Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutFCS-13-139 - Operations Division ReviewI Staff Rep�►r Infrastructure 5ervrCes Department wvmkitchener ra REPORT TO: Audit Committee DATE OF MEETING: September 16, 2013 SUBMITTED BY: Ralph Thele, Manager, Service Coordination & Improvement 519- 741 -2600 EXT 4169 PREPARED BY: Ralph Thele, Manager, Service Coordination & Improvement 519- 741 -2600 EXT 4169 WARD(S) INVOLVED: ALL DATE OF REPORT: September 16, 2013 REPORT NO.: FCS - 13 - 139 SUBJECT: Operations Division Review RECOMMENDATION: For Information Only EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This report provides a summary of the activities and findings of a review of the City of Kitchener's Operations Division that was conducted by City Staff and an external consulting firm. In order to evaluate the Operations Division's history, current state, and future opportunities, City Staff and the consulting firm utilized group and individual interviews, written questionnaires, and other experiential evaluation and assessment techniques to gain insight into the following aspects of its operation and, where possible, make appropriate recommendations: • Inventory of Services Being Provided • Internal and External Service Recipients • Financial Funding /Recovery for Services • Work Environment • Workload Management and Scheduling • Tools, Equipment, and Vehicles • Compliance with Legislative and /or Organizational requirements • Productivity, Efficiency, and Utilization Management • Performance and Success Measurements • Comparatives To Other Municipalities • Information Management • Kitchener Operations Facility (KOF) 1- 1 The design and implementation of robust Performance Management protocols are severely hampered by the chronic deficit position that envelops the Operations Division. This deficit position represses the creation of a rigorous planning and measurement platform since the Division is forced to shift resources to the services that "need to be done" from services that "should also be done ". Without a stable funding strategy, any attempts at measuring and /or managing the Division's performance would be ill- advised as a true year- over -year "apple to apple" comparison is not attainable. While stable funding is a prerequisite for performance management, an equally significant component is the stability of the expectations surrounding the services. A clear and concise understanding of the "level" of service between the recipients (or their appointed representatives) and the provider must be established in order to effectively budget for it. At present, some of the service levels are simply set to adhere to the minimum maintenance standards as set out by provincial /federal entities, while other services have no established service levels at all. It would be beneficial for the Operations Division and the Corporation as a whole to embark, at its earliest convenience, on ensuring the creation or existence of Community /Council /Staff agreed -upon service levels for all of the services provided by the Operations Division. The combination of a stable funding formula and an agreement of the levels of services to be provided would allow for an environment that promotes pro- active, objective planning and decision - making, and will dramatically assist in the elimination of the financial and productivity losses associated with ungoverned work requests. Although there are currently no measurements in place to concretely verify any productivity improvements as a result of the new Kitchener Operations Facility (KOF), it is this author's professional opinion (based on many years of Performance Management experience) that the utilization and efficiency factors of the KOF's existence and design have resulted in overall productivity gains of at least 5% (and possibly as much as 10 %) within the Operations Division alone. This opinion is based on presently intangible considerations like (but certainly not limited to): • Enhanced deployment opportunities for staff and fleet • Improved apparatus availability • Reduced apparatus shuttling • Decreased apparatus down -time • Heightened intra - divisional communication and idea sharing opportunities • Dedicated and spacious workspaces • Onsite heavy- equipment training areas • Large, readily - accessible salt and aggregate storage locations • Enriched inter - divisional communication and issue resolution • Ready access to major thoroughfares • Centralized tool and material shop This operations review was performed from two distinct perspectives: 1) one from the outside looking in, and 2) from the inside looking out. These two perspectives were garnered, respectively, by Dillon Consulting Ltd (in conjunction with Performance Concepts Ltd.), and by the writer if this report. A summary of their combined recommendations can be found in Appendix 5. 1 -2 BACKGROUND: Since the recent integration of the Operations division into the new Kitchener Operations Facility in 2011 there has been considerable interest from both Council and management related to determining the efficiencies gained by moving to the new location and assessing whether there are further opportunities for improvement. As such, this review of the division was requested. The purpose of this review was to assess the effectiveness of the division by determining if the right activities and services are being performed and whether they are being performed in the right manner, at the right service level. Review Team This review was jointly performed by City of Kitchener staff and a partnership of two external consulting firms. In order to ensure coordination of efforts and objectivity, the review was overseen by a steering committee which included the City's Internal Auditor. The findings and recommendations put forward in the body of this report represent the research and analysis done by City staff and view the division from the inside perspective. The work of the consultants is contained in Appendix 1 and provides an external perspective of the Operations division in comparison to other municipalities. City of Kitchener Project Manager: Ralph Thele, Manager Service Coordination and Improvement, INS External Consultants: Dillon Consulting Ltd: Luc Begin, Scott Praill, Rory Baksh, Eric Marc Performance Concepts Ltd: Scott MacDonald Steering Committee Team: Pauline Houston, DCAO, INS Jim Witmer, Director, Operations Hans Gross, Director, Asset Management Corina Tasker, Internal Auditor The Operations division provides over 250 distinct services. It was recognized by the steering team in early 2012 that this scope was unmanageable given the budget for this review. It was decided to scale back the scope by prioritizing all of the services into priority 1 and 2 lists. The prioritization was based primarily on legislated requirements, Council- mandated services, labour hours expended, and budget dollars allocated; with higher resource intensive services being placed in the Priority 1 list, with the remainder falling into Priority 2. A complete list of services in each priority list can be found in Appendix 2. This exercise resulted in a list of 80 services in the Priority 1 services which are in scope for this review. Two of the main categories of services that have been excluded from the Priority 1 list are the storm and sanitary services. Since these are funded by their respective "utilities ", it was felt that the tax - supported budget dollars allocated for this review should not be spent on reviewing them at this time. All winter maintenance services were also excluded from the staff portion of this review as several internal and external reviews have been done on this service in 1 -3 the recent past. The consultants however have mentioned these services in their analysis of recommended key performance indicators and key success factor measurements. Future reviews of the Priority 2 services could be conducted if desired by either Council or management. Methodoloav: The following analysis was undertaken as part of this review: • Over 40 interviews and 2 questionnaires with Operations front -line, supervisory, and management staff to get an understanding of the current work environment, workload distribution, scheduling practices, tools / equipment / vehicles, productivity, efficiency and support services. Review of external and internal literature including, but not limited to,: • Financial Information Return (FIR) 2007 through 2011 • Primarily utilized for financial information and comparisons • Authored annually by Staff for submission to Provincial Government • "City of Kitchener Cityworks Maturity Assessment" - 2011 ■ Utilized to provide insight into the usage and capabilities of internal software ■ Authored by Prior & Prior Associates Ltd. 2010 — 2014 Regional Roads Maintenance Agreement • Utilized to assess compliance and impacts on internal services • Authored by Region of Waterloo • "Program Model for Operations Service Delivery" - 2003 • Utilized to determine the repetitive issues and /or recommendations • Authored by Giffles Associates Limited • Municipal Performance Measurement Program (MPMP) 2005 through 2011 • Primarily utilized for operative comparisons • Authored annually by Staff for submission to Provincial Government • Benchmarking service levels and service delivery methods with 5 other municipalities including Markham, Waterloo, Oakville, Vaughan and Richmond Hill. • Development of recommended key performance indicators and key success factors and assessment of resources required to implement. • Gap analysis between City of Kitchener operations and other municipalities • Analysis of changes and / or improvements made since moving to the Kitchener Operations Facility. • Creation of a services inventory including commentary on services which: might be better off not providing, that do not receive adequate levels of attention, that are charged to other groups, that could or should be charged to other groups, that require improvements, that are provided to 3 d parties that negatively impact ability to perform City services, and that do not have defined service levels. • Impact assessment which includes an inventory of customers for whom service is provided and service suppliers who support the delivery of Operations services. 1 -4 REPORT: This section will provide an overview of the findings by staff of each of the aspects listed in the "Executive Summary ", along with any pertinent recommendations that pertains to that particular aspect. Each of these aspects will be broken down into the following sections: • Overview • Findings • Recommendations 7 11 11T One of the first tasks of this review was to adopt a standardized definition and framework of the term "Service ". While any such definition or framework can vary slightly from individual to individual, group to group, and municipality to municipality, it was important to establish a baseline that could be used in comparative assessments and would provide a standardized forum upon which future plans and recommendations could be made. The framework that was used to define a "service" for the purposes of this review can be found in "Appendix 3 ". Findings Based on the service definition framework, the Operations Division within the Infrastructure Service Department of the City of Kitchener is responsible for approximately 250 services (see "Appendix 2" for a list of those services), each of which falls under one of the following operational categories: • Forestry • Sanitary Sewers • Winter Maintenance • Sanitation • Concrete Repairs • Sports fields, Trails, Parks, and Sites • Minor Improvements & Technical Services • Horticulture • Storm Sewers • Road Maintenance • Water Course Maintenance • Pumping Stations • Traffic and Sign Shop • General Work While 250 services may not be unusual within Public Sector or Municipal entities, it is important to draw attention to the fact that many Private Sector service providers limit their focus to between 8 and 30 distinct services in order that they may maintain cost - effective operational control and agility. And because such an enormous discrepancy in service offerings exists between the two sectors, it would be imprudent to attempt to draw direct comparisons between them without ensuring that all mitigating factors have been vetted to ensure an "apple -to- apple" evaluation. Some of the recommendations within this review will aid in the establishment of those mitigating factors, however it would take on -going momentum, resourcing, and organizational resolve to achieve such a comprehensive evaluative state. 1 -5 Recommendations Establish a Service Level Review Committee that regularly reviews the Operations Division's inventory of services to assess their current intrinsic, direct, and fiscal value to the Community. This would be done through consultation with the "outward facing" representatives (such as: Council; Compass Kitchener; Downtown Kitchener Business Improvement Association; etc.) This Committee would provide these groups with an avenue to highlight, select, and /or address the services that the Public /Community feels: a. Are no longer providing relevant or adequate benefit; b. Are improperly funded; c. Negatively affect the performance of other services; d. Do not appear to meet perceptions or expectations; e. Are of an emergency- or disaster - relief nature and may have a profound effect on the delivery of other day -to -day services; f. Services that are deemed to need adjustment in priority and /or focus; and, g. Should be considered for addition, re- allocation, or omission to /from the inventory in the short -, medium -, and long -term. 2. The Corporation should continue its implementation and sustenance of the "Continuous Improvement" model of measurable process assessments, improvements, and protocols. Over time, such efforts will translate into cost - savings and /or productivity, efficiency and effectiveness gains. As an added benefit, these endeavours would also lay much of the groundwork towards the certification within the ISO 9000 (Quality Management) and the ISO 18000 (Safety and Hazard Prevention) series of conventions; should that be a journey the City's leaders choose to embark upon in the future. Internal and External Service Reci is ants Overview As well as providing services to specific capital projects, the Operations Division provides services to the following internal divisions and external entities: Internal Divisions Division Services Provided Community Programs and Services . Turf Maintenance • Horticulture • Snow Removal • Sanitation Facilities (@ the Kitchener . Turf Maintenance Operations Facility) . Horticulture • Snow Removal • Sanitation 1 -6 Internal Divisions Division Services Provided Market, Downtown, City Hall . Turf Maintenance Region of Waterloo • Horticulture • Snow Removal • Sanitation Parking Enterprise . Turf Maintenance • Horticulture Public & Separate School Boards • Asphalt Maintenance Fire Department . Turf Maintenance Townships of Wilmot and Woolwich • Horticulture Cemeteries . Snow Removal City of Waterloo • Forestry Services • Material Haulage The Auditorium . Winter Maintenance Sports Field Users • Sorts Field Maintenance Engineering . Asphalt Maintenance Program External Entities Entity Services Provided The Community at Large . All operational services Region of Waterloo . Road Maintenance • Winter Maintenance of Regional Roads • Boulevard Maintenance • Tree Maintenance • LRT (Future) Public & Separate School Boards . Sports Field Maintenance • Sorts Field Sanitation Townships of Wilmot and Woolwich . Sanitary Sewer Collection • Regulatory Sign Maintenance City of Waterloo . Street Sweeping • Leaf Collection • Snow Clearing Sports Field Users . Field Rentals • Bleacher Rentals Downtown Kitchener Business . Sanitation Improvement Association . Street Sweeping • Snow Clearing • Hanging Flower baskets Findings Based on available feedback, the recipients of the Division's services appear between "satisfied" and "very satisfied" with the services they receive, as well as with the level at which they receive them. It was also noted that the Operations Staff, in totality, prides itself in providing consistent service results to both planned and reactive work requests. 1 -7 On an average, the work distribution between planned versus reactive work is a ratio of approximately 80/20. While 20% reactive work ratio is not alarming, the causes /sources of this reactive work were considered since that type of work is generally accepted to be about 50% more costly than its "planned" counterpart. Approximately three - quarters of that reactive work could be deemed to address matters that could pose public health or safety concerns; the other quarter (or 5% of the Division's work) appears to stem from grievances and /or conditions of: • A one -time nature • A perceived non - compliance with /to an existing service level • A perceived hazard or eye -sore Simple extrapolation from the Divisions' annual labour budget puts the cost and /or productivity losses of responding to these non - threatening reactive matters (often referred to as "ungoverned work requests ") above $100,000 per year. Recommendations In order to provide the City's constituents with transparency and clarity about the services they receive, create a public /community "Services Awareness Program" that provides them with information about: a. Who is responsible for an asset that is contained within the City's limits (i.e. Regional Roads versus City Streets; City -owned sport fields versus School Board -owned fields; Kitchener - Wilmot Hydro; etc.) b. Who sets the service level for the asset (i.e. the Region of Waterloo; the City of Kitchener; District School Board(s); etc.) c. What the current service level is for that asset (i.e. streets are swept "x" times per year; Regional road snow removal must be completed within "x" hours of snow cessation; etc.) d. Who provides the actual service (i.e. City Staff; Regional Staff; an independent contractor; etc.) e. Who should be contacted if a concern about non - conformity to a service level arises, and how that contact should be made (i.e. via the Corporate Contact Center; via email; via telephone; etc.) 2. In order to reduce /eliminate the costs associated with unplanned, reactive, work that does not compromise the safety and health of the public, commence the establishment of clear and concise escalation, resolution, and review protocols that: a. Aid in the decision - making of whether that work should be performed immediately or can wait until its regularly scheduled time b. Will monitor any re- occurrence of the same /similar situations so that cause and effect can be determined and, potentially, lead to apt adjustments to the service, its budget, and /or its service level(s) c. Will monitor the impacts on cost and /or productivity, so that future budgets can be appropriately adjusted 1 1. 1 1 1- • - • - r Although the services the Operations Division provides are funded primarily through the annual Operating Budget, the Division also provides, on an "at cost" recovery basis, services to specific capital projects and the previously - listed internal divisions and external entities. Findings Based on the number of services, the associated service levels of many of those services, the ever - expanding legislative requirements /restrictions, and the continued growth /expansion of the assets they maintain, the Operations Division is chronically underfunded. This combined with what appears to be inadequate cost recoveries from some of the internal /external entities and unpredictable weather /seasonal patterns, further exacerbates the deficit position the Division works within. Although an annual allowance for growth is provided in the budget call, Operational entities can be subject to cost fluctuations on items that are beyond their immediate control. Increases to vehicle, equipment, material, and commodity costs can exceed the annual growth allocation. These, as well as other uncontrollable factors can lead to further deficit positions. Once in that position, productivity gains or service level reductions are the only options. If cost - effective productivity gains have been exhausted, service level reductions, regardless of palatability must be considered. Potentially being left in a constant state of "making do ", Divisional management often needs to make operative decisions based on resource availability rather than on planned efficiency and effectiveness. This influences "what gets done" rather than "how it gets done "; often to the detriment of other non - legislated or non - mandated services or asset classes. It needs to be stated however that the Division still manages to meet existing legislated and mandated service levels. It does so by employing appropriate planning, prioritization, and scheduling techniques, and appropriately attuning them when and where possible. Recommendations Cost recoveries for services provided to internal divisions should not be capped at the amount budgeted by those divisions, as this creates an inaccurate representation on two sides of the budget ledger. If an internal division inadequately budgets for a service (ex. for Snow Removal at a Community Center), the short -fall should not be charged back to the Operations Division as it only serves to distort the actual operating expense of the Community Center and further amplifies the deficit of the Operations Divisions. 2. While synergies with external entities are extremely important, it is equally essential to ensure that the relationships are also symbiotic (of equal benefit to both parties). Because it appears that there is an inequity between the services the Division provides and the costs it recovers, it is strongly recommended that the financial aspects of services provided to external entities be carefully audited before agreeing to any further or on -going commitments. This appears especially true for the agreements the Division has with the Region of Waterloo and the two School Boards; as the current agreements appear to favour those entities. Based on a cursory review of the efforts /assets needed to perform their respective services, the 1 -9 imbalance could result in cost recovery and productivity losses. It should be noted that cost assessments and refinements are presently being performed to determine the true cost of the services being provided to 3 d -party entities. This enhanced information is being utilized during the current contract re- negotiations with the Region of Waterloo. 3. If the formation of accurate performance management indicators is a desired result, the (re- )establishment of proprietary reserve and contingency funds for services such as Winter Maintenance, Summer Maintenance, and natural emergencies needs to be considered. A funding formula that results in an inconsistent, deficit -based working environment is unlikely to provide the required stability and robustness to a viable Performance Management platform. Without adequate and stable resourcing, decisions that could enhance efficiency and effectiveness would always be overridden by decisions resulting from availability and need. Overview The entire staff of the Operations Division (Managerial, Supervisory, Administrative, and Front- line Operatives) has responded favourably to the changes of their work environment since their move to the Kitchener Operations Facility (KOF) in 2011. While there were some "territorial" apprehensions shortly after the move, these have all but dissipated. The proactive approach that was taken during the design of the KOF resulted in an environment that is conducive to today's needs, yet ensures opportunities for ease -of- growth for decades to come. Findings Although the three distinct Sections (Roads, Parks, and Sewers) work in close proximity with each other within the KOF, this does not appear to cause any operational conflicts. In fact, feedback from the Managers and Supervisors has indicated a continued increase in positive operative synergies. On a day -to -day basis, Front -line operatives from the three Sections still show some levels of segregation but this can be primarily attributed to the differences in their daily activities and responsibilities. During the winter maintenance period, when staff from the Roads and Parks Sections was required to perform the same work, they did so inter - dependently without any decrease in cooperation or harmony. There also appears to be a courteous and cooperative relationship between divisional management and the union's executive /members; each showing a respectful appreciation and understanding of the other. Appropriate problem resolution protocols appear to be in place and are successfully utilized in the majority of circumstances by the two parties. Although these protocols are not successful in all cases, their numbers and magnitude appear to be well within the bounds expected within a unionized environment. Recommendations There are no recommendations that have not been, or are not being, addressed already through other means and forums. 1 -10 Tools, Equipment, and Vehicles Overview Due to the breadth of the portfolio of services, the Operations Divisions requires and utilizes an immense number of tools, equipment, and vehicles (hereafter conjointly referred to as "apparatus "). The operative design requirements for most new and replacement apparatus is stipulated by the Operations Division, while the sourcing, tendering, and /or procurement of those items fall upon the Purchasing and /or Fleet Divisions. Dependant on the asset classification, repair of an apparatus is done by internal specialists, the Fleet Division, or an external entity. Every year, members of the Equipment Review Committee and applicable members from the Facilities, Fleet, Purchasing, and Operations Divisions, perform an "Equipment Review" to assess or set the following for each piece of apparatus: • its current state • its life -cycle • its anticipated longevity; • its charge -out rate (based on its procurement, depreciation; carrying and maintenance costs) • Acquisitions • Dispositions Findings Based on feedback, the apparatus utilized by the Operations Division is of adequate design and performance to fulfill the requirements of the services it provides. Based on the services the Division provides strictly to "city- owned" assets, there is an over- abundance of apparatus. This additional apparatus (such as tandem -axle trucks) primarily ensures that the services being provided to external entities can be executed. There are currently no directives or plans in place for the re- allocation or disposal of this additional apparatus should either party choose to bow out of the service provision agreement. There are in excess of 450 vehicles that require keys to start the vehicles. Each vehicle is allocated three sets of keys: one set for the operators; one set for Fleet Division needs; and, one set maintained for due diligence. Legislated standards for the maintenance and training requirements of apparatus have dramatically increased in recent years, resulting in additional fiscal and productivity strains. Compounded, these standards increases negatively affect the availability of the apparatus itself, the staff to operate it, and the staff to maintenance /repair it. Recommendations 1. Separate and distinct Charge -Out rates should be established for apparatus that is primarily or completely utilized for services provided to 3 d -party entities. These distinct rates should take into account the additional carrying, maintenance, and overhead costs associated with the ownership of apparatus that would otherwise not be required. This 1 -11 initiative would also serve to eliminate the cost - averaging for specific types of apparatus, thereby reducing the absorption of unwarranted costs for internal services. 