1 / 21

The Six Sigma Approach

using evidence-based outcomes to justify public sector programs—a practitioner model Hard Stuff Made Easy…Using a Lean Sigma Approach. The Six Sigma Approach. Six Sigma. LEAN Six Sigma. Focus on Waste Removal Rework Causes of Defect Not as Statistical Detailed

jase
Download Presentation

The Six Sigma Approach

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. using evidence-based outcomes to justify public sector programs—a practitioner modelHard Stuff Made Easy…Using a Lean Sigma Approach

  2. The Six Sigma Approach Six Sigma LEAN Six Sigma Focus on Waste Removal Rework Causes of Defect Not as Statistical Detailed Utilized More-so outside manufacturing Education Transportation Healthcare Financial Institutions • Business Management Strategy1 • Seeks to improve the quality of process outputs by identifying and removing the causes of defects (errors) and minimizing variability in processes; • Uses a set of quality management methods • Statistical Methods, • Key Goal(s) = Cost Reduction and/or Profit Increase 1Generally Speaking

  3. why do it? Funding Programmatic (policy / practice change) Narrow the Gap of Success Improve Outcomes Communicate Outcomes Increase Dialogue with Stakeholders Communicate Data Driven Decisions Best Practices Detect Patterns Control Process Create Competitive Advantage • Economic Crisis • Political Environment • Societal Demands MINDSET

  4. General theme /concerns from those in the trenches about program evaluations • Unnecessarily Diverts Resources • Generally (10-20%) of the Program Budget to Conduct and Process Outcome Evaluation; what is gained will enable streamlining resources and focus on “what works” • Produce Negative Results • “what does not work” is as important as “what does work” • Too Complicated • Create Additional Burden(s) • Another Form of Program Monitoring

  5. Benefits At All Levels[Federal/Local/Institutional/Individual] • Understanding & Accountability • Demonstrate Program Outcomes • Evidence of Effectiveness & Efficiency • Documentation for Reports • Foundation for Strategic Planning • Accountability, Flexibility, Sustainability

  6. Essential Criteria to Effectively Argue for the Existence of Program/Funding? answer these questions? Can You Provide Evidence of Your Answers? • What do you do? • Why do you do it? • Have you been effective at doing what you do? • Do you measure what you do? • Have you improved what you do? • What did or did not work? • What have you changed? Why? • Are you best practice? • Who has benefited from what you do? How do you know? • If you didn’t do what you do, what would be the impact?

  7. Traditional Methodology Mission Retain, Graduate, Enroll in Post-Secondary The “Black Box” Input is Converted into Output Inputs Outputs No Longer Good Enough! Annual Performance Report (APR)

  8. Mind The “GAP”What Can and Cannot BE Controlled • Variation • Man • Machine • Method • Measurement • Materials • Mother Nature

  9. Five-year End of Cycle Evaluation FTF Comparison of ULM Talent Search Graduates to Louisiana Public High School Graduates, by Percent 82% First Generation 91% Low Income

  10. Four-Year Graduation Rates of ULM-ETS Target Schools National Average = 73.9% State Average = 65.9% Source: Louisiana Department of Education, District Composite Reports, revised January 2010

  11. 92% of Senior (College Ready) Participants Will Graduate Each Year 92%

  12. 70% of Senior (College Ready) Participants Will Apply for Post-Secondary Admission During the Budget Period 70%

  13. 60% of All Senior (College Ready) Participants Will Enroll in College 60%

  14. PARETOULM Impact on Federal Mandatory Objectives Objective 1: 90% of Non-Seniors Will Be Promoted to Next Grade Objective 2: 92% of Senior (College Ready) Participants Will Graduate Each Year Objective 3: 70% of Senior (College Ready) Participants Will Apply for Financial Aid During the Budget Period Objective 4: 70% of Senior (College Ready) Participants Will Apply for Post-Secondary Admission During the Budget Period Objective 5: 60% of All Senior (College Ready) Participants Will Enroll in College Average Annual ∆% (Slopes) Identify Greatest Opportunities for Improvement

  15. Percent Difference/Percent Total Student Contribution Post-Secondary Application for Admission Exceeded Student Contribution

  16. Objective 5Percent Difference/Percent Total Student Contribution Post-Secondary Enrollment Exceeded Student Contribution Did Not Meet Contribution

  17. obstacles • Defects / Variation • Rework • Overproduction • Waste • Scope Drift / Creep • Continued Sustainablity

  18. Opportunities & Limitations obstacles benefits Proactive vs. Reactive Empowerment Depersonalizes Decision Making Analysis of Results (Reporting is NOT Analysis) Sense of Ownership Manage Unexpected Challenges Transparency & Accountability • Upper Level Management • Budgeting & Forecasting • Staff Buy-in

  19. Recommendations Do not wait until you are being asked for data • Mandated at Executive Level • Individual must be trained in Evaluation Studies • Matter of Necessity in Today’s Climate Develop your improvement plans • Ability to Distinguish Your Program from Others Track your accomplishments • Summative Evaluations are Just ONE part of the Equation • Formative  Summative Results Publish them

More Related