Check Bid Alternate Dependencies Before You Level Bids

Define what makes alternates comparable

Two alternates are comparable when they cover the same base scope, use the same unit basis, and carry the same exclusions. That sounds obvious, but bid forms often ask for alternates as simple add or deduct numbers, leaving each bidder to decide what the number includes. The estimator's job is to reconstruct the basis before comparing the totals.

Start by restating the base bid and each alternate in a common format: scope included, quantity, unit price where relevant, schedule effect, and qualifications. Do not accept a single net number as the whole story. If a bidder cannot explain the basis, the alternate is not ready for leveling, even if the number looks attractive.

Separate base scope from alternate scope

Build a two column map. The left column lists the base scope that must be present in every bid. The right column lists what each alternate adds, deletes, or substitutes.

Then check for overlap. An alternate that adds a premium finish while the base bid already carries an allowance for that finish is double counting, not an upgrade. Use the same work breakdown structure for every bidder.

If one bidder prices an alternate by trade and another by system, convert both to the same unit before comparing. The subcontractor scope gap review provides the normalization questions for the underlying trade packages.

Map dependencies between alternates

Create a dependency matrix with alternates on both axes. Mark whether accepting alternate A changes the quantity, sequence, or feasibility of alternate B. A common example is a roofing alternate that changes the structural loading and therefore the steel alternate.

Another is a mechanical efficiency alternate that changes electrical service size. The matrix does not need a dollar value in every cell. It needs a flag and a short note explaining the relationship.

That is enough to stop a leveling meeting from summing independent totals when the choices are actually a package. If the bid form allows only one alternate to be selected, the matrix should also state which combinations are mutually exclusive.

Recheck quantities and units for each option

An alternate often arrives with a quantity that was copied from the base scope. Check the takeoff against the alternate drawings or specifications rather than assuming the same count. A different product may have a different coverage rate, waste factor, or accessory count.

Those differences belong in the alternate price, not in a later change order. Pay particular attention to units that change with the option, such as square feet of wall area when insulation thickness changes, or linear feet of pipe when a routing alternate is selected. The unit conversion review lists the arithmetic checks that catch these shifts before they reach the bid tabulation.

Test the schedule effect of each combination

Ask what has to happen earlier or later if an alternate is accepted. A longer lead time may move a procurement milestone and add general conditions. A different sequence may create a temporary condition that the base bid did not include.

Record the schedule effect separately from the direct cost so the owner can see the full consequence. For each combination, note the longest lead item and the trade that governs the sequence.

If two alternates both extend the same milestone, the effects may overlap rather than add. That is a judgment for the project lead, but the estimator should supply the dates and the affected activities rather than a single lump sum.

Document the leveling decision

The leveling sheet should end with a recommendation and a reason. State which alternate is recommended, which dependencies were tested, and which assumptions remain. If the recommendation depends on an owner preference that is not yet confirmed, mark it as conditional instead of presenting it as a firm comparison.

Keep the rejected options in the record with their adjusted values. A later question about why a cheaper alternate was not selected should be answerable from the file. The bid submission readiness check should then confirm that the selected alternate and its qualifications appear consistently in the final forms.

Carry the result into the submission

Transfer the chosen alternate into the bid form exactly as leveled. Check that the add or deduct amount matches the adjusted scope and that the narrative does not describe a different option. If a clarification is needed, write it in the terms the form allows and attach the dependency note only if the instructions permit attachments.

After submission, keep the dependency matrix with the estimate. Post-bid negotiations often revisit alternates, and the matrix is the fastest way to show why a combination was priced the way it was. The record also protects the estimating team if a scope question arises during award.

Keep the dependency matrix usable under deadline

A matrix that takes a day to build will not survive a short bid cycle. Limit it to the alternates that the owner is likely to select and the trades that can change each other. For a typical package that is five to ten rows, not the entire work breakdown.

A short matrix that is actually filled in beats a comprehensive one that is started and abandoned. Review the matrix with the chief estimator before the leveling meeting. Ask which combination is most likely, which is most expensive, and which is impossible.

Those three answers usually expose the dependency that matters. The AGC construction resources library is a useful reference for common contracting structures when the bid form is unclear. After the meeting, keep the matrix with the leveling sheet.

If the owner asks for a different combination later, the team can reopen the specific dependency instead of rebuilding the whole comparison. The matrix is a working document, not a presentation, and its value is highest when the bid is still moving.

Frequently Asked Questions