Session Fri 35Why the Earned Value Measured 

Mile Analysis Works

Project

• Ohio Schools Facility Commission• Wheelersburg High School• 2006 J&H Award $16,026,000 General Trades• Multi‐Prime• Owner Supplies HVAC Equipment

Measure Mile Impact Period Total

Start to 8/6/20078/6/2007 to 8/4/2008

$1,586,999 $866,000 $2,452,99964.7% 35.3%36,220 32,919559.8 932.5

(559.8)372.635.3%

13,154$35.79 $470,793.62$12.17 $160,088.2510% $63,088.195% $34,698.50

$728,668.56 728,668.56$

Labor FringesOverhead

ProfitTotal Additional Cost

Net Impact per 1 % CompletePortion of Project ImpactedAdded Impact Hours

Labor Wage

Base Contract Dollars Earned

Man-hours/ 1 % EarnedLess Measured Mile

Earned Percent Complete

Masonry Loss of Productivity Calculation

Man-hours Expended

Measure Mile Impact Period Total

Start to 8/6/20078/6/2007 to 8/4/2008

$349,106 $128,569 $477,67473.1% 26.9%2,496 3,48634.2 129.5

(34.2)95.426.9%2,567

$35.79 $91,864.86$12.17 $31,237.6510% $12,310.255% $6,770.64

$142,183.39 $142,183.39

Steel Loss of Productivity Calculation

Man-hours ExpendedEarned Percent CompleteBase Contract Dollars Earned

Man-hours/ 1 % EarnedLess Measured Mile Net Impact per 1 % CompletePortion of Project ImpactedAdded Impact Hours

Labor WageLabor Fringes

OverheadProfit

Total Additional Cost

Measure Mile Impact Period Total

Start to 8/6/20078/6/2007 to 8/4/2008

$454,298 $165,739 $620,03773.3% 26.7%7,853 7,353107.2 275.1

(107.2)167.926.7%4,488

$35.79 $160,615.73$12.17 $54,615.6310% $21,523.145% $11,837.73

$248,592.23 $248,592.23

Labor FringesOverhead

ProfitTotal Additional Cost

Net Impact per 1 % CompletePortion of Project ImpactedAdded Impact Hours

Labor Wage

Base Contract Dollars Earned

Manhours/ 1 % EarnedLess Measured Mile

Earned Percent Complete

Civil/Concrete Loss of Productivity Calculation

Manhours Expended

Description Manhours AmountMasonry 13,154 $728,668.56Steel 2,567 $142,183.39Civil/Concrete 4,488 $248,592.23Other 1,973 $109,416.82Total 22,182 $1,228,861.00

HOV Services, LLC / Meridian 771 East Southlake Blvd, Southlake Texas 76092

Tel : (817) 310 6420 Fax : (817) 310 6435 Toll Free: (800) 497-9527 www.hovservices.com

EXPERT REPORT

Court of Claims of Ohio - Cause No. 2010-07644

Judge Joseph T. Clark

Case: J&H Reinforcing & Structural Erectors, Inc. – Plaintiff

vs. Ohio School Facilities Commission – Defendant / Counter Plaintiff

Project: Wheelersburg K-12 School

March 22, 2011

Prepared For: Ohio School Facilities Commission

Prepared by:

Kelly D. Roeschke Director: Claims and Litigation

EXPERT REPORT March 22, 2011

------------------------------------- J&H vs. OSFC Wheelersburg K-12 School 9

DAMAGES

Calvey’s “Measured Mile” $1,228,861

Calvey’s “Measured Mile” method of computing J&H’s lost labor productivity costs is

comprised of unsupported calculations that are not reflective of what actually

occurred on the Project or actually incurred by J&H. Calvey resorted to using the

Measured Mile method because a Total Cost or Modified Total Cost analysis would not

produce the desired result and could not be supported by J&H’s own job cost records.

J&H’s records indicate it made a Profit on this Project. In fact, this Project made as

much Profit as J&H anticipated making.

Project record documents such as project meeting minutes, daily reports and

correspondence do not reflect the magnitude of lost labor productivity asserted and

computed by Calvey. Month after month for more than 1.5 years, J&H failed to notify

OSFC of these alleged impacts and the purported lost labor productivity.

