and permit fees, cost escalation,
and managing project design and construction.

1.3 ELIGIBLE WORK AND COST

Grants administered under the PA Program must comply with the provisions of the Stafford Act.
Application of these provisions is described in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR) Part 206, as amended. These regulations define the types of facilities, work, and costs
that are eligible for reimbursement under the PA Program. When a large project estimate is

September 2009 1-3

 Introduction

developed, the base cost (Part A) must include only that work which is eligible under these
regulations.
PA grants must also comply with 44 CFR Part 13, which defines procedures for grant
administration by the State and provides specific guidance on allowable costs. The factors
included in the CEF represent only those non-construction costs that are allowable under Part 13.
The factors also represent costs that an applicant can reasonably expect to incur during
construction. Excessive mark-ups for possible contingencies are not allowable under the
provisions of Part 13.

1.4 APPLICABILITY AND LIMITATIONS

In general, to qualify for CEF consideration, a project must be:
• A large project (according to the FEMA threshold for the applicable fiscal year)
• Permanent restorative work (Categories C – G)
• Less than 90 percent complete (pre-punch list and contractor retaining stage)
Actual eligible costs should be used for large projects that are more than 90 percent complete at
the time of facility inspection.
The CEF is intended for use on projects that are eligible under the Stafford Act, Federal
regulations, and FEMA policy. It may be used for all types of disasters and all types of facilities,
including:
• Transportation facilities, including roadways, bridges, and tunnels
• Water control facilities, such as irrigation and drainage systems
• Buildings and similar structures, including warehouses, garages, offices, schools,
libraries, municipal buildings, museums, research facilities, laboratories, and hospitals
• Utilities, such as water treatment, wastewater treatment, and power generation facilities,
including the associated transmission, distribution, and collection systems
• Special facilities such as railroads, ports, marinas, and airports
The CEF should not be used for small projects, or for emergency work, such as large-scale debris
removal operations (whether a small or a large project).
The results obtained with the CEF are only as accurate as the data that are input into the CEF
spreadsheet. The base cost (Part A) is critical to the accuracy of the results. The Federal-State-
local team must ensure that Part A is complete, accurate, and based on sound engineering and
estimating judgment. This is especially important when considering situations in which damage
or necessary repairs may not be immediately evident. The CEF is not designed to account for the
failure of the team to develop an adequate base construction cost estimate as outlined in this
Instructional Guide. The results are also dependent on the appropriate selection of the factors in
Parts B through H. These factors must not be applied in an arbitrary manner, and must be
correlated specifically with the design and construction activities as they are to be executed.

September 2009 1-4

 Introduction

1.5 CREDENTIALS OF CEF USERS

Given that the success of the CEF system is predicated upon the development of an accurate
scope of work in Part A and selection of the appropriate factors in Parts B through H, the
professional experience of the user is an important consideration. Members of the CEF team
should be engineers, architects, and other construction professionals with experience in design,
construction, and parametric and conceptual cost estimating. A complex infrastructure project
may require a more experienced engineer or architect with specialized experience in the
functional area of the damaged facility. Team members should have:
• Experience as a fully competent engineer/architect in all conventional aspects of the
subject matter of the functional area of the assignment
• The ability to plan and conduct work requiring judgment in the independent evaluation,
selection and modification of standard techniques, procedures, and criteria
• The ability to devise new approaches to problems encountered
• Successfully completed FEMA PA Project Specialist training

1.6 UPDATES TO THE CEF

The CEF will be periodically reviewed and updated as data on the completion of large projects is
gathered. These updates will occur on an as-needed basis. Comments and suggestions should be
sent to:
Anthony Ndum, P.E.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Center Plaza
500 “C” Street, S.W. – Room 414
Washington, D.C. 20472
Additionally, the PA Group Supervisor for each disaster is responsible for reporting on the
performance of the CEF. Reporting procedures are described in Section 2.7 of this guide.

September 2009 1-5

 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

SECTION TWO THE COST ESTIMATING FORMAT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS

The CEF is used as part of the large project formulation process. A FEMA representative, the
Project Specialist, is responsible for developing large projects in partnership with State and local
representatives. The CEF is used to develop the cost estimate for the project and the estimate is
then used as the basis for obligating funds.

Figure 1: Development and Processing of a CEF Estimate

2.1 STEP 1 – QUALIFY PROJECTS FOR THE CEF

As stated previously, the CEF should only be used on large projects for which the permanent
restorative work is less than 90 percent complete. Percent complete for all types of projects
(including improved and alternate projects) is calculated by dividing the amount of approved
contractor invoices for eligible work by the approved construction contract amount for eligible
work and multiplying the resulting decimal by 100.

September 2009 2-1

 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

The issues described below may also affect the manner in which the CEF is applied.
Hazard Mitigation Proposals: The Project Specialist may include an appropriate hazard
mitigation proposal when developing a large project estimate. To be approved, such a proposal
must comply with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements and with all FEMA policies.
If FEMA approves the proposal, the base cost (Part A) must include the cost of the hazard
mitigation measures. After approved mitigation measures have been included in the base cost,
the estimate is completed applying CEF factors as applicable. See Section 4.5 of this
Instructional Guide for additional information of FEMA’s policy on hazard mitigation and how
to incorporate hazard mitigation as a type of work into the CEF estimate.
For Improved Projects involving a replacement facility, at the same or new site, Section 406
(Stafford Act) hazard mitigation work items will not be eligible and therefore are excluded from
consideration in the CEF, and the PW.
For Alternate Projects, Section 406 hazard mitigation work items will not be eligible and
therefore are excluded from consideration in the CEF, and the PW.
Improved Projects: When performing permanent restoration work on a damaged facility, an
applicant may decide to use the opportunity to make improvements to the facility while still
restoring the facility to its pre-disaster function and capacity. For the most part, these are
projects for which the funding for the improvements cannot be separated from the costs for the
original repair work.
Improvements beyond restoring a facility to pre-disaster function and capacity are not eligible;
therefore, these costs will not be included in the estimated base cost.
The base cost will only reflect the work associated with the eligible disaster-related repair or
replacement. The CEF will be used to calculate the final estimate, and the Federal share of this
estimate will be forwarded to the State for disbursement through the progress payment system.
The funds are limited to the Federal share of the costs that would be associated with repairing or
replacing the damaged facility to its pre-disaster design, or to the actual costs of completing the
improved project, whichever is less. Any expenditure in excess of this amount are borne by the
applicant, as the work actually accomplished on the project will normally be quite different from
the work described on the PW. The State is responsible for ensuring project compliance with
Federal regulations.
Alternate Projects: An applicant may determine that the public welfare would not be best
served by restoring a damaged facility or its function. In this event, the applicant may use the
PA grant for that facility for other eligible purposes. The alternate project may only include
eligible work and costs to restore the damaged facility to its pre-disaster design.
The CEF will be used to calculate the final estimate. Ninety percent of the Federal share of the
final estimate will be forwarded to the State for disbursement through the progress payment
system. As with alternate projects that do not involve the CEF, the funds are capped at 90
percent of the approved Federal share of the estimated eligible costs associated with repairing the
damaged facility to its pre-disaster design, or 90 percent of the Federal share of actual costs of
completing the alternate project, whichever is less.

September 2009 2-2

 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

Replacement Projects (50 Percent Rule): A facility is eligible for replacement when the cost
of repairing the facility exceeds 50 percent of the replacement cost. This comparison must be
based on the following:
• The cost of repair is that which is necessary to repair disaster-damaged components using
current methods and materials. The repair costs include non-emergency mold
remediation associated with the damaged components and the codes and standards
upgrades that apply to the repair of the damaged components. This cost does not include
upgrades of other components triggered by codes and standards, design associated with
upgrades, demolition of the entire facility, site work, or applicable project management
costs, even though such costs may be eligible for PA. The cost of contents and hazard
mitigation measures is not included in the repair cost.
• The replacement cost includes the costs for all work necessary to provide a new facility
of the same size or design capacity and function as the damaged facility in accordance
with all current applicable codes and standards. The cost does not include demolition,
site work, applicable project management costs, cost of contents, and hazard mitigation
measures.
Both the repair and replacement costs should be calculated for comparison using Part A of the
CEF. If the resultant ratio of repair to replacement is greater than 50 percent, the replacement of
the facility is eligible. The final estimate is equal to the total cost associated with the eligible
work, including items not used in the 50 percent analysis (e.g., eligible codes and standards
upgrades, demolition of existing facility for replacements, etc.) using CEF Parts B through H as
applicable.
Refer to the PA Guide, FEMA 322, and the PA Policy Digest, FEMA 321, for additional
information regarding the 50 Percent Rule and the eligibility of codes and standards for
restoration work.

2.2 STEP 2 – IDENTIFY DISASTER-SPECIFIC FACTORS AND UNIT COST DATA

Local factors affect the development of project cost estimates. Specific items include local unit
prices, city cost indices (if applicable), escalation to the mid-point of construction, and local
costs for plan checks, building permits, or special reviews. The PA Group Supervisor or
designee is responsible for collecting and evaluating this information at the beginning of each
disaster and making the information available to the Project and Technical Specialists. The
Project and Technical Specialists are responsible for applying the factors in a uniform manner for
all CEF analyses.
Unit Cost Data: When evaluating a project, the Project or Technical Specialist should request
average weighted unit prices (local costs derived from actual contract history) from the applicant,
or from a relevant State or regional agency, for example, the State Department of Transportation
(DOT). The average weighted unit price information should be evaluated for consistency with
the eligible scope of work.
If the applicant does not have appropriate average weighted unit price data (meaning that the
data does not apply to the eligible scope of work), the Project or Technical Specialist should use
the most current available cost data in accordance with industry standard construction cost

September 2009 2-3

 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

estimating resources, (e.g., RSMeans, BNi Costboooks, Marshall & Swift, Sweet’s Unit Cost
Guide, etc.). Care should be taken in selecting the appropriate cost data reference for the work.
• Major infrastructure repair and construction projects, such as roads, railroads, bridges,
and water control facilities, should be estimated using heavy construction cost data
guidance.
• Building and structural work expected to exceed $1,000,000, such as that necessary for
schools, hospitals, and municipal buildings, should be estimated using building
construction cost data guidance.
• Building and structural work expected to be less than $1,000,000 should be estimated
using facilities construction cost data guidance.
The following cost data references should be available in the Joint Field Office (JFO) for use by
the Project or Technical Specialists:
• ADA2 Compliance Pricing Guide • Mechanical
• Building Construction • Plumbing
• Concrete & Masonry • Repair and Remodeling
• Electrical • Site Work and Landscape
• Facilities • Square Foot Costs
• Heavy Construction

If national cost data is used in Part A, city cost indices for each CSI division of work must be
applied to adjust the national unit prices to the nearest city for the declared counties. The PA
Group Supervisor or designee is responsible for identifying the zip codes included in the
declared area, researching references for the appropriate city cost indices, and tabulating them
for use by Project or Technical Specialists.
If the estimate is developed using an electronic estimating tool, the estimate can be developed
with the unit costs set for the applicable city. This automatically adjusts the unit cost data to the
specified location and the CEF City Adjustment Factor must be entered as 1.0.
Only if the previously mentioned sources are unavailable should FEMA Cost Codes, or other
commercial cost-data estimating resources, be used for unit prices in preparing Part A base costs.
Only unit costs from sources outlined in this Instructional Guide are acceptable data for
developing estimates using the CEF. Use of other unit price data is prohibited without written
authorization of the PA Group Supervisor or his/her designee.
Factors: The PA Group Supervisor or designee is responsible for checking the appropriateness
of individual factors and ranges (Parts B through H), and for application of these factors. This is
especially important with regard to force account efforts, use of contingencies, time frames for
escalation, post-disaster inflation adjustments in Part A, and the need for engineering design and
construction phase services. Guidance on generally appropriate conditions to use the factors and
values of factors to use is provided in Appendix F.

2
Americans with Disabilities Act
September 2009 2-4
 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

The type of damage experienced will dictate the need for, and relative ranges of many of the
factors. For example, visual identification of damage may be less difficult after a flood once
floodwaters have receded than after a severe earthquake. The PA Group Supervisor may decide
that the contingency factors in Part C should therefore be higher than recommended in the CEF
for an earthquake. The PA Group Supervisor or his/her designee will be responsible for
justifying in writing any changes to the factors, if changes are warranted.
Plan Review and Construction Permit Costs: The PA Group Supervisor or designee is
responsible for obtaining documentation related to plan review and construction permit costs and
for distributing this documentation to the Project or Technical Specialists. These costs will be
determined directly from the controlling jurisdictions in the declared counties. Typical sources
include the City Building Department or the Office of the State Architect. Important
considerations are listed below.
• How is the plan review or construction permit cost defined?
• What cost item (construction cost or total project cost) serves as the basis for calculation
of plan review and construction permit costs?
• What percentage(s) is applied to the base cost?
• Are these percentages on a sliding scale?
• Are these fees ever waived by the State or local jurisdiction in post-disaster situations?

2.3 STEP 3 – DETERMINE THE ELIGIBLE SCOPE OF WORK

The Project or Technical Specialist is responsible for identifying the eligible scope of work in
accordance with the requirements of the Stafford Act, Federal regulations, and FEMA policies.
All work activities needed to perform the eligible scope of work must be individually listed, as
described below in the discussion of preparing the base cost estimate. The scope should also
reflect all applicable special considerations, such as historic preservation, environmental and
floodplain management issues, insurance considerations, and approved Section 406 hazard
mitigation measures. Reference the Project Specialist Checklist for CEF Implementation
included in Appendix G.

2.4 STEP 4 – COMPLETE THE CEF SPREADSHEET

The Project or Technical Specialist is responsible for completing and documenting the CEF
Spreadsheet. The spreadsheet is described in greater detail in Section 3.
When preparing the CEF estimate, the Project or Technical Specialist must obtain the
appropriate supporting documentation. This documentation may include:
• A site map or location plan
• Photographs and sketches
• Measurements and calculations
• Section 406 hazard mitigation proposals
• Force account summary sheets
September 2009 2-5
 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

• Documentation that applies to applicable codes and standards

• Schematic drawings and, for major construction activities such as water control facilities
and large buildings, a set of plans (preferably reduced) containing basic information such
as elevations, floor plans, a site plan, structural details, and sections
• Insurance declarations
• Actual/anticipated insurance settlements
• Construction permits/clearances
Source documents such as invoices, vouchers, timesheets, purchase orders, item slips, weight
slips, plans, specifications, and insurance policy information reside with the applicant and need
not be collected by the Project or Technical Specialist.

2.5 STEP 5 – COMPLETE THE PROJECT WORKSHEET

Once the Project or Technical Specialist has developed an estimate using the CEF Spreadsheet,
he or she must complete a PW using that estimate. A printout of the CEF Spreadsheet should be
attached to the PW, along with all supporting documentation. The Project or Technical
Specialist should work with the PAC Crew Leader to ensure that the case management file is
updated to reflect the completion of the estimate and that the PW package is submitted for
approval, processing, and storage in accordance with procedures established for that disaster.
Many projects, particularly buildings, to which the CEF is applied, are insurable. The Project
Specialist, working with the applicant and the PAC Crew Leader, must identify insurable
facilities and ensure that the appropriate actions are taken to account for actual or anticipated
proceeds from an insurance settlement. If a facility is insurable, an Insurance Specialist will be
responsible for determining the amount for which the grant for that facility should be reduced.
The amount of actual or anticipated insurance proceeds should be a line item deduction on the
PW. The total cost is given in the “Total Cost” block of the PW. Further instructions on
completing the PW can be found in Appendix E. Salvage value or depreciation for equipment
should also be deducted from the PW.

2.6 STEP 6 – RECONCILE COSTS WHEN PROJECT IS COMPLETED

The CEF estimate shown on the PW will be used to obligate the Federal share of project costs.
This does not mean, however, that these funds are immediately available to the State (the
grantee) or to the applicant (the subgrantee). As stated above, the CEF is used to provide an
estimate only; it is not used as a final cost settlement instrument. For large projects, funds are
made available to the subgrantee on a progress payment basis. The subgrantee may request
progress payments for bills already in hand or for funds anticipated to cover project costs in the
near future (less than a week). The grantee may draw from the Federal government only the
Federal share of the payment in making progress payments. The regulations for grant
administration (44 CFR Part 13) provide that payments may be made in advance of actual
expenditure if recipients demonstrate the willingness and ability to maintain procedures to
minimize the time elapsing between the transfer of funds and their disbursement by the grantee
to the subgrantee. Department of Treasury regulations (31 CFR Part 205) govern these

September 2009 2-6

 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

procedures. The general guidelines are to allow no more than 3 to 4 days between the transfer of
funds to the grantee’s account and disbursement to the subgrantee.
Upon completion of a large project, the grantee must submit supporting documentation and an
accounting of all eligible costs incurred for the project to FEMA for a final determination of
eligible project costs. The grantee must certify that the reported costs were incurred in the
performance of eligible work and that the project was completed in accordance with FEMA
approval. The grantee may perform inspections and audits as it deems necessary to make this
certification. FEMA will review the reported costs to determine if the costs are eligible, and may
conduct inspections or audits as necessary to verify eligible costs. Upon completing this review,
FEMA will reconcile final costs for eligible work against the original estimate and prepare a
supplemental PW to adjust the approved amount upward or downward as necessary. If
additional funds are approved by FEMA, the grantee may then make an additional drawdown of
any funds remaining for that project.
Within 90 days following completion of the last large project, the grantee must submit a final
progress report that includes the final amount paid for each large project. If FEMA determines
that the grantee has drawn Federal funds for ineligible costs, then the grantee must return those
funds to FEMA.
Refer to Appendix E (Standard Operating Procedure – CEF for Large Projects) for additional
information relating to the cost reconciliation process.

2.7 STEP 7 – CEF PROJECT REPORTING

The CEF will be revised periodically, as data from actual projects become available. To
facilitate revisions, a standard report, called the CEF – Large Project Report, has been developed
to collect these data. The report is a Word spreadsheet that is distributed with the electronic CEF
template.
For each disaster, the PA Group Supervisor or designee will prepare the report using, as
appropriate, the following information:
• Disaster number and name of the PA Group Supervisor preparing the report
• Declaration date and the date prepared
• Applicant name
• PA ID number
• PW number
• Category of permanent work (C, D, E, F or G)
• CEF estimated cost
• CEF actual post-construction cost
• Dollar amount of obligation or de-obligation
• Reason for cost reconciliation
• Primary function of the facility

September 2009 2-7

 The Cost Estimating Format Development Process

A sample copy of the report has been included in Appendix C, and an electronic copy has been
included with this guide. The PA Group Supervisor should submit the report to the address
included in Appendix G, PA Group Supervisor Checklist for CEF Implementation.

2.8 SUMMARY OF PA GROUP SUPERVISOR AND PROJECT SPECIALIST

RESPONSIBILITIES
The respective responsibilities of the PA Group Supervisor and Project Specialist throughout the
CEF process are outlined in Appendix G.

September 2009 2-8

 Completing the CEF Spreadsheet

SECTION THREE COMPLETING THE CEF SPREADSHEET

The CEF Spreadsheet has been organized to make it user-friendly and flexible enough to respond
to individual project conditions and to promote uniformity in the development of cost estimates.
While many projects are simple to analyze, others will need to be analyzed by level of
completion and type of work activity being conducted. Therefore, the user can structure the
spreadsheet to address specific project characteristics by simply clicking on those parameters that
define the project.
The parts of the spreadsheet are separated onto individual tabs at the bottom of the spreadsheet.
They are:
• CEF Fact Sheet
• Part A – “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades
• Summary for Completed Work
• Summary for Uncompleted Work
• Total Project Summary
• CEF Notes
Each of these parts is described below. A printout of a blank electronic spreadsheet is given in
Appendix A for illustration purposes. Please refer to Appendix A.

3.1 CEF FACT SHEET

The CEF Fact Sheet is the first tab in the spreadsheet and should be completed first. Information
on the Fact Sheet automatically completes some information in other components of the CEF,
including the CEF Notes, Summary of Completed Work, and Summary of Uncompleted Work
sheets. It is designed to allow the user to document basic information about the project and the
estimate, including the date the CEF was prepared, the declaration number, the FEMA Region,
the applicant, the category of work, and the name and location of the facility. The user should
also provide a clear and concise description of the eligible scope of work.
The Fact Sheet also allows the user to customize the spreadsheet for the type of work being
performed and the level of project completion. This customization occurs automatically when
the user specifies the “Type of Work” on the Fact Sheet, and includes changes to the formatting
and labeling.
Type of Work: The Fact Sheet asks the user for the type(s) of work that must be performed.
Suggested types of work include:
• Repair work: activities that are solely allocated to restore a damaged facility to its pre-
disaster condition.
• Retrofit and upgrade: activities undertaken to upgrade a damaged item to current codes
and standards.
• New construction: the replacement of part or all of a facility, as opposed to repairing or
retrofitting discrete elements.

September 2009 3-1

 Completing the CEF Spreadsheet

• Hazard mitigation: measures taken to reduce or eliminate future damage from hazards
similar to that which caused the damage, or from multiple hazards.
• Other work: activities that are typically undertaken outside of the typical applicant-
general contractor-subcontractor relationship. Examples include hazardous material
abatement, selective demolition, and force account activities.
A project can consist of one type of work, or multiple types, depending upon how the restoration
activities match the requirements of the PA Program. Under certain circumstances the estimate
may use separate types of work to accurately apply cost factors to reflect the applicant-contractor
relationships, e.g., a trade contractor acting as the general contractor thus not requiring general
contractor mark-ups on his/her own work.
The user should select the work type(s) to be analyzed and enter it into the Fact Sheet. Once the
fact sheet is completed, a CEF Spreadsheet tailored specifically for this analysis is created. Each
“Type of Work” entered on the Fact Sheet populates a column title on the Summary of
Completed Work and Summary of Uncompleted Work sheets. To change the prepared format,
the user must return to the Fact Sheet and redefine the type of work.
Work Completion: Projects being analyzed will likely have completed and uncompleted work
elements. Since several of the CEF factors are based upon unknowns that result from the level of
completion, the spreadsheet is structured to analyze completed and uncompleted work
separately. Therefore, it is recommended that the user separate completed and uncompleted
work in Part A.
Mixing completed costs with estimated costs in mid-construction can lead to inaccurate
estimates, unless the completed work is a discrete, stand-alone portion of the project without the
potential for change orders. For example, cost inaccuracies can result by using unit costs
applicable to cast-in-place concrete in bridge abutments for concrete used for deck pavement.
Therefore, to be considered completed work, a project work element must be:
• A specific type of work (repair, retrofit, new construction, hazard mitigation, or other) for
which actual incurred costs documentation for eligible work can be easily obtained
• A discrete work activity (such as grading or laying foundations) that is complete and has
no potential for future change orders
In some cases, an applicant may have solicited bids for the project before the CEF is prepared.
The lowest qualified bid amount obtained through a competitive bid process can be accepted for
purposes of developing an estimate, as long as the bid conforms substantially to the eligible
scope of work, the qualified bidder has been given the notice to proceed, and a cost analysis has
been conducted to evaluate the reasonableness of the bid as required in 44 CFR Part 13. The
application of the CEF to document the reasonableness of bid costs in such cases is described in
Section 4.10 of this Instructional Guide.
Preparers’ Notes: The purpose of the Scope/Prepares Notes section is to document the basis of
the CEF estimate. The CEF user should use this section to document, as a minimum:
• A clear, concise description of the project, including a summary of the eligible scope of
work

September 2009 3-2

 Completing the CEF Spreadsheet

• The status of the project at the time of the estimate, i.e., percent of design and/or
construction complete
• The anticipated project delivery method, i.e., design-bid-build, force account, etc.
• The source of unit cost data

3.2 CEF NOTES

The CEF Notes sheet provides the user with a place to document the logic, assumptions, and
reasoning for the selection of each factor. To ensure proper documentation, the user must enter
notes for each work type and must indicate the value chosen for each factor and the rationale for
the choice. The sheet also contains an area for miscellaneous comments and notes.

3.3 PART A – BASE COSTS FOR CONSTRUCTION WORK IN TRADES

Part A of the CEF Spreadsheet is designed to capture the detailed construction cost required to
directly complete the eligible scope of work. Estimates are defined using the Cost Item Number,
Item Description Title or Component Description, and Division or Cost Code columns. The total
estimated cost for each work activity is a product of the quantity, unit price, and city adjustment
index.

3.4 SUMMARY FOR UNCOMPLETED WORK

Using the Summary for Uncompleted Work, the user selects factors to be applied to the base cost
estimate of uncompleted work. Refer to Sections 4 through 11 of the Instructional Guide for a
description of each factor and guidance on selecting factors. The user employs either check
boxes or specific values to apply each factor or sub-factor in the spreadsheet. Check boxes are
used when the factor is fixed (such as with B.2, the factor for General Conditions) or is
calculated by the spreadsheet automatically (such as with H.1, the factor for Applicant’s Project
Management – Design Phase). The default value for each factor is 0, i.e., the factors are
unselected when opening a new CEF. The user must elect to apply factors appropriate to the
eligible work, the conditions under which the work will be performed as documented at the time
of the estimate, and the source of unit cost data.
Guidance on selecting factors in Parts B through H is provided below. The components of each
factor are described and a recommended range for each factor is provided. All assumptions
made by the user and rationale for selecting values, particularly values outside of recommended
ranges, should be documented in the CEF Notes section of the spreadsheet. Selection of values
outside the recommended ranges will be based on guidance provided by the PA Group
Supervisor and shall be included in the supporting documentation for the project.

3.5 SUMMARY FOR COMPLETED WORK

Using the Summary for Completed Work, the user selects factors that are applied to the base cost
estimate for completed work. Factors in Parts B through H are applied using check boxes or by
selecting specific values in the same manner as described for Summary of Uncompleted Work.

September 2009 3-3

 Completing the CEF Spreadsheet

Care must be exercised in determining the applicability of Parts B through H if Part A is based
on actual costs for completed work.

3.6 TOTAL PROJECT SUMMARY

The Total Project Summary merges estimated costs for completed and uncompleted work into a
single estimate for the entire project. This estimate is used in the preparation of the PW.

September 2009 3-4

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

SECTION FOUR PART A: “BASE COSTS” FOR CONSTRUCTION WORK IN

TRADES

4.1 BACKGROUND
Part A contains the “base costs” for the project. It includes costs for all eligible permanent and
non-permanent trade work required to directly complete the eligible scope of work. These costs
represent the “complete and in-place” cost components, i.e., the cost of all labor, equipment,
materials, small tools, incidentals, and hauling costs necessary to complete an item of work.
Each of these components, as they apply to permanent and non-permanent work, is discussed
below. As stated above, the preparation of a precise base cost estimate in Part A is critical to the
accuracy of the total project estimate developed with the CEF.

4.2 PART A SPREADSHEET

Part A can be formulated to meet the specific requirements of a particular estimate. The user
may add rows to the spreadsheet to accommodate additional items of work as necessary.
Rows may be added by left clicking the “Add Row” button on the appropriate Part A subsection:
• Completed Permanent Items
• Completed Non-Permanent Items
• Uncompleted Permanent Items
• Uncompleted Non-Permanent Item
Rows added using the “Add Row” feature are formatted to include the calculation for that rows
total cost.
Rows added in any other manner likely will not include the row total cost calculation. The user
should check to ensure that formulas have been properly copied after inserting rows in a manner
other than the “Add Row” feature.
The CEF is an official document of the Federal Government and may not be changed, altered or
amended without review and written concurrence of FEMA Headquarters. Therefore, no
changes to the format or functionality of Part A other than the addition of rows as described
above are to be made by a CEF User.

4.3 SCOPE OF WORK

Before Part A can be completed, the FEMA eligible scope of work must be clearly defined. This
scope is the work required to repair or replace the damaged facility on the basis of the design of
the facility as it existed immediately prior to the disaster. Regulations outlining PA eligibility
are found in 44 CFR Part 206. As previously described, the scope of work must include eligible
upgrades necessary to comply with current codes and standards and it must include any approved
hazard mitigation measures. The scope of work must not include ineligible work that would be
considered part of an improved or alternate project.

September 2009 4-1

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

The Project Specialist, in partnership with State and local representatives, develops the eligible
scope of work. The Project Specialist is also responsible for developing the CEF estimate and
must ensure that Part A does not contain ineligible work. The application of the CEF is the last
step in the large project formulation process; therefore, any eligibility conflicts involving scope
of work items must be resolved before the CEF is prepared.

4.4 ORGANIZATION OF “BASE COSTS”

44 CFR Part 206 requires a quantitative estimate for eligible work. To meet the requirements,
the user should list work items in Part A with as much detail as possible. The Part A spreadsheet
is organized to allow the user to:
• Differentiate between permanent and non-permanent work.
• Differentiate between completed and uncompleted work.
• Sort items by work type (repair, retrofit, new construction, hazard mitigation, and other
discrete work elements such as selective demolition and force account). The types of
work specified should match those selected when the user completes the CEF Fact Sheet.
Once the user has organized the line items using these categories, the line items within each
category should be further organized using standard CSI divisions.
• The 1995 CSI format consists of 16 divisions.
• The 2004 CSI format consists of 50 divisions, including 21 divisions held for future use.
• To avoid the cost of recreating construction documents into the 2004 CSI format,
especially for repair projects, applicants and designers frequently use prior model
documents written in the 1995 format.
• The 1995 and 2004 formats of the CSI divisions are shown in Table A.1.
Part A may be developed using either CSI MasterFormat 1995 or MasterFormat 2004. However,
the estimate must be competed using the same MasterFormat throughout.

September 2009 4-2

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

Table A.1: CSI Divisions

1995 Master Format 2004 Master Format
Division 1: General Division 1: General Division 24: Open for future
Requirements Requirements use
Division 2: Existing Division 25: Integrated
Division 2: Site Construction
Conditions Automation
Division 3: Concrete Division 3: Concrete Division 26: Electrical
Division 4: Masonry Division 4: Masonry Division 27: Communications
Division 28: Electronic Safety
Division 5: Metals Division 5: Metals
and Security
Division 6: Woods and Division 6: Woods, Plastics, Division 29–30: Open for
Plastics and Composites future use
Division 7: Thermal and Division 7: Thermal and
Division 31: Earthwork
Moisture Protection Moisture Protection
Division 8: Doors and Division 32: Exterior
Division 8: Openings
Windows Improvements
Division 9: Finishes Division 9: Finishes Division 33: Utilities
Division 10: Specialties Division 10: Specialties Division 34: Transportation
Division 35: Waterway and
Division 11: Equipment Division 11: Equipment
Marine Construction
Divisions 36–40: Open for
Division 12: Furnishings Division 12: Furnishings
future use.
Division 13: Special Division 13: Special Division 41: Material
Construction Construction Processing and Handling
Division 14: Conveying Division 14: Conveying Divisions 42–43: Open for
Systems Systems future use
Division 15–20: Open for Division 44: Pollution Control
Division 15: Mechanical
future use Equipment
Divisions 45–47: Open for
Division 16: Electrical Division 21: Fire Suppression
future use
Division 48: Electric Power
Division 22: Plumbing
Generation
Division 23: Heating,
Divisions 49–50: Open for
Ventilation and Air
future use
Conditioning

September 2009 4-3

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

All construction work activities must be itemized and quantified. As lump-sum construction cost
estimates do not meet the requirement for quantitative estimates, lump sums are not acceptable
for preparing the CEF estimate. If eligible unforeseen site conditions are present or eligible
hidden damage is discovered and the scope of work must be revised, unit costs lend themselves
to this task more readily than lump-sum items.
Using this system, a project may be broken into a series of separate sub-estimates for each major
item of work. This facilitates:
• Application of the city cost factors by CSI division
• Checking the estimate
• Analyzing the work to determine if alternative solutions exist
• Use of the estimate for policy determinations
• Future changes in scope without requiring that the estimate be recalculated
Once the user has developed estimates for completed and uncompleted work, the user must enter
these estimates in the Summaries of Completed Work and Uncompleted Work, respectively.
The estimates are entered in the appropriate fields under Part A on each summary sheet. The
distinction between permanent and non-permanent work must be maintained when completing
the summary sheets.
Examples of completed Part As can be found in Appendix B. Permanent and non-permanent
work is discussed in more detail in Sections 4.8 and 4.9.

4.5 REPAIR VS. REPLACEMENT

The determination of eligibility for a replacement facility shall include only those repairs,
including non-emergency mold remediation, associated with the damaged components, and
upgrades to meet current codes and standards that apply to the repair of the damaged
components. The cost does not include upgrades to other components triggered by codes and
standards, project design, demolition of the entire facility, site work, or project management
costs (even though these upgrade costs may be eligible for FEMA funding).
The following calculation, known as the “50 Percent Rule,” is used to determine whether
replacement is eligible:

Refer to the PA Guide, FEMA 322, and the PA Policy Digest, FEMA 321, for additional
information relating to the 50 Percent Rule and the eligibility of codes and standards for
restoration work.
In most cases, the criteria outlined in Table 2: Repair/Replacement in the PA Guide, FEMA 322,
June 2007, are adequate for repair and replacement projects. However, particular attention
should be paid to the repair of damaged historic buildings. Such repair could trigger a

September 2009 4-4

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

requirement to upgrade a structure to new construction standards, while at the same time
maintaining historic features. The total restoration cost, in this situation, may exceed
replacement cost, as in condition 3 found in the referenced Table 2, but the excess over the
replacement cost is not eligible.
The regulations [44 CFR 206.226(f)(3)] contain an exception to the funding limitation depicted
in the table that applies only when a facility is eligible for listing or is listed in the National
Register of Historic Places. If an applicable standard that requires a facility to be restored in a
certain manner and disallows other options, such as leaving the facility un-restored, the eligible
cost to complete the restoration may exceed the replacement cost.
The repair vs. replacement calculation is begun by completing two separate Part A base cost
estimates using the CEF (do not apply parts B through H). The user prepares one estimate for
each of the repair and replacement scenarios. The “Total Part A Base Construction Cost” from
the estimates is used in calculating the actual repair vs. replacement fraction. The two Part A
estimates can be completed using a single CEF to facilitate review of the repair vs. replacement
analysis. The resulting percentage determines whether the type of work will be repair or
replacement. Once the type of work has been selected for a project (i.e., either repair or
replacement), then the project is estimated using CEF in the standard manner (including adding
additional eligible costs in Part A and applying the appropriate B through H factors for the
project) as illustrated in Appendix B, Example 3.

4.6 HAZARD MITIGATION

Hazard Mitigation is defined as cost-effective action taken to prevent or reduce the threat of
future damage to a facility in 44 CFR 206.2. The mitigation measures must be appropriate to the
disaster damage and must prevent future damage similar to that caused by the declared event.
For hazard mitigation measures to be approved, the measures must be reviewed by FEMA staff
to ensure eligibility, technical feasibility, environmental and historic preservation compliance,
and cost effectiveness.
Mitigation measures must be determined to be cost effective. Any one of the following means
may be used to determine cost effectiveness:
• Mitigation measures may amount to up to 15 percent of the total eligible cost of the
eligible repair work for the damaged facility.
• Certain mitigation measures, see Appendix D, may be determined to be cost effective as
long as the mitigation measure does not exceed the cost of the eligible repair work on the
project.
• For measures that exceed the costs of eligible repair work, the subgrantee must
demonstrate through an acceptable benefit-cost analysis that the measure is cost effective.
Costs of meeting applicable codes and standards in accordance with 44 CFR 206.226 are distinct
from mitigation funding.
Section 404 hazard mitigation (statewide mitigation program) does not fall under the purview of
the PA Program. Therefore, the grantee and subgrantee must be able to identify specific hazard
mitigation work that will be accomplished with funding through Section 406.

September 2009 4-5

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

Costs approved for project-specific mitigation measures under Section 406 of the Stafford Act
may not be applied to improved projects that will involve the replacement of the disaster-
damaged facility, whether on the same site or an alternate site. However, funds recommended
for mitigation measures may be approved for an improved project, which will include the work
required to repair the disaster-damaged facility and restore its function, as well as improvements.
The cost caps (15 percent or 100 percent) for Section 406 hazard mitigation measures will be
based on the total cost of damage to: 1) the damaged element, and 2) the affected building
contents.

4.7 FORCE ACCOUNT WORK

As stated previously, the term “force account” refers to the applicant’s own resources, in terms
of labor, equipment, or materials. Not all of the CEF factors are applicable to force account
work.
• The profit and overhead factors represented by Part D should not be applied to force
account work.
In the absence of information regarding the method for completing the project, the Project
Specialist should prepare the CEF estimate as if the applicant plans to complete the project using
a contractor. The Project Specialist shall make every effort to determine how the applicant
intends to complete the work.
• For those instances in which the applicant has begun the work using force account
resources or expresses the intent to complete the work with force account resources, the
estimate should reflect this intent.
• If the project will be completed by a combination of contractual and force account
resources, the Project Specialist should prepare two separate Part A estimates—one for
the force account portion of work and one for the contract portion of the work—and
should apply the factors separately to each Part A as appropriate.
• Line-items may also be included for an applicant’s fringe benefit costs or productive
hourly rate.

4.8 A.1: ESTIMATE FOR PERMANENT WORK

“Permanent work” refers to those work items that are necessary to repair or replace damaged
elements of a facility, or that are part of the reconstruction of a facility. Typically, these items
relate to a fixed part of the facility and are left in place once the work is complete (for example:
installation of an asphalt surface, placement of riprap, patching and painting interior walls, or
repairing cracked water distribution lines). If appropriate, permanent work should be separated
into structural and non-structural elements to facilitate the application of FEMA policy,
particularly with regard to upgrades for codes and standards.
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance: Measures necessary for compliance
with applicable codes and standards regarding ADA requirements may be eligible. The increase
in design and construction costs associated with ADA compliance will vary considerably
according to the category, use, and location of the facility. If possible, ADA costs should be

September 2009 4-6

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

developed using a line item estimate in Part A. For example, highway and bridge work
undertaken by State DOTs typically include separate work items for ADA compliance, such as
wheelchair ramps and utility pole setbacks. Alternatively, set factors for specific cost items may
also be used. Reference should be made to nationally accepted or locally set standards for such
factors, such as the most recent ADA Compliance Pricing Guide.
For Category E buildings that sustain structural damage, ADA compliance costs are less site-
specific but are more easily quantified, and therefore less variable. If the damaged portion of the
building does not comply with ADA, and a detailed scope of work for completing ADA
upgrades is not available to be included in Part A, an allowance for ADA compliance can be
estimated using Table A.2. The ranges provided cover the inherent differences between less
complex facilities (warehouses, factories, garages) and facilities where ADA compliance could
be more costly (historic and monumental buildings). This allowance should be applied only on
the basis of the eligible structural damage to the facility. ADA allowances cannot be applied on
the basis of damage to non-structural elements or architectural finishes. The allowances given in
Table A.2 should be applied to buildings (Category E) with eligible structural damage only.
When using Table A.2 to select the ADA compliance factor, the user should consider the need
for ADA compliance based on local requirements, then the facility’s use and function. The user
should also compare the selected factor to other, similar projects undertaken by the applicant, if
the information is available.

Table A.2: ADA Compliance Allowance for Category E Facilities

Cost of ADA Compliance
Structural Repairs ($) Allowance (%)
0 to 82,000 20.00
82,000 to 100,000 12.5–19.8
100,000 to 125,000 8.5–19.5
125,000 to 150,000 5.8–19.00
150,000 to 175,000 5.0–18.5
175,000 to 200,000 5.0–18.0
200,000 to 225,000 4.8–17.5
225,000 to 250,000 4.8–16.5
250,000 to 275,000 4.7–15.0
275,000 to 300,000 4.7–12.5
300,000 to 500,000 4.7–11.5
500,000 to 1,000,000 4.6–10.5
1,000,000 to 2,500,000 4.6–9.8
2,500,000 to 10,000,000 4.6–5.5
Over 10,000,000 4.5–5.5

September 2009 4-7

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

4.9 A.2: ESTIMATE FOR NON-PERMANENT, JOB-SPECIFIC WORK

“Non-permanent work” includes job-specific work activities or equipment required to complete
the permanent work but is not left in-place at the completion of the construction. Examples
include:
• Construction aids such as safety nets, scaffolding, construction signs, lighting, and
personal safety equipment
• Major equipment such as cranes and other lifting or hoisting equipment
• Activities such as de-watering, temporary relocation of utilities, and the installation of
blasting pads, coffer dams, and temporary access roads
Non-permanent work items are included in CSI Division 1 (General Requirements). Unless such
work items are specifically required to execute the eligible work and can be quantified based on
a schedule analysis, they should not be specified as part of the permanent work (A.1) or duplicate
the job site factors covered in Part B.1.

4.10 METHODS FOR PREPARING THE “BASE COST” ESTIMATE

As described above, the Project Specialist should attempt to obtain average weighted unit prices
(local costs derived from actual contract history) from the applicant, or from a relevant State or
regional agency when preparing Part A. However, if appropriate local data cannot be developed,
industry standard construction cost estimating resources (e.g., RSMeans, BNi Costboooks,
Marshall & Swift, Sweet’s Unit Cost Guide, etc.) are the recommended source of cost data for
the CEF. These publications have been selected based on their wide acceptance in the industry
and the availability of data for nationwide use. The Project Specialist must ensure that the
current cost data publications are used in these cases.
Some cost estimating resources publish cost data for union and non-union activities. Typically,
large, publicly funded projects are completed with union labor. Therefore, union rates should
normally be used for estimating purposes, unless the Project Specialist can establish that non-
union labor will be used to complete the scope of work. The Project Specialist should document
use of non-union rates in the CEF Notes Sheet.
While industry standard construction cost estimating resources are recommended for use with the
CEF, these publications may not always provide work items that are appropriate or applicable to
the construction activities required to complete the project. There are numerous sources that
may be used in the preparation of cost estimates for large projects when it is determined that
industry standard cost data are not appropriate. Some additional sources are:
• Historical documentation and average costs for similar work in the area
• Published unit costs from national cost estimating databases
• Low bid or construction contract unit costs from prior projects
• Applicant force account labor, equipment, and material costs
• FEMA Cost Codes

September 2009 4-8

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

In all cases, the Project or Technical Specialist should ensure that the components of unit cost
data are fully understood. Each unit cost must represent a complete and in-place cost that
includes all labor, equipment, materials, small tools, incidentals, and hauling costs necessary to
complete the work. Unit costs should not include surveying and construction inspection costs.
The Project or Technical Specialist should understand cost elements that could potentially be
duplicated in Parts B through H, such as general contractor’s overhead and profit.
The unit costs in Part A should be “base costs,” that is, they should include the subcontractor’s
overhead and profit, but should not include general contractor overhead and profit. Factors for
general contractor overhead and profit are included in Part D.
• Cost estimating publications provide unit cost data with and without overhead and profit.
The overhead and profit included in the total unit price is for the installing trade or
subcontractor only and should be used for most projects.
• If a source other than industry standard construction cost estimating resources is used,
such as contract or bid unit costs, costs obtained from that source should be analyzed to
determine if general contractor overhead and profit are included in the unit cost.
• Overhead and profit are normally part of the unit price for an item of work within a
contract (if the contract was let in a bid environment), or as a separate line item in a
written quote (if obtained from the contractor in a non-bid environment). As previously
indicated, all contractor bid costs must be analyzed for reasonableness as required by
44 CFR Part 13.
• If a prime contractor and subcontractor relationship is anticipated during completion of
the work, then the Part A costs should include the subcontractor overhead and profit and
the Part D factor should also be included to cover general contractor overhead and profit.
• The prime contractor and subcontractor relationship is generally used for more complex
facilities in which prime contractors subcontract specialized work. In all cases, the
Federal-State-local team should verify the relationship before the Project Specialist
prepares the CEF.
Disaster conditions may cause shortages of skilled labor, building materials, and energy sources,
resulting in fluctuations in costs. When these conditions prevail, the available unit cost data may
not be accurate. The Project or Technical Specialist should identify and document such
conditions during large project formulation and adjust unit cost data before applying the CEF.
Any changes in standard cost data must be documented in writing and approved in writing by the
PA Group Supervisor or his/her designee.
The following paragraphs describe various scenarios that may be encountered when developing
costs in Part A. All assumptions or the basis for development of Part A must be recorded in the
CEF Notes Sheet.
a) Development of an estimate when no work has been completed by the applicant:
i. Define all work activities required to complete the work and determine the quantities and
units associated with each work item. As stated above, lump-sum work items should be
avoided.
ii. If the applicant intends to use force account labor, equipment, and materials to complete

