Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Benchmarking ANL Procurement (where do we stack up??)

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Benchmarking ANL Procurement (where do we stack up??)"— Presentation transcript:

1 Benchmarking ANL Procurement (where do we stack up??)
HI- intro

To provide business services to support accomplishment of the Laboratory’s programmatic goals and objectives, within the limitations of the Prime Contract, applicable laws and executive orders, and University of Chicago requirements This is the mission as we see it

3 From August 2002 Customer Service Survey
Benchmarking is the search for best practices that lead to superior performance. In general, through looking outward, we can learn from others and achieve quantum leaps in performance that otherwise could take years to achieve through internal incremental improvements. Benchmarking is the process of continuously comparing and measuring an organization against the business leaders everywhere in the world in order to gain information which will help the organization take action to improve its performance. However, it is imperative that first we understand our own processes and practices. Only then can they be quantified to show their effects, compared to the best, and then changed to achieve greater overall effectiveness. Benchmarking has two aspects – first for data collection –data for comparable organizations, second, comparison for concepts We do both

4 ANL PROCUREMENT STRATEGY To change and improve the present system’s culture, management systems, and line processes consistent with the principles of Quality Management, in order to establish and maintain: a customer focus, a sense of urgency, continuous process improvement, with an emphasis on results. This is our concept of operations-what is our long range goal

5 ANL Procurement Trends FY 1995-2002
* This, although busy, shows our movement towards a goal – lower costs, less people, improved customer satisfaction * * * = Data Not Maintained

6 Benchmarking ANL Procurement (sources of data)
CAPS/DOE – The Center for Advanced Purchasing Studies “DOE Contractors Benchmarking Report” – 22 DOE contractors surveyed, FY2000 data, updated with FY2001 data (where available) CAPS/DEF - The Center for Advanced Purchasing Studies “Aerospace/Defense Industry Benchmarking Report” – 38 contractors surveyed 1999, updated with October 2001 data (where available) DOE-BSC – “FY 2001 Contractor Balanced Scorecard Results” –FY2001 data – 32 DOE contractors reporting All Comparisons with actual FY2002 Procurement Data The data for benchmarking shown here deals with comparable organizations based on regulatory requirements

7 Benchmarking ANL Procurement (data used in this presentation)
ANL Human Resources (September 30, 2002) Employees 4850 FTE’s ANL Budget Office (September 30, 2002) Laboratory Receipts $545,740,249 Procurement Statistics Dollars $184,700,000 Employees 55.5 FTEs Data self explanatory

8 Procurement vs. Laboratory Funding (Procurement costs as a % of Laboratory funding)
ANL Procurement costs as a % of Laboratory funding are comparable to the DOE Contractor average, and 20% less than the DOD Contractor average

9 Optimum Cost of Procurement (Procurement costs as % of obligations)
The cost of ANL Procurement as a percent of obligated dollars is in line with other DOE Contractors and about 2/3rds the cost of DOD Contractors

10 Acquisition Support (Procurement lead-time)
Days Awards Under $100K – 4.6 days, Over $100K 31.2 days Customer Service Awards 1.7 days ANL procurement on average processes procurement requirements in less than ½ the time as the CAPS benchmarks and DOE/BSC average

11 Effective Supplier Management (Percent of on-time deliveries)
ANL On-time delivery exceeds the DOE/BSC average by 5.6%, and CAPS/DOE-DEF by 10%-12%

12 Effective Supplier Management (Percent of on-time deliveries – JIT system)
AMOS Contract requirements call for 48 hour delivery on “stock” items and 10 day delivery on “non-stock” items. For FY2002 – Through July 2002 all AMOS items are averaging 2.9 days from order to receipt ANL On-time delivery performance for exceeds the CAPS/DOE average for JIT by 4.4%

13 Effective Internal Controls (Percent of compliance)
These types of efforts keep the DOE sub-contract review threshold at the $10,000, level. Other Doe Contractor facilities are still at the $1,000, threshold level for DOE approval ANL Procurement compliance performance exceeds DOE/BSC average by 4.0%

14 Customer Satisfaction (Percent of satisfied customers)
ANL Procurement customer performance exceeds DOE/BSC average by 7%

15 Procurement Head Count (Procurement personal as % of Laboratory head count)
Includes East and West Procurement The current head count of Procurement employees is 26.0% less than the CAPS/DOE benchmarking average of 1.54 Procurement employees per 100 DOE Contractor employees, and less than 1/3 the benchmarking average of 3.72 Procurement employees per 100 DOD Contractor Employees

16 % of Costs Returned to ANL
Millions $ ANL Procurement Department has negotiated cost savings in excess of total Procurement costs for FY2002 by 120%

Download ppt "Benchmarking ANL Procurement (where do we stack up??)"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google