kenneth j. harms vice president kitchell, cem

Download Kenneth J. Harms Vice President Kitchell, CEM

If you can't read please download the document

Upload: arawn

Post on 25-Feb-2016

126 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Kenneth J. Harms Vice President Kitchell, CEM. Rona G. Rothenberg, FAIA, LEED Green Associate Senior Manager, Design & Construction Services, Judicial Branch Capital Program Office Judicial Council of California-Administrative Office of the Courts. Would you accept this deal? . - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Sheriffs Office Main Jail Expansion County Project No. I 2201

KEN1

Kenneth J. HarmsVice PresidentKitchell, CEM

Rona G. Rothenberg, FAIA, LEED Green AssociateSenior Manager, Design & Construction Services, Judicial Branch Capital Program OfficeJudicial Council of California-Administrative Office of the Courts

KEN2Would you accept this deal? Design a 103 story office building in 2 weeksBuild a $500M project in less than 14 monthsKEN3

Built in 1930 for $41M ($8M below budget) in 13 months$500M in todays dollarsCMAR has Been Around for a Very Long time!KEN4State and County AuthoritySB 1732 Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002 established the judicial branch authority for facilities, including funding and exemption from the Public Contract Code (PPC)SB 328 (2013) extends CMAR as a project delivery method to all. (Government Code Section 20146)

RONA first bullet; KEN second bullet5Construction management at-risk is seen by many policy-makers and legislators as an innovative approach to public sector project delivery. The CM at risk delivery method is an alternative procurement process similar to long-standing private sector construction contracting. CM at-risk is a cost effective and time conscious alternative to the traditional design-bid-build process.

-AIA Washington DC, 2005KEN6A project delivery method is fundamentally a people method because people remain the most valuable construction resource. The success or failure of any delivery method depends upon the performance, trust, and cooperation among the parties.

-AGC, Project Delivery Methods for Construction, 2011KEN7

CMAR Not Using Under Consideration

KEN8CMAR Public Owners in California

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA10 locations

CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY 23 LocationsAdministrative Office of the Courts58 LocationsKEN9CM at Risk PhilosophyOWNERA/ECMCollaborativeTeamApproachRespect the role & responsibility of each team member

Develop trust & confidence based on performance

Exceed expectationsKEN10OrganizationProcurement and contract structure functional much like a private sector model of the negotiated contract.Criteria for selection are qualifications based and include competitive bid with preconstruction services. Criteria for selection of the CMAR vary from one jurisdiction to another based on allowable and measurable factors. In Preconstruction services, the contractor works slid-by-side with architect and owner in the design phase to analyze and select materials equipment based on cost, benefits and availability

KEN11CM at Risk vs. DBB/Lump SumDesigner Involvement CM at RiskLow BidContractor involvement in Design PhaseNoOwner receives competitive pricingPerformance and payment BondsAbility to Re-bid individual trades NoPrequalify all subcontractorsNoField coordination controlCommissioning/ Warranty IssuesPrice Guarantee *Contractor pays for scope gapsContractor contingency available for E&O and unanticipated field conditionsNo*Low bid not always final priceRONA12California SB 1732Trial Court Facilities Act of 2002 California Code of RegulationsGovernment Code Sections 69202 et seq.Establishes statutory authority for the State of California Judicial Branch responsibility for court facilities including initial funding sourceSection 70374 provides an exemption from the Public Contracts Code, subject to appropriate contracting policies and proceduresRONA13Trail Court Facilities Program 2002 - PresentCourt projects: 46 authorized since 2004Courtrooms: 1 to 71Sizes: 6,500 704,000 bgsfProject Cost: $3M $634MEstimated Total:$5.5BFunding: Cash, lease revenue bondsProject Status in 2014:14 Completed12 in construction20 in design or site acquisition

