CA Record Keeping

Log Out | Topics | Search Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Author Message John Hunter Senior Member Username: johnhunter Post Number: 112 Registered: 12-2005 Posted on Thursday, September 18, 2014 - 01:59 pm:    In the SF Bay Area, we're seeing increased use of systems like Procore and Archittrek for tracking and distributing RFI's, submittals, cost requests, etc. We have always, as policy, retained a separate copy of these records on our server, particularly when the system is administered by the Contractor. Appreciate hearing from others on their approach to managing this information. Nathan Woods, CSI, CCCA, LEED AP Senior Member Username: nwoods Post Number: 598 Registered: 08-2005 Posted on Thursday, September 18, 2014 - 02:15 pm:    Yes, I strongly agree. It's not cheap to contemplate maintaining separate, somewhat redundant records, but making it a policy to doso may actually decrease your ENO insurance rates. Reasons for maintaining your own records are numerous, and run the range of simply having date evidence supporting your actual efforts, to having the data on your server that remains available once the online data is archived and the account access is no longer available. I also think that we as design professionals should track the Reason in addition to the raw metrics. Sure, a project might have 3,500 RFI's, but if 50% of them are "Info in the Documents" or "Construction Deficiency" you can justify your extra services requests resulting from abusive GC's that much easier. It's extremely helpful to be able to quickly, accurately defend your performance to negotiate fees and or resolve disputes. You can't easily do this with most available online systems, particularly ones where as the Architect, we are not the account holder!