and GDOT’s Office of Organizational Performance Management American Society of Civil ... Meeting Documents... · 2017-07-20 · American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Peer ...

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) PeerReview Initial Observations/Recommendations

Update on Federal Performance & AssetRequirements and Timelines

Update on GDOT Performance Managementand GDOT’s Office of Organizational Performance Management

Office & District metrics reviewed through quarterly performance meetings.

Performance metrics are further tiered into individual performance measures based upon position responsibilities.

The quarterly review process prompted a deeper dive via the ASCE Peer Review.

Promoting a culture of continuous process improvement with a focus on successful outcomes.

Defining our goals, creating metrics around the goals, setting targets to the metrics, and then measuring.

Focus on Program Delivery• Review of ways to improve on-time delivery

190+ Interviews Conducted

10 Reviewers with transportation/engineering backgrounds• State DOTs: Arizona, Florida, Louisiana, North Carolina, Kansas, & New York• Federal Highway Administration including a former Division Administrator• Former ASCE President • Former Naval Public Works Officer• Experience with County and City Transportation/Public Works Departments• Private Sector Experience

• Conducted a broad-based survey prior to interviews• May 22nd to May 24th; June 5th to June 7th

• Included all divisions (in varying degrees) & all 7 districts

• Included Leadership (Executive/District/Division/Office)• Interviewers maintained interviewee confidentiality• Interviews ranged from 30 minutes to 45 minutes

• Attended and observed key multi-office meetings

Employees• Courteous and helpful; respect upper

management; dedicated/committed; like the family environment and flexible schedule; generally good morale; feel public perception is good; willing to be held accountable

Transportation Funding Act• Created great opportunities for success due to availability of funding• Demonstrates a generally supportive political environment

Program/Project Delivery• GDOT embraces Alternative Delivery Systems• Well-defined Project Management process

Baseline Schedule/BenchmarkingIdentify additional strategies for input and appropriate adjustments

Balancing Plan Quality and SchedulePerfecting process to balance as well as strengthen feedback loop

Project ManagementOpportunities for further growth and development

Staff Recruitment & RetentionExplore various strategies

Information TechnologyPrioritization and integration opportunities

Final report expected during this quarter.

Implementation of initial findings already underway.

RuleNotice of Proposed Rule

Making (NPRM) FINAL RULE

Safety Performance Measure (Rule 26) March 11, 2014Published

March 16, 2016

Highway Safety Improvement Program (Rule 32) March 28, 2014Published

March 16, 2016

Highway Asset Management Plan (Rule 33) Feb 20, 2015Published

October 24, 2016

Pavement/Bridge Performance Measure (Rule 29) January 5, 2015Published

January 20, 2017

System Performance Measure (Rule 30) April 22, 2016Published

January 18, 2017

Measures• Number & Rate of Fatalities• Number & Rate of Serious Injuries• Number of Non-motorized Fatalities & Injuries

Establish statewide targets by August 31, 2017 based on rolling 5- year average.

Assessment made by FHWA in August 2019 and annuallythereafter, on achievement of overall significant progress (50% oftargets achieved).

Penalty if overall significant progress is not made, the Statewould be required to:• use obligation authority only for HSIP projects equal to the HSIP

apportionment for the fiscal year prior to the year for which the overallperformance targets were not achieved

• develop an implementation plan annually until overall significant progress is achieved

• FHWA Proposed Measures– Interstate and Non-Interstate System:

• Percentage of pavements in Good condition• Percentage of pavements in Poor Condition

• Pavement Condition Thresholds

• Targets must be established by May 20, 2018. Baseline reportdue October 1, 2018. Mid-period performance report dueOctober 1, 2020 and full-period report due October 1, 2022.

• FHWA Minimum Condition Level: 5% or less ofInterstate System lane miles can be in poor condition.

• Penalty: If minimum not met for 2 consecutive years,State must obligate NHPP funds & transfer funds from theSurface Transportation Block Grant Program.

• Georgia currently exceeds minimum conditions:

Interstate

Pavements

Good 54.9%

Fair 44.6%

Poor 0.5%

• FHWA Measures– Percent of NHS Bridges Classified as in “Good” condition– Percent of NHS Bridges Classified as in “Poor” Condition

• Bridge Condition Thresholds for NHS Bridges

• FHWA Minimum Condition Level: 10% or less of totaldeck area of NHS bridges can be classified asstructurally deficient.

• Penalty: If minimum not met for 3 consecutive years,State must set aside and obligate NHPP funds to eligibleNHS bridge projects.

• Georgia currently exceeds minimum conditions:

Interstate

Bridges

Good 44.1%

Fair 55.6%

Poor 0.4%

Non-Interstate

National Highway

System Bridges

Good 53.7%

Fair 44.2%

Poor 2.2%

• Targets must be established by May 20, 2018. Baseline reportdue October 1, 2018. Mid-period performance report dueOctober 1, 2020 and full-period report due October 1, 2022.

Peak Hour Excessive Delay (Urbanized Areas)

Non-Single Occupancy Vehicle Travel (Urbanized Areas)

National Highway System Travel Time Reliability

Freight Reliability

Minimum components: • Summary listing and condition description of NHS pavements and bridges

with respective targets

• Asset management objectives and measures & performance gap analysis

• Risk analysis & Life-cycle planning

• Financial plan (minimum 10 years) & Investment Strategies

Timeline: • April 30, 2018—submit initial plan describing process

• June 30, 2019—submit fully compliant plan

• October 1, 2019 (Annually thereafter)—FHWA determines compliance

Penalty—if non-compliant, FHWA match on NHPP projects will be reduced from 80% to 65%.