Manage Facilities Planning Process Improvements. Work System Owner Ed Curry. Work System Enabling Leader Dane Theodore, Director

Transcription

1 Macro Process: MANAGE FACILITIES PLANNING Process Owner: M. Gaffney Manage Facilities Planning Process Improvements Work System Owner Ed Curry Work System Enabling Leader Dane Theodore, Director Priority Processes Owner Mike Gaffney, Planning Mgr. May 22, 2009 Revision R E C I PI E T N GOVERNOR S STERLING AWARD

2 Macro Process: MANAGE FACILITIES PLANNING Process Owner: M. Gaffney REVISION LOG PAGE / SECTION # REVISION DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION 10 5/22/09 Macro PCS Baseline Update 11 5/22/09 FISH PCS Baseline Update

3 Macro Process: MANAGE FACILITIES PLANNING Process Owner: M. Gaffney Table of Contents 1. Cover Sheet 2. Table of Contents 3. Internal and External Customers 4. Macro Flow Chart 5. Key Work Process 1 Flow Chart 6. DMAIC Lite Storyboard - Check Points Priority Process Selection Matrix Form 8. Key-In-Process Measures Determination System Form 9. BPS Process Management System 10. Macro Process Control Form 11. Key Work Process 1 Process Control Form 12. Countermeasure Matrix 13. Countermeasure Action Plan Matrix 14. Action Plan Root Causes Document Tree 16. Key Work Process Indicator Data

4 Macro Process: MANAGE FACILITIES PLANNING Process Owner: M. Gaffney PLANNING INTERNAL CUSTOMERS School Board Superintendent Area Superintendents District Administration School Administration PLANNING EXTERNAL CUSTOMERS State of Florida Florida Department of Education Local Government Agencies Parents / Guardians Students Taxpayers

5 Macro Process: MANAGE FACILITIES PLANNING Process Owner: D. THEODORE STEP WHO BPS SCHOOL BOARD STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT BPS FACILITIES PLANNING BPS DEPARTMENTS & SCHOOLS NEED QUESTION QUESTION MAINTAIN & CERTIFY DEVELOP, PUBLISH & OBTAIN DEVELOP & PUBLISH NEED FACILITY PLANNING To ensure adequate and appropriate educational facilities to accommodate projected student membership and program offerings DELIVERABLES: D1. FISH Certification D2. Growth Management Projections D3. 5-Year Facility Plan D4. School Concurrency Application D5. Educational Plant Survey D6. Student Accommodation Plan D7. Boundary Change Recommendations KWP2 STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS? KWP1 BA YES P1 - Data Accuracy? NO MAINTAIN & CERTIFY BPS FISH DATA DEVELOP & PUBLISH GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROJECTIONS P2 - Growth Management Projections Schedule Milestones YES D1 D2? KWP6 INVOLVES STATE & LOCAL GOV T? NO MAINTAIN OTHER PLANNING DATA OBTAIN DISTRICT / FINANCE STUDENT PROJECTIONS BA D6 DEVELOP & PUBLISH STUDENT ACCOMMODATION PLAN BA D3 P6 - Student Accommodation Plan Schedule Milestones DEVELOP & PUBLISH KWP3 DEVELOP & PUBLISH 5-YEAR FACILITY PLAN P3-5-Year Facility Plan Schedule Milestones BA D7 BOUNDARY CHANGES KWP7 DEVELOP & PUBLISH BOUNDARY CHANGES PERFORM KWP4 PERFORM SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ACTIVITIES P4 - # School Concurrency Applications P5- Application Review Cycle Time D4 P7 - Boundary Changes Schedule Milestones BA D5 DEVELOP & PUBLISH MANAGE KWP8 KWP5 P8 - Educational Plant Survey Schedule Milestones MANAGE IMPACT FEE ACTIVITIES DEVELOP & PUBLISH EDUCATIONAL PLANT SURVEY P9 - Impact Fee Activity Schedule Milestone MANAGED NEED IS MET Legend: BA - Board Approval Required for Submittals FISH - Florida Inventory of School Houses SAP - School Accommodation Plan SCA - School Concurrency Activities EPS - Educational Plant Survey Q1 - FISH Data Accuracy Q2 - State and Local Submittals On Time Q3 - BPS Submittals On Time Q4 - Facility Design Capacity Utilization (%) FACILITIES SERVICES / Robert J. Wiebel & Mike Gaffney 12/9/08

