水利工程质量监督全过程全方位定量评价模型构建

为促进我国水利工程质量监督管理工作运行的高效化,确保工程监督的有效性和权威性,基于AHP （analytic hierarchy process）原理,针对水利部督查小组的现场检查情况,依据水利部下达的相关文件,结合负分制和一票否决制,将定性问题定量化,构建一套涉及水利工程建设、运行、管理全过程全方位的质量监督管理评价模型,共包含7层2 112个指标。在综合试错的基础上,计算得出不同层级和不同指标的权重,然后选用该模型分析评价2020年7个省份受督查水利工程项目的质量管理与安全生产管理监督数据,间接说明模型的实用性和易操作性。评价结果表明：7个省份均在合格以上,整体质量管理情况较好,但得分差异显著,其中最高得分90.6、最低得分65.6,相差25分;不同类型管理评价结果显示,安全生产管理得分普遍高于质量管理得分;各参建单位评价结果显示,建设单位和勘察设计单位的情况最优、评分基本达到满分,而质量检测单位和施工单位得分最低、需重点加强相关监管。评价结果为水利工程监督管理工作提供了科学的数据支撑,构建的评价模型也为水利工程质量监督定量化提供了易实操的普适性工具。

Construction of the comprehensive quantitative evaluation model of all-round process for quality supervision of hydraulic engineering project

To implement the quality management and supervision (QMS) of hydraulic engineering projects, the Ministry of Water Resources of the People''s Republic of China has formulated and issued the Measures of Supervision and Inspection of Hydraulic Engineering Quality and Work Safety , the Measures of Supervision and Inspection of Operations and Management of Hydraulic Engineering and the Measures of Supervision and Inspection of Hydraulic Engineering Contacts ("Three Measures" for short) for the supervision and inspection. The supervision and inspection work based on the "Three Measures" involves the QMS of the stakeholders and the hydraulic engineering projects. However, the related evaluation based on the "Three Measures" is qualitative, not quantitative. Thus, the QMS of hydraulic engineering projects needs to be improved, and a quantitative evaluation system is needed to compare different departments involved in the same project, different projects, and different provinces. Analytic hierarchy process (AHP for short) was selected for designing the evaluation system. The qualitative indicators in the "Three Measures" was taken as the quantitative indicators of the evaluation system. The evaluation indicator system was designed as seven layers, including 2,112 indicators which is in accordance with the "Three Measures". The indicators score system was designed combining the methods of the point-deduction system and the one-vote veto system. To improve the accuracy and reliability of the evaluation system, the weights of the indicator evaluation system was designed, compared, and selected. The importance of elements was divided into "normal", "important" and "critical", and the corresponding weight of the indicator of the evaluation system was set to one, three, and nine, respectively. The quantitative indicator evaluation system of QMS was established through the comprehensive index method using the selected weights and indicators score system. Additionally, this evaluation system of QMS has a flexible structure and can be spliced and deleted according to management requirements and the critical parts of supervision. The indicator evaluation system of "quality management" and "work safety management" were selected and established, and different hydraulic engineering projects were applied in seven provinces in China. These seven provinces were named A1 to A7 respectively. Two aspects of different stakeholders QMS in the projects and different projects QMS in different provinces were also evaluated. The quality management evaluation results of different stakeholders indicate that the level of the construction department is the highest, and the quality examination department and the building department are both at the lowest level. The evaluation results of work safety management in each stakeholder indicate that the construction department and the survey and design department are at the highest level, and the building department and the supervision department are at the lowest level. The evaluation scores of quality management in each province indicate that A2 and A7 are in the highest and lowest levels of quality management, respectively. The evaluation scores of work safety management in each province indicate that A6 and A5 were at the highest and lowest levels of work safety management, respectively. The comprehensive evaluation scores of quality management and work safety management in each province showed a tiered distribution, of which, 28.6% of the provinces were "excellent", 42.9% "good", and 28.6% "qualified", and no "unqualified" appeared.The average evaluation scores of work safety management were generally higher than those of quality management in provinces. The comprehensive scores indicated that the provinces were all above "qualified" and showed a three-tiered distribution. The scores had a large difference among these provinces. The quality and work safety management comprehensive analysis showed that the building departments were the most problematic in all provinces. The references can be provided to the hydraulic engineering projects QMS.