2. 1 FY02 ASA Presentation Environmental Protection Branch Presented by: Don Wilson Division of Safety National Institutes of Health 18 November 2002

3. 2 Table of Contents Main Presentation ASA Template ……………………………….……………………………….4 Customer Perspective……………………….………………………….…5-6 Customer Segmentation …………………….………………………………...7-11 Customer Satisfaction……………………….………………………………..12-19 Internal Business Process Perspective……………………………………20 Service Group Block Diagram……………………………………………………21 Conclusions from Discrete Services Deployment Flowcharts………….…….22 Process Measures………………………………………………………….…23-38 Learning and Growth Perspective………………………………………….39 Conclusions from Turnover, Sick Leave, Awards, EEO/ER/ADR Data……...40 Analysis of Readiness Conclusions……………………………………………..41 Financial Perspective………………………………………………………..42 Unit Cost……………………………………………………………..…………43-48 Asset Utilization……………………………………………………………………49 Conclusions and Recommendations……………………………………….50 Conclusions from FY02 ASA..………………………………………..………51-52 Recommendations…………………………………………………………………53

4. 3 Table of Contents Appendices Page 2-3 of your ASA Template Customer satisfaction graphs Block diagram Process maps Learning and Growth graphs Analysis of Readiness Information

5. 4

6. 5 Customer Perspective

7. 6 Customer Perspective EPB WMS Services Overview Recycling, solid and medical waste services provided under one Performance Based Contract. Contract services from Bldg 25 operations center with approximately 30 contractor employees. Hazardous waste services provided under Chem/Rad Contact. Services provided from Bldg 21 and 26T operations center with 23 contractor employees on-site. All operations must comply with applicable license, permits and regulations.

8. 7 Customer Segmentation  Chemical Waste  Medical/ Pathological Waste  Recycling  Solid Waste Environmental Protection Branch Waste Management Section

9. 8 Customer Segmentation – DS1,2,4 Customer Segmentation Charts are same for Discrete Services 1 (Recycling), 2 (Solid Waste), and 4 (Medical Waste). These 3 services are performed by collecting waste or recyclables from either loading docks, cold boxes,or containers in corridors or at outside locations. Segmentation based on assigned Institute square footage within on-site buildings. Largest Customers: ORS (18%), CC (17%), NCI (10%), NLM (8%)

10. 9 DS 1, DS 2, DS 4 - Customer Segmentation NIH Campus Institutes Serviced in Square Footage Percent of Each Customer to Total Campus Area = 4,238,629 ft 2 Total Area in Ft. 2 per Institute % #

11. 10 Customer Segmentation – DS3 The Customer Segmentation Chart for DS3, Collect and Dispose of Hazardous Waste, was created based on a list of customers from the Hazardous Waste Customer Database. There are a total of 984 customer groups in the database. A customer is not a single person, but a laboratory group that works together under the same lab chief or PI. Largest Customers: NCI (162), NIDDK (102), NIAID (100), NHLBI (80)

12. 11 DS 3 – Customer Segmentation Collect and Dispose of Hazardous Materials 152 108 100 8056 50 44 50 35 47 34 31 26 2416 75 Percent of Each Customer to Total Customer Base = 984 Number of Customers per Institute #%

13. 12 FY02 ORS Customer Scorecard Data for the Annual Self Assessments Service Group 18: Provide Waste Management DS3 - Collect and Dispose of Hazardous Waste 16 October 2002 Summary Prepared by the Office of Quality Management (OQM)

14. 13 Survey Distribution Number of Surveys Distributed Collect Chemical Wastes from Laboratories and Provide Empty Containers as Needed30 Number of Surveys Returned Collect Chemical Wastes from Laboratories and Provide Empty Containers as Needed 13 Response Rate 43%

15. 14 Radar Chart FY02 Product/Service Satisfaction Ratings Note: The rating scale ranges from 1 - 10 where “1” represents Unsatisfactory and “10” represents Outstanding. Refer to the Data Analysis and Graphing training for advice on interpreting these results. 8.27 ORS Index = 8.27 8.40 8.28 8.48 7.42 1.00 4.00 7.00 10.00 Cost Quality Timeliness Reliability Data based on 436 respondents 9.94 Service Group Index = 9.94 10.00 9.80 1.00 4.00 7.00 10.00 Cost Quality Timeliness Reliability Data based on 13 respondents