2. Due to the size of the KOF and the number of apparatuses that require keys, an automated and controlled Key Management System (KMS) should be procured. This recommendation is in line with that made by Internal Audit in the 2008 Inventory Controls Audit. Using an estimated productivity gain of 1 minute per apparatus per day (based on 70 vehicles and a fully- funded crew size of 2), the return -on- investment of a $115,000 Key Management System is less than 5 years. This figure does not even account for other, but not lesser, intrinsic factors such as: a. Desperately needed level of control and security over who has access (and when) to a specific piece of apparatus b. The implications associated with lost keys c. The lost time associated with searching for vehicles that are (or should be) taken out -of- service due to legislative requirements or preventative maintenance d. Potential fines resulting from the use of a restricted vehicle by an unauthorized individual 3. Additional consideration should be given annually to the impact on productivity associated with the ever - increasing requirements of apparatus training and safety. Although the costs for this upper -tier legislation are often accounted for, the adverse effect on productivity is not. A year- over -year log of time spent on utilization /safety training should be instituted so that productivity impacts can be accounted for via additional manpower or within future productivity measurements. Overview The Operations Division is subject to compliance on almost every front. Whether it is from legislation dictating "what needs to be done" and "how it needs to be done" or requirements parlaying "who needs to do it ", the Operations Division is somehow affected. Findings There is no indication that the Operations Division, as a whole, is in non - compliance with any legislated or organizational expectations. There has been considerable focus in recent years on Commercial Vehicle Operator Registration (CVOR) compliance which has resulted in an improved CVOR rating from the Ministry of Transportation. The recent development and implementation of the corporate Accountability, Responsibility, and Compliance (ARC) Program provides the framework and support for managers to proactively monitor and action any compliance issues which may arise. Recommendations Because the organization maintains and stores Global Positioning System (GPS) information of all its vehicles, it would be prudent to implement a management and reporting system that ensures that vehicle operators adhere to Ontario's Highway Traffic 1 -12 Act. Thusly, any contraventions could be proactively documented, recognized, and dealt with. Using these proactive activities allows the City to provide mitigation against potential legal actions and continues to add to the safety of its staff and its citizens. 2. That, as an opportunity to ensure the appropriate synergies and protocols are between the Operations Division and the ARC Program are in place and implemented, an initial audit be performed to verify that the Division's and the Program's inventories /requirements pertaining to compliance regulations are in complete alignment. Overview For the purposes of this review, the following "generally accepted" equation and definitions will be used as a basis for discussing its three components: Productivity = Efficiency X Utilization, where: Productivity is the final output, Efficiency is the measurement of the staff's proficiency while performing a task /service, and Utilization is the measurement of effectiveness of all of the actions and tools that allow the staff to perform the task /service Findings The Operations Division currently does not calculate any productivity, efficiency, or utilization values. But it must be strongly stressed that none of the operative entities of any of the comparative municipalities contacted for this review have a framework in place to accurately assess those components. In fact, based on the research done, there are no known municipalities in North America that can claim to accurately to be able to calculate these values for all of their operational services. Some of the daily data currently being captured could be utilized to build the framework for calculating some productivity, efficiency, or utilization values. Unfortunately, due to the number of software systems used to collect this data (not to mention the variances between them), this information is not easily retrievable, manageable, or reportable. This plight seems to be equally mirrored by the other municipalities canvassed. Despite some isolated complaints from the public to the contrary, based on experience and observations, there appear to be no major indicators at this point in time to lead one to believe that front -line staff are inefficient or have become inefficient. Here are some examples of the reasons why: • Asset Base Increases: the hectares of managed parkland and turf have increased by 34% since 2007, yet the front -line staffing complement in this area has decreased by 5% since that time. Similarly, the Roads and Sewer asset base outgrew its staffing complement by a ratio of 4:1. • Operational Process Changes: through segregation of functions and modifications to staff deployment, the sidewalk /curb repair entity of the Division, has increased throughput by more than 45% in the last three years. 1 -13 • Legislation: Almost annually, increases to legislated standards force escalations in one or more of the following: Performance 0 Compliance Management 0 Administration Data collection 0 Reporting • Productive Staff -Hour Decreases: As the tenures of existing employees increase and the number of new employees decreases, the average vacation allotment per employee rises. Without an associated or offsetting increase in resources, this rise is directly at the expense of the available hours that staff can spend on productive work. Judicious management for the application of overtime ensures that productivity gains must more than compensate for the added cost. In other words, overtime is only approved after it has been clearly demonstrated that the benefit outweigh the cost. Recommendations 1. It would appear that more benefits could be derived by focusing on the aspects of the overall "effectiveness" ( "Utilization ") of the Division. By altering the focus from "What can this Division do to improve things" to "What impedes this Division from doing things: Better, Cheaper, and /or Faster ", the organization will be provided with a much broader spectrum of opportunities and greater transparency for decision - making. 2. Establish, for each service currently being provided by the Division, a matrix of obstacles that encumber the Division from performing the service in better, cheaper, and faster fashion. These matrices could then be vetted and prioritized by Corporate Management and Council for a further and more detailed Cost/Benefit Analysis (CBA) that could assess the prudency of the removal or mitigation of any of the obstacles. Although resourcing for this type of effort is not in place, it is estimated that each of these CBAs would require one person -month to complete. Overview Measurements of performance are often referred to as KPIs (Key Performance Indicators). Measurements of successes are often referred to as KSFs (Key Success Factors). Performance measurements differ from Success Factors in the following ways: • KPIs indicate change; KSFs indicate achievements • KPIs compare identical actions occurring in different locations or time periods; KSFs compare progress against an established goal • KPIs are normally represented by ratios or percentages; KSFs can be represented in an infinite number of ways • KPIs are affected by changes to a process; KSFs are generally not affected • KPIs can highlight the need for decisions or change; KSFs cannot 1 -14 • KPIs are objective; KSFs are subjective • KPIs can confirm the legitimacy of KSFs; KSFs provide no reciprocal benefit to KPIs Findings As stated earlier, the Division does not currently engage in any sort of performance measurements. The Division does however actively monitor itself against dozens of Key Success Factors. Many of the services that the Division provides are subject to legislated requirements and Service Level Agreements (SLAs). Each of these requirements and agreements stipulates a target that the Division must achieve. Whether it is the required timeline(s) to clear snow from city's streets or the frequency of grass cutting in parks or the testing of pumping station alarms; the Division measures its achievements against a pre- defined target or goals. At present, the Division appears to have achieved (or be in compliance with) all of its required targets as set out in legislated requirements and service level agreements. It must be stated, however, that in order to achieve those targets, it is sometimes at the expense of the more discretionary services (such as tree inventory, canopy trimming, or other preventative maintenance services). While one or two of the municipalities polled for this review claim to be establishing /generating actual KPIs, further evaluation of the examples they provided showed that almost all of those measurements were in fact Key Success Factors or KSFs. As such, it can be safely stated that the Operations Division does not lag behind their counterparts within any of those municipalities; the difference only being the fact that those municipalities may "formally" report on their achievements and compliance, and Kitchener's Operations Division simply deems these successes as a part of doing what is expected or required. As no applicable or warrantable KPIs were found in the information garnered from the other municipalities, a sample list of potential indicators can be found in Appendix 4. Recommendations In order to clearly measure the effectiveness of the Divisions achievements (KSFs), the Division must establish, adopt, and manage Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). While this may still not be an established practice within the Division, the Corporation or other municipalities, the future of fiscal scrutiny, amendments, and policies will undoubtedly require and depend on them. At present though, there are no resources allocated towards such work. 2. Key Performance Indicators require a level of historical information in order to be meaningful. In the case of seasonal or weather - impacted services, several years of data collection may be in order. It is therefore recommended that a Performance Management Committee be formed to: a. Create a Terms Of Reference document for a Performance Management program b. Establish a process framework for the education, definition, measurement, audit, results inspection, and change management of KPIs c. Create a preliminary implementation calendar 1 -15 d. Determine cost estimates for the implementation and on -going operation of the program e. Report the findings to Council or Committee for review and decision Comparatives To Other Municipalities Overview All comparative references within this report made about/to other municipalities come from information derived through one or more of the following activities: • Direct interviews • Telephone interviews and /or discussions • Webinars • Internet research • Information derived by /from the external consulting entity retained for this review Findings As already alluded to in previous sections of this report, there are few (if any) municipalities that could be used as a direct benchmark (for comparative purposes) in appropriately assessing the City of Kitchener's Operations Division. There are an infinite number of reasons for this but the predominantly recurring ones appear to be: • The numbers and types of services provided directly by the respective operational entities vary greatly between municipalities • Municipalities vary in their governmental make up (single tier; two -tier; multi -tier; etc.) • Variance in the size and growth of the assets being maintained • Funding and staff resourcing models differ • Information and technological support services models and capabilities vary • The impact that weather has on the types or scopes of the services provided • Legislated, mandated, and community service -level requirements and /or expectations One common thread amongst all municipalities appears to be the recognition of the importance of, and inevitable need for, appropriate performance measurements and indicators. This is accompanied by the universal realization that current service - monitoring information policies, protocols, and techniques are not funded, robust, nor accurate enough to provide adequate clarity for objective decision - making. None of the municipalities that were polled or researched had any misunderstanding or doubt about that the extensive costs of endeavoring into the realms of process or performance management. However, what remained misunderstood or in doubt in all cases were the "when's" and the "how's" of embarking on what appears to be an inescapable journey. Despite the research to date, there appears to be no clear leaders, movements, or pathways that the City of Kitchener could call upon, join, follow, or emulate. Many municipalities are willing 1 -16 to adopt a submissive or collaborative role in any type of Performance Management initiative, but none appear to have (appropriated) the required resource funding. In fact, many actively state that such funding would not be made available until "someone" establishes a true and tried roadmap. Recommendations In order to gain some clarity into the longer -term directional and evaluative requirements for performance and service -level management, the City's leadership groups need to establish how the Corporation should /wishes to present or position itself in the realm of these management information standards. As it has little or no control in the setting of the expectations of the community or other service recipients, it would be ill- advised for the Operations Division to endeavour, or be expected to endeavour, down this path on its own. Overview The Operations Division receives information from numerous enterprise -wide software systems; provides information to an Infrastructure Services -based software system (City Works); and, is in the final stages of implementation of a divisionally -based GPS system to aid in the monitoring of vehicle and materials (principally, salt for roadways) usage. Findings All staff resources dedicated to the implementation, (re- )design, development, maintenance, or administration of any enterprise -wide and Infrastructure Services -based software systems are based out of other Divisions. The Operations Division has no direct control over these resources and shares them with other entities within the Corporation. The Division has a Technologist position allocated to aid in the design and overview of the divisionally -based GPS system. Primarily, the Division receives information from the enterprise -wide software systems upon request. The Division does receive some financial performance reports automatically and regularly. The Infrastructure Services -based software serves as a depository for actions and costs associated with the front -line provision of services. The Division receives relatively little detailed, summary, or management information from this system at this time. The action and cost data that is deposited into this system is subsequently uploaded into one or more of the enterprise - wide software systems so that vital payroll and financial functions can be initiated. At present, there is an extreme shortage of resources allocated to the provision of pertinent information. Organizationally, most of the existing resources allocated to software systems fall into the categories of software maintenance and up -keep or data entry. A relatively small proportion of the resources are assigned to the design, development, data -value mapping, or business unit requirements analysis. While this is a problem for the Operations Division, it equally affects many other Divisions. This problem is also shared by other municipalities. Historically and currently, the selection and collection of data primarily focuses on ensuring that financial - reporting or legislative requirements are met and /or to provide mitigation for litigation 1 -17 matters. While some of this data may be conducive to managing internal operational entities, it often lacks completeness or is in a less- than - optimum format. Recommendations Note: The recommendations that follow are made strictly with the benefits of the Operations Division in mind. Appreciation needs to be given to the fact that it is well beyond the scope and ability of this review to fully assess the potential impact that these recommendations' may have on other strategies, initiatives, or internal entities. To allow for the creation of inclusive and meaningful management information, initiate a project that will focus on the alignment and a conjoined data repository of /between the data contained within the Infrastructure Services -based software system (City Works) and other enterprise -wide software systems (especially the SAP financial software system). This need could potentially be addressed through the role redefinition /duty reprioritization of an existing position within the Division or Department. 2. To ensure that the Operations Division's informational requirements and needs are appropriately analyzed, designed, and communicated moving forward, allocate a dedicated analytical resource (with IT and Operational experience) to act as an intermediary between Operations Management and the staff responsible for the City Works software. Once again, a redefined /reprioritized existing position could be a consideration for this longer -term role. Mchene Overview The Operations Division moved into the new, state -of- the -art Kitchener Operations Facility (KOF) in April of 2011. Prior to that, its Sections operated out of two out - dated, and less than optimum, Chandler Drive and Bramm Street facilities. The new KOF was designed to alleviate many of the known spatial and operational short- comings of the existing facilities. With exception of the Asset Management, Engineering and Traffic Management Divisions, the KOF acts as the hub location for all other Divisions within the Infrastructure Services Department. Findings While there were some initial and understandable "co- existence" tensions between the staff of the three Operations Sections, these have been found to have almost dissipated. In fact, there a sense of camaraderie that appears to have set in to replace those tensions. The KOF is, rightfully, considered a flagship for operational innovation and growth. It is, through many accounts, the envy of many other municipalities. Due to the shortage or non - existence of data for performance -based information (that has been alluded to throughout this report), many of the tangible benefits of the KOF cannot be prudently demonstrated. The following is a list of benefits /accomplishments that were derived directly due to the existence of the KOF: • Faster vehicle deployments due to the Fuel, Wash, and Inspect program • Faster winter maintenance vehicle deployment due to availability of inside parking 1 -18 • Centralization of vehicles, equipment, and tools reduces non - productive time associated with shuttling and sharing • Centralization of Stores and Tool Cribs reduces inventory duplication and decreases the amount of time required for Operations staff to obtain their tools and parts since they no longer have to go to two different locations. • Centralized fleet maintenance improves turn - around times and responsiveness • Central housing of most of the Divisions within INS increases ease and frequency of communications between Operations and other inter - dependant Divisions • Centralized housing of the Sections within the Operations Division fosters the sharing of ideas, ideals, opportunities, and communication between them • On -site heavy equipment training areas increases training opportunities and serves to augment operator safety and productivity skills • A state -of- the -art Salt Dome that provides savings through bulk purchasing opportunities and enhances salt utilization and management opportunities • On -site and expanded aggregate storage provides savings through bulk purchasing opportunities and increases likelihood of inventory availability Concern has been expressed that the KOF is less centrally located within the City than the previous two locations and, thereby, increasing travel costs and time for the Operations Divisions front -line staff; especially to the north end of the City. While there is an element of truth to that belief, that belief must be offset by the fact that travelling time to the southern side of the City has been equally lessened. Furthermore, the KOF's current location is strategically located to key elements of the existing road network and, therefore, likely better suited to any future expansion of the City. Recommendations 1. In order to leverage the benefits already seen in the existing Fuel, Wash, and Inspect program of large trucks, expand the program to include all other vehicles in the Operations fleet. Current legislation requires all vehicles to be inspected for safety and load security prior to leaving the yard. Waiting for the designated driver to perform the inspection (and, possibly, to fill the vehicle with fuel) results in non - productive time for all other members of the crew. This wait could easily equate to a 30- minute lost productivity per vehicle factor. While the allocation of one or two additional resources to perform these functions throughout the night may not result in any net savings, an increase in respective productivity would be forthcoming. ALIGNMENT WITH CITY OF KITCHENER STRATEGIC PLAN: The work of the review and this report falls within the foundational "Efficient and Effective Government" area within the 2011 -2014 version of the City of Kitchener's Strategic Plan; specifically, in the sub -areas and strategic directions of: • Customer Service • Provide consistent levels of service in all departments and locations • Initiate corporate -wide customer service standards and policies • Ensure service delivered in an effective and cost efficient manner • Review of the service delivery model 1 -19 o Develop a framework for a customer service delivery model • Financial Management • Maintain assets strategically • Ensure the effective and responsible stewardship of public funds • Maximize value through cost effective service delivery • Explore new sources of sustainable revenue FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Financial and funding implications are fully dependent on the level of adoption of the recommendations contained within this report. However, the recommendations have been summarized in the following chart to indicate those which could potentially yield either cost savings or the requirement for additional funds: Recommendation Potential Fiscal Impact Institution of a "Services Awareness Cost dependant on the means and scope utilized to Program" communicate the Program Reduction /Elimination of ungoverned Potential cost savings and /or productivity increases of work requests $100,000 Reserve funding for Winter /Summer Requires an initial influx of funding to establish the maintenance and natural disaster reserve(s) response Ensures that these services can be performed without affecting the service provision and /or funding of other services Is a requirement for the establishment of a workable performance management program Ensure, that during re- negotiation of Ensures that relationships between the City and its contracts for 3 d -party service partners provide not only synergies but reciprocal provision, that an allowance is made equality and value for regular evidentiary adjustments of rates and recoveries throughout the Note: These renegotiation efforts are currently under term of a contract way for the Regional Maintenance Contract as the existing version is set to expire at the end of 2014 Establishment of distinct Charge -Out Ensures fair, equitable, and accurate cost recoveries rates for 3 d -party service provision from 3 d -party service recipients Initiate a funding formula revision or Although the adoption of this recommendation the entire elimination of the Loose made by the external consultant would result in Leaf Collection Program additional cost savings and /or revenue opportunities, there is a clear recognition that this matter has been previously and extensively discussed and vetted by /with Council. 