BangfortheBuck?FollowingtheMoneyfrom

TransportationDecisionstoOutcomes

RobZako,Ph.D.

3/21/17 1

RebeccaLewis,Ph.D.+RobZako,Ph.D.

PairofPIs

3/21/17 2Credit:RemingtonSteele,1982–1987

AlexisBiddle,J.D.,M.C.R.P.+RoryIsbell,J.D.,M.C.R.P.

GradStudents:“FollowtheMoney”

3/21/17 3Credit:AllthePresident'sMen,1976

Advisors:T4A&NRDC

3/21/17 4Credit:StarTrek:TheNextGeneration,1987–1994

ResearchQuestions

Effectiveness(“BangfortheBuck”):Howeffectivelyarestatesandmetropolitanplanningorganization(MPOs)advancingtheirowneconomicdevelopment,publichealth,andotherlivabilitygoalswithtransportationinvestments?

Accountability&Transparency:HowarestatesandMPOsmakingtransportationinvestmentdecisions?Howcould(performance-based)decision-makingprocessesbeimprovedtoprovidebetteroutcomes?

3/21/17 5

Best&WorstPractices

3/21/17 6Credit:ConsumerReports,2016

Methodology

●  CaseStudies◦  Considered10states/MPOs;studied6states/MPOsindetail

●  DocumentAnalysis◦  Organizationalstructures◦  Constitutions&statutes◦  Long-rangeplans&goals◦  State&metropolitantransportationimprovement

Programs(STIPs&MTIPs);budgets◦  Otherreports

●  StakeholderInterviews◦  Contacted6states&6MPOswithfollowupquestions

3/21/17 7

CaseStudies

3/21/17 8Source:U.S.CensusBureau

Findings

3/21/17 9Credit:AllthePresident'sMen,1976

Questions

TheEnd.

Actually,justthebeginning.

3/21/17 10

Outline

1.  Problem

2.  Solutions

3.  MAP-21

4.  Conclusion

3/21/17 11

Performance-Based Planning and Programming Guidebook September 2013

Source:FederalHighwayAdministration,2013,Performance-BasedPlanningandProgrammingGuidebook

“Houston,wehaveaproblem”

3/21/17 12Credit:NASA

GovernmentTransportationExpenditures

Mode Expenditures(millionsof$)

Highway 206,251 64.5% Transit 55,150 17.2% Rail 1,752 0.5% Air 41,794 13.1% Water 13,261 4.1% Pipeline 86 0.0% GeneralSupport 1,523 0.5%

Total 319,817 100.0%

3/21/17 13Source:BureauofTransportationStatistics,2016,TransportationStatisticsAnnualReport2015

$FlowsBetweenLevelsofGovernment

3/21/17 14Source:PewCharitableTrusts,2014,IntergovernmentalChallengesinSurfaceTransportation

$FlowsinMassachusetts

3/21/17 15

MBTA Operations

$1.509 billion

Figures do not include state budget allocation for federal funding, capital budget outlays, MassPort, ferry authorities, or the one-time $32 million supplemental funding from the General Budget for fiscal year 2014 snow and ice operations spent in 2015. Also not included are: state parking ticket surcharges on rental cars (which are paid to municipalities), Merit Rating Board assessments (paid by insurance companies), gaming revenue transfers to the Transportation Infrastructure and Development Fund, or $31.1 million State Retiree Benefits transfer from the CTF.