September 2009 4-9

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

the project, these costs should be treated as contractual work and included in Part A. As
stated above, not all CEF factors are applicable to force account work. Home office
overhead and profit factors represented in Part D should not be included for force account
work.
iii. Using the appropriate cost data source, as recommended above, determine the unit cost
for each work item. List the item number, item description, cost code, quantity, and unit
price on the Part A worksheet. Care should be taken to avoid combining multiple
definable work items in a single loaded unit cost.
• A critical factor in developing cost estimates is the appropriateness of using
assembled (as opposed to non-assembled) costs. Using an assembled cost for work
activities that can be represented by a single unit of measurement is acceptable, as
long as the source of the assembled costs is valid.
• For example, some cost estimating publications provide assemblies cost tables for a
variety of construction components. These assembled cost tables have unique
identification numbers; illustrations, descriptions, and design criteria; listing of
system components, their quantities, and units of measure; derived assembly unit
costs for materials and installation; and total costs. If the eligible scope of work
deviates from the assumed condition upon which the assembly cost is based, the
estimate must be based on unit cost data. The assembly description can be used for
reference to ensure all components of work are included in the estimate.
• Assembled costs are most applicable for new or replacement type projects. On the
other hand, repair projects are typically characterized by a number of discrete
unrelated work activities (represented by different units of measurement); therefore,
assembly costs should not be used and a detailed line item cost estimate should be
prepared
iv. After itemizing each work item required to complete the project in Part A, apply the
appropriate city adjustment factor from the cost estimating publication to each line in Part
A. If local average weighted unit prices (local costs derived from actual contract history)
are used, the city cost adjustment must be entered as 1.0. Similarly, if cost estimating is
completed with cost data settings to the applicable local area, the city cost adjustment in
the CEF is 1.0.
v. Enter the totals for permanent and non-permanent work in the appropriate fields at the top
of the summary for uncompleted work.
b) Estimate based on an Architect and Engineering (A&E) report:
If an A&E report with a construction cost estimate for uncompleted work is available check
the reasonableness (44 CFR Part 13) of the estimate as follows:
i. Verify that all items of work included in the estimate are eligible.
ii. Check a minimum of six of the ten largest cost items against local average weighted unit
prices or industry standard construction cost data, (e.g., RSMeans, BNi Costboooks,
Marshall & Swift, Sweet’s Unit Cost Guide, etc.). Note that the largest cost items should
consist of systems (e.g., heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems) or subsystems
(e.g., plumbing piping or air distribution duct) and not individual components. The

September 2009 4-10

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

selected cost items must represent a minimum of 25 percent of the CSI Divisions
included in the eligible scope of work.
iii. Check a minimum of 25 percent of the remaining cost items against local average
weighted unit prices or industry standard construction cost data. The cost items should
consist of systems or subsystems representing an additional 25 percent of the CSI
Divisions included in the eligible scope of work.
iv. If the item costs checked in the A&E construction cost estimate are within 10 percent of
the local average weighted unit prices or industry standard construction cost data, use the
A&E construction cost estimate in Part A.
v. If the item costs checked in the A&E construction cost estimate are not within 10 percent
of the local average weighted unit prices or industry standard construction cost data,
assume the entire estimate is not comparable and develop a new Part A. Care should be
exercised to ensure that the scope of work used to develop the new Part A contains
eligible items only.
• All work items specified in the report must be listed in Part A and quantified; lump-
sum items may not be used. Each work activity should be reviewed to determine if
the estimate reflects costs that could be duplicated by factors in Parts B through H.
Examples include contingencies, which could be included in the quantities that would
be duplicated by Part C; overhead and profit that could be duplicated in Part D; and
escalation that could be duplicated in Part E.
vi. After completing Part A, enter totals in the appropriate fields at the top of the Summary
for Uncompleted Work.
c) Estimate based on a bid or construction contract:
If an appropriately procured construction contract or bid for uncompleted work is available, it
can be used in the CEF if a cost analysis concludes that the contract cost is reasonable
(44 CFR Part 13). The cost analysis must check the contract cost for eligibility,
reasonableness, and applicability.
i. Prepare an objective line item estimate of the work to compare it with the bid. This can
be done using the verification process explained in (b) (ii) and (b) (iii) above. If the bid
or construction contract is reasonable and the scope of work is eligible, use that value in
Part A.
ii. After completing Part A, enter totals in the appropriate fields at the top of the Summary
for Uncompleted Work.
iii. Identify those factors in Parts B through H that might already be included in the
construction contract bid amount. The contractor’s unit costs probably include part or all
of the contractor’s overhead and profit reflected in Part D, allowance for contingencies
reflected in Part C, and escalation reflected in Part E. These unit costs could even include
permit and plan review fees (Part F), and allowances for change orders (Part G).
Therefore, the CEF should be adjusted to reflect the inclusion of these factors in the
contractor’s unit costs as appropriate.
d) Developing an estimate when the applicant has partially completed the work:

September 2009 4-11

 Part A: “Base Costs” for Construction Work In Trades

Mixing actual costs with estimated costs in mid-construction can result in significant
inaccuracies, unless the completed work is a discrete, stand-alone portion of the project.
Complete the Part A spreadsheet as follows:
i. Separate completed and uncompleted work.
ii. If the applicant had an estimate prepared before the work was completed, compare the
actual costs against that estimate and reconcile any differences. Enter the result in Part
A, Summary for Completed Work.
iii. If no estimate exists, prepare a CEF Part A estimate of the eligible completed work
activity as outlined in the preceding paragraph c, and compare it against the actual costs
and reconcile any differences. Enter the result in Part A, Summary for Completed Work.
iv. Prepare a Part A estimate for uncompleted work as outlined in the preceding paragraphs
a) or b). Enter the result in Part A, Summary for Uncompleted Work.
v. Using the values that are most applicable to the eligible scope of work will minimize
questions on the application of Parts B through H.

September 2009 4-12

 Part B: General Requirements and General Conditions

SECTION FIVE PART B: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS AND GENERAL

CONDITIONS
Part B accounts for non-permanent job site work that could not be readily itemized in A.2. The
Part B factors are applied directly to the work type subtotals from Part A.
• To apply the B.1 factors, enter the percentage factors for each work type.
• To apply the B.2 factors, select each work type to which the factor should be applied.
• If no percentages or check boxes are selected, the B factor will be set to 0.
Parts B.1 and B.2 are described in greater detail below.

5.1 B.1: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS

The General Requirements factor B.1 addresses those costs typically described in the general
requirements of construction specifications. B.1 items include safety and security items,
temporary services and utilities, submittals, and quality control. Whenever possible, these items
should be specified in the non-permanent work section of Part A. If any of these costs have been
included in Part A, they should not be duplicated in Part B. All assumptions or the basis for
selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.
Safety and security: This factor includes such items as:
• Guard service
• First aid, barricades, uniformed traffic persons, flagging, railings, toe-boards, and rented
fencing
• Harnesses, scaffolding, and other safety equipment
• Fire protection, such as fire extinguishers and temporary hydrants
• Temporary signage that may be required by a regulatory authority (e.g., the Federal
Highway Administration) to control pedestrian or vehicle detours within and around the
construction zone.
For most construction sites, 4 percent is a reasonable factor for safety and security items. It can
be increased to 6 percent as project complexity increases. The higher end of the range would be
applicable on projects such as airports, marinas, and ports; large segmented sites with phased
construction; projects on sites that require employee tracking during working hours; and projects
in areas requiring a 24-hour security staff.
Temporary services and utilities: This factor includes construction trailer or office space, and
related office equipment. The space may be for the construction job superintendent or for
inspectors. The factor also includes temporary utilities such as construction water, electricity
(including temporary power distribution to work areas), telephones, construction craft sanitary
facilities, and weather protection that may be necessary for temporary services or utilities. The
recommended value for typical projects is 1 percent.
Quality control: This factor reflects completion of quality control by an organization other than
the applicant or the contractor. Typically, this organization is an independent testing and

September 2009 5-1

 Part B: General Requirements and General Conditions

inspection service with expertise specific to the project scope of work. Examples include
concrete strength testing, water quality testing, and non-destructive examination of welds. These
costs typically range from 0.5 percent to 1.0 percent of the installation or trade construction cost.
The recommend value for typical projects is 0.5 percent, and toward 1.0 percent as the overall
project or specific complexities increase (e.g., a broader spread footing required on one side of a
building project because of unforeseen, unstable soil conditions at that location).
Submittals: This factor includes the contractor’s costs for preparation of shop drawings,
materials certifications, and instructions; providing samples and product data; and preparation of
construction progress schedules. The recommended value for a typical project is 5 percent.

5.2 B.2: GENERAL CONDITIONS

The B.2 factor represents a prime contractor’s on-site project management costs. It covers field
supervision. A recommended value of 4.25 percent has been established. Before applying this
factor, the Project Specialist should verify that the prime contractor’s on-site project
management costs have not already been included in any unit costs or bid prices. All
assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

September 2009 5-2

Part C: Construction Cost Contingencies/Uncertainties (Design and Construction)

SECTION SIX PART C: CONSTRUCTION COST CONTINGENCIES/UNCERTAINTIES

(DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION)
A contingency is a monetary provision for uncertainties about performing the work and
unforeseeable costs. It is included in an estimate to create an appropriate level of probability for
completing the project within that estimate. The cost allowances added to the estimate in Part C
of the CEF represent financial protections for the final delivery of the eligible scope of work
(developed in Parts A and B) defined during the engineering and design phase.
Part C includes:
C.1 – Design Phase/Scope Definition Contingencies: This factor represents standard cost
estimating contingencies based on the status of the design and engineering process at the time of
the estimate. This contingency is based on the concept that there are typically more unknowns
and items at the schematic design stage than at the final design stage. As the engineering design
becomes more detailed, the scope of work and the means and methods of construction are able to
be better determined. Therefore the estimates may include a smaller contingency for
uncertainties. A single value representing the status of project design is used for each type of
work.
C.2 – Facility or Project Constructability: C.2 allows for premiums due to site conditions or
construction process complexities that could increase the cost of a project.
C.3 – Access, Staging, and Storage Contingencies: This factor addresses varying degrees of
difficulty in mounting the particular job at a specific site. For example, work in an urban
environment may require storage of materials and equipment several miles away from the actual
construction site, increasing the project cost.
C.4 – Economies of Scale: This factor offsets the overstatement of costs when CEF factors are
applied to large projects with repetitive work elements that allow workers to achieve above
average productivity.
To apply the C.1, C.2, and C.3 factors, the user enters the percentage for each work type. To
apply the C.4 factor, the user checks the boxes for the work types to which the factor should be
applied. If no percentages or check boxes are selected, the C factor will be set to 0. All
assumptions for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

6.1 C.1: STANDARD DESIGN PHASE/SCOPE DEFINITION CONTINGENCIES

The project should be evaluated to determine the accuracy of the scope definition based on the
level of design completion at the time the estimate is prepared. The level of completion of A&E
work as a function of time can characterize the construction. The unknowns gradually decrease
as the scope of work is defined, details for completing the work are developed, and the project
advances towards a set of construction drawings and specifications that can be used by a
construction contractor. The C.1 factor is designed to account for these unknowns.
Two levels of design development are considered in C.1, as described below.
Preliminary Engineering Analysis Stage: At this stage, concepts have been developed, usually
without a significant level of detail. Accurately quantifying work at this stage is difficult, and
contractors would assume a relatively high level of risk/uncertainty in bidding a project at this
September 2009 6-1
Part C: Construction Cost Contingencies/Uncertainties (Design and Construction)

time. The recommended values range from 15 to 20 percent to allow some differentiation
between simple and more complex projects.
Working Drawing Stage: At this stage of design, the design requirements are better defined,
concepts are determined, details are more complete, and work tasks and quantities have been
readily defined. Contractors are likely to assume a low to medium level of risk in bidding this
type of project. The recommended values range from 2 to 10 percent to allow for differentiation
depending on the level of completeness of working drawings. A project in the early stage of
working drawing (e.g., less than 60 percent complete), which would have an average level of
detail and readily identifiable quantities, should be assigned a factor at the upper end of the
range. A project in the final working drawing stage should be assigned a factor at the lower end
of the range.
The C.1 contingency is intended to represent the state of the project design development at the
time that the CEF is prepared. Only a single C.1 value representing the status of project design is
used for each work type. The Project or Technical Specialist should obtain all information
necessary to prepare the CEF for the current state of project development. As stated above, all
assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

6.2 C.2: FACILITY OR PROJECT CONSTRUCTABILITY

The C.2 factor is intended to address project complexity, as it relates to the type of facility and to
the type of repair or retrofit being performed.
The complexity of construction activities varies among different types of projects. New
construction is comprehensive in scope; that is, something is created where nothing existed
before. Conversely, repair and retrofit projects, which must be accomplished within the physical
and operational constraints of existing facilities, tend to consist of tasks that are more selectively
located, are more intensely detailed and sequenced, and require closer supervision throughout the
process. Therefore, the C.2 factor applies to repair and retrofit projects only. No complexity
allowance is provided for new construction; the design process is assumed to take the complexity
of the project into account.
The constructability factor represents site conditions or construction process complexities such
as the following:
• Steep site embankments
• Unstable soil conditions
• Difficult subsurface construction conditions requiring such activities as de-watering and
rock excavation
• Extreme weather conditions affecting productivity, such as winter shutdowns
• Urban sites
• Special building code requirements
• Availability of adequate energy, skilled craft labor, and building materials
• The applicant’s special requirements and restrictions

September 2009 6-2

Part C: Construction Cost Contingencies/Uncertainties (Design and Construction)

• Environmental considerations
The applicant’s requirements and restrictions must be reasonable; that is, they must apply to the
specific services related to the eligible scope of construction. For example, specific tolerances
related to sports facility floors and seating; end user and/or environmental requirements for
hospitals and museums; and special site-specific construction requirements, or restrictions,
mandated by State or local regulatory agencies. Such requirements or restrictions could include,
for example, access restrictions during normal business hours to portions of the facility being
repaired.
If possible, project complexity issues should be addressed in Part A. If all complexity issues are
addressed in Part A, the C.2 factor should not be used. However, if certain project conditions
cannot be identified or quantified, select a suitable factor from the range of values given in Table
C.2.

Table C.2: Constructability Factors

Percentage
Project Category and Type
Range
Category C – roads (rural-urban) 1–2
Category C – bridges and culverts (simple-complex) 1–5
Category D – water control facilities 1–5
Category E – simple open buildings 1–2
Category E – schools, libraries, and offices 1–5
Category E – hospitals, museums, and historic buildings 1–7
Category F – public utilities 1–5
Category G – park and recreation facilities 1–5

Simple construction projects should be assigned a C.2 factor of 0 or 1 percent; projects with a
combination of features that increase complexity should be assigned factors at the upper end of
the appropriate range. For example, two bridges may require the same materials and equipment.
However, if unstable soil conditions exist at one of the bridges, the work at this bridge will
require more detailed sequencing and greater supervision. As stated above, all assumptions for
selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

6.3 C.3: ACCESS, STORAGE, AND STAGING CONTINGENCIES

The C.3 factors address project site conditions that impose additional costs on the work activities
listed in Part A. As with C.2, these items should be specifically defined in Part A, if possible.
However, if the need for these contingencies is unclear and is not accounted for in Part A, the
C.3 factors should be applied. The factors represent the following:
Site Access: This factor addresses access to the project site. Examples include difficult or long
access routes for trucks delivering materials; a temporary access roadway or driveway
constructed to provide access for equipment; site loading conditions requiring heavy equipment

September 2009 6-3

Part C: Construction Cost Contingencies/Uncertainties (Design and Construction)

such as barges, cranes, or forklifts; off-site parking for workers; restricted material delivery
hours at operational facilities; and obstructions created by utilities or exposed systems.
Storage: This factor addresses the storage of construction materials and equipment on site to
support proper staging and construction activities. Examples include remote or off-site storage
of materials due to space constraints; temporary easements; and lot, sidewalk, or roadway space
rental costs.
Staging: This contingency addresses the timing and execution of the work, which could be
complicated by occupation of facilities, lack of space, and access to the facility. This factor
should be used for sites that have work access limitations because services must continue to run
in spite of the construction, such as hospitals and city halls.
The recommended values for C.3 factors range from 1 to 4 percent. The CEF user should assign
the appropriate value according to the impact each of these factors has on project cost. All
assumptions for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

6.4 C.4: ECONOMIES OF SCALE

Economies of scale are the increases or decreases in cost, resulting from task or project size. For
example, the mobilization cost associated with putting a laborer to work is proportionally higher
for 1 day’s work than for 30 days’ work. Typically, unit costs are applicable for projects of a
given size; use of these costs for projects outside of this range can result in distorted estimates.
This concept also applies to the factors in the CEF. Therefore, economies of scale must be
accounted for when using the CEF. Economy of scale is particularly applicable to new
construction projects, but it is also applicable for other types of work for which there is a
reduction in cost due to the project size.
Table C.4 lists the construction cost changes (in percentages) that can be anticipated due to
economies of scale. The multiplier is set automatically when the user checks the box for the type
of work to which the factor should be applied. If the user does not check a box, the factor will be
set to 0. If it can be determined that the unit costs in Part A and the factors in Part B reflect
economies of scale, the C.4 factor should not be used. All assumptions or the basis for selecting
factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

Table C.4: Economies of Scale

Construction Cost
Project Size
Change (%)
Under $500,000 0
Under $2 million -0.5
Under $10 million -1
Over $10 million -2

The CEF calculates the value of C.4 based on an interpolation between percentage points.
Interpolation is based on a natural logarithmic formula derived from the values shown in Table
C.4.

September 2009 6-4

 Part D: General Contractor’s Overhead and Profit

SECTION SEVEN PART D: GENERAL CONTRACTOR’S OVERHEAD AND PROFIT

Part D accounts for the general contractor’s construction costs that have not been included in
Parts A, B, or C. These factors reflect the general contractor’s home office overhead and costs
that are related to the construction contract, such as insurance, bonding costs, and profit. Part D
factors should not be applied to force account work. Additionally, Part D does not reflect the
subcontractors’ overhead and profit, which should be included in the line items listed in Part A.
To apply Part D, the user must select the type of work to which the factor applies or enter the
percentage, depending on the factor. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be
recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

7.1 D.1: GENERAL CONTRACTOR’S HOME OFFICE OVERHEAD COSTS

The general contractor’s main office expenses include labor and salary costs for personnel,
including the principals, estimators, project managers, and general office staff, plus all other
operational expenses associated with working out of the main office. The value for D.1 is
7.7 percent. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes
Sheet.

7.2 D.2: GENERAL CONTRACTOR’S INSURANCE, PAYMENT, AND

PERFORMANCE BONDS
This factor includes an allowance for general contractor’s payment and performance bonds (1.5
percent), builder’s risk insurance (0.3 percent), and public liability insurance (1.5 percent). The
total value of the factor is fixed at 3.3 percent. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors
must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

7.3 D.3: CONTRACTOR’S PROFIT

The general contractor’s profit should be taken from Table D.3 below and is applied to the sum
of Parts A, B, C, D.1, and D.2. The factor value is set automatically when the user checks the
box for the type of work to which the factor should be applied. If the user does not check a box,
the factor will be set to 0. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in
the CEF Notes Sheet.

September 2009 7-1

 Part D: General Contractor’s Overhead and Profit

Table D.3: General Contractor’s Profit

General Contractor’s Profit (%)
Project Size (Sum of Parts A,
B, C, D.1, and D.2) New
Repair Retrofit
Construction
Under $500,000 10 10 10
$500,000 to $750,000 9 9 9
$750,000 to $1.5 million 8 8 7.5
$1.5 million to $3 million 7 7 6.5
$3 million to $5 million 5.5 5.5 5
$5 million to $10 million 4.5 4.5 4
Over $10 million 3 3 3

The CEF calculates the value of D.3 based on an interpolation between percentage points.
Interpolation is based on a natural logarithmic formula derived from the values shown in Table
D.3.

