How to Compare Architect Proposals in Seattle (2026)

TL;DR: Comparing architect proposals fairly means putting them on the same footing first — same scope, same phases, same deliverables — then comparing fees, then weighing fit and communication. The lowest number often hides missing scope. Build a simple scorecard and decide on value.

When homeowners send us a competing proposal to “match,” the proposals are rarely comparing the same thing. One includes construction administration; another doesn’t. One assumes a structural engineer; another leaves it out. Price looks like the difference, but scope is. Here’s how to compare proposals on equal terms.

Step 1: Normalize the scope

Before you look at a single dollar figure, list what each proposal actually covers. Put them in a column-by-column grid:

• Project scope and approximate size
• Which phases are included (schematic design → design development → construction documents → permitting → construction administration)
• Deliverables (floor plans, elevations, permit set, specifications)
• Consultants included or excluded (structural, civil, energy)
• Number of design revisions
• Permitting support

If one proposal is missing a phase the others include, you’re not comparing like with like. Add the missing item back in (even as an estimate) so the comparison is honest. Our guide to proposal red flags covers the gaps to watch for.

Step 2: Decode the fee structures

Architects price work differently — percentage of construction cost, fixed fee, or hourly — and you can’t compare a percentage to a flat number without context. Convert each to the same basis if you can. A 10% fee on a $600,000 project is $60,000; a “$48,000 fixed fee” may look cheaper but could exclude CA or permitting. Read our breakdown of how architects charge in Seattle to translate the structures.

Step 3: Score fit and communication

The cheapest proposal from a firm you can’t reach is the most expensive in the end. Rate each firm on:

• Relevant Eastside / project-type experience
• Responsiveness and clarity so far
• Who you’ll actually work with day to day
• How they handle problems and changes
• Whether the proposal itself is clear and complete

These “soft” factors predict your day-to-day experience over a year-long project more than a few percentage points of fee.

Step 4: Build a simple scorecard

Score each proposal 1–5 on the factors that matter to you, weight the ones you care about most, and total them. A rough example:

Factor	Weight	Firm A	Firm B
Scope completeness	25%	5	3
Fee value	25%	3	5
Relevant experience	20%	5	3
Communication	20%	5	4
Deliverables clarity	10%	4	3

The exercise forces you to weigh value, not just price — and often the “more expensive” firm wins once missing scope is added back to the cheaper one.

Common mistakes

• Comparing on price alone. Scope differences usually explain the gap.
• Ignoring exclusions. Excluded consultants and CA become real costs later.
• Underweighting fit. You’ll work with this firm for months — communication matters.

For the broader decision, see how to choose an architect in the Seattle area.

Want a proposal that’s easy to compare — clear scope, phases, and fees with nothing hidden? Request one from Piper Cole Architects.

FAQ

Should I always choose the lowest architect proposal? No. The lowest number often excludes phases like construction administration or consultants. Normalize scope first, then compare value.

How do I compare a percentage fee to a fixed fee? Convert the percentage to a dollar amount using the estimated construction cost, then check that both proposals cover the same phases and deliverables.

What matters besides price? Scope completeness, relevant experience, deliverables, revision limits, permitting support, and how clearly the firm communicates.

Sources consulted: AIA owner-architect agreement fee-structure conventions; Seattle-area construction cost references; Piper Cole Architects proposal practice.