2.1 03-28-2022 Study SessionCity Commissioners CPI Overview
Past
WhaLhappenL-d?]
{#�
H w and Why did it
happen? (M0deirin�
and Experime�stal
Design)
Present
What is Ha
pp
raw? J#ier[s, Real-
tims Updated
What Is thm next best
action?
(Rerommendaruon�
Future
Whzit will happen?
(Extrapolation)
What's the best %
v9"t that can
ppen? (PredlOon,
Optirnatization,
Swmulationl
information
insight
Understanding CPI
Continuous Process Improvement
By definition, Continuous process improvement (CPI) is the
act of implementing improvements to a product, service
or process. These changes can either be incremental
(over time.. Aka.. Just -Do -it /Quick Fix) or advanced (all
at once Aka.. HIP Projects).
CPI ensures that your business survives and strives in the
long-term. By constantly re-evaluating and improving
business processes, your organization will be more
efficient, effective, innovative, agile, and meaningfully
unique.
Two Lean Six Sigma Methodologies
City of Salina is Meaningfully Unique
DMADV
Create new
processes,
products, and
services to 6
Sigma quality
■ Define
■ Measure
■ Analyze
■ Design
■ Verify
Process Management
Leverage and sustain the gains
achieved by improvement and creation
DMAIC
Improve existing
processes,
products, and
services to 6
Sigma quality
■ Define
■ Measure
■ Analyze
■
Improve
■ Control
Return on Investment
City of Fort Wayne:
Mayor Graham Richard of Fort Wayne, Indiana led a Lean Six Sigma effort that resulted in savings
estimated to be about $11 million, with no tax increases and increases in citizen satisfaction.
Florida Dept. of Revenue:
The departments training program is designed to be result -oriented, with education and application
performed concurrently. For every dollar invested in the training program, the department is seeing a $23
benefit.
Washington State Department of Licensing:
Identified those offices having excessive customer wait times. Most offices achieved a 50% or more wait
time reduction along with an increase in customer satisfaction. In addition many quality —of -work -life
issues were identified and changes were made.
City of Salina Road to ROI:
1. Staff Training — 728 Hours or $18,300.10 + $1,000.00 in Quarterly Awards for JDI
2. Working of High Impact Projects $436,180 (realized) $753,764 (Pending) = $1,189,944 ROI=6,165/1
3. Continued Just Do It efforts $745,842 ROI=3,864/1
4. Four Stalled project due to no time to work — Over $100K in potential impact
5. Total ROI to date = 10,029/1 (373/1 total program)
City l f
Salina
Recipient Name
Certified Lean Six Sigma Green Belt
6"R/b"v a fA" "Wjw��, 4ff �/bjwl"Wl&y 1-91~ ale
/
*W&
< 4e4 < ff W4 all J
/ /
rte.,. i�arr,
On: �G�6ew 17, 20-I8
Scott Gardner I Director I Lean 66 MBB
Mike Schrage I City Manager
/ Start
CIP Over $20K
— Current State
Over$20K
Desi n A royal
No/Authorize
Project
M
PSE Est.
Plan
Specifications
Estimations
/ Temporary \
Funding
Needed - Bond
No
Standardize
Process
Bid / Pre Bid
Assign Project Commission Create CIP Draft
Number Approval Study Session vcs
Commission Identify
Action Taken Funding
Modify
No
Consider Bid forEncumber Project Execute Contract
Award
Contract yes
Awarded by
Commission
No
Project
Execution
City wide
Prioritization
Improve
Process
Legal / Risk
Interaction
g pp
Process
Over $20K
16
Needed
Y
Need
Project Alternative
Department
Justification
CIP Request
Identification
Options
Prioritize
Okay to Proceed
Preliminary
N Budget Over $20K
C05t Estimation
Within
From Dept. Head
External Input
[hang
Design Needed
Allocation
Department
Under$20K
Standardize
Standardize
Standardize
standardize
Process
Process
Process
Process
No/Authorize
Project
M
PSE Est.
