R15 REGional Workshop FOCUS 2021 Improving Data Quality & AMP - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
r15 regional workshop
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

R15 REGional Workshop FOCUS 2021 Improving Data Quality & AMP - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Oct 15, 2022 246 likes •1.64k views

R15 REGional Workshop FOCUS 2021 Improving Data Quality & AMP Improvement Plan Implementation (LA3, 4, 5, 16, 17) Workshop Purpose To build sector understanding and application of Purpose how quality data and its use leads to achieving

slide-1
SLIDE 1

R15 REGional Workshop

Improving Data Quality & AMP Improvement Plan Implementation (LA3, 4, 5, 16, 17)

FOCUS 2021

slide-2
SLIDE 2

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

2

Workshop Purpose

To build sector understanding and application of how quality data and its use leads to achieving better outcomes along with building assurance that AMP improvement plans will be implemented.

Purpose

slide-3
SLIDE 3

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

3

Overview

  • Welcome & House keeping
  • Improving Insight and Interpretation of

Evidence

  • REGional Champions Update
  • Innovation Space

Lunch 12:30 pm

  • Ownership of AMP Improvement Plans
  • REG Update
  • Review & Close

Agenda

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Welcome & House Keeping

slide-5
SLIDE 5

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

5

Check In

  • Health & Safety
  • Intro’s for any new

members

  • Any constraints on the

day?

slide-6
SLIDE 6

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP 8

2018 REG Learning & Development Programme

REG

Systems Evidence Communicating Decision Making Service Delivery

People / Culture People / Culture Pillars of Success Pillars of Success

slide-9
SLIDE 9

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

9

Learning Activity

LA1 – Utilsing the REG ONRC classification in ‘place’ and ‘space’ (i.e. Road/corridor form vs. function) LA2 – Utilising REG ONRC Performance Measures (customer and technical) LA3 – Improving data quality LA4 – Improve data reporting LA5 – Improving our evidence - Interpretation, analysis, and understanding how to use data. Long-term condition and deterioration modelling; use of non-asset variables (i.e. economic, social, and environmental value) LA6 – Transport & Road network planning LA7 – Improving the use of the Business Case Approach LA8 – Improving the ‘line of sight’ - connecting the ‘why’ to programme delivery LA10 - Managing and leading change LA11 – ‘Sharing the story’ - Communicating and engaging with stakeholders (Governance, Snr Mgrs, etc) LA12 – Improving alignment with sector approval processes (i.e. GPS, NLTP/IAF, RLTP, LTP, AMP). LA13- Financial, procurement & strategic planning systems – improving alignment internally for improved AMP outcomes. LA14 – Business excellence and managing performance LA15 – Enhancing procurement, service delivery & using the CLoS/PM in contracts LA16 – Improving collaborative outcomes in delivering AMP improvement actions & service delivery LA17 – Supporting innovation and shared knowledge development

2018 REG L&D Programme

Culture change is continued and celebrated

  • Sector capability is increased
  • Collaboration is enhanced
  • Sector buy-in is increased
  • Improved investment decision

making

  • Improved relationships between

co-investment partners (RCA/NZTA)

Continuous Improvement

  • RCAs actively progress their AMP

improvement plans

  • RCAs effectively meet

improvement milestones

  • Improvement actions are more

efficiently delivered

  • Innovation is increased
  • Delivery of the AMPS for 2021/24

NLTP shows improvement on 2018/21

Improved communication in sharing the story

  • Improved senior management and

governance understanding and engagement

  • Support to elected members
  • RCAs enhance their ability to

clearly communicate the investment story

Desired Outcomes

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Improving Insight & Interpretation of Evidence

slide-11
SLIDE 11

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

11

By the end of this session you should:

  • Understand the 17/18 Data quality report

results and how these reflect data quality for each RCA.

  • Appreciate how Practice Overviews can help

with improving data quality.

  • Understand how data quality can help RCAs

with good asset management decision making.

slide-12
SLIDE 12

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

12

Evidence

Developing your evidence base

Analysis

Understanding our Existing Performance to Inform Decision Making

Desired Outcomes Action 1 Action 2 Action 3 Action 4 Action 5

slide-13
SLIDE 13

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

13

The Big Picture . . .

slide-14
SLIDE 14

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

14

Asset Inventory Traffic

Data in the Asset and Delivery Lifecycle

Life Cycle

Dispose Planning Construct Operate and Maintain Renewal/ Replace

slide-15
SLIDE 15

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

15

Quality Dimension Definitions

Dimension Definition Accuracy The data reflects the real world object or event Completeness The data is comprehensive for where it is intended to be used. Timeliness Data is available when expected and needed Usability The extent to which data is clear and easily used Consistency Data across all the system(s) reflects the same information

slide-16
SLIDE 16

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

16

2017/18 National ONRC DQ Results (Provisional)

DATA QUALITY DIMENSION METRICS ACHIEVING THE EXPECTED STANDARD (%) 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 All dimensions 46% 48% 57% 59% *(60%) Completeness 62% 59% 61% 58% *(63%) Accuracy 37% 50% 60% 67% Timeliness 44% 37% 49% 46%

We are trending towards the green zone

* Result excluding metric Su4 included in 2017/18 for the 1st time

slide-17
SLIDE 17

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

17

2017/18 National ONRC Dimension Results

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 Total Accuracy Completeness Timeliness Grade 3 Grade 2 Grade 1

slide-18
SLIDE 18

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

18

2017/18 National ONRC Sub Category Results

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 Carriageway Treatment Length Surfacing Maintenance Activity Roughness Traffic Counts Traffic Estimates Crash Grade 3 Grade 2 Grade 1

slide-19
SLIDE 19

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

19

2017/18 National Asset Management Results

(provisional)

DATA QUALITY DIMENSION METRICS ACHIEVING THE EXPECTED STANDARD (%) 2016/17 2017/18 All dimensions 34% 36% Completeness 25% 36% Accuracy 39% 38% Timeliness 29% 39% Usability 33% 16% Consistency 38% 34%

Marginal overall improvement to the expected standard

slide-20
SLIDE 20

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

20

2017/18 National Asset Management Dimension Results (provisional)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 Total Accuracy Completeness Timeliness Usability Consistency Grade 3 Grade 2 Grade 1

slide-21
SLIDE 21

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

21

2017/18 National Asset Management Category Results (provisional)

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 2016/17 2017/18 Network Asset Inventory Maintenance Activity Condition Grade 3 Grade 2 Grade 1

slide-22
SLIDE 22

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

22

What is the purpose of the metrics?

  • Each metric is there to test the data underpinning the ONRC

Performance Measures or our investment planning and decision making

  • They are intended to flag where data quality may not be to the

expected standard. Further analysis is then needed to confirm this

  • To have confidence in the Performance Measure comparative

reporting we need confidence in the quality of the data used

  • Good quality data is a key input to support our evidence based

investment decisions

slide-23
SLIDE 23

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

23

How to read the results and what do they tell me?

  • The box and whisker plots show

where an individual RCA sits against the spread of national results

  • They provide context if a data

quality issue is at an individual

  • r sector level
  • The results support identifying

and prioritising any data improvement programme

70 75 80 85 90 95 100

Individual RCA result This example shows:

  • The 50th percentile of all RCA’s results is

about 91%.

