Scope identification, inclusions and exclusions · Lesson 4 of 4

Scope identification, inclusions and exclusions: defects, verification and case study

Ten scope defects tied to the sources, a second-reader checklist and the evidence to file, a constructed case study of a cleat nobody carried, and the options for closing a found gap.

You will be able to: Recognize the common ways a scope goes wrong, run a second-reader check, walk a constructed case study to the written question that closes the gap, and say which corrective options the contract may allow.

10 min · 10 slides · 7 questions

All lessons in this module

Slide 1 of 10

Ten ways a scope goes wrong

Omission: nobody carries the item. Overlap: two parties do. Vague wording. A boilerplate exclusion. Conflicting documents. A missing addendum. An unstated assumption. A thickness the table does not give. An item beyond AFS’s limits. A flashing family split across sections with no one joining the halves.

Sources

Scope Best Practices and Specificity (June 2025) - American Subcontractors Association of Metro Washington
UFGS-07 60 00 Flashing and Sheet Metal (August 2023, Change 1 05/25) - USACE, NAVFAC and AFCEC, hosted by the Whole Building Design Guide
AFS fabrication limits - materials, thicknesses, bend rules and sizes the shop can make - Architectural Flashing Supply

Glossary

Double scoped: Work that appears in the scope of more than one trade. ASAMW says caulking is often double scoped across multiple trades.
Scope gap: Required work that no party’s price or subcontract includes. A working term used in this module.
Bid leveling: Putting competing proposals on the same scope basis before comparing them (this module’s working definition). ASAMW asks both sides to review exclusions in detail during bid and leveling.
Deviation: A bid that departs from the specified material or basis of design. ASAMW says a bidder must clearly highlight deviations in its proposal.
Boilerplate exclusion: A standard list of exclusions carried on every bid instead of identifying what the project does not require. ASAMW reports it as a recurring complaint.
Second reader: A person who did not write the scope and checks its words against a checklist before the price is set. A working practice taught in this module.