1. Delivery of Multiple Small Projects—Now!
Task Order-Construction Agreements JH
Andrea / Moderator: Introduction of panel
Synopsis of session:
What created the need for TO-CA;
Quick overview of the process;
What is the best use of TO-CA / Comparison to other methods
Details of process and items to pay special attention to;
Discussion, question and answers;
When we get to the best practices we want to open up to Q&A and have more of a round table discussion, we’ll share some lessons learned and current challenges Adam / SJSU’s is dealing with
How many are interested in using the TO-CA process in the near future?

2. A New Project Delivery Tool…
What created the need?
Emphasis on Smaller Projects
Simplified Procurement / Delivery
Design-Build Capability
Best-Value Selection
Staff Augment
JH -
At an Executive Facilities Officers meeting a Small Project Committee was formed with a goal to facilitate CSU’s delivery of small projects
This renewed focus on small projects was emphasized at least partially because of the deferred maintenance backlog that CSU is now facing
The committee identified issues with current small project delivery models,
Some of the needs identified for small project delivery were:
The Design-Bid-Build (DBB) delivery for small projects is time consuming and cumbersome. Bidding and awarding these projects often takes longer than the work itself
Bids for JOC contracts have become increasingly competitive with bid factors becoming correspondingly lower, causing a lack of quality in the contractor’s project delivery, and incentive for contractors to “game” the system.
Specialty Contracts (stage rigging, AV systems, building controls, etc.) are difficult in both the DBB and JOC delivery methods. The need for specialized consultants and bidders lengthens and complicates the DBB or JOC process.
The need to be able to perform certain projects at a moments notice and be more nimble….
There was an expressed need for a Design-Build JOC, and a “Best-Value” selection process for JOC.
Having a dedicated CM/DB that is able to help with programing, scheduling and budgeting of multiple projects, (and because of on multiple Campuses)
Staff Augment on an as-needed basis
Building a relationship with a DB/AE/subcontractor team that will get more efficient as multiple projects progress.
The discussion of these needs precipitated the development of both the JOC program described in the previous session, and the TO-CA small project delivery solution…
Thanks to all that have participated in its development…. Barbara Nicolson, Jim Sowerbrower, Andrea Gunn Eaton, Tinnah M., Ken R; John Gormley, Mark Zakhour, Adam B. (SJ is now using a CM version of this – CMMSP)

3. What is TO-CA? A model to deliver multiple projects under one contract
Master Enabling Agreement (MEA)
Task Order
Construction Agreement
Projects
Construction Manager (CM) or Design-Build (DB)
Projects to $5 Million
NTE $10 Million / year
JH what level of criteria are you thinking, establish criteria as a team – enough to propose on fees and consultants / AB to address?
So, what is a Task Order Construction Agreement?
The parts aren’t anything new, but we have cobbled together the parts into something that functions differently.
It is a Master Enabling Service Agreement that allows the use of multiple Task Orders to scope and design multiple projects, which A/E has been using these for years
When Campus and the DB Team are ready, a project is bid, a lump sum is proposed, and a construction agreement is executed for each project.
The new part of this is that more than one project may be designed and constructed under one agreement.
In fact, as a result of our June Trailer Bill Legislation, a single TO-CA MEA agreement may be used to complete projects on more than one Campus.
This may prove useful as we move forward with TO-CA for energy projects or other uses…
The TO-CA MEA, including Task Orders and Construction Agreements, is intended to function as both a Design-Build project delivery method, where the Builder contracts with the design professional,
and/or as a Construction Manager project delivery method, when the Trustees contract with the design professionals.
It could also be a mixture of these methods where the Campus may contract with an architect and builder brings on DA or DB trade contractors to participate in the design
The Campus will specify in the task order request whether the project is DB or CM. More on this later….
No project shall exceed $5,000,000 in total cost.
Not to exceed $10M/year
There is no minimum project cost.
The contract and project maximums have been arrived at so that a nice range of project sizes are possible, but so the TO-CA does not compete with our larger project delivery methods.