RONA14California Judicial Branch Capital ProgramCourt Facilities Contracting Policies and Procedures, Adopted by the Judicial Council of California on 12/7/07 established multiple construction delivery methods, procedures for procurements of goods and servicesJudicial Branch Contracting Manual, CA PCC Sections 9201-19210, became effective 10/1/2011 as an overriding contracting code with certain exemptions pertaining to capital facilities projects

RONA15CM at Risk ComparisonKEN16CM at Risk Lessons for SuccessOwner involvement essentialNeed clear definition of CM & A/Es rolesDetermines preferences for Agency vs. At-Risk contractsInform and educate your staff and superiorsEstablish County internal processes to support CMAREstablish a fundamental attitude toward a collaborative or advocacy approach to the open-book type of contract administration, non-adversarial with a spirit of trust about scope, cost and time

KEN/RONA17Benefits to the OwnerOwner chooses their builder on QBSProject team works in a collaborative atmosphereGreater schedule control/ flexibilityGreater budget control including re-bid on individual trades if necessaryPre-qualify all trade contractorsMinimum three bids in each tradeOwner & Architect can participate in sub selectionLowers potential for future change ordersPerceived as more friendly contracting approach by designers and subcontractorsOpen Book financial approach

RONA18Benefits to the ArchitectA/E maintains contractual relationship to OwnerSelection of contractor based on qualificationsContract involvement during design phaseGMP prior to construction

RONA19Benefits to CMAR FirmSelected on Best Value not Low PriceInvolved in Design PhaseCollaboration vs. ConfrontationPrequalification of Major TradesManageable RiskKnown Site ConditionsQuality of Documents

KEN20

CMAR Selection ProcessCM at Risk Selection Process: RFQRecommended InformationBasic Company DataFirm HistoryLocal OfficePrimary ContactLicensing InformationForm of OwnershipDesigner/County Internal Processes to Support CMARKEN22CM at Risk Selection Process: RFQsRecommended InformationInsurance RequirementsLimits of CoverageCompany RatingCompleteness of CoverageBonding CapacitySingle Project LimitAggregateLetter from Agent

KEN23CM at Risk Selection Process: RFQsRecommended InformationSafety ProgramEMRSafety PlanTrainingQuality ProgramManagement Information Systems and Technology

KEN24CM at Risk Selection Process: RFQsRecommended InformationPersonnel CapabilityConsultantsExperience in Delivery System and Project TypeSafety RecordFinancial InformationReferences

CM at Risk Selection Process: RFQsRecommended InformationDetailed Information on Select Relevant Project Information- at least 3 similarTeamOrganization ChartResumes% of Time CommitmentManagement PlanApproach to Managing the Project -Phasing, Bid Package Strategy, Site LogisticsSchedule

KEN26CM at Risk Selection Process: Discussion/InterviewsProvide for Adequate Time45 to 60 Minutes for Technical Presentation15 to 30 Minutes for Questions & AnswersObjective and Interested Selection CommitteeWell Defined Selection Criteria and Scoring Information- Share It!

KEN27AOC Criteria for Contractor Selection and Short List, CMAR and Prequalified GCWritten SOQs which respond to specific requirements of the RFQSOQs ranked based on published criteriaEvaluations done by the PMS with Procurement team and Court, with architect as advisoryAll submissions must be in on time!RONA28Criteria for Contractor SelectionCriteria for Selection per RFQ:

Financial Strength 20 points Demonstrated Experience of firm 30 points Demonstrated Experience and training of personnel 30 points Project Plan including 20 points Local Outreach Plan 5 pointsTotal scoring 100 pointsRONA29AOC Contractor Selection ProcessCMAR Selection and Prequalified GC Separate evaluation of RFQ and Interview per RFQ Criteria by point scoring

CMAR Selection Sealed fee (including total of preconstruction services and fee based on direct cost of work) opened: $ Total price in dollars = Cost Per Unit of QualityTotal quality points of Quality Lowest Cost per Unit of Quality is responsiveRONA30

CMAR ServicesCM at Risk Design Phase ServicesManagement PlanBudget EstimatesValue EngineeringConstructability ReviewBid Package StrategyMaster ScheduleConstruction ScheduleLogistics Planning

