Quick Answer
What is Construction Management at Risk (CMAR), and what do owners need to know?
CMAR is a delivery method where the construction manager joins the project early—often during design—and guarantees a maximum price (GMP) to the owner. The CM holds the trade contracts and carries construction performance risk, while the owner gets cost certainty, early input on constructability and cost, and a single point of accountability. It sits between agency CM (where the owner holds the contracts and the CM provides advisory services) and design-build (where one entity handles both design and construction). Owners need to understand how the GMP is developed, what happens with savings, and how transparent the process will be. Getting those clear up front shapes whether CMAR delivers the collaboration and budget control you’re after.
Introduction
Construction projects today are rarely simple. Whether delivering improvements within an active airport, expanding an occupied campus, or building a high-end facility with multiple stakeholders, owners are increasingly navigating complexity, schedule pressure, and financial scrutiny simultaneously.
In response, many have turned to CMAR as a delivery method that brings earlier alignment between design, cost, and construction. By engaging the construction manager during design and establishing a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP), CMAR offers the potential for greater cost certainty and more informed decision-making.
However, the value of CMAR is not inherent in the contract itself. Its success depends on how the process is executed, how the GMP is developed, how transparent the team is, and how effectively the owner, designer, and construction manager work together from the earliest stages of the project.
This blog is intended to provide clarity. It outlines how CMAR works, where it is most effective, and what owners should understand to ensure the delivery method performs as intended.
Understanding CMAR: Structure and Intent
At its core, CMAR is designed to bring construction expertise into the project earlier than traditional delivery methods allow. Rather than waiting until design is complete, the construction manager joins the team during design and works alongside the architect to support decision-making on cost, constructability, sequencing, and logistics.
This early involvement allows the project team to address challenges before they become costly issues in the field.
Under a CMAR structure, the owner maintains a direct contractual relationship with the architect, preserving design independence. At the same time, the construction manager assumes responsibility for holding trade contracts and ultimately delivering the project within a GMP.
This balance, separating design responsibility while consolidating construction accountability, is one of CMAR’s defining advantages. It allows the owner to benefit from both collaborative input during design and clear accountability during construction.
Yet this structure delivers value only when the construction manager is actively engaged, and the process is managed with discipline and transparency.
How CMAR Compares to Other Delivery Methods
Every project delivery method reflects a different balance of risk, control, and timing. Understanding these differences helps owners select the approach that best aligns with their goals.
The comparison below highlights how CMAR differs from other commonly used delivery methods:
| Delivery Method | Builder Involvement | Cost Structure | Trade Contracts Held By | Key Advantage |
| CMAR | Early (design phase) | GMP | Construction Manager | Cost certainty with early collaboration |
| Design-Build | Very early (design + construction) | Lump Sum or GMP | Design-Builder | Speed and single-point responsibility |
| Agency CM | Early (advisory role) | Fee-based | Owner | Maximum owner control |
| Design-Bid-Build | After design completion | Lump Sum (bid) | General Contractor | Competitive bidding based on complete documents |
CMAR occupies a middle ground, offering early collaboration similar to agency CM, while also providing a defined cost structure and transferring construction risk to the construction manager. At the same time, it preserves the owner’s direct relationship with the architect.
For many owners, this balance makes CMAR particularly well-suited to projects that require both flexibility and accountability.
When CMAR is Most Effective
CMAR is not a one-size-fits-all solution. Its strengths become most apparent in projects where early alignment and careful coordination are critical to success.
Projects within active or occupied environments are a common example. Whether in an airport terminal, a school campus, or a club facility, construction must often be carefully sequenced to avoid disrupting ongoing operations. In these cases, the ability to plan logistics, access, and phasing during design is invaluable.
Similarly, projects with complex systems or high-end finishes benefit from early constructability input. Engaging the construction manager early allows the team to evaluate materials, coordinate systems, and identify potential conflicts before construction begins.
CMAR is also well-suited for projects with aggressive schedules. By releasing portions of the work early, it enables overlapping phases of design and construction, helping owners meet critical timelines.
In each of these scenarios, the defining advantage of CMAR is not simply cost control; it is the ability to make informed decisions earlier, when they have the greatest impact.
Considerations for Public Owners
For public owners, the decision to pursue CMAR carries additional considerations beyond project delivery alone. Procurement requirements, transparency expectations, and accountability for public funds must all be carefully addressed.
A well-structured CMAR process can meet these requirements. Open-book pricing provides visibility into how costs are developed, while competitive subcontractor bidding maintains fairness and market accountability. Clear documentation of assumptions, allowances, and contingencies ensures that the GMP is both defensible and transparent.
Equally important is defining change management procedures. Public projects often involve multiple stakeholders and evolving priorities, making it essential to establish a clear and disciplined process for evaluating and approving changes.
When these elements are in place, CMAR can provide public owners with both the flexibility needed to manage complex projects and the transparency required to meet procurement standards.
The GMP: More Than a Number
The GMP is often viewed as the centerpiece of CMAR. It provides a ceiling on project cost and serves as a key point of alignment between the owner and construction manager.
However, the reliability of the GMP depends entirely on how it is developed.
In effective CMAR delivery, GMP is not a single event; it is the result of a continuous validation process. As design progresses, the construction manager works with the design team to refine the scope, obtain market input, and identify risks. Pricing is updated regularly, allowing the owner to understand how decisions impact cost in real time.
This progressive approach reduces uncertainty and builds confidence in the final GMP.
