Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods (2018)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

85 B.1 General and Demographic Information Table B1 summarizes state DOTs responding to the survey. A P P E N D I X B Aggregated Survey Results No State DOT No State DOT 1 Arizona 24 Nebraska 2 Arkansas 25 Nevada 3 California 26 New Jersey 4 Colorado 27 New York 5 Connecticut 28 New Hampshire 6 DC 29 North Carolina 7 Delaware 30 North Dakota 8 Florida 31 Ohio 9 Georgia 32 Oklahoma 10 Hawaii 33 Oregon 11 Idaho 34 Pennsylvania 12 Indiana 35 Rhode Island 13 Iowa 36 South Carolina 14 Kansas 37 South Dakota 15 Kentucky 38 Tennessee 16 Louisiana 39 Texas 17 Maine 40 Utah 18 Maryland 41 Vermont 19 Massachusetts 42 Virginia 20 Michigan 43 Washington 21 Missouri 44 West Virginia 22 Minnesota 45 Wisconsin 23 Montana 46 Wyoming Table B1. State DOTs responding to the survey.

86 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Figure B1 displays the result for the group/section in which the survey respondents work. Out of 46 responses obtained, a majority of the respondents work in multiple groups or sections. The construction group is the most common group as shown. Respondents who chose “other areas” included the works in material group, project management division, and infrastructure policy. 11% 67.40% 34.80% 17.40% 13% 13% 8.70% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Other Construction Group/Section Alternative Project Delivery Group/Section Contracts/procurement Group/Section Design Group/Section Program delivery Group/Section Operations Group/Section Maintenance Group/Section Fig B1. Group/section in which survey respondent work (n = 46). • Figure B2 displays the result for authority to use primary ACMs. Six state DOTs reported that they do not have authority to use ACMs (North Dakota, South Dakota, New Jersey, Okla- homa, Wyoming, Iowa). 43 agencies reported that they have authority to use at least one of the primary ACMs. Majority of the agencies have authority to use D-B (93%), followed by P3 (45.6%). Only 39% of the agencies are authorized to use CM/GC. 93% 45.65% 39% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% D-B P3 CM/GC Fig B2. Authority to use alternate contracting methods (n = 46).

Aggregated Survey Results 87 • Figure B3 shows whether or not agencies have legal constraints placed on the outsourcing of services for which it may have the capacity to perform in-house. Out of 39 responses (exclud- ing WY, SD, ND, OK, NE, IN and IA), more than half of the agencies have no legal constraints on outsourcing of services. 8 agencies out of 39 agencies (20.5%) have legal constraints on outsourcing of services. 15.50% 20.50% 64% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Don't Know Yes No Fig B3. Constraints on outsourcing of services (n = 39). • Figure B4 shows the procurement methods agencies have used to procure contractors for primary ACMs. Total responses for D-B, CM/GC, and P3 are 40, 17, and 17 respectively. 10% 25% 57.50% 82.50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Other Qualification-Based Low Bid Best Value Fig B4.1. Procurement methods used by the agencies for D-B (n = 40).

88 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods 5.90% 5.90% 47% 70.60% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Other Low Bid Qualification-Based Best Value Fig B4.2. Procurement methods used by the agencies for CM/GC (n = 17). 0.00% 5.90% 47% 70.60% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Other Qualification-Based Low Bid Best Value Fig B4.3. Procurement methods used by the agencies for P3 (n = 17).

Aggregated Survey Results 89 • Figure B5 shows the number of projects delivered by the agencies with the primary ACMs. No data were received from ND, SD, NE, IA, WY, AR and OK state DOTs. Number of responses for D-B, CM/GC, and P3 are 39, 18, and 16 respectively. Most of the agencies have delivered more than 15 projects with D-B (53.8%). Likewise, a majority of the agencies (62.5%) have delivered less than 4 projects with P3 as shown. 15.40% 20.50% 10.30% 53.80% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 1 to 4 5 to 10 11 to 15 >15 Fig B5.1. Number of projects delivered by the agencies with D-B (n = 39). 55.60% 27.80% 5.60% 11.11% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 1 to 4 5 to 10 11 to 15 >15 Fig B5.2. Number of projects delivered by the agencies with CM/GC (n = 18).