1 -20 Recommendation Potential Fiscal Impact Acquisition of a Key Management Acquisition costs of between $100K to $150K System for vehicles Anticipated productivity gains in excess of $20K per annum Establishment of a Safety, Skill -set, Training Budgets may be shown to need adjustment and Compliance Training Log Productivity gains through Training Schedule Management Implement GPS management and Additional Resource funding for the design and reporting protocols to enhance safety implementation of a management and reporting and improve driver compliance to system legislation Potential reductions in insurance, mitigation, and legal costs Establishment of Performance and Until a Performance Management Committee is KPI Management program established and reports on its findings and recommendations, additional resource funding requirements will not be known Create an aligned, conjoined, and Additional staffing may not be required centralized data repository of information from systems used by Enhanced and timely utilization of management Operations information would likely result varying levels of costs savings or productivity increases Expansion of the Fuel, Wash, and Additional staffing would be required Inspect program Productivity gains would (more than) offset the additional staffing costs COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT: Members of the community have been informed of the existence of this report and its contents through the posting of this report on the internet on September 11, 2013. CONCLUSION: The results of this review have shown that while the Operations Division is efficient and generally meeting legislative and customer expectations, there is still room for improvement. The three primary areas of concern include the chronic funding shortfall, no agreed upon service levels, and a lack of systems and framework to establish and track key performance 1 -21 indicators and key success factors. These observations were also echoed by the analysis done by the external consultants. The design and implementation of robust Performance Management protocols are severely hampered by the chronic deficit position that envelops the Operations Division. This deficit position represses the creation of a rigorous planning and measurement platform since the Division is forced to shift resources to the services that "need to be done" from services that "should also be done ". Without a stable funding strategy, any attempts at measuring and /or managing the Division's performance would be ill- advised as a true year- over -year "apple to apple" comparison is not attainable. While stable funding is a prerequisite for performance management, an equally significant component is the stability of the expectations surrounding the services. A clear and concise understanding of the "level" of service between the recipients (or their appointed representatives) and the provider must be established in order to effectively budget for it. At present, some of the service levels are simply set to adhere to the minimum maintenance standards as set out by provincial /federal entities, while other services have no established service levels at all. It would be beneficial for the Operations Division and the Corporation as a whole to embark, at its earliest convenience, on ensuring the creation or existence of Community /Council /Staff agreed -upon service levels for all of the services provided by the Operation Division. The combination of a stable funding formula and an agreement of the levels of services to be provided would allow for an environment that promotes pro- active, objective planning and decision - making, and will dramatically assist in the elimination of the financial and productivity losses associated with ungoverned work requests. Next Steps: Operations Division Management will have three months to prepare a response to the recommendations contained in this report. Any actions requiring Council /Committee direction or decision will come back to a future committee meeting. A follow -up review will take place in not less than one year in order to assess the status of the recommendations and any impact they have had on the Operations Division. ACKNOWLEDGED BY: Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO, Infrastructure Services 1 -22 A112endix 1: External Consultant's Report - Dillon Consulting Ltd 1 -23 September 9, 2013 The City of Kitchener Operations Division 131 Goodrich Drive Kitchener, Ontario N2C 2E8 Attention: Mr. Ralph Thele Manager, Service Coordination & Improvement Re: Operational Review of Operations Division — Final Report Dear Mr. Thele: On behalf of Dillon Consulting Limited and Performance Concepts Consulting, we are pleased to submit our Final Report for the operational review of the Kitchener Operations Division. We would like to express our appreciation for selecting our team for this challenging assignment and have enjoyed collaborating with you and the Steering Committee. We look forward to presenting our findings to the Corporate Leadership Team and Audit Committee. Should you have any questions or require any further assistance, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Yours truly, Dillon Consulting Limited Luc Begin, 1 .I.:rlg.. Partner Encls. u� Rory Baksh, MCIP, RPP Associate ` ".V�il�ry III. 177 Colonnade Rd Suite 101 Ottawa Ontario Canada K2E 7J4 Telephone (613) 745 -2213 Fax (613) 745 -3491 ]IC i lon Cons ulking Limited 1 -24 0000- 1,1, ONMII�ll DILIA-)N C'(IN L, 1, 1 N C� The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The City of Kitchener ( "Kitchener ") retained Dillon Consulting Limited, in collaboration with Performance Concepts Consulting Limited ( "the consulting team "), to undertake an Operational Review of the Operations Division ( "Operations "). This report provides a discussion of the Operational Review's purpose, its methodology, the research /analysis conducted, and recommendations with a suggested timeline for implementation. This review was to be undertaken in a series of distinct yet overlapped phases by the consulting team. The phases were: 1. Generation of "Comparative and Best Practices Service Levels" for Priority 1 Services; 2. Gap analysis; and, 3. Recommendations and their Risks. The consulting team's work was preceded by a services inventory and prioritization of services by Operations Staff. For the review to provide meaningful analysis and recommendations within the established timeframes it was necessary to prioritize the total inventory of services and select approximately eighty (80) services which will be included for analysis. Refinements to the Ot-iginal Scope of Wot-k and'Renemiedftiectfiies of the Opet-ational - Warm To complete an exercise of this kind, Kitchener and the peer municipalities need to be organized in a way that would facilitate their comparison. The initial research into Kitchener's systems and the peer municipalities indicated that they were not ready for comparison since they were lacking aspects of a results -based management system (except for Oakville). To continue moving forward with this operational review, we broadened our perspective to leverage the information available to us from Kitchener and the peer municipalities (program maps, key performance indicators and key success factors, and results -based management tools). Overall, the peer municipality benchmarking component of this review has yielded important insights for Kitchener concerning program mapping, key performance indicator and key success factor selection, target setting, and dashboard results reporting. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 1 Labour tracking tools? Financial and data mapping structures in place? KPl/KSFs in place? Quantifiable service delivery targets? Dashboard performance reporting tools? The City of Kitchener -- Operational Review of the Operations Division Yes Unknown New tool New tool Unknown Yes Yes pending pending Not Program Evolving to Unknown based Program Based Evolving to Program Based Not beyond Not beyond Not beyond Yes... but weak Partial - but MPMP MPMP MPMP and evolving evolving Mixed - Partial - Partial - Partial - Partial - legislated legislated legislated legislated legislated minimums are minimums are minimums are minimums are minimums are met for roads,, met for roads met for roads met for roads met for roads many ad hoc service levels No No No Pending No Yes Yes Yes No Observations ..... Staff Intervie is During the course of the staff interviews, a wide range of feedback was received from the consulting team regarding the challenges and potential solutions division -wide and specific to programs. The consulting team has considered all the feedback received through the interviews and has been able to identify a series of common themes. The following observations are a consolidation of the feedback received through the interviews and no specific staff person is named in these observations: ■ Reactive maintenance requests are negatively impacting planned maintenance efficiencies; Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; ii The 0ity of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division ■ Managers and supervisors have adapted CityWorks' work orders to suit their service lines; • Managers strive to minimize overtime; • Managers and supervisors have made adaptations to improve productivity; • Small utility jobs are not cost - effective; • Some back - charging of costs to other departments is happening; • Travel time significantly reduces total productive time and its impact is not well documented; • There are mixed expectations about the usefulness of mobile technology; • Some supervisors are challenged with not enough in -field time; • Some key inventories of assets need to be addressed; • Service boundary adjustments and route optimization does occur annually; • There is a need for planning of certain summer services; • Kitchener may be losing money on the Regional maintenance contract; • Some equipment innovations have been implemented; • There is an inequity in the levy for the curbside loose leaf collection program'; and, • A shift from a culture of "no news is good news" to performance measurement is needed. The observations using the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) provide an initial picture of where Operations stands along the maturity model's continuum. The CMM evaluation indicates that Operations is averaging a strong "Level 2: Managed Process" position on the five -level continuum. This is actually a good ranking for Operations given that it is very difficult for many organizations to score in Levels 4 or 5 for their key processes unless they have invested heavily over a number of years to optimize their processes, as well as instil a culture of continuous improvement and quality management. We believe that Operations is on the verge of moving up to "Level 3: Described Process" which would be very helpful in realizing this operational review's goal to ensure sustainable service delivery that maintains the quality of community expected by Council 1 The leaf collection was not one of the 80 services but has been included since it merits consideration by the City. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- fags; iii The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division and citizens. We believe Operations can also move to "Level 3: Described Process" for many of its key processes because there is a vast amount of knowledge that exists with managers, supervisors, and field staff; once this knowledge is integrated with a fully - functional maintenance management system and service -based budget, then the processes will be in place and Operations will be easily able to score "Level 3: Described Processes." The overall system management recommendations are shaped by the research, peer benchmarking, best practices from the peers and other jurisdictions, gap analysis, staff interviews, and the capability maturity model. We have developed a strategy to help Kitchener through the transition, having regard for resources, timing, and ease of implementation. The scope for moving forward prioritizes and describes the phasing -in of the recommendations. It also includes a high -level explanation of the resources needed. The inherent philosophy to this scope is to help Operations adapt through small, incremental changes, and the prioritization recognizes that certain changes are a foundation and must precede other changes. The scope for moving forward begins on page vi (note: only overall system management recommendations are listed; for program- specific recommendations, including any service levels identified for Operations, please see Section 5 of this report). Summat- The following is a summary of the key conclusions from this Operational Review: 1. As a growing municipality that adds new green space and roads each year, Kitchener risks running short on its annual Operations funding which causes instability in overall municipal finances. Kitchener needs service -based budgeting to match funding to growth, thereby sustaining its "quality of community "; 2. Kitchener is a step ahead of most of its peer municipalities: improvements to planning, delivering, and adapting each year will contribute to efficient /effective service delivery. 3. Operations staff have strong knowledge of service levels being delivered across all programs, although the CityWorks software is underutilized in this regard. The transfer of knowledge /data into CityWorks improves resource allocation, boosts efficiency and supports evidence based decision - making. 4. Overall system recommendations: an emphasis on budget vs. actual record - keeping, performance monitoring, and target setting will support long -term efficient /effective delivery of services. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- raga; iv The City of Kitchener - operational Review of the operations Division S. Specific program recommendations: throughout the Operations Division, there exist many fine-grain opportunities for continuous improvement (most importantly, the renegotiation of the Regional maintenance contract which has the potential to recover a significant amount of money); and, 6. Implementing actions as prioritized through 2016 will make for a straightforward transition for the Operations Division. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Page v I = E = 2 w J k _ F U o / E / ƒ � ƒ % � ± 2 ± ƒ ± ± ± m _ = �.g c y � ƒ y C- n _§ c m \ *_ % % % ± / % % % % 2 G 2 2// 2 2 2 2 C \ G u = e = = m _ _ =-e = cu 2 � 9 g e 2/ o ƒ f > G ƒ -\ ƒ ƒ -® ƒ U) Cl) Cl) > g CO b Cl) CL k\ k -0 k� % ƒ : 2 = ƒ ƒ \ \ \ k E = \ \ \ E 5 % CL _ CL � y% o c- o CL CL o CL O= O O m z» O U O O U O = E = _ k F U o / E f � ƒ % \ 2 § ƒ E m _ = �.g c y o ƒ y C- n _§ c *_ k C \ 2 u / /f/ a 7 2 7 9 g e 2/ f f U -\ 2 � G CL -0 % ƒ : 2 = ƒ ƒ _ = E = 7 % # -m 7 _ C6 y t .g 7 o CU C G° Q E 0 >- G�° f / / 0 - E 7 ƒ -\ E :\ (_ / 7 2 - E a a n n± U\ ? n 2 _0-0 c U m) a- @% E & c E »® 7 \ƒ 2 a %� y 2 % / 2 ƒ 7 \ % 0 / / » % % / k _0 > 7 7? o / » 0 /± %§% » J a 7 2 y 2 a �__ ± 2 -0 m± g n E [ ƒ � $ = k [ 7 > ° G -E _ @ > ° = 2 % ¥ :% = a\ 2 2 n a _? ƒ f t 7¥ƒ k\ \ 7 C § 0) a a 7 c s 4� o= c kƒ k/ k% 0 k/ 2 k C k a# 7 = 7 a m o � G££ 041 k � o 04� CO 04 CO ci E / ƒƒƒ 04 k ) a \ E ? k ® § 2 ± 3 [ ® o nV) 2 ° 0 2 2 d£ \ k E 0 S 5 0 o E E U> £ / Q /% 0 .G ¢ 2 k 3 E/ \ u$ I a� E a� CO c O CL a`> M a> U C C6 E O N Q 7 O C6 N N C O cu C6 N C6 L CDI O N a-+ C G.1 G.1 L L a� E CO a� ca 0 CO a> 0 0 cuc c 0 U C6 O L Cc6 _0 N N CU6 C6 C6 C N N 7 CO C6 N .Q L 0 C N O O U � i C6 N F- 0 7 N U Q C U) C6 C6 N O >' (D C6 Q Q C _0 N Cc6 7 U) U � CO o n � Y O N Q I The City of Kitchener - Operational Review of the Operations Division � Introduction................................................................................................................................... 1 �.i r)(�sClI)tjot, ar,(� uibp oj)(�niuotis m�,Iis�011 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I 1 .2 KAr(�CtiV(�s offfi(� 01)(�nlUomfl R(Vim ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 2 1 .2 .1 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... � 1 .2 .2 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... � 1 .2 .� msC��ss�o,, wf Ro,�,,(mTmIs W ffi(� Oli �mfl scoj)(� Of �Iml R(mm(��] ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 5 2 Methodology for the Operational Review ............................................................................ 9 2 .1 P(�(�rP)(�tiCfDTmrdtig ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... � 2 .2 N'krj)itig mi�] Cm7(�Ifl S(�n/C� R(Vim ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... I� 2 .� ...............................................................................................................12 2,,,1, ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 1� 2 ,S WrA[fl�Vsis...........................................................................................................................................I "t 3 Observations ................................................................................................................................ 14 �.I P(�(�rP)(�11C1[m'1rd11g mi�] Gil) s ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ,,,,15 �.I .I pn3gnim N'LIuj)i11g ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 15 �.1 .2 �enN�dol7mKlC(�UmcfiCflors �Iml S(�n/C� ...............................................................22 �.I .� Tm,gd Sd�illg ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2,1, � rmsm)o�,nfRer0MU11g ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 25 �.I .S (V(�n[POStj01ilig Of W P(�(�t's ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... .2(!!) �.2 N'kirj)itig �,iml S(�n�iiCx� 1,(V([9..........................................................................................2 "7 �.� SUfff UIIWn�ims ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 28 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ��35 Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited - Page vill The City of Kitchener - Operational Review of the Operations Division 5 Program-Specific Management Recommendations ....................................................... 43 5 .1 Nrks, Tni[s �,llul Pklygl,oululs pt,ogl,�l `llIll 5 .2 lloM Cu�tlI����l�r��s Pn3gl�Dn..................................................................................................�� 5 .� RO�ul �,llul skl(�VVflk pt,ogl,�l[ll ..........................................................................................................5� S."l, �V][lWt,CO[lU,O[Pn39l'MII ................................................................................................ ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 52 5 .5 TnIfliCNh[lg(�Dn(�Ifl Pt,Ogl,WII ........................................................................................................5 "1 5 ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..�� 5 .7 Clt,bsil(� lx��fCO(�cUoti P m gl'�i III ..................................................................................... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 57 6 Scope for Moving Forward ...................................................................................................... 58 �.I (V(�n[sVsWDnNh[lg(�Dn(�Ifl R(�DVDn III (�Il �11 � I Otis ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 58 �.2 Pn3gn[ii -Sn(�CffCR(�DVDnDn(�IuhlUolls ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ()() F.1,1111111171 111111, Ira II Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited - Page ix The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The City of Kitchener ( "Kitchener ") retained Dillon Consulting Limited, in collaboration with Performance Concepts Consulting Limited ( "the consulting team "), to undertake an Operational Review of the Operations Division ( "Operations "). This report provides a discussion of the Operational Review's purpose, its methodology, the research / analysis conducted, and recommendations with a suggested timeline for implementation. This introduction section of the report provides background on the Operations Division and the scope of this Operational Review. I :I Desci i fi° y f Kitcheiuimiir' iratiii ini Div I ui iui� f City f I I iii iui-i The Operations Division of the City of Kitchener's Infrastructure Services Department provides approximately 250 services on behalf of Kitchener's approximate 225,000 citizens. These services are currently being managed, administered, and dispatched out of the recently- completed Kitchener Operations Facility ( "KOF "), located on Goodrich Drive. They can be grouped into the following categories: • concrete repairs; • downtown maintenance; • environmental services (i.e., horticulture and forestry); • minor improvements /repairs; • road maintenance; • sanitation (street sweeping and fall leaf management); • sewer utilities; • sports fields, trails, parks, and sites; • storm utilities; • traffic maintenance (i.e., barrier installation /removal); and, • winter maintenance. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 1 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The services currently being provided by Operations can be further summarized to fall within one of the following asset categories: • storm; • wastewater; • roads; • parks - courts and pitches (i.e., sports fields); • parks; and, • forestry. Operations is committed to the use of CityWorks'" software system as its information management tool to various degrees of functionality across the Division. Primarily, the software is used as a work order management tool that enables the collection of labour, equipment, and material utilization data. CityWorks'" is capable of providing assistance in resource scheduling and asset management; however this functionality is in limited use and requires further configuration. The staff complement in Operations includes one director, three managers, 13 non - unionized supervisors, and nearly 190 full -time and part -time unionized positions. f 2 Objectiiiv e the Opeiratioinial Review The purpose of this Operational Review was to arrive at an assessment and reflection of the services that Operations currently provides, and to provide answers to the following questions: • What services are currently being provided? • How well are the services administered and managed? • How well are the services performed or executed? • At what service level are these services currently being provided? • How do the current service levels compare (to other municipalities and best practice)? • Are the services being performed effectively? • Are the services being performed efficiently? • Are the proper resources (fiscal; staff; equipment) in place to adequately perform the services? Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 2 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division ■ Should we be providing the service? Is there an alternate way to provide the service? Is it feasible? ■ For service being provided on behalf of others: o Should we be providing those services? o Are we being adequately recompensed? o Does the provision of those services impact positively or negatively on other services we provide? ■ What is the resource impact (fiscal; staff; equipment) should we adopt any new or proposed service levels? ■ What are the risks of retaining the current service levels and of moving to the recommended service levels? 1 2 i Stirnmary of the scope of' Work This review was to be undertaken in a series of distinct yet overlapped phases by the consulting team. The phases were: 1. Generation of "Comparative and Best Practices Service Levels" for Priority 1 Services; 2. Gap analysis; and, 3. Recommendations and their Risks. The consulting team's work was preceded by a services inventory and prioritization of services by Operations Staff. For the review to provide meaningful analysis and recommendations within the established timeframes it was necessary to prioritize the total inventory of services and select approximately eighty (80) services for analysis. Staff reviewed the inventory of approximately 250 services delivered by Operations and categorized them into Priority 1 and 2 lists. The prioritization was based primarily on legislated requirements, Council - mandated services, labour hours expended, and budget dollars allocated, with the higher resource intensive services being placed in the Priority 1 list. The services in the Priority 1 list were subject to analysis by the consulting team in this review. The Priority 2 list may be reviewed by staff at a later time. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 3 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division Genet- n of "(7o pat— ie n e 'imm actices "-t-Wc e eiiels ° Timm tmm t-ity f el-il Utilizing the Priority 1 services inventory created by staff in Phase 1, the consulting team was to gather information on best practices and previous experience to perform the following analysis: ■ compare Kitchener's current service levels to at similar municipal entities or other best practices to determine whether the current service levels are at, above or below the average; and, ■ if suitable, to identify whether there are alternative service delivery methods that could be used, and the pros and cons of the alternative delivery methods. Ga Anal ms Service Level Adjustment Recommendations: Leveraging expertise, knowledge /understanding of applicable best practices, and information derived through this review, the consulting team was to recommend service level adjustments for each Priority 1 Service. Gap Assessment: The consulting team was to assess any resource gaps (staff, equipment, information, etc.) between the resources currently available and those required to perform the inventoried services efficiently and effectively at the proposed service levels. Risk Assessment an Re omm :ndation The consulting team was to review all collected data and documentation, and prepare an overview of the challenges and elements of risks that Kitchener may /will face by maintaining existing service levels and /or by moving to the recommended service levels. The consulting team provided recommendations that would help Operations better manage its current performance and workloads, better provide the Priority 1 services, and generally address overall efficiency /effectiveness. The recommendations were framed with the expectation that no net staff reductions would occur but staff resources could shift between lines of service. i. g 2 Role and Composition of th Leering Corni- nines The Operational Review was guided by a Steering Committee composed of City Staff. The Steering Committee was responsible for the review and authorization of the Operational Review's scope and subsequently provided oversight and direction to the consulting team throughout the review process. Milestone meetings with the consulting team were conducted by the Steering Committee to review progress and work completed, including Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 4 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division review of this report. At the conclusion of the Operational Review, the Steering Committee will assess all recommendations and elect the next appropriate course of action in accordance with Council direction. The members of the Steering Committee were: • Pauline Houston, Deputy CAO, INS; • Jim Witmer, Director of Operations, INS; • Hans Gross, Director of Asset Management, INS; • Corina Tasker, Internal Auditor, FCS; and, • Ralph Thele, Manager of Service Coordination and Improvement, INS. I. g 3 Dissi,uission of'Refinernents to the Original Scope oi. ork, and Renewed Objectives of the Operational Review To complete an exercise of this kind, Kitchener and the peer municipalities need to be organized in a way that would facilitate their comparison. These requirements include: ■ Similar conceptual models for mapping of programs /services /activities (ideally based on the municipal reference model) that explain how resources are grouped together to deliver services; ■ A maintenance management system with an accurate allocation of staff labour hours across the map of programs /services /activities that actually consume these hours to enable comparability between internal data and that of other municipalities; and, ■ Key performance indicators and key success factors (KPIs and KSFs) - measuring service outputs, unit costs, and quality of service delivered - that the municipalities aim to achieve, monitor, report on, and use to continuously improve. The initial research into Kitchener's systems confirmed that it is not yet ready for comparison with peer municipalities since it does not have an established program /service /activity data hierarchy (i.e., program mapping). Furthermore, there were historical accuracy concerns with data in Kitchener's maintenance management system. We also learned that there was no formally established set of program /service key performance indicators or key success factors with results not being regularly reported (although some relevant performance data is being collected). Additionally, there was the substantive issue of a major disconnect between how labour hours are logged in Operations' CityWorks software and how the labour costs appear in the Human Resources' SAP /PeopleSoft software, and without these systems matching up, it is virtually impossible to conduct a traditional service level review. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division With respect to the peer municipalities, many of them were not ready for comparison either. Many of the peer municipalities had an un -even application of established program /service /activity data hierarchy (i.e. mapping), some had solid maintenance management system data whereas others did not, and there were varying degrees of service /activity performance indicators or key success factors in place. However, all of the managers at the peer municipalities we spoke to indicated that they understood that a formal system with key performance indicators and supporting technical tools was ideal and necessary (refer to Section 3.1 of this report for further details on how Kitchener's compares to its peer municipalities). The Scope Refinements and'Renemied'Obiectfiies To continue moving forward with this operational review, we broadened our perspective to leverage the information available to us from Kitchener and the peer municipalities. Our scope refinements include: ■ Comparing the consulting team's draft Kitchener Program /Service /Activity mapping to the general information made available by the peer comparators; ■ Comparing the consulting team's draft Kitchener KPI /KSFs and service levels /targets to the general information made available by the peer comparators; and, ■ Comparing whether key tools like maintenance management systems, specialized portals for management to monitor performance (i.e., management "dashboard ") were being used, etc. With this broadened scope, the key objectives of the operational review could be maintained in the absence of appropriate organizational structures and in the absence of extensive service level data from the peer municipalities. Namely, Kitchener would still gain an understanding of how it compared to its peers; secondly, the analysis and recommendations arising from this review would still be able to propel Kitchener toward setting performance targets, adjusting service levels, and supporting its decision - making around Operations' budget. i. g 4, I°o ands R stints Based Management for Kitchener The broadened scope of this Operational Review changes the original focus - from predominantly about service levels - to strategically moving Operations into a Results - Based Management (RBM) approach. Much of the terminology used through the remainder of this report draws upon RBM which is explained here. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 6 The City of Kitchener -- Operational Review of the Operations Division Innovative cities across Canada are making steady progressive in adopting RBM service delivery models. Rather than focusing exclusively on organizational structure, defined budgets, and staff input costs, RBM addresses service delivery outputs (i.e., units of municipality services), service delivery unit costs, and the results these services actually achieve. Budget Decisions Target Plan... Setting Target Adjustment Based on Prior, Results Deliver... p r ° hop ll �f Sfeeh g 'No. Evaluate Results Reporfing RBM operates on an annual Plan - Deliver - Evaluate cycle. In the planning stage, performance indicator data trends inform annual service delivery target setting. At the core of the planning stage, the annual budget is built from the bottom up - it is based on staff or contractor maintenance hours required to execute activities /processes that in turn achieve service delivery quality targets. In the evaluation stage, actual service delivery results (i.e. outputs, unit costs, quality levels) are compared to planned service delivery results. Targets can then be checked and refined for future cycles based on actual results. This RBM cycle is on -going year after year, and it promotes accountability, continuous improvement, and evidence -based operational decision - making. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 7 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The foundation toolkit for RBM is as follows: ■ Program /activi , maps: this is a hierarchy created for Kitchener services that is used to track and organize staff labour hour data, cost data and performance data; ■ Key performance indicators (KPIsI: these are quantifiable measures for each program /service in Operations that document the amount of service units delivered, the cost of these service units, and the quality levels achieved (expressed in terms such as timeliness, coverage plans, productivity /efficiency, etc.); ■ Key success factors (KSFs): these are subjective measures for each program /service in Operations that document the quality outcome achieved (expressed in terms such as customer satisfaction); ■ Quantifiable service level targets: these are specific targets for each individual service delivered by Operations (expressed in terms of response rates, rotations of a service per period, passes by a service vehicle per period, etc.) that is informed by historic KPI /KSF data trends and some may be legislated requirements under the Ontario Municipal Act's Minimum Maintenance Standards; ■ Activity -based budget (or service -based budget): an Operations budget built from the bottom -up3 that first calculates the labour hours and resources necessary to meet the municipality's KPI /KSFs and service levels for a year, and then determines the dollar value based on the estimate of labour and resources. The renewed objective of this Operational Review is to assess Kitchener's current capacity to implement RBM and accelerate its adoption. Once RBM is in place, Council can make rational, evidence based decisions about the allocation of finite budget resources across competing priorities - based on measurable service delivery results tied to those decisions. 3 Versus a top -down budget approach that takes the current year's budget and adds an inflation amount to give the value of the following year's budget (for example, $200 million in the current year plus a 3% inflation amount results in a $206 million budget for the following year). Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- fags; 8 The City of Kitchener - operational Review of the operations Division Methodology for the Operat ional Review This section of the report describes the approach taken to the analysis. Observations and recommendations based on the analysis are provided in subsequent sections of this report. 2 1 Pee ir Beiiii-ichiiii-iia Ills -Iciiiii-ig For Kitchener to implement Results Based Management - including measurement derived service levels - Operations Management determined that a review of peer municipality service levels would be prudent. Management intended to use peer municipality performance data regarding service offerings (e.g., number of units, unit cost, etc.) and quality to inform their own efforts to establish on-going sustainable budgets and performance targets. FOWT-WTx"n- AN 111� population Measures giobal service der nand and acts as a proxy for scale of municipal operations/bUdget Der nographics of Population Unuisuai dernographic distribUtion of popuiation can skew rnunicip6i spending priorities /service levels Land Area/Population Density Impacts efficiency, service, costs & affordability. As area increases and density decreases, uniit costs go up,, Per Household Income Measures fiscal capacity/ability to pay'. Service level expectations correlate witli income to some degree Per Capita Assessment Measures fiscal capacity/abifity to pay. Municipal Asset Consumption predictor of ide-cycle asset replacement costs/pressuires, Could crowd-cut service lev&i demand in situations of firnited fiscai capacity. Municipal $ position Measures $, health and flexibi lit y Of MUnicip alit y, indicator of fiscal room to enhance service levels. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Page 9 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The consulting team provided Kitchener with evidence -based advice on the selection of peer municipalities. The criteria illustrated on the previous page were used to evaluate /filter potential Ontario urban municipalities down to a manageable list of potential peers for an "apples -to- apples" comparison of service levels. The evaluation /filtering criteria data for potential peer comparators was extracted from the highly regarded BMA Consulting municipal financial report (see Appendix A for the detailed peer evaluation /filtering results). The following eight cities were identified by the consulting team as potential "apples -to- apples" peers for Kitchener to consider: • Vaughan • Oakville • Richmond Hill • Burlington • Windsor • Markham • Cambridge • Waterloo In consultation with the Steering Committee, the following set of final peers was identified by the consulting team (Oakville was later substituted for Burlington based on their advanced performance measurement capabilities, and the opportunity for significant "best practices" learning by Kitchener): Benchmark eery .. Markham . Waterloo Oakville urlington -------- o out Vaughan 5. Richmond hamond Hill Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- raga; 10 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The consulting team executed a detailed review of the peer municipalities' progress in adopting RBM. This review included website research and on -site interviews with staff, as well as analyses of budgets, detailed staff level results reports, and public results report to Council. With respect to methodology - subject to the level of cooperation that was offered from the staff of the peer municipalities - the investigation was comprehensive: underlying labour tracking tools (i.e., maintenance management systems) were investigated; financial and data mapping structures were reviewed; key performance indicators and key success factors used by peers have been collected and assessed for application in Kitchener; quantifiable service delivery targets have been identified and evaluated; and, dashboard performance reporting tools have been reviewed. y 2 Activity f)f iuiuu alaii Ctiuu uu iui-f y iui ice Level Review Municipal governments are best understood using a "program logic" conceptual model. The figure below sets out a simple program logic model for Operations, with turf maintenance as the example for the output. uDrt� Activities r0��� ,.... utUt. A program logic model can only add value for a municipality if inputs data can be linked to the various service delivery activities, processes and outputs. Outputs are the Operations "product" that is delivered via processes that are in turn composed of activities. It is essential to be able to match staff hour inputs to activities - and activities to service delivery processes called programs. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance ance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 11 Labour Krtchiener coirrposed of s'W raursfe rsori e HeaMhy, I'urf Hours Acfivifies Services o�.�rs delmverte(,J rec V0Gg schecluled n"Vdr Afen)<.,incem afferifVon A program logic model can only add value for a municipality if inputs data can be linked to the various service delivery activities, processes and outputs. Outputs are the Operations "product" that is delivered via processes that are in turn composed of activities. It is essential to be able to match staff hour inputs to activities - and activities to service delivery processes called programs. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance ance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 11 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division Much work has been done across the Canadian municipal sector to design standardized program logic maps for numerous public services. This work has been codified in the Municipal Reference Model (MRM) which is a common structure for describing the business of municipal government. The mapping of Operations' activities into Program /Service processes by the consulting team used the Municipal Reference Model. The 80 Priority 1 activities originally supplied to the consulting team by Management were reorganized into program maps following the MRM and were further refined based on insights gleaned from the peer municipalities. Detailed maps for Operations Programs /Services have been prepared by the consulting team and are provided in Section 3.1.1 of this report. '3 Kitch iurieir Staff Iii-iteirviews Over a three day period from July 15 to 17, 2013, interviews were conducted with the Division's three managers, 11 supervisors, three field staff, and one staff person dedicated to the CityWorksTM software platform. These interviews were an important part of the process since they provided the consulting team with much insight to Operations from those directly involved in managing, supervising, and delivering the services. It should be noted that many of the supervisors have been employed by Kitchener in Operations for many years and were able to offer a historical perspective on Operations that would be impossible to gain through document research and data analysis. Staff provided the consulting team with the Division's organization chart and the consulting team then identified staff to be interviewed (with the exception of the field personnel that were selected by their managers). Prior to the interviews, the consulting team prepared a brief introductory questionnaire that was intended to help stimulate interviewees thoughts on the organization, service delivery and levels of service, maintenance management systems, and Kitchener as a leader. The questionnaire is included as Appendix B to this report. During the course of the interviews, the consultants provided an explanation of the Operational Review as an introduction to each interview, and then conducted a discussion with each interviewee about the services being delivered, productivity / levels of service, tools and challenges, expectations and performance, budget and record - keeping, recent service adaptations, and opportunities for continuous improvement, in particular technology. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 12 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The interviews were extremely valuable in providing first -hand knowledge of the operational efficiencies, levels of service, challenges, and potential improvements for Operations. Observations from the interviews have been consolidated into Section 3 of this report. Capability Matuirity Model The Capability Maturity Model (CMM) is an organization evaluation approach that aims to determine whether an organization or sub -group of an organization is well - suited to change or continuous improvement. The philosophy underlying the approach is that good process combined with clearly articulated goals creates an organization that delivers consistent outcomes. The CMM is relevant to Operations because the services it delivers are expected to have consistent outcomes (e.g., consistently maintained roads, consistently maintained parks). The evaluation considers the cluster of related activities that achieve important goals, an understanding of the goals to be achieved, and five common features: • Ability to perform (i.e., is the organization able to deliver on expectations ?); • Commitment to perform (i.e., is the organization dedicated to deliver on expectations); • Activities performed (i.e., is the organization doing things it should do ?); • Measurement (i.e., does the organization know how well or poorly it is doing ?); and, • Verification (i.e., does the organization use its knowledge to improve itself?). Any organization that has been evaluated by the CMM fits into one of five levels: • Level 5: Optimizing (best performance, continuous improvement is adopted and in place by quantitative feedback and from piloting new ideas and technologies); • Level 4: Quantitatively Managed (processes are measured by collecting detailed data on the processes and their quality); • Level 3: Described Process (all processes are defined, documented, standardized, and integrated with each other); • Level 2: Managed Process (basic process is established and there is a level of discipline to maintain these processes); and, • Level 1: Ad Hoc (poorest performance, with processes that are poorly defined or chaotic). Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 13 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division The CMM evaluation for Kitchener relies on the other aspects of the operational review (peer benchmarking, activity mapping and current service level review, and staff interviews) as inputs to provide the overall picture of Operations. The results of the CMM evaluation are provided in Section 3 of this report. y 5 f uunlyiii The work conducted for the gap analysis was aimed at closing two gaps. First, with limited information about current service levels readily available, the gap analysis aimed at identifying any relevant service levels for Kitchener to position the municipality with some go- forward service levels and help identify what service lines remained to be benchmarked in subsequent years. This gap was closed through a variety of means, predominantly by drawing upon the knowledge of managers and supervisors during the interviews, but also drawing upon service level information provided by the peer municipalities albeit limited. Secondly, the gap analysis aimed at identifying the timeframes and resources needed to implement the recommendations for improved efficiency and /or effectiveness arising from this operational review. This recognizes that change is necessary for Operations, and addressing the gap of "how to get from here to there" is paramount to the successful transition from the current system to a fully service level - driven and CityWorks -integrated division. This gap was closed through an analysis of all the major recommendations (to improving the overall system and specific program elements) relative to each other and fitting them together into a rationalized timeline, as well as considering the necessary involvement of other Kitchener departments. Consideration was also given to the Capability Maturity Model (i.e., how well Kitchener appears able to adapt to change) in rationalizing the timeline and closing the implementation gap. The gap analysis discussions appear in Section 3 as part of our observations and are incorporated into our recommendations in Sections 4, 5 and 6 of this report. .. ions This section of the report provides a summary of the findings gained through the research and analysis conducted for this operational review. Recommendations are provided in Section 4 and Section S. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 14 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division y :f Pee uur Be ini h iui ii- iii iuni uung l uinialy iii Overall, the peer municipality benchmarking component of this Review has yielded important insights for Kitchener concerning program mapping, performance indicator selection, target setting, and dashboard results reporting. i. i prograrn Mapping The following program maps were developed based on the 80 Priority 1 activities identified by Kitchener Operations staff and by reorganizing them to fit with the Municipal Reference Model (MRM). Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 15 r � � � t � .� � � � � � � � • s WIN s s • p- : � � t � � � .� � � � � � � � � p- : � � t � � � .� .� � .� � � ■\ � � � � � i W s s s • s s •! • • p- : � � t � � � � t � � � � � � � � The City of Kitchener - operational Review of the operations Division A review of the Kitchener program maps reveal that virtually all activities within the maps focus on a variety of (i) planned maintenance or (ii) reactive maintenance activities. Separating reactive and planned activities was necessary because it provides Management with an opportunity to ensure finite resources are properly balanced between short -term priorities (i.e., reactive) and longer -term priorities (i.e., planned). The mapped activities are linked to services /programs defined by different asset types in Kitchener; sports fields, parks, trails, trees, roads, etc. This approach to activity mapping supports sustainable asset management, as well as efficient and effective activity based budgeting. Once they were developed, the consulting team's program mapping for Kitchener Operations was tested with peer municipalities in face -to -face working sessions and teleconferences. Representatives from the peer municipalities endorsed the program /activity mapping based on the Municipal Reference Model. Oakville for instance, has maintenance management system (i.e., labour hours) and budget tracking data mapping in place that is markedly similar to the proposed mapping for Kitchener. General ledger structures match the activity -based structures set out in the Oakville MMS. Vaughan and Waterloo are committed to program /activity based mapping to populate new MMS systems coming online; both municipalities are expecting performance measurement and unit cost budgeting to be value added results of their activity mapping exercises. In short, the peer review indicates that the mapped programs /activities for Kitchener are appropriate and that future benchmarking (i.e., comparison of service levels) should be feasible among peers once new MMS tools are in place in Waterloo and Vaughan. I. 2 Key Performance Indicators and service Levels A package of key performance indicators (KPIs) and key success factors (KSFs) was developed by the consulting team for consultation with the peer municipalities. This package of KPI /KSFs was then tested with peer municipalities in face -to -face working sessions and teleconferences. A sample of the KPI /KSFs from the original package for sport fields and parks is provided in the table below: Sports Fields Actual season rotation cuts versus planned Measures productivity / season plan (by field category) coverage / effectiveness Parks Actual season rotation cuts versus planned Measures productivity / season plan (by park category) coverage / effectiveness Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 22 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division Peers endorsed measuring program /activity outputs and unit costs based on planned and reactive maintenance hours - tracked against various categories of assets. The feedback from the peers have informed the consulting team's program specific KPI /KSF recommendations made later in this report. As noted in Section 1, the original intention of this Operational Review was to conduct a comparative review of service levels between Kitchener and its peer municipalities; however, the peer municipalities had varying degrees of information pertaining to service levels. Some information existed regarding turf maintenance and roads, and these service levels where reviewed /discussed with the peer municipalities. Peers endorsed setting sports field and turf maintenance service levels based on the number of planned seasonal grass cutting "rotations" across all turf locations. Like Kitchener, the peers segregated sports field locations into A versus B quality categories - each with differing service level standards around the number of planned cutting rotations. The peers confirmed once - per -week complete maintenance coverage for A -level sport fields and coverage in the 1.5 weeks to 2 weeks range for park turf. These service levels assume typical /average precipitation patterns across a season. Both sports field and park turf rotations can vary significantly from the planned service level in the case of a markedly dry or wet season. Kitchener provides a "premium" service level for sports field turf for selected CLASS bookings - supplying an addition cut to bring turf height to 2 inches rather than the typical 3 inches. Peer review of winter control service levels revealed that the current Kitchener service level (linked to the Province's legislated Minimum Maintenance Standards) is not atypical. Like the peers, Kitchener measures winter control performance from the end of the winter event - calculating required road system hours of plowing time for cleaning up various road classes. These clean -up timeframes are set out in the Minimum Maintenance Standards. While some peers are exceeding the winter control Minimum Maintenance Standard, others mirror Kitchener's current commitment to the standard. Therefore an adjustment to the winter control service level standard is not a compelling priority for Kitchener. These peer service levels have informed the consulting team's program- specific service level recommendations made later in this report. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 23 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division 1 3 i "argait Setting g The target setting regime designed by Oakville for its performance indicators is worthy of emulation by Kitchener. Performance based targets are tied to budget decision making in the Oakville model. Rather than opt for a simplistic one - number approach (i.e., "Did you meet the exact target - yes or no ? ") Oakville allows an acceptable range for each performance target. If actual results are within the tolerance of the target's mid - point, then performance is deemed "green light" or successful. Actual results can also be classified as yellow light or red light as they fall further from the mid -point in the target zone, or blue if they exceed the target in the positive direction as show in the following figure. This approach to target setting is endorsed by the consulting team for all recommended KPI /KSFs for Kitchener Operations. By linking performance targets to budget allocations, a "contract" for programs to be delivered within an acceptable budget range and meeting community expectations has been created between Oakville Council and the managers of Oakville's Operations. Program: Infrastructure Maintenance CUSTOMER B NNPFITS/] MPA T ' AND PROGRAM OUTCOMES O ME OA K Y1 N N J The peer review also demonstrated that Kitchener pays disproportionate attention to reactive maintenance service levels and performance. While other peers are balancing Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Page 24 The City of Kitchenexr -- Oi1¢.r °atlonal Review of the Oi1¢.r °a ions Division planned maintenance labour budgets versus reactive maintenance labour budgets, Kitchener is following a different approach. Kitchener's service delivery culture is to be very responsive to Council and residents. While there is nothing inherently wrong with being highly responsive, when resources are limited then being highly response means that planned maintenance activities critical to sustainable asset management and longer -term stewardship can be short - changed. Peer behaviour when addressing service requests in some jurisdictions is markedly different than Kitchener. Planned maintenance labour budget integrity is protected from ad hoc consumption by "urgent" reactive maintenance requests. Kitchener can adjust this disproportionate attention to reactive maintenance workload by setting explicit planned maintenance targets - a lesson derived from Oakville. Additionally, Kitchener could consider the approach of other jurisdictions that dedicate a few field crews to reactive requests and keep the majority of their field crews dedicated to planned maintenance activities. 1 4, Dashboard Reporting Fa�fe'arWree i,,:� 4'rtpraa�u:r sent tteruz °ga,� 1,teVet', W lteDU � t8µ„ttvtz� rsta7+iup�rretFg4ru1�'. p trrulbox 0ramtr Sent perms Dekted He t�uuuvl k.-traxaak "Q 1 0'" th oxu l i Ny t5S IYeer1, ✓ 4,P'�I 'searor Irollder'a. io � 11YtMlti t�IFm a�'ou °mtreclt Fwo '�,�, ''P4'FlmlridUat�t Fodg CdAt I:IlrobrilFreerdu,uu . Ihwadv le Older 1au,aagme,tn 15r�m a IrtlF„,r'ti t4prrtk'ua'ee 4tre�n. Dashbc ar& IPM Project Dashboard w JO tFul 11 ,0a „I(btn ... r„rr ,,i;, 1 1. -at of 2�3 Q telede'd( z a I +rtirtisrr t A1948 t.01F°GF p t K r,1 r,Fur Ps "F t Chan e Requests by Statues IM Not Issue "J ti,rPtentW °,, ➢I "Prat A'FDs: My Overdue RN's * F1amre .o,,. I; ui: tex'I i 0 00 -0000 1hrerheadsg Name RequRed IClate 1 Status Sub)fct r 11*001 (SW Food, Wfaaeh_ 'Fr mmarV... °' 11•dl 21Gruttleru Elledrucal.., The Can ' , 11 C 3 (South FaA GOWI, hwturdun, 201015,12011 AdIive 1.1. -0N4 (Metro Bind Stop II, Vohs Fla 7 11.0005 gNftwmvoutk Deusuoy_ SIouthea 0 11 OD06I VNate Or'0nt F"tace,,., Fairway ° 1,1 7 (Iiahtclirroal Fgouit; Horner I 1. -at of 2�3 Q telede'd( z a I +rtirtisrr t A1948 t.01F°GF p t K r,1 r,Fur Ps "F t Chan e Requests by Statues IM Not Issue "J ti,rPtentW °,, ➢I "Prat A'FDs: My Overdue RN's * < -:r , ri i,l , I ,,, , � -) . ]PIA RFQJs° My Open RF'' Name RequRed IClate 1 Status Sub)fct r Name - 11• 1•r iwll g, dcNWtlou9al,.. M0512V11 Erne Addutmnalcopy, 11 ,0001.0001 iElectrpsalS_ 11• 0m,14003 'Sgl „rc charltp.. 201015,12011 AdIive Spec clanrtocatao ? 11-00014002 002 tPluaavauovFq ... 7 1.1 •thi l -0 004 � vertrarcr 20/05r1011 Aduwe Overhang 'a1 dr.. I 11 001.0003 (Palnttiatg) Kitchener currently tracks some important existing performance data in its maintenance management labour tracking software system, and on paper maintenance log sheets. However, this performance data seems to be stuck in the software system or in paper files - without easy or regular reporting to Management to inform decision - making. Management needs to have an enhanced approach to monitoring Operations performance Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 2 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division in real time so that it can quickly adapt to situation and trends, ideally with desktop electronic access to a portal that summarizes key results - commonly referred to as a "dashboard " — such as the one illustrated above. Vaughan is addressing this issue by acquiring new performance dashboard software. Dashboard software provides staff with constant access to "fresh" performance data via simple visual reports that are easy to understand and interpret. Dashboards create a positive performance culture by connecting the work accomplished by individual employees to a visual scoreboard. Staff teams can compete against themselves and each other using the dashboard as a performance scoreboard. Vaughan is very aware of the results -based culture benefits of dashboard software. Kitchener can significantly improve its capacity to "get the message out" by using a dashboard tool to promote performance - indicator- derived target setting and target achievement. CligView is one of many highly regarded dashboard software products already being used by multiple municipal organizations in Ontario. i. "S Overall Positioningol'Kitchener Relative to Reams Kitchener is reasonably well positioned relative to the peer comparators in terms of evolving capability to implement results -based management and its related decision support tools, as illustrated in the table on the following page. Only Oakville seems to be significantly more advanced in developing RBM tools. Many of the Oakville advances towards fully- evolved results -based management have been documented in this report for on -going emulation by Kitchener. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 26 The City of Kitchener -- Operational Review of the Operations Division Labour tracking Yes tools? Unknown New tool New tool Yes pending pending Financial and Evolving to Evolving to data mapping Not Program Unknown Unknown Program Program structures in based Based Based place? Yes... but KPl/KSFs in Not beyond Not beyond Not beyond partial - but weak and place? MPMP MPMP MPMP evolving evolving Mixed - Partial - Partial - Partial - Partial - legislated Quantifiable service delivery legislated legislated legislated legislated minimums are targets? minimums are minimums are minimums are minimums are met for roads, met for roads met for roads met for roads met for roads many ad hoc service levels Dashboard performance No No No Pending No reporting tools? Activity Mal)l)iiiii-igaiiii-idSeiiii vicei,evels Yes Yes Yes Yes M This approach to Program /Service /Activity mapping and data tracking supports sustainable asset management, as well as efficient and effective activity based budgeting. The 80 mapped activities originally supplied to the consulting team by Management have been further refined / supplemented based on insights gleaned from the peer municipalities. Peer municipality staff reviewed and endorsed the mapping - they either track data in the same fashion or plan on doing so. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 27 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division Service levels and performance indicators should be linked to the processes and the outputs inherent in a program logic model and Kitchener's program maps. Service level measurement at the individual activity level is overly ambitious at this time - it should be deferred until higher -level program measurement requirements have been met. None of the Kitchener peers reported setting measurable service levels at the activity level - they do so at the program level. The 80 Kitchener service delivery activities assessed by the consulting team have all been mapped into program outputs (i.e., municipal products) that directly impact the public. Therefore all 80 are now incorporated into an evolving program based planning, costing and performance measurement model for Kitchener. Results Based Management (RBM) at the program level is the recommended "deliverable" for Kitchener to fully implement in coming years, and is discussed fully as part of the recommendations in Section 4. Staff l uu f uu views During the course of the staff interviews, a wide range of feedback was received from the consulting team regarding the challenges and potential solutions division -wide and specific to programs. The consulting team has considered all the feedback received through the interviews and has been able to identify a series of common themes. The following observations are a consolidation of the feedback received through the interviews and no specific staff person is named in these observations. ac hie maintenance requests are negathielY impacting p annex inaii teem' c e efficiencies Most the services delivered by Operations are intended to be planned maintenance, which means that the work is scheduled and delivered based on a planned route. However, Operations also has to respond to requests for service to address a specific issue (reactive maintenance), such as roadside debris clean -up, and the supervisors indicate that the majority of reactive maintenance requests are given priority over planned maintenance. This means that operations crews which would have completed a planned day's work along efficient routes are detoured from their route to respond to issues in different locations across the municipality, resulting in a significant decline in productivity and reduction in cost - effectiveness because they are travelling to multiple dispersed locations. Furthermore, many of these issues do not require immediate response, although the apparent customer service standard is that the issue is resolved as quickly as possible. Over the course of a year, multiple service lines, and numerous crews, the inefficiency of travel time to service Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 28 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division reactive requests builds up and undermines Operations' ability to be as efficient and cost - effective as possible. Afanaget-s an upet -ii isoi -s h iie ad'apted' Cityf /ot- ' iot * ot-d'et-s to quit theit- set-iiice lines All of the work that needs to be done by Operations is linked to a work order in CityWorks; this is an appropriate approach but has the risk of becoming a time - consuming administrative burden to managers and supervisors who might create a work order for every specific task undertaken (for example, issuing a work order for each street that needs asphalt crack sealing). Instead, the managers and supervisors have adapted their approach with work orders to suit the type of work in their service lines and have found a balance between resource allocation, service requests, and record - keeping. Some work orders are issued to a sub -area, quadrant, or neighbourhood of the municipality and all of the service is resourced, requested, and recorded at an aggregate level with comments about completion logged in CityWorks (e.g., street sweeping is work - ordered in four quadrants). Other work orders are issued specifically to each project or piece of work, and service is resourced, requested, and recorded at the task - specific level (e.g., each complaint received regarding tree maintenance is work ordered separately). This mixed approach to the work orders illustrates an appropriate application of management process and technology, and good attempts by managers and supervisors to reduce administrative burden for Operations. Afanaget-s i-Ne to minimize it- me While the services delivered by Operations can be done during regular "9 to Y business hours, there are a wide variety of services that occur early in the morning, late in the evening, and on weekends such as snow plowing, preparation of sports fields, and road closures. There is a potential for a significant amount of overtime to consume the division's annual budget; however, senior leadership has been given direction to minimize overtime to the extent possible. Managers and supervisors have taken steps to minimize overtime costs that helps optimize the budgets for as many labour hours as possible. For example, the services delivered by horticulture are delivered by shifts whose hours include weekend days but do not trigger overtime. In the winter season from 2012 to 2013, managers indicated that they were able to keep a cap on overtime hours while still being able to meet the Province's required service levels for road maintenance. This demonstrated effort to reduce overtime illustrates good tactics by management to optimize labour hours within the given budgets. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 29 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division Through discussion with the peer municipalities, there was an understanding that many of them were busy (or too busy) trying to deliver services and not trying to adapt to improve efficiency. In Kitchener's case, there are signs that managers have made adaptations to improve efficiency and optimize resources and the budgets allocated to them. As one example, the crews that repair the concrete sidewalks used to work together to build the forms and then pour the concrete, and were able to pour approximately 900 to 1,000 cubic metres of concrete each year; now, a specialized crew builds the forms well in advance of the crew which pours the concrete, and by staging the work, the entire crew is about to pour approximately 1,900 cubic metres of concrete each year - roughly doubling the previous output. As another example, one member of the crew that seals cracks in asphalt begins the day at 6:45 a.m. to heat the crack sealing compound and the remaining five members of the crew arrive at 7:30 a.m. when the compound is ready for application, and then the crew goes out; this is better use of staff time than the previous approach where all six members of the crew arrived in the morning and were mostly idle until the compound was ready. The adaptations by managers and supervisors to improve efficiency demonstrate good diligence within Operations and a desire by many to "work smarter, not harder." Small utilitY cut jobs at-e not cost-effectNe Operations is responsible for cuts into the asphalt roadway and /or concrete curb and sidewalks prior to any work by the electricity, cable television, telephone, and water /sewer utilities. Operations has a cost recovery mechanism for the cut jobs for non - municipal utilities (cable television, telephone) that overall seems appropriate at $225 per concrete slab and $104 for asphalt cuts under 20 square metres (plus a $182 show -up fee). However, for small jobs this is not cost - effective since the actual cost is estimated at $500 or more per concrete slab (the actual cost for asphalt is undefined). A change to the cost recovery mechanism has yet to be made to implement new pricing for the small cut jobs. Management's awareness that there are cost - recovery issues such as this one is a good sign of in -depth knowledge, although a change to the cost recovery formula for the small cut jobs has yet to be implemented. Some back-chat-ging of costs to othet- delmaments is happening In addition to being the "public face" of many services delivered to the community such as snow plowing and parks maintenance, Operations is also a service provider to other departments whose projects require their involvement. For example, road closures and detours for special events has good cost recovery because the labour is Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 30 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division charged to the budget for the special event (such as Oktoberfest) and does not have to be absorbed by the Operations budget. This same cost - recovery approach applies to road closures and detouring in winter for the repair of water main breaks - the cost is charged to the water utility's work order and the service provided is fully cost - recovered - as well as street sweeping after a traffic accident, cuts in asphalt and sidewalk for the cable television and telephone utility companies, and capital engineering projects. The back - charging of costs to other departments demonstrates good financial management by Operations. Tt-aiiel time significantlY i-e 'uces total Timm ductNe time and its impact is not miell The travel before work can begin is referred to as "dead heading." Both managers and field staff expressed a consistent concern regarding the amount of productive time impacted by long dead heading. With the exception of horticulture services that deploy from three locations, any services delivered to the northern section of the municipality require long dead heading of work crews and vehicles. During interviews and a review of budget data, it became apparent that travel time is not logged separately from actual productive time. This clouds management's ability to understand actual travel time versus productive time and budget appropriately for both activities for each service line. The issue is significant because as the municipality grows then the hours of dead heading increases, which has the potential of significantly reducing the average amount of actual work hours delivered by field crews year- over -year. Management is aware of the issue and its implications. It is expected that travel time will continue to increase as Kitchener grows southward and crews serving the far southern end of the municipality may start to see dead head times similar to those for the northern end of the municipality. Management has the ability to calculate dead head time using the GPS equipped on Operations vehicles, although this is rarely done. It does, however, have a grasp of the dead head time issue and understands that round -trip travel time can consume from 25% to 35% of the work day hours. Operations currently deploys mobile technology differently across its service lines, including using tablet computers for certain condition assessments, lead hands using Blackberry smart phones to photograph problems and initiate service requests, and other staff using their own personal devices to facilitate efficiency in the absence of the municipality making mobile technology available to them. One of the primary benefits of mobile computing (e.g., notebook computers in field vehicles) is the real -time logging of labour hours and job completion, rather than Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 31 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division staff returning early each day to the KOF to log this information. During discussions, managers and supervisors indicated that mobile technology would be very suitable for certain crews whereas it might not be helpful for other crews. While it may seem that management is not fully embracing technology, they are simply demonstrating their good understanding of the need to improve technology skills before asking all the crews to be adept with new hardware. Supervisors are an important part of the team hierarchy in Operations since they provide in- office work order management and in -field oversight of the crews to ensure that work is being done properly. Many, but not all, supervisors indicate that there is a significant challenge with the amount of in- office work that needs to be done, especially with managing work orders that prevents them from spending the amount of time they believe they should be spending in the field. Those supervisors that wanted to spend more time in the field believe that mobile technology would help them stay in the field for longer periods since they could manage work orders remotely from the office. The desire for supervisors to be in the field demonstrates good diligence on their part. An important part of maintaining the quality of community desired by Council and citizens is having good inventories of all the assets that need to be maintained. There are two important inventories at Kitchener; one that needs to be updated and another that needs to be developed. The tree inventory is 6 years old and without knowing the maturity, species, and last service of the tree, then maintenance of the municipality's trees is not optimized. The Province has minimum maintenance standards for road signage but Kitchener does not have a full inventory of all of its road signs, meaning that road sign maintenance is likely to default to a more expensive and inefficient reactive approach rather than a planned approach. It is in Kitchener's best interest to update the trees database and develop the road signage database as the first step to optimizing the resources expended on maintaining trees and road signage. As the urban area of the municipality expands each year it is important for Operations to stay abreast of the additional infrastructure and facilities in newly built neighbourhoods, and ensure service and maintenance in these areas is delivered equally as well to established neighbourhoods. This necessitates periodic review of service boundaries and optimization of routes. Managers and supervisors Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 32 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division indicate that these boundary adjustments and route optimizations occur annually, noting recent adjustments such as the addition of two snow plow routes and changes to the street sweeping boundaries and routes, as well as a reconfiguration of the salt truck routes in 2009. These on -going refinements to how services are delivered demonstrate that management is properly linking service planning with geographic growth. To optimize staff resources across the summer and winter seasons, all staff are pooled together as winter approaches and are allowed to select their winter duties based on seniority, and when the season changes from winter to summer then staff are redeployed into their summer duties. While this seasonal redeployment is viewed as a positive because it allows for a generally consistent labour force year - to -year, it demands time and resources from managers and supervisors. In particular, maintenance of parks and similar assets that require some pre - planning and target- setting prior to the start of season are not being planned. Crews are launched into maintenance duties and management feels that planning some of these summer activities would help improve effectiveness (especially related to grass fields where preventative maintenance can significantly reduce resource - consuming needs later in the season such as weeding and resodding). Management's awareness and desire to plan these summer services shows that it does understand the dynamics of good maintenance versus issue resolution, although it has not been able to implement summer planning for specific maintenance activities. Wtchenet- maY be losing moneY on the Regional maintenance conti'act In addition to being a service provider to other departments, Operations is also a service provider to the Regional Municipality of Waterloo which subcontracts road maintenance work to Kitchener. Management indicates that there is logic in Kitchener servicing the Regional and feels they have sufficient resources to service the Region and Kitchener (in particular during winter). The Regional maintenance contract is bid as a lump sum; however, it is currently not favourable for Kitchener because there is no cost allocation to cover the manager and supervisor time needed when servicing the Regional contract. Management is fully aware of this issue; estimates that it may be losing a significant amount of money per year under the current contract; and is currently renegotiating the contract. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 33 The 0ity of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division Some equil)tnent innoiiations haiie been implemented' Either through special capital projects or an on -going innovation fund for public works, municipalities (including the Region of Waterloo) pilot new equipment - other than information technology - that is intended to increase efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery. We understand that an on -going innovation fund does not exist for Operations, yet even in its absence, management has been able to introduce equipment innovations. For example, given limitations on the labour budget and stringent paint specifications by the Ontario Ministry of Transportation for the maintenance of pavement markings, management invested in equipment that uses thermoplastic technology instead of paint to mark the roads; this has allowed Operations to achieve targeted coverage of the municipality with the same number of staff prior to the thermoplastic technology. As another example from concrete and asphalt maintenance, the crews now use mud - jacking technology to raise lowered concrete sidewalk slabs rather than removing, reforming, and re- pouring new slabs, as well as use a new asphalt and concrete grinding machine that can skim asphalt and concrete to smooth both materials and surfaces simultaneously. The equipment innovations which have been implemented by management in the absence of specific funding illustrates that management does not rely on the status quo and demonstrates management's willingness to continually advance Operations. Thet-e is viii i equit y in the leyY ii- the it-bsi e loose leaf collection ' i -ogimma m• Municipal leaf waste collection in autumn is customarily collected at curbside using compostable bags; however, Kitchener Council has given direction to Operations to collect leaves in autumn through a program that allows certain property owners to put out the leaves in a loose pile at the curbside. The properties that are allowed to put out loose leaves at the curbside are in specific neighbourhoods with very mature trees and loose collection is offered since these property owners would otherwise have to put out a large number of bags for bagged collection. Management indicates that the number of eligible properties increases over time because the trees in the municipality are continually maturing. We understand that the funding for this program comes from the sewer levy, since the leaf collection helps reduce blockage of the storm sewer catchbasins; however, the sewer levy fee is collected city -wide and properties that do not receive loose leaf collection pay to subsidize the increased level of service that the loose leaf collection eligible properties receive. In the migration to a service -based budget, it is important that Kitchener levy the true 4 The leaf collection was not one of the 80 services but has been included since it merits consideration by the City. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- fags; 34 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division cost of the loose leaf collection program to the benefitting properties so that it can escalate the program cost accurately when new neighbourhoods are added in subsequent years. need ed' Kitchener may not have a formally established results -based management system (i.e., setting performance targets, monitoring and reporting on performance, and using previous years' performance to inform next year's planning) but this is also the case at other peer municipalities such as Markham and Richmond Hill. To bridge the performance measurement gap, two elements need to be in place: the measurement /monitoring tools and a performance- oriented culture among all staff. Later sections of this report provide recommendations the performance measurement /monitoring tools to address the first element. Regarding the second element of culture, it is clear that Operations benefits from a demonstrated desire by management to continuously improve, reinvest, and sustainably deliver services that support Kitchener's quality of community; furthermore, managers and supervisors appear to have a good grasp of how much service can be delivered for the summer and winter seasons with the resources they have. While these positive aspects are a good starting point for the shift towards a performance measurement system, there appears to be an understanding that "no news is good news," meaning that if services are delivered and no one is complaining then inherently services are being delivered optimally. We anticipate that this culture exists because management simply does not have the feedback loop offered by a performance measurement system to objectively tell them if they are meeting goals other than budgetary compliance. With a performance measurement system in place that informs management about the division's successes, then the gain in knowledge should support a transition from the "no news is good news" culture to a performance- oriented culture of "we achieved targets X, Y and Z this season ". 3 4 Capability Matuirity Model . The observations using the Capability Maturity Model (as described in Section 2) provide an initial picture of where Operations stands along the maturity model's continuum. It should be noted that Kitchener should not place too much emphasis on the numerical ratings especially because it is very difficult for organizations such as Kitchener without extensive standard procedures (such as an ISO 9001 management system) to score higher than "Level 3: Described Process." The goal is to understand the current state of the Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 35 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division organization and move away from any unstructured management activities to well - defined structure of processes, protocols, and policies. Below are the key processes in Operations and the maturity model ranking. The ranking is based on the consulting team's research, analysis, peer benchmarking, and staff interview results discussed in the preceding subsections of this report. Coordinate /plan maintenance activities and maximize effectiveness of resources Level 2: Managed Process Maintain municipal assets Coordinate work with projects in other departments Track activities and costs in a maintenance management system Manage resources and activities to optimize service delivery across two seasons (summer, winter) Respond to public and internal inquiries in a responsive manner Monitor and improve customer satisfaction level Use past performance to set budget and targets and future years Level2: Managed Process Level2: Managed Process Level2: Managed Process Level2: Managed Process Varies between Level2: Managed Process and Level 3: Described Process Level2: Managed Process Varies between Level 1: Ad Hoc and Level2: Managed Process The CMM evaluation indicates that Operations is averaging a strong "Level 2: Managed Process" position on the five -level continuum. This is actually a good ranking for Operations given that it is very difficult for many organizations to score in Levels 4 or 5 for their key processes unless they have invested heavily over a number of years to optimize their processes, as well as instil a culture of continuous improvement and quality management. We believe that Operations is on the verge of moving up to "Level 3: Described Process" which would be very helpful in realizing this operational review's goal to ensure sustainable service delivery that maintains the quality of community expected by Council and citizens. We believe Operations can also move to "Level 3: Described Process" for Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 36 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division many of its key processes because there is a vast amount of knowledge that exists with managers, supervisors, and field staff; once this knowledge is integrated with a fully - functional maintenance management system and service -based budget, then the processes will be place and Operations will be easily able to score "Level 3: Described Processes." The full range of recommendations to help Operations advance into the future - that have regard for the capability maturity model ranking - is presented in the following sections of this report. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 37 The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division Overall Management R, The recommendations for Operations is divided into overall system management recommendations in this section of the report and program- specific recommendations in Section 5 of this report. The overall system management recommendations are shaped by the research, peer benchmarking, best practices from the peers and other jurisdictions, gap analysis, staff interviews, and the capability maturity model. The recommendations begin on the following page. They are organized by the recommended improvement, and explanation of the risk if there is no change, the specific change(s) to the system that are needed to achieve the improvement, and the benefit offered by implementing the change. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 38 I V) C L E U � a) a) C cu U) O a) .Q 7 a) Cn ca N U Cl) o Cf) a> '' — CO O U > N Cn O - -0 -6 CCU N Q CO CO 0) C6 i � 0 0 a) N a) 0 O CO� _ -p Q CO O o2f > "� E a) � C O N "co -� c "� a) E > o 0) C -p a) U .0 U � a) "U 0� U N 0 E C �' a) X cp O U .� C6 — O — C O _0 c Cn E C C C6 a) -0 c6 C Q C) CM U6 a) O c >1 C) C6 Q � O Q E — -p O _ Q cu z= — O o C r O OL 0 _0 0 O I 5 S ON 0 CU O c E U (D �C6 _ -0 a N O - O c O an ) U) E O O O > , a) O O :3 a) C6 Q O - -0 a a- Cn a) n -p a) c6 5' C n c - O u) CU E -ZU O n Cn — O c :I "C6 U O N ` CU O C6 _0 E — n O U) n 2 _ _ _U_0 Cn ?� U U Cn L L o -p C U cu Cn J a) (D ~ O U� O W z U c> o2S O c H U6 > c6 L.L C6 Q 0 L W O N C — N 0 o2f O _� > C6 "U6 L.L � W Un m U C a) .� N c6 (D Cn N W Q - .� .� N O •� -N m Q a� LZ O a) -a �- W m • • • 0 � a> con :3 a- CO cn O CO Cn C O � -0 O p C O OL U "E N U 'p Q U CU L G c CU � a`> a> — o a o _ o c Ua c :3 >1 a> E E �3 cu CD- 1 CU L1J a) o2f U) a> ccu CU N 0 o °— 4:-: � u > :3 O �o °> (D (D v 0) 0) 0) O 0) 0 C c6 Cn m Q CO C Q c E p O UL6 OC c6 C E Ua -0 E Q c (D >, O Cn p "� a) LL Y c a)-, 0 O w C C6 U c6 O C Y -tf N I O ca s= O N U O . — U6 8 L C N Q fl C 0 > a) O O Q N O- "> N Q U) cA 0- o -a O (D O :t-f V) C L E U � a) a) C cu U) O a) .Q 7 a) Cn ca N U I O O O 0 C 0 O C E a) O O 0 N Ur- O N- ° C ) U -- Q U U - U C O O ° O ° C "� Cll E C6 C6 -w C E — C6 ) -O C6 O C6 C6 C6 Q Cn O Q Cn 'p 7 Q 0 -� C6 C6 C C� a) C E N O > E C :tf O Cn OU U m E O cl) C "� o X > ca a> CL 5 = °- aci ca U � aci o C) 6 m 0 CM E c o f Ca a> `n - O c o ) `o c C ca ° Ca O — c a> -6 C M -p CL > o o° ° cn 0 °> t ° c o O c °= O c C 0 � C oo ca ca � o CL CU c o C _¢ _� ° '� CU U C C6 >, C6 N I C6 C — o cn L M ID C cn C E U) �_ c a`> 0 O C6 ,� N Cn _> N O a) O COq E Y a) C O v V) O E N E i .00 C% L d E C cp N a C C6 U) C O .0 N E .Q O 0 U C6 a) C Ca a> a> E E c O a) E E 7 Cn a) C C C6 Q C 7 O U 7 O Q _0 _ N C C6 E D- 0 7 O Cn — N a) y O LL. W o z co W c6 m � a) Cn N Ca a> O a> a> c is U C a> U a> .E CU C U (1) C6 Q — =f - — CV O N N _ a) L O N C�6 a) -� Cn N U O OL cm C6 a) Cn 0) C C a) N co C6 C w N (� .0 C O N � C6 0) C6 a) " O E � a) C a5 Q -� -p C6 Ci -� —_ Cn -0 0 � L C6 .L a) _ C6 c') (1) a) O U O U a U Q C 0 C6 -p C 0- Q O 0 c � CC6 A Cn U >, U Cn C O -� .O E E Q C (10 CO OC cl) O O E -0 a) � N ~ a) Cn N � N N 'p O 7 N a) > � i N � co N a) 0 O N CC6 _0 O a) _0 Cn N m a) C6 � C6 U C6 CD a) Cn N LL Cn a> E O a) - E 0 N 0 cl) _> N C6 - Y Cc6 a> � '— C N O O a> E _� Q c) U m > Q) N a) E U� Q CC6 �_- CU -0 P (10 C� 6 Q -O Q �- N_ Cq � C6 O 0 O E-0 O C6 U O C C C_0 OF -L � C6 C E = � a> � N 4:—: C O a) a: 5 �' C" C N— Q E o _c C E LU Z� .> a> c- o O .= c- o C' a> 0 OU 0 O C6 Cn O OU W C6 C- m O m U N > LL E_ m E� E R N N-0 Q Cn N-0 O O O 0 C 0 O C E a) O O 0 N Ur- O N- ° C ) U -- Q U U - U C O O ° O ° C "� Cll E C6 C6 -w C E — C6 ) -O C6 O C6 C6 C6 Q Cn O Q Cn 'p 7 Q 0 -� C6 C6 C C� a) C E N O > E C :tf O Cn OU U m E O cl) C "� o X > ca a> CL 5 = °- aci ca U � aci o C) 6 m 0 CM E c o f Ca a> `n - O c o ) `o c C ca ° Ca O — c a> -6 C M -p CL > o o° ° cn 0 °> t ° c o O c °= O c C 0 � C oo ca ca � o CL CU c o C _¢ _� ° '� CU U C C6 >, C6 N I C6 C — o cn L M ID C cn C E U) �_ c a`> 0 O C6 ,� N Cn _> N O a) O COq E Y a) C O v V) O E N E i .00 C% L d E C cp N a C C6 U) C O .0 N E .Q O 0 U C6 a) C Ca a> a> E E c O a) E E 7 Cn a) C C C6 Q C 7 O U 7 O Q _0 _ N C C6 E D- 0 7 O Cn — N a) y O LL. W o z co W c6 m � a) Cn N Ca a> O a> a> c is U C a> U a> .E I / § .- (1) / 0 / 7 Cl) n Cl) 2 \ � / ƒ 7 ƒ / E a / 7 CM ) 2 Cl) J f = ± c = n / ) _ % % 2 �__ % n/ a n_ t = 7> 2 / % ƒ � \ ƒ / :ƒ Cl) o f - & 7 nƒ -® %(§ S Q ° (1) / ( ® ± CL 2 % _ ® c § � Cl) e ƒ/ > m/ ® 6° E f .% c _ = o m « o % § ± ) @ ± 2 0 c @ ± n m o = \ _ _ = b f / 7 $ y f ° \ m - $ ± / % / 7 2 =e / S ƒ _ -_§ - Cl) w k m® 2 2 =%� 2 Cl) m M§ d ƒ ± ± n § Cl) @ ƒ E 2 ° ? 2 U = 4 m 2 a 2 k ® _ & \ & c ® _ _ = Cl) m o k § 2 / y 7 G 2 \ - --- \ ± & / ƒ 2 4:-: = a 2 � ± ~ t c & � / k 7 . * 2 = 2ƒ n%) tƒ n -� n 7 2 m = m f -- n 7 m= a e .g 2 2 7 -» 7 =± n E / -% ƒ G ƒ ) [ / f o � 2 / .R / # 2 = 2 S/ m%% 0- k O k k 7 2 0 2ƒ k / U E m c m O- » .g 0- E n- c o_. 4 2 � 2 ¢ � E m o k � m 7 -0 F ƒ m CO 7 e \ j / & 2 .g ƒ ƒ @ CO LO a @ y = / % 2 E ¥ w ® \ R - / § ± R _CU ± / e 5 % [ CO 0 � n k a � 3 y n 2 f© m% 2 G E e f _ f a CO m§ CO 99§\_kf y /3 CO ® 7 � G m ° 2 § k _ 0 7 -E / E § $ Cl) \ 7 -0 § % \ / Cl) c e% 1 4= m \ 2/ e J� m = m - n % & w> @ n w c = E y / e .G cz e ¥ E d% o E R E§ t / S® e ± e 9 C D af-0 oo § ° f n ƒ ® E ® { % = / ° s 0§ E a 2 2 eƒ 2 o_0 2 .� § 7 7 \ n » - m 0 0) , / % k 3 7 22) 0 / CO -/ 5; 2 % & z ƒ > C-1) \/ƒ d b - 3 ƒƒ 2 d cu / § .- (1) / 0 / 7 Cl) n Cl) 2 \ � / ƒ 7 ƒ / E a / 7 CM ) 2 Cl) J f = ± c = n / ) _ % % 2 �__ % n/ a n_ t = 7> 2 / % ƒ � \ ƒ / :ƒ Cl) o f - & 7 nƒ -® %(§ S Q ° (1) / ( ® ± CL 2 % _ ® c § � Cl) e ƒ/ > m/ ® 6° E f .% c _ = o m « o % § ± ) @ ± 2 0 c @ ± n m o = \ _ _ = b f / 7 $ y f ° \ m - $ ± / % / 7 2 =e / S ƒ _ -_§ - Cl) w k m® 2 2 =%� 2 Cl) m M§ d ƒ ± ± n § Cl) @ ƒ E 2 ° ? 2 U = 4 m 2 a 2 k ® _ & \ & c ® _ _ = Cl) m o k § 2 / y 7 G 2 \ - --- \ ± & / ƒ 2 4:-: = a 2 � ± ~ t c & � / k 7 . * 2 = 2ƒ n%) tƒ n -� n 7 2 m = m f -- n 7 m= a e .g 2 2 7 -» 7 =± n E / -% ƒ G ƒ ) [ / f o � 2 / .R / # 2 = 2 S/ m%% 0- k O k k 7 2 0 2ƒ k / U E m c m O- » .g 0- E n- c o_. 4 2 � 2 ¢ � E m o k � m I 2 w 2 ± m 7 \ ± c ° 2 e CU e = § � } \ ( / \ \ Cu ® ± ®k ? / � ƒ -0 % -0 y \ CO k / G / y m@ 2 2 w f k C) ° 7 a§ __ M e = % / \ / o & 3 ƒ E / _ƒ % R 2 % # ® § / k k / 7 § > C [ A > = J § _ ° a CL o± A® 2 7 k % % \ a » / ± § / = CO k Cu = a � 2 C ƒ) 2 CO k ) CO > @ 2 & = f ± > a: E e / 2 ® ® 2 m ° 2 -« ® � / `§ / 2 4 2 Cu e % a & u / @ / » 12 c / ƒ f f ) / 2 � - R > 2 _ -m t Cu x = R ° e § k 2 ®§ c} k_ 0% g% k ¥ t U Cu U / / e / c % ¥ f / / 7 / % ) ƒ _ = 2 ƒ a / ƒ c CO G .2 \ c 3 -\\/ c- Cu 2 6 LL. y =.g CL CO o® ® 7 w &ƒ Cu f & f k U)C _k 2 d CO � -- -0 > ~ _ -0 _ _ 0 k 3 Q b§ 2 2 2 d/ 3 2 2ƒ S) 3 b .g ± / / CO O / \ ƒCu 2 ® _ = E ® k § \ ° ° G _= a Cu 6 o m c- _ _ @ Cu g « % ( § CO Cu @ = f % \ y G® 2 // _ƒ 0 a CO a G ® °: Z® y k = c Cu _ ° c = _ _ / -� > e 2 = ± a Cu J R - j / 2 ® / CO k � CL CO CO § 2 ) 2 a / # _ § § = 2 = 2 k $ 7 / - -/ S ƒ t / 2 = > -@ ° e p G = x E e k 0 m > @ 2 ° °° 3° 00 J= 7 n% m n= % 2 2 d: n c -- w =± g 2 .� n a o a n m t = n.y » 3 ± .g -m m- J ± ± = 2 = w Q* o o e t=-a a 2 5 2 f 7/ Cu ƒ f ) Cu � a - ƒ \ k \ ƒ / ƒ / / 2 0 f % ° Cu * _ -0 = J % / \ 2 g b Cu 7 S 8 CU G S_® .> ( ± ± % #_ ± » a 2 ® a / c > ) 9 / Cu § » { $ ®2 § Cu a_ -- ± Cu 2 k [ ƒ E Cu § � ) 2 k / CO E § - ƒ ) f t±= -Cu t= o= f W 7- f c= a y=_ 2_0 0 \ 9 d CO a± 7 %± a a d@ E%® J E e= o= n = a 7= c y n (10 CL 2 a n -1 = m 2 .- e Cu e� e o O e Cu o e O d e � ^ 'k V) « o m 2 m 2 § / 6 V) § m The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division rogram Spec R, Following from the overall system recommendations from Section 4 are program- specific recommendations. The program- specific recommendations are shaped by the research, peer benchmarking, best practices from the peers and other jurisdictions, gap analysis, staff interviews, and the capability maturity model. The program- specific recommendations begin on the following page. They are organized slightly differently that the overall system recommendations since these recommendations are specific to the services delivered by Operations. There are two sets of recommendations for each program: ■ Recommendations organized by asset category, recommended key performance indicators and key success factors, and recommended service levels; and, ■ Data capture (i.e., important measurements related to service delivery that need to be tracked and entered into CityWorks) and operational improvement opportunities. As noted previously in this report, neither Kitchener nor its peers had a comprehensive set of established service levels for the 80 activities that were targeted for this operational review. Therefore, the recommended service levels are a combination of existing service levels identified by Kitchener staff during the interviews, a few service levels from peer municipalities (predominantly Oakville), service levels mandated by the Province under the Municipal Act's Minimum Maintenance Standards regulation, and service levels based on the experience of the consulting team. It should also be noted that the service levels include a mix of some specific service levels and some aggregated service levels because of the lack of consistent information on service levels; however, the aggregated service levels that are recommended represent a good starting point for Operations to begin its transition to a service -based budget, recognizing that it does need to benchmark all its service levels as a follow -up activity to this Operational Review before it can transition fully to a service - based budget. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 43 I m = 7 = § 2 e m 2 2 m% o co _ / = o / m CO ® m 0 g _ @ 2 & _ƒ k % ® am) ® \ ƒ ƒ % \ o ± -ƒ ± 4 @ e 4 ± R = $/ G y$» G 0 7» : ƒ m 2 -- » : ƒ 2 e ± » _ ® / k�: °� � k�� ��� /0 / a a c § a c m E / \ % _ _ / y -0 ƒ e M 0 ƒ % m m M mƒ R ©§ G± E R © 4%± E m 2 2 2 0ƒ k o 0 0» _� % \ E\ m\ E m 2 E m E° y ± ° c f k 2 = n= t .c e° 2) C * # y) 7° 7 3 D E e 4:-:/ m o/ _ / 4 M o @ 3 g $ / 4 D± = m 2 = § - o § % 4 % m / � �� § \ / ƒ ± G ± G ƒ 2 m ¥ \ 2 $ / { ¥ § ƒ .R = - _ 2 _ 5 w/ - a n¢ 2 _§ 5)/ _ - a n¢ 7= _ n m 2ƒ y E m 2 ƒ 8$ E � c$ E 7 2 ƒ ƒ / 7 . / c & & 3 g 3 g k [ k $ [ k $ U) k ƒ _0 Cl) 7 -0 = G = - _ > = c � % \ = c 7 \ ± 2§ § 2 > a Cl) 2 -® t m= E m% -0 -0 c G m% 7 m C a 3 2 % J m 3 = E > � % Cl) > = % ¥ 7§ S 2&%= 2 2% 9 7 % / = 2 o % E ƒ = m 7±§ ® = m = 2 o± % M 2 2 % § Cl) ® E % § ® x # 3 \ % # @ E k \ƒ _ 7 = 2 k° R@ 7 fƒ k R @ M \/ k\ \ 2/ � 0 � 0 0 �= o\ 9\� = n o 0 9 7-0 � 2 S= f 7 7 % m t @ % 2 % M » m - @ ƒ % # n � / ƒ ƒ / ± _ 7 4t 0 0 M # ƒ 0� _ 0 Cl) ƒ \ % / § \ ƒ @ % � § % \ � \ %-g E g e n c m m E m e§ c% n = e Z 4> S a G# CO 4 S w o #% k> Sƒ . . . . . . . . w w a S 2 S S 2 75 § I Cn N Q ob 0 CU E V � 5 O1 C > Ll U "C - � N _ C6 O N Cl) C c- N -0 O LO O C6 0) � � N '6 C CO `o a Cl) — _ Cn Ca E C E C cm cu N C N > 0 cu C a) LL -CCU U � N E t- ~ LL °� -0 0) CC6 -0 C a) C C C c Ca Q Ca ° :3 U) 0 :3 C '> O C6 O Q O (10 U ° CU6 O C 0 N -6 C E Cl) �' 0 p > C) co C) a) O1 �- -6 C C) Cl) C C C -- co N � "> Cl) N E UJ N cm U C Q Cl) N � "> Cl) N C p U -- Cl) N O I C O N p -- C6 N O N N 0 W ?� 0) Q Cn 0 Q Cn N U) O 0 U) O U Cn Cn O 0 Cn U O U) _ -> 0) CO � _ O _ .Q � O co .0 E .O C6 U Cn E c O Q 0 C6 U N N C Ca I -0 ca -6 >, 0) E Q w N ca CO N C Ca I � -6 >, .0 O Cl) N _ U 0� cu .0 O N -p CC6 cu N N CC6 N N N _�' > N _�" ? O - O N U C O w_0 O C C6 C N N -� N -_� NU 0 .0 0 �� N CC6 (6 Q CO N � � 0 .0 � � � U) C6 _� — ?� C O' _� — U L CQ _� — OU C U U > O U N C C6 N 0 0 C U 0 U > N 06 N C O C C6 C6 O Cl) i N C >+ C Cn 06 O p C6 C6 O E C U C N C) N N Q p) C O C6 N N Cn E CC6 C U C U C) C c C 'p Q -6 E ) C) N O 0- O Q ¢ 0 N co O ) O CL N C_ n flN - N N p) � CO N _ _ C) C � co Q O C C co C4 � C6 C Q W C N > O - O -p N O CO > Q Q _5) ce co co U 0) 2 5) CD U � Z ii Ca U) 1 Ca � CQ CQ U 0) CD U Cn N Q ob 0 CU E V � 5 O1 C > Ll U "C U � N _ C6 O N Cl) C L N N -0 O LO O C6 (6 C6 � N '6 C C � O Cl) EU C Cn Ca E C E C N O U N C N > 4 cu E C6 LL -CCU U N N N E E � U O °� -0 0) CC6 -0 N C C C C c N Cn Q Q C6 E C) C '> O C6 O Q Cn F Q U N CU6 CU6 ob 0 V V - N C C L.L CC E O C C � Q (6 _ N 0 O _C _> 7 O CU C cu Cn U C6 � C C) :� N E ' 4 cu E 'C Q LL CB O N C6 i 0 7 C6 C6 0 CD O _ N 0 co Cl) Cn cu C6 C E L N CU6 - O C N N > E Ca CC6 N CC6 C) a) c c C) C) C C C CU�6 o CU6 -cu -cu Q N E E 7 V V � O CC L.L CC E O L O G1 N I % % ƒ = ƒ 2 7 $ ® 2 % % 2 2 > % % % - t # 0 g -> 0=§ ®@ 7 7 2@ 2@ # y m a§ CL 7- m n J n a m= 7 a m m a aƒ u a m= 7= 7 = m = ¥ _ ° � = m � 2 -� 0 -_ _ = m e n 0 _= o m g m%% E m°° m m$ E E e °\¥ cm k% 6+ +±# 4 E 6 6+ E+ E 4 4 n S+ o .@ + � £ k � X $ $ R R 2 0 2 2 c 0 0 t t \ \- ? ?_ f f ! !=i % % § § % % 0 3 E E 0 2 2 G G m m m= 0 0 3 0 2 2 0 0 f n n n 0 0- ¢ CL C CL ® ¢ o o ® / / E E%% 2 2 0 0 2 2 2 2° ƒ ƒ / R R - - % % a / / % % / / / / 9 9 \ - - - -0 0 0 ®± % % ± ± � � 7 7 o f f= o o m m y y y y= m m = = ® % % & & / / » a a - -� - -0-0 + ® ® - -% � �_ \ \ k / / / / ƒ ƒ _ = - 2 ° _ & & m = J m m - co o -ƒ k k S -� 2 0 E 2 2 E ƒ ƒ% 7 7 _ @ @ 0 0 E 7 7 7 { { - -7 § § 7 7 G G C) a a-0 _ _ E E/ 7 o%§ g g > > n n a y $ 2 2 ƒ ƒ � �= ƒ a y ƒ f ƒ 7 7 ƒ ƒ f f ƒ f 7 . .0 = = f - n n o o m m o o 0 0>1 e e 2 2 J J -- f - k 0 0 ) 2 k k c - � � � � _ _) k ) 2 / \ \ 7 7 7 7 2 2 7ƒ $ $ C @ 0 0ƒ® 1 f 2 2 4 c c % % c * * - - - C @ f - -0 - - ± 12 f ± _ _ = 4 { o � / / f f % % 2 2 / / 0 7 % % _ = \ f f / / a / { o � E 2 2 > 2 § 0 7 t /\ � k k @ @ @ E y 2 2 y > 2 m± % t �\ k n± _ _- u u ( \ \ 7 7 c n _ t 2 2= ° _ = = n m 7 7 % % K K/ = o o = = = c E - E E ° ° y y - -0 ƒ § § \ \ § § . S E E � � ƒ ƒ - -§ § § ƒ ƒ ƒ ƒ cu ƒ .§ S ƒ ƒ _ m m = = m m ± _ _ � / ƒ � a a % % o o ± ± o o k @ @ + + � 2 . . . . £ £ / ƒ 2 2 % % S S 7 7 S S U5 7 7 7 ° ° ± ± w w > g g = = 7 7 C C § 2 _ § > > ƒ 2 2 ƒ ƒ ) ) \ \ ) ) 2 2 k _ { 2 2 S o m S S 2 E o. e J S e 0 o m 0 m m g g e e f 2 e f e J _0 0 J 0 0 - -» 0 0 E / o _ m \ _ n 0 C e / # w o o m \§ 0 0 ƒ ƒ ) ) 0 0 # 0 m m% 2 2 t t / / n n * * t t J J m m@ ± ± 7 7 ƒ f \ / / C c- a ƒ f \ a m __ - -> > CU c > c c = = _ _ _ _ C CL 2= - -§ C CM% m m c c o o a m - -- - t).g = = 0 e a a m m @ 0 0 e e - -R £ £ o-® ° % 3 a ® e ± o o y f o o o n n o o E E.= % % g g 3= e ± y f o o m == e e= . . C - /\ = 7 k k k k y y k k y y/ k k k k § §\ \ \ ®= t -0 / = 7 0 o 0 R t m m= m m_0 - -- @ @ 2 2 t t t t 0 o 0 = - R® t E m m o t - -® - -0 n n ƒ % 7# m \ k k § § 3 m o o o o? 7 7 = -- E ® % o 0 2 ƒ % \ 3 % % % % 2 2 2 »� 4 2 ¥ 4 _ ¥ 2 2 ® % 2 2 g g § § E 2 2 - -R 3 3/ 2 2° \ $ 7 \± g g g g » _ e e n = = a a » » $ 7 = = # # # # f f = = f f � £ k � I / j CO j � � / @ = 0 4 �j » R m § k � £ $ 2 ƒ o % i n '--> @ $ & 2 _0 / k ® m $ a) § CO § ƒ ± ° CO ./ ƒ J `y o f n -m % ._ 7 \ 0.) E 2 = e % o =- 0 $ 2 \ � R / / = d CL > / o Eƒ m o\ 4 gƒ ® :, 4 c ± » _ 2 \ D (D £ f 2 -» Cl) 4 o 7 k Cl) 7 f��- \ -0 \ k .ƒ 7 2 G y § § 2 E n m o 0 7 a S Q / o ƒ 2 / % 0 _/ Cl) $ ƒ ƒ / / _E \ 2 3 _0 cu 0 * * % m m § a / E % � _ 7 n = CU _ m 0') / _ $ \ .g m 7 c 3 k _= E % / / 4 E § 2 cu CM y S 0 O - f � £ a / m Cl) = y 7 g a m 0) ± Cl) 2 n G Gƒ 2 / E a/ ) 1 E ƒ E ƒ f E m E E� n� / k If g / 2 ƒ ƒ R E -R ® @ 2 J / f E \ @ \ R 2 f ¥ ± 9 ¥ ¥ -® \ = 2 7 m 0 m m/@ C- 2= e w 2% w w 2± 3 k � £ � I � .g E o co co co co o Cl) Cl) o- k ] S S S S+ 4 / S » S k 17 m � / = � � 0 R ƒ cu � ƒ � � a w a a w a 2 2 E 2 / m 0 t G 0 _ -0 + $ 0 k a ® % = ® m m @ G o 0 4 \ 4 c § 7 2 % t $ y= 2 2 ƒ a e � k 7 \ % k % \ m n 2 ± © � / § _0 G (D 4 -0 O 2 = S a _= .§ j = S -® -® CU = % 0 �_ e o _0 _0 -2 2 _ _ 2 § D § / > > 3 :s f % % Cl) m ƒ k % f 4 ƒƒ m ® 7 & ° k e k k / k 0 ® / ] ] 2 m 7 ° 5 \ a a 3 c y D % y % a a f 7 2 k _0 ® k k / = $ (D -E § 2 -0 y 7 - d t t ƒ 2 & 0- = \ / \ 2 k \ n= m± f (D ) / n % 2 » m n= % % 0q-- Cl) ® / @ / __ % m .- ./ 0 0 ./ / = \ \ 2 f \ \ ?/ 2 - ƒ e 0 e § a a %000000) ]t ] % o J \ % k / ¥ ƒ S S E o co co co co o Cl) Cl) o- k ] S S S S+ 4 / S » S k 17 m � / = � � 0 R ƒ cu � ƒ � � a w a a w a 2 2 / 0 _ % 0 % S % % 2 2 0 4 ® 4 c § g = a ® y= 2 2 2 e w % k \ m n 2 k / _0 = m kE ( = S a _= .§ j Q CU = f 0 0 2 0 _ § Cl) m m 3 3 :s % % Cl) m ƒ k me o = ƒ 7 & ° e k k / k 0 = / ] ] 2 m 7 ° ? E \ o y 7 % % y m = a f 7 2 k _0 ƒ k k / ± 2 = y 7 - d t t m 0 = o a 2 2 2 8 8 / 8 8 8 2 o % Cl) / ) 2 @ o / / % m ./ / \ k 0 f \ \ a \ 7 0 k k § Cl) %000000) ._ % - _ 7/ k k 0 / k E C-/ % > CL R Cl) 2 @ § \ ± ® / / 2 e f Cl) co cu > 0 ® / S o t = a o L m 2 § ƒ-0 2 j E E 2 2 2 2 _ _0 % & 2 6 3 2 k 2 -0 t k t $_ / _c -0 2 J / Cl) f \ ƒS S 2 / ® \ 7 c m m Z_ = o= / 7 -/ 0 ./ 0 .g » J 2 g m f e f=- °_% m= _0 m 7 k k ) $ ¥ % \ e 4t :3 -Fu 75 / / / k / / j Cl) CO _� U) E 0 E / § / 2 2 & ± \ § 0 4r- 4> S» S w# m+ m e t w w a w a a w w w E o co co co co o Cl) Cl) o- k ] S S S S+ 4 / S » S k 17 m � / = � � 0 R ƒ cu � ƒ � � a w a a w a 2 / cu S S % % 0 4 4 g = = ® ® 2 2 2 k k \ m m k n 4 kE ( (= .§ j CU j 0 0 o C Cl) m m 3 3 :s % % % = ƒ k me o = ƒ o & ° e k k / / 7 / / ] ] 2 2 7 7 ° 2 \ \ o o 7 7 % % k = m m = = f f 2 k k k k k k k k f f C) t t t t t t t t± % 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 2 k . / ) / / / / ) ./ / 7 f f \ \ \ \ \ \ ® k k k k k k k k %000000) / S » S k 17 m � / = � � 0 R ƒ cu � ƒ � � a w a a w a / = � � 0 R ƒ cu � ƒ � � a w a a w a I § ® / S » S m .§ c j $ 0 J \ / = (1) - m _0 m 0 > / % / / R \ / = 0 2 \ . � -E . g m = o 2 e ) 7 \ 2 - / 0 o / { \ 7 ± 7 b . _0 ® ƒ k g ƒ S > _ » 0 / J ° = y% m C 3 cu ƒ ± CL ? \ 0 w / k 2 \ * g ƒ kLD 7 C _0 kƒ 2 h 3 \ f § ® / S » S k j $ 0 J ± = y .R m § 0 O � . � - . g / m § / 7 2 � ± / k § m f u C CU § . G � \ g ± * g ± » # c 7 # m - = f § ± C § / 2 0 G E 3 E f § f = oC_ 7 2 o g_ § E § c \ -\ 0 \ -® / 0 > * R ƒ % > ƒ % 0 t ° n - -� t ` ° ® m 7 y # = n ƒ 0 � CU ƒ / c) a a § _ f g ) 2 & % ) \ \� Q ¥ 0 R of » ¥ t: + » a m 2 J° m m m t= w 4� b e w m a e / S » S k 17 m � I \ i ƒ ƒ o % m 2 _0 / / 0 § CO = m C) / � ƒ f / f \ U CO e 7 2 � -0 j C) / k \ C k a_ 2 4:-: $ t ƒ � ® » / k m / &4 _ S S S 0 CD2 ƒ g 2 % y \ 2 ƒ § _0 % S @ >0) » 2 0 cu § 2 k / / 7 2 \ % § % -0 ® @ -§ « C) % \ _0 / 7 E E Cl) \ __ _ 0) § % = 2 3 ® 0 g ƒ 3 k k / 0 (D \ CO ƒ § ƒ k _ G m f 2 / / - 7 = 2 Cl) @ ® @ R 7 J- 7 = e 2%% \ # 2 2 e = 2 ® @ 0 0._ / D @ 7 2 = m = m 2 = 0) 2 2 y / 0 _= 2 _ ._ 2 k » E 2 # n % % % — w w a 7 / w } S S S k E _ g 2 _0 \ 2 ƒ § _0 0 S � ± � 0 cu § cu / / 7 u Q _0 E ® @ E n C) % m CD- ƒ E § Cl) m E f o % -ƒ E 0 ® 0 g & > ® 2 / / U § d k _ G G ƒ / / \ - t ¥ Cl) Cl) @ ® @ R n J- 0- 0 Cl) %* CL cu n 2 t t ƒ / \ ® \ Cl) 7 y \ CO y / 0 ± _ = m » E 2 # n % % % — ) n C 7 \ 7 / / } E / § / -2 / m 0 m 0 J § 2 cu cp - co c w a w a a 7 a 2 ® Cl) ° 2 / a = a) _ g m ° 2 2 > 0 4 7 _§ a ® ° -0 u k $ \ \ 2 ƒ ƒ_ \ \ = % 7 .E 0 % 2 -0 5 E _ CL = c g = 7 = e _ 2 g b m- 7 2 ƒ % » u % Cl) e m ƒ Cl) / & * 2 % ƒ ± @ > = n 7 G 0 � m m 0 ± % o $ ƒ CL Cl) 0 � / § _ / \ / Cl) k J 0 4 C.> CO y f % o 7 yƒ ƒ/ 0 n ƒ 7 7§ 2 & % a S & ¥ S S S k E _ g 2 _0 \ 2 ƒ § _0 0 S \ ± � 0 cu § cu / / 7 u Q _0 E ® @ E n C) % e @ 9 ƒ E Cl) % E f \ _0 _ ® _ » k & > ® 2 / / / § d _ G _ G G \ ° e / J § Cl) m_0 = f t ¥ t ¥ 2 @ ® @ R _0 ƒ k k 0 Cl) ƒ / 2 t t - m \ k 0 ƒ ƒ / \ ) 7 = \ \ _ ¥ 2 ) ° E 2 # n % % % — 0 n C 7 \ 7 / / / E / 3 Z5 / -2 __= m 0 m 0 J = 2 3+ w w a w a a S S S k E _ g 2 _0 \ 2 ƒ § \ ± � ) k / @ u Q _0 ® @ a) f E f E E > _0 \ � k ƒ kk k 7 / $ 0 0 f 2 / / 2 E / \ \ ® @ % 7 a 0 Cl) 0 m 2 2 = _ _= m m =e k 2 ( U w w a w S S S k E § § / § ƒ § � ± � I k C) % CO k E § � cu / .L k CO M ® E � q � � ■ 5 � � 7 f � / f 0 2 cu ƒ .� _0 cu CL 2 § § CO 7 CO k # CO 7 % f ƒ § 4:-: _0 CU ± CO 2 » C) _0 \ _% -0 \ § y 3 ) / ƒ E CO / § 7 � _ 2 2=3 §\ 7 § 2 = kf & = © o 7- _0 & S § = g y @ \ ± k � = 7 § }� . _0 E f CD ° ( (1) & k CO $ CO -- n = k ± \ Cb E 6 / / § 2 ) 1 = _ e -0 % J J e J 7 % @ 7 ° ± =3 o - co J - J ) _O 5 =3 e7. - < 2 < E < b kG 2= k / w w f a ® E � q � � ■ 5 � � 7 f � / f 0 2 cu 7 _0 cu o § § 7 & k # 7 % } ƒ § 4:-: CU ± CO » C) .0 \ -0 \ § y 3 0-® a / ƒ E CO % ,» = � \ 2 2=3 §\ 7 a 2 o a = kf 0 = § o 7- & S ± = g y @ \ ± = 7 § }� f E f CD ° � = \ $ ± Cl) % 0 ± / 4 / 6 / / § ƒ ) 1 = _ e -0 m , e ; _* ® % @ 7 ° ± =3 o j _ w m ) _O 5 =3 e7. y /-0 kG 2= k / ° f % n % / 2 § / A D ƒ % ƒ § [ ± E co D % _ ) £ k 7 § / ƒ k 2 ƒ cu 2 o § § # / # # 7 % 7 7 \ \ \ _o / a � / / \ � \ \ o a 0 0 = 7 § _ _ = / 2 = = ± Cl) ± ± / E / / ƒ 0- / / _ w m m w w y k 2 § / § I � m ƒ ± � 2 R: k k ƒ ƒ 0 0 ± CO CO = 0 24 p $ n n e 2 2 % » ¥ ° CO CO _ 0 § k / / 2 ƒ ._ n n k E \ ± ± .e .e » 7 » o \ / \ g * & / / E E .E .E c 3 / 3 cu 7 7 n / / -0 / -� k § 2 n = n ? 2 2 4:-: / E -§ 7 2 7 % = 6 _ CY) �o E �o 2 $ @ ƒ ± � 2 R: k k ± § ± = 0 24 p $ e cu % » ¥ ° § _ 0 § k 2 ƒ ._ k E \ ) J 2 ° 7 o / g * & / / 2 - m c / cu 75 n / o -0 k -� k § 2 ± = 5 ? 2 2 m § E -§ 2 ± % = 6 _ CL \ E \ 2 $ @ .= 7 t / $ 9 0 = g 4 E / E _ % e ¥ = � c g c g » 3 -.0 § k k k \ * E m a .0 f. ƒttD c- 0 e f % 2 / ® 2 ƒƒ ƒ k e =% = e¥ = S 7 S S Sƒ + 0+ 8 w \ f a a 00 CL 2= § # 2 CU Cl) % % a / � m ƒ cu « o e e � S S Sƒ + 2+ 8 k w a w a a w ƒ ± � 2 R: ) � 2 § � 7 k R: k § ± � p $ e % ¥ ° _ 0 § k 2 f ._ \ ) o E * / c / cu 75 > ƒ -� 2 \ = 5 ? 