It’s a whole new language
Cee-cee–wiffel – say that to a QS and it is like saying ‘Bonjour!’ to a French person who thinks you only speak English!
CCWFL is a fabulous acronym for the framework a quantity surveyor uses to build up a rate for something, and we use this when we are pricing elementally.
The term can also be described as a ‘sandwich rate’ and the idea is that it is based on a description of work, rather than itemised measuring. It’s a quick way to pull pricing together with as much accuracy as possible.
The acronym is broken down as follows;C – Cost
The cost of the materials within the description, broken down into the unit specified, ie /m2
The cartage allowances to bring the material to site including extra value such as carting by hand on a steep section etc.
Generally the waste allowance for a particular item, depending on the material type and job type given as a percentage and calculated as a unit.
The fixings allowance for the materials, glues, screws and nails. Materials not usually itemised, unlike bolts for instance.L – Labour
The labour allowance for each material type, broken down into a per unit basis. Labour constants are based on the average guy doing the average job on an average day.
An example of a description that you might be using could be;
10mm plasterboard to 90mm internal timber-framed walls with 2.4 stud including insulation.
So why do you care about this?
You care because you want to know that if you are using a QS and you ask for an estimate or an elemental report, this is the theory behind why we do what we do.
QS’s get accused all the time of overcooking a price and it coming in too high.
But as you can see, if we are using CCWFL that is not the case at all, it is simply to do with covering you financially and giving accurate expectations to your client.
The other reason is if you are putting together pricing exercises like this yourself, this theory is handy.
Personally, I think that there is nothing worse than promising a client you can do something for a particular value, then having to renege on it when true costs are apparent.