Best Risk Management Practice by joj13098

VIEWS: 20 PAGES: 60

More Info
									              Motivating Success

             A Toolkit for Performance Measurement

             Major Projects

             Reporting Pro - Forma

             Development Phase
             version 2.0
                  Apr-09




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                        Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
                     Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators


Scheme Name
Package name if applicable
Month - year


Project Manager
Supplier
Approx. Tender Value


Procurement approach



                                                             signed             date

Supplier Representative & Position

Project Manager

HA Representative & Position if
NOT Project Manager




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                      Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
                                   Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

                                                  1. PRODUCT                                                     View
                                                                                                                           Owner
           Capability /behaviour measured           No.    Description                             (0 - 10)   Attachment

Design and construct the physical road asset        1.1    To design a scheme which satisfies HA
                                                           requirements                                           1


                                                                              Overall Score



    No                                                    Comments and Evidence                                                    No   Comments and Evidence cont…




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 1                                                                                                                                              return to    Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                            score
PRODUCT 1.1
Purpose :

To design a scheme which satisfies HA requirements
Quality Standard Evidence
Products
     Appraisal summary table
     Environmental statement
     Road safety Audit
     Geotechnical investigation report
     Geotechnical design report
     Preliminary design
     Pre construction design
     As built design
     Draft orders
     Public inquiry statement & “evidence”
     Public inquiry handling objections
Other Evidence
     Whole life cost consideration
     Balance between non conformance to DMRB and innovation
     Structures options report


Other Information to be considered
     Compliance with statements in original tender submission




 Purpose: To design a scheme which satisfies H A requirements                                                                                              return to
                                                                                                                                                             score
   Score                       Satisfaction                                                    Quality Criteria
                              Totally satisfied          Scheme design fully satisfies (or is likely to fully satisfy) all HA/DfT requirements without
    10                                                   compromise .It represents the lowest whole life cost solution , is within the scheme budget
                                                         and is based on robust data including geological and traffic surveys. ASTs are fully
                                                         described and quantified (where appropriate) and there is confidence that the scheme will
                                                         exceed all of them. NO and NS are fully engaged and support the design .Departures from
                                                         standard are supported by a business case and are accepted by HA and DfT key
                                                         stakeholders.
                               Highly satisfied          Scheme design satisfies (or is likely to satisfy) HA/DfT key requirements but minor whole life
     8                                                   cost or other compromise is likely or has been necessary. It is based on appropriate
                                                         supporting survey data for this stage of the design evolution. ASTs are fully described and
                                                         quantified (where appropriate) and scheme is considered likely to deliver all of them. NO
                                                         and NS have been fully consulted and departures from standard have been agreed.

                                Just satisfied           Scheme design satisfies or is likely to satisfy HA/DfT key requirements but more significant
     6                                                   compromise has been, or is likely to be, necessary including whole life cost. Design is based
                                                         on robust survey data for this stage of the design evolution. ASTs are described and
                                                         quantified (where appropriate) and scheme is considered likely to deliver key targets. NO
                                                         and NS have been fully consulted and departures from standard have been agreed as
                                                         necessary and cost effective.
                     Neither satisfied or dissatisfied   This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
     5                                                   with the design. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.

                            Slightly dissatisfied        Some minor aspects of the scheme design are currently unacceptable. This concern should
     4                                                   be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting
                                                         minutes/action points.
                              Very dissatisfied          One key aspect of the scheme design is currently unacceptable. The project manager
     2                                                   should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA
                                                         SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

                             Totally dissatisfied        More than one key aspect of the scheme design is currently unacceptable. The project
     0                                                   manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them         return to
                                                         of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.                          score




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                               Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
                            Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

                                                     2. SERVICE                                                     View
                                                                                                                              Owner
      Capability /behaviour measured                                                                             Attachment
                                                     No.                  Description                 (0 - 10)
Maintain effective HA stakeholder                    2.1    To engage effectively with the project
engagement                                                  manager and Integrated Team.                             3
                                                     2.2    To engage effectively with Network
                                                            Operations and Network services.                         4
Maintain effective external stakeholder              2.3    To engage effectively with external
engagement                                                  stakeholders                                             5
Manage sustainability                                2.4    To manage sustainability effectively
                                                                                                                     6
Manage risk                                          2.5    To manage risk and opportunities
                                                            effectively                                              7
Manage the supply chain                              2.6    To manage the contractor‟s supply chain
                                                            effectively                                              8
Apply innovation and VFM                             2.7    To facilitate continuous improvement
                                                            through innovation                                      10

                                                                                 Overall Score


 No                                                        Comments and Evidence                                                      No   Comments and Evidence cont…




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 3                                                                                                                                                   Evidence / Corrective Actions
SERVICE 2.1                                                                                                                                       return to
                                                                                                                                                    score
Purpose
To engage effectively with HA stakeholders

Quality Standard Evidence
   Communications plan
   Communication with project manager and integrated project team
   Pro active nature of planned communications
   Timeliness of communication
   Methodology for requesting and acting on feedback
   Accountability and responsibility
   Succession plans
   Contact arrangements


Source of Data
   Project records
   Correspondence
   Minutes of meetings
   Feedback received


Other Information to be considered




Purpose: To engage effectively with the project manager and Integrated Team.                                                                       return to
                                                                                                                                                     score
Score                  Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria
  10                 Totally satisfied               All aspects of engagement with the project manager and the HA integrated team are
                                                     excellent. The PM has a single point of contact for accountability on all relevant matters
                                                     but is kept fully updated on responsibility across the supply chain. Succession plans on
                                                     key roles are agreed with HA. Contractor totally embraces team working and provides
                                                     timely and pro active progress reports (with an appropriate balance between good and
                                                     bad news) and reliable, considered, professional unbiased advice and forecasts drawing
                                                     on their expertise.
  8                   Highly satisfied               There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations
                                                     Contractor fulfils the criteria of 6.In addition, an appropriate named longer term
                                                     succession plan and shorter absence cover term plan is agreed with the PM to ensure
                                                     continuity throughout the duration of the scheme. Communication is timely, reliable and
  6                    Just satisfied                effective. communicates clearly and pro actively with HA team, the project manager is
                                                     Contractor
                                                     kept fully informed and there is a „no surprise‟ culture .Relative responsibility and
                                                     accountabilities are clear and key contractor personnel are accessible when required.
  5         Neither satisfied or dissatisfied        This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with design compliance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by
                                                     the project manager.

  4                Slightly dissatisfied             Some minor aspects of communication and/or engagement are currently unsatisfactory.
                                                     This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of
                                                     progress meeting minutes/action points.

  2                  Very dissatisfied               A key aspect of communication and/or engagement is currently unsatisfactory. The
                                                     project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior
                                                     management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

  0                 Totally dissatisfied             More than one aspect of communication and/or engagement is currently unsatisfactory.
                                                     The project manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to
                                                     inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 4                                                                                                                                                      Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                      return to
SERVICE 2.2                                                                                                                                             score
Purpose
To engage effectively with NO and NS

Quality Standard Evidence
    Communication with project manager and integrated project team
    Communication with NO and NS
    Pro active nature of planned communications
    Timeliness of communication
    Methodology for requesting and acting on feedback
    Accountability and responsibility
    Succession plans
    Contact arrangements
Products
Preliminary sources study
Geotechnical investigation report
Geotechnical feedback report
Early structures notification
Structures options report
Approvals – principles checklist
Design and check certificates checklist
Construction compliance certificate checklist
Source of Data
    Project records
    Correspondence
    Minutes of meetings
    Feedback received
Other Information to be considered




Purpose: To engage effectively with Network Operations and Network services.                                                                         return to
Score                   Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria                                            score

  10                  Totally satisfied               All NOD/NS issues relating to the scheme have been addressed fully. Contractor has fully
                                                      engaged through the project manager and conflicting objectives have been resolved
                                                      based on robust data on best value. All aspects of scheme handover are anticipated to be
                                                      totally satisfactory.
   8                   Highly satisfied               There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations.
                                                      Contractor fulfils the criteria of 6.In addition, all reasonable steps have been taken to be
                                                      pro active, allow reasonable time for response, optimise JTR through construction and
                        Just satisfied                Contractor has engaged with NODcost effective departures. manager on relevant
                                                      minimise unnecessary and/or non and NS through the project
   6
                                                      issues, including those relating to communication, whole life cost, safety, reliability,
                                                      departures and maintenance. Relevant targets and measurement have been agreed for
                                                      the impact of JTR on the network affected directly and indirectly during the construction
                                                      phase. Scheme handover is anticipated to be satisfactory

   5          Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                      dissatisfied with engagement. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the
                                                      project manager.

   4                Slightly dissatisfied             Some minor aspects of engagement are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be
                                                      itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting
                                                      minutes/action points.

   2                  Very dissatisfied               A key aspect of engagement is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have
                                                      escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail
                                                      should also be recorded in the scheme risk register..

   0                 Totally dissatisfied             More than one aspect of engagement is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager
                                                      should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this
                                                      concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




           d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                                                                                                                                         return to
ATTACHMENT 5                                                                                                                                                         Evidence / Corrective Actions
SERVICE 2.3
Purpose
To engage effectively with external stakeholders
Quality Standard Evidence
   Communications plan
   Contractor involvement in public consultation
   Contractor involvement in Public Inquiry
   Contractor involvement in draft orders
   Communication with project manager and integrated project team
   Pro active nature of planned communications
   Methodology for requesting and acting on feedback
   Traveller routine updates
Source of Data
   Project records
   Feedback received
Other Information to be considered
   Stakeholders include
   -Road users
   -Local communities
   -The general public
   -The media
   -Public Inquiry team




Purpose: To engage effectively with external stakeholders                                                                                                return to
Score                   Satisfaction                                                         Quality Criteria                                              score

 10                   Totally satisfied              All aspects of external stakeholder management, including communication, are excellent.
                                                     The need for a public inquiry has normally been avoided where this can be achieved cost
                                                     effectively .If it is unavoidable because of the nature of the scheme, contractor has
                                                     demonstrated exceptional cost effective and pro active action to minimise objections.
                                                     This has, or is likely to, significantly assist the successful resolution of a PI. Feedback
                                                     received from external stakeholders is positive on matters within the contractor‟s control.

  8                    Highly satisfied              Contractor fulfils the criteria of 6 .In addition, positive stakeholder influencing capability is
                                                     demonstrated and structured feedback is pro actively obtained in all relevant
                                                     circumstances and acted upon. External stakeholder feedback on matters within
                                                     contractor‟s control is generally positive.

  6                         Just                     Contractor‟s approach to engagement minimises avoidable negative feedback, including
                          satisfied                  complaints. Communication is structured, planned, relevant, timely, clear, unambiguous
                                                     and tailored to the appropriate audience. Flexibility is in evidence over choice of medium,
                                                     venue and timing. Structured feedback is encouraged and acted upon. Pro active
                                                     stakeholder management plans are in place. Travellers are kept fully informed. PCF
                                                     communication products are satisfactory.

  5         Neither satisfied or dissatisfied        This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager.

  4                  Slightly dissatisfied           Some minor aspects of communication and/or stakeholder management are currently
                                                     unsatisfactory. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded
                                                     in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.


  2                   Very dissatisfied              A key aspect of communication and/or stakeholder management is currently
                                                     unsatisfactory. The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to
                                                     contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the
                                                     scheme risk register.

  0                  Totally dissatisfied            More than one aspect of communication and/or stakeholder management is currently
                                                     unsatisfactory. The project manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and
                                                     HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme
                                                     risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 6                                                                                                                                        return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                      score
SERVICE 2.4
Purpose
To manage sustainability effectively

Quality Standard Evidence
   Record of environmental determination
   Environmental public notices
   Environmental Assessment report stages 1 2, 3.
   Environmental statement
   Environmental statement non technical summary
   Compliance with HA requirements to measure scheme carbon footprint
   Compliance with construction environmental management plan (CEMP)
   Considerate constructors assessment results
Source of data
   PCF products
   Project records
   Contractor records
   Considerate constructors assessments
   Tender documents


Other Information to be considered
   Compliance with statements in tender submission
   CEEQUAL, sustainability awards and gold considerate constructor‟s criteria are not a pre requisite
   of a score of 10 if there are other factors that warrant this score.




Purpose: To manage sustainability effectively                                                                                                       return to
                                                                                                                                                      score
Score                   Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria

 10                   Totally satisfied              All aspects of sustainability are excellent. The project sustainability strategy is clear
                                                     across all areas of the supply chain , aligns with the overall HA sustainability action plan
                                                     and focuses on the triple bottom line(economy, social, environment).Contractor fully
                                                     engages with HA ,the public and their supply chain to ensure that the project and client
                                                     sustainable aspirations are achieved. Scheme will normally be registered on CEEQUAL
                                                     and/or have won an external sustainability award and /or have a considerate constructor‟s
                       Highly satisfied              assessment of „gold‟.
                                                     There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations. The
  8
                                                     scheme fulfils the criteria of 6.In addition, it will have a considerate constructor‟s
                                                     assessment equating to „silver‟ and participates in and supports wider industry sustainable
                                                     initiatives and bodies such as WRAP.
  6                     Just satisfied               Plans are in place covering material sourcing, recycling, waste management, travel and
                                                     management of resources. Relevant scheme measures are being produced which link
                                                     into HA‟s sustainability strategy. Agreed tender undertakings are being delivered. PCF
                                                     environmental products are satisfactory

   5        Neither satisfied or dissatisfied        This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager.

  4                  Slightly dissatisfied           Minor aspects of sustainability or supporting measurement are currently unsatisfactory.
                                                     This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of
                                                     progress meeting minutes/action points.

