Description
A procedure is a document written to support a "Policy Directive". A Procedure is designed to describe Who, What, Where, When, and Why by means of establishing corporate accountability in support of the implementation of a "policy".
U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration TPM-20 Office of Engineering Project Management Oversight Oversight Procedure 32D - Project Delivery Method Review __________________________________________________________________________________ 1.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Oversight Procedure is to describe the review, analysis and recommendation procedures and reporting requirements expected by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) from the Project Management Oversight Contractor (PMOC) with regard to the Grantee’s selection of a project delivery method and plan for project delivery. 2.0 BACKGROUND
For these purposes, Project Delivery Method is defined as the overall approach selected by the Grantee to contract for those services necessary to place the project in revenue service. Major capital transit projects include fixed infrastructure, real estate, vehicles and the professional services required to manage and design the project and see it through construction and into revenue operations. The largest proportion of the project’s budget is associated with the construction of fixed infrastructure. The focus of this review is on the Grantee’s plan for the delivery method selection for construction, and as a subset of this, the Grantee’s strategy for segmenting the project into contract packages. A variety of project delivery methods or contracting techniques are available. The most common method involves the use of a design consultant to prepare drawings and specifications which are attached to contract documents and then used to solicit competitive bids for construction. This is often referred to as design-bid-build. Other alternative contracting methods include design-build, designbuild-operate and maintain, and the construction manager at-risk or construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC) approach. All of these delivery methods are viable and have been used successfully, however, some work better than others in particular situations. For example, a parking garage might be a good candidate for design-build because the garage designs can be formulaic. A signature building might be a good candidate for design-bid-build because of the importance of a unique design with custom or experimental detailing, etc. The project delivery method should be selected on the basis of how well it satisfies the Grantee’s goals. Goals could include rapid construction, lowest constructed cost, a unique innovative design, among other things. The Grantee should document its choice of and rationale for a project delivery method and contracting strategy in its Project Management Plan (PMP). In the PMP, the Grantee should demonstrate consideration of: • • Its design approach to the project; Its own technical capacity and capability to produce the project. Different staffing levels and skill sets are required to successfully manage a design-bid-build approach versus a designbuild approach. An agency embarking on its first rail project will face many decisions that
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 1 of 5
will require careful consideration. A traditional design-bid-build approach can provide more opportunities and time to consider those decisions without necessarily impacting the project schedule. Using a design-build approach, however, requires the Grantee to make decisions at the outset as part of the preparation of the performance specifications. A delay in making those decisions may negate the perceived schedule advantage offered by the design-build approach. • Its preferred allocation of risk between itself, the construction contractors, and third parties. FTA’s Project and Construction Management Guidelines note that risk should be considered in selection of project delivery method so that the likelihood of success is optimized. Its selection of project delivery method with a narrative explaining the factors taken into consideration. o The overall strategy for delivering the project should be developed early in the Preliminary Engineering phase. These decisions should start with the identification of key objectives of the Grantee. There may be multiple objectives that apply to the overall project or selected elements. The comparison of objectives and project delivery methods should take into account the physical characteristics of the project and the degree of difficulty inherent in constructing the project. Factors may include the amount of real estate and right-of-way to be acquired and the number of individual parcels affected; whether development involves negotiation of rights with a freight railroad; the number of political jurisdictions involved; the need for a tunnel or significant aerial structure, etc. Once the delivery method selection has been made, the Grantee must tailor the contract documents and procurement process and schedule to match the selected delivery method. o The development of the project delivery strategy during the PE phase is important because the final design phase of the project is directly linked to the strategy. From the earliest point in PE possible, the design consultant should know whether the design will be used for competitive bidding or if less detailed design documents along with a performance specification are needed for a design-build approach.
