Donation Facilitation

1. Donation Facilitation Preliminary detailed Design review 11/19/2018

2. Today’s Agenda • Progress Since Last Design Review • Discuss Experiment • Overview • Results • Lessons Learned • Future of Replenishment Board • IMS Needs per Sharon • Solution to IMS Needs • Operation Observation • Parking Lot Ideas • Next Steps • Please ask questions throughout presentation!

3. Progress Made Since Last Design Review • Created Team Vision for Phase • Planned vs Actual • Re-defined Problem Statement • Agreed on Food Categories • Created Chart to Explain Categories • Created Replenishment Board / Prepped Experiment • Kicked Off and Completed Experiment 1 • Created BOM for Potential Purchases • Formed Test Plans to Test Engineering Requirements • Updated Risks

4. Final Categories

5. Category Visual for Volunteers

6. Overview of Experiment • Purpose • Understand if the board provides Sharon with the knowledge she needs • Understand if the replenishment board will be used by employees • Procedure • Sent instructions and purpose to employees • Constructed & established the replenishment board with 5 item categories • Conducted twice-daily progress checks • Metrics Recorded: • Has the board been interacted with? • Is the board accurate? • Were any changes accurate? • Should changes have been made that weren’t made? • What was the current employee’s opinion / level of understanding?

7. Results of Experiment • Flowchart lead to lack of understand on how the employee is supposed to interact • Feedback after explanation • “Very Intuitive” • “Cool Idea” • “Simple to use and I definitely foresee people using it” • Board (inventory status) was accurate 80% of the time (⅘ checks) • Accurate = Sign truly represents the inventory status of the food category • Potentially due to us not having it in the correct state to start the experiment

8. Results of Experiment (Continued)

9. Lessons Learned • Sharon distributing information was effective • Make sure we are not using too much technical jargon in our descriptions/instructions • Employees were receptive to new ideas, eager to learn about system • Board was effective • As a team: • Experiments are effective • Physical experiments are better than simulations • Longer experiments ≠ Better results

10. Potential Applications of Tracking Board • Current board: • Shown to be useful • Easy to use/understand • Generated a lot of enthusiastic feelings • Where do we go from here? • Option 1: Keep utilizing the replenishment board with the 5 item categories • Continue experiment to gather different data • Option 2: Start utilizing the board with all 17 categories, and make part of standard operations • Option 3: Conclude that this was a success experiment and try other electronic alternatives

11. Needs Assessment Shortcomings of the Replenishment Board: • Doesn’t provide knowledge of numerical quantities per food category • Does not track quantities of food donated • Does not provide analysis on data • Inflow / Outflow. Min / Max Capacity. Ideal Solution: • Quantify inventory levels by category • Track purchased and donated food • Ability to generate reports with item quantities • Track rates of consumption at category level

12. Proposed Solutions to Needs

13. Proposed Solution to Needs - Output System can log the following • Daily Usage • Daily Donations • Daily Stock Levels This data can be used to generate reports

14. Gauge Interest / Discussion • Do you like this? • Additional thoughts? • Do you foresee any problems? • Are there any new requirements you have? • Can we run an experiment trying this?

15. Next Steps • Finalize decision on current replenishment board • Re-do flowchart / instructions based on decision from Sharon • Category Analysis • Determine how much space each of the categories will take • Determine how much possible shelf space we have total • Re-categorizing the shelves based on the 17 categories • Create new labels • Digital IMS • Keep improving and adding needs per Sharon • Create IMS file for experiment • Form & Run experiment with Digital IMS • Talk about next semester – hours changed

16. Expected vs Actual Operations • Volunteers do not seem to be reacting to door bell system • One volunteer sat in inventory room for almost the customer’s entire visit (2 separate occasions) • Volunteers do not always check to ensure 5 items have been taken • Can’t quantify how many occasions we have seen this on • Have yet to see full check to ensure 5 items have been taken • Right after a donation, we were offered some of the food that just came in because “there is so much here right now” • This concerns the group because strategic rationing of food seems to be missing in day-to-day operations • Only thought of during shortages

17. Expected Vs Actual Operations (Cont.) • Safety Fail Incident • Team was working in back room • Volunteer left facility and armed alarm • Volunteer did not lock door • As the team was leaving, the alarm went off • Campus security was never notified • Group decided to stay to keep facility secure from break-ins • RA came to lock up 50 minutes later

18. Questions?

19. Parking Lot Ideas • Improve the outside sign • Cheap fix and improves student awareness • Combine customer and inventory rooms to be one room • Generate new facility layout for new location • Continue experimenting with volunteer pick • Make sure it will only enhance customer experience

20. Parking Lot Ideas (Cont.) • Travel to other colleges to spread system • Help other colleges in the Rochester area • U of R • MCC • UB • Experience will help us flesh our any bugs in the system • Allow us to possibly publish a paper that any food pantry system can read, download, and start using right way