12.07.2015 Views

Department of Health: The Paddington Health Campus Scheme

Department of Health: The Paddington Health Campus Scheme

Department of Health: The Paddington Health Campus Scheme

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

part two2.1 This part <strong>of</strong> the report focuses on the risks faced bythe <strong>Campus</strong> partners in delivering the scheme outlined inthe 2000 OBC and the way in which the <strong>Campus</strong> partnersattempted to manage those risks.<strong>The</strong>re were complex intrinsicproject, organisational and policyrisks for the <strong>Campus</strong> scheme2.2 <strong>The</strong> <strong>Campus</strong> scheme, like other major capitalschemes faced multiple layers <strong>of</strong> risk: intrinsic projectrisk, organisational risk and policy risk. However thescale and complexity <strong>of</strong> the scheme meant that theserisks were exacerbated by the ways in which the <strong>Campus</strong>partners chose to address them. In addition, the schemewas based on the 2000 OBC which the 2004 JointReview (Appendix 2) found was produced at speed andcontained a number <strong>of</strong> errors and omissions such that itwas not deliverable at the price within the OBC.Intrinsic project risk2.3 <strong>The</strong>se are risks faced by any major capitalinvestment. <strong>The</strong> only NHS-specific risks relate to theclinical content. All capital investments must managethese risks. Many struggle unsuccessfully to balance time,cost and quality. None will succeed without good risk,project and programme management.2.4 A major project risk affecting affordability is that<strong>of</strong> the history <strong>of</strong> cost escalation for large NHS schemes.All large NHS capital investments (schemes above£75 million) cost significantly more than their initialOBCs. For major schemes either in planning or buildstage, the average cost increase above the original OBCis 117 per cent (Figure 3 overleaf). In the case <strong>of</strong> the<strong>Campus</strong> scheme it was late 2002 before the <strong>Campus</strong>partners realised, for the first time, that, because <strong>of</strong> theinadequate 2000 OBC, the likely full costs <strong>of</strong> deliveringthe scheme had more than doubled to £786 million(excluding optimism bias).2.5 In the case <strong>of</strong> the <strong>Campus</strong> scheme, the 2000 OBComitted any material cost relating to how St Mary’shospital would be kept operational while the newhospitals were built on the St Mary’s site – the decantstrategy. <strong>The</strong> original OBC allowed £1 million for this.<strong>The</strong> <strong>Campus</strong> partners’ 2003 estimate was for £80 millionfor what was, by then, a completely different schemebecause the <strong>Campus</strong>’s space requirements grew duringits development.<strong>The</strong> <strong>Paddington</strong> <strong>Health</strong> <strong>Campus</strong> scheme15

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!