‘Firefighting’ within the U.S. Coast Guard’s Shore Infrastructure Capital Investment Program

Abstract

This thesis proposes that the Coast Guard’s shore infrastructure capital investment program operates in crisis mode, also referred to as firefighting, and cannot develop projects as effectively and efficiently as it should. This proposal is supported by evidence derived from recent U.S. Coast Guard (CG) and U.S. Navy (USN) project studies, subject matter and organization expertise. With an abundance of needs, the absence of a long-term, sustainable shore infrastructure capital investment strategy leads the organization to make investment decisions that foster and reinforce harmful firefighting activities.

The CG has many aging and outdated facilities, as evident by its more than $2.4B shore infrastructure backlog. The multitude of projects needed to rebuild from natural disasters and support the service’s most extensive fleet recapitalization efforts exacerbates the effects of these known facility needs. Because of the high volume, lack of consistent funding and dynamic priorities, the CG’s shore infrastructure capital planning and cost estimating program frequently deviates from its processes and business rules and cannot deliver facilities in a timely manner, with acceptable risk or without rework that frustrates a motivated workforce.

This thesis analyzes ten waterfront capital investment projects by focusing on the projects’ scopes and associated costs. It also summarizes current research into project planning uncertainty and the causes, symptoms, and proliferation of firefighting. The work corroborates the findings with interviews of subject matter experts throughout the program’s network. A systems view revealed excessive planning uncertainty passed into project execution due to scope changes, incomplete planning, and flawed estimating. A deeper look unveiled more pressing fundamental issues such as inconsistent organizational direction, funding volatility and rampant process deviations resulting in projects built to budget, not requirements, inefficient planning, and a discouraged workforce.

The development of a sustainable, long-term infrastructure capital investment strategy and a consistent funding stream will enable organizational adherence to planning processes. It makes project priority decisions easier, ensuring proper planning to minimize planning risks and better use of scarce funding.