performance management presentation procure and deliver

1

Performance Management Presentation

Procure and Deliver Animal Product

Team Members:

Scott GreenJody SallahDenise Duff

ORS National Institutes of Health

9 January, 2004

2

Table of Contents

Main Presentation

Performance Management Plan

Relationship Among Performance Objectives

Customer PerspectiveC1a: Number of transportation runs by customerC1c: Number of procurement orders processed by customerC2a: ORS customer scorecard ratings for animal transportationC2b: ORS customer scorecard ratings for animal procurement

Internal Business Process PerspectiveIB1a: Number of transportation runs per monthIB1b: Number of procurement orders processed per month

3

Table of Contents (cont.)

Main Presentation

Learning and Growth PerspectiveLG2a: Number of CAPS users group meetings heldLG2b: ORS customer scorecard ratings on CAPS

Financial PerspectiveF1a: Animal transportation unit costF1c: Animal procurement unit costF2a: Average number of transportation runs per person by monthF2b: Average number of procurement orders processed per person by

month

Conclusions

Appendix

4

Performance Management Plan

Team Members

Scott Green

Denise Duff, Jody Sallah

Date: 12/16/03

Service Group

The Animal Procurement and Transportation Service supports the regulatory and research needs of the NIH intramural community by providing centralized services. Our responsible and dedicated staff work with our customers to reliably and conveniently procure and transport animals.

Value Proposition

Team Leader

To streamline our internal business processes to improve the responsiveness, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of our services.

Strategy Description

Service Strategy

Performance Management Plan (PMP)

DS2: Procure research animals

DS1: Provide animal product delivery

Discrete Services

Division Approval/Date: Associate Director Approval/Date:

Procure and deliver animal product

Operational Excellence

Customer Intimacy

Product Leadership

Growth

Sustain

Harvest

5

Relationship Among Performance Objectives

C1: Increase Customer Satisfacton

CU

ST

OM

ER

FINA

NC

IAL

INT

ER

NA

L

BU

SIN

ESS

LEA

RN

ING

&

GR

OW

TH

IB1: Adjust capabilities to meet customer demand

F1: Minimize unit cost of all discrete

services

LG2: Educate customers about our

services

LG1: Provide training to service providers

Procure and Deliver Animal Product

IB2: Increase reliability of service

Date: December 10, 2003

C2: Increase responsiveness to

customers' varying needs

F2: Maximize utilization of

assets

--- relationship between objectives in different perspectives___ relationship between objectives within a perspective

most important objectives

6

Customer Perspective

7


ObjectiveDes

Measure FY 03 Target FY04 Target FY05 Target Initiative Owner

For

C1a: Number of transportation runs by customer

baseline TBD TBD Track and monitor monthl;y

Transportation Staff

C1c: Number of procurement orders processed by customer

baseline TBD TBD Track and monitor monthl;y

Sallah

C1: Increase responsiveness to customers' varying needs

8

C1a: Number of Transportation Runs by Customer (as of 30 Sept)

Transportation Runs by Customer

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

NIAID

NHLBINCI

NINDS

NICHD

NIAAA

NIDDK CC

NIAM

SNIA

NIMH

FDANID

R

ORS/VRP

NEIGRC

NIDA

NHGRI

WRAIR

USHUS

NIDCD

Other

IC

Nu

mb

er o

f R

un

s

FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03

9

C1c: Number of Procurement Orders Processed by Customer (as of 30 Sept)

Procurement Orders Processed by Customer

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

NIAID

NINDS

NICHD

NIMH

NIDDK

NIA

NIDCR

NHLBI

NIDA

NHGRINEI

NCI

NIAAA

NIDCD

NIAM

S CCORS

NCCAM

IC

Nu

mb

er o

f R

un

s

FY02 FY03

10

Customer Perspective (cont.)

