Difference between revisions of "102.2 Contractor Performance Rating System"
m (photo added) |
m (Updated Contractor Performance Report Questionnaire) |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
|'''Forms''' | |'''Forms''' | ||
|- | |- | ||
| − | | | + | |[http://www.modot.org/business/contractor_resources/documents/2010CPRQuestionnaire.pdf Contractor Performance Evaluation Example Form] for 2010 |
|- | |- | ||
|[http://p0003/ContractorRating/updateLogin.do Contractor Performance Evaluation System] | |[http://p0003/ContractorRating/updateLogin.do Contractor Performance Evaluation System] | ||
| Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
The category of Prosecution and Progress is evaluated based on the dollar value of the contract. Some considerations in determining the contractor's rating are: status of project progress, project scheduling, subcontractor / supplier coordination, adequacy of equipment, adequacy of work force, and project supervision. | The category of Prosecution and Progress is evaluated based on the dollar value of the contract. Some considerations in determining the contractor's rating are: status of project progress, project scheduling, subcontractor / supplier coordination, adequacy of equipment, adequacy of work force, and project supervision. | ||
| − | To keep from penalizing contractors for delays beyond their control, adjustments in the contract completion must be made as allowed by [http://www.modot.mo.gov/business/standards_and_specs/Sec0108.pdf | + | To keep from penalizing contractors for delays beyond their control, adjustments in the contract completion must be made as allowed by [http://www.modot.mo.gov/business/standards_and_specs/Sec0108.pdf Sec 108] (see appropriate subsections Secs 108.6, 108.7.1, 108.7.2, 108.8 or 108.14). It will be necessary to change order justifiable time extensions for additional authorized work, utility or other excusable or noncompensable delays affecting the contractor's schedule. |
Complete change orders to adjust project completions prior to submitting the evaluation to the contractor to minimize disputes. The review period for the evaluation is tight and it is not to the advantage of the state nor the contractor to utilize the review period for challenging contract delays. | Complete change orders to adjust project completions prior to submitting the evaluation to the contractor to minimize disputes. The review period for the evaluation is tight and it is not to the advantage of the state nor the contractor to utilize the review period for challenging contract delays. | ||
Revision as of 08:00, 14 October 2010
| Forms |
| Contractor Performance Evaluation Example Form for 2010 |
| Contractor Performance Evaluation System |
Contents
The Missouri Code of State Regulations governs the Contractor Performance Rating System. While this system is not mentioned in the specifications, changes in specifications and areas of emphasis warrant periodic changes to the evaluation process and the administrative rules are routinely changed to improve the system.
The Construction and Materials Division is charged with tracking contractor performance. The Commission is informed of contractors being recognized for outstanding performance as well as those being disciplined for less than satisfactory performance after the State Construction and Materials Engineer completes reviews and the Chief Engineer gives approval.
The project performance evaluation is provided at the project preconstruction conference and at the start of each year. Project performance measurements are known at the beginning of each evaluation period.
102.2.1 Evaluation
The reporting period for the annual performance project evaluation is the calendar year, January 1 through December 31 with the report for each active project due on February 1 of the following year. Final reports on projects completed during the calendar year are due 30 days after project acceptance.
An Interim Report is completed on all contractors with a disciplinary status and may also be completed at any time, at the discretion of the engineer, for any contractor when a serious concern regarding contractor performance on the project exists. Interim reports are performed at mid-season; either when the work on the project for the year is approximately fifty percent (50%) completed or by September 1, whichever comes first. The interim report provides the contractor an opportunity to improve their ratings before the end of year annual evaluation. The interim report is for informational purposes only.
102.2.2 Evaluation Categories
The evaluation is divided into sections corresponding to the Missouri Standard Specifications for Highway Construction. Point values are assigned to each question and each question is assigned to one of four categories: Quality, Prosecution and Progress, Contract Compliance, and Contract Administration.
Contract Compliance is further divided into 3 subcategories:
- contract requirements,
- erosion control, and
- traffic control.
102.2.3 Evaluation Completion
The project inspection staff is responsible for completing the individual project performance evaluation and, after a review by the resident engineer, it is provided to the contractor for review and comment.
When completing an evaluation, every question begins with a 100% compliant response. Documentation is required to reduce any response rating. Stepped communications for infractions are encouraged. Minor infractions should be initially verbally communicated (no effect on ratings). If the infraction continues, documentation should begin (rating is effected). Order Records (Notices of Violations) create negative point assessments for "Contract Compliance". Letters or documentation records do not, but provides a basis for reducing the contractor’s performance evaluation.
102.2.4 Evaluation Determination
Contractors receive individual project evaluations in each of the four categories and an Overall annual rating. Category performance ratings are determined by dividing the total point values of applicable questions answered by the total possible category point value. Questions included in the evaluation are contract requirements. Routine project records and documentation support the responses. Not all questions included in the evaluation are applicable on a project.
