GB/T 50844-2013Evaluation code for implementation of engineering construction standard (English PDF)

1 General provisions

1.0.1 The code was drawn up in order to unify the assessment of the implementation status, the implementation effect and the scientific soundness of engineering construction standards, and to drive forward and improve the work of implementing them.

1.0.2 It applies to the assessment of the implementation of engineering construction standards at national, sectoral and local level.

1.0.3 The assessment of the implementation of an engineering construction standard is to follow the principles of objectivity, completeness and impartiality.

1.0.4 Besides this code, such an assessment is also to comply with the provisions of the relevant national standards currently in force.

2 Terms

2.0.1 Engineering construction standard implementation evaluation is defined as the process of assessing, once a standard has been in force for a period, the various strands of work that drive its implementation together with its implementation effect and its scientific soundness, judged against the aims and the working requirements of standardization work.

2.0.2 Evaluation classification is defined as dividing the implementation of an engineering construction standard, according to the aims and features of standardization work, into several parts of differing nature, each of which can be assessed on its own.

2.0.3 A basic standard is defined as a standard for terms, symbols, units of measurement or modules.

2.0.4 A comprehensive standard is defined as one whose content and field of application reach two or more stages of construction activity, among planning, investigation, design, construction, quality acceptance, management, inspection, appraisal, evaluation and operation and maintenance. A single standard, 2.0.5, is one whose content and field of application reach only one of those stages.

2.0.6 Standard implementation status is defined as the picture, after a standard has been approved and released, of promotion by construction administrations at every level, of the organisation of its publication and distribution, and of its implementation by the bodies concerned, among them planning, investigation and design organisations, construction drawing review bodies, construction and installation contractors, supervision, testing and assessment bodies, safety and quality supervision bodies, research institutes and higher education institutions.

2.0.7 to 2.0.13 define the indicators of promotion status: standard release status, the publication of the release announcement in the relevant media, websites and periodicals included; standard published status, the way the distribution network supplies the standard to users within a province, autonomous region or municipality; standard publicizing and training status, the activities run by the standardization administration and the bodies concerned and the professional training run by training organisations with the standard as its main content; management system requirements, the explicit requirements on implementation written into the management systems that the departments concerned formulate; and standard derivative status, the distribution of teaching materials, lecture notes and training material, guides, manuals, software and atlases that help the standard to be implemented.

2.0.8 and 2.0.14 to 2.0.16 define the indicators of application status: standard application status, the picture of the standard being applied by all parties in construction, applied in projects, applied by professional technical personnel and mastered by them; standard application status in unit, whether the bodies concerned bring the standard promptly into their quality management system, run publicity and training and send technical personnel to training; standard application status in engineering, whether the standard is carried through in construction within its field of application; and the status of technical staff mastering the standard, whether the technical personnel concerned have the content of the standard in hand and can apply it to good effect.

2.0.17 to 2.0.19 define the three effect indicators. Economic effect is the effect that applying the standard in construction has on saving material consumption, raising production efficiency and lowering cost. Social effect is the effect on engineering safety, engineering quality, personal health, the public interest and technical progress. Environmental effect is the effect on saving and making rational use of energy and resources and on protecting the ecological environment.

2.0.20 to 2.0.22 define the three indicators of scientific soundness. Practicality is how reasonable the provisions of the standard are and how convenient they are to apply in construction, together with how feasible the technical measures are. Coordination reflects how far the standard is in step with the relevant national policies and with related standards. Advancement reflects that the standard meets the current needs of social, technical and economic development, that the technology is mature, that the provisions are sound and that it promotes the application of new technology.

3 Basic requirements

3.0.1 The assessment covers four pieces of work: settling the evaluation classification and the evaluation indicators; settling the survey method and drawing up the survey questionnaire and the survey outline; surveying the implementation of the standard; and assessing, analysing and preparing the evaluation report.

3.0.2 The assessment covers three classes, implementation status, implementation effect and scientific soundness. Table 3.0.2 sets out the classes and their indicators as a tree: under implementation status stand promotion status, with the indicators standard release status, standard published status, publicizing and training status, management system requirements and standard derivative status, and application status, with the indicators application status in unit, application status in engineering and status of technical staff mastering the standard; under implementation effect stand economic, social and environmental effect; under scientific soundness stand practicality, coordination and advancement.

3.0.3 The assessment is carried out according to the features of the standard being assessed and the needs of standardization work, choosing one or more of the three classes.

3.0.4 Implementation status should be assessed once the standard assessed has been in force a full year; implementation effect once it has been in force three years; scientific soundness once it has been in force two years.

3.0.5 An evaluation working group is formed and carries out the assessment. Its composition and its size are settled according to the content of the standard assessed and the volume of assessment work.

3.0.6 Sampling survey methods should be used. The working group chooses, against the evaluation indicators, between a sampling questionnaire survey, an expert survey, a field survey or another method. For a questionnaire survey the group prepares the questionnaire, settles the target population among the bodies, individuals and projects using the standard, picks the subjects by stratified sampling and issues the questionnaires, the number returned being enough to keep the conclusions sound. For an expert survey the group draws up a survey outline and picks experts of reasonable number who know the standard assessed and have wide practical experience. For a field survey the group draws up the content and the objectives and picks typical enterprises or projects, the subjects being representative and enough in number. For another method the group argues the choice through, settles the method and draws up a detailed survey outline and plan, the scope and the subjects meeting the needs of the assessment.

