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

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

3. Why Change?

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

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

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

7. 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

8. 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

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

10. 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

11. 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

12. Expectations of Leaders/Managers

13. Spend time on Big Vision! Forest, not Trees!

14. Covey Time Management Matrix Quadrant 2

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

16. 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

17. 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

18. 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)

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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

24. Overall Results

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

26. Cost Effectiveness FFY 2009-2012
$0.83

27. Past Performance Rankings FFY 2009-2012
Year

28. Total Collections

29. Where We Are: 2012 2008 2012 Performance Measures
Performance Measures
Paternity % %
Support Orders % %
Current Support 60.1 % %
Arrears % %
Cost Effectiveness $ $ 2.76
Total Collections $31,139,936 $28,574,419
Caseload 18, ,676
Staffing
Priority Customer Service Performance

30. Enjoy the Journey Humorous Campaigns Quarterly Newsletter
Staff Recognition

31. Celebrate Your Success

32. 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

33. Looking Ahead

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

35. Questions?