International Scan: Linking Transportation Performance and ...

24
National Cooperative Highway Research Program American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration International Scan: Linking Transportation Performance and Accountability American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Federal Highway Administration Federal Transit Administration National Cooperative Highway Research Program Webinar Presentation April 22, 2010

Transcript of International Scan: Linking Transportation Performance and ...

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

International Scan:Linking Transportation Performance and Accountability

American Association of State Highway and Transportation OfficialsFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

National Cooperative Highway Research ProgramWebinar Presentation

April 22, 2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

2

Background of the Scan The US Congress is considering a performance management approach

for Federal transportation programs and their grant recipients

State DOTs, transit agencies and MPOs would be accountable for achieving performance targets in exchange for continued Federal funding

DOTs, transit agencies and MPOs all use some form of performance measurement

However, fewer agencies have performance management systems thatlink performance to project-selection and budget processes

We wanted to learn from the experience in Sweden, the UK, Australia and New Zealand who use performance management for surface transportation programs

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

3

Purpose of the Scan Seek examples of goals

translated into agency performance measures

Find ways to effectively set performance measures based on public, legislative input

Find examples of performance tied to budgets

Find ways agencies can demonstrate accountability through performance measures

Seek advice on what works, what doesn’t

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Final Report

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 44/20/2010

It is available at: http://www.internatio

nal.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf

We will repeat this web address at the end of this presentation

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

5

Where We Went The Swedish Road

Administration The British Department for

Transport The New South Wales Road

and Traffic Administration in Sydney, Australia

The Victoria Department of Transport and Vic Roads in Melbourne, Australia

The Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads in Brisbane, Australia

The New Zealand Transport Agency

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

6

Scan Team Members State DOT

Carlos Braceras, Scan Co-Chair and Deputy Director, Utah State DOT

Daniela Bremmer, Director, Strategic Assessment, Washington State DOT

Leon Hank, Chief Administrative Officer, Michigan State DOT

Federal Highways and Federal Transit

Robert Tally, Jr., Scan Co-Chair and Indiana Division Administrator, FHWA

Jim March, Acting Director Office of Transportation Policy Studies, FHWA

Kristine Leiphart, Deputy Associate Administrator, FTA

Connie P. Yew, Stewardship/Oversight Team Leader, Office of Infrastructure, FHWA

J. Woody Stanley, Team Leader Strategic Initiatives Team

Local/MPO Jane Hayse, Chief Transportation Planning Division,

Atlanta Regional Commission

AASHTO Tony Kane, Director Engineering and Technical Services,

AASHTO

Private Sector Steven Pickrell, Senior Vice President, Cambridge

Systematics

Other Jenne Van der Velde, Strategic Advisor, Public

Works and Water Management, Dutch Ministry of Transport

Scan Logistics/Recorder Jake Almborg, American Trade Initiatives

Gordon Proctor, Report Facilitator

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

7

The Observations Were: National goals were clearly ingrained into

transportation agency performance management systems

Broad national goals – not hard, specific targets – were used

Budgets and targets were not linked, but…. Ambitious national visions spurred investment Reporting was constant, improvement was

iterative http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pu

bs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

Considerations

Carlos Braceras

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

9

Considerations: Set a limited number of high-level transportation

policy goals with a few, clearly articulated, measures and targets

Collaborate with transportation agencies to negotiate targets (based on their local priorities) which implement the national goals and measures

Track, measure and report performance in clear language appropriate for the audience

Emphasize incentives, instead of penalties Understand that the true benefit of performance

management is achieving long term improvement to the decision and investment process

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

10

Considerations The major policy goals were remarkably

consistent;─ Safety;─ System preservation;─ Economic growth;─ Environmental sustainability;─ System operations (congestion and trip

reliability). Asset management was strong

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

11

Considerations Less is more, in

terms of measures─ Evolution was from

many measures to fewer

─ Agencies have extensive metrics, but few targets are required by the central government (e.g. safety and greenhouse gases)

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

12

Considerations

‘Do it with people, not to them’─ Performance targets are negotiated, not imposed─ The metrics are benchmarks for continuous

improvement, rather than milestones for penalty.─ Performance agreements across agencies are

common─ Managing to short term targets can compromise

progress toward long-term goals

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

13

Considerations Metrics are translated into personal terms

─ ‘The Journey Home’─ ‘We Are Community Builders’─ ‘We are a travel agency’─ ‘Support for the Journey’─ Support for ‘Active Travel’ of walking, cycling

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

14

Considerations PM takes time

─ Agencies had systems for more than a decade

─ PM is long-term, iterative process Important Outcomes Difficult to Measure

─ Environment, economy, quality of life measures are elusive

Candor can earn criticism─ Media, politics can exploit candid reporting

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

15

Considerations Continuous communication was found

between agencies, Ministries and parliament

Service Level Agreements, other forms of negotiations, were used

Reporting and communication were on-going

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

16

In other words….

Less is more Do it together Use compelling language Carrots instead of sticks Not a black box

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

IMPLEMENTATION PRIORITIES

Dr. Anthony KaneAASHTO

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

18

Main Implementation Audiences

Key Federal , State and local policymakers , including the US Congress

State DOTs, Local government and MPO’s ---transport leaders and operators

Performance Management professionals and researchers

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Top 10 Implementation Priorities1. Brief Congressional Staff

─ House—done─ H and S—after the final report is printed

2. Conduct DOT CEO Workshop(s)─ Oct 2009─ Feb 2010─ TBD

3. Present scan findings to other key stakeholder groups

─ TRB, Universities,USDOT,OMB,GAO─ AASHTO,AMPO,NACE,APWA ,APTA,etc.

19http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pu

bs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Top 10 Implementation Priorities4. Develop illustrative ways to present

performance information─ NCHRP 20-24 (37 F&G )

5. Develop a performance management website

─ NCHRP 20-24 (37 F ) plus new solicitation of the state DOTS

6. Conduct peer reviews on performance management

20http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pu

bs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Top 10 Implementation Priorities

7. Evaluate comparative safety, and greenhouse gas emission efforts from Australia and Europe

─ Scan follow-up funds

8. Synthesize best practices in benefit-cost analysisfrom abroad

─ FHWA and other contract resources

9. Case study report on the use of British public service agreements

─ FHWA and other contract resources

21http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pu

bs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Top 10 Implementation Priorities

10. Development of an R&D performance management road map (e.g.)10.1 Document Australian risk management

practices10.2 Develop guidance for measuring

sustainability and livability10.3 Performance Management Leadership

Module10.4. Etc.(NCHRP 20-24 (75)—panel to be named)

22http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pu

bs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Follow-up Implementation Contacts

Tony Kane [email protected] Jim March [email protected] for executive summary of report:

http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10009/pl10009.pdf

23http://www.international.fhwa.dot.gov/pu

bs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf 4/20/2010

National Cooperative Highway Research Program

U.S. Department of TransportationFederal Highway AdministrationFederal Transit Administration

American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials

Questions? Report is available

at: http://www.internatio

nal.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl10011/pl10011.pdf