2015 oregon department of revenue presentation to ways and … · 2020. 1. 22. · corporate income...

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15)

2015Oregon Department of Revenue

Presentation to the Ways and Means Committee

March 9–12, 2015

www.oregon.gov/dor

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15)

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) i

Table of contents

Who we are ...................................................................................................................................................1 Mission, Vision, Values .......................................................................................................................1 Department of Revenue today ......................................................................................................2What we do ...................................................................................................................................................3 2013–15 General Fund (total resources) ......................................................................................4 Income tax programs ........................................................................................................................5 Personal income tax revenues: How they’re paid ....................................................................6 Compliance continuum ....................................................................................................................7 Property tax administration ............................................................................................................8 Funding of shared services ..............................................................................................................9 Cigarette and tobacco taxes .........................................................................................................10 Other taxes and services ................................................................................................................11Strategic plan .............................................................................................................................................12Tax compliance POP performance ......................................................................................................15Major budget drivers and environmental factors ..........................................................................16Core systems replacement update .....................................................................................................19Refund fraud ...............................................................................................................................................27Income tax programs ..............................................................................................................................31Property tax program..............................................................................................................................39Key performance measures .................................................................................................................. 44

AppendicesAppendix A: Achievements and efficiencies ...................................................................................80Appendix B: 2013 Legislation with possible fiscal impacts .........................................................89Appendix C: House Bill 2020/4131 .......................................................................................................93Appendix D: Ten percent reduction options .................................................................................. 94Appendix E: Long-term vacancies ......................................................................................................95Appendix F: Audit response ..................................................................................................................96Appendix G: New hires and reclassifications ...................................................................................98Appendix H: Information technology projects $1 million + ................................................... 107Appendix I: Key performance measures ........................................................................................ 109

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15)

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 1

Who we are

MissionWe make revenue systems work to fund the public services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens.

VisionWe are a model of revenue administration through

the strength of our people, technology, innovation, service, and collaboration.

ValuesHighly ethical conduct

Fiscal responsibility

Quality in relationships

Service and operational excellence

Accountability

Continuous improvement

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 2

Assistance & OversightCadastralDeferralORMAPTimberValuation

Corporation/EstateWithholding/PayrollOther Agency Accounts (collections)

Special Programs Administration

Director’s OfficeLegislative CoordinationInternal AuditCommunicationsHuman Resources

Program Management Office

Core Systems Replacement Project

Research

Processing CenterFinanceBudgetProcurementIT Services

ComplianceCollectionsProgram Services

Director

BusinessDivision

Deputy Director

Property TaxDivision

Personal Tax & Compliance

Division

Revenue Leadership Team

Agency Program

Management Office

Bend/PendletonEugene

GreshamMedford/Coos Bay

NewportPortland

Field and satellite offices

Administrative Services Division

Department of Revenue

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 3

What we do

Department of Revenue’s major tax programs

Income taxes—personal and corporate• Compliance.

• Collections.

Property tax• Assessment and taxation.

• Mapping.

• Industrial and centrally assessed property valuation.

• County grants.

• County training.

• Deferral programs.

Cigarette and other tobacco taxes• Distributor, wholesaler, retailer, consumer compliance.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 4

Other$699 M

4%

Corporate income tax

$1.06 B7%

Tobacco tax$132 M

1%

2013–15 bienniumSource: December 2014 forecast

2013–15 General Fund

Net General Fund revenues: $15.85 billion

Personal income tax$13.77 B

87%

Estate tax$189 M

1%

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 5

Income tax programs

2013–15 biennium

2013–15 bienniumSource: December 2014 forecast

$14.8 billion94%

of state’s General Fund

Taxpayer assistance and

education

Processing

Banking

Auditing

Collecting

Filing enforcement

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 6

Personal income tax revenues

How they’re paid

Audit & collections$188 M

3%

Income tax withholding, quarterly estimated payments,

and payments with returns$6.65 B

97%

Fiscal year 2014Source: DOR Research Section

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 7

Compliance continuum

Voluntary: Less expensive, more e�

cientInvoluntary: M

ore expensive, less e�cient

Information from XXXXXXXXXXXXX.

Agency Taxpayer

Propose tax legislation

Publish forms and instructions

Assist and educate taxpayers

Process return data and payments

Resolve errors and issue bills

Resolve protests

Audits

Collections

Litigation

Learn about tax obligations

Review information

File returns and make payments

Answer questions about filing errors

Review bills and pay or protest

Pay taxes found due after protest

Undergo audit

Collection defense

Litigation defense

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 8

Property tax administration

2013–15 biennium

2013–15 bienniumSource: DOR Research Section

$11.3 billion

Counties$1.9 billion

Specialdistricts

$1.5 billion

Urban renewal

$432 million

Schools$4.6 billion

Cities$2.4 billion

Centrally assessed property valuation

Industrial property valuation

Mapping

County administration

oversight

Forestland valuation

Department of Revenue functions

Community colleges

$466 million

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 9

Funding of shared services

2015–17 projections

$ in

bill

ions

Education Public Safety

Human Services

Other

Property TaxesIncome Taxes

0

3

6

9

12

15

Income tax $16.7 billion

Property tax $12.4 billion

TOTAL $29.1 billion

K–12 systemESDsCommunity colleges

Public healthSeniorsWaterSewer

SheriffJailPoliceDistrict attorneyFire

LibrariesParks & recreation

Source: DOR Research Section

Education Public Safety Human Services Other

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 10

Cigarette & tobacco taxes

2013–15 biennium

2013–15 bienniumSources: DOR Research Section, Legislative Revenue Office

$512 million

Cities, counties, public transit

$22 million

Stop smoking education$16 million

Mental health programs

$23 million

OregonHealth Plan$319 million

GeneralFund

$132 millionProcessing

BankingCollecting

Audits

Inspections

Taxpayer/distributor education and

assistance

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 11

Other taxes and services

• Estate tax.

• Emergency communications tax (911).

• State lodging tax.

• Hazardous substance fee.

• Amusement device tax.

• Petroleum load fee.

• Forest products harvest tax.

• Small-tract Forest Land Severance tax.

• Transit taxes.

• Court fines and assessments.

• Other agency collections.

• Senior citizens, veterans, disabled citizens deferral programs.

• Elderly Rental Assistance.

• Nonprofit homes for the elderly.

Agency

150-800-556, page 1 (Rev. 02-15)

February 2015

Strategic Plan

Strategic foundations

Outcom

e areas

Division

strategies

Mission

We m

ake revenue systems w

ork to fund the public services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens.

VisionW

e are a model of revenue adm

inistration through the strength of our people, technology, innovation, service, and collaboration.

Values • H

ighly ethical conduct. • Q

uality in relationships. • Service and operational excellence.

• Accountability.

• Fiscal responsibility. • Continuous im

provement.

Voluntary compliance

Enforcement

Employee engagem

entCustom

er experienceEquity &

uniformity

Agency

ASD

• Create easier w

ays for people to com

ply and file.•

Maintain adequate lifecycle

replacement of equipm

ent and softw

are.

BUS/PTA

C•

Create easier ways for people

to comply and file.

• A

ssist taxpayers and tax practitioners w

ith voluntary com

pliance.

Executive•

Provide easy access.

PMO

PTD•

Streamline filing and reporting

requirements.

• Provide training and im

prove com

munication.

• M

odernize systems

and implem

ent process im

provements.

ASD

BUS/PTA

C•

Focus on greatest areas of risk.•

Leverage data and systems for

enforcement.

• U

se tools and opportunities to enhance enforcem

ent efforts

Executive

PMO

PTD

ASD

• Ensure em

ployees have the right tools and skills to do their job.

• Foster a positive w

ork environm

ent that allows

employees to thrive.

BUS/PTA

C•

Attract and retain outstanding

employees by investing in our

staff.•

Value employee participation.

• Create a w

orkplace that allows


Executive•

Strengthen our workforce.

• Value em

ployee participation.•

Create a workplace that allow

s em

ployees to thrive.

PMO

• A

ttract and retain outstanding em

ployees by investing in staff.•


• Create a w

orkplace that allows


PTD•

Encourage employee

participation.•

Increase staff skills and com

petency.•

Stay engaged with staff

through performance

managem

ent plans.•

Clarify expectations.

ASD

• Custom

ers receive timely and

accurate services.

BUS/PTA

C•

Customer self-sufficiency.

• Custom

er experience.

Executive•

Develop new

business processes.

• M

odernize technology.

PMO

• Com

municate im

portant inform

ation.

PTD•

Keep information current and

accurate.•

Work w

ith county partners to im

prove processes.•

Improve quality of assistance

provided to counties.•

Improve com

munication and

partnerships with counties.

• Em

phasize collaboration and coordination.

• Sim

plify and improve program

adm

inistration.

ASD

BUS/PTA

C•

Develop clear and consistent

processes.

Executive•

Efficient central services.•

Governance.

• M

anage risks appropriately through internal controls.

PMO

• Prom

ote understanding and uniform

ity.

PTD•

Modernize system

s.•

Strengthen competency of

staff.•

Collaborate with county

partners to identify and im

plement best practices.

• Clarify departm

ent oversight role.

• Identify areas for stream

lining.

BUS/PTAC division page

150-800-556, page 4 (Rev. 02-15)

February 2015

Strategic Plan


Outcom

e areas

Business D

ivision/Personal Tax and

Compliance

Division

strategies

Mission

We m



VisionW



Values • H



• Accountability.


provement.


Enforcement

Employee engagem

entCustom


uniformity


to comply and file

• Focus on the needs of the custom

er.•

Use third party data to assist

taxpayers.

Assist taxpayers and tax

practitioners with voluntary

compliance

• U

se education and assistance to help people com

ply.•

Understand the factors

that influence voluntary com

pliance.

Focus on greatest areas of risk•

Risk is used to determine case

selection and prioritization.•

Use processing system

s for initial return verification.


enforcement

• U

se data to identify non-com

pliance (audit, filing enforcem

ent, and collections).•

Leverage partnerships to gain third party inform

ation/data.

Use tools and opportunities to

enhance enforcement efforts

• Leverage public perception of noncom

pliance to enhance com

pliance with tax law

s.•

Maxim

ize public and private partnerships.



staff•

Employees have access to

training, information, and tools

needed to do their job.•

Employees know

how to be

successful at DO

R.•

Successes are recognized and celebrated.

Value employee participation

• Support staff participation in process re-engineering and process im

provement.

• Encourage staff to seek com

mittee involvem

ent.•

Provide opportunities for em

ployees to participate in decision m

aking processes.


s em

ployees to thrive•

Find opportunities to align business needs w

ith flexible w

ork schedules and telework

opportunities.•

All em

ployees are treated fairly, respectfully, and equally.

• Provide opportunity for ideas to be heard and acknow

ledged.

Customer self-sufficiency

• Custom

ers have access to do business transactions 24/7.

• Taxpayers have options and know

what their options are to

meet their needs.

• O

ur customers have the tools

that they need to comply.

Providing a good “customer

experience”•

Staff understand and provide a good “custom

er experience.”•

Use clear, concise,

comm

unications.•

Customers get the assistance

they need.•

A clearly articulated service

standard is available to the public that sets the expectations.


processes•

Use cross division w

ork groups to create and update shared policies and procedures w

here they exist.

• Exception processes are docum

ented.

BUS/PTAC

150-800-556, page 10 (Rev. 02-15)

February 2015

Strategic Plan


Outcom

e areas

Business D

ivision/Personal Tax and

Compliance

Division

strategies

Initiatives

Mission

We m



VisionW



Values • H



• Accountability.


provement.


Enforcement

Employee engagem

entCustom


uniformity


to comply and file.

Assist taxpayers and tax

practitioners with voluntary

compliance.

Focus on greatest areas of risk.


enforcement.

Use tools and opportunities to

enhance enforcement efforts.



staff.



s em

ployees to thrive.

Customer self-sufficiency.

Customer experience.


processes.

• Process all G

reenlight Rebates w

ithin 10 days of receipt.•

Identify conflicting statutes and prepare report.

• Schedule all conferences w

ithin 30 days and complete

within 60 days.

• Respond to iW

ire calls within

24 hours.•

Respond to Payroll help questions w

ithin 48 hours.•

Review and update

oregon.gov content.•

Review SSA

W-2 specifications.

• Review

IRS 1099 specifications.•

Incorporate professional resilience into our daily actions.

• M

aintain high quality of custom

er service.•

Base our interactions as custom

er service is our core. •

Cross train units.

• D

evelop agency-wide training

plan for use of iWire.

• Review

and update Rocket content for section.

• O

rganize and plan “Taking Care of Business.”

• Review

RPI requests within 30

days of receipt.•

Encourage participation in agency-w

ide fundraising events.

• Plan em

ployee recognition and unit activities.

• Exceed offsite investigation expectations.

• Recognize staff w

hen goals are m

et.•

Transparency in processes (legislation, rules, etc.).

• Install filtered w

ater fountains.

• U

se iWire to identify non-filers

in our system.

• D

evelop additional ACT

investigation letters.•

Assess liable entity on

collection liabilities within 60

days of assignment.

• Im

plement ICN

full circle audits pilot program

.

• D

evelop database of comm

on subm

ission errors for iWire.

• D

evelop a PAP review

group.•

Review and update

documentation guide.

• Provide com

plete monthly

production reports.•

Create organizational checklist and procedure for CS2 files.

• D

evelop standardized appeal responses and procedure.

• M

aintain crosstraining betw

een administrative

support and registrations.

• O

rganize and attend 30 outreach events a year.

• Review

and revise all iWire

documentation.

• Provide one call resolution.

• Evaluate taxpayer strategies for com

pliance risks.•

Maxim

ize use of current inform

ation.•

Support core systems

replacement (CSR).

• Identify em

erging compliance

issues.

Withholding &

Payroll Tax Section

BUS/PTAC, W

PTS

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 15

Tax compliance POP performance

Cost Revenue generation (as of December 31, 2014)

Revenue generation commitment

$3.8 million $29.4 million $33.1 million

Source: DOR Personal Income Tax and Compliance program

2,836 liabilities and $4.3 million in debt written o�.

28,818 liabilities and $58.4 million in debt cancelled.

1. No assets located in three years.

2. No payments received in seven years.

3. No correspondence received in three years.

4. Account assigned to a �eld agent for more than a year.

1. No assets located in three years.

2. No payments received in three years.

3. No correspondence receivedin three years.

4. Taxpayer not deceased.

5. No liabilities older than seven years.

Cancellation (ORS 305.155)Write-o� (ORS 293.240)

Accounts receivable clean-up

Employees hired Focus areas12 tax auditors Self-employed individuals, pass-through entities, and

single issue audits.10 revenue agents Accounts receivable clean-up, tax collection. 6 revenue agents Tax collection. 1 public service rep Additional call center volume. 1 audit manager Supervise auditors. 1 collections manager Supervise collectors.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 16

Property Valuation SystemThe agency is responsible for assessing real market value (RMV) on approximately 600 centrally assessed properties (e.g. companies such as airlines, utilities, railroads, telecom-munications, etc), and another 850 sites defined as principal or secondary industrial (i.e. val-ued at over $1 million and engaged in processing or manufacturing activities). The agency currently uses antiquated applications and internally developed databases, spreadsheets, and paper files to manage this complex responsibility. Because of the current system’s limited capabilities and its fragmented and increasingly unsupportable architecture, many processes are manual and paper-driven. These processes are prone to both error and inef-ficiency. This combination of manual processes and less reliable, fragmented, and limited technology poses a risk to our long-term ability to develop accurate and timely RMVs.

The agency believes the appropriate way to address the problem is to deploy a commercial off-the-shelf, computer assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) software system. CAMA systems have been in use in all Oregon counties for more than 15 years. They are designed to aid the public property tax administrator in the daunting task of annually valuing each and every assessable unit of property in a given jurisdiction. These CAMA systems make it easier to accurately identify, track, and maintain data related to assessable property. They also

Major budget drivers and environmental factorsMajor budget drivers

Core systems replacement projectThe agency is in year two of a planned four-year project to replace the agency’s core legacy systems with a modern system solution and infrastructure to ensure that the agency’s business needs can be supported into the future. The new system will streamline agency processes and utilize improved access to data to increase effectiveness in compliance and revenue generation. The first rollout converted corporation and cigarette and tobacco taxes, and was successful.

Over the next two years, the agency will convert the personal income tax and withholding programs. Because these are our two largest programs in terms of size and impact, we will have to carefully manage both the project activities and the personal income tax program resources to ensure successful conversion while continuing to deliver on our critical pri-mary mission.

Personal income tax refund fraudPersonal income tax refund fraud attempts are increasing. While many attempts are stopped before a payment is made, the dollar loss from unrecoverable payments to fraudulent tax return filers will continue to grow without aggressive intervention. The agency has identi-fied opportunities to invest in two new tools to reduce fraudulent return processing:

• Using additional GenTax products, integration of third-party data analytics and an identity theft quiz.

• Creating the ability to match, in real time, state income tax withholding claimed on per-sonal income tax returns against that reported by employers.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 17

allow for appropriate appraisal techniques to be employed in developing and maintain-ing statutory value in a timely manner—promoting equity and uniformity of assessment administration.

County Assessment Function Funding Assistance (CAFFA) shortfallDue to a significant increase in costs, combined with relatively flat CAFFA revenue, the agency has a funding shortfall related to the statutorily mandated duties of the Industrial Valuation and Centrally Assessed Valuation programs. In order to counter this increasing shortfall, the Property Tax Division has held General Fund positions vacant and limited services and supplies expenditures.

Property Tax Deferral for Disabled and Senior CitizensTo address a serious threat of insolvency, the Legislature has made a series of significant program changes to the Property Tax Deferral for Disabled and Senior Citizens program in each of the last four legislative sessions. These program changes significantly modified eligibility and filing requirements to ensure that the program remained viable for the needi-est of recipients. These changes significantly increased the complexity of administering the program and have created an ongoing need for additional deferral program staff.

Implementation of revised 911 programHouse Bill 4055, passed by the 2014 Legislature, extended the current tax to prepaid tele-communications service subscribers until October 1, 2015 and established a point-of-sale method of collection for the tax program thereafter. Currently, we receive returns from approximately 250 to 300 taxpayers. We expect between 1,700 and 2,000 additional returns, quarterly, after implementing the new point-of-sale collection method. Increased distribu-tions under HB 4055 allowed us to fund the increased administrative expenses anticipated due to the law changes. We plan to use these funds to increase resources for taxpayer assis-tance, collection, return processing, and enforcement.

While HB 4055 allowed additional funds to the department for administration, the Legisla-ture did not authorize additional positions to handle the increased duties. The agency did submit a fiscal impact form when the measure was considered that identified the need for additional resources in the 2015–17 biennium. We are requesting two positions to meet our increased auditing and processing needs for this revised program.

Potential Personal Income Tax KickerThe last time Oregon’s kicker law was triggered in 2007, it cost $1 million to issue 1.65 mil-lion checks. Because the method of distributing the kicker was changed in 2011 to a credit on the personal income tax return rather than a check, we expect to be able to cover the minimal administrative costs within our regular budget appropriation, if necessary.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 18

Major environmental factors2008 recession and statewide accounts receivable management

We have identified a pattern of growth in our accounts receivable over the past four years, with the total due increasing from $815 million in 2010 to $1 billion in 2013. The majority of this increase is due to lingering effects of the 2008 recession and subsequent growth in personal income tax non-filer assessments. Internally, the agency’s high-level outcome is to ensure the accounts receivable balance accurately reflects the net funds we anticipate receiv-ing through timely resolution of accounts. The new GenTax system has several state-of-the-art collection tools that we expect to be able to utilize when the system is fully implemented.

Additionally, the department is a key participant in the Department of Administrative Services-led project to develop an enterprise accounts receivable management strategy. The department is also working with the Institute for Modern Government (part of Willamette University’s Atkinson Graduate School of Management) to identify and advocate for collec-tion best practices.

County fundingA significant issue facing the property tax system in Oregon is ongoing funding issues affecting timber-dependent counties. The effectiveness of the property tax system in Oregon is dependent on the ability of both the department and the counties to adequately admin-ister their assessment and taxation programs. As counties continue to be budget-stressed, the agency must be prepared to provide appropriate support, despite already stretched resources. The department is actively working with the most affected counties to identify ways to ensure work continues to be completed timely, accurately, and efficiently.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 19

Core systems replacement update

Replacing our core systemsThe department is in the midst of replacing the majority of its core tax systems to mitigate the growing risks of not being able to support its aging legacy systems and maintain current service levels.

The agency is responsible for administering nearly $16 billion per biennium of General Funds. Replacing core tax systems ensures the agency can continue to achieve its mission of making revenue systems work to fund the public services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens. It also enables the agency to move toward its vision of becoming a model of revenue administration through the strength of our people, technology, innovation, service, and collaboration.

The agency determined that a commercial off-the-shelf integrated tax system and data warehouse best fit the agency’s needs. With this option, the basic architecture and programming are already complete, so deployment can begin quickly. In addition, this solution ensures that the agency will be able to keep up with technology changes in the future.

The agency sought and received approval to begin implementation of a new integrated tax system and data warehouse (GenTax) through Fast Enterprises, LLC.

To maximize the opportunity for successful implementation, the agency is implementing the new system using a phased approach. These phases include:

Planning phases• 2009–11 biennium: Planning and preparation.• 2011–13 biennium: Agency readiness and procurement.

CSR implementation phase*2013–15 biennium

• Fall 2014 – Rollout 1: Corporate and tobacco tax programs.

2015-17 Biennium2013-15 Biennium 2017-19 Biennium

7/1/20

13

7/1/20

14

1/1/20

14

7/1/20

15

1/1/20

15

7/1/20

16

1/1/20

16

GenTax Installation

1/1/20

17

Rollout 2 (PIT, Transit)

Rollout 1 (Corp, Tobacco)

Rollout 3 (Withholding, etc.)

7/1/20

17

Rollout 4 (Other)

Project implementation roadmap

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 20

Enhanced compliance and revenue• Increased ability to uncover noncompliant tax-

payers.• Faster identification of under-reporting taxpay-

ers.• More effective audit candidate selection.• Increased fraud detection.

Improved customer service• Wider variety of secure and efficient web ser-

vices with real-time processing.• Complete, accurate and timely answers to tax-

payer questions.• Increased information security and privacy.

Increased overall efficiency• Improved data driven decision making.• Reduced errors and transaction time.• Faster training time.• Fewer redundant steps.

Increased flexibility in tax administration• Quick, economical response to statutory

changes and requests for information.• Ability to adapt to evolving taxpayer needs,

behaviors and complex financial transactions.

Risk avoidanceThe primary benefit to replacing the core tax systems is continued support of existing revenue streams by reinvestment in core infrastructure, which reduces the risk of revenue loss.

Revenue loss risks include:

• Some key systems are at risk of reaching maximum capacity and/or failing.

• Highly specialized and inflexible applications require manual workarounds to meet business needs.

• Inflexible, obsolete, and diverse architecture adds complexity and may not continue to be supported (skill sets fading or increasingly difficult to find).

• Seasonal changes and legislative tax law revisions require multiple, complex system updates which take time. The agency risks not being able to execute such changes by the time laws or policies are effective.

Improved performanceAn integrated system and data warehouse will provide a single view of taxpayer information, broader access to data analytics and management tools, more consistent business processes, better tools for employees to conduct their work, improved capabilities for sharing resources and data, and increased ability to respond timely to changes in laws and regulations.

States that have implemented a a similar system have realized benefits such as:

2015–17 biennium

• Fall 2015 – Rollout 2: Personal income tax, transit self-employment, deferral, emergency communications (911 Tax), and estate tax programs.

• Fall 2016 – Rollout 3: Withholding, transit payroll, Other Agency Accounts, and small programs.

2017–19 biennium

• Fall 2017 – Rollout 4: Other remaining programs.

*CSR rollouts include additional tax and revenue programs that are not listed here.

Business driversThe primary business drivers for replacing core tax systems are risk avoidance and improved performance.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 21

Rollout 1 updateThe first rollout of the new GenTax integrated tax system for the corporation, cigarette, and tobacco programs was completed November 2014, on schedule and under budget. To accom-plish the first conversion, the agency developed detailed cutover plans involving processes within both GenTax and legacy systems. Functionality of both systems was validated during cutover weekend. Converted tax data was also verified for accuracy and reconciled to the penny ($4,421,400,865.99). Rollout 1 user profiles (687) were established in advance and ready at go-live.

In addition, the agency will have ongoing membership in the community of system users, sharing data and best practices, as well as ensuring the content and reliability of future product releases.

Commitment to planning and keeping to those plans.

Commitment to industry best practices.

Improving based on lessons learned.

Attention to detail.

Trusted partnerships.

Competent vendor.

Multiple mock data

conversions.

Functional “staging”

environment.

Bene�ts of a COTS

solution.

Keys to rollout successKeys to rollout success

There are three overall project management concepts the department is using to guide the CSR project implementation. These concepts are:

• A commitment to planning and adherence to those plans.

• A commitment to industry best practices.

• Making frequent, ongoing improvements based on lessons learned.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 22

Several key activities contributed to a successful first implementation, including:

• Attention to detail in all aspects of the project.

• Trusted partnership with stakeholders.

• A competent vendor with significant experience working with tax administration agencies.

• Multiple mock data conversions conducted prior to go-live to identify and address potential issues in advance.

• A fully functioning pre-production technical “staging” environment where conversion activities could be thoroughly planned.

• Full utilization of the benefits of a COTS solution, including ongoing monitoring after conversion to verify that interfaces to other systems and other agencies are working appropriately.

The CSR project continues to operate under budget for the 2013–15 biennium. General Fund savings are from lower than expected Enterprise Technology Services (ETS) costs. Other Fund savings are from lower than expected hardware and software costs, lower staff costs due to a later start date, and not using available contingency funds.

These activities, in conjunction with the overall project management concepts, enabled the department to be successful during Rollout 1.

Rollout 2 updatePlanning is now underway for programs in Rollout 2 (personal income tax, transit self-employment tax, estate and trust taxes, disabled and senior citizen property tax deferral, and emergency communications [911] tax).

Rollout 2 activities are on schedule. The project schedule will be re-baselined once enough information is available to understand the resource requirements, operational impacts, and project needs for Rollout 2 programs (Spring 2015).

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 23

Governor’s budget for CSR – 2015-17

CSR project costs (in millions), as of December 2014

2009–13 2013–15 2015–17* 2017–19 TotalsDOR contribution Ongoing agency operating costs $7.3 $0.7 $0.9 $0.3 $9.1General Fund Non-bond eligible general services/supplies $0.2 $0.2 $0.1 $0.5 Project costs $1.8 $4.2 $1.5 $7.5 Total General Fund $2.0 $4.4 $1.6 $8.0Other Funds (bonds) Debt financed project costs $18.9 $26.7 $9.1 $54.7Project totals (excluding debt service) $7.3 $21.6 $32.1 $10.9 $71.8

The agency is requesting funding to continue implementing the CSR project. Overall, the resource requests for staff and funding for contractors has tracked very close to initial plans. Updated project costs will be provided during the 2015 Legislative Session.

The agency has identified a few areas where minor modifications to resource requests or funding are necessary to adequately continue the project. Specific requests are described below.

StaffingWe previously received 32 positions for the life of the project. These positions are being used to back-fill for staff who have been moved to the project from a program area to ensure current

Rollout 2 schedule

Note: Component figures may not total accurately due to rounding.*Agency Requested Budget

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 24

2015–17 2017–19Core systems replacementDOR project team: Project management team (Three from within Program Management Office) 9 4.5

Technical team 14 7

Business team 13 6.5

Total FTE 36 18

Note: Does not include testing and training activities, which will involve most agency staff at certain times.

We will be coming to the 2017 Legislature with information about the type and amount of resources necessary to operate in our new environment after Rollout 4.

Facilities

• The project team is housed in vacant space at the Revenue building (Room 471).

• Additional space is needed to house testers, trainers, and production support for the life of the project (Room 470). Our 2015–17 cost projections include additional expenses through DAS (will use existing furniture already provided by DAS).

• Three training rooms have been set up in Salem. Training is also being held in field offices.

2013–15* 2015–17 2017–19 TotalOriginally request-ed (Room 471)

$0.7 $0.3 $0.08 $1.1

Additional request (Room 470)

- $0.2 $0.06 $0.3

Total $0.7 $0.5 $0.1 $1.4

*Includes a one-time build-out cost to prepare space and purchase of furniture and miscellaneous office equipment.

operational levels and commitments are maintained. Three positions from the agency’s Program Management Office are also dedicated to the project.

We are requesting one additional FTE to coordinate data conversion and data cleansing activities throughout the life of the project. We underestimated the level of effort necessary to coordinate this activity.

We are also requesting reclassification of two previously approved positions to reflect a higher-level technical skill set needed for configuration duties and support of GenTax. These positions will be critical to learn how to operate GenTax before implementation phases end.

For an initiative of this size and scope, we need to temporarily augment certain staff functions in both business areas and in IT Services, as well as acquire skills that we currently don’t have in the department. During implementation, we are back-filling certain positions or contracting out for services to satisfy project and current system needs.

Planned number of FTE required for the remainder of the initiative, including the one additional position requested is demonstrated in the table below.

CSR project team FTE

CSR facilities expenses (in millions)

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 25

Agency-wide, expanded team effort• Transitioning to a new core system is an agency-wide effort, a major undertaking that uses

all of our resources.

• Programs are providing subject matter experts to help configure GenTax.

• Programs also provide staff to thoroughly test the configuration of the system to be sure it will meet their business needs, and provide trainers to create training materials and conduct classes.

• Programs cleanse program data to prepare it for conversion from our legacy systems into GenTax.

• Our IT Services staff is making and testing modifications to our legacy systems before and throughout each rollout.

Contracts• Contractors are being used where needed.

• Contractors currently engaged on the CSR project include:

Vendor name Role Contract typeFast Enterprises, LLC Implementation Fixed price,

deliverables-basedCSG Government Solutions, Inc. Quality assurance, indepen-

dent verification and validation

Fixed price, deliverables-based

Bluecrane, Inc. and RK Technical Associates, LLC

Project management advisor and schedule controller


Sierra-Cedar, Inc. Organizational change leadership


Enterprise Technology Services (ETS) Costs• Original ETS cost projections were estimated based on 2011–13 rates with an anticipated

inflationary increase.

• We continue to monitor the increased ETS services as we implement and operate GenTax to determine our future usage and ETS costs. To date, actual ETS costs are running below estimates.

Project funding, including Article XI-Q bondsThe CSR project is being financed each biennium through three sources:

• The agency’s budget.

• An additional General Fund appropriation for ETS fees, contracted maintenance and support, non-bond eligible general services and supplies, and bond debt service.

• Article XI-Q general obligation bonds.

Six Article XI-Q bonds are being sequentially issued by DAS, each with a seven-year maturity period.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 26

SummaryThe Department of Revenue is seeking:

• $17.4 million in General Fund appropriation for 2015–17.

• $4.2 million of these costs are for ETS fees and contract maintenance.

• $.2 million is for estimated non-bond fund eligible general services and supplies.

• Debt service costs are projected for $13 million in 2015–17.

• $26.7 million in Other Fund limitation for 2015–17 for the debt-financed costs of continuing installation, Rollout 2 and 3 vendor payments, contractor expenses, developer and project management staffing, hardware, and Quality Assurance/IV&V costs. This request includes:

• One additional FTE for work coordinating data conversion and data cleansing activities.

• Reclassification of two previously approved technical positions due to more complex skill sets needed for configuration and long-term system support and operation.

Updated project costs will be provided during the 2015 Legislative Session.

Looking to 2017–19The agency is undergoing substantial transformation as we change our business processes to take advantage of new tools in GenTax. These improved processes and tools require different skill sets and shifts in resources to be most effective in our new environment. We will present the 2017 Legislature with a package that will true-up our resource needs based on our understanding at that time to ensure we have staff working in the right classification and to best position ourselves to execute our mission and vision.

The agency will also be seeking funding for annual maintenance and support costs of the new system after implementation, and estimated ongoing ETS server and storage costs for the new system (net of savings from reduced ETS fees associated with retiring legacy systems). Estimated cost for these items beginning in 2019 is approximately $8 million per biennium. This provides the agency with system upgrades as new versions of the system are released. This ensures, for example, that 10 years after GenTax is first installed, the agency will be using the most current version. The agency will no longer be concerned with upgrading its core tax system because they will always be operating in the most current system available. System enhancements, if necessary, may require additional funds.

The agency will present new opportunities to enhance compliance and improve service to the governor and the Legislature. We’ve already identified one opportunity, enhanced fraud detection services. It’s contained in a separate Policy Option Package for the 2015 Legislature.

• Bond issuance costs and interest expense to date have been less than originally estimated.

• DAS provides updated bonding costs throughout the project.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 27

Refund fraudTax refund fraud is a growing problem nationwide. In the past, a typical fraudulent refund involved an altered W-2 or enhanced deductions on the return. People have also counterfeited Schedule C returns, which are used to establish earned income for refundable credits. Today, the majority of fraudulent refunds are the result of identity theft. Tax returns are filed with a stolen social security number and fictitious W-2 information. For example, stolen identities from a local organization were gathered by a person in another state and used to file several hundred Oregon returns electronically from another country. Of these, the Department of Revenue caught over $1.1 million, but paid nearly $65,000 in refunds. Of that $65,000, $40,000 was recovered before the refund was withdrawn from the bank account.

Taxing authorities implement rules-based filters to block many of these refunds. While often successful, the true amount of fraud is unknown. It is also nearly impossible to bill and recall the disbursed funds when fraud is discovered, as the funds are often spent or transferred immediately, and the fraudulent filer’s physical location is generally unknown.

NumbersFederalThe IRS estimates that $29.4 billion in fraudulent federal refunds were attempted in 2013. The IRS estimates they stopped or recovered $24.2 billion (82 percent of the estimated attempted fraud), but issued $5.2 billion in fraudulent refunds in 2013.

OregonIn 2014, the department stopped 4,779 fraudulent state refunds (out of 1.9 million returns overall), totaling $7.85 million. The department paid $145,279 in fraudulent refunds where fraud determinations were made after refunds were processed and sent. $50K

$100K

$500K

$1M

$1.5M

$2M

76 paid

2010 2011 2012 2013

StoppedPaid

2014

$2.5M

$3M

$3.5M

$4M

$4.5M

$5M

$6M

$5.5M

424 stopped

51 paid

983 stopped

15 paid

2,037 stopped

56 paid

1,798 stopped

159paid

4,779 stopped

Note: Paid amounts re�ect unrecovered refund amounts.

$6.5M

$7M

$7.5M

$8M

Source: DOR Personal Income Tax and Compliance program

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 28

The agency paid roughly two percent of the total known fraud. If the 18 percent federal estimate for issued and unrecovered fraudulent returns is applied to Oregon, the department could have missed an additional $1.1 million in fraudulent returns.

Oregon fraud review pilot programsIn the 2013 budget document, the department mentioned two fraud pilot programs. For the first, a vendor reviewed 2.5 million records from 2011 individual tax returns for potential fraud. This review flagged over 92,660 returns as suspicious. Of that, 26,000 were potentially fraudulent, representing $13.8 million in refunds. This wasn’t a paid project and individual account findings weren’t shared with the department, so we were unable to verify if refunds were actually fraudulent, or if they matched fraudulent refunds already stopped by our efforts. But, this shows that there is likely more fraud not being caught.

In 2013, the department also paid for a test project with ARM Insight, Inc., from Portland. We sent ARM the Automated Clearing House (ACH) records generated for direct deposit refunds when a refund was processed. Using agreements with banking companies, ARM ran their analytics against the ACH information and other banking transactions. They noted anomalies and suspicious refunds, notifying the department in time to stop the refund before withdrawal. In all, the department verified and stopped 22 refunds identified by ARM, totaling $10,585. ARM also identified six refunds totaling $1,485 that were withdrawn, but the department was unable to recover these funds. This project confirmed that the department is doing well in catching fraud, at least in this arena.

Processing refundsCharacteristics of the current tax processing schedule typically hamper the ability to effectively verify a refund before it is issued. For instance, over 50 percent of returns are received and processed before the March 31 due date for employer W-2s. Having the employer data to match returns to during processing would provide additional verification of a taxpayer’s income.

There is also pressure to issue refunds promptly. Federal and Oregon law require interest be paid on refunds that take longer than 45 days to issue. The IRS tells taxpayers to expect their refund within 21 days. They averaged 9.6 days in 2013. The department has a key performance measure that sets a 12-day goal for issuing refunds. In 2014, refunds were generally issued in eight days.

Refund delaysThe department understands there’s a tradeoff between increased fraud detection and slower refund delivery. As noted above, refunds that didn’t need manual review were processed in about eight days in 2014. Manual review of refunds in 2014 averaged 60 days to complete and issue a refund. Two years ago, the review of an e-filed return took about 26 days until the refund was issued.

For the last two processing seasons, the department shifted its philosophy and process. The department suspended more returns for potential fraud and reviewed more refund returns. We also focused more on quality than quantity. We changed the review process and strengthened our procedures. While improving fraud detection, refunds took longer to process.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 29

Future strategiesBecause of the growing tax refund fraud industry, the department recognizes it must evolve to be successful in mitigating refund fraud. The department has various future strategies, including:

• Continuing use of our own internal business rules, processes and dedicated staff resources.

• Implementing a data exchange with other states through GenTax (2015 PIT rollout).

• Adjusting resources for fraud detection within GenTax in the coming years (beginning with the 2015 rollout). It will take some realigning to deal with additional returns being flagged for potential fraud. Taxpayers with legitimate refunds will also be impacted, as their refunds may take additional time and effort to be resolved. It will take a year or more to analyze, measure, and adjust to address these needs.

• Using a commercial data analytic product from Thompson Reuters. Thompson has partnered with Fast Enterprises, Inc. to integrate the analytics into GenTax. These analytics:

• Vastly improve the ability to recognize identity theft.• Automate the current, mostly manual process.• Provide insurance/backup to the department’s efforts.• Help prevent fraudulent refund perpetrators from gravitating to Oregon as a state

that doesn’t engage in some additional fraud prevention efforts.

• Implementing real-time withholding match. The department is proposing (with the Employment Department) the development of a real-time withholding match system for processing tax returns. This effort will help limit W-2/wage earner fraud and enhance the department’s wage earner non-filing program.

Summary• We are presenting a package for legislative approval to fund and implement real-time

withholding matching and the implementation of additional fraud detection tools through GenTax.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 30

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 31

Income Tax ProgramsThe Department of Revenue’s income tax programs are responsible for approximately 94 percent of the biennial General Fund divided across personal income tax ($13.77 billion) and corporation income and excise taxes ($1.06 billion). Administration of these tax programs is divided between two divisions: the Business Division and the Personal Tax and Compliance Division. Both are responsible for processing returns, auditing, and collections.

The Business Division directs and manages tax programs where the primary interaction is with business or commercial interest. The Business Division also administers the state’s captive collection agency known as Other Agency Accounts (OAA). Division programs include:

• Corporation income and excise taxes.

• Payroll taxes and withholding.

• Fiduciary and inheritance/estate.

• Other Agency Accounts.

• Tobacco taxes.

• Other miscellaneous taxes (e.g. amusement device, lodging, 911, etc.).

The Personal Tax and Compliance Division administers the state’s personal income tax program. The division commits its resources to strategies that enhance voluntary compliance, such as debt collection, filing enforcement, audits, and assisting taxpayers with filing returns and paying taxes. The department received over 1.9 million personal income tax returns in 2014.

Income tax strategies

Current initiatives

One area of tax compliance work that the department allocates its resources to is filing enforcement. This activity occurs when an individual or business that is required to file a tax return fails to do so. The majority of these cases are selected based on federal tax information from the IRS. We use this data to match against our own records to identify non-filers.

We recently reviewed our processes and made some changes to streamline the filing enforcement process. We removed the requirement to research current employment status on some cases to speed up the process because the goal is to gain voluntary compliance in filing tax returns, not necessarily to collect additional tax.

We also reduced the amount of review necessary before sending tax assessments to non-filing taxpayers. The assessments are based on federal tax return data. While this may not be the full picture of Oregon tax, it is the best information that we have. Because the data does not require adjustment, lower levels of review are appropriate to ensure that policies are being followed. In addition, taxpayers always have the option to file an actual return to correct their tax. We anticipate that these processes will become even more streamlined with the implementation of GenTax because the information we use for our filing enforcement work will be in one computer system, which will allow more automation.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 32

In the corporate tax area, the filing enforcement process is further complicated by complex areas of law, such as economic nexus, which doesn’t rely on people or physical assets in the state when determining taxability. An effective strategy for this tax program is to focus on known areas of non-filing, such as certain industries with historically higher percentages of non-filing.

The corporate tax area also uses indexing based on industry specific economic data to assess tax when actual income information is not available. Even though the corporate tax program was in the first rollout of GenTax, it will take some time to learn about and fully utilize all of the tools available in the new system.

During the 2014 (tax year 2013) processing season we ran a pilot project in which some auditors reviewed returns during processing. There are several things that we learned from this process. First, examining issues on a return soon after filing resulted in a much higher response rates from taxpayers. This is possibly because the records we requested were recently used for the return and, therefore, easier for the taxpayer to locate and provide to us.

We also learned that there are some issues that are too complicated to audit during processing. We believe this project led to more accurate adjustments being made, however, the only measure for this is to track the number of appeals from this work, and it’s too soon to tell if there will be long-term gains. We plan to use auditors again during the 2015 processing season focusing their work based on what we learned last year.

Anticipated tools in Gen Tax

In our corporate filing enforcement work, we will be automating mailings and non-filer determinations more than we do in our current systems. We are exploring the potential for greater use of industry information (North American Industry Classification System, or NAICs) gathered to estimate the amount of tax owed by non-filing companies.

We also anticipate being able to better use information from the IRS, other state agencies, and other sources to identify non-filers and to determine tax that should be paid. This information will accumulate over a few years and provide greater benefit to non-filer determinations in the future.

The new system will allow us to better track and monitor loss items and tax credits that can be carried forward or applied back to previous tax years to reduce tax. With this feature, we will be able to more accurately provide information on unused losses or credits and the potential impact to future tax revenues. We will also be able to more efficiently enforce compliance through automated examination of claimed amounts during processing and the limitations on carryback or carryover periods for these items.

Operational measuresThere are four measures used to evaluate the overall performance of the Business and Personal Tax and Compliance divisions.

Non-filers acted on

This measure tracks the percentage of non-filers the department takes an action on. For each quarter, it compares the number of “request to file” notices that the department sends out to the number of non-filers added to the non-filer system. It covers the personal income tax and corporate tax programs. The target is to take action on 100 percent of non-filers.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 33

Suspense effectiveness

This measure tracks the department’s suspense process by calculating the percentage of suspended returns that result in adjustments. Suspense is an automated process that identifies tax returns with errors, problems, and other red flags for additional review. It covers the suspense function for personal and corporate income taxes. The target is to adjust 50 percent of the returns that suspend.

Non-filers acted on

Source: DOR personal income and corporation tax programs

1/13-3

/13

40

60

80

100

120

7/11-9

/11

7/14-9

/14

4/14-6

/14

1/14-3

/14

10/13-1

2/13

7/13-9

/13

4/13-6

/13

10/12-1

2/12

7/12-9

/12

4/12-6

/12

1/12-3

/12

10/11-1

2/11

Actual

Target

1/11-3

/11

7/14-9

/14

4/14-6

/14

1/14-3

/14

10/13-1

2/13

7/13-9

/13

4/13-6

/13

1/13-3

/13

10/12-1

2/12

7/12-9

/12

10/11-1

2/11

7/11-9

/11

4/11-6

/11

1/12-3

/12

4/12-6

/12

20

30

40

50

60

Suspended/verified returns


Actual

Target

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 34

Liability movement

This measure tracks how efficient the department is at moving liabilities through the collection pipeline. It looks at the subset of liabilities that enter “active collections” status and determines the percentage of those liabilities that are resolved within 90 days, 180 days, and 365 days. It covers personal tax, corporate tax, and payroll tax collections.

80

85

90

95

100 Audits with adjustments

7/14-9

/14

4/14-6

/14

1/14-3

/14

10/13-1

2/13

7/13-9

/13

4/13-6

/13

1/13-3

/13

10/12-1

2/12

7/12-9

/12

4/12-6

/12

1/12-3

/12

10/11-1

2/11



Liabilities moved out of active collections

40

60

80

100

4/14-6

/14

1/14-3

/14

10/13-1

2/13

7/13-9

/13

4/13-6

/13

1/13-3

/13

10/12-1

2/12

7/12-9

/12

Perc

ent

Audit selection effectiveness

This measure tracks the percentage of the department’s audits that result in adjustments in the personal income tax and corporate tax programs. The target is 85 percent.

<365 days

<180 days

<90 days

90-day target

Actual

Target

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 35

Return data

In the Personal Income Tax program, more than 92 percent of the returns are prepared with software. Software helps eliminate errors, specifically those related to the math done on the return and around limits for deductions and credits. The high rate of software use helps lower the suspense rate. The suspense rate for e-filed returns averaged just 8 percent for 2014, compared to 24 percent for paper-filed returns.

As a side note, e-filing has become the norm. Only about 7 percent of returns were paper filed in 2014. Because of this, the department will stop printing and automatically mailing income tax books in 2015.

Accounts receivable (A/R) management• Tax liability is intended to be self-reported. At the end of fiscal year 2014, about 35 percent

of outstanding tax debt in all income tax programs was self-reported. The department has no discretion on whether this debt is added to A/R.

• Approximately 65 percent of outstanding A/R are from liabilities created through department compliance activities. This is an important part of our mission.

• The amount of tax assessed by the department to non-filers is an estimate and includes penalties for non-filing. That estimate is almost certainly incorrect because the department does not have complete knowledge of taxpayers’ income, and generally has even less knowledge of deductions and credits that may be allowed if the taxpayer were to file a true return.

Process improvementA review of A/R balances over the past 10 years helps identify trends. Some trends are related to taxpayer economic circumstances, and some are related to changes in department strategy or tax law.

A/R balances

Source: DOR Research Section

6/20

04

5/20

14

10/2

013

3/20

13

8/20

12

1/20

12

6/20

11

11/2

010

4/20

10

9/20

09

2/20

09

7/20

08

12/2

007

5/20

07

10/2

006

3/20

06

8/20

05

1/20

05

$0

$100

$700

$600

$500

$400

$300

$200

$900

$800Tax

Penalty

Interest

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 36

Composition of accounts receivable A view of accounts receivable at a point in time can provide some context for analysis. Note, the category “Other” is primarily self-assessed.

PIT $680 MCorp $114 MWithholding $79 M

$873 M

Deficiency $183 MFiling enforcement $380 MOther (Primarily self-assessed) $310 M

$873 M

Tax $558 MPenalty $163 MInterest $152 M

$873 M

Income taxes accounts receivable, as of June 30, 2014

78%

13%

9%

21%

44%

35%

64%19%

17%

Source: DOR Personal Income and Corporation Tax programs

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 37

Uncollectible debt managementA component of the tax compliance POP includes the process of writing off or cancelling the department’s uncollectible accounts receivables. The department hired 11 positions (10 revenue agents and one manager) to help accomplish this goal. Their work focused on locating accounts that met the criteria of ORS 305.155 (Cancellation of Uncollectible Tax) and ORS 293.240 (Writing Off Uncollectible Debts Due State Agency).

From July 2013 through December 2013, the department reduced the A/R by 25,543 liabilities, for a total of $50.1 million.

The department planned two periods of time to focus on removing uncollectable accounts. The first period was July through December 2013. The second period will finish prior to the end of this biennium.

Reductions of accounts receivable by account type, as of June 30, 2014

$16.7 M

$11.4 M

$22.0 M

Self-assessed

Deficiency

Failure to file


Managing uncollectable debt in the futureThe department is in the process of implementing Rollout 2 of its Core Systems Replacement project. We are building proper business requirements into GenTax to automate cancellations and write-offs.

We also continue to collaborate with the Department of Administrative Services, Institute for Modern Government, and other stakeholders toward future uncollectable debt management solutions.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 38

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 39

Oregon’s property tax system generated over $11.3 billion in the 2013–15 biennium to fund public schools, police, fire, and other local government services. The counties and the state have a shared responsibility for ensuring statewide uniformity and accuracy in assessment and taxation.

CountiesEach of the 36 counties is responsible for all aspects of direct assessment and taxation (A&T) administration within its county. Counties work cooperatively with each other and the department in addressing shared issues. Total A&T staffing in the counties is approximately

835 FTE.

Department of RevenueThe department, through the Property Tax Division (PTD), has overall supervisory responsibility for the property tax system and is tasked with providing oversight in all areas of property tax administration (appraisal, assessment, tax collection, budgets, and appeals). In addition to the oversight function, PTD is also responsible for valuing all centrally assessed properties and industrial manufacturing properties with values in excess of $1 million. The division also provides general assistance to counties and taxpayers and administers the Property Tax Deferral for Disabled and Senior Citizens programs, several timber tax programs, and the ORMAP and cadastral mapping programs.

PTD is funded for 97 FTE, split between the Support, Assistance and Oversight (SAO) and Valuation Sections. This is a decrease from 135 FTE in 2001.

PTD consists of five major program areas:

• Valuation (industrial and centrally assessed property).

• County assistance, support, and oversight.

• Property tax deferral.

• Timber tax.

• ORMAP and cadastral.

Valuation SectionThe department is responsible for appraising, at market value, all industrial manufacturing properties in the state with a value of $1 million or more, in addition to centrally assessed companies such as communications, utilities, and railways. Approximate property tax revenue raised from valuing industrial and central assessments is $1 billion for the 2013–15 biennium.

The department annually appraises approximately 850 sites, almost 4,200 accounts, and nearly $25 billion of real and personal industrial property value in the state. The department also appraises approximately 600 utility, energy transmission, communications, and transportation companies with an assessed value of approximately $20 billion.

Funding for this work comes from a General Fund appropriation and up to 10 percent annually from the County Assessment Function Funding Assistance (CAFFA) account. The

The Property Tax System in Oregon

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 40

CAFFA program is a grant program created in 1989 by HB2338 to provide an additional funding source for A&T functions. Money for the program comes from a portion of the interest charged on delinquent property taxes and a portion of the fees charged for recording documents. The department distributes 90 percent of the money to the counties and retains up to 10 percent for administration of the grant program and appraisal of principal and secondary industrial and centrally assessed properties.

The CAFFA funding stream has been relatively stable for the past 12 years while the costs and complexity of performing the appraisals have increased significantly. We anticipate that costs associated with performing appraisal work will continue to rise, while the available CAFFA funding will remain flat or possibly decrease.

In addition, the number of properties appraised have increased while the number of appraisers has decreased.

• The number of industrial sites under department responsibility has remained fairly stable since 2001, with a total number of sites in the mid-800s.

• The number of the department’s utility companies for appraisal increased over 35 percent (from approximately 440 to over 600) between 2001 and 2013.

• The number of appraisal staff in the Valuation Section decreased from 44 in 2001 to 38 today.

Funding challengeWithout additional funding to offset the gap between available CAFFA revenue and the costs associated with completing statutorily required appraisal work, our ability to complete the

Source: DOR’s Property Tax Division

CAFFA receipts and charges

Costs charged to CAFFA

2001

-200

2

2002

-200

3

2003

-200

4

2004

-200

5

2005

-200

6

2006

-200

7

2007

-200

8

2008

-200

9

2009

-201

0

2010

-201

1

2011

-201

2

2012

-201

3

2013

-201

4

2014

-201

5

$1.5M

$2M

$2.5M

$3M

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 41

work accurately and timely is at risk. The current gap between available CAFFA funding and expenses is $1.8 million for the 2015–17 biennium, representing approximately 10 positions.

In an effort to address this increased workload, there have been significant organizational changes in both the Valuation Section and the division as a whole. We have created teams that are dedicated to specific functions to better align available resources with identified needs. In addition, we’ve made many process improvements that increased both the quality of the work being completed, as well as the quantity (See Appendix A for examples). The program is also making better use of metrics and available data to improve program performance. We’ve largely reached the limits of our current capabilities, and our ability to make additional improvements is becoming increasingly limited, especially with the tools and staff available.

Technology challengeThe Valuation Section relies on antiquated applications and internally developed, stand-alone systems to assist in the appraisal of department accounts. We lack any kind of industry-standard computer-assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) system that integrates all the necessary data to effectively manage appraisals. Appraisers spend significant time on manual processes, which could be better spent performing appraisal work. In addition, the technology architecture the system is built on is no longer supported, putting us at risk of losing functionality at some point in the future.

Based on our analysis, we believe the appropriate way to address the problem identified above is to fund and deploy a commercial off-the-shelf software system. The proposed funding mechanism is debt financing through a Certificate of Participation.

County Support, Assistance and Oversight SectionThe role of the SAO Section is to provide a variety of services to our county partners, taxing districts, and taxpayers. As with the Valuation Section, the SAO Section has experienced a reduction in staffing (approximately 30 percent) over the past decade. We’ve made significant changes in our organizational structure to better align our resources with identified needs, especially those in the counties.

Given the current funding issues facing a number of counties, especially the timber-dependent counties, the department remains committed to providing an appropriate level of support to ensure the continued integrity of all county A&T programs.

Direct support to taxpayers and counties

Deferral programsAs part of our direct support responsibilities, the department administers the Property Tax Deferral for Disabled and Senior Citizens programs. These programs pay the property taxes for qualified disabled and senior citizens in exchange for a lien against their property for the estimated amount of the deferred taxes plus interest.

Starting around the 2007-09 biennium, money spent on property tax payments exceeded the amount of repayments, due to a variety of mostly economic factors, threatening the viability of the program. The Legislature made changes to eligibility requirements during the 2011, 2012, 2013, and 2014 sessions that ensured continued self-sufficient funding for the program, but also contributed to increased administrative complexity, significantly increasing the workload of program staff. Additional work included increased correspondence, handling appeals, and

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 42

responding to communications from both taxpayers and county staff. Application processing and review time has increased by over 800 percent.

Prior to 2011, the program was administered with three FTE. Since 2011, we have added a policy analyst and an administrative specialist to the team to coordinate processing and policy changes, and respond to appeals. For the 2013 and 2014 processing seasons (December –June), we used six temporary seasonal positions to process applications and respond to taxpayer requests.

The result of these temporary staffing changes and enhancements has been a significant improvement in the service level to taxpayers already in the program and for those seeking to enroll in the program. We have moved from a situation where taxpayers often waited weeks or more to have their eligibility determined or receive answers to questions, to now having sufficient resources to meet the expectations of the majority of participants.

In addition to managing changes to the eligibility requirements, the deferral program is migrating to GenTax in 2015 (Rollout 2), creating an additional workload challenge this year. To ensure we are able to manage the program effectively, we are seeking to make these staffing additions permanent.

Cadastral mapping services to countiesAnother area of direct support to the counties is our cadastral program. The department has the responsibility of providing direct cadastral mapping services to a number of mostly small, eastside counties. The number of counties requiring support has decreased over the past several years from 14 to nine, due to a variety of factors, including improved collaboration between counties and enhanced technologies. As the needs from the counties have changed or decreased, we have been adjusting our resource level and skill sets to ensure we remain aligned with their needs, both now and into the future. The Cadastral Information Systems Unit (CISU) has been reduced from 20 FTE in 2003, to nine FTE today. In addition, the majority of remaining resources are now focused on training and oversight of all 36 counties rather than direct support to just a few. Unit staff continue to perform statutorily required work, including boundary change approvals (ORS 308.225).

Assistance to counties, taxing districts and taxpayersCounty support and assistance is primarily accomplished by setting standards, monitoring programs, providing training, and offering direct assistance to individual counties through a variety of special programs.

Program staff provides direct assistance and support to assessors and their respective staffs either remotely or on-site in the county. In addition, analysts work with local taxing districts and counties on a variety of budget, tax calculation, tax collection, and exemption issues. The section has specialists in all program areas including farm/forest, exemptions, mass appraisals, CAFFA, ORMAP, cadastral, deferrals, Measure 50 exception value, and others.

Oversight of property tax systemAs county A&T budgets continue to be tight in parts of the state, and mostly static in others, county A&T staff are under pressure to complete work to ensure operations are functioning adequately. As the supervisor of the system, the agency is responsible for ensuring the

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 43

statutory work is completed and the integrity of the system as a whole is maintained.

To do this, we rely on a combination of the following:

• Maintaining a positive working relationship with each county.

• Regular communication with individual counties.

• Collaboration with the county assessor and tax collector associations.

• Performance metrics.

CollaborationThe property tax system in Oregon is extremely complex. As counties face continued funding pressures, it is critical that collaboration occurs, where possible. Assessors, tax collectors, and the department are working diligently to identify ways to improve efficiencies and the quality of the products we produce. Some counties are now providing cadastral support for other counties, and several southern Oregon counties are exploring ways to share commercial appraisal and personal property staff. Other counties are exchanging services (e.g., cadastral mapping support and GIS services) under intergovernmental service agreements, depending on where the expertise resides. The department is working jointly with the counties on ways to improve appraisal training and standardize the skill sets of county and state appraisers, something that couldn’t be done individually.

MetricsIn an effort to better ensure that work in the counties, and here at the department, is done well, we are working with counties and our Research Section to identify better ways to measure performance as a way to better target resources and address possible issues. We are adopting two new KPMs to measure the quality of property valuations in the counties and by our industrial and utility appraisers.

In addition, we are looking at available data provided by counties to identify potential issues or areas of concern. Our current analysis of three pilot counties indicates work is largely being done in accordance with statutory requirements. We plan to extend the analysis to additional counties in the coming year and will continue until all counties are analyzed and any issues are addressed.

Finally, we are exploring technology tools that could be used by agency appraisers and other specialists to gather, store, analyze, document, and measure appraisal work in a way that will improve both efficiency in completing the work and the quality of the work products.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 44

Key performance measures

I. Executive summary

II. Key measure analysis 1. Deleted.

2. Replaced with key performance measure 14: Appraisal program equity and uniformity.

3. Replaced with key performance measure 15: Appraisal value uniformity.

4. Replaced with key performance measure 13: Effective taxpayer assistance.

5. Replaced with key performance measure 18: Cost of assessments.

6. Replaced with key performance measure 17: Collection dollars cost of funds.

7. Replaced with key performance measure 16: Direct enforcement dollars cost of funds.

8. Average days to process personal income tax refund.

9. Percent of personal income tax returns filed electronically.

10. Replaced with key performance measure 19: Employee engagement.

11. Employee training per year.

12. Customer service.

13. Effective taxpayer assistance.

III. Using performance data

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 45

Executive summary

Scope of reportThe agency’s key performance measures (KPMs) are intended to represent our major business outcomes in the income tax and property tax programs.

These measures address the agency’s major functions, including collecting revenue, auditing returns, and assisting taxpayers.

The Oregon contextThe Department of Revenue is a key strategic and operational partner in providing healthy tax systems and long-term revenue stability for the state of Oregon. Our mission of making revenue systems work to fund public services includes strong work values around operational excel-lence and fiscal responsibility. The experience and skills required to support our mission sig-nificantly contributes to the governor and the legislature providing the best possible future for all Oregonians.

Our performance is guided by the agency’s vision that emphasizes the importance of tax administration and service, operational excellence, and a safe and positive work environment. We currently have 12 department performance measures that tell us how well we are doing in these areas. Our organizational strategic vision is designed to move and motivate the depart-ment for many years. To continue making this vision a reality, we are committed to innovating, streamlining, and using the most appropriate tools and technology available to us.

The agency continually collects, analyzes, and communicates information from and to stake-holders to build healthy relationships, better understand stakeholder needs, and drive continu-ous improvement in our operations.

Performance summaryWe have 12 key measures of performance linked to our mission and vision. Successes during the past year include a significant increase in the dollars collected per revenue agent per month. Success in this area is at least partially due to increased staffing and process changes, including a focus on issuing garnishments in Spring 2014.

We also saw an increase in the number of personal and business income tax cases closed per revenue agent per month. Again, success was due to increased staffing in the programs overall, including the increased support provided by phone agents.

We continue to see growth in the number of personal income tax returns filed electronically. More and more taxpayers are filing electronic returns, improving speed and efficiency of pro-cessing and reducing costs (KPM #9). However, the number of days to process a return, which was trending downward due to additional emphasis on tax return review to reduce refund fraud has increased (KPM #8).

The department’s leadership team made a commitment to increased employee training and development at the beginning of the 2013-15 biennium. The result is a significant increase in the percentage of employees who received over 20 hours of training in FY 2014. In FY 2013, the per-centage of employees receiving over 20 hours of training was 27, and in FY 2014 the percentage

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 46

was 46. Although a significant increase, it is still short of the goal of 60 percent of employees with over 20 hours of training.

We saw the effective taxpayer assistance measure (KPM #13) remain relatively the same as FY 2013. This measure rolls up results from three different, weighted components: call wait times, successful self-help, and customer service satisfaction. While all three components saw changes, the more heavily weighted components of reduced wait time and successful self-help drove this measure upward. The most significant change was in reduced call wait time due to factors including full staffing, a new Interactive Voice Response system, and initiating caller-elected call back in Spring 2014.

We had some challenges in meeting some performance measures, including the personal income tax non-filer assessments issued per employee per month (KPM #5) and delinquent returns filed after compliance contract per filing enforcement employee per month (KPM #7). In both of these measures, the targets were not met and the results dropped between FY 2014 and FY 2013. Some factors that may be affecting results may include significant staffing turnover in these areas and a better economy that may be increasing the number of people filing volun-tarily and paying on time.

The percent of assessor’s maps digitized in GIS format (KPM #3), has progressed, although it has still fallen short of goals, due largely to a diminished funding stream. The agency’s cus-tomer service measure (KPM #12) declined significantly from 2013 to 2014. We implemented new technology for FY 2014 to capture customer service survey information on an ongoing basis, rather than once per year. This change resulted in a much larger sample of customers responding to the survey during all parts of our business cycles. Due to survey results, the pro-gram has implemented short-term and long-term plans to improve customer service, including adding questions to the survey to determine why people are calling, which will allow us to

Performance summary

50%Target to -5%

33.3%Target > -15%

16.7%Target -6% to -15%

Exception: Cannot calculate status (zero entered for either actual or target).

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 47

pinpoint problem areas and tailor improvements. Longer-term options for increasing customer service include customer service training for staff, more self-sufficiency options online through the new core systems, and piloting live-chat instant messaging with the public. Some measures stayed essentially the same between 2013 and 2104. The percentage of property taxes collected is up slightly. We expected this is based on the positive changes in the economy.

ChallengesOver the next four years, we will be replacing our core information technology systems. This investment will allow for increased efficiency in our income tax programs and update the tools and data that our employees use to do their work. The project will have four phases over four years, and different programs will implement the software at each phase. We anticipate that program efficiency and effectiveness may dip at various points in time as employees learn the new systems and still have to operate in the old environment through the transition periods. In addition, as the agency has reviewed its KPMs and strategic plan, we have found that some of the measures we currently have are not the best measures to track our performance over time. The agency believes that KPMs #1, #2, #3, #5, #6, #7, and #10 need to be deleted. New KPMs were discussed during the 2014 Legislative Session and will be reviewed during the 2015-17 budget development process. We believe the changes to the KPMs proposed by the department will provide better information to our programs to adjust resources to meet strategic outcomes.

Resources and efficiencyThe agency’s Legislatively Approved Budget for the 2013–15 biennium is $230,843,872, which represents a significant increase from the previous biennium.

The increase is mainly due to two policy option packages adopted for the 2013–15 biennium including the Core Systems Replacement project and an additional 31 positions to assist in increasing tax compliance. The department had mixed results on its key measures, including its efficiency measures, over the past year.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 48

KPM # 2013–14 Approved KPMs

1 Dollars collected per revenue agent, per month (personal income tax).

2 Percent of property taxes collected.

3 Percent of assessor’s maps digitized in a GIS format.

5 Personal income tax non-filer assessments issued per employee, per month.

6 Personal income tax and corporation tax cases closed per revenue agent, per month.

7 Delinquent returns filed after compliance contact per filing enforcement employee, per month.

8 Average days to process personal income tax refund.

9 Percent of personal income tax returns filed electronically.

10 Employee work environment (based on a scale of 1-6).

11 Employee training per year (percent receiving 20 hours per year).

12 Customer service: Percent of customers rating their satisfaction with the agency’s cus-tomer service as “good” or “excellent”: overall, timeliness, accuracy, helpfulness, expertise, and availability of information.

13 Effective taxpayer assistance: Provide the most effective taxpayer assistance services by a data-driven combination of direct assistance and electronic self-help services.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 49

New/Delete Proposed KPMs for biennium 2015–17

New Title: Appraisal value uniformity - We will demonstrate our ability to deliver high quality business results by measuring appraisal equity.

Rationale: This is a replacement measure. The previous measure, KPM #3, was too nar-rowly focused and did not reflect our core work. The Property Tax Division is proposing this replacement measure as a way to gauge our ability to deliver statutory real market value to county assessors.

New Title: Direct enforcement dollars cost-of-funds - We will demonstrate our efficiency and effectiveness at funding services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens by measuring the cost-of-funds for every direct enforcement dollar received by our agency.

Rationale: This is a replacement measure for KPM #7. This new measure is a more holistic view of the efficiencies of our direct enforcement work, including audit, filing enforcement, and collections functions. We will show the effectiveness of our direct en-forcement processes and strategies by measuring the cost of each direct enforcement dollar we receive.

New Title: Collection dollars cost-of-funds - We will demonstrate our efficiency and effective-ness at funding services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens by measuring the cost-of-funds for every dollar collected by our agency.

Rationale: This is a replacement measure for KPM #6. This new measure is a more holis-tic view of the efficiencies of our collections function. We will show the effectiveness of our collections processes and strategies by measuring the cost of each dollar we collect.

New Title: Employee engagement - Index of employees considered actively engaged by a standardized survey.

Rationale: This is a replacement measure for KPM # 10. This change will allow us to compare standardized survey data with other public and private sector organizations. A third-party administers the survey, increasing objectivity.

New Title: Appraisal program equity and uniformity - We will measure the degree to which county appraisal program equity and uniformity is achieved by determining the per-centage of study areas statewide with real market values that are within accepted ap-praisal standards.

Rationale: This is a replacement measure. The previous measure, KPM #2, was largely outside our influence and didn’t accurately reflect the work we do in a meaningful way. This new measure directly evaluates conformity with accepted appraisal standards, and targets our plan for action (training, assistance, support) when counties do not meet those standards.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 50

New Title: Cost of assessments - We will demonstrate our efficiency and effectiveness of our suspense, audit, and filing enforcement functions by measuring the cost of every audit and filing enforcement dollar assessed.

Rationale: This is a replacement measure for KMP #5. This measure is a more holistic view of the efficiencies of our audit (including adjustments made to returns during processing) and filing enforcement work. We will show the effectiveness of our audit and filing enforcement processes and strategies by measuring the cost of each dollar assessed.

Delete Title: Dollars collected per revenue agent, per month (personal income tax)

Rationale: This measure is being proposed for deletion. The sampling methods devel-oped for gathering the data for this measure are no longer measuring the representa-tive work of all collectors, but a non-representative sample. This is resulting in numbers that do not accurately reflect the work of our collections staff. In addition, because it focuses on only one classification of employee, the measure is not representative of the collection function as a whole since the function requires managers and support staff, as well as all levels of revenue agents in order to produce effective and efficient collec-tions functions. We propose this measure be deleted because it is no longer effective in helping us run our business, nor is it sharing a realistic picture of the collections func-tion.

Delete Title: Percent of property taxes collected

Rationale: This is being replaced with proposed KPM #14. Please see previous page for title and rationale.

Delete Title: Percent of assessor’s maps digitized in GIS format


Delete Title: Personal income tax non-filer assessments issued per employee, per month


Delete Title: Personal income tax and corporation tax cases closed per revenue agent, per month


Delete Title: Delinquent returns filed after compliance contact per filing enforcement employ-ee, per month


Delete Title: Employee work environment (based on a scale of 1–6)


150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 51

Key performance measure 8 Average days to process personal income tax refund

Measure since: 1999

Goal: We adopt best business practices to make tax systems work better, and take full advantage of opportunities presented by new technology.

Oregon context: This goal links directly to the department’s mission.

Data source: Personal income tax return processing system.

Owner: Terrence Woods, Administrative Services Division administrator

1. Our strategy: Our strategy is to issue personal income tax refunds in a timely manner, through efficient use of people, processes, and systems.

2. About the targets: The target is to issue refunds within 12 days from the receipt of the tax return. The department is keeping current targets until more data is available from changes in faud and suspense program work through the implementation of the core system replacement project.

3. How we are doing: Actual performance for 2014 is eight days, four days fewer than the target. Performance for 2013 was seven days.

4. How we compare: Oregon’s targets and usual performance are comparable with other states. The IRS reports that nine out of ten refunds are issued within 21 days.

