Performance Management Presentation Provide Mail, Courier and Package Screening Services

1. Performance Management PresentationProvide Mail, Courier and Package Screening Services Team Members: Leader: John Hunt Members: James Spears Tracy Niksich Angela Milton Division of Mail and Courier Services ORS National Institutes of Health Date: January 14, 2005

2. Table of Contents Main Presentation PMP Template …………………………….……………………Slide 4 Customer Perspective……………………….………………….Slide 7 Internal Business Process Perspective……………………………………………………Slide 21 Learning and Growth Perspective……………………………………………………Slide 33 Financial Perspective……………………………………………Slide 40 Conclusions and Recommendations……………………………………………Slide 52

3. Table of Contents (cont.) Appendix Customer Perspective NONE……………………………………………. Internal Business Process Perspective IB1: Complete and update process maps of Service Group/Discrete Services IB5: Actual postage used vs. OMAS statements IB6: Percentage of courier items meeting the two hour delivery target Learning and Growth Perspective LG1a: Turnover LG1b: Sick leave usage LG2a: EEO LG2b: ER LG2c: ADR LG3: Awards/Recognition Financial Perspective NONE………………………………………………...

5. Relationship Among Performance Objectives Customer needs and expectations Learning and Growth Objectives Internal Business Objectives Operational Objectives Performance Feedback Performance Improvements / Operational Changes Financial Objectives Customer Objectives

6. Relationship Among Performance Objectives • Division of Mail and Courier Service (DMCS) performance objectives have little, if any impact on other objectives • DMCS performance objectives refer to well-defined but separate areas of the discrete services they represent

7. Customer Perspective

8. Customer Perspective

10. Customer PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? • IC mail managers provided an excellent means of disseminating information concerning mail service issues, performance improvement initiatives, and postal news • IC mail managers were a good source of information about the potential reactions of IC customers to various issues, from postage rate increases to DMCS performance improvement initiatives

11. Customer Perspective

12. Survey BackgroundPurpose • Evaluate the effectiveness of the NIH Division of Mail and Courier Services (DMCS) in fulfilling its’ mission over the last six months • Assess the NIH mail stop contact’s satisfaction with the following service attributes: • Quality • Timeliness • Reliability • Availability • Responsiveness • Convenience • Competence • Handling of Problems • Assess awareness that address information in NED is used by DMCS • Solicit open ended comments: • What was done well • What needs to be improved • Other • Respondents could optionally leave contact information for follow up

13. Survey BackgroundMethodology • Hard copy surveys were distributed to all NIH mail stop code contacts, along with introductory letter and pre-addressed return label. • Surveys distributed late October 2004 • Responses were gathered through late November 2004. Completed surveys were returned to OQM • All responses that contained contact information were forwarded to Mr. James Spears of DMCS for follow up • Responses analyzed by SAIC throughout month of December and presentation prepared

14. Survey BackgroundDistribution Number of surveys distributed 1,000 Number of respondents 358 Response Rate 36%

15. FY04 Satisfaction Ratings on Specific Service Aspects Mean Response N = 356 N = 357 N = 353 N = 352 N = 352 N = 351 N = 353 N = 353 Unsatisfactory Outstanding

16. Survey Results: Overall Scores Mean Response 8.4 Median 9.0 Scored as Excellent 78.9% Scored as Good to Excellent 95.8%

17. Summary • Respondent Characteristics • 36% of recipients responded to survey. • Satisfaction Ratings on Specific Service Aspects • Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the following aspects of mail and courier services • Quality • Timeliness • Reliability • Availability • Responsiveness • Convenience • Competence • Handling of Problems • The scale ranged from (1) Unsatisfactory to (10) Outstanding. Satisfaction mean ratings range from a high of 8.84 on Responsiveness to a low of 8.22 on Quality. Notice that the lowest mean rating (8.22) is still well above the midpoint of a 10-point scale. In general, respondent perceptions are quite positive.

18. Summary (cont.) • Comments • What was done particularly well? • A total of 144 comments were made • Two themes were evident • 91% of comments were Kudos. Timeliness of delivery and courteousness of staff were mentioned most frequently. • 6% of comments mentionedspecific individuals as particularly outstanding • What needs to be improved? • A total of 139 comments were made • 47% of comments mentioned miss-directed mail. • 20% of comments indicated that nothing needs to be improved. • 6% of comments mentioned timeliness. • 5% of comments mentioned regular pick up times. • Other comments • A total of 72 comments were made • 50% of comments were Kudos. • 14% of comments mentioned miss-directed mail. • 8% of comments mentioned needing more information.

19. Customer PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? • The overall scores show that our service is perceived as generally excellent. • As with our previous survey, the majority of complaints centered around the perception of Positional mail as misdelivered mail.On speaking with the 65 mail stop contacts who complained of occasional mis-deliveries, 45 (approximately 70%) were referring to positional mail, which had been correctly delivered-as addressed.There is still a lack of knowledge within the NIH community concerning positional mail. This, despite the fact that the DMCS has distributed flyers and discussed the issue with IC Mail Managers for the last two years.