ObjectiveDes


We will fo

C2a: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings for animal transportation

Approved animal transportation survey

Improvement in FY02 ratings

TBD Survey animal transportation customers every other year

Green

C2b: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings for animal procurement

Approved animal procurement survey


TBD Survey animal procurement customers every other year

Green

C2: Increase Customer Satisfaction

11

Customer Scorecard Methodology

• In FY03, modified ORS Customer Scorecard for animal transportation and animal procurement services

• Conducted surveys in Quarter 1 FY04 • For animal transportation, hard copy surveys were

distributed to 20 animal transportation customers• For animal procurement, hard copy surveys were

distributed to 25 animal procurement customers• Follow-up e-mails were sent

12

C2a: ORS Customer Scorecard Ratings for Animal Transportation (as of FY04 Q1)

6.5

7.25

7.88

7.5

7.38

7.5

7.38

7.63

8

7.6

7.17

7.67

7.33

7

7

6.67

7.33

10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Handling of Problems

Competence

Convenience

Responsiveness

Availability

Reliability

Timeliness

Quality

Cost

FY03

FY02

Note: No significant differences found

N = 6

N = 8

13

C2a: ORS Customer Scorecard Ratings for Animal Transportation (as of FY04 Q1) (cont.)

What was done particularly well?

Accommodation of special requests for Poolesville deliveries.Phone service has greatly improved in past year.

What needs to be improved?

Timeliness, availability.Transport box orders - processing, timeliness, delivery. Flexibility on departure from NIHAC.Consistently - There have been a few incidents where things that are routine have not been done. Communication about transports could improve. Several times animals were not picked up or not on time.

14

C2b: ORS Customer Scorecard Ratings for Animal Procurement (as of FY04 Q1)

7.64

7.5

7.23

7.07

7.71

7.31

6.92

7.08

6.17

5.57

4.86

6.71

4.86

5.71

5.71

5.57

6.14

5.4

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Handling of Problems

Competence

Convenience

Responsiveness

Availability

Reliability

Timeliness

Quality

Cost

FY03

FY02

Note: No significant differences found

N = 7N = 14

15

C2b: ORS Customer Scorecard Ratings for Animal Procurement (as of FY04 Q1) (cont.)

What was done particularly well?

Staff are very responsive to needs, issues, and problem. They provide proactive service when problems arise.

What needs to be improved?

Need more staff in VRP to process animal orders. Need to process counter offers in a timely manner.Need more personnel in VRP to handle orders. I handle the training of PI's in my ICP in CAPS. Would be nice to have a training session provided.Follow up on standing orders, counter offers, changes in delivery dates, and emergency orders need to be improved.More timely confirmations of shipment dates. More timely notification of wait listed orders.

16

Customer Perspective Summary

• Animal Transportation• Customer Mix

• There’s been a shift in the mix of animal transportation customers. Prior to FY03, NIAID accounted for 51% of transportation runs. In FY03, NIAID accounts for 33% of the runs. NIA, NIMH, ORS/VRP, NEI, and GRC account for substantially greater percentages of the runs in FY03

• FY03 Customer Scorecard• Survey response rate - 30% • Scores range from 6.67 to 10 on a 10-point scale• Highest level of satisfaction was for cost (10)• Lowest level of satisfaction was for timeliness (6.67)• Scores were fairly consistent with previous year (i.e., no

significant differences found on any categories)

17

Customer Perspective Summary (cont.)

• Animal Procurement

• Customer Mix

• The customer mix has remained essentially the same.

• FY03 Customer Scorecard• Survey response rate - 28%• Scores ranged from 4.9 to 6.7 on 10-point scale• Highest level of satisfaction was for convenience (6.71)• Lowest level of satisfaction was for responsiveness

(4.86) and competence (4.86) • Although scores appear lower than previous year, no

significant differences were found on any categories.

18

Customer Perspective Summary (cont.)

• The data suggests there is a need to increase our responsiveness to our animal transportation and procurement customers

• Major area of concern for procurement services is adequate numbers of staff and ability to resolve problems

19

Customer Perspective Planned Actions

• Improve responsiveness to transportation customers

• Continue with flexible hours for transportation delivery staff by staggering start and stop times for personnel

• Communicate strategies to customers through web site, Animal Program Advisory Committee, and selected staff interactions to increase convenience of scheduling (e.g., setting up regular schedules, establishing standing orders)

20

Customer Perspective Planned Actions (cont.)

