Los ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
CITY • EAST• HARBOR • MISSION • PIERCE• SOUTHWEST• TRADE-TECHNICAL • VALLEY • WEST
MEMO
Date: April 18, 2016
To:
Facilities Master Planning arid Oversight Committee:
Ernie Moreno, chair; Scott Svonkin and Sydney Kamlager
From: James O'Reilly, chief facilities execuf e
RE:
April 25, 2016 Facilities Master Planni g and Oversight Committee
Please find attached background materials for the Facilities Master Planning and
Oversight meeting to be held on April 25, 2016.
The agenda will include project design reviews, an analysis of upcoming solar
photovoltaic buyout options, a follow-up to the BuildLACCD invoice and payment
process review and the Program Management Office annual report.
Background materials are inCiuded for your reference.
\
I will be joined by staff at the;meeting to discuss the item on the agenda. Please feel free
to call me at (213) 891-2048 if you have.a ny questions.
C:
Dr. Francisco Rodriguez, chancellor
Dr. Adriana Barrera, deputy chancellor
Dr. Linda D. Rose, president, Southwest College
Thomas Hall, director, facilities planning and development
Thomas Donovan, director, LACCD bond Program Management Office
JDO/drm
770 WILSHIRE BLVD., LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017-3896 * (213) 891-2000
Building for Tomorrow’s Leaders
LACCD Program Management
515 S. Flower Street, Suite 900
Los Angeles, California 90071
www.build-laccd.org
213.593 8000
866.817.1051
tel
fax
FACILITIES MASTER PLANNING AND OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE
April 25, 2016
Background materials
Page #
Valley College – Energy Infrastructure Improvements project review .......................................... 3
Valley College – Transportation and Accessibility project review ................................................ 10
Trade-Tech College – Grand Avenue Enhancement and Blue Line Extension project review ..... 16
Solar Photovoltaic buyout analysis ............................................................................................... 26
Invoice and payment review for BuildLACCD by Deloitte ............................................................ 37
Program Management Office annual report ................................................................................ 53
Construction update summary ..................................................................................................... 77
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
2 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
3 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
4 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
5 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
6 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
7 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
8 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
9 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
10 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
11 of 78
1SPKFDU%FTDSJQUJPO
4DPQFPG8PSL"SFBT
12
3$5.,1*
12
3$5.,1*
ϭϭ
ϰϴ
ϲϳ
021$5&+6
/$9$//(<
ϱϯ
ϯ
ϱϮ
ϴ
ϳ
)+
ϲ
ϱϬ
ϰϵ
12
3$5.,1*
12
3$5.,1*
*(1(
5$725
12
3$5.,1*
12
3$5.,1*
12
3$5.,1*
12
3$5.,1*
12
3$5.,1*
12
3$5.,1*
-&(&/%
1"$,"(&
/PSUI(ZN
4PVUI(ZN
1"$,"(&
4UBEJVN
1"$,"(&
)VNBOJUJFT
&OHJOFFSJOH
#FIBWJPSBM4DJFODF
'PSFJHO-BOHVBHFT
1"$,"(&
$BNQVT4JUF
1"$,"(&
#FIBWJPSBM4DJFODF$MBTTSPPNT
/$9$//(<
/$9$//(<
1"$,"(&
.BUI4DJFODF
-JGF4DJFODF&NFSHFODZ4FSWJDFT5SBJOJOH
#VTJOFTT+PVSOBMJTN
021$5&+6
021$5&+6
1"$,"(&
"SU
.VTJD
/05& 4DPQF PG XPSL BSFBT TIPXO GPS SFGFSFODF POMZ
'PS FYBDU MPDBUJPOT PG TDPQF TFF QSPKFDU EPDVNFOUT
-PT"OHFMFT$PNNVOJUZ$PMMFHF%JTUSJDU
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
/$9$/
/$9$//(<
-PT"OHFMFT7BMMFZ$PMMFHF]$BNQVTXJEF"DDFTTJCJMJUZ*NQSPWFNFOUT]1SPKFDU%FTDSJQUJPOBOE$SJUFSJB
021$5&+6
$5&+6
)+
12 of 78
)+
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
13 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
14 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
15 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
16 of 78
LOS ANGEL ES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTR IC T
DEPARTMENT OF FACILITIES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
SUSTAINABLE BUILDING PROGRAM
FACILITIES MASTER PLANNING & OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE (FMP&OC) MEETING
NON-LEED PROJECT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
College Name:
LACCD Project Name:
LACCD Project Number:
College Project Director:
Design Build Team:
Los Angeles Trade Technical College
Grand Avenue Enhancement Phase 1 - Blue Line Extension
07T.773.05 / 07T.773.06
Rory Lorenzo
Belfour Beatty / DLR Group
Project Description:
New plaza, monument signs, enhanced Accessibility, crosswalk and traffic light
realignment, sidewalk widening, and bioswales.
Relevant Statistics:
The College requires clearly identified and accessible entrances from its adjoining streets and the Metro
Line.
The design-build / design-bid-build project has a construction cost of $3,618,217 and is funded by MTA,
FTA, Proposition A & AA, and Measure J.
Schedule:
Expected Design Phase Completion:
Expected Construction Phase Completion:
Expected Close-Out Phase Completion:
12/2016
02/2018
03/2018
Reason why Project does not meet District LEED™ Project Criteria:
The project scope only involves hardscape, landscape, and signage improvements
Sustainable Features:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Drought tolerant landscaping
Low water use irrigation
New Bioswales
Easy to maintain surfaces
Shade trees and canopy structure
Low power consumption lighting
Form DES-0015-A
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Page 1 of 1
Rev.06.29.15
17 of 78
Oak Hall- F
G
B
J
A
C
A
LRCLearning
Resource
Center
Cypress Hall
D
H
K
M
EMPTY LOT
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
18 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
19 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
20 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
21 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
22 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
23 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
24 of 78
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
25 of 78
Los Angeles Community College District
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SERVICES
Synopsis of Solar Photovoltaic System
Buyouts
Facilities Master Planning and Oversight Committee
April 25, 2016
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
1
26 of 78
Summary of District Photovoltaic Systems
• There are 10 free-standing solar photovoltaic (PV)
systems at five colleges and one property.
