SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. Project Charter

Transcription

1 Project Charter The project charter is a document that authorizes the manager to apply organizational resources to project activities and to proceed with finalizing the project scope and developing the project plan. Project Title: Project Managers: Project Sponsors: Mandates: Regional Simulation Model (RSM) Development and Implementation Jack Maloy and Jayantha Obeysekera Ken Ammon (CERP) Jack Maloy Carlyn Kowalsky (Water Supply) Bob Howard (Operations Control) No Legal mandate. Level of Empowerment: This project charter has been initiated by the Regional Simulation Model (RSM) Development and Implementation Steering Committee and authorizes the project managers to expend District resources to complete a project plan for the RSM Development and Implementation Project. Approvals: Office of Counsel Project Sponsor Project Sponsor Project Sponsor Project Sponsor Other Approving Authority, if needed Date Date Date Date Date Date

2 Project Team: The Project Team structure consists of a Steering Committee consisting of representation from the major sponsors of the effort; two project managers (Jack Maloy responsible for high level resource management and Jayantha Obeysekera executing day to day project management) and three major teams executing implementation, development, and capability maturity model guideline implementation tasks. Pattie Fulton and Rich Sands (JMJV) are executing day to day project coordination activities. The Implementation Team is the largest team and will apply the RSM to a large portion of the South Florida Water Management District. The Kissimmee basin and sub-basins downstream of S-78 and S-80 will not be included in this implementation. The Development Team will provide code development support to the Implementation Team and will finalize the Hydrologic Simulation Engine (HSE) following peer review for distribution outside the District. The Capability Maturity Model (CMM) Team will ensure that code development is conducted in a standardized manner following specific guidelines. The JMJV is providing work order support of the Development Team in the conduct of peer review activities. The following provide details of the Project Team structure and team leaders: RSM Development and Implementation Overall Team Structure Page 2 of 21

3 SFRSM Implementation Team Sub-Team Leadership JMJV Development Work Order Support Team Structure Page 3 of 21

4 Project Management Oversight Team: Project Management oversight will be provided by the Steering Committee which meets as needed on the decision of the project managers. The Steering Committee consists of: Jack Maloy Chief Executive Consultant Ken Ammon CERP Carlyn Kowalsky Water Supply Bob Howard Operations Control Jayantha Obeysekera Office of Modeling Trevor Campbell IT Representative Dean Powell Watershed Management The steering committee will meet on an as needed basis to make major decisions and to provide guidance toward meeting client expectations. Project Location: The majority of work effort will be conducted by the Office of Modeling (OoM) at the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD). The OoM is primarily located on the north east side of Building Two at 3301 Gun Club Road, West Palm Beach, FL Nadine Meece is the primary administrative point of contact for the OoM and she can be reached at The JMJV support is primarily being provided out of the Jacobs Oakridge, TN Office located at 125 Broadway Avenue, Oak Ridge, TN Primary phone number for the Oakridge Office is Some travel to field locations may be necessary to ground truth model parameters and have been worked into the project schedule. Project Scope: The overall scope of the RSM Development and Implementation Project is to provide a tool to simulate the hydrology and manmade water control features of South Florida. The South Florida Regional Simulation Model (SFRSM) will be used to predict the intricate results of implementing physical and operational alternatives being considered to address changing water management priorities and issues. This model represents the next generation of integrated water management modeling and provides the ability to simulate the complexity of the South Florida hydrologic system and is necessary to support decision-making processes well into the future. One of the primary goals of this model is that it must be both flexible and adaptable in its application. With the expansive planned changes to the South Florida basins under Page 4 of 21

5 the CERP program and water supply plans, it is necessary to develop a model that is adaptable in its application. It is imperative that the cost of admission be lowered to allow for wider participation in the development and application of the hydrologic modeling in South Florida. It is desired to execute the implementation of this modeling effort in a manner that takes advantage of future software developments in modeling options and components. It is desirable to take advantage of this future componentbased modeling. The SFRSM will be an assembly of different components that can be swapped in and out as the model evolves. The following provides a list of the primary hydrologic processes that will be modeled in the SFRSM: Overland and Groundwater Flow Precipitation Evapotranspiration Infiltration Levee Seepage Canal and Structure Flow The SFRSM will also model hydraulic management activities to allow the simulation and assessment of environmental, urban and agriculture demand and flood control needs in the SFWMD system, and provide resolution of these needs through management actions. Project Components The Hydrologic Simulation Engine (HSE) simulates the hydrology in South Florida, including the canals, structures, levees and other barriers to flow in the C&SF Project. The Management Simulation Engine (MSE) simulates the management activities in South Florida, including the operation of the C&SF Project. The Graphical User Interface (GUI) provides a simple, easy to use tool for graphically setting up a SFRSM model and providing a mechanism to view results graphically. The Database (DB) provides a convenient storage and retrieval facility of SFRSM data. Project Development Plan The HSE coding has already been utilized during implementations currently underway for the Southern Everglades (Southern Everglades Model, SEM), the Arthur R. Marshall Page 5 of 21