•
3.0
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this review are to verify that the Grantee has developed a rational plan for project delivery; that the plan is based on satisfying the Grantee’s objectives for the project or its individual parts; that the plan is based on the unique characteristics of the project; that the plan was developed with consideration of the current and expected conditions of the local and national construction market place; that the project delivery method(s) chosen are appropriate for the associated project element; and that the plan takes into account the Grantee’s technical capacity and capability. 4.0 REFERENCES
The following are the principal, but by no means the only, references to Federal legislation, regulation and guidance with which the PMOC should have a good understanding as related to the Grantee’s project work being reviewed under this OP: 4.1 United States Code • 49 U.S.C. Section 5327
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 2 of 5
4.2
Regulations • Project Management Oversight, 49 C.F.R. Part 633 FTA Circulars • C4220.1, Third Party Contracting Requirements Guidance • Project and Construction Management Guidelines, 2003 Update - 4.2 Construction Procurement Considerations - 4.2.1 Construction Contract Bid Documents and Requirements GRANTEE SUBMITTALS • • • • • • Written Project Description Design Documents (Plans, Specifications) Project Management Plan PMP sub plans such as Grantee Technical Capacity and Capability, and Risk/Contingency Assessment and Management Plan Project Schedule Cost Estimate in original and SCC format
4.3
4.4
5.0
6.0 6.1
SCOPE OF WORK PMOC Qualifications
The individual or team of individuals selected to perform this evaluation should have extensive experience in the planning and delivery of large complex capital projects. The experience should include the use of a variety of delivery methods. The individual(s) should be familiar with the advantages and disadvantages inherent in the various techniques, and the factors that would influence the choice of a particular delivery method. Ideally, the individual(s) should have managed the actual construction of multiple projects using a variety of contracting methods. 6.2 Preliminary Document Review
Upon receipt of the assignment, the PMOC should obtain the specified project documents and other materials from the Grantee. The PMOC may already be generally familiar with the project as a result of on-going monitoring activities. If the assigned personnel are not familiar with the project, they should review the materials in preparation for their on-site visit. 6.3 On-Site Review Meeting
The PMOC should arrange for an on-site briefing by the Grantee’s project management team. The briefing should include a point-by-point discussion of the project delivery strategy. The presentation should include:
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 3 of 5
• • • • • • • • • 6.4
discussion of the project objectives the delivery and packaging methods considered any state law constraints on contracting methods the process that was used to develop the strategy the selected strategy and packaging plan the implementation schedule showing each major element or package and associated preparatory and subsequent events significant risks affecting the selection the proposed procurement process for each type of delivery method and the steps being taken to develop appropriate contract documents the Grantee’s approach and proposed staffing to manage implementation of the strategy
Review and Assessment
The PMOC should review the Grantee’s plan to check and review its process and selected strategies for delivering the project. The PMOC should review for the adequacy and timing of the checks planned and implemented by the Grantee. Checks may be in the form of peer reviews and/or independent or internal process reviews that ensure the strategies employed and processes used to select and ultimately deliver the project are both sound and comprehensive. The PMOC shall fully identify, describe, and analyze the Grantee’s individual contract packages and anticipated or actual pricing/compensation components inclusive of overheads, contingency and “contingency like” components, and any negotiated profit/fee values. The PMOC shall assess and evaluate the degree to which such pricing/compensation components are themselves aligned with the Grantee’s project strategy/risk management plan and their effectiveness in terms of minimizing costs (and cost overruns) and schedule (and schedule slippages). The PMOC shall review Grantee’s Project Delivery and Procurement section of the Project Management Plan and supporting documents to characterize and provide a report regarding the sufficiency of Grantee’s design and construction procurement and contract packaging strategies. This section of the Project Management Plan is provided in Appendix B for the PMOC’s reference. • • • • • • Does the grantee have a comprehensive project delivery strategy? Was a sound process used to develop the strategy? Is the grantee’s strategy likely to satisfy the overall project objectives as well as the unique objectives of individual elements? Did the selected delivery method(s) consider relevant risks associated with the project element(s)? Is the selected delivery method or methods appropriate for use with the particular project element? Is the strategy, including the contract packaging plan, appropriately documented in the Project Management Plan?
