e-Construction Presentation Portfolio

www.econstructiontoday.com

e-Construction as a Disruptive technology Leveraging Technology in DOT EveryDay Business

march 30 & 31, 2016 | dearborn, michigan

Presentation Slide Deck

Tuesday 6:00-8:00 PM

Pre-Conference Evening Ice Breaker at the Dearborn Inn Ten Eyke Tavern Optional event with cash bar and individual pay menu items available for order.

Wednesday 7:15-7:45 AM 7:30 AM 8:00 AM 8:10 AM 8:25-8:45 AM 8:45-9:05 AM 9:05-9:30 AM 9:30 AM

10:00 AM

10:45 AM

11:15 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM

1:45 PM 2:30 PM 3:15 PM 4:15 PM 4:30 PM 4:30-4:45 PM 5:00-7:00 PM 6:45-7:15 PM

Transportation from Dearborn Inn Lobby to Automotive Hall of Fame Registration and Continental Breakfast Welcome, Conference Overview, and Objectives Cliff Farr | Engineer Manager of Construction Technology and Training | Michigan DOT Host State Welcome Brad Wieferich, PE | Director, Bureau of Development | Michigan DOT Overview of E-Construction Kathryn Weisner, PE |Construction & Contract Admin. Eng. | FHWA Resource Center The Culture of Innovation | William Vavrik, PE, PhD | Vice-President | ARA, Inc. Introductions | Cliff Farr | Michigan DOT BREAK TECHNICAL TRACK MANAGEMENT TRACK Creating a Business Plan Electronic Contracts, Bidding, & Signatures Amy Tootle, PE | Florida DOT Paul Wheeler, PE |Utah DOT Jim Foringer, PE | Pennsylvania DOT PS&E Submittal and Digital Plan Rooms Moderated Panel Discussion Richard Beckes, PE| Minnesota DOT Panelists: Amy Tootle, Jim Foringer Sarah Kleinschmit, PE | Missouri DOT Working with Partners Cliff Farr|Michigan DOT Table Discussions Rachelle VanDeventer, PE |MI-ITA LUNCH Construction Administration and Creating Policy to Facilitate eConstruction Management Tools Jim Foringer, PE |Pennsylvania DOT Lori Miles, PE | Pennsylvania DOT Moderated Panel Discussion Document Management & Collaboration Jim Foringer, Cliff Farr, Stuart Laakso | Michigan DOT Rachelle VanDeventer Lori Miles, M.Ed. | Pennsylvania DOT BREAK Table Discussions Closing Remarks and Instructions for Day 2 Cliff Farr | Michigan DOT Adjourn Transportation from Automotive Hall of Fame to Dearborn Inn for those not attending the evening event Evening Event at the Automotive Hall of Fame (Optional) Dinner served at 5:30 p.m. Reservations required for this event and the cost is $25.00. Transportation from Automotive Hall of Fame to Dearborn Inn

Thursday 7:15-7:45 AM 7:30 AM

Transportation from Dearborn Inn Lobby to Automotive Hall of Fame Registration and Continental Breakfast

8:00 AM

Welcome Cliff Farr | Engineer Manager of Construction Technology and Training | Michigan DOT

8:05 AM

The Culture of Diversity Alexa Mitchell, PE | CIM Consultant | WSP | PB

8:15 AM 9:15 AM 10:00 AM 10:30 AM 11:15 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 1:45 PM 2:45 PM 3:00 PM 3:00-3:30 PM

Mobile Technology for Field Inspection Rick McGowan | Michigan DOT Roxi Garcia, PE | Advance Transportation Planning Director | Texas DOT Tom Feliz | Strategic Sales Executive | Pavia Systems Technology Demonstrations: Attendees Visit Vendor Exhibit Hall BREAK The Future Project Acceptance and Close-out Rob Wight, PE | Director of Construction | Utah DOT IT Support and User Training Daniel Belcher, PE | Design Services Manager | Michigan DOT Stuart Laakso | ProjectWise Construction Analyst | Michigan DOT LUNCH Table Discussions Led By All Presenters Panel Q&A Session With All Presenters Closing Remarks: Next Steps (CIM) Daniel Belcher, PE | Design Services Manager | Michigan DOT Adjourn Transportation from Automotive Hall of Fame to Hotel or Airport

WELCOME

e-Construction as a Disruptive Technology DEARBORN, MICHIGAN MARCH 30, 2016

c

MISSION: PROVIDING THE HIGHEST QUALITY INTEGRATED TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR ECONOMIC BENEFIT AND IMPROVED QUALITY OF LIFE.

VISION:

MDOT WILL BE RECOGNIZED AS A PROGRESSIVE AND INNOVATIVE AGENCY WITH AN EXCEPTIONAL WORKFORCE THAT INSPIRES PUBLIC CONFIDENCE.

