Supporting Statement

OMB Control No. # 0693-0033 – NIST Generic Clearance for Program Evaluation Data Collections

Baldrige Technical Editing Survey

FOUR STANDARD SURVEY QUESTIONS

1. Explain who will be surveyed and why the group is appropriate to survey.

Public Law 100-107 (The Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Improvement Act of 1987) that established the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program and its Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award (MBNQA) stipulates that organizational applicants for the award (see OMB Control #0693-006) receive “an intensive evaluation by a competent board of examiners which shall review the evidence submitted by the organization and, through a site visit, verify the accuracy of the quality improvements claimed.”

Per the statute, “the Director of the National Bureau of Standards shall rely upon” these examiners, as they are in essence the workforce of the Baldrige Performance Excellence Program. Baldrige Program staff members manage and improve the award and all of its processes, but the examiners actually do the objective review of MBNQA applicants.

One review that Baldrige examiners do is called technical editing, when they review the feedback reports that will be sent to organizational applicants for the MBNQA. This review focuses on the technical content of the reports based on the Baldrige Excellence Framework and its Criteria; the reports outline each organizational applicant’s strengths and opportunities for improvement. As Baldrige Criteria, organizational design, and sector experts, Baldrige examiners perform this technical review at the highest competency and efficiency. Baldrige staff members then review the reports for grammar issues and to ensure they comply with general guidelines before they are sent to the applicants.

To understand what problems, challenges, and solutions these technical editors found while performing their tasks is crucial to the Baldrige Program, which uses that information in designing training for examiners, knowing which reports need extra attention and why, and soliciting suggestions to improve the overall process. The program also simply needs to know what worked well so that best practices can be shared.

2. Explain how the survey was developed including consultation with interested parties, pre-testing, and responses to suggestions for improvement.

The Baldrige Program has been working with a volunteer workforce for more than 35 years. Open communication through face-to-discussions, hotlines, the assignment of Baldrige staff as monitors to reach out to examiners, focus groups, conferences, social media, webinars, and other media have allowed examiners to give feedback to Baldrige staff informally on the MBNQA process (and its subprocesses). This short survey is designed based on the information that needs to be shared and to seek suggestions.

3. Explain how the survey will be conducted, how customers will be sampled if fewer than all customers will be surveyed, expected response rate, and actions your agency plans to take to improve the response rate.

Technical editors (one for each organizational applicant and its feedback report, ~35) will be surveyed via email about their preferences in performing technical editor roles and then about what they learned from that performance, best practices, challenges, resolutions, etc. The survey is meant to be personal and informal.

The expected response rate is 100%, as these technical editors just complete a voluntary service and typically want to report on it. If the program does not hear from technical editors, then a staff member may call the person to ensure he/she is not having problems with the assignment.

4. Describe how the results of the survey will be analyzed and used to generalize the results to the entire customer population.

Survey results will be used in training examiners in the next cycle, and evaluative feedback on problematic reports may be used in the personal development of an examiner or tech editor. Information on problematic reports also will be used by staff who will need to give extra attention to the reports before they are sent to the applicants.

The entire customer population (Board of Examiners) hears about improvements made to the MBNQA process (and its subprocesses) at the next year’s training, during a webinar, or at one of the program’s conferences.