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 4 of 5
• •
Does the project schedule reflect the project delivery strategy, including sufficient preparation time? Does the Grantee currently possess, or have a plan to acquire, the staff resources to successfully execute the project delivery strategy?
7.0
REPORT, PRESENTATION, RECONCILIATION
With consideration of the laws, regulations, policies, circulars, guidance documents, and practices that apply to the Grantee’s work, the PMOC should provide its review. Review and analyze the pertinent information available for completeness, adequacy, consistency, and the appropriate level of detail given the phase of the work. Identify any and all discrepancies, shortcomings or fatal flaws. State findings in descending order of importance and make recommendations for modifications or additional work by the grantee, including a time frame for the performance of the work. The PMOC shall provide FTA with a written report of its findings, analysis, recommendations, professional opinions, and a description of the review activities undertaken. After FTA approval, the PMOC should share the report with the Grantee. In the event that differences of opinion exist between the PMOC and the Grantee regarding the PMOC’s findings, the FTA may direct the PMOC to reconcile with the Grantee and provide FTA with a report addendum covering the agreed modifications by the Grantee and PMOC. The report formatting requirements of OP 01 apply. When necessary, PMOC shall perform data analysis and develop data models that meet FTA requirements using Microsoft Office products such as Excel and Word and use FTA-templates when provided. The PMOC may add other software as required but documentation and report data shall be made available to FTA. Include in the Body of the Report: • • Review procedures and PMOC personnel (including capsule of reviewer qualifications) Summary of the Grantee’s Project Delivery Plan o Consistency with Project Plans ? Consistency with Contracting Plan ? Consistency with Master Schedule ? Consistency with Budget Grantee’s technical capacity and capability to successfully implement the project delivery plan including staffing, and procurement policies and processes;
•
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 5 of 5
APPENDIX A Acceptable Quality Level ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHECK LIST MONITORING METHOD MM1a. Periodic review by FTA or its agent. MM1b. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
DESIRED OUTCOME 1 PMOC shall review, analyze and present findings to FTA regarding Grantee's plan for project delivery.
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT R1a. The PMOC shall develop and document a process for review and analysis of Grantee's project delivery plan. R1b. The PMOC shall use its process to analyze the completeness, consistency and appropriateness of Grantee's project delivery plan. R2a. The PMOC shall review and assess the necessary Project documents in preparation for an on-site review meeting with Grantee.
ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL Q1a. Process exists and has been followed. Q1b. Assessment must be made and the PMOC provides internal verification that the process as documented has been followed. Q2a. Professional opinion of project delivery plan and other supporting documentation.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE M1a. Evidence of a documented process. M1b. Documented assessment of the overall project delivery plan and supporting documents for completeness, consistency and appropriateness. M2a. Documented evidence of a thorough review by PMOC of Grantee's project delivery plan technical components, and other related documentation, supported by professional opinion. M2b. Documented evidence of onsite briefing of PMOC by Grantee's project management team with full discussion of all aspects of Grantee's project delivery strategy, supported by professional opinion.
2
The PMOC shall review Grantee's plans for project delivery to determine appropriate delivery methods and whether Grantee has the technical capacity and capability to successfully implement the selected methods.
MM2a. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
R2b. The PMOC shall arrange an on-site briefing by Grantee's project management team to include a complete and comprehensive discussion of all phases of Grantee's project delivery strategy. PMOC shall require sufficient information and discussion from Grantee's staff to be able to form a well-reasoned professional opinion of Grantee's project delivery plan, the likelihood of success of Grantee's plan and the risks attendant thereto. R2c. The PMOC shall review and provide an opinion on the adequacy of Grantee's plan and process for checking and review of selected strategies for delivering the Project. R2d. The PMOC shall review the Project Delivery and Procurement sections of the PMP with supporting documentation and provide in its report an opinion characterizing the sufficiency of Grantee's design and construction procurement and contract packaging strategies.
