Madera County Grand Jury
• 2015-2016
1516-05 Madera County 311/crm System Publication Date: June 22, 2016
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 12 findings
F1
The appreciation of constituents being able to converse with a live operator is difficult to measure, but is highly valued.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The Board of Supervisors did not mandate the use of CRM for public interface to all departments.
No recommendations for this finding
F3
CRM is a robust database application capable of many processes. To utilize CRM a department needs to dedicate the time and effort to work with the Information Technology CRM database manager to develop specific applications for its use.
No recommendations for this finding
F4
Use of the CRM system is lower than it could be because departments were allowed to opt out at the onset. For example the Road Department transfers CRM service requests to the department’s own "GoRequest" system for processing.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Board of Supervisors requires the various county departments to work with the Information Technology Department to develop CRM applications that would replace duplicate or redundant systems. This could save the expense of upgrades and maintenance contracts for these other systems.
F5
The Road Department started using the GoRequest system prior to the inception of 311/CRM. GoRequest serves the Road Department and its constituents well. This system is used in many state jurisdictions sending on-line reports of hazardous road conditions to the correct responding agency.
No recommendations for this finding
F6
Interdepartmental requests for building maintenance, supplies, and job openings are processed through CRM.
No recommendations for this finding
F7
Requests are delivered to electronic in-boxes of the various departments, addressed by the selection of department at the time of the original report.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
Department staff training was provided at the onset of 311/CRM, but confusion as to its use and capabilities remain.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
More training is conducted throughout county departments now that the system has been implemented and employees have been exposed to its capability and performance. Respondents: Madera County Board of Supervisors 200 W. 4th Street Madera, CA 93637 Madera County Chief Administrative Officer 200 W. 4th Street Madera, CA 93637 Madera County Chief Information Officer 200 W. 4th Street Madera, CA 93637
F9
Some departments that use their own tracking/ticketing systems immediately close the CRM ticket. Others do not use the ticket numbers until after an investigation verifies the validity of the issue.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The 311 portion that connects the CRM system to the website, must be updated (replaced) to a version that allows continued operation and patching of the software code. This upgrade, to the 2016 version, has already been approved.
No recommendations for this finding
F11
The biggest departmental user of 311/CRM is the Madera County Animal Shelter, receiving 35% of 311 calls.
No recommendations for this finding
F12
Calls into 311 are recorded for information and training purposes. The recording stops if the call is transferred.
No recommendations for this finding
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Madera County
County