6TH ANNUAL CONFERENCE

Performance Based Maintenance Results

Tim Lattner, P.E.Director, Office of Maintenance,

Florida Department of Transportation

Florida State Roadways

Performance Based Contracts

• Asset Maintenance Contracts• Focused Performance Contracts– Lighting; Striping; Pond Maintenance;

Sidewalk; Aesthetics • Memorandums of Agreement– Lighting; Signals; Landscaping

Management Approach for Performance Based contracts

• Do not provide “to do” or “work needs” lists or “deficiency survey” results

• We cannot direct them on what to do• Things may not be corrected as quickly as you like• We may not be have the same ability to respond

to “high profile” complaints• Need to hold them to the performance measures

in the contract

Expect Contractors on Performance Based contracts to:

• Determine what needs to be done• Meet performance measures by performing

consistent maintenance• Take full responsibility• Take pride in the condition of “their” assets

Key Elements to Measuring results of Performance Based contracts

• Cost comparison• MRP results• Contract performance results (AMPER)

FY 2012/2013 Expenditures

AMC31%

In-House14%

Contracts55%

Statewide

Rural Road-ways

Urban Road-ways

Facility Main-tain

RestAreas Se-curity

Bridges In-spect

Bridges Main-tain

Ancillary Structure

Funding

AM 3158.902 1789.471 81 57 84372.8288244743

73572.6738976715

5493 0.31

Non-AM 2817.098 4322.729 8 8 92653.4453431237

73176.7710819731

11064 0.69

5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

65%

75%

85%

95%

Statewide Maintenance AM

Non-AM

Centerline Miles # of Facilities Deck Area (1000SF) # of Struct

As of March 2014

Performance Based Striping contractsContract # Office Contract Start

DateMiles of Striping

Awarded Amount Calculated Cost* Reductions in Compensation Previously

AssessedTotal for 5 years $/Miles of Striping Total for 5 Years $/Miles of Striping

E5P91 Leesburg 4/26/2012 341 $1,667,790.00 $4,890.88 $1,979,747.70 $5,805.71

E5P96 Ocala 9/6/2012 1210 $2,842,200.00 $2,348.93 $5,638,241.35 $4,659.70$18,948.00

Lane User Fee

E5Q42 Oviedo 11/28/2012 488 $2,563,000.02 $5,252.05 $3,062,524.31 $6,275.66 E5Q65 Orlando 1/16/2013 825 $2,580,000.00 $3,127.27 $2,125,428.03 $2,576.28 $28,000.00DeficienciesE5Q37 Leesburg 3/25/2013 627 $2,476,000.02 $3,948.96 $5,061,057.72 $8,071.86 E5Q60 Brevard 5/15/2013 466 $1,332,000.00 $2,858.37 $2,476,287.60 $5,313.92 E5Q49 DeLand 6/16/2013 1390 $1,294,215.96 $931.09 $4,070,575.67 $2,928.47 E5Q75 Oviedo 11/7/2013 435 $889,699.02 $2,045.29 $2,421,762.18 $5,567.27 E5Q74 DeLand 12/6/2013 618 $1,025,835.18 $1,659.93 $3,494,875.09 $5,655.14

$16,670,740.20 $30,330,499.65

E1J02 Sebring 8/3/2011 1029 $3,540,180.00 $3,440.41 $4,419,870.39 $4,295.31 $ 531,027.00

Deficiencies/lost payments

E1M77 Sarasota 1/12/2014 1736 $1,883,333.35 $1,084.87 $6,284,478.68 $3,620.09 $ -

$5,423,513.35 $10,704,349.07

Grand Total $22,094,253.55 $41,034,848.72*"Calculated Cost" based on:

Replacing all stripes with Thermo one (1) time Replacing all RPMs 2.5 times5% for Mobilization5% for MOTRunning the MRU 6 times at $14.90/mile of stripe each time

Total estimated savings over 5 years $18,940,595.17

E1J02* Minimum 400 mcd/lx-m2 (white) and 300 mcd/lx-m2 (yellow), other lines and symbols 175 mcd/lx-m2. Testing required each quarter.

Must achieve minimum of 80 on RPM, striping and symbol characteristics each period. Additional quarterly evaluation performed by contractor each quarter to MRP requirements.

E1M77* Contract requirements are based on MRP testing results (minimum of 80 on striping and RPM)

This is a 3 year contract. Contract amount was extrapolated to 5 years but may not represent actual 5 year contract cost.

Maintenance Rating Program Results

• Statewide MRP for FY 13-14– 86

• Statewide MRP for FY 13-14 for AM areas (not apples to apples comparison)– 87

Asset Maintenance Contractor Performance Evaluation Report

AMPER

AMPER

• Asset Maintenance Contractor Performance Evaluation Report

• Grades contractor performance using a standard, established, thorough process

• Generates a numeric 0-100 score with 70 being threshold of acceptable performance

• Results are used for matters of Default, Non-Responsibility and Contractor selection for future jobs

Contractor Performance

A+ A B C F0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Out of 208 AMPER Scores

AM Program Growth

20002001

20022003

20042005

20062007

20082009

20102011

20122013

2014

0

200

400

600

800

1000

Annual AM Lettings Total Value of All Active AM Contracts

Mill

ion

Dol

lars

Questions?