• Improve responsiveness to procurement customers• Continue to hold CAPS Users Group meetings to

educate customers on use of CAPS

• Develop web-based ordering system to replace CAPS for procurement orders

• Increase animal procurement staff

21

Customer Perspective Planned Actions (cont.)

• Continue to track and monitor animal transportation runs and animal procurement orders processed by customer

• Modify ORS Customer Scorecard

• Survey animal transportation and animal procurement customers in FY04

• Begin tracking response times to special requests for animal transportation

22

Internal Business Process Perspective

23


ObjectiveDes


IB1a: Number of transportation runs per month

Monitor Monitor Monitor Track and monitor monthly. Increase staff responsiveness by staggering staff work hours.

Sallah

IB1b: Number of procurement orders processed per month

Monitor Monitor Monitor Track and monitor monthly. Continue educating CAPS users on placing orders that allow for flexibility and speedier response.

Sallah


24

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Oct

FY02

Nov FY02

Dec F

Y02

Jan F

Y02

Feb F

Y02

Mar

FY02

Apr FY02

May

FY02

June

FY02

July

FY02

Aug FY

02

Sept F

Y02

Oct

FY03

Nov FY03

Dec F

Y03

Jan F

Y03

Feb F

Y03

Mar

FY03

Apr FY03

May

FY03

June

FY03

July

FY03

Aug FY

03

Sept F

Y03

Number of Runs

IB1a: Number of Transportation Runs per Month (as of 30 Sept)

Note: Control chart (IB1a1) shown in Appendix

Average = 200

Range = 146 - 340

25

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Oct

FY02

Nov FY02

Dec F

Y02

Jan F

Y02

Feb F

Y02

Mar

FY02

Apr FY02

May

FY02

June

FY02

July

FY02

Aug FY

02

Sept F

Y02

Oct

FY03

Nov FY03

Dec F

Y03

Jan F

Y03

Feb F

Y03

Mar

FY03

Apr FY03

May

FY03

June

FY03

July

FY03

Aug FY

03

Sept F

Y03

Number of Procurement Orders Processed

Note: Control chart (IB1b1) shown in Appendix

IB1b: Number of Procurement Orders Processed per Month (as of 30 Sept)

Average = 1,188

Range = 459 – 1,547

26

Internal Business Process PerspectiveSummary

• An average of 200 transportation runs are made each month. • Control chart analysis indicates special cause

signals but interpretation does not reveal any significant patterns.

• Runs are highly dependent on research protocols and are outside DVR control.

27

Internal Business Process PerspectiveSummary (cont.)

• Routine transportation requests require 24 hours notice

• Special requests are honored dependent on driver availability

• Automating the ordering system would benefit both the customer and staff• Customers: Easier to place routine orders,

standing orders, and special requests• Staff: Time saved on processing orders could be

spent on customer special requests

28


• An average of 1,188 procurement orders are processed each month. • Control chart analysis does not reveal any

significant patterns though the data appear to be somewhat seasonal (i.e., a larger number of procurement orders processed in spring and early summer).

• Procurement orders are highly dependent on research protocols and are outside DVR control.

29


• Procurement orders are processed within 24 hours

• Improvements in ordering system would benefit both the customer and staff members• Customers: Easier to place and define orders • Staff: Free up time that staff spends on

processing orders to allow time to respond to customer special requests.

30

Internal Business Process PerspectivePlanned Actions

• Continue to track customer transportation runs and procurement orders processed monthly

• Pilot customer complaint log in FY04, revise as appropriate, and implement

• Develop web-based system for transportation requests

• Work with OLAO to take better advantage of automated credit card reconciliation

31

Learning and Growth Perspective

32


ObjectiveDes


LG2a: Number of CAPS users group meetings held

Baseline TBD TBD Continue to educate CAPS users on system

Green

LG2b: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings on CAPS


Baseline TBD Continue to educate CAPS users on system

Green

For discr

LG2: Educate our customers about our services

33

LG2a: Number of CAPS Users Group Meetings Held (as of 30 Sept)

8

4

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

FY02 FY03

Number of CAPS User Group Meetings

34

LG2b: ORS Customer Scorecard Ratings on CAPS System (as of FY04 Q1)

N = 7

3.57

3.57

3.33

3.86

3.4

4.29

3.6

3.6

1 2 3 4 5

I believe CAPS is an effective tool

I believe CAPS is convenient

I believe CAPS is a flexible system.

