1 / 39

Performance Management Presentation Improve Environmental Quality

Performance Management Presentation Improve Environmental Quality. Team Members: Kenny Floyd, Jim Carscadden, Bill Ketner, Charlyn Lee, Valerie Nottingham, Don Wilson Division of Environmental Protection ORF National Institutes of Health January 21, 2004. Table of Contents.

saxton
Download Presentation

Performance Management Presentation Improve Environmental Quality

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. Performance Management PresentationImprove Environmental Quality Team Members: Kenny Floyd, Jim Carscadden, Bill Ketner, Charlyn Lee, Valerie Nottingham, Don Wilson Division of Environmental Protection ORF National Institutes of Health January 21, 2004

  2. Table of Contents Main Presentation PM Template ……………………………….……………………………………….4 Customer Perspective……………………….………………………………….6 Internal Business Process Perspective………………………………….17 Learning and Growth Perspective…………………………………………34 Financial Perspective…………………………………………………………….37 Conclusions and Recommendations………………………………………42

  3. Table of Contents (cont.) Appendix Page 2 of template………………………….………………………………. Customer Perspective C2a: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. C2b: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. C2c: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. Internal Business Process Perspective IB1a: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. IB1b: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. IB3a: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. Learning and Growth Perspective LG1b: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. LG2a: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. Financial Perspective F1a: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. F2a: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. F3a: List Name of Measure……………………………………………. C4a: List Name of Measure…………………………………………….

  4. Relationship Among Performance Objectives • The objectives under this service group all have a common theme of meeting regulatory requirements. A common goal for each discrete service is reduced liability and maintaining good public relations. • This presentation will focus on the waste management discrete services.

  5. Results from the FY04 ORF Customer Scorecard Service Group: Improve Environmental Quality Product/Service: Manage Solid Waste Streams December 15, 2003 Summary prepared by the Office of Quality Management (OQM) and SAIC

  6. Methodology • Goal was to survey a sample of our 800 documented chemical waste collection customers • 100 customers were randomly selected from our database of 800 customers • Customer Scorecards were hand-delivered to the 100 customers • Instructions requested that the survey be completed and mailed to our office

  7. Survey Distribution FY04 Administration Number of Surveys Distributed100 Number of respondents 17 Response Rate 17%

  8. FY04 SatisfactionRatings N = 17 Unsatisfactory Outstanding * Respondents did not choose numerical ratings on this category

  9. Scatter DiagramFY04 Customer Importance and Satisfaction Ratings 10.00 9.90 9.80 9.70 9.60 9.50 Reliability 9.40 9.30 Availability Importance 9.20 Competence Timeliness 9.10 Responsiveness Handling of Problems 9.00 Quality 8.90 Convenience 8.80 8.70 SATISFIED, 8.60 IMPORTANT 8.50 8.50 8.60 8.70 8.80 8.90 9.00 9.10 9.20 9.30 9.40 9.50 9.60 9.70 9.80 9.90 10.00 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. Satisfaction Data based on 17 respondents Cost not included since not rated on satisfaction Note: A smaller portion of the chart is shown so that the individual data points can be labeled.

  10. Scatter DiagramFY04 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.

  11. FY04 Timeliness RatingWaste collection services provided within 24 hours of customer request – Frequency of Response N = 17 Mean = 9.56 Median = 10

  12. Customer CommentsWhat was done particularly well? • I have had no problems with collection of material. • Very responsive to our calls/needs. All the people who come to DLM are courteous and professional. Keep doing the good job! • Timeliness of removal. • Timely responsiveness. • Very quick to pick up wastes. All personnel from phone help to those coming to the lab have been extremely pleasant and appear to be quite competent. • Quick responsiveness. Always easy to reach. • The pick-up team always arrives within a day of our request. • Very timely. • Removal. • Maintaining the physical dumpsters.

  13. Customer CommentsWhat needs to be improved? • Communication on the actual cost of services to the end user. • Communication by phone. We did not place all items in boxes, so two trips were required. • Stop the contract clean-up crews from washing animal waste and bedding from being washed down. The storm drain leading to the NIH creeks. The waste is located near the 14A Cage wash "Somat" dumpster. This area needs constant monitoring so a waste management problem does not get out of hand.

