SCOPM Overview

Performance Management:The Game Changer

SCOPT Business MeetingDecember 7, 2010

Savannah, GA

Agenda

2

1. Introduction

2. Performance Measurement Framework

3. SCOPM Task Forces

4. Future Activities

5. Questions and Answers

Introduction

• History– Created in February 2008– Charge: Provide State DOTs the expertise and resources to support

performance based management and to create a results-driven environment to maximize the performance of both transportation systems and organizations.

• 11 task forces created:– 9 technical task forces– 2 programmatic task forces– Each lead by a member of the SCOPM

SCOPM Leadership

Chair & Preservation TFKirk SteudleMichigan DOT

Safety TFNancy RichardsonIowa DOT

Freight & Economic Development TFTom SorelMinnesota DOT

Comparative Perf. MeasuresDaniela BremmerWashington DOT

Co-ChairPaula HammondWashington DOT

Congestion & Operations TFSteve SimmonsTexas DOT

Comparative Perf. MeasuresMara CampbellMissouri DOT

Connectivity TFFrancis ZieglerNorth Dakota DOT

Planning & Programming ProcessDeb MillerKansas DOT

EnvironmentMatt GarrettOregon DOT

Transit TF & Livability TFare being created

AASHTO Reauthorization Proposal

In 2008, reauthorization proposal adopted. Included a national performance measurement program focused on critical national transportation goals.

Focus attention on key national

goals

More transparency & accountability for the federal

program

Build on the PM work

already in State DOTs

Make the case for a

larger Federal program

Drive better performance

through comparative PM program

Performance targets set in cooperation

w/partners & stakeholders

National Performance Measurement Program

Key elements of the program include:

and NOT include:

National Goals by Congress &

Secretary of Transportation

PMs established through a

collaborative process

For each state – build on the work already done on PMs

Consistent monitoring & reporting of

actual results

Performance measures or

targets established in

legislation

Tying PMs and/or targets

to funding

Disincentives that penalizes

states

Interstate Commerce: Supporting America’s global competitiveness, growth in productivity, economic development, and national defense

through an improved multi-modal freight system

Environment: Enhancing community quality of life

and minimizing impacts on the environment and

global climate change

System Operations: Using advanced management techniques and technologies to assure travel reliability and provide effective

emergency response in disasters

Safety: Reducing traffic fatalities, serious injuries,

and property loss

National Goals

Preservation and Renewal: Preserving highway, transit, and

rail systems so they last for generations to come

Congestion Reduction and Connectivity for Urban and Rural Areas: Improving the ability of highway, transit, and rail to improve personal

mobility, connectivity, and accessibility

Technical Task Forces

• Technical task forces created centered around:1. Safety2. Pavement Preservation3. Bridge Preservation4. Congestion/Operations5. Connectivity6. Environment7. Freight/Economic Competitiveness8. Transit9. Livability

• Offered 2-4 performance indicators in each key area– Working with relevant stakeholders to ensure recommendations could be

embraced as national performance metrics.– Developed a tiered approach.

Readiness Criteria

9

CriteriaInitial Measures –

Ready for Deployment

General consensus on the definition of the measure

Common or centralized approach to data collection in place

Availability of consistent data across states established through a national comparative analysis or other research effort

Candidate Initial Set of Performance Measures for Rollout

10

Goal Area Initial Measures – Ready for Deployment

Safety Multiple year moving average of thenumber of fatalities

Pavement Preservation NHS IRI

Bridge Preservation Deck Area of structurally deficient bridges on NHS

Congestion/Operations Speed based metric

Connectivity No initial measures

Environment No initial measures

Freight/Economic Competitiveness

Speed/travel time on significant freight corridors (SFC)Reliability on SFCs

Transit No initial measures

Livability No initial measures

Programmatic Task Forces

• Planning and Programming– Focus on implementation of performance measures into the planning and programming

process– Engaging Metropolitan and Regional Planning Organizations

• Comparative Performance Measurement Efforts– Demonstrate state DOTs can compare performance in areas key to every DOT’s mission.

National Forum on Performance-Based Planning and Programming

• Co-Sponsored/Organized by AASHTO, APTA, AMPO, NADO, FHWA, FTA

• Funded by FHWA, FTA, AASHTO thru NCHRP 20-24 (58) and the Volpe Center

• Participants equally divided among State DOTs, MPOs and transit agencies with some representation of rural planning agencies as well

• Two and a half day meeting in Dallas (Sept 13-15, 2010)12

Key Themes and Issues

Positive “vibe”

Better education and

communication

Connection to funding

Stronger link between LRPs and programs

Targets

Importance of a national

performance measures program

A Key Ingredient

Collaboration

Share information on

practices of better

performing states

Understand current state of the data –

work towards common

definitions and measurement

practices

Provide states with

comparative view of

performance relative to

peers

Useful practices and

sharing of knowledge and

self - improvement is the goal - not punishment

Get buy-in from states, agree on

guidelines or standards for

comparability – qualify

measures for Tier 1 status

Comparative Performance Measures Program

15

O B J E C T I V E S

RELATIONS TO NATIONAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES

CPM provides valuable input

for development

of national performance

measures

Gain “on the ground”

experience working with

available data

Involve states in building

consensus around

measures

Vet candidate national

measures

Has allowed states to get ahead of the curve to help influence the authorizing

environment

Round 2

16

Comparative Performance Measurement Projects

Bridge ConditionIncident

Response

CPM InfrastructureNCHRP 20-24(37F)

- Framework & functional description for comparative performance database & analysis infrastructure

- Implementation and stewardship approach for the database & web site

Technical Standards & GuidanceNCHRP 20-24(37G)

- Tier 1 Measure definitions, calculation methods, reporting formats

- Action needed to progress Tiers 2&3

- Implementation guidance for nationwide performance program implementation

Future Activities

• Complete technical guidance framework

• Adopt technical guidance framework for each of the goal areas and performance measures

• Support state data collection efforts

• Operationalize/Implement the use of national performance measures in the decision-making process

• SCOPM will collectively look at the integration of other modes in the performance measures