EXHIBIT A - SCOPE OF SERVICES.pdf

Exhibit A-Scope of Services

Self-Performing Construction Work Feasibility Study

RFP No: PS136577(3)

Date: September 16, 2026

Objective

The objective of the feasibility study is to determine whether Metro can effectively self-perform selected construction scopes — such as concrete, structural steel, earthwork, utilities, and interior finishes — using its own labor force, rather than procuring these services through subcontractors. The study's objectives should include a comprehensive analysis to ensure accuracy, consistency, and compliance with applicable construction industry standards. It should also evaluate Metro's internal capabilities, financial capacity, operational readiness, risk exposure, and prevailing market conditions to assess the technical, economic, and operational viability of self-performed construction-related work.

Additionally, the study should also include a comparative analysis of self-performing versus subcontracting the same scopes of work, assessing each approach in terms of cost efficiency, Safety, quality control, risk allocation, schedule reliability, and long-term strategic value to Metro’s transportation infrastructure.

• Establish the technical requirements and procedural framework for preparing a feasibility report assessing the company’s ability to self-perform specific scopes of construction work

• Determine the financial, operational, and technical feasibility of self-performing selected scopes of work on Metro construction projects.

• All analyses, evaluations, and recommendations shall be based on verified data, industry standards, and documented methodologies.

• The feasibility report shall be prepared under the supervision of qualified professionals with expertise in construction management, estimating, scheduling, and risk analysis

Additional details on the self-performing construction work study, including its origin, rationale, and key drivers identified in a previous construction best practices study that evaluated cost drivers and influencing variables, are available at the link below.

https://metro.granicus.com/player/clip/2843?view_id=2&redirect=true https://metro.granicus.com/player/clip/2843?view_id=2&redirect=true

Scope of Evaluation

The feasibility study shall commence with a detailed identification and evaluation of the various scopes of work and trade disciplines involved in heavy civil construction projects.

Analyze the nature, complexity, and scale of each construction scope of work to determine its suitability for self-performance. The assessment should include the technical requirements, labor demands, scheduling implications, and integration with other project components. By thoroughly understanding each scope, the contractor should establish a foundation for evaluation based on realistic and attainable corporate goals.

• Define the specific scopes of construction work to be evaluated for self-performance, including task breakdowns, deliverables, and performance criteria.

• Each scope shall be categorized in accordance with the Construction Specifications Institute (CSI) divisions and referenced to the contractual specification on the project to ensure that all cost, labor, equipment, and productivity analyses correspond to the exact scope definitions required to complete the work.

• Identify all project parameters that could affect the feasibility, including Safety, risk exposure, oversight, cost, training, location, project type, scopes of work, project or scope size, design complexity, logistics, and anticipated schedule.

• Include a sensitivity analysis to determine how different variables can impact the feasibility of self-performing construction work.

• Include a comprehensive social impact analysis with the goal of minimizing negative impacts and maximizing benefits to ensure Metro construction projects are more equitable and sustainable for the Los Angeles community.

• The scope evaluation shall serve as the comprehensive framework for informed decision-making by integrating insights and empirical data to anticipate challenges and optimize solutions for self-performing construction work.

Acceptance Criteria

The final report will be deemed acceptable when it meets the acceptance requirement criteria:

• Address each objective that is outlined in the technical specifications in tasks A - F

• Includes verified and traceable data sources

• Demonstrates sound analytical methodology

• Provides actionable recommendations supported by evidence

• Conclusion

Any deviation from these specifications shall require prior written approval from the Metro Office of the Inspector General.

Task A1

Kick-Off Meeting

1.0 The kickoff meeting launches the project by aligning stakeholders on project goals, scope, roles, and communication protocols. The team reviews key requirements, deliverables, and decision-making processes. It confirms responsibilities, introduces key contacts, establishes the reporting cadence, and concludes with clear next steps and action items for the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General.

