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.
2020 N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 939 Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods Volume 3: Research Overview Keith R. Molenaar Douglas Alleman Allen Therrien Kelly Sheeran University of Colorado Boulder, CO Mounir El Asmar arizona state University Tempe, AZ Dean Papajohn University of arizona Tucson, AZ Subscriber Categories Administration and Management â¢ Construction â¢ Design Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transporta- tion results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to high- way authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniquesâthe National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Department of Transportation, under Agree- ment No. 693JJ31950003. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRBâs recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRBâs relationship to the National Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of special- ists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs iden- tified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transportation departments, by committees of AASHTO, and by the FHWA. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Special Committee on Research and Innovation (R&I), and each year R&Iâs recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Direc- tors and the National Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Academies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement, rather than to substitute for or duplicate, other highway research programs. Published research reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 939, VOLUME 3 Project 08-104 ISSN 2572-3766 (Print) ISSN 2572-3774 (Online) ISBN 978-0-309-48142-7 Library of Congress Control Number 2020933172 Â© 2020 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FTA, GHSA, NHTSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The research report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the FHWA; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Boardâs varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP RESEARCH REPORT 939 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Edward T. Harrigan, Senior Program Officer Anthony P. Avery, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications Cassandra Franklin-Barbajosa, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 08-104 PANEL Field of Transportation PlanningâArea of Planning Methods and Processes Daniel DâAngelo, Applied Research Associates, Inc., Clifton Park, NY (Chair) Shailendra G. Patel, Virginia DOT, Richmond, VA John T. Brizzell, HNTB Corporation, Albany, NY Ravi V. Chandran, Connecticut DOT, Rocky Hill, CT Joseph K. Dongo, California DOT, Sacramento, CA Joshua F. Johnson, Bentley Systems, Fort Collins, CO Brian M. Killingsworth, National Ready Mixed Concrete Association, San Antonio, TX Jessica D. Kuse, HNTB, Raleigh, NC Ivan Mutis, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL Richard Duval, FHWA Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This guidebook would not be possible without the input and guidance received from the following: Members of the Consultant Team: Stuart Anderson, Texas A&M University Wylie Bearup, Arizona State University Kristen Betty, KBA, Inc. Cliff Schexnayder, Arizona State University, Professor Emeritus Roy Sturgill, Kentucky Transportation Research Center Dave Zanetell, Kraemer North America Members of the Peer Review Team: John Carlson, Sundt Construction Lisa Choplin, Maryland Department of Transportation Peter Davich, Minnesota Department of Transportation James Ernzen, Arizona State University Teresa Foster Eckard, Washington State Department of Transportation Jake Goettle, Montana Department of Transportation Edward Hammontree, Federal Lands Highway Bill Hinton, Dispute Resolution Board Foundation Ben Huot, Utah Department of Transportation Jean Nehme, Arizona Department of Transportation Matthew Pacheco, Colorado Department of Transportation Mark D. Rolfe, Connecticut Department of Transportation David Sadler, Florida Department of Transportation Steve Waddle, Kentucky Department of Transportation (continued on page vi)
