|
|
|
Contractor |
DOE Office |
|
Contract No.:
DE-AC03-76SF00515 |
LCMD Name: Rosemary Gourley |
|
Point of Contact: Leslie Normandin |
Telephone No.: (510) 637-1632 |
|
Telephone No.: (650) 926-4350 |
CO Name: Tyndal
Lindler |
E-mail: leslie@slac.stanford.edu |
Telephone No.: (650) 926-4963(SLAC) |
|
|
(510) 637-1885 (OAK) |
Date of last assessment:
October 1999
The Property Control functional
area received an overall rating of excellent in the FY 1999 Annual Appraisal.
Gradients have been established and agreed upon for the measurement of inventory
performance. Our self-assessment team identified areas of opportunity for
enhanced performance and will address those areas in the following report.
Laboratory Mission
The Stanford Linear Accelerator Center (SLAC) is dedicated to experimental and theoretical research in elementary particle physics and in those fields that make use of its synchrotron radiation facilities, including biology, chemistry, geology, material science and electrical engineering. This includes the development of new techniques in 1) particle acceleration and detection and 2) synchrotron radiation sources and associated instrumentation. The center is operated as a national user facility for the Department of Energy by Stanford University.
Organizational Mission
The Property Control and Warehouse Services Group within the Business Services Division is responsible for control of government property in SLAC’s possession. This includes marking incoming property, inventory of equipment and sensitive property, record initiation for property items, and operation of the salvage and warehouse function with responsibility for property disposal. Site security and Transportation is not included in this function. DOE/Oakland approved the SLAC personal Property Management System on May 23, 2000>
Names, titles, affiliations of participants
Leslie Normandin, Property Control Manager
Douglas P. Kreitz, Assistant Director Business Services Division
Burl Skaggs, Site Engineering & Maintenance – Transportation Group
Performance Objective/Measure: #1 Accountability of Personal Property.
SLAC will achieve cost effective accountability for
government property.
Performance Criteria 1.1: Equipment Inventory. The Laboratory shall conduct successful equipment inventories as established in its Inventory Plan. Property accountability records shall be reconciled within 90 days after conclusion of the inventory.
Performance Measure 1.1.a: Equipment Inventory Results. Percentage of equipment accounted for, by acquisition value, in the most recent equipment property inventory conducted will be measured.
Process used to meet
objective/measure: The Laboratory submitted its inventory plan for this
fiscal year based on a wall-to-wall inventory, with DOE concurrence.
Findings: The inventory
began in October 1999. There were 3,607 items in this category with an
acquisition cost of $559,208,401.30. The reconciliation period was
during the months of July, August and September. At the close of the
inventory cycle the inventory team continued to conduct searches for those items
not inventoried. In addition, a memo and computer generated custodian
listing was sent to those individuals with property that was still unaccounted
for, and a copy of this list was sent to their group leader.
The inventory team was able to find all but 50 items. These items have a
total acquisition cost of $651,996.87. The percentage of equipment
accounted for is 99.88% giving SLAC a rating of ‘Outstanding’.
|
|
Performance Objective/Measure: #1 Accountability of Personal Property. <
SLAC will achieve cost effective accountability for government property.
Performance Criteria 1.2: Sensitive Property Inventory. The Laboratory shall conduct successful sensitive property inventories as established in its Inventory Plan. Property accountability records shall be reconciled within 90 days after conclusion of the inventory.
Performance Measure 1.2.a: Sensitive Inventory Results. Percentage of sensitive property accounted for, by acquisition value, in the most recent sensitive property inventory conducted will be measured.
Process used to meet objective/measure: The Laboratory submitted its inventory plan for this fiscal year based on a wall-to-wall inventory, with DOE concurrence.
Findings:
The sensitive category had a total of 4,595 property items with an acquisition
cost of $ 7,344,984.43 at the start of the inventory. The inventory began
in October 1999. The reconciliation period was during the months of July,
August and September. At the close of the inventory cycle, the inventory
team continued to conduct searches for those items not inventoried. In addition
a memo and computer generated custodian listing was sent to those individuals
with property that was still unaccounted for, and a copy of this list was
sent to their group leader. The inventory team was able to find all
but 33 items. These items have a total acquisition cost of $39,520.74.
The percentage of equipment accounted for is 99.46% giving SLAC a rating of
‘Excellent’.
