Sector Ohio Valley.

1. Coast Guard Knowledge
Summit
18-20 February 2009

2. SOHV Integrated Management System
What is the Sector Ohio Valley
Integrated Management System?
A system of gathering, tracking, and
Performance!
understanding information with the
goal of achieving and sustaining
operational excellence and meeting
other Coast Guard goals.
Knowledge
IMS
inf
ion or
rmat ma
fo
in tio
n
info
rma
inform tion
ation

3. Why Create a Knowledge Management System?
Our cutters, boats, and aircraft and integrated and
mutually supporting
Out command, control, and communications
systems are getting there
Our management systems are …?

4. Why Create a Knowledge Management System?
High risk, complex, and dynamic
environment
bring order to chaos, identify risk,
and provide us with the tools to meet
our goals
Continuity& sustained
performance over time/PCS
moves
Knowledge Management must have a goal
•Mission – Maritime Safety, Security, Stewardship
•Performance – deliver results
•Competition – better than any alternatives
•Change – cope with a dynamic world

5. The Goal of the SOHV IMS
Translate Strategic Direction
into Sustained Performance
Performance!
Excellence
Continuous Improvement and
Adaptation in a Dynamic Organizational Goal
Environment “Mission execution is what we do.”
“We must adapt and evolve into a
change-centric, learning organization.”
Organizational Approach
“Transparency of information breeds self-correcting
behavior.”

6. Sector Ohio Valley’s Approach
In order to remain goal focused, the SOHV IMS
begins with our Strategic Business Plan
Transparency of Information - goals, measures,
targets, policies, etc are all clearly posted and
visible to all SOHV members
Trust in the Command, in the IMS, and among
the members and units within the Sector is critical
Change Centric Culture
Broad participation across the Sector – all units
and all levels

7. SOHV Integrated Management System
What is the SOHV Integrated Management System
• Is Based on the Commandant’s Performance Excellence Criteria
• Implements Standard Operational Planning Process & Mission Management System
• Uses Enterprise Applications & Data
• Implements the Incident Command System in Daily Activities
• Includes Contingency Planning & Exercises
• Promotes Unity of Effort
• Employs a Tailored Dashboard System

8. MAJOR COMPONENTS
Strategic Business Plan
Supporting Plans for outreach, training, etc
Use of ICS for routine operations
Leadership Initiatives
Communication tools (Riverbend, Blog, etc)
Balanced Scorecards with measures/targets
Mission Performance
Readiness
Leadership
Partnerships

9. Strategic Business Plan Components
Begins with strategic direction from COMDT
concerning Safety, Security, & Stewardship
missions.
Links HQ goals with SOHV activities, and
prioritizes those activities
Organized by mission, not department or unit to
emphasize Unity of Effort
Has specific measures and targets (Balanced
Scorecard)
Identifies long term (5 year) objectives

