1 / 36

BART Presentation AASHTO Trns•port Users Group  18 th TEA/TUG Conference and Workshop Daytona Beach, FL

Ohio Department of Transportation. BART Presentation AASHTO Trns•port Users Group  18 th TEA/TUG Conference and Workshop Daytona Beach, FL . November 2 - 10, 2005 . What / Who is BART ?. BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005. No, Wrong BART. Don’t have a Cow Man !. ODOT NEWS.

amandla
Download Presentation

BART Presentation AASHTO Trns•port Users Group  18 th TEA/TUG Conference and Workshop Daytona Beach, FL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Ohio Department of Transportation BARTPresentation AASHTO Trns•port Users Group  18th TEA/TUG Conference and Workshop Daytona Beach, FL November 2 - 10, 2005

  2. What / Who is BART ? BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  3. No, Wrong BART Don’t have a Cow Man ! ODOT NEWS BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  4. BidAnalysis Review Team The sharing of BART ideas and activities with other agencies, departments and friends. BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  5. BARTBid Analysis Review Team • ODOT – Office of Estimating • Jeff Hisem – Administrator • Three person diverse group • Tim Pritchard • Michael Guckes • David Buhn BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  6. Introduction “A Single Focused Mindset” can be like a … One Legged Stool BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  7. Where does BART sit ? • Seat - DSS (Decision Support System) • The data & tools support and sustain the group’s activities • Legs - Activities • Bid history products • Collusion and Questionable activity detection • Market Analysis • Surface beneath the stool • Activities exist upon an uneven & changing foundation. Imagine : BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  8. Collusion & Questionable Activity Detection Bid Analysis Review Team DSS connects to all activities Bid History Products Market Analysis Uneven & Changing Ground ODOT Environment BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  9. The Seat • DSS (Decision Support System) database • Necessary on-going support activities • Data is checked, re-checked, then checked again • Examples of data verification • Project coordinates • Missing rejected contract bid tabs • Changing field definitions, i.e. spec changes, vendor ids • Update approved asphalt plant & aggregate pit info • Vendor affiliate tracking • Pre-qualification • Asphalt / Aggregate inspections (QC) and approval • Use external sources i.e. ODNR, Associations, Contractors BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  10. 1st Leg • Bid History Products • FHWA / PR45 Reports & FHWA Bridge Report • Bid History Catalog for CES and Estimator • Historical Bid Data for Estimating • Annual Report “Summary of Contracts Awarded” • Requests for Information (Internal & External) BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  11. FHWA / PR45 Reports • Two Quarterly Reports for the FHWA • Projects on the NHS • Firstly, a hardcopy report that provides information and $’s bid from the three lowest bidders for each project. • Secondly, a computerized Focus report that provides 1) $ split between pavement and bridge and 2) $ amounts associated with different concerned commodities for each project. • i.e. Asphalt, Excavation, Rein. Steel, Structural Concrete BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  12. FHWA / Bridge Reports • Annual Report for the FHWA • Criteria for report: • Determine NHS bridges and Non-NHS bridges • Only New bridge decks or removed bridge decks • Provide Info: • Type of bridge • Cost of bridge deck area (Sq Ft or Sq M) • No. of Spans • Special Conditions: i.e. locations, height, complexity, etc. BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  13. Bid History Catalogs • Catalogs for CES & Estimator • DSS HIREG created • Built using weighted averages or regression estimates BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  14. Historical Bid Data • Tool used by Estimators • Select “Item of Work” and returns following attributes • Project Number • County Route & Section • Type • Quantity • Estimated Price • Awarded Bid • Low Bid • High Bid • Average Bid BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  15. Historical Bid Data BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  16. External Contractors, OIG, AG, State Agencies, OTC SAS, Excel Spreadsheets, Geomedia Maps Quantities, Avg Pricing, Worktypes, Areas Internal Director, Construction, Accounting, Finance Presentations, Meetings, Projections/Forecasts Bundling, Asphalt Pricing, Aggregate Control, Market Shares, Cost Indices Information Requests BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  17. 2nd Leg • Collusion & Questionable Activity Detection • Line Item Profiles (LIP’s) • 80/20 Analysis • Asphalt Analysis BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  18. A Tool used to determine Unbalanced Bids Front- end Loading Complementary Bidding ODOT’s current LIP method Plotting bid line items Any bidder who’s bid $ amount (of each line item) is => +/- 1% of the total estimate of the project Sham Bids Inaccurate Estimates Line Item Profiles BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  19. Line Item Profiles BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  20. 80/20 Analysis • Collusion Pre-Test: Where to look first • Technique: • Analysis by contract work-type • Select items of work that have 80% of $ in work-type • Remove as-per-plan, lump sum, and each • Statistically standardize item price information (Price Change/Distribution Value) • Compare different items of work (apples to oranges) BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  21. Blending Price Movement with Bidding Behavior • Compare the nature of the median price change by year. • Red flag items with “too much” price change from year to year for a given price range. Method not effective for items with “each”, “lump sum” or other hard-to-measure units. BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  22. Asphalt Analysis • Track ownership changes from 2000 to present • Record mergers and acquisitions among paving firms • Changes in bidding behavior • Ownership of approved asphalt mfg. facilities • Ownership of approved aggregates sources • Search for collusion or other questionable behavior • Follow Info Tech methodology BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  23. Present Day Vendor “A”Pits/DF’s and Asphalt Facilities Pit and Asphalt Facility Pit Only Asphalt Facility Only

