The different procurement strategies that might be considered for the project where the control of programme and continued access to the blocks are a top priority
BSP7CAC Costing and Contracts
|
Module name |
Costing and Contracts |
|
Module code |
BSP7CAC |
|
Level |
7 |
|
Module start month and year |
September 2022 |
|
Module pass mark |
50 |
|
Assignment |
2 |
|
Assignment due time and date |
10.00 a.m. (UK time), Wednesday 1 February 2023 |
|
Word count (see section below for info) |
3,500 |
|
Assignment weighting |
70% |
|
Module learning outcomes assessed |
LO1, LO2, LO3, LO4 (see module ‘Assessment tab’ for details) |
Submission details
For this assignment, you are required to submit online:
- a report as one PDF file or alternatively as one Word (or similar) file.
Please refer to the relevant ‘Assessment preparation’ week of the module for further guidance.
If you have any questions about this assessment, please contact your Module Team using the Assignment forum in the relevant ‘Assessment preparation’ week on the VLE.
Scenario
You work for a housing association that is looking to undertake a substantial programme of planned maintenance works to five blocks of two- to three-bedroom apartments, of concrete frame and brick infill construction. The three-storey buildings will be refurbished using over-cladding and improved insulation to the walls. The windows, doors, kitchens and bathrooms are to be replaced. Each block comprises 12 apartments and is currently fully occupied.
The cost limit has been agreed and the project is to proceed with an overall completion date set for three years from now. There is not a detailed programme for the works but individual tenants will be decanted to alternative accommodation whilst work on their apartment is being carried out.
Task
You have now been asked to submit a report to the management team advising on the cost and contract management of the project. In providing this advice, you should explain the processes involved and offer a reasoned justification of their relevance to this project.
Write a professional report that critically analyses:
- the different procurement strategies that might be considered for the project where the control of programme and continued access to the blocks are a top priority. Recommend your preferred route, setting out the reasons for your choice using a selection matrix to illustrate your reasoning;
- the post-contract cost control processes you will implement to ensure the project is completed within budget, based on your selected procurement method;
- the potential conflict that could occur on this project between the housing association, the contractor and the tenants, and indicate how a suitable management strategy might ensure any concerns raised do not escalate into disputes.
Clearly state your assumptions and provide examples to support your explanation or discussion. Your procurement selection matrix and any back-up information or calculations should be included in an appendix to your report.
Reference list
You should include a reference list with a minimum of eight separate relevant and appropriate sources that you have written about and cited within your work.
A bibliography of uncited sources is not required.
Additional information
Further information to support you with this assignment is available within the study materials for this module on the UCEM VLE.
It is recommended that you engage with the Assignment briefing webinar and Assignment forum, as the module team may signpost relevant learning activities and also answer any questions you may have.
Marking guidance for this activity
This guidance is designed to help you to do as well as possible in your assessment by explaining how the person marking your work will be judging it
Your work will be assessed in relation to the requirements set out in the assessment criteria marking guide at the end of this document and the grading guidance section below.
It is recommended that you read both of these sections before starting your assessment to learn what will help you to achieve the highest marks. Before submitting your assessment you should review it to check you have produced what is required to achieve the highest marks.
When you receive your feedback from your tutor you should be able to see where you gained marks and, where relevant, recommendations about how to improve your performance going forward.
Grading guidance
This grading guidance section explains in more detail what a submission for this assessment should include in order to achieve a mark at the threshold, good and excellent standards.
Threshold
You will have described the methods of procurement that can be used for this project scenario and supported your discussion with a procurement selection matrix. The methods of post-contract cost control will be discussed in order to ensure the project is completed within budget. Finally, you will have identified potential conflict areas that could arise and how a suitable management strategy could help avoid any concerns escalating into disputes.
Good
You will have met the criteria for Threshold and provided a critical analysis of procurement approaches. A suitable procurement approach will have been identified following evaluation of the project scenario and procurement matrix. There will be further consideration of possible risks to the project budget and how these can be managed. Potential conflict that may arise and a suitable strategy to manage those conflicts will be analysed in relation to the project scenario. Examples will be provided to support your points and to relate to the project scenario.
Excellent
You will have met the criteria for Good and further demonstrated insight and analysis about each of the different parts of the task considering the type of project. Reasoned and insightful assumptions will have been made about the project and client, and arguments developed around these.
