Construction Administration for
Architecture and Engineering Firms

The Billing Problem Most A/E Firms Don't Solve Until CA Is Over

Construction administration is budgeted as a defined phase with a defined fee. In practice it behaves differently from every other phase in the project.

Design phases have predictable deliverables. The scope of a schematic design package or a set of construction documents can be estimated with reasonable accuracy at proposal time. The work is largely self-directed. The team controls the pace.

CA does not work that way. The demands on the A/E firm during construction are driven by contractor behavior, owner decisions, field conditions, and agency requirements — not by the scope of services the firm defined. Every RFI the contractor submits, every submittal that needs review, every change order that requires engineering evaluation, every site condition that diverges from the documents — each one creates real work for the firm.

Most CA fees are set as a percentage of the design fee or as a fixed sum estimated at proposal time. Neither method accounts for what the project actually produces in CA demands. The fee gets set. The project gets built. The CA scope expands. The firm absorbs the difference.

The firms that manage CA profitably are not the ones that scope it perfectly at proposal time — that is not possible. They are the ones that track CA scope actively as it accumulates, identify additional services before they are fully delivered, and bill them while the project is still open and the conversation is still natural.

Why CA Is the Phase Where A/E Billing Gets Most Complicated

Every other phase in the A/E project has a natural billing structure. Design phases produce deliverables that can be billed on a percent-complete basis as they are completed. Permitting phases have defined submittal and resubmittal milestones. Bidding phases have a defined scope and a defined endpoint.

Construction administration lacks these features.

CA is an ongoing engagement with an indeterminate workload. The firm is on call for the duration of construction — available to respond to RFIs, review submittals, observe construction, evaluate change order requests, and manage the contractor relationship. None of those demands arrive on a schedule the firm controls. All of them consume the fee.

RFIs compound faster than most firms expect

An RFI — a request for information from the contractor — requires the architect or engineer to review the question, research the answer, coordinate with consultants if the question spans disciplines, and issue a written response. A straightforward RFI takes 30 to 60 minutes. A complex one involving structural coordination, code interpretation, or a design change can take half a day.

A project that generates 150 RFIs over a 14-month construction schedule has produced 150 separate service events — each one consuming firm time against a CA fee that was set at proposal time without knowing how many RFIs the contractor would generate.

Submittals exceed scope assumptions routinely

The number of submittals on a project is driven by the contractor's procurement process, fabricator relationships, and level of document compliance — not by the A/E firm's scope estimate. A mechanical submittal log that was estimated at 60 items reaches 110 when the contractor uses fabricators unfamiliar with the specified systems. Each additional review is additional CA time that was not in the fee.

Change orders require engineering evaluation

Every change order — owner-directed or contractor-initiated — requires the A/E firm to evaluate the change, assess its impact on the design, coordinate with affected disciplines, and issue revised documents if required. The evaluation itself is additional engineering work that sits outside the original scope. When it is not captured as an additional service, it is absorbed.

Extended schedules create extended CA obligations

A construction project that runs 6 months beyond its scheduled completion date requires 6 additional months of CA services — site visits, RFI responses, submittal reviews, contractor coordination, and punch list management. The CA fee was set for a defined construction period. The additional period was never priced. The firm delivers it anyway.

The Four CA Billing Challenges Every A/E Firm Faces

Percent-complete billing during construction

Most CA phases are billed on a percent-complete basis — a monthly draw against the CA fee based on estimated progress through the construction schedule. The challenge is that CA percent complete is not a function of the firm's work output. It is a function of construction progress, which the contractor controls.

When construction falls behind schedule, the CA percent-complete basis diverges from the actual work the firm has performed. The firm may have delivered 80% of the work effort by month eight of a project scheduled to be completed in month twelve, but the construction schedule is only 60% complete. Billing based on construction progress undervalues the work actually performed.

The right CA billing structure tracks the firm's actual work — RFIs responded to, submittals reviewed, site visits conducted, change orders evaluated — and bills against that record, not against an external schedule.

Change orders and additional services

The most commonly unbilled CA work in A/E firms is change order evaluation and additional services triggered by contractor requests, owner-directed changes, and unforeseen conditions. Each category has a clear basis for additional billing. Each one is regularly absorbed because the evaluation happened under time pressure, the conversation with the client didn't occur at the right moment, or the additional service was too small to justify the billing friction.

The cumulative cost of that absorption across a project is rarely small. Ten additional services at $500 to $2,000 each are $5,000 to $20,000 in unbilled work on a single project — work the firm performed, charged to overhead, and never recovered.

Retainage and CA cash flow

Many owner contracts include retainage — a percentage withheld from each CA billing until construction is substantially complete. A CA fee of $80,000 with 10% retainage means the firm collects $72,000 during the project and waits for the remaining $8,000 until the owner releases retainage at substantial completion.

When construction extends beyond the scheduled completion, retainage stays outstanding longer. The firm is performing additional CA work — uncompensated for the schedule extension — while waiting for the prior-period retainage that the owner has not yet released. The cash flow impact compounds in exactly the wrong direction.

The billing conversation at CA closeout

The end of construction is when unbilled additional services become hardest to recover. The owner is focused on punch list completion and the certificate of occupancy. The contractor is managing the closeout. Everyone is oriented toward completion, not toward billing discussions.

Additional services that were not captured and billed during the project are significantly harder to collect at closeout — both practically and relationally. The right time to bill additional CA services is when they are performed, not when the project is closing.

What Good CA Management Looks Like

A firm that manages construction administration profitably can answer these questions at any point during the project:

• How many RFIs have been issued and responded to, and how does that compare to the original scope assumption?
• How many submittals have been received and reviewed, and how does that volume compare to what the CA fee assumed?
• How many site visits have been conducted, and how many remain in the CA budget?
• What additional services have been identified, and which ones have been authorized and billed?
• What is the current CA fee balance — how much has been earned versus how much remains?
• Is the construction schedule on track? If not, what does an extended schedule mean for the remaining CA fee?

These questions cannot be answered without a system that tracks CA activity in real time — logging RFIs, submittals, and site visits against the project as they occur, and connecting that activity to the CA fee balance so the project manager can see exactly where the phase stands.

Firms that answer these questions monthly — rather than at project closeout — manage CA more profitably than those that don't. Not because they avoid the work. Because they see it in time to bill it.

Related Resources

Construction administration connects to every financial system in the firm — billing structure, project management, cash flow, and the proposals that set the CA fee before the project starts.

Billing & Profitability for A/E Firms
‍How billing structure, additional services management, and invoice timing determine whether CA fees produce the margin the project was supposed to generate.

Project Management for A/E Firms
‍How phase structure and scope control during design create the conditions for CA success — or set up the billing problems that emerge during construction.

Proposals & Fees for A/E Firms
‍How CA fees get set at proposal time — and how the scope language and fee structure chosen before construction starts determines how defensible the fee is when CA demands exceed the original estimate.

Cash Flow & AR for A/E Firms
‍How CA billing timing, retainage, and extended schedules create cash flow pressure during the construction phase — and how to manage the collection cycle when CA revenue is the slowest to arrive.

‍