-
Job Description
Marketing Statement
Ride BART to a satisfying career that lets you both: 1) make a difference to Bay Area residents, and 2) enjoy excellent pay, benefits, and employment stability. BART is looking for people who like to be challenged, work in a fast-paced environment, and have a passion for connecting riders to work, school and other places they need to go. BART offers a competitive salary, comprehensive health benefits, paid time off, and the CalPERS retirement program.
Job Summary
Pay Rate
This classification has moved to a salary step structure as of January 1, 2025. Individuals hired into the classification will typically be appointed at Step 1 of the salary range. They will advance to Step 2 after working in the position for six (6) months, to Step 3 after working in the position for twelve (12) months, and to Steps 4 and 5 at one (1)-year intervals thereafter. Each salary step progression will provide a 5% increase to the employee’s base salary until Step 5 is reached. The salary range is $147,347.20 to $179,088.00 (AFSCME Grade 21).
Negotiable starting salary will be between $147,347.20 to $162,448.00/annually depending on experience and education.
Reports To
Sr. Manager of Agreement Management
Current Assignment
The Bay Area Rapid Transit Direct (BART) is seeking a Project Support Manager to join the Agreements Compliance Team under the Procurement Department.
The selected candidate will be performing supervisory and analytical work such as acting as a deputy to the senior manager; spearheading process improvement activities and developing key performance indicators (KPIs) for the team; supervising financial analysts, including assigning work, overseeing output and evaluation. Additionally, the candidate will coordinate assigned activities across the team, prime contractors, Office of Civil Rights, Internal Audit, and Office of Infrastructure Delivery.
The most qualified candidates for this position will have competencies in the following areas, which will be reinforced with related work experience and will be clearly articulated during the selection process:- Proven analytical and problem-solving skills.
- Solid understanding of principles and practices of architectural and engineering contract administration within a capital program.
- General knowledge of public sector procurement guidelines, including Federal Acquisition Regulations and Federal Transit Administration Circulars governing capital projects.
- Supervisory experience overseeing highly skilled subject matter experts.
- Strong written and verbal communication skills and the ability to clearly communicate complex topics in an accessible and easy to understand way.
- Comfort working with complex data and performing routine statistical analyses on the data, and willingness to learn more advanced techniques.
- Ability to leverage various computer systems and applications in conducting analyses, including familiarity with Microsoft Excel formulas and functions.
Selections Process
This position is represented by American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). Applications will be screened to assure that minimum qualifications are met. Those applicants who meet minimum qualifications will then be referred to the hiring department for the completion of further selection processes.
The selection process for this position may include a skills/performance demonstration, a written examination, and/or an individual or panel interview.
The successful candidate must have an employment history demonstrating reliability and dependability; provide copies of certificates, diplomas or other documents as required by law, including those establishing his/her right to work in the U. S.; pass a pre-employment medical examination which includes a drug and alcohol screen, and which is specific to the essential job functions and requirements. Pre-employment processing will also include a background check. (Does not apply to current full-time District employees unless specific job requires additional evaluations) The selection process for this position will be in accordance with the applicable collective bargaining agreement.
Examples of Duties
Manages the capital project control and administrative support activities of Transit System Development and West Bay Extension including construction contract administration, project control, and capital and operating budget development, monitoring and reporting.
Reviews project design and construction costs; assesses project costs against actual budget; report variances; develops information which outlines project impact.
Participates in the development and implementation of goals, objectives, policies and priorities; recommends and implements resulting policies and procedures.
Directs, coordinates and reviews the work plan for assigned services and activities; assigns work activities and projects; monitors workflow; reviews and evaluates work products, methods and procedures; meets with staff to identify and resolve problems.
Coordinates the work activities of assigned personnel from other departments to provide support to Project Managers on extension projects.
Develops and administers engineering and professional contracts and agreements; monitors and analyzes contract expenditures.
Develops and monitors extension project budgets, financial plans, cash flows, reporting requirements and specification changes; prepares budget and capital labor reports.
Coordinates and oversees funding agency contracts; develops reporting schedule; oversees reporting activities; ensures all contract activities comply with funding agency requirements.
Develops automated tracking systems for effective project control; coordinates project control needs with outside agencies and other District departments.
Develops Federal and State grant applications and status reports; tracks and reports on Disadvantaged Business Enter prise participation.
As assigned, oversees insurance programs in assigned area; ensures all programs are administered in compliance with District standards and regulations.
Selects, trains, motivates and evaluates assigned personnel; provides or coordinates staff training; works with employees to correct deficiencies; implements discipline and termina tion procedures.
Represents the District in meetings with representatives of government agencies, transit and professional organizations and the public.