  2                   Very dissatisfied              One key aspect of sustainability or supporting measurement is currently unsatisfactory.
                                                     The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior
                                                     management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

  0                  Totally dissatisfied            More than one key aspect of sustainability or supporting measurement is currently
                                                     unsatisfactory. The project manager should have written to the appropriate contract and
                                                     HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme
                                                     risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 7                                                                                                                                          return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                        score
SERVICE 2.5
Purpose
To manage risk and opportunities effectively ( see attachment 7)

Quality Standard Evidence
   Risk management plan
   Risk register
   Quantitative risk assessment
   Qualitative risk assessment
   Evidence of review meetings showing dates ,actions and effectiveness of follow up-both for
   contractor and their supply chain

   Evidence of training and awareness sessions
   Evidence of contractor being pro active across their supply chain
   Senior management involvement
   Relationship between compensation events and risk register


Source of Data
   PCF products
   Details of risk meetings including sub contractors
   Tender documentation
   Risk register and related documentation
   Compensation events


Other Information to be considered




Purpose: To manage risk and opportunities effectively                                                                                                 return to
Score                  Satisfaction                                                         Quality Criteria                                            score

 10                  Totally satisfied               All aspects of risk management are excellent .Contractor pro actively manages risk with
                                                     their supply chain and can demonstrate that all risks within their control have been
                                                     managed successfully and that all opportunities have been taken .All risks materialising
                                                     were initially recorded as potential on the risk register or are so unusual that they could
                                                     not have been anticipated. Approach taken has been documented and contractor supports
                                                     HA in delivering continuous improvement and promoting best risk management practice.

  8                   Highly satisfied               There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations
                                                     .Contractor fulfils the criteria of 6, demonstrates that significant avoidable risks are being
                                                     managed effectively and significant opportunities have been taken Risk review is
                                                     demonstrated to be pro active, timely and effective.

  6                    Just satisfied                Risks and opportunities have been identified, documented ,assessed and managed in a
                                                     structured way in accordance with the MP Risk Management Manual .They are reviewed
                                                     monthly through the development and construction phases. Appropriate mitigation plans
                                                     are in place with named owners. All PCF products are satisfactory. Agreed tender
                                                     undertakings are being delivered

  5         Neither satisfied or dissatisfied        This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager.

  4                Slightly dissatisfied             Minor aspects of risk management are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be
                                                     itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting
                                                     minutes/action points.

  2                  Very dissatisfied               A key aspect of risk management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should
                                                     have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO.
                                                     Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

  0                 Totally dissatisfied             More than one key aspect of risk management is currently unsatisfactory. The project
                                                     manager should have written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them
                                                     of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 8                                                                                                                                          return to     Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                        score
SERVICE 2.6
Purpose
To manage the contractor’s supply chain effectively

Quality Standard Evidence
   Tender submission-risk, reward and other tender undertakings
   Criteria for selecting sub contractors
   Evidence of input from sub contractors
   Evidence of contractors being paid on time
   Reasonableness of sub contractors pay awards.
   Details of performance monitoring process
   Evidence of process being used effectively and results shared with HA
   Evidence relating to two way appraisal system being operated effectively




Source of Data
   Tender documents
   Sub contractor payment history
   Contractors records
   Sub contractor‟s performance assessments


Other Information to be considered




Purpose: To manage the contractor’s supply chain effectively                                                                                          return to
                                                                                                                                                        score
Score                  Satisfaction                                                        Quality Criteria

 10                  Totally satisfied               All aspects of supply chain management are excellent. Contractor is pro active in sharing
                                                     all relevant information with HA including details of sub contractors, nature of the
                                                     contracts, financial information and sub contractor performance. The operation of a robust
                                                     and effective two way performance appraisal system with all members of their supply
                                                     chain is visible to HA and under performance is managed effectively from an early stage.


  8                   Highly satisfied               There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations
                                                     .Contractor fulfils the criteria in 6, is providing key information promptly on request and is
                                                     pro active in sharing other additional relevant information without request. Contractor
                                                     actively encourages input from all members of the integrated team, including supply chain
                                                     partners and has a robust performance measurement process in place for key members
                                                     of their supply chain.
  6                    Just satisfied                Level 2 and 3 supply chain procurement is based on original tender submission on
                                                     conditions aligned to HA in terms of outcomes and risk /reward mechanisms. Agreed
                                                     tender undertakings are being delivered. Selection criteria include relevant experience,
                                                     capability and performance. Contractor actively encourages input from key members of
                                                     the integrated team, including supply chain partners. Accountability and flexibility in
                                                     evidence with supply chain partners being paid on time. Contractor ensures that annual
                                                     pay awards for their sub contractors are reasonable .

  5          Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager.

  4                Slightly dissatisfied             Minor aspects of supply chain management are currently unsatisfactory. This concern
                                                     should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress
                                                     meeting minutes/action points.

  2                  Very dissatisfied               A key aspect of supply chain management is currently unsatisfactory. The project
                                                     manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management
                                                     and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.


  0                 Totally dissatisfied             More than one key aspect of supply chain management is currently unsatisfactory. The
                                                     project manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to
                                                     inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




ATTACHMENT 10                                                                                                                                           return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                          score




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                                                                                                                                         score
SERVICE 2.8
Purpose
To facilitate continuous improvement through innovation

Quality Standard Evidence
   Evidence of value engineering /management workshops being undertaken at appropriate intervals
   and attended by appropriate personnel.


   Evidence of managing costs down and other toolkits being used

   Evidence of appropriately calculated benefits feeding directly into scheme forecasts

   Evidence of approach being fully visible to HA and contractor supporting HA in deploying best
   practice(where appropriate)


Source of Data
   Minutes/action points from workshops
   Workshop outputs
   PCF products
   Contractor records
   Scheme records
   Scheme time/cost forecasts
   Scheme budget
   Value plan
   Value Opportunities Register


Other Information to be considered
Innovation cost saving is cumulative for the phase and should be measured against the central cost of the scheme budget.
Time saving is also cumulative for the phase and should be measured against the agreed scheme plan.




Purpose:To facilitate continuous improvement through innovation                                                                                      return to
                                                                                                                                                       score
Score                   Satisfaction                                                        Quality Criteria

  10                  Totally satisfied               Contractor can demonstrate significant ongoing innovation relating to safety, efficiency,
                                                      cost or time benefit across the whole of their supply chain. Value Opportunities Register
                                                      confirms innovation savings in terms of time and /or cost >10% of the scheme
                                                      Programme and/or budget.. Alternatively, other innovation which does not have cost or
                                                      time benefit is significant and has application to other schemes. Detail is fully shared and
                                                      contractor pro actively supports HA in applying best practice across other schemes where
                                                      appropriate.
  8                    Highly satisfied               There is evidence that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations.
                                                      Innovation is applied across the whole of contractor‟s supply chain. Value Opportunities
                                                      Register confirms innovation savings in terms of time and /or cost of 3-10% of the
                                                      scheme Programme and/or budget. Detail is shared fully with HA.

  6                     Just satisfied                A structured mechanism is in place (including value management processes) to
                                                      encourage the use and evaluation of innovation and continuous improvement. Effective
                                                      reviews are undertaken at appropriate intervals. Whole life cost is fully considered.
                                                      Managing Down Costs and other toolkits are applied as appropriate. Value Opportunities
                                                      Register confirms innovation savings in terms of time and /or cost of up to 2.99% of the
                                                      scheme Programme and/or budget.
  5          Neither satisfied or dissatisfied         This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                      dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                      documented by the project manager

  4                 Slightly dissatisfied             Some minor aspects of innovation are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be
                                                      itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting
                                                      minutes/action points.

  2                   Very dissatisfied               A key aspect of innovation is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have
                                                      escalated this concern in writing to the contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO.
                                                      Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

  0                  Totally dissatisfied             More than one key aspect of innovation is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager
                                                      should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this
                                                      concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




           d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                               Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
                            Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

                                                    3. RIGHT FIRST TIME                                                 View
                                                                                                                                 Owner
      Capability /behaviour measured                                                                                Attachment
                                                        No.                  Description                 (0 - 10)
Manage effective quality processes and                  3.1    To deploy and manage quality processes
controls                                                                                                               11
Demonstrate effectiveness of quality                    3.2    To confirm effectiveness of Quality
management through audit review                                processes through independent audit                     12
Deliver RFT                                             3.3    To ensure that key information provided
                                                               does not require avoidable rework                       13


                                                                                    Overall Score


 No                                                           Comments and Evidence                                                      No   Comments and Evidence cont…




         d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 11                                                                                                                                       return to     Evidence / Corrective Actions
RIGHT FIRST TIME 3.1
Purpose
To deploy and manage quality processes

Quality Standard Evidence
   Contractors documented quality management plan
   Sub contractor‟s quality management plans
   Compliance with tender undertakings
   Pro active ownership of quality processes across supply chain
   Quality failures /defects reported
   Root cause analysis and corrective action arising from quality failures
   Award from external body (where appropriate)


Source of Data
   Contractor‟s records
   Quality defects records
   Contract documents


Other Information to be considered




Purpose:To deploy and manage quality processes                                                                                                        return to
Score                   Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria                                             score

 10                   Totally satisfied              All aspects of quality management are excellent, with evidence of proactive ownership at
                                                     senior management level. Quality processes across the whole contractor‟s supply chain
                                                     are visible to the HA and proven to be fully effective. Processes are aligned with the HA
                                                     which has confidence that all aspects of the contract will be delivered. Quality failures
                                                     are minor and resultant action is fully visible to HA. Contractor has fully deployed a
                                                     recognised QM process (such as lean)

  8                    Highly satisfied              There is evidence that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations. Contractor fulfils
                                                     the criteria of 6. In addition, quality processes across the whole of their supply chain are
                                                     fully visible and proven to be effective. Processes are aligned with HA which has
                                                     confidence that key quality aspects of the contract should be delivered. Quality failures
                                                     are minor and resultant action is fully visible to HA. Contractor has fully deployed a
                                                     recognised QM process such as lean.

  6                     Just satisfied               An overall quality plan is in place and implemented which identifies agreed QM controls,
                                                     process and timescale for quality audits. Robust arrangements are in place for
                                                     identifying and quantifying quality failures, taking appropriate corrective action and
                                                     implementing lessons learned. Agreed tender undertakings are being delivered

  5          Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager

  4                 Slightly dissatisfied            Some minor aspects of quality management are currently unsatisfactory. This concern
                                                     should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress
                                                     meeting minutes/action points.

  2                   Very dissatisfied              A key aspect of quality management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager
                                                     should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA
                                                     SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

  0                 Totally dissatisfied             More than one key aspect of quality management is currently unsatisfactory. The project
                                                     manager should have written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them
                                                     of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 12                                                                                                                                    return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                   score
RIGHT FIRST TIME 3.2
Purpose
To confirm effectiveness of Quality processes through independent audit

Quality Standard Evidence
   Timetable of planned audits
   Timetable of actual audits
   Qualification of audit team
   Reporting lines of audit team
   Nature of recommendations
   Resolution of audit recommendations


Source of Data
   Contractor records
   Audit reports
   Defects reports


Other Information to be considered
   Results should be used to validate the scoring for attachment 11
   It is accepted that the contractor‟s personnel will routinely undertake audits of quality management
   systems.
   The independence reference relates to the reporting lines and organisational responsibility of the


Purpose: To confirm effectiveness of quality management through audit                                                                            return to
                                                                                                                                                   score
Score                   Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria

 10                   Totally satisfied              Structured quality audits are undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply
                                                     chain, all results are shared promptly and pro actively with HA and no issues have been
                                                     reported requiring corrective action. Past audit recommendations have been resolved
                                                     within an appropriate timescale.
  8                    Highly satisfied              Quality audits are undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply chain .All
                                                     results are shared promptly with HA and only minor issues have been reported requiring
                                                     corrective action. Past audit recommendations have been resolved within an appropriate
                                                     timescale.
  6                     Just satisfied               Quality management systems are in place with routine appropriate audits planned
                                                     across the whole supply chain and undertaken on time. The audit team is appropriately
                                                     qualified and reporting lines demonstrate scheme independence (eg reporting to a Board
                                                     member). . Past audit recommendations have been resolved within an appropriate
                                                     timescale.

  5          Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with quality audits. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the
                                                     project manager

  4                 Slightly dissatisfied            Some minor aspects of quality audit are currently unsatisfactory This includes a quality
                                                     audit undertaken up to one month late, more significant non compliance reported or past
                                                     audit recommendations not resolved within an appropriate timescale. This concern
                                                     should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress
                                                     meeting minutes/action points.