16. 15 Radar Chart FY02 Customer Service Satisfaction Ratings Note: The rating scale ranges from 1 - 10 where “1” represents Unsatisfactory and “10” represents Outstanding. Refer to the Data Analysis and Graphing training for advice on interpreting these results. 8.55 ORS Index = 8.55 8.60 8.58 8.54 8.51 1.00 4.00 7.00 10.00 Availability Responsiveness ConvenienceCompetence Handling of Problems Data based on 436 respondents 9.97 Service Group Index = 9.97 10.00 9.85 10.00 1.00 4.00 7.00 10.00 Availability Responsiveness ConvenienceCompetence Handling of Problems Data based on 13 respondents

17. 16 Scatter Diagram FY02 Customer Importance and Satisfaction Ratings: A Closer Look Note: A smaller portion of the chart is shown so that the individual data points can be labeled. 7.00 7.20 7.40 7.60 7.80 8.00 8.20 8.40 8.60 8.80 9.00 9.20 9.40 9.60 9.80 10.00 7.007.207.407.607.808.008.208.408.608.809.009.209.409.609.8010.00 Satisfaction Importance SATISFIED, IMPORTANT Cost Convenience Responsiveness Availability Handling of Problems Competence Quality Timeliness Reliability Data based on 13 respondents

18. 17 Scorecard Comments for - What was done particularly well? We appreciate the prompt pickup of old full containers and the delivery of new empty ones. Handling of problems. They are prompt and courteous. Gentlemen know what assigned task was, performed politely and efficiently Promptness is very important. The chemical waste was picked up within the 24 hour call. Polite customer service contact by phone. Picked up waste the next morning. Very efficient. Response time very good. Very friendly pick up people. Always prompt, polite. I am very impressed with the next day service.

19. 18 Scorecard Comments for – What needs to be improved? We have never had a problem. Nothing.

20. 19 Feedback to Scorecard Responders Provide email back to all responders. Email thanks them for participating and gives a summary of the results of the surveys. The email expresses our commitment to providing the highest quality of service and continuing to support the NIH mission of biomedical research.

21. 20 Internal Business Process Perspective

22. 21

23. 22 Our Service Group completed 4 deployment flowcharts for 4 discrete services The flowcharts show EPB waste services are potentially impacted by other parties. Other parties include: - Housekeeping staff that load and operate trash compactors - MPW generators or CC Housekeeping Staff who package MPW for disposal - Vehicles parked illegally that prevent emptying or pulling of trash dumpsters Conclusions from Discrete Services Deployment Flowcharts

24. 23 Performance Measures DS1: Collection and Processing of Recyclable Materials Time between customer collection request and delivery of service (PBSC Measure) Contract Performance Standard: Receive service request calls for recycling collection from Project Officer or customers by phone or electronic means, document electronically and respond within 24 hours. AQL = 100% of all service request calls serviced within 24 hours Results: AQL measured for 40 weeks. Met AQL in 39 of 40 weeks = 97.5% Compliance

25. 24  DS 1 - Compliance with 24 hour Recycling Pick Up Requests – 40 week measurement Performance Measures

26. 25 Performance Measures DS1: Collection and Processing of Recyclable Materials Timeliness and effectiveness of recyclable collections (PBSC Measure) Contract Performance Standard: Timely and efficient collection of recyclable materials from interior and exterior containers and liners replaced as required in the SOW AQL = No more than 10% of a representative sample of all containers in use greater than 50% full as measured within 4 hours of scheduled service. Results: AQL measured for 40 weeks. Met AQL in 40 of 40 weeks = 100% Compliance

27. 26 Performance Measures  DS 1 - Compliance with Timeliness and Effectiveness of Emptying Recycling Containers Campus Wide – 40 week measurement

28. 27 Performance Measures DS2: Collection and Disposal of Solid Waste Timely and effective emptying of exterior trash dumpsters to prevent overfilling and loading dock backups (PBSC Measure) Contract Performance Standard: Empty containers on schedules that allows continuous loading from the dock. AQL = No more than 10% of containers full and unable to receive additional trash on main campus during core hours. Results: AQL measured for 40 weeks. Met AQL in 40 of 40 weeks = 100% Compliance

29. 28  DS 2 - Compliance with Timeliness and Effectiveness of Emptying Dumpsters to Prevent Overfilling – 40 week measurement Performance Measures

30. 29 Performance Measures DS2: Collection and Disposal of Solid Waste Effectiveness of waste reduction efforts accomplished through the recycling program The effectiveness was determined by taking the amounts recycled divided by amounts of solid waste plus amounts recycled. This provides a percentage of solid waste reduction achieved through recycling. Results: Achieve an average recycling rate of 25% for FY2002

31. 30 Performance Measures  DS 2 – Effectiveness of Waste Reduction FY 02 In Tonnage and Percentile

32. 31 Performance Measures DS3: Collection and Disposal of Hazardous Waste Effectiveness of hazardous waste regulatory compliance as measured by regulatory violations The effectiveness was determined by evaluating the results of all regulatory inspections performed during FY02. One 2-day regulatory inspection was performed by the Maryland Department of the Environment. Results: No regulatory violations were discovered as a result of this inspection = 100% compliance

33. 32 Performance Measures  DS 3 – Effectiveness of Hazardous Waste Regulatory Compliance FY 02

34. 33 Performance Measures DS3: Collection and Disposal of Hazardous Waste Time between customer collection request and delivery of service The effectiveness was determined by using the ORS Customer Scorecard. We added an extra question on the Scorecard to measure whether the customers felt that contract requirement for providing waste collection services within 24 hours of request was being met. Results: Of the 12 responders that answered the question, all 12 gave a perfect score of 10 = 100% compliance

35. 34 DS 3 - Hazardous Waste Survey Survey of Customer Satisfaction with 24 hour Request for Pick Up Requirement

36. 35 Performance Measures DS3: Collection and Disposal of Hazardous Waste Effectiveness of using recycling options as compared to destruction or disposal The effectiveness was determined by calculating the total weight of hazardous waste recovered for reuse divided by the the total weight disposed plus weight recovered for reuse. This provides a percentage of hazardous waste that was effectively recovered for reuse. Results: Achieve an average recycling rate of 18% for FY2002. This is a very good recycling rate due to the light weight of many recyclable waste streams.

37. 36 DS 3 - Effectiveness of Utilizing Recycling Options as Compared to Destruction or Disposal

38. 37 Performance Measures DS4: Collection and Disposal of Medical Pathological Waste Time between MPW boxes placed in storage areas by customer and removed by Contractor (PBSC Measure) Contract Performance Standard: Timely and efficient collection of MPW containers from building interiors and loading docks AQL = 90% of all MPW containers collected on- site within 3 hours of being set-out by generator. Results: AQL measured for 40 weeks. Met AQL in 40 of 40 weeks = 100% Compliance

39. 38 Performance Measures  DS 4 – Timeliness and Effectiveness of Pick Ups of MPW Boxes within 3 hours of Being Placed Out by Client 40 Weeks Jan 02Apr 02Feb 02Dec 02Mar 02May 02June 02Jul 02Aug 02Sep 02 40 Weeks

40. 39 FY02 Learning and Growth (L&G) Data for the Annual Self Assessments Service Group 18: Provide Waste Management 26 September 2002 Summary Prepared by the Office of Quality Management

41. 40 No significant conclusions can be drawn from the data Conclusions from Turnover, Sick Leave, Awards, EEO/ER/ADR Data

42. 41 One employee to staff proposed Twinbrook Research Complex, scheduled to open 2004. Additional human resources for service demands created by completion and occupancy of new CRC, Twinbrook Research Campus, and new NRC Building. Analysis of Readiness Conclusions

43. 42 Financial Perspective

44. 43 UNIT COST MEASURED BY COST OF METRIC TON PER YEAR

45. 44 UNIT COST MEASURED BY COST OF METRIC TON PER YEAR

46. 45 UNIT COST MEASURED BY COST OF METRIC TON PER YEAR

47. 46 UNIT COST MEASURED BY COST OF METRIC TON PER YEAR

48. 47 UNIT COST MEASURED BY COST OF METRIC TON PER YEAR

49. 48 EPB provides top quality waste services to the NIH without significant costs increases from year to year Unit Cost Measure Conclusions

50. 49 EPB staff are assigned to manage the recycling services and hazardous, medical, and solid waste services. High amount of direct staff involvement required due to complex technical and regulatory nature of work. Work writing permits, reviewing regulatory shipping documents, new building plans impacting our services, and Contractor prepared regulatory reports. Because the staff does not perform repetitive quantifiable tasks, an asset utilization measure of EPB human resources was not practical. Asset Utilization Measures