6 Key Work Process (1): MANAGE ANNUAL FISH DATA BASE CERTIFICATION Process Owner: D. THEODORE STEP WHO BPS SCHOOL BOARD STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT BPS FACILITIES PLANNING BPS DEPARTMENTS & SCHOOLS NEED NEED TO MANAGE ANNUAL FISH DATA BASE CERTIFICATION RECEIVE RECEIVE FISH UPDATE DOCUMENTATION QUESTION DOES IT INVOLVE NEW CONSTRUCTION?? NO QUESTION OBTAIN IS A FORM 208 REQUIRED? YES YES? NO OBTAIN FORM 208 (FROM PM/ARCHITECT) VERIFY DELIVERABLE: FIELD VERIFY QUESTION D1. FISH DATA ACCURACY CERTIFICATION IS FORM 208 ACCURATE?? NO YES QUESTION IS UPDATE DOCUMENTATION VALID? YES? NO VALIDATE DATA UPDATE UPDATE FISH DATABASE DEVELOP IS IT TIME TO DO ANNUAL DATA BASE CERTIFICATION? YES? NO DEVELOP BOARD ITEM PERFORM PERFORM BOARD APPROVAL QUESTION IS IT TIME FOR THE STATE VALIDATION OF FISH DATA BASE? YES? NO PERFORM WP1 PERFORM STATE FISH DATA BASE VALIDATION QUESTION DOES THE FISH DATA BASE NEED TO BE UPDATED? YES? NO UPDATE UPDATE FISH DATA BASE MANAGED NEED IS MET MACRO Q1 - FISH DATA ACCURACY Abbreviations: FISH = Facility Inventory of School Houses FACILITIES SERVICES / Robert J. Wiebel & Mike Gaffney 12/16/08

7 ATTACHMENT A INSTRUCTIONS: Please return your completed DMAIC Storyboard, along with your Process Control System (both flow chart and indicator information) and your completed Action Plan (see Improve checkpoint #10), via to rseemer@etsfl.com and copy Steve Muzzy on all s. Thank you, Bob Seemer, President & COO, Electronic Training Solutions, Inc. Priority Process Name: Manage Facilities Planning Work System / Leader: Dane Theodore DEFINE Macro DMAIC Lite Storyboard Facilities Planning 1. Describe how the linkage between the process Q measures and the District s KPIs (or strategic objective measures) was established and confirmed. In order to meet strategic objectives associated with the District s goal of Safe and Healthy Learning and Work Environment, certain legislative and District imposed mandates or targets must remain in focus. Planning for facilities requires that the District adhere to a multitude of statutes and comply with Florida Department of Education (DOE) requirements. Additionally, coordination and agreement with Local Governments, in some cases dictated by legislation, is critical to insuring adequate and appropriate facilities are available. With these objectives in mind, processes have been mapped, and key measures established with which to gauge performance: Q1 State and Local Government Submittals on time Q2 Brevard Public Schools Submittals on time Q3 Facility Design Capacity Utilization 2. Explain which process Q measure(s) will be improved. In order to identify the Q measure that should be focused on for improvement efforts, a Facilities Planning Priority Process Selection Matrix and a Key In-Process Measures Determination Form were created (see Pages 7 and 8). The Selection Matrix, and the fact that Brevard Public School (BPS) FISH* Data Accuracy is a measure within each Q1, Q2 and Q3, indicate that the process associated with Maintaining and Certifying BPS FISH Data should be looked at for improvement. * FISH Florida Inventory of School Houses 3. Develop a theme statement which will focus your process improvement efforts. The theme statement must be consistent with the measure in checkpoint #2, above. Develop procedure(s) for maintaining FISH Data to minimum 95% accuracy. Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 1

8 ATTACHMENT A MEASURE DMAIC Lite Storyboard Facilities Planning 4. List up to five (5) potential problem areas in this process and the associated P measure(s) for each. Delta between field survey data and FISH data greater than 5% (a) P1 Data Accuracy Changes to actual spaces (physical or usage) by parties outside of Planning staff (a) P1 Data Accuracy Methodology utilized to measure spaces (a) P1 Data Accuracy Timeliness of new or revised data for input to FISH (a) P1 Data Accuracy Revisions to FISH Standards by the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) (a) P1 Data Accuracy 5. Select the most significant problem or opportunity and develop a problem statement which answers the questions: What? When? Gap between actual and targeted values? (Hint: You may want to refer to the six sigma DMAIC course material, checkpoint #9 of the Measure step, as you develop your problem statement.) Problem: Delta between field survey data and FISH data greater than 5% Problem Statement: (1)(b)1 Florida Statutes requires the Net Square Footage and the Student Stations reported in FISH to be ninety-five (95) percent accurate. However, during validation efforts in 2006 and 2007, Florida Department of Education (FDOE) surveys pointed out a significant number of spaces where the square footage data contained in FISH differed from data they obtained through field surveys by more than 5%. Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 2

