We partner with the AIA to give two scholarships to architecture students each year, and, as usual, we’re excited to announce the winners.

Laura Colagrande completed her Bachelor of Fine Arts at Virginia Commonwealth University in 2013 and is enrolled in the M.Arch program at the University of Pennsylvania. With a background in design, she has worked as a designer for Middle of Broad in Richmond, VA, Wolcott AI, and Wirt Design, both located in Los Angeles. A constant desire to learn pushed Colagrande to add business skills, completing a business program at UCLA Extension and studying global marketing, branding, and risk and crisis management. She has learned the value of limiting risk and containing the negative consequences of a crisis, and is now implementing these lessons in the context of her studies in architecture.

Jonathan Teng graduated from the University of Washington with a Bachelor of Arts in Architectural Studies with Distinction in 2010, receiving a Faculty Award for Scholarship and Design and is enrolled in the M.Arch program at Washington University in St. Louis. He has held internships at Heliotrope Architects and Mahlum Architects, both of Seattle, WA. Teng has developed his ability to represent the LGBT community in architecture, and has set his focus on practicing design that provides inclusive and diverse spaces for everyone. As part of this process, he has learned to incorporate communication across the levels of the project, not just between the architect and the client, but also including the end-user when possible.

“The scholarship applicants this year demonstrated strengths in diversified areas within the submission requirements that made it challenging to select our winners,” said juror, Lira Luis, AIA. “The scholarship winners however, stood out among the rest because not only did their essays address the practice management topic in an articulate to-the- point manner, but also the suggested solutions demonstrated clear understanding of best practices such as peer reviews and the value of accountability, where risk is reasonably managed and future potential liabilities mitigated and the value of communication that includes in person interactions.”

Our scholarship was renamed in 1999 for David W. Lakamp, a founder of a/e ProNet and a trusted advisor to the profession. He left behind a legacy of professionalism and integrity that set new standards in the field of insurance services. The jury for the 2016 David W. Lakamp a/e ProNet Scholarship includes: Thomas G. Coghlan, Integro Insurance Brokers; David B. Richards, FAIA, LEED, AP, PMP, Rossetti and A. Lira Luis, AIA, RIBA, LEED AP BD+C.

Learn more about he a/e ProNet scholarships for both architecture and engineering students on our Scholarships page. And don’t forget to follow us on Twitter! We tweet application openings and deadline reminders each year.

Congratulations, Laura & Jonathan!

Read the full AIA press release here.

smoothsailing_engineeringinc

Design firms preparing to purchase or renew professional liability insurance ask the same few questions every year.

How will my professional liability premium be calculated? Will my professional liability premium go up? Should I change professional liability insurance companies?

One helpful resource to answer these questions is the 2015 Professional Liability Insurance Survey of Carriers, a report published annually by the ACEC along with a companion analysis in Engineering, Inc. that includes insight from insurance companies and other experts  This year, the title of the article says it all: 2015 was “Smooth Sailing” for the professional liability insurance industry, and that means good things for architects and engineers.

“The ACEC Risk Management Committee worked with the American Institute of Architects, the AIA Trust, and the National Society of Professional Engineers to survey 18 carriers.” With construction spending higher than it’s been in years and expected to rise, the number of insurance companies providing professional liability insurance to architects and engineers is also growing. New markets increase the competition for more established companies, and keep rates stable, which means Eric Moore, President of a/e ProNet and Vice President of Moore Insurance Services, is optimistic.

“Nonrenewal is about the only reason Moore would suggest changing carriers” this year. “If you do see a claim, a carrier you’ve been with a few years is less likely to drop you, he says.”

Also quoted in the article are representatives from several of the top-tier professional liability insurance carriers, like a/e ProNet sponsors Travelers, Beazley, and Victor O. Schinnerer, as well as Tim Corbett of SmartRisk, a performance management consultant for the design and construction industry, who has written for a/e ProNet many times.

You can read a digital version of this article in the January/February 2016 issue of Engineering, Inc.

As always, if you have any questions about this report or the professional liability market, please contact your local a/e ProNet broker today.

poetry_foundation_building

Chicago architecture firm and a/e ProNet client John Ronan Architects is one of seven finalists for the design of the Obama Presidential Library, which will be built on Chicago’s South Side. The remaining seven firms hail from all over the world, so it’s exciting that at least one “local” architect made the cut. John Ronan Architects may be best known for the dramatic Poetry Foundation building in Chicago. Best of luck to the team!

