HCS 412 Week 5 Project Reporting, Change Management and Closure Example

Status Yellow, One Change Request and a Handover: Reporting, Controlling Change and Closing a Hospital Sleep Center Project

[Student Name]

University of Phoenix

HCS/412: Project Management for Health Care Professionals

Week 5 Assignment

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The hospital, the project's status, the change request and the lessons are composites written for a model paper; research findings come from the sources listed.

At week 28 of 39, the composite community hospital's six-bed sleep disorders center was behind. Crews found corroded pipes behind a wall during demolition, and replacing them cost two weeks. The project was still expected to open on time, but the buffer had shrunk. This paper follows the project through status reporting, a change request, preparation for the new service and closure.

The Status Report at Week 28

Overall status: yellow. Schedule: yellow; construction is two weeks behind, leaving 2.5 weeks of buffer against the 39-week date. Cost: green; $780,000 spent against $790,000 planned, with $48,000 of contingency used for the pipe replacement. Risks: recruitment closed, both technologists hired; credentialing on track with three of five payers approved; equipment delivery confirmed for week 32. Quality: all information system tests passed; policies approved. Decisions needed: approval to add weekend work for finishes.

Recovery Decision

The sponsor approved weekend work for four weekends at a cost of $18,000 from contingency, restoring a week of buffer. The project manager reports weekly instead of biweekly until construction is complete.

The Change Request

Pediatric pulmonologists asked that one room be made suitable for adolescents aged 13 to 17, with a sleeping space for a parent, child-appropriate sensors and a pediatric scoring protocol. The pediatric program had been excluded from scope.

Analyzing the Change

Scope: one room redesigned, pediatric sensors purchased, a scoring protocol and technologist training added. Schedule: redesign of a room already under construction would add two weeks to the critical path, consuming most of the buffer. Cost: about $32,000. Risk: technologists would need pediatric competency, and the accrediting body's pediatric standards would apply.

The Board's Decision

The change control board, which reviews any change to the approved baseline (Project Management Institute, 2021) and is made up of the sponsor, the medical director, the finance director and the project manager, deferred the change to a second phase six months after opening. It approved buying the pediatric sensors now, since they did not affect the schedule, and planning the room change without disrupting construction. Saying not now, with a date and a plan, protected the opening while taking the physicians' request seriously, which is the balance change control exists to strike.

Preparing People for the Change

Kotter (1995) argued that transformation efforts often fail when leaders do not establish urgency, communicate the vision widely or anchor changes in the culture. A new service is a change for the people around it. The medical director met referring practices to explain the new referral process and home testing criteria. Emergency and inpatient nurses were briefed on what to do if an overnight sleep patient needed help. The hospital operator learned where to route calls.

Communicating the Status

Different audiences received the week 28 news differently. The sponsor received the full report and the decision request. Team members heard it at the weekly meeting, with the pipe problem explained and the weekend plan described. Referring physicians were told only that the opening month was unchanged, which was true, and that home testing devices would be available from the first week.

Change Control for Smaller Items

Not every change needs the board. The team set a threshold: changes under $5,000 that do not touch the critical path may be approved by the project manager and logged. A request to move an electrical outlet in the monitoring station was handled this way in a day. Larger or schedule-affecting changes go to the board.

Final Weeks

Construction finished in week 32, equipment was installed and tested in weeks 32 and 33, and the mock patient night in week 35 found two issues, a missing emergency call cord and a scheduling template error, both fixed before opening.

Opening

The first patient was studied in week 38, a week before the committed date.

Acceptance

The sponsor and medical director signed acceptance against the criteria set in Week 4: rooms passed inspection, all systems recorded test studies, both technologists passed competency validation and the mock night ran without critical errors after fixes.

Contract Closeout

The construction contract closed after the punch list was complete and the final lien waiver received. Equipment warranties and service contracts were transferred to biomedical engineering.

Handover to Operations

The sleep center manager, reporting to the medical director, assumed responsibility for daily operations. The handover package included policies, the equipment inventory, vendor contacts, the quality measures and the phase two pediatric plan.

The Final Report

Final cost was $1.21 million, $30,000 under the $1.24 million approved. The schedule met the committed date. Quality acceptance criteria were met. Benefits will be reported at six months against the charter's target of waits under four weeks.

Lessons Learned

Williams (2008) found that organizations frequently identify lessons from projects but often fail to spread them or to change practice. The team therefore limited itself to three lessons, each with an owner. First, exploratory openings during design should include plumbing, not only ceilings; owner, facilities director, who updated the design checklist. Second, start payer credentialing paperwork before staff are hired, using provisional names; owner, revenue cycle director. Third, publish exclusions to physicians at the start, so requests like the pediatric room come early; owner, planning office.

Celebrating the Team

Closure also recognized the people who did the work. The sponsor thanked the facilities crew who worked four weekends, and the medical director invited the whole team to see the first patient's room before opening night. Recognition matters for the next project, since many of the same people will be asked to do it again.

Six-Month Benefits Review

At six months, the wait for testing was 19 days, down from five months, and the center had performed 910 studies, on pace for its first-year target.

Conclusion

Honest status reporting, disciplined change control, attention to the people around the new service and a complete closure turned a slipping project into a center that opened on time and under budget. Lessons with owners give the next project a better start.

References

Kotter, J. P. (1995). Leading change: Why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 73(2), 59-67.

Project Management Institute. (2021). A guide to the project management body of knowledge (PMBOK guide) (7th ed.). Project Management Institute.

Williams, T. (2008). How do organizations learn lessons from projects-and do they? IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 55(2), 248-266. https://doi.org/10.1109/TEM.2007.912920