resources.ricsapcguide.com – Resources, Tutorials & Support for APC candidates

When planning my APC Case Study, I found that reviewing past example submissions was incredibly valuable as it gave me a clear understanding of how to structure and write up the 3,000-word report. In this post, I’m sharing a copy of a successful example case study, which helped a colleague pass the APC in 2019 for the Building Surveying pathway. I hope this will offer a helpful insight into how to structure the document and serve as a useful reference point as you work on your own APC case study. RICS APC Case Study Example: Building Surveying Confidentiality Statement The following case study contains confidential information included for the purpose of the Assessment of Professional Competence. The Client's details have been removed due to confidentiality agreements and they are referred to throughout this report as “The client”. My Firm have given their consent to disclose details for the case study on the basis that the information is not to be used for any other purpose or by any person other than those authorised by the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors. Contents Introduction My Approach My Achievements Conclusion Appendix A – Competencies Demonstrated in this Case Study Appendix B – Project Photographs Introduction Project Overview The client had been occupying an office however, the lease was nearing its end. The client was unable to renew the lease and was therefore looking to relocate their staff. Following a search, the client identified a nearby ground floor, open planned office. The building was shared with other tenants over three-storeys and included toilets, a reception and a shared multi-level underground car park. The building elevations were predominantly double-glazed steel curtain walling with sections of tile clad ventilating rain screen to the North, South and West facades. The existing ceilings included a 600 x 600 suspended grid with MF ceiling tiles. The internal walls comprised of decorated plaster and were finished in square pine skirting boards and architraves. An unfinished raised floor was present throughout. The client’s proposed demise included one of two offices on the ground floor. This office spanned at a right angle from the South, North and West of the building. Male, Female and accessible toilets were located centrally but fell within the Landlords demise. A building entrance and reception serving all offices was present to the East of the building. The client approached my employer to undertake a feasibility study and provide design options prior to signing the lease. I was appointed as the Building Surveyor and organised a conference call with the client to understand the requirements of the feasibility study. In this meeting the client noted that the study was to provide assurance that the staff and operations at the nearby building could be relocated into this new space within budget. Prior to undertaking the visit with the M&E consultant, the client confirmed that due to the Landlords restrictions, the inspection was limited to a visual survey only with no opening-up. I raised some concern with the client and noted that although the feasibility study would assist with the decision making, the report should not however be relied upon as a basis for a significant commercial decision. I also recommended that a technical due diligence should be undertaken should the client wish to proceed. Upon completion of the feasibility study, the report was submitted to the client and included a caveat in relation to the limited access. Following a review of the report I was instructed by the client to progress the design and prepare a tender pack. The project required stakeholder engagement however, the client still had an intention to go out to tender within 14 days, due to the lease expiry date of the nearby office. Once again, I raised my concerns of the limitations of the survey and recommended that full access would reduce the risk to the client. The client however confirmed they wished to continue regardless of the caveats I highlighted in the report. Following this, I advised that the contingency sum should be increased to cover for the level of ‘risk with unknowns’. The project stakeholders were identified as the client’s estates team, the security standards team, the design standards team, the client’s staff and the general public. My Involvement And Responsibilities Our appointment covered the design and delivery of the complete project. During the design I acted in the capacity of a Building Surveyor and as Contract Administrator in the delivery of the works. I assisted in compiling the Pre-Construction Information document and undertook the initial review of the contractor Construction Phase Plan. My Approach Key Issue 1: Programme Challenges I reviewed the overall project programme and adjusted the dates following the recent approval from the client. The programme had now been reduced due to the delayed instruction. The proposed end date could not be moved later in the year due to the lease terminating in the clients existing office. It was clear that some resequencing of the programme was required to overcome this issue. I contacted the clients design standards team to understand their involvement as I progressed the design. It transpired that the client was launching a UK wide set of design standards that all refurbishments should adhere to. The issue was that this guide was still being produced during our design period, which caused a further programme challenge. It was confirmed that the new facilities were to mirror their other offices with a modernised finish. I explained the limited timescales and suggested that I could put forward products and design recommendations for review and approval, before including them within the tender pack. The client accepted that they would not be able to sign these off within the 2 weeks and accepted that there would be an element of change and additional cost. Following this, I held further consultations with other stakeholders to review whether the space standards were sufficient for the new accommodation. When discussing the proposals with the security standards team, they noted that the client had certain procedures in relation to desk locations, access control and CCTV coverage. These standards were in place to protect staff against aggressive public members by providing escape routes and secure rooms. Following discussions with all parties it was clear that a design meeting would be required before making any further design alterations. It was unlikely that the design could be finalised ahead of the tender period and after raising this with my client I reviewed alternative options for the programme. Option 1 - Alternative