The Evolution of Real Property Service Management at PWGSC – … · 2014-12-01 · " The size of individual AFD contracts ranged from 50,000 m2 to 420,000 m2, valued at between

The Evolution of Real Property Service Management at PWGSC

– Past, Present and Future –

RPIC Conference November 19, 2014

Today’s Presentations

2

The Past: ü The basis for the Alternative Forms of Delivery (AFD) Model, ü Details specific to the first two generations of AFD contracts ü Lessons learned from the Model’s adoption by a select group of OGD custodians ü The rationale for moving from AFD contracts to Real Property (RP) Service Management mechanisms The Present: ü Information specific to the RP-1 contract structure, and service delivery regime ü Quality and Performance monitoring controls that will be used. ü Oversight and management of the new suite of Real Property contracts ü Governance ü Multiple and complex “behind the scenes” requirements specific to contracts of this scope. ü Development, deployment and maintenance of the IM/IT capabilities specific to large outsourced

mechanisms. The Future: ü A view of the Real Property Service Management of the future, including the possible creation of

additional mechanisms to meet the evolving service delivery requirements of both PWGSC and OGD custodians.

A HISTORY OF AFD THE PAST

3

Vision Statement / Business Plan

•  As a result of a re-examination of assumptions and operating practices, our Branch management arrived at a consensus that the following key areas would be incorporated into our strategies and plans for the future: Ø meet broad government objectives; Ø improve response to clients; Ø achieve overall cost savings; Ø meet program review targets; and Ø eliminate the perception of competing with the

private sector. 4

Vision Statement

•  To respond to general concerns raised by key stakeholders, a Vision Statement was developed that charted a new direction for federal real property services.

•  This foundational Vision Statement became: •  “… to be recognized as adding value to achieving

client and government objectives through the delivery of the most timely and affordable real property program and services".

5

Business Plan

•  The new Business Plan identified four major strategies (activities) related to repositioning with the private sector: Ø  Defining core competencies; Ø  Identification of contracting out opportunities; Ø  Negotiations with industry and provincial governments; and Ø  Communication of the repositioning of RPS business with

stakeholders

6

Business Plan Outcomes

•  As the result of a detailed core/non-core analysis of its services, the strategic decision to concentrate on advisory and real property services management roles, while finding a more responsive and less costly method of providing day-to-day operational services.

•  This decision became the rationale for investigating – and

eventually adopting – Alternative Forms of Delivery (AFD).

7

Philosophy For Contracting Out

•  Having decided to contract out non-core services, the question became: How?

•  As a first step, the AFD Task Force Team reviewed the

experiences of other jurisdictions.

•  Other jurisdictions had implemented contracting out initiatives that ranged from unit price tendering to complete privatization.

8

9

Philosophy For Contracting Out

Motivate the contractor

At-risk fees (15%) Separate incentive

(10%/year)

Strategic Alliance

Minimize contract

oversight Self-monitoring

ISO-certified quality framework

Promote continuous improvement Performance ranges and dynamic performance indicators

Provide flexibility to innovate Outcome-oriented scope of work

9

Principles for the AFD Initiative •  In addition to establishing a business strategy, objectives, and a

philosophy for contracting out, the RPS Management Committee adopted a set of principles to guide managers in the on-going implementation of AFD. The principles were structured around the four following themes: Ø Our People Ø Our Clients Ø Our Business Ø AFD Contract

10

Organization of the AFD Task Force

•  An AFD Transition Task Force (TTF) was set up early in the planning process.

•  The TTF drew its members from a broad range of departmental staff with the expertise to ensure that the business and technical requirements in an AFD contract were understood and dealt with fully.

•  Key people were seconded from their operational duties to work on the AFD initiative.

11

Selecting Facilities for Contracting Out

•  In theory, all PWGSC facilities were available candidates for alternate forms of service delivery, however: Ø  the scope of the AFD included building operations and

maintenance, and related architectural and engineering work up to a value of $200,000.

Ø  The total worth of all contracts was approximately $210M per year. Ø  The size of individual AFD contracts ranged from 50,000 m2 to

420,000 m2, valued at between $500K and $50M per contract. •  Eventually, 13 contracts were awarded to the private sector, and 2

Federal/Provincial were negotiated. •  In order to assess if any facilities should be excluded from the AFD

initiative, it was necessary to apply the client relationship filter and the private sector filter (early days for Industry, where capacity and capability were not yet known).

