| CONTACT: |
| Supreme Court of the Philippines Library Services, Padre Faura, Ermita, Manila, Philippines 1000 |
| (632) 8524-2706 |
| libraryservices.sc@judiciary.gov.ph |
(NAR) VOL. 9 NO.1 / JANUARY -MARCH 1998
[ CIAOTP, January 30, 1998 ]
CONSTRUCTORS’ PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SYSTEM (CPES) IMPLEMENTING GUIDELINES FOR ROAD, BRIDGE, HOUSING, BUILDING, PORT AND HARBOR PROJECTS
The Implementing Rules and Regulations (IRR) of P.D. 1594 as amended last 12 July 1995 provide a new section, that is, IV. PE - Evaluation of Contractors Performance. This section provides, among others, the evaluation by offices/agencies/corporations concerned of all constructors’ project performance and the formulation of the Constructors’ Performance Evaluation System (CPES) by a committee composed of representatives from government tendering agencies, constructors associations and construction-related professional organizations created by the Construction Industry Authority of the Philippines (CIAP).
The CPES was developed in order to:
2.1. Establish a uniform set of criteria for rating the performance of constructors;
2.2 Develop a centralized base of information on performance rating of constructors for licensing, pre-qualification, quality improvement, and other purposes of government agencies, project owners, financing and insurance companies and other interested parties; and
2.3 Contribute in ensuring that infrastructure projects are conformed with the specified requirements of project owners.
3. SCOPE
The guidelines shall be used in the performance evaluation of constructors undertaking government road, bridge, housing, building, port and harbor projects as follows:
3.1 Local constructors licensed by and registered with the Philippine Contractors Accreditation Board (PCAB);
3.2 Foreign constructors licensed by the PCAB; and
3.3 Joint ventures and consortia licensed by the PCAB.
4.1. Constructor — deemed synonymous with the term builder and hence, any entity including joint venture and consortium licensed by PCAB who undertakes or purports to have the capacity to undertake or submits a bid for infrastructure projects.
4.2. Constructors’ Performance Evaluation System (CPES) — a system of grading the performance of a constructor for a specific kind of projects using a set of criteria.
4.3. Constructors Performance Evaluators (CPE) — an individual or group of evaluators accredited by CIAP tasked to undertake performance evaluation of a constructor’s project using the CPES guidelines and/or evaluation requirements of the construction industry.
4.4. Corrective Action Request (CAR) — a form wherein the CPE records its validated finding(s) including corresponding location(s) which do not conform to any of the checklist criteria requiring immediate actions by the constructor. Likewise, it shall include the constructor’s specific actions and timetable to immediately correct findings and proposes measures to prevent the recurrence of such findings. The proposed corrective/preventive actions recommended by the constructors project engineer shall be approved by the head of the IU concerned or his authorized representative.
4.5. CPES Implementing Unit (IU) — the unit of an agency responsible for the implementation of CPES.
4.6. During Construction — reckoned from the time the constructor receives the Notice of Proceed (NTP) up to substantial completion of the projects or the period covering the contract effectivity date as stated in the NTP up to the date of substantial project completion.
4.7. Infrastructure Projects — refers to construction, improvement or rehabilitation of roads and highways, airports and air navigation facilities, railways, ports, flood control and drainage, water supply and sewerage, irrigation systems, dams, buildings, communication facilities, dredging and reclamation, power generating plants, power transmission and distribution facilities and other related construction projects.
4.8. Percentage Weight — the weight for a specific item of work, computed by dividing its cost by the total contract amount.
4.9. Rate — the score for each item of work evaluated, derived using the criteria in evaluating the workmanship and materials aspects.
4.10. Relative Percentage Weight — refers to the weight of an item of work to be rated, computed by dividing the percentage weight of the item of work to be rated by the sum of the percentage weight of all items of work to be rated.
