National Roads Maintenance Review Phase 1 Report

A Standards & Asset Management

A.1 Introduction

Standards and asset management refers to:

  • the national standards for designing, building and maintaining roads in Scotland;
  • the method of assessing, forecasting and managing ongoing costs at all stages of an asset's (eg. a road's) life. This runs throughout the life of the asset, from design through construction to operation and maintenance. It is focused on long-term value and the factors that influence maintenance and hence costs.

The road maintenance community in Scotland operates in an environment that is highly regulated by standards on safety, performance and design specifications, working codes of practice, as well as public procurement rules, contractual agreements and warranties. This highly regulated environment is essentially driven by the need to minimise risks to all road users, and to clearly assign commercial risks between client and delivery organisations.

The headline topics considered by the Working Group were Standards and Asset Management, which included Condition Assessments, Prioritisation, Benchmarking and Communication.

In the current economic climate, maintaining the backlog at even its current level presents a huge challenge. Effective prioritisation of available funding, to deliver value for money, whilst ensuring public safety and satisfaction will be essential to ensure the best return is achieved for the available budgets. Asset management has been considered in this review to see how it can improve efficiency and help arrest the increasing maintenance backlog. A UK Treasury letter to CIPFA[27] noted, "the (UK) government is convinced that there are significant benefits to be gained from adopting an asset management approach to local highways".

Within this overarching context the Working Group explored:

  • The baseline - what is the current situation across Scotland?
  • Best practice - what is emerging in Scotland and internationally?
  • Innovations - what new ideas are being developed in Scotland and internationally?

A.2 Standards

Headline Summary

  • Current practice is driven by adherence to standards and maintenance Codes of Practice to minimise risk.
  • Some long-standing standards and specifications may be slowing more widespread adoption of best practice and innovations.
  • SCOTS is developing a set of recommended minimum maintenance standards for local authorities.
  • Transport Scotland is trialling a 'departures database' to assist in cases where departures from standards are brought forward.
  • Industry organisations are developing Codes of Practice on new working methods.

Standards - Baseline

The standards and codes of practice which influence the Scottish road maintenance community include:
Standard/ Code of Practice Purpose Desired Outcome
Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 Sets out the powers and duties of roads authorities in Scotland for local and trunk roads. Clear legislative responsibility.
Scottish Road Works Register Coordination and planning is undertaken by road authorities and utility companies entering details of their planned works on the Scottish Road Works Register. Information extracted from the Register is used to provide Indicators which provide a body of evidence on the performance of roads authorities and utility companies.
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB)
DfT
15 Volumes		 Design standards for roads and bridges, including structural, road layers, lighting, environmental design specifications (amongst others). Safe, durable, reliable infrastructure.
Non-compliance requires a “departure from standards” under the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984.
Specification for Highways Works (SHW)
DfT		 Detailed specifications for materials and construction methods. Safe, durable, reliable infrastructure.
Manual of Contract Documents for Highways Works (MCHW)
DfT		 Standard forms of contract and payment. Well managed contracts.
Well Maintained Highways
UK Roads Board/ UK Roads Liaison Group		 Code of Practice guidance document for maintenance activity. Ideal maintenance recommendations.
Well Lit Highways
UK Lighting Board/ UK Roads Liaison Group		 Code of Practice guidance document for lighting management and maintenance activity. Reliable maintenance recommendations.
Traffic Signs Manual
DfT		 Safe working environment at road works. Provides guidance on the safety of road users and road workers.

Some of these 'standards' are statutory requirements and others have developed over time either as good practice policy or as guides and Codes of Practice.

Codes of Practice are not necessarily statutory but are sets of recommendations drawn up to give practitioners guidance. However these have come to be regarded by the courts as 'minimum standards' and have been used to justify claims against roads authorities, resulting in settlements being made out of court. Since 2005 over £4.8 million has been paid in "out of court" settlements for claims related to carriageway defects alone.[28]. However, it should be borne in mind that this sum represents around 0.2% of the total annual road maintenance budget when averaged across the five-year period.

Suggested recommendations in UK Codes of Practice are explicitly not mandatory[29] on authorities, however where there are sound reasons for authorities departing from the Code's guidance, it is recommended that the deliberation process is formally recorded[30]. By doing this, claims can be repudiated.

Compliance with standards, and the minimisation of risk, is a key driver in delivering efficiently managed and maintained roads. Some experienced practitioners contributing to this review are questioning the continued compliance with any 'standards' that do not deliver intended outcomes cost-effectively.

For example, in areas such as street lighting and traffic signs, these policy standards have fallen behind technological advances: reflective materials used for road signs are now more effective than when standards requiring signs to be externally lit were introduced. Such circumstances may create operational difficulties for roads authorities, especially if the standards are treated as 'legally binding' in contentious situations. This can lead to an adherence to standards, based on risk aversion, at the expense of exploiting technological advances, leading to overprovision and unnecessary costs.

To deal with situations where standards cannot be met, there are processes that enable 'departures' from standards. These departures tend to be developed and considered on a case-by-case basis, can be time-consuming and potentially stifle innovation.

In planning road maintenance, there are significant opportunities within existing standards to influence the selection of materials, working methods and plant required to minimise overall costs. The Scottish road maintenance community recognise this, and regularly hold workshops, with designers and contractors to determine the best solutions. Transport Scotland's threshold for such workshops is £250k in value, aimed at ensuring scheme design and specification options are reviewed to deliver the desired outcomes.

