1 Performance Management Presentation (7) Manage and Administer Worksite Enrichment Program Worksite Enrichment Program Team Lead: Timothy Tosten Members: Allyson ColeDwayne Parris Christopher GainesMary Ellen Savarese Ellen GrantDavid Shea Carole HarmanKiana Timmons Pamela Jenkins Office of Research Services National Institutes of Health January 9, 2004

2 Table of Contents Main Presentation PM Template ……………………………….………………………3 Customer Perspective……………………….……………………..6 Internal Business Process Perspective………………………………………………………21 Learning and Growth Perspective………………………………………………………30 Financial Perspective………………………………………………40 Conclusions and Recommendations………………………………………………46

3

4 Relationship Among Performance Objectives

5 High Impact Objectives

6 Customer Perspective

7 Mandatory to Report on Customer Satisfaction

8 Customer Scorecard Methodology Worksite Enrichment Team met with OQM and consultant to determine optimal customer assessment methodology Customized ORS Customer Scorecard into multi-dimensional survey to meet Team’s needs based on services: Child Care Food Services Retail Fitness Travel Interpreting Determined method of survey distribution Distribute survey NIH-wide via NIH intranet Data collected for during the months of Feb-Mar 2004 Completed surveys will be returned to OQM Survey data will be entered into a database and analyzed

9 C1a: Customer Satisfaction Data from Customer Scorecard will be available in early March

10 C1a: Customer Feedback

11 C1a: Customer Feedback (cont.)

12 C1b: Usage/Demand for Child Care Services Total = 283 Available SpacesTotal = 961 Children on the Wait List = 10 Children

13 C1b: Usage/ Demand for Food Services

14 C1b: Usage/Demand for Interpreting Services

15 C1b: Usage/Demand for Interpreting Services

16 C1b: Usage/Demand for Fitness Membership

17 C1b: Usage/Demand for Travel Services

18 C1c: Customer Counts Total customers served= 2,185,797 Note: Interpreting Services shows requests, not total people served

19 Customer Perspective What the data tells us? Although we have not completed our Customer Scorecard survey, we have some indications that customer satisfaction is good. The trend shows us that our programs are growing in usage and demand.

20 Customer Perspective A ctions Work with OQM to ensure that we have a valid Customer Scorecard Conduct ORS Customer Scorecard assessment after the Performance Management Conference Make changes to our services, processes and approach based on feedback from customers

21 Internal Business Process Perspective

22 Internal Business Process Perspective

23 IB1a. Results of Audit (Plan vs Actual) Note: This shows plan vs actual for our largest program

24 Internal Business Process Perspective (cont.)

25 IB2b. Percent of Contracts Reviewed for Change/Update

26 IB2a. Number of “filtered” customer suggestions and vendor inputs included in use agreements and contracts

27 Internal Business Process Perspective What the data tells us We are not collecting data concerning how our vendors are doing for decision-making purposes. We are reviewing our contracts/use agreements for possible conversion to performance based but are slower at changing them than anticipated. We are not making regular updates to our contracts and use agreements as quickly as we should based on customer and vendor input.

28 Internal Business Process Perspective Actions Review and update our contracts/use agreements on consistent basis. Move all of our contracts/use agreements towards more “performance-based.” Include vendor and customer input in contracts (as relevant). Track, monitor, and discuss vendor “follow- through” to ensure standards are met and better decisions can be made.

29 Learning and Growth Perspective

30 Learning and Growth Perspective

31 L2a. Results of internal climate survey N = 9 UnsatisfactoryOutstanding

32 Summarizing Our Internal Climate Survey Data Results Overall, our employees rate our work environment as “good” and indicated that they felt we are achieving our mission – High ratings were given for “communications with peers” and for “communications with managers/ supervisors.” – We also received written comments regarding the satisfaction with the parking situation at our off-site location. – We received the lowest ratings for keeping staff “abreast of various programs” and “schedule/location of others.” – We also received written comments regarding the need for more team building We will be addressing the low ratings and negative comments – We will be making changes to the way we inform each other of schedules/ locations of each other – We will also be finding ways for the staff to update each other on their projects. – We will also examine possibilities for some additional team-building exercises We intend to survey staff again in FY04 to ensure we are improving our climate.

33 L2b. Vendor Survey Results N = 112 UnsatisfactoryOutstanding

34 FY04 Vendor Satisfaction Ratings: NIH Project Officer N = 112 UnsatisfactoryOutstanding

35 Summarizing Our Vendor Survey Data Our Vendors rated their work environment as “good” overall – High ratings were given for “Personal Security” and “Lighting of Stairways.” – We also received mostly outstanding ratings for the section related to our Project Officers – The lowest ratings were given for “Storage Space” and “Restroom/ Locker room cleanliness.” – We also received written comments regarding the need for: – Solutions to the parking problems – Speed of ID Requests/ Processing – Equipment Maintenance – Restroom cleanliness We will be addressing the low ratings and negative comments – We will be working with the vendors to determine how we can better assist with processing of ID’s, equipment maintenance, and in improving the cleanliness of the restrooms. – It is unlikely that we will be able to impact the parking situation, however we can try to keep our vendors better informed regarding parking issues and alternatives through a new newsletter just for our vendors starting in Feb 04. We intend to survey vendor staff again in FY04 to ensure we are improving their ability to serve our customers.

