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 189
~PENDIX B
Saga 0E HICK AGENT SU~EY RESPONSES
OCR for page 190
OCR for page 191
HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE QUESTIONNAIRE
NCHRP 1~12 Highway Maintenance Quality Assurance
1. What is Me approximate total amount of your agency's maintenance budget?
2. How many employees are in your maintenance organization?
3. Approximately how many lane-miles of roadway is your agency responsible for?
4. What is your agency's annual expenditure for contract maintenance?
What areas of maintenance are included in the maintenance budget and what are the approximate
amount of funds are spent annually in each area? (please check and specify)
Maintenance
Included? Area Disbursements?
Pavement Maintenance
Pavement Resurfacing
Roadside (General and Agronomy)
Mowing
Bridge Maintenance
Bndge Rehabilitation
Drainage
Snow & Ice
Rest Areas
Traffic (Signs, Lighting, Pavement Marking)
Other (Specify: )
Other (Specify: )
d,
hi?
,~
$
d,
V
6. In which areas of maintenance have qualibr assurance programs been instituted and what are your
agency's perceptions of Me successfulness of Hose programs? (please theck and specify)
QA Maintenance Perceived
Program? Area Successfulness?
Pavement Maintenance
Pavement Resurfacing
Roadside
Mowing
Bridge Maintenance
Bridge Rehabilitation
Drainage
Snow & Ice
Rest Areas
Traffic
Over (Specify:
Over (Specify:
)
B-1
OCR for page 192
7. Does your agency have any literature on in-place maintenance QA programs?
Have copies of this literature be included with your completed survey?
Based on the results of this survey, some follow-up questions pertaining to in-place QA programs may be
desired by the ERES research team. As such, we would appreciate it if you could provide the following
information
Name of Preparer
Tide:
Telephone:
Fax:
Name of Appropnate
Follow-Up Contact
Title:
Telephone:
Fax:
B-2
OCR for page 193
Table B-1. City and County responses to noetic NCHRP 1~12 survey.
Nannc of City/Caunt~ cncy
Total Maintenance Budget
(inch contract
maintcnanec)
Albuquerque, NM
Casper, WY
Charleston WV
Columbus, OH
Grand Rapids, MI
Jackson, MS
Kansas City, MO
Jimmie, WY
[little Rock, AR
Peoria, L
.
Providence, RI
.
Raleigh' NC
Rochester, NY
Sioux Falls, SD
.
Springfield, MO .
Virginia Beach, VA
Wichita, KS
Bannock County, ID
Bell County, 1X
Broward County, FL
Calcasian Parish, LA
Cass County, ND
Champaign County, Il.
Hennepin County, MN
Hillsborough County, FL
johnson County, KS
Kent County, MI
Kern County, CA
Lane County, OR
|Lexington County, SC
1
Lexington-Fayette County, KY
.
Milwaukee Camty, MI
r
Orange County, MY
Palm Beach Camty, FL
Ramsey County, MN
Tama County, IA
.
Tulsa County, OK
Volusin County, FL
. . .
Vashoe County, NV
_
Sll,OOO,oOO
S2~067,000
No Iffy
Sll,600,000
$~12,000,000
S2,058,605
$20~700~000
.
S2rO00,000
S6~500,000
S7,600,000
S30,700,000
.
S4~500,000
55~417,000
S1,000,000
S4,076~909
S2,300,000
$6~842,664
SS,324,746
S19r595~200
S5~000~000
$2,418,000
S4,000~000
$16,000,000
S7~506~785
S1,350~000
S2,500,000
S12,000~000
$30~000,000
$3~900,000
S10,800,000
S8~500~000
$11,000,000
$3~200~000
Sl,8i1~350
S23~400,000
No inforrn~ion I.
_
$6,602,193
1
S12,000,000
S3~500,000
S5,500~000
Sll,OOO,oOO .
