ASA Template Training

1
(No Transcript)
2
FY02 ASA PRESENTATION

• ACQUIRE DISPOSE OF REAL ESTATE
• Discrete Services
• DS 1 Maintain real property records
• DS 2 Purchase real property
• DS 3 Dispose of real property
• DS 4 Lease real property

3
Deployment Flowchart

• Service Group Acquire Dispose of Real Estate

4
Block Diagram

• Service Group Acquire Dispose of Real Estate

5
Table of Contents

• Main Presentation
• ASA Template .7
• Customer Perspective....9
• Customer Segmentation .10
• Customer Satisfaction..13
• Internal Business Process Perspective
  .14
• Service Group Block Diagram....
  15
• Conclusions from Discrete Services Deployment
  Flowcharts .....17
• Process Mapping . ..18
• Process Measures. .23
• Learning and Growth Perspective..3
  3
• Conclusions from Turnover, Sick Leave, Awards,
  EEO/ER/ADR Data34
• Analysis of Readiness Conclusions
  ..35
• Financial Perspective...37
• Unit Cost.38
• Asset Utilization.41
• Conclusions and Recommendations.4
  3
• Improvements Implemented. .44
• Conclusions from FY02 ASA..45

6
Table of Contents

• Appendices
• Block diagram

7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
Customer Perspective Customer Segmentation
Customer Satisfaction
10
Customer Segmentation

• Who Are Our Customers For Services ?
• DS 1 Maintain real property records
• DS 2 Purchase real property
• DS 3 Dispose of real property
• DS 4 Lease real property

11
Customer Segmentation Conclusion

• Who are our Customers?
• DS 1 Maintain real property records
• DHHS, OGC, ORS (ADRS, DES,DPS,DS, OFP, OBSF
  DSS), GSA, OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, LESSORS
• DS 2 Purchase real property
• DHHS, ICs, OGC, and ADRS
• DS 3 Dispose of real property
• DHHS, ICs, OGC, and ADRS
• DS 4 Lease real property
• DHHS, ICs, OGC, ORS (ADRS, DES,DPS,DS, OFP, OBSF
  DSS), GSA, OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES, LESSORS

12
Customer Segmentation
13
Customer Satisfaction No Results in FY02

• FY02 - Customers identified
• FY02 - Survey tool identified Customize ORS
  survey tool to include real estate specific
  questions
• FY03 - Future survey anticipated
• Survey frequency - Annually
• Unique Customer Measures
• To be provided upon completion of customer survey
  in FY03

14
Internal Business Process Perspective
15
Service Group Block Diagram
16
Service Group Block Diagram

• DS 1 Maintain real property records
• DS 2 Purchase real property
• DS 3 Dispose of real property
• DS 4 Lease real property
• Preponderance of staff time is devoted to DS 4
  DS 1 in Lease Administration functions

17
Conclusions from Discrete Services Deployment
Flowcharts

• Completed 4 deployment flowcharts
• DS 1 highlighted the importance of our ability to
  archive retrieve lease data
• DS 1 emphasized impact of incomplete files in
  support of real estate records
• DS 2 3 required no action due to infrequency of
  event
• DS 4 interacts on a regular basis with 7 major
  ORS components to deliver the services to the
  customer
• DS 4 emphasized the importance of communicating
  to the customer the extreme different of lease
  cycle/time frame for the acquisition of new space
  vs. space in entities where NIH already has a
  presence
• Intra-organizational relationships in ORS create
  cross-functional work processes mutual
  dependency for accurate information
• ORS does not have a single point of contact for
  information on real estate inquiries.

18

• Process Mapping
• Process Measures

19
Process Map DS1
20
Process Map DS2
21
Process Map DS4
22
Process Map DS4
23
Process Measures

• DS1 Maintain Real Property Records
• Total number of active and inactive leases
  maintained
• Number of files fully documented FY02
• Total number of transactions per active
  inactive leases (NTPs SLAs)
• Total number of lease records/portfolios review
  and archived
• Turn around time for external requests FY03
• FINDINGS
• Awareness of importance to maintain accurate
  records to properly document lease
  transactions
• Established organized available documents to
  establish a baseline for completion of existing
  lease portfolios
• Since 7/02 instituted best practices for all
  lease portfolios
• FY-02 established a Standard for lease portfolios
  to ensure accuracy of information.

