ISG Playbook
APIs...
...
...
...
...
- Their travel includes multiple legs as they travel back and forth to the facility over 4-5 days and each leg must be considered in the review of rental cars vs. rideshare.
- PHE has pinpointed specific issues such as using SUVs or standard size vehicles vs economy class to maintain safety and as recommended by CDC (Centers for Disease Control).
- Parking is not within the acceptable range.
- Lack of tools to support travel requests.
- Missing documentation when vouchers are submitted.
Stakeholders
- SOG Leadership
- Survey and Operations Group (SOG) Operations Team
- SOG Surveyors
- SOG Robotic Process Automation Taskforce
Approach
The SOG Taskforce team leveraged the CCSQ Human-Centered Design 6-step process to deliver Robotic Processing Automation solutions to the surveyors.
1. Initiate
- It was determined that travel was a pain point for the surveyors.
2. Immerse
- Shadowed two surveyors as they booked their travel to understand their processes.
- Discussed issues with frequent audits, extra work to address and added stress
- Observed a tedious process to compare costs for use of rental cars, personal cars, and rideshares:
3. Synthesize
- Identified pain points with audits and rental car justification.
4. Ideate
- Identified potential automation ideas:
- Verifying SUVs not ordered
- Verifying all attachments included
- Generation of rental car justification (. access to CMS systems not needed) - SELECTED
5. Prototype
- Surveyors were solicited to support user acceptance testing from each location.
- Enhancements made based on feedback include changes such as:
- Including tips in the rideshare costs
- Calculating and including gas costs for the rental car
- Adding the standard text for the COVID justification for the rental
Input to Bot
Output from Bot
- Bot resolves addresses for airports, hotels, and facilities and using TaxiFareFinder identifies mileage and ride share options for each leg
- Least cost rideshare option is identified
- A summary table is created as well as PDF with screenshots for each leg, creating a complete file to submit with the travel request
6. Implement
- The pilot started 3/11/22 with the surveyors who helped in the previous step.
- Feedback loop and backlog process has been defined and feedback will be actively solicited from the participants
- Additional surveyors will be added on a regular basis.
Results / Metrics
- Reduced process from 30-45 mins to 3-5 mins by leveraging Concur Pre-Authorization Itinerary and simple Excel template.
- System provides data for most cost-effective choices for traveling
- 800 hours (about 1 month) saved per year. The new system saves 30 min/trip, 20 trips/year, which equates to 10 hours saved per surveyor per year. SOG has 80 surveyors, which equates to 800 hours saved per year, or .4 SOG FTE savings per year.
- This does not include time spent reviewing and responding to audits which will result in additional savings for the surveyors, their managers, and SOG leadership.
Next Steps for SOG
Thefunctionality is currently operational,and the teamis making enhancements based on end-user feedback.
Goals
What were your goals for launching a customer satisfaction (CSAT) site survey? How do these goals differ from those of other customer research methods you use?
Our goal was to implement a single-ease question survey with which we could evaluate how easy or difficult it is to complete key tasks in HQR, such as submitting data via web forms, submitting bulk data, or viewing reports.
Stakeholders
What stakeholders did you collaborate with to accomplish this work?
We collaborated with our CMS Product Lead and Chief Product Owner team, the CCSQ HCD CoE, the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) team at OSORA, and with the Touchpoints support team at the General Services Administration (GSA).
Approach
What steps did you take to implement your approach? What was the level of effort?
The steps we took were as follows:
- As an HCD team, decide on our approach to the survey (survey goals, what question(s) to ask, how many users to target, etc.)
- Get buy-in from our CMS customers and ADO team
- Apply for PRA permission to survey a percentage of our users
- Work with the PRA team to finalize our application
- Apply to the Technical Direction Board (TDB) to implement Touchpoints in our sandbox and production environments (two applications)
- Establish an account to use the Touchpoints SaaS tool with our CMS Product Lead
- Build out and iterate on the survey in the tool with our CMS Product Lead
- Scope and prioritize development work to implement the survey
- Still to come: complete development, test, and release the survey to users
What questions are included in the survey?
The survey has one question: “Overall, how easy or hard did you find it to complete your task today using Hospital Quality Reporting?” (users then select a response on a scale from 1-5, very easy to very hard).
What was the process like for: PRA, tools, custom development, data analysis/reporting?
The process has taken a very long time and has incorporated many steps, with some steps being uncovered along the way. We have successfully passed each gate, but it’s taken the support of many stakeholders and has been a very gradual process. We are still in the midst of custom development and don’t have experience with data analysis or reporting yet.
What factors made you choose this approach?
We chose to use Touchpoints because we wanted to implement a site-intercept user survey, and we believed that, as a government-created and supplied tool, it would be easier to get the approvals and do the implementation.
Learnings / Challenges
What are your key learnings from the project? What recommendations would you make for other teams who will begin this work soon?
So far, our key learning has been to allow ample time, and seek key stakeholder support, for PRA and TDB approvals.
Is there anything you would have done differently? Why?
We started with a plan to evaluate key user tasks, vs overall user satisfaction, and in retrospect it might have been easier to implement the tool with a single question as a generic survey rather than making it task-specific. Our developer seems to have gotten it working fairly easily (submit a web form, see the survey) but it still might have been easier to go with a more straightforward implementation first for approvals and testing.
Results / Metrics
What has the outcome of your work been to date?
Do you have metrics from the CSAT survey? If so, how has your team used these to improve the customer experience?
We are still in the implementation phase, so we don’t have outcomes or metrics to report on yet.
Next Steps for HQR
What are your next steps for this work?
...
...
- Establish and test a site intercept survey tool
- Determine questions for satisfaction, ease of use, and efficiency
- Define a statistically relevant sample for continuous data collection
- Resolve PRA coverage and Information Collection Request (ICR) for site intercept survey
- Complete and submit Third Party Website and Applications (TPWA) form for the site intercept tool
- Determine approach for survey display
- Establish a plan for leveraging ongoing customer data
...
...