Home→...→Approach→Delivery Methods

Delivery Methods

SNS Construction Project Delivery Methods

With more than 135 years of experience, SNS Construction brings expertise across a range of delivery methods, helping customers choose the approach that best fits each project. From early planning through completion, we focus on collaboration, efficiency and the outcomes that matter most.

400+Program management projects
250+Continuing contract projects
115+Construction Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) projects
1,100+Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR) projects
25+Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) projects
515+Design-build projects

Our Primary Delivery Models

Design-Build (DB)

Single-Point Responsibility

Under a single contract, we coordinate both the architectural design and the physical construction phases. This integrated workflow reduces design changes, eliminates finger-pointing, and significantly accelerates schedule timelines through overlapping phases.

  • Shorter overall project schedules
  • Minimal owner administrative burden
  • Early cost guarantees

Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR)

Collaborative & Open-Book

We join during the design phase to provide key constructability input, cost estimating, and sequencing reviews. We then commit to delivering the project under a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP), giving owners financial security and open-book cost transparency.

  • Early identification of design conflicts
  • Shared cost savings
  • Reduced risk of change orders

Integrated Project Delivery (IPD)

Multi-Party Alliance

Owner, architect, and builder sign a single joint contract, aligning goals and sharing risks and rewards. IPD maximizes efficiency and collaboration from day one, leveraging the collective intelligence of the entire project coalition.

  • Highly collaborative team dynamic
  • Joint risk pool & shared incentives
  • Millimeter-level design alignment

Determining the Right Delivery Method

Choosing the correct delivery method is a strategic decision that shapes the entire project lifecycle. We evaluate four critical parameters to advise owners on the best model for their needs:

01. Scope Clarity

If the project scope is highly defined at inception, a traditional CMAR or Design-Build path works well. For evolving programs, a collaborative CM/GC model allows flexibility as designs mature.

02. Risk Profile

We analyze whether the owner wishes to retain control over design decisions (CMAR) or transfer design-related risks to a single-point entity (Design-Build).

03. Schedule Urgency

When speed-to-market is the primary objective, Design-Build allows construction to begin on early foundation packages while upper-floor designs are still being completed.

04. Cost Certainty

For strict public budgets, early pricing commitments via CMAR or fixed-price Design-Build establish a clear ceiling, preventing cost overruns.