10. ESC “SBP Alignment” Review
Minutes Balanced Scorecard SWOT Objectives Achievements McDevan Initiatives SBP Dashboard
SOHV Overall PLAN PREV RESP LOG SCC VTS NASH CINC PITT HUNT PADU OSAG OBIO CIMA CHEN CHIP OUAC DANA
USCG Required SOHV Required
Sector Ohio Valley - Balanced Scorecard D8OPD Required
Goals Area Measure Target Current Goals Area Measure Target Current
Deployability >90% 95.3% Mariners Saved ACGN 95% 0%
SAR and Boating
Pers onnel Overweight(AD/R) <2% 2.6% Mariners Saved BCGN 88% 0%
Safety
Com petencies >75% 75% Property Saved 80% 0%
HAZWOPER >90% 94% # Reportable CAG 208 34
ICS - General >90% 89.6% # Mariner Deaths 2 0
Training
ICS - IMT 100% 52.5% # Mariner Injuries 16 8
Maritim e Safety
GMT (AD/R) >90% 81.0% # Pas s enger Deaths 4 0
Com m ercial
Update 100% 97% # Pas s enger Injuries 2 1
Plans Ves s els and
c a e n iro m n l ro c n
Exercis e 100% 100% Barge Break-aways 39 14
is s
Facilities
In re s E v n e ta P te tio
ro e s s
In re s C s m r S tis c n
R d c S fe a d S c rity R k
c ie e p ra n l x e n e
Im ro e M n g m n &P c s e
Prevention 100% 100% Towing Vs l Ins p 76 160
c a e u to e a fa tio
A h v O e tio a E c lle c
Res pons e 100% 92% LORAN Availability 99.90% 99.90%
Policies Plan 100% 100% Fixed ATON on tim e 97% 83%
c ae ed es
e u e a ty n e u
In re s R a in s
Com m and Center 100% 98% MTSA Vs l Breaches 0 0
Logis tics 100% 100% MTSA Fac Breaches 15 6
p v aae et
WLR quot;Cquot; 6854.4 4314 Maritim e Security # Incidents @ Events 0 0
RBS % Bravo 92% SafePort Spot Checks 100% 97.2%
Equipm ent
DART % Bravo 100% Facility ACE 100% 97.2%
PPE 100% 100% Maritim e # Pollution Incidents 97 17
STE 100% 100% Stewards hip Spill Volum e (gals ) 2344 294.7
Res erve Recall >90% 87.3% CT (Vs l cas es > 30d) 20 10
Drills AWS >90% 78% CT (Fac cas es > 30d) 7 1
ERROR 100% 50% Cas ework CT (Inv cas es > 60d) 40 26
SIPRNET 100% 81% CT (SAR cas es > 30d) 0 0
RFO 80 88.7 CT (Viol cas es > 120d) 9 4
STAN 40 43 Ex Survey - Prevention >4 4.7
MLC Com pliance Com pliant Ex Survey - Res pons e >4 4.6
Ins pection WLR SEOPS Com pliance Com pliant Ex Survey - Planning >4 4.7
Cus tom er Service
LORSTA QA 70 77.2 Ex Survey - VTS >4 4.5
SCC >80% 0% Ex Survey - SCC >4 4.7
VTS OPEVAL Com pliance Pending Ex Survey - WLR >4 4.7
CPEC Evaluation Bas Effective Bas Eff/Beg Goals Area Measure Target Current
Evaluation
Voting Mbrs Attendance 50% 69%
Goals Area Measure Target Current
Mis hap (A,B) 0 0 AMSP Update 100% 100%
Safety
AMSC
Mis hap (C,D) 14 3 MSRAM Update 100% 100%
IDP (AD) 100% 81% RMMP Develop 100% 80%
In re s P rtn rs ip
Prof Dev
c ae a e h
CPO Acad (AD/R) 100% 45% IJ Delays 0 0
In re s E p y e
c a e m lo e
Plan (AD) 90% 93% OGA/CG Water Patrols >0.54 1.12
S tis c n
Phys ical Fitnes s Local LE
a fa tio
AD Challenge 50% 82% OGA/CG Shore Patrols >2.29 6.34
Education AD Us e of TA 25% 13% Benkert Applications 1 0
Marine Indus try
CGI As s es s AD Com pleted 25% 23% TBSIP Participants 2 2
Quality 0 Return 0 ACOE quot;Fleet Sweepquot; Ins ps 6 2
Evaluation
Tim elines s 100% 100% D8/ACOE/Ind WAP Update 100% 100%
Recognition Tim elines s 100% 100% Marine Events 127 15
Trans ition Spons or Survey >4 4.25 CGAUX D8ER Mis s ion Count 1001 110
Internal Survey >4 4.1 Education Hours 1861 192.5
Satis faction
D8 Workplace >4 4.5 JTTF Joint Res pons es 100% 100%
SOPP Effectiveness Workload Asset Hours Deployability Quals Safety Drills Surveys Upward

11. Sector Ohio Valley - Balanced Scorecard
Goals Area Measure Target Current
Deployability >90% 95.3%
Overweight(AD/R) <2% 2.6%
Personnel
Readiness Competencies >75% 75%
HAZWOPER >90% 94%
Metrics ICS - General >90% 89.6%
Training
ICS - IMT 100% 52.5%
GMT (AD/R) >90% 81.0%
Medical, Dental, Update 100% 97%
Plans
Exercise 100% 100%
ICS, and GMT for
Improve Management & Processes
Prevention 100% 100%
Sector are all well Response 100% 92%
above D8 and CG Policies Plan 100% 100%
Increase Readiness
Command Center 100% 98%
averages, including
Logistics 100% 100%
reserve data. WLR quot;Cquot; 6854.4 4314
RBS % Bravo 92%
Equipment
DART % Bravo 100%
PPE 100% 100%
Monthly STE 100% 100%
Reserve Recall >90% 87.3%
competition
Drills AWS >90% 78%
between all ERROR 100% 50%
Sector units SIPRNET 100% 75%
RFO 80 88.7
STAN 40 43
MLC Compliance Compliant
Inspection WLR SEOPS Compliance Compliant
LORSTA QA 70 77.2
SCC >80% 0%
VTS OPEVAL Compliance Pending
CPEC Evaluation Bas Effective Bas Eff/Beg
Evaluation