90 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Fig B6 shows the percentage of average annual construction program in terms of number of projects. Out of 37 respondents (excluding AZ, IA, FL, OK, AR, NE, ND, WY, and SD) majority (46%) of agencies have performed 1% to 5% of their annual construction programs using ACMs as shown. 62.50% 31.25% 6.30% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 1 to 4 5 to 10 11 to 15 >15 Fig B5.3. Number of projects delivered by the agencies with P3 (n = 16). 29.70% 46% 13.50% 8.10% 0% 2.70% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% <1% 1% to 5% 5% to 10% 10% to 15% 15% to 20% >20% Fig B6. Percentage of annual construction program using ACMs (n = 37). Range <1% 1%-5% 5%-10% 10%- 15% 15%- 20% >20% Total Count 11 17 5 3 0 1 37

Aggregated Survey Results 91 • Figure B7 shows the percentage of average annual construction budget in terms of dollar volume allocated to ACM projects. 36 responses were obtained (excluding AZ, LA, IA, WY, OK, NJ, AR, NE, ND, and SD). 41.60% 30.50% 13.80% 0.00% 5.70% 8.40% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% <10% 10% to 20% 20% to 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% >50% Fig B7. Percentage of average annual construction budget in dollar volume (n = 36). • Figure B8 shows the number of years of experience of agencies with the primary ACMs. As shown, many agencies have more than 10 years of experience with D-B. 0% 13.20% 23.70% 63.10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% <2 years 3 to 5 years 6 to 10 years >10 years Fig B8.1. Number of years of experience with D-B (n = 38). Range <10% 10% to 20% 20% to 30% 30% to 40% 40% to 50% >50% Total Count 15 11 5 0 2 3 36

92 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods 16.60% 44.40% 27.80% 11.20% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% <2 years 3 to 5 years 6 to 10 years >10 years Fig B8.2. Number of years of experience with CM/GC (n = 18). 14.30% 35.70% 21.40% 28.60% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% <2 years 3 to 5 years 6 to 10 years >10 years Fig B8.3. Number of years of experience with P3 (n = 14).

Aggregated Survey Results 93 B.2 Organizational Structure and Training for ACM Projects • Figure B9 shows the organizational structures that the agencies use to deliver primary ACMs. Total responses for D-B, CM/GC, and P3 are 38, 18, and 15 respectively. It is seen that a majority of the agencies use combination structure for all primary ACMs. 21% 5.30% 73.70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Centralized Structure Decentralized Structure Combination Structure Fig B9.1. Organizational structure in use for D-B (n = 38). 16.60% 5.50% 77.90% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Centralized Structure Decentralized Structure Combination Structure Fig B9.2. Organizational structure in use for CM/GC (n = 18).

94 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Figure B10 shows whether or not the agencies have strategic approach to staffing needs for implementing ACMs. It is seen that a majority (66.6%) of the agencies have no strategic approach to staffing needs for implementing ACMs. 39 responses were obtained from various state DOTs (excluding IA, NJ, OK, NE, ND, WY, and SD). 46.70% 6.60% 46.70% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Centralized Structure Decentralized Structure Combination Structure Fig B9.3. Organizational structure in use for P3 (n = 15). 33.40% 66.60% Yes No Fig B10. Strategic approach to staffing needs for ACMs (n = 39).

Aggregated Survey Results 95 • Figure B11 shows whether the agencies have business unit/divisions for ACMs. A little more than half of the responding agencies do not have business unit/divisions for ACMs. 48.70% 51.30% Yes No Fig B11. Business unit/division for ACMs (n = 39). • Table B2 shows the number of agencies that have a separate office for the procurement/ administration of ACM. It is seen that most agencies have no separate office for procurement/ administration of ACMs. ACMs Yes No Responses D-B 13 26 39 CM-GC 5 13 18 P3 10 9 19 Table B2. Separate office for procurement/administration of ACMs. • Table B3 shows the number of agencies that utilize consultants for implementing ACMs. Most agencies utilize outside consultants to deliver ACM projects as shown. ACMs Yes No Responses D-B 34 4 38 CM-GC 11 3 14 P3 15 1 16 Table B3. Use of consultants for ACMs.