Shout-out Credit:

Mike Welbel
M.G. Welbel and Associates
650 Dundee Road, Suite 170
Northbrook, IL 60062
Phone: 847.412.1414
mwelbel@mgwelbel.com

PNN_1511In what attorney Brian Stewart calls a “disturbing trend,” more and more project owners design professionals to procure separate questionnaires from their insurance brokers. These “broker-verification questionnaires” are meant to re-state or re-affirm the limits, exclusions, etc. of the relevant insurance policies to the project.  If you’re an architect or engineer who has met push-back from your broker on this issue, our November 2015 issue of ProNetwork News explains why:

I:  The Problem with Broker Verifications

The use of broker-verification questionnaires has been a growing trend seen most commonly in the context of construction insurance… Historically, a broker has satisfied this requirement through the production of a certificate of insurance or, if necessary, a copy of the policies themselves which demonstrate that the insured had the applicable coverage.  However, a number of project owners have recently been refusing to accept certificates alone and are requiring brokers to complete a questionnaire and verification, with the understanding that a failure to complete the questionnaire will cost the broker’s client the job.

The increasingly frequent use of such broker-verification questionnaires raises a number of legal issues for the broker.  The first issue deals with the broker’s authority to interpret the underlying policy between the insurer and the insured and whether a broker has the authority to confirm in writing whether a specific policy meets the requirements, not of the contract between the Owner and the insured but rather the requirements contained in the broker-verification questionnaires.  The second legal issue deals with the effect of a conflict between the underlying policy and the language of the questionnaire.  Specifically, what is the legal consequence when a broker completes a questionnaire that potentially contains conflicting language from the actual policy?  Finally, this opinion will analyze what risks and liabilities a broker is exposed to when completing  a questionnaire that contains language that is in conflict with  or amends, modifies, expands, etc. the underlying policy.

II:  Principles of Contract

Insurance is a matter of contract governed by the rules of contract. Unlike the ordinary commercial contract where the parties seek to ensure a commercial advantage for themselves, an insurance contract seeks to obtain some measure of financial security and protection against calamity for the insured.

Being a voluntary contract, as long as the terms and conditions made therefor are not unreasonable or in violation of legal rules and requirements, the parties may make it on such terms, and incorporate such provisions and conditions as they would see fit to adopt.  The rights and obligations of parties to an insurance contract are determined by the language of the contact and the insurance policy is the law between the parties unless the contractual provisions are contrary to public opinion or law.

III:  Role of the Broker

An insurance broker provides a professional service for the insured, its client and goes to the insurance market to determine what policy or policies best fit the needs of its clients.

Relevant distinctions exist between an insurance agent and an insurance broker.  Whereas an agent generally represents a particular insurance company, an insurance broker generally represents only the insured. Consequently, an insurance broker owes a duty to the insured and not the insurer. Continue reading “The Down-Low on Broker-Verification Questionnaires”

drone

They offer a bird’s eye view of construction sites. They provide breathtaking photographic opportunities for architects looking to showcase their work. And they’re fun to fly. However, while they may be intriguing tools for architects and engineers, drones open up the design firms that use them to many possibly unanticipated risks. These days, obtaining a drone is as simple as stopping at your local WalMart, but all drones are not created equal, nor are all drone pilots equally skilled and certified.

Victor O. Schinnerer’s Risk Management Blog recently offered an overview of this issue. Should your design firm use a drone in your administration of contracted services? Read on:

“Professional service firms have to be aware that the use of drones is not a simple transition in the process of observing the work on a project site. As with web cameras, drone cameras often produce far more images than are used in the evaluation of a project. If not properly denoted in a contract, the scope of the firm’s services could include the use of all the available images as part of the firm’s duty to observe and evaluate the project as part of construction contract administration duties.

“Additionally, while licensed drone operators are undoubtedly careful about having general liability insurance that protects others from their negligence in aerial activities, and follow the FAA’s rules and guidelines, many firms using drone photography are doing so as amateurs. Turning hobby activities into commercial uses is likely to be unlawful, dangerous, and uninsured.”

Continue reading Drone use can put firms at risk beyond their knowledge by Frank Musica

PNN_1411Which is better, more or less documentation in your project file after the job is complete? Despite recent advances in technology, document retention has become a difficult, expensive and complex proposition. Computers have changed design professionals’ work flows and methods, greatly increasing efficiencies, but also exponentially multiplying the volume of data; e-mails, attachments, drawing revisions, text and voice messages, not to mention folks are still sending faxes and letters, actual paper ones. All of this adds up and can become an unmanageable mess, even for the best of us.

Making decisions now about which project documents to keep and which to discard is like trying to pick who will win the Super Bowl in the year 2024. You never know which ones will be the most important until you are right in the middle of a claim. Experience and common sense tell us that there are certain documents that, no matter what, are probably safe bets to come in handy down the road. You may also be required by law or contract to keep certain records for certain time frames.

