Programmatic Implementation of Alternative Contracting Methods (2024)

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.

2024 Programmatic Implementation of Alternative Contracting Methods A Synthesis of Highway Practice Daniel Tran Tran & Associates, LLC Lawrence, KS Christofer M. Harper Black Dog Consultants, LLC Fort Collins, CO Roy Sturgill, Jr. Blue Cyclone, LLC Gilbert, IA Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Ofcials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration Subscriber Categories Administration and Management • Construction • Design N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP SYNTHESIS 625

Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to https://www.mytrb.org/MyTRB/Store/default.aspx Printed in the United States of America NCHRP SYNTHESIS 625 Project 20-05, Topic 54-12 ISSN 0547-5570 ISBN 978-0-309-70965-1 Library of Congress Control Number 2024934541 © 2024 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the graphical logo are trade- marks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, APTA, FAA, FHWA, FTA, GHSA, or NHTSA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the FHWA; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board does not develop, issue, or publish standards or spec- ifications. The Transportation Research Board manages applied research projects which provide the scientific foundation that may be used by Transportation Research Board sponsors, industry associations, or other organizations as the basis for revised practices, procedures, or specifications. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names or logos appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transporta- tion results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to high- way authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniques—the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Department of Transportation, under Agree- ment No. 693JJ31950003. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRB’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRB’s relationship to the National Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of special- ists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs iden- tified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transportation departments, by committees of AASHTO, and by the FHWA. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Special Committee on Research and Innovation (R&I), and each year R&I’s recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Direc- tors and the National Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Academies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement, rather than to substitute for or duplicate, other highway research programs.

e National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. e National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. e National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. e three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. e National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. e Transportation Research Board is one of seven major program divisions of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. e mission of the Transportation Research Board is to mobilize expertise, experience, and knowledge to anticipate and solve complex transportation-related challenges. e Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,500 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. e program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP SYNTHESIS 625 Waseem Dekelbab, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs, and Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Edward T. Harrigan, Senior Program Officer Daniel J. Magnolia, Senior Program Assistant Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications NCHRP PROJECT 20-05 PANEL Joyce N. Taylor, Maine Department of Transportation, Augusta, ME (Chair) Anita K. Bush, Nevada Department of Transportation, Carson City, NV Joseph D. Crabtree, Kentucky Transportation Center (retired), Lexington, KY Mostafa Jamshidi, Nebraska Department of Transportation, Lincoln, NE Jessie X. Jones, Arkansas Department of Transportation, Little Rock, AR Raymond J. Khoury, Virginia Department of Transportation, Richmond, VA Brenda Moore, North Carolina Department of Transportation (retired), Cary, NC Jesus Alberto Sandoval-Gil, Arizona Department of Transportation, Phoenix, AZ Cynthia J. Smith, Mississippi Department of Transportation, Jackson, MS Jack D. Jernigan, FHWA Liaison Jim T. McDonnell, AASHTO Liaison Stephen F. Maher, TRB Liaison Brian Roberts, TRB Liaison TOPIC 54-12 PANEL Paul Chung, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA Hongtao Dang, Washington State University, Pullman, WA Jay J. Hietpas, Minnesota Department of Transportation, St. Paul, MN Carrie Lavallee, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, Boston, MA Christine Mizioch, AI Engineers, Charlestown (Boston), MA Raymond S. Tritt, California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA Keli Wylie, Arkansas Department of Transportation, Little Rock, AR John Huyer, FHWA Liaison Robert J. Shea, TRB Liaison C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S

ABOUT THE NCHRP SYNTHESIS PROGRAM Highway administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which information already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and practice. This infor- mation may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to highway administrators and engineers. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day- to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evalu ating such useful information and to make it available to the entire highway community, the American Association of State High- way and Transportation Officials—through the mechanism of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program—authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, NCHRP Project 20-05, “Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Practices,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an NCHRP report series, Synthesis of Highway Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. FOREWORD By Edward T. Harrigan Staff Officer Transportation Research Board Alternative contracting methods (ACMs), including design-build (D-B), construction manager/ general contractor (CM/GC), and public-private partnerships (P3s), have added a wide range of options for state departments of transportation (DOTs) to consider when delivering projects. DOTs have traditionally used the design-bid-build (D-B-B) method, by awarding a contract for construction to the lowest bidder based on agency-designed plans. The D-B-B delivery method is now so engrained in local, state, and national agency processes, standards, and contracts that most agencies are organized around this one delivery model. Thus, implementing ACMs warrants different mindsets and approaches to processes, standards, risk allocations, and contracts to reach successful project outcomes. While some DOTs have focused on a single project to test an ACM or have developed each ACM project on an individual or one-by-one basis, other DOTs have developed agency-wide programmatic approaches to build and maintain consistency when implementing ACMs across multiple projects or regions. This consistency brings greater efficiency and familiarity for agency staff, stakeholders, and industry participants. But whether, or how, an agency chooses to establish a programmatic approach to implementing ACM projects varies from one agency to the next. The objective of this synthesis is to document state DOT practices of programmatic approaches to ACMs. Information for this study was gathered through a literature review, a survey of state DOTs, and follow-up interviews with selected DOTs. Case examples of six state DOTs provide additional information on practices of programmatic approaches to ACMs. Daniel Tran of Tran & Associates, LLC, collected and synthesized the information and wrote the report, supported by Christofer M. Harper, Black Dog Consultants, LLC, and Roy Sturgill, Jr., Blue CyClone, LLC. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on page iv. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records engineering considerations and practices that were accept- able within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand.

1 Summary 5 Chapter 1 Introduction 6 Synthesis Objective, Goals, and Scope 6 Synthesis Methodology 7 Synthesis Organization 8 Chapter 2 Literature Review 8 Overview of Alternative Contracting Methods 11 Organizational Structures and Policies for Utilizing ACMs 14 ACM Selection Approaches 16 Programmatic Approaches to ACMs 24 Summary 25 Chapter 3 Results from the Survey Questionnaire 26 Overview of Alternative Contracting Methods 31 Programmatic Approaches to ACMs 35 Guidance and Policies for Programmatic Approaches to ACMs 41 Benefits and Risks of Programmatic Approaches to ACMs 48 Summary 50 Chapter 4 Case Examples 50 Selection of Case Examples 51 California Department of Transportation 55 Massachusetts Department of Transportation 60 Minnesota Department of Transportation 64 North Carolina Department of Transportation 69 Ohio Department of Transportation 74 Washington State Department of Transportation 78 Summary 79 Chapter 5 Summary of Findings 79 Summary of Findings from the Study 83 Suggestions for Future Research 84 References 86 Abbreviations and Acronyms 88 Appendix A National Survey Questionnaire 98 Appendix B Individual Survey Responses 129 Appendix C Case Example Questionnaire C O N T E N T S