9 ATTACHMENT A ANALYZE DMAIC Lite Storyboard Facilities Planning 6. List up to five (5) potential causes of the selected problem from checkpoint #5 in the Measure step. Existing spaces not included/incorrectly entered in FISH Changes to actual spaces (physical or usage) by parties outside of Planning staff Methodology used to measure spaces Multiple FISH users entering data Sampling size (set of classrooms vs. entire campus) 7. List the root causes and describe the approach used to select them from among the others. Root Causes Approach Used To Select Root Cause A. Information regarding change not Cause and Effect Analysis communicated to Planning B. Data Gatherers not familiar with FISH Cause and Effect Analysis User s Manual Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 3

10 ATTACHMENT A IMPROVE DMAIC Lite Storyboard Facilities Planning 8. List the countermeasure(s) you considered for implementation for each selected root cause from the Analyze step. A. Information regarding change not communicated to Planning o No construction permit issued without transmittal of renovation to Planning o Maintenance to issue schedule of work to Planning B. Data Gatherers not familiar with FISH User s Manual o Establish procedure (including Sampling Plan) and train specific team members 9. Determine the effectiveness x feasibility score for each countermeasure, and note the highest scores. All 3 countermeasures listed in 8 above scored 20 or 25 (see attached Countermeasures Matrix) (Hint: Refer to six sigma DMAIC course, checkpoint #18 of the Improve step.) 10. Develop an action plan for each countermeasure to be implemented which shows the following: What (description of countermeasure) o See attached Action Plans. Note that no Action Plan was assembled for the countermeasure regarding Maintenance to issue schedule of work to Planning, as this only requires a weekly (or monthly) . When (projected start and end dates) o See attached Action Plans Who (accountable person) o See attached Action Plans Which organizations need to support you o See attached Action Plans Estimated cost to implement o Estimating that the FISH Sampling Plan will require approximately labor hours annually, this process could cost, at an average weighted labor rate of $40 per hour, roughly $12 to $16K per year. (Remember: your action plan(s) with this completed DMAIC Lite Storyboard, per instructions on page 1.) Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 4

11 ATTACHMENT A CONTROL DMAIC Lite Storyboard Facilities Planning 11. Briefly explain how you will know the root causes were reduced or eliminated. As the DOE forms (Form 208, 208A, etc.) and drawings begin to come into Planning regarding Maintenance Department projects, the spaces affected will be accounted for in FISH. It will be clear as to whether or not Planning is receiving a copy of the regularly updated Maintenance Project schedule. As the Sampling Plan is implemented, validation efforts should reflect diminishing corrections to the FISH data base as time goes on. 12. Briefly explain how you will know the problem was reduced. As noted in number 11 above, as the Sampling Plan is implemented, the corrections to the FISH database should diminish. 13. Briefly explain how you will know the theme measure was improved. By continuing the Sampling Plan effort year to year, the field measures/surveys will match the FISH data that is currently in the database. 14. Explain how you will prevent this problem from recurring. By continuing the Sampling Plan effort year to year, the field measures/surveys will match the FISH data that is currently in the database. 15. Identify which other BPS locations should consider implementing your countermeasures. As the Planning Department is the keeper of the District s FISH data, these countermeasures do not apply to other Departments. 16. Identify what other BPS locations could learn from this project. Refer to number 15 above. 17. List the remaining problem areas in this process. There are occasional Parent-Teacher Organization (PTO) projects that may be implemented without adhering to the process currently in place to capture these renovations/additions that affect FISH. Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 5

12 ATTACHMENT A DMAIC Lite Storyboard Facilities Planning CONTROL 18. List the key lessons learned from this process improvement. Key lessons learned will be visited after the first exercise of the sampling plan is implemented. Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 6

