Coventry committee lays out OPM solicitation, delegated authority and reporting expectations

The Coventry School Building Committee agreed to solicit proposals for an owner’s project manager (OPM) and to form a small subcommittee to draft the scope and selection criteria, with a target to return a recommendation at the committee’s June 2 meeting.

Committee members said they want an OPM to manage state paperwork, track budgets and schedules, attend regular contractor meetings and provide timely reports to the committee. The group discussed whether OPMs should provide written monthly budget-to-actual reports in addition to oral updates at meetings and whether attendance may be in person or via remote means when permitted.

Don Coward (School Building Committee member) said the committee will ask respondents to list staff who would work on the project and provide examples of similar scope projects. Phil (staff member) suggested the solicitation list responsibilities such as attending biweekly executive meetings, producing budget tracking and participating in contractor meetings; he asked the committee to clarify whether written monthly reports are required. “Report out is too vague,” one committee member said, urging a written, accountable deliverable for budget and schedule updates.

Selection process and schedule

Committee members identified firms on the state MPA (master price agreement) and repeatedly mentioned Downes, Peregrine and Leftfield as commonly recommended OPMs. The committee agreed to solicit statements of qualifications and fee proposals based on a defined scope, to evaluate submissions with a small OPM-selection subcommittee and to present a recommendation for committee approval on the June 2 agenda.

Change-order thresholds and delegated authority

Members discussed delegated authority for change orders and the practical need to approve time-sensitive work quickly. Examples from other districts were cited: some communities delegate authority for change orders up to $25,000 or use a percentage-of-contract threshold. The committee agreed to seek guidance from Phil and the town’s bond counsel on what delegated authority would preserve state reimbursement and meet local procurement rules.

Public meetings, attendance and accountability

Committee members asked whether OPMs must attend in-person meetings; a staff member noted public meetings are back in person but will continue to be recorded and broadcast. The committee asked that the solicitation clarify expected attendance frequency, whether remote participation is acceptable, and whether the OPM must provide written monthly financial reports in addition to oral updates.

Ending

The committee appointed a short list of volunteers (committee members and staff) to draft the OPM scope and solicitation, with a timeline to issue the request and return a recommendation by June 2.