Quality Assurance in Design-Build Projects (2008)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

The quality of transportation projects affects nearly everyone in the United States daily. This report focuses on the mechanics of how departments of transportation (DOTs) achieve qual- ity projects. Specifically, this reports looks at quality in design-build (DB) projects. DB has been advancing rapidly in popularity and many states now have some experience using DB in their transportation projects. In traditional design-bid-build (DBB) construction, the design and construction are done under two separate contracts. In many cases, the DOT performs the design itself and then advertises for construction contractors to bid on the finished design. In DB, the design and construction are done under one contract by the same entity. As a result, the DOT has less control over the day-to-day details of design development in the DB project. An understanding of how to ensure that DB projects achieve at least the same level of quality as DBB projects is of interest to all involved in the process. Two definitions are rele- vant for further discussion. First, quality is the degree of excellence of a product or service, the degree to which a product or service satisfies the needs of a specific customer, or the degree to which a product or service conforms to a given requirement. Second, quality man- agement is the system used to manage the ultimate quality of a product. Managing quality has traditionally been the responsibility of the DOT. DOTs developed the designs, specified the materials to be used, and watched over the construction for DBB projects. In DB, however, many of the quality management responsibilities have been shifted to the design-builder. This report discusses how these responsibilities were distributed and communicated in DB proj- ects across the nation. Also identified are the trends or practices that have become common. The objective of this synthesis is to capture the various ways in which quality assurance (QA) is handled in DB projects. The synthesis identifies different approaches, models, and commonly used practices, recognizing the differences in each of the different delivery meth- ods. The synthesis also addresses how the core principles of QA can be satisfactorily addressed in DB projects. It applies these principles from the procurement phase to both the design and construction phases and, in the cases of projects with post-construction options for operations and/or maintenance, to the operational phase to cover the entire life cycle of a DB project. In addition to a rigorous literature review, the synthesis is based on new data from two sets of surveys and two content analyses. A general survey on DB quality management provided 76 responses from 47 states. A content analysis of DB solicitation documents from projects with a total contract value of more than $11.5 billion from 26 transportation agen- cies across the country was also conducted. For further verification, an additional content analysis of DB policy documents from 17 states was conducted and the data were collected from a brief survey on DB quality perceptions from 17 states. This synthesis report is timely because it follows a report published in 2006 by the FHWA to the U.S. Congress detailing the effectiveness of DB on a sample of the first 300-plus trans- portation projects authorized under Special Experimental Project No. 14 (SEP-14). The FHWA study’s findings are best summarized by the following excerpt: On average, the managers of design-build projects surveyed in the study estimated that design-build project delivery reduced the overall duration of their projects by 14 percent, reduced the total cost of SUMMARY QUALITY ASSURANCE IN DESIGN-BUILD PROJECTS

the projects by 3 percent, and maintained the same level of quality as compared to design-bid-build project delivery. (italics added) The synthesis has generally confirmed that quality issues pervade the procurement, design, construction, and operations and maintenance phases of a DB project. The issues range from the quality of the design-builder’s personnel, to the quality of the past experience of the vari- ous firms that make up the design-builder’s team, to the quality of the plans that will be used to implement quality management practices after the DB contract is awarded, not to mention the classic design and construction quality issues present in traditional projects. Therefore, the management of quality in the DB project is of utmost importance, and a DOT that is consid- ering using DB project delivery must prepare a thorough and thoughtful approach to commu- nicating the DB project’s quality requirements as well as the administrative and technical mechanisms that the DOT intends to use to manage both design and construction quality. The synthesis’ conclusions cover the life cycle of the DB project and are as follows: • An examination of DB policy documents found that they were either silent or overly gen- eral on the subject of quality. Additionally, approximately half of DB procurement documents did not clearly articulate the owner’s approach to quality management and appeared to rely on the qualifications evaluation portion of the award process using an approach called “quality by qualifications.” As a result, the study concluded that DOT DB policy documents, such as guidelines and model requests for proposals (RFPs), would benefit from specific guidance with regard to the agency’s quality management approach to set the stage for ensuring that quality is properly emphasized throughout the project’s life cycle. • The DB solicitation document content analysis, the survey responses, and the literature review identified a new set of quality management activities. These are the activities that the DOT undertakes with its own forces or with the assistance of a third-party consultant to ensure a quality project when it has assigned QA responsibilities to the design-builder. This set of activities was termed “project quality assurance” (PQA) and includes over- sight, independent assurance, verification, and acceptance found in DBB projects as well as DB-specific activities such as “over-the-shoulder” design reviews and “witness and hold points” during construction. A model for DB PQA is presented in chapter one. • Convergence was also found between the literature and the DB solicitation content analysis regarding the value of using the two-step selection process for emphasizing quality in DB projects. One author called the two-step selection process “essential for success,” and the RFP content analysis agreed when it found that 89% of the projects analyzed used the two-step request for qualifications/request for proposals (RFQs/RFPs) process. DOTs can leverage the two-step process to promote quality by requiring com- peting design-builders to include a quality-focused submittal in both steps. • Continuing in the procurement phase analysis, the study found that DOTs are using a “best value” rather than a low-bid award process. This finding was indicated by the lit- erature and the DB solicitation document analysis. Most of the RFPs analyzed (90%) used some form of best value award. Qaasim stated that “best value award is a good way to add extra weight to quality components,” and one DOT indicated that “placing a quality component in the RFQ or RFP brings extra attention to the design-builder that quality is an important issue for the DOT and that a proposal emphasizing quality will be evaluated more favorably.” • The synthesis finds that design quality management is not receiving sufficient emphasis by DOTs in their DB quality management programs. The RFP content analysis showed that only about one-third of the documents contained specific references to design qual- ity, whereas two-thirds of the survey respondents indicated that they rated detailed design criteria as having a high or very high impact on the project’s ultimate quality. The liter- ature clearly shows that the design phase is the time when the quality of the constructed product is defined. • The issue of how to incorporate the DOT’s standard specifications was explored in both the survey and the content analysis. It was resolved by reviewing both the RFP content 2