13 ATTACHMENT A FACILITIES PLANNING PRIORITY PROCESS SELECTION MATRIX FORM Selection Factor Key Work Processes Importance x Gap = Point Score 1. Maintain and Certify BPS FISH Data Priority Rank Maintain Other Planning Data Develop and Publish Growth Management Projections 4. Develop and Publish Student Accommodation Plan 5. Develop and Publish 5-Year Facility Work Plan 6. Develop and Publish Boundary Changes 7. Perform School Concurrency Activities 8. Develop and Publish Educational Plant Survey Manage Impact Fee Activities SCALE: 5 = Extreme 4 = High 3 = Moderate 2 = Low 1 = None Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 7

14 ATTACHMENT A FACILITIES PLANNING KEY IN-PROCESS MEASURES DETERMINATION FORM Outcome Measures In-Process Measures 1. BPS FISH Data Accuracy 2. Growth Management Projections Schedule Milestones Q1 - State and Local Submittals On Time 3. 5-Year Facility Work Plan Schedule Milestones 4. Concurrency Application Review Cycle Time 5. Educational Plant Survey Schedule Milestones 6. Impact Fee Activities Schedule Milestones 1. BPS FISH Data Accuracy 2. Growth Management Projections Schedule Milestones Q2 - BPS Submittals On Time 3. Student Accommodation Plan Schedule Milestones 4. 5-Year Facility Work Plan Schedule Milestones 5. Educational Plant Survey Schedule Milestones 1. BPS FISH Data Accuracy Q3 Facility Design Capacity Utilization (%) 2. Growth Management Projections Schedule Milestones 3. 5-Year Facility Plan Schedule Milestones 4. Boundary Changes Schedule Milestones Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 8

15 Process Name: Manage Facilities Planning Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, DCA, FDOE, Local Governments, students, parents, and the community Process Purpose: To ensure adequate and appropriate educational facilities to accommodate projected student membership and program offerings P1 P2 P3 Process and Quality Indicators Process Control Indicators Limits And Quality Specs/ Indicators Targets Brevard Public Schools (BPS) Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) Data Accuracy Growth Management Projections Schedule Milestones 5-Year District Facilities Work Program Schedule Milestones Target: > 95% Baseline: 72% Target: 100% of activities completed by scheduled milestone date Baseline: 50% Target: 100% of activities completed by scheduled milestone date Baseline: 100% Macro Process Control System Update 5/21/09 Process Owner: Dane Theodore Critical Customer Requirements: Current Sigma Level: TBD Outcome Indicators: Q1 Q4 Checking / Indicator Monitoring Timeframe Data to Collect (Frequency) What is Checking Item When to or Indicator Calculation Collect Data? Statistically significant sample of current Florida Department of Education (FDOE) FISH data for BPS Growth/Certificate of Occupancy (CO) Data from Local Govts (LGs): 1st week June thru mid- July Six-Day and October FTE Counts: 3 rd week- Aug. & Mid-Oct. Projection calculations: 2 nd week Nov. Five-Year Capacity Utilization Table: Nov. 30 Obtain Growth Mgt Projections: Mid-Nov. Obtain COFTE Projections: 1 st week July (of following calendar year) Obtain Preliminary FY Budget: Mid-July EPS Spot Survey (if necessary): July 31 Assemble and Distribute Draft: August 1 Obtain Local Govt Comments: Sept. 1 Submit Board Information Agenda: Early Sept. Obtain August 6-Day Count: 1 st Week Sept. Obtain Final FY Budget: 1 st Week Sept. Generate Final Draft: 2 nd Week Sept. Submit for Board Consent Agenda/Approval: Final Sept. mtg. Submit to FDOE: October 1 Annually (by 3/31) Annually (6/1 11/30) Annually (Mid-Nov, then 7/1 thru 9/1) Responsibility Who will Check? M. Gaffney M. Gaffney M. Gaffney Contingency Plans / Miscellaneous Actions Required for Exceptions Procedure References Perform additional sampling or validation of entire data set if warranted. Reference: SREF 6.1(7)(c) Failure to meet established mid-july milestone due to lack of relevant input from Local Governments will necessitate use of prior year s Growth/CO data. Reference: Interlocal Agreement 3.1 Failure to meet milestone(s) warrants staff overtime as necessary to meet final milestone of October 1. Reference: F.S /14/2009 FINAL Page 1 of 5

16 Process Name: Manage Facilities Planning Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, DCA, FDOE, Local Governments, students, parents, and the community Process Purpose: To ensure adequate and appropriate educational facilities to accommodate projected student membership and program offerings P4 P5 P6 Process and Quality Indicators Process Control Indicators Limits And Quality Specs/ Indicators Targets # School Concurrency Applications School Concurrency Application Review Cycle Time Student Accommodation Plan (SAP) Schedule Milestones Target: None Baseline: Avg. # of Application Received Target: 100% of reviews 10 working days from receipt of application to written response Baseline: 100% Target: 100% of activities completed by scheduled milestone date Baseline: 63% Macro Process Control System Update 5/21/09 Process Owner: Dane Theodore Critical Customer Requirements: Current Sigma Level: TBD Outcome Indicators: Q1 Q4 Checking / Indicator Monitoring Timeframe Data to Collect (Frequency) What is Checking Item When to or Indicator Calculation Collect Data? Average Number of Applications Received in SY 08/09. This number varies year to year. # Working Days for each Review Total # Working Days for All Reviews divided by Total # of Reviews = Average Days per Review Request Area Supt. Input: Jan. 2 Obtain Area Superintendent Input: Feb. 1 Generate Draft SAP: 2nd Week Feb. Obtain Comments: 4th Week Feb. Generate Final Draft SAP: 1st Week March Obtain Area Supt. Approval: 2nd Week March Submit for Board Info. Agenda: Early April Submit for Board Consent Agenda: Mid-April Annually (6/30) Monthly Biweekly (1/2 4/30) Responsibility Who will Check? M. Gaffney M. Gaffney J. Stannard Contingency Plans / Miscellaneous Actions Required for Exceptions Procedure References This is a level of effort measurement. Failure to review applications and respond in an average <10 working days requires reprioritization of nonstatutory tasks. Reference: Interlocal Agreement 13.2(d) & 13.3(a) Failure to meet milestone(s) warrants staff overtime as necessary to meet milestone date for Board approval in mid-april. 5/14/2009 FINAL Page 2 of 5

17 Process Name: Manage Facilities Planning Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, DCA, FDOE, Local Governments, students, parents, and the community Process Purpose: To ensure adequate and appropriate educational facilities to accommodate projected student membership and program offerings P7 P8 P9 Process and Quality Indicators Process Control Indicators Limits And Quality Specs/ Indicators Targets Boundary / Concurrency Service Area (CSA) Changes Schedule Milestones Educational Plant Survey (EPS) Schedule Milestones Impact Fee Activity Schedule Milestones Target: 100% of activities completed by scheduled milestone date Baseline: 89% Target: 100% of activities completed by scheduled milestone date Baseline: 100% Target: 100% of activities completed by scheduled milestone date Baseline: 100% Macro Process Control System Update 5/21/09 Process Owner: Dane Theodore Critical Customer Requirements: Current Sigma Level: TBD Outcome Indicators: Q1 Q4 Checking / Indicator Monitoring Timeframe Data to Collect (Frequency) What is Checking Item When to or Indicator Calculation Collect Data? Obtain Six-Day Student Membership: Mid-Aug. Develop New (Proposed) Scenarios: End Sept. Obtain Recommendations from Evaluation Committee: Mid-October (New) Update Scenarios (if Required): Mid-Nov. Submit for Board Info Agenda: Mid-November Board Work Shop: Fall (Nov-Dec) Submit Proposed Changes to Local Governments / Capital Outlay Committee (COC): 45 days prior to adoption Submit for Board Consent for Public Hearing Agenda: December Submit for Public Hearing / Board Approval: January Validate approved projects are appropriate for upcoming 5-Year District Facilities Work Program Submit EPS to FDOE: Prior to June 30 of 5 th FY Obtain collections from Brevard County: April 1 and October 1 Hold Advisory Committee Meetings: May 31 and November 30 Submit for Board approval: June and Dec. mtgs. Monthly (Mid-Aug thru 1/31) Annually (5/1 7/31) Monthly (4/1 6/30 ) (10/1 12/31) Responsibility Who will Check? M. Gaffney Contingency Plans / Miscellaneous Actions Required for Exceptions Procedure References Failure to meet milestone(s) warrants staff overtime to meet Board agenda milestones. Failure to meet milestone(s) could also result from postponement of School Board workshops/meetings or request(s) for additional information/work shops. Reference: Interlocal Agreement 12.2(d)2 Failure to meet milestone(s) warrants staff overtime as necessary to meet milestone date for submittal to FDOE. Reference: F.S Reference: Brevard County Educational Impact Fee Ordinance Chapter 62, Article V, Division 7. Florida Inventory of Refer to contingency plans and School Houses Target: > 95% Q1 Statistical Sampling of FISH data Monthly miscellaneous information above (FISH) Data Baseline: 72% related to individual submittals. Accuracy 5/14/2009 FINAL Page 3 of 5

