What a PCA costs, and how long it takes

ASTM E2018-24 sets no price, fee range or schedule for a property condition assessment. The only dollar amounts in the guide, $3,000 and $10,000, are thresholds that decide which repair cost opinions a property condition report (PCR) includes; they concern the property's repairs, not the consultant's fee (E2018-24, 10.3.1). On timing, it gives a ten business day test for records and does not expect more than one site visit; neither sets how long a PCA takes (E2018-24, 8.4.4, 9.2). What the guide does say is that how far a PCA goes follows from the user's objectives, risk tolerance, schedule and budget (E2018-24, 4.1).

The user's budget, schedule and risk tolerance

Because users differ in objectives, risk tolerance, schedule and budget, the guide allows that a PCA more or less thorough than its baseline may suit a given user, and it does not recommend any particular scope of work. It recommends that users weigh their needs, the PCA's purpose and their risk tolerance when they set the scope and the consultant qualifications they want (E2018-24, 4.1). Not every property warrants the same depth: the guide ties the level of assessment to the PCA's purpose, the property type, the age of the improvements, the user's expertise and risk tolerance, and the time available for preparing and reviewing the PCR's opinions (E2018-24, 4.3.5).

The guide also sets a limit on itself. A PCA is not technically exhaustive: past some point, the cost or time of more information outweighs its use and can hold up the transaction, and the guide aims at a balance between those demands and the uncertainty that remains (E2018-24, 4.3.3). The contract between user and consultant is outside the guide (E2018-24, 4.8).

The guide's nonmandatory Appendix X1 says changes to the baseline balance the user's objectives, risk tolerance, budget and schedule. A user who wants less uncertainty should expect a larger budget or a longer schedule, it says, though neither guarantees a stronger assessment (E2018-24, X1.2.1).

Time and cost for records

The guide intends records to reach the consultant within ten business days after the source receives the request, with no visit in person required, for no more than a nominal charge covering retrieval and copying. The consultant may still search files in person at the site visit where that is practical (E2018-24, 8.4.4). If records are not practically reviewable, or arrive too late to inform an opinion, the PCR should say so, and the consultant need not chase or review them afterward (E2018-24, 8.4.2). The consultant is not responsible for information a source fails to give, gives only in part, or gives late (E2018-24, 6.4.2). The Phase I standard's test is 20 calendar days (E1527-21, 8.1.5).

What can change the scope

The user's objectives. The user should say what the PCA is for and work out the scope with the consultant to meet it. Absent any other note in the PCR, the objective is taken to be finding physical deficiencies in support of continuing the current use, with no rehabilitation, change of use or other alteration (E2018-24, 5.1).
Specialists. Whether to add specialists to the field observer should be settled by user and consultant together before engagement, weighing the user's requirements, risk tolerance and budget, the PCA's purpose, how soon the PCR is needed, and the property's complexity (E2018-24, 7.2). Unless they agree to expand the scope, the consultant need not price remedies that depend on specialists, testing or probing (E2018-24, 6.4.3). The nonmandatory appendix says specialists observing high-cost or critical systems can cut uncertainty significantly (E2018-24, X1.2.3).
Representative observations. The user may set the representative observations for the property or for a given system, in more or less detail than the mandatory Annex A1 recommends (E2018-24, 4.3.4.1, A1).
Out-of-scope work. Taking up out-of-scope considerations or excluded activities is the user's decision, and the approach should be expressly agreed with the consultant (E2018-24, 1.3; Section 12, Note 2).
Optional services. The nonmandatory appendix lists further options, among them long-term costs, verified counts and measurements, service company research and a flood zone note; the report should name any supplemental services included (E2018-24, X1.2, X1.2.5 to X1.2.8). The Executive Summary lists services beyond the baseline (E2018-24, 11.4.3).
A prior PCR. The guide recognizes that a prior PCR can spare duplicated work and cost, but a current PCR still calls for a new walk-through survey, new interviews, and the building and fire departments' records of material violations, asked for again and reviewed (E2018-24, 4.4, 4.5.2).

What the user provides

Before work starts, the user should name a point of contact who knows the property's physical characteristics, maintenance and management, to arrange access and coordinate information (E2018-24, 5.2). The user should arrange access to the property, roofs included, that is timely, complete, supervised and safe, and the owner, its representative or the user should promptly open access to the contact, staff, vendors and documents (E2018-24, 5.3). The user should disclose what it holds that would help: prior PCRs, studies of the property or its systems, known physical deficiencies, and pending proposals or costs for repairs (E2018-24, 5.4). Readily available drawings should go to the consultant to help describe the improvements and develop quantities (E2018-24, 8.4.3). Access problems that are not cured should be documented as limiting conditions (E2018-24, 5.3).

The cost opinions are not the fee

A PCR's opinions of cost are preliminary, order of magnitude budget figures for remedying physical deficiencies, meant to give the user a general sense of the property's condition (E2018-24, 3.2.35, 10.1, 10.3.2). They describe the property's repairs and say nothing about what the PCA itself costs.

This page is general reference. It does not assess any property. ASTM E2018-24 is the standard and is not reproduced here; the judgment of the consultant on the facts governs.