CONTI

This nation needs a better, more efficient transportation system if it’s going to keep pace with the global economy. With a decrease in Federal transportation funding accompanied by growing needs for infrastructure improvement, congestion relief and emissions reduction, the transportation industry is increasingly relying on funding innovation and private investment to keep our nation moving. This modified — meaning no longer tied directly to fuel taxes -- user-financed system must be accountable to the tax payers, lenders and investors who pay the bills, for the obvious reason that people want to know what they’re getting for their money.

Can performance measurement be the answer? Yes! Here’s how:

It’s easier to know where you’re headed if you know where you’ve been. Decision-makers rely on performance metrics for establishing and monitoring new standards for improved performance. This is as true for the transportation industry as it is for any other business. Benchmarks, target performance levels, and other standards are used to gauge progress, and the results are used for budgeting, developing strategic initiatives, and planning.

With performance measurement, money can go where it’s likely to be used most effectively, and awards can serve as incentives for improvement. Increasingly, transportation agencies are obtaining results-based funding allocations. Performance data plays a crucial role in projecting different levels of outputs and outcomes associated with alternative funding levels and alternative delivery methods. In North Carolina, for example, the state’s General Assembly commissioned PBS&J to evaluate the DOT’s program delivery before considering additional project funding.

So if it makes such good sense, then why hasn’t every state embraced performance measurement? There’s no instant gratification. According to FHWA statistics, major highway projects take approximately 13 years from inception to completion. It takes even longer to measure the benefits and performance of a highway project. Politicians and appointed leaders, especially those with term limits, aren’t typically focused on long-term success stories.

Transportation agencies don’t want to be held responsible for metrics that they don’t trust. Uniform systems of performance measurement in transportation were slow to develop because of the complexity of the transportation network and the difficulty of “controlling” most of the inputs. Even when metrics were applied, the results were often questionable and difficult to evaluate.

But now performance measurement is simplified. Advanced technology and the results of numerous “how-to” studies now make transportation performance measurement not only feasible, but exceedingly practicable, with results that are reliable and timely.

Now, there are plenty of successful examples of how to apply metrics to transportation elements, such as traffic flow/congestion, urban congestion, economic and environmental impacts, and cost-benefit analyses. For example, the states of the I-95 Corridor Coalition are moving aggressively on an incident management strategy that measures incident duration, initial response time and overall recovery time on the corridor from Maine to Florida.

So after we get the data; how do we evaluate it? Performance data can be presented as scorecards that document targets and milestones as a way of gauging success in attaining goals and objectives. At the Missouri DOT, for example, scorecards are used as a management tool to guarantee that business units are advancing the department’s strategic plan. Several other states (including Florida, Virginia, Washington, and Minnesota) have adopted similar reporting approaches.

Transportation agencies can also use scorecards and other data presentations for evaluating employee performance, communicating performance metrics to stakeholders and the general public, setting strategic objectives and goals, and budgeting.

Transportation is a business. As proprietors, it’s up to us to demand certain levels of performance. If we’re not measuring progress, we’re measuring decline, and declining performance of our transportation assets correlates to crumbling infrastructure, increased congestion and growing emissions. With limited Federal funding, it’s just common sense for transportation agencies—and their private sector partners--to do whatever they can to make the most of our transportation dollars. Performance measurement is a key component to assuring the best value for our transportation investment.

Gene Conti is the former U.S. Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, and Chief Deputy of the North Carolina Department of Transportation. Currently, he is Vice President/District Director for PBS&J in Raleigh NC. He can be reached at 919.876.6888; Gconti@pbsj.com.

If you have an idea for a Viewpoint please contact Viewpoint Editor William J. Angelo at
781-937-9265 or william_angelo@mcgraw-hill.com.