Lean Six Sigma Project (ePEB Process)
Post on 10-Feb-2017
Define Tollgate Template
Lean Six SigmaReduce the process lead time for the Armys ePEB processLD22009MDEP(S): FAPMDr. Robert Vaul, MBBMs. Cheryl Moman, Project MentorSFC Christopher Brown, BBCOL Carl Johnson, PSMr. Walt Wood, RMProject Initiation Date: 25 Sep 12Define Tollgate Date: 4 Oct 12
Define11. Problem statement adequately describes the pain with the process.2. Goal statement has a quantifiable metric goal (e.g., reducing PLT from 75 days to 35 days or improving SQL from 1.1 to 3.1.3. Overall tool selection and proper usage (e.g., if the project involves PLT, the project should have a VSM and identify constraints and time traps; was the data checked for normality?; was a capability analysis done correctly?; was a fishbone, C&E, and FMEA done correctly?)
Problem statement/goal statementProject scope Business impact Project summaryDuplication review & replication/collaboration considerations SIPOC map Process mapsValue stream map Voice of the customer and voice of the processCommunication planOperational definitionsQuick win candidates Next Steps Storyboard Define tollgate checklistTollgate attestation statements DMAIC methodology Define
3Problem statement/goal statementProblem statementThe Director, US Army Physical Disability Agency, expects the process lead time (PLT) for the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB) process to take 84 calendar days and the current process is operating at 95 calendar days. This speed deficiency has existed since before 2007 across all three PEBs.This speed deficiency slows disability assessments and expedited delivery of benefits to Soldiers.Goal statementReduce the PLT by 12%, from 95 calendar days to 84 calendar days, NLT 31 Dec 12.
Define3An Opportunity or Problem Statement:Contains information that gives specificity to the issueDescribes the pain caused by the current problem Identifies the issuesWhat is occurring/happening?Example: Products are delivered late to our customersWhen did the problem start?Example: The problem has developed over the last six monthsWhere is the occurrence?Example: Our West Coast customers are primarily affected (roughly 75% of the total)Extent of the problemExample: 30 orders worth $790,000 in July
Project scope Scope-in The first step of the process is receipt of the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) findings referral for a fitness determination to the informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) by an HR Analyst using the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB) Incoming Worklist and the last step of the process is transfer of the completed case to HQ PDA using the ePEB To PDA Worklist. The following are included: Active Army, Army Reserve, and Army National Guard Soldiers. Scope-out The following are excluded: cases introduced before IDES replaced the Armys existing or legacy disability evaluation system, 26 Mar 12; ABCMR, NDR, PDCAPS, TDRL cases.4
Business impact5Cost savings Working estimate financial benefit worksheet initiated/posted in PS documents
AssumptionsNo controlling assumptions identifiedOperational benefitsReduce PLT by 12%Required data elements Power SteeringMDEP: FAPMPEG: MMAPE: 433709APN: MPA, OMAROC: 224Working Estimate Financial Benefits ($K)FY13FY14FY15FY16FY17FY18FY19FY20TotalNet cost avoidance0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Net cost savings0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0Sum of all financial benefits0.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.00.0
6Project summaryProblem: The Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency, expects the process lead time (PLT) for the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB) process to take 84 calendar days and the current process is operating at 95 calendar days. Scope: The first step of the process is receipt of the Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) findings referral for a fitness determination to the informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB) by an HR Analyst using the electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB) Incoming Worklist and the last step of the process is transfer of the completed case to HQ PDA using the ePEB To PDA Worklist.Goal: Reduce the PLT by 12%, from 95 calendar days to 84 calendar days.Problem/Goal StatementTollgate Review ScheduleBusiness ImpactCore Team
Financial benefit type 2 (cost savings) (FY13-20): $TBDK Financial benefit type 3 (cost avoidance) (FY13-20): $TBDK Financial benefit type 4 (operational): 12% decrease in PLTPS Col Carl JohnsonProject MentorMs. Cheryl MomanMBBDr. Robert Vaul Core Team Role% Contrib. LSS TrainingCOL Betty YarbroughTM10%BBcLTC Deb CisneyTM10%BBcCPT Rocquel GalvanTM20%BBcExtended TeamDr. Alan JanusziewiczSME05Not TrainedMr. Walt WoodRM05%Not TrainedMr. Fred SchumacherITXXBBTollgateScheduledRevised CompleteDefine:4 Oct 124 Oct 12Measure:25 Oct 12Analyze:8 Nov 12Improve:29 Nov 12Control:13 Dev 12
