Detailed Information on the
General Services Administration - New Construction Assessment

Review the current measure of construction projects on schedule and determine if revision is required.

Exploring ways to compare the program to other agencies and/or commercial entities.

Measure: Number of days to complete new courthouse construction projects

Explanation:Cycle time measures the average number of days from the authorization/appropriation of design funds to substantial construction completion. This measure applies to planned, new courthouse construction projects and reports aggregate results in three year increments -- in the past five years GSA has completed an average of four new courthouse projects per year. Each year listed above is the last year of the three (calendar) year average, i.e., 2002 represents the period from 1-1-00 to 12-31-02. Reducing cycle time will result in greater efficiency in program execution and lower program costs. The projected average cycle times for the projects currently under construction and scheduled for completion are 2,849 for the three-year period ending 2005; 3,409 for the three-year period ending 2006; and 3,260 for the three-year period ending 2007.

Measure: Percent of New Construction program registered for LEED

Explanation:LEED is the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System. Requiring timely LEED registration ensures that sustainable design principles are incorporated from the very beginning in new projects in the construction program, increasing the likelihood of LEED certification following construction completion. The result is an optimal balance of cost, environmental, societal, and human benefits while meeting the needs of the client agency. It is GSA's intent to integrate sustainable design as seamlessly as possible into existing design and construction processes to maximize efficiency and achieve cost effective sustainability in the program. Building types that are not eligible for LEED certification shall be excluded.

Measure: Percent of New Construction program that is certified for LEED

Explanation:LEED is the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System. This measure tracks the level of sustainability achieved by the new construction program. Projects must be LEED certified within 18 months of substantial construction completion. Sustainable design principles are incorporated throughout GSA's building processes, beginning with design. The result is an optimal balance of cost, environmental, societal, and human benefits while meeting the needs of the client agency. It is GSA's intent to integrate sustainable design as seamlessly as possibly into existing design and construction processes to maximize efficiency and achieve cost effective sustainability in the program.

Measure: Percent of newly constructed buildings independently verified for achievement of established operational requirements.

Explanation:For the new construction program PBS adopted a quality assurance process to achieve, validate and document that the performance of each building and its systems meet the design intent and owner requirements. This process, called commissioning, enables GSA to assure the facilities it is developing meet or exceed program requirements and expectations for performance, efficiency, safety, sustainability, security and occupant satisfaction. This independently verified process leads to reductions in building operation costs, enhanced energy efficiency, improved environmental/health conditions, increased maintainability of building systems and significant extension of equipment/systems life cycle.

Measure: Construction projects on schedule

Explanation:This measure compares the planned schedule of construction work to be put in place with the actual construction progress that is accomplished in the new construction program.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: YES The purpose of the GSA Public Buildings Service (PBS) new construction program is well defined, focused, and ties directly to GSA's mission to provide a superior workplace for the Federal worker and a superior value for the American taxpayer. The purpose of the PBS new construction program is to create these workplaces in an efficient, cost effective manner when the existing inventory or leased space cannot meet client agency space needs. In these cases, GSA, the client, and OMB/Congressional stakeholders have determined that new construction is the best alternative to meet that need. GSA derives benefit from the new construction program by leveraging buying power and capitalizing on centralized expertise in order to realize financial savings, economies of scale, and programmatic advantages while creating a well-occupied portfolio of superior workspaces for customer agencies.

Evidence: The new construction program's purpose is to support GSA's mission, to "help federal agencies better serve the public by offering, at best value, superior workplaces, expert solutions, acquisition services and management policies," and PBS's mission "to deliver a superior workplace to the Federal worker and a superior value to the American taxpayer" (GSA's FY2006 Congressional Justification, page FBF -13). The Public Buildings Act of 1959 (41 USC 3302-3304, section 2, states that PBS is responsible for the construction of all public buildings and the activities included to achieve that mission, within public code. The program's successful fulfillment of its mission and purpose is reflected in the private industry's recognition of GSA as an industry leader and standard bearer in new construction, as evidenced by the following awards: Cooper-Hewitt Award for Design Excellence; AIA National Design Award - Islip, NY Courthouse; GSA Design Awards for Office Space and Art Conservation; The American Architectural Foundation (AAF) 2004 Keystone Award; the National Building Museum's Honors Award; the Associated General Contractors Grand Award for Construction, Seattle Federal Courthouse; and the Technology in Architectural Practice (TAP) Knowledge Community Building Information Model Award.

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The new construction program addresses the continuing and specific need for government agencies' long term workspace solutions in a specific geographical location when specialized space is required or suitable space is not readily available in the leasing market. The new construction program meets this need and provides space solutions in order to meet government agency space requirements through construction of new Federal buildings, courthouses, and border stations. As part of its capital investment planning process, GSA analyzes its existing portfolio and the market prior to determining that only new space acquisition will satisfy the need. The vast majority of new construction projects are for the courts or border station agencies (80% of funded prospectus projects in the last 5 years were courthouses or border stations). An internal process in which GSA analyzes needs and establishes long-term priorities nationwide drives construction of these facilities. Only after a project is determined to meet these prioritized needs is it proposed as part of GSA's annual budget for OMB and Congressional review.

Evidence: The Public Buildings Act of 1959 (41 USC 3302-3304, section 2, states that PBS is responsible for the construction of all public buildings and the activities included to achieve that mission, within public code. PBS provides unique space solutions that the marketplace cannot supply or readily supply. PBS has developed unique, collaborative relationships with long-term, key customers, such as the U.S. Courts and the Department of Homeland Security - Customs Border Protection (CBP). PBS executes the Court's Five Year Plan prepared by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts that outlines the court's additional space needs in priority order over the next five years, and the Border Station long term plan that outlines CBP's additional need for space. In executing its mission, PBS works with customer agencies that drive most new construction projects to assess their long-term space needs. Federal agencies must request space requirements from PBS in writing and agree to those requirements by signing an Occupancy Agreement (OA). Using OAs the PBS new construction business line solidifies the partnership between GSA and the agency with regard to committed goals and measures, whereby the customer agency is held accountable for cost overruns caused by that agency.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: GSA's new construction program is designed and intended to serve the unique needs of a specific Federal client base that is not served by other Federal programs. As defined by the Public Buildings Act of 1959, GSA has the exclusive authority to construct public buildings. This act specifically gives GSA the sole authority to construct facilities such as courthouses, border inspection facilities and office buildings. The GSA's responsibility is the construction of Federal public buildings intended to house federal agencies, employees and programs. Other agencies and construction programs within the Federal government are responsible for construction projects in foreign countries, such as embassies, or on military installations. They also receive funds and are given authority for buildings in the United States. Although the Public Buildings Act set forth that GSA would construct most shared use buildings, many single tenant buildings are constructed and funded directly by those agencies.