I believe CAPS is easy to use

Investigators believe CAPS is an effective tool

Standing orders are used when possible

Investigators believe CAPS is easy to use

Investigators are adequately trained on CAPS

FY03

Strongly Disagree Strongly Agree

35

Learning and Growth PerspectiveSummary

• CAPS Users Groups• Held monthly in FY02. • Decision made by members to hold meetings

quarterly in FY03 and on an “as needed” basis.

• CAPS Survey Results• Survey response rate - 28% • Scores range from 3.33 to 4.29 on a 5-point scale• Highest level of satisfaction was for “standing

orders are used when possible” (4.29)• Lowest level of satisfaction was for “I believe

CAPS is a flexible system” (3.33)

36

Learning and Growth PerspectiveSummary (cont.)

• CAPS Survey Results (cont.)• Scores were inconsistent among respondents with

disagreement on almost all areas surveyed (e.g., scores at times ranged from 1 to 5 on any single category)

37

Learning and Growth PerspectivePlanned Actions

• Animal Transportation Short Term• Communicate strategies to customers through

web site, Animal Program Advisory Committee, and selected staff interactions to increase convenience of scheduling (e.g., setting up regular schedules, establishing standing orders)

• Develop refresher training for staff on handling exceptions

• Animal Transportation Long Term• Develop a web-based ordering system• Develop training on use of system

38

Learning and Growth PerspectivePlanned Actions (cont.)

• Animal Procurement Short Term• Continue to hold CAPS Users Group meetings to

educate customers on use of CAPS• Develop and implement standard operating

procedures for utilization of CAPS• Animal Procurement Long Term

• Work with CIT to develop a web-based ordering system (NBS)

• Work with the Office of Logistics and Acquisition Operations (OLAO) to review the credit card reconciliation process to identify opportunities for improvement

39

Financial Perspective

40


ObjectiveDes


We wil

F1a: For animal transportation, cost per request (number of requests /budget)

Comparison to FY02 results

TBD TBD Track and monitor quarterly


F1c: For animal procurement, cost per procurement order (number of procurement orders/budget)



Green

F1: Minimize unit cost of each discrete service at a defined service level

41

F1a: Animal Transportation Unit Cost (as of 30 Sep)

$102

$119

$152$145

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

$140

$160

FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03

Unit Cost

Note: Unit cost increased 4.6%

42

$310

$346

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

FY02 FY03

Unit Cost

F1c: Animal Procurement Unit Cost (as of 30 Sep)


43

Financial Perspective (cont)

ObjectiveDes


We wi

F2a: Average number of transportation runs per person by month

Baseline TBD TBD Track and monitor quarterly

Green

F2b: Average number of procurement orders processed per person by month


Green

F2: Maximize utilization of assets

44

F2a: Average Number of Transportation Runs Per Person by Month (as of 30 Sep)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Oct

FY03

Nov FY03

Dec F

Y03

Jan F

Y03

Feb F

Y03

Mar

FY03

Apr FY03

May

FY03

June

FY03

July

FY03

Aug FY

03

Sept F

Y03

Average Number of Runs Per Person

Average = 45

Range = 35 - 68

45

F2a: Average Number of Procurement Orders Processed Per Person by Month (as of

30 Sep)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Oct

FY03

Nov FY03

Dec F

Y03

Jan F

Y03

Feb F

Y03

Mar

FY03

Apr FY03

May

FY03

June

FY03

July

FY03

Aug FY

03

Sept F

Y03

Average Number of Procurement Orders Processed Per Person

Average = 249

Range = 190 - 300

46

Financial PerspectiveSummary

• Animal transportation unit cost (runs/budget)• Unit cost has increased by 4.6% which is most

likely due to routine cost escalation and increased contractor costs

• Animal transportation unit cost weighted by size of trip• Is a better measure• Will collect data in FY04

• Animal transportation asset utilization• An average of 45 runs are made per person each

month

47

Financial PerspectiveSummary (cont.)

