1 / 53

Getting Better Results from Government Washington State’s GMAP

Getting Better Results from Government Washington State’s GMAP. Pacific Northwest Digital Government Summit Performance Measurement in Washington June 20, 2006 Presented by Robin Campbell, Governor’s GMAP Analyst, Office of the Governor

ros
Download Presentation

Getting Better Results from Government Washington State’s GMAP

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. Getting Better Results from GovernmentWashington State’sGMAP Pacific Northwest Digital Government Summit Performance Measurement in Washington June 20, 2006 Presented by Robin Campbell, Governor’s GMAP Analyst, Office of the Governor Matthew Krieger, Organizational Performance Manager, Dept of Information Services Vince Schueler, Technology Manager, GMAP, Office of the Governor

  2. Today we’ll talk about • Washington’s Management Framework • What GMAP Is and How It Works • Examples and Video • Technology and GMAP

  3. Management Framework

  4. Why are we doing this?The performance imperative • Improve service delivery We must be able to confirm that change is happening • Business as usual is not enough We must learn to adapt to a changing environment • Improve budget and operational decisions Measure lest you be measured • Tell our story Clear communication – not ‘spin’ – promotes accountability

  5. What is GMAP?GovernmentManagementAccountability andPerformance

  6. GMAP is . . . A management tool that promotes the sharing of current information to achieve better results • Managers report in person • Reports are data-driven • Dialogue is honest, and questions are direct and challenging • Leaders and managers hold each other accountable by following up

  7. GMAP Principles* • Personal presence of high level leadership • Accurate, timely data • Effective strategies and tactics • Real-time problem solving • Relentless follow-up Did we do what we said we would do? Did it work? * Adapted from the COMPSTAT principles developed by Jack Maple

  8. Two Levels of GMAP • Agency directors and senior executives review performance within their agencies • The governor pays particular attention to results that are aligned with her key priorities, and to initiatives that involve multiple agencies

  9. Governors GMAP Room Layout  General Seating Agency Management Team Seating (to support presenting directors) Communications Director C Director A Director B  Risk Mgmt Personnel Agency Staff Projection Screen #1 Projection Screen #2 Information Svcs Lead Analyst & Recorder Policy Legislative Relations GMAP Deputy Chief of Staff Finance Chiefof Staff Governor

  10. Role of the Leadership Team • To clarify expectations • To learn: Why are we getting these results? • To identify and remove barriers to achieving results • To make decisions, take action, and relentlessly follow up to see if it’s working • Recognize accomplishments

  11. Five key questions managers need to ask • Are we where we thought we would be? • Why or why not? • Do we need to change our strategies, improve our processes, or recalibrate our targets? • What actions need to be taken? • What is the story to be told?

  12. Where do we get our measures? Use of the Logic Model

  13. Logic Model ExampleDepartment of CorrectionsGoal: Preventing Recidivism Ultimate Outcome Communities are safer. % of inmates who commit crimes after release …so that… Inmates choose gainful employment over crime… % of inmates finding a job after release Ultimate Policy Intent …so that… Inmates will have a marketable skill when they leave prison… # of inmates certified in the skill Intermediate Outcome …so that… Activity: We train inmates in work skills # of classes taught Degree of Influence/Control Immediate Outcome Output

  14. Why it makes sense to focus on performance • Sets a tone of accountability • Highlights excellence by staff • Creates knowledgeable leaders • Builds team through collaboration • Solves problems immediately • Facilitates honest dialogue • Creates positive risk takers • Exposes barriers to progress • Drives performance excellence Excerpted from a 12/1/03 presentation by former Washington State Patrol Chief Ronal Serpas, PhD

  15. The GMAP process ensures persistent follow-up • Every governor’s forum includes: • Responses to unanswered questions from previous sessions • Action plans for improvement when problems are identified • Current information on personnel and budget performance, updated quarterly • After every forum: • GMAP analysts send follow-up memos to identify unresolved issues and begin to plan the next session

  16. GMAP Examples A look at what works, and why

  17. Data Notes How is the Children’s Administration managing its budget to achieve outcomes and accountability? Analysis • Children’s Administration management will control budget units • Budget units with a variance contain contractual or fixed costs • Adoption support per capita costs assumed in the appropriation are $52/month per child lower than the actual cost per child in FY 2005 • The assumed per capita cost for foster care is $28/month lower than the FY 2005 cost • Lease costs exceed appropriated amount by $2.1 million Action Steps • Implement comprehensive financial management system • Rebalance regional staffing levels and adjust budgets • Increase direct services staff • Strengthen the service array through contracts review • Refine foster care and adoption support forecast model • Engage Boeing’s “Lean Team” • Acquire state and federal resources FY06 Budget Appropriation ,Year-to-Date Expenditures SOURCE: DSHS Budget Office; Children’s Administration Fiscal Office

