Return On Investment In Transportation Asset Management Systems And Practices

Return on Investment in Transportation Asset Management Systems and Practices TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Research Report 866: Return on Investment in Transportation Asset Management Systems and Practices explores how transportation agencies manage their transportation assets, and provides guidance for evaluating the return on investment for adopting or expanding transportation asset management systems in an agency. As the term is most generally used, transportation asset management (TAM) entails the activities a transportation agency undertakes to develop and maintain the system of facilities and equipment--physical assets such as pavements, bridges, signs, signals, and the like--for which it is responsible. Based on the research team's work and the experiences of these agencies and others, the researchers describe a methodology that an agency may use to assess their own experience and to plan their investments in TAM system development or acquisition. A spreadsheet accompanies the research report helps agencies evaluate the return-on-investment of TAM systems.The tool allows users to summarize data from various simulation tools. The calculator also includes factors and procedures from the Highway Economic Requirements System State Version (HERS-ST) to estimate user benefits for pavement projects. It does not estimate user benefits for bridge projects. -- cf. http://www.trb.org/main/blurbs/177179.aspx.

Although transportation agencies in the U.S. have been developing Asset Management Systems (AMS) for specific types of infrastructure assets, there are several barriers to the implementation of AMS. This paper documents the development of a generic methodology for quantifying the benefits derived from implementation of AMS and justifying investment in AMS implementation. The generic methodology involves three analysis methods: descriptive analysis, regression analysis, and benefit-cost analysis. This paper demonstrates how the methodology can be applied to evaluate the implementation of a pavement management system in terms of efficacy, effectiveness, and efficiency (3Es).

Aims to encourage transportation agencies to address strategic questions as they confront the task of managing the surface transportation system. Drawn form both national and international knowledge and experience, it provides guidance to State Department of Transportation (DOT) decision makers, as well as county and municipal transportation agencies, to assist them in realizing the most from financial resources now and into the future, preserving highway assets, and providing the service expected by customers. Divided into two parts, Part one focuses on leadership and goal and objective setintg, while Part two is more technically oriented. Appendices include work sheets and case studies.

Transportation Asset Management (TAM) is a strategic approach to maximize the benefits from resources used to operate, expand, and preserve the transportation infrastructure. It takes a long-term perspective of infrastructure performance and cost, and considers investment options in a comprehensive and informed way. TAM integrates the various disciplines related to infrastructure management, including planning, engineering, economics, and budgeting. It is systematic and fact based, and therefore dependent on good information and analytical capabilities. Economic analysis plays a critical role in TAM by facilitating tradeoff analysis, in which the net benefits of competing investment options are compared in terms of their "dollars and cents" impact on the public. Information from the analysis feeds back to planners and engineers, allowing them to identify the most beneficial investments.

Explores a framework for applying asset-management principles and practices to managing Interstate Highway System investments.

"Roadway infrastructure within the United States includes features such as roads, bridges, signs, pavement markings, traffic signals, support commerce and mobility, and is, in essence, a shared financial public resource worthy of being managed at the highest level of efficiency. State departments of transportation (DOTs), local transportation authorities, and federal agencies responsible for the fiscal management of the transportation system have shown a growing interest in advancing the state of practice in managing these critical assets. In addition, the recent congressional passage of Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21 Act) has established an outcome-driven, performance-tracking approach that will hold states and metropolitan planning organizations accountable for improving the conditions and performance of their transportation assets. It will therefore increase agency attentiveness to these vital issues. Transportation Asset Management (AM) is a strategic and systematic process of operating, maintaining, upgrading, and expanding physical assets effectively throughout their life cycle. It focuses on business and engineering practices for resource allocation and utilization, with the objective of better decision making based on quality information and well-defined objectives. Advancing AM capabilities and integrating these capabilities across an organization's business units requires self-assessment, alignment, goal setting, and support. This synthesis of transportation asset management practice among state highway agencies will be a timely resource for agencies to identify their current state of practice and determine where they will direct their AM efforts. This synthesis is based on two separate surveys, with additional input from practitioners. The initial survey requested that participants conduct a self-assessment to characterize their agency's AM practices....The self-assessment results reflect current and future (5-year) business practices and the agencies' institutional, organizational, financial, and IT environments. This survey yielded 18 DOT participant responses (see Appendix D). Based on the results of the initial survey, and input from the Topic Panel, a second survey was designed to capture the state of practice and forward looking expectations (for the next 3 to 5 years) among state DOTs. Forty-three agencies participated in this second survey."--p. 1.