fy 2013 workforce summary lessons learned proposal
DESCRIPTION
FY 2013 Workforce Summary Lessons Learned Proposal. Peter H. Garbincius & Young-Kee Kim November 5, 2012 – updated after meeting Director’s Senior Management ++ Group filename: Management_5nov2012-phg-ykk.pptx http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OPPS/index.htm - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
1
FY 2013 Workforce SummaryLessons Learned
Proposal
Peter H. Garbincius & Young-Kee KimNovember 5, 2012 – updated after meeting
Director’s Senior Management ++ Group
filename: Management_5nov2012-phg-ykk.pptxhttp://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OPPS/index.htm
http://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OIP/OHAP/index.htmlhttp://www.fnal.gov/directorate/OIP/OHAP/PlanNeeds/index.htm
2
What are our goals for this meeting?
• Information we gathered in the past What we learned and how we used it
• FY 2013 staffing info from 9/12 Budget Uploads requests vs. allocation for major projects
• What staffing projection info do we need? Over what timescale?
• Brainstorming on Lessons Learned and Proposal for FY2013
3
OHAP(Organization and Human Asset Plan)
• 10 year projection– 3 years in details (tier 1 skills ~ 22 Functional Categories)– High level projection beyond 3 years (tier 1 skills) to identify
potential skill gaps in the future– 5 year plan for scientists (via annual survey)
• Distribution of OHAP roles– latest 9/30 FTEs from FTL for FY 2011– haven’t done FY 12
• Budget Upload for FY 12, 13, 14 – Jan 2012• removed:
– Age Distribution 1/1/2008, 5/15/2012• Peter H. Garbincius, Dean Hoffer, Bridgette Fricks• first presented 5/14/2012, latest rev 6/15/2012
4
OHAP Structure SummaryFunctional Discipline Functional Category -Tier 1 # Roles
Information Technology 14
Scientific 26Postdoctoral Research Associate 9Scientist 17
Technical 34Alignment 2Design 6Electrical Technician 6Mechanical Technician 8Operations 5Other Technical 7
total # Roles 150
OHAP Structure SummaryFunctional Discipline Functional Category -Tier 1 # Roles
Administration 28Communications 2Finance 3Human Resources 10Other Administration 8Procurement 1Project Management 4
Engineer 18Civil Engineer 3Electrical Engineer 7Mechanical Engineer 8
ES&H 12
Facilities Mgmt 17
7 Functional Disciplines, 20 Functional Categories – Tier 1, 150 Functional Roles – Tier 2 (plus Guest Scientist & Guest Engineer)
5
OHAP Study – last in FY2012• 10 year study – give funding profile for decade!
Fermilab budgets & plans are not stable over decade• Ask for personnel requirements for
both projects and regular “operations”• Focus on “needs to get the job done” not on balancing the
budget especially for large future projects– Regular operations including accelerators and support functions
by sections: constant level– Projects need to meet their budget guidelines. Some budget
guidelines (e.g. long-term projects) are not realistic except the current year and the following year
6
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
FY 10
FY 11
FY 12
FY 13
FY 14
FY 15
FY 16
FY 17
FY 18
FY 19
FY 20
FY 21
$ K/yr
Funding Model per Project by FY
Project X - Stage 1 *
LBNE - Stage 1
LHC Accelerator Upgrades
CMS LS2 Upgrade
Mu2e
Muon g-2 + Muon Exp Area
MicroBooNE
NOvA
Proton Improvement Plan - M&S
Muon Accelerator Program
SCRF Infrastructure
reference: peterg$\SC Planning FY 2012\Completed elements\OHAP stuff\Solid Plot 19dec2011…
results are only as good as the long-term guidance provided
7
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY 15 FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20 FY 21
LBNE - FULL start in FY 2015
LBNE - delay start
Project X - Stage 1
The 800 pound gorillas: LBNE & Project XWhen do these guys really start?
