1. Project Delivery Systems

2. Enabling Legislation
Prior to 1995, ISDs were required to utilize competitive bidding.
In 1995, the Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill No.1 – intended to decentralize authority and return control to school districts.
Section of the Texas Education Code was added under this legislation, which modified the basic purchasing statutes for school districts.
Introduced the concept of “BEST VALUE PROCUREMENT” ($25,000+)
School districts were granted the flexibility of choosing any of a list of available methods of contracting.
Recent – SHALL legislation…

3. Enabling Legislation Senate Bill 1, 1995 Senate Bill 1331, 2003
– “Best Value” Procurement by Districts
Senate Bill 583, 1997
– Procedures for Various Strategies
Senate Bill 669, 1999
– Details, Job-Order Contracting
Senate Bill 510, 2001
– Tweak D/B
Senate Bill 1331, 2003
– Tweak
Several items vetoed in 2005/07 Sessions
In 2011, House Bill 628
– Gov’t Code, Chap 2269

4. HB 628 Construction and Public Works Methods
– Competitive Bidding
– Competitive Sealed Proposals
– Construction Manager-Agent
– Construction Manager-at-Risk
– Design-Build
– Job Order Contracting
– Minor projects - Not new construction
– Existing facility
Government Code Chapter 2269
Consolidates procurement methods
– public works
– construction-type projects
Local governments, including ISDs
Traditional competitive procurement methods

5. HB 628 Methods under Section 44.031 Texas Education Code are now
– Competitive bidding for services other than construction services
– Competitive sealed proposals for services other than construction services          
   – A request for proposals, for services other than construction services
– An inter-local contract for services other than construction services
– A method provided by Chapter 2269, Government Code, for construction
services
– The reverse auction procedure as defined by Section (d)
– The formation of a political subdivision corporation under Section
            

6. HB 628 Section 44.031(b) TEC – The district shall consider
The purchase price
The reputation of the vendor and of the vendor’s goods or services
The quality of the vendor’s goods or services
The extent to which the goods or services meet the district’s needs
The vendor’s past relationship with the district
The impact on the ability of the district to comply with laws and rules relating to historically underutilized businesses
The total long-term cost to the district to acquire the vendor’s goods or services
Any other relevant factor specifically listed in the request for bids or proposals         
            

7. HB 628 Sec. 2269.055 Criteria to Consider
– A method provided by Chapter 2269, Government Code, for construction
services
– The governmental entity may consider (used to read “shall”)
The price
The offeror’s experience and reputation
The quality of the goods or services
The impact on the ability of the governmental entity to comply with rules relating to historically underutilized businesses
The offeror’s safety record       
The offeror’s proposed personnel 
Whether the offeror’s financial capability is appropriate to the size and scope of the project    
Any other relevant factor specifically listed in the request for bids, proposals or qualification
             

8. HB 628 Construction contract other than Competitive Bidding…
– Before advertising
– Determine which method provides the best value for the governmental entity
– Publish in the request for proposals or qualifications the criteria and the applicable weighted value
– Document the basis of its selection and make the evaluations public not later than the seventh day after the date the contract is awarded
           

9. HB 628 Sec. 2269.053. DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY.
(a) The governing body of a governmental entity may delegate its authority under this chapter regarding an action authorized or required by this chapter to a designated representative, committee, or other person.
(b) The governmental entity shall provide notice of the delegation, the limits of the delegation, and the name or title of each person designated under Subsection (a) by rule or in the request for bids, proposals, or qualifications or in an addendum to the request.
             

10. Project Delivery Systems

11. Competitive Bidding (CB)
Quick Facts
Traditional – most familiar approach
District selects the Architect to design the project
After documents are fully complete, lump sum prices from General Contractors are requested
Selection of General Contractor is based on the lowest price and made to a single contractor

12. Competitive Bidding (CB)
Flow Chart

13. Competitive Bidding (CB)
Pros & Cons
PROS
CONS
Familiar delivery method
Defined project scope
Single point of responsibility for construction
Open, aggressive bid competition
No design phase teaming
Longer overall duration
Lack of flexibility for change
Possibility of adversarial relations
Contractor quality is not a factor

