EVMS General Topics

Common Problems Found in EVM Systems and Recommended Corrective Actions – Part 3

By /

Part 3: IMS Health Problems; Data Item Non-Compliance; Planning Package Misuse

This is the third part of a five part series regarding common findings discovered in Earned Value Management Systems (EVMS) reviews and the recommended corrective actions to help mitigate those findings.  The previous two articles discussed:

Part 3: IMS Health Problems; Data Item Non-Compliance; Planning Package Misuse

The topics anticipated for parts four and five are:

Part 4: Misalignment between BCWP and ACWP; Freeze Period Violations; Failed Data Traces.

Part 5: Inappropriate use of PERT and LOE; Misuse of Management Reserve; Administrative CAMs.

1.  IMS Health Problems 

Several years ago the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) issued the 14-Point Assessment Metrics. Twelve of the metrics are related to the “health” of the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) while the remaining two (critical path length index and baseline execution index) are “tripwire” metrics for schedule performance.  Of the 12 health metrics, H&A has found that most discrepancy reports (DRs) are associated with missing logic, high total float, and high duration.

Missing Logic:  The DCMA uses logic checks to identify any incomplete tasks that are missing a successor or predecessor, or both.  As a rule of thumb, all activities should be tied to at least one predecessor and one successor with the exception of the first and last activities (respectively) in the project.  By the DCMA’s standards, there is an allowance of 5% for activities not having these types of relationships; but some believe that may be too loose.  In the Planning and Scheduling Excellence Guide or PASEG (National Defense Industrial Association, June 2012, version 2.0) states that all discrete tasks (excluding receipts/deliveries, LOE and summary tasks) should have at least one predecessor and one successor as even one missing logical tie could adversely affect the program’s ability to successfully execute the contract.

High Total Float:  Total float (or “total slack” for Microsoft Project users) is the amount of time an activity can be delayed or expanded before the finish date of the project is affected.  In the DCMA Program Analysis Pamphlet (DCMA-EA PAM 200.1, April 2012), any incomplete tasks with total float greater than 44 working days are considered as having high total float;  an allowance of 5% is also given before this metric trips a red flag.  The primary drivers for inappropriate high total float are missing successor linkages or planning well in advance of need.  For this metric, however, there are many conditions that may drive a high total float value that are perfectly legitimate.  This is especially true for longer projects and production projects that often receive materials well advance of need.

High Duration:  The DCMA Program Analysis Pamphlet classifies incomplete activities with a baseline duration greater than 44 working days as having “high duration”, and again have applied a 5% threshold to the metric.  The fear of very long tasks is that they may not provide enough precision for measurement of accomplishment and will introduce subjectivity into the statusing process.  As with total float, there may be conditions that drive high duration activities that are justifiable.  This is often the case when activities are representative of schedules outside of the IMS, such as at subcontractors or manufacturing planning systems.

Most Common Corrective Action Plans

The IMS is a critical management tool, and the purpose of the health metrics is to ensure that it provides an accurate plan and reliable forecasting for program management and execution.  The basic approach to resolving DRs written for IMS health issues is to first take all the necessary steps to improve the real health of the schedule using the metrics as indicators.  This includes a thorough review of the linkages, relationships, and task durations on an ongoing basis.  Organizations should establish a health check “rhythm”, to be used to review the IMS prior to customer submittal.  This process should also require the CAMs and their scheduling support staff to justify any conditions that may drive tripping a metric.

The contractor should work with its customer to gain a mutual understanding of the conditions that may legitimately result in high total float and high duration activities.  Contractors should try to avoid taking illogical actions, such as adding unnecessary linkages or arbitrarily breaking tasks into small durations simply to meet the metric requirements.  The IMS health metrics are simply indicators of potential issues.  If the nature of the program were one where relatively higher total float values or high durations are to be expected, the appropriate thresholds for tripping a metric may be higher than the standard 44 days.  In these cases, it is worth having a discussion with the customer to establish  new metric thresholds.

2. Data Item Noncompliance

The reports that are generated from an EVMS or IMS, and delivered to the customer, are usually placed on the contract by the incorporation of a Data Item Description (DID) and included in the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL).  As of June, 2012, both earned value and schedule reporting are included in the Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR), DI-MGMT-81861.  It is important to generate the system reports in accordance with the appropriate DID as the requirements have changed with progressive releases.

Prior to the IPMR DID, IMS reporting was required per DI-MGMT-81650.  For EVM reporting, the previous DID was DI-MGMT-81466A, Contract Performance Report (for contracts established between March, 2005 and June, 2012), and before that was DI-MGMT-81466 or the Cost Performance Report.  The release of the Contract Performance Report DID in March 2005 also eliminated the use of the Cost/Schedule Status Report (C/SSR, DI-MGMT-81467) for new contracts.  There are, however, active contracts which use any one of the above DIDs as the requirements document for earned value and schedule reporting, and compliance of the submitted reports is evaluated against the DID that is required on each contract.

Data Item Descriptions are not just guidelines for reporting, they stipulate the contractual requirements for the documents. There are 203 uses of the word “shall” in the current IPMR DID, and some of these “shall statements” refer to a list of many requirements.  Any planned deviation, or tailoring, from the DID must be approved by the Procuring Authority and documented in the CDRL (DD 1423-1 on DoD contracts).  Section 3.0 of the “IPMR Implementation Guide” (OUSD AT&L PARCA, January 24, 2013) provides tailoring guidance for the IPMR.

Software programs used to generate the IPMR formats have reduced the amount of data specific errors in the reports; however, there are many requirements in the IPMR that are not related to data reporting.  In the requirements for the Format 5 (Explanations and Problem Analyses), for example, there are nine discussion requirements in addition to the required explanations for cost and schedule variances that exceed the variance thresholds.  The narrative portions of the IPMR cannot be generated by a software tool.

A contributing factor in the delivery of poor data items is when the customer encourages noncompliance or does not provide feedback on submitted reports.  It is easy to fall into apathy regarding compliance to the DID when there is no motivation to do so.  This situation, however, does little to convince other reviewers, such as the DCMA, that noncompliance is allowable.

Most Common Corrective Action Plans

When DID noncompliance is found and communicated to the contractor, the best immediate approach is correction and resubmittal of the document.  Noncompliance is most likely a discipline issue which requires a structured approach to developing the report, training the personnel who are responsible, and a thorough review prior to submittal.  Many organizations develop checklists that are used to ensure that all the requirements have been met prior to submittal.  There are also training materials available which can provide cell-by-cell instructions to make the proper entries into these reports (H&A has a DVD titled “Contract Performance and Funds Status Reports (CPR/CFSR) Completion and Reconciliation”).  It may be worthwhile to develop a “buddy system” with another program or another part of the company to exchange outside review and evaluation of data items.  This type of accountability can be mutually beneficial.

3. Planning Package Mismanagement

A planning package is far-term effort in a control account that cannot yet be subdivided into detailed work packages.  Planning packages share similar attributes as work packages, such as a time phased budget, a scope of work, start and finish dates, and must have enough detail in the IMS to support the development of a critical path.  There can be no accomplishment or actual costs recorded against the scope and budget that is defined in a planning package.  When enough information is available to detail plan the planning packages, they are converted to work packages.  This is done through a process called “Rolling Wave Planning”, and it is a good practice to have the detailed information available for at least six months in advance.  Advanced detailed planning is an effective approach to avoid unpleasant surprises, such as lack of availability of the necessary resources or the necessity to begin a hiring exercise.  In addition, near term lack of detail in the Integrated Master Schedule may drive improper or incomplete logic ties, which will impact total float and critical path analyses.

Company EVMS System Description Documents (SDDs) should provide guidance for rolling wave planning, including rules for any baseline adjustment in the current or near term periods.  It is important that planning packages are not allowed to exist in the current or past periods.  It is also improper for any actual costs (ACWP) or performance (BCWP) to be recorded against a planning package.  Most earned value engine software tools prohibit this, but some contractors have been known to override that prohibition in the toolset.  In addition to ACWP and BCWP, there should also be no cumulative BCWS in the current period for any planning package.  Cumulative BCWS is the most noticeable evidence that a planning package was not converted to a work package in a timely manner.

Most Common Corrective Action Plans

The most common corrective action is to conduct a monthly analysis of the EVM data to identify planning packages that are nearing the planning period.  While it is the responsibility of the control account manager (CAMs) to convert planning packages to work packages, Project Controls can easily provide the CAMs with a list of planning packages needing conversion.  If there is no guidance or process written for rolling wave planning, these should be developed to provide instructions to the CAMs and the support staff.  It is also critical that organizations maintain the restrictions in the earned value engines to prohibit the accrual of earned value or actual costs for planning packages.

Please contact Humphreys & Associates if you have any questions on this article.

