What the cited historical or program record documents.
EFPS Evidence Guide
How to read and navigate this companion
What CFIG retrospectively connects or would bring forward for decision-makers.
Source-linked implications for the decisions available at that time.
The records reviewed and the decisions they inform.
Interactive Evidence Chain
Select any stage for its supporting detail, or follow the chain from 1 through 9.
Executive Evidence Summary
Cost warnings, incomplete design, complex scope, a changed delivery method, and weak decision controls were connected—not isolated.
This project demonstrates full-life-cycle megaproject warning integration. It shows how CFIG makes separate design, cost, contract, staffing, and schedule warnings visible as one executive decision condition.
The 82-page VA OIG review, GAO cost-and-schedule testimony, the official facility history, project chronology, findings, and management responses.
Repeated estimates above budget, evolving and incomplete design, delivery-method change, slow modifications, unclear responsibility, and weak executive controls formed one escalating condition.
The connected failures affected construction cost, completion timing, contractual leverage, accountability, and delivery of the replacement medical center to veterans and staff.
When contractor and independent estimates showed the evolving design could not be built within the approved $604 million construction amount.
An early-warning register, change-and-contingency reforecast, and executive responsibility matrix would support a hold, simplify, redesign, fund, delivery-change, or recovery decision.
Design, change, schedule, and accountability gaps could continue compounding while options narrowed, costs increased, and activation moved further into the future.
Executive significance: Makes compounding exposure visible early and supports accountable recovery decisions.
Documented Path
What the portfolio’s public record shows
Recorded project path
Need → Scope and site → Design → Estimate → Contract strategy → Construction → Changes and dispute → Federal recovery and activation.
Evidence boundary
This demonstration uses public audit, accountability, and owner history records. It does not reperform design, cost, legal, or healthcare-facility reviews.
Retrospective CFIG Analysis
What CFIG would bring into one decision picture
Condition CFIG connects
CFIG connected repeated estimates above budget, design complexity, incomplete construction documents, delivery-method change, slow decisions, and unclear accountability into one escalating cost-and-schedule condition.
CFIG-informed path
Source gate → Condition connected → Cost–Schedule–Design Early Warning Register → Change and Contingency Reforecast → Executive Responsibility and Decision Matrix → Should the project hold, simplify, redesign, reforecast, add funding, change delivery, or escalate to recovery management? → Makes compounding exposure visible early and supports accountable recovery decisions.
Decision to be supported: Should the project hold, simplify, redesign, reforecast, add funding, change delivery, or escalate to recovery management?
Decision Window
When meaningful options were still available
When independent estimates first showed the design could not be built within the approved construction amount.
Why timing mattersThe completion estimate moved years beyond the original September 2013 target.
Comparative Differential Analysis
Documented path versus CFIG-informed path
Historical facts and retrospective analysis are separated below. The CFIG column describes what the demonstration indicates CFIG would have surfaced; the source record and proposed decision support remain distinctly identified.
| Dimension | Documented project record | CFIG-informed presentation | Differential | Likely impact or benefit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Evidence picture | Cost warnings, incomplete design, complex scope, a changed delivery method, and weak decision controls were connected—not isolated. | CFIG connected repeated estimates above budget, design complexity, incomplete construction documents, delivery-method change, slow decisions, and unclear accountability into one escalating cost-and-schedule condition. | Separate facts become one connected decision condition. | Incomplete design, delivery-strategy change, and slow modifications weakened control of price and responsibility. |
| Timing | Need → Scope and site → Design → Estimate → Contract strategy → Construction → Changes and dispute → Federal recovery and activation. | When independent estimates first showed the design could not be built within the approved construction amount. | The chronology becomes an explicit window for action. | The completion estimate moved years beyond the original September 2013 target. |
| Decision control | The public record shows the path taken and the conditions that developed. | Should the project hold, simplify, redesign, reforecast, add funding, change delivery, or escalate to recovery management? | Historical information becomes a defined leadership choice. | Makes compounding exposure visible early and supports accountable recovery decisions. |
| Risk and value | Work can continue while design and estimate gaps keep creating new changes. Late redesign can stop connected work and move activation years later. | Makes compounding exposure visible early and supports accountable recovery decisions. | Exposure is weighed against a source-grounded alternative while choices remain. | Delay pushed back use of the replacement medical center for veterans and staff. |
Potential Impact
Why the differential matters
Cost effect
Documented path: The federal record shows the total project estimate grew from $328 million in 2004 to $1.675 billion in the 2016 OIG review, excluding some activation costs. CFIG-informed difference: A unified early-warning register would place each estimate variance beside the related design maturity, scope, funding authority, delivery decision, and accountable executive before additional work advanced. Practical significance: This difference matters because leaders could see that the budget problem was structural—not an isolated estimate—and decide whether to simplify, redesign, reforecast, add funding, or stop further compounding.
