Scoring Criteria 5 = Very Good 4 = Good

3 = Adequate 2 = Poor 1 = Very Poor

In the event that both Network Rail and the Supplier's representative are unable to reach agreement on the scoring to be applied, this matter and details of the disagreement are to be escalated via the SAM (Supplier Account Management) process. If the contract is not subject to SAM process then the issues shall be
escalated via the same hierarchy as is applied to the contract.

Delivery On Time
1 off Action
At the project kick off meeting both parties are to agree the mobilisation periods for the project start up

Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance

5 = Assessed party consistently provides all relevant documentation / approvals / acceptance etc in advance of the agreed programme requirements. Where variations to
the contract scope are required they are agreed within a timescale relevant to the nature of the variation (ie:- simple, non complex within less than 5 working days, complex
Timely contract award for adequate lead times (including for Timeliness of assurance, quality documentation and other within a timescale as mutually agreed between the parties). They should have an appropriate timescale allowed for in order to undertake the additional activities in a safe
and cost effective way, without negatively impacting upon other areas of the programme. Programme contains detailed activities in regards to the requirements for
design) submitted documentation (including for design) permanent and temporary works design, resources (plant, materials and labour), or other 3rd party influences and the lead time for these requirements are sufficiently
detailed such that all orders / interactions are completed well in advance of the back stop date. The programme is continually monitored with a view to improving the
delivery timescales (at levels 3 and 4) , reported against and all activities are delivered on time or in advance of the programme dates.

4 = Assessed party consistently provides all relevant documentation / approvals / acceptance etc in accordance with the agreed programme requirements, and occasionally
Development, maintenance and adherence to programmes in advance of the programme. Where variations to the contract scope are required they are agreed within a timescale relevant to the nature of the variation (ie:- simple,
Effective and timely management of changes and variations non complex within less than 10 working days, complex within a timescale as mutually agreed between the parties). They have been agreed with an appropriate timescale
(including for design) and plans (including integrated programmes for temporary and allowed for in order to undertake the additional activities in a safe and cost effective way, but they may have an impact upon other areas of the programme. Programme
permanent works design) contains outline level activities in regards to the requirements for permanent and temporary works design, resources (plant, materials and labour), or other 3rd party
influences. The programme is continually monitored, reported against and all activities are delivered on time.

3 = Assessed party provides all relevant documentation / approvals / acceptance in accordance with the agreed programme. Where variations to the contract scope are
Timely site provision of plant and materials (and temporary required they are agreed within a timescale relevant to the nature of the variation (ie:- simple, non complex within less than 21 working days, complex within a timescale as
Timely provision of NR free issued materials and plant and permanetn works design submissions to avoid late or last mutually agreed between the parties). They are agreed with an appropriate timescale to complete the additional activity in a safe but not necessarily cost effective way, the
(including information for design) additional requirements may have a negative impact on other areas of the programme. Programme contains high level activities in regards to the requirements for
minute processing of certification) permanent and temporary works design, resources (plant, materials and labour) and other 3rd party influences. The programme is continually monitored, reported against
and the majority of activities are delivered on time, and those which aren't achieved on time have limited impact upon the overall programme.

2 = Assessed party consistently provides all relevant documentation / approvals / acceptance late but within 10 working days of the agreed programme. Where variations
Realistic timescales set for the safe delivery of the
Timely provision of team resources, site and off site (including to the contract scope are required they take time to agree regardless as to the nature of the variation. The additional requirements will have a negative impact on other
requirements:- possessions, lead times etc (including for areas of the programme. Programme contains high level activities in regards to the requirements for permanent and temporary works design, resources (plant, materials
design) for design) and labour) and other 3rd party influences. The programme is occasionally monitored and reported against however, a proportion of the activities are delivered late,
requiring some mitigation / intervention in order to meet the overall programme.

