Construction Advisory CommitteeSept. 14, 2020

Contractor Performance Evaluation presentation — original pdf

Thumbnail of the first page of the PDF
Page 1 of 9 pages

Contractor Performance Evaluation Program Update Construction Advisory Committee (CAC) September 14, 2020 1 Contractor Performance Evaluation Purpose PURPOSE: January 31, 2014 (Administrative Rule R161-13.37) – COA adopted procedures to:  Administer a city-wide vendor performance evaluation program, and  Collect vendor performance assessments to:  Establish historical record  Use as a tool in future solicitations and subsequent contract award decisions  CCO developed the Consultant/Contractor Evaluation to ensure high quality of services and performance is maintained. 2 New Criteria and Scores Beginning July 3, 2017 1. Quality 2. Schedule 3. Wage Compliance and Required Job Postings 4. Compliance with MBE/WBE Procurement Program(s) 5. Invoicing and Payments 6. Regulatory Compliance and Permitting 7. Safety and Protection 8. Adequacy and Availability of Workforce 9. Project and Contract Management 10.Communications, Cooperation and Business Relations  Needs Improvement (1 Point) (Does not meet contractual requirements. Indicates a need for improvement and characterize performance levels that result in detriment to the project)  Successful Performance (2.5 Points) (General success. Performance meets contractual requirements)  Exceptional Performance (3 Points) (Exceeds contract requirements to the City’s benefit. Exceptional performance beyond expectations and characterize performance levels that result in substantial positive contributions to the project) 30 Points Maximum 3 When to Conduct Construction Evaluations Contractors/Construction:  IFB (Traditional Low-Bid)  End of Construction (Substantial Completion)  Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ):  At time of option/contract term renewal(s);  End of Contract  Competitive Sealed Proposals (CSP):  End of Construction (Substantial Completion)  Job Order Contracts (JOC):  By Project  End of Construction (Substantial Completion)  Construction Manager at Risk (CM@R):  End of Construction (Substantial Completion)  Design-Build (DB):  End of Design, and  End of Construction (Substantial Completion) 4 Contractor Performance Evaluation Update Construction Solicitations Issued by CCO since 2014’s CPE Rules Adoption Future CPEs (Projects not at substantial completion or IDIQ not at contract term) CPEs Due CPEs Received CPEs Pending 330 174 156 130 26 5 Below 25 Points – Unsuccessful Performance  Communication  Inability to contact contractors readily when need arises  Not submitting reports CPE Scoring Trend Analysis  Not completing work assignments on a timely basis (as contractually obligated)  Poor project management  MBE/WBE Procurement Program compliance violations  Not Invoicing on a timely scheduled requirement Above 25 Points – Exceptional Performance  Contractor is consistently available and accessible  Responsive communication  Excellent planning and completion of assignments ahead of schedule  Demonstrated excellence in quality of work and service delivery 6 Needs Improvement (below 25) 12 9% Successful Performance Exceptional Performance (25 Totals 91 70% to 30) 27 21% 130 100% Contractor Performance Evaluation Summary In summary… ~91% of COA Contractors are meeting or exceeding contractual requirements. 7 Sonya Powell, CPE Coordinator, (512) 974-6052 CPE Program Contacts Felecia Shaw, Business Process Consultant Sr., (512) 974-6017 Melissa Pool, Admin & Finance Manager, (512) 974-7052 8 Additional information, including the latest guidelines and forms, can be found at: performance-evaluation CPE Program Resources CPE Consultant Evaluation Program Flier Consultant and Contractor Evaluation Forms Performance Evaluation Scoring Guidelines - Contractors Performance Evaluation Scoring Guidelines – Consultants Consultant and Contractor Evaluation Program Rules 9