Plan
Specifications
Estimations
/ Temporary \
Funding
Needed - Bond
No
Standardize
Process
Bid / Pre Bid
Assign Project Commission Create CIP Draft
Number Approval Study Session vcs
Commission Identify
Action Taken Funding
Modify
No
Consider Bid forEncumber Project Execute Contract
Award
Contract yes
Awarded by
Commission
No
Project
Execution
City wide
Prioritization
Improve
Process
Legal / Risk
Interaction
PCT and PCE
Process
==> Work In Process ==>
Input L
& CVA Time Exit Rate
Process Cycle Time
PCT = W I P / Exit Ratc
PCE = CVA Time / PCT
• Work -In -Process (WIP) = "Things in Process" — Orders, People In Queue, Documents,
etc.
• Exit Rate = The output of a process, expressed in units/time equal to the rate of the time
trap (constraint) operation
• Process Cycle Time (PCT) = the time from release of a product into a process until it is
completed
• Customer Value Add Time (CVA Time) = the amount of time that value is actually being
added to a product or service (the time that the customer is willing to accept)
Current Projects and Potential Impacts
Quick Fixes Still Tracked. but Not included
Active Projects
Potential
Impact Statement
EMS Transfer Review
0 Efficiency and Effectiveness are not acceptable, and resources need to be address to allow for full alignment of the noted call outs
City Streets
0 Identify way to level spending in streets, and predict the need for street repairs and full replacement
Parks & Recreation Participation
0 We are above average for engagement in activities, but are below a department imposed %. We need to increase citizen engagement
Time &Attendance Process
$ 68,334.50 Reviewing Proposals
Parks Equipment Contracts
Parks and Recreation equipment replacement assessment - PR -
Platting Process Review
Platting, Special Assessments, Infrastructure Construction, and Building Permits all associated with new subdivisions -DS-
Fees
$ 250,000.00 Hire in-house Council, Implement use of forms to reduce need for Legal review on standard actions. Awaiting CM action
$
97,654.00 Hire 2 people to conduct preventative maintenance which will lower maintenance cost to replace failed equipment - no time to work
Total Potential Impact
$ 318,334.50
In -Active Projects
Monitored
Impact Recommendation/ Action needed
Potential
Impact Statement
FD Engine Staffing
Office Equipment Contracts
0 Department hired position
Board Compliance
$ 35,430.00 Modify process to allow for collection of evidence in a more timely manner allow for impactful follow-ups to cases -more closures to cases
0 Worker changed departments
Electronic Discovery II
$
0 No time to work due to limited workforce
Bid Process
$
11,660.00 Standardize process to acquire bids, and track bids
Utilities Hiring Effectiveness
$
97,654.00 Hire 2 people to conduct preventative maintenance which will lower maintenance cost to replace failed equipment - no time to work
Motion to Revoke
0 Modify process to allow for fewer arrests and lower fees for housing inmates - no time to work
Right Size
$
400,000.00 Change manpower calculation method. Do not increase head count. Work with SPD to identify "K" factor that represents SPD. Hired staff
Total Potential Impact
$
509,314.00
Active - Implemented
Monitored
Impact Recommendation/ Action needed
Code Administration Process
$25,884.00 Streamline and standardize process for City Inspections
Office Equipment Contracts
$ 118,000.00 Received Okay to Implement. Implement in 2022 when contracts come due -reduce printing and copying fees -Implement in 1st quarter 2022
PD Report Follow-up Process
$ 35,430.00 Modify process to allow for collection of evidence in a more timely manner allow for impactful follow-ups to cases -more closures to cases
Total Monitored Impact
$ 179,314.00
Closed
Impact Recommendation/ Action needed
Land, Data, Mobile Phone Review
$
14,554.68 Review billing and Contracts
Credit Card Fees
$
149,805.57 Streamlined the number of different Credit Card processing providers and transferred the cost to the User
MC Housing Fee
$
100,000.00 Received Okay to Implement. Renegotiate contract - Review cost for housing inmates
No Units Available
$
11,511.83 The rate at which the SPD does not have units available needs to be reduced.
