PerformanceBased Transportation Planning

1
Performance-Based Transportation Planning
presented at the 4th National Transportation
Asset Management Workshop presented by Lance
Neumann Cambridge Systematics, Inc. September
23-25, 2001
2
Agenda

• Overview of Performance-Based Planning
• Measuring Asset Performance
• Examples of Performance Measures and Tools
• Trade-off Analysis
• Conclusions

3
What is Performance-Based Planning?

• Systematic and ongoing process
• Major features
• Goals and quantifiable objectives
• Performance measures and data
• Analysis and evaluation
• Decision support
• Monitoring and feedback

4
Linking With Objectives

• How well is the system performing?
• Implications of policies, plans, programs and
  operating strategies
• Identify opportunities for improvement
• System performance over time

5
What are some of the risks?

• Peer group comparisons may distract decision
  makers from your agencys mission-critical
  activities and priorities
• Unrealistic performance targets may create false
  expectations, or result in gaming
• External factors will affect consequences of
  decisions and influence measured results as well
• Decision makers may ignore or even mis-use
  performance information

6
Uses of Performance Measures

• Policy analysis
• Planning
• Resource allocation/programming
• Delivery/operation
• Monitoring/evaluation

7
Elements of a Performance-Based Planning Process
May result in changes to...
Over time affect...
System
Operations
Monitored
Economic Development
through...
Used to identify...
Relate to...
Evaluated with...
Leads to...
Reflected in...
Cost-
Alternative
Goals and Objectives
Evaluation
Performance
Effective
Improvement
Criteria
Measures
Strategies
Strategies
Transportation
Defines
Requires
requirements
targeted...
Provide
Sustainable Environment
Vital Economy
for...
assessment
for...
New or modified
transportation planning
Analytical
Data
elements to provide
Methods
performance-based
planning process
Utilized by...
8
Measuring Asset Performance

• Effective Asset Management Requires
• Goals that lead to mission accomplished
• e.g., reduce motor vehicle crashes, injuries and
  fatalities
• Unambiguous, quantifiable objectives
• e.g., reduce the fatal crash rate per 100MVM
  from 1.38 to 1.35 by the year 2005
• Performance measures that directly align with
  objective
• e.g., fatal crashes per 100MVM

9
Asset Management Elements

• Asset Inventory
• Condition/Service Assessment
• Condition/Service Deterioration Over Time
• Condition/Service Targets Related to Policy Goals
  
• Budget Required to Meet Condition/Service Targets
• Tradeoff Analysis

10
Management Systems

• Key tool for Asset Management and Generating
  Performance Information
• Use of management systems to date has been
  limited
• Increasing credibility, acceptance, and use is a
  key challenge

11
Use of Management Systems
PMS
BMS
Under Development 100 100 In Use 84
76 Establish Goals and Objectives 57 51 Set
Program Funding 30 16 Project Priority
Setting 54 49 Capital/Maintenance Tradeoff
27 11
12
Examples
13
Performance Measures Generated by Pontis

• Bridge component level
• Element-level condition data ( in each state)
• NBI Ratings for superstructure, substructure,
  deck, and culvert condition, and deck geometry
• Bridge level
• Health Index - varies with element condition and
  cost
• NBI Ratings for structural evaluation and
  underclearance
• Sufficiency Rating
• Structural Deficiency/Functionally Obsolete
  (SD/FO) status

14
Pontis Performance Measures (continued)

• Network level
• Health index
• Sufficiency ratings
• SD/FO status
• Bridge replacement and rehabilitation funding
  eligibility

15
Use Scenario Testing Capabilities of Systems
16
Expected Performance as a Function of Budget
17
Similar Curves Generated with Actual Data from
Arizonas PMS
18
Performance Measures for Highway Maintenance