Duplication review I confirm that:The Armys LSS/CPI Database PowerSteering has been searched before launching the project team to avoid duplicative Army-level projects and to leverage similar project ideas/tools/methods for replication opportunities within my own project a search for the keyword PEB yielded 45 projects; none of which, duplicate this project (Dr. Vaul, 17 Sep 12). Projects of interest include: NG0749, LD003241, and LD00338.DoDs LSS/CPI Database DEPMS (DoD Enterprise Performance Management System) has been searched before launching the project team to avoid duplicative projects and to leverage similar project ideas/tools/methods for replication opportunities within my own project a search for the keyword PEB yielded two projects; none of which, duplicate this project (Dr. Vaul, 17 Sep 12). This is not an Army joint-level collaboration project.7
SIPOC map (1 of 2)SuppliersInputsProcessOutputsCustomers
Case routed to sequential ePEB WorklistCase votedDA form 199/199-1DA form 5892DVA condition ratingDVA preliminary rating memoEmail (DA form 199)IPEB determinationIPEB ratingMemo signedRating reconsideration findingsRequest for disability ratingRequest for proposed rating from DRASVA ratings packetVTA data posted
10 USC 61Administrative and personnel documentsAdobe AcrobatAR 40-3AR 40-501AR 40-3AR 40-400AR 600-8-4AR 600-60AR 635-40Army Directive 2012-18AwardsCase appears in ePEB WorklistCase fileCheat sheetCOAD/COARDA form 199/199-1DA form 3349DA form 3947DA form 5889DA form 5892DA form 5893Developmental counselingDisability ratingDODD 1332.18DODI 1332.28DODI 1332.38DODI 1332.39 DVA preliminary rating memoePEBePEB adjudication screenePEB promptsePEB worklistIDES bookmarking requirementsIPR/IMRMEB documentationMedical evidenceMedical profileMedical recordMemo templateMicrosoft ExcelPEB documentationPerformance evidenceRADSRating memoRationale checklistROMRPAMRPASRationale checklistUCMJ actionsVA ratings packetVASRDDVAePEBePEB adjudication screenePEB Worklist ownersHR AnalystMEPNARSUMPEBPEBLOSAFESoldierVTAAdjudicatorDVAePEB Worklist ownerPEBPEBLOPhysicianPresiding OfficerSoldier
PEB intakes casePEBadjudicates casePEBtransferscase
9SIPOC map (2 of 2)VOC/VOPInput metricsProcess metricsOutput metricsCategoryVOC/VOPVOPStaffing levelPLTSpeedVOCVOCVOC/VOPVOPVOPVOPAccessibilityOpennessPoor/slow commsReview variationSQL% cases meeting timeliness goalsQualityVOPVOPProcess costNet savingsCost
Flow chart (1 of 5)Incoming Worklist
Vote 1 Worklist
Vote 2 Worklist
Vote 3 Worklist
Distribution WorklistGreen (CVA); Amber (NVA-R); Red (NVA)101. PEB Analystreviewcase2. PEB Supervisorreviewcase3. PEB Physicianadjudicatecase4. PEB PMOadjudicatecase5. PEB POadjudicatecase6. Unfit/Fit7. PEB Analystgenerate prelim memoUnfitFit9. PEB POsign prelim memo10. PEB Analystdistribute memoDisperse to PEBLO, Soldier and DRAS (VA)41. PEB Analystgenerate DAF 19942. PEB POsign DAF 19943. PEB Analystdistribute DAF 199Disperse to PEBLO and Soldier8. PEB Supervisorreviewprelim memo
Flow chart (2 of 5)VA Worklist
Vote 1 Worklist
Vote 2 Worklist
Vote 3 Worklist
Distribution WorklistGreen (CVA); Amber (NVA-R); Red (NVA)1111. DVAprovidedisability rating12. PEB Physicianadjudicatecase13. PEB PMOadjudicatecase14. PEB POadjudicatecase15. PEB Analystgenerate DAF 19917. PEB POsign DAF 19918. PEB Analystdistribute DAF 199Disperse to PEBLO and Soldier16. PEB Supervisorreviewprelim memo
Flow chart (3 of 5)PEBLO
To PDA Worklist
Distribution WorklistGreen (CVA); Amber (NVA-R); Red (NVA)1219a. PEBLO reviewDAF 19921. PEB AnalystreviewDAF199 election22. PEB Analystforwardcase19b. Election20. Soldier concur with findings20. Soldier concur with PEB/request VA reconsideration20. Soldier nonconcur w/PEB20. Soldier nonconurwith PEB and VAOrOrOr23. PEB Analystgenerate memo25. PEB POsign DAF 19926. PEB Analystdistribute memoDisperse to DVASee28. Formal board24. PEB Supervisorreviewmemo
Flow chart (4 of 5)VA Worklist
SoldierGreen (CVA); Amber (NVA-R); Red (NVA)1327. DVAprovide VA finding34. PEB AnalystgenerateDAF199-136. PEB POsign DAF 199-137. PEB Analystdistribute DAF 199-1Disperse to Legal Counsel, Soldier, and PEBLO29. Formal Boardfit to unfitdetermination28. Finding38a. Legal CounselreviewDAF 199-138b. Soldiersign DAF 199-135. PEB Supervisorreviewmemo29. Formal Board concur with PEB/request VA reconsiderationOr30. PEB Analystgenerate memo32. PEB POsign memoDisperse to DRAS (VA)31. PEB Supervisorreviewprelim memo33. PEB Analystdistribute DAF 1991119a1
Flow chart (5 of 5)Distribution Worklist
To PDA Worklist
Green (CVA); Amber (NVA-R); Red (NVA)1439a. PDA AnalystawaitSoldier signatureOr40. Termination
IDES solution description document15
IDES PEB phase
Top level flow mapCase sent to EPEBIn process and review Send to Vote 1Send to Vote 2Send to Typing for review and create prelim memoSend to Vote 3 & Signature
Send to PEBReview ElectionSoldier makes electionSend to DistroAdminDr/PMODr/PMOAdminAdminMTFMTFPOAdminSoldier appealsSend to VA HoldPull case from Soldier search when ratings are received from DRASAdminAdminApply VA Ratings in VA work listPMOSend for ElectionAdminSoldier agreesSend to PDAGenerate DA 199AdminSend to SignaturePO17
Value stream map18Value stream map cards are available at LD22009-D VSM
1919 VOC/VOPVOCKey Customer Issue(s)CCRWhat does the customer want from us? We need to identify the issue(s) that prevent us from satisfying our customers.We should summarize key issues and translate them into specific and measurable requirements List of all steps in sequenceLack of transparencyOpenness, accessibilityExplanation of what happens at each stepLack of transparencyOpenness, accessibilityTime range for each stepLack of transparencyOpenness, accessibilityAbility to obtain current day status of caseLack of transparencyOpenness, accessibilityPEBLO unable to answer questionsPEBLO training deficienciesScope-outPEBLO unable to keep me informedPEBLO workloadsScope-outPEB process takes too longStaffing level, caseload, step requirementsPLTVOPKey Process Issue(s)CPRWhat does the process want from us? We need to identify the issue(s) that prevent us from meeting strategic goals/missions.We should summarize key issues and translate them into specific and measurable requirements PEBs are understaffedStaffing level, TDA, hiring authorityPLT, Takt time/rateePEB process is too slowStaffing level, caseload, step requirementsPLTVarying application of review standardsStaff training, performance pressureSQLPEB takes too long to provide DA forms 199Staffing level, caseloadPLTSlow/poor communication from PEB to PEBLOTraining, performance pressure, policySQL
Define20Communication planAudienceMediaPurposeMessageOwnerFrequencyNotesCOL JohnsonFTFInformProject statusDr. VaulBi-weeklyMs. MomanFTFCoach/mentorOverall projectDr. Vaul As neededCOL YarbroughLTC CisneyFTFData collectionData analysisOverall projectDr. Vaul As neededMr. WoodFTFFinancial benefitsFinancial data entryLTC CisneyAs neededMr. SchumacherFTFCoordinationIT implicationsCOL YarbroughAs needed
21Operational definitions (1 of 3)Department of Veterans Affairs Book C Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD)Disabilities determined to be physically unfitting and compensable under DODI 1332.38 shall be assigned a percentage rating. The Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA) Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) is the standard for assigning percentage ratings.
Continuation on Active Duty (COAD)/Continuation on Active Reserve (COAR)Soldiers who have been determined unfit by the PDES may be COAD or in active reserve status (COAR) as an exception to policy UP AR 635-40.
Disability Rating Activity Site (DRAS) Location owned by the VA that performs the rating of conditions of Soldiers found unfit by the PEB. Upon completion, these ratings are returned to the PEB .
Expedited Disability Evaluation System (EDES)process designed to expedite a service member seriously injured in combat from military to veteran status, by waiving the standard Disability Evaluation System (DES), resulting in receipt of benefits in three to four months, compared to a recovery and standard DES process that would normally take much longer.
Electronic Physical Evaluation Board (ePEB)Electronic application residing on the Enterprise Content Management System (ECMS) that meshes with the electronic Medical Evaluation Board (eMEB) that moves all documents through the process digitally. All transactions are stored and retained in an electronic environment.
Formal Physical Evaluation Board (FPEB)A Soldier is entitled to a formal hearing if requested after informal consideration by a PEB. The Soldier may waive this right by concurring in the findings and recommendations of the informal board. If the Soldier is incompetent, the right to waive a formal hearing may be exercised by next-of-kin or legal counsel. After demanding a formal hearing, a Soldier may later withdraw the demand and accept the informal boards decision, in which case, the counsel will inform the PEB. The case will be forwarded to USAPDA. The Soldier must be counseled on the right todemand a formal board. If the Soldier demands a formal hearing, he or she is entitled to counsel as provided in paragraph 310d and h, AR 635-40.
Informal Physical Evaluation Board (IPEB)Each case is first considered by an informal PEB. Informal procedures reduce the overall time required to process a case through the disability evaluation system. An informal board must ensure that each case considered is complete and correct. The rapid processing intended by the use of informal...