As more and more states and localities consider utilizing a public-private partnership model for delivering physical and social infrastructure, it is important that a rational and explanatory analytical framework form the basis for assessing the relative efficacy of P3 delivery when contrasted with other, more traditional forms of project delivery, including design-bid-build (DBB) and design-build (DBM). Although VfM analysis has become relatively universal, an understanding of its primary objective—to determine the optimum approach for delivering a project—is often lacking. It is based on an incomplete list of actual factors that should be considered in any decision on project delivery. Thus, before the currently-defined VfM process becomes irrevocably embedded in the P3 lexicon, our industry should give serious attention to developing and implementing a more logical, understandable and appropriate method of assessing the relative benefits of alternative methods of project delivery.