3,585
.,144
1 650
6,200
1100
2,800
Lane.Mlle5 for which Annual E - enditure for
Roadway Attend is Contract Maintenance
Responsible
S30~000
S2~000~000
S1,300,000
S2,200,000
S3,500,000
S1,462,000
S1,000,000
.
No inforrn~ion Banded.
S1 0°r°°°
S513,560
S1,400~000
S7~976~300
S4~700,000
SO
SO
S600,000
S14,000,000
pit
S185,000
Slr500,000
S2,200,000
S3~000~000
Sl,100,oOO
S1,500,000
No infannation Carded.
SO
S350~000
S1~500~000
S2,951,000
S1~400~000
S150 000
,
SSO,OOO
S1,600,000
S2~700,000
(roads and budges)
OCR for page 194
Name of City/County Agency
Laramie, WY
Little Rock, AR
Kiowa Falls, SD
.
Springfield, MO
Virginia Beach, VA
Wichita, K'S
Bannock County, ID
Bell County TX
toward County FL
Cal~cian Pansh, LA
Cass County, ND
Champaign County, L
l ennepin County, MN
Hillsborough County, FL
Johnson County, K'S
ent County MI
em County, CA
Lane County, OR
exington County, SC
L=cington-Fayette County, KY
Mancopa County, AZ
Milwaukee County, MI
.
range County, NY
?alm Beach Cc~nty, FL
. .
Ramsey County, MN
[ama County, IA
.
Tulsa County OK
Volusin County, FL
.
Table B-1. City and County responses to initial NCHRP 1~12 survey.
Pavement Maintenance _ _
Approximate QA
Pe~ta~c of Program?
4%
Approximate
Perceived Successfulness of QA Program Percenta~c of
Total Budge'
18%
11%
9%
2%
Yes (monitored by Management Info System).
TQA in progress
The QA program in the Street Division has been
very successful It brings an awareness to the
work force of perceived work standards,
productivity, and is an outstanding method of
tracking cost of labor, equip., and malls. in our
many activitivities.
All roads are inspected and rated.
Good (district supervisor inspection)
QA Perceived Successfulness of QA Program
Program?
A must - insures design life extension.
Fair (use contract inspection and testing).
Very good.
. . .
Improved pavement life.
See "Pavement Maintenance."
All roads are inspected and rated.
Good (for pavement mime).
OCR for page 195
Table B-1. City and County responses to Outed NCHRP 1~12 survey.
Name of City/County Agency
Albuquerque, NM
Charleston, WV l
Columbus, OH
|Grand Rapids, MI
ackson MS
Kansas City, MO
Jimmie, WY
Little Rock, AR
1%
3%
Mesa, AZ t
Milwaukee, WI l
Newark, N]
Peona, IL l
Providence, RI F
Raleigh, NC L
ochester, NY
Sioux Falls, SD
Springfield, MO
Virginia Beach, VA
Wichita, KS
.
Bannc~cCaunty, ID
l
Be out
8roward County FL
Calcasian Parish, LA
Cass County, ND
Champaign County, IL
Hennepin County, MN
Hillsbora~gh County, E:L I
Johnson Caunty, KS L
Kent County, MI
1
Kern County, CA
1
Lane County, OR
|Le~ngton County, SC
L~cington-Fayette County, KY
1
|Maricopa County, AZ
|Milwaukee Caunty, MI
Orange County, NY
Palm Beach County, FL
Ramsey County, MN
Tame County, LA
Tulsa Calnty, OK
2%
2%
2%
Volume County, FL
Washoe County, NV
. ~
. Roadside (General & Agronomy) Mowing/ landscaping
Approximate
Percentage of QA Program?
Total Budget
No
No
No
Yes
19%
1%
6%
-
1%
5%
5%
9%
No
No
Perceived Successfulness of QA Percentage of
Program Total Budget
No
No
1 9,o
Yes (monitored by Management Info
System).
49G
Perceived Successfulness of QA
QA Program? Program
No
No
Yes
Yes (monitored by Management
Info Systerr0.
