Military Surface Deployment & Distribution Command Personal Property Forum 7 April 2011.

Military Surface Deployment& Distribution Command

Personal Property Forum

7 April 2011

Opening Remarks

2

Lt Col Derek OliverDeputy Chief of Staff

Personal Property Directorate

3

Agenda

• DP3 Update– Claims – BRAC – DPS Phase III– Volume Moves / One Time Only Requirements

• DPS Update

• Peak Season

• Mr. Mike Williams remarks

• Program Efficiency Review

4

Claims

5

Claims Analysis

Number of Claims to Shipments per BOSBranch of Service Shipment Total Claims Submitted Percentage

Air Force 121,163 12,345 10.19%

Army 164,358 14,748 8.97%

Coast Guard 9,855 1,122 11.39%

Marines 32,221 2,690 8.35%

Navy 69,529 5,532 7.96%

Grand Total 397,126 36,437 9.18%

• Total number of claims submitted

• Total number of shipments delivered complete

Data period is from DPS inception thru present (01 Nov 2008 – 21 Feb 2011)

6

Claims Analysis

Claims Satisfaction Percentages

Branch of Service Average ClaimsSatisfaction Score

Air Force 74.94%

Army 69.03%

Coast Guard 69.15%

Marines 70.820%

Navy 70.89%

Total Average 71.20%

• High number of claims open due to DPS Claims Module complexity• 10% Claim Satisfaction Score decrease (past 12 months)• Does not include Quick Claims, Non-temp Storage, or DPM

7

Claims Module

• Current Interface is not intuitive• Way Ahead

• Established a Claims Working Group − Military Claims Office, Industry Claims reps, SDDC, TC-AQ− Created mock up for ‘To Be’ claims module

• Working quick fixes for peak season– No fee quick fixes– Disclaimer language– Relocating the “Submit” button

• Ensure members review Claims Video on Move.mil prior to filing

8

Base Realignment and Closure

(BRAC)

9

Army BRAC Status

Outbound ImpactsPP-15-10: Fort Bragg to Eglin AFB840 Shipments, 1 July – 30 JunePP-02-11: Fort Bragg to Eglin AFB755 Shipments, 1 July – 30 September

Solicited Volume Moves Impacting BRAC Locations

Outbound & Inbound ImpactsPP-03-11: Fort Knox to Fort Benning546 Shipments, 5 March – 29 June

Inbound ImpactsPP-01-11: Fort McCoy to Fort Knox50 Shipments, 1 April – 31 JulyPP-04-11: Fort Stewart to Fort Bragg1,500 Shipments, 15 April – 29 July

Sites involved with the Army BRAC but are not Army BRAC locations (such as Eglin AFB, Fort McCoy, & Fort Stewart) have been involved throughout the process

SDDC is assisting with BRAC movements by:• Facilitating coordination sessions• Arranging for Volume Move extensions• Troubleshooting issues with stakeholders• Sharing knowledge capital• Remaining in constant contact with involved PPSOs• Staying abreast of BRAC activities and providing guidance• Forecasting key events of high volume and providing

direction for successful BRAC movements

10

DPS Phase III

1111

New shipment Markets and Code of Service to replace Direct Procurement Method (DPM) managed shipments.

Phase III Business Rules

Shipment Markets Domestic Small Shipments (dS2)

Shipment Code of ServiceIntra Country Moves (iCM)

Code of Service (COS) C

Non-Temporary Storage (NTS)

Requires FRN

12

Phase III Business Rules

Business Rules timeline

SDDC Finalize Draft Business

Rules/Submit to TRANSCOM J5/4

Service’s O-6 level Approves

Business Rules

31 Mar 2011 30 April 2011

TRANSCOM Finalizes

Business Rules

TBD

13

Next Steps•TRANSCOM delivers final Business Rules to JPMO

SDDC, TRANSCOM, and Services develop system requirements

TRANSCOM incorporate requirements into contract solicitation

TRANSCOM awards contract for Phase III capability

System Initiatives•Begin implementation of Phase III capability in DPS by FY13

Phase III Business Rules

14

Volume Moves and One-Time-Only (OTO)

15

Volume Moves/OTO

–Numbers: ~7,000 OTO shipments per year

~ 5,000 Volume Move shipments per year–Challenges with legacy programs and process

– Audits -Metrics -Not web based– Revisions -Interfaces

–Volume Move/OTO Capabilities / Improvements– Best Value Score -Metrics/Reporting

–Benefits to our Services customers

15

16

VM

in Production

May’11

Completed

VM Reqs

Nov’10

16

VM Testing

Completed

25 Mar 11

VM Testing

Started

14 Mar 11

Started

VM Reqs

Aug’10

OTO in Production

Oct’11

Completed

OTO Reqs.

Apr’11

OTO Testing

TBD

Started

OTO Reqs.

Nov’10

Volume Moves

OneTimeOnly

Moves

Volume Moves/OTO

17

Volume Moves

• Awarded on Best Value –vs- Low Cost• Allows for use by Multiple GBLOCs (75 mile radius of origin)• PPSO/SDDC set Minimum Tonnage• TSP places bid and Maximum Daily Capability• DPS continuity (No shipment refusals, blackouts allowed)• TSP bid must be lower than their rate on file• Weight –vs- Number Shipment Allocations• QA Actions Taken on all Markets regardless if VM or Standard• Greater Report Capability• Automated emails• Reduced Paperwork

17

18

One-Time-Only

– Create a new “OTO” Market– Encourage Greater Industry Participation, Minimize negative impact to

iHHG & iUB– Increased Quality Assurance Controls Utilizing DPS Software

– Best Value Score Functionality– Facilitate OTO Awards based on Best Value Score– Improved Customer Service, end to end visibility (PPSO, SDDC, TSP,

Customer)

– Streamline Program Management – Improved “Pre, During, and Post Shipment Capabilities– Leverage DPS PPCIG capability to reduce errors, ensure timely

movement– Automated emails, reduced paperwork

– Shipment Visibility– TSP Oversight (SFR, Agent(s), U.S. Flag Claims )– Improved Statistical Data and Tracking Options

18

19

PlaceholderDPS Update(Col Miller)

20

2011 Peak Season

2011 Peak Season

• Insufficient PPSO/Industry training on DP3–Webinars, policy/process updates

• Shipment distribution–Adjusted rate filing process/schedule

–No resetting of TDL • Capacity

–Code 2, PMSC, Blackout functionality, SIT management

• Expectation management of DOD customers–Counseling webinar–Moving Tips for Members

• Weekly telecon with industry/services • Monitoring peak season shipment awards

21

22

WebinarsTOPIC PRESENTATION DATES

400NG training 7/9 Dec 10Analytics 11/13 Jan 11Claims 18/20 Jan 11Accessorial Pamphlet 25/27 Jan 11DPS Edit Capabilities 1/3 Feb 11Storage in Transit (SIT) 8/10 Feb 11Short Fuse process 15/17 Feb 11Blackout functionality 22/24 Feb 1110 Things a TSP should know 1/3 Mar 1110 Things a PPSO should know 8/10 Mar 11DTR Part IV Overview 15/17 Mar 11Capacity 22/24 Mar 11Counseling Do’s and Don’ts 29/31 Mar 11OTO/SS Training TBD

23

Code 2

Definition:Movement of Domestic Household Goods in a Container from origin residence in CONUS to destination residence in CONUS. Use of commercial best practice containers is authorized. Shipments must always be containerized, will never be member packed, and cannot be left unsecured or outdoors.• Separate code of service in the Domestic Market• Awarded by the PPSO on separate TDL• Ability to black out separately from Code D• Loose load or crating of Code D still TSPs option• Portable Movement Storage Containers or lift vans authorized for

containerization under Code 2 • SDDC PAM 55-12

24

DP3 Quick Reference Guide

• DP3 Quick Reference Guide (Old Accessorial Pamphlet)– Example book– Origin/Destination Service Charge– Shuttle Service– Crating– Third Party Services

25

QA Data PointsClarifications to U.Q. coming

Pullback

Turn-backs

Missed pickups

2626

Notable Suspension TrendsSignificant market suspension increase during 2010 Peak Season

Significant channel suspension increase during May 2010 due to TSPs filing rates on Intrastate channels without authority

Starting in Peak Season 2010, significant Letters of Warning increases have occurred

QA Suspension/Warning

27

Pullbacks

Member cancelling the shipment comprises almost all pullbacks in DPSSome other reasons include:

Double BookingTSP or agent would not serviceOffer timed outShort Fuse ErrorOffered to TSP on “blackout date”Wrong shipment type

A higher number of pullbacks occur during Peak Season

Frequency of pullbacks to total shipments varies from month-to-moth from 2.70% to 4.66%. Pullbacks occur at a slightly higher frequency during Peak Season

Turnbacks

28

13

27

10

24

7 -

21

7 -

0.00%

0.10%

0.20%

0.30%

0.40%

0.50%

0.60%

0.70%

Series1

Percent of Turnbacks in DPS

Date # Turnbacks Total Shipments % of Turnbacks

13-26 Dec 24 10,766 0.22%

27 Dec – 9 Jan 19 4,227 0.45%

10 – 23 Jan 18 9,423 0.19%

24 Jan – 6 Feb 52 9,057 0.57%

7 – 20 Feb 14 8,078 0.17%

21 Feb – 6 Mar 17 8,529 0.20%

7 – 20 Mar 22 7,739 0.28%

29

Storage Inspection FeeNew Item Code 105J – Storage Inspection Fee

Industry requested discussion regarding code 105J

DPS has been updated to support this item

Inspection Fee is $3.03 CWT

On delivery from NTS, TSP receives unpacking fee

(see 400NG and IT11)

30

Short Fuse

Maximum 2 identified logins to accepts short fuse shipments per SCAC

Reduce stress on DPS

Level playing field

31

Alaska RatesExploring use of a Single Factor Rate between CONUS and Alaska (including intrastate) in FY 12

Similar to current international SFR

Transport options remain mode neutral (ocean or ALCAN Highway)

