Dashboard Use @ ESDDashboard Use @ ESD

To DateTo DateThe ESD VisionThe ESD VisionNext StepsNext Steps

Bob MillerBob MillerESD ITSD – Business ESD ITSD – Business ApplicationsApplications

GMAPGMAP

DashboardsDashboards

E-DashboardsE-Dashboards

With DrilldownWith Drilldown

WHYWHY

FEDERALFEDERAL

Department of Department of LaborLabor

Set us on the road Set us on the road toto

a performance a performance based culture.based culture.

Federal Measures

UI•GPRA•TPS•MIM

WorkSource•Common Measures

LMEA•Bureau of

Labor Statistics

GMAP “Deliverables”GMAP “Deliverables”

1.1. SLT to Commissioner “Web Site”SLT to Commissioner “Web Site”

2.2. Commissioner to Gov “Web Site”Commissioner to Gov “Web Site”

3.3. Public Web SitePublic Web Site

4.4. Drill Down to Desktop = Mgmt Drill Down to Desktop = Mgmt DashboardDashboard

The Giuliani Way . . . The Giuliani Way . . . BaltimoreBaltimore

CitistatCitistat

New York CityNew York City

CompstatCompstat

Washington Washington StateState

ESDESD

MayorMayor

XX XX

GovernorGovernor

XXBureau ChiefBureau Chief

XX XX

CommissionerCommissioner

XXPublicPublic

XX XX

PublicPublic

XXMgmt to Mgmt to DeskTopDeskTop

XX

GMAP Dancing To DateGMAP Dancing To Date

WeeklyWeekly by Division by Division

ManualManual (Somewhat) (Somewhat) CollectionCollection PresentationPresentation AnalysisAnalysis

Healthy Data Healthy Data WarehouseWarehouse Already ExistsAlready Exists

5 Stages to E-Dashboard5 Stages to E-Dashboard

ID the MeasuresID the Measures

Define for Define for Collect-Collect-abilityability

Um, er, uh, hmmmUm, er, uh, hmmm

Automate the Automate the CollectionCollection

PresentationPresentation

Enable Enable AnalysisAnalysis

COLLECTIONCOLLECTION

SKIES

SKIES

SKIESSKIESTransaction Systems

DW(MS)

SKIESDW

(Oracle)

ETL

ETL

AFRSTAXISUI BenefitsWorkFirstDIS Charges

SKIES

NEEDEDAFRS BudgetAFRS A/RTelecentersHRMS

HISTORYFinancialJobNETJTPAWIATeleCenters

Tier Description Tim

e Current Qtr Target

Stretch Qtr Target

August UI Actual

August KCTC

August PCTC

August STC

Gov % of Timely first payments M 87.0% 90.0% 90.9% 91.7% 89.2% 91.2%

Gov % Claimants satisfied with service Y 89.0% 90.0%

GovOverpayment collection to expense ratio Q 14.91$ None

Gov Fraud overpayment prevention Q $2.0M None

Gov % Employer Taxes paid timely Q 98.0% None

Gov % of employers reporting electronically Q 50.0% 51.8%

Gov% of wage records reported electronically Q 81.1% 86.0%

Agency Timely non-monetary determinations M 70.0% 80.0% 83.2% 86.3% 83.3% 80.4%

AgencyBTQ scores of non-monetary Separation determinations Q 75.0% 80.0%

AgencyBTQ scores of non-monetary NonSeparation determinations Q 75.0% 85.0%

Agency # of eligibility decisions per hour M 1.0 /hr 1.1 /hr 1.07/hr 1.03/hr 1.06/hr 1.13/hr

Agency Call monitoring scores M 80.0% 90.0% 85.4% 87.0% 72.9% 95.9%

Agency Average TeleCenter call wait time M 7.0 None 4.0 3.3 5.2 3.8

Agency Overpayment recovery rate M 59.0% 59.0% 68.0%

Agency% New employer accounts established timely Q 90.0% 90.0%

TeleCenter measuresTax measuresOSI/BPC measuresOther UI Division measuresUI Director's tracking

Area of concernProblem

Meeting DLAsMeeting stretch goal

PRESENTATIONPRESENTATION

Tier Description Tim

e Current Qtr Target

Stretch Qtr Target

August UI Actual

August KCTC

August PCTC

August STC

Agency % of businesses audited M 2% CY 2.25% 2.2%

Agency % Annual tax quality measures passed Y 80.0% 100.0%

Agency Overpayments Detected Q $5.5M

Div% of BAM audits of paid claims finished (within 60 days) Q 70.0% None

Div% of BAM audits of paid claims finished (within 90 days) Q 95.0% None

Div% of BAM audits of denied claims finished (within 60 days) Q 60.0% None

Div% of BAM audits of denied claims finished (within 90 days) Q 85.0% None

Div % Accurate Benefit Payments (BAM) Q 91.5% None

Div % Employer Tax reports filed timely Q 91.0% None

Div % of wage reports received timely Q TBD

Div% of employers paying taxes electronically Q 7.0% 8.0%

Div % Continued claims filed via Internet M 33.2% 43.1%

Div % Initial claims filed on Internet M 30.4% 33.0%

Div % of employee evaluations completed. M 100% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Div Job Search Review Training. Q 100.0% None

DivNonmonetary accuracy (Affirm rate of Lower Appeals) Q 91.7%

TeleCenter measuresTax measuresOSI/BPC measuresOther UI Division measuresUI Director's tracking

Meeting DLAsMeeting stretch goalArea of concernProblem

PRESENTATIONPRESENTATION

Speak!

PRESENTATIONPRESENTATION

TeleCenter Call Monitoring

Purpose:

• To measure the quality of customer interactions with TeleCenter agents

•Target:

Process owner:

• Rosie Macs, TeleCenter Operations

Outcome

87.8% last 3 months passed (361 of 411).

How this measure contributes to our strategic goals

•provides agents feedback regarding accuracy; identify training needs•provides agents feedback regarding quality of service given •provides quantifiable information that contributes to performance evaluations

Improvement strategies

Acquiring call monitoring software would:• enhance the perception of fairness and objectivity • be a more effective means of providing feedback• allow identification of computer input errors•Approx. Cost = $300K

Call Monitoring Percent Passed

60.0%65.0%70.0%75.0%80.0%85.0%90.0%95.0%

100.0%

King 87.8% 90.4% 87.0%

Pierce 90.5% 81.3% 72.9%

Spokane 90.0% 92.9% 95.9%

June July Aug

90% or Above (Stretch 90% or Above (Stretch Goal)Goal)

89% - 75% (Goal = 80%)89% - 75% (Goal = 80%)

Below 75%Below 75%

ANALYSISANALYSIS

Kitsap

Pacific Lewis

Cowlitz

Mason

Wahkiakum Skamania

Yakima

Klickitat

Thurston

Pierce

KingDouglas

Grant

Benton

Franklin

WallaWalla

Whitman

Asotin

Columbia

Garfield

Stevens

PendOreille

Grays Harbor

Jefferson

Clallam

Kittitas

Snohomish

Okanogan

Chelan

Adams

Lincoln

Ferry

Clark

San Juan

Island

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

PacificLewis

Cowlitz

Mason

Wahkiakum Skamania

Yakima

Klickitat

Thurston

Pierce

King Douglas

Grant

Benton

Franklin

WallaWalla

Whitman

Asotin

Columbia

Garfield

Spokane

Stevens

PendOreille

Grays Harbor

Jefferson

Clallam

Kittitas

Snohomish

Okanogan

Chelan

Adams

Lincoln

Ferry

Clark

Kitsap

Region 3: Northwest WA% to Target = 80%

Region 4: Snohomish Co.% to Target= 95%

Region 1: Olympic Consortium% to Target = 93%

Region 5: Seattle / King Co.% to Target = 95%

Region 6: Pierce Co % to Target = 72%

Region 2: Pacific Mountain% to Target = 85%

Region 7: Southwest WA% to Target = 78%

Region 8: N. Central WA

% to Target = 96%

Region 10: Eastern WA. Part.

% to Target = 76%

Region 12: Spokane

% to Target = 88%

Region 9: % to Target = 101%

Region 11: Benton-Franklin

% to Target = 94%

Job Seekers Employed

= 79% or below Target

= 80% to 89% to Target

= 90% to 99 % Target

Statewide: 88% to Target

Source: UI Wage & New Hire Data

Skagit

Whatcom

= At Target

PRESENTATIONPRESENTATION

Time to Work

State Target for PY 04-05:(Rational for setting target: a 5%decrease from the median numbersof days for last complete year ofdata)• 87 median days

Analysis:• Jul. 05 preliminary estimate is 95

days to employment. • Reflects 8 days off target.

Actions:• Improve the job seeker registration

process (i.e.: add desired employment information)

• Focus staff resources to assist in better job matching and reduce generic job search activities.

• Focus on providing job referrals to staff assisted job seekers

July 2005

Median Time to Job Seeker Employment (in days)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Jun-04

Jul-04

Aug-04

Sep-04

Oct-04

Nov-04

Dec-04

Jan-05

Feb-05

Mar-05

Apr-05

May-05

Jun-05

Jul-05

Aug-05

Sep-05

Oct-05

Nov-05

Dec-05

Jan-06

Feb-06

Mar-06

Apr-06

May-06

Jun-06

For the 12 month period ended

Goal is 5% reduction

The measure allows for employment up to 365 days after first service

Average of Actuals

* The number in the target row represents the proposed targets and may not be final.**July data is based on a rolling 12 month average.

Time to WorkWDA 1 - Olympic

WDA 2 - Pac. Mt.

WDA 3- NW WA

WDA 4 - Snohomish Co.

WDA 5 - King Co.

WDA 6 - Pierce Co.

WDA 7 - SW WA

WDA 8 - N. CentralWDA 9 - Tri Co.

WDA 10 - Eastern WA Part.

WDA 11 - Ben.-Franklin

WDA 12 - Spokane

State

Baseline 91 103 96 103 104 103 89 73 84 78 91 99 92*Target 86 98 91 98 99 98 85 69 80 74 86 94 87**July 93 101 97 105 107 95 96 80 87 75 96 96 95

ANALYSISANALYSIS

Where we really areWhere we really are

Auditioning DashboardersAuditioning Dashboarders . . .with State . . .with State ParticipationParticipation

COWABUNGA DUDE!

OLD GARTNER NOISEOLD GARTNER NOISE

OLD META NOISEOLD META NOISE

GMAPGMAP

DashboardsDashboards

E-DashboardsE-Dashboards

With DrilldownWith Drilldown

Bob Miller Bob Miller - - BBMiller@esd.wa.govBBMiller@esd.wa.gov Bob BartuschBob Bartusch- - BBartusch@esd.wa.govBBartusch@esd.wa.gov