Managing Contingency Construction Operations †MyAssignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about the Managing Contingency Construction Operations. Answer: Introduction: An independent consultant body called the Calcutta Group was consulted and accordingly significant changes were made to the project. The consultant in its review recommended that there was a need for a new program which would cover all projects which are needed for successful operational commission of the hospital (Rodgers, 2005). In reply, SA Health began a new RAH Program which had nine departments which included an cohesive project management office (iPMO). It also, set up a number of key governance committees including a revamped steering committee and a new operations board. SA Health also roped in a temporary director who was brought in January 2014. Also, keeping in mind the recommendations of the Calcutta Group some very specific responsibilities connected to the administration of the Project Agreement were handed over from SA Health to DPTI. These arrangements were: Health minister chose the Executive Director, Building Management , DPTI as the Project Director in accordance to the Project Agreement. DPTI was given the responsibility for managing the delivery of the infrastructure by designing and constructing it. They are also responsible for the delivery of the facilities management services pursuant to the Project Agreement (Rodgers, 2005). SA Health, however, retained the responsibility of delivering clinical services and logistics when the building would be completed. Contract handover and sign-off For a project of this magnitude where around 9000 items are to be procured or transferred to the RAH a robust contract management framework is needed for managing the obligations and risks. Recommendations were made to SA Health to complete the plans. SAs responded by saying that it had finalized a contract management framework for managing vendors and expected deliverables for State funded clinical equipment. The framework lines up with the contractual obligations of the Project Agreement and the functional needs of RAH. According to SA Health the contract for clinical equipment was also nearly done. Next, SA Health were advised to see to it that contracts and their variations were executed properly. It was also asked to review the status of ICT contracts and to finalize all outstanding contracts and variations. SA Health then said that they have already put in place a more effective contract management process which can be used by designated managers to look into the current status of a contract. SA Health also answered queries relating to contract management plans in connection to what responsibilities have been given to officers. It stated that the Project Director (DPTI) is in charge of all the functions under the agreement. Infrastructure maintenance issues The new hospital is being done using a PPP model. Therefore the biggest concern for the leadership was to decide how it would deal with the issues relating to infrastructure maintenance. Then it was decided that the private sector will deal with the designing, building and financing of the project along with providing facilities management over a certain time-period (Sorvari Seppl, 2010). The State on the other hand will be providing the equipment for RAH and also the clinical services. To also make things less complicated and to see who is responsible for what, the project agreement was looked into. Under it the State is to grant an operating licence to Project Co. to use the site and the facilities once it becomes operational till the end of the Project Agreement which is 2046. During this time frame the State will pay Project Co. through payments for the maintenance and operation of infrastructure (Thomas, 2012). Strategic planning for maintenance The leadership also strategically planned for maintenance through Commercial Acceptance where the State will identify a lease asset over the operating term of the Project Agreement. During this time the State would have to pay money to Project Co. for the building, operation and maintenance of the infrastructure that Project Co. has provided and financed (Thomas, 2010). Now, the value of the payments made by the State will change from time to time in tune with the agreement. These will reflect project lifecycle costs made by Project Co, which includes payments such as significant asset maintenance and replace works (Pradhan, Laefer Rasdorf, 2007). For maintaining such a massive hospital as RAH one needs to have a fool proof management system which looks into it. There are different ways of maintenance management, here are a few: Cleansing relative to household chores, porter-age and medical services, waste managing departments and control measures insuring departments . (Brtland, 2010). Techniques used for managing critical infrastructure Project Co. was responsible for building and designing the ICT network as the task was given to them in the construction phase of the project. Therefore it was also given the responsibility, during the operating phase of the project , with the ICT management.