4. What is TO-CA? Selection of Service Provider Contract Projects
Two Phase – Best Value
Request for Qualifications (RFQ)
Request for Proposals (RFP)
Contract
One Year MEA Contract
Extension for a second year
Projects
Preconstruction – Negotiated Fees
Construction - GC Fee, OH&P and as Bid JH
The selection of the Service Provider / Contractor is a two-phased process, the Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and Request for Proposals (RFP)
It is a best value selection process very similar to the CMAR process that many of you are probably familiar with
Cost component of RFP is based on Builders and Designers proposed hourly rates for preconstruction and construction staffing, and the Builders Construction proposed OH&P. we’ll walk thru this on another slide
The TO-CA MEA is a one-year contract, with an option for the Trustees to extend the contract for a second year.
In the first year of the Contract, the total maximum Budgeted Cost for all Projects shall not exceed $10,000,000, or a total of $20,000,000 for two years, if extended to a second year.
“Project” may include programing and planning services and /or construction
Preconstruction services are done under a Task Order with negotiated fees based on structure proposed in the RFP
Construction Agreement - Management fee is negotiated – OH&P is as proposed -Direct construction cost is bid to subs

5. When Should We Use TO-CA?
Deliver Groups of Projects
Small Major Capital Projects
Mix of Design-Build and CM
Tight Delivery Windows
Programming and Planning Efforts
Staff Augment Services
Last Minute Projects
JOC Use
JH -
When to use TO-CA
Most important differentiator is the use for groups of projects
Projects that are close to or over the minor capital limit.
Small Design-Build projects
Specialty Design-Build projects
Don’t have to differentiate between the sizes of projects, or maintenance or construction…
Groups of projects with tight delivery windows that benefit from expedited procurement.
When outside help is needed to prioritize, budget and schedule a group of projects.
For use as a staff augment – Learn about the attributes of a relationship with a contractor as a staff augment –
locate staff augment in Campus office for better collaboration…. SJSU
Last Minute projects should be “minimized” 10% of the total
TO-CA may be used on projects similar to those done with JOC. The differentiators between the two delivery methods are:
Size of project – projects close to the $634K minor cap limit should go to TO-CA
Projects that are good candidates for Design-Build should be TO-CA
Projects that have many Non-Pre-Priced tasks are better in TO-CA
Projects that can be logically grouped or phased may be better in TO-CA
Projects that don’t need a lot of design or are on an especially tight time frame my be better in JOC
Repetitive tasks are better in JOC – painting, tile, carpet,
Minor projects that are easily scoped and priced are better in JOC
So that’s the short version of what it is – we’ll get into the details for a bit…

6. How Do We Use TO-CA? RFQ RFP List of Projects Schedule Qualifications
No Qualifications in RFP
Interview / Proposed Team
Rider A
Cost Component
JH -how to put a TO-CA in place, who to put on their team, how to prequalify subs all at once or job by job, San Diego multiple contract awards, San Jose Construction Manager Multiple Small Projects (CMMSP) with the ability to have DB and DA subs. DB sub must submit a GMP in Pre-Con and design to, DA at conclusion of Pre-Con trade package must be bid to get GMP.
So, now that you have an overview of what TO-CA is, how do we use it?
RFQ
RFQ is abbreviation of the CMAR model
List of the anticipated projects so builders will know if they are interested and qualified at RFQ stage
Includes a Schedule for the selection process and through at least the first project, Teams must be able to plan for their staffing they are committing to.
Zero points for previous CSU experience – trying to get new blood into the system,
TO-CA is a good way for new contractors to prove themselves…
RFP
RFP is simplified CMAR versions as well,
Qualifications have been removed from RFP, in RFQ only
Interview and proposed team is an important part of the RFP, evaluation points have been bumped up –
Proposal for staffing of the different phases of the published projects with proposed hours for each staff member
The importance of the team cannot be overemphasized in the TO-CA process, that’s what the RFP focuses on and what you are buying…
Abbreviated scope of services in RFP
All scope of work descriptions have been moved into the Rider “A”
There is no commitment for any minimum volume of work, it dependent on team performance
One thing I should mention is that, if desired, an award can be made to multiple firms with one RFQ/RFP process. You would just have to state that’s what you intend to do in the bid documents. San Diego will be an early adopter of TO-CA and will Probably do this as they want to do more than $10M in the first year.
The RFP will have 2 components:
Technical proposal with staffing proposal and numbers of hours
Sealed cost proposal that extends the staffing proposal with the hourly rates for each proposed staff member. This will be opened after the Technical proposals have been evaluate….next slide

