Choosing an architect

Ask for a scope of work with defined tiers, not one line item

A proposal that just says "design work" leaves the boundary between what's included and what costs extra undefined until a change order shows up. The American Institute of Architects builds its own standard contracts around a tiered structure instead: basic services included by default, with anything beyond that named and priced separately.

"Services listed are divided into basic, supplemental, and additional services."

Source: B-Series Owner/Architect Agreements guide, American Institute of Architects

Whether your architect uses AIA's own forms or not, ask for this same shape: what's covered at the base fee, what triggers an added charge, and who decides when a change order is needed.

Verify licensure yourself, before you sign anything

Don't take a candidate's word for their license status. Check it directly against your state's architecture licensing board, and ask outright whether your project's scope requires a stamped, sealed deliverable or whether that level of sign off is optional for the work you're planning.

Licensing rules, and whether a stamped deliverable is legally required for a given project, vary by state and by whether the work touches structural elements. Confirm the requirement before you sign, not after the drawings arrive.

Some states exempt architects from competitive bidding entirely

Getting three bids feels like due diligence, but it isn't always required, and it isn't always the point. Florida's competitive bid statute, for example, requires bidding once a contract exceeds a set share of the annual budget, but it separately excludes architect contracts from that requirement, along with attorneys, accountants, and engineers.

Even where bidding does apply, the same statute is explicit that the board is not required to accept the lowest bid. Whether a bidding requirement exists at all, and which professions are exempted, varies by state. Check your own state's statute and your governing documents before assuming a rule applies.

Following the architect's advice is a defense, not a shield

A board that hires a qualified architect and reasonably follows their advice has real legal footing if that decision is later questioned. Retaining a professional first, rather than deciding alone, is itself evidence the board acted reasonably.

"An important legal defense that would not be available if the board had simply just made those decisions."

Source: Understanding the Business Judgment Rule for Boards, Barker Martin, P.S.

That protection is conditioned, not automatic. It holds only where the board's reliance was made in good faith and where the board reasonably believed the advice fell within the architect's actual competence, and it does not cover a board that hires an architect and then ignores what the architect told them.