Maintenance Quality Assurance Field Inspection Practices (2015)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

38 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSIONS OVERALL FINDINGS Over the past 20 years, Maintenance Quality Assurance (MQA) programs have been implemented by state DOTs as a method of monitoring maintenance work accomplishments and documenting the resources required to perform common maintenance activities. Over time, the programs have evolved to support an agency’s performance management activities, including the development of targeted level of service (LOS) and the use of performance-based budgeting to establish and communicate maintenance needs. As these MQA programs have evolved, a number of initiatives have been designed to expand the use of MQA programs at the state DOT level and to share MQA practices among practitioners. Given the level of interest in MQA programs among state DOT maintenance practitioners, and the recent support for performance-based management in the MAP-21 legislation, this synthesis of MQA field inspection practices serves as a timely resource for any agency trying to enhance its asset preservation efforts. The findings presented in this synthesis were primarily obtained through the results of a survey of practice that was completed by representatives from 40 state DOTs. Additional information was obtained from interviews of representatives from eight DOTs in the following three areas: • The rationale and motivation for initiating their MQA program • The procedures used to ensure the quality and consistency of the MQA data and results • The impact their methodology has had on how the MQA results can be used to support agency decisions. The overall findings are summarized in the following areas: • Condition assessment methods • Data collected • Managing data quality • Using and communicating results. Condition Assessment Methods According to the survey results, 70% (28 of 40) of the state DOTs have an MQA program in place, an additional eight state DOTs intend to implement a program within the next 2 to 5 years, and two more state DOTs intend to implement an MQA program in 1 to 2 years. Among the states that have an MQA program in place, 75% of them have had their program for more than 10 years and most of the remaining programs have been in place for 5 to 10 years. Although the MQA programs have been in place for many years, they have not been static, with 78% of the states with MQA programs indicating that they have made substantial changes to their programs in the past 5 years. The names of the programs vary, but the majority of the programs are reported to have been developed by agency personnel. Some additional state DOTs developed their programs in partnership with a consultant. A number of factors have driven the interest and activity in the MQA area, with most state DOTs indicating that their program was initiated to: • Improve accountability • Estimate maintenance needs • Develop performance-based budgets • Monitor the performance of assets • Make good use of available funding • Track and report maintenance activities. Data Collected The survey of state practice investigated data collection practices in six asset categories: drainage, roadside assets, pavements, bridges, traffic, and special facilities. Of these asset categories, pavements and bridges had the most complete inventories established. Several assets within the traffic and special facilities categories also reportedly had complete inventories established in more than half of the 28 state DOTs with MQA programs. The drainage category included assets such as culverts, flumes, ditches, and drop inlets. Culvert inventories were established or were being established for the greatest number of states responding, but initiatives to inventory curbs and gutters, drop inlets, ditches and slopes, and sidewalks were also in place in close to half of the states with MQA programs. More than half of the 28 state DOTs reported collecting the following condition attributes for drainage assets: • Culverts: Channel and culvert condition • Ditches: Erosion and inadequate drainage as a result of silting

39 • Slopes: Erosion • Drop inlets: Blockage and grate broken or missing. Similar results were reported for roadside assets, which include fences, landscaping, plant beds, and sound barriers. Less than half of the state DOTs had established complete inventories of these assets and less than half reported that partial inventories were in place. Of those state DOTs that had established inventories, the inventories for sound barriers and fences were the most complete. More than half of the 28 state DOTs with MQA programs in place collect the following condition attributes for these assets: • Fences: Length damaged or missing • Grass: Grass height • Litter: Volume • Vegetation: Amount. Most of the state DOTs with MQA programs have complete inventories for their paved roads and close to half have complete inventories of their paved and unpaved shoulders. Common condition attributes that are used by more than half of the state DOTs with MQA programs include the following: • Paved roadways: Structural distress, cracking, and rutting • Shoulders: Drop-off. Most states with MQA programs have a complete inventory of their bridges. Half of the agencies with MQA programs use the results of inspections conducted for their bridge management system to monitor bridge conditions. The traffic category typically includes assets that contribute to the safety of the roadways, such as signs, pavement marking, guardrail end treatments, overhead sign