Design Product Evaluation Criteria Handbook

Transcription

1 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Design Product Evaluation Criteria Handbook Evaluation Criteria for Design products Office of Project Development Procedures 3/15/2013 This handbook is for use in evaluating highway design products during the initiation, preliminary design, and final design phases of a project. This is to be used by core PDT members in identifying and prioritizing issues prior to these becoming problems or risks.

2 Table of Contents Contents Introduction/Background... 4 Applicability... 5 Project Development Team Members... 5 Product Evaluation... 6 Project Development Team Meeting... 8 Risk Management prior to Ready to List Milestone... 9 Applicability during Project Reviews... 9 Evaluations Guidance Design Product Evaluation Template Evaluation Criteria Overall Criteria Design Purpose and Need Design Designs Standards Compliance Design Optimization Project Management Cost Management (Page 1 of 4) Project Management Schedule Management Project Management Optimization Structure Design Design Standards Compliance (1 of 2) Structure Design Optimization Right of Way Right of Way Minimization & Compliance Environmental Purpose and Need Environmental Environmental Commitments, Minimization, & Compliance Page 2

3 Office Engineer Construction Contract Standards Compliance (Page 1 of 3) Construction Protective Features (Page 1 of 2) Construction Construction Contract Standard Compliance (Page 1 of 2) Construction Constructible Structure Construction Constructible (1 of 3) Traffic Operations Protective Features Traffic Operations Design Standard Compliance Traffic Operations Designed to Operate as Planned Maintenance Protective Features (Page 1 of 2) Maintenance Maintainable Planning Purpose and Need (Page 1 of 3) Planning Designed to Operate as Planned (Page 1 of 4) Evaluation Criteria Index Design Project Management Structure Design Right of Way Environmental Office Engineer Construction Structure Construction Traffic Operations Maintenance Planning Page 3

4 Introduction/Background This handbook establishes a framework for implementation of evaluation criteria to improve the quality of design products developed during the project delivery process. Caltrans has historically relied on conformance to standards and practices, and often individual preferences, to define a project s quality. Consistent application of these standards and practices can be problematic given the various expertise and opinions of the product evaluator. By establishing these evaluation criteria, which are based on product outcomes, and referencing these criteria to the actual standards and practices, it is anticipated that a more consistent application of quality evaluation will be achieved. These evaluation criteria were developed by experts within the key functional units who own and must manage the outcomes of design products, essentially Design s partners and customers. It is critical that these partners and key customers form the core of the Project Development Team (PDT) which will guide the project through the delivery process. These PDT members also own the evaluation of those design characteristics which were developed by their respective functional experts. By continuously evaluating the design product utilizing the identified characteristics, risks to project quality will be identified and can be prioritized and resolved in an efficient manner. Page 4

5 Applicability The project development team (PDT) is encouraged to apply the design product characteristics to all projects on or proposed to be on the SHS regardless of implementing agency, sponsor or funding source. Project Development Team Members During the project initiation and project approval phases, PDT members consist of nine core functional areas representatives from project management, design, structure design, environmental, right of way, traffic operations, transportation planning, construction, and maintenance. Furthermore, during the final design phase the PDT increases by two core functional areas to include representatives from office engineer and structure construction. Each of these functions owns one to three performance characteristics to evaluate, based on the interests, expertise and accountability of the functional area. The performance characteristics and responsible functional areas are listed in the figure below. Performance Characteristic Protective Features x x x Purpose & Need x x x Cost Management x Schedule Management x Design Standards Compliance x x x Environmental Commitments, Minimization & Compliance x R/W Minimization & Compliance x Construction Contract Standards Compliance x x Constructible x x Designed to Operate as Planned x x Maintainable x Optimization x x x Project Management Design Structure Design Environmental Right of Way Office Engineer Construction Structure Construction Traffic Operations Transportation Planning Maintenance Page 5