1 = Assessed party consistently provides all relevant documentation / approvals / acceptance late (greater than 10 days) against agreed programme. Where variations to
Timely approval of submitted documentation; including the contract scope are required they take significant time (greater than 21 working days) to agree regardless as to the nature of the variation and they are unrealistic /
assurance submissions and quality documentation, planning Impact of re-work, remediation and late changes to temporary unacceptable in regards to timescales to complete the activity and potentially introduce safety risk to the programme. The additional requirements will have a negative
permissions temporary and permanent works design and permanent works design impact on other areas of the programme. Programme doesn't contain sufficient detail in order to ensure that permanent and temporary works design, resources (plant,
submissions etc materials and labour) and other 3rd party influences are provided in a timely manner to meet programme. The programme is occasionally monitored and reported against
however, a significant proportion of the activities are delivered late, requiring continual mitigation / intervention in order to meet the overall programme.

Engineering Assurance
Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance
5 = Management of risk and engineering assurance review requirements completely aligned between supplier and Network Rail. Low levels of review or review levels
reduced progressively following consistently high quality of deliverables. Good evidence of application of Safe by Design principles. Effective 2 way communication
optimising the management of engineering risk and communicating client requirements clearly and efficiently
4 = No resubmissions necessary and comments are minimal with low or reducing levels of assurance required. Responses to queries consistently high quality and risks
managed proactively. Clear evidence of application of Safe by Design principles.
3 =No resubmissions necessary due to either Supplier or Network Rail deficiencies. Only minor comments requiring action and consistently good quality deliverables
provided. Risk management effective. Evidence of application of Safe by Design principles. Dialogue and comments associated with engineering assurance is clear and
actionable.
2 = Some deliverables requiring resubmission and regular comments requiring actions result in high levels of review. Higher levels of review being carried out than
considered necessary for a project with the risk profile presented. Modest evidence of Safe by Design principles. Dialogue regarding comments through engineering
assurance not helping the progress of the project. Considering or already escalating issues to national SAM meetings. Risk management a concern requiring the
involvement of senior people.

1 = Poor quality deliverables, requiring high levels of review and frequent resubmissions necessary to achieve suitable deliverables. Key risks not managed effectively
without intervention typically involving senior people within both organisations. No evidence of application of Safe by Design principles. Dialogue regarding comments
through engineering assurance process blocking the progress of the project. Supplier or Network Rail Engineering Assurance performance has been escalated to national
SAM meetings
 Delivery as Specified
Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance

Clarity of Scope, at contract award and in any ensuing 5 = Significantly exceeds specification but achieved the cost and programme milestones successfully. Provided innovation or functionality that exceeded specification and
Quality of permanent and temporary works design and was aligned to Network Rail objectives. Provision of information and deliverables from either parties that are consistently high quality and exceeding requirements and
variations. Clear, unambiguous and consistent communication integration of same physical workmanship, waste management therefore providing additional project benefits. Delivers health and safety risks mitigations through the design process. High quality of workmanship and documentation
of standards and expectations providing a legacy that exceeds client expectations. Environmental management exceeds expectations and is reflected in a culture that supports all aspects of sustainability.

Fully documented contract variation instructions which are 4 = Specification exceeded and additional benefits achieved but achieved the cost and programme milestones successfully achieved. Good quality of workmanship and
clear and unambiguous Corrective action reports including for design documentation. Delivers health and safety risks mitigations through the design process. Both parties provide information and deliverables that are high quality with
additional benefits to the projects. Environmental and sustainability exceed minimum requirements of the project consistently

Availability of "as is" drawings and other information required Sub-contractor management including coordination of 3 = Achieved the specification without the need for intervention. Adequate workmanship and documentation as required by the specification. Information and deliverables
consistently high quality. Delivers health and safety risks mitigations through the design process. Environmental management compliant and sustainability objectives
to identify risks. permanent and temporary works design achieved.

Quality of Design's or other documentation including 2 = Failed to achieve the specification or had significant intervention to achieve the specification. Workmanship and documentation have deficiencies that require
assessment of health and safety risks and opportunities to Quality management including for design correction. Information and deliverables from either party fail to meet expectations. Delivers health and safety risks mitigations occasinally through the design process.
design risk out and residual risks thereafter. Environmental and Sustainability issues not addressed adequately.

