Click for next page ( 83


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 82
82 APPENDIX A SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE QUESTIONNAIRE NCHRP Project 20-5 Synthesis Topic 37-07 Use of Bridge Management for Transportation Agency Decision making All state departments of transportation (DOTs) have a bridge management process or system in place and in use. The extent to which these processes are used in network level planning and programming decisions may vary significantly from one agency to another. It will be beneficial for state transportation agencies to know how other agencies use and benefit from their bridge management processes in making resource allocation decisions relating to bridges. This synthesis is gathering information on current practices that agency senior decision makers use to make network level funding decisions for their bridges, and the use they make of their bridge management processes for these decisions. Also, information is being collected on future plans for upgrading and better utilizing bridge management processes. The focus is on both funding allocations for bridges within the overall agency programs, and allocations within the bridge program for replacement, rehabilitation, and maintenance needs. This is a three part questionnaire to elicit different perspectives regarding the bridge management process: Part I. To be completed by the Chief Bridge Engineer responsible for the bridge management process within the State. If the Chief Bridge Engineer or the person(s) he or she delegates can complete all three parts, please do so, otherwise have the following individuals complete the remaining two parts concerning budgeting and planning. Part II. Head of budgeting with significant responsibility in helping the CEO make decisions concerning the allocation of funds across different programs including bridges. Part III. Head of State transportation planning. Please return all three parts of the completed questionnaire by April 10, 2006 to: William Hyman E-mail: bhyman@ara.com Principal Investigator Phone: 410-540-9949 Applied Research Associates, Inc. Cell: 301-593-7842 7184 Troy Hill Drive, Suite N Fax: 410-540-9288 Elkridge, MD 21075

OCR for page 82
83 QUESTIONS FOR THE CHIEF BRIDGE ENGINEER Respondent Information Bridge Engineer Name: Title: Agency: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Fax: e-mail: To make effective decisions regarding the bridge program, to your knowledge does the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and his or her management team use each of the following types of information with regard to bridges throughout the State? Please respond by using the following rating scale: 1 Currently uses 2 Uses with significant data manipulation 3 Would like to use, but limited by the capabilities of the Bridge Management System 4 Does not or is unlikely to use. Information on Bridge Condition and Performance 1. An overall measure of the current condition or health of bridges. Rating: 2. A measure of the condition of key components of bridges that involve significant expenditures (e.g., bridge decks). Rating: 3. Key bridge safety problems that should be addressed such as piers subject to scour, bridges that could be exposed to hurricane storm surges, and bridges potentially affected by seismic activity. Rating: 4. The number of bridges that are currently structurally deficient. Rating: 5. The number of bridges that are currently functionally obsolete. Rating: 6. Progress in achieving bridge condition performance targets set in the prior year. Rating: 7. A measure of the future condition or health of bridges. Rating: 8. The target level of maintenance required that would be consistent with the requirements of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board. Rating:

OCR for page 82
84 Programming and Budgeting 9. Future bridge expenditure needs for bridge preservation and improvement over the forthcoming budget cycle assuming no budget constraints. Rating: 10. Short-term (15 year) projections of future bridge expenditure needs under alternative budget assumptions. Rating: 11. Mid-term (610 year) projections of future bridge expenditure needs under alternative budget assumptions. Rating: 12. Long-term (1150 year) projections of future bridge needs under alternative budget assumptions. Rating: 13. A single recommended bridge budget for the forthcoming budget cycle. Rating: 14. Analysis of choices and tradeoffs regarding expenditures within the recommended bridge budget or program--maintenance, rehabilitation, replacement, and major projects. Rating: 15. A breakdown of the recommended bridge budget by main or important types of structures. Rating: 16. Breakdown of the recommended bridge budget by in-house work versus contract work. Rating: 17. Descriptions, locations, and costs of candidate and recommended major bridge projects. Rating: 18. A breakdown of the recommended bridge budget by political jurisdiction or administrative unit. Rating: 19. A breakdown of major bridge projects in the recommended budget presented by political jurisdiction or administrative unit. Rating: 20. Reports and graphics showing the results of changing the resource allocation between the bridge program and other program areas such as pavements and operations. Rating: Economic Criteria Used in Resource Allocation 21. Network level benefit-cost ratios for alternative bridge programs. Rating: 22. Network level estimates of life-cycle costs. Rating: 23. Network level estimates of avoidable road user costs (accidents, travel time, vehicle operating costs). Rating: 24. Benefit-cost ratios of major bridge project alternatives. Rating:

OCR for page 82
85 District-Level Information 25. Does the CEO and management team generally use the same type of district-level analysis and information as you checked above for the state? Check a box: Yes No. If no, please explain: For each of the following identify the organizational unit, level, or decision maker(s) where bridge program decisions are made: 26. The allocation of funds among different assets (e.g., pavements, bridges, maintenance appurtenances, transit) 27. What the performance measures will be. 28. What the performance targets will be. 29. The split of funds for bridge preservation, rehabilitation, and replacement. 30. The major bridge projects that will be funded. 31. Who picks the state-owned bridges that will receive some action in a certain year? 32. Local bridges outside metropolitan areas that will receive funding. 33. Bridges in metropolitan areas that will be funded and which are included in a metropolitan Transportation Improvement Program.

OCR for page 82
86 In regards to each of the following statements, describe how your agency uses your computerized bridge management system. Please use the following rating scale: 1. Based primarily on the Bridge Management System 2. Manipulation of BMS data occurs outside the BMS 3. Not used or seldom used Performance Measures for Needs Assessment and Resource Allocation 34. Calculates a measure of the current condition of each bridge (e.g., condition rating, sufficiency rating, health index). Rating: 35. Identifies current condition of each bridge on the network and key sub-networks such as districts or Interstate bridges (composite index, health index). Rating: 36. Projects into the future the condition of each bridge in the inventory. Rating: 37. Calculates a composite index of the projected network level condition of all bridges in the state (e.g., network-level health index). Rating: 38. Determines the depreciated value of the bridge inventory or uses the modified procedure for public reporting under the Governmental Accounting Standards Board Statement 34. Rating: Needs Analysis 39. Identifies bridge needs (maintenance, rehabilitation, improvement and replacement) that can be used as input to the statewide budgeting and programming process by using engineering judgment and basic bridge data (e.g., inventory and inspection data, condition ratings, sufficiency ratings, whether a bridge is structurally deficient and/or functionally obsolete, and safety or other serious problems that are flagged in the data base). Rating: 40. Identifies major project needs. Rating: 41. Uses project level analysis to identify options (candidates) as input to the network level analysis. In other words, analysis of network level needs is derived from project options for each bridge stored in the bridge management system data base. Rating: 42. Determines network level needs unconstrained by budgets by using benefit-cost analysis or other similar techniques. Rating: 43. Determines multi-year, network level bridge needs subject to annual budget constraints by using benefit-cost analysis, optimization, or other procedures. Rating: 44. Produces reports useful for building a recommended bridge budget for each organizational unit responsible for some portion of the bridge inventory (e.g., districts). Rating:

OCR for page 82
87 Resource Allocation and Tradeoff Analysis 45. Has a network level dashboard for communicating the effects of different budget levels on various factors of concern to bridge managers (e.g., a health index for bridges on the network, the benefits in relationship to the costs that can be achieved for a given budget levels). Rating: 46. Has a project level dashboard for communicating the effects of deferring bridge work on the condition of bridge elements, life-cycle costs, etc. Rating: 47. Provides network-level analysis to help allocate funds for all agency bridges. Rating: 48. Provides network-level analysis to help allocate funds among organizational units within your agency (e.g., districts and possibly lower levels of the organization). Rating: 49. Provides network analysis to help allocate bridge funds by functional class, corridors, or other sub-networks of the highway system. Rating: 50. Produces reports useful for allocating the bridge portion of the budget approved by the governor and legislature to each organizational unit responsible for some portion of the bridge inventory (e.g., districts). Rating: 51. If your bridge management system has most of the capabilities listed above, do you use them to help the CEO and top management team do planning, programming, and budgeting, especially resource allocation within the bridge program? Yes No If your answer is no, check each box that provides part of the explanation: 52. The recommended actions from the bridge management system are too different from the actions our bridge inspectors and engineers recommend. 53. The bridge management system gives too much emphasis to economic considerations relative to other considerations, especially conditions we observe in the field. 54. The economic assumptions are not accurate. 55. The bridge management system is perceived by too many managers as a black box--it uses analytic procedures we really do not understand 56. Management's capabilities include the ability to assess current and future needs. A bridge management system detracts from the bridge manager's prerogatives. 57. We have found it difficult to implement a bridge management system, train personnel, and obtain buy-in from managers that must depend upon it. 58. We have had problems with reliability (software, data, and/or analysis) 59. Other:

OCR for page 82
88 Additional Questions 60. Is there anything--perhaps something distinctive or unique-- about your bridge management process or your computerized bridge management system that significantly helps, hinders or constrains bridge decision making in regards to the following: a) Choices and tradeoffs within the bridge program concerning expenditures on maintenance activities, rehabilitation, and replacement. b) Choices and tradeoffs between the bridge program and other programs such as pavements, operations, and the broader set of maintenance activities. 61. Do you have any future plans to upgrade and allow top management to better utilize the bridge management process (including analysis from the computerized bridge management system)? 62. Please provide examples of the most useful reports, tables, charts, maps, PowerPoint presentations, screenshots, or other material you provide to the CEO and management team for purposes of bridge decision making. (Mail them to William Hyman, the Principal Investigator, at the address shown on the first page) 63. OPTIONAL BUT DESIRABLE. Please provide documentation on your bridge management business process. How resource allocation decisions are made within the bridge program area and between the bridge and other program areas is of primary interest. You can satisfy this request in one of two ways, the first being much simpler than the second: c) Provide existing documentation that is already available within your agency. This documentation may be descriptive material or flow charts and may be found in published papers, reports, policies and procedures, various types of plans, and completed requirements

OCR for page 82
89 analysis that documents existing business processes for bridge decision making or resource allocation within and across different types of assets such as bridges and pavements. Your Information Technology group may have this type of system documentation. d) Begin from scratch and develop a flow chart or list of steps that describes how key bridge decisions are made. Identify the title of the person or organizational unit responsible for each step. Identify which steps involve the use of a computerized bridge management system. In a flow chart, show key decision points and decision branches. Whether you provide existing documentation or document the bridge management process from scratch, please try to address each of the following bridge related decisions:. x Establishing performance measures and targets x Determining which bridges warrant some action based upon condition, safety, functional obsolescence, or economics (i.e. benefits exceed costs) x Determining those bridges for which actions must be deferred or down-scoped due to insufficient funds. x Recommending a funding level for bridges to be incorporated into the budget to the governor and legislature x Determining the allocation of the recommended and approved budgets among maintenance, rehabilitation, and capital expenditures including replacement, new construction, and major projects x Determining the allocation of the recommended and/or approved budget between bridges and other program areas (e.g. pavements and operations) x Determining local and metropolitan bridges that will be funded. x Adjusting performance targets based on periodic review and feedback (Please mail your documentation of the bridge management process to William Hyman, the Principal Investigator, at the address shown on the first page) 64. What information do top decision makers require for funding and programming decisions that are not being provided by your bridge management process? 65. Other comments:

OCR for page 82
90 QUESTIONS FOR HEAD OF BUDGETING (IF NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF BRIDGE ENGINEER) BACKGROUND All state departments of transportation (DOTs) have a bridge management process or system in place and in use. The extent to which these processes are used in network level planning and programming decisions may vary significantly from one agency to another. There may also be great variation in the familiarity of senior decision makers with the basic assumptions underlying the bridge management process and with its potential to produce useful reports regarding bridge condition, performance, and resource allocation needs. It will be beneficial to all transportation agencies to know how other agencies use and benefit from their bridge management processes in making resource allocation decisions relating to bridges. This synthesis is gathering information on current practices that agency CEO's and senior decision makers use to make network level funding decisions for their bridges, and the use they make of their bridge management processes for these decisions. Also, information is being collected on future plans for upgrading and better utilizing bridge management processes. The focus is on both funding allocations for bridges within the overall agency programs, and allocations within the bridge program for replacement, rehabilitation, and maintenance needs. This is a three part questionnaire to elicit different perspectives regarding the bridge management process: Part I. To be completed by the Chief Bridge Engineer responsible for the bridge management process within the State. If the Chief Bridge Engineer or the person(s) he or she delegates can complete all three parts, please do so, otherwise have the following individuals complete the remaining two parts concerning budgeting and planning. Part II. Head of budgeting with significant responsibility in helping the CEO make decisions concerning the allocation of funds across different programs including bridges. Part III. Head of State transportation planning. Respondent Information Head of Budgeting (if not completed within the Office of the Chief Bridge Engineer) Name: Title: Agency: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Fax: e-mail:

OCR for page 82
91 PLEASE RETURN THIS PORTION OF THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO YOUR AGENCY'S CHIEF BRIDGE ENGINEER WHO WILL SEND IT TO THE PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, WILLIAM HYMAN, APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC. 1. Please rate on a scale from 1(unimportant) to 5(very important) the importance of each of the following factors in the budgeting process: a) The budget level for the previous budget cycle. Rating: b) The budget level for the previous fiscal year. Rating: c) Giving first priority to bridge preservation projects. Rating: d) Giving first priority to capital expenditures for bridges replacement and major projects. Rating: e) Giving first priority to major bridge projects, with the balance of bridge funds going to the rest of the bridge program. Rating: f) The political jurisdictions in which bridge replacement work and major bridge projects occur. Rating: g) Bridge needs determined at the district and/or lower levels of the organization, possibly with input from local government or Metropolitan Planning Organizations. Rating: h) Documented bridge needs, tempered by engineering judgment, based on results of the computerized bridge management system. Rating: i) Quantitative analysis of choices and tradeoffs from the bridge management system regarding the allocation of funds among bridge maintenance, rehabilitation and replacement work. Rating: j) Quantitative analysis of choices and tradeoff from one or more computerized management systems regarding the allocation of funds between the bridge program and other programs such as pavements and operations. Rating: k) Subjective analysis of top managers and professionals concerning the choices and tradeoffs within the bridge program and between the bridge program and other programs such as pavements. Rating: l) An analysis of bridge work that should be performed by in-house staff versus contractors. Rating:

OCR for page 82
92 2. Does your budget office use your agency's computerized bridge management system to help support the budgeting process? Yes No If yes, which of the following features are used? a) Generate summary information about the inventory, condition, structural deficiency, functional obsolescence at the network and district level b) Identify safety or other serious problems such as scour, presence of fracture critical elements or seismic vulnerability c) Produce information that can be compared with performance targets set by management d) Generate alternative scenarios subject to budget constraints for planning, programming, budgeting and resource allocation e) Explore choices and tradeoffs for allocation of resources within the bridge program (maintenance, rehabilitation, replacement) f) Calculate bridge life-cycle costs and/or minimum component life-cycle costs g) Calculate avoidable road user-costs (accidents, travel time, vehicle operating costs) as a function of alternative budget levels h) Provide information to satisfy public reporting requirements under the Governmental Accounting Standards Board i) Provide information helpful in setting parameters (performance targets, budget levels by organizational unit, other guidelines) to effectively delegate to lower level managers the responsibility for selecting what work to do on specific bridges on the network j) Past and planned bridge work by organizational unit or geographic area 3. Of the items you did not check in response to Question 2, would any be useful to you for budgeting?