  14. Other Customer Comments • I am very satisfied. • We would like to find the funnel that is shorter and transparent if available. • I don't know what the cost is so I can't comment on this. It may be very important. • I really dislike this scorecard. Suggest that it be tailored to the service being evaluated.

  15. Summarizing Your Customer Scorecard Data • Overall the surveys show a high level of customer satisfaction • The customers place a high importance on the reliability of the service and are very satisfied with the convenience. • Future actions • We will continue to improve communications with our customers and address their needs thru changes to the contract service and attention to contract performance requirements.

  16. Internal Business Process Perspective

  17. Internal Business Process PerspectiveContinued

  18. Performance Measures IB7-1: 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 12 months. Met AQL in 51 of 52 weeks = 98.08% Compliance

  19. Performance Measures • IB7-1: Compliance with 24 hour Recycling Pick Up Requests

  20. Performance Measures IB7-2: 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 52 weeks. Met AQL in 52 of 52 weeks = 100% Compliance

  21. Performance Measures IB8-1: 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 52 weeks. Met AQL in 52 of 52 weeks = 100% Compliance

  22. Performance Measures • IB8-1: Compliance with Timeliness and Effectiveness of Emptying Dumpsters to Prevent Overfilling – 52week measurement

  23. Performance Measures • IB8-2: Effectiveness of Waste Reduction Efforts Accomplished through the Recycling Program 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 30.30%for FY2003

  24. Performance Measures IB8-2: Effectiveness of Waste Reduction Efforts Accomplished through the Recycling Program

  25. Performance Measures IB9-1: 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

  26. FY04 Timeliness RatingWaste collection services provided within 24 hours of customer request – Frequency of Response N = 17 Mean = 9.56 Median = 10

  27. Performance Measures IB9-2: Effectiveness of Recycling/Reuse 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: Achieved a recycling rate of 21.7% for FY03. This is a very good recycling rate due to the light weight of many recyclable waste streams. The recycling rate in FY02 was 18%. This was a 20.5% improvement over the previous year.

  28. Performance Measures IB9-3: Compliance with Hazardous Waste Regulations • Effectiveness of hazardous waste regulatory compliance as measured by regulatory violations • The effectiveness was determined by documenting any regulatory violations received in FY03. • Results: No regulatory violations were received = 100% compliance

  29. Performance Measures • IB9-3: Effectiveness of Hazardous Waste Regulatory Compliance FY 03 N = 17 Average Customer Satisfaction = 89.78% * Respondents did not choose numerical ratings on this category

  30. Performance Measures IB10-1: 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-sitewithin 3 hours of being set-out by generator. • Results: AQL measured for 52 weeks. Met AQL in 52 of 52 weeks = 100% Compliance

  31. Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? • Recycling Services: We met our contract performance based standards 100% of the time. • Solid Waste Services: We met our contract performance based standard 100% of the time and we increased our recycling rate to 30%. FY02 rate was 25%. • Hazardous Waste Services: We increased our recycling rate, operated in full regulatory compliance, and achieved a very high score from customers on the Customer Score Card. • Medical Waste Services: We met our contract performance based standard 100% of the time.

  32. Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat actions are planned? • Recycling Services: Strive to maintain and improve this high level of performance. • Solid Waste Services: Strive to maintain and improve this high level of performance and continue to pursue a recycling rate goal of 50%. • Hazardous Waste Services: Strive to increase our recycling rate, maintain our full regulatory compliance, and achieve an even higher score from customers on the Customer Score Card. • Medical Waste Services: Strive to maintain and improve this high level of performance.

  33. Learning and Growth Perspective

  34. Financial Perspective

  35. Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you? • DEP provides top quality waste services to the NIH without significant costs increases from year to year • Solid waste cost does not account for removal from within the building to the exterior waste collection container • Solid waste and recycled materials are directly related, as one goes up the other comes down

  36. Conclusions from PMP • List major findings from your PMP - Quality of services have remained at the highest levels • List any improvements achieved - 20% increase in solid waste recycling - 21% increase in hazardous waste recycling • Highlight initiatives for FY04 - Continue to increase hazardous and solid waste recycling rates - Continue hazardous waste operations in full regulatory compliance

More Related