24
Process Measures DS1
25
Process Measures DS1
26
Process Measures

• DS2 Purchase Real Property
• Successful Acquisition of Land
• Findings
• Infrequency of event has prompted review of
  procedures (FY 03)

27
Process Measures

• DS3 Dispose of Real Property
• Successful disposal and legal transfer of
  property to the ownership.
• Findings
• Infrequency of event has prompted review of
  procedures. FY03 familiarize

28
Process Measures

• DS4 Lease Real Property
• Number of SJDs received for lease action
• Number of SLAs/NTPs developed processed
• Number of financial transactions reviewed
  approved for payment
• Number of new leases awarded
• Findings
• Initiated financial data logs for each lease
  portfolio
• Identified work load peaks
• Keenly aware of necessity for an enhanced
  automated system to track input/outcome of work
  products

29
Process Measures DS4
30
Process Measures DS4
31
Process Measures DS4
32
Process Measures DS4
33
Learning and Growth Perspective
34
Conclusions from Turnover, Sick Leave, Awards,
EEO/ER/ADR Data

• Data inconclusive
• During FY02 responsibility for DS 1, 2, 3, 4
  was administered by 1 federal employee with
  contract staff.

35
Analysis of Readiness Conclusions

• FY02 For the first 9 months had I warranted
  Federal Real Estate Officer
• FY03 FY04 Contemplate hiring a Real Estate
  Branch Chief 2 Senior Real Estate Officers
  with warrants
• Skill Requirements New staff must be fully
  accredited in Real Estate and must have
  eligibility for immediate warrant
• Training Programs Complete core competency real
  estate/acquisition training maintain annual
  proficiency professional development
• Quality of Work Life Staff regularly work in
  excess of normal work schedule to achieve goals
  (average work week 55 hrs.)
• FY03 Goal Reduce hours staff work
• FY 02 Self Assessment (1 worst 10 best) -
  Level 5
• FY05 Self Assessment Goal Level - 10

36
Analysis of Readiness Conclusions

• RESULTS OF NO CHANGE
• Increase in unacceptable lease award time
• Negative impact on NIHs ability to conduct
  business
• Employee burn out and turn-over
• Increase risk exposure (legal, regulatory
  compliance, financial, etc.)

37
Financial Perspective
38
Unit Cost Measures
39
(No Transcript)
40
(No Transcript)
41
Asset Utilization Measures
42
Asset Utilization Measures
43
Conclusions and Recommendations
44
Conclusions from FY02 ASA

• Major function, Lease Administration, is not
  captured as a discrete service
• Additional internal operating procedures required
• Other real estate records are incomplete /or not
  housed in OAS/Real Estate Contracting Branch such
  as NIH owned property, use agreements, etc.

45
Improvements Implemented

• Implemented a standardized lease management
  portfolio system Data tracking, portfolio
  format, and internal review/audits
• Reviewed/closed and archived 115 backlogged
  expired leases and 395 other related lease
  records
• Created synergy between government contract
  staff (arm length, yet cooperative) to deliver
  services
• Established scheduled meetings to review and
  evaluate projects
• Improved communication with other ORS entities
  OBSF, OFP, DES stake holders
• Enlightened ICs regarding the process unique to
  acquire new space vs. existing space
• Collaborated with DES on ASA as shared stake
  holders which led to enhanced understanding of
  both processes

46
Recommendations

• Combine DS 2 3 into one Discrete Service (DS
  2) due to infrequency
• Establish an additional discrete service as Lease
  Administration This major function is not
  captured clearly in DS1 and 4
• Recommend that OAS/Real Estate Contracting Branch
  is recognized as the official point of contact
  for information on all NIH real property and
  leases. This should facilitate a complete
  response.

