AECOM is where women work

 

Transformation Lead – Assurance and Delivery Confidence AssessmentS

AECOM

Andover, United Kingdom

Job Summary
To support the “Commission & Assure” operating model, the current intention is for there to be three levels of assurance within PPD/ Capital Investment Programme (CIP) delivery: (1) The Principal Support Provider (PSP – Project Management and Design Services) self-assures its work; (2) The PPD Project Manager assures that the PSP has carried out its assurance and does their own assurance checks; and (3) the PPD Centre of Excellence carries out assurance and audits on the PMs and PSPs, including gateway and other reviews and Delivery Confidence Assessments (“Health Checks”). The aim is to improve overall CIP delivery confidence and to drive delivery performance improvement. The purpose of the “Transformation Lead – Assurance and Delivery Confidence Assessment” role will be to support the development, implementation and initial delivery of this enhanced approach to assurance. Therefore the role will include:

Working with the Head of COE to support the development and roll-out of the revised assurance procedures

Leading the CIP 2017 Delivery Confidence Assessment (DCA)

Leading the CIP 2018 DCA

Chairing gateway reviews for key projects

Supporting the establishment of a panel of approved Gateway Review Chairs

The lead for Delivery Confidence Assessment will focus on three main areas:

Assessing existing data confidence

Understanding the data and current delivery performance

Project set up and resources

The above can be further broken down into the following activities:

Assessing data confidence

Is the project able to provide a current project schedule, risk register, cost model, Master Data Assumptions List and Requiremetns / scope documentation?

Have documents been developed by Suitably Qualified and Experienced Personnel (SQEP) resources; do they represent best practice with stakeholder input?

Have outputs been agreed with stakeholders – owning the requirements, risks and assumptions?

Has the assessment / analysis been carried out using the appropriate tools?

Have the Principal Support Provider (PSP – industry provided project management and design services) checked, reviewed and assured the outputs and is there a record of this?

Has the DIO Project Manager reviewed and assured the documents and is there a record of this?

Does the output align with the Information Management System data?

What was status at most recent Project Status Report?

2. Understanding the data and delivery performance

Scope and issues in terms of scope clarification

CPI and SPI (if available)

Spend vs. budget

Forecast outturn spend (and changes over last couple of months) vs. budget and approvals envelope

Progress vs. schedule

Spend / forecast broken down by financial year – i.e. performance in both FY17/18 and FY18/19.

Forecast outturn schedule (and changes over last couple of months) vs. In Service Date / approvals envelope

Level of risk burn-down (in terms of budget)

Level of float – is this appropriate or not

Status of risk register – Last update, RAG application etc.

Quantitative Schedule Risk Analysis (QSRA) output – does it make sense, i.e., P50 vs P90 given the known risks

Quantitative Cost Risk Analysis QCRA output – does it make sense, i.e., P50 vs P90 given the known risks

3. Project set-up and resourcing

Concerns of DIO PM

Concerns of PSP

Any Early Warning Notices / Changes – and their status

Resourcing challenges / short-falls in key areas?

Health and Safety performance

The focus of each assessment will be to establish what is currently in place. If there are concerns identified, then the DCA will also provide clear recommendations on next steps, to provide basis for a recovery plan.

A similar exercise will be required for CIP 18, but reviewing all projects (extant and planned).

Minimum Requirements
Assurance Transformation – General
Supporting assurance transformation, through chairing Gateway Reviews and supporting development of a pool of approved Gateway Review chairs.
Supporting the Hd of COE, the LFE, Standards & Methods and Assurance Team Lead and Assurance Sub-team Lead to develop, implement, and transition PPD to the enhanced assurance model.
Supporting the transformation to the new assurance model by leading audits of compliance with the new processes, tools and standards.

Preferred Qualifications
A Professional with over 20 yrs. experience in the delivery of complex programmes and projects
MOP Practitioner [Note: can be gained post selection, if the individual has relevant experience.]
Experience of undertaking programme / project assurance reviews
Experience of chairing peer reviews (such as Gateway Reviews)
Significant experience of working as a programme / project director on medium to high value instructions
A relevant professional qualification / accreditation
Excellent communication skills
Ability to review and interpret data, Programme / Project team outputs and form a considered view on the likelihood of achieving CIP 17 outcomes.

Apply


Share this page: