Req to check April 2012

CITY OF NEW ORLEANS

Reporting Period: April 1 – April 30th

Office of Performance & Accountability

ReqtoCheckSTAT

www.nola.gov/opa

http://www.nola.gov/opa

Context In order to deliver critical services for its citizens—such as constructing roads, rehabilitating homes, or picking up trash—the City often engages with private companies with specialized expertise. Because these and other services are so critical, Mayor Landrieu has made it a priority for vendors to be selected fairly, for contracts to be negotiated expeditiously and in the best interests of New Orleanians, and for vendors to be paid in a timely manner. What is ReqtoCheckStat? In order to improve the performance, accountability, and transparency of the City’s contracting system, Mayor Landrieu asked the Office of Performance and Accountability to design a performance management program for the entire process of contracting out services—from the requisition of budgeted funds to the issuance of check for services rendered. The result is ReqtoCheckStat, a performance management system where key City officials review data to assess how the City is meetings its goals and to hold departments accountable for their results. ReqtoCheckStat, which takes place monthly, are working meetings, intended to provoke constructive dialogue on what is working, what is not, and what the City needs to do to improve. Can I participate? This meetings are open to the public. Members of the public are invited to submit questions, which will be addressed by City officials.

Procurement Process Overview*

Requisition

•Department identifies need, and creates a requisition

•Requisition to use budgeted funds is approved by different offices

Procurement / DBE

•Approved requisition is reviewed by the Bureau of Purchasing

•Requisition is converted to Purchase Order (PO), Bid or Request for Proposal (RFP), depending upon scope of work and dollar amount

Contract Creation and

Routing

• Department routes contract materials through the system in order to obtain a contract

Contract Processing

and Approval

•Contract is reviewed for form, legality by Law Department

•CAO, City Attorney, Executive Counsel, Mayor/ Council review and approve contract

Payment

•Department reviews invoice and submits payment voucher to Accounts Payable (AP) to process payment

•Accounts Payable processes requests and makes payment

*See a more detailed process map on slide 30

Note : The reporting period covering the period 12.15.2011 to 1.31.2012 includes 1 ½ months of activity .

Requisition Approval

• Requisition Approved and Processed per Period

• Requisition Approval Queue by Approval Level

• Approval Time of Requisitions

Requisition Procurement

/ DBE


Routing

Contract Processing

and Approval Payment

Source : City of New Orleans Procurement System 5.1.2012

Requisition Procurement / DBE Contract Creation and Routing Contract Processing and Approval Payment

Approval Queue Continues to Decrease Reaching 66 Requisitions as of 4.30.2012

54 36

130

48 51 47

158

56

214

132

40 19

1 33

42

213

92

344

213

133

66

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

11.15.2011 12.15.2012 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2013

Finance

Budget

Department

Requisitions in Q to be Approved

11

1

6

1

0 5 10 15

2 Days or Less

3- 5 Days

6-10 Days

Over 10 Days

Age of Requisitions in Q Budget Office (Total 19)

213 133 66

1087 1167 943 1010

Ending Approval Q2.29.2012

New Requisitions Created Requisitions Approved Ending Approval Q3.31.2012

New Requisitions Created Requisitions Approved Ending Approval Q4.30.2012

Requisition Approval Queue General Fund for Period Ending 4.30.2012

Source : City of New Orleans Procurement System 5.1.2012


Number of Days to Approve Requisitions Meeting Target

3.4 3.0 2.1 2.45 1.88

0.6

0.6 0.7

1.0 0.55 0.57

0.6

3.99 3.76 3.10 3.00

2.45

1.21

0.0

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

11.15.2011 12.15.2012 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Average Number of Days to Approve Requisitions by Reporting Period (Budget Office and Department of Finance)

Finance(1 Working Day Target)

Budget(2 Working Day Target)

3 Working Day Target

Days to Approve 11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

1 or less 99% 99% 85% 99% 97% 96%

2 Days 1% 0% 7% 1% 2% 2%

3-5 Days 0% 1% 8% 0% 1% 2%

6-10 Days 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

11-15 Days 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Over 15 Days 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Finance20122011

Days to Approve 11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2013 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

2 or less 69% 61% 71% 53% 74% 96%

3 Days 4% 6% 9% 15% 8% 3%

4-5 Days 8% 12% 9% 25% 11% 1%

6-10 Days 7% 17% 10% 7% 6% 0%11-15 Days 7% 4% 1% 0% 1% 0%

Over 15 Days 5% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

20122011

Budget

Requisition to Procurement

• Processing of Requisition by Bureau of Purchasing

• Status of Requisitions Awaiting Buyer Response

• Time to Convert Requisition to PO

• Status of Requests for Proposals

• Status of Bids

• DBE Compliance (Preliminary Data)

Requisition Procurement

/ DBE


Routing

Contract Processing

and Approval Payment

Source : Obtained from the Bureau of Purchasing 5.1.2012 and 5.10.2012


The Number of Requisitions in Queue Waiting to be Processed by the Bureau of Purchasing Marginally Increased to 141

207 133 141

1167 1241 1010 1002

Ending Approval Q2.29.2012

New Requisitions Approved Requisitions Processed Ending Approval Q3.31.2012

New Requisitions Approved Requisitions Processed Ending Approval Q4.30.2012

Bureau of Purchasing Requisition Processing General Fund for Period Ending 4.30.2012

Status Count

Awaiting Contract 77

Completed 41

Processing Procurement 14

Waiting for Support 9

Grand Total 141

Status Count

Property Management 3

Econ. Development 2

Nord 1

Police 1

NOPD 1

DPW 1

Grand Total 9

Status of Reqs Awaiting Buyer Processing

4.30.2012

Waiting for Support 92% 93% 93% 89% 85%

7% 3% 4% 5% 7% 1% 4% 3% 6% 8%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

11.16.201112.15.2011

12.16.20111.31.2012

2.1.20122.29.2012

3.1.20123.31.2012

4.1.20124.30.2012

9 Days and Over 5 - 8 Days 0 -4 Days

The Bureau of Purchasing Processed Requisitions in Four Days or Less 85% of the Time (Average 1000 POs per month)

* 4.1.2012 -4.30.2012 Includes time Req. to PO & RFPs and Bids time Req. received to time send to OIG

Source : Bureau of Purchasing 5.1.2012 and 5.10.2012


* Includes cancelled RFPs for which proposals were not received

50% 67%

50% 50%

50% 33%

50% 43%

7%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1.31.2012 YTD (2.29.2012) YTD (3.31.2012) YTD (4.30.2012)

10 and Above

4 to 9

3 and below

Number of Proposals Received for RFPs Completed YTD 2012 (as of 4.30.2012). YTD 14 Completed

8

7 9*

5

4 8*

6

2 6

7

8 8

2

3

Ending RFP Q2.29.2012

RFP Requests RFP Completed/ Cancelled


RFP Requests RFP Completed/ Cancelled


The Number of RFPS in Process Decreased to 15 as of 4.30.2012

Waiting Committee Meeting

Waiting Opening Date

Total 21

Total 19

Waiting Information From Department / Other

Total 15

Department Brief Description

French Market Corp Multi-Use Parking Facility

Aviation Board Airport Pavement Index Study

Aviation Board Land Use

OCD Livable Neighborhoods Revitalized Corridors

OCD NOATF Legal Services Base Realignment

Police Survey

CAO Unemployment Management Personnel

Awaiting Committee Meeting

Department Brief Description Comment

OCD Online Auction Services N.O. East Awaiting Decision

Public Works Curbside Management & Enforcement Awaiting Decision

Waiting on Support / Response from Departments

Source : Bureau of Purchasing 5.1.2012 and 5.10.2012


* Includes cancelled Bids for which proposals were not received

Department Brief Description Comment

Homeland Security Access Alarm Services Award Recommendation

Homeland Security 2 Chem ID Devices Award Recommendation

Capital Hubbell Library Renovations Award Recommendation

Capital Temporary Stables Building Award Recommendation

Capital Joseph Bartholomew Maint. Bldg. Award Recommendation

Parks & Parkways 3rd & 4th District Tree Trim/ Removal Award Recommendation

Aviation Board Taxiway Golf Extension East Award Recommendation

Aviation Board Security Perimeter Fence replacement Award Recommendation

Awaiting on Department

57% 52% 50% 51%

43% 48% 47% 46%

3% 3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1.31.2012 YTD (2.29.2012) YTD (3.31.2012) YTD (4.40.2012)

10 andAbove

4 to 9

3 andbelow

Number of Proposals Received for Bids completed YTD 2012 (as of 4.30.2012). YTD 37 Completed

9 8 8

9

14 9*

18

3

13*

6

5

2

4

Ending Bid Q2.29.2012

Bid Requests Bids Completed/ Cancelled


Bid Requests Bids Completed/ Cancelled


The Number of Bids in Process Decreased to 18 as of 4.30.2012

Waiting Opening Date

Waiting Information From Department

Total 23 Total 28 Total 18

In Process Bureau of Purchasing/DBE


Source : Office of Supplier Diversity 5.16.2012

Cumulative YTD Percentage of DBE Award Value as of 4.30.2012

1,190,946

4,756,283

7,905,779

$15,245,959

-

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

16,000,000

18,000,000

January February March April

DBE Commitment for Bids/RFPS Opened and that Have Been Reviewed by the Office of Supplier Diversity

Cumulative Estimated Contract Value 35% Target DBE Award Value Committed

35% Target

39% YTD Actual

Bid/RFP Closed 2012 51DBE Complete

(Included in Summary as of 4/30/2012)21

Aviation Board

(Excluded Form Summary 4/30/2012)9

Processing (RFP Prices/ DBE Review / Recently Opened)

(Excluded From Summary 4/30/2012)17

Other (Re-Bid )

(Excluded From Summary 4/30/2012) 4 5 9

3 4

3

3

4 3

3

1

8 3.2 Days

15 5.6 Days

8 5.1 Days

7 4 Days

0

5

10

15

20

1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Over 10Days

4-10 Days

0-3 Days"Target"

Time to Process DBE Validation by the Office of Supplier Diversity 2012 Requests Completed (Working Days)

units

Contract Package Routing

• Average Contract Routing Time

Requisition Procurement /

DBE Contract Creation

and Routing

Contract Processing and

Approval Payment

Source : ECMS 5.1.2012


Average Time to Approve Contracts Meeting Target

1.9 1.8 2.3

1.1 0.6

0.6 0.5

0.4

0.4

0.5

0.7

0.3

0.6

0.4 0.9

0.7

0.7

0.8

0.5 0.5

4.0

3.3

4.1

2.4 2.5

-

0.50

1.00

1.50

2.00

2.50

3.00

3.50

4.00

4.50

12/15/2011 1/31/2012 2/29/2012 3/31/2012 4/30/2012

Average Approval Time of Contracts by Approval Level in Days (by period)

CAO (1 day target)

Civil Service (1day target)

Finance (1 daytarget)

Bureau ofPurchasing (1 daytarget)

4 day aggregate target

Routing Aggregate Time 4.9 Days 5.15.2011

1 4 Days

4 0 Days

1 1 Days

1 9 Days

Purchasing

Finance

Civil Service

CAO

0 1 2 3 4 5

7 Contract Request are in Q as of 4.30.2012 Days to Approve 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012 Days to Approve 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

0-1 Days 90% 93% 91% 0-1 Days 92% 97% 93%

2- 3 Days 3% 7% 9% 2- 3 Days 8% 3% 7%

4-7 Days 7% 0% 0% 4-7 Days 0% 0% 0%

Over 8 Days 0% 0% 0% Over 8 Days 0% 0% 0%

Days to Approve 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012 Days to Approve 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

0-1 Days 97% 93% 93% 0-1 Days 62% 78% 88%

2- 3 Days 3% 7% 2% 2- 3 Days 18% 16% 9%

4-7 Days 0% 0% 5% 4-7 Days 10% 1% 3%

Over 8 Days 0% 0% 0% Over 8 Days 10% 5% 0%

Finance Distribution Approval

CAO Distribution Approval

Bureau of Purchasing Distribution Approval

Civil Service Distribution Approval

Contract Approval Process

• Contract Processing and Approval

Requisition Procurement /

DBE Contract Creation

and Routing


Approval Payment


Contracts: All Contracts Processed, Received and in Queue 5.15.2011 – 4.30.2012 (Legal Review, CAO, Vendor Signature, City Attorney, Executive Council, Mayor/City Council)

Source : Law Department and ECMS System 4.30.2012

152 155 157 161 154 154 151 133 109

170 188 183 212

112 109 76 74

112 108

40 47 90 93 81 99

39 63

141

80 114 96 111 116 123

94

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

5.15.2011 6.15.2011 7.15.2011 8.15.2011 9.15.2011 10.15.2011 11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

All Contracts Processed, Received and in Q at the End of the Reporting Period as of 4.30.2012 (in units)

216 Contracts as 3.15.2011 2011 2012

In Queue Received

Closed

3 2 4

-7 -3 -18 -24

61

18

-5

29

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

6.15.2011 7.15.2011 8.15.2011 9.15.2011 10.15.2011 11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Net Change in Contracts Queue

2012 2011

Increase Q Decrease Q


Contracts : All Contracts in Process by Period (Legal Review, CAO, City Attorney, Executive Counsel, Mayor/Council Approval)

Source : Contract Management System ECMS 4.30.2012

69 43

74 109 94

118 26

25

42 26 45

52

12 13

24 24 11

13

12

6

10 13 13

7

14 22

20 16 20

22

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Over 120 Days

91 - 120 Days

61 - 90 Days

31- 60 Days

0 - 30 Days

The Average Age of Contracts Awaiting Processing Decreased to 45 Days

Total 188 Average Days 46


216 Contracts 64 Average Days

3.15.2011





23 76

4 38 48 6 9 8

37 Days Since Entered for

Processing

23 Days Since Received by

The Law Department 34 Days

Since Received by CAO/Sent by Law

020406080

100120140160180

Manually RoutedEmergency

(Location NotSpecified)

Attorney Dp. City Att CAO Law Prepare forVendor

Vendor Sign Ordinance Executive Counsel Returned

Location and Average Age of Contracts in Process as of 4.30.2012

1Days Since Signed by the

Vendor

17 Days Since Completed

by Attorney

4 Days Since Reviewed

CAO

152 Days Since Submitted for

Legal Review

78 Days Signed Vendor /Approved CAO


Source : : Contract Management System ECMS 4.30.2012

Contracts : All Contracts Executed by Period (Legal Review, CAO, City Attorney, Executive Counsel, Mayor/Council Approval)

30% 41% 33% 42% 34%

70% 59% 34% 28% 34%

16% 10% 12% 11% 6% 9% 6% 14% 9%

60

39

56 62 58

51

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Over 120 Days

91-120 Days

61-90 Days

31-60 Days

0-30 Days

The Average Time to Close Contracts During the Period Decrease to 51 Days from 58 Days. 28% of Contracts Were Closed in 30 Days or Less (80% Target)

66 Days 3.15.2011

28%

46%

18% 2%

6%

66

21

2 0 5

16 6

010203040506070

Manually RoutedEmergency

(Location Not Specified)

Legal Review D. City Att CAO To Send Vendor From Vendor Executive Con.

Average Days to Process Contracts Completed During the Period 4.1.2012 - 4.30.2012 (by Stage)

ECMS

2012 2013

Department / Agency Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

AVIATION 2 1 1 1 7 3 2 10 2 1

BLIGHT & REVITALIZATION 1 1 1 1 1 1

CANAL STREET DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 1 1

CAO 4 12 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 1 1 1

CAPITAL PROJECT 1 4 16 6 5 8 5 3 2 9 6 15 16 6 2 7 1 1

City Council 6 1

CITY PLANNING 1

CIVIL SERVICE 1 5 1 1

COUNCIL UTILITY REGULATORY OFFICE' 1 1 6

DEFENSE BASE CLOSURE AND REALIGNMENT COMMISSION (BRAC) 1 1

DEPUTY MAYORS' & ASSISTANTS 1

DISASTER CDBG UNIT 1 1 2 4 1 4 5 3 1 1 1

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1 1 1 3 1 1

FACILITIES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 5 3 3 1 1 1 4 1 1 2 2 2

FINANCE 1 1 2 2 1 1 1

FIRE DEPARTMENT 2 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

HEALTH DEPARTMENT 1 15 2 1 2 2 4 3 11 8 4 1 3 4 1 1

HISTORIC DISTRICT LANDMARK COMMISSION (HDLC)

HOMELAND SECURITY 1 1 4 1 3 5 14 3 3 6 5 3 4 1 1 3

HOMELAND SECURITY GRANTS APPROVAL 1 1 1

HUMAN RESOURCES 1

HUMAN SERVICES 2 1 1 1

LAW 1 3 3 2 9 5 3 4 7 4 10 4 5 1 1 1

MAYOR 2 1 2 2 2 8 6 1 2

MOSQUITO CONTROL BOARD 3

MUNICIPAL YACHT HARBOR MANAGEMENT CORPORATION(MYHMC) 1

NEIGHBORHOOD ENGAGEMENT OFFICE 1 1

NEIGHBORHOOD STABLIZATION 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 7 6 6

NEW ORLEANS BUILDING CORPORATION 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1

NORD RECREATION DEPARTMENT 2 1 3 2 6 1 1 3 6

OFFICE OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE COORDINATOR 1 2 4 1

OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL 1

OFFICE OF TECHNOLOGY & INNOVATION 1 3 1 1 1 2 1 4 2 1

PARKS & PARKWAYS 2 2 1 1 3 2

PIAZZA D'ITALIA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 1 1 1

POLICE DEPARTMENT 3 2 5 1 1 1 1 1 3 7

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 8 1 3 1 4 1

PUBLIC LIBRARY 1 1 1

PUBLIC WORKS 8 3 5 8 9 4 3 7 8 20 10 12 32 19 18 14 1

REGISTER OF VOTERS

RIVERGATE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 1

SAFETY & PERMITS 1 1

SANITATION DEPARTMENT 1 1 2 1 1 1

SERVE NOLA

Grand Total 26 45 40 27 42 41 17 37 43 79 63 103 93 82 65 37 8 3 2 1 6 1 4 4

New Tool To Review Contracts Expiring Every Month


Source : : Contract Management System ECMS 4.30.2012

Note: Each department is responsible for monitoring expiring contracts and making sure legacy contracts are renewed. This schedule should only be used as a guide.

The check: Accounts payable

• General Fund Payments

• Processing by Accounts Payable

• Payment from Invoice Date

• Capital and Grants Expenditure Payments

• Processing by Accounts Payable

• Payment from Invoice Date

• Detail Review (invoices in the pipeline)

• CDBG Invoice Payments

• DPW Payments

• DPW Revolver Payments

• Capital Projects Payments

• Capital Projects Revolver Payments

Requisition Procurement Contract Creation

and Routing


Approval Payment


Source :Accounts Payable and Office of Performance and Accountability. Collected 5.4.2012

The Percentage of General Fund (and Agency) Payments Processed in 7 Days or Less Decreased to 28%

56% 37%

20%

45% 45% 28%

23%

40%

48%

53% 54% 70%

12% 23% 30%

1% 1% 2% 9% 2% 1%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Working Days to Process General Funds and Agencies Check Payments by A/P Office for Periods Ending 11.15.2011 to 4.30.2012 (in %)

Sample 280 selections 95% confidence level +-5

Over 30 Days

16 - 30 Days

8-15 Days

7 Days or less

11 11 12

8 8 9

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Average Number of Days to Process Invoices by A/P Department (GF Expenditures)

Target 7 Days


The Percentage of General Fund (and agency) Payments in 30 Days or Less Decreased to 50% in the Current Period

50% 46% 34% 40%

56% 50%

28% 36% 42%

45% 33%

32%

17% 10% 16% 8% 8% 14%

5% 8% 8% 7% 3% 4%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Percentage of Payments in Days From Invoice Date to Payment for General Fund (or Agency) Expenditures for Periods Ending

11.15.2011 - 4.30.2012(in %) Sample 280 selections 95% confidence level +-5

Over 121 Days

61 - 120 Days

31 to 60 Days

30 Days or Less

45 48 52

48 40

44

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Average Number of Days to Pay Invoices From Invoice Date (GF Expenditures)

Target 30 Days


The Percentage of Capital and Grant Payments Processed in 7 Days or Less Remains Over the 90% Target


98% 97% 95% 92% 99% 98%

3% 4% 5% 1% 2% 2%

1% 1% 2%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Working Days to Process Capital Expenditures and Grants Check Payments by A/P Office for Periods Ending 11.15.2011 - 4.30.2012(in %)

Sample 100 selections 90% confidence level +--10

Over 30 Days

16 - 30 Days

8-15 Days

7 Days or less

2 2 3

4

2 2

0123456789

10

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Average Number of Days to Process Invoices by A/P Department (Capital and Grant Expenditures)