• Animal procurement unit cost (orders processed/budget)

• Unit cost has increased by 11.8% which is reflects an 12.5% increase in the cost of purchased animals.

• Animal procurement unit cost exclusive of the cost of the animal is a better measure as it excludes pass through costs which can skew the data. It only measures the cost of operations

• Unit cost exclusive of the animal costs increased by 4.3% from FY 02

• Animal procurement asset utilization• Need to determine the percentage of time that staff

members spend on processing procurement orders• Will collect data in FY04

48

Financial PerspectivePlanned Actions

• Animal Transportation• Collect and interpret data on unit cost weighted by

size of trip• Size of trip to be defined as small (on-campus, no

wait), medium (off-campus within 15 miles or on-campus with wait), and large (more than 30 miles)

• Animal Procurement• Develop staff log to capture percentage of time

that staff members spend on a variety of tasks (e.g., processing orders, credit card reconciliation, responding to customer special requests)

49

Conclusions

50

Conclusions from PMP

• Importance of web-based transportation systems• Importance of updating CAPS system for increased

flexibility• Need for additional staff in animal procurement (staff

have been identified, and will be on site during Q2)• Demand for services have remained constant and we

expect this trend to continue.

51

Appendix

Appendix

Pages 2 – 7 of Performance Management Plan


C1b: Percentage of transportation special requests filled

C1d: Percentage of available staff time spent on credit card reconciliations C2c: Customer feedback categorization

C2d: ORS customer scorecard ratings for the business process


IB1a1: Control chart analysis of transportation runs per month

IB1b1: Control chart analysis of number of procurement orders processed per month

IB2a: Complaint categorization

IB2b: Percentage of complaints resolved

52

Appendix (cont.)

Appendix


LG1a: Percentage of identified animal delivery staff that received training

LG1b: Percentage of identified animal procurement staff that received training

Financial PerspectiveF1b: Animal transportation unit cost by size of trip

F1d: Animal procurement unit cost exclusive of size of animal

F2b: Percentage of time staff spends on animal procurement activities (e.g., processing orders, billing customers, credit card reconciliations)

53

Performance Management Plan (page 2)

ObjectiveDes


C1a: Number of transportation runs by customer

baseline TBD TBD Track and monitor monthly





C1c: Number of procurement orders processed by customer


Sallah

C1d: Percentage of available staff time spent on credit card reconciliation

baseline TBD TBD Pilot and implement staff log of time spent on various activities (e.g., credit card reconciliations, processing procurement orders, billing customers)

Sallah

Cus

tom

er


For discrete servic

54


ObjectiveDes


We wil

C2a: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings for animal transportation

Approved animal transportation survey


TBD Survey animal transportation customers every other year

Green

C2b: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings for animal procurement



TBD Survey animal procurement customers every other year

Green

C2c: Categorize and evaluate customer survey feedback

Develop categorization scheme

Baseline TBD Implement categorization scheme, identify actions, and implement actions

Green

C2d: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings customized for the Business Process

Approved business process survey

Baseline TBD Conduct survey in FY04 Green and Foltz

Cus

tom

er


55


ObjectiveDes


IB1a: Number of transportation runs per month

Monitor Monitor Monitor Track and monitor monthly. Increase staff responsiveness by staggering staff work hours.

Sallah


Monitor Monitor Monitor Track and monitor periodically

Sallah

IB1b: Number of procurement orders processed per month

Monitor Monitor Monitor Track and monitor monthly. Continue educating CAPS users on placing orders that allow for flexibility and speedier response.

Sallah



Sallah

IB2a: Complaints categorized by discrete service, type, and corrective action (if applicable)


Baseline TBD Pilot complaint categorization log, revise, and implement

Green

IB2b: Percentage of complaints subject to corrective action that are resolved



Green


Inte

rnal

Bus

ines

s

IB2: Increase reliability of service to our customers

For each of o

56


ObjectiveDes


For d

LG1a: Percentage of identified animal transportation staff that received training.

Baseline TBD Develop and conduct staff refresher training

Sallah

For di

LG1b: Percentage of identified animal procurement staff that received training.

