2. Identify global and such as the estimate's base year, time-phasing and life cycle. Met. Life cycle cost are included in the Strategy, and all other items are addressed in the Assumptions Document and BOEs. 3. Identify program schedule information by phase and program strategy. Met. Addressed in the Strategy and is by a detailed RLS developed by the project. 4. Identify any schedule or budget constraints, assumptions, and travel costs. Met. The CD-1 estimate was aligned with funding from HEP and other and constraints were documented in the Document. 5. Specify equipment the government is to furnish as well as the use of facilities or new modification or Met. CDR describes how PIP-II fits into existing Complex. 6. Identify prime and major Met. The Acquisition identifies FRA as the prime contractor and major international partners. 7. Determine technology refresh cycles, technology assumptions, and new technology to be Met. CDR describes the conceptual technical design in detail. 8. Define commonality with legacy systems and assumed heritage Partially Met. Project explain how PIP-II linac replaces the existing linac, but savings are not 9. Describe effects of new ways of doing business. Met. The strategy of using international partners to significant portions of a US particle accelerator is unique and discussed in the Acquisition Strategy and PPEP. The collaboration with India is defined in detail.
4. Determine type of risk distributions and reason for their use. Met. The risk register uses triangular probability to increase credibility. 5. Ensure that risks are not correlated. Met. Reviewed for by the Risk Manager and RMB. 6. Use an acceptable analysis method (e.g., Monte Carlo to develop a interval around the point estimate. Met. Developing Monte Carlo simulation to determine contingency at a 90% CL. 7. Identify the confidence level of the point Met. 90%. 8. Identify the amount of contingency funding and add this to the point to determine the risk-adjusted cost Met. Results of the Monte Carlo analysis at a 90% CL are used to add cost impacts of risks and costs as a result of schedule impacts army). Contingency for cost estimating uncertainty is added for each major cost according to FRA contingency rules. 9. Recommend that the project or program office develop a risk plan to track and mitigate risks. Met. The project has a risk management plan that a lab-wide procedure. 10 Document the estimate 1. Document all steps used to develop the so that a cost unfamiliar with the program can recreate it quickly and produce the same result. Met. The cost estimate was developed using a defined WBS and thoroughly BOEs and 2. Document the purpose of the estimate, the team that prepared it, and who approved the estimate and on what date. Met. The estimate purpose (for CD-1 Cost Range) and estimating team are 3. Describe the program, its schedule, and the technical baseline used to create the estimate Met. Addressed in the CDR. 4. Present the program's time-phased LCC. Met. The life cycle cost was documented in the Strategy.
5. Discuss all ground rules and assumptions Met. Documented in the Document. 6. Include auditable and traceable data sources for each cost element and document for all data sources how the data were normalized. Met. BOEs document sources and methods for creating the estimate data. 7. Describe in detail the estimating methodology and rationale used to each WBS element's cost (prefer more detail over less). Met. BOE documents this information. 8. Describe the results of the risk, uncertainty, and sensitivity analyses and whether any contingency funds were identified. Partially Met. Developing Monte Carlo model for risk, estimate uncertainty in BOE. No analysis. 9. Document how the compares to the funding profile. Met. The estimate is being aligned to a funding profile using the RLS. 10. Track how this compares to any previous estimates. Partially met. Certain cost estimate variances from are documented but not comprehensively for the project. 11 Present estimate to management for approval 1. Develop a briefing that presents the documented LCCE. Information will be presented at the ICR, and a briefing is planned to the ESAAB. Agree with project team assessment. 2. Include an explanation of the technical and baseline and any uncertainties. Information will be presented at the ICR, and a briefing is planned to the ESAAB. 3. Compare the estimate to an independent cost estimate (ICE) and any differences. N/A at this stage of the PIP-II CF plans to an ICE to support refinement of the cost and schedule estimates prior to CD-2. A comprehensive ICE will be done by DOE prior to CD-2.
