MassDEP`s Agency Process Optimization

Report
Summit on Lean and Process Improvement for
Environmental Agencies in the Northeast
May 28, 2014
Douglas Fine, Assistant Commissioner for Planning & Evaluation
Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection









Integrated online Secretariat-wide IT system
Automate standardized business processes
Share data transparently
Use state-of-the-art information technology
Improved tools for businesses, the public,
and EEA agencies
Cost: $40 million over 5 years
Pre-Design work began in 2011
Begin design work in July 2014
EIPAS functions begin rolling out 2015
2
Tools for Businesses/Regulated Entities:
• 24/7 access to permit & reporting status
• One on-line place for reporting, compliance payments, etc.
• Step-by-step permit application guidance (incl. sample
permits; completeness checks,..)
Tools for General Public/Advocates:
• Map-based “point & click” access to regulated activities
• Easy dive into deeper content (incl. permits held, spill
notifications, compliance status/history,..)
Tools for MassDEP:
• Computerized administrative completeness & compliance
screening
• Automated (or IT-assisted) agency responses
• Improved management tools
3
Legend
P Active MassDEP
permit
D Reported
environmental data
V MassDEP permit
violation
E MassDEP permit
enforcement
W Wetlands notice of
intent
B
Brownfields site
R Reported spill
or release
RAO Release site with RAO
filed (cleanup complete)
AUL Release site with
activity use limitation
ABC Waste Combustor, Inc.
123 Main Street, Suite 4000
North Southland, MA
3 active permits, air quality and industrial
wastewater
Permits Reports Violations Enforcements more
P D V E
Release Site 3-0012345 (notification 1/2/03)
100 Main Street
North Southland, MA
Reporting category: 2 hours, oil release
Compliance status: Response Action Outcome filed
No activity use limitation
Notice Correspondence Plans History RAO more
B
RAO
In order to maximize the value of the IT
redesign, MassDEP is:
◦ Optimizing and aligning agency work
practices (called Agency Process
Optimization)
◦ Establishing common data standards
across all programs and locations
7

Before IT design begins, engage with staff
who “do the work” to:
◦ Align practices across programs & offices
◦ Make simple improvements in work flows
◦ Document agency processes/work flows

APO helps:
◦ Provide clear consistent documentation to
designers
◦ Reduce the number of workflows for EIPAS
◦ Avoid “coding” current inefficiencies
8



Inventory processes (agency-wide)
Prioritize processes for APO
Identify optimizations (for a handful of processes)
◦ mapping current workflows
◦ identifying ways to standardize and improve
◦ mapping future workflows

Implement optimizations
(for these processes)
◦ codifying future-state workflows
◦ creating SOPs, template docs, etc.

Expand optimizations (across all programs, for each
process)
9

Processes Inventoried

Selected three for first APOs
(Winter 2013)
(Winter 2013):
◦ Permitting, Complaint Management, Reporting

Identified Optimizations
(Winter 2013):
◦ Permitting: 3 Air Permits; 2 Groundwater Permits
◦ Complaint Management: Air, Wetlands, Strike Force
◦ Reporting: Environmental Results Program
[Done via intensive “workshops” – 2 to 4 days]
10

Implemented these Optimizations
(Summer/Fall
2013)
[Done via periodic team meetings w/assignments]

Expanding Permitting Optimizations to all
permits (Winter/Spring 2014) (aka Assimilation)
[Done via consultation sessions w/individuals or
small groups]
11
The Winter 2013 workshops followed 4 key steps to identify pre-design
process changes and map a standardized “future state” process.
Standardization Steps
Map Current
State
Current State Map
Identify
Opportunities
and Solutions
Develop High
Level Action
Plan
Map Future
State
Future State Map
12
1.0 Standard Procedures:
◦
◦
◦
Staff checklists for internal documentation of permit review
Guidance to support internal document sharing
Internal SOPs for administrative tasks & PIMS entry
2.0 Supporting Documents & Templates:
◦
◦
Applicant checklists for complete submittals
Document templates (Admin Review Completed, Confirming Withdrawal of Application)
3.0 New Tools & Capabilities:
◦
◦
Decision trees for applicants
Templates/forms for GW applicants to self-certify ownership & control and financial/operational
responsibility
4.0 Staff Training on Permit Writing:
◦
◦
Determine need for, and contents of staff training (must first clarify the “problem to be solved”)
Develop or provide the training
13
Conduct “consultation sessions” to:
◦ Identify key variations from a baseline workflow
◦ Put permits into “families”
◦ Generate permit workflow diagrams for each family
◦ Collect standard documents & templates in use
◦ Identify new std docs / SOPs that would be helpful
◦ Record process improvement recommendations
See sample workflow charts (on wall)
14


Finish Assimilation for all Permits
Additional Implementation Work (pre-EIPAS
Website Changes) for Complaints
Management

APO for Revenue Collection & Management

APO for Routine Reporting

Additional APO (TBD)
16
Activity / Role
# of People
Duration of
Commitment
# of Days
Project
Management
Team
12
On-going
(began Dec.
2012)
1 day/week
Project Sponsors 3
On-going
1 day/month
Identification
12 per process
3 weeks each
4 days total per
Implementation
12 per process
12 weeks each
4 days total per
Assimilation
45 for
permitting
16 weeks
1 day total per
person
person
person
17







Std documentation of workflows & std
templates are very helpful
Some pre-design testing is valuable
Lean “Lite” isn’t enough time
Make “identification” and “implementation”
the same step
More frequent sr. sponsor engagement
w/teams (daily?)
Need good facilitators
Line staff need coaching to develop programwide implementation guidance
18

Event “playbook” (for Identifying
Optimizations)

Event facilitator resources

Sample materials
◦
◦
◦
◦
Charters & scopes
Meeting invitations
Event agendas
Implementation memos, etc.
19
20
The following perceptions were raised by staff
in Fall 2013:
 EIPAS will limit staff flexibility thus limiting
our value-added
 EIPAS will replace people/result in layoffs
 EIPAS is too big & ambitious to get done
 EIPAS will only be a glorified fee collection
system
 EIPAS will fade away with the next governor
21



Establish a clear vision
Top down communication to highlight
priorities
Bottom up engagement with staff to help plan
for a system based on client needs and to
build “ownership” of the system
22
Routinely share EIPAS & APO information and
engage personnel via:
◦ Weekly updates at Commissioner’s Senior Staff
meetings
◦ Monthly decisions/acceptance sessions at Senior
Leadership meetings
◦ Monthly updates at Bureau & Regional 1st line
supervisors meetings
◦ Periodic All-Staff “Road Shows” (began 2014)
◦ Periodic Commissioner’s All-Staff emails
◦ Bi-Weekly Sponsor Meetings
23





Significant time/effort for APO & Data
Standards
Persistent staff engagement &
communications
Strong commitment from senior agency
heads
Committed Project Management Teams and
Sponsor Group
Dedicated project support/coordination
24
25

similar documents