FED BSC FY 2002 Rev1

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
FEDERAL PROCUREMENT SYSTEM
BALANCED SCORECARD
PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
FY2002
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.
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
CUSTOMER
To Achieve Our Vision,
How Should We Appear
To Our Customers?
FINANCIAL INTERNAL BUSINESS

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?
BALANCED SCORECARD
PERSPECTIVES AND OBJECTIVES
CUSTOMER
- Customer Satisfaction
- Effective Service/Partnership
INTERNAL BUSINESS
PROCESSES
FINANCIAL MISSION - Acquisition Excellence
- Optimum Cost Efficiency of - Most Effective Use of
Purchasing Operations VISION Contracting Approaches
- Streamlined Processes
STRATEGY - On-Time Delivery
- Supplier Satisfaction
- Socioeconomics
LEARNING
AND
GROWTH
- Access to Strategic Information
- Employee Satisfaction
- Organization Structured for
Continuous Improvement
- Quality Workforce
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.
with the quality of goods and services We will not measure in FY 2001
Data Verification: Procurement Directors
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.
entered into Excel Data Reduction
INTERNAL BUSINESS PERSPECTIVE
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.
able for compliance and/or HQ reviews .
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.
Use of Electronic Commerce: Use of Electronic Commerce:

Data Source: Electronic Small
Purchase Systems, PADS, CUTS, 1. Percent of purchase and delivery 33% for FY 2001
local tracking systems orders issued through electronic 50% for FY 2002
Data Generation: Data is tabulated commerce as a percentage of total 60% for FY 2003
from the listed tracking systems. simplified acquisition actions.
are responsible for accurately reporting 2. Percent of all synopses (for which 100% of actions over $25K.
results and retention of records in accor-
widespread notice is required) and
dance with records management require-
associated solicitations posted on
ments. Records will be made available for
FEDBIZOPPS. This measure will be
tracked at HQ.
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,
HQ will randomly sample pre and post Percent of total eligible service contract 60%
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
generate data from PADS.
1. Percent of total dollars obligated on 75%
Data Verification: Procurement Directors 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.
(The above two measures will be tracked

at Headquarters)
Streamlined Processes
Procurement Administrative Lead Time: Procurement Administrative Lead Time

Data Source: PADS, local tracking (PALT) for Acquisition:
systems
Data Generation: Data is generated Average time from receipt of offer to date 123 days for competitive services between
from PADS and local tracking systems. of award. $1M and $25M.
are responsible for accurately reporting PALT for Financial Assistance:
1. Average time from start of the award 49 days for new non-competitive actions.
process (usually the receipt of acceptable
PR package) to date of award.
2. Average time from receipt of application 150 days for new competitive actions up
to date of award. to $25M.
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.
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
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.
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.
Percent of all acquisition personnel meeting 90% (exception: individuals receiving a

Quality Workforce
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.
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.

FED BSC FY 2002 Rev1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

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

FED BSC FY 2002 Rev1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

FEDERAL PROCUREMENT SYSTEM

Do we get the best LEARNING Do we continue to

FINANCIAL INTERNAL BUSINESS

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

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%

Use of Electronic Commerce: Use of Electronic Commerce:

Performance Based Service Contracts:

(The above two measures will be tracked

Procurement Administrative Lead Time: Procurement Administrative Lead Time

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

Socioeconomics Percent achievement of assigned goals. 100% achievement.

Employee Satisfaction Superior Executive Leadership: 84%

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

Percent of all acquisition personnel meeting 90% (exception: individuals receiving a

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

You might also like