8
Census Headcount.xls Budgeted FTEs Budgeted FTEsCensus OHAP_5_11_12.xls experience through FY 2012 for FY 2012 in for FY 2013 inDiscipline 29-Sep-11 31-Mar-12 11-May-12 13-Aug-12 J an 2012 UploadJ an 2012 UploadAdministration 276 290 288 296 268.3 264.5Engineering 264 257 258 257 249.8 235.8ES&H 56 56 57 55 58.9 59.0Facilities Management 183 178 178 170 180.0 177.0Information Technology 309 287 287 267 300.7 292.8Scientific 355 347 343 329 358.8 333.8Technical 465 425 426 416 416.6 387.5Grand Total 1908 1840 1837 1790 1833.1 1750.4WDRS headcount 1907 1843 1838 1791WDRS FTEs 1893.5 1831.5 1825.3 1778.1WFRS FTES/Headcount 99.3% 99.4% 99.3% 99.3%closest WDRS staffing report 30-Apr-12 31-J ul-12
these numbers are plotted below
UPDATE THIS FOR FY13
9
identifying the gaps
15% shortfallupdate Census to 13aug2012
10
example: expandAdministration
3 year gaps – 7a
update Census to 13aug
11-5% 5% 15% 25% 35% 45% 55%
Communications
Finance
Human Resources
Other Administration
Procurement
Project Management
Civil Engineer
Electrical Engineer
Mechanical Engineer
ES&H
Facilities Management
Information Technology
Postdoctoral Research Associate
Scientist
Alignment
Design
Electrical Technician
Mechanical Technician
Operations
Other Technical
% shortfall /census (12may2012) - OHAP Category - Tier 1
update to 13aug2012 census
surplus shortage
12
Concentrate on “key” capabilities
Prior Concerns• Cryogenic Engineers• RF Engineers• Target Engineers
– no such category!• Project Managers• Project Controls
– use contractors• Procurement
New Concerns• Electrical Engineers• Mechanical Engineers
– guest engineers?– effectiveness?– just graduate students?
• Electrical Technicians• Mechanical Technicians• can contractors help here?
No idea even how many Visitors from US institutions under Purchase Orders– not in PeopleSoft
13
“key” capabilities
Key Capabilities Concern by OHAP Role ohap 7a
OHAP <need> FY12-14
Census 13aug2012
Comments & Strategy
Cryogenic Engineers 23.4 17RF Engineers 24.5 22 + 6 RF Scientists + 1 Guest RF EngTarget Engineers no such OHAP CategoryProject Managers 26.3 14 re-use ScientistsProject Controls 9.4 8 use contractorsProcurement 23.4 21Electrical Engineers 130.7 121Mechanical Engineers 122.1 105 plus 10 Guest EngineersElectrical Technicians 136.0 100Mechanical Technicians 227.4 172
Update to 30sept2012
14
lessons learned?• Should we ensure agreement with SWF budgets?
– These, too, are inadequate to do the job!• Is a 10 year projection too ambitious?
– Industry typically does 3 (or 5) year projections• Large projects such as LBNE would need a ~10 year plan.
– Based on the DOE’s budget guidance, we need a staffing plan: between now and 2022 for R&D and construction and ~2023 for operations (required for CD-2).
• Carl S: in era of reduced workforce, gotta move specialization => generalization (cross-training) of skills and capabilities for individuals
