Evaluating – Performance Standards 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Transportation Overview. Transportation East
Advertisements

FUNDING FOR TRANSPORTATION SERVICES The only transportation funding districts receive is for specialized transportation services as required for pupils.
SDB Powerpoints presents.
Building Utilization Summary High School 9-12 Chenango Valley Middle School; District Office; 6-8 Chenango Forks Elementary Schools Year 1 Port Dickinson.
VAPT June 24,  Data can be used for future projections  Data is used in determining the funding for transportation, which is included in Basic.
Wappingers Central School District BUS REPLACEMENT PLAN
Pupil Transportation Funding Derek Graham, Section Chief Transportation Services North Carolina Dept. of Public Instruction.
Gates County Schools Transportation Mission Statement Recognizing the safe transportation of students as this department’s primary responsibility, it is.
HAMMONDSPORT CENTRAL SCHOOL Budget Information.
Agenda Define Efficiency. Where do we start? –Expenditures –Revenue Establish Performance Indicators. Cost savings measures. Things to think about. Bottom.
BSIP Reporting and Analysis. What Data Can I Get ? In short: Anything put in can be seen in a report somewhere You can only get back out of BSIP what.
1 Transportation Operations and Financial Review Michael E. Finn, CFO.
Charter Schools, Transportation, and Children with Special Needs: From North Carolina and Beyond.
Data Driven Decision Making, What to Measure? 1. HCPS Vision Data Driven Decision Making, What to Measure? 2 To become the nation's leader in developing.
Berkshire Local School District Where are We and How are We Doing? Merry Lou Tramont, Treasurer.
Superintendent’s Budget Proposal Oswego City School District Budget Plan March 20, 2012.
Long Range Infrastructure Planning The Gilbert, Arizona Experience Kenneth C. Morgan, PE Public Works Director.
Student Transportation Services Highway to Excellence Transportation Performance Indicators, Measures and Benchmark Data Presented by: Greg Akin, Director.
Presented on January 20, ◦ Services 2 3 fixed routes, 1 bus 23 vans, 19 daily vehicle runs.
Baltimore County Public Schools Office of Transportation.
STUDENT TRANSPORTATION COSC Presentation in Boardroom Wednesday, April 8 th, :30 p.m.
Transit Agency Status FY
TRANSPORTATIONPRESENTATION SCHOOL YEAR.
Bucks County Transport, Inc. Status FY Current Financial Position Current Operations Service Statistics/Trends Funding Statistics/Trends Other.
LEAN TRANSIT.
Budget Proposal MISSION STATEMENT We will support student achievement by developing and sustaining exemplary educational experiences; creating.
Transportation Cost Cutting Ideas Michael F. Detwiler, Sr. Great Valley School District PASBO Conference March 2011.
Finance Committee Update Oswego City School District Budget Plan April 17, 2012.
1 Business Operations October 27, 2011 HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT Construction and Facility Services Transportation Food Services Police Business.
Line 8 - Local Expenses Training expenses for employees reported on lines 1-5 Tuition, mileage, meals, workshops Line 9 – Telephone/Postage Don’t forget.
Transportation Services Budget February 4, 2010 Josh Davis, Director 1.
Bus Service RFI Routes Overview on Process 8/14/2015 Draft for Discussion & Policy Purposes Only1.
Key Performance Indicators for Facility Operations Roger Young FacilityMastersOnline.com
1 UTA & Alternative Fuel Vehicles GOVERNOR’S ENERGY DEVELOPMENT SUMMIT JUNE 2014.
SALEM PUBLIC SCHOOLS STUDENT TRANSPORTATION - UPDATE July 27,
Lyme Central School District Budget Hearing May 7, 2015.
Business Logistics 420 Public Transportation Lecture 22: Transit System Governance and Management.
What’s your number? By Don Ross, Manatee District School February 8 th 2013.
Business Logistics 420 Public Transportation Lecture 23: Transit System Performance Evaluation.
Monitoring: Continuous Improvements & Achieving Results Scott Copsey Travel Plan Coordinator University of Hertfordshire.
Selected Contracted Services for OCPS Transportation February 21,
Rod Weis, Texas A&M University Lana Wolken, Texas A&M University Joe Richmond, University of North Texas Operating Your Own System Versus Contracting.
Bus Acquisition and Facility Expansion Plan for Lamar Consolidated ISD (LCISD) Prepared by Texas Transportation Institute April 2006.
Transport.tamu.edu Fall 2016 Proposed Route Changes.
TDTIMS Overview What is TDTIMS? & Why Do We Do It?
LEA Transportation Funding DPI Transportation Services Derek Graham, Section Chief.
Transporting tomorrows future: Teachers, leaders &maybe even bus drivers.
1 FY2006 TDA Triennial Performance Audits Metropolitan Transportation Commission Programming & Allocations Committee October 4, 2006 GGBHTD (Golden Gate)
Review of Proposed Changes January 14 th, 2014.
Piqua City Schools Good Schools……Good Value Piqua City School District Permanent Improvement Levy Renewal Presentation May 6, 2014 Superintendent of Schools:
Transport.tamu.edu TAMING WILD BRONCOS Transit Management Changes, Financing, Training, Staffing Rod Weis, Texas A&M University Lana Wolken, Texas A&M.
MCTC Transportation Report January 2012 MCTC TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT REPORT 2012.
Technician Staffing Levels for Modern Public Transit Fleets TCRP Project E-10 Summary.
STARS Efficiency Rating System Student Transportation.
Goodhue School District 2015 Payable 2016 Truth In Taxation Public Meeting Time: 6:30pm Date: December 21, 2015 at the Goodhue School District Board Room.
In FY the District Faced a $2.6 Million Dollar Reduction  SUMMARY OF REDUCTIONS  36.5 staff positions (5+%)  Elementary foreign language 
RCPS Transportation Department Overview Spring 2012.
Transportation Department Review November 5, 2012.
Next Phase: Benchmarking Presented to the Council of Great City Schools Chief Operating Officers Conference April 2006 Los Angeles Unified School District.
Indianapolis Public Public Hearing – Proposed 2014 Budget Thursday, August 15, 2013 Transportation Corporation.
Review of 2016–2021 Strategic Budget Plan Development Process and 2016 Budget Assumptions Financial Administration and Audit Committee April 14,
KPI: Decision Making and Problem Solving Charleston, WV – July 11, 2016 John W. Hazelette, CDPT NAPT Region 2 Director 1.
UCPS Budget Proposal.
Using The Balance Scorecard
Canyons School District Bell Efficiency Study 2016
Manage costs and schedules for system replacement due to obsolescence
Where’s My Ride William Tsuei Director of IT.
Attendance Conference Murfreesboro Embassy Suites April 20, 2018
Shelton School District
WOODLAND School District Year End Financial Summary
Presentation transcript:

Evaluating – Performance Standards 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance1

Evaluating – Performance Standards Daily bus as % of total fleet Full service buses ÷ Total fleet buses Spare bus factor Age of fleet Changes in eligibility 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance2

Evaluating – Performance Standards Students receiving basic home to/from school Students receiving transportation ÷ total enrollment Need to count AM/PM riders at least every 7 weeks 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance3

Evaluating – Performance Standards Transportation Expenditures as % of General Fund Total transportation expenses ÷ General fund budget Impact of transportation on overall district operation Key indicator of operational efficiency 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance4

Evaluating – Performance Standards Average Age of Fleet Age of all fleet buses ÷ Number of fleet buses Balance reliability/ongoing maintenance against capital expenditures Careful life cycle analysis needed to determine balance 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance5

Evaluating – Performance Standards Average Daily Ride Time Average total daily ride time (AM+PM) minutes per student Maximize riders Minimize time AM Run Times PM Run Times TimeRidersTime/Run RouteHSMSESAM timeHSMSESPM TimeAM+PM Minutes# Runs /13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance6

Evaluating – Performance Standards Cost per Contractor-Operated Bus Total spent on contractor services ÷ Total contractor-operated buses Objective analysis of true cost allows district to determine best service model 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance7

Evaluating – Performance Standards Cost per District-Operated Bus Total transportation expenses related to district-operated buses ÷ Total number of daily used buses Objective analysis of true cost allows district to determine best service model 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance8

Evaluating – Performance Standards Cost per Mile Operated Total transportation expenses ÷ Total annual miles – district and contractor Basic measurement of cost efficiency of a pupil transportation program. Baseline cost comparison across districts 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance9

Evaluating – Performance Standards Deadhead Miles per Bus Annual deadhead miles for buses – district/contractor ÷ Number of daily buses - district/contractor (Miles driven without students – negative value) Efficiency indicator of transportation services. Reduces fuel consumption, vehicle maintenance, and other operating costs. 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance10

Evaluating – Performance Standards Fleet In-Service Number of buses out of service on a daily basis for any reason ÷ Total number of buses – district/contractor Measure of district’s transportation maintenance program 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance11

Evaluating – Performance Standards Live Miles per Bus Annual live miles for buses – district/contract ÷ Number of daily buses – district/contract Captures productive use of buses Maximize productive time Minimize non-productive time 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance12

Evaluating – Performance Standards Mechanics per Bus Total mechanics and helpers responsible to service school buses ÷ Total number of buses e.g. 4 mechanics ÷ 75 school bus =.053 mechanics per bus Indicates level of staffing needed for bus maintenance Compare staffing with other similar operations (fleets) What is similar? Miles, buses, mechanics, etc. 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance13

Evaluating – Performance Standards Miles between Accidents (Crashes) Total number of annual miles ÷ Number of annual accidents Provides overall measure of safety and trust 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance14

Evaluating – Performance Standards Miles between Preventable Accidents (Crashes) Total annual miles – district/contract ÷ Number of preventable accidents (crashes) Accident awareness and prevention can reduce liability exposure to a district 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance15

Evaluating – Performance Standards Total Miles per Bus Annual total miles for buses – district/contract ÷ Number of daily buses – district/contract Efficiency indicator for transportation services by equating miles costs Contract services may have mileage limit requirements Component of a bus replacement plan 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance16

Evaluating – Performance Standards On-Time Performance (10 minutes) Average time of buses arriving within 10 minutes of scheduled arrival time Success transportation service has in staying on published arrival schedule 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance17

Evaluating – Performance Standards Runs per Day Total number of daily scheduled runs ÷ Total number of buses – district/contract Captures how well district uses its buses Efficiencies are gained when a bus is used multiple times 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance18

Evaluating – Performance Standards Average Number of Students per Bus Number of expected riders on a daily basis ÷ Total number of buses – district/contract Basic measure of cost efficiency Baseline comparison across districts 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance19

Touch HERE to move on toHERE Evaluating – Legislation Review 3/13/2012Part II Evaluating - Fleet Performance20