FY03 ORS Performance Management Provide Administrative Support (1)

1

FY03 ORS Performance Management

Provide Administrative Support (1)

Team Members: Dinah Huffer, Debra Levick, Marcia Potts

January 9, 2004

2

Overview• PMP Template

• Value proposition and strategy• Performance objectives and measures

• Customer Perspective: Critical Measures• Customer Survey of Administrative Services

• Internal Business Process Perspective: Critical Measures• Types of Service Requests by Department • Types of Service Requests by Method• Travel Orders & Time and Attendance

• Learning and Growth: Critical Measures• # of Administrative employees

• Financial Perspective: Critical Measures• Unit costs of discrete services

• Conclusions and Actions

Performance Management Plan (PMP)

Division Approval/Date: Associate Director Approval/Date:

Service Group

Provide Administrative Support (1)

Discrete Services

DS1: Coordinate administrative processes and procedures

DS2: Implement new administrative systems

DS3: Manage ORS space and property

Value Proposition

Our team of administrative experts supports the ORS administrative officers and staff in the complex process of assuring workforce adherence to the rules, regulations, and guidelines governing our administrative policies, procedures and automated systems. By teaming with our customers, we economically exchange information and establish best practices that educate our workforce to avoid making costly mistakes that could affect their personal credibility, cause loss of funding, damage the reputation of NIH, and even result in criminal or civil penalties.

Service Strategy

DS4: Administer Awards Program

Strategy Description

We will use Operational Excellence to economically exchange iformation, establish best practices, and instill consistency in administrative procedures to avoid costly mistakes and ensure credibility. We will make knowledge and expertise more available by utilizing our web technology based on ORS rules, regulations and policies.

Team Leader

Dinah Huffer

Team Members

Debra Levick, Marcia Potts

Operational Excellence

Customer Intimacy

Product Leadership

Growth

Sustain

Harvest

4

Performance Plan for FY 04 - 05

Cu

sto

mer

C1. Increase Customer Satisfaction.

C2. Improve as single-source contact on ORS-wide administrative processes.

C3. Improve responsiveness to customers' request and inquiries.

C1.1 Customer Survey handling problemsC1.2 # of Admin SOP's available on the web

C2.1 # of Inquiries by typeC2.2 Customer survey competence

C3.1 Customer Survey usefulness score

7.310

45007.4

7.0

7.414

-2%7.5

7.2

≥ FY0417

-5%≥ FY04

≥ FY04In

tern

al

Bu

sin

ess

IB1. Increase infusion of Best Practices throughout ORS Admin.

IB2. Right the first time, everytime. Be consistent.

IB3. Improve smooth transition of new automated systems.

IB1.1 # of corrections in payroll processIB1.2% inquiries by method(e-mail)

IB2.1 Survey Consistency scoreIB2.2 # and type of WO's processedIB2.3 # inquiries by type

IB31 # of travel orders

10840%

6.9965

4500

482

≤ FY0350%

7.0≥FY03- 5%

+5%

≤ FY0460%

≤ FY04≥FY04- 5%

+5%

Learn

ing

an

d G

row

th L1. Improve our administrative expertise.

L2. Improve impact analysis of new and updated policies.

L3. The Virtual Delivery Team for guidance, rules and regulations.

L1.1 Customer Survey competency scoreL1.2 # inquiries by type L2.1 Customer survey usefulness

L3.1 # of Admin employeesL3.2 # of SOP's available on webL3.3 Customer satisfaction handling problems

7.44500

7.0

28107.3

7.5actual

7.2

28147.4

≥ FY04actual

≥ FY04

2417

≥FY04

Fin

an

cia

l

F1. Minimize unit costs.

F2. Achieve cost savings from reduced rework and reprocessing.