RONA32CM at Risk Bid ProcessPre-Qualify SubcontractorsAdvertise to BidInvitation/ Instructions to BiddersScope of Work SheetsPre-Bid MeetingPublic Bid OpeningEvaluate BidsOwner Assigns Bids to CM at Risk

KEN33What is a GMPA Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) is the amount that the CM at Risk firm guarantees (the sum of the cost of the work and the CMs fee) it will not exceed. The maximum is subject to additions and deductions, due to changes in the scope of work. All costs which exceed the GMP and are not approved by change order are paid by the CM.

KEN34CM at Risk-Preparation of the Preliminary GMPTotal Direct Cost of Work$CMAR Fee$CMAR GCs$Project Contingency$Allowances$Total GMP$

Terms and Requirements which Affect the GMPDVBE, MBE and related goals or requirementsOCIP or CCIP Self Performance and terms of procurement Labor agreements Local outreach goals or requirements Subcontractor listing Deductive and additive alternates Terms for administration of the retentionCM at Risk - GMPChanges to the GMPErrors & OmissionsChange of ScopeUnforeseen Conditions Including Force MajaeurCM at Risk Cost (GCs + Fee + Precon Cost) +Subcontractors Bids = GMP +Contingency (3% controlled by CM)KEN37CM at Risk Services Construction PhaseField ManagementSafety ProgramField EngineeringQuality Control ProgramField inspection AdministrationCommissioning ServicesProject Close Out ProcessWarranty Period Service

RONA38Construction PhaseConstruction of building and site features Furniture installation Quality Assurance Inspections Site visits by A&E and AOC OCCM Team Commissioning of building systems

RONA39OccupancyCourt responsible for telephone and data equipment and servers Court responsible for staff move-in AOC post occupancy evaluation Survey building users Lessons learned LEED Silver certification by the United States Green Building Council

RONA40New Hollister CourthouseSuperior Court of San Benito County

Status: Bid Phase Construction Cost: $34M Architect: SmithGroup Contractor: Kitchell (CM@Risk)RONA41Lessons Learned from AOC in CMARCareful consideration of qualificationsMeticulous checking of references and backgroundUnimpeachable qualification of low bidsEstablish a basis to evaluate the preconstruction services as a condition for the construction contractWatch out for the lump sum low bid in disguise delivered by some CMARsRONA42Lessons Learned from CMsWhen is GMP Established?Establishing the GCs as a baseline allowance in the initial fee proposalOwnership of Design Errors/ OmissionsShared Savings ClausesContingency OwnershipSelf-Perform Work Yes or No?KEN43Contract Key Features CMARScope of work in preconstruction Contractual obligation for the content of the architects documentsAppropriate development of bid packages and prequalification of the subsAdministration of the contractors contingencyAdministration of the GMAX as an open book processRe-qualification of the GCs, consideration of supplemental conditions if neededProper field staffing and administration of field documentationRONA44Whats Important to AOCCompliance with design standards which anticipate well-designed, well-constructed buildings that consider long-term ownership costs and needs Strong partnerships with our architects and contractors which are collaborative advocacies Good service by you to us and the Courts That you succeed and are profitable in giving us these things

RONA45

CMAR Projects in California

Cal Berkeley Memorial StadiumFresno State LibraryMarian Medical CenterCal Poly Recreation CenterCal Poly Recreation CenterJacobs Medical CenterFullerton State Steven Mihaylo Hall

AOC, Hollister CourthouseKEN46Questions & Answers

KEN47SUMMARYFor more information:

KEN48ContactKenneth J. HarmsVice President2750 Gateway Oaks Drive, Suite 300Sacramento, CA 95833O: 916.648.9700/ C: 916.956.4059Follow us: Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | KitchellProgress.com

For InformationJudicial Branch Building Programwww.courts.ca.gov/programs-facilities.htm

Thank you!