The hypothesis test results do not conclusively prove or disprove the hypothesis. While the data directly from PRIMELink showed no significant change in total payment processing time, further analysis uncovered that the data was missing key information about time contractors spent withholding invoices to avoid rejection. When accounting for this, total time likely did increase. More data is needed to fully evaluate the hypothesis.

1. LEAN SIX SIGMA BLACK BELT PROJECT STORYBOARD
CITY OF SAN ANTONIO |TASK ORDER & INVOICING PROCESS TIMING
MARCH 24, 2016
JESSICA M. SHIRLEY-SAENZ
PROJECT CONTROL MANAGER | TRANSPORTATION & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS DEPARTMENT

2. TABLEOFCONTENTS
DEFINE
Project Charter | Tools
KEYWORDS 4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
DMAIC METHODOLOGY 5
MEASURE
Data Collection | Baseline Measures | Tools
ANALYZE
Root Cause Analysis | Tools
IMPROVE
Solutions| Implementation Plan | Charts | Tools
CONTROL
Control & Monitoring Plans | Next Steps | Lessons Learned
APPENDIX 23

3. TASKORDER&INVOICINGTIMING
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Construction ManagementProblem Statement
Project Control
ComplianceBusiness Case
In April 2014, the City received complaints from on-call task order Contractors regarding how
long it takes to receive payment for completing work on street maintenance projects.
Contractors alleged that payments were taking longer than it use to, up to 30 or more days to
receive. Consequently, if payments are delayed, Contractors and their subcontractors are not
paid. If continued, Contractors would no longer bid on City projects which would delay the
completion of street maintenance projects city-wide. If street maintenance projects are not
completed this will negatively impact and potentially compromise the City’s infrastructure -
namely, its safety, transportation conveniences and accessibility.
Project Results
Graphical Display of ImprovementRoot Cause Analysis
Identified delays in efficiently processing task order payments was significantly attributed to:
▪ Payments Rejected for Incorrect Quantities – Due to inconsistent, redundant and non-
transparent documentation of approved quantities.
▪ Delayed and Combined Payment Requests (Invoicing) – Due to invoices being
submitted long after project completion, an additional review was being required to verify
quantities.
Solutions Implemented
▪ Implemented a tolerance threshold for quantity yield calculations to reduce number of rejects
for disputed quantity amounts
▪ Implemented new daily quantity process to centralize and standardize the documentation of
daily quantities information
▪ Updated the payment workflow so City can invoice on behalf of Contractor to improve
timeliness and eliminate the additional review of quantities
▪ Increased overall number of payments processed monthly for street maintenance
task orders from an average of 97 payment requests to 116 payment requests
▪ Reduced the overall number of rejected payments for disputed quantity amounts
from an average of 17 rejects to 12 rejects
▪ Reduced the overall percentage of rejected payments for disputed quantity amounts
from 58% ($21.6 million) to 42% ($15 million)

4. KEYWORDS
Lean Six Sigma Black Belt Project Storyboard
Task Order & Invoicing Process Timing
Construction Management
Responsible for the review and approval of task orders
and invoices; and creation as well as closure of Task
Order Purchase Orders in the City’s financial system (i.e.
SAP).
City Fiscal Accountant
Project Control
Compliance
Contracts
Fiscal
Responsible for inspecting the work Contractors perform
to ensure consistency with contract drawings and
specification. Inspects the work as acceptable, documents
construction quantities and approves payment.
City Inspector
Consists of City’s Project Manager (PM) (customarily, an
Engineer) and Project Team. Oversees the work
Contractors perform, is consistent with the contract
drawings and specifications, affirms the completed work as
acceptable, submits task orders and approves payment.
City Project Team
Responsible to perform construction work as defined by
the contract drawings and specifications.
Contractor
Is a PRIMELink form used by the Contractor or City to bill
(i.e. invoice) on behalf of the Contractor for work
completed.
Payment Request
Is a hosted enterprise capital improvements project portal
system. It manages the electronic routing and storage of
capital project documents such as Task Orders, Invoices,
Payment data and all other associated project documents
(i.e. change orders, contracts, plans, RFIs, submittals,
etc…).
PRIMELink System
Quantities refer to the itemized list of work, materials and
any cost related items supplied by the contractor in order
to complete the requested work. Actual billable quantities
are verified by a City Inspector and included in the
Payment Request so the Contractor is paid for those
items.
Quantities
Is a PRIMELink form used by the City to authorize work
consistent with the scope of the contract and within the
existing contract dollar authorization. It is needed to
create a Purchase Order (PO) for work to be completed.
Task Order
Transportation and Capital Improvements Department
(TCI) oversees and directs the development and
maintenance of the publicly owned infrastructure of the
City of San Antonio.
TCI

