The first step is not a calculation
Before any operation, it must be established which regime applies to the service, because the dual regime introduced by the corrective decree governs the whole procedure. The classification therefore precedes the calculation rather than accompanying it.
| Service | Regime |
|---|---|
| Relating to design | Annex I.13 to the code, across the two design stages |
| Not relating to design | Ministerial decree of 2016, pending the new instrument |
On a mixed commission the two regimes coexist, and the calculation is carried out separately for each share before the results are added. The two shares should be kept distinct in the tender documentation as well.
The parameters and their sources
| Symbol | Parameter | Source |
|---|---|---|
| V | Value of the works, by category and functional use | Bill of quantities or the project cost framework |
| G | Complexity factor of the category of works | Table of categories and complexity factors |
| Qi | Coefficient for the individual deliverable or service, identified by a code | Table in Annex I.13, for design services |
| P | Base parameter, a decreasing function of the value of the works | Formula laid down by the rules |
| S | Expenses and incidental costs | Percentage determined under the criteria the rules set |
Two cautions on this table.
The first concerns V. The value of the works is broken down by category and functional use, and a composite project is separated into its constituent categories, each with its own complexity factor. That breakdown precedes the calculation and determines its outcome entirely.
The second concerns Qi. The coefficients are attached to codes identifying individual deliverables and services. The corrective decree did not change the values of the coefficients but their distribution across the design stages, which went from three to two.
The calculation sequence
The procedure runs through five steps, and the order is binding. Reversing the steps produces a different amount.
First step. Break the works down by category and functional use, attributing to each the value V and the complexity factor G.
Second step. Identify the deliverables and services covered by the award, on the basis of the relevant design stage, and the corresponding codes in the table.
Third step. Determine the base parameter P as a function of the value of the works.
Fourth step. Calculate the fee for each category and each deliverable.
CP = Σ ( V × G × Qi × P )
The summation extends to every category and every deliverable code actually awarded. A deliverable required and not counted is an unremunerated service.
Fifth step. Add expenses and incidental costs.
C = CP + S
The result is the amount to be put out to tender, against which the operator will frame its discount. The discount therefore applies to a verifiable amount.
The consistency check
Four checks usefully precede any use of the result. They cost a few minutes and prevent the most frequent errors.
| Check | Question |
|---|---|
| Breakdown | Do the categories identified correspond to the actual composition of the project |
| Stages | Have the deliverables been placed in the correct design stage under the current allocation |
| Scope | Do the codes entered correspond to the deliverables actually required, no more and no less |
| Regime | Have the non design services been calculated under the regime governing them |
The second row is where error is most likely today, because the allocation of deliverables across two stages rather than three is recent and experience gained under the previous system prompts superseded placements. The check should be made against the annex rather than from memory.
The third row is the one that protects the practice. A divergence between the deliverables listed in the tender documents and the codes remunerated in the tender basis translates into unpaid work, and is a point to raise through a clarification request before bidding.
What the calculation is for
The procedure has two distinct uses and both are worth keeping in mind. It serves to frame a tender and to review the tender basis.
The first is checking the tender basis. Because the tables are mandatory, the calculation makes it possible to establish whether the amount put out to tender was correctly determined. It is a check carried out on the documents and it returns an objective result.
The second is building one's own tender. Knowing the structure of the fee makes it possible to identify which deliverables weigh most in the calculation and to assess the real financial impact of a discount on each component of the service.
One final observation concerns the private market. The fee framework does not apply to private commissions, where the fee arises from agreement between the parties. Many practices nevertheless use it as an internal benchmark for testing whether a private fee is sustainable, and that is a legitimate use provided the nature of the benchmark is made clear to the client.
Note: this page sets out a calculation method in parametric form and contains no fee values, which are set out in the tables annexed to the code and in the ministerial decree in force for non design services. The references relate to Italy and are current as at the date of publication: the text in force and the tender documents of the individual award should be checked before any operational use.