RFIs: workflow, turnaround, metrics

A request for information, or RFI, is the contractor's formal question to the design team. A few hundred of them are normal on a warehouse job. What separates a healthy project from a troubled one is not the count but the flow: whether questions are good, answers are quick, and the answers that change price or time leave the RFI log and enter the change process. This lesson shows owners how the workflow runs under CCDC 2-2020, how to set turnaround targets and which numbers to watch each month.

Learning outcomes

• Tell an RFI apart from a Supplemental Instruction, a submittal and a change, and name the CCDC 2-2020 clauses behind each.
• Map the RFI workflow from question to closed answer, including who holds the "ball" at each step.
• Set turnaround targets in Working Days and calculate them across Ontario statutory holidays.
• Build a monthly RFI dashboard for Northgate: volume, open count, ageing, turnaround and RFIs that became changes.

The lesson

What an RFI is, and is not

The term "RFI" does not appear in CCDC 2-2020. The contract handles questions through other clauses. GC 1.1.3 makes the contractor review the Contract Documents to coordinate the Work and report problems it finds. Under GC 2.2.6, the Consultant is the first interpreter of the Contract Documents, and GC 2.2.7 says questions go to the Consultant in writing, copied to the other party. The Consultant's findings must be consistent with the intent of the documents and made impartially (GC 2.2.8), in writing and within a reasonable time (GC 2.2.9). The RFI form and log are simply how projects carry out those clauses.

The answer to an RFI takes one of three forms:

• Answered in the documents. The information was already there. The Consultant points to the drawing or section and closes the RFI.
• Supplemental Instruction (SI). CCDC 2-2020 defines an SI as an instruction, consistent with the intent of the Contract Documents, that does not change the Contract Price or Contract Time. GC 2.2.12 has the Consultant issue them with reasonable promptness or on an agreed schedule. Most RFI answers that add information end here.
• A change. If the answer adds scope, cost or time, it goes into Part 6: a proposed change, then a Change Order (GC 6.2) or a Change Directive (GC 6.3). If the contractor thinks an SI is really a change, GC 6.6 requires it to give prompt written notice of its intent to claim.

Just as important is what an RFI is not. It is not a submittal, a substitution request, a schedule, a safety plan or a letter. The Navigant Construction Forum's 2013 study of RFIs recommends keeping each of those in its own channel, and asking only questions the documents cannot answer. The OAA's Canadian Handbook of Practice lists the reasons some RFIs are sent anyway: asking is easier than searching, the question shifts responsibility, or it builds a record for a later claim for extra work or delay.

What a good RFI looks like

Navigant's study lists the qualities of a good RFI, and they translate into a simple form:

• One subject. One question per RFI, so it can be routed and closed cleanly.
• Specific references. Drawing number, detail, grid line and specification section.
• The contractor's own interpretation. A proposed answer, with reasons. It speeds the reply and shows the documents were read.
• Impact flag. Whether the contractor believes the answer may affect cost or time.
• A real required-by date. Tied to the schedule activity it affects, not "ASAP". Navigant suggests issuing at least 10 days before the answer is needed.

Setting turnaround targets

CCDC 2-2020 does not set a deadline for answering RFIs. The Consultant must respond "within a reasonable time", and SIs come with "reasonable promptness" or on an agreed schedule. Reasonable is hard to manage, so most owners set targets in Division 01 (often in the project meetings or project management sections) and in the consultant's agreement. A common tiered approach, which BRC recommends as a starting point:

• Urgent, work stopped or about to stop: 2 Working Days.
• Standard: 5 Working Days.
• Complex, needing design or a subconsultant: 10 Working Days, with a holding reply inside 5.

Count in Working Days, as CCDC 2-2020 defines them: days other than Saturdays, Sundays, statutory holidays and statutory vacation days observed by the construction industry where the Work is located. Agree in writing when the clock starts. The OAA suggests treating documents received after noon on a Friday, or the day before a holiday, as received the next Working Day, which prevents arguments over a few hours.

The numbers worth watching

The Navigant Construction Forum's 2013 study analyzed 1,362 projects with more than a million RFIs between them. It found an average of 796 RFIs per project, a median response time of 9.7 days and an estimated cost of about $1,080 to review and answer each RFI. On projects of $5 million to $50 million, there were about 17.2 RFIs per $1 million of construction cost. The data were international and mostly not Canadian, so use them for scale, not as targets. Six measures make a good monthly dashboard:

1. Raised and closed this month, to see whether the backlog is growing.
2. Open count and ageing, in bands such as 0 to 5, 6 to 10 and over 10 Working Days.
3. Median turnaround and the share answered on time.
4. Ball in court: open RFIs waiting on the Consultant versus waiting on the contractor for more information.
5. Conversion rate: the share of RFIs that became an SI with a cost notice, a proposed change or a claim.
6. Repeat topics: clusters by drawing or trade, which point to a coordination gap in the design.

Medians are better than averages here. One RFI that sat for 60 days while a design decision was made will drag the average and hide that most answers were on time.

Northgate worked example

On Northgate Distribution Centre (fictional), Halvorsen Builders Ltd. (fictional) sends RFIs to Ridgeline Architects Inc. (fictional), which routes them to its structural and MEP subconsultants. The Northgate fact sheet sets a $34,950,000 Contract Price. At the Navigant rate of 17.2 RFIs per $1 million, the owner's representative expected about 600 RFIs over the job, roughly 40 a month at peak. For this lesson, assume Division 01 sets the three-tier targets above (an illustrative assumption).

