performance management presentation provide mail, courier and package screening services

1

Performance Management Presentation

Provide Mail, Courier and Package Screening Services

Team Members: Leader: John Hunt

Members: James SpearsTracy NiksichAngela Milton

Division of Mail and Courier ServicesORS

National Institutes of Health

Date: January 14, 2005

2

Table of Contents

Main Presentation

PMP Template …………………………….……………………Slide 4

Customer Perspective……………………….………………….Slide 7

Internal Business Process Perspective……………………………………………………Slide 21

Learning and Growth Perspective……………………………………………………Slide 33

Financial Perspective……………………………………………Slide 40

Conclusions and Recommendations……………………………………………Slide 52

3

Appendix

Customer PerspectiveNONE…………………………………………….

Internal Business Process PerspectiveIB1: Complete and update process maps of Service Group/Discrete ServicesIB5: Actual postage used vs. OMAS statementsIB6: Percentage of courier items meeting the two hour delivery target

Learning and Growth PerspectiveLG1a: Turnover

LG1b: Sick leave usageLG2a: EEO

LG2b: ERLG2c: ADR

LG3: Awards/Recognition

Financial PerspectiveNONE………………………………………………...

Table of Contents (cont.)

4

Team Members

Mr. John Hunt

James SpearsAngela MiltonTracy Niksich

Team Leader

We provide exceptional service to our customers - researchers, managers, research support personnel, and others - through our twice-daily delivery, pick-up and dispatch services, special alternate ground service, on-demand courier service, postal accounting service, and package screening services.

Strategy Description

We provide comprehensive mail security and screening services to help ensure that materials received by NIH employees are safe. This includes regular x-ray and visual scans of incoming materials, and expedited positive screening operations for suspicious packages. We keep current on best practices and technologies for timely and secure transport of mail and materials, and provide ongoing training for our mail personnel. We maintain a close watch on customer needs through regular meetings, focus groups, and surveys, and are very responsive to requests and suggestions.

We ensure reliable and timely delivery of mail and other materials to the entire NIH population by offering a wide range of delivery options, including on-demand courier services. Through our special alternate ground service and our postal accounting service, we help NIH reduce and manage its postal costs.

Service Strategy

Ensure safe, secure, accurate, and timely transport of critical and mission-sensitive letters, journals, and packages. Reduce mail and courier costs for IC's and other offices.

Value Proposition

DS6:

DS5: Scan Incoming Packages

DS4: Provide Courier Services

Provide mail, courier and package screening services

Service Group

Performance Management Plan (PMP)

DS3: Manage Postal Accounting System

DS2: Process and Dispatch Outgoing Mail

DS1: Process and Deliver Incoming Mail

Discrete Services

Division Approval/Date: 01/14/05 Associate Director Approval/Date:

Operational Excellence

Customer Intimacy

Product Leadership

Growth

Sustain

Harvest

5

Relationship Among Performance Objectives

Customer needs and expectations

Operational Objectives

Internal Business Objectives

Learning and Growth Objectives

Performance Improvements / Operational Changes

Customer Objectives

Financial Objectives

Performance Feedback

6

Relationship Among Performance Objectives

• Division of Mail and Courier Service (DMCS) performance objectives have little, if any impact on other objectives

• DMCS performance objectives refer to well-defined but separate areas of the discrete services they represent

7

Customer Perspective

8


Objective Measure FY 04 Actual FY05 Target FY06 Target Initiative Owner

C1: Increase customer satisfaction

DMCS management team meets with all IC mail managers to discuss operations and gather feedback

3 meetings 3 meetings 3 meetings Customer Contact Mr John Hunt

9

FY Meetings2002 32003 32004 3

MEETINGS WITH IC MAIL MANAGERS

01234

2002 2003 2004

Fiscal Year

Mee

tin

gs

10

Customer PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?

