Management subcommittee closeout Jay Marx (chair, LBNL), Joel Butler (Fermilab), Stan Wojcicki (Stanford) Thanks to all for cooperation and openness!!

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Collaborative Planning as an Effective Tool for Program Management and Sustainability … beyond UASI funding … Sandra Davis Sandra Davis Denise Barrett.
Advertisements

WMO WIGOS Implementation & (WIP) RA I Sub-Regional Workshops for WIGOS and WIS for West / North Africa Nov 2013 Dr I. Zahumensky, WIGOS-PO.
RESPONSE TO THE THEMATIC EVALUATION: INCREASING WOMEN’S LEADERSHIP AND PARTICIPATION IN PEACE AND SECURITY AND IN HUMANITARIAN RESPONSE Saraswathi Menon,
NSF Experience with Management of Research Infrastructure
Northwest Rail Update Nadine Lee, Northwest Rail Project Manager Regional Transportation District March 21, 2012.
INITIATING THE PLANNING PROCESS. CONTENT Outputs from this stage Stage general description Obtaining government commitment Raising awareness Establishing.
Delivery Business Solutions April 29, Nashville PMI Symposium April 29, 2013 Stephanie Dedmon, PMP Director, Business Solutions Delivery Department.
DOE Neutrino Program Plans
Supporting people with a learning disability Introduction to Project Management Presenter: Steve Raw FInstLM, FCMI.
1 WRF Development Test Center A NOAA Perspective WRF ExOB Meeting U.S. Naval Observatory, Washington, D.C. 28 April 2006 Fred Toepfer NOAA Environmental.
February 2002 Scope and Contingency; Transition to the Research Phase William J. Willis Columbia University.
By Saurabh Sardesai October 2014.
Managing Risk to Reduce Construction Claims (And Improve Project Success) Presented by Laurie Dennis, PE, CVS-Life, FSAVE.
Student Assessment Inventory for School Districts Inventory Planning Training.
Adapting to Climate Change: Canada’s Experience and Approach Elizabeth Atkinson Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation Directorate Natural Resources Canada.
State of Kansas Statewide Financial Management System Pre-Implementation Project Steering Committee Meeting January 11, 2008.
1 Interdisciplinary Collaboration for Elder Care.
Challenges Faced in Developing Audit Plans and Programs 21 st March, 2013.
Webinar: Leadership Teams October 2013: Idaho RTI.
DON MARIANOS, DDS, MPH ORAL HEALTH 2014 INITIATIVE WEBINAR MAY 11, 2012 Prevention & Dental Public Health (DPH) Infrastructure: A State Oral Health Program.
Inter-sectoral coordination and social mobilization IDSP training module for state and district surveillance officers Module 12.
CROSS-CUTTING PAPER FOR DISCUSSION AT MDBS ANNUAL REVIEW MAY 17, PRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC SECTOR REFORM (PSR) SECTOR GROUP PUBLIC SECTOR MANAGEMENT.
HEPAP and P5 Report DIET Federation Roundtable JSPS, Washington, DC; April 29, 2015 Andrew J. Lankford HEPAP Chair University of California, Irvine.
Date Coordinator Name(s) Other Leadership Name(s) ABC Coalition Clean Cities Re-designation.
1 1 BRANCH: CORPORATE AFFAIRS 1. CORPORATE MANAGEMENT SERVICES To provide financial and strategic support services that enhance service delivery by the.
Developing a result-oriented Operational Plan Training
Information Assurance The Coordinated Approach To Improving Enterprise Data Quality.
Monitoring :Thailand’s Experiences Session 2: Monitoring: Processes, Potentials, Tools and Instruments Global Dialogue of Agencies and Ministries for International.
Getting Started Conservation Coaches Network New Coach Training.
INITIATING THE PLANNING PROCESS. CONTENT Outputs from this stage Stage general description Obtaining government commitment Raising awareness Establishing.
Human Services Integration Building More Effective Responses to Peoples’ Needs.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 3. Cost Estimate Gines, Fisher 2.Are the estimated cost and proposed schedule ranges realistic, consistent with the technical and budgetary.
AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 5 May 2005 AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting 5 May 2005 Useful Links: RSVP Project : C-AD.
June 4,  Why are we spending time discussing elements of effective group work ?  Effective and collaborative group work requires an intentional.
A Yearly Plan Will State members goals State participation expectations Outline individual responsibilites Provide a schedule.