• Three categories based on the year that they were
installed and the financing mechanism used:
2007 Project (1)
2009 Projects (6)
2010 Projects (3)
Power Purchase
Agreement
Solar Leases/Master
Equipment Leases
with Production
Guarantees
Solar Leases/Master
Equipment Leases
with Production
Guarantees
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
2
27 of 78
PPA & Solar Lease Comparison
Power Purchase
Agreement
Solar Lease
Provider paid for & installed PV
Provider paid for & installed PV
Provider maintains facility for life of
agreement
Provider maintains facility for life of
lease
Colleges pay from general
fund to provider based on
electricity produced
Lease payment amounts
fixed & paid from respective
colleges’ 40J energy funds
System buyout option end of year 6 /
beginning of year 7
System buyout option end of year 6 /
beginning of year 7
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
3
28 of 78
ELAC Northwest Parking Solar Photovoltaic Array
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
4
29 of 78
ELAC Northwest Parking Solar Photovoltaic Array
Year
Buyout Value
(in millions)
Termination
Value
1
2
3
4
Annual Production Charges +
$130k annual capacity charge
$333,430.50
No buyout /
termination
option
$342,000.01
No buyout /
termination option
$350,930.51
• Buyout/term value in year 6
refers to buyout/term at end
of year 6 / beginning of year
7
$360,237.21
5
$369,935.95
6
$3.17
$380,043.25
7
$3.07
$390,576.32
8
$2.97
$401,553.10
9
$2.87
$412,992.28
10
$2.77
$424,913.33
11
$2.67
$437,336.55
12
$2.57
$450,283.10
Buyout value +
removal fee
13
$2.47
14
$2.37
$477,835.30
15
$2.27
$492,487.86
16
$2.17
$507,757.66
17
$2.07
$523,670.71
18
$1.97
$540,254.08
19
$1.87
$557,536.04
20
$1.77
$575,545.99
• Buyout value: lump sum
payment from purchaser to
power provider before end
of agreement term, to take
ownership of generating
facility and terminate
agreement
• Term value: Lump sum
payment from purchaser to
power provider upon term of
agreement
$463,775.03
TOTAL
$8,793,094.79
Building for tomorrow’s
leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
• No buyout/term in first 6
years
• Term value = buyout value
+ removal fee
• Removal fee = all costs
associated with removal of
generating facility, if
purchaser elects to have the
power provider remove the
generating facility upon
early term of agreement
5
30 of 78
ELAC NW Parking Lot Solar PV System
Post Buyout Service and Maintenance Alternatives
• Alternative I:
– Do nothing and leave it the way it is. Right now, it is being
serviced and maintained by an outside company.
• Alternative II:
- Hire the services of an outside company to do the
service and maintenance of the existing solar asset.
• Alternative III:
Continue the service and maintenance contract for at
least 1 year so that during that year (learning curve),
ELAC Facility Personnel could learn and be trained to
do their own service and maintenance work.
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
6
31 of 78
Decision and Financial Analysis of ELAC Feasible
Solar PV System Buyout Alternatives
• Alternative I:
• 40J Energy Budget Funds are earmarked for
acquisition of solar assets.
– Execute Buyout ASAP in order to maximize cost savings benefit.
Please see table below.
6 Year Buyout Cost Savings Benefit
$3,483,767.36
7 Year Buyout Cost Savings Benefit
8 Year Buyout Cost Savings Benefit
9 Year Buyout Cost Savings Benefit
$3,193,191.03
$2,891,637.93
$2,578,645.65
It does make financial sense to proceed with the buyout, even if the
worst case scenario is considered where we include the cost of the
service and maintenance contract for the remaining 12 years contract +
feasible and/or unforeseen replacement costs of (2) 500 kW Satcon
Inverters ($615,509.00).
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
7
32 of 78
Decision and Financial Analysis of Feasible Solar
PV System Buyout Alternatives
Alternative II – Status Quo
– If Solar PV System Buyout is not considered by the BOT, then
ELAC will continue to make annual payments for the remaining
years of the contract (12 years).
– ELAC has already made $2,928,707 in payments until May 1st,
2016.
– Total payments made by ELAC during the life of the contract (20
Year) will amount to $8,793,095.
– Even if buyout doesn’t ever occur until the end of the contract,
there is still a mandatory buyout amount per contract which
needs to be paid off in addition to a removal fee and/or cost for
the solar system.
– It is important to know that every time we delay the buyout
process for whatever reason(s), there is a financial loss on
average of $302K per year in spite of your decrease in buyout
value of $100K per year.
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
8
33 of 78
ELAC Northwest Parking Solar Photovoltaic Array
PV Array Buyout Facts
• 1,190 kW DC (5,952 panels)
• Buyout option began on May 1, 2015
• Funds allocated in the 40J Energy budget to proceed
with system acquisition for $3,072,750 (if executed by
5/1/2016)
• According to the system provider, Chevron Energy
Solutions, system has performed as expected based
on monitoring analysis reports.
• ELAC will stop paying for energy production out of
general funds.
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
9
34 of 78
ELAC Northwest Parking Solar Photovoltaic Array
Operations and Maintenance Options Post Buyout
1. District hires the services of an outside company to
service and maintain the existing PV system.
2. Additional College facilities staff operate and
maintain the systems after appropriate training.
3. O&M services cost per year (based on formal
quotation):
$20,458
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
10
35 of 78
Schedule of System Buyouts
Year
Type
College
Project Name
1
2007
PPA
East
NW Parking PV Farm /
Carport Structure
2
2009
SL
Harbor
3
2009
SL
4
2009
5
Early Buyout
Net EBO Price
Total Net EBO Price
5/1/16
$ 2,972,750
2,972,750
Phase 1 – Parking lots 6 &
8
6/30/16
2,050,501
Harbor
Phase 2 – Parking lots 6 &
7
6/30/16
2,126,845
SL
Pierce
Parking lot 6
6/30/16
896,160
2009
SL
East
A1 CC, C1 MG, E9 WG,
G3 Aud, H9 PF, P1 AS
6/30/16
217,542
6
2009
SL
SW
Parking Lot 3
6/30/16
463,194
7
2009
SL
East
NW Parking PV System
Expansion
6/30/16
239,255
8
2010
SL
Pierce
Parking lots 1 & 8
12/30/17
1,377,619
9
2010
SL
Valley
M&O, C & D Parking Lots
12/30/17
1,140,045
10
2010
SL
VDK
South Parking Lot
12/30/17
387,471
TOTAL
5,993,497
2,905,136
11,871,383
PPA = Power Purchase Agreement with production guarantees
SL = Solar Leases/Master Equipment Leases with production guarantees
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
11
36 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review
for BuildLACCD
Briefing No. 2
April 25, 2016
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
37 of 78
Status Update
On February 26, 2016, LACCD’s Board and AECOM requested Deloitte to assess the invoice and payment process at BuildLACCD
Tasks Completed
1. Assembled team and developed work plan
2. Interviews with CPTs at 9 colleges and PMO
3. Interviews with MATOC Prime‐Vendors (Staff‐Augmentation)
4. Data analytics ‐ MATOC and GC
5. Contractual Lifecycle Analysis ‐ MATOC Contracts and GC
6. Actual Lifecycle Analysis – MATOC Staff‐Augmentation 7. Variance Analysis ‐ MATOC Staff‐Augmentation 8. Preliminary Observations and Opportunities for Improvement Tasks Underway 1. Data Analytics ‐ MATOC Professional Services and GC
2. Overview analysis of FF&E and Professional Services Contracts 3. Period‐of‐Performance (POP) Analysis
Tasks Not Started
1. Potential interviews with MATOC Sub‐Vendors 2. Representative Invoice and Payment Testing
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
38 of 78
BuildLACCD Organization Chart (for invoice and payment process)
Board of Trustees
District
PMO
PMO Partners
Deloitte
Central Services*
PMO Partners
Pacifica Services, Inc.