18 Process Name: Manage Facilities Planning Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, DCA, FDOE, Local Governments, students, parents, and the community Process Purpose: To ensure adequate and appropriate educational facilities to accommodate projected student membership and program offerings Q2 Q3 Process and Quality Indicators Process Control Indicators Limits And Quality Specs/ Indicators Targets State and Local Submittals On Time BPS Submittals On Time Target: 100% Baseline: 90% Target: 100% Baseline: 92% Macro Process Control System Update 5/21/09 Process Owner: Dane Theodore Critical Customer Requirements: Current Sigma Level: TBD Outcome Indicators: Q1 Q4 Checking / Indicator Monitoring Timeframe Data to Collect (Frequency) What is Checking Item When to or Indicator Calculation Collect Data? Certification of FISH Data(FDOE): April 1 School Board Approved EPS (FDOE): Prior to June 30 of 5 th FY Draft 5-Year Work Program (Local Governments / Capital Outlay Committee): August 1 School Board Approved 5-Year District Facilities Work Program (FDOE): Oct. 1 5-Year Capacity Utilization (Local Governments): Nov. 30 Proposed Boundary/CSA Changes (Local Governments/Capital Outlay Committee): 45 days prior to School Board adoption Concurrency Reviews (Local Govts): <10 days Recommended Boundary/CSA Changes Information Agenda (School Board): Mid-Nov. Recommended Boundary/CSA Changes Public Hearing Advertisement (School Board): December Recommended Boundary/CSA Changes Public Hearing/Approval(School Board): January Recommended SAP (School Board): Mid-April Recommended EPS (School Board): June Impact Fee Recommendations (School Board): June and December Recommended 5-Year District Facilities Work Program (School Board): Mid-September Monthly Monthly Responsibility Who will Check? Contingency Plans / Miscellaneous Actions Required for Exceptions Procedure References Refer to contingency plans and miscellaneous information above related to individual submittals. Refer to contingency plans and miscellaneous information above related to individual submittals. 5/14/2009 FINAL Page 4 of 5

19 Process Name: Manage Facilities Planning Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, DCA, FDOE, Local Governments, students, parents, and the community Process Purpose: To ensure adequate and appropriate educational facilities to accommodate projected student membership and program offerings Q4 Process and Quality Indicators Process Control Indicators Limits And Quality Specs/ Indicators Targets Facility Design Capacity Utilization (%) Target: 100% of Schools utilized 100% of Factored Permanent FISH Capacity Baseline: 74% (FY08) Macro Process Control System Update 5/21/09 Process Owner: Dane Theodore Critical Customer Requirements: Current Sigma Level: TBD Outcome Indicators: Q1 Q4 Checking / Indicator Monitoring Timeframe Data to Collect (Frequency) What is Checking Item When to or Indicator Calculation Collect Data? Mid-October Student Count divided by Factored Permanent FISH Capacity (for every school): November 5-Year Capacity Utilization (Local Governments): November 30 Annually (11/30) Responsibility Who will Check? J. Stannard Contingency Plans / Miscellaneous Actions Required for Exceptions Procedure References Adjust projection assumptions and methodologies for the following fiscal year. Approved: Date: Rev #: Rev Date: 5/14/2009 FINAL Page 5 of 5

20 Facilities Planning KWP1 Maintain and Certify BPS FISH Data - Process Control System Update 5/22/09 Process Name: Facilities Planning Manage Annual FISH Database Certification Process Customers: BPS School Board, representing staff, DCA, FDOE, Local Governments, students, parents, and the community Process Purpose: To ensure accuracy of data in the Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) P1.1 Process and Quality Indicators Process Indicators And Quality Indicators Maintain / Certify FISH Data Accuracy Q1 FISH Data Accuracy Control Limits Specs/ Targets Target : > 95% Baseline: 72% Target : > 95% Baseline: 72% Process Owner: Dane Theodore Critical Customer Requirements: Current Sigma Level: TBD Outcome Indicators: Q1 FISH Data Accuracy Checking / Indicator Monitoring Timeframe Data to Collect (Frequency) What is Checking Item When to or Indicator Calculation Collect Data? Statistical sampling of existing FISH data Annually (by Jan.30) Responsibility Who will Check? M. Gaffney Statistical sampling of existing FISH data Annually Contingency Plans / Miscellaneous Actions Required for Exceptions Procedure References Should statistical sampling warrant, perform validation of entire data set for that particular facility. Approved: Date: Rev #: Rev Date: 12/16/08 Page 1 of 1

