- Prior to establishing Wandoo and the BHDC redevelopment project, DCS had two juvenile detention facilities: BHDC and Rangeview, and a master plan for increased bed space at BHDC. BHDC is now the sole juvenile facility in WA and is almost at full capacity. Reducing its juvenile facilities to one limits DCS’ ability to respond to operational issues or increases in the number of juvenile detainees. DCS currently has no permanent or short term options for alternative accommodation for juvenile detainees should the need arise.
- DCS placed more emphasis on meeting its timeframe for opening Wandoo than reducing the risk to BHDC. DCS chose a staged approach to building, with multiple construction sites within the operating facility to enable work to be completed concurrently. This should have taken the shortest time possible, but caused the greatest disruption to BHDC. Other options, such as a single stage build, where only one building site was in operation at all times, would have been lower risk and less disruptive, but would have taken longer.
- The project governance, management and tendering processes were not adjusted to reflect the overall project complexity or risk profile. At around $30 million, or five per cent of the total spend for the prison upgrade program, the BHDC redevelopment project did not represent a large risk in terms of financial value. However, the BHDC redevelopment project carried significant risk as it was undertaken inside a secure facility with three separate building sites operating in close proximity to detainees. The tight timeframe for delivery added additional risks. However, DCS and BMW did not adequately take these risks into consideration when establishing the project management structure, governance arrangements or procurement options.
- Despite having a policy that requires the consideration of risk, quality standards and service benchmarks, BMW awarded the BHDC contract based on cost, choosing the lowest conforming tender. Given the complexity and risks presented by building inside a detention centre, an approach that allowed for the consideration of these risks, may have produced a better outcome. Similarly, project management and governance arrangements could have been strengthened to match the actual risk, allowing closer control, monitoring and reporting of the project.
- The accommodation units built in Stage B of the BHDC project were delivered 12 months late, delaying the handover of Rangeview to the private provider contracted to run Wandoo. Despite this delay, approximately $530 000 worth of work originally included in Stage B has been deferred. These elements including additional office space for psychological services, an upgraded canteen area, and artwork were removed from the Stage B scope of works. While these works, now called ‘separable portion three’, are not considered core to accommodating detainees, they are important to maintaining BHDC’s culture and operating philosophy. DCS has the funding for this portion of works, but a decision is yet to be made on when or if these works will be delivered. BMW and DCS will need to consider the risk associated with the site, as well as the best approach to completing the works when determining a commencement date.
- There were many factors that contributed to the project delay. The need to redo defective building works such as structural defects in the females’ accommodation unit caused an estimated three month delay. Limited monitoring and actioning of risk management plans meant risks identified early in the project planning including security breaches were realised. This resulted in additional security requirements being implemented, slowing down building progress. The poor attendance at the Project Control Group (PCG), and limited alternative communication mechanisms all played a role in the project being delivered late.
- The whole project is currently under budget despite the delays and costs of approximately $1.8 million for extensions of time and contract variations. This is mainly because the winning bids for Stages A and B were approximately $3.6 million lower than the pre-tender estimates and $530 000 worth of works was removed from the scope for Stage B, but remains in the project budget. DCS incurred additional costs of approximately $790 000 for the delay in handing Rangeview to Serco.
- Optimistic reporting prevented senior management getting a clear picture of how the project was progressing. In the absence of an effective PCG, progress reports were the best avenue to keep senior management informed of the project’s progress. However, the reports did not clearly reflect the actual progress of the project. In October 2011, two months prior to the planned completion date and 13 months before actual completion, the reports were still reporting the project as on time.
- Records management for the BHDC project was inadequate. BMW and DCS do not have good records for the project, limiting transparency. This also makes it difficult and time consuming to get a clear picture of the project.