Corrections_Today_September_October_2021_Vol.83_No.5

n Quality

actions captured into one metric) to ensure performance achievements meet or exceed performance expectations and are usually captured as close to “real time” as pos- sible. Effective metrics typically don’t monitor the types of requirements mandated by statutes but monitor the outcomes of procedural documents (e.g., procedures, manuals, etc.). In the manufacturing world, QA can be understood as the product engineering specifications and QC includes testing product samplings throughout the manufacturing process. QC ensures the “machine” is tuned correctly. This activity includes statistical process controls. Samples are extracted from the line based on statistical calcula- tions and certain features of the product are measured. When QC identifies non-conformity, a gauge is adjusted or a lever position is changed to get the machine functioning within tolerance to continue production In corrections, correcting problems is rarely a matter of turning a knob or adjusting a gauge. As people are involved in almost every activity, variance in the system is a given at almost every point. In our industry these two activities (QA and QC) are most apparent in the accreditation process. The accrediting agency promulgate standards of expected practices (the QA activity) then they come in periodically and audit the organizations compli- ance with those expected practices (the QC activity). As you can see QC is an after the fact activity. In the QC activities involving critical functions metric moni- toring, once performance standards are established, it is necessary to determine the critical functions necessary to achieve those standards. Once those activities are determined and defined and systems are set in place to monitor critical functions, supervisors and managers can essentially determine “on the fly” if those aspects of their organization are performing as desired and expected. Driving change through analysis and action planning Analysis and action planning are the remaining component of the Quality discipline. These activities

determine why the desired outcomes of the QA activities are not being met (analysis). With good analysis, decision makers can create an action plan to remedy. The resulting analysis provides a feedback loop to those engaged in de- fining QA content so adjustments can be made in policies, procedures, contracts or training standards. Finding non-conformance is generally not problematic for organizations that have QC systems in place. While there are some inherent landmines in the QC process (bias, favoritism, intimidation), they can be overcome. In my experience, the skills required to find non-compliance are very distinct and different from those skills required to fix the problems (analysis and action planning). Most non-conformity boils down to individual deci- sions. In other words, someone somewhere thinks “that’s the stupidest thing I’ve ever

heard and I’m not going to do it,” or they believe “I just don’t have time to do it like that.” In those instances, remedy options include changing the re- quirement or changing the operator. Caught early a simple action plan can correct the issue. However, if individual decisions like these are allowed to exist and multiply then the breath of the non-conformity can

expand well beyond “patient zero.” There are non-compliance issues that are more complex and can even be systemic. In these cases, there are multiple contributors to the problem or parts of the system are set up in con- flict with each other. For example, missing or tardiness for external inmate medical appointments. There may be several institutional functions that must interact in a coordinated and timely manner or appointments are missed wasting facility resources. Diagnosing and fixing those rarer instances require system thinkers and decision makers. In some of the more complex issues, a skilled fa- cilitator in root cause analysis can walk managers through the process and identify the systemic conflict so decision makers can remedy the issue. The one thing staff need to focus on in the Analy- sis activities is: “Why did this happen?” The “why” is more important than just seeking the “what happened we hear about.” The answer can be as simple as an isolated instance centering on one operator or as complex as

34 — September/October 2021 Corrections Today