Management and Organizational Assessment
PUBLIC REPORT
June 19, 2019
Date: June 19, 2019
Subject: Our Sincere Appreciation
To: Stakeholders and Fellow Commissions
When I became Chairman of the D.C. Public Service Commission, I decided that we should undertake
a study of our strengths and weaknesses in order to assure that we are fulfilling our mission in the most
strenuous and positive way. We engaged a consultant, ADC Management Solutions, to assess our
business practices and operations and to identify potential improvements.
As part of that assessment, we consulted with you, our stakeholders in D.C. and our fellow
Commissions across the country, to solicit your views on current business operations and future
considerations and improvements. We researched lessons learned and best practices employed by
other Commissions and we gained valuable insights that have enabled us to identify recommendations
for future organizational and business process change. We are very grateful for your honest input, care
and respect for our mission.
The result of that process is this Final Report. It contains many recommendations for change that the
Commission will embrace, and I invite you to watch our progress in implementing these changes. Our
website will contain this report, and an “Implementation Tracker” that identifies the changes we are
making in our organization and business practices. It can be found at
http://dcpsc.org/ManagementandOrganizationalAssessmentReport
.
We are committed to continuous improvement and learning. And the success of this project is due in
large part to your generosity in sharing your insights with us. For that we thank you. As we move
forward, we welcome your continued involvement and support.
Sincerely,
Willie L. Phillips
Chairman
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The Public Service Commission of the District of Columbia (the Commission) acknowledges the
contributions and input received from our internal and external stakeholders. In addition, PSC is grateful
to the sharing of lessons learned and best practices that we have compiled through our research and
collaboration with other PSC organizations.
The information in this report, was compiled independently by ADC Management Solutions (ADC-MS),
and has provided the Commission with the objective insight necessary to take measured actions to
improve our organizational structure, operating strategies, and approaches to internal and external
customer services. As the Commission moves forward to continually improve our organization and the
services proved to the citizens of the District of Columbia, we do so with a commitment to open
communication, and greater business transparency.
Finally, the Commission is committed to building and fostering an environment for professional growth
and excellence. We recognize that quality of the public service provided by our organization is a reflection
of our team and the commitment to our mission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 1
METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 1
OBSERVATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 1
RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................ 2
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 3
PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT ............................................................................................... 3
APPROACH ........................................................................................................................... 3
DISCOVER ....................................................................................................................... 7
ABOUT THE COMMISSION .................................................................................................. 7
DATA COLLECTION FINDINGS ............................................................................................ 8
ANALYZE AND COMPARE ............................................................................................ 10
LESSONS LEARNED .......................................................................................................... 10
4 ENVISION ....................................................................................................................... 13
CHANGE MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................... 13
PRIORITY OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................... 14
SECONDARY RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................................. 20
4.4 DATA BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 21
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ................................................................................................... 23
Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report summarizes the findings of the organizational assessment of the Public Service Commission of the
District of Columbia (the “Commission”). It represents the analysis and feedback gained from a review of
internal and external stakeholder survey responses, focus groups and interviews. The Report also considers
benchmarking research conducted at similarly situated regional Public Utility Commissions.
Findings from this research and analysis will assist the Commission in embarking on a culture of operational
excellence, data-driven decision making, innovation, and customer-centric focus. We have organized our
findings and recommendations in the areas of people, process, technology and culture. Our recommendations
provide the Commission with strategic approaches for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of
Commission operations.
METHODOLOGY
The ADC Team used the following high-level methodology to complete the assessment:
1. Collect all available data.
2. Synthesize and organize into the areas of people, process, technology, and culture.
3. Organize all data.
4. Develop comprehensive observations.
5. Prioritize these observations for Commission consideration into primary and secondary based on
prevalence, impact, risk, and ease of implementation.
OBSERVATIONS
Using all available data, a total of 12 observation areas were identified. These observations were then
prioritized and consolidated based on their impact, risk, prevalence, and ease of implementation. Priority
findings are those that have the most potential risk and impact to the organization. Secondary findings are
important, but do not have a significant level of urgency or impact. The priority and secondary observations
that emerged are as follows:
• Internal and External Communication
• Commissioner Responsibilities
• Organizational Culture
• Process Improvement
• Human Resources
• Organizational Structure
• Awards & Recognition
• Succession Planning
• Use of Technology
• Procurement
• Mission Alignment
• Organizational Performance (Use of KPIs)
A discussion of the primary items is below:
Priority #1: Internal and External Communication:
Despite being a critical aspect in the Commission’s mission, ratepayers and other consumers are generally
unaware of the Commission’s role and impact. Despite being a critical aspect in the Commission’s mission,
ratepayers and other consumers are generally unaware of the Commission’s role and impact. In addition, our
Priority Observations
Secondary Observations
Page 2
survey and interviews with external stakeholders indicated that communications is an area that needs
improvement in terms of frequency and relevance.
Priority #2: Commissioner Responsibilities:
The roles and responsibilities of the Commissioners should be examined to assess workload volume and
efficiency. Benchmarking analysis has shown that the span of responsibilities for the District of Columbia
Commissioners is much higher than their counterparts in other State Commissions. For example, in
Delaware, Commissioners’ caseload is supported not only by administrative law judges who review cases,
but also part-time commissioners who support the process. In addition, certain procurement approvals at the
Commission below a certain threshold can be delegated to the Executive Director.