Review use of separate rate areas US8030400, US8050500, US8101000, US8190100

SDDC

32

Mr. Michael WilliamsDeputy to the Commander

Surface Deployment and Distribution Command

33

Customer Satisfaction Survey (CSS)

34

CSS Trend

2008Non-Peak Peak Non-Peak Peak Non-Peak

TOPS 19.05% 23.06% 28.87% 33.17% 43.34%DPS 2.46% 10.11% 14.35% 21.88% 29.31%

OVERALL 18.59% 20.00% 24.48% 25.38% 31.14%

2009 2010

NOTE: Monthly trends are explained through calculation techniques

CSS Response Rates have Increased

35

Survey Revision and Restructuring• Utilized Service Member comments/feedback• Conducted a full-spectrum analysis with the current survey

– Question relevancy– Intent– Question types and sequence– Weighting scales

• Formulated new and revised survey questions– Better align with the objectives of the DP3 program

• Possible name change Customer Satisfaction Survey instrument name– Total Move Evaluation (TME)– Customer Satisfaction Score (CSS)– Customer Satisfaction Evaluation (CSE)

CSS Rewrite and Name Change

36

SECTION I: ORIGIN PPSO/PPPO

1. How responsive was the Government’s origin Personal Property Office to your questions and concerns via phone and email?

>Excellent – answered all emails and phone calls - (60 pts) >Good - answered emails, never replied to phone calls or vice versa - (45 pts)

>Satisfactory - seldom answered or returned any emails or phone calls - (30 pts) >Poor - only answered one email or phone call - (15 pts)

>Unsat - never responded back to email or phone calls - (0 pts)

2. Were you offered the opportunity to be counseled by a PPSO? >Yes (20 pts) >No (0 pts)

3. Did the Government’s origin Personal Property Office communicate the importance of obtaining ETA login and password, completion of the Customer Satisfaction Survey and procedures for filing a claim?

>Excellent (20 pts) >Good (15 pts) >Satisfactory (10 pts) >Poor (5 pts) >Unsat (0 pts)

CSS – Potential Revised Questions

37

SECTION II: TSP

4. Would you recommend this moving company to a friend, family member or associate?>Definitely Recommend (40) >Would Recommend (30) >Might or Might Not Recommend (20)

>Would Not Recomment (10) >No-Definitely Not Recommend (0)

5. How well did the Transportation Service Provider contact and communicate with you prior to the pick-up of your personal property?

>Excellent (12) >Good (9) >Satisfactory (6) >Poor (3) >Unsat (0)

6. Evaluate the quality of packing services provided at origin by the packing crew (e.g., labeling, organized, packed well or carelessly):

>Excellent (12 pts) >Good (9 pts) >Satisfactory (6 pts) >Poor (3 pts) >Unsat (0 pts)

CSS – Potential Revised Questions

38

SECTION II: TSP (continued)

7. How well did the Transportation Service Provider meet the agreed upon date and time for delivery of your personal property?

>Excellent - Showed up on time (12) >Good – Only a couple hours late (9) >Satisfactory – Several hours late (6) >Poor – Extremely Late (3)

>Unsat - Showed up a day or more after agreed upon time (0) 

8. At the time of delivery, the Transportation Service Provider is required to give you AT LEAST four documents: Legible copy of 619-1, Bill of Lading, legible copy of Inventory, Notification of Loss and Damage at Delivery, and Notification of Loss and Damage after Delivery. How many of these documents did you receive?

>All four documents (12) >Three documents (9) >Two documents (6) >Only one document (3) >None (0)

9. Did the Transportation Service Provider exhibit professionalism (courtesy, attitude, etiquette, and demeanor) while handling your personal property?

>Excellent – Very professional (12) >Good – Somewhat professional (9) >Satisfactory – Could use a lot of improvement (6) >Very unprofessional (0)

CSS – Potential Revised Questions

39

SECTION III: DESTINATION PPSO/PPPO

10. Evaluate how satisfied you were with the destination Personal Property Office that may have assisted you in one or more of the following: Where and how to complete Customer Satisfaction Survey, communicating with the TSP regarding the status of your shipment and/or process to file a claim, etc. If you were not in contact with, or did not use the destination Personal Property Office, please answer Not Applicable.>Excellent (100 pts) >Good (75 pts) >Satisfactory (50 pts) >Poor (25 pts) >Unsat (0 pts) >N/A

CSS – Potential Revised

Questions

40

Program Efficiency Review

41

Program Review Goals

•Improve efficiencies

•Reduce complexity

•Standardization

•Incorporate best commercial processes

•Outdated business model

42

Program Review Goals

•CFAC Definition•Financial resource affiliations•Administrative personnel•Rate filing restrictions•Domestic definition•International definition

•TSP Definition•One Company = One Authority•Assets

•Equipment/Trucks•Packing Crews•Warehouse space

43

Program Review Goals

•Managed Authorities•Does not fit into DPS business model•Creates additional layer between TSP and customer

•Open Season•After new TSP definition/CFAC rules implemented•Fall of 2012 earliest projection

Wrap up

QUESTIONS?

44