4.11. Relative Rate — the product of the relative percentage weight and the rate for each item of work.
4.12. Upon Completion — refers to 100% completion of the project as claimed by the constructor.
The sequential activities to be undertaken by the CPES Implementing Unit (IU), Constructors Performance Evaluators (CPE), Constructor, Implementing Office, and Construction Industry Authority of the Philippines (CIAP) are presented hereunder. The CPES Functional/Deployment flowchart is illustrated in Annex 1.[*]
5.1.Listing of Projects by the IU
The IU shall prepare the list of all road, bridge, housing, building, port and harbor projects of the agency which have been issued Notice to Proceed (NTP) on a monthly basis upon receipt of documents “a” and “b” as listed in Section 10.1 hereof from the Implementing Offices concerned. Thereafter, the IU shall determine the frequency and tentative date(s) of the evaluation to be undertaken by the CPE for each project based on the following parameters:
a. During Construction — A minimum of two evaluations shall be performed by the CPE, except those projects with duration of less than two months which must be evaluated beyond the prescribed minimum shall be determined by the IU based on the size, nature and complexity of the project and shall be subject to approval by the proper authorities within the agency. The first evaluation shall be scheduled when the constructor has already accomplished substantial work based on the approved schedule. Regardless of project duration, an evaluation shall always be performed when fifty percent (50%) of the value of works is completed.5.2. Consolidation and Review of Documents by the IU
b. Upon Completion — only one evaluation shall be performed by the CPE right after the constructor claims one hundred percent (100%) completion on the project.
Prior to the tentative evaluation date(s), the IU shall require the Implementing Office concerned to submit copies of documents “c” to “f” as listed in Section 10.1 hereof and consolidate all of the submitted project documents for subsequent use of the CPE. The punchlist listed as document “g” shall form part of the documentary requirement for the “upon completion” evaluation only. Based on the status of the project, the IU shall determine the most appropriate evaluation date(s) and fills out the CPES Evaluation Forms to be used for such evaluation.
5.3. Assignment of CPE and Provision of Documents by the IU
The IU shall coordinate and schedule the most appropriate evaluation date(s) of the CPE. Also, the IU shall provide the CPE with all the necessary documents for evaluation. The CPE shall be selected by the IU from the evaluators accredited by CIAP.
5.4. Review of IU — Supplied Documents and Pre-Determination of Spots for Evaluation by the CPE
The CPE upon receipt of the documents supplied by the IU shall review the same and enter pertinent data (standards and tolerances) in the appropriate spaces provided for in the CPES checklist. The CPE shall also randomly pre-determine the spots for evaluation comprising at least ten percent (10%) of the on-going or accomplished portions of each item of work, which are verifiable.
5.5. Finalization of Evaluation Date(s) and Notification of Agency’s and Constructor’s Project Engineer
The IU shall finalize the date(s) of actual evaluation based on latest project updates provided by the concerned Implementing Office and the agreements made by the CPE. The IU shall, likewise, notify the agency’s and constructor’s project engineer before the actual evaluation date(s) within 24 hours for projects located in urban areas where communications are accessible and three (3) working days for projects located in remote areas.
5.6. Notification of CPE, CPE Resource Persons/Witnesses by the CPES IU
The CPES IU shall inform the CPE and CPE resource persons/witnesses as enumerated in Section 9.2 hereof of the evaluation date(s). The CPES IU shall request their presence on said date(s) and specified venue. The resource persons/witnesses are to provide valuable inputs to the CPE.
5.7. Consolidation and Submission of Documents by Constructor’s Project Engineer
The constructor’s project engineer shall consolidate documents “a” and “b” as listed in Section 10.2 hereof and present the same during the on-site pre-evaluation meeting to be conducted by the CPE.
5.8. Conduct of On-Site Pre-Evaluation Meeting Among CPE, Resource Persons and Witnesses
Prior to actual evaluation, the CPE and its resource persons/witnesses shall meet to discuss the following: purpose and mechanics of CPES; scope and status of each work item (percentage of accomplishment) to be evaluated; documents supplied by the constructor’s project engineer; and other factors affecting the implementation of the project. Based on said discussion, the CPE shall update/validate all of the standards/tolerances on relevant checklists to be used.
5.9. Conduct of Actual Evaluation by CPE
Based on the pre-determined spots to be evaluated, the CPE and its resource persons/witnesses, shall undertake the necessary evaluation and records findings in relevant checklists. The CPE may list additional criteria in relevant checklists if needed and corresponding findings. The CPE shall also take photos and/or videos to substantiate its findings.
