Brookhaven Science Associates U.S. Department of Energy


Published on

Published in: Business, Technology
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 1
  • Site wide mapping- expected completion would be end of FY’03. It will become lower priority and completion date is unknown. Little will be able to be done without hiring contracted labor. Many improvements are pending such as data flagging for other media, future groundwater reporting, tracking and data review and a geo database application (for updating models). Monitoring cut – May not be able to initiate deer sampling as planned. May need to request additional funds if an unusual sampling event(s) occurs. This one would be my first priority to keep funding for. Groundwater Protection- cut contingency funds. Should be reduced risk but may need to request funds if not. P2- Less funding for proposals for other departments. DOE will not be funding P2 as they did in years past. EMS- reduced contractor services. Should be able to complete work with in house staff Misc cuts include reduction in relocation expenses, travel, printing, building trades, etc.
  • Brookhaven Science Associates U.S. Department of Energy

    1. 1. FY03 Assessment & Improvement Plan Quality Programs & Services Office Integrated Assessment Program Office of Management Services November 25, 2002 Brookhaven Science Associates U.S. Department of Energy
    2. 2. Agenda <ul><li>Assessment & Improvement </li></ul><ul><li>Performance Measure 3.2 </li></ul><ul><li>The Primary focus </li></ul><ul><li>Review the three parts to the measure </li></ul><ul><li>Talk about the process flow </li></ul><ul><li>Key Milestones & Status as of November 25 th </li></ul>
    3. 3. The Driver <ul><li>Performance Measure 3.2 – Assessment & Improvement </li></ul><ul><li>The Primary focus </li></ul><ul><li>Strengthen our Management Systems approach to doing Business through assessment and improvement. </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Institutionalize the process </li></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Began in SBMS-Nov 6 </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Utilize ATS for Planning & Improvement </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul>
    4. 4. The Driver-Part 1 <ul><li> – MS Objectives & Assessment Activities </li></ul><ul><li>Establish process for planning MS assessments </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Guidance Documents Developed </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The Process Flow Chart </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>The Template </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Publish process in SBMS </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Refined from the Guidance Documents </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Document & Integrate the MS Assessment Activities for the 11 Management Systems </li></ul>
    5. 5. The Driver- Part 1 Con’t. <ul><li> MS Objectives & Assessment Activities </li></ul><ul><li>The 11 Management Systems are: </li></ul><ul><li>Acquisition Mgt Life Cycle Asset Mgt </li></ul><ul><li>Emer’y Preparedness Radiological Control </li></ul><ul><li>Environmental Mgt Safeguards & Security </li></ul><ul><li>Facility Operations Work Planning & Control </li></ul><ul><li>Facility Safety Worker Safety & Health </li></ul><ul><li>Hazardous Material Transportation </li></ul>
    6. 6. The Driver - Part 2 <ul><li> – Consensus-based User/Peer Reviewer Maturity Determinations </li></ul><ul><li>This is Based on the Maturity Evaluations conducted as part of the Quality Program Verification completed in FY02 </li></ul><ul><li>Perform MS Maturity Evaluations on 4 MS: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Facility Safety </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Safeguards & Security </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Worker Safety & Health </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Radiological Control </li></ul></ul>
    7. 7. The Driver – Part 3 <ul><li> – Third Party Evaluation of the MS Assessment Program </li></ul><ul><li>Establish a third party of 2-3 people, public and private sector, to evaluate BNL’s MS Assessment Program. </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluation protocol to be developed jointly with DOE-BAO using criteria from: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Baldrige Award NY State Excelsior Award </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>DOE Mgt. and Independent Assessment Guide </li></ul></ul>
    8. 8. PART 1 MS Objectives & Assessment Activities <ul><li>The following Process flow chart outlines the process for the 11 management systems </li></ul><ul><li>Template Tool </li></ul>