• Would compiling Tier 3: experience & abilities of individuals be useful? PCz for Engineers. → information inflation!
15
at beginning of FY2013• WDRS FNAL-FTE Analysis – heads & FTEs 99.3%
not all counted below (e.g. Children’s Center)• Budget upload for FY2013 & FY 2014• Deployment of Staff → total = 1725
– OHAP Group (14) * OHAP Group (20 + Guest Sci & Eng)• Budget office recently asked projects staffing
needs for FY 14 and FY 15 – complete negotiations with D/S/C and upload by November 20, 2012
16
WDRS - September 30, 2012
Reg Hd Count
Reg FTE
Reg Opens
Reg Schd
TerminsReg Total
Reg Target
Term Hd Cnt
Term FTE
Term Opens
Scheduled Term
TerminsTerm Total
Term Target
AD 416 413.73 0 0 413.73 466 6 5 0 0 5 19
APC 34 34 1 0 35 35 17 17 1 0 18 19
BSS 127 126.4 1 1 126.4 129 0 0 1 0 1 1
CD 257 255.73 17 0 272.73 308 5 4.5 3 0 7.5 9
CMS 1 1 0 0 1 1 16 16 0 0 16 16
DO 43 42.2 0 0 42.2 47 1 1 0 0 1 4
ES&H 40 39.6 1 1 39.6 41 1 1 0 0 1 2
FCPA 3 3 0 0 3 3 5 5 2 0 7 11
FESS 107 106.18 0 0 106.18 116 2 2 0 0 2 3
FI 32 31.6 1 0 32.6 32 0 0 0 0 0 1
LBNE 7 7 0 0 7 9 1 1 0 0 1 0
PPD 304 302.9 1 0 303.9 348 58 58 2 2 58 87
TD 197 196.38 1 0 197.38 217 16 16 1 0 17 18
WDRS 59 56.08 1 0 57.08 56 2 1.8 0 0 1.8 2
TOT LAB 1627 1615.8 24 2 1637.8 1808 130 128.30 10 2 136.3 192Total Regular + Term Count & FTE: 1757 1744.10 ratio = 99.27%
Term Employees Consist of Scientific Term Appointments, Non Scientific Term Appointments, and Phased Retirees
17
OHAP CATEGORY (22)Values
Row Labels
Sum of FY12 FTE BUDGET
Sum of FY13 FTE BUDGET
Sum of FY14 FTE BUDGET
Alignment 12.0 13.0 12.0Civil Engineer 24.0 21.0 24.5Communications 14.9 11.2 14.9Design 39.6 37.1 43.7Electrical Engineer 122.9 114.3 115.1Electrical Technician 101.1 91.6 99.7ESH 58.3 60.0 59.3Facilities Management 180.0 167.0 177.0Finance 43.3 41.1 41.5Guest Engineer 0.0 6.4Guest Scientist 24.9 17.3 2.0Human Resources 32.0 30.6 32.6Information Technology 293.5 273.8 290.9Mechanical Engineer 103.6 102.7 99.6Mechanical Technician 190.0 169.7 175.9Operations 54.9 46.8 54.4Other Administration 116.9 126.4 114.6Other Technical 18.3 44.5 15.3Postdoctoral Res Assoc 62.0 59.5 65.9Procurement 23.0 21.5 24.1Project Management 36.2 38.6 32.9Scientist 263.9 230.4 265.7Grand Total 1815.3 1724.5 1761.3
Trends FY 2012 → FY 2014
180 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
DATA ACQUISITION AND ON-LINE …
NETWORKS
SCIENTIFIC SOFTWARE
THEORY
INFORMATION SYSTEMS
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY CORE …
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT
SCIENTIFIC & TECHNICAL SERVICES
SCIENTIFIC COMPUTING SERVICES
SITE, BUILDINGS, FACILITIES
ES&H, SAFEGUARDS, EMERGENCY …
BUSINESS OPERATIONS
EXPERIMENTS & DETECTORS
ACCELERATORS & BEAMLINES
FY13 Budgeted FTEs by OHAP Group
19
Sum of FY13 FTE BUDGET Column Labels
Row Labels ACCE
