District Consultant CEI Managers Meeting Minutes

District Consultant CEI Managers Meeting Minutes
October 20 and 21, 2004 in Orlando, FL
Note: Action items are italicized and underlined.
October 20, 2004
Attendees: David Sadler, Stefanie Maxwell, Ronnie Klein, Patrick Stanford, Jim
Hubbard, Carrie Stanbridge, Lee Spitzkopf, Fernando Villabona, Donald Davis, Janet
Cook, Greg Ouzts, Marnie Parry, Bill Walsh, Zeke Gonzalez, Alida Schmitt, Jonathan
Duazo, Ananth Prasad.
Districts shared D/wide Salary averages.
Stefanie will send the districts a spreadsheet showing the raw and billing rate averages of
all districts.
Districts shared CCEI Work Program.
Grouping projects: D1 is still doing a lot of grouping, a lot of inspection only, groups
of 3-5 jobs. D1 has stopped using federal funds for District wide contracts. D2 - has a
district wide contract specifically for landscaping. D2, D3 and D4 are adding contracts
when the consultant is doing well. D5 is overlapping jobs and adding contracts when
consultant is doing well. D6 has reduced grouping but has language to add contracts. D7
and TP are still doing groupings, but smaller.
Carrie discussed a letter from PSU requesting approval from FHWA to allow Districtwide contracts to run for 5 years and $1.5 Million instead of 2 years and $750k. FHWA
has not agreed to these changes even though the procedure was changed. FHWA is
willing to consider changing this requirement if the Department can implement a Quality
Assurance Review process. In the interim, Don Davis offered that it’s ok as long as the
FA jobs in the group do not exceed 2 years and 750k. On conventional CEI contracts, the
Department has a requirement in the procedure that any consultant contract that includes
projects more than 3 years apart require the Assistant Secretary’s approval. There was
some discussion about what defines the three years. It was interpreted by Dave that the
three years are based on lettings (first and last lettings cannot be greater than 3 years).
CEI Cost Report by District: Sequence number problem – Ananth will set up
something with work program. D1 - CEI costs should be 6034 less. D2 – materials
monies were not picked up. D3 – will get with Michelle. D4 – included pushbutton
contract in report that shouldn’t be there. D5 – should be 8% instead of 7.5%. Putting in
wrong activity code. Does not pull phase 56 and 58, JPA’s are missing. D6 – not
picking up 56 and 58 – JPA’s, concerned with picking up post design services because
we do not have any control over. D7 – missing post design services, have not completed
the review. TP – wrong FIN number used. The districts requested that a report be pulled
for active jobs and the ability for districts to run the report themselves. Stefanie spoke
with Kathy and we cannot allow districts to run themselves because it would take too
much computer resource time to run the report. The districts can request a report for
active jobs by contacting Kathy Lovett. Send differences to Stefanie.
1
District Consultant CEI Managers Meeting Minutes
October 20 and 21, 2004 in Orlando, FL
Consultant timesheets during Hurricanes: If the job is shut down by us, CEI is on
overhead unless they were directed to be part of the relief effort. We should not be
receiving billings during shutdown period.
Role of the Consultant CEI and the Construction Project Manager:
D1: CEI is signed based on new scope, on all new and select old.
D2: all contracts to be signed by CEI, some issues with PM’s letting go.
D3: working on getting the CEI’s to sign.
D4: blanket all projects, applied sparingly by PM, will reemphasize what is required and
wanted.
D5: all Consultants are signing SA’s.
D6: strongly suggested CEI comply and they did.
D7: new –sign, current –same.
TP: PM reviews documentation and encumbers money, CEI signs SA’s after TP review.
Ananth suggested that you coach your PM’s to manager your CEI, not contractor.
Role of the Construction Project Manager (Stanbridge): Carrie discussed a handout
of guidelines that was developed by a task team that involved Greg Schiess (FHWA) and
herself. Greg is looking for ways to document how we are doing what is in the handout.
