Public Private Partnerships and Schedule Risk Management: a Case Study of Akron
Patrick J. O’Brien1, David Di Perna2

1Patrick J. O’Brien, PhD, P.E., PMP, CCM, University’s South Residence Hall Project, South.
2David Di Perna, LEED A.P. and, University’s South Residence Hall Project, South.
Manuscript received on November 15, 2014. | Revised Manuscript received on November 18, 2014. | Manuscript published on November 25, 2014. | PP:8-11 | Volume-3 Issue-1, November 2014. | Retrieval Number: L08591021214

Open Access | Ethics and Policies | Cite
© The Authors. Published By: Blue Eyes Intelligence Engineering and Sciences Publication (BEIESP). This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (

Abstract: Collaboration between private entities supplying capital for public projects presents unique challenges and risks for the contracting entities. In Ohio, universities can select developers to design and build facilities using a privately selected CM at Risk on their behalf but the developer is required to retain elements of public construction practices in their project execution, most notably, the CM at Risk must procure their subcontractors via the traditional public bidding process. On a project with a very challenging schedule, the Thomarios Construction Group, as Signet UA Development, LLC’s CM at Risk, building a 158,800 SF, six story 531 room residence hall, instituted a series of innovative schedule management practices as part of the prebid preparation, validated subcontractor acceptance of the proposed practices during the procurement phase, and successfully executed the project implementing the risk management tools established as part of their planning processes to overcome a series of unforeseen conditions.
Keywords: PPP, risk management, construction management, schedule management, preconstruction, cost management, transparency.