Effects of Contract Procurement Factors on Performance of Transportation Projects

Cost and schedule savings are the main measures of a project’s success. Several factors affect the cost and schedule performances in a construction project, such as design changes, material, labor and equipment shortages, unpredictable weather conditions, and errors & omissions in contract documents.Some studies have shown that either the construction cost or the schedule performance of a project was dependent on the procurement factors, namely: bid cost, number of bidders, the bid cost deviation between the first and second bidder, the liquidated damage rate per day, the type of a contract, and the project location. However, a comprehensive study on the combined effect of procurement factors on performance metrics has not been yet conducted. Therefore, this study collected all the available contract procurement factors to determine the combined effect of these factors on the construction cost and the schedule performances. In addition, the multiple linear regression models within the study were developed to predict the performance metrics based on these factors. For this study, the project data completed between the year 2000 and 2016 were collected from two state department of transportations (DOTs): Texas and Florida. The results showed that not only cost growth but also schedule growth had a significant correlation between the liquidated damage rate per day, the type of a contract funding, the type of a contractor, and the location of a project. The validation process showed that the models developed during this study could predict project performance metrics accurately. Further research is recommended with more state DOTs data to check whether the relationships between the procurement factors and project performance metrics are similar to those found in this study

Evaluation of Alternative Project Delivery Methods in Water and Wastewater Projects

The United States (U.S.) is facing significant challenges in addressing aging water infrastructure. Most of the drinking water infrastructure is reaching the end of their useful lives. The American Water Works Association (AWWA) estimated that it will cost about $1 trillion to repair or replace drinking water pipes. Over the next 20 years, it will cost about$298 billion to fix or expand pipes of the nation\u27s wastewater and storm-water systems (AWWA, 2012). Owners, engineers, and contractors are using Alternative Project Delivery (APD) methods - e.g., Design-Build Construction Management-at-Risk Construction Management/General Contractor- to build water and wastewater projects in order to save time, cost, and improve the quality of the projects. The purpose of the research was to find the owners\u27 satisfaction levels regarding various benefits related to APD methods as well as different obstacles in using these methods in water and wastewater projects. In addition to this, it was to determine the different satisfaction level of APD methods experienced by different levels of respondents as well as by type of project delivery method experience. A survey questionnaire was prepared and emailed to 455 utility owners to determine their assessments about these project delivery methods. The results showed the majority of respondents were satisfied with various benefits provided by the APD methods. They also showed that Project Staff was significantly more satisfied with APD methods than Utility Manager. Design-Build users were significantly more satisfied with the quality of completed project than Construction Management-at-Risk users. In addition, Statistical analysis of the responses revealed important insight to interested parties of the water industry