The project Quality rating is weighted by the dollar value of work completed during the rated construction season for each section of the evaluation. (Example: if bridge items comprise 75% of the completed work performed on a project, then 75% of the project Quality of Work rating will be obtained from the Section 700 questions). The effect of subcontractors’ work on the prime contractor’s rating can be determined.
The category of Prosecution and Progress is evaluated based on the dollar value of the contract. Some considerations in determining the contractor's rating are: status of project progress, project scheduling, subcontractor / supplier coordination, adequacy of equipment, adequacy of work force, and project supervision.
To keep from penalizing contractors for delays beyond their control, adjustments in the contract completion must be made as allowed by Sec 108 (see appropriate subsections Secs 108.6, 108.7.1, 108.7.2, 108.8 or 108.14). It will be necessary to change order justifiable time extensions for additional authorized work, utility or other excusable or noncompensable delays affecting the contractor's schedule.
Complete change orders to adjust project completions prior to submitting the evaluation to the contractor to minimize disputes. The review period for the evaluation is tight and it is not to the advantage of the state nor the contractor to utilize the review period for challenging contract delays.
The Contract Compliance rating is based on dollar value of work completed during the rated year. The subcategories of the category are: traffic control, erosion control and contract provision requirements.
The Contract Administration category evaluation is also based on the dollar value of the contract. The category rates required documentation submittals for the project, such as: list of suppliers, subcontract requests, payrolls, trainee reports, material invoices / certifications and final project documentation.
The project Overall rating is the average of the categories rated.
The contractor’s annual performance summary is the weighted average of the individual project’s overall and category ratings, i.e., $10 M of completed work on one project will carry twice the weight of $5 M of completed work on a second project.
Statistical analysis is used to identify the system's performance levels:
- Outstanding
- Above Average
- Average
- Below Average
- Unacceptable
The mean (average) and standard deviation of all ratings are calculated for each of the categories and overall ratings. Ratings falling below the mean minus two standard deviations define unacceptable performance. Ratings between the mean minus one and two standard deviations establishes below average performance. Rating values between the mean plus and minus one standard deviation identifies average performance. Ratings between the mean plus one and two standard deviations signifies above average performance. Outstanding performance is recognized as having a rating above the mean plus two standard deviations.
102.2.5 Contractor Recognition
For purposes of performance recognition, contractors are divided into 4 groups.
Specialty Contractors are defined as contractors performing 85% of their total work in a single work element. Specialty contractors typically complete 2 to 4% of the total dollar volume.
Heavy Volume Contractors are the top ten contractors who complete the largest volume of work and typically complete 45 to 50% of the total dollar volume.
Medium Volume Contractors are the top 1/2 remaining contractors and typically complete 45 to 50% of total dollar volume.
Low Volume Contractors are the remaining contractors. They typically complete 3 to 5% of total dollar volume.
Contractors eligible for recognition must complete greater than 2% of Low Volume Contractor group total dollar volume and have an overall rating of above average. Group Overall Top Achievers are recognized by a plaque displayed in MoDOT’s Central Office Lobby and with a plaque presented at Annual MoDOT / Associated General Contractor (AGC) Meeting routinely held each fall. Group "Category" Top Achievers receive a certificate of recognition at the annual MoDOT/AGC COOP meeting.
102.2.6 Contractor Discipline
Disciplinary action results from unacceptable ratings in the categories:
- Quality
- Prosecution & Progress
- Contract Compliance
- Overall
An unacceptable Contract Administration rating will not by itself bring disciplinary actions unless the category rating results in an unacceptable Overall rating.
The system is designed to encourage communication on the project and provide information to the contractor to help identify operational areas where greatest improvement can be realized. Continued unacceptable performance imposes progressive disciplinary actions. Disciplinary actions may extend to affiliates of the contractor.
An initial unacceptable performance rating will place the contractor on probation.
After a second unacceptable performance rating the contractor will be declared nonresponsible and suspended from bidding any additional work for a period of one year. At the conclusion of the suspension period, the contractor will be permitted to bid on department projects on a probationary status.
A third subsequent unacceptable rating will disqualify a contractor from bidding for a period of three years.
A contractor will be declared nonresponsible and will be prohibited from bidding for a period a three years if the company is in probationary status after return from a previous suspended or disbarred status. After the three year debarment, the contractor will be allowed to bid work on a renewed probationary status.
Contractors with a disciplinary status can return to good standing after achieving average annual summary ratings.
102.2.7 Performance Discussion
The resident engineer must discuss performance with the contractor. If performance deficiencies exist, the contractor needs the time during the remainder of the season to provide the opportunity to improve their ratings for the year. The department does not want a contractor disciplined at the end of a construction season without assurances efforts were made to timely communicate any poor performance. It is not MoDOT’s intent or desire to disqualify contractors but it must insist on quality construction and timely completion of projects.
