Independent Project Management Self-Assessments

ATL can provide project management self-assessments and reviews, throughout project planning and design or prior to a project’s Critical Decision (CD) formal review, to facilitate CD approval and project execution. Independent Project Reviews (IPRs), External Independent Reviews (EIRs), and Technical Independent Project Reviews (T-IPRs) provide a method to evaluate the cost, scope, schedule, and technical attributes of a project prior to CD milestones during project execution. The results of the IPRs/T-IPRs/EIRs are valuable tools utilized by the Acquisition Executives to determine the readiness level of a project prior to proceeding into the subsequent phases to improve overall project performance.

ATL staff participated in a recent NA-54 “Lessons Learned Database” study to identify the reasons that projects fail. The most common deficiencies identified during management reviews included:

• (44%) Cost Estimate contained errors, was incomplete, and/or lacked Basis of Estimate (BOE) to justify estimate. BOE was often cited as lacking sufficient detail. Independent Reviewer could not validate estimate.
• (11%) Risk Analysis and Risk Management were not done or did not support cost estimate or management reserve and/or contingency.
• (11%) Scope was not sufficiently defined or was changed.
• (8%) Funding profile and/or funding availability did not support project plan.
• (7%) Cost Ranges where required (CD-0, CD-1), but were not adequately determined; cookie-cutter recipe used instead of engineering design, adequate cost estimating, and/or risk analysis. Cost ranges were based on two or three scopes.
• (7%) Other Project Costs were confused or improperly applied to Total Estimated Cost.
• (5%) Acquisition Strategy was not sufficiently defined or not optimum and resulted in higher project costs.
• (2%) Escalation rates did not recognize rising prices in U.S. materials and construction costs.
• (0.5%) Earned value management was not being properly applied.
• (0.5%) Overheads were improperly applied.

Independent reviews almost always uncover problems with the cost and schedule estimates and, if conducted early enough, can help managers avoid costly mistakes. ATL has technical experts in all areas of Department of Energy/National Nuclear Security Administration (DOE/NNSA) project management who can assist Federal Project Directors and their staffs in improving the critical areas of:

• preparing comprehensive cost-cycle cost estimates (especially of all alternatives prior to CD-1)
• making sure the cost estimates properly reflect the entire scope
• producing realistic resource-loaded schedules with milestones
• ensuring safety is integrated into the design
• making project planning consistent throughout the project phases
• ensuring that estimates, schedules, and plans are accurate, compliant, and error-free
• applying Lessons Learned from other NNSA projects.

One powerful tool that ATL uses to aid project teams in performing these reviews is the Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI). The PDRI was formulated by the Construction Industry Institute from construction projects that were executed throughout the nation in a number of different industries. They identified areas of strength and weakness and produced the PDRI as a means of quantifying their findings.

Many Federal Project Directors have already applied this tool to their projects and found that is helps to identify areas of planning and management weakness. ATL staff helped NA-54 apply this tool during their reviews. ATL can walk you through this process and help you evaluate the results.

ATL can provide you with management review experts with direct NNSA experience in the following areas:

• Mission Need and Project Goals
• Management Systems, Controls, and Planning
• Acquisition Strategy
• Safeguards and Security
• Scope and Technical Considerations
• Cost Estimates and Funding
• Schedule
• Risk and Contingency Management
• Environment, Waste Management, and Energy Conservation
• Occupational Safety and Health
• Nuclear Safety
• Waste Minimization, Energy Conservation, and Pollution Prevention
• Value Engineering
• Quality Assurance/Quality Control
• Evaluation of Corrective Actions from Previous Review