September 2009 7-2

 Part E: Cost Escalation Allowance

SECTION EIGHT PART E: COST ESCALATION ALLOWANCE

Part E allows the user to adjust the estimated construction costs to account for inflation during
the design and construction period. This factor should only be used for escalating the cost of
uncompleted work. To apply Part E, which employs a nationally recognized economic inflation
factor, the user establishes a design and construction timeline to the mid-point of construction of
the eligible portion of the work. This timeline will vary according to whether the eligible work
has already started or is delayed. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be
recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet. The escalated cost of construction is equal to:

Before further discussing the cost escalation allowance to the mid-point of uncompleted
construction, a design and/or construction timeline needs to be developed and analyzed for
eligibility, reasonableness, and applicability to the type of construction activity being
contemplated.
The applicant is responsible for submitting their design and/or construction timeline (as
appropriate) to the Project Specialist during the project formulation stage. The timeline must
include start and finish dates for both the design and/or construction phases. The timeline must
be referenced to the eligible scope of work only, and the criterion also applies to improved and
alternate projects as well. For further information, reference the Applicant Handbook, FEMA
323, Chapter 6, Handling Large Projects. This reference describes subgrantees’ large project
roles and responsibilities.
The Project Specialist will verify eligibility, reasonableness, and applicability of the design
and/or construction timeline submitted by the applicant against the appropriate local data or the
industry standard construction time data, (e.g., RSMeans, BNi Costboooks, Marshall & Swift,
Sweet’s Unit Cost Guide, etc.) prior to application of the CEF, as follows:
i. Check a minimum of six of the ten largest cost item work activities against the local data
or the industry standard construction schedule data.
ii. Check a minimum of 25 percent of the remaining cost item work activities at random
against the local data or the industry standard construction schedule data.
iii. If the line-item work activities checked within the applicant timeline are within 10
percent of the local data or the industry standard data, use the applicant timeline for
determining the mid-point of uncompleted construction.
iv. If the line-item work activities checked in the applicant timeline are not within 10 percent
of the local data or the industry standard cost data, assume the entire timeline is not
comparable, and attempt to resolve discrepancies with the applicant. If discrepancies
cannot be resolved and the design and/or construction timeline include ineligible items of
work (as agreed by the PAC Crew Leader or PA Group Supervisor) use the Project
Specialist developed timeline. Care should be exercised to ensure that the work activities
used to develop the timeline contain eligible items of work only.
In the absence of an applicant-submitted design and/or construction timeline, the Project
Specialist will develop the timeline considering the following elements described in items 1

September 2009 8-1

 Part E: Cost Escalation Allowance

through 3. The number of months in the escalated cost formula is referenced to the mid-point of
uncompleted construction, based on the durations necessary to complete the following timelines,
as applicable:
1. Preparation of design and bid documents: The duration for design can be estimated using
data provided by the applicant for completion of similar projects (local data). If this
information is not available, the design time will have to be estimated. Use the appropriate
industry standard construction cost estimating resources (e.g., RSMeans, BNi Costboooks,
Marshall & Swift, Sweet’s Unit Cost Guide, etc.), according to the type of infrastructure
being analyzed for estimating design times.
• For example, RSMeans’ Facilities Cost Data recommends estimating the design time for
different building types at 25–40 percent of the construction duration (see “Construction
Time Requirements,” R01-020). For this example, the lower bound should be used for
typical flood and hurricane wind disasters where the damage necessitates less complex
design; the upper bound would be applicable to major seismic and hurricane disasters
where greater damage necessitates more complex analysis and design.
Repair and replacement activities that are based on a facilities “As-Built” drawing will
typically not require a design duration similar to that of a new construction project.
• For this example, the design effort may be limited to updating applicable permits,
assembling General Condition’s contract documents, assembling applicable construction
standards and specifications, tabulating work activity descriptions and quantities with
their itemized unit prices, and deriving an engineer’s estimate for the eligible scope of
work prior to bid solicitation.
In all cases, the Project Specialist should ensure that the components of the design effort are
fully understood, and are reasonable and applicable to the type of construction activity being
contemplated for the eligible scope of work.
2. Solicitation of bids, review of bids, and award of contract: The duration for bidding and
award can be estimated using data provided by the applicant for completion of similar
projects (local data). If this information is not available, the estimated bidding and award
time will have to be estimated. A period of 2 to 3 months for bidding and award duration is
typical. Extremely large projects (over $5 million) may need additional time for the bidding
and award process.
3. Construction start and completion dates: The duration for construction can be estimated
by one of two methods.
• For the first method, the Project Specialist may use information provided by the applicant
for completion of similar projects (local data).
• For the second method, the Project Specialist should prepare an outline of the major
construction tasks, and determine the duration and linkages (critical paths and
dependencies) associated with each of these tasks to arrive at a total construction time.
The construction start date is determined from the date that the applicant gives notice to
proceed to the contractor.
The construction completion date occurs when the owner accepts the project and agrees to

September 2009 8-2

 Part E: Cost Escalation Allowance

pay any outstanding retainage due the contractor (normally after project punch-list work has
been completed and accepted).
Use the appropriate cost data book according to the type of infrastructure being analyzed and
reference the “Construction Time Requirements” section to determine the total eligible
construction value for eligible work only.
It is important that the construction timeline reflect only eligible items of work. For example,
owner activities, such as maintenance, capital improvement planning efforts, ineligible facility
improvements, and ineligible code upgrades, are not considered part of the eligible scope of
work and should be excluded from the construction timeline.
For improved projects involving a replacement facility, at the same or new site, Section 406
hazard mitigation work items are not eligible and therefore are excluded from the construction
timeline. For alternate projects, Section 406 hazard mitigation work items are not eligible and
therefore are excluded from the construction timeline. When evaluating improved or alternate
projects, the construction duration should reflect the eligible items of work only.
If detailed information is not sufficient to develop a reasonable project schedule, design and
construction times may be estimated using the expenditure or “burn” rates in table E.1.

Table E.1: Estimated Design and Construction Times Based on Project Cost
Monthly
Design and Ramp-Up and
Burn Rate
Construction Fees Close-Out Time
Assumption
Design
Fee < $200,000 $75,000 2 Months
Fee > $200,000 $115,000 3 Months
Construction Estimate
< $2 million $200,000 3 Months
$2 to $10 million $400,000 4 Months
$10 to $20 million $750,000 5 Months
> $20 million $1,000,000 6 Months

Time estimate calculations resulting in fractional months should be rounded to the next higher
whole month.
Once the eligibility, reasonableness, and applicability of the design and/or construction timeline
(whether applicant or Project Specialist developed) to the construction activity being
contemplated is confirmed, the cost escalation allowance to the mid-point of uncompleted
construction can be computed as follows:
The escalation factor is based on a 2-year average of either the Building Cost Index (BCI) or the
Construction Cost Index (CCI) according to the ENR (Engineering News Record). Definitions
for the BCI and CCI can be found in this publication. The appropriate index should be chosen
September 2009 8-3
 Part E: Cost Escalation Allowance

according to the nature of the project. The 2-year average of the appropriate index should be
used to calculate an average, monthly cost escalation percentage. The PA Group Supervisor or
designee is responsible for calculating this percentage at the beginning of a disaster. BCI or CCI
information can be obtained from the ENR Web site located at
http://www.enr.com/cost/cost2.asp (access to historical cost indices data may be limited to ENR
subscribers). The escalation factor should be calculated annually and distributed to the Project
Specialists for application within the CEF for disasters of longer duration.
• For example, a disaster is declared in August 2009. For large building projects, the PA
Group Supervisor references the BCI for August 2007 (4512) and July 2009 (4762).
• The index has risen 250 points, meaning that the 2-year escalation can be calculated as
(250/4512) x 100 = 5.54 percent.
• For CEF purposes, the escalation factor used is a linear interpolation rather than a
compound rate.
• The average monthly value can be calculated by dividing the 2-year escalation by 24 (the
number of months accounted for in the 2-year average).
• This equates to a rate of 0.231 percent per month.
To apply the Part E factor, the monthly escalation rate and the number of months to the midpoint
of uncompleted construction should be entered. Example 1 in Appendix B shows the monthly
escalation factor being applied to a project where the work is uncompleted. In the example, the
time for completing the outstanding eligible scope of work was calculated. This value, in
months, was then multiplied by the monthly escalation rate and divided by two to escalate to the
midpoint of construction. The factor was then applied to each work type for the sum of Parts A
through D. All assumptions for selecting the escalation factor must be recorded in the CEF
Notes Sheet.
If the Part A estimate is based on an A&E report or validated contract price, escalation is
typically included. The CEF user should verify that escalation is or is not included in the unit
cost data before adding it a second time.

September 2009 8-4

 Part F: Plan Review and Construction Permit Costs

SECTION NINE PART F: PLAN REVIEW AND CONSTRUCTION PERMIT COSTS

Part F reflects fees charged by State and local agencies for plan reviews and construction
permits. It should include all fees that are paid to others to obtain approvals required before
construction can commence. The actual cost of the fees should be entered into the spreadsheet.
The applicant is generally responsible for obtaining all of the required reviews and producing a
bid-ready set of plans and specifications that have been through agency reviews, plan checks,
and general building permit processes. Sometimes an applicant may, at his or her option, require
the contractor to obtain specific permits necessary for actually performing the eligible scope of
work. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes
Sheet.

9.1 F.1: PLAN REVIEW FEES

At the beginning of the disaster, the PA Group Supervisor or designee is responsible for defining
the required plan review fee schedules and distributing that information to the Project Specialists.
The Project Specialist, working with the applicant, should determine exact figures for plan
review fees. Note that State-owned facilities (such as schools, medical facilities, bridges, and
treatment plants) may have different approval requirements than other facilities. All assumptions
or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.

9.2 F.2: CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FEES

As with plan review fees, the PA Group Supervisor is responsible for defining the required
construction permit fee schedules at the beginning of the disaster and distributing that
information to the Project Specialists. The Project Specialist, working with the applicant, should
determine exact fees for construction permits.
Part F is not applicable in those situations for which State and local agencies waive fees during
disaster recovery situations. The PA Group Supervisor is responsible for notifying the Project
Specialists of these circumstances. All assumptions for selecting factors should be recorded in
the CEF Notes Sheet.

September 2009 9-1

 Part G: Applicant’s Reserve for Construction

SECTION TEN PART G: APPLICANT’S RESERVE FOR CONSTRUCTION

Part G reflects the applicant’s reserve for construction. This reserve is intended to be controlled
by the applicant; it is to be used to fund approved change orders to eligible work and any other
incidental costs that may be incurred after the construction contract is awarded. However, it
does not reflect discretionary change orders for upgrades or for any ineligible work. All
assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.
When a work type selection box is highlighted, the applicant’s reserve in Part G is applied to the
work type subtotal of Parts A through F. The multiplier is set automatically when the user
checks the box for the type of work to which the factor should be applied. If the user does not
check a box, the factor will be set to 0. The applicant’s reserve is based on project size, as
shown in Table G.1.

Table G.1: Applicant’s Reserve for Construction

Project Size
Percentage
(Sum of Parts A through F)
Less Than $200,000 7
$200,001 to $800,000 6
$800,001 to $1,400,000 5
$1,400,000 to $2,000,000 4
Greater Than $2,000,000 3

The CEF calculates the value of G.1 based on an interpolation between percentage points.
Interpolation is based on a natural logarithmic formula derived from the values shown in Table
G.1.

September 2009 10-1

 Part H: Applicant’s Project Management and Design Costs

SECTION ELEVEN PART H: APPLICANT’S PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND DESIGN

COSTS
Part H represents the applicant’s costs for overall project development and management
throughout the design and construction phases. The factor includes the applicant’s costs for:
• Managing the design process
• Basic design and inspection services normally performed by an A&E firm
• Managing the construction phase (either third party or in-house)
Incidental development costs should be absorbed into these categories.
As stated above, Part H does not duplicate the administrative allowance provided to the applicant
under the Stafford Act. That allowance is provided to meet the cost of requesting, obtaining, and
administering disaster assistance. Part H covers the cost of managing the project, not grant
funds. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes
Sheet.

11.1 H.1: APPLICANT’S PROJECT MANAGEMENT – DESIGN PHASE

The applicant’s costs to manage the project during the design phase include:
• Managing the A&E contracts for final design
• Managing the permitting and special review process
• Interfacing with other agencies
A value of 1 percent has been established for this factor. To apply the H.1 factor, select the box
under each work type to which the factor is to be applied. If the factor box is not highlighted, the
factor will be set to 0. The H.1 factor is not applicable in those situations for which design is not
required. All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes
Sheet.

11.2 H.2: A&E DESIGN CONTRACT COSTS

This factor covers the cost of basic design and inspection services, normally performed by an
A&E firm, as well as a number of additional services not necessarily required with every
construction project. The basic services consist of:
• Preliminary engineering analysis
• Preliminary design
• Final design
• Construction inspection
The engineering service curves found in the PA Guide, FEMA 322, June 2007, are used to
estimate the cost of basic engineering services as a percentage of the estimated construction cost.
One of two curves, Curve A or Curve B, may be used to determine the appropriate percentage.
These curves have been incorporated into the CEF Spreadsheet.
September 2009 11-1
 Part H: Applicant’s Project Management and Design Costs

Curve A applies to projects with above-average complexity and non-standard design. Examples
include:
• Airports with extensive terminal facilities
• Water, wastewater, and industrial waste treatment plants
• Hospitals, schools, and office buildings
• Power plants
• Large dams and complicated small dams
• Highway and railway tunnels
• Pumping stations
• Incinerators
• Complicated waterfront and marine terminal facilities
Curve B applies to projects of average complexity. Examples include:
• Industrial buildings, warehouses, garages, hangars, and comparable structures
• Bridges and other structures of conventional design
• Simple waterfront facilities
• Roads and streets
• Conventional levees, floodwalls, and retaining walls
• Small dams
• Storm sewers and drains
• Sanitary sewers
• Water distribution lines
• Irrigation works, except pumping plants
• Airports, except as classified for Curve A
The user must select the appropriate project complexity curve and check the box for that curve
on the spreadsheet. The spreadsheet automatically calculates the percentage to be applied. If a
box is not checked, the factor is set to 0.
In addition to the basic services described above, the following special services may be required
and are not usually included in the fee for basic engineering services. These services should be
specifically described and justified in Part A, and the cost estimated, before the services are
included in the CEF. Examples include:
• Engineering surveys
• Soil investigations
• Resident engineer services

September 2009 11-2

 Part H: Applicant’s Project Management and Design Costs

• Feasibility studies
When the nature of work requires only basic construction inspection services, a fee that does not
exceed 3 percent of construction cost should be used to cover the following items:
• Review of bids
• Work site inspection visits
• Checking and approval of material samples
• Review of shop drawings and change orders
• Review contractors request for payment
• Acting as the applicant’s representative
The user must enter the percentage for basic construction services. If the box for this factor is
not checked, the factor will be set to 0.
Part H.2 is not applicable in those situations for which design, construction inspection, or other
basic services are not required. All assumptions for selecting factors should be recorded in the
CEF Notes Sheet.

11.3 H.3: PROJECT MANAGEMENT – CONSTRUCTION PHASE

Project management costs during the construction phase are estimated using Table H.3 and
include:
• Quality assurance and management of additional testing during construction
• Advertising and awarding the construction contract
• Decisions on construction problems and requests for information
• Management of change orders for on-site construction conditions and design errors
• Omissions and unforeseen problems, such as differing site conditions and hidden damage

Table H.3: Project Management – Construction Phase

Project Management -
Construction Costs Construction Phase
(%)
under $500,000 6
$500,000 to $1,000,000 5
$1,000,000 to $5,000,000 4
Greater than $5,000,000 3

September 2009 11-3

 Part H: Applicant’s Project Management and Design Costs

To apply the H.3 factor, select the box under each work type to which the factor is to be applied.
The values will be automatically calculated. If a box is not checked, the factor will be set to 0.
All assumptions or the basis for selecting factors must be recorded in the CEF Notes Sheet.
The CEF calculates the value of H.3 based on an interpolation between percentage points.
Interpolation is based on a natural logarithmic formula derived from the values shown in Table
H.3.

September 2009 11-4

 Appendix A
CEF Spreadsheet

CEF Instructional Guide

(Version 2.1)
September 2009
 9/10/2009
CEF Fact Sheet

Date of Estimate:
FEMA Region:
Preparer(s):
Applicant Name:
Project Title:
Damaged Facility:
Declaration Number:
Project Number:
PA ID No.:
Date of Inspection:
Event Date(s)
Work Category:
Type of Work:
(Enter New, Repair, etc.)

Preparer's Notes:

1 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Notes
-
Damaged Facility: 0
Applicant Name: 0
Project Number: 0
Date of Estimate: January 0, 1900
Preparer(s): 0
Part A Notes: A.1 -
A.2 -
Part B Notes: B.1 -
B.2 -
Part C Notes: C.1 -
C.2 -
C.3 -
C.4 -
Part D Notes: D.1 -
D.2 -
D.3 -
Part E Notes: E-
Part F Notes: F.1 -
F.2 -
Part G Notes: G.1 -
Part H Notes: H.1 -
H.2 -
H.3 -
Miscellaneous
Notes &
Comments:

2 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
-

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Completed Work Items

Add Row Completed Permanent Items
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Permanent Total $ -

Add Row Completed Non-Permanent Items

$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Non-Permanent Total $ -

3 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
-

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Uncompleted Work Items

Add Row Uncompleted Permanent Items
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Uncompleted - Permanent Total $ -
Add Row Uncompleted Non-Permanent Items
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Uncompleted - Non-Permanent Total $ -

TOTAL PART A BASE CONSTRUCTION COST $ -

4 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ -

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part A Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Guide
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0%
Quality Control 0% 1.0%
Submittals 0% 5.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part B Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

5 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Guide
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Guide
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.4 Economies of Scale

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

6 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

D.3 General Contractor's Profit

New Construction

Repair/Retrofit
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part D Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

E Cost Escalation Factors

Cost Escalation Factor

Months
Monthly Factor
Part E Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

7 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

8 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part H Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

TOTAL OF COMPLETED WORK

9 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ -

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) . $ -

Part A Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Range
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0%
Quality Control 0% 1.0%
Submittals 0% 5.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part B Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

10 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Range
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies
Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Range
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging
Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.4 Economies of Scale

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

11 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
D.3 General Contractor's Profit

New Construction
Repair/Retrofit
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part D Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

E Cost Escalation Factors

E Cost Escalation Factor

Months
Monthly Factor
Part E Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

12 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

13 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
-
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part H Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

TOTAL OF UNCOMPLETED WORK

14 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 9/10/2009
CEF Total Project Summary

Summary
-
Completed Uncompleted Total
PART A "Base Costs" for Construction Work In Trades $ - $ - $ -
A.1 Permanent Work $ - $ - $ -
A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ - $ -

PART B General Requirements and General Conditions $ - $ - $ -

B.1 General Requirements $ - $ - $ -
B.2 General Conditions $ - $ - $ -

PART C Construction Cost Contingencies (Design and Construction) $ - $ - $ -

C.1 Standard Design-Phase Scope Contingencies $ - $ - $ -
C.2 Facility or Project Constructability $ - $ - $ -
C.3 Access, Storage, and Staging Contingencies $ - $ - $ -
C.4 Economies of Scale in New Construction $ - $ - $ -

PART D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit $ - $ - $ -

D.1 General Contractor's Home Office Overhead Costs $ - $ - $ -
D.2 General Contractor's Insurance, Payment, and Performance Bonds $ - $ - $ -
D.3 Contractor's Profit $ - $ - $ -

PART E Cost Escalation Allowance $ - $ - $ -

PART F Plan Review and Construction Permit Costs $ - $ - $ -

F.1 Plan Review Fees $ - $ - $ -
F.2 Construction Permit Fees $ - $ - $ -

PART G Applicant's Reserve for Construction $ - $ - $ -

PART H Applicant's Project Management and Design Costs $ - $ - $ -

H.1 Applicant's Project Management - Design Phase $ - $ - $ -
H.2 Architecture & Engineering Design Contract Costs $ - $ - $ -
H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase $ - $ - $ -

Complete Project Total for Completed and Uncompleted Work $ - $ - $ -

15 of 15 Appendix A - CEF Spreadsheet V2.1

 Appendix B
Examples of Completed
CEF Spreadsheets

CEF Instructional Guide

(Version 2.1)
September 2009
 Example 1:
Category C – Roads and Bridges – Simmonds Arch Bridge

This example illustrates the use of unit prices from industry standard construction cost estimating
resources for uncompleted work in the preparation of the CEF.

Project Background
The estimate was developed for the replacements of the Simmonds Arch Bridge located near Winchester,
VA. The bridge was destroyed by heavy thunderstorms resulting in a declared flood disaster. The
applicant is River College, a public university that owns and maintains the bridge. Public universities are
eligible applicants and the bridge is an eligible facility. The facility includes the bridge, four wing-walls,
and about 25 feet of roadway on each end of the bridge. Observations by the project formulation team at
the time of inspection concluded that the bridge was approximately 80 percent destroyed. The guardrails
and bridge railing were not salvageable. Because the bridge was more than 50 percent damaged, the
bridge is eligible for replacement based on the original function and capacity. The estimate was
developed using industry standard building cost data and the associated electronic cost data format.
The Simmonds Arch Bridge is located approximately 150 feet from the Lundberg Dam on Spout Run
Creek. The bridge was approximately 15 years old and functional at the time of the declared disaster.
The earth-covered reinforced concrete arch was 24 feet long (across the stream) and 26 feet wide (along
the stream line). The bridge included two lanes of traffic and a paved walkway. The waterway opening
was 24 feet at the base, 3 feet high at the sides, and 5 feet high at the center. Each abutment, including
the upstream and downstream wing-walls, was supported on a continuous strip footing 5 feet wide and 2
feet thick. The approach roadway on each side of the bridge consisted of 4 inches of asphalt concrete
pavement over a six-inch base course. Bridge postings included a speed limit of 15 miles per hour and a
weight limit of 15 tons. Traffic volume on the bridge was 50 vehicles per day.
Removal of debris resulting from the bridge failure was accomplished under a pre-existing facilities
maintenance contract with a local contractor. A separate PW was prepared for removing debris from the
stream.

Information Relating to Development of the Estimate

Replacement of the Simmonds Arch Bridge was judged to be Category C – Roads and Bridges work.
Quantities for the estimate were calculated based on measurements taken during the site visit conducted
by the project formulation team, and cross-checked against the original construction drawings provided
by the applicant.
Guidance provided by the PA Group Supervisor included:
• Project unit costs should be adjusted for Winchester, VA.
• The monthly escalation factor is 0.231.
 9/10/2009
CEF Fact Sheet

River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge

Date of Estimate: July 28, 2009

FEMA Region: III
Preparer(s): James Allen and John Christopher
Applicant Name: River College
Project Title: Simmonds Arch Bridge
Damaged Facility: Simmonds Arch Bridge
Declaration Number: FEMA - 1234 - DR - MD
Project Number: 6747
PA ID No.: 955-8888
Date of Inspection: July 23, 2009
Event Date(s) July 8 - 9, 2009
Work Category: C - Roads and Bridges
Type of Work: Replacement
(Enter New, Repair, etc.)

Preparer's Notes:
Floodwaters during a declared strom event destroyed the Simmonds Arch Bridge across Spout Run Creek. The
bridge consisited of a roadway and backfill over a reinforced concrete arch.

The eligible scope of work constructing a new bridge having the same function and capacity as the destroyed
bridge. Simmonds Arch Bridge was 26 feet wide and 24 feet long with reinforced concrete abutments and wing-
walls at each end. The project damage description and scope of work is detailed in the Project Worksheet.

The replacement bridge will be completed using a design-bid-build process. Engineering drawings will be based
on the original design and are about 50 percent complete.

Estimate developed using RSMeans Building Cost Data and CostWorks. Cost data was updated to 2nd quarter
2009.

