Asset management an expanded team effort since november 2005
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 51

Asset Management An Expanded Team Effort Since November 2005 PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 162 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Asset Management An Expanded Team Effort Since November 2005. Making Progress at ODOT Update for Asset Management Steering Committee September 29, 2009. Our Agenda. Review – Where we’ve been Status – Where we are now Next Steps – Where we need to go next Issues Possible solutions

Download Presentation

Asset Management An Expanded Team Effort Since November 2005

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Asset Management An Expanded Team Effort Since November 2005

Making Progress at ODOTUpdate for Asset Management Steering CommitteeSeptember 29, 2009


Our Agenda

  • Review – Where we’ve been

  • Status – Where we are now

  • Next Steps – Where we need to go next

    • Issues

    • Possible solutions

    • Discussion and decision


Asset Management

Providing the right information

to the right people

at the right time

for lifecycle management

of transportation assets


Asset Management Timeline

  • 1990’s – OTMS in response to ISTEA (1991)

    • Infrastructure for seven major systems in various stages of development by 1996

  • 2005 – Strategic plan for more comprehensive program adopted

  • 2005 – Prioritized assets and assessments

  • November 2005 – Agreement signed for pilot effort

  • 2006 – Year of the pilot

    • Asset data from 4 highway segments (75+ mi) within District 3

    • Statewide perspective on data – need?, get?, integrate?, tools?, who?, implementation?


Timeline, continued

  • January 2007 - Draft Report on the Pilot

    • Recommendations for statewide efforts to build capacities

  • 2007 Tech Services Asset Mgmt Task Force established

  • July 2007 - Asset Management Integration Section created

  • 2007 – Inventory work plans developed based on pilot recommendations

    • Data Collection: Signs; Traffic Barriers; Bike Facilities; Sidewalks; Retaining Walls; Culverts


Timeline, continued

  • 2008 – Sustain efforts and build for additional:

    • Data collection continues; prep for other assets

    • Communication: Circuit Ride; Inside ODOT; web; conferences; webinars

  • 2009 – Making data more accessible

    • Working for solutions and reporting: Data Warehouse, FACS/STIP Tool & TransInfo efforts; network speeds & optimization

  • 2009 – Yet to come

    • Governance must reflect movement from planning to implementation


A Year Ago…..

  • We were

    • Working on and completing inventory plan

    • Getting ready to tour the regions

    • Waiting for signs data warehouse project to begin

    • Developing requirements and contract for TransInfo

    • Individual asset data owners were the sole source for reporting


2007 Plan for Building Asset Inventory

  • Resourced Efforts:

  • Sustain the “green:”

    • Bridges

    • Pavements

    • ITS Sites

  • Basic Inventory statewide by Oct. 2008:

    • Retaining Walls

    • Culverts

    • Traffic Barriers

    • Signs

  • Basic Inventory by July 2008

    • Bike/Ped. Facilities


Progress Made on Inventory

Project started August 2008 – Complete (or almost): R1 & R3; Started: R2 & R4 (est. @ 40-45%)


Circuit Ride & Communications

  • Inside ODOT

    • Monthly articles since Summer 2008

  • Visits to all regions began October 2008

    • Project Delivery and Tech Center teams and staff

    • Maintenance teams and staff

  • Purpose

    • Update and inform

    • Dialogue about AM, future efforts, how it could help and how we could collaborate


Findings & Constant Comments

  • Gaps in knowledge of available data or appropriate sources

    • Accessibility significant issue

  • Interest in data

    • Culverts, approaches, environmental, etc.

  • Network speeds an impediment in more places than you might think

  • Interest in how efforts impact and/or benefit field staff

    • Want to be involved, “at the table”


Sign Data Warehouse Project

  • Data Warehouse tools used to join data from

    • ITIS

    • Multiple district sign databases

      • R4 unable to participate (Cartegraph)

  • Developed initial reporting needs to improve data

    • Enabled systematic data corrections

  • Preparing sign data for integration into future TransInfo module

    • Useful tool to prepare other asset data

  • Effort has enhanced team’s understanding of data


TransInfo – “The Great Integrator”

  • Replace ITIS & Features Inventory systems with a consolidated system used to enter & maintain data about linear assets.

