Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures

Michael Cohn, Editor

Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures Michael Cohn, Editor Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS Washington, D.C. www.nap.edu

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This study was supported by Contract Number S5C5AAC0004 between the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the National Academy of Sciences. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project. International Standard Book Number 0-309-10228-6 Additional copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lockbox 285, Washington, DC 20055; (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); Internet, http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Wm. A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Wm. A. Wulf are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures WORKSHOP PLANNING GROUP MANUEL GONZALEZ, Chair, KTGY Group, Inc., Santa Monica, California MELVIN M. MARK, Pennsylvania State University, State College JOHN K. SPEAR, Architect/ Richwood Development Corporation, Houston, Texas JORGE A. VANEGAS, Texas A&M University, College Station Staff LYNDA L. STANLEY, Director, Board on Infrastructure and the Constructed Environment MICHAEL D. COHN, Program Officer DANA CAINES, Financial Associate PAT WILLIAMS, Senior Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures BOARD ON INFRASTRUCTURE AND THE CONSTRUCTED ENVIRONMENT HENRY HATCH, Chair, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (retired), Oakton, Virginia MASSOUD AMIN, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis REGINALD DesROCHES, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta DENNIS DUNNE, Consultant, Scottsdale, Arizona PAUL FISETTE, University of Massachusetts, Amherst LUCIA GARSYS, Hillsborough County, Florida WILLIAM HANSMIRE, Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, San Francisco, California THEODORE C. KENNEDY, BE&K, Inc. SUE McNEIL, University of Delaware, Wilmington DEREK PARKER, Anshen+Allen, San Francisco, California HENRY SCHWARTZ, JR., Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri WILLIAM WALLACE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York CRAIG ZIMRING, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta Staff LYNDA STANLEY, Director MICHAEL COHN, Program Officer KEVIN M. LEWIS, Program Officer DANA CAINES, Financial Associate PAT WILLIAMS, Senior Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures Preface The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) asked the National Research Council (NRC) to review and comment on its 2005 draft PATH Program Review and Strategy, Performance Metrics, and Operating Plan. A public-private initiative started in 1998, the Partnership for Advancing Technology in Housing (PATH) is dedicated to accelerating the development and use of technologies that improve the quality, durability, energy efficiency, environmental performance, and affordability of housing in the United States. To accomplish this task, the NRC established a planning group to conduct a one-day workshop. The workshop participants included the planning group and representatives of PATH’s diverse stakeholders. They discussed PATH’s proposed program goals and measures and provided suggestions for improving them. These workshop proceedings provide an edited, but inclusive, transcript of that discussion. The appendixes give details on project logistics and include a reprint of the draft PATH performance metrics and operating plan provided to the workshop participants as well as additional written comments received from participants after the workshop. There was no attempt to develop consensus findings and recommendations. It is hoped nevertheless that the feedback provided by these proceedings will prove useful. The NRC and the planning group recognize the contributions of the workshop participants and appreciate this opportunity to help guide the future of a program that is vital to improving the design, construction, and performance of American homes. Manuel Gonzalez, Chair Workshop Planning Group

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures This page intentionally left blank.

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures Contents 1   INTRODUCTION, Michael Cohn   1 2   OVERVIEW OF HUD OBJECTIVES, Carlos Martin   3 3   OVERVIEW OF THE 2003 NRC ASSESSMENT OF PATH AND HUD’S CURRENT RESPONSE, Manuel Gonzalez   5 4   THE VALUE OF TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION IN HOME CONSTRUCTION AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT/INDUSTRY PARTNERSHIPS IN PROMOTING INNOVATION, Sarah Slaughter   6 5   DEFINING SUCCESS AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR THE EVALUATION AND MANAGEMENT OF PATH, Melvin Mark   17 6   DISCUSSION OF PATH GOAL I—REMOVE BARRIERS AND FACILITATE TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT AND ADOPTION   23 7   DISCUSSION OF PATH GOAL II—IMPROVE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER, DEVELOPMENT, AND ADOPTION THROUGH INFORMATION DISSEMINATION   31 8   DISCUSSION OF PATH GOAL III—ADVANCE HOUSING TECHNOLOGIES RESEARCH AND FOSTER DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNOLOGY   38 9   PATH FORWARD—PROGRAM PLAN AND PERFORMANCE MEASURES   44     APPENDIXES         A  Statement of Work   53     B  Biographical Sketches of Workshop Planning Group Members and Key Presenter   54     C  Workshop Agenda and Participants   56     D  Summary Operating Plan and Performance Measures   59     E  Additional Comments and Observations of Workshop Participants   90

OCR for page R1
Proceedings of a Workshop to Review PATH Strategy, Operating Plan, and Performance Measures This page intentionally left blank.