FOCUS AREAS: •

LEADERSHIP

•

SAFETY

•

SYSTEM FOCUS

•

PARTNERS

•

WORKFORCE

•

CUSTOMER CENTERED

•

INNOVATIVE & EFFICIENT

INNOVATIVE & EFFICIENT: •

2015 - 16 GOAL IS TO INCREASE MDOT’S CAPACITY TO INNOVATE

“IF YOU HAVE AN APPLE AND I HAVE AN APPLE AND WE EXCHANGE THESE APPLES THEN YOU AND I WILL STILL EACH HAVE ONE APPLE. BUT IF YOU HAVE AN IDEA AND I HAVE AN IDEA AND WE EXCHANGE THESE IDEAS, THEN EACH OF US WILL HAVE TWO IDEAS.” - GEORGE BERNARD SHAW

ENJOY THE CONFERENCE

Bradley C. Wieferich, P.E. Bureau of Development Michigan Department of Transportation

e-Construction as a Disruptive Technology Kathryn Weisner, P.E. FHWA Resource Center

Efficiency through technology and collaboration

Definition of e-Construction • A paperless contract administration and project delivery system. • The creation, distribution, review, approval, and storage of project documents in a paperless environment by all stakeholders in a secure environment through mobile devices. • A disruptive technology that displaces an established process and has the potential to transform an industry.

2

Project Phases impacted by e-Construction

3

Civil Integrated Management (CIM)

Source: Research Project: NCHRP 10-96 Domestic Scan: Scan 13-02 or NCHRP 20-68A

AK

WA

VT MT

OR

MN ID

WY

NV CO

AZ

NM

MI PA

IA

KS OK

MO

Exploring

WV VA

DC

NC

TN

SC MS

TX

CT NJ DE MD

OH

IN KY

AR

National Leader Potential Lead

NH MA RI

NY

IL

CA HI

WI

SD NE

UT

ME

ND

AL

GA

LA FL

Discussing PR 5

Map Revision: 2/9/16

Goal 12/31/2016

23

30

2/9/2016

6

37

11

National Leader Exploring Discussing

1/1/2014

0

12

33

8 10

20

30

40

50

60

Definitions: National Leader – Has constructed 2 or more projects using technology Exploring – Investigation and/or piloting EDC-3 technology Discussing – Not taking part in national EDC-3 technology initiative 6

Current Initiatives: EDC-3 Implementation Plan • • • • • • •

3 Regional Workshops 18 Peer Exchanges Webinar Series How-to Guide Sample Specifications ROI analysis FHWA Federal Lands and Division Office Pilot

Future Initiatives: EDC-4 !!! 7

Considerations

Holistic Program Understanding Buy-In Return on Investment Technical Capabilities External Support

Stakeholder Buy-in

Administrative

Project Delivery

Short- and Long-Term Goals One-Stop Shop Dashboard

Reporting

Real-Time Reporting

Financials

Document Library

Schedules

Project/Program Health Index

Project Information

Document Control and Tracking Recording Document Flow to/from Stakeholders

File Management Program/Project Collaboration

Assigning Parameters Recording Checklists and Audits

Version Control

Results

Results

Source: Project Inspection Using Mobile Technology, Research Report WA-RD 840.2 (WA, TX, MN): MI DOT; FL DOT: TFHRC Task 3.

www.fhwa.dot.gov/construction/econstruction [email protected] [email protected]

13

SOLVING PROBLEMS OF GLOBAL IMPORTANCE

www.ara.com

The Culture of Innovation e-Construction as a Disruptive Technology March 30, 2016

www.ara.com

© 2016 Applied Research Associates, Inc.

1

There are many pieces to an innovative organization

2

3

SOLVING PROBLEMS OF GLOBAL IMPORTANCE

Organizations fall into an analysis trap Left-Brain Skills •

Processes

•

Right-Brain Skills Creativity

•

Measurement

•

Imagination

•

Execution

•

Analogy

•

Empathy

www.ara.com

© 2016 Applied Research Associates, Inc.

4

5

C O N S T R U C T I O N

6

7

Listen

8

Stay

Open 9

10

Go Flat

11

12

13

14

15

16

“It’s better to have a 9-1 record than a 1-0 record.”

17

18

March 30, 2016

Leadership Track

March 30, 2016 10:00am

Creating a Business Plan

FDOT’s e-Construction Business Plan Amy Tootle, P.E. S tate C onstruction E ngineer F lorida Department of Transportation

2

e-Construction Key Players • State Construction Office  Doug Martin – State Construction Systems Engineer  Amy Tootle – State Construction Engineer  Sherry Valdez & Maria Irizarry - State Construction Final Estimates • Engineering/CADD Systems  Quinton Tillman – CADD Applications Engineer • Office of Information Technology  April Blackburn – Chief Information Officer  Donald Rye – Information Technology Service Manager • District Construction  Pilot Team Members – 8 Districts 3

e-Construction at FDOT • Document Management ProjectSolve SP EDMS

• Digital Signatures  IdenTrust

• Electronic “As-Builts”