12

Key Issues

•  In making the final business case RPS grappled with the following key issues: Ø Business Volumes:

Each contract – and each bid – would have to stand on its own. That meant that each contract must be clearly viable from a business perspective, and that bidders would not be permitted to “buy” a contract (taking a loss) in hopes of making gains elsewhere.

Ø Savings Objective: Management decided that if the 10% saving could not be achieved, AFD would not proceed.

13

Key Issues, continued Ø  Impacts on Other PWGSC Branches

§ AFD would affect the business volumes of these other Branches by reducing the number of projects, account entries, contracts and human resource transactions they were expected to handle.

Ø  Impact on the RPS Revolving Fund § Transferring a sizable portion of RPS’s work to a contractor would

obviously reduce revenues coming into the Revolving Fund. Ø  Impacts on PWGSC Financial Policy and Management Practices

§ The need to make account coding less cumbersome; § The need to create a new database to receive and store information

provided by contractors; § Sorting out differences between the way in which government

departments and private sector contractors charge the GST, PST and HST, etc.

14

AFD Timeline

15

Janu

ary

Febr

uary

Mar

ch

Apr

il

May

June

July

Aug

ust

Sep

tem

ber

Oct

ober

Nov

embe

r

Dec

embe

r

Janu

ary

Febr

uary

Mar

ch

Apr

il

May

June

July

1997 1998

Indu

stry

Brie

fings

OBS Eval

RFQ

Con

tract

A

ppro

vals

AFD Transition Period

First Year Contract

Performance

Letter of Intent

Contract Award

Contract Initiation

RFP Preparation

Evaluation OBS

-‐  RFQ -‐  RFP -‐  Extensive Transi2on

AFD – 1998 to Present

1ST Generation – 1997/98 § Approximately 250 PWGSC Crown-owned office buildings (excluded leased and OGD facilities). § Scope – property management, project delivery ($200K), tenant-funded work and retail letting and administration. § Term – 2 years-10 months core, plus four-1 year options (total 7 years). § Assets grouped into 13 “geographical” portfolios. § BoP – allowable pass through costs plus applicable management fees (O/H and profit). § Total value - $1.77B

• 

2nd Generation – 2004/05 § Approximately 319 PWGSC Crown-owned office buildings. § Scope - property management, project delivery ($200K), tenant-funded work and retail letting and administration, with options for FM, lease admin and projects < $1M. § Term – 4 year core, plus three-2 year options (total 10 years). § Assets grouped into 8 geographical portfolios. § BoP – same as 1997/98, with increased allowance for pass through § Total value - $5.4B

16

AFD – 2013 and Beyond

2nd Generation Today §  As of 2012/13, over 1,000 buildings

(including 750+ OGD facilities) are managed through the AFD contracts (CBSA, RCMP, NRCan).

§  Options for lease admin and projects < $1M exercised in most portfolios.

§  Wide variety of buildings/facilities managed from coast to coast to coast.

§  All available options exercised, extending the contracts to March 31, 2015.

§  The total value of the contracts is $5.91B (increased by $500M+ to accommodate GoC AIP).

3rd Generation - 2015 §  Contracts are now referred to as “Real

Property” (RP) services management mechanisms.

§  Focus on “total responsibility” for service delivery.

§  Performance management framework enhanced.

§  OHS and SDS “strengthened”. §  Provision for portfolio planning and

different asset types. §  Lease admin and projects <$1M “core”,

options for projects >$1M, FM and AMP / BCR.

§  Expanded “footprint”. 17

Does any of this sound familiar?

§  Stewardship Issues §  Capacity §  Core business §  Logistics §  Culture §  Governance §  Authority §  Budgets Levels – (Funding erosion) §  Broader government pressures

18 18

An OGD Experience (2008-2009)

§  Inventory in every corner of Canada •  1,904 properties occupying 1643 Ha. •  731 points of service including its HQ , district offices and community offices. •  1,456 houses. •  6 national labs. •  1,491,113 m2 floor space. •  5th Largest real estate holder of federal jurisdiction