OCR for page 82
93 4. Please check which of the following organizational units in the department play a key role in making decisions regarding the allocation of resources within the bridge program and between the bridge program and other programs in the department. Note that some of these functions, such as budget and finance, may be found within the same organizational unit. a) Office of the CEO b) Budget c) Finance d) Planning e) Programming f) Construction g) Bridge Construction h) Maintenance i) Bridge Maintenance j) Operations k) Computer Services l) Office of the District Director, District Engineer or similar district head m) District Office of Planning n) District Office of Programming/Budgeting o) District Office of Construction p) District Office of Maintenance q) Areas r) Shops/Garages s) Other: t) Other: u) Other: 5. Please provide examples of the most useful tables, charts, maps, slide presentations, or other material you provide to the CEO and management team for purposes of budget development and resource allocation within the bridge program and between the bridge and other program areas (Please return these materials to the Chief Bridge Engineer to be mailed to William Hyman, the Principal Investigator) 6. Other Comments:

OCR for page 82
94 QUESTIONS FOR HEAD OF PLANNING (IF NOT COMPLETED WITHIN THE OFFICE OF THE CHIEF BRIDGE ENGINEER) BACKGROUND All state departments of transportation (DOTs) have a bridge management process or system in place and in use. The extent to which these processes are used in network level planning and programming decisions may vary significantly from one agency to another. There may also be great variation in the familiarity of senior decision makers with the basic assumptions underlying the bridge management process and with its potential to produce useful reports regarding bridge condition, performance, and resource allocation needs. It will be beneficial to all transportation agencies to know how other agencies use and benefit from their bridge management processes in making resource allocation decisions relating to bridges. This synthesis is gathering information on current practices that agency CEO's and senior decision makers use to make network level funding decisions for their bridges, and the use they make of their bridge management processes for these decisions. Also, information is being collected on future plans for upgrading and better utilizing bridge management processes. The focus is on both funding allocations for bridges within the overall agency programs, and allocations within the bridge program for replacement, rehabilitation, and maintenance needs. This is a three part questionnaire to elicit different perspectives regarding the bridge management process: Part I. To be completed by the Chief Bridge Engineer responsible for the bridge management process within the State. If the Chief Bridge Engineer or the person(s) he or she delegates can complete all three parts, please do so, otherwise have the following individuals complete the remaining two parts concerning budgeting and planning. Part II. Head of budgeting with significant responsibility in helping the CEO make decisions concerning the allocation of funds across different programs including bridges. Part III. Head of State transportation planning. Respondent Information Head of Planning (if not completed within the Office of the Chief Bridge Engineer) Name: Title: Agency: Address: City: State: Zip: Phone: Fax: e-mail: WOULD THE HEAD OF PLANNING PLEASE RETURN THIS PORTION OF THE COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE TO YOUR AGENCY'S CHIEF BRIDGE ENGINEER WHO WILL SEND IT TO THE PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, WILLIAM HYMAN, APPLIED RESEARCH ASSOCIATES, INC.

OCR for page 82
95 1. Please indicate which of the following capabilities of a computerized bridge management system your department uses to help support the planning process? For each item that applies, place a check in the box. a) Provide summary reports on the inventory and condition of bridges for the state and the districts. b) Provide statewide and district reports on the number of bridges that structurally deficient and functionally obsolete c) Identify or flag safety or other serious problems such as scour, presence of fracture critical elements or seismic vulnerability d) Provide an overall network and district level condition or health index e) Provide information that can be compared with performance targets set by management f) Explore alternative scenarios subject to budget constraints for planning, programming, budgeting and resource allocation g) Identify choices and tradeoffs for allocation of resources within the bridge program (replacement, rehabilitation, maintenance) h) Identify life-cycle costs of bridges i) Identify avoidable road user costs as a function of alternative budget levels j) Provide information to satisfy public reporting requirements under the Governmental Accounting Standards Board k) Provide the CEO and other top managers recommended parameters (performance targets, budget levels by organizational unit, other guidelines) to effectively delegate to lower level managers the responsibility for selecting what work to do on specific bridges l) Identify past and planned bridge work by organizational unit or geographic area m) Identify past and planned bridge work by political jurisdiction 2. Please provide examples of the most useful tables, charts, maps, slide presentations, or other material you provide to the CEO and management team for purposes of making planning decisions regarding bridges. (Please give this information to the Chief Bridge Engineer to be mailed to the Principal Investigator, William Hyman).

OCR for page 82
96 3. Please describe any recent trends in planning that are likely to help top management make improved decision making regarding bridges. These trends may concern management theory, systems, technology, research, organizational development, communications, etc. 4. Other Comments: