IPR
VW International, Inc
 Background
& Scope
 Approach to Study
 Conceptual Definitions – Past Lessons
 Results…
 Questions
 Mod
performed to the HFPO Guide (wiki)
update process with the idea to incorporate
the results/processes into the Guide.
 The scope is to evaluate, determine, and
recommend the optimal way for HFPA
Construction Management Division (CMD) to
support the initial outfitting/facility
provisioning and transition of operations for all
projects within HFPA’s construction program.

Specific requirement was to provide recommendations
regarding:
• Programming of funds and resources
• Staffing / Organization of CMD, Project Offices, and local MTF’s
•
•
•
•
•
transition committees
Development of IO&T budget requirements, management of
funds, and execution tracking
Transition , IO planning, consulting support & execution
management
IO procurement and management
Development of policies, procedures, checklists and other items
to document the plan
Other functions and actions required to provision and transition
operations into the new facility.
Ft Richardson (1)
FY07 $37.2M ($17.2M MCA)
Ft Wainwright (1)
$215.0M
Ft Lewis (1)
FY13 $8.0M
Ft Irwin (1)
FY07 $6.0M
Aberdeen (2)
FY09-13 $381.0.0M
Ft Carson (1)
FY13 $3.1M
Pike’s Peak (1)
FY12 $4.2M
White Sands (1)
FY13 $8.0M
Germany (1)
$13.0M
Germany (3)
FY12-13 $65.2M
Ft Detrick (2)
FY07-13 $735.0M
Ft Leonard Wood (1)
FY09 $20.0M
Korea (2)
$62.0M
Korea (1)
FY13 $11.8M
Ft Detrick (2)
FY06 $54.2M
Ft Drum (1)
FY07 $9.7M
Italy (1)
FY07 $52.0M ($29.5M MCA)
Ft Riley (1)
FY13 $20.0M
Ft Bragg (1)
$4.3M
Camp Zama (1)
FY13 $6.7M
Tripler (1)
FY13 $35.0M
07
Ft Stewart (1)
FY13 $4.0M
Legend
Medical MILCON In Construction
Total Projects: 10
Total PA: $372.1M
Medical MILCON Program FY 07-13
Total Projects: 26
Total PA: $1,596.3M / $46.7 MCA
Ft Hood (2)
$16.5M
Ft Hood (1)
FY07 $18.0M
FY
Camp Bullis (1)
FY08 $7.4M
Ft Sam Houston (1)
FY09 $11.0M
Ft Benning (1)
$7.1M
08
09
10
11
Ft Benning (2)
FY12-13 $153.0M
NOTE: From TMA FY08-13 POM Submission
12
13
 Study
and recommend best approach for HFPA
to support the Initial Outfitting and Transition
of the incoming Construction workload
 Analyze
available historical data for resourcing
patterns
 Create model to determine tasks
 Extrapolate scale given input parameters: $,
location, FY, type, quantities
 Research task suitability for contracting
 Consolidation by location, type of activity, designbuild options
 Estimate alternatives
 Identify risks due to capacity issues
 Determine
the distribution of total
requirements as defined by the
anticipated construction program
 Determine funding model using
construction program as input parameter
(pie-sizer)
 Create a Task Allocation model (pieslicer)
 Propose a model of task consolidation
based upon timing and location
 Utilizing
data from BAMC and Basset
AHC
 Analyze and catalogue expenditures into
task groupings.
 Determine allocation of funds expended
by Task Category
 Arrive at a model as to how to slice the
IO&T resource pie into Task Slices, which
could then be addressed as
requirements
 Analyze
prospective from three aspects: time (FY),
location, and scale.
 Determine
 Group
 Slice
size of each project’s pie.
the pies (by location & time).
each pie into tasks.
 Group
pies”.
the task “slices” into new “requirements
A
look back to Brooke Army Medical Center (as
detailed data source)
 Conceptual
definitions
Transition Funds

Investment
• Supports all costs required to move the “steady state” of the
facility from the current level to the newly proposed level of
the project. Currently MEDCOM and HFPA IO& transition
budgets pay some of these costs.

Transition
• Supports all costs that are temporal in nature, and that do
not result in a change of the “steady state.” Currently
MEDCOM and HFPA transition budgets pay for more than
this category.

Operations
• Supports annually recurring costs required to sustain the
new “steady state.” Currently MEDCOM and HFPA transition
budgets pay some of these costs.









Certification &
Commissioning
Dual Operations
Phasing
Planning
Post-BOD Initiatives
Preparation
Project Management
Promotion
Provisioning





Military Construction /
Renewal
Moving
Operations/Sustainment
Training
Reclamation

Certification & Commissioning
• Testing building systems, safety inspections-assessments.

Construction/Renewal
• The actual project appropriation, i.e MILCON, BRAC, or Renewal.

Dual Operations
• Operating two physical plants during occupation phase from BOD through
FOD.

Phasing
• Operating costs incurred due to phasing through the project period (temp
buildings, moving of functions temporarily, etc.)

