Organizational Management Consulting and DCD Reorganization

1. Organizational Management Consulting and DCD Reorganization Presentation by Bob Gray – December 27, 2006

2. REVIEW OF THE PROCESS • Gather and review pertinent documents • Review original assessments done for the WIND information system. • Offsite sessions • Staff interviews and Departmental Assessments • Findings documents for each Department • Organizational recommendations

3. Background Materials Reviewed • Navajo Nation Appropriations Act • Navajo Nation Procurement Act • Navajo Nation Business Opportunity Act • Navajo Nation Purchasing Manual • Navajo Nation Local Governance Act • Best Practices Review of the Navajo Nation Capital Improvement Planning Process • CIP Ploicies and Procedures • DCD Conduct of Operations

4. Additional Organizational Information Developed by PWT for DCD • Assessment of Project Management Policies and Procedures Currently in Use by the DCD • Proposed Policies and Procedures to Support Project Management by DCD • WIND Information System

5. ORGANIZATIONAL CONSULTING • Encompassed all six departments, the LGSC’s and Division Administration • Final results and deliverables: • Findings documents for each Department based on Offsite Sessions and Departmental Assessments • Proposed organizational structure • Functional job descriptions • Job qualifications

6. ORGANIZATIONAL CONSULTINGPhase I • First phase involved DES, CDBG and CIO • Fast tracked in order to get onto new strategic plan and 2007 budget. • TCDC driven • More information about these three departments because the original assessment had largely been completed. • Three off-site planning sessions with DCD staff

7. ORGANIZATIONAL CONSULTING PHASE II • This task involved NDOT, Solid Waste, Housing Services, the LGSC’s and Division Administration assessments in preparation for the Phase III reorganization sub-task • Interviews with departmental management and staff • Review current processes • Review current problems • Review current organizational structure • Workloads/Staffing • Authorities • Approvals • Road blocks/Bottlenecks

8. ORGANIZATIONAL CONSULTING (continued)Phase IIDepartmental Assessments • Review of current systems and management tools • Manual systems • Spreadsheets • Databases • Management and Financial systems • Project management tools • Funds tracking • Payment processing

9. ORGANIZATIONAL CONSULTING(continued)PHASE III • Phase III was roughly the same as Phase I except that it involved NDOT, Solid Waste, and Housing Services as well as Division Administration and the five LGSC’s. • Based on staff interviews instead of Offsite Sessions. Everyone was interviewed except Temporary Employees.

10. Deliverables • Debrief and analysis documentation after each off-site planning session. • Interim results prior to each off-site planning session. • Pre-final documentation. • Org and staffing charts • Job descriptions • Job qualifications • Capacity for project execution • Implementation plan with timeline and required resources

11. ORGANIZATIONAL RECOMMENDATION • Based on background research and the Departmental Assessments. • Housing has poor audit reports, significant morale issues, weak management direction, and staff that must go outside to get answers. • CDBG has good audit reports, excellent morale, and management that provides good direction and follows up with staff. • Merge CDBG and Housing Services – Agreed to by PWT and the Core Reorganization Team to resolve current COA.

12. MERGE CDBG AND HOUSING SERVICES • Looked at placing Housing Services under the LGSC’s, DES and CDBG • Fits well with CDBG for the following reasons • Some of the same funding sources • Both provide housing only services • Streamlines the construction and occupation of housing by allowing the coordination of both home building and the provision of services • Both Departments face funding cutbacks in future years • CDBG has strong efficient management and good marks from the auditors. Housing Services management is struggling.

13. WHY NOT MERGE CDBG WITH DES? • The current design and construction activity done by CDBG is strictly housing related. • Different codes, specs and standards than those used for Capital Projects

14. WHY NOT MERGE HOUSING SERVICES WITH THE LGSC’S? • The LGSC’s are already struggling with their current mission • The mission of the LGSC’s is to provide Chapter Assistance, not construction related services • Best fit with CDBG

15. SHORT TERM BENEFITS • Streamline the occupation of new housing by placing home construction and home utility services under single management. • Savings in Accounting and Administrative staff. • With both Departments facing decreasing funding the combination of services is more logical as one Department. • Places the use, and management of HUD funds in a single Department.

16. LONG TERM BENEFITS • Comprehensive approach to housing development taking into account transportation, utilities and homes. • New Department could eventually be a regulatory office. • Oversee grants management of NHA through new department • Leading eventually to a Tribal Designated Housing Entity with funds flowing through the new Department • No current coordination between NHA and other entities