7. What is TO-CA? RFP Bid Form Cost Component:
Average of three staff rates with highest number of hours:
Architectural Services Fees x 2500 hours
Consultants Services Fees x 2500 hours
Preconstruction Services Fees x 1000 hours
Construction Phase Site Management Fee x 4000 hours
DB Construction OH&P x 50% of Budgeted D.C.C.
CM Construction OH&P x 50% of Budgeted D.C.C.
Fee for Assembly of Initial subcontractor bidding pool JH
Cost component gets to the heart of RFP is because its based on staffing and rates:
How much will this new partner cost?
The RFP sealed cost proposal will contain:
Architects staffing preconstruction and construction phase hourly rates
Consultants staffing preconstruction and construction phase hourly rates
Contractors staffing preconstruction hourly rates
Contractors Construction phase Site management fee hourly rates
Percentage of Direct Construction Cost for Construction Phase OH&P for DB and CM projects
Lump Sum for prequalification and assembly of the bidding pool
The average of the rates for the three staff members from each category with the highest proposed number of hours in the technical RFP will be multiplied by the assumed number of hours to arrive at a total cost of services for evaluation purposes
The proposed OH&P for CM and DB delivery is multiplied by an assumed percentage of the total dollar volume of the listed projects
To all of this the proposed lump sum fee for the assembly of the trade contractor bidding pool is added to arrive at the cost component for evaluation purposes
This illustrates one of the reasons that a list of the anticipated projects is important
Proposers need to be able to predict the staffing - more on that

8. How Do We Use TO-CA? Task Orders Preconstruction Services
Negotiated Fees for Services
Preconstruction Services
Define Scope of Projects
Scheduling
Estimating
Design Services
As CM or Design-Builder
AB – we want to touch on phase 1 lump sum is for service and commodity acquisitions, phase 2 lump sum is for installation
After RFQ/PFP selection process:
Service providers are given a TO-CA Master Enabling Agreement
For each project, or task, Campus issues a project or task specific, Task Order Request
Include: a project description that may vary:
A narrative for a smaller project
criteria and/or performance documents for larger or more specialized projects;
Criteria can be developed with the service provider, but this may entail a separate task order
project budget;
project schedule;
description of preconstruction services required;
CM or DB
Task Orders have reimbursable expenses as described in rider A
Service Provider submits specific proposals to Trustees for design and/or preconstruction services as detailed, to serve as the basis for the Task Order
Task Order staffing costs shall be based on the fee schedule submitted as part of the RFP cost component
Campus write Service Provider a Task Order under the MEA for services and costs as negotiated
During the preconstruction phase:
Service provider to work with the Trustees to define the budget, scope, and schedule of the project(s);
Colocation with Campus Staff and augment to staff?
Use to fill in the holes in current staffing – The task order scope of services for each project will vary to suit.
Scheduling preconstruction and construction activities, for separate projects, and the phasing of projects
Providing budgeting estimates, and more refined estimates as scopes are developed
Identification of project risks and working thru the trade package scopes of work to mitigate the risks
Constructability and value management (as opposed to value engineering)
Recommending and providing site investigation services – reduce unforeseen site conditions
Site investigations including selective demolition as required. This results in physical labor so use a direct PO under service acquisition PO or use a demolition construction agreement that can be used for multiple projects
Provide coordination with AE, Trustees, and subcontractors as required assuring conformance to project budget, schedule, and project scope;
Providing design services as a Design-Builder or working with a Campus A/E in CM role
If a DB project, provide design services with AE under contract to the DB to provide scope definition and code compliance drawings and specifications;
If CM project, providing cost estimating, cost control, logistics planning and constructability services, and providing a warranty for services

9. How Do We Use TO-CA? Preconstruction Services
Subcontractor Bidding Pool
Advertise
Prequalify
Bidding
Campus Building Permit
Bid to Subcontractor Pool
Lump Sum Project Proposal
Management Fees as proposed and negotiated
OH&P as proposed
AB – we want to discuss the difference between lump sum vs GMP approach, staff augment, programming services the deliverable is a task order for a specific project
The preconstruction services desired may be highly variable but generally include:
Before the first project bids:
Builder to advertise and prequalify subcontractors for inclusion in the project bidding pool,
Bidding Pool will be used to bid all subsequent projects; no need to re-advertise, new subs can be prequalified at any time,
You may decide to prequalify the subs based on a point system, ranking the subs by qualifications and only allowing a predetermined number of subs to become part of the bidding pool.
Contractor runs prequalification process, university reviews and collaborates on the advertisements and prequalification criteria
This prequalification and the creation of the bidding pool may happen incrementally or largely up-front
If projects or trades are added subcontractors may be added to the bidding pool
Build relationships with subs so that they are willing and eager to bid the projects. You take care of them, and they will take care of you…
Other Preconstruction tasks likely to be the builders responsibility, with Campus collaboration are:
Acquire a Campus Building Permit (may be phased?);
Bid the project to prequalified subcontractors for each trade and award to the lowest bidders;
Bidding may happen whenever Campus and contractor agree / may be phased
Assemble a project Lump Sum proposal based on low bids.
The lump sum proposal will include a negotiation to determine the construction contingency and the LD’s
Also included in the lump sum price
If the task order is DB, the Construction Agreements will be Design-Build to the extent that change orders will be limited to unforeseen site conditions, and Trustees or Regulatory Agency changes.
If Task Order is CM , CM constructability warranty will be in effect
The warranty is described in the Rider A scope of work description
One of the things that differentiates TO-CA DB is that, if desired, the entire design period may be collaborative, or Campus and DB may decide to develop the plans to a point that allows the DB to provide a GMP then complete the documents, bid the project, and convert to a lump sum.
This would allow a phased construction start with a NTE price, while still allowing for the development of the documents

