|
|
Risk Assessment and Allocation for Highway Construction Management
Risk Management Matrix - High Probability, High Impact
Return to Text
Program Management
| Program Components |
Risk Factors |
FLH Unit with Primary Responsibility |
Frequency of Exposure (High,Medium or Low) |
Likelihood of Risk Event/Occurrence (High, Medium,Low) |
Impact (High, Medium or Low) |
Tolerance |
Risk Prior to Control (High, Medium, or Low) |
Stewardship and Oversight Controls |
Post Control Risk (High, Medium, or Low) |
| Program Funding Allocations |
Accuracy, Timeliness, Interception, Many players. Loss of ability to timely obligate funds. FHWA Integrity with Federal and State Partners |
HQ |
L |
L |
L |
M |
L |
Reviewed by 3rd party. Separation of duties. Reconciliation. Project cost tracking. |
L |
| IRR Program Oversight |
Misuse of funds, Breakout of activities pending |
HQ |
H |
H |
H |
L |
H |
Stewardship agreements, BIA controls |
H |
| Delegations of Authority |
Recent Audit issues have brought attention to this |
HQ, FLHD |
L |
L |
L |
H |
L |
|
L |
Planning & Programming
| Program Components |
Risk Factors |
FLH Unit with Primary Responsibility |
Frequency of Exposure (High,Medium or Low) |
Likelihood of Risk Event/Occurrence (High, Medium,Low) |
Impact (High, Medium or Low) |
Tolerance |
Risk Prior to Control (High, Medium, or Low) |
Stewardship and Oversight Controls |
Post Control Risk (High, Medium, or Low) |
| Management Systems, Bridge BMS |
Congressionally mandated. SMS, PMS under development. Bridge Mngmt Sys in place, poor data collection/data mining |
HQ, P&P,
TS PMS |
M M L M M |
M |
L |
M |
M |
Many under development |
L |
| Selection of Projects |
Not much political fallout with FWS and NPS but some with FS. FHWA sometimes involved in Project Selection with FWS and NPS |
P&P |
M |
M |
L |
H |
M |
Under development via mgmt systems |
L |
| Roadway Inventory Program |
Cost, Data Integrity, Data Access, Schedule Delays |
Tech
Serv |
H |
M |
L |
H |
M |
FHWA Collects Data (NPS), QC/QA of digital data |
L |
| Bridge Inspection Program |
Tort Claims, Safety Issues, Loss of service which can be an adverse event if structural failure results in loss of life>>hence low tolerance |
Bridge |
H |
L |
H |
L |
M |
FHWA Collects Data (NPS) biennially and evaluates bridge condition when critical. Projects added/revised to Program at annual Program Meetings. Bridge Inspections are conduted every 2-years, except for structures that are new or have low risk of
deterioration, e.g. concrete which are then visited every 2- yrs & inspection reports developed every 4th yr. Struc. experiencing distress are monitored frequently, e.g. ever yr until rehabilitation or replacement occurs. |
L |
| Reimbursable Agreements |
Misunderstanding on how RAs are to be used. Focus of the Auditors. Signatory Auth. CO vs. DE. |
P&P, Finance |
H |
H |
H |
L |
H |
FMFIA? 31 USC Section 1535?. EFLHD Legal Reviews |
H |
Project Delivery
| Program Components |
Risk Factors |
FLH Unit with Primary Responsibility |
Frequency of Exposure (High,Medium or Low) |
Likelihood of Risk Event/Occurrence (High, Medium,Low) |
Impact (High, Medium or Low) |
Tolerance |
Risk Prior to Control (High, Medium, or Low) |
Stewardship and Oversight Controls |
Post Control Risk (High, Medium, or Low) |
| Bridge Design Standards (i.e. AASHTO LRFD) |
Structural Failures impact Public Safety (i.e. loss of life & emergency access); Tort Claims; General Safety |
Bridge |
H |
L |
H |
L |
M |
All bridge designs are independantly checked by an experienced checker. |
L |
| A/E Outsourcing |
Core competency, higher PE, poor quality, longer time, succession planning |
P&P and Proj. Develop. |
H |
M |
H |
M |
M |
COTR certification, Evaluation Process, IDIQCs. FAR A/E Selection process, phased SOW with Notice to Proceed required between phases, Progress Meetings, Quality Control checklists, Performance Evaluations, Business Focused Measurements |
M |
| R/W Acquisition (Uniform Act) |
Larger issue for WFL/ CFL with counties., transferring to agencies |
Proj. Develop. |
H |
H |
H |
L |
H |
Scheduling activities in PRMS, Timeline controlled by Partner Agency |
H |
Procurement and Acquisition
| Program Components |
Risk Factors |
FLH Unit with Primary Responsibility |
Frequency of Exposure (High,Medium or Low) |
Likelihood of Risk Event/Occurrence (High, Medium,Low) |
Impact (High, Medium or Low) |
Tolerance |
Risk Prior to Control (High, Medium, or Low) |
Stewardship and Oversight Controls |
Post Control Risk (High, Medium, or Low) |
| Bidding Methodology |
Increased usage of letter contracts |
P&A |
H |
M |
H/M |
L |
H |
FAR, TAR, CO Review, Separation ofDuties. |
M |
| 8(a) Procurement, Hub Zone |
Not meeting targets, higher costs, less experience, brokering/suit case contracting. Potential Claims and loss of control in program (SBA). Little emphasis from DOT-FHWA |
P&A |
M |
L |
M |
M |
M/H |
SBA. FDL, Annual Procurement Plan and Division goals established and monitored |
M |
| Small Business Utilization |
Not meeting targets, higher costs, less experience, brokering/suit case contracting. Little or no ability to control who gets contracts |
P&A |
L/H |
L |
M |
L |
L/M |
SBA. FDL, Annual Procurement Plan and Division goals established and monitored |
L |
| Small Purchases |
Fraud, abuse, mismanagement |
P&A |
H |
M |
M |
L |
L |
|
|
Fiscal Management
| Program Components |
Risk Factors |
FLH Unit with Primary Responsibility |
Frequency of Exposure (High,Medium or Low) |
Likelihood of Risk Event/Occurrence (High, Medium,Low) |
Impact (High, Medium or Low) |
Tolerance |
Risk Prior to Control (High, Medium, or Low) |
Stewardship and Oversight Controls |
Post Control Risk (High, Medium, or Low) |
| Accounting System |
Cash flow, Cost Accounting System, Integrity with vendors, Inability to track
project costs, loss of funds |
Finance |
H |
H |
H |
L |
H |
FMFIA Review |
H |
| Overhead Cost |
Loss of program, dissatisfied partner, outsourcing? |
Finance |
H |
H |
M |
M |
M |
FMFIA Review |
M |
| Reimbursable
Authority |
Loss or limitations of Reimbursable Authority. Misuse. Consistency among Divisions. Tied with flexibility and capabilities of Accounting System. |
P&P and Finance |
H |
H |
H |
L |
H |
15R Budget Tracking for Projects and Overhead |
L |
Chart of a Federal Lands Highway Division Critical Elements Risk Assessment. Table has ten columns and eighteen rows, separated into the following sections: Program Management, Planning & Programming, Project Delivery, Procurement and Acquisition, and Fiscal Management.
Return to Text
|
Events
More Information
Contact
Hana Maier
Office of International Programs
202-366-6003
hana.maier@dot.gov
|
