Performance Management at WSDOT: How it supports GMAP and Performance Audits

1. Performance Management at WSDOT:How it supports GMAP and Performance Audits Daniela Bremmer Director of Strategic Assessment Washington State Department of Transportation “Measuring Up” Association of Government Accountants (AGA) Olympia Chapter Olympia , WA November 2, 2006

2. What funds are available for WSDOT to deliver its programs for 2005-07? WSDOT Profile • 7,000 employees • Own, manage and maintain: • 20,000 miles of state highway lanes (86 m. vehicle miles traveled/day) • 3,400 state bridges • 28 ferry vessels and 20 terminals (24 m. passengers/year) • Amtrak Cascades state supported passenger rail (420,000 passengers/year) • Grain Train (89 grain cars) • WSDOT is currently delivering the largest infrastructure program in state’s history

3. WSDOT’s Accountability Challenge : …….To be a high performance organization credible with and accountable to the Governor, Legislature, taxpayers and transportation delivery partners across the state…..

4. Background: Where did we start? WSDOT, January 2001: An Agency In Crisis: Political and Public Pressures • 30% revenue erosion from voter cutback (MVET) on transportation taxes. • Blue Ribbon Commission and gubernatorial concerns over departmental inefficiency and lack of accountability • Media/talk show preoccupation with state’s “transportation crisis” • Legislature embroiled in partisan and regional contentions • WSDOT employee morale in the tank April 2001, Secretary Doug MacDonald was hired with the mandate to enhance accountability

5. Management Adaptive Performance Measurement Governor/ Legislature Media/ Public WSDOT’s approach and how the Gray Notebook fits into the challenge WSDOT’s Strategic Approach as of April 2001 • Accountability and Transparency • Comprehensive Performance Analysis and Reporting • Adaptive and Dynamic Performance Measurement Tool:WSDOT’s quarterly performance report • “Measures, Markers and Mileposts”, also referred to asthe Gray Notebook (GNB)

6. Responses from the media and transportation partners were encouraging “These reports are among the best I’ve seen in Washington state government for using performance measurement data to tell the agency’s story.” The Washington State Office of Financial Management July 2001 “MacDonald is adopting performance benchmarks within his agency, a recommendation high on the list of the governor’s Blue Ribbon Commission on Transportation last year” Seattle P-I November 2001 “As MacDonald’s style takes hold at DOT, we can hope for a change in perception. Accountability builds trust and candor, removes mysteries….” “The Gray Notebook…is as addictive in the same manner as a copy of the The World Almanac.” Puget Sound Business Journal May 2002 “The Measures, Markers and Mileposts publication Is education in action. If you are not checking this out, you are missing out.” Washington Highway Users Federation May 2002 “WSDOT’s Gray Notebook is second to none in the country for reporting performance measures.” Christine Johnson FHWA Director of Field Services November 2002

7. Today : How WSDOT’s Performance Management program supports these GMAP needs 1. Communicate clear, relevant and easy-to-understand measures 2. Demonstrate how programs contribute to priorities 3. Gather, monitor and analyze program data 4. Evaluate effectiveness of programs 5. Hold regular problem-solving sessions 6. Allocate resources based on strategies that work 7. Regularly report to Governor on performance

8. Incident Response: Improving Clearance Times • Analysis - Issues Affecting Clearance Time: • Commercial vehicle involved; • Circumstances, such as fatal injury, and/or criminal collision investigations; • Contacting additional entities required for vehicle/cargo and scene recovery and time required for their work, such as: • EMS Extrications • Fire/Hazardous Material Units • Department of Ecology • Tow truck (class C & S tows for semi-truck removal) • Medical Examiner / Coroner required for transport of deceased. Total Number of WSDOT Responses to all Recorded Incidents and Average Clearance Time • Actions: • Request a technology upgrade of our existing collision investigation tools, Bob Maki, WSP, Budget Decision Package September 2006. • Reinvigorate WSDOT and WSP’s Traffic Incident Management (TIM) training program with Fire Chiefs, local law enforcement and hazmat responders. Fred Fakkema, WSP and Rick Phillips, WSDOT. • Reconvene statewide TIM Committee, October 2006. • Pursue funding for statewide incident management conference, July 2007. • Increase the number of counties allowing offsite extrications of deceased by July 2007. Mike DePalma, WSP and Rick Phillips, WSDOT. • WSP, WSDOT, and the Thurston County Coroner signed the state’s first formalized agreement in April 2006. • WSP and WSDOT will develop consistent definitions and measurement tools to evaluate the effectiveness of Incident Response Programs. Tim Hannah, WSP and Anna Yamada, WSDOT, December 2006. • Develop Incremental Performance Targets, December 2006. • 1. Economic Costs • In 2003, the total cost of traffic congestion in the greater Seattle • area was over $1.2 billion. Savings due to traffic operations, • including Incident Response, were estimated at $107 million. • Source: Texas Transportation Institution • 2. Safety • Protects injured parties at an incident from further injury • Reduces exposure of on-scene responders • Helps prevent secondary collisions • 3. Throughput / Efficiency On a three-lane divided freeway: • A car on a shoulder can reduce total throughput by 20%; • A disabled car blocking one lane can reduce throughput by 50%; • An accident blocking two lanes can reduce total throughput by 85%. • Source: Texas Transportation Institution WHAT WORKED WELL