Discussion: As in past inventories the majority of sensitive items not located were computers. Many of these computers are older models. SLAC has made a big improvement in the area of the sensitive inventory. For this inventory period SLAC switched from a statistical sample inventory to a wall-to-wall inventory. During the fiscal year SLAC embarked on a campaign to increase employee awareness and responsibilities regarding property. Several approaches have been taken, from focus groups to posters.
Corrective Action:
Performance Objective/Measure: # 2 Organizational Stewardship and Individual Custodianship. SLAC will ensure that both stewardship and custodianship for personal property is maintained.
Performance Criteria 2.1Organizational Stewardship and Individual Custodianship. The Laboratory will ensure organizational and individual accountability (stewardship and custodianship, respectively) for property.
Performance Measure 2.1.a: Timeliness of Assignment. The
accountable individual is identified for equipment and sensitive property, and
the timeliness of such identification is measured.
Performance Assumptions:
% of accurate custodian assignments for sensitive property
% of accurate custodian assignments for controlled
% of initial custodians assigned within 60 days
Process used to meet
objective/measure: The initial custodian assignment was reviewed and checked for
custodial assignment and signature within 60 days. To measure sensitive and equipment assignment, a computer
generated list was run and a random sample was chosen for physical verification.
Findings:
% of
accurate custodian assignments for sensitive property.
To verify sensitive property custodial assignment, a computer-generated
report of all sensitive property was produced for a Stanford University internal
audit. The auditor randomly
selected 40 items with an acquisition cost of $83,427 for verification.
All items were found with the same custodian, except two.
In addition, we were unable to locate two items.
The University’s internal audit of sensitive property found that
“SLAC’s internal controls on personal and sensitive property to be
comprehensive, adequately documented, in place, and operational”.
“SLAC has responded and acted appropriately to the recommendation made
by DOE/OAK during their review of SLAC’s FY99 Performance Evaluation –
Personal Property section”. Based
on SLAC’s performance gradients our rating is 90% or good.
The equipment custodian assignment was verified from a random sample of 60 items. The Air Force random sample program was used to select the items for verification. All items were found with the same custodian, except three. One of the items with a different custodian was with the group computer administrator. He was holding the item to include in a load he was preparing for Salvage. In addition, we were unable to locate two items. These two items were not located on our equipment inventory and have been retired in the database as non-inventoried. Not including these items in the rating, based on SLAC’s performance gradients our rating is 96.67% or excellent.
There were a total of 1,463 sensitive and equipment items received this fiscal year. A total of 3 items did not get a final custodian assignment within the 60 days. The average custodial assignment was approximately 26 days. The new custodian has a 99.80% assignment within 60 days, for a rating of outstanding.
Discussion:
Refer to corrective action in performance measure
1.2. These actions help contribute
to a more accurate database regarding custodial assignment. The property staff
continues to follow up on new custodian assignment within 60 days. A list is run monthly of the signature forms that have not been returned.
Follow up calls, e-mail, and visits are made to insure forms are on file
within 60 days, and the database is updated.
Performance Objective:
#3 Utilization of Property. SLAC
will ensure proper utilization of government property.
Performance Criteria 3.1: Vehicle Utilization Program. The Laboratory will ensure proper
utilization of government motor vehicles.
Performance Measure
3.1.a: Measure vehicle utilization. Percentage of
total eligible motor vehicles meeting local utilization criteria will be
measured using the average utilization percentage for each class of vehicle.
Reviews will be completed for each class of motor vehicles with established
criteria.
Assumptions: The average utilization percentage will be calculated for each class
of vehicles by dividing the overall utilization measured into the overall
utilization standard. As an example, 10 vehicles with a utilization standard of
1,000 miles per year would equate to an overall utilization standard of 10,000
miles per year. If the overall utilization measures 9,500 miles, then the
average utilization percentage would be 9,500/10,000 or 95%.
Process used to
meet objective/measure: The Transportation Department issues
quarterly reports on vehicle utilization. The Transportation Committee reviews
the data and makes recommendations regarding vehicle reclassifications and
recalls to the Associate Director of BSD when requested by the Transportation
Department, using the Fleet Management Policy as a guide.
Findings: The
Year 2000 average utilization percentage for motor vehicles quarterly reports
submitted to DOE has demonstrated over 100% in each vehicle category.
Performance Objective/Measure: # 4 Customer Satisfaction
SLAC will strive to improve customer satisfaction
Performance
Criteria 4.1:
The Laboratory listens and responds to its internal and external customers and
stakeholders in a fair and open process that encourages dialogue and
participation.