LERA
TORS
& B
EAM
LIN
ES
BUSI
NES
S O
PERA
TIO
NS
DAT
A AC
QUI
SITI
ON
AN
D O
N-L
INE
COM
PUTI
NG
ES&
H, S
AFEG
UARD
S, E
MER
GEN
CY P
ROTE
CTIO
N
EXEC
UTIV
E M
ANAG
EMEN
T
EXPE
RIM
ENTS
& D
ETEC
TORS
INFO
RMAT
ION
SYS
TEM
S
INFO
RMAT
ION
TEC
HN
OLO
GY C
ORE
SER
VICE
S
NET
WO
RKS
SCIE
NTI
FIC
& T
ECH
NIC
AL S
ERVI
CES
SCIE
NTI
FIC
COM
PUTI
NG
SERV
ICES
SCIE
NTI
FIC
SOFT
WAR
E
SITE
, BUI
LDIN
GS, F
ACIL
ITIE
S
THEO
RY
Gran
d To
tal
Alignment 11.1 1.9 13.0Civil Engineer 0.0 1.0 1.0 19.0 21.0Communications 6.2 5.0 11.2Design 0.1 14.7 1.1 0.1 0.0 19.3 0.6 1.3 37.1Electrical Engineer 0.5 57.3 5.2 3.1 1.9 1.1 34.8 0.2 7.9 1.0 0.1 1.3 114.3Electrical Technician 0.2 49.8 2.4 0.6 15.5 16.8 0.4 0.9 3.9 1.1 91.6ESH 1.0 50.6 2.3 3.8 0.0 0.5 1.8 60.0Facilities Management 0.4 52.4 36.3 2.1 0.2 0.2 75.4 167.0Finance 31.1 1.0 6.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 41.1Guest Engineer 5.0 1.4 0.1 6.4Guest Scientist 4.9 0.0 0.0 9.9 0.0 2.2 0.3 17.3Human Resources 30.6 30.6Information Technology 1.4 30.8 13.8 0.3 5.0 8.7 17.6 33.3 41.0 13.6 2.1 81.6 17.3 7.4 273.8Mechanical Engineer 0.1 43.1 5.9 0.2 0.9 46.2 6.4 102.7Mechanical Technician 1.7 89.7 2.8 0.7 0.0 55.2 0.0 0.0 17.8 1.8 169.7Operations 40.3 1.1 0.0 3.7 0.0 1.7 46.8Other Administration 3.0 58.0 6.7 31.7 9.7 0.3 9.0 7.0 1.0 126.4Other Technical 0.1 4.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 7.3 31.0 44.5Postdoctoral Res Assoc 5.0 41.5 13.0 59.5Procurement 21.0 0.5 21.5Project Management 6.8 4.4 1.5 24.0 0.8 0.2 1.1 38.6Scientist 0.5 57.3 8.1 0.5 1.0 4.5 114.9 0.1 6.3 11.1 7.5 18.7 230.4Grand Total 4.5 423.8 246.4 4.5 120.0 64.7 410.6 34.4 42.4 14.5 90.5 94.7 24.9 115.8 33.0 1724.5
Acco
unts
Re
ceiv
able
FY2013OHAPGroup vs.
Category
20
020
4060
8010
012
014
016
0
Build
ing M
anag
emen
t
Mag
nets
Grid
& C
loud
Com
putin
g
g-2
Mic
roBO
ONE
Build
ing
Impr
ovem
ents
DZer
o
Phen
omen
olog
y and
Mod
el B
uild
ing
CDF
Prop
erty
Man
agem
ent
Muo
n Co
llide
r
Prot
on Im
prov
emen
t Pla
n
Ente
rpris
e In
form
ation
Sys
tem
s
Core
IT Se
rvic
es
Site
Mai
nten
ance
Proc
urem
ent S
ervi
ces
Dark
Ener
gy Su
rvey
Emer
genc
y Ser
vice
s
Mai
n In
ject
or
325
MHz
Pro
gram
Proj
ect X
Tran
spor
tatio
n, D
istrib
ution
, Fle
et
Tech
nica
l Fac
ilitie
s Ope
ratio
ns /
Impr
ovem
ents
Hum
an R
esou
rces
Com
mun
icati
on /
Educ
ation
/ Pu
blic
Out
reac
h
Acce
lera
tor C
ontr
ols &
Inst
rum
enta
tion
LBNE
-Lo
ng B
asel
ine
Neut
rino
Expe
rimen
t
Inte
nsity
Fron
tier G
ener
al
Prot
on So
urce
Fina
ncia
l Man
agem
ent
Safe
ty Se
rvic
es
Build
ing
Mai
nten
ance
Acce
lera
tor O
pera
tions
Gen
eral
SRF -
Supe
rcon
ducti
ng R
adio
frequ
ency
Mu2
e -M
uon
to El
ectro
n Co
nver
sion
Expe
rimen
t
NOvA
-Nu
MI O
ff Ax
is N
eutr
ino
Appe
aran
ce
CMS -
Com
pact
Muo
n So
leno
id
D/S/
C Ad
min
istra
tion
FY13
Bud
gete
d FT
Es b
y Ac
tivite
s -to
p 80
%38
ent
ries (
9.2%
, 4.6
%,..
.)
