The audit of the Department of Transportation focused on asset management contracting and monitoring processes during the period July 2002 through January 2004, and selected actions through July 2004.  Our audit disclosed that these processes were generally performed in accordance with applicable laws, rules, procedures, and good business practices.  However, improvements could be made in the contract procurement, amendment, and monitoring processes.

Contract Procurement and Amendments

Finding No. 1:        Improvements are needed in Department cost estimation processes to ensure consistency in preparation and to document that estimates were considered during the contract procurement process. 

Finding No. 2:        The Department could enhance assurances that the contractor selection process is free of conflicts of interest by documenting the impartiality of key decision makers. 

Finding No. 3:        For one contract out of five contracts tested, Department staff did not follow Department procedures and timely amend the contract when the scope of services was reduced.

Contract Monitoring

Finding No. 4:        The Department could enhance its assurance of the accuracy of Maintenance Rating Program (MRP) data and that the appropriate level of contract monitoring occurred by ensuring that the MRP consistency checks are performed and documented and the Asset Monitoring Plans are completed.

Finding No. 5:        Department and contractor personnel did not always use the revised rest area performance measure rating and checklist.  As a result, contractors, and in one instance the same contractor, were held to different standards.

Finding No. 6:        In some instances, specific contract performance measures related to rest area inspections and highway lighting outages were not applied by District personnel in assessing contractor performance and contractors were not always assessed penalties.

Finding No. 7:        The Department does not have a process in place to ensure accurate final contractor performance evaluations and updated Central Office cost savings estimates are available for use in future contract renewal decisions.

Finding No. 8:        Some District Safety Office personnel were not always performing safety inspections related to highway facilities.  Worker safety, and that of the traveling public, could be improved through the continued inspection of these facilities. 

The Executive Director's written response to the audit findings and recommendations is included in the audit report which can be viewed on the Auditor General Web site.