• IC mail managers provided an excellent means of disseminating information concerning mail service issues, performance improvement initiatives, and postal news

• IC mail managers were a good source of information about the potential reactions of IC customers to various issues, from postage rate increases to DMCS performance improvement initiatives

11


Objective Measure FY 04 Actual FY05 Target FY06 Target Initiative Owner

C2: Reduce Customer Complaints Regarding Missorts

Customer Scorecard (mean response score) 8.4 8.5 8.6 Customer Contact Mr John Hunt

12

Survey BackgroundPurpose

• Evaluate the effectiveness of the NIH Division of Mail and Courier Services (DMCS) in fulfilling its’ mission over the last six months

• Assess the NIH mail stop contact’s satisfaction with the following service attributes:

• Quality• Timeliness• Reliability• Availability• Responsiveness• Convenience• Competence• Handling of Problems

• Assess awareness that address information in NED is used by DMCS

• Solicit open ended comments:• What was done well• What needs to be improved• Other

• Respondents could optionally leave contact information for follow up

13

Survey BackgroundMethodology

• Hard copy surveys were distributed to all NIH mail stop code contacts, along with introductory letter and pre-addressed return label.

• Surveys distributed late October 2004• Responses were gathered through late November

2004. Completed surveys were returned to OQM• All responses that contained contact information were

forwarded to Mr. James Spears of DMCS for follow up

• Responses analyzed by SAIC throughout month of December and presentation prepared

14

Survey BackgroundDistribution

Number of surveys distributed 1,000

Number of respondents 358

Response Rate 36%

15

FY04 Satisfaction Ratings on Specific Service Aspects

8.84

8.49

8.41

8.35

8.22

8.26

8.32

8.66

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Handling of Problems

Competence

Convenience

Responsiveness

Availability

Reliability

Timeliness

Quality

Mean Response

Unsatisfactory Outstanding

N = 356

N = 357

N = 352

N = 353

N = 353

N = 353

N = 352

N = 351

16

Survey Results: Overall Scores

Mean Response 8.4

Median 9.0

Scored as Excellent 78.9%

Scored as Good to Excellent 95.8%

17

Summary• Respondent Characteristics

• 36% of recipients responded to survey.

• Satisfaction Ratings on Specific Service Aspects• Respondents were asked to rate their satisfaction with the following aspects of

mail and courier services• Quality• Timeliness• Reliability• Availability• Responsiveness• Convenience• Competence• Handling of Problems

• The scale ranged from (1) Unsatisfactory to (10) Outstanding. Satisfaction mean ratings range from a high of 8.84 on Responsiveness to a low of 8.22 on Quality. Notice that the lowest mean rating (8.22) is still well above the midpoint of a 10-point scale. In general, respondent perceptions are quite positive.

18

Summary (cont.)

• Comments• What was done particularly well?

• A total of 144 comments were made• Two themes were evident• 91% of comments were Kudos. Timeliness of delivery and courteousness of staff were

mentioned most frequently.• 6% of comments mentioned specific individuals as particularly outstanding

• What needs to be improved?• A total of 139 comments were made• 47% of comments mentioned miss-directed mail.• 20% of comments indicated that nothing needs to be improved.• 6% of comments mentioned timeliness.• 5% of comments mentioned regular pick up times.

• Other comments• A total of 72 comments were made• 50% of comments were Kudos.• 14% of comments mentioned miss-directed mail.• 8% of comments mentioned needing more information.

19

Customer PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?

• The overall scores show that our service is perceived as generally excellent.

• As with our previous survey, the majority of complaints centered around the perception of Positional mail as misdelivered mail.On speaking with the 65 mail stop contacts who complained of occasional mis-deliveries, 45 (approximately 70%) were referring to positional mail, which had been correctly delivered-as addressed.There is still a lack of knowledge within the NIH community concerning positional mail. This, despite the fact that the DMCS has distributed flyers and discussed the issue with IC Mail Managers for the last two years.

20

Customer PerspectiveWhat actions are planned?