5. Factors affecting results: Refunds on electronically filed (e-filed) returns are issued the quickest. As more taxpayers e-file, the average time to issue a refund is reduced (82.5% of our personal income tax returns were e-filed—see KPM #9). In 2014, e-filed returns both refund and tax to pay, averaged 4.28 days to process, two days slower than the previous year. The volume of returns received in the mail decreased by about 16,500, and took an average of just over 29 days to process. Processing delays by the IRS and/or the timeliness of Congress enacting legislation also has an effect on our ability to process timely. This year, it only affected the processing start date.

6. What needs to be done: We need to continue process improvement that balances efficiency with accuracy verification and fraud detection. We also need continued education on the benefits of filing

Average number of days to process personal income tax refundBar is actual, line is target

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

7 12 9 10 7 8

Num

ber o

f day

s

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 52

electronically. In addition, we do not yet know what tools the new system will provide and how they will impact this body of work.

7. About the data: The reporting cycle is the calendar year in which returns for the preceding tax year are processed (example: 2013 returns processed in 2014). This data reports on tax returns that do not suspend for errors or additional review from the automated process. Refunds from returns that do suspend take an average of 60 days to process primarily due to intentional changes to the review procedures aimed at fraud prevention.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 53

Key performance measure 9 Percent of personal income tax returns filed electronically

Measure since: 2002

Goal: Operational excellence: Adopt best business practices, taking advantage of technology to improve our system and processes.


Data source: Personal income tax return processing system statistics for electronically filed returns.

Owner: Joann Martin, Personal Tax and Compliance administrator

1. Our strategy: Our strategy is to improve customer service and efficiency by increasing the percent of personal income tax returns filed electronically. Electronically filed (e-filed) returns are faster and less expensive to process.

2. About the targets: The targets were revised upward in 2011 to reflect the continued growth in e-filing at the state and federal level. For 2014, the target was 80%. Higher is better.

3. How we are doing: We are above target with 82.5% of tax returns filed electronically. The numbers for the e-file have consistently risen each year, though the rate of growth has slowed.

4. How we compare: Historically, Oregon’s rate of e-filing has been comparable with other states. According to the lastest full year Federation of Tax Administrators survey (November 25, 2013), states with filing volume similar to Oregon were at an 82.4% e-file rate. The national average was 81%. The IRS expects to receive about 85% of their returns electronically in calendar year 2014.

5. Factors affecting results: Oregon’s e-filing is linked to the federal system; we benefit as more taxpayers choose to file their federal tax returns electronically. Revenue implemented a tax practitioners e-file mandate in 2011, which matches the IRS mandate. However, there is no penalty for non-compliance; DOR sends a reminder letter each year to those practitioners who should have filed their client’s returns electronically. (We have yet to achieve 100% participation by practitioners in the e-file mandate.)

Oregon participates in the Free File Alliance that allows taxpayers to e-file for free if they meet certain criteria. Typically, the participation criteria are tied to income level, age, veteran status and

Percent of personal income tax returns filed electronicallyBar is actual, line is target

0

20

40

60

80

100

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

63% 67% 75% 79% 81% 83%

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 54

type of federal return filed. Oregon allows taxpayers to enter their return information into an on-line fillable form and file the return directly with us for free. Unlike other states, Revenue has not put much emphasis on advertising e-file to taxpayers because the growth has been steady over the years.

6. What needs to be done: We will continue to emphasize the benefits of electronic filing to taxpayers and practitioners through our forms, booklets, and publications; including information on our website; and discussing the benefits of e-filing with taxpayers when we interact with them.

7. About the data: This data is only for personal income tax returns. The reporting cycle for e-file percentages is the calendar year.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 55

Key performance measure 11 Employee training per year

(percent receiving 20 hours per year)

Measure since: 2000

Goal: Work environment: Provide a positive, productive, and welcoming work environment.

Oregon context: This goal links to the department’s mission.

Data source: Agency cost allocation system (CAS) for the period before 2011. iLearn Oregon for 2012 and ongoing.

Owner: Kimberly Dettwyler, Human Resources manager

1. Our strategy: Our strategy is to advance our workforce by using creative training and development activities to get the most out of training resources.

2. About the targets: Oregon Benchmark 29: Labor Force Skills Training - this benchmark measures the percentage of Oregon’s state labor force who receive at least 20 hours of skills training during the year. Oregon’s Benchmark is that 75% of employees receive a minimum of 20 hours of training per year. Our interim target is lower than the statewide target, at 60%. We will revise the target upward when we meet the interim target.

3. How we are doing: In 2014, the target was 60%; actual performance was 45%. We are not meeting our training target, though we have seen improvement in this area.

4. How we compare: There is no state-wide system for means of comparison.5. Factors affecting results: There continues to be an issue with under reporting or late reporting of

training for tracking the data in the collection source (iLearn).6. What needs to be done: We will continue to seek creative, low-cost ways to deliver training to the

general employee base. We’re working to identify and capture standard onboarding training for new employees and specialized training for specific classifications. Our Procurement Office will inform Human Resources of all contracted training provided by vendors to ensure it is recorded

Employee training per year Bar is actual, line is target

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

32% 38% 33% 27% 27% 45%

Perc

ent r

ecei

ving

20

hour

s pe

r yea

r

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 56

in the iLearn system. We’ll also continue to partner with managers to make sure we receive their training information.

7. About the data: The reporting cycle is Oregon fiscal year. The data comes from iLearn Oregon.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 57

Key performance measure 12 Customer service:

Percent of customers rating their satisfaction with the agency’s customer service as “good” or “excellent”: based on overall, timeliness, accuracy, helpfulness, expertise, and availability of

information.

Measure since: 2006

Goal: Tax administration: Provide excellent service to taxpayers in a timely manner.

Oregon context: This goal links to department’s mission.

Data source: Written surveys of walk-in customers at our field offices or main building; telephone sur-veys of randomly selected taxpayer calls.

Owner: Joann Martin, Personal Tax and Compliance Division administrator

1. Our strategy: Our strategy is to provide the best possible customer service to taxpayers who visit our field offices or call our Tax Services Unit for assistance, as measured by surveys of our customers.

2. About the targets: This target is the percent of customers rating their satisfaction with the agency’s customer service as “good” or “excellent” in these categories: accuracy, availability of information, expertise, helpfulness, timeliness, and overall experience. We have set the targets for all components at 90%. Higher percentage is better.

3. How we are doing: The customer service ratings were down in 2014. The Department’s overall score is 33%. While the drop is dramatic from 2013, the exact cause is not clear. That said, this number does indicate that there is a general dissatisfaction with DOR’s customer service from the majority of those who responded to the survey, which we are focused on addressing. (See What needs to be done).

4. How we compare: A state-wide system hasn’t been built for agencies to compare themselves against each other.

Agency performance based on tax services surveyBars are actual, line is target

0

20

40

60

80

100

Accuracy Availability Expertise Helpfulness Overall Timeliness of information

2012

2013

2014

95 95 96 97 97 96

82 73 86 86 79 77

45 48 43 38 33 32

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 58

5. Factors affecting results: Nature of the business: The Department of Revenue administers very complicated tax laws. We review, audit and change tax returns and send billing notices. We are the state’s collection agency. People don’t tend to contact DOR unless they are confused, waiting on a refund, we’ve sent them a billing notice or we are attempting to collect debt. Inherently, DOR’s customers are interacting with the agency personnel on a sensitive subject.

Inconsistent data: Revenue has been inconsistent in the gathering of survey information, both in reporting periods and method of gathering information. The numbers reported in 2012 and 2013 are not statistically viable. In 2012, it was conducted for one month (December). The survey in August 2013 was limited to just two weeks due to technical and workload issues. There were less than 200 responses in 2013.

In 2014, Revenue made the survey available for 11 months of the fiscal year. This substantially increased the number of respondents (from 182 to 3,072), but the results were less optimistic. It should be noted that the total represents about 2% of the calls taken by Tax Services in the reporting period (it doesn’t count the number of inperson contacts).

Processing season delays: A federal government shut down in late 2013 caused nearly a month delay in the start of the 2014 processing season. The federal government has delayed the start of the processing season for the last few years. Because our e-file system is reliant on the IRS’s system, we have no control over when we start to process returns. By compressing the filing season, refunds were delayed for many taxpayers. This impacts how taxpayers feel about us but we are unable to impact decisions the IRS makes in this area.

Internal Processes: For the last two years, DOR made intentional changes to reviewing refund returns to be more effective in addressing refund fraud. We’ve reviewed more returns because we’re looking at more issues. The result (in addition to catching fraud) has significantly increased the time it takes to get a valid refund selected for enhanced review to a taxpayer (averaging 60 days for enhanced review and processing, up from 26 days two years ago). Longer refund times are not popular with DOR customers

The survey: The survey does not have a question to help identify the nature of the call or who answered it. Although the performance measure is tied to DOR’s main call center (Tax Services), callers are routinely routed to other areas for resolution. For example, callers who input they have a collection issue are automatically transferred to a Collection area yet they are given the survey contact information for Tax Services at the initiation of the call. Survey responses connected with transferred calls don’t reflect the quality of service in the call center, but cannot be culled out of the measure due the survey design. Moreover, there is no connection between time of service and the completion of the survey. In fact, the survey does not capture the date of service on which the agency is being evaluated.

Change in delivery method of survey: In 2012 and 2013, the surveys were conducted by the tax services representative prior to the end of a call or handed to taxpayer receiving in-person services. It is likely that having a tax service representative administer the survey may have had some influence over the nature of the responses due to the personal interactions and the potential discomfort for a taxpayer to provide a negative response. Beginning in fiscal year 2014, the survey was made available to taxpayers via telephone in a manner that guaranteed full anonymity. We expect that taxpayers are more comfortable giving full feedback in this environment.

6. What needs to be done: The department’s goal is to improve customer service through increasing availability of self-help options and quality direct customer service. The goal is long term and should involve investment in technology as well as training of staff. The initiatives and strategies the Department is planning on using to increase satisfaction with customer service include:

Short term• Evaluating the ability to add clarifying questions to the survey; questions that would give

us better information of why the taxpayer has contacted us (general tax question, billing

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 59

notice, collection activity, etc.) This would allow DOR to focus on problem areas and tailor improvements.

• Analyzing refund review processes; including eliminating edits that have proven to be fraud free, evaluating resources and adjust ing to improve workflow.

Long term:• Continuing to invest in technology. The department’s Automated Call Distributor is outdated

and in need of replacing. The department will look for ways to use new tools, including investigating “live chat” - an instant messaging product that is successfully used by other public and private call centers.

• Upgrading the on-line tools available for self-help service. Revenue has the opportunity to offer more sophisticated and comprehensive on-line tools with the core system replacement project. DOR intends to create a focus group to build the service for the 2015 personal income tax roll-out.

• Researching and implementing continued customer service training of DOR staff.• Understanding that there are many legs to good customer service, efforts to improve should

connect with the initiatives in KPM 13.7. About the data: The data for this report was collected for eleven months of the fiscal year.

Taxpayers who called in were directed to a phone survey through the IVR. Walk-in taxpayers were given a stamp on their receipt with the number to call and take the survey through the IVR. Email customers received the survey invitation with their email response. The results were downloaded into a spreadsheet for tabulation.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 60

Key performance measure 13 Effective taxpayer assistance:

We provide the most effective taxpayer assistance services by a data-driven combination of direct assistance and electronic self-help options.

Measure since: 2011

Goal: Effective taxpayer assistance: Provide excellent service helping taxpayers meet their commitments with education, assistance and compliance.


Data source: Revenue Department automated systems.

Owner: JoAnn Martin, Personal Tax and Compliance Division administrator

Effective taxpayer assistanceBar is actual, line is target

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2009 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Num

ber

51 51 61 59

1. Our strategy: We have a two-part strategy: increase access to electronic services, and provide effective one-on-one assistance where necessary. We provide electronic self-help options (web and phone based) for taxpayers to get quick answers or perform common tasks (e.g. Where’s My Refund?). We must also provide effective assistance to those who lack access to the web, or from whom direct contact is the only or preferred method. We use customer service surveys as “checks” to ensure we provide the proper balance between direct and self-help service options.

2. About the targets: We’re using a composite measure that “rolls up” individual results from three specific component measures: call wait times, successful self-help, and direct customer service satisfaction surveys. Individually, these are operational measures. In aggregate, they tell us the degree to which we are providing efficient, effective taxpayer services. Since each portion of the measure is weighted differently (wait times = 40% of the measure, successful self-help = 50%, and customer service ratings = 10%) and the data forms are somewhat different, targets and actuals are normalized into a common expression: a scale of 1-10. A higher aggregate score is better.

3. How we are doing: Overall score: 59 (out of 100). This is down slightly from the 2013 score of 61. Call wait times were down significantly, that offset the decline in successful web look-ups and customer service rating.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 61

Wait time: Calls with less than five minutes wait time = 68% of total calls (versus 50.3% in 2013). The decrease in wait times for 2014 over 2013 was due to a number of factors.• The call center was fully staffed for most of the year and the number of Spanish speaking

representatives increased from three to four.• The new Interactive Voice Response system installed in mid-2013 allowed callers to “self-

transfer” to collections without the intervention of a representative.• The Department also installed a “virtual hold” system with a soft launch in March of 2014. This

feature gives the caller the option to hang up and get a call back when a representative becomes available. Calls where the caller chose to be called back later are not included in this statistic. This feature was popular with both the taxpayer and the DOR representatives. The taxpayer tended to be calmer as they weren’t tied to the phone waiting to talk to a representative.

General factors that cause longer wait times:• Call volume was up about 24,000 calls over 2013. Even though we added an additional

Spanish speaking representative, the call wait time for Spanish speaking taxpayers continues to be longer than the average wait time for an English speaking representative (we don’t track other language requests).

• Wait times are typically increased by other, specific one-time factors. Changes to our refund review processes (refunds took longer because of fraud review) had the biggest potential to increase call volume this year. Also, the season started later because of the late 2013 federal shutdown, putting more calls into a condensed timeframe.

Percentage of successful “Where’s My Refund?” inquiries made through IVR or web applications: 56.7% (down from 64% in 2013). Successful inquiries are defined as any response other than “not found,” meaning, we haven’t begun processing the return and it’s not found in our system when the taxpayer asks. An unknown number of inquiries are unsuccessful because taxpayers don’t wait the suggested two-weeks from when they file the return to allow us to begin processing. Taxpayer expectations on processing don’t change year to year, but we do have events that affect the start of processing season. This last reporting period, processing season started several weeks late related to the federal government shut down in late 2013. In addition, this season had significant web and maintenance issues. Increased weekend maintenance during the height of the season allowed taxpayers onto the web, but made their attempts unsuccessfulPercentage of customer service ratings of “good” or “excellent”: 40% (down from 80.4% in 2013). It’s difficult to tie the dramatic decrease in this sub-measure to any one factor and the exact cause not clear (see Inconsistent Data for this measure in KPM 12.. But, this sub-measure indicates there is a general dissatisfaction with DOR’s customer service from those who respond to our survey which we are focused on addressing. See KPM 12 for more detailed information about this measure.

4. How we compare: Comparable data is not available.5. Factors affecting results: See comments in the How are we doing section.6. What needs to be done: We now have consistent sources for the data that feeds this measure. We

need to continue monitoring the data as we introduce more self-help tools to our customer service model. In addition to adding self-help tools, there are a number of short and long-term initiatives that DOR should pursue to improve the overall customer service. Those initiatives are detailed in KMP 12.

7. About the data: Reporting cycle is the Oregon fiscal year. During this reporting period the customer service survey data was collected from August 2013 to June 30, 2014. Our IVR now has the standard customer service KPM survey running all year. Call wait time data is gathered directly from our phone system. Self-service successful look ups are measured as any inquiry from our phone system or web application that provides a response other than “not found.”

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 62

Key performance measure 14 Appraisal program equity and uniformity

(We will measure county appraisal program equity and uniformity by determining the percentage of areas with real market values within accepted appraisal standards.)

Measure since: 2012

Goal: High quality business results: Make informed business decisions to support county appraisal program equity and uniformity.


Data source: The source data arise from the annual sales ratio studies submitted by each county. The data evaluated consists of coefficients of dispersion (COD), which are a measure of the success of the appraisal programs in achieving 100% of real market value (RMV) based on market sales evidence. The measure will describe the statewide percentage of study areas appraised by counties that meet the stan-dard contained in administrative rule.

Owner: Mark Kinslow, Property Tax Division administrator.

Study areas appraised by counties that meet standardsBar is actual, line is target

80

84

88

92

96

100

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Perc

ent

90 90 89 93 94

1. Our strategy: Use existing data reported annually by counties to help fine-tune and target our county training, assistance, and support.

2. About the targets: The target is 95 percent of study areas within COD standard. We recognize that, due to market conditions, lack of sales or other factors, it is not reasonable to assume that 100 percent of study areas in the state will fall within COD standards for any given year. We will work with those counties with areas outside of the standard to obtain additional sales information or complete re-appraisals to ensure that all real or personal property within each county is valued at 100 percent of its RMV (ORS 308.232).

3. How we are doing: For the ten-year period of 2004 to 2013, the percentage of market areas in compliance were between 86 percent (2006) and 94 percent (2013).

4. How we compare: There are no comparables available.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 63

5. Factors affecting results: Concerns include:• CODs are self-reported by the counties, and our ability to validate methodology is limited

at this time.• • Study areas can vary year-to-year creating consistency and comparison issues.

6. What needs to be done: We can use more intensive re-appraisal efforts, increased training and assistance, or re-determination of a more appropriate sales database to bring study areas within standards.

7. About the data: The sales ratio studies (which include CODs) are submitted annually by August 1, and reflect county appraisal program equity and uniformity prior to the January 1 assessment date.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 64

Key performance measure 15 Appraisal value uniformity

(We will demonstrate equity and uniformity in the appraisal of our industrial accounts.)

Measure since: 2013

Goal: High quality business results: Demonstrate the quality of our appraisal work. Oregon context: This goal links directly to the department’s mission.

Data source: We intend to compare sale values of industrial property appraised by the agency to values that we maintain through mass appraisal processes. In the absence of an adequate number of sales, we will include recent appraisals in our analysis. This data will be derived using acceptable statistical anal-ysis generating indicators of appraisal uniformity (i.e. coefficient of dispersion [COD]).

Owner: Mark Kinslow, Property Tax administrator.

Appraisal value uniformityBar is actual, line is target

15

16

17

18

19

20

2012 2013 2014 2015

Coef

ficie

nt o

f dis

pers

ion

16.36 16.13 16.15

1. Our strategy: We are testing our business results to determine the quality of industrial values generated by our appraisers.

2. About the targets: Our target of 20 or less is codified in administrative rule as a standard for county appraisal programs. PTD is using the same standard as an internal measure of our appraisal activities. When our program meets these standards, we have a reasonable level of confidence that we are delivering RMV to county assessors. Although we are within standard, our target is to improve the quality of our appraisal values over time and we’ve set our upcoming targets as follows:

2014: 16.5 2015: 16 2016: 15.5 2017: 15 3. How we are doing: We have only two years of data, but we are reaching the target. 4. How we compare: We have no direct comparables. The closest comparable would be the work

done in the 36 counties to measure uniformity. A significant difference between the counties and the department, is that counties are required to measure uniformity across relatively small market areas, whereas for the department the market area is the entire state. Approximately 95 percent of the county responsible accounts in Oregon are within acceptable standards.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 65

5. Factors affecting results: PTD is required to appraise highly complex industrial properties engaged in processing and manufacturing activities. These properties do not sell often and, when they do, there are many factors that make it difficult to compare the sales price to assessment roll values. Therefore, the limited number of usable sales will decrease the reliability of this indicator.

6. What needs to be done: Since a lower COD indicates higher appraisal value uniformity, the program continues to strive to improve processes that would drive the COD lower. We are working to change our processes and will continue to measure CODs to determine if our changes are appropriate.

7. About the data: We look for sales and appraisal data close to the assessment value date of January 1. Sales or appraisals within 6-12 months of this date are typically viewed as reliable.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 66

Key performance measure 16 Direct enforcement dollars cost-of-funds

(We will demonstrate our efficiency and effectiveness at funding services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens by

measuring the cost-of-funds (COF) for every dollar collected for our agency)

Measure since: FY 2014

Goal: Enforcement: Provide excellent service, helping taxpayers meet their commitments with education, assistance and compliance.


Data source: This measure will compare direct enforcement dollars we receive to what we spend to bring in those dollars. Our baseline, or annual target, is Revenue’s Legislatively Adopted Budget (LAB) for our direct enforcement functions divided by the total direct enforcement dollars received.

Owner: JoAnn Martin, Personal Tax and Compliance Division administrator.

Cost of funds per dollar collected - Direct enforcementBar is actual, line is target

0.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

0.30

0.35

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Dol

lar

1. Our strategy: Our long-term goal is to drive down the cost of each enforcement dollar by increasing the effectiveness of our audit and collection functions. Our strategy for increasing dollars received is to focus efforts on accounts most likely to pay, to use data available to us and our partners to improve decision making, and to use public perception of non-compliance to improve collection efforts. In addition, we will focus on the areas of greatest risk to compliance and use the tools and opportunities available to enhance our enforcement activities. By implementing tactics that align with this strategy, we will increase enforcement dollars - resulting in a lowered cost per enforcement dollar.

2. About the targets: are many factors that impact cost of funds. Some of the external factors affecting our enforcement revenue include the health of the overall economy and the labor market participation rate. Internal factors influencing our enforcement revenue include the Core Systems Replacement (CSR) project, changes in staffing, the relative level of staff experience, and filing enforcement strategies.

This measure is related to the cost of enforcement actions taken by the department. While economic conditions play a role in overall compliance, the overall impact is related to resource availability and management decisions (see Department of Revenue Research Section, “Enforcement Revenue

0.241 0.215 0.215 0.326

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 67

Identification and Modeling.” January 2012). The strategies that are currently in use reflect the movement of experienced staff to focus on the successful implementation of CSR over the next three years. This leads to an increase in hiring and training and a less experienced workforce.

The target for FY2015 of 0.326 recognizes the time and resources that will be dedicated to CSR. Because of the continued short-term impact of the CSR project, we anticipate that the level of production will be similar to FY2014.

3. How we are doing: Our COF for FY2014 was 0.326. This represents a 51.6 percent increase over the FY2013 COF of 0.215. Dollars received fell $11.3 million from $233.7 million in 2013 to $222.4 million in 2014 and the department’s LAB increased $22.2 million from $50.3 million in 2013 to $72.5 million in 2014.

The reduction in dollars received was due to unusually high levels of staff turnover and vacancies resulting in lost productivity and increased investment in training. Additionally, revenue agent 3s in the department worked several complex cases that may not result in successful collections for some time. These are initially expensive and represent a choice of enforcement priority for the department.

The increase in LAB was due to the tax compliance POP granted by the 2013 Legislature and shared overhead costs associated with CSR. The department has shifted resources to CSR while still attempting to maintain consistency in both collections and billings.

We anticipate 2015 will have a decline in enforcement revenue due to increasing training and testing of CSR. However, we anticipate that our hiring strategy and having newly trained staff will partially offset those costs.

4. How we compare: Comparable data is not available. It is difficult to compare Oregon’s performance with other states due to the widely diverse tax structures and differences in enforcement staffing levels. Instead, we will make a direct comparison to our previous years’ COF to monitor our progress.

5. Factors affecting results: Expanded hiring/training: In FY2014, the Business and PTAC divisions added a significant number of new and inexperienced collections and audit staff to the programs, and saw substantial employee turnover. This has both negative and positive impacts on enforcement revenue. The experienced staff trained and mentored new staff, which reduced production.

Additionally, the 2013 Legislature approved a POP that added 12 auditor positions to the department. The production losses from shifting experienced staff to help develop new auditors are temporary, but they result in increased cost of funds until the new auditors are fully trained.

Process changes: There were also some changes to processes that had an impact, particularly for PTAC. Prior to June 11, 2014, members of PTAC collections were divided into two separate groups. One focused on inbound phone calls and the other focused on work queue management. This work flow created long wait times and unacceptable phone response. In June, all revenue agents were assigned an account caseload and placed on the automated call distributor. One of the benefits of this change is decreased lag time in working new liabilities, which historically have a higher rate of collectability than older liabilities.

Core Systems Replacement: As programs are involved in Rollout 1 (ending Fall 2014) or Rollout 2 (ending Fall 2015), we will focus more resources toward project implementation and away from enforcement functions. The Business and PTAC divisions began providing resources to CSR for testing and training during the latter part of FY2014.

As we approach Rollout 2, PTAC anticipates an increasing impact from the shift of resources to CSR. It is difficult to quantify the exact value of the impact at this time and we are committed to mitigating adverse impacts.

The Business Division also anticipates an increasing impact from the CSR. Because the Business Division is responsible for collections of Corporate Tax and Tobacco accounts, its collectors will be working out of both the legacy system and the new system, which may result in some temporary

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 68

efficiency decreases. As more programs implement CSR, we anticipate fewer impacts because staff will have a better understanding of the new system.

Shifting resources: Several enforcement audit staff were shifted to work on compliance at the return filing stage. This work resulted in reduced refunds as well as additional tax due from both fraudulent and incorrect tax returns. Reduced refunds are not reflected in this measure.

External factors: We also recognize that there are a variety of external factors that impact the amount of non-compliance. We do not have a way to measure these impacts or whether they are positive or negative. Factors such as the overall economy, employment rate and external policy decisions all have the potential to affect enforcement rates.

Legislatively Adopted Budget (LAB): Increases or decreases to the budget will affect this measure. POP: The Legislature approved a POP for 2013-2015 that focused on increasing compliance and

cleaning up the department’s accounts receivable. For the first four months of FY2014, PTAC had 10 experienced revenue agents focused on reviewing over 50,000 liabilities for possible write-off or cancellation. In the end, 25,543 liabilities were cancelled or written off. This was necessary work, but there was a temporary corresponding drop in collection revenue while the new agents were in training. We anticipate additional A/R clean-up in FY2015. However, stable staffing levels, we do not foresee a similar impact on collection revenue. The POP also included additional resources for collections, audit, and filing enforcement, which resulted in increased hiring, training, and mentoring. This has temporarily led to a lower level of enforcement assessments while experienced staff assisted new staff.

6. What needs to be done: Going into FY2015, PTAC has made an effort to eliminate vacancies, including double-filling many revenue agent and audit positions, to reduce the impact of staff turnover. As the year progresses and Rollout 2 for CSR approaches, PTAC will have more resources assigned to testing and training. We are monitoring the impact of CSR on our staffing needs and will be evaluating and refining our hiring strategy as needed.

PTAC’s Collections Section will continue to monitor monthly collection revenue and will take action, if necessary. Although we anticipate CSR will have some impact on collection revenue, we don’t want to miss other opportunities for improvement. In addition, we expect that our recent process changes will have a positive impact on our enforcement revenue.

The Business Division’s efforts to reduce vacancies should address the “two system” environment that it will be facing until Rollout 3. Unfortunately, some temporary productivity loss is inevitable. We expect that as the staff becomes acclimated to moving between the two systems, productivity should increase.

Our central strategy is to increase voluntary filing compliance. We need to continue our efforts to make it easier for people to comply and provide assistance to taxpayers. We will also communicate the consequences of non-compliance through direct outreach to businesses and individuals.

A key way to reduce the cost of funds is to increase efficiency. The department must continue to focus on the greatest areas of risk to compliance and account for these risks when selecting and prioritizing cases.

Lastly, we need to evaluate the COF on an annual basis to measure the effectiveness of our business. This measure will help the department compare the dollars we are receiving from enforcement revenue each year to the costs to bring in those dollars. Through this exercise, we will ensure that we are focusing on work that utilizes our limited resources to the fullest potential.

7. About the data: The reporting cycle is Oregon’s fiscal year. The direct enforcement dollars comes from our Research Section’s enforcement revenue data and includes dollars received due to our direct enforcement functions, including collections, audit, and filing enforcement. The costs are from the agency’s LAB, as allocated to the collections functions and the audit, suspense, and filing enforcement functions (agency overhead costs are allocated based on enforcement revenue costs compared to the agency’s remaining costs), and are gathered by our Finance Section budget officers.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 69

Key performance measure 17 Collection dollars cost-of-funds

(We will demonstrate our efficiency and effectiveness at funding services that preserve and enhance the quality of life for all citizens by

measuring the cost-of-funds (COF) for every dollar collected for our agency. )


Goal: Enforcement: Provide excellent service, helping taxpayers meet their commitments with educa-tion, assistance and compliance.


Data source: This measure will compare direct enforcement dollars we receive to what we spend to bring in those dollars. Our baseline, or annual target, is Revenue’s Legislatively Adopted Budget (LAB) for our direct enforcement functions divided by the total direct enforcement dollars received.


Cost of funds per dollar collected - CollectionsBar is actual, line is target

0.00

0.03

0.06

0.09

0.12

0.15

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Dol

lar

1. Our strategy: Our long-term goal is to drive down the cost of each dollar collected by increasing the effectiveness of our collection function. Our strategy is to focus efforts on accounts most likely to pay, use data to improve decision-making, and to communicate the consequences of non-compliance to improve collection efforts. By implementing tactics that align with the strategy, we will increase dollars collected within our current budget structure, resulting in a lowered cost per dollar collected.

2. About the targets: There are many factors that impact COF. Some of the external factors affecting our enforcement revenue include the health of the overall economy and the labor market participation rate. Internal factors influencing our enforcement revenue include Core Systems Replacement project, changes in staffing, the relative level of staff experience, and filing enforcement strategies. The other factor in COF is the department’s LAB.

Our new target for fiscal year 2015 of 0.138 recognizes the time and resources that will be dedicated to CSR. We anticipate that the level of production will be relatively similar to FY2014.

3. How we are doing: Our COF for FY2014 was 0.138. This represents a 64 percent increase over the FY2013 COF of 0.084. Dollars collected fell $11.3 million, from 233.7 million in 2013 to $222.4 million

0.099 0.087 0.089 0.138

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 70

in 2014. The department’s LAB increased $10.9 million, from 19.7 million in 2013 to $30.6 million in 2014.

The reduction in dollars collected was due to unusually high levels of staff turnover and vacancies resulting in lost productivity and increased investment in training. Additionally, RA3s in the department worked several complex cases that may not result in successful collections for some time. These are initially expensive and represent a choice of enforcement priority for the department.

The increase in LAB was due to the A/R clean-up POP granted by the 2013 Legislature and shared overhead costs associated with CSR. The department has shifted resources to CSR while still attempting to maintain consistency in both collections and billings.

We anticipate 2015 will have a drop off in enforcement revenue due to increasing training and testing of CSR. However, we anticipate making that up with efficiencies gained through training new staff.

4. How we compare: Comparable data is not available. It is difficult to compare Oregon’s performance with other states due to the widely diverse tax structures and differences in enforcement staffing levels. Instead, we will make a direct comparison to our previous years’ COF.

5. Factors affecting results: Expanded hiring/training: In FY2014, the Business and PTAC divisions added a remarkable amount of new and inexperienced collections and audit staff to the program, and saw substantial employee turnover. This has both negative and positive impacts to enforcement revenue. The experienced staff trained and mentored new staff, resulting in a production loss.

Process changes: There were also some processes changes that had an impact, particularly for PTAC. Prior to June 11, 2014, members of PTAC collections were divided into two separate groups. One focused on inbound phone calls and the other focused on queue management. This workflow created long wait times and unsatisfied phone response. In June, all revenue agents were assigned an account caseload and placed on the automated call distributor. One of the benefits of this change is decreased lag time in working new liabilities, which historically have a higher rate of collectability than older liabilities.

Core Systems Replacement: We have started focusing applying resources toward project implementation and away from enforcement functions. PTAC and Business divisions began providing resources to CSR for testing and training during the latter part of FY2014.

As we approach Rollout 2, PTAC anticipates an increasing impact from the shift of resources to CSR for. It is difficult to quantify the exact value of the impact at this time, and we are committed to mitigating adverse impacts.

The Business Division also anticipates an increasing CSR impact. Because the Business Division is responsible for collections of corporate tax and tobacco accounts, its collectors will be working out of both the legacy system and the new system, which may result in a temporary efficiency decrease. As more programs implement CSR, we anticipate fewer impacts because staff will have a better understanding of the system.

POP: The Legislature approved a a POP for 2013-15 that focused on increasing compliance and cleaning up the department’s accounts receivable. For the first four months of FY2014, PTAC had 10 experienced revenue agents reviewing more than 50,000 liabilities for write-off or cancellation. Ultimately, 25,543 of those were cancelled or written off. There was a temporary drop in collection revenue during this time. We anticipate additional A/R clean-up in FY2015. However, due to stable staffing levels, we aren’t expecting a similar impact on collection revenue.

The POP also included resources for audit and filing enforcement, which resulted in increased hiring, training, and mentoring. This has temporarily led to a lower level of enforcement assessments while experienced staff assisted new staff.

6. What needs to be done: Going into FY2015, PTAC has made an effort to eliminate vacancies, including double-filling many revenue agent and audit positions to reduce the impact of staff

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 71

turnover. As the year progresses and Rollout 2 of the CSR project approaches, PTAC will have more resources assigned to the project.

PTAC’s Collections Section will continue to monitor monthly collection revenue for issues and take action, if necessary. Although we anticipate CSR will have some impact on collection revenue, we don’t want to overlook other opportunities for improvement. In addition, we expect that our recent process changes will increase our enforcement revenue.

The Business Division’s efforts to reduce vacancies should address the “two system” problem that it will be facing until Rollout 3. Unfortunately, some temporary productivity loss is inevitable. We expect that as the staff becomes acclimated to moving between the two systems, efficiency should increase.

Our central strategy is to increase voluntary filing compliance. We need to continue our efforts to make it easier for people to comply and file, and provide assistance to taxpayers. We will also communicate the consequences of non-compliance through direct outreach to businesses and individuals.

A key way to reduce cost of funds is to increase efficiency. The department must continue to focus on the greatest areas of risk and account for these risks when selecting and prioritizating cases.

Lastly, we need to evaluate the COF on an annual basis to measure the effectiveness of our business. This measure will help the department compare the dollars we are receiving from enforcement revenue each year to the costs to bring in those dollars. This will help us focus on work that best uses our limited resources.