47
Appendices
48
Appendices

• Block diagram

49
FY02 Learning and Growth (LG) Data for the
Annual Self Assessments Service Group 3
Acquire and Dispose of Real Estate 26
September 2002 Summary Prepared by the Office of
Quality Management
50
Methodology

• All data represent occurrences from Oct 2001 -
  June 2002
• Data analyzed covered period between October 1st
  and end of June to provide time to analyze and
  present the data
• ORS Human Resources (HR) provided data on
• Turnover
• Sick leave
• Awards
• HR data stored in NIH databases by Standard
  Administrative Codes (SACs)
• Developed cross-reference of ORS Service Groups
  to SACs
• Almost all SACs assigned to Service Groups
• Some Service Groups have identical SACs
• In this case, two Service Groups will receive
  same set of data

51
Methodology (cont.)

• Also obtained data from
• Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
• Number of EEO complaints
• Employee Relations (ER)
• Number of ER cases
• Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
• ADR cases

52
Interpreting Your Data

• FY02 is the first time LG data were collected
  and analyzed
• Compare your Service Group relative to the other
  ORS Service Groups
• What are all the LG indicators telling you?
• In the future your group should compare itself to
  its own Service Group data over time
• Interpret data in terms of other ASA data
• Customer satisfaction ratings
• Process measures
• Financial measures
• Does the LG data, when compared to data in other
  perspectives, show potential relationship (could
  LG be contributing to customer satisfaction
  results)?
• From reviewing your Service Groups LG data,
  what could be done to improve Quality of Work
  Life (QOWL)?

53
Service Group Turnover Rate

• Calculated as the number of separations for a
  Service Group / Population of Service Group
• Separations defined as
• Retirements (separation codes 3010, 3020, 3022)
• Resignations (separation codes 3120, 3170)
• Removals (separation codes 3300)
• Terminations (separation codes 3520, 3550, 3570)
• Promotions to new organization (separation codes
  7020)
• Reassignments (separation code 7210)
• Note that transfers/promotions within ORS
  Divisions/Offices are not captured by the NIH
  database

54
Service Group Turnover Rate (cont.)

• Calculation of Service Group population was
  needed since number of employees changes over
  time
• Population for Service Group was estimated based
  on average of employee count at three snapshots
  in time (Nov 2001, Feb 2002, June 2002)

55
Service Group Turnover Rate (Oct 2001 - June
2002)
Turnover Rate
Service Group Number
56
Average Hours of Sick Leave Used

• Calculated as the total number of sick leave
  hours used for a Service Group / Population of
  Service Group

57
Average Hours of Sick Leave Used (Oct 2001 - June
2002)
Average Hours
Service Group Number
58
Average Number of Awards Received

• Calculated as the total number of awards received
  / Population of Service Group
• Includes both monetary and non-monetary awards
• Cash awards
• QSIs
• Time-off
• Honorary
• Customer Service

59
Average Number of Awards Received (Oct 2001 -
June 2002)
Average number
Service Group Number
60
Average Number of EEO Complaints

• Calculated the total number of EEO complaints for
  a Service Group / Population of Service Group

61
Average Number of EEO Complaints (Oct 2001 -
June 2002)
Average Number
Service Group Number
62
Average Number of ER Cases

• Calculated the total number of ER cases for a
  Service Group / Population of Service Group
• Case is defined as any contact with ER Office
  where an action occurs (e.g., Letter is prepared)

63
Average Number of ER Cases (Oct 2001 - June 2002)
Average Number
Service Group Number
64
Average Number of ADR Cases

• Calculated the number of ADR cases for a Service
  Group / Population of Service Group
• Case is initiated when person contacts ADR

65
Average Number of ADR Cases (Oct 2001 - June
2002)
Average Number
Service Group Number
66
Learning and Growth Data Table
1 ADR case out of 16 employees
3 ER Cases out of 16 employees
About 1 award for every 3 employees
More than 6 days sick leave per employee.
13 employee turnover
67
Summary of Service Group 3Learning and Growth
Data

• Thirteen percent employee turnover
• More than a week of sick leave per employee
• About one award for every 3 employees
• Three ER cases and 1 ADR case out of 16 employees