” Evidence-based ” Life-cycle Federal Facility Management, BIM, and the Status Quo – NIBS, FFC

Yesterday (6/19/2012), the National Academies Federal Facility Council hosted a timely, and potentially watermark event “Predicting Outcomes of Investments in Maintenance and Repair of Federal Facilities“.

It is my hope that this event and those similar to it  be expanded as much as possible to assist all real property owners, architects, contractors, subcontractors, building product manufactures, oversight groups, and the community truly practice facility life-cycle management, referred to more recently as BIM (building information modeling / management).

Key Topics / Take Aways:

Identify and advance technologies, processes, and management practices that improve the performance of federal facilities over their entire life-cycle, from planning to disposal.

Predicting Outcomes of Investments in Maintenance and Repair for Federal Facilities
-Facility risks to Organizational Mission
-Potential to quantify
-Ability to predict outcomes vs. investment
-Communication strategies
-The “how” of measuring investment successes

1. You can’t manage what you don’t measure.

2. Requirements for facility life-cycle management, efficient repair/maintenance/sustainability, BIM

3. Inventory of Built Environment

4. Physical and Functional Condition of Assets (Portfolio, Site, Building/Area, System, Sub-system, Component Levels)

5. Expected Life-cycle and Deterioration Rates for Physical Assets

6. Ranking of Facilities/Built Environment relative to Organizational Mission

Mission Criticality / Risk Matrix

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

7. Associated Capital Reinvestment Requirements and Ability to run multi-year “What-if ” scenario analyses

8. Collaborative, Efficient Project Delivery Methods ( IPD – Integrated Project Delivery, JOC – Job Order Contracting)

 

Strategic approaches for investing in facilities maintenance and repair to achieve beneficial outcomes and to mitigate risks. Such approaches should do the following:

• Identify and prioritize the outcomes to be achieved through maintenance and repair investments and link those outcomes to achievement of agencies’ missions and other public policy objectives.
• Provide a systematic approach to performance measurement, analysis, and feedback.
• Provide for greater transparency and credibility in budget development, decision making, and budget execution.

• Identify and prioritize the beneficial outcomes that are to be achieved through maintenance and repair investments, preferably in the form of a 5- to 10-year plan agreed on by all levels of the organization.
• Establish a risk-based process for prioritizing annual maintenance and repair activities in the field and at the headquarters level.
• Establish standard methods for gathering and updating data to provide credible, empirical information for decision support, to measure outcomes from investments in maintenance and repair, and to track and improve the results.

Vehicles for Change—
• Portfolio-based facilities management (aka asset management)
•Technology (tools, knowledge, risk)
• Recognition of impacts of facilities on people, environment, mission (i.e., prioritizing)
• Changing of the Guard

Best Practices … Partial Listing
• Identification of better performing contractors or service providers
• GIS mapping tools
• Facility condition assessments – surveys, vendors, frequencies, costs
• Maintenance management systems
• Predictive maintenance tools
• Organizational structures
• Budget call process
• Master Planning processes
• Improve relationships with the facility end users and foster a “One Community”
• Energy management

Presentations:

Doug Ellsworth_USACE

DR_Uzarski_CERL

John Yates_DOE

Get Moy_Portfolio Mgmt

Peter Marshall_FFC_Chair

Terms:

Component-section (a.k.a. section): The basic “management unit.” Buildings are a collection of components grouped into systems. Sections define the component by material or equipment type and age.
Condition Survey Inspection (a.k.a. Condition Survey; Inspection): The gathering of data for a given component-section for the primary purpose of condition assessment.
Condition Assessment: The analysis of condition survey inspection data.
Component Section Condition Index (CSCI): An engineering – based condition assessment outcome metric (0 – 100 scale) and part of the Building Condition Index (BCI) series.

