Property Control

Introduction/Background

Performance Area: Personal Property Cumulative Available Points: 20 points (Total WEIGHT: 100%)

Performance Objective 1: Customer Perspective:  Effective Services/Partnership (i.e. responsiveness, cooperation, quality, timeliness, and level of communication). Data Source: Customer surveys, focus groups and random samples.

Performance Criterion 1.1: External customer satisfaction: Extent that external customers are satisfied with specific personal property products and services.

Performance measure 1.1.a: Timeliness: Extent of external or customer satisfaction with the timeliness of specific personal property products and services (or) percent of products and services that were delivered to external customers in a timely fashion.  Quality: Extent of external customer satisfaction with the quality of the information and services provided (or) percent of products and services that met external customers’ quality expectation. Partnership: Extent of external customer satisfaction with responsiveness, cooperation, and level of communications with the personal property office.   

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 80% customer satisfaction rating.

Formula: % of Satisfaction Rating = (Total # of surveys returned w/SAT or higher rating) / (Total # of surveys returned)

Process used to meet objective/measure:  A new customer survey was developed that included timeliness, quality and partnership. 

Findings:  The survey was sent to our external customers who currently hold our scrap metals bid and to the Stanford Site Office. We received back 3 of the surveys.   There were no negative responses. 

100 % satisfaction rating =   (3 returned surveys with satisfactory or higher rating) / (3 surveys returned)

Discussion:   This was the first year we sent surveys to our external customers. We will look into ways to survey our internet sale customers.  Our external customer satisfaction is rated at 100% for an ‘Outstanding’.  All responses were satisfactory or higher.

Performance criteria:

Timeliness

Property Control responds to my request in a timely manner

Quality

Property Control provides accurate information/data

Property Control is knowledgeable of services they provide

Partnership

Property Control is courteous

Property Control is responsive to my requests

Scored using scale:  Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree

Performance Criterion 1.2: Internal customer satisfaction: Extent that internal customers are satisfied with specific personal property products and services.

Performance measure 1.2.a: Timeliness: Extent of external or customer satisfaction with the timeliness of specific personal property products and services (or) percent of products and services that were delivered to external customers in a timely fashion.  Quality: Extent of external customer satisfaction with the quality of the information and services provided (or) percent of products and services that met external customers’ quality expectation. Partnership: Extent of external customer satisfaction with responsiveness, cooperation, and level of communications with the personal property office.   

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 80% customer satisfaction rating.

Formula:%of Satisfaction Rating = (Total # of surveys returned w/SAT or higher rating) / (Total number of surveys returned)

Process used to meet objective/measure:  This fiscal year a customer survey was used to measure performance.  A new form was designed to include timeliness, quality and partnership. 

Findings:  The survey was sent to 299 randomly selected property custodians. We received back 31.77% of the surveys.  This is more than double the responses we received back last year. The high return rate can be attributed to how easy it was to reply to the survey.  The property custodian did not have to open an email attachment or mark up a hard copy. The survey, incorporated into the body of the email, was short and to the point.  The results were tabulated.  There were no negative responses.

100 % Satisfaction Rating =  (95 surveys returned with satisfaction or higher rating) / (95 surveys returned) 

Discussion:   Our customer service for Property continues to be far above average.  We continue to provide above average service to our customers. All surveys returned were with a satisfactory or higher response. This area has an overall rating of ‘Outstanding’.

Performance criteria:

Scored using scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree, Strongly Disagree

Timeliness

Property Control responds to my request in a timely manner

Quality

Property Control provides accurate information/data

Property Control is knowledgeable of services they provide

Partnership

Property Control is courteous

Property Control is responsive to my requests

Performance Criteria 1.3: Accuracy of and consent to property assignments (internal): percent of sampled property items confirmed by the accountable individual or organization as being property assigned.

Performance Measure 1.3a: Percent of sampled sensitive items confirmed by the accountable individual or organization as being property assigned.  (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 98% of sensitive items properly assigned.

Formula:% of Accuracy =  (# of sampled confirmed, properly assigned sensitive items) / (Total number of sampled assigned sensitive items)

Process used to meet objective/measure:  To assess sensitive assignment, a computer-generated list was run and a random sample was chosen for physical verification. Stanford Site Office and Property Control physically verified 30 sensitive items.

Findings: All sensitive items were physically located with the same custodian.  The rating for this measure is ‘Outstanding’.

100 % of Accuracy = (30 of sampled confirmed, properly assigned sensitive items) / (30 total sampled assigned sensitive items)

Discussion:  Two (2) items were in different rooms but with the same custodian.

Performance Measure 1.3b: Percent of sampled equipment items confirmed by the accountable individual or organization as being property assigned.  (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 98% of equipment items properly assigned.

Formula: % of Accuracy =  (#of sampled confirmed, properly assigned equipment items) / (Total number of sampled assigned equipment items)

Process used to meet objective/measure:  To assess equipment assignment, a computer-generated list was run and a random sample was chosen for physical verification. Stanford Site Office and a SLAC representative physically verified 30 equipment items.

Findings:  The custodian assignment was reviewed for accuracy.  All items were physically located with the same custodian.  The rating for this measure is ‘Outstanding’.

100 % of Accuracy = (30 sampled confirmed, properly assigned equipment items) / (30 total sampled assigned equipment items)

Discussion:  All 30 equipment sample items were physically located.  One (1) item, with the same custodian was in the same building but in a different room.  One (1) item was in a different building but with the same custodian.

Performance Objective: 2  Internal Business Perspectives

Effective Life Cycle Management of Assets to Meet Departmental Missions. Data Source: Physical inventory results, equipment issue/usage records, excess and surplus property disposal records. (Total Weight: 20%)

Performance Criterion: 2.1

Asset Accountability: Percent of property subject to physical inventory located during inventory.

Performance Measure: 2.1.a

Percent of equipment, sensitive property and stores inventory located during physical inventory (Weight 10%)

Performance Gradients: 

National Target: Equipment: 99% (Acquisition Cost)

Formula:% of Acquisition Cost Located  

 = (Amount of equipment acquisition cost located during physical inventory) / (Amount of equipment acquisition cost subject to physical inventory)

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:  Due to the Type A accident at SLAC, all work at the Laboratory was stopped. The inventory process was delayed.  The reconciliation and completion of the inventory happened simultaneously.  There were 4,399 items in the equipment category with an acquisition cost of $856,900,236.40.  During the reconciliation, the inventory team conducted searches for those items unaccounted for.  In addition, an email was sent to all property custodians soliciting their help in locating the unaccounted for items. The inventory team was able to find all but 10 items with a total acquisition cost of $96,123.66. The percentage of equipment accounted for by cost was 99.99% equating to a rating of ‘Outstanding’. 

99.99 % Acquisition Cost Located =

($856,804,112.74 amount of equipment acquisition cost located during physical inventory) / ($856,900,236.40 amount of acquisition cost subject to physical) inventory

Discussion:   The equipment inventory results continue to show outstanding results.  All departments with a 100% find rate were placed in an article in the SLAC newspaper, the ‘Interaction Point’. A certificate was sent to all departments having 100% accountability.  A memo and computer generated listing was sent to the division and departments with equipment not located during the inventory cycle. 

Performance Gradients: 

National Target: Equipment: 98% (Items)

Formula:  % Items Located = (Number of equipment items located during physical inventory) / (Number of equipment items subject to physical inventory)

Findings:

The inventory team was able to find all but 10 items with a total acquisition cost of $96,123.66.  The percentage of equipment accounted for was 99.77% equating to a rating of ‘Outstanding’. 

99.77 % Items Located =  (4389 number of equipment items located during physical inventory) / (4399 Number of equipment items subject to physical inventory)

Performance Gradients:  

National Target: Stores Inventory: 99% (Acquisition Cost)

Formula:  % of Acquisition Cost Located = (Amount of  stores inventory cost located) / (Amount of stores inventory acquisition cost subject to inventory)

Findings: The sum of the cycle counts for the period 10-1-04 through 9-30-05 showed $6,694,335.51 worth of inventory acquisition cost was located. This was divided by a stores inventory acquisition cost subject to inventory (cycle count) of $6,702,475.46. The percent of acquisition cost located is 99.87%.

99.87 % of Acquisition Cost Located =  ($6,694,335.51 stores inventory cost located) / ($6,702,475.46 stores inventory acquisition cost subject to inventory)

Discussion: SLAC stores inventory is determined by a perpetual cycle count method. All items in Stores have a SLAC identification number and cycle counted based on their utilization type. The utilization type is established by its unit cost, the more expensive and/or sensitive items counted more often. Some items are cycle counted more than once during a year.

Performance Gradients:  

National Target: Stores Inventory: 98% (Items)

Formula:  % Items Located = (Number of stores inventory items located) / (Number of stores inventory items subject to inventory)

Findings: The number of inventory items located via the cycle count method was 420,145.81. The number of stores items subject to inventory was 419,281.81. The percent of items located is 100.2%.

100.2 % Items Located =  ($420,145.81 number of stores inventory items located) / ($419,281.81 number of stores inventory items subject to inventory)

Discussion: This anomaly of finding more items than those subject to inventory is explained in that some items could have been found in this fiscal year cycle count which had previously been adjusted out of the inventory last fiscal year. ‘Outstanding’

Performance Criterion 2.2: Equipment Utilization: Percent of equipment meeting Federal or local utilization standards or objectives.

Performance Measure 2.2.a: Percent of motor vehicles meeting utilization standards and objectives. (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradients:  

National Target: 90% of items meet usage/issue standards.

Formula:

% Vehicle Usage =  (Total number of vehicles meeting or exceeding DOE approved utilization standards) / (Total number of vehicles subject to approved utilization standards)

Findings: 

98.65 % Vehicle Usage = (220 vehicles meeting or exceeding DOE approved utilization standards) / (223 vehicles subject to approved utilization standards)

A total of 98.65% gives us an ‘Outstanding’ rating.

Performance Criterion 2.3 Percent of increase in the volume of items reported excess and disposed of within 180 days as compared with the previous cycle.

Performance Measure 2.3.a: SLAC meets the 5% increase of the reported as excess and disposed of within 180 days from previous year. (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradients:  

National Target: 5% increase reported as excess from previous year.

Pass or Fail

Process used to meet objective/measure: A review is conducted of all items entered into EADS.  The amount of items and their disposal is tracked for the timeliness of disposal.

Findings: There were 101 items placed in excess this fiscal year.  This represents a decrease of 4.95% from fiscal year 2004. During this fiscal year, a total of 76.24% were on time.  Currently there is 1 item pending disposal within the 180 days.

Discussion:  On average, excess items are resolved within 157 days.   Our activity code was not renewed and cancelled this year.  Without an activity code, no entries could be made into EADS.   Stanford Site Office was notified and is in the process of reinstating our activity code. An activity code is needed in order to process excess property into EADS.  All items for excess are on hold until our activity code is reinstated. 

SLAC has failed to meet the target.      

Performance Objective 3.0:   Use of Information Technology to Improve Asset Management Performance. Data Source: Personal property data base, surplus property sales records, and supporting documentation. (Total Weight: 5%)

Performance Criterion 3.1: The percent of surplus items sold using “on line” sales media during the year.

Performance Measure 3.1.a: Meets the percentage of items sold on line by 5% (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradients:  

National Target: Increase the number of “items” sold “on line” by 5% per year for three years.

Pass or Fail

Process used to meet objective/measure:   The amount of items sold on line were tracked and compared with fiscal year 2004 sales.

Findings:  For fiscal year 2005, a total of 47 internet auctions were posted for sale.  This is an increase from fiscal year 2004, which had a total of 44 internet auctions.  This is an increase of 6.38%.

Performance Objective/Measure 4: Ensure that personal property acquired via purchase card is recorded in the property and financial management system. (Total Weight: 5%)

Performance Criteria 4.1: Percent of personal property acquired via purchase card is recorded in the property and financial database within 72 hours of receipt of property.

Performance Measure 4.1.a:  The percent of personal property acquired with purchase card is recorded within 72 hours of receipt of property. (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 98%

Formula:

 %=  (# of items acquired via purchase card recorded into database within 72hrs of receipt) / (Total number of items acquired via purchase card)

Process used to meet objective/measure:   The total items acquired by purchase card were tracked by the date the asset was marked against the acquisition date.

Findings:  Equipment acquired on the purchase card was tracked for marking within 72 hours.  A total of 186 equipment items were assigned a property control number.  Of these 131 were marked within the 72 hour criteria.  The gradient for this fiscal year was 70.43 % for an ‘Unsatisfactory’ rating.

70.43% = (130 items acquired via purchase card recorded into data base within 72 hrs of receipt) / (185 items acquired via purchase card)

Discussion: In order to meet this new criterion, several steps have been taken.  A new brochure was sent to all purchase card holders and their approving official highlighting the new goal.  The property home page now includes the 72 hours criterion. All card holders and approvers are required to have an annual P-Card refresher course.  Included in the training for FY05, is the new 72 hour measure.  Though the measure rated unsatisfactory, we are accomplishing our goal of 100% accountability.  The P-Card transactions are reviewed by Property Control on a monthly basis.  Equipment purchases are followed up to ensure proper marking.  It should be noted that no equipment acquired on a purchase card has been reported missing before it was marked. 

Performance Objective 5: Ensure that subcontractor-held personal property is recorded in the contractor’s property management system. (Total Weight: 5%)

Performance Criterion 5.1: The 98% of subcontractor-held property is identified in the contractor’s property inventory database upon review of invoices and/or scheduled inventories.

Performance Measure 5.1.a:  The percent of subcontractor-held property is recorded in contractor’s management system. (Weight 5)

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 98%

Formula:

 %= (Number of subcontractor-held property recorded in contractor’s inventory data base) / (Total Number of subcontractors-held property identified on invoices and/or scheduled inventories)

100 %=  (0 # of subcontractor-held property recorded in contractor’s inventory data base) / (0 Total # of subcontractors-held property identified on invoices and/or scheduled inventories)

Findings:  A review was conducted of subcontractor held property.  Currently there is no equipment held by subcontractors.

Performance Objective/Measure 6.0:  Learning and Growth Perspective

Access to Dynamic and Strategic Information and Management System.  Data Source: Communication plan, meeting/briefing records, etc. (Total Weight: 5%)

Performance Criterion 6.1: System Access:  Extent to which reliable property management system measures are in place and communicated regularly.

Performance Measure 6.1.a: Percent of external/internal customer communication plan (Addressing balanced scorecard objectives, measures, targets and results) completed. (Weight 5%)

Note: Lab should identify what each (external and internal) communication plan entails.

Performance Gradients:

National Target: Communication plan is met.

Pass or Fail

Findings: The Property Control communication plan used the following avenues: SLAC media (newspaper, internet), interoffice mail, email communications and focus groups or training. In partnership with DOE, we met with Stanford Site Office (SSO) when needed or requested.  Quarterly reports are sent to SSO on all balanced score card measures.  All property communications to DOE goes to the SSO for further dispersal. 

The SLAC newspaper, The Interaction Point, was used many times this past fiscal year to communicate inventory results, trade-in, and off site use and ISMS.  In addition at the conclusion of last year’s inventory, a certificate and letter of congratulations was sent to each department with 100% find rate.  The Associate Directors were mailed the inventory results of items not located in their divisions.  The department heads also received a listing of inventory not located in their department.  Before the start of the inventory, a computer generated email was sent to all property custodians. .

Performance Measure 7.0:  Employee Alignment. Data Source: Individual development plans, performance standards, and training schedules.  (Total Weight: 10%)

Performance Criterion 7.1: Employee Alignment: Percent of property management employees having performance expectations and training requirements that respond to balanced scorecard objectives.

Performance Measure 7.1.a: Percent of scheduled training, supporting balanced scorecard objectives, completed by personal property management employees during the period.  (Weight 4%)

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 90% of scheduled training completed.

Formula:  % = (# of personal property management employees completing scheduled BSC training) / (# of personal property management employees subject to BSC training)

Findings:  Everyone in the Property Control group has identified training requirements to support the balanced score card.  All training was completed by 100% of the staff for an ‘Outstanding’ rating.  Appropriate staff members were identified and all completed the formal training offered through the National Property Management Association.

Performance Measure 7.1.b:  Percent of personal property professional staff with an individual development plan (IDP) based on balanced scorecard objectives (Weight: 3%)

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 90% of personal property professional staff has individual development plans.

Formula: %= (Number of personal property professional staff with BSC objective IDPs) / (Number of personal property professional staff subject to BSC objective IDPs)             

Findings:  Everyone in the Property Control group has an individual development plan. The plan includes training requirements as it pertains to meet the goals of the balanced score card, job performance and safety training.

Performance Measure 7.1.c:  Percent of personal property professional staff that received an annual review of performance against balanced scorecard objectives. (Weight 3%)

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 90% of personal property professional staff receives annual performance reviews.

Formula: %=(# of PP professional staff receiving performance review against BSC objective ) / (# of personal property professional staff subject to performance reviews against BSC objective)

Findings:  Property staff receives an annual performance evaluation.  The evaluation includes goals as it pertains to meeting the balanced scorecard objectives.  Their overall performance rating reflects meeting these goals.

Performance Objective 8:   Financial Perspective

Performance Criterion 8.1: Cost of (major) process (e.g. physical inventory, warehousing and disposition). (Total Weight: 10%)

Performance Measure 8.1.a: The major personal property process identified (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradients:  

National Target: Baseline and trend annually.

Pass: Establish a major process, perform baseline and trend and analysis for minimum of three years.

Fail: Did not establish a major process, nor perform a baseline and trend.

Findings:  The process identified for tracking is the physical inventory.  This first year, we gathered information to be used as a baseline for future trend and analysis.

Performance Measure 8.1.b:  Efficiency (cost vs. performance) of targeted processes. (Weight 5%)

Performance Gradients:  

National Target: Improving trend (lower cost and/or performance improvement).

Pass: Established a trend

Fail: Did not establish a trend.

Findings:  The baseline established for the cost of the physical inventory is $2.14.

Discussion:  For FY2006, we will look at ways to improve performance.  The FY06 inventory will be tracked and the cost will be compared against our baseline.

Performance Objective 9:  Ensure the fleet is comprised of vehicles needed to meet the site’s mission and still achieve maximum economy and efficiency. (Total Weight: 5%)

Performance Criterion 9.1: By each non-law enforcement sport utility vehicle (SUV), compare the number of trips made that required driving on other than normal road conditions with the total number of trips the SUV made.

Performance Measure 9.1.a:  Non-Law enforcement sport utility vehicle (SUV), compare the number of trips made that required driving other than normal road conditions with the total number of trips the SUV made.

Performance Gradient:

National Target: 90% of each SUV’s trips require driving on other than normal road conditions.

Formula:

% Off-Road Trips per SUV = (Number of trips logged on SUV trip logs as “off road”) / (Total number of trips logged for each SUV)

Pass or Fail

Findings:   6 % =  (652 trips logged on SUV trip logs as “off road”) / (9534 total number of trips logged for each SUV)

SLAC has failed to pass this measure

Performance Objective 10: Ensure SLAC meets the DOE reduction of petroleum consumption requirement of Executive Order 13149, Greening the Government Federal Fleet and Transportation Efficiency.

Performance Criterion 10.1:  The percent of reduced petroleum consumption within entire motor vehicle fleet, as compared with FY1999 petroleum consumption levels.

Performance Measure 10.1a:  As compared with FY1999 petroleum consumption levels, for FY2005, demonstrate a significant improving trend in reducing the net petroleum consumption, and by FY2008, achieve at least 20 percent petroleum consumption reduction. (Weight: 3%)

Performance Gradient:

National Target:

As compared with FY1999 petroleum consumption levels, for FY2005, demonstrate a significant improving trend in reducing the net petroleum consumption, and by FY2008, achieve at least 20 percent petroleum consumption reduction.

Formula:

% Fuel Consumption Reduction = (Baseline FY99 fuel consumption – FY05 fuel consumption) / (Baseline FY99 fuel consumption)

Findings:

32% reduction = (27538 FY99 baseline – 18677 FY05 fuel consumption) / (27528 FY99 fuel consumption baseline)

SLAC has significantly reduced fuel consumption since FY99.  SLAC has passed this measure.

Pass: Demonstrate a significant improving trend in efficiency and/or cost for targeted process.

Fail: Did not demonstrate a significant improving trend in efficiency and/or cost for targeted process.

Performance Objective 11: Property Management Processes

Although SLAC has a functional and approved property system, certain areas have vulnerabilities for potential loss, theft, fraud, abuse or national security concerns.  Some of the property processes will require management attention to assure execution of the actions necessary to enhance the existing property management system and reduce vulnerability.  (Total Weight: 10%)

Performance Criterion 11.1:  Personal Property Management System

Personal Property management system is in compliance with the Federal Property Management Regulations (FPMR), the DOE Property management Regulations (DOE-PMR) and applicable DOE Orders to assure the Property Management System are in compliance.

Performance Measure 11.1a:  Laboratory Continues to Progress on Potential Area

The Laboratory continues to progress on potential area where additional management attention may be required to assure that Property Management System complies with applicable regulations. (Weight: 10%)

Performance Gradient:  

Pass: Continued implementation of all recommendations and actions as stated in the Personal Property Corrective Action Plan.

Fail: Failed implementation of all recommendations and actions as stated in the Personal Property Correction Action Plan.

Findings:  System approval was granted based on completion of corrective action from the Office of Science review and the outcome of the 2003 Appendix B annual performance assessment. (getting clarification from Leslie)

Objectives/Goals for FY 2005

• Work to improve purchase card equipment is promptly marked and recorded in the property data base.
• Improve disposal times.
• Continue to Use On-line Sales and increase the amount sold online.
• Continue to Conduct Successful Inventories

• Continue to focus on providing quality service.