Contract

No:
Contract
Name:
LIPS No:
Contractual
Dates:
Date of
Review:
Contract
Value:
Review
Number:
Liquidated
Damages?
Score Comment / References to Correspondence or Minutes:
1 Management (25%)
1.1 General management 0 2 4 6 8 10
1.2 Risk Management 0 2 4 6 8 10
1.3 Responsiveness 0 1 2 3 4 5
0
2 Administration (15%)
2.1 QA documentation 0 1 2 3 4 5
2.2 Financial 0 1 2 3 4 5
2.3 Handling of Variations 0 1 2 3 4 5
0
3 Physical Works (40%)
3.1
Manpower Availability and
Performance
0 1 2 3 4 5
3.2 Ability to Meet Program 0 2 4 6 8 10
3.3 Achieve Specified Standard 0 2 4 6 8 10
3.4 Defect Management 0 2 4 6 8 10
3.5 Sub Contractor Performance 0 1 2 3 4 5
0
4 Health and Safety (20%)
4.1 Safe Work Practices 0 2 4 6 8 10
4.2 Safety of Others 0 2 4 6 8 10
0
0
Result
Unacceptable Performance <36%
Below Average 37-47%
Average 48-57%
Good 58-72%
Very Good 73-87%
Excellent
88-
100%
5
Rev.
No.
1 2 3 4
By who JDS JDS JDS JC
Date Jul-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Aug-11
Why
New
layout
H&S
scoring
Option
for N/A
Formatt
ing
Sub Total
Overall Rating Comment on Key Issues and/or offer Recommendations for Performance Improvements
Total
6 Document Control
Contractor's Comments regarding
Engineer's Representative's General
Performance
Signature Contractor's
Representative
Signature Eng. Representative
CONTRACTORS PERFORMANCE REVIEW FORM (guideline overleaf)
Contractor & Branch:
Contractor's Representative(s):
Engineer's Representative(s)/
Contract Administrator:
TCC's Representative(s):
Criteria / Weighting
Scoring
Weak ----------------------------------------------------->Strong
Sub Total
Sub Total
Sub Total
Weak ----------------------------------------------------->Strong
Weak ----------------------------------------------------->Strong
See note 6 in guidelines if a score below 4 is given
TCC Ref:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Item Issues to Consider
1 Management
1.1 General Management
Management skill, relationship with client and customers (refer TCC The Customer Comes First Guide ) and ER,
communication skills, availability, management of conflict, decision making, communication and coordination with all
relevant parties.
1.2 Risk Management Identification, quantification and qualification of risk and the management thereof.
1.3 Responsiveness Response to and management of queries, instructions, changes, deviations from spec./contract, issues.
2 Administration
2.1 QA documentation Records of quality assurance procedures, issues and incidents, QA reporting, deviations from specification.
2.2 Financial Clarity and accuracy of invoicing, management and reporting against budget, regular updating of cash flow.
2.3 Handling of Variations
Validity of and reasons for variations, agreement thereof and managing related procedures and documentation.
Processing, reviewing and submitting of variations.
3 Physical Works
3.1
Manpower Availability and
Performance
Manpower deployed - level of skill, availability, performance.
3.2 Ability to Meet Program Adequate activity management to avoid delays and/or acceptable mitigation measures put in place.
3.3 Achieve Specified Standard Measure of quality of output generally including ability to meet TCC standards, setting out of works, etc.
3.4 Defect Management Response to and management of errors, defects x. Are reasons valid and agreed?
3.5 Sub Contractor Performance Sub-Contractor's general performance including the Contractor's management of the Sub-Contractor's performance.
4 Health and Safety See NOTE 6 above
4.1 Safe Work Practices
Conformance with required legal and contractual procedures. Incidents reported, recorded, investigated and corrective
action taken.
4.2 Safety of Others Traffic management, members of public, Sub-Contractors, others in the vicinity.
5 Contractors Comments
Comment, with reasons, on aspects of the contract documents which could have been improved for improved contract
performance. Comment on lessons learned, experiences gained, suggest improved techniques. Comment on reasons
for conflict and how they could have been avoided. If liquidated damages are/have been an issue, comment on how
they could have been avoided.
The following is a guideline on issues that the ER and Contractor should consider during the review process.
Contractors Performance Review - Guideline for Discussion and Scoring
Expectations of the contract team and review items listed on the score sheet should be clarified at project inception and agreed by all parties. This will
help in reducing subjectivity of certain items.
Please include key issues that arose (positive or negative) from the review, together with agreed actions (if any) and/or the need to escalate these for
management awareness and/or resolution. Add comments or suggestions for improvements. A section is included at the end for the Contractor to
provide comment on the ER performance - purely for TCC information.
The purpose of this document is to facilitate the review of the Contractor's performance and quality of output and to agree measures for improvement
throughout the contract. This form together with references will be used for completing the contract completion review report (referred to in the TCC
Procurement Guide) at the end of the contract.
The review should be undertaken by the Engineer's Representative (ER). The TCC project manager may attend and/or contribute to review sessions.
Measures to improve performance and quality of output should be agreed between the ER and Contractor's Representative.
The review should be undertaken approximately 1 month into the contract (which may be the only review for short contracts) and periodically thereafter
(e.g. monthly for short contracts, 3 - 6 monthly for long contracts - unless issues arising dictate a more frequent review) and, finally, at completion.
A scoring system similar to the NZTA process has been used. Please complete only the yellow shaded sections. Only high level tasks have been
included to encourage discussion of important issues. Guidance is included below on issues that could be considered. The ER is required to insert a
final score in the appropriate box in the results column.
Important: In the event of H&S score (refer 4 below) being less than 4, the overall rating will be unacceptable, regardless of how well the Contractor
may have scored elsewhere.
Reviewer(s) must enter a score between weak performance and strong performance in the rating column. Only fill in cells highlighted in yellow. If an
item is not applicable, mark it as N/A - scoring is automatically adjusted in the spreadsheet.
2 248737515.xlsx.ms_office