Conducts or directs analytical studies; develops and reviews report findings, alternatives and recommendations.
Minimum Qualifications
Education :
Possession of a Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university in Engineering or a closely related field.
Experience :
The equivalent of four (4) years of full-time verifiable (full-time equivalent) verifiable experience in engineering project financial program administration and control which must have included at least one (1) year of management and/or supervisory experience.
Substitution:
Additional professional experience in engineering project financial program administration and control may be substituted for the education on a year-for-year basis. A Bachelor’s degree is preferred.
Knowledge and Skills
Knowledge of :- Principles, practices and methods of engineering and construction project control and administration including budgeting and scheduling
- Principles and practices of cost estimating, cost accounting and financial analysis
- Applicable engineering and construction terminology and concepts
- Principles and practices of contract administration
- Methods and techniques of contract development
- Funding and regulatory policies and procedures of various agencies
- Modern office procedures, methods and equipment including comput er
- Current in Federal, State and local laws, codes and regulations.
Skill/ Ability in :- Planning, organizing, assigning, directing, reviewing and evaluating the work of assigned lower-level Staff
- Selecting, supervising, training and evaluating staff
- Developing engineering and construction project budgets and schedules
- Performing financial analysis and analyzing complex financial information
- Preparing, tracking and interpreting engineering and construction cost estimates, budgets, forecasts and schedules
- Preparing clear and concise reports
- Operating office equipment including computers and supporting word processing and spreadsheet Applications
- Communicating clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing
- Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with those contacted in the course of
Equal Employment Opportunity GroupBox1
The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District is an equal opportunity employer. Applicants shall not be discriminated against because of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, age (40 and above), religion, national origin (including language use restrictions), disability (mental and physical, including HIV and AIDS), ancestry, marital status, military status, veteran status, medical condition (cancer/genetic characteristics and information), or any protected category prohibited by local, state or federal laws.
The BART Human Resources Department will make reasonable efforts in the examination process to accommodate persons with disabilities or for religious reasons. Please advise the Human Resources Department of any special needs in advance of the examination by emailing at least 5 days before your examination date at employment@bart.gov .
Qualified veterans may be eligible to obtain additional veteran's credit in the selection process for this recruitment (effective Jan. 1, 2013). To obtain the credit, veterans must attach to the application a DD214 discharge document or proof of disability and complete/submit the Veteran's Preference Application no later than the closing date of the posting. For more information about this credit please go to the Veteran's Preference Policy and Application link at www.bart.gov/jobs .
The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) prides itself in offering best in class benefits packages to employees of the District. Currently, the following benefits may be available to employees in this job classification.
Highlights- Medical Coverage (or $350/month if opted out)
- Dental Coverage
- Vision Insurance (Basic and Enhanced Plans Available)
- Retirement Plan through the CA Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS)
- 2% @ 55 (Classic Members)
- 2% @ 62 (PEPRA Members)
- Reciprocity available for existing members of many other public retirement systems (see BART website and/or CalPERS website for details)
- Money Purchase Pension Plan (in-lieu of participating in Social Security tax)
- 6.65% employer contribution up to annual maximum of $1,868.65
- Deferred Compensation & Roth 457
- Sick Leave Accruals (12 days per year)
- Vacation Accruals (3-6 weeks based on time worked w/ the District)
- Holidays: 9 observed holidays and 4 floating holidays
- Life Insurance w/ ability to obtain additional coverage
- Accidental Death and Dismemberment (AD&D) Insurance
- Survivor Benefits through BART
- Short-Term Disability Insurance
- Long-Term Disability Insurance
- Flexible Spending Accounts: Health and Dependent Care
- Commuter Benefits
- Free BART Passes for BART employees and eligible family members.
Closing Date/Time: 4/27/2025 11:59 PM Pacific -
ABOUT THE COMPANY
-
-
BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
Show moreThe BART story began in 1946. It began not by governmental fiat, but as a concept gradually evolving at informal gatherings of business and civic leaders on both sides of the San Francisco Bay. Facing a heavy post-war migration to the area and its consequent automobile boom, these people discussed ways of easing the mounting congestion that was clogging the bridges spanning the Bay. In 1947, a joint Army-Navy review Board concluded that another connecting link between San Francisco and Oakland would be needed in the years ahead to prevent intolerable congestion on the Bay Bridge. The link? An underwater tube devoted exclusively to high-speed electric trains.
Since 1911, visionaries had periodically brought up this Jules Verne concept. But now, pressure for a traffic solution increased with the population. In 1951, the State Legislature created the 26-member San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission, comprised of representatives from each of the nine counties which touch the Bay. The Commission's charge was to study the Bay Area's long range transportation needs in the context of environmental problems and then recommend the best solution.
The Commission advised, in its final report in 1957, that any transportation plan must be coordinated with the area's total plan for future development. Since no development plan existed, the Commission prepared one itself. The result of their thoroughness is a master plan which did much to bring about coordinated planning in the Bay Area, and which was adopted a decade later by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).
The BART Concept is Born
The Commission's least-cost solution to traffic tie-ups was to recommend forming a five-county rapid transit district, whose mandate would be to build and operate a high-speed rapid rail network linking major commercial centers with suburban sub-centers.The Commission stated that, "If the Bay Area is to be preserved as a fine place to live and work, a regional rapid transit system is essential to prevent total dependence on automobiles and freeways."
Thus was born the environmental concept underlying BART. Acting on the Commission's recommendations, in 1957, the Legislature formed the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, comprising the five counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco and San Mateo. At this time, the District was granted a taxing power of five cents per $100 of assessed valuation. It also had authority to levy property taxes to support a general obligation bond issue, if approved by District voters. The State Legislature lowered the requirement for voter approval from 66 percent to 60 percent.
Between 1957 and 1962, engineering plans were developed for a system that would usher in a new era in rapid transit. Electric trains would run on grade-separated right-of-ways, reaching maximum speeds of 75-80 mph, averaging perhaps 45 mph, including station stops. Advanced transit cars, with sophisticated suspensions, braking and propulsion systems, and luxurious interiors, would be strong competition to "King Car " in the Bay Area. Stations would be pleasant, conveniently located, and striking architectural enhancements to their respective on-line communities.
BART employees in the 1970s.
Hundreds of meetings were held in the District communities to encourage local citizen participation in the development of routes and station locations. By midsummer, 1961, the final plan was submitted to the supervisors of the five District counties for approval. San Mateo County Supervisors were cool to the plan. Citing the high costs of a new system-plus adequate existing service from Southern Pacific commuter trains - they voted to withdraw their county from the District in December 1961.
With the District-wide tax base thus weakened by the withdrawal of San Mateo County, Marin County was forced to withdraw in early 1962 because its marginal tax base could not adequately absorb its share of BART's projected cost. Another important factor in Marin's withdrawal was an engineering controversy over the feasibility of carrying trains across the Golden Gate Bridge.
BART had started with a 16-member governing Board of Directors apportioned on county population size: four from Alameda and San Francisco Counties, three from Contra Costa and San Mateo, and two from Marin. When the District was reduced to three counties, the Board was reduced to 11 members: four from San Francisco and Alameda, and three from Contra Costa. Subsequently, in 1965, the District's enabling legislation was changed to apportion the BART Board with four Directors from each county, thus giving Contra Costa its fourth member on a 12-person Board. Two directors from each county, hence forth, were appointed by the County Board of Supervisors. The other two directors were appointed by committees of mayors of each county (with the exception of the City and County of San Francisco, whose sole mayor made these appointments).
The five-county plan was quickly revised to a three-county plan emphasizing rapid transit between San Francisco and the East Bay cities and suburbs of Contra Costa and Alameda counties. The new plan, elaborately detailed and presented as the "BART Composite Report, " was approved by supervisors of the three counties in July 1962, and placed on the ballot for the following November general election.
The plan required approval of 60 percent of the District's voters. It narrowly passed with a 61.2 percent vote District-wide, much to the surprise of many political experts who were confident it would fail. Indeed, one influential executive was reported to have said: "If I'd known the damn thing would have passed, I'd never have supported it. "
The voters approved a $792 million bond issue to finance a 71.5 mile high-speed transit system, consisting of 33 stations serving 17 communities in the three counties. The proposal also included another needed transit project: rebuilding 3.5 miles of the San Francisco Municipal Railway. The new line would link muni streetcar lines directly with BART and Market Street stations, and four new Muni stations would be built.
The additional cost of the transbay tube -- estimated at $133 million -- was to come from bonds issued by the California Toll Bridge Authority and secured by future Bay Area Bridge revenues. The additional cost of rolling stock, estimated at $71 million, was to be funded primarily from bonds issued against future operating revenues. Thus, the total cost of the system, as of 1962, was projected at $996 million. It would be the largest single public works project ever undertaken in the U.S. by the local citizenry.
After the election, engineers immediately started work on the final system designs, only to be halted by a taxpayer's suit filed against the District a month later. The validity of the bond election, and the legality of the District itself, were challenged. While the court ruled in favor of the District on both counts, six months of litigation cost $12 million in construction delays. This would be the first of many delays from litigation and time-consuming negotiations involving 166 separate agreements reached with on-line cities, counties, and other special districts. The democratic processes of building a new transit system would prove to be major cost factors that, however necessary, were not foreseen.
-