Target 7 Days



The Percentage of Capital and Grant Payments Made in 30 days or Less from Invoice Date Increased to 58%, from 56% in the Prior Period

53% 49% 52% 49% 56% 58%

25% 29% 26% 32% 29% 18%

14% 8% 15% 14% 10% 12%

8% 15% 7% 6% 5% 12%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Percentage of Payments in Days From Invoice Date to Payment for Capital and Grant Expenditures for Periods Ending

11.15.2011 - 4.30.2012(in %) Sample 100 selections 90% confidence level +-10

Over 121 Days

61 - 120 Days

31 to 60 Days

30 Days or Less

50 57

51 47 47 44

-

10

20

30

40

50

60

11.15.2011 12.15.2011 1.31.2012 2.29.2012 3.31.2012 4.30.2012

Average Number of Days to Pay Invoices From Invoice Date (Capital and Grant Expenditures)

Target 45 Days


(**)Represents the percentage of payments over 60 days, from invoice date, for the specific department.

Sample Results Payments Vouched Period 4.1.2012 – 4.30.2012


Source :Accounts Payable 5.4.2012

Sample 280 Selections 95% Confidence level +-5 Sample 100 Selections 90% Confidence level +--10

(*)Through a sample selection of approximatelly 370 invoices each reporting period, the Office of Performance and Accountability asks

departments with 3 (General Fund and Agencies) or 2 (Capital and Grant Expenditures) payments exceeding a 60 day payment window (invoice

date to payment date) to attend the periodic ReqtoCheck meeting to discuss challenges preventing invoices from being paid in a timely fashion. .

4 4 4 4

3 3

2 2 2 2 2 2

1 1 1 1 1 1

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

Capital DPW OCD Aviation Health Human

Services

NORDC ITI EMD Mosquito

Control

Mayor's

Office

Park and

Parkways

Library NOPD Property

Man.

Law Homeland

Security

Registrar

# of Reporting Periods Departments/AgenciesHad Multiple Payments Over 60 Days Since January 2012

Payments over 60 Days During Most Recent Reporting Period

General Fund & Agencies

Department No Yes

Parks 6 7 13 54%

Health 5 3 8 38%

Mayor 13 7 20 35%

Human Services 6 3 9 33%

Mosquito 7 3 10 30%

NORDC 17 4 21 19%

EMS 11 2 13 15%

Law 13 2 15 13%

Library 18 2 20 10%

Aviation 39 3 42 7%

Other Departments 92 17 109 16%

Total 227 53 280

Over 60 DaysGrand Total

(**) %

Dep. Late

Capital & Grants

Department No Yes

Homeland Security 6 4 10 40%

Capital 14 5 19 26%

OCD 16 5 21 24%

DPW 15 4 19 21%

Health 12 2 14 14%

Other Departments 14 3 17 18%

Grand Total 77 23 100

Over 60 DaysGrand Total

(**) %

Dep. Late

Significant Improvement in CDBG Payments in the Pipeline. Only a Few Outliers in the Over 60 Days Categories

Information obtained from Quickbase ( OCD ) 5.1.2012 – 5.11.2012


Over 60

days

Over 30

days

45 20 47 74 29 62

43 58 41

53 47 5 22

14 5 4 9 9 9 4

146 158 151 145

0

50

100

150

200

Jan-12 Feb-12 Mar-12 Apr-12

Over12091-120

61-90

31-60

OCD Aging of Invoices in the Pipeline

Processing Stage <=30 31-60 61-90 91-120 Over 120 Total

PM to Send to Owning Department 0

Owning Department to Send to Accounting 3 3

Accounting to Approve 18 18

State DRU to Send to State Finance 21 28 49

State Finance to Pay City 32 13 1 2 48

Payment to Hit City's Bank 12 12

City to Cut Check 0 5 4 2 4 15

Grand Total 74 58 5 4 4 145

Reasons for Delay

Dispute with the vendor 3

Misplaced / Nor Processed Timely

With the State 31 1 2

Contract being processed

Other 2 (B) 2 (A)

Paid as of 5.10.2012 27 2 1

(A): 2 invoices for NORA (DR #12); CNO received pymt 4/18/12; still not paid due to amount rec'd being greater than DR amount

(B): 2 invoices for NORA; see explanation above (DR #11)

Age


Information obtained from Quickbase (DPW Department) 5.1.2012 – 5.11.2012

Over 60 days

Over 30 days

Significant Improvement in DPW Payments in the Pipeline. Invoices in the Over 60 Days Categories Were Reduced by More Than 50%

20 11 18 19

12 9 3 3

7

4 5

2

1 2 1 3

24

25 26 9

64

51 53

36

010203040506070


Over12091-120

61-90

31-60

DPW City: Aging of Invoices in the Pipeline by Period


PM to Approve 3 1 6 10

Department to Create Receiver 6 2 2 3 2 15

Department to Deliver to Finance 1 1

Finance to Cut Check 3 3

Finance to Release Check 6 1 7

Grand Total 19 3 2 3 9 36

Reasons for Delay

Dispute with the vendor

Goods received at a later date / Services

were not renderedInvoice was missplaced / not processed

timely

Contract being processed 1 2 7

Other* 2 2 1 2

Paid 5.10.2012

*7 Invoices in "Other" Category - 6 are awaiting reimbursement from SWB before the invoices can be processed.

1 is waiting for reimbursement from the State before the check can be released.

Age


Over 60 days

Significant Improvement in DPW Revolver Payments in the Pipeline. Invoices in the Over 60 Days Categories Were Reduced by More Than 50%

Over 30 days


5 10 1

4 4 6 4

3 0

3 2

3

34 33 23

9

46 41 38

19

0

10

20

30

40

50


Over 120

91-120

61-90

31-60

30

DPW Revolver: Aging of Invoices in the Pipeline by Period


PM to Approve 0

Fiscal to Receive Invoice 1 8 9

Department to Create Receiver 6 2 1 9

State to Send to Hancock 1 1


Reasons for Delay

Dispute with the vendor

Goods received at a later date / Services

were not rendered

Invoice missplaced / not processed timely

Contract being processed 3 9

Other** 6

Paid 5.10.2012

*6 Invoices in Other Category - All 6 are pending approval to use Revolver funding before they can be processed.

Note: 29 "Vendor Dispute" Invoices are not included in the aging above- same vendor, same project.

Working with Legal to resolve.

Age

Capital Projects Maintains Good Track Record of Paying Invoices on Time.



Over 60

days

Over 30

days

24 21 13

7

7 9

7

3

1 4

3

3

1

2

1

4

1

36 35

25

15

0

10

20

30

40


Over 120

91-120

61-90

31-60

30

Capital City: Aging of Invoices in the Pipeline by Period


Department to Create Receiver 2 1 3

Finance to Receive from Department 1 1

Finance to Cut Check 5 1 6

Finance to Release Check 2 1 1 1 5


Reasons for Delay

Dispute with the vendor 2

Goods received at a later date / Services were not

rendered

Invoice was missplaced / not processed timely


Other 2 1 1 1

Paid by 5.10.2012 1

Age

Capital Projects Maintains Good Track Record Paying Revolver Invoices on Time

Information obtained from Quickbase (Capital Projects Department ) 5.1.2012 – 5.11.2012


Over 60

days

Over 30

days


Department to Create Receiver 1 1

Finance to Receive from Department 1 1

Finance to Send to State 1 1

State to Send to Hancock 7 1 8


Reasons for Delay

Dispute with the vendor 1 1

Goods received at a later date / Services were not

rendered

Invoice was missplaced / not processed timely


Other 1

Paid by 5.10.2012

Age

16 15 17 8

8 2

5

1

2

2

4

0 1

3

2 1

2

33

21 24

11

05

10152025303540


Over 120

91-120

61-90

31-60

30

Capital Revolver: Aging of Invoices in the Pipeline by Period

Procurement Requisition

Contract Creation

and Routing

Contract

Processing

and Approval

Payment

Supplemental

Procurement

Evaluation Form Are you a city employee or a member of the public? On a scale 1-5, how useful was this meeting to you (1= least useful and 5= most useful)? What’s working? What’s not working?

Req to check April 2012

Economy & Finance

requisition requisition

approval contract

contract contract processing

requisition department

routing contract processing

approval payment source

requisition of budgeted

city attorney