Common Problems Found in EVM Systems and Recommended Corrective Actions – Part 3 Read Post »

Keeping the EVM Love Alive In Your Organization

By / / ,
,

Keeping the EVM loveAdmittedly, operating an Earned Value Management System (EVMS) in an organization can sometimes be like getting your kids to the dentist.  They know they have to do it, and they will even concede that it may be good for them, but it does not mean they have to like it.

Earned Value provides a framework for integrating the cost, schedule, and technical scope of your project, and is an exceptionally valuable tool for management and project status.  There are, however, a few strategies that can be employed in order to maintain a healthy system by motivating those who operate within the system to do so with a sense of ownership.

Keeping the EVM love alive can follow the simple formula of Push, Pull and Inform.

1)   Push:  Senior Management Must Use the Data and Demand Quality

Having those up the food chain demanding accurate and timely information can be a powerful “push” that maintains interest and focuses efforts on system health and quality.  Organizations where EVM is nothing more than a reporting requirement and is not used for decision making or conveyance of project status, will have a difficult time maintaining a healthy system.  Sometimes negative attitudes towards Earned Value can even start with the customer and flow down to the contractor.

The alternative is in companies in which it is apparent that EVM is deeply embedded in the projects’ culture.  In a multitude of forums, the language of Earned Value is used to describe the status and issues of the project.  In these companies you probably will not see only the obligatory EVM charts in project reviews, but instead see the concepts and outputs of the system used throughout project management.  If poor variance analyses, inaccurate Estimates at Completions (EAC), incomplete baselines, or lack of corrective actions are challenged by the entire chain of management, then chances are those problems will stop being problems and the organizations can begin relying on the information to manage effectively.

2)    Pull:  Keep the System Useful to the Users

A great deal of resources may be invested in an EVMS, and in organizations with a healthy and useful system the return on this investment can be substantial.   Organizations that employ toolsets with timely and accessible reporting of project information help combat the belief that EVM is just a one-way reporting process.  A common interface for data is an “EVM Cockpit”, or some other tool set or reports that make the information easy to access for day-to-day management purposes.  The flip side of this are systems that make data accessibility difficult, or the problems of the system cause the data to be unreliable for prompt decision making purposes.  For example, one of the more important processes in an EVMS is variance analysis; however, when a great deal of time and effort is spent explaining variances that are not related to project performance, it becomes a significant drain on the attitude towards the system.

It is also important that the critical processes of the system are easy to use and understand.  These processes include project baselining, updates to the Estimate to Complete (ETC), statusing the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), incorporation of changes, preparing variance analyses, and tracking of corrective actions.  Decisions regarding the architecture of the toolsets supporting these processes can significantly impact the attitudes of system users.  In addition, developing tool sets that eliminate the redundancy of data inputs between the cost and scheduling systems can dramatically improve the quality of the Earned Value data.

3)   Inform:  Regular Communication and Continuous Education to the Project Teams are Critical

Like any important management system in an organization, it is important to continually inform and support those who operate within the EVM system.  There is an endless source of special topics and project notifications that can provide useful information to project teams, which will help maintain EVM knowledge and a healthy system.  Some topics, such as preparing quality variance analysis, thorough corrective actions, and valid ETCs, need routine refreshment.

Below are a few suggestions on ways to communicate within the organization:

  • Monthly Internal Newsletter: An excellent mechanism to convey important updates to EV processes or changes that pertain to the business and the industry. This gives employees a chance to keep up with the latest news and developments.
  • EV Blog:  By blogging regularly, an organization can develop themes that are specific to business issues the organization is experiencing. If there are many of the same questions repeated again and again, the blog can be used to answer those questions. This way, people can just refer to the blog if they have questions that are common.
  • Lunch & Learn Sessions: These sessions are an excellent way for all participants to gain further knowledge on a specific topic and ask questions in real time.  This becomes more advantageous as all participants benefit from the group discussion.
  • Quarterly Webinar: This is particularly beneficial for organizations that may have multiple facilities located throughout the country. Specific subjects would be applicable to all sites. All participants, regardless of location, can attend and benefit.
  • Annual Quiz: This is a great way to gauge how well employees are grasping and using EVM. Questions would be centered on topics relating to events that occurred during the year. The quiz could be recurring and mandatory in the same manner as ethics and sexual harassment training.

For more information about keeping the EVM love alive in your organization give us a call at Humphreys & Associates, Inc. We are happy to answer questions.

