22
eReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th , 2014

EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

eReg 2.0

CNLP BriefJune 11th, 2014

Page 2: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Where we were

• Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. – Too many steps were needed to register participants

(learners)– Each training registration took about 20 minutes

• Transition to current process – (eReg 1.0)– September 2013 – identified options – October 2013 – Training collaborated with IT branch – November 2013 – eReg 1.0 implemented – Benefits and limitations

Page 3: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

The Business Problem – Moving beyond eReg 1.0

• Lost Training Opportunities - Poor data and conflicting processes result in under and over booking leading to lost training opportunities.

• Class Cancellations - This directly affects CalHR customers (class cancellations), training partners, instructors, and accounting.

• Enhanced Data capturing - The continued success of the Statewide training required statewide training to make better data driven decisions.

Page 4: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

What’s Improved with eReg 2.0

• No more:– Reservations; only paid for bookings– No more Cal 46 paper forms/faxes– No more reconciling unpaid reservations with Cal46 payment

information• Enhanced analytics and demographic capabilities• Automatic email notification (system generated) based upon

registration activities (request, approve, deny)• eReg 2.0 offers improved scheduling and workflow for

approvals • Reduce average registration processing time from 10 to

approximately 8 minutes

Page 5: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Roles

• Requesters – The person requesting training. It may by the learner or a designated POC

• Approvers – The person designated by the requester. Approvers need spending obligation authority or have an internal process which grants them approval authority.

• Training Admins – CalHR training coordinators• Accounting – Processes all forms of payments

Page 6: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Student input On Line

eReg Record

Send eReg reservation number to

Student

Generate Daily Roster Report

eReg Data

46 Rec’d?

Update Daily Roster Report

Send Confirmation

email

46 Rec’d?

Remove Record End

Process Monthly Invoice

Datasheet

Y

Y

N

N

fax / efax

Split FileBy

Person and Class

• Last• First• Class title

Update Billing Workbook

• Payment Info• Type• Supervisor

Send Disenroll

ment Letter +

Reminder

Send Reminder 1-2 days Update

Statewide Register X

• No shows• Cancels

Student Attends Training

Current BuildeReg 1.0

Page 7: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Requester input On Line

Pg 2

eReg Record

Process Monthly Invoice

Datasheet

Update Statewide Register X

• No shows• Cancels

Student Attends Training

eReg Data

Email:Approve?

Email:Disapprove

Approver

Funding DataPg 3

• PO number• Contract• Cal Card - XXXX

Requester input On Line

Pg 1

1. Requester inputs initial data in eReg Registration Form (page1)

2. Requester inputs approver and demographics data in eReg Registration Form (page2)

3. eReg:1. Begins disapproval

countdown timer (72 hours)

2. Generates email to Approver with approve/disapprove links

4. Approver clicks “approve” link on email

5. Approver enters funding data in eReg (page3)

6. eReg generates email with funding info to CalHR/Acct’g (credit is manually handled between approver and acct’g)

7. eReg generates email acknowledgement to Requester

Accounting/CalHR/Requester

eReg Data Approval

UpdatedeReg 2.0

Page 8: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 9: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 10: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 11: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 12: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 13: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 14: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 15: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 16: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 17: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 18: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –
Page 19: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Acknowledgements – e-Reg team members

• Kristene Marshall – Statewide Training• Laurel Robinson – Statewide Training• David Gay – Information Technology • Rick Black – Information Technology• Nick Buffalo – Information Technology• Susan Barnes - Accounting • Primo Siador – Accounting

Page 20: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Acknowledgements – e-Reg focus group participants

• Michelle Edwards – Dept. Developmental Services• Sue Teafatiller – Victim’s Compensation Board• Carrie Edwards – Air Resources Board• Riza Kahn – • Barbara Rivers – Department of Public Health• Brittney Trost – State Treasure’s Office

Page 21: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Any Questions?????

Page 22: EReg 2.0 CNLP Brief June 11 th, 2014. Where we were Where we were – In July, 2013, the training registration process had too many manual processes. –

Thank you for your time