SNC-Lavalin welcomes the…

SNC-Lavalin welcomes the opportunity to review and provide its constructive feedback to the Ministry of Transportation’s (MTO) changes to the RAQS system’s Qualifications Procedures for Engineering Service Providers. Our company is committed to working with MTO to support its efforts to plan, design, construct and sustain the transportation portfolio as part of the government’s commitment to the resiliency and prosperity of Ontario and its citizens. As part of this commitment, SNC-Lavalin is presenting what it views as some practical solutions to amend the current RAQS system that can provide positive results for both MTO and its Engineering Service Provider partners.

Changes to the present system will be most beneficial when they enhance present capabilities supporting the needs of the portfolio by adding greater market capacity, incorporating new and innovative systems, processes, approaches, and capabilities from ESPs with experience and expertise gained from the successful delivery of projects for other clients and jurisdictions. It is SNC-Lavalin's understanding that through this consultation on the proposed changes to RAQS that MTO is seeking to facilitate greater engagement with a broader pool of qualified and experienced engineering firms to deliver its portfolio assignments as efficiently and effectively as possible, providing the greatest value for Ontarians.

With this in mind, we have some concerns that the proposed changes to the qualification criteria for the Contract Administration Category, rather than support the positive change all parties desire, will reduce competition, inhibit innovation, and actually prevent additional well-qualified firms from entering the market to partner with MTO to deliver its portfolio.  Our specific concerns are as follows:

For High Complexity

The new criteria include:

• “New ESP firms are required to submit the application for the High Complexity with a minimum of two (2) qualified Key Personnel” and
• “The ESP Applicant must have completed three (3) projects with the applicant’s firm of medium complexity with the ministry…”

We interpret this to mean that the applicant (the key personnel) shall have completed 3 medium complexity projects WITH their applicant firm ONLY (and with no other firm) directly for MTO projects, and that if a qualified person is to leave their qualified firm to join a new firm, they would need to restart the qualification process from Low Complexity.  Further, to satisfy the requirement of two (2) qualified Key Personnel, a firm needs to therefore win and perform at least three medium complexity projects with MTO, with one of the Key Personnel as the PM and the other as the CA, or six (6) medium complexity projects if the two key personnel are not working on the same projects.  In order to succession plan, the number of required projects to maintain the qualification further increases. If this understanding is correct, we submit that these criteria, rather than facilitating the engagement of additional well-qualified firms to support the delivery of the ministry’s portfolio, will instead limit market participation and perpetuate current challenges constraining project delivery.

To resolve this situation we request MTO to consider the following revision:

• The ESP Applicant must have completed three (3) projects with the applicant’s firm of medium complexity with the ministry with a suitable similar Canadian or US jurisdiction having achieved an with the overall performance appraisal rating of satisfactory of 3 or better or similar ratings and/or references for other jurisdictions.

We also request MTO to consider certifying firms with the High Complexity qualification if they hire individual(s) that meet the criteria, to waive the requirement of “To be eligible for qualification in this Specialty, the ESP firm and proposed Key Personnel shall be prequalified in the Construction Administration - Medium Complexity”.

For Medium Complexity

The new criteria include:

• “The ESP Applicant must have completed three (3) projects with the applicant’s firm of Low Complexity with the ministry, with the overall performance appraisal rating of satisfactory of 3.00 or better (Retainer assignments may also be considered Low Complexity with supporting letters of recommendation from the ministry’s Area Manager);
• “The ESP shall provide a minimum of 3 Low Complexity projects to support the review of the application”;
• “To be eligible for qualification in this Specialty, the ESP firm and proposed Key Personnel shall be prequalified in the Construction Administration - Low Complexity”

We interpret this to mean that the applicant (the key personnel) shall have completed 3 low complexity projects WITH their applicant firm ONLY (and with no other firm) directly for MTO, and that if a qualified person is to leave their qualified firm to join a new firm, they would need to restart the qualification process from Low Complexity. 

 We are concerned that this is not an achievable criterion due to the low volume of Low Complexity Contract Administration MTO assignments that are available in the market, which are typically released as RFQs when they are available.  The price points to win an RFQ requires firms to lose money to win, especially if new staff that were previously qualified under High Complexity must requalify through Low Complexity projects.   In other words, these criteria are promoting a “pay to play” culture.

We request MTO to consider the following revision:

• The ESP Applicant must have completed three (3) projects with the applicant’s firm of Low Complexity with the ministry, with a suitable similar Canadian or US jurisdiction having achieved an with the overall performance appraisal rating of satisfactory of 3.00 or better (Retainer assignments may also be considered Low Complexity with supporting letters of recommendation from the ministry’s Area Manager) or similar ratings and/or references for other jurisdictions.

 For all

In the spirit of trying to achieve the best potential outcome as previously defined, the new criteria as presented do not provide a means for practical and qualifications-based entry into the MTO CA market; they will serve only to perpetuate the group of firms already providing these services for MTO.  The criteria will also create a barrier for firms to attract good staff.  Qualified personnel will be limited in their mobility to other firms as any such move will require a multi-year repeat of the qualification process. Firms that are qualified will find it difficult to manage a succession plan if their qualified personnel leave their firm, and will suddenly face re-qualifying as if they are new to the market.  Therefore, it only benefits large established CA groups (only 3 or 4 companies) and prevents new CA consultants from emerging.

Further, the new criteria prevent firms from pursuing work with other clients that use MTO’s RAQS as a qualification criterion thereby perpetuating current broader market capacity problems, negatively contributing to an already frustrated condition.

To promote competition, succession planning, and address the overall workforce availability challenges the industry is facing, we respectfully request the following changes:

• Consider complex work completed for municipalities in Ontario or similar Ministry/Department of Transportation agencies in Canada or USA as acceptable medium or high complexity experience
• Consider provide defining characteristics to more clearly explain the differences among Low, Medium and high complexity CA assignments, or only the specific differences between the three, thereby simplifying the interpretation and make less ambiguous for a common understanding to those applying and to those evaluating
• Consider experience of our key personnel completed while employed at other firms
• Consider allowing a firm entry at medium or high complexity if the key personnel have the appropriate experience

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on this proposed change to Qualifications Procedures for Engineering Service Providers.  Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.  We look forward to continued collaboration with MTO and a positive outcome on this matter.