{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020558002936857563, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010279001468428781, 'mean_word_length': 5.167420814479638, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Analysis of Owners Safety Management Approaches in Design-Build Projects

Other than mining and agriculture, construction jobsites are the most dangerous workplaces in the United States. However, owners and contractors remain primarily concerned with whether or not a project is completed within the scope of the contract, on schedule, and on budget (Rechenthin, 2004). With the emergence of the Design-Build (DB) delivery system as a prominent method in public projects, owners drafting requests for proposals (RFPs) are given a unique opportunity to place an emphasis on the importance of safety practices in the award of best value DB contracts. This study reviewed 115 RFPs to investigate the role of safety management in Design-Build RFPs. Out of the 115 RFPs reviewed, 62 RFPs mentioned safety. An in depth analysis of this 62 RFPs was performed to determine safety management approached in Design/Build projects. Results suggest that owners can include safety criteria in their RFPs which can be part of an overall risk management plan, particularly on projects with greater interface between the construction work zone and the general public. Additionally, if differential safety performance is not an evaluation criterion, it should not be referenced in the RFP and safety expectation beyond legal and regulatory standards should be clearly spelled out.