MBTA Debt

1. Motor Vehicle Sales Tax$510.0m

2. Motor Fuels Taxes$824.6m

Commonwealth Transportation Fund

$1.933 billion

MA TransportationTrust Fund

$1.071 billion

11. Prison license plates(Department of Corrections)$3.1m

3. Other (Highway fines, late charges, etc.)$5.4m

4. Registry and Inspection Fees$571.2m 5. Registry of Motor

Vehicles Operations$70.5m

6. Western Turnpike(Tolls, etc.)$173.6m

7. Metropolitan Highway System(Tolls, etc.) $222.9m

8. Tobin Bridge(Tolls, etc.) $34.4m

9. Other (Permits, adverts, etc.)$19.6m

10. CTF transfer to MTTF $620.1m

12. Additional Assistance$122.6m 13. Debt Service

$1.196 billion

14. CTF Transfer to RTAs$40.0m

Regional Transit

Authorities15. Transfer to RTAs through MTTFFY15=$40.0m plus$1.3m earmarks

16. Debt Service$171.0m

17. MassDOT Operations$853.2mFor Highways, Office of the Secretary, and Aeronautics

20. MBTA Fares$602.6m

19. Local Gov’t Assessment(175 cities and towns)$160.2m

18. MBTA Sales Tax Transfer$970.6m

21. MBTA Parking, Adverts, Real Estate$43.3m

22. MBTA Debt Service$413.4m

Debt

Operating Budget

Source:PhineasBaxandall,2017,“WhatdoesMassachusettstransportationfundingsupportandwhataretherevenuesources”

$FlowsinMassachusetts

Mass.Gen.Lawsch.29,§2ZZZ(a)Thereshallbeestablishedandsetuponthebooksofthecommonwealthaseparatefundtobeknownas

theCommonwealthTransportationFund,whichshallbeusedexclusivelyforfinancingtransportation-relatedpurposes.…

(c)Inadditiontothoserevenuescreditedtothefundundersubsection(a)thereshallbecreditedtothefundallmoniesreceivedbythecommonwealthfromthereceiptsfromsalesofmotorvehiclesundersections3,25and26ofchapter64Handallmoniesreceivedbythecommonwealthonthesalespriceofpurchasesofmotorvehiclesundersections4,26and27ofchapter64I,fromthetaxesimposedundersaidchapters64Hand64Iasexcisesuponthesaleanduseatretailofmotorvehiclesanduponthestorage,useorotherconsumptionofmotorvehicles,includinginterestthereonorpenalties;providedhowever,suchamountshallnotincludeanyportionofthetaxesthatconstitutespecialreceiptswithinthemeaningofsubsection(b1/2)ofsection10ofchapter152oftheactsof1997.TheamountcreditedtothefundunderthissubsectionshallbenetofthededicatedsalestaxrevenueamounttransferredtotheMassachusettsBayTransportationAuthorityStateandLocalContributionFundundersection35Tofchapter10andtotheSchoolModernizationandReconstructionTrustFundundersection35BBofsaidchapter10.

(d)NotlessthanthefollowingamountsshallannuallybedistributedfromthefundtotheMassachusettsBayTransportationAuthorityandregionaltransitauthorities:

(1)$160,000,000totheMassachusettsBayTransportationAuthorityoranyfundcontrolledbytheauthorityineachfiscalyear;and

(2)$15,000,000toregionaltransitauthoritiesorganizedunderchapter161Borpredecessorstatutesineachfiscalyear.…

3/21/17 16

$FlowsinCalifornia

DTP-0001 (Revised September 2013)

EIR/FONSIBegin Environmental (PA&ED) Phase

Document TypeCirculate Draft Environmental Document

Begin Design (PS&E) Phase

05

E-mail Address

Heavy trucks and RV's comprise a very high percentage of the total traffic on this portion of Route 46. These vehicles typically experience a reduction in running speed of 31 km/h. There are limited passing opportunities on this segment, which contributes to driver frustration and passing miscalculations. Route 46 will continue to serve as a vital conduit for traffic to and from the San Joaquin Valley region and beyond, to the Central Coast. This project will reduce congesion, enhance safety and provide passing opportunities, improve the facilitation of goods movement, improve recreational travel and major east/west route from the San Joaquin Valley and Interstate 5 to the Central Coast and Rout101.

Project Milestone

Construction

Draft Project Report

02/01/19

05/09/0608/01/1807/01/23

/ /

Caltrans Right of Way

The Project benefits include:Safety Improvements, reduction of fatalities and injuries. The project supports a growing economy, improves the livability of the region, and reduces greenhouse gases. It is a Primary Goods Movement Route, and will provide Bike/Ped Improvements.