Task A2

Written Plan and Schedule

1.1.0 The written plan and schedule delineate the project's methodology, key tasks, responsibilities, resources, and necessary controls. It establishes measurable milestones, sequences, and deadlines to facilitate stakeholder coordination and progress monitoring.

The schedule specifies critical activities, dependencies, and deliverables, thereby supporting timely approvals, risk mitigation, and accountability throughout the execution and closeout phases.

Task B

Data Collection and Baseline Information

2.0 The feasibility study shall incorporate historical data from at least three different types of heavy civil construction projects that are typical on Metro construction projects with comparable scopes of construction-related work and operating conditions. The data and baseline information must be included in the appendices of the final report and listed on a Data Verification Log (DVL). The verified scopes of work should reference previous projects with reliable documentation to enable valid comparisons and evidence-based conclusions.

When acquiring project data, compile budget estimates, actual costs, funding sources, delivery and procurement methods, schedules (planned versus actual), scope changes, change orders, risk events, quality metrics, performance metrics, and outcomes. Clearly state any assumptions used that only align with project data (e.g., currency, escalation indices, scope normalization) and document the rationale for inclusion or exclusion of specific data elements.

2.1.0 All data and baseline figures must be verified against original financial records and authoritative project management documentation (e.g., approved budgets, pay applications, cost reports, schedules, and closeout records). Record the verification steps taken and any discrepancies identified, along with their resolutions.

Organize the complete data sets, sources, normalization methods, and verification logs in the appendices of the final report. Present summaries in the main body and provide explicit cross-references to the appendices to ensure transparency, traceability, and audit readiness.

2.1.2 The contractor shall gather historical data of the proposed scope of work from at least three comparable projects and include the overall cost (labor, construction-related materials, productivity, office and field composition, equipment utilization, and order frequency change.

2.1.3 Data sources shall include records from Metro’s project management databases and accounting systems. All data must be verified and documented in a Data Verification Log (DVL).

Data Verification Log (DVL):

• Data element

• Contractor

• Contract number

• Date the scope of work was completed

• Detailed scope of work

• Complexity

• Staffing

• Project duration

• Contract value and Change orders

• Safety and Risk

• DART rate

2.1.4 Market research shall include subcontractor pricing, material escalation trends, labor availability, and regional construction cost indices.

2.1.5 Conclude with data that will improve Metro’s operational efficiency and productivity for the self-performing construction model.

Organizational Structure and Governance

2.2.0 Identify the organizational structure necessary to manage self-performed work effectively. It must identify lines of authority, reporting mechanisms, and decision-making protocols. The contractor must thoroughly explain how project controls, safety, risk, scheduling, and cost management functions will be maintained internally without compromising oversight.

Key roles required to self-perform construction work:

• Project Executive

• Project Manager

• Superintendent

• Foreman

• Safety

• Craft Workers

2.2.1 The contractor shall define the organizational structure for managing self-performed work, identifying key roles and responsibilities.

2.2.2 Include a Responsibility Assignment Matrix (RAM) that will delineate accountability, reporting lines, and communication protocols.

2.2.3 Describe how project controls, cost management, and scheduling oversight will be maintained internally.

2.2.4 Analyze Metro’s organizational credibility and decision-making process.

2.2.5 Conclude with a well-defined governance framework that ensures strategic objectives align with ethical and regulatory standards to meet stakeholder expectations.

2.2.6 Consider the obstacles to Metro self-performing construction, including whether Metro is legally authorized to self-perform construction work or to acquire a construction company. Evaluate the possibility of whether Metro should establish a sub-agency or subsidiary to handle all construction activities, and how Metro might acquire such a company. Analyze what litigation and associated costs could potentially be avoided in the future when compared to Metro’s past litigation history involving subcontracted construction. Identify any legislative changes that may be required for Metro to implement a self-performance model, in whole or in part. Finally, consider whether and how Metro’s ability to obtain federal funding for construction projects might be affected.