Should there be a need to assess the constructor’s performance during the warranty period, the IU may request the CPE to undertake such evaluation. The evaluation results shall be submitted by the CPE to the IU and/or concerned units of the agency.
5.10. Conduct of Post-Evaluation Meeting
a. Validation of Findings by CPE5.11. Submission of Accomplished Rating Sheet, CAR(s) by CPE
The CPE leader shall convene a meeting to be attended by the CPE members, resource persons and witnesses to deliberate on the findings and validate the causes for such.
b. Finalization of Evaluation Rating and CAR(s) by CPE
Based on validated findings, the CPE shall meet to finalize its evaluation rating as well as CAR(s), if any, using relevant forms. Each CAR, however, shall be prepared in duplicate copies.
c. Presentation/Issuance of Rating and CAR(s) by CPE
The CPE leader shall reconvene the meeting with the CPE members, resource persons and witnesses in order for him to present the evaluation rating and issue the duplicate copies of the CAR(s) to the constructor’s project engineer.
d. Agreement on Rating and CAR(s) by Constructor’s Project Engineer
The constructor’s project engineer can either agree or disagree with the rating and in all or some of the CAR(s). Should there be agreements on the rating contained in the summary rating sheet and all CAR(s), the CPE leader shall request said engineer to affix his signature in spaces provided for in all copies of said documents. Thereafter, said engineer shall be given duplicate copies of the CAR(s). But in case of disagreements with the rating or any of the CAR(s), the CPE leader shall inform said engineer that these shall be settled by an appropriate adjudicating body to be designated by the agency.
Immediately after the completion of the evaluation, the CPE leader shall submit to the IU the original copies of the accomplished rating sheet (cover sheet, checklists and summary sheet) and CAR(s). The CPE leader shall, likewise, prepare a report indicating the documents to be submitted to the agency’s designated adjudicating body.
5.12. Preparation and Implementation of Corrective Action Plan (CAP) and Preventive Action Plan (PAP) by the Constructor
Based on the non-conformance findings prepared by CPE, the constructor shall prepare and submit the corresponding CAP to the Head of the Implementing Office (IO) for his assessment and subsequent approval. If the CAP is approved by the IO Head, the constructor’s Project Engineer (PE) shall implement the plan and to be monitored by the Project Owner’s PE. However, if CAP is disapproved, the constructor’s PE has to submit another CAP proposal for approval by the IO Head. The constructor has to submit PAP proposal if similar findings by the CPE occurred twice or more. The process of PAP’s approval is similar to CAP’s.
5.13. Review of CPES Rating, Preparation of Reports, and Dissemination of Information by IU
The IU, upon receipt of the CPES rating sheet for a particular project and visit, shall review the completeness and consistency of its contents. Should the contents be in order, the IU shall submit it to the Agency Head and concerned IO. The concerned IO shall monitor the constructor’s implementation of all the recommendations made by the CPE on the noted non-conformances. This shall be supported by videos or photos before, during and after rectification has been made. After the constructor has satisfactorily completed all the corrections made, the IO shall submit the reports to the IU.
The IU shall submit to CIAP’s PDCB an authenticated photocopy of the complete CPES Evaluation Form to contain Parts I, II, III & IV and/or other required report(s) within a week after the conduct of the final visit for the completion phase.
5.14. Databanking by IU and CIAP
All original copies of the CPES rating sheets shall be filed and pertinent data stored in a computer by the CPES IU for easy access and processing of information in the future. This unit shall serve as the agency’s databank for all CPES information and documents pertaining to its projects and constructors.
CIAP’s PDCB, on the other hand, shall establish the CPES central data bank and maintain linkages with concerned agencies to ensure timely and continuous submission of authenticated copies of accomplished CPES Evaluation Forms and to facilitate information sharing among users of CPES data.
6. ASPECTS OF EVALUATION
The performance of the constructor shall be evaluated “during construction” and “upon completion” of a project. The assigned weights and aspects to be evaluated “during construction” and “upon completion” shall vary depending on the kind of project as follows:
6.1. During Construction — with a weight of 60% for road, bridge, port and harbor projects, and 70% for housing and building projects, the maximum rating for the following aspects shall be:
Workmanship 0.40
Materials 0.30
Time 0.10
Facilities 0.03
Environmental, Safetyand Health (ESH) 0.07
Resources Deployment 0.10
Total 1.00
====
The assigned weight for housing and building projects is higher than that for road and bridge projects in view of the complexity of the nature of the former projects. In general, the evaluation “during construction” is assigned heavier weight to encourage constructors to immediately attain satisfactory performance and be able to maintain it until substantial work has been accomplished.