Reduces Greenhouse Gas EmissionsSupports Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Goals

MPO IDPPNO TCRP No.

MPO

Purpose and Need

Project Benefits

Project Study Report Approved

STATE OF CALIFORNIA ● DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

PROJECT PROGRAMMING REQUEST

Date: 8/7/15General Instructions

Caltrans

Element

Existing

Component

Location, Project Limits, Description, Scope of Work

Caltrans

Proposed

john.luchetta@dot.ca.gov

Near Cholame, from 0.7 miles west of Davis Road to 0.5 miles west of Antelope Road. Convert to a 4 lane expressway.

Includes Bike/Ped ImprovementsIncludes ADA Improvements

PM BkRoute/Corridor Project Sponsor/Lead AgencyCaltrans

CO SLOCOG

District

SLOCounty

0226K EA

46

Project ID05140000283307C

PS&E

PM Ahd54.1

Project Manager/Contact PhoneJohn Luchetta

57.8

PA&ED

End Environmental Phase (PA&ED Milestone)

Begin Right of Way PhaseEnd Design Phase (Ready to List for Advertisement Milestone)

(805)549-3175

Route 46/41 Wye Project Title

Implementing Agency

For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate formats. For information call (916) 654-6410 or TDD (916) 654-3880 or write Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814.

04/01/26

/ / / /

Begin Closeout Phase

04/01/23

End Construction Phase (Construction Contract Acceptance Milestone)04/01/27

Begin Construction Phase (Contract Award Milestone)End Right of Way Phase (Right of Way Certification Milestone)

ADA Notice04/01/28End Closeout Phase (Closeout Report)

01/01/24

Amendment (Existing Project)

3/21/17 17Source:Caltrans,2016,Revised2016InterregionalTransportationImprovementProgram

It’sComplicated

3/21/17 18

WhatthePublicSees

3/21/17 19

WhatthePublicREALLYSees

3/21/17 20

Problem:LackofTransparency

1.  Accountability:Deliveringdesiredresults◦  “Thecontinuousefforttousepublicdollarsinthemost

efficientandcost-effectiveway”—WisconsinDOT◦  “Demonstratingwisestewardshipofpublicfundsor

generatingapositivereturnoninvestment”—T4America2.  Transparency:Inanunderstoodmanner◦  “Inafreesociety,transparencyisgovernment’sobligation

toshareinformationwithcitizens.Itisattheheartofhowcitizensholdtheirpublicofficialsaccountable.”—SunshineReview

◦  “Broadlyunderstoodandaccepteddecision-makingprocess”—T4America

3/21/17 21

Need:ReportOutcomestoTaxpayers

3/21/17 22

Solutions:Outcomes-BasedDecision-Making

Aproposed4-phaseapproach1.  Planning◦  Setreal-worldgoalsthatmatter◦  Determineactionstoachieveoutcomes

2.  Funding◦  Levytaxestoraiseneededrevenues◦  Empowerwell-positioneddecision-makers

3.  Programming◦  Investineffectiveprojects

4.  Evaluating◦  Monitoroutcomesontheground◦  Reportreturnsoninvestmentstotaxpayers◦  Adjustexpectationsinlightofexperience

3/21/17 23

BenefitsofOutcomes-BasedApproach

●  Transparency:Maintainingtaxpayerconfidence

●  Accountability:Deliveringvaluetothepublic●  BangfortheBuck:Morevalueontheground

●  ResolveConflicts:Amongstandbetweentransportationandotherpolicies

●  AdditionalFunding:Makecasetotaxpayers

3/21/17 24

FourPhasesinaCycle

3/21/17 25

Planning

Funding

Programming

Evaluating

PhysicsAnalogy:AdiabaticExpansion

3/21/17 26

WhatCountsas“Transportation”?