Task C

Risk Identification and Mitigation Analysis

3.0 Identify and categorize the risks associated with self-performing work under the following categories:

• Financial effectiveness

• Schedule control

• Operational efficiency

• Safety

• Quality control and outcomes

• Legal obstacles, risks, minimization, and steps

3.1.0 Each risk must be assessed for probability, impact, and detectability, resulting in a quantified risk matrix and mitigation strategies in comparison to the subcontractor model.

3.1.2 Identify financial, operational, Safety, quality, and legal risks associated with self-performed work.

3.1.3 A risk matrix shall categorize each risk by probability, impact, and detectability.

3.1.4 Quantitative risk assessment techniques, such as Monte Carlo simulation, may be used to model overall exposure.

3.1.5 Mitigation strategies shall include contingency reserves, enhanced training, additional supervision, or subcontractor supplementation.

3.1.6 A recommended contingency allowance shall be presented based on the cumulative risk profile.

3.1.7 Conclude with a risk mitigation plan for the proposed scope of work and include best practices for continuous improvement and how that compares to a subcontracted construction circumstance.

Safety and Regulatory Compliance

3.2.0 The feasibility study shall include applicable Safety and occupational health regulations, in accordance with the California Department of Industrial Relations, Cal/OSHA Title 8, and environmental and project-specific safety programs. The feasibility report should outline three typical prior Metro projects' safety performance histories, Experience Modification Rates (EMRs), and injury records for the last 5 years. Identify risk exposure and risk mitigation, best practices, and required craft training development programs.

3.2.1 All self-performed work shall comply with OSHA 29 CFR 1926, Cal/OSHA Title 8, environmental, permitting, and prevailing wage requirements applicable to the jurisdiction, as well as project-specific safety programs.

3.2.2 Experience Modification Rate (EMR), incident record, and safety training programs.

3.2.3 Identify the exposure and include the plan to mitigate risk and define responsibilities, training, and required personal protective equipment (PPE).

3.2.4 Evaluate organizational competency, resources, and liability impacts

3.2.5 Conclude with a self-performance safety and compliance implementation plan that is sustainable for regulatory compliance, which will monitor both leading and lagging indicators and how that will be more or less effective than a subcontracted construction circumstance.

Task D

Legal Oversight

4.0 Legal oversight provides structured governance to ensure the organization complies with applicable statutes, regulations, and contractual obligations while minimizing legal and financial exposure. Counsel reviews legal parameters pertaining to self-performed work, procurement instruments, scope alignment, and adherence to internal policies and external requirements. Legal advisors address labor and employment issues, insurance and indemnity provisions, safety and risk allocations, and document retention protocols.

Effective legal oversight strengthens decision documentation, standardizes templates, delivers compliance training, and reinforces ethics, confidentiality, and accountability across project delivery.

Labor and Resource Capability Assessment

4.1.0 Assess the workforce availability, skill levels, training programs, and historical performance metrics. The report must compare internal labor capabilities against industry benchmarks and identify gaps that require subcontractor supplementation or training investments.

4.1.1 Evaluate and analyze labor resources, including workforce classification, skill levels, training required, and union affiliations.

4.1.2 The assessment shall compare internal capabilities with industry standards to identify training needs or workforce gaps.

4.1.3 Analyze the subcontractors' labor resource histogram and workforce loading curve and illustrate resource demands throughout the project timeline.

4.1.4 Identify the training requirements for the proposed scope of work and determine if this scope necessitates specialized equipment.

4.1.5 Analyze the hiring priorities that are governed by Project Labor Agreements (PLA) and Community Workforce Agreements (CWA) for local, disadvantaged, and veteran workers

4.1.6 Include the Union requirements that pertain to the scope of work and include the criteria for Metro to comply with apprentice-to-journeyman ratios.

4.1.7 Conclude with a sustainable Labor Resource Plan that encompasses a proactive workforce strategy, comprehensive development programs for efficient project execution, and long-term operational success for Metro, and how that compares to a subcontracted construction circumstance.