6.2. Upon completion — with a weight of 40% for road and bridge projects, and 30% for housing and building projects, the maximum rating for the following aspects shall be:
Workmanship 0.50
Time 0.50
Total 1.00
====
7.1.During Construction
a. Workmanship [Maximum Rating of 0.40]
Workmanship refers to the quality and quantity of on-going and/or completed items of work, which are verifiable, in accordance to approved plans and specifications. This aspect covers the utilization of the correct methodology needed in producing the desired quality of work. In rating this aspect, efficiency of methodology shall be considered.
In assessing/evaluating workmanship, spots comprising at least ten percent (10%) for every on-going and/or completed items of work, which are verifiable, shall be randomly pre-determined by the (CPE) prior to actual site inspection. Checklists for Workmanship for roads and bridges, housing and building, and ports and harbor projects are presented in Annexes[*] 2, 3 & 4, respectively. Refer to Section 11.4a hereof in determining the rating for workmanship.
In case there are on-going or completed additional works or variation orders, which are verifiable, at the time of inspection, these shall be rated if said variations were approved by at least agency’s Project Engineer.
b. Materials [Maximum Rating of 0.30]
To impress upon the constructors the importance of materials in producing the desired quality of an item of work, this aspect is viewed separately from workmanship as another factor in assessing performance.
Materials means the quality, quantity and type of construction materials including asphalt and ready-mixed concrete, and components supplied by entities other than the constructors as required in the contract. The constructor gets the full rating of 0.30 for materials in a particular item of work if he complies with all the ten (10) criteria in the checklist for materials in Annex 5[*] . Refer to Section 11.4b in rating materials.
Alternative construction materials used by the constructor may also be considered by the (CPE) in rating the materials aspect, provided there are supporting documents consisting of the approval by the owner’s authorized personnel and test results. If a work item does not require the use of materials (e.g., demolition of existing structure, excavation, or scraping), the constructor automatically gets 0.30 in this aspect provided he gets the full rating in the workmanship aspect for such work item. However, if the particular item of work was not done or inadequately complied with, the rating for material shall be 0.00. Furthermore, when a particular item of work was not rated since it is no longer visible and cannot be verified, the material aspect for such item of work shall not be rated.
Materials for on-going or completed additional works, which are verifiable, at the time of inspection shall also be rated provided said variations were approved by at least the agency’s Project Engineer.
Unlike the workmanship and materials aspects which are evaluated on a per item of work, the following four (4) aspects shall be appraised during each visit without particular attention to the work items completed/being completed by the constructor.
c. Time [Maximum Rating of 0.10]
This refers to the over-all accomplishment in accordance with the approved PERT/CPM or approved program of work. The constructor gets a full rating of 0.10 if he is on or ahead of schedule but gets a lower score if there is any delay or slippage attributable to his fault. The score shall depend on the percentage of delay as reflected in the checklist for time aspect presented in Annex 6*. Refer to Section 11.4c in rating the time aspect.
In case there are on-going or completed additional works or variation orders, time would be rated based on effective PERT CPM and S-Curve approved by at least agency’s project engineer. In case it has not yet been approved by agency’s project engineer, time shall be rated based on the latest approved PERT CPM and S-curve.
d. Facilities [Maximum Rating of 0.03]
The facilities being referred to here are those set up by the constructor prior to actual project start. This aspect covers the provision of project signboard, sanitary and/or field and on-site office facilities which includes the surveying, transport and communication and other equipment, appliances, utensils and other items as required in the contract. The constructor merits a full rating of 0.03 if he complies with the criteria enumerated in the checklist for facilities presented in Annex 7*. Refer to Section 11.4d in rating this aspect.