3/21/17 27

Transportation

ResidencesBusinessesIndustriesSchoolsParks

PricesIncome

Demographics

HealthAirQuality

WaterQualityCommunities

Equity

1.Planning–SetGoals

Setreal-worldgoalsthatmatter●  IdentifyGoals:Learnwhatthepublicwants

●  Considerthe“ThreeP’s/E’s”:Thinkbeyondtraditionalgoalstoprosperity,people&planet,i.e.,economy,(social)equity&environment

●  SetPriorities:Especiallywhengoalsconflict◦  Example:Ismobilityorsafetymoreimportant?

●  QuantifyPerformance:Establishobjectives,measures&targets

3/21/17 28

Tennessee:LRTPGuidingPrinciples1.  Preserve&managethe

existingsystem2.  Supportthestate’seconomy3. Maximizesafetyandsecurity4.  Providefortheefficient

movementofpeople&freight5.  Buildpartnershipsfor

sustainable&livablecommunities

6.  Protectnatural,cultural&environmentalresources

7.  Emphasizefinancialresponsibility

3/21/17 29Source:TDOT,2015,25-YearLong-RangeTransportationPolicyPlan:PlanSummary

1.Planning–DetermineActions

Determineactionstoachieveoutcomes●  IdentifyActions:Considerabroadrangeof

potentialactionsthataffectthegoalsofinterest

●  DevelopScenarios:Determineapackageofactionstoachieveoutcomescost-effectively

●  PlanforUncertainty:Asnotallfactorscanbecontrolledandmodelsareimperfect,planforimperfectpredictions

3/21/17 30

SanFrancisco:PlanBayArea

3/21/17 31

Goals&Targets ProjectedOutcomes

Source:MetropolitanTransportationCommission,2013,PlanBayArea

2.Funding–LevyTaxes

Levytaxestoraiseneededrevenues●  SecureRevenues:Levytaxes&feestofund

transportationactions

●  BeAccountable:Neededtomaintaintaxpayersupport

●  PriceEfficiently:Taxes&feesaren’tmerelysourcesofrevenue,butalsoactionsthatcreateincentives&disincentivesthatimpactthetransportationsystem

3/21/17 32

weMoveMassachusetts

3/21/17 33Source:MassDOT,2014,weMoveMassachusetts:PlanningforPerformance

2.Funding–Empower

Empowerwell-positioneddecision-makers●  Allocate:Providefundingtodecision-makerswith

sufficientbreadthofresponsibilityandfamiliaritywithissues

●  GiveFlexibility/EliminateConstraints:Decision-makersneedsufficientflexibility—lackofconstraints—tofundthemosteffectiveactions

●  HoldAccountable:Holddecision-makersaccountableforachievingoutcomes

3/21/17 34

“TransportationdecisionmakinginVirginiasuffersfromaninabilitytomarshaltheresourcesandtheauthoritytomaketransportationfundingandinvestmentdecisionsthatbothoffertheappropriatenexusofdecisionmakingandprovideanappropriateleveloffundingtoaddressregionaltransportationchallenges.”—OfficeofIntermodalPlanningandInvestment,2009

AppropriateDecision-Makers?

3/21/17 35Source:OfficeofIntermodalPlanningandInvestment,2009,VTrans2035:RegionalandLocalDecisionMaking