6 Although there may be additional PDT members, this handbook was based on the core functional areas described above. The functional area manager should select the most appropriate representative to participate on PDT teams. This representative should be knowledgeable of the project development process, and have technical expertise in the function s manuals, policies, standards, laws, and regulations. Acknowledging that some representatives have limited technical knowledge of some aspects within their functional areas, these representatives should consult technical advisors within their functional areas when needed. Product Evaluation The PDT members should assess the emerging design product using their function s evaluation criteria. One or more functional areas are accountable for each performance characteristic. Each of the eleven functional areas has interests, expertise, and accountability regarding different performance characteristics. When a functional area representative applies an evaluation to a performance characteristic, it becomes a project performance measure. When a project s performance measures are displayed all at once, the display is called a project dashboard. The figure below shows an example project dashboard with 23 performance measures. This type of dashboard should be quickly created and displayed during each PDT meeting. In this example, the team should use the dashboard to prioritize issues, beginning with red (1), which indicates needs significant attention. In the example below, the PDT should develop a plan to involve the necessary PDT members and technical advisors to address Constructible-Construction and Protective Features- Maintenance before the next PDT meeting. Page 6

7 Project Dashboard (with sample evaluations) Functional Area Performance Characteristic Evaluation Design Purpose & Need 4 Design Standards Compliance 2 Optimization 3 Project Cost Management 4 Management Schedule Management 3 Optimization 3 Structure Design Standards Compliance 2 Design 1 Optimization 3 Right of Way R/W Minimization & Compliance 3 Environmental Purpose & Need 4 Environmental Commitments, Minimization & Compliance 3 Office Construction Contract Standards Compliance 2 Engineer 2 Construction Protective Features 3 Constructible 1 Structure Construction 1,2 Construction Contract Standards Compliance 2 3 Constructible 2 Traffic Protective Features 3 Operations Design Standards Compliance 3 Designed to Operate as Planned 3 Maintenance Protective Features 1 Maintainable 5 Planning Purpose & Need 3 Designed to Operate as Planned 3 NOTE: 1 Recommended for projects with structure(s) 2 Recommended during the final design phase (a.k.a. PS&E phase). Page 7

8 Project Development Team Meeting Project Managers are to facilitate the PDT issue prioritization as follows: 1. Project Status Page 8 The project engineer, or a representative from the design unit, will provide an overview of the project status and issues in order for the PDT to have sufficient information to provide assessments consistent with the evaluation criteria. Below are possible ways to provide this information: a. A design product, Gantt chart, aerial photo etc. b. The last approved document and intermediate outline or draft document c. Recent project review comments (see below) d. The resolution or status of prior PDT meeting issues 2. Evaluation Each functional area representative individually evaluates the project relative to his or her performance characteristic(s) utilizing the evaluation criteria to assess information and/or products provided. (Refer to the respective evaluation criteria in this handbook.). 3. Display Evaluations (see example above) The PM obtains the evaluation number/color from each functional area representative and displays the resulting project dashboard to the team. 4. Discuss high risk performance measures Performance measures that received an evaluation of Needs Significant or Needs are sources of risk for a project. Beginning with the Needs significant attention measures, the Project Manager facilitates a discussion with the representative who provided the risk assessment(s). As time permits, this step is repeated until all the high risk performance measures have been discussed with the PDT. 5. Prioritize The PDT determines priorities and selects the most significant issues that will require an action plan prior to the next PDT meeting, if any. 6. Next Steps The PDT decides next steps and which technical advisors are necessary to solve each prioritized issue. 7. Risk Registry

9 The PDT determines which unresolved issues should be incorporated into the risk register in accordance to the Project Risk Management Handbook. 8. Record The PM records the responses of steps 2 thru 7 in the meeting notes. Risk Management at Project PS&E, (Milestone 380) Prior to Milestone 380, Project PS&E, any measures listed as needs significant attention must have completed a thorough collaboration with the appropriate HQ functional unit and then be added to the Risk Register per PD-09, Project Risk Management. If any of the following performance measures are listed as needs significant attention the Legal Division should be consulted in order to develop a risk strategy for the project records. The conversation with the Legal Division is protected by attorney/client privileges and the resulting strategy will assure that risks are fully addressed. Need and Purpose - Design Protective Features - Traffic Operations Protective Features - Maintenance Protective Features - Construction Design Standards Compliance - Traffic Operations Design Standards Compliance - Design Design Standards Compliance - Structure Design Construction Contract Standards Compliance - Construction Designed to Operate as Planned- Traffic Operations Maintainability - Maintenance Optimization - Design Optimization - Structure Design Applicability during Project Reviews The results of district circulation, safety reviews, constructability reviews, and any other technical reviews need to be studied and understood by the appropriate PDT members prior to the PDT meeting, so that these findings can be incorporated into the comprehensive project performance assessment by the PDT. For example, once a safety review has been performed, the project engineer should distribute the results to the PDT members who evaluate Protective Features - the PDT members representing Construction, Page 9

10 Traffic Operations, and Maintenance. At the next PDT meeting, the safety review results should be considered when determining the evaluations for Protective Features. Similarly, once a constructability review has been performed, the project engineer should distribute these results to Construction, Structures Construction, and Office Engineer PDT members for their consideration when evaluating Constructible and Construction Contract Standards Compliance. Evaluations Guidance Each performance measure is made up of several aspects. Note that there are evaluation criteria for each aspect. Each PDT member should use his/her professional judgment to decide which aspect(s) should be the basis of the evaluation. This assessment should take into consideration the project s schedule, cost, project phase, or other factors. Coming up with a numerical evaluation for a performance characteristic involves: 1. Familiarizing himself/herself with each of the respective functional area s performance characteristics, aspects, and criteria, 2. Reviewing the current status of the project, or, if available, the draft design product, 3. Contrasting the proposed design solutions with applicable standards, policies and practices, 4. Determining the impact of the issues on the performance characteristic (outcome), and 5. Assigning a numerical evaluation consistent with the evaluation criteria The numerical evaluation is dependent on the PDT member professional judgment. For example, suppose the standard calls for a 10-foot shoulder, but the plan proposes a 9-foot shoulder. Professional judgment is needed to determine if the Design Standards Compliance measure is deemed needs attention" or "needs significant attention. If the design product is a 30% PS&E, this issue might need attention, but at 95% the issue might need significant attention. Another example: if the 9-foot shoulder is on an off ramp, it may need attention, but if it is on a freeway mainline it may need significant attention. Remember, the purpose of the evaluation criteria is to help the PDT prioritize issues, and to create a greater degree of consistency statewide. In order to assist in keeping the evaluation criteria as objective as possible, the Design Product Evaluation Criteria Handbook has indexed the evaluation criteria to policies, manuals, regulations, or practices. The more the evaluations are based on Department policies, standards and practices, the more useful and credible this prioritization process will be. Page 10

11 Design Product Evaluation Template Project No: PDT Meeting Date: Functional Area Performance Characteristic Evaluation Design Project Management Structure Design Purpose & Need Design Standards Compliance Optimization Cost Management Schedule Management Optimization Design Standards Compliance Optimization Right of Way R/W Minimization & Compliance Environmental Purpose & Need Environmental Commitments, Minimization & Compliance Office Construction Contract Standards Compliance Engineer Construction Protective Features Structure Construction Traffic Operations Constructible Construction Contract Standards Compliance Constructible Protective Features Design Standards Compliance Designed to Operate as Planned Maintenance Protective Features Planning Maintainable Purpose & Need Designed to Operate as Planned Page 11

