Integrating Asset Management into the Metropolitan Planning Process: A Peer Exchange

Introduction

This report summarizes the proceedings of Integrating Asset Management into the Metropolitan Planning Process, a peer exchange organized by the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Office of Asset Management and Office of Planning. It was held in Traverse City, Michigan on July 18-19, 2006.
The goal of the peer exchange was to bring representatives from state departments of transportation (DOTs) together with representatives of metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to discuss the use of Asset Management techniques in the metropolitan planning process. Participants were chosen to ensure a diverse group, with representatives for all parts of the country as well as from jurisdictions of various sizes. In addition, participants were chosen to bring together representatives with a range of experience in Asset Management.

David R. Geiger, Director of FHWA's Office of Asset Management, opened the Peer Exchange by welcoming the participants and explaining that the goal of the meeting was to gather information on best practices. He expressed concern that state DOTs and MPOs are not collaborating enough and there is a need to integrate the state transportation improvement programs (STIPs) with local-level transportation improvement programs (TIPs).

Mr. Geiger explained that some of the participants have many years of experience using Asset Management while some are just beginning to implement an Asset Management program. Those who have more experience in Asset Management were encouraged to share their knowledge and experience with those just starting the process. Finally, Mr. Geiger encouraged the participants to view the potential of Asset Management in areas beyond infrastructure and begin to find ways to apply its techniques to areas such as safety.

Summary of Key Themes

While each organization differed in its experience, several key themes recurred in a number of presentations.

1. MPOs and Asset Management

The Varying Role of MPOs in Asset Management: The role of MPOs in Asset Management varies widely, largely depending on their role in system preservation. Some MPOs are primarily involved in capacity expansion and currently do not have much involvement in preservation and maintenance. Therefore, such MPOs are not generally involved in Asset Management at all. Others considered preservation and maintenance, but only at a program level, not including review of specific projects. Those MPOs who have the most developed Asset Management programs are those who take active roles in both preserving and maintaining existing assets and planning for new capacity.

Unlike state departments of transportation, most MPOs do not have direct ownership of assets and are therefore not involved in most maintenance decisions. Rather, they work with state and local governments who have sizable assets to coordinate planning for the overall transportation system. Many DOTs set funding category levels, including how much should be invested in system preservation and how much in new capacity, and the MPOs accept these program-level allocations. For these reasons, the state departments of transportation at the peer exchange typically had significantly more experience in Asset Management than the MPOs in attendance.

Trends in MPO involvement in Asset Management: MPOs are becoming more interested in implementing Asset Management programs. Most formal programs are in early stages of development; however, MPOs have been involved in related activities.

For the past number of years, MPOs have become more involved in collecting the type of data needed for Asset Management. Many are beginning to take advantage of data collected by the state DOTs. Several of the MPOs at the exchange, such as the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) and the Capital District Transportation Committee (CDTC), are using the data to determine the long-term funding needs of their assets. Depending on the level of involvement within an MPO, some are able to select specific projects at a program level.

In general, MPO Asset Management programs are considerably less extensive than those within state DOTs. The level of involvement in Asset Management largely depends on the role of the MPO in preservation, the level of resources the MPO has and the interest of the state in Asset Management.

Possible Future Roles of MPOs in Asset Management: MPOs could choose to take on roles in Asset Management ranging across a continuum from actively using Asset Management to simply implementing Asset Management strategies developed on the state or regional level. Those MPOs with a more active involvement may implement Asset Management in ways similar to DOTs. Other MPOs may choose to take on a role of Asset Management champion or facilitator, encouraging and supporting the use of Asset Management among the local governments in its jurisdiction. Each MPO could find its place along the continuum to best match its role in the community and relationship to its region's assets.

Open communication between the MPOs and their state DOT is essential for a successful Asset Management program on a regional level. DOTs generally have experience, data collection processes and management systems that can be of use to MPOs. By working together, the state DOTs and MPOs can improve asset management throughout their state resulting in improved system performance.

2. The Benefits of Asset Management

Both MPOs and DOTs are finding significant benefits from their Asset Management programs: The peer exchange participants who have been using Asset Management shared their experiences with the benefits that it brought their agencies and constituencies. The following are selected benefits that were mentioned throughout the Exchange.

Improvements in information technology systems have allowed investment decisions to be more data-driven than in the past: Since transportation agencies are expanding their information technology infrastructures they are collecting more and better data. This data is being used to drive investment decisions and leads planning to be increasingly based on quantitative goals in addition to qualitative ones.
Asset Management can be effective at depoliticizing the allocation process and winning support: Since investment decisions are made using carefully collected and analyzed data, there is less room for political pressures in the decision-making process. Transportation planning staff can provide decision-makers with detailed data to support their recommendations. By using these data, participating state DOTs and MPOs found that the program helped then convey the importance of operations and preservation to legislators and other stakeholders.
Organizations are setting and meeting performance targets and agency goals:Agencies are using Asset Management principles to set quantifiable performance targets. These targets are directly related to the overall agency goals and objectives. Through the use of performance targets, state DOTs and MPOs can measure their success in meeting their larger-scale goals and demonstrate the effectiveness of their investment choices to stakeholders.
Longtime users of Asset Management programs are beginning to see measurable results:Since Asset Management has been used for the past several years, early adopters are beginning to see measurable improvements from their programs. For example, Michigan saw the percentage of pavements in "poor" condition go down to 9% from 36% ten years ago.