Constitutional&StatutoryConstraints

3/21/17 36

Transportation Governance and Finance ! 67

Table 25. Dedications of State Fuel Taxes in State Law

StateDedications of State Fuel Taxes

To Roads and Bridges Only To Transportation PurposesOther

Constitutional Statutory Constitutional Statutory

Alabama •

Alaska No restrictions

Arizona •

Arkansas Constitutional and statutory

California Roads and bridges, fixed

guideway transit

Colorado With a limited exception for local entities

Connecticut •

Delaware • Session law, constitutional restric-tion pending

Florida With exceptions

Georgia With an emergency exception

Hawaii Includes bikeways and

trails

Idaho •

Illinois Roads and bridges, public

transit

Indiana •

Iowa •

Kansas Constitutional and statutory

Kentucky •

Louisiana •

Maine •

Maryland Constitutional and statutory, with exceptions

Massachusetts Roads and bridges, public

transit, with exceptions

Michigan At least 90 percent must be used for

roads, streets, and bridges

Minnesota •

Mississippi With exceptions

Missouri •

Montana With exceptions

68 ! A 50-State Review of State Legislatures and Departments of Transportation

StateDedications of State Fuel Taxes

To Roads and Bridges Only To Transportation PurposesOther

Constitutional Statutory Constitutional Statutory

Nebraska Roads and bridges, public

transit

Nevada •

New Hampshire •

New Jersey •

New Mexico With exceptions

New York •

North Carolina With exceptions

North Dakota •

Ohio •

Oklahoma •

Oregon •

Pennsylvania •

Rhode Island •

South Carolina •

South Dakota •

Tennessee With exceptions

Texas State constitution dedicates three-fourths of fuel tax revenues to roads and bridges and one-fourth to the Available School Fund

Utah •

Vermont With exceptions

Virginia •

Washington •

West Virginia •

Wisconsin •

Wyoming •

District of Columbia •

Note: See state profiles for additional details and statutory citations.

States have placed restrictions, not just on fuel taxes, but on a broad range of other transportation revenues. Common provisions in state laws include that vehicle-related taxes and fees must be used for roads and bridges, tolls must be spent on toll facilities, or certain revenues derived from rail, waterways, or aviation must be reinvested in those same modes (see state profiles). States must also align their restrictions with a 2014 Federal Aviation Administration ruling that airport-related revenues, including state taxes on aviation fuels, must be used for aviation purposes.

In part because restrictions in state law have not always prevented the diversion of transportation revenues to other areas of the budget, states have taken various actions to further protect them. In 2014, for example, voters in Maryland and Wisconsin approved constitutional protections (or “lockbox” measures) on those states’ multimodal transportation funds. Since then, leg-islatures in Connecticut, Delaware, and Illinois have also taken steps in this direction. As a different approach, under Virginia’s 2013 transportation funding legislation, any provisions of the act that generate additional funding through state taxes or fees

Source:AASHTO,2016,TransportationGovernance&Finance:A50-StateReview

3.Programming

Investineffectiveprojects●  FundWhat’sPlanned:Ideally,themost

effectiveprojectsarealreadyplanned,makingprogrammingalesserexerciseintiming

●  ThinkMulti-Modal/Jurisdictional:Fundthemosteffectiveprojects,regardlessofmodeorjurisdiction

●  AssessBenefits&Costs:Reviewnotonlybenefitsbutalsocosts—“bangforthebuck”

3/21/17 37

Virginia:SMARTSCALEMeasuresFactorArea Measure

SafetyS.1 NumberofFatalandInjuryCrashes(50%)S.2 RateofFatalandInjuryCrashes(50%)

CongestionMitigationC.1 PersonThroughput(50%)C.2 PersonHoursofDelay(50%)

AccessibilityA.1 AccesstoJobs(60%)A.2 AccesstoJobsforDisadvantagedPersons(20%)A.3 AccesstoMultimodalChoices(20%)

EnvironmentalQualityE.1 AirQualityandEnvironmentalEffect(50%)E.2 ImpacttoNaturalandCulturalResources(50%)

EconomicDevelopmentED.1 ProjectSupportforEconomicDevelopment(60%)ED.2 IntermodalAccessandEfficiency(20%)ED.3 TravelTimeReliability(20%)

LandUse* L.1 Transportation-EfficientLandUse(100%)*forareasover200,000inpopulation

3/21/17 38Source:VDOT,2017,SMARTSCALEevaluationmeasures

Virginia:SMARTSCALEScorecard

3/21/17 39

PROJECT SCORECARD

McVitty Road and Old Cave Spring Road Improvements

Improve safety and congestion at McVitty Rd (Rte 1662) and Old Cave Spring Rd (Rte 1663) by reconstructing the intersection, widening lanes and shoulders, adding turn lanes, improving curves, and upgrading Rte 419/1662 signal

App Id: 605

Project Location .......... Roanoke County

HB2 Area Type .......... B

Submitting Entity .......... Roanoke County

Total Project Cost .......... $19,305,742

HB2 Request .......... $12,946,546

Performance

VTrans Need: Cave Spring Urban Development Area

HB2 COST TOTAL COSTFinal Score 1.1 0.7

Statewide Rank 177/287 186/287

District Rank 23/37 25/37

Project Beneft Score

1.4

Click for details

Preliminary Engineering .......... Underway

Right of Way .......... Underway

Construction .......... Not Started

Expenditures to Date .......... $5,388,339

Key Fund Sources .......... Fed/State Disc.