9. Reducing Bottlenecks and Chokepoints I-405/SR 167 Ramp Separation Project Congestion Benefits: Before and After Analysis Based on this performance measure analysis, citizens would recover the cost of this project ($10M) in the value of avoided travel delay in just over two years. WSDOT has been able to develop this kind of “before” and “after” congestion reduction benefits demonstration for only a very small number of projects. Source: Gray Notebook September, 2004 WHAT DIDN’’T WORK WELL

10. 31% increase in cost from the information presented in May 2006 – based on 2005 average How is WSDOT Addressing the Sharp Run-Up in Construction Costs? WHAT DIDN’’T WORK WELL Same info simplified WORKED WELL

11. In turn: How GMAP supports WSDOT’s Performance Management Process • Provides broader audience for WSDOT management successes, challenges and needs • Good venue to engage Governor and cabinet members in problem solving process • Explore alternative formats and levels of detail to present information to an audience that is constrained by time and involved in many different issues • Enhances partnerships and coordination with other cabinet agencies • Receives input from OMAP & others doing similar work

12. Tangible Benefits of Consistent Performance Management and Reporting Enhanced WSDOT credibility and accountability supports positive funding considerations: 2003 State Gas Tax Increase • Transportation Revenue Package. 5 cents/gallon gas tax increase took effect July 1, 2003 2005 State Gas Tax Increase • Transportation Revenue Package. 9.5 cents/gallon gas tax increase (phased in over three years). July 1, 2005 Nov 2005: I-912 • Through a simple majority vote, Washington State citizen had a choice to eliminate the 9.5 cents gas tax that was passed by the 2005 WA Legislature. • 47% voted YES – eliminate the new gas tax • 53% voted NO – don’t eliminate the new gas tax

13. What made the difference? • History of transparency and accountability • Supportive Governor and Legislature • Hurricane Katrina • Public GMAP reporting combined with continued Performance Communication in the Gray Notebook, including the “On –Time” and “On- Budget” Delivery Message for Nickel Projects completed to that date

14. Statewide Transportation Benchmarks Governor’s Priorities of Government (POG) Performance Based Budgeting for the state Office of Financial Management (OFM) Federal Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Performance Audits by: state Transportation Performance Audit Board (TPAB), Joint Legislative Review Committee (JLARC) and the State Auditor And feeds many special reports and communication needs……………… “One Stop Shopping”— In addition to being a management and accountability tool and basis for GMAP, the Gray Notebook meets multiple State and Federal performance reporting needs:

15. Performance Audits at WSDOT • Department of Transportation Ferry System Performance Audit, JLARC, 1998 • Department of Transportation Highways and Rail Programs Performance Audit, JLARC, 1998 • Performance Audit of the Washington State Ferry System Capital Program, OFM,2001 • Performance Measurement Audit and Report of WSDOT, November 12, 2004, TPAB • Overview Audit of WSDOT Capital Project Management January 21, 2005, TPAB • Overview Audit of Environmental Permitting for Transportation Projects January 21, 2005, TPAB • Review of Accountability Mechanisms for WSDOT August 7, 2005, TPAB • Business Process Review of Environmental Permitting for Transportation Projects October 7, 2005, TPAB • Review of Transportation Goals, Benchmarks and Ten-Year Investment Criteria and Process February 15, 2006, TPAB • Audit of Port Angeles Graving Dock Project, TPAB-JLARC, June 2006 • Review of Transportation Financing Methods, Joint Transportation Committee, November 2006 • Washington State Ferry System, Joint Transportation Committee, January 2007 • Overhead and Administrative Costs Performance Audit, SAO, Spring 2007 • Ferries Division Performance Audit, SAO, Spring 2007 • Highway Program Performance Audit, SAO, Spring 2007 • Congestion and Performance Measures Performance Audit , SAO, October 31, 2007

16. Performance Management and Performance Audits: Lesson’s to Date • Early and frequent communication • Knowledge and expertise of agency staff • Performance measures, results and data are helpful • Executive management involvement is needed • Apply strict standards of quality control of data and analysis agency provides as well as receives back • Difficult to balance with day-to-day work; time consuming and resource intensive • Wrong questions – right answers? • Having staff person managing GMAP and Audit responses is a plus • PA overload ..”too much of a good thing?”.

17. So the Challenge Continues to be .. …….A high performance organization credible with and accountable to the Governor, Legislature, taxpayers and transportation delivery partners across the state…..

18. Resource Page • WSDOT’s overall Accountability site: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability/ • WSDOT’s GMAP site: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability/publications/default.htm • WSDOT”s Gray Notebook: http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/accountability/Archives/GrayNotebookJun-06.pdf • Contact: Eric Thomas WSDOT, GMAP & Performance Audit Reporting Manager (360) 705-7936 thomaer@wsdot.wa.gov • Daniela Bremmer • WSDOT, Director of Strategic Assessment • (360) 705-7953 • bremmed@wsdot.wa.go