21
02
46
810
1214
DECa
m -
Dark
Ene
rgy
Cam
era
LSST
-La
rge
Syno
ptic S
urve
y Te
lesc
ope
SDSS
-Sl
oan
Digi
tal S
ky Su
rvey
Scie
ntific
Sim
ulati
ons &
Soft
war
eNe
w In
itiati
ves N
ot O
ther
wise
Cat
egor
ized
Neut
ron
Ther
apy
Bubb
le C
ham
ber
MIP
P -M
ain
Inje
ctor
Par
ticle
Pro
ducti
on E
xper
imen
tOt
her A
xion
s -So
lid X
enon
, Cha
mel
eons
CDM
S SN
OLab
-Cr
yoge
nic D
ark
Matt
er S
earc
h at
Sudb
ury
Neut
rino …
Qual
ity A
ssur
ance
Pro
gram
DOE
Dire
cted
Acti
vitie
sFu
ture
Acc
eler
ator
R&D
Gen
eral
Dark
side
MIN
IBoo
NEM
KID
Exte
rnal
Rev
iew
s and
Com
mitt
ees
ATLA
S -A
Tor
oida
l LHC
App
arat
uSPR
EPDe
tect
or O
pera
tions
Gen
eral
Dete
ctor
Sim
ulati
ons
MTA
-M
uon
Test
Are
aCo
smic
Fron
tier G
ener
alAc
cele
rato
r Scie
nce
Gene
ral
DAQ
Deve
lopm
ent
Dete
ctor
Dev
elop
men
t Too
lsCC
Ds -
Char
ged
Coup
led
Dev
ice R
&DDa
rk M
atter
Ener
gy F
ronti
er G
ener
alTr
avel
Ser
vice
sSC
(Sup
er C
ondu
cting
) Mat
eria
ls R&
DCo
nfer
ence
Org
aniza
tion
Teva
tron
Virt
ual P
latfo
rms
ASIC
R&D
-Ap
plica
tion-
spec
ific I
nteg
rate
d Ci
rcui
t R&D
Trai
ning
Inte
rnal
Aud
itLe
gal S
ervi
ces
Pier
re A
uger
-So
uth
Holo
grap
hic I
nter
fero
met
ryAc
com
mod
ation
s &
Foo
d Se
rvic
esDe
tect
or D
evel
opm
ent T
actic
al In
itiati
ves
Latti
ce Q
CD C
ompu
ting
Facil
ityM
uon
Sour
ceSi
te N
etw
orki
ngFi
re P
rote
ction
Proj
ect O
vers
ight
Acco
unts
Rec
eiva
ble
SRF
Mat
eria
ls R&
DDa
taba
se S
ervi
ces
Dete
ctor
Dev
elop
men
t Tr
acki
ngCa
lori
met
ryM
edica
l Ser
vice
sTe
leco
mm
unica
tions
Man
agem
ent
Test
Bea
mDr
ell-Y
an (S
EAQU
EST)
MIN
OS -
Mai
n In
ject
or N
eutr
ino
Oscil
lati
on S
earc
hEx
tern
al B
eam
lines
IT In
fras
truc
ture
Info
rmati
on S
ervi
ces
COUP
P -C
hica
gola
nd O
bser
vato
ry fo
r Und
ergr
ound
Par
ticle
Phy
sics
Docu
men
t Wor
kflow
& In
form
ation
Ser
vice
sCo
mpu
tatio
nal P
hysic
s Too
ls &
Appl
icatio
nsM
INER
vACD
MS
-Cry
ogen
ic Da
rk M
atter
Sea
rchIn
tern
al R
evie
ws a
nd C
omm
ittee
sCo
mpu
ter S
ecur
ity &
Pol
icyW
ork
for O
ther
s Not
Oth
erw
ise C
ateg
orize
dLa
ttice
Gau
ge T
heor
ySe
curit
y Se
rvice
sSe
rver
s, Fa
rms &
Disk
s Ope
ratio
nsDa
ta S
tora
geAc
cele
rato
r Mod
elin
gIn
form
ation
Res
ourc
es /
Rec
ords
Man
agem
ent /
Tec
hnica
l Pub
licati
ons
Cosm
olog
y an
d Pa
rticle
Ast
roph
ysics
Cryo
geni
csIT
Gov
erna
nce
& Ov
ersig
htDe
skto
p Su
ppor
tW
ide
Area
Net
wor
kUS
CMS
Tier
-1 F
acili
tyLH
C -L
arge
Had
ron
Colli
der
Envi
ronm
enta
l Ser
vice
sLiq
uid
Argo
n TP
C
FY13
Bud
gete
d FT
Es b
y Ac
tivite
s -b
ottom
20%
82 e
ntrie
s
ad infinitum …by projects, activities, job types, D/S/C, etc.
22
for Sept 2012 Budget
Presentations• Major Projects: NOvA,
Project X, CMS, LBNE, Mu2e, SRF, (and I also asked PIP) were asked to also compare their requested staffing level for FY 2013 by OHAP Category with that which D/S/C could allocate.
OHAP Category Total Total TotalRequest Allocate Diff
Alignment 0.99 0.89 -0.1Civil Engineer 2.8 2.8 0Design 23.08 22 -1.08Electrical Engineer 39.79 44.81 5.02Electrical Technician 24.61 21.255 -3.355ESH 3.26 3.26 0Finance 1 1 0Guest Engineer 1.35 5.41 4.06Guest Scientist 0.83 3.39 2.56Information Technology 39.88 40.38 0.5Mechanical Engineer 56.1 55.105 -0.995Mechanical Technician 65.43 64.885 -0.545Operations 6.38 5.955 -0.425Other Administration 3.5 2.75 -0.75Other Technical 3.14 3.05 -0.09Posdoctoral Res Assoc 1.2 2.2 1Procurement 0.5 0.5 0Project Management 26.56 23.62 -2.94Scientist 31.02 28.94 -2.08Scientist (off Project) 10.42 10.42 0
total 341.84 342.62 0.78100.2% 0.2%
Positive Diff => SURPLUSNegative Diff => DEFICIT
23
OHAP Categories for Projects for FY 2013Project Staffi ng FY2013.xls /Summary - Peter H. Garbincius - 2nov2012
OHAP Category Total Total Total Project X Project X Project X LBNE LBNE LBNE SRF SRF SRF PIP PIP PIPRequest Allocate Diff NOvA Request Allocate Diff CMS Request Allocate Diff Mu2e Request Allocate Diff Request Allocate Diff
Alignment 0.99 0.89 -0.1 0 0.1 0 -0.1 0 0.32 0.42 0.1 0.25 0.2 0 -0.2 0.12 0.22 0.1Civil Engineer 2.8 2.8 0 1.8 1 1 0 0 0 0Design 23.08 22 -1.08 2.35 2.05 1.53 -0.52 0.64 3.45 3.33 -0.12 8.2 4 4.45 0.45 2.39 1.5 -0.89Electrical Engineer 39.79 44.81 5.02 2.26 6.6 6.85 0.25 4.1 1.14 2.77 1.63 8.35 11.04 15.03 3.99 6.3 5.45 -0.85Electrical Technician 24.61 21.255 -3.355 3.39 1.75 1.17 -0.58 1.45 0.63 0.01 -0.62 3.06 7.86 6.49 -1.37 6.47 5.685 -0.785ESH 3.26 3.26 0 0.5 0.15 2.4 2.4 0 0.21 0 0 0 0 0 0Finance 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0Guest Engineer 1.35 5.41 4.06 1.35 0 4.06 4.06 0 0 0Guest Scientist 0.83 3.39 2.56 0 1.1 1.1 0 0 0.15 0.15 0.83 0 1.05 1.05 0 0.26 0.26Information Technology 39.88 40.38 0.5 1.9 0.35 1.03 0.68 30.05 0.9 1.1 0.2 4.7 1.74 1.35 -0.39 0.24 0.25 0.01Mechanical Engineer 56.1 55.105 -0.995 6.41 1 1.5 0.5 0.81 7.35 8.82 1.47 17.05 22.13 19.1 -3.03 1.35 1.415 0.065Mechanical Technician 65.43 64.885 -0.545 19.81 1.95 3.5 1.55 1.26 3.81 3.24 -0.57 4.04 29.7 28.87 -0.83 4.86 4.165 -0.695Operations 6.38 5.955 -0.425 1.15 0.3 0.3 0 0 0.2 0 -0.2 0.95 2.38 2.3 -0.08 1.4 1.255 -0.145Other Administration 3.5 2.75 -0.75 1 0.25 0.25 0 0 1.75 1 -0.75 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 0Other Technical 3.14 3.05 -0.09 0.2 0 0.13 0.13 0 0.77 0.15 -0.62 0.5 1.6 2.05 0.45 0.07 0.02 -0.05Posdoctoral Res Assoc 1.2 2.2 1 0 0.2 0.2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0Procurement 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 0.5 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0Project Management 26.56 23.62 -2.94 8.12 1.55 1.6 0.05 3.5 10.9 7.88 -3.02 1.54 0.75 0.76 0.01 0.2 0.22 0.02Scientist 31.02 28.94 -2.08 0.61 10.9 9.28 -1.62 0 2.2 1.9 -0.3 4.85 10.18 9.63 -0.55 2.28 2.67 0.39Scientist (off Project) 10.42 10.42 0 1.99 0 0 0 1.25 0 0 0 7.18 0 0 0 0 0 0
total 341.84 342.62 0.78 49.69 27 28.44 1.44 43.21 36.32 33.67 -2.65 66.86 93.08 97.64 4.56 25.68 23.11 -2.57100.2% 0.2% 105.3% 5.3% 92.7% -7.3% 104.9% 4.9% 90.0% -10.0%
Positive Diff => SURPLUS NOvA see notes for Project X CMS: no Streamline with D/S/C Mu2eNegative Diff => DEFICIT agreed comments LBNE: change ME => PM agreed
LBNE: change EE FESS Civil Eng→ Communicator costed as M&S
24
FY 2013 Total Total TotalUPLOAD Request Allocate Diff CommentsNOvA 49.69 49.69 reached agreement w D/S/C
