Community, Planning and Development 2016 Peak Performance Report. April 4, 2016

Transcription

1 Community, Planning and Development 21 Peak Performance Report April 4, 21

2 21 Budget 21 Budget vs. Actual CPD Revenue THOUSANDS $2, $2, $1, $21,39, $2,473,71 $2,7 $2,2 $2,17 $2,11 Services/Supplies - Computers/Software Services/Supplies - Other Services/Supplies - Inspections Related Services/Supplies - Prof Svcs - Planning Svcs Services/Supplies - Prof Svcs - Development Svcs THOUSANDS $4, $3, $3, $2, $2, $1, $1, $, $ $27,39, $24,2 Budget License/Certificates $3,19,29 $32,27 Actual Permits/Plan Review $1, Services/Supplies - Education Internal Services Internal Billings Other NIS Associated $, $ $14,221 $14,233 Budget Actual Personnel - Pension/SS Personnel - Benefits/Wellness Personnel - Payroll The 21 budget is still open. The variance ($921,29) between budget and actual will be reduced as the final expenses are allocated. Actual 21 Revenue greatly exceeded budget, driven primarily by increased permit/plan review fee revenue.

3 21 Budget THOUSANDS $2, $2, $1, $1, 21 Budget vs. Actual $23,27,199 $3,1 $2,2 $1,2 Services/Supplies - Computers/Software Services/Supplies - Other Services/Supplies - Inspections Related Services/Supplies - Prof Svcs - Planning Svcs Services/Supplies - Prof Svcs - Development Svcs Services/Supplies - Education Internal Services THOUSANDS CPD Revenue $3, $3,449,4 $3, $2, $2, $1, $29, $1, 1% to Budget $, $4,1 $ Budget Actual* License/Certificates Permits/Plan Review Internal Billings NIS Associated Other $, $ Budget 12% to Budget $2,119 Actual* Personnel - Pension/SS Personnel - Benefits/Wellness Personnel - Payroll YTD Expenditures slightly below budget expectations, resulting in vacancy savings YTD Revenue meeting budget expectations Of the 1 new budgeted positions for 21, 1 are currently filled and 1 is posted. * Actuals through February, % of CPD s budgeted positions are vacant (17 out of 23).

4 CPD Mission Level Metrics Year * YTD Annual Rating 79% 74% 72% 4% 4% 49% % 7% % % 4% 3% 4% % 43% 1% Customer Satisfaction % 4% % 39% 4% 2% 3% 2% 7% 4% 24% 3% 2% 1% % * Note that the survey tool that was used to measure customer service was substantively changed in July 214. This number reflects only data gathered with updated survey.

5 CPD Mission Level Metrics Ratio (X:1) Ratio of Private Investment in Areas of Change to Areas of Stability Target Ratio (X:1) Private Investment in Areas with Small Area Plans to Areas without Small Area Plans Target CPD significantly exceeds all of its Planning Services Mission Level Metrics. The Neighborhood Planning Initiatives and Blueprint Denver Update both begin this summer and will have long-term impact on these metrics. * Note that valuation figures for 21 are not yet finalized; therefore, ratios listed above for 21 are estimates based on actuals through May 21. Ratio (X:1) Private Investment in Designated Historic Properties to Undesignated Properties Target

6 CPD Mission Level Metrics 1% % % 4% 2% % % of Reviews Completed On-Time 9% 92% 93% % 7% 79% 4% 4% 3% 37% YTD Average Review Time (in weeks) YTD Residential Commercial Target Residential Commercial Target Following a 21 summer of record high volumes, coupled with technology complications, the core plan review metrics are all trending positively. The challenge will be to maintain these results as summer volumes begin to return Average # of Days Late YTD Residential Commercial Target

7 CPD Mission Level Metrics,, 4, 2,,,, 4, 2,, % of Counter Customers Seen within 3 Minutes 73% 72% 7% 9% 49% Proj % 7% % % 4% 3% 2% 1% % 9% 9% 94% 92% 9% % % of Complaints responded to in 3 days or less (Zoning/NIS) 97% 93% 92% YTD* # of Counter Transactions % of Customers Seen Within 3 Minutes % of Complaints responded to in 3 days or less Target Inspections Completed Increased volumes are contributing to fewer customers being seen within 3 minutes at the counter, most acute at the Log In and Residential counters. Several successive years of higher inspection volumes. Higher volumes are impacting Z/NIS inspectors ability to respond to requests within 3 days or less. 4, 3, 3, 114,9 122,14 2, 133,31 2, 1, 1, 17,92 219,9 22,94, 1,474 42, YTD # of Building Inspections # Zoning/NIS Inspections * Note that Accela reporting issues are impacting ability to determine Z/NIS 21 YTD results accurately

8 People Vital Signs - Hours not Worked Overtime has increased to match a corresponding increase in permit and inspection volumes over the past years. 3% of 21 OT hours were for Inspections CPD remains relatively stable in hours not worked. The increase in 21 PTO usage is attributed to new hires with PTO allowances rather than vacation/sick accrual CPD Overtime Hours CPD: Vacation, Sick, PTO, Workers Comp Hours CPD remains stable in FMLA usage Vacation Sick PTO Comp Time Worker's Comp 7 CPD FMLA Hours PAID UNPAID

