ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT
May 23, 1995
TO: Vancouver City Council
FROM: Director of Permits and Licenses and
Manager of Information Services
SUBJECT: Acquisition of a Document Imaging System for Permits
and Licenses
RECOMMENDATIONS
A. THAT Council approve the issuance of a Request for
Proposal (RFP) for a Document Imaging System suitable
for the Permits & Licenses Department.
B. THAT the General Manager of Community Services report
back to Council on the results of the RFP and on the
financing plan for implementation of Document Imaging
in the Permits & Licenses Department based on costs not
to exceed $2,500,000. The costs will be recovered
through off-sets, consistent with council policy.
GENERAL MANAGERS' COMMENTS
The General Managers of Community Services and Corporate
Services RECOMMEND approval of A and B.
COUNCIL POLICY
Council established information as one of the City's corporate
priorities, through the City Manager's report dated June 7, 1990.
On February 4, 1994, Council established a policy that during the
term of the 1994-1996 Budget Management Program, recommendations
for increased staff or new and enhanced programs be fully offset
by corresponding expenditure redirection or increases in non-tax
revenues within the City's operational budget, subject to Council
discretion.
SUMMARY
All information pertaining to each of the City's 132,000
properties is currently stored in either paper or microfiche
form. This system is no longer capable of meeting the needs of
the general public and City staff. The introduction of a
document imaging
system will significantly enhance the service provided by the
Permits and Licenses Department, will greatly improve staff
productivity, and will reduce the City's legal and disaster
protection risks.
PURPOSE
This report is to request Council approval for the issuance of a
Request for Proposal (RFP) for a document imaging system in
Permits and Licenses to replace the existing microfiche based
filing system.
BACKGROUND
The Data Resource Centre in Permits and Licenses is the only
comprehensive source of information related to construction, use
and maintenance of the 132,000 properties in Vancouver. This
information includes such information as permits, inspection
reports, documentation related to construction, complaints and
correspondence related to by-law infraction, enforcements and
general inquiries. The services of the Centre are used
extensively by property owners, developers, lawyers, the public
and City departments.
The information in the Centre is stored both in paper and
microfiche format. The process of filing, storing and retrieving
documents has grown significantly and now exceeds the capacity of
the current microfiche system. Consequently, the Centre is not
able to serve external or internal customers effectively or
efficiently. Security, access and disaster recovery also
represent high risks with the current system.
DISCUSSION
1. Current System
Documents related to properties (e.g. permits, inspection
reports, correspondence) have been microfilmed and the resulting
microfiche stored in the Permits and Licenses Data Resource
Centre. The documents contained in these files must be available
to property owners, the general public, developers, lawyers, and
City personnel. To provide this service and to provide control
over the microfiche and paper files, Permits and Licenses clerks
retrieve, copy and replace files.
2. Problems with the Current System
Principal problems with the system are briefly summarized below:
(a) Labour Intensive -- The microfilming system is highly
labour intensive. The filing of a single document requires
16 steps, involves 5 file clerks, and requires more than 48
hours.
(b) No Indexing -- All documents pertaining to a property are
filed by property address. A reviewer must scan through all
documents associated with a property on microfiche to locate
the document(s) of interest. For example, electrical
inspectors must scan through a myriad of other permits (e.g.
plumbing, building) and non-related correspondence to locate
the electrical permits of interest.
(c) Damage -- Frequent handling of the microfiche results in
damaged microfiche jackets which, in turn, become
unavailable during the repair process.
(d) Inefficiency -- The process of staff going to the Data
Resource Centre, waiting for a clerk to locate and copy a
file, and return to their workstation severely impacts staff
productivity and customer response time.
(e) Microfilm Backlog -- During the job action, retaining
documents in paper files was found to be the most
expeditious method of storage because of limited staff
resources. These paper files will form the most efficient
method of conversion to the proposed document imaging
system.
3. Assessment of the Document Imaging Alternative
In July 1994, Permits and Licenses initiated an assessment of the
potential use of document imaging technology to replace the
microfiche system. This process included the participation of
three potential suppliers of the system on a Request for
Information basis. The review involved the following activities:
(a) Identification of document storage and retrieval
requirements for Permits and Licenses.
(b) Development and submission of a formal Request for
Information (RFI) to qualified suppliers of document imaging
systems.
(c) Formal evaluation of RFI responses.
(d) Determination of which vendors are qualified to implement a
document imaging system for Permits and Licenses.
(e) Development of cost estimates for the Permits and Licenses
document imaging system based upon qualified vendor
responses.
4. Benefits of a Document Imaging System
The implementation of a document imaging system for Permits and
Licenses would have the following principal benefits:
(a) Greatly Improved Customer Service -- Telephone inquiries
from the public could generally be answered during the
course of the call. The call recipient will have immediate
access to all pertinent information.
(b) Disaster Protection -- Alternate capabilities in the event
of a disaster would be provided. (With the current system,
the destruction of the Data Resource Centre would leave the
City with limited and incomplete records of its 132,000
properties.)
(c) Productivity Improvement -- The improved workflow which is
facilitated with a document imaging system will result in
direct productivity gains. For example, it is estimated
that the lost time for staff caused by the current
microfiche retrieval process totals 90 hours per day.