No
Yes
a%
See "Pavement Maintenance."
15%
No
Yes
See "Pavement Maintenance."
No
OCR for page 196
OCR for page 197
Table B-1. City and County responses to initial NCHRP 1~12 survey.
Name of City/County Agency
Albuquerque, NM
-
Casper, WY
Charleston WV
Columbus, OH
. .
Grand Rapids, MI
ackson, MS
Kansas City, MO
Laramie, WY
Little Rock, AR
Sioux Falls, SD
Springfield, MO
Virginia Beach VA
Wichita, KS
. .
Bannock County, ID
.
Bell County' 1X
Brow
Calcas~ast Parish, LA
Cass County' ND
Champaign County, IL
HennepinCount;y, MN
.
Hillsborough County, FL
[ohnsonCamty, KS
.
ent County, MI .
l
Kern County, CA l
Lane County OR
, l
l e~angton County, SC
L - ngton-Fayette County, KY
Mancopa County, AZ
Milwaukee County MI
Orange County, NY
Palm Beach Camty, FL
Ramsey County, MN
Tama County, IA
Tu1~9~
Volusin County, FL
Washoe County, NV
10%
28%
4%
Ayproxanate Perceived Successfuln - s of App~x~mat~
Percentage of QA Program? QA Program Total Budget
-
~9 ~ ~ . .__~.~ ~
D.. X ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ -
,
~ ~ ~ Stir 3 ,3~ ~
5%
No
Yes
_R. .
3~ .
11~o
See common under"PaveTneT
149`
Perceived Successfulness of
QA Prog'~n
Good
Yes (monitored by
Management Info System).
I - roved drainage system.
.
Yes (monitored by
Management Info SysteTn).
Y-c
See coin nent under ''PaveTnen
Maintenance".
See"Pavetnent Maintenance." I
Good (district supervisor |
_S__~:__\ I
peplum). 11
_1
_1
1
1
_1
_1
_1
_1
_1
_1
_1
_1
_1
OCR for page 198
Table B-1. Citr and County responses to initial NCHRP 1~12 survey.
Rest Areas
- 1
Traffic (Si - , Lighting, ~ averment Marking)
Approximate Perceived Successfulness of
Percentage of QA Program? QA Program
Total Budget
Name of City/County Agency
App~c~atc
Percentage of
Total Budget
Albuquerque, NM
Casper, WY
Charleston, WV
Columbus OH r
r
Grand Rapids, MI L
Jackson, MS ~
KansasCiy, MO L
|Laramie, WY
l~tleRo=^ L
Mesa, AZ r
1
|Milwaukee, WI
|Newark, NJ
1
IMP, IL
1
|Prov~dence, RI
|Raleigh' NC
|Rochester, NY
Is oux Falls SD
|Spungfield, MO
Vi~ia Beach, VA
1
Wichita, KS
BannockCamty, ID
Sell County 1X
,
roward County, FL
Calcasian Parish, LA
Sass County, ND
Champaign County, IL
Hennepin County, MN
Hillsborough County, FL
ohnson County, KS
Kent Camty, MI
ern County, CA
Lane County, OR
Lexington County, SC
e~angton-Fayette County, KY
No
No
No
No
No
-
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
0%
Mancopa County, AZ
Milwaukee County, MI
range County, NY
elm Beach Camty, FL
abbey County, MN
Tama County, LA
Tulsa County, OK
Volusin County, FL l
Washoe County, NV
=
=
=
Perceived Successfulness of
QA Program? QA Program
No
| No
No
No
No
No
No
No
-
No
No
No
No
No
No
30%
9%
7%
16%
7%
TQA in prowess
.S~"PavPmPnt Maintenance"
9%
IS%
2%
7%
1296
4%
5%
18%
12%
2'C
6%
8%
18%
2%
.
.
15%
13%
4%
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
-
No
No
No
No
No
No
Yes
Yes (monitored by
Management Info System).
No
y
es
No
No
No
Yes
Improved operation and
safety.
