The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

Pages 68-84

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 68... ... 68 Appendix C descriptive Summary of Survey Results The following results were collected in response to the survey questions. Descriptive statistics are provided graphically in tables and sometimes graphics following each of the major questions of the survey. Read the entire page →
From page 69... ... 69 Q2. What programs/categories are addressed by your agency's resource allocation strategy? Read the entire page →
From page 70... ... 70 Other - Write In 2 Business Partnership Program Community and regional priority projects, and jurisdictional transfer Other statewide programs Rail Safety and Expansion Travel Demand Management Urban/Local Other - Write In 3 ADA Compliance Greater Minnesota and Twin Cities Mobility Interstate Maintenance Local Preservation Planning Partnership Program Q3. Indicate what percentage of your agency's annual resources the agency has discretion over in the resource allocation strategy. Read the entire page →
From page 71... ... 71 Q4. What is the dollar value of annual outlays your agency made for transportation programs (all programs combined) Read the entire page →
From page 72... ... 72 Response The MDOT Highway Program is based on implementation of the goals and policies outlined by the State Transportation Commission (STC) , emphasizing an asset management approach to preserving the transportation system and providing safe mobility to travelers. Read the entire page →
From page 73... ... 73 Value Percent Count Internal proposal by staff, which was approved by leadership over time 46 17 Agency staff or consultant work with public input as part of a long-range planning process 13 5 Agency staff or consultant work with public input outside of a long-range planning process 3 1 Direction by elected or appointed officials/bodies, which was implemented by agency staff 11 4 Direction from an independent board or commission 23 1 A process specified by the state legislature 5 2 Other -- Write In 19 7 Total 37 Other -- Write in Collaborative proposal developed by MoDOT, representatives of MPOs and RPCs Direction from CEO FHWA influence; bridge and pavement conditions Highway Corridor Priorities (HCP) based on Customer Service Levels (CSL) Read the entire page →
From page 74... ... 74 Value Percent Count Internal proposal by staff, which was approved by leadership over time 40 14 Agency staff or consultant work with public input as part of a long-range planning process 51 18 Agency staff or consultant work with public input outside of a long-range planning process 26 9 Direction by elected or appointed officials/bodies, which was implemented by agency staff 40 14 Direction from an independent board or commission 17 6 Legislative action 27 10 Other - Write in 14 5 Other - Write In Coordination with COGs/MPOs Highway/Bridge/Multimodal Committee Recommendations Internal Buy in from Investment Class Managers N/A Significant biennial public involvement process Q8. Why does your agency use the resource allocation strategy that it does? Read the entire page →
From page 75... ... 75 Value Percent Count Ensure objectivity and consistency in funding levels over time 65 24 Ensure minimum core needs are met for each program 78 29 Achieve long-term performance targets/goals 87 32 Ensure transparency in investment decisions 68 25 Satisfy requirements of state statutes 51 19 Satisfy executive policy objects of secretary, governor, board of transportation, or other policy entity 51 19 Other -- Write in 11 4 Other -- Write in Can evaluate the results of our decisions in the future Incorporate public input on trade-off discussion of investment priorities MPOs and RPCs are included in decision-making and are supportive of the program Show needs vs resources in response to funding proposals. A legislative committee is meeting now to look at sustainable funding sources. Read the entire page →
From page 76... ... 76 Q10. How much support or scrutiny does your allocation strategy get from stakeholders, elected officials and other outside the agency? Read the entire page →
From page 77... ... 77 Please list other factors or give additional detail on the factors above (e.g., where is there particularly strong support or opposition to the strategy? Read the entire page →
From page 78... ... 78 Value Percent Count Very small percentage of resources over which agency has discretion (due to federal and state requirements dictating how funds are spent) 20 1 Limited staff or technical resources to consistently implement a resource allocation strategy 60 3 Unpredictable funding cycles, needs, and resource levels make consistent policy impractical 40 2 Political environment does not allow state discretion in resource allocation (elected officials and other policy bodies specify all resource decisions) Read the entire page →
From page 79... ... 79 Q15. In this time, has your agency experienced an increase or decrease in the amount of discretion that it has over resource allocation among programs? Read the entire page →
From page 80... ... 80 Lack of funding to consistently apply the right treatments to all roadways at the right time, resulting in a prioritization approach. Legislative directives (state bonding) Read the entire page →
From page 81... ... 81 Funding sources and allocation at: http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f? p=100:pg:0:1:T,V:4500, Run the Prezi. Read the entire page →
From page 82... ... 82 MDOT is pursuing a prioritization model which may allow for cross-program optimization in the future. The norm for the Idaho Transportation Department is to set performance program funding targets for the most future year of the program update process. Read the entire page →
From page 83... ... Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) Read the entire page →
From page 84... ... TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 5 0 0 F ifth S tre e t, N W W a s h in g to n , D C 2 0 0 0 1 A D D R ESS SER VICE R EQ UESTED NO N-PRO FIT O RG . Read the entire page →

From page 68...

... 68 Appendix C descriptive Summary of Survey Results The following results were collected in response to the survey questions. Descriptive statistics are provided graphically in tables and sometimes graphics following each of the major questions of the survey.