Gafcon, Inc.
CPT City
CPT East
CPT Harbor
CPT Mission
CPT Pierce
CPT Southwest
CPT Trade‐Tech
CPT Valley
CPT West
Primes
Primes
Primes
Primes
Primes
Primes
Primes
Primes
Primes
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
Subs
*Central Services include: College Project Central Services (e.g., legal and insurance), Satellites (Southgate and VDK), and District Wide Initiatives (e.g.: IT, Energy, Transportation & Accessibility). FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
39 of 78
Four Types of BuildLACCD Contracts and Invoices
1.
Multi‐Award Task Order Contracts (MATOC), which include:
staff augmentation and professional services
2. General Contractor (GC) contracts
Invoices for MATOC and GC contracts require the most effort to process by the BuildLACCD team. For this reason, our analysis and observations to‐date focused on these types of contracts.
3. Furniture, Fixture and Equipment (FF&E) contracts, which include:
furniture procurement and Move Managers
4. Professional Services, which includes master agreements for:
Architect/Engineer, Inspector of Record and Laboratory of Record
Invoices for FF&E and Professional Services contracts appear to require lower level of effort to process by the BuildLACCD team. For this reason, our analysis to‐date did not focus on these types of contracts. We will perform this analysis at the Board’s request. FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
40 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review ‐ Contractual Lifecycle
(MATOC Vendors)
PMO
District
PMO
D
E
F
Invoice Receipt and Process by PMO
District Review, Drawdown and Wire Funds
Cut Check/
Mail
C
Invoice Receipt and process by CPT
CPT
B2
B1
Prime Vendors
(If applicable)
Element
Contractual Duration
A
Beyond PMO’s Contractual Purview
B1 or B2
15th of each Month after POP
Prime Receives
Payment
G
Prime Vendors
C
D
A
Sub‐vendors
E
30 Calendar Days
H
F
G
Beyond PMO’s Functional Purview
H
Paid when Prime paid (Varies from 7 to 15 Calendar Days)
(If applicable)
Sub‐vendors
Element within PMO’s contractual purview
Element outside of PMO’s functional purview
Element outside of PMO’s contractual purview
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
41 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review ‐ Actual Lifecycle (Apr 2014 to Mar 2015)
MATOC Staff Augmentation Prime‐Vendors
Process Description
Avg. Durations
(Calendar Days)
Period of Performance (POP) A and B
End to Receipt by CPT/PMO
Arcadis US,
Inc.
Cumming
Hill
Jacobs
Cordoba
Construction International, Engineering
Corporation
Management
Inc.
Group
Jacobs
Project
Management
Vanir
Yang
Construction Management,
Management
Inc.
STV/AVA
35
22
28
NA
32
NA
47
37
13
CPT to Prime
C -
-
5
NA
-
NA
-
-
-
PMO Analysis
D
16
15
14
NA
16
NA
20
14
12
District Review / Drawdown
E
6
7
6
NA
7
NA
5
6
6
Cut check / Mail
F
3
3
2
NA
2
NA
2
1
2
Integrated Cycle
60
46
52
NA
54
NA
77
60
33
Median
54
34
45
NA
54
NA
72
58
30
Mode
41
34
60
NA
34
NA
72
41
27
Invoice Count
98
15
109
NA
67
NA
12
77
40
$1.9 M
$313 K
$2.1 M
NA
$1.3 M
NA
$139 K
$1.5 M
$641 K
24%
4%
27%
NA
16%
NA
2%
19%
8%
Total Invoice Amounts
% of Total Invoice Amounts
Notes:
1. Based on the available data within PMO’s information systems, each element is calculated from a distinct number of invoices.
2. Data was not available for Elements G and H, since they were not within the PMO’s Functional or Contractual purview.
3. Hill International Inc. and Jacobs Project Management did not have invoices within this period.
4. “% of Total Invoice Amounts” represents the ratio of each vendor’s total invoiced amount versus the aggregate invoiced amounts by all vendors for this period.
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
42 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review ‐ Actual Lifecycle (Apr 2015 to Nov 2015)
MATOC Staff Augmentation Prime‐Vendors
Jacobs
Project
Management
Vanir
Yang
Construction Management,
Management
Inc.
Avg. Durations
(Calendar Days)
Period of Performance (POP) End to Receipt by CPT/PMO
A and B
20
29
22
41
16
15
29
21
12
CPT to Prime
C 11
-
7
-
-
-
3
-
-
PMO Analysis
D
15
11
17
12
26
16
16
11
12
District Review / Drawdown
E
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
Cut check / Mail
F
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
3
Integrated Cycle
45
50
47
71
51
40
53
42
32
Median
41
37
42
50
43
37
42
41
30
Mode
37
37
41
41
43
31
35
41
24
380
73
370
28
8
230
143
214
85
$6.2 M
$1.3 M
$6.2 M
$376 K
$142 K
$4.1 M
$1.9 M
$3.7 M
$1.3 M
25%
5%
25%
2%
1%
17%
8%
15%
5%
Invoice Count
Total Invoice Amounts
% of Total Invoice Amounts
Arcadis US,
Inc.
Cumming
Hill
Jacobs
Cordoba
Construction International, Engineering
Corporation
Management
Inc.
Group
Process Description
STV/AVA
Notes:
1. Based on the available data within PMO’s information systems, each element is calculated from a distinct number of invoices.
2. Data was not available for Elements G and H, since they were not within the PMO’s Functional or Contractual purview.
2. In mid‐April 2015, Jacobs Engineering Group was substituted by Jacobs Project Management to provide Staff Augmentation Services for BuildLACCD. We observed invoices from both entities for a short period in April 2015.
3. “% of Total Invoice Amounts” represents the ratio of each vendor’s total invoiced amount versus the aggregate invoiced amounts by all vendors for this period.
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
43 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review ‐ Actual Lifecycle (Dec 2015 to Feb 2016)
MATOC Staff Augmentation Prime‐Vendors
Process Description
Ave. Durations
(Calendar Days)
Cordoba
Contractual Requirement Arcadis US,
(Days)
Inc.
