U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590

Skip to content U.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway AdministrationU.S. Department of Transportation/Federal Highway Administration



Questionnaire Regarding State DOT Approaches for Dealing with Unsatisfactory Contractor Performance (time and quality)

  1. How does your state define unsatisfactory contract prosecution and progress? (Please indicate the response that best describes your current State policy.)
    1. Numeric comparison of the percentages of contract payments vs. contract time (At what point is progress considered unsatisfactory?) (AL, AR, AZ, FL, HI, KS, LA, MD, MS, NC, NM, NV, OK, PR, SC, TN, VT, WY)

      (AL - a. When the % time charged exceeds the % complete (based on the $ value of the original contract and $ value of work accomplished) by 25% or more.)

      (CA - Currently the following methods for measuring prosecution and progress are not specifically defined in the contract but are Department policy and procedures. Efforts are underway to contractually define prosecution and progress.

      For "Termination of Control" unsatisfactory progress is defined as any of the following (pdf, 0.6 mb, Reference Construction Manual Section 3-807, Termination of Control):

      1. "Percent Complete" of the contract is more than 25% behind the "Percent Time Elapsed"
      2. Complete cessation of the work
      3. Working has not started within a period equal to 10% of the original working days or 50 working days, whichever is less.

      For the purposes of determining retention percentage from progress payments satisfactory progress is determined with use of form CEM-2601 form CEM-2601 (search for CEM2601) and Section 3-909, "Retentions" of the Construction Manual (pdf, 0.4 mb)

      (EFLHD - difference of 10%+ )

      (FL - (a) when contract time has expired and the contract work has not been completed.)

      (HI - when contract payment lags contract time by more than 15% or work not completed when contract time exceeds 100%.)

      (LA - For time elapsed(te) <55%; then %time - %complete > 40%; For 55%< te < 70%, then prorate the allowable difference; For te>70%; %time - %complete > 25%)

      (MS - A, when the percent complete lags more than 20% behind the approved progress schedule.)

      (NC - We use a 15/15 rule: 15% behind the approved project schedule and 15% behind based on the elapsed time (fiscal comparison to elapsed time)

      (NM - 15%)

      (NV - This is how job progress is tracked, however there is no "definition" in our standard specification. Unsatisfactory progress is determined on a case by case basis.)

      (OK - Activated when 30% or more of revised contract time is used and % of work lags behind % of time used by 20% or more (see attached construction control directive)

      (PR - When contractor is overdue with the revised completion date and also his performance and quality of work does not meet the contract specifications.)

      (SC - If variance is greater than 25%, this triggers a review of contractor's schedule.)

      (TN - When progress is behind more than 15% on a project we start looking at reasons for delay.)

      (VT - It is up to the Resident Engineer's judgment.)

    2. No numeric definition, but contractual measures are invoked when a contractor cannot justify unsatisfactory progress (CO, CT, CFLHD, EFLHD, IA, ID, IL, IN, ND, NJ, NY, OH, TX )

      (IA - We don't consider percentage of payments vs. time because some projects have a large payout near the end of the project, such as a bridge contract. The beams and deck pour may amount to a relatively large percentage of payment near the end of the contract.)

    3. Unsatisfactory progress for activities on the critical path or controlling items of work (AZ, MI, MD, ME, MN, MO, NE, NY, PA, RI, SD, UT, VA, WA, WFLHD, WV)

      (AZ - Large jobs have CPM requirement)

      (UT - The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) requires a critical path method (CPM) schedule on all projects unless otherwise specified in special provisions. An interim base line schedule describing the activities that will occur during the first 60 days of the project must be submitted to the engineer at or before the preconstruction conference. The base line schedule must be submitted for approval by the engineer on or before the date established for the first partial estimate. Failure to provide a baseline schedule could result in withholding all contract payments until an acceptable schedule is received. The contract requires the engineer and the contractor to hold monthly job site progress meetings to update the baseline CPM schedule. Failure to provide schedule updates or a revised baseline schedule could result in withholding all subsequent contract payments until an acceptable schedule is received.)

      (VA - more than 10% behind the contractors anticipated schedule based on $ value of the controlling items of work)

    4. Other (please explain) (AK, GA, IA, LA, MA, MO, NH, OR)

      (AK - ADOT/PF defines unsatisfactory as an unsatisfactory comparison of the contractor's approved progress schedule and their actual performance of the work.)

      (GA - On most projects, the State uses a numeric comparison of the percentage of contract payments vs. an approved schedule of payments. When a CPM is required, progress is considered unsatisfactory when the project is more than 30 days behind schedule. On projects that do not require a schedule (such as resurfacing projects), progress is considered unsatisfactory when it falls behind more than 25% based on time.)

      (IA - Our current specs state:

      "H. Work Progress. The progress of the work shall be at a rate sufficient to complete the contract within the time allowed. If it appears that the rate of progress is such that the contract will not be completed within the time allowed, or if the work is not being executed in a satisfactory manner, the Engineer may order the Contractor to take such steps as necessary to complete the contract within the period of time specified or to prosecute the work in a satisfactory manner. If the Contractor fails to comply with such order within 14 calendar days after receipt of the order, the Contractor may be disqualified from receiving any additional bidding proposals, and the Contracting Authority will have the right to declare the contract in default and to complete the work in accordance with Article 1108.11. Failure of the Contracting Authority to issue such order shall not alter the Contractor's responsibility under the contract."

      We don't use a specific percentage to monitor progress. The project engineer compares completion of work to contractors schedule and working days allowed for the project. A written notice may be sent if it appears the project will not be completed within the time allowed. This is usually only done if the contractor falls substantially behind schedule.)

      (LA - On CPM designated projects comparison of earned money (EM) to scheduled earnings (SE) are used for disqualification.

      • te < 55%; If progress is >20% behind SE
      • 55%< te < 75% ; prorate the allowable difference
      • te > 75%; If progress is >10% behind SE)

      (MA - MassHighway relies on the progress of work as it relates to the project completion date. As the work progresses the Resident will assess the project staffing and equipment to make a determination if the contractor is managing the project properly.)

      (MO - Missouri utilizes a project questionnaire in evaluating contractor performance. Standard questions based on contract specification requirements are used to evaluate performance in 3 categories: Quality, Contract Compliance and Prosecution & Progress of work on the project. A contractor's performance summary is computed using weighted averages of the value of the contract for Prosecution & Progress and the value of work completed for the rated period for Quality and Contract Compliance. The contractor also is rated on Overall Performance, which is the average of the applicable rated categories.

      Various questions pertaining to project Prosecution & Progress include; the submittal of an acceptable project schedule, the presence of an authorized contractor representative on the project, resolution of complaints, and the dismissal of employees for incompetence, misconduct, or negligence. The greatest weight of the category rating falls with actual progress on the project.

      One question of 4 possible are completed, dependent upon if the project is finalized or carries over into the next construction season, and if the project is a working day assessment project or calendar completion date project.

      Once all summaries are completed, the mean and standard deviation are computed. Performance levels are defined as:

      • Excellent = Mean + 2 Std Dev.;
      • Above Average = Mean + 1 Std Dev;
      • Average = Mean +/- 1 Std Dev;
      • Below Average = Mean - 1 Std Dev; and
      • Unacceptable = Mean - 2 Std Dev.)

      (NH - Unsatisfactory progress for activities on the schedule or controlling items of work.)

      (OR - Oregon has a specification

      "Provisions and Requirements

      00120.00 Prequalification of Bidders The Oregon Department of Transportation (The Department) will prequalify bidders according to OAR 734, Division 10. A bidder must file for prequalification and pay a fee. Prequalification must be renewed March 1 of each year. Make application for prequalification on standard forms furnished by the Department's Construction Contracts Unit, Room 212 Transportation Building, 355 Capitol St. N.E., Salem, Oregon 97301-3871 (telephone (503) 986-3877). Return the completed application and fee to the Construction Contracts Unit.

      Contracts will only be awarded to bidders who, at the time of bid opening, are prequalified in the Class of Work named in the special provisions, except that a bidder whose prequalification has been revoked or revised as provided in ORS 279.041(3) may also be eligible for award if the project was advertised prior to the revocation or revision. The Department will consider a bid from a bidder whose complete application for prequalification has been received by the Department's Construction Contracts Unit at least 10 calendar days before the opening of bids. Submit bids in the same company name used on the prequalification application.

      The Department will regularly evaluate the performance of Contractors on its projects."

      and also a policy/procedure that we use to evaluate the contractor's performance.

      I have attached our contractor performance evaluation procedures and our evaluation form. The revised statutes (279.041) and the administrative rules (734 division 10) (pdf, 0.6 mb) are also available.

  2. List the methods currently available in your agency for dealing with unsatisfactory contract prosecution and progress (indicate all that apply):
    1. Withholding progress payments (AL, CA, CO, CFLHD, EFLHD, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, LA, MA, MD, MI, MO, MN, MS, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, UT, VA, WFLHD, WY)

      (CA - the Department utilizes a variable retention percentage on progress payments which is tied to satisfactory prosecution and progress of the work.)

