J-0200000-04 Sample Partnering Agreement.pdf

Partnering Agreement Base Operations Support Services Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Section I. Partnering Agreement

As stated in the contract, partnering will be used for the duration of performance of the Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida and outlying areas, Base Operations Support Service contract. The Partnering Agreement complements the Performance Appraisal Plan (PAP) generated by Naval Facilities Engineering Systems Command Southeast (NAVFAC SE) to provide outstanding mission support of all stakeholders.

Section II. Stakeholder Leadership Commitment Name Organization Signature

Section III. Partnering

Partnering is an effective process to build a collaborative, successful outcome-focused team. It is a structured process by which multiple key stakeholders with shared interests function as a high-performing team to achieve project success with mutual benefits to all. It requires empowering team members to solve problems at the lowest possible organizational level. A successful partnering arrangement includes:

Active participation of key stakeholders who impact the success of the project;

Alignment of common goals, objectives and agreement on how the team will work together

Establishes shared accountability for project outcomes;

Improves effectiveness and efficiency by extending relationships beyond contracts and removes organizational impediments to communication;

Requires open communication and active listening, especially on challenges to progress;

Results in acceptance by all parties to maintain and improve the partnering process;

Demonstrates a personal commitment by every team member;

Establishes an expedited process for issue identification and resolution.

Partnering is not a waiver of a party’s contractual rights and responsibilities, but rather a recognition and respect of those rights and responsibilities and a willingness to work together to help all stakeholders fulfill them. The Partnering approach works to identify issues and drive action. Partnering will not erase every issue on a project, but rather provides a structure to help anticipate and mitigate issues proactively.

Projects that fully engage in partnering -- driven by stakeholder leadership support -- result in a higher degree of successful outcomes for all stakeholders, along with fewer claims, better financial results, greater connection to the mission, no surprises, higher performance evaluations, and enhanced experience for all team members.

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Section IV. Key Project Stakeholde

The following stakeholders have significant responsibilities in the success of Jacksonville BOS and will participate actively in partnering:

Commander, Navy Region Southeast Commander/Directors, Major Commands PWD Jacksonville Naval Facilities Engineering Command Southeast (NAVFAC SE) ContractorExecutive Staff/Contractor

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Quarterly Partnering Sessions

Section V. Partnering Process Elements

Partnering is not an event, but a process. It begins at project award with the identification of integral stakeholders, a commitment from stakeholder leadership, and planning for periodic execution. Throughout the life of the project, facilitated partnering sessions will be conducted to identify critical issues and the associated actions and team members required to resolve those issues in a timely manner. The following graphic and table represent a simplified illustration of the process and meeting frequency.

Regularly Scheduled Partnering Meetings

Partnering Session Frequency

Partnering Planning Session(s) Once / Additional Meetings As Needed

Initial Leadership Alignment / Partnering Kick-Off Once

Recurring Facilitated Partnering / Team Performance Evaluations Quarterly

Specific Issue Based Partnering Session (e.g. Commissions Support) As Needed

Performance Period Debrief End of each Period

Project Governance Structure

Leadership

Alignment

Session

Project Kick-Off

Meeting

Joint Project

Goals / Charter

Team Performance Evaluation Surveys

Executive Summary Dashboards

Quarterly partnering Sessions

Leadership Action Item Management

Project Award

Alignment / Kick-Off

Partnering and Planning

Performance Period Start

Performance Period Debrief

Base Operations Support Service

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Section VI. Project Governance Structure

NAVFAC has established a three-tiered governance structure to provide effective communication, accountability, visibility and transparency, understanding, timely decision-making, and issue identification and resolution at the appropriate levels. As a component of the PAP, the governance provides the structure for decision-making and information flow that is incorporated throughout the project

The governance tiers will identify and resolve issues quickly at the lowest appropriate level. When an issue cannot be resolved in a timely fashion, it will quickly be escalated up to the next leadership level for resolution with no or minimal impact to the project. To ensure continuity, the ELT will include the senior leader from each stakeholder group from the SLT, and the SLT will include the senior leader from each stakeholder group from the Project Leadership Team (PLT). This governance structure will be incorporated into the partnering agreement and signed off at the flag level for each of the key stakeholder groups: CNRSE, C4F, and NAVFAC. The following are the leadership tiers:

1. Executive Leadership Team (ELT)

Composed of senior executive leaders and principals from all stakeholders including the senior leader from the ELT. This team is responsible to address and solve significant issues that cannot be solved by the lower governance teams.

2. Senior Leadership Team (SLT)

Composed of stakeholder senior leaders. This team is responsible and accountable to make decisions and apply resources to solve problems that rise above the typical day-to-day management of the project. To ensure continuity of communication and briefing details, one individual from each stakeholder team will be a member of the SLT and advisor to the ELT.