5. DEFINE
PROJECT CHARTER
Construction ManagementProblem Statement
Project Control
Compliance
Contracts
Goal Statement
Scope In/Out
Problem Statement
Timeline
Team Members
Business Case & Benefits
On-call task order Contractors are complaining about how long it takes to receive
payment after completing work on street maintenance projects. The average standard
processing time is 13 days, if all of the quantities are correct and scope of work is pre-
approved prior to the start of work.
POSITION PERSON
Executive Sponsor Mike Frisbie, TCI Director
Project Champion(s) Anthony Chukwudolue, TCI Streets Asst. Director
Debbie Racca-Sittre, TCI Support Services Asst. Director
Razi Hosseini, TCI Project Delivery Asst. Director
The goal is to increase the number of payment requests processed by decreasing the
number of rejected invoices for disputed quantity amounts by 10% or more by the end
of 4th Quarter in FY 2015 (September 2015) .
In Scope: Street Maintenance City Construction Task Order Contracts, Process Steps
(Including Task Order, Payment & Associating Processes), System Upgrades
Out of Scope: Street Maintenance Utility (Electric, Gas or Sewer) Work Task Orders
Improved timeliness of payment requests to Contractors will result in more timely
payments to Subcontractors and restore Contractors’ confidence with the City’s invoicing
process (as more reliable). Which will translate to Contractors wanting to continue to
bid on City street maintenance projects; and, allow the City to release funds that would
otherwise remain encumbered delaying completion of other projects.
PHASE PLANNED ACTUAL
Define April 28, 2014 April 28, 2014
Measure May 19, 2014 May 26, 2014
Analyze July 24, 2014 July 24, 2014
Improve August 25, 2014 *April 2, 2015
Control September 1, 2014 *August 3, 2015
*Project delays attributed to:
(1) Team awaiting for completion
of FY 2015 budget to buy
laptops needed for TCI
inspectors to complete the new
daily quantity log in the field.
(2) Team awaiting start of new
Street Maintenance Task Order
contracts.
POSITION PERSON
Project Manager Jessica M. Shirley-Saenz
Core Team Members Contractors
Fiscal
PRIMELink Manager
TCI Streets Engineering Project Teams
TCI Inspectors

6. DEFINE
SIPOC
Key Take Away: The scope of this project begins with the planning of the task order and includes when the work is
initiated up through inspection of the work, ending with the payment for the work completed.
S I P O C
Supplier Input Process Output Customer
Work Planning  Agreed Upon Project Scope Planning Payment Contractor
Contractor  Defined Project Limits Initial Phase of Task Order  Completed Project Work
(City) Project Team  Estimated Quantities Define Project Scope & Quantities  Inspected Work
(City) Inspector  Completion of Work  Agreed Upon Quantities
Work Task Creation  Inspection of Work Creation
Contractor  Quantity Verification Task Order (Authorization/Approval of
Work)(City) Project Team
Work Completion
(Contractor) Work Crew Execution
(Contractor) Superintendent Work Completion
CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS
(City) Inspector Inspection & Quantity Verification
Payment Timely & Consistent Payment
(Contractor) Fiscal Rep Payment Transparency
(Contractor) Superintendent Payment Request Creation Improved Communication
(City) Project Team Payment Request Approval
(City) Inspector
Close-Out Close-Out
(Contractor) Fiscal Rep Project Completion
(City) Project Team Coordination of Final Payment
(City) Inspector Final Task Order Completion

7. DEFINE
VOICE OF THE CUSTOMER
Construction ManagementProblem Statement
Project Control
Compliance
Contracts
Fiscal
Customer Comment Gathering More Understanding Customer Requirement
“It takes forever to receive payment for work I
complete”
Contractor not receiving payments timely Payments should be processed within 13 days
or less
“I can’t invoice because the task order isn’t even
processed yet”
Contractor completes work prior to task
order being processed
Require the task order must be processed
prior to work start
“I don’t submit invoices anymore because they just
get rejected”
Contractor stop submitting payments because
payments are rejected for incorrect quantities
Quantities are documented and accessible
daily and agreed upon daily
“I’d be happy if I could just get paid for the work
quantities we do agree upon, we can work out the
ones we disagree with later”
Once the payment request is submitted the
Contractor nor the City can modify or
remove quantity pay items; one disputed item
out of a list of many will hold up an entire
Payment Request
Should have ability to generate an Payment
Request with approved quantities only and
pend disputing quantities until resolved
“I have to wait for quantities and when I do get
them I have to hunt through emails or call
inspector for quantities”
City Inspector documents quantities on
various manual logs and provides quantities
manually to the City’s ProjectTeam and
Contractor through email or by phone
Establish a consistent and standard process to
document and provide quantity information
to City staff and Contractor
Key Take Away: Project needs to address the documentation process of a project’s daily quantities. Specifically, the
standardization, accessibility and consistency. Standardization of this process will help identify and rectify quantity errors in a
more timely manner which will help reduce the number of rejected payments and in turn increase the number of timely
payments made.