      (VA -withholding 5% of each month's payment while they are behind)

    2. Assessing liquidated damages (AL, AK, AZ, CA, CO, CT, CFLHD, EFLHD, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, LA, MA, MD, ME, MO, MI, MN, MS, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, PR, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, WA, WFLHD, WV, WY )

      (AK - Liquidated damages, assessed only at the end of the project (after the completion date, or after exhausting all the calendar days).

      (NV - Assessment of liquidated damages only occurs when the contractor has failed to complete the project completion and/or milestones in the specified times, not at interim points when he is behind schedule.)

      (WA - B with respect to overrun in total contract time.)

    3. Performance evaluations directly lead to an adjustment of prequalification capacity rating with the completion of every contract (explanations suggested) FL, IA, IL, MA, MD, ME, MO, NE, VT)

      (MO - Yes, Missouri has a stepped discipline process. The first year a contractor receives a Unacceptable rating, the firm is placed on probation, a second subsequent Unacceptable rating places the firm on suspension for one year. (The contractor or any of its subsidiaries with common ownership cannot bid as a prime). A third subsequent Unacceptable rating debars the contractor, or any of its subsidiaries with common ownership, from bidding as a prime for a period of 3 years. At any time if the disciplined contractor achieves an average rating in all categories, the firm is reinstated to good standing and the previous history is cleared.)

      (NE - The NDOR performs an "Evaluation of Contractors" within 30 days after the tentative acceptance on prime contractors. Subcontractors are evaluated within 30 days of the date when the subcontractor has completed work on the project. The contractors ratings change as a result of the evaluations.

    4. Performance evaluations indirectly lead to an adjustment of prequalification capacity rating only when consistent or below average performance is noted over several contracts (CA, IN, KS, MA, MI, ND, NH, NJ, NV, OH, OR, PA, SD, UT, WA, WV, WY)

      (CA -through the contractor's bonding capacity obtained through a surety.)

      (NV - Nevada DOT's process utilizes a running average, therefore one individual rating will have little impact on the contractor's overall rating.)

      (OR - see question #1 explanation)

      (WA - D in overall contractor performance on a project.)

    5. Removal from the prequalification list (AL, IA, IL, IN, KS, MA, MO, NC, ND, NE, NH, OK, OR, PA, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA )

      (MO - see response c)

      (NE - 108.07 2.c. If the contractor fails to make satisfactory arrangements to adjust his/her performance and schedule within 7 days, his/her qualification for submitting bids at future lettings may be suspended until the Contractor's performance and schedule demonstrate that the contract will be completed by a time satisfactory to the Department. The Engineer will also issue a written decision as to whether to allow the Contractor to proceed or to stop work and terminate the contract.)

      (NH - Temporary removal from the prequalification list)

      (OR - see question #1 explanation)

      (SC - Contractor's placed in "delinquency" status are not eligible to bid until delinquent contract work is resolved.)

      (TN - We do not remove them from the Prequalification list but we do preclude them from bidding until their progress is restored to acceptable levels on their existing contracts.)

      (VA - may remove from list if behind for several months)

      (WA - E applies in the event that there are several unsatisfactory reports on file.)

    6. Increasing retainage on future contracts (ID, MD)
    7. Initiating termination procedures (AK, CA, CFLHD, CO, CT, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, LA, MA, MD, MI, MN, MS, NC, ND, NE, NM, NJ, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PR, RI, TN, VT, VA, WA, WFLHD )

      (AK - Initiating termination procedures. Utilized only in extreme cases, and after a determination of default.)

      (CFLHD - very infrequent, but we have done this)

      (MS - Temporary suspension of work & request the contractor to submit a new progress schedule without changing the specified completion date.)

      (NC - Only if issues get bad enough)

      (NV - Only utilized in extreme cases. Nevada DOT declared one contractor in default in 2001 and called on the Surety to complete the contract. The contractor had serious financial problems and subsequently declared bankruptcy.)

      (VA - may default if progress is severely behind schedule)

      (WA - G would apply in an extreme case although we have not had any termination for default situation in recent history.)

    8. Other (please explain) (AK, AL, AZ, CA, CO, CT, HI, IL, LA, NJ, NM, TX )

      (AK - Retainage of up to 10% on subsequent progress payments.)

      (AL - default of contract ) contract is turned over to the bonding company for completion.)

      (AR - Contractors under liquidated damages are not permitted to obtain bid proposals for future projects until the project that they are under liquidated damages on is substantially complete.)

      (AZ - reduced bonding capacity; no performance measures are used)

      (CA - on a limited basis, utilization of incentive/disincentive amounts for completion of the work or portions thereof. Currently a very small percentage of the Department's contracts utilize this type of system.)