 Bluebeam Revu eXtreme

• Mobile Devices  iPad Air 2

4

Document Management  October 2013 – Management approval

 July 2014 – Procured consultant (Project Solve)  August 2014 – First Project Activated (I-4 Ultimate)  September 2014 – Team devising standard workflows  July 2015 – Phased Implementation

5

Digital Signatures  July 2, 2013 – Initial purchase of 390 digital certificate vouchers  July 29,2013 - Issued Memo of Understanding  January 2015 – Approval by DFS for use of digital signatures on monthly estimates  Winter 2015 – Contract Signatures 6

Digital Signatures Laws

• Florida Statute 668 – Electronic Commerce • Florida Statute 471.025 – Regulation of Professions and Occupations (Engineering)

Rules

• Florida Administrative Code 61G15-23.003 – Procedures for Signing and Sealing Electronically Transmitted Plans, Specifications, Reports or Other Documents. 7

Electronic Final “ As-Built” Plans

 Fall 2013 – Decision to go electronic with As-Built Plans  Spring 2014 – Resolved to use pdf software for As-Built Plans

 July 2014 – Evaluation of pdf software  Bluebeam Revu eXtreme  July 2015 – Implement electronic “As-Built” Plans 8

Mobile Devices 

May 2014 – Begin E&O Windows based pilot

 November 2014 – End Windows based pilot  August 2015 – Construction iPad pilot  Summer 2016 – Phased implementation for construction 9

Mobile Devices

iPad versus Surface Pro 10

Cost Breakdown

 Digital Signatures: $39k/2 years • 390 Users • Paid by OIT  ProjectSolveSP: $800k/year • $125 per month/contract • Budgeted into Work Program  Bluebeam: $49K • 393 Construction Users • Reserve Money  iPads: $210k • 287 Users • Grant?

11

Cost Summary  Initial Investment: $1.1M  Annual Recurring Expense: $682K $931k  Reduction in Scanning Costs: $125K/year  Savings each year: ~ $22M

12

Challenges District Buy In The “rest” of the Agency catching up Mobile Device Funding Device Neutral

13

Preparation for Implementation Specifications e-Construction Website Training Industry Presentations Implementation Date – July 2016 14

Questions?

15

March 30, 2016 10:45 am

Moderated Panel Discussion

Creating a Business Plan Panelists: Amy Tootle – Florida DOT Jim Foringer – Pennsylvania DOT Feel free to take notes on your workbook. Questions are on pages 7-8

2

Creating a Business Plan 1. How was your leadership involved in setting the vision for the organization?

3

Creating a Business Plan 2. Did you have a formal business plan or project charter? If so, what did it include? Who were the team members and what role did they play throughout the implementation?

4

Creating a Business Plan 3. How did you assess your baseline capabilities and incremental goals for implementation?

5

Creating a Business Plan 4. How much of your plan was based on leveraging existing resources? Which resources did you leverage

6

Creating a Business Plan 5. How much of your process was paper-based prior to implementation?

7

Creating a Business Plan 6. Did you conduct a formal or informal costbenefit analysis?

How did you use that information?

8

Creating a Business Plan 7. What costs were involved, and who funded your e-Construction initiative?

9

Creating a Business Plan 8. How long did your implementation last? Or how long will it last?

10

March 30, 2016

Dearborn, Michigan

That was then…

.

Contractor Association: contractors, sub-contractors State Level central DOT staff Region Staff: multiple levels of involvement Managing office staff - engineers, inspectors, administration DOT material testing staff Consulting Association: design, construction, material testing consultants Various levels of local and central office reviews and audits Materials: suppliers, fabricators, producers, manufacturers Local Governments FHWA: State, Region, and Federal levels

Improved Construction Documentation Efficiency: All contract documentation in one location Accessible from anywhere at anytime Secure Storage Intelligent Workflows (Automated Document Routing) • Full Audit Trail • Transparency • • • •

Stuart Laakso – ProjectWise Construction Analyst Heather VerHage – ProjectWise Administrator Rachelle VanDeventer – Design Engineer Support Cliff Farr – MDOT e-Construction Coordinator 517-897-3672, [email protected]

Construction Contractors Glenn Bukoski – VP of Engineering Services Michigan Infrastructure & Transportation Association

MDOT Andy Esch – Information Security Officer Steve Hawker – Materials Supervisor Rick McGowan – Construction Inspector

Planning

Maintenance & Operations

Design

e-Project eConstruction

Bidding

Contracts

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Kentucky Louisiana Georgia Iowa Michigan Minnesota

7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13.

