Upload
taryn-hazley
View
213
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
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 FTEs
Census OHAP_5_11_12.xls experience through FY 2012 for FY 2012 in for FY 2013 in
Discipline 29-Sep-11 31-Mar-12 11-May-12 13-Aug-12 J an 2012 UploadJ an 2012 Upload
Administration 276 290 288 296 268.3 264.5
Engineering 264 257 258 257 249.8 235.8
ES&H 56 56 57 55 58.9 59.0
Facilities Management 183 178 178 170 180.0 177.0
Information Technology 309 287 287 267 300.7 292.8
Scientific 355 347 343 329 358.8 333.8
Technical 465 425 426 416 416.6 387.5
Grand Total 1908 1840 1837 1790 1833.1 1750.4
WDRS headcount 1907 1843 1838 1791
WDRS FTEs 1893.5 1831.5 1825.3 1778.1
WFRS 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
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 12.0
Civil Engineer 24.0 21.0 24.5
Communications 14.9 11.2 14.9
Design 39.6 37.1 43.7
Electrical Engineer 122.9 114.3 115.1
Electrical Technician 101.1 91.6 99.7
ESH 58.3 60.0 59.3
Facilities Management 180.0 167.0 177.0
Finance 43.3 41.1 41.5
Guest Engineer 0.0 6.4
Guest Scientist 24.9 17.3 2.0
Human Resources 32.0 30.6 32.6
Information Technology 293.5 273.8 290.9
Mechanical Engineer 103.6 102.7 99.6
Mechanical Technician 190.0 169.7 175.9
Operations 54.9 46.8 54.4
Other Administration 116.9 126.4 114.6
Other Technical 18.3 44.5 15.3
Postdoctoral Res Assoc 62.0 59.5 65.9
Procurement 23.0 21.5 24.1
Project Management 36.2 38.6 32.9
Scientist 263.9 230.4 265.7
Grand 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 ACCEL
ERA
TO
RS
& B
EAM
LIN
ES
BU
SIN
ESS
OPER
ATIO
NS
DA
TA
ACQ
UIS
ITIO
N A
ND
ON
-LIN
E CO
MPU
TIN
G
ES&
H, SA
FEG
UA
RD
S, E
MER
GEN
CY P
RO
TEC
TIO
N
EXEC
UTIV
E M
AN
AG
EMEN
T
EXPER
IMEN
TS
& D
ETEC
TO
RS
INFO
RM
ATIO
N S
YST
EMS
INFO
RM
ATIO
N T
ECH
NO
LOG
Y C
OR
E SE
RV
ICES
NET
WO
RKS
SCIE
NTIF
IC &
TEC
HN
ICA
L SE
RV
ICES
SCIE
NTIF
IC C
OM
PU
TIN
G S
ERV
ICES
SCIE
NTIF
IC S
OFT
WA
RE
SITE,
BU
ILD
ING
S, F
ACIL
ITIE
S
TH
EOR
Y
Gra
nd T
ota
l
Alignment 11.1 1.9 13.0
Civil Engineer 0.0 1.0 1.0 19.0 21.0
Communications 6.2 5.0 11.2
Design 0.1 14.7 1.1 0.1 0.0 19.3 0.6 1.3 37.1
Electrical Engineer 0.5 57.3 5.2 3.1 1.9 1.1 34.8 0.2 7.9 1.0 0.1 1.3 114.3
Electrical Technician 0.2 49.8 2.4 0.6 15.5 16.8 0.4 0.9 3.9 1.1 91.6
ESH 1.0 50.6 2.3 3.8 0.0 0.5 1.8 60.0
Facilities Management 0.4 52.4 36.3 2.1 0.2 0.2 75.4 167.0
Finance 31.1 1.0 6.0 2.0 0.0 1.0 41.1
Guest Engineer 5.0 1.4 0.1 6.4
Guest Scientist 4.9 0.0 0.0 9.9 0.0 2.2 0.3 17.3
Human Resources 30.6 30.6
Information 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 7.4 273.8
Mechanical Engineer 0.1 43.1 5.9 0.2 0.9 46.2 6.4 102.7
Mechanical Technician 1.7 89.7 2.8 0.7 0.0 55.2 0.0 0.0 17.8 1.8 169.7
Operations 40.3 1.1 0.0 3.7 0.0 1.7 46.8
Other Administration 3.0 58.0 6.7 31.7 9.7 0.3 9.0 7.0 1.0 126.4
Other Technical 0.1 4.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 7.3 31.0 44.5
Postdoctoral Res Assoc 5.0 41.5 13.0 59.5
Procurement 21.0 0.5 21.5
Project Management 6.8 4.4 1.5 24.0 0.8 0.2 1.1 38.6
Scientist 0.5 57.3 8.1 0.5 1.0 4.5 114.9 0.1 6.3 11.1 7.5 18.7 230.4
Grand 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
Acc
ounts
R
ecei
vable
FY2013OHAPGroup vs.