Procurement and Supply Chain Management

4.2.0 The feasibility study shall include procurement strategies and supply chain management to ensure the timely delivery of materials, tools, and equipment necessary for self-performed scopes. Identify critical vendors, lead times, potential single-source dependencies, and material management processes from procurement through to the acquisition process and delivery of the final product, in comparison to the subcontractor model.

4.2.1 Procurement analysis identifying major suppliers, lead times, and vendor reliability.

4.2.2 Evaluate purchasing power, bulk procurement opportunities, and supplier diversification strategies.

4.2.3 Material management processes shall include procurement, ordering, inspection, storage, traceability, and final delivery.

4.2.4 The procurement plan shall align with the project schedule to mitigate risks associated with long-lead materials and prevent schedule delays.

4.2.5 Conclude with a comparison model and a detailed plan that outlines procurement and material management strategies to optimize self-performing construction operations for Metro and how that compares to subcontracted construction circumstances.

Task E

Financial, Operational, and Cost Analysis

5.0 Include three detailed financial cost analysis models of real-life scopes of work from capital projects and compare the cost of self-performing work with the cost of subcontracting for the same type of work.

5.1.1 Develop a detailed financial model to compare self-performing work costs versus subcontracted delivery.

5.1.2 The model shall include direct costs (labor, materials, equipment, supervision) and indirect costs (overhead, insurance, bonding, payroll burden, and contingencies).

5.1.3 The data for the analysis must be obtained from previous capital projects.

5.1.4 Sensitivity analyses shall be conducted to evaluate the impact of material escalation, labor shortages, or productivity variations.

5.1.5 The cost comparison shall be presented with complete documentation of assumptions, escalation indices, and normalization procedures.

5.1.6 Conclude with a financial operational cost analysis that demonstrates how self-performing construction can provide sustainable long-term value when effectively managed

Schedule and Productivity Analysis

5.2.0 The feasibility study shall include a schedule analysis using the Critical Path Method (CPM) to identify the longest sequence of project activities. Identify and evaluate the production rates of key activities, including assessing potential float-reduction opportunities, bottlenecks, work sequencing and management, crew assignments, resource leveling challenges, the impact of time-related costs, and strategies to accelerate or delay expenses.

5.2.1 The schedule feasibility study shall be performed for the proposed self-performed work, in comparison to the subcontractor model.

5.2.2 Identify major work sequences, crew allocations, and production rates to assess schedule viability.

5.2.3 Identify Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that measure efficiency.

5.2.4 Include metrics like Schedule Performance Index (SPI), Cost Performance Index (CPI), and labor productivity (e.g., work hours per yard/square foot).

5.2.5 Schedule impact analysis shall quantify float consumption, bottlenecks, or acceleration costs associated with self-performance.

5.2.6 Conclude with a strategic plan outlining how the proposed scope of work will be sustained along a recoverable path with ongoing focus on critical activities and proactive resource management.

Quality Assurance and Control

5.3.0 Incorporate a quality control plan to ensure that self-performing work complies with contractual and regulatory standards and define the quality management framework.

5.3.1 Define the Quality Management framework applicable to the self-performed work.

5.3.2 Procedures for material testing, inspection, and documentation consistent with ISO 9001 or equivalent standards.

5.3.3 Quality metrics, including rework hours, inspection pass rates, and defect frequency, shall be benchmarked against subcontracted work.

5.3.4 Conclude with a preliminary Quality Control Plan (QCP) for the proposed scope of work that shall demonstrate the readiness and mitigation strategies to meet the following:

• Compliance

• Improve quality control

• Improve Safety and Risk

• Prevent rework

• Cost savings

• Schedule certainty

• Enhance efficiency and flexibility

• How this will compare to a subcontracted construction circumstance.

Implementation Strategy

5.4.0 Implement a self-perform construction strategy that will improve cost, schedule, safety, and quality certainty by directly controlling field execution and daily production.