36 Learning and Growth Perspective What the data tells us The internal climate data tells us that most of our staff are satisfied with their work environment; however, they feel we need to improve our internal “information pipeline” with regard to schedules/locations of staff. The data also tells us that we need to share more information among our staff with regard to all of our programs. The vendor data tells us that we are doing a good job in relating to our vendors, but that we need to address some of their environmental needs so that they can better serve our customers.

37 Learning and Growth Perspective Actions Respond to/address the top concerns of both our staff and our vendors. Improve “messaging” to our vendor community (a newsletter for vendors – which is planned for Feb 04).

38 Financial Perspective

39 Financial Perspective (cont.)

40 F1a. Unit Measures DS1- Number children/families served DS2- Number of customers DS3- Number of customers DS4- Based on tickets issued annually DS5- Based on hours provided per year

41 F1a. Unit Measures Unit MeasuresFY 2003 Budget FY 2003 Actual FY 2004 Request FY 2005 Request FY 2006 Forecast Manage child care services, programs, contracts and use agreements (*T his FY03 budget number is based on expanded capacity at some centers, and counting families on the waiting list.) # of children/families served * Manage food services programs, contracts and use agreements (No numbers entered for FY02/03 because we changed our unit of measure.)# of customers 1,727,0001,715,0001,755,000 Manage retail and fitness services, programs, contracts and use agreements (No numbers entered for FY02 /03 because we changed our unit of measure.) # of customers 436,000450,000465,000 Manage interpreting services, programs, and contracts # of interpreting service hrs11,18711,98512,58413,21313,874 Manage travel management services programs and contract# of tickets processed50,00051,20952,50055,12558,000

42 F1b. FY 03 Budget Requested vs Approved *Does not include rent

43 Financial Perspective What the data tells us The new unit measures are a much better indication of what we are doing. We are doing a good job of requesting our funding, but we could provide better justifications for our budgets based on data collected.

44 Financial Perspective Actions Validate Unit Costs of all of our services. Track budget numbers and numbers better.

45 Conclusions

46 Conclusions from PMP In 2003, we mainly concentrated on our “High Impact” Objectives Demand for our services is increasing yearly Our vendors show a high level of satisfaction with their environment and with the management team, but there is room for improvement, especially in communication Our employees are fairly satisfied with their current environment We need to do a better job of formally tracking and monitoring vendor performance We intend to use all three of our surveys to determine the “critical few” things we need to improve in 2004: Customer Scorecard (Feb/Mar) Internal Climate Vendor Survey

47 Table of Contents (cont.) Appendix Page 2 of template………………………….……………………………….48 Customer Perspective C2a: Percent of Vendors meeting standards in contracts………….49 C2b: Number of meetings with vendors.………………………………50 C3a: Percent of new spaces opened without amenities planning….51 C3b: Number of inclusions of WPB staff in planning meetings that impact amenities…………………………………………………………..….52 Internal Business Process Perspective IB3a: Percent of customers that can put our name with our program………………………………………..…………………………. 53 IB3b: Advertising and promotion volume………………………………54 Learning and Growth Perspective LG1a: Work Plan vs actual for each program area…………………..55 LG1b: Customer Complaints /customer satisfaction survey results………………………………………………….…………………..56 LG3a: Frequency of vendor/contractor acknowledgements…………57 LG3b: Number of Messages to Vendors………………………………58 Financial Perspective F1a: Speed of service tickets…………………………………………….59 F1b: Payment Rate for Vendors…………………………………………60 F3a: Percent of Plans with retro for amenities………………………….61 F3b: Percent of construction plans matching actual for amenities …62 F3c: Number of construction document submission changes………63

48 PMP Template- Page 2

49 C2a. Percent of Vendors meeting standards in contracts

50 C2b. Number of Meetings with vendors

51 C3a. New space opened without amenities planning influence

52 C3b. Number of inclusions of WEPB staff in planning meetings that impact amenities

53 IB3a. Percent of customers that can put our name with our program

54 IB3b. Advertising and Promotion Volume

55 L1a. Work plan vs actual (for each service area)

56 L1b. Customer complaints/ customer satisfaction survey results for each service area

57 L3a. Frequency of vendor/contractor acknowledgements

58 L3b. Number of messages to vendors (Notional)

59 F1a. Speed of service tickets

60 F1b. Payment rate for vendors (late vs on time)

61 F3a. Square footage with Retrofit for Amenities

62 F3b. Number of plans matching actual on construction of amenities

63 F3c. Number of construction document submission changes (impacting amenities)