2 CL \ k \ 4 m f t t 2 � 0 0§ f -0 _ % e ¥ = � c g c g » § 2� / CU CU E a .0 c- 0 e % % a / ® m ƒ ± e e = 2 = 2 = S S Sƒ + 0+ 8 w a w a a ) � 2 § � 7 k R: I o k -2-.0 g ƒ- C 0 0 E M ¥ 0 0 C CU =c U) % C t § o 0 % E m ± § 2 m CU §� § 0 ƒ -E cu d ƒ / / ƒ ± � 2 R: 0 � 2 E \ � 0 / k cu F-- @ 0 » } / / _0 k ƒ / U) ) � 2 § � 7 k R: @ 7 0 75 G: 0 0 k k c') d ® ± / # ° m o= = m ƒ 2 3 0-0 m f f / ® = \ o ƒ / ) \ * � % _ ƒ c 0 = % - _ -0 / .E ƒ 0 { ƒ \ 0 E / / o± o= 0 7=± 4 = » S = ® 7 = 2 = - 2 §§\ J§ _ -0 0 9/ 2 y S%= t CO) 4 ƒ 0 0ƒ 2 G % a § G � ® \ £ -0 m ± % e § 4 ® - % ƒ 2 @ _± k0 0- f 2 2 2 ®° (D o 4 2 ƒ > e § / � g & = 0 0 k a§ 0 2 / 0 kƒ � 0 � o = m ± o ± e / 2 2 / % ° e ° e 2 / -� 2 = _ _ ± = a d u .7 \§ / C f u 0 y \ ° _� U) & ± % t 2 f ) \ ¥ $ @ f R 7 ƒ ± 0 2 ƒ . . . . o k -2-.0 g ƒ- C 0 0 E M ¥ 0 0 C CU =c U) % C t § o 0 % E m ± § 2 m CU §� § 0 ƒ -E cu d ƒ / / ƒ ± � 2 R: 0 � 2 E \ � 0 / k cu F-- @ 0 » } / / _0 k ƒ / U) ) � 2 § � 7 k R: I m i ƒ 0 ¥ % k CO ) n % ± f e / k m C) � ƒ G v � 7 _0 2 / � E ƒ ƒ ¥ � Cu }§ / \ 7 E Co ƒ 7 2 \ f / _ § @ U) _0 § = e a m D 3 k §k _0 ± = E _ =e 2 � e = 7 o S R 0- Cu / § j k k k _0 J § � / / c 2 »)f CU ƒ @ / / �� k E t a Cu Cu Cu Z k k k ® » § / / w k 7 / / / / % / 3 / / ± b k ./ S S 2 _ w w a w % 2 2 _0 CO CO 2 CO CO .g E 2 \ U) 4 / + 2 d CO CO CO 7 � E S $ / Cu / .0 G �k m + _0 2 / � E ƒ ƒ ¥ � 0 }§ 7 E Co Co \ / _ % U) o k 2 _0 _/ 0 3 R 0- Cu / 7 f E 2 _0 J § 7 2 »)f 0 � �� k E $ . ƒ E § / / w k / Cu / / ) \ CO _ \ \ 7 / ° ± % % J J E O O p » Cu ƒ % Co Cu m ° / t e e 7 - < _ .g S S Q 2 7 w a w a 2 d CO CO CO 7 � E S $ / Cu / .0 G �k m + 2 / � E ƒ ƒ ¥ � 2 d CO CO CO 7 � E S $ / Cu / .0 G �k m + w w a 7 7 \' v k / \ � U ƒ 7 Co Co _ C 2 _0 _/ ) / 7 _0 § § \ @ 7 � k E $ . E ( & k U) 2 -- n = k \ CO E 2 % J J e J 7 » » _ ƒ Cu ƒ \ ƒ ƒ < < E < L 2 w w a 7 7 \' v k / \ � U I ƒ 0 CO n 2 CO \ % ƒ » E / .E 2 m C) n / k / v / ƒ & \ & � 0) 0 .n \ 2 \ ® 2 \ 0 2 » % §§ % > ) ƒ ƒ k k k a e e / / ƒ CD / $ : k k k ƒ cu 2 \ 2 ƒ ƒ _ § o C) a o c c E E / \ g \ g -� \ n O O d 5 f R§ U) -Q _ __ % k 2 (D (D 4 � � � ± CN m # B G ) n % ƒ .\ § / � ƒ � / C 2 n § § / m 0 2 / 2 E /_ E k R \ \ Cl) E _0 / / § % k 4 / k 2 2 2 cu _0 k � (D / � f 3 2 2 � ± a § ƒ \ ƒ 0 )E � k� / y k R \ -& % 0 \ ck & R ° cu 55 U) -� \ k m >, G ± e cu = k \ g & E .2 3 & � 0) .n 2 2 ® 0 » % CO § k k E S ® / $ ƒ ƒ cu 2 = cu ƒ E n y m d a § ƒ \ ƒ 0 )E � k� / y k R \ -& % 0 \ ck & R ° cu 55 U) -� \ k m >, G ± e cu = k \ g � '§ C, E .2 3 & � I q m ƒ a � $ 2 k Cl) .§ k y 2 ƒ ƒ \ CL w 2 \ WE 7 / % § ƒ k j C) \ k 2 7 / k » � .g a .§ y cu § 2 ƒ ƒ d / ƒ / c ± $ k m 2 � m § \ � / ƒ 0 » -§ U CO / n % \ -0 _± 2 C- = o § -§ S ) ƒ k f ® 20)§ 2 7 \ \ƒ � y y \ \ S S % » P R R § / 0 0 f % $ © m -m o o y 3 E 6 6 # � m § \ � / ƒ 0 » -§ U CO I III @ 7� _ � � / � & ./ 1:4 � / \ � O .» � § \ ./ $ 0 @ / .� \ 0 � � / � \ _ \ & \ / § U / E C) § u C.) / j 2 .§ / c .7 / A R V) \ C.) 2 § E > m 2 = 0 CO q / -E ƒ 2 / 0 = 2 c 5 o k / \ C) c -m n = g = 7 a # $ y \ C') } ± E 7 = = ® o -o 2 C) 5 % > 2 % Cl) ƒ k c') / ° J t 7 2 a < ? § & 2 E 0 f cu CL � 2 ¥ $ 0 > co co co 0 \ c C) ■ m 0 a t 0 ƒ m $ / f d ± 4 � \ § 0) k Cl) Cl) / ° k n m 7 ± ) ƒ 9 CL /� ( /-0 CL ƒ % 0 / \ ƒ / § 2 ® @ % c) ®a % Cl) CL -» — 7 o 0 J -0 / = $ 2 U 0 _ ± -® -/ _0 Cl) f -0 % x % _ > % % -0 n \ ° ± 0 2 ® ƒ c ± 2 ® ? o Cl) � » 2 w 2 % 7 \ ¥ �� -7: a/% .0 0 a y n� m � :§ 2 0 ° ) � / * co 2% 0 0 ± 2 / / n o c g § E ƒ m=. a § m m =__ -® $ 3 Eƒ *% 0 m e 0 @ \ % c .E C E 1-0 o o � \ § 0) k The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division .F Section 4 and 5 of this report provide numerous recommendations to help Operations advance, continuously improve, measure performance, and ultimately be able to budget based on levels of service. This section of the report organizes the recommendations into a logical roadmap for Kitchener over the next three years of change management. We have developed a strategy to help Kitchener through the transition, having regard for resources, timing, and ease of implementation. The scope for moving forward prioritizes and describes the phasing -in of the recommendations. It also includes a high -level explanation of the resources needed. Where reference is made to "Council -in- principle" as an anticipated resource, this means that Council recognizes the benefit to the City and will support Management during the transition. The inherent philosophy to this scope is to help Operations adapt through small, incremental changes, and the prioritization recognizes that certain changes are a foundation and must precede other changes. The scope for moving forward begins on the following page and is organized by overall system management recommendations first and then program- specific recommendations. :f Oveirall Systeiin Maiiniageii-neii-it I iui uu iui- fiii iui- In 2014, we recommend that Kitchener advance work on aligning it's programs to CityWorks and SAP /PeopleSoft, ensuring accurate counting of labour hours, plan a bit better for summer work, and start the process for a pilot team of staff to log their hours using mobile technology. Through 2015, we recommend that Kitchener make the full transition to a budget for Operations based fully on service levels, begin monitoring how much time staff spends travelling to the jobsite as a separate item from actually doing the work itself, and take stronger control over reactive maintenance requests which reduce productivity. Through 2016, we recommend that Kitchener begin an initiative to provide managers with aggregate information they need to manage Operations effectively using performance data and a "dashboard," once it has achieved success with the other work in the years previous. Full details of the 0iiet-all SYstem Afanagement Recommendations The detailed overall system management recommendations are provided in the following table. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Fags; 58 I = E = 2 w J k _ F U o / E / ƒ � ƒ % � ± 2 ± ƒ ± ± ± m _ = �.g c y � ƒ y C- n _§ c m \ *_ % % % ± / % % % % 2 G 2 2// 2 2 2 2 C \ G u = e = = m _ _ =-e = cu 2 � 9 g e 2/ o ƒ f > G ƒ -\ ƒ ƒ -® ƒ U) Cl) Cl) > g CO b Cl) CL k\ k -0 k� % ƒ : 2 = ƒ ƒ \ \ \ k E = \ \ \ E 5 % CL _ CL � y% o c- o CL CL o CL O= O O m z» O U O O U O = E = _ k F U o / E f � ƒ % \ 2 § ƒ E m _ = �.g c y o ƒ y C- n _§ c *_ k C \ 2 u / /f/ a 7 2 7 9 g e 2/ f f U -\ 2 � G CL -0 % ƒ : 2 = ƒ ƒ _ = E = 7 % # -m 7 _ C6 y t .g 7 o CU C G° Q E 0 >- G�° f / / 0 - E 7 ƒ -\ E :\ (_ / 7 2 - E a a n n± U\ ? n 2 _0-0 c U m) a- @% E & c E »® 7 \ƒ 2 a %� y 2 % / 2 ƒ 7 \ % 0 / / » % % / k _0 > 7 7? o / » 0 /± %§% » J a 7 2 y 2 a �__ ± 2 -0 m± g n E [ ƒ � $ = k [ 7 > ° G -E _ @ > ° = 2 % ¥ :% = a\ 2 2 n a _? ƒ f t 7¥ƒ k\ \ 7 C § 0) a a 7 c s 4� o= c kƒ k/ k% 0 k/ 2 k C k a# 7 = 7 a m o � G££ 041 k � o 04� CO 04 CO ci E / ƒƒƒ 04 k ) a \ E ? k ® § 2 ± 3 [ ® o nV) 2 ° 0 2 2 d£ \ k E 0 S 5 0 o E E U> £ / Q /% 0 .G ¢ 2 k 3 E/ \ u$ I � 2 � � 5 k \ \ k o ± y § / § § § 0 ƒ § ƒ 7 n kkk ƒ j (D 0 ® \ ) § 7 E $ * -e G * @ O \ \ o n CL 0- k k / -0 7 2 % ± * e / 7 � � / ¢ E \ § 7 k k % / cc q � \ / \ \ u � / \ ? / § § \ 4 \ / o / C � E 7 ) � { t V) 3 7 w � c = § o t Q o ._ » t o � \ \ \ \ o _ 2 p V) / / ° C) u / \ u o o u % x o 7 4J ° \ $ / \ u & o c _ .\ / u § I a� a� ca ca N O (a L Q i N � Q Q cu (a N (a -a .T C/) N U L (Z a) cz CZ C) (a N O O N Q N CZ O CZ U cO N N Q 0 O cz (a U) C- 0- O U, -a N L U H N N a c� a� a� ca ca N O (a L Q A c- U (a O Q (a CD E U N E E O E M N c U C- E N O Q N • C O r_ N m a) E L L 4- \O L V) N N N a� O � rn a� a� ca ca N O (a L Q N Q Cl) CO U N CD 0 Y L N � � NO E O U O L m Q O � U + O Cl) CD O E Lo � r O O N , U O � � N (a O CVO U • N O L U \H O O U 0 U a� a� ca ca N O (a L Q �i (a (a a� (a U O E O Q Y O � O M N N = C cz cz O N ._ Cp O O O N E Ze rn i L •� \H O L Q O aN+ •i d U m ° n U) ¢ � $ E 7 % � 2 k k . 7 O � % � CD / 2 LO 2 0 CN o � c 7 \ 0 C- F--- C6 o � \ o \ / k 2 § E S � F m = E § \ � V) V) ) / � E 7 % � U) o � \ � � � k Ln � k / � R '§ � 0 O = § � / � k � k \ _ � t � k 2 / \ � 2 V) � d % 2 0 E � � V) 2 E E _ 2 k U) 2 0 o m o § § 2 2 = o 2 0 2 .k U) . n% m 7 $ S O O ¢ a � E 7 % � U) o � \ � � � k Ln � k / � R '§ � 0 O = § � / � k � k \ _ � t � k \ 7 2 V) d 2 0 � V) k _ 2 k 0 2 0 o m o t k 2 = o 2 0 2 n n% m $ S C/) V-) 2 R R o k 7 B a 2 V) 7 E E E 6 2 _% E 2 2 G$ = o 0 2 o n K k R t E Ln o G Ln ./ E ® '% o o 5# o Cm) E 2 k/ m k = k ® 0 7 CL �-�e � E o k k E m -- § G U)> a) �77� 22� �' \� o E a t\ 9 2 k 2= g % 6 E% 0 2 E 8 2 2 k ® p 7 _m & • § m 7 7 E k § k D e a 2$ o a o$ V) e m 2 E _ � E 7 % � U) o � \ � � � k Ln � k / � R '§ � 0 O = § � / � k � k \ _ � t � k 7 2 V) d 2 0 � V) k k � k Ln 0 o m o t 2 = o 2 0 2 o m 9 V-) / Ln 0 B 7 V) V) 2 k§ 2 V)_ K R t E Ln o G Ln 2 E m o o 5# o k E k/ m k = k G CL � E 7 % � U) o � \ � � � k Ln � k / � R '§ � 0 O = § � / � k � k \ _ � t � k I a� E (a N N � 0 O � N N Q N O Q . . . aD C- 0 N E (a N E O E�. N N E N O E L (� i E N N (a � N N O Q Q O O C O O E U N }i m a� E (a N N � 0 O � N N Q N O Q . . . � o N N O N � O N Lo (a O CO U O CN O L C- U) E O O U O O O U N 0 O � O N (a O N O � . O Cp C N L ,0 L L 0 _ U O � E N O N — ii U U . N Q N (a O U � > O � N N � O 4- O N O � O C- U � N N --- 75 r O N _M O O � N � . O L C � CD = CbN \H U A N NL L � O Q N � The City of Kitchener -- operational Review of the operations Division 7 Summary and. Conclus ions The following is a summary of the key conclusions from this Operational Review: 1. As a growing municipality that adds new green space and roads each year, Kitchener risks running short on its annual Operations funding which causes instability in overall municipal finances. Kitchener needs service -based budgeting to match funding to growth, thereby sustaining its "quality of community "; 2. Kitchener is a step ahead of most of its peer municipalities: improvements to planning, delivering, and adapting each year will contribute to efficient /effective service delivery; 3. Operations staff have strong knowledge of service levels being delivered across all programs, although the CityWorks software is underutilized in this regard. The transfer of knowledge /data into CityWorks improves resource allocation, boosts efficiency and supports evidence based decision - making; 4. Overall system recommendations: an emphasis on budget vs. actual record - keeping, performance monitoring, and target setting will support long -term efficient /effective delivery of services; S. Specific program recommendations: throughout the Operations Division, there exist many fine -grain opportunities for continuous improvement (most importantly, the renegotiation of the Regional maintenance contract which has the potential to recover a significant amount of money); and, 6. Implementing actions as prioritized through 2016 will make for a straightforward transition for the Operations Division. Dillon Consulting Limited + Performance Concepts Consulting Limited -- Page 64 The City of Kitchener - Operational Review, of the Operations Division Appendix A: Peer Selection Consid-erations 1-99 I 21 O O 74 7� 0 7� 74 • • • U C6 Q ca U ca U N N 9 O m U C6 > Q � •U � O � .— ca X � � O 4— a••+ E O O 4-j — ca � U -V�O N N i ca .O a •cif• CL .F .: N O rl 3 X O N aJ N v cn Q O O Q U Q C6 4-J N C2A a"' — cn N cn � M -0 f6 N -0 O O cn cn ,U f6 U cn Q can Q f6 Q a•-+ O cn i U m Q E O O U ate--+ C N> i — Q U N \ N -0 f 6 ClA >, U a--+ N Q v1 U i U N cu O — f6 U U f6 C2A U E u N N N lZ Ln cn N " M � O O cu N m N N U O v U cn N U Q Q 'c O 7 E U O O N C E E p U Q i a O 0 a i o a +� a, o cs C s Q N 0 M a N o Q a a Q O Q L O E a a '� J C� C U C6 Q ca U ca U N N 9 O m U C6 > Q � •U � O � .— ca X � � O 4— a••+ E O O 4-j — ca � U -V�O N N i ca .O a •cif• CL .F .: N O rl M O 74 0 7� 74 H i Ln 0 74 74 C) 74 0 7� 74 d 74 0 7� 74 O 74 74 74 74 74 74 74 N rl rl rl M rl rl rl V 74 74 74 ■ b.0 � N � U O O :L-j C6 o �E O 'N ca � N Q � O O O � L � N � U � N O � a-J CAA U 4-J 4-J m =3 E 0 -0 -6 O o m s bu0 N E N O U N U 2 2 O .N C6 •E O � }, O U •O O }, N � C6 L N N N U � O N a..i cn U N C6 � Q O U 0 O E U_ iR O •U N O ca O N N U 0 U C6 E O O ,V Lo U m O L N N U 4-J 0 U C6 E O O M N N � .> >� -0 C6 =3 N � •— C6 � L � � O •U � U � O • � ca b.0 N C: Q -0 .� 2 0 0 •� ClA N � C6 L C6 C6 N CL C6 E O O O U L � ca E m a � O O s dA i C 3 m Ln 74 74 1 74 The City of Kitchener - Operational Review, of the Operations Division Appendix B: Interview Questionnaire 1-116 The City of Kitchener - operational Review, of the operations Division Operational Review of Operations Division Interview Preparation Introduction This Operational Review's purpose is to objectively assess the effectiveness, quality of service, and level of service being delivered by the Operations Division by exploring two basic concepts: 1. Are the right things being done; and, 2. Are they being done the right way? The intent of the Operational Review is to help Kitchener move towards two key systems that will help support the long -term sustainability of our department and services: 1. Maintenance management system, a computer- driven system that helps us coordinate work orders, improves overall efficiency in scheduling / delivering maintenance work, and provides useful data to managers and Council on how well we are doing; and, 2. Service level based - budgeting, which means that our annual budget is based on achieving agreed -upon targets for maintaining the municipality's infrastructure, recreational, and other assets. Approach The City has retained Dillon Consulting Limited and Performance Concepts Consulting Limited to help complete this Operational Review. Kitchener staff Pauline Houston, Ralph Thele, Jim Witmer, Hans Gross, and Corina Tasker (from Finance) are coordinating the project. Your interview will be an informal discussion with representatives from the consulting team. They will provide some more background on the Operational Review before asking for your thoughts on whether we are doing the right things and whether we are doing them the right way. To make the most of the one hour discussion, please consider the questions on the following page before your meeting with the consultants. ************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** 1-117 The City of Kitchener - Operational Review, of the Operations Division Kitchener Operations Division Operational Review Discussion Questions Part 1: Organization (a) Since our restructuring, do you believe that we are more efficient at what we do? Why? (b) What type of annual or quarterly business planning do you participate in? (c) Do you believe everyone here has a mindset of continuous improvement? Do people here adapt well to change? Part 2: Service Delivery and Levels of Service (a) How well do you believe we perform when it comes to our core activities? Can you describe the productivity of some of our core activities in numbers (e.g., 5 times per week, 12 times per month, etc.)? (b) What issues do you believe impact our efficiency? (c) Assuming we need to perform better, what do you believe are our greatest challenges (excluding budget)? (d) If we could improve our efficiency and resolve our challenges, can you describe the increase in productivity for some of our core activities in numbers (e.g., increased by 2 times per week, increased by 3 times per month, etc.)? (e) Where should we reallocate resources so that we can be more effective delivering our core activities? Part 3: Maintenance Management (a) Can you please describe how a typical day or week of work is prioritized, and how the progress /completion is tracked? (b) What tools do we need to prioritize and track our work more efficiently? (c) What personnel do we need to prioritize and track our work more efficiently? (d) If we did a better job at prioritizing and tracking our work, how would we benefit? (e) Do you believe that you begin each year with a realistic budget for your core activities? Why or why not? (f) What concerns do you have if an activity goes "over budget "? Part 4: Kitchener as a Leader (a) What do you think should be our top three priorities to become a leading Operations Division among the medium -sized Ontario cities? ************************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** 1-118 A112endix 2: Prioritized List of Services Priority 1 Services 1-119 Priority 1 Services Service Area Asset Function: Downtown Sidewalks Sweeping Downtown Furniture Maintenance Downtown Hanging Baskets Install /Maintenance /Remove DTS ENG Capital Construction Environmental Trees Pruning Environmental Trees Removal Environmental Shrubs Maintenance Environmental Flowerbeds Maintenance Environmental Trees Inspection Environmental Landscape Watering Environmental Trees Planting Environmental Garden Plots Install /Maintenance /Remove Environmental Trails New Construction Environmental Trees Street Inventory Environmental Entrance Features Maintenance Environmental Parks Watering Environmental Trails Maintain Environmental Community Gardens Maintenance Environmental Trees Diagnosis /Pest Control Environmental Trees Fort Removal Environmental Wildlife Maintenance Environmental Trails Clean Up Horticulture Trees Inventory (Capital) Horticulture Trees Woodlands Horticulture Natural Areas New Construction Horticulture Trees Planting Operations Misc. _ Hauling Operations Facilities Yard Maintenance Operations Misc. Misc. -Tool Crib Activities Operations Misc. Woodwork & Metal Fabrication Operations Misc. Supervisor Salary OT /DT & Premiums Operations Misc. Small Tool Maintenance Operations Lands Building /Wall Maintenance Parks Playgrounds Equipment Maintenance Parks Trails New Construction Parks Barrier /Signs /Footbridge Maintenance Parks Parks New Construction Parks Playgrounds Hazard Inspection Parks Playgrounds New Construction 1-119 A112endix 2: Prioritized List of Services 1-120 Priority 1 Services Service Area Asset Function: Parks Furniture Maintenance Parks Playgrounds Resilient Surface Maintenance Parks Buildings Maintenance Parks Trails _ Maintain Parks Playgrounds _ Waterplay Parks Playgrounds Maintenance Parks Trails Footbridge Hazard Inspection Roads Facilities Yard Loader Roads Roads Hot Mix Patching Roads Trails Surface Maintainance Roads Roads Cold Mix Patching Roads Roads Hot Mix Topping Roads Shoulders Gravel Maintenance Roads Roads Utility Cut Prep and Support Roads Roads Utility Cut From Utility Companies Roads Roads Crack Sealing Roads Roads Infra -red Maintenance Roads Roads Utility Cut Repair - Public Complaints Roads Misc. Special Events Setup Roads Misc. Heating Oil /Cleaning Equipment Roads Roads Capital Construction Roads Laneways Brushcutting & Debris Roads Aggregates Stockpiling /Hauling Roads Furniture Maintenance Roads Landscape Restoration Sanitation Parks Sanitation Sanitation Roads Illegal Dumping - Roadside Pickup /Cleanup Sportsfields Parks Turf Maintenance Sportsfields Baseball Diamonds Turf Irrigation /Maintenance Sportsfields Soccer Fields Turf Maintenance /Irrigation Sportsfields Outdoor Rinks Maintenance Sportsfields Parks Turf Irrigation Sportsfields Turf Maintenance Sportsfields Hardware - Benches /Goals /etc Maintenance Traffic Barricades Install /Remove Traffic Markings Traffic Marking /Painting Traffic Barricades Maintenance Traffic Roads Calming Traffic Bollards Relocate Traffic Bollards Repair 1-120 A112endix 2: Prioritized List of Services Priority 2 Services 1-121 P rice rity, 2 ' Se rvices Service Area Asset Function Downtown Roads Accident /Debris Cleanup Downtown Roads Sweeping Environmental Barrier /Signs /Footbridge Maintenance Environmental Crops Greenhouse Crop Production Environmental Office Plants Install & Maintain Environmental Parks New Construction Environmental Roads Tree Road Reconstruction Recovery Environmental Trails Clean Up Environmental Trees Donation Environmental Trees Inventory Operations Lands By -Law Violation Cleanup Operations Misc. Hauling Operations Misc. Graffiti Removal /Vandalism /etc. Operations Misc. Spills Operations Misc. Sign Shop Parks Buildings Maintenance Roads Aggregates Stockpiling /Hauling Roads Building /Wall Maintenance Roads City Hall Snow Loading Roads Facilities Yard Loader Roads Furniture Maintenance Roads Landscape Restoration Roads Laneways Brushcutting & Debris Roads Misc. Special Events Setup Roads Misc. Heating Oil /Cleaning Equipment Roads Misc. Patrol Roads Roads Hot Mix Patching Roads Roads Cold Mix Patching Roads Roads Hot Mix Topping Roads Roads Utility Cut Prep and Support Roads Roads Maintenance Roads Shoulders Gravel Maintenance Roads Sidewalks Concrete Repairs Roads Sidewalks Mudjack - Raising Slabs 1-121 A112endix 2: Prioritized List of Services 1-122 Priority, 2 Services Service Area Asset Function Roads Sidewalks Landscape Restoration Roads Sidewalks Mudjack - Sidewalker Roads Sidewalks Curb & Gutter Repair Roads Sidewalks Concrete Replace - Sidewalker Roads Sidewalks Utility Cuts Roads Sidewalks Curb & Gutter Cuts Roads Sidewalks Pavestone Repairs Roads Sidewalks Capital Construction Roads Trails Surface Maintainance Sanitary Sewers Connections Install Sanitary Sewers Connections Replace Sanitary Sewers Laterals Maintain /Repair Sanitary Sewers Mains Install Sanitary Sewers Mains Repair Sanitary Sewers Mains Blocks Sanitary Sewers Mains CCTV Sanitary Sewers Manhole Inspection Sanitary Sewers Manhole Cave-in Repairs Sanitary Sewers Manhole Dye Testing Sanitary Sewers Manhole Install Sanitary Sewers Manhole Replace Sanitary Sewers Manhole Castings Install Sanitary Sewers Manhole Castings Replace Sanitary Sewers Pipes Sewer Clean /Flushing Sanitary Sewers Pipes Blockade Sanitary Sewers Pipes CCTV Inspection Sanitary Sewers Pipes Rodents Removal Sanitary Sewers Pipes Capital Construction Sanitary Sewers Pipes Odour Assessments Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Building Maintenance Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Alarms Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Pumps Work Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Checking Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Wet Well /Holding Tank Work Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Diesel Fueling Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station General Process /Building Electrical Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Valves Work Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Level Sensing Devices Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Force Main 1-122 A112endix 2: Prioritized List of Services 1-123 Priority, 2 Services Service Area Asset Function Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Building Heating Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Generator Sanitary Sewers Pumping Station Ventilation Work Sanitary Sewers Stubs Cap And Inspect Sanitation Buildings Fine Paper Pick -up Sanitation Leaves Hauling From Streets - Loaders /Trucks Sanitation Leaves Hauling From Dumpsites Sanitation Leaves Loose Sweeper Pickup Sanitation Leaves Dump Site Prep Sanitation Leaves Blower Pickup Sanitation Roads Accident /Debris Road Clean Up Sanitation Streets Sweeping Sportsfields Baseball Diamonds Facility Maintenance Sportsfields Baseball Diamonds Turf Irrigation Sportsfields Basketball Courts Maintenance Sportsfields Horseshoe Pits Install /Remove Sportsfields Horseshoe Pits Maintenance Sportsfields Outdoor Rinks Install /Remove Sportsfields Soccer Fields Facility Maintenance Sportsfields Soccer Fields Turf Irrigation Sportsfields Tennis Courts Maintenance Storm Sewers Catchbasins Repair Storm Sewers Catchbasins Replace Storm Sewers Catchbasins Cleaning Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inspection Storm Sewers Catchbasins Retrieval Storm Sewers Catchbasins Castings Repair Storm Sewers Catchbasins Castings Replace Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inlets Inspection Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inlets Repair Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inlets Replace Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inlets Cleaning Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inlets Retrieval Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inlets Castings Repair Storm Sewers Catchbasins Inlets Castings Replace Storm Sewers Culverts Repair Storm Sewers Culverts Replace Storm Sewers General Capital Construction Storm Sewers Leads Repair 1-123 A112endix 2: Prioritized List of Services 1-124 Priority, 2 Services Service Area Asset Function Storm Sewers Leads Replace Storm Sewers Leads Install Storm Sewers Manhole Repair Storm Sewers Manhole Replace Storm Sewers Manhole Castings Repair Storm Sewers Manhole Castings Replace Storm Sewers Pipes Sump Pump Connections Storm Sewers Pipes Install Connections Storm Sewers Pipes Repair Storm Sewers Pipes Flood management of Streets Storm Sewers Pipes Flood management of Backyards Storm Sewers Pipes Flooding mitigation of Basements Storm Sewers Pipes Cleaning Storm Sewers Ponds Maintenance Traffic Guard Rails Maintenance Traffic Markings Lane Lines Traffic Markings Special Markings Traffic Markings Reparation Traffic Markings Pre- Marking Traffic Roads Calming Traffic Signs Create Watercourse Culverts Repair Watercourse Culverts Replace Watercourse Culverts Maintenance Watercourse Misc. Silt Removal Watercourse Misc. Debris Removal Watercourse Misc. Brush Cutting Watercourse Roadside Ditches Cleaning Winter Bus Stop Trackless Winter Bus Stop Handsalting Winter Crosswalks Trackless Winter Crosswalks Handsalting Winter Culverts Clearing Winter Culverts Thawing Winter Facilities Plowing Winter Facilities Salting Winter Facilities Yard Loading Winter Inlets Clearing Winter Inlets Thawing 1-124 A112endix 2: Prioritized List of Services 1-125 Priority, 2 Services Service Area Asset Function Winter Outlets Clearing Winter Outlets Thawing Winter Roads Salting Winter Roads Plowing Winter Roads Snow Loading Winter Roads Road Patrol Winter Roads Snow Removal Winter Roads Snow Hauling Winter Roads Snow Melting Winter Roads Plow Damage Repairs Winter Roads Sanding Winter Roads Anti -Icing Winter Roads Scarifying /Ice Breaking Winter Roads Clearing /Thawing Winter Sand Boxes Install /Fill /Remove Winter Sidewalks Trackless Winter Sidewalks Handsalting Winter Snow Dump Maintenance Winter Snow Fences Install /Remove 1-125 1-126 A112endix 3: Characteristics used to define a Service For it to be defined a "Service ": • It is intended /expected to be performed more than once; and • It is repeatable without the need to change skillsets; and • Its anticipated results ( "Service Level ") can be clearly defined; and, • It is performed upon identical asset types; and, • It allows for the agreement of expectation between the service recipient and the service provider; and, • Its Service Level can be increased or decreased without a change in skillset or equipment type and by simply: o Adjusting the level of effort; and /or, o Adjusting the volume of equipment utilized If any of the characteristics above are not met, it is presumed that: • Has not yet been fully vetted to its lowest form, or • May be a project or program; not a service, or • It is a similar, but separate or distinct, service 1-127 1-128 A112endix 4 — Sample Key Performance Indicators Indicator Ca egory Types & Example Category Purpose KPI Productive Time Adjustment Factors These Utilization KPIs allow one to establish an adjustment factor to determine the ratio of time available for productive work Used to enhance planning and deployment activities A work unit can be any duration but is typically measured in Hours and extrapolated into longer time frames Travel Time per Actual Work Unit Crew Size per Job Function Sick Time per Available Work Unit Vacation time per Available Work Unit Time per Available Work Unit -Training Delayed Start Time per Available Work Unit Early Return per Available Work Unit Equipment Down -time per Available Work Unit Break/Lunch Time per Available Work Unit Functional Costing Allows for period over period comparison of cost trends Costs can be further broken down into their labour, equipment, and material elements Mowing cost per hectare Irrigation cost per hectare Sport field maintenance cost per booked hour of usage Road Maintenance cost per lane kilometer Sewer maintenance cost per sewer kilometer Winter Maintenance cost per centimeter of snowfall Sidewalk repair cost per sidewalk section Productivity Measurements Allows for period over period comparison of productivity trends Highlights productivity gains or the need for further deployment adjustments Highlights necessary Asset Management adjustments Labour Hours per hectare of turf maintained Labour Hours per cubic meter of asphalt repair Labour Hours per meter of sidewalk repair Labour Hours per maintenance rotation of "A" class sports fields Labour Hours per tree canopy trimmed (0 — 20 foot trees Labour Hours per tree canopy trimmed (20 — 40 foot trees) NOTE: The above indicators are simple examples to highlight the potential information gains. The actual indicators that would be utilized would be determined through thorough assessment of need and the resources available to capture, maintain, and report on the data. Each measurement would be vetted for extended use. In other words, any given measurement that could be used in more than one KPI would be given preference over measurements that feed a single KPI. KPIs, which could be used in Composite or Dashboard Indexes, would be prioritized for implementation 1-129 1-130 L Q E a) 0) cu Q cu O cu U c 0 cu O U N 0 Q cu a) a) L Q Q 0 0) a) a) a) cu U O 0 Q E O U 0 H 74 M 74 74 d (0 00 L O N U X X O U a) ° C ) a) C .0-0 s_ cn U � (B >, > .