      (CO - Price reduction based on quality measurements (test results) of the work.)

      (CT - termination only for the most serious cases; responsibility determinations prior to award.)

      (IL - Performance evaluations directly lead to an adjustment of prequalification capacity rating when consistent or below average performance is noted over several contracts)

      (HI - a, b, g, h, and notify bonding company)

      (LA - Contractor is disqualified from bidding as a prime or subcontractor)

      (MD - Technically, Maryland law does not prevent state agencies from prequalifying bidders; however, the fact that a contractor is not prequalified does not bar him from submitting a bid. SHA generally only requires prequalification of bidders on select contracts.)

      (NJ - NJDOT's current policy is best defined by "B" however, in 2003, we will be implementing a new Critical Path Scheduling requirement to monitor prosecution and progress of contracts advertised after 9/1/02).

      (TX - h - invoking default procedures, h - disincentives for failure to complete work on time)

  3. Which method in Question No. 2 is used the most in your state to deal with unsatisfactory contract prosecution and progress?

    (Method a - EFLHD, GA, ID, HI, IN, MN, NE, NM, OH, RI, UT, VA)

    (Method b - AL, AK, AR, CFLHD, CO, CT, FL, HI, IA, IL, IN, MD, ME, MN, MO, ND, NV, NY, OH, OK, PA, PR, SC, SD, TN, TX, WA, WFLHD)

    (Method c - AL (most effective), CA, FL, IA, VT, WY)

    (Method d - KS, NH, NJ, MI, OR, WV)

    (Method e - NC )

    (Method f - )

    (Method g - )

    (Method h- Other - AZ, LA, MA, MS, NM)

    (HI - "a" but "b" is used when time exceeds 100%)

    (LA - disqualification from bidding)

    (MA - MassHighway uses the Performance Report to rate the contractor's work. If during the course of the project there is a problem an interim report is prepared and forwarded to the Prequalification Committee for review and action if warranted. The contractor is warned of the consequences of continuing poor performance and the potential affects it can have in is overall prequalification status.)

    (MS - revise progress schedule, assess liquidated damages at the end of the contract time.)

    (MO - In order to equalize project complexities, Missouri divides the contractors into 4 groups. The Heavy Volume Contractors, are the top 10 contractors who has completed the most work by $ value for the rated period. Specialty Contractors are defined as contractors who do 85% or more of their work volume in a specific area, ex. Bridge, asphalt, grading, etc. The remaining contractors are divided into equal numbers to define the Medium Volume Contractors and Light Volume Contractors. Each contractor group category top achiever is recognized with a certificate. Each group contractor who is the top achiever in Overall Performance is given a plaque and a brass plate recognizing them is added to the Contractors Top Achievers plaque mounted outside the Headquarters Commission hearing room, where contractors can view the list at each bid letting. The certificates and plaques are given at an annual meeting held each year.)

    (PR - we assess liquidated damages. As long as the contractor keeps working, termination procedures will not be initiated.)

  4. Does your state generally inform the contractor's bonding company when it is determined that the contractor's prosecution and progress is unsatisfactory?

    (Yes - AL, AR, AZ, CA, CT, EFLHD, FL, GA, HI, IN, KS, LA, MS, ND, NC, NJ, NE, NM, OK, OR, RI, WFLHD)

    (No - CO, IL, MI, MD, ME, PA, UT, VT, WA, WY)

    (Yes, but rarely or only as a last resort - AK, CFLHD, IA, ID, MA, MO, NH, NV, NY, OH, PR, SD, VA)

    (Other qualified response - MN, SC, TN, TX, WV)

    (AK - ADOT/PF first requires an updated progress schedule. If the contractor does not adhere to the revised schedule, then ADOT/PF requires a Corrective Action Plan to get back on schedule. Then if we have serious doubt about the contractor completing the project on time, we feel we have a duty to contact the surety.)

    (AR - Yes, a copy of correspondence advising contractor of status (time vs. work complete) is sent as a carbon copy to the surety.(Usually when reaches 50% behind).

    (CFLHD Only when termination or other severe action is contemplated)

    (CO - only notifies the bonding company when they give notice of default. Default is an extreme case of unsatisfactory contract prosecution and progress.)

    (CT - Typically when a contractor fails to address performance issues satisfactorily (we usually give 14-30 days for an acceptable response) we go on record with the contractor and its bonding company that progress is unsatisfactory and specific actions are required to address the performance issues.)

    (GA - Yes, if appropriate corrective measures are not followed after a specified period of time.)

    (OK - Yes - when using method e) removal from the pre-qualification list or g) initiating termination procedures)

    (LA - Yes, any correspondence sent to the contractor involving progress is copied to the bonding company)

    (MA - The bonding company is notified only when the decision is made that they will be brought in to take over the control of the contract.)

