1 / 16

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

Benchmarking ANL Procurement (where do we stack up??). ANL PROCUREMENT. MISSION

percy
Download Presentation

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

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

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

  2. ANL PROCUREMENT MISSION 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

  3. 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.

  4. ANL Procurement TrendsFY 1995-2002 * * * * = Data Not Maintained

  5. 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

  6. 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

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. Acquisition Support(Procurement lead-time) Days ANL procurement on average processes procurement requirements in less than ½ the time as the CAPS benchmarks and DOE/BSC average

  10. 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%

  11. Effective Supplier Management(Percent of on-time deliveries – JIT system) ANL On-time delivery performance for exceeds the CAPS/DOE average for JIT by 4.4%

  12. Effective Internal Controls(Percent of compliance) ANL Procurement compliance performance exceeds DOE/BSC average by 4.0%

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

  14. Procurement Head Count(Procurement personal as % of Laboratory head count) 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

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

More Related