The use of the Scottish Road Works Register (SRWR) is now standard practice for coordinating planned roads maintenance. The SRWR requires that all roadworks, whether by utilities, such as water or gas mains, or road maintenance, such as repairing potholes, are centrally logged and coordinated to assist in effective management of the road network. Information from the Register is used to provide indicators and a body of evidence on the performance of roads authorities and utility companies and to support monitoring in relation to the standard of road reinstatements carried out by utility companies.

The SRWR has been specifically designed to allow the public easy access to information about ongoing road works anywhere in Scotland. Its website gives information on how long specific works are expected to last, which organisation is carrying out the works and contact details for that organisation.

Current work being undertaken by the Office of the Scottish Road Works Commissioner is considering issues relating to charges for unreasonably prolonged works, contributions to costs of making good long term damage caused by trench reinstatement and mechanisms to raise the quality of reinstatements. It has been suggested that one option would be to introduce reinstatements as a quality target by utilities companies.

Standards - Best Practice

Best practice in this area is where standards support efficiently delivered outcomes, whilst enabling flexibility in how work is carried out. Performance-based specification, eg. specifying that a road must maintain a minimum level of grip to prevent skidding, but not being prescriptive on how this is achieved would be an example of such an approach. In New Zealand this approach is adopted in long-term maintenance contracts.

A local example of the benefits from updating standards (eg. contracts) was Transport Scotland's change from its second to third generation Operating Company contracts. This change required the same or improved levels of service but delivered savings of £63 million over five years, compared with previous contract arrangements[31].

Standards should be revised regularly to ensure they are up to date and reflect current practice, otherwise best practice and innovation can be stifled hindering potential savings. SCOTS has commenced a review of this area, with a view to defining an appropriate, reasonable and deliverable set of standards that provide a minimum level of safety and affordability. The revised standards should be reviewed by Transport Scotland to work towards a common set of maintenance standards where possible.

Transport Scotland has recently developed a "departures from standards" database to improve data management in this complex area. This is to help identify similar, previously approved departures, potentially streamlining the process, saving time and costs. The database is under trial at present, and if proven successful, consideration should be given to extending its use throughout the roads network across Scotland.

Industry bodies continue to bring forward working Codes of Practice and guidance, for example, the Road Surface Treatments Association (RSTA) Codes on the use of new materials and treatment techniques. These provide best practice guidance on application and handling, aiming to share knowledge and deliver a better finished product.

Standards - Innovation

Innovation could be defined here as questioning the 'standard' to see if the outcome can be delivered more efficiently or cost effectively.

Revisions to standards can be seen as a time consuming process, involving many stakeholders, resulting in inertia. Changing adopted standards may also require changes in the perception and allocation of risk, and such changes may require wider political discussion. Innovation may be being impeded by the sheer number of different standards and avoiding deviation from the recommendations of a relevant Code of Practice (ie. being risk averse).

Industry feedback reflects a desire to speed up changes in standards to accommodate innovations. This is linked to a need to reduce the time taken for innovations to come to market through the trials and approvals processes (discussed further in Appendix B).

Within the Scottish roads maintenance community, some long-standing standards are under review to see if they can be changed to deliver a similar outcome in a more cost-effective manner. Examples include:

  • lighting - there is currently a requirement for some signs to be lit. Modern retro-reflective sign materials are brighter than traditional materials when illuminated by vehicle headlights. This means external sign lighting may no longer be required, providing energy and maintenance cost savings (potentially amounting to £millions over time). The SCOTS Lighting Working Group, as well as Transport Scotland and its Operating Companies are trialling options and have highlighted possible issues around devolved powers on lighting standards;
  • safety barriers - Transport Scotland has introduced a case-by-case, risk-based approach to safety barrier requirements, over a blanket standards-driven method.

In the event that a more detailed review of current standards is undertaken, it would be worthwhile including consideration of a range of international road maintenance standards, for example on traffic management comparisons. This may highlight areas of current over-specification in Scotland that could be addressed, potentially reducing costs and liability.

There is some support within the roads maintenance community in developing greater understanding between the legal profession, the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and roads authorities. It is thought that this would enable knowledge transfer and better understanding and appreciation of both the technical and legal requirements for road maintenance and, potentially, lead to developing guidance on meeting health and safety regulations in a more cost effective manner.

A.3 Asset Management

Headline Summary

  • Road Asset Management Plan (RAMP) implementation represents current best practice in 'whole life' asset management and prioritisation.
  • 30 out of 32 local authorities have introduced RAMPs via the SCOTS programme.
  • Funding to continue the SCOTS RAMP programme over a longer term has not yet been secured. Current consultancy support costs around £100k per annum.
  • Transport Scotland has a well developed RAMP and an ongoing Asset Management Improvement Programme (AMIP). Transport Scotland's total annual RAMP costs are around 1% if its maintenance budget and has delivered savings of over three times that value (c£3.4 million) in Year 1.
  • Transport Scotland AMIP is reviewing maintenance thresholds to identify the optimal intervention period to minimise whole life costs, possibly by allowing further deterioration before a road is repaired in some cases. A 'Benefits Realisation Plan' is also in development to clearly identify the benefits of its asset management programme. It may be useful for all road authorities develop similar plans.
  • Internationally, New Zealand has a well established asset management regime that sets long term budgets and maintenance standards to keep its road system at a pre-determined standard (steady state).