Q2b. Professional opinion and review of Project delivery strategy via an onsite briefing from Grantee.
MM2b. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
Q2c. Professional opinion and evaluation of review process instituted by Grantee for its Project delivery strategies. Q2d. Professional opinion and evaluation of Grantee's contract packaging selections.
M2c. Documented evidence of review and analysis of adequacy of review process for Grantee's selected Project delivery strategies, supported by a professional opinion. M2d. Documented evidence of review of Project Delivery and Procurement sections of the PMP and analysis of sufficiency of Grantee's contract packaging, supported by a professional opinion.
MM2c. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
MM2c. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page A-1
APPENDIX A Acceptable Quality Level ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DESIRED OUTCOME The PMOC shall review Grantee's plans for project delivery to determine appropriate delivery methods and whether Grantee has the technical capacity and capability to successfully implement the selected methods. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT R2e. The PMOC shall address in it's report, the completeness, adequacy, consistency and any discrepancies of Grantee's project delivery plan, stating it's findings in descending order of importance, with recommendations for modifications or additional work by Grantee and a time table for completion of such. R2f. The PMOC shall make an overall assessment of the comprehensiveness of Grantee's project delivery method, including all documentation, the presence or absence of necessary personnel and shall identify any risks associated with Grantee's plan. R3. The PMOC shall present its findings, conclusions, analysis and recommendations to FTA and, upon FTA approval, reconcile those recommendations with the Grantee to the extent possible when so directed by FTA. CHECK LIST ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL Q2e. Professional opinion and evaluation of Grantee's project delivery plan and analysis of discrepancies. PERFORMANCE MEASURE M2e. Documented evidence of findings, analysis of discrepancies, evaluation of adequacy and consistency and recommendations supported by a professional opinion. MONITORING METHOD MM2e. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
2
Q2f. Professional opinion and review of delivery methods and associated risks.
M2f. Documented evidence, review and evaluation of project delivery method, all documentation and associated risks, supported by a professional opinion.
MM2f. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
3
The PMOC shall document its findings, professional opinions, and recommendations in a report to the FTA.
Q3. Reports and presentations are professional, clear, concise, and well written. The findings and conclusions have been reconciled with other PMOC reports and have been reconciled with Grantee to the extent possible.
M3. PMOC's findings in descending order of importance, conclusions, recommendations, and presentation.
MM3. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page A-2
APPENDIX B Project Delivery and Procurement Table of Contents from Project Management Plan __________________________________________________________________________________
Project Delivery and Procurement Table of Contents Procedures for Procurement (advertising, bidding, awarding of contracts for consultants and construction contractors, procurement for equipment, etc.) Procurement Plan and Schedule (indicate project phase, durations for RFP, screening, interviews, selection, board approvals, etc.) Community Outreach Services Information Systems Services Real Estate Services Project Management Services Design Services Legal Services and other services Construction Management Services Construction Testing and Inspection Services Construction Preliminary Selection of Project Delivery Method (DBB, DB, CMGC) (include rationale for and identification of risks inherent in selected method) Final Selection of Project Delivery Method Major Construction Packages – Description of Packages and Construction Sequencing Procurement of Long Lead Items and Pre-FFGA/PCGA items or work Procurement of Materials, Equipment, Vehicles including procurement in advance of construction contract. Work by Grantee’s own Forces (Force Account Work) Work by Third Parties such as Utilities, Railroads, Private Sector, etc. Contracting Strategy for Transit-oriented and Joint Development Identification of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Opportunities identification of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Opportunities, Federal DBE, State/Local WBE & MBE, Plans and Goals
OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page B-1
doc_668603667.pdf
A procedure is a document written to support a "Policy Directive". A Procedure is designed to describe Who, What, Where, When, and Why by means of establishing corporate accountability in support of the implementation of a "policy".
