API Handbook

Area Performance Indicator

API Handbook

Issue 05 Revision 01 March 2007

Area Performance Indicator Handbook

Contents

Contents Page Current document status 3 Handbook Issue History / Document Control 4 Introduction / History 5 Measurement Working Group Membership 8 APIs

1 Response to Emergency Incidents 10 2 Response to Category 1 Defects 13 3 Customer Satisfaction 16 4 Environmental Amenity Index 18 5 Site (workplace) Safety 31 6 Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Time 35 7 Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Cost 38 8 Predictability of Resource (Accruals) Forecasting 43 9 Winter Maintenance 45 10 Defect Free Work 46 11 Road Traffic Accidents at Road works 48 12 Street Lighting Outages 50 13 Network Availability 52 14 Third Party Claims 53 15 Recycling and Re-use 56

Issue 05 Rev 01Mar 2007 2 of 60


Current Document Status

Description of Measure API Ref. Meas. Ref. Issue

No. Date

Response to Emergency Incidents 01 (REI 01 – REI 04) 02 31 01 05

Response to Category 1 Defects 02 (IR 01 – IR 07) 03 06 05 05

Customer Satisfaction 03 (CS 01 – CS 04) 02 31 01 05

Environmental Amenity Index 04 (EAI 01) 02 31 01 05

Site (workplace) Safety 05 (SS 01 – SS 02) 03 31 01 05

Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Time 06 (TP 01 – TP 04) 06 31 01 05

Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Cost 07 (CP 01 – CP 03) 06 31 01 05

Predictability of Resource (Accruals) Forecasting 08 (EF 01 – EF 02) 02 09 10 03

Winter Maintenance 09 WM 01 – WM 02) 02 31 01 05

Defect Free Work 10 (DF 01 – DF 05) 03 01 12 06

Road Traffic Accidents at Roadworks 11 (RTA 01 – RTA 02) 02 31 01 05

Street Lighting Outages 12 (SL 01 – SL 02) 02 31 01 05

Network Availability 13 (NA 01 – NA 03) 02 31 01 05

Third Party Claims 14 (TPC 01 – TPC 06) 02 31 01 05

Recycling and Re-use 15 (RR 01) 02 31 01 05



Handbook Issue History

Issued Documents Main Amendments Inclusive Measures

(note appropriate to time of issue)

Issue No.

Date

API Handbook 1 - 11 01 Feb 03

API Handbook API 5 (02), API 12 &13 1 - 13 02 Sept 03

API Handbook (draft) APIs 14 & 15. 1 - 15 03 July 04

API Handbook Reformat, inclusion of Design data sheets. 1 - 15 04 Feb 05

Title sheet, Current Document Status sheet and API 02

API 02 revised methodology to clarify and correct IR04. New integer (K) introduced

02 04 (Rev 01)

May 05

API Handbook

API 10 (Iinclusion of DF05) In all API’s the state See section “Changes in Issue 05 Revision 01”“

1 - 15 05 Mar 07

Document Control

Document Title Area Performance Indicator Handbook Author Measurement Working Group Owner Performance Measurement Policy Team (PMP) - HA Distribution HA Area Teams & Service Providers Document Status See Handbook Issue History




Introduction

The Measurement Handbook details the measurement system developed by the Area Maintenance Community for the delivery of the Agency's Managing Agent, Managing Agent Contractor contracts and the Enhanced Managing Agent Contractor contracts. The measurement system is viewed as an essential management tool to allow us to prove and improve our performance in delivering our service.

Historical Background The current operational contracts for M.A.s and M.A.C.s were first rolled out with tranche 1 contracts in the summer of 2001. There was concern over the consistency and validity of the measures that were specified in these contracts. A workshop was held in April 2002 the purpose and output of which was

• To have an alignment as to what attendees collectively wanted to achieve from performance measurement within the HA over the next few years.

• To agree what were the key strategies that would enable these goals to be achieved

• To agree an action plan to deliver on these strategies. The following were some of the comments from the workshop with regard to Performance Measurement within the existing MA/ MAC contracts Lack of clarity as to why certain things are being measured –how it relates back to desired outputs and outcomes Lack of alignment as to what should be measured and hence different things being measured Disparate ways of carrying out the measure and presenting results Scepticism as to whether what is being measured is relevant Lack of clarity as to who is accountable for what in the delivery of the activities Not a lot on measuring Culture The Vision The following vision was agreed and will continue to provide the anchor against which all strategies and actions are determined. The Measurement Framework will be:- A FRAMEWORK THAT MEASURES THE PERFORMANCE AND CAPABILITY OF THE HA AND IT’S SUPPLY CHAIN PARTNERS, AND DRIVES CONTINUAL IMPROVEMENT.

Area Performance Indicator Handbook Objectives and Goals The Objectives and Goals were agreed as being to have: - A Measurement Framework that not just quantifies performance but drives its improvement by identifying best practice. A Measurement Framework that aligns the measurement of activities with the HA’s Outcomes and Objectives, measuring elements each organisation can influence. A consistent approach in the context of what is measured, how it is measured, and how the data is presented, recognising any bespoke requirements. A Measurement Framework that is practical, focused, and cost effective. A means of communicating the Measurement and Results that positively encourages interest and participation in achieving improvement. A Measurement Framework that is inclusive of all organisations that contributes to the overall performance. The Community It was agreed that a Community would be created whereby the HA and its supply chain partners can move forward together on the Measurement Framework. The Way Forward Strategies to deliver these Objectives were agreed. Establish a Measurement Group. Identify a Measurement model. Establish what we should measure. Refine the measures. Collect and present the results. Enrol the Community and all new members. A Performance Measurement Group was set up under the auspices of PRIDe to ensure that the strategies were delivered. The Way Forward (December 2006) Performance measurement has been identified as a key process in delivering continued performance improvements and best value for all Highways Agency projects. In doing so, the Highways Agency will be supported in achieving its overarching aim stated in the Corporate Plan of “Safe Roads, Reliable journeys, Informed travellers”. The Highways Agency has developed “Motivating Success” A Toolkit for Performance Measurement for all long term contracts which will provide a consistent form of measurement across our contracts. The Toolkit for Maintenance Contracts uses the API’s detailed in this document as evidence of good performance, and is currently being rolled out across all new contracts. Details’ regarding the use of API’s is contained in the “Motivating Success Toolkit - A Toolkit for Performance Measurement -Maintenance” the most current version of which is available from the Highways Agency Supply Chain Management Team.


Area Performance Indicator Handbook The Measurement Model It was agreed that the model must take the HA’s high level Outcomes (plus external organisations e.g. RUC, Ministerial) and produce a set of coherent objectives rationalising measure and linking to them controllable activities. How We Did It The Measures were sorted into four bins under the following categories. `Bin’ 1 Measures that Add value Drive improvement Are practical & cost effective Can be implemented immediately `Bin’ 2 Measures that Add value Are Measures to be resolved Require prioritised development Bin’ 3 Measures that are Measures to be discarded Irrelevant Outside `our’ control Add no value / costly `Bin’ 4 Measures that are compliance measures

i.e. demonstrated contractual compliance only and / or covered elsewhere ie by QM systems / PRIDe audit.

The existing Measures from all the contracts were also linked to the HA’s desired Outcomes as specified at that time. These fell under the two areas of Customer Satisfaction from the Ten Year Plan, and Quality Performance which covers the two areas of Construction Best Practice indicators and Client Charter Compliance requirements. Customer Satisfaction Easing Congestion Effective Maintenance Safer Travel Better Information Quieter Roads Delivering in Partnership Smarter Roads Quality Performance CBP Indicators Client Charter Compliance The Measures were then developed into a robust set of measures.




Group Membership

At the start of 2004 the group membership was reviewed and the area representation was altered to organisational representation thus giving membership on the group to every organisation currently providing a MA/MAC/TMC service to the HA. This resulted in a smaller more focussed group.

Terms of Reference - Measurement Working Group (MWG) Date: January 2007

• To assist the Highways Agency, as directed by the PMG, to develop robust Performance Indicators to measure the efficiency and effectiveness of service delivery as set out in the HA Performance Measurement Framework (this Performance Measurement Framework is expressed in the API Handbook, Motivating Success Toolkit, Area Business Strategies and the Agency’s high-level business objectives and PSA Targets)

• To develop detailed guidance notes to promote consistency in the measurement and reporting of the

HA Performance Measurement Framework

• To review and refine the Performance Indicators (as expressed in the Performance Measurement Framework) as necessary to ensure their ongoing effectiveness / relevance.

• To communicate requirements with respect to Performance Measurement to the Maintenance

Community.

• To work with the Good Practice Working Group and others in the Maintenance Community to promote and develop Performance Measurement

• To liaise with other industry bodies with an interest in developing Performance Measurement

Current membership of the group is given at the end of this section of the handbook. Ownership of the measures has been taken on by individual members of the group who are subsequently responsible for keeping the measures up to date and reporting back at collective reviews of the measures.