F1. Unit cost comparison year to year FY 03DS1= $5.78 DS2 = $31k DS3 = $6.03 DS4 = $142.86

F2.1 # of corrections in payroll process

see chart

108

≤ FY03

≤ FY03

≤FY 04

≤FY 04

5

Performance Objectives – Strategy Mapping

6

Strategy Mapping Conclusions

We identified a major outcome (strategic objective) that needed to be addressed –

IB1. Improve Exception Processing

• Strategy Map Analysis:• We can achieve our customer goal (C1.) Increased

satisfaction if we focus on meeting (IB2.) Right the first time, every time, be consistent. Reaching this goal will depend on our achieving (L3.) Make our knowledge and expertise more available. Meeting our (IB2.) goal will help us meet (IB4.) Improve exception processing which translates into lower unit costs (F1.) Minimize unit costs.

7

Customer PerspectiveCritical Measure: Customer Survey

Objective Measure FY 03 FY04

TargetFY05

Target

Cu

sto

mer

C1. Increase Customer Satisfaction.

C2. Improve as single-source contact on ORS-wide administrative processes.

C3. Improve responsiveness to customers' request and inquiries.

C1.1 Customer SurveyC1.2 # of Admin SOP's available on the web

C2.1 # of Inquiries by typeC2.2 Customer survey

C3.1 Customer SurveyC3.2 Customer responsiveness score

n/a10

4500n/a

n/an/a

actual14

≤ FY03actual

actualactual

≥ FY0417

-5%≥ FY04

≥ FY04≥ FY04

8

Customer Survey of Administrative Services

• Customized ORS Customer Scorecard to measure the Quality attributes of Administrative Services

• Effective Explanation of Policies/Procedures

• Consistency

• Usefulness of Information

• Responsiveness of AO’s

• Competence of AO’s

• Handling of problems by AO’s

9

Survey Distribution

FY04 Administration

Number of surveys distributed 1,622*

Number of respondents 422

293 ORS, 99 ORF, 30 skipped question

Response rate 26%

160 respondents made comments (38%) on the survey

*Note: Number distributed based on count of emails in the ORS and ORS global email list as of November 2003 and also includes 100 hard copy surveys given to individuals without email access. 405 respondents answered via the web, 17 via hard copy.

10

Who are you?

N =391

NIH employee

85%

Contractor15%

11

What is your organization?

N = 392

ORS75%

ORF25%

12

Do you know who is your primary AO?

N = 393Don't know3%

Yes86%

No11%

13

How often have you consulted with any AO?

N = 392

Daily10%

A few times45%

Never18%

At least monthly14%

At least weekly13%

14

Which of the following services have you used during FY03?

21

34

13

28

29

29

62

22

74

111

43

54

87

93

192

108

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200

Other

In-house work requests

Coordination of office moves

Funds approval for acquisitions

Processing ID/BLDG access requests

Processing training requests

ITAS

Travel

ORS

ORF

N = 392

Note: Multiple responses allowed.

15

FY03 Satisfaction with ORS Administrative Services by Organization

7.43

7.56

7.04

7.13

7.00

6.78

6.80

6.34

6.60

6.39

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Handling ofProblems by AO(s)

Competence ofAO(s)

Consistency ofguidance given

Usefulness ofinformation provided

Explanation ofpoliciies/procedures

ORF

ORS

N = 99

N = 293

Unsatisfactory

Outstanding

Statistically significant difference (p < .05)

16

FY03 Satisfaction with ORS Administrative Services Compared to ORS Overall

8.73

8.79

7.3

7.40

6.90

7.00

6.86

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Handling ofProblems by AO(s)

Competence ofAO(s)

Consistency ofguidance given

Usefulness ofinformation provided

Explanation ofpoliciies/procedures

AO

ORS

N = 340

N = 5,698

Unsatisfactory

Outstanding

Note: Comparisons made to ORS overall where possible. The number of respondents varied for each question so an average N was calculated.

17

Explanation of Policies/Procedures Satisfaction RatingFrequency by Rating

19

7 8

18

42

24

53

79

49

39

21

32

14

0

25

50

75

100

125

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK NA Blank

Fre

qu

en

cy

of

Re

sp

on

se

Unsatisfactory Outstanding

N = 338

Mean = 6.86

Median =7.0

Note: Graph shows the distribution of responses by ratings selected.

