Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-21-006 - Development Services Review Project Close-out ReportREPORT TO:Community & Infrastructure ServicesCommittee DATE OF MEETING:February 8, 2021 SUBMITTED BY:Justin Readman, General Manager,519-741-2200 ext. 7646 PREPARED BY:Margaret Love, Manager of Service Coordination & Improvement, 519-741-2200 ext. 7042 WARD(S) INVOLVED:All Ward(s) DATE OF REPORT:January 21, 2021 REPORT NO.:DSD-21-006 SUBJECT:Development Services Review Project Close-out Report RECOMMENDATION: ThatDSD-21-006, regarding Development Services Review Project Close-out Report, be received for information REPORT HIGHLIGHTS: The purposeof this report istopresentthe results of the development services review andformally close the project. The key findingof this report isthat the development services review has resultedin meaningful improvements as evidenced bystrengthening the City’scontinuous improvement culture, feedback from customers,andearly indicatorsof success. The financial implicationsarelimited to the existing approved capital budget allocated to the development services review. The remaining balance will be used on the on-going implementation of improvement projects. A detailed community engagementplanwas developedand executedover the lifecycle of the development services reviewusing a broad range of engagement tactics; details are summarized in this report. This report supports Great Customer Service. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Twoend-to-end Lean reviews wereundertaken between June and October 2019on public engagement processes related to development applications and site plan approvals processes. Thesereviewsresulted inthe creation ofa customer-informed workplan that included18Kaizens (i.e. Lean improvement projects/events)that began in October 2019 and concluded in December 2020. Over 111 staff were engaged in these reviews viaa bottom-up approach to problem-solvingand implementation.A detailed communications and engagement plan was developed in collaboration with the City’s Corporate Engagement Consultant and executed using a multi-pronged approach with touchpoints throughout the entire process. BothLean reviews and resulting improvements wererooted *** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. *** Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance. 8 - 1 inunderstanding the voices of our customersand finding ways to add more value to the City’sprocesses from thecustomer’s perspective.For public engagement, this involved understanding who we’re currently engaging, who we’re not,and where there are gaps so that equity-informed engagement plans can be created, and subsequently by implementing improvements that work to addressand removethe identified barriers.For the site plan process, this involved understanding a complex, multi-year approvals process from the perspective of the applicant and finding improvements that streamline the customer experience, ultimately resulting in a decrease in review and approvaltimelines through better communication,coordination,collaboration, and creative problem-solving. Early data shows that, on average,there has been a decrease of 60%in the time it takes to obtain an approval in principle. Satisfaction ratings of 85% and 90% have also been achieved for thenew pre-submission process and the new onsite certification process, respectively. A summary of all improvements is provided in the body of this report and in Attachments B and C. BACKGROUND: The purpose of the development services review wasto look at how development functions interact and are coordinated, and to identify if that coordination can be improved in a way that results in clearer accountability, stronger collaboration, and ultimately an even better customer experience. Fiveobjectives forthe reviewwere identified early in the process: 1.Establish a Shared Vision for Economic Growth, City Building, Sustainability, and Development Interests:With a variety of disciplines involved in the delivery of development services, representing functions with competing interests at times, it is important that staff are working towards common goals and understand how their contribution supports the results that we are trying to achieve within the city. Starting from existing strategies, plans and policies, staff will need to establish shared goals, objectives and principles to guide effective and consistent decision making. 2.Align Work Processes to Support the Development Services Vision: Selected development processes will be reviewed end-to-end on a prioritized basis using Lean methodologies to ensure a clear and consistent focus on delivering customer value, efficient services, and streamlined customer interactions. 3.Enhance Team Building, Collaboration and Creative Problem Solving:The most challenging development opportunities require all stakeholders to work together in trusting and respectful relationships that support the best results for the community. 4.Take a Coordinated Approach to Development: Support less experienced applicants to more easily navigate the process. Engage the community in a coordinated way to build a holistic vision for their neighbourhoods. Coordinate staff resources to reduce wait-times, hand-offs and work backlogs. 