  • Based on the distribution, just over half of

RCA’s in NZ have data in the expected standard range with a result of 90% or greater.

  • The remaining potentially have minor data

issues.

10th %ile 25th %ile 50th %ile 75h %ile 90th %ile

slide-24
SLIDE 24

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

24

What do your results tell you (ALT14)?

  • How is my RCA going?
  • Do the new results reflect the recent investment you have

made to improve data quality?

  • Is our current data improvement plan going to get us into the

‘green zone’?

  • Do we need to change our focus as we work towards the

21/31 AMP/LTP and 2021/24 NLTP?

  • Are there any areas of poor data quality that could be

addressed on a regional or sub regional basis – how could we do this?

slide-25
SLIDE 25

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

25

National Asset Management RCA Scores

2017 / 2018 Top Score - Western Bay of Plenty = 78 Lowest Score - Grey District Council = 32 Average score = 56

slide-26
SLIDE 26

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

26

Northland Auckland 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Auckland Transport 55 64 57 Far North District Council 54 68 60 Kaipara District Council 53 61 62 Whangarei District Council 58 58 53 Avg 55 63 58 Median 55 63 59 Min 53 58 53 Max 58 68 62

slide-27
SLIDE 27

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

27

Bay of Plenty 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Kawerau District Council 31 33 34 Opotiki District Council 50 72 59 Rotorua District Council 49 63 63 Tauranga City Council 58 65 57 Western Bay of Plenty District Council 65 83 78 Whakatane District Council 76 84 67 Avg 55 67 60 Median 54 69 61 Min 31 33 34 Max 76 84 78

slide-28
SLIDE 28

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

28

Bay of Plenty 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Ashburton District Council 53 68 69 Chatham Islands Council 52 53 60 Christchurch City Council 46 56 51 Hurunui District Council 62 62 53 Kaikoura District Council 38 33 41 MacKenzie District Council 46 47 52 Selwyn District Council 61 75 71 Timaru District Council 52 53 68 Waimakariri District Council 57 57 55 Waimate District Council 51 71 68 Avg 52 58 59 Median 52 57 58 Min 38 33 41 Max 62 75 71

slide-29
SLIDE 29

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

29

Gisborne Hawkes Bay 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Central Hawkes Bay District Council 46 53 56 Gisborne District Council 47 65 50 Hastings District Council 60 62 64 Napier City Council 37 59 51 Wairoa District Council 47 55 51 Avg 47 59 54 Median 47 59 51 Min 37 53 50 Max 60 65 64

slide-30
SLIDE 30

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

30

Southland Otago 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Central Otago District Council 55 62 58 Clutha District Council 56 61 60 Dunedin City Council 54 55 69 Gore District Council 43 38 54 Invercargill City Council 60 60 64 Queenstown-Lakes District Council 54 62 56 Southland District Council 64 75 77 Waitaki District Council 50 51 49 Avg 55 58 61 Median 55 61 59 Min 43 38 49 Max 64 75 77

slide-31
SLIDE 31

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

31

Taranaki Manawatu Whanganui 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Horowhenua District Council 46 45 49 Manawatu District Council 54 52 45 New Plymouth District Council 48 53 45 Palmerston North City Council 43 38 51 Rangitikei District Council 56 50 44 Ruapehu District Council 52 65 56 South Taranaki District Council 64 75 63 Stratford District Council 54 55 42 Tararua District Council 45 52 42 Whanganui District Council 56 69 48

Avg 52 55 49 Median 53 53 47 Min 43 38 42 Max 64 75 63

slide-32
SLIDE 32

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

32

Top of South West Coast 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Buller District Council 34 40 38 Grey District Council 32 40 32 Marlborough District Council 63 63 50 Nelson City Council 47 58 48 Tasman District Council 49 54 53 Westland District Council 47 55 47 Avg 45 52 45 Median 47 55 48 Min 32 40 32 Max 63 63 53

slide-33
SLIDE 33

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

33

Waikato 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Hamilton City Council 47 67 71 Hauraki District Council 65 78 69 Matamata-Piako District Council 45 55 59 Otorohanga District Council 52 52 73 South Waikato District Council 61 67 57 Taupo District Council 35 50 62 Thames-Coromandel District Council 58 61 40 Waikato District Council 56 68 54 Waipa District Council 58 69 77 Waitomo District Council 65 62 51

Avg 54 63 61 Median 57 65 61 Min 35 50 40 Max 65 78 77

slide-34
SLIDE 34

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

34

Wellington 2017/18 Asset Management Scores

2016/17 Prototype 2016/17 New 2017/18 Final Draft Carterton District Council 53 66 61 Hutt City Council 47 34 44 Kapiti Coast District Council 55 65 64 Masterton District Council 45 66 60 Porirua City Council 46 55 45 South Wairarapa District Council 48 53 58 Upper Hutt City Council 60 65 58 Wellington City Council 47 54 52 Avg 50 57 55 Median 48 60 58 Min 45 34 44 Max 60 66 64

slide-35
SLIDE 35

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

35

Please send your feedback about the results

  • r your draft 2017/18

reports to: roadefficiencygroup@nzta .govt.nz Before end of Friday 2nd November

slide-36
SLIDE 36

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

36

Practice Overviews

Poor processes for the timely collection and recording of maintenance and renewal activity Missed

  • pportunity

through ‘doing what always has been done’ Lack of industry understanding

  • r guidance

around the management of key datasets

Poor Data Quality

slide-37
SLIDE 37

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

37

Practice Overviews

Maintenance Activity Data Carriageway Surfacing Data Traffic Count Data Traffic Estimate Data Carriageways Crash Data Work Origin Treatment Length Segmentation Bring management of network down to a project level and assist greatly with forward works planning, dTIMS and maintenance intervention strategies. Assists greatly with NPV analysis, FWP development, deterioration modelling and asset management decision making and understanding performance. Accurate, complete and up-to-date surfacing data is the foundation to enable a robust forward works programme, deterioration model and other analysis Allows for reliable planning of asset and maintenance management and for more accurate estimation on the non-counted parts of the network. A key input for asset management decisions by allowing understanding of traffic input and loading on roads. Fundamental in how the network is defined and split into lane kilometres. Carriageways form the basis for referencing other linear data. Vital for improving safety on the network by targeting investment and measuring the benefits of safety improvements. Associates the carriageway surface and pavement layer inventory records with the NLTP Activity Classes and Work Categories. Why we do it: Data type:

slide-38
SLIDE 38

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

38

  • Take out your smart phone/device
  • Go to kahoot.it
  • Enter PIN number
  • Put in your name
  • Lets get started!
slide-39
SLIDE 39

REGional Champion Update

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Innovation Space

slide-41
SLIDE 41

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

41

Innovation Space

The process of translating an idea or invention into a good or service that creates value or for which customers will…

slide-42
SLIDE 42

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

42

Carriageway Sections

Why are Carriageway sections important?

  • Fundamental in defining and

classifying the network, including for ONRC. What are they?

  • Sections of roads as recorded in the

RAMM road names table.