• DMCS will continue to schedule a mail managers meeting every four months to keep this communication channel open and viable

• DMCS will continue to educate our customers on positional mail through flyers and direct communication

• DMCS will conduct another customer poll in FY 2005 to gauge progress vs. FY 2004

21

Internal Business Process Perspective

22


Objective Measure FY 03 Actual FY04 Actual FY05 Target Initiative Owner

IB2: Driver Delivery Times are consistent

Time of day at route mid-point +/- 9.0 min +/- 8.1 min +/- 8.0 min PacTrac/Driver monitoring James Spears

23

AVG Variation in Delivery Time

Highest Variation in Delivery Time

AVG Variation in Delivery Time

Highest Variation in Delivery Time

0:08 0:15 0:09 0:210:08 0:21 0:08 0:230:08 0:16 0:09 0:250:06 0:20 0:07 0:220:08 0:18 0:09 0:250:07 0:21 0:08 0:24

East

PM DeliveryCentralNorthSouth

WestMidway

Driver Delivery Statistics for one year period October 2003 - September 2004

CentralNorthSouthEast

WestMidway

AM Delivery

Driver Delivery Times are Consistent

24

chart # part #Product: A.M. Driver Central Point Measurement (6116 Exec. Blvd.) - Central RouteMeasurement: Time at which driver reaches predetermined mid-point zero equalsDateDay 9/1 9/2 9/3 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/13 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/20 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/27 9/28 9/29 9/30Notes

Measurments: 10:58 11:01 10:50 10:57 11:04 10:50 11:05 10:52 10:57 11:05 10:52 11:03 10:55 10:58 10:52 11:05 10:58 10:50 10:57 10:58 10:58 10:57 =Average timeMoving Ranges 0:03 0:11 0:07 0:07 0:14 0:15 0:13 0:05 0:08 0:13 0:11 0:08 0:03 0:06 0:13 0:07 0:08 0:07 0:01 0:00 0:08 =Average range

0:21 =3v11:18 =UNPLx10:36 =LNPLx0:26 =UCLr0:08 =Clr

Upper Control Limit11:18

Average Measurement10:57

Lower Control Limit10:36

Upper Control limit0:26

Average Range0:08

CHART FOR INDIVIDUAL VALUES and MOVING RANGE

0:00

0:30

1:00

1:30

2:00

2:30

3:00

9/2 9/3 9/4 9/5 9/6 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/25 9/26 9/27 9/28 9/29 9/30

10:00

10:30

11:00

11:30

12:00

9/2 9/3 9/4 9/5 9/6 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/25 9/26 9/27 9/28 9/29 9/30

Me

as

ure

me

nt-

Tim

e

25

chart # part #Product: P.M. Driver Central Point Measurement (6116 Exec. Blvd.) - Central RouteMeasurement: Time at which driver reaches predetermined mid-point zero equalsDateDay 9/1 9/2 9/3 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/13 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/20 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/27 9/28 9/29 9/30Notes

Measurments: 16:32 16:27 16:20 16:35 16:22 16:35 16:27 16:20 16:32 16:41 16:20 16:34 16:20 16:29 16:30 16:25 16:20 16:27 16:35 16:30 16:28 16:28 =Average timeMoving Ranges 0:05 0:07 0:15 0:13 0:13 0:08 0:07 0:12 0:09 0:21 0:14 0:14 0:09 0:01 0:05 0:05 0:07 0:08 0:05 0:02 0:09 =Average range

0:23 =3v16:51 =UNPLx16:04 =LNPLx0:29 =UCLr0:09 =Clr

Upper Control Limit16:51

Average Measurement16:28

Lower Control Limit16:04

Upper Control limit0:29

Average Range0:09

CHART FOR INDIVIDUAL VALUES and MOVING RANGE

0:00

0:30

1:00

1:30

2:00

2:30

3:00

9/2 9/3 9/4 9/5 9/6 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/25 9/26 9/27 9/28 9/29 9/30

Mo

vin

g R

an

ge

s

15:30

16:00

16:30

17:00

9/2 9/3 9/4 9/5 9/6 9/7 9/8 9/9 9/10 9/11 9/12 9/13 9/14 9/15 9/16 9/17 9/18 9/19 9/20 9/21 9/22 9/23 9/24 9/25 9/26 9/27 9/28 9/29 9/30

