Asset Management at ODOT Status, Issues & Next Steps December 2013

The Request Based on: –Program status and progress –“Bumps” encountered Want to: –Garner support Maintain and sustain efforts Appropriately augment existing resources –Prep for next budget cycle –Move to institutionalize program and learning Reduce dependency upon the ”whos”

Strategic/Implementation Plan Four Goals: –Integrated Decision-Making Weaving data into processes for optimum decisions –Inventory Sustain or establish appropriately reliable statewide inventories –Integrated Data Systems TransInfo integrated with other key systems such as Pontis –Integrated Tools Supporting efficient updates and use of data

Why? To build ODOT’s capacities for better informed decisions –Supporting optimum results via methodology for proactively managing infrastructure assets by providing: The right information… to the right people… at the right time

Asset Management Principles Managed Data and Systems Standards and Tools Projected Throughout ODOT – How We Do Business

Governance TransCOI RE: Systems HMT RE: Policies AMSC RE: Plans, Priorities ADMC RE: Standards Chief Engineer TDD Administrator State Maintenance Enginee r AMSC: Asset Management Steering Committee ADMC: Asset Data Management Committee

AMI Role in These Efforts Facilitate and coordinate program structure Serve as liaison for enterprise progress We don’t do “inventory”, we aren’t making the decision; we enable it and ensure it is done in accordance with ODOT standards and goals Program Structure

Integrated Decision Making Better positioned, but “a la carte” programs exist –Bridge, pavement, ITS, bike/ped, etc. FACS-STIP Tool and other tools provide “cafeteria” for asset data Corridor Management Strategy pilot guides some steps to take –Corridor-based design exceptions –Asset reports FACS-STIP can evolve to provide

Inventory – Highway Where we started:Where we are now:As of 2010: Note: GREEN is an indication of progress, but not an ability to maintain that progress

Integrated Data Systems Integration Systems –Data Warehouse –GIS Key Systems/Platforms –TransInfo

Integrated Tools FACS-STIP Tool Toughbooks for signs “Apps” (forms) for 1R data collection using mobile GPS –Culvert apps in use Pilots –Integrating mobile scanner data –Other mobile GPS tools

Expenditure Estimate Details

Levels of Capacity Decisions –Program-level –Basic Tools –Analysis –Data collection Databases –Optimal –Basic Inventory –Optimal –Basic

How Far We’ve Come (& Going) Tier 1 Tier 2Tier 3Tier 4 Note: GREEN is an indication of progress, but not an ability to maintain that progress

Over-Arching Issue We’ve “striped all the easy bike lanes” –Is ODOT serious about maintaining and continuing progress?

Managing Data as an Asset Like managing highways –Support for users Plan Maintain and operate Scope, survey Standards Preserve, modernize

Data Alignment and Management Key to Efficiency Data, like transportation assets –Can surprise us over and over again with “failures” if not managed Alignment and management of data means significant efficiency gains –Less waste of ODOT resources Finding data Maintaining systems and data –Significant reductions in untold cost of thousands of Access databases Staff could do other things by relying on enterprise data

Data Misalignment/Management

Impacts from Mismanagement Case Study: Approaches –Data Misaligned CHAMPS OPALS Inventory collected with mobile GPS and mobile scanner

Impacts from Mismanagement Case Study: Approaches, continued –Analysis not informed by reliable data –Decisions not supported by this same data –Trust eroded due to lack of transparency –Early warning signs from legislature –In the end, legislation that dynamically changed ODOT business Also derailed other initiatives

Many Other Similar Stories Districts “maintaining” ADA data –Too much to reconcile variances so new statewide data collected (ODOT SOP) Portland Harbor –Costly to build dataset, but now costly to repair dataset DFMS –Significant systems effort is now a “step-”database in TransInfo And so on….25,000+ Access databases are telling us something

Recovery is Costly Case Study: Approaches, continued –Begin the laborious process of reconciliation 1000’s and 1000’s of records –Permit specialists and RAMEs CHAMPS, OPALs, GPS inventory …and this one we can’t start over

Data and Systems Management is Like Land Use Planning Efficient maintenance and support Requires thoughtful new development Inefficient for maintenance and support Few constraints on new development

Efficiency Through Knowledge Lessons learned from these experiences should be documented in ODOT policy so we avoid repeating the same costly mistakes

Key Challenges – Growing Pains System needs vs capacities –Absence of ODOT IS system master plan –Lack of true business readiness –IS resource constraints Magnitude and volume of asset data needs Communication across ODOT “Squirrel” syndromeSquirrel – Pace of external change vs. pace of internal, coupled with organizational challenge of keeping eye “on the ball”

AMI Project List Decisions: Waiting for resources Inventory: Culverts-On track, budget & time Systems: TransInfo (Signs & Reporting Database)- Analysis Phase Tools: –FACS-STIP-Maintenance and Discovery Mode –1R Apps-In Process, on track –Toughbooks (Signs)-Completed –Culvert (Advanced App)-Completed –Trimble Yuma (testing)-Not yet started –Mobile scanner pilots-In Process

