{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017191977077363897, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.43778801843318, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison of Construction Manager at Risk and Integrated Project Delivery Performance on Healthcare Projects: A Comparative Case Study

This study provides information and a basic overview on Construction Manager at Risk (CMR) and Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) as project delivery methods while contrasting their performance in the design and construction of two healthcare facilities. The study identifies benefits as well as challenges from applying IPD and CMR as project delivery methods on healthcare facilities. The research is based on a comparative case study of two completed healthcare projects. Quantitative data was collected to compare: square foot cost, schedule changes, number of requests for information (RFIs), and change cost percentage. Qualitative data was also collected through interviews with members of the project management teams. This study contributes to the body of knowledge in construction by comparing the quantitative data collected. It then goes a step further providing the perceptions of project team members using both CMR and IPD to gain a deeper understanding of why the differences occur. By comparing CMR and IPD on projects that are similar in size, scope, and location, stakeholders in future projects can make an informed decision, based on empirical study, regarding the delivery methods that aligns best with their project goals and challenges.