Corporation
Sub to Prime
A
Prime to CPT/PMO
B
NA
15th of each month after
POP
CPT to Prime
C
D
PMO Analysis
District Review / Drawdown
Cut check / Mail
E
Integrated Cycle
Median
Mode
Shortest
Longest
Invoice Count
Total Invoice Amounts
% of Total Invoice Amounts
Hill
Jacobs
International,
Project
Inc.
Management
STV/AVA
Vanir
Yang
Construction Management,
Management
Inc.
6
12
Not Provided
NA
6
Pending
Pending
5
17
24
Not Provided
17
15
Pending
Pending
5
6
17
4
25
5
14
6
23
5
16
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
5
7
8
8
8
9
7
Pending
Pending
8
2
4
2
4
1
2
5
2
4
Pending
Pending
Not Provided
Pending
Pending
2
2
2
8
Not Provided
NA
7
Pending
Pending
2
71
NA
NA
NA
NA
3
Not Provided
49
49
57
38
66
73
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
Pending
39
57
59
NA
44
71
7
Pending
-
54
54
57
35
88
82
Pending
Pending
30
28
26
26
39
11
-
$1.4 M
$26 K
$616 K
$107 K
$1.3 M
Pending
Pending
$158 K
-
38%
1%
17%
3%
37%
Pending
Pending
4%
30
F
Prime Receives Payment G
Prime Sends Payment to H
Sub
Cumming
Construction
Management
NA
Paid when Prime Paid
(varies from 7 to 15 days)
-
Not Provided
Not Provided
Not Provided
Not Provided
Notes:
1. Based on the available data within PMO’s information systems, each element is calculated from a distinct number of invoices.
2. Cumming did not provide dates for invoice process and payment tracking. Thus, Elements C to F were populated with data from the PMO’s information systems.
3. STV/AVA and Vanir have not provided complete data sets for invoice process and payment tracking. This data remains outstanding. 4. All Primes except Cordoba furnished Sub‐Consultant agreement templates for our review with respect to their subs.
5. Due to our cut‐off date of March 5, 2016, some data (i.e., drawdown dates, cut check dates) were not available for all invoices submitted in Feb 2016. 6. This table represents only those invoices that have been paid per PMO Information systems, and does not include any open invoices.
7. “% of Total Invoice Amounts” represents the ratio of each vendor’s total invoiced amount versus the aggregate invoiced amounts by all vendors for this period.
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
44 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review Actual Lifecycle for MATOC Staff Augmentation Prime‐Vendors: Elements A to F
(Apr 2014 to Feb 2016)
DAYS
40
35
Arcadis, Cordoba, Hill, Jacobs and Yang
All MATOC Staff‐Augmentation Vendors
A and B
30
A and B
25
A and B
20
D
D
D
15
10
5
C
C
E
E
E
C
F
F
F
G
H
0
April 2014 to March 2015
POP End to Receipt by CPT/PMO
April 2015 to November 2015
CPT to PMO
PMO Analysis
District Review, DD
December 2015 to February 2015
Cut Check/Mail
Prime Receives Payment
Prime Sends Payment to Sub
Notes:
1. Data was not available for Elements G and H between April 2014 and November 2015, since they were not within the PMO’s functional or contractual purview.
2. Cumming, STV/AVA and Vanir did not provide data for the period between Dec 2015 to Feb 2016.
3. MATOC Prime‐Vendors are required to submit their invoices within 15 days after the end of Period of Performance.
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
45 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review ‐ Actual Lifecycle for MATOC Staff Augmentation: ‘AIM Consulting’ as Jacobs’ Sub‐Vendor (Dec 2015 to Feb 2016)
DAYS 50
C‐F
45
40
9%
35
30
25
20
$ 279,000
A‐B
100%
H
15
91%
10
5
0
POP End to Receipt by
CPT/PMO
CPT/PMO Receipt to Mail
Check
E
G
64%
36%
9%
91%
District Review/Drawdown
Prime Receives Payment
6%
28%
67%
Prime Paid to Send Payment
to Sub
Notes:
1. These percentages are based on data provided by Jacobs to BuildLACCD (as well as within BuildLACCD’s information systems): 17 invoices at Elements A‐B; 11 invoices at Elements C‐G; and 18 invoices for Element H.
2. According to its Sub‐Consultant Agreement, Jacobs was required to pay AIM Consulting within 7 calendar days of Jacobs’ receipt of payment from BuildLACCD.
3. MATOC Prime‐Vendors are required to submit their invoices within 15 days after the end of Period of Performance.
4. Element E (District Review/Drawdown) is demonstrated via a stand‐alone bar graph (and is already accounted for in Elements C‐F).
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
46 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review ‐ Actual Lifecycle for MATOC Staff Augmentation: ‘Global Design Build’ as Jacobs’ Sub‐Vendor (Dec 2015 to Feb 2016)
DAYS 45
C‐F
40
11%
35
30
$ 62,000
A‐B
25
20
75%
H
89%
15
10
25%
E
11%
56%
33%
56%
11%
33%
District Review/Drawdown
Prime Receives Payment
5
0
POP End to Receipt by
CPT/PMO
CPT/PMO Receipt to Mail
Check
G
22%
11%
67%
Prime Paid to Send Payment
to Sub
Notes:
1. These percentages are based on data provided by Jacobs to BuildLACCD (as well as within BuildLACCD’s information systems): 4 invoices at Elements A‐B; and 9 invoices for all other elements.
2. According to its Sub‐Consultant Agreement, Jacobs was required to pay its subs within 7 calendar days of Jacobs’ receipt of payment from BuildLACCD.
3. MATOC Prime‐Vendors are required to submit their invoices within 15 days after the end of Period of Performance.
4. Element E (District Review/Drawdown) is demonstrated via a stand‐alone bar graph (and is already accounted for in Elements C‐F).
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
47 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review: Observations/Inputs from CPT Interviews
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Invoices from GCs require wet signatures from Architect/Engineer and IOR/LOR. CPTs spend a lot of time to obtain these signatures if these individuals/entities are not on site.
Invoices for Retention Release from GCs also require wet signatures from Architect/Engineer and IOR/LOR. CPTs report that these signatures had been previously obtained from prior invoices, are therefore redundant, and need not be required. Certain MATOC Prime Vendors do not submit invoices in a timely way. On occasion, these Primes hold onto invoices from prior months and submit them in a ‘bundle’ at a later date.
There was not a clear way to determine how long it takes for Prime Vendors to receive Cut Checks once mailed by the PMO. On occasion, Prime Vendors submit invoice packages that are incomplete or inaccurate. This lengthens the time for processing by the CPT, since they must question the Primes for requisite clarifications and missing information. If vendors do not respond promptly, the CPT will reject the entire invoice (including any Sub‐Vendors) and return it to the Prime.
On occasion, green‐bag courier service was delayed or did not deliver invoices to the PMO.
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
48 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review: Observations/Inputs from MATOC Prime Interviews
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Agreements between Primes and Subs specified varying payment terms (between 7 and 15 calendar days).
Agreements between Primes and Subs often did not specify a timeline for invoice submission.
On occasion, Prime’s staff (or their Subs) have had difficulty in acquiring wet signatures from supervisors for labor logs.
After a shift in submission procedure was instituted by the PMO in December 2015, some Primes reported a lack of clear communication and a lack of transparent point of contact among PMO/CPTs. Around this time and on occasion, they experienced delays in invoice payments and difficulties in getting responses to inquiries from the PMO.
Some Primes indicated recent, improved communication from the PMO in regard to responding to questions and processing some of their back‐logged invoices.
Some Primes elected to submit only after it had received all invoices from all Subs for a given period of performance. If one Sub did not submit in a timely way, then all Subs became delayed.
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
49 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review: Opportunities for Process Improvement – MATOC Contracts
Element Suggested Improvement
Savings in Days
A
1) Electronic signatures on ‘labor logs’ eliminates time to obtain on‐site approvals and allows faster processing time between Subs and Primes
2) Automated monthly reminders between Primes to Subs will prompt invoices to be generated in a timely way
1 to 5 days
B
1) Automated monthly reminders between CPT/PMO to Primes will prompt invoices to be generated in a timely way
2) Electronic submission of invoices will reduce transit time of invoices among Primes, CPTs, and the PMO
3) Possible implementation of ‘PMIS’ Invoice Loading feature by Primes to expedite processing and to enhance transparency and communication
4) Assign a Point of Contact at the CPTs/PMO for each prime as a “go‐to” resource to facilitate communication between PMO and Primes
1 to 3 days
C
1) Electronic signatures will reduce processing time by CPTs
2) Electronic submission of invoices between CPT and PMO will reduce transit time
1 to 3 days
D
1) Staffing and process review at PMO may alleviate backlog and processing time
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Under Analysis
50 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review: Opportunities for Process Improvement – MATOC Contracts (Cont.) Element Suggested Improvement
E
1) Designate certain days for submission of Invoice and Drawdown Requests to District (i.e., Tuesday and Thursday of every week by 2:00 PM)
2) Designate back‐up individual(s) at District for review and approval of Invoice and Drawdown Requests
3) Allocate Reserve Funds to the PMO to allow checks to be cut prior to District’s final approval
4) Streamline communication between District and LA County to release funds in a more accelerated manner
Savings in Days
1 to 4 Days
Electronic Fund Transfers (EFTs) in lieu of paper checks that are wet‐signed and mailed could lead to many efficiencies:
F & G 1) Automated authorizations eliminates the need for manual signatures and mailing of individual checks
2) Less reliance on third‐party delivery systems
3) Higher assurance that funds are received, and are received in a faster and more timely way
4) Automated proof of payment
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
(See next slide)
51 of 78
Invoice Process and Payment Review: Opportunities for Process Improvement – MATOC Contracts (Cont.) Element
F & G
(Cont.)
H
Suggested Improvement
5) Less administrative follow‐up burden for PMO and District associated with lost checks
6) Automated notifications to Vendors when funds are wired
1) EFTs between Primes and Subs will hasten the payment time
Cumulative Time Savings
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Savings in Days
1 to 5 Days
Under Analysis
5 to 20 Days 52 of 78
Los Angeles Community College District
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT SERVICES
PMO Annual Update
Facilities Master Planning and Oversight Committee
April 25, 2016
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
1
53 of 78
BuildLACCD Financial Summary
A
Funding June 2015
Colleges
B
Current Funding
Dec 2015
$4.75 B C
D
E
Contracted Expended
Dec 2015 Dec 2015
$4.75 B $4.16 B
EAC
Dec 2015
$3.86 B
$330.37 M $330.37 M $216.44 M
$209.91 M $335.99 M
Central Services
$541.02 M $541.02 M $440.41 M
$368.38 M $541.02 M
$371.62 M $374.65 M $205.83 M
$160.01 M $374.64 M
Retire District Debt $117.16 M $117.16 M $109.64 M
& Refinance
$109.64 M $117.16 M
District Bond Contingency
Program Reserve1
TOTAL
$14.64 M Variance Explanation(s) $4.76 B $(11.21 M)
Satellites
Districtwide Initiatives
F=B‐E
Variance
Funding ‐
EAC
$(5.62 M)
EAC adjustment ($11.2M) not captured by Dashboard data run due to timing issue. Resolved in January 2016 Dashboard to show zero
variance.
Funding adjustment pending District resolution.
$‐ N/A
$0.01 M
June to Dec Funding:
Funding transfer from Pierce College to consolidate project IT funds into one financial ID.
Current Funding to EAC: EAC adjustment not captured by the Dashboard data run due to timing issue. Resolved in January 2016 Dashboard to show zero variance.
$‐ N/A
$14.64 M $‐
$‐
$1.53 M
$140.00 M $133.17 M $‐
$‐
$5.13 B
$4.70 B
$‐ $133.17 M College.
$6.13 B $129.47 M
$6.26 B $6.26 B $13.12 M N/A
Funding transfer to Mission Source: December 2015 Dashboard Report
1
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
Program Reserve EAC currently under evaluation to account for outstanding Program-wide exposure.
2
54 of 78
College-Level Financial Summary
A
B
C
D
E
F=B‐E
Current Variance
Funding Funding Contracted Expended EAC
Funding ‐
June 2015 Dec 2015 Dec 2015 Dec 2015 Dec 2015 EAC
Variance Explanation(s) City
$568.44 M
$568.44 M
$482.14 M
$452.76 M $568.44 M
$‐ N/A
East
$664.82 M
$664.82 M
$622.67 M
$573.94 M $664.82 M
$‐ N/A
EAC adjustment not captured by Dashboard data run due to timing issue. Resolved in January 2016 Dashboard to show zero variance.
Funding variance (June to Dec): Funds transfer from Program Reserve.
Funding variance (June to Dec): Funds transfer from Pierce to 40J IT to consolidate budget under one financial ID.
