Report from the Collaboration MICE Project Board (CMPB)

1. Report from the Collaboration MICE Project Board (CMPB) Norman McCubbin Director, Particle Physics Department MICE Oversight Committee July 2009

2. OLD Role of the Project Board • The Collaboration MICE Project Board (CMPB) monitors and controls • Progress against schedule • Financial progress • Risk • Scope change Fulfils the role of the “project board” as required by the STFC (exCCLRC) Corporate Project Management Handbook and the STFC (exPPARC) project management process. Official forum for frank, constructive discussion between MICE project and STFC, in both its funding and its operational role.

3. Changing the role of CMPB At the last (April) OsC and in several other discussions between STFC and MICE it was noted that: there was, in practice, considerable overlap between the PSAG and the CMPB; MICE lacked independent oversight of the project as a whole. (The OsC provides independent oversight, but its ToR are clearly and deliberately focussed on the UK.) In practice, the CMPB has been trying to cover both: Management, review and revision of schedule, costs and risk, AND Oversight of schedule, costs and risk. The normal practice, at least in particle physics, is that 1 is the responsibility of the internal project management whilst 2 is carried out by an external, independent body. Norman McCubbin 3

4. Membership of current CMPB • Alain Blondel, Geneva (Switzerland) • David Findlay, STFC (ISIS) • Dan Kaplan, Illinois Institute of Technology (USA) • Yoshitaka Kuno, Osaka (Japan) • Ken Long, Imperial College • Norman McCubbin, STFC (Chair) • Andy Nichols, STFC • Maurizio Bonesini, INFN Milan (Italy) • Mike Poole, STFC (ASTeC) • John Womersley, STFC • Mike Zisman, LBNL (USA) In attendance: • Charlotte Jamieson, STFC • Tony Medland, STFC Names in italics are members of MICE.

5. Towards a new MICE Project Board (MPB) • At the PSAG of 21st May we discussed Management and Oversight of MICE, and agreed a “direction of travel” based on a clear separation between “management” (slide 3, point 1) and “oversight” (slide 3, point 2). • A paper agreed by PSAG was submitted to the CMPB meeting of 5th June, and discussed further and agreed. • During the discussion it was noted that: • Current CMPB and PSAG were set up at start of MICE, under a different RC structure; • Over the next few years MICE requires major contributions from across the whole collaboration. • So it is not too surprising that the management and oversight needs some “tuning” at this point. • SPO (Swindon) agreed to draft ToR for the new MPB, and those ToR will be discussed at next CMPB (early August).

6. Towards a new MICE Project Board (MPB) (2) The basis of the new approach is that: “The collaboration must renew and refresh its focus on the first role (slide 3, point 1), and the CMPB should be reconstituted with membership that is independent of the collaboration to take on the second role.” (slide 3, point 2). The new MPB will be an STFC-organised committee with likely membership: Chair; One cross-member from each of UK OsC and MUTAC; Up to 2 experts on RF, superconducting magnets and accelerator systems; One expert on project management; STFC MICE Project Officer (ex-officio); Representative of STFC as Host Laboratory (ex-officio). The MPB should meet at least every 6 months, and report to both the STFC Project Sponsor (Janet Seed) and the international Funding Agencies Committee (FAC). Norman McCubbin 6

7. Towards the new MPB • Aim is to have the new MPB functioning in time for the next FAC. • Comments please.