Project X 27.00 28.44 1.44 cannot fund > 27 FTEs lost Champion, Kerby, Wendt
CMS 43.21 43.21 reached agreement w D/S/C need Procurement & Finance ME => PM, EE => Communicator
Mu2e 66.86 66.86 reached agreement w D/S/CSRF 93.08 97.64 4.56 down by 47 FTEs since FY11PIP 25.68 23.11 -2.57 still negotiating with Acc Divtotals 341.84 342.62 0.78
LBNE 36.32 33.67 -2.65
reduce workforce by 15% 4 FTE
Project FY 2013 Staffing Summary
25
What did we learn?• Need good long term model of activities/funding
TImeline for accelerators and experiments (not including theory, accelerator science and generic R&D programs)
Young-Kee Kim - October 23, 2013 R&D (through CD-2)Construction (CD-3)Operation
Accelerator/Theme Experiment FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017
Proton SourceAIP/PIP
LHC CMSTevatron CDF/DZero D&D / Da ta Ana l ys i s
Booster: neutrinos & muons MiniBooNE Data analysisMicroBooNE CD-1 CD-2 CD-3
Muon g-2 CD-0 CD-1/2 CD-3
Mu2e CD-0 CD-1 CD-2/3a
Main Injector: neutrinos MINOSMINERvA
NOvALBNE CD-0 CD-1
SY120 SeaQuest Data analysisTestbeam
NMLProject X
MAP (Muon Accelerator Program)Other (ORKA etc.)
Dark Matt er CDMSCOUPP
DarkSideDark Energy DES DES DESpe c/Bi gBos s
LSSTCosmic Particles Pierre Auger Data analysis
Quant. Space-time Holometer Data analysis
for FY2013 Scientist Survey
26
What did we learn (2) ?• Easy to document the past and the present difficult to
prepare for the future• D/S/C Heads don’t take 10 yr OHAP very seriously Projects,
however, have formal multi-year plans• Tension between D/S/Cs and Projects: Projects
have definite needs, but finite $ D/S/Cs must secure funding for their staffs
• FY13 study has not addressed gaps for D/S/C D/S/C too need staff to do their job
• Won’t get useful information unless we ask for it: gaps: needs vs. availability for D/S/C (not Projects) FY14 (asking projects for FY14-15, but not gaps)
• Existing data for FY2013 is very incomplete. Is it even useful?
27
OHAP: Proposal (2013)
• Projections for the next three years– Combine budget meetings and workforce planning– Budget meetings: Present budget and workforce for the
next three years instead of one year• Projections for the next five years
– Continue the 5-year scientist survey• Projections for the next ten years
– Analyze workforce needs for large projects such as LBNE (based on the DOE budget guidance) and Project X and identify future “skill set” issues
28
Participants’ Discussion & Suggestions:• Do we have a healthy overhead rate?
– Cindy C: Consistent with OHs for other DOE science labs
• Separate next year specifics (in September) from following 2 year projections (in January) ask D/S/Cs
• Ask for the gaps, isolate signal from the noise• Leave identification of staffing gaps to D/S/C heads
– CarlS would advocate this approach• In the past, we haven’t acted on indentified gaps• Some people you can hire, some you must grow!
29
Participants’ Discussion & Suggestions (2):• AD: Engineering Physicists provide flexibility OHAP
has Eng Phys = Technical/Other Technical not as Engineers
• Should include contractors in staffing mix, since we can switch between contractors and staff. We might learn something from this exercise. Jack A: these are really “staff augmentation”. Include US University Visitors, paid as M&S
• What has been correlation between projected OHAP needs and actual FTL? Someone should do this study, we have the OHAP and FTL data ready for FY2011