Julie S. Paik, Director Department of Child Support Services Sonoma County August CSDA Leadership Institute
Performance Measures ◦ Paternity: % ◦ 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 ???
New System: CSE New State Director New State Priorities/Focus Economic Crisis/Employee Morale Turn-over of Board of Supervisors
New Director/Attorney Director Complacency or Ignorance about Performance and what moves performance No or unknown Priority Employee Engagement Study
Improve on Federal Performance Goals No separate customer service goal because excelling on the performance goals is the best customer service.
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
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
Remain laser-focused on priorities Stop non-productive and redundant work – Learn to say “no” Be strategic about customer service
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
Assign all staff to strategies and/or goals Measure against those goals regularly Reflect participation in individual performance goals Determine appropriate next steps for staff with performance challenges
Empower Yourself and Staff! Ask for Forgiveness, not Permission!
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 ◦ Lowered Morale ◦ Performance would Plummet
Impact of CE: 10¢ per annum Staffing Levels: ◦ 2009: 144 ◦ 2010: ◦ 2011: ◦ 2012: ◦ 2013: Management Ratio: ◦ 2008: 1:5 ◦ 2012: 1:20 30% Reduction in staff
What Goal Does this Impact ◦ Direct Impact on Goal 5 (C/E) ◦ Indirect Impact on Goal 2 (processing of court documents) and Goal 5 (time from enforcement workers) 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 $400,000 in our budget ◦ Wait times would increase ◦ Performance would not improve
Results ◦ Improved Cost Effectiveness: 7¢ per annum ◦ Deleted attrited vacant positions and made others more efficient ◦ Better wait times went from 4 minutes 9 seconds to 1 minute 22 seconds ◦ Increased staff morale ◦ Increased adaptability ◦ Help with performance measures
What Goal Does This Impact: ◦ Direct Impact on Goal 5 (C/E) Genesis: ◦ Quickly Increasing Rent Costs ◦ Building Too Big to Meet our Needs ◦ Dark, Uninviting Environment ◦ Floor Plan Created Division Among Staff Risks: ◦ No Easy Public Transportation ◦ Relocating Would Cause Inconvenience to Customers and Staff ◦ BOS Would All Vie to be Based in Their Districts
Results: ◦ Improved cost effectiveness: 12¢ for first year ◦ Cheaper rent ◦ Nicer, more modern space ◦ More conducive to communicative work environment ◦ Allowed for incorporation of technology
Hard to Change Course/Inertia is a Strong Force Hard to Stay on Course/ Can Be Easily Distracted Trust takes time Must constantly refine as you go
Performance Measures FFY
Cost Effectiveness FFY
Ranking Year Past Performance Rankings FFY
Where We Are: 2012 Performance Measures Paternity104.8 %108.7 % Support Orders83.24 %94.1 % Current Support60.1 %70.2 % Arrears65.62 %70.02 % Cost Effectiveness$ 1.96$ 2.76 Total Collections$31,139,936$28,574,419 Caseload18,09013,676 Staffing PriorityCustomer Service Performance
Humorous Campaigns Quarterly Newsletter Staff Recognition
2010 California DCSS Directors Excellence Award th place statewide Overall Performance; Top Performing LCSA Medium County th place statewide Overall Performance; Top Performing LCSA Medium County; Most Improved County
Increasing Collections - Flat-lining Maintaining High Performance Increasing Costs of Doing Business Maintaining staff morale Succession Planning Review Organizational Chart Goal Calculator