Clarity

  • 1.  Actual Costs Versus ACWP

    Posted Feb 26, 2014 04:26 PM

    I have a question that has stumped me and hope that you guys may be able to help.

    We are looking at using the Program Functionality in Clarity 13.2 and have been doing some Validation of the #’s that we are seeing in some of the Portlets. The issue isn’t around programs though, but on project data. 

    On Some portlets like the "Cost and Schedule Overview" of the "PMO-Program Status" Layout from PMO Accelerator, or the Project List View, we See “Actual Costs (ACWP)” (or Just "ACWP") which we can get to populate through the “Update Cost Totals” Link From Baseline or Task Screens or “Update Earned Value Totals” Job. So we are getting reasonable data being populated.

    My Assumption is that this cost should generally match the Actual Cost we see on the Cost Plan Actuals Field or under “Actual Cost“ on the “Hierarchy – Financial Rollup (Basic)” Page, but that is where I am seeing some discrepancies.

    In looking at a couple projects that are Labor Only, with all actuals posted through timesheets (we have not imported any Transactions from our GL System) I would expect these Costs to be the same at the same point in time after the “Update Cost Totals” Function is Run for these projects. Yet we are seeing slight differences. Such as

    Project       Hierarchy          ACWP          Delta
    P1          $    16,080   $     16,050   $          30
    P2          $    31,217   $     31,096   $        121


    I checked one of them to see if I had a Rate Change occur where the effective date in WIP doesn’t match with what is on the Rate Matrix (WIP was Posted and then the rate matrix was updated but the already posted transactions were not adjusted) but that seems ok.

    What am I missing as far as Why these would be different?  Where can I look to help find the delta?

     



  • 2.  RE: Actual Costs Versus ACWP

    Posted Feb 26, 2014 06:40 PM

    Running into similar questions.

    I believe the issue is that the Earned Value measures are calculated using the content of the WBS and the rate matrix - therefore, it doesn't require that one generate a Cost Plan from the WBS, nor does it require one use Finanicial Transactions.

    The Actual Costs reported as part of a Cost Plan or Budget view, are based on Financial Transactions.

    Take a project with 100 actual hours and a rate of $10/hour - ACWP would be $1000.  But, if one hasn't enabled project Financials, transactions won't be produced and Actual Cost displayed on a Cost Plan or Budget view will be zero.

    I have some more work to confirm this for myself.  However, based on conversations I've had with CA personnel in the past and recently, and the recent test I've been able to complete, I expect this is true.  For example - EV metrics report blank results in project list views until I baseline the project and run the Update jobs related to earned value - even if I have a cost plan and transactions recorded against the project.  The EV metrics don't appear to use any of the Cost Plan/Budget or transactional data - just the baselined WBS and rate matrix.

     



  • 3.  RE: Actual Costs Versus ACWP

    Posted Feb 26, 2014 07:13 PM

    Thanks Dale,

    I get what you're saying, but if we do run the financials and only have timesheet reported, assignment actuals posted to WIP, I would assume that the Actual Hours * Rate from the assignments would equal the posted wip transactions that resuted from timesheets submitted for those same tasks. 

    Tim



  • 4.  RE: Actual Costs Versus ACWP

    Posted Feb 26, 2014 07:48 PM

    Tim,

    OK - couple more ideas: 

    1- Since the ACWP numbers are lower than Actual Cost by a small bit, could the "As of" dates be set on the two projects to dates that occur before the last transactions occurred?  Idea is that Actual Cost would report all transactions, but ACWP will only report up to the "As of" date and may be missing a transaction or more that occurred after the "As of" date.

    2- Bug in calculation.  I've heard from a CA source that there may be an issue.  Part of the testing I need to complete is to confirm whether or not we are seeing an error - and if so, create a case with Support.

    Dale

     

     



  • 5.  RE: Actual Costs Versus ACWP

    Posted Feb 27, 2014 04:37 AM

    Jenn Rinella posted a Tuesday's tip on the calculations

    https://communities.ca.com/web/ca-clarity-global-user-community/message-board/-/message_boards/message/98937390?&#p_19

     

    ACWP: Actual Cost of Work Performed

    ACWP: Sum of the actuals on the project through a point in time. That point in time is the Project As Of Date, if set, else the current system date. If you have future posted actuals, they will not be included in this calculation unless your As Of date is at or beyond the last date of posted actuals.
    Baseline Required: No

    Detail Task Level: ACWP = Sum of all assignment Actual Cost values for the task
    Summary Task: ACWP = Sum of ACWP for Child Tasks
    Project Level: ACWP = Sum of ACWP for all Level 1 Summary Tasks

    Martti K.



  • 6.  RE: Actual Costs Versus ACWP

    Posted Sep 02, 2019 07:59 AM
    Can the ACWP be calculated for NPIO's like on Other work. Does any one have any idea.
    If yes please can someone elaborate on how does it does the calculation and what are its dependencies.