Regional Online
Permitting Program
June 26, 2014
Users Group Meeting
Agenda




Creative uses of ViewPermit
Survey results / feedback
Issues Resolution process
Latest ViewPoint news
Current Members
Bolton
 Madison
 Brookfield
 Manchester
 Coventry
 Milford
 East Hartford  New Britain
 East Windsor  New Haven
 Ellington
 Newington
 Enfield
 North Haven
 Glastonbury  Ridgefield

Simsbury
 Southington
 Stamford
 Tolland
 Wethersfield
 Waterford

Survey Results
June 2014 Survey –
specific functionality
How is it working?
Does
not
work
N/A
4
0
2
14
6
0
3
10
4
0
9
Very
well
Well
Create a new permit
10
12
Managing the permit approval
process
5
Assign reviewers and review
agencies to the permit
5
Needs
improve
ment
How is it working? (continued)
Very
Needs
Does not
Well
N/A
well
improvement
work
Managing the permit review
process
3
14
9
0
3
Managing the inspections process
3
10
8
0
7
Monitoring performance
1
11
7
0
9
How is it working? (continued)
Very
Needs
Does not
Well
N/A
well
improvement
work
Managing the CO process
3
8
12
0
6
Providing information to the public
regarding permits
2
5
13
1
8
Inspections
Very well
Well
Needs Does
improve not N/A
ment work
Assign inspections to a permit
2
8
7
0
6
Schedule inspections
1
3
6
2
11
Enter inspection results
4
9
6
1
3
Communicate inspection results
to customers
1
3
8
2
9
Close out permits once
inspections are complete
1
11
6
0
5
2012 and 2014
Identical Surveys
15 Respondents in 2012
12 respondents in 2014
-0.50
2012
-1.00
-1.50
-2.00
2014
Customer Portal
Dashboard
Other Reporting
Inspection Reporting
Permit Reporting
Metrics Reporting
Financial Reporting
CO Reporting
Reporting Overall
Wetlands Overall
Zoning Overall
Planning Overall
Building Module Overall
Overall
2012-2014 Comparison Summary
ViewPermit User Survey 2012-2014 Comparison
0.50
0.00
1. Please rate your overall satisfaction with
ViewPermit in the following categories
2012 Response
Overall
Building Module Overall
Planning Overall
Zoning Overall
Wetlands Overall
Reporting Overall
Feel free to comment on your response (optional)
2014 Response
Overall
Building Module Overall
Planning Overall
Zoning Overall
Wetlands Overall
Reporting Overall
Very Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
Rating Average
1
2
0
0
0
0
8
6
3
2
2
3
2
6
3
4
4
5
2
0
3
3
3
5
0.31
0.29
-0.67
-0.89
-0.89
-0.92
Very Satisfied
Somewhat
Satisfied
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
Very
Dissatisfied
Rating Average
0
0
0
0
0
0
8
7
3
2
2
5
3
4
1
2
0
3
1
1
2
2
3
3
0.25
0.08
-0.33
-0.67
-0.80
-0.36
2. Please rate the usefulness of the reports
outlined below
2012 Response
CO Reporting
Financial Reporting
Metrics Reporting
Permit Reporting
Inspection Reporting
Other Reporting
2014 Response
CO Reporting
Financial Reporting
Metrics Reporting
Permit Reporting
Inspection Reporting
Other Reporting
Very Usable
Usable
Needs Some
Tweaking
Not Usable
Rating Average
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
3
1
5
3
2
10
5
2
9
5
6
3
6
8
0
5
3
-1.07
-1.00
-1.55
-0.29
-0.92
-0.91
Very Usable
Usable
Needs Some
Tweaking
Not Usable
Rating Average
0
0
0
1
0
0
4
2
0
4
2
2
5
5
6
4
6
4
2
2
2
1
2
1
-0.45
-0.78
-1.25
0.00
-0.80
-0.57
3. How useful is the dashboard to you?
2012 Response
2014 Response
Very Useful
Somewhat
Useful
Minimally
Useful
0
2
11
Very Useful
Somewhat
Useful
Minimally
Useful
1
1
5
Not Useful At
Rating Average
All
1
-0.79
Not Useful At
Rating Average
All
4
-0.91
4. What modules do you primarily use?
2012 Response
Building
Planning
Zoning
Wetlands
Public Works
Other (please specify)
Response
Percent
Building 100.0%
Planning 35.7%
Zoning 35.7%
Wetlands 21.4%
14.3%
Public Works
Other (please specify)
Response
Count
14
5
5
3
2
3
2014 Response
Response
Percent
Response
Count
100.0%
16.7%
16.7%
8.3%
16.7%
12
2
2
1
2
2
5. How satisfied are you with the customer portal
and the responsiveness within the customer
portal?
2012 Response
Very Satisfied
0
2014 Response
Very Satisfied
0
Somewhat
Satisfied
1
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
4
Very
Dissatisfied
8
Somewhat
Satisfied
2
Somewhat
Dissatisfied
3
Very
Dissatisfied
4
N/A
2
N/A
3
Rating
Average
-1.46
Rating
Average
-1.00
2014 Comments
• I never got a call when I used the portal so I now use technical support.
• We havent opened up to the public yet or seen the public side
• Although you receive an email stating what percent the issue has been resolved, there is no feedback regarding the
solution, etc. In addition, they may assign a percentage right away but it could stay like that until the user takes the
time to follow up on it. At the moment, I'm unable to create any new tickets because I do not have a login. It seems as
though they changed the customer portal and did not contact existing users about how to login. I emailed James but
have not heard back yet.
• Our IT department now uses the portal. If I have an issue, I have to let IT know instead of using the portal. When I did
use the portal, I was "somewhat satisfied" at the outcome, but very satisfied with someone at least contacting me.
• dissatisfied
• Need to do tweaking here as well to design the application to include everything that is needed to review and determine
if the app should be accepted. The current front end is over simplified for our needs.
6. Please list ticket numbers of any high,
"must-have" priority outstanding issues on
the portal (resolved or unresolved) in order
of importance. (2014)
• #40 - PermitType Report including inactivated permits as issued;
ONGOING issue - State Education Fee (what criteria is it pulling from rec'd? Issued? includes inactive? Pending?)
• Do not use.