1 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Notes
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Damaged Facility: Simmonds Arch Bridge
Applicant Name: River College
Project Number: 6747
Date of Estimate: July 28, 2009
Preparer(s): James Allen and John Christopher
Part A Notes: A.1 - Unit costs for uncompleted permanent work are based on RSMeans Building Cost
using CostWorks. Cost data updated to 2nd quarter 2009. Location in CostWorks
set as Winchester, VA. City Adjustment Factor is 1.0.
A.2 - Unit costs for uncompleted non-permanent work based on RSMeans Building Cost
using CostWorks. Cost data updated to 2nd quarter 2009. Winchester, VA. City
Adjustment Factor is 1.0.
Part B Notes: B.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 5%, the average recommended value, for safety and
security. Work around water will require special safety and security barriers. Work
will also require typcial construction safety measures, and security measures to
protect equipment and materials during non-working hours.
Estimate includes a cost of 1%, the maximum recommended value, for temporary
services and utilties. Contractor willl be required to provide all site services including
temproary power, communications, potable water, and sanitation.
Estimate includes a cost of 0.5%, the average recommended value, for qualtiy
control. Feild testing and inspection is anticipated for concrete, compacted fill and
asphalt paving.
Estimate includes a cost of 2%, slightly less than the average recommended value,
for submittals. Although separate material submittals are expected for guard rails,
paint, and miscellaneous items, most materials submittals will be in conjunction with
field qualtiy control services.

B.2 - General conditions costs have been included for site supervsion and coordination.

Part C Notes: C.1 - Estimate includes a contingency of 5% for design uncertainty, slightly below the
average recommended value for the working drawing stage. Although drawings are
only 50% complete, design is based on available original design, which reduces
uncertainty. However, there are uncertainties in the cost because of a lack of
design data for shoring and dewatering requirements during placement of the
concrete arch culvert and construction of the abutment and wing-walls.

C.2 - No constructability issues are expected for the new construction. Therefore, no
costs for constructability are included in the estimate.
C.3 - Estimate includes a cost of 1%, the lowest recommended value, for site access.
The site is close to Winchester, VA, with good access to labor and materials. Traffic
delays and limited access to the project site due to loss of the bridge are expected
to have an impact on project cost.
Estimate includes a cost of 1% each, the lowest recommended value for storage
and staging. The project boundaries are confined to the road right-of-way and one
side of Spout Run Creek. Those limitations are expected to have a minor impact on
costs as a result of having to handle some materials multiple times from delivery to
installation.
C.4 - Based on the size of the project, no economies of scale are anticipated.

2 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Notes
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Part D Notes: D.1 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC home office
overhead is included in the estimate.
D.2 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC costs for
project insurance on bonds is included in the estimate.
D.3 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC profit is
included in the estimate.
Part E Notes: E - The anticipated project schedule is 2 months for design, 2 months to bid and award
a contract, and 4 months for construction. Time to midpoint of construction =
2+2+(4/2) = 6 months.
Current monthly escaltion factor provided by PAO = 0.231%
Part F Notes: F.1 - The univeristy is exempt from plan review fees for site work project.
F.2 - The univeristy is exempt from building permit fees for site work projects.
Part G Notes: G.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 7% for changes in the eligible scope of work that may
be encountered during the project.
Part H Notes: H.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 1% for the applicant to manage project design.
H.2 - Estimate includes a cost of 14% for design services based on a project of average
complexity as defined in the PA Guide, June 2007.
H.3 - Estimate includes a cost of 6% to manage construction of both completed and
uncompleted work.
Miscellaneous Reference to recommended values is to guidance provided in the CEF Instructional
Notes & Guide, August 2009.
Comments:

3 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Completed Work Items

Add Row Completed Permanent Items
$ -
$ -
$ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Permanent Total $ -

Add Row Completed Non-Permanent Items

$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Non-Permanent Total $ -

4 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Uncompleted Work Items

Add Row Uncompleted Permanent Items
Public Storm Utility Drainage Piping, concrete reinforced
culvert reinforced elliptical, 8' lengths, 38" x 60" inside, round
334113603550 26.00 L.F. $ 320.01 1.0000 $ 8,320.14
equivalent 48" diameter, C507 class 3, excludes excavation or
backfill
Borrow, select granular fill, 3/4 C.Y. bucket, loading and/or
312323155050 200.00 B.C.Y $ 18.40 1.0000 $ 3,680.01
spreading, front end loader, wheel mounted
Compaction, structural, select fill, 8" lifts, sheepsfoot or wobbly
312323240400 200.00 E.C.Y $ 1.17 1.0000 $ 234.00
wheel roller
Structural concrete, in place, continuous strip footing, 36" wide
x 12" deep, includes forms (4 uses), reinforcing steel, and 033053403950 80.00 C.Y. $ 233.99 1.0000 $ 18,719.08
finishing
Structural concrete, in place, retaining wall, level backfill, 8'
high, includes forms (4 uses), reinforcing steel, and finishing 033053406300 36.00 C.Y. $ 324.98 1.0000 $ 11,699.42

Compaction, 2 passes, 6" lifts, towed vibrating roller 312323236200 75.00 E.C.Y $ 0.82 1.0000 $ 61.50
Fine grading, finish grading, small area, to be paved with
312216100012 220.00 S.Y. $ 3.24 1.0000 $ 712.86
grader
Base course drainage layers, aggregate base course for
roadways and large paved areas, crushed stone base, 321123230302 220.00 S.Y. $ 11.05 1.0000 $ 2,430.97
compacted, crushed 1-1/2" stone base, to 6" deep
Plant-mix asphalt paving, for highways and large paved areas,
321216130480 220.00 S.Y. $ 17.05 1.0000 $ 3,750.96
wearing course, 4" thick
Sidewalks, driveways, and patios, side walks, asphaltic
320610100100 15.00 S.Y. $ 13.70 1.0000 $ 205.50
concrete, 2-1/2" thick, excludes base
Painted pavement markings, acrylic waterborne, white or
321723130200 225.00 L.F. $ 0.43 1.0000 $ 96.74
yellow, 6" wide
Vehicle guide rails, corrugated steel, galvanized steel posts,
347113260012 80.00 L.F. $ 33.00 1.0000 $ 2,639.98
steel posts 6'-3" O.C., 6" x 8" posts
Vehicle guide rails, corrugated steel, galvanized steel posts,
347113260300 4.00 Ea. $ 231.00 1.0000 $ 924.01
install wrap around end section
Rip-rap and rock lining, random, broken stone, 50 lb. average,
313713100300 10.00 Ton $ 41.00 1.0000 $ 410.00
dumped

5 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Railing, ornamental, steel, 3'-6" high, posts @ 5' O.C., shop

05 73 2350 0560 80.00 LF $ 160.00 1.0000 $ 12,800.00
fabricated, maximum
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Uncompleted - Permanent Total $ 66,685.18
Add Row Uncompleted Non-Permanent Items
Dewatering, pumping, 8 hours, attended 2 hours per day, 4"
discharge pump used for 8 hours, includes 20 L.F. of suction 312319200650 40.00 Day $ 166.03 1.0000 $ 6,641.00
hose and 100 L.F. of discharge hose
Sheet piling, steel, 22 psf, 15' excavation, drive, extract and
314116101300 540.00 S.F. $ 20.00 1.0000 $ 10,800.99
salvage, excludes wales
Synthetic erosion control, silt fence, polypropylene, ideal
312513101000 200.00 L.F. $ 0.94 1.0000 $ 187.98
conditions, 3' high
$ - $ -
Uncompleted - Non-Permanent Total $ 17,629.97

TOTAL PART A BASE CONSTRUCTION COST $ 84,315.15

6 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ -

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part A Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Guide
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0%
Quality Control 0% 1.0%
Submittals 0% 5.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part B Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

7 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Guide
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Guide
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.4 Economies of Scale

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

8 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

D.3 General Contractor's Profit

New Construction

Repair/Retrofit
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part D Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

E Cost Escalation Factors

Cost Escalation Factor

Months
Monthly Factor
Part E Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

9 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

10 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part H Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

TOTAL OF COMPLETED WORK

11 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ 66,685 $ 66,685

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ 17,630 $ 17,630

Part A Total $ 84,315 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 84,315

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Range
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0% 5.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0% 1.0%
Quality Control 0% 1.0% 0.5%
Submittals 0% 5.0% 2.0%
$ 7,167 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,167

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ 3,583 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,583

Part B Total $ 10,750 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 10,750

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ 95,065 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 95,065

12 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Range
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies
Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0% 5.0%
$ 4,753 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 4,753

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Range
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0% 1.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0% 1.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0% 1.0%
$ 2,852 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 2,852

C.4 Economies of Scale

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ 7,605 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,605

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ 102,671 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 102,671

13 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ 7,906 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 7,906

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ 3,388 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,388
D.3 General Contractor's Profit
10.0%
New Construction
Repair/Retrofit
$ 11,396 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 11,396

Part D Total $ 22,690 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 22,690

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ 125,361 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 125,361

E Cost Escalation Factors

E Cost Escalation Factor

Months 6
Monthly Factor 0.231%
Part E Total $ 1,738 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,738

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ 127,098 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 127,098

14 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately) $ -

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ 127,098 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 127,098

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ 8,897 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,897

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ 135,995 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 135,995

15 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Replacement $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ 1,360 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,360

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 24.8% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 13.9% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ 18,906 $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ 18,906 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 18,906

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
$ 8,160 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,160

Part H Total $ 28,426 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 28,426

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ 164,421 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 164,421

TOTAL OF UNCOMPLETED WORK $164,421

16 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 9/10/2009
CEF Total Project Summary

Summary
River College - Simmonds Arch Bridge
Completed Uncompleted Total
PART A "Base Costs" for Construction Work In Trades $ - $ 84,315 $ 84,315
A.1 Permanent Work $ - $ 66,685 $ 66,685
A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ 17,630 $ 17,630

PART B General Requirements and General Conditions $ - $ 10,750 $ 10,750

B.1 General Requirements $ - $ 7,167 $ 7,167
B.2 General Conditions $ - $ 3,583 $ 3,583

PART C Construction Cost Contingencies (Design and Construction) $ - $ 7,605 $ 7,605

C.1 Standard Design-Phase Scope Contingencies $ - $ 4,753 $ 4,753
C.2 Facility or Project Constructability $ - $ - $ -
C.3 Access, Storage, and Staging Contingencies $ - $ 2,852 $ 2,852
C.4 Economies of Scale in New Construction $ - $ - $ -

PART D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit $ - $ 22,690 $ 22,690

D.1 General Contractor's Home Office Overhead Costs $ - $ 7,906 $ 7,906
D.2 General Contractor's Insurance, Payment, and Performance Bonds $ - $ 3,388 $ 3,388
D.3 Contractor's Profit $ - $ 11,396 $ 11,396

PART E Cost Escalation Allowance $ - $ 1,738 $ 1,738

PART F Plan Review and Construction Permit Costs $ - $ - $ -

F.1 Plan Review Fees $ - $ - $ -
F.2 Construction Permit Fees $ - $ - $ -

PART G Applicant's Reserve for Construction $ - $ 8,897 $ 8,897

PART H Applicant's Project Management and Design Costs $ - $ 28,426 $ 28,426

H.1 Applicant's Project Management - Design Phase $ - $ 1,360 $ 1,360
H.2 Architecture & Engineering Design Contract Costs $ - $ 18,906 $ 18,906
H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase $ - $ 8,160 $ 8,160

Complete Project Total for Completed and Uncompleted Work $ - $ 164,421 $ 164,421

17 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 1B

 Example 2:
Category F – Utilities – River Park Elevated Water Tank

This example illustrates the use of unit prices from industry standard construction cost estimating
resources for uncompleted work in the preparation of the CEF.

Project Background
The estimate was developed for the replacement of a 100,000-gallon water storage tank located near
Mobile, AL. The water tank collapsed as a result of a tornado that caused area-wide damage resulting in
a disaster declaration. The elevated water tank was owned by the Lower Alabama Water Authority. The
public authority is an eligible applicant and the water tank is an eligible facility. The tank shell was
severely damaged by the collapse, and falling debris damaged pumps, the emergency generator, and
foundations, requiring that they be replaced.
Removal of debris is being accomplished by Authority employees as Category A – Debris Removal. That
work is included on a separate PW.

Information Relating to Development of the Estimate

Replacement of the River Park elevated water tank was judged to be Category F – Utilities work.
Quantities for the estimate were calculated based on measurements taken during the site visit conducted
by the project formulation team.
The estimate was developed using industry standard building cost data and the associated electronic cost
data format.
Guidance provided by the PA Group Supervisor included:
• Project unit costs should be adjusted for Mobile, AL.
• The monthly escalation factor is 0.231.
 9/10/2009
CEF Fact Sheet

Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank

Date of Estimate: May 19, 2009

FEMA Region: IV
Preparer(s): Frank Beason and Joseph Peters
Applicant Name: Lower Alabama Water Authority
Project Title: River Park Elevated Water Tank
Damaged Facility: River Park Elevated Water Tank
Declaration Number: FEMA 1256 DR - AL
Project Number: 41373
PA ID No.: 567-9832
Date of Inspection: May 15, 2009
Event Date(s) May 10, 2009
Work Category: F - Utilities
Type of Work: New
(Enter New, Repair, etc.)

Preparer's Notes:
A tornado during a declared event destroyed the River Park elevated water tank.

The eligible scope of work includes replacement of a 100,000-gallon elevated water tank, an emergency
generator, supply pump, and associated piping. Piping consists of a network of short sections located above
grade. The falling tank pulled anchor bolts from the foundations. The new tank manufacturer requires new
foundations as a condition of validating the warrenty. Facility damage description and scope of work is detailed
in the PW.

Rubble is being removed by Lower Alabama Water Authority staff. Costs associated with that work are being
included is a separate Catagory B PW.

The replacement water tank will be completed using a design-bid-build process. Engineering drawings will be
based on the origninal design and are about 25 percent complete.

Estimate developed using RSMeans Building Cost Data and CostWorks. Cost data updated to 1st quarter 2009.

1 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Notes
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
Damaged Facility: River Park Elevated Water Tank
Applicant Name: Lower Alabama Water Authority
Project Number: 41373
Date of Estimate: May 19, 2009
Preparer(s): Frank Beason and Joseph Peters
Part A Notes: A.1 - Unit costs for uncompleted work based on RSMeans Building Cost and CostWorks.
Cost data updated to 1st quarter 2009. Location in CostWorks set as Mobile, AL.
City Adjustment Factor is 1.0.
A.2 -
Part B Notes: B.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 4%, the minimum recommended value, for safety and
security. Work installing elevated tank will require safety measures related to fall
hazards for a small work crew. Other project work will required typcial construction
safety measures, and security measures to protect equipment and materials during
non-working hours.
Estimate includes a cost of 0.5%, the average recommended value, for temporary
services and utilties. Contractor willl be required to provide all site services including
temporary power, communications, potable water, and sanitation.
Estimate includes a cost of 0.5%, the average recommended value, for qualtiy
control. Field testing and inspection is anticipated for concrete, and structural steel
erection.
Estimate includes a cost of 5%, the recommended value, for submittals. Submittals
from the tank supplier are expected to include strucural design calculations,
foundation design loads, and erection details.

B.2 - General conditions costs have been included for site supervsion and coordination.

Part C Notes: C.1 - Estimate includes a contingency of 10% for design uncertainty, the low range of
recommended values during the preliminary design phase. Drawings are only 25%
complete resulting in uncertainties about foundation details and water tank erection
requirements.
C.2 - No constructability issues are expected for the new construction. Therefore no
costs for constructability are included in the estimate.
C.3 - Estimate includes a cost of 2%, the average recommended value, for site access.
The site is close to Mobile, AL, with good access to labor and materials. Traffic
delays and rough access into the project site, particularly relative to delivery of the
elevated tank and supporting structure, is expected to have an impact on project
cost.
Estimate includes a cost of 2% each, the average recommende value, for storage
and staging. The project site is expected to be too congested to store all materials
until after the elevated tank is erected, requiring some materials to be stored off site
and only be staged as needed. Those limitations are expected to have an impact on
costs as a result of having to handle some materials multiple times from delivery to
installation.
C.4 - Based on the size of the project, no economies of scale are anticipated.
Part D Notes: D.1 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC home office
overhead is included in the estimate.
D.2 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC costs for
project insurance on bonds is included in the estimate.

2 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Notes
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
D.3 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC profit is
included in the estimate.
Part E Notes: E - The anticipated project schedule is 1 month for design, 2 months to bid and award
a contract, and 10 months for construction. Time to midpoint of construction =
1+2+(10/2) = 8 months.
Current monthly escaltion factor provided by PAO = 0.231%
Part F Notes: F.1 - LAWA is exempt from plan review fees.
F.2 - LAWA is exempt from building permit fees .
Part G Notes: G.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 7% for changes in the eligible scope of work that may
be encountered during the project.
Part H Notes: H.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 1% for the applicant to manage project design.
H.2 - Estimate includes a cost of 11.3% for design services based on a project of
average complexity as defined in the PA Guide, June 2007.
H.3 - Estimate includes a cost of 4.3% to manage construction of uncompleted work.

Miscellaneous Reference to recommended values is to guidance provided in the CEF Instructional

Notes & Guide, August 2009.
Comments:

3 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Completed Work Items

Add Row Completed Permanent Items
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Permanent Total $ -

Add Row Completed Non-Permanent Items

$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Non-Permanent Total $ -

4 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Uncompleted Work Items

Add Row Uncompleted Permanent Items
Aboveground Water Utility Storage Tanks, elevated Steel
Storage Tanks for water, 100' to bottom capacity line, 100,000 331619503300 1 Ea. $ 308,500.00 1.0000 $ 308,500.00
gallons, incl. painting, excl. pipes or pumps
Structural excavation for minor structures, bank measure, for
spread and mat footings, elevator pits, and small building
312316166030 100 B.C.Y. $ 21.50 1.0000 $ 2,150.19
foundations, common earth, 1/2 C.Y. bucket, machine
excavation, hydraulic backhoe
Structural concrete, in place, spread footing, over 5 C.Y.,
033053403850 300 C.Y. $ 266.99 1.0000 $ 80,097.60
includes forms (4 uses), reinforcing steel, and finishing
Anchor bolts, J-type, 1-1/2" diameter x 36" long, galvanized,
031505023600 32 Ea. $ 74.49 1.0000 $ 2,383.84
includes nut and washer
Fence, chain link industrial, galvanized steel, 6 ga. wire, 2-1/2"
posts @ 10' OC, 8' high, includes excavation, in concrete, 323113200920 300 L.F. $ 42.50 1.0000 $ 12,749.51
excludes barbed wire
Fence, chain link industrial, double swing gates, 8' high, 20'
323113205090 1 Opng. $ 3,049.87 1.0000 $ 3,049.87
opening, includes excavation, posts & hardware in concrete
Utility Piping, cast iron, B & S, 12" diameter, excludes
333113132032 200 L.F. $ 101.99 1.0000 $ 20,398.48
excavation or backfill
Water Utility distribution valves, butterfly valves with boxes,
cast iron, mechanical joint, 12" diameter, includes valve box 331216103340 3 Ea. $ 3,149.96 1.0000 $ 9,449.88
and mechanical joints, excludes excavation and backfill
Water Utility distribution valves, gate valves, cast iron,
mechanical joint, with boxes, 250 PSI, 12" diameter, includes
331216103820 3 Ea. $ 2,425.02 1.0000 $ 7,275.06
valve box and mechanical joint, excludes excavation and
backfill
Fire Pumps, electric, 1500 GPM, 100 psi, 139 HP, 1770 RPM,
213113503750 1 Ea. $ 41,899.25 1.0000 $ 41,899.25
6" pump, incl. controller, fittings & relief valve
Generator set, gas/gasoline, 3 phase 4 wire, 277/480 V, 100
263213160700 1 Ea. $ 30,899.75 1.0000 $ 30,899.75
kW, incl battery, charger, muffler & automatic transfer switch
Shelters, aluminum frame, acrylic glazing, 3' x 9' x 8' h 133423700020 2 Ea. $ 4,375.07 1.0000 $ 8,750.14

5 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Grounding rod, copper clad, 10' long, 1/2" diameter 260526800080 2 Ea. $ 86.01 1.0000 $ 172.01
Rigid galvanized steel conduit, 4" diameter, to 15' high, incl
260533100680 400 L.F. $ 36.00 1.0000 $ 14,399.20
couplings only
Wire, copper, stranded, 600 volt, 3/0, type XHHW, in raceway 260519903200 12 C.L.F. $ 815.02 1.0000 $ 9,780.28
$ - $ -
Uncompleted - Permanent Total $ 551,955.05
Add Row Uncompleted Non-Permanent Items
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Uncompleted - Non-Permanent Total $ -

TOTAL PART A BASE CONSTRUCTION COST $ 551,955.05

6 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ -

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part A Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Guide
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0%
Quality Control 0% 1.0%
Submittals 0% 5.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part B Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

7 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Guide
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Guide
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.4 Economies of Scale

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

8 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

D.3 General Contractor's Profit

New Construction

Repair/Retrofit
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part D Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

E Cost Escalation Factors

Cost Escalation Factor

Months
Monthly Factor
Part E Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

9 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

10 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part H Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

TOTAL OF COMPLETED WORK

11 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ 511,955 $ 511,955

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) . $ -

Part A Total $ 511,955 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 511,955

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Range
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0% 4.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0% 0.5%
Quality Control 0% 1.0% 0.5%
Submittals 0% 5.0% 5.0%
$ 51,196 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 51,196

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ 21,758 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 21,758

Part B Total $ 72,954 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 72,954

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ 584,909 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 584,909

12 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Range
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies
Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0% 10.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0%
$ 58,491 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 58,491

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Range
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0% 2.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0% 2.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0% 2.0%
$ 35,095 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 35,095

C.4 Economies of Scale

-0.6%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ 93,585 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 93,585

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ 678,494 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 678,494

13 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ 52,244 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 52,244

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ 22,390 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 22,390
D.3 General Contractor's Profit
8.7%
New Construction
Repair/Retrofit
$ 65,448 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 65,448

Part D Total $ 140,083 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 140,083

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ 818,577 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 818,577

E Cost Escalation Factors

E Cost Escalation Factor

Months 8
Monthly Factor 0.231%
Part E Total $ 15,127 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 15,127

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ 833,704 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 833,704

14 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ 833,704 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 833,704

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
4.9% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ 41,212 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 41,212

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ 874,916 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 874,916

15 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
New $ - $ - $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ 8,749 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,749

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 16.7% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 11.3% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ 98,867 $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ 98,867 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 98,867

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

4.3% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
$ 37,516 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 37,516

Part H Total $ 145,132 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 145,132

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ 1,020,047 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 1,020,047

TOTAL OF UNCOMPLETED WORK $1,020,047

16 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 9/10/2009
CEF Total Project Summary

Summary
Lower Alabama Water Authority - River Park Elevated Water Tank
Completed Uncompleted Total
PART A "Base Costs" for Construction Work In Trades $ - $ 511,955 $ 511,955
A.1 Permanent Work $ - $ 511,955 $ 511,955
A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ - $ -

PART B General Requirements and General Conditions $ - $ 72,954 $ 72,954

B.1 General Requirements $ - $ 51,196 $ 51,196
B.2 General Conditions $ - $ 21,758 $ 21,758

PART C Construction Cost Contingencies (Design and Construction) $ - $ 93,585 $ 93,585

C.1 Standard Design-Phase Scope Contingencies $ - $ 58,491 $ 58,491
C.2 Facility or Project Constructability $ - $ - $ -
C.3 Access, Storage, and Staging Contingencies $ - $ 35,095 $ 35,095
C.4 Economies of Scale in New Construction $ - $ - $ -

PART D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit $ - $ 140,083 $ 140,083

D.1 General Contractor's Home Office Overhead Costs $ - $ 52,244 $ 52,244
D.2 General Contractor's Insurance, Payment, and Performance Bonds $ - $ 22,390 $ 22,390
D.3 Contractor's Profit $ - $ 65,448 $ 65,448

PART E Cost Escalation Allowance $ - $ 15,127 $ 15,127

PART F Plan Review and Construction Permit Costs $ - $ - $ -

F.1 Plan Review Fees $ - $ - $ -
F.2 Construction Permit Fees $ - $ - $ -

PART G Applicant's Reserve for Construction $ - $ 41,212 $ 41,212

PART H Applicant's Project Management and Design Costs $ - $ 145,132 $ 145,132

H.1 Applicant's Project Management - Design Phase $ - $ 8,749 $ 8,749
H.2 Architecture & Engineering Design Contract Costs $ - $ 98,867 $ 98,867
H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase $ - $ 37,516 $ 37,516

Complete Project Total for Completed and Uncompleted Work $ - $ 1,020,047 $ 1,020,047

17 of 17 Appendix B - CEF Example 2B

 Example 3:
Category E – Buildings

This example illustrates the use of unit prices from industry standard construction cost estimating
resources for conducting a repair vs. replacement analysis and completing the eligible work estimate.

