Strengthening Construction Management in the Rural Rehab Line of Business

The Five Key ObservationsObservation#1: Rural rehab success emanated from positive thinking and persistent implementationObservation #2: Almost every RHRO would benefit from a substantial increase in the per unit funding available, especially in light of the forthcoming HUD HOME requirement to establish written rehab standards in ten subcategories.Observation #3: A smartphone and tablet with 20 to 40 apps is the rehab specialist's Swiss Army knife. They are our, GPS, calculator, spec writer, office lifeline in case of danger, camera, clock, cost estimator calendar and a hundred other single-purpose but very important uses.Observation #4: NeighborWorks® Rural Initiative could provide a clearinghouse for success techniques targeted to rural rehab. Each month it might focus on a specific aspect of rehab management; inspection checklists in January, green specs in February, feasibility checklist in March, contractor qualification questionnaires in April and so on.Observation #5: Even with most components of in-house contractor success formula in place, per the Statistic Research Institute 53% of construction firms go out of business with in the first 4 years. It remains a very risky model that requires significant; funding, staff experience, administrative support and risk tolerance.Three Rehab Production Models And Their AlternativesThis middle section restates the introduction and methodology and offers a detailed review of the Traditional Rehab Specialist, Construction Management Of Subcontractor and the In-House General Contractor production models .for each model the article provides: definition and staffing pattern, design roles and tasks for each major player, benefits and challenges, alternative models and finally recommendations for successful implementationFocus TopicsDuring our interview process, three ideas surfaced that were best served with a mini discussion of the topic rather than being embedded in the already large middle section.The three topics are; software and technology, management of community relations – marketing and quality control, and budget solution

Review of Erosion and Sedimentation Control Programs in the Piscataqua Region

The Piscataqua Region Estuaries Partnership (PREP) seeks to minimize adverse impacts to water resources associated with construction site development activities. In order to achieve this goal, PREP must understand the strengths and weaknesses of existing erosion and sedimentation control (E&SC) programs in the 52 municipalities of the PREP water shed (Figure 1-1). A detailed understanding of the existing E&SC programs will enable PREP and other stakeholders to identify and implement actions to improve E&SC programs and minimize adverse impacts. This report provides a review and assessment of existing erosion and sedimentation control programs and a set of recommendations for improving these programs. Our approach in conducting the review was to obtain available federal, state and municipal programs data and to interview people who work with E&SC programs on a daily basis, including state, municipal, construction contractor and site inspector staff. A statement of the problem, an introduction to applicable regulations, and a description of our project approach are provided below

Guidelines for testing and release procedures

Guidelines and procedures are recommended for the testing and release of the types of computer software efforts commonly performed at NASA/Ames Research Center. All recommendations are based on the premise that testing and release activities must be specifically selected for the environment, size, and purpose of each individual software project. Guidelines are presented for building a Test Plan and using formal Test Plan and Test Care Inspections on it. Frequent references are made to NASA/Ames Guidelines for Software Inspections. Guidelines are presented for selecting an Overall Test Approach and for each of the four main phases of testing: (1) Unit Testing of Components, (2) Integration Testing of Components, (3) System Integration Testing, and (4) Acceptance Testing. Tools used for testing are listed, including those available from operating systems used at Ames, specialized tools which can be developed, unit test drivers, stub module generators, and the use of format test reporting schemes

A requirements engineering framework for integrated systems development for the construction industry

Computer Integrated Construction (CIC) systems are computer environments through which collaborative working can be undertaken. Although many CIC systems have been developed to demonstrate the communication and collaboration within the construction projects, the uptake of CICs by the industry is still inadequate. This is mainly due to the fact that research methodologies of the CIC development projects are incomplete to bridge the technology transfer gap. Therefore, defining comprehensive methodologies for the development of these systems and their effective implementation on real construction projects is vital. Requirements Engineering (RE) can contribute to the effective uptake of these systems because it drives the systems development for the targeted audience. This paper proposes a requirements engineering approach for industry driven CIC systems development. While some CIC systems are investigated to build a broad and deep contextual knowledge in the area, the EU funded research project, DIVERCITY (Distributed Virtual Workspace for Enhancing Communication within the Construction Industry), is analysed as the main case study project because its requirements engineering approach has the potential to determine a framework for the adaptation of requirements engineering in order to contribute towards the uptake of CIC systems