• Public Notices, Abutters List, Conservation should be Wetlands, inability to
link regulations, inability to have proper permits print out with usable
information. Inability to pair proper permits.
• I will get with IT for specific ticket numbers before our meeting this week.
• too many to list
• Our IT manager will have to supply that. I don't keep track.
7. In what ways has the VP system been a
benefit to your community? (2014)
• Online permit center helpful
• It is a quick system for entering permits which is great. Over all I
am pleased with View Permit for the use of Permits.
• it hasnt been
• With ViewInspect, the inspectors have a lot more information
available in the field.
• reduces paper; having information on the computer helps to find
information quicker and without physically going into the file
room (leads to better, more professional customer service)
• has not been
• It has provided a first step in providing electronic options to
residents and it has streamlined internal review of applications
• Helps track permit approvals. Online permitting for customers is
a plus.
8. In what ways could VP’s product or
service be improved?(2014)
•
•
•
•
Need more resources on Help Desk to respond AND resolve issues in a timely manner
The reporting could be improved.
VP is extremely slow. We have fiber optic in our building, so I feel the problem is on your end. It
is painful to enter inspections.
It needs to be updated with the ability to properly perform the tasks that you are told it can do
when they sell it to you.
•
I know that James is the frontline customer service person but he also does all the reporting, I
think it would benefit everyone to have a dedicated customer support person that could reply and
follow up in a timely manner. James is very good to work with and they have come a long way but
there is still room for improvement.
•
•
•
system needs work - reporting, issues with comments and day-to-day functions/mishaps
improve service
Reporting, reporting, reporting. Also would be good if City could add names of new streets and
other basic permit field changes.
•
ViewInspect needs to hold and save all inspection report info. Their support is not responsive to
problems or complaints. Costs too much for the service they provide.
Respond to requests for changes
Notify users of changes that are implemented prior to updates being released
•
•
Satisfaction Survey
15 Respondents in 2012
12 respondents in 2014
1. Rate the quality of ViewPermit software in
terms of:
Fails
Excee
to
Below Meets Above
ds
Answer Options meet expect expect expect
N/A
expect
expect ations ations ations
ations
ations
6
12
7
0
0
0
Overall
4
12
7
0
1
0
Work flow
6
10
6
3
0
0
Time savings
4
13
5
3
0
0
Ease of use
9
10
3
0
0
3
Reporting
7
9
6
0
0
2
Administration
3. Rate the quality of ViewNspect in terms
of:
Answer Options
Overall
Work flow
Time savings
Ease of use
Reporting
Administration
Fails to
Excee
Below Meets Above
meet
ds
expect expect expect
expect
expect
ations ations ations
ations
ations
4
0
1
0
0
4
1
0
0
0
3
2
0
0
0
4
0
1
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
4. How do you rate ViewPoint's Support?
Fails to
Excee
Below Meets Above
meet
ds
Answer Options
expect expect expect
N/A
expecta
expect
ations ations ations
tions
ations
5
16
0
2
0
2
Overall
6
15
0
2
0
2
Response times
7
12
3
1
0
2
Quality of responses
New customer
1
8
1
0
0
14
support portal
Summary
Satisfaction Survey Summary
(0 = Meet Expectations)
0.00
-0.20
-0.40
-0.60
-0.80
-1.00
-1.20
-1.40
5. What three things do you like best about
ViewPoint products?
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
online application process
Entering a permit is quick.
Reports can export to Excel easily.
It is easy to use.
Integration with multiple departments; tracking permit review; tracking inspections.
Streamlined work flow
Back office functions flow
Ability to generate some custom reporting
Seeing all permits issued for each address.
Given the amount of issues / limitations experienced / discovered so far I do not have anything favorable
to say about View Permit. Ellington is still in the implementation stage after more than over a year from
signing a contract and more negative issues are discovered each day.
Nothing
1.The ability to have documents imported directly into the permit by the On-Line applicant
2. Tax & Contractor license verification (when it works)
3. N/A
5. What three things do you like
best about ViewPoint products?
- continued
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1) Definite improvement on what we had prior for inputting, sorting and retrieving data
2) Online center - generally time-saving (for less complicated permits and express permits) and most
contractors really like it (when licensing expiration dates are accurate and in sync w/ DCP)
3) Wizard component for setting up new permit types, etc. - much easier than when we first started using
software
good concept
I like each reviewing department can enter their own reviews/comments.
At this point I am hard pressed to list any good points to this product. It does not function in the capacity
that we were told it would when we purchased the product. It is essentially useless for Board and
Commission purposes.
1. Being able to link more than one parcel to a permit
GIS access;
interdepartmental sign-offs tracking;
Permit for classification of work beyond permit type.
Like the automation of the process
the overall look of the software
reporting can do more with it but much better tan old paper process
Usage
Q1 Comparisons
Issues Resolution and
Process
ViewPoint Update