Upload
molly-williams
View
222
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Impact Assessment Indicators for Administration of Public Transportation GrantsNCHRP 20-65 Task 49
Viktor Zhong
Scott Baker
Dec 3, 2015
Agenda
1. Background and Introduction
2. State Impact Indicators in Use• Overall program administration efficiency• Effectiveness of funding advocacy and funding programming• Timeliness of grant administration activities• Provision of grantee support
3. Indicators Reporting
4. Recommendations and Conclusions
12/3/2015
Background and Introduction
Research Background
“How effective is the state’s administration of transit programs?”
“How efficiently does the state use resources for transit program administration?”
– Two questions of interests to stakeholders of state transit administration, including state transit administrators and external stakeholders
– Indicators of state transit administration effectiveness and efficiency - focus of this study
– Indicators can be misinterpreted and misused
12/3/2015
Research Approach
12/3/2015
Surveyed all 50 states’ public transit administration
Conducted more in-depth interviews with three states- Missouri Department of Transportation, Multimodal Division
- Texas Department of Transportation, Public Transit Division
- Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation
Compiled performance indicators in use by state transit administration
State Administration Activities and Process
12/3/2015
Indicators reported in each of the three areas of state transit administration, as well as overall effectiveness and efficiency
Securing State Match/Appropriation
Making Federal Grant Application
•Local transit training
• State vehicle procurements
• Inspections• Local transit
planning,• Construction
management• Drug and alcohol
testing• Compliance
assistance• MAP-21 (asset
management plans, performance targets, safety plans)
Funding and Allocation
Receiving and Reviewing Grant Applications
Eligibility and Selection of Grant Applications
Making Grant Awards
Administration and Reimbursement of Grants
State Transit Program Design &
Management
1. Funding and Program Level
3. Grantee Support
2. F
undi
ng A
dmin
istr
ation
Audit
Closeout
Performance Indicators In Use
Overall Administration Effectiveness and Efficiency
Indicators State
Administration cost as % of total annual expenditureFL, MO, OR, VA,
WV
Program administration cost per trip supported by the program
MN
Actual expenditure to budget ratio MA, MO
Percent of partners indicated “Satisfied” or “Very Satisfied” with DOT in delivering transportation services
MO
12/3/2015
Administration Cost As A Percentage Of Total Annual Expenditure
– A measure of overall administration efficiency;
– A lower percentage is desired by some, but…
CAVEATS: when it is compared among states or over time:– Administration cost is not proportional to funding level– Amount and quality of services provided drive the ratio
– Consider separating grant administration costs from other program administration expenditures
12/3/2015
¿𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒕𝒆 𝑨𝒅𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝑪𝒐𝒔𝒕𝒔
𝑻𝒐𝒕𝒂𝒍 𝑨𝒏𝒏𝒖𝒂𝒍 𝑬𝒙𝒑𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒆𝒐𝒇 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝑻𝒓𝒂𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒕 𝑷𝒓𝒐𝒈𝒓𝒂𝒎
Funding and Program Level
Indicators State
Total state and federal transit funding received/expended/under contract/available in all open grants/active
AZ, IL, MO, NM, VA, TX
Percent of federal funds subject to forfeiture at the end of the fiscal year (Sept 30) committed by the department
FL
12/3/2015
Total Funding Level and Funding Lapsed
– Example from Texas DOT’s Public Transit Division
12/3/2015
Effectiveness and Efficiency of Grant Administration
Indicators State
Number of grants awarded/opened/managed AZ, IL, TX, VA
(Percent of )vendor invoices paid on time or time it takes to pay a requisition
AZ, MO, OH, IL
Operating/capital payments processed and to Finance on time
MI
• Average number of days from sponsor project selection to project award (MO)• Time from grant application until time of grant award contract (IL)
IL, MO
Staff hours per application review WI
Number of grants closed AZ
12/3/2015
Provision of Grantee Support
Indicators State
Number of subrecipient grantees served VA
Number of vehicles purchased/delivered to grantees AZ, MO
Number of compliance program field visit technical support
TX
Number of site visits for transit grantees’ compliance with federal and state requirements completed
MO
Number of participants in transit training MO
Number of grant recipient compliance reviews completed TX
Staff hours per procurement WI
Average purchased vehicle delivery time AZ
12/3/2015
Indicators Reporting
Indicators Reporting
– Purposes: internal and external communication
– Internally• Audience: state transit administrators • Purpose: to evaluate administrative performance and inform
management decisions to improve effectiveness and efficiency
– Externally• Audience: funders (state and federal), grantees, and general public• Purpose: to demonstrate to key stakeholders the state transit
administration used resources responsibly to provide quality services to their grantees
12/3/2015
Indicators Reporting
12/3/2015
– Reported in strategic and/or business plans
– Reported in performance report• Use a dashboard tool
Recommendations and Conclusions
Conclusions and Recommendations
– Success in tracking indicators in all aspects of state administration, including• Overall administration efficiency• Effectiveness of funding advocacy and funding programming• Timeliness of grant administration activities• Provision of grantee support
– Consider using a dashboard tool
– Consider separating grant administration costs from grantee support costs
12/3/2015
Thank You