Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to the newest version of your browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of Construction News, please enable cookies in your browser.

Welcome to the Construction News site. As we have relaunched, you will have to sign in once now and agree for us to use cookies, so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Network Rail's contractor league table revealed

Story Contracting was the best performing of all Network Rail’s construction contractors across 2017/18, Construction News can reveal.

The Carlisle-based contractor scored the highest average PRISM score across Network Rail’s 15 reporting periods up until the end of 24 February 2018 (see table below).

The PRISM score is a measure used by Network Rail to monitor the delivery performance of its contractors.

Companies are scored between one and five on a number of different performance criteria, including delivery on time, engineering assurance, health and safety, contract administration and behaviour. 

Network Rail scores companies every four weeks of their contracts.

In data obtained by CN through a freedom of information request, Story Contracting came out as the top-performing railway contractor having scored an average PRISM score of 4.91 across the 15 periods.

SSE Contracting, the energy giant’s M&E arm, came in second with a score of 4.68 over the year, with St Albans-based rail specialist Giffen Group third after scoring 4.67.

Of the UK’s 30 biggest contractors by turnover, Skanska was the highest performing with a score of 4.57, followed by Bam Nuttall on 4.48 and Balfour Beatty Civil Engineering with 4.34.

The PRISM score was brought in by Network Rail in 2011 so it could better monitor the performance of companies working in its supply chain.

Only Network Rail’s principal contractors receive PRISM scores. Firms must be working on a contract that is three months or longer and has a value greater than £50,000.

Network Rail’s contractors are assessed every four weeks during project update meetings with the client. The review goes both ways, with contractors also scoring Network Rail on its performance.

The lowest-performing contractor across Network Rail’s principal contractors was Morgan Sindall, which scored an average of 2.47 across the period.

Carillion scored an average of 4.15 before it collapsed, while the company which has now taken on the majority of Carillion’s rail contracts, Amey, scored 4.31.

Network Rail contractor PRISM scores to 24 Feb 2018

CompanyAverage PRISM score
Story Contracting  4.91
SSE Contracting 4.68
Giffen Group  4.67
QTS Group 4.61
Skanska  4.57
Taziker Industrial 4.53
Construction Marine 4.52
Lundy Project 4.52
Bam Nuttall 4.48
Geoffrey Osborne  4.42
Global Rail Construction 4.39
Balfour Beatty Civil Engineering 4.34
Balfour Beatty Rail 4.32
Amey UK 4.31
VolkerFitzpatrick 4.24
Keltbray Rail 4.16
Carillion 4.15
McNicholas construction 4.15
Amey / Inabensa JV 4.14
Costain Group 4.13
Hochtief  4.08
Kent PHK 4.06
Kelly ITS 4
C Spencer 3.99
Spence  3.93
Amalgamated Construction 3.91
Kier Group 3.91
Aspin Foundation 3.89
ABC 3.88
Murphy  3.84
Dyer & Butler  3.8
Alun Griffiths 3.78
BCM Construction 3.74
Signalling Solutions (Balfour / Alstom) 3.72
Babcock Rail 3.66
HVMS 3.66
Cairn Cross Civil Eng 3.61
Galliford Try 3.6
Colas Rail Morgan Sindall JV 3.51
John Graham Holdings 3.29
Buckingham Group 3.28
VolkerRail  3
Colas Rail 2.89
Bailey Rail 2.86
Morgan Sindall  2.47

Readers' comments (2)

  • It is a shame to see this published in this way. The article fails to mention that every time a PRISM score is filled in by NR for a Contractor that Contractor also fills in a score for NR. You can easily see those who are "playing the game" with NR and scoring high marks for both teams and those who are using the PRISM system to give true and accurate scores so that improvements can be made.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The article also fails to mention that for the CP5 frameworks in the IP Central region, PRISM scoring is not implemented and has been superseded by a series of Framework KPIs. Some of the contractors on the article's list have the majority of their turnover in this region and score very well on the KPIs but have not figures to contribute to the list for PRISM, this leads to an inaccurate picture of their performance

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.