managing for results austin, texasglenn.osu.edu/faculty/glenn-faculty/worley/may 16 - reading 2 -...

1

Managing for Results Austin, Texas

ICMA Best Practices 2004

April 22-23, 2004 Annapolis/Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Presenter: Mike Erwin Budget Manager City of Austin P. O. Box 1088 Austin, Texas Phone: 512-974-2556 Fax: 512-974-2617 E-mail: [email protected] Facilitator: Mike Lawson Director, ICMA Center for Performance Measurement ICMA 777 North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20002-4201 Phone: 202-962-3634 Fax: 202-982-3603 E-mail: [email protected]

2




Local Government Data

Form of Government Council-Manager Legislative Body 7 member Council; Mayor, Mayor Pro-Tem and 5 Council Members

all elected at-large; Council selects Mayor Pro-Tem Population 678,000 Area 246.4 square miles Budget $1.9 Billion, incl. General Fund, Support Services, Airport, Utilities Major Types of Revenue Sources User Fees, Property Tax, Sales Tax Number of Employees 10,944.33 Socio-Economic Indictors Median Household Income Median Age Homeownership Rate (%) Educational Attainment:

$45,785 30.7 48% 40.6% w/ College Degree (or higher)

Leading Employers University of Texas at Austin Education 20,249 Dell Computer Corp. Technology 16,000 City of Austin Government 10,944 Austin Independent School Dist. Education 10,408 Motorola, Inc. Technology 7,500 Seton Healthcare Network Health Care 7,200 IBM Corp. Technology 6,300 HEB Grocery Co. Food Supplies 6,200 IRS/Austin Center Government 5,000 Austin Community College Education 4,600

Other Distinguishing Characteristics

Located in the Central Texas Hill Country, Austin is approximately 230 miles from Mexico and less than 200 miles from 3 of the 10 largest U.S. cities (Dallas, San Antonio and Houston). The population is 52.9% white, 30.5% Hispanic, 9.8% African American, 4.7% Asian and 2.1% other. Austin averages 300 days of sunshine each year and about 33.78 inches of rainfall. It rarely snows in Austin.

Austin is the state capital of Texas and home to the largest university, University of Texas. The motto of Austin is “The Live Music Capital of the World.” The city also boasts a growing film industry. (The Rookie, Miss Congeniality, Spy Kids, The Alamo).

3




EXECUTIVE SUMMARY After several years of program budgeting, the city of Austin formalized business planning through its Managing for Results initiative in the spring of 1999. In 1999, the city began the process of aligning the departments by their services, activities, and programs in both business planning and budgeting. Since its implementation in 1999, several elements have been added to the business planning process in order to address the needs of city management and departments. The basic structure of business planning and the Managing for Results program have remained unchanged. These new components simply enhance business planning and provide decision-makers with additional tools to help them during the budget process and throughout the year. Managing for Results is a business system that connects people, dollars, and resources to the results customers and citizens expect from city services. It is a system that integrates strategic planning with budgeting, performance measurement and decision-making. The goal of Managing for Results is to have an effective performance management system that is accountable to citizens for achieving results. The city of Austin Managing for Results program is committed to meeting this goal.

City departments assess the past, present and future to develop plans for the upcoming fiscal year. Program Performance-based budgets are developed based on the goals and results departments expect to achieve in the upcoming year. Performance information is collected throughout the year to monitor progress towards department goals and objectives. The performance information is also used to improve the effectiveness of services provided to citizens. The 2003 Managing for Results Business Planning Guide describes all of the steps necessary to develop business plans that are meaningful to each department (http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/03-04/downloads/bpresourceguide2003.pdf). In summary, all performance measures, services, activities, programs, goals, and department missions align to the city’s vision.

4

The following chart outlines how each service within a department aligns to the city’s vision “To make Austin the most livable community in the country.” The city of Austin’s employee evaluation system, Success Strategy Performance Reviews (SSPRs), also aligns to this vision.

The question asked was “How does the city of Austin make the Managing for Results system work better for the departmental and citizen users?” The challenge involved two parts: 1) giving departments a sense of ownership to the process while still capturing the important information, and 2) focusing on what the customer receives instead of what the provider does. The initial implementation in 1999 focused more inward to the employees than outward to the citizens, and efforts were needed to change the direction of the focus. The changes occurred during a period of fiscal restraint for the city of Austin. Thus, any changes needed to provide additional tools for decision-makers without incurring much or any additional costs. The impact of the process was to close substantial budget gaps in the FY 2003 and FY 2004 budgets, identifying savings through the innovation initiative while maintaining acceptable service levels. The results of the actions taken have allowed the Managing for Results process to maintain city operations during a time of fiscal restraint, provide information quickly to both citizens and employees, and improve employee satisfaction with the process over the last two years.

City VisionTo make Austin the most livable community in the country

Department VisionDepartment Mission

Program Activity Activity Activity Activity

Service

Service Service

Service

Service

Service

Service

Service

Program Department Goal

SSPRs SSPRs SSPRs SSPRs

Department GoalDepartment Goal

5

PROBLEM ASSESSMENT/POLICY ENVIRONMENT There were two problems that needed addressing in the Managing for Results (MFR) process.

• Lack of buy-in by departments. The first problem was with departmental perceptions and resistance. Staff felt as if the budget office and city auditor, through the initial review process, had forced the decisions concerning measures and business plans upon them. Some of these top-down budget and audit decisions had been necessary in the beginning to implement the process, but this did not change departments’ perception. Starting with an October 2001 focus group, the city asked the users (departments) what they thought would improve the process. Two of the major complaints were the large number of measures and the fact that the departments did not feel ownership in the process.

• Lack of customer focus. The second problem was an inward focus on “what do we do,”

instead of an outward focus on “what does the customer receive.” These were the major issues initially addressed. As a result of subsequent user surveys and feedback from the executive team, other changes were implemented later to make the process more user-friendly and to better report the results to the employees and the citizens. To address the buy-in issue, the departments were told at the beginning of the FY03 that the specific performance measures were theirs to decide.

• This gave the departments a sense of ownership, although it did take more than a year for the thought to finally take hold. The budget office let the departments select their own measures for their business plans.

• The guideline was that each activity needed only one output, efficiency (cost) and result (outcome) measure, plus any other measures of the department’s choosing that they felt necessary to tell their story.

• There were exceptions when the budget office instructed the departments to leave in or add certain measures in order to address needs expressed by other stakeholder groups, such as city council.1

• By letting the departments select their measures; this addressed both departments’ concerns of lack of ownership and too many measures.

The second part of the problem involved focusing on what was important. The city of Austin began the Managing for Results process by listing every service provided on yellow post-it notes. This step identified the services provided by the city and gave a starting point for the grouping of services into activities and activities into programs. This thought process established precedent for the city recording and measuring everything. The focus needed to return to what was important to the citizens and the departments. Listed on the next page are steps the city of Austin took to improve the process.