Missouri Nebraska New York Ohio Oklahoma Tennessee Texas

14. Vermont 15. Virginia 16. Wisconsin

Michigan is participating with the combined FHWA & AASHTO effort to share e-Construction innovations through: Every Day Counts-3 Initiative AASHTO Innovation Initiative (formerly Technology Implementation Group - TIG) MITA participation as a primary partner: Home office: Glenn Bukoski, Rachelle VanDeventer Contractor: K&R, Inc.: Dan Ringnalda

The following stakeholders are in production, including: All MDOT construction & materials offices 303 contracting firms 860 contractor users

58 consultant firms 1017 consultant users

22 FHWA users 4 Cities; 9 users 9 counties; 31 users 252 active or finaled contracts ~ $1.5 billion as-let contracts

http://mdotwiki.state.mi.us/construction/index.php/E-Construction

The e-Construction Process at MDOT: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAbYgqgnyB8

Mobile Devices in the Field: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_9XCy2IQ2w

e-Construction on the 96 Fix: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScB1b3fqjQo

Cliff Farr, [email protected], (517) 897-3672 Stuart Laakso, [email protected], (517) 897-3789 20

March 30, 2016 10:45 am

Moderated Panel Discussion

Working with Partners Panelists: Cliff Farr – Michigan DOT Rachelle VanDeventer – MI-ITA Robert Fijol – FHWA Michigan Division Jim Foringer – Pennsylvania DOT

2

Working with Partners Feel free to take notes on your workbook.

Questions are on pages 9-10

3

Working with Partners 1. How did you engage your legal staff to support the e-Construction initiative? Were digital signatures already allowed by state law when you started your implementation? If no, explain what actions you had to take to change the law.

4

Working with Partners 2. Did you have a formal business plan or project charter? If so, what did it include? Who were the team members and what role did they play throughout the implementation?

5

Creating a Business Plan 3. How did you go about communicating your e-Construction goals with your business partners and contracting community?

6

Working with Partners 4. How did MI-ITA receive MDOT’s eConstruction initiative? Was there any resistance? What did MI-ITA do to provide support for MDOT’s e-Construction initiative?

7

Working with Partners 5. How did you go about providing support for contractors and suppliers?

8

Creating Policy to Facilitate eConstruction 1. Which project delivery processes did you identify as potential e-Construction initiatives?

9

Creating Policy to Facilitate eConstruction 2. What specific policies did you have to change to support e-Construction?

10

Creating Policy to Facilitate eConstruction 3. How did you prioritize which policies to implement first?

11

Creating Policy to Facilitate eConstruction 4. How long did it take to switch to the new policies? Was there a transition or grace period? How did you make the transition?

12

March 30, 2016

Technical Track

10:00 a.m. March 30, 2016

Electronic Contracts, Bidding, & Digital Signatures

Electronic Contracts, Bidding, and Signatures Paul Wheeler Technology Advancement Specialist Utah Department of Transportation

2

Did you know? • Average of 1.24 days is added to paper-based signature processes • Nearly half of all documents are printed for the sole purpose of adding signatures ALA legal management October 2014 3

Electronic Signatures and the Law

Utah Digital Signature Act Utah Code §§ 46-3-101 to 46-3-504 Enacted by L. 1995, ch. 61 4

Electronic Signatures and the Law The adoption of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) in most states and the passage of Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN) at the federal level in 2000 solidified the legal landscape for use of electronic records and electronic signatures in commerce.

5

Electronic vs. Digital Signatures

Electronic? Digital?

6

Electronic vs. Digital Signatures (continued)

Electronic:

• Just an image, not verifiable • No Integrity • No metadata behind it • Easy to manipulate

7

Electronic vs. Digital Signatures (continued)

Digital: •Intelligent electronic signature •Provides the metadata behind the signature to enhance security and integrity 8

Electronic vs. Digital Signatures (continued)

• Authenticity • Integrity of content • Decreased printing costs • Ease of distribution • Save time!

9

Requirements for Digital Signatures • Each state has different requirements for licensing and electronic seal use • Reputable Certificate Authority • Software that is friendly to Digital Signature workflows • Organizational understanding of the digital signature documents and workflow

10

Electronic Professional Seals Template Cell Library for Creation of Seal

11

Electronic Professional Seals (continued)

Finished Seal from template

12

Signature Fields

13

Signature Fields (continued) Signature Field – Interplot Pen File

14

Signature Fields in Adobe Acrobat

15

Multiple Stamps and Signatures Sheet

16

Adobe Acrobat Portfolio Creation

17

Cover Sheet to Lock and Certify Portfolio

18

Software and Services to Support e-Signatures

• SafeNet (Tokens) • IdenTrust (Third Party Certificate Verification) • MicroStation • Adobe Acrobat Pro • (3) Employees Support Digital Signatures • Web page dedicated to Digital Signatures 19

Procuring software and Technical Services

• SafeNet cost $388 for 3 year package for all tokens for internal employees • Purchased 188 total tokens, 163 are being used • $39 user fee for renewal annually for Identrust • $300-$500 every 3 years • Future projects will use CoSign $10,000 investment • Researching DocuSign for signatures in the field

20

Future •CoSign used by all internal employees •Sign in MicroStation on 3D base models • imodels have problems with signatures •Signatures don’t show up 21

Lessons Learned • Ensure everyone uses the same version of the software • Have a system for keeping certificates up to date • Have an organized workflow for signing the documents • Make it easy to use the digital process!