Progress to date The Measures in the following handbook are the resultant measures from the above exercise. They are still being developed in some areas and the handbook will be updated as new Measures become available. All measures as developed have been aligned to other areas of Measure within the HA wherever possible. The HA have written to Network Boards indicating their approval to the adoption of these Measures in place of original Annex 12 or 15 contractual Measures. Some organisations may still feel it is beneficial to continue to Measure some of the original Measures. Econtract Econtrack is a IT based web tool that has been developed by the HA, it is being used across all areas by the HA’s suppliers to input the data for the measures in this handbook. Guidance for the use of Econtrack is available from the Highways Agency Supply Chain Management Team and can be found on PartnerNet. PartnerNet The aim of the PartnerNet site is to foster closer working relationships between the Highways Agency and its business partners by making it easier for us to communicate, share knowledge and work together. It does this by allowing access to named members of the Providers’ teams and their HA Counterparts. It also provides access to toolkits the HA has developed, i.e. Journey Time Reliability, Managing Down Costs, and Traffic Management. The Measurement Working Group (MWG) uses PartnerNet to collect relevant documents and exercises together. The Core Information group is organised with a folder for each meeting of the MWG which holds the Agenda, Minutes, Presentations, API Reviews, the report to the Performance Management Group any other reports such as proposals for new APIs or the Maintenance Steering Group’s Briefing Paper.



There are other areas (API Specific and BSL Collector groups) house specific material relating to the development of APIs in general, this Handbook, and any material relating to the use of BSL’s Econtrack product. .

Changes in Issue 05 Revision 01 Inclusion of document Control table. Section name change from “Background” to “Historical Background” Inclusion of “The Way Forward (December 2006)” Inclusion of Measurement Working Group’s “Terms of Reference” Inclusion of simple explanation of Econtrack, PartnerNet, Update of membership table for Measurement Working Group. In all API sections the removal of “Possible future measures under consideration” API04 - Inclusion of description for (K) API08 - Removing (Target +/- 5% max.) from paragraph two. - Removing (Target +/- 2% max.) from paragraph three. - Simplyfing “Data Source” statement to - “HA systems and / or providers records”. - EF01(A) changed to EF01(FYTD) to be the same as in Econtrack - EF02(A) changed to EF02(FYTD) to be the same as in Econtrack

- EF01(M) Area target from * to tick - EF01(FYTD) Area target from tick to *

API10 - Inclusion of Measure DF05 API14 - TPC01 and TPC05 change of Area Target from to N/A API15 - Inclusion of description for (V) General Tidying of document formating.

e 05 Rev 01Mar 2007 10 of 60

Measurement Working Group Membership at March 2007 Organisation Areas Representative E-mail Phone Mobile API

ownership HA Tony Darnell [email protected] 01132 835416 07710958413 HA Chris Roy [email protected] 01234 796352 HA 2 Lance Marshall [email protected] 0117 372 8325 07789923 175 Atkins/Optima 6,10,11 Mark McCappin [email protected] 01827 317649 07876 656794 3 & 11 Atkins Emma Langman [email protected] 01214 835590 07834505827 AmeyMouchel 9, 13 Stephen Norris [email protected] 01865 713349 07747627037 1 & 2 Mouchel Parkman Tim Pearce [email protected] 013728445604 6 & 7 Carrillion/URS/WSP 5,8,12 Mark Rawson [email protected] 01536 413700 4, 9 A-one 14 Kumar Kusalakumar [email protected] 01325 341697 07921795150 14 AMScott 7 John Eyles [email protected] 01623 675625 07766422110 12 & 15 BBISL/MM/InterRoute 3,4 John Bourke [email protected] 07966895705 5 & 10 InterRoute 2 John Mills [email protected] 01454 452373 07801434392 AccordMP Alison McFarlane [email protected] 01392 312659 07929279494 13Le Crossing Dartford Azeem Tayab [email protected] 01322 221603 07957993178 8


Issu

For current membership details use PartnerNet


Indicator Ref. & Title API 1: Response to Emergency Incidents Indicator issue 02

HA Objective Reducing Congestion and Improving Reliability, Improving Road Safety Purpose / Description

To measure the efficiency and effectiveness of the Provider’s Emergency Management and Response service. The Provider should respond to emergencies on the Area Network as quickly and effectively as possible in order to minimise any danger, disruption or delay to the public, or damage to the Area Network and / or local environment.

Measures REI01

REI02

REI03

REI04

Total number of emergency incidents for which an immediate response by an ISU was required. Percentage of emergency incidents identified by Provider’s ISU teams (`proactive’ deployments). Percentage of `reactive’ ISU call-outs to emergency incidents achieved within the response times defined in the Contract. Average response time achieved for `reactive’ ISU call-outs to emergency incidents reported as a percentage of the response times defined in the Contract. (note: the lower the percentage, the better the performance)

Definitions Emergency Incident

`Proactive’ deployment

`Reactive’ call-out

Response Time

ISU

A disruption or potential hazard to the operation, safety and/or integrity of the Area Network (or adjacent land) that requires an immediate response by an ISU. Response provided to an emergency incident identified directly by Provider’s ISU teams (note: has a `zero’ response time) Response provided to an emergency incident notified to the Provider’s Control Centre by a 3rd party or Provider’s staff (excluding ISU teams) The time elapsed (in minutes) from notification of the initial incident to the Provider’s Control Centre, to the time of notification of arrival on site of the emergency incident by the ISU (note: not the time of arrival of the ISU at the back of a traffic queue caused by the incident – although Provider’s may wish to record this time separately for their own records) Incident Support Unit (or equivalent as defined in the contract)

Methodology

REI02 is calculated as a percentage of the incidents reported at REI01. REI03 is calculated as the combined sum of all `reactive’ call-outs (within each response time category) responded to within target time, divided by the total number of `reactive’ call-outs attended. REI04 is reported as a percentage of the response times defined in the Contract (to take account of differing contractual requirements). The percentage is calculated as the sum of the actual response times provided, divided by the sum of the contractual response times.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 11 of 60



Data Source / Requirements

Provider’s incident logs / database REI01 and REI02 are reported for contextual information, although REI02 also provides a measure of the proactive service provided by ISU teams.

Additional Information

REI03 and REI04 exclude incidents identified directly by the Provider’s ISU teams in order to provide a `true’ measure of the `reactive’ incident call-out response times achieved (i.e. excluding `proactive’ deployments with a `zero’ response time).

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 12 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 13 of 60


Data Input (Frequency / Reporting Period: Calendar month) Field Type Calculation Decimals Range Total number of emergency ISU deployments (in month)

(A) Integer 0 0 - 1000

Number of `proactive’ emergency ISU deployments (in month)

(B) Integer 0 0 - 1000

Number of `reactive’ emergency ISU deployments (in month)

(C) Auto Calc A - B 0 0 - 1000

Number of `reactive’ deployments achieved within target response time

(D) Integer 0 0 - 1000

Total actual response time to `reactive’ deployments (mins)

(E) Integer 0 0 - 20,000

Total allowable response time to `reactive’ deployments (mins)

(F) Integer 0 0 - 20,000

Calculations (Individual Monthly Performance)

Measure Report – Graph and/or Table (G/T)

Type Calculation Decimals Range Area Target

REI01 - (M) G + T Integer A 0 0 - 1000 n/a REI02 - (M) G + T Percentage (B / A) *100 1 0 - 100 * REI03 - (M) G + T Percentage (D / C) *100 1 0 - 100 REI04 - (M) G + T Percentage (E / F) *100 1 0 - 100 Calculations (Rolling 12 Month Performance) i.e. current month + preceding 11 months



REI01 - (A) T Integer ΣA / 12 0 0 - 1000 n/a REI02 - (A) T Percentage (ΣB / ΣA)

*100 1 0 - 100 *

REI03 - (A) T Percentage (ΣD / ΣC)

*100 1 0 - 100 *

REI04 - (A) T Percentage (ΣE / ΣF)

*100 1 0 - 100 *

Note: Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding 11 months. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator

Denotes area set target, * denotes target requirement at discretion of area.


Indicator Ref. & Title API 2: Response to Category 1 Defects Indicator issue 03

HA Objective Improving Road Safety Purpose / Description

To measure the efficiency of the Provider’s response to Category 1 defects. The Provider should manage resources and programme to ensure all Category 1 defects are responded to within the maximum response times defined in the Contract. In meeting these targets, danger to the public will be minimised and further deterioration of the defect will be avoided.

Measures IR01

IR02

IR03

IR04

IR05

IR06

IR07

Percentage of Category 1 defects made safe or repaired within the 24 hour response time Percentage of Category 1 defects repaired within the 7 day response time Percentage of Category 1 defects repaired within the 28 day response time Average time (in days) for repair of Category 1 defects within the 7 day response time category Percentage of Cat 1 “24 hour” defects which remain open and overdue within the current month and preceding 11 months. Percentage of Cat 1 “7 Day” defects which remain open and overdue within the current month and preceding 11 months. Percentage of Cat 1 “28 Day” defects which remain open and overdue within the current month and preceding 11 months.

