Jean Ryan - Kentucky
Kentucky had done QC business the old fashioned way with old paper worksheets and case files. Started looking for a way to automate the process. In the past, supervisors had no way to review work other than wait on mail runs and pen and ink changes. There was a postage expense related to moving hard copy materials around the state. They were using a tremendous amount of paper. 42 file cabinets. When they relocated, the floor had to be reinforced to accommodate. Presently down to 8 file cabinets. Looked to IS staff for solution. Now using SharePoint as a tool.
(Powerpoint) Built folders on a shared drive. these folders contain the assigned review worksheets/schedules. Analysts can only see the folders to what they are assigned but supervisors can see all folders. This is based on permission levels. Supervisors can go in at any time and look at their work. They can answer processing questions in real time. Notes are kept on case details as well as re-review findings. Policy is also shared via SharePoint. Files can be renamed by users. Meeting notes are built and shared on this drive also. Clerical support needs for QC teams were reduced and staff were reassigned to other areas.
QC reviewers can only see their folder. They cannot see their peers. But supervisors can see all staff assigned under them. There is also a assignment tracking system which monitors case processing and compliance to processing timeframes. (Excel document)
When review is completed, the file is moved to a closed file folder and is no longer contained in the reviewer's personal folder. When cases are pulled for re-review, the case is copied from the closed case folder. Cases are stored by active and negative. The system has a robust search engine.
Analysts create a snapshot of the screen print of the eligibility system material. Other documents are scanned into the SharePoint file. There are no paper QC review files created.
Under a given review, the analyst creates a file containing eligibility screen prints, worksheets, verifications, etc. The naming of the pieces of a review file have consistent naming structures for consistency. That way, the federal re-reviewer can locate the various pieces of a review case easily.
They also keep separate notes such as client's non-cooperation folders were an analyst can keep processing notes to refer back to for efficiencies. They can also double check their original assignments to ensure that they did not overlook something.
To partner with regional staff, the offices have access to folders which provide error memorandums and other QC related communications. These folders are also built with security structure similar to the QC staff structure. This method allows the offices to review and respond to QC errors. Additionally it allows a location point for an office to conduct analysis of their office's past errors when developing a corrective action plan.
Management Evaluations are also stored in these regional folders. This helps everyone in working through problems within a regional office.
QC findings are added regardless of dispositions. Clean cases as well as those with significant findings are added under the regional office folders. These folders are build by month under a master FFY. They do not see the dropped case findings. Under this approach, regional offices respond to the QC error within the same folder. Responses are available to QC as well as policy. Compliance to error responses can be easily tracked.
Questions:
Q: Can you show us how the reviewer uses the 380-1? A: Worksheets are developed in an Excel program. Jean is willing to share this workbook if you would like to see it. Her e-mail address is j.ryan@ky.gov
To address analyst training needs, there is a training folder with example workbooks set up for examples.
Talk to your techs and see what solutions may be available to you.
Q: What are the costs associated with electronic storage? A: Not sure
Q: If verifications come back in which require some type of comment, can the QC reviewer add some type of sticky note? A: Yes, but documentation through the workbook, not on the verification which was scanned into the review record.
Q: Can the supervisor use this for other issues such as case management feedback? A: Yes but you need to build it. Spreadsheets can be developed to address and track the various aspects of case processing.
Q: What columns are on your case tracking spreadsheet? A: Case assignment date, date interview letter is sent, date of interview, date completed, etc.
Q: Do you have reviewers who enter into QCS themselves? a: Yes. Supervisors clear the case for entry into QCS system.
Q: When supervisors clear the case, do they create the PDF file? A: Yes, they move the case into the FFY closed folder. For re-review, the closed case is copied and moved into another folder from which a CD is burnt. For FNS timeliness reviews, only the relevant documents are captured and shared. If any additional documents were needed, they were provided as a hard copy.
Q: Fran asked Jean to share what she has done with him. He indicates that this is the direction that they are moving toward on a Federal level. His vision is that all reviews will be built this way in the future.
Jean believes the process is very user friendly and people adapt to it easily.
Jean is willing to provide more specifics and answer any questions. Just contact her.
No comments:
Post a Comment