In recent decades, the use of construction manager-at-risk (CMAR) has surged as an innovative construction project delivery method in comparison to traditional competitive bid procurement methods. The conceptual pros and cons of the method are widely accepted throughout the construction industry; however, very little quantitative research exists validating such beliefs. The study presented in this technical paper empirically compares the performance of CMAR to that of the more traditional method of competitive sealed proposal (CSP) in the construction of higher educational facilities. In a study of 33 projects constructed by The Texas A&M University System, 19 procured using CMAR and 14 procured using CSP, observed results show a reduction in schedule growth and change order quantity when using CMAR over CSP. However, additional results show that CSP is more apt to result in decreased project and construction costs than CMAR. Business practices of The Texas A&M University System, statistical significance testing of research data, and practical applications of research findings are included.