Examples will be specific to the scenario provided in the assignment
Word count and overwriting
Exceeding 10% of the stated word count may limit the marks allocated for communication (see assessment criteria marking guide below).
The following table outlines the inclusions and exclusions in the word count of the most common features of assessed pieces of work. Not all these features may be relevant to your assignment; please refer to the assignment task for confirmation of which features are required.
|
Included in wordcount |
Excluded from wordcount |
|
Introduction |
Executive summary/abstract |
|
Main body |
Title page/front cover |
|
Footnotes/endnotes |
Contents List |
|
In text citations |
Calculations |
|
Words in tables |
Drawings/Images |
|
Conclusion |
List of references |
|
Recommendations |
Bibliography |
|
Headings and titles, except for those explicitly excluded |
Appendices |
The total number of words used must be stated on the first page of your assessment.
Avoiding academic misconduct (Academic integrity)
Academic misconduct is a serious offence. Types of misconduct include, but are not limited to: plagiarism, self-plagiarism, collusion, or contracting a third party to write your assessment. It is important that your assessment shows academic integrity. You must ensure that you reference sources you have used and check the originality of your work before submission. Please see the ‘Assessment preparation’ week for more information on academic misconduct, including guidance on how to avoid academic misconduct, how to check your work, and how UCEM checks all submitted assessment for academic misconduct
ASSESSMENT CRITERIA MARKING GUIDE
|
LEVEL 7 |
Weight- ing % |
|
||||||
|
1. COMMUNICATION |
15 |
0–2 Inadequate |
3–5 Limited |
6–7 Below threshold |
8 Threshold |
9–10 Good |
11 Excellent |
12–15 Outstanding |
|
Relevance to task
|
|
Irrelevant and addresses neither the task nor the needs of the intended audience. |
Largely irrelevant and does not effectively address the task or the needs of the intended audience. |
Partially relevant and attempts to address the task and the needs of the intended audience with significant irrelevance or omissions. |
Sufficiently relevant to the task and the needs of the intended audience to meet the learning outcomes. |
Consistently relevant to the task and focussed on the requirements of the intended audience. |
Highly relevant to the task and precisely focussed on the requirements of the intended audience. |
Completely relevant to the task and fully focussed on the requirements of the intended audience. |
|
Structure and presentation
|
|
A lack of structure beyond a loosely connected list of points. |
Largely unstructured and does not have a clear logical flow. |
Inconsistent structure and logical flow. |
Adequate Structure and logical flow. |
Capable structure and logical flow. |
Advanced structure and logical flow. |
Proficient structure and logical flow. |
the intended audience and/or industry protocols
|
Presentation format is inappropriate.
Communication is obstructed. |
Presentation format is ineffective.
Communication is hindered. |
Presentation format is confused.
Communication is only partially effective. |
Presentation format is satisfactory.
Communication is sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. |
Presentation format is effective.
Communication is sound. |
Presentation format is sophisticated.
Communication is articulate. |
Presentation format is innovative.
Communication is insightful. |
|
|
Grammar
|
|
Use of grammar is deficient and meaning is obstructed. |
Significant grammatical errors and meaning lacks clarity. |
Several grammatical errors and meaning conveyed insufficiently clearly. |
Notwithstanding some minor errors and oversights, grammar and clarity of meaning are sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. |
Grammar usage is capable and conveys meaning effectively. |
Grammar usage is advanced and conveys meaning precisely. |
Grammar usage is exceptional and conveys meaning eloquently. |
|
2. KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING |
20 |
0–3 Inadequate |
4–7 Limited |
8–9 Below threshold |
10–11 Threshold |
12–13 Good |
14–15 Excellent |
16–20 Outstanding |
|
Systematic knowledge and understanding of the key aspects of the field of study |
|
Inadequate systematic knowledge and understanding of the field of study. |
Limited systematic knowledge and understanding of the field of study. |
Insufficient systematic knowledge and understanding of the field of study. |
Sufficient systematic knowledge and understanding of the field of study to meet the learning outcomes. |
Good systematic knowledge and understanding of the field of study to meet the learning outcomes. |
Excellent systematic knowledge and understanding of the field of study to meet the learning outcomes. |
Outstanding systematic knowledge and understanding of the field of study to meet the learning outcomes. |
|
Critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights at or informed by the forefront of the academic discipline |
Inadequate level of critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, very little, if any, of which has been informed by the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Unsatisfactory level of critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, little of which has been informed by the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Basic level of critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, some of which has been informed by the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Adequate level of critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, much of which has been informed by the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Sound level of critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, most of which has been informed by the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Comprehensive level of critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, nearly all of which has been informed by the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Exceptional level of critical awareness of current problems and/or new insights, all of which has been informed by the forefront of the academic discipline. |