9 People Vital Signs - Retirement Forecasting 4% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1% % % Projected Retirement Eligibility 3.% 33.% 29.7% 24.9% 2.% 29.1% 2.% 22.7% 22.% 19.4% 1.1% 13.3% 21 (Current) CPD Citywide* N = 1 Unlimited CA employees (1.1.1). There are 42 individuals eligible for retirement in 21. With between 2%-4% of staff becoming retirement eligible over the next years, CPD is prioritizing succession planning around the most critical roles. * Citywide refers to all CSA limited and unlimited employees (N = 7,27 as of )

10 People Vital Signs- Turnover Turnover Position Status 3% 3 12% 2% 2 1% 2% 1% 1% 1% 1% 11% 11% 11% 11% # OF POSITIONS % % 4% VACANCY RATIO % % Citywide* CPD High Performer Citywide* High Performer CPD 21 Actual Goal Turnover Before 2 Years CPD Turnover Before 2 Years Citywide* 2% % 3-Feb 29-Feb 14-Mar 4-Apr Salary Saved Position 21 New Position Requiring Creation Unposted Vacancy BMO Approval Process OHR Posting Process Posted Interviewing Offer Made/Awaiting Paperwork % Vacant CPD benefits from lower turnover than CCD as a whole, especially among its highest performing staff. Retaining top talent is key to succession planning and ensures stability throughout the organization. CPD s vacancy ratio is 7.2%, with only 17 of 23 budgeted positions currently vacant. 1 of the 17 vacancies are active, either in the approval stages (BMO/OHR), posted, interviewing or with an offer made. * Citywide refers to all CSA limited and unlimited employees (N = 7,27 as of )

11 Employee Engagement Employee Engagement Index Citywide CPD Linear (Citywide) CPD has rebounded from a poor 213 employee engagement index result, although the 21 result still trails CCD citywide. Focused attention, coupled with an active CPD Employee Engagement Committee, intends to raise this score significantly by concentrating on the below action areas. Top Three Department Areas for Action Investing in the training and development of our employees Working with supervisors to create processes and establish expectations to provide timely and appropriate feedback to staff regarding their performance Implementing technology enhancements to improve efficiencies and raise moral

12 Permit Volumes 9,, 7,,, 4, Permits Issued vs. FTE Levels Projecting an % increase in Permits Issued in 21 over 21 1% more permits issued in January 21 than January 21 2% more permits issued in February 21 than February 21 3, 2, 1, (Proj) Permits Issued FTE's 1 14% more permits issued in March 21 than March 21 Higher permit volumes correlate to longer counter wait times Recent counter innovations have mitigated impact of rising volumes 3 Counter Transactions vs. Counter Wait Times 12 COUNTER TRANSACTIONS MINUTES Permits Created Average Wait Time

13 Permit Volumes % Reviews On-Time relative to Volumes 1% 9% % 7% % % 4% 3% 2% 1% % Plan review turnaround times also increase as permit volumes increase New staff, technology improvements and staff augmentation are helping to keep ontime rates high but peak of building season hasn t yet begun. Increased volumes also impacts inspection requests. Over, backlogged building inspection requests Permits Created Weighted On-Time Review Utilizing 3 rd parties, overtime and process improvements to address current backlog Weekly Construction Inspection Requests Rolled to Monday (backlog) Requests Received Inspections Completed,, 4, 3, 2, 1,

14 Inspections, NADB/Unsafe Structures Utilizing all three (3 rd Parties, On-Calls and Overtime) options, could reduce backlog of, Building inspections: In 19 weeks At a cost of $12,31 $4,1 (Two 3 rd Party Inspectors) $4,1 (Three new On-Calls) $3, (extra OT) Assumes volumes remain constant COST TO ELIMINATE Eliminating Building Inspection Backlog Options $2, $23, $21, $2, $14, $1, $1, $, $ 3rd Parties On-Calls OT Cost to Eliminate Weekly Inspections Completed Weeks Required We estimate each NADB property costs the City $/month in overhead and administrative expenses, which totals: $1,29, in 213 $7,4 in 214 $7, in 21 $13, in 21 YTD # OF NADB JAN JUNE Count of NADBs in Denver JAN # of NADBs Monthly Cost JUNE JAN JUNE JAN MAR $1, $, $, $4, $2, $ MONTHLY COST

15 Electronic Plan Review Online Permitting 2, Potential Impact on Review Capacity MILLIONS $2. $1. $1. Potential Savings ADDITIONAL REVIEW CAPACITY 2, 1, 1, FTE EQUIVALENTS CREATED $1.4 $1.2 $1. $. $. $.4 1. $.2 1% 2% % 7%. $. 1% 2% % 7% % ONLINE ADOPTION Additional Plan Review Capacity FTE Equivalents Created Internal Salary Savings % ONLINE ADOPTION Annual Customer Opportunity Cost Savings Online Adoption Rate 1% 2% % 7% Weeks of Work Recaptured Additional Review Capacity 3 7 1, 2,2 FTE Equivalent(s) Created Internal Salary Savings $1,317 $23,293 $4,7 $9, Customer Opportunity Cost Savings $1,33 $417,3 $34,17 $1,21,2

16 Innovation Areas Working Smarter High Work Space Improvements Investing in Customer Success/ Experience Planning Initiatives 21 st Century Regulations Ensuring a safe and vibrant Denver Cost, Time and Risk Medium Low NADB/Unsafe Structures Demo, Board and Shore Green Code GIS Enhancements Community Engagement Website Upgrades Queueing Change Records Management Sign Code Force Multiplier Accela Advocate Old Code/ New Code Staff Augmentation and Consultants Electronic Plan Review Employee Development Low Medium High Benefit