- Briefing Room
Public-Private Partnership (P3) handback experience is very limited the U.S. and internationally. This paper analyzes the handback experience in three highway P3 projects: East-Link Bridge in Dublin, Ireland, Highway 4 (VT4 Järvenpää-Lahti) in Finland and M4 Tollway in New South Wales, Australia. Two of the projects did not have any material handback clauses in their P3 contracts. Still, the handback processes and outcomes of all three projects are considered successful. The projects experienced a relatively smooth handback process, mainly due to very good working relationships between the contracting authority and the P3 concessionaire. There have not been significant technical quality concerns or problems in the years immediately following the handback. Other drivers for successful P3 handback include clear definition of handback requirements, sufficient incentives and protections, clear procedures and joint inspection processes, a collaborative approach, and workforce sustainment. These contractual requirements and financial incentives and protections are very beneficial as working relationships between P3 agencies and concessionaires will not always be excellent, which could lead to less smooth handback processes.
This discussion paper explores the issues associated with compiling information on major surface transportation projects in a publicly accessible online information source or database to assist in establishing benchmarks on projects delivered conventionally and through Public-Private Partnerships (P3s). Information on projects delivered conventionally and through P3s for operating transportation facilities and those in various phases of development could also provide a resource for practitioners seeking to develop or implement similar projects.
This paper highlights some key tax-related principles of public-private partnership (P3) structures in the U.S. for both public and private sector participants. The report focuses on key considerations for the public sector at different levels of government and different types of private sector entities. Such key considerations include the distinction between direct and indirect taxes in the context of transportation concessions, the choice of legal entity and other investor-specific tax considerations, and applicable state and local income/franchise taxes relevant to P3 transactions. The report also details tax considerations for transportation concessions, for both the toll concession and the availability payment concession. It makes general observations about the tax implications of each structure. The intended audience of this report is policy and decision makers who are involved in the delivery of transportation infrastructure.
This discussion paper draws upon past and current experience to examine different mechanisms used by public agencies for involving private developers during the early stages of a project delivered through a P3. The document provides an overview of the experiences of state DOTs, metropolitan planning organizations, local agencies, private developers, and financial institutions in soliciting potential innovations of private companies during project planning and procurement. The document also evaluates consultative mechanisms used during project procurement and after contract award, and considers introducing these types of activities earlier in the project development and programming process to encourage private sector input. The findings are used to identify approaches that have been effective in securing early input from the private sector to enhance opportunities for P3s.
This report assesses the experience of the 28 highway P3 concession projects that have been implemented in the U.S. since 1992. The report presents trends that have occurred for three groups of P3 projects: real toll concessions, availability payment concessions and long term leases. It analyzes how financing strategies and procurement structures have evolved over time, focusing on federal financial tools and related approvals. The report includes an appendix with 28 narrative P3 Story documents providing comprehensive information on the different highway P3 projects.
During the last decade, several U.S. P3 projects experienced significant financial stress requiring restructuring. Lately, some private concessionaires have avoided revenue risk P3s, preferring those in which public agencies retain the responsibility for revenues, typically through availability payments. To ensure robust private participation in U.S. P3s - and explore whether there is a "middle ground" between availability payment and revenue risk toll P3s - this paper aims to foster a discussion about sharing downside revenue risk between the public and private partners. The discussion paper evaluates revenue risk sharing mechanisms from both the public and private sector perspectives, applying four criteria - value for money, fiscal impacts, financeability and ease of implementation.
Public agencies can maximize opportunities for innovation when they allow the private sector reasonable flexibility to create efficient solutions while managing associated risks. Public agencies can provide this flexibility to stimulate innovations by specifying outcomes that align with the objectives of project stakeholders rather than mandating means and methods in their request for bid proposals. This paper discusses how a public agency can stimulate innovations that generate value by using performance requirements for design and construction of P3 projects.
This report identifies best practices in the use of P3s where private sector concession companies design build finance operate and maintain new highways and other transportation improvements. The report was prepared by U.S. DOT to describe how public agencies can best work with the private sector to implement new transportation improvements. The document is organized around the following phases in implementing and operating P3 projects: legislation and policy, project development, procurement, and performance monitoring and oversight.
This report provides a framework to evaluate the societal benefits and costs of P3 delivery, including the net societal benefits from accelerating project delivery. In addition to this guide, FHWA's P3 Toolkit the P3-VALUE 2.0 Tool and User Guide also addresses benefit-cost analysis.
This report synthesizes the findings of a series of reports (including the one below) prepared for FHWA following an international P3 scan conducted in 2008. Investigators studied P3 markets in the United Kingdom, Australia, Portugal, and Spain to identify transferable lessons for the evolving P3 market in the U.S. The report summarizes notable P3 practices used in the four scan countries and Canada (included in the analysis but not formally part of the scan trip), including P3 delivery options, value for money analysis, and risk allocation. The report provides a brief overview of the development of the P3 market in each of the five countries, accompanied by twelve project profiles of notable P3 projects in each market.
The 2011 Value for Money State-of-the Practice document was created to assist state practitioners in their P3 program efforts. Value for Money is a uniform process utilized on a case-by-case basis to compare the aggregate benefits and the aggregate costs of a P3 project against those of the traditional public alternative. In addition to the introductory chapter (Chapter 1), the report includes two separate sections: International Methodology and Practice and Methodology and Practice in the United States. The report is a state-of-the practice document. FHWA does not recommend any single approach to analyzing procurement options. FHWA does highly encourage that state practitioners consider some type of analysis when considering P3 procurement options.
FHWA, AASHTO, and NCHRP sponsored a scan to collect information about P3 programs for highway infrastructure in Australia, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom, where P3 experience is more extensive. In this publication, the scan team reports that P3s are an effective strategy for delivering highway projects, and they are service arrangements as much as financial ones. The team observed that potential P3 projects must be analyzed and structured thoughtfully to preserve public interests and that managing the partnership over the life of the contract is critical to providing the services expected. Team recommendations for U.S. implementation include convening workshops, developing training guidelines, establishing an expert task group, developing a research strategy, and publishing principles and guideline documents on P3 topics.
This 2009 FHWA report addresses public policy considerations associated with P3 arrangements. The ways in which individual states deal with these issues depend on a number of factors including the public sector's policy objectives, the interests of the users, the characteristics of the project, and specific risk factors. This report examines how different states have responded to the issues most frequently raised by examining provisions in state law and P3 agreements. The report identifies and addresses 14 public policy issues related to P3s, based on a review of Congressional and state legislative hearings, publications, and discussions with key federal, state and local decision makers.
This 2008 report describes the use of P3s by state and local transportation authorities as an update of U.S. DOT's 2004 Report to Congress on P3s. This report refines and focuses the 2004 report's P3 definition to reflect the increasing utilization in the U.S. of long term, concessions. The report describes the advantages of P3s as an alternative to the failings of traditional approaches to project funding and delivery, and it identifies certain risks commonly attributed to P3s and how they can be managed and evaluated.
This report focuses on P3 applications to transportation projects in the United States as of the mid-2000s. It promotes greater understanding of the role of institutional factors in the implementation of P3s.
This report focuses on P3 applications to transportation projects in England, Australia, New Zealand, Hong Kong, India, Israel, Denmark, Sweden and Argentina as of the mid-2000s.
This report presents a synthesis of a comprehensive database of highway infrastructure projects from around the world financed or delivered through some form of P3. The synthesis reveals the predominant types and sizes of P3 contracts used in various regions and countries around the world for developing highway infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and tunnels.
This U.S. DOT responds to a Congressional request to prepare a report identifying the impediments to the formation of large, capital-intensive highway and transit projects involving public-private partnerships. The report covers history and initiatives, value of public-private partnerships, impediments to their formation, stakeholder comments, and recommendations for removing those impediments. The value section is designed to help States considering public-private partnerships develop a better understand the potential benefits of this approach, as well as the possible the downside.
In June 2001, a team of federal, state, contracting, legal, and academic representatives traveled to Portugal, the Netherlands, France, and England to investigate and document alternative contract administration procedures for possible implementation in the U.S. The scan team discovered that European highway agencies appear to be better at exploiting the efficiencies and resources that the private sector offers, through the use of innovative financing, alternative contracting techniques, design-build, concessions, performance contracting, and active asset management. European agencies have created contracts that focus on the users, while seeking to allocate risk appropriately and establish an atmosphere of trust in the implementation of procedures.