Keeping the EVM Love Alive In Your Organization Read Post »

The Benefits of Using Nine EVMS Process Groups

By /

The benefit to a contractor initially developing its management system and the documentation of that management system in a System Description Document (SDD) using the Nine Process Groups is to clearly and completely structure its SDD in a natural grouping of related topics.

Below are the Nine Process Groups mapped to the EIA-748 Guidelines:

Nine Process Groups mapped to the EIA-748 Guidelines by Humphreys & Associates, Inc.

Guideline Areas

Process Groupings
  • Organization
  • Planning, Scheduling & Budgeting
  • Accounting Considerations
  • Analysis & Management Reports
  • Revisions & Maintenance
  1. Organizing
  2. Scheduling
  3. Work Authorization
  4. Accounting
  5. Indirect Management
  6. Management & Analysis
  7. Change Management
  8. Material Management
  9. Subcontract Management

Why not use the five EVMS sections (guideline groupings) for organizing an SDD?  The 32 guidelines were chronologically organized into these five sections rather than by process.  When a program is started, the focus is to “Organize”.  This includes activities such as:

  • Organizing the staffing  and work (OBS and WBS)
  • Integrating the management control systems and the company’s processes
  • Integrating the WBS with the OBS to establish control accounts
  • Identifying the organization that is responsible for managing the overhead costs

These are all activities that occur prior to the next phase “Planning, Scheduling, and Budgeting”.  This type of grouping is also an excellent method for teaching the basic concepts of EVMS.  An Earned Value course organized in this manner has a natural flow, because each one of the five guideline areas builds upon the concepts of the one before.

An SDD, however, should describe an already established system rather than a concept, and the best framework in which to understand that system is not with a chronological orientation.  Using the five EVMS areas approach often results in a document that is muddled, with disjointed flows of information.  For example the topic of Indirect Cost Management is covered in six different guidelines across four different guideline areas.  Similarly, Subcontract Management is represented in eight guidelines across four guideline areas.  An SDD using the structure of the five EVMS areas would need repeated coverage of these topics throughout.  Many companies also have organizational disciplines represented by several of the nine process groupings, e.g., Subcontract Management, Material Management, Indirect Management, and Accounting are often organizations within the company.  Their associated processes represent the flow of the organization as well as the earned value management system.  The clearest method for designing, reviewing and documenting an earned value management “system” is to structure the system using the nine process groups.  The nine process grouping also follows the DCMA EVMS Cross Reference Checklist and its Management System Characteristics (MSCs) to accommodate contractor system structuring.

Additional chapters or section such as pre-contract award/proposal process, risk and opportunity, and system surveillance could be included in the system description, as they also involve earned value management.

In summary, while either approach could be used to construct the Earned Value Management System, the nine process group structure has proven to be the best architecture for an EVMS document.

For additional information about EVM education, EVMS Consulting or the Nine EVMS Process Groups, feel free to contact Humphreys & Associates.

The Benefits of Using Nine EVMS Process Groups Read Post »

EVM Systems – The 16 Foundational Guidelines

By /

The Earned Value Management System (EVMS) – Standard Surveillance Instruction (SSI) (latest revision February 2012) defines the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) standardized methodology to conduct contractor surveillance on EVM Systems. This includes assessment of contractor processes and procedures to ensure the 32 EIA-748 Guidelines are being followed when contractually required.

Of the 32 Guidelines, sixteen are considered high-risk or foundational for EVM Systems.  This means that if the requirements of those Guidelines are not met, considered noncompliant, the Earned Value Management System may not produce accurate, reliable and auditable data such that it provides the customer with the information necessary to reliably manage a program.

The 16 Foundational Guidelines are highlighted below in red.

EVM Systems - 16 Foundational Guidelines

Each year, the DCMA prepares a surveillance schedule which includes the five EVMS Areas and associated Guidelines to be reviewed and the programs/contracts involved.  Of the 32 Guidelines, the 16 high-risk Guidelines are evaluated every year and all 32 Guidelines evaluated within a 3 year period.  By concentrating on these 16 high-risk Guidelines, resources for both the Government and the contractor can be used more efficiently.  Concerns with non-high risk Guideline(s) could be surfaced during reviews and these can then be scheduled for additional surveillance.  Generally, a minimum of four surveillance events are planned covering the five EVMS Areas in a given year.

If guideline noncompliance were found in any of the high risk guidelines, this signifies that there are shortcomings in the system and the information produced from that system is not reliable for management purposes.