§  $130 M+ O&M – $120M+ annual capital budget

19 19

AFD Out-‐Tasking

• Modernized Custodian Property Management -‐ Instant • Successful efficient/effec2ve in most applica2ons • Focus on the Core • Preven2ve maintenance • Buildings inspec2ons • Legislated Compliance “ defense of due diligence” • Na2onal Service Call Centre: Sa2sfac2on Survey 88% • Building Management Plans • Asset Informa2on Availability (financial / asset integrity) • Capacity -‐ Instant • Sustainability • Private Sector Skills and business exper2se • Norms / Service Levels are aTainable -‐ KPIs

• Flexible -‐ Financial •  May be more appropriate in remote and Northern inventory – case by case basis

• Contract was a “Square peg in a round hole” • Expensive Project Delivery • “Percep2ons” of being expensive overall •  Good fit in urban areas • Stay back Teams are too large • Cultural Change difficult in some areas • Private Sector Organiza2on – Public Percep2on •  Inflexible •  Internal Services efficiency opportuni2es were not harvested

• Service is not comprehensive / spoTy • Places not visited for years • Funded based on compe2ng priori2es • High reliance for employee involvement of maintenance

•  No preven2ve maintenance program •  No Call Centre •  Limited capacity •  Internal services sustainability •  Not aligned with broader government objec2ves •  No risk transfer and increased risk •  Reac2ve stewardship •  Legislated compliance is uneven

The Good

The Bad

20 20

Real Property Procurement Activity

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Atlantic Central HQ NWR Pacific

FY0809FY0910FY1011FY1112

Pre-‐AFDPre-‐AFD

Pre-‐AFD

21 21

Volume of Transac2o

ns

22

Atlan2c Region reduc2on: 17.50% NWR Reduc2on : 17.75%

Accounts Payable Transactions

Pre-‐AFD

Pre-‐AFD

22

# of Transac2o

ns

BMP Project Work - Post AFD

23 23

# of Projects

NSCC Service Categories

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

1B -‐ Cleanin

g

2C -‐ HVAC

2D -‐ Electric

al

2D -‐ In

terior Lig

hting

2E -‐ Arch

itectu

ral/Struc

tural

2E -‐ Power Doors

2F -‐ Plum

bing

2G -‐ Fire and Life Safety

2H -‐ O

ther Build

ing Mainten

ance

4B -‐ R

oads and Grounds

4E -‐ Se

curity

9A -‐ R

esidential -‐ Struc

tural

9B -‐ R

esiden

tial -‐ E

lectric

al

9C -‐ Residen

tial -‐ P

lumbin

g

9D -‐ R

esidential -‐ He

ating

9E -‐ Residen

tial -‐ W

ater M

ainten

ance

9G -‐ R

esiden

tial -‐ G

rounds

# of S

ervic

e Req

uests

UrgentNormalEmergency

Base Building Requests (Detachments/Others)

Residential Requests (Housing)

24 24

25

NSCC –Monthly Progression

National NSCC Volume

15,00016,00017,00018,00019,00020,00021,00022,00023,00024,00025,000

Apr-‐09

May-‐09

Jun-‐09

Jul-‐09

Aug-‐09

Sep-‐09

Oct-‐09

Nov-‐09

Dec-‐09

Jan-‐10

Feb-‐10

Mar-‐10

RCMP Monthly Use

Atlantic region not included Started on Sept 1 2009

Total

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Apr-‐09

May-‐09

Jun-‐09

Jul-‐09

Aug-‐09

Sep-‐09

Oct-‐09

Nov-‐09

Dec-‐09

Jan-‐10

Feb-‐10

Mar-‐10

25

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I

Going ? How do I get there?

26

Asset integrity BMP Project plan/s Financials BCR P3 Benchmark CMMS Client Capacity NSCC KPI Regime

CURRENT STATE

27

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


Stewardship Efficiency Potential Governance Focus on Core Secure Budget Sustainable Environment Urgency/Priority Risk Transfer

OBJECTIVES

28

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


Core Business Strategic Sustainability

CORE / NON-CORE

29

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


In-House Out-tasking AFD P3 Hybrid Intergovernmental Risk Transfer Arms length Object Credible

BUSINESS CASE

30

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


In-House Developed AFD-PWGSC AFD Other Partnering Out-Tasking Timeline

DEVELOP / BUY

31

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


People Data Systems Contract Mgmt Contract Novation Communications Internal Services Policy Renewal KPI Organization Governance

TRANSITION

32

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


KPI Communications People Governance Quality Management

MONITOR

33

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


Asset Integrity Client Satisfaction Financial Data Integrity

ADJUST

34

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


Asset Integrity Client Satisfaction Financial Information Integrity

OPERATE

35

Where am I

Now ?

