Implementing Organizational Change Julie S. Paik, Director Department of Child Support Services Sonoma County August 2013 2013 CSDA Leadership Institute

Where We Were: 2008 Performance Measures Caseload Staffing Paternity: 104.8 % Support Orders: 83.24 % Current Support: 60.1 % Arrears: 65.62 % Cost Effectiveness: $1.96 Total Collections: $31,139,936 Caseload 18,090 Staffing 144 Priority: Customer Service/Compliance/???

Why Change?

External Reasons for Change New System: CSE New State Director New State Priorities/Focus Economic Crisis/Employee Morale Turn-over of Board of Supervisors

Internal Reasons for Change New Director/Attorney Director Complacency or Ignorance about Performance and what moves performance No or unknown Priority Employee Engagement Study

New Focus Improve on Federal Performance Goals No separate customer service goal because excelling on the performance goals provides the best customer service

Lay and Reiterate the Groundwork Know the Federal Performance Measures Know what moves the Federal Performance Measures Goal 2: Stop opening cases Goal 3: Numerator and denominator are two independent factors Goal 4: Impact of arrears forgiveness Goal 5 (C/E): Service of process practices

Create an Annual Plan (FFY) Know the goals Know historical performance Collect ideas from every possible source Managers Staff Other LCSAs Other County Departments Have short and long term goals

Follow Your Plan Remain laser-focused on priorities Stop non-productive and redundant work – Learn to say “no” Be strategic about customer service

Adapt, if Necessary Don’t let a bad month get you down Study why it happened and how to prevent it Be flexible in the late Spring/early Summer

Ensure Accountability Assign all staff to strategies and/or goals Measure against those goals regularly Reflect participation in individual performance evaluations Determine appropriate next steps for staff with performance challenges - ABC

Expectations of Leaders/Managers

Spend time on Big Vision! Forest, not Trees!

Covey Time Management Matrix Quadrant 2

Be Brave! Empower Yourself and Staff! Ask for Forgiveness, not Permission!

Brave Project #1: New Organizational Structure What Goal Does this Impact: Direct Impact to Goal 5 (C/E) Indirect Impact to Other Goals Through Stream-lined Business Processes Genesis: CSE Conversion Completed Job Classification Review Commitment to Managers Managing Outlier with All LCSAs Duplication/Unnecessary Workloads/Processes SEIU Grumblings Risks: Staff Would Lose their Jobs Lower Morale Performance would Plummet Temporarily

Organizational Structure Results Staffing Levels: 2009: 144 2010: 128.5 2011: 114.5 2012: 107.5 2013: 102.5 Management Ratio: 2008: 1:5 2012: 1:20 Impact of CE: 10¢ per annum 30% Reduction in staff

Brave Project #2: Alameda County Call Center What Goal Does this Impact Direct Impact on Goal 5 (C/E) Indirect Impact on Goal 2 (processing of court documents) and Goal 5 (CSO phone time)

Brave Project #2: Alameda County Call Center Genesis: Long wait times Unhappy customers Inefficiencies in creating a model to handle phone calls Disgruntled legal processors who answered the phones Inefficiencies and delay in legal processing work Frustration by caseworkers who felt calls were not adequately screened Less expensive model offered by Alameda County Risks: Giving up $400,000 in our budget Wait times would increase Performance would not improve

Alameda Call Center Results Improved Cost Effectiveness: 7¢ per annum Deleted attrited vacant positions and made others more efficient Better wait times went from 4 minutes 9 seconds to 1 minute 22 seconds Increased staff morale Helped with performance measures

Brave Project #3: Shared Services Agreement W/ Riverside County What Goal Does this Impact: Direct Impact to Goal 5 for Sonoma County Direct Impact to Goal 2 for Riverside County Genesis: CSE Statewide Uniformity Unclear if more CSOs Would Necessarily help Collections Risks: SEIU Rumblings/Objections Unable to Perform Work Remotely

Riverside Shared Services Results Win/Win Resolution Riverside: Work 5,000 Establishment Cases resulting in orders and closures and working locates Sonoma: 6¢ per annum Intangible Gains Staff Want to be on Team Riverside Staff Learn More About Other LCSAs

Lessons Learned Hard to Change Course/Inertia is a Strong Force Hard to Stay on Course/ Can Be Easily Distracted Trust takes time Must constantly refine as you go

Overall Results

Performance Measures FFY 2009-2012 100% 6.7% 9.5% 5.2%

Cost Effectiveness FFY 2009-2012 $0.83

Past Performance Rankings FFY 2009-2012 Year

Total Collections

Where We Are: 2012 2008 2012 Performance Measures 2008 2012 Performance Measures Paternity 104.8 % 108.7 % Support Orders 83.24 % 94.1 % Current Support 60.1 % 70.2 % Arrears 65.62 % 70.02 % Cost Effectiveness $ 1.96 $ 2.76 Total Collections $31,139,936 $28,574,419 Caseload 18,090 13,676 Staffing 144 107.5 Priority Customer Service Performance

Enjoy the Journey Humorous Campaigns Quarterly Newsletter Staff Recognition

Celebrate Your Success

Awards Sonoma Sonoma DCSS DCSS 2012 2011 2010 2011 2012 California DCSS Directors Excellence Award 2011 9th place statewide Overall Performance; Top Performing LCSA Medium County 2012 6th place statewide Overall Performance; Top Performing LCSA Medium County; Most Improved County

Looking Ahead

Future Challenges Increasing Collections - Flat-lining Maintaining High Performance Increasing Costs of Doing Business Maintaining Staff Morale Succession Planning Review Organizational Chart Goal Calculator

Questions?