Museum Staffing
$
16,424.00 Hire hourly staff to do work, and allow for Salaried staff to do programming
Household Waste & E3 Position
0 Department hired position - Project stopped
Fees MC
100,000.00 Hire in-house council for MC in lieu of CML
Total Impact
1 $
392,296.08
Total Active and Closed $ 889,944.58
Open Discussion
Ll&ts rfALK
Pr�;��rir�� r`�r �, Cf�ar�ke�Clet,r,��;�
JJ li I rijt, I \i a--,, Sea r rt �Jvlj � �I'j f 1-t (,,�E) �Jv)
Jrl I ::j -ei
r
r�
Jr ba�CP-rrlerIt tf, I t ifivD Jes the tal'JrJ!�y J7 per.sDrja
PfDperty t J r rr�rr f'l Jr Jr �JrlrJrrlrrlJfl rI�JJ JrJr ��
Jr 11IDd1 �'cI Dr -SJ�frled S" D�tajninv ar]
:,-] drrJirlJJtr:,),rJve -Search warrarit J -is -CTIe be -St praC,tice,
Jf J 1 Vehicles Median Median Median
2010- 2010- 2016-
Towed 2019 2015 2019
J J J 2010 12 12.17
rir �� r1� 2011 8 12.17
J 2012 5 12.17
2013 16 12.17
2014 20 12.17
The Current2014
12 12.17
ref r j1:-jr j bacl,]JJ J7 2016 1 1
Jr1Jpera je vehjcJ—P,; 2017 1 1
Jr1 need J7r 2018 0 1 ferf)Dvaj 2019 2 1
is -
45
vehicles!
25
20
15
This rJ!.Jmber
r 10
5
r• I
1 f1 r17J 6y
Jr1� rrlJfi Jrl 1''Aar h 0
02
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Median Inops Towed 2010-
2015, 2016-2019
Inoperable Vehicles Towed
2010-2019
I r�J JI ]r�I � � Ina s
324
Vehicles!
J
�� J ! ��QJ�. � r�� �J .1 J� ;l II
J
�� J ! ��QJ�. � r�� �J .1 J� ;l II
Team Members ..� Function I Department I % of Time
Ynawn HOrrian
CEO
DS
10%
Gary Peterman
CEO
DS
10%
Allison Hamm
Admin
DS
5%
Christina Trocheck
IProsecutor�
MC
1-5%
Department Approval
Development Services
Development Services
Development Services
Municipal Court
Business Reduce the cost of each ASW by as much as $454, reduce cycle time, eliminate a
Analysis 45 vehicle backlog... Improved Customer Service!
Problem Statement
It took $458 to secure a warrant for
abatement of property maintenance code
violations. It should have cost $134.
Goals Statements
1. Reduce the cost of securing ASWs.
2. Reduce cycle time for ASWs.
3. Eliminate the inoperable vehicle backlog.
Process Information
1st Process Step Write affidavit for ASW
Last Step ASW received by CEO
affidavit, presentation to
In Scope: judge, warrant
Out of Scope: perennial violator fees
ft Business Case & Benefits �
During 2019, the cost of securing an administrative search warrant
was $458. The $134 per warrant target reveals a $324 cost impact
for missing this target. The Neighborhood Services Division should
be securing at least 12 warrants per year for abatements,
revealing the $3,888 per year cost impact of the current process.
The growing 45 abatement backlog creates opportunity for saving
S14.586 as it is eliminated.
Timeline
Planned Comoletion Date Actual
Implement 4/28/21
Report Data
Report Data
Finish
Departments Impacted
Development Services
Municipal Court
Police Department (Dispatch Only)
Search•
•
•Process
Information
/\
Affidavit is
E
form
prepared, No
sent to DS �
CEO reviews iews
affidavit. Is it
accurate?
printed,
signed,
Yes
notarized, and
CEO gets
O
Admin Staff
delivered to
warrant
DS Admin Staff
CEO ends
process
A
DS Admin DS Admin
CEO makes
DS Admin
DS Admin
d
Staff proofs, Staff sends
corrections,
Staff notifies
Staff notifies
IM
sendsto ASW
sends
CML that
CEO that
affidavitto
CML, et. al. affidavitto
CML
affidavit is
warrant is
(CML) CEO.
ready
ready
In
t
CML
CML
CML prepares
CML picks up
notifies
brings
C
ASW affidavit,
affidavit,
DS
warrant
M
sends it to DS
presentsto
Admin
to DS
L
Admin Staff.