The approach below is sequenced to establish clear decision boundaries, build reliable delivery capacity, and maintain disciplined performance controls.

5.4.1 Define self-perform scope and boundaries

Identify the work packages best suited for in-house execution and establish clear scope limits, interfaces, and exclusions. Set productivity targets (baseline unit rates), cost assumptions, and acceptable variance thresholds, including explicit “stop/go” triggers if performance deviates. This ensures self-performance is applied where it provides measurable value and prevents scope creep.

5.4.2 Build the field organization and capability

Staff a dedicated self-perform team with defined roles (superintendent, foremen, leads, crews), supported by safety and quality coverage and cost control functions. Establish training, qualification requirements, and supervision expectations. Clear accountability and competent field leadership are essential to maintaining safe, consistent production.

5.4.3 Develop the execution plan, schedule, and cost-loaded budget Create a detailed work plan that defines means and methods, sequencing, crew sizing, production rates, and constraint management. Integrate the plan into a schedule and cost-loaded budget aligned to measurable quantities and unit rates. This ties resources and costs to production outputs and enables objective performance management.

5.4.4 Establish procurement and equipment readiness

Confirm material lead times and vendor capacity, and plan deliveries to support uninterrupted production. Implement tools and equipment tracking, availability controls, and preventive maintenance. Reliable materials, tools, and equipment protect planned unit rates and reduce downtime-driven cost and schedule impacts.

5.4.5 Implement safety and quality systems embedded in the work Deploy JSAs/JHAs, daily pre-task plans, competent person oversight, and routine inspections in accordance with Metro Construction Safety and Security Manual. Establish quality checkpoints and hold points tied to specifications and work sequencing.

Embedding safety and quality into daily operations reduces incidents and rework, which are primary drivers of productivity loss.

5.4.6 Standardize work and control production through metrics Use standardized work methods and daily production tracking, including installed quantities, labor hours, unit rates, and rework. Compare actuals to baseline targets routinely and require corrective actions when thresholds are exceeded. Consistent measurement enables early intervention and prevents compounding performance losses.

5.4.7 Coordinate closely with subcontractors and site logistics Formalize trade interfaces, handoffs, access routes, laydown/staging areas, and inspection coordination to avoid conflicts and interruptions. Integrated planning with subcontracted trades maintains workflow and reduces delays caused by interdependencies.

5.4.8 Close out systematically and benchmark performance

Create a plan to execute punch lists, complete as-builts and turnover documentation, and capture lessons learned. Compile final productivity and cost benchmarks (actual unit rates, drivers, and improvement actions) to strengthen future planning, estimating, and self-perform decision-making

Technology and Information Systems

5.4.9 The feasibility study shall include an assessment of how construction management technologies will support self-performance activities.

5.5.0 The feasibility analysis shall address integration of technology platforms to support field productivity and reporting.

5.5.1 The contractor shall identify proposed digital tools such as Building Information Modeling (BIM), Field tracking software, Safety, and Quality control.

5.5.2 Real-time dashboards for cost and schedule performance shall be developed to monitor the progress of self-performed work.

5.5.3 Assume data security and governance shall comply with ISO/IEC 27001 standards.

5.5.4 Assume integration of digital timesheet, asset tracking, and cost control systems is mandatory for accuracy and transparency.

5.5.5 Conclude with a plan on how innovation and technology can streamline Metro's processes and prevent waste as compared to the utilization of subcontracted construction.

Task F

Reporting and Documentation

6.0 All findings, calculations, and recommendations for the comparison model shall be compiled into a comprehensive feasibility report. The document must include an executive summary, detailed analysis sections, supporting appendices, and visual aids such as charts, a risk matrix, and workflow diagrams. All data sources, assumptions, and methodologies shall be fully referenced.

6.1.1 The feasibility report content shall include the formatting standards:

• Table of contents

• Evaluation of three projects where Metro has used companies to perform the same type of work on capital projects with comparable contract values, in comparison to Metro performing that work.