8 - 2 5.Communicate Clearly and Effectively:Applicants and members of the public should have a clear understanding of the requirements and expectations, the steps, timelines and costs involved, and how they can engage constructively with the City in the development process. Engagement with stakeholders was instrumental in identifying two priority areas for the review: the full site plan processandpublic engagement processeswithin development services. These two focus areas and the shared vision for development services were confirmed through Committee / Council in May 2019 (DSD-19-096). REPORT: This report serves asthe project close-outreportfor the development services review, which commenced in June 2019 and was completed December 2020. Key Milestones Completedas Part of the Development Services Review Key project milestones include: 183 internal/external stakeholders engaged (Oct-Nov 2018) Stakeholder Engagement Report prepared& shared(Jan 2019) Three staff visioning workshops (Nov 2018 – Jan 2019) Engage Kitchener staff page launched (Dec 2018) SWOT analysis & Benchmarking with other Municipalities (Jan 2019) ½ day strategy session with CLT (Jan 2019) Council Strategy Session (March 2019) Developer engagement sessions (March 2019) Community focus group sessions (March / April 2019) Shared vision and project scope finalized (May 2019) Committee and Council meetings (May 2019) Environmental scan (May 2019) Internal and external subject matter experts identified to participate in the detailed review (April/May 2019) Lean orientation and training forimprovementproject teams completed (June 2019) Lean review completed (June 2019 – Sept 2019) End to end process mapping of site plan and public engagement processes Current state process map complete Value-added tasks identified Data collection plans completed Data collected and analyzed Future state value stream map completed Pinch points identified Problem statements written Root causes identified 8 - 3 Problem statements and root causes confirmed by external stakeholders Joint internal/external solutions generation workshops (Oct 2019) Organization and prioritization of improvements focusing on high impact/low effort and high impact/high effort solutions (Oct 2019) 18 improvement projects identified and completed (Oct 2019 – Dec 2020) Implementation (ongoing) Data-driven monitoring and iterative improvements (ongoing) Develop new workplans bi-annually for continuous improvement initiatives in development services (ongoing) Strengthening the City’s Continuous ImprovementCulture Throughout the development services review, staffdevelopedautonomy in multi- disciplinary team-based problem-solving. Understanding the experiencesof their customers and working with their stakeholders to find mutually beneficial solutionswere central tothis review. The review has helped create a framework, knowledge base, and build momentum for continuous improvement initiatives in development services. Increasedemployee and stakeholder engagement in improvementprojects is not only an empowering approach but a necessary one, asprojects will have the highest chance of succeedingif they involve those directly impacted by the outcomes. In total,111 staff were directly engagedin completing 18 improvement (kaizen) projects. Further, 42% of staff volunteered to actively participateand lead the improvementsto full implementation.In total, eight staff received their Lean Green Beltcertification and 46staff received their Lean White Belt certification throughout the reviewperiod. Staff completed three replicatechange management surveysat the beginning, mid-point and end of the development services review.This was done to establish a baseline for change within our development servicesculture and then observe how the baseline changed throughout the lifecycle of the project.One of the greatest success stories that emerged fromthe development services review is the strengthening of aculturethat supports change, which is evidencedbythe survey results.Overall, eight of nine measures saw an increase in “yes” responsesand six of nine measures saw adecrease in “no” responsesbetweenthe second andthird surveys. Seven of nine measures in the third survey resulted in the highest “yes” responses out of all three surveys. Between 82% - 92% of staff responded that they areencouraged to come up with new or better ways of doing things, they feel safe and supported in continual learning and making suggestions for service improvements, they believe a continuous improvement culture is important and that the development servicesreview has the potential to result in meaningful change.The participant response rate also increased by 46% from the second to third survey. Three of nine measureswere identified as areas requiring further work in 2021: 1.29% of staff feel that they have the time to explore new or better ways of doing things within regular work hours(26% answered ‘neutral’). Moving forward, continuous improvement needs to be viewed as part of core service delivery. 