Guide to Calculating Ownership and Operating Costs of Department of Transportation Vehicles and Equipment: An Accounting Perspective (2020)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

38 6.1.4. Custom Systems Custom developed systems typically offer the highest degree of integration with the DOT accounting system. Eleven state DOTs use this type of system. The fleet management capabilities of these systems vary widely, as does the extent to which fleet capital, operation, maintenance, and salvage costs are available for lifecycle cost fleet reporting. In general, the reporting capabilities of these systems tend to be limited, with new report generation typically requiring custom programming. Most custom (and ERP-based) fleet systems are effectively part of the accounting system. Native system capabilities vary considerably by specific system and DOT; however, common functionalities include some level of integration with purchasing, inventory management, and payroll systems. 6.1.5. Enterprise Resource Planning Systems Four state DOTs use an ERP system. These applications were typically developed to support major private-sector industry needs and have been adapted for public-sector use. Vendors currently providing these systems to DOTs include SAP and PeopleSoft. ERP systems typically offer fully integrated fleet management solutions as part of the core application, including accounting system functionality. However, many of these exist as modules that have been adapted from private industry manufacturing or facility management Figure 5. Categories of fleet management systems used by DOTs

39 environments. These types of systems are typically organized around component-level repairs (such as electrical, cooling, chassis, or HVAC) rather than around specific assets (vehicle or equipment units). Like mainframe-based systems, costing functionality is fully integrated into the accounting system. However, these systems typically lack the ability to holistically report fleet costs at the asset (unit) level without significant custom configuration and reporting. 6.1.6. Enterprise Asset Management Systems EAM systems, used by eight state DOT fleets, are designed to provide asset lifecycle management support to multiple asset types (fleet as well as other assets such as roadways, bridges, and facilities). Importantly, some offer cross-asset optimization capabilities, which provide users with a way to compare alternate asset investment scenarios (such as fleet versus infrastructure investment). Like ERPs, EAMs are typically modules within a fully integrated system. The client determines how many modules to purchase and use based on costs, needs, and perceived value. Like ERPs, EAMs provide single-entry, multiple-update data field functionality for all modules using that information. However, unlike ERPs and most custom applications, EAMs are designed to be integrated with an external accounting system via some form of interface, rather than directly providing the accounting function. 6.1.7. Commercial Off-the-Shelf Fleet Systems Twenty-seven of the 50 state DOTs use a COTS FMISs. Most COTS systems are mature software products that reflect many years of incremental improvements in a competitive marketplace. These applications can typically provide lifecycle management support for fleet assets (if provided the necessary data) and the embedded business processes tend to be focused on the needs of fleet operations. A number of vendors provide these applications, including AssetWorks’ M5 or Fleet Anywhere/FA, FASTER, Chevin, and many others. 6.2. Fueling Systems Fuel is a significant part of fleet lifecycle costs. Capturing fuel usage tends to be a challenge because it may require manual data entry, log taking, and combining private and public fueling transactions. 6.2.1. Private Fueling Most DOTs have some level of in-house (private) fueling capacity, typically consisting of bulk fuel tanks and dispensing equipment. In best practice implementations, fueling information (fuel volume along with time, date, and unit number) is transmitted to the fleet MIS along with the equipment odometer/hour meter information. This is the minimum data needed to provide in-house fuel costing information. However, in advanced implementations this information can