96 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Figure B12 shows the factors that agencies consider in making outsourcing decisions. Major factors that influence outsourcing decisions are found to be lack of availability of in house personnel and lack of qualifications of in-house personnel. 20.50% 94.20% 73.50% 11.80% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Other Lack of Availability of In-House Personnel Lack of Qualifications of In-House Personnel Cost Savings Fig B12. Factors in making outsourcing decisions (n = 34). • Figure B13 shows agency responses to the typical activities that are conducted by consultants. As shown, preliminary engineering design and contract development are two such activities in which consultant staff are mostly employed by the agencies. 18% 24% 33% 44% 44% 50% 56% 68% 85% 88% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% Other ACM Assessment and Selection Providing ACM Training to Agency Staff Developing ACM Practices and Documents Project Management in the Procurement Phase Technical Proposal Assessment Project Management in the Construction Phase Environmental Reviews and Document Preparation RFP/RFQ and Contract Development Preliminary Engineering Design Fig B13. Consultant staff activities (n = 34).

Aggregated Survey Results 97 • Figure B14 shows results regarding whether the agencies provide ACM training to their staff. It is found that a majority (69.2%) of responding agencies provide ACM training to their staff. 69.20% 30.80% Yes No Fig B14. ACM training to staff (n = 39). • Figure B15 shows the results of type of training provided to staff for ACM. Out of 27 respond- ing agencies that provide ACM training to their staff, more than half (51.8%) provide project- specific training. Likewise, 44.4% of responding agencies provide agency-wide training, as shown. 22.20% 37% 44.40% 51.80% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Other Project-Specific Training for Every Project Agency-Wide Training is Provided to Staff Project-Specific Training for Some projects Fig B15. Types of training provided to staff (n = 27).

98 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods B.3 Staffing Needs and Skill Sets for ACM Projects • Figure B16 shows the average age of staff for ACM of 39 responding agencies (other 7 agencies have no authority for ACMs). It is seen that a majority of staff are in the 40 to 49 years age group. 2.60% 28.20% 59% 10.20% 0% 20-29 Years 30 - 39 Years 40- 49 Years 50-59 Years 60 Years or more Fig B16. Average age of staff for ACM (n = 39). • Figure B17 shows the average years of experience of agency staff related to ACM. It is found that a majority of agency staff fall in the range of 5 to 15 years of experience. 18% 33.30%30.80% 7.70% 10.20% 0% 1 to 5 years 5 to 10 years 10 to 15 Years 15 to 20 Years 20 to 25 Years 25 to 30 Years Fig B17. Average years of experience related to ACMs (n = 39).

Aggregated Survey Results 99 • Figure B18 shows the average years of experience of agency staff in general. Many staff fall into the experience level of 15 to 20 years, as shown. 5.50% 5.50% 27% 46% 13.40% 2.60% 0% 1 to 5 years 5 to 10 years 10 to 15 Years 15 to 20 Years 20 to 25 Years 25 to 30 Years 30 or more years Fig B18. Average years of experience of agency staff in general (n = 37). • Figure B19 shows the agencies’ use of technological tools (e.g., BIM/CIM, laser scanners, smart sensors, cameras, etc.) to meet staffing needs when implementing ACMs. A majority (81.6%) of the agencies do not use technological tools to meet staffing needs. Only 7 agencies (out of 38) use technological tools (CT, KS, MA, MI, MT, and NY state DOTs). 18.40% 81.60% YES NO Fig B19. The use of technological tools to meet staffing needs in ACMs (n = 38).

100 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Figure B20 shows the strategies that agencies use to address staff shortfall (workload staffing peaks) to deliver ACM projects. 92% of agencies employ consultant staff to cope with staff shortfalls. Likewise, placing existing staff on overtime and temporary reassignments of staff from other business units are also the common measures adopted by the agencies to tackle staff shortfall. 2.60% 2.60% 7.90% 18.40% 21% 58.00% 60.40% 92.10% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Other Reduce Inspection Requirements Assign Non-Construction Personnel to Construction Duties Use Risk-based/Statistical Inspection Methods Hire Additional Staff Temporary Reassignments of Staff from Other Business Units Place Existing Staff on Overtime Outsource to Consultant Staff Fig B20. Strategies to address staff shortfalls (n = 38). • Figure B21 shows the result of whether or not agencies use ACMs to augment its existing staff (e.g., outsourcing design and/or construction responsibilities) during program funding spikes. Only 39.4% of agencies use ACM to augment existing staff during program funding spikes. 39.40% 60.60% YES NO Fig B21. Use of ACMs to augment existing staff (n = 38).