    • Exor Corporation has been selected to provide the COTS package

  • Increases in quality control make it easier to manage data & generate reports.

  • Define transportation GIS network locations for state highways.

  • Establish foundation for future Asset Management projects.


TransInfo – Steps

  • Map current work processes to validate requirements

  • Contractor began work May 2009

  • Built network types – highway, route, segment, crew & expense account

  • Building prototype system

    • Determining best practices for new system

    • Identification of issues/preliminary data decisions

    • Extracting data from ITIS & loading into prototype

  • Stakeholder meetings – 4 meeting held to date

  • TransInfo moved to production October 2010


Future Benefits to ODOT

  • Upon TransInfo implementation:

    • Establishes foundation for standardizing statewide highway data

      • Increase the ease and accuracy of reporting

      • Ability to analyze layers of spatial data allowing for proactive approach to project management

      • Efficient use of limited budget and resources


Tools for Data Collection

  • Manuals document definitions, methods and tools

  • TDD and Tech Services working together to create pool of tools :

    • GeoXT’s

    • Laptops

      • Some new ones acquired

      • Surplus also on hold for deployment

    • Ron Singh – point person

    • Next steps

      • Coordination and applications – a must for data that can be integrated and used by others

        • Ad hoc team formed in August


Tools for Reporting Data

  • FACS-STIP Tool

    • Recognized need to make asset data easily accessible

    • Phased process to improve upon STIP Scoping Tool – completed or underway:

      • WOC 1: Master Plan

      • WOC 2: Current desktop application to web

      • WOC 3: Requirements for Asset Data to Go

      • WOC 4: Building beta version-Asset Data To Go


Breaking Down Data Barriers


FACS-STIP Tool

The Overall Concept:

  • Current tool to web

  • Expand data availability

  • Populate forms

  • Additional tables allow for appended data through phases (updated maps)

  • Mobility option - “data to go”

  • Regular e-mail notifications to asset owners will enable completion of data cycle


FACS/STIP Tool Diagram

E-mail Notifications Regarding Changes

(on some regular cycle)

Accessible

Quantities of

Additional

Information

Available for All

Maps &

Reports

Change

Reports

Data

To Go

Arc Server

Laptop Version

Application Check-In/Check-Out Process

Updates via the web

New FACS/STIP

Application

Populated

Electonic

or Paper

Forms

Management

System

Desktop Version

Management

System

Check-out

Check-in Process

Spatial

Data

Engine

Feature Manipulation Engine

Data-Filled

STIP

Scoping

Forms

Management

System

Geo

Database

Corporate

GIS

Database

Appended

Additions &

Changes

New Additional

Layers

Misc.Files


FACS-STIP Timeline

  • Aggressive schedule! (fingers still crossed)

    • June: Three WOCs delivered - Master project plan, desktop application moved to web, requirements for Asset Data To Go

    • July: Built Asset Data To Go

    • August: Building and beta testing - Field use & comments

    • September: Application adjustments

    • October: Statewide training

    • November: Ready for scoping

    • Ongoing: Additional data & updates

      (web application makes this efficient)

  • Other opportunities

    • Factored in 1R Program requirements (Roadside Inventory)

    • Ready to help with MS4 Permit requirements


FACS-STIP Tool – Landing Page


The FACS-STIP Tool provides asset data to ODOT Staff in a simple-to-use Web Interface. It also provides on-line tools to promote communication using a map reference or convenient spreadsheet export.


Asset “Data to Go” Wizard


Asset “Data to Go” Report


FACS-STIP Tool Feedback

  • Fixes & enhancements (WOC 4):

    • Emphasis is on fixing known defects

  • Highest priorities for follow-up before roll-out:

    • Reformat Excel export product

    • Map option to select Area of Interest

    • Print map option for scoping packets

  • Highest priorities for future enhancements:

    • Expand comment feature to capture additional asset information

    • Ties to other GIS-based efforts, i.e., EDMS


FACS-STIP Tool

ROW-GIS & FileNet

EDMS

Sweet, Suite of Tools

Complimentary efforts to provide data that is of interest


Asset Management – Other Key Interfaces

  • 1R Program

  • HB 2001

    • Practical Design

  • Financial Reporting


1R Program

Pave Mainly – Can’t Make Any Safety Features Worse

Statewide Strategic Approach to Highway Features Normally Upgraded by 3R Projects

Asset Inventories Needed for Strategic Approach

$6 M 1R Safety Fund for Traffic Barrier Upgrades

Essential to Maintain Data in Asset Inventories

1R Roadside Inventories – October 2009

The 1R Program supports a strategic approach for managing ODOT assets…


1R Roadside Inventory

ADA Ramps

Bicycle Facilities

Bridges

Culverts

Sidewalks

Traffic Barriers

Signs

Traffic and Safety Data

Special Problems – Clear Zone Hazards


Practical Design

Design Practices that use Flexibility in the Application of Standards to Reduce Cost While Preserving and Enhancing Safety and Mobility

Mandated by HB 2001 – Report to Legislature by Nov 10

1R Program is a Key Element

2R Program Being Considered Where Some Safety & ADA Features may be Included in Projects

Asset Inventories will be used to Conduct Project Scoping and Allow for Informed Decisions

Practical Design will use Asset Inventories for Decision Making …


Financial Reporting

  • FSB - for ODOT:

    • Prepares ODOT Financial Statement

    • Submits financial information to DAS for State of Oregon report (Comprehensive Annual Financial Report or “CAFR”)

    • Standards must be complied with

      • Several levels of review and accountability

        • Includes DAS, Secretary of State, FHWA and other outside governing bodies

      • Compliance ensures

        • Good rating for bond issuance

        • Continued receipt of federal funds and grants


Financial Reporting Challenges

  • Many folks involved in ODOT’s largest assets

    • Highways

    • Structures

    • Land

  • Current processes, systems and organizational structure make tracking difficult and compromise data integrity

    • Make compliance with reporting standards a significant challenge


Financial Reporting – Musts to Solve

  • Audit findings result in requirements for better lifecycle tracking

    • Estimates from TRANS*PRT and actuals from CPS and TEAMS

    • Landing “on the books”

      • Valuing (capitalizing) new – capturing all project outcomes and cost

      • Activities that extend useful life - capturing significant maintenance activities and cost

    • Depreciating or retiring assets

      • Removing the value on the books for disposed assets


Moving Forward

Things to consider;

things to solve….


Patterns for Readiness

  • Building methodology to improve decisions and awareness based on:

    • Levels of informed decisions

      • Basic inventory and beyond

      • Inspection and update cycles

    • Asset location methods and tools

      • Standards key for data quality and integration

    • Experience with data (“sandbox”)

      • Field experience before inventory

      • Using data before system

        • Just guessing system requirements without it


TransInfo Readiness Considerations

  • Asset priority

    • TransInfo candidate?

  • Good things to do to be ready for migration to TransInfo

    • General

      • Location data standards

    • Asset specific

      • Asset data standards

      • Metadata

      • Established governance structure

      • Data warehouse effort to improve data quality

        • ITIS with multiple sources or single database


Potential TransInfo Queue

  • Signs

  • Storm Water

  • Retaining Walls

  • Sound Barriers

  • CHAMPS

  • Interchanges

  • Intersections

  • ITS Equipment

  • Right of Way

  • Traffic Structures

  • Decisions based on:

    • Risk

    • Priority

    • Readiness


Asset Management – Issues & Barriers

  • Networks & impacts on speeds

  • Universal knowledge of data availability and sources

  • Organizational readiness to support enterprise data

    • Issues of trust

    • Regions/Salem perceptions

    • Updating data

  • Data governance

    • Standards do not necessarily spawn compliance

  • Forums for discussion – broader input

    • Key in order to make inroads on above (orange)


Issues & Barriers - Others

  • Data Warehouse – Sign Data Project

    • Process requires plan for follow-through

      • Want/need to sustain progress

        • Statewide data

        • Ready to migrate data to TransInfo

    • Fragmented jurisdiction and responsibilities made consistent and sustained effort a challenge

      • Data updates inconsistent

        • Network or application issues

        • Resource issues

        • Inconsistent buy in or expectations


Network Speeds/Optimization

  • Slow network and/or application response times impede pace of business in many ODOT offices

    • Major factors include network topology; applications; equipment compatibilities & business processes (how data is shared)

  • Team assembled (includes IS and Business) to

    • Pinpoint issues

    • Assess options

    • Develop strategies where options exist


Network Speeds, continued

  • Challenges

    • Cost; SDC; regional or city capacities for higher speeds; lack of options; necessary applications (MMS ATC, GIS, MSProject)

  • Corrective Action

    • Collaboration with SDC

      • Network band-width upgrade project

      • Identifying & prioritizing other possible improvements


Other Issues to Solve

  • Active engagement of region staff

    • Asset data and priorities

    • Updating and reporting data

    • Data governance

      • Standards

      • Tools for collecting

    • Cross-functional/cross-asset conversations

  • Forum for routine communications and decisions

  • Process for understanding readiness in relation to needs for systems work


Filling Void for Signs

  • Recruited SAM-IT

    • Members:

      • David Smith, R1

      • Ramona Cline, R2

      • Randy Camp, R3

      • Pat Creedican, R4

      • Mike Barry, R5

      • Joel Fry, Maintenance & Operations

      • Scott King, AMI

      • ???, Tech Services (Dave Greenberg/Greg Stellmach?)

      • ???, IS/GIS


SAM-IT:

Ensure sign data readiness to migrate to statewide system

Approve recommendations

Ensure resources for follow-through

Develop requirements for TransInfo Sign Module

SAM:

Ensure sign data readiness to migrate to statewide system

Prioritize issues

Develop recommendations

Review and comment on draft requirements for TransInfo Sign Module

SAM-IT vs. SAM Committee Role


Too Many Assets

  • Limitations of asset-specific committees

    • Would result in too many committees

    • Does not develop cross-asset decision making

      While SAM-IT solves an immediate need,

      long-term, the solution should be

      painted with a broader brush


Next Stage

  • Asset Management Implementation Leadership Team

    • Involve Regions and other divisions

      • Look for ties to other leadership or management teams

    • Develop processes to ensure broader input

      • Ties to other teams and committees whenever possible

        • Concept already tested initially with RLT


Asset Management -

Implementation Leadership Team

Membership:

  • AMI Manager

  • Region Tech Center Rep (SD?)

  • Region Maintenance Rep (KK?)

  • Construction Rep

  • Area Manager Rep

  • AM Task Force Rep (PW)

  • AM Task Force Rep (SL)

  • Financial Services (JM/KK)

  • Planning Rep

  • Information Systems Rep

  • Motor Carrier Rep

  • Transportation Data Rep

Responsibilities:

  • Communication

  • Advocate

  • Accountability

  • Resource Support for Recommendations:

    • Data Governance

    • Priorities:

      • Inventory

      • Data Systems

      • Tools

    • Issue ID & Resolution

Possibility?


System Initiatives & Maintenance

  • Current challenges

    • Prioritization processes exist, but multiple sources still leave questions

    • Business readiness can be difficult to understand

    • RFW’s not always used just for maintenance

  • Potential solution is in creating a team to build single prioritization process


QUESTIONS?

DISCUSSION?


Approvals

  • Current Decisions

    • SAM-IT

    • Concepts for broader engagement for Asset Management decisions and data governance

      • AM-ILT

      • System initiatives and maintenance prioritization

  • Future Decisions

    • AM-ILT membership

    • Process for system initiatives, etc.

    • TransInfo queue

    • Funding to sustain current efforts and new initiatives


  • Login