analysis output and survey responses from states that have completed more than five DB projects. Most of these agencies chose to incorporate their standard specifications by reference in their DB contracts and to allow the design-builder to optimize specific con- struction means and methods with its design approach. The agencies are comfortable with this because, as previously stated, they remain involved in the design process by retaining the responsibility for design QA. • Finally, the survey of the perception of DB’s impact on project quality was analyzed. More than 80% of the industry practitioners responded by rating DB project quality as either the same or better than DBB project quality. This was not the case, however, for the public agency respondents to the same survey who were evenly split among the pos- sible answers of better, the same, or worse than DBB project quality. Thus, perceptions that teaming the engineer of record with the construction contractor might degrade the quality of the project remain a barrier to implementation in spite of the FHWA DB effectiveness study that found that quality was comparable. DOTs need to remain sen- sitive to this issue in developing their DB quality management programs. Retaining design QA responsibilities, as cited in the previous conclusion, may furnish an effective response to this perception if this perception exists within a given DOT. The analyses also led to the identification of 10 commonly used practices, which were found in the literature and then confirmed in practice by either the survey or content analysis. These practices cover the entire life cycle of the DB project and are listed here without the supporting information, which can be found in the appropriate chapters of the text. • Use of the best value, two-step DB procurement process. • Clear identification of the quality management organizational approach that will be used on the DB project in the solicitation documents and clear assignment of the responsi- bility for all levels of quality management in both design and construction, ensuring that those roles that are reserved for the DOT or its third-party quality consultant are also clearly indicated. • Having the design-builder furnish highly qualified and experienced personnel on its DB projects and list required quality-specific qualifications for both the design and con- struction members of the DB team in the DB RFQ/RFP. • To ensure that the competitors understand the requisite level of design and construction quality, preliminary design documents in the RFP must clearly state the specifications, design criteria, and standards that will be used in the final design and construction of the project. • Determining the number of design reviews that will be conducted during the DB project design phase and clearly assigning the responsibility for conducting those reviews in a man- ner consistent with the selected QA organizational plan, publishing them in the project’s solicitation documents to create the necessary contractual requirements for both parties to the DB contract. If the project is not schedule-constrained, the DOT can afford to inject more design review points, whereas design reviews are minimized on a fast-track project. • Unless the DB project has a follow-on maintenance or operations option, the DOT can sat- isfy its federally mandated oversight requirements by remaining involved in design QA, using either its own forces or through the employment of a third-party quality consultant. • The design-builder’s engineer of record is usually assigned some responsibility for con- ducting construction QA. • The design-builder’s construction quality manager is usually assigned some responsi- bility for conducting construction quality control. • The DOT normally conducts PQA activities to satisfy its federally mandated oversight responsibilities, using either its own forces or through the employment of a third-party consultant. • Incorporating standard state specifications by reference in the DB contract and allow- ing the design-builder to optimize construction means and methods with its proposed design approach. 3