7. About the data: The reporting cycle is Oregon’s fiscal year. The direct enforcement dollars total comes from our Research Section’s enforcement revenue data. It includes dollars received due to our direct enforcement functions, including collections, audit, and filing enforcement. The costs are from the agency’s LAB, as allocated to the collections functions (agency overhead costs are allocated based on enforcement revenue costs compared to the agency’s remaining costs), and are gathered by our Finance Section budget officers.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 72

Key performance measure 18 Cost of assessments

(We will demonstrate our efficiency and effectiveness of our suspense, audit, and filing enforcement functions by measuring the cost of every

audit and filing enforcement dollar assessed)


Goal: Enforcement: Provide excellent service, helping taxpayers meet their commitments with educa-tion, assistance and compliance.


Data source: The measure will compare dollars we assess to what we spend to assess those dollars. Our baseline, or annual target, is Revenue’s Legislatively Adopted Budget (LAB) for our audit and filing enforcement functions divided by the total audit and filing enforcement dollars assessed. This measure will be collected quarterly and reported annually.


Dollars assessed compared to assessment costBar is actual, line is target

2011 2012 2013 2014 20150.00

0.05

0.10

0.15

0.20

0.25

Dol

lar

0.187 0.181 0.180 0.233

1. Our strategy: Our long-term goal is to drive down the cost of each dollar generated from enforcement functions. Our strategy is to focus on the greatest areas of risk, use data and systems for enforcement activities, and use tools and opportunities to enhance enforcement efforts. By implementing tactics that align with these strategies, we will make the best use of our resources, resulting in a lowered cost per assessment dollar.

2. About the targets: Our current targets are set using the agency’s LAB, as allocated to the audit, suspense, and filing enforcement functions; and the dollars assessed per audit and filing enforcement positions from FY2014. Our new target for FY2015 of 0.233 recognizes the time and resources that will be dedicated to CSR.

This measure is related to the value of assessments issued from the department’s enforcement actions. While economic conditions play a role in overall compliance rates, the overall impact is related to resource availability and management decisions (see Department of Revenue Research Section, “Enforcement Revenue Identification and Modeling.” January 2012). The strategies that are currently being in use focus on the successful implementation of GenTax over the next four years. This leads to increased hiring and training ahead of resource shifts and a less experienced.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 73

3. How we are doing: In 2014, our cost of assessments increased slightly to 0.233, in large part because of the CSR project. Assessed dollars have increased from $177.6 million in 2013 to $179.9 million in 2014. In addition, the enforcement-related budget increased from $30.6 million in 2013 to $41.8 million in 2014. The Business Division’s programs saw particularly productive years, but those strong numbers appeared to be skewed by two abnormally large assessments. Single filers can have a far greater impact in business tax programs than in personal tax programs. There are far more filers in personal tax than in business tax, and those additional filers can better “absorb” outliers. With those outliers, Business Division assessments showed only modest growth.

Personal income tax assessments remained relatively stable from auditing. Filing enforcement assessments declined this fiscal year, leading to an overall decline for the program. Those variations better reflect the situation at the department, demonstrating the factors that increased cost of funds. The department has shifted resources to CSR, while still attempting to maintain consistency in billings to meet commitments in the tax compliance POP.

The corporation program was in Rollout 1 of the CSR project, and shifted a large percentage of its staff to project. The full impact of this shift will most likely be seen in FY2015. For personal income tax, we anticipate assessed dollars in 2015 will remain fairly consistent with previous years, even with resources shifting to CSR. Production will be supported by staff who are currently in training, and we expect they will become more productive as they gain experience.

4. How we compare: Comparable data is not available. It is difficult to compare Oregon’s performance with other states due to the widely diverse tax structures among states and differences in enforcement staffing levels. It is also not an equivalent comparison to use the cost of funds model used in financial industries, as this measure tracks the dollars assessed as opposed to the dollars collected.

5. Factors affecting results: Several factors contributed to the increased cost of assessments in 2014: Core Systems Replacement: Existing staff are needed to help refine business processes, system testing,

and user training. Many of these staff are in enforcement positions and, therefore, not setting up assessments. Fewer assessments means an increase in the cost per assessment.

Training and mentoring new tax auditors: Auditors are hired in groups and require the efforts of experienced audit staff to train, mentor, and review their work Since the beginning of 2013, we have hired 42 new auditors. These new auditors are the result of a 2013 POP that added 12 auditor positions, and the end of a multiple year hiring freeze. These factors have lead to more work training and mentoring. Production losses from shifting experienced staff to other duties are temporary.

IRS budget cuts and shifting of resources: IRS budget cuts and redirecting of staff to Affordable Care Act responsibilites have resulted in fewer IRS audits sent to the states that impact state tax returns. Federal audits on Oregon taxpayers nearly always result in additional tax due to Oregon. These audits translate to approximately $15 to $25 million in additional Oregon assessments each year.

Decline in filing enforcement: There was a period of increases in this area during 2012 and 2013, because of program changes changes made following a 2011 Secretary of State audit. This audit recommended a different approach to identifying non-filing taxpayers.

In addition, during 2010 and early 2011, almost all PIT filing enforcement staff were redirected to a collection speed-up effort, resulting in fewer assessments. This fiscal year we’ve experienced a high level of turnover, including losing several veteran staff members to retirement. This has caused a stable staff base to shift into training and mentoring mode, further reducing production.

Both the withholding and corporation sections had unusually large assessments, causing an increase in assessed dollars. These types of anomalies are difficult to anticipate and can’t be routinely expected.

External factors. We also recognize that there are a variety of external factors that impact the amount of non-compliance. We don’t have a way to measure these impacts or determine if they are positive

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 74

or negative. Factors such as the overall economy, the employment rate, and external policy decisions can impact enforcement rates.

Shifting resources. Several enforcement audit staff were shifted to work on compliance at the return filing stage. This work resulted in reduced refunds and additional tax due from both fraudulent and incorrect tax returns. Reduced refunds are not reflected in this measure.

6. What needs to be done: The department’s broad strategies are geared toward increasing efficiency. We must continue to focus on the greatest areas of risk and account for those risks when selecting and prioritizating cases.

Our central strategy is to increase voluntary filing compliance, and to improve non-compliance on filed returns. We need to continue our efforts to make it easier for people to comply and file, and provide assistance to taxpayers. We will also communicate the consequences of non-compliance through direct outreach to businesses and individuals.

We need to maintain our production while assisting with the successful implementation of CSR. The true impact of CSR on our production goals is currently unknown. To somewhat mitigate the impact, we are hiring ahead to minimize training and hiring occurring during the greatest allocation of resources to CSR.

Lastly, we need to evaluate the COA on an annual basis to measure the effectiveness of our business. This measure will help the department compare the dollars we are receiving from enforcement revenue each year to the costs to bring in those dollars. This will help us focus on work that best uses our limited resources.

7. About the data: The reporting cycle is Oregon’s fiscal year. The dollars assessed comes from our Research Section’s Enforcement Revenue data and includes tax and penalty dollars assessed due to direct audit and filing enforcement efforts and from adjustments made during the processing of returns. The costs are from the agency’s LAB, as allocated to the audit, suspense, and filing enforcement functions (agency overhead costs are allocated based on enforcement revenue costs versus the agency’s other costs), and are gathered by our Finance Section budget officers.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 75

Key performance measure 19 Employee engagement

(Index of employees considered actively engaged by a standardized survey.)

Measure since: 2014.Goal: Employee engagement: We engage employees so they care about their work and the performance of the organization, and they recognize how their efforts make a difference.


Data source: We are surveying staff annually to measure employee engagement. The standardized sur-vey is coordinated by DAS through a third-party vendor. The first two surveys were sent to all staff in February and August of 2013. In 2014, the agency chose to go to an annual survey, which was adminis-tered in May 2014.

Owner: Kris Kautz, deputy director.

Employee engagementBar is actual, line is target

50

55

60

65

70

2013 2014 2015

Inde

x ra

ting

53.5 60

1. Our strategy: Our strategy for employee engagement is five-fold. When our employees are engaged, they:

• Feel valued and understand their role in the organization.• Have access to the data and tools necessary to do their work.• Participate in continuous improvement initiatives as opportunities are identified.• Have the skills and training to be successful in their career.• Clearly understand work expectations and receive regular feedback.

2. About the targets: The agency initially chose an increasing target to 62 in five years, which is consistent with other state agencies. We established our baseline index of 53 in February 2013.

3. How we are doing: The agency initiated the standardized employee engagement survey in February 2013. The results established our baseline index of 53. We completed the survey again in September 2013. Those results showed slight improvement in the index to 54. In May 2014, the agency’s employee engagement index increased to 60, which exceeded the target.

From the August 2013 survey, the highest engagement drivers were:• I know what I am accountable for achieving. • I understand my agency’s mission and how it connects to what I do.

While the agency is moving in the right direction regarding employee engagement, we still lag behind some other state agencies and the private sector. We review the results of each survey, both

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 76

the data elements and the written comments, to determine how to both maintain current progress and continue to improve.

4. How we compare: Our latest employee engagement survey results were similar to other public sector organizations, but behind private sector organizations in similar fields. Other public sector organizations show an average index score of 62. Other state agencies that use this survey tool score between 55 and 66. Comparable private sector organizations in the finance/insurance arena average an index of 71.

5. Factors affecting results: At the agency level, the leadership team has committed to making training and development for staff a priority this biennium. In addition, the agency is continuing its commitment towards transparency in communications through monthly town hall meetings, bi-weekly Revenue TV videos, a weekly blog, and information from administrators and managers. These communication channels provide good information to staff about what is going on in the organization, what is changing, and what can be expected. Studies also show that organizations may receive a boost in employee engagement due to large investments and/or projects in an organization, such as our Core Systems Replacement project.

6. What needs to be done: The agency recognizes that engaged employees can improve organizational performance. We are committed to providing employees opportunities to engage in the CSR project. We’ve reiterated our commitment to skills and development training. We will continue to provide various forms of communication about what’s going on in the organization. The survey results show each division has a different critical engagement tactic needing attention. We believe the most effective employee engagement is between a manager and their employees, and what works best for one unit may be different than what another work unit needs. We continue to encourage managers and staff to find new opportunities to engagee.

7. About the data: The employee engagement survey will be conducted annually. The survey is conducted through a third-party vendor contract managed by DAS, which allows for completely anonymous feedback. The results are provided at the division level, so administrators and staff can focus on the strategies that concern them most.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 77

Using performance dataThe following questions indicate how performance measures and data are used for manage-ment and accountability purposes.

InclusivityStaff: Staff are increasingly involved in reviewing our agency mission, vision, and values, which are supported by these key performance measures. There is increasing participation and input on review and requests for modifying and/or changing measures.

Elected officials: Elected officials review the performance measures as part of the legislative process.

Stakeholders: Stakeholders are consulted regarding the measures as appropriate.

Citizens: Citizens review the performance measures on the department’s website and submit questions and comments.

Managing for resultsPerformance measures are used as key indicators of the agency’s progress toward achievement of its long-term vision. They are also used as indicators of progress made in projected efficiency gains as a result of automation. The agency uses additional internal measures and division and agency level dashboards to track internal indicators to assist in using output data to more effec-tively manage to identified outcomes.

Staff trainingVarious agency managers have previously, and continue to, attend targeted training classes, with topics related to public sector performance measurement and have brought the knowledge gained at those classes back to the agency. In addition, managers have reviewed training and information posted on the Department of Administration’s website. The department has begun offering internal training on process performance metrics and the tools of quality.

Communicating resultsStaff: Staff have the capability to review key performance measures on the department’s inter-nal website. Managers are engaged in multiple levels of review of each updated annual per-formance progress report. Based upon their reviews, work processes may be changed or prob-lems/trends identified, which are then addressed.

Elected officials: Elected officials review the performance measures and evaluate the depart-ment’s effectiveness as part of the department’s budget process. The measures are also included in the agency business plan provided to the legislature and other elected officials.

Stakeholders: Stakeholders review the measures on the department’s external website and may ask questions or make suggestions.

Citizens: Citizens review the measures on the department’s external website and may ask ques-tions or make suggestions.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 78

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 79

Appendices

Appendix A: Achievements and efficiencies ...................................................................................80

Appendix B: 2015 Legislation with possible fiscal impacts .........................................................89

Appendix C: House Bill 2020/4131 .......................................................................................................93

Appendix D: Ten percent reduction options .................................................................................. 94

Appendix E: Long-term vacancies ......................................................................................................95

Appendix F: Audit response ..................................................................................................................96

Appendix G: New hires and reclassifications ...................................................................................98

Appendix H: Information technology projects $1 million + ................................................... 107

Appendix I: Key performance measures ........................................................................................ 109

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 80

Appendix A Achievements and efficiencies, 2013–15

Personal Tax and Compliance Division

Enforcement

Audit process improvementThis project implemented consistent procedures and letters for use in the audit process. One goal of the project was to decrease the time to close an audit, which will increase the number of audits that can be completed over time. Another goal was to increase payments made before collection efforts begin, which allows collectors to focus on other debt owed to the agency.

Reduced filing enforcement review We reduced the amount of lead worker review necessary on failure-to-file setups performed by administrative specialist 1s and 2s who have demonstrated a low error rate (between 5 and 20 percent). This action allows lead workers to complete more of their own cases, which leads to higher overall production.

Criteria to reduce auditor review to 20 percentOnce an auditor is proficient in a category of work, the level of review of their completed cases drops from 100 percent to 20 percent. Criteria were recently developed to evaluate auditors’ proficiency on a consistent basis. These criteria include understanding of tax law, appropriate use of judgment, and clear communication. This action will streamline the review process and increase overall audit production.

Audit review process improvementWe’re continuing to improve the audit review process. We’re evaluating the purpose of each review and identifying areas to streamline. The goal is to have a more effective and efficient review process that minimizes resource use while ensuring that we provide quality service to taxpayers.

Employee engagement

TechnologyWe have reduced field office travel by increasing our use of Mondopads and webcams for train-ing, meeting, and mentoring. While the savings from the reduction in travel is difficult to quan-tify, providing this option to staff has many benefits, including more time spent on enforcement activities.

Rebuilding bench strengthThis biennium has been a time for the Compliance Section to rebuild our auditor classification. The tax auditor entry (TAE) classification is an entry-level position and a way for many people to enter the agency workforce. People who are successful as tax auditors have gone on to many other positions in the agency including policy, IT, management, and appraisal. We hired more

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 81

than 40 TAEs this biennium and implemented new strategies to get them into productive work sooner. In general, it takes a full year to train a new auditor. However, we’ve implemented ways to expedite the training, including:

• Condensing the classroom training allows staff from our field offices to travel less. Based on class feedback, auditor training is more effective when held in this manner.

• Shortening the timeline for training on advanced topics, such as business auditing. This allows more time for new auditors to complete advanced cases and shifts the focus of their first year onto more productive subjects.

• Standardizing our mentoring program so that mentors are at a 2:1 ratio with new audi-tors. This has required some resource shifting away from audits. However, it is a valu-able investment in the future success of the auditing program.

The Collections Section has also focused more time this year on hiring revenue agent 1s. The RA1 classification is a way for many people to enter into the agency workforce. Since August 2013, we’ve been filling vacant positions within the Collections Section and double-filling when appropriate. We have hired more than 50 RA1s in the past year. Hiring larger classes of RAs lessens the impact on our existing staff by shortening the amount of time spent training and mentoring new staff. Our RA training program is continually being reviewed and improved based on mentor/mentee feedback. We rely on our lead workers for training and review of new agents.

Some other changes made over the past year include:

• Modified RA1 training, enabling new staff to answer calls within a month of hire.

• New staff receive laptops, meaning less wasted time when the computer lab is not avail-able. Staff is able to use Wi-Fi in any conference room.

• A mentoring program that provides standards and an outline for mentors to review with all mentees to ensure a similar training experience for all new staff.

Team changesOver the past year, we have modified the collections process as it relates to the RA1s. As a result, all RA1s now manage an active caseload while simultaneously being available for incoming calls on the automated call distributor (ACD). In the past, they were either assigned to a queue or the ACD, but not both. The result has been shorter call wait times for taxpay-ers, account queue size reduction, and touching the majority of our accounts within 90 days of assignment. Performance standards and training are the same for all agents within the section. Prior to the change, the standards and training depended on which team the agent was on.

Customer experienceWe upgraded the call center’s Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system and put it in the cloud. The new system allows callers to self-transfer to a revenue agent if their call is collections-related. It also has a virtual hold feature that allows callers to get a call back when it’s their turn in the queue without staying on the phone. This feature is popular with both taxpayers and staff. We also changed the ACD hours of operation from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. to 7:15 a.m. to 5 p.m. to better accommodate taxpayers’ schedules.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 82

FutureThe department’s goal is to improve customer service through increasing availability of self-help options and to improve the quality of direct customer service. The goal is long-term and involves investment in technology and training of staff.

In the technology arena, the department plans to replace its outdated ACD when the state implements an enterprise-wide telephone system. Upgrading the ACD will allow the department to be more efficient in routing callers and improve tracking and reporting capabilities.

Another tool being considered is an instant messaging device. It allows a back and forth interaction with the department without tying up the phones. One representative can engage in multiple chats simultaneously. The tool is successfully used by other public and private call centers; one state reports the tool gave them a one-for-one reduction in calls (each chat resulted in one less call).

With GenTax, the department is also expanding online self-help options. Revenue Online became available with the first programs migrated to GenTax. Revenue Online provides more online payment options, more options for filing returns, the ability to appeal or submit an authorization to represent, and the ability to place cigarette stamp orders. The system can be tailored, and the department will add features to meet the needs of the various programs.

Equity and uniformity

eFile platformThe department has fully converted to the IRS’ modernized eFile return platform. Oregon had been one of the pilot states, receiving half of the e-filed returns in the new system. The mod-ernized version decreased processing time by about a day for non-suspended returns. It also allows taxpayers to send PDF attachments (schedules and explanations).

Process changeWe shifted resources to help with the processing of suspended tax returns. We used tax audi-tors for the more complex issues. We also used individuals from the Compliance Section who specialize in the Working Family Tax Credit to help process those returns. The learning curve in the suspense system negated any positive affects, but efficiency should improve in the next processing season. Finally, we changed the business rules for refund returns that don’t suspend for other adjustments so that they process faster. The goal is to process within 45 days (interest is paid on refunds processed after 45 days).

Income Tax BookletsPaper filing of tax returns has become the exception (7 percent of the returns received in 2014 were paper). As taxpayers move to e-filing their tax returns (either professionally or on their own), we have adjusted the printing and mailing of income tax booklets. Printing has decreased by 35 percent from the previous biennium. In 2015, we will discontinue the automatic printing and mailing of tax booklets altogether.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 83

Process improvementAs of December 10, 2014, the department has saved approximately $868,000 through SB184 (garnishments by regular mail) and SB185 (no warrant with garnishment, no signing of garnishment).

Savings is based on:

• Sending garnishments via regular mail instead of certified mail.

• Issuing garnishments without having to attach a copy of the warrant before mailing. Ordering a copy of the warrant added additional personal service and printing costs.

Business DivisionVoluntary compliance

Voluntary Disclosure Agreement (VDA) process With GenTax, the VDA process used for our corporate excise tax becomes more efficient because the documents are created in a manner that requires less data entering. GenTax also identifies the account as a VDA, so with business rules we can automate accounting transac-tions that were previously completed manually.

Outreach eventsWe have placed emphasis on reaching out to stakeholders and customers and have maintained a dedicated resource who proactively engages with professional and community groups for outreach and educational activities. As of December 10, 2014, we have presented information at 52 educational events. We continue to work with our partners and stakeholders to ensure that we are providing the taxpayer community with the information that they need to comply with their tax filing and payment requirements.

Revision of production reporting and performance measuresOur legacy computer system poses various challenges in mastering the access and manipula-tion of the data that it contains. We have invested in staff and devoted resources to gain a bet-ter understanding of how to extract data and turn it into meaningful production reporting and performance measures. We have increased our knowledge and skills by continued training, and those efforts have resulted in the creation of new reports, measures, and refining and reconcil-ing previous data analysis activities. These reports allow our decision makers to identify areas where we can increase effectiveness in our operations. This information will also give us a solid foundation for developing business rules within GenTax.

Enforcement

Expanded use of third-party data warehouse toolWe’ve broadened our use of a third-party tool to help us identify debtors and income sources. Through the third-party tool, we’ve been able to identify 80 percent of debtors who we previ-ously couldn’t identify in our other agency account collection tool.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 84

Information and Wage Information Return E-services (iWire) compliance The department has statutory authority to require the electronic submission of information returns (1099 and W2 returns) through iWire, with the ability to impose penalties for late, incomplete, or erroneous returns. We have conducted an analysis of non-compliance in this area and have initiated projects aimed at identifying, contacting, and resolving outstanding return submissions. We have also proactively engaged in communication activities to inform the return-filer community of their responsibility to file the information returns electronically with the department. Our payroll section has been actively involved in providing notice to non-compliant filers to ensure that future voluntary compliance is achieved. For the upcoming tax filing season, the department will impose penalties on the non-compliant population to pro-mote filing compliance.

State lands, WageVu matchingWe continue to look for ways to maximize the use of our data for recovery and fraud detec-tion. We used Audit Command Language (ACL) software to manipulate and mine data. For example, we cross referenced our open billing inventory against the Department of State Lands’ unclaimed property list. We found $250,000 in unclaimed funds that could be applied to exist-ing debt.

With ACL, we can also analyze large data sets to identify opportunities to resolve outstanding liquidated and delinquent debt. This data analysis allows for a better understanding of debt and assists our revenue agents in determining the best way to collect on that debt.

Employee engagementWe have focused our hiring processes to identify the behaviors and decision-making skills that will improve the department. This has brought in agents with positive energy who have increased production and motivated other staff.

In our collection areas, we have developed strong collection standards and recognition pro-grams for agents who exceed the standards.

Customer Experience

Other tobacco products (OTP) agreement with the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw IndiansWe entered into a revenue sharing agreement with the Confederated Tribes of Coos, Lower Umpqua, and Siuslaw Indians. They’ve agree to sell taxed tobacco products on tribal lands if we return a portion of the revenues received by taxed tobacco products. This return is proportional to tribal membership and tobacco use rates. This results in lower administration costs for the department, a positive working relationship with the tribe, and, ultimately, ensuring the tribes receive the tax-free tobacco products due to them.

Online services for cigarette and tobacco taxpayers On November 12, 2014, Revenue Online went live for for cigarette and tobacco taxpayers. Ciga-rette distributors can now submit their cigarette stamp orders online, track their order, and view their account. Prior to this automation, they were required to submit a paper copy to us and could not track their order or view their account. This improves our accuracy when filling the stamp order, and offers additional customer service options.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 85

Online payments for special tax programs In February 2013, we implemented the ability for our hazardous substance fee payers, 911 tax-payers, transient lodging taxpayers, petroleum load fee payers, and amusement device fee pay-ers, to pay their fee and/or tax bill online. Prior to this implementation, they were required to send us a check and we processed it manually. This will allow for more accurate posting of pay-ments, less time to process payments, and offers additional customer service options.

Automated Call Distributor (ACD) implementation and useWe have an ACD system and have effectively implemented the tool in various areas. The ACD receives incoming calls and distributes them to revenue agents. It has proven to be an enhance-ment to workflow and caseload management. This tool allows our agents to answer more calls and provide more efficient and effective customer service, which subsequently results in enhanced debt resolution. By utilizing real-time data, we can apply strategies and deploy resources to further reduce the abandoned call rate and the wait times for incoming calls. It has allowed us to evaluate the technology and the performance of our work groups to maximize efficiency. In some areas of the agency, we have also provided:

• Recordings of information commonly repeated to allow agents to do multiple tasks.

• A streamlined incoming telephone menu. We reduced the number of options and reor-ganized the menu so the most common option is the first option.

• The caller-elected call back feature; minimizing the time a customer waits to speak to an employee.

• Real-time displays showing the incoming telephone traffic so resources can be allocated to the area that requires attention.


Processing changes with implementation of GenTaxWith the implementation of GenTax, the number of returns that previously suspended for manual processing due to payment mismatch errors is expected to decrease substantially. For example: payments will no longer be assigned to either corporate income tax or excise tax until the return showing which tax is being reported is filed. Payments made by corporate affiliates of the filing entity will be transferred to the return filed within which the affiliate is listed, as part of the consolidated return filing. We are still transitioning to the new system and do not yet have precise numbers for the total change in suspended returns.

Case resolution group process changesWe have made changes to the process used to review and evaluate corporate case resolution. For some cases, the previous amount of resources used are not needed. Using a specific set of criteria, we are now more strategic in our use of resources for this task.

Change to written objection processPrior to GenTax, a corporate tax appeal would be scanned and an electronic file created on a network drive to store files, such as the objection, any related emails, and the final Letter of Determination. All appeal activity was tracked separately on a spreadsheet and assigned to staff using email. With GenTax, the appeal is scanned, logged, assigned, and tracked through

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 86

one entry. This not only saves time, but provides a single location for staff to access all appeal information.

Modern e-file (MeF) XML data cleaningStarting in January the manual process used to clean corporate tax data will no longer be neces-sary for current and future returns. MeF data will be input directly into GenTax, and it will no longer have to fully be cleaned and validated. Currently the process takes several steps using a third-party application.

Property Tax DivisionCustomer experience

Minimum training and experience standards for appraisersPTD partnered with the assessors association to develop a long-term strategic plan that will update the Oregon appraiser registration and continuing education program. The plan provides for development of minimum training and experience standards for appraisers to ensure uni-form practices and improve equitable property valuation.

Working with tribes and counties on tribal taxation mattersWe have committed to working with tribal representatives through the tribal tax work group to proactively address tax-related matters. We met with tribal and county representatives several times during 2013 and 2014 to discuss property tax issues related to Bureau of Indian Affairs regulations and court cases outside of Oregon.

Surveying counties to determine support needsWe conduct biennial customer surveys of county assessors and tax collectors to help us identify ways to improve service delivery and to address future training needs. In 2013, we changed the survey focus to issues that are important to the counties and included more opportunities for the respondents to provide input regarding improvements they would like to see us make. We used the results to inform our division strategic plan developed in Spring 2014.

Improving speed, accuracy, and consistency in our processesWe implemented new or enhanced processes in several areas to ease certain filing requirements for customers and reduce costs. Examples include:

• A new process for tracking, reporting, and notifying districts that file for boundary changes under ORS 308.225. This will ease the filing process for filers and the department.

• Conversion of the nine counties whose assessor maps we maintain to a single ARC-GIS application (ESRI platform). This will provide for greater uniformity and reduced costs (fewer licensed seats required).

Utilizing technology to improve the service quality, timeliness, and affordabilityWe’ve increasingly integrated online training options into our package of appraiser continuing education course offerings. We also use WebEx videoconferencing to communicate with coun-ties, which significantly reduces travel costs, and increases outreach opportunities.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 87

Providing improved support to property tax deferral program participantsUsing mostly limited-duration employees, we increased our support services to senior and disabled property tax deferral participants. This reduced response times, increased customer satisfaction, and resulted in timely completion of the 2014 application processing season in a cost-effective manner.


Streamline filing and reportingTo assist taxpayers with filing their Industrial Property Returns (IPR), the department has developed fillable electronic forms. This allows taxpayers with large inventories of machinery and equipment to upload information into an electronic document and submit it electronically for appraisal and processing purposes.

Training At the beginning of each valuation season, the industrial appraisers provide training to taxpay-ers. This training especially benefits taxpayers with complex property and returns.

Modernize systems and improve processesThe Valuation Section was realigned to better address new and existing objectives. To aid our staff in their appraisal work, we have subscribed to hosted data and reporting development software. This system is a near-term fix until a more comprehensive IT solution platform is implemented.

Employee engagement

Increase staff skillsWe have developed training and professional development guidelines to identify appropriate educational pathways for appraisers. Additionally, the section has provided classes on appraisal and leadership.

Increasing staff technical proficiency through training and development We completed the identification of basic knowledge and training requirements for each employee and posted the results in each individual’s performance management plan.

Providing multiple forums for engaging staffWe provided formal and informal forums for gathering ideas, soliciting feedback, recognizing group and individual successes, and maintaining line-of-sight with overall section, division, and agency goals.


Strengthen competency of staffNear- and long-term training plans are developed for each appraiser. Earning professional des-ignations are encouraged and promoted for all staff.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 88

Working with stakeholders to simplify the forestland valuation processIn August 2014, we organized a stakeholder group and initiated a process to evaluate the cur-rent methodology for valuing forestland with the objective of simplifying the process and obtaining administrative efficiencies, while retaining the rigor and industry acceptance of the existing methodology. Meetings will continue during 2015, with the goal of adopting the new methodology by 2016.

Maintaining standards within the assessment and taxation systemWe developed a tool that will enable us to evaluate whether county mapping programs are meeting certain minimum standards for accuracy and completeness. Since property assess-ment begins with an accurate property tax description, conformity with certain standards is essential. We will introduce a pilot program in early 2015 to gather information to use in target-ing future training and assistance efforts.

County data reviewWorking with our Research Section, we initiated a four county pilot study using data already provided to the department to determine whether such a “data dump” could help us easily identify potential issues with assessment and tax calculation. We will evaluate the results in 2015 to determine possible broader application of the study to ensure statewide equity and uniformity.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 89

Appendix B 2015 Legislation with possible fiscal impacts

for Department of Revenue

Potential impacts

Savings Low ($50,000–$100,000)

Medium ($100,000–$500,000)

High (>$500,000)

Agency-wide bills

HB 2137 Creates a sales and use tax on artworks with a sale price over $250,000. The department will administer this new tax program.

X

HB 2164 Makes tax compliance project for licensees permanent with an automated method developed by January 1, 2016.

X

HB 2167 Requires a business entity to be in compliance with tax laws of the state before getting a business license from the Secretary of State.

X

HB 2169 Requires state agencies that issue grants to make sure grant applicants are in compliance.

X

HB 2590 Enacts sales and use tax. X

HB 2732 Enacts sales and use tax. Reduces rates of income tax. Increases EIC. Creates credit for business investment.

X

Corporation-related bills

HB 2822 Creates a tax credit for capital improvement projects. The department will determine eligibility for the tax credit.

X

Payroll tax-related bills

HB 2960 Retirement security. X

SB 56 Statewide lien register. X

SB 615 Retirement security. X

Personal income tax-related bills

HB 2068 Increases the amount of the Earned Income Credit to equal the federal earned income credit if a taxpayer has a dependent under the age of three (tax years 2016-19) (ORS 315.266).

X

HB 2073 Disallows the mortgage interest deduction for non-personal residences if the AGI is greater than $250,000 ($125,000 MFS) beginning with tax year 2015 (ORS 316.695).

X

HB 2076 PTE reduced tax rate is limited to $1 million of nonpassive income. Decreases the employee’s hours to 1,000. Raises PIT rate to 10.8 percent or 11 percent if over $125,000 or $250,000 of income beginning with tax year 2016 (ORS 316.043 and 316.037).

X

HB 2091 Doubles the percentage allowed for the Working Family Child Care Credit (changes from 40 percent to 80 percent) for tax year 2015.

X

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 90

Potential impacts

Savings Low ($50,000–$100,000)

Medium ($100,000–$500,000)

High (>$500,000)

HB 2101 Eliminates the standard and itemized deductions, the blind and severely disabled exemption credit, federal tax subtraction, and the foreign tax subtraction limitations. Allows a standard deduction of 33 percent of the federal amount before tax year 2018.

X

HB 2104 Eliminates the standard and itemized deductions, the blind and severely disabled exemption credit, federal tax subtraction, and the foreign tax subtraction limitations. Allows a standard deduction of 33 percent of the federal amount before tax year 2018.

X

HB 2136 Limits the amount of home mortgage interest allowed on the Oregon return to $10,000 beginning with tax year 2015 (ORS 316.695).

X

HB 2139 Directs DOR to calculate a net federal itemized deduction ratio average over five years and if the projected ratio is greater than the ratio calculated, the itemized deductions would be reduced.

X

HB 2146 Add collection fee for missing income or corporate excise tax installment payment.

X

HB 2152 Limits amount of certain tax expenditures connected to economic development allowed corporate-rate excise taxpayer to 1 percent of Oregon taxable income. Begins with tax year 2016 (ORS 285C.309, 315.141, 315.331, 315.336, 315.341, 315.507, 315.514, 315.533, 316.778, 317.124, 317.391, and 317.394).

X

HB 2156 Allows the taxpayer to get a refund of the exemption credit if their federal taxable income is under a dollar limitation. Reduces the taxpayer’s itemized deductions if the federal taxable income is over a dollar limitation. Begins with tax year 2016 (ORS 316.085 and 316.695).

X

HB 2158 Increases/decreases the tax rate if the high school graduation rate falls or exceeds a certain percentage.

X

HB 2239 Creates a new credit for hiring at-risk or disadvantaged youth at 25 percent of the wages paid to the employee beginning with tax year 2015.

X

HB 2242 Increases the dependent exemption credit to $250 per dependent child beginning tax year 2015 (ORS 316.085).

X

HB 2289 Creates a new credit for cleanup of Brownfield property beginning with tax year 2016.

X

HB 2747 Increases limitation on subtraction for contributing to college savings network to amount per designated beneficiary. Creates refundable credit for contributions to college savings.

X

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 91

Potential impacts

Savings Low ($50,000–$100,000)

Medium ($100,000–$500,000)

High (>$500,000)

HB 2751 Reduces rate of tax on capital gains of personal income and corporate income and excise taxpayers if amount equal to gain is invested in Oregon business during tax year.

X

HB 2859 Creates reduced rate of PIT capital gains attributable to benefit companies (ORS 316.037).

X

SB 195 Reduces personal income tax rates for certain taxpayers by modifying income tax brackets beginning with tax year 2015 (ORS 316.037).

X

SB 197 Modifies provisions allowing for optional reduced rates of PIT on nonpassive income. Makes available to all PTEs. Adds cost-of-living adjustments (ORS 316.043).

X

SB 200 Creates subtraction from taxable income for net capital gain that is invested in certain businesses beginning with tax year 2015.

X

SB 433 Reduces rate on capital gains to half the tax rate beginning with tax year 2015 (ORS 316.037).

X

SB 530 Creates a new tax credit for interest on qualified education loans beginning with tax year 2015.

X

Property tax-related bills

HB 2078 Imposes state property tax on property subject to local ad valorem property taxation.

X

HB 2083 Changes eligibility criteria to senior and disabled property tax deferral programs, authorizes the department to purchase insurance on behalf of participants.

X

HB 2085 Authorizes Multnomah County to establish a property tax deferral program; requires the department to transfer accounts under state program.

X

HB 2588 Creates new timber severance tax $19/MBF. X

SB 58 Same as HB 2085. Authorizes Multnomah County to establish a property tax deferral program; requires the department to transfer accounts under state program.