8. MEASURE
DATA COLLECTION PLAN
Measure Data Type Operational Definition Stratification Factors Sampling Notes Who and How
Total Number of
Task Orders
Continuous Street Maintenance City Task Orders not
rejected . All task orders with a “Complete”
status.
By Contractor
By Purchase Order Line
Sample includes every task order
processed in *Fiscal Years 2012
through 2015.
Project Lead retrieve from
PRIMELink
Administrator/PRIMELink
Total Number of
Payments Processed
Continuous Street Maintenance City Payment Requests not
rejected . All Payment Requests with a
Payment Date.
By Contractor
By Purchase Order Line
Sample includes every payment
request processed in *Fiscal
Years 2012 through 2015.
Project Lead retrieve from
PRIMELink
Administrator/PRIMELink
Timeliness of
Payments Processed
Continuous Number of days to process payment.
calculated by taking the difference between
Payment Request creation date and payment
date. List of payments processed within 30
days.
By Contractor
By Payment Date
By Day Ranges [5 days,
10 days, 15 days, 30 days
and 30 days+]
Sample includes every payment
request processed in *Fiscal
Years 2012 through 2015.
Project Lead retrieve from
PRIMELink
Administrator/PRIMELink
Total Number of
Payments Rejected
Continuous Street Maintenance City Payment Requests
rejected. All payment requests with a
“Rejected” status.
By Contractor
By Reject Date
Sample includes every rejected
payment request in *Fiscal Years
2012 through 2015.
Project Lead retrieve from
PRIMELink
Administrator/PRIMELink
Reject Types Discrete List of reasons for rejects. None Sample includes feedback
retrieved from the contractor
(with largest volume) and city
staff approvers (inspectors,
project team & fiscal)
Project Lead retrieve from
interviews document top
reasons and tally
Total Number of
Rejected Payments
by Reject Reason
Continuous Street Maintenance City Payment Requests
rejected by the identified reasons retrieved
from sampling above.
By Reject Reason Sample includes every rejected
payment request processed in
*Fiscal Years 2012 through 2015.
Project Lead from
PRIMELink
Administrator/PRIMELink
Key Take Away: Project lead is responsible for all data collection – team and subject matter experts (SMEs) made the
appropriate adjustments to provide and/or make themselves available to accommodate the request for information.
*Fiscal Year = October 1st – September 30th

9.  Task order Street Maintenance payment requests
processed between October 2012 to June 2014 (1,531
Payment Requests valued at $69.3 million) was analyzed
to understand within how many days are these payment
requests being processed.
 It is City’s policy that vendors (i.e. Contractors) be paid by
the City within 30 days of the date a correct Payment
Request is submitted for work performed for the City.
The TCI department’s overall average payment processing
time is 11 days.
 Pareto shows that 95% of the Street Maintenance
payment requests processed between October 2012 to
June 2014 were processed within 30 days; and, less than
5% of the payment requests took more than 30 days to
process.
BASELINE MEASURE
Payment RequestTimeliness
36% 34%
18%
7%
5%
DATA SUMMARY
Key Take Away: Average processing time for task order
Street Maintenance payment requests is 13 days. Data
shows that 95% of Street Maintenance payment requests
when submitted with no issues were processed within 30
days.
Baseline
Oct. 2012 - June 2014

10. BASELINE MEASURE
Payment Rejects
 Task order Street Maintenance payment requests rejected
between October 2012 to June 2014 (322 valued at $21.6
million) was analyzed to understand the volume and
reasons for rejected payment requests.
 The Pareto shows that that payment requests were
rejected for Disputed Amounts (83%) followed by Utility
related disputes (14%) and Budget Adjustment (3%).
DATA SUMMARY
Key Take Away: Rejected payment requests delay
payments made to the Contractor. Baseline data
shows Street Maintenance payment requests are
rejected more often for disputed amounts than any
other reject reason. Team planned on gathering
additional information from process experts to help
identify what is causing the amounts to be disputed.
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Disputed Amount Utility Budget Adjustment
NumberofRejects
83%
14%
3%
Baseline
Oct. 2012 - June 2014