Procurement Routes I reviewed other areas of the programme which could be improved. The first option was to review different procurement routes. The client’s preference was the traditional single stage Tender approach but accepted that an alternative approach to procurement could be reviewed. The first possibility was to suggest a Design and Build contract to reduce initial design. The second possibility was a two-stage tender approach allowing the contractor to finalise the products with the design team. Option 2 - Tender exercise while design was not approved An alternative option was to complete the design and inform the contractors that the design was likely to be altered throughout the tender period. This option would allow for overlapping of the design and tender programme, enabling a further period to define the final design. This would set out an achievable date to finalise the design and achieve approval from all stakeholders. Proposed Solution to Key Issue 1 I organised a conference call and presented the client with my proposals. The first option was to review the procurement strategy. I discussed a change from Intermediate to a Design and Build contract. This option would reduce the design period and allow the design to progress throughout the tender period. Although the client agreed with this change, they also noted that they wished to have greater control of the design finishes through the design standards team and wanted me to drive the changes. The client was also more comfortable with me taking the design forward, following my involvement at feasibility stage and my initial discussions with the various stakeholders. Secondly, I discussed a change from single stage to two-stage tender. I noted that this option had the potential to reduce the programme however, it would increase the cost uncertainty. The client noted that they did not wish to change the tender strategy due to the potential cost implications. Following this I presented the second option. I advised that an alternative solution could be to submit the tender documents to the contractor up to RIBA Stage 4 whilst continuing to finalise the design. I advised that this option would minimise the design period by overlapping the tender period. I confirmed that the tendering contractors would be made aware that the design may change throughout the tender period. I also advised the client that a suitable contingency should be included to allow for any changes raised post tender. The client agreed and I approached potential contractors from their framework to gauge their interest. I organised an onsite meeting with the client, staff, security standards team and the M&E consultant to obtain feedback from the design and record observations and requirements raised. I also walked through the proposal with the stakeholders and sketched alterations to the initial design. These changes were agreed at the meeting and included within the tender pack. All parties were made aware that another opportunity to revise the design further would be possible during the tender period. I also contacted the design standards team to explain the change in programme. When writing the specification, I used well known suppliers which provided a good range of products for office fit outs. This ensured that the products were readily available, and pricing was competitive and easily sought. Throughout the specification I chose finishes and designed forms of construction which were slightly higher specification to ensure that there was enough capacity in the contract sum, should any changes occur post tender. During the tender period I revisited the design and specification with the stakeholder and the design standards team. Overall the impact of their feedback was limited to changes of colours to walls, carpet finishes and internal doors were changed from vinyl wrap to timber veneer. I then amended the tender documents, sought final approval and highlighted these to the contractors to allow them to adjust their tenders in the last week of the tender period. Key Issue 2: Fire Compartmentation Overview The contractor commenced the demolition of the ceiling and removed the ceiling tiles adjacent to the internal wall which ran a great length of the office. This internal wall divided the toilets, the other ground floor office and a corridor shared with both ground floor offices. As the other office was vacant during the time of the works these areas were under the control of the Landlord. I was contacted by the contractor who informed me that the fire compartmentation to the internal wall within the ceiling void was poor. I asked the contractor to continue with the removal of remaining ceiling tiles and I organised a site visit. In attendance, I reviewed the fire compartmentation and it was clear that the fire barrier system was poorly installed. Sections of this system were loose, and gaps were present. The overall finish also appeared undulated. In addition to this some ventilation ducting had been severed and unsealed at the junction of the wall. I was aware that to comply with Building Regulations Approved Document Part B, that offices under different occupancies required a compartment line to stop the spread of fire. I asked the contractor to investigate whether the ducting which passed through the compartmentation wall had fire dampers installed to reduce the spread of fire. Access was obtained that afternoon and the contractor confirmed that dampers were not currently installed. Following the visit and the information shared from the contractor, I collated photos and produced a report which detailed the findings. I made the client aware and advised that under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 duties lie with the responsible person in control of the premises. Although the client was a tenant and aware of failings, they would need to mitigate the risk. I explored several options and I asked the client to contact the Landlord to make them aware of the discovery. Option 1 - Landlord to undertake the works As the internal wall was shared with Landlord responsible areas the initial and most apparent option was for the Landlord to undertake the works. The Landlord was liable for the costs and if the client was to undertake the works, there may have been issues with access. I did however have some concerns with this option. There was a risk that the Landlord may not have been able to complete the works prior to the client staff relocating and would require access into the office areas once occupied. This would have caused disruptions to the client as well as further potential costs to the Landlord. The Landlord may have had to undertake the works out of hours to avoid working around staff and the public. This option would also have CDM and Building Control