12 Evaluation Criteria Overall Criteria 5 State of the Art 4 Good 3 Acceptable 2 Needs 1 Needs Significant Complete No changes are necessary Project consistent with master plan and meets future needs Stakeholder expectations exceeded, without controversy Work plan is excellent in all aspects Outstanding clarity of communication Complete, but not outstanding Standards, policies and practices are reasonably well met Presentation and communication clear Comprehensive risk response plan Complete, but minor changes may be called for No mandatory changes required Stakeholder needs are met Compliance with minimum standards Enough information to justify the project moving forward Risk response plan is included Not complete, but should not stop the project Needs justifiable reason to move forward Does not meet minimum requirements or standards, and documentation has not been provided Incomplete risk response plan Not complete, contains major omissions Does not meet the transportation need Fatally flawed in terms of funding, resources, scope, or schedule Does not meet mandatory requirements or standards (all areas) and contains no associated exceptions Totally missing customers expectations Ignores the needs of stakeholder(s) or key functional area(s) No risk response plan Page 12

13 Design Purpose and Need State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Need (symptoms) and deficiency (what is broken) clearly and succinctly defined. Clearly and succinctly demonstrates a transportation need and deficiency. Clearly stated deficiency is the cause of the transportation problem. Demonstrates a need and related deficiencies - minor changes/clarification can be made. Demonstrates need and deficiencies stated should address problem, maybe some ambiguity or missing minor information. Not well demonstrated, some ambiguous, vague, or incomplete. Need not demonstrated or incomplete. Proposed stated deficiency does not address the need, or existing deficiency not stated. Purpose statement identifies deficiency and defines intended outcome the project will address. A clearly defined transportation deficiency the project intends to address and discusses those that will not be addressed Defines intended outcome, promotes a suitable range of alternatives, and relates to need statement. Discusses transportation deficiencies the project intends to address, but need minor clarification. May not address all deficiencies not to be addressed. Intended outcome is not as specific or comprehensive as it could be, minor clarification or detail may be needed. Defines transportation deficiencies the project intends to address, but need some minor clarification. May not discuss deficiencies not to be addressed. Intended outcome needs some clarification, a little vague or limiting. Purpose does not adequately address transportation deficiencies and is too vague and limiting. Purpose not stated nor has no relation to need statement. Have no idea neither what deficiency the project intends to fix, nor what the intended outcome is--too vague allows too broad of a range of alternatives, or so narrow that it precludes study of reasonable alternatives. Purpose statement states the proposed alternative. Alternatives or proposed design meet the expectations stated in the Need and Purpose? Expectation exceeded, scope exactly met, and limits of work met, no scope creep. Good variety of alternatives - including minimum standard. Expectation met, scope met with very little scope creep. A variety of alternatives - including minimum standard. Expectation, scope, and limits of work met or very close, may have some scope creep. Several alternatives, adequate variety, but no obvious alternative missing- including minimum standard. Expectations not completely met, scope and limits of work missing elements of purpose statement, or exceeded limits, too much creep, original scope lost. Little variety of alternatives, obvious alternatives missing, or is missing minimum standard. Expectations not met, scope and limits of work does not conform to need, too much creep from original scope lost or too much missing. No variety of alternatives, single alternative with other obvious missing - missing minimum standard. Supporting Evidence Evidence clearly demonstrates and identifies transportation deficiency. Demonstrates transportation deficiency - minor changes/clarification are needed, may need more information but no additional studies needed. Demonstrates transportation deficiency - minor changes/clarification can be made, may need more information but no additional studies needed Does not have strong support for need or studies are out of date or incomplete. Does not support need, inadequate support, or evidence not provided/ incomplete. Page 13

14 Design Designs Standards Compliance Highway Design Manual (HDM) & Design Informational Bulletin (DIB) - PR & 95% Highway Design Manual (HDM) & DIB - PID, DPR, 30%, 60% State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Most minimum standards exceeded and few design exceptions (not because of constraints but to improve the design). Most minimum standards exceeded and few design exceptions (not because of constraints but to improve the design). Some minimum standards exceeded or met, and approved design exceptions. Some minimum standards exceeded or met, and approved design exceptions. DIB-82 Most minimum standards exceeded All minimum standards met or exceeded. AASHTO/Local Standard - Local facilities All local roads exceeded CT or AASHTO standards. All design guidance and standards met and some exceeded. All design standards minimums met or design exceptions approved. All design standards minimums met or design exceptions approved. All minimum standards met or approved design exception. Most design guidance and standards met or exceeded, and documented concurrence for variations. Non-standard features no approved design exceptions Non-standard features no approved design exceptions. May require minor re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no approved design exceptions. Requires minor re-design to get design exception approved. Design guidance and standards not fully met no documented concurrence for variations. Non-standard features no approved exception, Issues with approval. Requires re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no approved exception; No conversations with Design Coordinator or Reviewer; Critical issues with approval; Requires major re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no approved exception. Requires major re-design to get design exception approved. Non-standard features no documented concurrence for variations, Issues with approval. Project Development Procedures Manual (PDPM) - PID/PR/PSE Meets all PDPM requirements with all issues clearly defined and fully discussed, and all alternatives sufficiently explored Meets all PDPM requirements with all issues defined and discussed, and variety of alternatives explored. Meets PDPM requirements with issues defined and may not be fully discussed, and few alternatives explored. Does not meet PDPM requirements with issues not clearly defined or discussed, and only single alternatives explored, no other mentioned. Does not meet PDPM requirements with issues not defined or discussed, and only single alternatives explored no other mentioned. PDPM - New/Modified Public Road Connection. Existing interchanges and/or local roads to be improved along with new connection to satisfactorily accommodate traffic demand. New public road connections and work on existing local roads will have positive effects on facility operation. Demonstrated that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to satisfactorily accommodate traffic demand. New public road connections will have no detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation. Demonstrated that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to satisfactorily accommodate traffic demand. New public road connections will affect but have no detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation. Incomplete analysis or questionable that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to accommodate traffic demand New public road connections will have detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation or incomplete analysis. No demonstration that the existing interchanges and/or local roads cannot be improved to accommodate traffic demand New public road connections will have detrimental effects that would diminish facility operation or no analysis. Page 14

15 Design Optimization HDM 81Design Philosophy State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Project provides the greatest public good over the long term for the total cost. Excellent cost/results Good cost/benefit Project provides public good over the Design Life for the Total cost. Acceptable cost/benefit Marginal cost/benefit The project chose the lowest cost alternative for a very narrowly focused purpose or short term benefits, leaving a system that down the road may be a costly to maintenance and operations with little or no long term benefit. Poor cost/benefit Reasonably accommodates all users All uses have clearly been taken care of and may even have separate facilities (Pedestrian Over Crossing or truck bypass), including during construction All users should be able to safely navigate through project limits, including during construction. Adequate accommodations for all uses all have short comings to accommodate other users. Reasonable safety for all, including during construction Access cutoff/blocked for one or more users, as designed and/or during construction One or more users clearly excluded by design, including during construction. Accommodate future of facility (beyond design life) Project facilitates future expansion to ultimate facility configuration and area build out. (Beyond design year) All new large capital outlay structures will work with future expansion Minor element will need to be rebuilt with future expansion. Although does not preserver ultimate foot print, does not encourage growth that would prohibit ultimate expansion. To accommodate future/ultimate expansion will require complete or major reconstruction. Project prohibits future growth, by putting in very expensive structures that will have to be completely rebuilt, or will encourage local growth which would prohibit future expansion. Compatibility/ Consistency with adjacent facility Compatible with or facilitates adjacent existing features, or is part of evolution of a facility for one type to another (conventional to freeway/expressway) Project is compatible with adjacent project/existing features, yet accommodates future needs. Project works with adjacent project/existing features Issues/conflicts with adjacent project/ existing features No compatibility with adjacent project/ existing features Driver Expectation/ standard practice No Driver confusion, Intuitive to travel Meets driver expectation Meets driver expectation, some signing may be needed to clarify. Driver indecision signing may not be enough to clarify. Driver confusion route/ alignment too complicated signing may not help. Page 15