  2                   Very dissatisfied              A key aspect of quality management is currently unsatisfactory This includes quality
                                                     audits undertaken 1-2 months late, key significant non compliance reported or previous
                                                     recommendations not resolved within 2 months. The project manager should have
                                                     escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail
                                                     should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

  0                  Totally dissatisfied            Quality audit fails to achieve level 2. The project manager should have written to the
                                                     appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also
                                                     be itemised in the scheme risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 13                                                                                                                                      return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                     score
RIGHT FIRST TIME 3.3
Purpose
To ensure that key information provided does not require avoidable rework

Quality Standard Evidence
   Key information is that which has the ability to impact on time ,cost or quality of project deliverables or which is required for the
   management of the overall programme .It includes (but is not exclusive to) the following:
        -PCF products
        -Design and survey data
      -Response to complaints and objections
      -Early warnings
      -Other non financial information
      -Quotations requested
      -EVM and MST data
      -Con H reports
      -Monthly accruals
      -Other financial information


Source of Data
   Project records
   Feedback received from MP Commercial, MP Finance and other directorates
   Recorded actions from progress meetings


Other Information to be considered
   It is not possible to generalise on the determination of minor and major iterations. Requires the judgment of the project manager,
   taking into account the nature of the rework and the clarity of the requirement/brief




Purpose: To ensure that key information provided does not require rework.                                                                          return to
                                                                                                                                                     score
Score                   Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria

 10                   Totally satisfied              >90% of key Information provided within the period is accepted as right first time with the
                                                     remainder only requiring minor avoidable iteration.

  8                    Highly satisfied              80-89% of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with
                                                     the remainder only requiring minor avoidable iteration.

  6                     Just satisfied               70-79 % of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with
                                                     the remainder requiring only minor avoidable iteration.

  5          Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager

  4                  Slightly dissatisfied           60-69 % of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with
                                                     the remainder requiring minor avoidable iteration, or one item requires significant
                                                     avoidable rework. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and
                                                     recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

  2                   Very dissatisfied              50-59 % of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with
                                                     the remainder requiring only minor avoidable iteration, or two items requiring significant
                                                     avoidable rework. The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to
                                                     contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the
                                                     scheme risk register.

  0                  Totally dissatisfied            Performance fails to achieve score level 2.The project manager should have written to
                                                     the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should
                                                     also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                               Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
                            Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

                                                       4. COST                                                      View
                                                                                                                              Owner
      Capability /behaviour measured                                                                             Attachment
                                                     No.                  Description                 (0 - 10)
Deliver within cost budget                           4.1    To complete the scheme within the
                                                            scheme budget                                           15
                                                     4.2    To complete the development phase
                                                            within the development phase budget                     16
Forecast current financial year spend                4.3    To forecast reliably for the current
accurately                                                  financial year                                          18
Report correct costs                                 4.4    To ensure that monthly assessments,
                                                            scheme out turn forecasts, Con H
                                                            analysis, accruals, unit cost and final                 19
                                                            account submissions are accurate.


                                                                                  Overall Score


  No                                                       Comments and Evidence                                                      No   Comments and Evidence cont…




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                                                                                                                                 return to
ATTACHMENT 15                                                                                                                                      score
                                                                                                                                                             Evidence / Corrective Actions
COST 4.1
Purpose
To complete the scheme within the scheme budget

Quality Standard Evidence
   The scheme budget
   Forecast out turn costs
   Strategic change adjustment agreed by the SRO


Source of Data
   Oracle
   Scheme records on other agreed strategic change
   SHARE
   Section 5.2 of the Contract Guidance Manual
   Section 1.7 of Works Information


Other Information to be considered
   The base for this measure is the scheme budget described in section 5.2 of the Contract Guidance Manual and set out in section 1.7 of
   Works Information. The budget is only adjusted in the event that a strategic risk occurs

   An example might be a significant change in scope such as duel two lanes changing to duel three lanes. The SRO must agree to any
   change to the scheme budget as a base for this measure.

   Scheme costs should be reviewed monthly through the construction phase and updated where appropriate. Through the development
   phase, scheme costs should be reviewed in accordance with PCF.




Purpose: To complete the scheme within the scheme budget                                                                                         return to
                                                                                                                                                   score
 Score                    Satisfaction                                                     Quality Criteria

  10                    Totally satisfied              Forecast scheme cost is >5% below the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic
                                                       change agreed by the SRO


   8                     Highly satisfied              Forecast scheme cost is 3- 5 % below the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic
                                                       change agreed by the SRO


   6                      Just satisfied               Forecast scheme cost is up to 2.99 % below the scheme budget after adjusting for
                                                       strategic change agreed by the SRO.


   5           Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                       dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                       documented by the project manager
   4                  Slightly dissatisfied            Forecast scheme cost is up to 4.99% above the scheme budget after adjusting for
                                                       strategic change agreed by the SRO. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk
                                                       register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.
   2                    Very dissatisfied              Forecast scheme cost is 5-10% above the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic
                                                       change agreed by the SRO. The project manager should have escalated this concern in
                                                       writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in
                       Totally dissatisfied            the scheme risk register.
                                                       Performance fails to achieve score level 2. The project manager should have written to
   0
                                                       the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should
                                                       also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




            d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 16                                                                                                                                     return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                    score
COST 4.2
Purpose
To complete the development phase within the development phase budget

Quality Standard Evidence
    Contractor‟s costs included in the phase budget
    Forecast phase out turn for contractor‟s costs in the development phase
    Phase cost review and update
    Adjustments for agreed change control


Source of Data
    Oracle
    ConH
    Compensation events
    Phase records on other agreed change control events
    SHARE


Other Information to be considered
The base for this measure is the phase budget agreed by HIB. There may be circumstances where there is a significant and fundamental
change in output or scope which is entirely outside the contractor‟s control and not covered by a risk provision .In these circumstances, the
SRO must agree to any change to the development phase budget a base for this measure.



Purpose: To achieve the Cost Performance Index (CPI) target through construction                                                                  return to
                                                                                                                                                    score
 Score                     Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria

  10                     Totally satisfied              Forecast development phase cost is reviewed/ updated monthly and forecast cost is >5%
                                                        below agreed phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control events
                                                        agreed by the SRO.

   8                      Highly satisfied              Forecast development phase cost is reviewed /updated monthly and forecast cost is 3- 5
                                                        % below agreed phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control events
                                                        agreed by the SRO.

   6                       Just satisfied               Forecast development phase cost reviewed/updated monthly and forecast cost is up to
                                                        2.99% below agreed phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control
                                                        events agreed by the SRO.

   5            Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                        dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                        documented by the project manager

   4                   Slightly dissatisfied            Forecast phase cost has not been reviewed /updated for two months and/or forecast is up
                                                        to 4.99% above agreed phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control
                                                        agreed by the SRO .This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and
                                                        recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points

   2                     Very dissatisfied              Forecast phase cost has not been reviewed /updated for three months and/or forecast
                                                        cost is 5-10% above agreed phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change
                                                        control agreed by the SRO. The project manager should have escalated this concern in
                                                        writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in
                                                        the scheme risk register.

   0                    Totally dissatisfied            Performance fails to achieve score level 2. The project manager should have written to
                                                        the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should
                                                        also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




             d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                                                                                                                                     return to
ATTACHMENT 18                                                                                                                                          score
                                                                                                                                                                 Evidence / Corrective Actions
COST 4.3
Purpose
To forecast reliably for the current financial year

Quality Standard Evidence
   Agreed spend profile
   Change control agreed including compensation events


Source of Data
   Oracle
   Con H
   HA Business Plan financial data


Other Information to be considered
   The base for this measure is the cumulative spend profile within the year agreed by HA. There may be circumstances where there is a
   significant and fundamental change in output or scope which is entirely outside the contractor‟s control and not covered by a risk
   provision .In these circumstances, the SRO must agree to any change to the spend profile used as a base for this measure.
   During the construction phase, costs may decrease because of an improved CPI or increase because of an improved SPI. Where this
   has been agreed with HA and fully accounts for the cost variation, the Project Manager may increase the reliability score to 5.This
   adjustment is intended to avoid conflict with other measures but the cap of 5 reflects concern that the changes might have been
   anticipated before the start of the year.




Purpose: To forecast reliably for the current financial year                                                                                         return to
                                                                                                                                                       score
 Score                    Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria

  10                    Totally satisfied              Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is, < ±1% of the amount stated
                                                       in the cumulative spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after adjusting for
                                                       relevant material change control events agreed by the SRO.

   8                     Highly satisfied              Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±3% of the amount
                                                       stated in the cumulative spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after
                                                       adjusting for relevant material change control events agreed by the SRO..

   6                      Just satisfied               Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±5 % of the amount
                                                       stated in the cumulative spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after
                                                       adjusting for relevant material change control events agreed by the SRO..

   5           Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                       dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                       documented by the project manager

   4                  Slightly dissatisfied            Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±7% of the amount
                                                       stated in the cumulative spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after
                                                       adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.. This concern should
                                                       be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting
                                                       minutes/action points.

   2                    Very dissatisfied              Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±10% of the amount
                                                       stated in the cumulative spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after
                                                       adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.. The project manager
                                                       should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA
                                                       SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.


   0                   Totally dissatisfied            Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year exceeds the amount stated in
                                                       the cumulative spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year by ±10% after
                                                       adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.. The project manager
                                                       should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this
                                                       concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




            d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 19                                                                                                                                          return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                         score
COST 4.4
Purpose
To ensure that monthly assessments, scheme out turn forecasts, Con H analysis, accruals, unit cost
and final account submissions are accurate.

Quality Standard Evidence
   Monthly assessments
   Con H data
   Unit cost data
   Monthly accruals
   Final accounts
   Scheme cost out turn forecasts


Source of Data
   Con H forms
   Oracle
   Feedback from Employers Agent
   Feedback from Commercial Division
   Feedback from MP Finance


Other Information to be considered
   Completeness and accuracy of monthly accruals




Purpose: To ensure that monthly assessments, scheme out turn forecasts, Con H analysis, accruals,                                                      return to
                                                                                                                                                         score
unit cost and final account submissions are accurate.
 Score                    Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria

  10                    Totally satisfied              All cost information requested is supplied accurately across the contractor‟s whole supply
                                                       chain to the detail required by HA .Contractor is proactive in offering relevant supporting
                                                       information which has not been requested and facilitating /supporting HA verification .A
                                                       full audit trail is available to verify costs. All assessment costs claimed in the period are
                                                       both allowable and due in accordance with the contract.All costs provided in the period
                                                       have been confirmed as accurate.

   8                     Highly satisfied              There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations.
                                                       Contractor satisfies the conditions of 6 for themselves and any of their supply chain
                                                       whose costs represent a material cost to HA. No cost has been challenged on monthly
                                                       assessments.

   6                      Just satisfied               An audit trail is available to verify contractor‟s costs claimed. The requirement to
                                                       challenge monthly assessments or other financial data submitted is minimal. Monthly
                                                       Oracle accruals and Con (H) returns are accurate and complete.

   5           Neither satisfied or dissatisfied       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                       dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                       documented by the project manager

   4                  Slightly dissatisfied            Costs permanently disallowed within the period up to 1.99 % of that claimed .This concern
                                                       should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress
                                                       meeting minutes/action points.

   2                    Very dissatisfied              Costs permanently disallowed within the period 2- 5 % of that claimed The project
                                                       manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management
                                                       and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.


   0                   Totally dissatisfied            Costs permanently disallowed within the period > 5 % of that claimed. The project
                                                       manager should have written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them
                                                       of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




            d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
                             Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

                                                       5. TIME                                                      View
                                                                                                                              Owner
       Capability /behaviour measured                                                                            Attachment
                                                     No.                  Description                 (0 - 10)
Deliver within time budget                           5.1    To complete the scheme within the
                                                            agreed contract completion date                         21
                                                     5.2    To complete the development phase
                                                            within the agreed timescale                             22
Provide timely information                           5.3    To ensure timely response to agreed key
                                                            actions and information required by HA
                                                            and other relevant stakeholders within                  24
                                                            the period


                                                                                Overall Score


  No                                                       Comments and Evidence                                                      No   Comments and Evidence cont…




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 21                                                                                                                                    return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                   score
TIME 5.1
Purpose
To complete the scheme within the agreed contract completion date
Quality Standard Evidence
   Overall scheme agreed project timescale
   Agreed change control events
   Agreed compensation events
   Schedule of work completed

Source of Data
   Project plan
   Project records
   Change control
   Contractor‟s time forecasts
   Contract completion date

Other Information to be considered
Planned = Overall scheme duration agreed with PM up to agreed completion date
Forecast = Agreed monthly assessment of actual duration
Example
Contract completion date 1.12.09 – 36 months scheme duration


Scheme completed in 32 months


Time saving 36 – 32 = 11% = score of 10
               36


Other Information to be considered
The base for this measure is the contract completion date. There may be circumstances where there is a significant and fundamental
change in output or scope which is entirely outside the contractor‟s control and not covered by a risk provision .In these circumstances, the
SRO must agree to any change to the contract completion date used as a base for this measure.


