Assessment BriefMEADE HEALTH CENTRE

Cost Management77-505150

Introduction Submission Date : see Assessment Diary( 02/12/2019 @ 3pm – check diary)

This assignment requires you to produce cost estimates, in the form of a technical report, for the proposed Meade Health Centre.

Learning OutcomesThis assessment is linked to the following learning outcome:

By successfully engaging with this module, the learner will be able to explain and apply the required profession techniques in relation to cost management of building works

Assignment DeliverablesYou should deliver a single MS Word file containing the following

(1) A 'Gross Internal Floor Area' cost estimate for the building

(2) A 'Building Cost Information Service' Cost Plan estimate for the building – Create an Excel Spreadsheet format

(3) A ‘Spons’ cost estimate for the Car Park using two costing techniques(i) Based upon the cost of a car paring bay (Functional Unit method)(ii) Based upon the surface area of the car park (Superficial method)

Assume the car park starts at the entrance (so include public footpaths on each side of the entrance, up to the end of the kerb curve)

(4) A 'Spons' cost estimate for the 'grassed area's and the two paths (the straight, main entrance path take from where it adjoins the public pavement

For each costing exercise create a new section to your report, and introduce the costing method and written conclusion for each section.

Any diagrams or extensive methods of ascertaining measurements/areas should be placed in the Appendices.

Do not provide a full take-off, of accurate 'Bill of Quantities' dimensions and descriptions.

Assignment SubmissionThe whole report should be laid out in order in a single MS word compatible

You should submit your MS word compatible file to the TurnItIn 1 point on blackboard before the deadline stated in assignment diary.

Word CountThe word count for this assignment is 2000 words. Only on very rare occasions will a journal editor deem a submission to be of such exceptional quality that an overlong submission will be accepted.

Assessment CriteriaThis assignment is worth 30% of the module mark. Please see detailed marking grid at the end of this brief. In summary. The marks will be broken down as follows:

(0) Presentation 10% (1) GIFA 20% (2) Cost Plan 25% (3) Car Park (Functional Unit & Superficial) 25% (4) Grassed Areas 20%

1 Note TurnItIn has a file size limit of 9BM, take care in assembly of your MS word file to ensure it fits.

GuidanceIt is important to reiterate the key point of guidance given in the first paragraph; You should attend class each block week as further guidance on the assignment will be given verbally on an ongoing basis.

Key items to highlight for this assessment are that:

Place equal effort in the research, thought and drafting for each part.

Materials that are not correctly referenced to APA System format may not be marked

Submit your work in an electronic format.

Feedback

Feedback for the assessment will be in the following format: Guidance and advice in class An electronic generic feedback note, giving details of class performance, common issues etc. Individual electronic feedback in the form of annotations on scripts and or feedback rubric

GuidanceIt is important to reiterate the key point of guidance given in the first paragraph; You should attend class each week as further guidance on the assignment will be given verbally on an ongoing basis.

Key items to highlight for this assessment are that:

A critical literature review is NOT a report. They are very different things. The source summary matrix should presented as a table on landscape A4 sheets containing the following

column headings: (1) APA references (2) Quality of source (3) What was used from the source (4) How it was used. Columns 2 to 4 count towards the words count.

Materials that are not correctly referenced to APA format may not be marked. Appendices should not appended and could lose you marks.

ResourcesSPONS Architects & Builders Price Book 2016 0r 2017 - available as an e-book through Library Gateway

BCIS (Building Cost Information Service) Elemental Cost Analysis - available through Library Gateway Data Bases

CIS ( Construction Information Service) - available through Library Gateway Data Bases

Extensions and extenuating circumstancesYou are advised to read the full procedures for the Submission of EERs and the Submission of Extenuating Circumstances within the SHU Regulations and Codes. (http://students.shu.ac.uk/rightsrules/regs.html)

ExtensionsPlease note there is a University system for exceptional extension requests for coursework. All learners should read the guidelines on the student intranet. The gateway or portal to most of the information you will need as a student is found at my.shu.ac.uk/

Extenuating CircumstancesExtenuating Circumstances policy addresses longer term problems. To claim for EC (most likely request to repeat an assessment) your should read the guidelines on the student intranet. The gateway or portal to most of the information you will need as a student is found at my.shu.ac.uk/

Academic IntegrityLearners should be familiar with SHU policy and practice in relation to academic integrity and in the context of assignments plagiarism and collusion. It advised that all learners should read the guidelines on the student intranet (see: http://students.shu.ac.uk/rightsrules/3gb.html). To support the application of this policy electronically submitted work may be presented to TurnitinUK a tool that supports the detection of plagiarism. For further information on TurnitinUK use the search provided in the blackboard support tab (Bb-support) of student intranet (my.shu.ac.uk).

Table 1 Marking Grid (Rubric)Section BUILDING GIFA COST (20%) BUILDING COST PLAN (25%) CAR PARK COST (25%) GRASSED AREA COST (20%)

Coverage

+ 10%PRESENTATION

Costs related to GIFA on all aspect of the Building, including but not limited to: Readability of the material, layout of the forms, clarity of calculations, formatting of text), correct referencing etc.

Range of cost sources/cost plans clearly cited. Judgement made in

relation to the accuracy of the sources. Explanation of usage of

sources.

A thorough compare and contrast of the two methods of costing with explanations

provided as to why there may be cost estimate differences

Accurate costs and quantities related to the grassed landscaped areas that

surround the building

Clear fail (<30%){Makes tutor

weep}

Clearly inadequate. Little of coverage seriously addressed. Critical errors- cost source and

calculations

Clearly inadequate. Little of coverage seriously addressed. Critical errors-

cost source and calculations

Clearly inadequate. Little of coverage seriously addressed. Critical errors- cost

source and calculations

Clearly inadequate. Little of coverage seriously addressed. Critical errors-

cost source and calculations

(≥ 30%) Borderline fail (<40%)

{Touches on some aspects}

Some of coverage met but with critical errors / omissions.- cost

source and calculations

Some of coverage met but with critical errors / omissions.- cost

source and calculations

Some of coverage met but with critical errors / omissions.- cost source and

calculations

Some of coverage met but with critical errors / omissions.- cost

source and calculations

(≥ 40%) Weak (<50%) {Not really

engaged}

Some of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

Some of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

Some of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

Some of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

(≥ 50%) OK (<60%) {No big

slips}

Most of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

Most of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

Most of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

Most of coverage met, with no critical errors / omissions.

(≥ 60%) Good (<70%) {Solid / covers bases}

All of coverage met, with only minor errors / omissions.

All of coverage met, with only minor errors / omissions.

All of coverage met, with only minor errors / omissions.

All of coverage met, with only minor errors / omissions.

(≥ 70%) Very Good (<85%) {Joy

to read}

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions,

some aspects exceeded.

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions, some

aspects exceeded.

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions, some aspects

exceeded.

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions, some

aspects exceeded.

(≥ 85%) Excellent {Better than tutor would do in time}

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions,

several aspect of assumption and innovation present

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions, several aspect of assumption and innovation

present

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions, several aspect of assumption and innovation present

All of coverage met, with no significant errors/ omissions, several aspect of assumption and innovation

present