20. Customer PerspectiveWhat actions are planned? • DMCS will continue to schedule a mail managers meeting every four months to keep this communication channel open and viable • DMCS will continue to educate our customers on positional mail through flyers and direct communication • DMCS will conduct another customer poll in FY 2005 to gauge progress vs. FY 2004

21. Internal Business Process Perspective

22. Internal Business Process Perspective

23. Driver Delivery Times are Consistent

26. Internal Business Process Perspective

27. Internal Business Process Perspective

28. Internal Business Process Perspective

29. Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? Driver Delivery Times: • Average variation for driver delivery times, which was much lower is FY 2003 than in FY 2002, was nearly a minute lower in FY 2004 than in FY 2003. Showing that improvement has continued in this area, although further improvement is likely to be less significant due to the distance of the Stonestreet building from the campus and the continued expansion of NIH. • Using control charts, all delivery variation was found to be well within controls.

30. Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? Incoming Mail is Sorted Correctly: • Two years of quality control samplings and feedback to the mail service contractors have been successful in lowering the primary sortation error rate from 1.06% (FY 2002) to 0.29% in FY 2003, to 0.16% in FY2004, with no consistent problem areas. Any further gains are going to be statistically insignificant since the distance to 0% is well below the statistical margin for error.

31. Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? Postage is Correctly Applied to Outgoing Mail: • Since the new mail services contractor began operations with increased training in June 2003, the quality sampling error rate has gone from 0.5% to 0.0%, and has remained there ever since.

32. Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat actions are planned? • DMCS will continue to monitor the work of the contractor in ways that provide creative feedback that increases operational excellence • PMP quality goals for incoming mail sortation in 2005 will be primarily focused on maintaining the current quality levels

33. Learning and Growth Perspective

34. Learning and Growth Perspective

35. Learning and Growth Perspective

36. Percentage of Computer-simulated Bomb Threats Identified

37. Learning and Growth PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? Training: • Meeting our training goal shows that training, especially safety training continues to be a priority at DMCS • DMCS believes that additional training makes for a safer, more effective organization • Continuous Improvement in DMCS quality numbers supports this policy

38. Learning and Growth PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? X-Ray Clerk Proficiency: • X-ray clerks are maintaining a high proficiency at identifying potential explosives, which is due to ongoing training efforts and only somewhat to worker experience, since 100% turnover is taking place each year (two positions) in these contracted positions

39. Learning and Growth PerspectiveWhat actions are planned? • Training for DMCS will continue at the two training sessions per year minimum, with at least one session devoted to workplace safety • Training for x-ray technicians will be increased in order to achieve our goal of 97% for next year

40. Financial Perspective

41. Financial Perspective (cont.)

42. Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? Unit Costs: • Labor costs for contracted discrete services are fixed by contract and increase when Bureau of Labor statistics job classification standards are raised. Nothing can be affected by DMCS management in the near term • Labor costs for the FTE centered discrete services are fixed by Congress. Nothing can be affected by DMCS management in the near term • Unit costs for “Scan Incoming Packages” are decreasing due to the increase and projected future increase in parcel volume in this area • The only way to decrease unit costs in the long term is to maximize throughput and minimize down time. Since down time is very low, efforts must be made toward increasing efficiency such that volume increases will not increase total costs

43. Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? Unit Costs: • The data shows work hours down, even as volumes are up. This clearly shows the advantage of DMCS’s focus on quality, efficiency, and time-saving technology.

44. Financial Perspective (cont.)

45. Total Savings vs. USPS Parcel Post

46. Total Savings vs. USPS Parcel Post

47. Total Savings vs. USPS Parcel Post

48. Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? Alternative Ground Shipping: • The alternative ground shipping program has exceeded expectations by increasing savings from the previous Fiscal Year by approximately $43,000 vs. USPS Parcel Post • While savings closely track volume, savings are greatest on medium-sized parcels (20-70 lbs)

49. Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? • Awareness of the alternative ground program was raised by means of flyers and by keeping IC mail managers aware of the savings potential and actual savings at each mail managers meeting • Efforts to increase volume through awareness began to pay off in March 2003. Despite continued promotion, volume appears to have leveled off in FY2004. Our inquiries have shown that there is relatively little additional volume available to us

50. Financial PerspectiveWhat actions are planned? • DMCS continues to employ more effective ways to utilize the work hours we’re paying for through applied technology; such as replacing the aging PacTrac system. • DMCS has also more effectively used workhours by minimizing sortation errors through a comprehensive quality control program (which minimizes rework) • Although the NIH community continues to grow and spread out geographically, DMCS has only needed to increase contractor personnel by one position to accommodate these changes