Get documents about "Independent Contractor Pro Contractor
Description
Independent Contractor Pro Contractor document sample
Document Sample
Motivating Success
A Toolkit for Performance Measurement
Major Projects
Reporting Pro - Forma
Development Phase
version 2.0
Apr-09
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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…
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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…
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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…
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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…
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.xls
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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…
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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…
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.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.
5a03dc21-9974-4a3a-9825-e31712a2a19f.xls