YPC
See "Pavement Maintenance."
Good (standards set by state
ant rules).
B-8
OCR for page 199
Table B-1. Cite ant! Countv responses to initial NCHRP 1~12 survey.
Nanne of City/County A~cocy
A~uquerc~ue, NM
Casper, WY |
Charleston,WV T
Columbus, OH
Grand Rapids, MI
Jaclcson, MS
Kansas City, MO
Laramie, WY
Little Rocl`, AR
Mesa AZ
. ' ~
Milwaukee, WI
Newarl<, NJ
eona IL
, .
Providence, Rl
Raleigh, NC
ochester NY
Sioux Falls, SD
Springfield, MO
irginia Beach, VA
Wit ~
Bannock Camp, ID
Bell County TX
.
B~,~
Calcasian Pansh, LA
Cass County, ND
Champaign County, IL
ennepin County, MN
Hillsborough County, FL
ohnson County, KS
Kent County, MI
em County, CA
Lane Ca~nty, OR
Lexington County, SC
L~dngton-Fayette County, KY
Ma= pa (Dy, AZ
Mid
Orange County, NY
Palm Beach County, FL
Ramsey County, MN
Tulsa County, OK
Volus~n County, FL
Washoe County, NV
~_ _ _ ~,1 ~
Other Arm of Maintenance
Other (1) A"v~ _
Other (1) DcscripHon Pcrecr~tage of Total
Budget _
Sweeping 5%
.
Guard Rail 0%
.
_ .
Storm Sewers No mform~'on provided.
Street Sweeping 3%
__
l Street Sweeping 10%
~-
Road Materials 26%
_
Admin. equip. purchase,
Bldg. & grounds, tuning, 17%
employee leave
Utility Cuts 13%
Road Rebuilding 17%
Traffic Signals 48%
Gravel road blading & 45%
regravel~n~
~ lders 2%
Constmction 10%
Dust Control 3%
Dust Control 11%
Special Project 9%
.
Dirt Road Grading 64%
Dirt Road Maintenance 8%
.
Salaries including 49%
ffinges/ovenime
Street Sweeping 4%
Granular Surfaces 17%
.
. .
Over (1) Over (2) App~c~atc
Successfulness of Over (2) Descr~on Percentage of Total
QA Pram .
Unpaved Road 4%
Maintenance
Shoulder 0%
Maintenance
,
Alleys ~ mfiorr - 'on proud.
Yes (monitored by
Management Info Signals 8%
deny.
Concrete Repair 6S
.
l~p~ for
other departments.
Street Sweeping 6%
_
Very good. Cmshing, Stockpilin 20%
_
Shader repair & 3%
maintenance
= Permits ~3%
Ma6~uto Control 6%
Gravel and Patrollin 1496
Equiprrent
MiscellaneouS Tools 0%
Miscellaneous 18%
Blading 9%
= _~
B-9
Odor (2)
Pered~d
Succmsf~ of
QA Program
Yes (monitored by
Management Info
System).
OCR for page 213
June 22, 1995
Page 3
-
19.
20.
21.
22
Is ~e output from any of ~ese systems ~ncorporated
into your agency's LOS rating system?
O Pavement
O Bridges
O Safety
O Congestion
Does your agency have an active maintenance Quality Assurance (QA)
program? (If No, skip to question 25) O Yes O No
Please rate the effectiveness of your agency~s existing maintenance QA program.
Very
Ineffective
2 ^
_ ~4 5 6 7 8
Very
Effective
9 10
In one or two paragraphs, please describe how your agency's maintenance QA
program Is used.
23. Are teams formed to establish QA policies and conduct reviews? O Yes O No
24. Are QA evaluations conducted....
25.
O while Me activity is being performed?
O after He activity is completed?
Does your agency have an active maintenance Quality Improvement (QI)
program? (If No, skip to question 28) O Yes O No
NCHRP 1~12
Highway Maintenance Quality Assurance Survey
~23
OCR for page 214
June 22, 1995
Paced
A,
26.