11. ANALYZE
FISHBONE DIAGRAM
TOOLS
REPORTING
CITY PROCESS
PAYMENTS
CITY PROCESS
TASK ORDERS
CITY STAFF
CONTRACTOR
NoTransparency
[For Quantities]
Inconsistent Documentation
Work Completed or Initiated
Prior toTask Order
Approval Sequencing
[Contractor Not Aware of Utility Rejects]
Task Order Not Processed
Rejected Payments
Quantity Discrepancies
Lack of Connectivity
to PRIMELink in
the Field
Tracking & Report Duplication
[Inspector, Project Team & Vendor Separately
Track]
Delayed Communication
Untimely Payment Request Submissions
Combining Payment Requests
Delayed
Processing
of Payment
Requests
(Payments to
Contractors)
No Standardization
[For Quantities]
Limited Accessibility
[For Quantities]
Inconsistent Material “Ticket”
Submissions
Delayed Utility Approvals
KeyTake Away: Root Cause Analysis will focus on Daily Quantity documentation/reporting process and Payment Process.
Why are Payment Requests
rejected for disputed
amounts?
-Contractor quantities included in
Payment Request do not match
City’s verified quantities
-Why? Verified daily quantities
information is not easily accessible
or consistently provided to confirm
quantities are correct
-Why? Documentation and delivery
of daily quantities varies by City
Inspector
- Why? There currently is no
standard documentation and
reporting process for daily
quantities

12. ANALYZE
HYPOTHESISTESTING RESULTS
Possible X Root Cause Hypothesis HypothesisTest Results
Payment Request
Time Period
Processing of Street Maintenance Task Order
Payment Requests takes longer than it used to
One-Sample Sign False
Task Order
Time Period
Processing of Street Maintenance Task Order
takes longer than it used to
One-Sample Test False
Rejects
There are more payment request rejects than there
used to be
One-Sample Sign True
Reject Types
Number of rejects seems to be higher for certain
reject reasons
Mood’s Median True
KeyTake Away: Hypothesis tests confirmed that rejected payments was a key area of focus.

13. ONE SIGN HYPOTHESISTEST
Hypothesis: Total payment processing time is taking longer than it use to.
Key Take Away: There was no significant change in total payment processing time. However, since “payment processing time” was a “critical X” and
identified by the Contractor’s as a significant issue, the team decided they needed to complete some further analysis. The team discovered the data retrieved
from PRIMELink did not capture the time expended from the Contractor with-holding and not submitting Payment Requests in PRIMELink to avoid Payment
Requests from being rejected. If the with-holding days were accounted for then the total payment processing time would have reflected as taking longer than
it use to. With this, the team then focused on what was causing the Contractor to not to enter payment requests in PRIMELink .
 Team looked at the current
payment processing time and
compared it to the historical
target.
 P-value less than 0.05, so team
rejected the null hypothesis (Ho).
 Result - Total payment processing
isn’t taking longer than it use to,
i.e. there is no significant change
in total payment processing time.
DATA SUMMARY

14. ONE SIGN HYPOTHESISTEST
Hypothesis: There are more payment request rejects than there use to be.
Key Take Away: There are more payment request rejects than there use to be. There was a total of 146 rejects in FY 2013 and 227 rejects in FY 2014.
Improvement focused on the rejected Payment Requests. More specifically, why they are being rejected and how we can reduce the number of rejects to
increase the number of payments .
 Team looked at the historical
reject volume and compared it to
the historical target.
 P-value is greater than 0.05, so
team failed to reject the null
hypothesis (Ho).
 Result - There are more payment
request rejects than there use to
be.
DATA SUMMARY
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
NumberofRejects
Run Chart

15. MOOD’S MEDIAN TEST
Hypothesis: Number of rejects seems to be higher for certain reject reasons
Key Take Away: Mood’s Median test confirmed there is a significant difference in the number of rejects for certain reject reasons. Data reflects that
Payment Request rejects are largely attributed to disputed amounts. Team focused on identifying root causes and solutions on how to reduce rejects for
disputed amounts.
 Team met with staff and
Contractor to retrieve
information on reasons why
Payment Requests are rejected
and compared it to the reject data
retrieved from PRIMELink.
 P-value less than 0.05, so team
rejected the null hypothesis (Ho).
 Result: There is a significant
difference in the number of
rejects for certain reject reasons.
DATA SUMMARY

16. IMPROVE
IMPACT & EFFORT MATRIX Impact Effort Matrix
Objective: Increase Overall Number of Invoices Processed On-Time
Sponsor: TCI Project Delivery, Streets and Support Services Asst. Directors
Stakeholder: Contractor
High Impact
Hard Easy
Low Impact
1. Update PRIMELink workflows to optimize the sequencing
of task order and payment request approval steps (i.e.
adding the City as a Payment Request submitter and
enabling the copy furnish feature to include Contractor
on rejected items).
2. Facilitate the exchange of i-pads for laptop computers so
Inspectors can document quantities in the field.
3. Implement a tolerance threshold for yield calculations to
minimize quantities rejections for minor quantity
threshold discrepancies.
4. Create an inspector quantity log in PRIMELink to allow
inspector to log and track quantities and allow all
authorized users (including the Contractor) to view
quantities.
5. Document and implement a new quantity authorization
process which will entail the documentation,
acknowledgement and agreement of approved quantities.
6. Change invoicing process such that the City will create
and initiate the Payment Request on behalf of the
Contractor based on approved documented quantities.
1
2
34
5
6
Key Take Away: Leveraging the low/high impact quadrant, the team was able to prioritize the implementation of the solutions.
Implementing “quick wins” first and gradually all of the rest the solutions as follows: 3, 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6.

