Ohio Enterprise Grants Management Program Business Process Reengineering (BPR) Project

1. Ohio Enterprise Grants Management Program Business Process Reengineering (BPR) Project PROJECT REPORT OUT May 21, 2015

2. OBJECTIVE • ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS: • WHY THE EGM BPR PROJECT? • WHAT DID WE DO? • HOW DID WE DO IT? • WHAT ARE OUR RESULTS? • WHAT’S NEXT? • Thank You’s and Acknowledgements

3. Problem Statement • Current State • 22 state agencies • $25 billion in Federal grant funds • 57 different software systems costing over $4 million per year • The State has insufficient visibility into enterprise grants management and reporting: Fiscal & Programmatic • a lack of standardization across grant programs • Significant opportunities exist to optimize grant management functions • & • Seizing these opportunities is the purpose of the EGM program

4. Vision • State Executives have accurate data available for decision making • Agencies are maximizing federal dollars while being aligned with state and agencies’ goals • Grants management is coordinated through a community of practice • Ohioans have access to information which allows them to see the value they get from grant dollars. • Subrecipientsuse the same grants process when dealing with all state agencies

5. EGM Program: Project Hierarchy VISION EGM PROGRAM CENTRALIZED GRANTS COORDINATION EGSS BPR PROJECT TOOLS / TECHNOLOGY STATE WIDE ROLLOUT NEEDS ASSESSMENT TOTAL SOLUTION IMPLEMENTATION THE BPR PROJECT IS ONLY ONE PROJECT OF THE OVERALL EGM PROGRAM. THE BPr FOCUS IS DEFINING AND IMPLEMENTING THE STANDARDIZED ENTERPRISE GRANTS MANAGEMENT PROCESS WITH CURRENT STATE TECHNOLOGY

6. EGM Program: History Enterprise Grants Management Software Solution (EGsS) • Analysis/Business Case completed in 2013. Current state RISKS • Federal audit negative findings • Federal compliance adverse findings • Misappropriation of grant funds • Missed opportunities for grant applications and additional funding • Lack of Enterprise oversight of grant activities RECOMMENDATION: • Standardize Business Processes

7. AGENCY PARTICIPANTS

8. BPR DELIVERABLES • Standard enterprise full life cycle grants management process • Grants management future state processes for each agency which are aligned with the Enterprise Process • Implement the future state processes within the agencies • Grants Glossary of Terminology

9. Challenges • How to standardize a process which is so large? • Response: • Break the effort into parts (sub-processes) • Homework • Leverage the skills and tools of LEAN Ohio

10. Challenges How to get 9+ agencies to agree to a standard process Response: Leverage the Agencies’ grant experts Agencies mapped and shared current states Team defined a standard EGM Process together Agencies design their future state processes

11. Challenges • At what level do we map the processes to be: • Flexible enough for agency variances and • Detailed enough for technology requirements and analysis? • Response: • Derive a functional level process: the “what we do” and not the “how we do it” • Perform a gap analysis of the EGM processes versus all the agencies future state process maps • Adjust the EGM Process to obtain maximum standardization

12. Challenges How to maintain momentum and progress through a 12+ month process project? Response: Weekly “Touchbase” calls/meetings Homework Expert support Learn and adjust as we move forward Have a great Agency Team that is determined to get it done!

13. Steps A - D Step E Step E1 Step E2 Step F Approach: Eating the Elephant SCOPE & PLANNING INFORMATION AGREEMENT TEAM BUILDING VSM (Step E) April Event Kaizen #1 VSM Capstone Kaizen #3 Kaizen #2 Jul Aug Sep Oct Mar May Feb Apr Jan Nov Dec

14. Our Process: Map/Gap Analysis AGENCY CURRENT STATE + + AGENCY FUTURE STATE

15. Our Process: Standardized EGM Process STANDARDIZED EGM PROCESS

16. What Are Our Results? STANDARD ENTERPRISE GRANTS MANAGEMENT PROCESS Standardized Steps: 54% Improvement What we do is more similar than we thought … Gaps: 64% Reduction … and what we do can be even more similar. AGENCY IMPLEMENTATION PLANS

17. LEAN OHIO PERSPECTIVE • Pioneers • Co-created this process • Modified the Kaizen approach • Applied best practices to a cross-agency set of complex processes • Everyone learned a lot about the process by working together and getting out of our silos • It took a lot of time, homework, and support from agency Lean resources • Commitment built over time

18. THE TEAM’S PERSPECTIVE • One word description from team members: • Challenging, overwhelming, frustrating, time consuming, collaborative, commitment, communication, surprising, structured, impossible, dedication, facilitation, team performance, high performers • Lot of anxiousness • Felt the transformation • Gained a better understanding of the “enterprise level” • Agency leadership through implementation of key milestones • Built trust between teams: no one was left behind • Built a framework for the future • Moved from hope to reality - built a sustainable plan moving forward • Lean Ohio and the OHT Leadership Team were always there for us • We look forward to the next phase of this program

19. Grants Path Forward Roadmap Operating Assumptions: • Path-forward Strategy: OBM and DAS are working out the details of ownership • Ongoing, regular meetings: ALT members will remain engaged • LEAN OHIO will continue facilitation • Pricing Process Standardization Source Selection Technology Project

21. AGENCY PARTICIPANTS

22. AGENCY PARTICIPANTS

23. LEAN OHIO / LEAN SUPPORT