22

UDOT Bidding Process

Contractors Request Login

23

UDOT Bidding Process (continued)

Project Explorer

24

UDOT Bidding Process (continued)

Bids Submitted

25

UDOT Bidding Process (continued)

Bid Opening Results

26

Unofficial Bid Results

27

Lessons Learned • Old system requires program to be installed on contractors local system which has caused problems with bids • Working on a full web based solution • Implementing Masterworks to replace current system for bidding

28

• • •

• •

Decreased printing costs for the department Integrity of digitally signed files Signing of plan sets were completed faster between departments/consultants Bidding for contractors became easier with Digital Print Room Contractors could easily distribute accurate verifiable electronic copies of the plan sets 29

QUESTIONS? 30

E-Plans: Where to Start? Rick Beckes P roject C ontrols Manager Minnesota Department of Transportation

2

Minnesota DOT.....MnDOT • Minnesota has 87 counties • 8 Districts • 22 Resident Construction Offices (5 Metro and 17 Out-State) 3

2014 MN Highway Construction Project Summary

• Number of Projects Awarded 241 • Awarded Amount ($ million) $802.16 • Total Number of Bidders 779

4

What is e-Construction? • e-Construction is a way to reduce the amount of hard copy documentation needed for highway construction projects. The eConstruction process promotes broad but controlled access to a central document management system in which every data element is stored exactly once via modern technologies, including mobile devices, by all key stakeholders at both a project and program level. 5

Benefits of e-Construction • Reduction or elimination of paper (sustainable solution) • Operates in a secure environment • Ease of document access or searchable text • Real-time document access • Controlled and improved document distribution and workflow

6

• Standardization of reports or forms • Reduced storage and lost paperwork • Enhanced disaster recovery • Improved cash flow • Reduction in claims • Field staff on the job site for a higher percentage of time • Easier access to manuals, plans, and project information 7

• Documents approved faster • Ability to sign electronic documents remotely • Faster, more accurate payments to contractors • Transparency—documents available for viewing by all project partners • Integrates with other core systems, such as accounting, asset management systems, etc. 8

MnDOT Enterprise Architecture…Proposed

9

Lettings, Award, and Contract Approval

• e-Plan Room • Electronic Bidding • Contracts Signed Electronically • Contract Documents transmitted Electronically *Special Provisions *Plans

10

Project Work Flow…Proposal

11

Project Work Flow…Contract

12

Tech Support Pre-Letting Process

13

Request for Proposal • RFP steps • Preparation of requirements • Solicitation for proposal • Receipt of proposals • Evaluation of submitted proposals • Selection of vendor

14

Scope of Work….Requirements • Electronic Plan Distribution System (EPDS) • EPDS will be a virtual plan room • Will be hosted by a third party • MnDOT participates by submitting plans electronically • MnDOT customers/stakeholders will have access to plans

15

Function of EPDS • Mn/DOT will package plans and proposals for a particular project in PDF format. • Mn/DOT will send the packaged plans and proposals to the Electronic Plan Distribution System which will unpackage them. • The Electronic Plan Distribution System will make the plans and proposals accessible to customers. • Customers could then view or download the plans and proposals or sections of the plans and proposals. 16

Functions-cont. • When addenda are issued, Mn/DOT will package them in PDF format. • Mn/DOT will send the packaged addenda to the Electronic Plan Distribution System which will unpackage them. • The Electronic Plan Distribution System will make the addenda accessible to customers.

17

Functions-cont. • The Electronic Plan Distribution System will notify customers, who have indicated that they wish to be notified of the availability of addenda, that the addenda are available. • Customers could then view or download the addenda. • The Electronic Plan Distribution System will send to Mn/DOT data on customers who have indicated that they wish to be notified of the availability of addenda. Mn/DOT will use the customer data to update the vendor and plan holder lists. 18

Specific Software Requirements • ACCESS • Maintenance of Plan Holder and Vendor Lists • Quality Requirements • Support • Legal, Copyright and Other Notices

19

Implementation—Marketing (To Who?) • Internal customer • Mn/DOT senior and middle management • Affected district and central office personnel

20

Marketing (To Who?) • External customers • Contractors and contractor groups • Consultants • Other affected state and federal agencies • Counties and cities • Bonding local agents

21

Marketing Tools • Informational meetings • Brochures • One page handout • Mn/DOT and industry newspapers or newsletters

22

Legislation • Permission to allow us to change the bidding process • Private Sector (If the law does not forbid it, then you can do it.) • Public Sector (If the law does not specifically allow it, then you can not do it.)

