DEVELOP DISTRICTAND SCHOOL
DOCUMENTATION A. ALFORDKey Work
Process(1): Process Owner:
Work System OwnerEd Curry
Work System Enabling LeaderDane Theodore, Director
Priority Processes Owner Andrea Alford, Director
June 12, 2009
Revision 1
Develop District and School SecurityDocumentation
Process Improvements
R TE NC EI IP
R TE NC EI IPGOVERNOR’S
STERLING AWARDGOVERNOR’S
STERLING AWARD
00 72 00 72
REVISION LOG
SECTION NUMBER REVISION DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION
DEVELOP DISTRICTAND SCHOOL
DOCUMENTATION A. ALFORDKey Work
Process(1): Process Owner:
12
18
6/12/09
6/12/09
KWP1 PCS Update
EZ DMAIC 20 CHECKPOINT REVIEW
Process Owner:
Table of Contents1. Cover Sheet2. Table of Contents3. Security Internal and External Customers4. Macro Flow Chart - Manage District and School Security5. Key Work Process 1 Flow Chart - Develop District and Security Documentation6. DMAIC Lite Storyboard - Check Points 1-187. Priority Process Selection Matrix Form8. Key-In-Process Measures Determination System Form9. District & Security Requirements Matrix10. BPS Process Management System11. Macro Process Control System Form12. Key Work Process 1 Process Control Form13. Countermeasure Matrix14. Countermeasure Action Plan Matrix15. Action Plan Root Cause #116. Action Plan Root Cause #217. Key Work Process Indicator Data18. EZ DMAIC 20 Checkpoint Review
DEVELOP DISTRICTAND SCHOOL
DOCUMENTATION A. ALFORDKey Work
Process(1):
SECURITY INTERNAL CUSTOMERSSchool Board
SuperintendentArea SuperintendentsDistrict AdministrationSchool Administration
SECURITY EXTERNAL CUSTOMERSState of Florida
Florida Department of EducationLocal Governments
Local Law Enforcement AgenciesParents / Guardians
Students
A. ALFORDKey Work
Process (1): Process Owner:
Manage District and School Security
Documentation Development
WHO
STEPBPS SCHOOL
BOARD SCHOOL
LOCALLE
AGENCY
BPS SAFETY& SECURITY
MANAGE DISTRICT & SCHOOL SECURITY A. ALFORD
Key PriorityProcess (7): Process Owner:
FACILITIES SERVICES / ROBERT J. WIEBEL / ANDREA ALFORD 2/11/09
MANAGE DISTRICT & SCHOOL SECURITY
NEED ISMET
DEVELOP DISTRICT AND SCHOOL SECURITY DOCUMENTATION
P5 - EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS MET (% OF FACILITIES)
P13 - # CODES BROADCAST
P14 - # MEETINGS HELD
P11 - # ID BADGES ISSUED
P12 - LEVEL II BACKGROUND CHECK CYCLE TIME (Planned vs. Actual)
P10 - # BACKGROUND CHECKS COMPLETED
P8 - SCHOOLS WITH SRO (%)
P9 - # SECURITY ASSESSMENTS REQUESTED
P2 - # INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED PER DISTRICT & SCHOOL SITE
P3 - # EXPULSIONS PER MONTH
CONDUCT BACKGROUND SCREENING
MONITOR & COORDINATE DISTRICT &SCHOOL SITE SECURITY
BROADCAST INCIDENT CODES
INTERFACE WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES
P1 - # POLICIES, PROCEDURES, PLANS, TRAINING COURSES,
CHECKLISTS, MANUALS, SURVEYS, HANDBOOKS AND PAMPHLETS
DEVELOPED, REVIEWED, UPDATED AND PUBLISHED.
MANAGE SECURITY EQUIPMENT
PERFORM SECURITY INVESTIGATIONS
P4 - # EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPED,
REVIEWED & UPDATED
P7 - # TRAINED PERSONNEL PER COURSE
P6 - # TRAINING COURSES CONDUCTED
P15 - # OF Criminal SESIR REPORTS RECEIVED IN WRITING
P16 - SECURITY BEST PRACTICES (OPPOGA) SELF-ASSESSMENT
MILESTONES (Milestones Planned vs. Actual Accomplished)
P17 - # 5 STAR SELF- ASSESSMENT FINDINGS
MONITOR SESIR REPORTS
PERFORM 5 STAR SECURITY SELF-ASSESSMENT
Legend: KWP - Key Work ProcessOPPAGA - Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability SCIRM - School Critical Incident Response Manual SESIR - School Environmental Safety Incident Report
Safety & Security Deliverables: D1 - School Safety Plan D2 - School Safety Reports D3 - School Critical Incident Response Manual D4 - Employee, Volunteer, and Contractor Level II Background Checks D5 - Employee, Volunteer, and Contractor ID Badges
CONDUCT TRAINING
KWP 1
KWP 2
KWP 3
KWP 4
KWP 5
KWP 6
KWP 7
KWP 8
KWP 9
KWP 10
Q1 - COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AND SCHOOL BOARD REQUIREMENTS
Q2 - PREVENT SCHOOL VIOLENCE ( SESIR INCIDENT RATIO - # CRIMINAL INCIDENTS / STUDENT POPULATION)
Q3 - REDUCE SECURITY RISKS AND LIABILITY(# PLANNED SECURITY TRAINING SESSSIONS / # ACTUAL SECUIRYT TRAINING SESSIONS)
Q4 - IMPROVE SCHOOL - COMMUNITY RELATIONS ON SCHOOL SECURITY (# SITE OR COMMUNITY VISITS CONDUCTED / # SITE OR COMMUNITY VISITS PLANNED)
MANAGE
NEED
CONDUCT
CONDUCT
INTERFACE
DEVELOP
PERFORM
MONITOR &COORDINATE
BROADCAST
MONITOR
PERFORM
MANAGED
NEED
NEED ISMET
DEVELOPSAFETY AND SECURITY
DOCUMENTATION
UPDATESAFETY AND SECURITY
DOCUMENTATION
PUBLISHSAFETY AND SECURITY
DOCUMENTATION
P1.1 - # POLICIES, PROCEDURES, PLANS, TRAINING
COURSES, CHECKLISTS, MANUALS, SURVEYS,
HANDBOOKS AND PAMPHLETS DEVELOPED, REVIEWED,
UPDATED AND PUBLISHED.