6 Loxahatchee National Wildlife Refuge (LNWR), North Palm Beach County, Southwest Florida and South Miami-Dade. These applications are in various stages of completion. The limits of these sub-regional efforts are portrayed in the following image. The current plan is to take the lessons learned in these sub-regional activities and apply the RSM to a larger region for system-wide modeling. The South Florida Regional Simulation Model (SFRSM) will cover the domain of several of the previous applications, but will use a new grid and in many places a coarser mesh than the individual sub-regional applications. Publications Various publications are available to help define the Project Scope and can be located on the following website: A project execution specific web site is also under development at this time to facilitate the sharing of data, questions, concepts and status. Project Goals/Objectives: The overall mission is to apply the Regional Simulation Model to deliver the calibrated and verified South Florida Regional Simulation Model (SFRSM) by Page 6 of 21

7 December This model will include necessary regional level operations functionality to be used for a screening level analysis of alternatives. (*The MSE subteam will evaluate the extent of operations that can be incorporated by December, 2005 and provide a timeline for full implementation by 7/12/2004.) The December 2005 implementation of the SFRSM, is expected to provide the basis on which future system-wide modeling of management alternatives can be built. It is expected that the SFRSM will eventually replace the South Florida Water Management Model (SFWMM) as the primary tool for system-wide water resources modeling in South Florida. Advantages of the SFRSM over the SFWMM will include: Increased user friendliness, hence more easily applied and modified to simulate different management strategies. More modular, hence more easily updated and more scientifically defensible. The ability to model different areas with different levels of detail, either through a denser mesh or through different pseudo cell implementations or both. The model we deliver needs to be well-documented, easy to learn and easy to modify. Performance (model run time) should be considered. SFRSM mesh boundary for this project is defined to include C43 and C44 basins up to S79 and S80 structures, calibrating just for flows in C43 and C44 and keeping the discretization rather coarse, but the ultimate goal is to expand this project in future phases to include the entire SFWMD boundary. Flexibility will be worked into the model to allow for this future expansion. Page 7 of 21

8 Project schedule will be controlled within the P3e environment with weekly updating that occurs most through the Project Web Site. Development of a Project Web Site that assists individuals sharing of information to conduct their daily tasks; as well as allow project control functions to occur as easily as possible. To develop a QA/QC d hydrology, geophysical and hydraulic model domain database that will be moved to the CERP ZONE to make available to CERP PIR Teams in addition to being used in the SFRSM. Provide a model that will be used to phase out use of the South Florida Water Management Model (SFWMM a.k.a. 2X2) in the future. Justification: Although the SFWMM (2X2) has formed the backbone of alternative system-wide simulations for the CERP and the LEC Regional Water Supply Plans; implementation of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program (CERP) on an already extremely complex hydrologic system in South Florida is difficult with the SFWMM (2X2) because of its specific coding architecture. It is a rigid model that requires extensive adaptation in order to make major changes within it. Page 8 of 21

9 The hydrologic system in South Florida consists of a large number of complex components, some of which are best described in a distributed fashion, while others best described in a lumped manner. At best, the system has sparsely measured rainfall, evapotranspiration (ET) and flow data at a limited number of locations. The system is heavily managed with a set of rules that have been developed over decades. In many cases these rules have been coded into the SFWMM as they have been developed or implemented, resulting in a code organization that is less than systematic and only completely understood by one or a few individuals. Efficient implementation of CERP, Regional Water Supply Plans and Operational Planning requires simulating operational changes by many people in a scientifically defensible and repeatable manner. The SFRSM will provide additional modeling flexibility to handle the CERP and operational changes for other projects coming in the future because it: Is more modular; using pre-designed water bodies to convey overland, groundwater and canal flows and pre-designed water movers that can determine interaction between water bodies. Allows the choice of local hydrologic features (pseudocells) to handle ET, rainfall, unsaturated flows, etc. Has a flexible mesh that can provide more detail where needed Is more easily expandable to allow for the inclusion of new water bodies, movers and vertical solutions Will allow more modelers to fully understand how to perform simulations with the easier to use software. Deliverables: Planning Deliverables: Page 9 of 21