One RFI, counted properly

Halvorsen issued NDC-RFI-047 on Tuesday May 18, 2027, a standard RFI. It noted that the dock leveller pit depth on the architectural details did not match the structural slab drawings, proposed using the structural dimension, and asked for an answer before the next pour sequence. The 5-Working-Day target, skipping Victoria Day on Monday May 24, fell on Wednesday May 26. Ridgeline answered on Thursday May 27 with an SI confirming the structural dimension: 6 Working Days, one day late. The RFI number and dates are illustrative.

The owner's representative cared less about the one day than about the pattern. It was the third RFI in a month on dock edge details, a repeat topic that pointed to a coordination gap between the architectural and structural sets. It raised the issue at the next OAC meeting (see lesson 11) and asked Ridgeline to review all 14 dock details at once.

The monthly view

Figure 2 shows the RFI flow for the first six months of construction, and Figure 3 the ageing of open RFIs at the end of August 2027. Both use illustrative numbers.

View the data

Month (2027)	Raised	Closed	Open at month end
March	18	10	8
April	31	24	15
May	42	33	24
June	38	40	22
July	29	35	16
August	27	30	13
Total	185	172	13

View the data

Age band (Working Days)	Open RFIs
0 to 5	8
6 to 10	3
Over 10	2
Total	13

Reading the two figures together, the owner's representative concluded that turnaround was under control after the May peak, and that the risk lay in the two old RFIs, both on the ESFR sprinkler layout near the office mezzanine. They were tied to the fire protection rough-in ahead of M6 (roof complete, weathertight) on Friday September 3, 2027, so each went on the next agenda with an owner and a date. In the owner's master schedule in Microsoft Project, the owner's representative also noted the five oldest RFIs against the activities they affect, so the schedule cost of a late answer is visible.

Owner's move

• Set targets in writing. Put Working Day turnaround tiers in Division 01 and in the consultant agreement, and agree when the clock starts.
• Ask for the log, not a summary. A native log with dates lets you calculate medians, ageing and ball in court yourself.
• Watch conversions. Every RFI answered with an SI that carries a cost notice is a future change. Track them in the change log from day one.
• Chase patterns, not single RFIs. Repeat topics on one detail mean a coordination fix, not a faster reply.
• Protect owner decisions. Some RFIs need the owner, not the architect. Name who answers for the owner and how fast.

Common mistakes

1. Letting the RFI log carry changes. An answer that adds scope must move to Part 6, or it becomes an unpriced change.
2. Calendar-day targets. Counting weekends and holidays makes everyone late on paper and invites argument.
3. Reporting averages only. A few stuck RFIs distort the average and hide the real pattern.
4. "ASAP" required dates. Without a date tied to the schedule, nobody can prioritize.
5. Using RFIs for submittals or substitutions. They bypass the review steps those processes need.

Quick quiz

1. Under CCDC 2-2020, which document is the right answer to an RFI that adds information but does not change the Contract Price or Contract Time?

   1. Change Order
   2. Change Directive
   3. Supplemental Instruction
   4. Field report

2. Who is the first interpreter of the Contract Documents under GC 2.2.6?

   1. The owner
   2. The contractor
   3. The Consultant
   4. The adjudicator

3. An RFI is issued on Tuesday May 18, 2027, with a 5-Working-Day target. Victoria Day is Monday May 24. When is the answer due?

   1. Sunday May 23
   2. Tuesday May 25
   3. Wednesday May 26
   4. Thursday May 27

4. Why is the median turnaround more useful than the average?

   1. It is always smaller
   2. A few very old RFIs do not distort it
   3. CCDC 2-2020 requires it
   4. It counts calendar days

5. Halvorsen believes an SI adds cost. What should it do?

   1. Ignore the SI
   2. Raise another RFI
   3. Give prompt written notice of intent to claim under GC 6.6
   4. Wait for final completion

Show answers and explanations

1. C. A Supplemental Instruction adds information consistent with the documents' intent, without changing price or time.
2. C. The Consultant interprets the Contract Documents in the first instance, impartially and in writing.
3. C. Counting Working Days from May 18: May 19, 20, 21, 25 and 26. The holiday and the weekend do not count.
4. B. The median shows the typical answer; a single 60-day RFI can drag the average well above it.
5. C. GC 6.6 requires prompt written notice of intent to claim, followed by a detailed account.

Key terms

Request for information (RFI)

A written question from the contractor to the Consultant about the Contract Documents.

Supplemental Instruction (SI)

A Consultant's instruction consistent with the intent of the Contract Documents that does not change Contract Price or Contract Time.

Turnaround

Working Days from receipt of an RFI to the Consultant's written answer.

Ball in court

The party that must act next on an open item.

Ageing

How long open items have been open, grouped in bands.

Conversion rate

The share of RFIs whose answers led to a cost notice, proposed change or claim.

Working Day

Under CCDC 2-2020, a day other than a weekend, statutory holiday or statutory vacation day observed by the construction industry where the Work is.

References

1. Canadian Construction Documents Committee, CCDC 2-2020 Stipulated Price Contract, Definitions and GC 1.1.3, 2.2.6 to 2.2.12, 6.2, 6.3 and 6.6 (paraphrased).
2. Ontario Association of Architects, Canadian Handbook of Practice excerpt: requests for information.
3. Navigant Construction Forum, Impact and Control of RFIs on Construction Projects (April 2013), hosted by CMAA.
4. American Society of Concrete Contractors, Request for Information (RFI) and rework (August 2020).
5. Ontario Association of Architects, Reviewing submittals (receipt-time practice tip).
6. Ontario Association of Architects and Ontario General Contractors Association, Recommended Supplementary Conditions for CCDC 2-2020 (revised March 15, 2024).

Verified on November 6, 2026.

Next lesson in this trackSubmittals and shop drawings