An Arizona Auditor General’s performance audit of the Arizona Motor Vehicles Division found that the Division should improve field office customer service, better regulate the ignition interlock program, and continue to enhance its oversight of third-party offices.
The Audit found:
MVD field offices handle millions of transactions — MVD provides services such as driver licenses, vehicle titles and registration, and vehicle inspections. Most services are also available at authorized third-party offices and online through MVD’s ServiceArizona. In fiscal year 2014, 24 percent of MVD transactions were completed at MVD field offices, and almost 2.8 million customers visited a field office between July 2013 and April 2014.
MVD field offices inconsistently provide a good customer service experience — Quality customer service includes the physical surroundings, interactions with staff, and the service itself, in addition to the wait time.
• Wait times — Although MVD data indicates that the field offices met the overall average wait time goal of 23 minutes for fiscal year 2014, from July 2013 through April 2014, nearly 118,000 people waited longer than an hour. Also, MVD’s wait time data reflects the time a customer receives a numbered ticket until he/she reaches a customer service window. It does not capture the time spent waiting to receive a numbered ticket or the time to complete a transaction after leaving a customer service window.
We conducted mystery shopping visits at seven field offices. Our total visit times ranged from 23 to 88 minutes. Some waits can be even longer, such as the wait to complete a driver license transaction. For example, two customers reported waiting longer than 5 hours to complete a driver license transaction that included road tests.
• Some customers must return — From July 2013 to April 2014, nearly 39,000 customers were not able to complete their transactions on the first visit. Some had to return because they were unaware of the documents they needed to complete a transaction, such as proof of legal presence. Others had to return because MVD’s computer systems were down. For example, the computer systems experienced downtime on 24 separate days between January and April 2014.
• Field office cleanliness and space varied — Mystery shoppers rated the cleanliness of some visited field offices as acceptable, but others as unacceptable. These field offices were cluttered, had trash left by customers, and/or had dirty and dingy walls, chairs, and desks. One field office was too small for its customer volume, so customers had to wait outside before they received a numbered ticket.
Mystery shoppers waited up to 30 minutes before receiving a numbered service ticket at this office with most of this time spent outside. MVD plans to expand this office.
MVD had an internal mystery shopper program to assess the quality of customer service at field offices, but the program was discontinued in 2009 because of budget constraints. MVD also uses an online survey to learn about customer satisfaction, but its response rate was only 0.14 percent in fiscal year 2014. Although these surveys indicate high satisfaction, the extremely low response rate may not fully represent the experience of all field office customers.
MVD should improve the customer service experience — MVD should better assess its customer service experience and its performance goals for field offices. It should also develop a comprehensive customer service plan that includes referring customers to other alternatives for conducting their transactions, such as third-party offices and online through ServiceArizona, and includes other ways to improve the overall customer service experience.
MVD administers the Program for drivers convicted of DUI — The Department must suspend the driver license of a person convicted of DUI, but the person may retain limited driving privileges by participating in the Program. A device is put on the participant’s car that detects alcohol on the participant’s breath and, if any alcohol is detected, it can either prevent the car from starting or record a violation if the car is already running.
The participant must pay for installation of the device, pay a monthly fee to maintain the device, and periodically
download the device’s records, which are forwarded to MVD for review and action, if necessary.
Program oversight should be strengthened — MVD certifies ignition interlock device manufacturers and installers. MVD reported that it conducts on-site inspections prior to certifying installers and may conduct periodic inspections thereafter, but only with consent beginning in April 2015. That is because MVD lacks statutory authority to conduct the inspections without permission from the installer. Further, inspection guidelines do not specify the frequency and method for checking installer compliance with various rule requirements during inspections. Finally, MVD investigates complaints about installers, but does not provide clear information about its complaint-handling process to participants, such as what types of issues are within its jurisdiction and what information to include when sending a complaint to MVD.
The Legislature should consider providing MVD with statutory authority to conduct periodic inspections of ignition interlock device installers.
The Department should develop and implement policies and procedures for inspecting ignition interlock device installers and improve its complaint-handling process.
MVD uses several methods to oversee third-party offices, but should enhance two aspects of its oversight – To provide MVD services, third-party offices are given access to MVD information. To help protect MVD assets and customer data, MVD requires financial responsibility documents and criminal background checks, and conducts site visits to assess the third party’s physical security of its locations. MVD also certifies and trains third-party processors, while the Department conducts periodic risk-based audits. Further, MVD conducts
a quarterly analysis on a sample of transactions to identify errors or omissions, and the Department uses a reconciliation process to ensure that monies from third parties are received in a timely manner. In February 2015, MVD reported taking steps to shift to a process that distinguishes between serious and minor errors.
In addition, the Department plans to provide reconciliation reports monthly instead of quarterly so that it can receive monies owed more quickly.
MVD should continue with its plans to modify its quarterly transaction errors analysis, and the Department should continue with its plans to increase the frequency of its reconciliation reports.