There are published international standards and codes of practice for asset management, including BSI's PAS 55 - The optimal management of physical assets. Asset management is a method of assessing the ongoing costs at all stages of an asset's life; in this case the asset includes the road and all associated or ancillary items such as road signs, bridges and street lighting. Asset management requires a whole-life approach, from design through construction to operation and maintenance. It is focused on long-term value and the factors that influence maintenance and hence costs. Successful asset management planning also requires adequate assured, or at least predictable funding, and sufficiently flexible systems to deal with uncertainties, to move from a largely reactive to a planned approach.

Asset management has, for example, been successfully implemented in the UK water industry to plan and deliver cycles of maintenance and capital investment[32]. A report published in 2008 by CIPFA[33] on local authority infrastructure assets suggests:

"Early findings from local government, combined with the greater experience in the water and rail industries, indicate that improved long term value for money from proper Asset Management Planning could be equivalent to at least 5% p.a. Improvements would come from more soundly based investment appraisals and consequent reductions in the long term whole life costs of the assets in question. It is important to avoid assuming these are 'cashable savings' that could ultimately be redirected to other service priorities."

Asset management planning is widely recognised as the benchmark for the optimal management of assets by aiming to rationalise and clearly prioritise maintenance. This enables clear spending decisions to be made, based on an agreed system and plan. Long term development of RAMPs should therefore help identify future opportunities for innovation through "whole-life" value-for-money considerations.

Critical aspects that inform, or are informed by, RAMPs include:

  • condition assessment;
  • prioritisation;
  • benchmarking; and
  • communication.

These aspects are each discussed further below.

Asset Management - Baseline

Transport Scotland published its RAMP in 2007, outlining its overall aims, objectives and targets for the trunk road network. It includes descriptions of the trunk road assets, the associated levels of service, as well as descriptions of the risk management, decision support, financial and life cycle planning mechanisms. Transport Scotland uses a detailed GIS asset inventory which includes integrated management modules for road layers, structures, routine maintenance and lighting management systems (collectively known as the SERIS system). These modules enable predictive modelling of asset condition, treatment options and asset valuation.

The RAMP is supported by the AMIP which involves periodic review and gap analysis to drive continual improvement. Transport Scotland invested around £1m over a three year period on its AMIP, designed to close the gap between current practice at the time and best practice. In addition, Transport Scotland spends around £1m per year on surveys, systems and asset management staff and support services, including consultancy fees. Other one-off costs have been incurred, including £4 million spent in 2004 to 2006 collecting and updating the GIS-based trunk road inventory of assets.

The costs of implementing and supporting the organisation's asset management approach are approximately 1.0% of Transport Scotland's maintenance budget. Transport Scotland has recently been able to quantify Year 1 savings, associated with its RAMP, of £3.4 million (2009/10).

SCOTS and its constituent local authorities have been working towards the implementation of RAMPs. These have been based on a common template developed by SCOTS. The 2011 Audit Scotland report highlighted significant variation in terms of maturity and deployment. However, SCOTS anticipate that by the end of the current implementation phase, in April 2012, all local authorities bar two will have RAMPs in place.

SCOTS approach to asset management has been funded by contributions from each local authority. The overall cost and expected savings from joint implementation of the SCOTS RAMP project were estimated at:

  • SCOTS RAMP project costs - £26.78 million (2005 estimate);
  • individual authority approach estimated total cost - £47.97 million (2005 estimate);
  • anticipated savings via SCOTS joint project - £20.87 million (2005 estimate) [34]

Total consultancy cost has been £400k over four years (averaging £100k per annum). The annual Scottish Road Maintenance Condition Survey (SRMCS) costs around £700k per annum. Local authority staff costs have been found from existing resources, and overall the project is a good example of sharing services, knowledge and learning from best practice.

SCOTS has taken forward this value-driven approach, aiming to integrate asset management into normal maintenance activities, rather than setting up dedicated teams. Some local authorities have appointed dedicated asset management champions, to focus knowledge and promote cultural change, which has proven beneficial. SCOTS see potential opportunities in sharing expertise in terms of optimising and using systems. These would, however, have to link with wider local authority corporate systems.

To fully realise the benefits of local authority RAMPs, they need to be fully implemented and supported over the long-term as live plans. There is currently only one more year of funding identified for the RAMP project and future funding is required to consolidate and develop practitioners' skills and experience. This will assist in delivering the desired outcomes.

A range of asset inventory systems and modelling software is used across roads authorities, and there may be scope to consolidate these to provide a common approach, which could deliver better value through joint procurement. The current SERIS IT support contract is being re-tendered[35], and being procured jointly with the Welsh Government. This joint tendering should deliver cost savings through economies of scale. A similar approach could be adopted by the local authorities, where the contract could be written to allow purchase of services as current support contracts expire.

In the United States, a National Cooperative Highway Research Program report recommended the use of asset management plans across the country[36]. The report considered an asset management framework would "most effectively identify and combat the effects of deteriorating infrastructure, minimize costly system disruptions, and ensure that our national highway system continues to serve as an engine for helping drive our economy forward".

Road maintenance issues and the aspiration for asset management plans have developed a higher profile in the US in recent years following the high profile collapse of the I-35W Interstate bridge in Minnesota, which caused substantial loss of life and injury. The net economic impact on the state was estimated at $60 million (~£40million) over 2007-08, and replacement bridge cost $234 million[37] (~£156 million).

It is also understood the Highways Agency in England is currently developing a RAMP for implementation. Scotland therefore appears to be at a more advanced stage in implementing whole life asset management planning than the United States[38] and compares well with European countries (see below).