Baseline TBD Develop and implement standard operating procedures for CIT training

Sallah

LG2a: Number of CAPS users group meetings held

Baseline TBD TBD Continue to educate CAPS users on system

Green

LG2b: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings on CAPS


Baseline TBD Continue to educate CAPS users on system

Green

For discr

Lear

ning

and

Gro

wth

LG2: Educate our customers about our services

LG1: Provide training to service providers to improve customer service

57


ObjectiveDes


F1a: For animal transportation, cost per request (number of requests /budget)




F1b: For animal transportation, report unit cost by duration of trip (i.e., small [on-campus, no wait], medium [off-campus within 15 miles or on-campus with wait], and large [more than 30 miles] beginning June 1 through end of FY03.

Baseline TBD Track and monitor quarterly


F1c: For animal procurement, cost per procurement order (number of procurement orders/budget)



Green

F1d: For animal procurement, determine unit cost exclusive of the cost of the animals (i.e., cost of placing order not to include the cost of the animals).


Green

Fina

ncia

l


We will investigate methods to

58


ObjectiveDes


We wi

F2a: Average number of transportation runs per person by month


Green

F2b: Average number of procurement orders processed per person by month


Green

F2c: For animal procurement, percentage of time staff spends on animal procurement activities (e.g., processing orders, billing customers, credit card reconciliations)

Baseline TBD TBD Track and monitor monthly

GreenFina

ncia

l


59


Objective Measure FY 03 Target FY04 Target FY05 Target Initiative Owner





baseline TBD TBD Pilot and implement staff log of time spent on various activities (e.g., credit card reconciliations, processing procurement orders, billing customers)

Sallah


60

C1b: Percentage of transportation special requests filled (as of 30 Sep)

• Develop log and begin tracking data in Quarter 3 of FY04

61


• Develop log and begin tracking data in Quarter 2 of FY04

62

Customer Perspective (cont.)


C2c: Categorize and evaluate customer survey feedback


Baseline TBD Implement categorization scheme, identify actions, and implement actions

Green

C2d: ORS Customer Scorecard ratings customized for the Business Process

Approved business process survey

Baseline TBD Conduct survey in FY04 Green and Foltz


63

C2c: Customer Feedback Categorization

Discrete ServiceType of

CommentNumber of

CommendationsNumber of Complaints

Cost 0 0Quality 0 0Timeliness 1 2Reliability 0 3Availability 0 1Responsiveness 2 0Convenience 0 1Competence 0 0Handling of Problems 0 0Increase Staff 0 0Other 2 1Cost 0 0Quality 0 0Timeliness 0 2Reliability 0 2Availability 0 0Responsiveness 2 0Convenience 0 0Competence 0 0Handling of Problems 1 0Increase Staff 0 5Other 0 0

Provide animal product delivery

Procure research animals

Note: Data based on FY03 Survey Comments for Animal Transportation and Animal Procurement

64

C2d: ORS Customer Scorecard Ratings for Business Process

• In FY03, modified ORS Customer Scorecard for DVR business process

• Will conduct survey in Quarter 3 FY04

65





Sallah



Sallah


66

IB1a1: Number of Transportation Runs (as of 30 Sept)

Individual Values: Animal Transportation

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Month/Year

Ind

ivid

ual

Val

ues

(X

)

LCL = 142.2

UCL = 274.3

Mean = 208.2

Signal

Moving Range: Animal Transportation

0

25

50

75

100

125

150

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47

Month/Year

Mo

vin

g R

ang

e (

mR

)

UCL = 81.2

medmR = 21

Signal

Jan 03

Feb 03

Jan 03

Feb – Sep 03

Feb 00 – Oct 01

Dec – Jul 02

67

IB1b1: Number of Procurement Orders Processed (as of 30 Sept)

Individual Values: Animal Procurement

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

2000

Month/Year

Ind

ivid

ual

Va

lue

s (X

)

# Animals Ordered 479 1046 1200 1086 1206 1533 1313 1575 1615 1211 1400 1314 1020 1060 915 1074 1169 1429 1547 1178 1406 1256 1330 1058

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

LCL = 683.8

UCL = 1767.9

Mean = 1225.8

Signal

Moving Range: Animal Procurement

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Month/Year

Mo

vin

g R

an

ge

(mR

)

Moving Range 567 154 114 120 327 220 262 40 404 189 86 294 40 145 159 95 260 118 369 228 150 74 272

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

UCL = 666

mR = 203.8

Oct 01

Sep 03

68

Internal Business Process Perspective (cont.)


