FY2009 FRA Visiting Committee for Administration & Operations

FY2009 FRA Visiting Committee for

Administration & OperationsAugust 3-5 2009

Committee◦ Dean Helms – Chair◦ Gregory Snow◦ Diane Schultz◦ Robin Wendt◦ Betsy O’Connor◦ Jane Monhart◦ Ernest Pierz

Staff◦ Laurence Hill –

UChicago◦ William A. Schmidt –

FRA◦ Benjamin G. Stauss –

FRA◦ Katie Weber – UChicago

Support◦ Mary Ellen Tolian - FNAL

FY2009 FRA Visiting Committee for Administration & Operations

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 the Committee

“The 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; Facilities Engineering Services; Business Services; Workforce Development and Resources; Information Technology; and Finance.”


Eight Questions 1. How did your functional area fare last year (FY 2008) versus

established performance measures? What steps are being taken to address deficiencies or sustain outstanding performance? What is your assessment of progress to date against FY 2009 performance measures and your projections of outcomes for the year on these measures?

2. How has the reorganization and consolidation of IT support services affected your area?


Eight Questions (continued)3. If your area is playing a role in the receipt and/or use of ARRA funds, are

there issues (e.g. allocation, control, reporting) with this funding and if so, please describe them and associated potential impacts on your ability to execute mission objectives and how you plan to successfully manage them?

4. How is your unit implementing appropriate aspects of the Quality and Best Practices plan and are you on schedule?

5. What interaction has your unit had this fiscal year with corresponding operations staff at Argonne National Laboratory? What are your future plans for interaction, and what are your specific goals?


Eight Questions (continued)

6. What specific steps have you taken to pursue cost-reduction opportunities (e.g., outsourcing, benefit price reduction, etc.)? What do you plan for the future? Were there lessons learned from your preparation for workforce reduction that have helped you or could help you in the future?

7. What specific achievements has your unit made in developing and sustaining a service culture? What do you plan for the future?

8. 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 50 follow-up interviews with presenters and drill down interviews at all levels of the Lab and FSO

Included service providers and customers Reviewed numerous documents


Interactions with Argonne National Laboratory

Observations

◦ Fermilab has increased the frequency and value of interactions with ANL counterparts in the last year

◦ Activities have included shared lessons learned, (e.g. systems development and

approaches to common problems) shared resources and expertise (e.g. training) explored possibilities with JIT and budget system joint ES&H reviews and assessments jointly considered land management cost reduction opportunities response preparation to H1N1 flu pandemic


Cost Reductions

Cost reductions have been achieved ◦ Employee and retiree benefit plans◦ Outsourcing◦ E-commerce for procurements, e.g. RFQs, electronic drawings◦ New electronic travel authorization/voucher implementation

Cost avoidance through improved efficiencies, process improvements, realignment of resources◦ Accomplish more with same or fewer resources

IT consolidation expected to result in significant cost savings


Service Culture

Observations

◦ Strong service culture is evident and continuing to improve Service and support elements are: Seeking to better understand customer expectations Improving communications, including customer friendly

websites Asking for feedback on quality of service and responsiveness

in identifying root causes of issues and quickly resolving


Other Observations

◦ FNAL and FSO continue to build their strong partnership relationship based on: Open and timely communications Shared goals and values Alignment on priorities

Lab well prepared for appropriate implementation of projects under ARRA funding


Ernest PierzFacilities Engineering


Observations◦ 2009 Performance on track◦ Overall -- very strong service attitude, good communication with all

Divisions/Sections◦ Very responsive to high priority activities (safety and Lab operations)◦ QA readiness on track –- As-is analysis completed and corrective

action plans developed◦ Strong interaction with other National Labs on Mission Readiness

initiative◦ Planning/Scheduling function effectively measuring actual work

order performance versus plan, driving down costs◦ Engineering charge back mechanism discourages use of FESS◦ Clearer direction on site wide project priorities, especially with DOE

efforts, would lead to more efficient use of team resources


Noteworthy Practices

◦ Well thought out ramp up of 3rd party resources for ARRA projects including flow down of DOE reporting requirements. Please note ARRA funding represents a five fold increase in GPP spending