    (MN - Generally not when withholding progress payments and assessing liquidated damages. Generally yes for initiating termination process).

    (MO - Only when it looks like they will not be able to finish the contract.)

    (NV - Not routinely, however we may if the delay is considered excessive.)

    (NY - only when a termination is contemplated)

    (OH - only after the contractor can not fulfill the department's contract.)

    (OR - We are working at doing this more, generally yes.)

    (PA - No, but we do inform them when default situations occur.)

    (RI - Yes, when a contractor refuses to submit a recovery plan).

    (SC - Not for "delinquency". However, where a more severe problem warrants default proceedings, the bonding company is notified.)

    (SD - only when performance is extremely poor.)

    (TN - No, but a report is available to review progress on all projects.)

    (TX - When default procedures are initiated, the bonding company is provided a copy of a 10-day warning letter addressed to the contractor, explaining the deficiency and reason for potential default.)

    (VA - Only at the point where default is considered)

    (WV -not generally but it does happen from time to time)

  5. If the answer to question No. 4 is yes, does the involvement of the bonding company generally result in improved contract prosecution and progress?

    (Yes - AK, CA, EFLHD, GA, HI, ID, IN, LA, MN, MS, NE, NM, RI, SD)

    (No - AR, PR, VA, WFLHD)

    (Not applicable - OH, TN, UT, VT, WA, WY)

    (Sometimes - CT, FL, IA, KS, ND, NJ, OK)

    (Unknown - AL, CO)

    (Qualified response: AZ, CFLHD, MA, NC, NH, NV, NY, OR, SC, TX, WV)

    (AL - unknown, but perhaps a negligible effect)

    (AK - Yes, the contact with the surety usually results in an improvement in progress.)

    (AR - No, usually the bonding company only gets involved when the project reaches 100% behind and fails to respond to a request for a schedule for action. At that point is usually where contract termination actions may begin, thus the bonding company starts to get involved)

    (AZ - no record)

    (CFLHD - by then the bonding company has usually been informed by the contractor, so it is not clear if this helps in our situations.)

    (CO - does not have much experience.)

    (CT - Sometimes. The bonding company, of necessity, must reserve its defenses in any such matter. Once the situation reaches the point where the bonding company becomes involved, there are typically ongoing negotiations to resolve the issues. In some cases the contractor is able to continue working during this process, in others work does not proceed until resolution is reached.)

    (MA - As stated before it is only when the boning company takes over. They have the option of using the original contractor or if they choose to they can bring in another company to do the work.)

    (NC - Not really - they don't typically get involved unless we are on the verge of default)

    (NH - not that we have seen)

    (NV - As noted above, NDOT has little experience in this area, however getting the Bonding Company on board took approximately 4-6 weeks due to legal issues regarding the contractor's bankruptcy. The Bonding Companies replacement contractor has performed adequately.)

    (NY - most of the time; is dependent on the quality of the surety.)

    (OR - We like to think so, but insufficient data exists to show a definite trend.)

    (PA - bonding company has authority to hire the defaulting contractor or any prequalified contractor to complete the work.)

    (SC - In most cases, yes.)

    (TX - Rarely.)

    (VA - No, absolutely not)

    (WV - generally, yes)

  6. How does your State define unacceptable quality in the performance of the work? (For example: quality of materials, quality of the constructed product, quality of traffic control facilities, timely submittal of documentation, cooperation, safety compliance, public coordination, etc. (indicate all that apply.)
    1. Through the use of quality assurance specifications (AL, AK, AR, AZ, CA, CFLHD, CT, CO, EFLHD, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, KS, LA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MS, ND, NC, NE, NH, NM, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, PR, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VT, VA, WA, WFLHD, WV, WY)

      (CA - Limited to certain items of work.)

    2. Through the use of means and method specifications (AK, AR, CA, CFLHD, CO, CT, HI, IA, ID, IL, MD, MI, MN, MS, NC, ND, NE, NV, NY, OH, OK, OR, SC, SD, TN, VT, VA, WA, WY)

      (CA - Limited to certain items of work.)

    3. Through performance related specifications or warranties (CA, CFLHD, CO, CT, HI, ID, IL, MD, MI, MN, MS, NH, NM, NY, OH, OR, SC, UT, VA, WA, WFLHD)

      (CA - Limited to certain items of work.)

      (MN - only for tress, roadway striping, limited surfacing contracts.)