3.0.7 The result for each indicator falls into one of four steps, printed as the first four characters of the Chinese decimal-stem series, jia, yi, bing and ding; the grade for each class falls into one of four steps, excellent, good, fair and poor.

3.0.8 Indicator assessment follows four rules. The group assesses the indicators under Chapters 5, 6 and 7 on the strength of the information gathered in the survey and settles the result against the assessment criteria. Where the material cannot give a full and objective picture of the implementation status, a supplementary survey is carried out. Where the grade is disputed, the group may organise a special appraisal and settle the grade after closer analysis. The grade is settled from the indicator results as the standard requires.

3.0.9 Class assessment follows indicator assessment: the scores that correspond to the indicator results are weighted, and the class result is settled from the calculated score.

3.0.10 If the standard assessed is revised, in whole or in part, while the assessment is under way, the group analyses what the revised content does to the material already gathered and to the results; where the results are affected, a supplementary survey is carried out and the results settled afresh, the final result reflecting the implementation status after the revision.

3.0.11 Once the assessment is finished the group carries out the particular and the overall analyses and drafts the evaluation work report.

4 Classification and indicators

4.0.1 Engineering construction standards may be divided, by the make-up of their content and their field of application, into basic standards, comprehensive standards and single standards.

4.0.2 For a basic standard, as a rule only the implementation status and the scientific soundness are assessed.

4.0.3 For comprehensive and single standards, the evaluation classes and indicators are settled from Table 4.0.3 according to the stages the field of application reaches.

Table 4.0.3 is a tick matrix. Its rows are the stages of construction activity: planning, investigation, design, construction, quality acceptance, management, inspection with appraisal and evaluation, and operation with maintenance and repair. Its columns are the nine indicators grouped under implementation status assessment, effect assessment and scientific soundness assessment. The note printed under the table states that a tick means the code applies to assessing that indicator and a dash means it does not; dashes appear in the effect columns for several of the later stages.

5 Evaluation of standards implementation status

5.1.1 Implementation status is assessed by assessing promotion status and application status separately under Article 4.0.3, the indicator results then being drawn together into a grade for implementation status.

5.2.1 For a basic standard, promotion status is assessed on two indicators, standard release status and standard published status. For single and comprehensive standards it is assessed on five: standard release status, standard published status, publicizing and training status, management system requirements and standard derivative status.

5.2.2 Table 5.2.2 gives the content to be assessed under each promotion indicator: for release status, whether the release of the standard was made known to the public in the relevant media and whether that was done in good time; for published status, the distribution ratio, which the table defines as actual sales volume over theoretical sales volume; for publicizing and training status, whether the standardization administration and the bodies concerned ran publicity activities and whether social training organisations ran training with the standard as its main content; for management system requirements, whether the government of the region assessed has issued policies that build on the standard and measures that push its implementation; and for derivative status, whether guides, manuals, software, atlases and the like tied to the standard are sold in the region assessed. A note states that the theoretical sales volume is estimated from the class and the nature of the standard together with the number of professional technical personnel using it in the region assessed.

5.2.3 Tables 5.2.3-1 and 5.2.3-2 settle the result for each promotion indicator. Table 5.2.3-1 grades release status by how many media carried the notice within one month of the ministry announcement and whether publicity ran before the date of entry into force; it grades published status by the distribution ratio; and it grades publicizing and training status by the share of the bodies using the standard that took part in the publicity activities and in the training. Table 5.2.3-2 settles management system requirements and derivative status as a plain presence or absence.

5.3.1 Application status is assessed on three indicators: application status in unit, application status in engineering, and the status of technical staff mastering the standard.

5.3.2 Table 5.3.2 gives the content to be assessed: for the unit, whether the standard has been brought into the quality management system, whether it is under control there, and whether publicity and training were run; for the project, the application rate and whether the standard is applied correctly and to good effect; for the technical staff, whether they have the content in hand and can apply it correctly. A note defines the application rate as the number of projects in which the standard was applied divided by the number of projects to which the standard applies, among the projects the surveyed body has taken on since the standard came into force.

5.3.3 Table 5.3.3 settles the result for each application indicator. The unit is graded on whether the standard is under control in the quality management system and on how far training was organised. The project is graded on the application rate, with separate thresholds for standards that are not mandatory and a full rate required for mandatory ones, and on whether the standard is applied correctly and to good effect. The technical staff are graded on how thoroughly they have mastered the content and whether they can apply it. A note adds that for a standard which policy requires to be strictly implemented in projects, mandatory or not, the application rate must be full before any grade above the lowest two is given.

5.4.1 Table 5.4.1-1 attaches a score band to each of the four indicator grades. Table 5.4.1-2 attaches a score to the presence or absence conclusions used for management system requirements and derivative status, half a point for presence and none for absence.

5.4.2 The implementation status score is calculated as the sum over the indicators of the weighting coefficient times the indicator score, plus the score for management system requirements and the score for derivative status. The symbols are: the implementation status score; the weighting coefficient of each class of status within implementation status, taken from Table 5.4.2; the scores that correspond to the results of the promotion and application indicators; the score for management system requirements; and the score for derivative status.

Table 5.4.2 gives the weighting coefficients by class of standard across six indicator columns: release status, published status, publicizing and training status, application status in unit, application status in engineering, and status of technical staff mastering the standard. For a basic standard the coefficients are 0.2, 0.2, no value, 0.2, 0.2 and 0.2; for a comprehensive standard and for a single standard alike they are 0.1, 0.05, 0.15, 0.2, 0.25 and 0.25. Each row sums to one.