(Arboleda et al., 2009). Debt procurement and equality in financing the deliverables of the project was main objective of the project. As well as insurances for construction and operating phase was also supported. (Anwar, Rayes, Elnashai, 2010). Also, under the Project Agreement, Project Co was also given the task of procuring debt and equity to fund the delivery of ICT and take out range of insurances for building and operating it. Best practices of asset management are through Financial asset management, where one has to manage investment funds. Next, its through Enterprise Asset Management where the fixed assets of an organization are managed through acquisition, operation, maintenance and decommissioning. Then there is the Fixed Assets Management which is the practice of tracking fixed assets so as to help in accounting, loss prevention and maintenance (Marlow, Beale Burn, 2010). Digital Asset Management too is a vital function through which an organization gets the rights to use the information they collect. The case study established the effective risk management by including identification, applications and monitoring of the progress on the present risk mitigation or the adapted or innovated safety measures (Brtland, 2010). Initially since September 2014, the committee was presented a register subjected to hold the details of enforcements and challenges. The register had some operational defects with some extreme, high and moderate risk with a generalized viewpoint of the risk, not conveying enough information to determine the danger and consequence to the project involved. The register did not withhold any strategy details for the safety management or the present situation regarding the risk. Quite a number of risk relevant enough in the delivery objectives of the project were inclusive of crucial complexities, which had potential to affect the patient safety, security and financial status. On analysis, it is evident the personals designated with the responsibility were not efficient enough to monitor or manage the risks involved and no detrimental measures were recorded. Such operational defects limit the progress of the project. Few other areas of management required for improvement- firstly, policy requirement: to ensure correct documentation and key approvals from an authorized personnel. Based on this, the records could have been maintained, which was lacking. Secondly, revision of the risk information mentioning the correct nature, name and descriptions of the registered risk as well as of the patient, if any involved was improper. Thirdly, limitation on due-dates, correct formatting and checking of due dates is a priority that was not followed, for correct proceedings. Lastly, the inconsistencies between the records register of committees and that delivered to the project director, was witnessed. Strategies and Recommendations: Few recommendations relevant to the challenges involved were made. Suggestive ways can prove to be strategic solutions to the already present problems. Firstly, establishing policy codes to guide the proper authorization to approvals and documented database, to ensure a proper mechanism to register the details. Secondly, registration of risks as well as timely removal of the same in an important step towards mitigation of this challenge, as this would be beneficial for the committee. Finally, mechanically imply of mechanisms to establish co-ordination between committee and the director. The committee members might not have understood the facts and nature of the potential risks involved with project earlier properly. As recommendation, the suggestive methodology to identify various risks was to revise the information relative to risks, the study of its nature and consequences of the same (Krohe, 2008). Information should further include the strategies to be implemented in order to maintain the safety management. Utilizing the strategy, in june 2015 the reporting involved the status of treatment solutions for strategic risks involved. In addition to this, the members to meet the necessary safety management in view provided in the future reports summary of control measures, treatments and specific analysis of the risk. Response from Management: The management department of the health centre, keeping in the view the limitations recorded decided to work on or implement the advised recommendations to the already raised issues. The prior aspects included the list of response are discussed in this section. Firstly, the new Royal Adelaide Hospital (RAH) Integrated Risk Program Committee established its stature in August 2015,which will effectively update the record register inclusive of addition and removal of the risks, producing clear and proper database deserving the authorization from the committee or personnel involved (Ugarelli et al., 2010). Secondly, the new RAH was assigned with an unique ID, to implement the reviews monthly about the risk and the control measures providing policy guidance to built proper documentation. The leadership displayed by the management department or the committee members proved evidently beneficial for the project (Ellis, 2006). The decision by the health center to hire an independent consultant specifically to insight the key limitations involving few governance reviews and the functional review of the newly organized program by RAH has lead to development concerning the hospital environment and its grandeur (Penn Parker, 2012). The consultant identified the lying areas with the scope of improvisations and proposed suggestive measures, to be followed, setting it as a priority (Rodgers, 2005). The period the case study was conducted this health center was in the process of identifying its limitations and challenges and in the path to follow the suggestive procedures made by the hired consultant. This gives the clear insight that in every possible way the committee and the organization were enthusiastic enough to work towards the existing problem, which is commendable. On August 2015 and September 2015, the project director confirmed the remediation regarding a claim for the same by Project Cos, which was evaluated to be $14.16 million (PwC, 2014). Cabinet confirmed the ministry of health for the execution of a deed of settlement and release concerning the agreements between state and the project. Techniques Adapted for Safety Management: The health center took steps to prepare a strategic Acquisition Plan for the procurement of clinical equipments including the funded furniture, variant fittings (clinical) and equipments for the newly organized RAH (Chen et al., 2009). This plan had the detailed and precise proposal of the procurement program, which was provided to the State Procurement Board (SPB) for the authentication. The plan made sure to achieve a quarterly review of the ongoing governance by the SPB (Marlow, Beale Burn, 2010). They finally, achieved the success in developing and implementing improvisations in the systems involved and reporting on the associated status and risks in the procurement program for furniture, fixtures and equipment. Conclusion: On analysis of the facts, it can be concluded that the state was actively in the process of resolving the issues claimed by the safety management and facility management departments. The project is on the path of a substantial growth towards setting grandeur with all possible facilities and safety measures required for the members and the patients oriented with the organization. Realizations and response towards the recommendations provided by the consultants and personnel from relevant backgrounds were commendable and showed an enthusiastic move to ensure proper services. The new RAH program proved to be beneficial for the program and the installation of the equipments was a technical improvisation much needed for the development in the project. The leadership also had their focus on maintenance and they proceeded towards it by first contract handover and then managing the maintenance issues. References: Brtland, J. (2010). Capital concepts as insights into the maintenance and neglect of infrastructure. Independent Review, 15(1), 3551. Chen, P., Scown, C., Matthews, H. S., Garrett, J. H., Jr., Hendrickson, C. (2009). Managing critical infrastructure interdependence through economic input/output methods. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 15(3), 200210. Ellis, R. (2006). Decommissioning: Taking part of a system off-line doesnt have to get out of hand. Engineered Systems, 23(5), 26. Krohe, J., Jr. (2008). Our daunting to-do list: When it comes to infrastructure, we know the problems. What are we going to do about them? Planning, 74(9), 613. Marlow, D. R., Beale, D. J., Burn, S. (2010). A pathway to a more sustainable water sector: Sustainability-based asset management. Water Science Technology, 61(5), 12451255. Martland, C. D. (2012). Chapters 10 (Sec 10.1), 15, and 16 (Sec 16.3) Penn, M. R., Parker, P. J. (2012). Introduction to infrastructure: An introduction to civil and environmental engineering, Chapter 13, Hoboken, N.J: Wiley. PwC (2014). Asset Management 2020: A Brave New World. Rodgers, T. L. (2005). An owners perspective on commissioning of critical facilities. ASHRAE Transactions, 111(2), 618626. Ugarelli, R., Venkatesh, G., Bratteb, H., Di Federico, Sgrov, S. (2010). Asset management for urban wastewater pipeline networks. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 16(2), 112121. Reprinted by permission of the American Society of Civil Engineers via the Copyright Clearance Center. Martland, C. D. (2012). Chapters 2 (Sec 2.6), 10 (Secs 10.4 and 10.5), 13 (Secs 13.3 and 13.5). Arboleda, C. A., Abraham, D. M., Richard, J.-P. P., Lubitz, R. (2009). Vulnerability assessment of health care facilities during disaster events. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 15(3), 149161. Reprinted by permission of the American Society of Civil Engineers via the Copyright Clearance Center. El-Anwar, O., El-Rayes, K., Elnashai, A. (2010). Maximizing temporary housing safety after natural disasters. Journal of Infrastructure Systems, 16(2), 138148. Reprinted by permission of the American Society of Civil Engineers via the Copyright Clearance Center. Pradhan, A. R., Laefer, D. F., Rasdorf, W. J. (2007). Infrastructure management information system framework requirements for disasters. Journal of Computing in Civil Engineering, 21(2), 90101. Sorvari, J., Seppl, J. (2010). A decision support tool to prioritize risk management options for contaminated sites. Science of the Total Environment, 408(8), 17861799. Reprinted by permission of Elsevier Science Technology via the Copyright Clearance Center. Thomas, M. U. (2010). Models for managing contingency construction operations. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 136(3), 391398.