Update Ver
1.9 – 03Jan00; 7:00 pm
Innovations in American Govt.: Harvard -
KSG / Ford foundation
Initial Date: Wed, 02 Jun 1999 - F I N A L
D R A F T
1. Describe the program. Please
emphasize its creative and novel elements. What is the innovation? (400 words)
This is a general description of our complex
program to design & build the new, state-of-the-art, two story, 155,000 SF,
National Water Quality Laboratory (NWQL) on the Denver Federal Center (DFC).
This technically complex facility supports the USGS & is a significant
upgrade to it’s technical capability. Unlike other government, NWQL is a
"fee-for-service" operation, providing high-quality analytical &
biological data. & is committed to pollution prevention. This lab was
finished on-schedule & on-budget. Relocated lab operations resumed within
two weeks of move in.
The landlord (GSA) wanted process improvement
& was open to innovation. We completed this facility professionally &
appled innovation in any way we could while complying with Federal Regulations.
We can’t say innovation was in any single, large activity. Our innovation was a
process with large & small innovative components yielding synergy &
quality. Most people said a $25 million construction budget was
"optimistic", but we did it. As we progressed thru design and
construction, we continually innovated to complete this needed facility.
Planning started in 1990 with GSA’s facility
programming. In 1993, the DFC site was selected, & GSA started the
construction manager (CM) and architect/ engineer (A/E) concurrently, on full
time efforts to resolve technical and budget issues. Further, we indoctrinated
non-laboratory personnel to meet the budget. During design, we realized the
need to adapt standard, cost effective building components in a unique manner
to resolve technical and budget issues with energy efficiency and reliability.
Prior to bidding, we acknowledged the importance of effective and efficient
field operations. In 1996, GSA started construction bidding.
Real
people provide real labor to build real buildings
Innovation developed on many levels. Our
formal & informal partnering program was most visible. Successful
partnering results were achieved without claims or default actions. Real
innovation was required to refine partnering and include stakeholders in the
technical, financial, & personnel decisions for timely action.
Partnering began before site work started -
our workshops were well attended, fun, individually focused, and highly
productive. Partnering was helped with (then) un-tried Internet tools - project
web site, email, etc, to help assure timely decisions. Partnering resulted in
continual quality assurance for a clean job site, offering excellent
operational conditions upon move-in.
Partnering applied to continual value
engineering and open dialog with experienced & knowledgeable tradesmen.
On-site technical problem solving quickly and effectively allowed field
personnel to maintain momentum. As well, personnel issues did not effect
productivity.
There are huge policy implications for
innovation and effective government project delivery. There’s a backlog of
necessary public and military facilities. Our successful project delivery
system can be re-used and modified for other public / private partnerships.
Another example of public / private
partnerships has been undertaken by the U.S Navy for military family housing.
Rear Adm. Veronica Froman has promoted & "cost avoided" more than
$50 million in San Diego with innovative public / private partnerships & to
date, has sponsored the private provision of over 3,800 housing units in San
Diego alone.
2. What
problem(s) does your innovative program address? (250 words)
We addressed complex construction problems:
A) Scope
determination (size, configuration, components, & lab modules).
NWQL is part of a large water quality program
to provide non-commercial, quality science to support data for long term
trends. Our "strategic framework" for the building scope supports
leading edge analysis and worker safety balanced with cost effectiveness,
durability, flexibility, visual appeal, and efficiency. This lab maintains
leading edge service for future analysis methods and techniques. Part of this
strategy is to safely minimize potential hazards to lab personnel; from low
level contamination, and from operational waste.
B) Funding (steering the project through
the Federal system from 1993 to 1999).
As a Federal project, we applied for and
waited on Congressional funds – an arduous process. In addition, we performed
work under the "pilot" umbrella provded by the "Reinvention of
Government". In terms of project execution, we acted to:
1) "Do more with less"
2) Restructure "traditional"
project management perceptions to maximize our efforts
3) Provide fast & effective technical problem
solving to meet budget and schedule
4) Minimize "extra GSA
paperwork" that did not bring about a valuable result
5) Adapt continuous construction value
engineering with on-site decision-makers:
a) Management and minimization of cost
over-runs
b) Management and minimization of project
delays
c) Management and minimization of
change-orders
C) Construction effectiveness (to maximize
stakeholder trust understanding during construction)
Construction effectiveness was achieved by
combining several activities which were difficult to measure . They included:
a) careful prebid and proposed bidder
analysis
b) professional and through technical
preparation
c) continual partnering
Partnering is more than "feel good"
sessions for upper management. Real work performed by real people requires
learning faces, names, interests, and skills - a key responsibility. Quickly
learning who has good habits, who has good problem skills (regardless of rank)
is also key. Improving understanding, and trust was based upon fact and joint
situational analysis. Our partnering workshops provided a basis to understand
the individual. Trust was not just given away with a title.