Category
20
020
4060
8010
012
014
016
0
Build
ing
Man
agem
ent
Mag
nets
Gri
d &
Clo
ud C
ompu
tingg-2
Mic
roBO
ON
E
Build
ing
Impr
ovem
ents
DZe
ro
Phen
omen
olog
y an
d M
odel
Bui
ldin
gCDF
Prop
erty
Man
agem
ent
Muo
n Co
llide
r
Prot
on Im
prov
emen
t Pla
n
Ente
rpri
se In
form
ation
Sys
tem
s
Core
IT S
ervi
ces
Site
Mai
nten
ance
Proc
urem
ent S
ervi
ces
Dar
k En
ergy
Sur
vey
Emer
genc
y Se
rvic
es
Mai
n In
ject
or
325
MH
z Pro
gram
Proj
ect X
Tran
spor
tati
on, D
istr
ibuti
on, F
leet
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
LBN
E -L
ong
Base
line
Neu
trin
o Ex
perim
ent
Inte
nsit
y Fr
ontie
r Gen
eral
Prot
on S
ourc
e
Fina
ncia
l Man
agem
ent
Safe
ty S
ervi
ces
Build
ing
Mai
nten
ance
Acce
lera
tor O
pera
tions
Gen
eral
SRF
-Sup
erco
nduc
ting
Radi
ofre
quen
cy
Mu2
e -M
uon
to E
lect
ron
Conv
ersio
n Ex
perim
ent
NO
vA -
NuM
I Off
Axis
Neu
trin
o Ap
pear
ance
CMS
-Com
pact
Muo
n So
leno
id
D/S
/C A
dmin
istr
ation
FY13
Bud
gete
d FT
Es b
y A
ctivi
tes
-top
80%
38 e
ntri
es (9
.2%
, 4.6
%,..
.)
21
02
46
810
1214
DEC
am -
Dar
k En
ergy
Cam
era
LSST
-La
rge
Syno
ptic
Surv
ey T
eles
cope
SDSS
-Sl
oan
Dig
ital
Sky
Sur
vey
Scie
ntific
Sim
ulati
ons
& S
oftw
are
New
Initi
ative
s N
ot O
ther
wis
e Ca
tego
rize
dN
eutr
on T
hera
pyBu
bble
Cha
mbe
rM
IPP
-Mai
n In
ject
or P
arti
cle
Prod
ucti
on E
xper
imen
tO
ther
Axi
ons
-Sol
id X
enon
, Cha
mel
eons
CDM
S SN
OLa
b -C
ryog
enic
Dar
k M
atter
Sea
rch
at S
udbu
ry N
eutr
ino
…Q
ualit
y A
ssur
ance
Pro
gram
DO
E D
irec
ted
Acti
viti
esFu
ture
Acc
eler
ator
R&
D G
ener
alD
arks
ide
MIN
IBoo
NE
MKI
DEx
tern
al R
evie
ws
and
Com
mitt
ees
ATL
AS
-A T
oroi
dal L
HC
App
arat
uSPREP
Det
ecto
r O
pera
tion
s G
ener
alD
etec
tor
Sim
ulati
ons
MTA
-M
uon
Test
Are
aCo
smic
Fro
ntier
Gen
eral
Acc
eler
ator
Sci
ence
Gen
eral
DA
Q D
evel
opm
ent
Det
ecto
r D
evel
opm
ent
Tool
sCC
Ds
-Cha
rged
Cou
pled
Dev
ice
R&D
Dar
k M
atter
Ener
gy F
ronti
er G
ener
alTr
avel
Ser
vice
sSC
(Sup
er C
ondu
cting
) Mat
eria
ls R
&D
Conf
eren
ce O
rgan