Definitions Category 1 defect

Repair (ed)

Defect

Defects which require prompt attention because they represent an immediate or imminent hazard, or there is a risk of immediate or imminent structural deterioration, or there is an immediate or imminent risk of damage to a 3rd party’s property or equipment, or there is an immediate or imminent risk of damage to the environment, or there is a risk of breach of statutory duty. Repair is as defined under the area contract A defect is deemed to fall within a month if its required completion date falls within the month.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 14 of 60

Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 2: Response to Category 1 Defects Indicator issue 03

Methodology

IR01 is reported as a percentage of the number of Category 1 defects identified requiring a 24hr response time (made safe or repaired). IR02 is reported as a percentage of the number of Category 1 defects identified requiring a 7 day response time. IR03 is reported as a percentage of the number of Category 1 defects identified requiring a 28 day response time. IR04 is reported as the average repair time in days. This is to include only those Category 1 defects identified requiring a 7 day response time and applies to all in month repairs irrespective of the required completion date. IR05 is reported as the number of open and overdue Category 1 defects requiring a 24hr response time reported as a percentage of the total (for current month and preceding eleven months). IR06 is reported as the number of open and overdue Category 1 defects requiring a 7 day response time reported as a percentage of the total (for current month and preceding eleven months). IR07 is reported as the number of open and overdue Category 1 defects requiring a 28 day response time reported as a percentage of the total (for current month and preceding eleven months). Note defects requiring to be made safe in 24 hrs and repaired within e.g. 7 days would be reported in both categories.

Data Source Provider’s RMMS database / works order system

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 15 of 60

Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 2: Response to Category 1 Defects Indicator issue 03

Data Input (Frequency / Reporting Period: Calendar month) Field Type Calculation Decimals Range Number of Cat 1 “24 hour” defects with required completion date / time within month

(A) Integer 0 0 – 1000

Number of Cat 1 “24 hour” defects closed by required completion date / time in month.

(B) Integer 0 0 – 1000

Total number of Cat 1 “24 hour defects” which remain open and overdue within the current month and preceding eleven months.

(C) Integer 0 0 – 5000

~~~~~~~~~~~ Number of Cat 1 “7 Day” defects with required completion date / time within month

(D) Integer 0 0 – 1000

Number of Cat 1 “7 Day” defects closed by required completion date / time in month.

(E) Integer 0 0 – 1000

Total number of Cat 1 “7 Day” which remain open and overdue within previous the current month and preceding eleven months.

(F) Integer 0 0 – 5000

~~~~~~~~~~~ Number of Cat 1 “28 Day” defects with required completion date / time within month

(G) Integer 0 0 – 1000

Number of Cat 1 “28 Day” defects closed by required completion date / time in month.

(H) Integer 0 0 – 1000

Total number of Cat 1 “28 Day” which remain open and overdue within previous the current month and preceding eleven months.

(I) Integer 0 0 – 5000

~~~~~~~~~~~ Total repair time in days for Cat 1 “7 Day” defects closed in month (irrespective of required completion date).

(J) Integer 0 0 – 21000

Number of Cat 1 "7 Day" defects closed in month (irrespective of required completion date).

(K) Integer 0 0 - 3000

~~~~~~~~~~~

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 16 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 17 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 2: Response to Category 1 Defects Indicator issue 03

Calculations (Individual Monthly Performance) Measure Report – Graph

and/or Table (G/T) Type Calculation Decimals Range Area Target

IR01 - (M) G + T Percentage (B / A)*100 1 0 - 100 IR02 - (M) G + T Percentage (E / D)*100 1 0 – 100 IR03 - (M) G + T Percentage (H / G)*100 1 0 – 100 IR04 - (M) G + T Integer J / K 1 0 - 25 Calculations (Rolling 12 Month Performance) i.e. current month + preceding 11 months Measure Report – Graph


IR01 - (A) T Percentage (Σ B/ Σ A) *100 1 0 - 100 * IR02 - (A) T Percentage (Σ E/ Σ D) *100 1 0 – 100 * IR03 - (A) T Percentage (Σ H/ Σ G) *100 1 0 – 100 * IR04 - (A) T Integer ΣJ / ΣK 1 0 - 25 * IR05 - (A) T Percentage (C/ ΣA)*100 1 0 – 100 * IR06 – (A) T Percentage (F/ ΣD)*100 1 0 – 100 * IR07- (A) T Percentage (I / ΣG)*100 1 0 – 100 * Note: Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding 11 months. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator

Denotes area set target, * denotes target requirement at discretion of area

Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 3: Customer Satisfaction Indicator issue 02

HA Objective Seeking Feedback from Customers Purpose / Description

To measure the effectiveness of the Provider's response to complaints and enquiries received from the public and other stakeholders in relation to the operation of the Area Network and / or the Provider’s activities.

Measures CS01

CS02

CS03

CS04

Total number of enquiries and complaints received. Number of complaints received. Percentage of complaints received that require(d) corrective action. Percentage of complaints received that require(d) corrective action that were closed within 10 working days.

Definitions Enquiry

Complaint

Observation

Compliment

Corrective action

Closed

HAIL

Communication / correspondence received requesting information about the Area Network or the Provider’s services. Communication / correspondence received regarding the condition or performance of the Area Network or the Provider’s performance which is formally recorded as a dissatisfaction with the service provided. Communication / correspondence received which reports on the condition or performance of the Area Network or the Provider’s performance (not notified to the Provider as a dissatisfaction). Communication / correspondence received which expresses praise for the service provided. An action which rectifies the condition or performance of the Area Network or modifies the Provider’s working practices (procedures). Actioning the initial complaint – may be just a reply, but must be a substantial reply detailing actions to be taken and timescales. Highways Agency Information Line

Methodology

Number of enquiries and complaints received by the Provider to include correspondence referred from HAIL and all other direct sources. Communications may be received in any form (i.e. telephone, e-mail, letter, personal etc). Enquiries and complaints received that are not the responsibility of the Highways Agency or the Provider will not be reported. CS01 to include the number of complaints reported in CS02. CS01-A and CS02-A will show average, not cumulative, values. CS03 to be reported as a percentage of complaints reported in CS02. CS04 to be reported as a percentage of the number of complaints that require(d) corrective action reported in CS03.

Data Source Provider’s Customer Service logs / database

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 18 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 19 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 3: Customer Satisfaction Indicator issue 02

Data Input (Frequency / Reporting Period: Calendar month) Field Type Calculation Decimals Range Number of enquiries and complaints

(A) Integer n/a 0 0 - 500

Number of complaints (B) Integer n/a 0 0 - 500 Number of complaints requiring corrective action

(C) Integer n/a 0 0 - 500

Number of complaints requiring corrective action that were closed within 10 working days

(D) Integer n/a 0 0 - 500


Measure

Report – Graph and/or Table (G/T)


CS01 - (M) G + T Integer A 0 0 - 500 n/a CS02 - (M) G + T Integer B 0 0 - 500 n/a CS03 - (M) G + T Percentage (C / B) *100 1 0 - 100 CS04 - (M) G + T Percentage (D / C) *100 1 0 - 100 Calculations (Rolling 12 Month Performance) ie current month + preceding 11 months



CS01 - (A) T Integer ΣA / 12 0 0 -

500 n/a

CS02 - (A) T Integer ΣB / 12 1 0 -

500 n/a

CS03 - (A) T Percentage (ΣC / ΣB)

*100 1 0 -

100 *

CS04 - (A) T Percentage (ΣD / ΣC)

*100 1 0 -

100 *



Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 4: Environmental Amenity Index. Indicator issue 02

HA Objective Respecting the Environment Purpose / Description

To provide a measure of the overall appearance and amenity value of a route / the network.

Measures

EAI01

Environmental Amenity Index.

Definitions Environmental Amenity Index

A subjective visual assessment of the amenity value of a route section across 10 categories (litter and debris, standard of grass cutting – swath and visibility splays, standard of grass cutting at obstructions, weed growth in verges and central reserve, weed growth in gullies and drainage, visibility of signs, cleanliness off signs, sweeping of channels, encroachment of vegetation on/over the carriageway, footpaths and cycleways, illegal signs, obstructions and graffiti) following the attached grading system.

Methodology

A 5km length of continuous carriageway of a route is jointly chosen at random by the Provider and HA Route Sponsor with no prior notice given to Provider’s ‘operations’ team. Inspections are carried out from a vehicle travelling as slowly as prevailing traffic speeds allow without disruption of traffic flow where practicable. At the end of each 1000m an assessment following the guidance notes is made for that section where there is an occurrence of the category item (NB this is not applicable to illegal signs, obstructions and graffiti). This will result in a maximum of 5 scores per category, these are then averaged to obtain the overall score for each category. The index is the average of the categories with resultant scores (e.g. if each 1000m section within a 5km length had no grass present a score would not be applicable for grass cutting, the maximum number of categories would therefore be 8 – see always applicable column on data input table below). All scores are reported to the nearest whole number. Details of the route and length are to be recorded. Where applicable routes shall be chosen to ensure maximum coverage of network annually.

Data Source Provider’s Inspection records.

Additional Information Provision of possible traffic management e.g. crash cushions, will depend on local conditions. Inspection to be carried out and agreed with HA Route Sponsor. A 5km random length of route should be jointly chosen prior to inspection with no prior notice given to `Operations’. Inspection to be carried out from a vehicle traveling as slowly as prevailing traffic speeds allow without disruption of traffic flow. All routes where possible, to be inspected annually (financial year). Scoring: A - 100%, B - 66%, C - 33%, D - 0% Average of applicable categories (whole no.) to be reported monthly, record route inspected.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 20 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 21 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 4: Environmental Amenity Index. Indicator issue 02

Data Input (Frequency / Reporting Period: Calendar month)

Field Type Calculation Decimals Range Always

Applicable Score for “Litter and Debris” (A) Percentage 0 0 – 100 Score for “Standard of Grass Cutting – Swath & Visibility Splays”

(B) Percentage 0 0 – 100 X

Score for “Standard of Grass Cutting at Obstructions”

(C) Percentage 0 0 – 100 X

Score for “Weed Growth in Verges and Central Reserve.”

