This document describes a project delivery method selection tool developed by researchers at UT and TxDOT to help TxDOT objectively choose between design-bid-build, design-build, and construction manager at risk project delivery methods. It provides an overview of the tool's development, including reviewing prior similar tools, identifying relevant project characteristics and goals, obtaining input from experts to determine weights, demonstrating the tool, and validating it on sample TxDOT projects. The tool aims to increase transparency and consistency in TxDOT's project delivery method decisions.

1. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Method
Selection Tool
2016 CTR Annual Symposium
April 13, 2016

2. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool
• History
– TxDOT received legislative authority in 2012
to use Design-Build
• Other approaches (CMAR) had been considered
• TxDOT previously limited to design-bid-build (DBB) method or
limited application of comprehensive development agreements
• Need
– Decision tool as projects are developed
– Objective analysis for determining project delivery method
– Specific to Texas

3. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
AGENDA
• Motivation and goals
• Relation to prior work
• Selection approach
• Expert input and validation
• Tool demonstration
• Concluding remarks

4. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Motivation: Main Goals of the Tool
• Help decision makers make an objective choice of project
delivery method, driven by:
– weighted project goals
– applicable project characteristics
• Transparent and flexible
• Modifiable and updateable (based on MS Excel)
• Recommendations will be consistent across projects and
users

5. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Method Selection
Tool
• Design - Bid - Build
• Design - Build
• Future – CMAR, others
These alternatives only represent major approaches. Specific contract
strategies (such as A+B, multiple primes, Incentives, Operate & Maintain)
should be analyzed after determining the delivery method, and are out of
the scope at this time.
Project Delivery Alternatives

6. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Team
CTR/UT Team
• Nabeel Khwaja, P.E
• Mayra Martinez
• Bill O’Brien, Ph.D., P.E.
• Jim O’Connor, Ph.D., P.E.
TxDOT Team
• Bill Hale, P.E. (sponsor)
• Richard Kirby, P.E.
• Tracey Friggle Logan, P.E.
• Duane Milligan, P.E.
• Katie Nees, P.E.

7. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Prior Work
• TRB – Evaluation of Project Delivery Methods
• Colorado DOT Methodology
• CII – Project Delivery Contract Strategy
• Georgia DOT Tool
• Florida DOT
• Virginia DOT
• Minnesota DOT
• New York DOT
• Washington DOT
• NTTA Model
• AASHTO

8. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Transit Cooperative Research Program
Framework for Texas Model
3 stages:
- Tier 1 – Qualitative (Like CDOT)
Structured discussion
- Tier 2 – Quantitative (Texas model)
Decision Matrix
- Tier 3 – Risk Analysis (contracting strategies)
Detailed analysis of specific risks
Objective:
“To assist transit agencies in evaluating and selecting
the most appropriate project delivery method for their
projects and in documenting this decision in a Project
Delivery Decision Report”

9. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Tier 1 Qualitative Tools
CDOT matrix

10. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Tier 2 Qualitative Tools
GDOT Design-Build
Suitability Assessment
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
11 7 8 6 12 2 5 3 9 4 1 10
PDCS Rating
CII’s Delivery
Methods’ Ranking

11. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Prior Work: Our Findings
• All mix dependent and independent variables:
– Mix Cause: project characteristics, and
– Effect: Project goals
• Commonality among factors
• Extracted a list of 34 factors that owners
consider when selecting a delivery method
• Factor list was consolidated with TxDOT input

12. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
34 Factors from existing methods & literature review
INDEPENDENT VARIABLES
PROJECT
CHARACTERISTICS
Inherent to the
project. Cannot be
changed.
DEPENDENT VARIABLES
PROJECT GOALS
Owner objectives.
Achievement will
depend on the project
characteristics and
the delivery method
chosen.

13. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Selection Approach – Method Overview
Delivery
methods
Project
performance
by objectives
and priorities.
Project
characteristics
Hinder or
leverage
Influence
2. Choose outcomes1. Score characteristics
3. Recommend method
(heat map – not absolutes)

14. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool:
Project Goals
Lower capital
cost
The contractual cost of the project must be the lowest reasonable;
the budget available is tight.
Higher cost
predictability
The project must be completed within the budget. The agency
wants to avoid cost growth.
Higher schedule
predictability
The project must be completed within the target schedule. The
agency wants to avoid schedule growth.
Lower capital
maintenance
costs
The agency is concerned about minimizing the maintenance costs
during the life cycle of the project.
-Safety & Quality are always considered target objectives
-Target duration can be met with any Delivery Method and the proper incentives

15. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool:
Project Characteristics
-34 Characteristics from review of prior work
-The team refined the list based on:
• Scope definition characteristics
• Overlaps
• Non-differentiating factors
• Applicability to TxDOT projects

16. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool:
Project Characteristics
1
Project has well known site conditions that won't cause significant field
changes.
2
The project will benefit from the introduction of innovative methodologies
early in the planning/design phase.
3
The project design (PS&E) is currently at an advanced stage; the agency
wants to avoid changes or rework in design.
4
The project requires the benefit of designer-contractor integration to
reduce coordination challenges.
5
Prescriptive project requirements for methods, materials, and/or
procedures limit contractor innovation in terms of alternatives.
6
For this project, alternate delivery methods shall create incremental
agency efforts and expenses that are expected to be greater than the
savings in capital expenses.

17. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool:
Project Characteristics
7
Early completion will add significant extra value for key project
stakeholders.
8
The agency is better equipped than the contractor to manage third party
issues.
9
The project is likely to benefit from shifting the risk of third party issues to
the contractor
10 Completion date of ROW acquisition is highly uncertain.
11
Utility relocations have not been completely identified and are likely to
result in important changes in the design, cost, and/or schedule of the
project.
12
The project includes permits requiring coordination and regulatory approval
during the design and/or construction phases of the project

18. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Obtaining Data to Assess
Weightings
TxDOT
FHWA
AGC
ACEC
Workshop Participants
Two workshops
• Refine characteristics
• Weight characteristics against
goals for each method
• Validation and review of
responses – understand outliers
• Weightings reflect summary
wisdom of community

19. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool
1. Project
characteristics
2. Project
objectives.

20. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool
3. Delivery
methods

21. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Project Delivery Selection Tool
Design- Build Delivery Method (Most Suitable)
Most Supportive Characteristics Least Supportive Characteristics
The project will benefit from the introduction of
innovative methodologies early in the
planning/design phase.
The agency is better equipped than the
contractor to manage third party issues.
The project requires the benefit of designer-
contractor integration to reduce coordination
challenges.
Prescriptive project requirements for methods,
materials, and/or procedures limit contractor
innovation in terms of alternatives.
Early completion will add significant extra value
for key project stakeholders.
For this project, alternate delivery methods shall
create incremental agency efforts and expenses
that are expected to be greater than the savings
in capital expenses.
Design- Bid-Build Delivery Method (Least Suitable)
Most Supportive Characteristics Least Supportive Characteristics
The project has well-known site conditions that
won’t cause significant field changes.
Completion date of ROW acquisition is highly
uncertain.
The agency is better equipped than the
contractor to manage third party issues.
Utility relocations have not been completely
identified and are likely to result in important
changes in the design, cost, and/or schedule of
the project.
The project will benefit from the introduction of
innovative methodologies early in the
planning/design phase.
The project includes permits requiring
coordination and regulator approval during the
design and/or construction phases of the project.
Most and least
supportive
characteristics
for each
delivery method

22. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Tool Validation
• Case-study based
• Tool should reproduce human decision making
• To ensure the tool gives recommendations aligned with
experts’ expectations
1
• Projects’
characteristics
& objectives
provided by PM
2
• Project ran
through the
tool
3
• Final recom-
mendation is
discussed

23. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Tool Validation
• Projects Tested
Project DBB DB Dif. Recommendation
1 75 Rehabilitation 0.32 -0.07 0.39 DBB
2 I-69 0.08 -0.02 0.1 Tier 3
3 Roger Deck Park 0.16 0.18 -0.02 Tier 3
4 SH 360 0 0.13 -0.13 Tier 3
5
Midtown Express
(SH183)
-0.07 0.27 -0.34 DB
6 LBJ East -0.16 0.32 -0.48 DB
7 SH-146 -0.26 0.24 -0.5 DB

24. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Tool Demonstration

25. COLLABORATE. INNOVATE. EDUCATE.
Concluding Remarks
• Creation of an objective MS Excel-based decision-support
tool (Tier 2)
– Including and differentiation of project goals and projects’
characteristics
– Giving quantitative measures for each alternative: DBB and DB
• Developed with the input of experienced TxDOT personnel
• Weighted with input from broad community of experts in
TxDOT projects
• Validated with range of TxDOT projects
• Flexible tool: easily auditable and modifiable