CASE STUDY

THE CENTRAL EVALUATION UNIT

The Central Evaluation Unit (CEU) evaluate applications from academics for research grants. The CEUs objectives were to make decisions that were consistently in line with directory guide rules, but also to give as speedy a response as possible to applicants. All new applications are sent to the CEUs applications processing unit (CEUPU) by University Liaison Officers (ULOs) based at universities in SADEC. Any academic who wants to apply for a grant submits an application form (downloadable online) and other documentation through the local University Liaison Officer.

Veronique Fontan was the manager in charge of the SEUs application processing unit (CEUPU). She had been invited to make a presentation to senior colleagues about the reasons for the success of her unit. Her operation was well known for consistently meeting, and in many cases exceeding, its targets. Veronique set a day aside to collect some information about the activities of the CEUPU. She first reviewed her monthly management reports. These reports identified that the Unit dealt with about 200 300 applications per week (the Unit operated a five-day 35-hour week) and all the Units financial targets were being met and most operational performance criteria were being exceeded. The targets for turnaround of an application, from receipt of an application to the applicant being informed (excluding time spent waiting for additional information from ILOs) was 40 working days. The average time taken by the CEUPU was 36 working days. Accuracy had never been an issue as all files were thoroughly assessed to ensure that all the relevant and complete data were collected before the applications were processed. There was always plenty of work waiting for processing at each section. A cursory inspection of the sections in-trays revealed about 130 files in each, with just 2 exceptions. The receipt clerks tray had about 600 files in it and the checkers tray contained about 220 files. (See the process map below).

The processing of applications is a lengthy procedure requiring careful examination by checkers trained to make assessments. All applications arriving at the Unit are placed in an in-tray. The incoming application is then opened by one of the eight receipt clerks who will check that all the necessary forms have been included in the application. This is then placed in an in-tray pending collection by the coding staff. The two clerks with special responsibility for coding allocate a unique identifier to each application and code the information on the application into the information system. The application is then given a front sheet with the identifier in the top left corner

Process map for the Central Evaluation Centre Processing Unit (CEUPC)

3

secretaries

130 in tray

50% recycled due to incomplete information

8 receipt clerks

2 coding clerks

3 checkers

10 writers

auditors

2 dispatch clerks

200 /

week

600 in tray

130 in tray

220 in tray

130 in tray

130 in tray

. The files are then placed in a tray on the senior checkers secretarys desk. As a checker

becomes available, the senior secretary provides the next job in line to the checker. In the case of about half the applications, the checker returns the file to the checkers secretaries to request the collection of any information that is missing or additional information that is required. The secretaries then write to the applicant and return the file to the receipt clerks who place the additional information into the file as it arrives. Once the file is complete it is returned to the checkers for a decision on the grant application. The file is then taken to writers who prepare the acceptance or rejection documents. These documents are then sent, with the rest of the file, to the two dispatch clerks who complete the documents and mail them to the University Liaison Officers. Each section, have trays for incoming work. Files are taken from the bottom of the pile when someone becomes free to ensure that all documents are dealt with in strict order.

Veroniques confidence in her operation was somewhat eroded when she asked for comments from some University Liaison Officers staff (ULO). One ULO told her of frequent complaints about the delays over the processing of the applications and she felt there was a danger of potential applicants not bother applying. A second ULO complained that when he telephoned to ascertain the status of an application, the CEUPU staff did not seem to know where it was or how long it might be before a decision would be made.

Veronique reviewed the levels of applications over the last few years which revealed a decline of 5% last year and 2% the year before that. Veronique then spent about 10 minutes with four of the clerks. They said that their work was clear and routine, but their life was made difficult by ULOs who rang in expecting them to be able to tell them the status of an application they had submitted. It could take them hours, sometimes days, to find any individual file. Indeed, two of the receipt clerks now worked full-time on this activity. They also said that ULOs frequently complained that decision-making seemed to be unusually slow.

Veronique wondered whether, after all, she should agree to make the presentation.

Question 1: What is the input, the transformation process and the output of The Central Evaluation Unit?

Question 2: What type of process and what type of layout is used by The Central Evaluation Unit?

Question 3: Describe the three most important performance objectives of The Central Evaluation Unit and give reasons for selecting them as the most important Question 4: Discuss and explain the 4Vs of The Central Evaluation Unit and indicate the impact of each one of them on the design of the process.

Question 5. What was the average time taken by the CEUPU to process an application?

Question 6 What is the target time for CEUPU to process an application?

Question 7 Are the targets too high or too low? Question 8 Explain why it is difficult to locate an individual file