27.
Please rate Me effectiveness of your agencyls existing maintenance QI program.
Very
Ineffective
1 2
3 4
Very
Effec'tive
6 7 8 9 10
In one or two paragraphs, please describe how your agency's maintenance Ql
program Is used.
28. Is your agency's maintenance operation administered from
a central office or has au~orit,Ybeen decentralized to
field units? ~ Central Office
~ Decentralized
29. Is We agency maintenance budget.... C] based on an annual needs assessment?
developed through historical funding
levels.
30. Do you recommend Mat over States adopt your agency's memos of
managing maintenance operations? O Yes ~ No
NCHRP 1~12
Highway Maintenance Quality Assurance Survey
B-24
OCR for page 215
June 22, 1995
Page 5
Possibly Mere are questions where Were was not adequate space to provide a complete
araswer. If so, you are invited to furnish supplemental information below at your
discretion. Also, we would appreciate it if you could furnish Me namers) and
telephone numbers of:
Name of Preparer 1:
Telephone No. ~ ~
Name of Preparer 2:
Telephone No. ~ ~
Thank you very much for your assistance.
Tide:
FAX No.
Title:
FAX No. t
NCHRP 1~12
Highway Maintenance Qualiby Assurance Survey
B-25
OCR for page 216
-
E ~ ~ c
to ~
5 c
o ._
~O
of
U)
~4
d4
~4
z
o
au
in
o
A
U)
o
in
a'
be
in
-
.n
a,
U)
o
-
U)
o
5 E ~
Cat
E ~
3
~ 5
c 5 ~ ~ c
to ~ ~
8.2 ~ ~
.
ho
E ~ ~ ~
. lo, ~ 11 ,~ it,
to ~ ~ 'o C
~._ _
i,, is
~ ~ -
-
~ ~ ~ E
C! H~ C
I-t
~ ~ OU 11 ~ ~ ~ ~ O~ ~ ~ ~
E :2 ~ E ~ D ~1 E I I~ ~
,^ a) 08 t~l ,~t ~ , ~-W u_ ~ ~ ; ~^.
- ~ 1 ~o i, ~ ~E ' 1~ ~
. l ~ ~ l .l ~
3~ ~ l 1
3~ ~ l 11
~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~
O ~ I , ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ I ~ ~
_ ~ , ~ ~R R ~ a
~ ~ .
~ ~ .~ ~ ~ 1^ l~
! , ~ ~ 1 l ~
~ ~ , E~ ~ l ~ E~
~ ~ l l ' _ ~ O ~ ~ l ~ _ ~ O l ~ ~ _ ~ O
c __ ' ~ : c _ ._ 1~1 ~ l ~ c _ ._ ' ~ c _ ·-
_11 ' ~ . o ~ ~ 1 - ~ ' ~ o ~ ~l ~ 0 0 ig ~
~ ~ 1 ~ . <~u ~ ~ ~ u-~ az v~
_ __ l t . ,y _ ~ R I ~ ~ ~ ~ O
~ _ 1';~ 81 ~ ~
Z Vo3~=I ~ Z I ~ Z I
~ -1 1 1
° 1 1 1
1 1 1
~ zl ~Z I Zt Z I ~
~ ~ ~ ~-
-1 ~ 1 ~ ~ 1 ~
3 1 '~ ~3~ ~:~ 3 43
~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1
E E 3 | ~O I O c |
~26
~, '= ~=
U , I ~ IY =
| 1~ m~
, ~
1 1 a, ~_
0 _ 0
~li~- ,Tn
~1 ~ 1 ~ ~i:
6 1 ~ 1 ~ ~ _
1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~
1 - 1 1 3 _
I ~t ~
. E~
or E E ~ --Z ~ ° ~ ~ E ~
I ~ I ~ I o ~I
1 ~h
3 i ~ ~ ~ 1 Z ~E
8 1 8 1 =, 1 ~ 1 8
1 1 1 ~ 1 1
1 ~ 1 ~ ~
1 1 1 1~11, 1
~1 01 ^1 zl ~1
~E j=~§uI t! 8
U 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 ~
.3e 1 ~1 . - 1 ~1 ~
-
OCR for page 217
a'
:>
in
~ -
o
c-J
a)
o
cn
a,
in
o
a]
be
.
