CII 2026 Request for Qualifications

Version date: 12/17/2026

 Introduction

CII is a consortium of organizations in the capital projects industry. Its mission is to provide a research and development platform to create and drive innovative solutions that tangibly improve business outcomes through an academically based and disciplined approach.

CII is now soliciting Qualification Submittals for research related to multiple topics described in Appendix A. Through this Request for Qualifications (RFQ), CII expects to identify investigators to conduct research that innovates and provides significant business value for the CII member organizations.

Academics wishing to be considered for these projects must respond by submitting their qualifications following the requirements described below and the instructions provided in the online form available at: Qualtrics Survey | Qualtrics Experience Management .

Applicants should remember several important points:

• Where applicable and requested in the topic summaries (see Appendix A), CII encourages the inclusion of academics or experts in adjacent areas (like business, social sciences, etc.). The goal is to bring innovative ideas from other fields of study. See the topic descriptions for more details under the ‘Member Background’ section.

• Although CII does not require graduate research assistants (GRAs) to be identified at this point when we select an academic for a study, we do consider the reputation of the University’s Graduate Program and its capability to attract qualified students.

• The projects listed in Appendix A include a one-year project and a two-year project.

• A full proposal will be required from each selected applicant after the RFQ process (see the timeline below). The final proposal will be developed by the PI in collaboration with CII staff and industry members. This will be particularly important for any ‘breakthrough’ (short) studies as academics will work with CII to identify a development partner. See the guidelines in the topic statements where applicable.

• The research grant will only be awarded upon CII’s acceptance of the final proposal. CII may opt to not proceed with any of the listed topics or submitted proposals.

To assist with this process, CII will conduct a webinar to orient prospective PIs on the CII researcher selection process and research expectations, address any process-related questions, and clarify elements of this RFQ. The purpose of the webinar is to discuss the process rather than research topic details. The webinar date and time, along with an access link, are listed in the “Timeline” section below.

The objectives and expected deliverables for each project are described in Appendix A.

CII Research Team Overview

The selected academic team for each topic will work in conjunction with industry practitioners who are representatives from CII member organizations to be identified by CII.

The overall guidelines for CII research apply to all research projects and can be found here: Resources for Research Teams - CII Funded Studies Committee Wiki - University Wiki Service.  Applicants are required to review the guidelines before submission and acknowledge that they have done so.

Eligibility

• Any faculty member with an appointment in a U.S. or Canadian university holding a terminal degree in their discipline from an accredited university.

• Experience with CII research is strongly encouraged.

• The PI must be familiar with the specific topic (i.e., have a track record of projects and/or publications related to the topic). This experience may be in an adjacent field rather than only in Construction Engineering and Management.

• CII will consider PIs from fields of study other than Construction Engineering and Management.

• CII also requires the PI or a co-PI to be from the Construction Engineering and Management field – in case a co-PI is included.

• CII will not select applicants with late/pending deliverables for CII research projects.

CII Requirements

• One PI per team. The PI will be the main point of contact for project management purposes and is expected to perform most of the project management tasks.

• Each applicant can only apply for one topic – either as a PI or co-PI.

• At most, one co-PI per team.

• Budget: The budget for the one-year project is capped at $135,000; the two-year project is capped at $270,000 (inclusive of fringe and overhead). Note that CII does not pay overhead on travel and tuition. Itemized budgets will be submitted along with the final proposal, after applicant selection. Proposed budgets will be reviewed considering the availability of funds for the portfolio of projects to be funded in 2026.

• A full proposal will be required from each selected PI after the RFQ selection process (see the timeline below).

Submission and Selection

Applicants should complete and submit the online RFQ form (an example is provided in Appendix B), observing the deadlines listed under the “Timeline” section below.

Selection Criteria (in order from most to least relevant):

• PI’s vision and insights for the project as addressed in the statement of interest, interview (where applicable), and by the inclusion of an academic or experts in adjacent areas (where applicable)

• PI with experience on the topic (as shown in the submitted publications)

• PI’s experience working with CII and/or industry teams

• Graduate program’s reputation

• All criteria above will be evaluated based on submitted RFQ information. Where necessary, an interview may also be conducted with finalists.

Selection Process

Applications will be reviewed by a panel of members of CII’s Funded Studies Committee and CII staff. This process will include the following steps:

• Step 1 – Review applications.

• Step 2 - (if necessary) – Schedule and conduct interviews.

• Step 3 – Rank submissions and select finalists.

Timeline

1. Applicants may participate in an informational webinar on January 14, 2026.

2. Applicants will submit qualification applications by noon Central on February 2, 2026, using the online form.

3. (If applicable) CII will conduct interviews during the week of February 9, 2026.

4. RFQ selection results will be announced by February 20, 2026.

5. Proposal preparation by the selected applicant in collaboration with CII: March 2 – March 30, 2026.

6. The expected kickoff meeting date may vary by topic and depends on CII’s capability to recruit industry members for the research team. The target date for kickoff meetings is June 2026.

Appendix A

Title: Efficient nuclear power project delivery – tailoring Front-End Planning and PDRI for the nuclear power segment

An initiative to customize a proven, well established CII Best Practice to enhance new nuclear project definition and development, and to enable more predictable and positive outcomes. 

Why It Matters

• New nuclear construction is poised for significant growth in North America.

• New nuclear construction projects have struggled with cost and schedule predictability, impacting confidence in the industry's ability to deliver to targets and align associated financing.

• CII has established best practices for Front End Planning, including the PDRI tool, with proven metrics to enhance/reduce project costs and schedule, leading to increased delivery certainty.  

Related R&D

• PDRI: Project Definition Rating Index – Industrial Projects, Version 5.0 (IR113-2)

• Front End Planning Toolkit 2014.1

• Adding Value through Front End Planning (SP268-3)

• (Ongoing RT) RT-432 Streamlining and improving the efficiency of Front End Planning

• DOE G 413.3-12A, Front-End Planning and Project Definition Rating Index for Nuclear and Non-Nuclear Constructions Projects

Questions

• Primary: How can we leverage and tailor the content of the existing FEP process and PDRI tool to better prepare the project stakeholders for readiness, awareness, and ultimately improved nuclear project delivery and execution?

• What PDRI elements a common across all PDRI implementations and which ones vary by industry segment? Which elements are specific for nuclear projects?

• What advancements in engineering modeling, modularization, construction technology, supply chain challenges, human performance requirements, nuclear quality aspects associated with newly licensed reactor technologies and business processes aligned with project controls need to be incorporated into this nuclear focused PDRI content?

Expected Outcome(s)

• New, specific PDRI for new nuclear construction projects including SMRs projects.

• Insights for an FEP process framework adapted to the nuclear segment’s lifecycle and stakeholder needs.

• A white paper on PDRI elements that have stayed common across different PDRI for different industry segments, and categories and components that have commonly being adapted (this should help future decisions on PDRI development).

Expected format: Traditional 1-year Research Team, plus a pre-kickoff workshop to be funded separately. CII will provide a stipend and cover travel costs for the workshop, which will be hosted in April, following the CII Board of Advisors meeting in Austin, TX. The goal of the workshop is to start defining specific aspects to be considered in a nuclear power project PDRI and to engage potential team members, expediting the RT delivery process.

Notes to the Team

• What this is not about:

  • Defining demand and forecasts for nuclear projects and other clean energy sources.

  • Addressing specific nuclear technologies.

  • Improving or solving regulatory aspects of nuclear project delivery (but rather about capturing and managing them in FEP).

• Recommended approach: adapt to Section 2 (technical scope) of the existing PDRI for nuclear projects in general, leaving Sections 1 and 3 largely unchanged. The team may then tailor for SMRs (and future teams may do the same for other segments).

• Consider engaging UT’s Nuclear research faculty, who are also connected to regulators and nuclear projects in Texas.

• Consider engaging DOE and NRC

• Expected academics’ background:

  • Required: familiarity with FEP research

  • Preferred: PDRI research experience.

Title: Enhancing construction oversight to mitigate rework, delays, and cost overruns.

A study to identify barriers to adequate oversight and develop actionable recommendations for more effective oversight, building upon current best practices (e.g., interface management, change management, quality management). Recommendations should establish clear interfaces and accountability among functional teams and stakeholders.

Why It Matters

• There is a need to ensure coordination and clear accountability between teams and stakeholders, avoiding costly errors, miscommunications, or scope gaps leading to rework and schedule overruns.

• Effective interface management can support smoother transitions of scope between functional teams and the owner, resulting in better documentation, fewer disputes, and higher confidence in project outcomes.

• Scalable, technology-driven solutions and integrated oversight into digital tools and standardized processes can empower organizations to deploy best practices consistently across projects, driving continuous improvement and measurable performance gains.

Related R&D

• Interface Management Implementation Guide (IR302-2)

• Rethinking Quality Management with a Culture-Centric Approach (FR-406)

• Project Health Indicator (PHI) Tool: Assessing Project Health during Project Execution

• Best Practices in Quality Management for the Capital Facilities Delivery Industry (254_1.pdf)

Question(s): How to enhance project oversight to create better projects outcomes?

Expected Outcome(s)

• A practical framework and toolset for integrated construction oversight, enabling better coordination, documentation, and accountability across teams and project phases. This should build upon or integrate past CII research (and expand it).

• Actionable recommendations for staffing, technology adoption, and interface management to support seamless project execution and minimize risks.

Expected format: Traditional 2-year Research Team / 1-year RT.

Notes

• What this is not about:

  • A project addressing quality management exclusively. Quality management is a symptom of a problem but not necessarily the only problem related to oversight.

  • Not about specific hardware like drones – the team may collaborate with CII's technology Committee on technologies (see note below).

• There is a strong connection to technologies in this topic. The idea is that the project will not focus on any technology or solely pursue technology as a solution. The RT will collaborate with the Technology Committee to schedule two sessions with the purpose of scanning applicable technologies (one early on and another later in the project).

• Any references to QA/QC need to take into consideration the work of RT-406.

• Potential aspects (dimensions of this project):

  • Sponsor and leadership capability: experience levels of project sponsors and executive leaders may correlate with successful oversight

  • Contract governance and its relationship to trust/relational governance may influence the “opportunistic behavior” in projects. This topic may relate to contract management – how different contracts may provide better oversight frameworks and ultimately reduce disputes. Contract type (EPC, lump sum, unit rate) impacts quality outcomes.

  • Are we talking about governance in early FEP (before project approval) or governance in project execution? It seems the intent is on project execution/construction.

  • Technology scan (see note above)

  • Interface management and communication dimensions. These may be relevant factors. interface management, ownership, and alignment across contractors. This may relate to broader considerations around transitioning scope between functional teams or to the owner, highlighting the need for more effective interface mechanisms. 

Appendix B

This document provides the questions on the RFQ. Please

enter your information in the online form:

Qualtrics Survey | Qualtrics Experience Management .

 CII’s Funded Studies Committee (FSC) is currently soliciting qualification submittals for topics described in the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for research to begin in January 2026.  The FSC will select principal investigators to participate in its research, based upon qualifications, innovative vision, and strategy for each specific topic. Note that a formal proposal is not due with the qualification submittal. Academics selected through this RFQ will develop proposals in collaboration with CII. The RFQ process solicits PI/Co-PIs’ submittals documenting qualifications, experience, and statement of interest, as well as information on the PI’s institution, with emphasis on the graduate student program.  Faculty interested in making a Qualification Submittal should thoroughly read the RFQ available through the link below.  