Environmental Management - consider any specific 1 = Consistently fail to achieve the requirements of the specification. Workmanship is consistently poor with significant areas incomplete or failing to achieve functional
Support to contractor initiatives and standards in regards to requirements and adherence to environmental plan, responses requirements. Outputs of the project would not be possible without significant intervention. Consistently poor quality deliverables and information. Health and safety risk
Environmental matters, Response to environmental plan to environmental incidents, Environmental management mitigations never or hardly ever delivered through the design process. Understanding of requirements regularly confused and delivery reflects lack of common
culture on site understanding and/or competence

Waste Management Compliance with the specification, NR Standards and quality

assurance procedure

Behavioural Aspects
1 off action
At the project kick off meeting both parties shall review their corporate values / behaviours and agree on the behaviours that they wish to see exhibited throughout the contract duration.

Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance

Teamwork Teamwork 5 = Assessed party consistently demonstrates the behaviours that have been agreed at the project kick off meeting, regardless as to whether the project is progressing on
Joint pursuit of whole life best value Collaborative and support both on and off the worksite time and to cost etc. Works in a collaborative manner and proactively seeks and values all contributions to resolve issues and conflicts regardless as to source. Is always
Collaborative and support both on and off the worksite Timely, open communication and issues visibility
seeking ways to improve performance for the contract as a whole, not just their team. All members of the team are skilled appropriately for the tasks that they are
Timely, open communication and issues visibility undertaking. Continually promotes success, and additionally reviews how things can be improved throughout the life of the contract/project, regardless as to standard of
Pro-active risk management performance and without the need to be prompted by the other party.
Pro-active risk management

Determination Determination
Culture of performance and continuous improvement 4 = Assessed party demonstrates the behaviours that have been agreed at the project kick off meeting, regardless as to whether the project is progressing on time and to
Culture of performance and continuous improvement cost etc. Works in a collaborative manner and values all contributions. Seeks ways to improve performance albeit mainly centred around their own companies
Appropriately trained, skilled and experienced people to Appropriately trained, skilled and experienced people to improvement, rather than specifically to improve contract/project performance. The majority of the team (and all key posts) are appropriately skilled for the tasks that they
manage the contract are undertaking. Occasionally considers improvements that may be made, but as a result of an issue that has arisen, rather than on a pro-active basis.
manage the contract
Seeking whole life best value at all times

Respect Respect
Honesty 3 = Assessed party generally demonstrates the behaviours that have been agreed at the project kick off meeting, however, in times of poor performance (of either party)
Courtesy Honesty
does not adhere to them. Tends to worked in a silo mentality when issues arise rather than working together to resolve. Works in accordance with the "contract
Integrity Courtesy requirements" and is unwilling to consider alternative ways to improve the contract/project output. Some, but not all, key personnel are skilled appropriately for the tasks
Willingness to comply with the contract, including timely Integrity that they are undertaking. Rarely considers opportunity to improve performance, albeit does undertaken lessons learnt in the event of poor performance of a key activity.
Willingness to comply with the contract
payments

Pride
Pride 2 = Assessed party understands that there are NR values which represent ideal working relationships, however, fails to work in accordance with the majority of them,
Taking appropriate responsibility to issue ownership
Ethical behaviour Responsible behaviour regardless as to whether the project is progressing on time and to cost. Works strictly in accordance with the contract conditions and predominantly in a
Innovative solutions Innovative solutions confrontational/adversarial manner whenever issues arise. A significant proportion (including key personnel) of their team is not skilled appropriately for the tasks that
Pro-actively striving for excellence they are undertaking. Fails to undertake any form of lessons learnt review in the event of an issue arising, albeit does not seek to apportion blame.
Pro-actively striving for excellence

1 = Assessed party consistently dismisses the NR values and works in a confrontational / adversarial manner regardless as to whether the project is progressing on time and
to cost etc. the majority of personnel (key or otherwise) do not have the skills required to carry out the tasks that they are undertaking. Apportions blame at times of poor
performance rather than attempt to determine what could be done to improve performance for the good of the contract
 Stakeholder Interface
Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance

5 = Continually and pro-actively engages with 3rd party stakeholders to seek their input into matters from the contract commencement, regardless as to whether there is a
Interface with Project Sponsors, LUL etc Interface with project sponsors programme / contractual obligation to do so.