◦ Widespread use of GIS and Metasys systems to maintain site design data. Opportunity to move towards “as built” in the future


Recommendations

◦ Identify and communicate single bid situations early on with the Divisions. Retest Division requirements

◦ Review status of critical equipment yearly with Divisions; recommend procurement strategy for replacement and/or hot spares especially for equipment at end of useful life

◦ Continue to be involved in the early planning for new science programs as the Lab moves past the Tevatron shutdown

Ensure infrastructure is properly planned and budgeted Use new projects to update infrastructure as necessary Use this planning effort to develop a site master plan

including potential building and system removal/demolition◦ Continue to support DP-18 (champion and educate) – Develop

a “DP-18 Lite” – checklist for Divisions


Diane SchultzWorkforce Development & Resources


Observations

Customers generally satisfied to very satisfied, both for standard services and guidance on specific issues

When issues arise, WDRS is reported to be responsive (e.g. recruitment & selection for Accelerator Division)

Customers acknowledge administrative/procedural requirements faced by WDRS

Change management model used for addressing: Insurance plan changes Expatriate orientation Scientific hiring


Observations

While implementation not required, methodology used for potential workforce reduction followed standard HR practice

Introduced succession planning across Lab

Initiated Diversity Council and held Focus Groups

Considered outsourcing/use of contract staff to manage peaks/valleys, especially in service areas which are not a core competency (e.g. HVAC service)


Observations Current service model for WDRS (traditional HR-related

specialty services) is sufficient but dated

Current service model not positioned to add greatest value to Lab and leadership team


Noteworthy Practices FESS showed deepest understanding of intent of

succession planning (continuity of operations) and took actions to address


Recommendations

Expand and elevate role of WDRS to serve as integral contributor to leadership of Lab

HR Director to serve on small leadership team as appropriate to topic

HR Director on every search committee for executive positions

Reallocate or add 2-4 new positions in WDRS as HR generalists for Divisions/Sections; to partner with AD and staff to create and implement HR solutions


Recommendations

Hold leadership/management team accountable for follow-up from focus group findings; realistically manage expectations from these findings Create task force for immediate responses Consider creating ongoing council

Acknowledge 2 different professional cultures and expectations (e.g. pay, recognition, career options), but manage in manner which is perceived as fair, even when different

Do not back down from commitments to manage performance; consider suggesting “expected” distribution of performance scores necessary to effectively differentiate annual merit awards


Recommendations

Leverage what SLLP graduates have learned; how can graduates coach/mentor others?

Hold managers and leaders accountable for two critical skills in today’s environment: influence leadership and change management


Recommendations

Continue to develop succession plans (rename Operations Continuity Planning?), including: Document process & procedures, link to QA plans Cross training, backup plans for absence or exits Identify potential successors Consider outsourcing options when appropriate Create meaningful development plans (OTJ 70%,

coaching/mentoring 20-30% classroom/training 0-10%) Focus on future requirements


Betsy O’ConnorFinance


Observations

◦ FY 2009 on track to meet or exceed expectations

◦ One position restored in Accounting and one position in MIS

◦ Quality Assurance is satisfied by A-123 Internal Controls review

◦ Interactions with ANL attempted but mostly increased communications

◦ Customer service improved through timely communications


Noteworthy Practices◦ Budget process is formalized and includes scientific and

operations areas together for a complete understanding of overhead and scientific requirements

◦ Implementing a system that combines effort and payroll time reporting is a difficult and significant accomplishment

◦ Communication and regular interaction between Finance and “customer” organizations is beneficial to both sides


Recommendations

◦ Priority – IT Consolidation should not jeopardize internal controls Most important issue in any Finance organization Single Finance performance measure in FY 2010 Formalized change management Documented authorization for any changes to systems

◦ Priority – Complete the implementation of FTL Running multiple systems is inefficient and costly Ineffective use of resources from all areas Implementation started in 2006 – too long


Recommendations◦ More oversight on ARRA spending

Funds used for purpose intended No waste, fraud or abuse of funds Light oversight is acceptable