3. Cite
the best verifiable evidence of the most significant achievements of the
program (250 words)
A) Client
and Worker Satisfaction
Clearly, evidence of our success is a
satisfied client. NWQL took possession of the lab per the base contract
schedule (no extensions). This project team has received accolades and awards
supporting a successful and well-managed project.
Skeptics predicted up to six months delay to
move into the new facility. NWQL’s move from the old facility into the new one
happened in two weeks with minimal coordination problems. Of course, there were
minor issues, such as a few new electric outlets to support old lab equipment.
Some "production lines" moved in the first week were set up and
operational in the second week, while other lines were being set up.
In our final partnering workshop, our
Partnering Facilitator (Norma Barr, Ph.D.) undertook a comprehensive and
impartial survey of project participants to rate individual feelings towards
work on this project. Our ratings were the highest the Facilitator has seen.
The summary analysis is available separately.
B) Cost Management
We continually applied value engineering with
the contractors. The Federal Acquisition Regulations (FARs) require that we bid
"plans and specs", however, we made it clear to all bidders that once
the contract was awarded, we would maintain an active value engineering (VE)
program. VE, with job site leadership and decision making, supported many
beneficial relationships to reach the desired balance of construction quality,
schedule, and profitability.
C) On-time Delivery
For leading edge science, we provided a
cast-in-place structural concrete frame to minimize very small vibration that
may effect sensitive equipment. Such a structure is both labor and material
intensive. In spite of "off-site" conditions, including a very wet
spring in Denver in 1998, a critical shortage of concrete, and a chronic labor
shortage, work was on time. Unlike other projects, the schedule was never
changed. The final delivery date was the exact date agreed to in the bid
documents. The construction teams’ continual effort to maintain a clean work
site brought about good results for quality work and finish quality with a
minimal punch list and mimimal "end of project" delay.
D) Minimal Change Orders
Although change orders were an ongoing
occurrence, they were typically minimal and were mostly just a clarification of
the specifications from a Request for Information (RFI). All stakeholders were
aware of the adverse impact of change orders, and subsequently inappropriate change
orders were minimized.
4. Who are the current and potential
beneficiaries of your program?
What are the
direct or indirect benefits to citizens? (200 words)
The immediate beneficiaries of this program
are the employees of USGS and NWQL. With the new facility, USGS is now capable
of supporting mission-critical analytical and biological work well into the 21st
century.
NWQL beneficiaries include existing, new, and
future customers (domestic and international), who can access a
state-of-the-art analytical facility. NWQL now provides higher quality, more
through analysis, and quicker results.
The public benefits from this laboratory as
dedicated to environmental sample analysis, to improved understanding of water
quality issues, and from information modeling for resource planning. Two recent
specific examples the work of this lab has addressed are:
1) The depletion of oxygen in the waters
adjacent to New Orleans in the Gulf of Mexico and the associated impact upon
the commercial fishing industry.
and
2) The components of MTBE from treated
gasoline appearing in fresh water with the associated impact upon the EPA’s
clean air decisions and the automobile and gasoline industries.
Other beneficiaries of this program include
the DFC who benefited from timely completion. Additional private sector
beneficiaries include the general contractor, the sub contractors, and on site
workers. Many workers were proud to say that this was the best project of their
careers.
Beneficiaries of the improved professional
management practices include the owner, the building users, the construction
contractors, and their families. By providing innovative professional
construction management services, GSA provided a profitable and timely work
environment.