Asset Management - Best Practice

Internationally, the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has a robust asset management process in place to ensure the state highway network is maintained to an agreed, prioritised long term programme. This helps maintain the network to a predetermined standard, delivering long-term value, rather than short term fixes. The State Highway Asset Management Plan (SHAMP)[39] is therefore a key strategic management document for NZTA.

The SHAMP focuses on national 'operational business' regarding state highways. It addresses customer needs and expectations, levels of service, economic growth, changes in traffic and land use, risk and changes in the environment that the NZTA operates within. It also addresses the needs of a growing asset base. The SHAMP sits at the heart of NZTA's, strategic, tactical and operational policies/plans and programmes. These all join together to set out how NZTA envisages its road network will develop over the next 30 years.

New Zealand's SHAMP ensures the forecasting of long-term funding needs that enable the national government to plan for adequate funding provision and demonstrate good stewardship. NZTA employ a robust 10-year forward work programme that identifies its asset management requirements. Long term maintenance contracts are let on the basis of clearly set forward budgets and contractors are required to maintain asset conditions above certain pre-determined levels.

The New Zealand Auditor-General reviewed NZTA in 2010 and reported "NZTA had good descriptive and condition information about the state highway roads, and it had a planning framework that enabled it to use this information for day-to-day maintenance and renewal of the road network. However, not all of its information was complete, especially for structures such as bridges and tunnels[40]."

The World Roads Association (WRA/PIARC) Technical Committee D1.1 Benchmarking of Asset Management Methods, is developing and reviewing international case studies to support benchmarking and identify good practice. The output is due to be published and presented at the WRA World Congress in September 2011.

Interim findings[41] include a review of Transport Scotland's RAMP by Rijkswaterstaat, the Dutch national roads authority. This recognises the following areas of good practice that are already underway in Transport Scotland:

  • a well defined set of core principles to be adhered to when developing lifecycle plans contained in the RAMP;
  • realisation of the need to improve linkages between corporate/ business objectives and asset management objectives to improve cross-asset prioritisation;
  • an annual business plan is drawn up specifying the actions to be taken in the next financial year, taking account of relevant constraints and stakeholder expectations;
  • recognition that Lifecycle Planning (LCP) is fundamental to understanding the long-term behaviour and needs of the assets on its network;
  • a clear distinction is made between different roles and responsibilities: the asset manager, the network operator and the network maintainer; and
  • The Asset Management Improvement Programme and associated gap analyses carried out in 2005, 2007 and 2009 has resulted in the production of a comprehensive manual detailing Transport Scotland's data collection requirements.

In addition, the Rijkswaterstaat review identified a number of areas for improvement, including quantifying the benefits of asset management, a high number of performance measures (63) and a lack of cross-asset prioritisation.

CIPFA have identified the costs and benefits achieved by Newcastle upon Tyne City Council in implementing a RAMP[42]. Initial start up costs were reported at £500k and ongoing running costs are estimated at £15k per annum[43]. Early benefits achieved include:

  • a substantial reduction in the number and cost of insurance claims (down from 838 in 2003 to 299 in 2006). As a result Newcastle's annual insurance premium reduced from £1.8m in 2004 to £1.2m in 2006;
  • a reduction in reactive maintenance (from 16,000 defects in 2003/4 to 13,000 in 2006/7 releasing £200k for use elsewhere;
  • an increase in the number of planned resurfacing schemes, slowing network deterioration, with the aim of reducing costs in the medium term as less full reconstruction is required; and
  • changes to procurement practices as a result of better network data delivering better value for money.

As well as completing the development and collection of inventory, which will include data capture from CAD drawings, Newcastle intends to review the development and outcomes from their asset management plan and will produce an annual progress report.

The result of more effective asset planning, condition surveys and data management is a greater and more visible understanding of the state of the network. It also supports the need for more effective prioritisation, given scarce resources and potentially declining budgets.

Best practice asset management will enable a proactive approach to planned preventative maintenance, to help arrest further deterioration, balanced against spending to deal with existing critical problems (ie. highest priority backlog elements). Transport Scotland's RAMP and the SCOTS asset management project can therefore also be seen as developing best practice, aligned to the needs of their diverse networks.

Asset Management - Innovation

A possible barrier to innovation is not treating the RAMP as a 'living' document that evolves in response to budget and operational pressures. RAMPs need to be fully integrated into all aspects of road maintenance. Long term deployment of RAMPs is anticipated to support future opportunities for innovation through 'whole life' value-for-money considerations.

Transport Scotland's review of maintenance intervention thresholds (ie. the extent to which a road can deteriorate before maintenance is required) as part of its AMIP and its new parameters for identification of proposed maintenance schemes offer opportunities to reduce costs. SCOTS' review of maintenance standards to produce a set of recommended minimum standards, discussed previously, could offer similar benefits.

Identification of the actual quantitative and qualitative benefits resulting from RAMPs is critical to their continued value. Transport Scotland is developing a 'Benefits Realisation Plan' to clearly identify the cost benefits/ savings resulting from its RAMP. It would be useful for Transport Scotland to share this knowledge with SCOTS, to ensure that any lessons learned are suitably transferred to works carried out by local authorities.

