The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 102-117

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 102... ... 102 This appendix presents the details of each case listed in Table 21, chapter five. The objective of this appendix is to portray the specific characteristics and IDIQ contracting procedures of the cases in a manner that gives the reader the background to understand how each contract's features contributed to the analysis reported in this synthesis report. Read the entire page →
From page 103... ... 103 Scope: This MATOC was used by CFLHD to reduce the project delivery period in roadway surfacing, resurfacing, and repair projects in Oregon, Idaho, Washington, and Northern California. It was restricted to roads owned and operated by the National Park Service. Read the entire page →
From page 104... ... 104 Optional jobsite visits create an opportunity for pool contractors to better understand project requirements allowing them to prepare more responsive proposals per work order. Setting the minimum guaranteed value of the contract equal to the minimum value per task order allows the owner to commit to issue no more than one task order, while still providing to contractors an incentive to submit low price proposals. Read the entire page →
From page 105... ... 105 FIGURE D1 Case 2 -- Contract locations (NYSDOT 2009) Read the entire page →
From page 106... ... 106 the estimated work quantity by the appropriate adjustment factor (unit price x estimated quantity x adjustment factor) Read the entire page →
From page 107... ... 107 Maximum Value per Work Order: A maximum value per work order was not established for this contract. Project Delivery Method: DB Scope: Given the high sensitivity of safety-related projects, some agencies have made efforts to improve procurement practices for this type of project in order to avoid unnecessary delays resulting from complex contracting procedures. Read the entire page →
From page 108... ... 108 Pay items and bid quantities were provided by the agency. To evaluate bid packages using best-value techniques, Florida DOT first scored the technical aspects based on the criteria shown in Table D1. Read the entire page →
From page 109... ... 109 Summary: In spite of the fact that this contract was mainly intended for relatively simple safety improvement projects, the large number of projects to be completed during the three-year period and the different types of work contained in the contract scope require certain technical and logistic skills from the contractor. Additionally, Florida DOT seems to be motivated to conduct a strict contractor selection process by the large size of the minimum guaranteed amount. Read the entire page →
From page 110... ... 110 Advertise/Award Procedures: The advertise/award process used in this contract is similar to the one used in by New York State DOT in Case 2. However, in this case interested bidders are required to bid three adjustment factors instead of two. Read the entire page →
From page 111... ... 111 From all agencies mentioned in chapter five and this appendix using IDIQ contracts to procure maintenance and or construction services, Minnesota DOT is the one with least IDIQ experience. However, between April 2013 and February 2014 (ten months) Read the entire page →
From page 112... ... 112 FIGURE D3 Case 5 -- Contract locations in Dakota, Ramsey, and Washington counties. Advertise/Award Procedures: This contract uses a low-bid procurement bidding process to select a single contractor to perform all work orders. Read the entire page →
From page 113... ... 113 Summary: This is a unit price IDIQ contract executed through simple procurement procedures. There are a number of factors that allow inferring that this case may be perceived by potential bidders as a low risk contract, making it easier for them to prepare price proposals. Read the entire page →
From page 114... ... 114 Advertise/Award Procedures: This contract used a QBS procedure for the selection of six successful firms. Table D4 comprises the selection criteria used to evaluate each consultant firm and the weight assigned to each selection factor. Read the entire page →
From page 115... ... 115 Summary: This case corresponds to a multiple award on-call contract executed by South Carolina DOT. This particular contract is intended to procure bridge design engineering services. Read the entire page →
From page 116... ... 116 Right-of-Way: Right-of-way was not an issue in this project. Permitting: Executive Order declaring emergency temporarily suspended the routine permitting process, which eliminated most permitting issues. Read the entire page →
From page 117... ... 117 The following is a list of effective practices observed in this contract in relation to IDIQ contracting procedures. IDIQ contract for emergency bridge repair on a statewide basis. Read the entire page →

From page 102...

... 102 This appendix presents the details of each case listed in Table 21, chapter five. The objective of this appendix is to portray the specific characteristics and IDIQ contracting procedures of the cases in a manner that gives the reader the background to understand how each contract's features contributed to the analysis reported in this synthesis report.