cO
a,
~ ~ ~ ~ -
~,= e 5
~ ~ .~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 0
p us Pa
2 >, ~ ~ ~
a= ~ =~= g
-4 .§ ~ ~
m0 ~ ,
0 ~ p
~ O ~
3.~1111
~ j' 5 i~2
3 -2 8~1 Id
~ u
P4
_ o O
' ,9 ~ e -~
8~a:
_ ~ be ~
.
Z Z
U] be
loo at 5
=~o
.=
Ma,
E~
0` z
_
m~ ~
^]
a
~ . ~ ~
6Z us ~
.
_8
E=: ~ .
1 = - 1 ~
I:'i
Imp ski
! ]] ~
~ ~ l
1 ~
1 1.8
~ ~l
1 Ft
~ W!
1
71 ~
B-27
OCR for page 218
nit
-
In
<:
5- fit .
Cal ~ ~
,o l
~ g
<:-
.=
I Ah 3
11
O It O I,,
~.!
-A fit ~ ' is.
5s ~ ~
-
to ~
~ W~ ~q :~E
~ u ~ ad ~ ~ ~I~ u ~ ~ O.- ]~ v ~ o ~ 1B ~ U
4t, m~ ~ ~ ~o 1- a, (L,- ~-1- t, sow ~ ~ ~ =. ~1 1 ~ a' =
3 ooze ~ to ~ ~= u 51 ~ .0O$ ~ ~ ~ bO A, ~ .~0 ~ ~ bO ~1 1' ~ be
D ~ D ~ ~ D ~ ~ ~ D ~D of l l ~
~1~ _ ~l l ~
~ l At_ ~l l ~
81 = ~ ~ 1 1 ~ = Be ~ 1 1 =
-1 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ I. ~ 1 1 ~
~ ~ l At_ ~. . l ~
o ~ 0 ~ 1 ~_ - o 0 o~} 0
·_ c,1 ~ .8 ·= ~ 1 3~ .2°~ 11 ~ - ~ 1E ~ 1 - 1 ~ bOc~
U ~ ~3~ , U L4 ~ y ~ ~0 ~ , U ~ ~ _~ ~ U ~ ~ U ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ U
§~s ~ , §~s p~ ~ ~t , ;~.o _g ~ ~·- ;~ ~ :a'~ =° t l ~ 3}~ ~._
~ ~ ~ `~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~E , .~, ~ ~ _~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 115 ~ ~ ,
$ 0 ~ . ~ ~o ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ , ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
cn g ~ u) = ~ u, ~ Ol ~ ~n g P ~ ~ cn ~ Ol u' ~ O cn ~ v ~ ~ ~ 3~ cn -g O'
- 1 . ~ ~1 ~t~ ~ ~ ~ I I
~- ~ 1 1
. B111 ~_. ~1 1 1
3 ~! . ~ ~ ~ ~1 ! 15
~ 3~ ; ~ i ~_~ ~ l l ~
~ ~ ~11 15 '° se ~1
~ ~ ~ F ~_~ ~ l l ~
~1. ~ ~ ~11~1 ~ _ . ~ ~41
~ ~ z~ ~ ~ z 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~§lilz~l
_: OC ~ c ~ ~ -: ~ ~ r ~ <~ <
B-28
OCR for page 219
u]
~ -
he
o
a)
On
o
On
a,
i)
o
to
a'
but
at:
.