U.S. DOT Federal Transit Administration TPM-20 Office of Engineering Project Management Oversight Oversight Procedure 32D - Project Delivery Method Review __________________________________________________________________________________ 1.0 PURPOSE
The purpose of this Oversight Procedure is to describe the review, analysis and recommendation procedures and reporting requirements expected by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) from the Project Management Oversight Contractor (PMOC) with regard to the Grantee’s selection of a project delivery method and plan for project delivery. 2.0 BACKGROUND
For these purposes, Project Delivery Method is defined as the overall approach selected by the Grantee to contract for those services necessary to place the project in revenue service. Major capital transit projects include fixed infrastructure, real estate, vehicles and the professional services required to manage and design the project and see it through construction and into revenue operations. The largest proportion of the project’s budget is associated with the construction of fixed infrastructure. The focus of this review is on the Grantee’s plan for the delivery method selection for construction, and as a subset of this, the Grantee’s strategy for segmenting the project into contract packages. A variety of project delivery methods or contracting techniques are available. The most common method involves the use of a design consultant to prepare drawings and specifications which are attached to contract documents and then used to solicit competitive bids for construction. This is often referred to as design-bid-build. Other alternative contracting methods include design-build, designbuild-operate and maintain, and the construction manager at-risk or construction manager/general contractor (CM/GC) approach. All of these delivery methods are viable and have been used successfully, however, some work better than others in particular situations. For example, a parking garage might be a good candidate for design-build because the garage designs can be formulaic. A signature building might be a good candidate for design-bid-build because of the importance of a unique design with custom or experimental detailing, etc. The project delivery method should be selected on the basis of how well it satisfies the Grantee’s goals. Goals could include rapid construction, lowest constructed cost, a unique innovative design, among other things. The Grantee should document its choice of and rationale for a project delivery method and contracting strategy in its Project Management Plan (PMP). In the PMP, the Grantee should demonstrate consideration of: • • Its design approach to the project; Its own technical capacity and capability to produce the project. Different staffing levels and skill sets are required to successfully manage a design-bid-build approach versus a designbuild approach. An agency embarking on its first rail project will face many decisions that
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 1 of 5
will require careful consideration. A traditional design-bid-build approach can provide more opportunities and time to consider those decisions without necessarily impacting the project schedule. Using a design-build approach, however, requires the Grantee to make decisions at the outset as part of the preparation of the performance specifications. A delay in making those decisions may negate the perceived schedule advantage offered by the design-build approach. • Its preferred allocation of risk between itself, the construction contractors, and third parties. FTA’s Project and Construction Management Guidelines note that risk should be considered in selection of project delivery method so that the likelihood of success is optimized. Its selection of project delivery method with a narrative explaining the factors taken into consideration. o The overall strategy for delivering the project should be developed early in the Preliminary Engineering phase. These decisions should start with the identification of key objectives of the Grantee. There may be multiple objectives that apply to the overall project or selected elements. The comparison of objectives and project delivery methods should take into account the physical characteristics of the project and the degree of difficulty inherent in constructing the project. Factors may include the amount of real estate and right-of-way to be acquired and the number of individual parcels affected; whether development involves negotiation of rights with a freight railroad; the number of political jurisdictions involved; the need for a tunnel or significant aerial structure, etc. Once the delivery method selection has been made, the Grantee must tailor the contract documents and procurement process and schedule to match the selected delivery method. o The development of the project delivery strategy during the PE phase is important because the final design phase of the project is directly linked to the strategy. From the earliest point in PE possible, the design consultant should know whether the design will be used for competitive bidding or if less detailed design documents along with a performance specification are needed for a design-build approach.