Harbor
$449.24 M
$449.24 M
$440.22 M
$382.64 M $460.44 M $(11.21 M)
Mission
$438.68 M
$445.51 M
$420.83 M
$399.88 M $445.51 M
$‐
Pierce
$627.76 M
$625.06 M
$499.49 M
$440.33 M $625.06 M
$‐
Southwest
$405.39 M
$405.39 M
$375.46 M
$370.27 M $405.39 M
$‐ N/A
Trade
$582.29 M
$582.29 M
$467.22 M
$433.74 M $582.29 M
$‐ N/A
Valley
$612.49 M
$612.49 M
$490.64 M
$449.08 M $612.49 M
$‐ N/A
West
$400.91 M
$400.91 M
$360.24 M
$354.30 M $400.91 M
$‐ N/A
$4.75 B $4.75 B
$4.16 B
TOTAL
$3.86 B
See Harbor Variance
$4.76 B $(11.21 M) Explanation above.
Source: December 2015 Dashboard Report
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
3
55 of 78
Risk Exposure Analysis
As of December 31, 2015
• Risk cost workshops conducted at the Colleges & PMO (Oct-Dec 2015)
• Monte Carlo analysis run in December 2015 for all active registers
• Analysis determined risk exposure at the 80th percentile
LACCD Aggregate Risk Exposure as a Function of College and District Contingencies & Reserves $300,000,000
$250,000,000
Program Reserve
$133.17M
$200,000,000
40J Risk Exposure
$2.10M $150,000,000
$100,000,000
$50,000,000
Program Risk Exposure $60.78M
District Bond Contingency
$14.64M Aggregate College Reserve
$27.39M
Aggregate College Risk Exposure
$61.34M Aggregate College Contingency $100.65M
College COPs: $12.10M Potential Commitments
$39.30M
$‐
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
Aggregate Risk Exposure & Outstanding COPs & Commitments
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Aggregate Contingencies & Reserves
4
56 of 78
College Projects Status Summary
As of December 2015
City
East
Harbor
Mission
Pierce
Southwest
Trade
Valley
West
Satellites
Pending
Planning
Design
Construction
Completed
TOTAL
6
3
7
1
7
0
7
6
4
0
3
4
0
1
12
2
8
6
1
2
3
3
1
5
4
2
0
2
9
0
5
3
3
4
8
0
3
5
0
0
52
88
55
66
75
71
64
45
47
10
69
101
66
77
106
75
82
64
61
12
Chart does not include 40J college projects such as ADA, Stormwater, Technology, Energy, etc.
Projects Remaining Breakdown
80
29
31
Projects Pending/In Planning
Projects in Design/DSA
Review
10% 1%
14%
9%
12%
8%
13%
8%
22%
Projects in Construction
3%
41
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Projects forecasted to start
Construction in 2016
City
East
Pierce
SW
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
West
Satellites
Harbor
Trade
Mission
Valley
5
57 of 78
Procurement Activity Summary
Awards ($M)
18
20
21
20
24
10
0.7
2015 New Contract Awards
$80
$60
Construction: $74.20M
Design: $7.71M
$40
Contract value only
$20
$Jul-15
Aug-15
Sep-15
Design
Oct-15
Construction
Nov-15
Dec-15
Other
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
2.5
1.3
Jul-15
Dec-15
Nov-15
Oct-15
Sep-15
Aug-15
Jul-15
Dec-15
Nov-15
Oct-15
Sep-15
Aug-15
0
2.4 2.5 2.6
Dec-15
30
$3.0
$2.5
$2.0
$1.5
$1.0
$0.5
$-
Nov-15
31
Oct-15
25 26
36
Sep-15
40 39
40
Aug-15
51
No. of P.O.s
57
Jul-15
No. of T.O.s
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Value of TOs and POs
Issued
Millions
Purchase Orders
Issued
Task Orders
Issued
6
58 of 78
Remaining Work by College
As of December 2015
$200,000,000
$180,000,000
$160,000,000
$140,000,000
$120,000,000
$100,000,000
$80,000,000
$60,000,000
$40,000,000
$20,000,000
$0
Total Remaining Funds
Remaining Construction Funds Only
* Southgate is included within the Satellite category per the Dashboard report.
Remaining Work: Current Funding less Expended to‐date (data as of 12/31/15).
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
7
59 of 78
Design & Construction
Projects Status Activity
50
45
40
No. of Projects
35
30
25
20
Planning
15
Design/DSA
10
Construction
5
0
Jul‐15
Aug‐15
Sep‐15
Oct‐15
Nov‐15
Dec‐15
Construction Activity
12
10
No. of Projects
10
8
6
4
2
3
3
2
1
2
1
1
0
Jul‐15
Aug‐15
Sep‐15
Construction NTP Issued
Oct‐15
Dec‐15
Substantial Completion Achieved
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Nov‐15
8
60 of 78
DSA Certification
26 Projects
Closed with Certification
Construction Value: $389M
22% Drop in Total Projects
Closed without Certification
Projects CWC
Projects
CWOC
Remaining
CWOC *
July - Dec 2015
July 2015
Dec 2015
City
2
6
7
East
6
9
7
Harbor
4
2
0
Mission
1
2
1
Pierce
3
6
5
Southwest
3
1
0
Trade
1
5
5
10
Valley
4
6
3
5
West
2
0
1
TOTAL
26
37
29
CWC: Closed with Certification
CWOC: Closed without Certification
35
30
25
20
15
0
Jul-15
Dec-15
* Two additional projects closed without certification in September
2015 (City, Pierce) and have since been submitted to DSA for
certification.
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
40
Number of Projects
College
Closed without
Certification Trend
9
61 of 78
Safety Report
Incidents by Month
Man Hours by Month
90,000
80,000
79,615
5
84,313
80,705
69,816
64,717
4
62,889
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
Total Monthly Incidents
Total Man Hours
70,000
20,000
3
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
10,000
0
0
0
Jul-15
Aug-16
Sep-16
Oct-16
Nov-16
Dec-16
Jul-15 Aug-15 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Dec-15
July –December 2015
7 Recordables
2015 NAICS Avg. 3.2
TRIR Goal: 3.2
TRIR Actual: 3.1
NAICS: North American Industry Classification System
TRIR:
Totalfor
Recordable
Injury leaders
Rate
Building
tomorrow’s
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
10
62 of 78
College Key Performance Indicators
• New criteria established and implemented for Risk and Schedule KPIs
• Change Order KPI criteria under development
• 2 New KPIs under development: Commissioning & Closeout
• KPI Comparison Report (June 30, 2015 vs. December 31, 2015):
Budget to
EAC Variance
Monthly
Invoice
Timing
Monthly
Safety
Monthly
Jun-15 Dec-15 Jun-15 Dec-15 Jun-15 Dec-15
Construction
Schedule
Monthly
Jun-15
Dec-15
Risk
Quarterly
Jun-15 Dec-15
Time to Execute
Change Orders
Monthly
Jun-15
Dec-15
City
East
Harbor
Mission
Pierce
Southwest
Trade
Valley
West
Compliant
Needs
Improvement
Unsatisfactory
Compliance
Variance < = 0%
New Criteria
New Criteria
All Individual Projects Green
(SC Slippage 0 to 30 days)
Weighted criteria
score 100% - 85%
Criteria Under Dev.