Administered By .......... VDOT

Eligible Funding Program(s) .......... District Grant

Congestion Mitigation Safety Accessibility Environment Economic Development Land Use

15% of score 20% of score 25% of score 20% of score10% of score 10% of score

Incr

ease

in D

aily

Per

son

Thro

ughp

ut

Dec

reas

e in

Per

son

Hou

rs

Del

ay

Red

uctio

n in

Fat

al a

nd S

ever

e In

jury

Red

uctio

n in

Fat

al a

nd S

ever

e In

jury

Rat

e

Incr

ease

in A

cces

s to

Job

s

Incr

ease

in A

cces

s to

Job

s fo

r D

isad

vant

aged

Pop

ulat

ions

Impr

oved

Acc

ess

to M

ultim

odal

C

hoic

es (U

sers

Ben

efit

Valu

e)

Econ

omic

Dev

elop

men

t Sup

port

(Sq.

ft.)

Inte

rmod

al A

cces

s Im

prov

emen

ts

(Ton

s Be

nefit

Val

ue)

Trav

el T

ime

Rel

iabi

lity

Impr

ovem

ent

Air Q

ualit

y (T

otal

Ben

efit

Valu

e)

Acre

s of

Nat

ural

/Cul

tura

l R

esou

rces

Pot

entia

lly Im

pact

ed

Tran

spor

tatio

n Ef

ficie

nt L

and

Use

0 0.3 4.5 2.2 0 0 0 0 7.50 8.0 0

50% 50% 50% 50% 60% 20% 20% 60% 20% 20%50% 50% 100%

Source:VDOT,2015,HowtoReadaProjectScorecard

Tennessee:DL3CriteriaWeights

3/21/17 40

TRAFFICOPERATIONS

25.8%

Mul5modal/Func.Class

4.2%

EconomicDevelopment

26.3%

RoadwaySafety26.3%

Region/MPO/RPORank23.6%

Environmentallmpact3.4%

Source:SteveAllen,“PrioritizingTDOT’sCandidateProjects”(presentation)

4.Evaluating–MonitorOutcomes

Monitoroutcomesontheground●  MeasureOutcomes:Measureoutcomesonthe

groundovertimeafterprojectsareimplemented(asopposedtojustmodelingbefore)

●  TrackCause&Effect:Linkoutcomesbacktoactions(asopposedtothoseduetoexternalfactors)

3/21/17 41

Washington:GreenhouseGasEmissions

3/21/17 42Source:WashingtonStateDept.ofEcology,2016,WashingtonGreenhouseGasEmissionsInventory:2010–2013

4.Evaluating–ReportReturns

Reportreturnsoninvestmentstotaxpayers●  BeAccountable:Reportwhatoutcomeswere

delivered—atwhatcost

●  BeTransparent:Reporthowweredecisionsmade

●  BeAccessible:ReportsuccinctlyinplainEnglishtothegeneralpublic

3/21/17 43

Utah’sUnifiedPlan

3/21/17 44Source:UDOT,2015,UtahUnifiedTransportationPlan

Minnesota:Sources&UsesofFunding

3/21/17 45

Transportation Funding, Fiscal Year 2014 Where it comes from and where it goes

$3.14 billion

About 80 percent of MnDOT funds are appropriated by the legislature and 20 percent are statutorily appropriated. Sources of legislative appropriations include state motor fuel taxes, motor vehicle registration fees, motor vehicle sales taxes (MVST), and federal motor fuel tax grants.