  18. Fiscal and Staffing ConcernsChild Protective Services caseloads by region Number of CPS Cases Per CPS Staff by Region 45 40 40 35 • Analysis: • Rebalancing of caseloads between Regions 3 and 4 is showing some change • Reaching comparable caseloads in Region 3 will take several months due to the hiring process • Action Steps: • Rebalance staffing levels between and within regions • Re-design CPS/CWS model to strengthen focus on child safety 32.4 30 26.7 25 26.6 26.5 25.1 24.8 24.2 23.9 23.5 23.1 22.3 20 21.3 20.6 15 10 5 0 Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Region 6 State Apr-05 Jul-05 Funded Ratio 1:24 SOURCE: Financial Reporting System & CAMIS Workload Report. Excludes DLR-CPS

  19. REGION 1 REGION 2 REGION3 REGION 4 Region Count Funded Ratios = 1:24 COA Ratios = 1:18 KEY Fiscal and Staffing Concerns What is the average CPS caseload? • Analysis: The recent Region 4 caseload increase reflects vacancies created by staff turnover and transfers, and difficulties recruiting qualified Social Workers in the Region. During the first 3 quarters of FY06: • The rate of Social Worker loss from transfers (8.5%) was about twice as high as the state average (4.3%) • The rate of Social Worker loss from turnover (9.6) was 40% higher than the state average (6.8%) Number of CPS Cases per CPS Staff  Regions 1 through 4 DATA NOTES SOURCE: Financial Reporting System and CAMIS Workload Report. Excludes DLR-CPS and cases with no activity for 180 days. Transfers mean employee movement between sub-agencies within DSHS. Turnover means leaving DSHS for any reason.

  20. DSHS REGIONS Region 3 Region 1 4 5 Region 6 Region 2 REGION 6 REGION 5 Region Count Funded Ratios = 1:24 COA Ratios = 1:18 KEY Fiscal and Staffing Concerns What is the average CPS caseload? • Analysis: • Low Region 5 caseload ratio shows impact of earlier case transfer from CPS to CWS Number of CPS Cases per CPS Staff  Regions 5 and 6 DATA NOTES SOURCE: Financial Reporting System and CAMIS Workload Report. Excludes DLR-CPS and cases with no activity for 180 days.

  21. Fiscal and Staffing ConcernsChildren’s Administration Recruitment • Planning to hire about 250 Social Workers during FY07 • Teaming with DSHS Human Resources and DOP on recruitment • New staff will be hired at a Social Worker 2 or 3 level - must be ready to carry cases immediately following Academy training • Anticipating 40 from the Child Welfare Training and Advancement Program (CWTAP*) • Other potential sources of Social Worker recruitment include: • other administrations • community based child welfare organizations • other disciplines (e.g. teachers) • other states • retirees *The Child Welfare Training and Advancement Program (CWTAP) offers Masters of Social Work (MSW) students interested in a career in child welfare an opportunity to enhance or develop practice skills while earning an advanced degree. The CWTAP is implemented through public universities in Washington State to enhance professional practice in child welfare and provide assistance to current and/or potential social workers who are committed to a career in public child welfare. In return for receiving financial assistance, program participants commit to actively pursue employment with Children’s Administration on a state-wide basis.

  22. Children will be safe from abuse and neglectHow many children receiving services in their home are visited every 30 days? SOURCE: CAMIS SER download 12/22/05.Data reflects children in an in-home dependency who were seen by their Social Worker in the last 30days. Point in time measure as of the first of the month.. Methodology to count in-home service cases (not in-home dependencies) is still in development. Policy effective October 1, 2005. Data Notes

  23. Children will be safe from abuse and neglectHow many children receiving services in their home are visited every 30 days? • Analysis: • 30-day visits have been implemented for in-home dependency and in-home service cases • Data is currently available to monitor the approximately 1,500 in-home dependency cases • The policy applied to approximately 6,800 in-home CPS service cases which cannot currently be monitored • 30-day visits cannot be implemented and sustained within current resources, as assumed in January 2005 • CPS staff are cumulatively impacted by new 24/72-hour response and 30-day policies and CWS staff are impacted by 30-day visits • In-home visits are very difficult to accurately count in CAMIS • Number of in-home dependencies may be exaggerated due to complexity of CAMIS documentation • In-home visits do not yet have a unique CAMIS Service Episode Record code

  24. Accountability and performanceGMAP data communicates

  25. Department of Revenue AuditsNet recovery per hour (Based on FY 2005) Percentage of NAICS Audited 2.5% Goal Public Administration Wholesale Management Mining Information Manufacturing By 2 Digit NAICS

  26. Historic Property Tax Incentive ProgramsGeographic Distribution State Special Tax Valuation for Rehab Federal Tax Credit Incentives For Rehab Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation

  27. Crime Laboratory DNA Backlog Monthly cases completed - 129 Monthly cases received - 163 Backlog Projected backlog • Problem Analysis: • Cases received outnumber cases completed by ~30 cases/month. • Gap grows by about 5% annually. • Staff currently in training will barely meet incoming demand, not reduce backlog. • Inability to hire experienced staff; new staff require 12 months training. • Even adding 12 DNA staff, backlog would rise to 1350 cases - average nine-month delay. • Conclusion: • Even with addition of new resources, backlogs would rise to unacceptable levels before improving due to lag-time in training and increased demand.