    9. 9. Planning and Assessment Cycle Long Term/Strategic Direction Near Term Planning Work Are you getting to where you want to go? Or staying where you want to stay? No Yes Adjust Stay on Course
    10. 10. Put Management Assessment Flow chart “ Dougie”
    11. 11. High Level Project Implementation Plan <ul><li>An implementation plan has been developed to Identify and accomplish milestones to ensure success of this Measure: </li></ul><ul><li>Objective Measure 3.2 </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><ul><li>“ Assessment and Improvement” </li></ul></ul></ul></ul></ul>
    12. 12. Put schedule here
    13. 13. Key Players in the Process <ul><li>Project Team: Roy Lebel, Bruce Miller, Doug Ports </li></ul><ul><li>Jessie Wilke </li></ul><ul><li>MS Stewards: M.Bebon, K.Brog, B. Sack, </li></ul><ul><li>T. Sheridan </li></ul><ul><li>MS POCs: M. Healey, F. Marotta, </li></ul><ul><li>B.Zimmerman, M. Schaeffer, </li></ul><ul><li>T. Monahan, S. Hoey, </li></ul><ul><li>S. Layendecker, R. Reaver, </li></ul><ul><li>T. Powers, O. White </li></ul>
    14. 14. Key Players in the Process <ul><li>Process Mentors: R.Costa, S. Maloney, </li></ul><ul><li>T Powers, S.Stein </li></ul><ul><li>J. Wilke </li></ul>
    15. 15. Process Mentors <ul><li>Role </li></ul><ul><li>Understand Process flow & tools </li></ul><ul><li>Support MS Steward in the Assessment Planning activity </li></ul><ul><li>Mentor the MS POC through the process </li></ul><ul><li>Interface with Project Lead and Team regarding problems, needs in completing tasks. </li></ul><ul><li>Follow up on Assessment activities </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Institutional ATS </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Feed back & improvement </li></ul><ul><li>End of year evaluation particapation </li></ul>
    16. 16. Key Players in the Process <ul><li>MS Maturity Evaluation Facilitators: </li></ul><ul><li>6-8 people who will receive facilitator training designed to support these evaluations. </li></ul><ul><li>List has been developed, needs to be finalized. </li></ul><ul><li>Outside training vendor selected. </li></ul><ul><li>Training to take place January16-17, 2003. </li></ul>
    17. 17. Near Term Key Success Factors <ul><li>Process Mentors educated and on-board - DONE </li></ul><ul><li>POC and on-board - DONE </li></ul><ul><li>MS, POCs, Mentors working template completion by (12/15) </li></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Process started – Some complete- Example (Work planning & Control) </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><li>Integration of assessment schedule (12/30) </li></ul><ul><li>Present and publish Assessment Schedule to SBMS (January ‘03) </li></ul>
    18. 18. Project Plan Status- November 18,2002 Assessment & Improvement –Objective 3.2 <ul><li>1.1 MS Stewards & POC’s on Board </li></ul><ul><li>1.3 Lab wide facilitators </li></ul><ul><ul><li>identified & secured 4 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>2 to go - new date of 12/2 </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>NO-impact to PROJECT </li></ul></ul><ul><li>2.2 Mentors selected & on board </li></ul><ul><li>Discussion Points </li></ul><ul><li>New Template developed with “Provoker Questions” being worked & looks good so far </li></ul><ul><li>Mike Bebon requests no meeting with POC but will allow team to partake in observing Template construction </li></ul><ul><li>Start work on SBMS documentation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>What is requirement Assessment table going to look like </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>What refinements to the guidance documents need to developed </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Identify and secure third party commitment </li></ul>Over all Status - On Target
    19. 19. EXAMPLE of Existing Table to be Modified Required Self-Assessments as outlined in the IAP Subject Management System Required Self-Assessments Required Frequency Assessment Aids Acquisition Management As determined by organizational management N/A None Administrative Support As determined by organizational management N/A None Educational Programs As determined by organizational management N/A None Emergency Preparedness and Off-Normal Event Reporting As determined by organizational management N/A None Emergency Response Services As determined by organizational management N/A None Environmental Management System 1. EMS Audit All 17 elements to be assessed on a periodic cycle determined by organizational managers. The scope (operations/program elements) is based on its importance and past performance. See Section 3. Preparing and Conducting Environmental Management System Assessments in the Environmental Assessments subject area
    20. 20. 40 Institutional Vulnerability is a function of System Maturity Implement Verify Behavioral Change Performance Improvement Develop CONSISTENCY REDUCES VULNERABILITY IN SUMMARY