Network Rail NDS, Operations and Customer Service, Network Rail NDS, Operations and Customer Service, 4 = Ensures that 3rd party engagement is considered during the contract, and identifies any specific requirements. Makes all necessary contact at the earliest opportunity
Maintenance (if applicable) Maintenance (if applicable) with such 3rd parties.

If applicable - Assurance documentation to LUL

Network Rail 3rd party suppliers 3 = Ensures that 3rd party engagement is carried out in accordance with the contract requirements.
If applicable - Access Planning with LUL

2 = Accepts that 3rd party engagement is required, but fails to do this in a timely manner, such that the project delivery is negatively impacted.

1 = Fails to undertake any 3rd party engagement, with significant detrimental impact on the project delivery.
 Contract Administration
1 off Action:-
Both parties should review the contract award timescales and determine whether these were achieved in accordance with the declared tender programme and capture commentary within the scorecard as to any impacts of over / under achievement

Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance

5 = All contracting obligations are exceeded for all payments, changes, notices such that project delivery is improved. Systems for timely capture and allocation of costs are
Fair and measured response to valuations, claims and final fully understood and effectively used by all members of the team. Payment process is consistently completed to time (or ahead of time) without any "surprises". Short
Timely response to instructions term and AFC forecasts are consistently accurate, updated and maintained throughout the life of the contract. Assessments of costs of change are accurate and kept up to
account discussions date. The opportunity for resource savings (methodology, productivity, waste, better buying etc) are constantly reviewed identified and delivered. All contract notices and
communications are up to date (at all times) agreed and recorded. Change and claims are collaboratively managed, fully controlled and up to date.

Appropriate resources employed to delivery the requirements Throughout the life of the project a "close as you go" commercial approach is adopted to facilitate timely final accounting. Final accounts are completed in advance of the
(in accordance with resource loaded programme) increased / contractual timescales following Substantial Completion. Aspirational targets are mutually agreed and widely distributed across both teams. Lessons learnt process is
Closing out claims as they arise decreased as necessary to ensure satisfactory delivery of the effective in securing continuous improvements. The resources employed to deliver the requirements are at an appropriate level required at any given point during the
requirements contract period.

4 = The majority of contracting obligations are exceeded (if not exceeded, then all met) for all payments, changes, notices such that project delivery is improved. Systems for
timely capture of allocation of costs are implemented; the commercial team and the key personnel understand and effectively use the systems. Short term and AFC
forecasts are generally accurate, updated and maintained throughout the life of the contract. All commercial contracting obligations are met and some aspirational targets
Avoidance of waste and re-work Efficiency methods being employed and visible (namely; Savings, innovations, relationships, lessons learnt) are achieved. The opportunity for resource savings (methodology, productivity, waste, better buying etc) are
occasionally reviewed (on a pro-active basis), identified and delivered. The resources employed to deliver the requirements are appropriate to deliver the requirements and
do vary appropriately throughout the contract duration, but are slow to react to increases / decreases in scope.

Pro-active identification of potential waste and re-work in a At key stages or milestones of the project lifecycle a "close as you go" commercial approach is adopted to facilitate timely final accounting. Final accounts are completed
Co-operating in mitigating the cost impact of disruptive events timely manager - any such occurrences being duly mitigated within the contractual timescales following Substantial Completion. Aspirational targets are widely distributed across both teams. Change and claims are collaboratively
wherever possible managed, fully controlled and up to date. Aspirational targets are agreed and distributed to relevant personnel across both teams.