FHWA suggested that we review CPAM Section 4.1 to make sure items in the handout
are included. FHWA wants to attend training as well, copy Don Davis.
Three Construction Project Manager training classes were conducted by Lee last May.
Lee will continue to teach the districts and the DCCM for the district will attend the
training. The training will last 4 hours and be held in Tallahassee Burns Auditorium –
D2,D3; Turkey Lake – D1,D5,D7; Pompano – D4,D6. All DCCM’s are to review and
comment to Carrie by Nov. 5, and Stefanie will set up training for Lee to start teaching
the training in early 2005.
Revision to Pre-qualification categories (Prasad) for Bridges: We have had some
problems with bridges. We want to show more emphasis on the quality of inspection for
the different bridge categories. Ananth will send the color copy of handout.
EAR Process: The EAR process was discussed at the last DCE meeting. The form has
been revised. The form will be available within a couple of weeks. The EAR process is
also flowcharted.
Discussed CEI Firms of Concern (All):
Construction Project Manager Staffing (All): Reviewed handout on full time
equivalent position for staffing level on consultant CEI contracts. Districts wanted to
revise. Tie to number of contracts (handout from Ronnie), and ability factor of PM. The
2
District Consultant CEI Managers Meeting Minutes
October 20 and 21, 2004 in Orlando, FL
districts are to provide more information for the table for full service consultant contracts,
but use cost of construction contracts. Send to Stefanie by Nov. 5.
FICE/FDOT Working Group on CEI Issues (All): Ananth provided a handout that
had a list of CEI issues. A working group has been developed to discuss these issues.
DCCM’s are to review and comment to Stefanie.
Compensation for Premium Overtime: Discussed e-mail dated 10-19-04 from Terry
Cappelini to Kevin Thibault.
Scope of Services Issues and future changes (Prasad): It may be worthwhile, on
certain contracts, to require an utility inspector or coordinator/person to ensure that the
Contractor is meeting local utility agency requirements. Ananth said to add if you need
it. Ananth provided a handout that listed qualifications of a utility coordinator. The
bottom half of page should be put in the scope and the utility coordinator as an alternative
at the end. Remove manager from the title and just use the title Utility Coordinator. Redline scope and send to Stefanie by Nov. 5. If you have an ITS project, advertise as 10.1
with secondary requirements of 6.3.
Action Request Form (Cook): Include contact person’s phone numbers on this form.
Qualification requirements (Cook): The Asphalt Plant Inspector qualification requires
an asphalt plant inspector have experience in the plant for one year. David Sadler said
that this requirement would not be relaxed. D4, D7, D6, TP and D2 have a separate
contract that supplies an asphalt plant inspector. D1 and D3 have the plant inspector
under the CEI contract.
Transition to laptop computers/notebook for SiteManger entry (Cook):
D1 in-house will have laptops. D2 - not supporting SitePad, talked about laptops. TP –
concerned about the expense rate. D6 – Tallahassee has given the districts some
ruggedized laptops. D7 – had problems with wireless. Jim Johnson is still working on
this. D5 – even if you have laptops, SiteManager can not support it, not at the point
where they can communicate. D5 has a pilot project using a ruggedized laptop but does
not use SiteManager.
Final Invoicing (Duazo):
Handout: 13.2 Invoicing Instructions: (last paragraph) reads: A Final Invoice will be
submitted to the Department no later than the 20th day of the month following Final
Acceptance of the individual project. Jonathan suggested changing it. It will be changed
to: A Final Invoice will be submitted to the Department no later that the 30th day of the
month following Final Acceptance of the individual project or as requested by the
Department. I struck out “of the month” in the sentence above, so if someone final
accepted a project on the 29th day of the month they would have more than one day to
submit final invoice. Stefanie will change the scope and have it posted on the website.
3
District Consultant CEI Managers Meeting Minutes
October 20 and 21, 2004 in Orlando, FL
Consultant Grading Update (Prasad): A new grading form has been developed by a
task team that included Janet Cook. Professional Services has it available for testing in
TSO. It will not go into effect until rule change – end of year.