18

Usefulness of Information Provided Satisfaction RatingFrequency by Rating

19

510

20

31 33

47

72

61

47

2027

13

0

25

50

75

100

125

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK NA Blank

Fre

qu

en

cy

of

Re

sp

on

se


N = 345

Mean = 7.0

Median = 8.0


19

Consistency of Guidance Given Satisfaction RatingFrequency by Rating

1913

9

19

3428

49

63 61

46

18

29

17

0

25

50

75

100

125

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK NA Blank

Fre

qu

en

cy

of

Re

sp

on

se


N = 341

Mean = 6.9

Median = 7.0


20

Competence of AO(s) Satisfaction RatingFrequency by Rating

11 9 817

3124

36

6571

66

25 28

14

0

25

50

75

100

125

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK NA Blank

Fre

qu

en

cy

of

Re

sp

on

se


N = 338

Mean = 7.4

Median = 8.0


21

Handling of Problems Satisfaction RatingFrequency by Rating

158

147

40

20

36

6661

69

2231

16

0

25

50

75

100

125

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 DK NA Blank

Fre

qu

en

cy

of

Re

sp

on

se


N = 336

Mean = 7.3

Median = 8.0


22

What did the customer data tell us?What actions do we plan to take?

Pointed out areas where we need to address better delivery of AO services (eg ORF vs ORS)

Demonstrated the relation between knowing policy and procedures and being consistent in answers and guidance

Feedback will be input for new branch chief to make recommendations:

- more hands on training of AO’s on specific systems questions

- more lessons learned – exchange of information sessions

23

Internal Business Processes Perspective

Critical Measures

Objective Measure FY 03/04 FY04

TargetFY05

Target

Inte

rnal

Bu

sin

ess

IB1. Increase infusion of Best Practices throughout ORS Admin.

IB2. Right the first time, everytime. Be consistent.

IB3. Improve smooth transition of new automated systems.

IB1.1 # of corrections in payroll processIB1.2% inquiries by method(e-mail)

IB2.1 Survey Consistency scoreIB2.2 # and type of WO's processedIB2.3 # inquiries by type

IB31 # of travel orders

10840%

6.9965

4500

482

≤ FY0350%

7.0≥FY03- 5%

+5%

≤ FY0460%

≤ FY04≥FY04- 5%

+5%

24

FY 2003 Customer Inquiries by Type

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Office/Division (Customer)

TRAVELTRAININGPERSONNELITASGENERAL

Total 1,183 action Queries . Annual Extrapolation = 4,500 action queries

Actual Data from Recording all Actions One week in each month for 12 months

Total = 4,500 action queries per year *

25

FY 2003 Customer Inquiries by Method

209

6192

4885

33

1

23

12

23

174

56

46

25

43

120

24

41

28

39

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

GENERAL ITAS PERSONNEL TRAINING TRAVEL

Inquiry Type

Visits

Telephone Calls

Mail

E-mails

E-mail contact is involved in over 40% of the 4,500 annual action queries

26

FY 2003 Number of Travel Orders Processed

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep

Month

Foreign Sponsored Travel

Foreign Travel

Domestic Sponsored Travel

Domestic Travel

Total = 482

27

FY 2003 Number of In House Service Requests by Division/Office per Month

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT

DSS

DS

DPS

DIRS

DBEPS

OD

28

FY 2003 Number of In House Service Requests per Month by Type

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT

Misc. (Universal Orders)

Work Orders (DES)

Telecomm.

Printing

Locksmith

29

What did the internal business process data tell us?What actions do we plan to take?

Most important responsibility of the AO is to be knowledgeable of rules and regulations – government wide and NIH wide

Most queries (40%) come via email – this is a more effective method than phone calls, visits and other.