23

MnDOT…Resources…Bid Letting Web Page

• http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bidlet/ Pre-letting (how to bid) Post letting (bid results) Advertisements E-Plan Room Tentative Future Lettings 24

E-Plan Vendors • Franz Reprographics…Current MnDOT • Quest CDN…previous MnDOT

25

Contact Info

Rick Beckes [email protected] (651) 366-4236

26

10:45 a.m. March 30, 2016

PS&E Submittal and Digital Plan Rooms

PS&E Submittal and Digital Plan Rooms Richard Beckes, P.E. – MnDOT Sarah Kleinschmit, P.E. – MoDOT Alexa Mitchell, P.E. – WSP PB

28

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Background

• 2004 – MoDOT established need for a more streamlined bid letting process • Contracting community supported electronic bidding • State law required physical signatures for public bidding work during this time and there was no process for digital seals • 2004 – MoDOT worked with legislators and board of registration to change the law/statute to facilitate e-Construction 29

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Implementation Plan

• 2005 – MoDOT business case for agency’s first e-construction • IT managed the project • Contract & bidding services in Design Division developed business requirements for bidding and contract workflows • Automation services in Design Division developed technical requirements to meet business requirements 30

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Implementation Plan (continued)

PS&E submittal and dissemination of plans were part of 5 e-construction initiatives in the Design Division: 1. Update of bid letting website 2. Implementation of new electronic bidding system 3. Implementation of e-plans and associated electronic document tracking system 4. Development of RFP for selection of eplan dissemination service company 5. Implementation of e-plan dissemination service 31

Requirements for Dissemination of e-Plans

• In 2005, MoDOT conducted research and issued an RFI to decide the standard format of agency e-plans • Choices were TIFF images, MicroStation drawings, or vector PDFs. • MoDOT chose PDFs – for the maturity of the file format and wide support for digital signatures • Key requirement for e-plan implementation was document management and version control

32

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Creation of Vector PDFs

33

Requirements for Dissemination of e-Plans

• ProjectWise was selected as the DMS to be used for PS&E documents, and contract plans • It was configured with one major data source and 10 storage servers physically located in the district offices • The database was set up in Jefferson City at the Central Office data center

34

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Contract Plans Workflow

35

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Contract Plans Workflow

36

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Contract Plans Workflow

37

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Contract Plans Workflow

38

Requirements for e-Contract Plans: Dissemination of Contract Plans

• RFP issued to select third party vendor for online plans room • INDOX of St. Louis, MO selected for developing online presence, hosted space, reporting, and optional printing service for contractors • In 2015, MoDOT brought online plans room in-house where is now hosted • Contractors can download and choose any third party printing service 39

Thank You Sarah Kleinschmit, PE - Missouri DOT [email protected] | 573-751-2926 40

March 30, 2016 1:00 PM

Construction Administration and Management

WEB-BASED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION SYSTEM Lori Miles, M.Ed. C onstruction S upport Manager P ennsylvania Department of Transportation

2

Construction Documentation System • Topics • History • The Study • Project Initiation • Business Requirements • Releases • Future Enhancements • Costs and Savings • Demonstration 3

PennDOT’s History of Construction Documentation System

In 2003: Web-based Engineering & Construction Management System (ECMS)

Construction Documentation System (CDS) NeXtGen was implemented. • Personal computer installation (PC)

4

Study to Upgrade CDS NeXtGen Functionality

October 2010 • was developed • Established objectives and goals • Could not envision what system to use

April 2011 •

Study completed with solutions briefing 5

New System Enhance ECMS to provide a web-enabled application • Named as Construction Documentation System version 3 (CDSv3) • April 2013: Management team established

6

The New System – CDSv3 • Project Site Activity (PSA) module to provide same functionality of CDS NeXtGen • PSA’s accessible to appropriate team members • Business requirements were developed • Release dates had to be coordinated

7

CDSv3 – Business Requirements • PSA • Approval work flow

Cloning Example

• Cloning – additional • Estimates • Work orders 8

CDSv3 – Business Requirements cont. • Audits • Report facility • Forms – fillable vs convert to data • Text search – additional

9

CDSv3 - Implementation • System Test • User Acceptance Test (UAT) • Original release date: 07-22-14 • Revised release date: 08-25-14 • Actual release date: 08-18-14 • Districts chose new projects • Removed CDS NeXtGen option for new projects: 10-27-14 10

CDSv3 – Release 2 Priority forms Project Punch List form – live

Final Inspection form

11

CDSv3 – Release 2

Automatic Asphalt Adjustment calculations

Diesel Fuel Adjustment calculations Performed System and UAT Release 2 implemented on 03-23-15 12