3 = All contracting obligations are met for all payments, changes, notices such that project delivery is not inhibited. Systems for timely capture of allocation of costs are
implemented; the commercial team and the some of the key personnel understand and effectively use the systems. Short term and AFC forecasts are generally accurate,
Access to complete resolution of snagging items Satisfactory quality of evidence to support application updated and maintained throughout the life of the contract. Some aspirational targets (namely; Savings, innovations, relationships, lessons learnt) are achieved. The
opportunity for resource savings (methodology, productivity, waste, better buying etc) are occasionally reviewed (only at the request of the other party). The resources
employed to deliver the requirements are generally appropriate to deliver the requirements, but do not flex with increases / decreases in scope.

Final accounts are completed within the contractual timescales following Substantial Completion. Aspirational targets are distributed but not across both teams. Change
and claims are managed but may not be up to date. Aspirational targets are occasionally considered. Apps and Payments generally agreed in accordance with the contract
Continuity of management throughout the close-out period Mitigation of the costs of variations and on time and they are accurate. The opportunity for resource savings (methodology, productivity, waste, better buying etc) are occasionally reviewed as and when
requested by either party.

2 = Contracting obligations are consistently missed for payments, changes, notices and as such have a negative impact on project delivery. Systems for timely capture and
allocation of costs are not understood or implemented appropriately. Payment process is consistently incomplete, late, or contains elements unknown to the other party.
Effectiveness of hand back Realism of Claims Short term and AFC forecasts are rarely completed and when they are they are consistently inaccurate and out of date. Assessments of costs of change are consistently
inaccurate and out of date. No consideration is given to the opportunity for resource savings (methodology, productivity, waste, better buying etc). Contract notices and
communications are inaccurate, and not agreed. Final accounts exceed the contract obligation by greater than 50% in time.

Close out review for shared lessons learned / continuous Mitigation of possession / train delays No aspirational targets are set. No consideration is given to lessons learnt or continuous improvement. The resources employed to deliver the requirements are
improvement inappropriate (be that too many or too few) for the majority of the contract period

1 = Contracting obligations are always missed for payments, changes, notices and as such have a significant impact on project delivery. Systems for timely capture and
allocation of costs are not understood or implemented appropriately. Payment process is consistently incomplete, late, or contains elements unknown to the other party.
` No Short term and AFC forecasts provided throughout the life of the contract. Assessments of costs of change are inaccurate and out of date. No consideration is given to
the opportunity for resource savings (methodology, productivity, waste, better buying etc). Contract notices and communications are inaccurate, and not agreed.

Final accounts exceed the contract obligation by greater than 75% in time. No aspirational targets are set. No consideration is given to lessons learnt or continuous
improvement. The resources employed to deliver the requirements are inappropriate (be that too many or too few) at all times during the contract period
 Safety & Sustainable Developemnt (To include Helath, Safety & Environment)
1. S & S D Documentation
Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance
The Principal Contractor is to comment on the quality and The Network Rail Project Team is to comment on the quality and 5. Outstanding:
submission of Pre-construction S&SD Information submitted to submission of all S&SD Documentation submitted to the Project a) The documentation submitted is project specific
b) It has been submitted in advance of timescales to enable timely review
them by the Project Team. Team for it's consideration and review. This could include: c) It identifies all high risk activities/concerns and provides assurance that these risks have been mitigated against
S&SD Documentation, includes all Health, Safety and a) The Construction Phase Plan d) Evidence of innovation can be found within approach taken in respect of safety and environmental management on the project
Environmental information supplied to the Principal Contractor b) Information in relation to the Environmental Management e) The detail contained within the documentation is appropriate to the risk
by the Project Team, that takes into consideration the risks, Plan for the Project f) The quality of the documentation, it's accuracy and it's ability to engage the reader is of very high standard.
threats, constraints and opportunities in relation to the project c) Project Specific Safety and Environment Risk Registers
4. Exceeded:
from a health, safety and environmental perspective d) Work Package Plans a) The documentation submitted is project specific
S&SD Documentation includes all: b) It has been submitted in advance of timescales to enable timely review
a) Pre-Construction Information, as required by the Construction c) It identifies all high risk activities/concerns and provides assurance that these risks have been mitigated against
(Design and Management) Regulations 2007 If Construction Safety and Sustainable Development information d) The detail contained within the documentation is appropriate to the risk
b) Specific Environmental information in relation to the project.
is not submitted in a timely manner and it does not address the e) The quality of the documentation, it's accuracy and it's ability to engage the reader is of very high standard.
specific risks associated with the project, this will have an 3. Good:
The timely high quality provision of pre-construction S&SD impact on the ability of the project to be delivered in a safe and a) The documentation submitted is project specific
information by Network Rail is an essential activity. Please compliant manner. b) It has been submitted on time
consider and provide feedback to Network Rail on the following; - Documentation is of high quality. c) It identifies all high risk activities/concerns and provides assurance that these risks have been mitigated against
- Documentation is of high quality. - Documentation was provided on time d) The detail contained within the documentation is appropriate to the risk
e) The documentation is adequate and meets requirements
- Documentation was provided on time - Documentation is relevant and project specific
- Documentation is relevant. - Documentation identifies the specific risks and mitigations on
- Document is accurate. the project
- Document is accurate.