Purpose:To complete the scheme within the agreed contract completion date                                                                        return to
                                                                                                                                                   score
 Score                    Satisfaction                                                    Quality Criteria

  10                    Totally satisfied             Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion > 5% earlier than contract completion
                                                      date after adjusting for agreed material change control including compensation events
                                                      agreed by the SRO.

   8                     Highly satisfied             Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion 3- 5 % earlier than contract completion
                                                      date after adjusting for agreed material change control including compensation events
                                                      agreed by the SRO.
   6                      Just satisfied              Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion up to 2.99% earlier than contract
                                                      completion date after adjusting for agreed material change control including
                                                      compensation events agreed by the SRO.
   5           Neither satisfied or dissatisfied      This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                      dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                      documented by the project manager
   4                  Slightly dissatisfied           Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion up to 4.99% later than contract
                                                      completion date after adjusting for agreed material change control including
                                                      compensation events agreed by the SRO. This concern should be itemised in the
                                                      scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action
                                                      points.
   2                    Very dissatisfied             Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion 5-10 % later than contract completion
                                                      date after adjusting for agreed material change control including compensation events
                                                      agreed by the SRO. The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing
                                                      to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the
                                                      scheme risk register.

   0                   Totally dissatisfied           Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion >10% later than contract completion
                                                      date after adjusting for agreed material change control including compensation events
                                                      agreed by the SRO. The project manager should have written to the appropriate
                                                      contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised
                                                      in the scheme risk register.




           d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 22                                                                                                                                     return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                    score
TIME 5.2
Purpose
To complete the development phase within the agreed timescale
Quality Standard Evidence
   Development phase agreed project timescale
   Agreed change control events
   Agreed compensation events
   Schedule of work completed


Source of Data
   Project phase plan
   Project records
   Change control
   Contractor‟s time forecasts

Other Information to be considered
The base for this measure is the agreed completion date for the development phase. There may be circumstances where there is a
significant and fundamental change in output or scope which is entirely outside the contractor‟s control and not covered by a risk provision
.In these circumstances, the SRO must agree to any change to the phase completion date used as a base for this measure
Example
Planned = Overall phase duration agreed with PM
Forecast = Agreed monthly assessment of actual duration

Phase completion date 1.12.09 – 36 months scheme duration


Phase completed in 32 months


Time saving 36 – 32 = 11% = score of 10
                  36



Purpose: To complete the development phase within the agreed timescale                                                                            return to
                                                                                                                                                    score
 Score                    Satisfaction                                                    Quality Criteria

  10                    Totally satisfied             Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion > 5% earlier than the agreed phase
                                                      completion date after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.


   8                     Highly satisfied             Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion 3- 5 % earlier than the agreed phase
                                                      completion date after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.


   6                      Just satisfied              Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion up to 2.99% earlier than the agreed
                                                      phase completion date after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the
                                                      SRO
   5           Neither satisfied or dissatisfied      This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                      dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                      documented by the project manager

   4                   Slightly dissatisfied          Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion up to 4.99% later than the agreed phase
                                                      completion date after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.
                                                      This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of
                                                      progress meeting minutes/action points.

   2                    Very dissatisfied             Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion 5-10 % later than the agreed phase
                                                      completion date after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.
                                                      The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior
                                                      management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.


   0                   Totally dissatisfied           Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion >10% later than the agreed phase
                                                      completion date after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.
                                                      The project manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors
                                                      to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




           d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 24                                                                                                                                      return to
                                                                                                                                                     score     Evidence / Corrective Actions

TIME 5.3
Purpose
To ensure timely response to agreed key actions and information required by HA and other relevant
stakeholders within the period
Quality Standard Evidence
   All information should be considered, including
   -Timely forecasts of phase/scheme cost out turn
       -PCF products
       -Design and survey data
       -Response to complaints and objections
       -Early warnings
       -Other non financial information
       -Quotations requested
       -EVM and MST data
       -Con H reports
       -Monthly accruals
       -Other financial information
Stakeholders include
       -HA project team               -HA Finance
       -Network Operations           -Network Services
       -Information Directorate
       -DfT
       -Road users                    -Local communities
       -The general public           -The media
       -Public Inquiry team
       -MP Programme Services Team
Source of Data
   Project plan
   Correspondence reporting system
   PQ and complaint response times
   Minutes of progress meetings (actions carried forward)
   Feedback from Commercial Division
   Feedback from Finance(accruals etc)
   Feedback from NO/NS/ID
Other Information to be considered


Purpose: To ensure timely response to agreed key actions and information required by HA and other                                                  return to
                                                                                                                                                     score
 Score                   Satisfaction                                                     Quality Criteria

  10                   Totally satisfied             Response time within the period generally >2 days earlier than agreed date due

  8                     Highly satisfied             Response time within the period generally 1-2 days earlier than agreed date due

  6                      Just satisfied              Response time within the period generally in line with agreed date due

   5          Neither satisfied or dissatisfied      This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager

   4                 Slightly dissatisfied           Response time generally up to 1 day later than agreed due date on key material. This
                                                     concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of
                                                     progress meeting minutes/action points.
   2                   Very dissatisfied             Response time generally 2-3 days later than agreed due date on key material or on any
                                                     individual item which is particularly important. The project manager should have
                                                     escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail
                                                     should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

   0                  Totally dissatisfied           Response time generally >3 days later than agreed date due on key material or any
                                                     individual item which is particularly important. The project manager should have written to
                                                     the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should
                                                     also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
                             Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

                                                    6. HEALTH & SAFETY                                                 View
                                                                                                                                 Owner
       Capability /behaviour measured                                                                               Attachment
                                                        No.                 Description                  (0 - 10)
Manage H&S processes                                    6.1    To manage health and safety processes -
                                                               Development                                             25
Demonstrate effectiveness of H&S                        6.2    To confirm effectiveness of H&S
management                                                     management through independent audit                    26
                                                        6.3    To minimise reportable accidents
                                                                                                                       27


                                                                                   Overall Score




  No                                                          Comments and Evidence                                                      No   Comments and Evidence cont…




         d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 25                                                                                                                                      return to
                                                                                                                                                     score
HEALTH & SAFETY 6.1                                                                                                                                                  Evidence / Corrective Actions
Purpose
To manage health and safety processes - Development

Quality Standard Evidence
   Criteria to be considered with standards to be achieved as set out in CDM 2007 Appendix A
   ‟Competence „ for stage 1 Assessment -criteria 1-14.

CDM Criteria
   H&S policy and organisation
   Arrangements
   Source of advice
   Training and information
   Individuals qualifications and experience
   Monitoring .audit and review
   Workforce involvement
   Accident reporting ,investigation and enforcement action
   Sub contractor consultation procedures
   Sub contractor competency assessments
   Hazard elimination and risk control
   Risk assessment procedural arrangements covering identification and control. Sample risk assessments, safe systems of work and
   method statements.

   Co operation/co ordination with others
   Welfare: H&S policy commitment, contracts with welfare facility providers.
   Co operation/co ordination with others
   Welfare: H&S policy commitment, contracts with welfare facility providers.


   PCF products
   Pre construction information
   Form 10 notification
   Construction H&S plan
   H&S file
   Maintenance /repair strategy statement


Other H&S legislation


Source of data.
   Products and contractor records
   H&S signed policy document and supporting detail
Other Information to be considered.




Purpose: To manage health and safety processes                                                                                                     return to score

 Score                     Satisfaction                                                   Quality Criteria

   10                    Totally satisfied           All aspects of H&S management are excellent, including welfare standards consistently
                                                     applied at all levels .Contractor is fully committed to job specific training, safe working
                                                     practices and the safety of the public. This includes director site safety tours. H&S
                                                     failures are minor and resultant action is fully visible to HA. Contractor can demonstrate
                                                     active monitoring of their supply chain arrangements and intervention (where necessary).
                                                     Scheme has normally received an award from a recognised body for safety
                                                     management.

   8                     Highly satisfied            There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations.
                                                     Contractor fulfils the criteria of 6 and can demonstrate enhanced application of both CDM
                                                     2007 Appendix 4-criteria 1-14 and welfare standards applied at all levels ,including their
                                                     supply chain.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
6                    Just satisfied            An overall H&S policy and plan is produced and implemented for the public and all
                                               personnel working on visiting or travelling through the area affected by the scheme. This
                                               includes site survey work and meetings attended by members of the public. Plan is fully
                                               compliant with CDM 2007 Appendix 4 „Competence criteria‟-in particular Regulation
                                               11(Duties of designers)- and all other relevant legislation .Contractor can demonstrate
                                               competence training and regular H&S updates for themselves and their supply chain.
                                               Robust arrangements are in place for identifying risks though risk assessments /audit
                                               and reviewing near misses, taking appropriate corrective action and implementing
                                               lessons learnt. Tender promises are being delivered.
5        Neither satisfied or dissatisfied     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                               dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                               documented by the project manager

4                Slightly dissatisfied         Some less significant aspects of H&S management, including welfare issues, are
                                               unsatisfactory but these do not represent a significant risk of injury . This concern should
                                               be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting
                                               minutes/action points.

2                 Very dissatisfied            Some key aspects of H&S management including welfare issues, are unsatisfactory. The
                                               project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior
                                               management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.


0                Totally dissatisfied          Performance fails to achieve level 2.The project manager should have written to the
                                               appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also
                                               be itemised in the scheme risk register.


                                                                                                                                              return to




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
ATTACHMENT 26                                                                                                                                   return to   Evidence / Corrective Actions
                                                                                                                                                  score
HEALTH & SAFETY 6.2
Purpose
To confirm effectiveness of H&S management through independent audit

Quality Standard Evidence
   Independent audit report documentation
   HA site visit reports
   Risk assessment documentation
   Follow up action documentation
   Evidence of concern resolution
   Number of HSE enforcement notices issued


Other Information to be considered
   It is not possible to generalise when specific audit findings should be categorised as red or amber and each area of concern identified
   should be assessed taking into account the likelihood of the risk materialising and it‟s severity. Remedial action should be
   commensurate with these factors.




Purpose: To confirm the effectiveness of H&S management through audit review                                                                    return to
                                                                                                                                                  score
 Score                     Satisfaction                                                  Quality Criteria

  10                     Totally satisfied            Structured H&S audits undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply chain.
                                                     Audit team is appropriately trained / qualified and reporting lines demonstrate
                                                     independence. All results shared promptly with HA and no issues reported requiring
                                                     corrective action. Past audit recommendations resolved within an appropriate timescale.


   8                     Highly satisfied            Structured H&S audits undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply chain,
                                                     Audit team is appropriately trained / qualified and reporting lines demonstrate
                                                     independence. All results shared promptly with HA and only minor issues reported
                                                     requiring corrective action .Past audit recommendations resolved within an appropriate
                                                     timescale.

   6                       Just satisfied            H&S systems in place with routine audits planned across the whole supply chain and
                                                     undertaken on time. Audit team is appropriately trained / qualified and reporting lines
                                                     demonstrate independence. Past audit recommendations resolved within an appropriate
                                                     timescale.

   5           Neither satisfied or dissatisfied     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager

   4                   Slightly dissatisfied         H&S audits undertaken up to 2 weeks late ,more significant issues reported requiring
                                                     corrective action or past minor recommendations not resolved within an appropriate
                                                     timescale The project manager should have written to the contractor to itemise this
                                                     concern which should also be recorded in the scheme risk register

   2                    Very dissatisfied            H&S audits undertaken 2-4 weeks late, serious issues reported requiring urgent
                                                     corrective action or past significant recommendations not resolved within an appropriate
                                                     timescale. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in
                                                     the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

   0                   Totally dissatisfied          Performance fails to achieve level 2.The project manager should have written to the
                                                     appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also
                                                     be itemised in the scheme risk register




                                                                                                                                                return to




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                                                                                                                               return to
ATTACHMENT 27                                                                                                                                    score
                                                                                                                                                           Evidence / Corrective Actions
HEALTH & SAFETY 6.3
Purpose
To minimise reportable accidents

Quality Standard Evidence


Source of data.
   AIRS


Other Information to be considered
   RIDDOR target will be reduced year on year to reflect continuous improvement
   Results shoul be considered to verify scoring in table 25




Purpose: To minimise reportable accidents (RIDDORs)                                                                                            return to
                                                                                                                                                 score
 Score                     Satisfaction                                                  Quality Criteria

   10                    Totally satisfied           Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR is < 0.10


   8                     Highly satisfied            Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR 0.10- 0.265


   6                       Just satisfied            Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR equals 0.266-0.27.


