Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

6 NIH Current Approach to Strategic Planning for the Bethesda Campus Buildings and Facilities
Pages 72-95

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 72...
... to ensure that scientific discoveries advance health and that NIH upholds its scientific stewardship responsibilities. The 2016-2020 research Strategic Plan has the opportunity to serve as the primary catalyst in the development of Bethesda Campus capital facilities planning.
From page 73...
... However, with respect to ensuring that NIH continues to prioritize the importance of capital facilities planning and reinvestment in existing capital assets, it was not evident to the committee that NIH leadership is aware that other major biomedical research institutions in the United States and internationally explicitly include specific capital investment requirements in their institutional strategic plans.
From page 74...
... , and long-term (10+ years) capital facility plans linked to strategic research plans within their implementation documents.
From page 75...
... Given the global competition to recruit, train, and retain an increasingly diverse scientific workforce, the report and several other NIH planning documents conclude that the IRP needs to build and support a biomedical research ecosystem that is second to none. Therefore, implementation of strategies to ensure that the organizational structure, culture, and capital planning efforts promote a physical work environment that continues to advance team science is needed.
From page 76...
... 1-31) However, the application of the six objectives will likely continue to challenge NIH's current capital cost planning process due to the apparent broad and disorganized nature of planning requests received by the Office of Research Facilities (ORF)
From page 77...
... Replacement of Aging Physical Plant and Reduction of NIH's Leased Facilities Since NIH ICs do not expect to expand scientific programs, personnel, or space in the next 10 years, the Master Plan addresses two additional priorities: replacing its aging physical campus and reducing operating costs by reducing the number of leased facilities. In addition to developing a campus Master Plan that addresses future scientific goals, the Master Plan also highlights the needs of an aging physical plant where existing facilities over the next 20 years may no longer be able to support the organization's scientific mission.
From page 78...
... Implementation of Four Priorities To address the above-mentioned priorities, contingent on future budgets, opportunities, and policy, the Master Plan outlines the following solutions. Research  Organize the campus into five research clusters to facilitate and nurture collaboration and create opportunities for development of multi-institutional centers and address other trends such as computational biology.
From page 79...
... Changes in Research Strategic Goals The 2013 Master Plan incorporates the goals and objectives of NIH-Wide Strategic Plan. As the Master Plan is implemented, it will be important to ensure that it continues to reflect and adapt to changes in NIH's strategic goals.
From page 80...
... Planning could examine new alternatives to ensure easy public access to resources on the Bethesda Campus to enhance relationships with the community. Funding The Master Plan and the NIH-Wide Research Strategic plan report that the lack of funding for strategic and facilities initiatives has hampered and will continue to hamper short- and long-term facilities planning and implementation on the Bethesda Campus.
From page 81...
... . Current Capital Cost Planning at NIH-BC Cost estimating and planning for high-performance biomedical research facilities and infrastructure is increasingly being scrutinized at leading research organizations.
From page 82...
... A major challenge for cost planning for the NIH state-of-the-art facilities is the lack of available cost benchmarks during the earliest design phases and under limited investigation of the specific conditions of the proposed capital project. Current NIH IRP project-specific capital cost models appear to be prepared in response to requests received from a wide range of sources within the Bethesda Campus and from NIH facilities located offcampus.
From page 83...
... For these reasons, the ORF should consider establishing a clear and consistent annual schedule for review of capital project priorities and estimated costs. NIH Bethesda Campus Project Capital Cost Factors Underlying the NIH capital project cost assumptions are the critical issues related to complying with the requirements of the National Capital Planning Commission, the National Historic Preservation Act, Executive Orders, HHS plans, Principles for Federal Leadership in High-Performance and Sustainable Building, Fire and Life Safety, and the other national model building codes and standards (including seismic performance improvements and special provision for seismic loads in the research environment)
From page 84...
... The table identifies three proposed capital project categories9 for NIH's "Projects Proposed in Building and Space Plan Process in Spring 2017": Section A: Complete POR, EIS, and IGE; Section B: Incomplete POR, EIS, and IGE; and Section C: Minimal Definition. Neither project capital cost projections nor potential fund sources were included in this Scoring Table as a decision making component when this blended prioritization and planning status table was created in spring 2017 by the ORF.
From page 85...