Me

as

ure

me

nt-

Tim

e

26



IB3: Incoming mail is sorted correctlyError rate from random samplings 0.29% 0.16% 0.15% QC inspection routine James Spears

27


Sortation Error Rate

0.00%0.05%0.10%0.15%0.20%0.25%0.30%

Oct

-03

Nov

-03

Dec

-03

Jan-

04Fe

b-04

Mar

-04

Apr

-04

May

-04

Jun-

04Ju

l-04

Aug

-04

Sep

-04

Per

cen

t E

rro

r

28



IB4: Postage is correctly applied to Outgoing mail

Correct postage rate from random samplings 99.5% 100.0% 99.9% QC inspection routine James Spears

29

Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?

Driver Delivery Times:• Average variation for driver delivery times,

which was much lower is FY 2003 than in FY 2002, was nearly a minute lower in FY 2004 than in FY 2003. Showing that improvement has continued in this area, although further improvement is likely to be less significant due to the distance of the Stonestreet building from the campus and the continued expansion of NIH.

• Using control charts, all delivery variation was found to be well within controls.

30


Incoming Mail is Sorted Correctly:• Two years of quality control samplings and

feedback to the mail service contractors have been successful in lowering the primary sortation error rate from 1.06% (FY 2002) to 0.29% in FY 2003, to 0.16% in FY2004, with no consistent problem areas. Any further gains are going to be statistically insignificant since the distance to 0% is well below the statistical margin for error.

31


Postage is Correctly Applied to Outgoing Mail:• Since the new mail services contractor began

operations with increased training in June 2003, the quality sampling error rate has gone from 0.5% to 0.0%, and has remained there ever since.

32

Internal Business Process PerspectiveWhat actions are planned?

• DMCS will continue to monitor the work of the contractor in ways that provide creative feedback that increases operational excellence

• PMP quality goals for incoming mail sortation in 2005 will be primarily focused on maintaining the current quality levels

33

Learning and Growth Perspective

34



LG4: Maintain & enhance competencies for the future organization.

Training courses attended 2/yr. 2/yr. 2/yr. Employee Training Angela Milton

35



LG5: X-ray clerks are alert and knowledgeable (training, etc.)

Percentage of computer-simulated bomb threats identified.

96.5% 96.5% 97% X-ray safety James Spears

36

Percentage of Computer-simulated Bomb Threats Identified

94.3

96.5 96.5

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100

FY2002 FY2003 FY2004

37

Learning and Growth PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?

Training:• Meeting our training goal shows that training,

especially safety training continues to be a priority at DMCS

• DMCS believes that additional training makes for a safer, more effective organization

• Continuous Improvement in DMCS quality numbers supports this policy

38

Learning and Growth PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?

X-Ray Clerk Proficiency:• X-ray clerks are maintaining a high

proficiency at identifying potential explosives, which is due to ongoing training efforts and only somewhat to worker experience, since 100% turnover is taking place each year (two positions) in these contracted positions

39

Learning and Growth PerspectiveWhat actions are planned?

• Training for DMCS will continue at the two training sessions per year minimum, with at least one session devoted to workplace safety

• Training for x-ray technicians will be increased in order to achieve our goal of 97% for next year

40

Financial Perspective

41

Financial Perspective (cont.)


F1: Minimize unit cost at a defined service level.

