Only if its stated scope actually includes the required work for both arrangements. First establish the necessary immigration steps, then ask for the applicable government charges and professional scope. Do not assume that two project names always mean two identical filings or that one authorization automatically covers everything.
Make the assumptions visible
The quotation should identify the employer arrangements and applicants assessed, document work included and circumstances that would change the scope. Keep travel and project cancellation costs separate. A clear estimate can support planning without implying that paying it establishes eligibility or a guaranteed start date.
A first review should distinguish government charges, professional scope, document retrieval, translations, credential work, travel and business expenses. Request a written scope that identifies which employer arrangement and which applicants it covers. The records that settle cost questions are current official fee instructions and the engagement letter, not an old online estimate.
Sequence the eligibility assessment before non-refundable travel or document orders where possible. Hypothetical example: A Canadian meteorologist receives a short-term offer from a New Mexico renewable-energy developer and assumes a customer will reimburse everything. The developer's letter covers only project travel, while the employer must still decide whether it will use an inspection-based process or a petition.
Problems arise when a project budget is presented as an immigration budget and nobody has assigned responsibility for the actual procedure. Confirm the cost owner in writing and revisit the estimate if another employer, worker or procedure is added. That step prevents a commercial dispute from becoming pressure to begin before authorization.
The decision record should show which costs are immigration-related and which belong to the underlying project.