Lots of Work Left to Do – State of the Assets – a Work in Progress Capacity Status/Needs Decisions - ProgrammaticInventory SystemToolsPerformance MeasuresRisk Mgmt Asset Priority Tiers StatusNeedsCommentsStatusNeedsComments Estimated ValueStatusNeedsCommentsStatusNeedsCommentsStatusNeedsCommentsManagedNeeds Tier 1 Bridges Bridge Program 1R Roadside Inventory 98%Maintain Stable in PONTIS MaintainLow RiskFew ToolsAnalysis Bridge PM Comply with MAP-21 Yes Culverts Developing 1R Roadside Inventory <50%98% Gap = High Risk; Current Initiative - HMT Priority Routes Stable in DFMS/ TransInfo Maintain Mobile Data Collection Maintain NoneDevelop Developing Pavement Pavement Program Sample Only100% $ 8,030,000,000 Unstable/ unsecure in Excel/ TransInfo Stable, Secure System High RiskFew ToolsAnalysis Pavement PM Comply with MAP-21 Partially Tunnels 100%Maintain Stable in OneDOT Maintain None Develop Partially Traffic Signals Insufficient in TSIS Migrate Laptops NoneDevelop Partially Tier 2 Retaining Walls None 98%Maintain Initial DB- Access Migrate None Develop No Traffic Barriers $6 Million Program/ 10 yr Plan 1R Roadside Inventory 98%Maintain $ 225,000,000 Stable in TransInfo Maintain Mobile Data Collection Maintain 1R PM Comply with 1R requirements Yes Vertical Clearance None <50%98% No System Excel-Bridges only Create Pilot Tool for VC measurement of all assets/ features over the highway NoneDevelop No Signs None 1R Roadside Inventory 98%Maintain Unstable/ unsecure in 63 Access DB MigrateTransInfo #2 Mobile Data Collection Maintain None Comply with FHWA requirements Partially Traffic Structures None <50%98% No Single System - parts in several Create Pilot Tool for VC measurement of all assets/ features over the highway NoneDevelop No Storm water None <50%98% N/A Partial in TransInfo Expand None Develop Initial Effort Unstable Slopes None <50%98% N/AAccessMigrate None Develop Partially Right of Way None 100%Maintain New System: RITS - Beg to End Processes Maintain None Develop Yes Sidewalks Multiple Programs 1R Roadside Inventory 98%Maintain Stable in TransInfo Maintain Mobile Data Collection Maintain Bike/Ped PM Partially ADA Ramps $1 Million Program 1R Roadside Inventory 98%Maintain Stable in TransInfo Maintain Mobile Data Collection Maintain Draft PM Partially Bike Facilities Bike Program 1R Roadside Inventory 98%Maintain Stable in TransInfo Maintain Mobile Data Collection Maintain Bike/Ped PM Partially Tier 3 ITS ITS Program 100%Maintain Stable in MicroMain Maintain None Field Data Collection NoneDevelop Yes Material Sources >50%98% Stable in ASISMaintain Mobile Data Collection Maintain NoneDevelop Partially Approaches Access Mgmt OPAL98%Maintain N/A Unstable in old system: CHAMPS Replace Mobile Data Collection Maintain NoneDevelop No Illumination None 0%98% None - Paper Files Create None Field Data Collection NoneDevelop No Tier 4 Wetland Mitigation Sites 98%Maintain Mobile Data Collection Maintain Draft PM Partially Weigh-in-Motion Sites 100%Maintain Temporary System: Excel Migrate None Field Data Collection Draft PM Partially Sound Barriers 98%Maintain Temporary System: Access Migrate None Field Data Collection NoneDevelop No

Priorities In general: MAP-21 Intermodal Oregon –MAP-21 requirements for transit fleet –Other asset work Pop-up Park & Rides, for example Program governance structure FACS-STIP Tool

Priorities, continued Related to goals: Decisions –Asset Summary Reporting –Corridor-based processes Inventory –Culvert Initiative –Traffic structures/vertical clearance –Pavement business process analysis

Priorities, continued Related to goals, continued: Systems –TransInfo Reporting Database Signs Position it to be asset database –Traffic Structures? –CHAMPS Tools –Data collection applications (1R) –R & D for best ODOT enterprise options –Standards for data management

Key Factors for Success Continued strong emphasis on coordination Strong, steadfast executive sponsorship Continued movement of ODOT culture –Built on foundation and principles of Asset Management –Enterprise data –Alignment and education of data management and governance best practices Transparent and inclusive communications

MAP-21 Considerations ODOT must have a plan –Rules in 2014 –Requirements in 2015 –ODOT has been participating as observer state FHWA Pilot involving three states –Development of Asset Management Plan »State of the Assets Continued collective efforts potentially position ODOT to be proactive as well as comply with MAP-21 requirements, but this could change with MAP-21 requirements

Key Program Risks No succession planning Resource constraints –But “they” will do something if we don’t respond Contentious and competing business drivers –Drive to “engineer” vs. resources AMI influencing with limited authority –Previous restructuring diluted perceptions of Asset Management and effectiveness of AMI –Voids in decision processes – who decides?

In Conclusion Significant benefits – efficiency and effectiveness - to continued AM efforts Asset management and monitoring more critical when funding limited –Sustained and appropriately augmented efforts Bumps, challenges and inefficiencies can be mitigated by additional program structure –Build on existing based on lessons learned Must chart our course in preparation for next budget cycle

Decisions based on this? …...or this? Asset Management Principles Managed Data and Systems Standards and Tools