Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Child Support Re-engineering The Idaho Child Support Enhanced Case Management System.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Child Support Re-engineering The Idaho Child Support Enhanced Case Management System."— Presentation transcript:

1 Child Support Re-engineering The Idaho Child Support Enhanced Case Management System

2 2004>>>>>>>>2006 2004>>>>>>>>2006 Seven Regional Child Support Offices State of Idaho One, Single, Statewide Business State of Idaho

3 Idaho’s Enhanced Case Management System LSCUSECUFIDM Enforcement Support Units – Collections, Customer Service & Data Integrity FARUPARU RMCU SACU CALL CNTR ORDS Unit P/E Units Region 1 Region 2 Region 3 Region 4 Region 5 Region 6 Region 7 Interstate Units Locate Unit “Flow-through” Functions – Collections & Data integrity Closure Unit INIT Units Other States Customer contact when establishing cases – Customer Service Core Case Management standards for Collections, Customer Service & Data Integrity Resources dedicated to locate services – Customer Service & Collections Standard process for case closure – Customer Service & Data Integrity

4 What is re-engineering? It’s about Change (The Culture) It’s about Change (The Culture) It’s about Structure (The Organization) It’s about Structure (The Organization) It’s about Tasks (The Work) It’s about Tasks (The Work) It’s about People (The Workers) It’s about People (The Workers) It’s about Technology (Automated Systems) It’s about Technology (Automated Systems) It’s about Performance (Quality, Accuracy, Timeliness, Consistency, and Standardization) It’s about Performance (Quality, Accuracy, Timeliness, Consistency, and Standardization) Re-engineering is about redesigning and implementing an interconnected statewide business system

5 Why Change? To Align People, Resources, and Technology To Align People, Resources, and Technology To Manage Caseload Growth To Manage Caseload Growth To Work Within Budget Constraints To Work Within Budget Constraints To Compensate for Staffing Reductions To Compensate for Staffing Reductions To Meet Challenges with Hiring, Training, Achieving Productivity To Meet Challenges with Hiring, Training, Achieving Productivity To Reduce Inefficiencies To Reduce Inefficiencies To Achieve Performance Expectations To Achieve Performance Expectations To Improve Customer Service To Improve Customer Service

6 The Need for Change From 1999 – 2006, Idaho’s Child Support caseload has increased each year without a proportionate increase in FTE. From 1999 – 2006, Idaho’s Child Support caseload has increased each year without a proportionate increase in FTE. –Less time available per case –Less time available per customer Requires proactive management to: Requires proactive management to: –Discover and implement efficiencies –Maintain high quality outputs and excellent customer service –Effectively implement and manage change

7 Changing the Culture Who & What Needs to Change? Management Management Supervisors Supervisors Line Staff Line Staff Processes Processes Bye Bye, Case Ownership, Hello, Shared Accountability

8 Source: Caseload Growth – FFY yearly average received from monthly DISA download; FTE- OCSE 157 Report Child Support Caseload to FTE Growth

9 Structure – Organizational Change Management Team of 11 reduced to 5 Management Team of 11 reduced to 5 7 Regional Offices Structure Redefined 7 Regional Offices Structure Redefined 1 Statewide Core Case Management Unit 1 Statewide Core Case Management Unit 13 In-House Functional Consolidated Units 13 In-House Functional Consolidated Units 2 Outsourced Functional Consolidated Units 2 Outsourced Functional Consolidated Units Seven “States” of Idaho have become One, Single Statewide Business

10 One, Single, Statewide Business

11 Organizational Structure

12 Staffing a Statewide Operation This Statewide system is managed by a Management Team of 5 Program Managers (3 Hub Based, 2 Located in the central Business Office). The Statewide Team - 148 Front Line Supervisors & Staff:  13 Functional Consolidated Units with a total of 74 FTP  A Statewide Core Case Management Team with a total of 57.5 FTP  A Supervisory Team of 16.5 FTP With Additional Case Management Support From:  2 Consolidated Support Units under a Contract Operation – Customer Service (CSCS), Receipting (SDU)  A Program Support Team located in the central Business Office