A.4 Condition Assessment

Headline Summary

  • Annual condition assessment surveys are undertaken across the Scottish road network, to common standards, and this is recognised as leading practice in the UK.
  • Surveys do not capture the full network in each period meaning a range of methods, including visual inspections, support the information from condition surveys. All Scottish roads authorities currently use the same supplier for data analysis.
  • The 'maintenance backlog' is established by aggregating the cost of all the work to address defects identified by condition assessments.
  • The SCOTS RAMP project produced a Footway Assessment Guidance document describing how to assess and score footway condition against a set rating.
  • SCOTS are developing a 'Finance Modelling Tool' to assist with compliance in financial reporting and the prediction of asset condition under a range of future funding scenarios.
  • Transport Scotland has developed condition assessment deterioration models for ancillary assets to enable budgets to be more effectively targeted.
  • Transport Scotland's Pavement[44] Forum employs annual visual inspections across a range of sites and a cross-section of the range of materials used on the network.

Condition assessments are integral supporting elements of road authorities' RAMPs. Regular programmes of inspections and surveys enable roads authorities to determine the state of their road network and to understand what maintenance is required in which locations.

Surveys are carried out using sophisticated equipment to record various aspects of road condition, including how much grip the surface has and if the road is rutted (a sunken track/ groove made by the passage of vehicles). There are also specific requirements on condition assessments for bridges and other assets (such as footways, street lights or safety barriers). Such assessments also enable deterioration forecasting to establish when assets are likely to wear out, and therefore to programme in the optimum maintenance intervention.

The 'maintenance backlog', referred to in the recent Audit Scotland report is established by aggregating the total cost of work required to correct defects identified by condition assessments. However, as noted by Audit Scotland, the local authority backlog figure is to address all road defects to a zero level (ie. it excludes other assets such as bridges and lighting), whereas Transport Scotland's backlog figure includes all assets, but not to a zero defects level. Transport Scotland's calculation reports the backlog to a target condition which is a comparable level to other UK trunk road agencies.[45]

Condition Assessment - Baseline

Scottish local authorities jointly procure the Scottish Road Maintenance Condition Survey (SRMCS) to establish the network condition on an annual basis (approx. cost £700k per annum):

A class roads - 100% covered in one direction each year (full coverage every 2 years)

B class roads - 50% covered in one direction each year (full coverage every 4 years)

C class roads - 50% covered in one direction each year (full coverage every 4 years)

U class roads - 10% sample is covered each year and the contract prohibits repetition of any route within the contract period.

SRMCS outputs are considered in conjunction with local visual inspections to capture roads that the survey has not covered, to confirm the condition of the running surface and to provide analysis of the underlying structural condition. This has been recognised as best practice in recent DfT reports[46] and is a vast improvement on previous methods, which solely used visual surveys, risking of a lack of consistency. The SRMCS enables local authorities to base high level maintenance decisions on consistent trend data, however industry feedback suggests there is potential for SRMCS to be developed further to produce more detailed scheme selection parameters.

Local authorities use a range of methods to enable public feedback on road conditions, which is used to support the SRMCS condition surveys. These include online registers, telephone hotlines, bus and taxi driver surveys, amongst others. This public feedback is also followed up with visual inspection.

Outputs from SRMCS are used to compile the Audit Scotland national 'Road Condition Indicator' (RCI) every two years. SRMCS also provides the information required to enable completion of Whole Government Accounts returns, including Gross Replacement Cost (GRC) and Depreciated Replacement Cost (DRC).

Transport Scotland's annual trunk road survey programme covers one quarter of the network each year and uses a range of survey mechanisms to monitor surface condition, skid resistance and structural integrity, with survey data fed back to the SERIS system.

The roads authorities also have regular programmes of inspections for bridges and lighting structures. The results are fed back to the relevant asset management teams, and condition data is used to prioritise maintenance within available budgets.

Condition Assessment - Best Practice

The ideal situation would be a complete survey of the entire road network each year. This would be much more expensive than current surveys, and may not deliver best value. The best practice option is then to survey a suitable, representative sample of roads as frequently as budgets permit. The SRMCS and Transport Scotland's surveys are delivering a representative sample each year, in line with best practice.

Twelve local authorities and Transport Scotland use the same Pavement Management System (PMS) supplier. These systems are fully UK PMS compliant (a UK national standard), other local authorities employ systems from a range of suppliers and it is not currently clear if these are all UK PMS compliant systems. There is therefore some potential for rationalisation between systems, as this could help to develop a pool of common expertise to use the systems to their full potential, delivering better outcomes as well as economies of scale, for example on a Scotland-wide system.

Condition Assessment - Innovation

PMS systems generally only cover roads and assist with decision making on capital maintenance spend. Therefore Transport Scotland has developed 'condition assessment and deterioration models for ancillary assets', such as safety barriers. These enable consideration of the rates at which these assets deteriorate to enable more effective targeting of budgets for planned routine maintenance.

Transport Scotland's Pavement Forum commissions annual surfacing inspections by a group of surfacing experts who represent Transport Scotland, Performance Audit Group (PAG), Quarry Products Association (QPA) Scotland and TRL. Known as the Scottish Inspection Panel (SIP), it is responsible for assessing the visual condition of a selection of surfacing sites chosen each year to represent the range of materials used on the Trunk Road Network. The 2010 SIP survey assessed 77% of two-year-old surfacing sites as performing well (two years represents the standard guarantee/ warranty period). A comparison with the SIP 2008 and 2009 surveys showed a similar trend in performance. These results highlight that there is scope to improve the quality of surfacing laid on the network. The report makes several recommendations to improve the durability of surface courses, including promoting a new national surfacing course specification (TS2010).

The SCOTS RAMP project has produced a 'Footway Assessment Guidance' document, published in 2010, which describes how to assess and score footway condition against common ratings[47]. The guidance document aims to standardise the process of footway condition assessment within the overall RAMP framework; thereby enabling improved asset inventory data and prioritisation of footway works within available budgets.