Priority #3: Organizational Culture:
The organizational culture at the Commission has negatively impacted the overall morale and cohesiveness
at the organization. Staff interviews and survey results indicate a strong need for more interactive
communications from leadership to staff as well as across departments. Leadership should consider several
recommendations, identified in Section 2.4, specifically examining the “clock in” and “clock out” processes
and an emphasis on improving top-down communication and transparency.
Priority #4: Process Improvement:
Policies and procedures exist throughout the organization, however the level of consistency in formalization
and content varies. Generally, the Commission benefits from experienced staff who understand their
respective tasks and assignments. However, while general practices are in place, written policies and
procedures need to be formally documented to ensure consistency, cross-functional specificity, and common
understanding.
Priority #5: Human Resources:
Human Resource practices have limited employee engagement and personnel growth. Many staff have
specifically mentioned the need to improve the level of training and strengthen the performance evaluation
process.
Priority #6: Organizational Structure:
The Commission has experienced and technically competent staff in all areas of performance. The
Commission would benefit from realigning the Office of General Counsel and the Technical and Regulatory
Analysis level to each other under the Commission’s Chairman. Additionally, the Commission would benefit
from a detailed position description and job review to refresh personnel skills and better align tasks.
RECOMMENDATIONS
There are a total of 35 recommendations included in this report. Of these, 26 relate to priority observations
and the remaining relate to secondary observations. Recommendations in priority areas are organized by
area for context and included in Section 4.2 of this Report: Priority Observations.
Recommendations for secondary observations are listed in Section 4.3 of this Report under Secondary
Recommendations.
Page 3
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
This report presents the findings of the management and organizational assessment conducted for the
Commission. The purpose of this report is to present observations on the agency’s operating profile and
management processes and practices. We identified opportunities for improvements as well as specific
recommendations to improve the organization’s people, processes, technology, and culture.
APPROACH
The ADC Team was organized around three primary project phases as defined below:
1. Discover: This data collection phase included the review of available internal and external
documentation, interviews with key internal and external stakeholders, focus groups, benchmarking,
and analysis of other available data.
2. Analyze and Compare: This phase included the analysis of available data and the comparison of
Commission functions, governance, and infrastructure to similarly sized and situated jurisdictions.
3. Envision: This phase will include the development of an implementation roadmap for change.
Recommendations were organized by priority and level of effort.
Each of these phases and their corresponding tasks are described below:
1.2.1 DISCOVER
The Discover phase included the collection of various data artifacts using the following methods:
Media and Document Review
Our team collected various data artifacts to support this engagement including publicly available and
proprietary Commission data. We conducted a search for Commission information and the Commission also
provided our team with historical studies and reports with a similar scope to this project. We then compiled,
archived, and conducted a comprehensive review of this information. The document review included:
- Oversight Hearing Documentation (2019)
- Organizational Charts
- Agency Audits and Studies
- Budget Data
- Lists of Existing Tools and Technologies being used by the Commission
- Personnel Data
- Performance and Key Performance Indicators
- News Articles Related to the Commission
Surveys
The issues and recommendations published in this report are a result of collecting feedback from staff,
managers, and executive leadership in two surveys as described below:
Page 4
• PSC Staff Survey: Prior to the initiation of this engagement, the Commission’s Transition Team
designed and implemented a survey to Commission employees and staff. The staff survey consisted
of 40 questions in the following key areas:
- Communication
- Culture and Environment
- Change Management
- Consumer Engagement
- Tools and Resources
- Mission and Purpose
- Business Processes
There was a total of 53 responses (including multiple choice and open narrative discussions).
• Commission External Stakeholder Survey: During this engagement, the ADC Team designed
and implemented a companion survey to key external stakeholders. This externally-focused survey
consisted of 23 questions in the following key areas:
- Communication
- Vision and Strategy
- Collaboration
- Consumer Engagement
A total of 14 out of 20 suggested respondents replied to the
survey. Responses included both multiple choice and narrative
data.
Individual Interviews
Interviews were conducted with internal and external personnel to facilitate an understanding of core topics
around people, process, technology, and culture. Example Questions to guide these discussions are
referenced in Appendix A: Individual Interview Guidance. The issues and recommendations stated in
this report include feedback collected from 29 interviews with internal Commission staff and external
stakeholders as represented in the table below:
Commission Interview Overview
Interview Type
Count of
Interviews
Area of Focus
Internal Commission Staff 12
Staff perspective on management communication,
training and human resources, processes and
procedures, culture and morale.
Internal Commission
Management
7
Management perspective on overall communication,
training and human resources, processes and
procedures, culture and morale.
External Stakeholders 10
External perspective on Commission customer service,
effectiveness, mission alignment, and transparency.
Interviews were generally conducted in person, with exceptions where onsite discussions were not
feasible. The specific individuals interviewed is listed as Appendix B: Individual Interview Participants.
Page 5
Group interviews
The issues and recommendations stated in this report include feedback collected from 26 individuals
who participated in group interviews.
Commission Group Interview Overview
Interview Type Count of Interviews Area of Focus
Transition Team 15
Survey results and specific organizational
recommendations
External Stakeholder Forum 11
Commission efficiency, transparency,
customer service and mission alignment
Benchmarking
The ADC-MS Team also conducted a benchmarking analysis of the Commission against similarly situated
public service commissions. This assessment compared the profile, organization, and operations of the
Commission to other public service commissions throughout the nation.
Benchmarking is an important way to establish baselines, define best practices, identify improvement
opportunities and create a competitive environment within the organization. Integrating results into
Commission operations will result in valuable data that encourages discussion and sparks new ideas and
practices. Benchmarking is also a tool to help evaluate and prioritize improvement opportunities – a critical
area for the Commission. The ADC-MS Benchmarking assessment included two components:
• Onsite Site Visits: The ADC Team joined members of the Commission leadership team on visits
to three public utility commissions in Maryland, Delaware, and Pennsylvania. These locations
were chosen because of their geographic proximity, size in employees, and population. Each visit
included a discussion with senior leadership and selected staff around the following key topics:
- Organizational Structure
- Performance Measures
- Technology and Tools
- Processes and Implementation
- Change Management
Based on these discussions, we have identified lessons learned for consideration. Throughout
the document, we have referred to these results as they relate to the areas of people, process,
technology, and culture.
• Public Utility Commission Comparative Analysis: In addition to onsite site visits, we also
conducted a data and metric analysis for eight additional jurisdictions. For these jurisdictions, we
compiled and analyzed available metrics in the areas of organizational structure, case oversight,
and consumer engagement. These jurisdictions were selected based on comparable population
sizes, location and breadth of work, and oversight scope:
- Vermont Public Utility Commission
- Regulatory Commission of Alaska
- Wyoming Public Service Commission
- North Dakota Public Service
Commission
- South Dakota Public Service Commission
- Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission
- Hawaii Public Utilities Commission
- Georgia Public Service Commission
Page 6
1.2.2 ANALYZE AND COMPARE
The Analyze and Compare phase included the following activities:
• Organizational of Results: The ADC Team then organized all findings in the areas of People,
Process, Technology, and Culture. Individually, these four aspects of organizational
transformation are critical in any assessment. However, working collectively, people, process,
technology, and culture can result in meaningful and sustainable improvements in an
organization.
• Lessons Learned: Our team compiled a list of lessons learned from all of our data collection
activities, with a focus on the onsite site visits at other public service commissions.
1.2.3 ENVISION
The Envision task included the delineation of observations and their associated recommendations. The
observations were prioritized based on their risk, impact, prevalence and ease in implementation. It
concludes the report with a list of next steps for the Commission to undertake to continue to its efforts
to pursue increased operating efficiencies and performance delivery.
Page 7
DISCOVER
This data collection phase includes the review of available internal and external documentation,
interviews with key internal and external stakeholders, focus groups, benchmarking, and analysis of
other available data.
ABOUT THE COMMISSION
The Commission was originally established by Congress in 1913 as an independent agency of the
District of Columbia Government. The Commission functions as an independent, quasi-judicial agency
in the District of Columbia. The Commission has 86 full-time positions and is headed by a Chairman
and two Commissioners, who are appointed to four-year terms by the Mayor with the advice and consent
of the DC Council.
The Commission carries out its mission by focusing on the following goals:
Motivating customer- and results-oriented employees;
Protecting consumers and public safety by ensuring safe, reliable, and quality utility services;
Regulating monopoly utility service providers to ensure their rates are just and reasonable;
Fostering fair and open competition among utility service providers;
Conserving natural resources and preserving environmental quality;
Resolving disputes among consumers and utility service providers;
Educating utility consumers and informing the public; and
Supporting the economy of the District of Columbia.
Page 8
Mission
The mission of the Commission is to serve the public interest by ensuring that financially healthy
electric, natural gas and telecommunications companies provide safe, reliable and quality utility
services at reasonable rates for District of Columbia residential, business and government
customers. The Commission has identified three goals for carrying out its mission:
• Economic Development: The Commission contributes to the economic development of
the District through the continued regulation of monopoly electric and natural gas distribution
services of Pepco and Washington Gas respectively, and, where feasible, the introduction
of competition in other segments of the electric, natural gas, and telecommunications
industries.
• Public Safety: Public Safety is promoted through natural gas pipeline safety and public
payphone programs and the investigation of certain occurrences, such as manhole
explosions and utility outages.
• Customer Service: The Commission promotes customer satisfaction by improving service
delivery through the streamlining of the processing of applications, payphone complaints,
payphone registration applications, and tariff and financing approval requests.
The following figure highlights some of the local and industry challenges facing the commission:
DATA COLLECTION FINDINGS
As a result of the Discover phase, the ADC Team identified over 125 findings that relate to the
organization. These findings included strengths, challenges, and areas for potential improvement. The
findings were categorized in the following key areas in order to provide meaningful analysis of the
Commission:
Page 9
Page 10
ANALYZE AND COMPARE
This section of the document summarizes the results of the analysis of all available data. It highlights
strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats as it relates to the Commission’s organizational
structure and its operations. The ADC-MS Team conducted a benchmarking analysis of the Commission
against similarly situated public service commissions. This assessment compared the profile,
organization, and operations to other public service commissions throughout the region.
LESSONS LEARNED
The following table summarizes the lessons learned from the site visits. Each lesson learned represents
experiences from other commissions that can be used to improve the Commission’s organizational
performance. These items were gleaned from discussions with public utility commission staff or through
a review of available site visit documentation.
