Performance improvement in Criminal Justice using Nimbus Control

Performance Improvement in the Criminal Justice Sector:How Nimbus Control helps

Ian Seath

Improvement Skills Consulting Ltd.

© 2011 Copyright ISC Ltd.1

Agenda

How we use Nimbus Control Process Improvement projects Case study examples

Procurement: cost savings Attrition: cycle-time reductions

Success factors Benefits of using Nimbus Control


How we use Nimbus Control Capture:

Live mapping workshops Walk-through

Improvement: Understand today’s process

Quantitatively – using Control’s “data capabilities” Qualitatively – using our knowledge of what “good” looks like

Design and implement changes

We typically use a process improvement project approach to give some structure, focus and to assist with effective management of change


Process improvement projects and Nimbus Control DMAIC

Define – process capture Measure – volumes, costs, times, delays, re-work

(RFT probabilities) Analyse – activity costing, FTE analysis Improve – process capture, scenarios Control – deployment of maps and documents,

process metrics


Example 1: Procurement process


Project Objectives The primary objective was to streamline the end-to-end

purchasing process to free up time to support the Contracts and Facility Management Function

Identified Problems Increased volume of purchase orders (up by 30% but no idea why) A strong perception that many “big ticket items” where not going

through the purchase order process (backed up by the fact they never had a grip on spend)

Had introduced “Oracle” centrally and were looking to roll-out to all admin clerks

Had been raised in a recent audit as an area to improve


High-level purchasing process volumes

Ordersfrom OM, Group, etc

34

2137.00(y)

Raise Purchase Order

35

2362.00(y)

Receive Goods

36

2338.38(y)

Invoice

37

9425.00(y)

Invoice received from supplier

Receive order by

post

Invoices without Purchase Orders

38

3306.62(y)

Approved Invoices

Make sure % matches

child

Consumable Needs

Ordersfrom Unpaid Work

225.00(y)

Specific Needs

Approved Land Line Invoices

Land lines

1020.00(y)

BT BillsQuarterly

Telewest Billsmonthly

Approved Mobile Invoices

Mobile Phones

2760.00(y)

Monthly Invoices

99%


Sub-level time and cost analysis

Monthly Invoices

Approved Mobile Invoices

in batches

Photocopy individual bills

£0.04 15.00"

2760.00(y)

Secretary

Input data into spreadsheet

cost period, costs

£0.14 1.00'

2760.00(y)

Secretary

Send to Ow ner of phone for identif ication of

personal calls

£0.14 1.00'

2760.00(y)

Secretary

Info added to hard copy sheet in folder

Rental amounts, calls

£0.16 1.00'

2760.00(y)

PCA

Batched and check batch amount matches

overall invoice

£0.03 10.00"

2760.00(y)

PCA

Pink coding slip added and completed

£0.16 1.00'

2760.00(y)

PCA

Filed

£0.07 30.00"

2760.00(y)

Secretary

Pay form arrives back and entered onto

spreadsheetDate paid, amount, how

paid

£0.28 2.00'

2760.00(y)

Secretary

Ow ner identif ies personal calls

and returns bill and remitance

£0.00 0.00h

2760.00(y)

Buyer


Improvements identified It cost £3,000 per year to process mobile ‘phone bills (excluding the

time it took managers to scrutinise bills)

Solution: change the policy on mobile ‘phone use and get one single invoice

The complexity of the “catalogue system” was only ever going to increase time and coding error rate (39 different types of black pen)

Solution: Reduce the number of order lines and pre-approve items

The updating of the catalogue coding process was chaotic (3 month time-lag led to orders for a new stapler delivering a new pair of stepladders)

Solution: Work with the supplier to an agreed “changeover” date


Improvements identified

100% of orders were routed through the Purchasing Managers (time and delay) and had already been authorised by Unit Admin Manager

Solution : Change system to allow Purchasing Clerk to authorise up to a certain level and free up managers’ time to pre-authorise, quality assure and manage control “catalogue” system

Some invoices were arriving with no Purchase Order leading to issues around budget control and lots of time wasted trying to find purchaser

Solution : Inform suppliers that no invoice would be paid without a Purchase Order number


Example 2: Courts process


Project Objectives

The primary objectives were to map the processes and analyse the performance data applied to cases from charge to sentence in the Central Area Command Unit, to include Magistrates’ and Crown Court cases.

The purpose was to identify practices that contribute to Cracked and Ineffective trials, and to identify actions that would lead to improved performance.

Ineffective Trial = On the trial date, expected progress is not made due to action or inaction by one or more of the prosecution, the defence or the court and a further listing for trial is required.

Cracked Trial = Cracked trials are those which result in a guilty plea at the last minute. The guilty plea may be to the whole indictment or to only part of it or even to an alternative count. A cracked trial therefore requires no further trial time.


Process Map – Charge to Sentence

© 2011 Copyright ISC Ltd.

Arrest & Charge

Remand

Bail

Early Admin Hearing

Scope & Size Decision made on

Mags/Crow n(NAREY)

Early First Hearing(Magistrates

Court)(NAREY)

Decision on EAH or EFH

Sentencing

Preliminary Hearing

Initial Case Management

Hearing

Trial

Sentencing(Effective Trial)

Cracked Trials

Sentencing

Plea & Case Management

Hearing

Trial

Vacated trial date(w ithin the case

progression function)

Ineffective TrialsRemand

Sentencing(Effective Trial)

Cracked Trials

Ineffective Trials

Section 51's sent to Crown

Court

Vacated Trial - new trial date set at hearing

Defence/Prosecution must have availability

before hearing

Sentencing

Initial Hearing(Traff ic)

Traff ic Cases

Sentencing

Follow -up Case Management

Hearing

Commitals

Court Mention either by

Judge/Prosecution/Defence

Review and Trial readiness

assessment

Bail

13

Ineffective Trials: Magistrates’ Court


Reasons for Ineffective Trials York/Selby Magistrates Court Feb '05 to Jan '06

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

N3

S1

M2 R N1

OT

HE

R1

Q1

S2

M1

W3

M3

W1

Q2

W2

W4

OT

HE

R

O1 P T

I - A I - PYO I - Y

Count of URN

New Reason

OutcomeAdult, Youth, PYO or PO

45% of ineffective trials are a prosecution failure 27% of ineffective trials are lack of prosecution witnesses 18% of all ineffective trials are caused by the defendant being absent

14

Outcome of Vacated Trials


75% of all trials that are vacated then go on to become Cracked or Ineffective (of the total number of trials in the twelve month period, 69% Crack or become Ineffective)

38% of all vacated trials that then crack are caused by the Prosecution team either not having witnesses or the Prosecution team ending the caseReason for Trial Vacation by Trial Outcom e (Ineffective/Cracked) for York/Selby Magistrates Court

Feb '05 to Jan '06

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

K A C F E L D G H N

C I

Count of URN

VacatedTrial.Reason

Outcom e

15

Cracked Trials: Crown Court


As the number of trials increases, the rate of cracking increases, suggesting that workload within the Prosecution team impacts the outcome of trials

Percentage of Cracked Trials vs Total Trials by Month York Crown Court Feb '05 to Jan '06

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

TOTAL TRIALS Log. (TOTAL TRIALS) 16

Success factors

Identify the right projects (processes) to work on Think process, not function – end-to-end & customer-

driven Do it with the process experts – the staff who operate the

processes Measure the right things – defined by your improvement

objectives Understand what a “good” process looks like – Lean

thinking helps Management of change – applying sound principles in

ways that work for the organisation (e.g. influenced by sector [private/public], industry [manufacturing/service])


Benefits of using Nimbus Control Speed of capture Easier analysis Rapid testing of improvement scenarios Confidence in deployment


© Copyright Improvement Skills Consulting Ltd.(September 2011)

E: [email protected]

M: 07850 728506

W: www.improvement-skills.co.uk

T: @ianjseath

19 © 2011 Copyright ISC Ltd.

Business

Performance improvement in Criminal Justice using Nimbus Control