Where am I


NEXT SESSION: - THE PRESENT -

RP-1 OVERVIEW

36

Presented by: Jennifer Hersey RP-1 Project Leader

37

RP-1 Topics

•  Procurement Project

•  Business Drivers

•  Assets and Contract Structure

•  Evolution of Requirements from AFD

•  Acceptance of Contractor Service Delivery Regimes

•  Performance Measurement

•  Future Evolution of Technical Requirements

38

RP-1 Procurement Project

•  Strategy, Project Initiation and Industry Consultation (RFI)

• Development of Requirements (SOW /RFP)

•  Solicitation:

o  Bid Submission

o  Evaluation of Proposals

• Contract Approval process

•  Award of Contracts

• Contract Initiation

We are here

39

RP-1 Responds to PWGSC’s Real Property Strategies and Objectives

•  Providing workplaces that are safe, healthy, secure and affordable

• Delivering responsive services that meet Tenant operational needs

•  Improving the sustainability of the government’s real property

•  Ensuring best value, consistent with federal policy

•  Leveraging the full value of commercial expertise •  Enabling custodians to focus resources on service management and

administration

40

•  RP-1 provides long-term arrangements for real property services for Crown-owned buildings and leased space

•  Covers operational needs of most Crown-owned assets administered by PWGSC, as well as assets of Other Government Departments

• Much of the inventory will be transitioned from existing contracts at the end of their terms

RP-1 is of strategic importance to PWGSC and other participating Departments and Agencies

41

•  Management Services

•  Services to Establish Third-party Leases and Agreements

•  Lease Administration Services

•  Project Delivery Services

•  Optional Services

Services included in RP-1

42

Assets Included in Contract Inventories Vary Widely

43

General Purpose Office Buildings

44

Enforcement and Detachment

Buildings

45

Examples of Other Assets

46

RP-1 Contract Structure

47

RP-1 Includes Six Contracts Aligned with PWGSC’s Regional structure

•  Pacific •  Western •  National Capital Area (NCA) •  Ontario •  Quebec •  Atlantic

portfolio

CONTRACT

portfolio portfolio

Assets Assets Assets

48

RP-1 INVENTORY BREAKDOWN

Atlantic 12%

Quebec 11%

NCA 51%

Ontario 14%

Western 7%

Pacific 5%

Breakdown of Custodian-Owned Assets Under RP-1

Atlantic 10%

Quebec 9%

NCA 41%

Ontario 17%

Western 14%

Pacific 9%

Breakdown of Leased Assets under RP-1

3.3M sq. m of Custodian-Owned assets… 2.9M sq. m of Leased assets…

Annual volume of approximately 5,600 projects worth $190M (Includes 3300 Projects amounting to $12M of Work for Tenants)

49

Each Contract contains multiple Portfolios Region Portfolios

Pacific 1.  Crown-Owned PWGSC Assets 2.  Leased Assets

Western 1.  Crown-Owned PWGSC and OGD Assets 2.  Leased Assets

Ontario 1.  Crown-Owned PWGSC Assets 2.  Leased Assets 3.  Crown-Owned OGD Assets

Quebec 1.  Crown-Owned PWGSC Assets 2.  Leased Assets 3.  Crown-Owned OGD Assets

National Capital Area 1.  Crown-Owned PWGSC and OGD Assets 2. to 5. Crown-Owned PWGSC Assets

Atlantic 1.  Crown-Owned PWGSC Assets 2.  Leased Assets 3.  Crown-Owned OGD Assets

50

How RP-1 Requirements Have Evolved From Previous

AFD Contracts

51

• Reliance on Contractors’ Service Delivery Regimes

•  Introduction of Acceptance Review Process and subsequent amendment of Contractor’s Service Delivery Regime (SDR) Specification into the Contract

Emphasis on the Contractor’s Total Service Delivery Responsibility

52

Emphasis on Sustainability

Contractors must improve the financial, social, functional and environmental sustainability of government accommodations, and assist Canada in balancing related considerations:

a)  implementing strategies consistent with Asset Management Plans

b) ensuring financially sound and affordable investments, and

c)  reducing the environmental impact of its assets and operations and meeting Custodian Sustainable Development Strategy (SDS) targets and other environmental targets

53

• RP-1 includes increased emphasis and clarity around the ongoing requirement for demonstration of ‘Best Value’.