SCOTS RAMP guidance on asset financial management and reporting complies with the principles of the CIPFA Transport Infrastructure Asset Code and is more developed in some areas[48]. Some elements of the CIPFA code, notably the treatment of depreciation, are not clearly defined. Local authorities therefore continue to use the RAMP project guidance whilst SCOTS have applied for funding to continue to develop:

  • clear guidance for other asset groups;
  • clear guidance on depreciation;
  • regional rates for Scotland; and
  • calculation, reporting and presentation tools.

SCOTS are also developing a 'Finance Modelling Tool' which is expected to assist local authority compliance in annual financial reporting under the CIPFA Code, and to enable the prediction of asset condition under future funding scenarios.

A.5 Prioritisation

Headline Summary

  • The Carriageway Scheme Ranking System developed under the SCOTS RAMP programme offers a consistent and transparent prioritisation methodology across all local authorities.
  • Transport Scotland should monitor the outcomes of its value management processes for road maintenance schemes.

Prioritisation is the method, using various assessment tools, of clearly establishing what maintenance can be done, and in what order, within available budgets. Prioritisation needs to provide transparency and an approach to road maintenance that is clear and logical. When roads authorities implement RAMPs, these must contain clear guidance on the methods and reasons for prioritisation linked to the long-term aims and aspirations of the RAMP.

There can be conflicting demands influencing prioritisation. Obvious defects such as cracking or potholes may actually be less critical than more fundamental damage underneath the road surface. A 'stitch in time' approach to treating roads that are not completely worn out may provide long term savings, but require higher initial maintenance investment. There is also a balance to be achieved between the needs of busy main roads and less busy suburban or rural routes. Such conflicting priorities may not be apparent to the wider community.

All roads authorities have a budget stream identified for routine and cyclic maintenance and the repair of urgent 'Category 1' defects (eg. potholes). Following recent extreme winter conditions, additional funds were made available by the Scottish Government (approximately £5 million in 2009/10 and £15 million in 2010/11). Even with this additional support, winter service needs still impinged upon money allocated to routine and cyclic maintenance. The severe winter also prevented some programmed works from going ahead.

Prioritisation - Baseline

Transport Scotland uses the outputs from network condition assessment surveys to work with the Operating Companies to develop one and three-year planned maintenance programmes. Prioritisation is highly influenced by modelling the residual life of the various road layers. The Operating Companies produce draft costed programmes and Transport Scotland reviews and approves works within the available budget, via value management processes and a defined governance framework.

Generally, local authorities rank maintenance needs based on SRMCS outputs and local visual assessments. Required works are weighted against locally defined criteria and recommendations are then made to elected members.

Implementation of asset management planning allows more informed decisions to be made with a clearer understanding of the financial needs of the asset. The SCOTS RAMP programme now recommends that all authorities employ a carriageway and footway scheme prioritisation methodology, that area specific route hierarchies should be established on a consistent basis and the project has introduced standard frameworks for use in carriageway and footway prioritisation analyses. An example of the Carriageway Scheme Ranking System is provided below.

An example of the Carriageway Scheme Ranking System
Assessment Factor Key Questions/ Issues Ratings Guide
1 Condition/ Engineers Assessment Is the pavement going to deteriorate significantly in the next year? Rated 1 (good) to 5 (very poor).
2 Safety Inspections Does this site have a history of safety defects which can be linked to poor condition?  Rated 1 (no faults in previous year) to 5 (more than 10 faults reported). 
3 Hierarchy More important roads get a higher priority. Rated 1 to 4
based on importance of route.
4 Accessibility / Land Use Services utilised by a high proportion of the public get a higher priority than a residential street. Rated 1 (Rural / urban cul-de-sac) to 5 (access to schools, health, employment, main shopping areas).
5 Customer Complaint Levels Customers generally only complain when there is a real problem.
If more than ten complaints are received on a section of road it is deemed high priority.		 Rated 1 (low) to 5 (numerous complaints from public, elected members, community councils.
6 Cost The financial outcome always needs to be assessed.
Cost / Benefit provides the assessor with the Best Value schemes.		 Rated 1 (low) to 5 (high, over £100k).

This offers a consistent and transparent prioritisation methodology which local authorities can review against their existing methodology, and which can be adapted to meet local priorities/ requirements.

It is recognised by all roads authorities that prioritisation between asset groups (eg. traffic signals, lights and columns, bridges and structures, etc.) is less well understood. Local authorities in Scotland have in place established route hierarchies. Transport Scotland has developed a route hierarchy, which has yet to be implemented. All roads authorities also consider compliance with newly introduced regulatory requirements, for example the Disability Discrimination Act. This ensures that all users of the road infrastructure are considered, not just motorists. Transport Scotland's assessed cost of DDA compliance, for example, is reported to be in the region of at least £40 million to 2025.

Prioritisation - Best Practice

Road infrastructure assets are built with a range of design-life expectancies: bridges up to 120 years, roads up to 40 years, with shorter ranges for lighting and other electrical equipment; however, effective maintenance is required to achieve these design life expectancies. Best practice in prioritisation takes account of the long life spans and aims to maximise the planning period for maintenance activity and budget allocation. Such an approach has a greater potential for delivering best value for money. It is important to note however, that annual affordability constraints, ie. cash available, may mean that lower value for money options need to be adopted.

