Hot and Bothered Over Botched UDOT Bid Process

Summer is supposedly over, but things are heating up along the Utah political landscape. On the front burner is questioning of the selection process in which Provo River Constructors (PRC) was awarded the $1.1 billion I-15 CORE project contract, the largest contract ever awarded by Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).

Details provided by UDOT confirm that a scoring matrix was used by Evaluation Teams to rank and rate the three short-listed bidders. Following the Evaluations Teams' review and scoring, Flatiron-Skanska-Zachry (FSZ) was favored as the preferred supplier. However, a second review was conducted by the Selection Recommendations Committee (SRC). This was not an entirely independent review, but, at least in part, a review of the Evaluation Teams' scoring. The SRC agreed with 24 of the 27 ratings provided by the Evaluation Teams. They made "upward adjustments" to 3 of the ratings in favor of PRC which resulted in a new winning supplier: Provo River Constructors.

"There was no pattern of bias, but it looked like it," John Njord, UDOT deputy director and chief engineer said. ⁽¹⁾

Following a December 2009 announcement of the winning bidder, Flatiron-Skanska-Zachary filed a protest. In January 2010 they followed up with supplements to the protest. A week and a half after that UDOT provided PRC with a Notice to Proceed. By February 2010, the situation was resolved with FSZ in which a $13 million bid protest settlement from UDOT to FSZ was agreed upon.

A governor's race in Utah, in which campaign contributions, favoritism, and private meetings are in question has recently brought the $13 million payoff to light. They may be saying good-bye to summer along Utah's Wasatch Front, but some are as uncomfortable as a boy in his wool church coat on a hot and sticky July afternoon.

(1) http://www.heraldextra.com/news/transportation/cars/article_b6ed3bb3-44af-5885-87bd-8f7e6e547775.html

Sample Test Question: Task 1-E-2

Scoring supplier responses to proposals is often done via a decision matrix where cross-functional team members independently review and rank suppliers. The supply management professional will set a range for scores (e.g. a range of 1 to 5). If a greater fineness of data is required, a supply management professional would be wise to:

A) Widen the range for scores.
B) Narrow the range for scores.
C) Increase the number of suppliers to be included in the bid.
D) Decrease the number of suppliers to be included in the bid.