Marketing the benefits of Asset Management can be a challenge: Preservation must compete with capital projects for dollars.Asset Management efforts do not include "ribbon-cutting" ceremonies and therefore often are not as attractive to elected officials as are new capital projects. Nevertheless, some agencies have found creative methods to explain the benefits of such systems. For example, in Colorado, the Department of Transportation emphasized the value of Asset Management in snow and ice removal, which is a priority to the electorate.

3. Advances in Asset Management

Asset Management among state DOTs is most advanced in the areas of pavement and bridge management: Pavement and bridge management have traditionally led the way in the development of Asset Management implementations. These areas are a natural fit for Asset Management due to their clear definition as assets and obvious need for preservation. Further, the majority of a DOT's asset value is in these two classes. On the other hand, Asset Management programs are less well developed for other asset classes, such as traffic control devices, safety hardware, and drainage and ancillary structures.

Most states use management systems for allocating funds and prioritizing projects within "silos" or "stovepipes": Most states have developed a set of asset classes for budgeting and investment decisions. Within these classes, investment decisions tend to be data-driven based on predictive models and similar tools. However, allocations across asset classes are often based on factors such as historical patterns, preset formulas, and judgment.

Most states are emphasizing a "preservation first" approach: Many states have documented shifting investment priorities to include a greater focus on preservation of existing assets at the expense of constructing new assets.

4. Types of Assets

There is a range of practice in the identification of asset classes: While nearly all states include pavements and bridges as asset classes, the lists of other asset classes range significantly from state to state. For example, Maryland is implementing an Asset Management program for sidewalks to support Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliance, while Washington State includes roadway slopes. Other asset classes in use are highway signs, traffic signals, rest areas, right-of-ways, culverts and overhead lights. Several states are realizing that they have significant assets in drainage facilities and wetlands and are using Asset Management principles for environmental management. The practice of Asset Management can continue to be improved and expanded by adding new asset categories that can benefit from this management method.

5. Performance Measures

Performance measures may vary between urban and rural areas: Some states with large urban centers, such as Maryland and New York, noted that it is not practical to have uniform performance standards across urban and rural roads. This is because urban roads are subjected to considerably more stress than the rural roads. However, Michigan and Ohio said that while performance measures range based on type of road, they remain consistent across all areas of the state.

6. Common Challenges in Integrating Asset Management into the Planning Process

One of the important roles of a peer exchange is to discuss common challenges and work together toward solutions. Many agencies found similar challenges in implementing Asset Management.

Staffing

Many organizations are facing high staff turnover: Since Asset Management requires significant training of staff, especially in areas of data collection and analysis, staff turnover is a common problem among organizations. Many are finding that long-time staffers with large amounts of agency knowledge are retiring.

Data

Choosing which data to collect and how to manage is important: Some agencies are collecting more data than they are using. Data collection is expensive and labor intensive. Some organizations are finding that they have more data than they can analyze and use. Agencies agreed that they should make an effort to collect only the data that are relevant to their operations and planning.

There is a lack of uniformity among information technology systems: Lack of uniformity of data systems is a challenge for DOTs and MPOs since they must coordinate data from a number of local and regional agencies. Some states have implemented uniform road referencing systems to begin to manage this challenge.

Integrating Capacity Expansion and Safety

Asset Management programs do not integrate well with capacity expansion or safety projects: The nature of Asset Management programs is to allocate investment choices among asset classes. However, the integration of Asset Management with planning for capacity expansion and safety requires a unified system. New York is endeavoring to adopt this approach; most other states have not yet done so. Allocating limited funds requires making tradeoffs. While the Asset Management programs assist in making tradeoffs within the program, states and MPOs are struggling to include other areas in these decisions as well.

Next Steps

Following the presentations, the peer exchange participants discussed next steps that can be taken by the FHWA and other organizations to address some of the challenges in integrating Asset Management into the MPOs' planning and programming processes.

1. Research Ways to Involve MPOs in Asset Management

Conduct a Survey of MPOs: Survey MPOs across the country to gauge:

Awareness and interest in Asset Management
Current and planned Asset Management activities
Level of involvement in maintenance and operations activities
Existing infrastructure for implementing an Asset Management program

This survey could be administered with the assistance of the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO), which has approximately 200 members. Survey questions could include:

What percentage of the work done at your MPO is for capacity expansion and what percentage is system preservation?
Does your MPO engage in Asset Management techniques? If so, briefly describe the Asset Management program in place?
Does your MPO take advantage of data collected by the state DOT for Asset Management?
Would your MPO be interested in further engaging in Asset Management? If so, what type of assistance would you need?