•
3.0
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this review are to verify that the Grantee has developed a rational plan for project delivery; that the plan is based on satisfying the Grantee’s objectives for the project or its individual parts; that the plan is based on the unique characteristics of the project; that the plan was developed with consideration of the current and expected conditions of the local and national construction market place; that the project delivery method(s) chosen are appropriate for the associated project element; and that the plan takes into account the Grantee’s technical capacity and capability. 4.0 REFERENCES
The following are the principal, but by no means the only, references to Federal legislation, regulation and guidance with which the PMOC should have a good understanding as related to the Grantee’s project work being reviewed under this OP: 4.1 United States Code • 49 U.S.C. Section 5327
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 2 of 5
4.2
Regulations • Project Management Oversight, 49 C.F.R. Part 633 FTA Circulars • C4220.1, Third Party Contracting Requirements Guidance • Project and Construction Management Guidelines, 2003 Update - 4.2 Construction Procurement Considerations - 4.2.1 Construction Contract Bid Documents and Requirements GRANTEE SUBMITTALS • • • • • • Written Project Description Design Documents (Plans, Specifications) Project Management Plan PMP sub plans such as Grantee Technical Capacity and Capability, and Risk/Contingency Assessment and Management Plan Project Schedule Cost Estimate in original and SCC format
4.3
4.4
5.0
6.0 6.1
SCOPE OF WORK PMOC Qualifications
The individual or team of individuals selected to perform this evaluation should have extensive experience in the planning and delivery of large complex capital projects. The experience should include the use of a variety of delivery methods. The individual(s) should be familiar with the advantages and disadvantages inherent in the various techniques, and the factors that would influence the choice of a particular delivery method. Ideally, the individual(s) should have managed the actual construction of multiple projects using a variety of contracting methods. 6.2 Preliminary Document Review
Upon receipt of the assignment, the PMOC should obtain the specified project documents and other materials from the Grantee. The PMOC may already be generally familiar with the project as a result of on-going monitoring activities. If the assigned personnel are not familiar with the project, they should review the materials in preparation for their on-site visit. 6.3 On-Site Review Meeting
The PMOC should arrange for an on-site briefing by the Grantee’s project management team. The briefing should include a point-by-point discussion of the project delivery strategy. The presentation should include:
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 3 of 5
• • • • • • • • • 6.4
discussion of the project objectives the delivery and packaging methods considered any state law constraints on contracting methods the process that was used to develop the strategy the selected strategy and packaging plan the implementation schedule showing each major element or package and associated preparatory and subsequent events significant risks affecting the selection the proposed procurement process for each type of delivery method and the steps being taken to develop appropriate contract documents the Grantee’s approach and proposed staffing to manage implementation of the strategy
Review and Assessment
The PMOC should review the Grantee’s plan to check and review its process and selected strategies for delivering the project. The PMOC should review for the adequacy and timing of the checks planned and implemented by the Grantee. Checks may be in the form of peer reviews and/or independent or internal process reviews that ensure the strategies employed and processes used to select and ultimately deliver the project are both sound and comprehensive. The PMOC shall fully identify, describe, and analyze the Grantee’s individual contract packages and anticipated or actual pricing/compensation components inclusive of overheads, contingency and “contingency like” components, and any negotiated profit/fee values. The PMOC shall assess and evaluate the degree to which such pricing/compensation components are themselves aligned with the Grantee’s project strategy/risk management plan and their effectiveness in terms of minimizing costs (and cost overruns) and schedule (and schedule slippages). The PMOC shall review Grantee’s Project Delivery and Procurement section of the Project Management Plan and supporting documents to characterize and provide a report regarding the sufficiency of Grantee’s design and construction procurement and contract packaging strategies. This section of the Project Management Plan is provided in Appendix B for the PMOC’s reference. • • • • • • Does the grantee have a comprehensive project delivery strategy? Was a sound process used to develop the strategy? Is the grantee’s strategy likely to satisfy the overall project objectives as well as the unique objectives of individual elements? Did the selected delivery method(s) consider relevant risks associated with the project element(s)? Is the selected delivery method or methods appropriate for use with the particular project element? Is the strategy, including the contract packaging plan, appropriately documented in the Project Management Plan?
