August 2-4, 2010 - Fermilab · August 2-4, 2010 FRA Visiting ... more than two slides per question....

August 2-4, 2010

August 2-4, 2010FRA Visiting Committee Administrative Peer Review 1

Committee

Anne Street – Chair

Jane Monhart

Betsy O’Connor

Frank Sanchez

Jonathan Silverstein

Greg Snow

Bob Stuewe

Staff

Tracey Quinn –UChicago

Ben Stauss – FRA

Tyler Przybylek – FRA

Katie Weber –UChicago

Support

Mary Ellen Tolian -FNAL


Acknowledgements

The Committee enjoyed extraordinary hospitality, cooperation, and support from FRA and FNAL

FNAL leaders, managers, and staff understood our mission and were consistently responsive to our requests


Charge to CommitteeThe Visiting Committee is asked to review and evaluate the

quality and effectiveness of Fermilab’s administrative

organizations and operations support systems, which

specifically include: Quality and Best Practices; Environment,

Safety & Health; IT; Facilities Engineering Services; Business

Services; Workforce Development and Resources; and Finance.

While the review team will have discretion to pursue questions

of interest, the format for the review will consist of

presentations by Fermilab offices/sections, and related follow

up, that specifically answer the following questions in no

more than two slides per question.


Seven Questions

1. How did your functional area fare last year versus established performance measures? What steps are being taken to address deficiencies or to sustain outstanding performance? What is your assessment of your progress to date against the FY10 performance measures and your projection of outcomes for the year against these measures?


Seven Questions2. What specific achievements has your unit made in developing and

sustaining a service culture? Specifically:

Has the reorganization and consolidation of IT support services had the desired effect?

Has our ability to track and trend, especially in the ES&H area improved?

Do the compensation, employee relations and employment functions enable and support excellence in science?

Are benefits planning and administration meeting employees’ needs?

Has the performance of organizations involved in utilizing the ARRA funding been up to the task?

What improvements would you like to see?


Seven Questions3. As the activities funded by the ARRA wind down, is Fermilab,

including its subcontractors, facing, either directly or indirectly, a situation where the workforce funded by the ARRA will be facing significant layoffs? If so, what is the plan to deal with the situation and what are our expectations for its success?

4. How is your unit integrating the efforts of Office of Quality and Best Practices (OQBP)? What contact has your area had with the OQBP? What do you plan for the future? How is your unit implementing appropriate aspects of the Quality and Best Practices plan? How does this support the requirement for a Contractor Assurance Overview?


Seven Questions

5. What interaction did your unit have with counterpart operations staff at Argonne National Laboratory? What are your future plans for interaction, and what are your specific goals?

6. Last year our Days Away Restricted Transferred and Total Recordable Case rates were high; this year the same rates have been remarkably low. Which year, if any, reflects the true state of our safety program and why?

7. How are you addressing succession planning for your unit?


Conduct of the Review

The Committee:

Heard presentations that were responsive to the questions in our charge

Conducted approximately 30 follow-up interviews with presenters, staff, and Fermilab Site Office

Included both service providers and customers in interviews

Reviewed numerous documents


Jane Monhart

Frank Sanchez


Observations

BSS met or exceeded its FY 2009 performance measures. BSS is on track to meet or exceed its FY 2010 measures. The new IT organization has not yet had its desired effect

for BSS. Oracle iProcurement Longer response times

ARRA funding has been successfully managed without additional staff.

A service culture is well established as evidenced by customer feedback.

BSS contributes to and is engaged with the efforts of the OQBP.

Open positions have been filled with succession planning in mind.


Observations

Interactions with ANL have proved beneficial for both organizations. Fermilab electronics recycling has benefited ANL ANL Procurement & shipping advice saved Fermilab

>$800k BSS has contributed to a successful ESH year for

Fermilab. DART cases Recordable cases National Safety Council Safe Driver Award EPEAT Certified computer electronic acquisitions Alternate fuel use and petroleum reduction Recycling

Overall, BSS is a good Fermilab citizen and values continuous improvement.


Noteworthy Practices

ARRA procurements were successfully awarded at a very high level of performance during a record procurement dollar volume year with no additional staff and with no audit findings.