1 An example would be public safety departments attempting to omit key indicators, such as response time.

6

Step 1: Measuring Progress Toward Goals First, all departments’ goals were expected to be measurable and one goal or measure included in the goals was to be benchmarked against other organizations. The typical department states they are to be the “best department in the nation” with no way of judging the accuracy of that statement. This new requirement forced departments to determine how they are doing based on performance measures and by benchmarking against other entities. This is an exercise the city continues to refine each year in the business planning process. Step 2: Reporting the Information Secondly, different reporting methods were needed. The city realized that reporting 4,400 performance measures in one annual budget document was inefficient. Some measures needed to be reported to council and city management while other measures only needed to be used internally and therefore reported only to the department and division managers. This division of measures—some for the council and city manager and others for internal use by departments—allowed the users to more efficiently access key summary information without having to wade through more detailed data. Another consideration was that performance information should become readily available to the public. Previously, the citizens of Austin had to wait until documents were published to review performance information. This led to the development and posting of the online performance measures database: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/eperf/index.cfm . Step 3: Classifying the Services A third change made by the city in the process was the classification of services (deliverables to the customers) into core, semi-core or service enhancements. This goes back to when the city listed every service provided and grouped the services into activities. The question the city asked was what was important? The core services initiative detailed what services were core, semi-core and service enhancements. This also allowed the city to weigh the relative priorities of its services and activities. Step 4: Planning for the Future The final adjustment involved working with the departments to plan better for the future better. There were three areas that needed improvement.

• First, as departments conducted environmental scans of their operations, they did not always communicate with management about their future technology needs

• Second, as departments looked at their strengths and weaknesses they would identify ways to improve their work processes, but did not share the information outside their departments.

• Third, departments would set goals without detailing how they would achieve those goals.

7

CHANGES IMPLEMENTED Under each section is provided the instructions departments currently use to implement these steps. Most of the information is located in the city’s Managing for Results Resource Guide, 2003. http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/03-04/downloads/bpresourceguide2003.pdf. These improvements were derived through focus groups and cross-departmental team meetings held to make the city’s business planning process as useful and beneficial as possible. Step 1: Measuring Progress: Measurable and Benchmarked Goals Departmental goals are now required to be measurable, either as a stand-alone statement or through the use of several performance measures listed under the goal. Shown below are the instructions departments now use for establishing and reviewing goals in the city:

Goals are necessary in Managing for Results (MFR) because they:

• focus the department’s efforts on achieving results for citizens; • provide a results-oriented basis for making good business decisions; • establish alignment with the mission; and, • provide focus and purpose for the people who work in the department.

Goals define the significant results department’s seek to achieve over the next one to five years. Goals are results-oriented and long-term. They translate the department’s mission into specific results to be achieved for the department’s customers, and may be accomplished through multiple programs, each with results-oriented performance measures. While the development of the department’s mission is based on its goals, it is possible and even likely to revise those goals during the discussion of the mission. Customer-focused goals define results to be achieved for customers:

• traffic safety, • access to or use of parks and recreation facilities, • success indicators for children, health of citizens, or, • quality of the environment.

Goals focused on improving the department’s work climate may include:

• management practices, • investing in the workforce through training or information technology, and, • changing the culture to be more accountable and results oriented.

Steps in Reviewing Current Goals

1. Compare current goals to identified internal and external factors affecting performance. 2. Confirm that the goals reflect where the department wants to be in 2 – 5 years. Do these goals

adequately position the department for the future? 3. Confirm that the issues addressed by the goals are still relevant and still a priority. 4. Check each goal for time frames and targets - or performance measures that can measure progress

toward the goal. 5. Review the key indicators to confirm that the key indicators effectively measure the department’s

business.

8

6. Develop new goals as necessary. 7. Include in the business plan a brief statement of why and how the goals will lead to the fulfillment

of the department’s mission. Suggested questions to ask when reviewing current goals or developing new goals:

• Does the goal reflect the department’s priorities and direction? • Will the achievement of the goal help the department respond to the Change Dynamics in an

anticipatory and proactive manner? • Does the goal provide direction for the identification of programs and activities? • Is the goal focused on the future (2-5 years)? • Is the goal results-oriented? • Is the goal measurable, either directly or through programs or activities? Is it reasonably

achievable? • Is the goal easy to understand and articulate? • Is the goal internally or externally focused? Does the department have a balance of both? • Will the goal provide the opportunity for the department to demonstrate accountability for results

and help decision-makers evaluate the performance of the department as a whole? • Can at least one goal be measured nationally with peer cities?

Departments now have measurable and benchmarked goals The departments now have measurable goals using performance measures to show how well they have done in achieving those goals. Shown below is an example of a non-measurable goal from the FY 2001 budget:

Prevention: Animal Services/No Kill Millennium - Promoting responsible pet ownership and minimizing the euthanasia of adoptable animals.

Here is how the goal now appears as a measurable goal from the FY 2004 budget:

Prevention/Provision/Protection: Animal Services/No Kill Millennium - Promote responsible pet ownership and minimize the euthanasia of adoptable animals

Increase the percentage of sheltered adoptable animals rescued, adopted or returned-to-owner per year at the Town Lake Animal Center from 66% to 100% by year 2007

Another example is this goal from the FY 2001 Library budget:

Improve the quality, delivery and awareness of library services to better meet customer needs.

Increase the percentage of customers who find the materials they need. Increase the percentage of customers who find the reference information they need. Increase the use of the library by Austin’s youth as measured by program attendance,

number of youth library cards and circulation of youth materials. Improve overall favorable rating of library services. Increase the percentage of customers that have used the Library in the last year.

Here is how the goal now appears as a measurable goal from the FY 2004 budget:

9

Deliver quality library services to meet customer needs.

78% of customers will find the materials they need through 2004. 85% of customers will find the reference information they need through 2004. Austin’s youth will use the library as measured by program attendance of 95,625,

issuance of 8,000 new youth library cards, and circulation of 1,152,000 youth materials through 2004.

78% of citizens will give the library an overall favorable rating of library services through 2004.

2,729,135 customers will use the Library through 2004. 821,000 Internet users will access Library resources electronically and the number of

web hits will reach 11,150,000 through 2004. Using this method allows the department to make a broad statement and then use performance measures to support the achievement of the goal. Now both the employee and the citizen are able to review how well departments do in achieving their goals.

***** For an example of the various types of performance measures and performance targets that appear in Austin’s budget document, see Appendix 1. [“Routine Roadways and Alley Maintenance” activity (within the Public Works Department) for FY2003-04.] For an example of how the goals of individual employees are linked to the city’s vision statement as well as to departmental missions and goals, see Appendix 2. [The Austin Police Department Annual Performance Evaluation: Officer”]

10

Step 2: Reporting the Information: Improved Reporting Processes

• The following chart outlines how performance information is now collected, stored and used for performance reporting.

Department enters performance information into its citywide database through a ColdFusion intranet application.

Or

Department sends Excel spreadsheet to the Budget Office to upload into its citywide database

BUDGET DOCUMENT

CARMA

generates some reports that are

part of the published

Budget Document.

INTRANET

Performance

measures data are extracted and

accessible to all city employees through another

ColdFusion intranet

application called ePerf.

INTERNET

The same data available on

ePerf is copied to a web server

where the public can access through the

Internet.

PERFORMANC

E REPORTS Performance data from CARMA is

compiled into quarterly

performance reports through a manual process.

