Performance Measures National Best Practices Spencer Stevens MI Transportation Planning Association August 8, 2014

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Performance Measures National Best Practices Spencer Stevens MI Transportation Planning Association August 8, 2014"


1 Performance Measures National Best Practices Spencer Stevens MI Transportation Planning Association August 8, 2014

2 Overview of Performance Management Broad consensus that performance management is important for accountability and transparency in the transportation industry Most agencies track and report various aspects of system and agency performance Need to integrate performance management principles into planning and programming May be a requirement for a consistent national approach 2

3 MAP-21 Background-Performance National Goals Focuses the Federal aid program on 7 goals supported through the statewide and metropolitan planning process. Measures USDOT to establish performance measures through rulemaking Targets - All States, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), and public transportation agencies required to establish targets for each of the measures established by USDOT. Plans All States, MPOs, and public transportation agencies are required to develop a number of plans to document strategies and investments to address performance needs. Reports All States, MPOs, and public transportation agencies are required to report on progress toward the achievement of their targets. Accountability All States will be held accountable to making significant progress toward the achievement of their targets established for the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) and the Highway Safety Improvement 3

4 10 Inter-related rules 4

5 10 Inter-related Rules Highway Safety Programs Grants (NHTSA) Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) (FHWA) Metro and Statewide Planning (FHWA-FTA) Safety Performance Measures (FHWA) Infrastructure Performance Measures (FHWA) System Performance Measures (FHWA) Highway Asset Management Plan (FHWA) Transit Asset Management (FTA) National Transit Safety Program (FTA) Transit Agency Safety Plan (FTA) 5

6 Proposal Comment Periods Transportation Performance Management March April May June July August September HSIP Safety PM Planning Asset Management Infrastructure PM System Performance+ PM

7 Rollout of NPRMs For each NPRM, FHWA plans to have: NPRM Informational launch events An informational session at relevant national conferences, upon request Additional supplementary webinars scheduled to focus on details of target setting, progress achievement and/or other requirements Comments will not be accepted during these informational sessions. All Public Comments should be submitted through the E-docket for consideration in the final regulation Public comment periods will be a minimum of 90 days for all NPRMs except the HSIP and TAMP NPRMs which is 60 days. 7

8 NPRM Status Performance Area / Element NPRM Target Safety Measures Status I: Safety Measures March 11, 2014 Infrastructure Condition Highway Safety Improvement Program *60 day comment Asset period. Management Plan March 28, 2014 Metro and System Statewide Performance Planning June 2, 2014 Planning Status II: Infrastructure Condition Measures Public Transportation Highway Asset Management Plan *60 day comment period. Status III: System Performance+ Measures Public Transportation ANPRM closed on 1/2/2014 June 2,

9 Quality Data and Public Involvement PLANNING Strategic Direction Where do we want to go? Goals and Objectives Performance Measures Analysis How are we going to get there? Identify Trends and Targets Identify Strategies and Analyze Alternatives Develop Investment Priorities Investment Plan Monitoring Resource Allocation Evaluation Program of Projects Reporting Programming What will it take? Implementation and Evaluation How did we do? PERFORMANCE-BASED PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING

10 Objectives Objective = specific, measurable statement that supports achievement of a goal Example: Reduce pedestrian fatalities (by 10 percent by 2025) Types of objectives: Outcome: reflects concerns of the public (e.g., incident-based delay) Output: reflects actions that affect outcomes (e.g., clearance time of incidents) Activity: reflects actions taken by transportation agencies (e.g., number of cameras tracking system conditions) It is critical to involve the public in developing goals and objectives as a strategic foundation for a performancebased approach to decision-making

11 SMART Objectives Specific: Sufficiently descriptive but not dictating approach Measurable: Quantitative (number, degree) Agreed: Consensus on meaning and value Realistic: Can be accomplished with expected resources Time-bound: Identifies timeframe 11

12 Maryland SHA Objectives FY Business Plan Key Performance Area Safety Example SMART Objectives Reduce the annual number of traffic related fatalities on all roads in MD from 592 in 2008 to 475 or fewer (19.8% reduction) by December 31, 2015 Mobility/Economy Achieve an annual user cost savings of at least $1.1 billion as a result of congestion management System Preservation and Maintenance Maintain annually at least 84% of the SHA pavement network in acceptable overall pavement condition (cracking, rutting, and ride) 12

13 Chattanooga TPO 2040 RTP Region to Region Community to Region Within Community Region to Region Objectives Preserve, maintain, and improve existing infrastructure before adding new capacity Support continued economic growth of the region by improving intermodal connections that reduce delay for both people and goods Reduce delay on critical regional thoroughfares with minimal impact to community, historic and environmental resources Improve the efficiency and reliability of freight, cargo, and goods movement by reducing delay on corridors critical to freight movement Improve travel time reliability through improved system operations 13

14 Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission MTP View other MORPC Goals and Objectives: 14

15 SEMCOG: Incorporating Measures into the Planning Process Program Area Pavement Preservation Performance Measure Percent of pavement in good or fair condition Highway Capacity Hours of delay per 1,000 vehicle miles Bridge Preservation Percent of bridges in good or fair condition Safety Fatalities per 100 million vehicle miles Transit Nonmotorized Extent of transit network Population % within ½ mile of a facility 15

16 Target Setting Key question Aspirational or vision-based targets vs. evidence-based targets No single approach appropriate for all areas MAP-21 requires evidence-based targets what do you expect to achieve 16

17 Performance Targets States must coordinate, to the maximum extent practical with relevant MPOs in selecting a target to ensure for consistency MPOs must coordinate, to the maximum extent practical, with the relevant State/s in selecting a target to ensure consistency Coordination required with public transportation providers, to the maximum extent practical. States and MPOs must integrate other performance plans into the planning process Federal Transit MAP-21: Administration Performance

18 MTC Targets for Sustainable Community Strategy/RTP Goal Area: Transportation System Effectiveness Targets Decrease average per-trip travel time by 10% Increase local road pavement condition (PCI) to 75 or better Decrease distressed lane-miles of state highways to less than 10% of total lane-miles Reduce average transit asset age to 50% of useful life 18

19 Minnesota DOT Target Example 19

20 Example Mn/DOT Multimodal Plan Investment Plans Performance Monitoring Supports Minnesota GO 50-year vision. Establishes objectives & strategies to guide investment Integrates performance planning & risk assessment to establish priorities for projected funding. Measures impact of investments on performance targets. Regular review of performance in each policy area 20

21 Reporting Examples Quarterly Performance Scorecard North Carolina DOT 2013 Annual Attainment Report Maryland DOT The Gray Notebook Washington DOT State of the System 2005 Bay Area Transportation Dashboard Virginia DOT State of the System Oregon DOT Tracker Missouri DOT 21

22 Maryland SHA SHSP Example Zero Fatality Goal Reduce fatalities and serious injuries in half by E approach to Safety Engineering Education Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Enforcement 6 Emphasis Areas Pedestrian Occupant Protection Aggressive Driving Impaired Driving Distracted Driving Infrastructure 22

23 Additional FHWA Resources MAP-21 Web Site Transportation Performance Management Web Site Performance Measure Rulemaking Direct Contact to FHWA FHWA Safety Program website Performance-based Planning and Programming 23

24 Thank you Spencer Stevens Acting Team Leader FHWA Office of Planning Oversight & Stewardship Team 202/