3. Project Leadership Teams (PLT)

The working level teams assigned to each major project component. This is the level where the typical day-to-day project management and construction efforts are performed. To ensure continuity of communication and briefing details, one individual from each stakeholder team will be a member of the PLT and advisor to the SLT.

Identification of the tier participants is the responsibility of SLT leadership and will be determined in the early stages of the project. All stakeholders agree to not only have the correct individuals identified, but also to ensure they are actively participating in the ELT, SLT and PLT’s for a successful project outcome. The SLT will also facilitate the development of stakeholder responsibilities, layered decision-making and timeliness/response times needed for each tier to operate in the most effective manner.

All stakeholder entities are responsible to ensure they have properly staffed their teams. The PLT will openly discuss staffing needs and shortcomings at their weekly meetings. If the necessary adjustments cannot be made by the PLT, then staffing concerns will be elevated to the SLT for resolution. Efficiency discussions may include co-location, member(s) of the design team on site, etc.

The Government (NAVFAC) team includes dedicated on-site Facility Service Contract Manager (FSCM) / Contracting Officer Representative (COR), Acquisition Staff, and, Engineering Technicians and Performance Assessment Representatives (PAR) who are assigned to and focused solely on this Contract. The on-site Public Works Department team maintains reach-back capabilities to NAVFAC Southeast as needed to resolve/expedite proposed changes and contract modifications that may impact the critical operations. On-site FSCM and Acquisition staff will be leveraged to the maximum extent possible to facilitate issue resolution, contract modifications, and performance assessment. All stakeholders will strive to limit turnover of key personnel as much as possible to maintain synergy, corporate knowledge, and consistency in team membership.

sen.yu Cross-Out

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Governance Teams Roles and Responsibilities Governance Level Members Role in the

Governance Level Meeting Frequency

Executive Leadership Team

(ELT)

Voting Members Commander Navy Region SE Commander, C4F Commander NAVFAC LANT CEO, Contractor

Resolve major issues o Change orders

Modifications w/ cost above $1M / critical mission impact

Forward looking to anticipate and plan for potential issues

Engagement with State / Federal regulators as needed

Engagement for any lost time safety incidence

Quarterly

Ad hoc as required

Senior Leadership Team (SLT)

Voting Members

NAVSTA CO

NAVFAC SE CO

CoS, C4F Contractor

Resolve escalated issues o Change orders w/ cost above $1M Ensure project is managed appropriately through PAP, risk registers, etc.

Develop efficient processes and incentivize stakeholders to make continuous improvements

Seek opportunities to better the project and ensure mission success

Monthly

Ad hoc as required

Project Leadership Team (PLT)

Voting Members

PWO

ENG, C4F

VP, BOS Mission

Support, Contractor

Advisors

FEAD

Contracting, NAVFAC SE

FSCM/ COR PWD

PM, Contractor

Manage project Identify and resolve critical issues Manage onsite resources Identify risks and develop mitigations Elevate issues as necessary to ensure minimal delays to resolution

Weekly

Ad hoc as required sen.yu Cross-Out

Base Operations Support Services

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

The main function of the governance tiers is to identify and resolve issues quickly and at the lowest appropriate level. When an issue cannot be resolved in a timely fashion, it will quickly be escalated up to the next leadership level for resolution and so forth until the issue is resolved with minimal impact to the project. The tiered structure avoids stakeholder “stove-piping,” which occurs when a stakeholder organization involved with a particular issue develops its own interpretation without other stakeholder involvement and delays or complicates the solution. The same process allows for risks and opportunities to better the project to be identified at the lowest level and escalate quickly for review and decision-making.

Early in the project, the PLT and SLT will determine how the team will operate most effectively by setting performance goals, developing processes to achieve these goals, and how frequently they will be measured.

These agreed-to processes must be well documented, communicated and understood by all stakeholder members and be included in on-boarding material for new team members. This effort will be accomplished through meeting minutes and other communication formats determined to be most effective by the PLT. Agreed to goals will be briefed to the SLT and ELT.

Processes (Issues and Commitments) developed at the initial partnering session may include, but are not limited to the following:

Topic 1

- Issue: Effective and timely proposal process

- Commitments:

The team will establish an agreed upon reporting matrix and submittal workflow by

DD MMM YY.

As a business rule, the team will attempt to resolve issues related to submittals and Key-personnel in- person or over the phone and document outcomes via e-mail and/or correspondence. Issues unable to be resolved in this manner will be deferred to focused meetings.

