Project Delivery Method Selection Tool

COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.

Project Delivery Method Selection Tool

2016 CTR Annual SymposiumApril 13, 2016


Project Delivery Selection Tool• History

– TxDOT received legislative authority in 2012 to use Design-Build

• Other approaches (CMAR) had been considered• TxDOT previously limited to design-bid-build (DBB) method or

limited application of comprehensive development agreements

• Need– Decision tool as projects are developed– Objective analysis for determining project delivery method– Specific to Texas


AGENDA

• Motivation and goals• Relation to prior work• Selection approach• Expert input and validation• Tool demonstration• Concluding remarks


Motivation: Main Goals of the Tool• Help decision makers make an objective choice of project

delivery method, driven by:– weighted project goals

– applicable project characteristics

• Transparent and flexible

• Modifiable and updateable (based on MS Excel)

• Recommendations will be consistent across projects and users


Project Delivery Method Selection Tool

• Design - Bid - Build• Design - Build• Future – CMAR, others

These alternatives only represent major approaches. Specific contract strategies (such as A+B, multiple primes, Incentives, Operate & Maintain) should be analyzed after determining the delivery method, and are out of the scope at this time.

Project Delivery Alternatives


Project Team

CTR/UT Team

• Nabeel Khwaja, P.E

• Mayra Martinez

• Bill O’Brien, Ph.D., P.E.

• Jim O’Connor, Ph.D., P.E.

TxDOT Team

• Bill Hale, P.E. (sponsor)

• Richard Kirby, P.E.

• Tracey Friggle Logan, P.E.

• Duane Milligan, P.E.

• Katie Nees, P.E.


Prior Work• TRB – Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods• Colorado DOT Methodology• CII – Project Delivery Contract Strategy• Georgia DOT Tool• Florida DOT• Virginia DOT• Minnesota DOT• New York DOT• Washington DOT• NTTA Model• AASHTO


Transit Cooperative Research ProgramFramework for Texas Model

3 stages:- Tier 1 – Qualitative (Like CDOT)

Structured discussion

- Tier 2 – Quantitative (Texas model)Decision Matrix

- Tier 3 – Risk Analysis (contracting strategies)Detailed analysis of specific risks

Objective: “To assist transit agencies in evaluating and selecting the most appropriate project delivery method for their projects and in documenting this decision in a Project Delivery Decision Report”


Tier 1 Qualitative ToolsCDOT matrix


Tier 2 Qualitative Tools

GDOT Design-Build Suitability Assessment

11 7 8 6 12 2 5 3 9 4 1 1030.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

PDCS Rating

CII’s Delivery Methods’ Ranking


Prior Work: Our Findings

• All mix dependent and independent variables:– Mix Cause: project characteristics, and – Effect: Project goals

• Commonality among factors• Extracted a list of 34 factors that owners

consider when selecting a delivery method• Factor list was consolidated with TxDOT input


34 Factors from existing methods & literature review

INDEPENDENT VARIABLES

PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS

Inherent to the project. Cannot be

changed.

DEPENDENT VARIABLES

PROJECT GOALS

Owner objectives. Achievement will

depend on the project

characteristics and the delivery method

chosen.


Selection Approach – Method Overview

Delivery methods

Project performance by objectives and priorities.

Project characteristics

Hinder or leverage

Influence

2. Choose outcomes1. Score characteristics

3. Recommend method(heat map – not absolutes)


Project Delivery Selection Tool: Project Goals

Lower capital cost

The contractual cost of the project must be the lowest reasonable; the budget available is tight.

Higher cost predictability

The project must be completed within the budget. The agency wants to avoid cost growth.

Higher schedule predictability

The project must be completed within the target schedule. The agency wants to avoid schedule growth.

Lower capital maintenance costs

The agency is concerned about minimizing the maintenance costs during the life cycle of the project.