MnDOT is a multi-modal agency. Its activities include transit, aeronautics, freight and commercial vehicles, construction, maintenance, and operation of 12,000 miles of state highways. Approximately 30% of MnDOT’s appropriations are state aid to local governments for road and bridge projects and other activities.

Note 1: Revenues and expenditures of the Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) and Metro Transit are not included. Note 2: Data from the State of Minnesota Revenue and Expenditures for Transportation Purposes flowchart (budgetary basis). Includes bond expenditures. Total of Sources; differs from Uses due to fund balance changes.

16%

28%

12%

21%

7%

11%5%

Sources of Minnesota state transportation funds:Federal Aid: Trunk Highway

State Fuel Tax

Motor Vehicle Sales Tax (MVST)

Motor Vehicle Registration Tax

Federal Aid: Local Roads and Multimodal

Bond Proceeds

Other Income and Transfers

32%

3%

5%

10%

36%

6%4% 4%

Uses of Minnesota state transportation funds: State Aid for Local Transportation

Public Safety Department

Multimodal Systems

Operations and Maintenance

State Road and Bridge Construction

Program Planning and Delivery

Debt Service

Agency Management and Other

Source:MnDOT

4.Evaluating–AdjustExpectations

Adjustexpectationsinlightofexperience●  AnalyzeOutcomes:Compareexpectedto

actualoutcomestoimproveunderstandingofeffectivenessofactionsandaccuracyofmodels

●  RevisitGoals:Reviseperformancetargetsbasedonprogress

3/21/17 46

Outcomes-BasedSummary1.  Planning

◦  Setreal-worldgoalsthatmatter  Identifygoals  Considerthe“threeP’s/E’s”  Setpriorities  Quantifyperformance

◦  Determineactionstoachieveoutcomes  Identifyactions  Developscenarios  Planforuncertainty

2.  Funding◦  Levytaxestoraiseneededrevenues

  Securerevenues  Beaccountable  Priceefficiently

◦  Empowerwell-positioneddecision-makers  Allocate  Giveflexibility/eliminateconstraints  Holdaccountable

3.  Programming◦  Investineffectivetprojects

  Fundwhat’splanned  Thinkmulti-modal/jurisdictional  Assessbenefits&costs

4.  Evaluating◦  Monitoroutcomesontheground

  Measureoutcomes  Trackcause&effect

◦  Reportreturnsoninvestmentstotaxpayers  Beaccountable  Betransparent  Beaccessible

◦  Adjustexpectationsinlightofexperience  Analyzeoutcomes  Revisitgoals

3/21/17 47

MAP-21:DeclarationofPolicy

“PerformancemanagementwilltransformtheFederal-aidhighwayprogramandprovideameanstothemostefficientinvestmentofFederaltransportationfundsbyrefocusingonnationaltransportationgoals,increasingtheaccountabilityandtransparencyoftheFederal-aidhighwayprogram,andimprovingprojectdecision-makingthroughperformance-basedplanningandprogramming.”

3/21/17 48Source:23U.S.C.§150(a)

MAP-21:NationalGoals1.  Safety:Toachieveasignificantreductionintrafficfatalitiesandseriousinjuriesonallpublic

roads.

2.  InfrastructureCondition:Tomaintainthehighwayinfrastructureassetsysteminastateofgoodrepair.

3.  CongestionReduction:ToachieveasignificantreductionincongestionontheNationalHighwaySystem.

4.  SystemReliability:Toimprovetheefficiencyofthesurfacetransportationsystem.

5.  FreightMovement&EconomicVitality:Toimprovethenationalfreightnetwork,strengthentheabilityofruralcommunitiestoaccessnationalandinternationaltrademarkets,andsupportregionaleconomicdevelopment.

6.  EnvironmentalSustainability:Toenhancetheperformanceofthetransportationsystemwhileprotectingandenhancingthenaturalenvironment.

7.  ReducedProjectDeliveryDelays:Toreduceprojectcosts,promotejobsandtheeconomy,andexpeditethemovementofpeopleandgoodsbyacceleratingprojectcompletionthrougheliminatingdelaysintheprojectdevelopmentanddeliveryprocess,includingreducingregulatoryburdensandimprovingagencies’workpractices.