New Zealand employs a framework of 10-year funding forecasts[49], maintained and updated each year, that underpin their three-year planned maintenance programmes. Whilst operating different standards to Scotland, treatments selected for maintenance are those offering the best value for money over the asset life.

The SCOTS Carriageway Scheme Ranking System offers a better solution than the traditional 'worst first' approach and is being adopted by an increasing number of local authorities. Experience in Glasgow City Council suggests this transparent approach brings benefits in communication in managing stakeholders' expectations.

The approach has been adopted by Dumfries & Galloway Council and is accepted by councillors and engineers as providing an improved return on investment and increased lifespan of the roads. They undertook a long-term financial modelling study and looked at 12 different scenarios. This indicated that using an 80:20 'Amber:Red' (condition) budget split resulted in a forecast Road Condition Index improvement. The study identified that treating 'Amber' was less expensive, meaning more work can be done.

This proactive approach is in alignment with key recommendations from the recent Christie Commission[50] which recommend preventative spend.

Prioritisation - Innovation

Moving from straightforward considerations of 'worst-first' to whole life value assessments, which deliver the most cost effective approach, would be classed as innovation.

Transport Scotland, through its AMIP, has conducted a review of maintenance thresholds, with the aim of identifying the optimum time for repairs. This will feed into prioritisation mechanisms for trunk roads. The rationale is that short term savings can be made by focusing on safety and delaying less critical maintenance work. However, this is only a mechanism to remain within significantly reduced funding levels and potentially stores up problems for the future.

Future innovation in this area requires appropriate, transparent incentives. An example of this includes the new 4G between Transport Scotland and its operating companies. The operating companies are able to propose changes to the contracts that are affordable, deliver efficiency savings and value for money, whilst also providing an appropriate commercial return to them.

A.6 Benchmarking

Headline Summary

  • KPIs are widely used by all roads authorities to monitor and benchmark performance.
  • Benchmarking needs to be transparent, independently monitored/ audited and linked to incentives for out-performance, or penalties for under-performance to ensure improvements are delivered.
  • The introduction of unit-cost benchmarking in local authorities will help drive knowledge-sharing on efficiencies.
  • The recent international 'Roads to Excellence[51]' benchmarking project recognised Transport Scotland's approach with an award for best practice in "Efficiency of Rendered Services".
  • There is potential to regularly benchmark Scottish road maintenance against UK and international performance.

Benchmarking is the comparison of one process or item with its peers, to determine its level of performance. For example, this can be comparing road maintenance performance or costs between authorities within Scotland, or on a national/ international basis. Benchmarking and performance management are integral parts of a RAMP.

Benchmarking enables the Scottish road maintenance community to determine some facts about how its performance compares internally and with others. It enables good practice to be identified and confirmed, as well as identifying areas for improvement.

Key performance indicators (KPIs) frequently form part of benchmarking as they provide a common method of assessing performance across different organisations, as well as enabling the identification of trends.

Benchmarking - Baseline

Some local authorities contribute to the Association for Public Service Excellence (APSE) Performance Network, which tracks performance against a wide range of key and secondary performance indicators. There are a number of indicators which specifically relate to 'Highways and Winter Maintenance'. There are seven key and 15 secondary indicators on road maintenance, with 10 key and seven secondary indicators for winter maintenance. Only one of the 25 indicators is output or outcome focused. The outputs from APSE benchmarking appear to be for internal use, making it difficult to monitor performance publicly, either over time, or between local authorities.

Transport Scotland uses Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to monitor the performance of its Operating Companies. The KPIs include repair response times and the effectiveness of the Operating Companies' systems in managing their own performance. KPI data is collated and reported by the Operating Companies, and audited by the Performance Audit Group (PAG). These demonstrate performance trends across the four Operating Companies.

PAG publishes an annual report that includes the Operating Company KPI performance. This independent scrutiny encourages the Operating Companies to focus their delivery on Transport Scotland's needs and encourages healthy competition and KPI performance is taken into account when considering extensions to contracts.

Recent policy and legislative drivers on climate change, sustainability, carbon and waste, are recognised in the new, 4th generation Operating Company contracts. These include a wider range of KPIs designed to track performance and improvement in these areas. Transport Scotland's Performance Management Framework, outlined in the RAMP, is used to monitor overall performance and is linked to strategic business objectives.

Benchmarking - Best Practice

Best practice in benchmarking involves ensuring that the data being collected to measure performance (ie. the KPIs) is actually the most relevant and useful in driving performance improvement. Benchmarking needs to be transparent, independently monitored/ audited and linked to incentives for out-performance, or penalties for under-performance to ensure improvements are delivered[52].

Transport Scotland uses the Performance Audit Group, as an independent body to monitor and review the Operating Companies' performance against pre-defined KPIs. The recent 'Roads to Excellence[53]' benchmarking project sponsored by the Swedish transport agency compared performance across eight international roads agencies. It presented Transport Scotland with an international award for best practice in 'Efficiency of Rendered Services'. This award recognises Transport Scotland's success in achieving its desired outcomes through its maintenance contracts and the quality of its outsourced services. The savings generated by the Performance Audit Group Contract have significantly exceeded the costs of the service which are typically around 2% of overall maintenance spend on trunk roads. Transport Scotland has been asked to lead on a continuation of the Roads to Excellence programme and this should be given consideration.

Benchmarking - Innovation

Data quality is improving as asset management plans are developed and implemented. This is likely to have a positive impact on enabling more effective benchmarking. Innovation would see the improvement of performance without increasing the burden or cost of necessary data collection, monitoring and analysis. It would also include improving linkages between output targets and financial inputs, such as unit cost comparators.