8 - 4 2.55% of staff said that they believe failures are viewed as opportunities to learn (39% answered ‘neutral’). This needs to be explored further to better understand how to create safe spaces so that the neutral responses can shift to yes. 3.29% of staff feel that they are provided with the supports they need when change occurs (61%answered ‘neutral’). Again, this needs to be explored further to better understand where there are gaps and how to shift neutral responses to yes. A summary of the results is presented in Attachment A. Improvement Highlights Ahigh-level summary of improvements is providedbelow. Additional informationis includedin Attachment Bofthis report. Site Plan Process Stakeholders were asked whatwould make the review a success, andthe top fivegoals were: streamline processes(i.e.improve workflow, reduce rework, reduce lead time) (55%) establish a collaborative/coordinated approach to delivering services (50%) define and articulate processes and service levels (35%) define roles/responsibilities and ensure there is accountability (34%) improve communication (30%) To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have been made to the site plan processas part of the development services review: Applicants and staff are spending less time and money pushing paper. The introduction of BluebeamRevu softwarehas transformed digital submission, circulation, review, and coordinating/consolidating feedback for the development community. This improvement equipped staff for resilient service delivery during the pandemic, and staff were well-positioned for accelerated implementation. Conflicting comments from subject matter experts can now be eliminated: if applicants commit to submitting a complete first submission fortheclearance of site plan conditions, staff will commit to a joint comprehensive review session using Bluebeam. A 1-yearpilot Project Manager, Development Reviewposition to help customers navigate approvals processes, compliance with standards, and issuesresolution.In 2021, this dynamic role will serve as a single point of contact for applicants, while supporting a cross-section of high-profile/strategic applications as well as less experienced applicants. Process clarity will be provided through a new website redesign for site plan applications. Improvements include articulation of the full site plan process, clear actions, timelines,how-to format, and will serve as a model for other processes. All requirements for site plan approval have been consolidated with plain language descriptions, why it is required, links to detailed information, and the timing of the requirement. This will help create predictability for customers in their project planning 8 - 5 To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have been made to the site plan processas part of the development services review: and management.With a newly redesigned landing page already in place, website traffic is up 211% over the previous format. Using AMANDA data, anewdashboardsummarizeskey performance metricsfor processes and milestones in site plan approvalsprocesses, which will allow management to settargets for approvals,monitor progressand proactively respond to files that are not achieving targets, and develop and prioritize future improvement strategies. Customerswill be better able to coordinate their clearances throughaccess to a new daily status report, auto-generated and shared through the AMANDA public portal. This will provide applicants and their consultants with up-to-date information on the status of their approvals, including what has been cleared and what hasn’t, the number ofre-submissions to-date,whether the next step is with the application or the city, the contact info forthe subject matter expert overseeing each clearance, and estimated review timeframes. Increased accountability across allmanagers/directorsinvolved in the site plan process will be achieved through revisions to job descriptions and the creation of recurring site plan management meetings, which will focus on issues resolution, greater collaborationand process improvements. The pre-submission consultation processhas been reimaginedto createmore efficient and effective meetingsthat are informative and constructive, resulting in cleareroutcomesandnext steps for the submission of a complete application – 85% of customers are satisfied with the new process. Workflow distribution from onemanagerto ten staff has reduced wait time in the queuereviewing applications for completenessand increased the amount of time for the managerto focus on strategic items. A new streamlined urban design scorecard replaces the former submission requirement for an urban design report. This new fillable spreadsheet format will result in streamlining the review process by improving quality and completeness, minimizing review time/effort, greater collaboration, and a solutions-oriented approach to meeting urban design guidelines. It is anticipated that this will act as a model to streamlineadditional report-based requirements. Moving goal posts have been eliminated from the re-submission process by ensuring that a consistent staff reviewer is assigned in each area of expertise for their lifecycle of anapplication. Re-submissions are prioritized and reviewed within a 7.5-day window – a 25% reductionin leadtime. Issues are escalated early to management. To reduce the amount of incomplete submissions across the entire site plan process, 11 improvements were made to better articulate requirementsand streamline submissions processes. 