4. Compare the estimate (LCCE) or independent cost estimate to the budget with enough detail to easily defend it by showing how it is complete, and high in quality. Cannot be met at this time. Although costs for PIP-II have been estimated, the budget for those out-years is not available at this time. 5. Focus in a logical on the largest cost and cost drivers. Cost drivers will be at the ICR and IPR. 6. Make the content clear and complete so that those who are unfamiliar with it can easily the competence that underlies the estimate To be done at the ICR and IPR. 7. Make backup slides available for more probing questions. To be done at the ICR and IPR. 8. Act on and document feedback from Will be done by responding to review recommendations. 9. Request acceptance of the estimate. Will be accepted with the of CD-1. 12 Update the estimate to reflect actual costs and changes 1. Update the estimate to reflect changes in or program or keep it current as the program passes through new phases or milestones. Met. The estimate and schedule are being updated to reflect the revised contributions and changes in scope. Will for CD-2. 2. Replace estimates with EVM EAC and estimate at (EAC) from the integrated EVM system. Will be done in practice prior to CD-2 and fully after CD-2. 3. Report progress on meeting cost and estimates. Met. Cost and schedule is reported to the FPD and program monthly. Full EV reporting will be after CD-2. rate,
GAO Best Practices for Schedule Table C-1 shows the project team self-assessment and the ICR team assessment of conformance with the GAO best practices for schedule. Table C1. GAO Best Practices for Schedule (GAO-16-89G) Point Description Criteria Project Team Assessment DOE-PM notation 1 Capturing all activities Schedule reflects all as defined in the work breakdown structure and scope. Met. Schedule was developed using a and WBS. 2 Sequencing all activities All activities logically in the order that they are to be out Met. A limited schedule was first adjusting the activities by and other constraints. Schedule should not rely on constraints to keep schedule dates from changing Met: The does not rely on constraints. Lags should only be used where appropriate. Leads are to be avoided. Met: Only lags are for tiered milestones. Summary or activities should not drive the schedule. Met: LOE tasks align with length of project but do not drive the length. 3 Assigning resources to all activities Schedule should reflect what resources are needed to perform the work, whether all required resources will be available when needed, and whether any funding or time exist. Funding are built into the RLS. Resource will occur CD-1.
4 Establishing the duration of all activities Durations of activities should reflect how long each activity will take to The same rationale used for cost estimating should be used for estimating. Durations should be as short as for accurate reporting. Met: Durations are estimated by the L3 managers. In the case of planning durations will be updated as the schedule develops. 5 Integrating schedule activities horizontally and vertically Schedule should link the products and outcomes with already activities. Met. To be by the ICR and IPR. 6 Establishing the critical path for all activities The longest duration path through the sequenced list of activities should be Met by using the critical path method. 7 Identifying total float Schedule software total float so that schedule flexibility can be determined. Activities on the critical path have zero float in the absence of Large total float typically reflects incomplete logic. Met: Primavera P6 is used to critical path and float. 8 Conducting a schedule risk analysis Schedule risk analysis uses a good critical path method schedule to model risks and simulate results of schedule risks collected from project participants. Results are the level of confidence in a project’s completion date. Met. Impacts to CD-4 due to schedule risks was calculated using a Monte Carlo simulation at a 90% CL. 9 Updating the schedule using logic and to the dates Schedule updating requires recording actual start and finish dates, and remaining duration to project activities. Maintaining schedule logic through statusing is to reflect true status. Will be done in practice prior to CD-2, including status updates on progress.
III. Analyze alternatives 12. Identify significant risks and mitigation strategies Definition: The AoA team identifies and documents the risks and mitigation strategies for each alternative. Risks are ranked in terms of significance to mission needs and requirements. All risks are documented for each along with any overarching or alternative specific mitigation strategies. Schedule risk, cost risk, technical risk of technical obsolescence, dependencies between a new project and other projects or systems, procurement and contract risk, and resources risks are examined. Effect: Since AoA processes typically occur early in the process, risk is inherently a part of every alternative. Not documenting the risks and related mitigation strategies for each alternative prevents decision makers from performing a meaningful trade-off analysis necessary to choose a alternative. Met. Alternative risks and were discussed in the AoA report. 13. Determine and quantify benefits/effectiveness Definition: The AoA team uses a standard process to the benefits and effectiveness of each alternative. The AoA team drafts a metric framework that details the methods used to evaluate and quantify the measures of effectiveness and measures of performance for all mission needs. The AoA team quantifies the benefits and effectiveness of each over the alternative’s full life-cycle, if possible. Just as costs cover the entire life-cycle for each alternative, the and effectiveness measures cover each alternative’s if possible, in order to determine each alternative’s net present value (NPV)—the discounted value of expected minus the discounted value of expected costs. In cases where the means to monetize a benefit are too vague (for intangibles like scientific knowledge), the AoA team treats those benefits as strategic technical benefits and uses scalability assessments to quantify those benefits so that they are compared across all viable alternatives. In situation where benefits cannot be quantified, the AoA team explains why this is the case as part of their analysis. Effect: Determining a standard process to quantify benefits is an essential part of the AoA process. If the AoA team does not clearly establish criteria against which to measure all bias is introduced to the study. Additionally, if the AoA team does not examine effectiveness over the entire life-cycle, decision makers cannot see the complete picture and are from making an informed decision. Intent was met: to OHEP program and future directions of program are Many of the benefits are intangible therefore a NPV could not be used Discussed in a HEP Memo dated Dec 17, 2016.