This article will offer suggestions on those categories of critical project documents necessary to defend claims, and which ones are better off being discarded as a matter of course after project completion. The question ultimately is framed as “what to keep and for how long?” Of course, these are only suggestions, and you should discuss implementation of any document retention program with your chosen legal and accounting advisors in your specific jurisdiction. Further, this article only addresses retention of construction project documents and not corporate, HR or tax records.

“Age of Discovery”

Modern construction projects, with all this data, are subject to modern lawsuits. These lawsuits are conducted by increasingly younger, tech savvy and sophisticated lawyers who sometimes make the litigation more about the discovery effort than about the facts of the case. Parties are allowed to submit detailed and specific “requests for production of documents” once in the lawsuit, or issue subpoenas to non-parties. State and federal court discovery rules could require parties to turn over copies of all information they have in their possession related to the project. Continue reading “Document Retention: More Paper or Paper-Less?”

Scottsdale’s Dramatic ‘Scorpion House’ Can Be Yours For $5.5-Million

Undoubtedly one of the most dramatic homes in the American Southwest, the so-called Scorpion House has recently been put up for sale in Scottsdale, Arizona. Designed by a/e ProNet client Eddie Jones of Jones Studio in 2001, the 4,700-square foot Scorpion House blends “poured concrete, glass and oxidized titanium panels into a curvilinear plan that spans the desert and boulder outcroppings in an organic form to protect the natural setting.” It holds an impressive roster of design awards, including ‘Gold, Architecture under 5,000 Square Feet’ by The Arizona Home Book Design Excellence Awards. The property has also been featured in Architectural Digest and Desert Living Magazine.

Scottsdale’s Dramatic ‘Scorpion House’ Can Be Yours For $5.5-Million

Scottsdale’s Dramatic ‘Scorpion House’ Can Be Yours For $5.5-Million

See more beautiful photos of this luxurious private residence on the Xtravaganzi blog.

Shout-out Credit:

Jeff Gerrick
Professional Underwriters of Az., Inc.
Scottsdale, AZ
Ph: 480-483-0440

PNN_1501For many design firms, the ability to offer and maintain competitive employee benefit programs continues to be one of the keys to attracting and retaining the best available talent.  Yet, the regulatory and legal environment within which these benefit plans are being designed and administered is more complex than ever.  Not only are there ERISA issues, but there is a literal alphabet soup of COBRA, FMLA, HIPAA, etc. With this greater complexity and heightened scrutiny comes risk:  risk for the company itself, and the executives and administrators responsible for overseeing and administering the benefit plans.

The good news is that the risks are manageable and design firms with employee benefit programs can take advantage of a three-legged stool of insurance protection – Employee Benefits Liability Insurance, ERISA Bonds, and Fiduciary Liability Insurance.  Many executives and administrators are confused about what each of these covers and whether or not they need them. This article will explain how each coverage evolved and what specific exposures they address.  We also examine some risk scenarios based on actual litigation.

Employee Benefits Liability Insurance

Employee Benefits Liability insurance (EBL) very simply provides protection against claims arising from errors in the administration of employee benefit plans.  This coverage was developed in the mid-1970s largely in response to exposures that arose from the 1962 court decision in Gediman v. Anheuser Busch.  In this case, an employer was held accountable to the estate of a former employee for providing incorrect information to the health insurance company, which then in turn denied the employee’s claim.  Thus, EBL insurance addresses claims arising out of errors or omissions in the administration of benefit plans. Three typical exposure scenarios covered by EBL insurance include:

  1. An employer failing to properly enroll an employee for health insurance coverage, resulting in a denial of coverage.
  2. An employer not providing an employee with the appropriate COBRA information after termination, resulting in the ex-employee being unable to continue participating in the health insurance plan as required by law.
  3. An employer incorrectly calculating the amount of an employee’s pension benefit so that the employee decides to retire early only to find that the amount is much less.

Continue reading “Managing Employee Benefits: A Three-Legged Stool of Protection”

????????????????????????????????????????If you or someone you know is an architecture student, we’ve got some good news. Each year, we offer a pair of scholarships in partnership with the AIA, and the deadline for the 2015 applications has been extended through the end of the week!

The scholarship is open to fourth-year undergraduates, and graduate students of architecture enrolled in an NAAB-accredited professional degree program. The promotion and selection are handled entirely by AIA. Eligible candidates are required to submit an application to AIA’s national headquarters in Washington, DC, on their standard application form. Submissions are reviewed by jury members of the AIA Practice Management Knowledge Community. Candidates must submit a copy of their transcripts, two letters of recommendation, and an essay on how they would resolve a project management dilemma.

Extended Deadline: 17 April 2015

How to Apply

We want to help architecture students succeed. Good luck to all who apply!

Read about past winners of the a/e ProNet AIA David W. Lakamp Scholarship here.