Judge
Staff
Admin
and CEO
Staff and
CEO
C
0
U
Process Time
ctual 'me
DoesJudge issue
No warrant?
R
-,
T
��
X -Y Matrix
Customer Importance (1-5) 1 5
Key Process Outputs
External I Internal
4
Process Steps
Key Process Inputs
Q)
4
5
ao
c
7
8
9
Q)
v v
Total
CEO prepares info form
10
4
o
ru
Q
4
4
4
U
U
0
dm
+�
U
Negative Impact on
a
;
4
°
a
;
a
4
Key Process Outputs'
v
U
104
Admin sends info form to CM
U
v
v
Z)
Low 1 - 10 High
,
5
4
4
v
6
113
Of
CML prepares affidavit
Affidavit prepared
U
10
U
U
2
Process Steps
Key Process Inputs
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Rank
Total
CEO prepares info form
10
4
10
4
4
4
CEO sends info form to Admin
4
4
4
4
4
4
8
104
Admin sends info form to CM
4
5
4
5
4
4
6
113
CML prepares affidavit
Affidavit prepared
6
10
6
10
2
CML sends affidavit to Admin
4
6
4
6
4
4
Admin sends affidavit to CEO
4
4
4
4
4
4
8
104
CEO signs/notarizes affidavit
Affidavit signed/notarized
2
2
2
2
2
2
11
52
CEO sends signed afd to Admin
4
4
4
4
4
4
8
104
Admin notifies CML RE: signed afd
4
6
4
6
3
3
5
115
CML picks up afd, goes to Court
2
8
3
8
3
3
CML presents afd to Judge
Affidavit presented to Judge
2
8
2
8
2
2
7
106
Judge issues warrant
Judge issues warrant
2
2
2
2
2
2
11
52
Upper Specification Limit: 3 3 3 3 3 3
Target: 2 2 2 2 2 2
Lower Specification Limit: 1 1 1 1 1 1
VA NVA
Process
Infoform
CEO sends
Admin reads,
CML
CML sends
Step
prepared by
form to DS
forwardsform
prepares
affidavitto
CEO
Admin Staff
to CML
affidavit
Admin Staff
Cost ($)
$83.37
0.00
$6.95
0.00
$13.90
0.00
$156.00
0.00
$39.00 0.00
Time (Hrs)
3.00
0.00
0.25
0.25
0.50
11.45
1.00
0.00
0.25 1.00
Admin staff
CEO
Admin
notifies
CEO drops
affidavitwith(notarized)
CEO signs
reviews
sends
CML (for
a
a
a
ASW
affidavitto
pickup)
Admin staff
affidavit
affidavit
CEO
0.00
$6.95
0.00
$0.00
0.00
$6.95
0.00
$13.90
0.00
$6.95
6.45
0.25
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.50
4.00
0.25
CML picks
CML delivers
up affidavit,
presents
present
ASW to
Admin Staff
CEO picks
to Judge,
E*
notifies CEO
E*
up ASW
to court
f
Admin Staff
gets warrant
$39.00
0.00
$39.00
0.00
$39.00
0.00
$6.95
0.00
$0.00
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.25
0.00
0.25
4.00
0.00
cost ($)
Time (Hrs)
CEO
receives
ASW
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.00
CP emails CEO Judge issues
warrant
5.95 0.00 5.95 0.00
0.25 0.00 0.25 0.00
Search Warrant
Acquisition:
New
Process
CEO prepares and signs
*Affidavit has been approved by Court
C
affidavit* for ASW,has
E
notarized, emails it to
0
City Prosecutor (CP),
CEO ends I
CEO gets
CCing DS staff (3.75 hrs)
process
warrant
J
It
CP examines
CP presents
CP
CP emails
C
affidavitfor
affidavitto
notifies
warrant
P
completeness
districtcourt
CEO
to CEO
(.5 hrs)
judge (.25 hrs)
(.25 hrs)
C
0
DoesJud a issue
g
Process Time
U
No
warrant? (.25 hrs)
Yes
4
TR
Act le
��
1 of
1
Administrative Search Warrant Acquisition
1 of
1
Shawn Homan
Shawn Homan
•- 4/1/2021
•- -
2/7/2020
'•
••m, inn
CEO prepares
CEO completes
CEO spends
Typo, required field
Template for
CEO proofreads
Other DS staff
CEO,
Immediate,
affidavit for ASW
affidavit incorrectly
additional time
left blank, failure to
affidavit; LAMA
form
proofread;
Immediately,
part of prep
correcting
include pics, etc.