Define the role of MPOs in Asset Management: Currently, the role of MPOs in Asset Management is not clearly defined. Many MPOs use some form of Asset Management but there is little consistency among them. Since MPOs do not own assets, their role in Asset Management programs will differ from that of state DOTs and local governments. Similarly, many are only minimally involved in maintenance and operations, while others are involved only at the program level. Therefore, research could evaluate alternative roles for MPOs in Asset Management. This could include a greater role in data collection or as facilitator of Asset Management among local governments.

Promote Best Practices of MPOs in Asset Management: Since there is wide variety in the use of Asset Management among MPOs, the FHWA or another national organization could take the lead in promoting best practices of MPOs that have successfully integrated Asset Management principles.

2. Document and publicize the benefits of Asset Management

As discussed in key theme #2 above, there are numerous benefits to using Asset Management. In order to further take advantage of Asset Management, DOTs and MPOs around the country should be made aware of the benefits of a formal Asset Management program.

Many organizations have been using Asset Management long enough to have been able to collect data on its economic benefits. For example, Maryland DOT has determined that its pavement management system saves it approximately $30 million a year. This data can be used to encourage transportation organizations to use Asset Management and to secure funding for the implementation and expansion of such systems.

The first step is to document the benefits of Asset Management. Currently, FHWA is working on a review of pavement management systems, and plans to expand this effort to other aspects of Asset Management as well. This and similar programs can begin to quantify the savings from these programs.

Once the benefits are documented, the FHWA and other organizations can proceed to publicize these benefits through publications, presentations at conferences and additional Peer Exchange programs.

3. Improve the Practice of Asset Management through Research

Refine methods for cross-asset analysis: As noted above, many Departments of Transportation have strong silo-based asset planning systems. This allows for tradeoffs within silos, but less so across asset classes. Research can collect best practices in this area and determine methodologies for conducting analysis across asset silos.

Integrate new capital and safety projects into Asset Management: Asset Management programs focus on existing assets. However, investment decisions need to include new capacity expansion and safety projects as well. Research can further define how to integrate new capital projects into existing Asset Management programs.

Include non-financial goals in Asset Management programs: Asset Management programs are designed to optimize transportation investments based on financial constraints. Research can determine the feasibility of including non-financial elements such as social and environmental goals.

Incorporate replacement needs into Asset Management: Currently, most Asset Management programs address resurfacing and re-decking of highways and bridges, but do not take replacement needs into account. The need to replace concrete pavements, in particular, is a major pending requirement for most of the country. Research is required to define methodologies for incorporating these replacement needs into long-term investment planning.

Refine performance measures: Setting performance measures is an important element of any Asset Management program. Agencies use these performance measures to gauge the success of their investment decisions. A research study can compare the performance metrics that are used around the country and determine which are best suited for the various asset classes. New metrics can also be developed that may more accurately assess conditions than those in use currently. This would build upon the work already completed in National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report 551 – Performance Measures and Targets for Transportation Asset Management, with particular reference to identifying performance measures that would be of interest to metropolitan planning organizations.

Develop an economic justification for Asset Management: In order to better demonstrate the benefits of Asset Management, an economic model can demonstrate how the use of this system translates into substantial dollar savings for public entities. Further research can explore the connections between Asset Management and reduced road congestion costs.

Participant List

State Departments of Transportation	Metropolitan Planning Organizations
Colorado Department of Transportation Scott Young, Investment Analysis Manager	Baltimore Metropolitan Council Eileen Singleton, Senior Transportation Engineer
Maryland State Highway Administration Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator Jeffrey H. Smith, Deputy Director of Office of Planning and Preliminary Engineering	Capital District Transportation Committee John Poorman, Staff Director
Michigan Department of Transportation Kirk T. Steudle, Director Ronald L. Vibbert, Manager of Strategic System Operations and Maintenance	Houston-Galveston Area Council Lily Elizabeth Wells, Transportation Program Coordinator
New York State Department of Transportation Tim Gilchrist, Chief of Transportation Strategy Louis H. Adams, Head of Modeling and Forecasting Section	Lane Council of Governments Paul Thompson, Senior Planner
Ohio Department of Transportation Leonard Evans, Administrator - System Analysis Planning	Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency John Hosek, Division Director Gary Grano, Senior Transportation Planner
Oregon Department of Transportation Catherine Nelson, Technical Services Manager/Chief Engineer	Pike's Peak Area Council of Governments Craig Casper, Transportation Director
Washington Department of Transportation Aaron Butters, Systems Analysis and Program Development Manager	Southeast Michigan Council of Governments Carmine Palombo, Director of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration
David R. Geiger, Director of Asset Management
Robert Ritter, Planning Capacity Building Team Leader
Stephen Gaj, System Management & Monitoring Team Leader

PB Consult
Wayne McDaniel, Principal Consultant
Virginia Ramos, Marketing Coordinator
Amy Zwas, Consultant