Performance Management Presentation Provide Basic Animal Life Support

1. Performance Management PresentationProvide Basic Animal Life Support Team Members: Eileen Morgan, Dr. Charmaine Foltz, Eric Hutchinson, Dennis Barnard, Andy Smith, Alphie Cisar, Brent Morse, Wayne O'Brien, Matt Tenace ORS National Institutes of Health 8 January, 2004

2. Table of Contents Main Presentation Performance Management Plan Customer Perspective C1a: AAALAC accreditation ratings C1b: ACUC inspection ratings by type C2c: Percentage of non-exempt animal census requiring socialization C2d: Percentage of attempted socializations that were successful C3a: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings for animal husbandry and clinical veterinary and technical services C3b: ORS Customer Scorecard Ratings for overall DVR services Internal Business Process Perspective IB1a: Investigator response time to notifications of health status IB1b: Percentage of holding agreements processed by beginning of fiscal year IB1c: Average number of days to receive quality assurance test results on feed

3. Table of Contents (cont.) Main Presentation Learning and Growth Perspective LG1a: Percentage of staff with desired credentials LG2b: Percentage of facilities with one fully trained technician Financial Perspective F1a: Unit cost of animal husbandry services F1b: Unit cost of clinical veterinary and technical services F1c: Unit cost of special environmental factors services F2a: Overall percentage of available housing utilized F2b: Overall percentage increase in holding capacity F3a: Percentage dollar savings associated with caging purchase strategy change Conclusions Appendix

4. Performance Management Plan

5. Relationship Among Performance Objectives --- relationship between objectives in different perspectives ___ relationship between objectives within a perspective most important objectives

6. Customer Perspective

7. Customer Perspective

8. C1a: AAALAC Accreditation Ratings FY02 fully accredited with commendations for DVR FY99 fully accredited FY93 all of NIH fully accredited; DVR falls under that accreditation DVR continuously accredited since 1960s FY93 1960s FY99 FY02 Note: AAALAC site visits are tri-annual

9. C1b: ACUC Inspection Results by Type (FY04 Q1) Note: Minor requests are not necessarily deficiencies, but rather suggestions.

10. Customer Perspective (cont.)

11. C2c: Percentage of Non-Exempt Animal Census Requiring Socialization (as of 30 Sept) FY03 50% of the non-exempt animal census required socialization FY02 46% of the non-exempt animal census required socialization Number of Animals

12. C2d: Percentage of Attempted Socializations That Were Successful (as of 30 Sept) FY03 84% of the attempted socializations were successful FY02 90% of the attempted socializations were successful Number of Animals

13. Customer Perspective (cont.)

14. Customer Scorecard Methodology • In FY03, modified ORS Customer Scorecard for animal husbandry and clinical veterinary and technical services • E-mail to customers (Animal Program Directors) in FY04 • In FY03, modified ORS Customer Scorecard for overall DVR services • Conduct structured interviews in FY04

15. C3a: Customer Scorecard Ratings for Animal Husbandry and Clinical Veterinary and Technical Services • Conduct survey during Quarter 3 of FY04 • Compare results to those obtained in FY02 • Determine actions as appropriate

16. C3b: Customer Scorecard Ratings for Overall DVR Services • Conduct structured interview and survey during Quarter 3 of FY04 • Review baseline results • Determine actions as appropriate

17. Customer Perspective Summary • AAALAC Accreditation successful for DVR and included commendations • ACUC ratings included 30 commendations, 30 minor requests, and 12 major deficiencies • Attempted socializations of non-human primates increased from 46% to 50% in FY03 • 84% of the attempted socializations were successful • Customer interviews and surveys to be completed in FY04

18. Customer Perspective Planned Actions • ACUC semi-annual reviews of program and facilities ongoing; Strive to minimize major deficiencies • Maintain percentages of attempted and successful socializations for non-human primates • Customer surveys to be sent to Animal Program Directors and structured interviews conducted with Scientific Directors in third quarter FY04

19. Internal Business Process Perspective

20. Internal Business Process Perspective

21. IB1a: Investigator Response Time to Notifications of Health Status (as of 30 Sep) Note: Data gathered from building 10A

22. IB1b: Percentage of Holding Agreements Processed by Beginning of Fiscal Year (as of 30 Sept) Note: Zero percentage of holding agreements were processed by beginning of fiscal year in FY03

23. IB1c: Average Number of Days to Receive Quality Assurance Test Results on Feed (as of 30 Sept) FY03 Average = 15 days Range = 7 - 32 days FY02 Average = 45 days Range = days Note: Control chart 1B1c1 shown in Appendix

24. Internal Business Process PerspectiveSummary • Investigator response time improvement continues at expected levels • Holding agreements processing resulted in 100% improvement in FY03 • Analysis of feed average turn-around time significantly improved from 45 days in FY02 to 15 days in FY03. However, a wide range still exists (7 – 32 days)

25. Internal Business Process PerspectivePlanned Actions • Discontinue tracking of response time; electronic alternative to customers still requesting fax • Holding agreement time frame process will continue to be measured to ensure maintenance of 100% success • The nutrition program is undergoing review and we will be assessing status

26. Learning and Growth Perspective

27. Learning and Growth Perspective

28. LG1a: Percentage of Staff with Desired Credentials (as of FY04 Q1)

29. Learning and Growth Perspective (cont.)

30. LG2b: Percentage of Facilities with One Fully Trained Technician (as of FY04Q1) • Based on pilot test of 3 facilities • 100% of the pilot facilities had one fully trained technician • Will gather data on all facilities in FY04 and track semi-annually

31. Learning and Growth PerspectiveSummary • Staff accreditations • Locating and retaining veterinarians with ACLAM board certification challenging • Facility managers maintained AALAS LATG Accreditation Status • Pilot of Fully Trained Technicians successful

32. Learning and Growth PerspectivePlanned Actions • Accreditations • Strive to obtain and retain board certified veterinarians in all new hires • Encourage facility management personnel to obtain LATG certification

33. Financial Perspective

34. Financial Perspective

35. F1a: Animal Husbandry Unit Cost (as of 30 Sep) Note: Baseline Unit Cost

36. F1b: Clinical Veterinary and Technical Services Unit Cost (as of 30 Sep) Note: Baseline Unit Cost

37. F1c: Special Environmental Factors Unit Cost (as of 30 Sep) Note: Baseline Unit Cost

38. Financial Perspective (cont)

39. F2a: Overall Percentage Increase in Available Housing Utilized (as of 30 Sep) Note: Includes all housing available for all animals. Individual building and animal percentages are presented in separate graphs in the Appendix.

40. F2b: Overall Percentage Increase in Holding Capacity (as of 30 Sep) Note: Includes entire holding capacity available for all animals. Individual building and animal percentages are presented in separate graphs in the Appendix.

41. Financial Perspective (cont)

42. F3a: Percentage Dollar Savings in Caging Purchases (as of 30 Sep) • In FY02, identified bulk purchasing as potential improvement to streamline purchasing process

43. Financial PerspectiveSummary • Unit Cost • Animal Husbandry Unit Cost is $1.83/animal cage days • Veterinary and Technical Unit Cost is $10.33/animal census • Special Environmental Factors combined are $90/unit • Housing Utilized and Holding Capacity continue to increase across DVR • Bulk purchasing of caging resulted in 23% percent savings to DRV in FY03

44. Financial PerspectivePlanned Actions • Unit Costs will continue to be calculated in future FY’s for cost containment purposes • Housing Utilized • Increases in leasing agreements continues • Housing Capacities continue to grow • Use of new caging schemes, i.e., ventilated rodent racks • Renovation of areas to become animal holding, i.e., Building 14G, 106; Building 102, A wing.

45. Financial PerspectivePlanned Actions • Savings in Caging Purchases • Continue to purchase bulk caging to obtain best pricing • Purchase rodent enrichment in bulk to reduce unit pricing

46. Conclusions

47. Conclusions from PMP • Full AAALAC Accreditation was maintained • Socializations maintained at satisfactory level • Established a baseline for monitoring ACUC • Established a baseline for monitoring commendations and complaints • Investigator Response Time improvement consistent over time • Addressed Leasing Agreement Process with a 100% improvement • Nutrition Program is currently being evaluated in its entirety • Identified a downward trend in Veterinary Certifications

48. Conclusions from PMP • Technician Proficiencies completed as a Pilot • In 3 facilities, identified a minimum of one fully trained technician • Housing Utilized and Capacity • Continue to be innovative in use of animal housing space utilizing new technology and transforming space to meet demand for housing different species, i.e., 102 housing rodents and primates

49. Conclusions from PMP • Highlight initiatives for FY04 • Strengthen animal care and use program for upcoming AAALAC review to include revision of SOP’s • Strive to increase socializations by 5-10% • Complete nutrition program review • Complete customer surveys for scientific directors • Complete technician proficiencies for each veterinary technician; strive for increased percentage of fully trained technicians

50. Appendix Appendix Pages 2 – 9 of Performance Management Plan Customer Perspective C1c: ACUC inspection ratings by facility C1d: ACUC inspection ratings by discrete service C2a: For control special environmental factors, number of consultations, presentations and trainings C2b: For control special environmental factors, number of publications and abstracts C3c: Number of commendations, minor requests/complaints, and major defects by type C3d: Number of commendations, minor requests/complaints, and major defects by facility C3e: Number of commendations, minor requests/complaints, and major defects by discrete service