Project Background
Severe flooding in Galveston, TX, caused by a subtropical storm resulted in a Presidential disaster
declaration. The flooding heavily damaged the offices of the Coastal Texas Planning Commission. The
Coastal Texas Planning Commission is an eligible applicant, and the Commission-owned office building
is an eligible facility.
The facility consists of a 4,100-square-foot, one-story, pile-supported office building.

Information Relating to Development of the Estimate

Based on the extent of damages observed during a site inspection, the project formulation team judged
that the eligible scope of work might be a replacement building designed for the pre-disaster function and
capacity. Determination of the eligibility for a replacement facility requires a comparison of the repair
and replacement costs. Facility replacement is eligible if the repair cost is greater than 50 percent of the
replacement costs. The repair scope of work is based on damages identified and measurements taken
during the site inspection conducted by the project formulation team. The replacement scope of work is
also based on building function and design identified by the project formulation team during the site
inspection.
The repair estimate was prepared using industry standard building cost and assembly cost data for
uncompleted work. The replacement estimate was prepared using Square Foot and Assembly Cost Data.
Assembly Cost data was used to tailor the square-foot cost building model to account for site-specific
conditions, i.e., pile foundations in lieu of shallow spread footings. Estimates were prepared using an
industry standard electronic cost data format.
The building was constructed in the mid-1970s and has no historic issues. No environmental assessment
has been conducted to evaluate the presence hazardous materials, such as asbestos containing materials or
lead-based paint.
The applicant has retained an A&E design firm, but design has not begun. The applicant intends to
manage the project using a design-bid-build approach and a single contract to demolish and replace
existing building, or remove, replace, and repair damages to existing building based on eligibility.
Guidance provided by the PA Group Supervisor included:
• Project unit costs should be adjusted for Galveston, TX.
• The monthly escalation factor is 0.231.
 9/10/2009
CEF Fact Sheet

Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building

Date of Estimate: August 5, 2009

FEMA Region: VI
Preparer(s): Nathan Charles and Ave Grace
Applicant Name: Coastal Texas Planning Commission
Project Title: Planning Commission Office Restoration
Damaged Facility: Planning Commission Office Building
Declaration Number: FEMA 9876 DR - TX
Project Number:
PA ID No.:
Date of Inspection: August 3, 2009
Event Date(s) July 23 - 25, 2009
Work Category: E - Buidings
Type of Work: Repair
(Enter New, Repair, etc.) Replacement
Other Eligible Work

Preparer's Notes:
Heavy rain from a subtropical storm caused extensive flooding in the Galveston, Texas area. The storm caused
flooding received a disaster declaration.

The main office building of the Coastal Texas Planning Commision received extensive exterior and interior
damage as a result of the flooding. The main office building is a one-story, timber pile supported, wood frame
structure encompassing approximately 4,100 SF.

Based on the extent of the building damage, a repair vs. replacement analysis was performed. As shown in this
CEF, the estimated Part A repair cost is $306,743, and the estimated Part A replacement cost is $491,268. The
repair/replacement ratio is 62.4% which is greater than 50% making replacement the eligible scope of work.

The repair estimate is based on RSMeans Buidling Construction and Assembly unit cost data, and the
replacement estimate is based on RSMeans Square Foot and Assembly unit cost data. Both estimates are
based on 2nd quarter 2009 data adjusted to Galveston Texas.

An architect has been retained but design work is just begining. The project is expected to use the design-bid-
build delivery method.

Applicant intends to award a single contract for demolition of the damaged building and construction of new building. Eligible d

Damage description and eligible work for the repalcement building is detailed on the Project Worksheet.

1 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Notes
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Damaged Facility: Planning Commission Office Building
Applicant Name: Coastal Texas Planning Commission
Project Number: 0
Date of Estimate: August 5, 2009
Preparer(s): Nathan Charles and Ave Grace
Part A Notes: A.1 - Unit costs for based on RSMeans Building Cost, Square Foot Cost, and Assembly
Cost data using CostWorks. Cost data updated to 2nd quarter 2009. Location in
CostWorks set as Galveston, TX. City Adjustment Factor is 1.0.

A.2 -
Part B Notes: B.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 5%, the average recommended value, for safety and
security. Demoliton work will require special safety and security barriers. Other work
will require typcial construction safety measures, and measures to secure
equipment and materials during non-working hours.
Estimate includes a cost of 0.5%, the average recommended value, for temporary
services and utilties. Contractor willl be required to provide all site services including
temproary power, communications, potable water, and sanitation.
Estimate includes a cost of 0.5%, the average recommended value, for qualtiy
control. Field testing and inspection is anticipated for pile installation, concrete, and
compacted fill.
Estimate includes a cost of 5%, the recommended value, for submittals. Project
speficiations are expected to require submittals of shop drawings, samples of
maerials, and manufacturer certifications that materials meet specification
requirements.

B.2 - General conditions costs have been included for site supervision and coordination.

Part C Notes: C.1 - Estimate includes a contingency of 12% for design uncertainty, slighlty below the
average recommended value during the preliminary design stage. An A&E has
been selected but design has not started. Uncertainties include potential presence
of hazardous materials, such as asbestos in the existing buiding being demolished,
and type and capacity of piles for the foundations.
C.2 - No constructability issues are expected for the new construction. Therefore no
costs for constructability are included in the estimate.
C.3 - Estimate includes a cost of 2%, the average recommended value, for site access.
The site is close to Galveston, TX, with good access to labor and materials. Site
access for new construction will be impacted by demolition work during the initial
stages of construction.
Estimate includes a cost of 2% each, the average recommended value for storage
and staging. The site is relatively small requiring off-site storage of most
construction materials. Those limitations are expected to have an impact on costs
as a result of having to handle some materials multiple times from delivery to
installation.
C.4 - Based on the size of the project, no economies of scale are anticipated.
Part D Notes: D.1 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC home office
overhead is included in the estimate.
D.2 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC costs for
project insurance on bonds is included in the estimate.

2 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Notes
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
D.3 - The project is expected to employ a General Contractor. Therefore, GC profit is
included in the estimate.
Part E Notes: E - The anticipated project schedule is 4 months for design, 2 months to bid and award
a contract, and 12 months for construction. Time to midpoint of construction =
4+2+(12/2) = 12 months.
Current monthly escaltion factor provided by PAO = 0.231%
Part F Notes: F.1 - The Planning Commission is exempt from plan review fees.
F.2 - The Planning Commission is exempt from building permit fee.
Part G Notes: G.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 4.15% for changes in the eligible scope of work that
may be encountered during the project.
Part H Notes: H.1 - Estimate includes a cost of 1% for the applicant to manage project design.
H.2 - Estimate includes a cost of 15.4% for design services based on a project of
average complexity as defined in the PA Guide, June 2007.
H.3 - Estimate includes a cost of 3.6% to manage construction of both completed and
uncompleted work.
Miscellaneous Reference to recommended values is to guidance provided in the CEF Instructional
Notes & Guide, August 2009.
Comments:

3 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Completed Work Items

Add Row Completed Permanent Items
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Permanent Total $ -

Add Row Completed Non-Permanent Items

$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Completed - Non-Permanent Total $ -

4 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Uncompleted Work Items

Add Row Uncompleted Permanent Items
REPAIR ESTIMATE $ -
Partition, galv LB studs, 18 ga x 6" W studs 16" O.C. x 12' H, 054104006200 150.00 L.F.
incl galv top & bottom track, excl openings, headers, beams, $35.00 1.0000 $ 5,250.01
bracing & bridging
Wood framing, miscellaneous, nailers, treated, steel 061105458660 0.64 M.B.F.
$1,924.72 1.0000 $ 1,227.97
construction, 2" x 4"
Custom Cabinets, kitchen base cabinets, hardwood, 064101000880 7.00 Ea.
prefinished, 1 top drawer, 1 door below, 24" deep, 35" high, $414.99 1.0000 $ 2,904.96
24" wide, excl. countertops
Custom Cabinets, kitchen wall cabinets, hardwood, 064101004400 6.00 Ea.
$239.00 1.0000 $ 1,434.01
prefinished, 2 doors, 12" deep, 15" high, 30" wide
Counter Tops, stock, plastic laminate, 24" wide, includes 064151000020 15.00 L.F.
$20.00 1.0000 $ 300.00
backsplash, minimum
Blanket insulation, for walls or ceilings, kraft faced fiberglass, 3- 072109500060 2,157.00 S.F.
$0.66 1.0000 $ 1,423.66
1/2" thick, R13, 11" wide
Roof Deck Insulation, expanded polystyrene, 3" thick, R11.49, 072207002110 4,096.00 S.F.
$1.25 1.0000 $ 5,120.00
1#/CF density
Polymer-based exterior insulation and finish system, field 072401000130 875.00 S.F.
applied, 4" EPS insulation, with 1/2" cement board sheathing $11.80 1.0000 $ 10,325.18

Polymer-based exterior insulation and finish system, v-groove 072401000370 200.00 L.F.
$0.67 1.0000 $ 134.20
shape in panel face
Vapor Retarders, building paper, aluminum and kraft 072601000020 22.00 Sq.
$14.45 1.0000 $ 317.89
laminated, foil 1 side
APP modified bituminous membrane, base sheet, #15 glass 075505000040 41.00 Sq.
$30.00 1.0000 $ 1,229.98
fiber felt, fully mopped to deck
SBS modified bituminous membrane, granule surface cap 075505001100 4,096.00 S.F.
$2.16 1.0000 $ 8,848.59
sheet, polyester reinforced, 160 mils, mopped
Sheet metal flashing, aluminum, flexible, mill finish, .050" thick, 076506000300 496.00 S.F.
$4.96 1.0000 $ 2,460.36
including up to 4 bends
Doors, commercial, steel, flush, full panel, hollow core, hollow 081102000640 2.00 Ea.
$410.00 1.0000 $ 820.00
metal, 20 ga., 3'-0" x 7'-0" x 1-3/4" thick

5 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Frames, steel, knock down, hollow metal, single, 16 ga., up to 081108200100 20.00 Ea.
$164.00 1.0000 $ 3,280.00
5-3/4" deep, 7'-0" h x 3'-0" w
Doors, wood, architectural, flush, interior, hollow core, 7 ply, 082109000180 18.00 Ea.
$139.01 1.0000 $ 2,502.13
birch face, 3'-0" x 6'-8" x 1-3/8" thick
Storefront Systems, aluminum frame, monumental grade, clear 084101400700 189.00 S.F.
3/8" plate glass, 3' x 7' door with hardware, 400 SF max wall, $45.50 1.0000 $ 8,599.29
wall height to 12' high
Door hardware, school, single, interior, regular use, excl. lever 087101502500 20.00 Door
$357.50 1.0000 $ 7,150.00
Stucco, 3 coats, float finish, with mesh, on wood frame, 1" 092202000015 240.00 S.Y.
$34.50 1.0000 $ 8,278.99
thick
Expansion joint, 3/4" grounds, limited expansion, 1 piece, galv. 092057001800 8.00 C.L.F.
$210.00 1.0000 $ 1,680.00
Partition wall, interior, standard, taped both sides, installed on 092601003800 4,330.00 S.F.
& incl. 25 ga, NLB metal studs, 3 5/8" wide, 16" O.C., 8' to 12' $3.11 1.0000 $ 13,468.12
high, 5/8" gypsum drywall
Ceramic tile, sanitary cove base, mud set, 6" x 4-1/4" h 093101001200 108.00 L.F. $8.90 1.0000 $ 961.22
Paints & Coatings, walls & ceilings, interior, concrete, drywall 099109201200 6,507.00 S.F.
or plaster, oil base, 3 coats, smooth finish, brushwork $0.67 1.0000 $ 4,359.69

Paints & Coatings, int. latex, doors, flush, both sides, roll & 099103100110 20.00 Ea.
$28.00 1.0000 $ 559.92
brush, primer, incl. frame & trim
Ceramic tile, walls, interior, thin set, 4-1/4" x 4-1/4" 093101005400 1,467.00 S.F. $4.81 1.0000 $ 7,055.24
Ceramic tile, exterior walls, frostproof, crystalline glazed, mud 093101006700 14.00 S.F.
$9.60 1.0000 $ 134.41
set, scored, 4-1/4" x 4-1/4"
Suspended Acoustic Ceiling Tiles, fiberglass boards, film 095107000400 843.00 S.F.
$2.47 1.0000 $ 2,082.17
faced, 2' x 2' or 2' x 4' x 3/4" thick
Cove base, rubber or vinyl, standard colors, 4" h, .080" thick 096512001150 745.00 L.F.
$1.82 1.0000 $ 1,355.97
Resilient Flooring, vinyl composition tile, solid, 12" x 12" x 096581007300 1,472.00 S.F.
$2.88 1.0000 $ 4,239.30
3/32"
Carpet, commercial grades, direct cement, nylon, plush, 60 096808003340 34.00 S.Y.
$72.50 1.0000 $ 2,465.04
oz., heavy traffic
Paints & Coatings, int. latex, doors, flush, both sides, roll & 099103100120 20.00 Ea.
$29.00 1.0000 $ 579.91
brush, finish coat, incl. frame & trim
Entrance screens, toilet, floor mounted, plastic laminate on 101651004300 2.00 Ea.
$579.99 1.0000 $ 1,159.98
particle board, 58" h x 48" w

6 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Shower doors, tempered glass door, economy, 24" w, 101851004200 1.00 Ea.
$245.98 1.0000 $ 245.98
excludes plumbing
Lockers, steel, baked enamel, single tier box, 12" x 15" x 72" 105055000110 3.00 Ea.
$260.98 1.0000 $ 782.94
Lavatory, wall hung, porcelain enamel on cast iron, white, 154184504040 6.00 Ea.
$510.02 1.0000 $ 3,060.13
single bowl, 16" x 14", includes trim
Carriers/supports, urinal, wall-mounted, plate type system 154102006300 10.00 Ea. $300.01 1.0000 $ 3,000.10
Faucets/fittings, lavatory faucet, center set with porcelain cross 154103002220 3.00 Ea.
$189.00 1.0000 $ 567.01
handles, polished chrome, with pop-up drain
Faucets/fittings, flush valves, with vacuum breaker, water 154103000860 3.00 Ea.
$182.01 1.0000 $ 546.04
closet, exposed rear spud
Faucets/fittings, flush valve, urinal, concealed stall 154103000960 1.00 Ea. $190.00 1.0000 $ 190.00
Faucets/fittings, flush valve, automatic flush sensor and 154103000972 1.00 Ea.
$465.00 1.0000 $ 465.00
operator for urinals or waterclosets
Faucets/fittings, shower thermostatic mixing valve, concealed 154103004200 1.00 Ea.
$374.99 1.0000 $ 374.99
Shower, head, water economizer 154185005500 1.00 Ea. $67.50 1.0000 $ 67.50
Drain, floor, medium duty, cast iron, deep flange, 7" diameter 151503002040 1 Ea.
$204.99 1.0000 $ 204.99
top, 2" and 3" pipe size
Water heater, residential, electric, glass lined tank, double 154802001180 1 Ea.
$1,499.97 1.0000 $ 1,499.97
element, 5 year, 120 gallon
Pipe, copper, tubing, solder, 1/2" diameter, type L, includes 151074202140 50 L.F.
$8.75 1.0000 $ 437.42
coupling & clevis hanger assembly 10' O.C.
Sink, kitchen, counter top style, porcelain enamel on cast iron, 154186002000 1 Ea.
$404.98 1.0000 $ 404.98
single bowl, 24" x 21", includes faucet and drain
Faucets/fittings, kitchen sink faucets, top mount, cast spout 154103001000 1 Ea.
$95.49 1.0000 $ 95.49
A/C packaged, DX, air cooled, electric heat, VAV, 60 ton D30502021060 1 Ea. $87,323.54 1.0000 $ 87,323.54
Service installation, includes breakers, metering, 20' conduit & D50101200520 1 Ea.
$32,218.90 1.0000 $ 32,218.90
wire, 3 phase, 4 wire, 120/208 V, 1600 A
Feeder installation 600 V, including RGS conduit and XHHW D50102300520 50 L.F.
$421.91 1.0000 $ 21,095.58
wire, 1600 A
Receptacles and wall switches, 400 SF, 6 receptacles D50201200560 4,100 S.F. $2.14 1.0000 $ 8,759.81
Fluorescent fixtures, type D, 12 fixtures per 600 SF D50202081640 4,100 S.F. $7.13 1.0000 $ 29,219.80
Central air conditioning power, 8 watts D50201400360 4,100 S.F. $0.75 1.0000 $ 3,059.01
Miscellaneous power, 2 watts D50201350440 4,100 S.F. $0.35 1.0000 $ 1,415.48
REPAIR SUBTOTAL $ 306,742.83

7 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

$ -
REPLACEMENT ESTIMATE $ -
Wood piles, 25' long, 50K load, friction type, 3 pile cluster A10201602240 25 Ea. $1,549.79 1.0000 $ 38,744.75
Grade beam, 15' span, 28" deep, 12" wide, 8 KLF load A10202102220 640 L.F. $81.00 1.0000 $ 51,841.34
Slab on grade, 5" thick, light industrial, reinforced A10301203400 4,100 S.F. $5.40 1.0000 $ 22,128.93
Roof Construction B1020 4,100 S.F $7.12 1.0000 $ 29,192.00
Exterior Walls B2010 4,100 S.F $6.88 1.0000 $ 28,208.00
Exterior Windows B2020 4,100 S.F $5.02 1.0000 $ 20,582.00
Exterior Doors B2030 4,100 S.F $2.22 1.0000 $ 9,102.00
Roof Coverings B3010 4,100 S.F $1.70 1.0000 $ 6,970.00
Partitions C1010 4,100 S.F $3.88 1.0000 $ 15,908.00
Interior Doors C1020 4,100 S.F $3.95 1.0000 $ 16,195.00
Fittings C1030 4,100 S.F $0.46 1.0000 $ 1,886.00
Wall Finishes C3010 4,100 S.F $1.07 1.0000 $ 4,387.00
Floor Finishes C3020 4,100 S.F $6.95 1.0000 $ 28,495.00
Ceiling Finishes C3030 4,100 S.F $5.10 1.0000 $ 20,910.00
Plumbing Fixtures D2010 4,100 S.F $4.07 1.0000 $ 16,687.00
Domestic Water Distribution D2020 4,100 S.F $1.48 1.0000 $ 6,068.00
Terminal & Package Units D3050 4,100 S.F $16.34 1.0000 $ 66,994.00
Sprinklers D4010 4,100 S.F $2.20 1.0000 $ 9,020.00
Standpipes D4020 4,100 S.F $0.95 1.0000 $ 3,895.00
Electrical Service/Distribution D5010 4,100 S.F $8.71 1.0000 $ 35,711.00
Lighting and Branch Wiring D5020 4,100 S.F $8.46 1.0000 $ 34,686.00
Communications and Security D5030 4,100 S.F $5.59 1.0000 $ 22,919.00
Other Electrical Systems D5090 4,100 S.F $0.18 1.0000 $ 738.00
REPLACEMENT SUBTOTAL $ 491,268.01
$ -
Repair/Replacement Analysis: Repair Cost ($306,743)/Replacement Cost ($491,268) = 0.6244 = 62.4%. Exceeds 50%, replacement is
$ -
eligible.
Additional Eligible Work for Replacment $ -
Building demolition, small buildings or single buildings,
concrete, includes 20-mile haul, excludes salvage, foundation 022201100600 5,750 C.F. $0.37 1.0000 $ 2,127.73
demolition or dump fees
Bldg. footings and foundations demolition, floors, concrete slab
on grade, concrete, wire mesh reinforced, 4" thick, excludes 022201300280 4,096 S.F. $3.86 1.0000 $ 15,806.46
disposal costs and dump fees

8 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Part A
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building

Item Div. # or City Adj

Item Description Title / Component Description Qty Units Unit Price Total Cost
No. Cost Code Factor

