1 / 33

HFPO Initial Outfitting & Transition Study

HFPO Initial Outfitting & Transition Study. IPR. VW International, Inc. Agenda. Background & Scope Approach to Study Conceptual Definitions – Past Lessons Results… Questions. Background.

hosea
Télécharger la présentation

HFPO Initial Outfitting & Transition Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. HFPO Initial Outfitting & Transition Study IPR VW International, Inc

  2. Agenda Background & Scope Approach to Study Conceptual Definitions – Past Lessons Results… Questions

  3. Background Mod performed to the HFPO Guide (wiki) update process with the idea to incorporate the results/processes into the Guide. The scope is to evaluate, determine, and recommend the optimal way for HFPA Construction Management Division (CMD) to support the initial outfitting/facility provisioning and transition of operations for all projects within HFPA’s construction program.

  4. Scope Specifics • Specific requirement was to provide recommendations regarding: • Programming of funds and resources • Staffing / Organization of CMD, Project Offices, and local MTF’s transition committees • Development of IO&T budget requirements, management of funds, and execution tracking • Transition , IO planning, consulting support & execution management • IO procurement and management • Development of policies, procedures, checklists and other items to document the plan • Other functions and actions required to provision and transition operations into the new facility.

  5. Medical Construction Program Ft Drum (1) FY07 $9.7M Germany (1) $13.0M Ft Richardson (1) FY07 $37.2M ($17.2M MCA) Ft Detrick (2) FY06 $54.2M Ft Wainwright (1) $215.0M Germany (3) FY12-13 $65.2M Ft Lewis (1) FY13 $8.0M Ft Detrick (2) FY07-13 $735.0M Ft Leonard Wood (1) FY09 $20.0M Aberdeen (2) FY09-13 $381.0.0M Korea (2) $62.0M Ft Carson (1) FY13 $3.1M Pike’s Peak (1) FY12 $4.2M Ft Irwin (1) FY07 $6.0M Korea (1) FY13 $11.8M Italy (1) FY07 $52.0M ($29.5M MCA) White Sands (1) FY13 $8.0M Ft Riley (1) FY13 $20.0M Ft Bragg (1) $4.3M FY Camp Zama (1) FY13 $6.7M Tripler (1) FY13 $35.0M 07 Ft Stewart (1) FY13 $4.0M Legend 08 Medical MILCON In Construction 09 Camp Bullis (1) FY08 $7.4M Ft Hood (2) $16.5M Ft Benning (1) $7.1M Total Projects: 10 Total PA: $372.1M 10 11 Ft Hood (1) FY07 $18.0M Ft Sam Houston (1) FY09 $11.0M Ft Benning (2) FY12-13 $153.0M Medical MILCON Program FY 07-13 12 Total Projects: 26 Total PA: $1,596.3M / $46.7 MCA 13 NOTE: From TMA FY08-13 POM Submission

  6. Purpose Summary Study and recommend best approach for HFPA to support the Initial Outfitting and Transition of the incoming Construction workload

  7. Approach • Analyze available historical data for resourcing patterns • Create model to determine tasks • Extrapolate scale given input parameters: $, location, FY, type, quantities • Research task suitability for contracting • Consolidation by location, type of activity, design-build options • Estimate alternatives • Identify risks due to capacity issues

  8. Key Analysis Challenges • Determine the distribution of total requirements as defined by the anticipated construction program • Determine funding model using construction program as input parameter (pie-sizer) • Create a Task Allocation model (pie- slicer) • Propose a model of task consolidation based upon timing and location

  9. Task Allocation Model (create a pie-slicer) • Utilizing data from BAMC and Basset AHC • Analyze and catalogue expenditures into task groupings. • Determine allocation of funds expended by Task Category • Arrive at a model as to how to slice the IO&T resource pie into Task Slices, which could then be addressed as requirements

  10. So As an Approach… • Analyze prospective from three aspects: time (FY), location, and scale. • Determine size of each project’s pie. • Group the pies (by location & time). • Slice each pie into tasks. • Group the task “slices” into new “requirements pies”.

