Compass: Assessing Highway Maintenance Condition

1
Compass Assessing Highway Maintenance Condition

• Teresa Adams, UW-Madison
• Scott Bush, Compass Program Manager
• Wisconsin DOT

2
About Compass
Compass WisDOTs maintenance quality assurance
(MQA) and asset management program for highway
operations Purpose To create a comprehensive
view of highway operations by providing an annual
report
3
Whats an MQA Program?

• Outcome-based, statistically valid, reliable and
  repeatable measures of asset maintenance
  condition
• Wisconsins Compass
• Texas Maintenance Assessment Program
• MQA Programs help maintenance managers
• Show accountability for maintenance expenditure
• Justify maintenance budgets
• MQA programs help decision-makers
• understand maintenance conditions
• set priorities

4
Getting Research into Practice

• Role of University Research Program
• MQA Peer Exchange
• Common Terminology and Recognized Measures for
  MQA
• Statistical Analysis Guidebook for MQA
• Impact of Investment on Maintenance Condition
• Maintenance Cost per Lane Mile
• Compass Data Analysis and Reporting

5
Resources available for establishing an MQA
program but little guidance on measures, and
reporting.

• Building upon
• NCHRP Report 442 MQA program development and
  some terminology
• NCHRP Report 511 Types of measures
  customer-focused programs
• NCHRP Report 446 Usefulness of performance-based
  planning planning performance measures library
• 2004 MQA Peer Exchange Conference, Madison, WI
• 2000 Workshop on Commonly Recognized Measures,
  Scottsdale, AZ

6

• 74 attendees
• 35 states provinces
• Counties
• FHWA, USDA

7
Key Themes from Peer Exchange

• Telling the story. Communicating the connection
  between dollars spent on maintenance and services
  that matter to drivers.
• Using data effectively. Determining what to
  measure and how to measure it.
• Connecting maintenance data. Integrating MQA with
  budgeting and maintenance management business
  processes and data systems.
• Common language for MQA
• Measures for data collection
• Standards for pass/fail
• Thresholds for minimal acceptance
• Targets for acceptable backlog
• Customer preferences and communicating to the
  public. Tying MQA with agency goals and
  preferences of the motoring public.
• Themes are not independent

8
MQA Resource Library

• 2004 MQA Peer Exchange Conference, Madison, WI
• On-line MQA document library http//www.mrutc.org/
  outreach/MQA/library/
• 35 transportation agencies (used 26 for this
  study)

• Documents Types
• Rating manuals
• Field guides
• Annual reports
• Correspondences
• PowerPoint presentations
• Financial reports
• Inspection forms

9
Whats Measured in the Field Review?

• States measure characteristics (quality or
  defects)
• Flexible Pavement potholes
• Rigid Pavement faults
• Shoulders drop-off
• Roadside litter/debris
• States measure features (physical assets or
  activities)
• Traffic Management guide rail
• Drainage pipes
• Bridges bridge approach
• Snow and Ice plowing
• When States measure features, the characteristics
  are implied in the standard for measurement.

10
A few Traffic Management Measures
11
A few Roadway Shoulder Measures
An excerpt from the Shoulder Measures table
12
Role of Research in Development of Compass

• Development of Measures
• Statistical Samples
• Data Analysis to Compute Measures
• Field Review (Shoulders, Drainage, Roadsides and
  Traffic)
• Sign Inventory
• Rigid and Flexible Pavements
• Bridges
• Winter
• Statistical Analysis of Backlog
• Comparison among Regions
• Diurnal Trends
• Development of Reports charts and tables

13
Compass is Evolving
14
Inside Compass

• Winter Maintenance
• Winter by the numbers
• Time to Bare/wet Pavement
• Winter crashes per VMT
• Winter Severity Index vs. Cost per lane mile
• Bridge
• Condition (NBI-based)
• Maintenance Needs
• Inspection Compliance

• Field Review
• Traffic (markings, delineators, etc)
• Shoulders (cracking, potholes, etc)
• Drainage (culverts, ditches, etc)
• Roadsides (fences, mowing, etc)
• Pavement
• Flexible (flushing, rutting, etc)
• Rigid (slab breakup, distress, etc)
• Sign
• Regulatory/warning Sign
• Other Sign

15
Wisconsin 2005 Targets for Highway Maintenance
Conditions

1 ? This symbol indicates that the percent
backlogged for that feature is statistically the
same as the target, or within 5 percentage
points. 2 Gap may be smaller than the
difference between actual and target. Estimates
of the gap are conservative and take into account
sample size.
16
Wisconsin 2005 Compass Report on Highway
Maintenance Conditions
1 Arrows indicate a statistically valid change
from last year to this year. Double arrows
indicate a change of 8 or more percentage points,
based on a conservative estimate using a 95
confidence interval.


17
Regions 2005 Compass Report on Highway
Maintenance Conditions

18
Wisconsin and Regions 2005 Sign Age Distribution
19
Wisconsin 2005 Bridge Condition Distribution
20
Next Steps for Compass

• Who uses it
• High-level decision makers
• WisDOT Operational Managers
• Maintenance supervisors
• What is it used for
• Help understand trends and conditions
• Guideline to prioritize resources
• Setting target future condition levels for the
  highway system
• Illustrate and understand the consequences of
  funding and policy shifts
• Demonstrate accountability to decision-makers at
  WisDOT and in the legislature

21
Impact of Maintenance Budget Cuts on Maintenance
Backlog for Patch Deterioration of Flexible
Pavement
22
Early Impact of Budget Restoration on Maintenance
Backlog for Patch Deterioration of Flexible
Pavements
23
Impact of Two Years of Budget Restoration on
Maintenance Backlog for Patch Deterioration of
Flexible Pavements
24
The End

• Thank you
• Questions?