X

SB 60 Same as HB 2083. Changes eligibility criteria to senior and disabled property tax deferral programs, authorizes the department to purchase insurance on behalf of participants.

X

Small programs administration

HB 2066 Increases cigarette tax by $1.25/pack of 20 (total tax $2.56); imposes floor tax; modifies current tax distribution; and prescribes distribution for additional tax.

X

HB 2074 Expands definition of “tobacco products” to include electronic cigarettes and nicotine solutions. Makes electronic cigarettes, vape pens, and nicotine solutions taxable as tobacco products.

X

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 92

Potential impacts

Savings Low ($50,000–$100,000)

Medium ($100,000–$500,000)

High (>$500,000)

HB 2082 Creates carbon tax on carbon-based fuel supplied to Oregon consumers and electricity generated from carbon-based fuel. Imposes carbon tax on fuel suppliers and utilities.

X

HB 2086 Imposes fee on fossil fuels or electricity generated from fossil fuels.

X

HB 2134 Expands definition of “tobacco products” to include electronic cigarettes and nicotine solutions. Makes electronic cigarettes, vape pens, and nicotine solutions taxable as tobacco products.

X

HB 2147 Requires DOR to study taxation of marijuana and report to interim legislature on or before September 15, 2015.

X

HB 2159 Creates carbon tax on carbon-based fuel supplied to Oregon consumers and electricity generated from carbon-based fuel. Imposes carbon tax on fuel suppliers and utilities.

X

HB 2166 Increases cigarette tax by $1.82/pack of 20 (total tax $3.13); imposes floor tax; modifies current tax distribution; and prescribes distribution for additional tax.

X

HB 2555 Increases cigarette tax by $1/pack of 20 (total tax $2.31); imposes floor tax; tax distribution percentages blank.

X

SB 55 Directs state agencies to impose collection fee on accounts transferred to private collection agency; directs DOR/OAA to impose collection fee on accounts collected for state agencies; directs state agencies to request SSN from applicant when they own the state agency more than $100.

X

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 93

Appendix C House Bill 2020/4131

House Bill 4131 reportSince 2013, the Department of Revenue has not needed to perform any additional administra-tive actions to achieve the 11 to 1 ratio target. We continue to consider our ratio when making any management hiring decisions that would affect current ratio levels. We also keep this ratio in mind when considering reduction option packages or policy option packages.

Total positions

Supervisory positions

Non-supervisory positions Ratio

As of 4-11-12 1,051 89 962 1–11As of 11-01-14 1,065 84 981 1–12

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 94

Appendix D Ten-percent reduction options

The agency continues to identify its ten percent reduction options with an eye toward main-taining the long-term health of the tax system. Because 97 percent of personal and income tax returns are submitted voluntarily, we continue to look at enforcement resources as the first level of reductions. The majority of positions in the first five percent of reductions are collectors, auditors, and filing enforcement positions. These reductions total 71 positions (61.78) FTE. The agency is estimating the direct General Fund impact of these positions at $32 million and the Other Funds revenue loss at $3.5 million. While the majority of positions are enforcement posi-tions, other programs and functions have positions within this first option, as well.

The second five percent of reductions total 67 positions (59.92) FTE. The General Fund loss asso-ciated with the second five percent reduction is $23.7 million and $6.0 million in Other Funds. Again, we have enforcement positions on the second five percent reduction list. There are addi-tional reductions in positions in the property tax valuation programs and agency administra-tive areas, such as the processing center, information technology, and human resources.

Another factor we considered in identifying the reduction options was the impact reductions would have on the Core Systems Replacement project, especially in information technology. Because we have chosen to use subject matter experts from program and information technol-ogy to staff the project, reducing the positions that are backfilling the subject matter experts would impact core administrative functions of the organization. We tried to maintain the bal-ance of both program and project success in light of any potential resource reductions.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 95

The agency does have some areas with vacancies over 6 months old. The vacancies generally fall into three categories: funding issues, recruitment issues, and core systems replacement project position issues. These are further outlined below.

For the 2013–15 biennium, the legislature approved 32 full-time, limited-duration positions to support the core systems replacement project. These positions were filled through temporary work assignments with permanent staff from department program areas. To ensure that per-manent staff do not lose their employment rights due to this employment arrangement, the project positions appear vacant, although the funding provided for the positions is being used to support the staff in their project roles. We have used the program funding in our base budget to double-fill these positions to ensure the agency continues to meet program expectations for processing, auditing, and collecting debt from taxpayers.

The Property Tax Division has some structural funding issues between General Fund allocation and Other Fund limitation on positions in the Valuation Program. The agency has submitted a policy option package for the 2015–17 biennium to resolve the funding issues and fill the posi-tions to meet program requirements. In the 2013–15 biennium, they held positions vacant to avoid overspending their existing GF allocation.

We have experienced significant recruitment challenges for a number of information technol-ogy positions. We have solicited for some positions as many as five times without finding a qualified applicant pool or a candidate we could hire at the pay range of the classification for the position. We have been actively addressing these issues all biennium and continue to look for solutions to recruitment challenges. We believe that other state agencies are experiencing similar challenges. We find that we often move the recruiting issues between agencies as IT employees change jobs. Promoting staff from outside the IT programs or from outside of state government may alleviate some of these issues.

Appendix E Long-term vacancies

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 96

Appendix F Audit response

Secretary of State audit

Statewide single audit report for the year ended June 30, 2010Recommendation: We recommend department management perform effective reviews over the year-end calculations of the taxes receivable estimates to ensure accrual calculations are accurate.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendation and is in the process of improving the review process of year-end tax receivable calculations.

Recommendation: We recommend department management ensure accounting staff have the requisite knowledge and skills to perform their assigned duties and ensure accounting transac-tions are accurately recorded to the proper accounts.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendation and has implemented pro-cesses which address improving staff knowledge and skills and ensuring accounting transac-tions are accurately recorded to the proper accounts.

Strategies for increasing personal income tax compliance and revenue collections, August 2010Recommendation: We recommend that DOR better identify and address the backlog of non-filers, increase tax compliance efforts, and increase the effectiveness and efficiency of its collections process.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendations and will continue to develop better methods for identifying people who do not file Oregon personal income tax returns. Management will also continue to develop performance management strategies in collections.

Statewide single audit report for the year ended June 30, 2011Recommendation: We recommend department management develop and implement effective monitoring procedures to ensure all accounting transactions are entered in the state accounting system for financial reporting purposes.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendation and has begun implement-ing improved procedures.

Recommendation: We recommend department management comply with state policy and ensure the cash accounts in its subsidiary system are routinely reconciled to the state accounting sys-tem and to Oregon State Treasury accounts.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendation and has begun the process of improving cash account reconciliations.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 97

Recommendation: We recommend department management ensure accounting staff have the requisite knowledge and skills to perform their assigned duties and ensure all accounting transactions result in accurate financial reporting.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendation and has begun implement-ing staff training and will enhance said training with additional in-depth accounting and tech-nical guidance.

Statewide single audit report for the year ended June 30, 2012There were no findings or material weaknesses found for the period ending June 30, 2012. The Secretary of State commented on the findings and recommendations from the previous year’s financial audit (ending June 30, 2011).

The agency has taken corrective action on the recommendation above regarding ensuring all accounting transactions are entered into the state accounting system for financial reporting purposes. The agency has made progress toward completing the other two recommendations.

Statewide Single Audit Report for the Year Ended June 30, 2013

There were no findings or material weaknesses found for the period ending June 30, 2013.

Secretary of State Property Tax Deferral Program: Financial Review, August 2013

Recommendation: We recommend department management develop and implement procedures to ensure interest receivable for the Senior and Disabled Property Tax Deferral Program is reported in SFMA.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendation and a process has been implemented to record a monthly accrual of interest receivable in SFMA.

Recommendation: We recommend department management consider performing its lien adjust-ment process on a more frequent schedule to ensure sufficient liens exist to cover participants’ liabilities.

Department response: Management agrees with the recommendation and a process has been implemented which includes performing the lien adjustment process on a more frequent sched-ule to ensure sufficient liens exist to cover participants’ liabilities.

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 98

Appendix G New hires and reclassifications

New hiresEffective: 7/1/2013 through 12/1/2014Report date: 12/15/2014Asset class 2 dataReport no.: EHRS0841

Agency Pos No Sal Rng Repr Repr Desc Class Class Desc Base rate

Step Appt Pa Eff Date Justifcation

15000 5145 28X MMS Mgt Svc Super-visory

X7004 Principal Executive/Manager C

6226 09 141 1/13/2014 Hired At Step 9 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary

15000 4243 31 OA SEIU Local 503 OPEU-strikeable

C0728 Appraiser Analyst 4 6885 09 141 1/13/2014 Hired At Step 9 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary

15000 3604 33I OA SEIU Local 503 OPEU-strikeable

C1488 Info Systems Specialist 8






C0727 Appraiser Analyst 3 5688 08 141 3/31/2014 Hired At Step 8 To Be Completitve With Previous Non-State Salary





C1216 Accountant 2 4079 06 141 8/11/2014 Hired At Step 6 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary





C5112 Revenue Agent 3 3781 06 141 9/2/2014 Hired At Step 6 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary




C0871 Operations & Policy Analyst 2




15000 1018 31 MMN Mgt Svc Nonsu-pervisory

X5618 Internal Auditor 3 5927 04 141 4/28/2014 Hired At Step 4 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2775 04 141 8/5/2013 Hired At Step 4 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary


C0104 Office Specialist 2 2636 04 141 9/2/2014 Hired At Step 4 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary




15000 3596 29 MMN Mgt Svc Nonsu-pervisory

X1322 Human Resource Analyst 3



C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 3225 04 141 2/10/2014 Hired At Step 4 Based On Previous Non-State Experinece In The Field


C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 3225 04 141 7/7/2014 Hired At Step 4 Based On Previous Non-State Experinece In The Field

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 99


C0107 Administrative Specialist 1





C0758 Supply Specialist 1 2451 04 141 8/1/2013 Hired At Step 4 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary

15000 5145 28X MMS Mgt Svc Super-visory

X7004 Principal Executive/Manager C












C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2702 03 141 12/16/2013 Hired At Step 3 Based On Previous Non-State Experinece In The Field


C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 3077 03 141 2/11/2014 Hired At Step 3 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary






C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 3077 03 141 2/10/2014 Hired At Step 3 To Be Competitive With Previous Non-State Salary


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2584 02 141 5/1/2014


C0103 Office Specialist 1 2188 02 141 11/3/2014



2873 02 141 10/13/2014




C0727 Appraiser Analyst 3 4273 02 141 3/17/2014



4619 02 141 3/24/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2546 02 141 10/7/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2584 02 141 5/1/2014



3869 02 141 12/1/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2584 02 141 5/1/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 100


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014


C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 2817 01 141 2/10/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 7/21/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 3/24/2014




C0323 Public Service Rep 3 2280 01 141 10/7/2013






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 3/3/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 10/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 3/3/2014





2488 01 141 1/6/2014





150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 101


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 10/1/2014



2488 01 141 1/6/2014


C1244 Fiscal Analyst 2 3896 01 141 1/7/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/27/2014





3696 01 141 12/5/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 3/3/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 10/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013



2538 01 141 11/3/2014



150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 102


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/28/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014


C1216 Accountant 2 3177 01 141 10/14/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013














C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 8/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014



2488 01 141 3/31/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/9/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 3/3/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 103






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 10/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 8/1/2014



2488 01 141 1/6/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 8/1/2014







2488 01 141 8/18/2014



150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 104




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/6/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/2/2013




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 9/15/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 10/1/2014




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013








C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013




C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/2/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/2/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014







4479 01 141 3/10/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 10/1/2014

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 105


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2538 01 141 10/1/2014






C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/1/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 10/7/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 5/5/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 3/3/2014


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2451 01 141 8/5/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013



2451 01 141 10/21/2013


C5110 Revenue Agent 1 2488 01 141 12/16/2013







150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 106

ReclassificationsEffective: 7/1/2013 through 12/1/2014Report date: 12/11/2014Asset class 2 dataReport number: dr000111

Classification from Classification toDate Class Name Range Step Salary Class Name Range Step Salary

Apr 14 X0103 Office Specialist 1 12 2872 X0107 Administrative Specialist 1 17 4 3012Apr 14 X1320 Human Resource

Analyst 123 4429 X1321 Human Resource Analyst 2 26 5 4881

Aug 14 C0871 Ops/Policy Analyst 2

27 5604 C0872 Ops/Policy Analyst 3 30 7 5961

Oct 14 C5111 Revenue Agent 2 19 3139 C5112 Revenue Agent 3 21 3 3290Oct 14 C5111 Revenue Agent 2 19 3972 C5112 Revenue Agent 3 21 8 4161Oct 14 C5111 Revenue Agent 2 19 3139 C5112 Revenue Agent 3 21 3 3290Dec 13 C5111 Revenue Agent 2 19 2942 C5112 Revenue Agent 3 21 2 3077May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3382 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Oct 13 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3032 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3484Oct 13 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3032 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3484Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 4079 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 5 4273May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 2817 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3077 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 2942 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3077 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3077 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 2817 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Oct 13 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3032 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3484Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3077 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Oct 13 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3838 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 5 4210May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3382 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Oct 13 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3032 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3484Oct 13 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3032 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3484May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3382 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Oct 13 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3032 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3484Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3077 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3896 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 4 4079Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3536 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 2 3707May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 2817 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 2817 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 2817 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536May 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3707 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 3 3896Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3077 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Jan 14 C5630 Tax Auditor/Entry 20 3077 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 1 3536Sep 14 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 3781 C5632 Tax Auditor 2 28 1 4161Sep 14 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 3707 C5632 Tax Auditor 2 28 1 4161Sep 14 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 3781 C5632 Tax Auditor 2 28 1 4161Sep 14 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 3781 C5632 Tax Auditor 2 28 1 4161Sep 14 C5631 Tax Auditor 1 25 3781 C5632 Tax Auditor 2 28 1 4161

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 107

Appendix H Proposed IT projects costing $1 million or more

Core Systems Replacement The Department of Revenue is in the midst of replacing the majority of its core tax systems to mitigate the growing risks of not being able to support its aging legacy systems and maintain current service levels.

Project costs (in millions), as of December 2014

2009–13 2013–15 2015–17* 2017–19 TotalsDOR contribution Ongoing agency operating costs $7.3 $0.7 $0.9 $0.3 $9.1General Fund Non-bond eligible general services/supplies $0.2 $0.2 $0.1 $0.5 Project costs $1.8 $4.2 $1.5 $7.0 Total General Fund $2.0 $4.4 $1.6 $8.0Other Funds (bonds) Debt financed project costs $18.9 $26.7 $9.1 $54.7Project totals (excluding debt service) $7.3 $21.6 $32.1 $10.9 $71.8

2015–17 2017–19

Core systems replacementDOR project team: Project management team (three from PMO) 9 4.5

Technical team 14 7

Business team 13 6.5

Total FTE 36 18

Note: Does not include testing and training activities which will involve most agency staff at certain times.

2015-17 Biennium2013-15 Biennium 2017-19 Biennium

7/1/20

13

7/1/20

14

1/1/20

14

7/1/20

15

1/1/20

15

7/1/20

16

1/1/20

16

GenTax Installation

1/1/20

17

Rollout 2 (PIT, Transit)

Rollout 1 (Corp, Tobacco)

Rollout 3 (Withholding, etc.)

7/1/20

17

Rollout 4 (Other)

Planned implementation road map

Note: Component figures may not total accurately due to rounding.*Agency Requested Budget

Project team FTE

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 108

Property Valuation System (PVS)OverviewThe Department of Revenue is responsible for assessing real market value (RMV) on properties identified as central assessment (e.g. companies such as airlines, utilities, railroads, telecom-munications, etc), and those defined as principal and secondary industrial (i.e. valued at over $1 million and engaged in processing or manufacturing activities). In current property tax admin-istration, the department relies on antiquated applications, and internally developed databases, spreadsheets, and paper files to manage the complex effort of annually valuing 850 industrial sites and 600 central assessment companies. Because of the system’s limited capabilities and its fragmented and increasingly unsupportable architecture, many of our processes are manual, paper-driven, and prone to both error and inefficiency. This combination of manual processes and less reliable, fragmented, and limited technology poses a risk to our long-term ability to develop accurate and timely RMVs for department accounts.

ProposalBased on our analysis, we believe the appropriate way to address the problem identified above is to fund and deploy a commercial off-the-shelf computer-assisted mass appraisal (CAMA) software system. The proposed funding mechanism is debt financing through Article XI-Q bonds.

The following chart is an estimated four-year cost breakdown:

2015 2016 2017 2018 Total costSoftware $1,000,000 $500,000 $150,000 $150,000 $1,800,000Staff $312,000 $326,000 $340,000 $354,000 $1,332,000Hardware $50,000 $50,000Quality assurance $75,000 $75,000 $150,000Total $1,437,000 $901,000 $490,000 $504,000 $3,332,000

The projected four-year cost of ownership is anticipated to be $3,332,000 ($2,338,000 for 2015–17) for system acquisition, installation, temporary staffing, maintenance, and for the additional IT infrastructure necessary to support the new system.

Project timeline

2013-15 Biennium 2015-17 Biennium 2017-19 Biennium

prior toComplete: Develop: Develop: Develop: Implement: Implement: Finalize:System Evaluation Business Case Business Case RFP Roll out Data Entry Go Live

Business Process POP POP Vendor Selection Conversion Conversion ConversionCAMA Review Testing Testing Finalize

150-800-550 (Rev. 02-15) 109

Appendix I Key performance measures

REVENUE, DEPARTMENT of

Annual Performance Progress Report (APPR) for Fiscal Year (2013-2014)

Original Submission Date: 2014

Finalize Date: 9/30/2014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

110

2013

-201

4 A

pp

rove

d K

ey P

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

res

(KP

Ms)

2013

-201

4

KP

M #

Doll

ars

Col

lect

ed P

er R

even

ue

Age

nt P

er M

ont

h (P

erso

nal

Inco

me

Tax

) 1

Per

cent

of

Pro

per

ty T

axes

Col

lect

ed.

2

Per

cent

of

Ass

esso

r's

Map

s D

igit

ized

in

a G

IS F

orm

at.

3

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax N

on

-Fil

er A

sses

smen

ts I

ssue

d P

er E

mpl

oyee

Per

Mon

th.

5

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax a

nd

Corp

orat

ion

Tax

Cas

es C

lose

d P

er R

even

ue A

gent

Per

Mon

th.

6

Del

inque

nt R

etur

ns

Fil

ed A

fter

Com

plia

nce

Con

tact

Per

Fil

ing

Enf

orce

men

t E

mpl

oyee

Per

Mon

th.

7

Aver

age

Day

s to

Pro

cess

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax R

efun

d.

8

Per

cent

of

Per

sonal

Inco

me

Tax

Ret

urn

s F

iled

Ele

ctro

nica

lly

9

Em

ploy

ee W

ork

Env

ironm

ent

(bas

ed u

pon a

sca

le o

f 1-

6) 1

0

Em

plo

yee

Tra

inin

g P

er Y

ear

(per

cent

rec

eivin

g 20

hou

rs p

er y

ear)

. 1

1

Cust

om

er S

ervi

ce:

Per

cent

of c

ust

om

ers

rati

ng

thei

r sa

tisf

acti

on w

ith

the

agen

cy's

cus

tom

er s

ervi

ce a

s "g

ood"

or

"exc

elle

nt":

ove

rall

,

tim

elin

ess,

acc

urac

y, h

elpf

uln

ess,

exp

erti

se, a

nd a

vail

abil

ity

of i

nfor

mat

ion.

12

Eff

ecti

ve T

axpay

er A

ssis

tanc

e: P

rovid

e th

e m

ost

effe

ctiv

e ta

xpay

er a

ssis

tanc

e se

rvic

es b

y a

data

-dri

ven

com

bina

tion

of

dire

ct a

ssis

tanc

e an

d

elec

troni

c se

lf-h

elp

serv

ices

.

13

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

111

Pro

pos

ed K

ey P

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

res

(KP

M's

) fo

r B

ien

niu

m 2

015-

2017

New

Del

ete

Tit

le:

App

rais

al V

alue

Uni

form

ity

- W

e w

ill

dem

onst

rate

our

abi

lity

to

deli

ver

high

qua

lity

bus

ines

s re

sult

s by

mea

suri

ng

ap

pra

isal

eq

uit

y

and

unif

orm

ity

for

DO

R i

ndus

tria

l ac

coun

ts.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is a

rep

lace

men

t m

easu

re.

The

pre

viou

s m

easu

re, K

PM

#3 -

Per

cent

of

Ass

esso

rs' M

aps

Dig

itiz

ed i

n a

GIS

Fo

rmat

, was

to

o

narr

owly

foc

used

and

did

not

ref

lect

our

cor

e w

ork.

T

he P

rope

rty

Tax

Div

isio

n (P

TD

) is

pro

posi

ng t

his

repl

acem

ent

mea

sure

as

a w

ay t

o g

uag

e

our

abil

ity

to d

eliv

er s

tatu

tory

rea

l m

arke

t va

lue

(RM

V)

to c

ount

y as

sess

ors.

NE

W

Tit

le:

Dir

ect

Enf

orce

men

t D

olla

rs C

ost

of

Fun

ds -

We

wil

l de

mon

stra

te o

ur e

ffic

ienc

y an

d ef

fect

iven

ess

at f

undi

ng

ser

vic

es t

hat

pre

serv

e

and

enha

nce

the

qual

ity

of l

ife

for

all

citi

zens

by

mea

suri

ng t

he c

ost

of f

unds

(C

OF

) fo

r ev

ery

dire

ct e

nfor

cem

ent

doll

ar r

ecei

ved

by

ou

r ag

ency

.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

mea

sure

is

bein

g pr

opo

sed

to r

epla

ce c

urre

nt K

PM

#7.

Thi

s ne

w m

easu

re i

s a

mor

e ho

list

ic v

iew

of

the

effi

cien

cies

of

ou

r d

irec

t

enfo

rcem

ent

wor

k in

clud

ing

audi

t, f

ilin

g en

forc

emen

t, a

nd c

olle

ctio

ns f

unct

ions

. W

e w

ill

show

the

eff

ecti

vene

ss o

f ou

r di

rect

en

forc

emen

t

proc

esse

s an

d st

rate

gies

by

mea

suri

ng t

he

cost

of

each

dir

ect

enfo

rcem

ent

doll

ar w

e re

ceiv

e.

NE

W

Tit

le:

Col

lect

ion

Dol

lars

Cos

t of

Fu

nds

- W

e w

ill

dem

onst

rate

our

eff

icie

ncy

and

effe

ctiv

enes

s at

fun

ding

ser

vice

s th

at p

rese

rve

and

enha

nce

the

qual

ity

of l

ife

for

all

citi

zens

by

mea

suri

ng t

he c

ost

of f

unds

(C

OF

) fo

r ev

ery

doll

ar c

olle

cted

by

our

agen

cy.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

mea

sure

is

bein

g pr

opo

sed

to r

epla

ce c

urre

nt K

PM

#6.

T

his

new

mea

sure

is

a m

ore

holi

stic

vie

w o

f th

e ef

fici

enci

es o

f o

ur

coll

ecti

ons

func

tion

. W

e w

ill

show

the

eff

ecti

vene

ss o

f ou

r co

llec

tion

s pr

oces

ses

and

stra

tegi

es b

y m

easu

ring

the

cos

t of

eac

h d

oll

ar w

e co

llec

t.

NE

W

Tit

le:

Em

ploy

ee E

ngag

emen

t -

Inde

x o

f em

ploy

ees

cons

ider

ed a

ctiv

ely

enga

ged

by a

sta

ndar

dize

d su

rvey

.

Rat

ion

ale:

W

e've

cho

sen

to r

epla

ce t

he w

orkp

lanc

e en

viro

nmen

t m

easu

re, K

PM

#10

wit

h em

ploy

ee e

ngag

emen

t. T

his

chan

ge

wil

l al

low

us

to

com

pare

sta

ndar

dize

d su

rvey

dat

a w

ith

oth

er p

ubli

c an

d pr

ivat

e se

ctor

org

aniz

atio

ns.

A t

hird

-par

ty a

dmin

iste

rs t

he s

urve

y, i

ncr

easi

ng

ob

ject

ivit

y.

NE

W

Tit

le:

App

rais

al P

rogr

am E

quit

y a

nd

Uni

form

ity

- W

e w

ill

mea

sure

the

deg

ree

to w

hich

cou

nty

appr

aisa

l pr

ogra

m e

qu

ity

an

d u

nif

orm

ity

is

achi

eved

by

dete

rmin

ing

the

perc

enta

ge o

f st

udy

are

as s

tate

wid

e w

ith

real

mar

ket

valu

es t

hat

are

wit

hin

acce

pted

app

rais

al s

tan

dar

ds.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is a

rep

lace

men

t m

easu

re.

The

pre

viou

s K

PM

#2

- P

erce

nt o

f P

rope

rty

Tax

es C

olle

cted

, w

as l

arge

ly o

uts

ide

ou

r in

flu

ence

an

d

didn

't ac

cura

tely

ref

lect

the

wor

k w

e do

in

a m

eani

ngfu

l w

ay.

Thi

s ne

w m

easu

re d

irec

tly

eval

uate

s co

nfor

mit

y w

ith

acce

pte

d a

pp

rais

al s

tan

dar

ds,

and

targ

ets

our

plan

for

act

ion

(tra

inin

g, a

ssis

tanc

e, s

uppo

rt)

whe

n co

unti

es d

o no

t m

eet

thos

e st

anda

rds.

NE

W

Tit

le:

Cos

t of

Ass

essm

ents

- W

e w

ill

dem

onst

rate

our

eff

icie

ncy

and

effe

ctiv

enes

s of

our

sus

pens

e, a

udit

and

fil

ing

en

forc

emen

t fu

nct

ion

s

by m

easu

ring

the

cos

t of

eve

ry a

udit

and

fil

ing

enfo

rcem

ent

doll

ar a

sses

sed.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

mea

sure

is

bein

g pr

opo

sed

to r

epla

ce c

urre

nt K

PM

#5.

T

his

mea

sure

is

a m

ore

holi

stic

vie

w o

f th

e ef

fici

enci

es o

f o

ur

aud

it

(inc

ludi

ng a

djus

tmen

ts m

ade

to r

etur

ns d

urin

g pr

oces

sing

) an

d fi

ling

enf

orce

men

t w

ork.

W

e w

ill

show

the

eff

ecti

vene

ss o

f o

ur

aud

it a

nd

fil

ing

enfo

rcem

ent

proc

esse

s an

d st

rate

gies

by

mea

suri

ng t

he c

ost

of e

ach

of t

hose

dol

lars

ass

esse

d.

NE

W

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

112

Pro

pos

ed K

ey P

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

res

(KP

M's

) fo

r B

ien

niu

m 2

015-

2017

New

Del

ete

Tit

le:

Dol

lars

Col

lect

ed P

er R

even

ue

Age

nt P

er M

onth

(P

erso

nal

Inco

me

Tax

)

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

mea

sure

is

bein

g pr

opo

sed

for

dele

tion

. T

he s

ampl

ing

met

hods

dev

elop

ed f

or g

athe

ring

the

dat

a fo

r th

is m

easu

re a

re n

o l

on

ger

mea

suri

ng t

he r

epre

sent

ativ

e w

ork

of a

ll c

oll

ecto

rs, b

ut a

non

-rep

rese

ntat

ive

sam

ple.

Thi

s is

res

ulti

ng i

n nu

mbe

rs t

hat

do n

ot

accu

rate

ly r

efle

ct t

he

wor

k of

our

col

lect

ions

sta

ff.

In a

ddit

ion,

bec

ause

it

focu

ses

only

on

one

clas

sifi

cati

on o

f em

ploy

ee, t

he m

easu

re i

s no

t re

pre

sen

tati

ve

of

the

coll

ecti

on f

unct

ion

as a

who

le s

ince

the

fun

ctio

n re

quir

es m

anag

ers

and

supp

ort

staf

f as

wel

l as

all

lev

els

of r

even

ue a

gent

s in

ord

er t

o p

rod

uce

effe

ctiv

e an

d ef

fici

ent

coll

ecti

ons

func

tion

s.

We

prop

ose

this

mea

sure

be

dele

ted

beca

use

it i

s no

lon

ger

effe

ctiv

e in

hel

pin

g u

s ru

n o

ur

bu

sin

ess,

nor

is i

t sh

arin

g a

real

isti

c pi

ctur

e of

the

col

lect

ions

fun

ctio

n.

DE

LE

TE

Tit

le:

Per

cent

of

Pro

pert

y T

axes

Col

lect

ed.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is b

eing

rep

lace

d w

ith

a ne

w K

PM

#14

, See

pag

e 3

for

titl

e an

d ra

tion

ale.

DE

LE

TE

Tit

le:

Per

cent

of

Ass

esso

r's

Map

s D

igit

ized

in

a G

IS F

orm

at.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is b

eing

rep

lace

d w

ith

a ne

w K

PM

#15

. See

pag

e 3

for

titl

e an

d ra

tion

ale.

DE

LE

TE

Tit

le:

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax N

on-F

iler

Ass

essm

ents

Iss

ued

Per

Em

ploy

ee P

er M

onth

.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is b

eing

rep

lace

d w

ith

a ne

w K

PM

#18

. See

pag

e 3

for

titl

e an

d ra

tion

ale.

DE

LE

TE

Tit

le:

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax a

nd C

orpo

rati

on T

ax C

ases

Clo

sed

Per

Rev

enue

Age

nt P

er M

onth

.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is b

eing

rep

lace

d w

ith

a ne

w K

PM

#17

. See

pag

e 3

for

titl

e an

d ra

tion

ale.

DE

LE

TE

Tit

le:

Del

inqu

ent

Ret

urns

Fil

ed A

fter

Com

plia

nce

Con

tact

Per

Fil

ing

Enf

orce

men

t E

mpl

oyee

Per

Mon

th.

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is b

eing

rep

lace

d w

ith

a ne

w K

PM

#16

. See

pag

e 3

for

titl

e an

d ra

tion

ale.

DE

LE

TE

Tit

le:

Em

ploy

ee W

ork

Env

iron

men

t (b

ased

upo

n a

scal

e of

1-6

)

Rat

ion

ale:

T

his

is b

eing

rep

lace

d w

ith

a ne

w K

PM

#19

. See

pag

e 3

for

titl

e an

d ra

tion

ale.

DE

LE

TE

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

113

We

mak

e ta

x sy

stem

s w

ork

to f

und t

he p

ubli

c se

rvic

es t

hat

pres

erve

and

enh

ance

the

qua

lity

of

life

for

all

cit

izen

s.

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fI.

EX

EC

UT

IVE

SU

MM

AR

Y

Age

ncy

Mis

sion

:

503-

945-

8466

Alt

ern

ate

Ph

one:

Alt

ern

ate

:Ja

n H

unt

Kri

s K

autz

Con

tact

:50

3-94

5-82

13C

onta

ct P

hon

e:

Green

Red

Yellow

Green

50.0%

Red

33.3%

Yellow

16.7%

Total:

100.0%

Pe

rfo

rma

nc

e S

um

ma

ry

Gre

en

= T

arge

t to

-5%

Exc

epti

on

Can

not

cal

cula

te s

tatu

s (z

ero

ente

red

for

eit

her

Act

ual

or

Red

= T

arge

t >

-15

%

Yel

low

= T

arge

t -6

% t

o -1

5%

1. S

CO

PE

OF

RE

PO

RT

Our

Key

Per

form

ance

Mea

sure

s (K

PM

s) a

re i

nte

nded

to

repr

esen

t ou

r m

ajor

bus

ines

s ou

tcom

es i

n th

e in

com

e ta

x an

d pr

oper

ty t

ax p

rogr

ams.

The

se m

easu

res

addre

ss m

ajor

fun

ctio

ns

that

inc

lude

coll

ecti

ng r

even

ue, a

udit

ing

retu

rns,

and

ass

isti

ng t

axpa

yers

.

2. T

HE

OR

EG

ON

CO

NT

EX

T

Pag

e 5

of

43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

114

The

Dep

artm

ent

of

Rev

enue

is a

key

str

ateg

ic a

nd o

per

atio

nal

part

ner

in p

rovi

ding

hea

lthy

tax

sys

tem

s an

d lo

ng-t

erm

rev

enue

sta

bili

ty f

or t

he S

tate

of

Ore

gon.

Our

mis

sion

of

mak

ing r

even

ue

syst

ems

work

to

fund

pub

lic

serv

ices

inc

lude

s st

rong

wor

k va

lues

aro

und

oper

atio

nal

exce

llen

ce a

nd f

isca

l re

spon

sibi

lity

. T

he e

xper

ienc

e

and

skil

ls r

equir

ed t

o s

uppo

rt o

ur m

issi

on s

igni

fica

ntl

y co

ntri

bute

s to

the

gov

erno

r an

d le

gisl

atur

e pr

ovid

ing

the

best

pos

sibl

e fu

ture

for

all

Ore

goni

ans.

Our

per

form

ance

is

gui

ded

by

the

agen

cy's

vis

ion t

hat

emph

asiz

es t

he i

mpo

rtan

ce o

f ta

x ad

min

istr

atio

n an

d se

rvic

e an

d op

erat

iona

l ex

cell

ence

. W

e cu

rren

tly

have

12

depa

rtm

ent

per

form

ance

mea

sure

s th

at t

ell

us

how

wel

l w

e ar

e do

ing

in t

hese

are

as.

Our

org

aniz

atio

nal

stra

tegi

c vi

sion

is

desi

gned

to

mov

e an

d m

otiv

ate

us f

or

man

y ye

ars.

To

conti

nue

mak

ing

this

vis

ion a

rea

lity

we

are

com

mit

ted

to i

nnov

atin

g, s

trea

mli

ning

, and

usi

ng t

he m

ost

appr

opri

ate

tool

s an

d te

chno

logy

ava

ilab

le t

o

us.

We

cont

inua

lly

coll

ect,

ana

lyze

, an

d e

xchan

ge i

nfor

mat

ion

wit

h st

akeh

olde

rs t

o bu

ild

heal

thy

rela

tion

ship

s, b

ette

r un

ders

tand

sta

keho

lder

nee

ds, an

d dr

ive

cont

inuous

im

prove

men

t in

our

oper

atio

ns.

3. P

ER

FO

RM

AN

CE

SU

MM

AR

Y

We

hav

e 12

key

mea

sure

s of

per

form

ance

lin

ked t

o our

mis

sion

and

vis

ion.

