SCOPM Overview Performance Management: The Game Changer

1. SCOPM OverviewPerformance Management:The Game Changer SCOPT Business Meeting December 7, 2010 Savannah, GA

2. Agenda • Introduction • Performance Measurement Framework • SCOPM Task Forces • Future Activities • Questions and Answers 2

3. 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

4. SCOPM Leadership Chair & Preservation TF Kirk Steudle Michigan DOT Co-Chair Paula Hammond Washington DOT Connectivity TF Francis Ziegler North Dakota DOT Planning & Programming Process Deb Miller Kansas DOT Safety TF Nancy Richardson Iowa DOT Congestion & Operations TF Steve Simmons Texas DOT Freight & Economic Development TF Tom Sorel Minnesota DOT Comparative Perf. Measures Mara Campbell Missouri DOT Environment Matt Garrett Oregon DOT Comparative Perf. Measures Daniela Bremmer Washington DOT Transit TF & Livability TFare being created

5. AASHTO Reauthorization Proposal In 2008, reauthorization proposal adopted. Included a national performance measurement program focused on critical national transportation goals. More transparency & accountability for the federal program Focus attention on key national goals Make the case for a larger Federal program Build on the PM work already in State DOTs Drive better performance through comparative PM program

6. National Performance Measurement Program PMs established through a collaborative process Key elements of the program include: For each state – build on the work already done on PMs National Goals by Congress & Secretary of Transportation Performance targets set in cooperation w/partners & stakeholders Consistent monitoring & reporting of actual results and NOT include: Performance measures or targets established in legislation Tying PMs and/or targets to funding Disincentives that penalizes states

7. National Goals Interstate Commerce: Supporting America’s global competitiveness, growth in productivity, economic development, and national defense through an improved multi-modal freight system Preservation and Renewal: Preserving highway, transit, and rail systems so they last for generations to come Safety: Reducing traffic fatalities, serious injuries, and property loss Congestion Reduction and Connectivity for Urban and Rural Areas: Improving the ability of highway, transit, and rail to improve personal mobility, connectivity, and accessibility System Operations: Using advanced management techniques and technologies to assure travel reliability and provide effective emergency response in disasters Environment: Enhancing community quality of life and minimizing impacts on the environment and global climate change

8. Technical Task Forces • Technical task forces created centered around: • Safety • Pavement Preservation • Bridge Preservation • Congestion/Operations • Connectivity • Environment • Freight/Economic Competitiveness • Transit • 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.

9. Readiness Criteria 9

10. Candidate Initial Set of Performance Measures for Rollout 10

11. 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.

12. 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

13. Key Themes and Issues Better education and communication Positive “vibe” Stronger link between LRPs and programs Connection to funding Importance of a national performance measures program Targets

14. A Key Ingredient Collaboration

15. Comparative Performance Measures Program O B J E C T I V E S Get buy-in from states, agree on guidelines or standards for comparability – qualify measures for Tier 1 status Share information on practices of better performing states Useful practices and sharing of knowledge and self - improvement is the goal - not punishment Understand current state of the data – work towards common definitions and measurement practices Provide states with comparative view of performance relative to peers RELATIONS TO NATIONAL PERFORMANCE MEASURES CPM provides valuable input for development of national performance measures Has allowed states to get ahead of the curve to help influence the authorizing environment Gain “on the ground” experience working with available data Involve states in building consensus around measures Vet candidate national measures 15

16. Comparative Performance Measurement Projects Bridge Condition Incident Response Round 2 CPM Infrastructure NCHRP 20-24(37F) Technical Standards & Guidance NCHRP 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 • Framework & functional description for comparative performance database & analysis infrastructure • Implementation and stewardship approach for the database & web site 16

17. 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