90% of customers surveyed to-dateappreciate the new proactive securities follow-up and onsite certification process, helping them certify more quickly and get money back in their pocket. Refer to Attachment B for additional details. Public Engagement Processes 8 - 6 Staffheard specifically from community members that the following goalswere the most important focus areas for the review: transparency and access to information (54%) meaningful, inclusiveengagement (39%) closing the engagement loop (32%), and eliminate technical jargon (29%) To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have been made to public engagementprocesses as part of the development services review: Technical letters for notices of application, neighbourhood information meetings and public meetings were replaced with simplified, graphical postcards that are impactful and easy to understand, helping to remove barriers to understanding and engagement with the community. The postcards include a link to more detailed information, including studies and reports that are now accessible at the click of a button. Consistent withthe council-approved recommendations in the City’s 2017 Community Engagement Review, staff created anew engagement framework/toolkit with an easy to use 6-step guide and a suite of engagement tactics that can be customized, supplementing the existing townhall method with alternative approaches to engagement that are meaningful, inclusive and equitable. In an effort to reduce barriers to engagement and promote equity-informed engagement plans, a post-engagement survey is administered after each engagement event.The survey includes questions on satisfaction, comfort, convenience, areas for improvement and demographics. Outcomes of engagement are sharedwithengaged participantsthrough a new, visual What we Heard summary after each engagement event. The community is excited about the new user-friendly approach to access information on development applications using an intuitive and visual map-based interface, similar to a google map. With the click of a button, users can drill down to more detailed information, including access to all studies and reportsand information on engagement opportunities. To reduce barriers to engagement, staff are equipping community members through the creation of anew, easily digestiblePlanning 101 workshop which will be delivered3 times per year. Complementary to the Planning 101 content, a new video explainerseriesis currently under development to help clarify and communicate aspects of planning processes that often create roadblocks to understanding and meaningful engagement. Key topicsinclude why zoning and policies change, roles and responsibilities, and how the community canget involved. Interactive walking and bike routesare beingdeveloped and integrated into a digitalAppto create a fun and active way for community members to learnmore about architecture and cultural heritage within the City of Kitchener, with a planto build-out additionaltours in 2021. Ageneral volunteer engagement group was set-upon the City’s Better Impact platform as part of a 1-year pilot programin 2021.A total of 80deep engagers 8 - 7 To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have been made to public engagementprocesses as part of the development services review: have signed up to participate in focus groups, small group discussions, surveys, and one-on-one interviews to help inform decisions and provide feedback on future process improvements,the creation of new processes,policy development and significantprojects. Internal relationships have been leveragedthrough a partnership between the Neighbourhood Development Office and Development Services to pilot 1-2 resident-led placemaking projectsin 2021within corporate capital design projects. Through these pilots, a streamlined process willbe developed for broader implementation. Refer to Attachment Cfor additional details. Status of Improvements Table 1 summarizes the public engagement and site plan improvementsundertaken between October 2019 and December 2020and their corresponding implementation status. It is important to note that while there were 18 improvement projects undertaken, some resulted in more than one improvement. For more information refer to Attachments B and C. Table 1: Public Engagement and Site Plan Improvement Implementation Status Measuring the Success of Improvements Measures of success will be tracked by staff on an ongoing basisin an effort tounderstand how improvements are impacting processes. This information will be used by managers to make both iterative improvements andidentify additionalfocus areas forimprovement projects. Site Plan 8 - 8 Based on preliminary data from the site plan process, theaveragetimebetween pre- submission consultation and receiving approval-in-principlehasdecreased by 202 days to 133 days on average – equivalent to a 60% reduction. This further breaks down to 50 days on average to complete the pre-consultation process and 83 days from application submission to approvalin principle.Table 2 showsCity of Kitchenerpost-improvement averagetimelines for approval for key milestones in the site plan approval process. The footnotes provide a comparison to both current state and best