Page 11
SITE VISIT LESSONS LEARNED
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC
UTILITY COMMISSION
MARYLAND PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION
DELAWARE PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION
PEOPLE
• Leadership is committed to
growth and enhancement of
organization
• Establish formal internship
programs as a mechanism to
support recruitment
• Internally conduct bi-monthly
training sessions, including live
streaming, allowing staff to
earn continuing education
credit
• Assign each bureau director
has a travel budget
• Conduct formal onboarding
training within 2-3 months for
new hires
• Establish Energy Leader
(emerging leader training)
program for selected staff
• To address challenges in personnel
retention, establish internal processes
for recruitment and retention
• Better align of resources and
participants improve meeting
management
• Implement competitive salary and
compensation plans
• Establish formal internship programs as
a mechanism to support recruitment
• Conduct semi-annual personnel
evaluations
• Create annual training plan
• Create a formalized relationship with
local universities (i.e. Johns Hopkins) to
create a talent pipeline
• Fully staff legislative team (policy,
regulations, legislation)
• Hire complaint mediator to address
consumer complaints before they
become formal
• Consider job/career passion as criteria
during candidate evaluation process
• Employ part-time commissioners to
improve workload management
• Revise and update job descriptions
regularly
• Create a formalized relationship
with local universities (i.e. University
of Delaware) to create a talent
pipeline
Page 12
SITE VISIT LESSONS LEARNED
PENNSYLVANIA PUBLIC
UTILITY COMMISSION
MARYLAND PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION
DELAWARE PUBLIC SERVICE
COMMISSION
PROCESS
• Involve staff in developing electronic
case management system
• Implement an investigation and
enforcement unit with the utility
(prosecutorial capability)
• Host monthly “all directors” meeting
• Commissioners review all case
information prior to attending hearings
• Circulate and preview agenda 24 hours
prior to meeting
• Establish public comment folder on
website to allow public input on
hearings
• Establish internal “Team Efficient”
group to identify and streamline
business processes
• Delegate authority/responsibilities
(where appropriate) from Chairman to
executive director
• Create annual policy acknowledgement
process for employees about HR
(ethics, sexual harassment, etc.)
• Implement a fully staffed policy team
(PPUC has 20 people)
• Issue infraction letters to utilities for
enforcement purposes
• Utilize mobile van for community
engagement and outreach
• Require regulated utilities to conduct
annual customer service survey
• Establish press release policy
• Consider assignment of Rate cases or
large utility applications to
administrative law judge
• Employ safety group to handle
emergency situations
• Draft orders are too brief and
inconsistently developed
• Heavy reliance on manual paper driven
processes (e.g. 17 copies of orders)
• Use style guide to improve consistency
in orders (e.g. FERC style guide)
• Utilize electronic newsletter to
enhance stakeholder communication
• Appoint social media coordinator to
enhance online communication
• Use administrative law judges to hear
case de novo (two tier case
management and review process)
• Create “buck” sheet to communicate
current issues impacting the
commission
• Establish bi-weekly formal meetings of
the commission and senior staff levels
• Establish and maintain a database of
consumer questions and resolutions
• Consider formalized rules/guidelines
for rulemaking process
• Screen and eliminate unnecessary
3rd party reporting processes
• Establish a quarterly non-case
discussion with utility senior
leadership (ED or above)
• Publish weekly update reports to all
staff
• Legislative affairs team reports
directly to the Chairman
• Evaluate the applicability for PSC
oversight for electronic charging
station regulations
• Establish, track and measure
number of cases completed within
the specified timeframe
• Utilize communication firewalls
between commissioners and staff
during active case considerations
TECHNOLOGY
• Redesign website with an emphasis on
creating a user-friendly environment
• Ensure all commission file documents
are published to website and
searchable (key word searches)
• Develop power shopping website
(www.papowerswitch.com)
• Live stream all hearings, trainings and
continuing education courses
• Digitize all records
• Upgrade IT applications (e.g. Microsoft
Access 97)
• Continuously upgrade IT environment
(every 18 months)
• Establish an electronic filing process
to improve rule making efficiency
• Digitize 100% of commission records
• Enable use of video technology for
training
CULTURE
• Ensure staff understands how their job
contributes to commissions vision
• Circulate monthly employee newsletter
that includes recent news, commission
activities, personal accomplishments,
and staff want ads.
• Circulate monthly “Cheerleading” email
to team to improve morale and tout
team member successes
• Establish an annual community service
event
• Host an annual All-Hands retreat for
commission employees
Page 13
4 ENVISION
This section will help provide an implementation “roadmap” for the Commission. The ADC Team has
developed observations and associated recommendations based on all findings. This analysis will
present short-term actions that can be implemented relatively easily (“Low-hanging fruit”) as well as
longer-term actions that will require cross-organizational coordination and external support. This section
will also discuss the aspect of change management necessary to effectively institute organizational
change.
CHANGE MANAGEMENT
Assessments for organizational improvement typically focus on the process improvement and business
process reengineering while minimizing the important people aspect of who is performing the tasks.
However, to achieve and maintain sustainability, business improvements must focus on the individuals
who will benefit from the assessment results and who have potential for transformation as well as the
impact on the culture of the organization.
Listed are the most critical elements of organizational change and improvement to consider in order to
function effectively:
• Top Management Sponsorship: To ensure full organizational acceptance, leaders shape and
reinforce behavior, and are able to bring people together to work through roadblocks, move
people towards productive agreement, and inspire teams to change.
• Employee Involvement and Input: It is important to involve all stakeholders, process owners,
and employees who will feel the impact of the changes in the learning, planning, decisions, and
implementation of the change. Employee buy-in is critical in shaping identification of issues and
their appropriate resolution.
• Timely and Honest Communication: Clear communication of the vision, mission, and
objectives of the change management effort help people to understand how these changes will
affect them personally. It is important to have consistent and frequent communication through
multiple channels.
