CHAPTER 5

Strategies to Improve Change Order Documentation for Future Analyses

Quality of Change Order Descriptions

Construction management software currently in use at many DOTs includes the capability to generate or document change orders. Change order information the system captures includes construction contract number, dollar amount, document number, location, type of contract, change order reason code, description, and remarks (or comments). Clear, complete, and concise change order descriptions should make it easier to classify and document UR change orders properly.

It is common to use change order reason codes. However, not every DOT uses them. In the current practice, UR reason codes are often ambiguous and do not describe the root cause of a change order effectively. In other cases, a change order might cover several topics, but the system only allows users to use one reason code or, at most, a limited number of reason codes. Even in cases where the system allows users to enter multiple reason codes, it is common to only use one or two reason codes.

If a DOT uses change order reason codes, a recommendation for UR change orders is to use the disaggregated reasons listed in Table 2. If the DOT does not use reason codes or it is not possible to change the list of reason codes, a recommendation is to include the appropriate reason from Table 2 as part of the change order description.

The following are recommendations to include effective, relevant information in the description or remarks column of a change order. The examples included with each recommendation (text in italics) are real-world examples. Italicized text in bold is intended to call attention to a specific issue.

• Implement a quality control process to minimize typing errors. Misspelled words and other inconsistencies result in incomplete text searches. Examples of change order text with misspelled words the research team found are as follows:
  • Remobilization due to utlity conflict and time extension.
  • Revision of drainage to accomodate right turn at Blanco.
  • Remov & replac 4′ × 4′ boxes. This change order provides compensation for the removal and replacement of 4 × 4 pre-cast box culverts due to a conflict with a southwestern bell telephone duct bank not indentified in the plans.
  • The city is the third party enitity on this project and is 100% responsible for the funds required or this change order.
• Avoid using acronyms or abbreviations whenever possible. In some cases, the use of common acronyms is acceptable. However, in other cases the use of acronyms can result in confusion. Examples of change orders with acronyms that can be confusing include the following:
  • Video existing and new ss lines. In this case, the acronym caused confusion because it was not clear whether the line was a sanitary sewer line or a storm sewer line.

• This change order will compensate the contractor for the installation of a junction box in order for the flowline of an RCP to be lowered below the city wl. This description could be confusing because not all stakeholders might necessarily know that wl stands for water line.
• Storm/sanitary sew – w/line & abnd tank conflicts. In this case, it was difficult to understand the change order because the text contained mostly abbreviations without much context.
• Cite the contract and change order number when referring to other change orders instead of repeating the description of those change orders. Repeating content from earlier change descriptions is confusing and unnecessary. In some cases, content from earlier change orders is paraphrased, leading to misinterpretation of the true reason for the change order. Examples of change orders with repeated descriptions are as follows:
  • Recover 3rd party participation for co #02, #04, & #05. This change order is needed because co #2, #4, #5 did not include a co-AFA form. The change order description then included a 346-word review of each of the referenced change orders (i.e., almost a page long), along with an explanation of why the advance funding agreement (AFA) was not included previously. A more effective way to present this information would have been to include a bulleted list of change orders, each one including just a few lines summarizing the change order, explaining briefly why the AFA was not included, and including the dollar amount recovered through the AFA.
  • Overhead reimbursement. The subject change order adds item of work no. 9608-2008 unique change order item 8 to the contract. New item of work no. 9608-2008 unique change order item 8 is being added to the contract to compensate the contractor for overhead costs due to untimely utility relocations and additional work performed that was not covered in the original subject contract. During the project there were five change orders processed that added 136 days to the contract. This change order compensates the contractor for the overhead costs associated with these days. The list of existing change orders addressing additional days is as follows. The change order description then included a 971-word review of the referenced change orders (i.e., two pages long). It is worth noting that the total number of words in the description of the original change orders was 4,421. A more effective way to present this information would have been to include a bulleted list of change orders, each one including just a couple of lines summarizing the change order and the number of days added.
• Avoid including information about the project scope or information that other columns in the change order already capture. An example of a change order that included unnecessary contract description information is as follows:
  • Revise landscape bed material. This change order provides for revising the topsoil material to be placed in the landscape beds and to account for revisions to the proposed pavement structure within the landscape bed areas. This project was designed by a consultant, and provides for the construction of a widening of a non-freeway facility consisting of grading, base, structures, concrete pavement, illumination, signing and pavement markings, signals, SW3P, etc. The subject contract includes landscaping to be installed at various locations within the raised medians along I-35. The contract includes the district standards for fertilizer, seed, sod, straw, compost, and water, planting and establishment, and irrigation details and materials that provide direction to the contractor on the landscape requirements. There are several discrepancies noted by the contractor between the contract and district standards. The discrepancies were discussed with the district landscape architect to find a best resolution. The contract shows to place topsoil and erosion control compost within the landscape bed areas and includes bid items for this work. The district landscape standard sheets included in the contract provide different details for the landscape bed areas. Per plan sheet 532, the planting and establishment standard, item 192 plant bed prep should have been included in the contract; however, this item was not included to bid. Item 192 plant bed prep details to use a general use compost and three landscape soil amendments. Item 192 plant bed prep nor items for the general use compost or landscape soil amendments are included to use. Through discussions with the district landscape architect, it was

determined to add item 161-2006 compost manuf topsoil (pb) in the landscape areas. This pre-blended manufactured topsoil includes soil amendments and replaces the need for the topsoil that was to be placed. This change order will add item 161-2006 compost manuf topsoil (pb) and deduct a portion of item 160-2002 compost manuf topsoil (bos) (4).