COMMUNITY SCORECARD

Data from

CARMA is also used to prepare the Community

Scorecard, which provides

information on how the city

delivers services in major areas.

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/default.htm , http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/eperf/index.cfm, http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/02-03/downloads/scorecard_2002.pdf

City departments collect performance

and operation information

CARMA (an Oracle database) houses all of the city

departments’ performance data

measures

11

The city of Austin now reports performance information both in the written format and electronically. The written format includes the budget document, http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/budget.htm quarterly reports, http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/performance.htm ; and Community Scorecard, http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/scorecards.htm . The city also provides current information through the performance measures database, http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/eperf/index.cfm . This database is automatically updated every Sunday evening and includes the monthly, quarterly and annual measures as reported by the departments. The database was developed in-house and is maintained by staff, taking approximately 200 hours to design, test and implement. No outside consultants were used in the process. The performance information moves from an Oracle database to an Oracle table from which the data is posted on the website. The database also provides information on the city’s programs and activities and lists contact information so citizens have a phone number to call. The city of Austin went from over 4,400 measures reported in the budget document to 2,500 reported this year for all departments. This streamlined the information in the budget document to the most pertinent information and kept the reader from becoming bogged down. From FY 2001 to FY 2004, this had significant effects on departmental budgets, for instance: Library decreased from 110 measures to 75, Solid Waste Services decreased from 187 measures to 108, and Police decreased from 182 measures to 132. The departments still track several other measures not reported in the budget document for their own internal use. Another new component of this process is the certification of measures. The internal audit division certifies performance measures and also developed a process for the departments to do a self-assessment of their measures. This process is located on pages 66 – 80 of the Resource Guide, 2003. http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/03-04/downloads/bpresourceguide2003.pdf

*****

For an example of the reporting of performance measures on Austin’s public Web site, see Appendix 3 (“Performance Measures, Public Works, Street Repair”).

12

Step 3: Classifying the Services: The Core Services Initiative The core services initiative is intended to provide management with a way to classify the services the city provides into three categories.

• Core services are primarily services that are fundamental to carrying out the responsibilities delegated to local governments from the State or the Federal government. These include, for example, public safety and public health.

• Semi-core services are primarily services that local governments may provide to augment

the level of services provided by other entities for whom these services are cores services. For example, a local government may provide education services or workforce development services, although these are the core services of the school district and the Texas Workforce Commission, respectively.

• Non-core services and service enhancements are services that are considered neither core

nor semi-core. In developing the core services criteria, (see below), staff understood and expected that there would be disagreement about the criteria and ultimately about the classification of city services.

The core services initiative is intended to be an administrative tool that management can use to provide policy recommendations to council on how to allocate scarce resources. It is not intended to be a policy statement, nor is it intended to be an absolute method of valuing or prioritizing city services.

Core Service Business Planning Process Criteria Note: The core service and semi-core service criteria are not infallible and the result of

classifying activities and services as core, semi-core, and non-core may not be exact. There will be exceptions, there will be ambiguities, and there will be occasions for reasonable people to

disagree. Please keep this in mind. Core Service Criteria

(in rough order of priority) Semi-Core Service Criteria

(in rough order of priority) 1 Has a potential immediate or near-term

effect on public safety or health Examples: Police patrol, EMS Ambulance, STD Control

1 Has a potential and beneficial long-term effect on public safety or health, but the loss of the activity or service would not have a potential catastrophic effect. Example: Flood Plain Home Buyout

2 Meets but does not exceed a State or Federal mandate or the city charter. Examples: National Pollution and Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) or other EPA requirements, Building Inspection

2 Is that portion of a core service that exceeds a State or Federal mandate – an augmentation of a core service Example: Assuming a State mandate to inspect 10% of restaurants per year, while a Department inspects 15%; the incremental portion of 5% is the semi-core portion.

13

Core Service Criteria (in rough order of priority)

Semi-Core Service Criteria (in rough order of priority)

3 The loss of the activity or service has a long-term but potentially catastrophic (i.e. 1. sudden, swift, and disastrous) effect on the public, and 2. the activity or service is not a core service of another entity [Note – for all criteria, an entity may be another jurisdiction, or maybe a city department, city program, activity, or facility] Examples: Flood control, building inspection

3 No semi-core equivalent

4 Has a beneficial effect on the daily lives of a significant segment of the population and is not the core service of any other entity. Examples: Library circulation services, swimming pools and recreation centers

4 Has a beneficial effect on the daily lives of a significant segment of the population but is the core service of another entity. Examples: After school care, workforce development

5 Provides revenue through a direct revenue-generating or collecting function that is in excess of its total costs and that is not otherwise provided by another entity. Examples: Electric generation, Municipal Court fine collection

5 Provides revenue through a direct revenue-generating or collecting function that funds most but not all of its costs and that is not generated or collected by another entity. Examples: Parks & Recreation programs

6 Provides direct support or critical indirect support for a core service. Examples: Austin Police Department administration (direct) Financial Services Department payroll (critical indirect)

6 Provides direct support for a semi-core service or indirect support for a core service. Example: Decentralized purchasing for a semi-core activity, training in the Purchasing Office for decentralized purchasing for core service departments.

Non-Core Service Criteria

Any program, activity, or service that does not meet the core service or semi-core service criteria is a non-core service or service enhancement.

***** For an example of a completed core services list, see Appendix 4 (Results Achieved—Core Services Initiative, Austin Fire Department (AFD)). Also included in Appendix 4 is a two-page memo to the mayor, council members and city manager describing the core services initiative.

14

Step 4: Planning for the Future The city began the process of resolving issues and concerns with the Managing for Results by first giving ownership back to the departments. This was accomplished by giving the departments the responsibility to select their measures. The city then worked on measurable goals and prioritizing services and activities. The next step was additional planning for the future. There were three ways the city went about this:

• Information Technology needs. As departments were performing Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analyses and reviewing change dynamics (one sentence statements of factors that effect the achievement of goals) each year, they were identifying specific technological needs but not including them as a deliverable with the business plan. The departments now include their identified IT needs each year as part of the business planning process.

• Process improvements. The second step involved planning for process improvements. Departments were already identifying changes to make their services more efficient during the business planning process and city management requested to receive a summarized deliverable outlining the process improvements and innovations the department looked to implement.

• Action plans. The third step involved developing action plans listing the steps to achieve department goals. Departments were developing measurable goals, but there were no written plans outlining the steps in order to meet their goals. A written document such as the action plans were needed in order to more clearly link business planning with Managing for Results.

Shown below are the steps used by the departments for their IT assessment, business process improvements and action plans. [For the full text, see Austin’s Resource Guide, Revised 2003, http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/03-04/downloads/bpresourceguide2003.pdf.]

A. IT Systems/Applications: Challenges and Opportunities Overview The information systems challenges and opportunities section provides city management descriptions of issues facing the departments and is collected centrally by the Chief Information Officer. Departments will conduct an assessment of their Information Systems/Applications. This assessment has been added to the business planning for the purpose of early identification of Information Systems needs looming on the horizon. The summary of this assessment by all departments provide city leadership with an opportunity to identify common needs and open the possibility of combining similar departmental needs to find the most effective and efficient means of providing solutions. Steps During this assessment, departments might ask the following questions:

15

1. Can our business needs be met with the current legacy IT solutions in place? If not, which legacy applications will need to be updated, replaced, or modified over the next two to five years?

