Skip to content
Quick Start for:
Texas Performance Review 
Home Improvements
A Manual For Conducting Performance Reviews 

Appendix 1
Sample workplan for a TPR review



Name, Team Coordinator


This review will examine the construction process used by the state for projects other than highway construction. The primary review will focus on prison construction.

Questions that should be answered by the review are: What is the most efficient and effective structure for administering state construction activities? What should be done to improve construction and professional contracts with the state? What could be done to improve the selection of construction contractors?

PHASE I -- Background research

(January 2, 1993 - February 28, 1993)


Objective: Determine the current organization of construction activities, its advantages and disadvantages.


  • Interview State Auditor's Office personnel responsible for statewide construction report.
  • Interview Attorney General's Office personnel concerning tort litigation.
  • Interview contractors concerning prison construction.
  • Conduct site visit and interview with Texas Department of Criminal Justice staff on prison construction.
  • Interview University of Texas (UT) facilities management group.
  • Interview other agencies with construction management activities--Texas Department of Health, Texas Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, Texas Youth Commission, Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, General Services Commission and other agencies as needed.
  • Check for Sunset Commission, State Auditor or Legislative Research reports.
  • Check with Texas Research League, UT, and LBJ School of Public Affairs for relevant research documents.
  • Review LEXIS/NEXIS for relevant articles.
  • Review Department of Administration survey of other states and do follow-up research.
  • Survey agencies for construction activities, past and current construction costs, projected construction costs and projects; identify construction dollars by size of project, organization of construction management for projects and weaknesses and strengths of current system.
  • Prepare initial bibliography while conducting background research.
  • Identify other sources of background information.

Phase II -- Focusing on issue identification

(March 2, 1993 - March 31, 1993)

Objective: Determine the scope of the review.


  • Prepare and submit a list of possible issue areas to executive management.
  • Consult with management on what areas to review.
  • Compile and draft background.
  • Identify issues, such as--
    • -Criteria for contractor selection process:
      a. Statutory requirements
      b. Current construction contractor problems (trade-off between cost and quality)
      c. Other approaches besides "lowest and best."
    • -Strength of construction contracts/documents, professional contracts, and dispute resolution:
      a. Relationship among owner, professional consultants and contractor on quality and cost control of projects
      b. Assignment of risk
      c. Dispute resolution
    • -Organization of state construction projects and its management:
      a. Continuity of staffing
      b. Expertise of staff
      c. Development of monitoring and review systems
      d. Familiarity with construction contracts and professional consultants
  • Identify additional research and interview resources.

Objective: Refine goals and objectives of the review.

  • Continue development of bibliography.
  • Continue research to fill holes in background material.
  • Begin preparing briefing sheets on each identified issue.

Phase III -- Issue development

(April 1, 1993 - May 15, 1993)

Objective: Determine the advantages and disadvantages of alternate approaches to contractor selection.


  • Analyze history of claims on construction jobs.
  • Consider as bid criteria the effect of contractor's history of claims.
  • Consider the effect of other factors as bid criteria.
  • Consider one-step bid process vs. two-step process.
  • Evaluate the effect on cost and quality of adding additional criteria (including maintenance costs and repairs and construction delay, in terms of per-day cost to counties).

Objective: Analyze issues on contracts and dispute resolution.


  • Examine the owner, consultant and contractor relationships and determine strategies for maintaining an optimum balance between parties.
  • Identify effect of alternate methods for assignment of risk.
  • Interview experts in dispute resolution and analyze federal dispute resolution experience (look at costs associated with disputes currently, how they are currently resolved, and the effect on construction).
Objective: Organize research into recommendations.


  • Provide briefing sheets to executive management for review.
  • Meet with the TPR manager and Peer Review team to discuss initial recommendations.
  • Follow-up peer review meetings with more research if necessary.

Phase IV -- Recommendation writing; final review

(May 15, 1993 - June 10, 1993)

Objective: Develop final recommendations.


  • Develop report outline.
  • Submit outline to executive management, if necessary.
  • Write recommendations.
  • Complete fiscal implications estimate and include in report.
  • Provide initial draft and recommendations to TPR management for final review and revisions.
  • Identify legal citations for draft legislation.

Phase V -- Report production; preparation of legislation request

(June 10, 1993 - July 1, 1993)

Objective: Finalize report.


  • Revise report based on input from TPR management.
  • Send revised report to executive management for review.
  • Modify report based on executive management input.
  • Submit to print personnel.
Objective: Draft legislation.


  • Prepare suggestions for legislation to be drafted.
  • Include specific legal citations for modification.

Deliverables: Due
Work plan 02/05/93
Report outline due 03/16/93
Initial draft of background 04/14/93
Bibliography 04/14/93
Brief issues and recommendation document 05/15/93
Modified outline05/19/93
Finalized background, recommendations and
fiscal implications draft
Review draft for manager,senior management, et al. 06/10/93
Final production report 07/01/93

Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts Window on State Government
Contact Us
Privacy and Security Policy