> 90% C.O.s approved
w ithin 90 days
20 to 30 days
RIR w ithin 10% of
3.4
Total of All Projects is Yellow
(SC Slippage 31 - 60 days),
or One Project Yellow or Red
(SC Slippage > 60 days)
Weighted criteria
score 84% - 50%
50% - 89% C.O.s
approved w ithin 90 days
30 + days
RIR > 3.4
Total of All Projects is Red
(SC Slippage > 60 days)
Weighted criteria
score 49% - 0%
< 50% C.O.s approved
w ithin 90 days
< 20 days
RIR < 3.4
Variance 0 to 1%
Variance > 1%
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
11
63 of 78
LSEDV Contract Award Breakdown
LSEDV : Local, Small, Emerging, Disabled Veterans
December 2015
LSEDV Non‐LSEDV Firms with Firms with LSEDV Task Task Firms
Orders
Orders
Contract Category
Total Firms
Staff Augmentation
178
124
34
15
Architecture/Engineering
18
7
5
7
Environmental
12
6
6
4
Inspector of Record
18
13
7
4
Laboratory of Record
9
5
5
4
Whole Bldg. Commissioning
11
3
2
5
Professional Services
246
158
59
39
Construction Companies 51
20
N/A
N/A
297
Total
Companies
178
LSEDV
Companies
60%
Task Orders
awarded to
LSEDV
Figures are not totaled under the “Total Companies” and “LSEDV Companies” to avoid
double-counting.
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
12
64 of 78
Local Worker Hiring Performance
33.00%
32.00%
14,598 Workers performed
work on 28 active projects
31.00%
4,733 or 32%, are local
(through Dec 2015)
30.00%
29.00%
28.00%
07/15
08/15
09/15
10/15
11/15
Actual Local Hire Participation (By Month)
12/15
Contractor Local Worker Hiring Performance
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
0
34%
30%
27%
43%
39%
32%
20%
25%
34%
41%
27%
37%
33%
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
Total Craft Workers
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Local Workers
43%
27%
29%
36%
37%
34%
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
13
65 of 78
College Internship Program Monthly Intern Participation
(H1-B Grant Funded On-Campus/PMO Positions)
6
Intern Count by Company
5
4
3
2
1
0
07/2015
08/2015
09/2015
AECOM
HARPER
10/2015
PACIFICA
11/2015
SGI
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
12/2015
14
66 of 78
Small Business Program-Small Contractor Boot Camp
Small Contractor Boot Camp Participants
Spring 2015
(51 Contractors)
38
40
SBE
21
30
LBE
20
9
2
10
DVBE
EBE
0
SBE
LBE
DVBE
EBE
*Some firms qualify for more than one business category.
 21 Small Business Enterprise (SBE)
51 Small Contractors attended Small Contractor Spring 2015
 38 Local Business Enterprise (LBE)
 9 Emerging Business Enterprise (EBE)
 2 Disabled Veteran Business Enterprise (DVBE)
*Some firms qualify for more than one business category.
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
15
67 of 78
Small Business Program-Prequalification Workshop
 37 small contractors attended the workshop
 31, or 84%, responded to the Request for Small Contractor Pre‐Qualification
 11 of 31, or 35%, who attended the workshop are Prequalified. Five (5) of those contractors attended the Small Contractor Boot Camp
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
16
68 of 78
Energy: PV System Buyouts Summary
Year
Type
College
Project Name
1
2007
PPA
East
NW Parking PV Farm /
Carport Structure
2
2009
SL
Harbor
3
2009
SL
4
2009
5
Early Buyout
Net EBO Price
5/1/16
$ 2,972,750
Phase 1 – Parking lots 6 &
8
6/30/16
2,050,501
Harbor
Phase 2 – Parking lots 6 &
7
6/30/16
2,126,845
SL
Pierce
Parking lot 6
6/30/16
896,160
2009
SL
East
A1 CC, C1 MG, E9 WG,
G3 Aud, H9 PF, P1 AS
6/30/16
217,542
6
2009
SL
SW
Parking Lot 3
6/30/16
463,194
7
2009
SL
East
NW Parking PV System
Expansion
6/30/16
239,255
8
2010
SL
Pierce
Parking lots 1 & 8
12/30/17
1,377,619
9
2010
SL
Valley
M&O, C & D Parking Lots
12/30/17
1,140,045
10
2010
SL
VDK
South Parking Lot
12/30/17
387,471
TOTAL
Total Net
EBO Price
$ 2,972,750
5,993,497
2,905,136
$ 11,871,383
PPA = Power Purchase Agreement with production guarantees
SL = Solar Leases/Master Equipment Leases with production guarantees
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
17
69 of 78
ELAC Buyout Status
• Tasks Underway
– Fair market value assessment (Energy Consultant)
– Buyout contract Good Faith review (Outside Counsel)
• Next Steps (April 2016)
– PMO recommendation to the Board regarding the buyout execution
1
Alternative I
Execute buyout contract immediately,
Alternative II
Continue to make annual payments for the remaining 12 years of the contract.
– PMO recommendation to the Board regarding the post buyout
2
maintenance & operation
Alternative I
No action; Service and maintenance of PV system performed by current owner
under contract.
Alternative II
District to hire outside entity to service and maintain existing solar asset.
Alternative III
Continue a service and maintenance contract for 1 year (min) with outside entity
to allow college staff to be trained on system service and maintenance.
3
– Obtain Board approval of next steps and proceed
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
18
70 of 78
External Assessment
– Completed FY 2015 KPMG Performance and Financial Audits:
•
•
•
Audit period covered: July 1, 2014 – June 30, 2015
Audits reported: at November 18, 2015 Facilities Master Planning and
Oversight Committee meeting
Audit results: No material or significant weaknesses or findings
– Auditors repeatedly expressed recognition of major/significant
improvements in several areas:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Budget
Estimating
Cost reporting
Scheduling
Communication and Expediency
Standardization across Colleges
Audit Transparency
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
19
71 of 78
Website Activity – Jul 1, 2015 – Dec 31, 2016
Visitor Acquisition
Returning vs. New Visitors
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
Device Type
20
72 of 78
Program Awards
October 2015
Green California Schools & Community Colleges
Summit, 2015 Green Building Award for
Community Colleges
Leadership Award
https://green-technology.smugmug.com/Events/GCSCS15Leadership-Awards/
November 2015
US Green Building Council Los Angeles Chapter,
5th Annual Sustainable Innovation Awards
Energy & Atmosphere Merit: Pierce College
Library Learning Crossroads
http://usgbc-la.org/greengala/
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
21
73 of 78
Revised Baseline & Forecast
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
74 of 78
Revised Baseline & Forecast Summary
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
23
75 of 78
Thank You
Building for tomorrow’s leaders
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
76 of 78
LACCD Program Management
515 S. Flower Street, Suite 900
Los Angeles, California 90071
www.build-laccd.org
Building for Tomorrow’s Leaders
213.593 8000
866.817.1051
tel
fax
ACTIVE CONSTRUCTION SUMMARY
(All data and dates are current through March 2016)
Does not include projects in programming, in procurement, in design, at DSA, in closeout, or completed.