Evidence: The GSA new construction program is designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any other Federal, state, local or private effort. The Public Buildings Act of 1959, (Public Law 86-249; 73 STAT. 478; [H. R. 76451; Section 2 states, "No public building shall be constructed except by the Administrator, who shall construct such public building in accordance with this Act." The Act further states that, "The Administrator in carrying out his duties under this Act shall provide for the construction and acquisition of public buildings equitably throughout the United States with due regard to the comparative urgency of the need for each particular building." Section 13 as used in the Act states, (1) The term "public building" means any building, whether for single or multi-tenant occupancy, its grounds, approaches, and appurtenances, which is generally suitable for office or storage space or both for the use of one or more Federal agencies or mixed ownership corporations, and shall include: (i) Federal office buildings, (ii) post office, (iii) customhouses, (iv) courthouses, (v) appraisers stores, (vi) border inspection facilities, (vii) warehouses, (viii) record centers, (ix) relocation facilities, and (x) similar Federal facilities, and (xi) any other buildings or construction projects the inclusion of which the President may deem, from time to time hereafter, to be justified in the public interest; . . ." The authority also provides certain exclusions for GSA's new construction program, including U.S. properties in foreign countries, on military installations, on Veterans Administration installations, etc., further illustrating how the program is specifically targeted to its core mission. GSA's mission is to help federal agencies better serve the public by offering, at best value, superior workplaces, expert solutions, acquisition services and management policies. The purpose of GSA is to create these workspaces through new construction and replacement of obsolete facilities in an efficient, cost effective manner when the existing inventory or leased space cannot meet customer agency needs. GSA improves the quality of its core inventory of owned buildings (about 180 million square feet) so that it can be the resource that it is intended to be - a superior workplace for the federal worker. The GSA new construction program performs a support and service mission to construct specialized workspaces for government customers, and also provides tangible benefits to state, county and municipal governments - without duplicating efforts of other public entities.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: The new construction program design is free of major flaws that would limit its effectiveness or efficiency. GSA is the industry leader in the design and construction of new facilities, including border stations, courthouses, Federal buildings and other specialized Federal space. Through its new construction program, GSA meets the needs of its customer agencies, and meets the social, environmental and economic responsibilities outlined in GSA's mission. To best accomplish that mission and serve customer agencies, GSA is organized its oversight and operation of the new construction program in a manner that centralizes strategic planning, policy development, programmatic guidance, budget allocation, and program performance measurement and evaluation. The PBS national office structure capitalizes on the multitude of specific program area expertise resident in PBS associates throughout the country (such as seismic, cost estimating, etc.) and maximizes the value of regional activities by establishing a local presence at every new construction project. The PBS National Office (NO) is responsible for delivering the new construction program within scope, on schedule and on budget. That responsibility includes, on an annual basis, reviewing and approving regional prospectus requests and prioritizing the annual, national prospectus, submission to Congress through which GSA requests funding for new construction projects. NO is also responsible for the final review and approval of every prospectus level new construction project prior to its submission to Congress. NO produces and disseminates to regional offices specific design and construction guidelines and requirements for implementation on new construction projects, such as pre-project planning and site selection guidance, design standards, facility standards, project proposal review guidelines, and building commissioning procedures. NO implements on-going management controls, throughout the life of new construction projects, which include monitoring the progress of a project through Quality Assurance / Quality Control reviews, and the coordination and oversight of independent industry expert project reviews during the design and construction phases. As an additional management control, the PBS Commissioner and the Chief Architect in the NO approve all design concept presentations for new construction projects.

Evidence: The national office has influence and authority of the regional offices throughout the nation and centralized control of all aspects of the new construction program essential to the program's success. The Congressional budget justification (pages FBF 13-29) Capital Investment and Leasing Program (CILP) is an annual process that provides a formal review by the PBS National Office (NO) of prospectus level construction projects that are submitted by the regional management to NO for funding considerations. Following this review NO prioritizes and assigns projects for inclusion in the President's budget for subsequent execution by the regional offices. PBS national office has processes in place to insure the effectiveness and efficiency of the program. PBS developed and issued the following programs, guides, and documented procedures to assist and guide the regions and program partners as they execute individual projects: 1. The Facilities Standards for the Public Buildings Service (P-100) establishes design standards and criteria for construction projects. www.gsa.gov/P100 2. The Design Excellence Policy and Procedures provides the objectives, guiding principles and the steps necessary to accomplish design excellence in Federal facilities. 3. The Project Management Guide outlines the "how to" in PBS project management to accomplish the tasks on a capital construction project. 4. The Site Selection Guide provides a roadmap for the entire site selection process. 5. The Building Commissioning Guide sets forth the process for building commissioning from project planning through tenant occupancy. To insure nationwide consistency, this guide presents recommendations, requirements and best practices based upon industry guidance and GSA experience. 6. The Project Planning Guide is a support document to assist with evaluating, developing, and implementing federal facilities projects. The PBS Commissioner issued a directive on April 4, 2005, requiring PBS regional management to receive approval prior to proceeding with final design development. The Commissioner also issued two memos: a) Cost Effective Delivery of the Capital Construction Program, dated December 23, 2003, that expanded and strengthened the role of National Office in the delivery of the capital program, and b) Release of the Building Commissioning Guide, dated April 4, 2005, that directed PBS regional management to use total building commissioning practices to assure development of sustainable, efficient and cost-effective facilities.

Is the program design effectively targeted so that resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries?

Explanation: The new construction program is effectively targeted so that resources directly address the program's purpose. PBS must justify the need for new capital construction projects - which are subject to Administration prioritization and line item approval by Congress. PBS's extensive portfolio planning effort determines the composition of the new construction program, as well as the priority order in which projects are submitted to Congress for approval. GSA prioritizes its resources at multiple levels within the organization, and supplements that effort with additional reviews by customer agencies. The majority of GSA's new construction projects are initiated on behalf of the U.S. Courts and the Department of Homeland Security Customs Border Protection. Eighty percent of funded prospectus projects in the last five years were courthouses or border stations. Both of these key client agencies have internal long-range capital investment plans. GSA considers these plans in conjunction with other Executive Branch needs in the development of its construction budget requests.

Evidence: PBS uses the long-term assessment of structural and program needs provided by the U.S. Courts (U.S. Courts Five Year Plan) and the DHS (Land Port-of-Entry Scoring Criteria and Factors) to aid the portfolio planning process. In addition, PBS develops an annual projected spending plan for every new construction project to ensure funds are being used for the intended purpose. As an added measure of control, PBS follows a procedure for the distribution of project funds, which is outlined in a memorandum signed by the PBS CFO, dated June 5, 2003. This memorandum guides the distribution of the funds and outlines the allowance process, which must be followed for any project to receive the allocated project funding from the PBS National Office. FY 2006 Congressional Budget Justification (pages 18-29) has line item descriptions for each new construction project. Executive Order 13327 established the Federal Real Property Council (FRPC) and directs all agencies to develop and implement asset management plans for all federal assets. GSA's FY 2006 Congressional Budget Justification sets forth Capital Investment and Leasing Program (CILP) funding requests to meet agencies' space requirements and authorizes the Administrator of GSA to construct properties totaling $65.966 million dollars to meet the need of federal agencies. Through the CILP process the GSA evaluates potential projects using The Automated Prospectus System (TAPS) to accurately establish a present value model prior to its submission as a funding request, as required by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-94. GSA, other government agencies, and commercial real estate professional that work with government agencies to evaluate real property investment alternatives, utilize TAPS. The computer model allows the user to examine year-by-year present value cost streams to compare various housing alternatives for employees. Present value costs are costs that are discounted back to today's value for a common frame of reference to compare alternatives. The alternatives that can be analyzed are: lease, new construction, repair and alteration, lease with purchase option, least-cost financing. The utilization of this technology, in conjunction with the development and implementation of asset management plans ensures resources will address the program's purpose directly and will reach intended beneficiaries. The new construction business line has three operating divisions with resources specifically focused on serving their intended beneficiaries: 1) the Center for Courthouse Programs; 2) the Center for Border Station Programs; and 3) the Center for Federal Buildings and Modernization. These PBS centers work in partnership with the following customer agencies 1) the U.S. Courts; 2) DHS Customs and Border Protection; and 3) Federal agencies, such as FDA, FBI, and ATF to align our goals, define priorities, and develop specific space solutions to fit their respective customer agency programmatic, facility and security requirements.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: GSA has five long-term performance measures focused on results and accountability and ensuring efficiency and effectiveness of the construction program.

Evidence: The goals are 1) reduce average cycle time for new courthouse projects to 2800 days or less; 2) register 100% of the new construction program for LEED in the same fiscal year design funding is authorized/appropriated; 3) certify 75% of the new construction program for LEED; 4) independently verify 100% of newly constructed buildings for sustainability and achievement of established operational requirements by 2015; 5) achieve 90% on schedule in the new construction program by 2010. GSA had an additional long-term outcome goal to maintain cost escalation on the new construction program at or below 1% by 2010. GSA achieved this goal and is on track to make this measure for FY 2005, after which time it will be discontinued in the PART. GSA will continue to measure cost escalation internally and include the measure in its performance budget as a mechanism to maintain this high level of performance.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: The new construction program has ambitious targets and time frames for its cycle time, LEED, operational requirements, and on schedule long-term measures. The establishment of benchmarks for all of the long-term performance metrics led to development of ambitious, measurable outcome goals for the new construction program and aggressive short-term and long-term targets for the new construction program.