Submittals requiring Contracting Officer approval only will be processed within 5 working days; those requiring NAVFAC SE approval will be processed within 10 working days.

Topic 2

- Issue: Effective site logistics

- Commitments:

PWD and Contractor teams will engage in weekly project-level coordination meetings with NGSB and tenant command stakeholders to forecast and coordinate logistics support

PWD will invite Contractor representatives to the standing weekly Project Leadership Team (PLT) meeting beginning DD MMM YY

Topic 3

- Issue: Effective risk management process

- Commitments:

PWD and Contractor will combine risk registers to develop and maintain an inclusive risk register as a basis for performance risk planning

Contractor will provide their risk register with PWD for incorporation into the project risk management plan

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Topic 4

- Issue: Effective and coordinated support

- Commitments:

The team will a feedback process early and maintain progress as a focus area throughout the contract

Goals, timelines of responses based on urgency, processes for rejected submissions and opportunities for over-the-shoulder reviews should be included. Impacts to cost and schedule should be clearly, concisely, and quickly communicated. Throughout the duration of the contract, stakeholders are incentivized to continuously improve processes and seek opportunities that provide greater efficiency, are more effective, and improve all stakeholder teamwork and morale.

Section VII. Alignment of Project Goals

Alignment of stakeholder goals and objectives is a critical part of the partnering process. The purpose is to involve each stakeholder entity into the process so they feel invested in the project and their needs and concerns, possibly articulated as goals and objectives, are communicated and understood by other project stakeholders so as to avoid surprise objections later. Stakeholder goals and objective may change during the life cycle of the project and should be reassessed regularly.

Leadership Alignment Session Initial stakeholder leadership alignment occurred during the initial formal partnering session. During this session, project stakeholders identified and determined the following:

Organizational Priorities – on time or early completion of operations support requirements Key Risks & Concerns – delay due to unforeseen conditions or failure to address and elevate potential issues early “Hidden Forces” – potential impacts of factors outside of the project team’s control and/or inherent to the region and base such as destructive weather, national security requirements, and COVID-19 impacts Expectations – leaders at all levels of the governance structure will work together and meet regularly to facilitate project success and “buy back” schedule opportunities. Team members must not hesitate to elevate issues to ensure the project remains on track

Key Issues / Critical Focus Areas – schedule management, risk management, understanding and exercising limits of authority, optimizing use of available tools and resources, and project management planning

The outcomes of this discussion will help project key content for the charter and Team Performance Evaluation surveys.

Project Goals

At the initial partnering session, the project team established the following collective goals:

Schedule – On time delivery of maintenance and operations support.

Quality – Certifications attained the first time. No Quality Assurance directed rework. 85% of submittals accepted the first time and 100% the second time, and no performance impacts due to submittals Safety – Develop a culture of safety that results in zero injuries. No one gets hurt today.

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Security – No reportable security violations. No impacts to schedule due to security. No access rejections due to process misses.

Teamwork – Exceptional CPARS rating. Team scores at 9.5 or higher on the World Class chart (see Section VIII).

During the initial partnering session the larger project team discussed and established:

Project Mission Organizational Understanding Outline of Project Goals Critical Issue identification Teambuilding

Charter The charter is a guide for cooperation, a physical symbol of the project stakeholders' commitment to work together as a team for a successful outcome. The charter does not change the terms of the project participants' contracts and is not a contract in itself. The project charter is intended to:

Define Project Mission Articulate what Success “Looks Like” Outline Joint Project Goals Set Targets

Each stakeholder entity and individual member will sign the charter to show their commitment to the partnering process and working together for success. The charter will be reviewed regularly to identify any problem areas, with the goal of maintaining all parties' commitment to the partnering process and to make sure that an adversarial relationship has not started to build. The Charter is attached to the end of the Partnering Agreement.

Section VIII. Measure Stakeholder Team Performance & Feedback

Team Performance Evaluations The Team Performance Evaluation (TPE) is a 360-degree feedback tool used to periodically review how the team is functioning together. It primarily assesses the strengths and areas for improvement of stakeholder entities in team performance and behaviors. Additionally, it is an effective tool to reveal critical issues that have not been communicated. The key to a successful TPE deployment is:

Independent of stakeholder team: it must be administrated by the Partnering Facilitator, Confidentiality: allows participants freedom to constructively communicate issues and concerns without fear of ramifications;

Honest Assessment: stakeholders cannot evaluate themselves, only the other stakeholder entities;

Commitment: stakeholders must commit to actively participate in completing the TPE and participating in the TPE discussion meeting.

Transparency: all scores and comments will be provided for review and discussion.