NTP = Notice to Proceed. EAC = Estimate at completion.
No.
Project #
Projects Under Construction
NTP
construction /
design-build
*Contract
substantial
completion
Forecast
substantial
completion
**Budget
**Expended
**EAC
Los Angeles City College
1
01C-110
Holmes Hall Modernization
02/10/14
01/09/15
05/31/16
$ 13,009,791
$ 8,566,759
$ 13,009,791
2
01C-134
Student Service Center
02/10/14
08/09/15
06/30/16
$ 38,105,141
$ 25,074,218
$ 38,105,141
3
01C-146
Physical Plant (M&O Building)
06/09/14
03/27/15
03/15/16
$ 9,064,289
$ 7,963,344
$ 9,064,289
4
01C-173.03
RWGPL - Traffic Mitigation (Red Line)
12/15/14
01/14/16
09/30/16
$ 8,471,879
$ 3,926,760
$ 8,471,879
04/23/14
06/21/16
08/20/16
$ 57,801,981
$ 29,731,540
$ 57,449,900
04/23/14
06/21/16
08/20/16
$ 3,623,162
$ 1,330,784
$ 3,770,911
East Los Angeles College
5
02E-222.03
6
02E-222.04
Science Career & Math Bldg G5
(Classrooms/Labs)
Science Career & Math Bldg G7 (Lecture Bldg.)
Los Angeles Harbor College
7
03H-307
Theater Drama Speech Building
09/02/10
09/08/15
08/19/16
$ 17,200,876
$ 15,860,418
$ 16,773,250
8
03H-350.03
S.A.I.L.S-Infrastr/Land &Hardscape/Security
09/07/10
04/05/14
04/29/19
$ 22,128,594
$ 17,828,473
$ 20,915,604
9
03H-350.01
SAILS Student Union
09/07/10
04/05/14
07/31/18
$ 52,981,751
$ 15,599,159
$ 63,731,497
Los Angeles Mission College
10
04M-405
Media Arts Center
11/12/09
10/03/11
03/31/17
$ 46,378,970
$ 26,448,543
$ 46,378,969
11
04M-419
Campus Modernization Phase 1
08/07/09
02/29/16
05/31/16
$ 21,898,351
$ 20,334,270
$ 21,859,092
12
04M-420
Campus Modernization Phase 2
05/03/10
02/29/16
04/15/16
$ 8,631,584
$ 7,085,096
$ 8,430,605
08/14/15
05/12/16
09/16/16
$ 22,006,996
$ 13,577,222
$ 22,006,996
Los Angeles Pierce College
13
05P-502
Life Science, Chemistry, Physics Building
*--Date does not reflect revised date approved via change order.
**-Inclusive of FF&E, retention, close-out and all soft costs.
FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
77 of 78
Building for Tomorrow’s Leaders
No.
Project #
Projects Under Construction
NTP
construction /
design-build
08/14/15
*Contract
substantial
completion
05/12/16
Forecast
substantial
completion
09/16/16
14
05P-505.02
15
05P-507
16
05P-510
17
05P-530.01
Phase II Renovations - Administration Building Interior and Exterior
Phase II Renovations - Computer Science and
Computer Learning
Phase 2 component finishing at a later date
Phase II Renovations - Behavioral Science,
Social science, Mathematics, and English
Buildings
Phase 2 component finishing at a later date
Campus Center (Existing) - General
18
05P-535.07
19
05P-535.02
20
05P-542.06
21
**Budget
**Expended
**EAC
$ 11,390,485
$ 7,909,660
$ 11,390,485
08/14/15
08/17/16
09/16/16
$ 10,398,954
$ 3,772,838
$ 10,398,954
08/14/15
08/17/16
09/16/16
$ 17,147,992
$ 4,525,299
$ 17,147,993
08/14/15
05/12/16
09/16/16
$ 2,577,379
$ 2,540,689
$ 2,577,379
SLE Faculty Center/Campus Center
08/14/15
05/12/16
09/16/16
$ 3,935,969
$ 2,071,011
$ 3,935,969
SLE - North of Mall - Classroom
Modernization/Technology/Low Voltage
Phase 2 component finishing at a later date
SLE - North of Mall - ADA/Landscaping
Phase 2 component finishing at a later date
Los Angeles Trade Tech College
08/14/15
08/17/16
09/16/16
$ 9,268,054
$ 4,262,728
$ 9,268,054
08/14/15
08/17/16
09/16/16
$ 7,673,426
$ 3,072,761
$ 7,673,426
07T-720.01
East Parking Structure
07/06/15
07/26/16
08/10/16
$ 40,803,429
$ 22,225,851
$ 40,782,310
22
07T-772.06
07/06/15
07/26/16
11/09/16
$ 7,036,866
$ 2,935,319
$ 7,015,598
23
07T-720.03
East Campus Substation and Electrical
Distribution System
East Campus Ground Improvements
07/06/15
07/26/16
08/10/16
$ 1,581,881
$ 11,803
$ 1,581,881
01/28/14
09/11/15
12/30/16
$ 43,318,309
$ 27,788,621
$ 46,678,335
10/02/14
11/27/15
04/15/16
$ 34,214,782
$ 31,234,084
$ 34,214,781
Los Angeles Valley College
24
08V-836
25
08V-837
Community Workforce Development Center/New
Administration a.k.a. Valley Glen Gateway
(VGG)
Athletic Training Facility
26
08V-839
Multi-Purpose Community Services Center
04/15/13
08/20/16
09/26/16
$ 24,926,523
$ 21,870,441
$ 24,926,524
27
08V-842
Monarch Center (Student Union Annex)
01/28/14
04/18/14
05/02/16
$ 37,832,079
$ 35,023,862
$ 37,832,079
$ 573,409,493
$ 362,571,551
$ 585,391,690
TOTAL
*--Date does not reflect revised date approved via change order.
**-Inclusive of FF&E, retention, close-out and all soft costs.
Active Construction Summary – March 2016 Page 2 FMP&OC - 4/25/2016
78 of 78