Open Forum: D6 – checking with counties and cities for an overlap of CEI selection
availability. D4 – has current assignments for CEI on their website for others to use to
check for availability. D2 – Legal needs access to documents in Hummingbird.
CEI and EOR Conflict of Interest (Prasad): FHWA thought that the two year approval
extended to affiliated companies like PB and PBCS. This is still in limbo and should be
discussed with Ananth and FHWA. The Department is discussing this with FHWA to
reach an agreement. The Assistant Secretary has to approve if EOR and CEI is same
entity i.e. RS&H is EOR and RS&H is CEI. Some Directors of Production are
suggesting eliminating the selection process and allow the EOR to become the CEI.
Project Management Office update (Murphy): Needs assessment for training in
November and early December. Lee will attend and represent the districts and central
office construction.
October 21, 2004
Attendees: Lorie Wilson attended in addition to the attendees listed on October 20.
Certified Final Estimates (Prasad): Inform the consultants of their errors. Consultants
do not have to reimburse the Department if the Errors and Omissions do not exceed the
absolute value of $5000.00. However, the PM are encouraged to ask them what they are
going to do on the next job, or what process they will have in place to make sure the error
or omission does not happen again. Bill suggested giving examples at the FICE
conference to help consultants understand what kind of process improvements we are
looking for. D5 and D6 are making Offer of Final Payment upon receipt of the Certified
Final Estimate. Ananth suggested that this is the desired process.
Lump Sum CEI contracts update (All): D1 – doing a lot in rural residences and doing
fine. D2 – is taking out an anchor job in one of the groups. D3 – two rest areas jobs are
doing good. They like LS. D4 – only one LS job completed and went well and looking
for more candidates. D5 – 2 projects went over 20% and they like LS. OIG was going to
do an audit on a JEA contract – Marnie Parry will check on this. D6 – a lot under
construction, using on interchanges with no excuse bonus and other big jobs, about to
complete a job and will bring in OIG, consultants like it, do not like doing multiple
projects. D7 – targeting single projects, consultant had to do survey on project that may
require a supplement, likes LS. TP – one project under construction and doing ok, four
more coming, likes LS. Ananth said that if you have a FA job get OIG to audit. Most
districts are keeping surveying costs separate from LS CEI contract.
Experiences with the new Negotiation process – General Discussion
4
District Consultant CEI Managers Meeting Minutes
October 20 and 21, 2004 in Orlando, FL
At the last meeting there was discussion from Terry Cappelini about negotiated rates.
D1, D5, D6, D7 are negotiating salaries. D4, TP are not negotiating rates. Operating
margins for districts are as follows: D1 – 27%, D2 – 34%, D4 – 24%, D5 – 24%, D6 –
28%, TP – 24%. D1, D4 and sometimes D6 are putting the estimated cost in the
advertisement. D2, D3, D5, D7, TP do not put the estimate in the advertisement. The
estimate is different than the budget. The percentage of CEI costs: D1 – 8-9%, TP –
8.21%, D2 – 9.67%, D3 – 10%, D4 – 10-11%, D5 – 8.5%, D6 – 8.5%. Will continue to
discuss lessons learned in the future meetings.
DBE Reporting (Cook): We are capturing the anticipated utilization, so consultants
should be reminded to report reasonable, achievable and what they intend to use for
utilization goals.
CITS: Jonathan discussed having to amend contracts to fit CITS. According to Lee, it is
almost impossible to fix a mistake in CITS. LS CEI contracts leave the prime contractor
and he pays subs. Jonathan suggested that CITS be modified to enter all money on prime
and let the prime consultant pay the subs and certify, like it is done on District Wide and
LS CEI Contracts. Ananth will talk with Brandon Spencer about this.
Open Discussion: Lee has a full time Sr. Project Engineer that is also a part time Sr.
Project Engineer on Zeke’s job. Dave suggested all districts share the CEI staffing
information like Lee has done by putting the information on their website and include if
they are full time or part time.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:40 am.
5