16 Project Management Cost Management (Page 1 of 4) State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Support Cost Estimate Support Cost Estimate from completed and approved Workplan -- Resourced Loaded Schedule -- using WBS Level 5 (or lower Level 6, Level 7, etc.) Activities and Milestones with Logic. Support Cost Estimate used for planning, programming, or budgeting support and is consistent with District Director Approved Project Study Report (PSR), Project Report (PR), Supplemental Project Report (PR) and/or Cooperative Agreement (Co-op). Support Cost Estimate partially complete or not up to date, i.e. missing activities, milestones, resources, etc. May require updated workplan, PSR, PSSR, PR, supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Support Cost Estimate not available. May require workplan, PSR, PR, supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Support Cost Component Estimate Project Support Cost Estimate summarized into the four support components -- SB-45 Components -- PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support -- according to the approved Workplan (Resourced Loaded Schedule). Support Estimate includes escalation rate according to the year the work is estimated. Support estimate includes the appropriate ICRP (Indirect Cost Rate %) for Caltrans Support versus Reimbursed Work. Project Support Cost Component used to identify support budget in PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Support Cost Estimate summarized by components partially complete, i.e. updated schedule, additional resources, escalation factor, correct ICRP, etc or not included in PSR, PR, supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. May require updated workplan, escalation calculation, support component calculation, PSR, PR, or Supplemental PR. Support Cost Estimate summarized by components not available. May require workplan, PSR, PR, or Supplemental PR. IQA Support Cost Estimate (For Projects performed by Local Agency -- Not Applicable if work is performed by Caltrans) IQA Support Estimate from Completed Workplan -- Resource Loaded Schedule -- using WBS Level 6 Activities, Milestones with logic, and consistent with District Director Approved PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Cooperative Agreement. IQA Support Estimate partially complete. May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. IQA support estimate and/or Cooperative Agreement not available. May require IQA workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Cooperative Agreement. Page 16

17 Project Management Cost Management (Page 2 of 4) Programmed Support Cost (Or Approved Support Budget if project is not programmed in STIP or SHOPP, i.e. Reimbursed Work) Forecast Support Cost Estimate at Completion Support Cost Performance Index (CPI) -- Earned Value (If available) State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 90% to 110 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 85% to 115 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Support Estimate Components used to program PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and/or Construction Support in approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document (RTP, FTIP, etc.). Include appropriate escalation rate and ICRP rate. Includes any approved Cooperative Agreement with local agencies for other funding. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 80% to 120 % of the approved Programmed Amount (i.e. PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support). May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change. Support Cost Estimate Components not consistent with Program Document or other financial planning document. May require updated workplan, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate at Completion within 70% to 130% of the Programmed Amount (i.e. PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support). May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change < CPI < 1.25 CPI < 0.75 or CPI > 1.25 May need to adjust project budget and/or program budget change. Support Estimate Components not available to validate support budget in program document. May require workplan, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Forecast Support Cost Component Estimate less than 70% or greater than 130% of the Programmed Amount. (i.e. PA&ED, PS&E, R/W Support, and Construction Support). May require updated workplan, PSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program cost change. Construction Capital Cost Estimate Construction Capital Cost Estimate prepared according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. 6 page estimate, etc., and is consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), and/or Cooperative Agreement. Construction Capital Cost Estimate needs to be updated according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. 6 page estimate, etc., and/or is not consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s). May require an updated Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Construction Capital Cost Estimate not available or not based upon District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation requirements, and/or not based upon approved Department cost estimating methodology -- i.e. 6 page estimate, etc. May require a Construction Capital Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Page 17

