JUDGES MEETING 1. Judges Meeting The Judges Meeting –Each Team will be assigned a date and time. Each Senior Examiner will be expected to present their.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
2012 EXAMINER TRAINING Examples of NERD Comment Formatting
Advertisements

Program Evaluation in Gifted Education Rebecca Mann EDPS 540.
Baldrige National Quality Program 2003 Baldrige National Quality Program The Site Visit Process and Evaluating Site Visit Issue Worksheets.
Site Visit Review Just-in-Time Training. Pre-work and Training Judging Examiner Evaluation Process Stage 1 Independent Review Stage 2 Consensus Review.
Using Baldrige to Create Organizational Alignment & Integration
EVALUATOR TIPS FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT WRITING The following slides were excerpted from an evaluator training session presented as part of the June 2011.
June 2002QPRC 2002, Tempe, Arizona A Workshop on Assessing to the Baldrige Criteria Cheryl L. Jennings, Motorola Lynn Kelley, Textron.
Welcome, Panel of Examiner and Process Development Members! Washington State Quality Award PEPD #1 Training 2008.
2014 Baldrige Performance Excellence Program | Self-Assessing Your Organization with the Baldrige Criteria.
Copyright 2010, The World Bank Group. All Rights Reserved. Agricultural Data Collection Procedures Section A 1.
Environmental Accounting. Discussion Environmental Accounting Overview –What is environmental accounting –Why do environmental accounting –What is an.
2010 AHCA/NCAL National Quality Award Program - Gold Overview - Jeri Reinhardt Ed McMahon Tim Case.
Baldrige National Quality Program Information and Analysis: The Foundation for Performance Excellence Harry S. Hertz DAMA - NCR Meeting March 13, 2001.
Applicant Name RMPEx Site Visit Opening Meeting Team Leader - Team Members –
Meta-Evaluation of USAID Evaluations: American Evaluation Association Annual Conference Molly Hageboeck and Micah Frumkin.
PPA 503 – The Public Policy-Making Process Lecture 9b – Policy Evaluation and Emergency Management.
Judging Orientation 58 th Annual DRSEF. Agenda 1) Organization 2) Scoring 3) Conduct.
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award
FIELD COMPLIANCE UPDATE CDR Thomas R. Berry, RPh FDA, Investigator RAL-RP / ATL-DO.
2014 Work Planning Local Program Leadership Team.
SM. SM Use of the Georgia Oglethorpe Award Logo is restricted to current Key Investors, Award Recipients,
Methods for assessing fidelity and quality of delivery of smoking cessation behavioural support Fabiana Lorencatto, Robert West, Carla Bruguera, & Susan.
Site Visit. 2 Process Intent Observation (IO) Strength to Comment Intent Observation: “Double plus on the process used for strategic planning.” Comment:
2015 Baldrige Performance Excellence Program | Producing a High-Quality Scorebook 2015 Presentation for Senior and Alumni Examiners.
Applicant Name RMPEx Site Visit Opening Meeting Team Leader - Team Members –
Examiner Training July The ONE Award will identify and promote best practices in non-profit organizations and recognize our region’s Organizations.
Michigan Quality Leadership Award New Examiner Training 2014.
Scoring 1. Scoring Categories 1 – 6 (Process Categories) Examiners select a score (0-100) to summarize their observed strengths and opportunities for.
A Florida Natural Resource: The Sterling Approach to Performance Excellence A workshop at The Florida Conference on Aging 2001 Doris Reeves-Lipscomb Groups-That-Work.
Malcolm Baldrige Award for Education Kyle Carney.
1 California Public Health Preparedness: Lessons from Seven Jurisdictions R. Burciaga Valdez, PhD June 8, 2004.
Operations Management For Competitive Advantage 1 Quality Management Operations Management For Competitive Advantage Chapter 7.
Assessment of an Arts-Based Education Program: Strategies and Considerations Noelle C. Griffin Loyola Marymount University and CRESST CRESST Annual Conference.
National Commission for Academic Accreditation & Assessment Developmental Reviews at King Saud University and King Faisal University.
1 Customer Service Audit July 17, Task Force Membership 18 Internal & External Representatives Parents Teachers Support staff Principals Community.
Data Quality Assessment
C ULTURE & C LIMATE S URVEY. Sample Employee Survey Report Findings ACME Widgets.
Monitoring Definitions: Derived from Latin monere “to advise” Ineffective PracticeEffective Practice
Applicant Name RMPEx Site Visit Opening Meeting Team Leader - Team Members –
1 ©2002 Minnesota Council for Quality Evaluation Techniques for Team-Leaders and Judges August 2002.
2008 AHCA/NCAL National Quality Award Program - Step III Overview - Jon Frantsvog Ira Schoenberger Tim Case.
Copyright 2010, The World Bank Group. All Rights Reserved. Managing Data Collection Section A 1.
Agenda Diocesan Self-Review What is still the same, what are the key changes and how can we best implement them? Validation What is still the same, what.
Factor0–5%10–25%30–45%50–65%70–85%90–100% Approach No systematic approach to Item requirements is evident; information is anecdotal. The beginning of a.
Tennessee Center for Performance Excellence Section 2 – Process Evaluation Factors.
Copyright © 2015 by The Segal Group, Inc. All rights reserved. STAFF CLASSIFICATION AND COMPENSATION STUDY Compensation Philosophy and Comparison Market.
American Educational Research Association Annual Meeting AERA San Diego, CA - April 13-17, 2009 Denise Huang Identification of Key Indicators of Quality.
Quality Texas Foundation Site Visit Team Closing Meeting January 15, 2014.
Site Visit Opening Meeting. Washington State Quality Award Council2 WSQA MISSION Make Washington State a better place to live, learn, and work by helping.
CERTIFICATE IN ASSESSING VOCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT (CAVA) Unit 1: Understanding the principles and practices of assessment.
2016 Baldrige Performance Excellence Program | Writing High-Quality Feedback for 2016 Baldrige Award Applicants.
Baldrige Performance Excellence Program | New Examiner Orientation and Examiner Training Experience Welcome to … BALDRIGE.
Cover slide Project, course, team, date. Outline welcome  1 slide introducing the key sections/ information items in this presentation.
Baldrige Performance Excellence Program | Baldrige Examiner Preparation
2016 Baldrige Performance Excellence Program | Producing “Straight A” Feedback for Baldrige Applicants 2016 Presentation for Senior.
Review of Social Marketing South East Region Presentation to Department of Health South East 5 August 2009 Hannah Corbett (South East.
Becoming a TEAMS Collegiate Host
Writing Your Federal Résumé
Program Evaluation ED 740 Study Team Project Program Evaluation
Finalizing Award Recommendations
Applicant Name RMPEx Site Visit Opening Meeting
Subrecipient Monitoring Audit
Missouri Quality Award Site Visit
Evaluation of the marketing standards framework for fishery and aquaculture products Presentation to the Market Advisory Council 23 May 2018 Brussels.
Becoming a TEAMS Collegiate Host
Updating Items in Scorebook Navigator
Employee Performance Management System (EPMS)
Environmental Accounting
Becoming a TEAMS Collegiate Host
Quality Management MNGT 420
Presentation transcript:

JUDGES MEETING 1

Judges Meeting The Judges Meeting –Each Team will be assigned a date and time. Each Senior Examiner will be expected to present their process and findings in a standard format presentation. The Senior Examiner may appear in person, or by telephone (the presentation will be run for them at the Judges Meeting site). –The Support Senior, and/or SIT are welcome and encouraged to sit in as a learning experience. –Senior travel expenses are not reimbursed. 2

Judges Meeting Presentation (Format Example) 3

Application Name and Number 4

Examination Team 5

Examination Process Issues Anything that happened during the pre-Site Visit Examination Process that was out of the ordinary, or a process issue that should be brought to the attention of the Judges 6

Site Visit Process Issues Any special challenges, process upsets, or anything that occurred during (or after) the Site Visit that was or potentially was a problem, or any issue that should be brought to the attention of the Judges 7

Applicant Overview & Key Factors- SAMPLE Large Manufacturing operation facility located in San Diego 2,200 employees 15 major product lines Serve the west coast widget market $37 million annual budget Three market segments (educational, government, and industrial widgets) 1,200 suppliers Regulated by EPA, OSHA, and FDA 8

Applicant Key Role Model Behaviors- SAMPLE Senior Leadership Process Management Community Involvement Training 9

Applicant Key Opportunities for Improvement- SAMPLE Extent of deployment: not across all sites as appropriate Several practices but not always overall systematic approach Collecting lots of data, but no systematic approach to using results for evaluating performance and improvement 10

Site Visit Length of Site Visit (time actually on site) If multiple sites, those visited and the basis for their selection Approaches used to evaluate sites not visited Approximate number of employees interviewed (categories, shifts, etc.) –Interviews with Leadership and other significant individuals/teams Other relevant information affecting the site visit 11

Major Site Visit Issues Going to Site Visit- Sample Absence of results Absence of action plans: “available on site” Verify extent of deployment across all sites as appropriate Verify systematic approach to improvements 12

Major Site Visit Findings- Sample Substantial competitive comparative data is lacking Scores were reduced in many data areas, due to the lack of competitive data Validated the deployment of refined Business and Support Processes 13

Site Visit Scoring Changes 14 Items that changed a Score Band.

Score History Stage 1, Individual Examiner Average Score = 538 Stage 2, Consensus Score = 554 Stage 3, Site Visit Final Score = 572 Score Range = 551 – 650 Team Award Recommendation = Silver 15

Examination Process Strengths Examination Process Strengths in general or specific process strengths. Processes that worked unusually well in this examination. 16

Examination Process OFIs Opportunities where the Examination Process in general could be improved. Something that happened in this particular examination process that could have been handled better. 17

WRAP UP Questions? Comments? 18

Thank You! 19