Time effect
Documented path: The estimated completion moved years beyond the original September 2013 target, and the official history records the later recovery effort and 2018 patient transfers. CFIG-informed difference: The decision record would connect design completeness, unresolved changes, approval latency, schedule impact, and recovery triggers to dated executive decisions. Practical significance: This difference matters because schedule loss becomes an accountable intervention point rather than a downstream consequence discovered after connected work, funding, and activation plans have already moved.
Contract effect
Documented path: Incomplete design, a changed delivery strategy, slow modifications, and disputed responsibilities weakened control of price, performance, and contractual leverage. CFIG-informed difference: An executive responsibility matrix would identify who controlled each design, scope, estimate, modification, funding, and delivery decision, what evidence closed the issue, and when escalation was mandatory. Practical significance: This difference matters because unclear ownership lets unresolved conditions migrate into changes and disputes; named authority and closure evidence strengthen timely decisions and the accountability record.
Mission effect
Documented path: Delay pushed back use of the replacement medical center for veterans and staff while the project moved through dispute, federal intervention, recovery management, completion, and activation. CFIG-informed difference: The reforecast would connect construction decisions to activation readiness, clinical transition, operational dependencies, and the date the facility could actually serve its mission. Practical significance: This difference matters because the consequence was not only financial; every unresolved project condition also affected when veterans and healthcare personnel could benefit from the replacement facility.
Tangible Options
Three outcome-level choices
These options illustrate the decision support CFIG could provide from the reviewed evidence. CFIG’s operating methods remain proprietary.
Cost–Schedule–Design Early Warning Register
Decision supportedWhether to hold, simplify, redesign, add funds, or change delivery before more work proceeds.
Potential benefitEarlier control of compounding cost and delay.
Change and Contingency Reforecast
Decision supportedWhat the real completion forecast is and which changes can still be avoided or sequenced.
Potential benefitMore credible funding and recovery choices.
Executive Responsibility and Decision Matrix
Decision supportedWho must decide each open issue and when authority transfers.
Potential benefitFaster decisions and a stronger accountability record.
Public Evidence Bridge
Sources supporting the demonstration
The complete coverage notes and exact reliance locations remain in the project portfolio. These links open the original public records.
| ID | Public source | Status | Open |
|---|---|---|---|
| S1 | VA OIG Report 15-03706-33082-page federal review; Findings 1–4, chronology, design phases, and management response. | VERIFIED | OPEN PUBLIC SOURCECLICK HERE |
| S2 | GAO-14-548TGovernment Accountability Office update on Denver cost, schedule, and scope. | VERIFIED | OPEN PUBLIC SOURCECLICK HERE |
| S3 | GAO-18-329TGovernment Accountability Office follow-up on cost estimates, schedules, and change-order tracking. | VERIFIED | OPEN PUBLIC SOURCECLICK HERE |
| S4 | VA Eastern Colorado facility historyOfficial owner history through construction pause, Army Corps recovery, and 2018 patient transfers. | SUPPORTING | OPEN PUBLIC SOURCECLICK HERE |
Completion Boundary
Evidence, decision value, and authority
Decision value: This companion connects cited project evidence to the decisions available at the time, identifies material exposure, and presents outcome-level options for authorized leaders to evaluate.
Professional boundary
CFIG supports decision-makers. Licensed and authorized professionals retain responsibility for engineering, safety, legal, environmental, accounting, regulatory, and other protected judgments.