18 Project Management Cost Management (Page 3 of 4) State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Right of Way Capital Estimate Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate prepared according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. R/W Data Sheet, Environmental Mitigation, Utility Relocation, Railroad, etc., and is consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), and/or Cooperative Agreement. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate needs to be updated according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. R/W Data Sheet, Environmental Mitigation, Utility Relocation, Railroad, etc., and/or is not consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s). May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate not based upon District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Cooperative Agreement, and/or not based upon the approved Department cost estimating methodology -- i.e. R/W Data Sheet, etc. May require R/W Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Environmental Capital Estimate Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate prepared according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. PEAR, MCCE, etc., and is consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), and/or Cooperative Agreement.. Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate needs to be updated according to the approved Department's cost estimating methodology, i.e. PEAR, MCCE, etc., and/or is not consistent with the District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Environmental Document, and/or Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s). May require an updated Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Environmental Mitigation Capital Cost Estimate not based upon District Director Approved PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, and/or Environmental Document using the approved Department cost estimating methodology -- PEAR, MCCE, etc. May require a PEAR/MCCE Capital Estimate, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Programmed Construction Capital Construction Capital Cost Estimate from approved PSR, PSSR, PR, or Supplemental PR used to program Construction Capital in approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. Construction Capital Cost Estimate not consistent with Approved Program Document. May require an updated Capital Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Construction Capital Cost Estimate not available to verify Approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. May require a Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Page 18

19 Project Management Cost Management Page 4 of 4) Programmed Right of Way Capital State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate from approved PSR/PSSR/PR used to program Construction Capital in approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate not consistent with Approved Program Document. May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Co-op, and/or program change. Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate not available to verify Approved Program Document or other Financial Planning Document. May require a Right of Way Capital Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Co-op, and/or program change. Construction Capital Forecast Cost Estimate at Completion Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 90% to 110 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 85% to 115 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 80% to 120 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 70% to 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Forecast Construction Capital Cost Estimate less than 70% or greater than 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Construction Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Right of Way Capital Forecast Cost Estimate at Completion Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 90% to 110 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 85% to 115 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 80% to 120 % of the approved Programmed Amount. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate at Completion within 70% to 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Forecast Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate less than 70% or greater than 130% of the Programmed Amount. May require an updated Right of Way Capital Cost Estimate, PSR, PSSR, PR, Supplemental PR, Permit/Mitigation Requirement(s), Cooperative Agreement, and/or program change. Page 19

20 Project Management Schedule Management Workplan Development (Planning) State of the Art Good Acceptable Needs Needs Significant All WBS Level 5 (or lower Level 6, Level 7, etc.) Activities and Milestones with logic identified in workplan schedule and consistent with District Director Approved PSR and/or Project Report. Workplan schedule not consistent in Approved PSR/PR/Environmental Document and may require the schedule to be updated. No Workplan schedule developed or included in Approved PSR/PR. Programmed Schedule Workplan delivery schedule for PA&ED, PS&E, Right of Way, and Construction used to identify delivery schedule and consistent with approved programming document. Forecast Schedule at Completion and Progress Forecast Schedule at Completion for WBS Activities and Milestone progress on schedule according to the approved program document schedule. Schedule activities, milestones, and progress (percent complete) up to date (no past due dates or missing progress). Delivery Milestones and updated progress up to date in Delivery Plan and Contract for Delivery. Schedule consistent with District Director Approved PSR/PSSR/Project Report/Environmental Document, or Supplemental Project Report and Revalidated Environmental Document. Workplan delivery schedule for PA&ED, PS&E, Right of Way, and Construction not consistent with program delivery schedule in an approved programming document which may require program schedule change. Forecast Schedule at Completion and WBS Activity and Milestone Progress not up to date and may require program schedule change. Workplan Development Schedule not used to schedule program delivery in an approved programming document. Forecast Schedule at Completion or WBS Activity and Milestones not Progressed and/or does not match approved program document. Schedule Performance Index (SPI) -- Earned Value (Not Applicable if Earned Value Calculation not available) SPI = 1.0 SPI > 1.0 SPI < 1.0 Page 20