2. What are the hurdles, challenges, and impediments to accomplishing this (what is the ‘this’)? i.e.: need assistance in programming, business process review, business analysis, IT resource allocation, Business Case based prioritization of projects, etc.

3. Are factors identified in the environmental scan affected by our current IT systems? 4. Are there opportunities for significant improvement by the introduction of new IT solutions that

will aid in accomplishing our department’s goals? The IT Assessment Summary should include a general description of the departments’ current IT system and the associated issues. It should not include:

• Hardware specifics such as numbers of PC’s or Servers. • Financial details related to IT systems.

The assessment summary should be developed in relation to how existing Information System solutions are working to help meet the goals, key indicators, and performance measures included in your Business Plan. If specific needs materialize into actual projects, the city will use industry IT standards such as Project Management Institute (PMI) and Software Development Life Cycle (SDLC) approaches to obtain the necessary details about the project. Summarize IT challenges and opportunities that will have a major effect on the department and its customers over the next 2 – 5 years. If none, state N/A Summarize whether current IT infrastructure will support steps required to reach goals. If not, describe how the department will manage the gap

For an example of a document from the Austin Public Library providing details of IT challenges and Opportunities, see Appendix 5 (Information Technology: Challenges and Opportunities).

B. Develop Business Process Improvements

Overview The Business Process Improvement component is another opportunity for Departments to tap into the knowledge and experience of Department Staff by soliciting ideas and identifying opportunities for process improvements. Departments should continuously identify opportunities to streamline and improve its business processes. While many process improvements will occur informally, Departments will identify 1 to 3 significant Business Process Improvements that it will focus on in the next fiscal year as part of its business plan. Steps Review your department SWOT analysis. Identify opportunities to improve the effectiveness and/or the efficiency of the department through process changes. Review all information collected and select 1-3 significant improvements the Department will focus on in the next fiscal year. Develop a summary of each improvement opportunity. Questions the department should be asking include:

• How can we work more effectively?

16

• How can we work more efficiently? • How can we deliver improved services?

Template • Describe improvement opportunity • Identify origin (where did the idea come from?) • Describe link to applicable activity objective and/or goal • Identify expected outcomes/benefits

For an example of the Austin Water Utility providing improvements in business processes, see Appendix 6 (Results Achieved: Business Process Improvement).

C. Innovations Departments continue to work on the innovation process and each year ask themselves the following questions or statements.

1. Provide a brief written description of the cost saving idea – how it will save money, how much money it will save, how much revenue will it generate, etc.

2. Describe how you calculate the amount of money this idea will save: for example, my department

now receives eight copies of the Austin American Statesman every day – in the future, we will receive only two.

3. In general terms, how would this idea be implemented? 4. Does this idea affect any processes, people, or savings that are in another department? If so, how? 5. Will implementing this cost-saving idea affect your customers? 6. Provide the fund/agency/org/object(s) against which this reduction will be taken in your

department.

For an example of an innovation that was implemented by the EMS Department, see Appendix 7 (Results Achieved—Innovation Initiative).

D. Develop Action Plans to Achieve Goals Overview Department will develop an Action Plan for each goal. The Action Plan describes the major steps the department must take to achieve the goal. This exercise will help departments think through the financial and personnel resources needed to achieve their goals and provide a format to communicate the department’s progress toward each goal. Action Plans may be updated and revised as needed to ensure the most current information is available for stakeholders and decision-makers. An Action Plan defines a set of steps the department will implement to accomplish goals. An Action Plan explains how a goal will be accomplished by defining the steps to be taken, the person or organizational unit responsible, the resources needed, and the performance period for accomplishing the action step. Additionally, Action Plans:

17

• Ensure that specific steps will be taken to achieve results; • Provide a process to think through what is needed to accomplish the goals and performance

measures established for it; • Provide additional opportunities to involve line supervisors and staff in the development of the

business plan; and • Give managers a tool for monitoring progress toward accomplishing activities.

Steps Each Action Plan will identify:

1. The current status, or baseline, of the goal, 2. An executive sponsor within the department to monitor the progress of the Action Plan, 3. Activities from the business plan involved in achieving the goal, 4. Department workgroups involved in achieving the goal, and, 5. A brief narrative summary of the Action Plan.

Departments will use the attached spreadsheet and include it in the department business plan

For an example of an action plan, see Appendix 8 (Results Achieved—Action Plan: EMS Response Time Action Plan). COSTS/SAVINGS/FISCAL IMPACT As stated earlier in the document, all these changes occurred during a period of fiscal restraint in the city of Austin and the changes were accomplished using existing staff and resources. Core Services – The core services initiative allowed the city management to educate inform the elected officials that 98% of the dollars went to either core or semi-core activities. The defining of activities and services as non-core or service enhancement did allow the city management to make budget reduction decisions. Examples of service enhancement activities that were eliminated included Pioneer Farms, a living-history museum covering more than 80 acres in Northeast Austin that depicts life in the 1880s on the Blackland Prairie of Central Texas, $300,000 and Neighborhood Academy, mini-courses on a variety of topics relevant to improving and sustaining a better quality of life within Austin's neighborhoods, $287,000. The prioritizing of activities also allowed the city to review administrative costs and make cuts in the IT and HR areas to reflect averages found via Austin’s participation in the ICMA Center for Performance Measurement. This was part of the $10.9 million savings in administrative costs in FY 2004. Business Process Improvements - Over the last two years, the city faced some of the most difficult financial challenges in its history. To meet those challenges, the city manager asked employees to provide suggestions for process improvements, revenue generators or changes in the way the city does business that result in near-term, permanent budget reductions or revenue increases. The Employee Innovation Initiative was extremely successful last year, and resulted in:

a. 4,041 innovations submitted city-wide (2,975 unduplicated ideas)

18

b. 286 innovations approved city-wide c. $8.8 million estimated cost-savings city-wide (all funds) d. $1.6 million estimated revenue gains city-wide e. $5.3 million estimated General Fund cost-savings f. $1.2 million estimated General Fund revenue gains

Approved budget amounts - These changes allowed the city to manage through two years of substantial budget cuts without adversely affecting services. (Closing gaps of $31 million in the General Fund in FY2003 and $38 million in FY2004). These savings were able to occur with only 38 total FTEs losing employment and without a substantial decrease in service.

PUBLIC RESPONSE/BENEFIT Every improvement to the business planning process enhanced the quality of information distributed to the public, including performance reporting and the budget document. Since implementation of Managing for Results, the public has had access to more information and the information is presented in a more understandable format. The city council has also embraced performance-based budgeting. One purpose of the performance measures database is to encourage citizens to ask questions and make suggestions as to what should be measured. Additional public response will be sought in the next two years as the city of Austin participates in the National Center for Civic Innovation’s Government Performance Demonstration Project. This grant encourages citizen input into what is to be measured. STAFF RESPONSE/BENEFIT Each improvement to the business planning process adds one more tool to help departmental staff and city management gather and analyze the information they need to help them make the best decisions possible. Listed below are examples of decisions made using performance information in the city of Austin.