2. Poor
a) The documentation submitted is non-project specific
b) It has been submitted on time
c) It contains a broad range of risk information, that make it difficult to identify the significant risks on the project
d) The documentation is either over excessive or little value
e) There is evidence of cut and pasting information from other similar documents within it
f) The information has had to be resumitted as it was deemed inadequate on it's first review

1. Significant Room for Improvement

a) The documentation is non-project specific
b) It has been submitted late
c) The risk information contained within it is of little value
d) There is wide scale evidence of cutting and pasting information from similar documentation
e) The information has had to be resumitted as it was deemed inadequate on it's first review
 2. Performance Monitoring
Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance
The Principal Contractor is to comment on their experience of The Project Team is to comment on the S&SD data supplied by 5. Outstanding:
reporting Safety & Sustainable Development Performance the PC at period end. a) All data is supplied well in advance of deadlines
b) It is accurate and has been reviewed by the Project Team
Indicators/Data to the project. c) All mandatory data requirements are included in the submission
a) Did the supplier submit their KPI data within the required d) All non-mandatory, proactive safety and sustainable development performance indicators has been competed, including details of: Close Call; Health Surveillance; Safety
a) Has the project team explained what needs to be measured timescales at period end. and Environmental Inspections; Safety Tours information on for the project
and why we are collecting the information requested. b) Was the data submitted accurate or did the Project Team e) The data is reviewed each month by both the supplier and project team and it is used to inform decison making and generate an improvement plan on the project to
b) Has the project set up the KPI Reporting tool correctly to have to query the data submitted enhance S&SD performance.
f) Through these discussions additional matrix are suggested as means of measuring and improving S&SD performance on the project.
enable the supplier to submit their periodic data against c) Did the data submitted include data relating to the non-
relevant project code(s) mandatory Indicators: Close Call information; Health 4. Exceeded:
c) Where data has been submitted, has the project team Surveillance; Safety Inspections; Safety Tours on the project a) All data is supplied well in advance of deadlines
validated this information in a timely manner to enable the d) Is the data that has been submitted by the supplier b) It is accurate and has been reviewed by the Project Team
supplier's data to be included within the overall Infrastructure discussed at Project Review Meetings and is it used to inform c) All mandatory data requirements are included in the submission
d) Three non-mandatory, proactive safety and sustainable development performance indicators has been competed that may include details of: Close Call; Health
Project S&SD submission to the Board decision making and generate initiatives to improve Health, Surveillance; Safety and Environmental Inspections; Safety Tours information on for the project
d) Is the data that has been submitted by the supplier Safety and Environmental Performance and behaviours on the e) The data is reviewed each month by both the supplier and project team and it is used to inform decision making and generate an
discussed at Project Review Meetings and is it used to inform project. improvement plan on the project to enhance S&SD performance.
decision making and generate initiatives to improve Safety and
Sustainable Development Performance and behaviours on the 3. Good:
a) All data is supplied on time
project. b) It is accurate and has been reviewed by the project team
c) All mandatory data requirements are included in the submission
d) At least one non-mandatory, proactive safety and sustainable development performance indicators has been competed that
may include details of: Close Call; Health Surveillance; Safety and Environmental Inspections; Safety Tours information on for the
project
e) The data is reviewed each month by both the supplier and project team.