17. IMPROVE
INNOVATIONTRANSFER OPPORTUNITIES
PROCESS IMPROVEMENT
[Innovation/Addition/Change/Removal]
PROCESS BENEFITS IMPACTED ENTITY
[Area/Department/Business Unit]
Update task order PRIMELink workflow (i.e. enabled the copy
furnish feature to include Contractor on rejected task orders)
• Expedites action needed on rejected task orders
• Reduces time needed to process task order so payment
requests can be submitted
• Contractor
• Streets Engineering ProjectTeam
Update payment request PRIMELink workflow (i.e. added the
City as a Payment Request submitter)
• Provides Contractor option to continue to invoice or permit
the City to invoice on their behalf
• Contractor
• Fiscal
Implemented 5% tolerance threshold for quantity yield
calculations
• Minimize and eliminate the unnecessary rejection of payment
requests due to quantity discrepancies
• Contractor
• Inspector
Established connectivity to PRIMELink for Inspectors in the field
(i.e. facilitated the purchase and exchange of i-pads for laptops
for all TCI Inspectors)
• Inspectors able to remotely access PRIMElink and shared drives
in the field
• Allow for near real time data entry of daily quantities, reports
and approvals
• Promote documentation standardization (i.e. provide a
centralized and easily accessible way to report)
• Eliminated the need for inspectors to drive to and from a
service center to upload data, thus allowing more time to be
spent in the field
• Inspector
Implemented new daily quantity log documentation and
reporting process
• Improved transparency and communication
• Report standardization
• Reduce payment requests for incorrect quantities
• Contractor
• Inspector
•Streets Engineering ProjectTeam
Implemented City initiated payment request (invoicing) process • Ensures timely and consistent payments based on approved quantities • Contractor
• Fiscal

18. IMPROVE
BEFORE & AFTER PAYMENT REQUEST REJECTS
Key Take Away: Implemented solutions
decreased total number of payments rejected
for disputed quantity amounts by 17%
achieving the project goal of decreasing the
number of rejects for disputed quantity
amounts by 10% or better.
Fiscal Year
Oct. 1 – Sept. 30
42% [ $15.1M]
REJECTED
58% [ $21.6M]
REJECTED
Mean: 15.10
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
RunChart:Data
Run Chart

19. IMPROVE
RISK MANAGEMENT
Key Take Away: For each identified risk, leveraged training, visual management/procedural guides, system and/or procedural
controls where needed to mitigate risks and proactively elevate issues.

20. CONTROL
MONITORING & RESPONSE PLAN
MONITORING PLAN
MEASURE
INPUT/OUTPUT/
PROCESS
TRIGGER MEASURES MEASURMENT METHOD
CHECKING
FREQUENCY
WHO MEASURES
Daily Quantities Timing Input Daily Quantity Log must be completed within 48
hours; No later than Tuesdays End of Day
Time Stamp When Log is Completed Daily Inspector
Supervisor
Daily Quantities Discrepancies Output Zero quantity discrepancies prior to invoicing
date (within two weeks of quantities being posted)
Time Stamp When Log is Completed Daily Contractor
Total Payment Requests Timing Process No greater than 15 days (Upper Control Limit) Time Stamp from When Payment Request
is Submitted to When Payment Request is
Paid
Monthly Fiscal Accountant
Total Number of Rejects Process No greater than 27 rejects (Upper Control Limit) Total Number of Rejects By Vendor for
Disputed Amount
Monthly Performance
Management Team
RESPONSE PLAN
DAMAGE CONTROL PROCESS ADJUSTMENT EFFECTIVENESS ASSESSMENT CONTINOUS IMPROVEMENT
Daily Quantity Discrepancies Report any quantity discrepancies to the Inspector to
either correct the discrepancy or agree to not include
in Invoice until discrepancy can be corrected
Determine if discrepancy attributed to typo or
missing documentation Project Team to verify
quantities daily
Project Team to verify once material tickets are
received to what is reflected on daily quantity log,
verify daily entry
Corrected Daily Quantity Log Inspector to either (a) correct quantity on the
appropriate daily quantity log (only if the log has not
already been pulled for invoicing) or (b) create new
daily log and reflect the corrected difference
Project Team and Inspector to review Daily
Quantity Summary Report to monitor quantity
and dollar balances
Project Team through review of balances can as
necessary submit appropriate budget adjustment to
elevate delays in invoicing; Inspector can know when
quantities are not within or exceeding specifications.
Unable to Process Payment
Request Due to Insufficient
Funds
Report funding insufficiency to Project Manager so
that a budget adjustment can be completed.
Project Team will run the summary daily quantity
report to monitor potential over runs.
Project Team and Inspector working together to help
proactively elevate the need for last minute
adjustments at time of invoice rather complete
adjustments sooner.
Rejected Payment Requests Fiscal Accountant to work with Contractor and/or
Project Team on correction needed. If quantity
related, work with Inspector to correct accordingly.
PRIMELink report regarding number of rejects
and payment timing will be evaluated monthly.
Team to review control charts to help trigger
additional investigation of causes and as needed
adjustments to control limits.
Key Take Away: Team devised a monitoring and response plan to help sustain improvements and know how identify as well as
handle issues should they arise.