Need more FAQ’s on all systems, policies and procedures that touch most people – need to be web based with easy searching capability

More hands on training for AO’s in current systems

More exchange of information among AO’s – have more meetings where lessons learned are shared

30

Learning and Growth PerspectiveCritical Measures


TargetFY05

Target

C u s t

C1. Increase Customer C1.1 Customer Survey handling problems 7.3 7.4 ≥ FY04

Lea

rnin

g a

nd

Gro

wth

L1. Improve our administrative expertise.

L2. Improve impact analysis of new and updated policies.

L3. The Virtual Delivery Team for guidance, rules and regulations.

L1.1 Customer Survey competency scoreL1.2 # inquiries by type L2.1 Customer survey usefulness

L3.1 # of Admin employeesL3.2 # of SOP's available on webL3.3 Customer satisfaction handling problems

7.44500

7.0

28197.3

7.5actual

7.2

28237.4

≥ FY04actual

≥ FY04

2427

≥FY04

31

Administrative Employees – Chart of FTE 2002/2003/2004

28 28

24

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Admin. Staff

2002

2003

2004

32

What did the L & G data tell us?What actions do we plan to take?

The community thinks the AO staff is competent and knowledgeable.

We need to have more consistent service delivery to all groups served.

We need to do several things:

see under Internal Business and Customer

33

Objective F1. Minimize unit costsMeasure: F1.1 Unit costs comparison Yr to Yr

Year Budget Items Unit Output

DS1 FY 02 176,000$ 4,500 $39.11DS1 FY 03 26,000$ 4,500 $5.78

DS2 FY 02 $0.00 0 $0.00DS2 FY 03 31,000$ 1 $31,000.00

DS3 FY 02 55,000$ 8,910 $6.17DS3 FY 03 50,000$ 8,292 $6.03

DS4 FY 02 $0.00 0 $0.00DS4 FY 03 5,000$ 35 $142.86

34

Financial PerspectiveCritical Measures


TargetFY05

Target

C u s t

C1. Increase Customer C1.1 Customer Survey handling problems 7.3 7.4 ≥ FY04

L e a r

L1. Improve our administrative L1.1 Customer Survey competency score 7.4 7.5 ≥ FY04

Fin

anci

al

F1. Minimize unit costs.

F2. Achieve cost savings from reduced rework and reprocessing.

F1. Unit cost comparison year to year FY 03DS1= $5.78 DS2 = $31k DS3 = $6.03 DS4 = $142.86

F2.1 # of corrections in payroll process

see chart

108

≤ FY03

≤ FY03

≤FY 04

≤FY 04

35

Payroll Corrections by Month Calendar Year 2003

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC

Month

Num

ber

of E

rror

s

Total = 108

Objective F2. Achieve cost saving from reduced rework and reprocessing

Measure: F2.2 Payroll correction items

36

What did the Financial data tell us?What actions do we plan to take?

Financial costs on a unit basis even hourly seem to provide little management guidance.

Customer Service ratings seem to be the more informative measure.

37

Conclusions from PMP

• More important to be right the first time and be consistent in our answers

• Our responsiveness is more effective using email over the other means of communication

• Customer satisfaction seems to be most important measure of our service delivery

• Key Initiatives• To be determined after the admin group reorganization is

complete and fully functional.

38

Appendices

39

7802

1825

6687

1605

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

FY02 FY03

Found Items

Items NotFound

Appendix 1Accountable Property Items

40

What needs to be improved? (cont.)Communication

• Better and earlier communication regarding early release the day before a holiday (11/26)

• Communication• Communication• It would be nice to have occasional meetings or at least direct

communication with our particular AOs (for those of us who've not gotten to know them too well). More importantly, I don't think this "AO pool" idea is going to improve anything, and it will preclude getting to know at least one AO and his/her function.

• What type of administrative support does ORS provide? Perhaps ORS communication and visibility to staff needs to be improved.

• Maybe a better selling of your vision. As an employee service org. a list of what services are available to us.

• Communication between the offices. Even though I know who my AO is now, it took awhile to know that info. Provide a list of AOs and their areas of responsibility. That way we know who to contact for what.

• Management needs to allow the AO's to keep the lines of communication open with the rest of the branch.

41

What needs to be improved? (cont.)Communication (cont.)

• Global notification of changes of employee locations• Provide an updated list of staff• To become more open with pertinent information when specific job

related• More sharing of information amongst AOs/AO Techs• Explain what their functions are ?• Monthly meetings just for informational purpose• Information sharing/communications

• Would be helpful if there were scheduled meetings between Admin. staff and ORF staff who do misc. general admin. duties to ensure requirements are being handled correctly.

42

What needs to be improved?Competence

• All Administrative staff seem not to have the same level of training• The competence of AOs varies dramatically - many are not qualified to

do their jobs. Train all AOs on policies and procedures or get rid of them.

• Took 4 times to get the number of dependents on state income tax withholdings corrected

• I feel the AO who handles my area needs training in alot of the services they provide. I get the impression that she is not confident in her position and has not been trained properly to handle the services or the questions that has been put before her. She is not friendly in her approach and I feel I am bothering her when ever I need to interact with her on admin issues. She is incompetent in that position. It has gotten to the point were my admin would be the last person I contact for help.

• Get people who know what they are doing• Someone with intelligence to know what to do

43

What needs to be improved?Competence (cont.)

• At least hire employees who have knowledge. Be able to work with people. Treat people with some kind of respect. Be flexible in cases of emergencies. Have some kind of compassion when an employee is stricken was a very serious disease.

• I believe they can improve on the training of new employees• Overall services• Everything• Everything• Knowledge of administrative issues

44

What needs to be improved? Customer Service Skills

• Attitudes of AOs• Provide better customer service• Customer service skills need improved.• Need to be more customer oriented.• Needs to be more personable• My AO typically acts annoyed when I call her, and she answers my

questions in a condescending tone. ITAS problems involving transfer of leave under VLTP are not resolved in a timely manner.

• Identify the administrative support people for each area. Customer service training for the AO, incl. their assistants. Job function training across the board so info disseminated is consistent.

• Change of leadership and the Administrative support, including the telephone support. The telephone support of the department has been very bad. Some researchers have gone to OEM to get equipment repaired, due to the rudeness of the person answering the phone.

• Having patience with staff.

45

What needs to be improved? Follow-up

• Better follow through and regular status updates of task provided would be helpful

• Contact information needs to be more accessible. Follow-up on issues is spotty.

• It would be very helpful if when reimbursed for travel we could be told the date and amount when reimbursements will go into personal accounts.

• Communication/follow up needs improvement. AO's should be more proactive in identifying/alerting staff on issues & then proposing possible solutions

• Sometimes, if the need is out of the ordinary, the AO simply begs out of the problem, without follow-up.

46

What needs to be improved? Consistency

• One concern I have is consistency of advice/guidance given by all AOs across ORS. It seems that sometimes different answers are given to the same question.

• More consistency in the information provided by different AOs• Provide consistent information regarding specific systems and

employee issues• Uniform standard of service. Collective training of AO's on a recurring

basis• For all AOs to provide consistent information

47

What needs to be improved? Support

• AO's in IC's do a lot. Our AOs don't seem to do much for us• At the ASU in bldg 10 we don't hear anything through the AO's office;

she may not know that she serves us• Increase support in ORF side - we still have no help getting access to

services (ADB, credit card resolution)

48

What needs to be improved? Training

• More guidance on what type of training is accessible• I cannot get training for IT support personnel. My promotion screwed

up by the AO staff. I REALLY DO NOT CARE FOR THE AO STAFF!!!!• More training to explain things to the people actually doing the work.

Like this morning for whatever reason I cannot access ITAS. No one knows why.

49

What needs to be improved? Procedures

• There should be an orientation of admin procedures for new people including contractors so that we can understand the process.