Aggregated Survey Results 101 B.4 Unique Staffing Issues for ACM Projects • Table B4 shows the roles of various agency staff at different phases of typical ACM projects. Phases Central Office Agency Staff District Office Agency Staff Project Office Agency Staff Consultant Staff Private Sector Partner Response Scoping 65.7% 47.3% 26.4% 31.6% 0% 37 Environmental 56.7% 40.6% 16.3% 51.4% 0% 37 Procurement 92% 28.9% 28.9% 34.2% 0% 37 Design 48.6% 46.2% 37.8% 73% 13.4% 37 Construction 24.4% 51.5% 59.4% 56.8% 13.4% 37 Project Close-Out 36.8% 55.3% 60.5% 36.8% 7.9% 37 Table B4. Roles of agency staff at different phases of ACMs. • Table B5 shows the roles of different agency staff in construction quality management and quality assurance for ACMs. Tasks NA Agency Staff Designer's Consultant Contractor's Construction Staff Contractor's Consultant Staff Agency's Consultant Staff Private Sector Partner Response Approval of construction post-award QA/QC 2.8% 94.4% 8.3% 11.1% 94.4% 50% 2.8% 36 Verification testing 0% 72.2% 2.7% 22.2% 27.7% 47.2% 2.8% 36 Independent assurance testing/inspection 2.8% 88.9% 0% 2.8% 19.4% 38.8% 0% 36 Approval of progress payments for construction progress 2.8% 97.2% 2.8% 2.8% 94.4% 36.1% 0% 36 Technical review of construction shop drawings 0% 78.4% 46% 35.1% 51.4% 56.8% 5.4% 36 Technical review of construction material submittals 0% 86.5% 10.8% 37.8% 43.2% 46% 2.7% 36 Report of nonconforming work or punch list 0% 83.4% 13.9% 36.1% 38.9% 58.3% 2.8% 36 Checking of pay quantities 0% 88.9% 2.8% 38.8% 19.4% 55.5% 5.6% 36 Routine construction inspection 0% 83.4% 2.8% 41.7% 33.3% 63.9% 5.6% 36 Quality control testing 0% 43.24% 0% 65% 54% 32.4% 8.1% 36 Establishment of horizontal and vertical control 0% 33.4% 11.1% 83% 55.6% 19.4% 5.6% 36 Acceptance testing 0% 85.7% 0% 11.4% 31.4% 48.5% 2.9% 36 Table B5. Roles of agency staff in construction QA/QC.

102 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Table B6 shows the knowledge and skill sets that are critical to the success of implementing ACMs. Knowledge and Skill Sets D-B CM/GC P3 Response Knowledge of highway materials and construction means and methods 100% 18% 45% 11 Ability to explain construction plans, specification, and contract provisions 88% 38% 13% 8 Leadership and ability to coordinate other staff 96% 52% 40% 25 Experience in managing claim and disputes 75% 50% 25% 4 Understanding of project management principles 100% 50% 10% 10 Knowledge of project delivery and procurement procedure 90% 25% 40% 20 Understanding of federal and state environmental approvals 100% 20% 40% 5 Ability to analyze constructability reviews and project phasing 75% 50% 38% 8 Knowledge of quality assurance principles for ACMs 100% 22% 56% 9 Familiar with federal transportation project finance structuring 33% 0% 67% 3 Ability to schedule, estimate, and control the work 63% 50% 13% 8 Knowledge of finance, accounting and cost management 25% 0% 100% 4 Project scheduling and resource loading 75% 50% 0% 4 Knowledge of change management 67% 100% 33% 3 Risk identification and analysis skills 96% 54% 38% 24 Knowledge of cost estimating practices and system implementation 0% 100% 0% 3 Strong background in the pre-construction process and planning 50% 38% 13% 8 Familiar with contractor's build/assembly methods 0% 0% 0% 0 Performance and accountability reporting to multiple levels 100% 0% 0% 2 Knowledge of construction contract administration 94% 38% 44% 16 Strong partnering and team-building skills 87% 43% 30% 23 Excellent written and oral communication skills 86% 43% 29% 7 Ability to synthesize cross-checks and balances into project delivery methods 25% 0% 100% 4 Knowledge of development, tracking, and reporting of performance measures 50% 0% 50% 2 Documentation and record maintenance skills 83% 33% 33% 6 Table B6. Knowledge and skill sets for ACMs.