• Change Agents: Organizational change requires effective change agents. A change agent is
an individual with the skill and power to stimulate, facilitate, and/or coordinate the change effort.
Change agents may be either external or internal. The success of any change effort depends
heavily on the quality and workability of the relationship between the change agent and the key
decision makers and sponsors within the organization.
We recommend that the Commission fully employ each of these elements as they implement the
recommendations outlined in this Report.
Page 14
PRIORITY OBSERVATIONS
Using all available data including media and document review, internal and external surveys, internal and
external focus groups, site visits, and benchmarking, a total of 12 observation areas were identified.
These issues were then prioritized based on an analysis of priority impact, prevalence, and the overall
risk to the Commission. The graphic below depicts the process for developing these observations:
The ADC Team then validated this information in a Management Retreat with the Commission’s
Management Team as well as an All-Hands staff meeting open to all Commission staff. The team had
several recommended changes that have been integrated in this Report. All organizational feedback has
been detailed in a Management and Staff Responses Report accompanying this document.
Priority Findings are those that have the most potential risk and impact to the Commission. Secondary
Findings are important but do not have a significant level of urgency or impact. Considerations when
classifying priority included the following:
• Prevalence of issue across various data points including internal and external sources
• Potential impact to the Commission if the issue is not resolved
• The severity of the issue
• The ease in implementation of the issue.
The priority and secondary observations that emerged are as follows:
• Internal and External Communication
• Commissioner Responsibilities
• Organizational Culture
• Process Improvement
• Human Resources
• Organizational Structure
Priority Observations
Secondary Observations
Page 15
• Awards & Recognition
• Succession Planning
• Use of Technology
• Procurement
• Mission Alignment
• Organizational Performance (Use of KPIs)
For each of the six priority observations above, detailed recommendations have been included below.
Priority #1: Internal and External Communication:
Despite being a critical aspect in the Commission’s mission, ratepayers and other consumers are generally
unaware of the Commission’s role and impact. In addition, our survey and interviews with external
stakeholders indicated that communications is an area that needs improvement in terms of frequency and
relevance.
1. Legislative Affairs: Build a Legislative Affairs Office to focus on City Council relationships,
emerging policies and other issues affecting the Commission’s areas of responsibility.
Consider assigning a dedicated policy resource to this team to proactively address and
research trending issues of which the Commission may have future impact.
2. Consumer Engagement: Review the Consumer Service Outreach and Education Team’s
interactions with external stakeholders. Ensure interactions are consistent with the
Commission’s primary charter of a fair and balanced judicial review. Prescribe a Monthly
Actions and Engagements Report to be aware of communications, get feedback and evaluate
if relationships are effective amongst all consumer service entities.
3. Communications Plan: Develop a comprehensive communication plan that:
a. rebrands the renewed focus on consumers and ratepayers, consider coordination with
the Office of the People’s Counsel;
b. is distributed and communicated to all managers;
c. prescribes weekly, monthly and other intermediate meetings to inform management
and staff of Commission activities;
d. includes formal policies for managing internal communications (e.g. bi-monthly
newsletters, quarterly All-hands Meetings, monthly birthday/special happenings to
employee events);
e. fully addresses all external communication (e.g. press releases);
f. covers at least one year; and
g. is part of the management evaluation process.
4. Website: Update the Commission’s website to include additional ratepayer-friendly features
and to include all case and issue documents from the Commission of interest to all
stakeholders. Potential updates include an expanded Consumer Corner that presents
guidance on key consumer touchpoints (regardless of whether they are regulated by the
Commission such as solar and wireless). Also, consider a docket fully searchable by keyword
and includes all documents from the Utility companies.
Priority #2: Commissioner Responsibilities:
The roles and responsibilities of the Commissioners should be examined to assess workload volume and
efficiency. Benchmarking analysis has shown that the span of responsibilities for the District of Columbia
Commissioners is much higher than their counterparts in other State Commissions. For example, in
Delaware, Commissioners’ caseload is supported not only by administrative law judges who review cases,
but also part-time commissioners who support the process. In addition, certain procurement approvals at
the Commission below a certain threshold can be delegated to the Executive Director. This evaluation
should also consider:
Page 16
1. Chairman Delegation of Authority: Consider delegating approval for certain procurement
and other Commission expenses and selected administrative duties to the Executive Director.
For example, all procurements less than $100k can have a streamlined approval that does
not require signature at the highest level.
2. Hearing Process Review: Examine the existing hearing process to identify further
efficiencies and process changes. For example, external stakeholders and civic organizations
have argued that the process is biased toward large regulated entities simply because of the
level of resources required to review and respond to Commissioner requests and rulings.
3. Commissioner Staff: Consider expanding the number of Commissioner staff to include
additional attorney and policy resources. This will support the Commissioners ability to
research trends, issues and cases without conflicting with OGC and OTRA research and
findings of the same.
4. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Resources: Used effectively, ALJ’s can be a valuable
resource in managing Commissioner workload and overall process efficiencies. PSC should
determine whether ALJ’s can be effectively integrated into the adjudication process at the
Commission.
Priority #3: Organizational Culture:
The organizational culture at the Commission has impacted the overall morale and cohesiveness at the
organization. Staff interviews and survey results indicate a strong need for focused and frequent
communication from leadership to staff as well as across departments. Leadership should consider
several recommendations, specifically, examining the “clock in” and “clock out” processes and emphasis
on improving top-down communication and transparency.