Bldg. footings and foundations demolition, add for disposal, up

022201304250 2,200 C.Y. $13.80 1.0000 $ 30,362.86
to 5 miles, excludes disposal costs and dump fees
Selective demolition, dump charges, typical urban city, building
022203300100 2,000 Ton $137.50 1.0000 $ 275,000.00
construction materials, includes tipping fees only
Additonal Work Subtotal $ 323,297.05
Uncompleted - Permanent Total $ 814,565.07

Add Row Uncompleted Non-Permanent Items

$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
$ - $ -
Uncompleted - Non-Permanent Total $ -

TOTAL PART A BASE CONSTRUCTION COST $ 814,565.07

9 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ -

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part A Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Guide
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0%
Quality Control 0% 1.0%
Submittals 0% 5.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part B Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

10 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Guide
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies
Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Guide
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging
Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

C.4 Economies of Scale

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

11 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

D.3 General Contractor's Profit

New Construction

Repair/Retrofit
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part D Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

E Cost Escalation Factors

Cost Escalation Factor

Months
Monthly Factor
Part E Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

12 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

13 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Completed Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0% 6.0%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part H Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

TOTAL OF COMPLETED WORK

14 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total
A "Base Costs" for Construction Work-In Trades
A.1 Permanent Work (CEF Part A) $ 491,268 $ 323,297 $ 814,565

A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) . $ -

Part A Total $ - $ 491,268 $ 323,297 $ - $ - $ 814,565

B General Requirements and General Conditions

Range
B.1 General Requirements Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Safety & Security 4.0% 6.0% 5.0% 5.0%
Temporary Services & Utilities 0% 1.0% 0.5% 0.5%
Quality Control 0% 1.0% 0.5% 0.5%
Submittals 0% 5.0% 0.5% 0.5%
$ - $ 31,932 $ 21,014 $ - $ - $ 52,947

B.2 General Conditions (4.25%)

$ - $ 20,879 $ 13,740 $ - $ - $ 34,619

Part B Total $ - $ 52,811 $ 34,754 $ - $ - $ 87,566

PART A through B SUBTOTAL $ - $ 544,079 $ 358,051 $ - $ - $ 902,131

15 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

C Construction Cost Contingencies

Range
C.1 Design-Phase Scope Contingencies Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Preliminary Engineering Analysis 7.0% 20.0% 12.0% 12.0%
Working Drawings 2.0% 10.0%
$ - $ 65,290 $ 42,966 $ - $ - $ 108,256

C.2 Facility or Project Constructability Enter % in Appropriate Column

Facility or Project Type and Complexity See IG for Values
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Range
C.3 Access, Storage & Staging Low to High Enter % in Appropriate Column
Access Contingencies 0% 4.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Storage Contingencies 0% 4.0% 2.0% 2.0%
Staging Contingencies 0% 4.0% 2.0% 2.0%
$ - $ 32,645 $ 21,483 $ - $ - $ 54,128

C.4 Economies of Scale

-0.5%
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part C Total $ - $ 97,934 $ 64,449 $ - $ - $ 162,384

PART A through C SUBTOTAL $ - $ 642,014 $ 422,501 $ - $ - $ 1,064,514

16 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

D.1 GC's Home Office Overhead

7.7%
$ - $ 49,435 $ 32,533 $ - $ - $ 81,968

GC's Insurance, Payment &

D.2
Performance Bonds 3.3%
$ - $ 21,186 $ 13,943 $ - $ - $ 35,129
D.3 General Contractor's Profit
8.9% 10.0%
New Construction
Repair/Retrofit
$ - $ 63,345 $ 46,898 $ - $ - $ 110,242

Part D Total $ - $ 133,966 $ 93,373 $ - $ - $ 227,339

PART A through D SUBTOTAL $ - $ 775,980 $ 515,873 $ - $ - $ 1,291,853

E Cost Escalation Factors

E Cost Escalation Factor

Months 12 12
Monthly Factor 0.231% 0.231%
Part E Total $ - $ 21,510 $ 14,300 $ - $ - $ 35,810

PART A through E SUBTOTAL $ - $ 797,490 $ 530,173 $ - $ - $ 1,327,663

17 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

F Plan Review and Permit Construction Cost

F.1 Plan Review Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

F.2 Construction Permit Fees

(List Individual Requirements Separately)

$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

Part F Total $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

PART A through F SUBTOTAL $ - $ 797,490 $ 530,173 $ - $ - $ 1,327,663

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders
7.0% 5.0% 5.4% 7.0% 7.0%
PART G Total $ - $ 39,903 $ 28,890 $ - $ - $ 68,793

PART A through G SUBTOTAL $ - $ 837,393 $ 559,064 $ - $ - $ 1,396,456

18 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Summary of Uncompleted Work
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Repair Replacement Other Eligible Work $ - $ - Total

H Applicant's Project Management And Design Costs

Applicant's Project Management -

H.1
Design Phase 1.0%
$ - $ 8,374 $ 5,591 $ - $ - $ 13,965

H.2 A/E Design Contract Applicability

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) 5.6% 16.9% 18.4% 5.6% 5.6%
Average Complexity (Curve B) 4.5% 11.4% 11.8% 4.5% 5.6%
Basic Construction Inspection Services 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0% 3.0%

A/E Design Contract Cost

Above Average Complexity (Curve A) $ - $ 141,336 $ 102,762 $ - $ -
Average Complexity (Curve B) $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Basic Construction Inspection Services $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -

$ - $ 141,336 $ 102,762 $ - $ - $ 244,098

H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase

6.0% 4.4% 5.5% 6.0% 6.0%
$ - $ 36,621 $ 30,729 $ - $ - $ 67,350

Part H Total $ - $ 186,331 $ 139,082 $ - $ - $ 325,413

PART A through H SUBTOTAL $ - $ 1,023,724 $ 698,145 $ - $ - $ 1,721,869

TOTAL OF UNCOMPLETED WORK $1,721,869

19 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 9/10/2009
CEF Total Project Summary

Summary
Coastal Texas Planning Commission - Planning Commission Office Building
Completed Uncompleted Total
PART A "Base Costs" for Construction Work In Trades $ - $ 814,565 $ 814,565
A.1 Permanent Work $ - $ 814,565 $ 814,565
A.2 Non-Permanent Job Specific Work (CEF Part A) $ - $ - $ -

PART B General Requirements and General Conditions $ - $ 87,566 $ 87,566

B.1 General Requirements $ - $ 52,947 $ 52,947
B.2 General Conditions $ - $ 34,619 $ 34,619

PART C Construction Cost Contingencies (Design and Construction) $ - $ 162,384 $ 162,384

C.1 Standard Design-Phase Scope Contingencies $ - $ 108,256 $ 108,256
C.2 Facility or Project Constructability $ - $ - $ -
C.3 Access, Storage, and Staging Contingencies $ - $ 54,128 $ 54,128
C.4 Economies of Scale in New Construction $ - $ - $ -

PART D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit $ - $ 227,339 $ 227,339

D.1 General Contractor's Home Office Overhead Costs $ - $ 81,968 $ 81,968
D.2 General Contractor's Insurance, Payment, and Performance Bonds $ - $ 35,129 $ 35,129
D.3 Contractor's Profit $ - $ 110,242 $ 110,242

PART E Cost Escalation Allowance $ - $ 35,810 $ 35,810

PART F Plan Review and Construction Permit Costs $ - $ - $ -

F.1 Plan Review Fees $ - $ - $ -
F.2 Construction Permit Fees $ - $ - $ -

PART G Applicant's Reserve for Construction $ - $ 68,793 $ 68,793

PART H Applicant's Project Management and Design Costs $ - $ 325,413 $ 325,413

H.1 Applicant's Project Management - Design Phase $ - $ 13,965 $ 13,965
H.2 Architecture & Engineering Design Contract Costs $ - $ 244,098 $ 244,098
H.3 Project Management - Construction Phase $ - $ 67,350 $ 67,350

Complete Project Total for Completed and Uncompleted Work $ - $ 1,721,869 $ 1,721,869

20 of 20 Appendix B - CEF Example 3B

 Appendix C
CEF - Large Project
Report

CEF Instructional Guide

(Version 2.1)
September 2009
FEMA Public Assistance Program FEMA- -DR- Prepared By:
Cost Estimating Format (CEF) – Large Project Report
Declaration Date: Date Prepared:
[First report due 30 days after completion of large projects that were estimated using the CEF]

Category of CEF Dollar

Project Permanent CEF Actual Amount of
PA ID Reason for Cost Primary Function of
Applicant Name Worksheet Work Estimated Post- Obligation
Number Reconciliation Facility
Number (C, D, E, Cost Construction or
F, or G) Cost Deobligation

Instructions for Completion (APPLY THE “SAVE-AS” <document name> FEATURE, FOR ADDITIONAL USE, WHEN THE REPORT HAS BEEN COMPLETED):

Starting at the top-middle field, enter the required information and press the tab key
to progress to the next field (or the shift-tab key to return to the previous field) –

1- Enter the disaster number and the name of PA Group Supervisor preparing the report
2- Enter the disaster declaration date and the date that this report was prepared
3- Enter the Applicant Name
4- Enter the PA ID # for the Applicant
5- Enter the Project Worksheet number for each large project estimated using CEF
6- Enter the large project category for permanent work SUBMIT THIS REPORT TO:
7- Enter the estimated large project cost for eligible work (from the CEF template)
8- Enter the actual, final post-construction cost for eligible work Anthony Ndum, P.E.
9- Enter the cost reconciliation calculation. Use the minus sign for negative numbers Disaster Assistance Directorate
(will display $ in parenthesis). Infrastructure Support Division
10- Enter a short description of the reason for cost reconciliation (i.e. the variation Federal Emergency Management Agency
between estimated and actual costs). Use a separate, attached sheet of paper Federal Center Plaza
if more space is needed and so note in the comment field as necessary. 500 C Street S.W., Room 414
11- Enter a short description of the function of the facility Washington, D.C. 20472
 Appendix D
Hazard Mitigation Measures for
Large Projects

CEF Instructional Guide

(Version 2.1)
September 2009
 Appendix D
Hazard Mitigation Funding Under Section 406 (Stafford Act)

POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES THAT ARE PRE-DETERMINED TO BE

COST EFFECTIVE

The following potential mitigation measures (reference: paragraph VII.B.2) are determined to be
cost-effective if they:
• do not exceed 100% of project cost,
• are appropriate to the disaster damage,
• will prevent future similar damage,
• are directly related to the eligible damaged elements,
• do not increase risks or cause adverse effects to the property or elsewhere,
• are technically feasible for the hazard and location, and
• otherwise meet requirements stipulated in this policy, including environmental, historic,
and mitigation planning considerations.
This list will continue to be evaluated and will evolve over time as new information becomes
available.

General
I. Drainage/crossings and bridges
A. Drainage structures - When drainage structures are destroyed, replacing the
structure with multiple structures or a larger structure. Sizing of replacement
culverts can be made using in-place state/local drainage criteria (nomographs).
However, structures need to be considered with regard to a total drainage system
and should not be upgraded without a watershed hydrology study with an
emphasis on downstream effects and NFIP regulations.
B. Culverts – Where the alignment of culverts is inconsistent with streams flowing
through them (because it has been blown-out), realign or relocate the culverts to
improve hydraulics and minimize erosion. However, realignment of structures
must be considered in regard to a total drainage system and shall not be replaced
without a hydrology study with an emphasis on downstream erosion effects.
C. Headwalls and wing walls - Installation to control erosion.
D. Low-water crossings – When bridges are destroyed and where traffic counts are
low, replacing bridges with carefully placed low-water crossings.
E. Gabion baskets, riprap, sheet-piling, and geotextile fabric installation - Installation
to control erosion.
F. Roadways – Where roadways shoulders are damaged by overflow from adjacent
water courses, stabilize shoulders and embankments with geotextile fabric.

Disaster Assistance Policy 9526.1, July 30, 2007 Page 1 of 5

 Appendix D
Hazard Mitigation Funding Under Section 406 (Stafford Act)

G. Restraining cables on bridges - Installation of cables to restrain a bridge from

being knocked off piers or abutments during floods or earthquakes. Also, where
bridges have been damaged or destroyed when girders, beams and decking system
are displaced by storm surges or earthquakes, install girder and deck uplift tie-
downs to prevent their displacement from the substructure.
II. Sanitary and storm sewer systems
A. Access covers - When feasible, access covers can be elevated to the hydraulic
grade line. There are a number of devices that prevent infiltration into access
holes.
B. Sewer lines – Repair, lining or encasement of damaged sections to prevent
infiltration or structural collapse.
C. Pump stations –
1. Equipment or controls in a pump station that are subject to damage from
the 100- year flood can be elevated. Pump station buildings can be dry
flood-proofed.
2. Installation of camlocks, transfer switches, and electrical panels to
facilitate the connection of portable emergency generators.
3. Pump stations – If pumps and their attached motors are damaged by storm
water inundation, replace them with submersible or inline pumps as
appropriate.
4. Pump stations – If pump station equipment is damaged as a result of
inundation resulting from power failure, install switches, circuit isolation
and/quick connect capability to facilitate rapid connection of backup
power.
III. Wastewater treatment plants
A. Elevation of equipment and controls that can be elevated easily.
B. Dry or wet flood-proofing of buildings.
IV. Potable water
A. Well systems –
1. Reduction of infiltration and subsequent contamination of the aquifer.
Methods include casing the well or raising the elevation of the well head.
2. Elevation of controls, mechanical equipment, or electrical service
associated with use of the well to protect them from flood damage.
B. Raw water intakes - Buttressing to prevent damage from erosion, scour and flood
debris.
C. Water treatment plants –
1. Elevation of equipment and controls that can be elevated easily.

Disaster Assistance Policy 9526.1, July 30, 2007 Page 2 of 5

 Appendix D
Hazard Mitigation Funding Under Section 406 (Stafford Act)

2. Dry flood-proofing.
V. Electric power distribution
A. Pad-mounted transformers - elevating above the base flood elevation.
B. Using multiple poles to support transformers.
C. Anchoring or otherwise protecting fuel tanks from movement in a disaster.
D. Replacing damaged poles with higher-rated poles, of the same or different
material such as replacing wood poles with precast concrete or steel.
E. Adding guy wire or additional support to power lines.
F. Removing large diameter lines from poles.
G. Providing looped distribution service or other redundancies in the electrical
service to critical facilities.
VI. Above ground storage tanks
A. Strengthening or stiffening base connections.
B. Installation of self-initiating disconnects and shut-off values between tanks and
distribution lines to minimize damage and leaks.
VII. Underground pipelines - Installation of shut-off valves so that damaged sections of
pipeline can be isolated.

Buildings:
I. General effects of flood damage –
A. Buildings substantially damaged under NFIP regulations - Repair, dry flood-
proofing, or elevation so they are protected to meet minimum NFIP regulations. If
the building is replaced, rather than repaired, minimum NFIP requirements are
generally in place as codes and standards in participating communities and are
applicable in both repair and replacement situation. Section 406 mitigation should
be considered in those cases where these standards either fall short or provide no
protection against other hazards.
B. Buildings not substantially damaged under NFIP regulations - If technically
feasible, dry flood-proofing. Electrical panels, machinery rooms, emergency
generators can be elevated above the BFE or dry flood-proofed. If dry flood-
proofing is not feasible, these buildings should be wet flood-proofed.
II. Roofs - Because the failure of a roof covering can lead to extensive damage to contents
and operation, damaged roofing should be evaluated to determine cause of failure.
A. Low slope roofs - Replacement of the entire roof with a roof covering with a
secondary membrane and a fully adhered roof covering, such as modified
bitumen. Mechanically fastened insulation or membranes are not acceptable.

Disaster Assistance Policy 9526.1, July 30, 2007 Page 3 of 5

 Appendix D
Hazard Mitigation Funding Under Section 406 (Stafford Act)

B. Roof-mounted equipment should be attached to a foundation that will resist

expected wind forces.
C. Hurricane clips - Hurricane clips for use in high-wind areas.
D. Roofs – When roof damages are due to wind pressure beneath soffits and
overhangs, strengthen the soffit and overhang material and means of attachment
to prevent wind pressure adversely affecting the roofing system.
E. Roofs – When there is roof system damage or water intrusion due to damage to
roof opening such as hatches and skylights strengthen the openings or the
windows to avoid future damage.
F. Roofs – For gable roofs damaged by wind, replace the gable end-framing with
hipped roof framing to reduce wind forces (lower edge pressure; reduced
projected wind area) and strengthen the roof framing.
III. Shutters - In areas subject to hurricane winds, shutters are appropriate in the following
areas:
A. All damaged windows on critical facilities such as hospitals.
B. The lower floors of buildings with damaged windows most likely to be struck by
debris.
C. Damaged windows of buildings with very high value contents that can be
damaged by water (such as libraries and document centers).
D. Damaged windows of buildings subject to debris from nearby ballasted roofs,
metal buildings, manufactured homes or other structures likely to fail and result in
debris.
IV. Anchoring –
A. Anchoring of mechanical and electrical equipment in critical facilities.
B. For small ancillary buildings that have sustained damage and/or have caused
damage to other facilities, anchor the buildings to foundations to prevent toppling
or becoming missile hazards.
V. Flexible piping - Installation of flexible piping at pipe/conduit connections to equipment
to accommodate expected movement in an earthquake.
VI. Bracing –
A. Bracing of and large diameter pipes and electrical lines to meet seismic loads.
B. Bracing non structural interior walls and partitions.
C. Bracing parapets, anchoring veneer or cladding, and bracing other non-structural
elements that could collapse and cause injury or block safe exit of a building
during an earthquake.
VII. Replacement of glass - Replacement of glass with impact-resistant material.

Disaster Assistance Policy 9526.1, July 30, 2007 Page 4 of 5

 Appendix D
Hazard Mitigation Funding Under Section 406 (Stafford Act)

VIII. General Buildings –

A. Buildings – Where spread footings have been undercut by scour, underpin
footings.
B. Siding – if siding has been damage by wind, replace with a stronger siding with
stronger attachments to the wall sheathing and structure.
C. Venting – Where there has been water damage caused by water intrusion through
venting systems, replace the vents with rain and water resistant vents.
IX. Doors and Windows –
A. Where damage has resulted from wind and water intrusion around weather
stripping on doors and/or windows, upgrade the weather stripping to prevent
water infiltration.
B. Where damage has been caused by wind-induced failure of doors, replace the
doors with stronger units. This applies to the door frame, door, hinges and lock
hardware. Both entry and garage doors should be considered.
X. Miscellaneous Structures –
A. Marine Piers – If marine piers ramps that attach to decking have been damaged by
storm-surge uplift and buoyancy, install open decking or floating decking with
uplift-resistant tie-downs and fasteners.
B. Signage – If sign panels and their supports have failed, replace with a stronger
type of system of supports and panels. Consider using multiple support posts and
stronger panels and fasteners.
C. Gutters and Downspouts – If damaged by either wind and/or water, upgrade the
gutter and downspout system to directing water away from the structure and
preventing interior or basement water damage.

Disaster Assistance Policy 9526.1, July 30, 2007 Page 5 of 5

 Appendix E
Standard Operating
Procedure – CEF for
Large Projects

CEF Instructional Guide

(Version 2.1)
September 2009
 Cost Estimating Format (CEF)
For Large Projects
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
SOP9570.8

COST ESTIMATING FORMAT

STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE

This Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) provides an overview of the Cost Estimating
Format (CEF) for Large Projects and guidance on how to use the CEF tool. The SOP
also discusses FEMA Headquarters large project reporting requirements.

What reference information is available on the CEF for Large Projects?

• The CEF Information Update (January 1999) provides an overview of FEMA’s cost
estimating methodology for large projects.

• The Cost Estimating Format for Large Projects Instructional Guide, Version 2.1
(September 2009) provides application guidance to users responsible for developing
large project cost estimates.

• A Microsoft Excel-based template, referred to as the CEF for Large Projects

Spreadsheet, provides more uniformity in estimating costs for large projects, and is
user friendly and flexible enough to respond to individual project conditions for all
types of permanent restorative work.

• The Applicant Handbook (FEMA Publication 323, October 2009) – Chapter 6,

Handling Large Projects describes an applicant roles and responsibilities in
formulating and documenting large projects.
(All documents referenced above can be located on the FEMA Web site at
http://www.fema.gov/government/grant/pa/resources.shtm).

For which Large Projects can the CEF be used to estimate costs?
The CEF should only be used on large projects for which the permanent restorative work
(categories C, D, E, F, and G) is less than 90 percent complete. Percent complete for all
types of projects (including improved and alternate projects) is calculated by dividing the
amount of approved contractor invoices for eligible work by the approved construction
contract amount for eligible work and multiplying the resulting decimal by 100.

Public Assistance Division Page 1 of 7

 Cost Estimating Format (CEF)
For Large Projects
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
SOP9570.8

What is the process for preparing an estimate for a Large Project using the CEF?

• The CEF tool is to be used for developing estimates of eligible costs for certain
permanent work large projects as described below. The primary objective is ensure
FEMA develops sound and reasonable estimates of eligible costs based on the
numerous factors, complexities, and local considerations related to the geographic
area and circumstances arising from the declared event. In order to develop the most
accurate and sound estimates, FEMA depends on a strong partnership with grantees
and subgrantees. The local officials and local technical professionals (i.e. engineers
and architects) commonly are in the best position to develop the estimates of eligible
costs once FEMA, the State, and local officials have agreed upon eligible scopes of
work. The role of FEMA is often to validate the estimates of eligible costs developed
by the locals, ensure the costs address only eligible disaster-related work, and that
appropriate CEF factors are applied to the base costs.

• The Public Assistance (PA) Group Supervisor or designee will determine which local
factors to use to develop the project cost estimate. Specific factors include unit price
sources, city cost indices (if applicable), and local costs for plan checks, building
permits, or special reviews. The PA Group Supervisor will collect and evaluate this
information for use in all CEF analyses at the beginning of each disaster.

• Project Specialists will determine the eligible scope of work and base costs (Part A of
the CEF); including Special Considerations and appropriate Section 406 hazard
mitigation for large projects that meet the CEF criteria. Projects Specialists will
complete Part A of the CEF in accordance with the guidance provided in the Cost
Estimating Format for Large Projects Instructional Guide. All work activities
needed to perform the eligible scope of work must include a written description of the
scope of work, the cost item reference [Construction Specifications Institute (CSI)
based], cost code reference (if FEMA cost codes are used), the unit [linear foot (LF),
square foot (SF), each (EA), cubic yard (CY), etc. - do not use lump sum (LS)], the
quantity or measurement, the unit cost, and the quantity cost. Project Specialists will
adjust each line item’s unit price and subtotal cost to reflect the city cost index where
the work will take place.