  • Sections should split the road at

recognisable landmarks e.g. intersections, bridges, culverts, route stations.

slide-43
SLIDE 43

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

43

Carriageway Sections

  • The accuracy of carriageway data is critical as most other

data in RAMM is dependent on it.

  • Poor carriageway data can lead to:
  • Incorrect reporting of network length
  • Poor understanding of network demand, including VKT
  • Poor reporting of network condition, including Smooth

Travel Exposure (STE)

slide-44
SLIDE 44

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

44

Carriageway Sections

What are national results showing us?

  • Overall,

carriageway data is in good condition.

Rural Lanes Ca1a2 Urban Lanes Ca1b2 ONRC Assigned Ca2 Rural Short Ca3a2 Urban Short Ca3b2 Sealed/unsealed Ca4

70 75 80 85 90 95 100 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 90 92 94 96 98 100 60 70 80 90 100 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 70 75 80 85 90 95 100

slide-45
SLIDE 45

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

45

Carriageway Sections

Group discussion:

  • What issues has your RCA had in the past due to poor

carriageway segmentation?

  • Does your RCA have a special method for maintaining

carriageway sections?

slide-46
SLIDE 46

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

46

Carriageway Sections

When must Carriageway Sections splits occur? a) A significant change in scenery b) Changes in number of lanes. c) Changes in pavement type. d) B and C

slide-47
SLIDE 47

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

47

Treatment Length Management

  • Why do we put roads into Treatment Lengths?
  • Like eating an elephant.
  • Brings the control of network maintenance

management down to a project level.

  • Allows for easier recording of all data

in RAMM

slide-48
SLIDE 48

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

48

Treatment Length Management

  • A treatment length is a uniformly performing

contiguous section of road, and performing differently from the adjacent sections.

  • Used for:
  • Forward works programming
  • Deterioration modelling (dTIMS)
  • Asset performance
  • Valuations
  • Maintenance strategies
  • Condition trend reporting
slide-49
SLIDE 49

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

49

Treatment Length Management

  • When should treatment lengths be reviewed?
  • When it becomes obvious that a treatment length is not

performing in a uniform manner

  • Changes to any of the configuration criteria such as

road widening, significant change in traffic etc. Who is responsible?

  • RCAs
slide-50
SLIDE 50

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

50

Treatment Length Management

When should treatment lengths be managed?

  • When it is obvious a treatment is no longer performing in a

uniform manner.

  • When changes occur i.e. road widening, change in traffic
slide-51
SLIDE 51

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

51

Treatment Length Management

Not Short TL1a Not Long TL1b Match TL2 STE TL4 Renewal TL5.1

70 75 80 85 90 95 100 60 70 80 90 100 60 70 80 90 100 80 85 90 95 100 30 50 70 90

Why these metrics?

  • Underpin the amenity ONRC

measures. What are national results showing us?

  • TLs are too long.
  • STE completeness data is varied

across sector.

  • TL updates to match renewals need

improvement.

slide-52
SLIDE 52

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

52

Activity:

  • In groups use the practice overview document

for treatment length as guidance,

  • segment the road into as many treatment

lengths as required and record why you have placed segments at certain locations. Number/reference segments as you go.

  • Also record what information was missing or

would have made this job easier?

Treatment Length Management

slide-53
SLIDE 53

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

53

Leaves the city Runs along a river Pavement thickness changes Seal widens Goes past an intersection Runs over a culvert Passing lane Trees close to verge Reduction in traffic volume Surfacing changes ONRC category change Speed hump Centreline wire rope barrier Pavement thickness changes Climbs up into mountains Speed limit change

slide-54
SLIDE 54

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

54

Leaves the city Runs along a river Pavement thickness changes Seal widens Goes past an intersection Runs over a culvert Passing lane Trees close to verge Reduction in traffic volume Surfacing changes ONRC category change Speed hump Centreline wire rope barrier Pavement thickness changes Climbs up into mountains Speed limit change

slide-55
SLIDE 55

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

55

Surfacing Data

Why do we collect surfacing data?

  • Foundation of treatment length segmentation
  • Critical for Forward Works Planning
  • Reflects a large proportion of RCA investment
  • Foundation for other data sets and deterioration modelling
slide-56
SLIDE 56

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

56

Surfacing Data

What is surfacing data?

  • Record of surfacing works completed on the road.
  • Location
  • Dimensions
  • Date
  • Material
  • Expected life
  • Includes renewals, rehabilitations, new works and other

construction projects.

slide-57
SLIDE 57

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

57

Surfacing Data

How can RCAs influence surfacing data quality?

  • Contract documents
  • Specifying who is collecting data and what and when it

needs to be collected

  • Data quality plan which indicates:
  • Level of accuracy
  • Attributes to be recorded
  • Level of data checks
slide-58
SLIDE 58

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

58

Surfacing Data

What are national results showing us?

  • Cost data has improved, but still

room for further improvement.

  • Work Origin data has a lot of room

for improvement.

  • Still too many sites with data

showing that surfacing is older than pavement.

In RAMM Su1 Location Su2 Cost Su3 Work Origin Su4 Newer Su5

2 4 6 8 10 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100

slide-59
SLIDE 59

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

59

Surfacing Data

What should surfacing data include? a) Location b) Date c) Material used d) All of the above

slide-60
SLIDE 60

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

60

Work Origin

Why is Work Origin important?

  • Enables better reporting of renewal activity which leads to

better analysis of asset performance and likely future needs.

  • Effects ONRC performance measures for:
  • Pavement Rehab
  • Chipseal resurfacing
  • Asphalt resurfacing
slide-61
SLIDE 61

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

61

Work Origin

How is Work Origin recorded?

  • The Work Origin field is currently only

available in the Carriageway Surface and Pavement Layer tables in RAMM. This functionality is expected to be available in the future in other asset inventory tables.

  • A Work Origin code is a valid combination
  • f Activity Class and Work Category.
slide-62
SLIDE 62

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

62

Work Origin

What ONRC performance measures does Work Origin data impact? a) Cost Efficiency 1: Pavement Rehabilitation b) Cost Efficiency 2: Chipseal Resurfacing c) Cost Efficiency 3: Asphalt Resurfacing d) All of these

slide-63
SLIDE 63

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

63

Traffic Count and Traffic Estimate Data

Why is this data important?

  • Allows us to understand current and changing

demands on network

  • Estimate data reduces need to count every

carriageway section on network

  • Better planning of maintenance and renewal

activity on the network

slide-64
SLIDE 64

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

64

Traffic Count and Traffic Estimate Data

What are the consequences of poor data?

Sub-optimal funding decisions Poor understanding of traffic patterns Poor customer service Poor understanding of renewals need Incorrect traffic management levels Poor performance reporting Inappropriate renewals designs Poor estimation of uncounted network

slide-65
SLIDE 65

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

65

Traffic Count Data Quality

What are national results showing us?

  • Large proportion of RCAs have

poor coverage of traffic count data in terms of VKT.

  • Classified data is in a good state

across the country.

Targeted TC1 Historic TC2 Programme TC3 Loading TC4 Coverage TC5

10 30 50 70 90 30 50 70 90 10 20 30 40 50 60 20 40 60 20 40 60 80

slide-66
SLIDE 66

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

66

Traffic Estimate Data Quality

What are national results showing us?