(d) Improved Security -- Compliance with the Freedom of
Information and Right to Privacy Act require that certain
portions of property files be precluded from public access
and review. Restricting the viewing of selected documents
is easily accomplished with a document imaging system.
(With the current system, the process of restricting the
viewing of documents relies on the judgement of a file clerk
with the attendant risks of errors in judgement and risk of
legal exposure.)
(e) Improved Document Control -- In an imaging system documents
are scanned immediately upon receipt, so they are accessible
and traceable within hours. The risk of lost, misfiled or
unsecured documents is virtually eliminated. Current system
technology provides efficient backup support.
(f) Better File Management -- A document imaging system would
overcome many of the current file management problems
associated with the existing system. Examples of the
improvements in file management are:
i) workflow, routing capability;
ii) several people can view the same documents
concurrently;
iii) documents do not become lost.
(g) Improved Employee Morale -- The current process is resulting
in a deteriorating employee morale. The frustration of lost
files, files unavailable because of repair, files
unavailable because they have not been microfilmed, etc.
would be eliminated with a document imaging system.
(h) Improved Response to Other Levels of Government and the
Public -- The number of requests for property related
information is increasing. A document imaging system would
facilitate the ability of Permits and Licenses to obtain
needed information in a more timely and more complete
manner. For example, there was a considerable time delay in
complying with a recent RCMP request for information on a
property. Because of the need for a detailed file review,
certain key documents were found to be stored in separate
file locations.
ALTERNATIVES/OPTIONS
Permits and Licenses has two principle alternatives:
(a) Continue to use microfiche and expand the equipment and
staff and space to meet current and future needs.
OR
(b) Implement a document imaging system.
The principal advantages and disadvantages of each are summarized
in the following table.
Continue with Microfiche System
Advantages Disadvantages
Lower initial investment Poor productivity
Increasing customer
dissatisfaction
Perpetuates obsolete
technology
Vulnerable to disaster
Higher long term cost
Implement Document Imaging System
Advantages Disadvantages
Improved customer service
Increased staff productivity Requires initial investment
Backup for disaster recovery
Enhanced security
Lower long term cost
Improved employee morale
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS
The environmental impact of the current document storage method
is limited to concentrated liquid ammonia. It is strong enough
to cause human health concerns if not used in the proper manner
under controlled conditions. The disposal of spent ammonia is
costly because the method of disposal is restricted by the
liquid's concentration which is several times that of household
ammonia. With document imaging, this impact would be eliminated.
SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Increasing neighbourhood awareness of rights and the advocacy
processes have made quick response to local concerns a necessity.
Answering a complainant's question during the course of a
telephone call would relieve stress and would allow concurrent
review of the filed information by staff in several remote
locations.
PERSONNEL IMPLICATIONS
Implementation of a document imaging system will involve
temporary and on-going reassignment of staff responsibilities,
review and modifications of current workflows and upgrading of
skills. Reductions in staff levels are not anticipated
initially; however, the situation will be monitored during the 2
years after implementation.
Financial benefits to the City will occur as a result of
increased staff productivity. This productivity combined with
the Permit re-engineering project will provide the departments
with options of:
- re-assignment of staff within the department or City to meet
changing needs; or
- acquisition of additional work types or volumes without
increasing staff; or
- release of staff by attrition; or
- any combination of the foregoing.
A copy of this report has been forwarded to the VMREU and has
been discussed with the staff involved.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
Based on the results of the Request for Information process, it
is anticipated that the cost of document imaging will range from
$1.5 million to $2.5 million, depending on the vendor and level
of vendor support chosen. As noted in the previous section,
there are significant potential savings and opportunities for
improved customer service associated with implementation of an
imaging system.
Any recommendation to proceed will take advantage of the
productivity opportunities to ensure that installation and
operation of the system can be justified on a sound business case
basis.
The most likely case is that the productivity gains will begin to
occur after a year of operation. Under this assumption,
reductions in operating costs should allow pay back in future
years.
Typically the financial plans are based upon a full payoff over a
five-year period. Since the digitally stored documents meet "de
facto" industry standards, the basic architecture of the system
is expected to exceed the 5 year financial life. From the
experience of other Imaging sites, there is a projected increase
in demand for Group and other departments access to the document
imaging system. This increase, coupled with the 3-4-year useful
life of a workstation, renders it desirable to provide for some
upgrades in the five-year period. For this reason, any excess of
revenues over costs and productivity benefits should be placed in
an expansion and replacement reserve account.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
Based upon a Council decision to proceed, the system would be
installed with initial operation in April, 1996 and full Permits
and Licenses operation in June, 1996. The major activities
associated with the procurement and implementation of a document
imaging system are shown in Figure 1.
CONCLUSIONS
The Permits and Licenses Department cannot continue to use
outdated microfiche technology to provide information on
properties. Although demands are increasing, customer service is
deteriorating and the productivity of City staff is decreasing.
Investment in a document imaging system is warranted. It is
expected that this technology would subsequently be expanded to
other departments of the City after successful implementation
within the Permits and Licenses Department.
* * *