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 4 of 5
• •
Does the project schedule reflect the project delivery strategy, including sufficient preparation time? Does the Grantee currently possess, or have a plan to acquire, the staff resources to successfully execute the project delivery strategy?
7.0
REPORT, PRESENTATION, RECONCILIATION
With consideration of the laws, regulations, policies, circulars, guidance documents, and practices that apply to the Grantee’s work, the PMOC should provide its review. Review and analyze the pertinent information available for completeness, adequacy, consistency, and the appropriate level of detail given the phase of the work. Identify any and all discrepancies, shortcomings or fatal flaws. State findings in descending order of importance and make recommendations for modifications or additional work by the grantee, including a time frame for the performance of the work. The PMOC shall provide FTA with a written report of its findings, analysis, recommendations, professional opinions, and a description of the review activities undertaken. After FTA approval, the PMOC should share the report with the Grantee. In the event that differences of opinion exist between the PMOC and the Grantee regarding the PMOC’s findings, the FTA may direct the PMOC to reconcile with the Grantee and provide FTA with a report addendum covering the agreed modifications by the Grantee and PMOC. The report formatting requirements of OP 01 apply. When necessary, PMOC shall perform data analysis and develop data models that meet FTA requirements using Microsoft Office products such as Excel and Word and use FTA-templates when provided. The PMOC may add other software as required but documentation and report data shall be made available to FTA. Include in the Body of the Report: • • Review procedures and PMOC personnel (including capsule of reviewer qualifications) Summary of the Grantee’s Project Delivery Plan o Consistency with Project Plans ? Consistency with Contracting Plan ? Consistency with Master Schedule ? Consistency with Budget Grantee’s technical capacity and capability to successfully implement the project delivery plan including staffing, and procurement policies and processes;
•
FOR FTA INTERNAL USE ONLY OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page 5 of 5
APPENDIX A Acceptable Quality Level ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHECK LIST MONITORING METHOD MM1a. Periodic review by FTA or its agent. MM1b. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
DESIRED OUTCOME 1 PMOC shall review, analyze and present findings to FTA regarding Grantee's plan for project delivery.
PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT R1a. The PMOC shall develop and document a process for review and analysis of Grantee's project delivery plan. R1b. The PMOC shall use its process to analyze the completeness, consistency and appropriateness of Grantee's project delivery plan. R2a. The PMOC shall review and assess the necessary Project documents in preparation for an on-site review meeting with Grantee.
ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL Q1a. Process exists and has been followed. Q1b. Assessment must be made and the PMOC provides internal verification that the process as documented has been followed. Q2a. Professional opinion of project delivery plan and other supporting documentation.
PERFORMANCE MEASURE M1a. Evidence of a documented process. M1b. Documented assessment of the overall project delivery plan and supporting documents for completeness, consistency and appropriateness. M2a. Documented evidence of a thorough review by PMOC of Grantee's project delivery plan technical components, and other related documentation, supported by professional opinion. M2b. Documented evidence of onsite briefing of PMOC by Grantee's project management team with full discussion of all aspects of Grantee's project delivery strategy, supported by professional opinion.
2
The PMOC shall review Grantee's plans for project delivery to determine appropriate delivery methods and whether Grantee has the technical capacity and capability to successfully implement the selected methods.
MM2a. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
R2b. The PMOC shall arrange an on-site briefing by Grantee's project management team to include a complete and comprehensive discussion of all phases of Grantee's project delivery strategy. PMOC shall require sufficient information and discussion from Grantee's staff to be able to form a well-reasoned professional opinion of Grantee's project delivery plan, the likelihood of success of Grantee's plan and the risks attendant thereto. R2c. The PMOC shall review and provide an opinion on the adequacy of Grantee's plan and process for checking and review of selected strategies for delivering the Project. R2d. The PMOC shall review the Project Delivery and Procurement sections of the PMP with supporting documentation and provide in its report an opinion characterizing the sufficiency of Grantee's design and construction procurement and contract packaging strategies.