   5           Neither satisfied or dissatisfied     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor
                                                     dissatisfied with contractor performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be
                                                     documented by the project manager

   4                   Slightly dissatisfied         Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR 0.271 -0.35. This concern
                                                     should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress
                                                     meeting minutes/action points.
   2                    Very dissatisfied            Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR 0.351-0.40. The project
                                                     manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management
                                                     and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

   0                   Totally dissatisfied          Data is not recorded monthly on AIRS or rolling 12 months AFR > 0.4. The project
                                                     manager should have written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them
                                                     of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




          d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                  Motivating Success Toolkit - Development Phase
               Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

                                            360 FEEDBACK
   No.       Capability /behaviour measured                      Description                     (0 - 10)
    1      Clarity of goals / needs           - Sense of purpose
                                              - Client communicatiates clear understanding of
                                              his requirements
                                              - Communicates expectations
                                              - Communicates business case

    2      Understanding Needs                - Business acumen / understanding Business
                                              - Knowledge and nderrstanding of supplier
                                              culture
                                              - understanding of what maks them money
    3      Staff Resources                    - Responsivenss to queries
                                              - Accessible client expertise
                                              - Availability to key staff

    4      Adaptability                       - Enables supplier to be efficient and effective




    5      Teamwork                           - Close working relationships
                                              - Partnering and partnering team skills
                                              - Team working to manage Stakeholders
                                              - Risk sharing
    6      Sponsorship                        - Ability to manage expectations in the client
                                              organisation
                                              - Problem solving

    7      Payment                            - Promt payment
                                              - Correct payment


    8      Overall Performance                - General comments / any points not covered by
                                              above indicators




                                                                        Overall Score


  No                                       Comments and Evidence




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                                            Motivating Success Toolkit - Construction Phase
                                                        Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators

Scheme Name

Package name

      Supplier

        Month
Categaory           Capability /behaviour measured          No.                                               Description                                               (0 - 10)
                    Design and construct the physical              To design a scheme which satisfies HA requirements
  PRODUCT                                                    1.1
                    road asset
  PRODUCT                                                    1.0                                                                                   Overall Score
                    Maintain effective HA stakeholder              To engage effectively with the project manager and Integrated Team.
   SERVICE                                                   2.1
                    engagement
                    Maintain effective HA stakeholder              To engage effectively with Network Operations and Network services.
   SERVICE                                                   2.2
                    engagement
                    Maintain effective external                    To engage effectively with external stakeholders
   SERVICE                                                   2.3
                    stakeholder engagement
   SERVICE          Manage sustainability                    2.4   To manage sustainability effectively
   SERVICE          Manage risk                              2.5   To manage risk and opportunities effectively
   SERVICE          Manage the supply chain                  2.6   To manage the contractor‟s supply chain effectively
   SERVICE          Apply innovation and VFM                 2.7   To facilitate continuous improvement through innovation
  SERVICE                                                    2.0                                                                                   Overall Score
                    Manage effective quality processes             To deploy and manage quality processes
      RFT                                                    3.1
                    and controls
                    Demonstrate effectiveness of QA                To confirm effectiveness of Quality processes through independent audit
      RFT                                                    3.2
                    through audit review
      RFT           Deliver RFT                              3.3   To ensure that key information provided does not require avoidable rework
      RFT                                                    3.0                                                                                   Overall Score
    COST            Deliver within cost budget               4.1   To complete the scheme within the scheme budget
    COST            Deliver within cost budget               4.2   To achieve the Cost Performance Index (CPI) target through construction
                    Forecast current financial year                To forecast reliably for the current financial year
    COST                                                     4.3
                    spend accurately
                    Report correct costs                           To ensure that monthly assessments, scheme out turn forecasts, Con H analysis, accruals, unit cost
    COST                                                     4.4
                                                                   and final account submissions are accurate.
    COST                                                     4.0                                                                                   Overall Score
      TIME          Deliver within time budget               5.1   To complete the scheme within the agreed contract completion date
      TIME          Deliver within time budget               5.2   To complete the development phase within the agreed timescale
                    Provide timely information                     To ensure timely response to agreed key actions and information required by HA and other relevant
      TIME                                                   5.3
                                                                   stakeholders within the period
      TIME                                                   5.0                                                                                   Overall Score
      H&S           Manage H&S processes                     6.1   To manage health and safety processes - Construction
                    Demonstrate effectiveness of H&S               To confirm effectiveness of H&S management through independent audit
      H&S                                                    6.2
                    management
                    Demonstrate effectiveness of H&S               To minimise reportable accidents
      H&S                                                    6.3
                    management
      H&S                                                    6.0                                                                                  Overall Score
ALL   (excludes 360)                                                                                                                     Overall Scheme Score


                                                                   - Sense of purpose
                                                                   - Client communicatiates clear understanding of his requirements
      360                    Clarity of goals / needs         1    - Communicates expectations
                                                                   - Communicates business case
                                                                   - Business acumen / understanding Business
      360                     Understanding Needs             2    - Knowledge and nderrstanding of supplier culture
                                                                   - understanding of what maks them money
                                                                   - Responsivenss to queries
      360                         Staff Resources             3
                                                                   - Accessible client expertise
      360                            Adaptability             4    - Enables supplier to be efficient and effective
                                                                   - Close working relationships
                                                                   - Partnering and partnering team skills
      360                            Teamwork                 5
                                                                   - Team working to manage Stakeholders
                                                                   - Risk sharing
                                                                   - Ability to manage expectations in the client organisation
      360                           Sponsorship               6    - Problem solving
                                                                   - Promt payment
      360                              Payment                7    - Correct payment
                                                                   - General comments / any points not covered by above indicators
      360                      Overall Performance            8

      360                                                    360                                                                                   Overall Score

      d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
                                     Motivating Success Toolkit - Construction Phase
                                 Quantitative Evidenced Contractor Performance Indicators
Version 1.07
Produced by: M. G. Bennett


Section               Capability /behaviour measured                                  Opt. Dev   Con.   Covering detail
1 Product             Design and construct the physical road asset                    n/a    x     x    Attachment 1
                                                                                      n/a          x    Attachment 2
2 service             Maintain effective HA stakeholder engagement                    n/a    x     x    Attachment 3
                                                                                      n/a    x     x    Attachment 4
                      Maintain effective external stakeholder engagement              n/a    x     x    Attachment 5
                      Manage sustainability                                           n/a    x     x    Attachment 6
                      Manage risk                                                     n/a    x     x    Attachment 7
                      Manage the supply chain                                         n/a    x     x    Attachment 8
                      Manage JTR through construction                                 n/a          x    Attachment 9
                      Apply innovation and VFM                                        n/a    x     x    Attachment 10
3 Right First         Manage effective quality processes and controls                 n/a    x     x    Attachment 11
time                  Demonstrate effectiveness of quality management through audit   n/a    x     x    Attachment 12
                      review
                      Deliver RFT                                                     n/a    x     x    Attachment 13
                                                                                      n/a          x    Attachment 14
4.Cost                Deliver within cost budget                                      n/a    x     x    Attachment 15
                                                                                      n/a    x          Attachment 16
                                                                                      n/a          x    Attachment 17
                      Forecast current financial year spend accurately                n/a    x     x    Attachment 18
                      Report correct costs                                            n/a    x     x    Attachment 19
                                                                                      n/a          x    Attachment 20
5.Time                Deliver within time budget                                      n/a    x     x    Attachment 21
                                                                                      n/a    x          Attachment 22
                                                                                      n/a          x    Attachment 23
                      Provide timely information                                      n/a    x     x    Attachment 24
6 H&S                 Manage H&S processes                                            n/a    x     x    Attachment 25
                      Demonstrate effectiveness of H&S management                     n/a    x     x    Attachment 26
                                                                                      n/a    x     x    Attachment 27
                      Manage safety of the public and road users                                   x    Attachment 28




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.1.1 - PRODUCT - ATTACHMENT 1
                                                                                                                            Development Phase
Purpose
To design a scheme which satisfies HA requirements

Quality Standard Evidence
Products
  Appraisal summary table
  Environmental statement
  Road safety Audit
  Geotechnical investigation report
  Geotechnical design report
  Preliminary design
  Pre construction design
  As built design
  Draft orders
  Public inquiry statement & “evidence”
  Public inquiry handling objections

Other Evidence
 Whole life cost consideration
 Balance between non conformance to DMRB and innovation
 Structures options report

Other Information to be considered
 Compliance with statements in original tender submission



Purpose: To design a scheme which satisfies H A requirements
  Score      Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria
                Totally     Scheme design fully satisfies (or is likely to fully satisfy) all HA/DfT requirements without compromise .It
   10          satisfied    represents the lowest whole life cost solution , is within the scheme budget and is based on robust data
                            including geological and traffic surveys. ASTs are fully described and quantified (where appropriate) and there
                            is confidence that the scheme will exceed all of them. NO and NS are fully engaged and support the design
                            .Departures from standard are supported by a business case and are accepted by HA and DfT key
                            stakeholders.
                 Highly     Scheme design satisfies (or is likely to satisfy) HA/DfT key requirements but minor whole life cost or other
    8          satisfied    compromise is likely or has been necessary. It is based on appropriate supporting survey data for this stage of
                            the design evolution. ASTs are fully described and quantified (where appropriate) and scheme is considered
                            likely to deliver all of them. NO and NS have been fully consulted and departures from standard have been
                            agreed.
             Just satisfied Scheme design satisfies or is likely to satisfy HA/DfT key requirements but more significant compromise has
    6                       been, or is likely to be, necessary including whole life cost. Design is based on robust survey data for this stage
                            of the design evolution. ASTs are described and quantified (where appropriate) and scheme is considered likely
                            to deliver key targets. NO and NS have been fully consulted and departures from standard have been agreed
                            as necessary and cost effective.
                Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with the design.
    5         satisfied or The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.
              dissatisfied
                Slightly    Some minor aspects of the scheme design are currently unacceptable. This concern should be itemised in the
    4         dissatisfied scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

                  Very         One key aspect of the scheme design is currently unacceptable. The project manager should have escalated
    2          dissatisfied    this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the
                               scheme risk register.
                 Totally       More than one key aspect of the scheme design is currently unacceptable. The project manager should have
    0          dissatisfied    written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be
                               itemised in the scheme risk register.

    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.1.2 - PRODUCT - ATTACHMENT 2
                                                                                                                           Development Phase
Purpose
To construct a scheme which satisfies HA requirements

Quality Standard Evidence

 Products
   Appraisal summary table
   Road safety audit
   Construction Compliance certificate checklist
   Other evidence
   Whole life cost
   Balance between non conformance with DMRB and innovation
   Compliance with scheme design
   Compliance with made orders
   Compliance with environment statement
   Compliance with commissioning report
   Compliance with maintenance and repair strategy statement
   Evidence relating to workmanship and speed of ,defect correction
Other Information to be considered
 Compliance with quality statements in original tender submission
 Number of instances of proceeding at risk (e.g. start bridge construction before design AIP has been formally approved)
 Outstanding accommodation works at road opening



Purpose: To construct an asset which satisfies H A requirements
 Score       Satisfaction                                                   Quality Criteria
                Totally   All aspects of physical construction to date are excellent, including quality management. Full compliance is
  10           satisfied  being achieved and is planned against scheme design, made orders, environmental statement, commissioning
                          report and the maintenance and repair strategy statement. There is a high level of confidence that scheme
                          handover will be totally satisfactory.
                Highly    All key aspects of physical construction to date are totally satisfactory, including quality management, and the
   8           satisfied  remainder are satisfactory. Some unavoidable departures have been made or are planned relating to scheme
                          design, made orders, environmental statement, commissioning report and the maintenance and repair strategy
                          statement. These are minor, could not have been anticipated at the design stage and have been endorsed by
                          key HA and DfT stakeholders. There should be no significant concerns at scheme handover.

            Just satisfied All aspects of construction to date are satisfactory, including quality management. Some cost effective
   6                       unavoidable departures have been made or are planned relating to scheme design made orders, environmental
                           statement, commissioning report and the maintenance and repair strategy statement. These are more
                           significant but could not have been anticipated at the design stage .They have been endorsed by key HA and
                           DfT stakeholders.
               Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Rationale for
   5         satisfied or scoring 5 should be documented by the project mgr.
             dissatisfied
               Slightly    Some minor aspects of physical construction are currently unacceptable. This includes avoidable departures
   4         dissatisfied which should have been anticipated at the design stage. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk
                           register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.
                Very       One key aspect of physical construction is currently unacceptable. This includes avoidable departures which
   2         dissatisfied should have been anticipated at the design stage. The project manager should have escalated this concern in
                           writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be in the scheme risk register.

                Totally       More than one key aspect of physical construction is currently unacceptable. This includes avoidable
   0          dissatisfied    departures which should have been anticipated at the design stage. The project manager should have written
                              to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in
                              the scheme risk register


   d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.2.1 - SERVICE - ATTACHMENT 3
                                                                                                                            Development Phase

Purpose
To engage effectively with the project manager and Integrated Team

Quality Standard Evidence
 Communications plan
 Communication with project manager and integrated project team
 Pro active nature of planned communications
 Timeliness of communication
 Methodology for requesting and acting on feedback
 Accountability and responsibility
 Succession plans
 Contact arrangements

Source of Data
 Project records
 Correspondence
 Minutes of meetings
 Feedback received

Other Information to be considered


Purpose: To engage effectively with the project manager and Integrated Team.
  Score      Satisfaction                                                     Quality Criteria
   10           Totally   All aspects of engagement with the project manager and the HA integrated team are excellent. The PM has a
               satisfied  single point of contact for accountability on all relevant matters but is kept fully updated on responsibility across
                          the supply chain. Succession plans on key roles are agreed with HA. Contractor totally embraces team working
                          and provides timely and pro active progress reports (with an appropriate balance between good and bad news)
                          and reliable, considered, professional unbiased advice and forecasts drawing on their expertise.

