Conference Proceedings 26 - Transportation Research Board

More documents

Recommendations

Info

194 PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS AND AGENCY OPERATIONSPENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OFTRANSPORTATIONContactDouglas Zimmerman, PennDOT, Office of Planning,P.O. Box 3643, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3643717-783-2509, 717-787-5491 (fax)dzimmer@dot.state.pa.usPoster Session SummaryA summary of the Pennsylvania Department ofTransportation performance measurement systemand the exhibits from the poster session can be foundunder the panel presentations of Selecting Measures,Data Needs, and Analytical Issues of the mainreport.METROPOLITAN WASHINGTON COUNCIL OFGOVERNMENTSThe report is divided into four sections:• Section I presents the financially constrainedlong-range transportation plan and the expected performanceof the plan.• Section II defines and illustrates regional accessibilityto jobs by mode (highway and transit) and byfastest travel time comparing the current conditionswith the conditions under the year 2020 long-rangeplan.• Section III presents basic information on the regionaldemographic profile of low-income and minoritypopulations.• Section IV summarizes the performance of theplan in terms of the change in regional accessibilityto jobs. The review of the resultssuggests that the change in accessibility to jobs is notdisproportionately affecting low-income and minoritypopulations in an adverse way. This review indicatesthat the benefits and burdens of the transportationinvestments appear to be distributed evenly across theregional demographic profile.The poster session included numerous exhibits fromthis report. Copies of the report are available fromthe Council of Governments.ContactGerald Miller, Metropolitan Washington Council ofGovernments, 777 North Capitol Street NE, Washington,DC 20002202-962-3319, 202-962-3202gkmiller@wcog.orgPoster Session SummaryThe Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments,National Capital Region Transportation PlanningBoard, prepared a report in May 2000 titled ARegional Accessibility Analysis of the 1999 FinanciallyConstrained Long-Range Transportation Planand Impacts on Low-Income and Minority Populations.The purpose of this report is to• Assess the performance of the constrained longrangeplan over the next 20 years in terms of regionalaccessibility to jobs,• Present a demographic profile of low-incomeand minority populations, and• Review the impact that the plan has on lowincomeand minority populations to address environmentaljustice requirements.REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT, DENVER,COLORADOContactA. Jeff Becker, Regional Transit District, 1600 BlakeStreet, Denver, CO 80202303-299-2148, 303-299-2008 (fax)jeff.becker@rtd-denver.comPoster Session SummaryThe customer comes first, thus reflecting a marketorientation rather than production orientation.• Questions for the service development includethe following:–What are the markets?–Should service be provided and how much?–What type of service should be provided?• Performance evaluation helps answer these questions.These are the essential elements:
SUMMARIES OF 20 POSTER SESSIONS 195–Objectives,–Performance measures, and–Comparative analysis.• Current performance measures include passengersper mile, subsidy per passenger, passengers pertrip, and passengers per hour, depending on the typeof service. Analysis applies standards to individualroutes (or segments) or services and identifies for improvementthose that are the least productive. TheRegional Transit District also uses other standards todesign new services and review the efficiency of currentservices.• Consider a family of services, suited to a varietyof markets, resulting in multiple domains of performance.To match the right service to a market or todetermine whether service should be provided at all,a common performance system is needed. Objectives,measures, and analysis must be defined.• Performance objectives and measures can becompared with those of a private firm:Private firm–Maximize profits–Subject to maximumavailable subsidy(budget)–Measure: profit perwidgetTransit firm–Maximize ridership–Subject to maximumallowable investment–Measure: subsidyper passenger• The use of passengers per hour, to define productivity,and subsidy per passenger, to define effectiveness,to depict performance for all services on aperformance evaluation chart (see Figures 17–19).• Advantages are as follows:–Is a simple, easily understood rationale for allocatingfinancial resources;–Measures the accomplishment of the objective(effectiveness);–Allows comparison of similar, new, and alternativeservices; and–Avoids difficulty of setting multiple standardsat the policy or overall level.FIGURE 17 Denver’s Regional Transit District performance evaluation:productivity–effectiveness chart.
Page 5 and 6:
National Academy of SciencesNationa
Page 7 and 8:
Workshop Summary ..................
Page 9:
General OverviewIntroductionExecuti
Page 12 and 13:
4 PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO IMPROVE T
Page 14 and 15:
6 PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO IMPROVE T
Page 18 and 19:
10 PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO IMPROVE
Page 20 and 21:
Page 23:
Linking Performance Measures withDe
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Panel DiscussionJohn Poorman, Capit
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Workshop SummaryJohn Basilica, Loui
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 55 and 56:
RESOURCE PAPERImplementing Performa
Page 57 and 58:
IMPLEMENTING PERFORMANCE MEASUREMEN
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Panel DiscussionJennifer Finch, Col
Page 69 and 70:
FIGURE 2Level of measures and align
Page 71 and 72:
PANEL DISCUSSION: AGENCY IMPLEMENTA
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
WORKSHOP SUMMARY: AGENCY IMPLEMENTA
Page 81:
Selecting Measures, Data Needs, and
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Panel Discussion, Part 1Anita Vande
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Panel Discussion, Part 2Douglas Zim
Page 104 and 105:
FIGURE 11 Example data
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Workshop SummaryBrenda Berg, Trans
Page 110 and 111:
Page 113 and 114:
RESOURCE PAPERMeasuring That Which
Page 115 and 116:
MEASURING THAT WHICH CANNOT BE MEAS
Page 117 and 118:
TABLE 1Sustainability MeasuresNewma
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
PANEL DISCUSSION: CONNECTING SYSTEM
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Workshop SummaryScott Bassett, Oreg
Page 145:
Freight Performance MeasuresCurrent
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153: 144 PERFORMANCE MEASURES TO IMPROVE
Page 163 and 164: APPENDIX ASummaries of 20 Poster Se
Page 165 and 166: SUMMARIES OF 20 POSTER SESSIONS 157
Page 167 and 168: TABLE 1(continued) WSDOT Outcomes,
Page 177 and 178: FIGURE 2 Sacramento Regional Transi
Page 179 and 180: FIGURE 3Goal evaluation table: Chit
Page 187 and 188: TABLE 6Mobility Performance Measure
Page 195 and 196: FIGURE 13 MPAH lane-miles by roadwa
Page 201: SUMMARIES OF 20 POSTER SESSIONS 193
Page 207 and 208: SUMMARY OF PEER EXCHANGE ON DATA FO
Page 223 and 224: APPENDIX C: RESEARCH STATEMENTS DEV
Page 225 and 226: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 217University,
Page 227: LIST OF PARTICIPANTS 219Darwin Stua
show all

Conference Proceedings 26 - Transportation Research Board

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?