  • High Volume/Arterial should be

estimated each year.

  • Lower classification roads

every 3 or 5 years.

  • Poor updating of records after

traffic counts have occurred.

Has Estimates TE1 HV to Arterial TE2a2 Primary to Sec. TE2b2 Access to LV TE2c2 Updated TE3 Loading TE4

70 75 80 85 90 95 100 20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100

slide-67
SLIDE 67

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

67

Traffic Count and Traffic Estimate Data

What is not a consequence of poor traffic count/estimate data? a) Sub-optimal funding decisions b) Increased heavy traffic on roads c) Poor understanding of renewals need d) Incorrect traffic management levels

slide-68
SLIDE 68

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

68

Group activity

  • Split into 3 groups
  • Each group to complete the activity sheet

provided

  • Report back on your observations
slide-69
SLIDE 69

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

69

Maintenance Activity Data

Why is maintenance activity data important?

slide-70
SLIDE 70

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

70

Maintenance Activity Data

What is maintenance activity data?

  • Summary of maintenance which has

a specific location

  • Recorded in maintenance cost table in RAMM
  • Data for all maintenance activities can be recorded
slide-71
SLIDE 71

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

71

Maintenance Activity Data

Who should record this data?

slide-72
SLIDE 72

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

72

Maintenance Activity Data

What are national results showing us?

  • Most RCAs are collecting

maintenance data to the expected standard.

  • However, some RCAs are

still not recording this data in RAMM or at all.

Complete MA1 Correct MA2 Location MA4

2 4 6 8 10 12 20 40 60 80 100 20 40 60 80 100

slide-73
SLIDE 73

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

73

Crash Data in RAMM

Why is crash data in RAMM important?

  • Analysis of wet road loss of control crashes for skid

resistance management

  • Prioritisation of surfacing treatments to enhance skid

resistance

  • ONRC safety performance measures
slide-74
SLIDE 74

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

74

Crash Data in RAMM

Who is responsible for collecting crash data?

  • Each RCA

What needs to be recorded?

  • When, where and how the crash
  • ccurred

Note: CAS data should be used for analysing crash data and statistics.

slide-75
SLIDE 75

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

75

Crash Data in RAMM

What is the national data telling us?

  • Appears to be a big lag in

available RAMM data (latest available data is November 2017).

  • Good location reference of crash

records.

Recent Cr1 Location Cr2

90 92 94 96 98 100 5 10 15 20 25 30

slide-76
SLIDE 76

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

76

  • Take out your smart phone/device
  • Go to kahoot.it
  • Enter PIN number
  • Put in your name
  • Lets get started!

We want your feedback! Take our Survey now!

slide-77
SLIDE 77

Implementing Our Improvement Plans

slide-78
SLIDE 78

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

78

Outline for this Section

  • 1. Context/Background
  • 2. Sharing ALT13 and progress to date (10 minutes)
  • 3. Outlining and feedback on proposal for joint NZTA/RCA

improvement plan monitoring and implementation

  • 4. Preparing for next workshop – joint RCA & IA partnership

approach

slide-79
SLIDE 79

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

79

A Time of Improvement is Ahead

  • Expectations for

accountability in the public sector are rising

  • LGNZ is very keen to

enhance Local Govt's reputation

  • LGNZ and NZTA want

the sector to succeed

  • REG is the vehicle

providing guidance to achieve success

  • Moving from asset

management plans to BCA activity management plans

slide-80
SLIDE 80

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

80

Any business case must address 5 key questions:

  • 1. Is there a compelling case for change?
  • 2. Does the preferred investment option optimise value for

money?

  • 3. Is the proposed deal commercially viable?
  • 4. Is the spending proposal affordable?
  • 5. How can the proposal be delivered successfully?

The BCA is a systematic approach to answering these questions

It isn't compliance – it is making sure we do what is right!

slide-81
SLIDE 81

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

81

Fundamental challenges BCA helps us address

  • 1. If this was my money would I spend it this way?
  • 2. If I can’t say why I am doing it, then . . . . . .

Why am I doing it?

BCA helps us better identify, explain and provide the right services It is not a compliance process but a mechanism to help our logic and support us delivering the right services to our communities and road users.

slide-82
SLIDE 82

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

82

Way back in R11 (Nov 2017) we asked: Is the investment story compelling?

  • 1. Is there a clear understanding of ‘Why’ you need to do

something?

  • 2. Is there evidence to support your recommended programme?
  • 3. Is what your are recommending affordable?
  • 4. Does it provide ‘value for money’?
  • 5. Do you have the management capability/capacity to deliver

the programme?

  • 6. Can the ‘supply chain’ / market respond and deliver within

your required timeframes?

slide-83
SLIDE 83

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

83

Where are we currently at?

  • 1. Many of our plans have only just met BCA requirements
  • 2. The requirements will be applied more stringently next time

(Not punitive but coaxing us to be more accountable and effective)

  • 3. Even the best plans have identified room for improvement
  • 4. There are challenges to deal with

– e.g. the improvement plan will need to address requirements of NZTA Co-funding General Conditions & any specific conditions

  • 5. We must keep what has to be done in mind or we will lose

sight of it and run out of time

slide-84
SLIDE 84

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

84

March 2017 Observation from Audit NZ on monitoring Improvement Plans

“We noted that many AMPs included a statement along the lines of

  • “Council takes a managed approach to improvement planning,

with adequate resources allocated and clear monitoring of performance”. In practice, we found this was often not the case, with insufficient or no resources allocated for working on the actions identified in the improvement plan and/or no monitoring of progress with improvement initiatives”.

slide-85
SLIDE 85

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

85

Observation from Audit NZ continued

“The improvement plan should be allocated sufficient resource to actually undertake the planned work. Progress against the plan should be monitored regularly. If there is limited resource and/or time to carry out all the actions identified as being necessary to achieve the desired levels of asset management sophistication and data reliability, entities need to ensure that the required tasks are prioritised and the most important initiatives progressed. It is better to have a few improvement initiatives that the

  • rganisation actively progresses rather than including a long

list that ends up being purely academic or that cannot be progressed due to insufficient resources.

slide-86
SLIDE 86

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

86

  • Ensuring the organisation’s business systems, planning documents, management

practices and reporting integrate the ONRC framework into all transport related decision making. This is to ensure robust evidence investment decisions are made which deliver value for money on a best whole of life basis.

  • Delivering and reporting the organisation's ONRC and your own key performance

indicators.

  • Delivering and reporting the planned improvements that form part of the programme

as submitted and accounted for in the Transport Agency’s approved funding.

  • Ensuring that the organisation’s investment decisions within the approved NLTP

allocation are focused on delivering the outcomes as set out in the draft GPS and the submitted programme of works set out as the basis for the Transport Agency’s approval of your programme.

  • Ensuring the organisation advises the Transport Agency at the earliest opportunity of

any changes that materially affect the planned programme of works and expected

  • utcomes to be achieved over the NLTP period.