SCOTS is continuing to work with APSE to develop additional performance indicators (indicators on street lighting services have recently been developed) and to develop a relevant and effective suite of unit cost comparators aimed at the identification of more efficient working practices effective unit cost benchmarks.

Impediments to innovation can result from poor quality or incompatible data. This needs to be considered to ensure any benchmarking is valid.

A.7 Communication - Industry and Public

Headline Summary

  • Communication, particularly understanding user needs, is a key element of a RAMP.
  • There is a fundamental need to improve public, media and political awareness of the importance of road maintenance in securing a reliable network, vital for sustainable economic growth.
  • There is a perception that current means of public communication leave the impression that the industry only repairs faults, rather than being engaged in proactive and considered maintenance of a valuable national asset.
  • Information at the site of roadworks is generally sparse. Other than the expected duration, there is generally no explanation for the reason for the roadworks.
  • Information flows reasonably well between those who operate within the sector, including the roads authorities, lobby groups, industry organisations and academics. The perception is that more coordination would deliver better, more effective outcomes.
  • New technologies are helping to improve public communications.

Transport infrastructure is critical in enabling and securing sustainable economic growth. However, the acceptance of the continuing deterioration of the asset suggests that maintenance of the road network is not necessarily perceived to be of critical importance to all asset users and owners.

Funding for new build assets appears to be more readily available (either due to political support and/ or different funding sources) making it a more exciting and challenging area for new entrants and easier to 'sell' to the public.

The importance of transport infrastructure to the effective operation of the economy is highlighted in the Eddington[54] study for the Department for Transport. A number of micro-economic drivers that are influenced by effective transportation, include:

  • improved business efficiency, arising from time savings and journey time reliability for business travellers and freight;
  • increased business investment, supported by economies of scale; and
  • more efficient functioning of the labour market.

The study also highlights the importance of effective prioritisation when finances are scarce, and the value in maintaining and making better use of current network assets. Given the pivotal role the road network plays in assisting economic growth, timely and effective maintenance is essential.

Communicating the importance of effective maintenance is seen as crucial by the Scottish road maintenance community. As budgets tighten and severe weather conditions accelerate road deterioration, ensuring that road maintenance is perceived as having as much a right to funds as any other vital community need, is now essential.

Communication - Industry and Public - Baseline

There are two key information flows between roads authorities and the public, ie. one providing information from authorities to the public, and the other feedback from the public:

  • the former provides the travelling public with advance information on upcoming works and potential delays. This can leave the impression that the industry only repairs faults, rather than being engaged in proactive and considered maintenance of a valuable national asset;
  • the latter opens channels for feedback from the public through, for example, user perceptions surveys, online or phone based fault reporting.

Traffic Scotland's website is specifically targeted at travel information and real-time bulletins, providing information on local, trunk and non-trunk roads. The Office of the Scottish Road Works Commissioner provides online access to the Scottish Road Works Register. It gives information on all road works across Scotland, including local and trunk roads. Some local authority websites carry links to Traffic Scotland or provide information on works within their area.

Transport/ Traffic Scotland and a number of local authorities use a network of digital variable message signs across Scotland to advise road users of delays and roadworks. These provide real-time information for drivers, enabling them to make choices based on the information provided. There are also strong links with radio and TV stations to provide regular, accurate traffic information.

Roads authorities use customer perception surveys to gauge feedback on road conditions and performance. The results of these surveys are generally not made public. The recent Audit Scotland report suggests the public believe standards are falling. The significant drop in maintenance budgets and purchasing power, as well as the effects of two severe winters, have inevitably been mirrored with increasing levels of public dissatisfaction.

There is a fundamental need to improve public, media and political awareness of the importance of road maintenance in securing a reliable network, vital for sustainable economic growth. Information at the site of roadworks is generally limited to basic details on works start date and expected duration. Long-term strategies and programmes for road maintenance works are not proactively made available to the public. This means the rationale and scale of works are not easily understood.

Information flows reasonably well between those who operate within the sector, including the roads authorities, lobby groups, industry organisations and academics. The perception is that more coordination would deliver better, more effective outcomes. This is discussed in more detail in the Technology & Productivity Innovation appendix.

Communication - Industry and Public - Best Practice

Best practice in external communication would be a proactive flow of clear information to the public on roads maintenance issues, whether planning or strategy. In terms of internal communication, it would represent wide sharing of knowledge and efficient access to information.

In the United States, a good example of best practice in external communications is the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT). It has established a user friendly, informative website, the VDOT Dashboard[55]. This is a real-time website that graphically displays information on the department's projects (http://dashboard.virginiadot.org/). By publishing clear, transparent, real time information on road maintenance performance, VDOT demonstrates to stakeholders that it is delivering on its commitments.

A good example of internal communications within the Scottish roads maintenance community is the SCOTS website which provides access to all SCOTS working group material and projects for all 32 authorities.

Communication - Industry and Public Innovation

Innovation in communications would be likely to involve greater use of new mobile and real time technology. This could be for reporting defects, or for communicating directly with stakeholders. There has been recent work considering phone applications ("Apps") to provide members of the public with access to up to date information direct to their own mobile phones. Examples include the 'ScotTraffic' app which gives users access to a host of live traffic and travel information at the touch of a button.

SCOTS is considering the potential benefits of 'plain English survey methods' to help the public understand the questions being asked and improve feedback returns.