|
|
3. USE AND APPLICATION OF SOURCE MATERIAL |
20 |
0–3 Inadequate |
4–7 Limited |
8–9 Below threshold |
10–11 Threshold |
12–13 Good |
14–15 Excellent |
16–20 Outstanding |
|
Application of UCEM Harvard referencing style |
|
A minimal number of sources have been referenced. The referencing system is applied incoherently. |
Referencing is unsatisfactory due to significant omissions, inaccuracies or inconsistencies in the application of the referencing system. |
Referencing is insufficient due to several omissions, inaccuracies or inconsistencies in the application of the referencing system. |
Referencing is sufficiently complete, accurate and consistent in the application of the referencing system to meet the learning outcomes. |
Referencing is competent with mostly complete, accurate and consistent application of the referencing system. |
Referencing is comprehensive with complete, accurate and consistent application of the referencing system with minimal errors. |
Referencing is comprehensive and applied faultlessly. |
|
Source Materials |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minimal and incoherent selection of course materials. |
Ineffective selection of course materials with significant omissions. |
Inconsistent and inaccurate selection of course materials. |
Adequate selection of course materials. |
Competent selection of course materials. |
Sophisticated selection of course materials. |
Innovative selection of course materials. |
|
|
Independent research is minimal and has not been informed by scholarship at the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Independent research is incomplete and unsatisfactory. It has not been informed by any notable scholarship at the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Independent research is basic and has partially been informed by appropriate scholarship at the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Independent research is sufficient and has been at least partially informed by appropriate scholarship at the forefront of the academic discipline, sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. |
Independent research is competent and has been informed by a reasonable amount of appropriate scholarship at the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Independent research is advanced and has been informed by a comprehensive range of authoritative scholarship at the forefront of the academic discipline. |
Independent research is proficient and has been informed by the full range of authoritative scholarship at the forefront of the academic discipline. |
|
|
Industry practice and personal experience omitted or irrelevant. |
Limited and incomplete reference to industry practice and personal experience. |
Simple reference to industry practice and personal experience. |
Satisfactory reference to industry practice and personal experience. |
Clear reference to industry practice and personal experience. |
Perceptive reference to industry practice and personal experience. |
Insightful reference to industry practice and personal experience. |
|
|
Originality in the application of knowledge |
|
Originality in the application of knowledge is inadequate and incoherent. The assessed work is not informed or improved by the source materials. |
Originality in the application of knowledge is ineffective and unsatisfactory. The assessed work is informed and improved in a limited manner by the source materials. |
Originality in the application of knowledge is inconsistent and partial. The assessed work is informed and improved in a basic manner by the source materials. |
Originality in the application of knowledge satisfactory and adequate. The assessed work is informed and improved in an adequate manner by the source materials, sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. |
Originality in the application of knowledge is competent and clear. The assessed work is informed and improved in a reasonable manner by the source materials. |
Originality in the application of knowledge is perceptive and accurate. The assessed work is informed and improved in a comprehensive manner by the source materials. |
Originality in the application of knowledge is innovative and insightful. The assessed work is informed and improved in an exceptional manner by the source materials. |
|
4. EVIDENCE BASED CRITICAL ANALYSIS |
20 |
0–3 Inadequate |
4–7 Limited |
8–9 Below threshold |
10–11 Threshold |
12–13 Good |
14–15 Excellent |
16–20 Outstanding |
|
Practical understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge |
|
Minimal understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. |
Unsatisfactory understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. |
Insufficient understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. |
Sufficient understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. |
Effective understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. |
Sophisticated understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. |
Insightful understanding of how established techniques of research and enquiry are used to create and interpret knowledge. |
|
Critical analysis
|
|
Analysis of the source materials is superficial, deficient or minimal |
Analysis of the source materials is shallow ineffective or incomplete. |
Analysis of the source materials is insubstantial, inaccurate or inconsistent. |
Analysis of the source materials is adequate and of sufficient depth to meet the learning outcomes. |
Analysis of the source materials is substantial clear and competent. |
