part4-199

An attribute may be defined as a specific aspect of case work that the
review will measure. “Attribute”
is synonymous with “quality standard”
. Attributes compare to, and replace, the
quality standards formerly used by the IRS. Refer to the Embedded Quality
web site above for a listing of these attributes.

Attributes are concise statements of SB/SE Excise expectations for quality
examinations and compliance reviews, and are guidelines to assist examiners
in fulfilling their professional responsibilities. Each attribute is defined
by elements representing components that are present in quality examinations
and compliance reviews.

Attributes provide objective criteria against which case quality is
assessed. Reviewers are responsible for reviewing Excise cases for quality
based on the following four quality measurement categories:

Attributes directly link to the examiner’s Critical Job Elements
(CJEs) in EQRS.

Attributes are divided into five categories for ease of data input,
as follows:

The Embedded Quality web site http://sbse.web.irs.gov/eq contains reference materials
to aid the Reviewer in rating cases and the employee in understanding the
evaluation system. These reference materials include:

Each attribute and aspect has been worded as a question. This format
minimizes the need for interpretation and is scored as:

This scoring system provides flexibility for Reviewers and provides
equal rating for all attributes.

The quality score is computed as a percentage of total ”
yes”
ratings divided by total “yes”
, and ”
no”
, ratings. A total score of 100 is possible for each case.

The overall quality score for Excise is reported as the Business Results
(Quality) measure for SB/SE.

The National Quality Manager, Specialty Programs, will work closely
with Cincinnati Submission Processing Center Post Processing Operations personnel
to obtain the necessary inventory of closed (status 90) Excise Tax cases for
review.

The purpose of the National Excise quality review process is to provide
management with measures on how well work processes are carried out and identify
processes that need to be improved.

It is important that Reviewers have an in-depth understanding of the
EQ attributes and process measures, as well as a good understanding of Excise
law, requirements and procedures. Furthermore, it is important that the reviews
be complete, accurate and consistent to promote a true and valid sampling
that management can rely upon to improve examination processes. See IRM 4.24.7.6., Consistency of Reviews

Case review results are entered into a web-based Data Collection Instrument
(DCI) on the Quality Review System (NQRS & EQRS).
See IRM 4.24.7.5.1 for DCI input procedures.

The DCI provides the principle documentation for the reviewer’s
case evaluation and conclusions. A DCI will be completed for each case reviewed
in the Embedded Quality system.

The first input section of the DCI is the data input of headers that
capture basic information about a closed case, such as “Who,
What, When, Where and Why.”
This information is categorized into four
groupings:

The next step in the case review process is the evaluation and coding
of the attributes. Reviewers of the case evaluate and code attributes that
are specific to a Specialized Code (SPRG). Excise has three SPRG’s:
Excise General, Excise 637, and FCO.

Attributes on the DCI are either required or optional and all required
attributes (in bold) must be rated “Yes”
or ”
No”
in order for the DCI to be recorded as complete if the review is “Evaluative”
.

If the review is “Evaluative Targeted”
then no attributes
or all attributes can be rated by the Reviewer. Attribute fields should be
completed if information is available to ensure an accurate quality case review.

Once the attributes have been rated, at least one reason code must be
selected for each attribute rated as not met (“No”
). The
reason code that best applies should be selected. If none apply, ”
Other”
may be selected and a narrative should be entered describing
the reason.

In addition to selecting a reason code on all attributes rated “N”
, the Reviewer is required to write a narrative in the attribute
narrative box specifically describing why a case failed a particular attribute.
Positive comments may also be entered for attributes that have been met and
are encouraged in order to provide a complete and balanced case review.

Reviewers need to be thorough in documenting case performance by providing
clear, concise, and specific descriptions of any errors in order to identify
problem areas. Positive actions should also be described in specifics. Citing
IRM or other references will add validity to the narratives. Narrative remarks
that are too general may not offer sufficient detail to allow either specific
recommendations for improvement or recognition of good performance.

Once the headers, attributes and narratives are completed, the Reviewer
should select the “Complete Review”
screen. At this point,
the EQ system notifies the Reviewer if there are any required items needed
to complete the case review and/or provides suggestions of recommended items.
The reviewer will not be able to complete the case review until all required
input is addressed.