... renovation B ORF BC Building 10 ACRF renovation B ORF BC Additional cell processing B ORF BC Convert G Wing to clinical offices B ORF BC Building 31 replacement, waste management facility, grounds maintenance, B ORF police station, parking structure, and associated infrastructure projects BC Renovate Building 1 B ORF BC New South Laboratory, adaptive reuse of Buildings 4, 5, 8, 30, and 41; Frederick, B ORF new parking structure, and associated infrastructure projects BC New Central Laboratory and associated infrastructure projects B ORF RML BSL-2 and 3 Research building (combination or previously requested research C NIAID space) BC New/expanded NIH Data Center for expanded scientific computing B CIT Section C: Minimal Definition BC Renovate Building 29A as lab and animal facility C ORF FC Construct a 268,000 GSF laboratory facility to house the current and developing C NCI research/clinical programs to replace aging and outdated laboratories in Frederick BC Renovate Building 29 as computational/dry lab C ORF BC Continuing requirement for an additional MRI bay in the Clinical Center C NINDS BC In future Building 45 addition, provide future NCBI space requirements for staff C NLM growth and expand collections space to accommodate growth of collection material, driven by the increase in genomics research and high-throughput technologies FC Construct a 288,400 GSF four-story parking garage on the north portion of the C NCI Frederick Campus to support the current and developing research/clinical programs BC New construction/addition to facilitate round-robin renovations in Building 10 C ORF BC Central quadrangle C ORF NOTE: Acronyms are defined in Appendix K
From page 86...
... The example of cost planning for capital projects by the Bureau of Reclamation is discussed in Box 6.1. To respond to the committee's charge to evaluate at a high level the completeness, accuracy, and relevance of cost estimates at the Bethesda Campus, the ORF provided the committee with approximately 70 conceptual capital budget documents (as defined in the May 19, 2006, HHS Facilities Program Manual Volume I (HHS, 2006)
From page 87...
... There are six levels of cost estimates used to support the Bureau's capital projects, as follows: 1. Preliminary 2.
From page 88...
... The committee believes that the development and application of consistent and credible capital cost data is critical to sustaining the NIH intramural research program's short-, mid-, and long-range capital plans. To create a credible and useful capital financial planning framework for specific potential capital projects, capital planning experts typically seek as much accurate and complete information as possible regarding the research program's activities from the specific research program leaders (termed by the ORF as the program of requirements, or POR)
From page 89...
... In summary, the rigor of capital cost planning focuses the attention from the level of the individual principal investigator managing and accountable for running his or her laboratory and clinic to the NIH Director on the NIH shared scientific mission; identifies realistic vulnerabilities and opportunities in the built environment to support the science; recognizes the financial constraints and capabilities facing the NIH center or program; and from the national perspective, enhances the financial viability and stability of the IRP by confronting the likely challenge of never having sufficient capital to meet all of its needs.13 10 D Wheeland, "Sustainment and Improvement Strategy," presentation to the HHS Capital Investment Review Board, July 2016.
From page 90...
... As noted earlier, capital cost models developed for specific capital projects serve as the only realistic foundation for short-, mid-, and long-range institutional capital plan prioritization. The preliminary and later planning phase capital cost projections are key to successfully supporting the effectiveness of the NIH Capital Plan, whether as part of a request seeking authorizing legislation at the federal level of the Operating Divisions with HHS, or by an individual project manager within the ORF, who is managing the project to ensure that the project's scope, schedule, and total cost identified earlier is balanced with the authorized appropriation.
From page 92...
... Due to the inherent location-specific mission of agricultural scientific endeavor, the study identifies project-specific capital investment recommendations for both the renovation/repair of existing capital assets identified in each of the five ARS Geographic Areas Capital Project & Repair Plans, but also development of new USDA ARS research facilities. The most current USDA ARS capital budget summary of the USDA ARS's prioritization and cost estimates for new building and capital renewal or recapitalization of existing buildings and infrastructure by geographic area was approximately $640 million in FY 2020 costs.2 Table 5 of that publication, "Recommended Out-Year Capital Investments for Modernizing or Replacing ARS Research Facilities" (see Table 6.3.1)
From page 93...
... FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Finding: The NIH-Wide Strategic Plan 2016-2020 sets forward the overall objectives of NIH research activities. However, as noted in the April 2016 Clinical Center Working Group Report to the Advisory
From page 94...
... As noted by the April 2016 Clinical Center Working Group Report to the Advisory Committee to the Director, NIH, there was "no independent entity to verify that engineering controls for high-risk facilities meet appropriate regulations or standards prior to or after construction." The committee was unable to identify evidence that formal or informal third-party peer review of NIH ORF preplanning PORs or total project capital cost models have been adopted. Finding: Current capital investment planning does include a consideration of current maintenance backlog items, which appear to be input when maintenance staff familiar with Bethesda Campus buildings recognize critical needs.
From page 95...
... Recommendation 6.2: NIH should establish a formal external interdisciplinary peer review panel to provide ongoing review of NIH capital assets, the annual project plan, the 5-year plan, the master plan, and the integrated research strategic plan and master plan, including enhancing interactions and collaboration among Intramural Research Program research personnel and partners. Recommendation 6.3: NIH should establish processes and a system that ensure third-party, expert peer review of all adopted Office of Research Facilities preplanning programs of requirements and total project capital cost models.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.