• Document whether any other governmental agencies self-perform all or a portion of construction work similar to what Metro is seeking analysis and, if they exist, describe the benefits and detriments they have encountered; any lessons learned from those entities’ experience.

• Detailed findings and technical analysis of the matters discussed herein.

• Financial and schedule models for the proposals and recommendations made by you.

• Safety and risk factors for Metro to consider in self-performance that differ from the subcontracting model.

• Costs, financial, and legal considerations.

• Appendices with supporting Data Verification Log

• Conclusion.

A table of recommendations.

6.1.2 All assumptions, calculations, and data sources shall be fully referenced.

6.1.3 Visual aids such as charts, tables, and diagrams shall be used to enhance clarity.

6.1.4 Final Draft Report meetings shall be held to review the draft and confirm that all tasks in Sections A–E are satisfied.

6.1.5 The final report shall be delivered in both editable (Word or Excel) and PDF formats, and the copyright, publishing rights, and all other rights to the report and its data shall be owned by Metro.

6.1.5 The report shall be submitted in both editable and PDF formats, following the company’s standard documentation template.

6.1.6 The following deliverables shall be produced as part of the feasibility report:

• Bi-weekly progress reporting to OIG personnel on completion of tasks.

• Self-Performing Feasibility Report (Draft and Final)

• Supporting Data Files (Cost, Schedule, Resource Models)

• Safety and Quality Risk Matrix and Mitigation Summary

• Craft Training Development Plan

• Presentation 25-30 slide Deck for Executive Review

6.1.7 All deliverables shall be submitted electronically and conform to Metro's document control and naming conventions.

Task G

Optional Task - Verbal Presentation at Metro Board's Discretion

7.0 This presentation is subject to approval by the Metro Boards and the Office of Inspector General (OIG). Such presentations are prepared two months in advance and require approval before they are presented to the Construction Committee, which convenes four times annually to review and receive updates on pertinent construction-related matters.

7.1.1This deliverable comprises a professional presentation deck consisting of 25 to 30 slides, specifically designed for Executive Review. It aims to furnish a clear, high-level overview of the initiative, encompassing objectives, progress to date, key milestones, performance metrics, and current challenges. The deck will emphasize significant risks, impacts, and mitigation strategies, complemented by concise findings and actionable recommendations to facilitate executive decision-making.

7.1.2 Content shall be organized for swift comprehension, including an agenda, executive summary, focused section narratives, and a final slide delineating the required decision, subsequent steps, and designated ownership. Throughout, the presentation will adhere to consistent branding and visual coherence and maintain a refined executive tone.

At the sole discretion of Metro, the optional task shall be exercised through the issuance of a contract modification.

Deliverables

6.2.0 The following are the deliverables for Task A through G:

Task No. Deliverable Due Date/Frequency

A1. Kick-Off Meeting

The Contractor shall conduct a kickoff meeting with the Project Manager from the Office of Inspector General to initiate discussions on project objectives, scope, roles, and communication protocols. The Contractor shall scrutinize essential requirements and deliverables from Tasks A through G, elucidate decision-making procedures with the project team, confirm designated responsibilities, and introduce key contacts. Additionally, the Contractor shall establish the reporting schedule, conclude the meeting with documented next steps and action items, and deliver these action items to the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General for review and approval, designated as Task E.

Upon contract award

A2. Written Plan and Schedule

The Contractor shall deliver a written project plan for their internal team and develop a detailed schedule for the study, outlining the project's methodology, principal tasks, responsibilities, resources, and requisite controls. The plan shall incorporate measurable milestones, task sequencing, and deadlines to enhance stakeholder coordination and facilitate progress monitoring. The schedule shall specify critical activities, dependencies, and deliverables to support timely approvals, risk mitigation, and accountability throughout the execution and closeout phases. Upon completion, the Contractor shall submit these documents to the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General for review and approval, designated as Task A.

