Forward thinking
-
News
- Promax V2 Launched
25 January 2012 - Best Practices For Portfolio Management
23 January 2012 - Structured Prioritization Approach for Maximizing the Benefits of Programmatic Investments
13 October 2011 - Across The Pond Portal Launched
28 September 2011 - Marymount University using Promax
06 September 2011
Categories
Archives
- Promax V2 Launched
Best Practices For Portfolio Management
23 January 2012
Prioritization Process
The USDoE Environmental Management Program Summary has an on our prioritization methodology (see Downloads).
A rigorous prioritization process has been developed for the selection of projects for the EM AR&TD Program portfolio. This prioritization process considers the benefit of developing and deploying the technology, the cost of development, the feasibility for achieving the benefit, and the sites that will benefit. The technologies are assessed from a systems perspective, using realistic assumptions and considering the expectations for maturing technologies and the economics of AR&TD investments.
OTID has adapted a prioritization process that has been used effectively in the United Kingdom for systematically identifying and evaluating options to help solve complex problems with clarity and confidence. The process, known as the Cogentus Framework, is particularly effective where there is a high level of stakeholder interest and where there are conflicting requirements that need to be balanced such as in the EM cleanup and closure program. The key benefits of the Cogentus Framework are that it incorporates consistency and rigor is transparent and auditable incorporates stakeholder input and ownership, and is structured and comprehensive.
The prioritization effort collected information on a wide range of technology needs in waste processing, groundwater and soil remediation, nuclear materials and D&D from across the complex. Information was collected on 125 needs in total. In order to address these technology needs in a more efficient manner, they were analyzed and consolidated into 30 program elements. The combination of the individual needs’ cost and benefits were calculated and entered into the prioritization models for assessment. The assessment reviewed the benefit profiles predicted for each program element, the amount being spent to realize those benefits, and the risks of not delivering the need. The balance of the program was also analyzed to ensure there was an acceptable mix of DOE Sites so the key drivers were adequately addressed. Finally, future investment requirements were considered such that if the program was approved, the future mortgage would be understood.