automation
automate
part of prep
CEO signs form,
Form is not signed
CEO has to wait a
Notary is unavailable
Multiple notaries
Email, stop by to
Know the
CEO,
Immediate
having it notarized
and notarized
day for notary
in building
check notary
notaries in the
Immediately
stamp
availability
City/County bldg
CEO emails form to
CP does not read
CEO has to wait a
CP is out of office,
Copy CP's staff on
Request READ
Request READ
CEO,
Immediate
City Prosecutor (CP)
email - sits inInbox
day or two for
email delivery issues
email
RECEIPTthrough
RECEIPTthrough
Immediately
warrant
email
email
CP approves form
CP does not
CEO spends
CEO's failure to proof
CP reviews before
CP checks CEO's
Other DS staff
CEO,
Immediate
approve, sends back
additional time
affidavit prior to
taking to court
work
proofread
Immediately,
to CEO for changes
correcting
sending
affidavit
part of prep
CP presents affidavit
CP is asked wait to
CP cannot present
Judge misses court,
Have everything
CP would advise
Wait on Court
Wait on Court
Wait on Court
for ASW to district
present request
for 2-4 days
COVID delay, etc.
ready for court
court judge
Judge grants ASW
Judge does not grant CEO, CP spend
Missed error,
Template for
Proofreads prior
Other DS staff
CEO,
Immediate
ASW due to
time correcting and
incomplete affidavit
affidavit, CP check
to email and
proofread
Immediately,
uncaught error
repeating
court
affidavit
part of prep
CP passes ASW to
CP does not send
CEO has fewer
ASW is sent to PD
CP - separate
PD and DS
CP has internal
CP,
Immediate
CEO
ASW immediately
hours to execute
with others acquired
folders for PD, DS warrants are
processes to
established
warrant
same day
warrant requests
different
mitigate
Number of ASWs requested:
Number of ASWs cancelled:
Number of ASWs received and executed:
Number of ASWs pending:
J-1 Ow Is
DS Dept Staffing Changes and Training:
J
New Process Refinement:
Anticipated additional savings: % hr/ASW $13.90/ASW
ASWs are received in person, not by email:
Anticipated additional cost: % hr/ASW $13.90/ASW
(1 inop)
Pott-j.ijtj-ki� Savings Ili DnL-J,
Backlog Elimination + Annual Savings = Total Savinp!�
Money: $20,436 + $5,448 = $25,8$4
■
■
`Jeri ��� ��� tfh � rJ�'
■
■
■
�1v I --., ,II r��J r r �� -r�ffJ
Potential Net Cost o r if 1 Jn A n A.S.,W
f..
Old Process Cost/ASW — Potential Savinits/ASW = New Process Cost/ASW
$458/ASW - $454/ASW = $4/Asw
$500
$400
$300
$200
$100
$0
■
■
* This process i, repeatable within Development Services and in other departments!
Qu op -o stl n n S?
na Municipal Court
Inmate Housing Project
Historical Housing Billing
Fixed Monthly Charge
2o16 2017 2018 2019 2020 (JAN - 2020 (MAR - 2021 2022
FEB) DEC)
Issues With Current Practices
Typically an amount is not decided on until we are into the budget year;
No data is collected to determine the City's usage of housing inmates;
Changes to the bonding practice years ago was not taken into consideration
when determining the fixed rate (i.e. book ins and outs with OR bonds,
higher usage of "Notice to Appears" versus arresting; and
It is unclear how the rate increase is determined annually.
-uture Ways of Billing
Flat Fee
By days housed
By hours housed
Billing Breakdown
Flat Fee
Currently used, but not able to identify what factors were used to establish current pricing.
Easiest method for the agency that would be billing.