Although the Standard Surveillance Instruction requirements are that those Guidelines that are not foundational be reviewed by the DCMA at least every three years, it is still incumbent on the contractor to ensure that those Guidelines remain compliant.

The 16 foundational guidelines are:

ORGANIZATION

Guideline 1: Define the authorized work elements for the program.

Guideline 3: Provide for the integration of the company’s planning, scheduling, budgeting, work authorization and cost accumulation processes with each other, and as appropriate, the program Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and the program organizational.

PLANNING AND BUDGETING

Guideline 6: Schedule the authorized work in a manner, which describes the sequence of work and identifies significant task interdependencies required to meet the requirements of the program.

Guideline 7: Identify physical products, milestones, technical performance goals, or other indicators that will be used to measure progress.

Guideline 8: Establish and maintain a time-phased budget baseline, at the Control Account level, against which program performance can be measured.

Guideline 9: Establish budgets for authorized work with identification of significant cost elements (labor, material, etc.) as needed for internal management and for control of subcontractors.

Guideline 10: To the extent it is practical to identify the authorized work in discrete work packages, establish budgets for this work in terms of dollars, hours, or other measurable units.

Guideline 12: Identify and control level of effort activity by time-phased budgets established for this purpose.  Only that effort which is immeasurable or for which measurement is impractical may be classified as level of effort. 

ACCOUNTING CONSIDERATIONS

Guideline 16: Record direct costs in a manner consistent with the budgets in a formal system controlled by the general books of account.

 Guideline 21: For EVMS, the material accounting system will provide for:

      1. Accurate cost accumulation and assignment of costs to Control Accounts in a manner consistent with the budgets using recognized, acceptable, costing techniques.
      2. Cost performance measurement at the point in time most suitable for the category of material involved, but no earlier than the time of progress payments or actual receipt of material.
      3. Full accountability of all material purchased for the program including the residual inventory.

ANALYSIS AND MANAGEMENT REPORTS

Guideline 23: Identify, at least monthly, the significant differences between both planned and actual schedule performance and planned and actual cost performance, and provide the reasons for the variances in detail needed by program management.

Guideline 26: Implement managerial actions taken as a result of earned value information.

Guideline 27: Develop revised estimates of cost at completion based on performance to date, commitment values for material, and estimate of future conditions. Compare this information with the performance measurement baseline to identify variances at completion important to company management and any applicable customer reporting requirements including statements of funding requirements.

REVISIONS AND DATA MAINTENANCE

Guideline 28: Incorporate authorized changes in a timely manner, recording the effects of such changes in budgets and schedules.  In the directed effort prior to negotiation of a change, base such revisions on the amount estimated and budgeted to the program organizations.

Guideline 30: Control retroactive changes to records pertaining to work performed that would change previously report amounts for actual costs, earned value, or budgets.

Guideline 32: Document changes to the performance measurement baseline.

For more information on these guidelines or to inquire about EVMS implementation and remediation, contact Humphreys & Associates.

EVM Systems – The 16 Foundational Guidelines Read Post »

Earned Value Management for Biotech and Pharma – Part 2 Accounting

By /

By Ric Brock – Engagement Director, Humphreys & Associates

As a follow up to our article on the Earned Value Management for Biotech and Pharma Industries, this is a quick look at how Biotech and Pharma companies collect and manage costs compared to accounting requirements on federal acquisitions.

The Operating Model for the Biotech and Pharma Industry

The basis of the Biotech and Pharmaceutical operating model is to discover/invent a compound or device to meet a need, validate its safety and efficacy, ensure proper patent protection, market it as quickly as possible, and maximize commercialization while there is still patent protection.  In short, it is about speed to market and maximizing the commercial life cycle.

Operating costs are collected and managed from a process costing basis.  Internal costs are usually not collected by a cost objective, as they are not managed to that level of detail.  Most internal labor is collected by department total headcount and labor dollars.  Project or activity based timekeeping is not practiced; i.e. time cards are not used.  External costs (materials, contract services, subcontractors, etc.) are collected within the purchasing system and can be tied to specific activities and traced to the originating departments.  Most companies do have the ability to set up and track job costs within their capital management system.

Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR), Cost Accounting Standards (CAS), and Timekeeping

The ability to plan and collect actual costs in a consistent and systematic manner by contract/project is a key to the Earned Value Management System requirement.  The costing of items and services purchased by the US Government on a non-firm fixed price basis are covered in the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) and the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS).  The ability to collect costs in a consistent and timely manner is an EVMS prerequisite.