Provide a safe and disciplined learning environment for students and staff that is free of violence, weapons, hazards, vandalism, and substance abuse.
?
?
ARE DOCUMENTATIONUPDATES NEEDED?
NO
YES
Legend: CPTED - Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design OPPAGA - Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability SCIRM - School Critical Incident Response Manual SESIR - School Environmental Safety Incident Report
WHO
STEP
Key WorkProcess (1): Process Owner:
BPS SCHOOLBOARD
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIONAND INSTRUCTIONAL
DEPARTMENTSDISTRICT AND SCHOOL
SECURITY
MANAGE DISTRICT AND SCHOOLSECURITY DOCUMENTATION
DEVELOPMENT A. ALFORD
NEED
QUESTION
DEVELOP
UPDATE
PUBLISH
MANAGED
Q1 - COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AND SCHOOL BOARD REQUIREMENTS
Q2 - PERSONNEL TRAINING RATIO (# TRAINED / # PLANNED TO BE TRAINED)
Q3 - 5 STAR COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
Q4 - SESIR INCIDENT RATIO (# INCIDENTS / STUDENT POPULATION
FACILITIES SERVICES / ROBERT J. WIEBEL & ANDREA ALFORD 1/24/09
DID THE SECURITY DEPARTMENTRECEIVE NOTIFICATION / INFORMATION
FROM FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL, SCHOOL BOARD OR OTHER SOURCE
THAT AFFECTS SECURITY DOCUMENTATION?
YES
NO
KWP1.2
KWP1.1
KWP1.3
Deliverables: D1 - OPPAGA REPORT D2 - SCIRM D3 - SESIR D4 - EVACUATION PLAN D5 - SAFETY PLAN D6 - DISTRICT HOMELAND SECURITY DIRECTIVE
NEED
NEED ISMET
DESIGN DOCUMENTATION
IDENTIFY AND ANALYSE
DOCUMENTATION NEEDS
Provide a safe and disciplined learning environment for students and staff that is free of violence, weapons, hazards, vandalism, and substance abuse.
LEGEND: CPTED - CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN OPPAGA - OFFICE OF PROGRAM POLICY ANALYSIS AND GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY SCIRM - SCHOOL CRITICAL INCIDENT RESPONSE MANUAL SESIR - SCHOOL ENVIRONMENTAL SAFETY INCIDENT REPORT
nWrite technical documentation based on the template and scope of work using the information gathered.
nTranslate technical terminology into plain English where appropriate.
nApply content format and style in accordance with relevant documentation standards and templates.
nSubmit technical documentation to appropriate person or department for review.
nGather and analyze feedback.
nIncorporate alterations into the technical documentation the technical documentation for technical and grammatical accuracy.
nCheck that the completed technical documentation meets client requirements and scope of work.
n Submit the technical documentation to appropriate person for approval.
n Prepare the technical documentation for publication and distribution utilizing appropriate channels.
P1.3 - NEW POLICIES, PROCEDURES, PLANS, TRAINING COURSES,
CHECKLISTS, MANUALS, SURVEYS, HANDBOOKS AND PAMPHLETS
DEVELOPED AND PUBLISHED.
P1.4 - NEW DOCUMENT DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT, EDITING AND
PUBLICATION SCHEDULE MILESTONES.
DEVELOP DOCUMENTATION
EVALUATE AND EDIT DOCUMENT
PREPARE DOCUMENTFOR PUBLICATION
n Identify documentation requirements.
n Interpret and evaluate documentation requirements and confirm details with the applicable departments.
n Investigate industry and documentation standards for requirements.
n Define and document the scope of work to be produced Consult with the client to validate and confirm the scope of work.
nIdentify information requirements with reference to layout and document structure.
nCreate document templates and style guides consistent with information requirements.
nConduct a review of the system in order to understand its functionality.
nExtract content that meets information requirements in accordance with relevant copyright restrictions.
nDevelop the structure of the technical documentation giving focus to the flow of information, style, tone and content format.
nValidate the technical documentation structure with the client.
?
?
YES
NOPRELIMINARY DRAFT COMPLETE?
FINAL DRAFT COMPLETE?
YES
NO
FACILITIES SERVICES / ROBERT J. WIEBEL / ANDREA ALFORD 1/27/09
WHO
STEP
Key WorkProcess (1.2): Process Owner:
BPS SCHOOLBOARD
DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVEAND INSTRUCTIONAL
DEPARTMENTSDISTRICT AND SCHOOL
SECURITY
DEVELOP SAFETY AND SECURITY DOCUMENTATION A. ALFORD
NEED
IDENTIFY&
ANALYZE
DESIGN
DEVELOP
EVALUATE
QUESTION
QUESTION
MANAGED
PREPARE
Q1 - COMPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL, STATE, LOCAL AND SCHOOL BOARD REQUIREMENTS
Q2 - PERSONNEL TRAINING RATIO (# TRAINED / # PLANNED TO BE TRAINED)
Q3 - 5 STAR COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW FOR SAFETY AND SECURITY DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION
Q4 - SESIR INCIDENT RATIO (# INCIDENTS / STUDENT POPULATION)
Q5 - CPTED REVIEW RATIO (# REVIEWS PERFORMED / # CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS)
Deliverables: D1 - OPPAGA REPORT D2 - SCIRM D3 - SESIR D4 - EVACUATION PLAN D5 - SAFETY PLAN D6 - DISTRICT HOMELAND SECURITY DIRECTIVE
ATTACHMENT A
Facilities Design DMAIC Lite 6/23/08 Page 3
INSTRUCTIONS: Please return your completed DMAIC Storyboard, along with your Process Control System (both flow chart and indicator information) and your completed Action Plan (see “Improve” checkpoint #10), via email to [email protected] and copy Steve Muzzy on all emails. Thank you, Bob Seemer, President & COO, Electronic Training Solutions, Inc. Priority Process Name: Manage District and School Security
Work System / Leader: Andrea Alford
Key Work Process (KWP) 1 DMAIC “Lite” Storyboard
DEFINE
1. Describe how the linkage between the process Q measures and the District’s KPIs (or strategic objective measures) was established and confirmed.
A. In order for the BPS District to achieve the 2008/2009 BPS “First in Nation” Strategic Plan, students, teachers, and support staff require a safe and secure learning and working environments in accordance with the F.S 1006.07 Florida Safe Passage Act and F.S. 1006.07(6) School Safety and Security Best Practices. In light of the need to provide a safe and secure learning and working environments, the District & School Security department has developed the following four (4) departmental objective measures:
i. Q1 – Comply with Federal, State, Local and School Board Requirements.
ii. Q2 – Prevent School Violence
iii. Q3 – Reduce Security Risks and Liability
iv. Q4 – Improve School-Community Relations on School Security Issues. \
B. See attached Requirement Relationship Matrix.
2. Explain which process Q measure(s) will be improved.
In order to identify the Q Measure to improve, a District and School Site Security Priority Process Selection Matrix and a Key-In-Process Measures Determination form were created. See attachments. After analyzing the data contained in each attachment, it was determined that Q Measure “Q1 – Comply with Federal, State, Local and School Board Requirements” will be improved by improving Key Work Process (KWP) 1 “Develop District and School Security Documentation”.
3. Develop a theme statement which will focus your process improvement efforts. The theme statement must be consistent with the measure in checkpoint #2, above.
Increase the completion rate of required security documentation from 83% to 100%.
ATTACHMENT A
Facilities Design DMAIC Lite 6/23/08 Page 4
DMAIC “Lite” Storyboard
MEASURE
4. List up to five (5) potential problem areas in this process and the associated P measure(s) for each.
A. Conflicting Priorities. P1
B. Poor Resource Planning. P1
C. Lack of department resources. P1
D. Lack of Senior Management Oversight. P1
5. Select the most significant problem or opportunity and develop a problem statement which answers the questions:
A. What? B. When? C. Gap between actual and targeted values?
Problem: The length of time it takes to develop and maintain District and School Security
documentation puts students and teaching, administration, and support staff at risk in the event of a critical incident.
Problem Statement: During a review of the School Critical Incident Response Manual (SCIRM) at the start of FY 08/08 School, it was noted that the SCIRM did not fulfill the requirements of the Florida Safe Passage Act, Board Policy 8405 and Federal Crisis Planning Guidelines for Schools and Communities.
Gap: A new comprehensive School Safety Plan is needed. With the addition of a new document, the document completion rate dropped from 100% to 83%.
(Hint: You may want to refer to the six sigma DMAIC course material, checkpoint #9 of the “Measure” step, as you develop your problem statement.)
ATTACHMENT A
Facilities Design DMAIC Lite 6/23/08 Page 5
DMAIC “Lite” Storyboard
ANALYZE
6. List up to five (5) potential causes of the selected problem from checkpoint #5 in the “Measure” step.
A. Timely Review of mandatory documents.
B. Reduced Training Budget.
C. Staff Limitations (Skill Set).
D. Reduced Collaboration Between, Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff.
7. List the root causes and describe the approach used to select them from among the others.
Root Causes Approach Used To Select Root Cause
A. Timely Review of mandatory documents. Team Consensus / Brainstorming
B. Reduced Training Budget. Team Consensus / Brainstorming
C. Staff Limitations (Skill Set) Team Consensus / Brainstorming
D. Reduced Collaboration Between, Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff.
Team Consensus / Brainstorming
ATTACHMENT A
Facilities Design DMAIC Lite 6/23/08 Page 6
DMAIC “Lite” Storyboard
IMPROVE
8. List the countermeasure(s) you considered for implementation for each selected root cause from the “Analyze” step.
A. Schedule document review and updates during summer break.
B. Develop document review schedule.
C. Increase staff training by attending off-site security / crisis planning seminars.
D. Perform departmental task analysis.
E. Identify alternate methods to communicate with Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff
F. Initiate local security outreach information sharing program.
G. Add additional staff.
9. Determine the “effectiveness x feasibility” score for each countermeasure, and note the highest scores.
Root Cause Effectiveness Feasibility Overall Action
A 5 5 25 Yes
B 5 5 25 Yes
C 5 1 5 No
D 5 5 25 Yes
E 5 5 25 Yes
F 5 5 25 Yes
G 5 1 5 No
(Hint: Refer to six sigma DMAIC course, checkpoint #18 of the “Improve” step.)
ATTACHMENT A
Facilities Design DMAIC Lite 6/23/08 Page 7
DMAIC “Lite” Storyboard
IMPROVE
10. Develop an action plan for each countermeasure to be implemented which shows the following: A. What (description of countermeasure) B. When (projected start and end dates) C. Who (accountable person) D. Which organizations need to support you E. Estimated cost to implement
See attached Countermeasure Action Plan Matrix.
(Remember: Email your action plan(s) with this completed DMAIC “Lite” Storyboard, per instructions on page 1.)
ATTACHMENT A
© ets 1992-2008 | All Rights Reserved FSS KWP1 DMAIC Lite Storyboard 2-12-09
DMAIC “Lite” Storyboard
CONTROL
11. Briefly explain how you know the root causes were reduced or eliminated.
Root Causes Reduction / Elimination Explanation
Timely Review of mandatory documents. When the review of security documents is conducted using document review task milestone schedules and the review cycle is shifted to summer.
Reduced Training Budget. When the District and School Security budget is increased to a level sufficient to start staff training.
Staff Limitations (Skill set) When the District and School Security budget is increased to a level sufficient to start staff training.
Reduced Collaboration Between, Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff.
After alternate methods of collaboration have been developed instead of attending safety, security and emergency / crisis management seminars and a local security outreach information sharing program has been developed and deployed.
12. Briefly explain how you know the problem was reduced.
When all security documentation, that do not have a mandatory review and approval cycle, are reviewed and approved two (2) weeks prior to the 1st Board meeting in September of each fiscal year.
13. Briefly explain how you know the theme measure was improved.
When all security documentation, that do not have a mandatory review and approval cycle, are reviewed and approved two (2) weeks prior to the 1st Board meeting in September of each fiscal year.
14. Explain how you will prevent this problem from recurring.
Add a document status agenda item on bi-weekly department meeting where the review and update of existing and the creation of new documents will be discussed.
15. Identify which other BPS locations should consider implementing your countermeasures.
Any department that has documents that must be reviewed on an annual cycle.
16. Identify what other BPS locations could learn from this project.
Facilities Environmental, Health, Safety and Code Compliance.
17. List the remaining problem areas in this process.
Budget shortfalls for security, emergency and crisis planning and management training.
18. List the key lessons learned from this process improvement.
Unless a structured approach is used to review documents in a timely manner, the review cycle time will extend well into the future putting students and teaching, administration, and support staff at risk in the event of a critical incident.
© ets 1992-2008 | All Rights Reserved FS&S KWP1 DMAIC Lite Storyboard 2-3-09
PRIORITY PROCESS SELECTION MATRIX FORM Selection Factor
Key Work Processes Importance x Gap = Point Score Priority
Rank Develop Safety & Security Documentation 4 3 12 2
Perform Security Investigations 5 1 5 5
Manage Security Equipment 4 2 8 4
Conduct Training 5 1 5 5
Monitor and Coordinate District & School Site Security 1 5 5 5
Conduct Background Screening 5 3 15 1
Broadcast Incident Codes 5 1 5 5
Interface with Law Enforcement Agencies 5 2 10 3
Monitor SESIR Reports 3 1 3 6
Perform 5 Star Security Self-Assessment 4 3 12 2
SCALE: 5 = Extreme 4 = High 3 = Moderate 2 = Low 1 = None
© ets 1992-2008 | All Rights Reserved FS&S KWP1 DMAIC Lite Storyboard 2-3-09
KEY IN-PROCESS MEASURES DETERMINATION FORM Outcome Measures In-Process Measures
1. # POLICIES, PROCEDURES, PLANS, TRAINING COURSES, CHECKLISTS, MANUALS, SURVEYS, HANDBOOKS AND PAMPHLETS DEVELOPED, REVIEWED & UPDATED (P1)
2. # EQUIPMENT REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPED, REVIEWED & UPDATED (P4)
3. SCHOOLS WITH SRO (%) (P8)
4. # LEVEL II BACKGROUND CHECKS COMPLETED (P10)
Q1 - Compliance With Federal, State, Local and School Board Requirements
5. # ID BADGES ISSUED (P11)
1. # TRAINING COURSES CONDUCTED (P6)
2. # TRAINED PERSONNEL PER COURSE (P7)
3. SCHOOLS WITH SRO (%) (P8)
4. # OF CRMINAL SESIR REPORTS RECEIVED IN WRITING (P15)
Q2 – Prevent School Violence
5. # INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED PER DISTRICT & SCHOOL SITE (P2)
1. # LEVEL II BACKGROUND CHECKS COMPLETED (P10)
2. # ID BADGES ISSUED (P11)
3. # CODES BROADCAST (P13)
4. SCHOOLS WITH SRO (%) (P8)
5. # POLICIES, PROCEDURES, PLANS, TRAINING COURSES, CHECKLISTS, MANUALS, SURVEYS, HANDBOOKS AND PAMPHLETS EVALUATED (P1)
Q3 – Reduce Security Risks & Liability
6. 5 STAR SELF-ASSESSMENT REPORT (P17)
1. SCHOOLS WITH SRO (%) (P8) Q4 – Improve School – Community Relations on School Safety Issues 2. 5 STAR SELF-ASSESSMENT REPORT (P17)
ATTACHMENT A
© ets 1992-2008 | All Rights Reserved FS&S KWP1 DMAIC Lite Storyboard 2-3-09
BPS Process Management System
Work System: District and School Security Leader: Andrea Alford
Owner Members Priority Processes Name Email Name Email
1.
2.
3. 1.
Distribute District & School Security Equipment
4.
1.
2.
3. 2. Develop Safety & Security Documentation
4.
1.
2.
3. 3. Conduct Training
4.
1.
2.
3. 4.
Monitor and Coordinate District & School Site Security
4.
1.
2.
3. 5. Conduct Background Screening
4.
1.
2.
3. 6.
Conduct District & School Security Equipment Audits
4.
ATTACHMENT A
© ets 1992-2008 | All Rights Reserved FS&S KWP1 DMAIC Lite Storyboard 2-3-09
1.
2.
3. 7. Broadcast Codes
4.
1.
2.
3. 8.
Monitor SESIR Reports Received In Writing
4.
1.
2.
3. 9. Perform 5 Star Self-Assessment
4.
Federal, State and / or School Board
Requirement Number Requirement Title
Q1 - Compliance with Federal, State, Local
and School Board Requirements
Q2 - Prevent School Violence
Q3 - Reduce Security Risks and Liability
Q4 - Improve School-Community Relations
on School Security Issues
F.S. 1006.07 Florida Safe Passage Act X X XF.S. 1006.07(6) Safety and Security Best Practices X X X X
F.S. 1012.32 Finger Printing X XF.S. 1012 465 Background Screening X X
BPS Policy 3121.01District Finger Printing & Background Check
Requirements X X
BPS Policy 4121Conditions for Employment & Re-
Employment of Support Staff X XBPS Policy 4121.01 CrIminal Background & Employment X X
BPS Policy 8405 School Safety X X XBPS Policy 8420 Emergency Evacuation of Schools XBPS Policy 8442 Reporting Accidents / Incidents X X X
SP 2.1.1 Conduct Safety and Security Audits X X X X
SP 2.1.2Review and Update School Safety &Security
Plans X X X XSP 2.1.5 Develop & Implement 5 StarComp Review X X X X
Legend: BPS = Brevard Public Schools - F.S. = Florida Statute - KPI = Key Performance Indicator - SP = Strategic Plan
District & School Security Requirement Relationship Matrix
Macro Process Control System – 3/20/09 Update Process Name: District and School Security Process Owner: Andrea Alford
Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, students, parents and the community
Critical Customer Requirements:
Current Sigma Level: TBD Process Purpose: Provide a secure and disciplined learning environment for students and staff that is free of violence, weapons, hazards, vandalism, and substance abuse.
Outcome Indicators: Q1 – Q4
Process and Quality Indicators Checking / Indicator Monitoring Process
Indicators Control Limits Data to Collect
Timeframe (Frequency) Responsibility
Quality Indicators Targets / Baseline
What is Checking Item or Indicator Calculation
When to Collect Data? Who will Check?
Contingency Plans / Misc. - Actions Required for Exceptions - Procedure References
P1 # Policies, Procedures, etc. Developed, Reviewed and Updated
Target: 120 D Baseline: 120 D
Number of district and school site safety and security
document reviews conducted Monthly Andrea Alford
Assign additional resources to complete the development, review and updating of documentations.
P2 # Investigations completed per District / School Site
Target: 24 Hrs. Baseline: 12 Hrs.
The response time for conducting a criminal
investigation Monthly Andrea Alford
Notify school and give them a new estimated time to complete the investigation.
P3 # Expulsions per District / School Site
Target: Zero Baseline: 15
Number of parents, guardians and / or students Monthly Andrea Alford
Conduct additional parent and student training. Participate in Open House. Publish expulsion articles in District and School Newsletters.
P4 # Equipment Requirements Developed, Reviewed and Updated
Target: 4 Baseline: 4
Develop and review / update district and school site security
equipment requirements. Monthly Andrea Alford
Assign additional resources to complete the development, review and updating of equipment requirements.
P5 # Equipment Requirements Achieved (% of District / School Sites
Target: 75% Baseline: 100%
Audit / Inventory the security equipment that has been issued
to District / School Sites Monthly Andrea Alford Work with school to replace damaged or
missing equipment.
P6 # Training Courses Conducted
Target: 4 Baseline: 4
Conduct District and School security training courses per
quarter Monthly Andrea Alford Contact the school to reschedule training
class.
P7 # Trained Personnel per Course
Target: 24 Baseline: 30
Collect training session attendance
Each Training Session Trainer
Increase communication about the importance to send teachers and staff to training course.
P8 # School With School Resource Officer (SRO)
Target: 100% Baseline: 82%
Track & count the number of schools with SRO Monthly Andrea Alford
Work with District Senior Managers and Local Law Enforcement agencies to place SRO on each campus.
And
Macro Process Control System – 3/20/09 Update Process Name: District and School Security Process Owner: Andrea Alford
Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, students, parents and the community
Critical Customer Requirements:
Current Sigma Level: TBD Process Purpose: Provide a secure and disciplined learning environment for students and staff that is free of violence, weapons, hazards, vandalism, and substance abuse.
Outcome Indicators: Q1 – Q4
Process and Quality Indicators Checking / Indicator Monitoring Process
Indicators Control Limits Data to Collect
Timeframe (Frequency) Responsibility
Quality Indicators Targets / Baseline
What is Checking Item or Indicator Calculation
When to Collect Data? Who will Check?
Contingency Plans / Misc. - Actions Required for Exceptions - Procedure References
P9 # of Security Assessments Requested
Target: Zero Baseline: None
Track & count the number of security assessments requested
by schools Monthly Andrea Alford Work with schools to reduce the need
for unplanned security assessments.
P10 # Background Checks Completed
Target: None Baseline: 615
Count the number of BCs completed Monthly Andrea Alford Review countermeasures and key work
indicators looking for hidden causes.
P11 # ID Badges Issued Target: None Baseline: 144
Track & count the number of ID badges issued Monthly Andrea Alford Contact applicant / company and request
justification for not getting badge made.
P12 Level II Background Cycle Time (Planned VS. Actual)
Target: 10% - 25% Reduction Baseline: 5D & 15D
Track the time it takes to complete a Level II BC Monthly Andrea Alford Review countermeasures and key work
indicators looking for hidden causes.
P13 # “Codes” Broadcast (Sent by Email & Phone)
Target: None Baseline: 6
Track & count the number of Codes broadcast Weekly Andrea Alford Use fax and / or radio.
P14 # Law Enforcement Meetings Held
Target: 3 per Month Baseline: 3
Track the number of community security-related
meetings held Monthly Andrea Alford Assign additional resources to schedule
and complete meetings as planned.
P15
# of Criminal SESIR Criminal Reports Received In Writing
Target: 100% Baseline: 75%
Track & count the number of SESIR Criminal Reports Monthly Andrea Alford Provide additional training to school
staff.
And
Macro Process Control System – 3/20/09 Update Process Name: District and School Security Process Owner: Andrea Alford
Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, students, parents and the community
Critical Customer Requirements:
Current Sigma Level: TBD Process Purpose: Provide a secure and disciplined learning environment for students and staff that is free of violence, weapons, hazards, vandalism, and substance abuse.
Outcome Indicators: Q1 – Q4
Process and Quality Indicators Checking / Indicator Monitoring Process
Indicators Control Limits Data to Collect
Timeframe (Frequency) Responsibility
Quality Indicators Targets / Baseline
What is Checking Item or Indicator Calculation
When to Collect Data? Who will Check?
Contingency Plans / Misc. - Actions Required for Exceptions - Procedure References
P16
Security Best Practices (OPPAGA) Self-Assessment Milestones
Target: 4 Mo. Baseline: 4 Mo.
Track the completion of the milestones required to
complete the Safety & Security Best Practices Audit
(OPPAGA)
Monthly Andrea Alford Assign additional resources to complete the self-assessment in a timely manner.
P17 # 5 Star Self-Assessment Findings
Target: Zero Baseline: Zero
Number of Self-Assessment findings that cause corrective
action reported to Law Enforcement
Annual Andrea Alford Work with District Directors and Managers to close security gaps exposed by self-assessment.
Q1 Compliance with Federal, State, Local and School
Board Requirements
Target: 100% Baseline: 82%
Track the number of Federal, State and Local safety and
security laws, regulations and policies for District & School
Security Dept Compliance
Annual Andrea Alford
Refer to contingency plans and miscellaneous information above related to individual key work process indicators.
Q2 Prevent School Violence Target: ≤ 1 Baseline: 1.73%
Count & compare the actual number of criminal incidents
with the total student population and create a ratio.
Annual Andrea Alford
Refer to contingency plans and miscellaneous information above related to individual key work process indicators.
Q3 Reduce Security Risks and Liability
Target: 1 Baseline: 1
Count & compare the number of planned training sessions
with the number actually conducted and create a ratio.
Annual Andrea Alford
Refer to contingency plans and miscellaneous information above related to individual key work process indicators.
And
Macro Process Control System – 3/20/09 Update Process Name: District and School Security Process Owner: Andrea Alford
Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, students, parents and the community
Critical Customer Requirements:
Current Sigma Level: TBD Process Purpose: Provide a secure and disciplined learning environment for students and staff that is free of violence, weapons, hazards, vandalism, and substance abuse.
Outcome Indicators: Q1 – Q4
Process and Quality Indicators Checking / Indicator Monitoring Process
Indicators Control Limits Data to Collect
Timeframe (Frequency) Responsibility
Quality Indicators Targets / Baseline
What is Checking Item or Indicator Calculation
When to Collect Data? Who will Check?
Contingency Plans / Misc. - Actions Required for Exceptions - Procedure References
Q4 Improve School /
Community Relations On School Security
Target: 36 Baseline: 36 Roll up monthly totals for P14 Annual Andrea Alford
Refer to contingency plans and miscellaneous information above related to individual key work process indicators.
And
Key Work Process (KWP) 1 Process Control System Process Name: Manage District and School Security Documentation
Process Owner: Andrea Alford
Process Customer: BPS School Board, representing staff, students, parents and the community
Critical Customer Requirements:
Current Sigma Level: TBD Process Purpose: To develop / update security documentation in a timely manner. Outcome Indicators: Q1
Process and Quality Indicators Checking / Indicator Monitoring Process
Indicators Control Limits Data to Collect
Timeframe (Frequency) Responsibility
Quality Indicators Targets / Baseline
What is Checking Item or Indicator Calculation
When to Collect Data? Who will Check?
Contingency Plans / Misc. - Actions Required for Exceptions - Procedure References
P1.1.1 Existing Policies, Procedures, etc. Reviewed, Updated and Published.
Target: 120 D Baseline: 120 D
Cycle time to review, update and publish existing
documents. Monthly Andrea Alford
Assign additional resources to complete the development, review and updating of documentations.
P1.2
Existing Document Review, Update, and Publication Schedule Milestones.
Target: 100% Baseline: 50%
The percent of milestones completed on schedule. Monthly Andrea Alford
Assign additional resources to complete the development, review and updating of documentations.
P1.3 New Policies, Procedures, etc. Developed and Published.
Target: 120 D Baseline: 240 D
Cycle time to develop and publish new documents. Monthly Andrea Alford
Assign additional resources to complete the development, review and updating of documentations.
P1.4
New Document Development and Publication Schedule Milestones.
Target: 100% Baseline: 50%
The percent of milestones completed on schedule. Monthly Andrea Alford
Assign additional resources to complete the development, review and updating of documentations.
Q1 Compliance with Federal, State, Local and School
Board Requirements
Target: 100% Baseline: 71%
Track the number of Federal, State and Local safety and
security laws, regulations and policies for District & School
Security Dept Compliance
Annual Andrea Alford
Refer to contingency plans and miscellaneous information above related to individual key work process indicators.
And
Countermeasures Matrix ____________________________Countermeasures Matrix ____________________________
EFFECTIVENESS X FEASIBILITY = OVERALL ACTION
PROBLEMThe length of time it takes to develop and maintain District and School Security documentation puts students and teaching, administration, and support staff at risk in the event of a critical incident.
ROOT CAUSE
COUNTER-MEASURE
PRACTICALMETHODS
Timely review of mandatory documents.
Staff Limitations (Skill Set) and Under Training - Under Funding
Reduced Collaboration Between, Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff.
Move the document review cycle to
summer months.
Develop document review task milestone
Identify alternate methods to
communicate Between, Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior
Staff.
Develop local security outreach
information sharing program.
Increase staff training and
attendance to off-site seminars and training sessions. Increase training
budget.
Training plan to b e developed by department
Director
Management Decision
Schedule to be developed by security staff.
Developed by security staff.
Developed by security staff.
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
1
25
25
25
25
5
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Scale: 1 = Negligible 2= Somewhat 3= Moderate 4= Very 5 = Extreme
District & School Security KWP1
DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD – IMPROVE – CHECKPOINT 10
KWP1 Countermeasure Action Plans COUNTERMEASURE
PROJECTED START DATE
PROJECTED END DATE
ACCOUNTABLE PERSON
SUPPORT ORGANIZATION ESTIMATED COST
Develop Document Review Task Milestone Schedule
6/29/09 9/14/09 Andrea Alford None The cost of staff time to develop schedule
Identify alternate methods to communicate with Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff and initiate local security outreach information sharing program.
2/23/09 3/23/09 Andrea Alford Federal, State, and Local Law
Enforcement and Emergency
Management
The cost of staff time to develop alternate methods and to create the outreach program.
Date:
Owners:
06/29/09 07/06/09 07/13/09 07/20/09 07/27/09 08/03/09 08/10/09 08/17/09 08/24/09 08/31/09 09/07/09 09/14/09 Comments
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
WeeksNo. Task Accountable
Person
1
2
Conduct Document Kickoff Meeting
Review Documentation
Evaluate Documentation
3
4
Update Dcoumentation
KWP1 Action Plan - District and School Security
Root Cause #1:
Countermeasure:
Practical Method:
Andrea Alford
12-Feb-09Timely Review of Mandatory Documents
Develop Document Review Task Mielstone Schedule
Use department staff to review and update documents.
7 Board Approval
Prepare Documents for Publication5
6 Publish and Distribute Documents
Date:
Owners:
02/23/09 03/02/09 03/09/09 03/16/09 03/23/09 03/30/09 04/06/09 04/13/09 04/20/09 04/27/09 05/04/09 05/11/09 Comments
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start & Finish
Completed
Scheduled Start Task Ongoing Task >
Completed
6 Select Alternate Method(s)
Conduct Alernate Methods Brainstorming Session
WeeksNo. Task Accountable
Person
KWP1 Action Plan - District and School Security
Root Cause #2:
Countermeasure:
Practical Method:
Andrea Alford
12-Feb-09Reduced Collaboration Between, Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff
Use department staff to develop alternate methods of communication and to develop outreachprogram.
Document Alternate Methods Recommendation
Conduct Alernate Methods Brainstorming Session
Document Alternate Methods Recommendation
7 Start Using Alternate Methods to Communikcate
Identify alternate methods to communicate with Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff & Initiate local security outreach information sharing program.
3
4
5
1
2
Conduct Kickoff Meeting
MacroProcess: Process Owner: Document Title:
MACRO DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD
MACRO PCS
MACRO FLOWCHART
MACRO PRIORITY PROCESSSELECTION MATRIX FORM
MACRO KEY IN-PROCESSMEASURES DETERMINATION
SYSTEMS FORM
MACRO DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD
MACRO PRIORITY PROCESSSELECTION MATRIX FORM
KWP6 CONDUCTBACKGROUND SCREENING
FLOW CHART
KWP6 ACTION PLAN(s)
KWP6COUNTERMEASURE
MATRIX
KWP6 INDICATOR DATA
Note 1: May be required if flow chart has internal work processin addition to individual steps.
KWP1 DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD
KWP1 PRIORITY PROCESSSELECTION MATRIX FORM
KWP1 DEVELOP DISCTICT AND SCHOOL SECURITY
DOCUMENTATIONFLOW CHART
KWP1 ACTION PLAN(s)
KWP1COUNTERMEASURE
MATRIX
KWP1 INDICATOR DATA
Note 1
KWP10 DMAIC LITE STORYBOARD
KWP10 PRIORITY PROCESSSELECTION MATRIX FORM
KWP10 PERFORM 5-STAR SECURITYSELF-ASSESSMENT
FLOW CHART
KWP10 ACTION PLAN(s)
KWP10COUNTERMEASURE
MATRIX
KWP10 INDICATOR DATA
Note 1
Key Work Processes 1 - 10
1st DMAIC Lite Storyboard 2nd DMAIC Lite Storyboard 3rd DMAIC Lite Storyboard
A. ALFORDManage District and
School Security
Manage District and School Security
EEZZ DDMMAAIICC 2200 CCHHEECCKKPPOOIINNTTSS DDEEFFIINNEE MMEEAASSUURREE AANNAALLYYZZEE IIMMPPRROOVVEE CCOONNTTRROOLL
PPllaann DDoo CChheecckk AAcctt
EZDMAICSM is a registered Service Mark of ets Inc. ~ Copyright 2009, ets Inc. Page 1
Macro Process Name: Manage District and School Security Key Work Process: KWP1 – Develop District and School Security Documentation
Work System / Leader: Ed Curry Process Owner: Andrea Alford DMAIC Status: Improve Cycle: Yes Refine Cycle: No
DEFINE
1. The stakeholder and need were identified. Yes: X No: Rating: 5 Comment: Internal and external customers were identified.
2. An indicator measuring our performance in meeting the need was developed. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: An indicator to measure “Q3 – Reduce Security Risks and Liability” was developed. See checkpoint 3.
3. A theme statement consistent with the indicator was selected. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: Yes, the theme statement, “Increase the completion rate of required security documentation from 83% to 100%”, is consistent with that Q Measure “Q1 – Comply with Federal, State, Local and School Board Requirements” will be improved by improving Key Work Process (KWP) 1 “Develop District and School Security Documentation”.
Rating Legend:
5 = Checkpoint Fully Satisfied / 4 = Meets Most Criteria of Checkpoint / 3 = Meets Minimal Requirement of Checkpoint 2 = Checkpoint Somewhat/Partially Satisfied / 1 = Checkpoint Not Addressed
EEZZ DDMMAAIICC 2200 CCHHEECCKKPPOOIINNTTSS DDEEFFIINNEE MMEEAASSUURREE AANNAALLYYZZEE IIMMPPRROOVVEE CCOONNTTRROOLL
PPllaann DDoo CChheecckk AAcctt
EZDMAICSM is a registered Service Mark of ets Inc. ~ Copyright 2009, ets Inc. Page 2
MEASURE
4. The theme was stratified from various viewpoints and a significant problem was chosen. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: The theme was stratified into four problems: 1) Conflicting Priorities. P1, 2) Poor Resource Planning. P1, 3) Lack of department resources. P1, and 4) Lack of Senior Management Oversight. P1
Problems 1, 2 and 3 all contributed to the problem.
5. A target for improvement was established based on the stakeholder's need and its impact on the theme indicator was determined. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: A documentation completion target has been established at 100%.
6. A problem statement that addressed the gap between the actual and target values was developed. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: Actual and target gap values have been identified.
Document Completion Target is 100%.
Document Completion Gap is 17%
Rating Legend:
5 = Checkpoint Fully Satisfied / 4 = Meets Most Criteria of Checkpoint / 3 = Meets Minimal Requirement of Checkpoint 2 = Checkpoint Somewhat/Partially Satisfied / 1 = Checkpoint Not Addressed
EEZZ DDMMAAIICC 2200 CCHHEECCKKPPOOIINNTTSS DDEEFFIINNEE MMEEAASSUURREE AANNAALLYYZZEE IIMMPPRROOVVEE CCOONNTTRROOLL
PPllaann DDoo CChheecckk AAcctt
EZDMAICSM is a registered Service Mark of ets Inc. ~ Copyright 2009, ets Inc. Page 3
ANALYZE
7. Potential causes most likely to have the greatest impact on the problem were selected. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: Four root causes were selected: 1) Timely Review of mandatory documents, 2) Reduced Training Budget, 3) Staff Limitations (Skill Set), 4) Reduced Collaboration Between, Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff.
8. A relationship between the root causes and the problem was verified with data. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: The relationship between the root causes and the problem were verified by the review of departmental reports, meeting minutes, equipment and staffing records. 9. Root causes were selected and the impact of each root cause on the gap was
determined. Yes: No: Rating: 5
Comment: The impact, of the root causes, was determined. 1) Not developing a yearly mandatory document review cycle, 2) The reduction in training budgets, 3) Training budgets impact the skill levels of department staff, and 4) Conflicting priorities and poor departmental resource planning have all caused the gap. Rating Legend:
5 = Checkpoint Fully Satisfied / 4 = Meets Most Criteria of Checkpoint / 3 = Meets Minimal Requirement of Checkpoint 2 = Checkpoint Somewhat/Partially Satisfied / 1 = Checkpoint Not Addressed
EEZZ DDMMAAIICC 2200 CCHHEECCKKPPOOIINNTTSS DDEEFFIINNEE MMEEAASSUURREE AANNAALLYYZZEE IIMMPPRROOVVEE CCOONNTTRROOLL
PPllaann DDoo CChheecckk AAcctt
EZDMAICSM is a registered Service Mark of ets Inc. ~ Copyright 2009, ets Inc. Page 4
IMPROVE
10. Countermeasures were selected to address verified root causes. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: Seven countermeasures were developed.
1. Schedule document review and updates during summer break.
2. Develop document review schedule.
3. Increase staff training by attending off-site security / crisis planning seminars.
4. Perform departmental task analysis.
5. Identify alternate methods to communicate with Federal, State, Local and School District Security Senior Staff
6. Initiate local security outreach information sharing program.
7. Add additional staff. 11. The method for selecting the appropriate practical methods was clear and considered
effectiveness and feasibility. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: An effectiveness and feasibility matrix was used to select which countermeasures to deploy. Practical methods were developed for each counter measure by using a brainstorming session. See Macro Storyboard package for effectiveness and feasibility matrix. All countermeasures were deployed.
IMPROVE
12. The action plan reflected accountability, schedule, and cost, and was implemented. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: An overall action plan was developed that incorporated all countermeasures. A countermeasure action plan matrix was developed which shows deployment accountability, schedule and associated cost.
Rating Legend:
5 = Checkpoint Fully Satisfied / 4 = Meets Most Criteria of Checkpoint / 3 = Meets Minimal Requirement of Checkpoint 2 = Checkpoint Somewhat/Partially Satisfied / 1 = Checkpoint Not Addressed
EEZZ DDMMAAIICC 2200 CCHHEECCKKPPOOIINNTTSS DDEEFFIINNEE MMEEAASSUURREE AANNAALLYYZZEE IIMMPPRROOVVEE CCOONNTTRROOLL
PPllaann DDoo CChheecckk AAcctt
EZDMAICSM is a registered Service Mark of ets Inc. ~ Copyright 2009, ets Inc. Page 5
CONTROL
13. [Results] The effect of countermeasure on the root causes was demonstrated. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: As of June 12, 2009, the 1st draft of the District and School Safety Plan has been completed. The identified counter measures have had an impact on completing this draft by June 12th. There are a few open TBDs in the draft that will be resolved during the review cycle.
14. [Results] The effect of countermeasures on the problem was demonstrated. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: As of June 12, 2009, the 1st draft of the District and School Safety Plan has been completed. The identified counter measures have had an impact on the reduction of the cycle time required to complete the draft by June 12th. 15. [Results] The improvement target was achieved and causes of significant variation were
addressed. Yes: No: X Rating: 5
Comment: The completion of the draft District and School Safety Plan by June 12, 2009 positions the document completion within the 120 day target. It has been estimated that the District and School Safety Plan will be fully staffed and released by June 30, 2009. 16. [Results] The effect of countermeasures on the theme indicator representing the
stakeholder’s need was demonstrated. Yes: X No: Rating:
Comment: Theme Statement: “Increase the completion rate of required security documentation from 83% to 100%”. By using the identified countermeasures the completion rate of 71% will be improved to 85%.
CONTROL
17. [Standardization] A method was established to document, permanently change, and communicate the revised process or standard, and was implemented. Yes: No: X Rating: 5
Comment: The countermeasure method has been communicated verbally to all District and School Security staff. The countermeasure method has been documented to permanently change and communicate the revised process. 18. [Standardization] Specific areas for replication were identified, and an action plan was
developed to promote organizational learning. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
Comment: This checkpoint was analyzed. The countermeasure can be replicated to other document development and update process.
CONTROL
19. [Future Plans] Any remaining problems of the theme were addressed. Yes: X No: Rating: 5
EEZZ DDMMAAIICC 2200 CCHHEECCKKPPOOIINNTTSS DDEEFFIINNEE MMEEAASSUURREE AANNAALLYYZZEE IIMMPPRROOVVEE CCOONNTTRROOLL
PPllaann DDoo CChheecckk AAcctt
EZDMAICSM is a registered Service Mark of ets Inc. ~ Copyright 2009, ets Inc. Page 6
Comment: There are no remaining problems associated with the theme.
20. [Future Plans] Lessons learned, P-D-C-A of the ets Six Sigma DMAIC Method, and team growth were assessed and documented. Yes: X No: Rating: 3
Comment: The problem solving activity to improve the theme occurred over numerous brainstorming and data analysis sessions. Data was examined from varying view points to understand the problem and gap. Lessons learned were discussed but not documented at this time.
Rating Legend: 5 = Checkpoint Fully Satisfied / 4 = Meets Most Criteria of Checkpoint / 3 = Meets Minimal Requirement of Checkpoint 2 = Checkpoint Somewhat/Partially Satisfied / 1 = Checkpoint Not Addressed