Suc

cess

es d

urin

g th

e pa

st y

ear

incl

ude

a si

gnif

ican

t in

crea

se i

n th

e do

llar

s co

llec

ted

per

reven

ue a

gen

t per

mon

th.

Suc

cess

in t

his

are

a is

at

leas

t pa

rtia

lly

due

to i

ncre

ased

sta

ffin

g an

d pr

oces

s ch

ange

s, i

nclu

ding

a f

ocus

in

the

spri

ng o

f 20

14 o

n is

suin

g

gar

nish

men

ts.

We

also

saw

an i

ncr

ease

in t

he

num

ber

of

per

sona

l an

d bu

sine

ss i

ncom

e ta

x ca

ses

clos

ed p

er r

even

ue a

gent

per

mon

th. A

gain

, su

cces

s w

as d

ue t

o in

crea

sed

sta f

fing

in

the

progr

ams

over

all,

incl

udin

g th

e su

ppo

rt p

rovi

ded

by p

hone

age

nts.

We

cont

inue

to s

ee g

row

th i

n t

he n

umber

of

pers

ona

l in

com

e ta

x re

turn

s fi

led

elec

tron

ical

ly. M

ore

and

mor

e ta

xpay

ers

are

fili

ng e

lect

roni

c re

turn

s, i

mpr

ovin

g sp

eed

and e

ffic

iency

of

pro

cess

ing

and

reduc

ing c

ost

s (K

PM

#9)

. How

ever

, the

num

ber

of d

ays

to p

roce

ss a

ret

urn

chan

ged

from

tre

ndin

g d

ownw

ard

due

to a

ddit

iona

l

emph

asis

on

tax r

eturn

rev

iew

to

reduc

e re

fund

fra

ud

(KP

M #

8).

The

depa

rtm

ent’

s le

ader

ship

tea

m m

ade

a co

mm

itm

ent

to i

ncre

ased

em

ploy

ee t

rain

ing

and

deve

lopm

ent

at t

he b

egin

ning

of

the

2013

-15

bien

nium

. T

he r

esul

t is

a

sign

ific

ant

incr

ease

in t

he

perc

enta

ge

of e

mpl

oye

es t

hat

rec

eive

d ov

er 2

0 ho

urs

of t

rain

ing

in F

Y 2

014.

In

FY

201

3, t

he p

erce

ntag

e of

em

ploy

ees

rece

ivin

g ov

er 2

0

hou

rs o

f tr

ainin

g w

as 2

7,

and

in F

Y 2

014 t

he

perc

enta

ge

was

46.

Alt

houg

h a

sign

ific

ant

incr

ease

, it

is s

till

sho

rt o

f th

e go

al o

f 60

per

cent

of

empl

oyee

s w

ith

over

20

hour

s of

trai

ning

.

We

saw

the

eff

ecti

ve t

axpa

yer

assi

stan

ce m

easu

re (

KP

M #

13)

rem

ain

rela

tive

ly t

he s

ame

as F

Y 2

013.

Thi

s m

easu

re r

olls

up

resu

lts

from

thr

ee d

iffe

rent

, w

eigh

ted

com

pone

nts

: ca

ll w

ait

tim

es, s

ucce

ssfu

l se

lf-h

elp,

and

cust

omer

ser

vice

sat

isfa

ctio

n. W

hile

all

thr

ee c

ompo

nent

s sa

w c

hang

es, th

e m

ore

heav

ily

wei

ghte

d

com

pone

nts

of

redu

ced w

ait

tim

e an

d s

ucce

ssfu

l se

lf-h

elp

drov

e th

is m

easu

re u

pwar

d. T

he m

ost

sign

ific

ant

chan

ge w

as i

n re

duce

d ca

ll w

ait

tim

e du

e to

fac

tors

incl

udin

g f

ull

sta f

fing

, a n

ew I

nte

ract

ive

Voic

e R

espon

se s

yste

m, a

nd i

niti

atin

g ca

ller

ele

cted

cal

l ba

ck i

n th

e sp

ring

of

2014

.

We

had

som

e ch

alle

nges

in

mee

ting

som

e per

form

ance

mea

sure

s, i

nclu

ding

the

per

sona

l in

com

e ta

x no

n-fi

ler

asse

ssm

ents

iss

ued

per

empl

oyee

per

mon

th (

KP

M

Pag

e 6

of 4

39/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

115

#5)

and

deli

nqu

ent

retu

rns

file

d af

ter

com

plia

nce

contr

act

per

fili

ng e

nfor

cem

ent

empl

oyee

per

mon

th (

KP

M #

7). I

n bo

th o

f th

ese

mea

sure

s, t

he t

arge

ts w

ere

not

met

and

the

resu

lts

dro

ppe

d b

etw

een

fisc

al y

ear

2014 a

nd f

isca

l ye

ar 2

013.

Som

e fa

ctor

s th

at m

ay b

e af

fect

ing

resu

lts

may

inc

lude

sig

nifi

cant

sta

ffin

g tu

rnov

er i

n

thes

e ar

eas

and

a be

tter

eco

nom

y th

at m

ay b

e in

crea

sing

the

num

ber

of p

eopl

e fi

ling

vol

unta

rily

and

pay

ing

on t

ime.

The

per

cent

of a

sses

sor’

s m

aps

digit

ized

in G

IS f

orm

at (

KP

M #

3), h

as m

ade

som

e pr

ogre

ss, b

ut h

as s

trug

gled

to

mee

t go

als.

In

addi

tion

, th

e ag

ency

’s c

usto

mer

serv

ice

mea

sure

(K

PM

#12)

dec

lined

sig

nifi

cant

ly f

rom

201

3 to

201

4. W

e im

plem

ente

d ne

w t

echn

olog

y fo

r F

Y 2

014

to c

aptu

re c

usto

mer

ser

vice

sur

vey

info

rmat

ion

on a

n on-

goi

ng b

asis

, rat

her

than

once

per

yea

r. T

his

chan

ge r

esul

ted

in a

muc

h gr

eate

r sa

mpl

e of

cus

tom

ers

resp

ondi

ng t

o th

e su

rvey

dur

ing

all

part

s

of o

ur b

usi

ness

cycl

es. D

ue t

o r

esul

ts, th

e pr

ogra

m h

as i

mpl

emen

ted

shor

t-te

rm a

nd l

ong-

term

pla

ns t

o in

crea

se c

usto

mer

ser

vice

inc

ludi

ng a

ddin

g qu

esti

ons

to t

he

surv

ey t

o d

eter

min

e w

hy p

eopl

e ar

e ca

llin

g, w

hic

h w

ill

allo

w u

s to

pin

poin

t pr

oble

m a

reas

and

tai

lor

impr

ovem

ents

. L

onge

r-te

rm o

ptio

ns f

or i

ncre

asin

g cu

stom

er

serv

ice

incl

ude

cust

om

er s

ervi

ce t

rain

ing

for

staf

f, m

ore

sel

f-su

ffic

ienc

y op

tion

s vi

a th

e w

eb w

ith

the

impl

emen

tati

on o

f ne

w c

ore

syst

ems,

and

pil

otin

g a

“liv

e ch

at”

opt

ion v

ia i

nsta

nt

mes

sagin

g w

ith

the

publi

c. S

ome

mea

sure

s st

ayed

ess

enti

ally

the

sam

e be

twee

n 20

13 a

nd 2

1014

. T

he p

erce

ntag

e of

pro

pert

y ta

xes

coll

ecte

d is

up

slig

htly

. W

e ex

pect

ed t

his

is

bas

ed o

n th

e po

siti

ve c

hang

es i

n th

e ec

onom

y.

4. C

HA

LL

EN

GE

S

Ove

r th

e nex

t 4 y

ears

, w

e w

ill

be

repl

acin

g o

ur

core

inf

orm

atio

n te

chno

logy

sys

tem

s. T

his

inve

stm

ent

wil

l al

low

for

inc

reas

ed e

ffic

ienc

y in

our

inc

ome

tax

progr

ams

and u

pdat

e th

e to

ols

and

dat

a th

at o

ur e

mpl

oyee

s us

e to

do

thei

r w

ork.

The

pro

ject

wil

l ha

ve 4

pha

ses

in t

he n

ext

5 ye

ars,

and

dif

fere

nt p

rogr

ams

wil

l

impl

emen

t th

e so

ftw

are

at e

ach p

hase

. W

e an

tici

pate

tha

t pr

ogra

m e

ffic

ienc

y an

d ef

fect

iven

ess

may

dip

at

vari

ous

poin

ts i

n ti

me

as e

mpl

oyee

s le

arn

the

new

syst

ems

and

stil

l ha

ve t

o op

erat

e in

the

old

envir

onm

ent

thro

ugh

the

tran

siti

on p

erio

ds. I

n ad

diti

on, a

s th

e ag

ency

has

rev

iew

ed i

ts K

PM

s an

d st

rate

gic

plan

, w

e

have

found

that

som

e of

the

mea

sure

s w

e cu

rren

tly

have

are

not

the

bes

t m

easu

res

to t

rack

our

per

form

ance

ove

r ti

me.

T

he a

genc

y be

liev

es t

hat

KP

Ms

#1, #2

,

#3, #

5, #

6, #

7 an

d #10

nee

d t

o be

dele

ted.

N

ew K

PM

s ha

ve b

een

disc

usse

d du

ring

the

201

4 L

egis

lati

ve S

essi

on a

nd w

ill

be r

evie

wed

thr

ough

the

201

5-17

budg

et d

evel

opm

ent

proce

ss. W

e be

liev

e th

e ch

ange

s to

the

KP

Ms

prop

osed

by

the

depa

rtm

ent

wil

l pr

ovid

e be

tter

inf

orm

atio

n to

our

pro

gram

s to

adj

ust

reso

urc

es t

o m

eet

stra

tegi

c outc

om

es.

5. R

ES

OU

RC

ES

AN

D E

FF

ICIE

NC

Y

The

agen

cy’s

Leg

isla

tivel

y A

ppro

ved

Budg

et f

or

the

2013

–15

bien

nium

is

$230

,534

,006

; w

hich

rep

rese

nts

a si

gnif

ican

t in

crea

se f

rom

the

pre

viou

s bi

enni

um.

The

incr

ease

is

mai

nly

due

to

two

pol

icy o

pti

on p

acka

ges

adop

ted

for

the

2013

–15

bien

nium

inc

ludi

ng t

he c

ore

syst

em r

epla

cem

ent

proj

ect

and

an a

ddit

iona

l

31 p

osit

ions

for

incr

ease

d ta

x c

ompli

ance

. The

dep

artm

ent

had

mix

ed r

esul

ts o

n it

s ke

y m

easu

res,

inc

ludi

ng i

ts e

ffic

ienc

y m

easu

res,

ove

r th

e la

st y

ear.

Pag

e 7

of 4

39/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

116

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Dol

lars

Col

lect

ed P

er R

even

ue A

gent

Per

Mon

th (

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax)

KP

M #

120

00

Tax

Adm

inis

trat

ion

: P

rovi

de

exce

llen

t se

rvic

e, h

elpi

ng t

axpa

yers

mee

t th

eir

com

mit

men

ts w

ith

educ

atio

n, a

ssis

tanc

e an

d co

mpl

ianc

e.G

oal

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

dir

ectl

y t

o t

he

depa

rtm

ent's

mis

sion

.

Agent P

roduct

ion R

eport

s A

CT

F007,

PTA

C P

erf

orm

ance

Measu

res,

Cost

Allo

catio

n S

yste

m (

CA

S);

base

d o

n p

roduct

ivity

per

posi

tion.

Dat

a S

ourc

e

Joann M

art

in,

Pers

onal T

ax

and C

om

plia

nce

Div

isio

n A

dm

inis

trato

r O

wn

er

0

20000

40000

60000

80000

100000

120000

140000

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

93315

103340

107830

118265

112977

114141

88429

122481

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Dol

lars

Col

lect

ed P

er R

even

ue A

gent

Per

Mon

th

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

curr

ency

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ate

gy

is to m

ain

tain

a w

ork

forc

e o

f sk

illed e

mplo

yees

and p

rovi

de them

with

ess

entia

l colle

ctio

n tools

and tech

nolo

gy.

We e

valu

ate

the e

ffect

iveness

of co

llect

ion s

taff in

colle

ctin

g d

elin

quent ta

x debt;

analy

ze the typ

e a

nd a

ge o

f delin

quent debt; a

nd e

valu

ate

the u

se o

f

Pag

e 8

of 4

39/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

117

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

ad

diti

on

al c

olle

ctio

n t

oo

ls.

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

The

targ

et m

easu

res

the

prod

uct

ivit

y of

coll

ecti

on s

taff

bas

ed o

n th

e do

llar

s co

llec

ted

per

posi

tion

. The

hig

her

the

leve

l ac

hiev

ed;

the

grea

ter

the

prod

ucti

vity

.

Due

to

the

foll

owin

g f

acto

rs,

we

are

adju

stin

g ou

r ta

rget

for

201

5 to

$11

0,0

00 p

er a

gent

:

The

Coll

ecti

on s

ecti

on c

hang

ed u

nit

stru

ctur

es a

t th

e beg

inni

ng o

f F

Y20

15. P

revi

ousl

y, t

hree

of

the

unit

s w

ere

“pho

ne a

gent

s” a

nd d

id n

ot h

ave

a ca

selo

ad

assi

gned

spe

cifi

call

y to

the

m. A

s a

resu

lt, t

he t

ota

l re

ven

ue c

olle

cted

by

all

RA

1s

was

onl

y cr

edit

ed t

o th

e ot

her

two

unit

s st

affe

d by

“qu

eue

agen

ts”

that

wer

e

assi

gned

all

of

the

case

s. C

urre

ntly

, al

l R

A1s

hav

e a

case

load

ass

igne

d to

the

m a

s w

ell

as p

hone

dut

ies;

the

refo

re, t

he d

isti

ncti

ons

betw

een

the

type

s of

uni

t ha

ve

been

eli

min

ated

.

As

we

go

thro

ugh R

ollo

ut 1

(Fal

l 20

14)

and

gear

up

for

Rol

lout

2 (

Fal

l 20

15),

CS

R i

s go

ing

to h

ave

an e

scal

atin

g im

pact

on

our

prod

ucti

on i

n F

Y20

15.

Mem

bers

of t

he C

olle

ctio

ns

staf

f w

ill

be

move

d to

CS

R t

o hel

p w

ith

impl

emen

tati

on a

nd t

rain

ing

. I

n m

ost

case

s, t

he s

taff

ing

reso

urce

s pr

ovid

ed w

ill

be a

gent

s th

at a

re m

ost

prof

icie

nt. T

his

is e

xpec

ted t

o de

crea

se t

he

over

all

coll

ecti

ons

reve

nue;

how

ever

, the

im

pact

on

this

KP

M i

s de

pend

ent

on t

he u

nits

cho

sen

for

incl

usio

n in

the

calc

ulat

ion a

nd t

he

num

ber

of u

nit

sta f

f w

orki

ng o

n C

SR

. The

red

uced

goa

l of

$11

0,0

00 p

er R

even

ue A

gent

per

mon

th i

s re

flec

ts t

hat

we

anti

cipa

te a

lev

el o

f

prod

uct

ion

loss

.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

Th

e a

ctu

al d

olla

rs c

olle

cte

d p

er

reve

nu

e a

ge

nt

pe

r m

on

th f

or

20

14

we

re $

12

2,4

81

an

d o

ur

targ

et

wa

s $

12

3,0

00

. I

n 2

01

3,

the

actu

al d

olla

rs

colle

cte

d p

er

reve

nu

e a

ge

nt

pe

r m

on

th w

ere

$8

8,4

29

an

d o

ur

targ

et

wa

s $

12

3,0

00

. T

he

act

ua

l do

llars

co

llecte

d p

er

reve

nu

e a

ge

nt

pe

r

mo

nth

fo

r 2

01

2 w

ere

$11

4,1

41

an

d o

ur

targ

et

wa

s $

12

1,0

00

.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Co

mp

ara

ble

da

ta is

no

t a

vaila

ble

. I

t is

diff

icu

lt to

co

mp

are

Ore

go

n's

pe

rfo

rma

nce

with

oth

er

sta

tes

du

e t

o t

he

wid

ely

div

ers

e t

ax s

tru

ctu

res

am

on

g s

tate

s.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

Pag

e 9 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

118

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

The

dat

a so

urc

e fo

r th

is m

easu

re i

s th

e pr

oduc

tion

of

five

out

of s

even

wor

k un

its

in t

he C

olle

ctio

n S

ecti

on. T

he m

easu

re i

s pe

rson

al i

ncom

e ta

x re

venu

e at

trib

uted

to t

he s

peci

fied

gro

up d

ivid

ed b

y th

e nu

mbe

r of

age

nts

in t

his

grou

p.

Over

all,

col

lect

ions

rev

enue

im

prov

ed d

ue t

o in

crea

sed s

taff

ing

, cha

nges

in

the

econ

omy,

and

pro

cess

cha

nges

. The

uni

ts s

elec

ted

for

incl

usio

n in

thi

s K

PM

wer

e

full

y st

affe

d fo

r th

e fi

scal

yea

r. T

he i

mpr

ovin

g e

cono

my

allo

ws

mor

e ta

xpay

ers

to p

ay i

mm

edia

tely

as

oppo

sed

to g

oing

thr

ough

the

Col

lect

ions

pro

cess

. (see

Dep

artm

ent

of R

even

ue

Res

earc

h S

ecti

on, “

Enf

orc

emen

t R

even

ue I

dent

ific

atio

n an

d M

odel

ing,

” Ja

nuar

y 20

12).

The

Col

lect

ions

Sec

tion

mad

e ad

just

men

ts t

o

incr

ease

eff

icie

ncie

s as

wel

l as

did

sev

eral

spe

ed-u

p pro

ject

s, i

nclu

ding

a f

ocus

thi

s sp

ring

on

incr

easi

ng g

arni

shm

ents

whe

n ap

prop

riat

e. A

ll o

f th

is l

ed t

o an

incr

ease

in

the

doll

ars

coll

ecte

d pe

r ag

ent

per

mont

h fo

r th

e K

PM

for

FY

2014

.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

're p

roposi

ng r

epla

cing this

measu

re w

ith o

ne that doesn

't lim

it th

e p

opula

tion b

ein

g m

easu

red s

o w

e c

an m

easure

the o

vera

ll

effect

iveness

of our

colle

ctio

ns

funct

ions

. In

the futu

re, C

ore

Sys

tem

Repla

cem

ent im

ple

menta

tion w

ill in

troduce a

dditi

onal a

uto

matio

n a

nd

the s

coring o

f acc

ounts

for

colle

ctabili

ty. W

e m

ust

als

o k

eep o

ur

vaca

ncy

rate

dow

n to m

axi

miz

e p

roductio

n a

nd m

inim

ize s

hort

-term

impact

s fr

om

work

rela

ted to C

ore

Sys

tem

Repla

cem

ent im

ple

menta

tion.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The r

eport

ing c

ycle

is O

regon's

fis

cal y

ear.

Pag

e 10 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

119

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Per

cent

of

Pro

per

ty T

axes

Col

lect

ed.

KP

M #

220

00

Tax

Adm

inis

tratio

n: P

art

ner

with lo

cal g

ove

rnm

ents

to p

rom

ote

a h

ealth

y and c

onsi

stent pro

pert

y ta

x sy

stem

.G

oal

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goal l

inks

direct

ly to the d

epart

ment's

mis

sion.

Ore

gon P

ropert

y Tax

Sta

tistic

s (v

arious

years

); P

ropert

y Tax

cert

ified

, P

ropert

y Tax

Colle

ctio

n,

and T

ota

l Unco

llect

ed r

eport

.D

ata

Sou

rce

Mar

k K

insl

ow

, P

rope

rty

Tax

Div

isio

n A

dmin

istr

ator

Ow

ner

0.0

0

20.0

0

40.0

0

60.0

0

80.0

0

100.0

0

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

94.4

094.4

093.9

093.2

093.4

093.7

093.7

094.0

095.3

0

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Per

cent

of

Pro

pert

y T

axes

Col

lect

ed

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

perc

ent

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ate

gy

is to p

rovi

de tra

inin

g o

f co

unty

colle

ctio

n s

taff

, and d

eve

lop a

nd m

ain

tain

support

mate

rials

to h

elp

countie

s co

llect

identif

ied

pro

pert

y ta

xes.

Pag

e 11

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

120

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

Th

e t

arg

et

me

asu

res

the

de

gre

e t

o w

hic

h c

ou

ntie

s a

re a

ble

to

tim

ely

co

llect

ide

ntif

ied

pro

pe

rty

taxe

s. T

he

hig

he

r th

e p

erc

en

tag

e o

f ta

xe

s

colle

cte

d,

the

be

tte

r, a

s m

ost

un

its o

f lo

cal g

ove

rnm

en

t re

ly h

ea

vily

on

pro

pe

rty

taxe

s to

fu

nd

loca

l se

rvic

es.

Ea

ch

da

ta p

oin

t (b

y c

ale

nd

ar

yea

r) r

ep

rese

nts

th

e t

ax

colle

ctio

ns

as

of

Jun

e 3

0 o

f th

at

yea

r.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

The

2014

tar

get

was

94.

0 pe

rcen

t. A

ctua

l m

easu

red

perf

orm

ance

was

95.

3%.

The

inc

reas

e ab

ove

targ

et i

s la

rgel

y at

trib

utab

le t

o in

crea

sed

use

of t

he

defe

rred

bil

ling

cred

it a

s pro

vide

d u

nder

OR

S 3

05.2

86 a

nd r

esul

ting

fro

m l

arge

val

ue p

rope

rty

tax

appe

als.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Com

para

ble

data

is

not

avai

labl

e.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

Dat

a re

vea

ls t

he c

ounti

es a

re c

olle

ctin

g a

hig

h pe

rcen

tage

of

the

tota

l pr

oper

ty t

axes

tha

t ar

e du

e an

d ar

e m

anag

ing

thei

r ac

coun

ts r

ecei

vabl

e ef

fect

ivel

y.

Addi

tion

al r

esea

rch

has

show

n t

hat,

by t

he e

nd o

f th

e th

ird

year

fol

low

ing

the

init

ial

bill

ing,

the

cou

ntie

s ha

ve r

ecei

ved

abou

t 99

.7 p

erce

nt o

f th

e ta

xes

due

for

that

yea

r.

The

stat

isti

cs s

how

a h

igh

degr

ee o

f ef

fect

iven

ess

in m

aint

aini

ng t

imel

y co

llec

tion

act

ivit

ies

for

the

prop

erty

tax

yea

r.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

Cont

inue

par

tner

ship

s w

ith

coun

ty c

olle

ctio

n o

ffic

es.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

repor

ting

cyc

le i

s th

e O

regon

fis

cal

year

. The

dat

a is

sel

f-re

port

ed b

y ea

ch o

f th

e 36

cou

ntie

s an

d us

es t

he s

ame

met

hodo

logy

as

is u

sed

for

the

Hea

lth

of

the

Pro

pert

y T

ax S

yste

m p

ubli

cati

on.

Pag

e 12 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

121

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Per

cent

of

Ass

esso

r's

Map

s D

igit

ized

in

a G

IS F

orm

at.

KP

M #

320

04

Opera

tional E

xcelle

nce

: A

dopt best

busi

ness

pra

ctic

es,

taki

ng a

dva

nta

ge o

f te

chnolo

gy

to im

pro

ve o

ur

syst

em

and

pro

cess

es.

Goa

l

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goal l

inks

direct

ly to the d

epart

ment's

mis

sion

Ore

gon M

ap P

roje

ct (

OR

MA

P).

Dat

a S

ourc

e

Mark

Kin

slow

, P

ropert

y Tax

Div

isio

n A

dm

inis

trato

r O

wn

er

0

20

40

60

80

100

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

69

75

78

81

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Per

cent

of

Ass

esso

r's

Map

s M

igra

ted

to G

IS F

orm

at

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

perc

ent

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ate

gy

is to p

art

ner

with

countie

s to

mig

rate

dig

itize

d p

ropert

y ta

x m

aps

into

GIS

form

at, p

rovi

din

g e

mplo

yees

and b

usi

ness

part

ners

with

easy

acc

ess

to a

ccura

te p

ropert

y ta

x m

ap in

form

atio

n.

Pag

e 13

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

122

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

The O

RM

AP

Advi

sory

Com

mitt

ee (

as

pro

vided u

nder

OR

S 3

06.1

35),

has

est

ablis

hed a

targ

et of 90%

for

Octo

ber

2014. A

s o

f July

1,

2014, w

e a

re a

ppro

xim

ate

ly 9

% b

elo

w the targ

et.

The targ

et re

pre

sents

the p

erc

enta

ge o

f m

aps

that are

pro

duced u

sin

g O

RM

AP

mappin

g m

eth

odolo

gy

and m

eetin

g O

RM

AP

Tech

nic

al s

peci

ficatio

ns

.

The lo

ng-t

erm

targ

et is

to h

ave

a tota

lly d

igita

l sta

tew

ide p

ropert

y ta

x m

ap b

y O

ctober

2016. T

his

will

require tra

nsfo

rmin

g a

ll th

e c

ounty

ass

ess

or

maps

into

a G

IS form

at by

that date

. T

he h

igher

the p

erc

enta

ge, th

e b

etter

the p

erf

orm

ance

.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

As

of th

is r

eport

ing p

eriod, w

e h

ave

com

ple

ted 8

1 p

erc

ent of th

e tax

maps,

and 8

7 p

erc

ent of th

e tax

lots

. T

he lo

ng-t

erm

targ

et is

at-

risk o

f

not bein

g m

et due to d

imin

ished fundin

g (

fundin

g is

rece

ived fro

m r

eco

rdin

g fees

arisi

ng fro

m r

eal e

state

activ

ity; re

al e

sta

te a

ctiv

ity h

as

decl

ined).

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

This

measu

re is

diff

icult

to e

valu

ate

acr

oss

jurisd

ictio

ns

beca

use

of diff

ering tech

nolo

gy

and term

inolo

gy

. Jurisdic

tions in

many s

tate

s a

re in

the p

roce

ss o

f co

nve

rtin

g their tax

lot base

data

to G

IS-e

nable

d form

at. F

ew

, how

eve

r, a

re d

oin

g it

fro

m the s

tate

wid

e le

vel.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

Fundin

g c

halle

nges

and a

sca

rcity

of sk

illed s

taff a

t both

the s

tate

and lo

cal l

eve

l pre

sent

ongoin

g c

halle

nges to m

eetin

g the targ

ets

.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

The d

epart

ment needs

to c

ontin

ue to p

art

ner

with

countie

s and o

thers

to m

anage a

nd fund r

em

appin

g e

ffort

s a

imed a

t im

pro

vin

g a

ccess to

ass

ess

or

map in

form

atio

n.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

Pag

e 14 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

123

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

The r

eport

ing c

ycle

is O

regon's

fis

cal y

ear.

Reco

mm

endatio

ns

from

our

inte

rnal a

udito

r w

ho r

evi

ew

ed the 2

006 a

nd 2

007 c

ycle

s h

ave b

een

adopte

d in

to the r

eport

ing a

nd m

anagem

ent of th

is m

easu

re.

Pag

e 15 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

124

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax N

on

-Fil

er A

sses

smen

ts I

ssue

d P

er E

mpl

oyee

Per

Mon

th.

KP

M #

520

00

Tax

Adm

inis

trat

ion

: P

rovi

de

exce

llen

t se

rvic

e, h

elpi

ng t

axpa

yers

mee

t th

eir

com

mit

men

ts w

ith

educ

atio

n, a

ssis

tanc

e an

d co

mpl

ianc

e.G

oal

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

to t

he d

epar

tmen

t's m

issi

on.

Cos

t All

ocat

ion

Sys

tem

(C

AS

) an

d F

ilin

g E

nfor

cem

ent

Mon

thly

Rep

orts

, bas

ed o

n pr

oduc

tivi

ty p

er p

osit

ion.

Dat

a S

ou

rce

Joan

n M

arti

n, P

erso

nal

Tax

and

Com

plia

nce

Div

isio

n A

dmin

istr

ator

Ow

ner

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

35

36

49

47

60

70

41

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax N

on-f

iler

Ass

essm

ents

Iss

ued

Per

Em

ploy

ee P

er M

onth

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

num

ber

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ateg

y is

to

dev

elop

fil

ing

enfo

rcem

ent

too

ls,

tech

niqu

es a

nd d

ata

sour

ces

that

wil

l im

prov

e th

e ac

cura

cy o

f ou

r in

form

atio

n an

d he

lp u

s as

sist

tax

paye

rs

to f

ile.

Pag

e 16

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

125

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

The

re a

re m

any

fact

ors

affe

ctin

g w

hy t

axpa

yers

don

't fi

le t

ax r

etur

ns,

incl

udin

g th

e ov

eral

l ec

onom

y, t

axpa

yer

sati

sfac

tion

wit

h th

e g

ov

ern

men

t, a

nd

em

plo

ym

ent

rate

s. W

hen

econ

omic

con

diti

ons

impr

ove,

dir

ect

enfo

rcem

ent

reve

nue

decr

ease

s as

tax

paye

rs a

re a

ble

to p

ay o

n ti

me

and

are

less

lik

ely

to

un

der

esti

mat

e th

e n

eces

sary

wit

hhol

ding

(se

e D

epar

tmen

t of

Rev

enue

Res

earc

h S

ecti

on,

" Enf

orce

men

t R

even

ue I

dent

ific

atio

n an

d M

odel

ing"

. Jan

uary

201

2).

Ass

um

ing

th

at o

ur

reso

urc

es r

emai

n a

t

thei

r cu

rren

t le

vel,

we

expe

ct t

he n

umbe

r of

fai

lure

-to-

file

tax

ass

essm

ents

iss

ued

to g

row

som

ewha

t ov

er t

ime,

acc

ount

ing

for

po

pu

lati

on

gro

wth

. T

hat

bei

ng

sai

d,

ou

r

targ

et f

or 2

015

is 4

1 fa

ilur

e- t

o- f

ile

asse

ssm

ents

clo

sed

per

empl

oyee

per

mon

th.

Thi

s re

flec

ts a

dec

reas

e fr

om t

he 2

014

targ

et r

elat

ed t

o t

he

exp

ecte

d i

mp

act

of

Co

re

Sys

tem

Rep

lace

men

t. T

he f

ull

exte

nt o

f th

e im

pact

is

uncl

ear

at t

his

tim

e.

Whi

le r

ollo

ut 2

(pe

rson

al i

ncom

e ta

x pr

ogra

m) w

ill

con

clu

de

du

rin

g F

Y 2

01

6,

ther

e is

mu

ch

wor

k to

be

done

in

prep

arat

ion

for

mig

rati

ng t

o a

new

com

pute

r sy

stem

tha

t w

ill

impa

ct t

he f

ilin

g en

forc

emen

t pr

ogra

m.

Fol

low

ing

im

ple

men

tati

on

of

the

new

sy

stem

we

expe

ct i

ncre

ased

eff

icie

ncy,

con

sist

ency

, and

acc

urac

y in

our

pro

cess

tha

t w

ill

begi

n to

im

pact

thi

s m

easu

re i

n 20

16.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

In 2

014,

the

num

ber

of f

ailu

re-t

o-fi

le a

sses

smen

ts c

lose

d pe

r em

ploy

ee p

er m

onth

was

41.

In

2013

, the

num

ber

of f

ailu

re-t

o-fi

le a

sses

smen

ts c

lose

d pe

r

empl

oyee

per

mon

th w

as 7

0. I

n 20

12, t

he

num

ber

clo

sed

per

empl

oyee

per

mon

th w

as 6

0. I

n 20

11, t

he n

umbe

r cl

osed

per

em

ploy

ee p

er m

onth

was

47.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Com

para

ble

data

is

not

avai

lable

. It

is

diff

icult

to

com

pare

Ore

gon

's p

erfo

rman

ce w

ith

othe

r st

ates

due

to

thei

r w

idel

y di

vers

e ta

x st

ruct

ures

.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

The

res

ults

ref

lect

cha

nges

mad

e to

the

pro

gram

bas

ed o

n a

2011

Sec

reta

ry o

f S

tate

(S

OS

) au

dit

that

rec

omm

ende

d a

diff

eren

t ap

proa

ch t

o id

enti

fyin

g

non-

fili

ng t

axpa

yers

. In a

ddit

ion,

duri

ng 2

010

and

earl

y 20

11, a

lmos

t al

l fi

ling

enf

orce

men

t st

aff

wer

e re

dire

cted

to

a co

llec

tion

spe

ed-u

p ef

fort

, whi

ch m

eant

few

er a

sses

smen

ts w

ere

issu

ed.

The

sta

ff w

as t

rans

itio

ned

back

to

thei

r fi

ling

enf

orce

men

t du

ties

in

earl

y 20

11, a

long

wit

h th

e ch

ange

s su

gges

ted

by t

he S

OS

audi

t w

hich

res

ulte

d in

hig

her

num

ber

s dur

ing

2012

-13.

Dur

ing

the

last

yea

r, w

e ha

ve e

xper

ienc

ed a

hig

h le

vel

of t

urno

ver,

inc

ludi

ng l

osin

g se

vera

l ve

tera

n

AS

1/2s

to

reti

rem

ent.

Thi

s tu

rnov

er h

as c

ause

d a

rela

tive

ly s

tabl

e gr

oup

of e

mpl

oyee

s to

shi

ft i

nto

trai

ning

and

men

tori

ng m

ode,

whi

ch h

as d

ecre

ased

prod

ucti

on.

We

expe

ct t

he n

umbe

r of

fai

lure

to

file

ass

essm

ents

to

incr

ease

onc

e st

aff

has

been

ful

ly t

rain

ed a

nd a

re o

pera

tion

al.

As

men

tion

ed i

n se

ctio

n 2

above

, the

re a

re o

ther

eco

nom

ic f

acto

rs t

hat

impa

ct t

he n

umbe

r of

tax

paye

rs w

ho d

o no

t fi

le, w

hich

has

som

e im

pact

on

this

mea

sure

;

how

ever

the

im

pact

is

diff

icul

t to

quan

tify

. Eco

nom

ic i

mpa

cts

are

mor

e cl

osel

y re

late

d to

the

am

ount

of

mon

ey p

aid

or c

olle

cted

.

Pag

e 17 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

126

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

beli

eve

the

stra

tegi

es w

e cu

rren

tly

hav

e in

pla

ce a

re i

mpo

rtan

t fo

r im

prov

ing

long

-ter

m v

olun

tary

com

plia

nce.