21. IMPROVE
RACI MATRIX
TASK FREQUENCY DUE DATE
Responsibility Approver Consulted Informed
The person responsible for
producing the deliverable
and/or completing the task.
The person accountable for
the deliverable.
The person or persons that
must be consulted before a
decision can be made.
The person or persons that
must be informed of any
decision that has been made.
Complete Daily Quantity Usage
Record
Daily
Within 48 hours; No Later
than Tuesdays End of Day
Inspector Inspector Supervisor Project Manager/Team
Construction Management
Manager
Run Daily Quantity Usage Reports
Weekly or As
Needed
Wednesdays End of Day Inspector Supervisor
Construction
Management Manager
Project Manager/Team
Project Delivery Assistant
Director
Review Daily Quantity Usage Reports
Weekly or As
Needed
Wednesdays End of Day Project Manager/Team
Streets Engineering
Manager
Inspector Supervisor Streets Assistant Director
Validate Daily Quantities
Weekly or As
Needed
Wednesdays End of Day Contractor Contractor Owner Project Manager/Team Streets Assistant Director
Communicate Daily Quantity
Discrepancies
As Needed
Within 2 Weeks of Quantities
being Posted
Contractor Contractor Owner Project Manager/Team Streets Assistant Director
Complete Daily Quantity Discrepancy
Revisions
As Needed
Within 2 Weeks of Quantities
being Posted or PM Team
Notification
Inspector Inspector Supervisor Project Manager/Team Contractor
Consolidation of Daily Quantities (for
City Issued Payment Requests)
Monthly or As
Needed
First Wednesdays of Month or
within 48 Hours of Receiving
PM Team Notification
Fiscal Accountant Capital Fiscal Manager Project Manager/Team Contractor
Consolidation of Daily Quantities (for
Vendor Payment Requests)
Monthly or As
Needed
Contractor Contractor Owner Project Manager/Team Streets Assistant Director
Creation & Submission of Payment
Requests
Monthly or As
Needed
First Fridays of Month or
within 48 Hours of Receiving
PM Team Notification
Fiscal Accountant Capital Fiscal Manager Project Manager/Team Contractor
Notification of Overruns Daily As Needed Project Manager/Team
Streets Engineering
Manager
Inspector Supervisor Streets Assistant Director
Creation & Submission Task Orders
(for Overruns or Project Close-Out)
Daily As Needed Project Manager/Team
Streets Engineering
Manager
Inspector Supervisor Streets Assistant Director
Updating Major Changes to Standard
Operating Procedures Document
As Needed As Needed
Performance
Management Team
Inspector Supervisor Project Manager/Team
Project Delivery & Steets
Assistant Director

22. CONTROL
CONTROL CHART
Key Take Away: Team is continuing to work on causes of variation and control limits. The control charts will be a key part
of TCI’s on-going monitoring of the process in identifying ways to improve and address issues. As a result, of the immediate
success of the 6-month pilot and overwhelming positive response from Contractors following the pilot, TCI has begun
rolling-out the new Daily Quantity Log and Payment Request process for all Street Maintenance Improvement construction
contracts and eventually all TCI managed construction contracts.
PAYMENT REQUESTS
Avg. Process Timing Trigger = 15 Days or Greater
[Upper Control Limit = 16]
16.49
Mean CL: 12.875
9.26
0
5
10
15
20
25
Individuals:Data
Individuals Control Chart
Data UCL CL (Mean) LCL
26.76
15.1025641
3.44
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
C:Data
C (Count) Control Chart
Rejects Data UCL CL (Mean) LCL
REJECTS
No. Rejects Trigger = 20 Rejects or Greater
[Upper Control Limit = 27 Rejects]

23. NEXT STEPS
Black Belt Project Storyboard
Task Order & Invoicing Process Improvement
EXTEND SUSTAIN
COLLABORATE IMPROVE
Roll out daily inspection
quantity and invoicing process
for all other capital
construction contracts.
IMPROVEMENT
Coordinate with local utilities to
have them begin utilizing new
daily inspection quantity and
invoicing process for utility
work on City projects.
Continue to retrieve feedback
from process owner, staff and
contractors. Follow through
and review monitor and control
plans.
Continue quarterly meeting
with process owners and users
to access process progress,
identify ways to improve and
address any associated issues.