• Growing use of maintenance quality assurance (QA)
  techniques
• Sample surveys and condition assessments of
  maintained highway features
• Maintenance Levels of Service (LOS) based on
  condition and impact to customers
• Use of LOS in performance-based budgeting
• Moves toward integrating maintenance and other
  information (e.g., pavement and bridge
  management)
• Several DOTs have formalized QA approaches (e.g.,
  Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Maryland,
  Washington)
• Greater integration with operational aspects
  likely in future

19
Example LOS for Road Surface (CDOT)
20
Example of Program-Level LOS and Budget, Current
and Projected Target (CDOT)
21
Example Chart of Program Budget (CDOT)
22
CDOTs Program Investment Category Structure
Reflect Performance in terms of Mobility, Safety,
System Quality
Capital-Maintenance Tradeoffs
Investment-Category and Program Tradeoffs
Regarding Transportation System Performance
23
Examples of Performance Measures

• System quality
• Pavement surface condition rating of fair or
  better
• Bridge sufficiency rating of fair or better
• Bridge needs versus programmed work, on-system
  and off-system
• Maintenance condition survey (current Level of
  Service) for preservation activities
• Safety
• Reductions in statewide crash rates by category
  of accident
• Customer perceptions of CDOTs safety activities

24
Examples of Proposed Performance Measures

• Mobility
• Proposed performance measures
• Roadway Congestion Index and newer Travel Rate
  Index
• Number of road closures by closure type
• Duration of road closures by closure type
• Customer perception of travel time variability

25
TRADEOFFS
26
What is a Tradeoff?

• Question How much resource do I allocate to
  program A versus program B?
• Tradeoff issue What are the consequences of a
  particular allocation of resources to A and
  B?
• Appropriate choice The allocation and set of
  consequences that the decision-maker prefers

27
Tradeoffs in Asset Management
28
Key Elements of a Tradeoff Analysis

• Defined resource or investment areas or programs
• Objectives and measures to assess performance
  within each program
• A method to predict performance results from
  different levels of investment in each program
• A method to compare investments across programs

29
Generalized Tradeoff Analysis Framework
Key Goals and Objectives
Characteristics of Objectives Measurable
Specific Well-defined Relevant
Horizontal Alignment for Resource Area Tradeoffs
Resource Area A Objective 1 Criteria for Area
A Criteria for Area A Objective 2 Criteria for
Area A Criteria for Area A ...
Resource Area B Objective 1 Criteria for Area
B Criteria for Area B Objective 2 Criteria for
Area B Criteria for Area B ...
Resource Area C Objective 1 Criteria for Area
C Criteria for Area C Objective 2 Criteria for
Area C Criteria for Area C ...
Resource Area .. Objective 1 Criteria Criteria O
bjective 2 Criteria Criteria ...
Vertical Alignment for Selecting Relevant Criteria
What are Resource Areas?
Modes Agency Functions User Groups Geographic
Areas Key Travel Corridors Objectives
Highway, transit, ferry, aviation,
etc. Construction, maintenance, admin.,
etc. Commuters, tourists, shippers,
etc. Districts, urban, rural, etc. Intercity,
intermodal, etc. Preservation, mobility, safety,
etc.
30
Techniques That May Support Some Program
Tradeoffs

• Economic B/C
• Modified B/C or scoring approaches
• Goal achievement indicators
• Integrated system performance objectives and an
  evaluation matrix
• Customer satisfaction and market research
  techniques

31
Structured Analysis of Impacts of Program
Alternatives
-20
-20
-10
-10
Baseline
Baseline
10
10
B 20
A 20
Budget Level
Choices A and B base A 10, B -10 A 20 B
-20 etc.
32
Conclusions

• Basic Principles of Performance-Based Planning
  Apply to Asset Management
• Key Steps Required
• Clear objectives and performance measures for
  each asset class or investment area
• Data and methods to predict performance
  consequences of different investment levels
• Structured approach for evaluating tradeoffs
• Many agencies implementing components of
  performance-based planning, programming and
  operations approaches