TPE's will occur every month via online partnering survey for early identification of critical issues and relationship difficulties between stakeholders. The purpose is to uncover concerns that are lurking below the surface before they become significant challenges.

The partnering survey assesses team member perspective on progress based on the charter, goals, and objectives; and includes an individual rating of the team’s overall performance based on a 0-10 scale detailed in the “From Good to World Class” matrix below:

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Partnering survey results will be collected by the project Partnering Facilitation Team and shared with project leadership for reference and use during monthly informal partnering discussions. Survey data will be compiled quarterly to inform recurring facilitated partnering sessions. The Partnering Facilitation Team will collect and this data and prepare a packet for the facilitated discussion to include:

High-level summary Compiled scores All comments collected

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Quarterly facilitated partnering sessions will be structured as follows:

A 2-3 hour facilitated discussion will focus on the areas where partnering survey results indicate concerns and capture specific action Items with issue leads, assisting team members, and dates for completion. An Action Items Report will be distributed to the stakeholder group within five (5) business days. Future Partnering Survey Review Meetings will include a review of the previous action items to capture updates and issue closure.

The partnering survey process and review meetings are a stand-alone function separate from PLT, SLT, ELT and regular project meetings. Diluting this effective tool will result is subpar results.

Partnering Quarterly Check-in:

1. Team Performance Evaluation Questions

Questions are created from charter, goals, hidden Issues

Administered monthly by the Partnering Facilitation Team

2. Advance Planning (2 weeks prior to session)

Meeting attendee list, venue & logistics finalized

3. Session Preparation (In week prior to session)

Reminder Sent to Recipients

Survey results compiled and report developed

4. Quarterly Partnering Session:

Survey results reviewed in Quarterly Check-in

Action Items developed to respond

Survey adjusted as necessary

5. Follow-up (In Week Following Session)

Action items generated in session are distributed to the team for completion

Section IX. Metrics and Communication

The project stakeholder team will utilize metrics to communicate Key Performance Indicators (KPI's) and risk and use this information to discuss status, areas that need stakeholder support, and seek opportunities to better the project. SLT members will be responsible to determine the KPI's most helpful to achieve successful delivery.

Executive Summary Dashboard A high-level project metric dashboard will be developed to communicate project metrics on a monthly basis.

Information will include:

Key Milestone Dates Key Position and Submittals Safety Statistics Performance Metrics Non-Compliance Notices Manpower Trend Reports Proposal Processing Time Consolidated Risk Register Monthly Partnering Survey Trends

Consolidated Risk Register A risk register is a tool used to identify project risks encompassing all stakeholders - not just issues - and can include direct and indirect risks, immediate and long-term risks, organizational and personnel risks, funding and approving risks, regulatory compliance, etc. To best mitigate risks that have the potential to negatively impact intended outcomes, it is important to identify them, develop mitigation plans, assign responsible stakeholder(s), review and manage them regularly. The PLT shall regularly review/manage/update the consolidated project risk register based upon input from the SLT and ELT. A briefing to include the addition and reduction of risks will be prepared for the SLT monthly and ELT quarterly, and reviewed during follow-on Partnering meetings.

(Initial Project Risk Register and to be confirmed during initial partnering session)

Naval Air Station Jacksonville, Florida

Section X: Identify Issues and Take Action

Quarterly Partnering Sessions The following are key components of the quarterly partnering sessions:

Project status update "Thanks and Kudos" to recognize good work done to-date Review and validation of project goals Identify critical issues to address Partnering survey results review

Review + update action items from previous sessions Develop leadership action items

Leadership Action Item Management The Action Items List of critical issues will be discussed at each partnering session to review action items identified at the prior meeting to close ‘as completed,’ determine additional steps needed to resolve the issue, or escalate it to a higher level. The following information will be captured on the Action Items List:

Capture actions that work to resolve critical issues Assign point person Set resolution date

Within a week after the Quarterly Partnering Meeting, the Facilitator will update and distribute the action items generated during the session to the team for completion.

Opportunities for Improved Performance Throughout the project, all stakeholders - entities and individuals - are encouraged to identify areas of improvement to processes, communication, safety, teamwork, morale, etc. The team is also incentivized to seek opportunities to improve the project schedule and to lessen the impact on follow-on work after construction delivery. These proposals should be discussed within the ELT and SLT leadership and include cost and schedule impacts.

Section XI: Debrief Session

At the conclusion of each phase of the project, the Partnering Facilitator will lead a project debrief discussion.

Topics discussed include:

Review project performance Analyze decisions and outcomes Self-identification of top areas of improvement Constructive 360° feedback Identification of top areas for future situational improvement

The purpose of the debrief session is to facilitate learning and improve how team members respond to future situations.