24. LESSONS LEARNED
Lessons
Learned
Lean Six Sigma methodology is not just
applicable to manufacturing operations it can
be applied in Municipal business functions and
services.
Lean Six Sigma methodology has provided a
roadmap to not only implement but sustain
improvements .
Data does matter – performance and its
established triggers are essential in maintaining
efficient and effective delivery of
services/deliverables.
Lean Six Sigma Methodology
Having a clear and consistent communication plan is
key in sustaining success and ensuring issues are
addressed accordingly. Communication helps fosters
better collaboration and a greater awareness of the
team’s overall goal and responsibilities.
Communication
Lack of standardized, documented and agreed
upon policies/processes leads to variability which
results in inconsistency, additional work and
potentially costly processing delays.
Creating uniform policies and procedures helps
reduce confusion and improves communication
for City staff and among Contractors.
Information regarding policies and procedures
should be accessible and easy to understand both
for Contractors and City staff.
Standardized Processes
With out the involvement through the project and
buy-in of the process owner of the improved
process the realized improvements can not be
sustained. Simply, “if its not important to the boss
its not important to staff.”
Ownership

25. APPENDIX
Lean Six Sigma Black Belt Project Storyboard
Task Order & Invoicing Process Timing

26. TASKORDER&INVOICINGTIMING
STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS
Key Take Away: There was no resistance to the process improvement and all appropriate key stakeholders were included as
part of the team.

27. TASKORDER&INVOICETIMING
AS-IS PROCESS MAPS
Key Take Away: Understanding the Task Order and associated Payment
Process was instrumental in identifying areas of focus and has provided City staff
a renewed and visible perspective of the entire process.

28. TASKORDER&INVOICINGTIMING
FIVE (5)WHY’S
Why are Payment Requests rejected?
Why ?: Contractor quantities included in Payment Request do not
match City’s verified quantities.
Why ?: Verified daily quantities information is not easily accessible or
consistently provided to confirm quantities are correct.
Why?: Documentation and delivery of daily quantities information
varies by City Inspector.
Why?: There currently is no standard documentation and reporting
process for daily quantities.
Key Take Away: Payment Requests rejected for disputed quantities is attributable to the lack of a defined process
and impacts the Contractor, City Project Team and City Inspector.

29. Expedite
Project Delivery
and Completion
of Infrastructure
Projects
City-Wide
City Staff
Contractor
City
Processes
Reporting &
Tools
MATCHING X &Y MEASURES
Key Take Away: X’s that impact Y (Expedited project delivery and completion
of Infrastructure Projects city-wide) are as follows: City Staff (includes Project
Team and Inspector), Contractor, City’s Processes and reporting/tools.
X1 X2 X3 X4 Y
City Staff
Communication
Report Duplication
Contractor
Communication
Consistency
City Processes
Standardization
Documentation
Reporting &
Tools
Equipment
Transparency
Standardization
Accessibility
Expedite
Project
Delivery and
Completion of
Infrastructure
Projects City-
Wide

30. TASKORDER&INVOICINGTIMING
8 WASTES CHECK SHEET
Process Area: Daily Quantity Process
Waste Definition Level Description of Issues
D Defects
Information, products and services that are incomplete
or inaccurate
High
Inconsistent documentation of daily project quantities
makes it difficult to research, verify and approve quantities;
instances of incorrect quantities more likely
O Overproduction
Making more of something - making it earlier or faster-
than it's needed
High
Redundant and non-transparent documentation (i.e.
quantities documented in emails and various manual logs by
Contractor, Project Team and Inspectors)
W Waiting
Waiting for information, equipment, materials, parts or
people
Medium
Daily quantities information is not centralized and easily
assessable (i.e. project team and vendor have to await for
information to be sent by Inspector )
N Non-Utilized Talent
Not properly utilizing people's experience, skills,
knowledge or creativity
Medium
Inspectors are unable to leverage PRIMELink in the field
consistently which forces inspectors to track and
communicate manually requiring additional time as a
opposed to documenting information in the system for all
to access
T Transportation
Unnecessary movement of materials, information or
equipment
High
Inspectors not able to document daily quantities in field so
Inspectors manually track and transfer information to
various logs and emails the same information
I Inventory
Accumulation of parts, information, applications, etc.
beyond what is required by the customer
High
Since there is no daily log in PRIMELink Inspectors manually
track quantities in the field and for most they wait until the
end of the week or several days so they have to update
manual logs and provide updates once
M Motion
Any movement by people that is not of value to the
customer
Medium
Project team, vendor and inspector have to search through
manual logs and emails to verify quantities to approve or
reject payment requests
E
Extra-
Processing
Any steps that do not add value in the eyes of the
customer
Medium
Project team, vendor and inspector each track quantities
on their own separate logs same information