40 also include usage and diagnostic information from the vehicle computer systems. Depending on the system and implementation, this diagnostic data can be used to automatically create system work orders or identify potential equipment maintenance concerns. 6.2.2. Fleet/Fuel Cards At a minimum, most DOTs provide fleet fueling cards to allow DOT equipment units to purchase fuel from commercial fueling locations. In some cases, DOTs may use these commercial facilities exclusively in lieu of maintaining private fuel capacity. In either case, this fuel must be paid for and attributed to the appropriate fleet unit. Depending on the fleet and the terms of the card agreement, fleet cards also can be used to pay for vehicle repairs or other maintenance items. Guidance for these practices varies by DOT, as does the network of vendors authorized to provide such items/repairs. 6.3. Telematics Telematics systems collect automatic vehicle location (AVL) data from a GPS for the purpose of fleet management. Depending on the device and implementation, this information also can include details from the vehicle’s onboard diagnostics system to identify any issues or concerns with the equipment. AVL and GPS data allow for tracking vehicle location and speed, which can be used to calculate miles traveled. Telematics can typically also collect odometer mileage through the on-board diagnostics port from vehicles with compatible software. Telematic systems can integrate with fleet card systems to ensure accurate odometer readings when fuel or vendor repairs occur. Vehicle usage information can typically be accessed through a user interface from the AVL or GPS vendor’s website. Alternatively, this data can be transmitted directly to FMIS for costing purposes via cellular modem, by Wi-Fi (upon return to an appropriately equipped DOT facility), or communicated through the fueling system (described above). Fleets can use both original equipment manufacturer and aftermarket telematic systems. Original equipment manufacturer systems can always read proprietary vehicle codes and data from on-board systems, while, in most cases, aftermarket systems can develop these capabilities and are also able to be used interchangeably with different vehicle makes. 6.4. Parts Integration Fleet management systems include varying degrees of parts and inventory management capabilities. In most cases, this integration can assign parts to a repair order and automatically adjust the identified part’s stocking level. Bar code scanners are frequently used to support this transaction, reducing potential data entry errors and streamlining the process.

41 Depending on the client and implementation, the inventory management system may be configured to support automatic reordering of items (when they reach certain stocking levels). However, this is a relatively rare practice in DOTs, where public procurement practices complicate efforts to create the types of direct supply chain linkages used in the private sector. DOTs that do not have parts personnel commonly contract the equipment parts support function to a single vendor. In these cases, because they were selected through a competitive process, the contractors can establish supply chain linkages as described above, making the parts more available while reducing inventory investment. In some DOTs, parts data is transmitted into the FMIS, allowing for a seamless interface between the vendor and fleet systems. Regardless of the process used, it is best practice to capture and account for the cost of parts and the support for those parts’ functions at the unit level.

42 7. REFERENCES American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (ASHTO). (2018). “AASHTO Equipment Management Technical Services Program.” https://www.emtsp.org/ American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). (2017). “AASHTO Equipment Management Technical Services Program: 2017–2019 Work Plan.” AccountingTools. (2017). “Direct costs.” https://www.accountingtools.com/articles/what-are- direct-costs.html Advanced Fleet Management Consulting (AFMG). (2017). “Vehicle Fleet’s Costs.” http://en.advancedfleetmanagementconsulting.com/2017/05/01/vehicle-fleets-costs/ American Public Works Association (APWA). (2008). “The Concise Manual for Calculating Public Fleet Rates.” www.apwa.net. American Public Works Association (APWA). (2016). “Top Ten Performance Measures for Fleet Managers: Revised Edition.” www.apwa.net. Asset Management Associates. (2015). “PLLC, Lifecycle Cost Analysis for Class 8 Snowplow Trucks DOT150358WK, Business Case–Final Report.” AssetWorks Inc. (2015). “AssetWorks Quick Guide: An Introduction to GASB 34.” Barnes, G., and P. Langworthy. (2004). “Per Mile Costs of Operating Automobiles and Trucks.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1864, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, p. 71–77. Bauer, E. (2010). “Fleet/Asset Management Systems.” PowerPoint presentation. https://www.pavementpreservation.org/wp- content/uploads/presentations/FleetAsset%20Management%20Systems%20-%20Bauer.pdf Berman, K., J. Knight, and J. Case (2006). “Financial Intelligence: A Manager’s Guide to Knowing What the Numbers Really Mean.” Harvard Business Review Press, p. 15-17. Boudart, J., and M. Figliozzi. (2012). “Key Variables Affecting Decisions of Bus Replacement Age and Total Costs.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2274, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, DC, pp. 109–113. Boutueil, V. (2016). “Fleet Management and the Adoption of Innovations by Corporate Car Fleets.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 2598, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, pp. 84–91.