10. How Do We Use TO-CA? Contingency Schedule Construction Contingency
Liquidated Damages
Work with Builder to mitigate downside risk
Contingency Schedule
Project Size
<$250K
<$500K
<$1,000K
<$2,500K
≤$5,000K
DB Projects 9%
8.5% 8%
7.5% 7%
CM Projects 6%
5.5% 5%
4.5% 4%
AB – JH chime in
Rider A table contains suggested contingency percentages so builders will know what to expect
The actual contingency is negotiated with Builder and variable depending on:
Size of project
DB or CM
New construction or remodel?
What does the risk matrix look like? Where are the risks, how large are they, and have they been dealt with in other ways? (allowances, site surveys, phased awards, future bids after demo…)
The contingency is treated as an allowance with any remaining balance returned to the owner so it is OK to be a bit liberal
If the Campus decides a split on any remainder of the contingency is possible, provides incentive for savings and better planning…
Liquidated damages
Agree with builder on the LDs:
Should be made as realistic as possible, reflecting actual anticipated losses if project doesn’t complete on time
That said, they should not be prohibitive,
If LD’s are too high, Campus will foot the bill for the perceived risk anyway
SJ Boiler project: if housing is not complete losses would be catastrophic, builder would not be able to sustain loss based on the size of the project and potential profit
For the boiler project, require that builder install a temporary boiler if not completed in time.
Work with the builder, get creative, to schedule and plan so the downside is mitigated and the risk is shared.
The TO-CA model allows a Campus great flexibility, with associated risks that must be wisely managed…

11. How Do We Use TO-CA? Construction Services Construction Agreement
Task Order
Construction Manager (CM)
Design-Build (DB)
Owner input on services
Build Project
AB -
Each Construction Agreement issued under the TO-CA shall have:
Separate Direct Construction Cost;
Lump Sum Price or GMP;
Contingency;
Construction Documents;
Payment and Performance Bonds;
Notice to Proceed;
Notice of Completion;
Retention
Owner may decide to request a greater (or lesser) level of service as required for each construction project, depending on project conditions and requirements (Division 1) This must be handled very carefully however as the GC/DB will have ultimate responsibility for construction cost and schedule
After the construction agreement between the DB/CM and the Trustees is fully executed, the DB/CM shall enter into contracts for the construction phase with the successful subcontractors in each trade, and build the project.

12. TO-CA Best Practices DB v. CM Options Listing projects included in RFP
Listing of Subcontractors
Pre-Process Meeting
Single v. Multiple project Task Orders
Negotiation of Task Orders AB
want to discuss in the process SJSU has there will have elements of design build - Open up to audience
DB v CM options:
DB v. CM shall be described in the Task Order Request and carried through the rest of the documents.
Rider A describes how this is done,
Specifying DB or CM in the task order revises the warranty requirements to remove responsibility for design errors from the CM team and the revises ‘Service Provider” to read CM or DB…
Use of General Conditions:
If a DB project the Collaborative Design-Build Contract General Conditions, with the DB TO-CA supplemental General Conditions are to be used.
If a CM project the CMAR General Conditions, with the CM TO-CA supplemental General Conditions are to be used.
DA and BB trade contractors may be used
This may be especially valuable for specialty projects, like energy projects,
Same best value selection process used for CMAR
Listing of projects at RFP phase is important so that proposers may determine and propose on:
sub-consultants;
subcontractors;
staffing and rates;
proposed OH&P for projects
Once a project has bid, and a builder has provided a list of subcontractors, then those subs have PCC 4100 rights, and the associated protections from being substituted. Contractors must provide updated sub listings with each pay request.
Pre-process meeting: describe content and purpose
Single v. Multiple Task, Task Orders for programing and other services
Negotiation of task orders:
related to listing of subs for stop notice rights