31. TASKORDER&INVOICINGTIMING
COMMUNICATION PLAN
Stakeholder Group Objectives/Actions Desired Message Delivery Method Timing
Executives (Project Champions)
Inform of project findings, create buy-in
and ownership
Results of analysis and hypothesis
tests; solutions selected
Share at Regular
Scheduled Executive Meeting
Within1 Week
Construction Management & Street
Engineering Supervisors
Inform of project findings, install
confidence in team and process
changes
Results of analysis and hypothesis
tests; solutions selected
Schedule Meeting Within 2 Weeks
Construction Management
Inspectors
Inform of project findings, create buy-in
and ownership, participate in pilot & roll-
out
Pilot results, training and
implementation plan
Schedule Meeting Within 3 Weeks
Street Engineering Project Manager
& Project Team Members
Inform of project findings, create buy-in
and ownership, participate in pilot & roll-
out
Pilot results, training and
implementation plan
Schedule Meeting Within 3 Weeks
Fiscal
Purchase new laptops , inform of project
findings, create buy-in and ownership,
participate in pilot & roll-out
Purchasing new hardware,
execution dates, training and
implementation plan
Email
After Executive and
Manager Approval
Vendors
Inform of project findings, create buy-in
and ownership, participate in pilot & roll-
out
Pilot results, training and
implementation plan
Schedule Meeting Within 3 Weeks
Key Take Away: Adhering to Communication Plan was instrumental in making sure the team and its project champions were
informed on what was happening with the project and anticipated due dates.

32. TASKORDER&INVOICINGTIMING
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN Plan Do Check Act
Action Responsible Due Date
Plan
Complete Test Task Order and Payment Request Work Flow Changes PRIMELink Manager 07/12/2014
Procure (32) Windows-based Laptops ProjectTeam Leader, Fiscal, Information Technology 11/14/2014
Design Inspector Daily Quantity Log in PRIMELink PRIMELink Manager 12/15/2014
Design Daily Quantity Log Detailed & Summary PRIMELink Reports PRIMELink Manager 12/15/2014
Design Payment Request Detailed & Summary PRIMELink Reports PRIMELink Manager 12/15/2014
Facilitate Exchange I-pads for Laptops ProjectTeam Leader, Fiscal, Construction Management 04/02/2015
Do
Create Inspector Daily Quantity Log in PRIMELink PRIMELink Manager 01/15/2015
Create Daily Quantity Log Detailed & Summary Reports in PRIMELink PRIMELink Manager 02/15/2015
Create Payment Request Detailed and Summary Reports in PRIMELink PRIMELink Manager 02/15/2015
Document Procedures,Visual Management Guide and Control Plan for
Inspector Daily Quantity Log and Payment Process
ProjectTeam Leader 04/15/2015
Train PRIMELink Helpdesk, Inspectors, ProjectTeam, Fiscal & Contractor ProjectTeam Leader, PRIMELink Manager 05/08/2015
Check
Deploy Pilot [Test Process & New Changes in PRIMELink with (1)
[Willing and Able Contractor]
PRIMELink Manager 06/26/2015
Monitor Inspector Daily Quantity Log Completion, Payment Process
Timing and RejectVolume for Team
ProjectTeam Leader 07/26/2015
Act
Made Adjustments to Daily Quantity Log and Payment Process Based on
Pilot
ProjectTeam Leader, Construction Management Inspectors, Street
Engineering ProjectTeam, Fiscal
08/03/2015
Roll Out New Daily Quantity Log and Payment Process for All Other
Street Maintenance Construction Contracts
ProjectTeam Leader, Construction Management Inspectors, Street
Engineering ProjectTeam, Fiscal
09/01/2015
Key Take Away: Implementation Plan was used to organize key tasks and provide the team an overview of what is to be completed and the
team’s role in tasks to be completed.

33. TASKORDER&INVOICINGTIMING
CONTROL CHART
5
1
2
2
2
2
5 5 5
12.88
9.26
16.49
9.00
10.00
11.00
12.00
13.00
14.00
15.00
16.00
17.00
18.00
19.00
20.00
21.00
22.00Individuals:Data
1.36
0.00
4.44
-1.00
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
MR:Data
Key Take Away: The I-MR-R chart turned out to be the visual tool to review payment processing time. Team has both a cumulative monthly and
daily chart to illustrate the process’s progress and any variation. The Upper Control Limit and Response Plan trigger is 16 days.
I-MR Chart | Monthly Payment ProcessingTime