structures, and impact attenuators. Of the assets in this category, 18 states have a complete inventory of their variable message boards, 17 have a complete inventory of their overhead sign structures, and 15 have a complete inventory of their signals. The most common condition attributes collected by more than half of the state DOTs with MQA programs in place include the following: • Signs: Panels damaged, post down, legibility, orientation, obstruction • Pavement markings: Visibility, amount missing or damaged • Pavement markers: Amount missing or damaged • Guardrail end treatments: Damage to end treatment and damage to post • Impact attenuators: Structural damage, functional damage. Four types of special facilities were included in the survey of state practice: rest areas, tunnels, weigh stations, and traffic monitoring systems. A total of 24 of the 28 agencies with MQA programs in place have a complete inventory of their rest areas and more than half have complete inventories of the weigh stations and tunnels maintained by the state DOT. No condition attributes are commonly used by more than half of the agencies with MQA programs, but the most commonly used attributes are related to rest areas, including those listed here: • Facilities working, • Appearance, • Landscaping, and • Cleanliness. Interestingly, no state DOT uses condition attributes to track traffic monitoring systems. Most state DOTs conduct manual surveys to collect the condition information for the various asset categories, with annual surveys being most common. The lone exception is that bridges are typically inspected every other year. Automated equipment is most commonly used for paved roadways, and the equipment is also used to some degree for other assets found along the road edge. Several of the 28 state DOTs rate the condition of assets to a predefined pass/fail criterion or they record the deficiencies found for each asset. Far more common is the use of a combination of these two approaches, depending on the type of asset. A total of 15 state DOTs use a combination of approaches to rate conditions. Surveys are typically conducted by district or regional personnel, and central office personnel are responsible for conducting random checks of data quality. Manual survey methods are most commonly used and nearly half of the state DOTs report using handheld computers to record information. Pencils and paper are still very common tools used during the MQA surveys. Twenty-three of the 28 state DOTs with MQA programs survey samples of the network to estimate statewide conditions. The samples are typically 0.10 mi long and between 10% to 20% of the total samples are inspected. State DOTs may use statistical methods to estimate the number of samples to inspect, or they may just set a number based on experience, but most agencies strive for a 95% confidence level in the data. Fourteen states spend more than 6 person-months conducting MQA surveys and five more states report spending 4 to 5 person-months on these activities. Sampling enables states to collect the data needed for maintenance planning within available resource constraints. Managing Data Quality With one exception, the state DOTs with MQA programs are actively taking steps to manage data quality, making use of

40 • Confidence in the data, and • Buy-in from field personnel. A number of enhancements are planned in the next few years, including those listed here. • Approximately 14 state DOTs will be implementing new software. • Sixteen state DOTs are developing handheld computer applications for recording data from the field. • Eight agencies are adding GPS characteristics to the data. • Seven state DOTs are investigating the use of automated surveys. FURTHER RESEARCH The results from this synthesis identified several gaps in current knowledge that could be addressed by the research and outreach activities described here. • Establish more consistent performance measures: As legislation and funding constraints continue to drive the transportation industry toward a performance-based management approach for making investment decisions, the survey results indicate a growing interest in the application of these concepts for managing maintenance activities at the state DOT level. The literature indicates consistency exists in the asset categories normally considered in an MQA program, but the features and condition attributes vary. As demonstrated by the survey results, some consistency exists in some of the condition attributes being used, but the industry would benefit from more consistency among practitioners in terms of the primary metrics that are used to monitor maintenance performance. The establishment of one or two condition attributes for each feature would allow state DOTs to better communicate with one another on an equal basis and would facilitate national reporting of maintenance needs. • Resurvey in 3 to 5 years to see if progress has been made. Based on the survey results, it is apparent that there is a lot of interest in MQA programs and initiatives are under way to improve existing capabilities. Therefore, it would be beneficial to the maintenance practitioners to monitor the changes that are taking place through another survey of practice in 3 to 5 years. At that time, new areas of emphasis could be identified and additional implementation guidance could be developed. • Improve the efficiency and safety aspects of data collection activities. The survey of practice found that the majority of state DOTs with MQA programs in place spend more than 6 person-months collecting data. Several state DOTs