Evidence: The GSA FY07 budget submission included cost and schedule measures. PBS will update its FY07 President's budget to reflect the new goals and ambitious targets included in this PART: 1) By 2019, reduce the average cycle time of new courthouse construction projects from the authorization/appropriation of design funding to substantial completion to 2800 days or less. The average cycle time for projects completed in 2004 was 3252 days. The moratorium established by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts deferred new courthouse design starts until FY08 or FY09 with results and construction completion projected beginning in 2017. 2) By 2010 register 100% of the new construction program for LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Green Building Rating System) in the same fiscal year design funding is authorized/appropriated. In 2004 no projects were registered for LEED and the 2005 result to date is 9.1%. 3) By 2013 certify 75% of the new construction program for LEED; the 2005 result to date is 17%. 4) By 2015 independently verify 100% of newly constructed buildings for sustainability and achievement of established operational requirements, enabling PBS to make proper, long-term adjustments in program requirements and design guidelines to assure development of a sustainable portfolio of assets; for projects completed in 2004 result is nearly 22%. 5) Achieve 90% on schedule in the new construction program by 2010. The FY 2004 result was 80.2%, up from 68% in FY 2003. GSA had an additional long-term outcome goal to maintain cost escalation on the new construction program at or below 1% by 2010. GSA achieved this goal and is on track to make this measure for 2005, after which time it will be discontinued in the PART. GSA will continue to measure cost escalation internally and include the measure in its performance budget as a mechanism to maintain this high level of performance.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that can demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term goals?

Explanation: GSA has specific annual performance measures that are linked to its strategic goals and program purpose and measure its success in managing the construction program. The PBS new construction program measure results for on schedule, on budget, and cost escalations are reported monthly to PBS senior executives, and are assessed at the PBS Quarterly Performance Review by the GSA Administrator and the PBS Commissioner and PBS senior executives. The performance measure targets and measures are re-evaluated on an annual basis, as well, to ensure that targets and measures are valid and appropriate drivers toward program achievement of long-term goals. The PBS new construction program also measures cycle time, LEED registration and certification, and achievement of operational requirements in new buildings. Should performance indicators demonstrate limited - or lack of - program progress toward achievement of PBS long-term goals, the new construction business line identifies and implements necessary business process improvements in program execution, and deploys necessary resources and expertise to develop and implement initiatives and activities to improve performance.

Evidence: GSA's Linking Budget to Performance measures (page 4) and the Annual Performance and Accountability report (pages 46-48) both list and discuss the PBS reported measures and their progress each year. Additionally, the FY 2006 Annual Congressional Budget Justification (pages FBF 21-23) outlines measures, their progress, and the future annual targets, which will assist in reaching the long-term goal(s). Goals and Measures include: new construction projects on schedule 87% of the time by 2007; achieve cycle time of 3100 days or less in 2007; register for LEED 50% of the new construction program receiving design authorization/appropriation in 2007; certify 25% of the new construction program for LEED in 2007; independently verify 35% of newly constructed buildings for achievement of established operational requirements in 2007. GSA had an additional long-term outcome goal: maintain cost escalation on the new construction program at or below 1% by 2010. GSA achieved this goal and is on track to make this measure for FY 2005, after which time it will be discontinued in the PART. GSA will continue to measure cost escalation internally and include the measure in its performance budget as a mechanism to maintain this high level of performance.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures?

Explanation: The PBS new construction program business line establishes baselines, tracks progress for on schedule and on budget performance at both regional and national levels, and has ambitious targets for its measures. PBS uses standardized construction cost benchmarks to establish individual project baselines and to develop a schedule of values for the project at the outset of each project. The schedule of values charts the planned progress of work to be put in place on a project. The new construction business line uses prior year performance and the schedule of values to derive baselines and set ambitious but realistic annual targets at the regional and national levels. PBS established aggressive targets for cost and schedule to improve performance of the new construction program, and to propel program performance to an increased level of efficiency, effectiveness, and sustainability.

Evidence: The program has baselines and ambitious targets for its annual measures. For FY03 the on schedule baseline was 68%; in FY04 it was 80%. The target of 90% by FY 2010 is aggressive, given the political environment, fluctuating construction commodity markets and the complex nature of the new construction program with its myriad of specialized functional, program and security requirements. For FY03 the baseline for cost escalations was 1.6%; for FY04 it was 1%. The target to remain at or below 1% is aggressive and allows no accommodation for fluctuations in the construction industry and commodities markets. When established by PBS, the 1% target for cost escalations was aggressive and set the bar at an extraordinary high level. Maintaining and sustaining that level of outstanding performance is ambitious and will remain an internal measure for GSA, but will not longer be included in the PART because PBS has met its target. The PBS new construction business line uses the Project Information Portal (PIP), the PBS IT tool for project management, for its performance management and evaluation of metrics, and reporting for regular Quarterly Performance Review meetings with the PBS Commissioner and the GSA Administrator. PIP establishes/reflects baseline schedule and budget for projects. The Courthouse Design Guide, Courthouse Construction Benchmark Report, and Courthouse PM Guide (Ai)(pages 3.9-3.12) outline standards for the construction of courthouse projects. These documents assist in the development of baselines and target setting for the new construction program. The FY 2006 Annual Congressional Budget Justification (pages FBF 21-23) describes each measure and the progress along with the targets for the annual measures. Additionally, it discusses any failures in meeting previous targets.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: The PBS new construction business line and its partner organizations - including industry and private sector professionals; customer agency executives - commit to and work toward the annual and long-term program goals. PBS uses incentive-based contracts to better align contractor goals with PBS program goals, and also includes standard contract language through which GSA and its program partners commit to work toward, and are held accountable for, program goals. In pursuing work with GSA, contractors agree to work toward PBS's long-term goals for sustainability (LEED), schedule (cycle time), and operational requirements, as outlined in the bilateral agreements. PBS uses formal Partnering on its capital projects whereby program partners execute a charter and commit in writing to the successful achievement of program and project goals, notably cost, schedule and sustainability. PBS customer agencies sign Occupancy Agreements (OAs) indicating their commitment to the project and to establish program scope requirements and customer expectations.

Evidence: PBS is able to translate program goals (cost, schedule, performance) into specific contract clauses. The FAR enables PBS to establish contractually binding commitments for program partners (contractors) with regard to cost, schedule and performance results. Notably FAR 52.211-12, Liquidated Damages; FAR52.211-10, Commencement, Prosecution, and Completion of Work; FAR 52.236-15, Schedules for Construction Contracts. GSA Standard Form 1442, Sections 11 and 17 establish cost and schedule commitments from contractors. Construction program partners are also formally enlisted and held accountable for the successful achievement of long-term performance goals under PBS order 3400.16. This order establishes Partnering as a preferred management process to be utilized on projects developed by the Public Buildings Service, including all new construction projects. The Occupancy Agreements used the PBS new construction business line to solidify the partnership between GSA and the agency with regard to committed goals and measures, whereby the customer agency is held accountable for cost overruns caused by that agency. Cost overruns during construction due to agency tenant changes are funded by the customer agency in accordance with these agreements. PBS uses incentive-based contracts to ensure that PBS's contractors on construction projects have a vested interest in the success of the annual and long-term PBS goals. Attachment III-B.1, Evaluation Criteria for Performance Evaluation Factors, states: "The Contractor must meet the minimum contract requirements. The standard for evaluation and rating of the Contractor's performance shall be compared against this for each factor and sub-factor. The intent of the award fee pool is to reward the Contractor where performance exceeds the minimum contract requirements." The attachment goes on to outline the performance factors which include: Change Order Management, Cost Control, Substantial Completion, Final Acceptance and Project Closeout. These factors relate to GSA's performance goals and enabled GSA to determine the contractor's eligibility for award fees based on the level of performance. The construction program business line also uses standard contract language and its partners to insure all parties are invested in, and accountable for, the successful achievement of the long-term outcome goal of LEED certification. Section II of the new construction program's Border Station contract as well as the Courthouse contract, lists the satisfaction of "requirements for a LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Building Silver rating" as a project objective and goal, and the "demonstration of LEED rating by itemizing and describing each credit as it relates to the proposed design" as a project requirement. These contract provisions and project goals, along with PBS's contract administration efforts make the contracted program partners accountable for the achievement of performance goals.

Are independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: The new construction program is subject to multiple independent reviews at the project specific and program-wide levels. Reviews address cost, scope and quality issues, as well as the ability of project teams to deliver the project as intended. PBS conducts reviews using private-sector industry professionals, at regular intervals on projects, during both the design and construction phases. The private sector professionals are typically the top architects, urban designers, and engineers in their respective fields and are enlisted to evaluate effectiveness and put forth recommendations for improvement. PBS National Office assembles each team to meet the specific needs presented by a given project, e.g., projects involve architectural professional industry experts; projects with complex heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) requirements would include an engineer who specializes in that field; a new downtown courthouse team would likely include a professional urban designer. During design, there are typically two reviews by private sector industry professionals (independent of the project and appointed by the PBS Commissioner): 1) Concept Phase. The teams evaluate the lead designer's proposed concepts for the new facility; and 2) Design Phase. The team evaluates the further-developed design concept. The process to independently critique design concepts is an established design industry standard and is used widely throughout the private sector architectural community. It is only after this second independent team review that the design concept is presented to the PBS Commissioner for approval. Similar team reviews are also conducted by independent private sector construction professionals during the construction phase. These teams evaluate construction quality, schedule progress, and project management performance, making recommendations to PBS NO. Like the design team, the construction team is assembled to provide expertise needed for a specific project. Additionally, PBS implements a Quality Assurance / Quality Control (QAQC) program that entails private sector, industry professional review of project quality and scope factors. QAQC evaluators oversee multiple projects and conduct reviews at three stages: design concepts (i.e., prior to PBS Commissioner approval), design drawings, and construction drawings. The QAQC design concepts review stage provides a more detailed analysis, and then continues through the end of design. The QAQC review applies a checklist-type approach to assess the developing project's adherence to the quality and performance requirements established in the PBS Facilities Standards (P-100). In response to lessons learned and outside audits, the QAQC process was developed to ensure that as program and budget decisions are made, project quality and scope remain intact. At the program level, recommendations from GSA's independent Office of the Inspector General (OIG), audits are also used to identify the need for improvements to the program Ernst & Young has conducted similar independent evaluations of the new construction program. These types of independent program evaluations have informed the project specific processes described above.

Evidence: The PBS professional team review-tracking file includes financial information concerning all team reviews that occurred from FY 2001 through April of FY 2004. It indicates how many professional team reviews PBS has completed and the FY 2006 Strategic Assessment indicates that it is the intention of PBS to increase the amount of team reviews. A Commissioner memo dated December 23, 2003 articulates additional actions for implementation as a result of the Study of Cost Overruns on New Construction and Repair Projects completed by Ernst & Young dated March 29, 2002. PBS completes a Scope Feasibility Study on prospectus level projects to evaluate that the needs of the client agency and the standards of a public owned facility are being met. A Cost Consulting and Index Study for New Federal Courthouse Construction comparing the costs of Federal verses State courthouse construction has allowed PBS to compare scope also. The Facilities Standards for the Public Buildings Service (P-100) establishes design standards and criteria for construction projects. www.gsa.gov/P100 This important reference document contains Architectural and Engineering Guidelines and PBS enlists private sector industry professionals to review its contents and recommend revisions and improvements. The OIG provides periodic evaluations on various aspects of the new construction program. The most recent audit is Report Number A030203/P/R/R04004, dated March 3, 2004. The June 2005 General Accountability Office (GAO) review of the new Courthouse construction program was submitted to congress as an independent evaluation of the program's ability to meet the needs of its customers and stakeholders. The GAO review cites the effectiveness of the new construction program in the areas of project management and communication as the foundation of the program's effectiveness. GSA's new construction program has demonstrated its ability to consistently fulfill its responsibility and purpose as evidenced by private industry's recognition of GSA as an industry leader and standard barer in new construction: Cooper-Hewitt Award for Design Excellence; AIA National Design Award - Islip, NY Courthouse; the American Architectural Foundation (AAF) 2004 Keystone Award; the National Building Museum's Honors Award; Associated General Contractors Grand Award for Construction, Seattle Federal Courthouse; and the Technology in Architectural Practice (TAP) Knowledge Community Building Information Model Award.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The annual Congressional Budget Justification includes the annual and long-term performance targets for the new construction program, detailed project descriptions, and aligns these with the funding requirements. The budget request was developed through GSA's Performance Management Process (PMP) for strategic planning, budgeting and program evaluation.

Evidence: The FY 2006 Congressional Budget Justification (FBF-23) illustrates the funding request to show what will directly support the long-term and annual goals, including the indirect costs. This breakdown is also shown in the annual Strategy and Action Plans. It ties the specific dollar amounts to the level of performance that will be achieved in the various measures. PBS uses the Performance Management Process (PMP) to evaluate staffing, funding levels, and other resource availability to insure budget requests are directly tied to long-term program performance goals.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: The PBS new construction program has taken meaningful steps to correct strategic planning shortcomings. GSA implemented the annual Performance Management Process (PMP), the formulation of both strategic and tactical initiatives in FY 2003, of which the PBS new construction program is a major component. This annual process emphasizes the strategic assessment of past performance, focuses on actions required to achieve long-term goals, and a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis. As a result of this agency-wide effort, PBS created a prioritized list of initiatives designed to improve performance in the new construction program. Additionally, as part of the PMP process, recommendations for program improvements generated from external audits of the program or specific issues are considered and acted upon. PBS implemented audit recommendations for project managers to attend design and construction workshops and to complete Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) evaluations. The PDRI is a risk-assessment and pre-project planning tool.

Evidence: The Office of Management and Budget has approved the strategy and action plan (SAP) for the new construction program developed for FY 2006. The SAP includes a number of initiatives intended to stem the tide of market costs and project cost escalations, as well as the following long term goals: execution of the new construction program on schedule 90% of the time by FY 2010, and maintain the percentage of escalations on the program at, or below, 1%. PBS also developed the following long-term goals to improve overall program and operational efficiency. The new construction program business line has also committed to reducing the cycle time for new courthouse construction projects to 2800 days by 2019, increasing the achievement of Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification to 75% by 2013 and increasing the independent verification of operational requirements (buildings systems) to 100% by 2015. The PBS Strategic Assessment of the new construction program annually evaluates the program's decision-making, performance measure target establishment and financial allocation. This evaluation includes the identification of internal and external influences that may affect the ability of the construction program to achieve its mission. These influences include internal issues involving human capital and associate training, as well as external market conditions, such as construction commodity market fluctuations, and potential threats to product and service costs. This examination in turn provides regional staff and project managers with the necessary information as a basis to generate business process improvements for the national program.

Has the agency/program conducted a recent, meaningful, credible analysis of alternatives that includes trade-offs between cost, schedule, risk, and performance goals, and used the results to guide the resulting activity?

Explanation: When there is a long-term need to house agencies in a given location, PBS analyzes alternatives and trade-offs at the project level by comparing the cost, schedule and risk of various alternatives. PBS conducts meaningful, multiple levels of review prior to submission of a capital budget request. In addition to a customer agency's own priority planning - such as that of the Courts' development and updating of its five year plan - GSA conducts analyses using The Automated Prospectus System (TAPS) to analyze the long-term financial impact of the various alternatives available for space acquisition (Leasing, Repairs and Alterations, Purchase, or New Construction). Throughout the pre-project planning phase PBS assesses project risk factors using the Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI). The PDRI process helps guide development of project implementation strategies; identifies issues that impact the choice of procurement vehicle and project delivery methods; and assists program partners identify, mitigate and manage project risks.

Evidence: The GSA Capital Investment and Leasing Program (CILP) projects are evaluated using The Automated Prospectus System (TAPS). TAPS is a present value model developed for the GSA to conform to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-94. It is used by GSA, other government agencies, and commercial real estate professional that work with government agencies to evaluate real property investment alternatives. The computer model allows the user to examine year-by-year present value cost streams to compare various housing alternatives for employees. Present value costs are costs that are discounted back to today's value for a common frame of reference to compare alternatives. The alternatives that can be analyzed are: lease, new construction, repair and alteration, lease with purchase option, least-cost financing. For the CILP PBS conducts a feasibility study before the project is approved and also uses the Project Definition Rating Index (PDRI) process built around a tool/checklist to identify project issues and risk factors that must be addressed for successful program and project implementation. Project team members and partners participate in several PDRI analysis sessions throughout the life of the project to continually monitor and assess risk factors and alternatives to assure project success.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: GSA conducts quarterly performance management reviews. This process ensures frequent top management attention to key program goals and adjustments to program priorities, if necessary, based on performance. This process identified a need to compile all program data into one system, resulting in the development and enhancement of the Project Information Portal (PIP), PBS' project tracking system. From a project perspective, new construction progress in meeting on-schedule and on-budget goals is monitored monthly using an earned value assessment model. Variances are analyzed and investigated by program analysts, resulting in earlier awareness of potential problems. In the source selection process, GSA uses information from National Institutes of Health's (NIH), Contractor Performance System (CPS). CPS enables GSA to track and monitor the performance of its contractors on a project and program-wide basis. CPS can be a valuable tool for the new construction program in identifying high performing contractors in program execution.

Evidence: Timely information from the PBS Project Information Portal (PIP) and the Contractor Performance System (CPS) allows GSA to make informed decisions regarding program management and business process improvements. PBS monitors quarterly performance information at the project and national level via the PIP. The PBS Commissioner and GSA Administrator review quarterly performance results and monthly status of funds reports. PBS analyzes data and reviews studies and reports to develop new ways to assist project managers. PBS uses its website and the Project Management Guide to post documents that will aid contract managers and the construction process. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) contractor performance system is used to review contractors during the source selection process.

Are Federal managers and program partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, and other government partners) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: Federal managers and other government partners are held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results. Internally GSA's "Linking Budget to Performance Program" (LB2P) provides incentives for regional office partners to meet or exceed performance targets and holds managers accountable for program goals and measures. PBS uses incentive-based contracts to better align contractor goals with PBS program goals, and also includes standard contract language through which GSA and its program partners commit to work toward, and are held legally and contractually accountable for, program goals. In pursuing work with GSA, contractors contractually commit to work toward PBS's long-term goals for sustainability (LEED), schedule (cycle time), and operational requirements, as outlined in the contract documents. Performance-based and incentive-based contract enable PBS to offer contractors cost savings or award fees in return for achievement of high level performance results and cost and schedule targets. Conversely, PBS assesses liquidated damages against contractors who - by their actions or inactions - cause delays to the construction contract. PBS contract administration is the mechanism through which PBS holds contractors accountable for cost, schedule and performance results. Similarly, PBS contractually requires architects and engineers (A/Es) to produce designs that can be bid for construction contracts within the available budget, and through contract administration, PBS requires A/Es to redesign at their cost if this does not occur. Designers are also held accountable for errors and omissions and are responsible for associated redesign costs. The PBS new construction business line and its partner organizations - including industry and private sector professionals; customer agency executives - commit to and work toward the annual and long-term performance results. PBS uses formal Partnering on its capital projects whereby program partners execute a charter and commit in writing to the successful achievement of program and project goals, notably cost, schedule and sustainability. With regard to customer agency program partners, PBS enters into signed Occupancy Agreements (OAs) with customers that establish their commitment to the project, program scope requirements and customer expectations. Cost overruns during construction caused by customer agency changes are paid for by the customer agency in accordance with provisions of Occupancy Agreements.

Evidence: PBS is able to translate program goals (cost, schedule, performance) into specific contract clauses. The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) enables PBS to establish contractually binding commitments and accountability for program partners (contractors) with regard to cost, schedule and performance results. PBS contracts establish cost, schedule and performance goals that are contractually binding upon GSA contractors. FAR is a governing standard for GSA construction contracts. GSA Standard Form 1442, Section 11 commits contractors to a set schedule, i.e., "The Contractor shall begin performance __ calendar days and complete it within __ calendar days after receiving [either] award/notice to proceed. This performance period is [either] mandatory/negotiable." Section 17 further commits contractors to performance results: "The offeror agrees to perform the work required at the prices specified below in strict accordance with the terms of this solicitation, if this offer is accepted by the Government in writing within __ calendar days after the date offers are due." Should a contractor fail to perform, GSA legally can assess Liquidated Damages, per FAR 52.211-12. FAR 52.211-10 prescribes that the contractor shall ??"prosecute the work diligently" and complete it within a specified time period, i.e., schedule. FAR 52.236-15 sets forth additional schedule requirements. Through FAR remedies are available to GSA to compel performance and insure accountability, including withholding progress payments, invoking the contractor surety, issuing show cause letter(s), terminating the contract. PBS uses the NIH Contractor Performance System is to evaluate contractors. PBS records contractor cost, schedule and project implementation performance results in this system, and the data is used by procurement officials to evaluate and review contractor performance during contractor selection processes. Construction program partners are accountable for the successful achievement of the long term outcome goal of LEED certification. Provisions within standard design and construction contracts used by the GSA new construction program formalize the program partner's responsibility for LEED certification. Section II of the construction program's Border Station contract lists the satisfaction of "requirements for a LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Building Silver rating" as a project objective and goal, as well as Section 2 of the standard Courthouse contract that list "demonstration of LEED rating by itemizing and describing each credit as it relates to the proposed design". Contract provisions and project goals make the program partners accountable for the achievement of performance goals. Program partners are also formally engaged and accountable for the successful achievement of long-term performance goals under PBS order 3400.16. This order establishes Partnering as a preferred management process to be utilized on projects developed by PBS, including all new construction projects. The signed Occupancy Agreement between GSA and its customer agencies allows PBS to hold the customer agency accountable if delays or cost overruns are the fault of the customer tenant.

Are funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: The PBS National Office approves new construction funds when spending plans are received from the regions. Monthly funds status reports, with detailed explanations for variances from plan, are reviewed at the highest levels of GSA. In addition to system-generated reports, PBS also maintains a Capital Projects Website, which contains detailed appropriation and obligation data. A quarterly funds-aging report is prepared and reviewed for all capital projects. A recent study of erroneous payments showed that the new construction program had $0 in erroneous payments in FY 2003 and $2,715 (actual dollars) in erroneous payments through February 2004. In accordance with the Purpose Statute, the PBS national office authorizes new construction funding in keeping with the prioritization of programmatic components as detailed in the annual CILP submission to OMB and Congress. The GSA new construction program is committed to obligating project funds in a timely manner to ensure the successful deliver of projects and the avoidance of funding delays. Funding for projects lapses within two years of authorization if no obligations are made. The GSA Administrator and PBS Commissioner review obligation plans for the new construction program on a monthly basis, and all authorized and appropriated new construction funds are obligated in accordance with congressionally authorized and approved project scope. Senior regional and NO executives are held accountable for the data and the performance results. Additionally, the obligation of project funding is monitored and tracked by the NO through the Project Information Portal, and the Capital Projects Website, and feeds into the construction performance measurement system maintained by PBS management.

Evidence: Each Construction project's projected obligation plan is generated at the start of each fiscal year. On a monthly basis, regions must report any cumulative variances greater than 15% along with the reasons behind the variance. This monthly Status of Funds report is presented to both the Commissioner and the Administrator. A GSA Risk Assessment and Erroneous Payment Audit has shown the new construction program is very accurate in the accounting of obligations. The Stratification of Funds Report identifies the age of all available funds in the new construction program. As an added measure of control, PBS follows a procedure for the distribution of project funds, which is outlined in a memorandum signed by the CFO of PBS, and dated June 5, 2003. This memorandum not only guides the distribution of he funds but also outlines the allowance process, which must be followed for the project to receive the allocated project funding from the National Office. In addition to system-generated reports, PBS also maintains the Capital Projects Website, which contains detailed appropriation and obligation data. PBS prepares quarterly funding reports and GSA senior management reviews new construction project financial performance.

Does the program have procedures (e.g. competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, appropriate incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: This program has an efficiency measure regarding cycle time for new courthouse construction projects. The new construction program also has developed specific cost benchmarks and put design guides in place to standardize unit costs by various space types (office, courtroom, etc.), including those unique to GSA, such as prisoner holding cells in courthouses and border inspection facilities). Standardizing space types for required uses and establishing unit costs for those specialized space types helps PBS control those costs and promotes consistency for GSA and its stakeholders, and enables PBS to achieve more efficient and effective program oversight.

Evidence: The cycle time efficiency measure for the average cycle time of new courthouse construction projects evaluates the efficiency of the new construction program's project delivers. A long term goal of 2,800 days or less by 2019 has been established, but aggressive annual targets for the program's performance will be set. The new construction program has developed a series of program standards and measures that must be met prior to the acceptance and initiation of design and construction proposals for an individual project. Those standards and measures ensure costs, competitive sourcing, and the appropriate incentives are included in each project, as is benchmarking of projects, the establishment of performance baselines, and the on going evaluation of the program within the accepted industry standard The PBS Commissioner memo, "Cost Effective Delivery of the Capital Construction Program", December 23, 2003, sets forth the requirement for independent government estimates and quality control quality assurance reviews. The unique requirements of GSA's customers necessitate unique procedures and standards for ensuring optimal efficiencies. The following guides, policies and procedures have been developed and distributed to meet those needs and ensure the efficient and effective execution of the new construction program: 1. The Facilities Standards for the Public Buildings Service (P-100) that establishes design standards and criteria for construction projects. www.gsa.gov/P100 2. The Design Excellence Policy and Procedures that provides the objectives, guiding principles and the steps necessary to accomplish design excellence for Federal buildings. 3. The Project Management Guide outlines the "how to" in project management to accomplish the tasks on a capital construction project with a life span of 5 to 7 years. 4. The Site Selection Guide provides an outline for the entire site selection process. 5. The Building Commissioning Guide provides the process for building commissioning from project planning through tenant occupancy. To insure nationwide consistency, this guide presents recommendations, requirements and best practices based upon industry guidance and GSA experience. 6. The Project Planning Guide was developed and issued to assist with evaluating, developing, and implementing federal facilities projects.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: GSA collaborates effectively with both internal and external programs. Examples of internal programs include Asset Management, Leasing, Customer Service, IT and the Federal Acquisition Service. Externally, in addition to its collaborative role with the U. S. Courts, the program works extensively with the Department of Homeland Security Customs, Border Protection, and other Executive Branch organizations as well as design and construction industry leaders. PBS has developed collaborative relationships with industry leaders to share best practices and professional team reviews and analysis. Those industry leaders include the American Institute of Architects, the Construction Industry Institute, the Construction Users Round Table, the Associated General Contractors, etc.

Evidence: PBS work with agencies on the development of the Occupancy Agreements identifying the space arrangements of the new building between GSA and the other agency. PBS continuously works with the Courts and DHS Customs Border Protection on their 5-year and long range plans, as well as with any other agency that has long range planning. The Interagency Security Committee agreements demonstrate the coordination of activities with other agencies. Additionally, PBS works very closely with private sector peers such as: Construction Management for Association of America, American Institute of Architects, Associated General Contractors, Project Management Institute, Construction Industry Institute, and other organizations (for contract language, training classes, professional team reviews, technological innovations, best practices, industry trend analysis, etc.).

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: The program has both systemic and manual controls in place to ensure that payments are proper and for the intended purpose. Multiple levels of fund status review take place daily, monthly, and quarterly. GSA has received a clean audit opinion every year since audited financial statements became a requirement--the best record of all Federal agencies. However, in the FY 2003 Annual Report, PBS had a reportable condition concerning controls over the balance sheet transfer of substantially completed construction projects from work in process to completed projects. In a recent audit of erroneous payments, the new construction program had $0 in erroneous payments during FY 2003 and $2,715 during the first five months of FY 2004. The Capital Projects Website and the Project Information Portal contain detailed project funding and status information, supporting our day-to-day operations. PBS is in the process of developing an enhancement to the Project Information Portal to link project status data, particularly the achievement of substantial construction completion; to the PBS CFO's office to address the balance sheet transfer issue.

Evidence: Erroneous Payment Study & Statement of Work demonstrates PBS's excellent record of limited erroneous payments. The FY 2004 Performance and Accountability Report (page 123-124) demonstrates that the auditors believe PBS is using strong financial management practices while noting that additional work needs to be done. The Capital Projects Website, Project Information Portal, and FR 83 AB are all areas PBS uses to record and report financials internally. Internal Controls of Greater Southwest Finance Center Accounts Payable Process Report indicated "...we conclude that the controls governing the accounts payable process and the degree of compliance with them provides sufficient reasonable assurance that control objectives were achieved..." As an added measure of control, PBS follows a procedure for the distribution of project funds, which is outlined in a memorandum signed by the CFO of PBS, and dated June 5, 2003. This memorandum guides the distribution of funds and outlines the allowance process, which must be followed for the project to receive the allocated project funding from the PBS national office.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: To enhance project success in budget and schedule measures, the Project Information Portal (PIP) was developed and is now widely used by PBS national office (NO) and regional office senior management. PBS has implemented a professional team review process using private sector industry experts - often including a third-party cost estimator - to assess prospectus projects at critical project milestones, as well as (QAQC) reviews of projects at critical stages in the design phase. PBS, through a multi-program adjudication committee, reviews all project cost escalation requests. The committee, led by a senior NO official, determines whether to accept or reject the request. In December 2003, a number of new initiatives to further improve performance during project delivery were initiated. NO also instituted quarterly meetings with senior NO and regional management officials to evaluate performance of the new construction program, address shortcomings, and develop business process improvements. PBS also published a The Building Commissioning Guide to better integrate the process of commissioning into project delivery to provide GSA customers with the assurance that PBS is delivering to them facilities which meet or exceed their expectations for performance, efficiency, safety, sustainability, security, and occupant satisfaction. PBS is also in the process of refining the checklist used to evaluate projects' readiness for the concept presentation to the PBS Commissioner. The checklist serves as a management control for senior leaders of the new construction program to insure projects submitted for concept approval by the PBS Commissioner have addressed key factors in project development and are ready to move forward on schedule, on budget and within scope.

Evidence: A Commissioner memo dated December 23, 2003 articulates additional actions suggested as a result of the Study of Cost Overruns on New Construction and Repair Projects completed by Ernst & Young dated March 29, 2002. Examples of actions the Commissioner's letter comments on are enhanced due diligence, administer a "verification of preparedness" checklist, and establish a design managers evaluation. The Project Planning Guide, Project Planning Tool, internal website pages, and Project Management training are all examples of ways PBS supplies a variety of tools to managers to assist them in reaching their goals. Additionally, a Construction Excellence Council Charter was signed by all project managers to show a commitment to the work.

Is the program managed by maintaining clearly defined deliverables, capability/performance characteristics, and appropriate, credible cost and schedule goals?

Explanation: All contracts used to provide services for new construction projects are performance-based and fixed- price with clearly defined deliverables. Baselines and targets are established early in project development and included in the contract language. Projects are tracked against their baselines to ensure on-time and on-budget performance. Senior PBS officials monitor performance of the new construction program on a quarterly basis. In addition, PBS national office (NO) convenes regular quarterly meetings with senior regional officials responsible for implementing the capital construction program, and conducts a monthly review of performance measure results with regional management. On a quarterly basis, the GSA Administrator and PBS Commissioner convene Quarterly Performance Review (QPR) meetings with senior NO officials to assess performance of the new construction program. PBS NO convenes annual workshop for PBS associates responsible for execution of the new construction program. This workshop involves intense training in project delivery strategies; lesson-learned and best practices analysis; review of performance measure results; development of business process improvements. PBS insures involvement of all of it program offices at the annual workshop, including Asset Management, Leasing, and Customer Service. PBS has implemented initiatives to maintain clearly defined deliverables, such as the QAQC reviews and the Capital Investment and Leasing Program (CILP) reviews. The PBS Commissioner must approve design concepts before new construction projects can move forward. The PBS Facilities Standards, P-100, outlines concept presentation and elements that must be addressed. PBS also uses private-sector industry professionals to conduct Design and Construction Excellence reviews of projects and program performance. Also, PBS has increased the percentage of new construction projects delivered on time, from 68% in FY 2003 to 80% in FY 2004 and reduced the escalation of project budgets from 1.56% in FY 2004 to 1% in FY 2005.

Evidence: The Capital Investment and Leasing Program (CILP) review ensures the "readiness" of projects in the program. The annual Strategy and Action Plans state how the program is going to implement the strategies specified in the annual Strategic Assessment. The Project Information Portal (PIP) is used to set and track timelines and goals for individual projects. Incentive Based Contracts are utilized to clearly define deliverables and performance requirements to the contractors.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals?

Explanation: PBS has made significant progress and is and is on track to meet its long-term performance goals which include clearly defined, long-term cycle time, Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) registration and certification, achievement of established operational requirements, on schedule and cost escalation goals for the new construction program. The on schedule project delivery measure was originally established in 2000, and has increased from 46% of projects delivered on schedule in FY00 to 68% in FY03 and then to 80% in FY04. This progress reflects the increased effort of the program to better prepare project managers, perform pre-project planning and more efficiently and effectively deliver construction projects. The long-term outcome goals for LEED certification and achievement of established operational requirements and performance parameters within 18 months of substantial completion have been established to evaluate the construction program's ability to fulfill its social and environmental responsibility to its customers and stakeholders. The percent of construction projects receiving LEED certification increased from 0% in 2004 to 9.1% in 2005 and the achievement of operational requirements increased from 13.8% in 2004 to 21.9% in 2005 to date. Both measures achieved their FY05 to date annual performance goals and are on track to achieve the long-term outcome targets as well. The new construction program is on target to make its cost escalation goal of 1% or less, after which time this goal will be discontinued in the PART. PBS will continue to measure cost escalation internally and include the measure in its performance budget as a mechanism to maintain this high level of performance. Using program metrics and performance results, PBS implemented programmatic changes and business process improvements to enhance program performance. The GSA Administrator and PBS Commissioner conduct Quarterly Performance Reviews with senior PBS management officials to review these business process improvements, performance measure results, and programmatic issues. Given the length of time required to execute a new construction project, implementation of the above management controls will facilitate PBS ability to improve the overall performance of the new construction program and increase management oversight capabilities. These efforts, in turn, will lead to increased discipline, consistency, and coherence in project execution and delivery and will facilitate increased success in program execution.

