You are here: Home Ideas Recover Act Project Information We Can Trust
 

Jump into the discussion

Here's a question to get you started:

What do you consider to be the most exciting upcoming technology or system in the field of managing, aggregating, and visualizing diverse types of data?

Recover Act Project Information We Can Trust

idea

What is the idea?

Mandate the use of a construction project management system by all recipients of Recovery Act infrastructure related funds. This ensures the information reported to Recovery.gov isn’t just project “information” but information we can all trust.

Why is it important?

Construction project management systems are forward facing “systems of record” which provide the scope, schedule and budget details required to run a portfolio of infrastructure related projects.

The systems include standard, configurable reports providing transparency so all fund beneficiaries are known clearly, accurately and immediately upon contract award. They can track any goals or targets desired including jobs created per project and provide program and project status reports upon request or to public websites such as Recovery.gov.

Construction project management systems protect the validity of the information they manage through security and audible activity logs so every bit of information can be tracked and verified before it’s reported on. After all, most organizations managing large construction projects use these systems today for business critical decisions and compliance reporting. In fact, this is technology which the federal government already owns and just needs wider implementation.

There are many excellent ideas on this site which address the presentation and communication of information, but the most critical component to the Recovery Act program is transparency and accountability of our tax dollars being allocated, committed and spent and the associated results. Implementing a construction project management system enforces procedures and processes associated with contracting, change management, invoicing, competitive bids and field reporting so consumers of Recovery.gov information can trust the information on the site.

Submitted by mkrichman from Meridian Systems (Other) on Apr 27, 2009

This idea is now closed to further comments.

Current number of stars: 3
based on 19 votes
Tags:

5 Comments

Dialogue catalyst comment

I agree that such an approach would provide useful information.  I have two questions regarding such an approach:

1. How would this apply to grant and loan recipients, or recipients of contracts for materials?  While it applies to construction projects it may not be that it can be applied more broadly?

2. How can reporting burden be minimized with this approach especially for the non-construction community?  While it is important to collect necessary information, the reporting burden needs to be as minimal as possible while gathering the data needed for true transparency. 

 

Comment from BHAI on Apr 27, 2009
Member comment

I agree completely. The transparancy and accountability requirments stipulated in the ARRA also provides an ideal labratory for proving the theory behind  Industrializing the Residential Construction Site.  Moreover an innovative software solution originally, designed to help Long Term Recovery Organizations rebuild New Orleans is available to help Community Development Corporations scale their organizations to meet the need immediately. www.RebuildingManagement.com

Comment from RebuildingMgmt at Rebuilding Management, LLC on Apr 27, 2009
Member comment

I agree with this idea entirely.  We can publish information in well thought out reports and graphics all day, but if the data is not coming from reliable sources and systems, then the reports lose value.

Thinking about the applicability of such systems to recovery act recipients, I beleive many project management systems include full modules for budget management and contract management.  A project does not need to be exclusive to construction, but any project or program of collective work with a defined scope and timeline.

I think the comment about reporting burden is important.  The recent OMB guidance released at the beginning of April noted a new FAR clause that will require first and second tier recipients to report on obligations, jobs etc.  Project management systems will certainly make this easier, but beyond that, I beleive the real answer for releaving such burden lies in other ideas on this site.  I saw an idea for XML webservices, which would allow both submission a retrieval of reported information via webservices.  Some existing project management systems support this technology and would releive the burden to recovery act fund recipients by automating the submission of data, meanshile the systems, as well as access to the webservices can be secured through appropriate security protocols.

Comment from jposkie at Meridian Systems on Apr 27, 2009
Member comment

very good points.  i agree.

Comment from gabriellemv2001 at Meridian on Apr 28, 2009
Member comment

I think this is key to pretty much every idea that's listed here. As I learned from http://stimuluswatch.org/ people will use every 'interpretation' possible to justify their requests or accounting.

If the US Gov. can't ensure consistency in proposals then I think it's laughable that they mandate business do so. And if the data's not consistent we'll end up comparing apples to oranges and not knowing it.

I for one believe that much of our political haggling it due to this type of uncertainty and solving it will build the trust we all need.

Comment from wjhuie on Apr 28, 2009