5 business days from contract start date

B. Data Collection and Baseline Information

The Contractor shall conduct research and provide historical data from three comparable heavy civil construction projects. This data shall encompass budgets, schedules, scope modifications, change orders, risks, and

25 business days date performance metrics, verified against authoritative records and documented in a Data Verification Log (DVL). Additionally, market research on pricing, escalation, labor costs, and cost indices shall be included, with assumptions and methodologies clearly documented. All full data sets and the DVL shall be appended, while summarized findings will be presented in the main body of the report to facilitate Metro's operational efficiency within a self-performing model. Upon completion, the Contractor shall submit these items to the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General for review and approval, designated as Task B.

C. Risk Identification and Mitigation Analysis

The Contractor shall conduct research and provide a comprehensive risk identification and mitigation analysis for self-performing work, benchmarked against the subcontractor model. Additionally, a safety and regulatory compliance assessment shall be prepared, encompassing Cal/OSHA Title 8, OSHA 29 CFR 1926, environmental regulations, permitting requirements, and prevailing wage statutes.

The review shall include examination of EMRs, incident records, and safety training data from three prior Metro projects within the last five years, with an evaluation of organizational competency, training needs, PPE, and liability considerations. The final deliverable shall be a combined risk mitigation and compliance plan that tracks leading and lagging indicators and benchmarks them against outcomes achieved by subcontractors. Upon completion, these items shall be submitted to the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General for review and approval, designated as Task C.

45 business days date

D. Safety and Regulatory Compliance submit a comprehensive legal oversight plan designed to ensure compliance with all applicable statutes, regulations, and contractual obligations pertaining to self-performed work. This plan shall encompass

65 business days areas such as labor and employment, insurance, indemnity, risk allocation, and document retention. Additionally, the Contractor shall provide a labor and resource assessment that evaluates workforce availability, skills, training levels, union affiliations, equipment requirements, and Public Labor Agreement (PLA)/CWA stipulations. This assessment shall be benchmarked against industry standards and a subcontracted model. Furthermore, the Contractor shall formulate a procurement plan addressing vendor reliability, lead times, risks associated with single-source suppliers, material management, purchasing power, and schedule coordination, all benchmarked against subcontracted outcomes. Upon completion, these deliverables shall be submitted to the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General for review and approval, designated as Task D.

E. Financial, Operational, and Cost Analysis;

Schedule and Productivity Analysis;

Implementation Strategy develop a feasibility analysis comparing the costs, schedules (CPM/KPIs), and quality (ISO 9001) associated with self-performance versus subcontracting, utilizing real project data. This analysis shall include a phased self-performance implementation strategy that encompasses scope, staffing, execution planning, procurement, safety and quality systems, and technology integration (such as BIM, dashboards, ISO 27001), benchmarked against outcomes achieved through subcontracting. Upon completion, the Contractor will submit these deliverables to the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General for review and approval, designated as Task E.

90 business days from contract start date

F. Reporting and Documentation

The Contractor shall deliver a comprehensive Self-Performing Feasibility Report (Draft and Final) accompanied by an executive summary.

This report must encompass all task items A-F, fully referenced data and methodology, appendices with the Data Verification Log, and

110 business days visual aids, adhering to standard formatting and templates. It should be submitted in both editable and PDF formats owned by Metro. The deliverables include bi-weekly progress updates to OIG, the feasibility report, supporting cost, schedule, and resource data files, a safety and quality risk matrix, a craft training development plan, and a 25-30 slide executive presentation deck. All items must be submitted electronically in accordance with Metro's document control standards. Once completed, the Contractor will deliver these items to the Project Manager and the Office of Inspector General for review and approval, designated as Task F.

G. Optional Task - Presentation to Metro Board

Verbal presentation of the study available to the Metro Board upon request at the Construction Committee meeting.

115 -175 business days

6.2.1 Contractor shall complete Tasks A through F within a period of five (5) months.