Bal Score Card

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
FEDERAL PROCUREMENT SYSTEM
BALANCED SCORECARD
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
FY2003
2
MISSION
To provide acquisition and assistance services to
support accomplishment of the Department’ s
programmatic goals and objectives.
VISION
To deliver on a timely basis the best value product
or service to our customers while maintaining
the public’s trust and fulfilling public policy
objectives.
STRATEGY
To change the present system’ s culture, management
systems, and line processes consistent with the
principles of Quality Management, in order to
establish and maintain: a customer focus, a sense of
urgency, continuous and breakthrough process
improvement, and an emphasis on results.
3
BALANCED SCORECARD
STRATEGIC PERSPECTIVES
CUSTOMER
How do our customers What must we excel at?
see us?
MISSION INTERNAL
FINANCIAL VISION BUSINESS
STRATEGY PROCESSES
Do we get the best LEARNING Do we continue to

deal for the Government? AND improve and create
value?
GROWTH
4
CUSTOMER
To Achieve Our Vision,
How Should We Appear
To Our Customers?
INTERNAL BUSINESS
FINANCIAL MISSION PROCESSES
To Succeed Financially,
How Should We Appear VISION To Satisfy Our Stakeholders
and Customers, What Business
To Our Stakeholders? STRATEGY
Processes Must We Excel At?
LEARNING
AND
GROWTH
To Achieve Our Vision,
How Will We Sustain Our
Ability To Change And
Improve?
5
BALANCED SCORECARD
PERSPECTIVES AND OBJECTIVES
CUSTOMER
- Customer Satisfaction
- Effective Service/Partnership INTERNAL BUSINESS
PROCESSES
- Acquisition Excellence
FINANCIAL MISSION - Most Effective Use of
- Optimum Cost Efficiency of Contracting Approaches
Purchasing Operations VISION - Use of Electronic Commerce
- Performance-Based Service
STRATEGY Contracts
- Use of Competition
LEARNING - Streamlined Processes
- Reduction in Overage
AND Instruments
GROWTH - On-Time Delivery
- Access to Strategic Information - Supplier Satisfaction
- Employee Satisfaction - Socioeconomics
- Organization Structured for
Continuous Improvement
- Quality Workforce
6
CUSTOMER PERSPECTIVE
OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET
Customer Satisfaction Timeliness: Extent of customer 85% for FY 2002

Data Source: Customer Survey satisfaction with timeliness of We will not measure in FY 2001
Data Generation: Accomplished by procurement processing; planning and FY 2003
using standardized survey instrument. activities; and on-going communications.
Individual survey responses are
entered into Excel Data Reduction
Quality: Extent of customer satisfaction 90% for FY 2002
Program which calculates results.
Data Verification: Procurement Directors
with the quality of goods and services We will not measure in FY 2001
are responsible for accuracy of data and delivered. and FY 2003
retention of Excel Program Reports in
accordance with records management
requirements. Reports will be made avail-
able for compliance and/or HQ reviews.
Effective Service/Partnership Extent of customer satisfaction with the 88% for FY 2002
Data Source: Customer Survey responsiveness, cooperation, and level of We will not measure in FY 2001
Data Generation: Accomplished by communication with the procurement and FY 2003
using standardized survey instrument. office.
are responsible for accuracy of data and
INTERNAL BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE 7
Acquisition Excellence Extent to which internal quality control 85%

Data Source: Manager’ s Self- systems are effective, particularly with
Assessment Survey, protest data respect to compliance with laws and regs, No sustained protests.
Data Generation: Accomplished by vendor selection and performance, contract
using standardized survey instrument. admin., and subcontractor oversight.
Most Effective Use of Contracting

Approaches to Maximize Efficiency
and Cost Effectiveness. Use of Purchase Cards:
Use of Purchase Cards: 1. Number of purchase card transactions 87%

Data Source: Card Issuer Reports,
as a percentage of total actions under
PADS, CUTS, local tracking systems $25,000.
Data Generation: Data is tabulated
from the listed tracking systems. 2. Total amount of cost avoidance through $6M
Data Verification: Procurement Directors the use of purchase cards.
are responsible for accurately reporting
results and retention of records in accor- (The above two measures will be tracked at
dance with records management require- Headquarters based on data submitted
ments. Records will be made available for by the field offices)
compliance and/or HQ reviews.
INTERNAL BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE - Cont. 8
Use of Electronic Commerce: Use of Electronic Commerce:

Data Source: Electronic Small
Purchase Systems, PADS, CUTS, IIPS,
1. Percent of purchase and delivery 33% for FY 2001
local tracking systems
orders issued through electronic 50% for FY 2002
from the listed tracking systems. commerce as a percentage of total 60% for FY 2003
Data Verification: Procurement Directors simplified acquisition actions.
results and retention of records in accor- 2. Percent of all synopses (for which 100% of actions over $25K.
dance with records management require- widespread notice is required) and
ments. Records will be made available for associated solicitations posted on
compliance and/or HQ reviews. FEDBIZOPPS. This measure will be
tracked at HQ.
3. Percent of all new competitive 30% for FY 2003

acquisition transactions over $100K 40% for FY 2004
conducted through electronic commerce.
Performance Based Service Contracts: Performance Based Service Contracts:

Data Source: PADS
Data Generation: Data is tabulated PBSCs awarded as a percentage of total 66%
from PADS. eligible new service contract awards
Data Verification: Procurement Directors (applicable to actions over $100K).
are responsible for accuracy of data
entered into PADS. On a routine basis,
Percent of total eligible service contract 60%
HQ will randomly sample pre and post
award actions and compare against the
dollars obligated for PBSCs (applicable to
FAR PBSC standards. all actions over $25K). This measure will
be tracked at HQ.
Use of Competition: Use of Competition:

Data Source: PADS
Data Generation: HQ will 1. Percent of total dollars obligated on 75%
generate data from PADS.
competitive actions over $25,000.
are responsible for accuracy of data
entered into PADS. 2. Percent of actions competed for 90%
actions over $25,000.
3. Percent of total dollars obligated on TBD

orders over $25K under MACs that were
awarded using the fair opportunity process.
4. Percent of actions for orders over $25K TBD

under MACs that were awarded using the
fair opportunity process.
(The above competition measures will be

tracked at Headquarters)
Streamlined Processes Procurement Administrative Lead Time

(PALT) for Acquisition:
Procurement Administrative Lead Time:
Data Source: PADS, PATS, local 1. For new competitive service awards
tracking systems over $100K (except major site and
Data Generation: Data is generated facility management contracts):
from PADS, PATS, and local tracking
systems. Determine the average time from receipt 110 to 150 days
Data Verification: Procurement Directors of offer (or solicit. closing date if applicable)
are responsible for accurately reporting to date of award for each new award.
results and retention of records in accor- Calculate the percent of award actions that
dance with records management require- fall within the target range (include those
ments. Records will be made available for actions that outperform the range).
2. For orders for services under the
Federal Supply Schedules that require
a Statement of Work and a Request
for Quotation:
Determine the average time from receipt 60 to 90 days (tentative target)

of quotation (or solicit. closing date if
applicable) to date of award for each new
award. Calculate the percent of award
actions that fall within the target range
(include those actions that outperform the
range).
Streamlined Processes Procurement Administrative Lead Time

for Financial Assistance:
Procurement Administrative Lead Time
(cont’d) For new competitive awards:
Determine the average time from receipt 210 to 270 days

of application (or solicit. closing date if
applicable) to date of award for each new
award. Calculate the percent of award
actions that fall within the target range
(include those actions that outperform the
range).

Reduction in Overage Instruments: Percent reduction in overage acquisition and 10% of each year’
s beginning total.
Data Source: PADS financial assistance instruments.
Data Generation: Data is generated
from PADS.
results and retention of records in accor-
dance with records management require-
ments. Records will be made available for
On-Time Delivery
Percentage of contracts where contractual 96%
Data Source: Past Performance Data
delivery date meets actual delivery/acceptance
Base, local deliverable tracking
date. (Note: applies only to procurement
systems
Data Generation: Data is tabulated actions (not financial assistance) over $1M).
from the listed tracking systems.
Supplier Satisfaction Extent of supplier (i.e. contractor/vendor) 95% for FY 2002

Data Source: Vendor Survey satisfaction with the responsiveness, We will not measure in FY 2001 and
Data Generation: Accomplished by cooperation, and level of communication FY 2003
using standardized survey instrument. with the procurement office.
Socioeconomics Percent achievement of assigned goals. 100% achievement.

Data Source: PADS, SRS, OSDBU,
local tracking systems
from the listed tracking systems.
LEARNING AND GROWTH PERSPECTIVE 14
Access to Strategic Information The extent to which reliable procurement Strategic information system that is 100%
Data Source: Manager’ s Self- management information systems are in accurate, timely and efficient.
Assessment Survey (Data Collection) place.
Data Generation: Accomplished by
using standardized survey instrument.
LEARNING AND GROWTH PERSPECTIVE - Cont. 15
Employee Satisfaction Superior Executive Leadership: 84%

Data Source: Employee Survey Employee’ s perception of the organization’
s
Data Generation: Accomplished by professionalism, culture, values, and
using standardized survey instrument. empowerment.
entered into Excel Data Reduction Quality Work Environment: Employee’ s 85%
degree of satisfaction with tools available
to perform job, with mechanisms in place
retention of Excel Program Reports in to ensure effective communications to
accordance with records management accomplish job requirements, and with
requirements. Reports will be made avail- current benefits and job security.
Organization Structured for Continuous Assessment of the level of continuous 81%

Improvement improvement including existence of an
Data Source: Manager’ s Self- effective quality culture, extent of
Assessment Survey (Mission Goals) benchmarking and other improvement
Data Generation: Accomplished by initiatives, and strategic planning actions.
using standardized survey instrument.
LEARNING AND GROWTH PERSPECTIVE - Cont. 16
Quality Workforce Percent of all acquisition personnel meeting 90% (exception: individuals receiving a
Data Source: Career Development
the qualification standards of the Acquisition written waiver from HQ)
data systems Career Development (ACD) program.
from the listed data systems. Percent of certified acquisition personnel 90%
Data Verification: Procurement Directors meeting the ACD Continuous Learning
are responsible for accurately reporting Requirement.
dance with records management require- Percent of all financial assistance personnel 90%
ments. Submitted results will be compared meeting the qualification standards of the
with data maintained by the Departmental Financial Assistance Career Development
Career Development Coordinators.
program.
17
FINANCIAL PERSPECTIVE
Optimum Cost Efficiency of Cost to Spend Ratio: Procurement organization’ s .012

Purchasing Operations operating costs (labor plus overhead) divided by
Data Source: PADS, local budget procurement obligations. (Note: the costs and
tracking systems obligations associated with M&O actions are
Data Generation: Cost to Spend Ratio excepted).
is calculated from data extracted
from listed data systems.
Data Verification: Procurement
Directors are responsible for the
accuracy of the calculated ratio, and for
retention of source documents and ratio
calculation sheets in accordance with
records management requirements. Records
will be made available for compliance
and/or HQ reviews.

Bal Score Card

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bal Score Card

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

FEDERAL PROCUREMENT SYSTEM

Do we get the best LEARNING Do we continue to

Customer Satisfaction Timeliness: Extent of customer 85% for FY 2002

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Acquisition Excellence Extent to which internal quality control 85%

Most Effective Use of Contracting

Use of Purchase Cards: 1. Number of purchase card transactions 87%

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Use of Electronic Commerce: Use of Electronic Commerce:

3. Percent of all new competitive 30% for FY 2003

Performance Based Service Contracts: Performance Based Service Contracts:

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Use of Competition: Use of Competition:

3. Percent of total dollars obligated on TBD

4. Percent of actions for orders over $25K TBD

(The above competition measures will be

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Streamlined Processes Procurement Administrative Lead Time

Determine the average time from receipt 60 to 90 days (tentative target)

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Streamlined Processes Procurement Administrative Lead Time

Determine the average time from receipt 210 to 270 days

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Supplier Satisfaction Extent of supplier (i.e. contractor/vendor) 95% for FY 2002

Socioeconomics Percent achievement of assigned goals. 100% achievement.

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Employee Satisfaction Superior Executive Leadership: 84%

Organization Structured for Continuous Assessment of the level of continuous 81%

OBJECTIVE MEASURE TARGET

Optimum Cost Efficiency of Cost to Spend Ratio: Procurement organization’ s .012

You might also like