Aggregated Survey Results 103 • Table B7 shows the “soft” skills relative to the success of implementing ACMs. (1 = Not Impor- tant, 2 = Slightly Important, 3 = Important, 4 = Very Important, 5 = Extremely Important, NA = Not Applicable) "SOFT SKILLS" 1 2 3 4 5 NA Responsible and reflective 0% 6% 26% 41% 26% 0% Diverse backgrounds 6% 18% 47% 21% 9% 0% Innovative problem solving attitude 0% 3% 3% 41% 53% 0% Accountability and trust 0% 0% 0% 38% 62% 0% Flexibility and open to new concepts 0% 0% 9% 38% 53% 0% Strong commitment to successful outcome 0% 0% 0% 35% 65% 0% Table B7. “Soft” skills relative to the success of implementing ACMs. • Figure B22 shows influence of ACM projects on staffing requirements compared to tradi- tional D-B-B projects. 38% 19% 32% 11% Less Staff is required More Staff is required No Difference Don't Know Fig B22.1. Influence of D-B on staffing requirements (n = 37). 3% 19% 28% 50% Less Staff is required More Staff is required No Difference Don't Know Fig B22.2. Influence of CM/GC on staffing requirements (n = 36).

104 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Figure B23 shows impact on staffing requirements during the ACM project close-out phase compared to a traditional D-B-B project. Almost half of the respondents reported that there is no difference on staffing requirements during ACM project closeout phase. 28% 8% 6% 58% Less Staff is required More Staff is required No Difference Don't Know Fig B22.3. Influence of P3 on staffing requirements (n = 36). 24% 14% 57% 5% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Less staff is required More staff is required No difference Don't know Fig B23. Impact on staffing requirements during ACM project close-out (n = 37).

Aggregated Survey Results 105 • Table B8 shows the results of open-ended questions related to staffing issues during the ACM project closeout phase. Count Staffing issues Related to Project Close -out 1 We have not yet closed out an ACM project. 1 While the process is different, w e haven't experienced any particular staffing issues. We are just entering the M&O phase for our first P3 project, so we don't have experience from that project yet. 1 At this time we are working through the as-built responsibilities but no other apparent issues as of yet. 1 Only issues related to transfer of warranties to appropriate parties (i.e., subcontractors) and receipt of ACCURATE, TIMELY As-Built from the contractors/DB teams. 1 Understanding of the Project's unique Quality Management Plan tests an individual's capacity to see a relatively deep body of knowledge and information and participants, but keeping the role of responsible stewardship. Strong sense of what is fair for the contracting entity versus the terms of the actual contract entered into; Contract language is generally customized and as such can still be ambiguous so good judgement is needed especially at closeout. 1 Close out should be the same as D -B-B. 1 Design Build typically involves less close -out documentation review, but requires more work for warranty monitoring. 1 We haven't had any issues with project phase closeout. 1 Closeout has been a challenge on the 10 projects we've done. Mostly due to the Private Partner and their staff leaving, but we are getting better at it. Our current approach is to have 2-3 key staff from the agency work on closeout with the partner. We are working on other options currently. 1 Major team participants have usually moved on to the next project and don't have time for the old one. 1 Generally, there's more documentation and we're still growing as an agency, so there's a learning curve for staff on ACM projects. 1 Staff is a function of the job's size and scope. Delegation of the Final Design and the QC role should result in less staff burden on the department. 1 As ACM's are usually paid by % complete there are fewer items to final. Still trying to figure out exactly how to do a final audit on D-B contracts. 1 We do not see significant difference here between DB and DBB. We have yet to close out a PPP. 1 Additional staff is needed for verifying as-built drawings, material certifications, and DBE/PW/EEO monitoring. 1 Must use A/E consultants due to legislative staffing level constraints. 1 It is very similar to design bid build with the exception of additional warranty requirements and the DB team is producing the as-built. 1 Not really a lot of difference if the project has kept up on documentation throughout construction. 1 Having staff knowledgeable about requirements for ACM-specific project closeout. Table B8. Staffing issues related to the ACM project closeout phase.