2. Poor:
a) Data is supplied late and/or.
b) Data is supplied, but the NR Proeject Team are routinely required to chase the PC for it, and/or
c) It is accurate, but did not get reviewed by the project team in a timely manner, which meant it could not be submitted and/or
d) The data reviewed by the Project Team contained inaccuracies and the supplier was questioned over their submission
e) None of the non-mandatory fields have been completed
f) The data is not used to generate discussions at regular project progress meetings.
1. Significant Room for Improvement:
a) Data cannot be submitted as the project has not been set up by the NR Project Team to enable the data to be supplied and/pr
b) The system has been set up, but the PC fails to routinely to submit their data and/or
c) No data is reviewed at regular project progress meetings.
d) There is a lack of understanding as to why data is being collected on the project.
 3. S & S D Initiatives
Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance
The Principal Contractor has created an environment on the The Project Team is to comment on the Principal Contractors 5. Outstanding:
project where improving S&SD performance is of paramount focus on improving S&SD performance the project. a) The Project Team and the Principal Contractor meet to discuss how S&SD performance can improved on the project
b) Both parties work together to implement initiatives and there are examples of several proactive S&SD initiatives
importance. implemented on the project that both parties would recognise
How receptive is the Principal Contractor in implementing a c) Feedback from the workforce (from Safety Truck visits/Surveys etc) in respect of improving S&SD performance is sought and acted upon
The Principal Contractor is to comment on how receptive and mature S&SD culture on the project:that will help create the d) Feedback from the wider community (from consultative meetings/project communications), in respect, of reducing
supportive the Project Team is of them implementing a mature right environment where improved S&SD performance is its the impact of the project on the community is actively sought and acted upon on the project
S&SD culture on the project: core focus. d) There is recognition that those undertaking, supervising and managing construction activity, are motivated and engaged in improving S&SD performance
e) There is recognition that a mature S&SD culture exists on the project and is recognised by both parties on the project
This could include but is not restricted to: Initiates could include but are not restricted to: 4. Exceeded
a) Bespoke Behaviour/S&SD/Designing out Waste Workshops a) Bespoke Behaviour/S&SD/Designing out Waste Workshops a) The Project Team and the Principal Contractor meet to discuss how S&SD performance can be improved on the project
b) Health and Wellbeing initiatives are delivered on the Project b) Both parties work together to implement initiatives and there are examples of at least two proactive S&SD initiatives
c) Innovation is used to promote and mitigate risks to people b) Health and Wellbeing initiatives being implemented on the implemented on the project that both parties would recognise
c) Feedback from the workforce (from Safety Truck visits/Surveys etc) in respect of improving S&SD
and the environment project performance is sought and acted upon
d) The wider community is consulted on project activities and c) Innovation used to promote and mitigate risks to people and d) Feedback from the wider community (from consultative meetings/project communications) in respect
are advised of mitigations to reduce the impact of project the environment of reducing the impact of the project on the community is actively sought and acted upon on the project
activities on them. d) Evidence that the wider community is regularly consulted e) There is an recognition that those supervising and managing the project are activity, are motivated and
e) The workforce are regularly consulted on S&SD performance about project activities and are advised of the mitigations in engaged in improving S&SD performance
f) There is recognition that a mature S&SD culture exists on the project and is recognised by both parties on the project
and their ideas are sought in order can be improve S&SD place to reduce the impact of project activities may have on
performance them.
e) The workforce are regularly consulted on S&SD performance
and their ideas are sought in order can be improve S&SD
performance