•  ‘Best Value’ has been defined as: a) optimal use of allocated labour, financial and other resources in

the delivery of services and solutions; b) consideration of sustainability, with a long-term view of the

costs and benefits of available options; and c) consideration of cost, quality, competition and transparency in

the provision of services, solutions and material.

Providing ‘Best Value’ to Canada

54

• Explicit catering to requirements and involvement of Other Federal Government Departments:

§  Portfolio Structure §  Planning and project initiation §  Structure of Performance Measurement Regime

•  Tailoring of service levels for different Asset Groups and considering other factors such as location

• Enhanced requirements for Contractors to host, share and provide information products

• Enhanced Work Authorization process • Explicit definition of deliverable requirements

Other RP-1 Improvements

55

• Quality Management ISO 9001 • Environmental Management System ISO 14001 • Energy Management ISO 50001 • Health and Safety CAN/CSA Z1000 • Commissioning CSA Z320 • Project Management ANSI PMBOK • ASHRAE Standards • CSA Z204 Guideline for Managing Indoor Air Quality in Office

Buildings • Open Standards Consortium for Real Estate (OSCRE) / BOMA

Standards

Contractors must comply with applicable legislation and other Federal requirements, but the focus is on

application of industry standards:

56

Service Delivery Regime Acceptance Process

57

•  Each Contractor’s SDR will be subject to an end-to-end Acceptance Review process at the start of the contract.

•  As part of the Acceptance Review Process, Contractors must demonstrate that they have appropriate approaches and the required capabilities to undertake operations in accordance with requirements.

• Contractors must produce an SDR Specification documenting how they will deliver the services.

• Once accepted, the SDR Specification will form part of the contract.

Contractors’ Service Delivery Regimes in a nutshell

58

•  Each Contractor’s SDR will be subject to an end-to-end Acceptance Review process at the start of the contract.

•  As part of the Acceptance Review Process, Contractors must demonstrate that they have appropriate approaches and the required capabilities to undertake operations in accordance with requirements.

• Contractors must produce an SDR Specification documenting how they will deliver the services.

• Once accepted, the SDR Specification will form part of the contract.

Contractors’ Service Delivery Regimes will be subject to acceptance

59

Service Delivery Regime Components

Service delivery strategies, capabilities, processes and procedures for:

•  Management Services

•  Services to Establish Third-party Leases and Agreements

•  Lease Administration Services

•  Project Delivery Services

•  Optional Services

60

Service Delivery Regime Components (2) Programs, Regimes and Systems

Sustainability Program • Optimized Maintenance Program • Energy Management System (EnMS)

Tenant Relationship Management Program

Commissioning Oversight Program Heritage Conservation Program

Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Program

Harmonized Standards-Based Management Systems Strategy

Risk Management Program Work Management System

Environmental Management System (EMS)

Project Delivery Regime (PDR)

Information Management (IM) Methodology

Performance Measurement Regime & Quality Management System

61

SDR Acceptance Review Process Timeline

Comprehensive Technical

Assessment Complete

Intermediate Acceptance

Review Complete

30 Oct 2015 (approx.)

Operational Start 1 April 2015

Intermediate Acceptance

Review Process

Preliminary Acceptance

Review Process

Critical Acceptance

Review Process

Final Acceptance

Review Process

Contract Award

Readiness Checkpoint 1 Apr 2016 (approx.)

Final SDR

Acceptance No later than 15 Dec. 2015

Critical Acceptance

30 July 2015 (approx.)

SDR Acceptance-in-Principle

15 Mar 2015

Management of

Ongoing SDR

Change

62

Performance Measurement • RP-1 Contracts are performance-based: a component of associated

fees payable to Contractors will be at risk based on successful performance.