106 Staffing for Alternative Contracting Methods • Figure B24 shows whether or not agencies have manual or documents that specifically describe the staffing procedures to be used for ACM projects. The majority of the agencies do not have manuals/documents describing the staffing procedures for ACM projects. 16% 84% Yes No Fig B24. Manuals/documents describing staffing procedures for ACMs. • Table B9 shows lesson learned by the agencies in staffing practices to implement ACM proj- ects obtained from the open-ended question in the survey. Table B9. ACM staffing lessons learned Count Lesson Learned in Staffing Practices 1 Get construction staff involved early in the process (preconstruction) so they understand the projects and decisions made. 1 We are too early in the process to be able to provide lessons learned on staffing practices. 1 The key is identify the correct staff for ACM projects. They have to the ability to think outside the DBB world and understand the differences between the various methods. Staff must have the ability to make decisions for the good of the project rather than be legalistic. 1 You need strong and experienced project personnel. 1 Manuals are needed. Response times are critical and potentially could require additional staff. Dedicated staff to facilitate the processes is critical. 1 TIMING! The Agency must be conscious of timing delivery of projects. Saturating the industry and agency staff is NOT conducive to success. 1 Good to have staff that is or can be rounded with both design and construction, and environmental. Staff should have ability to truly foster partnership and discourage adversarial relationships. Staff should be "bridge builders" to bring agency SMEs along with ACM approach: it is usually a foreign concept and some can be resistant to change. Focusing staff on providing both project management and SME discipline engagement positively pays off for the agency. Respect for others perspective is important. Creating the change that is needed in order to be successful is a key success trait. Ability to foster paradigm shift toward beneficial concepts. Ability to be decisive and adjust temperament professionally to be appropriate for the occasion. Ability to keep calm amid enormous pressure and expectations is a needed characteristic. Delegation of authority is critical, especially for Major Projects.

Aggregated Survey Results 107 1 PM is key through all phases. Has to have knowledge of all phases (procurement, D-B, O and M), has to know how to manage consultants. Understands who owns what risk, and not take back risk. Importance of record keeping. 1 Personality type and experience are important in selecting staff for these project. Typically, outside staff are hired to perform work on these projects. 1 Owner must have qualified staff with appropriate experience to manage these contracts; it’s not for everyone! 1 More emphasis on training internally within the DOT. The specialists in DB/P3 know what the process looks like and what needs to happen; however, they sometimes fail to spend time upfront to fully brief the other non-D-B/P3 DOT professionals critical to the process (e.g. geo-tech, hazardous material managers, environmental, right of way). This is time well spent to get your advisers up to speed so they can modify their normal approaches to fit that needed by D-B/P3 project development and procurement. 1 Get construction staff involved early in the process (preconstruction) so they understand the projects and decisions made. 1 We are too early in the process to be able to provide lessons learned on staffing practices. Count Lesson Learned in Staffing Practices 1 Staff needs to be flexible and responsive to the fast pace of design−build. 1 We formed a part-time innovative contracting team to help review RFPs, project requirements, general contract conditions, etc. 1 Parties that will be involved with the project need to be on board at the very start and should follow the project throughout the procurement. The staff needs to remain open to the contracting process and able to keep personal preferences out of the contract. 1 Many lessons learned. The most successful model is to have a dedicated project team with leadership complementary of each other - Project Director and the Deputy Project Director having different disciplines (Construction and Design). This team also has support staff of Project Engineers (generally 3-5) dedicated to the project. We have experimented with other variations of this using support staff that are not dedicated. We are currently experimenting Area Team involvement in Project Delivery with mixed results. 1 We rely heavily on consultant services to provide us agile staffing solutions to meet the varying needs of the ACM projects. 1 If you don't have enough quantity for statistical verification, then duplication efforts for inspection are considerable. 1 Need better understanding of the contract quality management plan and roles and responsibilities with material testing. Need same number of field staff as similarly sized D-B-B contracts. 1 It can be a challenge to attract those individuals to a high paced intensive and unique work environment. Moreover, once you attract those individuals, your program must be mature enough to ensure that there is always ample workload to keep these high performers interested. 1 The Department has identified a stronger correlation between project staffing and project cost as opposed to project staffing and ACM. 1 ACM does not necessarily mean lower cost - as some may think Adopting Contractor innovations that are in contrast to standards are at time contentious - breaking status quo. 1 Strong staffing with team player, exceptional attitudes, open to change greatly helps ACM projects success. 1 An experienced staff is needed to develop and deliver a D-B project. 1 Need project development experience, not just people with construction-only backgrounds. Table B9. (Continued).