NZTA Co-funding General Conditions

slide-87
SLIDE 87

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

87

What we are looking for

Minimum requirements Compliance BCA RCA Owned BCA

Implementing AMP Improvement Plan Community Value Added

BCA application BCA application

slide-88
SLIDE 88

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

88

Current progress discussion

At your table, discuss your organisation’s Improvement Plan Implementation progress summaries.

  • 1. Are you making/monitoring progress?
  • 2. Have sufficient resources to complete before July 2020?
  • 3. Reviewing and adding to your improvement plan?
  • 4. Whereabouts on the Compliance to Ownership continuum?

(Being “made to do it” versus “wanting to do it")

  • 5. Any new actions to be added after today?

Plenary Share where on the continuum and new actions you have identified

slide-89
SLIDE 89

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

89

Looking ahead

Joint Monitoring Proposal Based on our learning and development programme as presented to R14

slide-90
SLIDE 90

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

90

Monitoring Proposal – your feedback wanted

Ensuring AMP meets standard for 2021 NLTP through

  • Draft Reporting/monitoring framework for

Improvement Plans

  • RCA example – Linking actions to pillars of success

Adopt RCA/NZTA Improvement Plan partnership approach

  • Improvement Plan conversations and reporting/monitoring

including (draft) dashboard

  • CCC and West Coast examples
slide-91
SLIDE 91

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

91

Why were using REGs Pillars of Success

  • 1. Keeps the “Big Picture” in front of us
  • 2. Helps us identify benefits beyond the immediately obvious
  • 3. Develops a better understanding of “Why”
  • 4. Helps move us away from a compliance mentality
  • 5. Develops a more robust and healthy work culture
  • 6. It helps link/reinforce the REG learning programme to real

examples

  • 7. Helps identify/prompt any potential ‘gap’ areas across the full

activity management system

  • 8. Offers a consistent approach to improvement initiatives and

monitoring

slide-92
SLIDE 92

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

92

Supporting the Sector to Succeed

Systems Evidence Communications Approval Processes Service Delivery Pillars of Success People / Culture People / Culture

Do your systems and process work well, what can be improved? Are they ’customer’ focused and incorporate the ONRC and BCA? Do they link your contracts to your AMP. Think of the whole transport system. Is there a clear line of sight from the strategic case to what you are delivering? Are you collecting the correct data? How good is your data quality? Is your RAMM database up to date? How well have you utilised and understand the gaps with the ONRC CLoS and your evidence base? How robust is your analysis and articulation of the evidence your data is providing? How clear is your investment story? Do you have a concise executive summary, the public could understand why they should support your defined programme and cost for it? Have you socialised your AMP investment requirements & programme with your GM/CE/strategic planners, and elected members? Is it aligned with your LTP? Does your council support your AMP and LTP submission? Does your NZTA funding bid meet the IAC? Are there other approvals required? You have engaged with the construction sector? Have you reviewed your procurement strategy and linked it to your delivery model? Have you introduced the ONRC into your maintenance contracts?

slide-93
SLIDE 93

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

93

Improvement themes identified in R12

Systems Data Approval Process Communications Service Delivery

Improve Data reporting and RAMM systems Improve data quality Improve telling a compelling robust story Better communications content and messaging Integrate ONRC into contracts Improve high level sector systems for monitoring/ audit/ reporting/ quality control linking GPS to delivery across councils. Improve information for Decision Making Improve alignment of sector approval processes Better Audience targeting Improve industry engagement Develop Line of sight systems from strategy to work programming to specifications to delivery Improve data Collection Improve regular communications Improved sector communication processes Improve procurement strategies Improve RAMM Improve communications through organisation culture and training Improve Communications capability Address sector issues Improve support for using data Improve procurement practice Improve Value for Money for data collection and use

slide-94
SLIDE 94

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

94

Framework linked to pillars of success

  • Line of sight
  • Embed ONRC
  • Improve use of

BCA in AMP

  • Reporting - use

& integration of evidence to programme

  • Defined LoS

framework

  • Integrated
  • rganisational

tools

  • Technology
  • Benefit

realisation links/framework

  • Improvement

planning

Systems Evidence Communi cating Decision Making Service Delivery People / Culture People / Culture

  • Data quality
  • Collection ONRC

PM

  • Reporting ONRC

PM

  • Customer/Stake

holder satisfaction

  • Utilising analysis

tools

  • Benefit

realisation reporting is included in evidence

  • Clarity of

investment story

  • Executive

summary

  • Structure of AMP

(use of principles)

  • Link to LTP
  • Link to GPS
  • Use of the

ONRC and decision-making

  • Use of RCA KPIs
  • Links to NZTA

assessment process

  • Links to Council

processes

  • FWP
  • Linking

evidenced as decisions & FWP

  • Benefit

realisation (intervention / selection improvement)

  • Smart Buyer
  • Procurement

strategy

  • Contract
  • Bedding AMP
  • utcomes on to

procurement

  • Embedding

ONRC into procurement

  • Contract

Management / QA / Operational Improvements

  • Culture
  • Leadership
  • Capability
  • Principal &

Suppliers

  • Collaboration &

knowledge sharing

  • Resources
  • Succession

planning

  • Structure
slide-95
SLIDE 95

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

95

Example Dashboard

slide-96
SLIDE 96

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

96

Example Dashboard continued

COMMUNICATING DECISION MAKING SERVICE DELIVERY PEOPLE / CULTURE

Initiate Plan Execute Complete

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Asset mgmt plan

35

Initiate Plan Execute Complete

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Forward works programme

40

Initiate Plan Execute Complete

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Procurement strategy

45

Initiate Plan Execute Complete

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Regional collaboration

55

Initiate Plan Execute Complete

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Maintenance contract

50

Initiate Plan Execute Complete

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Capability plan

60

slide-97
SLIDE 97

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

97

Preparing the sector for the future REG improvement planning

Assessment Areas Outcomes Desired Areas of consideration Focus Questions Systems

Fit for purpose planning

Line of sight, Improvement planning, Embedded ONRC, Use of BCA, Reporting, LoS framework, Technology, Integrated

  • rganizational links, improvement planning

Can the RCA demonstrate alignment between their transport activity planning and their strategic long term planning processes? Does the RCA have a robust business case supporting their AMP? How does the RCA demonstrate the transfer of their business planning through to their forward programme? What is the RCA strategy to understand the problems and performance on their network? How do they align with strategic partners? Can the RCA demonstrate the outcomes they need to invest in?