have initiated research studies rating manuals, training programs, independent verification checks, and data reasonableness checks to support their efforts. Most states use a team of two raters to conduct surveys to help reduce bias. A total of 19 states certify their raters and at least one state has posted the qualifications for raters on its website. Several states have initiated studies to statistically evaluate the number of samples that need to be inspected in order to provide a reasonable level of confidence in the data. Using and Communicating Results MQA data are used in a variety of ways to support agency decisions. A total of 21 states use the survey results to establish a LOS, with letter grades (A to F) being most commonly used. Twenty-three states have used the data to establish performance targets and 11 of these states have established links between their performance targets and resource requirements. Another 11 states are in the process of establishing these links. A total of eight states place a higher weight on the MQA scores for some asset categories in their budgeting activities (e.g., safety assets). This process allows states to prioritize maintenance needs on a statewide basis and helps to ensure that the highest-priority activities are funded. Twenty states have a computerized maintenance management system in place, yet less than half of the state DOTs use the MMS to estimate budget needs or schedule work activities. In addition, only nine states have integrated their MMS with their pavement or bridge management systems. The survey results are typically reported to maintenance and field personnel in virtually all of the state DOTs. Nineteen agencies provide the information to other agency personnel and less than half of the state DOTs present the information to elected officials or the public. Reports are the most common method of presenting information, but agencies also use websites and dashboards to communicate with stakeholders. Twenty-three of the 28 state DOTs report that their MQA program has helped their agency achieve more consistent conditions on a statewide basis and 25 of 28 state DOTs report that the information has helped them establish maintenance priorities. The program also enables the agencies to be more proactive in communicating maintenance needs. Most state DOTs report that their program has been a success, but they see additional areas for improvement. The following factors have most contributed to the success of the program: • Support of upper management, • Training, • Simplicity of the program, • Ease of use,

41 States where the MMS is not being used for budgeting and planning activities would benefit from peer exchanges, domestic scans, and workshops in which these activities’ benefits can be conveyed. Research or guidance on enhancing the maturity of an MQA program would also benefit this group. • Establish LOS-cost relationships for maintenance activities. Only nine state DOTs with an MMS have integrated the system with their pavement or bridge management systems. As a result, it is difficult for an agency to fully quantify the capital and maintenance costs of preserving the transportation network over the entire life of roadway assets. Research is needed to develop methodologies for better integrating capital and maintenance expenditures on roadway assets to enable states to reduce the overall life-cycle costs. This research would further support the consideration of life-cycle costs as required under MAP-21 in a state’s Transportation Asset Management Plan. • Develop methods of demonstrating the benefits of maintenance expenditures. Most of the states with MQA programs in place have realized benefits in terms of more consistent conditions on a statewide basis and clearer maintenance priorities. Research that demonstrates the benefits of investing in maintenance and methods of sharing the results to different stakeholder groups would strengthen communication results. The research results would also help state DOTs justify the expenditures being made on MQA programs. to determine, statistically, the lowest number of sample units that can be inspected with a reasonable level of confidence. Other state DOTs inspect between 5% and 50% of their total network samples. These inspection rates may be determined statistically, but they may also be based on the judgment of DOT personnel and the resources available to support the program. These efforts would benefit from the development of guidance to help agencies establish a reasonable confidence level for different highway system priorities and asset categories, and to determine the corresponding number of samples that need to be inspected. In addition, agencies would benefit from research that demonstrates how automated data collection equipment vans can be used to improve the efficiency of MQA surveys if the equipment is already being used for pavement management surveys. Automated equipment could also contribute to improved worker safety by taking raters off the road. • Increase the use of MQA results for planning and budgeting activities. Although 20 of the 28 state DOTs with MQA programs have an MMS in place, less than half of them use it to estimate budget needs or schedule work activities. Rather, the MQA results are primarily used to track maintenance accomplishments and report maintenance conditions. The state DOTs that use their MMS for budgeting purposes report that they can be more proactive in communicating maintenance needs effectively with state legislators and defending the funding needed to achieve different levels of service.