Im

prov

ed e

nfor

cem

ent

is a

n in

tegr

al p

art

of

our

la r

ger

stra

tegy

of

volu

ntar

y co

mpl

ianc

e. U

nfor

tuna

tely

, th

is m

easu

re o

nly

focu

ses

on o

ne s

trat

egy

for

affe

ctin

g vo

lunt

ary

com

plia

nce

whe

n w

e ac

tual

ly f

ocus

on m

ulti

ple

stra

tegi

es. I

n th

e fu

ture

, w

e w

ill

exam

ine

addi

tion

al s

trat

egie

s th

at o

ffer

mor

e ed

ucat

ion

and

assi

stan

ce t

o no

n-f

iler

s an

d w

e w

ill

seek

rep

laci

ng t

his

mea

sure

wit

h on

e th

at t

akes

a h

olis

tic

appr

oac

h an

d w

ill

enco

mpa

ss a

ll o

f th

e st

rate

gies

we'

ve a

dopt

ed i

nto

our

busi

ness

. In

addi

tion

, we

do n

ot y

et k

now

wha

t

tool

s th

e ne

w s

yste

m w

ill

pro

vide

and

how

the

y w

ill

impa

ct t

his

body

of

wor

k. W

e do

bel

ieve

tha

t on

ce i

n pl

ace

the

new

sys

tem

wil

l re

sult

in

an i

ncre

ased

lev

el

of f

ilin

g en

forc

emen

t ac

tivi

ty.

Ove

r th

e ne

xt t

wo

year

s as

sta

ff a

re n

eede

d to

pro

vide

inp

ut, t

est,

and

lea

rn a

bout

the

new

sys

tem

the

re w

ill

be a

per

iod

of

decr

ease

d pr

oduc

tion

.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

rep

orti

ng c

ycl

e is

the

Ore

gon

fis

cal

year

.

Pag

e 18 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

127

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax a

nd C

orpo

rati

on T

ax C

ases

Clo

sed

Per

Rev

enue

Age

nt P

er M

onth

.K

PM

#6

2000

Tax

Adm

inis

trat

ion

: P

rovi

de

exce

llen

t se

rvic

e, h

elpi

ng t

axpa

yers

mee

t th

eir

com

mit

men

ts w

ith

educ

atio

n, a

ssis

tanc

e, a

nd c

ompl

ianc

e.G

oal

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

dir

ectl

y t

o t

he

depa

rtm

ent's

mis

sion

.

Dat

a fr

om A

gent

Pro

duct

ion

Rep

orts

AC

TF

007

and

FT

E f

rom

Cos

t All

ocat

ion

Sys

tem

(C

AS

), b

ased

on

prod

ucti

vity

per

pos

itio

n.D

ata

Sou

rce

Joan

n M

arti

n, P

erso

nal

Tax

and

Com

plia

nce

Div

isio

n A

dmin

istr

ator

Ow

ner

0

40

80

120

160

200

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

194

126

159

135

137

106

176

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax a

nd C

orpo

rati

on T

ax C

ases

Clo

sed

Per

Rev

enue

Age

nt P

er M

onth

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

num

ber

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ateg

y is

to

pro

vid

e co

llec

tion

sta

ff w

ith

too

ls a

nd t

rain

ing

to r

esol

ve c

olle

ctio

n ca

ses

quic

kly

. The

mea

sure

eva

luat

es t

he e

ffec

tive

ness

of

staf

f in

wor

king

wit

h ta

xpay

ers

to c

lose

cas

es.

Pag

e 19

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

128

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

The

tar

get

refl

ects

ste

ady

grow

th i

n ca

ses

clos

ed p

er r

even

ue a

gent

. A h

ighe

r nu

mbe

r is

bet

ter.

Our

curr

ent

targ

et r

efle

cts

stab

iliz

atio

n in

cas

es c

lose

d pe

r re

venu

e ag

ent

due

to s

ever

al f

acto

rs:

The

Col

lect

ion

sect

ion

chan

ged

unit

str

uct

ures

at

the

begi

nnin

g of

FY

2015

. Pre

viou

sly,

thr

ee o

f th

e un

its

wer

e “p

hone

age

nts”

and

did

not

hav

e a

case

load

assi

gned

spe

cifi

call

y to

the

m. A

s a

resu

lt, t

he t

otal

rev

enue

cas

es c

lose

d by

all

RA

1s

was

onl

y cr

edit

ed t

o th

e ot

her

two

unit

s st

affe

d by

“qu

eue

agen

ts”

that

wer

e

assi

gned

all

of

the

case

s. C

urre

ntl

y, a

ll R

A1s

hav

e a

case

load

ass

igne

d to

the

m a

s w

ell

as p

hone

dut

ies;

the

refo

re, t

he d

isti

ncti

ons

betw

een

the

type

s of

uni

t ha

ve

been

eli

min

ated

.

As

we

go t

hrou

gh R

ollo

ut 1

(Fal

l 20

14)

and

gear

up

for

Rol

lout

2 (

Fal

l 20

15),

CS

R i

s go

ing

to h

ave

an e

scal

atin

g im

pact

on

our

prod

ucti

on i

n F

Y20

15.

Mem

bers

of t

he C

olle

ctio

ns s

taff

wil

l be

mov

ed t

o C

SR

to

hel

p w

ith

impl

emen

tati

on a

nd t

rain

ing

. I

n m

ost

case

s, t

he s

taff

ing

reso

urce

s pr

ovid

ed w

ill

be a

gent

s th

at a

re m

ost

prof

icie

nt. T

his

may

im

pact

the

num

ber

of

case

s cl

ose

d pe

r m

onth

; ho

wev

er, t

he i

mpa

ct o

n th

is K

PM

is

depe

nden

t on

the

uni

ts c

hose

n fo

r in

clus

ion

in t

he

calc

ula

tion

and

the

num

ber

of

unit

sta

ff w

orki

ng o

n C

SR

.

In p

repa

rati

on f

or R

ollo

ut

2 a

nd a

s pa

rt o

f a

2013

-15

Pol

icy

Opt

ion

Pac

kage

, th

e C

olle

ctio

ns S

ecti

on w

ill

be f

ocus

ed o

n w

riti

ng o

ff o

r ca

ncel

ling

qua

lifi

ed a

ged

debt

whic

h m

ay i

ncre

ase

the

case

s cl

osed

per

mon

th f

or F

Y20

15 d

epen

ding

on

the

unit

s se

lect

ed f

or t

his

mea

sure

nex

t ye

ar.

The

im

prov

ing

econ

omy

allo

ws

more

tax

paye

rs t

o p

ay i

mm

edia

tely

as

oppo

sed

to g

oing

thr

ough

the

Col

lect

ions

pro

cess

. (see

Dep

artm

ent

of R

even

ue R

esea

rch

Sec

tion

, “E

nfor

cem

ent

Rev

enue

Ide

ntif

icat

ion a

nd M

odel

ing,

” Ja

nuar

y 20

12).

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

For

2014

, the

num

ber

of c

ases

clo

sed

is 1

76 (

104

perc

ent

of t

arge

t).

For

201

3, t

he n

umbe

r of

cas

es c

lose

d is

106

(59

per

cent

of

targ

et).

For

201

2, t

he

num

ber

of

case

s cl

osed

was

137

(81

per

cent

of

targ

et).

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Com

para

ble

data

is

not

avai

lable

.

Pag

e 20 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

129

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

The

dat

a so

urce

for

thi

s m

easu

re i

s th

e pr

oduc

tion

of f

ive

out

of s

even

wor

k un

its

in t

he C

olle

ctio

n S

ecti

on. T

he m

easu

re i

s pe

rson

al i

ncom

e ta

x ca

ses

clos

ed

attr

ibut

ed t

o th

e sp

ecif

ied

group

div

ided

by

the

num

ber

of a

gent

s in

thi

s gr

oup.

In t

his

repo

rtin

g pe

riod

, som

e ag

ents

spe

cial

ize

in f

ield

ing

phon

e ca

lls;

som

e ag

ents

hav

e an

ass

igne

d ca

selo

ad a

nd s

peci

aliz

e in

iss

uing

col

lect

ion

acti

ons

such

as

garn

ishm

ents

. A

gent

s th

at i

ssue

coll

ecti

on a

ctio

ns c

lose

mor

e ca

ses,

but

req

uire

the

sup

port

of

and

bene

fit

from

the

wor

k of

the

pho

ne a

gent

s fo

r th

at p

rodu

ctio

n.

In t

his

repo

rtin

g pe

riod

, the

age

nts

trac

ked

by t

his

mea

sure

wer

e as

sign

ed c

olle

ctio

n du

ties

wer

e pr

imar

ily

phon

e ag

ents

. Beg

inni

ng i

n F

Y20

15, a

ll R

A1s

hav

e a

case

load

ass

igne

d to

the

m a

s w

ell

as p

hone

dut

ies;

ther

efor

e, t

he d

isti

ncti

ons

betw

een

the

type

s of

uni

t ha

ve b

een

elim

inat

ed. T

his

chan

ge i

n un

it s

truc

ture

may

impac

t th

e nu

mbe

r of

cas

es c

lose

d si

nce

all

cas

es a

re d

istr

ibut

ed t

o al

l ag

ents

; th

us, e

ach

reve

nue

agen

t ha

s le

ss c

ases

to

hand

le a

nd c

lose

.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We’

re p

ropo

sing

rep

laci

ng

this

mea

sure

wit

h on

e th

at d

oesn

’t l

imit

the

pop

ulat

ion

bein

g m

easu

red

so w

e ca

n m

easu

re t

he o

vera

ll e

ffec

tive

ness

of

our

coll

ecti

ons

func

tion

s. I

n th

e fu

ture

, Cor

e S

yste

m R

epla

cem

ent

impl

emen

tati

on w

ill

intr

oduc

e ad

diti

onal

aut

omat

ion

and

the

scor

ing

of a

ccou

nts

for

coll

ecta

bili

ty.

We

mus

t al

so k

eep

our

vaca

ncy

rate

dow

n to

max

imiz

e pr

oduc

tion

and

min

imiz

e sh

ort -

term

im

pact

s fr

om w

ork

rela

ted

to C

ore

Sys

tem

Rep

lace

men

t

impl

emen

tati

on.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

rep

orti

ng c

ycl

e is

the

Ore

gon

fis

cal

year

.

Pag

e 21 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

130

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Del

inqu

ent

Ret

urn

s F

iled

Aft

er C

omp

lian

ce C

onta

ct P

er F

ilin

g E

nfor

cem

ent

Em

ploy

ee P

er M

onth

.K

PM

#7

2001

Tax

Adm

inis

trat

ion

: P

rovi

de

exce

llen

t se

rvic

e, h

elpi

ng t

axpa

yers

mee

t th

eir

com

mit

men

ts w

ith

educ

atio

n, a

ssis

tanc

e an

d co

mpl

ianc

e.G

oal

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

to t

he d

epar

tmen

t's m

issi

on.

Cos

t All

ocat

ion

Sys

tem

(C

AS

) an

d F

ilin

g E

nfor

cem

ent

Mon

thly

Rep

orts

, bas

ed o

n pr

oduc

tivi

ty p

er p

osit

ion

Dat

a S

ou

rce

Joan

n M

arti

n, P

erso

nal

Tax

and

Com

plia

nce

Div

isio

n A

dmin

istr

ator

Ow

ner

048

12

16

20

24

28

32

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

20

18

25

20

23

29

18

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Del

inqu

ent

Ret

urns

Fil

ed A

fter

Com

plia

nce

Con

tact

Per

Fil

ing

Enf

orce

men

t E

mpl

oyee

Per

Mon

th.

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

num

ber

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ateg

y is

to

id

enti

fy n

on-

fili

ng

taxp

ayer

s an

d en

cour

age

them

to

file

the

ir o

wn

retu

rns.

If

taxp

ayer

s vo

lunt

aril

y co

mpl

y by

fil

ing

thei

r ow

n re

turn

s, w

e

beli

eve

ther

e is

a h

ighe

r li

keli

hood

of

thei

r fu

ture

tax

com

plia

nce.

Pag

e 22

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

131

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

The

tar

get

for

this

mea

sure

is

23 d

elin

quen

t re

turn

s fi

led

afte

r co

mpl

ianc

e co

ntac

t. H

ighe

r is

bet

ter.

We

expe

ct t

his

mea

sure

to

incr

ease

ove

r ti

me.

Wit

h

impl

emen

tati

on o

f th

e ne

w s

yst

em t

here

wil

l be

inc

reas

ed e

ffic

ienc

y, c

onsi

sten

cy, a

nd a

ccur

acy

in o

ur p

roce

sses

tha

t w

ill

begi

n to

im

pact

thi

s m

easu

re i

n 20

16.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

In 2

014,

the

num

ber

of f

iled

ret

urns

per

em

ploy

ee p

er m

onth

was

18.

In

2013

, the

num

ber

of f

iled

ret

urns

per

em

ploy

ee p

er m

onth

was

29.

In

2012

, the

num

ber

of f

iled

ret

urns

per

em

ploy

ee p

er m

onth

was

23.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Com

para

ble

data

is

not

avai

lable

. It

is

diff

icult

to

com

pare

Ore

gon

's p

erfo

rman

ce w

ith

othe

r st

ates

due

to

thei

r w

idel

y di

vers

e ta

x st

ruct

ures

.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

The

res

ults

ref

lect

cha

nges

mad

e to

the

pro

gram

bas

ed o

n a

2011

Sec

reta

ry o

f S

tate

(S

OS

) au

dit

that

rec

omm

ende

d a

diff

eren

t ap

proa

ch t

o id

enti

fyin

g

non-

fili

ng t

axpa

yers

. In a

ddit

ion,

duri

ng 2

010

and

earl

y 20

11 a

lmos

t al

l fi

ling

enf

orce

men

t st

aff

wer

e re

dire

cted

to

a co

llec

tion

spe

ed-u

p ef

fort

, whi

ch m

eant

few

er a

sses

smen

ts w

ere

issu

ed.

The

sta

ff w

as t

rans

itio

ned

back

to

thei

r fi

ling

enf

orce

men

t du

ties

in

earl

y 20

11 a

long

wit

h th

e ch

ange

s su

gges

ted

by t

he S

OS

audi

t w

hich

res

ulte

d in

a h

ighe

r num

ber

of t

axpa

yers

con

tact

ed, l

eadi

ng t

o m

ore

retu

rns

file

d.

Em

ploy

ers

are

now

req

uire

d to

sub

mit

wag

e an

d w

ithh

oldi

ng i

nfor

mat

ion

elec

tron

ical

ly t

o us

. Thi

s ha

s al

low

ed u

s to

pro

vide

tha

t in

form

atio

n di

rect

ly t

o

wag

e-ea

rnin

g ta

xpa

yers

whe

n th

ey d

on't

have

it,

all

ow

ing

them

to

file

the

ir r

etur

ns t

hem

selv

es.

We

cont

inue

to

anal

yze

data

fro

m t

he I

RS

to

find

fil

ing

enfo

rcem

ent

lead

s. I

t's a

ssum

ed t

he m

ore

taxp

ayer

s w

e co

ntac

t, t

he

mor

e re

turn

s w

e re

ceiv

e. W

e be

liev

e th

e re

duct

ion

in t

his

mea

sure

is

due

to a

hig

h le

vel

of s

taff

tur

nove

r,

espe

cial

ly w

ith

mor

e ex

per

ienc

ed s

taff

ret

irin

g. T

his

turn

over

has

cau

sed

a re

lati

vely

sta

ble

grou

p of

em

ploy

ees

to s

hift

int

o tr

aini

ng a

nd m

ento

ring

mod

e w

hich

has

decr

ease

d pr

oduc

tion.

As

men

tion

ed i

n K

PM

5, t

here

are

oth

er e

cono

mic

fac

tors

tha

t im

pact

the

num

ber

of t

axpa

yers

who

do

not

file

, whi

ch h

as s

ome

impa

ct o

n th

is m

easu

re, h

owev

er

the

impa

ct i

s di

ffic

ult

to q

uant

ify

. Eco

nom

ic i

mpa

cts

are

mor

e cl

osel

y re

late

d to

the

am

ount

of

mon

ey p

aid

or c

olle

cted

.

Pag

e 23 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

132

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

beli

eve

the

stra

tegi

es w

e cu

rren

tly

hav

e in

pla

ce a

re i

mpo

rtan

t fo

r im

prov

ing

long

-ter

m v

olun

tary

com

plia

nce.

Im

prov

ed e

nfor

cem

ent

is a

n in

tegr

al p

art

of

our

la r

ger

stra

tegy

of

volu

ntar

y co

mpl

ianc

e. U

nfor

tuna

tely

, th

is m

easu

re o

nly

focu

ses

on o

ne s

trat

egy

for

affe

ctin

g vo

lunt

ary

com

plia

nce

whe

n w

e ac

tual

ly f

ocus

on m

ulti

ple

stra

tegi

es. I

n th

e fu

ture

, w

e w

ill

exam

ine

addi

tion

al s

trat

egie

s th

at o

ffer

mor

e ed

ucat

ion

and

assi

stan

ce t

o no

n-f

iler

s an

d w

e w

ill

seek

rep

laci

ng t

his

mea

sure

wit

h on

e th

at t

akes

a h

olis

tic

appr

oac

h an

d w

ill

enco

mpa

ss a

ll t

he s

trat

egie

s w

e've

ado

pted

int

o ou

r bu

sine

ss. I

n ad

diti

on, w

e do

not

yet

kno

w w

hat

tool

s th

e ne

w s

yste

m w

ill

pro

vide

and

how

the

y w

ill

impa

ct t

his

body

of

wor

k. W

e do

bel

ieve

tha

t on

ce i

n pl

ace

the

new

sys

tem

wil

l re

sult

in

an i

ncre

ased

lev

el

of f

ilin

g en

forc

emen

t ac

tivi

ty, w

hich

sho

uld i

n t

urn

inc

reas

e vo

lunt

ary

fili

ng.

Ove

r th

e ne

xt t

wo

year

s as

sta

ff a

re n

eede

d to

pro

vide

inp

ut, t

est,

and

lea

rn a

bout

the

new

sys

tem

the

re w

ill

be a

per

iod

of d

ecre

ased

pro

duct

ion.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

rep

orti

ng c

ycl

e is

the

Ore

gon

fis

cal

year

.

Pag

e 24 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

133

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Av

erag

e D

ays

to P

roce

ss P

erso

nal

Inc

om

e T

ax R

efun

d.

KP

M #

819

99

We

ado

pt b

est

busi

ness

pra

ctic

es t

o m

ake

tax

syst

ems

wor

k be

tter

, and

tak

e fu

ll a

dvan

tage

of

oppo

rtun

itie

s pr

esen

ted

by n

ew t

echn

olog

y.G

oal

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

dir

ectl

y t

o t

he

depa

rtm

ent's

mis

sion

.

Per

sona

l in

com

e ta

x re

turn

pro

cess

ing

syst

em.

Dat

a S

ourc

e

Ter

ren

ce W

oods

, AS

D A

dmin

istr

ator

Ow

ner

02468

10

12

14

16

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

15

14

7

12

910

78

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Ave

rage

Day

s to

Pro

cess

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax R

efun

d

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

num

ber

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ateg

y is

to

iss

ue p

erso

nal

inco

me

tax

refu

nd r

eque

sts

in a

tim

ely

man

ner,

thr

ough

eff

icie

nt u

se o

f pe

ople

, pro

cess

es,

and

syst

ems.

Pag

e 25

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

134

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

The

tar

get

is t

o is

sue

refu

nds

wit

hin

12 d

ays

from

the

rec

eipt

of

the

tax

retu

rn.

The

dep

artm

ent

is k

eepi

ng c

urrr

ent

targ

ets

unti

l m

ore

data

is

avai

lable

fro

m c

han

ges

in f

aud a

nd

susp

ense

pro

gram

wor

k th

roug

h th

e im

plem

enta

tion

of

the

core

sys

tem

rep

lace

men

t pr

ojec

t.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

Act

ual

perf

orm

ance

for

201

4 is

eig

ht d

ays,

fou

r da

ys f

ewer

tha

n th

e ta

rget

. Per

form

ance

for

201

3 w

as s

even

day

s.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Ore

gon’

s ta

rget

s an

d pe

rform

ance

are

com

para

ble

wit

h ot

her

stat

es. T

he I

RS

rep

orts

tha

t ni

ne o

ut o

f te

n re

fund

s ar

e is

sued

wit

hin

21 d

ays.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

Ref

unds

on

elec

tron

ical

ly f

iled

(e-

file

d) r

etur

ns

are

issu

ed t

he q

uick

est.

As

mor

e ta

xpay

ers

e-fi

le, t

he a

vera

ge t

ime

to i

ssue

a r

efun

d is

red

uced

(82

.5%

of

our

pers

onal

inc

ome

tax

retu

rns

wer

e e-

file

d—se

e K

PM

#9)

. In

2014

, e-f

iled

ret

urns

bot

h re

fund

and

tax

to

pay,

ave

rage

d 4.

28 d

ays

to p

roce

ss, t

wo

days

slo

wer

than

the

pre

viou

s ye

ar. T

he v

olum

e of

ret

urns

rec

eive

d in

the

mai

l de

crea

sed

by a

bout

16,

500,

and

too

k an

ave

rage

of

just

ove

r 29

day

s to

pro

cess

.

Pro

cess

ing

dela

ys b

y t

he

IRS

and

/or

the

tim

elin

ess

of C

ongr

ess

enac

ting

leg

isla

tion

als

o ha

s an

eff

ect

on o

ur a

bili

ty t

o pr

oces

s ti

mel

y. T

his

year

, it

onl

y af

fect

ed t

he

proc

essi

ng s

tart

dat

e.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

need

to

cont

inue

pro

cess

im

prov

emen

t th

at b

alan

ces

effi

cien

cy w

ith

accu

racy

ver

ific

atio

n an

d fr

aud

dete

ctio

n. W

e al

so n

eed

cont

inue

d ed

ucat

ion

on t

he

bene

fits

of

fili

ng e

lect

roni

call

y.

In a

ddit

ion,

we

do n

ot y

et k

now

wha

t to

ols

the

new

sys

tem

wil

l pr

ovid

e an

d ho

w t

hey

wil

l im

pact

thi

s bo

dy o

f w

ork.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

rep

orti

ng c

ycle

is

cale

ndar

yea

r, i

n w

hich

ret

urns

for

the

pre

cedi

ng t

ax y

ear

are

proc

esse

d (e

xam

ple:

201

3 re

turn

s pr

oces

sed

in 2

014)

.

Thi

s da

ta r

epor

ts o

n t

ax r

etur

ns t

hat

do n

ot s

uspe

nd f

or e

rror

s or

add

itio

nal

revi

ew f

rom

the

aut

omat

ed p

roce

ss. R

efun

ds f

rom

ret

urns

tha

t do

sus

pend

tak

e an

aver

age

of 6

0 da

ys t

o pr

oces

s pr

imar

ily

due

to i

nten

tiona

l ch

ange

s to

the

rev

iew

pro

cedu

res

aim

ed a

t fr

aud

prev

enti

on.

Pag

e 26 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

135

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Per

cent

of

Per

son

al I

ncom

e T

ax R

etu

rns

Fil

ed E

lect

roni

call

yK

PM

#9

2002

Op

erat

ion

al E

xce

llen

ce:

Ado

pt b

est

busi

ness

pra

ctic

es, t

akin

g ad

vant

age

of t

echn

olog

y to

im

prov

e ou

r sy

stem

and

pro

cess

es.

Goa

l

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

dir

ectl

y t

o t

he

depa

rtm

ent's

mis

sion

.

Per

sona

l in

com

e ta

x re

turn

pro

cess

ing

syst

em s

tati

stic

s fo

r el

ectr

onic

ally

fil

ed r

etur

ns.

Dat

a S

ourc

e

Joan

n M

arti

n, P

erso

nal

Tax

and

Com

plia

nce

Adm

inis

trat

or O

wn

er

0

20

40

60

80

100

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

56

60

63

67

75

79

81

83

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Per

cent

of

Per

sona

l In

com

e T

ax R

etur

ns F

iled

Ele

ctro

nica

lly

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

perc

ent

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ateg

y is

to

im

pro

ve c

usto

mer

ser

vice

an

d ef

fici

ency

by

incr

easi

ng t

he p

erce

nt o

f pe

rson

al i

ncom

e ta

x re

turn

s fi

led

elec

tron

ical

ly.

Ele

ctro

nica

lly

file

d

(e-f

iled

) re

turn

s ar

e fa

ster

and

les

s ex

pens

ive

to p

roce

ss.

Pag

e 27

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

136

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

The

tar

gets

wer

e re

vise

d up

war

d in

2011

to r

efle

ct t

he c

onti

nued

gro

wth

in

e-fi

ling

at

the

stat

e an

d fe

dera

l le

vel.

For

201

4, t

he t

arge

t w

as 8

0%.

Hig

her

is

bett

er.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

We

are

abov

e ta

rget

wit

h 82.

5% o

f ta

x re

turn

s fi

led e

lect

roni

call

y. T

he n

umbe

rs f

or t

he e

-fil

e ha

ve c

onsi

sten

tly

rise

n ea

ch y

ear,

tho

ugh

the

rate

of

grow

th h

as

slow

ed.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

His

tori

call

y, O

rego

n's

rate

of

e-fi

ling

has

bee

n co

mpa

rabl

e w

ith

othe

r st

ates

. A

ccor

ding

to

the

late

st f

ull

year

Fed

erat

ion

of T

ax A

dmin

istr

ator

’s s

urve

y

(Nov

ember

25,

201

3), s

tate

s w

ith

fili

ng v

olum

e si

mil

ar t

o O

rego

n w

ere

at a

n 82

.4%

e-f

ile

rate

.

S

tate

Ret

urns

eF

ile

%

Pra

ctit

ione

r M

anda

te

O

rego

n

1.8

mil

lion

82%

Yes

A

labam

a

1.9

mil

lion

82%

Yes

C

onne

ctic

ut

1

.8 m

illi

on

8

4%

Y

es

Io

wa

1.6

mil

lion

85%

No

K

entu

cky

1.8

mil

lion

80%

Yes

O

klah

om

a

1.

7 m

illi

on

8

3%

Y

es

The

nat

iona

l av

erag

e w

as 8

1%. T

he I

RS

exp

ects

to

rece

ive

abou

t 85

% o

f th

eir

retu

rns

elec

tron

ical

ly i

n ca

lend

ar y

ear

2014

.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

Ore

gon'

s e-

fili

ng

is l

inke

d to

the

fed

eral

syst

em;

we

bene

fit

as m

ore

taxp

ayer

s ch

oose

to

file

the

ir f

eder

al t

ax r

etur

ns e

lect

roni

call

y.

Rev

enue

im

ple

men

ted

a ta

x p

ract

itio

ners

e-f

ile

man

date

in

2011

, whi

ch m

atch

es t

he I

RS

man

date

. How

ever

, the

re i

s no

pen

alty

for

non

-com

plia

nce;

DO

R s

ends

a re

min

der

lett

er e

ach

year

to

thos

e pr

acti

tion

ers

who

shou

ld h

ave

file

d th

eir

clie

nt’s

ret

urns

ele

ctro

nica

lly

. (W

e ha

ve y

et t

o ac

hiev

e 10

0% p

arti

cipa

tion

by

prac

titi

oner

s in

the

e-f

ile

man

date

).

Pag

e 28 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

137

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Ore

gon

part

icip

ates

in

the

Fre

e F

ile

All

iance

that

all

ows

taxp

ayer

s to

e-f

ile

for

free

if

they

mee

t ce

rtai

n cr

iter

ia.

Typ

ical

ly, t

he p

arti

cipa

tion

cri

teri

a ar

e ti

ed t

o

inco

me

leve

l, a

ge, v

eter

an s

tatu

s an

d ty

pe o

f fe

dera

l re

turn

fil

ed.

Ore

gon

allo

ws

taxp

ayer

s to

ent

er t

heir

ret

urn

info

rmat

ion

into

an

on-l

ine

fill

able

for

m a

nd f

ile

the

retu

rn d

irec

tly

wit

h us

for

fre

e.

Unli

ke

other

sta

tes,

Rev

enue

has

not

put

muc

h em

phas

is o

n ad

vert

isin

g e-

file

to

taxp

ayer

s be

caus

e th

e gr

owth

has

bee

n st

eady

ove

r th

e ye

ars.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

wil

l co

ntin

ue t

o em

phas

ize

the

bene

fits

of

elec

tron

ic f

ilin

g to

tax

paye

rs a

nd p

ract

itio

ners

thr

ough

our

for

ms,

boo

klet

s, a

nd p

ubli

cati

ons;

inc

ludi

ng i

nfor

mat

ion

on o

ur w

ebsi

te;

and

by d

iscu

ssin

g e-

file

ben

efit

s w

ith

taxp

ayer

s w

hen

we

inte

ract

wit

h th

em.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

Thi

s da

ta i

s on

ly f

or p

erso

nal

inco

me

tax

retu

rns.

The

rep

orti

ng c

ycle

for

e-f

ile

perc

enta

ges

is t

he c

alen

dar

year

.

Pag

e 29 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

138

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Em

ploy

ee W

ork

En

viro

nm

ent

(bas

ed u

pon

a sc

ale

of 1

-6)

KP

M #

10

2002

Wor

k E

nvi

ron

men

t: P

rovi

de a

po

siti

ve, p

rodu

ctiv

e, a

nd w

elco

min

g w

ork

envi

ronm

ent.

Go

al

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

dir

ectl

y t

o t

he

depa

rtm

ent's

mis

sion

.

Em

plo

yee

surv

ey c

ondu

cted

by

the

agen

cy' s

Wor

kfor

ce E

nvir

onm

ent

Cou

ncil

.D

ata

Sou

rce

Kim

berl

y D

ettw

yler

, Hu

man

Res

ourc

es S

ecti

on M

anag

er O

wn

er

0.0

0

1.0

0

2.0

0

3.0

0

4.0

0

5.0

0

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

4.6

54.3

44.1

5

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Em

ploy

ee W

ork

Env

iron

men

t S

atis

fact

ion

(sca

le 1

-6;

6

bein

g m

ost

sati

sfie

d)

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

num

ber

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Pro

vide

our

em

plo

yee

s w

ith

the

phys

ical

env

iron

men

t, s

uppo

rt, a

nd r

esou

rces

the

y ne

ed t

o do

the

ir j

obs

wel

l.

Pag

e 30

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

139

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

Em

ploy

ees

rate

the

wor

k en

viro

nmen

t on

a s

cale

of

1-6.

Hig

her

is b

ette

r.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

We

did

not

pro

vide

the

sur

vey

to s

taff

in

FY

201

2, 2

013

or 2

014.

In

late

spr

ing

2012

, the

age

ncy'

s le

ader

ship

tea

m d

iscu

ssed

a d

iffe

rent

mea

sure

men

t to

ol

for

empl

oyee

wor

k e

nvir

onm

ent/

enga

gem

ent.

W

e hav

e im

plem

ente

d a

new

too

l fo

r th

e F

Y 2

013

and

2014

.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Com

para

ble

data

is

not

avai

lable

.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

As

prev

ious

ly i

ndic

ated

, no

surv

ey w

as c

ondu

cted

in

2012

, 201

3 or

201

4 to

com

pare

wit

h th

e pr

evio

us y

ear

resu

lts.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

are

reco

mm

endi

ng t

his

KP

M b

e el

imin

ated

and

a ne

w o

ne d

evel

oped

to

repl

ace

it t

hat

is c

ompa

rabl

e an

d su

stai

nabl

e.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

rep

orti

ng c

ycl

e is

the

Ore

gon

fis

cal

year

. D

ata

in p

revi

ous

year

s w

as c

olle

cted

thr

ough

an

agen

cy-w

ide

elec

tron

ic s

urve

y. A

ll e

mpl

oyee

s ha

d th

e

oppo

rtun

ity

to r

espo

nd a

nony

mou

sly.

Pag

e 31 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

140

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Em

ploy

ee T

rain

ing

Per

Yea

r (p

erce

nt

rece

ivin

g 20

hou

rs p

er y

ear)

.K

PM

#11

2000

Wor

k E

nvi

ron

men

t: P

rovi

de a

po

siti

ve, p

rodu

ctiv

e, a

nd w

elco

min

g w

ork

envi

ronm

ent.

Go

al

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

to t

he d

epar

tmen

t's m

issi

on.

Ag

ency

Cos

t All

ocat

ion

Sys

tem

(C

AS

) fo

r th

e pe

riod

bef

ore

2011

. iL

earn

Ore

gon

for

2012

an

d on

goin

g.D

ata

Sou

rce

Kim

ber

ly D

ettw

yler

, H

um

an R

esou

rces

Man

ager

Ow

ner

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

51

32

38

33

27

27

46

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Em

ploy

ee T

rain

ing

Per

Yea

r (p

erce

nt r

ecei

ving

20

hour

s

per

year

)

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

perc

ent

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ateg

y is

to

adv

ance

our

wo

rkfo

rce

by

usi

ng

crea

tive

tra

inin

g an

d de

velo

pmen

t ac

tivi

ties

to

get

the

mos

t ou

t of

tra

inin

g re

sour

ces.

Pag

e 32

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

141

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

Ore

gon

Ben

chm

ark

29:

Lab

or F

orce

Ski

lls

Tra

inin

g -

this

ben

chm

ark

mea

sure

s th

e pe

rcen

tage

of

Ore

gon'

s st

ate

labo

r fo

rce

who

rec

eive

at

leas

t 20

hou

rs o

f

skil

ls t

rain

ing

duri

ng t

he y

ear.

Ore

gon'

s B

ench

mar

k i

s th

at 7

5 pe

rcen

t of

em

ploy

ees

rece

ive

a m

inum

um o

f 20

hou

rs o

f tr

aini

ng p

er y

ear.

O

ur i

nter

im t

arge

t is

low

er t

han

the

stat

ewid

e ta

rget

, at

60 p

erce

nt.

We

wil

l re

vise

the

tar

get

upw

ard

whe

n w

e m

eet

the

inte

rim

tar

get.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

In 2

014

the

targ

et w

as 6

0%;

actu

al p

erfo

rman

ce w

as 4

5%.

We

are

not

mee

ting

our

tra

inin

g ta

rget

, tho

ugh

we

have

see

n im

prov

emen

t in

thi

s ar

ea.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

The

re i

s no

sta

te-w

ide

syst

em f

or m

eans

of

com

pari

son.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

The

re c

onti

nues

to

be a

n is

sue

wit

h un

der

repo

rtin

g o

r la

te r

epor

ting

of

trai

ning

for

tra

ckin

g th

e da

ta i

n th

e co

llec

tion

sou

rce

(iL

earn

).