Change in Units for each Discrete Service

F1a: Unit: # of work hours processing incoming mail

27,214 26,146 25,079

Business Plan Angela Milton

F1b: Unit: # of pieces of outgoing mail processed 4,219,485 6,278,380 5,300,000


F1c: Unit: # of reports (postal accounting system)

390 390 390


F1d: Unit: # of packages for courier services

4,456 5,274 6,242


F1e: Unit: # of packages scanned for incoming mail

51,728 54,623 57,680

Courier Services Tracy Niksich

Fin

anci

al

42

Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?Unit Costs:• Labor costs for contracted discrete services are fixed by

contract and increase when Bureau of Labor statistics job classification standards are raised. Nothing can be affected by DMCS management in the near term

• Labor costs for the FTE centered discrete services are fixed by Congress. Nothing can be affected by DMCS management in the near term

• Unit costs for “Scan Incoming Packages” are decreasing due to the increase and projected future increase in parcel volume in this area

• The only way to decrease unit costs in the long term is to maximize throughput and minimize down time. Since down time is very low, efforts must be made toward increasing efficiency such that volume increases will not increase total costs

43

Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?Unit Costs:• The data shows work hours down, even as volumes are

up. This clearly shows the advantage of DMCS’s focus on quality, efficiency, and time-saving technology.

44

Financial Perspective (cont.)

Objective MeasureFY 03 Actual

FY04 Actual

FY05 Target

Initiative Owner

F2: Maximize savings from alternative ground shipping program

Total savings vs USPS Parcel Post $ 140,498 $ 183,682 $ 190,000 Alternative Ground James Spears

45

Total Savings vs. USPS Parcel Post

FedEx Savings compared to Volume

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Oct-02

Nov-02

Dec-02

Jan-

03

Feb-0

3

Mar

-03

Apr-0

3

May

-03

Jun-

03

Jul-0

3

Aug-0

3

Sep-0

3

Oct-03

Nov-03

Dec-03

Jan-

04

Feb-0

4

Mar

-04

May

-04

Jun-

04

Jul-0

4

Aug-0

4

Sep-0

4

Oct-04

Parcels

$-

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

Savings

Parcels Shipped Total Savings

46


FedEx Parcels Total SavingsFY 2003 Shipped Savings Per ParcelOctober 2739 7,393$ 2.70$ November 2963 11,182$ 3.77$ December 2456 5,974$ 2.43$ January 2513 5,016$ 2.00$ February 2556 7,979$ 3.12$ March 4945 13,097$ 2.65$ April 5129 16,082$ 3.14$ May 4559 15,226$ 3.34$ June 5022 16,579$ 3.30$ July 4735 13,631$ 2.88$ August 4585 14,269$ 3.11$ September 4820 14,070$ 2.92$

Totals 47022 140,498$ 2.99$

47


FedEx Parcels Total SavingsFY 2004 Shipped Savings Per ParcelOctober 5556 19,266$ 3.47$ November 4124 14,848$ 3.60$ December 3809 11,853$ 3.11$ January 4026 12,170$ 3.02$ February 5596 18,860$ 3.37$ March 6919 24,301$ 3.51$ April 4995 16,937$ 3.39$ May 3913 13,016$ 3.33$ June 3849 14,746$ 3.83$ July 3602 13,483$ 3.74$ August 3213 11,917$ 3.71$ September 3200 12,286$ 3.84$

Totals 52802 183,682$ 3.48$

48

Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?

Alternative Ground Shipping:• The alternative ground shipping program has

exceeded expectations by increasing savings from the previous Fiscal Year by approximately $43,000 vs. USPS Parcel Post

• While savings closely track volume, savings are greatest on medium-sized parcels (20-70 lbs)

49

Financial PerspectiveWhat does the data tell you?

• Awareness of the alternative ground program was raised by means of flyers and by keeping IC mail managers aware of the savings potential and actual savings at each mail managers meeting

• Efforts to increase volume through awareness began to pay off in March 2003. Despite continued promotion, volume appears to have leveled off in FY2004. Our inquiries have shown that there is relatively little additional volume available to us

50

Financial PerspectiveWhat actions are planned?

• DMCS continues to employ more effective ways to utilize the work hours we’re paying for through applied technology; such as replacing the aging PacTrac system.

• DMCS has also more effectively used workhours by minimizing sortation errors through a comprehensive quality control program (which minimizes rework)

• Although the NIH community continues to grow and spread out geographically, DMCS has only needed to increase contractor personnel by one position to accommodate these changes

51

Financial PerspectiveWhat actions are planned?