◦ Hackett Benchmarking Study Participate in the next wave if presented Unique opportunity to measure performance against other labs Simpler than expected

◦ Automate travel – authorization and expense reporting Difficult implementation – get users involved Inherent Lab-wide benefits due to automation – not just to Finance Potential savings due to improved information and contracting abilities Consider an on-line travel booking tool


Recommendations◦ Add one additional FTE to Budget Office

Increased budgeting requirements from management and DOE Improved oversight and analysis of organizational burdens Increased support of scientific and operations areas Design and implementation of a Lab-wide budgeting tool

(requires MIS resources)

◦ Transition to bi-weekly payroll Reduces work across the Lab – Payroll, HR, AP, supervisors, etc. Transition schedule may be long, but beneficial in the long run Consider simplifying pay rules and outsourcing payroll

processing


Robin WendtEnvironment, Safety, & Health


Observations◦ Leadership Succession

◦ FY2009 PEMP Generally good performance to date Expect fairly strong performance at yearend

◦ Accident rates somewhat elevated from FY2008 levels Active management Long-term trend still shows desired reductions Little correlation between leading indicators and accident rates

◦ QA Involvement ES&H CAS completed and passed DOE review, subject to a reasonable corrective action

plan “As-Is” issues being aggressively closed out Active participation on IQA effort


Observations (cont’d)

◦ ES&H services generally well accepted

◦ Senior Level Accident Review Senior managers discuss accidents at weekly Scheduling

meeting, causes and preventive measures Process documented in the ES&H document database

◦ Vehicle Safety Active program to detect and track vehicle violations

and to put “users” on notice/probation



◦ “Take Five for Goal Zero” Program Demonstrated management commitment Generally relates well to types of accidents sustained

in FY2009 Genesis from LSC member – shows line commitment

◦ ES&H Construction Safety Staff Augmented in anticipation of increased ARRA

construction activity


Recommendations

◦ Leading indicators Though difficult, strive to develop leading indicators that

better correlate with outcomes, esp. TRC and DART rates

◦ Accident Rates Continue to monitor and manage Keep FSO informed

◦ ES&H Staff Certifications With new section leadership, continue emphasis on staff

development toward attaining relevant ES&H certifications


Recommendations (cont’d)

◦ “Take Five for Goal Zero” Program If effective in long run, incorporate in hazard analysis

section of FESHM

◦ Rewards and Recognition Program Reinforce applicability for safety performance Communicate achievements for all programs


Gregory SnowFRA Board Representative, Information Technology


Comment

◦ In previous reviews, we have dealt with the Computing Division in the context of customer for services provided by the Sections

◦ Today, we are treating the CD as a provider of services to a number of customers


Observations

◦ There has been a consolidation and centralization of IT enterprises at Fermilab, the most noticeable being the absorption of Management Information Systems (MIS) into the Computing Division, under the leadership of an acting Chief Information Officer


The four quadrants of the Computing Division

Main activity here

The former Lab and Scientific Core Services quadrant with MIS “attached”MIS here

Observations

◦ The Org Chart for the reorganized Lab and Scientific Core Services quadrant has just been rolled out


The former Lab and Scientific Core Services quadrant with MIS integrated

Observations

◦ Noteworthy progress: This org chart results from an analysis/inventory of service areas, the people with expertise in these areas, the way different services are tied to other services – and lots of discussion with MIS and CD staff members and their customers


Observations

◦ The panel heard a variety of comments on how the reorganization has/will affect their units and operations

◦ The comments covered a wide range of sentiments, from optimism to uncertainty to confusion to indifference


Observations

◦ Since the reorganization is quite new, it will take some time to see how it plays out and how the Laboratory will profit from a more streamlined, centralized IT enterprise that eliminates some of the historical duplication and redundancy of services


Observations (Performance measures)

◦ FY08 performance measures were at the B to A- levels (business systems [FTL ], cyber security, network bandwidth, …)

◦ There was a timely response to the “marginal” cyber security audit with the roll out of the Tune IT Up campaign


Observations (Quality)

◦ The CD has fully participated in the Quality and Best Practices activities – selected processes to assess this year, 4 corrective action plans, 2 best practices identified.