3. Good:
a) The Project Team and the Principal Contractor meet to discuss how S&SD performance can be improved on the project
b) Both parties work together to implement initiatives and there is at least one example of a proactive S&SD initiative implemented on the project, that both parties would
recognise
c) Feedback from the workforce (from Safety Truck visits/Surveys etc) in respect of improving S&SD performance is sought and acted upon
d) Management is committed and motivated in improving S&SD performance
e) S&SD performance on the project has not got any worse throughout the life of the project.
2. Poor:
a) The Project Team and the Principal Contractor meet but spend little, if any time discussing S&SD performance.
b) Management say that they are committed and motivated in improving S&SD performance on the project, but there is little evidence of this.
c) There is no recognition that specific S&SD initiatives have been implemented on the project.
d) S&SD performance has not improved and there are concerns about the S&SD performance on the project.

1. Significant Room for Improvement:

a) The Project Team and the Principal Contractor meet but no time is spent reviewing S&SD performance
b) There is a perception that lip service is paid to S&SD performance and that delivery is of paramount importance.
c) There is no recognition that specific S&SD initiatives have been implemented on the project.
d) S&SD performance has got worse throughout the life of the project.
 4. Competence of S&SD Staff
Performance Indicators for Consideration for the Supplier Performance Indicators for Consideration of Network Rail Scoring Guidance
The Principal Contractor is to comment on the performance of The NR Project Team is to comment on the performance of the 5. Outstanding:
the S&SD resource allocated by the NR Project Team to the S&SD resource allocated by the project by the PC and/or the The NR Project Team/PC has dedicated S&SD resource(s) attributed to it that is/are:
a) Competent
project and/or the ability of the NR Project Teams to respond ability of the PC to respond to S&SD queries, concerns and b) Professional
to S&SD queries, concerns and requests for information requests for information, which includes information arising c) Strategic and collaborative in their approach; - they work with other suppliers and NR in order to embed current S&SD best practice onto their project.
from accidents and incidents. d) Is visible to those delivering the project and is proactive in their dealings with them
e) Offers solutions and ideas to the Project Team/PC
f) Is able to communcate and articulate their concerns and ideas to workforce/Management
g) Always responds to requests for information and assistance promptly
4. Exceeded:
The NR Project Team/PC has dedicated S&SD or shared resource(s), determined by risk, attributed to it that is:
a) Competent
b) Professional
c) Is visible to those delivering the project is proactive in their dealings with them
d) Offers solutions and ideas to the Project Team/PC
e) Is able to communicate and articulate their concerns and ideas to workforce/Management
f) Always responds to requests for information and assistance promptly

3. Good:
The NR Project Team/PC has a S&SD resource, but it is shared amongst a number of projects, but is deemed adequate
for the risk profile of the project, that is regarded as:
a) Competent
b) Professional
c) Is visible to those delivering the project
d) Is able to communicate and articulate their concerns to workforce/Management
e) Always responds to requests for information and assistance, but may need to be reminded

2. Poor:
The NR Project Team/PC has a S&SD resource, but it is shared amongst a number of projects, the resource is deemed inadequate
in respect of the risk profile of the project. The resource provided is however regarded as:
a) Competent
b) Professional
c) Is not visible enough on the project
d) Is able to communicate and articulate their concerns to workforce/Management
e) Responds to requests for information and assistance, but the response may take some time to be given.

1. Significant Room for Improvement:

The NR Project Team/PC has no dedicated S&SD resource on the project. The resource is ad hoc.
a) Competence is questioned
b) Is not visible enough on the project
c) There is no evidence of communication between the S&SD resource and the workforce
d) Responses to requests for information and assistance are rarely answered.
e) Demonstrates unprofessional behaviours

Appendix : Safe by Design Guidance

(a) Clear evidence of the concurrence of Health and Safety risk identification and management all documentation from PCIP through design information to method statements and programme for implementation on site and maintenance of the asset thereafter.

"Good" would be prominent evidence, "Poor" would be no evidence

b) Effective coordination and management of integrated permanent works and temporary works design

"Good" would be well documented procedures including clear definition of rles and responsibilities and timely information transfer. Poor" would be reflect lack of suitably defined procedures, role definition and information distribution.