Building our Future: Programme Board TOR PURPOSE To be the governing forum for the design & effective delivery of the Building our Future Programme To.
American Chemical Society ACS and You Leading the Way to a Sustainable Future Dr. E. Ann Nalley, Cameron University & Dr. S.K. Airee, University of Tennessee.
John Peoples for the DES Collaboration BIRP Review August 12, 2004 Tucson1 DES Management  Survey Organization  Survey Deliverables  Proposed funding.
Partnership Analysis & Enhancement Tool Kit Cindy S. Soloe Research Triangle Institute (RTI) April Y. Vance Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Norman McCubbin1 Report from the Collaboration MICE Project Board (CMPB) Norman McCubbin Director, Particle Physics Department MICE/UKNF Oversight Committee.
24-Aug-11 ILCSC -Mumbai Global Design Effort 1 ILC: Future after 2012 preserving GDE assets post-TDR pre-construction program.
Fermilab Presentation Greg Bock, Pepin Carolan, Mike Lindgren, Elaine McCluskey 2014 SC PM Workshop July 2014.
Draft. NAWMP Progress Assessment You did what with our $3 billion?
The Implementation of BPR Pertemuan 9 Matakuliah: M0734-Business Process Reenginering Tahun: 2010.
Charnwood Together AGM 1 4th September 2015 Chris Traill Strategic Director Neighbourhoods & Community Wellbeing.
Muon Collider R&D Co-ordination MCTF. INTRODUCTION 2 2 Steve Geer MUTAC REVIEW April 2007 BNL Steve Holmes, March 13 th, 2007: “ … MCOG ask the NFMCC.
OFFICE OF SCIENCE 1 Closeout Report on the DOE/SC CD-3b Review of the Utilities Upgrade Project (UUP) Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory August 11-12,
InterAction Collaboration Peer Review at TRIUMF Laboratory Subcommittee on Organization Structure, Management and Resources Neil Calder, ITER Roberta Antolini,
US Army Corps of Engineers PLANNING SMART BUILDING STRONG ® SMART PLANNING TO SUPPORT FLOOD RISK MANAGEMENT USACE Flood Risk Management and Silver Jackets.
Management February 20, Annual Review of the Muon Accelerator Program (MAP) Subcommittee members: Ron Prwivo, Ron Lutha, and Jim Kerby.
AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 6 Jan 2005 AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting 6 Jan 2005 Useful Links: RSVP Project : C-AD.
Common Core Parenting: Best Practice Strategies to Support Student Success Core Components: Successful Models Patty Bunker National Director Parenting.
Dan Austin 2004 COLLABORATIVE PROJECT PLANNING : Leveraging the Collective Wisdom of the Team Small problems are easy to fix, hard to detect. If you let.
Preparation Plan. Objectives Describe the role and importance of a preparation plan. Describe the key contents of a preparation plan. Identify and discuss.
SO – What is CRM ? Stakeholder consensus decision-making process. Stakeholders are any interest with a stake in the consequences of the decision. The.
CGSIC International Subcommittee Prague, Czech Republic March 14, 2005 Michael E. Shaw Director, Navigation and Spectrum Policy U.S. Department of Transportation.
PRE-PLANNING FOR CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS. OVERVIEW ASSESSING OWNER CAPABILITIES ANALYSIS OF RESOURCES REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEWING.
Eric Prebys, Fermilab Program Director, LARP July 10, 2012.
BIMILACI 2007 Partners for Quality Infrastructure: The FIDIC Vision Washington, May 10, 2007 Dr. Jorge Díaz Padilla FIDIC President.
European Social Fund Promoting improvement 15 th March 2016 Nigel Finch.
1 AGS RSVP Review 4-5 November 2004 Management Issues Philip Pile Collider-Accelerator Department 4 Feb 2004.
AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting P. Pile 10 Mar 2005 AGS RSVP Weekly Meeting 10 Mar 2005 Useful Links: RSVP Project : C-AD.
Shared Services Initiative Summary of Findings and Next Steps.
LSST CORPORATION Patricia Eliason LSSTC Executive Officer Belgrade, Serbia 2016.
An Industry Perspective Nicole Denjoy COCIR Secretary General
KEEPING A DEVELOPMENT FOCUS: THE CHALLENGES IN ENSURING POLICY COHERENCE FOR DEVELOPMENT: A UGANDA’S PERSPECTIVE Presented by: Pius Bigirimana, Permanent.
PROJECT OPTIMIZATION DTAR DIGITAL SOLUTION
A Yearly Plan Will State members goals
Preliminary Project Execution Plan
Presentation transcript:

Management subcommittee closeout Jay Marx (chair, LBNL), Joel Butler (Fermilab), Stan Wojcicki (Stanford) Thanks to all for cooperation and openness!!