Analysis of the source materials is rigorous, accurate and comprehensive. |
Analysis of the source materials is profound, proficient and very advanced. |
to the demands of the task |
Analysis is not applied to the demands of the task. |
Analysis is applied unsatisfactorily to the demands of the task. |
Analysis is partially applied to the demands of the task. |
Analysis is satisfactorily applied to the demands of the task. |
Analysis is reasonably applied to the demands of the task. |
Analysis is perceptively applied to the demands of the task. |
Analysis is innovatively applied to the demands of the task. |
|
|
Development of arguments
|
|
Arguments and justifications are incoherent and deficient. There is minimal evidence of an attempt to develop or sustain an argument. |
Arguments and justifications are unsatisfactory and ineffective. The development of arguments is incomplete and not sustained. |
Arguments and justifications are confused and inaccurate. The development of arguments is inconsistent and partially sustained with significant omissions. |
Arguments and justifications are satisfactory and sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. The development of arguments is basic and sustained adequately. |
Arguments and justifications are clear and reasonable. The development of arguments is fair and sustained competently. |
Arguments and justifications are advanced and sophisticated. The development of arguments is sophisticated and sustained comprehensively. |
Arguments and justifications are ambitious and exceptional. The development of arguments is insightful and fully sustained. |
|
Technical ability (where appropriate)
|
|
Drawings are incorrect or omitted |
Drawings are incomplete or with significant omissions |
Drawings are inaccurate and only partially completed |
Drawings are completed at a basic level sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. |
Drawings are completed at a competent level |
Drawings are completed accurately |
Drawings are completed to an exceptionally high standard |
|
Calculations are incorrect or omitted |
Calculations are incomplete with significant omissions |
Calculations are inaccurate and only partially completed |
Calculations are completed at a basic level sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. |
Calculations are completed at a competent level |
Calculations are completed accurately |
Calculations are completed to an exceptionally high standard |
|
and application of information. |
Selection of information is incorrect or minimal. Information is applied inadequately or incoherently to the task. |
Selection of information is incomplete with significant omissions. Information is applied ineffectively or unsatisfactorily to the task. |
Selection of information is inconsistent and partial. Information is applied inaccurately to the task. |
Selection of information is satisfactory and sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. Information is applied adequately to the task. |
Selection of information is clear and reasonable. Information is applied competently to the task. |
Selection of information is accurate and comprehensive Information is applied perceptively to the task. |
Selection of information is proficient and insightful Information is applied innovatively to the task. |
|
5. INSIGHT, INTERPRETATION AND EVALUATION |
25 |
0–4 Inadequate |
5–9 Limited |
10–12 Below threshold |
13–14 Threshold |
15–17 Good |
18–19 Excellent |
20–25 Outstanding |
|
Systematic and creative approaches to complex issues |
|
Inadequate self- direction and originality in tackling and solving problems and in implementing tasks at a professional level. |
Ineffective self- direction and originality in tackling and solving problems and in implementing tasks at a professional level. |
Insufficient self- direction and originality in tackling and solving problems and in implementing tasks at a professional level. |
Sufficient self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems and in implementing tasks at a professional level to meet the learning outcomes. |
Competent self- direction and originality in tackling and solving problems and in implementing tasks at a professional level. |
Successful self- direction and originality in tackling and solving problems and in implementing tasks at a professional level. |
Exceptional self-direction and originality in tackling and solving problems and in implementing tasks at a professional level. |
|
Critical evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline |
|
Any evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline is unsubstantiated and unstructured. |
Evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline is unsatisfactory in its reasoning. |
Evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline is simple in its reasoning. |
Evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline is adequate in its reasoning. |
Evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline is competent in its reasoning. |
Evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline is sophisticated in its reasoning. |
Evaluation of current research and advanced scholarship in the discipline is ambitious and convincing in its reasoning. |
|
Judgements in the absence of incomplete data |
|
Judgments in the absence of incomplete data and/or conclusions are deficient. |
Judgments in the absence of incomplete data and/or conclusions are inaccurate. |
Judgments in the absence of incomplete data and/or conclusions are confused. |
Judgments in the absence of incomplete data and/or conclusions are satisfactory and sufficient to meet the learning outcomes. |
Judgments in the absence of incomplete data and/or conclusions are clear and appropriate. |
Judgments in the absence of incomplete data and/or conclusions are perceptive. |
Judgments in the absence of incomplete data and/or conclusions are insightful. |