Helping to support RCAs to deliver the defined benefits to their communities, improve their AMPs, achieve higher expectations for the 2021 NLTP, and meet NZTA co-funding conditions.

slide-98
SLIDE 98

Worked Examples:

West Coast and Christchurch City

slide-99
SLIDE 99

Transport Improvement Programme Review

9October 2018

slide-100
SLIDE 100

Agenda

  • Programme overview
  • Focus areas
  • Line of sight
  • People
  • Process
  • Decision making
  • Technology
  • Knowledge
  • Progress so far
slide-101
SLIDE 101

Programme overview

slide-102
SLIDE 102

Programme overview

Line of Sight - to help everyone visualise how their work fits into the council vision, core strategies, policies and principles. People - empower, clarify roles, responsibilities and how they interact. Process cess - clarify and support collections of linked tasks which lead to the delivery of a service or product. Decisio sion making g - support good decision making, supplying accurate information, and repeatable standards and methods. Knowl wledge - support the retention and distribution of knowledge making it accessible and visible to all. Techno hnology y - enabling the effective use of our technology, ensuring data is accurate and people are trained.

slide-103
SLIDE 103

Programme overview

slide-104
SLIDE 104

Line of Sight

slide-105
SLIDE 105

Strategic Direction

slide-106
SLIDE 106

People

slide-107
SLIDE 107

Process

Operations Maintenance Planning Delivery

Network operations and safety Reactive interventions Strategic planning Project management Compliance and enforcement Planned interventions Network planning Design Transport education Maintenance contracts Asset management Procurement Amenity protection Funding Construction Handover

slide-108
SLIDE 108

Decision Making

slide-109
SLIDE 109

FINDING PROBLEMS ON THE NETWORK

  • Contractor is responsible for

inspecting the network

  • Customer may identify a

problem and call us

slide-110
SLIDE 110

PROGRAMMING

  • Key activity to drive proper

prioritisation across the network

  • Programme structured by Asset

Type, ONRC Road Hierarchy, Traffic Volume & Dispatch Programme Category

  • Programme agreed by 20th of

each month and locked KEY MEASURE:

  • >90% of work in programme

(value & number of jobs) completed each month

slide-111
SLIDE 111

Technology

slide-112
SLIDE 112

RAMM as a contract tool – audits comms deliverables etc

slide-113
SLIDE 113

Knowledge

slide-114
SLIDE 114

Progress

slide-115
SLIDE 115

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

115

CCC Improvement Programme

slide-116
SLIDE 116

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

116

West Coast Improvement Plan

slide-117
SLIDE 117

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

117

West Coast Improvement Plan

slide-118
SLIDE 118

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

118

West Coast Improvement Plan

slide-119
SLIDE 119

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

119

Project Title Activity Current Status Future Status and Identified Improvements Improvement approach Priority Timeframe Responsibility Resources Status Update / Notes % complete Risk Level Risk Management Plan SYSTEMS 1 Improvement framework Adopting regional improvement framework New framework prototype drafted for discussion and feedback. Agreed framework adopted and signed off by NZTA and RCAs. Regular meetings and monitoring. Supports continuous improvement and NLTP funding conditions. Preparing RCA for 2021 NLTP. Partnership workshop to discuss approach and framework. High Transport Manager & NZTA IA 5 Low 2 Line of sight Improve the use of the BCA and line of sight connection in Activity Management Plan and programme of works. Regional AMP has been developed with regional problem statements. Test problem statements within each local RCA network. Better understand the scale of regional problems at local level. Improve link of local programme delivery to high level
  • strategy. Improve use of BCA in AMP
for next NLTP. Work collaboratively with other regional RCAs. Ensure individual
  • wnership and how this applies
within each individual RCA. High Transport Manager 10 Medium 3 ONRC integration Improve how the ONRC is linked to business systems Regional AMP has been developed incorporating the ONRC; 2018 NLTP use of ONRC was a new initiative and work to date has started the integration. Business / AMP systems fully integrated with ONRC classification, levels of service, and use of performance measures. Work collaboratively with other regional RCAs and NZTA. High Transport Manager 15 High EVIDENCE 4 RAMM database Upgrade of the RAMM databases 2016/17 Data Quality score 34. Number of major data quality issues present Accurate, complete and timely RAMM data to better inform investment decisions and facilitate performance
  • management. Improved capability to
utilise data Audit RAMM databases and identify
  • gaps. Develop and implement
prioritised action plan. Assess
  • ptions for future management of
RAMM databases High Transport Manager 20 High 5 ONRC measures Collection and reporting of ONRC customer performance and technical
  • utput measures
A number of ONRC performance measures are not being collected and/or monitored Collect data to better understand network performance indicators, comparative measures and guide investment Draft ONRC data collection plan, collect and store data, analyse and report High Transport Manager 25 Medium 6 Satisfaction surveys Collection and analysis of customer and stakeholder satisfaction with the road networks Varied approach to customer satisfaction surveys Review satisfaction survey questions and usefulness of data received. Adopt conistent approach across 3 West Coast Councils to enrich data set and contribute to benchmarking for the region Define customer user groups, develop plan and programme for collection of data from users groups, implement and analyse data Medium Transport Manager 30 Low COMMUNICATING 7 Asset mgmt plan Fully integrate the technical asset management plan with BCA AMP to support a cohesive investment story. Two separate documents exist; Combined BCA Activity MP and technical asset management plan. Explore potential to integrate and combine for a more cohisive investment story. Review audit NZ findings and REG
  • guidance. Disuccus approach with
NZTA IA. Medium Transport Manager 35 Low DECISION MAKING 8 Forward works programme Programme development Lack of data and evidence base to develop proactive forward works programmes. Use data to develop longer term views in renewal programmes which will assist collaboration and procurement
  • pportunities
Co-ordinated approach to data collection, review of strategic problems and priorities, develop and assess programme options for 2021- 24 bid Medium Jul-20 Transport Manager 40 Medium SERVICE DELIVERY 9 Procurement strategy Review of procurement strategies Out of date procurement strategy Reviewed, updated and endorsed procurement strategy Identify what is being purchased, extent of competition in the market, capacity and capability of market and internal staff, purchase selection methods, collaboration opportunities High Dec-18 Transport Manager 45 High 10 Maintenance contract Procurement of new transport and roading contracts 10 yr maintenance contract ends July 2020 Retender maintenance contract having regard to updated procurement strategy. Adopt common contract specs across the WC Councils, integrate ONRC Develop programme of tasks required
  • ver 20 month period between Sept
2018 and July 2020. Obtain internal approvals and develop communications plan High Apr-20 Transport Manager 50 High PEOPLE / CULTURE 11 Regional collaboration Regional collaboration is continued to be developed and new
  • pportunities identified
Collaboration and development of combined AMP occurred in 2018 NLTP. Continue to work together with shared improvement opportunities for AMP
  • development. Identify further
collaborative opportunities Reinstating regular collaboration
  • meetings. Involve both RCAs and
NZTA. High Transport Manager 55 Medium 12 Capability plan Development of a regional capability and success plan No plan in place Review individual RCA plans (if available) and identify any gaps. Individual RCA capability matrix of core competencies required
  • developed. Combine into an
integrated regional plan. Gaps identified collectively. Action plan developed collectively. Medium Transport Manager HR departments 60 Low
slide-120
SLIDE 120

Don’t lose your “Big Picture” Perspective

slide-121
SLIDE 121

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

121

Worksheet exercise

At your table,

  • 1. Identify additions/alterations to the monitoring framework
  • 2. Discuss the practical challenges in implementing this