Federal Acquisition Regulations

Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) are a set of regulations governing the US Government processes of purchasing goods and services.  Among the guiding principles are to have an acquisition system that satisfies the customer’s needs in terms of cost, quality, and timeliness; to conduct business with integrity, fairness, and openness; and to fulfill other public policy objectives.

Part 52 of the FAR contains standard contract clauses and solicitation provisions. Many clauses incorporate parts of the FAR into government contracts by reference, thereby imposing FAR rules on contractors.

Part 30 of the FAR describes policies and procedures for applying the Cost Accounting Standards Board (CASB) rules and regulations [48 CFR Chapter 99 (FAR Appendix)] to negotiated contracts and subcontracts. This part does not apply to sealed bid contracts or to any contract with a small business concern [see 48 CFR 9903.201-1(b) (FAR Appendix) for these and other exemptions].  Part 30 also identifies the standard contract clauses and solicitation provisions contained in FAR Part 52 that are to be incorporated when applying the CASB rules and regulations to a contract or subcontract.

When a government agency issues a contract or request for proposal, it will specify a list of FAR clauses that will apply.  In order to be awarded the contract, a bidder must either comply with the clauses, demonstrate that it will be able to comply at time of award, and/or claim an exemption from them.  A bidder must also ensure that it understands the contractual commitments, as complying with some FAR clauses may require changes to operating processes.

Cost Accounting Standards

Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) are a set of 19 standards and rules (CAS 401 – 420) that the US Government uses in determining the costs on negotiated procurements.

A company may be subject to full CAS coverage (required to follow all 19 standards), modified CAS coverage (required to follow only Standards 401, 402, 405, and 406), or be exempt from coverage.

Full coverage applies only when a company receives either one CAS-covered contract of $50 million or more, or a number of smaller CAS covered contracts totaling $50 million. In addition to complying with the standards, the company must also file a CAS Disclosure Statement (CASB DS-1) which clearly describes the company’s accounting practices (such as what costs are treated as direct contract charges and what costs are treated as part of an overhead expense). There are two versions of the CAS Disclosure Statement: DS-1 applies to commercial companies while DS-2 applies to educational institutions.

Modified coverage applies when a company receives a single contract of $7.5 million or more. 

Timekeeping

Despite the significant role timekeeping plays in government contracting, the FAR provides little direction on timekeeping.  This lack of guidance has been left to government audit agencies (such as the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) to establish audit standards.  The DCAA uses its Contract Audit Manual (CAM) to provide audit guidance to its auditors.  The CAM provides guidance on auditing timekeeping procedures in section 5-909.  The audit manual states that timekeeping procedures should be able to “assure that labor hours are accurately recorded and that any corrections to timekeeping records are documented…”.

This timekeeping system should feed a labor distribution system that maintains labor hours and dollars by employee, by project/contract, and type of effort account.  This labor distribution should be reconciled to the general ledger labor accounts at least monthly.

Timekeeping is critical.  Unlike other contract costs, labor charges are not supported by external documentation.  The move by a Biotech/Pharma company to a formal timekeeping system may require extensive cultural change.

Summary

As Biotech and Pharmaceutical companies move to FAR contracting, it will require a transition to a project/job costing basis from a process costing basis.  This change may appear straight forward, but any process change requires sound change management.

All aspects of EVMS are critical to ensure the utility of an effective program management tool.  In this blog we provided a summary level look at cost accounting data.  The ability to collect valid, timely, and auditable cost is the foundation for the Actual Cost of Work Performed (ACWP).  Without knowing what we accomplished and what we spent to get to where we are, it is very hard to predict where we are going: the Estimate to Complete (ETC).   As a company designs and develops its EVMS, it must make sure actual cost collection and management is also addressed within the FAR and CAS requirements.

For questions or inquires on how to implement Earn Value project management in the biotechnology or pharmaceutical industries, contact one of the experts at Humphreys & Associates.

Ric Brock - Engagement Director, Humphreys & AssociatesMr. Brock has over 30 years of experience in program and project management, operations, and quality assurance in government and commercial environments.  He has extensive experience working with all levels of an organization, from top management to performing personnel. Ric has extensive experience supporting Pharmaceutical companies in life cycle management, filing new drug applications, and launching new drugs.  He has a wealth of experience with EVM systems across a variety of industries from defense to commercial including biotech/pharma. You can find Ric on LinkedIn

 

Earned Value Management for Biotech and Pharma – Part 2 Accounting Read Post »

Scroll to Top