— O -C a � a) Q :tf •— O m ' �. �. a) 0 cn U L E E a) a) `' U �_ "J O 0 0c�LoU Q _ Q `� O (a" O L �o a) X0 N O 0 U O ` — cn >, cn E (6 O V 0-,- ° U ,— .— i a) Y a) � o L) 0 +� to — 0 a) cn a) � cn � Q O � � o ) O �- a) a) ° _0 ca U O ca a) X ���0� �o CU °�0 4 �� o> 0 c� >, cn � cA O (B c (B y (B "_ E a) Q U •> — Z) L_ O •� N �! _ O cn cn a) a) Q O a) U c-0 Q O Q V_ J > LL a) (B O i U U a) a) > s_ (B (B c Q C (B - >, a) cn a) L �, Q U � ! nQ`` U� Q Q cn y� L) Z) cu ! yn�` Q ° n� n U tf� Q O Z) yQ� O L U cu U ',. L L E cn a) W a)� n (U E U Q CU-0 cn cn +� Q a) O s_ _0 O s_ a) O _ U Z) 1 a) u) �. � Q cn U • • i "-' y-. cn a) N E U O U � (B s_ � O U a) a) 1 V (B a) U U �. �. -0 (B O cn U (B a) O Z) cu U U) o � U (6 U O a) a) a) O . o �. �_ �� U o a) U H o (B (B Q a) "J c 3 Q (B a) o L -- — cu > cn — 0 > � > - � O � � cn �, O 2 > O a) � L) c U- O (B a) O U .cu -0� O �. (B a) U a) O _ U U CU a) O a) > O T N U O cn c � a _0 >, 0 O (a a) a) a O U O O J O L L .� U L) U > o L Z) E ncn� a) B O L � 1^ E > O /� - z VJ -r- cn 70 W y_i � Q E _ VJ 0- ti' '� Q U > O � a) a) O> a) U 0 0 a) L a) a) o () O U� a) O C a) (B 2' O � O O .. Q L L L a) O L� to L '— — � L U) Qua) d) aazoa a)cn� ° Q o o ns W D a Q >, 74 M 74 74 N M rl rl 00 X x x x cn — � c L U CU a) "J �—�� � (� U 4-- -C— L !Vl a) CU O _ T — >, p a) a) O U O p Q ( HE — U ) c L) CU O L Q ° L cu L a) CU OL p U >, X N U L O i Q E E L >, (u O (a M N a) — N �U Z) O (a L oo.�_a M cn O- 0 0-C E > a) o o N D� p o�Q�� �_ (B (B (B U a) 0 O � .— . C O (B N U L O C L O a) > O O a) O a) m C: a) "' p T U � a1 Q cn a) O N � O "J N �_ O D-0 O cn .0 •L > i Q N � O a) Q to a) • � �- a) cn O a) a) O OU a) (B � L-� O L N U) pj > +� cn +� U V N L "-' U C cn U � O a) (B O a) p L 70 O O N �� d cn p `� (a N� a) i-0 0 m p 0 •U Z) L) (B OV � m Q — -0 � � — L a) O ' E w -0 a) � � (a L O N O > a) U a) i a) c1 S.. (B cn (6 p _ (B L N-o O N O '_ o O O � y-- cu CE (B a) a) � >+ a) > (B , L O O O 4 > E C U a) ca O C O �_ — U a) a' O in a) U a) - a) � cn O � _ cn U O cu O �, �. .. O .FD O � (B N O (B � a) O . L a) U a) _0 — Q = cn �' (a >, � ^ L p O cn p c L -0 � O a) a) cn 5 L C: cn a) �a -0- � UP.�� (a >+O 4_ i cn� cn U 0 cu cn cu O O LL a) N >_ U `� O a) Q L) N `� � cn O O (B � (U > �O � (B � U O O cn -0� F m 0 1 a) •N O U 0 E O N w p N� 0) — _ — a) OV E 0 — • � D (u L Q _ — U a) (B Z) U O U 0> O : � O `..— Q L� U� ,� a) Z Q O � CU "- U cu (6 to O � cp a) N > �. E " O O a) L a) — a) L L) CU =5 O U O ca a) O N O �~ U O C U C cn p O: p E U 0 c-0 0— a) U cn -0 . p U OV N O N O O to (a > O U L a) O L m 0 D O Q p a) +-- — �. a) +-- > �. 0 U 0 L j L cu cn �. cn O � � U -0 OL CU 0 C: O 0 0 M O 0� Q a) — a) (B a) 4-- O a) i Q p i L C O Q E cn T E O •> (B N D m cn cn � m o �, (B �- O V 0 0 O> O�� C: a) 0) C) O L � c 0 L a) ++ U 0) O LO) •a) E cu: N -- O� F -�� U 0 o U I 0 a) N < cn � � o � a� o C: cn � � CU C aa) o a� Q coin ° ai �> U� >, 0- �� °� o 0 -0 cn-0 � w o m O� �-0 o m co LO cO N M rl rl M M rl 74 x x x 70 N 70 N 70 a n Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q N a a a� x x x x `� o E cu O cn Q p �• cB a) U N O L L a) a) a) L a) CU U U �. a) i U >, a) > N � N N a) c E c N c cu ca cn L �+ Z) N wU+ a) O a) cu L a) U 01 c �_ -0 U c a) cn Z) � U O >� U a) cu a) � c cu a) � O V cu ! A. � cu 5 � � Q� Q� a) cn 70 U Z) cu a) m 5 Y U- Q 1 O a) a) o � � u) E ate) ca O -0 o a) U p U Z _ U 0) 5 Y p N c L> a) � ON Q L cu L c c cB c Z) L `/ cu ca _ O) o� U cB 4— O •� > a) E Q C a) L) U Z) cn L a) O � Q L "- ...� .� i L > U :ER 16 cn cn L > cn CU a) cu 0 a) .� C—u Z Y � , 04 ca `.Q p N a) N> cu Q >_ m N E D �. u) o ca O U c� >, Z O> a) �. E CU �• Z) 0 i a) c "J Q Q a) i cu N U "J L Q ,U • (� O O OU cn Q (� 0).— ) c L Z) > L N O U N� U (n >? L O N L U N E a) Q L " Z) U L �• cB cn L � >' U >, 4- cu a) cu U >; O to U (� O a) a) a) U p E a) _ CU a) 0 a) N �. U n >_ "' � N ca 0 70 U� ca -0 a) � O � a) cu — D -O U U ' � Z 0 cu � cu E Q � � "-' L ' p �. p L H a) a) a) � � a) � p a) +- U a) _0 a) U Q E-- U a) �. U) L U L a) � a) � U U O O > CU Z) >, E � (n cinn 4-- "' > C C U c� Q a) d � Y 3 n ca CE N a) 5 -0 ca O U >, " U a) U j cu N a) -0 M a) L to 0 N C 1 O -0 a) a) : a) �. N cu U a) .Ln a) CU p a) .0 ca Q Q cn= L - Y N ca cn N Q cu a) C: ca E E m O N Q CU O O cn 01 E cOn n E 0 U E cn O �. C: cn .� U�� U U "_ a) L) �_ cn � a) O O L cn O cn (a a) �. L a) O > O � tO i—, L O1 a) O a) a) > � a) O a) N >, U �. L i (U a) -0 � p Q + i cB w-± E cu >' L U cB > to L a) U p 0 a) O a) = O� cn a) cB >p a) cn E j cu E 0 U U N N 4 _ U L �>- cB U 5 �_ > �_ L � E a) cB > N O O K cn LO O D H d cu U O O U O U U H U n a) n U cu a) a) W L L E U E Q a) U �) Q cu cu L U `/ 6a cu cu cu -0 U 0-0 Tr-- 0— co m M M rl 74 V M rl rl x x x x x x 70 0 0 L 0 0) QQ QQ QQ QQ QQ Q' a a a a a a� x x x x x x x U L O O O c 1 O) c L U L (B a) cu Yi > A L a) L � 1 a) N L E (B `. W ♦V � cn U N N N� n u0i N •� C _0 Q O- a) E L a) N 0) � .2 a) E a) > p �>> a) .� O O V C C •; (B a� FD 1 , N L •� a) s_ U (B U �. _0 p > cu d U - Q Z) L-0 p cn a) to+ E 1 a) to E �+ O O 'L +� i i O cn O U' a) cn a) a) Q 0-O � 0 0- ;-.7 ) c c O O Q O mc C C ) C/) U Z) O LL � aH Q I..L a) O (V C LO c O (V � _r C "- a) N c � E N U E a) 0 cn � ai O ca O O 0 cu (a N-0 cn a) " �_ >, cE a) X O 0 0 Q a) -r- a) (B � ca E �'O _ O _ _ O �� �N c- a) a) o���= L �• U a) E— a) cn c >, O _r O _ > uoi O Q E > ca Q Q U U) o N � � a) O) O 4•i ui N O= `� L O 0 a) O �. cn Q L U Q (B N i1 O a) L �' cn O U O a) -0 can � a) _ 0 - cn a) a) c cn � Q N L "'' ca ca LL �_ N 0 E cn CU U ca FU O CU -0 (B a) ca .� cn -0 cn (B cn c a) _ 75 CU a-r— ~ p Q _ can N a) to ,- -C— ZFE O) -0 (B -0 ) Q O Q 0)0)p N O p D Q m n 06 _ 7FD -0 C O Q 1_ N — U U L (a a) - CU O a) W N cn cn (n Q �- U L cn � U O a) N �_ -0 O 0 °�$ cn 0 � � cn p -2 U E Q L O O O V+ _cn Q V O y-- (B O L > L) a) CU O c- E cn a) > O (a > to N O)W L�� LaH Q cn p i a) "' a) OHO j �C�. C a) c �(n a) L (B � Q >1 (B E a) U) Q O l J L L _ U a) - O U a) C7) (B a) _ O O U) L a) �_ � cn a) 'O Q O O (B (B (B a) O N O N ) j O Q• �•� E a) -0 O-0 N > O N a) Q 0 (B to — O 2 U >, >. N a) 7FD a) > U a) O cu O cu OL0- O Z) 0- cu CU c� ���Qo2smL � cn of 21-1 r N r co r r LO r (0 r Il- r V M rl rl Ln M rl rl x x x cLO LO Cc �L Q Q �� Q Q �LO QQ a a 0) 0) a� x x x x x N L) U) O L (n O C N >, n C L� — 70 70 N C O CU N C .-. O >, D N c O E U N 0 a) .- cB cB .0 - N Q L cu �, 42 Z) O CU OL U O O U (U N> N O ) Q CU �O a) U-0 - cu U N _ a) cu U Q 0 y--� "c U O w a Q Z cB � Q U O O O O Q cu p O Q-o p Q p ,� N N U �. N •� N i N E L O �� ~ OU - N >, N ) Z) Q 0 U_ �O "� c to cB O N O% O � -0 N c L N O cB N cn O% cu > -0 cB L cn U cB �. �. - .- N c _ U �. N _ .0 - to U c cB U CU N O Z) CU U 4 i N S O N N M _ U "� O M N- U� O O U U) U) 1 p cu N N i -t -0 U L L O N N N cn U cu cu L �• (U p O "_ Q (U N cB O cB N � N +� , cn cu N (U O cn O cn M •� U) �"� m L O p cB CA O "' O o O N L cn N N O i O N �' `- N cB +L — 00 U �' N cn c 0.— p O O ^ O C p 70 T N U) O p Z) C cu �. a) �' cu L) can N � u, � i cu i U� a) to N N U n � _ U L •- U U c� C N L N p� N� m N U ca O �. N �. U� cu U Z) N O (U O Q � - CU N L U U) Q _ O E 5 U U N c .E �. cu L cB O N O U Q Q) U � O O cn T >, E E N N L O N E N U N U N N () cB � C: O cu Z N -0 (U �. 70 i .� L O U co: cu cn L (� Q U p N C cB ^ O _0 v o E c t o= 0 O (D Q L) o � L> )— L O�� z; w N U) c N .� O ui 0000 -0 U i C: L C = O i rr E �- U) N O �� U C - — N U L '� a) —� (a L N - 0 - m "- � E N U i1 cB CU CU Y U (� cn N— (� �+ L Q � L �+ to N �+ - — O— U N — CU L U) N i ^ O N p Z— L O i N (5 N cB O O L X O N O N U cn cn O N Q O> N > u) N �. O L O n N E N o N U O O cu E E N 5 N N i > Q :t:! O O 0) O CU O CU CU N 70 4-- O a) CU O N cB N N N m OV U i Q �. O L N N ca E N _ n (n �_ O U >, N U > >, >, , cB — E O L N cu U� CU CU p) N cu E U O a) Q Q p L) p Q Q Q O L L L p E O L N — CU -g L U cB � O N CO cu cn O L cu Q Q c7 U L Q Q . co O O N N N N Ln M rl rl M rl rl x x x x 70 70 70 70 a)� a)� a)� a)� QQ QQ QQ QQ Q O Q Q Q x x x x x x U N O _0 N p L N E L _ cu CU _0 U > p �, O N i_a � N L N N L N a) O N > 0) O c cu Z) ~ O i N -0 > U O O U O cn N N O U (T N _ Q Q � cB U) a) 0 U) Q U) U) M � ! A V/ � � � � p N � Q c� yp aS 0 L o �— �, L '5 :t! a�Y o � o�� o L -0 cu o Cn cn 0) a) Z) cu Y cu Z) -.0)-0 �� o cn 0LP E -0 -o � LO aoi� o o a°'i U) � � O c N U � O N� � E ---� cO Q O L +� cu 0 cO E > OU —�� U •� CU (a in O O O - O CU cu (B (U C L O i C N Z) C: "_' O "� L N U � "� L p cn N-0 � L cB U O N m OU D> �O a) C: O O U -cu L N N' �' OU ?� i � cB U� Q � U) cu N _0 O Q.- -0 O N O O c U) -0 N � U N _a N a) i p U M N� O cu U cu cu _0 N (B �, N N N O E cu O L) O /�� CU N o Q— (U ca +� o u L o ca � aS .� .L Z) -0 � a) Cc:) V) Y_ cn Q a� o cn U O 0 cu O C O i cu � O Q O _ - cu O N O> > L d L) U L O �• L O j>-0 O N_0 E " o O O U � cu L� N U a) O N U>N � 0 U N Y U >+ "J O N O O L U) N U U) N �_ y +� . N E i cB E O �_ cB L 70 �, D L N� p_ O cu p U O U -0 T N � O N -r- . O O L U) N p 0 L �. O N O N �. >,c L L G �.. �• . O � O O cu O +J N 70 O> U) 1 � �. � N i 0 U) N cB L cB > cB N cB > cB O LO > L) N O O O cn N Q U d m O Q L �+ cu U U) N U Z) �' Q cB E .. S U >, O U N N �, U p O O p p "' N O (� U) N O L N N E > U >, �. U N Q U >, � `� O ca d �. ca cu - OU U O O L cB N N �' U O N c� 0) O �• E -0 -0 N N .� _ U '— cu - _� cB X O 0 Q U U OU N ?� N N E O U) G 0 O _ N Q O L Q cB O O O O N Q �. L �• U) ca N N ca O p y cB U Lt- CU cu CU N C: 0 �. Q N OU Q O cn N �' N E� >, � cUi) cn Z) z L cu E (� U) L U) cB O N .O �- N Q_ p o U) cB �� U N �O U) L �_ O .O U N N O O N L .cu L . g cu cn U) cu N N � U) L O Fn N .O � OU O O -0 > O Q N U Q cu cu �_ � � . `- 'U � > CU = � N > ca • oU U) Q " L) H ca of U � OU N d -0 -0 0 i ca Q cn D U 5 ca N N N N N N M rl rl N M rl rl .X X �� �rl- LO �LO QQ a) QQ Q _ Q _ LO LO Q� Q� x x x x x L 4- p) cu O c a) LL L a) to O 0 a) � 0 a 0Q))0 ° -0O Y ° CU CU � o cn a) a) L a) �? Y = (� a) a) a) O cu O O >— _ (U O— _ (U _ Q U — —_ L O> L O E N _ cu O a) Z) >, �. O L a) a) E O a) a) �• O D U a) q) a) a) O Z) a) p a) cn > U U (n L� CU L a) U a) O •— 6•L ca c cB Q O •- U ca � a) � Q Q 0 � � � .� �°, �'0a)U� 0 aa) ca a) 0) a°i U : �- cn O O U— cu a) Q L cB � �E O cn L Z) ° to U p-0 0 _ --0 U O 0 _ 1 E cu i u O O cu •cn (B O cn a) c cu Z O a) U U D U (B a) a) _� _0 E ca a �- U m �. cB -0 a) = p �- CU �- U a) c a) > O U 0 i a) U cu cu N O E (n �, O .� O O i" E -c- 0 O U I L � O a i 00 +� C L �+ �+ . _ to a) CU 'y J L '+� p CU o a > E O ao Y a) ) U o 0 ° -0 a) Q a) O > a) cu O ) U N C a) a) U cu U E O U a) c c cu a) a) 0 0 E i 00 M rl 74 x x x x x 70 70 70 70 70 QQ QQ QQQQQQ N Q _ 00 x x x x x x x _ cu N "'' cu cB _ L L O 0) cn N CU O> E L O E O O >1 � N >�' N ca N cn to N & N U — N cu U) ca \� C: E O� O �. cu O N O O 4 • L) N -r- O-0 O U _ L CU N — O O O O E — O O) O. N Z) — cp cu N_ N D U cn cO � N > O �' a) U a) +� N Q .� O E •L E L cn N c6 U N cn O N •� O C L N — a) U O� N N O cn 1 L _ 0 � (n — ;� N O �, p cn U E m U m m N E N N Q N d cu CL (B U N N E O� Q E L > 0) L O Q N � c�.N U�• ) N " ?� Q -0� >,p CU O� �O CU a) O — Q Q O— — N N �' E a) U U � cn — L O ca L a) 4-- 0 O O cB — Z O cB c_ u p -0 U -0 (U 0)•— >, E O O c N L cu O- c� O Q( CU CU C � NO O> > — N O O) O B > O N > cu N V U N cL n / `N N 6 &- > V L C n U >1 E O � O U c c � -0 cu a) O -0 O E- 0) N , Q > N cu >n O > a cu C) c LL) �a) cu >N � , -�,�a I •C: CU cu L cu d O 1 L O T N cn E i N (� O >+ "_ `� can d Y ~ a v� Z .0)u p Z) a) ���; �cu U)0), U) ) � � �� ���o� O U �+ > _ U L L L - - U - N (n O •— cn O� _ N O _ U Q M — L U) N Q E _ O "' N -0 LL N i c: t L `� E LL N U T 0) c� O O N Z) O �_> Z) .� > L •— O N N cn � cn L O N cn E 7 U O 0) O O > O x N O O N T U) �. �_ L N L i � O— ca Q i N .� r, . — N Z) cn (n �? — N �_ . _ .� cn �_ cu 1 U N .? N L Q U =_ a) >, cn (- N • O � > O L U �.._ (a O U-0 Q N � O c Q Q m c, O Q O C �. U �_ cu Q U //D N V J Q y--� a) N CL L._ —_ N N cn 00 N O �. O N U ca cB > `~ O N L 0) N L ? - Q L U U `� �. N L V V� _ft NC L C O N O M M O cu CU � U) c cu E Q) N L N m 0 N E m cu E T C ?� �� N N O ,U O C O O cB N a) cO o N Z) E O 'Q U O j OV E O _ O L _ Q _ (B U /y�/ /� a� L E 0 •O (� 'L U cn O O N L O E cu N O 0) — N cB / 1„L N N O Ri O L m � N a CU < CU LL 0-0- cn _ (n (n L ca � � y� m c� m d U © � Q -O cu cn L 7Lcoo ti c FCC,)) o � o c-- co 00 M rl 74 M rl 74 x x x x x x x x m70 a 04 70 Lo 70 � 70 � 70 rl- m a 70 Lo c1r) L? a) Q a) ' Q a) ' Q a) ' Q a) ' Q a) ' Q a) ' Q a) Q Q a0 Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q ^ T– a a a a a a a a� x x x x x x x x x U L ,70 O)— U U) U (1) O p a) p �• CU cu Ucu cu a) Q o0 L- aS a) a) a) -0 CU Z) L ca N U cn L� - O O •c — L cn O) to L O 70 U U � � O •CO U a O (a cn � " +a� r� p o .•U . 11 p a O p �• U ) Q Q Q a) U a) O1 L +� L L C7% O a) a) a) ca cn O U > X cn ' O (n O cn (� ^ T � i U N a) O a) T N N L a) a) Q a) cn _ 0 >N Q O O .2 C: N oZS U _ O� > cu U U N c6 O N ^� �—� U L O U (U •� LO U Q L L L C3% c Q > a) > O � U L cB O E a) Q _ Ud � a) O QV �, 070 L 3 O — p U O U U a) Q U L U ca �, a) � L 0) cu Q i O c a) ^U cB a) O � H cn 0 a) 01 � a) O a) O) /�//�� L� L U� (a -0 O •; -0 O .Q •F O a) 0) a) Q O O cn L o a) . yJ a) E U c /� cu ��C p p p cB O O 't� a) L 0)a)- cu cu U O) a) a ) 0 o � O cn E cu O U CU -0 � E � >, � � O > O O c C O ca) O O O� a)O 0 4-- N _0 Q L � �x cu 0 a) /^ CL >' °) 75 U O c � c cu (1) O 1 > — N u U O c p c F i LM a) cu cu CU c>ac CUC Ja)Z)a) a�i� �'a�i a�i Eca� u)a) 7FD CU � � c C) Z) N (B L cB a) 0 O L N N p cu U p p U cB N cu to U i U cu i L- O Q �• >, C O U E � a) cn cu �• U 1 0 N O 1 O U L L L cn O) V N V J U_ > O Q a) O ry�� !Vl cc� L) L) O (a (a_ T cn L) cn CU .s U G �� W � U 2 U cu N co � Lo (o ti 00 0') � � � � � � � � M rl 74 O 74 N � C7 r X X N N — N. d � 3: O � -0 -0 (B Ur �L OU 0) C cu N� N E E 2 N CU U) Q U N O to - N "' U p N E ) (6 O a) - U E O O U O C E Q O L Q a) O E .— >+ U Q a) N -0 E (B O O >,� U N N .— cu cn L >, C) cn o cn O) O 0 O O O N L L UO - cu O (B E cu U O a) C- N O U L O> >,.� L O L O O U' �CU� cu a) cu 0 "C0 O L O a) O C Q O -0 N 75 U U .� (B Q L (B n ,> U cu U > OU -5 > U •O O �-r-a) a) c E > o m 5ocU o o�Q— Os. — o v ov U — (� N > (B (u O (B c • N .', cu a (� � Q �. cn O N N O U "' O O 40 (B (B Q N - _0 � cu E U N Q CU V � c � O a) 70 N (B Cu U > H (B (B O L O 74 R� 1 � O .- M O i T--- M '- O N 0 O � cn C) C o U O O .0 LL ._ ._ E -t 2-0 0 (D (D o ry 00 J El', 0 -0--i N E N CD m _ cn C: U N O p N � .� E z co O O v� L > J a) ° p � � Q p Q p o o O N — L 4-0 � a) cn O N _ E O _ .L N i rl a) ._ U O A.-O 2 _O O O 4--+ a) 2t O Q. O U Cn 0) C� E Jc: U C: O co AL A U. O cn C O N O U N cn O Cn x O Z � N M 14 L6 O O =3 M ry i a) ._ U O A.-O 2 _O O O 4--+ a) 2t O Q. O U Cn 0) C� E Jc: U C: O co AL A U. O cn C O N O U N cn O Cn x O Z � N M 14 L6 O O =3 J El', 0 0 0 rt� J Jr ^0 v, W C� C/) O A.-O L C/) C/) O � a) O U O Q. O U v '— 0 .— a) '> U L u) a) O O •� a) � C/) to � C . U a) + 0) O >, > U o a) LO C/) C/) N C: O O > cu }' L. + L O a) O .. a) C/) C/) C/) L N CD = O � O •— O O •� C/) •- co '— O Clu . - o cn U) � L O M> x O C w l I I Ln V 74 1 74 rt� J Jr A.-O O 0) i2 O O O O C� Cn Ll U) m QL nU) 1 .0 O QL 4--j 4--j =3 U O -0 0 C6 O U) 4--j .0) O 4--j U) I 0) O O O �o .C/) O 0 0 A--+ m O A-n Ll ca ca C6 U O m I C- m E L- 0 O O U O O X W I N Q �U O .cn -t O Q. x O 4- O L. O 2.) O 2 Ll 1 7" � rt� J m, El', ■ •O O A. —O M •- ■N U Q CL L. A.—O CL W 0 L M .,--A cn C� C: I O O > > cn ._ c O .V L C L O E O O cn o U � N �nrvnn�nnnnn� moioouum� mRmuuuuuuumr fuI u u uum °11II m u A 1UU II " moioouumr mRmuuuuuuumr muuluq �uuuumMU'" t ary mumufu�� I a� O 0 a) . . . . . . . . . 06 � V �nrvnn�nnnnn� vervnN'�uuuuuuuu�i O mmoouumr mmoou,,,,,, � mRmumuuuuuur mRouuuuuuuuur... uuuuu uuuuuuu mr omu � ■ "" '���� � uuuuuuu�����u�u�ul'�� mumu,mluuim' uuum ml }� mu �iA uupgm�y „ '�Omm moioouumr. mmoouumr rn uuuuuuuumr C/ / wuuluq mRmuuuuuuumr wuuluq �IVIIIIIIUM ary �IVIIIIIIUM p t ary mumufu�� c: mumufu 0 O I ■_ � . _ ca c: c: c/) C: t:.— O O O „ cm C: cn I cn CU 0 cn L O V O to O cn cn ca (D • - Co N le W1 1 W1 O O O ............. r. u Ln 74 cn N r-4 N vlci V 0 U O .r!q C� 11 ...: ........ 1 0 0 bA vlci u cn �rl 0 0 Ra C a) c LOME '14 5mw �Wl 41- c a) C. Ca OL I > Lu ......... ,,... .......... 0 41- c a) C. Ca OL I O r� r� ��1 0 U v, o Uv O bA c� cry ul O OD O O O CD 1 0 LIM N Ln 74 � �} Ln 74 LO cn C- C- a) 0 E lc-ua W-0 c- E 0 cn >% co U) cn > C- 0 i N >-% O O ca cn O � ) Ca 'j � 0 O tt- N cn o 0 • L � U L Ca +� U E 0 70 -0 N Co - T O > __ T N —_ •U U U) Ca ca }, C'a o .� o _ - o Co co co �•ca M- o O p •� N U) I O O ca cn O ) cn o 0 • L � U L Ca +� U U T Ca ca }, C'a o .� o _ - o co co �•ca M- o U) a U) o Q) O i U) O p E y cn ,� N y O V i= $ O�$ 00 ♦ U t�/� CL N t I LO CN cn C- C- a) 0 E lc-ua —0 c- E m E l� # • cn >% co U) cn > C- 0 U—. i 1 T O O N .L O U) U j OL N N 0 7 0 L _ .E F 0 E 'c- 0 N >U) N }, to -0 -0 O Q) —_ +� L Q Ca E OU -0 O • U) U) U) O� N Ca p 0 O O in N Ca � T 70 _ Co 0 O O U M N M > .� p '— .� O A 70 N N Q-0 N E Ca O .E N '� +� � `� 70 � U � � � O � >, O O N p O .O N Q E 0 Ca 0 U Co 70 M a s= cn a a 1 LO cn C- C- a) 0 E lc-ua #0 c- E 1. # • cn >% c U) cn > C- 0 "Ol 1 U A A-2 as p 70 Ca N •� U O �• N ~ _O _ •� m N 6 Uj U) -0 L O N ?' N Q — N p co 70 co •= U (m U) � O 0) ° m 0 � 2 U 70 U) U) � U) L- 70 j �--� U) > N N � U) 'L O > N .� cn N � � CD `� to Ca 70 70 F-5 70 > N E 70 co L cn o O Ca � N 0 N N� p L- U) . U 0 Ca N •� 4--j 70 � L Uj U) 0-0 OU N N N .0) O Ca N N 70 + N — Q U O U=3 Ca U N N M-0 O Q • 1 as m 1 i 1, r m i U E L- Q N O N U) N Ca Ca U E N U) N C� Ca � � N 06 � v 70 O U N � Ca � U) � E N O Ca U) � N U � 70 N co E O (m }' U O � � • • 72 Q N N 70 1 AW '> O > Co U) U O N O �� V as m N O O Co O 0-) M N Co � � N L -1--j U O Uco -0 Co O O • 72 Q N N 70 1 AW '> O �� V as m 72 Q N N 70 1 1, 1, r m N i cfj N }, U) U) N _ .O •U � N Ca i N N � ry O 0 70 i > 70 U U) •U EF W • N U O (L) U) � � N E U) Ca � N > 70 � � N U) O 0- ti Flb U) O Q N U ca U) i Ca N 0 0 N Ca C) N •� A Ca N L- > 0 i Q l.E T N U) Q N U N ca W71 1 I���������������� \V �./� `' , r� • �..) 0 N 0 � U� • �--� � � � � �'�� ,��" "„ r �r im e �:�� �� I� pmllllllllllll� 'e "; illllllllllllll� o • s • 1 1 i 1 i � 1 i 1 i �r 1 i 1 1 i 1 i 1 i 1 � M • � i 1 1 i 1 • s M i i 1 i f 2 04 i M i i i i s • 2 im- i 1 M i 1 s 1 i 1 s s �r 1 1 i i 0 s %: 1 1 i 1 i i 1 i 1 i 1 s • c i s 1 i 1 40' 9 s 1 N r MI-0, i sly 1 1 0 s 1 i 1 s 1 i s 1 i 1 i 1 1 ii 0 s 1 1 M Mo 2 r �r im " s 1 1 M Mo 2 1 1 i i • • 1 1 M i 1 M, i • 1 i 1 i 1 M 0 i 1 1 i i i 2 M M M M M • M M M M M M M r M M M M M M • M M M M M M M M M M r �r im e ® 1 o-, IVuuuuuum �iuuuuuuu� 'e "; uuuuuuu� �� .s 1 1 i i • • 1 1 M i 1 M, i • 1 i 1 i 1 M 0 i 1 1 i i i 2 M M M M M • M M M M M M M r M M M M M M • M M M M M M M M M M 1 1 1 1 1 • i 1 1 i 1 i 1 f B4 c r �r im e 1 1 1 1 1 • i 1 1 i 1 i 1 f B4 c I���������������� \V �./� `' , r� • �..) 0 N 0 � U� • �--� � � � � �'�� ,��" "„ r �r im e �:�� �� IMO 4-J 0 4-J u 4-J 4--J C42-4 0 4-J 4-J cn 4-J u 14� U 4-J 4-J 4-J U 0 4-J 4-J 0 I cn >% 0-00111� U) co %U cn > C- • tu 0 E U. 0 CY) •: 0 0) 1 , o C- 0 CU U) I> H O � U M (D G Cm G Cm G > U) U) ' 7 O E O O N 70 N (D 7 } 70 L -0 0 Ca O 0 Ca ./J = -+C-13 0 (a O Ca } O) c . E E 0 ) M O = O:- > _ = O) U) O U m M (L) � -I.- O > O _0 7C3 N U) � 0- a V N 5 N E U) D L O U) L E — L O O U }' _0 N N Q i .� U 0- �U a ' o ( D 0 ca U (L) � E N E N 0) � 0) 0 - m Q O N U O N _O 0- cU) N _O 0- E cU) Ca a L i O a ca Q d�0 ca E N V Co 4-0 E O 32 O Co ca 4-0_ ca j O O ca N 4-0 ca O 2 U can m u) 1 cn >% 0-00111� U) co CU cn > C- 0 0 # 0 E LL 0 CY) 0 .5 0� 0 0) C) CU o C- 0 CU U) I> # YE O N U Cll N V ca N a . 1 Cll Cll Cll Cll Cll Cll ca ca ca �_ Ca G CCa G CCU G L Q U O O O U U 0-0 0- 0-0 O U O O U o _0 Q _0 a) > - > c I m a' > (D > Cll O U _0 LO Ca CD CZ) C- O C3 7 E O O O) Ca O f%) I O `� . U > O O CU U) a C � > L U) _0 a U ca M L - m c- O Cll i-- -1.— ], i--� Ca i--� Cll Cll U Lo C7� Lo L 0') L6 70 U }>—, r 07C3 O =3 Cll U O L =3 = O E Cll N -n = Ca N 0-0 c/) N cn N N > Co N > a i ca ca a0+ N ++ +� O N •� i= ca >+ ca E N co N i V � 4-0 ca Co N i +� v ca ca d L Co co W ca 0 � U t/1 H t/1 YE O N U Cll N V ca N a . 1 cn >% 0-00111� U) co CU cn > C- 0 0 # 0 E LL 0 i 0 .5 0� 0 0) C) CU o C- 0 CU U) I> # N U Ca L N L Ca 1 H N N O ca E N a O N � 4-0 � � N ca ca � aN E N a n ca m cn N N 32 ca � c� O 0 E U) U co O ` co _AO Co O U E z 0- 0- O O O cn ca ca U 0 U O — �i:i C/) (1) O Ca L L 70 M (� N L E `E O U) 0 O O p (% QX C'O 5, -0 O) U) M N E m � m L OU O p Q N p N U .= U N otS M - I O 7 p LO 0 O `� L r _0 O � CD Q m p _ -0 N Ca N Q:3 N U Ca L N L Ca 1 O ca E a O 4-0 aN E N a n Q N N 32 ca � c� O 0 E co ` co _AO Co 4-0 U E z N U Ca L N L Ca 1 P% 74 • I s 1 • s • • • 1 I I I s 1 • s • • • 1 rt� J Jr -*--a }� C: C W W E E > C� c: J C- � U � C 't> w — W a) O W O o a cy) 0 +_+ =3 • — ca L O O � O C: LL 0 O O O � } U U + C: C CU O O O _ w w U) C/) I > I Q W 0 0 O C6 O N � > U J� CU a) 0 E C: cu o E U L a) J � U NN > !A a) 0 O N U 'O U W U O Ln N 74 1 74 m� J uulluuui uuVuu 01 ■ ♦^ U W W 1 I un }, 2 U : 0 J C6 >t cn ch � a) U cn a) c: a) c� -a a) a) 4-j a) Q- -0 a) O � x � � -0 C/) M CZ cn C6 � O — — C/ >% CU L a) a) a) c cu cn E > a) a) a) 0 -0 cn A.-i 0 E c: C: C/) C/) 0 C) a) a) z a) (j) a) X a) L- CL C6- > -E o C.) M� .0 a) (.) -�-j CU a) a) a) Q0 a) cn a) J cu 4--+ � 4) 4) � ca C= C: 4) }' • O a) a) ._ p ._ > ._ O •> cn > CU > U-) L. N Q E — U a I a I a I Cn Cn Cn 0 0 0 rt� Yry El', CD E 0 iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillillillillillillilliillI LiIiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii co N cn O � E � O C- Cl. � U O � O -1--j 0 Jc: C� � C: - O cn cn a) a) cn > M> 0 a) cn C: > 0 cn C;) a) o C: M� a) a) c� v `� a) � ° � X CU V O O •V � L C: L. C: C: a) m 0 •— O Q .. C: cn cn E O v, E .> O��000 a) •> C: C: c� F = O a) a) C: — L U O + a) E � a)a)' >� O O +� � V� L O X .— x a) L cv w U w W c� t FM lot O rML Q Cl) c 0 LM uu R� 1 t FM lot O rML Q Cl) c 0 LM uu L l�^ i 27 ^� E i E • U) E co 0 (m \A�1/a \r U) 0 0) E \r cu cn l ^� cn i 0 C- a) _ I I H d 1 wl �ryu� �pF 06 cu u I, i CD 1 (D III VIII i cu III QL C)IIIIIIIIIII • cu ■ E cn• y� �v /TAJ/ _ I I L l�^ i 27 ^� E i E • U) E co 0 (m \A�1/a \r U) 0 0) E \r cu cn l ^� cn i 0 C- a) _ I I H d 1 wl rt� J m� Jr CD u Ciiiiiiiiiiii uuuuuuuuii�� aiiiiiiiiiiii 0) L� C� A--+ w 0 0 0 0 n� W W U C6 n� W 0 t 0, n> W Cn I 0 nom+ W C6 1 7" l 0 W cn �_ •�_ C6 cn Cn cn11 O 0 C)) CIO .0 CUCU n -1-I vn -0-I C-) -r- C 0 O U CU � x > C a) a) -0 t+- C6 0 0 •c _ �) • C)) C W W 0 CU O -1-a U) I 0 U I ca Q I 0 0 0 n� W W U C6 n� W 0 t 0, n> W Cn I 0 nom+ W C6 1 7" l ��ouuiuuuuuuuuuii CD E uilVluuluVl ulllll IIIIIIIIII�IWIIIIIIIIIIIII II�IW uuuuuuuuil�� 0 C)IIIIIIIIIIII 0) H Ll X m W O .x E O n� W L.L I LA� W /W� VJ U) O a) a) U) a) U O O 0 W U O C6 Un), W � Al M > � O � U C6 N 00 i rl • M 00 rl i rl J El', �, '' ��ouuiuuuuuuuuuii CD u uiluuiuul uuuuuuuui��' C/) 4--j O U � U) O v c: •� Cu Cn cn •� 0 0 •V - ^C •C m W > -a E a) U) i I P � rvi w.... mx J El', Ll \cn \r > O E O L� U O L- 0 U O .O cn D O C6 E O cn O Z U L- 0 ca cn N N cn O cn O cn O cn O =3 LA� W M d wl "�illlllllllllllllllllllllllll CD III�II� 3ro �IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIII cull II IIIIIIIIII�IWIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII���� O m E cn O Ll \cn \r > O E O L� U O L- 0 U O .O cn D O C6 E O cn O Z U L- 0 ca cn N N cn O cn O cn O cn O =3 LA� W M d wl rt� J Jr ��ouuiuuuuuuuuuil CD E IIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII III uuuuuuuuil�' 0 C)IIIIIIIIIII O QL a .— a) O •a a) �U � C6 O Q- C/) =3 C/) -r— C: O C: 0 O }, O O 4-a -1�.a cu cu E E O W W L. �� Q c- O O O L-- C I 0 0 a) c� �W W O C6 cn tf _O W O O cn W C E cn C6 O C6 E O O U C6 O E E L— V, W W W O O O O -Fu 0 1 7" l t FM v ea E L 0 a •J J co R� 1 t FM v ea E L 0 a •J J • • nm W U) 4--j M d 1 74 J El', FM 0 ca LM as a LM LL 0 li %famoo O O 74 7� 7� I 74 • N i rl M wl O 4--+ QL O C6 U) � cu o U) w CU O O U -0 0-0 •( O •� o .- }' O • — C6 M 0-0 C6 U v� E O • • O cn ca � ) O C: U) -r— v, a, Q O s= C6 a) U F O 0-0 O � C6 O � O �U CD � Q Q.- M wl �F nn,, W O O QL O CL 4 4=0 Cn Cl) cn 4=0 O x Z 0- O O c� Cn O � cn � •O O O O � 'U E O O � � U 0— cn E CU Lf O cn cn � .O O U O U O p a cn . E s=ue cu E� O M O o E E U� nCn � • , O O j C6 cn m C6 O cu cu O CU O U) c- 0 — O O_ O C6 }, 0-0 .— O 0 E —0 C6 m � o E �0 0 1 O O > OOa) o c a) Q o 1 wl t old 4& Ln R� 1 t old 4&