implications for the Landlord and therefore be required to pay additional fees. Option 2 - Client to undertake works A second option was explored for the client to undertake the works and charge the additional cost back to the Landlord. As the client was currently undertaking works within their demise it appeared to be a justified option. The costs to the Landlord would have also been lower due to Principal Designer and Building Control fees, as well as contractor’s mobilisation and set up costs. There would have been no disruption to staff once the office was occupied. However, as these works would be instructed by the client and may cause the programme to overrun an extension of time may have been required. This event would end the client’s rights to Liquidated Ascertained Damages. Proposed Solution to Key Issue 2 Prior to presenting the options to the client and Landlord, I approached the main contractor and asked them to price for remedial works to the internal wall and installation of dampers to the ducting. The price was to include for all required certification. I asked the contractor to also review the programme and whether these additional works would cause any delays in completion and therefore increase the prelim costs. The contractor approached an accredited installer to provide a quote for the works. Once returned I was provided with the contractor’s costs which included for additional prelim and O&P. The contractor also confirmed that the programme would be delayed by one week if the fire compartmentation works were instructed, as this would delay the installation of the new ceiling grids. Upon review this increase in programme appeared fair. I organised for a meeting on site with the Landlord’s representative and the client to discuss the issue and present both options. At the meeting I asked the Landlord how swiftly they were able to progress the works and whether this was likely to be undertaken prior to my clients planned relocation and occupation date. The Landlord representative confirmed that it was unlikely that the works would be undertaken prior to this. The client was concerned by this statement and wanted to avoid disruption to the office area once occupied by staff. The client therefore wanted to explore the second option. Following discussions, the Landlords representative confirmed that they were willing to make payment to the client once the works had been undertaken, if they could be carried out as part of the ongoing refurbishment works and the necessary certificates could be issued. The client approved and an agreement was drafted between the client and the Landlord for review. Once the agreement was in place the client notified me that the contractor could be instructed. As the insurance had been taken out by the client in joint names, I advised the client that the insurers should also be informed of the change in programme. Once works were completed, I was forwarded certification from accredited installer to confirm the wall provided the required level of fire integrity to the client. I was also presented a copy of the Fire Damper drop test commissioning certificates. The client then passed this to the Landlord and sought payment following Practical Completion and once the final account had been agreed. My Achievements Key Issue 1: Programme Challenges I provided the client with good reasoned advice by making them aware of programme slippage and delivered a solution to the design phase. I ensured that I communicated regularly with the various stakeholders and accurately recorded feedback and suggestions which enabled the design to only require minor changes during the tender period. I also ensured that the client was safeguarded by additional spend and design by including a larger contingency sum, specifying to a high standard of construction and choosing reputable materials. Key Issue 2: Fire Compartmentation I advised the client that they had a duty of care and ensured that the clients demise complied with the Building Regulations Approved Document Part B. This ensured that the client took all possible steps to ensure their staff and the public did not occupy a non-compliant building. Using my experience, I was able to organise discussions between the Landlord and client and successfully negotiated a solution with the Landlord to resolve the issues. The solution, which was agreed, ensured that works were not undertaken retrospectively once the client’s staff had occupied the building. This solution also protected the client against any additional spend caused by the delay to the programme. Upon completion of the specialist works, I ensured that the client and Landlord were provided with documentation as evidence of compliance. Conclusion Throughout this project, I have been able to improve my technical knowledge of a multi-disciplinary role. I have also learnt the importance of good communication and the value of teamwork. By acting quickly when an issue was raised and ensuring all necessary stakeholders were involved, I was able to ensure that the best action was carried out swiftly without causing any unnecessary delay to the programme. Using my Contract Administration knowledge and negotiations skills, I was able to work with the client and the Landlord to obtain a suitable resolution to the fire compartmentation issues which were discovered to be non-compliant. I feel that I have improved my communication skills through the experience of this project. I made certain that the client was informed of any risk to programme as soon as it was apparent and I presented several solutions to the issues which were raised. I have learnt the importance of regular site inspections and organisation of appropriate specialists to attend and advise where required. Working on this project I have also learnt the importance of full access to a building, particularly when preparing a specification for tender. I feel that I have obtained valuable lessons by handling a project from initial inception through to completion. This has greatly increased my competency and skill to meet with the expected professional standards set out by the RICS. Total word count for case study - 2982 (Excluding Contents List & Tables) Appendix A Appendix B RICS APC Case Study: Building Surveying Example To receive a full copy of this Case Study in word format, please click here. What Is The RICS APC Case Study Word Count? The Case Study Word Count is strictly limited to a maximum of 3,000 words which excludes the contents list and appendices however all other items such as headings and sub headings are included. For further guidance on the essential components your Case Study must include and how to select your key issues, please click here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WloI7dndsjs&t=20s

Recent Posts