51. 50 Conclusions and Recommendations

52. 51 Conclusions from FY02 ASA Major findings from the FY02 ASA ORS Scorecard showed customer satisfaction at an extremely high level

53. 52 Conclusions from FY02 ASA Other Comments Concerning ASA Process WMS expended approximately 480 total man- hours Too much specialized training required ASA demands reduced staff ability to provide services at highest level ASA process needs streamlining to allow standardized inputs from Service Groups after which final report is self-generated

54. 53 Award a new 5 year Chemical and Radioactive Waste Contract in FY03 with performance based elements. Work to improve performance in areas identified by process maps Implement customer recommendations from scorecard where possible Recommendations

55. 54 Appendices

56. 55

57. 56

58. 57 FY02 ORS Customer Scorecard Data for the Annual Self Assessments Service Group 18: Provide Waste Management DS3 - Collect and Dispose of Hazardous Waste 16 October 2002 Summary Prepared by the Office of Quality Management (OQM)

59. 58 Survey Distribution Number of Surveys Distributed Collect Chemical Wastes from Laboratories and Provide Empty Containers as Needed30 Number of Surveys Returned Collect Chemical Wastes from Laboratories and Provide Empty Containers as Needed 13 Response Rate 43%

60. 59 Survey Respondents FY02 Respondents by IC 6 111111 000000000000000000000000 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NCI NIDDK NICHHD NINDS NIAID NIDCR CBER NIMH NIDCD Other ORS CCOD NHLBI NEI NIA NHGRI NIAMS NIAAA CSR NIDA NCCAM NCRR NINR NLM CIT JEFIC NIBIB NIEHS NIGMS NCMHD NIH IC Number of Respondents Data based on 13 respondents Note: One respondent did not answer question.

61. 60 Survey Respondents (cont.) FY02 Respondents by Location

62. 61 Radar Chart FY02 Product/Service Satisfaction Ratings Note: The rating scale ranges from 1 - 10 where “1” represents Unsatisfactory and “10” represents Outstanding. Refer to the Data Analysis and Graphing training for advice on interpreting these results.

63. 62 Radar Chart FY02 Customer Service Satisfaction Ratings Note: The rating scale ranges from 1 - 10 where “1” represents Unsatisfactory and “10” represents Outstanding. Refer to the Data Analysis and Graphing training for advice on interpreting these results.

64. 63 Scatter Diagram FY02 Customer Importance and Satisfaction Ratings Note: The Importance rating scale ranges from 1 - 10 where “1” represents Unimportant and “10” represents Important. The Satisfaction rating scale ranges from 1 - 10 where “1” represents Unsatisfactory and “10” represents Outstanding.

65. 64 Scatter Diagram FY02 Customer Importance and Satisfaction Ratings: A Closer Look Note: A smaller portion of the chart is shown so that the individual data points can be labeled.

66. 65 Scorecard Comments What was done particularly well? We appreciate the prompt pickup of old full containers and the delivery of new empty ones. Handling of problems. They are prompt and courteous. Gentlemen know what assigned task was, performed politely and efficiently Promptness is very important. The chemical waste was picked up within the 24 hour call. Polite customer service contact by phone. Picked up waste the next morning. Very efficient. Response time very good. Very friendly pick up people. Always prompt, polite. I am very impressed with the next day service.

67. 66 What needs to be improved? We have never had a problem. Nothing.

68. 67 Other Comments Task assignment from EPB needs refinement. 1. Chemical waste tags need to be redesigned to include DATE you delivered containers and instructions that containers must be removed within 60 days. 2. You should notify all users by WRITTEN MAIL or E-MAIL of this new 60 day rule. Very good. There should be some kind of a clear window on the red cans so the investigator will know when it is full. This is a wonderful service.

69. 68 Customer Scorecard Summary Conclusions based on graphs and comments – Our customers rate the quality of this service very highly – This service excels in all measured areas Potential actions based on what you have learned from the data – Revise the Chemical Waste Tag as suggested – Provide NIH wide email notification concerning removal of containers within 60 days

70. 69 Summarizing Your Customer Scorecard Data (cont.) Does the customer satisfaction data, when compared to data in other perspectives, show potential relationships? Answer: None that could be observed From reviewing your data, what could be done to improve your customers’ satisfaction? Answer: Very little based on the data. We will consider customer suggestions concerning the Chemical Waste Tag and the collection containers.

