Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

3 The Performance Assessment Process
Pages 46-58

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 46...
... For example, an immediate outcome from building a wastewater treatment facility should be cleaner water within a river where the effluent is released. Over the longer term, the outcomes may extend beyond clean water itself to include improved health of the population using or living around the water system, which in turn represents enhanced quality of life for residents in the area.
From page 47...
... " There are many possible answers, ranging from "We have to" (e.g.J to meet federal requirements) to "We want a clearer understanding of how to make our public assets work harder for us" to "We have a strategic vision for our community and want to use infrastructure to help us achieve it." Regardless of the particular motivation, the performance assessment process is a primary mechanism for the expression of community values and subsequent decision making about infrastructure development and management.
From page 48...
... au u)
From page 49...
... O Z ~ c, 3 1 1 _ = I ~ , out , ~.° I ~ :^ I UO 1 it, ~ _ 1 ~ ~ ~ 1 cl: ~ o .P~ ~ ~ U)
From page 50...
... As the shaded area of Figure 3-2 indicates, the committee focused its attention primarily on certain elements of infrastructure and within the jurisdictional levels between state and local government, but it inevitably considered a much broader scope of interests. The first step after the need for performance assessment is established is to clearly identify who the stakeholders are in the decision-making situation that motivates the assessment.
From page 51...
... Because infrastructure is essentially a local matter, performance assessment should always include the local perspective, even when the decisions of concern are essentially broader. Officials in cities the committee visited pointed out that some federal regulatory and funding programs fail to recognize this need for local perspective in achieving higher infrastructure performance and impose standards uniformly on all areas, regardless of the causes of performance deficiencies or the consequences of inappropriate standards.
From page 52...
... The committee found that in many areas the lack of data is one of the principal obstacles to implementing an effective performance measurement process. A continuing regional data collection system is needed to support performance assessment and enable longer-term performance monitoring.
From page 53...
... If it is successfully carried through to completion, the performance assessment process provides a basis for making decisions and taking action regarding infrastructure development or management. The types of infrastructure decisions that are made fall broadly into three categories (see Figure 34~: planning (including both early concept development and facility design)
From page 54...
... Infrastructure actions may have other benefits indirectly related to the services it is expected to provide, such as giving a temporary boost to the local economy. The decision on a preferred course is then typically reflected in an adopted plan, a capital budget, or some other document that guides subsequent action and decision making.
From page 55...
... MEASURING AND IMPROVING INFRASTRUCTURE PERFORMANCE Deas~on Making Stage Key Question and Decision Process Planning What will it cost to take actions needed to achieve desirable performance, i.e., to meet specific objectives, satisfy stated goals, or conform to specific regulations? Develop ~ Develop, ~ Identify ~ Adopt plan,allocate vision; set adopt alternative resources, and goals and performance appropriate implement plan objectives measures actions and select a preferred course (e.g., use benefit cost analysis)
From page 56...
... If the process has been applied from planning to this stage, then the objectives set forth in planrung, with refinements in the implementation stage, would be the basis for selecting performance measures. However, if the first performance assessment is to be made at the evaluation stage, for example, as an audit of an existing operating entity, performance measures must be developed or adopted from elsewhere.
From page 57...
... On a more limited scale, financially constrained governments must allocate tax revenues among competing modes, and cannot increase spending on one element of infrastructure without reducing spending elsewhere. The committee found that effective performance management generally requires a broad systems perspective encompassing these interactions, despite their often poor match of agency responsibilities.
From page 58...
... The committee recommends that responsible agencies adopt infrastructure performance measurement and assessment as an ongoing process essential to effective decision making. Adequate budgets should be maintained to support the continuing performance assessment process.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.