14. Competitive Bidding (CB)
Organizational Structure
General Contractor
Architecture / Engineering

15. Competitive Sealed Proposal (CSP)
Quick Facts
Similar to Competitive Bid – combination of price and other factors established by the district
District selects the Architect to design the project
After documents are fully complete, lump sum prices are accepted
Selection of General Contractor is not only based on the low price – but also on factors such as a project team, personnel. Schedule and similar project experience

16. Competitive Sealed Proposal (CSP)
Flow Chart

17. Competitive Sealed Proposal (CSP)
Pros & Cons
PROS
CONS
Selection flexibility
Defined project scope
Single point of responsibility for construction
Aggressive bidding – opportunity to select more qualified team
No design phase teaming
Longer overall duration
Longer bid process with several required steps

18. Competitive Sealed Proposal (CSP)
Organizational Structure
General Contractor
Architecture / Engineering

19. Construction Manager, Agency (CMA)
Quick Facts
CM agent acts as administrator and manager for the district in lieu of a General Contractor
CM provides design phase services
CM holds no subcontracts nor provides project bonding
Selection of CM Agent is qualifications based

20. Construction Manager, Agency (CMA)
Flow Chart

21. Construction Manager, Agency (CMA)
Pros & Cons
PROS
CONS
No single point of responsibility
Owner is the Contractor
No guarantee on price – until project completion
District manages all contracts
Cost are typically higher with multiple prime contractors
Higher owner administration cost to manage the project
No licensing requirements
Selection flexibility (Qualifications vs. Low Bid)
Design phase assistance
Change flexibility
Team building opportunity
Potential fast-track delivery process

22. Construction Manager, Agency (CMA)
Organizational Structure
Construction Manager, Agency
Architecture / Engineering

23. Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR)
Quick Facts
Construction Manager (CM) serves as the General Contractor assuming the risk for construction at contracted price or GMP (Guaranteed Maximum Price)
CM is responsible for project cost and schedule
CM provides design phase services in evaluating cost, schedule, constructability and alternatives
Selection is based on criteria that may combine qualifications, experience and fee

24. Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR)
Flow Chart

25. Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR)
Pros & Cons
PROS
CONS
Selection flexibility
Design phase assistance
Single point of responsibility
Change flexibility
Team concept
Faster schedule delivery
Removes some competitive nature of bidding
Difficult for district to evaluate validity of GMP

26. Construction Manager at Risk (CMAR)
Organizational Structure
General Contractor
Architecture / Engineering

27. Design & Build (DB) Quick Facts
A single entity is contracted to provide both design and construction
Complex delivery approach that requires district to be knowledgeable and very involved
Selection is based on proposal offering the best overall value to the district
Governmental entities are required to hire an independent architect to serve as their representative for the duration of the project

28. Design & Build (DB)
Flow Chart

29. Design & Build (DB) Pros & Cons PROS CONS Selection flexibility
Single point of responsibility for design and construction
Team concept
Faster schedule delivery
Loss of checks and balances
Difficult for district to manage
Key element is trust. Trust is hard to demonstrate to taxpayers.

30. Design & Build (DB) Organizational Structure General Contractor
Architecture / Engineering

31. Job Order Contracting Quick Facts
Job Order Contracting can be used for minor construction, not just repair and rehabilitation as was the previous limitation.
While there is no statutory dollar limit, owners should use their best judgment in determining the maximum aggregate value of projects under this method.

32. Job Order Contracting
Flow Chart

33. Job Order Contracting Pros & Cons PROS CONS
Suited for small in-house projects
Costing margin determined against RS means or other industry accepted labor table
Competition limited

34. Job Order Contracting Organizational Structure General Contractor
Architecture / Engineering

35. Recommendation
Competitive Sealed Proposal as the delivery method for Middle School #6
Northwest ISD Board of Trustees elects to delegate it’s authority to receive, review, and score qualified submissions; and present the final recommendation to the Board of Trustees
Northwest ISD Board of Trustees elects to delegate authority to the following indivuals:
NISD District Architect/Planner
NISD Executive Director of Construction
NISD Construction Manager
NISD Director of Purchasing and Contract Management
Representative of the A/E (of record) team

36. Questions?