    8           Highly     There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations Contractor fulfils the
               satisfied   criteria of 6.In addition, an appropriate named longer term succession plan and shorter absence cover term
                           plan is agreed with the PM to ensure continuity throughout the duration of the scheme. Communication is
                           timely, reliable and effective.
    6       Just satisfied Contractor communicates clearly and pro actively with HA team, the project manager is kept fully informed and
                           there is a „no surprise‟ culture .Relative responsibility and accountabilities are clear and key contractor
                           personnel are accessible when required.
    5          Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with design
             satisfied or compliance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.
             dissatisfied
    4          Slightly    Some minor aspects of communication and/or engagement are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be
             dissatisfied itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2            Very         A key aspect of communication and/or engagement is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should
              dissatisfied    have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be
                              recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0           Totally       More than one aspect of communication and/or engagement is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager
              dissatisfied    should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should
                              also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




   d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.2.2 - SERVICE - ATTACHMENT 4
                                                                                                                            Development Phase
Purpose
To engage effectively with NO and NS

Quality Standard Evidence
 Communication with project manager and integrated project team
 Communication with NO and NS
 Pro active nature of planned communications
 Timeliness of communication
 Methodology for requesting and acting on feedback
 Accountability and responsibility
 Succession plans
 Contact arrangements
Products
  Preliminary sources study
  Geotechnical investigation report
  Geotechnical feedback report
  Early structures notification
  Structures options report
  Approvals – principles checklist
  Design and check certificates checklist
  Construction compliance certificate checklist
Source of Data
 Project records
 Correspondence
 Minutes of meetings
 Feedback received

Other Information to be considered


Purpose: To engage effectively with Network Operations and Network services.
  Score       Satisfaction                                                    Quality Criteria
   10            Totally   All NOD/NS issues relating to the scheme have been addressed fully. Contractor has fully engaged through the
                satisfied  project manager and conflicting objectives have been resolved based on robust data on best value. All aspects
                           of scheme handover are anticipated to be totally satisfactory.
     8           Highly    There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations. Contractor fulfils the
                satisfied  criteria of 6.In addition, all reasonable steps have been taken to be pro active, allow reasonable time for
                           response, optimise JTR through construction and minimise unnecessary and/or non cost effective departures.

     6       Just satisfied Contractor has engaged with NOD and NS through the project manager on relevant issues, including those
                            relating to communication, whole life cost, safety, reliability, departures and maintenance. Relevant targets and
                            measurement have been agreed for the impact of JTR on the network affected directly and indirectly during the
                            construction phase. Scheme handover is anticipated to be satisfactory
     5           Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with engagement.
               satisfied or    The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.
               dissatisfied
     4           Slightly      Some minor aspects of engagement are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be itemised in the
               dissatisfied    scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.
     2            Very         A key aspect of engagement is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have escalated this
               dissatisfied    concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme
                               risk register..
     0           Totally       More than one aspect of engagement is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have written to
               dissatisfied    the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the
                               scheme risk register.


    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.2.3 - SERVICE - ATTACHMENT 5
                                                                                                                           Development Phase
Purpose
To engage effectively with external stakeholders

Quality Standard Evidence
 Communications plan
 Contractor involvement in public consultation
 Contractor involvement in Public Inquiry
 Contractor involvement in draft orders
 Communication with project manager and integrated project team
 Pro active nature of planned communications
 Methodology for requesting and acting on feedback
 Traveller routine updates

Source of Data
 Project records
 Feedback received

Other Information to be considered
 Stakeholders include
 -Road users
 -Local communities
 -The general public
 -The media
 -Public Inquiry team



Purpose: To engage effectively with external stakeholders
  Score       Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria
   10            Totally    All aspects of external stakeholder management, including communication, are excellent. The need for a public
                satisfied   inquiry has normally been avoided where this can be achieved cost effectively .If it is unavoidable because of
                            the nature of the scheme, contractor has demonstrated exceptional cost effective and pro active action to
                            minimise objections. This has, or is likely to, significantly assist the successful resolution of a PI. Feedback
                            received from external stakeholders is positive on matters within the contractor‟s control.
    8             Highly    Contractor fulfils the criteria of 6 .In addition, positive stakeholder influencing capability is demonstrated and
                satisfied   structured feedback is pro actively obtained in all relevant circumstances and acted upon. External stakeholder
                            feedback on matters within contractor‟s control is generally positive.
    6              Just     Contractor‟s approach to engagement minimises avoidable negative feedback, including complaints.
                satisfied   Communication is structured, planned, relevant, timely, clear, unambiguous and tailored to the appropriate
                            audience. Flexibility is in evidence over choice of medium, venue and timing. Structured feedback is
                            encouraged and acted upon. Pro active stakeholder management plans are in place. Travellers are kept fully
                            informed. PCF communication products are satisfactory.
    5            Neither    This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly   Some minor aspects of communication and/or stakeholder management are currently unsatisfactory. This
               dissatisfied concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting
                            minutes/action points.
    2             Very      A key aspect of communication and/or stakeholder management is currently unsatisfactory. The project
               dissatisfied manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail
                            should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally    More than one aspect of communication and/or stakeholder management is currently unsatisfactory. The
               dissatisfied project manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this
                            concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.2.4 - SERVICE - ATTACHMENT 6
                                                                                                                             Development Phase
Purpose
To manage sustainability effectively

Quality Standard Evidence
 Record of environmental determination
 Environmental public notices
 Environmental Assessment report stages 1 2, 3.
 Environmental statement
 Environmental statement non technical summary
 Compliance with HA requirements to measure scheme carbon footprint
 Compliance with construction environmental management plan (CEMP)
 Considerate constructors assessment results
 Compliance with HA sustainability toolkits
Source of data
 PCF products
 Project records
 Contractor records
 Considerate constructors assessments
 Tender documents

Other Information to be considered
 Compliance with statements in tender submission
 CEEQUAL, sustainability awards and gold considerate constructor‟s criteria are not a pre requisite of a score of 10 if there are other
 factors that warrant this score.



Purpose: To manage sustainability effectively
  Score      Satisfaction                                                        Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     All aspects of sustainability are excellent. The project sustainability strategy is clear across all areas of the
               satisfied    supply chain , aligns with the overall HA sustainability action plan and focuses on the triple bottom
                            line(economy, social, environment).Contractor fully engages with HA ,the public and their supply chain to
                            ensure that the project and client sustainable aspirations are achieved. Scheme will normally be registered on
                            CEEQUAL and/or have won an external sustainability award and /or have a considerate constructor‟s
                            assessment of „gold‟.
    8            Highly     There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations. The scheme fulfils the
               satisfied    criteria of 6.In addition, it will have a considerate constructor‟s assessment equating to „silver‟ and participates
                            in and supports wider industry sustainable initiatives and bodies such as WRAP.
    6        Just satisfied Plans are in place covering material sourcing, recycling, waste management, travel and management of
                            resources. Relevant scheme measures are being produced which link into HA‟s sustainability strategy. Agreed
                            tender undertakings are being delivered. PCF environmental products are satisfactory
     5          Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Minor aspects of sustainability or supporting measurement are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be
              dissatisfied itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         One key aspect of sustainability or supporting measurement is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager
               dissatisfied    should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also
                               be recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       More than one key aspect of sustainability or supporting measurement is currently unsatisfactory. The project
               dissatisfied    manager should have written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which
                               should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.2.5 - SERVICE - ATTACHMENT 7
                                                                                                                             Development Phase
Purpose
To manage risk and opportunities effectively

Quality Standard Evidence
 Risk management plan
 Risk register
 Quantitative risk assessment
 Qualitative risk assessment
 Evidence of review meetings showing dates ,actions and effectiveness of follow up-both for contractor and their supply chain

  Evidence of training and awareness sessions
  Evidence of contractor being pro active across their supply chain
  Senior management involvement
  Relationship between compensation events and risk register

Source of Data
 PCF products
 Details of risk meetings including sub contractors
 Tender documentation
 Risk register and related documentation
 Compensation events

Other Information to be considered



Purpose: To manage risk and opportunities effectively
  Score       Satisfaction                                                   Quality Criteria
   10            Totally   All aspects of risk management are excellent .Contractor pro actively manages risk with their supply chain and
                satisfied  can demonstrate that all risks within their control have been managed successfully and that all opportunities
                           have been taken .All risks materialising were initially recorded as potential on the risk register or are so unusual
                           that they could not have been anticipated. Approach taken has been documented and contractor supports HA
                           in delivering continuous improvement and promoting best risk management practice.

    8            Highly        There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations .Contractor fulfils the
                satisfied      criteria of 6, demonstrates that significant avoidable risks are being managed effectively and significant
                               opportunities have been taken Risk review is demonstrated to be pro active, timely and effective.
    6        Just satisfied Risks and opportunities have been identified, documented ,assessed and managed in a structured way in
                            accordance with the MP Risk Management Manual .They are reviewed monthly through the development and
                            construction phases. Appropriate mitigation plans are in place with named owners. All PCF products are
                            satisfactory. Agreed tender undertakings are being delivered
    5           Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Minor aspects of risk management are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be itemised in the scheme
              dissatisfied risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.
    2            Very       A key aspect of risk management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have escalated this
              dissatisfied concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme
                            risk register.
    0           Totally     More than one key aspect of risk management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have
              dissatisfied written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be
                            itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.2.6 - SERVICE - ATTACHMENT 8
                                                                                                                            Development Phase
Purpose
To manage the contractor’s supply chain effectively

Quality Standard Evidence
 Tender submission-risk, reward and other tender undertakings
 Criteria for selecting sub contractors
 Evidence of input from sub contractors
 Evidence of contractors being paid on time
 Reasonableness of sub contractors pay awards
 Details of performance monitoring process
 Evidence of process being used effectively and results shared with HA
 Evidence relating to two way appraisal system being operated effectively


Source of Data
 Tender documents
 Sub contractor payment history
 Contractors records
 Sub contractor‟s performance assessments

Other Information to be considered



Purpose: To manage the contractor’s supply chain effectively
  Score      Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     All aspects of supply chain management are excellent. Contractor is pro active in sharing all relevant
               satisfied    information with HA including details of sub contractors, nature of the contracts, financial information and sub
                            contractor performance. The operation of a robust and effective two way performance appraisal system with all
                            members of their supply chain is visible to HA and under performance is managed effectively from an early
                            stage.
    8            Highly     There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations .Contractor fulfils the
               satisfied    criteria in 6, is providing key information promptly on request and is pro active in sharing other additional
                            relevant information without request. Contractor actively encourages input from all members of the integrated
                            team, including supply chain partners and has a robust performance measurement process in place for key
                            members of their supply chain.
    6        Just satisfied Level 2 and 3 supply chain procurement is based on original tender submission on conditions aligned to HA in
                            terms of outcomes and risk /reward mechanisms. Agreed tender undertakings are being delivered. Selection
                            criteria include relevant experience, capability and performance. Contractor actively encourages input from key
                            members of the integrated team, including supply chain partners. Accountability and flexibility in evidence with
                            supply chain partners being paid on time. Contractor ensures that annual pay awards for their sub contractors
                            are reasonable .
    5           Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager.
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Minor aspects of supply chain management are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be itemised in the
              dissatisfied scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         A key aspect of supply chain management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have
               dissatisfied    escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded
                               in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       More than one key aspect of supply chain management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should
               dissatisfied    have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be
                               itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.2.7 - SERVICE - ATTACHMENT 10
                                                                                                                          Development Phase
Purpose
To facilitate continuous improvement through innovation

Quality Standard Evidence
  Evidence of value management workshops being undertaken at appropriate intervals and attended by appropriate personnel.
  Evidence of managing down costs and other toolkits being used
  Evidence of appropriately calculated benefits feeding directly into scheme forecasts
  Evidence of approach being fully visible to HA and contractor supporting HA in deploying best practice(where appropriate)

Source of Data
 Minutes/action points from workshops
 Workshop outputs
 PCF products
 Contractor records
 Scheme records
 Scheme time/cost forecasts
 Scheme budget
 Value plan
 Value Opportunities Register

Other Information to be considered
Innovation cost saving is cumulative for the phase and should be measured against the central cost of the scheme budget.
Time saving is also cumulative for the phase and should be measured against the agreed scheme plan.


Purpose:To facilitate continuous improvement through innovation
  Score       Satisfaction                                                   Quality Criteria
   10            Totally   Contractor can demonstrate significant ongoing innovation relating to safety, efficiency, cost or time benefit
                satisfied  across the whole of their supply chain. Value Opportunities Register confirms innovation savings in terms of
                           time and /or cost >10% of the scheme Programme and/or budget.. Alternatively, other innovation which does
                           not have cost or time benefit is significant and has application to other schemes. Detail is fully shared and
                           contractor pro actively supports HA in applying best practice across other schemes where appropriate.

    8            Highly        There is evidence that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations.
                satisfied      Innovation is applied across the whole of contractor‟s supply chain. Value Opportunities Register confirms
                               innovation savings in terms of time and /or cost of 3-10% of the scheme Programme and/or budget. Detail is
                               shared fully with HA.

