January 2010 Archives

Editor's Note: Steve Winkelman, director of transportation and adaptation programs at the Center for Clean Air Policy and a contributor to this blog, is providing this week's question.

Performance measurement is fundamental to ensure that transportation policy and funding achieves desired policy outcomes. This week we will discuss the transition to performance-based transportation policy:

• How to develop effective and practical performance measures?

• What data, resources and institutional changes will be needed?

I think we can all agree that we want to get our money's worth from federal transportation investments and that trying to optimize investments across multiple policy goals is challenging. Accountability for outcomes is seen as critical, but it's a frightening prospect to some (who believe they cannot or should not meet the national goals).

I see three important reasons for measuring performance: 1) to establish baselines, 2) to measure progress toward policy goals, and 3) to inform funding allocation.

When used to inform funding allocations, performance measures must be flexible enough to allow goals to be met in a variety of ways tailored to the unique characteristics of the community or region, yet rigorous enough that they truly measure the desired outcomes and cannot be circumvented either deliberately or unknowingly.

Performance measures can be defined as absolute levels, relative levels, trends and/or on a per capita basis. Measure definition will depend in part upon how national goals are defined. While we all have different priority weightings of national policy goals, I expect that they are likely to include the economy, accessibility/mobility, safety/reliability and energy/environment.

I invite you all to share your thoughts on the merits of specific formulations for measuring various policy outcomes.

-- Steve Winkelman

19 responses: Steve Winkelman, Lisa Caruso, Steve Van Beek, Scott Belcher, James Corless, Gabriel Roth, Jack Kinstlinger, Steve Winkelman, Lisa Caruso, Michael A. Replogle, Gabriel Roth, Janet F. Kavinoky, Emil H. Frankel, Gabriel Roth, Steve Winkelman, Gabriel Roth, James Corless, Keith Laughlin, Rob Atkinson

Last week Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood proposed new livability-based funding guidelines for major transit projects and rescinded Bush administration requirements that based funding decisions on how much a project shortened commute times compared to its cost. The criteria determine which projects get funded under the Federal Transit Administration's New Starts and Small Starts programs.

"We're going to free our flagship transit capital program from long-standing requirements that have allowed us only to green-light projects that meet very narrow cost and performance criteria," LaHood told the Transportation Research Board annual meeting on Jan. 13. "Instead, as we evaluate major transit projects going forward, we'll consider all the factors that help communities reduce their carbon footprint, spur economic activity and relieve congestion. To put it simply, we will take livability into account."

What do you think of the new criteria that Secretary LaHood proposed? How would they improve the New Starts and Small Starts programs and how might they hurt them? What other changes would you propose making to the criteria for determining which transit projects receive federal funding?

20 responses: Jon Martz, Jon Martz, Rich Sarles, Emil H. Frankel, Deron Lovaas, Steve Van Beek, Lisa Caruso, Bob Poole, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., Steve Heminger, Mortimer L. Downey, Parris N. Glendening, Greg Cohen, Gabriel Roth, Rep. James L. Oberstar, D-Minn., Ken Orski, Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., Anthony E. Shorris, James Corless, William Millar

The failed Christmas Day attempt by a 23-year-old Nigerian to blow up a Northwest flight from Amsterdam to the United States again made the issues of aviation security and counterterrorism front-page news. As this country's enemies demonstrate their continued willingness to use aircraft as weapons of mass destruction, what are the most effective strategies to improve aviation security and thwart would-be terrorists?

3 responses: Roger Dow, Bob Poole, Ron Kuhlmann

What were the three most important transportation developments of 2009? And what should be the top three transportation policy priorities of 2010, either for government at any level or for the private sector?

17 responses: Randell H. Iwasaki, Bill Graves, Parris N. Glendening, James Corless, Rep. James L. Oberstar, D-Minn., Jack Kinstlinger, Scott Belcher, Emil H. Frankel, Geraldine Knatz, James Corless, Steve Van Beek, Greg Principato, Deron Lovaas, John M. Krieger, John Horsley, Gabriel Roth, Michael A. Replogle