RFQ link:  CII 2026 Request for Qualifications - CII Funded Studies Committee Wiki - University Wiki Service

The RFQ page contains CII’s expectations, detailed instructions for the online submission, a timeline for the RFQ, and descriptions for each research topic that CII expects to start in 2026.  Qualifications should be submitted online by Noon on February 2, 2026, Central Time. Make sure that you proceed until you see the thank you note at the end of the survey. Partial submissions will not be accepted. Any questions regarding this RFQ should be submitted to Sarra Qutob (sarra.qutob@cii.utexas.edu).

Powered by Qualtrics

Statement of Interest

Please indicate the topic summary for which you are submitting qualifications:

• Best Practices in Safety Communication and Training

• Enhancing Alignment and Communication of Business Drivers in FEP

Statement of Interest (max. 5000 characters)

Powered by Qualtrics

Bottom of Form

Top of Form

Principal Investigator Qualifications

Name

Webpage

Email

Phone Number

Address

Education

Number of years as Faculty

Current Appointment

Previous Academic Appointment(s)

Industry Experience – Yes/No. If yes, list any relevant industry experience (outside academia)

Honors and Awards

Top 3 Relevant Publication(s)

Please provide the title and link to three publications relevant to the select research topic.

Previous CII Experience

Note that CII experience is not a prerequisite for this RFQ. However, CII experience across the academic team will count for a small portion of the evaluation score.

• No

• Yes, (please describe)

Number of M.S. and Ph.D. Students Supervised

Powered by Qualtrics

Top of Form

Co-PI Qualifications

Name

Webpage

Email

Phone Number

Address

Education

Number of years as Faculty

Current Appointment

Previous Academic Appointment(s)

Industry Experience – Yes/No. If yes, list any relevant industry experience (outside academia)

Honors and Awards

Top 3 Relevant Publication(s)

Please provide the title and link to three publications relevant to the select research topic.

Previous CII Experience
Note that CII experience is not a prerequisite for this RFQ. However, CII experience across the academic team will count for a small portion of the evaluation score.

• No

• Yes, (please describe)

Number of M.S. and Ph.D. Students Supervised

Powered by Qualtrics

Top of Form

Consultant/Subject Matter Expert (if applicable)

Name

Company

Job Title

Email

Phone Number

Address

Provide a statement of how your expertise/experience can assist in this project. (max. 5000 characters)Powered by Qualtrics

Top of Form

Graduate Student / Graduate Student Program

Part 3 - Graduate Student / Graduate Student Program

​The main goal of this section is to capture information about the graduate student (if identified) and the graduate student's program. Note that the identification of a specific graduate student is not required but strongly preferred. If more than one graduate student is being considered for this project, please explain in the notes at the end of this section.

Graduate student program reputation Indicate how the GRA's program compares to peer programs and mention any relevant rank. Note that this section addresses the GRA's program rather than a specific PI or co-PI’s program.

If a specific graduate student has been already identified, please answer the following questions:

Graduate Student Name

Degree being pursued (MS, PhD)

• M.S.

• Ph.D.

• Other

Graduate student highest degree

Graduate student industry experience: Please describe any industry experience relevant to the selected research topic.

Notes on graduate student program or selection (e.g., if application has more than one graduate student)

Top of Form

Acknowledgment and Consent of Principal Investigator – By selecting the box below, the PI acknowledges that they read the CII RFQ requirements and agree to comply with all terms and conditions contained therein.

• I, having read the RFQ REQUIREMENTS, hereby agree to comply with all requirements contained therein.

In addition to the general acknowledgment above, the PI(s) acknowledge the following stipulations for their contracts in case they are selected (both boxes must be checked for the submittal to be accepted):

• Facilities and Administrative (F&A) Cost Rate on the proposal may not exceed the lower of the following two rates: 1) the rate the submitting university has negotiated with the Federal Government, in effect on the proposal date; or 2) the UT Austin F&A rate in effect on this date, currently 59%.

• CII will not pay overhead on travel-related expenses or tuition. It is the applicant's responsibility to verify with your office of sponsored project their acceptance of these clauses. Failure to accept these clauses will hinder the award.