1

Performance Measures　 in Road Administration Management

Khoo Kai SiangSosuke UchiyamaMakoto FujiuIkumi Hiramatsu

2

in Japan

Performance Measures of RoadAdministration Management

3

■Significance of Outcome-based Road Administration Management

① Making road management efficient 　

　 To spread principle based on outcome to each division and aim for reform of administrative management

② Improving transparency of road administration

　 Prior numerical targets, appropriateness of the targets, effects of measures and projects implemented, including related data prepared by each prefecture, should be released as Performance Plans and Reports on Degree of Achievement so that the nation can check the details.

■Building up of Cycle of Management

① Framework that allows numerical targets to be declared beforehand, degree of achievement to be evaluated afterward, and results of evaluation to be reflected in the subsequent administration management

② Report on Degree of Achievement for fiscal year 2003 and Performance Plan for fiscal year 2004 have been released on June 30

Performance Management in Japan

4

Approaches to Performance Management for Road Administration in Japan

5

1) Reflection of user-needs

2) Comprehensive approach

3) Deep environmental consideration

4) Collaboration with users and citizens

5) Cost-effectiveness assessment

6) Transparent and effective policy making process

Targets of Performance Management

6

【 Policy Making Stage】“Outcome-based Road Policy Management”

【 Project Evaluation Stage】“Comprehensive Evaluation”

(including simple Cost/Benefit Evaluation)

【 Project Planning Stage】“Road Planning Scheme based on Comprehensive Assessment and Public Involvement”

(a kind of “Strategic Environmental Assessment”: SEA)

【 Field Management Stage】“Road Performance Management” (Road Management Scheme based on Collaboration with Users”

Improvements in Administration Systems

7

Performance Improvement of Road Administration

8

Starting “outcome-based” road administration from 2003

Implement of an outcome-based public management system where numerical targets set beforehand using indicators(outcome indicator) that express outcome of road projects, evaluate afterwards, and then reflect in the subsequent measures and projects from 2003

Making “Performance Plan” which indicates the numerical targets to be achieved in a year’s time using 17 indicators

Compile and disclose as “Performance Plan for Road Administration”, which indicates the setting numerical targets to be achieved in a year’s time using 17 indicators such as “time loss due to road congestion,” “hours of road work,” and “Ratio of death and injury due to road accidents” and evaluating the validity of the measures and projects for achieving targets concerning outcomes of road policy based on the budget in 2003.

Evaluating degree of achievement after a year and reflecting it in the subsequent administration

The degree of achievement for each numerical target is measured after a year, the reason analyzed if it has not been met, and the evaluation result is compiled and disclosed as the “Achievement Report.” Furthermore, the evaluation result is properly reflected in the subsequent measures and projects.

Outline of “Performance Plan for Road Administration”

9

Performance Indicators of Each Policy Theme

10

Priority targets and Indicators

11

Issues for outcome-oriented road administration

Measure outcomes using indicators

To formulate performance plan and performance report by measuring outcomes using indicators and setting annual numerical target being aware that measurement itself is only a part of outcome-oriented administration.

Gather materials (best practices or databases) for consciousness for outcome-oriented administration

To gather best practices to share them with all worksites all over the country, and to order data with which every work office became able to make diagnoses with numerical data representing actual situation instead of business instincts of persons responsible.

Build in "outcome-oriented" consciousness into routine proceduresTo change consciousness of staffs into outcome-oriented by building outcome-oriented activities in budget request, execution plan or other annual routine procedures.

Communicate strategicallyTo establish communication with publics and stakeholders based on the facts representing the revolution of road administration, utilizing several measures including visual contents (e.g. 3-D maps ).

The first step :

measurement

The second step :

diagnosis

representation

The third step :

decision

management

The forth step :

communication

12

Priority Measures and Budget Request based on the Report on Degree of Achievement

13

Establishment of a Management Cycle

14

Performance Measures of Road Administration Management

in USA

15

Mission Statement

Mission

Policy Target

Outcome Indicator

Target Value

We continually improve the quality of our Nation’s highway system and its intermodal connections.（ FHWA 1998 National Strategic Plan)

16

Establishment of the Policy Target

Mission

Policy Target

Outcome Indicator

Target Value

The FHWA had developed fivepolicy targets as below to supportaccomplishing their Mission andachieving their Vision.

MobilitySafetyProductivityHuman and Natural EnvironmentNational Security

17

Configuring Outcome Indicator and Target value

Mission

Policy Target

Outcome Indicator

Target Value

They set a few outcome indicators on each policy target.

Each outcome indicator also has a few specific targets.

All of target value are not only specific, but very strategic.

18

MobilityImprove the operation of the highway systems and intermodal linkages to increase transportation access for all people and commodities.

Preserve and enhance the infrastructure of Federal-aid highways with emphasis on the NHS.

Minimize the time needed to return highways to full service following disasters.

---Increase in user satisfaction with the Nation’s highway systems to meet their needs.---Reduce delays on Federal-aid highways by 20 percent in 10 years.

---Improve the condition of NHS bridges so that less than 20 percent are classified as deficient in 10 years.---improve the condition of all bridges so that less than 25 percent are classified as deficient in 10 years.

---State and local officials satisfaction with the FHWA emergency relief measures (to be measured through surveys.)---increase in the number of Federal, State and local agencies using accelerated contraction mechanisms to make emergency response repairs

19

Object-administrative organizational framework

For every policy objective, FHWA establishes departments which has a responsibility to meet their targets.

Implementation departmentFor every policy objective

Performance evaluation department

FHWA establishes department which is in charge of performance evaluation of departments mentioned before.

Office of the Administrator

Federal LandsHighway

Safely Infrastructure OperationsPlanning,

Environment,And Realty

CorporateManagement

Administration

Policy

Office of Budget and

Finance

20

Performance Plan

Performance Report

Implement of operations and measures

Feed back!!

Plan – Do – Check!!

21

FY 2002 Performance Plan (’01.10 published)

(http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/2002plan/)

2000

2001

2002

1999

Trend Benchmark

1.5

1.6 1.5

1.5

1.4

■Plan (take Safety as example)Target value of 2008:1.0

22

Conclusion

23

Public Management of Road Administration System

24

USA has developed the objective-oriented mechanism of road management for about 10 years.Recent years, Japan has tried to create similar mechanism as USA system.In Japan, there are some trials which use this type of performance measurement scheme.Cycle of management in Japan has create improvement in the efficiency of road management system.

But…in Japan・ A target of Japan has few concepts of "productivity."・ The personnel's consciousness reform is required. But it is difficult to perform it. ・ It is difficult to set up the optimal target.・ The authority granted to the evaluation organization is small.