practices inOntario municipalities.At 2.8 monthson average,Kitchener currently exceeds the best practice of 3-9 months to obtain approval in principle as well as the current state average of 18 months to obtain full site plan approval, which is on average16 months in Kitchener. Table 2:City of Kitchener Timelines Compared to Current State and Best Practices for Ontario Municipalities Surveys were also distributed to customersto obtain feedback on the new pre-submission andsite certification processesand the results show 85-90% satisfaction, respectively. Staff have begun to track thenumber of re-submissions required until approval is granted, which is directly relatedto the quality of submissions (i.e. incomplete applications, drawing and report submissions).This measure of success will be monitored closely in 2021, with a goal to achieve 3 or fewer attemptsprior to approval. Staff will also use the data available through a new dashboard to make informed decisions when setting approval targets and identifying opportunities for improvement. Public Engagement Focus groups were used throughout the review to test improvement concepts and ideas. Community members unanimously supported multi-pronged diverse engagement options, access to more information, hands-on and visualtools (e.g. map-based navigation to find development information),as well as communications that weresimplified through the use of visuals/graphicsand plain language.As staff and citizens saw value in using focus groupsas a way to test process improvement ideas, inform the creation of new processes, develop or amend new policies, or provide feedback on city-wide initiatives, a volunteer 8 - 9 group, opento any City of Kitchener resident, was created and continues to grow in interest and registrants (80and counting). While a detailedanalysis on the demographics of this volunteer group has not yet been undertaken, it appearsthat there is diversity in this growing group(based on a cursory review). Staff will work with the Equity, Diversity and Inclusion office to continue to develop a roster of diverse individuals that reflect Kitchener’s demographics. The overarchingmeasure of success for the public engagement reviewis whether or not a representative cross-section of the community is activelyengagedin the decisions that impact them. A post-engagement surveywas launched in late fall 2019 in the Transportation and Planning divisions. Early data suggeststhat staff are not hearing from a representative community voiceat community meetings. For example, based on 120 responsesfrom five events: o 94% of participants spoke English as a first language; o 82% were white or white European; and, o 76% said that both they and their parents were born in Canada. Participants also answeredquestions related to satisfaction, comfort and convenience. Prior to the pandemic staffhad an opportunity to run several meetings using an open house format. Responses showed that open houses scored higher in satisfaction, comfort and convenience when compared to the traditional townhall format. Over 50% of participants also wanted to see more online engagement opportunities.The post- engagement surveywas revised based on feedback and formally launched across the entire Development Services Department in September 2020. The survey will continue to be administered by all staff in Development Services on an on-going basisand,in collaboration with the City’s new equity, diversity and inclusion office, staff will workto identify and remove barriers usingan equity informed approach to engagement. The focus of the City’s public engagement review has been on increasing the quality of engagementso that barriers to engagement can be removed, resulting in an inclusive process. The focus was not on decreasing overall review and approval timeframes for the processes within which engagement takes place(this was out of scope).In parallel to the development services review, Regional municipalities have been undertaking a joint review of approval processes related to Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment applicationsin an effort to streamline approval timelines. Topics of discussion have included the timing and nature of public engagement and the impact on statutory timelines. This review is ongoingwith recommendations to be finalized and shared at a later date. Next Steps Key next steps are summarized below. Processes that did not form part of the formal development services review will be considered as part of an on-going body of continuous improvement work, which will be consideredandprioritizedby the General Manager of Development Servicestwo times per yearas part of regular business planning. It is important to note that, where appropriate, opportunities to replicate the process improvements identified as a result of these reviews should be identified and assessed. 