Department of

Veterans Affairs

M21-4

Manpower Control and Utilization in Adjudication

Divisions

Productivity Measurement

Quality Control

Change 40 **Veterans Benefits Administration**

April 25,1989 Washington DC 20420

M21-4 Veterans Benefits Administration

Change 40 Department of Veterans Affairs

Washington, DC 20420

April 25, 1989

Veterans Benefits Administration Manual M21-4, \"Manpower Control and
utilization in Adjudication Divisions\", is published for compliance by
all concerned.

/s/

R.J. VOGEL

Chief Benefits Director

Distribution: RPC: 2150

FD

**ii**

**M21-4 November 30, 1995**

**Change 63**

**F O R E W A R D**

This manual describes tools available to field station
managers\--including work teams empowered with managerial
responsibilities as part of their claims processing efforts\--for
assessing the level of service accorded to claimants. Individual
chapters discuss key indicators for evaluating/monitoring division-level
performance in the areas of quality, processing timeliness, work flow,
productivity, etc. Although the focus is division-level performance, the
principles discussed are equally applicable to work teams responsible
for composite elements of overall division service. The discussions of
the key indicators include suggestions for applying the measurement of
them to management of the claims adjudication process. However, a note
of caution is appropriate. While program management can help define
overall key performance indicators, it cannot address every possible
variation at each station. Therefore, local management is expected to
exercise the considerable flexibility inherent in its authority in
applying the general guidance contained herein to unique local
conditions.

Program management\'s focus is to encourage management of the claims
adjudication process to improve service to claimants while discouraging
\"management\" of the statistical attributes of the claims workload. In
practice, this should translate into concerted efforts to evaluate
division managers, along with work teams with whom the responsibility
and authority of managing the workload is shared, on how they go about
managing, rather than simply gathering numerical evidence of an
individual manager\'s or team\'s performance. As we move into
restructuring claims adjudication processes, the degree of involvement
of empowered employees and/or work teams in managing the work flow
process is a critical indicator of managerial performance.

The mission of adjudication remains to provide timely, efficient, and
empathetic service to every veteran and his/her dependents regarding
compensation, pension, and education benefits under laws enacted by
Congress. In the past, we measured the degree to which a division
accomplished this mission by comparing only its statistical performance
indicators to national averages or program requirements. Favorable data
were presumed to reflect effective management and unfavorable data
ineffective management. Monitoring of statistical attributes in the
areas of quality, timeliness, and productivity will continue. In
addition, as VBA moves further into the measures associated with the
Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), customer-based
satisfaction and unit cost will be added to indicators that allow us to
measure the success of the compensation and pension programs. However,
it is considered a starting point for analyzing and evaluating how
effectively each increment of, as well as, the overall claims
adjudication process is managed. Where statistical information indicates
a problem, management, including designated work teams, are expected to
identify causes, define solutions, implement corrective actions, and
complete follow-up reviews to ensure that the essential improvement
occurs.

The manner in which individual offices address work flow analysis may
range from the more traditional statistical analyses of operations, to
self-reviews by employee-empowered teams, to monitoring locally devised
variations of reports covering specific areas of claims processing. The
range and depth of statistical attributes now available because of
advanced technology enables those charged with management
responsibilities at all levels to undertake refined reviews of quality,
timeliness, and productivity. The incisiveness the reviews demonstrate
in identifying and resolving problems is another measure of managerial
effectiveness. Those charged with management responsibility and
authority at the local level, including designated work teams, must not
allow themselves to be lulled into a sense of security merely because
claims processing may meet an overall timeliness or quality standard.
Constant vigilance is essential to identify new or unexpected changes
from performance guidelines so that corrective action can be initiated
to prevent chronic deviations that could lead to poor service to our
veteran-customers.

**iii**

September 30, 1993 M21-4

Change 58

CONTENTS

CHAPTER PAGE

1\. GENERAL 1-1

2\. QUALITY IMPROVEMENT 2-1

3\. QUALITY ASSURANCE 3-1

4\. CLAIMS PROCESSING TIMELINESS 4-1

5\. QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT 5-1

6\. WORKFLOW MANAGEMENT 6-1

7\. SYSTEMATIC. ANALYSES OF OPERATIONS 7-1

APPENDIX

A. GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND DEFINITIONS App. A-1

B. (RESERVED) App. B-1

C. END PRODUCT CLASSIFICATION CODES AND WORK RATE STANDARDS

FOR QUANTITATIVE MEASUREMENT App. C-1

**iv**