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 60
50 CHAPTER FOUR INSIGHTS FROM THE SURVEYS This chapter provides insights based on the responses nance contracts along sections of the interstate. Based on the received from two sets of surveys that were administered as number of different types of PBMC throughout the United a part of this project: States and Canada, again the most frequent type of perfor- mance-based maintenance contracts in rank order are area- · Surveys of state DOTs and Canadian provincial trans- wide covering a subunit of the state for one activity or related portation agencies group of activities, areawide covering more than one activity · Surveys of private sector contractors involved in per- or related group of activities, and fence-to-fence along a cor- formance-based contracting. ridor (see Table 16). As mentioned earlier, 61 surveys were administered to Table 15 state DOTs, the District of Columbia, and Canadian provin- cial transportation agencies. Forty-two were returned for AGENCY INVOLVEMENT IN PBMC a response rate of 69%. The response rate was 38 out of 51 Number of (75%) for state DOTs and the District of Columbia and 4 out Types of Maintenance Contract Agencies of 10 (40%) for Canadian provincial transportation agencies. Areawide contract covering a subunit of the state Fourteen surveys were sent out to private contractors, but only and involving a single activity or a related group 6 of activities such as rest area maintenance four provided meaningful responses (a response rate of 29%). Areawide contract covering more than one activity 5 or related group of activities within a state INVOLVEMENT IN PERFORMANCE-BASED Areawide contract covering all of the state and all MAINTENANCE CONTRACTING 2 or most maintenance activities Contract for selected activities in a corridor 1 Of the 42 state and Canadian transportation agencies that Contract for fence-to-fence maintenance covering responded to the survey, 31 said they had never done PBMC 4 all activities in a corridor and 11 said they had. Total 18 State and provincial transportation agencies were asked whether they use performance-based contracting for dif- Table 16 ferent types of maintenance contracts. It is most common BREAKDOWN OF NUMBER OF CONTRACTS FOR ALL for a state or province to be involved in an areawide PBMC STATES AND PROVINCES BY TYPE OF PERFORMANCE- covering a subunit of the state or province and involving a BASED MAINTENANCE CONTRACT single activity or a group of related activities such as rest area maintenance. The second most common are areawide Type of Contract Number contracts covering more than one activity or a related group Areawide performance-based contract covering a of activities within a state or province. The third most fre- subunit of the state or province for one activity or 20 quent are fence-to-fence maintenance contracts covering all, related group of activities or more realistically speaking, nearly all activities in a cor- Areawide performance-based contract for more 26 ridor (see Table 15). than one activity or related group of activities Areawide contract covering all or most activities 1 States and provinces were asked to estimate how many within a state or province different types of performance-based contracts each cur- Performance-based contract for selected activities 3 rently has. Given that only 11 states and provinces have par- within a corridor ticipated in PBMC, but these 11 have 70 performance-based Performance-based contract covering all activities contracts, it is clear that several, if not most, have more than 20 in a corridor one type of contract. For example, TxDOT has numerous Total 70 rest area maintenance contracts and fence-to-fence mainte-
OCR for page 61
51 Table 17 REASONS FOR NOT DOING PBMC Number (% giving answer out Reasons of those not doing PBMC) 15 We have no experience with PBMC and have found our current contracting methods satisfactory. (48%) There is resistance or discomfort with PBMC on the part of staff and our maintenance leadership. They 0 believe that in the future not only will the performance of contractors be measured but so will the per- formance of agency staff. (0%) 3 Our staff and maintenance leadership believe that PBMC could jeopardize many civil servant jobs. (10%) We do not have the maintenance management systems and quality assurance procedures in place to 11 make PBMC work. (35%) 1 There is a general mistrust of the private sector. (3%) Agency maintenance personnel are unionized and the union strongly believes PBMC is not in their 4 interest. (13%) Our agency has the resources and the expertise to do most maintenance and therefore we contract out 16 only what is essential and see no need to do PBMC. (52%) 2 We have tried PBMC in the past and did not find it to be successful. (6%) Table 18 WRITTEN EXPLANATIONS FOR NOT CURRENTLY DOING PBMC State/Province Explanation Arizona Our procurement office is not in favor of performance-based contracts. We use primarily Invitation for Bids. Connecticut Existing state contracting laws would make this method of contracting very difficult. Missouri We have been doing performance measures on our internal staff since 2002. Nebraska We are considering PBMC for some of our maintenance activities such as rest areas and right-of-way mowing. We have performed basic striping for our high-end epoxy urethane lines to ensure longevity. We have analyzed the proposals set forth by private contractors in the past and found them to be almost twice what it cost for us to do the New Mexico same job. We also have a long-term warranty on a 90-mile stretch of road that is failing and causing damage to the department's reputation. (New Mexico DOT provided supplementary written material that has been incorporated as a case study in this report.) North Carolina is in the process of writing its first performance-based contract. The expected advertisement date is North Carolina August 1, 2007. We believe these types of contracts are another method of getting maintenance work done and can be used effectively in the right environment. Agency is staffed to provide effective snow and ice control. Maintenance personnel are used to perform the neces- North Dakota sary maintenance whenever snow and ice control is not required. Performance measures are difficult at best to identify for in-house folks. Identifying performance measures for con- Tennessee tracts that are reasonable is even more difficult. We have not felt the benefit was worth the effort. Outsourcing in general is still not proven to be a cost savings. Certainly, maintenance work can be contracted out Washington successfully, but that does not mean it will result in cost savings. If it is to be contracted out, we firmly believe that State PBMC is the way it needs to be done. Wisconsin has a long-standing history of contracting highway maintenance work with our 72 County Highway Wisconsin Departments--We have no state forces for maintenance field operations. We do not use PBMC with the counties and are satisfied with the job they are doing. We have tried contracting out maintenance services for most activities within a selected area and found poor con- Manitoba tractor performance. As a result, Manitoba is reluctant to move toward more contracting out, other than where it is deemed economical or practical to do so (mowing contracts, gravel production, etc.). Political will to move to this type of contracting is not in place. One attempt to move to PBMC in 1999 resulted in Nova Scotia the government changing their minds and backing out after union pressure.