Plenary

Write your key points on the worksheet

Share your findings

slide-122
SLIDE 122

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

122

Preparing for next workshop – R16

  • 1. Work with your NZTA Investment Advisor to develop a

partnership approach to implement your improvement plan

  • 2. Set up
  • a prioritised implementation schedule using the 5 pillars
  • a monitoring/reporting system
  • 3. Secure endorsement from Infrastructure Manager that

improvement plan and programme has support of senior management and governance

  • 4. Report back to R16
slide-123
SLIDE 123

REG Update

slide-124
SLIDE 124

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

124

Procurement Work Plan

  • Regeneration of Procurement Strategies
  • Knowledge and rules
  • Principles and culture change
  • Integrating ONRC into Contracts/Procurement
  • Developing Procurement tools to increase capapbility and

reduce resource demand

  • Developing a collaborative culture through initiatives
  • Improving Health and Safety through investigating use of

emulsion seals

  • Engaging with the wider sector
slide-125
SLIDE 125

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

125

We need to lift our Procurement Capability

Qualifications of proposal (tender) evaluators

  • The Transport Agency requires a TET to include a ‘qualified’ evaluator – refer

Procurement Manual section 10.19

  • Connexis is the ITO that administers the qualification – contact Ashley

Chisholm

  • The qualification is obtained by demonstrating to an ‘assessor’ that you

have the knowledge and experience set down for each of the unit standards. A list of assessors is available from Connexis

  • The qualification is not classroom learning based – it acknowledges prior

learning

slide-126
SLIDE 126

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

126

Sector Excellence

Benefit Delivery Systems Evidence Communicating Decision Making Service Delivery

People / Culture Quality Improvement People / Culture Quality Improvement

REG Pillars

  • f Success

REG Pillars

  • f Success

Enabling Sector Excellence Enabling Sector Excellence

slide-127
SLIDE 127

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

127

The Outcome

  • Quality Evidence
  • Fit for Purpose

Planning

  • Quality Decision

Making

  • Agreed Network

Performance

  • Whole of Life Value
  • Benefit Realisation
  • Value Based Service

Delivery

  • Quality Improvement

Office of the Auditor General

LGA/LTMA assessment LGNZ CouncilMARK

  • Public Confidence

in Investment

  • Community

Outcomes

Treasury

Investor Confidence Rating Government confidence in Investment

NZTA Audit & Risk

  • Network

Performance

  • Confidence in

Delivery

  • Compliance

Realising Excellence in the Transport Sector

slide-128
SLIDE 128

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

128

Excellence Programme and Fit with REG

C u r r e n t S t a t e Future State Continuous Improvement, Learning & Strategic Development

One Network Evidence Activity Management Service Delivery Community Outcomes Enhanced

BCA, Performance Measures, Reporting Tool Classification, movement, place, & space Data quality, improved analysis and links to ‘why’ Increased value from procurement

Sector Excellence I

slide-129
SLIDE 129

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

129

Sector Excellence Programme Principles

  • Based on objective assessment criteria that utilises existing

frameworks;

  • Utilises the REG Pillars of Success as weighted criteria.
  • Reflects that different RCAs have programmes of differing size,

complexity, and significance.

  • Recognises that different RCAs have higher/lower investment

risks; higher risk equals more assurance required and vice versa;

  • Simple and transparent;
  • Focuses on benefit delivery, identifying the ability to deliver

customer/community outcomes;

  • Considers aspects from governance to asset managers/engineers;
  • Can be utilised by governance, senior management, and asset

managers/engineers to improve and communicate performance; and

  • Considers the competencies required (governance to

asset/engineer).

slide-130
SLIDE 130

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

130

Identifying Excellence and Gaps

Focus is on identifying:

  • Strengths and how to build on these (if appropriate)
  • Priority areas for improvement
  • Identifying capability and capacity of individuals and dividing

responsibilities accordingly

  • Agreeing the course of action required
  • Monitoring its implementation
slide-131
SLIDE 131

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

131

The excellence programme could be used to:

  • Identify if the RCA is delivering on customer outcomes & benefits to

the community (realising benefits);

  • Form a view on the capability and capacity of the RCA to deliver

identified outcomes;

  • Identify areas of improvement, planning, and monitoring progress;
  • Justify the shifting of additional investment responsibilities to high

performing RCAs away from NZTA (ie. Potential delegations and self-monitoring, ensuring resourcing is appropriate to manage change);

  • Provide more targeted and strategic engagement;
  • Improve ability to receive NZTA co-funding and reduce

requirements for investment assessment rounds and funding conditions;

  • Provide sector transparency on performance and pathways for

improvement; and

  • Enable the sector to support each other in improving capability and

building capacity.

slide-132
SLIDE 132

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

132

Right sizing assessments

What is the level of risk associated with the RCAs programme?

  • Will depend on the size, complexity, and significane of the

programme and any particular risks (transport network or land use risks). Three types of programmes (based on NZTA PIRF)

  • 1. Core: maintenance/operations programme only
  • 2. Core Plus: programme with bigger improvement projects as

well

  • 3. Advanced: programme with large and/or complex

improvement projects as well

slide-133
SLIDE 133

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

133

Focus is on delivery of community outcomes and whole of life value in the assessment of sector excellence

  • Considers if the outcomes for the community/customer have

been achieved.

  • Considers the whole of life value being delivered for the

assets.

  • Will build capability of the sector over time to focus on

benefit delivery. Brings the sector continually back to ‘why’ and desired benefits.

  • Reporting of the assessment is weighted toward benefit

delivery.

slide-134
SLIDE 134

Benefit Delivery Systems Evidence Communicating Decision Making Service Delivery

People / Culture Quality Improvement People / Culture Quality Improvement

REG Pillars

  • f Success

REG Pillars

  • f Success

REG Excellence Programme Using the Pillars of Success

Enabling Sector Excellence Enabling Sector Excellence

Customer focused

  • utcomes

and whole of life value delivered

Third Party Alignment

slide-135
SLIDE 135

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

135

Assessment Areas Outcomes Desired Excellence Looks Like… Areas of consideration Focus Questions Systems

Fit for purpose planning

Systems support people knowing exactly what their doing, their supported, and doing it, whole business is integrated into the

  • utcomes (all parts integrated), systems

integrate with national, regional, and local policies and show how these apply to local decision making, agnostic to policy

  • directions. Support sound communications.

Links to KPIs, evidence framework is in place. Line of sight, Improvement planning, Embedded ONRC, Use of BCA, Reporting, LoS framework, Technology, Integrated

  • rganizational links, improvement

planning, inputs/process/outputs, IIMM followed, ISO standards used Can the RCA demonstrate alignment between their transport activity planning and their strategic long term planning processes? Does the RCA have a robust business case supporting their AMP? How does the RCA demonstrate the transfer of their business planning through to their forward programme? What is the RCA strategy to understand the problems and performance on their network? How do they align with strategic partners? Can the RCA demonstrate the outcomes they need to invest in?

Evidence

Quality evidence

Able to show evidence in support of what you asked. Shows what success looks like to identify the level of investment. Knowing what all your assets, activities are, what condition is, what good looks like and being able to show this. Demand, growth and is

  • clear. Fit for purpose evidence base.

Data quality, Collection and reporting of ONRC PM, Customer/stakeholder satisfaction, utilising analysis tools, benefit realization reporting is modeled in

  • evidence. Confidence of evidence,

understanding of the gaps/issues. What is the REG data reports telling us about the RCA’s data quality? What is the magnitude in change of data performance Has the RCA kept their ONRC network performance up to date? What evidence does the RCA use? Can they demonstrate how they use that evidence for building their business cases? Does the RCA quantify the evidence and how?