• The alternative ground program will continue, as it has been extremely effective at saving money vs. USPS Parcel Post, while providing superior service

• DMCS will continue to try and capture any remaining internal parcel business that can result in savings for NIH

• DMCS will continue to look for ways to save through technological innovation

52

Conclusions

53

Conclusions from PMP

• Meetings with the IC Mail Managers have helped improve service and understanding

• The continued reduction of average delivery time variation has resulted in better service for our customers

• DMCS Quality Control program has resulted in improved service

• Ongoing training continues to be a key part of DMCS customer service improvement

• Current x-ray clerk training is very effective • Technology has improved service and slowed

contractor cost increases

54

Conclusions from PMP:Improvements• Implemented a program to decrease the

amount of wasted postage due to undeliverable mail

• Increased mail efficiency throughout NIH through vigorous oversight of the mail contractor and strict enforcement of performance requirements outlined in the performance-based contract

• Developed a mail security guide (to supplement training) that contributes to keeping DMCS employees safe at all times, but especially in time of crisis

55

Conclusions from PMP:Improvements• Expenses have been avoided by using

technology to get work done more effectively

• Due to recent software improvements in the industry, a replacement for the PacTrac system is being considered. This will not only enable DMCS to process the larger number of accountable mail pieces currently received in less time, but to manage the software more effectively, with less training for operators due to increased product “ease of use” from other vendors

• DMCS quality control program has reduced sortation error from 1.06% (FY2002) to 0.29% (FY2003) to 0.16% (FY2004)

56

Conclusions from PMP:Improvements• The alternative ground shipping program met

expectations by increasing the savings from the previous FY ($183,682 vs. $140,498) due to excellent service and promotional efforts

57

Appendix

58

AppendixPages 2-5 of template

Customer PerspectiveNONE…………………………………………….

Internal Business Process PerspectiveIB1: Complete and update process maps of Service

Group/Discrete ServicesIB5: Actual postage used vs. OMAS statementsIB6: Percentage of courier items meeting the two hour delivery target

Learning and Growth PerspectiveLG1a: Turnover

LG1b: Sick leave usageLG2a: EEO

LG2b: ERLG2c: ADR

LG3: Awards/Recognition

Financial PerspectiveNONE………………………………………………...

59

Appendices: DS1 Process ChartProcess Incoming Mail

Office of Occ.Health

USPS Project Officer Clerks Drivers

Deliver to NIH at301 N Stonestreet

Ave.

X-Ray for PotentialHazards

Is Cleared forDelivery

Sort Mail toDelivery Point

Load Mail andleave Office

DeliverMail

Pick-up Mail

Place Mail inDriver Pick-up

Areas

Is ExternallyForwarded

or RTS

Label and Identifyas Forwarded or

as RTS

Examine forpotential

Biohazards

Is PossibleExplosive

Device

Call Campus andMontgomery

County Police(911)

Is PotentialBiohazard

Is Hazardous

Turn Over toAuthorities

Is Hazardous

Disposed of byAuthorities

USPS Pick-Up

Is ForwardedInternally

Is ClearlyAddressed

DirectoryLook-up

Quality Check

CorrectlySorted

Present Errors toContractorSupervisor

Is in Directory

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

No

No

NoNo

No

No

No

60

Appendices: DS2 Process ChartProcess Outgoing Mail

USPSClerks Project OfficerDrivers

Prepare forDelivery Run

Load Mail andleave Office

DeliverMail

Pick-up MailIs USPSOutgoing

Process and MeterOutgoing Mail

Quality Check

Done Correctly

USPSDriver Pick-up

Dispatch toPost Office

Present toContractorSupervisor

Sort to DeliveryPoint

Reference:"Process IncomingMail" Flow Chart

Delivery Errors

Yes

Yes

No

No

61

Appendices: DS3 Process ChartManage USPS Accounting System

Office of FinancialManagement

IC Mail Managers

Contractor/FTEMeter Operators

& Meter Mail DataSystem

USPS AccountingMCSB

Program Specialist

Sends OMASreport to NIH

Receives USPSOMAS Report

downloads MMSmetered mail data

for the Quarter

Are OMAS andMMS data valid

Data Compiledinto Quarterly

report

USPS investigatesand adjusts

charges to reflectactual NIH usage,or explains why

justified

Quarterly Reportprovided to IC Mail

Managers

Quarterly Reportprovided to OFM

Has questions

Has questions

Accepts Report

Accepts Report(Use for next year's

assessment

Resolvesissue/problem

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

System Storesmonthly and

cumulative MMSmetered mail data

62

Appendices: DS4 Process ChartCourier Service

MCSBManagement

RecipientCourierDispatcherORS Customer

(sender)

Place Call toDispatcher for

Courier Pick-up

Receive Call, logcall in computer,contact courier

Pick-up item fromORS Customer,log transaction,provide tracking

number

Receive, sign forCourier parcel

ContactDispatcher to

confirm delivery

Enter Deliveryand time ofdelivery incomputer

Prepare DeliverySummary at the

end of Day,submit to MCSB

Management

Compile MonthlyUsage Data for

Future CustomerBilling

End of Day

Yes

No

Continue toAccumulate Daily

Data

63

Scan Incoming Packages

NIH PoliceDMCS

ManagementPrivate Courier

(UPS, FedEx, etc.)X-Ray Clerk

DMCS Customer(Recipient)

Label package asinspected and

sign/date the labelto prevent reuse of

box

Receive, sign forPrivate Courier

parcel

Place package inx-ray machine

Arrives at buildingdock with package(s)

Examine on-screen image for

presence ofexplosive device

or weapon

No

Package issafe to allow in

building

Yes

Present packageto x-ray clerk

Sign in at guardstation

receive packageback from x-ray

clerk

Alert DMCS Mgmtand NIH Police.

Follow instructions

Make determinationof danger, give

instructions to x-rayclerks and DMCS

mgmt

Remain in contact withx-ray clerks and NIH

police, alert ORSmanagement as

appropriate

Appendices: DS5 Process Chart

64



IB5: USPS billing is accurateActual postage used vs. OMAS Statements 98% 100% 100% OMAS Angela Milton

65

Appendices: Process Measures

POSTAL OVERCHARGES RECOVERED BY NIH

0

500000

1000000

1500000

2000000

2500000

3000000

3500000

4000000

4500000

5000000

Year

Fund

s R

ecov

ered

$-

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

$3,000,000

$4,000,000

$5,000,000

$6,000,000

$7,000,000

$8,000,000

$9,000,000

$10,000,000

Cum

ulat

ive

Fund

s R

ecov

ered

YearAmountCumulative Amount

66


Objective Measure FY 03 Target FY04 Target FY05 Target Initiative Owner

IB6: ORS Courier delivery is timelyPecentage of items meeting the two hour delivery target 100% 100% 100% ORS Courier service Tracy Niksich

67


Aug 04 Packages

Sep 04 Packages

Total

Total 539 334 521 682 567 433 447 407 355 322 334 333 5274missed 2hr

windowØ Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø Ø

Oct 03 Packages

Nov 03 Packages

Dec 03 Packages

May 04 Packages

Jun 04 Packages

Jul 04 Packages

Jan 04 Packages

Feb 04 Packages

Mar 04 Packages

Apr 04 Packages

68


Increase understanding of process:• All process maps are updated as needed and agreed

to by NIH management, contractor management, and contractor employees as an actual representation

USPS billing is accurate:• There was no discrepancy in USPS OMAS reporting

this year

ORS Courier delivery is timely:• All parcels entrusted to the ORS courier service were

delivered within the two hour window

69

• No data was available from Human Resources from FY2004 with which to generate comparative studies

Conclusions from Turnover, Sick Leave, Awards, EEO/ER/ADR Data

performance management presentation provide mail, courier and package screening services

Documents

service groupprovide

postal accounting service

exceptional service

mail personnel

timely delivery of mail

courier costs

demand courier services

courier servicesds5