Performance
Measure 4.1.a: The Laboratory shall select areas in which to determine the needs of
its customers relative to its property management systems and methods. Measurement of improved customer satisfaction will be from an established
baseline. The Laboratory will submit its selection by December 1, 1999
and its plan of action by April 1, 2000.
Process used
to meet objective/measure:
A selection and plan was submitted to DOE/OAK on November 29, 1999. The selection outlined the use of a survey, sent by e-mail to all
administrative associates. Previous customer surveys was used as the baseline
for improvements.
Findings:
The survey was e-mailed to 140 administrative associates. Results were collected and compared against past surveys.
The overall rating continues to reflect an above average
level of customer satisfaction. The following areas were addressed in the
Customer Survey:
Overall how
well does the Property Control Group, including the Salvage & Warehouse
Operations meet your expectations in terms of service, knowledge, timeliness,
efficiency and availability?
The
following scoring method was used for overall service:
Frequently exceeds my expectations
Meets my expectations most of the time
Meets my expectations sometimes
Occasionally falls below my expectations
Frequently falls below my expectations.
 |
The
following scoring method was used on the balance of the survey: Scoring method:
5
- Strongly Agree; 4 - Agree; 3 - Neutral; 2 - Disagree; 1 - Strongly Disagree
Each
area had a section for comments and general overall comments.
 |
|
Property
Management Services Property Database access and quality (database
located on 'BIS' home page, 'search the database') |
|||||
|
1.
Easy to Use |
2.
Data is Reliable |
3.
Data is Accurate |
4.
Meets my needs |
||
|
Property
Passes (Offsite Use Forms)(i.e. to be filled out when you take computers
home for SLAC business) |
|||||
|
5.
Knowledgeable |
6.
Friendly and Courteous |
7.
Meets my needs |
|
||
|
Inventory/Marking
Services (annual physical inventory and marking new equipment) |
|||||
|
8.
Knowledgeable |
9.
Friendly and Courteous |
10.
Timeliness |
11.
Meets my needs |
||
|
Salvage
Operations (equipment/material pick up service and items for reissue)
|
|||||
|
12.
Knowledgeable |
13.
Friendly and Courteous |
14.
Timeliness |
15.
Meets my needs |
||
|
Warehouse
Storage (equipment/material placed or removed from storage) |
|||||
|
16.
Friendly and Courteous |
17.
Meets my needs |
|
|
||
Discussion: There are no significant changes in this year’s survey
results. The “needs improvement” rating for sensitive property also
triggered ways to improve our customer service. We are continually evaluating
our services and looking for ways to improve.
The Property Control staff has attended a workshop for customer service.
In addition to the survey, two distinct areas were
targeted for a focus group meeting. The
first meeting was held with Administrative Associates.
They were chosen because they are the ones who usually take care of the
paperwork for their departments. The
second focus group was held with Computer Administrators.
They are responsible for installing and repairing computers. In both groups, ideas were solicited on the benefits of
property control, the issues, and ideas for improvement. Also discussed were the best methods to communicate
improvements, reminders, and new policies.
From their suggestions, improvements were made in ‘BIS’ to the
property page. A mailing of
property listings was sent to every custodian along with a new property
brochure. From the custodians that responded to the property listing
mailing, we were able to clean up some inaccuracies in the database.
Performance
Objective/Measure: # 5 Information to
Improve/Maintain Process
SLAC ensures that Property Management programs are
consistent with policies and procedures approved by DOE.
Performance
Criteria 5.1:
Self-Assessment of Policies and Procedures. The Laboratory shall plan, conduct, document and report annually, the
results of a successful property management system evaluation.
Performance
Measure 5.1.a: Assessing Support Processes. The
property processes shall be measured against identified system evaluation
criteria established in the plan.
Basis for
Rating:
SLAC’s self-assessment worksheet provides the activities to be measured, point
value for each activity and performance gradients.
Processes:
1. Disposition of Excess Property. The Laboratory will ensure that excess property is disposed of within 180 days of being identified as excess to SLAC.
Process used to meet objective/measure: All items placed in excess are checked for the disposal time it takes to go through the excess proces
Findings: There were 76 items placed in excess this fiscal year. All items that have been through the screening period have been resolved within 180 days. With resolution of 100%, the rating for this measure is ‘far exceeds expectations’. Thirty-nine of the 76 items are still in the screening process.
Discussion: On average, excess items are resolved within 55 days.
2. Warehouse Storage The Laboratory will review storage records and ensure that all property in storage is documented or is disposed of within 180 days from the time it is declared as excess.