21 ATTACHMENT A Countermeasures Matrix Facilities Planning COUNTER- MEASURES PRACTICAL Action METHODS Effectiveness X Feasibility = Overall ROOT CAUSES Information regarding change not communicated to Planning Issue no permits for construction w/o transmittal to Planning Maintenance to issue schedule of work to Planning Building Dept checklist Obtain copy of update provided at Maintenance Project status meetings Yes Yes PROBLEM Delta between field survey data and FISH data greater than 5% Data Gatherers not familiar with FISH User s Manual Establish procedure & train team members Develop sampling procedure Yes SCALE: 1 = Negligible 2 = Somewhat 3 = Moderate 4 = Very 5 = Extreme Facilities Planning DMAIC Lite 7/30/08 Page 9

22 Action Plan #1 - Facilities Planning Root Cause: Data gatherers not familiar with FISH User's Manual Countermeasure: Establish procedure(s) and train team members Date: 25-Jul-08 Owners: Robert Wiebel (RW) Mike Gaffney (MG) Rick Bellanger (RB) Practical Method: Develop sampling plan No. Task Accountable Person Week Comments 1 Establish Verification & Validation process (Statistical Analysis) RW, MG, RB 2 Determine/quantify team members, sampling periods and sampling sizes RW, MG, RB 3 Implement sampling efforts Team On going 4 Monitor discrepancies between field sampling and FISH data base RB On going

23 Action Plan #2 - Facilities Planning Root Cause: Information regarding change not communicated to Planning Countermeasure: Issue no construction permit without notice of renovation to Planning Date: 25-Jul-08 Owners: Mike Gaffney (MG) Rick Bellanger (RB) Practical Method: Building Department Checklist No. Task Accountable Person Week Comments 1 Discuss issue with Bldg. Dept. and Maintenance MG, RB, Bldg. Dept & Maintenance Dept. 2 Develop Process to include DOE forms, drawings, etc. (similar to Project Mgt Dept.) MG, RB, Bldg. Dept. & Maintenance Dept. 3 Coordinate with Maintenance Construction Mgrs. on regular basis Bldg. Dept. & Maintenance Dept. On-Going

24 Macro MANAGE FACILITIES Process: PLANNING M. Gaffney Process Owner: Document Title: Process Improvement Document Tree MANAGE FACILITIES PLANNING MACRO FLOW CHART KWP1 MAINTAIN & CERTIFY FISH ACCURACY FLOW CHART KWP6 DEVELOP & PUBLISH STUDENT ACCOMMODATION PLAN FLOW CHART KWP7 DEVELOP & PUBLISH SCHOOL BOUNDARY CHANGES FLOW CHART Key Work Processes 1-8 MACRO PCS MACRO DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD MACRO DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD MACRO PRIORITY PROCESS SELECTION MATRIX FORM KWP6 DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD Note 1 KWP6 PRIORITY PROCESS SELECTION MATRIX FORM KWP7 DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD Note 1 KWP7 PRIORITY PROCESS SELECTION MATRIX FORM MACRO PRIORITY PROCESS SELECTION MATRIX FORM KWP1 ACTION PLAN(s) KWP6 ACTION PLAN(s) KWP7 ACTION PLAN(s) MACRO KEY IN-PROCESS MEASURES DETERMINATION SYSTEMS FORM KWP1 COUNTERMEASURE MATRIX KWP6 COUNTERMEASURE MATRIX KWP7 COUNTERMEASURE MATRIX KWP1 INDICATOR DATA KWP6 INDICATOR DATA KWP7 INDICATOR DATA 1st DMAIC Lite Storyboard 2nd DMAIC Lite Storyboard 3rd DMAIC Lite Storyboard Note 1: May be required if flow chart has internal work process in addition to individual steps.