    6        Just satisfied A structured mechanism is in place (including value management processes) to encourage the use and
                            evaluation of innovation and continuous improvement. Effective reviews are undertaken at appropriate
                            intervals. Whole life cost is fully considered. Managing Down Costs and other toolkits are applied as
                            appropriate. Value Opportunities Register confirms innovation savings in terms of time and /or cost of up to
                            2.99% of the scheme Programme and/or budget.
    5           Neither      This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Some minor aspects of innovation are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be itemised in the scheme
              dissatisfied risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.
    2            Very       A key aspect of innovation is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have escalated this concern
              dissatisfied in writing to the contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme
                            risk register.
    0           Totally     More than one key aspect of innovation is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have written to
              dissatisfied the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the
                            scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.3.1 - RIGHT FIRST TIME - ATTACHMENT 11
                                                                                                                           Development Phase
Purpose
To deploy and manage quality processes

Quality Standard Evidence
 Contractors documented quality management plan
 Sub contractor‟s quality management plans
 Compliance with tender undertakings
 Pro active ownership of quality processes across supply chain
 Quality failures /defects reported
 Root cause analysis and corrective action arising from quality failures
 Award from external body (where appropriate)

Source of Data
 Contractor‟s records
 Quality defects records
 Contract documents

Other Information to be considered




Purpose:To deploy and manage quality processes
  Score      Satisfaction                                                    Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     All aspects of quality management are excellent, with evidence of proactive ownership at senior management
               satisfied    level. Quality processes across the whole contractor‟s supply chain are visible to the HA and proven to be fully
                            effective. Processes are aligned with the HA which has confidence that all aspects of the contract will be
                            delivered. Quality failures are minor and resultant action is fully visible to HA. Contractor has fully deployed a
                            recognised QM process (such as lean)
    8            Highly     There is evidence that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations. Contractor fulfils the criteria of 6. In
               satisfied    addition, quality processes across the whole of their supply chain are fully visible and proven to be effective.
                            Processes are aligned with HA which has confidence that key quality aspects of the contract should be
                            delivered. Quality failures are minor and resultant action is fully visible to HA. Contractor has fully deployed a
                            recognised QM process such as lean.
    6        Just satisfied An overall quality plan is in place and implemented which identifies agreed QM controls, process and timescale
                            for quality audits. Robust arrangements are in place for identifying and quantifying quality failures, taking
                            appropriate corrective action and implementing lessons learned. Agreed tender undertakings are being
                            delivered
    5           Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Some minor aspects of quality management are currently unsatisfactory. This concern should be itemised in the
              dissatisfied scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         A key aspect of quality management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have escalated
               dissatisfied    this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the
                               scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       More than one key aspect of quality management is currently unsatisfactory. The project manager should have
               dissatisfied    written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be
                               itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.3.2 - RIGHT FIRST TIME - ATTACHMENT 12
                                                                                                                            Development Phase
Purpose
To confirm effectiveness of Quality processes through independent audit

Quality Standard Evidence
  Timetable of planned audits
  Timetable of actual audits
  Qualification of audit team
  Reporting lines of audit team
  Nature of recommendations
  Resolution of audit recommendations

Source of Data
 Contractor records
 Audit reports
 Defects reports

Other Information to be considered
 Results should be used to validate the scoring for attachment 11
 It is accepted that the contractor‟s personnel will routinely undertake audits of quality management systems
 The independence reference relates to the reporting lines and organisational responsibility of the auditors



Purpose: To confirm effectiveness of quality management through audit
  Score      Satisfaction                                                     Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     Structured quality audits are undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply chain, all results are
               satisfied    shared promptly and pro actively with HA and no issues have been reported requiring corrective action. Past
                            audit recommendations have been resolved within an appropriate timescale.
    8            Highly     Quality audits are undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply chain .All results are shared
               satisfied    promptly with HA and only minor issues have been reported requiring corrective action. Past audit
                            recommendations have been resolved within an appropriate timescale.
    6        Just satisfied Quality management systems are in place with routine appropriate audits planned across the whole supply
                            chain and undertaken on time. The audit team is appropriately qualified and reporting lines demonstrate
                            scheme independence (eg reporting to a Board member). . Past audit recommendations have been resolved
                            within an appropriate timescale.
    5           Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with quality audits.
              satisfied or The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Some minor aspects of quality audit are currently unsatisfactory This includes a quality audit undertaken up to
              dissatisfied one month late, more significant non compliance reported or past audit recommendations not resolved within an
                            appropriate timescale. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record
                            of progress meeting minutes/action points.
    2            Very       A key aspect of quality management is currently unsatisfactory This includes quality audits undertaken 1-2
              dissatisfied months late, key significant non compliance reported or previous recommendations not resolved within 2
                            months. The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management
                            and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0           Totally     Quality audit fails to achieve level 2. The project manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and
              dissatisfied HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.3.3 - RIGHT FIRST TIME - ATTACHMENT 13
                                                                                                                               Development Phase
Purpose
To ensure that key information provided does not require avoidable rework

Quality Standard Evidence
  Key information is that which has the ability to impact on time ,cost or quality of project deliverables or which is required for the
  management of the overall programme .It includes (but is not exclusive to) the following:
     -PCF products
     -Design and survey data
    -Response to complaints and objections
    -Early warnings
    -Other non financial information
    -Quotations requested
    -EVM and MST data
    -Con H reports
    -Monthly accruals
    -Other financial information

Source of Data
 Project records
 Feedback received from MP Commercial, MP Finance and other directorates
 Recorded actions from progress meetings

Other Information to be considered
 It is not possible to generalise on the determination of minor and major iterations. Requires the judgment of the project manager, taking
 into account the nature of the rework and the clarity of the requirement/brief



Purpose: To ensure that key information provided does not require rework.
  Score      Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria
   10           Totally        >90% of key Information provided within the period is accepted as right first time with the remainder only
               satisfied       requiring minor avoidable iteration.
    8           Highly         80-89% of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with the remainder only
               satisfied       requiring minor avoidable iteration.
    6        Just satisfied    70-79 % of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with the remainder
                               requiring only minor avoidable iteration.
    5            Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly      60-69 % of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with the remainder
               dissatisfied    requiring minor avoidable iteration, or one item requires significant avoidable rework. This concern should be
                               itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         50-59 % of key information provided within the period is accepted as right first time, with the remainder
               dissatisfied    requiring only minor avoidable iteration, or two items requiring significant avoidable rework. The project
                               manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail
                               should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       Performance fails to achieve score level 2.The project manager should have written to the appropriate
               dissatisfied    contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk
                               register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.4.1 - COST - ATTACHMENT 15
                                                                                                                            Development Phase
Purpose
To complete the scheme within the scheme budget

Quality Standard Evidence
  The scheme budget
  Forecast out turn costs
  Strategic change adjustment agreed by the SRO

Source of Data
  Oracle
 Scheme records on other agreed strategic change
  SHARE
 Section 5.2 of the Contract Guidance Manual
 Section 1.7 of Works Information

Other Information to be considered
 The base for this measure is the scheme budget described in section 5.2 of the Contract Guidance Manual and set out in section 1.7 of
 Works Information. The budget is only adjusted in the event that a strategic risk occurs
  An example might be a significant change in scope such as duel two lanes changing to duel three lanes. The SRO must agree to any
  change to the scheme budget as a base for this measure.
  Scheme costs should be reviewed monthly through the construction phase and updated where appropriate. Through the development
  phase, scheme costs should be reviewed in accordance with PCF.



Purpose: To complete the scheme within agreed cost
  Score      Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria
   10           Totally        Forecast scheme cost is >5% below the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic change agreed by the
               satisfied       SRO
    8           Highly         Forecast scheme cost is 3- 5 % below the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic change agreed by the
               satisfied       SRO
    6        Just satisfied    Forecast scheme cost is up to 2.99 % below the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic change agreed by
                               the SRO.
    5            Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly      Forecast scheme cost is up to 4.99% above the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic change agreed by
               dissatisfied    the SRO. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress
                               meeting minutes/action points.
    2             Very         Forecast scheme cost is 5-10% above the scheme budget after adjusting for strategic change agreed by the
               dissatisfied    SRO. The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management
                               and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       Performance fails to achieve score level 2. The project manager should have written to the appropriate contract
               dissatisfied    and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.4.2 - COST - ATTACHMENT 16
                                                                                                                            Development Phase

Purpose
To complete the development phase within the development phase budget

Quality Standard Evidence
  Contractor‟s costs included in the phase budget
  Forecast phase out turn for contractor‟s costs in the development phase
  Phase cost review and update
  Adjustments for agreed change control

Source of Data
Oracle
ConH
Compensation events
Phase records on other agreed change control events
SHARE


Other Information to be considered
The base for this measure is the phase budget agreed by HIB. There may be circumstances where there is a significant and fundamental
change in output or scope which is entirely outside the contractor‟s control and not covered by a risk provision .In these circumstances, the
SRO must agree to any change to the development phase budget a base for this measure.




Purpose: To complete the construction phase within agreed cost
  Score      Satisfaction                                                       Quality Criteria
   10           Totally        Forecast development phase cost is reviewed/ updated monthly and forecast cost is >5% below agreed phase
               satisfied       budget after adjusting for material relevant change control events agreed by the SRO.
    8           Highly         Forecast development phase cost is reviewed /updated monthly and forecast cost is 3- 5 % below agreed
               satisfied       phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control events agreed by the SRO.
    6        Just satisfied    Forecast development phase cost reviewed/updated monthly and forecast cost is up to 2.99% below agreed
                               phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control events agreed by the SRO.
    5            Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly      Forecast phase cost has not been reviewed /updated for two months and/or forecast is up to 4.99% above
               dissatisfied    agreed phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control agreed by the SRO .This concern
                               should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action
                               points
    2             Very         Forecast phase cost has not been reviewed /updated for three months and/or forecast cost is 5-10% above
               dissatisfied    agreed phase budget after adjusting for material relevant change control agreed by the SRO. The project
                               manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail
                               should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       Performance fails to achieve score level 2. The project manager should have written to the appropriate contract
               dissatisfied    and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.4.3 -COST - ATTACHMENT 18
                                                                                                                          Development Phase
Purpose
To forecast reliably for the current financial year

Quality Standard Evidence
 Agreed spend profile
 Change control agreed including compensation events


Source of Data
 Oracle
 Con H
 HA Business Plan financial data


Other Information to be considered
 The base for this measure is the cumulative spend profile within the year agreed by HA. There may be circumstances where there is a
 significant and fundamental change in output or scope which is entirely outside the contractor‟s control and not covered by a risk
 provision .In these circumstances, the SRO must agree to any change to the spend profile used as a base for this measure.
 During the construction phase, costs may decrease because of an improved CPI or increase because of an improved SPI. Where this
 has been agreed with HA and fully accounts for the cost variation, the Project Manager may increase the reliability score to 5.This
 adjustment is intended to avoid conflict with other measures but the cap of 5 reflects concern that the changes might have been
 anticipated before the start of the year.




Purpose: To forecast reliably for the current financial year
  Score      Satisfaction                                                    Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is, < ±1% of the amount stated in the cumulative
               satisfied    spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after adjusting for relevant material change control events
                            agreed by the SRO.
    8            Highly     Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±3% of the amount stated in the cumulative
               satisfied    spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after adjusting for relevant material change control events
                            agreed by the SRO..
    6        Just satisfied Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±5 % of the amount stated in the cumulative
                            spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after adjusting for relevant material change control events
                            agreed by the SRO..
    5           Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±7% of the amount stated in the cumulative
              dissatisfied spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed
                            by the SRO.. This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of
                            progress meeting minutes/action points.
    2            Very       Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year is within ±10% of the amount stated in the cumulative
              dissatisfied spend profile approved by HA at the start of the year after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed
                            by the SRO.. The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior
                            management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.
    0           Totally     Cumulative contractor phase spend for the financial year exceeds the amount stated in the cumulative spend
              dissatisfied profile approved by HA at the start of the year by ±10% after adjusting for relevant material change control
                            agreed by the SRO.. The project manager should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to
                            inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.4.4 - COST - ATTACHMENT 19
                                                                                                                            Development Phase
Purpose


To ensure that monthly assessments, scheme out turn forecasts, Con H analysis, accruals, unit cost
and final account submissions are accurate.