(D) Percentage 0 0 – 100

Score for “Weed Growth in Gullies and Drainage”

(E) Percentage 0 0 – 100

Score for “Visibility of Signs” (F) Percentage 0 0 – 100 X Score for “Cleanliness of Signs” (G) Percentage 0 0 – 100 X Score for “Sweeping of Channels”

(H) Percentage 0 0 – 100 X

Score for “Encroachment of Vegetation”

(I) Percentage 0 0 – 100

Score for “Illegal Signs, Obstructions and Graffiti”

(J) Percentage

0 0 – 100

Environmental Amenity Index for month ”

(K) Percentage

Sum(A:J)/n 0 0 – 100


Measure Report – Graph

and/or Table (G/T)

Type Calculation Decimals Range Area Targe

t

EAI01 - (M)

G + T

Percentage

(SUM (A:J)) / n

0

0 – 100

Calculations (Rolling 12 Month Performance) i.e. current month + preceding 11 months


and/or Table (G/T)

Type Calculation Decimals Range Area Targe

t

EAI01 - (A)

G + T

Percentage

ΣK / 12

0

0 – 100

*

Note: Σ = the aggregation of monthly performance results for the current month and the preceding 11 months. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator

Denotes area set target, * denotes target requirement at discretion of area n = the number of applicable input scores for the current month (max. 10, min 5) SUM (A:J) = A + B + C + ….+ J


General guidance on grading system:- 1. Inspection to be carried out and agreed with HA route sponsor. 2. A 5km random length of route should be jointly chosen prior to inspection with no prior notice given to ‘Operations’. 3. Inspection to be carried out from a vehicle travelling as slowly as prevailing traffic speeds allow without disruption of traffic flow. 4. All routes where possible, to be inspected annually (financial year). 5. Scoring: - A 100% B 66% C 33% D 0% Average of the categories (whole no.) to be reported monthly, record route inspected.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 22 of 60


1. Litter and debris.

A. Free of litter. B. Not much litter apart from a few small items. C. Quite a lot of litter with small build-ups.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 23 of 60


2.Standard of grass cutting - Swath and Visibility Splays A. Consistent length, good visibility. B. Inconsistent cut, good visibility. C. Inconsistent cut, minor windrows, tufts left possibly causing

visibility problems with new growth.

D. Inconsistent cut, tufts still standing, obstructing visibility.

A B

C D

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 24 of 60


3. Standard of Grass Cutting at Obstructions A. No visible growth > surrounding grass. B. Obstructions/ signs exposed some areas of grass >

surrounding area.

C. Partial attempt, obstruction/ sign (~50%). D. No attempt made.

A B

C D

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 25 of 60


4. Weed Growth in Verges and Central Reserve A. No visible weed growth. B. Weed growth minimal and no higher than surrounding grass. C. Weed growth evident with further treatment required. D. Weed growth unrestrained.

A

C

B

D

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 26 of 60


5. Weed Growth in Gullies and Drainage A. No visible weed growth. B. Weed growth visible, no impairment of function. C. Weed growth partially impairing function. D. Weed growth impairing function.

A B

C D

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 27 of 60


6. Visibility of signs A. Fully visible. B. Partially obscured (<10%) with no loss of visibility of message. C. Partially obscured message readable. D. Message obscured and/ or unreadable. (Ref - The traffic signs regulations & general directions for

distances.)

SIGN FULLY

VISIBLE

A B

C D

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 28 of 60


7. Cleanliness of Signs A. Clean. B. Soiling barely visible no impairment of legend. C. Partial impairment of legend. D. Heavily soiled, legend not clear.

D

A B

C

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 29 of 60


8. Sweeping of Channels A. Clear of detritus. B. Small amounts of detritus, no impairment of function. C. Function partially impaired. D. Function impaired.

A B

C D

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 30 of 60


. Encroachment Of Vegetation on/ over carriageway, footpaths and cycleways. A. No encroachment. B. Growth near pavement but no encroachment. C. Encroachment without action being taken. D. Encroachment over pavement potentially hazardous.

A B

C D

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 31 of 60


10. Illegal signs, obstruction and Graffiti A. Clear of all illegal signs, obstructions and graffiti. B. No graffiti minimal sign(s) of temporary nature e.g. charity

event.

C. Minimal non offensive graffiti and or minor signs/ obstructions

with no associated hazards.

D. Graffiti and/or signs/ obstructions causing visible blight or

potential hazard.

A B

C D

CLEAR OF ALL Illegal signs,

Obstructions, and Graffiti

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 32 of 60


Indicator Ref. & Title API 5: Site (Workplace) Safety Indicator issue 03

HA Objective To Be a Good Employer Purpose / Description

To measure the effectiveness of the Provider’s safety processes by monitoring all accidents reportable under RIDDOR and all other recorded injuries within the Provider’s organisation.

Measures SS01

SS02

Area RIDDOR Frequency Rate, based on all accidents reportable under RIDDOR. Area Accident Frequency Rate, based on the total number of SS01 and all other recorded injuries.

Definitions Provider’s organisation

RIDDOR

Recorded injuries

All site, network and compound based staff involved in MAC, EMAC or MA/TMC activities including subcontractors and head office staff directly employed in area business. Further guidance is given on the attached table at appendix A. Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations All injuries recorded in Accident Books (or databases) covering the Agency's Area Maintenance contract (MA & TMC, MAC or EMAC).

Methodology

SS01 is calculated as all accidents reportable under RIDDOR in the 12 month period, as a rolling average, divided by the total number of hours worked in that period by the Provider’s organisation (see appendix A), multiplied by 100,000. For reasons of practicality, other staff hours such as delivery drivers and limited visits to site by HA staff or other third parties will not be monitored. However any injuries incurred by others shall be included in the injury numbers. SS02 is calculated as the total number of recorded injuries and all accidents reportable under RIDDOR in the 12 month period, as a rolling average, divided by the total number of hours worked in that period by the Provider’s organisation, multiplied by 100,000.

Data Source Provider’s Accident Books / databases including RIDDOR forms.


none

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 33 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 34 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 5: Site (Workplace) Safety Indicator issue 03


Field Type Calculation Decimals Range

Total number of hours worked in the month

(A) Integer ABMB + ABT B 0 0 – 150000

Total number of all accidents reportable under RIDDOR in the month

(B) Integer BBMB + BBT B 0 0 – 50

Total number of recorded injuries in the month (Non-RIDDOR)

(C) Integer CBMB + C BT B 0 0 – 100

Total of all accidents reportable under RIDDOR and all recorded injuries

(D) Auto Calc B + C 0 0 – 150



and/or Table (G/T)

Type Calculation Decimals Range Area

Target

SS01 - (A) G + T Integer (ΣB / ΣA) *10P

5P

2 0 – 5

SS02 - (A) G + T Integer (ΣD / ΣA) *10P

5P

2 0 – 20 Note: Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding 11 months. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator

Denotes area set target, * denotes target requirement at discretion of area Subscript BMB relates to MA/MAC data Subscript BT Brelates to TMC data where applicable, for MACs this will be nil


Indicator Ref. & Title API 5: Site (Workplace) Safety - Appendix A Indicator issue 03

Ref Resource type Resource category To be included in

API 5 analysis? (incl employees, on

training scheme, on work experience, employed by someone else or self-employed)

1 Member of the public N/A No 2 HA Area and Head Office

(HO) dedicated Area staff No

3 HA Route Management Strategy / other consultant working in/on the Highways Agency (HA) Area

No

4 HA Technology Provider No except for Area 2 EMAC where Technology elements are included in Provider's scope

5 MA/MAC HO dedicated staff Yes 6 MA/MAC Area staff Yes 7 MA/MAC Agency staff Yes 8 MA/MAC Sub-consultants

(permanent works design / study)

Yes

9 MA/MAC Sub-contractors for surveys, letter drops and the like

Yes

10 TMC/MAC/EMAC HO dedicated staff Yes 11 TMC/MAC/EMAC Area staff Yes 12 TMC/MAC/EMAC Sub-consultants

(temporary works designers, Design & Construct (D&C) item designers and the like)

Yes

13 TMC/MAC/EMAC Sub-contractors Yes 14 TMC/MAC/EMAC Agency staff Yes 15 Framework Contractors HO staff dedicated to the

scheme No

16 Framework Contractors Scheme specific staff No 17 Framework Contractors Scheme specific Agency

staff No

18 Framework Contractors Sub-consultants (temporary works designers, D&C item designers and the like)

No

19 Framework Contractors

Sub-contractors No

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 35 of 60


Indicator Ref. & Title API 5: Site (Workplace) Safety - Appendix A Indicator issue 03

Ref Resource type Resource category To be included in API 5 analysis?

(incl employees, on training scheme, on work experience, employed by someone else or self-employed)

20 MA/MAC/EMAC Framework schemes supervisory staff (MA, MAC or EMAC)

Partial: exclude hours where these staff are on Framework site as these will be reported by Framework Contractor as Principal Contractor

21 Tendered scheme contractor

HO staff dedicated to the scheme

No


Scheme specific staff No


Scheme specific Agency staff

No


Sub-consultants (temporary works designers, D&C item designers and the like)

No


Sub-contractors No

26 MA/MAC/EMAC Tendered schemes contract supervisory staff (MA, MAC or EMAC)

Partial: exclude hours where these staff are on Tendered Scheme site as these will be reported by Framework Contractor as Principal Contractor

27 Section 278 scheme contractor

HO staff dedicated to the scheme

No


Scheme specific staff No


Scheme specific Agency staff

No


Sub-consultants (temporary works designers, D&C item designers and the like)

No


Sub-contractors No

32 MA/MAC/EMAC Section 278 scheme contract supervisory staff (MA, MAC or EMAC)

Partial: exclude hours where these staff are on Section 278 site as these will be reported by Framework Contractor as Principal Contractor

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 36 of 60

Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 6: Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Time (Schemes > £100k) Indicator

issue 06

HA Objective To Ensure More Effective Delivery Through Better Working Relationships Purpose / Description

This API measures the accuracy of time predictions, initially only on eligible schemes exceeding £100K in value. The indicators are designed to reflect the impact on customers and the HA of milestones in the process of design and construction of these schemes not being achieved at predicted times. The API is a measure on the whole of the delivery team including HA, MA/MAC, TMC and the Supply Chain.

Milestone description

A series of milestones throughout the scheme are identified as defined in “Time and Cost Phases for API 6 & 7”, see Appendix 1.

1. Commitment to detailed design – dates to be agreed by 31st March 2. Completion of detailed design 3. Agreement of Cost (API 7 only) 4. Agreement of predicted start and finish dates 5. Actual start of Construction 6. Actual Completion of Construction 7. Agreement of final account at first valuation after completion (API 7 only)

Measures

TP01

TP02

TP03

TP04

Variance between actual date at 2, compared to date at 2 as predicted at 1. NB: Only for Live Schemes where data is less than 365 days old Variance between actual date at 5, compared to date at 5 as predicted at 4. NB: Only for Live Schemes where data is less than 365 days old Variance between actual date at 6, compared to date at 6 as predicted at 4. NB: Only for Live Schemes where data is less than 365 days old Variance between duration 5 to 6 as predicted at 4, compared to actual duration 5 – 6. NB: Only for Live Schemes where data is less than 365 days old

Definitions

“Live” Scheme

Scheme Cost

Eligible Scheme

Measure Period

All Parties

Milestones

A Live scheme is determined by the age of the second of the two milestones that constitute the API. This should be 365 days old or less to qualify as Live data. The sum of all money managed by the Provider on behalf of the HA – including design, construction, statutory undertakers etc. This will not include land costs. Scheme currently approved by HA, with an estimated scheme cost over £100K at milestone 1. Rolling 12 months [current month + preceding 11 months] (or year to date if less than 12 months data exists) HA, Designer/Project Manager, Constructor(s), MA/MAC, TMC and Supply Chain. All Milestones are defined in Appendix 1, “Time and Cost Phases for API 6 and & 7”.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 37 of 60


issue 06 Methodology

Scheme Data Flow As part of preparing the annual programme, covering works funded for each financial year, a record for each Scheme is produced and relevant details recorded, including project details and the predicted date for completion of detailed design (milestone 1). When detailed design is completed relevant details are recorded and the variation from the prediction is calculated and recorded (milestone 2).

Similarly, when all parties agree the construction dates – (during milestone 4) – the predictions for the start date for construction and completion date for construction, and therefore the construction duration are recorded. The actual dates for Start and End of Construction are promptly recorded as they occur and at the End of Construction the construction duration is calculated and entered into the records (milestone 5 & 6) API Calculation Individual scheme data is then summarised to calculate the API’s. Only Live data is considered for each of the API’s. Each month, each API is considered independently, so that data for a scheme may be eligible for inclusion in the calculation of some or all API’s. (NB As soon as completion of detailed design data is recorded for a scheme, that data is included in the subsequent calculation of TP01, at the end of the month. Once this data is more than 365 days old (i.e. 12 months old) it is removed from the calculation of TP01, even though data from the same scheme may still be eligible for the calculation of TP02, TP03 or TP04 that month.] For all Time Predictability API’s only positive variations (late completions) are added to the cumulative total, which is divided by the number of eligible schemes in the measure period to calculate the indicators. Compensation events will affect the actual recorded dates but the predicted dates will not be amended to reflect compensation events. i.e. compensation events which affect the duration of a scheme will have a negative effect on the result. Until data is available for 12 months, the indicators are reported as Year to Date (YTD).

Data Source Provider’s records


None.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 38 of 60


issue 06

Data Input for individual projects (Frequency / Reporting Period: Calendar month for all new data)


Predicted date for completion of detailed design as made at milestone 1.

(A) Integer 0 Any date

Actual date for completion of detailed design (milestone 2).

(B) Integer 0 Any date

Predicted date for start of construction as made at milestone 4.

(C) Integer 0 Any date

Actual date for start of construction (milestone 5).

(D) Integer 0 Any Date

Predicted date for completion of construction as made at milestone 4.

(E) Integer 0 Any Date

Actual date for completion of construction (milestone 6).

(F) Integer 0 Any Date

Field Type Calculation Decimals Range Live Data for TP01 (G) Calculation =IF[(TODAY –

(B)) >365, 0, 1] 0 0/1

Live Data for TP02 (H) Calculation =IF[(TODAY –

(D)) >365, 0, 1]

0 0/1

Live Data for TP03 and TP04 (I) Calculation =IF[(TODAY – (F)) >365, 0, 1]

0 0/1

Predicted Length of Construction (J) Calculation (E-C) 0 0-1000 Actual Length of Construction (K) Calculation (F-D) 0 0-1000 Number of Days Variance for TP01 (L) Calculation (B-A) 0 0-500 Number of Days Variance for TP02 (M) Calculation (D-C) 0 0-500 Number of Days Variance for TP03 (N) Calculation (F-E) 0 0-500 Number of Days Variance for TP04 (O) Calculation (K-J) 0 0-500

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 39 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 40 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 6: Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Time (Schemes > £100k) Indicator

issue 06

Calculations (Rolling 12 month Performance i.e. current month + preceding 11 months)

Measure Report –

Graph and/or

Table (G/T) Type Calculation Decimals Range Area

Target

TP01 - (A)

G + T

Integer

IF(G = 1), then (Σ(L>0))/ Σ(G)

0

0 - 500

TP02 - (A) G + T Integer IF(H = 1), then (Σ(M>0))/ Σ(H) 0

0 - 500

TP03 - (A) G + T Integer IF(I = 1), then (Σ(N>0))/ Σ(I) 0

0 - 500

TP04 - (A)

G + T Integer IF(I = 1), then (Σ(O>0))/ Σ(I) 0 0 - 500

Note: Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding 11 months. This data is deleted after 12 months inclusion in the results, see definition of live data. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator


Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 7: Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Cost (Schemes > £100k) Indicator

issue 06


This API measures the accuracy of cost predictions, initially only on eligible schemes exceeding £100K in value. The indicators are designed to reflect the impact on customers and the HA, of changes in predictions and costs during the different phases of design and construction of these schemes. The API is a measure on the whole of the delivery team including HA, MA/MAC, TMC and the Supply Chain.

Milestone description

A series of milestones throughout the scheme are identified as defined in “Time and Cost Phases for API 6 & 7”, see Appendix 1.

1. Commitment to detailed design – dates to be agreed by 31st March 2. Completion of detailed design 3. Agreement of Cost (API 7 only) 4. Agreement of predicted start and finish dates 5. Actual start of Construction 6. Actual Completion of Construction 7. Agreement of final account at first valuation after completion (API 7 only)

CP01

Variance between the sum of costs at milestone 3 compared to those costs predicted at milestone 1, as a percentage of costs predicted at milestone 1. NB: Only for Live Schemes where data is less than 365 days old

CP02 Variance between the sum of costs at milestone 7 compared to these costs predicted at milestone 3, as a percentage of costs predicted at milestone 3. NB: Only for Live Schemes where data is less than 365 days old

Measures

CP03 Variance between the sum of costs at milestone 7 compared to these costs predicted at milestone 1, as a percentage of costs predicted at milestone 1. NB: Only for Live Schemes where data is less than 365 days old

Definitions

“Live” Scheme

Scheme Cost

Eligible Scheme

Measure Period

All Parties

Milestones

A Live scheme is determined by the age of the second of the two milestones that constitute the API. This should be 365 days old or less to qualify as Live data. The sum of all money managed by the Provider on behalf of the HA – including design, construction, statutory undertakers etc. This will not include land costs. Scheme currently approved by HA, with an estimated scheme cost over £100K at milestone 1. Rolling 12 months [current month + preceding 11 months] (or year to date if less than 12 months data exists) HA, Designer/Project Manager, Constructor(s), MA/MAC, TMC and Supply Chain. All Milestones are defined in Appendix 1, “Time and Cost Phases for API 6 and & 7.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 41 of 60

Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 7: Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Cost (Schemes > £100k) Indicator

issue 06 Methodology

Scheme Data Flow As part of preparing the annual programme, covering works funded for each financial year, a record for each Scheme is produced and relevant details are recorded, including project details and prediction of final cost (milestone 1). When all parties agree the construction costs (milestone 3), the provider records the revised predicted final scheme cost and the date of this entry, against the project record.

Finally, the provider records the projected final scheme cost, at the first valuation after the End of Construction (milestone 7) and the date of this entry, against the project record. API Calculation Individual scheme data is then summarised to calculate the API’s. Only Live data is considered for each of the API’s. Each month, each API is considered independently, so that data for a scheme may be eligible for inclusion in the calculation of some or all API’s. (NB As soon as cost data at milestone 3 is recorded for a scheme that data is included in the subsequent calculation of CP01, at the end of the month. Once this data is more than 365 days old (i.e. 12 months old) it is removed from the calculation of CP01, even though data from the same scheme may still be eligible for the calculation of CP02 + CP03 that month] As all deviations from predictions are undesirable for budgetary control, the API considers the absolute value of cost variances as a percentage of the sum of the initial predictions. This avoids the potential for negative and positive differences, in separate schemes, to have a compensatory effect on the indicators. Compensation events will affect the actual scheme cost but the predicted cost will not be amended to reflect compensation events. i.e. compensation events which affect the overall cost of a scheme will have a negative effect on the result. Until data is available for 12 months, the indicators are reported as Year to Date (YTD).

Data Source Provider’s records, HA records and Contractor’s records (if applicable)


None.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 42 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 43 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 7: Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Cost (Schemes > £100k) Indicator

issue 06 Data Input for individual projects (Frequency / Reporting Period: Calendar month for all new data)


Predicted scheme cost as made Milestone 1.

(A) Integer 0 0 - 5x10P

6P

Predicted scheme cost as made Milestone 3.

(B) Integer 0 0 - 5x10P

6P

Date Milestone 3 was reached. (C) Integer 0 Any Date Predicted scheme cost as made Milestone 7.

(D) Integer 0 0 - 5x10P

6P

Date Milestone 7 was reached. (E) Integer 0 Any Date Variance Calculation for CP01 (F) Calculation B – A 0 0 - 5x10P

6P

Variance Calculation for CP02 (G) Calculation D – B 0 0 - 5x10P

6P

Variance Calculation for CP03 (H) Calculation D – A 0 0 - 5x10P

6P

Live data for CP01 (I) Calculation =IF[(TODAY – (C))

>365, 0, 1] 0 0/1

Live data for CP02 and CP03 (J) Calculation =IF[(TODAY – (E))

>365, 0, 1] 0 0/1

NB: Data for F-J does not necessarily need to be visible Overall Calculations (Rolling 12 month Performance i.e. current month + preceding 11 months)

Measure Report – Graph and/or

Table (G/T) Type Calculation Decimals Range Area

Target

CP01 - (A)

G + T

Percentage

For all schemes where I = 1 ( ) 100*]/[ AF ΣΣ

0

0 - 100

CP02 - (A) G + T Percentage

For all schemes where J = 1 ( ) 100*]/[ BG ΣΣ

0

0 - 100

CP03 - (A) G + T Percentage

For all schemes where J = 1 ( ) 100*]/[ AH ΣΣ

0

0 - 100

Note: Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding 11 months. This data is deleted after 12 months inclusion in the results, see definition of live data.

etcA... signifies a modulus of the number. i.e. all values taken as positive whether positive or negative. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator



Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 44 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 6 & 7 : Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Cost (Schemes > £100k) Indicator issue 06

Appendix 1: Time and Cost Phases for API 6 & 7

Milestone definitions

• DESIGN PHASE:

1. Commitment, after final VM, to detailed design completion dates and initial scheme cost. These dates are drawn from a programme covering works funded for a financial year, to be compiled and agreed by 31P

stP March, for all eligible schemes. For schemes issued after 31P

stP March the earliest

possible design date and scheme cost is to be agreed within the team. 2. Completion of detailed design as evidenced by the availability of a COMPLETE design package (this

may not coincide with the issue of the design package, subject to programme and unforeseen delays in starting pricing). Any issue of additional information would put back the end of the design stage. If the HA request a hold on pricing then the end of the design stage is the stage at which the complete package is ready for issue.

• PRICING PHASE

3. Agreement of Cost (e.g. Target Cost, Derived Price, Task Order Agreement and Tender price agreement)

Contd.

Com

mitm

ent t

o de

taile

d de

sign

Com

plet

ion

of d

etai

led

desi

gn

Pos

sibl

e de

lay

betw

een

com

plet

ion

of w

orks

info

and

st

art o

f pric

ing.

Agr

eem

ent o

f Cos

t

Agr

eem

ent o

f pre

dict

ed s

tart

and

finis

h da

tes

Pos

sibl

e de

lay

betw

een

agre

emen

t of t

arge

t pric

e an

d st

art o

f con

stru

ctio

n..

Actu

al s

tart

of C

onst

ruct

ion

Act

ual c

ompl

etio

n of

con

stru

ctio

n

Agr

eem

ent o

f fin

al a

ccou

nt a

t firs

t val

uatio

n af

ter

com

plet

ion

Milestone 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Design Phase Construction Phase

Pricing Phase

Construction Phase to first valuation after completion

time


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 45 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 6 & 7 : Predictability of Discrete Schemes – Cost (Schemes > £100k) Indicator issue 06

UAppendix 1: Time and Cost Phases for API 6 & 7 • CONSTRUCTION PHASE:

4. Point at which an agreed construction programme is published. This will normally coincide with

milestone 3. 5. Actual start of works on site including any traffic management.

6. Completion as defined under the Contract and including removal of all traffic management.

7. Agreement of final account at first valuation after completion


Indicator Ref. & Title API 8: Predictability of Resource (Accruals) Forecasting Indicator issue 02


To measure the predictability of the Provider’s resource (accruals) forecasting with respect to the monthly accruals and annual budget allocation for the overall area portfolio. Relates to the requirements of the Resource Accounting Manual to demonstrate the `proper handling and reporting of public money’.

Measures EF01

EF02

Percentage variance between the actual and forecast value of work completed in the month (overall portfolio) Percentage variance between the current Full Year Projection (FYP) and the Full Year Budget (FYB) (overall portfolio)

Definitions Resource Accounting

& Budgeting (RAB)

Accruals

Forecast expenditure

Actual expenditure

Full Year Projection (FYP)

Full Year Budget (FYB)

HAMIS / SfM

MPML

System of planning, controlling and reporting on public spending for government using accruals accounting principles `Non-cash’ effects of transactions and other events reflected in the month / year in which they occur (i.e. not when cash involved is received or paid) The value of work planned to be incurred during the month, forecast at the beginning of the month (or end of the preceding month), based on the proposed programme for design, supervision and works. The value of work actually incurred during the month as shown on invoices / applications submitted to the Highways Agency for payment. The overall value of work projected / forecast to be incurred during the financial year (April – March) – updated monthly The overall budget allocated to the Maintenance Area for the financial year, as formally adjusted from time to time throughout the year. Highways Agency Management Information System/System for Management Management Plan Monitoring Line (budget category)

Methodology

To be reported on the overall portfolio / budget under the control of the MAC / MA / TMC. EF01 to be calculated as the actual value of work incurred in the month minus the forecast value of work in the month, divided by the forecast value of work in the month (expressed as a percentage) i.e. (Am – Fm) / Fm EF02 to be calculated as the current Full Year Projection (FYP) minus the Full Year Budget (FYB), divided by the Full Year Budget (FYB) (expressed as a percentage) i.e. (FYP – FYB) / FYB

Data Source HA systems and / or providers records.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 46 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 47 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 8: Predictability of Resource (Accruals) Forecasting Indicator issue 02



Forecast value of work planned to be completed in month (overall portfolio)

(A) Integer 0 0 - £30m

Actual value of work completed in month (overall portfolio)

(B) Integer 0 0 - £30m

Current Full Year Projection (FYP) (overall portfolio)

(C) Integer 0 0 - £120m

Current Full Year Budget (FYB) (overall portfolio)

(D)

Integer 0

0 - £120m


Measure Report – Graph and/or Table (G/T) Type Calculation Decimals Range Area

Target

EF01 (M)

G + T

Percentage

(B - A) / A

*100

1

0 – 100 (+ or -)

Calculations (Financial Year to Date – April to March) i.e. current month + preceding months to and including April

Measure Report – Graph and/or Table (G/T) Type Calculation Decimals Range Area

Target

EF01 (FYTD)

G + T

Percentage

(ΣB - ΣA) / ΣA *100

1

0 - 100 (+ or -)

*

EF02 (FYTD)

G + T

Percentage

(C - D) / D

*100

1

0 - 100 (+ or -)

Note: (FYTD) = Full Year To Date, Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding months to and including April.


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 48 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 9: Winter Maintenance Indicator issue 02

Desired Outcome Customer Satisfaction ~ Effective Maintenance Purpose / Description

To measure the effectiveness of the Provider’s Winter Maintenance service. The Provider should, as far as is possible, ensure that ice does not form on the carriageway. In doing so, the service should allow the safe movement of traffic on the network, and keep delays and accidents caused by adverse weather to a minimum.

Measures WM01

WM02

Number of reported instances of ice on the network. Number of confirmed instances of ice on the network.

Definitions Reported instances

Confirmed instances

Instances where the Provider is notified by a 3P

rdP party or member of the

Provider’s staff that there is ice on the network (excludes snow). This includes instances where the reliability of the reporter to confirm ice is in doubt. Reported instances of ice on the network should be assessed and verified by a competent person – see below. Reported instances include all confirmed and unconfirmed reports. Instances where a competent employee of the Provider, or other reliable source identifies or confirms the presence of ice on the network.

Methodology

WM01 is reported as the number of reported instances of ice on the network reported in the month. WM02 is reported as the number of confirmed instances of ice on the network reported in the month.

Data Source Provider’s Customer Service logs / database


Reasons and locations for confirmed instances of ice should be detailed in the Comments / Exceptions section of the API Report.



Total number of reported instances of ice in month

(A) Integer N/A 0 0 – 200

Total number of confirmed reported instances in month

(B) Integer N/A 0 0 – 200



and/or Table (G/T)


Target

WM01 - (M) G + T Integer A 0 0 – 200

WM02 - (M) G + T Integer B 0 0 – 200 Note: (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator


Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 10: Defect Free Work Indicator issue 03

Desired Outcome Customer Satisfaction – Quality Performance Purpose / Description

To measure the effectiveness of the Provider’s supervision and workforce in achieving a right first time culture. To reduce inconvenience to the customer caused by additional visits to the site for remedial works and the customer’s perception of continuous occupation of the highway.

Measures DF01

DF02

DF03

DF04

DF05

Number of Provider’s works substantially completed. Percentage of Provider’s works substantially completed with no defects. Percentage of Provider’s works substantially completed with defects that require corrective action. Percentage of Provider’s works substantially completed with defects that require a compromise acceptance to the Specification with an associated guarantee. Percentage of Provider's works substantially completed with Customer Impact Defects.

Definitions Provider’s works

Substantial Completion

Defect

Customer Impact Defect

Network

Renewal (including Small Works) and Improvement works greater than £5,000 in works value undertaken by the MAC / TMC below the threshold value (as defined in the Contract) – excluding lump sum and/or cyclic/routine maintenance. The stage when the works have been put to use for their intended function or completed in accordance with the contract be this with no defects or only minor defects. A part of the works that is not in accordance with the Works Information (as defined in the Contract) – will either require corrective action or acceptance as a compromise to the Specification. Defects can be in design, workmanship or materials. A Defect which, after Substantial Completion, gives rise to rectification work that necessitates restrictions to the unimpeded use of the Network. The length of trunk road and/or motorway, including all carriageways, hard shoulders, slip roads and access roads as recorded in SRW for an area.

Methodology

DF02, DF03 DF04 and DF05 are reported as a percentage of the number of Provider’s works reported at DF01 on a rolling 12 month basis.

Data Source Provider’s Records.


DF01 is reported for contextual information, to evaluate DF03, DF04 and DF05. DF02 is reported as a check.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 49 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 50 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 10: Defect Free Work Indicator issue 03



Number of Provider’s works substantially completed in month greater than £5k Of (A), number of works with Defects that require corrective action Of (A), number of works with Defects that require compromise to Specification Of (A), number of works with Customer Impact Defects (record in the month the impact first occurs)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Integer

Integer

Integer

Integer

0 0 0 0

0 – 200

0 –200

0 – 200

0 – 200




DF01 – (M)

T

Integer

A

0

0 – 200

*

Calculations (Rolling 12 Month Performance) ie current month + preceding 11 months



DF01 - (A)

G + T Integer ΣA / 12 0 0 – 200 *

DF02 - (A) G + T Percentage ((ΣA-(ΣB+ΣC))/

ΣA) *100 0 0 – 100

DF03 - (A) G + T Percentage (ΣB / ΣA) *100 0 0 – 100 *

DF04 - (A) G + T Percentage (ΣC / ΣA) *100 0 0 – 100 *

DF05 – (A) G + T Percentage (ΣD / ΣA) *100 0 0 – 100




Indicator Ref. & Title API 11: Road Traffic Accidents at Roadworks Indicator issue 02

Desired Outcome Customer Satisfaction ~ Safer Travel Purpose / Description

To monitor road traffic accidents associated with roadworks and any resultant criticism of the traffic management.

Measures RTA01

RTA02

Number of road traffic accidents reported at roadworks. Number of road traffic accidents reported at roadworks where criticism of the traffic management was received.

Definitions Roadworks

Criticism of TM

Coned extent of traffic management – to include queuing traffic beyond extent of traffic management. Any criticism received by the Provider with respect to the traffic management system, which can be directly related to a road traffic accident at roadworks.

Methodology

RTA01 Record total number of road traffic accidents reported at roadworks. RTA02 Record total number of road traffic accidents reported at roadworks where criticism of the traffic management was received. .

Data Source Provider’s Customer Service and Accident databases


It is recognised that limitations in the scope of data capture exist with this measure.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 51 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 52 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 11: Road Traffic Accidents at Roadworks Indicator issue 02



Total number of RTAs reported at roadworks.

(A) Integer A 0 0 – 200

Number of road traffic accidents reported at roadworks where criticism of the traffic management was received.

(B)

Integer

B

0

0 –100




RTA01 - (M) G + T Integer A 0 0 – 200

RTA02 - (M) G + T Integer B 0 0 – 100




RTA01 - (A) T Integer

12AΣ

0 0 – 200 N/A

RTA02 - (A) T Integer

12BΣ

0 0 - 100 *




Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 53 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 12: Street Lighting Outages Indicator issue 02

Desired Outcome Customer Satisfaction ~ Safer Travel Purpose / Description

To measure the effectiveness of the Provider’s response to operational failures of road lighting equipment on the network.

Measures SLO 01

SLO 02

Number of lamp outages based on the last lamp scout in the reporting period as a percentage of the total agreed population. Percentage of CAT 2 (High & Medium) outages fixed within target time.

Definitions Road Lighting Equipment

Includes: • Luminaires provided for the purpose of road lighting whether mounted on

columns or brackets on Motorways and All-Purpose Trunk Roads. • Pedestrian subway lighting Excludes: • Tunnel lighting • High mast lighting • Lighting to signs and bollards etc.

Outage An outage shall be recorded for each individual lamp failure i.e. Where 2 luminaries on a single column or bracket have failed, this shall be recorded as 2 number outages.

Inspections

Two levels of inspection may be carried out to detect lighting failures. A programme of regular nightime “Safety Inspections” carried out from a moving vehicle. Additionally, these may also be carried out in response extreme weather or major road traffic accidents. “Detailed Inspections” will involve a comprehensive scrutiny & testing of the structural, electrical and mechanical elements of the road lighting system.

Inspection Frequency Safety Inspections shall be carried out as detailed in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 8, Section 3, TD 23/99, Annex B, Table 6. Detailed Inspections are generally carried out with programmed bulk lamp changes every 24 months, however reference should be made to DMRB TD 23/99 Annex B, Table 6 for specific requirements.

Category of defect

Response Time

A description of defect categories is given in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 8, Section 3, TD 23/99, Tables 1 and 2. A description of response times for each category of defect is given in Design Manual for Roads and Bridges, Volume 8, Section 3, TD 23/99, Table 3.

Methodology

SLO 01 is calculated as the number of lamp outages recorded at the last lamp scout in the reporting period as a percentage of the agreed figure for the total population. SLO 02 is calculated as the number of outages classified as CAT 2 (High & Medium) fixed within the target response time as a percentage of the total number of outages (with required completion date/time in month) classified as CAT 2 (High & Medium) recorded at the last lamp scout in the reporting period.


Provider’s inventory database and inspection records


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 54 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 12: Street Lighting Outages Indicator issue 02


It must be recognised that a true figure for outages at any one time is difficult to accurately determine, as lamp scouts are carried out over a period of days on large networks and SLO 01 does not allow for repairs completed between the lamp scout and reporting period end date. Assuming that outages occur at a relatively consistent rate, an assessment of performance can be gained by comparing changes month by month. Please note that checks should be made to ensure that repeat failures do not occur month on month. The measure SLO 02 may show a satisfactory performance for completing a repair but will not highlight if the same failure occurs regularly. Performance against all reported figures may be influenced by power outages under the control of the Regional Electricity Boards



Total lamp population. (A) Integer 0 0 – 50000 Total number of lamp outages recorded at the last scout.

(B) Integer 0 0 – 50000

Number of lamp outages classified as CAT2 (high & medium) with required completion date/ time in month.

(C) Integer 0 0 – 10000

Number of lamp outages classified as CAT2 (high & medium) closed by required completion date/ time within month.

(D)

Integer 0

0 – 10000



and/or Table (G/T))


Target

SL01 - (M) G + T Percentage (B / A) *100 1 0 – 100

SL02 - (M) G + T Percentage (D / C) *100 1 0 – 100 Calculations (Rolling 12 Month Performance) i.e. current month + preceding 11 months


and/or Table (G/T))


Target

SL01 - (A) T Percentage (ΣB / ΣA) *100 1 0 – 100 *

SL02 - (A) T Percentage (ΣD / ΣC) *100 1 0 – 100 * Note: Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding 11 months. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator



Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 55 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 13: Network Availability Indicator issue 02

Desired Outcome Customer Satisfaction ~ Easing Congestion Purpose / Description

To provide an indirect measure of the amount of work being carried out on the Area Network, and of the effectiveness of the Provider's network management / operator role with respect to road space co-ordination. Wherever possible, road works should be carried out outside of peak times so as to minimise disruption and delay to road users.

Measures

NA01

NA02

NA03

Percentage of the Area Network available for use by road users during peak hours. Percentage of the Area Network available for use by road users during off-peak hours. Percentage of the Area Network available for use by road users during night hours.

Definitions Area Network

Peak

Off-peak

Night

The length of trunk road and/or motorway, including all carriageways, hard shoulders, slip roads and access roads as recorded in SRW for an area. As defined in SRW

Methodology

The network availability percentages are calculated using the standard reports provided within SRW.


Scheduled Road Works (SRW) system, or


Field Type Calculation Decimals Range Availability - Peak hours (A) Percentage 2 0 - 100 Availability - Off-peak hours (B) Percentage 2 0 - 100 Availability - Night hours (C) Percentage 2 0 – 100 Calculations (Individual Monthly Performance)


and/or Table (G/T))


Target

NA01 – (M) G + T Percentage A 2 0 - 100

NA02 – (M) G + T Percentage B 2 0 - 100

NA03 – (M) G + T Percentage C 2 0 - 100

Note: (M) Monthly indicator


Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 14: Third Party Claims Indicator issue 02

Desired Outcome Customer Satisfaction – Quality Performance Purpose / Description

To measure the effectiveness of the Provider’s handling of Third Party Claims on behalf of the Secretary of State.

Measures TPC01

TPC02

TPC03

TPC04

TPC05

TPC06

Number of incidents of damage by 3rd parties to Crown property. Percentage of Claims identified in TPC01 for which driver / vehicle details are “known” (i.e. traceable claims). Estimated Total Value of “known” claims (identified in TPC02). Percentage of Claims for which driver / vehicle details are “known” (TPC02) that have been invoiced by the Provider (either to Culprit or sent to HA dependent on contractual obligations) Number of claims made against the Provider (on behalf of the HA) from third parties claiming damages as a result of the condition of the Area Network. Percentage of Claims (identified in TPC05) where details are forwarded to the HA in compliance with contractual requirements.

Definitions TR430

TR137

This form must be used when reporting damage to Crown Property under the provisions of circular 630, Circular Roads 4/75 and TRMM 2/87 on behalf of the Secretary of State (Green Claims) This form must be used when investigating a claim by third parties, against the Secretary of State, arising out of the condition of the Area Network. (Red Claims)

Methodology TPC01 is the total number of incidents of damage to Crown Property, by a third party, where “Known” and “Unknown” claims have arisen, reported monthly and on a rolling 12 month basis. Reported for contextual information only. TPC02 is reported irrespective of value, on a rolling 12 month basis, due to possible time lag in obtaining details. TPC02 should include claims where details have been received and claims where information is known to be available but has not yet been received from DVLC / Police etc. (withheld on occasion) TPC03 Estimated total value of “known” claims. Reported on a rolling 12 month basis. Reported for contextual information only. TPC04 Percentage of claims identified in TPC02 for which driver details are “known” that have been invoiced by the Provider (TR430’s may be used here, dependent on contract). Reported on a rolling 12 month basis only (no monthly figure).

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 56 of 60

Area Performance Indicator Handbook Indicator Ref. & Title API 14: Third Party Claims Indicator issue 02

Methodology (Continued)

TPC05 Number of claims made against the provider will include all types of claims. Condition of the Area Network includes removal of debris at works etc. Reported monthly and on a rolling 12 month basis. TPC06 is the total number of claims where details have been forwarded to the HA within contractual requirements, reported on a rolling 12 month basis, contextual information only.

Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 57 of 60


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 58 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 14: Third Party Claims Indicator issue 02



Number of incidents of damage by 3 P

rdP

parties to Crown property in monthly.

(A)

Integer

0

0 – 1000

Number of incidents of damage for which driver details are known (12 Month Rolling Total)

(B) Integer 0 0 – 12000

Estimated total value of “known” claims (identified in TPC02) (12 Month Rolling Total)

(C) Integer

0 0 – 15 x 10 P

6P

Number of Claims for which driver details are “known” and have been invoiced as per contractual obligation (12 Month Rolling Total)

(D) Integer

0 0 – 12000

Number of claims made against the Provider from third parties claiming damages in month.

(E) Integer 0 0 – 100

Number of claims made against the Provider forwarded to the HA in compliance with the contract (12 Month Rolling Total)

(F) Integer 0 0 – 1200



and/or Table (G/T))


Target

TPC01 – (M) T Integer A 0 0 – 1000 N/A

TPC05 – (M) T Integer E 0 0 - 100 N/A Calculations (Rolling 12 Month Performance) i.e. current month + preceding 11 months


and/or Table (G/T)


Target

TPC01 - (A) G + T Integer ΣA / 12 0 0 – 1000 N/A

TPC02 - (A) G + T Percentage (B / ΣA) * 100 1 0 - 100

TPC03 - (A)

T

Integer

C 0

0 – 50 x 10 P

6P

N/A

TPC04 - (A) G + T Percentage (D / B) * 100 1 0 – 100

TPC05 - (A) G + T Integer ΣE / 12 0 0 – 100 N/A

TPC06 - (A) G + T Percentage (F / ΣE) * 100 1 0 - 100




Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 59 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 15: Recycling and Re-use. Indicator issue 02

Desired Outcome Construction Best Practice ~ Delivering in Partnership. Purpose / Description

To promote the recycling and re-use of materials used in or arising from all network activities.

Measure

RR01 Total of scores recorded across the 19 identified material categories.

Definitions

Recycling

Re-use

A subjective assessment based on evidence, of the percentage recycling and / or re-use of materials in 19 identified categories using a points system. Each category scoring a maximum of 5 points except planings where scores are doubled (i.e. Max 10). The use of a production process to convert waste materials into new material. The use of waste materials for any purpose without processing that results in an overall material change (e.g. cleaning of items would not result in an overall change).

Methodology

Following an initial assessment of recycling and re-use scores are established for the reporting categories consistent with the supporting evidence available. A mechanism that enables improvement (e.g. action plan), where applicable, is then agreed (Provider and HA). This should be reviewed on an annual basis. As supporting evidence becomes available scores are amended accordingly and reported in the month that they take effect. UCategories.U (European Waste Codes - guidance where applicable) Tyres(16.01.03), Glass(20.01.02), Paper(20.01.01), Office Consumables / Equipment(20.01.36,other codes may apply), Planings(17.03.02), Concrete and Concrete Products(17.01.01), Filter Drain Material(17.05.03), Unbound Materials / Aggregates(17.05.04), Wood(20.01.38), Ferrous Metals (not including safety fence) (17.04.05), Safety Fencing (17.04.05), Non Ferrous Metals (17.04.07), Batteries(20.01.33), Oil(13.--.-- full code dependent on type of oil), Plastics(20.01.39), Water(no applicable code), Green Waste(20.02.01), Lantern Units(20.01.21), Gully Arisings(20.03.03). UScoring.

Estimated percentage usage

≤10 11-20 21-40 41-60 61-80

81-100

Points 0 1 2 3 4 5 Data Source Audits, internal and external.

Service contracts. Scheme specific information. Sub-contractors.


Issue 05 Rev 01 Mar 2007 60 of 60

Indicator Ref. & Title API 15: Recycling and Re-use. Indicator issue 02

Data Input (Frequency / Reporting Period: Calendar month) Field Type Calculation Decimals Range Score for Tyres (A) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Glass (B) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Paper (C) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Office Consumables / Equipment

(D) Integer 0 0 - 5

Score for Planings (E) Integer 0 0 - 10 Score for Concrete and Concrete Products

(F) Integer 0 0 - 5

Score for Filter Drain Material (G) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Unbound Materials / Aggregates (H) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Wood (I) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Ferrous Metals (J) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Safety Fencing (K) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Non Ferrous Metals (L) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Batteries (M) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Oil (N) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Plastics (O) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Water (P) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Green Waste (Q) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Lantern Units (R) Integer 0 0 - 5 Score for Gully Arisings (S) Integer 0 0 – 5

Recycling and Reuse Index for month

(V) Integer Sum(A:S) 0 0 - 100


Measure

Report – Graph

and/or Table (G/T)


RR01 - (M)

G + T

Integer

SUM (A-S)

0

0 -100



and/or Table (G/T)

Type Calculation Decimals Range

Area Target

RR01 - (A)

G + T

Integer

ΣV / 12

0

0 – 100

*

Note:Σ = the aggregation of input data for the current month and the preceding 11 months. (M) Monthly indicator (A) Annual indicator


API Handbook

Documents

handbook issue history

time of issue issue

api handbookapi

reuse api

area maintenance community

measurement system

current document status

emergency incidents