Preliminary Scope

Alternative contracting methods (ACMs) are defined as the realm of contract payment provisions, procurement procedures, and various types of project delivery methods (PDMs) that supplement traditional low-bid, design-bid-build contracting. The potential benefits of using ACMs includes reducing project construction duration, reducing operational and life-cycle costs, improving quality and constructability, promoting innovative solutions, improving risk allocation strategies, and allowing for alternative financing solutions.

The Federal Highway Administration has evaluated the performance of the three most commonly used PDMs (design-bid-build, design-build, and construction manager/general contractor) using a comprehensive dataset of 291 completed highway projects. The study outcome resulted in the creation of numerous guidelines at the state and federal levels to assist agencies in selecting the most appropriate ACM for a project given its current goals, resources and constraints.

An example on the federal level is the AASHTO Alternate Contracting Method Guideline, which was developed to provide guidance and aid in selecting the most appropriate ACM. On the state level, several departments of transportation (DOTs) have developed their own guidelines and ACM selection tools. However, there is very little information or guidance about looking back after a project is complete and evaluating the ACM decision that was made and the benefits that accrued from the decision.

The objective of this synthesis is to document state DOT current practices for evaluating ACM decisions after project completion. The synthesis will address the ACM selection in its entirety, including the PDM, procurement procedure, and payment provision selection.

Information to be gathered includes (but is not limited to):
• Current policies, procedures, and guidelines to evaluate ACM decisions after
project completion, including any benefits realized in the following:
o reduction in project duration,
o reduction in operational and life-cycle costs,
o quality of constructability,
o promoting innovative solutions,
o risk allocation strategies, and
o allowing alternative solutions.
• Timing of post-completion evaluations;
• Formal and informal tools used for evaluating the ACM decisions for completed
projects; and
• Whether post-completion evaluation measures are used to inform other ACM
selection decisions.

Information will be gathered through a literature review, a survey of state DOTs, and follow-up interviews with selected agencies for the development of case examples. Information gaps and suggestions for research to address those gaps will be identified.

Information Sources (Partial):
• FHWA Publication No: FHWA-HRT-17-100. Alternative Contracting Method
Performance in U.S. Highway Construction. 2018.
• NCHRP Report 787: Guide for Design Management on Design-Build and
Construction Manager/General Contractor Projects. 2014.
• MDOT. Innovative Construction Contracting Guide. 2015.
• FHWA CASE tool, research documentation, 2020.
• NCHRP Report 939: Guidebooks for Post-Award Contract Administration for
Highway Projects Delivered Using Alternative Contracting Methods