  24. Vendor “B” 2001-8/2004 Wins and Losses Black – 2004 Green – 2003 Red – 2002 Blue - 2001 Shelly & Sands: 3

  25. Vendor “B” 2001-8/2004 Wins with Number of Bidders Black – 2004 Green – 2003 Red – 2002 Blue - 2001

  26. Single Bid Asphalt Contracts 2001-8/2004 B - contractor B G - contractor G J - contractor J K - contractor K S - contractor S S&S - contractor SS JV - joint venture O - Other Vendors [R indicates a rejected bid] Black – 2004 Green – 2003 Red – 2002 Blue - 2001

  27. 3rd Leg • Market Analysis • ODOT Cost Index: “Basket of Goods” Approach • Asphalt Bundling Project • OTC Bid Analysis BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  28. Asphalt Project Bundling • Scenario: A single owner gains market control of Aggregate and/or Asphalt in a specific area • Strategy: promote more than a single bid • Bundle (combine) similar Asphalt Projects in and around the market controlled area • Locate projects to bundle near competitive companies asphalt facilities • Select projects in areas with different bidders • Cross boundaries i.e. district, county • Increase size of project by $ value and/or quantity for economies of scale BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  29. Ohio DOT Cost Index • Primary Question: • How will inflation and market fluctuations affect future construction costs? • Develop an Index (FY01-FY05): • Used bid data in DSS for analysis to create Laspeyres type index like Consumer Price Index • Selected largest expenditure items for each commodity • “Basket of Goods” Approach • Determined composite index for each commodity “Basket” • Developed an overall ODOT composite cost index of all the individual commodity indices BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  30. Ohio DOT Cost Index Graph BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  31. Ohio DOT Cost Index (Table)

  32. Ohio Turnpike Commission - OTC • OTC: • The OTC separate from ODOT (similar operations) • The Commission manages 241-mile toll road spanning Northern Ohio • Project: • Analyze each bid item within each OTC 3-lane widening project • To include all projects, bids, and items BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  33. (Cont’d) Ohio Turnpike Commission - OTC • BART: • Current work: • Develop an item master of all OTC related items • Align pertinent data for useful future analyses • Download all OTC data into the DSS database • Future work: • Line Item Profiles – Analysis of bidding patterns of projects • Vendor Competition – Analysis of competitors who bid on projects or why bidders did not • Also, analysis of vendor markets, market shares and price analysis BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  34. The Surface…Uneven & Changing Ground • Factors that influence BART activities • Today’s newspaper articles • Tomorrow’s newspaper articles • Collusion found in neighboring states • Perceived inflation increases • Inter-office collaborations • Data availability • Requests for information BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

  35. Wrap Up • Summary • DSS Database necessary starting point • Multiple types of activities for sustainable team • Collusion and Questionable Activity Detection • Bid History Products • Market Analysis • Discussion BART- TEA/TUG Daytona November 2005

More Related