m
-
En
~ I ~W
1 1 1 1 'S ~ 1~ ~ ~ 1 z 1 1 1
E
At Fi ~ ~ a. ,~ ~
q'OO _
~ ~ -~rr~
z 1 ~ I z 1 ~ 1 z~= z 1 z ~ I z =1 1 z
.t I u I C I - ~| 6 ~ ~ | C ~ | ~ ~ | | ~
~ ~ \; ~11,~ 3 ~ :~; ~ ~ =~ a ~ ~ ~ ,3, d I
a a a a ~c: c ~ a u a u u
a ~ ~ _ Oc e I | e C | 5 o ~ _,_ D | C .8 18 -= | c .0
~ ~n 3 ~ ~ g ~ ~ n ~ ~ . 11_-~ ~ u o) ~ S] ~ 8] r' 83
U O : 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ O ~ ~ 1 1 -~ -- 1 ~c ~ ~ ~ ·_ ~ ~1~ ~ ~14 ~ 1 ~ ~ ~
, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l _
~ ·1~ , ~ ~ ~ '- ~ '4 t ',- ~ ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ '- ~ '- ~ '- ~ '-
cn ~v , ~v ~V q'
1 R , _8, ~ ~
1 ~ _: R_ Dl7S
I
R ~_
I L 5__~
I ~ l_ _l
l ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~
~l ~C ~CO ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
l ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ l
1
1
1
1
~ ~ ~ ~ l
l l l
~ ~- ~ ~ ~ :_~:
T rr 1 1 1 1 1 D 1 ~ 1 .5 1 ~ 5
1 ~ ~ 1 Ro 1~m' ~ ~ ~
13 1 ~ 1 5 1 5 1 ~ 1 ~ 1 '3- ~ 1 5~ 1 =5i ~
1 61
1 ~
1 81
1 _1
1 ~1
1 =1
~1
~1
~1
~1
~1
- .
~ o ~ ~
~ ~ ~ C,
~ ~ ~ o
S t3 {3 ,0
u].
~ o ~
G~ E
e;~n c5 '; e; `
O
U) f; ~ ,~ O
~ ~ ~ .
~.
1 >~
1 ~ ==
1 .~O
5 ~ ~ Y
·s
s °
1
~29
OCR for page 220
DETAILED RESPONSES TO SECOND NCHRP 14~12 SURVEY
Survey Question: Descnbe how the QA program is used.
Florida
Central office conducts annual reviews to insure compliance win Agency and State
laws, rules, procedures and guidelines to insure conformance with "agency designated
critical requirements." This provides management with an overview of how each
District Is performing, and establishes uniformity in Me LOS provided the taxpayer.
Maryland
Annual Peer Reviews of each county are done by teams of maintenance managers
from different areas. These results are helpful in prioritizing work needed for We
counties' annual programs.
Peer Rewew criteria are shared wad team leaders so that Hey know what is Me
desired I~OS for each activity. Team leaders will inspect Weir assigned areas daily, note
conditions which need corrections, and then working win the RME/ARME, or on Weir
own, schedule corrective actions, within budget/personnel/equipment limitations.
Pennsylvania
The Department's Quality Assurance program serves a number of functions as
follows:
I. Monitors short-term and long-range performance trends.
2. Used to recommend and provides a form to evaluate changes to performance
and production standards.
3. Source for recommendations for policy changes.
4. Identifies localized or statewide training needs.
5. Identifies localized deficiencies in adherence to performance standards.
Identifies high achievers and recommends organizations for awards/recognition
programs.
B-30
OCR for page 221
British Columbia
Used to monitor Me contractor's performance by performing three types of
inspections-rando~rdy selected 2-km sections, end-product, and ~n-process
inspections. The first type (present state) is a measure of how well the contractor is
performing, is an the work done. The other two types are more of a check on how well
specific work is nerfom~ed.
Sioux Falls, SD
- r
Our agency's quality assurance is somewhat informal. Our workforce is trained In
methods, has We correct equipment for Me activity Hey are asked to perform, and has
He performance standards to adhere to. Everyone within the chain of command (from
management, to foreman, to crew lead equipment operator, along with He rest of He
work force) are all dedicated to getting He job done right He first time so as not to have
to do it over within a reasonable pavement life span. Outside testing firms are also
enlisted for compaction tests and materials testing.