Recommendations – some of which refer to activities in the works and some which come from the panel

◦ Develop the strategy and governance structure, specific action items, and milestones for implementing integrated IT services Lab-wide that capitalize on the reorganized CD structure. This is an opportunity!

◦ Prioritize projects that need immediate attention – FTL, Peoplesoft upgrade, ISO20000 certification, management dashboard, etc.



◦ Address specific concerns of customers who need to manage (some or all of) their IT services locally (example Metasys in FESS, ..)

◦ Ensure that the system control structure important to systems formerly in MIS (especially financial systems) remain intact in the 4th quadrant of the CD



◦ Establish internal IT Management Steering Committee as part of the overall IT governance

◦ Enlist external counsel from institutions (universities, laboratories, companies) which have successfully implemented centralized administration of IT services



◦ As the search for the permanent CIO progresses, consider whether there are advantages to having a separate Head of the Computing Division and a CIO

◦ Continued communication about the reorganization and its implications and attention to customer concerns


Jane MonhartBusiness Services, Quality & Best Practices


BUSINESS SERVICES

Observations

◦ BSS expects to meet or exceed their FY 2009 performance measures

◦ Adequate IT support continues to be received notwithstanding some concerns

◦ Quality and Best Practice implementation is on track A QAR has been appointed and BSS is actively involved

in Laboratory-wide efforts Actions from 2006 audit are on track for completion


BUSINESS SERVICES

Observations (cont’d)

◦ Continuous improvement is a strong part of BSS culture and customers are appreciative

◦ Recommendations from last year have been conscientiously addressed Advance acquisition planning Succession planning Cost reduction Travel management


BUSINESS SERVICES


◦ Electronics recycling at Fermilab is an award- winning program Federal Electronics Challenge Award in the Midwest

Medium Civilian Facility Category was received for FY 2008

ANL electronics are recycled by Fermilab The program contributes to cost reduction


BUSINESS SERVICES

Recommendations

◦ Continue to use hiring opportunities to bring in new talent to bolster succession planning efforts

◦ Continue to pursue system improvements to achieve cost reduction, e.g. Oracle iProcurement


QUALITY AND BEST PRACTICES

Observations

◦ The Laboratory expects the FY 2009 performance measures to be met

◦ QA Representatives have been appointed, trained, and activated

◦ The 26 findings from the 2006 audit are expected to be closed prior to the September 2009 audit

◦ There is a DOE approved IQA Program in place◦ The DOE Site Office is provided with a briefing every 60 to

90 days


Quality and Best Practices

Observations (Cont’d)

◦ The “As-Is” Assessment is complete◦ Approximately 90 Corrective Action Plans have been identified but

not all are complete◦ A Graded Approach Procedure has been developed. The ANSI/ASQ

Z1.13 standard selected by Fermilab allows for a graded approach◦ A QA Implementation Plan has been developed and

implementation is underway◦ Buy-in to the program is uneven across Fermilab

There is recognition that the program can add value There is concern about the resources needed for implementation


Quality and Best Practices

Recommendations

◦ Senior management should continue to provide frequent, visible support and direct involvement to ensure that the program does not lose momentum

◦ The graded approach should be continued and strongly supported by senior management. Resources should be focused in areas where there will be the greatest return on investment


Summary

◦ Noteworthy progress observed in most areas of FNAL service and support sector

◦ The Committee is generally pleased with how FNAL has addressed 2008 recommendations

◦ Laboratory relationships with DOE appear to be strong

◦ While there are no “Findings,” the Committee has concerns as reflected in our “Recommendations”


Summary (continued)

◦ Continued oversight and support required from Director’s Office to ensure high priority programs and initiatives will achieve expected results: Safety QA IT Consolidation ARRA Response to focus groups


Date post:	24-Feb-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	belva
View:	38 times
Download:	0 times

FY2009 FRA Visiting Committee for Administration & Operations

Documents