12. USCG Sector Ohio Valley McDevan Award
Scoring Matrix & Summary
PRES
RFO & GMT & HAZWOPR & FITNESS
STAN (35%) Deploy (25%) ICS (10%) IDP (10%) OMSEP (10%) (10%) Current
Unit Overall
80.1
SOHV (Louisville) 83 95.0 94.9 87.4 65.0 20.4 79.6
76.4
MSU Huntington 77 95.7 90.9 93.7 86.1 21.7 80.1
75.2
MSU Paducah 83 95.6 90.6 93.7 24.6 14.8 75.3
85.6
MSU Pittsburgh 95 97.2 97.2 91.8 91.0 22.8 87.8
81.3
MSD Nashville 91 95.9 96.5 90.7 87.5 6.3 83.9
81.4
MSD Cincinnati 77 96.0 100.0 96.3 100.0 17.5 82.3
79.2
CGC CHENA 91 89.3 67.3 72.1 79.0 23.6 78.4
83.2
CGC CHIPPEWA 98 92.8 80.4 61.9 100.0 25.0 84.2
80.9
CGC CIMMARON 86 92.9 83.1 90.6 100.0 20.0 82.7
84.2
CGC OBION 95 96.5 90.5 89.9 92.0 27.1 87.3
83.3
CGC OSAGE 96 100.0 100.0 96.9 58.3 22.2 86.3
78.8
CGC OUACHITA 94 92.9 84.8 64.2 100.0 23.8 83.4
LORSTA Dana 1 77.2
77 100.0 100.0 95.3 100.0 30.0 84.6

13. USCG Required SOHV Required
D8OPD Required
Goals Area Measure Target Current
Mission
Mariners Saved ACGN 95% 0%
SAR and Boating
Mariners Saved BCGN 88% 0% Execution
Safety
Property Saved 80% 0%
Metrics
# Reportable CAG 208 34
# Mariner Deaths 2 0
# Mariner Injuries 16 8
Targets set at
Maritime Safety
# Passenger Deaths 4 0
Commercial
better than
# Passenger Injuries 2 1
Vessels and
Increase Environmental Protection
Reduce Safety and Security Risks
Barge Break-aways 39 14 HQ level
Achieve Operational Excellence
Increase Customer Satisfaction
Facilities
Towing Vsl Insp 76 160
and/or
LORAN Availability 99.90% 99.90%
improvement
Fixed ATON on time 97% 83%
over prior
MTSA Vsl Breaches 0 0
MTSA Fac Breaches 15 6
year
Maritime Security # Incidents @ Events 0 0
SafePort Spot Checks 100% 97.2%
Facility ACE 100% 97.2%
# Pollution Incidents 97 17
Maritime
Stewardship Spill Volume (gals) 2344 294.7
CT (Vsl cases > 30d) 20 10
CT (Fac cases > 30d) 7 1
CT (Inv cases > 60d) 40 26
Casework Target pro-rated
CT (SAR cases > 30d) 0 0 for the year
CT (Viol cases > 120d) 9 4
Ex Survey - Prevention >4 4.7
Ex Survey - Response >4 4.6
Ex Survey - Planning >4 4.7
Customer Service
>4
Ex Survey - VTS 4.5
>4
Ex Survey - SCC 4.7
Ex Survey - WLR >4 4.7

14. Leadership and Employee Focused
Metrics
Goals Area Measure Target Current
Mishap (A,B) 0 0
Safety
Mishap (C,D) 14 3
IDP (AD) 100% 80%
Prof Dev
Increase Employee
CPO Acad (AD/R) 100% 45%
Plan (AD) 90% 93%
Satisfaction
Physical Fitness
AD Challenge 50% 82%
AD Use of TA 25% 13%
Education
AD Completed 25% 23%
CGI Assess
Quality 0 Return 0
Evaluation
Timeliness 100% 100%
Timeliness 100% 100%
Recognition
Sponsor Survey >4
Transition 4.25
Internal Survey >4 4.1
Satisfaction
D8 Workplace >4 4.5