Do not take into consideration the current book in and book out practice.
Hourly Fee
More accurate, but could be more time consuming as delays in processing can impact
charges.
Would take into consideration the current book in and book out practice on new charges.
Daily Fee
Charges are based on a daily fee, and will round to nearest day.
Would not take into consideration the current book in and book out practice on new
charges.
Data Collected
In 2020, a work group of employees from the City of Salina and Saline County was
formed. The group was tasked to find an agreeable method of collecting and
tracking data;
It was determined, that Saline County could input more information into the
housing software to determine the number of days and hours someone was
housed for;
The data was entered for inmates house from January 2019 to present;
The data does not separate inmates that are housed for both Saline County District
Court and Salina Municipal Court. Historically those are considered to be Saline
County expenses only.
The data for 2019 - 2021 was used to determine the number of hours and days of
housing.
The Saline County Sheriff's office provided a cost of $53 a day to house an inmate.
Da- :ollected
Days Housed for Municipal Court
12000
10000
8000
6000
4
5389
000
2000
2019
Hours Housed for Municipal Court
250000
200000
150000
100000 123417
50000
o
2019 2020
Daily Rate Comparision
$140.00 $124.69
$116.89
$120.00
$100.00
$80.00 $61.39
$53.00
$6o.00
$40.00
$20.00
2021(Q R) 2019 2020 2021
Annual
Payment
$800,000.00
$700,000.00
$600,000.00
$500,000.00
$400,000.00
$300,000.00
$200,000.00
$100,000.00
Inmate Housing
(2008- 2018 days not tracked/ Daily cost unavailable)
Maximus report Agreed Upon Annual Inflator I
*City
Inmate
Days
County Data 20,000
Provided 9/21
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
5,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2005 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2015 2019 2020 2021 *Includes
Same Day
Yearly Cost Daily Cost Days Housed Book In/
Book out
7
1200
1000
8 r . i
600
400
200
0
2016
NTA ISSUED
2017 2018 2019
.ii+iii*a■
4 a a 7*+ T a 7 i 7 i a*+ T+ r. 4* i*+*. r T+
2020 2021 STD 2021 P
700,000.00
550,000.00
)00,000.00
550,000.00
;00,000.00
+50,000.00
+00,000.00
350,000.00
300,000.00
250,000.00
Z00,000.00
150,000.00
100,000.00
$50,000.00
Data Collected
Billing based on Days and Fixed Rate
Days
Hours
Fix Rate Charge
2019 $556394.00
$521,565.00
$644,524.56
2020 $303,637.00
$271,517.40
$669,635.26
2021 $285,617.00
$250,421.6o
$671,938.68
1000
800
600
400
zoo
0
Data Collected
Book Ins & Outs
Number of Book Ins Greater than 4 hours = Number of Book Ins & Outs -Percentage of Book Ins & Outs
1000 M
2019
607
2020
687
- 562
2021
100%
90%
8o%
70%
6o%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Potential Sav;ngs
$53.00/day or $2.2o/hr
Quoted rate provided by Saline County Sheriff's Office in 2021
Savings for 2019 based on actual numbers
Hourly - $122,960
Daily - $88,131
Savings for 2020 based on actual numbers
Hourly - $398,118
Daily - $365,998
Savings for 2021 based on actual numbers
Hourly - $421,517
Daily - $386,322
Noted Changes in Process
The
data observed
takes into
consideration
changes that the Municipal Court
has
made
over the
years that
has impacted
the
use inmate
housing.
Utilization of a collection agency for fines that are delinquent;
Reduced number of warrants issued;
Standardization of bonding practices and written "Notice to Appears"; and
Review of old cases on whether defendants should be brought back for prosecution
when picked up or when warrants are to be purged after five years.
Recommendation based on Data
Renegotiate the current billing agreement to be charged by the day and not a flat
fee or utilize data collected to determine the future amount to be paid (to be done
prior to the budget process annually);
Establish the parameter of rounding to the closest day during booking out process;
Review database used as dates listed on report do not match that of the data;
Review current court process to reduce the number of inmates that are housed in
the future (i.e. implement walk in process for probation violators, utilize collection
services more aggressively, add services for GPS monitoring in house.