• RP-1 includes four Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for demonstrating performance: 1.  Satisfaction KPI: meeting PWGSC expectations and promoting

occupant satisfaction 2.  Asset Integrity KPI: sustaining value of assets 3.  Financial KPI: delivering affordable services that provide best value 4.  Information Integrity KPI: ensuring required information is

trustworthy and available

63

Performance Measurement

•  The RP-1 fee at risk is based on a two-tier holdback as follows: 1.  A holdback for each Portfolio based on satisfactory

performance against the four KPIs 2.  A holdback for each Contract based on satisfactory

performance for all the Portfolios

• Contractors are required to have a Performance Measurement Regime and to provide information to demonstrate successful performance

64

Illustrative Example

Financial

Asset Int.

Info.Int.

Satisfaction

Portfolio #1: Fee Holdback

Financial

Asset Int.

Info.Int.

Satisfaction

Portfolio #2: Fee Holdback

Financial

Asset Int.

Info.Int.

Satisfaction

Portfolio #3 Fee Holdback

Contract-level Fee Holdback (10%)

Payable if the KPIs are passed for all three Portfolios

Portfolio-level Holdback = 15% of Fees in each Portfolio

65

Technical Requirements will Continue to Evolve • RP-1 Contracts are long-term relationships in which change is

inevitable • Contractors will be required to apply best practices consistent with

industry industry standards, which will evolve

•  A rigorous Lessons-Learned gathering process is already underway • Contractual mechanisms incorporated in RP-1 for responding to

change, including:

o  Comprehensive Technical Assessments, and

o  Ongoing SDR Change Management requirements.

66

NEXT SESSION: MANAGEMENT OF CONTRACTS Presented by: Nathalie Laliberté

Tiger Team Lead

Background •  Alternate Forms of Delivery arrangements (now being referred to

as RP contracts) have been successfully implemented for the last 15 years

•  They are one of the pillars of the PWGSC Corporate Real Estate model adopted by the Branch in 2006

•  These arrangements have been audited extensively (internally and externally) over the past 3 years

•  Tolerance to risk within the federal government context has shifted significantly as government operations are placed under heavy scrutiny to demonstrate fiscal probity

•  Contracts are coming due - A round of new contracts are being put in place

•  Budgets have been reduced across government

67

Drivers for Change

•  Key aspects of PWGSC Strategic Direction: –  Better alignment, integration, collaboration, and efficiencies –  Exercise due diligence through national oversight

approaches –  Draw on the national workforce expertise

•  AFD Audits and Lessons Learned •  Cost management: focus on risk-based policy, oversight and

value for money •  Increased need for demonstrating national consistency •  Increased need for integration and collaboration

Defining Oversight

A set of controls and associated activities based on risk to

systematically and efficiently ensure compliance with the terms and

conditions of the contract(s) and managing the contract execution

and analysis for the purpose of maximizing financial and

operational performance.

Mandate of the Tiger Team Develop, implement and monitor the effectiveness of a comprehensive RP Oversight Framework for the management of current and future RP contracts.

•  To be in place for the operational start date of RP-1 (April 1, 2015); •  Will include a review of the full spectrum of oversight activities; •  Oversight requirements need to be a balancing act between risks

and fiscal reality; •  All activities will be integrated and applied consistently across all

Regions and Sectors; •  Will respect performance-based contracting principles; and •  Flexible and integrated approach to managing multiple

mechanisms 70

RP Oversight Framework

Competencies Development and Training

Processes and Procedures

Benchmarking and Industry Intelligence

Information and Reporting

Resources

Quality Monitoring

Compliance Management Review

Agreements Lead

ersh

ip a

nd

Dire

ctio

n

Oversight S

tructure &

Responsibility M

atrix

Risk Management

Ove

rsig

ht R

esul

ts

Eva

luat

e O

vers

ight

71

Implementation •  Risk activities ongoing, reviewed and adjusted regularly •  Procedures are aligned with the delivery of the Statement of

Work •  Directives provide guidance on costing methodology,

Information Management and document exchange •  Functional Structure will be consistent across all regions •  Delegation of Authority delegates activities to various

functions in the organization •  Quality Monitoring will monitor the RP Contractors against the

terms and conditions of the contract •  Agreements will be signed with Client Departments using RP-1 •  Measure and evaluate the performance and effectiveness and

efficiency of the RP Oversight Framework

Contract Oversight

Risk Based

Approach

Service Delivery

Contract Administration

Contract Deliverables

Quality Monitoring 73

Confidence Level

Time

100%

Year Two Year One Acceptance Review

Year Three

Confidence level Sample Size

QUALITY MONITORING PRINCIPLES

Sweet spot

•  How many resources required by control activity – volumetrics •  Level of effort estimated on historical data and on the new procedures •  Funding for oversight will be fenced-in starting in 2016/17 and to be

used only for oversight activities (PWGSC as custodian) •  Consultation and reasonable assumptions should results in fair and

consistent costing practices •  Adequately pricing custodians

Costing Approach

National Steering Committee •  Committee of Director Generals and Regional Director Generals

making recommendation to the ADM •  Consider options to address issues •  Examine opportunities to leverage the RP contracts such as the

addition of buildings and exercising options •  Consider options surrounding opportunities to leverage additional

private sector expertise and capacity through the replacement of existing and/or development, procurement and implementation of additional RP Contracts

•  Ensure that the comprehensive RP Oversight Framework is effectively implemented and monitored

National Service Agreements with custodians (other than PWGSC) •  Need to be signed prior to April 1, 2015 •  Govern the relationship and the responsibilities and accountabilities of

both parties.

76

Governance RP-1

Custodian: •  Responsible for the stewardship of real property under its

administration •  Comply with applicable legal, regulatory and government policy

requirements •  Approval of program of projects and maintenance •  Proving accurate and timely budget information consistent with the

terms of the contract •  Consistent with PWGSC established standards and oversight

requirements

77

Accountability and Authority RP-1

PWGSC as Technical Authority (TA): •  Prime contact with the contractor •  Perform RP contract oversight •  Services are provided in accordance with the Contract on all technical

matters •  Funding and payment are managed in accordance with the FAA PWGSC as Contracting Authority:

•  Is the principal point of contact to the TA for all matters concerning the terms and conditions of the contract

•  Makes contract amendments including: •  Add optional services •  Add or delete inventory •  Any change to the Statement of Work, Terms and Conditions, or

limitation of expenditure of the Contract •  Exercise options to extend the Contract term 78

Accountability and Authority RP-1

•  Change management and communication strategies

•  Multi-disciplinary team of Human Resources specialists

•  Consistency across the regions is mandatory

•  Activities prioritized along the delivery of the Statement of Work

•  Ongoing learning/training and knowledge transfer

•  Defining how much technical expertise we need to keep in-house

•  Increasing capacity in financial stewardship

•  Strengthening our Quality Monitoring approach

•  Alignment of funding model

•  Balancing risk tolerance and availability of funds

•  Interim state is challenging 79

Change Management Considerations

80

REAL PROPERTY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY – OUTSOURCED SERVICE DELIVERY Presented by: Bill Meek

Director, PMO-AFDS

81

•  With the ongoing focus on program-related and/or administrative efficiencies across government, many departments and agencies are looking for innovative solutions for the management of their real property assets. RPSM mechanisms are likely to be leveraged to provide many of these services .

•  Focus will now shift toward the development, procurement, implementation, management , enhancement and, where possible, the expansion of RPSM mechanisms to meet broader GC priorities and objectives.

•  The timeliness, quality and/or accuracy of the information and data generated by RP Contractors through their service delivery activities is critical to the stewardship and strategic management of our real property assets. Equally important, therefore, are the systems that support the transmittal, storage and use of this information and data.

Real Property Service Management (RPSM) Mechanisms and IM/IT Support

82

RPSM Contractors are required to provide and make available a broad range of information, data and reports, including:

•  Securely submitting electronic transactions to PWGSC systems (AFDMS);

•  Exchanging business files (i.e., other documents and deliverables, such as reviews, reports, and studies) through electronic media (RPDE), and;

•  Providing PWGSC with electronic access to Contractor-hosted

documents, systems, and performance measurement information – most of which are subject to quality management / monitoring.

This is why we’ve added a KPI on Information Integrity to the RP-1 Contracts

Real Property Service Management Mechanisms and IM/IT Support (cont.)

83

Contractor = data source

Submitted by Portfolio (a group of buildings)

Electronic submission

FTP Server / AVS tool

Electronic validation PWGSC Systems

Business Review & Validation

Reports

General Information Flow – Review and Validation

Validated Data

84

AFDMS is the repository of information and data submitted electronically by Contractors as part of the current Alternative Forms of Delivery (AFD) and/or RPSM Contracts (RP-2 and RP-1) for outsourced service delivery. The data submitted enables PWGSC to monitor and manage contracts, perform data and trend analysis, and report to Parliament. Information and data is transferred to a reporting database (AFDMS/R) to provide regional and national reporting to support stewardship, strategic decision-making and business operations activities. AFDMS is currently the source system / application for business and/or technical information and data specific to the AFD / RPSM Contracts (i.e., information on buildings managed and services delivered by Contractors).

Alternative Forms of Delivery Management System (AFDMS) – What is it?

85

AFDMS captures the following types and categories of business and technical information / data:

-  Contract Management -  Planning and Budget Management -  Financial Management -  Third-party Leasing -  Administration of Lease Contracts -  Inventory -  Environmental Activities -  Utility consumption -  Critical Incidents -  National Service Call Centre

Alternative Forms of Delivery Management System (AFDMS) – What’s in it?

Alternative Forms of Delivery Management System (AFDMS) – How does it work?

•  The format for information and data delivery is identified in the SOW / Contracts and reflects common industry best practices (XML format)

•  The scope and structure of the submissions are outlined in the two Chapters that make up the IM/IT Standard: –  The Chapters define specific types of data and provide

information with respect to the manner in which it should be identified (naming conventions) and categorized

–  Chapter 1: data elements “grouped” into logical transactions (as defined by PWGSC) for submission purposes. The transactions are used to generate reports

–  Chapter 2: codes and descriptions specific to the data in the transactions identified in Chapter 1

•  The transactions are submitted through the “Managed Secure File Transfer” (MSFT) protocol in XML format to a PWGSC terminal / server. The data is “picked-up” and moved into the AFDMS / AFDMS/R. 86

87

Real Property Document Exchange Solution (RPDE) To improve information management (IM) in the context of “outsourced” real property service delivery, PWGSC has included requirements specific to good “IM” housekeeping, with a focus on the receipt of timely, accurate and complete information, in the RP-1 RPSM Contracts. To facilitate and support this requirement, PWGSC has created a document exchange solution (RPDE) to manage the receipt, assessment and return (where required) of document deliverables submitted by RPSM Contractors (ie: Investment Analysis Reports, Incident Reports and etc). Validation of this back and forth transfer is required for the new RP-1/n Information Integrity KPI

88

At present, RPMS is used to capture, calculate and measure Contractor performance (KPI’s) for the AFD-2005 and RP-2 Contracts. Contractors are responsible for capturing and submitting the data required to calculate and report on the PI’s and KPI’s to RPMS. RPMS is also used for recording, monitoring and reporting on service calls from the NSCC. In the future (RP-1/n) , RPMS will not be used to capture, calculate and measure Contractor performance. RPMS will continue to be used for NSCC and quality monitoring purposes.

Real Property Management System (RPMS)

89

AFDMS Contractor’s Systems

MSFT

Reporting

Information Repository

Server / Terminal

Server / Terminal

Business Transactions

AFDMS Exchange

Electronic Delivery - MSFT RPDE Information Distribution

AFDMS Exchange

RPDE - Exchange of Documents and Deliverables

Contractor Collects and

Stores Data and Information

Secure, Real-Time Access for PWGSC

AFDMS = Alternative Forms of Delivery Management System MSFT = Managed Secure File Transfer Protocol

Information Exchange Between Contractors and PWGSC

90

Typical Industry Real Property Systems

-  Geographic Information System (GIS) -  Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) -  Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) -  Project Management System -  Computerized Maintenance Management System (CMMS) -  Work Management System (WMS) As well as… -  Integrated Workplace Management System (IWMS), which combines

a functionality specific to real property management into a single contiguous system solution.

91

Private Sector Leverage -  PWGSC will continue to leverage the Contractor’s systems to manage

and/or report on real property service delivery activities. -  Future RP’s will identify PWGSC’s information and reporting

requirements, with an emphasis on the Contractors ability to store, manage and report on the information and data that it captures on our behalf.

Where PWGSC and Contractor may be going: - Contractors will be expected to provide system access and interfaces. - Contractors will increasingly be required to adopt and employ common

industry standards, such as the Open Standards Consortium for Real Estate OSCRE;

- Contractors will be required to manage business and technical information and data on a lifecycle basis.

- Contractors will be expected to make information and data available in a secure manner on mobile devices via “apps”

- Continuous improvement will be a focus and priority

The Future of IM-IT in an RPSM Environment

Discussion...

92