Printable version of the memo and attachment (.pdf, 57 kb)

Final Value Engineering (VE) Program Performance Measures

Attachment

Goal 1: Maximize the influence VE studies have on a project's cost and performance.

Outcome:

By increasing the number of VE study recommendations that are implemented, improvements in the project's cost-effectiveness and performance will be realized.

• Baseline: 2.0 (FY 2009)
• Target: 2.5 (FY 2016)

The baseline and target measures were developed using weighted averages of the data collected from the annual VE reporting cycles. These measures are based on a weighted average of 60% of the indicator for project construction costs saved and 40% of the indicator for VE study recommendations implemented. Both the national average and numeric average for each indicator will be compiled, tracked and reported.

Performance indicators:

1. Percentage of VE study recommendations implemented
   • National average:
     • Baseline: 44 % (FY 2009)
     • Target: 55 % (FY 2016)
   • Performance indicator & metric: The data collected (question 11b) in the annual VE reporting cycle for each state DOT is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix:
     • Baseline: 2.3 (FY 2009)
     • Target: 2.8 (FY 2016)

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   % of Implemented Recommendations	0-15%	16-30%	31-45%	46-60%	61-80%	81-100%

2. Percentage of project construction costs saved
   • National average:
     • Baseline: 8.0 % (FY 2009)
     • Target: 10.0 % (FY 2016)
   • Performance metric: The data collected (question 10b & 12b) in the annual VE reporting cycle for each state DOT is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix:
     • Baseline: 1.8 (FY 2009)
     • Target: 2.4 (FY 2016)

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   % of Construction Project Cost Savings	0-2.5%	2.5-5%	5-7.5%	7.5-10%	10-12.5%	More than 12.5%

Goal 2: Enhance the quality of VE programs.

Outcome:

To enhance both the strategic and day-to-day capacity (e.g., policy, procedures, functions, services) and quality of VE programs.

• Baseline: 2.5 (FY 2009)
• Target: 3.5 (FY 2016)

The baseline and target measures were developed using weighted average of the data collected from the annual VE reporting cycles. These measures are based on a weighted average of 30% for the state DOTs with a VE policy, 30% for the State DOTs with an established VE program, and 40% for the state DOT's conducting VE studies prior to completing 30% of the design of a project.

Performance indicators:

1. Number of state DOTs with a VE policy.
   • Baseline: 2.7 (FY 2009)
   • Target: 4.1 (FY 2016)

   Performance Metric: The data collected (question 1b) in the annual VE reporting cycle is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix:

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   VE Policy	No policy documented or formal VE program commitment	Documented commitment to conduct required VE studies (23 CFR 627) & 1 VE program element in policy	2 VE program elements addressed in policy	3-4 VE program elements addressed in policy	5-6 VE program elements addressed in policy	All 7 E program elements addressed in policy

2. Number of states with an established VE Program.
   • Baseline: 3.1 (FY 2009)
   • Target: 4.0 (FY 2016)

   Performance Metric: The data collected (question 1a & 2a) in the annual VE reporting cycle is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix:

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   VE Policy	No policy documented or formal VE program commitment	1 VE program element identified or under development	2 VE program elements identified or under development	3 VE program elements identified or under development	4 VE program elements identified or under development	5 VE program elements identified or under development

3. Percentage of VE studies conducted prior to completing 30% of a project's design.
   • Baseline: 1.9 (FY 2009)
   • Target: 2.7 (FY 2016)

   Performance Metric: This indicator reflects the percentage of the VE studies that state DOTs conduct prior to completing 30% of a project's design, using the data collected (question 4c) in the annual VE reporting cycle, is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix:

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   % of VE studies conducted before completing 30% of a project's design	0-15 %	15-30 %	30-45 %	45-60 %	60-80 %	80-100 %

Goal 3: Improve FHWA's stewardship and oversight of the VE Program.

Outcome:

To enhance FHWA's consistency with providing oversight of the VE programs and involvement with studies.

• Baseline: 2.4 (FY 2009)
• Target: 4.3 (FY 2016)

The baseline and target measures were developed using weighted average of the data collected from the annual VE reporting cycles. These measures are based on a weighted average of 30% for the FHWA Divisions engaged in VE studies, 30% for the FHWA Divisions verifying all required VE studies are conducted, and 40% for the FHWA Divisions stewardship and oversight of VE programs and studies.

Performance indicators:

1. Divisions are engaged in VE studies.
   • Baseline: 3.1 (FY 2009)
   • Target: 4.2 (FY 2016)

   Performance Metric: The data collected (question 20a) in the annual VE reporting cycle is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix:

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   Participating in VE studies	No involvement	Rarely (0-20 %)	Seldom (21-40 %)	Occasionally (41-60 %)	Frequently 61-80 %	Normally (80-100 %)

2. Number of Divisions verifying all required VE studies are conducted.
   • -Baseline: 3.0 (FY 2009)
   • -Target: 5.0 (FY 2016)

   Performance Metric: The data collected (question 20d) in the annual VE reporting cycle is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix:

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   Verification of VE studies conducted	0-5	6-20	21-35	26-39	40-51	52

3. Enhance the consistency of FHWA's stewardship and oversight of VE.
   • Baseline: 1.4 (FY 2009)
   • Target: 3.7 (FY 2016)

   Performance Metric: The data collected (question 19a) in the annual VE reporting cycle is converted to a numeric value and averaged as depicted in the following matrix.

   	0	1	2	3	4	5
   Integration of VE in Divisions stewardship & oversight agreements, risk assessment, & reviews conducted	VE is not included in Divisions stewardship & oversight agreement VE is not included in annual risk assessment process	Identified in Divisions stewardship & oversight agreement, work plan or standards operating procedures: When VE studies need to be conducted VE integrated in the planning & design sections of agreement &/or plans VE is considered in Divisions annual risk assessment process	Identified in Division's stewardship & oversight agreement, work plan or standard operating procedures: State DOTs VE policies & procedures referenced Division's VE coordinator & role described	Identified in Division's stewardship & oversight agreement, work plan or standard operating procedures: Division's VE roles & responsibilities Division's participation in VE studies	Identified in Division's stewardship & oversight agreement, work plan or standard operating procedures: Divisions role in reviewing VE study recommendations Divisions role in verifying VE recommendations are implemented	Identified in Division's stewardship & oversight agreement, work plan or standard operating procedures: Division's role in the monitoring, & reporting of VE programs Division's role with supporting improving a State DOTs VE program