8 - 10 Because the pandemic delayedthe development services review by 3 months, there are two improvements projects that will carryover to 2021:the development of a lecture series and a review of the feasibility of requiring a compositeand functionalutility planearly in thesite planreview/approval process. The public engagement review resultedin a variety of projects, includingbut not limited to: the development of a new community engagement frameworkfor the Planning Division; a new post engagement survey that includes demographic questionsas well as questions on satisfaction, comfort, convenience,and areas for improvement; increasing public circulationnotices to now include occupants and owners of residences; doubling the legislated circulation distancefor statutory notices; reimaginingnotification lettersinto a postcard format; and, reimagining property signs and newspaper notices.All improvements noted above meet or exceed statutory requirements for communication and public engagement.As implementation wasdelayed due to the pandemic,staff will continue implementation efforts, monitor the outcomes of these projects over the coming months, and bring forward a recommendation related to Council Policy MUN-PLA- 1095 - Public Participation in the Planning Process. The next review date for the policy is July 2021. CONCLUSION: The development services review hascreated a framework, knowledge base (i.e. through trained, Lean Green Belt-designated staffand kaizen team members),and momentum for an on-going body of continuous improvement workin development services. There is evidencethrough survey resultsthat a continuous improvement culturefrom the customer’s perspectivein development services has been strengthened throughout this project, which is arguably one of the most significant outcomes from the review. The strengthening of ourchange culture in development services is an asset thatwill help build buy-in, support and momentum for future change initiatives. STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT: This report supports Great Customer Service. It was also a 2019/2020 Business Plan project. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Capital Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budgetbeyond what was already approved in 2018. A balance has been carried over to 2021 for the implementation of improvement strategies. Operating Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: External stakeholders were informed of opportunities to engage in the development services review through information on Facebook, Twitter, the City’s website, Engage Kitchener, print form (cards at the front counters of engineering, planning, building, 8 - 11 transportation, economic development), Council-supported outreach, targeted invitations, emails to neighbourhood associations, and advisory committee meetings. Figure 1:Photosfrom a cross-section of engagement opportunitiesthroughout the review INFORM This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the council / committee meeting. A project presentation was delivered in Fall 2018 at Advisory Committee meetings (including a question and answer period). Project presentations were delivered in 2018and2019 at the AnnualWaterloo RegionalHome Builders Liaison Workshop. Project updates wereshared through a public facingEngage Kitchenerproject page and emailthroughout the course of the project. Engagement reports wereprepared and distributed, summarizing the outcomes of the March/April 2019 and October 2019 Community and Development Community engagement sessions. CONSULT 30 citizensthrough one-on-one interviews and an online survey 34 members of the development community through one-on-one interviews and an online survey Eight organizations (e.g. Region of Waterloo, utilities, government organizations) through interviews and an online survey Sevencommittees (Economic Development Advisory Committee, Committee of Adjustment, Cycling and Trails Advisory Committee, Downtown Action and Advisory Committee, Environmental Committee, Heritage Kitchener, Arts & Culture Advisory Committee) 8 - 12 The Engage Kitchener platform wasused to engage stakeholders across the life cycle of the projectand included the use of the survey tool and ideas boards.25 people engaged on Engage Kitchener through surveys, general comments and ideas boards. Attended Waterloo Regional Home Builders Association meetings throughout 2018, 2019, 2020and January2021to provide project updates and request feedback on site plan and public engagement improvements 3 community members provided feedback on initial concepts for a video explainer series (focus groups planned for 2021). COLLABORATE 26 community members participated in three visioning sessions in 2019 15 development community members participated in visioning sessions in 2019 24communityand development community members participatedin joint internal/external workshops to brainstorm solutions in 2019(80 participants, including staff). Here’s a summary of whatexternalparticipants sharedabout the engagement: o Mix of attendees resulting in great dialogue o Hearing opinions on all parts of the process – enjoyed moving to different problem statements o Understanding the frustrations of other stakeholders o Learned that we have some similar concerns and challenges o The amount of staff that attended was great – so many were present from all departments o Open conversation o Rapid ideation o The “everyone bring your ideas” approach o Good discussion and collaboration o The focus on solutions o Having facilitators to keep us on track o Transparency is key – more communication o Meeting new people, sharing ideas, positive atmosphere o A good way to cover issues in a short amount of time 40 community membersprovided feedback on threeengagement improvements: Story Map, Postcards/Property Signs, Engagement Framework – there was unanimous support for all three initiatives. 