Q2b. Professional opinion and review of Project delivery strategy via an onsite briefing from Grantee.
MM2b. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
Q2c. Professional opinion and evaluation of review process instituted by Grantee for its Project delivery strategies. Q2d. Professional opinion and evaluation of Grantee's contract packaging selections.
M2c. Documented evidence of review and analysis of adequacy of review process for Grantee's selected Project delivery strategies, supported by a professional opinion. M2d. Documented evidence of review of Project Delivery and Procurement sections of the PMP and analysis of sufficiency of Grantee's contract packaging, supported by a professional opinion.
MM2c. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
MM2c. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page A-1
APPENDIX A Acceptable Quality Level ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
DESIRED OUTCOME The PMOC shall review Grantee's plans for project delivery to determine appropriate delivery methods and whether Grantee has the technical capacity and capability to successfully implement the selected methods. PERFORMANCE REQUIREMENT R2e. The PMOC shall address in it's report, the completeness, adequacy, consistency and any discrepancies of Grantee's project delivery plan, stating it's findings in descending order of importance, with recommendations for modifications or additional work by Grantee and a time table for completion of such. R2f. The PMOC shall make an overall assessment of the comprehensiveness of Grantee's project delivery method, including all documentation, the presence or absence of necessary personnel and shall identify any risks associated with Grantee's plan. R3. The PMOC shall present its findings, conclusions, analysis and recommendations to FTA and, upon FTA approval, reconcile those recommendations with the Grantee to the extent possible when so directed by FTA. CHECK LIST ACCEPTABLE QUALITY LEVEL Q2e. Professional opinion and evaluation of Grantee's project delivery plan and analysis of discrepancies. PERFORMANCE MEASURE M2e. Documented evidence of findings, analysis of discrepancies, evaluation of adequacy and consistency and recommendations supported by a professional opinion. MONITORING METHOD MM2e. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
2
Q2f. Professional opinion and review of delivery methods and associated risks.
M2f. Documented evidence, review and evaluation of project delivery method, all documentation and associated risks, supported by a professional opinion.
MM2f. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
3
The PMOC shall document its findings, professional opinions, and recommendations in a report to the FTA.
Q3. Reports and presentations are professional, clear, concise, and well written. The findings and conclusions have been reconciled with other PMOC reports and have been reconciled with Grantee to the extent possible.
M3. PMOC's findings in descending order of importance, conclusions, recommendations, and presentation.
MM3. Periodic review by FTA or its agent.
OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page A-2
APPENDIX B Project Delivery and Procurement Table of Contents from Project Management Plan __________________________________________________________________________________
Project Delivery and Procurement Table of Contents Procedures for Procurement (advertising, bidding, awarding of contracts for consultants and construction contractors, procurement for equipment, etc.) Procurement Plan and Schedule (indicate project phase, durations for RFP, screening, interviews, selection, board approvals, etc.) Community Outreach Services Information Systems Services Real Estate Services Project Management Services Design Services Legal Services and other services Construction Management Services Construction Testing and Inspection Services Construction Preliminary Selection of Project Delivery Method (DBB, DB, CMGC) (include rationale for and identification of risks inherent in selected method) Final Selection of Project Delivery Method Major Construction Packages – Description of Packages and Construction Sequencing Procurement of Long Lead Items and Pre-FFGA/PCGA items or work Procurement of Materials, Equipment, Vehicles including procurement in advance of construction contract. Work by Grantee’s own Forces (Force Account Work) Work by Third Parties such as Utilities, Railroads, Private Sector, etc. Contracting Strategy for Transit-oriented and Joint Development Identification of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Opportunities identification of Disadvantaged Business Enterprises (DBE) Opportunities, Federal DBE, State/Local WBE & MBE, Plans and Goals
OP 32D Project Delivery Method Review Rev. 2, May 2010 Page B-1
doc_668603667.pdf