• The Library department provides an example of a department cutting its budget and continuing to function at an acceptable level. The budget was cut over $2.5 million dollars (from $19 million to $16.5 million), branch libraries closed one day per week, and staff cut from 325 to 282 full-time equivalent positions (FTEs) from FY 2002 to FY 2004. And yet, the department’s “percent of customers who find the title they are seeking” remained at 80% in FY 2002 and FY 2003. Although the staff expected results to decrease to the 65% range, in the first quarter of FY 2004 the title search measure was 84% satisfaction.

• Another example of performance measures used to make management decisions during the FY 2003 budget process was in the Building Inspections activity of the Watershed Protection and Development Review Department. The department proposed cutting 7 inspector FTEs for the FY03 budget. The effect of these cuts would have decreased the performance measure, “Percent of inspections performed within 24 hours” from 95% to 80%. The city manager deemed the decrease unacceptable and restored 4 inspectors, which allowed a 90% result for this measure.

19

• Yet another example was the use of performance measures in the “core services” initiative. Several “output” performance measures informed management of an activity’s participant/customer count, which was used to determine whether the activity met the condition of serving “a significant portion of the population.” One example was the Parks department and understanding the total number of users kept the Austin Nature Center as a core service activity with its 450,000 visitors a year instead of a semi-core activity.

LESSONS LEARNED Guidelines for the Performance Measure Process

• Must have the support of the highest level executive • Limit the number of measures to the most important measures relevant to the particular

audience (e.g., citizens, city council, city manager, department directors, division directors, work teams)

• Change the corporate culture to get the departments’ acceptance and ownership of measures

• Provide good instructions through the process, instructions, templates and examples • Keep a basic framework with the ability to make improvements each year • Have a process to verify the data • Report successes • Get employees to accept responsibility even though they do not have complete control of

the outcome • Make sure that the goals are measurable. Have a timeframe and intended result for each

goal. CONCLUSION The adjustments the city made to the Managing for Results business planning process have proved successful for the city of Austin. The focus shifted from the department to the customer, operation levels were maintained through budget decreases, decisions were made on facts in the budget process. The city of Austin welcomes the reader to use any or all of the process in their city and would encourage phone calls and questions, 512-974-2610. [email protected] Special note: To view the performance measures for the city of Austin, visit: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/eperf/index.cfm

20

GROUP DISCUSSION EXERCISES




Exercise 1: 1. How did you get and maintain the buy-in of elected officials, supervisors/managers/other

decision makers, and employees to pursue performance measurement? What are the opportunities and challenges for performance measurement in your organizations?

2. How do you report performance goals and results to your residents/customers? What are the potential benefits of sharing such information? How might this affect their levels of expectation?

3. How do you measure success in your jurisdictions?

21

Exercise 2: Summary of exercise The goal of the exercise is to simulate how measures for specific services could be developed in any community, regardless of size or fiscal resources. It also simulates how measures could be viewed through the eyes of the general public, elected officials, top management, and front-line employees. Instructions

• Each table is to develop at least one output measure, one efficiency measure and one

results (outcome) measure. A one-page document placed at the center of each table will indicate the specific service area and specific activity assigned to each group. As in Austin, additional measures are encouraged.2

• Each table is to select a department director for the specific service. All remaining

individuals at each table are to play the role of mid-level supervisors or front-line road maintenance workers.

After approximately 20 minutes, tables will be asked to report their results. Individuals from the other tables are to play the role of either: (1) the city/county manager, (2) a member of the city/county council, or (3) a member of the general public. They will offer their comments and critiques on the measures reported.

2 In determining/selecting the measures, consider how specific measures would help your work team to (1) monitor progress in its work activities and (2) to “tell its story” more effectively to the department head, city manager, council members and the general public.

Appendix #1

3RTMProgram Name: STREET REPAIR

Routine Roadways and Alley MaintenanceActivity:Activity Code:

The purpose of the Routine Maintenance activity is to provide street maintenance services for the citizens of Austin to ensure a safe riding surface.

Activity Objective:

Services of the Activity:

Requirements and FTE 2003-04Actual Amended Estimate Proposed2001-02 2002-032002-03

Actual Amended Estimate Proposed

Activity Performance Measures:

Performance Measures: Type2003-042001-02 2002 -032002 -03

2003-04Approved

Approved2003-04

Core Services: Surface repairs, including pot hole repairs; Surface milling; Alley maintenance; Guardrail and barricade repairs; Emergency response

Semi Core Services: N/A

Service Enhancements: N/A

EfficiencyCost per square yard of surface repairs

$6.47 $5.50 $5.50 $5.50 $5.50

OutputHours spent responding to emergency events

10,600.35 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000

OutputNumber of potholes repaired 2,203 2,200 2,200 2,200 2,200

ResultPercent of potholes reported by citizens repaired within 6 working days

95% 90% 90% 90% 90%

ResultPercent of safety critical potholes repaired within 24 hours

91% 95% 95% 95% 95%

$4,340,416 $4,352,876Total Requirements $4,239,376 $4,694,174 $4,663,797

69.98 69.35 69.35 69.35Full-Time Equivalents 69.35

Appendix #2The Austin Police Department Annual Performance Evaluation Officer

Officer’s Name: __________________________________ Eval Period: FY 2000 - 2001 Evaluator’s Name: ________________________________ Assignment: Canine

City of Austin Vision: We want Austin to be the most livable community in the country.

Department Mission

The Austin Police Department’s mission is to protect and serve Austin’s diverse community so that residents and visitors feel and are safe.

Department Goals

related to position

1. Reduce violent crime rate by 5% so that Austin is among the top five safest major cities in the United States with regard to violent crime.

2. Reduce property crime rate by 5% so that Austin is among the top twenty

safest major cities in the United States with regard to property crime. 3. Improve traffic safety so that motorists and pedestrians may move safely in

Austin. 4. Improve the quality of life so that Austin’s residents live, work, and play in

clean, safe neighborhoods.

Department Program(s) related to position

1. Investigations Program

Department Activity(s) related to position

1. Special Operations

(Use additional pages as needed)

PART A: Use the following criteria to assess the officer’s ability to perform the identified skills which are necessary to further the goal of making Austin one of the 10 safest major cities to live in.

Poor Needs Impr.

Satis-factory

Highly Effective

Excellent

1. Time Management: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Effectively accomplishes departmental goals and prioritizes problem solving efforts with other responsibilities. 2. Awareness: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Researches problems in assigned area; Takes steps to stay informed via citizen contact and familiarity with current events in neighborhood; Reviews departmental information; Shares information with colleagues. 3. Communication: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Elicits information from colleagues, supervisors, and citizens to facilitate problem solving; Conveys information and interacts with others in a clear and respectful manner. 4. Analysis: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Gathers and uses information from both internal and external sources; Analyzes and uses data to develop goals and make decisions. 5. Judgment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Identifies legitimate alternatives that can be used as responses in addressing problems; Selects the best alternative based on resource availability, ease of implementation, and perceived effectiveness of response. 6. Goal Setting: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Distinguishes between short- and long-term goals of response; Identifies goals that are measurable; Relates the goal to the problem. 7. Planning: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Prepares a legitimate action plan to implement a response; Identifies responsibilities of participants, appropriate procedures, and timetable; Understands long-term impact of decisions. 8. Coordination: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Demonstrates competency in organizing efforts of participants involved in implementing responses. 9. Initiative: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Motivates himself/herself to engage in the problem solving process and to identify and address problems; Helps others when appropriate. 10. Use of Force: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Understands the policy and uses only the force necessary to bring a situation under control.

11. Report Writing/Overall Investigation: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Writes thorough, meaningful reports; Takes the time to get all the facts available for County/District Attorney’s Office. 12. Responsibility /Timeliness: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Arrives to work on time and in adherence to departmental policy; Keeps commitments for Court appearances. 13. Dress: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Maintains a clean uniform that is within the limits set by policy; Does not wear unauthorized pins, etc. and takes pride in appearance. 14. Professionalism: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Maintains a high ethical standard; Sets a good example for all officers to follow. 15. Fitness: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Maintains physical fitness level that helps prevent injury. 16. Driving/Collisions: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Adheres to departmental policy and state law regarding traffic laws.

The Rating Scale (Part A): Excellent : The officer has a superior understanding of what skills to use to accomplish assigned responsibilities. Officer initiates and completes responsibilities without prompting from the supervisor, and there is never any doubt as to officer's exercise of sound judgment. Supervisor and officer work in consultation with each other when appropriate. Highly Effective: Performance exhibited is above average. Work performed and skills displayed regularly exceed basic requirements. Officer demonstrates an advanced ability to apply skills to various responsibilities and projects, and makes conscientious effort to adhere to procedures and standards. Sound judgment is always exercised, and officer is always willing to perform the skills to do the work – without instructions or directions from supervisor. Satisfactory: Performance in response to each skill is acceptable. Officer has demonstrated the ability to perform problem skills effectively and efficiently, in a consistent manner. Officer applies knowledge and skills while using sound judgment and is usually willing to perform skills with minimum instructions and directions from the supervisor. Needs Improvement: Performance is considered to be barely satisfactory, and skill performance is minimal. There is limited ability to perform the skill in association with appropriate activities. Officer frequently disregards performing the skill properly or does not adhere to standards governing the skill, and occasionally exercises sound judgment in skill performance. Supervisor is often required to observe the officer performing the skill; instructions are usually needed. Performance is sufficient, inconsistent, occasionally effective, but only to a minimally acceptable degree. Poor: Officer’s skill performance causes supervisor to be greatly concerned about officer’s capabilities. Demonstration of skill is weak, leading one to question officer’s understanding of what is expected and his or her ability to perform with consistent competency. Officer demonstrates signs of “going through the motions” and tends to act quickly, without regard to effects or consequences of actions. Supervisor spends an inordinate amount of time correcting officer’s actions or telling officer what must be done. Final Classification for Part A: Check: Rating: Poor……………………………….. 16-31 Rating: Needs Improvement.. ……………..32-79 Rating: Satisfactory………………………...80-111 Rating: Highly Effective……………………112-143 Rating: Excellent……………………………144-160

Part B (Business Plan Performance Measures):

SSPR Performance Plan (Use additional pages as needed)

Priority #

Service Name: Canine searches

Program Objective : The purpose of the Investigations Program is to provide an impartial and complete investigation of cases that require a particularly high level of expertise, to Area Commands, victims, suspects, external members of criminal justice agencies, and the public, in order to protect victims and the public and deter criminal activity. Activity Objective : The purpose of the Special Operations activity is to resolve crises involving hostage/barricade situations and explosive devises, provide canine and warrant service, and support highway/traffic enforcement to APD and the public in order to enhance the safety of officers and residents. Activity Results Measure(s) : % of critical incidents resulting in no injuries which require medical attention to officers, hostages, or the public – FY2001 goal is 95%. Description of Service(s) performed by employee to achieve Activity Objective (List service description, and areas of responsibility) 1. Conduct searches for persons or property. Individual Performance Measure(s) related to Service 1. Officer maintains bite ratio of < 20%. 2. Officer responds to the scene when canine is called out. 3. Officer actively trains canine. 4. Officer maintains proper unit documentation. 5. Officer deploys canine in accordance with Unit SOPs.

Performance Review: o Exceptional Performance o Successful Performance o *Unacceptable Performance (*Supervisor should init iate Performance Improvement Plan or other appropriate action.) Rationale:

PART C: Evaluator’s Comments/ Recommendations :

Officer’s Comments:

Total from part A (possible 160):

Rating from part B: ___________________________

Sergeant’s Signature Officer’s Signature ____________________________ Lieutenant’s Signature Commander’s Signature

Find! Options Select a service Select a map

Directory | Departments | Links | Site Map | Help | Contact Us

Home All City Departments Definitions

Public Works Approved Amount: $ 40,828,713Department Director: Sondra Creighton - Acting DirectorDepartment Website: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/test/publicworks/default.htmDepartment Phone: 512-974-7065

Program Information Approved Amount: $ 6,794,809

Name: STREET REPAIR

Objective: The purpose of the Street Repair program is to maintain streets and bridges for the traveling public in order to keep the infrastructure in a safe and drivable condition.

Activity Information Approved Amount: $ 4,663,797

Name: Routine Roadways and Alley Maintenance

Objective: The purpose of the Routine Maintenance activity is to provide street maintenance services for the citizens of Austin to ensure a safe riding surface.

History: This activity is a core activity. The legal mandate for this activity is in the city code, chapter 15-6, transportation user fee. Routine roadway/alley maintenance involves numerous activities performed by the street crews such as level-up, surface replacement, alley maintenance and cleaning, shoulder maintenance, barricade and guardrail installation and repair, bus pad construction, and hot mix repair. The diverse nature of these activities involve responding to customer requests while working on scheduled street repairs. In 1999 the Central Maintenance District added additional resources in personnel and equipment to adjust and accommodate for a shift in the North and South district boundaries that occurred as a result of 1998 annexations.

Changes: No Data


Activity Contact: Chee Lin Phone: 512-440-8444

Performance Measure InformationName: Cost per square yard of surface repairs

Description: Measures the amount of pavement repairs in relation to the cost of the repairs

Type: Efficiency

Current Data - Quarterly

2004 Budget Q1 Q2 Q2 YTD Q3 Q3 YTD Q4 Q4 YTD Year$5.50 $5.00 No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data

History Data

FY 2001 Actual FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2003 Amended FY 2004 Amended$3.66 $6.47 $5.84 $5.50 $5.50

Austin City Connection - The Official Web site of the City of AustinContact Us: Send Email or (512) 974-6550.©2001 City of Austin, Texas. All Rights Reserved.P.O. Box 1088, Austin, TX 78767 (512) 974-2000

Page 1 of 1Appendix #3

3/18/2004http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/eperf/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.PerfMeasure&DEPT=...

Find! Options Select a service Select a map

Directory | Departments | Links | Site Map | Help | Contact Us

Home All City Departments Definitions

Public Works Approved Amount: $ 40,828,713Department Director: Sondra Creighton - Acting DirectorDepartment Website: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/test/publicworks/default.htmDepartment Phone: 512-974-7065

Program Information Approved Amount: $ 6,794,809

Name: STREET REPAIR

Objective: The purpose of the Street Repair program is to maintain streets and bridges for the traveling public in order to keep the infrastructure in a safe and drivable condition.

Activity Information Approved Amount: $ 4,663,797

Name: Routine Roadways and Alley Maintenance

Objective: The purpose of the Routine Maintenance activity is to provide street maintenance services for the citizens of Austin to ensure a safe riding surface.

History: This activity is a core activity. The legal mandate for this activity is in the city code, chapter 15-6, transportation user fee. Routine roadway/alley maintenance involves numerous activities performed by the street crews such as level-up, surface replacement, alley maintenance and cleaning, shoulder maintenance, barricade and guardrail installation and repair, bus pad construction, and hot mix repair. The diverse nature of these activities involve responding to customer requests while working on scheduled street repairs. In 1999 the Central Maintenance District added additional resources in personnel and equipment to adjust and accommodate for a shift in the North and South district boundaries that occurred as a result of 1998 annexations.

Changes: No Data


Activity Contact: Chee Lin Phone: 512-440-8444

Performance Measure InformationName: Number of potholes repaired

Description:

Type: Output

Current Data - Monthly

2004 Budget Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. Sept. Year2,200 85 79 68 No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data No Data

History Data

FY 2001 Actual FY 2002 Actual FY 2003 Actual FY 2003 Amended FY 2004 Amended4,620 2,203 3,231 2,200 2,200

Austin City Connection - The Official Web site of the City of AustinContact Us: Send Email or (512) 974-6550.©2001 City of Austin, Texas. All Rights Reserved.P.O. Box 1088, Austin, TX 78767 (512) 974-2000

Page 1 of 1City of Austin - ePerformanceMeasures

3/18/2004http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/budget/eperf/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.PerfMeasure&DEPT=...

Appendix #4 - CORE SERVICES INITIATIVE Each department now lists their activities by priority. This tool forces the departments to look at the importance they place on each activity and allows city management a tool for review. Shown below is the Fire department’s list for FY 2005.

AFD Prioritized List of all Departmental Activities and Alignment of Programs

Activity Classification 1. Combat Operations Core 2. AFR – Bergstrom Core 3. Communications Core 4. Air Mask/Operations

Research Core

5. Cadet/In-service Training Core 6. Special Operations Core 7. Safety Operations Core 8. Fire Code & On-Site

Inspections Core

9. Medical/Quality Compliance

Core

10. Engineering Services Core 11. Public Education Semi-Core 12. Investigations Semi-Core 13. Planning & Research Semi-Core 14. Recruiting Enhancement

Appendix #5 - IT ASSESSMENT Shown below is an example of the Library Department’s submission for information technology challenges facing the department. Information Technology Challenges and Opportunities Technology continues to provide the Austin Public Library with great challenges and excellent opportunities. While customer demand for technology inside the Library is increasing, so is demand for online services available from home or office, enabling customers to access library services without traffic and parking problems. Demand by staff for online Intranet tools to assist them in executing job tasks electronically, which could improve effectiveness and efficiency, is also increasing. It is essential that libraries meet the needs of their customers. In FY 2004, the Austin Public Library is scheduled to purchase and implement a new Library Automation System. The product from the SIRSI Corporation, SIRSI UnicornOasis, utilizes an Oracle database. This database management system will allow information to be accessed more easily as well as allow flexibility to successfully make changes as our organization’s needs evolve. New categories of data can be added to the database without disruption to the existing Unicorn system. The Oracle database will allow reporting via standardized tools such as Crystal Reports. In FY 2005, the Library will begin to realize the benefits of this flexible product. This flexibility, while presenting a great opportunity, is also a challenge. The tools will allow the library to accomplish more tasks electronically but will require staffing resources for the initial implementation of the processes as well as ongoing maintenance of the processes. The department will continue to improve electronic services offered to the public and to staff. A second challenge facing the department is ongoing funding for a replacement schedule for capital items. In FY 2004, funding was included in the department budget to begin a desktop computer replacement strategy. Technology is a dynamic field and standards are constantly changing. It is essential that the Library maintain the capital funding to complete this replacement strategy. Hardware that is replaced on a regular schedule leads to lower technology support costs as well as the ability to maintain customer satisfaction at acceptable levels. The Library has also made a significant investment in network infrastructure devices such as switches, routers, and servers. The Library maintains two totally independent networks. The Communications and Technology Management Department is responsible for the routers on the City of Austin network, but the Library Department must maintain the layer2 and layer3 switching capabilities. On the public network, the Library must maintain both the routers and the switches. The department also has aging system servers that attach on both networks. These servers are responsible for the delivery of many technology infrastructure services including file/print, signup/authentication, wireless, storage, Web, database, and delivery of video. These computer infrastructure services are crucial to maintaining current services levels at the Austin Public Library, and the devices supporting them need to be put on a replacement schedule similar to that of the computer desktops.

A third challenge and opportunity is our public network. The Library provides desktop services on computer workstations at all Austin Public Library locations. All workstations are loaded with the Microsoft Office Suite of products, with many other miscellaneous applications available on some workstations. Each public access computer is connected to the Internet via several ISP’s. Austin Free-Net and the Library work together to fund these Internet connections. The John Henry Faulk Central Library is connected to the Internet via an ATM connection. The Internet is routed to the Austin History Center, Little Walnut Creek Branch, St. John Branch, Carver Branch, and Ruiz Branch Libraries via T1 Point to Point lines. All other branch libraries are connected directly to ISP’s, either GrandeCom or Time Warner. The public access WAN (wide area network) is built via a VPN between each remote location and the Central Library. The GrandeCom connections are donated to the Library at no charge, Austin Free-Net and TARA fund the Time Warner connections, and the Library funds the ATM and T1 connections. As library services have continued to increase over this network, its reliability has become an important factor. Currently, we utilize a product by Pharos to authenticate users and track collection of funds for printouts from our customers. We are having limited success with the client/server product due to the lack of quality of service (QOS) on this network. In FY 2004, we will continue to provide temporary solutions just to keep the systems communicating and working, which will be quite a challenge. In FY 2005, the department needs to plan to provide a solution designed around the types of communication that take place on this network. The Library may be eligible for E-rate discounts on these types of services so there is a chance that converting the connections that Austin Free-Net and TARA provide to the department we may be able to offset the cost for the increased QOS network with the discounts received. This will be a political and physical challenge but could be a huge success for improved service for public access to the Internet.

Appendix #6 - BUSINESS PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS

Shown below is an example of the Austin Water Utility’s business process improvement for FY 2005. The Utility will focus on three business processes to improve in FY 2004-05 that will help support the accomplishment of its Goals and Objectives. 1. To support the 'Conservation and Environmental Protection and Customer Service' Goal, the Utility will focus on improving Capacity, Management, Operation, and Maintenance (CMOM) of the sanitary sewer collection systems and to improve public notification of Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO):

q Within the scope of the Austin Clean Water Program, develop the CMOM and

initiate development of various modules of a comprehensive CMOM plan for efficient operation and maintenance of the sanitary sewer collection system.

