Standard Appraisal Framework for Hybrid Maintenance Contracts

Transcription

1 NZ Transport Agency Page 1 of 5 Standard Appraisal Framework for Hybrid Maintenance Contracts This document is considered a guideline for the establishment of a performance system for the NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) hybrid procurement model - State Highway Network Management. The system framework presented will need to be customised to suit the specific needs of the road network and agreed between the project parties. The network Consultant is responsible for leading the establishment of the measures and the associated reporting. 1 Purpose The fundamental issue is to understand why we need to measure the performance of contract delivery systems. The key reasons being: 1. Identify the drivers of road network condition gain an understanding of the activities, which improve road condition. 2. Identify problems recognise where problems exist within the contract delivery systems. 3. Identify solutions to the problems solutions are explored to improve network service delivery. 4. Make continuous improvements the affects of system modification are monitored. 5. Feedback on achievement of target performance levels monitoring the results against the required level of service. 6. Demonstrate contract compliance delivery performance is monitored and the road condition measured. 7. Benchmarking between Networks different roading networks are compared to ensure consistency in the level of service. 8. Identify outside influences that may affect the network condition and the performance of the outcome based contract (seasonal, resource, and financial). 9. Recognise where deficiencies lay or improvements are made in the systems used and the service delivery achieved. The overall objective of the performance measurement system is to maintain and where possible improve performance in respect to road condition and service delivery. Regular monitoring of KPI s will lead to continuous improvement. However, the KPI s have to be focused on the important aspects of road management and directly relate to tangible elements of the service delivery. 2 Integrated Performance System There are three key performance elements to the total performance system include operational compliance, visual assessment scorecard, and service performance appraisal for contract extension purposes. Functional relationships between these elements are shown in the following figure:

2 Page 2 of 5 NZ Transport Agency An annual summary of the achieved operational compliance and visual assessment scorecard for items Operational Compliance Scorecard (monthly) Visual Assessment Scorecard (bi-annual) Service Performance Appraisal (annual) Transit PACE Performance Evaluation (varies) Measures which can be influenced by the Consultant/Contractor are identified in both the operational compliance and visual assessment scorecards are incorporated into the Consultant/Contractor Performance Appraisals respectively. Furthermore the results of the service performance appraisal are reflected into NZTA PACE performance appraisals. This process ensures consistency in the results and performance outcome. 3 Operational Compliance Compliance monitoring systems ensure that operational requirements (standards and response times) are met. The responsibility for the monitoring systems is shared between the parties and these are measured and presented regularly (typically monthly) during the contract period. A set of key performance measures to represent project operations for each project outcome are established and agreed between the project parties. These should include a balance of measures where the responsibility in the result sits with both Consultant and Contractor. NZTA should also be responsible for some measures (eg culture) where operations are paramount to the success of the project. Weightings are assigned to each project outcome to reflect the significance of the outcome in respect to the road network. A suggested operational compliance matrix follows including score weighting for each outcome (Table 1) below. Table 1 - Operational Compliance Operational Outcome Description Type Responsible Safety (35%) SH Protection (10%) Environment (5%) Road Hazards M Consultant Worksite Audit M Contractor Crashes at worksites M Contractor Response time for preliminary fatal reports M Consultant Response to sweep after sealing M Contractor Response to reinstate markings M Contractor Contractors internal safety record M Contractor Crash Reports S Consultant Planning consents M Consultant Service consents M Consultant Managing environmental issues M Consultant Contractors environmental effects M Contractor

3 NZ Transport Agency Page 3 of 5 Table 1 - Operational Compliance Operational Outcome Description Type Responsible Asset Management (15%) Contract Delivery (15%) Culture (10%) Service (5%) Economic analysis M Consultant PFR peer review M Consultant RAMM database management M Consultant RAMM database input M Consultant Management of Contractors lump sum I Contractor Management of Consultants lump sum I Consultant Incident response M Contractor Consultants programme M Consultant Underpinned tendered quantities S Contractor Complaints S Consultant Praise S Consultant Relationships M All Meeting agenda M Consultant Speed restriction - maintenance M Contractor Incident response M Contractor Road closure - weather S Consultant Preventive Maintenance (5%) Identification of sites, which satisfy funding rules M Consultant Key: Type M Measure (an index which the relevant party has control over). Type I Indicator (an index of which the consultant has only partial control). Type S Statistic (information which assists the client with understanding the activity level on the network). Achievements of the outcomes are monitored and presented as a compliance chart for including into the project monthly report. The benefit from this compliance system is not in generating a single operational score, but in jointly reviewing each measure result to ascertain areas for improvement. This process could be undertaken during a joint monthly meeting involving NZTA, the network Consultant, and Contractors. 4 Visual Assessment Scorecard The visual assessment scorecard provides a measure of the physical aspects of the road network from a road user perspective. All significant road components are identified and field rated in terms of condition, comfort and safety (Table 2) below.

4 Page 4 of 5 NZ Transport Agency Table 2 - Visual Assessment Matrix Condition Comfort Safety Rest Areas Bridges Lined Channels RRPM 1-5 Edge Marker Posts Intersections Mowing 1-5 Signs General Network Litter 1-5 Water Tables 1-5 Pavement Surface Shoulders Pavement Marking Lighting 1-5 Chemical Control 1-5 Rail Crossing Trees 1-5 Sight Rails = Poor 2 = Needs Attention 3 = Average 4 = Good 5 = Excellent This process should be undertaken during a joint drive over involving NZTA, the Consultant, and Contractors. The benefit from a co-operative approach is to set target standards, while understanding the practical inputs. 5 Service Performance Appraisal The purpose of this appraisal is to determine whether the Consultant and Contractor have achieved sufficient performance standards to be awarded any annual extensions (separable portions) to the original contract term. This appraisal identifies results from both the operational compliance and visual assessment scorecard where the Consultant and Contractor has control on the outcome. There will also be other measures important to NZTA, which will compliment the project measures. The framework for this assessment follows: 6 Consultant's Performance Appraisal Consultant's achievements of their performance measures (45%) Consultant's quality system/nonconformance (10%) Summary of Outcome Key Performance Measures Where Consultant Can Control Result. Project Quality Plan.

5 NZ Transport Agency Page 5 of 5 Consultant's Project Management (20%) Financial Management Response Management Stakeholders view of Consultant's Performance (5%) Network Contractor's Performance (20%) Annual Plan. TLA's Assessment of Consultants performance. Transfer from Contractors Appraisal. 7 Contractor's Performance Appraisal Management and Operational Measures (25%) Contract Quality. Programme/Contract Delivery Documentation Traffic Management and Road Safety Key Performance Measures (25%) Skid Resistance Roughness Physical Works Achievement Field Performance Measures (30%) Network Consultant's Performance (20%) Texture. Summary of Outcome Key Performance Measures Where Contractor Can Control Result. Transfer from Consultants appraisal. 8 PACE Refer to NZTA Minimum Standard Z/11 for details on performance evaluations (PACE). The majority of the PACE measures can be sourced directly from the service performance appraisals for both Consultant and Contractor.