13. TO-CA Best Practices When is Lump Sum Defined? Review of Lump Sum
Contingencies
Scheduling AB
Bidding and Lump Sum submissions; when is Lump Sum defined?
Its all about hitting the budget bulls-eye – working together beforehand to define the project goals, budgets, and schedule, so the final result fits the needs of both the Campus and the Builder
Review of Lump Sum (very similar to a CMAR GMP)
The lump sum will be the total of:
Competitively bid direct cost Sub bids
Allowances
General Requirements should be treated as an allowance if not bid, may be a split on savings…
Site management fee (for builder and AE as appropriate) based on staffing rates proposed in RFP and as negotiated;
OH&P as proposed in the RFP;
Exceptions and Conditions: Be very careful with any exceptions or clarifications to the contract that the builder may want to make. Very often those types of exceptions are items that should be covered in preconstruction, or are already covered by general conditions.
Contingencies v. Allowances: Don’t allow a builder to pile on too many allowances that will essentially aggregate to form another contingency. Look for “hidden” contingencies within the sub bids work through them with the builder so they are moved into a legitimate allowance or bid.
Scheduling: The scheduling section of the General Conditions has been replaced (via the supplemental General Conditions) with a simpler scheduling specification. It is much closer to the Minor capital scheduling specification. If desired, that section of the SGCs can be deleted in favor of the entire major cap scheduling section.

14. TO-CA Best Practices Project Closeout Lump Sum Contract Punch list
Reconciliation of Allowances
Project Closeout Checklist
Certification of Completion &
Occupancy/Release of Retention
Notice of Completion
Retention AB
Each project within the MEA will be built under a separate construction contract and closed out separately:
Lump Sum Contract
Punch list
Reconciliation of Allowances (new form on line)
Closeout checklist (new form on line)
Certificate of completion
Notice of Completion
Retention
As already described, the projects, both DB and CM are Lump Sum construction contracts.
A strong preference for this was expressed by Campus EFO’s, so that’s the way its been set up.
That makes it very similar to a traditional design-build, meaning no final accounting is required during the closeout of the project.

15. TO-CA Best Practices Risk ‘Teeter – Totter” Feedback Loop
JH - pre-construction survey, limited construction via direct PO? (previous slide?), public works vs maintenance (no difference in TO-CA), relative risk because you don't have many protections
TO-CA has many built-in flexibilities, allowing a Campus wide discretion in staffing choices,
how a project can be delivered:
Type and extent of contract documents;
phasing and scheduling;
contingencies;
liquidated damages
The flipside of those flexibilities is the potential for added risk that must be carefully managed
Risk should may be thought of in terms of a teeter totter, the risk must be balanced between the parties.
How much do you want to transfer?
What do you want to give up, what will you get from that, and how much will it cost you to transfer that risk?
If you assume risk wisely and manage it well it will result in less expensive and more successful projects.
Risk should be assumed by the party that can most effectively manage that risk
Wise risk decisions must be made or the TO-CA won’t work, you will end up spending too much, or on the flip side you may have contractors that don’t want to participate.
One of the more useful aspects of TO-CA is the ability to take the lessons learned from one project about;
the team in place and its dynamics;
Effective team communications;
appropriate contingencies and liquidated damages;
planning process and approvals, etc.
and cycle those lessons learned back into future projects
This has the possibility to allow all sides of the team to improve your process and LEAN it up.
Plan-Do-Check (review)-Act (PDCA Cycle)
With this PDCA cycle your TO-CA projects should become more efficient as they progress by removing the non-value-added wastes

16. TO-CA Best Practices It’s all about Relationships… JH
TO-CA is mostly about the ability to build a relationship with your selected architect, builder and subcontractor and develop that relationship into a LEANer team process that will allow you to build your projects more quickly, and for less.
In order for that to happen the risks must be balanced between the parties, everybody must learn from previous projects and plug that back into future work, and above all there must be TRUST.
Steve Covey talks about “The Speed of Trust” in his book, that’s how TO-CA should work.
When trust goes up, costs go down and time goes down.
When trust goes down, costs go up, and time goes up…

17. TO-CA Road Show… Pilot Campuses CPDC TO-CA Training JH
Closing: TO-CA Road Show
CPDC is going to control the use of the TO-CA at first in order to learn more about its best use and refine the process.
A few pilot Campuses have signed on to be the early adopters. (San Jose, Long Beach, Fullerton, Channel Islands, San Diego,)
TO-CA is a Work in Progress… That reminds me of a construction joke, oh never mind I’m still working on it.. Point being is that we want to improve as we go.
When these Campuses have provided feedback on the process it will be cycled back into the model and made available to other Campuses.
Please let us know when you may want to adopt the use of TO-CA.
As Campuses adopt the use of TO-CA, CPDC will get on the road, come to you to train your Facilities and Procurement people in its use, and share the best practices learned from the early adopters.

18. Questions – Discussion ?
JH / AB

19. The California State University
Thanks All….
The California State University
Capital Planning, Design and Construction