By Patrick Aylesworth, LEED Green Associate
How the right project delivery method protects your budget, your schedule, and your community’s expectations from the start
The “Low Bid” Tradition
At some point in nearly every school construction project, there’s a moment when the room gets quiet. The bids are opened, the numbers are read aloud, and everyone around the table begins doing the same calculation: Does this match the budget we approved?
For school boards and administrators, that moment carries real weight. The number in front of them isn’t just a construction bid; it represents taxpayer trust, bond commitments made to the community, and the promise that the district can deliver the schools and facilities it planned.
In Missouri, we’ve long followed the “low bid should win” philosophy. Missouri is the “Show Me State” after all, and communities expect transparency and fairness when public dollars are spent. That mindset is why design-bid-build and traditional hard-bid construction remain so common for public projects.
At S. M. Wilson, we know that world well. In fact, just in the past few months we were the successful low bidder on projects, including Rolla School District’s new Storm Shelter and Early Childhood Center and Jefferson City’s Administration Center. Our bids aren’t aspirational — they’re built on decades of experience working with more than 40 school districts. When we submit a number, it’s a price and schedule we can stand behind.
But we’ve also learned something important over the years: in today’s market, the lowest bid on bid day isn’t always the final price a community pays.
And for school boards and districts, that difference matters.
Hidden Costs
The traditional design–bid–build process is built on a “wait and see” approach. The design is finished, the project is bid, and only then are the building costs refined. Design-bid-build works well when the scope is fully defined and market conditions are stable. But if the market has changed and steel, concrete, or labor prices have jumped, you can already be over budget before construction even starts.
When this happens, districts often experience what feels like “change order whiplash.” With budgets strained, the scope gets cut, and timelines slip. Board meetings and taxpayers who aren’t versed on the ins and outs of construction projects are left wondering why the number they approved isn’t the number they’re paying or why the plans had to be scaled back to meet their budget.
Districts may not realize there are other project delivery paths that can prevent these issues before they become costly problems in the field.
Construction Management: An Alternate Path
Construction Management at Risk (CMAR) isn’t about spending more. It’s about avoiding surprises, so you have higher confidence that the design you approved is the build you will get within the budget. CMAR works well when there are concerns with budget certainty, early
collaboration, and market volatility.
With CMAR, S. M. Wilson joins the team during design, ideally before the district goes to the ballot for a bond issue. We review drawings in real time, identify conflicts, close gaps, and resolve inefficiencies before they affect cost or schedule.
Simply put, we have the luxury to build the project on paper first when we are brought in during the design phase. This allows teams to plan for real-world conditions, adjust early, and keep tax dollars focused where they belong, on classrooms and learning environments — not on rework and change orders.
Having an initial round of accurate pricing before a bond issue also helps align program expectations with the bond’s capacity. For districts, that means fewer surprises after voters approve a bond issue and greater confidence that the projects promised to the community will be delivered as expected and within the approved funding.
You still receive competitive pricing. Every major trade, plumbing, electrical, mechanical, masonry, drywall and more, is competitively bid. The difference is that the work is packaged strategically, reviewed carefully, and aligned with current market conditions so nothing is
overlooked and nothing is based on guesswork.
You can also get ahead of supply challenges. With CMAR, districts do not have to wait for construction documents to be 100% completed to begin. Early bid packages can be released for long-lead items like sitework, HVAC equipment, or electrical gear. At the stage where other project delivery methods must wait on materials, CMAR projects are already moving forward.
Most importantly, you receive a Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP). The GMP establishes a true ceiling for the project budget. In plain terms: no budget ambushes and no surprise overages. If the final cost comes in under the GMP, the district shares in the savings. In a traditional hard-bid model, the contractor keeps those savings.
The Bottom Line
Our team is highly experienced in both design-bid-build and CMAR. There isn’t one better method — it’s about choosing the right path to deliver the project your community was promised.
This matters now more than ever. Districts across Missouri are navigating tighter budgets, evolving funding models, and continued market volatility. Since CMAR was approved in Missouri within the past decade, it may not have been an option during your last major project.
We welcome the opportunity to talk through your goals, your constraints, and your vision—then help you align the right delivery approach to achieve your vision.
At S. M. Wilson, we take that responsibility seriously. As a 100% employee-owned company, every decision we make is rooted in accountability, performance, and delivering on the commitments made to your community. “Beyond the Build” is more than a tagline—it’s how we ensure the project you approve is the project you receive.
Patrick Aylesworth is a Market Executive at S. M. Wilson, specializing in Missouri education and public projects. Contact Patrick at patrick.aylesworth@smwilson.com or (314) 633-9689 to schedule a time to discuss your school’s exciting, future project.