DISSEMINATION OF NCHRP DOMESTIC SCAN 14-01: LEADING ...

[Pages:126]SCAN TEAM REPORT NCHRP Project 20-44 (05)

DISSEMINATION OF NCHRP DOMESTIC SCAN 14-01: LEADING MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN DETERMINING FUNDING LEVELS FOR MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION

Supported by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program

The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 20-44, Task 05, National Cooperative Highway Research Program. SPECIAL NOTE: This report IS NOT an official publication of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION

Intro-ii

Acknowledgments

The work described in this document was conducted as part of NCHRP Project 20-44, Task 05, Dissemination of NCHRP Domestic Scan 14-01: Leading Management Practices in Determining Funding Levels for Maintenance and Preservation. This task was proposed in support of the dissemination activities developed by the scan team that participated in Domestic Scan 14-01, Leading Management Practices in Determining Funding Levels for Maintenance and Preservation, under NCHRP 20-68A ? U.S. Domestic Scan Program. The Domestic Scan Program is intended to accelerate beneficial innovation in transportation by facilitating information sharing and technology exchange among the states and other transportation agencies and identifying actionable items of common interest. Further information on the NCHRP 20-68A U.S. Domestic Scan program is available at: .

The NCHRP 20-44 program provides funding to help facilitate the implementation of NCHRP research results. Funding requests are reviewed and approved by a panel. This peer exchange was proposed under the NCHRP 20-44 program to advance the use of maintenance performance data to improving maintenance funding, since the scan found that only three state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) were using maintenance performance data to support the statewide allocation of funding for maintenance activities. Several additional state DOTs use maintenance performance data to allocate funds to districts but the degree to which performance data is used varies widely.

The report was prepared by many of the original members of the scan team (listed below) who volunteered to serve as the steering committee responsible for organizing and conducting the peer exchange. Peer exchange planning and logistics were managed by Arora and Associates, P.C. Harry Capers served as the principal investigator and Melissa Jiang provided valuable support to the team. In addition, Greg Waidley, CTC and Associates, LLC, provided implementation support to the scan team throughout the planning and conduct of the peer exchange. NCHRP Project 20-44 is guided by a technical project panel and managed by Andrew Lemer, PhD, NCHRP Senior Program Officer.

NCHRP Domestic Scan Team Members Involved in the Peer Exchange Activities:

Mark McConnell, PE, Scan Team Chair, Volkert (Mississippi DOT, retired) Dale Doughty, Maine DOT Laura Mester, Michigan DOT Rudy Powell, Florida DOT Tony Sullivan, Arkansas DOT Thomas Van, FHWA Katie Zimmerman, PE, Applied Pavement Technology, Inc., Subject Matter Expert

The peer exchange team is extremely grateful for the support provided by the Tennessee DOT throughout the meeting. In addition to providing the meeting space and furnishing all necessary audiovisual materials, the Tennessee DOT participants also provided shuttle service between the hotel and meeting space each day.

Disclaimer

The information in this document was taken directly from the submission of the authors. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the scan team and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its sponsoring agencies. This report has not been reviewed by and is not a report of the Transportation Research Board or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

DISSEMINATION OF NCHRP DOMESTIC SCAN 14-01: LEADING MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN DETERMINING F U N D I N G L E V E L S F O R M A I N T E N A N C E A N D P R E S E RVAT I O N

Intro-I

NCHRP Project 20-44 (05)

Dissemination of NCHRP Domestic Scan 14-01: Leading Management Practices in Determining Funding Levels for Maintenance and Preservation

REQUESTED BY THE American Association

of State Highway and Transportation Officials

PREPARED BY

Mark McConnell, PE, Scan Team Chair, Volkert (Mississippi DOT, retired) Dale Doughty, Maine Department of Transportation

Laura J. Mester, Michigan Department of Transportation Rudy Powell, Florida Department of Transportation

Tony Sullivan, Arkansas Department of Transportation Thomas Van, Federal Highway Administration

Kathryn (Katie) A. Zimmerman, PE, Applied Pavement Technology, Inc., Subject Matter Expert

PROJECT MANAGEMENT Arora and Associates, P.C.

Lawrenceville, NJ

November 2018

The information contained in this report was prepared as part of NCHRP Project 20-44, Task 05, National Cooperative Highway Research Program. SPECIAL NOTE: This report IS NOT an official publication of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, Transportation Research Board, or the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.

