Alameda County’s General Services Agency Too Often Fails at Capital Project Management Executive Summary Alameda

Conclusions 1

• CL1 Page 11
  Our investigation found that high priority capital projects often moved slowly when GSA held the lead role. The grand jury identified staff retention and training, improved project planning, communication and coordination, and management’s attention to clients’ needs as the most important steps GSA must take to improve its capital project management and delivery. The grand jury heard from witnesses that GSA’s upper management must be more engaged; they should be front and center when explaining important delays or significant cost overruns to client departments or when key project manager turnover occurs. Such developments can be huge setbacks for capital projects, and clients need the assurance that GSA cares, understands, and possesses the capability to fix them. When staff turnover or increased workload threatens GSA's ability to deliver quality services, management needs to acknowledge those complications, inform client departments, and work creatively to find alternatives solutions, such as contracting with outside project management firms. GSA must also be more disciplined and transparent in communicating the status of its capital projects. One technique is to share with clients a weekly GSA report card on all active capital projects listing next steps, key milestones, responsible parties, and deadlines. Sometimes the reason for a client’s dissatisfaction is a lack of understanding of the planning, design, bidding, or award policies and procedures. Finally, GSA must lead with more robust planning for the county’s infrastructure with the guidance of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors. This would help the General Services Agency better manage current projects and anticipate future workloads and secure the necessary resources.

No Responses Found 1

Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.