  11. Initial Analysis & Concepts A look back to Brooke Army Medical Center (as detailed data source) Conceptual definitions

  12. Transition Funds MILCON - Procuring a Power Projection Platform

  13. Definitions(Concepts not Programs) • Investment • Supports all costs required to move the “steady state” of the facility from the current level to the newly proposed level of the project. Currently MEDCOM and HFPA IO& transition budgets pay some of these costs. • Transition • Supports all costs that are temporal in nature, and that do not result in a change of the “steady state.” Currently MEDCOM and HFPA transition budgets pay for more than this category. • Operations • Supports annually recurring costs required to sustain the new “steady state.” Currently MEDCOM and HFPA transition budgets pay some of these costs.

  14. Investment -> Change to the Steady State

  15. Project Task Categories • Certification & Commissioning • Dual Operations • Phasing • Planning • Post-BOD Initiatives • Preparation • Project Management • Promotion • Provisioning • Military Construction / Renewal • Moving • Operations/Sustainment • Training • Reclamation

  16. Task Categories • Certification & Commissioning • Testing building systems, safety inspections-assessments. • Construction/Renewal • The actual project appropriation, i.e MILCON, BRAC, or Renewal. • Dual Operations • Operating two physical plants during occupation phase from BOD through FOD. • Phasing • Operating costs incurred due to phasing through the project period (temp buildings, moving of functions temporarily, etc.) • Planning • Actions not directly related to project management but which are generated by the project existence (i.e. backfill plans for old facility). • Post-BOD Initiatives • Initiatives not part of the original scope but identified to make the facility meet user operational desires/needs (may be ECPs).

  17. Task Categories (continued) • Preparation • Making the facility ready for occupation but excluding provisioning tasks. ie. pest control, initial pre-cleaning, IBS floor sealing. • Project Management • Management tasks required to support construction and all other tasks required to move in and operate it (excludes RE and tasks that would be considered normal medical operational management ie. strategic planning) • Promotion • Any promotional actions: dedication ceremony, tours, advertising/marketing materials. Does not include staff training support materials. • Provisioning • The bulk of the project support costs. Procurement costs to equip, and install those new items. If part of a central contract, some project management costs may be here.

  18. Task Categories (continued) • Moving • The task of physically moving from the old to the new, may become blurred with phasing costs in a total renovation project. • Operations/Sustainment • Tasks and costs associated with operating the plant, may be higher or lower than current dependent upon adaptation of business practice to new facility. • Training • Staff training actions, i.e. orientations, systems hands-on training, TDY • Reclamation • Getting out of the old facility prior to release to post. e.g. disposal of old equipment, cleaning, potentially environmental clean-up.

  19. Expense Mix for BAMC • BAMC Costs - last year of project, partial data. • Minimal Operational cost information. • Transition Cost managed by HFPA • Investment costs - mixed management, includes MILCON • Approximately $297M in addition to MILCON

  20. WAMC Costs by Program 92-00 Total: $454,907,502 Programs consist of: Investment, Transition & Operational costs.

  21. WAMC Costs by Program, (details) Programs consist of: Investment, Transition & Operational costs.

  22. Predictive Model as percent of PA(Based upon WAMC estimate) Applied to some projects : • 121 Hospital Korea, PA: $7.1M • Transition $0.738M • Investment $4.217M • Operational $0.866M • Beach Education Center, PA:$24M • Transition $ 2.496M • Investment $14.256M • Operational $ 2.928M • Ft Wainwright Hospital, PA:$117M • Transition $12.198M • Investment $69.498M • Operational $14.274M 4.4% PM 6.0% Transition 12.2% Operational 9.2% Investment 17.7% IM Investment 32.5% MEDCASE

  23. WAMC Costs by Project Task Excludes construction costs, except Cat E ($18M), percents of task costs not total project cost.

  24. Prospective Look at Bassett ACH 1997 look

  25. Initial Outfitting Execution

  26. Current Process / Execution Environment (Simplified)

  27. Future Execution Options (Prototypical)

  28. Contractor Turn-Key Support (Features)

  29. Contract Support Center of Excellence (Features)

  30. HFPA IO Team (Features)

  31. Regional IO Support Template Western Region Eastern Region NOTE: Location sites ( ) from TMA FY08-13 POM Submission

  32. Prototype Decision Matrix (One of Many) 1 – Creates a Challenging Management Efficiency 2 – Is an Acceptable Management Efficiency 3 – Creates an Improved Management Efficiency

  33. Questions?

More Related