Recommendations

Continue to pursue system improvements to achieve cost reduction, cost avoidance, and operational efficiencies, e.g. Oracle iProcurement or appropriate alternatives.


Frank Sanchez

Anne Street


Observations

Current benchmarking of Lab employee pay and benefits indicates they are competitive with that of companies in the selected market.

The Lab is successfully recruiting and retaining needed employees.

A consultant is working with WDRS to evaluate management of employee benefits.

There is a concern about IT service for the Education Office.



WDRS has several initiatives to improve support to the Lab:

Improved communication with employees– Ask HR, Tell HR, new website, benefits bulletins, employee advisory group, increased frequency of meetings with employees and managers in supported organizations

Succession planning for the top Lab jobs

Curriculum committee to improve management development at the Lab.


Recommendations Recommend WDRS investigate cost efficiency

opportunities of coordinating administration of medical/dental benefits with Argonne National Lab. Also recommend participation with Argonne on consultant to assess impact of healthcare reform legislation.

Recommend the Lab consider additional opportunities to increase communications with the bargaining unit regarding safety and efficiency to include WDRS, FESS, the bargaining unit and DOE.


Recommendations Recommend WDRS assess recently implemented

changes to the hiring process for Lab scientists at an appropriate time to determine their effectiveness.


Recommendations For Lab Management - Recommend Lab continue and

expand efforts for greater utilization of WDRS as a valued participant in Lab management decisions and execution, including: Performance management Management development Strategic planning Culture change Cost control

In view of the recent incident, recommend the Lab review processes to identify and support employees/users at risk (WDRS), and to safeguard the workforce and to protect the organization (Lab management).


Robert B. Stuewe

Betsy O’Connor


Observations

Progress in implementation of Quality Assurance is evident:

Management engaged: Individually, Assurance Council

Overall program is defined

Supporting procedures/methods are coming along:

For example: Management Assessments; Corrective and Preventative Action; Quality Assurance Guidelines for Scientific Research; Lessons Learned; ITNA

Supporting roles, e.g. QAR, QE, are active

Some As-Is Baselines have been performed, acted upon

Quality Improvement via Assessments/CAPs has begun


Observations

Integrated Quality Assurance Program is not yet providing optimal value to FNAL:

Multiple assessments reaching the same conclusions: “work documents not sufficiently managed”

QA is not well integrated, e.g. multiple FNAL methods for assessments and corrective action tracking

QA broadly applied rather than risk-focused

Lessons learned not yet effective, e.g. US Chem Safety Board recommendations for Gas Purging (high risk)

Approach to Quality Improvement is unclear

Strategic Plan + PEMP + Reviews + IQA + Problem Solving = ?

Improvement results mostly qualitative/anecdotal

Collaboration with ANL not in evidence


Observations

No unified understanding of what a Contractor Assurance System is, how it will be developed, and desired benefits for the Laboratory.

Different ideas from everyone interviewed

What is CAS, versus QA, versus ES&H, versus ….



Identifying major systems and key processes

Critical step for CAS as well as QA

Many orgs do not do this up front, costs them time and money

Scientific Research As-Is Assessment

Credible evidence that FNAL seriously committed to quality in science


Recommendations

Identify the primary risks to mission achievement and apply QA to the processes involved first:

Where is it critical that we get it right the first time?

What can we absolutely not afford to have happen?

Make strategic plan more actionable, accessible:

Clear Objectives with measureable goals

Actions with assigned owners and timeframes

In format and language that the workforce can understand

Use to prioritize assessment, issues, corrective action plans, resource decisions, etc.


Recommendations Use Contractor Assurance (H-13) as an opportunity

to integrate what you have: Integrate assessment selection, scheduling, execution.

Integrate issue and corrective action management.

Get measures and performance targets in place for your key processes (needed for CAS) Also enables trending and analyses for CAS

Benchmark your LL Program against others in DOE.

Simplify, risk-prioritize, align with how FNAL learns.