38 community participants joinedafocus groupand pilotpresentationin 2020 to reviewPlanning 101 Workshopcontent and provide recommendations and assist in refining the course content PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES: DSD-19-048– Council Strategy Session: Council Input on the Development Services Review (March 4, 2019) DSD-19-096– Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee: Development Services Review Update (May 13, 2019) CAO-17-001 – Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee:Community Engagement Review(January 9, 2017) MUN-PLA-1095: Public Participation in the Planning Process Policy (Approved July 12, 1996; next review date July 2021) 8 - 13 APPROVEDBY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A – Staff Change Survey Results Attachment B – Site Plan Improvement Project Highlights Attachment C – Public Engagement Improvement Project Highlights 8 - 14 ATTACHMENT A – Staff Change Survey Results Table 1.Staff change survey results Survey Questions Observations (Response Options: Yes, Neutral, No) (n=38) 82% of respondents answered “Yes” and 16% answered “Neutral” Question 1. In my work area, I am Between Surveys 2 & 3, 17% more respondents encouraged to come up with new or answered “Yes” (11.5% of respondents moved from better ways to do things “Neutral” to “Yes” and 5.5% from “No” to “Yes”) This also represents a 15% increase from survey 1 87% of respondents answered “Yes” and 8% answered “Neutral” Question 2. I feel safe making suggestions for new or better ways Between Survey # 2 & 3, 18% more respondents to deliver service answered “Yes” (previously answered “Neutral”) This also represents a 4% increase from survey 1. 29% of respondents answered “Yes”and 26% answered “Neutral” Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by 6% (“No” responses moved to “Yes”) and 7% (“No” Question 3. During regular work to “Neutral”) hours, I have time to explore new or Staff shared that their workflow is heavy and that better ways to do things time needs to be allocated as part of their core service to work on continuous improvement initiatives This also represents a 9% increase from survey 1. 55% of respondents answered “Yes” and 39% answered “Neutral” Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by Question 4. In my work area, we 9% (“No” responses moved to “Yes”) view failure and mistakes as Work needs to be done to create safe spaces to try opportunities to learn new things, even if they don’t result in the anticipated outcomes; this is at the heart of continuous improvement This also represents an 8% decrease from survey 1. 82% of respondents answered “Yes” and 13% Question 5. My team (supervisor or answered “Neutral” staff) supports the continual learning Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by and development of our skills, 17% (12% moved from “No” to “Yes”; 5% moved abilities, and the ways that we do from “Neutral” to “Yes”). our work This also represents a 9% increase from survey 1. 8 - 15 Survey Questions Observations (Response Options: Yes, Neutral, No) (n=38) 29% of respondents answered “Yes” and 61% answered “Neutral” Question 6. In my work area, when There was minimal change between all three change occurs (whether initiated by surveys. me or others) I am provided with the Work needs to be done to understand where gaps supports I need may exist so that staff feel more supported in implementing changes. 92% of respondents answered “Yes” and 8% Question 7. I think a continuous answered “Neutral” improvement culture is important in Between surveys 2 and 3, this response decreased by the workplace 4% (moved from “Yes” to “Neutral”). 71% of respondents answered “Yes”and 18% Question 8. Overall, I think my answered “Neutral” colleagues believe that a continuous Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by improvement culture is important in 13% (moved from “Neutral” to “Yes”). the workplace This also represents an 8% increase from survey 1. 92% of respondents answered “Yes” and 8% answered “Neutral” Question 9. I think the development services review has the potential to Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by result in meaningful process 15% (12% moved from “No” to “Yes”; 3% moved improvements from “Neutral” to “Yes”). This also represents a 25% increase from survey 1. 8 - 16 ATTACHMENT B – SITE PLAN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS The following attachment provides a summary of the site plan improvements from the development services review. =Improvement has been implemented =Improvement is being piloted/tested =Improvement is in the process of being implemented 8 - 17 8 - 18 8 - 19 8 - 20 8 - 21 8 - 22 8 - 23 8 - 24 ATTACHMENT C – PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS The following attachment provides a summary of the public engagement improvements from the development services review. =Improvement has been implemented =Improvement is being piloted/tested =Improvement is in the process of being implemented 8 - 25 8 - 26 8 - 27 8 - 28 8 - 29