• Project Specialists will document the eligible scope of work on the CEF Fact Sheet.
Documentation must include detailed supporting backup information such as site
maps (or location plan), photographs, sketches, calculations, measurements, insurance
declarations, anticipated or actual insurance settlement, Section 406 Hazard
Mitigation Proposal(s) (HMP), construction permits and clearances, force account
summary sheets, and codes and standards described in the CEF Notes Sheet. For
major construction activities (e.g. water control facilities and large buildings), the
applicant should submit to the Project Specialist schematic drawings, a set of plans

Public Assistance Division Page 2 of 7

 Cost Estimating Format (CEF)
For Large Projects
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
SOP9570.8

(preferably reduced to 11" x 17") containing basic information such as elevations, floor
plans, site plan, structural plans and sections, etc., as applicable. The applicant should
keep copies of source documents such as invoices, vouchers, timesheets, purchase orders,
item slips, weight slips, plans and specifications, and insurance policies.

• After the eligible scope of work and its base costs are completed in Part A, the Project
Specialist will complete Parts B through H (the factors applied to the base cost) of the
CEF. The Project Specialist will develop separate summaries for completed and
uncompleted work. The Project Specialist will document assumptions used in
selecting factors B through H on the CEF Notes sheet.

• The Project Specialist will complete the Project Cost section of the PW as follows:

Item – Enter sequential item number

Code – #9000

Narrative – add statement "See attached CEF spreadsheet for itemized unit-price
estimate particulars"

Quantity/Unit – 1 LS (lump sum)

Unit Price – use the total estimate value from the CEF spreadsheet

Apply appropriate cost adjustments to the CEF line-item #1 (e.g., a deduction for
anticipated or actual insurance proceeds, salvage value/depreciation, etc.)

The Total Project Cost will reflect the final eligible cost after any cost
adjustments

• The following steps will then be performed:

1. The Project Specialist will print the Excel file containing the CEF estimate and
attach it to the PW. All applicable supporting back-up documentation noted
above must be attached to the CEF spreadsheet. The Project Specialist will
submit the completed PW and the CD ROM containing the electronic CEF
spreadsheet to the Public Assistance Coordination (PAC) Crew Leader for review.
2. The PAC Crew Leader will review, approve, and submit a paper and electronic
copy of the PW and CEF documentation to the Data Coordinator for entry into
EMMIE.
3. The Total Cost block of the PW will be used as the basis for obligating the
Federal share of the large project cost.

• When applicants complete large projects and submit project documentation to the
State and FEMA, FEMA will reconcile actual eligible costs against estimated costs,
except for alternate and improved projects.

Public Assistance Division Page 3 of 7

 Cost Estimating Format (CEF)
For Large Projects
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
SOP9570.8

• If the Project Specialist requires assistance with any part of the CEF, the PAC Crew
Leader will request a Technical Specialist (a cost estimator, engineer, environmental
specialist, historic preservation specialist, insurance specialist, etc.) from the Ordering
Specialist. Refer to the CEF for Large Projects Instructional Guide for more detail.

What is the process for preparing an estimate for a Large Project if CEF is not used?

• The Project Specialist will prepare the eligible scope of work and cost estimate using
the standard damage assessment cost estimating procedures (see the Public Assistance
Guide FEMA 322).

• The applicant should submit the same back-up and source documentation for all large
projects formulated with or without CEF.

• The Data coordinator will scan all applicable supporting back-up documentation and
attach to the PW.

• If the Project Specialist requires assistance with any part of the CEF, the PAC Crew
Leader will request a Technical Specialist (a cost estimator, engineer, environmental
specialist, historic preservation specialist, insurance specialist, etc.) from the Ordering
Specialist.

What are the appropriate references for unit prices in preparing Part A base costs?
• Project Specialists will request average weighted unit prices (local costs derived from
actual contract history) from the applicant or relevant State/regional agency (e.g.,
Department of Transportation) in order to develop Part A of the CEF. The Project
Specialist should evaluate the average weighted unit price information for
applicability to the eligible scope of work and consistency over a reasonable time
period.

• The Project Specialist may use the FEMA Cost Codes, but is not required to do so.
The FEMA Regional offices issue cost codes at the beginning of a Joint Field Office
(JFO) operation. The cost codes represent “complete and in-place” costs (i.e., labor,
equipment, and material costs necessary to complete installation) at the general
contractor level (different from various industry standard cost estimating resources)
and include overhead and profit.

• The Project Specialist may use the current edition of industry standard construction
cost estimating resources (e.g., RSMeans, BNi Costbooks, Marshall & Swift, Sweet’s
Unit Cost Guide, etc.) if the applicant does not have appropriate average weighted
unit price data for unit prices in preparing Part A base costs.

Public Assistance Division Page 4 of 7

 Cost Estimating Format (CEF)
For Large Projects
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
SOP9570.8

The PA Group Supervisor should order (at a minimum) one copy of each of the
following cost data books for use by PA staff at the JFO:
• ADA Compliance Pricing Guide • Facilities
• Building Construction • Heavy Construction
• Concrete and Masonry • Mechanical
• Electrical • Plumbing
• Repair and Remodeling • Square Foot Costs
• Site Work and Landscape

• If the Project Specialist uses national industry standard cost data in Part A, he should
apply city cost indices to adjust the national unit prices to the nearest city for the
declared counties. The PA Group Supervisor or designee will identify the zip codes
included in the declared area, research industry standard cost estimating resources for
the appropriate city cost factors and tabulate them for use by the Project Specialists.

• If cost estimating data is provided in an electronic format, only the appropriate city
and/or zip codes may need to be provided. Various industry standard electronic cost
estimating resources can be used to adjust the unit cost data to the required location
automatically.

How are local costs for Plan Review and Construction Permits (Part F) determined?

• The PA Group Supervisor or designee should request documentation related to plan

review and construction permit costs from the grantee and distribute the costs in
tabular form to the Project Specialists for their use.

• Alternatively, the Project Specialist may request this documentation from the
applicant and provide the documentation to the PAC Crew Leader and the PA Group
Supervisor for review and approval.

• The controlling jurisdiction (e.g., City Building Department or Office of State

Architect) will determine costs applicable to its areas of responsibility. Key items of
information include:

A description of how the plan review or construction permitting cost is defined.

Identification of the cost item that (construction cost, total project cost, etc.)
serves as the basis for calculation of plan review/construction permit costs.

The percentage applied to the base cost and these percentages may be on a sliding
scale.

If the fees are waived in post-disaster situations.

Public Assistance Division Page 5 of 7

 Cost Estimating Format (CEF)
For Large Projects
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
SOP9570.8

What are the responsibilities of the PA Group Supervisor?

The PA Group Supervisor or designee is responsible for checking the appropriateness

of individual factors and ranges (Parts B through H) and for uniform application of
these factors during large project formulation. This is especially important with
regard to force account efforts, use of contingencies, time frames for escalation, post-
disaster inflation adjustments (e.g., when local costs are used in Part A, etc.), and the
need for engineering design and construction phase services.

The type of damage sustained will dictate how the values are selected for many of the
factors. For example, visual identification of damage may be less difficult after a
flood (once floodwaters have receded) than after an earthquake. The PA Group
Supervisor may decide that the contingency factors in Part C should therefore be at
the higher end of the range for an earthquake than for flooding.

The PA Group Supervisor will be responsible for justifying range selections in

writing.

How is completed work costs included when the CEF is used for estimating the total
cost of a Large Project that is less than 90 percent complete?

The Project Specialist will prepare a Part A estimate using the CEF for Large Projects
spreadsheet for the entire project. The Project Specialist is responsible for separating
eligible work from ineligible work. If the applicant had an estimate prepared before the
work was completed, the Project Specialist should compare the actual costs against that
estimate, and if reasonable, reconcile the cost differences. The result should be entered in
Part A “Summary for Completed Work.” If no applicant estimate exists, the Project
Specialist will prepare a CEF Part A estimate of the eligible completed work activities
and compare the actual costs against it, and if reasonable, reconcile the cost differences.
The result should be entered in Part A ”Summary for Completed Work.” In both
instances, the Project Specialist will also prepare a Part A CEF estimate for the
uncompleted work portion using either average weighted unit prices or industry standard
construction cost estimating resources (e.g. RSMeans, BNi Costbooks, Marshall & Swift,
Sweet’s Unit Cost Guide, etc.). The Project Specialist is also responsible for completing
Parts B through H, as appropriate, for both the completed and uncompleted work.

Public Assistance Division Page 6 of 7

 Cost Estimating Format (CEF)
For Large Projects
Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)
SOP9570.8

What are the CEF large project reporting requirements?

• The CEF Large Project Report is a Microsoft Word-based form that is distributed
with the CEF Excel-based spreadsheet. Both tools are located on a CD ROM
attached to the inside-back cover of the Cost Estimating Format for Large Projects
Instructional Guide, Version 2.1, September 2009.

• For every large project FEMA estimated using CEF, the PA Group Supervisor or
designee will prepare a CEF Large Project Report consisting of:

Disaster Number (and preparer’s name)

Declaration Date (and date prepared)

Applicant Name

PA ID Number

PW Number

Category of Work

Type and function of the Facility

CEF Estimated Project Cost

Actual Project Cost

Dollar Amount of Obligation or Deobligation

Reason for Cost Reconciliation

• After applicants complete all large projects for which FEMA used CEF to estimate
the costs, and FEMA reconciles the actual project costs with estimates, the PA Group
Supervisor will forward the CEF Large Project Report to:

Anthony Ndum, P.E.

Federal Emergency Management Agency
500 “C” Street, S.W., Room 414
Washington, D.C. 20472

Public Assistance Division Page 7 of 7

 Appendix F
Guidelines for Selecting Values
CEF Parts B through H

CEF Instructional
Guide
(Version 2.1)
September 2009
 CEF V2.1
Guidelines for Application of Parts B through H

CEF RECOMMENDED APPLICATIONS

PART TITLE
RANGE VALUE APPLICATION
B General Requirements & Conditions
Most projects requiring routine site security, including temporary fences,
4%
barricades, etc., and general worker safety provisions.
Projects with unusual safety and security concerns such as requirements to
maintain public access during construction, special needs to protect
Safety & 5%
4% to 6% construction material and equipment during non-working hours, or special
Security worker safety issues such as work requiring a confined space entry program

Projects with extraordinary safety or security issues such as airports, ports,

6% correctional facilities, etc. that require full-time worker identification and
interaction with facility users.
All temporary services, including power, water, sanitation, communications,
0%
Temporary etc. are fully itemized in Part A as non-permanent work
Facilities & 0 to 1% Some, but not all, temporary services are included in Part A, e.g. sanitation
0.50%
Services faculties.
B.1
1% Temporary services are not itemized as non-permanent work in Part A.
Only appropriate for projects limited to non-structural repairs conducted
0%
using contract package without technical specifications.
0.50% Applicable to most routine projects involving A&E contract documents.
Quality Control 0 to 1%
Applicable to projects with A&E specifications requiring special testing, such
1% as pile load tests or full-scale load tests of structural elements, or projects
requiring special full-time engineering inspection and reports.
Only appropriate for projects limited to non-structural repairs conducted
0%
using pre-existing services contracts.
Submittals 0 to 5% Only appropriate for projects limited to non-structural repairs conducted
2.50%
using contract package without technical specifications.
5% Applicable to most routine projects involving A&E contract documents.

Off if project is performed without the involvement of a General Contractor,

General Off or if all General Contractor project costs, including supervision, trade
B.2 On or Off coordination, etc. are detailed in Part A.
Conditions
On Any project not included in the “Off” description.
C Construction Cost Contingencies
Estimates developed without engineering drawings and having a scope of
15% work consisting primarily of work from three or less CSI Divisions (based on
Preliminary 16 Division Format).
Engineering
Estimates developed without engineering drawings and having a scope of
Analysis –
15% to 20% 17.50% work consisting primarily of work from more than three and less than eight
Design Phase
CSI Divisions (based on 16 Division Format)
Scope
Contingencies Estimates developed without engineering drawings and having a scope of
C.1 20% work consisting primarily of work from more than eight CSI Divisions (based
on 16 Division Format)
7% to Estimates developed from a scope of eligible work based on preliminary
Working 10% engineering drawings equal to or less than 50% complete.
Drawings –
Estimates developed from a scope of eligible work based on preliminary
Design Phase 2% to 10% 4% to 6%
engineering drawings more than 50% and less than 80% complete.
Scope
Contingencies Estimates developed from a scope of eligible work based on preliminary
2% to 5%
engineering drawings equal to or more than 80% complete.

September 2009 Page 1 of 3

 CEF V2.1
Guidelines for Application of Parts B through H

CEF RECOMMENDED APPLICATIONS

PART TITLE
RANGE VALUE APPLICATION

Applies to repair or retrofit only. Does not apply to new construction.

Facility of
Refer to Represents cost for site conditions or applicant or facility operations
C.2 Project 0 to 5%
CEF IG conditions not readily captured in Part A costs. Refer to CEF Instructional
Constructability
Guide for detailed guidance.

Project is located in a metropolitan area with ready access to construction

1%
labor, materials, and equipment without long trip times.

Project is located in a suburban to ex-urban area with access to construction

Access 2.50%
1% to 4% labor, materials, and equipment with trip distances of 25 to 70 miles.
Contingency
Project is located in a rural or other remote area with limited access to
4% construction labor, materials, and equipment with trip distances exceeding 70
miles.
Project site has ample interior and exterior storage areas easily accessible to
1%
delivery vehicles.
Storage Project site has limited interior storage areas and/or exterior storage areas are
1% to 4% 2.50%
C.3 Contingency not easily accessible to delivery vehicles.
Project site has interior and exterior storage space resulting in frequent
4%
deliveries of material and equipment.
Facility is unoccupied during construction, there is ample space to assemble
1% elements of work prior to final installation, and there is easy access to all
work areas.
Facility is occupied by Applicant’s staff, there are some limitations on space
Staging
1% to 4% 2.50% for pre-assembly of components, and/or access is restricted to some work
Contingency
areas.

Facility is open to the public during construction, no space for pre-assembly

4%
of components, and access to all work spaces is limited by facility operations.

If scope of work lacks sufficient repetitive, continuous work elements to

Off
achieve large scale efficiency in production that would lower unit costs.
Economies of
C.4 On or Off
Scale If scope of work contains sufficient repetitive, continuous work elements to
On
achieve large scale efficiency in production that would lower unit costs.

D General Contractor's Overhead and Profit

General Off If no General Contractor involved on the project.
D.1 Contractor’s On or Off
Home Office On For all projects involving a General Contractor.
Overhead
General Off If no General Contractor involved on the project.
Contractor’s
Insurance, On or Off
D.2
Payment, & On For all projects involving a General Contractor.
Performance
Bonds
General Off If no General Contractor involved on the project.
D.3 Contractor’s On or Off
Profit On For all projects involving a General Contractor.

E Cost Escalation Factor Time to mid-point of construction = design time + ½ (construction time)
E Months Any Number Months Number of months to the mid-point of uncompleted construction
Escalation Refer to Based on a 2-year average of either the Building Cost Index or the
E <1
Factor CEF IG Construction Cost Index according to the Engineering News Record.

September 2009 Page 2 of 3

 CEF V2.1
Guidelines for Application of Parts B through H

CEF RECOMMENDED APPLICATIONS

PART TITLE
RANGE VALUE APPLICATION

F Plan Review and Construction Permit Costs

F.1 Plan Review Fees Established by local Building Official

F.2 Construction Permit Fees Established by local Building Official

G Applicant's Reserve for Change Orders

Applicant's Recommend Off for completed projects, or work elements with evidence that
Off
G Reserve for On or Off all claims for additional payment beyond the bid price are resolved.
Change Orders On Recommend using for all cases not meeting the “Off” conditions above.
H Applicant's Project Management and Design Cost
Applicant's Off for projects limited to less than four trades and work procured through
Off
Project pre-existing service contract.
H.1 On or Off
Management - On for projects involving competitive procurement to cover costs of
Design Phase On
developing construction bid documents.
Refer to Public Assistance Guide, FEMA 322/June 2007 for guidance on
Curve A
determining above-average complexity projects.
A/E Design Refer to Public Assistance Guide, FEMA 322/June 2007 for guidance on
H.2 Curve B
Contract Cost determining average complexity projects.
Construction
Use for projects that do not require development of construction bid
Inspection
documents; i.e., plans, specifications and General Contract Conditions.
Services
Off for projects in which Applicant’s direct costs associated with the
Project construction phase, including approval of submittals, attending progress
Management – Off
H.3 On or Off meetings, processing progress payment, etc. are included and documented
Construction elsewhere.
Phase
On For all cases apply factor not meeting the “Off” conditions above.

NOTE: Interpolatation between values is acceptable. Interpolations should limit significant figures to a tenth of a percent.

September 2009 Page 3 of 3

 Appendix G
Checklists – PA Group
Supervisor, Project Specialist,
and Part A

CEF Instructional Guide

(Version 2.1)
September 2009
Appendix G.1 – PA Group Supervisor Checklist for CEF Implementation

PA Group Supervisor Checklist for CEF Implementation

To implement the CEF during the large project formulation process, the PA Group Supervisor or
designee is responsible for the actions listed below.

Obtain the following:

Disaster-specific Public Assistance Program policies

List of approved, cost-effective hazard mitigation measures

Current versions of industry standard construction cost estimating resources, (e.g., RSMeans,
BNi Costbooks, Marshall & Swift, Sweet’s Unit Cost Guide, etc.)

Current FEMA cost codes

City cost adjustment factors appropriate for the disaster area.

CEF factors appropriate for the disaster (such as the escalation factor)

Plan review and construction permits fee information for the controlling jurisdictions in the
declared counties

Set policies regarding the application of CEF, particularly with regard to:

Force account efforts

Use of contingencies

Adjustments for post-disaster inflation

The need for engineering, design, and construction phase services

Location of disaster-specific information for CEF users

Complete the CEF Large Project Report, as described above, and submit the report to FEMA
Headquarters:
Anthony Ndum, P.E.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
Federal Center Plaza
500 “C” Street, S.W. - Room 414
Washington, D.C. 20472

September 2009 Page 1 of 3

Appendix G.2 – Project Specialist Checklist for CEF Implementation

Project Specialist Checklist for CEF Implementation

During the formulation and processing of large projects, the Project Specialist is responsible
for the actions listed below.

Obtain the following from the PA Group Supervisor or designee:

• Disaster-specific Public Assistance Program policies

• List of approved, cost-effective hazard mitigation measures
• Current versions of industry standard construction cost estimating resources (e.g.,
RSMeans, BNi Costbooks, Marshall & Swift, Sweet’s Unit Cost Guide, etc.)
• Current FEMA cost codes
• City cost adjustment factors appropriate for the disaster area
• CEF factors appropriate for the disaster (such as the escalation factor)
• Plan review and construction permits fee information for the controlling jurisdictions in
the declared counties

Meet with the PAC Crew Leader to discuss the applicant’s needs.

Meet with the applicant and the State to assess the applicant’s large projects.

Obtain average weighted unit cost data from the applicant or relevant State or regional
agency.

Determine if the large project qualifies for CEF use.

Conduct a site visit and determine the eligible scope of work.

Identify any special considerations issues, including insurance, potential hazard mitigation
measures, floodplain management, and compliance with environmental and historic
preservation legislation, and executive orders. Notify the PAC Crew Leader of potential
issues and revise the scope of work as appropriate.

Assemble all appropriate back-up documentation, and a design/construction timeline.

Prepare the CEF Spreadsheet. Document all assumptions on the CEF Notes Sheet.

Review the estimate with the PAC Crew Leader.

Complete the PW.

Attach the CEF Spreadsheet to the PW. Submit the PW and appropriate back-up data to
the PAC Crew Leader for processing and filing. See Appendix E – page 3.

Assist the PAC Crew Leader in updating the Case Management File.
Assist the PA Group Supervisor in preparing the CEF Large Project Report as necessary.

September 2009 Page 2 of 3

Appendix G.3 – Part A Checklist for CEF Implementation – Eligible Scope of Work

Part A Checklist for CEF Implementation

Eligible Scope of Work

Does the scope of work address the damage caused by the disaster?

Has a site visit by the project formulation team (Federal, State, and local members) been
conducted?

Is the scope of work eligible?

Has the most effective method for accomplishing the work been selected?

Does the scope of work include required code upgrades?

Are upgrades for compliance with ADA eligible (for structural damage only)? If so, does the
scope of work include ADA upgrades?

Does the scope of work include approved hazard mitigation proposals?

Has the applicant requested an improved or alternate project?

Does the scope of work address special considerations such as insurance, floodplain
management, compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act and other
environmental laws, and compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act?

Has special considerations clearance been obtained?

Is the scope clearly defined in terms of repair, retrofit, new construction, hazard mitigation
and other activities that might be contracted separately?

Are completed work items separated from uncompleted work items?

Are permanent and non-permanent work items clearly separated?

Have all eligibility decisions been made and agreed upon with the applicant?

Itemized Cost Estimate

Has each itemized work activity been identified, described, quantified, and assigned the
appropriate cost item number or cost code?

Can the eligible scope of work be clearly related to the itemized cost estimate?

Have the quantities and units been established and spot-checked?

Is the source of the unit prices appropriate?

Do the unit prices include the installing contractor’s overhead and profit?

Have the current year values been used?

Have the values been adjusted for regional differences using city cost adjustment factors?

Have lump-sum items been used? If so, eliminate them and provide itemized units of
measurement.

Part A Totals

Are there separate totals for completed work and are they separated by work type (repair,
retrofit, new construction, hazard mitigation, and other)?

Are there separate totals for uncompleted work and are they separated by work type (repair,
retrofit, new construction, hazard mitigation, and other)?

Are all situations where Part A includes factors that could be duplicated in Parts B through H
noted?

Have all assumptions or clarifying notes been included in the CEF Notes Sheet?

September 2009 Page 3 of 3