PROJECT MANAGEMENT CONTROL SYSTEM (PMCS) AT SLAC Jeff Chan, SLAC April 24, 2002 PMCS Approach - Past and Current Projects - System Requirements (External) - PEP-II MSR Results (PMCS Certification) PMCS Baseline Development PMCS Data Flow Model Execution and Control Lessons Learned LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Approach (Methodology) The PMCS System and methodology is modeled after the B-Factory PMCS Utilize personnel experienced with the B-Factory PMCS system for both implementation and execution. More importantly several of the key system managers (and Project Management) have direct experience with the system LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Approach (Projects and Requirements) Past and Current Projects B-FACTORY Project (PEP-II and BaBar) SPEAR 3 Project GLAST-LAT Project SYSTEM Requirements D.O.E. Order 413.3 “Program and Project Management” (formerly D.O.E Order 4700) EIA-748 “Earned Value Management Systems” (formerly C/SCSC) LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Approach (MSR) PEP-II Management Systems Review “The PMCS is currently under development and has made excellent progress to date” “ The CPM based schedule is the core of the PMCS and will satisfy or exceed the requirements of the D.O.E. notice 4700.5” The review team gained a high level of confidence in the PMCS staff who demonstrated a thorough knowledge of project controls as well as their practical application” The current staff has been exemplary in setting up the WBS schedules in the PMCS…The decision to buy the software instead of developing it was a sound one” LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Approach (MSR) Noteworthy Practice “ The critical path method based schedule is the core of the PMCS. Time phased budget development and earned value oriented updates are performed on the schedule (Primavera Project Planner) and electronically transferred to the cost processor (Cobra). This type of schedule focus is rare if not unprecedented within the D.O.E complex and is worthy of commendation.” LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Approach (D.O.E Award) SLAC WINS D.O.E. AWARD for PROJECT MANAGEMENT “ On Oct. 17 the Department of Energy honored the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center with a year 2000 award for the program and project management. The award acknowledged the on-time, on-budget completion of the $293M B-Factory Project. The Project comprised of two major construction efforts: a two ring accelerator complex built by a collaboration of SLAC, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and a 1,200-ton particle detector built by a consortium of nine nations. . . “ LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Baseline Development Schedule (Plan for the Plan) Baseline Development Step 1 Detailed Schedule Development Step 2 Schedule Integration Step 3 Establish the Performance Measurement Baseline Step 4 Funding Reconciliation Step 5 Integrate the Cost and Schedule Baseline LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Baseline Development (Plan for the Plan) LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Baseline Development STEP 1 – Detailed Schedule Development 100% of scope covered Simplest approach is to schedule the WBS Logic-driven schedule networks Consistent use of calendars, units and resources for reliable calculations Identify interfaces (Needs and Avails) with other systems Proper activity coding for reporting and summarization LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Baseline Development STEP 2 – Schedule Integration Radiator Design Tracker 4.1.4 Calorimeter 4.1.5 ACD 4.1.6 Project Complete Inst Integ & Test 4.1.9 6 Months AVAIL Test Fab Mechanical Systems 4.1.8.1 Mechanical Systems 4.1.8.2 Grid Procurement Fabrication Electronics 4.1.7 Science Analysis Software 4.1.D IOC 4.1.B NEED LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Baseline Development STEP 3 – Establishing the PMB Develop the work packages Cost load the schedule to establish the budget and obligation profiles Identify performance measurement techniques STEP 4 – Funding Reconciliation Typically, the ‘bottoms-up’ plan yields a different funding requirement than what has already been established from the ‘Top-down’, requiring schedule iterations Identify and correct funding issues at lowest level of detail plan fit within the existing funding constraints LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Baseline Development STEP 5 – Integrate Cost/Schedule Baseline LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Integrated Cost/Schedule Database PMCS Data Flow Model Accounting Systems Cost Estimate wInsight Perf Analyzer Reports for Mgmt/DOE Cobra PMB Baseline Primavera Integrated Project Schedule (IPS) Integrated Cost/Schedule Database Status Worksheets CCB Actions LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Integrated Cost/Schedule Database PMCS Data Flow Model 4. Actual cost and commitments are collected, via code of accounts, at the 5th or 6th level of the WBS 1. The cost estimating information was transferred to Primavera for initial budget & obligation time-phasing Accounting Systems Cost Estimate 5. Accounting files are transferred electronically to the PMCS group and imported into Cobra wInsight Perf Analyzer Reports for Mgmt/DOE Cobra PMB Baseline 2. Progress information is gathered from the system managers and input into the scheduling system for baseline variance and critical path analysis Primavera Integrated Project Schedule (IPS) 6. Technical/Cost/Schedule Baseline changes are controlled and documented through the change control process 3. Progress information is transferred from the scheduling system into the cost processor for Earned Value calculations Integrated Cost/Schedule Database Status Worksheets CCB Actions LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control Monthly Reporting Contents Cost Drill Down Approach Top Level SPA Chart Cost Report – WBS Level 2 (C/SSR) System Level Cost Report – WBS Level 3 Work Package Detail Cost Report Detailed Accounting Report Schedule Drill Down Approach Top Level Cost Report – WBS Level 2 Detailed Schedule Report Traditional Schedule Analysis Critical Path, Detailed Baseline Schedule Variance Comparison, Milestone Chart LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (SPA Chart) Status thru Apr ‘00 Earned Value Schedule variance is beginning to exhibit a general behind schedule condition (approx. 2 mos.) resulting largely from a deliberate slowdown due to the new funding schedule Cost variance is slightly positive LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control ( Top Level Cost Report) Cost Variance Identified LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (System Level Cost Report) Major contributor found LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Work Package Detail Cost Rpt) Work Package determined LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Detailed Accounting Report) Detail Accounting Info LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Detailed Accounting Report) Source of cost LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Top Level Cost Report) Schedule Variance Identified LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (System Level Cost Report) Major contributors found LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Work Package Detail Cost Rpt) Work Packages determined LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Detailed Schedule Report) Current schedule late compared to baseline target schedule LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Milestone Chart) Nine of twenty-two DOE milestones have been achieved All of the milestones scheduled to complete by June have been met LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Critical Path) LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (Performance Analysis) LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

Execution and Control (CCB) CCB Process Prepare project scope change request form (tech description, cost evaluation and schedule impact) Approve and incorporate changes to the baseline Document the change – CCB Log Example LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC

PMCS Summary (Lessons Learned) Cost Effective Factors PMCS team members skilled in both cost and schedule “no duplication of duties” as in traditional organizations. Detailed analysis of current and future PMCS requirements Software selection based upon successful experiences “NO FALSE STARTS” Implementation Success Due to “No Tolerance” approach by top management Technical team willing to take ownership of schedule and cost Discipline approach by PMCS team Development of formal needs analysis and adoption of formal methodologies by management team LCLS DOE Review, April 24, 2002 Jeff Chan, SLAC