Condition Survey Inspection Objectives
1. Determine Condition (i.e. CSCI) of Component-Section
2. Determine Roll-Up Condition of System, Building, etc.
3. Provide a Condition History
4. Compute Deterioration Rates
5. Calibrate/Re-calibrate Condition Prediction Model Curves
6. Compute/Re-compute Remaining Maintenance Life
7. Determine Broad Scope of Work for Planning Purposes
8. Quantify/refine Work Needs (incl root cause analysis, if needed)
9. Establish when Cost Effective to Replace (vs. Repair)
10. Compute/Re-compute Remaining Service Life
11. QC/QA (Post-work Assessment)

Condition Survey Inspection Types
Deficiency: The “traditional” inspection discussed previously.
Distress Survey: The identification of distress types (i.e. crack, damage, etc.), severity (low, medium, high) and density (percentage) present. Data directly used in the calculation of the CSCI. No estimate of cost or priority.
Distress Survey with Quantities: Same as distress survey except that distress quantities are measured or counted. The resulting density is more accurate than a distress survey, thus the CSCI is more precise.
Direct Rating: A one-step process that combines inspection and condition assessment. An alphanumeric rating (three categories, three subcategories each) is assigned to the component-section by the inspector. Rating is directly correlated to a CSCI value, but is less accurate than a CSCI derived from a distress survey. Quick, but no record of what’s wrong.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

About The Federal Facilities Council

The Federal Facilities Council (FFC) was established at the National Academies in 1953 as the Federal Construction Council. The mission of the FFC is to identify and advance technologies, processes, and management practices that improve the performance of federal facilities over their life-cycles, from programming to disposal. The FFC is sponsored and funded by more than 20 federal agencies with responsibilities for and mutual issues related to all aspects of facilities design, construction, operations, renewal, and management.

The FFC fulfills its mission by networking and by sharing information among its sponsoring federal agencies and by leveraging its resources to conduct policy and technical studies, conferences, forums, and workshops on topics of mutual interest. The activities to be undertaken in any given calendar year are approved by a committee composed of senior representatives from each of the sponsor agencies.

Much of the work of the FFC is carried out by its 5 standing committees, each of which meets quarterly. The majority of meetings include presentations by guest speakers from the federal community, academia, and the private sector and these presentations are open to the public. The presentation slides are posted on the Events page of this website. If you would like to automatically receive notices of new reports or upcoming events, please subscribe to the FFC listserv.
Within the National Academies, the FFC operates under the auspices of the Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment (BICE) of the National Research Council. The BICE provides oversight and guidance for FFC activities and serves as a link between the sponsoring federal agencies and other elements of the building community, both national and international.

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier software for efficient construction project delivery – renovation, repair, sustainability – JOC, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, IPD, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA …

BIM Collaboration – Fact or Fiction?

BIM Collaboration – Fact or Fiction

As members of the AECOO1 Community and stewards of the build environment, it is our obligation to collaboratively address our industry-specific productivity and business process issues as well as the our lack of significant progress relative to addressing environmental impacts.

Truth be told, there is only one significant barrier to efficient AECOO practices and it is our existing culture of mistrust, lack of open communication, and reliance upon antagonistic construction delivery methods.

The design-bid-build construction delivery method and associated practices such of awarding contracts to the lowest bidder do little more than a fuel to the fires of waste, protracted project timelines, change orders, and legal disputes.

Also, focus upon symptoms such as lack of effective technology usage and associated interoperability issues, have done little to drive change.  That said, it may be technology that is the acts as the catalyst to tear down the walls of mistrust and silos of independent groups and activities.

Cloud computing and associated social networking have already begun to dramatically alter the world and stand ready to forcefully impact the AECOO community.

A simplified, however, powerful definition of BIM is “the efficient life-cycle management of the built environment supported by digital technology”.   Achievement of this goal requires the integration of multiple knowledge domains and associated processes, procedures, and activities, which to date have been managed in isolation.   While detailed knowledge of each domain will remain a challenge, sharing of critical information with multi-disciplinary impact can be achieved if communication barriers are removed.   Cloud computing, social networking, and the associated use of integrated project delivery methods2 will provide the basic foundation upon with BIM will be enabled.  An an actionable framework for professional AECOO collaboration, and increased productivity is on the horizon.   The timing and success, however, is totally dependent upon transformational changes regarding the ways in which AECOO professionals communicate and deliver their services.

 

1-Architerture, Engineering, Construction, Owners, Operations

2-Current examples include integrated project delivery (IPD) for new construction and job order contracting (JOC).  The latter is a form of IPD specifically targeting renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction.