  28. Crime Laboratory DNA Backlog • Action Plan: • Supervisors will turn down low-value cases that are currently being submitted (cellular DNA gun possession cases, etc). • Better management of “window dressing” testing (e.g. testing multiple other exhibits beyond initial identification). • Evaluate salary structure of Forensic Scientist series which prevents hiring experienced staff. • Request additional DNA staffing for Spokane and Vancouver Labs. • Evaluate contracting-out of training, or use of dedicated training facility. • Hire every qualified experienced DNA scientist that comes our way, even at the expense of other functional areas. • Validate robotics and further automation. • Pursue Federal funds for contracting-out sexual assault rape kits. Assessment: Addresses crisis in backlog growth and works toward the goal of 60-day turnaround time. Enhances resources to meet demand from criminal justice agencies. Still untapped potential of DNA technology in property crimes cases to prevent crime.

  29. Employment Security Department: Pierce County WDA Can we improve job placements by focusing on certain services? Pierce County WDA: FY06 - as of January 2006 2,500 60% 50% 2,000 33.9% 33.1% 40% 1,500 26.3% 25.5% 25.4% 24.0% 30% 22.8% 1,000 20% 500 10% 193 164 169 163 158 112 149 104 102 80 64 71 68 61 0 0% Jul-05 Nov-05 Jan-06 Jun-06 Apr-06 Oct-05 Feb-06 Mar-06 Sep-05 Dec-05 Aug-05 May-06 Staff assisted job matching Initial assessment Percent of Job Openings Filled The percentage of job openings filled in Pierce County has not exceeded 33% in over 3 years. Last year’s 12 month average was 16.9%. The goal for 2005-07 is 30%. WDA: Workforce Development Area

  30. Employment Security Department: Pierce County WDA What services are most effective? • Started with a Logic Model • Backwards planning from the employer perspective at local level • Quality referrals increase chances of job seeker employment • Job seeker to employment opportunity alignment is key (Staff Assisted Job Match) • To achieve a good job match, ESD staff must identify transferable skills, education, and customer’s desired employment objectives (Initial Assessment) Increase Initial Assessments In order to… Increase Quality Job Matching In order to… Increase Better Job Referrals In order to… Increase Job Placements Initial Assessment: the intake process where staff interview job seekers and document their job histories, skills, interests, and abilities in the shared electronic database. If the system is not populated with complete information, the likelihood of making a good job match is lowered.

  31. Job seeker assessment and job match Follow up Quality job referral Employment Security Department: Pierce County WDA What steps did we take to test the theory and implement? • Action Steps: • Analyzed all 12 areas statewide • Assessed performance and services provided • Selected feeder measures which were linked to high performers: • Complete initial assessments • Resume assistance • Job matching • Job referrals • Developed staff reporting and monitoring tools • Established individual staff accountability for providing quality services • Provided training • Managers use tools to drill down to staff level to conduct quality assurance reviews of performance Job Match: providing the job seeker with a list of open job opportunities which are a match with his or her desired employment, or employment needs. These opportunities must be a functional match for the job seeker.

  32. Employment Security Department: Pierce County WDA Result: More job openings filled Pierce County WDA: FY06 - as of April 2006 2,500 60% 48.2% 50% 2,000 38.1% 1,585 33.9% 40% 33.4% 1,739 33.1% 1,500 26.3% 1,216 25.4% 25.5% 30% 24.0% 22.8% 1,009 1,000 20% 500 193 158 10% 164 169 163 142 149 104 112 80 102 61 64 68 71 37 0 0% Jul-05 Jan-06 Nov-05 Jun-06 Apr-06 Feb-06 Mar-06 Oct-05 Sep-05 Dec-05 Aug-05 May-06 Implemented change in February 2006 Staff assisted job matching Initial assessment Percent of Job Openings Filled Pierce County leads the entire State in Initial Assessments and also has the largest productivity increase in all around service delivery. We are exceeding our YTD jobs openings filled target by 11%.

  33. Project Outlook Project Status Compared to Success Original Plan Factors Agency Level 3 Project Scope Sched Budget Scope Sched Budget Department of HRMS* Red Red Red Green Green Green Green Personnel 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 Green Red Red Green Red Green Yellow DSHS ProviderOne* 1 3 3 1 3 1 2 Department of Red Red Red Green Green Green Green OMNI* Corrections 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 Benefits Administration/ Gray Gray Gray Gray Gray Gray Gray Health Care Authority Insurance Accounting University of On-line Record of Yellow Red Red Green Yellow Green Yellow Washington Clinical Activity* 2 3 3 1 2 1 2 Center for Information Community and Yellow Red Red Yellow Red Red Yellow Services Re-hosting Technical Colleges Project* 2 3 3 2 3 3 2 Office of the Hewlett Packard 3000 Insurance Green Red Green Green Green Green Green Replacement* Commissioner 3 Statewide Automated DSHS Child Welfare Gray Gray Gray Gray Gray Gray Gray Information System Gaming System Lottery Green Green Green Green Green Green Green Procurement 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Department of Hewlett Packard 3000 Green Green Green Green Green Green Green Licensing Replatforming Washington State IWN-East Green Yellow Green Green Yellow Green Green Patrol 2 2 GMAP Reporting of State IT Projects Level 3: Projects rated high for both severity and risk. * Project outlook based on revised plans. For other projects, original plan has not been revised. Legend: Color Variance Green None Yellow Little to moderate Red Significant (Gray = Not yet started) Information current as of May 11, 2006 Information Services Board Meeting

  34. Let’s Take a Look Video clip examples from Governor’s GMAP sessions

  35. What did you see and hear?What did you think?

  36. What have we learned so far? • It’s very hard work • It takes courage • Persistent follow up makes it happen • You can’t measure everything • GMAP reports and forums are only the beginning of the conversation

  37. What’s coming in the future? • Better performance measures • Citizen Advisory Board to assist governor • Budget priorities for 2007-09 (Priorities of Government) • Personnel reports • Statewide initiatives (Regulatory Improvement, Plain Talk) • Risk management • Audit findings • Better outreach to stakeholders • Monitoring the performance of contractors

  38. The most important thing: It works • Getting to kids at risk of serious abuse within 24 hours • When Governor Gregoire took office, we were getting there 71% of the time • Just over a year later, we’re getting there 95% of the time • Getting to neglected kids within 72 hours • January 2005 – 19% of the time • February 2006 – 90% of the time

  39. Technology in GMAP

  40. Technology – CIO’s Role in GMAP Baltimore model • Personnel • Budget • Technology

  41. Performance Objectives Effective use of tools and technology Requires Effective data Effective data comes from Good program management and objectives

  42. Performance Objectives Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic, Timebound Examples: Customer service Financial variances Performance evaluations

  43. Management Managers must: Engage in the details of the data • Including definitions Assume accountability for data quality Use data for program management • Establish program targets • Review progress regularly • Take actions to achieve results

  44. Lessons Learned (referred to as “Success Factors”) User Involvement* Executive Management Support* Experienced Project Manager Clear Business Objectives Minimized Scope Agile Business Requirements Standard Infrastructure Formal Methodology Reliable Estimates Skilled Staff Contract Negotiation and Management Implementation IT Projects - Lessons Learned, Success Factors What are the lessons learned from the past, and how are we incorporating them into current projects?

  45. Technology tools DIS completed Washington technology assessment (state agencies) • 48 agencies participated • Assessed tools in use for data collection, analysis, presentation • Microsoft Office tools predominant • Some agencies have more extensive tools • Retirement Systems • OFM Decision to start: Use the tools we had

  46. Where are we now?Where are we going? IT Support for Performance Measurement in Washington

  47. Washington State’s performance measurement system is outgrowing its IT infrastructure • Concerns and constraints • We have measures but don’t always have the data • Performance measurement reporting isn’t effectively integrated (agency strategic plans, federal requirements, Priorities of Government, budget-based performance measures (PMT), and GMAP) • We lack a clear bridge between enterprise, agency and program performance measures and a means of mapping how it all fits together • We have no systematic method for follow up when indicators suggest the need for action • Reporting and compiling information is very labor intensive • Reporting systems aren’t flexible • What we measure is often driven by the data we have, not the measures we need • We have too many measures • Measurement data and goals are inaccessible and/or hard to interpret

  48. Starting Assumptions • You must show value to your authorizing environment first (Executive Leadership Team and Legislature). • Effective performance measurement systems focus attention on what is most important (and need to be designed to discourage measurement proliferation). • The most important measures are not always most easily accessible or most amenable to standardization. Useful measures come in many forms and formats. • All agencies should get some value out of a system, even though Agencies have different platforms, computer system sophistication, and IS capacity. Those with more capacity and sophisticated needs should be able to do more. • Direct real time access to source data sets (Nirvana) is very complex operationally and can be misleading. Most measurement data and data sets must be adjusted before they are used. • Drive before you fly

More Related