Quality Standard Evidence
 Monthly assessments
 Con H data
 Unit cost data
 Monthly accruals
 Final accounts
 Scheme cost out turn forecasts

Source of Data
 Con H forms
 Oracle
 Feedback from Employers Agent
 Feedback from Commercial Division
 Feedback from MP Finance

Other Information to be considered
 Completeness and accuracy of monthly accruals



Purpose: To ensure that monthly assessments, Con H analysis, accruals, unit cost and final account
submissions are accurate.
  Score      Satisfaction                                                        Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     All cost information requested is supplied accurately across the contractor‟s whole supply chain to the detail
               satisfied    required by HA .Contractor is proactive in offering relevant supporting information which has not been
                            requested and facilitating /supporting HA verification .A full audit trail is available to verify costs. All
                            assessment costs claimed in the period are both allowable and due in accordance with the contract.All costs
                            provided in the period have been confirmed as accurate.
    8            Highly     There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations. Contractor satisfies the
               satisfied    conditions of 6 for themselves and any of their supply chain whose costs represent a material cost to HA. No
                            cost has been challenged on monthly assessments.
    6        Just satisfied An audit trail is available to verify contractor‟s costs claimed. The requirement to challenge monthly
                            assessments or other financial data submitted is minimal. Monthly Oracle accruals and Con (H) returns are
                            accurate and complete.
    5           Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    Costs permanently disallowed within the period up to 1.99 % of that claimed .This concern should be itemised in
              dissatisfied the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         Costs permanently disallowed within the period 2- 5 % of that claimed The project manager should have
               dissatisfied    escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded
                               in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       Costs permanently disallowed within the period > 5 % of that claimed. The project manager should have written
               dissatisfied    to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the
                               scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.5.1 - TIME - ATTACHMENT 21
                                                                                                                            Development Phase
Purpose
To complete the scheme within the agreed contract completion date

Quality Standard Evidence
  Overall scheme agreed project timescale
  Agreed change control events
  Agreed compensation events
  Schedule of work completed

Source of Data
 Project plan
 Project records
 Change control
 Contractor‟s time forecasts
 Contract completion date

Other Information to be considered

Planned = Overall scheme duration agreed with PM up to agreed completion date
Forecast = Agreed monthly assessment of actual duration

Example
Contract completion date 1.12.09 – 36 months scheme duration

Scheme completed in 32 months

Time saving 36 – 32 = 11% = score of 10
                36

Other Information to be considered
The base for this measure is the contract completion date. There may be circumstances where there is a significant and fundamental
change in output or scope which is entirely outside the contractor‟s control and not covered by a risk provision .In these circumstances, the
SRO must agree to any change to the contract completion date used as a base for this measure.



Purpose:To complete the scheme within the agreed timescale
  Score      Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria
   10           Totally        Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion > 5% earlier than contract completion date after adjusting for
               satisfied       agreed material change control including compensation events agreed by the SRO.
    8           Highly         Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion 3- 5 % earlier than contract completion date after adjusting for
               satisfied       agreed material change control including compensation events agreed by the SRO.
    6        Just satisfied    Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion up to 2.99% earlier than contract completion date after
                               adjusting for agreed material change control including compensation events agreed by the SRO.
    5            Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly      Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion up to 4.99% later than contract completion date after adjusting
               dissatisfied    for agreed material change control including compensation events agreed by the SRO. This concern should be
                               itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion 5-10 % later than contract completion date after adjusting for
               dissatisfied    agreed material change control including compensation events agreed by the SRO. The project manager
                               should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should
                               also be recorded in the scheme risk register.



    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
0            Totally       Planned/actual (or forecast) scheme completion >10% later than contract completion date after adjusting for
           dissatisfied    agreed material change control including compensation events agreed by the SRO. The project manager
                           should have written to the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should
                           also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.5.2 - TIME - ATTACHMENT 22
                                                                                                                              Development Phase
Purpose
To complete the development phase within the agreed timescale

Quality Standard Evidence
 Development phase agreed project timescale
 Agreed change control events
 Agreed compensation events
 Schedule of work completed


Source of Data
 Project phase plan
 Project records
 Change control
 Contractor‟s time forecasts

Other Information to be considered
 The base for this measure is the agreed completion date for the development phase. There may be circumstances where there is a

 Example
 Planned = Overall phase duration agreed with PM
 Forecast = Agreed monthly assessment of actual duration

 Phase completion date 1.12.09 – 36 months scheme duration

 Phase completed in 32 months

 Time saving 36 – 32 = 11% = score of 10
                   36




Purpose: To complete the construction phase within the agreed timescale.
  Score       Satisfaction                                                  Quality Criteria
   10            Totally   Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion > 5% earlier than the agreed phase completion date after
                satisfied  adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.

    8            Highly        Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion 3- 5 % earlier than the agreed phase completion date after
                satisfied      adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO.

    6        Just satisfied Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion up to 2.99% earlier than the agreed phase completion date
                            after adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO

    5            Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly      Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion up to 4.99% later than the agreed phase completion date after
               dissatisfied    adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO. This concern should be itemised in the
                               scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion 5-10 % later than the agreed phase completion date after
               dissatisfied    adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO. The project manager should have escalated
                               this concern in writing to contractor‟s senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the
                               scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
0            Totally       Planned/actual (or forecast) phase completion >10% later than the agreed phase completion date after
           dissatisfied    adjusting for relevant material change control agreed by the SRO. The project manager should have written to
                           the appropriate contractor and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the
                           scheme risk register.




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.5.3 - TIME - ATTACHMENT 24
                                                                                                                              Development Phase
Purpose
To ensure timely response to agreed key actions and information required by HA and other relevant
stakeholders within the period

Quality Standard Evidence
  All information should be considered, including
    -Timely forecasts of phase/scheme cost out turn
    -PCF products
    -Design and survey data
    -Response to complaints and objections
    -Early warnings
    -Other non financial information
    -Quotations requested
    -EVM and MST data
    -Con H reports
    -Monthly accruals
    -Other financial information
Stakeholders include
    -HA project team                              -HA Finance
    -Network Operations                          -Network Services
    -Information Directorate
    -DfT
    -Road users                                   -Local communities
    -The general public                          -The media
    -Public Inquiry team
    -MP Programme Services Team

Source of Data
 Project plan
 Correspondence reporting system
 PQ and complaint response times
 Minutes of progress meetings (actions carried forward)
 Feedback from Commercial Division
 Feedback from Finance(accruals etc)
 Feedback from NO/NS/ID

Other Information to be considered


Purpose: To ensure timely response to agreed actions and information required by HA and other
relevant stakeholders within the period.
  Score      Satisfaction                                                   Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     Response time within the period generally >2 days earlier than agreed date due
               satisfied
    8           Highly      Response time within the period generally 1-2 days earlier than agreed date due
               satisfied
    6        Just satisfied Response time within the period generally in line with agreed date due

    5            Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly      Response time generally up to 1 day later than agreed due date on key material. This concern should be
               dissatisfied    itemised in the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.
    2             Very         Response time generally 2-3 days later than agreed due date on key material or on any individual item which is
               dissatisfied    particularly important. The project manager should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior
                               management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded in the scheme risk register.

    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
0            Totally       Response time generally >3days later than agreed date due on key material or any individual item which is
           dissatisfied    particularly important. The project manager should have written to the appropriate contract and HA directors to
                           inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.6.1 - HEALTH & SAFETY - ATTACHMENT 25                                                                                Development Phase
Purpose
To manage health and safety processes -Development
Quality Standard Evidence
 Criteria to be considered with standards to be achieved as set out in CDM 2007 Appendix A ‟Competence „ for stage 1 Assessment -
 criteria 1-14.
CDM Criteria
   H&S policy and organisation
   Arrangements
   Source of advice
   Training and information
   Individual‟s qualifications and experience
   Monitoring, audit and review
   Workforce involvement
   Accident reporting ,investigation and enforcement action
   Sub contractor consultation procedures
   Sub contractor competency assessments
   Hazard elimination and risk control
   Risk assessment procedural arrangements covering identification and control. Sample risk assessments, safe systems of work and
   method statements.
   Co operation/co ordination with others
   Welfare: H&S policy commitment, contracts with welfare facility providers.
 PCF products
 Pre construction information
 Form 10 notification
 Construction H&S plan
 H&S file
 Maintenance /repair strategy statement
Other H&S legislation
Source of data.
 Products and contractor records
 H&S signed policy document and supporting detail

Other Information to be considered.



Purpose: To manage H&S processes
  Score       Satisfaction                                                    Quality Criteria
   10            Totally   All aspects of H&S management are excellent, including welfare standards consistently applied at all levels
                satisfied  .Contractor is fully committed to job specific training, safe working practices and the safety of the public. This
                           includes director site safety tours. H&S failures are minor and resultant action is fully visible to HA. Contractor
                           can demonstrate active monitoring of their supply chain arrangements and intervention (where necessary).
                           Scheme has normally received an award from a recognised body for safety management.


    8            Highly        There is evidence to demonstrate that the contractor is exceeding HA‟s expectations. Contractor fulfils the
                satisfied      criteria of 6 and can demonstrate enhanced application of both CDM 2007 Appendix 4-criteria 1-14 and welfare
                               standards applied at all levels ,including their supply chain.

    6        Just satisfied An overall H&S policy and plan is produced and implemented for the public and all personnel working on
                            visiting or travelling through the area affected by the scheme. This includes site survey work and meetings
                            attended by members of the public. Plan is fully compliant with CDM 2007 Appendix 4 „Competence criteria‟-in
                            particular Regulation 11(Duties of designers)- and all other relevant legislation .Contractor can demonstrate
                            competence training and regular H&S updates for themselves and their supply chain. Robust arrangements are
                            in place for identifying risks though risk assessments /audit and reviewing near misses, taking appropriate
               Neither      corrective action and implementing lessons learnt. Tender promises are being delivered.
                            This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
    5
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
4            Slightly      Some less significant aspects of H&S management, including welfare issues, are unsatisfactory but these do
           dissatisfied    not represent a significant risk of injury . This concern should be itemised in the scheme risk register and
                           recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

2             Very         Some key aspects of H&S management including welfare issues, are unsatisfactory. The project manager
           dissatisfied    should have escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also
                           be recorded in the scheme risk register.
0            Totally       Performance fails to achieve level 2.The project manager should have written to the appropriate contract and
           dissatisfied    HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register.




d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.6.2 - HEALTH & SAFETY - ATTACHMENT 26
                                                                                                                           Development Phase
Purpose
To confirm effectiveness of H&S management through independent audit

Quality Standard Evidence
  Independent audit report documentation
  HA site visit reports
  Risk assessment documentation
  Follow up action documentation
  Evidence of concern resolution
  Number of HSE enforcement notices issued

Other Information to be considered
 It is not possible to generalise when specific audit findings should be categorised as red or amber and each area of concern identified
 should be assessed taking into account the likelihood of the risk materialising and it‟s severity. Remedial action should be commensurate
 with these factors.



Purpose: To confirm the effectiveness of H&S management through independent audit review
  Score      Satisfaction                                                      Quality Criteria
   10           Totally      Structured H&S audits undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply chain. Audit team is
               satisfied    appropriately trained / qualified and reporting lines demonstrate independence. All results shared promptly with
                            HA and no issues reported requiring corrective action. Past audit recommendations resolved within an
                            appropriate timescale.
    8            Highly     Structured H&S audits undertaken on time across the contractor‟s whole supply chain, Audit team is
               satisfied    appropriately trained / qualified and reporting lines demonstrate independence. All results shared promptly with
                            HA and only minor issues reported requiring corrective action .Past audit recommendations resolved within an
                            appropriate timescale.
    6        Just satisfied H&S systems in place with routine audits planned across the whole supply chain and undertaken on time. Audit
                            team is appropriately trained / qualified and reporting lines demonstrate independence. Past audit
                            recommendations resolved within an appropriate timescale.
    5           Neither     This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
              satisfied or performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
              dissatisfied
    4           Slightly    H&S audits undertaken up to 2 weeks late ,more significant issues reported requiring corrective action or past
              dissatisfied minor recommendations not resolved within an appropriate timescale The project manager should have written
                            to the contractor to itemise this concern which should also be recorded in the scheme risk register

    2             Very         H&S audits undertaken 2-4 weeks late, serious issues reported requiring urgent corrective action or past
               dissatisfied    significant recommendations not resolved within an appropriate timescale. This concern should be itemised in
                               the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    0            Totally       Performance fails to achieve level 2.The project manager should have written to the appropriate contract and
               dissatisfied    HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the scheme risk register




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls
No.6.3 - HEALTH & SAFETY - ATTACHMENT 27
                                                                                                                              Development Phase
Purpose
To minimise reportable accidents

Quality Standard Evidence

Source of data.
 AIRS

Other Information to be considered
 RIDDOR target will be reduced year on year to reflect continuous improvement
 Results shoul be considered to verify scoring in table 25



Purpose: To minimise reportable accidents
  Score      Satisfaction                                                  Quality Criteria
   10           Totally     Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR is < 0.10
               satisfied
    8           Highly      Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR 0.10- 0.265
               satisfied
    6        Just satisfied Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR equals 0.266-0.27.

    5            Neither       This is to be used in exceptional circumstances where HA is neither satisfied nor dissatisfied with contractor
               satisfied or    performance. The rationale for scoring 5 should be documented by the project manager
               dissatisfied
    4            Slightly      Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR 0.271 -0.35. This concern should be itemised in
               dissatisfied    the scheme risk register and recorded in the record of progress meeting minutes/action points.

    2             Very         Data is recorded monthly on AIRS and rolling 12 months AFR 0.351-0.40. The project manager should have
               dissatisfied    escalated this concern in writing to contractor senior management and HA SRO. Detail should also be recorded
                               in the scheme risk register.
    0            Totally       Data is not recorded monthly on AIRS or rolling 12 months AFR > 0.4. The project manager should have written
               dissatisfied    to the appropriate contract and HA directors to inform them of this concern which should also be itemised in the
                               scheme risk register.




    d671e35c-0b9f-497c-ac2f-47751c25a0bf.xls

								
To top