eBusiness quality checking in QST 111-20080652

eBusiness quality checking process aligns with Services Australia's Quality Frameworks and Standards and the 7 quality principles.

The quality checking process:

• assists team leaders and quality checkers to identify eBusiness process improvements
• ensures consistency in quality checking

In scope

• Manual identity verification for Provider Digital Access form (HW080)
• Online claiming provider agreement form (HW027)
• Provider registration for Electronic Funds Transfer payments form (HW029)
• Banking details online claiming form (HW052)
• Bulk Minor Id Updates
• Bulk Banking details update for the National Health Service

The Service Delivery Support team is responsible for:

• analysing national quality reports to identify learning needs or process improvement opportunities
• escalating national quality issues to the relevant program or policy area and/or to the Quality and Skill Tags team
• reviewing and updating the relevant Operational Blueprint files and training materials
• reviewing suggestions and working collaboratively with the Quality and Skill Tags team to improve Operational Blueprint quality checking process and resources
• identifying strategic and operational risks or issues that impact customer outcomes

Managers/team leaders are responsible for ensuring:

• Quality checkers complete the process for quality checker accreditation
• Quality checkers hold appropriate skill tags in the Quality and Support Tool. This is arranged by sending an email to Quality and Skill Tags
• Timely error feedback is discussed with the service officer as part of the coaching conversation to support learning and development opportunities
• Reporting all privacy breaches using the notification form on the Report a Privacy Incident intranet page
• Analysis of errors. That is, if errors occurred due to factors such as limited training, understanding the business rules, environmental or system-based issues
• Positive quality checking outcomes are acknowledged with the service officer

Quality checkers are responsible for:

• Carrying out quality checks as specified in the sampling plan
• Updating and maintaining eBusiness technical knowledge, procedures and policies
• Maintaining a correctness standard for personal accuracy
• Completing root cause analysis and systemic issues
• Reporting and escalating trends or concerns to the team leader
• Providing constructive and non-judgemental feedback including appropriate reference materials such as Operational Blueprint
• Explaining the impact of errors and action to be taken to correct the error (where applicable)
• Ensuring they do not check their own work. If the quality checker's work is selected, it must be given to another accredited checker to action

Quality team is responsible for:

• Providing support for quality checking in the Quality and Support Tool (QST)
• Providing relevant reports as required
• Arranging QST training for Quality Checkers
• Supporting the business with flexible and fit for purpose quality approaches

Provider Engagement Service Delivery Support Team (PESDST) is responsible for:

• National implementation of eBusiness quality practices
• Analysis of national quality reports to identify learning needs or process improvement opportunities
• Escalation of national quality issues to the relevant program area and teams

To attain accreditation, quality checkers must:

• maintain a high correctness standard in the program they are checking
• understand the quality checking procedure
• have knowledge of relevant policies and procedures and/or know where to find them
• meet the accreditation standards

See Quality checker accreditation for Health Service Delivery Division for more information.

Pre-checks apply to new starters and/or when new processes are introduced. New starters have 100% of their work reviewed and corrected until deemed proficient. Any errors made in pre-check must be recorded as errors. Results are used to support ongoing training.

Program/post-checks randomly selects work completed the previous business day in PaNDA. The results are provided to management and external stakeholders as needed.

Targeted checks apply:

• in response to business triggers or when there is a consistent/long-term quality issue identified
• to Aim for Accuracy (Check the Checker), which is completed every 12 months to confirm the accuracy of quality checking results. This involves rechecking a representative sample of previously checked work to determine if quality checking procedures have been followed correctly.

Pre-checks

Staff have 100% of their work reviewed until deemed proficient. As a guide, new starters are considered proficient as per the training and consolidation plan from the Learning and Development Team.

Program/post-checks

Five percent of the monthly eBusiness work types are randomly selected for quality checking.

Targeted checks

To arrange a targeted check(s), the team leader sends an email request to Quality and Skill Tags. Include:

• the percentage of work type to be checked, for example, 100%
• the staff member's name and logon details
• the quality checker's name and logon details
• the reason and length of time required for the targeted check
• details of how often a targeted check report is required, for example, weekly

Timeframes

Quality checks are undertaken daily on a sample of work. Quality checkers should complete quality checks within 1-2 business days to ensure timely feedback to staff.

All quality checks for the month must be actioned within 3 calendar days of the following month. After this time, remaining work is abandoned.

Resources

Quality checkers must have access to the following to undertake quality checks:

• Program specific processing systems
• PaNDA
• Quality and Support Tool
• Skill tags added on the Quality and Support Tool

An error is information processed or keyed that does not match the documents supplied, or the supporting documents uploaded on the systems.

Critical and non-critical errors

Error codes are categorised as critical and non-critical.

An error is defined as critical when there is a potential risk to the agency's reputation and/or a customer's:

• privacy
• eligibility
• payments
• application assessment being finalised
• record

An error is defined as non-critical when it does not meet the above criteria. Generally, this relates to administrative errors.

Only critical errors are used to calculate the health status of the program.

Each time a quality check is completed, the quality checker records the outcome in the Quality and Support Tool (QST).

An email is then sent in real time to the service officer and their team leader advising them of the quality check outcome. Individual results are captured in reporting data.

Quality checking feedback is sent by email to the service officer and their team leader. The email includes details about the:

• work item being checked
• result (including any errors identified), and
• quality checking dispute process

Method for managing and storing feedback

Feedback is recorded/stored in the Quality & Support Tool.

Correcting Errors

Critical errors

Quality checkers must correct critical errors immediately, as they are identified.

Non-critical errors

Quality checkers are to provide instruction in the feedback email. The original processing service officer is to correct any non-critical errors based on the feedback.

Quality checkers consult Local Peer Support (LPS) and/or eBusiness Team Leaders for procedural or policy related queries. Team leaders can raise unresolved concerns with eBusiness Policy.

Enquiries about quality checking business rules or issues with checking results that cannot be resolved on site should be directed to Quality and Skill Tags by email.

Quality checking procedures are reviewed and updated by the agency and program in consultation with the Quality and Skill Tags team. The review ensures error codes are current and that approved policy changes are included.

Any changes that require immediate action will be advised and updated accordingly. Any changes not critical to quality will be incorporated in the review of the procedures.