    4. Through State DOT evaluations during the performance of the contract (AR, CA, CFLHD, CO, CT, FL, HI, IA, IL, IN, KS, LA, MD, MI, MS, OR, PA, NC, NJ, NV, RI, SC, TN, UT, VT, VA, WA, WFLHD)

      (CA - limited use).

    5. Through State DOT evaluations after the completion of the contract (CA, CFLHD, FL, IA, IL, IN, KS, MD, ME, MI, NC, NE, NH, OR, PA, SC, SD, VT, WA, WV, WY)

      (CA - limited use).

    6. Other (please explain)(AL, AZ, CFLHD, MA, NC, NJ, NV, UT)

      (AL - We are in transition from means and methods specs to end result specs).

      (AZ - schedule compliance)

      (CFLHD - all of the above... but mainly through use of QA/QC processes during construction.)

      (MA - We have only recently started using QA specifications on a pilot program. On the majority of projects it is through evaluation and performance.)

      (NC - quality of materials, quality of the constructed product, quality of traffic control facilities, safety compliance)

      (NJ - also uses "a" and "b" for some construction items)

      (MO - N/A)

      (NV - The question as written is vague, due to the term "unacceptable." In your definition, would this constitute material/work which required removal and replacement? Or is non-specification material (determined to be in substantial compliance) which is accepted at a lower cost considered unacceptable. At any rate, NDOT uses items a, b and d (if by evaluation, you mean inspection). In my opinion, unacceptable quality would be considered primarily as non-specification material which required removal, or an item of work which had to be removed/replaced due to poor workmanship or construction practices. As noted previously, these features are monitored by our materials testing processes and on-site inspection during the contract.)

      (UT - Other: The use of A + B bidding (using road user costs), lane rental and liquidated damages for non conforming traffic control elements.)

  7. How does the State use contract performance evaluation data? (other than contract progress, for example: quality of materials, quality of the constructed product, quality of traffic control facilities, timely submittal of documentation, cooperation, safety compliance, public coordination, etc. )
    1. Performance evaluations directly lead to an adjustment of prequalification capacity rating with the completion of every contract (explanations suggested) (FL, GA, IA, IL, ME, MO, NE)

      (IA - YES An average of recent contractor evaluations are applied as a factor to the prequalification limits.)

      (NE - The "Evaluation of Contractors" includes categories such as Quality of Equipment, Amount of Equipment, Quality of Personnel, Amount of Personnel, Quality of Work, General Attitude, Prosecution of Work, Employee Safety, and Public Safety. These evaluations impact the contractor's rating to perform future work.)

    2. Performance evaluations indirectly lead to an adjustment of prequalification capacity rating only when consistent or below average performance is noted over several contracts (CA, IN, KS, MI, MO, ND, NH, NJ, NV, OH, OR, PA, SD, UT, VA, WA, WV, WY)

      (CA - through contractor's bonding by the surety.)

      (KS - If any of above are noted, we will invite contractor to meet with us and discuss ways to improve)

      (NV - Quality of work is one category the contractors are evaluated on. This category includes materials and workmanship issues.)

      (OR -Yes, see question #1)

      (SD - out intent - only recently implemented.)

      (VA - annually with prequalification renewal)

      (WA - For the most part B is the answer in that we prepare an evaluation on every job that evaluates the contractor's performance If there or multiple unsatisfactory reports, this could lead to removal of Prequalification status. Finally, if the performance is bad enough to initiate termination proceedings, typically the one or more evaluations would have already been completed to document and inform the contractor of the lack of performance.)

    3. Removal from the prequalification list (AL, IA, IL, IN, MO, NC, ND, NE, NH, OH, OR, PA, UT, VT,VA)

      (IA - May temporarily suspend bidding privileges for non-performance of existing contracts.)

      (NC - Yes -but only for safety violations)

      (NH - possible removal)

      (OR - Yes, see question #1)

      (VA - if the score is low enough)

    4. Increase retainage on future contracts (AR, MD, MO)

      (AR - cry progress for activities on the cri)

    5. Initiate termination procedures (CA, CFLHD, IN, MD, MO, NC, ND, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, VT)

      (AR - Failure to cooperate, failure to submit required items, failure to respond, failure to refund overpayments, etc.)

      (CFLHD - rarely)

      (NC - Only if severe problems)

      (ND - we can if problems are severe)

    6. Other (please explain) (AL, AR, AZ, CA, CFLHD, CO, CT, EFLHD, HI, ID, IL, LA, MA, MN, MS, NY, OK, PR, RI, SC, TN, TX, WFLHD)

      (AL - default action)

      ( AR - Action is taken in the form of price reductions or removal/replacement of failing material for material quality.)

      (AK - ADOT/PF does not have a system that incorporates contract performance data into a prequalification system.)

