© 2010 AMPO • 1029 Vermont Ave., NW, Suite 710 • Washington, DC 20005 • tel: 202.296.7051 • fax: 202.296.7054

Performance Based Planning

AMPO Management & Operations Work Group Meeting

Boston MPO

July 26-27, 2010

Surface Transportation Authorization Act released in 2009 by Chairman Oberstar, House T&I Committee

• Does include language on developing measures and statistics for key programs.

• Does not include cross-cutting national performance targets for measuring the success or failure of federal transportation investment.

• Planning Section:– MPOs shall implement a system of performance management.– Measure the degree to which the LRTP reduces congestion, improves

mobility and safety, increases state of good repair, decreases GHGs, consistent with land use plans, and more.

– Establish target levels of performance.– Certification of the plan is dependent on meeting the performance measures.

July 26, 2010 2

STAA on Performance Measures

July 26, 2010 3

Performance Measures - AMPO

• AMPO is partnering with AASHTO, APTA, NADO, FHWA, FTA, and TRB to conduct a national forum on performance-based planning in September 2010.

– How does the current planning process incorporate performance and accountability?

– What are the effective approaches and evolving changes needed to realize a performance-based, outcome-driven planning and programming process?

– How do we synchronize transportation planning with plans and policies related to housing, the economy, energy, environment, and climate change?

– What federal, state, and local relationships and roles and responsibilities support a performance-driven planning process?

– How do we get there?

July 26, 2010 4

Research Insights

Early Insights from Volpe– Significant evolution underway.

– Of the areas studied, none has a complete integrated framework in place.

– Common disconnects or gaps in frameworks exist.

– Significant challenges have been encountered. Appropriate data and measures. Evaluation of overall performance planning priorities.

– Identification of the agency being held directly responsible is difficult for topics of livability, sustainability, health, economics.

 

July 26, 2010 5

Key Issues

• Need to develop a working definition of performance-based planning (key goal of September National Forum).

• How will this change the way we do currently do transportation planning and programming?

• Goal in using performance measures should be continuous improvement, not punishment. – European scan highlighted several methods that focused on

incentives system, and show positive trends to target over time.

• Identify what the public wants to see, not what engineers and planners want to see. – Concerns about technocratic overkill and onerous steps that make

a program difficult to administer. KISS!

July 26, 2010 6

Key Issues

• Some things are easier to measure. Others are more difficult (quality of life, economic, environmental)– Qualitative “measures” are ok.

– Balance data-driven and qualitative-driven decision-making.

• How do we provide a strong vision and national policy goals, yet allow state/regional/local development of the correct performance measures?

• Focus on a few good measures.• Performance measurement is one of many parts of the

decision-making process.• Federal government should fund capacity building and

research to improve models and data.

July 26, 2010 7

Key Issues

• ARRA can serve as a pilot for what works in reporting.• USDOT should approve the process of developing performance

measures, not the targets themselves.• Recognize that it takes a few authorization cycles before we get

where we want to be.

July 26, 2010 8

Thank You!

AMPO1029 Vermont Ave., NWSuite 710Washington, DC 20005

Rich Denbowrdenbow@ampo.org