 

 

 

via 4Clicks Solutions, LLC – Premier software for cost estimating and efficient project delivery – Job Order Contracting – JOC, SABER, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA, IPD …. and best implementation of RSMeans Construction Cost Data, including enhanced 400,000+ line items with detailed descriptions and modifiers.

BIM Construction Cost Estimating – Top Ten List

First and foremost BIM is the life-cycle management of the built environment supported by digital technology.  While the industry is currently fixated upon 3D visualization tools, aka Revit, Archicad, Bentely… they only represent components of a BIM solution.

Construction cost estimating, and facility life-cycle cost estimating are critical components of any facility design, project delivery, repair, renovation, sustainability, or planning function.

Here’s a list of BIM Construction Cost Estimating Requirements:

1.  Collaboration – involvement of all stakeholders – Owners, AE’s, Contractors, Oversight Groups, Community …

2. Transparency – Appropriate access to cost information, and associated comparison to published independent third-party costs such as RSMeans Cost Data.

3. Consistent Format and Terminology – Use of a standard set of terms and data architectures such as Uniformat, Masterformat, Omniclass.

4. Metrics and Benchmarks – Time, Accuracy, Cost

5. Proper allowances for local conditions – geographic, weather, productivity of labor, …

6. Appropriate level of technology to assure productivity, collaboration, security, audit trail.

7. Robust Process – The application of a robust process and business “best-practices” with a focus upon continuous improvement.

8. Appropriate knowledge of all “levels” of construction cost estimating and their potential accuracy – Square Foot / Conceptual / Building Level Construction Cost Estimating, Assembly / System Level Construction Cost Estimating, Unit Line Item Construction Cost Estimating.

9. Knowledge of the impact of the Construction Cost Delivery Method upon construction costs and life-cycle costs – Design-Bid-Build, CM@Risk, Design-Build, Job Order Contracting, Integrated Project Delivery

10. Fundamental understanding of Total Cost of Ownership and Facility Life-cycle Management – Physical and functional conditions, Operations, Sustainability, Renovation, Repair, Efficient Project Delivery Methods ( IPD-Integrated Project Delivey, JOC – Job Order Contracting )

Clouds, Collaborative and Integrated Solutions = Efficient Facility Renovation, Repair, Sustainability, and Construction

The convergence of global economic and environmental change with collaborative disruptive technologies is altering the very foundation of the Facility Architecture, Engineering, Construction, and  Operations sector.  Transformational change is upon all stakeholders; Owners, Contractors, Facility Users, Oversight Groups, Architects, Engineers, Building Product Manufactures…

Transparency, common lexicon, and the sharing and adoption of “best practices” with a focus upon PROCESS, embedded within and supported by technology is the clear direction.   Those unwilling to “share” and/or collaborate will face severe limitations as “Facebook” cloud-centric technology and associated collaborative processes for the built environment pound against the silo walls of monolithic dated software and isolated, unsubstantiated ad-hoc business methods.

BIM, building information modeling, will quickly evolve in everyone’s mind from 3D visualization to facility life-cycle management.  Tools such as Revit and Archicad will become the components of total BIM solution that they are vs. “BIM solutions”.  Cloud technology will integrated the previously separate domains of design, capital planning, project delivery, repair and maintenance, building automation systems, geographic information systems,  life/safety, security, operations, etc.

Furthermore, the fact that the sum of valued components can exceed the value of whole will become abundantly clear.  Best-in-class solutions from each of these knowledge domains will evolve and readily talk to each other… in an “apples to apples” manner, and “single point” systems such as IWMS, etc. will go by the way side.

BIM and the Cloud – 2012 – Article

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier software for construction cost estimating and efficient project delivery for JOC, SABER, IPD, IDIQ, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA.  RSMeans strategic business partner and exclusive provider of enhanced 400,000 line item RSMeans Cost Database.

LEED Abandoned by DOD?

In the recent past, all new DOD construction projects were required to meet the LEED Silver or an equivalent standard and/or to comply with the five principles of High Performance Sustainable Buildings. This year a new construction code for high-performance, sustainable buildings, is expected that will govern all new construction, major renovations and leased space acquisition. This new code, based heavily on ASHRAE 189.1, will accelerate DoD’s move toward efficient, sustainable facilities that cost less to own and operate, leave a smaller environmental footprint and improve employee productivity.