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

wil

l co

ntin

ue t

o se

ek c

reat

ive,

low

-cos

t w

ays

to d

eliv

er t

rain

ing

to t

he g

ener

al e

mpl

oyee

bas

e.

We'

re w

orki

ng t

o id

enti

fy a

nd c

aptu

re s

tand

ard

on b

oard

ing

trai

ning

for

new

em

ploy

ees

and

spec

iali

zed t

rain

ing

for

spec

ific

cla

ssif

icat

ions

. O

ur P

rocu

rem

ent

Off

ice

wil

l in

form

Hum

an R

esou

rces

of

all

cont

ract

ed t

rain

ing

prov

ided

by

vend

ors

to e

nsur

e it

is

reco

rded

in

the

iLea

rn s

yste

m.

We'

ll a

lso

cont

inue

to

part

ner

wit

h m

anag

ers

to m

ake

sure

we

rece

ive

trai

ning

inf

orm

atio

n.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

rep

orti

ng c

ycl

e is

Ore

gon'

s fi

scal

yea

r. T

he d

ata

com

es f

rom

iL

earn

Ore

gon.

Pag

e 33 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

142

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Cus

tom

er S

ervi

ce:

Per

cen

t o

f cu

stom

ers

rati

ng t

heir

sat

isfa

ctio

n w

ith

the

agen

cy's

cus

tom

er s

ervi

ce a

s "g

ood"

or

"exc

elle

nt":

ove

rall

,

tim

elin

ess,

acc

urac

y, h

elpf

uln

ess,

exp

erti

se, a

nd a

vail

abil

ity

of i

nfor

mat

ion.

KP

M #

12

2006

Tax

Adm

inis

trat

ion

: P

rovi

de

exce

llen

t se

rvic

e to

tax

paye

rs i

n a

tim

ely

man

ner.

Goa

l

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

to t

he d

epar

tmen

t's m

issi

on.

Wri

tten

sur

veys

of

wal

k-i

n c

usto

mer

s at

our

fie

ld o

ffic

es o

r m

ain

buil

ding

; te

leph

one

surv

eys

of r

ando

mly

sel

ecte

d ta

xpay

er c

alls

.D

ata

Sou

rce

Joan

n M

arti

n, P

erso

nal

Tax

and

Com

plia

nce

Div

isio

n A

dmin

istr

ator

Ow

ner

020

40

60

80

10

0

Acc

ura

cyA

vaila

bili

ty o

f

Info

rma

tion

Exp

ert

ise

He

lpfu

lne

ssO

vera

llT

ime

line

ss

95

95

96

97

97

96

82

73

86

86

79

77

45

48

43

38

33

32

20

12

20

13

20

14

Ta

rge

t

Age

ncy

Per

form

ance

Ave

rage

of

Tax

Ser

vice

s S

urve

y

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

Our

str

ateg

y is

to

pro

vid

e th

e be

st p

ossi

ble

cu

sto

mer

ser

vice

to

taxp

ayer

s w

ho v

isit

our

fie

ld o

ffic

es o

r ca

ll o

ur T

ax S

ervi

ces

Uni

t fo

r as

sist

ance

, as

mea

sure

d

by s

urve

ys o

f ou

r cu

stom

ers.

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

Pag

e 34

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

143

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Thi

s ta

rget

is

the

perc

ent

of c

usto

mer

s ra

ting

the

ir s

atis

fact

ion

wit

h th

e ag

ency

's c

usto

mer

ser

vice

as

"goo

d" o

r "e

xcel

lent

" in

the

se c

ateg

orie

s: a

ccur

acy,

avai

labi

lity

of

info

rmat

ion,

exp

erti

se, h

elpf

ulne

ss, t

imel

ines

s, a

nd o

vera

ll e

xper

ienc

e.

We

have

set

the

tar

gets

for

all

com

pone

nts

at 9

0%.

Hig

her

perc

enta

ge i

s

bett

er.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

The

cus

tom

er s

ervi

ce r

atin

gs w

ere

dow

n in

201

4. T

he D

epar

tmen

t’s

over

all

scor

e is

33%

.Whi

le t

he d

rop

is d

ram

atic

fro

m 2

013,

the

exac

t ca

use

is

not

clea

r (s

ee “

Inco

nsi

sten

t dat

a”

in t

he f

acto

rs a

ffec

ting

res

ults

bel

ow).

Tha

t sa

id,

this

num

ber

does

ind

icat

e th

ere

is a

gen

eral

dis

sati

sfac

tion

wit

h D

OR

’s c

usto

mer

ser

vic

e fr

om

the

maj

ori

ty o

f th

ose

who

resp

onde

d to

the

sur

vey

whi

ch w

e ar

e fo

cuse

d on

add

ress

ing

(see

“W

hat

Nee

ds t

o be

Don

e”).

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

A s

tate

-wid

e sy

stem

has

n't

been

bui

lt f

or a

genc

ies

to c

ompa

re t

hem

selv

es a

gain

st e

ach

othe

r.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

Nat

ure

of

the

busi

ness

.

The

Dep

artm

ent

of

Rev

enue

adm

inis

ters

ver

y co

mpl

icat

ed t

ax l

aws.

We

revi

ew, a

udit

and

cha

nge

tax

retu

rns

and

send

bil

ling

not

ices

. W

e ar

e th

e st

ate’

s co

llec

tion

agen

cy.

Peo

ple

don

’t t

end

to c

onta

ct D

OR

unl

ess

they

are

con

fuse

d, w

aiti

ng o

n a

refu

nd, w

e’ve

sen

t th

em a

bil

ling

not

ice

or w

e ar

e at

tem

ptin

g to

col

lect

debt

. Inh

eren

tly,

DO

R’s

cus

tom

ers

are

inte

ract

ing

wit

h th

e ag

ency

per

sonn

el o

n a

sens

itiv

e su

bjec

t.

Inco

nsis

tent

dat

a.

Rev

enue

has

bee

n in

cons

iste

nt

in t

he g

athe

ring

of

surv

ey i

nfor

mat

ion,

bot

h in

rep

orti

ng p

erio

ds a

nd m

etho

d of

gat

heri

ng i

nfor

mat

ion.

The

num

bers

rep

orte

d in

2012

and

2013

are

not

sta

tist

ical

ly v

iabl

e. I

n 20

12, i

t w

as c

ondu

cted

for

one

mon

th (

Dec

embe

r).

The

sur

vey

in A

ugus

t 20

13 w

as l

imit

ed t

o ju

st t

wo

wee

ks d

ue t

o

tech

nic

al a

nd w

orkl

oad

issu

es. T

here

wer

e le

ss t

han 2

00 r

espo

nses

in

2013

.

In 2

014,

Rev

enue

mad

e th

e su

rvey

ava

ilab

le f

or

11 m

ont

hs o

f th

e fi

scal

yea

r. T

his

subs

tant

iall

y in

crea

sed

the

num

ber

of r

espo

nden

ts (

from

182

to

3,07

2), b

ut t

he

resu

lts

wer

e le

ss o

ptim

isti

c. I

t sh

oul

d be

note

d t

hat

the

tot

al r

epre

sent

s ab

out

2% o

f th

e ca

lls

take

n by

Tax

Ser

vice

s in

the

rep

orti

ng p

erio

d (i

t do

esn’

t co

unt

the

num

ber

of i

n pe

rson

con

tact

s).

Pro

cess

ing

Sea

son

dela

ys.

A f

eder

al g

ove

rnm

ent

shut

dow

n in

lat

e 20

13 c

ause

d n

earl

y a

mon

th d

elay

in

the

star

t of

the

201

4 pr

oces

sing

sea

son.

The

fed

eral

gov

ernm

ent

has

dela

yed

the P

age

35 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

144

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

star

t of

the

pro

cess

ing

seas

on f

or t

he l

ast

few

yea

rs. B

ecau

se o

ur e

-fil

e sy

stem

is

reli

ant

on t

he I

RS

’s s

yste

m, w

e ha

ve n

o co

ntro

l ov

er w

hen

we

star

t to

pro

cess

retu

rns.

By

com

pres

sing

the

fil

ing

seas

on, r

efun

ds w

ere

dela

yed

for

man

y ta

xpay

ers.

Thi

s im

pact

s ho

w t

axpa

yers

fee

l ab

out

us b

ut w

e ar

e un

able

to

impa

ct

deci

sion

s th

e IR

S m

akes

in

this

are

a.

Inte

rnal

Pro

cess

es.

For

the

las

t tw

o ye

ars,

DO

R m

ade

inte

ntio

nal

chan

ges

to r

evie

win

g re

fund

ret

urns

to

be m

ore

e ffe

ctiv

e in

add

ress

ing

refu

nd f

raud

. We’

ve r

evie

wed

mor

e re

turn

s

beca

use

we’

re l

ooki

ng a

t m

ore

issu

es. T

he r

esul

t (i

n ad

diti

on t

o ca

tchi

ng f

raud

) ha

s si

gnif

ican

tly

incr

ease

d th

e ti

me

it t

akes

to

get

a va

lid

refu

nd s

elec

ted

for

enha

nced

rev

iew

to

a ta

xpay

er (

aver

agin

g 60

days

for

enh

ance

d re

view

and

pro

cess

ing,

up

from

26

days

tw

o ye

ars

ago)

. Lon

ger

refu

nd t

imes

are

not

pop

ular

wit

h D

OR

cus

tom

ers

The

sur

vey.

The

sur

vey

does

not

hav

e a

ques

tion

to

help

ide

ntif

y t

he

natu

re o

f th

e ca

ll o

r w

ho a

nsw

ered

it.

Alt

houg

h th

e pe

rfor

man

ce m

easu

re i

s ti

ed t

o D

OR

’s m

ain

call

cent

er (

Tax

Ser

vice

s), c

alle

rs a

re r

outi

nely

rou

ted

to o

ther

are

as f

or r

esol

utio

n. F

or e

xam

ple,

cal

lers

who

inp

ut t

hey

have

a c

olle

ctio

n is

sue

are

auto

mat

ical

ly

tran

sfer

red

to a

Col

lect

ion

area

yet

the

y ar

e gi

ven

the

surv

ey c

onta

ct i

nfor

mat

ion

for

Tax

Ser

vice

s at

the

ini

tiat

ion

of t

he c

all.

Sur

vey

resp

onse

s co

nnec

ted

wit

h

tran

sfer

red

call

s do

n’t

refl

ect

the

qual

ity

of s

ervi

ce i

n th

e ca

ll c

ente

r, b

ut c

anno

t be

cul

led

out

of t

he m

easu

re d

ue t

he s

urve

y de

sign

. M

oreo

ver,

the

re i

s no

conn

ecti

on b

etw

een t

ime

of s

ervi

ce a

nd t

he c

ompl

etio

n of

the

sur

vey.

In

fact

, the

sur

vey

does

not

cap

ture

the

dat

e of

ser

vice

on

whi

ch t

he a

genc

y is

bei

ng

eval

uat

ed.C

hang

e in

del

iver

y m

etho

d of

sur

vey

. In

2012

and

201

3, t

he s

urve

ys w

ere

cond

ucte

d by

the

tax

ser

vice

s re

pres

enta

tive

pri

or

to t

he

end o

f a

call

or

han

ded

to t

axpay

er

rece

ivin

g in

-per

son

serv

ices

. It

is l

ikel

y th

at h

avin

g a

tax

serv

ice

repr

esen

tati

ve a

dmin

iste

r th

e su

rvey

may

hav

e ha

d so

me

infl

uenc

e ov

er t

he

nat

ure

of

the

resp

onse

s due

to t

he

pers

onal

int

erac

tion

s an

d th

e po

tent

ial

disc

omfo

rt f

or a

tax

paye

r to

pro

vide

a n

egat

ive

resp

onse

. B

egin

ning

in

fisc

al y

ear

2014

, th

e su

rvey

was

mad

e av

aila

ble

to t

axpay

ers

via

tele

phon

e in

a m

anne

r th

at g

uara

ntee

d fu

ll a

nony

mit

y.

We

expe

ct t

hat

taxp

ayer

s ar

e m

ore

com

fort

able

giv

ing

full

fee

dbac

k in

thi

s en

viro

nm

ent.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

The

dep

artm

ent’

s go

al i

s to

im

prov

e cu

stom

er s

ervi

ce t

hrou

gh i

ncre

asin

g av

aila

bili

ty o

f se

lf-h

elp

opti

ons

and

qual

ity

dire

ct c

usto

mer

ser

vice

. The

goa

l is

lon

g te

rm

and

shou

ld i

nvol

ve i

nves

tmen

t in

tec

hno

logy

as

wel

l as

tra

inin

g of

sta

ff. T

he i

niti

ativ

es a

nd s

trat

egie

s th

e D

epar

tmen

t is

pla

nnin

g on

usi

ng t

o in

crea

se s

atis

fact

ion

wit

h c

usto

mer

ser

vice

inc

lude

:

Sho

rt t

erm

.

·

E

valu

atin

g th

e ab

ilit

y to

add

clar

ifyi

ng q

ues

tion

s to

the

sur

vey;

que

stio

ns t

hat

wou

ld g

ive

us b

ette

r in

form

atio

n of

why

the

tax

paye

r ha

s co

ntac

ted

us (

gene

ral

tax q

uest

ion,

bil

ling

not

ice,

col

lect

ion

acti

vity

, etc

.) T

his

wou

ld a

llow

DO

R t

o fo

cus

on p

robl

em a

reas

and

tai

lor

impr

ovem

ents

.

·

A

naly

zing

ref

und

revie

w p

roce

sses

; in

clud

ing e

lim

inat

ing

edit

s th

at h

ave

prov

en t

o be

fra

ud f

ree,

eva

luat

ing

reso

urce

s an

d ad

just

ing

to

impr

ove

wor

kflo

w.

Pag

e 36 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

145

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Lon

g te

rm:

·

C

onti

nuin

g to

inv

est

in t

echno

logy

. T

he d

epar

tmen

t’s

Aut

omat

ed C

all

Dis

trib

utor

is

outd

ated

and

in

need

of

repl

acin

g. T

he d

epar

tmen

t w

ill

look

for

way

s to

use

new

too

ls, i

nclu

ding

nves

tiga

ting

“li

ve c

hat”

– a

n in

stan

t m

essa

ging

pro

duct

tha

t is

suc

cess

full

y us

ed b

y ot

her

publ

ic a

nd p

riva

te c

all

cent

ers.

·

U

pgra

ding

the

on-l

ine

tool

s av

aila

ble

for

self

-hel

p s

ervi

ce.

Rev

enue

has

the

opp

ortu

nity

to

offe

r m

ore

soph

isti

cate

d an

d co

mpr

ehen

sive

on

-lin

e to

ols

wit

h th

e

core

sys

tem

rep

lace

men

t pr

ojec

t. D

OR

int

ends

to

crea

te a

foc

us g

roup

to

buil

d th

e se

rvic

e fo

r th

e 20

15 p

erso

nal

inco

me

tax

roll

-out

.

·

R

esea

rchi

ng a

nd

impl

emen

ting

con

tinue

d cu

stom

er s

ervi

ce t

rain

ing

of D

OR

sta

ff.

·

U

nder

stan

ding

tha

t th

ere

are

man

y le

gs t

o goo

d cu

stom

er s

ervi

ce,

effo

rts

to i

mpr

ove

shou

ld c

onne

ct w

ith

the

init

iati

ves

in K

PM

13.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

The

dat

a fo

r th

is r

epor

t w

as c

olle

cted

for

ele

ven m

onth

s of

the

fis

cal

year

. T

axpa

yers

who

cal

led

in w

ere

dire

cted

to

a ph

one

surv

ey t

hrou

gh t

he I

VR

. Wal

k-i

n

taxp

ayer

s w

ere

give

n a

stam

p on

the

ir r

ecei

pt w

ith t

he n

umbe

r to

cal

l an

d ta

ke t

he s

urve

y th

roug

h th

e IV

R. E

mai

l cu

stom

ers

rece

ived

the

sur

vey

invi

tati

on w

ith

thei

r em

ail

resp

ons

e. T

he

resu

lts

wer

e do

wnl

oad

ed i

nto

a sp

read

shee

t fo

r ta

bula

tion

.

Pag

e 37 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

146

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Eff

ecti

ve

Tax

pay

er A

ssis

tan

ce:

Pro

vide

the

mos

t ef

fect

ive

taxp

ayer

ass

ista

nce

serv

ices

by

a da

ta-d

rive

n co

mbi

nati

on o

f di

rect

assi

stan

ce a

nd

elec

tron

ic s

elf-

help

ser

vice

s.

KP

M #

13

Eff

ecti

ve T

axpa

yer

Ass

ista

nce:

Pro

vide

exc

elle

nt s

ervi

ce, h

elpi

ng t

axpa

yers

mee

t th

eir

com

mit

men

ts w

ith

educ

atio

n, a

ssis

tanc

e an

d

com

plia

nce.

Goa

l

Ore

gon

Con

text

T

his

goa

l li

nks

dir

ectl

y t

o t

he

depa

rtm

ent's

mis

sion

.

Rev

enue

Dep

artm

ent

auto

mat

ed s

yste

ms.

Dat

a S

ourc

e

Joan

n M

arti

n, P

erso

nal

Tax

and

Com

plia

nce

Div

isio

n A

dmin

istr

ator

. O

wn

er

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2009

2011

2012

2013

2014

2015

51

51

61

59

Bar

is a

ctual,

line is

targ

et

Eff

ecti

ve T

axpa

yer

Ass

ista

nce

Dat

a is

rep

rese

nted

by

num

ber

1. O

UR

ST

RA

TE

GY

We

have

a t

wo

-par

t st

rate

gy:

inc

reas

e ac

cess

to

elec

tron

ic s

ervi

ces,

and

pro

vide

eff

ecti

ve o

ne-o

n-on

e as

sist

ance

whe

re n

eces

sary

. W

e pr

ovid

e el

ectr

onic

Pag

e 38

of

439/

30/2

014

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

147

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

self

-hel

p op

tions

(w

eb a

nd p

hone

bas

ed)

for

taxp

ayer

s to

get

qui

ck a

nsw

ers

or p

erfo

rm c

omm

on t

asks

(e.

g. W

here

's M

y R

efun

d?).

We

mus

t al

so p

rovi

de

e ffe

ctiv

e as

sist

ance

to

thos

e w

ho l

ack

acce

ss t

o th

e w

eb, o

r fr

om w

hom

dir

ect

cont

act

is t

he o

nly

or p

refe

rred

met

hod.

W

e us

e cu

stom

er s

ervi

ce s

urve

ys a

s

"che

cks"

to

ensu

re w

e pr

ovid

e th

e pr

ope

r ba

lance

bet

wee

n di

rect

and

sel

f-he

lp s

ervi

ce o

ptio

ns.

2. A

BO

UT

TH

E T

AR

GE

TS

We'

re u

sing

a c

ompo

site

mea

sure

tha

t "r

olls

up"

ind

ivid

ual

resu

lts

from

thr

ee s

peci

fic

com

pone

nt m

easu

res:

cal

l w

ait

tim

es, su

cces

sful

sel

f-hel

p, an

d d

irec

t cu

stom

er s

ervic

e

sati

sfac

tion

sur

veys

. Ind

ivid

uall

y, t

hese

are

ope

rati

onal

mea

sure

s. I

n ag

greg

ate,

the

y te

ll u

s th

e de

gree

to

whi

ch w

e ar

e pr

ovid

ing

effi

cien

t, e

ffec

tive

taxpay

er s

ervic

es. S

ince

eac

h

port

ion

of t

he m

easu

re i

s w

eigh

ted

diff

eren

tly

(wai

t ti

mes

= 4

0% o

f th

e m

easu

re, su

cces

sful

sel

f-he

lp l

ook

ups

= 5

0%, an

d cu

stom

er s

ervic

e ra

tings

= 1

0%

) an

d t

he

dat

a fo

rms

are

som

ewha

t di

ffer

ent,

tar

gets

and

act

uals

are

nor

mal

ized

int

o a

com

mon

exp

ress

ion

; a

scal

e of

1-1

00.

A h

ighe

r ag

greg

ate

scor

e is

bet

ter.

3. H

OW

WE

AR

E D

OIN

G

Over

all

scor

e: 5

9 (o

ut o

f 10

0). T

his

is d

own

slig

htly

fro

m t

he 2

013

scor

e of

61.

Cal

l w

ait

tim

es w

ere

dow

n si

gnif

ican

tly,

tha

t of

fset

the

dec

line

in

succ

essf

ul w

eb

look-

ups

and c

usto

mer

ser

vic

e ra

ting

.

Wai

t-T

ime:

Cal

ls w

ith

less

than

fiv

e m

inut

es w

ait

tim

e =

68%

of

tota

l ca

lls

(ver

sus

50.3

% i

n 20

13).

The

dec

reas

e in

wai

t ti

mes

for

201

4 ov

er 2

013

was

due

to

a

num

ber

of f

acto

rs.

·

T

he c

all

cent

er w

as f

ull

y s

taff

ed f

or m

ost

of t

he y

ear

and

the

num

ber

of S

pani

sh s

peak

ing

repr

esen

tati

ves

incr

ease

d fr

om t

hree

to

four

.

·

T

he n

ew I

nter

acti

ve V

oice

Res

pons

e (I

VR

) sy

stem

ins

tall

ed i

n m

id-2

013

allo

wed

cal

lers

to

"sel

f-tr

ansf

er"

to c

olle

ctio

ns w

itho

ut t

he i

nter

vent

ion

of a

repr

esen

tati

ve.

·

T

he

Dep

artm

ent

also

ins

tall

ed a

"vi

rtual

hold

" sy

stem

wit

h a

soft

lau

nch

in M

arch

of

2014

. Thi

s fe

atur

e gi

ves

the

call

er t

he o

ptio

n to

han

g up

and

get

a c

all

bac

k w

hen

a r

epre

sent

ativ

e be

com

es a

vai

lable

. Cal

ls w

here

the

cal

ler

chos

e to

be

call

ed b

ack

late

r ar

e no

t in

clud

ed i

n th

is s

tati

stic

. Thi

s fe

atur

e w

as p

opul

ar w

ith

bot

h th

e ta

xpay

er a

nd t

he D

OR

rep

rese

ntat

ives

. T

he t

axpa

yer

tend

ed t

o be

cal

mer

as

they

wer

en’t

tie

d to

the

pho

ne w

aiti

ng t

o ta

lk t

o a

repr

esen

tati

ve.

Gen

eral

fac

tors

tha

t ca

use

long

er w

ait

tim

es:

·

C

all

volu

me

was

up a

bout

24,

000

call

s ov

er 2

013.

Eve

n th

ough

we

adde

d an

add

itio

nal

Spa

nish

spe

akin

g re

pres

enta

tive

, the

cal

l w

ait

tim

e fo

r S

pani

sh

spea

king

tax

paye

rs c

onti

nues

to

be l

ong

er t

han

the

aver

age

wai

t ti

me

for

an E

ngli

sh s

peak

ing

repr

esen

tati

ve (

we

don'

t tr

ack

othe

r la

ngua

ge r

eque

sts)

.

·

W

ait

tim

es a

re t

ypic

ally

inc

reas

ed b

y ot

her,

spe

cifi

c on

e-ti

me

fact

ors.

Cha

nges

to

our

refu

nd r

evie

w p

roce

sses

(re

fund

s to

ok l

onge

r be

caus

e of

fra

ud

revi

ew)

had

the

bigg

est

pote

ntia

l to

inc

reas

e ca

ll v

olum

e th

is y

ear.

Als

o, t

he s

easo

n st

arte

d la

ter

beca

use

of t

he l

ate

2013

fed

eral

shu

tdow

n, p

utti

ng m

ore

call

s in

to

a co

nden

sed

tim

efra

me.

Pag

e 39 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

148

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

Per

cen

tage

of

succ

essf

ul

"W

her

e's

My

Ref

un

d?"

in

qu

irie

s m

ade

thro

ugh

IV

R o

r w

eb a

pp

lica

tion

s:56

.7%

(do

wn

from

64%

in

2013

). S

ucc

essf

ul

inquir

ies

are

def

ined

as

any r

esponse

othe

r th

an "

not-

foun

d,"

mea

ning

, we

have

n't

begu

n pr

oces

sing

the

ret

urn

and

it's

not

fou

nd i

n ou

r sy

stem

whe

n th

e ta

xpay

er a

sks.

An

unknow

n n

um

ber

of

inquir

ies

are

unsu

cces

sful

beca

use

taxp

ayer

s do

n't

wai

t th

e su

gges

ted

two-

wee

ks f

rom

whe

n th

ey f

ile

the

retu

rn t

o al

low

us

to b

egin

pro

cess

ing.

Tax

paye

r ex

pect

atio

ns

on p

roce

ssin

g d

on

't ch

ange

yea

r to

yea

r,

but

we

do h

ave

even

ts t

hat

affe

ct t

he s

tart

of

proc

essi

ng s

easo

n. T

his

last

rep

orti

ng p

erio

d, p

roce

ssin

g se

ason

sta

rted

sev

eral

wee

ks l

ate

rela

ted t

o t

he

feder

al g

over

nm

ent

shut

dow

n

in l

ate

2013

. In

addi

tion

, thi

s se

ason

had

sig

nifi

cant

web

and

mai

nten

ance

iss

ues.

Inc

reas

ed w

eeke

nd m

aint

enan

ce d

urin

g th

e he

ight

of

the

seas

on a

llow

ed t

axpay

ers

onto

the

web

, but

mad

e th

eir

atte

mpt

s un

succ

essf

ul

Pe r

cen

tage

of

cust

omer

ser

vice

rat

ings

of

"go

od"

or

"ex

cell

ent"

: 4

0% (

dow

n fr

om 8

0.4%

in

2013

). I

t’s

diff

icul

t to

tie

the

dra

mat

ic d

ecre

ase

in t

his

sub

-mea

sure

to a

ny

one

fact

or a

nd t

he e

xact

cau

se n

ot c

lear

(se

e In

cons

iste

nt D

ata

for

this

mea

sure

in

KP

M #

12..B

ut, th

is s

ub-m

easu

re i

ndic

ates

the

re i

s a

gener

al d

issa

tisf

acti

on w

ith D

OR

’s c

ust

om

er

serv

ice

from

tho

se w

ho r

espo

nd t

o ou

r su

rvey

whi

ch w

e ar

e fo

cuse

d on

add

ress

ing.

See

KP

M 1

2 fo

r m

ore

deta

iled

inf

orm

atio

n ab

out

this

mea

sure

.

4. H

OW

WE

CO

MP

AR

E

Com

para

ble

data

is

not

avai

labl

e.

5. F

AC

TO

RS

AF

FE

CT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S

See

com

men

ts i

n "H

ow

We

Are

Doi

ng"

sect

ion.

6. W

HA

T N

EE

DS

TO

BE

DO

NE

We

now

hav

e co

nsis

tent

sou

rces

for

the

dat

a th

at f

eeds

thi

s m

easu

re. W

e ne

ed t

o co

ntin

ue m

onit

orin

g th

e da

ta a

s w

e in

trod

uce

mor

e se

lf-h

elp

tool

s to

our

cust

omer

ser

vice

mod

el.

In a

ddit

ion

to a

ddin

g se

lf-h

elp

tool

s, t

here

are

a n

um

ber

of s

hort

and

lon

g-te

rm i

niti

ativ

es t

hat

DO

R s

houl

d pu

rsue

to

impr

ove

the

over

all

cust

omer

ser

vice

. Tho

se

init

iati

ves

are

deta

iled

in

KP

M 1

2.

7. A

BO

UT

TH

E D

AT

A

Rep

orti

ng c

ycle

is

the

Ore

gon

fisc

al y

ear.

Dur

ing t

his

rep

orti

ng p

erio

d th

e cu

stom

er s

ervi

ce s

urve

y da

ta w

as c

olle

cted

fro

m A

ugus

t 20

13 t

o Ju

ne 3

0, 2

014.

Our

IV

R n

ow

has

the

sta

ndar

d cu

stom

er s

ervi

ce K

PM

sur

vey

runn

ing

all

year

. C

all

wai

t ti

me

data

is

gath

ered

dir

ectl

y fr

om o

ur p

hone

sys

tem

. S

elf-

serv

ice Pag

e 40 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

149

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

fII

. KE

Y M

EA

SU

RE

AN

AL

YS

IS

succ

essf

ul l

ook

ups

are

mea

sure

d as

any

inq

uiry

fro

m o

ur p

hone

sys

tem

or

web

app

lica

tion

tha

t pr

ovid

es a

res

pons

e ot

her

than

"no

t fo

und"

.

Pag

e 41 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

150

III.

US

ING

PE

RF

OR

MA

NC

E D

AT

A

Age

ncy

Mis

sion

:W

e m

ake

tax

syst

ems

work

to

fund

the

pub

lic

serv

ices

tha

t pr

eser

ve a

nd e

nhan

ce t

he q

uali

ty o

f li

fe f

or a

ll c

itiz

ens.

RE

VE

NU

E, D

EP

AR

TM

EN

T o

f

503-

945-

8466

Alt

ern

ate

Ph

one:

Alt

ern

ate:

Jan

Hun

t

Kri

s K

autz

Con

tact

:50

3-94

5-82

13C

onta

ct P

hon

e:

Th

e fo

llow

ing

qu

esti

ons

ind

icat

e h

ow p

erfo

rman

ce m

easu

res

and

dat

a ar

e u

sed

for

man

agem

ent

and

acc

oun

tab

ilit

y p

urp

oses

.

* S

taff

: S

taff

are

inc

reas

ingl

y in

volv

ed i

n re

view

ing

our

agen

cy m

issi

on, v

isio

n an

d va

lues

, whi

ch a

re s

uppo

rted

by

som

e of

the

se K

ey P

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

res.

The

re i

s in

crea

sing

par

tici

pati

on a

nd i

nput

on

revi

ew a

nd r

eque

sts

for

mod

ifyi

ng a

nd/o

r ch

angi

ng m

easu

res.

1. I

NC

LU

SIV

ITY

* E

lect

ed O

ffic

ials

: E

lect

ed O

ffic

ials

rev

iew

the

per

form

ance

mea

sure

s as

par

t of

the

leg

isla

tive

pro

cess

.

* S

tak

ehol

der

s:

Sta

keho

lder

s ar

e co

nsul

ted

rega

rdin

g th

e m

easu

res

as a

ppro

pria

te.

* C

itiz

ens:

C

itiz

ens

revi

ew t

he p

erfo

rman

ce m

easu

res

on t

he d

epar

tmen

t's

Web

sit

e an

d su

bmit

que

stio

ns a

nd

com

men

ts.

2 M

AN

AG

ING

FO

R R

ES

UL

TS

Per

form

ance

mea

sure

s ar

e us

ed a

s ke

y in

dica

tors

of

the

agen

cy's

pro

gres

s to

war

d ac

hiev

emen

t of

its

lon

g-te

rm v

isio

n.

The

y ar

e al

so u

sed

as i

ndic

ator

s of

pro

gres

s m

ade

in p

roje

cted

eff

icie

ncy

gain

s as

a r

esul

t of

aut

omat

ion

. The

age

ncy

uses

addi

tion

al i

nter

nal

mea

sure

s an

d di

visi

on a

nd a

genc

y le

vel

dash

boar

ds t

o tr

ack

inte

rnal

ind

icat

ors

to a

ssis

t in

usi

ng

outp

ut d

ata

to m

ore

effe

ctiv

ely

man

age

to i

dent

ifie

d ou

tcom

es.

3 S

TA

FF

TR

AIN

ING

Var

ious

age

ncy

man

ager

s ha

ve p

revi

ousl

y, a

nd c

onti

nue

to a

tten

d ta

rget

ed t

rain

ing

clas

ses,

wit

h to

pics

rel

ated

to p

ubli

c se

ctor

per

form

ance

mea

sure

men

t an

d ha

ve b

roug

ht t

he k

now

ledg

e ga

ined

at

thos

e cl

asse

s ba

ck t

o th

e

agen

cy. I

n ad

diti

on,

man

ager

s ha

ve r

evie

wed

tra

inin

g an

d in

form

atio

n po

sted

on

the

Dep

artm

ent

of A

dmin

istr

atio

n

Web

site

. The

dep

artm

ent

has

begu

n of

feri

ng i

nter

nal

trai

ning

on

proc

ess

perf

orm

ance

met

rics

and

the

too

ls o

f qu

alit

y.

4 C

OM

MU

NIC

AT

ING

RE

SU

LT

S* S

taff

: S

taff

hav

e th

e ca

pabi

lity

to

revi

ew K

ey P

erfo

rman

ce M

easu

res

on t

he d

epar

tmen

t's

inte

rnal

Web

sit

e.

Man

ager

s ar

e en

gage

d in

mul

tipl

e le

vels

of

revi

ew o

f ea

ch u

pdat

ed A

nnua

l P

erfo

rman

ce P

rogr

ess

Rep

ort.

Bas

ed u

pon

thei

r re

view

s, w

ork

proc

esse

s m

ay b

e ch

ange

d or

pro

blem

s/tr

ends

ide

ntif

ied,

whi

ch a

re t

hen

addr

esse

d.

* E

lect

ed O

ffic

ials

: E

lect

ed O

ffic

ials

rev

iew

the

per

form

ance

mea

sure

s an

d ev

alua

te t

he d

epar

tmen

t's

effe

ctiv

enes

s

as p

art

of

the

depa

rtm

ent's

bud

get

proc

ess.

The

mea

sure

s ar

e al

so i

nclu

ded

in t

he A

genc

y B

usin

ess

Pla

n pr

ovid

ed t

o

Pag

e 42 o

f 43

9/30

/201

4

150-

800-

558

(Rev

. 12-

14)

151

the

legi

slat

ure

and

othe

r el

ecte

d of

fici

als.

* S

tak

eho

lder

s:

Sta

keho

lder

s re

view

the

mea

sure

s on

the

dep

artm

ent'

s ex

tern

al W

eb s

ite

and

may

ask

que

stio

ns o

r

mak

e su

gges

tion

s.

* C

itiz

ens:

C

itiz

ens

revi

ew t

he m

easu

res

on t

he d

epar

tmen

t's e

xter

nal

Web

sit

e an

d m

ay a

sk q

uest

ions

or

mak

e

sugg

esti

on

s.

Pag

e 43

of

439

/30

/201

4

2015 oregon department of revenue presentation to ways and … · 2020. 1. 22. · corporate income...

Documents