15. Partnerships and
Externally Focused Metrics
Goals Area Measure Target Current
Voting Mbrs Attendance 50% 69%
AMSP Update 100% 100%
AMSC MSRAM Update 100% 100%
RMMP Develop 100% 80%
Increase Partnership
IJ Delays 0 0
OGA/CG Water Patrols >0.54 1.12
Local LE
OGA/CG Shore Patrols >2.29 6.34
Benkert Applications 1 0
Marine Industry
2
TBSIP Participants 2
ACOE quot;Fleet Sweepquot; Insps 6 2
D8/ACOE/Ind WAP Update 100% 100%
Marine Events 127 15
1001 110
CGAUX D8ER Mission Count
Education Hours 1861 192.5
JTTF Joint Responses 100% 100%

16. SOHV Integrated Management System
Cascading “Balanced Scorecards” – Alignment & Balance

17. SOHV Integrated Management System
Measurement
How Does It Work?
Strategic Business Planning Cycle
(monthly review)
Assessment
Year in Review
Current FY SBP Current FY
Performance Plan Adjustment
Next FY SBP

18. SOHV Integrated Management System
Daily SCC Brief
(Continuous Awareness)
How Does It Work?
Mission Execution
Process Incident Action Plan
(Emergencies)
Sector Weekly IAP
(Weekly Planned Workgroup Weekly 204
(Routine Operations)
Activities)
Updated Command Priorities
(Monthly Adjustment)
Performance!

19. How Does It Work? Mission Support Process
Resource Availability
Readiness Measures
Command
Priorities
Required Deadlines
Incident Action Plan Resource Requirements
Routine Operations (Monthly Update)

20. SOHV Integrated Management System
How Does It Work? Knowledge Management
Incident-specific IAP Best Practices
Individual Sub-unit’s
Website
Consolidated Sector
Sector’s SOP Website
Bookshelf of IAP’s

21. SOHV Integrated Management System
How Does It Work? Continuous Improvement
Version Date Improvement
10.0 May 08 Mission Management System Fully Complied
11.0 May 08 BSST Instruction Developed
12.0 May 08 Customer & Stakeholder Survey Implemented
13.0 May 08 D8 Workplace Assessment Sector-wide
13.1 May 08 D8 CPC Assessment
14.0 Jun 08 SOHV Major Incident Response Instruction Implemented
15.0 Jun 08 SOHV-Auxiliary Interoperability Optimized
16.0 Jul 08 Sector Newsletter
17.0 Jul 08 SOHV Reference System
19.0 Dec 08 Change Management adopted
20.0 Feb 09 Hamilton Application submitted

22. SOHV Integrated
Management System
Performance!
What Are the Results?
More Involved Work High Personnel Increasing Updated Plans
Force Readiness Competencies
Meeting Decreasing Greater Success Significantly
Performance Case Work Cycle in Acquiring Improved
Mandates Time Resources Unity of Effort

23. More Involved Work Force

24. High Personnel Readiness

25. Increasing Competencies and Quals

26. Updated Plans

27. USCG Sector Ohio Valley McDevan Award
Scoring Matrix & Summary
PRES
RFO & GMT & HAZWOPR & FITNESS
Unit STAN (35%) Deploy (25%) ICS (10%) IDP (10%) OMSEP (10%) (10%) Current Overall
80.3
SOHV (Louisville) 83 95.6 94.9 #VALUE! 65.0 20.4 #VALUE!
75.1
MSU Huntington 77 95.9 90.9 68.7 86.0 21.7 77.7
75.2
MSU Paducah 83 95.3 90.6 69.0 24.9 14.8 72.8
84.9
MSU Pittsburgh 95 97.5 97.2 67.1 91.0 22.8 85.4
80.4
MSD Nashville 91 94.5 96.5 90.7 87.5 6.3 83.6
81.1
MSD Cincinnati 77 94.7 100.0 #VALUE! 100.0 17.5 #VALUE!
79.4
CGC CHENA 91 93.3 67.3 73.6 79.0 23.6 79.5
82.9
CGC CHIPPEWA 98 90.4 80.4 62.2 100.0 25.0 83.7
80.3
CGC CIMMARON 86 88.9 83.1 90.6 100.0 20.0 81.7
83.2
CGC OBION 95 97.8 90.5 89.9 92.0 27.1 87.6
82.3
CGC OSAGE 96 98.6 100.0 96.9 58.3 22.2 86.0
77.3
CGC OUACHITA 94 95.9 84.8 64.2 100.0 23.8 84.1
LORSTA Dana 1 74.8
77 100.0 100.0 95.3 100.0 30.0 84.6
1 LORSTA RFO value is scaled equivalent NAVCEN OA