Quickly set up a Sharepoint server, design a simple document/site hierarchy, and get a simple document management process going


Betsy O’Connor



Observations

Performance Measures

Met expectations in FY 2009

On track to meet expectations in FY 2010

Reorganization of IT

No decline in IT controls identified

Concerns regarding the availability of resources

Dissatisfied with IT response time


Observations

ARRA No additional resources

Additional oversight beneficial

Reporting is still a challenge

No IG audit findings

Contractor Assurance System Leverage required A-123 Internal Controls testing

Result of A-123 is the annual Assurance Statement

Not using A-123 may degrade the A-123 program

A-123 also satisfies QA needs


Observations

New FAR Clause

Onerous reporting requirements, questionable benefits

Procurement involvement

Assure that any FAR Clause reporting is consistent with financial reporting

New Work Breakdown Structure

Enhanced usage of financial data

Improved information for management

Ability to meet ad hoc requests from management and DOE


Observations Fermilab Time & Labor

Met the PEMP requirement

But not complete

Work with vendor to fix the back office bug

Improve reporting for customer value

Concerns with hosted services provider

Responsiveness

Change management controls

Budget Job Family

Eliminated potential disparity in similar jobs

CFO participation in hiring is important


No Noteworthy Practices this year


Recommendations

Fermilab Time & Labor

Work with vendor to fix the bug

Improve reporting to enhance customer value

Possible success for management dashboard

Budget Improvements, mostly direct

Better training and/or communication of requirements

More realistic deadlines

Enhanced financial analysis with new WBS

Improved budgeting tools including labor planning


Recommendations

Travel Automation

Eliminate manual process for entire Lab

Potential savings due to improved contracting

Electronic Invoice Approval

Requires minimal IT resources

Negative certification for invoices < $100K

E-mail certification for invoices > $100K

Conversion to the DOE SGL (Standard Genl Ledger)


Gregory Snow

Jane Monhart


Observations

Commendably low number of TRC and DART incidents so far in FY2010


FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009FY2010

to DateGOAL

TRC Cases 29 31 12 24 11 <12

DART Cases 7 12 3 12 3 <5

This was zero until just recently

Observations

2010 Milestones met in numerous reviews and programs

Corrective action items from March 2009 Accelerator Safety Review

Reduced environmental impact of personal computers – Federal Electronics Challenge

FNAL/FSO review of Emergency Management Program


Observations Menu of new/ongoing initiatives

Prevailing opinions are that these are leading to noticeably low injury rates. Among them: “Take Five for Goal Zero” program Safety awareness signs posted at site entrances Rewards, recognition, and safety incentive

programs Enhanced web presence and tools Porcelain Press postings Revitalized Traffic Safety Subcommittee of

FESHCOMM ESH Fairs


Observations

Menu of new/ongoing initiatives

Prevailing opinions are that these are leading to noticeably low injury rates. Among them:

Collection of data useful in leading indicator, and tracking/trending analyses, which will include first aid cases and near-miss incidents

Continuous improvements database

Traffic violations database

Lessons learned database (with OQBP)

Database analyst hired by ES&H section

Open CD functional analyst position


Observations

A “Sustainability Challenge” (Executive Order 13514) is on the horizon

Calls for noticeable reductions in:

Green house gas emission (28%)

Energy usage (30%)

Water consumption (16%)

And increases in:

Renewable energy generation/usage (7.5%)

Sustainable building practices

Over several years



Recent, successful renewal of ISO 14001 and OHSAS 18001 registrations

Deep engagement of Sections and Divisions in safety awareness, attention, and participation in ES&H programming


Recommendations “Stay the course”. By this we mean continued

dissemination of programs and successes, with focus on zero incident goals

Keep the awareness messages fresh – avoid complacency! Example: Elevate road-sharing awareness in a

creative way

ES&H has many initiatives and programs on their plate – analyze and stress those with greatest impact

Identify good behaviors that have brought us where we are


Recommendations Fill CD functional analyst position

Coordinate teaming with ES&H database analyst

Do the tracking and trending analyses, examine correlations of incidents and near-misses with a wide range of parameters and behaviors

Since there is little guidance from DOE on the Sustainability Challenge – at this time, be patient and study possible pathways

Solicit DOE clarification and expectations for FNAL


Anne Street

Bob Stuewe


Observations

FESS staff has met the challenge of performing ARRA work without compromising delivery of traditional activities

FESS is considered to be responsive by the organizations it serves



Migration to an error / near miss reporting culture serves as a vehicle for improving safety


Recommendations Lab management – consider requiring building

automation in all new projects, if lifecycle cost savings can be demonstrated.

Lab management – consider charging FESS with the development and maintenance of a complete master plan for the site.

Lab management – look at the organization and purpose of FESS and PMO to clarify that they meet current vision for the Lab.

FESS – document work in the field in procedures.

FESS – consider initiating Service Level Agreements for routine maintenance services.



Gregory Snow


Observations Coherent IT organization assembled and functioning

IT support professionals re-organized into one organization with clarity of roles and responsibilities

Fermilab Time and Labor (FTL) Kronos installed

DOE Notable Outcome

Still active work with Finance and vendor to stabilize all functions and gain secondary use of the data

Consolidation of capabilities having some desired effects but remaining challenges from IT viewpoint

Cybersecurity more easily and completely controlled

Multiple methods of doing some tasks still creating compromises, but further standardization ongoing

frESHTRK and other databases with ES&H established


Observations Basic IT services unacceptably slow or missing to users in

multiple Sections and Divisions of Lab

Break-fix of desktops taking multiple days

Users confused regarding prioritization of requests

Ordering and configuring standard machines too slow

Basic SLAs not established or unusable in most areas

Users desire higher visibility/understanding of consolidated IT performance and prioritization

Engagement in prioritization and governance lacking

Last year’s recommendation to “establish an internal IT Management Steering Committee” was not followed

Some projects on hold due to resource constraints



Best practices and knowledge from MIS department, particularly in regard to financial systems, successfully integrated into central IT organization


Recommendations Basic IT services must be attended immediately

It is well understood throughout the laboratory that some decreased service performance would occur in this first year of consolidation, but that has now passed

Persistent problems in this area would raise the level of significance to a “Finding” for the laboratory next year

Strategic (long-term, project-based) prioritization of IT resources is needed, given resource constraints

A council for strategic decision-making should be established (e.g. will iProcurement be deployed? When?)

User engagement in IT operations is needed

Establish an open forum including representation from all Sections and Divisions (and open to Departments)


Recommendations Establish and maintain in depth needs assessments, and

then SLAs (formal or informal) with all Sections, Divisions, and some Departments

Some will need standard agreements to gain economies

Some will need common understanding of what IT systems will be managed locally (i.e. why and how)

Some will need only systems support on local systems

e.g. websites/servers and macintosh desktops currently self-managed in Education Office

Coherent performance measures of IT services and regular reporting to users will gain trust

e.g. Service Desk metrics provided to each Section/Division

Regularly communicate the status of IT improvements

54August 2-4, 2010FRA Visiting Committee Administrative Peer Review

Anne Street


Observations & Recommendations Laboratory is in transition from a future vision of a

single large project (ILC) to many new initiatives.

Develop clear, crisp vision and communicate to staff and to the public.

Identify implications of new vision for Administrative & Operations Support areas in the strategic planning process.

Laboratory has institutionalized safety as a way of life.

Now you must individualize it.

Interactions with Argonne are inconsistent across the organization.

Keep seeking opportunities – the collaboration has value.


Observations & Recommendations The Sustainability Challenge appears to be virtually

impossible to achieve on an individual lab basis without impacting science mission.

Strive to convince DOE that the best solution is a reduction across all labs.

Succession planning for Lab management may become more visible under Contractor Assurance System.

Continue efforts begun by WDRS


August 2-4, 2010


Parent Oversight for CAS

Visiting Committee for Ops/Admin

Could easily be modified to CAS Parent Oversight

Recommend:

Annual FNAL Management (Self) Assessment for CAS

Details/quantification of implementation & effectiveness

Annual CAS Review by Committee using assessment

Board Approval

At least a few more Board members on Committee

Board formally assures DOE CAS is functioning (Letter)


MeasuresAssessments

Issue & Corrective Action MgtLessons Learned

Contractor Assurance

System

Using= forSystem Assurance

Parent Oversight (+)DOE Oversight (-)

Date post:	26-Aug-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dinhdat
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

August 2-4, 2010 - Fermilab · August 2-4, 2010 FRA Visiting ... more than two slides per question....

Documents