NCHRP Research Report 939 presents practical guidance for the post-award administra- tion of projects delivered using alternative, nontraditional methods. The report will be of immediate interest to engineers in state and local transportation agencies and industry with responsibility for planning, designing, and delivering transportation projects using alternative contracting methods. Much research and reporting has been completed in the past decade on project delivery using alternative contracting methods such as designâbuild, construction manager at risk, construction manager as general contractor (CM-GC), and other nontraditional methods. The bulk of this work has been accomplished with a focus on the decision process for pre-award procurement and project delivery. However, information is lacking on effec- tive methods for administering alternative contracting method contracts after they have been awarded. Previous NCHRP research found that contract administration issues comprised most of the case law in alternative contracting methods, suggesting a need for an evaluation of current methods for post-award contract administration of designâ build and CM-GC projects and the preparation of guidebooks describing the most effective methods available. Under NCHRP Project 08-104, the University of Colorado Boulderâin association with Arizona State University and the University of Arizonaâwas tasked with developing practitioner guidebooks for post-award contract administration of designâbuild and CM-GC projects based on the identification and analysis of the methods used in the range of alter- native contracting method projects. Their research entailed a review of the current state of the practice in post-award designâbuild and CM-GC contract administration, develop- ment of a model of the contract administration process, case studies of post-award contract administration of 19 designâbuild and 11 CM-GC projects, an effectiveness evaluation and calibration of tools for post-award contract administration, and testing of the draft guidebooks on ongoing and completed designâbuild and CM-GC projects. The key outcomes of this research are NCHRP Research Report 939: Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods, Volume 1: DesignâBuild Delivery and NCHRP Research Report 939: Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods, Volume 2: Construction ManagerâGeneral Contractor Delivery. Volumes 1 and 2 also include Appendix A: Contract Administration Tools and Appendix B: Case Studies. Volume 3 is the contractorâs final report, which provides results and analyses supporting the guidebooksâ contents. F O R E W O R D By Edward Harrigan Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (Continued) Agencies that contributed case studies or guidebook testing: Arizona Department of Transportation California Department of Transportation Central Federal Lands Highway Division Colorado Department of Transportation Connecticut Department of Transportation E-470 Public Highway Authority Federal Highway Administration Florida Department of Transportation Georgia Department of Transportation Hawaii Department of Transportation Maryland Department of Transportation Michigan Department of Transportation Minnesota Department of Transportation Missouri Department of Transportation New York State Department of Transportation North Carolina Department of Transportation Pennsylvania Department of Transportation Utah Department of Transportation Vermont Transportation Agency Virginia Department of Transportation Washington State Department of Transportation
1 Chapter 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Problem Statement 2 1.2 Research Objectives 2 1.3 Research Framework and Scope of Work 3 1.4 Report Outline 4 Chapter 2 State of the Practice 4 2.1 Introduction 4 2.2 Federal and State Legislation 6 2.3 Alternative Contracting Manuals 8 2.4 Alternative Contracting Method Research 9 2.5 Summary 10 Chapter 3 Update to the AASHTO Guide for DesignâBuild Procurement 10 3.1 Introduction 10 3.2 Methodology 12 3.3 Summary 13 Chapter 4 Modeling the Contract Administration Process 13 4.1 Introduction 13 4.2 Choosing an Appropriate Process Modeling Approach 14 4.3 Overview of Integrated Definition Modeling 17 4.4 DesignâBidâBuild, Construction ManagerâGeneral Contractor, and DesignâBuild Integrated Definition Model Introduction (Level 1) 23 4.5 Summary 24 Chapter 5 Case Study Project Selection 24 5.1 Introduction 24 5.2 Data Collection Process 25 5.3 Project Selection 27 5.4 Summary 28 Chapter 6 Case Study Interview Protocol 28 6.1 Introduction 28 6.2 Case Study Process 29 6.3 Case Study Questions 33 6.4 Case Study Follow-Up 34 6.5 Summary C O N T E N T S
35 Chapter 7 Agency Contract Administration Tools 35 7.1 Introduction 35 7.2 Tool Identification 36 7.3 Initial Tool Selection Survey 39 7.4 Final Tool Selection and Examples 39 7.5 Summary 40 Chapter 8 Guidebook Development and Testing 40 8.1 Introduction 40 8.2 Guidebook Structure and Layout 45 8.3 Guidebook Testing 45 8.4 Summary 46 Chapter 9 Conclusions and Recommendations 46 9.1 Conclusions 47 9.2 Challenges to Implementation 47 9.3 Recommendations 49 References and Bibliography 53 Appendix A Alternative Contracting Methods State Legislation and Manuals 64 Appendix B Case Study Summaries 103 Appendix C AASHTO Guide for DesignâBuild Procurement Provision Updates Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.