NCHRP 20-107 [RFP]
Effective Construction Project Staffing Strategies for Transportation Agencies
Project Data
Funds: $500,000
Contract Time: 24 months
(includes 2 months for NCHRP review and approval of the interim report and 3 months for NCHRP review and for contractor revision of the final report)
Authorization to Begin Work: 6/8/2016 — estimated
Staff Responsibility: William C. Rogers
Phone: 202/334-1621
Email: wrogers@nas.edu
RFP Close Date: 1/21/2016
Fiscal Year: 2016
BACKGROUND
Transportation agencies continue to struggle with constrained resources, often resulting in staff reductions. At the same time, agencies are challenged to ensure that legal, environmental, and other requirements are met and documented for all federal- and state-funded projects. As a result, many agencies have decided to hire full- or part-time consultants, create limited-term positions, or recruit co-op or similar staff in order to supplement their workforce. In order to provide more unified and efficient use of resources, there is a need to analyze current staffing practices, the use of supplemental resources, and the types of work being outsourced.
Research is needed to develop guidance to help transportation agencies understand alternative ways to effectively and efficiently balance program oversight responsibilities using agency staff, consultants, and contractors.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this research is to develop guidance for staffing transportation construction projects that (1) identifies current contracting methods and associated staffing used by transportation agencies; (2) identifies staffing strategies; (3) identifies knowledge, skills, abilities, and qualifications required for project inspection and testing staff; and (4) recommends best practices for balancing project oversight responsibilities using agency staff, consultants, and contractors for transportation construction projects.
The guidance should address a broad range of activities related to staffing of transportation construction projects such as, but not limited to the following:
Identifying variables for consideration (e.g., workforce labor agreements, peak and non-peak construction periods, types of consulting contracts and contracting methods, material sampling and testing, risk-based inspections, and success measures);
Evaluating the impact of technologies to inspect and manage transportation construction projects;
Identifying types of projects being outsourced;
Identifying consultant levels of responsibility and approval authority;
Developing effective procedures, protocols, and tools for resource acquisition and allocation; and
Developing a workforce planning toolkit with various optional inputs for project size, delivery method, cost, geography, required staffing, complexity, and technologies.
RESEARCH PLAN
The NCHRP is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research objective. Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can be realistically accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time. Proposals must present the proposers’ current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objective.
A kick-off teleconference of the research team and NCHRP shall be scheduled within 1 month of the contract’s execution. The work plan proposed must be divided into 2 phases with tasks, with each task described in detail. Phase 1 will include the results of the research that (1) identifies current contracting methods and associated staffing used by transportation agencies; (2) identifies staffing strategies; (3) identifies knowledge, skills, abilities, and qualifications required for project inspection and testing staff; (4) outlines the guidance to be developed in Phase 2; and (5) lists proposed attendees for the Phase 2 workshop. An interim report will be prepared and a face-to-face meeting held with NCHRP to discuss the results of Phase 1 and the work plan for Phase 2. The project schedule shall include 2 months for NCHRP review and approval of the interim report. No work will be performed on Phase 2 without NCHRP approval. Phase 2 will include the development of the guidance as well as a workshop at the Keck Center in Washington, DC, to critique the guidance.
Note: The costs for the workshop, including invitational travel for up to 30 attendees, shall be included in the detailed budget for the research. TRB will cover costs associated with the meeting space and NCHRP panel travel.
The final deliverables shall include (1) final guidance for staffing transportation construction projects that (a) identifies current contracting methods and associated staffing used by transportation agencies; (b) identifies staffing strategies; (c) identifies knowledge, skills, abilities, and qualifications required for project inspection and testing staff; and (d) recommends best practices for balancing project oversight responsibilities using agency staff, consultants, and contractors for transportation construction projects; (2) a final report documenting the entire project, incorporating all other specified deliverables of the research; (3) a PowerPoint presentation, with talking points, of the guidance that can be tailored for specific audiences; (4) a one-page fact sheet describing for executives the value of the guidance; and (5) a stand-alone technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” (see Special Note C for additional information).
Note: Following receipt of the draft final deliverables, the remaining 3 months shall be for NCHRP review and comment and for research agency preparation of the final deliverables.
SPECIAL NOTES
A. Proposals should include a task-by-task breakdown of labor hours for each staff member as shown in Figure 4 in the brochure, “Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals” (http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/crp/docs/ProposalPrep.pdf). Proposals also should include a breakdown of all costs (e.g., wages, indirect costs, travel, materials, and total) for each task using Figures 5 and 6 in the brochure.
B. Item 4(c), “Anticipated Research Results,” in each proposal must include an Implementation Plan that describes activities to promote application of the product of this research. It is expected that the implementation plan will evolve during the project; however, proposals must describe, as a minimum, the following: (a) the “product” expected from the research, (b) the audience or “market” for this product, (c) a realistic assessment of impediments to successful implementation, (d) the institutions and individuals who might take leadership in applying the research product, (e) the activities necessary for successful implementation, and (f) the criteria for judging the progress and consequences of implementation.
C. The required technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” should (a) provide recommendations on how to best put the research findings/products into practice; (b) identify possible institutions that might take leadership in applying the research findings/products; (c) identify issues affecting potential implementation of the findings/products and recommend possible actions to address these issues; and (d) recommend methods of identifying and measuring the impacts associated with implementation of the findings/products. Implementation of these recommendations is not part of the research project and, if warranted, details of these actions will be developed and implemented in future efforts.
D. Item 5 in the proposal, “Qualifications of the Research Team,” must include a section labeled “Disclosure.” Information relevant to the NCHRP’s need to ensure objectivity and to be aware of possible sources of significant financial or organizational conflict of interest in conducting the research must be presented in this section of the proposal. For example, under certain conditions, ownership of the proposing agency, other organizational relationships, or proprietary rights and interests could be perceived as jeopardizing an objective approach to the research effort, and proposers are asked to disclose any such circumstances and to explain how they will be accounted for in this study. If there are no issues related to objectivity, this should be stated.
E. Proposals are evaluated by the NCHRP staff and project panels consisting of individuals collectively very knowledgeable in the problem area. Selection of an agency is made by the project panel considering the following factors: (1) the proposer’s demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experiment design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the plan for ensuring application of results; (5) the proposer’s plan for participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises–small firms owned and controlled by minorities or women; and (6) the adequacy of the facilities.
Note: The proposer’s plan for participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises should be incorporated in Item 12 of the proposal.
F. The research plan shall be limited to no more than 20 pages. This does not include the detailed schedule or the detailed budget.
G. Research agencies are encouraged to include personnel with diverse, relevant experience and expertise to reflect the broad scope of knowledge required to complete the project. Universities who propose graduate students should describe their field of study and specify the team member with oversight responsibility for their work.
Proposals (20 single-bound copies) are due not later than 4:30 p.m. on 1/21/2016.
This is a firm deadline, and extensions are not granted. In order to be considered for award, all 20 copies of the agency’s proposal accompanied by the executed, unmodified Liability Statement must be in our offices not later than the deadline shown, or the proposal will be rejected. Proposers may choose any carrier or delivery service for their proposals. However, proposers assume the risk of proposal rejection if the carrier or delivery service does not deliver all the required documents by the deadline.
Delivery Address:
PROPOSAL-NCHRP
ATTN: Christopher W. Jenks
Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Transportation Research Board
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Source
http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=4059