Step 5: Perform Risk Assessment



  • Lack of inter-governmental cooperation
  • Legal challenges to procurement methods (i.e. P3)
  • Inflationary pressures
  • Competing interests for limited state/federal funds
  • Unavailability of financing mechanisms (i.e. PABs cap is reached)
  • No public champion at the state level
  • Increased diversions of state tax revenue (i.e. gas tax)
  • Political pressures to include bridges based on criteria other than bridge condition
  • Procurement-specific risks (i.e. change orders, contractor default)
  • Overbundling (i.e. inclusion of too many bridges in one bundle vs. resources available)
  • Stakeholder threats (i.e. residents impacted by construction)
  • Economies of scale
  • Use of new procurement methods that may be better suited for Bridge Bundling projects
  • Bridge Bundling is a new concept in Illinois, can be used as another model for other states
  • Decreased travel times for goods and people
  • Safer travelling experience
  • Lower procurement costs (i.e. multiple bridges included in one procurement)
  • Bridges delivered faster than if not bundled
  • Tap into new pools of federal funding
  • Develop quantitative based criteria for inclusion of bridges in bundle, eliminating bias and political pressures
Primary Risks Mitigation Strategy
Lack of Inter-Governmental Cooperation
  • Clear understanding of project-enabling legislation.
  • Robust project management plan outlining responsibilities, and communications plan outlining how communications should be handled.
  • Identify point person(s) at each level of government involved in developing.
Limited Funding
  • Identify all local funding sources available, and develop a plan to ensure full utilization of all currently available funding sources.
  • Preemptively allocate future local funding streams to undergird Bridge Bundling project.
No public champion for project identified
  • Identify public champion early in the project’s development. This person will be the face of the project to the public and state legislators – they will be the one championing the project at the state level to secure funding and necessary approvals.
  • It may not be clear at the start of the project who the public champion will be. This person may have to be determined through a nomination process by the key stakeholders early on in the development process.
  • Putting all of the moving pieces in place for the project is not the sole responsibility of the public champion, but this person will be responsible for winning hearts and minds of public and elected officials, and ensuring the project is viewed favorably in the zeitgeist.


To properly mitigate risks, the outcome would be a robust project risk management plan and a project risk register (excerpt of an example below):

Nature of Risk
Risk Description
Primary Risk Consequences
Major Risk Mitigation Measures
Project Scope
Macroeconomic Risks
A downturn in the economyPrivate entities may face economic constraints that prevent them from bidding or that reduce competitionEvaluate financial viability of proposals; surety and bonding, builders insurance, evaluate financial viability
Go/No Go
Shortlisted team drops out
A shortlisted team drops out without submitting a proposal in response to the RFPReduced competition, remaining shortlist (if aware) is less incentivized to innovate, fewer proposals to evaluate after RFP processEvaluate whether there is still sufficient competition or whether to re-procure; assess why the shortlisted team dropped out
Construction Phase
Construction Quality
Quality of construction work is deficientReduced asset performance and additional remedial costs; service life of roadway is not as long as planned; additional future costsMonitor compliance and enforce contract intent; require adjustments; retain right not to accept project unless and until performance standards are met; engage third part inspectors
Site Conditions
Preliminary survey/base map
Survey/base map or plan is inaccurateChange orders, delays, hazards not identifiedContractual clause shifting risk to contractor

Source: WSP