71. 70 Feedback to Scorecard Responders Will provide email back to all responders. Email will thank them for participating and give a summary of the results of the surveys. The email will express our commitment to providing the highest quality of service and continuing to support the NIH mission of biomedical research.

72. 71

73. 72 Process Flow Charts

74. 73

75. 74

76. 75

77. 76

78. 77

79. 78

80. 79

81. 80

82. 81 FY02 Learning and Growth (L&G) Data for the Annual Self Assessments Service Group 18: Provide Waste Management 26 September 2002 Summary Prepared by the Office of Quality Management

83. 82 Service Group Turnover Rate (Oct 2001 - June 2002) Service Group Number Turnover Rate

84. 83 Average Hours of Sick Leave Used (Oct 2001 - June 2002) Service Group Number Average Hours

85. 84 Average Number of Awards Received (Oct 2001 - June 2002) Service Group Number Average number

86. 85 Average Number of EEO Complaints (Oct 2001 - June 2002) Service Group Number Average Number

87. 86 Average Number of ER Cases (Oct 2001 - June 2002) Service Group Number Average Number

88. 87 Average Number of ADR Cases (Oct 2001 - June 2002) Service Group Number Average Number

89. 88 Learning and Growth Data Table About 1 week sick leave per employee About 1 award for every 2 employees 10% employee turnover No EEO complaints or ER/ADR cases

90. 89 Summary of Service Group 18 Learning and Growth Data Ten percent employee turnover About 1 week sick leave used per employee About one award for every 2 employees No EEO, ER, or ADR issues

91. 90 No significant conclusions can be drawn from the data Conclusions from Turnover, Sick Leave, Awards, EEO/ER/ADR Data

92. 91 1. What are the right mix of skills and abilities needed to carry out the mission of this service group? Recycling: Understanding of industry equipment, operations and work practices, basic PC skills, contract management skills, communication skills, a full understanding of applicable regulations and required reports, good people skills and customer service skills Solid Waste: Understanding of industry equipment operations and work practices, basic PC skills, contract management skills, communication skills, a full understanding of applicable regulations and required reports, good people skills and customer service skills Answers to Readiness Questions

93. 92 Hazardous Waste: Understanding of hazardous waste regulations and their application at the NIH, ability to interpret new regulations and permit conditions knowledge of the industry (transportation, treatment, and disposal), good college science background in chemistry, biology, and physics, good PC skills for data tracking and document preparation, contract management skills, communication skills, good people skills and customer service skills Medical Waste: Understanding of industry operations and work practices, college background in biology and general sciences, understanding of state and DOT medical waste regulations, basic PC skills, contract management skills, communication skills, good people skills and customer service skills Answers to Readiness Questions (Cont.)

94. 93 2. Will the service group have sufficient numbers of people, with the right skills and abilities to carry out its mission in the next three years? In 2004, an additional EPB staff member will be required to manage proposed Twinbrook Research Complex Waste Facility. Additional staff resources also required 2004-2006 to support increased service demands created by occupancy phases of following new buildings: CRC, NRC and Twinbrook Research Complex. Answers to Readiness Questions (Cont.)

95. 94 3. What are going to be the training needs of the employees and contractors employed in this service group in the next two to three years? Will continue our existing training track including: regulatory and industry specific training, customer relations and leadership skills training, on-site training required by permits, and IT training related to data tracking and contract management. A stronger emphasis will be placed on IT training related to data management and on leadership/management skills. Answers to Readiness Questions (Cont.)

96. 95 4. What will be the right tools or materials (e.g., information, software applications, hardware, specialized equipment) needed to carry out the mission of this service group in the next three years? Industrial waste handling equipment, hazardous waste analytical equipment, replacement computers, hazardous waste tracking software, and data tracking software. On- site staging area for dumpsters with suspected hazardous material contamination. Answers to Readiness Questions (Cont.)

97. 96 5. Does the service group have the right quantity of tools or materials needed to carry out its mission in the next three years? Mainly need to continue existing hazardous waste tracking software enhancements for more detailed data tracking. 6. What are the anticipated implications of not obtaining the right mix of skills and abilities, or tools and materials (e.g., service disruption, inefficiencies, increased turnover of key personnel) in meeting service or mission expectations? Greater difficulties in tracking and retrieving critical hazardous waste data and reduced work efficiency by contractor staff. Answers to Readiness Questions (Cont.)