28. Professional Mariner Injuries
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09
MSD Cincinnati MSD Nashville MSU Huntington MSU Paducah MSU Pittsburgh SOHV (Louisville) Target (95% of prev FY)

29. SOHV Integrated Management System
S
O
SOHV’s Solution
H
C C S V
T P I G M O I Features:
Q E C B M P M
CATEGORY M C S I S P S
• Is Based on the Commandant’s Performance
Strategic Planning X X X X
Excellence Criteria
Measurement X X X X X
Analysis X X X X X
• Incorporates the Incident Command System in
Knowledge X X X X
Routine Operations
Management
Process Management X X X X X X
• Uses a System of Cascading “Balanced
Performance Results X X X X X
Scorecards” to Ensure Organizational
Innovation X X X
Alignment & Activity Balance
Crisis Management X X
Organizational X X X X X
• Institutionalizes Planning & Exercise Processes
Alignment
to Promote Continuous Improvement
Activity Balance X X X
Continuous X X X X
• Employs a Tailored Dashboard System to
Improvement
Facilitate Transparency of Information
TQM – Total Quality Management
CPEC – Commandant’s Performance Excellence
Criteria
• Uses Enterprise Tools & Data
SOPP – Standard Operational Planning Process
CGBI – Coast Guard Business Intelligence
MMS – Mission Management System
ICS – Incident Command System
SOHVIMS – SOHV Integrated Management System

30. SOHV Integrated Management System
Like the “Planning P”, the SOHV Q is our
model for Readiness and Quality

31. SOHV Integrated Management System
Seamless Transition From “Q” to “P”
ROUTINE OPERATIONS CRISIS MANAGEMENT
Tools
Lead Purpose SOHV IMS Purpose Lead
INST
Sector Command Center Daily Brief ICS-201 Incident Briefing Initial Incident Commander
Executive Steering Committee Command Objectives ICS-202 Incident Objectives Planning Section Chief
Sector Duty Officer WQSB ICS-203 Org Assignment List Resources Unit Leader
Depts, MSUs, MSDs Work Plan ICS-204 Assignment List Resources Unit Leader
Sector Command Center Comms Plan ICS-205 Radio Comms Plan Communications Unit Leader
Sector Logistics Medical Plan ICS-206 Medical Plan Medical Unit Leader
Sector Duty Officer Duty List ICS-207 Organization Chart Resources Unit Leader
Sector Deputy Safety Plan ICS-208 Site Safety Plan Safety Officer
Sector Deputy Requests for Support ICS-215 Op Planning Operations Section Chief
Worksheet

32. SOHV Integrated Management System
“Minding P’s and Q’s” and SOHV Success
MISSION EXECUTION
OPERATIONAL READINESS
More Satisfied Work Force High Personnel Readiness Up-to-date Plans High Customer Satisfaction
Better Management of Greater Success Significantly Improved Meeting
Workload in Acquiring Resources Unity of Effort Performance Mandates

33. SOHV Integrated Management System
Key to Successful Implementation
RESISTANCE & BARRIERS SOLUTIONS
Resistance to Change Designate a Change Management Team
Misunderstanding CAPT Nguyen—Executive Sponsor
Low Tolerance of Change CSC Wigman-Nilsson—Change Manager
Disagreement Over the Need for Change Education
Self Interest SOHV IMS Brief
SOHV Commander’s UNREP Session
Unit’s Visits
Ownership
SOHV “Leadership Compact”
Joint Development of Plans & Solutions
Incorporation of Useful Best Practices
Routine
Use of ICS Forms
SOHV ERROR Exercise Program
Reward
SOHV Semper Paratus Award
SOHVIMS Innovator Award
SOHV Recognition Coin

34. Next Steps and Wider Applicability?
Enterprise data and applications must be
connected, easy to use, and performance oriented
Leadership must be incorporated into all systems
Systems must be dynamic like our operating
environment
Systems must be connected across all operational
and support units
Recognize that one unit’s outcome/output is
another’s input