izati
onTe
vatr
onV
irtu
al P
latf
orm
sA
SIC
R&D
-A
pplic
ation
-spe
cific
Inte
grat
ed C
ircu
it R
&D
Trai
ning
Inte
rnal
Aud
itLe
gal S
ervi
ces
Pier
re A
uger
-S
outh
Hol
ogra
phic
Inte
rfer
omet
ryA
ccom
mod
ation
s &
Foo
d Se
rvic
esD
etec
tor
Dev
elop
men
t Ta
ctica
l Ini
tiati
ves
Latti
ce Q
CD C
ompu
ting
Fac
ility
Muo
n So
urce
Site
Net
wor
king
Fire
Pro
tecti
onPr
ojec
t O
vers
ight
Acc
ount
s Re
ceiv
able
SRF
Mat
eria
ls R
&D
Dat
abas
e Se
rvic
esD
etec
tor
Dev
elop
men
t Tr
acki
ngCa
lori
met
ryM
edic
al S
ervi
ces
Tele
com
mun
icati
ons
Man
agem
ent
Test
Bea
mD
rell
-Yan
(SEA
QU
EST)
MIN
OS
-Mai
n In
ject
or N
eutr
ino
Osc
illati
on S
earc
hEx
tern
al B
eam
lines
IT In
fras
truc
ture
Info
rmati
on S
ervi
ces
COU
PP -
Chic
agol
and
Obs
erva
tory
for
Und
ergr
ound
Par
ticl
e Ph
ysic
sD
ocum
ent
Wor
kflow
& In
form
ation
Ser
vice
sCo
mpu
tati
onal
Phy
sics
Too
ls &
App
licati
ons
MIN
ERvA
CDM
S -C
ryog
enic
Dar
k M
atter
Sea
rch
Inte
rnal
Rev
iew
s an
d Co
mm
ittee
sCo
mpu
ter
Secu
rity
& P
olic
yW
ork
for
Oth
ers
Not
Oth
erw
ise
Cate
gori
zed
Latti
ce G
auge
The
ory
Secu
rity
Ser
vice
sSe
rver
s, F
arm
s &
Dis
ks O
pera
tion
sD
ata
Stor
age
Acc
eler
ator
Mod
elin
gIn
form
ation
Res
ourc
es /
Rec
ords
Man
agem
ent
/ Te
chni
cal P
ublic
ation
sCo
smol
ogy
and
Parti
cle
Ast
roph
ysic
sCr
yoge
nics
IT G
over
nanc
e &
Ove
rsig
htD
eskt
op S
uppo
rtW
ide
Are
a N
etw
ork
USC
MS
Tier
-1 F
acili
tyLH
C -L
arge
Had
ron
Colli
der
Envi
ronm
enta
l Ser
vice
sLi
quid
Arg
on T
PC
FY13
Bud
gete
d FT
Es b
y A
ctivi
tes
-bo
ttom
20%
82 e
ntri
es
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 Source
AIP/PIP
LHC CMS
Tevatron 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 MINOS
MINERvA
NOvA
LBNE CD-0 CD-1
SY120 SeaQuest Data analysisTestbeam
NML
Project X
MAP (Muon Accelerator Program)
Other (ORKA etc.)
Dark Matt er CDMS
COUPP
DarkSide
Dark Energy DES DES DESpe c/Bi gBos s
LSST
Cosmic Particles Pierre Auger Data analysisQuant. 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