      (AZ - We don't use performance evaluations; we are not starting to consider quality performance in controlling bonding limits)

      (CA - 1.QC/QA specifications for asphalt concrete pavement tie performance evaluation to the amount of payment. 2. Contract deductions are made for materials outside of specified operating ranges where specified in contract. 3.Some submittals may be included in payment schedule for contract items of work.)

      (CFLHD - quality pay bonus or deduction, acceptance/rejection of work, forced compliance)

      (CO - No current procedure).

      (CT - There is no established procedure for collecting and maintaining contract performance data. Connecticut does a performance rating of contractors and subcontractors on an annual basis and at the completion of projects. This information, along with project documentation is utilized for determining the need for a responsibility determination regarding a particular contractor. If a contractor is low bidder and found to be non-responsible, the contract will not be awarded to the contractor.)

      (HI - "f" not used. We have one trial project that falls into the category characterized by "a.")

      (EFLHD - N/A)

      (ID - No formal use. We are just more careful to document things and stay current with issues in the future)

      (IL - Performance evaluations directly lead to an adjustment of prequalification capacity rating when consistent or below average performance is noted over several contracts)

      (LA - There is no routine established procedure. All cases are determined individually. At this time there are no cases of disqualification due to quality issues.)

      (MA - Performance evaluation can lead to an adjustment of prequalification capacity rating normally when consistent or below average performance is noted over several contracts. However if the problem is severe enough it can be done as the result of just one project. We have also taken the approach of suspending a contractor from bidding for a period of time due to poor performance.)

      (MN - as guidance for future work with Contractor.)

      (MS - revise progress schedule, assess liquidated damages at the end of the contract time.)

      (NY - appearance before department contract review unit on occasion of next low bid)

      (OK - Generally, addressed on a project specific basis at this time.)

      (PR - It is used as a recommendation for new contract awarding process.)

      (RI - Withhold payment for work until the problems are corrected).

      (SC - Payments to the contractor are adjusted for quality measurements as outlined in specifications)

      (TN - In the few instances where quality has been an issue, we have precluded contractors from bidding until such time that the quality is achieved to an acceptable level on existing contracts.)

      (TX - N/A)

      (WFLHD - none)

  8. Does your state have a process for rewarding above average performance? (other than incentives based on quality assurance specifications)? If yes, please explain.


    (Yes - AL, IA, IL, KS, LA, MD, MO, NY, OK, OR, PA, PR, SC, WA)

    (other - AK, MA, OH)

    (AL - we use early completion incentives to achieve early completion of projects when needed.)

    (AK - ADOT/PF rewards contractors for superior asphalt pavement under a Quality Level Analysis. We also have a potential bonus under the ride spec.)(QA spec?)

    (CA - For most contracts no, however in a few cases contracts will utilize incentive/disincentive dollar amounts that are tied to performance measures (time).)

    (CFLHD - No... mainly use QA materials bonuses.)

    (IA - The contracts engineer sends letters each year to 15 contractors having the highest evaluations. No monetary incentive.)

    (IL - yes prequalification capacity ratings are increased)

    (KS - we can increase prequalification amount)

    (LA - Yes, only on high ADT projects by use of incentive clauses.)

    (MA - The only method of rewarding above average performance would be in increasing the contractor's prequalification limits so they can bid on larger projects.)

    (MD - A contractor may request a reduction in retainage if he has achieved an 'A' or a 'B' rating on two consecutive annual performance evaluations.)

    (NJ - not at present. A contractor rating system is in development for this purpose.)

    (MO - We recognize the top performing contractors on an engraved plaque in the GHQ lobby. Top achievers in quality, prosecution & progress and contract compliance are recognized with framed certificates. These are determined by our Contractor Rating System at the end of each year.)

    (NY - A+B bidding bonuses - payment for days completed earlier than bid.)

    (OK - QA/QC and A+B incentives are the only current methods.)

    (OR - Yes, on occasion we have used either A+B bidding (Time and Money) or offered a monetary incentive to open a roadway section. This occurs on perhaps 1 contract in 75.)

    (OH - QC/QA for Concrete Structures - Structure Concrete quality assurance testing is set up as 1 in 10 to verify contractor results. Reduced pay is up to 25% and incentive is up to 6%. Below 25% the product is removed. The pay factors are based on statistically percent within limits. There are also specific controls for an individual result below the required design strength. QC/QA Guidelines for Asphalt Concrete - Pavement concrete is based on the current testing frequency for the product with 1 in 10 random selections. Smoothness is the current incentive/disincentive with a rework limit and grinding. Tree & Shrubs - a 20% bonus for every tree living after the established period.)

    (PA - yes, we are in the final stages of developing a contractor recognition program. Also, we present annual highway quality awards.)

    (PR - Yes, in special projects, the early completion bonus is included in the construction contract).

    (SC - There are occasions where contractors are eligible to receive incentive payments for early completion of contract work.)

    (SD - South Dakota - Our state only has QC/QA specs for asphalt concrete, and are currently working towards QC/QA for pccp. We do also have incentives/disincentives for ride specs, time incentives, etc. )

    (WA - Yes, adequate performance leads to increased Prequalification limits. Our state considers a "standard" rating the same as a "superior" rating in the increase to Prequalification.)

  9. Does your state have a contractor prequalification process? (No - AK, CA, CFLHD, EFLHD, ID, LA, MN, MO, NY, PR, RI, WFLHD)

    (Yes - AL, AR, CO, CT, FL, GA, HI, IA, IL, IN, KS, MA, ME, MI, NC, ND, NJ, NE, NM, NV, OH, OK, OR, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WY)

    (May be used on individual projects - MD, MS)

    (Other - AZ)

    (AZ - see 7f above)

    (CA - No direct prequalification process is currently in use by the Department. Indirect prequalification is provided through contractor licensing and bonding requirements. In addition the Department has, in rare instances, utilized responsibility hearings that may impact a contractor's ability to receive an award of contract.)

    (FL - Yes, used in the adjustment of rating)

    (HI - yes, on selected projects; it is used for "non-responsibility" of bidders.)

    (MD - See response to #2.)

    (MS - We only use a prequalification process on certain specialty items and/or projects.)

    (NH - contractor performance is a standard for ratings, or adjustment of ratings).

    (NM - Only for registration and monetary capacity purposes)

    (NY - We don't have a prequalification process, per se, but we may require specific qualifications, e.g. SSPC certification for bridge painters.)

    If so, is contractor performance a criterion that is used in the adjustment of ratings or in a determination of "non-responsibility " of a bidder?

    (Yes - GA, IL, IA, IN, KS, ME, MI, NE, NV, OH, OK, OR, PA, SD, UT, VA, VT, WA, WV, WY)

    (No - AL, CO, CT, MA, NM, TN, TX)

    (Other explanation - SC, NC, ND)

    (AR - based mostly on financial standing)

    (CO - based on financial responsibility)

    (CT - Prequalification is based on financial factors and contractors past experience only. Performance is not a factor in Connecticut's prequalification process. Performance is addressed through the process of determining if a low bidder is a "responsible" contractor.)

    (KS - Yes and is used in adjusting of ratings)

    (ND - contract performance is used indirectly in determining ratings - not a formal process.)

    (NJ - This process will be replace by the one being developed to incorporate the subject of question 8).

    (MA - Yes we do have a prequalification process. Contract performance is not a criterion to determine the non-responsibility of a contractor. The contractor must be prequalified prior to submitting a bid and to do so they must have the proper category of work and the proper amount of bonding/prequalification limit that must be equal or greater than the engineer's estimate.)

    (NC - We prequalify based on bonding capacity and a safety rating. We are getting ready to add other components (within the next year))

    (NV - Quality of work is one category the contractors are evaluated on. This category includes materials and workmanship issues.)

    (OK - Yes our administrative rules allow for the possibility of "suspension" of a pre-qualification status and we have used performance as justification for determination of a bid as non-responsive.)

    (OR - yes, see question #1)

    (PA - Performance affects ability factors and can affect non-responsibility of a bidder.)

    (SC - We currently have a prequalification process that weighs more heavily on financial capabilities. We feel this evaluation can be as easily qualified or determined by a firms ability to obtain bonding. There is not a strong work related capabilities portion to this prequalification process. As a result of the above conditions, considerations are underway to phase out this financially based prequalification process.)

    (SD - South Dakota - Yes. Contractor performance is a criteria, but in the past we have found reluctance on the part of our personnel to document poor performance so that it can be utilized in the prequalification process. Within the past year, we have instituted a performance evaluation document, but have not made it mandatory to utilize on every project. Therefore, we still are facing reluctance by some to fill out. We are hoping for eventual buy-in without having to make it a mandate.)

    (UT - Response: Yes, the UDOT has a prequalfication procedure. Refer to section three on page 4 of 6. If the contractor=s performance rating (three year average) drops below 70 percent they lose their prequalification. The form used by the UDOT staff to rate the contractor=s performance can be found below.)

    (VA - We do have a prequalification process. Contractor performance is one factor in determining maximum capacity.)

PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®
Updated: 06/27/2017
Federal Highway Administration | 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE | Washington, DC 20590 | 202-366-4000