10 1. Planning materials that will be available on the Project Web Page: Sponsorship Agreement Letters Requirements Management and Change Control Procedure Use Case Analysis Process Peer Review Process Estimating Procedure Project Metrics Virtual Project Team Room Glossary of Project Terms Project Definition Report Deliverable Definition Document Project Quality Process and Plan Project Communication Process and Plan Project Configuration Management Process and Plan Project Budget Stakeholder Management Plan Project Team Training Plan Project Team Charter Team Infrastructure Test Plan Deployment and Training Plan Organizational Breakdown Structure Work Breakdown Structure Resource Management Plan Responsibility Assignment Matrix Major Milestone Timeline P3e Schedule Project Overview Project Processes Project Metrics Change Control Board Change Control Board Charter Project Review Board Charter Project Kickoff Materials 2. Project Management that will be available on the Project Web Page: Status reports Project communications Page 10 of 21

11 Meeting minutes Project schedule and costs 3. Analysis & Requirements: Detailed, baselined, traceable, numbered requirements for execution of project. 4. Standardization Code Development governed under CMM Data documentation standards Data Configuration Standards Data Change Control Procedure 5. Quality and Usability Model Quality and Usability Standards Development of User s Manuals 6. Availability and Accessibility Data, model and Accessibility and Availability Standards Availability of the model, data and supporting documentation in the CERP ZONE 7. Backup, Recovery and Archival Backup Procedure Archival Procedure Archival Plan 8. Storage Data storage capacity 9. Work Management Work Management Process Procedures for the collection, approval, prioritization, and assigning of work and for project collaboration and teaming 10. Outreach Governing Board Presentations User s Manuals 11. Training Requirements for user and help desk system documentation User and help desk training materials Page 11 of 21

12 Model Development Deliverables: 1. Design Develop a calibrated and verified RSM application [South Florida Regional Simulation Model (SFRSM)] by December This model will include necessary* regional level operations functionality to be used for a screening level analysis of alternatives. *The MSE subteam will evaluate the extent of operations that can be incorporated by 12/20095 and provide a timeline for full implementation by 7/12/ Development Calibration time period will be to cover wet, dry and average periods plus transitions in between, plus to make comparisons between SFWMM and SFRSM Verification period will be and , with the possibility of adding 2001 data to include the drought recovery. Multiple land use snapshots should be provided during the calibration period, but may not be possible due to time constraints Imposed flows will be used for calibration to define the physical constraints of the system The model we deliver needs to be well-documented, easy to learn and easy to modify. Performance (model run time) should be considered. We will use vertical datum NGVD 29, but will produce a plan by January 2006 for transition to NAVD 88. We will use English units instead of metric. GIS datasets will be developed in ArcGIS on local servers, but final datasets will be placed in the CERPzone. Standards for archival of model files and data and version control will be decided by the CMM team Standard platform for running the model will be LINUX, with GMS and ArcGIS tools in Windows used for mesh development and datafile preprocessing, respectively. SFRSM mesh boundary was set to include C43 and C44 basins up to S79 and S80 structures, calibrating just for flows in C43 and C44 and keeping the discretization rather coarse. HSE Validation will use HSE v.2.2.2, which is tagged and in CVS under CVSROOT /vol/hsm/cvsroot 3. Testing Updated Test Plan Test results User acceptance signoff

13 4. Deploy and Train RSM training will begin the week of May 10, 2004 and continue as needed/requested, beginning with theory, file setup (GMS, GIS, XML) and pseudocells Updated long term deployment and training plan will be developed Listing of users help staff Develop training tracking system Training and communication schedule phases 5. Close and Post Implementation Post implementation review report Preliminary Methodology: The two facets of this project (HSE Peer Review) and SFRSM Implementation will occur simultaneously; however the Development Team will provide code development support to the Implementation Team. The schedule of the Implementation Team will govern the conduct of the project and is addressed first in detail below. The last portion of this section addresses the preliminary methodology that will be utilized to control the HSE validation and peer review portion of the project. SFRSM Implementation The SFRSM Implementation Team will control the RSM implementation throughout, undertaking the integration, testing, calibration and verification in five primary stages which are generally portrayed in the timeline that follows. They will ensure that the various hydrologic simulation engine (HSE) and management simulation engine (MSE) components are incrementally tested. This team will be responsible for the overall integration of the SFRSM as it is built and then undertake calibration and verification in the latter stages of SFRSM implementation. A detailed schedule is available in the P3e schedule that is currently being updated following the Interactive Planning Session that was conducted on 18 May 2004.

14 Overview of RSM Implementation Major Tasks and Milestones Year Month Stage Hydologic Simulation Mesh developmen < follow up refinement > Geographic data Canal network & structures Time series data Implement pseudo cells phase 1 into HSE, test with mesh, geog data Document management capability needs < follow up refinement > HSE testing with level 1 controllers Conceptualize, design & test regional controller coordination (supervisors) < follow up refinement > Improve pseudo cells through calib Pseudo cell refinement Further testing, regional controllers Pseudo Cells for management simulation Management Simulation Put together management controller library - level 1 Test & learn RSM benchmarks Implement priority 1 controllers Assemble level 2 management controller library Implement supervisors onto initial calibration Finalize implementation of management features with simulation SFRSM integration, testing, calibration and verification Supervision & coordination Mesh,network & pseudo cell integration & testing Testing with controllers Initial calibration (imposed flow) Phase 2 calibration (simulated flow) Ongoing supervision and coordination Revised calibration Stage 1: Involves initial implementation work including definition of the model domain and collecting all the necessary geographic data for the model. A large portion of the network data and time series data will also be collected. Decisions will be made on the canal network density. Canal network, sub-basin and flow barrier information will be incorporated into the mesh which will be tested and refined with phase 1 pseudo cells in the HSE. The milestone that ends stage 1 is a refined (final) mesh. Stage 1 also includes documentation of SFRSM management capability needs and initial development of a controller library. This stage includes implementation of simple pseudo cells for uplands and wetlands. Stage 2: In this stage of implementation, the Priority 1 controllers (those needed for calibration) are implemented into the canal network. The time series and canal network data (including all canal properties) collection efforts are completed. The controller management library is completed and conceptualization, design and testing of regional controller coordination (supervisors) is continued. The milestone that ends stage 2 is combined HSE/MSE implementation of the SFRSM that is ready for calibration verification. This stage includes evaluation of sub-basin water budgets and implementation of complex pseudo cells where appropriate. Stage 3: In this stage, initial calibration is undertaken with refinement of the pseudo cells through the calibration process. The conceptualization, design and testing of regional controller coordination is completed during this stage. If necessary the development of pseudo cells to handle sub-basin water management will begin. The milestone that ends this stage is the completion of initial calibration. Page 14 of 21

15 Stage 4: During this stage, the regional management supervisors are implemented onto the initial calibration and further refinement of hydrologic pseudo cells occurs and implementation of sub-basin water management pseudo cells occurs. The milestone at the end of the stage is a fully calibrated version of the SFRSM. Stage 5: During this stage the management features beyond those that are needed for calibration are implemented. Management features similar to those in the SFWMM simulation of the 2000 existing condition will be implemented and 36 year simulation testing will be undertaken. As more management features are implemented in the long term simulation, calibration of the model will be revised. The milestone at the end of this stage will be an implemented SFRSM that can be run for 36 years that is fully calibrated. RSM Development The RSM Development portion of the project centers on the validation of coding of the HSE model and conducting a national level peer review. This work effort is primarily being executed with a work order that has been provided to the CERP JMJV and includes: finalizing documentation of the HSE model, performing technical review, coordination of peer reviews, and providing training for the RSM to expedite RSM utilization on the CERP projects, water supply and operations activities within the SFWMD. Minor code development will be provided if found necessary during testing and verification of the HSE components. Enhanced development of the graphical users interface (GUI) will also be undertaken. The following provides description of the task listing that will be used to control the RSM Development activities of this project: TASK 1: Work Plan Development The JMJV will develop a work plan that contains the details of the proposed work and methods that will be used to complete the work. An interactive planning session was conducted on 18 May 2004 was used to delineate project responsibilities, schedules and deliverables based on the developed work plan. Task 2: Completion of the HSE User s Manual The next task is to complete the existing User s manual for the HSE model. The goal of the task is to bring the User s manual up to a level that a contractor that has close association with SFWMD personnel will find useful in executing modeling without excessive questions. The manual will be edited, reorganized and expanded. Task 3: Testing And Verifying Accuracy of the HSE model Task three involves testing the selected version of HSE to ensure that the model correctly solves a wide Page 15 of 21

16 variety of problems. Detailed testing will be conducted for all objects present in the model. The examples used during testing will also be included in the HSE documentation. The goal of the task is to prepare the model for peer review by external agencies such as the Department of the Interior and others. Task 4: Review and Completion of Documentation of the RSM Graphical User Interface - Task four involves taking the existing work that has been done on the graphical user interface and enhance the package to a more usable tool. A new preprocessing system and enhancements to the post-processing system are expected work items under this task. Testing and expanding the documentation for the existing RSM graphical user interface and add literature covering any new enhancements is the primary effort of this task. The interface is a primary tool used to post-process RSM models and will be used in the future to perform auto-calibration and sensitivity analysis. The documentation will be useful for applications modelers and the RSM GUI will be a component covered during the RSM training sessions. Task 5: Review and completion Documentation of the HSE Pseudocell Manual This task involves the review of the existing Pseudocell manual and involves incorporation into the HSE User s guide. Additional content including examples and references are likely for this manual. Task 6: Coordinating a Peer Review of the HSE This task involves the identification, contacting and coordination of the activities of external agency peer reviewers for the HSE. The reviewers will be provided all needed materials including the model, manuals, and test cases. This work will commence once Tasks 2-5 are completed. The reviewers will be expected to comment on the HSE within the sixty (60) days after receipt of HSE peer review package (manuals, code, etc.). A report of findings will be produced under this task. The base work order does not address the funding necessary to engage the external reviewers. This funding will need to be addressed during the future anticipated modification to the work order. Task 7: Coordinating a peer review of the MSE theoretical basis This task involves the identification, contacting and coordinating the activities of peer reviewers for the MSE theoretical basis. The reviewers will be provided all needed materials for the review. The reviewers will be expected to comment on the theoretical basis being used for the MSE and to make suggestions for areas of improvements and alternative approaches. The contractor will prepare a report of findings. Due to uncertainties in the scope of work, pricing and funding mechanisms for these reviewers, cost estimation for the external reviewers is currently not included in the work order and will need to be addressed during the future anticipated modification to this work order. Business Areas Involved: The majority of the work currently identified will be conducted within the Office of Modeling; however support from other work units is necessary to finish the required Page 16 of 21

17 workload to meet the December 2005 deadline. There is a critical link of coordination between the Office of Modeling and the CERP Team, Water Supply and Operations since the SFRSM will provide modeling support to all three of these business areas upon completion. A series of summit meetings and Letters of Agreement will be produced to ensure model development allows for answering of critical design question in the CERP program, provides necessary support to the Operations staff in the long term and provides Water Supply with answers it expects from the modeling. The summit meetings and deadlines for production of the Letters of Agreement are found in the P3e schedule for the project. The USACE Jacksonville District is providing work effort support on a person by person basis, but is not taking a major role in the planning and execution of this project. It is anticipated that the IMC and TRT will play roles in the project exectution. Funding/Costs/Resources: This project will be funded by three sources which include the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Program (CERP), the SFWMD Operations Control Department and the SFWMD Water Supply Department. CERP will provide 50% of the funding with Operations Control and Water Supply providing 25% each of the remaining funding respectively. Labor will be charged the to the following codes with charging percentages checked monthly by the project control team and adjusted as needed to balance funding percentages. The Development and Implementation Teams have assigned personnel across the following accounts to help ensure correct percentages of funding. These codes are applicable only to FY04 and will change during the FY05 portion of the project. RSM Development Team Development Efforts P Implementation Efforts P SFRSM Implementation RSM Development P RSM Implementation (SFRSM/NSRSM) P RSM Implementation (Luis and Michelle) Dj06 (Ops) RSM Implementation (Lehar and Raul) Dj01 (WS) The following shows the financial and resource details of the work order that is currently executing with the JMJV. JM/JV RSM Development Project Work Order Support Resource and Cost Estimate Person Firm Description (Professional/Technical I) JMJV Estimated Hours Price Environmental Modeling Support 1614 $258,240 Page 17 of 21