Evidence: The PBS Project Information Portal (PIP) is the data collection portal for performance metrics on active prospectus projects. The system includes information concerning scope, schedule, budget and conditions. The new construction program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term performance goals: 1) cycle time result in 2003 of 2853 days with a target of 2950; cycle time result of 2988 days, shy of the target by just over two months in an eight year period; 2) LEED registration result of 16% in 2003, 5% target; 3) LEED certification 2002 result of 16.7% target of 5%; 2004 result of 17%, target of 15%; 3) independent verification of operational requirements 2003 result of 17.3%, target of 10%; 2005 result of 21.9%, target of 20%, and just shy of the 2004 target of 15% with a 13.8% result. The on schedule result improved from 68% in FY2003 to 80.2% in FY04. PBS has improved its focus on sustainability and has taken steps to improve building operations and maintenance efficiency and effectiveness by developing criteria and standards for operational requirements to be achieved on all new construction projects funded for design in FY 2007. Similarly, PBS has increased its efforts on Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and established ambitious long-term outcome goals and targets to insure continuous improvement with regard to sustainability in the new construction program. PBS also implemented Quality Assurance Quality Control reviews, cost estimate reviews, private-sector industry reviews during design and construction, established and published building commissioning guidelines, increased its efforts on pre-project planning. PBS national office officials responsible for oversight to the new construction program meet quarterly with senior regional management officials charged with execution of the program to evaluate performance and develop business process improvements. The Quarterly Performance Review for FY04 illustrates the progress made by the new construction program toward the achievement of the on time delivery performance measure.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: The PBS construction program has achieved its FY05 performance goal for LEED certification and achievement of operational requirements and performance parameters, and nearly achieved the FY04 performance goals for the delivery of construction projects on schedule, with a result of 80.2% and a target of 84%. This result is up from 68% in FY03. The percent of construction projects receiving LEED certification increased from 0% in FY03 to 17% in FY05, above the target of 15%. Achievement of established operational requirements increased from 6.3% in 2004 to 18.8% in 2005. Both measures are on track to achieve the long-term outcome targets. This progress reflects the increased effort of the program to better prepare project managers, perform pre-project planning and more efficiently and effectively deliver construction projects, as well as PBS's social and environmental responsibility to construct more energy efficient and cost-effective facilities for its customers and stakeholders. The new construction program demonstrated improved efficiency in achieving the 2003 efficiency target of 2950 days, the average was 2853 days, and the 2004 target of 2900 days was nearly achieved with an average of 2988 days - just over two months in an eight year time frame. The new construction achieved its annual performance goals for operational requirements in 2003 and 2005, and came just over 1% from achieving the 2004 target. The new construction program also continues to reduce program cost escalations, making the FY04 goal, and is on target to make the FY05 cost escalation goal of 1%, after which time this goal will be discontinued in the PART - ahead of the 2010 target date. PBS will continue to measure cost escalation internally and include the measure in its performance budget as a mechanism to maintain this high level of performance.

Evidence: The new construction program achieved its annual performance goals: 1) cycle time result in 2003 of 2853 days with a target of 2950; cycle time result of 2988 days, shy of the target by just over two months in an eight year period; 2) LEED registration result of 16% in 2003, 5% target; 3) LEED certification 2002 result of 16.7% target of 5%; 2004 result of 17%, target of 15%; 3) independent verification of operational requirements 2003 result of 17.3%, target of 10%; 2005 result of 21.9%, target of 20%, and just shy of the 2004 target of 15% with a 13.8% result. The on schedule result improved from 68% in FY2003 to 80.2% in FY04. The PBS Commissioner memo, "Cost Effective Delivery of the Capital Construction Program", December 23, 2003, sets forth actions for implementation by PBS that were recommended by the Study of Cost Overruns on New Construction and Repair Projects completed by Ernst and Young dated March 29, 2002. Examples of actions the Commissioner's letter instructs PBS to address are enhanced due diligence, administer a "verification of preparedness" checklist, and establish a design manager evaluation. Strategy and Action Plan states the goals each year and the action PBS plans to achieve these goals. The progress of the goals is tracked in the Project Information Portal (PIP); Progress is also reported in GSA's Annual Performance and Accountability Report; FY 2006 Congressional Budget Justification.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program goals each year?

Explanation: PBS demonstrates efficiency and cost effectiveness by achieving program goals. The new construction program business line established an efficiency measure regarding the cycle time of new courthouse construction projects. This measure evaluates the construction program's ability to efficiently deliver new courthouse projects. Reduced cycle time results in cost savings and more efficient program execution. This efficiency measure is evaluated by calculating the cycle time for new courthouse construction projects on a three-year basis. The new construction program achieved the 2003 efficiency target of 2950 days, the average was 2853 days, and the 2004 target of 2900 days was nearly achieved with an average of 2988 days - just over two months in an eight year time frame. The average cycle time for the seven projects completed in 2002 was 3039 days A number of events beyond the control of the new construction program resulted in an increase in the average cycle time of the new courthouse construction projects, and caused upward adjustment of the efficiency targets to 3100 days for FY05 and the coming years. These higher targets are aggressive, given the projected cycle time results for 2006 and 2007 are 3409 and 3260 respectively and there is limited opportunity for PBS to recover lost time during construction. In 2004, 2005 and 2006, four specific projects of interest, all of which began design prior to the initiation of this efficiency measure, will reach substantial completion. The Federal courthouse projects in Seattle, WA; Laredo, TX; Brooklyn, NY; and Washington, D.C. have all encountered a series of unforeseeable delays in design and construction resulting in highly abnormal projected cycle time averages for the coming years. The factors contributing to the delays of these four particular projects are beyond the control of the new construction program - ranging from the impact of domestic and international terrorism to an absence of Congressionally approved construction funding to the unforeseeable bankruptcy of one general contractor during construction.

Evidence: The PBS new construction efficiency measure is to reduce average cycle time on new courthouse construction projects to 2800 days or less. Cycle time measures the average number of days from the authorization/appropriation of design funds to substantial construction completion. This measure applies to new courthouse construction projects and reports aggregated results in three year increments - in the past five years GSA has completed an average of four new courthouse projects each year, with the annual numbers ranging from two to seven. Reducing cycle time will result in greater efficiencies in program execution and lower overall program costs. An efficiency report of the new Courthouse construction program was prepared to calculate the number of days required for the completion of new Courthouse projects. This report analyzed the number of days from the initial date of design funding authorization to the date of substantial completion. This evaluation was used to establish the initial benchmark and the subsequent annual and long-term performance goals for the efficiency of the new construction program. Several key projects experience delays outside the control of PBS and had an adverse impact on the cycle time results, and will continue to impact the project for several years in the future: Seattle: Funds appropriated for design in 1992 not authorized by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure until 1995. Oklahoma City bombing voided the original site selected for construction. Site and design authorized by Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works in July 1996. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure authorized site in September 1996 and design in October 1997 (FY 1998). No funding for courthouse program in President's budgets for FY 1998, FY 1999 and FY 2000. Laredo: Requirement changes and additional space requests by the U. S. Attorney and the judicial required the project to be redesigned. Contractor not performing and had to be terminated. Project completed using new contractor. Prettyman Annex: No funding for courthouse program in President's budgets for FY 1998, FY 1999 and FY 2000. Construction funding requested in FY 2001. Funded as an advance appropriation for FY 2002. Brooklyn: Congress appropriated design funds for FY 1992 to address Court requirements. Congress appropriated additional design funds for FY 1993. The construction contractor declared bankruptcy in September 2003.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., with similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: PBS demonstrates efficiency and cost effectiveness by achieving program goals. While the GSA new construction program cannot be compared directly to another program, private sector, local, state or federal governments, its performance compares favorably to other programs with loosely similar purposes and goals. The intricate program, functional, and security requirements; funding mechanisms and budget cycles; stakeholder interests; and institutional size and complexity make any comparative analysis to a private corporation or other government entity incomplete. Although GSA retains private sector contractors to support design and construction of the new construction program, there is no private or governmental program that oversees the management, development, and operation of a program similar to PBS's in nature, size, monumental scale, functional and security specialization, complexity, and federal purpose. State and local governments may in some instances perform duties that appear to parallel in nature those of GSA, i.e. construction of a municipal courthouse, it is the size, intended use, highly specialized functional and security requirements, monumental scale, and level of complexity that denote the important distinction between GSA's efforts and those of other public entities. PBS is responsible for the construction of federal public buildings intended to house a myriad of federal agencies with disparate missions, purposes, employees and programs. Other agencies and construction programs within the Federal government are responsible for specific construction projects in foreign countries, such as embassies, or on military installations, but the GSA's services are unique. No cost analysis have been performed to determine if the cost of GSA's program are comparable to other programs, as GSA would submit that it is difficult to compare GSA to any other agency. However, GSA compares favorable on schedule and costs.