13 Child Support Statewide Consolidated Units INIT – Case Initiation – Two Units – Coeur d’Alene & Boise (Westgate) INIT – Case Initiation – Two Units – Coeur d’Alene & Boise (Westgate) PECU – Paternity Establishment – Two Units – Coeur d’Alene & Boise (Westgate) PECU – Paternity Establishment – Two Units – Coeur d’Alene & Boise (Westgate) LOCU – Locate - Lewiston LOCU – Locate - Lewiston ISCU – Interstate – Two Units – Caldwell & Lewiston ISCU – Interstate – Two Units – Caldwell & Lewiston FIDM – Financial Institutions Data Match – Boise (Westgate) FIDM – Financial Institutions Data Match – Boise (Westgate) FARU – Financial Audit Review – Boise (Westgate) FARU – Financial Audit Review – Boise (Westgate) PARU – Payment Adjustment & Recovery – Twin Falls PARU – Payment Adjustment & Recovery – Twin Falls ORDS – Order Abstract & Debt Setup - Pocatello ORDS – Order Abstract & Debt Setup - Pocatello LSCU – License Suspension - Pocatello LSCU – License Suspension - Pocatello SACU – Secondary Approval Unit (Adjustments) – Idaho Falls SACU – Secondary Approval Unit (Adjustments) – Idaho Falls CLOS – Case Closure – Idaho Falls CLOS – Case Closure – Idaho Falls SECU – Special Enforcement – Idaho Falls SECU – Special Enforcement – Idaho Falls RMCU – Returned Mail Consolidated Unit - Lewiston RMCU – Returned Mail Consolidated Unit - Lewiston CSCS – Child Support Customer Service (Contract Unit) - Boise CSCS – Child Support Customer Service (Contract Unit) - Boise RCTG – Payment Receipting (Contract Unit) – Boise RCTG – Payment Receipting (Contract Unit) – Boise CCM – Core Case Management - Statewide CCM – Core Case Management - Statewide

14 Tasks – Defining the Work Caseload vs Workload Caseload vs Workload Functions vs Tasks Functions vs Tasks What is “The Work” What is “The Work” Balancing Priorities Balancing Priorities Managing the Case Managing the Case Shared Ownership Shared Ownership Targeted Objectives Targeted Objectives

15 Caseload Equalization Note: Data is a “snapshot” in time and changes on a dialy basis

16 Caseload vs Workload Core Case Management Team Core Case Management Team Average Caseload = 1089/FTP Average Workload = 761/FTP

17 Caseload Equalization: Core Case Management Core Case Management (Enforcement) Caseload July-07 RegionTotal Less I/S Enforcement TotalCCMgt FTP Average Caseload 1 12,709 4,385 8,3247.5 1,110 2 5,245 1,903 3,3423 1,114 3 16,685 3,722 12,96311 1,178 4 19,739 4,505 15,23414.5 1,051 5 11,029 2,302 8,7278 1,091 6 9,618 1,892 7,7267.5 1,030 7 8,574 1,708 6,8666.5 1,056 TOTAL 83,599 20,417 63,18258 1,089

18 Workload Equalization: Core Case Management Statewide Core Case Management (Enforcement) FTP Allocation & WorkloadJuly-07 Location of FTP # of Total FTP for Unit % FTP Allocated Enfo FTP Allocated ENFC Wk CaseloadWorkload CCMgt58100%58 INIT*743%3 FARU475%3.00 FIDM*1.575%1.13 PARU4.875%3.60 ORDS775%5.25 LSCU*475%3.00 SECU*275%1.50 SLOA *275%1.50 CLOS367%2 LOCU3.2528%1 TOTAL 82.9863,182761

19 People – The Workers Participation in the Planning Participation in the Planning Matching Skills to Assignments Matching Skills to Assignments Offering Choices Offering Choices No Involuntary Transfers No Involuntary Transfers No Layoffs No Layoffs No Reclassifications No Reclassifications