3/21/17 49Source:23U.S.C.§150(b)

MAP-21:PerformanceMeasures

3/21/17 50

Highways●  NationalHighwayPerformanceProgram(NHPP):conditionof

pavement&bridges;performanceofInterstateSystem&NationalHighwaySystem

●  HighwaySafetyImprovementProgram(HSIP):seriousinjuries&fatalities

●  CongestionMitigation&AirQualityProgram(CMAQ):trafficcongestion&emissions

●  NationalFreightMovement:freightmovementontheInterstateSystem

PublicTransportation●  TransitAssetManagement:conditionassessment

●  PublicTransportationSafetyProgram:safetyriskmanagement&safetyassurance

Source:23U.S.C.§150(c);49U.S.C.§§5326,5329

MAP-21:Responsibilities

●  U.S.DOT◦  Establishperformancemeasures

●  States◦  Settargets(within1year)

◦  Reportprogress(within4yearsandthenevery2years)

●  MPOs◦  Settargets(within1year)

◦  Reportprogress(within4yearsandthenevery2years)

3/21/17 51Source:23U.S.C.§§150(d)–(e),134(d)(2),134(h)(2)

Performance-BasedPlanning&Programming

3/21/17 52Source:FederalHighwayAdministration,2013,Performance-BasedPlanningandProgrammingGuidebook

MAP-21vs.Outcomes-Based?MAP-21 Outcomes-Based

Planning•  StateDOTs&MPOsfocus

narrowlyontransportationsystem

•  Accountforfactorsinteractingwithtransportationsystem:landuse,economy,etc.

Funding

•  Donotseetaxing&allocatingasperformance-baseddecisions

•  Focusespeciallyonallocatingtoensureflexibility/eliminateconstraintstoinvestinmosteffectiveprojects

Programming •  Notnecessarilytightlylinkedwithplanning•  Strongplanningshould

mostlyinformprogramming

Evaluating•  Nottrackingcause&effect •  Integrateplanning,

programming&evaluatingtoanalyzecause&effect

3/21/17 53

Summary

●  Focusonoutcomesthatmatter,andsetpriorities●  Developscenarios,andplanforuncertainty●  Empowerdecision-makerswithbroadresponsibilities,

allocateflexiblefunding,andholdaccountable●  Investinprojectsthatachieveperformancemeasures

effectively:“bangforthebuck”● Monitoroutcomesovertime,andtrackcause&effect●  Beaccountable,transparent&accessibletothepublic●  Adjustexpectationsinlightofexperience

3/21/17 54

Conclusion1.  Planning

◦  Setreal-worldgoalsthatmatter  Identifygoals  Considerthe“threeP’s/E’s”  Setpriorities  Quantifyperformance

◦  Determineactionstoachieveoutcomes  Identifyactions  Developscenarios  Planforuncertainty

2.  Funding◦  Levytaxestoraiseneededrevenues

  Securerevenues  Beaccountable  Priceefficiently

◦  Empowerwell-positioneddecision-makers  Allocate  Giveflexibility/eliminateconstraints  Holdaccountable

3.  Programming◦  Investineffectiveprojects

  Fundwhat’splanned  Thinkmulti-modal/jurisdictional  Assessbenefits&costs

4.  Evaluating◦  Monitoroutcomesontheground

  Measureoutcomes  Trackcause&effect

◦  Reportreturnsoninvestmentstotaxpayers  Beaccountable  Betransparent  Beaccessible

◦  Adjustexpectationsinlightofexperience  Analyzeoutcomes  Revisitgoals

3/21/17 55

ThankYou

RebeccaLewis,Ph.D.541-346-4432

rlewis9@uoregon.edu

RobZako,Ph.D.541-346-8617

rzako@uoregon.edu

3/21/17 56

“EffectivenessofTransportationFundingMechanismsforAchievingNational,State,andMetropolitanEconomic,Health,andOtherLivabilityGoals”

http://nitc.trec.pdx.edu/research/project/875/