Planning
• Actions not directly related to project management but which are
generated by the project existence (i.e. backfill plans for old facility).

Post-BOD Initiatives
• Initiatives not part of the original scope but identified to make the facility
meet user operational desires/needs (may be ECPs).

Preparation
• Making the facility ready for occupation but excluding provisioning
tasks. ie. pest control, initial pre-cleaning, IBS floor sealing.

Project Management
• Management tasks required to support construction and all other
tasks required to move in and operate it (excludes RE and tasks
that would be considered normal medical operational
management ie. strategic planning)

Promotion
• Any promotional actions: dedication ceremony, tours,
advertising/marketing materials. Does not include staff training
support materials.

Provisioning
• The bulk of the project support costs. Procurement costs to equip,
and install those new items. If part of a central contract, some
project management costs may be here.
 Moving
• The task of physically moving from the old to the new,
may become blurred with phasing costs in a total
renovation project.
 Operations/Sustainment
• Tasks and costs associated with operating the plant,
may be higher or lower than current dependent upon
adaptation of business practice to new facility.
 Training
• Staff training actions, i.e. orientations, systems hands-
on training, TDY
 Reclamation
• Getting out of the old facility prior to release to post.
e.g. disposal of old equipment, cleaning, potentially
environmental clean-up.
Operation
0.32%


Transition
2.08%


Investment 
97.60%
BAMC Costs - last year of
project, partial data.
Minimal Operational cost
information.
Transition Cost managed
by HFPA
Investment costs - mixed
management, includes
MILCON
Approximately $297M in
addition to MILCON
Operational
6.69%
Transition
5.71%
Investment
87.60%
Total: $454,907,502
Programs consist of: Investment, Transition & Operational costs.
Operational 7%
TOC 2%
MEDCASE 18%
HFPO 1%
IM, Investment 10%
Transition 3%
Investment 5%
BRAC 9%
MILCON 46%
Programs consist of: Investment, Transition & Operational costs.
4.4% PM
6.0% Transition
Applied to some projects :

12.2% Operational
121 Hospital Korea, PA: $7.1M
• Transition
• Investment
9.2% Investment
• Operational

17.7% IM
Investment
Beach Education Center, PA:$24M
• Transition
• Investment
• Operational
32.5%
MEDCASE

$0.738M
$4.217M
$0.866M
$ 2.496M
$14.256M
$ 2.928M
Ft Wainwright Hospital, PA:$117M
• Transition
• Investment
• Operational
$12.198M
$69.498M
$14.274M
IM Provisioning
19.05%
Operations 13.39%
Training 1.62%
Certification & Promotion
0.24%
Post-BOD Initiatives 1.32%
Cat E
8.04%
Moving 1.36%
Project Management
5.37%
Phasing 0.89%
Decomissioning 0.37%
Preparation 1.57%
Dual Operations
0.60%
Provisioning
46.19%
Excludes construction costs, except Cat E ($18M), percents of task costs not total project cost.
Training Certification
0.24%
0.96%
Operations
6.21%
IM Provisioning
20.69%
Promotion
Post-BOD Initiatives
0.14%
Planning
0.00%
Moving
0.02%
2.91%
Project Management
4.12%
Phasing
0.01%
Reclamation
7.51%
Preparation
0.45%
Dual Operations
0.57%
Provisioning
56.18%
1997 look
Facility / HFPO – Requirements determination /
re-use validation
I&O Requests to MEDCOM
MEDCOM release funds on demand
Facility Logistics procurement process
Receipt, storage, installation process managed
by facility and HFPO / project resources
Status Quo
Contractor Turn-Key • Central, Regional or Project Specific
Contract Support
HFPA IO Teams
Other …
• Central, Regional or Project Specific
• Central or Regional
Contractor
HFPO
Requirements identification
/ re-use validation
Facilitating contractor
Procurement
Installation and acceptance
coordination
Receipt & Storage
Installation / Training
Facility
• Requirements
identification /
re-use validation
• Receipt &
Storage
• Installation /
training
CX
• Procurement
• Installation /
Training
HFPO
• Coordinating
requirements
identification
• Coordinating
logistics’
procurement,
receipt & storage
• Installation and
acceptance
coordination
HFPA IO Team
• Requirements identification / re-use validation
• Procurement
• Receipt
• Storage
• Installation / training
HFPO
• Facilitating requirements identification
• Installation and acceptance coordination
Western Region
Eastern Region
NOTE: Location sites (
) from TMA FY08-13 POM Submission
Status Quo
Turn-Key
MX
HFPA Teams
Requirements ID
1
2
1
3
Procurement
Timeliness
1
3
1
3
Procurement
Correct
2
3
3
3
Receipt/Storage
2
3
2
2
Installation
1
2
1
1
Totals
7
15
8
12
1 – Creates a Challenging Management Efficiency
2 – Is an Acceptable Management Efficiency
3 – Creates an Improved Management Efficiency