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 35
35 CHAPTER 7 Performance Measures 7.1 Introduction · Cambridge Systematics, Inc. and David Evans and Associ- ates. ODOT Operations Program Performance Measures Performance-based planning provides a consistent, repeat- Draft Final Report. Oregon Department of Transportation, able, and transparent process for developing and selecting June 2001. transportation projects and policies. This section presents a · Cambridge Systematics, Inc. NCHRP 446: A Guidebook for comprehensive list of freight performance measures and tools Performance-Based Transportation Planning. TRB, National needed to address states' primary analytical and policy freight Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2000. transportation needs. These needs, described in Section 3.0 · Performance Measures Summary. Minnesota Department and summarized in Table 7.1, were identified through tele- of Transportation, January 1999. phone, Internet, and e-mail surveys targeted primarily to state · Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Texas Transportation Plan: departments of transportation. The table shows 15 primary Objectives and Outcome Measures. PowerPoint presenta- analytical and policy areas, which were screened for forecasta- tion by Arlee Reno, April 13, 1999. bility and then further screened and matched according to · Marbek Resource Consultants, Ltd. How Jurisdictions are appropriate tool components for calculating the measures. Measuring Performance of Transportation Policy and Planning. The performance measures were assembled from numerous Ministry of Transportation (Canada), October 16, 2001. current sources, then matched to the 15 analytical and policy · Measures, Markers and Mileposts: The Grey Notebook for the areas. Quarter Ending June 30, 2002. Washington State Depart- Sections 7.2 and 7.3 list the freight performance measures ment of Transportation, June 30, 2002. that can be forecast and calculated using tool components from the toolbox. Section 7.2 also lists freight performance measures The performance measures were first screened for fore- that cannot be forecast or calculated using the toolbox. castability. For example, future shipper satisfaction with Section 7.3 matches the tool components to the perform- modal or scheduling flexibility is not something that can be ance measures. Section 7.4 presents an abbreviated, targeted predicted with existing data and tools. Next, the measures list of measures for states to use to address their freight trans- were screened based on the available tools in the Toolkit. portation analytical and policy needs, and describes each Thus, while freight dock availability could potentially be fore- measure in detail. cast if detailed data on a facility's current capacity and usage, as well as future demand, were available, there are currently no tools in the Toolkit to support such an analysis. 7.2 Performance Measures Table B.2 in Appendix B presents 55 freight-related per- for States' Primary Needs formance measures that are forecastable and can be calculated Seven different state, Federal, and international sources using available tools. In addition, each of these measures were used to assemble a comprehensive list of freight-related addresses one or more of the freight transportation policy and performance measures: analytical needs indicated by states. Italicized measures form a short list of recommended measures, and are explained in · Cambridge Systematics, Inc. National Transportation detail in Section 7.4. Tables 7.2 and 7.3 show performance System Performance Measures Final Report.U.S. Depart- measures in the context of policy needs and analytical needs, ment of Transportation, Washington, D.C., April 1996. respectively.