In case the contract does not indicate any provision for camp facilities, to be checked are the sanitary, field and on-site office facilities provided by the constructor for its technical staff and workers.
e. Environmental, Safety and Health (ESH) [Maximum Rating of 0.07]
The constructor must learn to care for his environment and must try his best not to pollute during project prosecution. He must observe safety and health measures as required in the general and/or special contract provisions, and safeguard the lives of his workers and those of the general public. The constructor gets a full rating of 0.07 if he complies with the criteria enumerated in the checklist for ESH presented in Annex 8[*] . Refer to Section 11.4e in rating this aspect.
f. Resources Deployment [Maximum Rating of 0.10]
In this aspect, to be evaluated is the constructor’s ability to deploy on time, based on the approved PERT/CPM or program of work, the required/pledged facilities and resources such as materials, equipment in good running condition and manpower. Refer to Section 11.4f in rating this aspect. Resources deployment checklist is presented in Annex 9[*] .
Should there be on-going additional works or variation orders at the time of inspection not yet covered by approved variation order, the provision on this matter as stated in Section 7.1-c shall likewise be adopted.
7.2 Upon Completion
a. Workmanship [Maximum Rating of 0.50]
Workmanship is one of the two aspects to be evaluated when the constructor claimed one hundred percent (100%) completion of the project.
The punchlists prepared by the inspectorate team may serve as additional reference for project evaluation. The constructor shall merit a full rating of 0.50 for a particular item of work if he satisfies the criteria in the checklist. Spots compromising at least ten percent (10%) of the entire project shall be the sample size used in evaluating this aspect.
b. Time [Maximum Rating of 0.50]
In rating the aspect of time, comparison shall be made between the approved contract completion time including time extensions granted and actual project completion time. Completion of a project on time includes demobilization and final clean-up.
The constructor shall get a full rating of 0.50 if he is on or ahead of schedule but if the project is delayed due to his fault, he gets 0.00 regardless of the number of days delayed. To encourage constructor to finish the project ahead of schedule, he shall earn additional score of 0.01 for every one percent (1%) ahead of schedule provided he has a perfect rating of 0.50 for workmanship aspect.
8. CPES IMPLEMENTING UNIT
To ensure the effective implementation of CPES, each government agency undertaking road, bridge, housing, building, port and harbor projects shall either create an independent unit or integrate the CPES functions in an existing unit with similar functions which shall act as the CPES Implementing Unit (IU). Ideally, the IU should be under the office of agency head but it could also be attached to the agency’s audit or monitoring group. Its organization and functions are as follows:
8.1 Organization
The CPES (IU) shall be composed of the following:
a. Unit supervisor — shall act as the head of the unit;
b. Technical personnel — shall assist the head in the performance of the unit’s technical functions; and
c. Clerk — shall perform all the administrative and coordinative requirements of the unit.
8.2 Functions
The IU shall have technical and administrative/coordinative functions as follows:
a. Technical
a.1 Orient in-house CPE members and resource persons/witnesses as enumerated in Section 9 hereof regarding CPES as well as provide the CPE with the necessary documents and references.
a.2 Review the reports and ratings made by the CPE for each visit.
a.3 Prepare CPES Evaluation Reports containing, among others, filled-up checklist, CAR forms and findings found by CPE requiring appropriate action by the constructor concerned.
a.4 Analyze all the data contained in the CPES Evaluation Form (Parts II, III & IV) and prepare necessary reports.
a.5 Act as member of the CPE as required.
b. Administrative/Coordinative
b.1 List all projects to be subjected to evaluation using CPES and identify/assign personnel to compose the CPE.
b.2 Schedule orientation-seminar on CPES for in-house CPE members and resource persons/witnesses.
b.3 Generate latest project status, schedule CPE site visits, coordinate visit with the agency’s project engineer and constructor concerned, and file/safekeep all CPES related documents.
b.4 Provide the CPE with CPES documents implementing guidelines and forms, and prepare CPE travel documents as required.
b.5 Submit CPES documents to all concerned users within the agency, CIAP’s Philippine Domestic Construction Board (PDCB) and other interested users.
Each government agency shall have the option of tapping in-house staff, third party evaluators or combination of both either as group/team or individual to compose the CPE. For those agencies whose CPE will be composed of in-house evaluators only or combination of in-house and third party evaluators, such in-house evaluators could either be assigned on a permanent or ad-hoc basis. It is necessary that all CPE members are not in any way involved with the project to be evaluated in order for them to give an objective and unbiased evaluation of the constructor’s performance.
9.1 Minimum Qualification of CPE Evaluators
All CPE evaluators shall be accredited by the CIAP based on the minimum qualifications as follows:
a. Licensed Engineer or Architect.
b. Must have at least 5 years experience in the actual implementation of project.
c. In full enjoyment of his/her civil rights, must not have been convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude or of any other crime for which the penalty imposed upon him/her is over six (6) months of imprisonment.
d. Willing to undergo all screening requirements and accreditation course for CPES evaluators to be conducted by the CIAP’s PDCB or any of its accredited training institutions.
Professionals who have substantially complied with the minimum requirements stated in items “a” to “c” above, and who by reason of trainings or experiences in construction, conducted lectures on CPES accreditation courses upon invitation by the CIAP’s PDCB are automatically accredited as CPE evaluators.
9.2 Composition of CPE Evaluators
Based on the abovementioned options in the creation of CPEs, the composition for each shall be:
a. With Voting Power
| Options | In-house CPE | Third Party CPE | Combination of In-house and Third Party CPE |
| Group or Team | One (1) - Engineering or Architectural staff occupying supervisory position accredited by the CIAP who shall act as the CPE leader. | Two (2) or more-Private individuals not connected with the project accredited by CIAP | One (1) - Engineering or Architectural staff occupying supervisory position accredited by the CIAP who shall act as the CPE leader |
| One (1) or more-Engineering or Architectural staff occupying supervisory position accredited by the CIAP. | One (1) or more-Private individuals accredited by CIAP. | ||
| Individual | One (1)-Engineering or Architectural staff occupying supervisory position accredited by the CIAP. | One (1) - Private individual not connected with the project accredited by CIAP. |
b. Without Voting Power
RESOURCE PERSONS/WITNESSES
one (1) or more - Owner’s and Constructor’s Project Engineer and/or Consultant assigned in the project to act as resource person(s).
one (1)- (Optional) Representative from any of the CIAP accredited constructors’ associations nearest to the project site, knowledgeable in project implementation to act as witness
one (1) - (Optional) Representative from the Local Government Unit (LGU) where the project is located to act as witness.
The CPE should have the following documents for its review and reference during actual evaluation which shall be supplied by the IU and the constructor’s project engineer:
10.1 IU-Supplied Documents
a. Contract documents: approved contract agreement, contract drawing, general and special/local provisions including plans and specifications, method of construction, safety and health measures.
b. Approved constructor’s construction program: CPM work schedule or bar chart, materials/manpower schedule, equipment schedule, organizational chart, financial chart such as S-curve or cash flow.
c. Constructor’s statistical reports: physical progress/status, equipment and manpower schedules based on the latest approved PERT/CPM.
d. Materials testing procedures, records of tests and results, materials quality control program.
e. Constructor’s operational set-up: general lay-out of facilities, project office and quarters, warehouse, shops for repair/maintenance/carpentry/rebar
f. List of subcontractors or suppliers
g. Punchlist
h. Relevant checklists, CPES evaluation form and cover sheet
10.2 Constructor’s Project Engineer-Supplied Documents
a. Project log book
b. Updated records of tests/results and materials quality control program monitoring reports
c. Other related reports
The CPES evaluation form and cover sheet to be used by the CPE is contained in Annex 11* and this shall be reproduced by the IU for distribution to all CPE(s) concerned prior to site visits.
11.1 Part 1 - Cover Sheet
Part I of the form is the cover sheet, which is to be filled up by the owner’s project engineer contains the following general information: name and address of the constructor; name and address of owner/authorized managing officer; project name, location and brief project description; original and revised contract amount and duration; scheduled date of project start and actual date started; and, scheduled date of project completion and actual date completed (number of days advance/delayed also indicated). Other necessary information pertaining to the project may also be included on this portion.
11.2 Parts II and III - Rating Sheets
The CPE shall use Parts II and III of the form during the “construction phase” first and second visits, respectively. In case the CPE intends to conduct more than two (2) visits during this phase, Part II of the form may be reproduced to correspond to the additional number of visits it shall make. Part III shall be used for the final visit.
For Parts II and III, the CPE shall list the items of work evaluated during the visit, their corresponding percentage weights and relative percentage weights, and their rates and relative rates for both workmanship and material aspects. As defined in Section 4 hereof, the percentage weight of a particular item of work subjected to evaluation shall be computed by dividing its total cost by the total contract amount while the relative percentage weight of said item of work shall be computed by dividing its percentage weight by the sum of the percentage weight of all evaluated items of work. The relative rate for each item of work for both aspects, which shall be computed by multiplying the rate for each item of work with corresponding relative percentage weight, shall be added and later on reflected in the Summary of Ratings with ratings for the other aspects covered.
For Part III, the CPE after completing the Summary of Ratings shall compute the “During Construction” Weighted Rating (A). This can be computed by adding all of the Ratings obtained for each visit during construction phase, dividing the sum of Ratings by the number of visits made, and then multiplying the quotient by sixty percent (60%) for road and bridge, port and harbor projects or seventy percent (70%) for housing and building projects.
11.3 Part IV - Rating and Summary Sheet
For Part IV, which will be used for the “upon completion” visit, the CPE shall list the items of work evaluated and their corresponding percentage weights and relative percentage weights, and their rates and relative rates for the workmanship aspect. After adding all of the relative rates, the sum along with the ratings for the time aspect shall be reflected in the Summary of Ratings. To determine the “upon completion” Weighted Rating (B), the CPE shall multiply the Total Rating by forty percent (40%) for road and bridge, port and harbor projects and thirty percent (30%) for housing and building projects. The Over-all Rating, on the other hand, shall be computed by adding the “during construction” Weighted Rating (A) and “during completion” Weighted Rating (B) and multiply the sum by one hundred percent (100%).
However, in case there are on-going or completed additional works not yet covered by an approved variation order or request for time extension which is not yet approved during the visit, the CPE using a separate form shall fill up all relevant portions such as the Rate column for the workmanship and material aspects, time and resources deployment. The ratings therewith shall be used in updating the appropriate form, either Part II, III or IV, only upon approval of the variation order or time extension.
The CPE head and members, resource persons and witnesses present during each visit shall always affix their signature in the spaces provided for in Parts II, III and IV.
11.4 CPES Checklist
a. Checklist for Workmanship
The checklist for Workmanship is contained in Annex 2[*] for Road and Bridge Projects, Annex 3[*] for Port and Harbor Projects and Annex 4[*] for Housing and Building Projects. The CPE shall select from the checklists those items of work which are applicable for evaluation/assessment. Criteria are set for each items of work but the CPE may add other criteria in the blank spaces provided for.
The CPE shall evaluate/assess the pre-determined spots based on the criteria set for each item of work and determine if there is non-compliance or full compliance. If criteria is not applicable, CPE should place NA (not applicable) at results box.
Determining Results, Score, Total Score and Rate.
a.1 Determine the number of non-compliance or full compliance per criteria.
a.2 Results = Compliance / Number of spots
a.3 Score = Results x 0.40
a.4 Total Score = Sum of all the scores
a.5 Rate of an Item of Work = Total Score (a) / No. of Criteria (b)
b. Checklist for Materials
The checklist for Materials is contained in Annex 5[*] and this should be reproduced by CPES IU for distribution to all CPE concerned prior to site visit. There are eight (8) criteria for this aspect and all criteria shall be rated. Compliance to each criteria means full score of one (1) and non-compliance means score of zero (0).
If constructor complies with criteria number 1 which is compliance to test requirements, then the remaining 7 criteria need to be evaluated. If the constructor does not comply with criteria number 1, however, the remaining 7 criteria shall also be evaluated for CAR/PAR purposes but the final rating is automatic zero (0).
Determining Results, Score, Total Score and Rate.
a.1 Results = If criteria is complied (C) = 1 and if not complied (NC) = 0
a.2 Score = Compliance = 1 x .030; Non-compliance = 0 x 0.00
a.3 Total Score = Sum of all the Score (a).
a.4 Determine number of criteria = 8(b)
a.5 Rate = Total Score (a) / No. of Criteria (b).
c. Checklist for Time
The checklist for Time is contained in Annex 6[*] . Part one is for “During Construction” and Part Two is for “Upon Completion”.
Determining Results, Score and Rate.
a.1 Place check in the results box for the corresponding percentage of delays or ahead in schedule.
a.2 Equivalent Score is set for each criteria.
a.3 Rate is equal to score. (Rate = Score)
d. Checklist for Facilities
The checklist for Facilities is contained in Annex 7[*] . The CPE should verify from the site if the criteria set for facilities are complied (C) or not complied (NC). Compliance means score of one (1) and non-compliance means score of zero (0). The CPE shall select only the criteria which are applicable.
Determining Results, Score, Total Score and Rate.
a.1 Results = If criteria is complied (C) = 1 or not-complied (NC) = 0.
a.2 Score = Compliance = 1 x 0.03; Non-compliance = 0 x 0.00
a.3 Total Score = Sum of all the Scores (a).
a.4 Determine number of criteria = 5(b).
a.5 Rate = Total Score (a) / No. of Criteria (b).
e. Checklist for Environmental, Safety and Health (ESH)
The checklist for ESH is contained in Annex 8[*] . The CPE should verify if each criteria set for this aspect is being strictly implemented by the constructor. The CPE shall select only the criteria which are applicable.
Determining Results, Score, Total Score and Final Rating.
a.1 Results = If criteria is complied (C) = 1 and if not-complied (NC) = 0.
a.2 Score = Compliance = 1 x 0.07; Non-compliance = 0 x 0.00.
a.3 Total Score = Sum of all the Score (a).
a.4 Determine number of criteria = 16(b).
a.5 Rate = Total Score (a) / No. of Criteria (b).
f. Checklist for Resources Deployment
The checklist for Resources Deployment is contained in Annex 9[*] . The CPE should check the actual deployment of resources (materials, manpower and equipment) and verify if the constructor complies or does not comply as per latest approved resources schedule. All criteria shall be rated.
Determining Results, Score, Total Score and Rate.
a.1 Results = If criteria is complied (C) = 1 or not compliance (NC) = 0.
a.2 Score = Compliance = 1 x 0.10; Non-compliance = 0 x 0.00.
a.3 Total Score = Sum of all the Score (A).
a.4 Determine number of criteria = 3 (b).
a.5 Rate = Total Score (a) / No. of Criteria (b).
12. INFORMATION UTILIZATION
The CPES rating and other information contained in the authenticated copies of CPES Evaluation Forms to be regularly provided by government agencies concerned to CIAP’s PDCB and centrally maintained by the same shall be made available to all interested users either electronically or in hard copy/diskette for the following purposes:
12.1 Prequalification of Constructors — Supply the Prequalification, Bids and Award Committees (PBACs) with necessary information in the review of constructors’ technical capabilities, which is a requirement in IB 6-3 of the amended IRR of PD 1594.
12.2 Negotiated Contract — Provide necessary information in determining whether the constructor meets one of the conditions of IB 10.4.2-1.c of the amended IRR of PD 1594.
12.3 Masterlist for Simplified Public Bidding — Provide the Philippine Contractors Accreditation Board (PCAB) necessary data in the preparation of a master list as provided for in IB 10.4.2-5.a of the amended IRR of PD 1594.
12.4 Licensing, Registration & Accreditation of Constructors — Serve as one of the basis in the licensing and registration of constructors by PCAB.
12.5 Shortlisting & Accreditation of Constructors — Provide agencies basis in preparing/updating their shortlist.
13. APPLICABILITY
These guidelines shall be applied to all constructors of all national government agencies and instrumentalities, including government-owned and controlled corporations (GOCCs) undertaking road, bridge, housing, building, ports and harbor projects.
Project Management Offices (PMOs) of private entities may also use these guidelines to evaluate their constructors project performance.
These guidelines shall become effective upon approval by the National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) Board’s Committee on Infrastructure (INFRACOM) and after fifteen (15) days upon publication by CIAP.
Adopted: 30 January 1998
(Approved by the NEDA Committee on Infrastructure [INFRACOM] in its meeting on 30 January 1998)
[*] Text Available at Office of the National Administrative Register, U.P. Law Complex, Diliman, Quezon City.