Calvey’s Measured Mile period, or un-impacted period, runs from Notice to Proceed to

August 6, 2007. Calvey has not identified why he used this date, however, we assume

it corresponds with the air-handling unit delivery delays from early August 2007,

which becomes the start of his Impact Period #1. Impact Period #1 runs to January 31,

2008, when Change Order #29 was issued. Impact Period #2 covers the time following

the issuance of Change Order #29 to September 29, 2009, which again is a date that

Calvey fails to explain.

Again, OSFC asserts that Change Order #29 constituted full and complete satisfaction

for all direct and indirect costs, which had been or may be incurred in connection with

the work performed during Calvey’s alleged Impact Period #1 from August 7, 2007 to

January 31, 2008.

EXPERT REPORT March 22, 2011

------------------------------------- J&H vs. OSFC Wheelersburg K-12 School 10

Calvey’s analysis is flawed in several ways and not applicable in others. For example:

1. Calvey has not identified the basis of his “Measured Mile” period. He has not

explained why he chose the period from construction start to August 6, 2007, as his

un-impacted period or “Measured Mile”.

2. The analysis somewhat contradicts Calvey’s other assertion that the early sitework

contributed to schedule delays and out of sequence from January through July

2007. This is the same period of time Calvey has chosen as his Measured Mile or

un-impacted period of labor productivity.

3. The Measured Mile period includes the three largest man-hour months for the

entire project, which skews the analysis.

4. The analysis does not compare the productivity of two “like” activities. The un-

impacted period is largely comprised of activities such as concrete, CMU-low wall

and trusses while Impact Period #1 includes CMU-hi wall, brick, structural steel,

carpentry activities and Impact Period #2 includes specialty work, sitework and

punchlist activities. The activities performed during Impact Periods #1 and #2 are

not “like” those activities performed during the un-impacted period. Calvey is

comparing “Apples to Potatoes” not “Green Apples to Red Apples”, which is

required by a Measured Mile analysis. Calvey’s comparison is not appropriate and

results in flawed results.

5. The analysis has not accounted for or made adjustments for the following factors

that influence labor productivity: a) Weather, b) Overtime, c) Hours/day, d) Crew

size, e) Material & Equipment availability, f) Low vs. High work, g) Exterior vs.

Interior work, h) Change Order work, i) Rework and repair of defective work, j)

Openness of the areas of work.

6. The analysis does not account for or recognize J&H’s self-inflicted labor

inefficiencies. Calvey assumes J&H performed flawlessly without fault for the

entirety of the Project.

7. The analysis is based on the monthly-approved percentages of work complete,

which is a guestimation of percent complete rather than an accurate measurement.

EXPERT REPORT March 22, 2011

------------------------------------- J&H vs. OSFC Wheelersburg K-12 School 11

8. The least impacted period or Measured Mile is largely comprised of concrete

activities, which are typically “front end loaded” by contractors for billing purposes.

In other words, J&H has shifted monies from other line items, but not the

corresponding man-hours. Thus, all work performed later in the Project would

inherently have a calculation of lower productivity.

9. The analysis fails to calculate specific losses attributable to the specific impacts

identified by Calvey. For example, why not identify the actual costs incurred by

J&H related to the air-handling unit delivery delays?

Calvey’s Overtime Premium Damages $112,447

Summary of J&H’s Overtime Premium @ $27.70 /hr including OH & P

Period Hrs Cost

12/06 to 1/08 3,660 $101,374 No notice from J&H to OSFC

2/08 to 9/08 1,852 $ 51,300 CO #29 included $40,227 for OT Premium

Total 5,512 $152,674

Calvey’s Summary of Damages asserts all $112,447 of overtime premium costs was

incurred during Impact Period #2 from February 1, 2008, to the end of the Project. His

assessment is in error. As described below, the majority of the overtime hours were

incurred in 2007, without prior notice by J&H to OSFC. Moreover, J&H is not entitled to

the overtime premium costs.

Calvey asserts J&H is entitled to 5,512 hrs of overtime premium costs for the entire

Project construction period. However, HOV determined that approximately 3,660 hrs

of the 5,512 hrs claimed were incurred from December 2006 through January 2008,

prior to J&H signing of Change Order #29. During this period of time J&H failed to

notify OSFC that overtime premium would be claimed as extra costs. J&H worked

overtime in 2007 on their own volition and, therefore, is not entitled to the overtime

premium costs.