Process Improvement: Prepare a process analysis/process map that identifies various management plan components of a comprehensive CMOM program including legal issues, measures and activities, CMOM data base development/integration, collection of SSO historical and infrastructure maintenance information, overflow reporting, and resources involved in the development of CMOM. Anticipated outcome: Implement the CMOM data base development/integration and overflow reporting modules of the comprehensive plan during FY 2004-05 that ensures the most effective and efficient management of the sanitary sewer collection system according to EPA guidelines.

2. To support the ‘Customer Service’ Goal, the Utility will focus on strengthening customer satisfaction by:

q Participate in Continued Implementation and Improvements to City-wide 24/7

Customer Information Center

Process Improvement: Assess and improve Utility processes in coordination with City-wide implementation of Customer Information Center. Implementation of the center will enable citizens to call one phone number, 3-1-1, for any City service 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This is similar to what is happening around the country – namely, growing the 3-1-1 system from a public safety non-emergency number to one that can be utilized for all City services. Anticipated outcome:

Improved access to Utility service information and assistance via telephone and Internet and improve customer satisfaction with Utility response to emergencies and value of services.

3. To support the ‘Financial Management’ Goal, the Utility will work to utilize capital improvements funding more efficiently by: q Improving CIP project planning, prioritization, funding, scheduling, and

implementation

Process Improvement: The Utility’s need for capital investment continues to rise along with the financial requirements to service existing debt requiring an ongoing improvement effort in this area. Anticipated outcome: The desired result of this improvement is to fundamentally change the master planning and CIP development processes and to review and revise them annually.

Appendix #7 - INNOVATION INITIATIVE

Below is an innovation submitted by the EMS Department.

Do all spec ops training on a preset schedule during one week per month - each FTE would be in training one week per year; Paramedics scheduled for spec ops training will be rotated through training schedules as part of on-duty time and not as off-duty time; This idea is contingent only upon available staffing. Higher-than-normal sick or on-the-job injury (oji) could hamper ability to complete training. Implemented successfully in August of 2003. Special Operations paramedics are provided training through regular shift rotations, as opposed to training while off-duty, which generates overtime. Average monthly savings, based on an analysis of training rotations conducted August through December of 2003 is $3,468.67, which projects to approximately $41,000 in savings over the course of a full year.

Appendix #8 - ACTION PLANS EMS Response Time Action Plan Department goal: Respond to Priority 1 Calls in Under 10 Minutes 90% of the time Baseline: FY 02 Actual: Percent Priority 1 Calls Responded to in Under 10 Minutes: 83.21% FY 03 Actual: Percent Priority 1 Calls Responded to in Under 10 Minutes: 81.58% Executive Sponsor: Gordon Bergh, Assistant Director, Operations Activities Involved: Emergency Communications, Emergency Services, Academy, Quality Assurance, Safety, Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance, Information Technology Support, Purchasing, Personnel Work Units Involved: Operations Command Staff, Paramedics, Communications, Recruiting, Fleet and Facilities Management, Information Technology Support, Purchasing, Personnel Action Summary: Adding new units will have the most direct impact on improving response times. Once the Far Southeast and Del Valle stations have been staffed, EMS proposes to begin transitioning from a deployment strategy based on dedicated 24/7 EMS stations to a blended strategy that deploys EMS units flexibly, according to demand patterns within the service area. The strategy would use a combination of peak demand units and dedicated 24/7 EMS stations. In a blended deployment system, some ambulances will not be assigned to any specific station. Such units, known as "peak demand units", will be deployed to sections of the service area where demand is greatest. These deployments could shift based on time of day and days of the week to accommodate traffic patterns, weather conditions, large events, holidays, and downtown activity on Friday and Saturday evenings. A blended system will allow for greater flexibility, faster deployment and will alleviate the expense of constructing and maintaining some new EMS stations. New stations could be occupied over time, based on demand in specific areas. A critical component of this plan is the development of consistent and reliable baseline response data. The majority of the EMS response time and call volume data is generated by the City’s Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) system. This system is over16 years old. Its reporting capabilities are quite limited and consistent data collection has been an ongoing challenge for EMS. The new CAD system, scheduled to be on line by January 2004, should provide more consistent and statistically accurate reporting than is currently

available. Data prior to FY 04 is being archived in a database that is accessible to multiple users and that provides consistent data results. Extraction of data from the new CAD system may require a data analyst FTE as well as specialized training.

Actions steps to be Taken Activity Involved Estimated time frame to implement

Related performance measure(s)

Desired Result

Open Far Southeast EMS station by April 2004

Emergency Services, Academy, Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance, Facility Expenses

Hire 10 paramedics and order 1 ambulance by Oct 2003 for station to open by April 2004

Percent Priority 1 Responses in Under 10 Minutes

85% response rate to Priority 1 Calls in Under 10 Minutes for FY 05

Develop scheduling plan in FY 04 to accommodate peak load units within the system

Emergency Communications Emergency Services

FY 04 – Using new CAD data and modeling tools


Plan for how demand units will be scheduled by FY 04

Develop and implement plan for alternative shift schedules in at least 2 high volume stations

Emergency Services Admin and Mgmt Personnel

Develop plan by 2nd quarter FY 04 for implementation in FY 05

Employee turnover rate Number of injuries

Reduce uniformed employee turnover rate by 5% by FY 05 Reduce injuries by 5% by FY 05 Maintain customer satisfaction rating of at least 90%

Staff Del Valle Fire/EMS station with an EMS unit by April 2005

Emergency Services, Academy, Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance, Facility Expenses

Hire 10 paramedics and order 2 ambulances in October 2004 for station to open by April 2005



Place 1 demand unit in service within the city limits during FY 05 including the necessary infrastructure support

Emergency Communications Emergency Services Academy Quality Assurance Safety Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance Info Tech Support Purchasing Personnel

Hire staff and purchase equipment in October 2004 for unit to go online by April 2005



Place 1 demand unit in service within the city limits during FY 06 including the necessary infrastructure support

Emergency Communications Emergency Services Academy Quality Assurance Safety Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance Info Tech Support Purchasing Personnel

Hire staff and purchase equipment in October 2005 for unit to go online by April 2006



Reduce critical fleet failures by 10% by September 2005 by tracking core fleet problems and outcomes, survey other users, work with Fleet Services to reduce chronic failures, develop relations with CRS on installation specifications

Vehicle/Equipment Maintenance

FY 03 and FY 04 Percent Priority 1 Responses in Under 10 Minutes Critical Failures per 10,000 miles driven

90% response rate to Priority 1 Calls in Under 10 Minutes for FY 06 0.54 fleet failures per 10,000 miles driven by FY 05

Develop consistent and reliable baseline response time data archives in a database that can be accessed by multiple users (see IT Assessment for further detail)

Info Tech Support Emergency Services

Archived program developed in FY 03, reports and web interfaces to be developed in FY 04

All response time measures

Accessible, consistent and reliable baseline CAD data from FY 98 through FY 2003

Develop consistent and reliable reporting capabilities from new CAD system (see IT Assessment for further detail)

Info Tech Support Emergency Services Emergency Communications

Implement new CAD system and reports by Jan 2004

All response time measures

Accessible, consistent and reliable CAD data as of FY 2004

managing for results austin, texasglenn.osu.edu/faculty/glenn-faculty/worley/may 16 - reading 2 -...

Documents