Company History
Cost Recovery Works, Inc. succeeds Capital
Project Review Services, Inc., launched as a sole
proprietorship in 1994 by Al M. Gray after 12 years of service to
five Fortune 250 companies as an internal auditor, capital projects
auditor, and accountant. During his corporate career Mr. Gray
planned, implemented, and directed on-site teams of auditors to
provide cost avoidance and cost recovery services. The basis for
founding the company was to leverage these proven cost recovery
methodologies, which had produced savings of tens of millions of
dollars, in the service of clients with a desire to reduce their
costs. Capital Project Review Services, Inc. added to this legacy
with tens of millions of new financial savings for eight more
Fortune 500 companies, international manufacturing, and other
large sized clients.
In 2005 the firm incorporated as Cost
Recovery Works, Inc. (CRW), a Georgia corporation. Mr. Gray is the
president of the firm. The firm has proceeded to market review
processes which produce vast savings relative to costs of these
services.
Cost Recovery Works, Inc. provides owners
with a variety of capital project planning, control, and review
techniques designed to reduce project costs from inception to
completion. The objective of the firm is to help you minimize and
control the costs of infrequent major projects by maximizing tax
benefits, reviewing contractor billings and claims, and by
coordinating existing resources within your organization. A
concurrent, proactive effort to minimize both project and tax costs
is the firm’s primary emphasis. Recovery and avoidance of client
costs is the firm's primary emphasis.
Since the firm was established, some
clients have enjoyed millions in savings,
others have adopted stronger capital spending controls, and clients
recovered large sums from contractors and taxing authorities.
Clients
Cost Recovery Works, Inc. is proud to
serve a number of Fortune 500 clients in a variety of industries.
Clients include corporations in the following industries: pulp and
paper, textile, chemical, food, packaging, building materials,
forest products, and manufacturing process equipment.
The CRW Method
|
1. |
Review multiple pressure points to
identify likely sources of cost recoveries. Alternatively, the
client directs the objective, i.e. capital spending, based on
its evaluation of the exposure. |
|
2. |
Quickly abandon areas with low
potential. Minimize work paper documentation to save time.
|
|
3. |
Concentrate on areas with high
potential by testing transactions, researching issues, and
expanding the scope, if necessary. |
|
4. |
Identify and quantify recoverable
costs. Identify and quantify future savings from alternative
processes and methodologies. |
|
5. |
If there are no material savings or
recoveries discovered, quickly halt the project. |
|
6. |
Establish a schedule and budget for
the recovery or cost avoidance effort. |
|
7. |
Determine whether the client has the
resources to perform the effort, the work should be performed
by contract accounting personnel, or CRW should complete the
recovery effort. |
|
8. |
Extract data into a database,
allowing ready reclassification, restatement, and
summarization of the affected transactions. |
How does CRW
produce such an attractive savings to cost ratio?
"VIGILANCE BUILDS
VALUE"
This simple slogan explains
the success of CRW, its guiding principles, and why clients
benefit. If it is a concept that you share, please
give us a call.
|
|
 |
|
|
Process
Development
The reason for founding CRW was an
increasing progression of capabilities and results for companies:
|
PHASE |
EXPERIENCE |
RESULTS |
|
I.
1983 to 1985 |
Construction Auditing for a $50
million chemical plant |
Savings in excess of $150 per hour.
Key finding a $125,000 refund from a previously
undetected overcharge. The owner saved more than $1,000,000 on
all affected projects.
|
|
II.
1985-1991 |
On-site Capital Project Auditing of
all project and facility functions for a $1 billion paper
mill. |
Project audit team produced savings
in excess of $200 per hour - conservatively stated. Total
savings ranged from a proven minimum of $6.5 million to $12
million including avoided costs.
|
|
III.
1992-1994 |
Multiple Site Capital Projects
Auditing for a textile manufacturer with annual capital
spending of $300 million |
Project audit team produced savings
in excess of $400 per hour - conservatively stated. Total
savings were a minimum of $3 million.
|
|
IV.
1994-2004 |
Capital Project Review Services
leverages cost recovery measures into even greater savings. |
Savings and cost recoveries average
in excess of $800 per hour, proving that capital projects
auditing is a sustainable producer of savings to clients.
|
|
V.
2005-Present
(and future) |
Cost Recovery Works, Inc., founded
to emphasize cost recovery successes, expands into property
development work and regulatory projects. |
The company offers reasonable hourly
rates for new cost recovery work, incentive fees to maximize
client returns, and contingency fees where the client lacks
funding or desire guaranteed returns.
|
|
|
|
The IMPACT
of: "Oh, by the way..."
The primary purpose
and perceived value in engaging Cost Recovery Works, Inc.
often becomes secondary to other more critical issues
discovered during our efforts. The principal reason for CRW's
extraordinarily high returns is the impact of these unintended
beneficial consequences. The initial review session is
frequently concluded with the client hearing "Oh by the way,
you should really take a look at this other issue, it will
save you money."
INITIAL
SCOPE
|
A |
CRW was engaged to
restate the tax accounting for a project in anticipation of
requesting a use tax refund of approximately $425,000. |
|
B |
CRW was engaged to
restate the tax accounting for multiple projects in an
effort to recapture an unknown amount in sales/use taxes |
|
C |
CRW was engaged to
assist the client with launching a proactive project auditing
function for its $130 million project. |
|
D |
CRW was
engaged in a multiple year development project
culminating with a $30 million retail center |
SECONDARY
ISSUE
|
A |
Several other
projects were identified which had been thought to be taxable
by the client. A tax law change and obscure rulings were
researched which supported exempting some of these other
projects. |
|
B |
During the review of
the project accounting for the projects it was determined that
the client had sustained duplicate billing for certain
subcontracted work. |
|
C |
The preliminary cost
accounting systems review indicated that the contractors'
systems were inadequate to perform the owner's multiple cost
system objectives for the project. |
|
D |
New regulations at
local and state level threatened the project |
RESULTS
|
A |
The client was able
to increase its refund request to $1.4 million, eventually
recovering approximately $1 million. |
|
B |
The client has
recovered more than $400,000 to date in addition to the
$500,000 in tax recoveries. |
|
C |
The contractor took
immediate action to revise its systems for the project and
gained approval from the owner for additional resources. The
project was completed ahead of schedule and under budget. |
|
D |
The owner
completed development with multiple cost and regulatory
concessions. Estimated benefit from the work was $1.2
million. |
Let
CRW make your capital reappear!
|
|