1. Clock In/Clock Out: The Commission should immediately curtail the use of the timesheet
clock in and clock out process for non-probationary employees. Consider alternatives to
offer management to manage time and attendance. In addition, the Commission should
consider the use of a flexible work policy for professional staff with emphasis on each
employee responsibly ensuring work performance and accountability. Management should
implement and track ongoing tasks, responsibilities, due dates and times and output for
employees. This process should contribute to the employee evaluation process.
2. Organizational Assessment Rollout: Organize and hold a meeting with management and
another meeting with all PSC staff to rollout the results of this assessment. Ensure this
meeting occurs after management has reviewed all issues and recommendations. An off-site
environment would be a more equal ground to encourage staff participation.
3. Commissioners All Hands Meeting: Hold a quarterly All Hands meeting, coordinated by
the Executive Director and led by the Chairman, to communicate with all staff simultaneously.
Possible agenda topics include upcoming procedural calendar and action items, information
on emerging issues, stakeholder issues and ideas, summary of adjudications, and foster open
discussion. The Executive Director should determine if one of the Departments with oversight
of the topics will perform the agenda presentation.
4. Staff Communication: Develop an employee centric Newsletter highlighting key commission
activities and forecasts, including policy initiatives/changes, upcoming events, new hires,
departures, employee birthdays and recognition, and issues of interest. This is an opportunity
to create archivable documentation in which current and future employees can refer to for
information. Alternatively, the Commission can utilize an employee Intranet resource that
Page 17
performs a similar purpose and provides a resource for relevant Commission documentation,
i.e., MS365 SharePoint managed by the Information Technology Department.
5. Employee Input: Create a mechanism for internal employee input into process improvement
(e.g. “Letter to the Director”, Employee Suggestion Box or Employee Engagement Team).
6. Social Activities: Create a volunteer “Culture Team”, “Team PSC” or similar mechanism for
planning social activities. Consider holding at least two social events per year for staff
including a holiday party and an off-site Employee Olympics event to change the work
environment and employee interaction dynamic.
Priority #4: Process Improvement:
Policies and procedures exist throughout the organization, however the level of consistency in
formalization and content varies. Generally, the Commission benefits from experienced staff who
understand their respective tasks and assignments. However, while general practices are in place, written
policies and procedures need to be formally documented to ensure consistency, cross-functional
specificity, and common understanding.
1. Process Assessment: Conduct a process assessment that determines the adequacy of
existing processes. Review, evaluate, and codify existing processes, including swim lanes.
Prioritize human resources management and procurement processes given their importance
in the organization and potential for risk. Draft or update existing standard operating
procedures as referable documents to the internal business processes of the Commission.
2. Key Performance Indicators: In addition to the Commission’s overall KPIs, consider adding
additional KPIs and performance measures that consider issues outlined in this Report.
Consider individual KPIs for staff that support employee growth and consider the overall
Commission KPIs. Also, potentially add a dashboard to communicate key metrics to internal
and external stakeholders.
3. Process Workflows: Improve Commission Standard Operating Procedures (SOP)’s with
flow charts of activities reflecting interdepartmental workflows and connections.
Priority #5: Human Resources:
Human Resource practices have limited employee engagement and personnel growth. Many staff have
specifically mentioned the need to improve the level of training and strengthen the performance evaluation
process. Other areas of focus include:
1. Bonus and Compensation Structure: Implement a merit-based bonus and compensation
structure that ties directly to the performance evaluation process. Develop valid measures to
quantify bonuses and evaluate their achievement tied to performance measures for periodic
outputs, training credits and new certifications achieve, and to the position description
requirements. Consider non-financial benefits such as two-day telework options and
employee recognition events.
2. Management and Employee Training: Develop a formal management and employee
training program that focuses on key human resources activities such as performance
management, coaching, counseling, development and professional job certifications.
Certifications should include; recurring continuing education and points per year in legal,
engineering and program and project management. The continuing education requirement
and points should be a performance evaluation criterion or KPI’s. Local universities,
community centers, accounting firms and online institutions offer continuing education and
certification training.
Page 18
3. Departmental Training Budget: Establish training and travel budgets at the Department
level and allow the Director full flexibility in allocating these funds as appropriate. The
Executive Director should retain oversight and authority of the funds with measurable and
executable input from the management team. Employee training and certification success
measures should be a management KPI.
4. Personnel Evaluations: Develop a more comprehensive staff evaluation process that
includes a recognition and rewards system to acknowledge exceptional performance. Ensure
that evaluations are developed and reviewed on a consistent and timely basis.
5. Onboarding and Orientation: Consider a comprehensive orientation process for new
employees that includes the existing New Employee Orientation (NEO) Guide and has
appropriate participation by individuals within the transitioning employee’s new Office.
Priority #6: Organizational Structure:
While the Commission is an established organization with an experienced and technically competent staff,
the Commission would benefit significantly from management reforms targeting improvements to the
organizational structure. Please note that there are other recommendations related to organizational
structure in other sections (Legislative Affairs Office and Commissioner Staff).
1. Leadership Evaluation: Conduct an immediate evaluation of the senior leadership team
(excluding Commissioners) and managers to ensure the capabilities are within the existing
position requirements.
2. Organizational Structure Review: Conduct a formal review of the current organizational
structure to help ensure overall operating efficiency. For example, one potential
recommendation would move the Office of Technical and Regulatory Analysis (OTRA)
reporting to the Office of the Chairman, parallel with the Office of General Counsel (OGC).
The Offices of OGC and OTRA would both have dotted line responsibility to the Executive
Director concerning administrative matters. This will help improve coordination between these
two critical departments.
A draft organizational chart below is shown for discussion purposes below.
Page 19
Draft Organizational Chart
Page 20
SECONDARY RECOMMENDATIONS
Below is a comprehensive listing of recommendations for secondary areas. The listing includes a reference to
specific tasks where this recommendation was mentioned.
RECOMMENDATIONS MATRIX
RECOMMENDATION
PRIORITY
RECOMM
INTERVIEWS
SITE VISITS
FOCUS
GROUPS
SURVEY
LESSON
LEARNED
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
INTERNAL
EXTERNAL
PEOPLE
1
Establish relationships with universities
to create internship program for college-
level interns.
2
Develop a succession plan and provide
cross training of staff to ensure
organizational effectiveness.
PROCESS
3
Consider an organization-wide web-
based dashboard that includes
performance measures and KPIs.
4
Consider the use of an electronic portal
between utility companies to expedite
communication.
5
Establish a committee to review and
identify processes that are no longer
effective and redesign accordingly.
TECHNOLOGY
6
Include the information technology team
when planning all major organizational
initiatives.
7
Develop and implement an integrated
database and customer portal to
enhance data storage and retrieval.
CULTURE
8
Develop mission, vision, code of conduct,
and customer service standards that
considers input from the Commission
Management Team as well as the
transition team.
9
Consider cross-departmental meetings to
help Increase cross functional
collaboration between internal business
units making each person aware of their
input and value to the Commission.
Page 21
4.4 DATA BENCHMARKING ANALYSIS
The following tables summarize the key data points from a comparison to each of the 11 entities identified. Each
public service commission was either contacted via telephone or visited onsite. Data points shown in gray were
not available.
Section 1: Organizational Structure
# of
Commissioners
Avg Tenure
(years)
# Employees # Residents Year created
Type of Comm.
Appointment
External Regulatory
Division?
# Entities
Regulated
(approx.)
# Entities
Registered
(approx.)
Budget
(previous fiscal
year)
Budget
per comm.
Residents
per comm.
FTE per
comm.
Use of
ALJs
DC Public Service
Commission
3
4 83.3 703,608 1,913
Appointed
(Mayor)
Yes
Director of Consumer
Services
109* 109 $ 14,599,000 $ 4,866,333 234,536 28 No
Maryland Public
Service Commission
5 5 115 6,050,000 1910
Appointed
(Governor/Senate)
Yes
Consumer Affairs
Division
19 2681 $ 25,322,327 $ 5,064,465 1,210,000 23 Yes
Pennsylvania Public
Utility Commission
5
5 503 12,810,000 1937
Appointed
(Governor/Senate)
Yes
Office of Legislative
Affairs
9,000+*
9,000+ $ 79,036,000 $ 15,807,200 2,562,000 100.6 Yes
Delaware Public
Service Commission
5
5 30 971,180 1949
Appointed
(Governor/Senate)
No 18 220+ $ 4,421,400 $ 884,280 194,236 6 Yes
Vermont Public Utility
Commission
3
6 26 623,960 1999
Appointed
(Governor/Senate)
No 8 50+ $ 3,647,978 $ 1,215,993 207,987 8.67 No
Regulatory Commission
of Alaska
5
6 49 738,068 1970
Appointed
(Governor/Legislat
ure)
Yes
Consumer Protection &
Information
<333 680 $ 7,769,859 $ 1,553,972 147,614 9.8 Yes
Wyoming Public Service
Commission
3
6 38 573,720 1915
Appointed
(Governor/Senate)
Yes
Office of Consumer
Advocate
51* 51 $ 8,391,492 $ 2,797,164 191,240 12.67 No
North Dakota Public
Service Commission
3 6 48 877,790 1885 Elected Statewide
Yes
Office of Consumer
Affairs Public Outreach
13+ 843 $ 21,721,146 $ 7,240,382 292,597 16 No
South Dakota Public
Utilities Commission
3
6 28 877,790 1939 Elected Statewide No 196 468 $ 4,763,962 $ 1,587,987 292,597 9.33 No
Rhode Island Public
Utilities Commission
and Division of Public
Utilities and Carriers
3 6 48 1,061,712 1839
Appointed
(Governor/Senate)
No 24 520 $ 8,733,815 $ 2,911,272 353,904 16 No
Hawaii Public Utilities
Commission
3 6 48 1,430,000 1913
Appointed
(Governor)
Yes
Office of Consumer
Affairs & Compliance
1807* 1807 $ 15,942,364 $ 5,314,121 476,667 16 No
Georgia Public Service
Commission
5
6 83 10,430,000 1879 Elected Statewide
Yes
Consumer Affairs Unit
2503* 2503 $ 11,800,000 $ 2,360,000 2,086,000 16.6 No
Organizational Structure
Page 22
Section 2: Case Oversight and Consumer Engagement
# Open Cases # New Cases
# Cases per
Comm.
Avg # cases per
Comm.