-Safety & Quality are always considered target objectives-Target duration can be met with any Delivery Method and the proper incentives


Project Delivery Selection Tool: Project Characteristics

-34 Characteristics from review of prior work-The team refined the list based on:

• Scope definition characteristics • Overlaps• Non-differentiating factors• Applicability to TxDOT projects



1 Project has well known site conditions that won't cause significant field changes.

2 The project will benefit from the introduction of innovative methodologies early in the planning/design phase.

3 The project design (PS&E) is currently at an advanced stage; the agency wants to avoid changes or rework in design.

4 The project requires the benefit of designer-contractor integration to reduce coordination challenges.

5 Prescriptive project requirements for methods, materials, and/or procedures limit contractor innovation in terms of alternatives.

6For this project, alternate delivery methods shall create incremental agency efforts and expenses that are expected to be greater than the savings in capital expenses.



7 Early completion will add significant extra value for key project stakeholders.

8 The agency is better equipped than the contractor to manage third party issues.

9 The project is likely to benefit from shifting the risk of third party issues to the contractor

10 Completion date of ROW acquisition is highly uncertain.

11Utility relocations have not been completely identified and are likely to result in important changes in the design, cost, and/or schedule of the project.

12 The project includes permits requiring coordination and regulatory approval during the design and/or construction phases of the project


Obtaining Data to Assess Weightings

TxDOT

FHWA

AGC

ACEC

Workshop Participants

Two workshops• Refine characteristics• Weight characteristics against

goals for each method• Validation and review of

responses – understand outliers

• Weightings reflect summary wisdom of community


Project Delivery Selection Tool

1. Project characteristics

2. Project objectives.

INPUT


Project Delivery Selection Tool

3. Delivery methods

OUTPUT


Project Delivery Selection ToolDesign- Build Delivery Method (Most Suitable)

Most Supportive Characteristics Least Supportive Characteristics

The project will benefit from the introduction of innovative methodologies early in the planning/design phase.

The agency is better equipped than the contractor to manage third party issues.

The project requires the benefit of designer-contractor integration to reduce coordination challenges.

Prescriptive project requirements for methods, materials, and/or procedures limit contractor innovation in terms of alternatives.

Early completion will add significant extra value for key project stakeholders.

For this project, alternate delivery methods shall create incremental agency efforts and expenses that are expected to be greater than the savings in capital expenses.

Design- Bid-Build Delivery Method (Least Suitable)

Most Supportive Characteristics Least Supportive Characteristics

The project has well-known site conditions that won’t cause significant field changes.

Completion date of ROW acquisition is highly uncertain.

The agency is better equipped than the contractor to manage third party issues.

Utility relocations have not been completely identified and are likely to result in important changes in the design, cost, and/or schedule of the project.

The project will benefit from the introduction of innovative methodologies early in the planning/design phase.

The project includes permits requiring coordination and regulator approval during the design and/or construction phases of the project.

Most and least supportive

characteristics for each

delivery method

OUTPUT


Tool Validation• Case-study based• Tool should reproduce human decision making• To ensure the tool gives recommendations aligned with

experts’ expectations

1

• Projects’ characteristics & objectives provided by PM

2

• Project ran through the tool

3

• Final recom-mendation is discussed


Tool Validation

• Projects Tested Project DBB DB Dif. Recommendation

1 75 Rehabilitation 0.32 -0.07 0.39 DBB

2 I-69 0.08 -0.02 0.1 Tier 3

3 Roger Deck Park 0.16 0.18 -0.02 Tier 3

4 SH 360 0 0.13 -0.13 Tier 3

5 Midtown Express (SH183) -0.07 0.27 -0.34 DB

6 LBJ East -0.16 0.32 -0.48 DB

7 SH-146 -0.26 0.24 -0.5 DB


Tool Demonstration


Concluding Remarks• Creation of an objective MS Excel-based decision-support

tool (Tier 2)– Including and differentiation of project goals and projects’

characteristics– Giving quantitative measures for each alternative: DBB and DB

• Developed with the input of experienced TxDOT personnel• Weighted with input from broad community of experts in

TxDOT projects• Validated with range of TxDOT projects• Flexible tool: easily auditable and modifiable

Project Delivery Method Selection Tool

Engineering

Transcript of Project Delivery Method Selection Tool