Testimony by  Dr. Dorothy Robyn Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations and Environment) before the House Appropriations Committee Subcommittee on Military Construction, Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies on March 7, 2012 to present the President’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 budget request for the Department of Defense programs to support installations, facility energy and the
environment covered four topics:

international and domestic basing, including the Department’s request for authorization of two new rounds of Base Realignment and Closure;

management of the built environment, including the programs that support military construction,
family housing,  sustainment and recapitalization;

strategy for managing facility energy to reduce costs and improve installation energy security;

and  management of the natural environment, including the programs that support environmental conservation and restoration, environmental technology and compatible development.

Relative to LEED it is important to note that  Congress has established a requirement to report  the return on investment from using consensus standards such as ASHRAE 189.1.  This is important to note as with more than 300,000 buildings and 2.2 billion square feet of building space, the DoD has a physical infrastructure footprint three times that of Wal-Mart and six times that of GSA.  The DOD’s  energy bill is approximately $4 billion annually—roughly 10 percent of what DoD spends to maintain its installation infrastructure ($40 billion).  Additionally facility energy represents nearly 40 percent of DOD greenhouse gas emissions.

Full Testimony

via http://www.4Clicks.com – Premier software for efficient cost estimating and efficient construction project delivery – JOC, SABER, SATOC, IPD, IDIQ, MATOC, MACC, POCA, BOA.  Featuring exclusive 400,000 line item representation of RSMeans Cost Data, visual estimating, contract management, and document management…all in one application.

Estimating, Project Delivery Methods and Improved Construction Productivity

Accurate construction estimates are a fundamental component of any successful construction project.

The more accurate the scope of a construction project, the more accurate the estimate.

To achieve accuracy in both the scope and the estimate requires collaboration and communication among Owners, AE’s, and Contractors.  Thus, while many/most AEC professionals could likely provide an accurate estimate if provided an accurate, detailed scope of the project, the latter is rare.

The endemic lack of collaboration among Owners, AEs, and Contractors, as well as relatively low percentage of timely accurate construction project scopes are both due to the inconsistent application of robust project delivery methods.

Any significant improvement in construction cost estimating and associated procurement, project management, and actual job-site work must be based in the development and deployment of efficient project delivery methods, such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD), IPD-lite, Job Order Contacting(JOC).

Accurate scoping requires a knowledge of the construction processes. Unit costs and standardized data architectures and lexicon play key roles in accurately communication project requirements, however, AE, site, and execution components all impact unit pricing.

Converting scope to quantities requires a solid understanding of construction techniques, working with numbers, drawing scales, waste factors, plan reading, conversion factors, labor/material/crew/equipment variables …. and quantity take-off (QTO) and unit, assembly, system, and square foot costs are all important aspects.  For example, professional estimators..whether Owners, Contractors, or Independent,  get their unit costs a wide range of sources… historical information, contractors, trades, business product manufactures, as well as published national average, and localized cost data.
While a  lump sum price is so much more than “just” the total of unit material, labor and equipment costs, unit costs and standardized cost data architecture do, however, help in mitigating “missed items” and in communicating and resusing cost data.

via-www.4Clicks.com – premier software for efficient project delivery – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, MACC, IDIQ, POCA, BOA.

Integrated Project Delivery – IPD, Job Order Contracting – JOC, BIM, and Efficient Project Delivery

Project delivery methods set the tone and largely dictate the relative success of any facility construction, renovation, repair, or sustainability project.  Project delivery methods must therefore be a component of BIM, a fact many/most 3D visualization software vendors appear to have ignored.

It is the project delivery method that is largely responsible for the fact that productivity within our AEC sector is abysmal compared to any other.

Below is are related article that I hope you find of interest.

Integrated Project Delivery and JOC by Rick Farrag (CJE Newsletter, 2010)

In the last few years, Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) has emerged as an accepted delivery method along with
Design/Build, CM, CM@R and, of course,Job Order Contracting. Recently, several organizations collaborated together and published a white paper titled Integrated Project Delivery for Public and Private Owners. The paper was authored by NASFA, COAA, APPA, the Association of Higher Education Facilities Officers, AGC and AIA, and described the IPD delivery method and explained that it is a collaborative alliance among project stakeholders – owners, designers, contractors and other participants – to optimize the project results.