# Cases closed # complaints Facebook Twitter Instagram LinkedIn YouTube
DC Public Service
Commission
129 8 45.67 45.67 N/A N/A
Maryland Public
Service Commission
357 71.4 71.4 283 2,696
Pennsylvania Public
Utility Commission
25,711 5142.2 5142.2
Delaware Public
Service Commission
129 25.8 25.8
Vermont Public Utility
Commission
0 0 799
Regulatory Commission
of Alaska
97 149 49.2 49.2 137 162
Wyoming Public Service
Commission
0 0 249 323
North Dakota Public
Service Commission
698 232.67 232.67 1,200+
South Dakota Public
Utilities Commission
155 51.67 51.67 119
Rhode Island Public
Utilities Commission
and Division of Public
Utilities and Carriers
0 0 85
Hawaii Public Utilities
Commission
163 429 197.33 197.33 451 77
Georgia Public Service
Commission
593 118.6 118.6
Case Oversight
Consumer Engagement
Page 23
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The following are the recommended next steps for this engagement. Each of the recommendations have
been classified as short, medium, or long-term.
RECOMMENDATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: PRIMARY OBSERVATIONS
SHORT TERM: <60 DAYS MEDIUM TERM: 61-120 DAYS LONG TERM: >120 DAYS
PRIORITY
• Consider delegating approval for certain
procurement and other Commission
expenses from the Commission Chairman
to the Executive Director.
• Curtail the use of the timesheet clock in and
clock out process for non-probationary
employees. Consider alternatives to offer
management to manage time and
attendance.
• Consider the use of a flexible work policy
for professional staff.
• Organize and hold a meeting with
management and another meeting with all
PSC staff to rollout the results of this
assessment. (Completed)
• Develop an employee centric Newsletter
highlighting key internal commission
activities.
• Create a mechanism for internal employee
input into process improvements (e.g.
“Letter to the Director” or an Employee
Suggestion Box).
• Create a volunteer Culture or Engagement
Team”, “Team PSC” or similar mechanism
for planning social activities.
• Consider a comprehensive orientation
process for new employees that includes
the existing New Employee Orientation
(NEO) Guide.
• Conduct an immediate evaluation of the
senior leadership team (excluding
Commissioners) and managers to ensure
the capabilities are within the existing
position requirements.
• Conduct a formal review of the current
organizational structure to help ensure
overall operating efficiency.
• Review the Consumer Service Specialists’
Team’s interactions with external
stakeholders. Prescribe a Monthly Actions
and Engagements Report to be aware of
communications, get feedback and
evaluate if relationships are effective
amongst all consumer service entities.
• Develop a comprehensive communication
plan.
• Examine the existing hearing process to
identify further efficiencies and process
changes.
• Hold a quarterly All-Hands meeting,
coordinated by the Executive Director and
led by the Chairman, to communicate with
all staff simultaneously.
• Conduct a process assessment that
determines the adequacy of existing
processes.
• Implement a merit-based bonus and
compensation structure that ties directly to
the performance evaluation process.
• Consider non-financial benefits such as
two-day telework options and employee
recognition events.
• Build a Legislative Affairs Office to focus on
City Council relationships, emerging policies
and other issues affecting the Commission’s
areas of responsibility. Consider assigning a
dedicated policy resource to this team to
proactively address and research trending
issues of which the Commission may have
future impact.
• Update the Commission’s website to include
more ratepayer-friendly features and to
include all case and issue documents from
the Commission of interest to all
stakeholders.
• Consider expanding the number of
Commissioner staff to include additional
attorney and policy resources.
• Determine whether ALJ’s can be effectively
integrated into the adjudication process at
the Commission.
• In addition to the Commission’s overall KPIs,
consider revising or adding additional KPIs
and performance measures to track
organizational performance to position
descriptions which reflect the task
requirements and support a Commission KPI
objective.
• Improve Commission Standard Operating
Procedures (SOP)’s with flow charts of
activities reflecting interdepartmental
workflows and connections.
• Develop a formal management and
employee training program that focuses on
key human resources activities such as
performance management, coaching,
counseling, development and professional
job certifications.
• Establish training and travel budgets at the
Department level and allow the Director full
flexibility in allocating these funds as
appropriate.
• Develop a more comprehensive staff
evaluation process.
Page 24
In addition to these recommended next steps summarized above, the Commission should:
• Identify a Champion: Assign an overall champion to continue to move forward with the results
of this assessment. This champion should be a member of Commission leadership and should
identify the specific recommendations to be implemented and confirm the timing associated
with each.
• Communicate Results: Communicate the results of this assessment to key internal and
external stakeholders. Based on Commission feedback, ADC is prepared to finalize a “Public
Report” that highlights overall findings.
• Recognize Staff Feedback: Communicate to each manager or staff member who submitted
written comments during the assessment reporting process. ADC will provide language that
will accompany this communication.
• Engage the Transition Team: In addition to identifying the Champion, fully engage the
Commission’s Transition team to help implement the results of this assessment.
RECOMMENDATION IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: SECONDARY OBSERVATIONS
SHORT TERM: <60 DAYS MEDIUM TERM: 61-120 DAYS LONG TERM: >120 DAYS
SECONDARY
• Include the Information Technology team
when planning all major organizational
initiatives.
• Consider cross-departmental meetings to
help Increase cross functional collaboration
between internal business units.
• Establish relationships with universities to
create internship program for college-level
interns.
• Consider an organization-wide we-based
dashboard that includes performance
measures and KPIs.
• Establish a committee to review and
identify processes that are no longer
effective and redesign accordingly.
• Develop mission, vision, code of conduct,
and customer service standards that
considers input from the Commission
Management Team as well as the
transition team.
• Develop a succession plan and provide
cross training of staff to ensure
organizational effectiveness.
• Consider the use of an electronic portal
between utility companies to expedite
communication.
•
Develop and implement an integrated
database and customer portal to enhance
data storage and retrieval.