Evidence: PBS performs a support and service mission for its government customers which makes comparisons between GSA new construction program and private sector organizations impractical. However, GSA does analyze data, where available, on construction cost and schedule measures. GSA's funding cycle is unique. The program has a larger, public responsibility than does its private industry counterparts. For example, there is Congressional oversight of planning, development, and project budget and scope activities for the new construction program. This oversight and associated restrictions make GSA unable to react in the same manner when external influences affect the cost, schedule, and scope of projects. PBS is the largest public real estate organization in the nation and provides workspace and workplace solutions to more than 100 Federal departments and agencies. There is, as of yet, no comparable benchmark for evaluation of GSA's construction program against that of any private sector organization. The difference between state and municipal programs that may share a comparable mission with GSA lies in the scope complexity and customer mix of the program. GSA's program involves a myriad of stakeholders on a national level and many external influences, such as Congress, Federal customers, and local communities. Private industry's recognition of GSA's success as an industry leader and standard bearer in construction is evidenced by the following awards - distinguishing GSA from other governmental agencies - Cooper-Hewitt Award for Design Excellence; AIA National Design Award - Islip, NY Courthouse; the American Architectural Foundation (AAF) 2004 Keystone Award; the National Building Museum's Honors Award; Associated General Contractors Grand Award for Construction, Seattle Federal Courthouse; and the Technology in Architectural Practice (TAP) Knowledge Community Building Information Model Award. Results from the Third Quarter Issue of the 2005 Quarterly Construction Cost Report by Rider Hunt Levett & Bailey (RHLB) indicate that the per square foot (p.s.f.) cost of GSA newly constructed space is comparable with private sector costs. The private sector cost p.s.f. in Washington, D.C. is $240 for a prime office building (RHLB report). The average cost p.s.f. of courthouses funded for construction in FY 2005 is $287. This figure is less than 20% more than the private sector cost of an office building and compares extremely favorably, despite the fact that courthouses include specific and costly program requirements such as enhanced security features, multiple secure elevator systems, specialized and unique HVAC requirements, and progressive collapse and blast mitigation measures - elements exclusive to federal construction and not the private sector. GSA's schedule performance also compares favorably to the private sector. In the January 3, 2005 issue of California Builder & Engineer, an article titled, "Construction Industry Survey" reported results from a national survey conducted by PinnacleOne, a construction consulting firm, which examined the opinions of construction industry executives on issues related to project management, energy/environment and claim resolution. Respondents estimated that a majority of their construction projects are delivered on time (62%), but a significant number are completed late (29%). For FY 2004 PBS on schedule result for new construction was 84% - significantly higher than the private sector. The construction professionals estimated that 61% of their projects come in on budget, while the FY 2004 PBS result was 88%, significantly higher than the private sector. The GSA new construction program business line is also working with the Construction Industry Institute to develop benchmarks of GSA's construction projects compared to one another as well as to other relevant public and private sector work, enabling PBS to measure future success more effectively and accurately.

Do independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The new construction program is subject to multiple, independent evaluations of sufficient scope and quality at the project specific and program-wide level to indicate the program is effective and achieving results. The GSA new construction program has recently been evaluated by the General Accountability Office (GAO) in a June 2005 report to Congress, and has been the subject of a 2005 Financial Statement Audit. The program is also scheduled for review by the Inspector General's Office in FY07. The GAO evaluation recognized the effectiveness of the new construction program to effectively communicate with customer agencies and program stakeholders throughout the life of the project. The report also cited the value of the construction program's project manager's and program partner's efforts to reduce project costs and delays through a variety of methods, including value engineering, modified contracting methods and customer engagement strategies. This independent evaluation of the program affirmed the effectiveness of the new construction program. The FY05 Financial Statement Audits reviewed the GSA new construction program's ability to effectively manage project documentation and with it the Federal Buildings Fund. The review offered useful recommendation to the construction program regarding the information controls that are currently being applied and will improve the effectiveness of the program. At the program level, recommendations from GSA's independent Office of the Inspector General (OIG), audits are also used to identify the need for improvements to the program. Since fiscal year 1997, the OIG has completed 9 evaluations of the new construction program. Progress in implementing OIG recommendations is tracked through GSA's management control system.

Evidence: Independent evaluations are of sufficient scope and quality to indicate that the program is effective and achieving results. The June 2005 Government Accountability Office (GAO) review of the new Courthouse construction program was submitted to congress as an independent evaluation of the program's ability to meet the needs of its customers and stakeholders (Courthouse Construction: Information on Project Cost and Size Changes Would Help to Enhance Oversight; Report Number: GAO-05-673). The GAO review cites the effectiveness of the new construction program in the areas of project management and communication as the foundation of the program's effectiveness. PBS contracted with the management-consulting firm of FMI to perform a partner survey of the construction program's professional partners in December of 2004. The FMI findings strongly support the findings of the Government Accountability Office in 2005. The FMI report indicated that the new construction program's relationship management and communication skills are the greatest asset to the program and should continue to serve the mission of GSA well. The survey conducted by FMI measured the satisfaction levels of GSA's industry partners (general contractors, construction managers and architects and engineers) recently contracted by the GSA to perform their respective tasks (in the last three years). The comprehensive study included more than 220 firms involved with 370 projects nationally. The General Services Administration's Inspector General performed an audit of prospectus funding as a management control for the PBS new construction program in February of 2005, report number A030266/P/4/R05004. The Inspector General, in conducting its comprehensive review of the program, sampled selected projects representative of the overall program. According to section 1), page 2 of the report, "the objective of this audit was to evaluate the controls in place to ensure that project costs do not exceed prospectus appropriations." This review found "the controls appeared effective in ensuring project costs do not exceed appropriations as all of the projects included in our review had new construction obligations less than cumulative authorized funding." The report also indicated that, "Controls that ensure project costs do not exceed prospectus appropriations appear to be effective," and as such further indicating the program is effective, efficient, and achieving results.

Were program goals achieved within budgeted costs and established schedules?

Explanation: The PBS construction program achieved its program goals within budgeted costs and established schedule. In FY05 PBS achieved the performance goal for LEED certification and achievement of operational requirements, and nearly achieved the FY04 performance goals for the delivery of construction projects on schedule, with a result of 80.2% and a target of 84%. This result is up from 68% in FY03. The new construction program achieved the 2003 efficiency target of 2950 days with a 2853 day result, and the 2004 target of 2900 days was almost achieved with an average of 2988 days - just under three months short in an eight year time frame. The new construction program also continues to reduce program cost escalations, making the FY04 goal, and is on target to make the FY05 cost escalation goal of 1%, after which time this goal will be discontinued in the PART - ahead of the 2010 target date. PBS will continue to measure cost escalation internally and include the measure in its performance budget as a mechanism to maintain this high level of performance.

Evidence: The new construction program achieved its program goals within budgeted costs and established schedules: 1) cycle time result in 2003 of 2853 days with a target of 2950; cycle time result of 2988 days, shy of the target by just over two months in an eight year period; 2) LEED registration result of 16% in 2003, 5% target; 3) LEED certification 2002 result of 16.7% target of 5%; 2004 result of 17%, target of 15%; 3) independent verification of operational requirements 2003 result of 17.3%, target of 10%; 2005 result of 21.9%, target of 20%, and just shy of the 2004 target of 15% with a 13.8% result. The on schedule result improved from 68% in FY2003 to 80.2% in FY04. The Quarterly Performance Review for FY04 illustrates the achievement of the annual performance target for the new construction's cost escalation goal. The FY04 target was achieved with an escalation rate of 1.56% and currently stands at 1% in FY05.