IB2a: Complaints categorized by discrete service, type, and corrective action (if applicable)



Green

IB2b: Percentage of complaints subject to corrective action that are resolved



Green

IB2: Increase reliability of service to our customers

69

IB2a: Complaint Categorization

Discrete Service Type of CommentNumber of Complaints

Cost 0Quality 0Timeliness 0Reliability 0Availability 0Responsiveness 0Convenience 0Competence 0Handling of Problems 0Increase Staff 0Other 0Cost 0Quality 0Timeliness 0Reliability 0Availability 0Responsiveness 0Convenience 0Competence 0Handling of Problems 0Increase Staff 0Other 0



• Developed log for categorizing customer complaints in FY03• Will pilot test and refine log in FY04

70

IB2b: Percentage of Complaints Resolved

• Developed log for categorizing customer complaints in FY03• Will pilot test and refine log in FY04

Discrete Service Type of CommentNumber of Complaints

Addressed/Resolved

Cost 0 0Quality 0 0Timeliness 0 0Reliability 0 0Availability 0 0Responsiveness 0 0Convenience 0 0Competence 0 0Handling of Problems 0 0Increase Staff 0 0Other 0 0Cost 0 0Quality 0 0Timeliness 0 0Reliability 0 0Availability 0 0Responsiveness 0 0Convenience 0 0Competence 0 0Handling of Problems 0 0Increase Staff 0 0Other 0 0



71


ObjectiveDes


For d

LG1a: Percentage of identified animal transportation staff that received training.

Baseline TBD Develop and conduct staff refresher training

Sallah

For di

LG1b: Percentage of identified animal procurement staff that received training.

Baseline TBD Develop and implement standard operating procedures for CIT training

Sallah

LG1: Provide training to service providers to improve customer service

72

LG1a: Percentage of Identified Animal Delivery Staff That Received Training (as of 30 Sep)

• In FY04 will• Identify staff that require training• Develop training• Conduct training

73

LG1b: Percentage of Identified Animal Procurement Staff That Received Training (as of 30 Sep)

• In FY04 will• Identify staff that require training• Develop training• Conduct training

74



F1b: For animal transportation, report unit cost by duration of trip (i.e., small [on-campus, no wait], medium [off-campus within 15 miles or on-campus with wait], and large [more than 30 miles] beginning June 1 through end of FY03.

Baseline TBD Track and monitor quarterly


F1d: For animal procurement, determine unit cost exclusive of the cost of the animals (i.e., cost of placing order not to include the cost of the animals).


Green


75

F1b: Animal Delivery Unit Cost Weighted by Size of Trip (as of 30 Sep)

• In FY04 will begin tracking deliveries by size of trip• Size of trip to be defined as small (on-campus, no

wait), medium (off-campus within 15 miles or on-campus with wait), and large (more than 30 miles)

76

$27.07$28.23

$0.00

$10.00

$20.00

$30.00

$40.00

FY02 FY03

Unit Cost

F1d: Animal Procurement Unit Cost Exclusive of Cost of Animal (as of 30 Sep)


77

Financial Perspective (cont.)



F2c: For animal procurement, percentage of time staff spends on animal procurement activities (e.g., processing orders, billing customers, credit card reconciliations)

Baseline TBD TBD Track and monitor monthly

Green

78

F2b: Percentage of Staff Time Spent on Animal Procurement Activities

• In FY03, developed and pilot tested log of staff time spent on variety of animal procurement activities

• In FY04, will refine log and begin collecting data• Categories will include time spent on processing

orders, credit card reconciliation, and responding to customer special requests

performance management presentation procure and deliver

Business

animal orders

ors customer scorecard

animal transportation

customer c2a

animal procurement services

customer c1c

customer scorecard methodology

customer perspectivecont