• Include the utility type in the description. Alternatively, include both the utility type and the utility owner’s name. Including only the utility owner’s name might result in confusion if a utility owner operates several types of utility facilities, or if a utility owner is local or regional and is not widely known. Examples of change orders that only mention the utility owner’s name or that have unclear features are the following:
  • Additional third-party work requested by ABC Water Coop.
  • Excelcom is requesting the construction of additional conduit placement along loop 288 from us 380 to holland lane.
  • This change order provides the cost for keeping Ray Inc. technician on site for emergency until the crane operation has been completed around the transmission lines.
  • The upstream manhole tie-in located at station 100+28.10 is shown in the plans to be at elevation 625.54 ft., and the actual tie-in elevation is 625.11 feet. The downstream manhole tie-in located at station 127+28.31 is shown in the plans to have an elevation of 617.60 ft., and the actual tie-in elevation is 618.22 feet.
  • Repair work, design error, change in site condition. This change order will allow the contractor to repair unsuitable areas in the subgrade as necessary. Increase a plan quantity item; and add a 12-inch pipe that was left off the original plans.
• Standardize utility owner names. Examples of change orders referring differently to the same utility owner are the following:
  • Unique item 9068-0518, furnish water meter vault, shall be paid for by lump sum and shall be full compensation for furnishing the water meter vault as requested by DWSS. Third party funding (d.w.s.s.): $ 8,695.56
  • Time extension for J&D Communications utility conflict. Description: add 84 days to milestone 3 and project completion, and three (3) months barricades due to a jd comm utility conflict as described below.
  • Electricwire poles at 11th and 12th street intersection. This change order will provide for adding one (1) new unique item of work to the contract as a method of payment to reimburse the contractor for relocating Electric Wire service poles.
• Include sufficient information to characterize the utility conflict properly. Only mentioning the occurrence of a utility conflict does not enable a proper understanding of its root causes. Examples of change orders providing incomplete descriptions are as follows:
  • Additional month for barricades. Due to an ongoing utility conflict that is delaying the contractor from returning to the job, this change order adds 4 months of barricades to the contract.
  • Time extension due to utility delays.
  • Add time for utility relocation delays and for extra work. This change order will add time to the contract, a total of 22 days. Fifteen days were added for additional work, and 7 more days were added for utility adjustments.
• Specify the cause of the change order when a new facility is discovered. Simply reporting that a utility facility was found is not sufficient. A utility facility not depicted in the plans could be due to (a) errors and omissions in the PS&E or (b) incomplete data about an existing utility location. Examples of change orders with unclear descriptions are the following:
  • Existing fiber optic lines not shown in the plans and an existing 8 sanitary sewer service utilities conflict with the project.
  • This change order revises the alignment of 18-inch RCP drainage due to existing sanitary sewer not shown in the plans.
  • This change order will compensate the contractor for removing asbestos cement waterline not shown in the original plans.

• Explain the reason that caused a DSC issue. Different events might lead to a DSC change order classification. For example, a utility facility not reported in the plans could constitute a DSC. However, classifying the record as a DSC could hide the actual reason that caused the change order. In this case, it would be more effective to explain why the utility facility was not included in the plans. Examples of change orders that were classified as a DSC but the actual reason was not clear are as follows:
  • Additional one month of barricades. Adding one month of barricades due to different site conditions and the re-design of french drains at approximate sta. 637+00 on plan sheet 51.
  • When drilling the shafts on bents 7 and 8 of the bridge, differing site conditions were discovered.
  • Quantity adjustments. This change order adjusts quantities for work items that were underestimated during PS&E development and other different site conditions.
• Standardize the structure of the description column. Each change order is different. However, using a standardized structure would assist in understanding and interpreting change orders more easily, particularly if the goal is to automate the extraction of data from change orders. A suggested structure is as follows:
  • Scope: Include a short sentence (up to 15 words) summarizing the purpose of the change order.
  • Justification: Include a short answer to the following questions:
    • What event triggered the need of the change order?
    • Was the change foreseeable?
    • Which party requested the change?
  • Details: Include additional information as needed. Examples of information to include are the following:
    • Identifier of earlier change order(s) that the new change order will amend or supplement.
    • Summary of earlier change order(s) that the new change order will amend or supplement.
    • Plan sheet numbers where the change is necessary.
    • Site location.
    • List of modified or additional items.
    • Adjusted quantities.
    • Title or reference to applicable industry standards.
    • Additional permits or agreements needed.

Analysis of Existing Change Order Records

A recommended practice to facilitate the extraction of utility-related change orders and claims from an existing database is to implement a cloud-based intelligent decision support system (IDSS) that interacts with the database and includes components that enable the classification of records, various analyses, and preparation of reports. The IDSS could be owned by the DOT or hosted on a commercial platform. Figure 9 shows the main system components, including a web application programming interface (API) to extract change order data from an existing project management system; components to process and analyze data, generate reports, and manage the system; and a user interface to interact with and run the IDSS.

Processing and analyzing change order data in the IDSS would involve a combination of automated record classification and manual review and editing. It is feasible to use AI models to automate the detection of UR change order records. It is also feasible to use trained AI models using data from one DOT to classify change order records from other DOTs if the change order description structure is similar to that used for training AI models. The feasibility of using AI models to extract UR change order records from other DOTs decreases if change order descriptions are too short or use too many acronyms. It would be necessary to train AI models specifically for these cases.