18 (Professional/Technical II) (Professional/Technical III) (Designer/Technician I) Other Direct Costs JMJV JMJV JMJV Environmental Modeling Support 1178 $147,250 Environmental Modeling Support 1325 $125,875 Environmental Modeling Support 308 $24,640 Total Labor: 5748 $ 556, trips/knoxville/wpb JMJV Coordination Trips NA $16,800 8% of Other Direct Costs JMJV $1,344 Assumptions: TOTAL $574, The Domain of the SFRSM will span from Lake Okeechobee in the north to Florida Bay in the south. It will include the Lake Okeechobee Service area, the Caloosahatchee basin in the west, the St Lucie Basin in the east and areas south and east of Lake Okeechobee, namely the Everglades Agricultural Area, the Water Conservation Areas, the Lower East Coast, the Big Cypress National Preserve and Everglades National Park (unnumbered Figure on Page 7). 2. SFRSM mesh will cover the entire domain and include the area of the SFWMM gridded domain as well as other area including southwest ENP, C-43 (up to S- 79) and C-44 (up to S-80). The mesh resolution will not be uniform throughout the model domain. 3. The lake and service area will be simulated in an approach that will be decided during development of the model. 4. The SFRSM will use a time step that best balances stability in the model and run time amount. This decision will be made after careful consideration of a number of factors with the final time step being determined during model development. 5. SFRSM will be a region scale model and will not specifically model project scale design features. 6. SFRSM will not simulate flood events that require significantly small time-steps, and, hence will not be suited for FEMA flood impact studies. 7. SFRSM will simulate all primary and secondary canals 8. SFRSM will simulate the effects of major flow-barriers (e.g., levees, US-41, I-75). Page 18 of 21

19 9. SFRSM will be a single layer model and hence will simulate the surficial aquifer only. However, where possible, it will aggregate data from other layers. 10. SFRSM boundary will trace the coastlines, lake and sub-basin boundaries where possible. 11. SFRSM will be calibrated and validated for the same period as the SFWMM calibration and validation periods i.e., from 1981 to SFRSM will use climatic records from 1965 to 2000 when simulating the current (2000) base operations. 13. Development of a RSM application for the Natural System is assumed to be a separate effort and hence is not considered as a part of the scope of the SFRSM implementation. 14. The vertical datum standard for this project will be NGVD All input and output data sets will be created in English units. 16. SFRSM will use data from SFWMM input files and data sources where possible. Some SFWMM input files will be changed to accommodate SFRSM s higher resolution (e.g., topography) 17. The testing and development of graphical user interfaces and performance measures will be excluded from the scope of the SFRSM implementation project. 18. RSM instruction and training will be excluded from the scope of the SFRSM implementation project, but will be conducted under the greater RSM development project. Constraints: Lack of critical manpower in GIS skill base category. Limited participation by USACE during SFRSM model approach planning period. Training facilities. Limited room size and training computers. Page 19 of 21

20 Risks Optimal approach may be inconsistent with existing policies, procedures, standards of current technology, and/or infrastructure Organizations resistance to change Poor data collection, review, and documentation methodologies that result in uncertifiable data Public access to results (data may be inappropriately used or misinterpreted) CERP Project Managers may be expecting the silver bullet model that can answer all questions under the sun. Roles and Responsibilities: The project sponsor is responsible for: Communicating District objectives Overseeing cross-organizational participation Providing a focal point to resolve issues escalated from the management oversight and guidance to the project manager Tracks project at the major milestone level Obtains required project resource staffing Provides approvals to proceed from each phase end Approves project metrics The management oversight team is responsible for: Providing oversight and guidance to the project manager Approving policies, plans, standards and procedures, including the quality assurance (QA), implementation, risk management and performance measurement plans Approving, as required, changes in project scope Monitoring project progress and performance Providing a focal point to resolve issues escalated from the project manager The project manager is responsible for: The project's overall performance and success Approving policies, processes, and procedures developed by project team members Escalating to the management oversight team issues that cannot be resolved at the project level Single point of contact for the project and integrates all aspects of the project Page 20 of 21

21 Plans the project s technical and project management activities Manages the schedule, costs and specification (scope) constraints to project sponsor satisfaction Analyzes change requests, manages the scope and revises the baseline after obtaining CCB approval Maintains stakeholder, customer relations Establishes systems to document the project Establishes project plans and processes by which the project will be controlled Issues project status reports Ensures compatibility with other projects and plans The project team is responsible for: Developing strategies to deliver the project. Documenting as required, project plan elements Developing the project WBS. Developing detailed schedules. Developing resources estimates Page 21 of 21