Our "public" state-of-the-art
Internet communication tools helped eliminate many possible delays. The
electronic transfer (i.e. FTP) of design documents to or from the architect
provided a faster review of the bid documents while in production. Further, our
construction web site displayed up to 12 weekly progress photos, 24 hours per
day. Local and national government officials from both GSA and USGS, employees,
sub-contractors, equipment suppliers, and families of workers were able to see
for themselves actual progress from the previous week.
5. How
replicable is the program or aspects thereof?
What obstacles might others encounter? (250 words)
Innovation can be replicated for other
construction programs or private sector interaction. Establishing credibility
and trust was the first and most important issue. Establishing a clear scope of
work and positive relationship is required. Further, competent and
comprehensive planning by knowledgeable professionals is a pre-requisite for
on-site construction. We achieved success through an emphasis on quality in the
first partnering workshop by teambuilding and establishing credibility. This is
balanced by timely technical problem resolution and responsible financial
management.
Further, we established positive synergy
from:
a) Competent leadership by NWQL project
management.
b) NWQL as a well organized client with
clear mission, strategy, & appropriate scope of work.
c) GSA as owner, was open to innovation for
a more valuable end result.
To simplify another significant issue - time
is of the essence and time is money. With a clear project scope described in
the bid documents, contractors could effectively plan for supplies, materials,
& tools. Material management was not a real problem in spite of the heated
Denver construction market. Correspondingly, on-site personnel management was
problematic without a bad systemic effect.
We made tough decisions at the proper moment
and effectively explained our reasoning. Leadership committed to teamwork with
timely, fair dealings, and clearly communicated expectations. As project owner
and construction manager we were actively engaged in continual, responsible,
professional, timely and productive dialog with front line supervisors. We
understood the timing to facilitate individual work schedules. A notable
example is that most "Requests for Information" were answered on the
same or next working day.
Personnel obstacles include:
1) Those
unwilling to "hear" a necessary goal, or not to be open to
innovation.
2) Individuals
or firms who are neither professionals nor "top-notch" performers.
For success, everybody needed to understand
the required outcome and set aside narrow interests in favor of project goals
and dialog independent of the formal organizational chart to accomplish
"real" goals.
Our "spiritual foundation"
established a credible strategy to support the contractors other business
goals. We realize that as beneficiary of the new building, we can’t do the work
for them, but we can be flexible in our thinking and decision making to
understand other demands and allow flexibility to accomplish our needs.
6. List
all current funding sources, with dollar and percentage contributions for each
for your current operating budget. If applicable, include separate subtotals
for public and private funds and sources. Provide details of any unusual
financial features not described elsewhere. (200 words)
1) NWQL has an approximate annual
operating income of $11.5 million, which is part of the larger $60 million,
USGS - National Water Quality Program.
2) There's no specific correlation between
lab operations and GSA rent, as the services provided by NWQL are a unique
government function, independent of commercial interests.
3) GSA's preparation cost for the
"base building" for about $22.5 million was fully included within an
annual Congressional appropriation for the Executive Office.
4) GSA contributed previously amortized
(unimproved) property on the Denver Federal Center. However, if we assume
commercial Denver real estate with a present market value of $500,000 per acre
for Denver’s active real estate market, GSA's land contribution would have an
approximate value of $4 million.
5) The new construction site offered existing
utility connections for electricity, gas, sewer, & domestic water. Specific
dollar cost were not an expressed part of the "base building".
However, sewer / water tap & permit fees, together with electrical &
natural gas extensions are estimated at $400,000.
On this project, GSA participated in
a new, Congressionally authorized, utility savings program. Public Service
Company of Colorado provided up front funds to subsidize energy savings
equipment with GSA’s long term commitment to use natural gas. For NWQL, this
was $1.3 million.
The projected energy savings for
this lab are significant. We built a balanced heating and cooling system
offering unique savings for any laboratory facility. In addition to chillers
& boilers, we provided evaporative cooling & heat recovery to provide
the most cost effective thermal comfort system over the life of the building.
Savings should be considerable given the very high air change requirements
required for leading edge water analysis.
6) With a new location on the Denver
Federal Center, GSA provided a cost reduction for the Federal Protection
Service now valued at $39,277 per year. This value is less than the lab’s
expense associated with their former (isolated) location.
7) USGS's contribution to the project
included funds for new lab casework as installed by the general contractor with
an approximate value of $2.5 million. Other special costs brought the total
USGS portion to a total of $4.75M.