DISSEMINATION OF NCHRP DOMESTIC SCAN 14-01:

L E A D I N G M A N A G E M E N T P R A C T I C E S I N D E T E R M I N I N G Intro-III

F U N D I N G L E V E L S F O R M A I N T E N A N C E A N D P R E S E RVAT I O N

Table of Contents

Abbreviations and Acronyms.......................................................................... TOC-XI

Executive Summary.......................................................................................... ES-1

Overview....................................................................................................................................... ES-1 Summarized Findings................................................................................................................ ES-1

Data........................................................................................................................................................ ES-1 Processes............................................................................................................................................. ES-2 Staffing.................................................................................................................................................. ES-3 Technology.......................................................................................................................................... ES-3 Recommendations..................................................................................................................... ES-3 Improve the Understanding of MQA Programs in the Maintenance Community..................................................................................................ES-3 Foster Activities That Improve the Effectiveness of MQA Programs..........................ES-4 Develop Tools and Resources to Support the Increased Use of MQA Data in DOTs........................................................................................ES-4

1 Introduction.................................................................................................. 1-1

Overview....................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Peer Exchange Logistics.......................................................................................................... 1-2 Peer Exchange Participants..................................................................................................... 1-2

Original Scan 14-01 Team Members and Organizers Involved in the Peer Exchange Activities..............................................................................................................1-2

Other Peer Exchange Participants.............................................................................................1-3 Peer Exchange Agenda............................................................................................................. 1-4 Report Organization.................................................................................................................. 1-4

2 Practice Summary....................................................................................... 2-1

Survey Response Summary..................................................................................................... 2-2

3 Collecting and Maintaining Inventory and Condition Assessment Data....................................................................... 3-1

Presentation Summaries........................................................................................................... 3-1 Washington State..............................................................................................................................3-1 Mississippi............................................................................................................................................ 3-2 Tennessee............................................................................................................................................ 3-3 Maine...................................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Nevada.................................................................................................................................................. 3-5 Montana................................................................................................................................................ 3-6

Facilitated Discussion................................................................................................................ 3-7 Keeping the Inventory Current and Ensuring Data Quality.............................................3-7 Data Usage..........................................................................................................................................3-8 Staffing.................................................................................................................................................. 3-9 Sampling and Improving Inspection Efficiency....................................................................3-9

DISSEMINATION OF NCHRP DOMESTIC SCAN 14-01: LEADING MANAGEMENT PRACTICES IN DETERMINING F U N D I N G L E V E L S F O R M A I N T E N A N C E A N D P R E S E RVAT I O N

TOC-I

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Key Session Takeaways............................................................................................................. 3-10

4 Selecting Performance Measures and Setting Performance Targets................................................................................... 4-1

Presentation Summaries........................................................................................................... 4-1 Arizona.................................................................................................................................................. 4-1 Utah........................................................................................................................................................ 4-3 Florida.................................................................................................................................................... 4-4 Colorado............................................................................................................................................... 4-5

Facilitated Discussion................................................................................................................ 4-6 How Are Letter Grades for LOS Established?.......................................................................4-6 Are Maintenance Crews Over-Servicing in Some Areas?.................................................4-6 Are Customer Surveys and Crowd Sourcing Used?...........................................................4-7 How Are Targets Communicated?.............................................................................................4-7 Other Issues in Budgeting and Performance Target Setting..........................................4-7

Key Session Takeaways............................................................................................................. 4-8

5 Using Data to Evaluate Funding Needs and Allocate Funding............ 5-1

Presentation Summaries........................................................................................................... 5-1 Mississippi............................................................................................................................................ 5-1 Utah........................................................................................................................................................ 5-2 Colorado............................................................................................................................................... 5-4 Tennessee............................................................................................................................................ 5-5 Texas...................................................................................................................................................... 5-6 Facilitated Discussion......................................................................................................................5-7 Considerations in Using Historical Funding Allocations...................................................5-7 Practical Considerations in Implementing Performance-Based Budgeting.............5-8 Addressing Differences in Priorities Across a State............................................................5-8 Steps Needed to Establish Performance-Based Budgeting...........................................5-9

Key Session Takeaways............................................................................................................. 5-9

6 Building an Organizational Culture to Support Performance-Based Decisions for Maintenance..................................... 6-1

Presentation Summaries........................................................................................................... 6-1 Florida.................................................................................................................................................... 6-1 Washington State..............................................................................................................................6-1 Colorado............................................................................................................................................... 6-2

Facilitated Discussion................................................................................................................ 6-4 Workforce Issues Related to Organizational Culture.........................................................6-4 Centralized Versus Decentralized Decision-Making...........................................................6-4 Building a Performance-Based Culture...................................................................................6-5

Key Session Takeaways............................................................................................................. 6-5

TOC-II

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download