Virginia Beach, VA
In-house teams of employees are used to review existing processes, standards, etc.
Outside consultants and testing labs are employed by He City or contractors working
for the City to provide qualibr contTo! on active construction projects.
Washoe County, NV
(Pavement) Paver - Inspection of all roads (500 centerline miles, every 2 years).
Two-man inspection crews working from April to September.
Ohio
The Ohio DOT's Maintenance Quality System is used to get a general picture
(evaluation) of He condition of Ohio~s highways, looking at 13 components of He
highway system (pavements, shoulder drop~ffs.' mowing, litter' etc.). Twenty 2-mile
(3.2-km) of highway are evaluated each quarter In each of our 88 counties. Each section
is randomly selected by computer.
B-31
OCR for page 222
Survey Question: Describe how the QI program is used.
Florida
Continuous teams are established by Me State Maintenance Office to review the
performance standards, maintenance rating program, maintenance management
system, and activity cost data on an annual basis. This "dynamic change" process
provides continuous updates for these systems. Changes are communicated Trough
annual trairung sessions with appropriate personnel.
Maryland
Maintenance personnel from different areas of Me State meet periodically in
"Maintenance Business Team" sessions in order to develop more efficient/effective
processes. They share current ways of performing maintenance, Men choose We best
methods across the State and mix why new ideas and technologies to come up win an
ideal process for Me selected activities.
Oregon
Pilot project in one geographic area using self managed teams to increase ownership
In final product.
Pennsylvania
The Maintenance Organization Is the biggest user of Me Suggestion Connection.
_ . . . . . ~, .. . . -
vie
These suggestions are sunm~neu and tor tne most part unplemented as a pilot or
suggested for statewide implementation by Me review committee. These ideas are
captured yearly In a GAINS brochure published by Me Productivity Center, in Me
Innovation Flyers published monkey by Me Center, and also broadcast on our
electronic bulletin board through Me Bureau of Office Services on a monthly basis.
The Maintenance Organization is also Me biggest user of Me Productivity
Improvement Fund. This fund gives the submitter up to $15,000 per idea to pilot and
Implement qualified ideas.
M~int~nzin~P hat trained a great deal of their nersc)nne1 in the quality CQI Overview
course which introduces Me workers to Total Quality. Many continue on to be
Instructed In Creative Problem Solving, CQl Tools and Techniques, Process Flow
Analysis and other quality courses. Many continue on to be instructors of Me quality
courses and facilitators of quality teams.
~ ~ ^~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ·~-_ _ ~-__ ~
Teamwork has become just a part of Me job In Maintenance. The formal teams have
developed into the less formal Crew-as-a-Team. There are working groups who
B-32
OCR for page 223
perform their jobs daily using the tools and concepts learned from the Creative
Problem Solving courses.
Maintenance has taken part In many quality measurement pilots In Me past
year surveying customers to see how quick our response rate is after calls on repairs
are made. Also, to see how weD we're doing in We Maintenance field-a Customer
Service Indexing pilot was completed this past fiscal year and implementation in every
county will occur this year.
Sioux Falls, SD
Our quality unprovement program consists of in-house and seminar type training
which includes our entire work force.
Virginia Beach, VA
The maintenance QI is an integral part of the City's total quality program. Issues
identified for study are reviewed by process improvement teams made up of
employees from different levels of Me orgaruzation.
Ramsey County, MN
Public works has a HPP (high performance participation) program underway Mat
includes our maintenance operation. ~ maintenance, we have started PI (process
improvement) groups Mat have reviewed our pavement recycling/resurfacing
program and is now beginning a review of our snow and ice control program.
Washoe County, NV
Feedback from crews. They are told to look for ways to Improve Me system.
B-33
Representative terms from entire chapter:
perceived successfulness