CDSv3 Release 2.2 – Interim Enhancement

Construction Consultant Hours and Mileage

Release 2.2 implemented on 02-29-16

13

Future Enhancements Material Source of Supply automatic approvals

Force Account documentation and cost automation

PennDOT’s personnel payroll and expense voucher automation

14

Mobile Construction Utilizes ECMS and CDSv3 • MC-Documents • MC-PSA • MC-Punchlist • MC-Force account • MC-Consultant hours and mileage

15

CDSv3 – Additional Information

• Training Train-the-Trainer Webinars • ECMS User IDs for all project personnel

16

CDSv3 Costs and Savings

• Costs • $2.74 million • 100% state funds • Savings • First year: $2.43 million • Second year: $5.13 million • Third year: $5.91 million

ECMS Demonstration • Website: www.dot14.state.pa.us/ECMS/

18

ECMS – LOGIN Bulletins

19

ECMS - Menus

20

ECMS - Menus

21

ECMS - Menus

22

ECMS - Menus

23

ECMS – Construction Projects Menu

24

ECMS – Construction Project Search

25

ECMS – Project “ Home Page”

26

ECMS – Detail Information

27

ECMS – Detail Information

28

ECMS – Detail Information – Edit Mode

29

ECMS – Detail Information – Edit Mode

30

ECMS – Construction Project Menus

31

ECMS – Construction Solicit Menu • Project Development Checklist

32

CDSv3 – Project Site Activities

33

CDSv3 – Project Site Activities (PSA) • Select New PSA

34

CDSv3 – Create New PSA

35

CDSv3 – PSA Entry Date • Select or type date

• Select Save Button

36

CDSv3 – PSA Created

37

CDSv3 – Completing a PSA • Select Add Inspector Hours • Add Inspector Hours

• Completed Entries

38

CDSv3 – PSA: Weather and Work Suspended

• Select Add Condition • Flags are required fields • Choose from available weather conditions

• 2 weather conditions entered 39

CDSv3 – PSA General Comments • Select Edit Comment • Enter own or select from Canned Remarks

40

CDSv3 – PSA General Comments • Selected Canned Comments

41

CDSv3 – Create PSA New Comment

Created Title and Comment

Added Comment Available to Select under PSA – Comments

42

CDSv3 – Partly Completed PSA

43

CDSv3 – PSA Contractor Information • Select Add Contractor • Click on + to select contractor or subcontractor

44

CDSv3 – PSA Contractor Information • Contractor or Subcontractor Entries

45

CDSv3 – PSA Contractor Information • Enter Work Hours

• Superintendent – Only for Prime Contractor

46

CDSv3 – PSA Contractor Equipment Used • Select from list provided or create new

47

CDSv3 – PSA Equipment Quantity Used

48

CDSv3 – PSA Labor Classification Used • Select from list provided or create new

49

CDSv3 – PSA Labor Classification Quantity

50

CDSv3 – Clone Feature • For Equipment and Labor Classification

51

CDSv3 – PSA Work Items • Select Add Work Items • Select + by Work Item Number

• Select + by the Plan Station

52

CDSv3 – PSA Actual Location

• Actual Location - Enlarged

53

CDSv3 – PSA Work Item Documentation • Fields available to complete • Date Placed – Asphalt and Diesel Fuel Adjustment Automation • To make an entry, select the icon

54

CDSv3 – PSA Work Item Remarks • Canned Remark • Create a Canned Remark • Type freestyle

55

CDSv3 – PSA Work Item Calculation

56

CDSv3 – PSA Work Item Reference

57

CDSv3 – PSA Actual Location • Once the Save button is selected, additional actual location can be entered for the same work item

58

CDSv3 – PSA Attachments • 2 attachments per PSA

59

CDSv3 – PSA Completed

60

CDSv3 – Workflow • Submit for Approval

61

ECMS – Project Team Profiles • Profiles • PennDOT Construction Team • Consultant Construction Team • A security role for each profile

62

ECMS – Project Team Profiles

63

CDSv3 – PSA Approval Process • The PSA Reviewer / Approver verifies the correctness of documentation and calculations • Accept – sends on for next approval or approves the PSA • Revise – sends back for corrections

64

CDSv3 - Estimates • Only approved status PSA’s are placed on the next estimate • Estimates are generated by Period Ending date

65

CDSv3 - Adjustments • Adjustments are applied to Estimates

66

CDSv3 – Adjustment Window

67

CDSv3 - Work Order

• Can add attachments

68

CDSv3 – Work Order Explanations

69

CDSv3 - Report Facility

70

CDSv3 - Punchlist

71

CDSv3 – Punchlist • “Live” Punchlist • Physical Work • Required Documents • Inspection Staff documents • Viewable to the Contractor • Resolution capabilities • Final Punchlist • Transfers unresolved list 72

CDSv3 - Summary • A web-based system • Direct and remote access • Eliminated Ad-hoc reporting database • “One-stop shop” for accessing construction documentation • Leverages PennDOT’s legacy system security framework

73

Questions? • Thank you for your time Contact Information: Lori Miles PennDOT District 11-0 Pittsburgh area 412-429-4852 [email protected]

74

March 30. 2016 1:45 pm

Document Management & Collaboration

Document Management & Collaboration Stuart Laakso P rojectWise C onstruction Analyst Michigan DOT

2

Components of a Document Management System

•Storage •Retrieval •Organization •Security •Workflow 3

Considerations for Selecting a Document Management System

•Ease of Use •Cost •Scalability •Integration •Mobility •Flexibility •Collaboration 4

Other Considerations for Selecting a Document Management System

•Review current applications •Internal vs. External users •Procurement Requirements •Hosting Preferences •Support Requirements 5

Michigan’s e-Construction Journey

6

Paperless Components Already in Place at MDOT

Paperless Components Already in Place at MDOT

While these improvements clearly helped make us more efficient, why was there still so much paper on our projects?

9

Final Steps to Reach “ Paperless” Goal

e-Construction

Digitally Encrypted Electronic Signatures

• Adobe Acrobat® • Investigating agency-wide solution

Issues • July 2012 – Michigan Infrastructure Transportation Association (MITA) and MDOT Leadership Meeting • Third-party software proposals • MDOT Engineering Support Services got involved and offered a solution

Process Discovery

C onvert Workflows

Allow E xternal Access

Test S olutions

Four months from conception to pilot

ProjectWise Solution

Electronic Document Submission

Secure Storage

Single Source of Truth

Workflows

Transparent

Accessible

Digitally Encrypted Electronic Signatures

Developing Policy

• Special provision developed for pilot projects • Current specifications were reviewed • Development of construction WIKI site

Conclusion

A necessary first step

PennDOT Project Collaboration Center

Lori Miles, M.Ed. C onstruction S upport Manager P ennsylvania Department of Transportation

17

PennDOT Project Collaboration Center Topics • Project Initiation • Business Requirements • Releases • Demonstration

18

PennDOT Project Collaboration Center (PPCC) • Web-based project documentation collaboration • Institutionalized • Customized Microsoft SharePoint • Construction Submittal and File System • Role Based Access Control (RBAC) • Automated workflow for review and approval • Version Control 19

PPCC Vision / Goals • PennDOT and business partners to share information • Accessibility • Automated workflow • Secure and reliable • Integrate with other PennDOT systems • Knowledge transfer and training

20

How We Used To Do Business…

21

How We Do Business Now…

22

Pre-PPCC • A consultant company had enhanced SharePoint for PennDOT’s projects • Piloted in October 2011 • Consultant transferred this version/ knowledge to PennDOT in 2012

23

PPCC Release 1 • Deployed into production: Sept. 13, 2013 • Go live date: Sept. 20, 2013 • Trained district designated administrators: September 24 or October 1, 2013 • Each district selected projects to use as a pilot • System and user acceptance testing is performed before the release goes live

24

PPCC Release 1 - Deliverables Base PPCC Application Code • Workflow • Security • Submittals

25

PPCC Release 2 • Go Live Date: January 31, 2014 • Deliverables • Increased the file upload size capacity • Enhanced admin roles capability • Improved consistency across reports • Submittal workflow enhancements • Improved performance and response rimes • Support request capability • Prevention of workflow submittals misroutes 26

PPCC Release 3 • Go live date: October 20, 2014 • Deliverables • Total submittals and projects report • Final acceptance notification • Publish users to existing projects • Business partner enhancements • Created references tab at portal level

27

PPCC Release 4 • Go live date: February 23, 2015 • Deliverables • Calculated “days for review” for a 2nd submission • Internal submittal workflow • PennDOT to PennDOT • PennDOT to Prime Contractor • Versioning for submittal attachments • Enhanced item history for submittals 28

PPCC Release 5 • Go live date: October 16, 2015 • Deliverables • Search functionality • Ability to manage folders • Record retention • Electronic Documentation Management System (EDMS) • Document type/class association • Design document class and type 29

PPCC July 2014 PPCC

District D01 Total D02 Total D03 Total D04 Total D05 Total D06 Total D08 Total D09 Total D10 Total D11 Total D12 Total Grand Total

Total Projects 9 2 1 0 3 0 3 4 31 46 8 107

Submittals 192 0 16 0 4 0 5 200 675 1315 525 2932

RFI 6 0 1 0 7 0 0 22 42 299 36 413

Other Correspondence 16 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 20 94 10 145

Total for All Categories of Source of Supply Submittals 42 256 0 0 0 17 0 0 1 14 0 0 3 8 23 248 244 981 642 2350 161 732 1116 4606

30

PPCC July 2015 PPCC

D01 Total D02 Total D03 Total D04 Total D05 Total D06 Total D08 Total D09 Total D10 Total D11 Total D12 Total Grand Total

Total Projects 65 48 79 27 55 24 53 67 85 103 58 664

Projects with