During the Construction Owners Association
of America Fall Conference last November, I had the opportunity to attend a one-hour breakout session dedicated to IPD. Two case studies were presented on projects executed by the Corps of Engineers.

So what is IPD? Numerous papers and articles have recently been published about IPD detailing this delivery method. In summary, IPD advocates pulling together the owner, contractor, designer, and others to achieve higher project results, which in turn increases the overall value to the owner. It promotes collaboration and partnership; it is about integrating design excellence with a constructor’s expertise during the conceptual stage of a project life cycle. Accordingly, the risk profile and allocation change significantly from other traditionaldelivery methods. It is intended for large-size projects.
IPD and Job Order contracting (JOC) have several things in common (JOC is actually a form of “IPD-lite”, created for renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction projects). Aside from the typical size of IPD projects, one may find several similarities between the two delivery methods.
For example, JOC is also based on close collaboration between all stake holders. Just as partnering is a prelude to IPD, it is the foundation that a successful JOC program is built on. Traditional construction delivery methods typically have an adversarial relationship. JOC, on the other hand, is a longterm contract of three to five years which promotes a close and effective working relationship between contractor, client and subcontractors. A JOC contract is inherently
built on partnering for the long-term relationship to succeed.

Early involvement of the construction manager and the contractor with the owner and the designer in the conceptual phase of the project is another similarity with IPD that brings value to the owners. Joint scope of work development
under the JOC program is a typical feature as the starting point for each project (task order) under the contract. Bringing the JOC contractor together with the owner and the designer, when applicable, provides a higher level of common understanding of the scope of work. This helps to eliminate potential disputes and change orders that traditional construction delivery methods are known to experience.

Another advantage that early involvement brings under a JOC contract is the ability of the contractor to provide input
about the potential cost, constructability, and value engineering that aids the designer in making more efficient and cost-effective decisions.
Common processes are yet another similarity between JOC and IPD. Establishing shared processes that govern the flow of information and communication between all project participants is critical in both delivery methods.
These processes develop an effective and transparent transfer of information in all directions with the goal of creating and building trust. After all, a JOC program is only as successful as the ability of all participants to trust each
other. An effective and successful JOC contractor focuses its efforts onbuilding and maintaining
the trust with his clients and subcontractors. Lastly, risk sharing is another advantage both
delivery methods bring to the owner. As scopes of work are jointly developed, discussed, agreed upon and finalized, a JOC contract is much less likely to have claims, change orders, and disputes than other traditional delivery methods.
Granted, JOC is not intended for multimillion dollar projects; and in most cases is limited to renovation, rehabilitation and minor new construction projects. However, this does not detract from the fact that JOC, if implemented
properly, is a great example of Integrated Project Delivery that has proven to be successful for over 25 years.

Second article:

JOC – The Stimulus Ready Delivery Method
By Robert Gair, RS Means  (CJE Newsletter 2010)

On August 22 CJE Member 4Clicks-Solutions sponsored a webinar on Job Order Contracting – The Stimulus Ready Delivery Method. The webinar was hosted by Reed Construction Data / RS Means moderated by Robert Gair, Principal Means Business Solutions with distinguished speakers Allen Henderson, consultant, formerly Facilities,
Manager Texas State University; John Murray, Director of Facilities Management, State of Missouri; Mark Bailey, President & CEO Centennial Contractors.

The intent of the webinar was to provide a broad perspective on JOC and to identify the benefits of using the JOC
Delivery Method and the specific value it provides for the Federal Stimulus Bill.

Allen Henderson

Allen Henderson led the presentation providing quality information on the JOC process and the interaction that occurs between an Owner and Contractor. Allen pointed out that JOC is unique from other delivery methods as the bidding process is not project specific, but takes on an IDIQ approach by issuing a contract to the best qualified contractor based the contractor’s
coefficient applied to a fixed price book. The coefficient remains constant through the life of the contract that may be one year with renewable option years up to four additional years. Inflation factors most often are based on the
annual or quarterly adjusted prices as provided by the price book. The awarded contractor is then available to the Owner on an on-call basis to perform renovation and repair projects. The Texas State experience showed that the
types of projects ranged from (1) interior renovations, (2) exterior building rehab, such as door, window and roof replacement (3) hardscape and landscape, (4) mechanical, electrical and plumbing upgrades, and (5) routine
maintenance and emergency work. To start a program Allen suggested beginning with a small, specific type of project work that is readily accomplished to get a feel for the JOC program. It is critically important to select a contractor that
is service oriented, who is quick to respond to owners requests, can submit sufficiently accurate job order proposals, can meet budget and timelines, and that the contractor become familiar with the owners needs and expectations.
Allen further noted that JOC has proven to be a delivery method that supports local contractors
which can provide professional quality workmanship. There may be a nationally based general contractor in charge of the overall program, but local contractors are hired to perform the work. With a successful program, the contractor will be rewarded with a contract extension and will have a reliable book of business which becomes a winning formula for
owner and contractor.
Allen cautioned that not all JOC contracts are the same. Contracts with no price restrictions(usually related to Division 1 General Requirements of the price book) will have a lower coefficient bid than contracts with restrictions,
which will commonly have a higher coefficient bid. Allen noted that contracts with restrictions are more predictable. He also noted, for the contractor to understand, that change orders are kept to a minimum with JOC – thus, the contractor’s coefficient bid is very important for their long-term profitability success. Successful JOC programs promote and adhere to a partnering philosophy between Owner and Contractor. The ways for the Owner and
Contractor to partner includes:
• Examine the internal project planning process
• Examine the job order review and award process
• Generate a list of the commonly used material and equipment
• Bring contractor in early in the design phase
• Provide access to all applicable record documents
• Accommodate contractor access to proposed project site
• Assist with permitting process, if needed
• Discuss access and staging issues
• Address issues to minimize the impact on existing operations
Regarding JOC proposals, Allen strongly suggested that reviewers should be experienced and well trained in general contracting and should have walked the job with the contractor so they mutually understand the project scope. He noted that the owner and contractor should be using the same software to develop and compare cost proposals.
He also felt that in-house trades personnel can be useful in the review process. Allen concludes that JOC is an effective delivery method when used on the right type of projects with a committed partnering contractor.

State of Missouri

John Murray provided the attendees with some very interesting facts and results from the State
of Missouri JOC Program. The State of Missouri passed legislation in 2005 allowing JOC as a delivery method for project work orders up-to $100,000. John felt that it was a beginning, but might be a limiting work order
dollar value for the long-term success of the JOC program. In 2007 the State changed the Statute to
a maximum of $300,000 on small, relatively simple projects with design limited to design
development.
John pointed out that the success of the State JOC program has grown and was clearly helped by the Statute increase affected in 2007. During the first two years for the program, April 2006 to April 2008, 34 projects were completed with a total projects value of $3,029,593. Under the second two-year contract April 2008 to April 2010, 86 projects were completed with a total dollar value of $5,012,086. The current contact is for one year with four one-year renewable
options.
John pointed out that the process in place at the
State is:
1. Owner Scope and Design
2. Walk Through with the Contractor
3. Contractor proposal
4. Owner Review
5. Negotiation
6. Notice to Proceed
7. Performance of Work
John agreed with the earlier comments from Allen noting that the partnering philosophy and the importance of having the owner and contractor using the same software program have been strong attributes to the success of the State’s program. The State of Missouri and their contractor both use RS Means JOCWorks software.
John’s conclusion was that the State of Missouri is very satisfied with its JOC Program with key elements being a strong working relationship with the Contractor, responsiveness of the Contractor and trust that is developed with success.

Centennial Contractors

Mark Bailey provided the attendees with the contractor’s perspective on JOC. Mark noted that JOC requires a different contractor skillset and mindset from the traditional Bid/Build process. The contractor to be successful using
JOC needs to embrace a collaborative spirit and process that emphasizes partnering and teamwork that is focused on a long-term relationship that is responsive to the owners’ needs. These attributes are created by delivering quality results and showing improved performance over time. To the owner, Mark provided this incite; ensure that JOC is the right fit for your organization, ensure that there is an adequate program volume that will be attractive to a qualified JOC contractor and be sure to consider your JOC bandwidth that generally fits between the inhouse trades that handle T&M contracts and the larger capital projects. (The project/task order values in this bandwidth fall between $10,000 and $1M, with a few exceptions ranging to $45M). Mark also noted that the owners should select JOC ‘able’ projects (Allen provided a good list in his presentation) and select the right contractor on a “Best Value” or a qualificationsbased
process. Mark provided a valuable incite into a successful JOC
program start-up. He feels strongly that a higher level of investment needs to be put in the working
relationship insuring that the alignment between the owner and contractor is well established. The contractor needs to insure that the owner’s and contractor’s simple projects with design limited to design
development.
John pointed out that the success of the State
JOC program has grown and was clearly helped
by the Statute increase affected in 2007. During
the first two years for the program, April 2006 to
April 2008, 34 projects were completed with a
total projects value of $3,029,593. Under the
second two-year contract April 2008 to April
2010, 86 projects were completed with a total
dollar value of $5,012,086. The current contact
is for one year with four one-year renewable
options.
John pointed out that the process in place at the
State is:
1. Owner Scope and Design
2. Walk Through with the Contractor
3. Contractor proposal
4. Owner Review
5. Negotiation
6. Notice to Proceed
7. Performance of Work
John agreed with the earlier comments from
Allen noting that the partnering philosophy and
the importance of having the owner and
contractor using the same software program have been strong attributes to the success of the State’s program. The State of Missouri and their contractor both use RS Means JOCWorks software.
John’s conclusion was that the State of Missouri is very satisfied with its JOC Program with key elements being a strong working relationship with the Contractor, responsiveness of the Contractor and trust that is developed with success.
Mark Bailey provided the attendees with the contractor’s perspective on JOC. Mark noted that JOC requires a different contractor skillset and mindset from the traditional Bid/Build process. The contractor to be successful using JOC needs to embrace a collaborative spirit and process that emphasizes partnering and teamwork that is focused on a long-term
relationship that is responsive to the owners’ needs. These attributes are created by delivering quality results and showing improved performance over time.
To the owner, Mark provided this incite; ensure that JOC is the right fit for your organization, ensure that there is an adequate program volume that will be attractive to a qualified JOC contractor and be sure to consider your JOC bandwidth that generally fits between the inhouse trades that handle T&M contracts and the larger capital projects. The project/task order values in this bandwidth fall between $10,000 and $1M, with a few exceptions ranging to $45M). Mark also noted that the owners should select JOC ‘able’ projects (Allen provided a good list in his presentation) and select the right contractor on a “Best Value” or a qualificationsbased process.
Mark provided a valuable incite into a successful JOC program start-up. He feels
strongly that a higher level of investment needs to be put in the working relationship insuring that the alignment between the owner and contractor is well established. The contractor needs to insure that the owner’s and contractor’s structure. A contractor who is familiar with the federal paperwork requirements and utilizes small local business will help to support and meet the stimulus hiring goals. JOC gives the owners a “shovel readiness” tool to maximize
funding from any source.
In conclusion, Mark noted what he called the added value of JOC:
1. Flexibility-matching project scope/goals to available budget
2. Targeted design; the right level of design for the project needs
3. Helping owners think plan and find solutions
4. Building safety into the project
5. Ensuring the local small business community benefits from the project dollars
6. Creating a financial incentive for the contractor that aligns with the owners goals for contractor performance

The Marginalization of BIM

1. All stakeholders – Owners, Contractors, A/E’s, Facility Users, Oversight Groups, ant the Community benefit from IPD (integrated project delivery) and “IPD-lite” which is JOC (Job Order Contracting).  The latter is a form of IPD for renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor new construction.

2. Existing and emerging technology and business processes such a BIM and cloud computing will enable and drive higher collaboration and productivity within the Architecture, Engineering, Contraction, Owner, and Operations sector.

3. Culture change is the current barrier to change, not technology or proven processes or lack of efficient delivery methods.  Collaboration, despite noteworthy examples to the contrary, is largely foreign to our industry.  Design-bid-build and low bid practices have created adversarial relationships in many/most cases.  Even “newer” processes such as design-build are lacking vs. IPD and JOC.

4. Contracts should reflect, support and embed the goals of the associated project delivery method, however, the project delivery method set the tone and determines the success/failure of most projects in concert with the professionalism of the team.

5.  The altered global economic and environment landscape, combined with collaborative cloud computing (the “Facebook for Life-cycle BIM”) will drive continued growth of IPD and JOC.

6.  LEAN and continuous improvement are indeed philosophies.  IPD, JOC, and BIM are methodologies, embedded within supporting technology to affect LEAN within the AECOO sector.  BIM, without LEAN, IPD, and JOC is indeed marginalized.

 

The BIM Framework - BIMF

A Step Closer to BIM? NIBS and AIA Working toward Centralized Building Information Resource

Let’s face it,  the virtually singularly low rate of productivity of the AECOO (architecture, engineering, construction, operations, owner) sector for the past several decades is due to our CULTURE.

As a group, we are kings of the “not invented here” syndrome… or the “my way is the better way” syndrome.  Also, the “let’s keep the Owner in the dark” or the “let’s not work together”, and the “bid low and make it up in change orders” , or “let’s accept the lowest bid and hope for the best” approaches to ruin.

As I’ve previously noted, the altered world economic and environmental landscapes will force CULTURAL change in our industry.  Architects, Engineers, and Contractors new motto will be “our best customer is a smart customer”.  Why?  It’s simple, collaboration and improved “cradle to cradle” facility life-cycle management approaches will be required for survival.  Furthermore, cloud computing and proven collaborative construction delivery methods such as Integrated Project Delivery (IPD) and “IPD-lite”, also known as Job Order Contracting, the latter for facility repair, renovation, sustainability and minor new construction, will converge to enable knowledge sharing among all facility stakeholders.

The signing of an agreement between The American Institute of Architects and the
National Institute of Building Sciences to Work Together on Promoting Building Industry Research and Knowledge
is just one indication of the our “changing AECOO landscape”.  It demonstrates the two organizations’ mutual interest in the design, construction, operations and maintenance of high-performance buildings and the desire… no better yet the recognized NEED TO COLLABORATE on issues surrounding these topics.

A primary initial goal of the “partnership” is the joint development of an on-line portal for building industry research and knowledge.   It’s amazing how many in our industry are not even aware of NIBS or Smart Building Alliance.  The march toward BIM, and recognizing its true potential as “efficient building life-cycle management support by technology and standardized processes, taxonomy, etc.” vs. “pretty 3D pictures” will know hopefully gain traction and momentum.

Building Information Management Framework - BIMF

via http://www.4Clicks.com – premier software for cost estimating and efficient project delivery – JOC, SABER, IPD, SATOC, MATOC, IDIQ, POCA, MACC, BOA ….

Beyond Green – High Performance Buildings, BIM, and Life-cycle Facility Management

Let’s face it, LEED is a great marketing tool, but NOT the solution.  “Kudos” to LEED for building awareness  and  addressing the need to focus upon sustainability of the built environment!

That said,  high performance buildings should not cost significantly more that “typical construction”.  The paperwork and methods involved in LEED add superfluous costs and will not necessarily yield optimal results.   I have entered far too many LEED certified  buildings with massive glass multi-story areas and other clearly “non-sustainable” items.  There should be little to no cost premium for a sustainable building.   Even now, studies show that a 2% premium is all that is required.   I would further argue that no premium is really need should basic standards be a requirement and market efficiencies take hold.  Also, over the life-cycle of a building, a sustainable, high-performance building will win on ROI every time as only 10%-20% of life-cycle cost go into construction, vs. operations, maintenance, etc.

Efficient ongoing life-cycle management of facilities is the key to sustainability.   It is probable that many, if not most LEED buildings constructed are no longer meeting their design goals.  Why?  They are simply not being monitored maintained on a proactive life-cycle basis.  Why not?   The culture of our industry and awareness of the true meaning of BIM need dramatic if/not disruptive change and  improvement.

BIM is the life-cycle management of the built environment supported by technology… not pretty 3D pictures that don’t link to value knowledge domains.   Further, collaboration is the key to BIM, and collaboration is dictated by AEC delivery methods.  Traditional delivery methods such as design-bid-build (DBB) and even attempts at improving it such as design-build (DB) and construction manager at risk (CMAR) are flawed as they inevitably pit some of the key parties involved against one another.

Integrated project delivery (IPD) and job order contracting (JOC), the latter “IPD-lite” specifically for renovation, repair, sustainability, and minor construction projects, are critical to BIM and to altering the inefficient and adversarial processes that dominant our industry today.

BIMF - A Framework for BIM