Owners should take care to clearly define what is included in the GMP, how allowances are handled, how contingency is managed, and how changes will be addressed. Equally important is understanding how savings, if achieved, will be shared.
When these elements are clearly defined and transparently managed, GMP becomes more than a contractual figure; it becomes a reliable decision-making tool.
What Makes CMAR Successful
CMAR does not succeed simply because of its structure; it succeeds through disciplined execution.
The most effective CMAR projects are characterized by early and meaningful engagement from the construction manager. This involvement goes beyond pricing; it includes actively informing design decisions, identifying risks, and shaping the overall delivery strategy.
Transparency is equally critical. Open-book cost development allows the owner to see how decisions impact the budget and ensures that pricing reflects current market conditions.
Successful teams also take a proactive approach to risk. Rather than passively carrying contingency, they identify potential issues early and work to resolve them before they affect cost or schedule.
Perhaps most importantly, successful CMAR projects are defined by alignment. When the owner, designer, and construction manager operate as a cohesive team, decisions are made more efficiently, and outcomes are more predictable.
In contrast, when communication breaks down or expectations are unclear, the benefits of CMAR can quickly diminish.
Selecting the Right CMAR Partner
Choosing a construction manager is one of the most important decisions an owner will make in a CMAR delivery.
Experience matters not only with CMAR itself but also with the specific type of project being delivered. A team that understands the nuances of operating within an active environment or coordinating complex systems brings a level of insight that cannot be replicated through process alone.
Equally important is the approach to preconstruction. Owners should look for a partner who views cost development as an ongoing process, who prioritizes transparency, and who is willing to engage deeply with the design team.
Communication and coordination capabilities are also critical. CMAR projects often involve multiple stakeholders, and the ability to manage those relationships effectively is essential to maintaining alignment.
Ultimately, the right partner combines technical expertise with a collaborative mindset and a disciplined execution approach.
Edison Foard’s Approach to CMAR
Edison Foard approaches CMAR with a focus on alignment, transparency, and execution.
Our teams engage early in the design process, working alongside owners and designers to provide real-time cost feedback, evaluate constructability, and develop strategies that align with project goals. This early involvement allows us to identify risks, refine scope, and build a foundation for a reliable GMP.
We emphasize open-book cost development, incorporating market input and trade partner engagement to ensure that pricing reflects current conditions. Throughout the process, we maintain clear communication with the owner and provide regular updates on cost, schedule, and risk.
Our experience includes projects in active and operationally sensitive environments, including aviation, institutional campuses, and high-end facilities. In these settings, success depends not only on delivering the work but on doing so in a way that respects ongoing operations and stakeholder expectations.
Across each project, our objective is consistent: to deliver a process that is predictable, transparent, and aligned with the owner’s goals.
Conclusion
CMAR offers a powerful approach to managing the complexity, uncertainty, and demands of modern construction projects. By bringing construction expertise into the design process and establishing a GMP, it creates an opportunity for earlier alignment and greater cost certainty.
Yet the delivery method alone does not guarantee success.
The true value of CMAR lies in its execution, through transparent cost development, proactive risk management, and strong collaboration among all members of the project team.
Owners who understand these principles, define expectations clearly, and select experienced partners are best positioned to realize the full benefits of CMAR.
FAQ: Frequently Asked Questions
In Agency Construction Management, the construction manager serves in an advisory role, and the owner holds all trade contracts, retaining both cost and performance risk. In CMAR, the construction manager holds the trade contracts and provides a Guaranteed Maximum Price, assuming responsibility for delivering the project within that cost framework. This structure shifts construction risk away from the owner while maintaining early collaboration.
The GMP is generally established once the design has progressed sufficiently to define the scope with confidence, typically between 60% and 90% of design completion. In well-executed CMAR projects, however, the GMP is not a single event, but the result of continuous cost validation throughout design.
In most CMAR agreements, the construction manager is responsible for costs exceeding the GMP, unless the increases are driven by owner-directed changes or contract-defined conditions. This structure provides a level of cost certainty that is central to CMAR.
CMAR is well established in public procurement across North and South Carolina, where it is widely used for complex projects that require early coordination, transparency, and cost control.
In private development, CMAR is often used in practice but may not always be formally labeled as such. Many private owners use a cost-plus with GMP structure that mirrors CMAR principles, including early contractor involvement, open-book pricing, and shared risk.
Yes. While the construction manager holds the trade contracts, subcontractors are typically procured through a competitive bidding process. Owners are often involved in reviewing bids, aligning scope, and approving final selections.
If the project is delivered below GMP, savings are typically shared between the owner and the construction manager, based on terms established in the contract.
CMAR allows for early release packages and phased construction, enabling portions of the work to begin before the full design is complete. This overlap between design and construction can significantly reduce overall project duration.
Owners should expect a fully transparent, open-book process, including visibility into subcontractor bids, general conditions, contingency usage, and all components of the GMP.
No. Successful outcomes still depend on active owner engagement, particularly during preconstruction, when key decisions affecting cost, scope, and schedule are made.
Owners should assess relevant experience, approach to GMP development, commitment to transparency, and ability to manage logistics and stakeholder coordination. The most effective partners combine technical expertise with a collaborative and disciplined approach.
Yes. In CMAR, the owner usually has a separate contract with the architect. The CM works with the architect during design to provide constructability and cost input, and then builds to the design.
Yes. Edison Foard offers construction management at risk, along with preconstruction, agency CM, design-build, and design-bid-build across the Southeast. You can contact us to discuss CMAR for your project.
