Performance Management Presentation Improve Environmental Quality

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 Perspective34
• Financial Perspective.37
• Conclusions and Recommendations42

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
(No Transcript)
5
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.

6
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
7
(No Transcript)
8
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

9
Survey Distribution
FY04 Administration Number of Surveys
Distributed 100 Number of respondents
17 Response Rate 17
10
FY04 Satisfaction Ratings
N 17
Unsatisfactory
Outstanding
Respondents did not choose numerical ratings
on this category
11
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
9.00
Responsiveness
Handling of Problems
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.
12
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.
13
FY04 Timeliness RatingWaste collection services
provided within 24 hours of customer request
Frequency of Response
N 17 Mean 9.56 Median 10
14
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.

15
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.

16
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.

17
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.

18
Internal Business Process Perspective
19
Internal Business Process PerspectiveContinued
20
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

21
Performance Measures

• IB7-1 Compliance with 24 hour Recycling Pick Up
  Requests

22
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

23
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

24
Performance Measures

• IB8-1 Compliance with Timeliness and
  Effectiveness of Emptying Dumpsters to Prevent
  Overfilling 52 week measurement

25
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

26
Performance Measures
IB8-2 Effectiveness of Waste Reduction Efforts
Accomplished through the Recycling Program
27
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

28
FY04 Timeliness RatingWaste collection services
provided within 24 hours of customer request
Frequency of Response
N 17 Mean 9.56 Median 10
29
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.

30
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

31
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
32
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-site
  within 3 hours of being set-out by generator.
• Results AQL measured for 52 weeks. Met AQL in
  52 of 52 weeks 100 Compliance

33
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.

34
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.

35
Learning and Growth Perspective
36
(No Transcript)
37
Financial Perspective
38
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

39
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