1 / 28

Electronic Reviews

Electronic Reviews. Who remembers last year’s presentation??? It looked something like this…. What’s that?. How will that work?. Will it be more work for me?. What will that cost?. Good questions! We have answers! . Survey says….

selah
Download Presentation

Electronic Reviews

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. Electronic Reviews

  2. Who remembers last year’s presentation??? It looked something like this…

  3. What’s that? How will that work?

  4. Will it be more work for me? What will that cost?

  5. Good questions! We have answers!

  6. Survey says… Overall, how Satisfied or Dissatisfied are you with the Electronic Review Communications? Email Communications w/ Attachments ­­­­­ 4 Satisfied 0 Dissatisfied Teleconference Communications ­­­­­ 4 Satisfied 0 Dissatisfied

  7. Did the Electronic Review provide you any benefits? 4 Yes 0 No Comments: Missouri fully supports the electronic review process. It provided an opportunity for staff members other than program managers/supervisors to be involved in the process. This involvement provided ‘big picture’ knowledge of the program and how daily individual job tasks affect the outcome. Ownership of the program instead of going through the motions. NE: Our office was moving during the week of the review. Not having to find adequate space for 3 review team members was helpful. It would have been a little stressful to try to work around the movers.

  8. How easy or difficult was the process of scanning the documents for the Electronic Review? • MO: Missouri has a blue beam save feature to create PDF files or our copy machine creates a PDF scanned image. This process was easy for Missouri. • NE: Scanning the audit folders took a long time and some files were huge. Would have been nice if we could have sent some files in Excel or Word rather than everything having to be converted to .pdf. • ND: Scanning process went very well using outside firm to complete scanning of audit files given to them. Uploading process also worked well. The administrative information was scanned and uploaded by NDDOT Motor Vehicle employees. The process went much smoother than we anticipated. • SD: Most of our information is already scanned so it was fairly easy. The older data was still on microfilm so that did take a little more time to pull from film and then scan.

  9. Were the Electronic File Name formats for the Clearinghouse uploads easy to understand? 4 Yes 0 No Ease of uploading data into the IFTA, Inc. Clearinghouse? 4 Satisfied 0 Dissatisfied

  10. If additional information was requested prior to the Electronic Review, was that information communicated in a timely manner? • 4 Yes • 0 No • Pre-review teleconference • Satisfied • 0 Dissatisfied • Comments: ND: Call was brief – basically a summary of calls planned for the coming week. May not be necessary.

  11. Please consider your last on-site review experience when answering the following questions. Opening Conference (including Team and Jurisdictions Introductions, Electronic Review Overview and the Review of the Program Review Process) 4 As Good 0 Not As Good How would you rate the overall satisfaction of the Electronic Review Process versus the On-site Review Process? (Including the gathering of information, interaction with team and lead reviewers, pre and post Review communications) 4 As Good 0 Not As Good Comment: NE: you do miss out on the Face-To-Face interactions which can be extremely beneficial.

  12. Closing Conference (including Review Findings, Post Review Procedures explained) 4 As Good 0 Not As Good Comment: NE: One reviewer did not participate – had wrong time.

  13. Were there parts of the Electronic Review that were more difficult than if the team were on-site? 1 Yes 3 No Comments: NE: No question. The scanning of returns and some audit papers was more difficult than just pulling the files had the reviewers been here.

  14. Did the Electronic Review present any problems or unexpected burden(s) to the staff? 4 Yes 0 No Overall Electronic Review Experience 4 Satisfied 0 Dissatisfied

  15. Provide a list of the Electronic Reviews strengths and weaknesses. • Able to plan, organize and assign different tasks associated with document/data gathering to multiple staff members and assign a contact person for all inquiries/needs from the team. • Upload and submit data as it becomes ready • Communication was key to this process and it was outstanding and timely • Needed additional information about the upload site and functionality • Saves money and time • Scanning audit files was tedious

  16. Most notable strength is being able to continue with other department tasks during the review as the review team is not in the office requiring much of our time. Most notable weakness is not being able to review firsthand some of the documents being questioned. Better communications during Review needed.

  17. How likely would you be to recommend an Electronic Review to member jurisdictions? 4 Likely 0 Not Likely

  18. General Review Comments How can we improve this process? What suggestions do you have for the next Electronic Review? Explain the upload site and functionality early in the communication. Uploading the .pdf was easy to do but a clearer explanation would be good for non-techie folks. Once I understood the process and received access, it worked great! Would be great if we could upload in Excel or Word. The process of reviewing and discussing issues during the audit went very well. However the development of the final report regarding the review could be better explained. It was unclear whether we were to begin to respond to the findings or wait for another final report. Once the files are uploaded, confirmation should be provided to the jurisdictions.

  19. Cost Analysis Review Cost (travel): 3 Reviewers/3 days Travel per diems: $1,200 per person X 3 days = $3,600 $3,600 x 4 (Reviews) = $14,400

  20. Electronic Review Cost (Conference calls): MO: $ 100.68 NE: $ 135.23 ND: $ 178.99 SD: $ 177.01 TOTAL: $ 591.92

  21. Travel vs. Electronic? Net Savings (4 Reviews): $ 13,808.08

  22. Combined IFTA / IRP Review Project - Update

  23. Ballot 2-2009 passed which changed IFTA from a 4 – 5 year review cycle. The IFTA, Inc. Board was provided with and reviewed two proposals prior to making its decision.The IFTA, Inc. Board decided at its January 2010 Board Meeting that the best way for IFTA membership to transition into this cycle was to skip Reviews in the 2011 year and begin the 5 year cycle in 2012.

  24. The Combined Review Committee met in February 2010. Group Discussion: Future of our Combined Review Project – As the discussions turned to the future of this Committee, more questions than answers arose.

  25. Mary Pat Paris advised the Committee that the IRP Board has convened a committee to research Distance Reviews for IRP. The study should be available for the IRP Boards review at their May meeting. It was decided that our next call would be scheduled sometime after the IRP Board meeting in May.

  26. In the meantime IRP, Inc. notified the IFTA, Inc. Board of its Regional Rotation proposal. Both Boards are reviewing Regional Rotations. Any future Committee work has ceased as the Committee awaits direction from the IFTA, Inc. Board.

More Related