Management aspects RSVP is embedded in an unusual management situation:  An NSF project at DOE laboratory using a DOE accelerator facility  Shared agency responsibility for funding the accelerator facility  Brookhaven is “host” laboratory but is not a sponsor of project  DOE is not a direct sponsor of the project  The RSVP project itself is very complex with project offices at Columbia and BNL and 4 almost “stand-alone” subprojects to be integrated into a unified project

After much negotiation a unique and complicated management structure has been developed to address this situation. The management structure is an “experiment” and should be given adequate time to see if it works. If not, changes should be made.

RSVP success requires coherent and cooperative management and communications at many levels involving  The project team  The host lab (BNL)  The collaborations  The agencies (NSF and DOE)  The foreign partners  Scientific success is the overriding consideration, not just a successful project Key challenge is integration into single project targeted to do the physics

The project team—  Project Director and Deputy bring important experience with large, complex projects  Transition from semi-autonomous experiments to centrally managed single project is crucial and by no means complete  Real structural changes must occur—e.g. KOPIO and MECO project managers fully accountable to central project office A sociological challenge for integration to succeed:  Project leadership must be actively engaged in building confidence of all key participants; especially leaders of collaborations.  Will require lots of goodwill, effort and open communication between all levels of project’s management and collaborations  A key element for success is open and frequent communication between the central management team, the collaboration spokespersons and the laboratory management.  Such meetings begin ASAP; occur at least monthly if not more frequently.

Brookhaven BNL management seems engaged and committed to success of RSVP  Director and AD for HENP working to find ways to enhance likelihood of success AGS management is actively engaged in providing for needs of RSVP BNL management must continue to be engaged and committed to success over life of RSVP

Agencies  Effective and continuing coordination is critical  NSF must plan for realistic levels of support during and beyond construction-  Increased and timely support for researchers for RSVP so collaborations can reach critical mass;  Operating cost exposures (more costly operations, longer operations, more costly D&D, etc). DOE should  Assure success of AGS project activities.  Provide adequate support for BNL scientific involvement in RSVP (host lab collaborators bring great value to an experiment)

Collaborations — challenge to adapt to integrated centrally managed project and less autonomy  This is a time of real risk until RSVP gets formal OK; real concerns & anxiety  Wary about centralized management.  Concern whether all players are committed to the physics goals and not just a successful “project”  Must approach change with good will, effort and open communications Foreign partners —Important to success and poised to contribute  RSVP and agencies must activate International Finance Committee and other steps to enable foreign collaborators to obtain support.

Management costs:  About $20M including 11% contingency  Support right size staff at Columbia and BNL project offices  Contingency too low, should be about 20% Overall Contingency  Management subcommittee fully supports 45% overall contingency.  Less is incommensurate with success.

Overall cost concerns ~2.8% inflation assumed throughout project is too low. – 4-5% more appropriate for labor part of estimate  Little or no schedule float is a significant cost risk  No contingency in estimate of operating costs.  Many unknowns (e.g. length of operations to do physics; DOE support of AGS ops; real cost of electricity after 2010, etc.).  Significant cost exposure for NSF.  D&D estimate for work in far future very uncertain (e.g environmental laws get stricter).  At least 100% contingency suggested.

Recommendations NSF-- immediately set up frequent stakeholders meetings to assure that all elements of RSVP are integrated, well coordinated and vectored towards success. Communications between the central management, the sub-project management, the collaboration spokespersons and the Brookhaven management should be significantly increased RSVP- develop a single integrated management plan

Recommendations NSF & RSVP-- address overall costing issues RSVP- complete MOUs asap Enable foreign participation to move forward NSF & DOE- put in place interagency agreement to facilitate funding flow to BNL NSF & RSVP- define performance goals for completion of AGS part of project as part of project plan NSF, BNL RSVP agree on AGS beam delivery goals vs. time during operations phase