1 / 8

Enhancing Planning and Metrics for Logistics, Infrastructure, and Research Projects in Antarctica

Discover how improvements in planning processes and success metrics benefit scientific endeavors in Antarctica by linking logistics, infrastructure, and research proposals. Learn about the Central Transantarctic Mountains Camp and the IceCube neutrino detector project supported by optimization efforts. Explore planning and process improvements, current metrics, and proposed assistance strategies to define project success criteria and enhance contractor support feedback.

regis
Télécharger la présentation

Enhancing Planning and Metrics for Logistics, Infrastructure, and Research Projects in Antarctica

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. Linking logistics, infrastructure, and research proposals: improving the planning process and the metrics for success OPP Office Advisory Committee May 18, 2011

  2. Central Transantarctic Mountains (CTAM) Camp • Supported 17 projects and more than 100 scientists • Constructed in only 28 days; benefit of the Field Camp Standardization Plan • Open for science 3 December – 26 January

  3. IceCube • Fully operational 86-string neutrino detector • Exceeded original scientific expectations for detector size

  4. Optimization • Field Camp Standardization Plan • Code waiver process • Simplified Operational Requirements Worksheet • SIP inventory requests feed into contractor databases for efficient allocations

  5. Planning Improvements • AIL working with ANT to complete in-depth support reviews on large projects in advance of successful scientific review • Contractor working with PIs on feasibility studies in advance of proposal submission • AIL & Contractor staff available to consult; need to get the word out

  6. Process Improvements • Support Information Package needs a refresh • Match worksheet structure and inventory to current practice • Science outbrief process needs to be more efficient

  7. Current Metrics • Antarctic Support Contractor measures performance in aggregate • ASC does not track performance specific to each science project • NSF has GPRA metrics to track productive science days

  8. OAC Assistance • Suggestions for how to define project success criteria with respect to contractor support • What support is most important to each project? • How do we measure that? • Suggestions for how best to receive feedback on support • On-ice or off? • Direct to NSF rather than through contractor?

More Related