• Where can employees read about policies and procedures?• Clear explanation of policies and procedures, especially to new

employees

50

What needs to be improved? Responsibilities

• Information on policies and procedures.• Expectations of service are muddy --in one regard the AO states they

are the liaison between HR, Budget etc. however we can not rely on them to carry out that function. We are referred directly to HR so this becomes the practice.

• Not clear what the responsibilities of the AO are. The ORF AO seems to have many fewer responsibilities than AOs in other ICDs.

51

What needs to be improved? (cont.)Others

• Timekeeping and attendance to include within grade increases, shift differential pay and cola adjustments specifically handled by timekeeper

• I have two issues. First, SF50s-I received a QSI early in FY03 and have yet to see the SF50. Also TSP - I was given erroneous information about the percentage allowed last year and have lost a year of contributing the maximum amount to my TSP.

• Supply a functional administrative infrastructure to facilitate and support operational needs of service areas. ie: Property, ITAS, work request, personnel actions(52,s). Timely and accurate input and reporting of OFM cost and expense reports. OHRM reporting is inaccurate and misleading for GM/GS cost and expense data.

• Providers of administrative services have not been clearly identified during ORS-ORF transition. Suggest issuance of a matrix or table listing administrative functions and contacts/providers for ORF and each Division thereof.

• The "who's who" after the ORS re-org was severely lacking. Also, the Awards Form keeps getting replaced! Frustrating! My ITAS issues are still not resolved. AO has basically given up and has asked that I resolve it on my own w/ the ITAS people.

52


• Based on my associates interactions and mine, I believe that there needs to be more review of the performance of administrative staff and the development of a much more positive responses to administrative problem solving.

• Sometimes the task is done or dismissed so quickly that the conclusion is not fully accurate.

• Promotions/upgrade for administrative technicians to GS-9

• Additional help for AO. Our AO always seem to be overwhelmed with work.

• Records maintenance and attention to detail.

• Would like to see an Optional place on ITAS form for explanation of why leave was used. For personal use/reminder. Key request still takes too much time.

• Computer support access

• Budget tracking and analysis

53


• A new administration for this branch.

• Micromanaging

• When you ask for help it would be nice get it .

• Remove red tape. Stop dishing out new regulation that are impossible to follow. Contractors want to enjoy all training granted for free to the government - direct employees as well.

• I've taken to the study of the history of business, and concluded that if the mantle of "business" sits any heavier on your shoulder than you would like to see a "scientific" attitude run rampant at NIH, things have gone awry

• More visible

• SEND MORE PAPERWORDNONE

54

What needs to be improved? Positive comments

• I found everything is great order and always got great support• Nothing.• Every thing is OK.• So far, all my dealings with the admin. support have been positive.• I am satisfied• I wouldn't change anything, it works well• Nothing I can think of at the moment• Nothing at this time Nothing at this time• I think they're doing a great job.• Nothing

55

Conclusions • While the majority of the respondents know who is

their primary AO, 14% do not know

• About one-third of respondents consult with an AO at least monthly

• Yet about two-thirds have little interaction with their AO

• The top three most frequently used AO services were:• ORS: ITAS, In-house work requests, travel

• ORF: ITAS, In-house work requests, processing ID/BLDG requests and processing training requests

• ORF respondents had lower satisfaction ratings on almost all variables compared to ORS

• Satisfaction with AOs on competence and handling of problems was lower than the ORS overall rating

56

Conclusions (cont.) • Comments

• It is evident that many of the respondents appear to be angry and frustrated on the topic of AO services

• Many people wrote negative responses to the question “What was done particularly well?”

• Comments provide ideas on how to improve service delivery• There were differences by organization in who made positive

and negative comments• More ORS respondent made positive comments, and more ORF

respondents made negative comments

• Positive comments were made with the most frequent topics being timeliness, competence/knowledge, guidance, and helpful staff

• Comments were made for areas for improvement with the most frequent topics being timeliness, communication, customer service skills, and follow-up

Documents

FY03 ORS Performance Management Provide Administrative Support (1)