Document review / 6 min read
What we look for when we read a bid set
A bid set is assumed complete until somebody proves otherwise, and nobody has time to prove otherwise in bid week. So the gaps get found during pricing, or after award.
The five checks, in order
- 01
Index the set against itself
Every sheet in the file listed and matched against the drawing list on the cover, both directions. A sheet on the list and not in the file is a missing sheet. A sheet in the file and not on the list is uncontrolled. Both change what can be priced.
- 02
Read the front matter properly
Code analysis sheets, general notes and legends are where occupancy, code cycle and rated assembly information lives, and where a set most often contradicts itself.
- 03
Verify the scale before trusting a dimension
Printed scale bars checked against known printed dimensions, in both axes, on each sheet series. Checking one axis catches a uniform error. Checking both catches a sheet distorted in one direction during plotting.
- 04
Cross reference every callout
A keynote or detail mark pointing at a sheet that is not in the set is a gap, not a detail. Each one gets listed with the sheet it references.
- 05
Extract what is priceable, and name what is not
The scope the documents actually support is written out. The scope they cannot yet support, and the reason, is written out beside it.
What those checks have actually turned up
All from real reviewed sets, with the projects and clients removed. Nothing in this list is illustrative.
- Mechanical, sprinkler and power sheets named on the drawing list and absent from the issued file.
- The same sheet number used twice, on two different drawings, in one set.
- Two conflicting occupancy classifications stated in the same package, which changes egress, rating and sprinkler scope.
- Two different code cycles cited in one set, so which edition governs was genuinely unclear.
- An elevator count on the drawings that contradicted what the client believed was in the building.
- A wall assembly sheet referenced by keynote and not present, so the rated assemblies could not be priced from the documents supplied.
- A graphic scale bar printed at double the sheet’s actual scale, which would have doubled every quantity taken from it.
- A 592 sheet package spanning two companion contracts, where the scope in question sat across both and neither set was complete alone.
Why this comes before the measuring
None of the findings above required specialist knowledge. They required somebody to read the whole set against its own drawing list before anyone started measuring.
The commercial argument is simple. A review is cheap and fast because it is a reading exercise rather than a measurement exercise. If the set is clean you have lost very little. If it is not, you have found out before committing bid effort to it, and you can send one consolidated request for information instead of discovering the same gaps one at a time.
Want this applied to your set?
Send it over and we will tell you what it costs to price properly.