Process used to meet objective/measure: The warehouse database is reviewed monthly to check for storage that needs renewal or removal. Upon renewal the appropriate documentation is required. If the item is turned over for excess it is tracked in the disposition of excess.
Findings: When the warehouse storage records are reviewed, a memo is sent to the department leader and to the requestor. During this fiscal year a total of 110 storage tags were closed. Twenty-four were released for reissue. The balance returned to the department. None of the items went to excess. With resolution of 100%, the rating for this measure is ‘far exceeds expectations’.
Discussion: Due to operational needs of the laboratory, the warehouse has lost a portion of its storage capacity. As a consequence, there was a large portion of items removed from storage this fiscal year. Due to the reduced storage area, items for short-term storage have been greatly reduced.
3. Loans: The laboratory shall review formal loans upon expiration and renew or take action within 60 days.
Process used to meet objective/measure: Loans are reviewed monthly.
Findings: Formal loans are reviewed annually upon expiration. The institution is contacted and the appropriate renewal is kept on file. The borrower is contacted for their continuing use or arrangements are made for the item to be returned to SLAC. There are currently 33 loans with other DOE laboratories or institutions. One is pending transfer and one is pending renewal.
Discussion: The Administrative Services Office handles formal loans. Copies of loans are sent the Property Office. The property database is updated from the original loan date and any extension date.
4. Offsite Use Forms: The laboratory shall review offsite use upon expiration and renew or take action within 60 days.
Process used to meet objective/measure: Review Offsite Use forms every month to insure all forms are current.
Findings: The form is sorted by the expiration date. At the beginning of each month the user is contacted for renewal or return of the property. All offsite use loans are current.
Discussion: As a courtesy, the property administrator telephones the custodian and verifies the items offsite, and sends the custodian a new form. The custodian is responsible for securing the appropriate signatures and returning the signed form.
Performance
Objective/Measure: # 6 Cost Efficiency
SLAC ensures that property is managed appropriately
to balance performance and cost.
Performance
Criteria 6.1:
Performance/Cost Efficiency. The
Laboratory shall ensure that property processes/products are provided in the
most cost efficient manner while maintaining desired levels of performance.
Performance
Measure 6.1.a:
Measuring Cost Efficiency/Effectiveness. The
Laboratory shall measure its ability to effectively balance property management
costs and performance.
Process used
to meet objective/measure:
The process selected is the ‘salvage equipment check-in’. This covers items that are surplus to the needs of a department or
individual and are dropped off at Salvage. A review of the entire process and amount of time taken to accomplish
this task has been examined. Implemented changes and the new procedures will be
used to compare and show the reduction in man hours/time and the reduced number
of steps.
Findings: The man-hours have been reduced in the equipment check in
process. The new process now uses a
computerized worksheet that can be accessed by the appropriate staff. Salvage implemented a new label that must be affixed to all equipment
being turned in. The custodian
fills out this label to the best of their knowledge regarding the condition
code. The condition code label has
eliminated telephoning the old custodian, and doing a physical inspection of the
item. These two changes have increased the efficiency by eliminating the
duplication of rewriting the data and handling the item too many times.
Computers still need to be sanitized.
Discussion: Based on the
findings the process restructure has met the goal to reduce the man-hours, and
still uphold the performance level without a reduction of service.
Performance
Objective/Measure: # 7 Learning and
Growth
SLAC ensures that there is a program for achieving
and maintaining learning and growth in the property management organization.
Performance
Criteria 7.1:
Evaluation of Learning and Growth and Employee Alignment.
The Laboratory will foster learning and growth and employee alignment in
its property management organization.
Performance
Measure 7.1.a:
Measuring Learning and Growth and Employee Alignment.
The Laboratory will have a process in place to measure learning and
growth as well as to understand and address workforce expectation.
Process used
to meet objective/measure:
Property personnel training opportunities were identified.
Classes were arranged and scheduled.
Training was measured by the percentage of employees required to take
training and those who completed the appropriate training.
Findings: Two
staff members attended the ‘National Property Managers Association Western
Region Educational Seminar’ this year. All
required property staff attended the PeopleSoft upgrade training and review.
In addition, staff attended a workshop on customer service.
The group manager attended the workshop and a follow up workshop on
customer service. The number of
employees attending and completing appropriately identified training, as stated
in the training plan, was 100%, for a rating of ‘far exceeds expectation.
Discussion: DOE
had spoken of holding a Metals Identification Training course but it was not
scheduled this fiscal year. Also, no National Property Conference was held this
year.