20 Technology – Automated Systems Processes defined Automation (Pre-1996) Processes defined Automation (Pre-1996) Automation redefined Processes (1996) Automation redefined Processes (1996) Redefining Processes to Maximize use of available Automated Systems (1996 to Present) Redefining Processes to Maximize use of available Automated Systems (1996 to Present) Enhancing Systems to Support Processes (1996 to Present) Enhancing Systems to Support Processes (1996 to Present) Implementing New Systems & Technologies (Now and into the Future) Implementing New Systems & Technologies (Now and into the Future)

21 Performance – Quality Outcomes Accuracy Accuracy Timeliness Timeliness Consistency Consistency Standardization Standardization Quality Outcomes = Quality Customer Service

22 Performance Metrics: ORDS Unit (Order Abstract & Debt Setup

23 Performance Metrics: ORDS unit

24 Performance Improvement: Order Abstract & Debt Setup Prior to Re-engineering – it took 6 to 8 weeks to get an order setup on the system, delayed collections, increased arrears, inconsistent data entry Prior to Re-engineering – it took 6 to 8 weeks to get an order setup on the system, delayed collections, increased arrears, inconsistent data entry After Re-Engineering – 5 to 15 days to get an order setup on the system, more timely collections, containment of arrears, consistent data entry After Re-Engineering – 5 to 15 days to get an order setup on the system, more timely collections, containment of arrears, consistent data entry

25 High Performance From July 2006 through June 2007 most of the functional consolidated units are exceeding performance goals From July 2006 through June 2007 most of the functional consolidated units are exceeding performance goals  Averaging 96-99% Accuracy  Averaging 96-100% Timeliness

26 Performance Improvement: 2006 Idaho Child Support Federal Self-Assessment Report Performance Summary 2006 Functional AreaFFY 2004FFY 2005FFY 2006Goal Closures93%92%99%90% Establishment of Orders79%88%91%75% Expedited Process (12-Month Standard) 100% 90% Expedited Process (6-Month Standard) 95%98% 75% Enforcement of Financial Orders98%97%95%75% Enforcement of Medical Orders96%98%97%75% Modifications (case review and adjustment) 86%99% 75% Interstate Cases84%92%98%75% Disbursements100%99%100%75%

27 Source Data: PSI FFY 2006 OCSE State Report – State Distribution Cost Effectiveness

28 Staffing, Training & Achieving Performance Goals Cultivating Experts vs Expecting Everyone to Know Everything Cultivating Experts vs Expecting Everyone to Know Everything Ramp-up Time to Achieve Productivity Goals Reduced – Days & Weeks vs Months & Years Ramp-up Time to Achieve Productivity Goals Reduced – Days & Weeks vs Months & Years Recruiting & Hiring for Specific Skills vs General Qualifications Recruiting & Hiring for Specific Skills vs General Qualifications Specialized Training for Functions & Tasks Specialized Training for Functions & Tasks Case Ownership vs Shared Accountability Case Ownership vs Shared Accountability

29 Planning & Implementation Develop a Comprehensive Plan Identify & Include All Stakeholders Identify & Include All Stakeholders Collect Data Collect Data Define Objectives Define Objectives Draft the Plan Draft the Plan Test Pilot Projects/Gather Data Test Pilot Projects/Gather Data Refine and Implement “The Plan” Refine and Implement “The Plan” Implementation - Big Bang vs Staged Transition Implementation - Big Bang vs Staged Transition Monitor & Measure Results Monitor & Measure Results Refine Processes - Continuous & Ongoing Refine Processes - Continuous & Ongoing

30 For More Information Contact Contact Tom Serich Program Manager, Statewide Operations Idaho Child Support Services State of Idaho – Department of Health & Welfare 450 West State St – 2 nd Floor Boise, ID 83701 Ph: 208-334-6545 Email: sericht@dhw.idaho.gov


Download ppt "Child Support Re-engineering The Idaho Child Support Enhanced Case Management System."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google