Communicating

Clear investment story

Clear investment story is articulated to the targeted audience. Fair and equitable communications back and forth promotes

  • partnership. Effectively communicated the

need and decision makers have supported

  • investment. Audience understands the

issues and can make decisions on the course of action. Alignment with strategic

  • plans. Follow through, committed to doing

what you said you are going to do. Allows good connection between all involved. Audience is interested in listening, early engagement, no surprises. Clarity of investment story, executive summary, structure of AMP (use of principles), link to GPS, NLTP, RLTP, LTP Can the investment case be easily understood by decision makers? How clear is the investment story? Does the investment requested clearly link to the benefits identified? Does the AMP tell the investment story defined in the LTP?

REG Excellence Programme Assessment Framework (DRAFT WIP)

Benefit Delivery Systems Evidence Communicating Decision Making Service Delivery

People / Culture Quality Improvement REG Pillars
  • f Success
Third Party Alignment Enabling Sector Excellence
slide-136
SLIDE 136

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

136

Assessment Areas Outcomes Desired Excellence Looks Like… Areas of consideration Focus Questions Decision Making

Quality decision making

Doing the right thing, at the right time, for the right price. Prioritisation and selection of recommended programme/outcome is clear and supported by evidence and strategy. Effective asset life cycle

  • management. Confidently answer

why you are doing what you have

  • identified. Gains trust with governors.

Decision making is defendable and consistent with the evidence.

  • Transparent. Programme
  • ptimisation is clear.

Use of ONRC in decision making, Use of RCA KPIs, Links to NZTA assessment processes, Links to RCA processes, Forward works programme, Linking evidence to decisions and FWP, Intervention / selection / improvement What analytical and modelling tools does the RCA use to support their programme development? How does the RCA use those tools to guide decision making? Does the RCA document the processes used to make decisions? What evidence does the RCA use for guiding decision making? Can the RCA demonstrate how they have used the evidence – How?

Service Delivery

Agreed network performance and value based service delivery

No rework or premature failures. All

  • n mean for seal life, etc.

Understanding of the time, cost, quality outcomes for delivery

  • requirements. Delivering on agreed
  • targets. Tell us, delivery, measure.

Delivery of agreed LoS and customer

  • utcomes. Knowing what you are

buying and getting delivered. Know what their buying and why and know what their getting for their money, know why their doing stuff. Understand their suppliers and

  • delivery. Collaborative engagement.

Procurement strategy, Smart buyer approach, procurement strategy, contracts, imbedding AMP outcomes and ONRC into procurement, Contract management / QA /

  • perational improvement

Using both the PMRT and the NZTA provided benchmarking, how does the RCA compare regionally, nationally and against peer groups? How does the RCA align their work programme with network performance gaps? How does the AMP describe how the RCA will close network performance gaps? How is the RCA closing these gaps and Are the timeframes justifiable? How often is the RCA testing their network performance, and how do they calibrate it back to their

  • utcomes contracts?

How do they use this evidence in their continuous improvement programmes? How does the RCA test the sustainability of their forward works programme? What tools does the RCA use to test their smart buyer capability? How does the RCA align their procurement across their organisation and with neighbouring RCA’s? How does the RCA measure the performance of their contracts and how do they use this information to shape future procurement? Does the RCA have an endorsed procurement strategy Can they confirm that they have a good appreciation of the supply chain Can they demonstrate that they are a smart buyer? Do they have access to the right level of capability?

Benefit Delivery Systems Evidence Communicating Decision Making Service Delivery

People / Culture Quality Improvement REG Pillars
  • f Success
Third Party Alignment Enabling Sector Excellence
slide-137
SLIDE 137

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

137

Assessment Areas Outcomes Desired Excellence Looks Like… Areas of consideration Focus Questions People / Culture

Capable people focused on quality improvement

People are using the systems and their roles are clear. Passion and

  • energy. People want to do the right

thing (have the desire). Do they have a culture to encourage people to do

  • better. Know why they are doing it,

be part of the change. Needs to be

  • evidence. Staff are empowered.

Culture, Leadership, Capability, Resourcing, Succession planning, Structure, Collaboration, Knowledge management Is the RCA part of the CouncilMARK programme? How have they used the findings from the assessment? Has the RCA had a recent NZTA audit and what where the findings? How has the RCA responded to the audit findings? How has the RCA responded to the investment conditions set by the NZTA as part of the NLTP allocations? How does the RCA use their customer service requests to guide improvement programmes? What were the LTP audit findings and how has the RCA responded? Has the RCA received improvement actions? Is the RCA responding to these in a timely manner? Does management have oversight of improvement implementation? Can the RCA demonstrate a continual improvement programme? What is the RCA’s approach to being a smart buyer through having the right capability?

Benefit Delivery

Customer focused

  • utcomes and

whole of life value delivered

Clear on the problem and outcome and this was delivered. Achieve trust from decision makers and customers you can deliver the outcomes

  • needed. Responding well to best
  • utcomes form the community. Show

what occurred and can make an informed call to learn. Show how you have implemented the business case and delivered the identified benefits. Knowing and showing true cost. AMP outcomes are delivering on LTP, Addressing defined problems, Delivering on customer outcomes, Delivering on CLoS, What tools does the RCA use to test their network based decision making? How can the RCA demonstrate that they have used these tools effectively? What is the ability of the RCA to demonstrate the delivery of value? Does the RCA lead trade off conversations and how is tis work documented? What approach does the RCA use to report on completed projects and programmes of work? How does the RCA confirm that the benefits are realised & map the benefit of their decision making outcomes? How does the RCA track and record the performance of projects and performance? How does the RCA use this information to guide future decision making? How does the RCA How do they use this information for guiding future project/programme development? Did you achieve the benefits you wanted for the investment?

Continuous Improvement

Striving to deliver the best for their community

Learning organisation. Being honest where your at and where you want to

  • go. Action plan and measure

progress. Is their evidence that the RCA embraces feedback from peer reviews and 3rd party audits. Are the finding reported to governors, and acted on in a timely manor? How are you measured in regard to maturity rating (IIMM)?

Benefit Delivery Systems Evidence Communicating Decision Making Service Delivery

People / Culture Quality Improvement REG Pillars
  • f Success
Third Party Alignment Enabling Sector Excellence
slide-138
SLIDE 138

THANK YOU!!

FOCUS 2021

slide-139
SLIDE 139

THE ROAD EFFICIENCY GROUP

139

Chris Olsen

16 Solway Place Papakowhai Porirua 5024 P: 04 2339697 M: 0274 477098 chris@coconsulting.co.nz

David Fraser

10 Bayview Drive Waiuku 2123 P: +64 9 2357245 M: 027 4739493 david@amsaam.co.nz

David Fraser

10 Bayview Drive Waiuku 2123 P: +64 9 2357245 M: 027 4739493 david@amsaam.co.nz

Erik Barnes

PO Box 2764, Wakatipu, Queenstown 9349 M: 021 997 863 erik@auxilium.co.nz