2013 Louisiana Transportation Conference
Kirt A. Clement, P.E.
DOTD Deputy Undersecretary
February 19, 2013
Presentation Overview
 Historical and statutory requirements for performance
measurement
 Current use of performance measurement in DOTD
 Agency level – LaPas
 Department level – Division
 Program level – Section/District
 Use of section/district performance measures to
measure individual performance
 Pay for Performance Pilot Program
Statutory Requirements for
Performance Management
 Louisiana Government Performance and
Accountability Act - Act 1465 of 1997
 Created RS 39:87.1 - SUBPART D. GOVERNMENT
PERFORMANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY
 Added 6 statutes
 Amended 8 statutes
Statutory Requirements and
Provisions
 Requires strategic planning w/performance measures
 Three year revision cycles
 Requires operation plans w/performance measures
 Annually
 Requires performance-based budgeting
 Requires biannual and quarterly reporting
 Provides for auditing of performance measures
 Provides for penalties for non-performance
Statutory Compliance
Requirement/Provision
Accomplished
Strategic Planning
Yes
Operational Planning
Yes
Performance-budgeting
???
Biannual & quarterly reporting
Yes
Auditing of performance Measures
???
Penalties for non-performance
???
Current Performance Measurement
and Management in DOTD
 Agency Level Performance Measures
 Division Level Performance Management
 Section Level Performance Management
Agency Level Reporting
Division Level Performance
Management
 Performance Measurement Reporting
 Scorecards
 Performance Management
 Monthly meeting at executive level
 Monthly meeting at section level
 Annual executive level performance reviews tied to
performance measures
Engineering Division Scorecard
Division
Section
Criteria
Objective
Type
Target
Jul FY 12- Aug
13
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
(LAPAS - Obj 9.4) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
80% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
87.55%)
--
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
(LAPAS - Obj. 9.1) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
97% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
98.09%)
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
(LAPAS - Obj. 9.2) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
Engineering Division
Engineering Division
Nov
Dec
84.86 -%
--
84.91
%
--
96.57 -%
--
96.57
%
95% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
95.30%)
--
93.49 -%
--
93.54
%
(LAPAS - Obj. 9.3) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
80% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
96.46%)
--
95.19 -%
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
Increase the number of
Divisional
Engineer’s Estimates that are in
the range -25% to +10% of
award cost to 70% of all HQ let
projects
50% (FY 26.9%
11-12
yearend =
41.6%)
30.0% 34.9% 40.7% 48.0% 51.3%
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
To deliver 25% of active
Divisional
projects without Type 1 change
orders or addenda due to
plan/design errors each fiscal
year
25%
--
--
Sep
Oct
84.5% --
95.40
%
95.8%
Section Level Performance
Management
 Performance Measurement Reporting
 Monthly scorecards
 Performance Management
 Monthly division scorecard review at staff meeting
 Monthly section scorecard review with section head
 Annual performance reviews tied to performance
measures
Budget Section Scorecard
Division
Section
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Criteria
Objective
Type
Deliver costManage and prioritize
Sectional
effective
budget request not to
products,
exceed an average of 35
projects, and
days old for incomplete
services in a
request (cumulative average
timely manner of month end averages)
Effectively
Develop staff's proficiency Sectional
develop and
by successfully completing
manage our
an average of 16 hours of
human
supervisor approved report
resources
training per employee.
Efficiently
Manage and restrict nonSectional
manage DOTD's personal services
financial
expenditures not to exceed
resources
97% of budget authority.
Improve
Manage and close multiSectional
customer
project fund
service and
sources/appropriation to
public
have no more than 5 active
confidence
years by fiscal year end.
Improve
Meet with Office Heads (or Sectional
customer
designee) at least bi-monthly
service and
to review Program operating
public
budget status.
confidence
Improve
Minimize the average
Sectional
customer
number of days a FHWA
service and
billable charge is
public
'suspended' and on unbilled
confidence
report.
Target
Jul FY
12-13
Aug Sep Oct
TBD
35.9
27.8 23.4 21.6 18.9
16
0
0
97%
0.36%
4.83 6.49 12.39 13.41
%
%
%
%
90%
0
0
0
0
0
24
0
1
2
7
7
70 days
22
22
22
20
17
3
5
Nov
6
DOTD’s Top Down/Bottom Up
Strategic Planning Methodology
 Goals
 Departmental level sets goals
 Goals then set at office level, then division level, then
districts and section level
 Objectives and Performance Measures
 District and section level, and in some cases work unit
level, set objectives, measures, and targets
 Based on objectives established at district, section, or
work unit level, objectives, measures and targets then
set at the division level, then office level, then
Department level
Budget Section Scorecard
Division
Section
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Management Budget
& Finance
Criteria
Objective
Type
Deliver costManage and prioritize
Sectional
effective
budget request not to
products,
exceed an average of 35
projects, and
days old for incomplete
services in a
request (cumulative average
timely manner of month end averages)
Effectively
Develop staff's proficiency Sectional
develop and
by successfully completing
manage our
an average of 16 hours of
human
supervisor approved report
resources
training per employee.
Efficiently
Manage and restrict nonSectional
manage DOTD's personal services
financial
expenditures not to exceed
resources
97% of budget authority.
Improve
Manage and close multiSectional
customer
project fund
service and
sources/appropriation to
public
have no more than 5 active
confidence
years by fiscal year end.
Improve
Meet with Office Heads (or Sectional
customer
designee) at least bi-monthly
service and
to review Program operating
public
budget status.
confidence
Improve
Minimize the average
Sectional
customer
number of days a FHWA
service and
billable charge is
public
'suspended' and on unbilled
confidence
report.
Target
Jul FY
12-13
Aug Sep Oct
TBD
35.9
27.8 23.4 21.6 18.9
16
0
0
97%
0.36%
4.83 6.49 12.39 13.41
%
%
%
%
90%
0
0
0
0
0
24
0
1
2
7
7
70 days
22
22
22
20
17
3
5
Nov
6
Engineering Division Scorecard
Division
Section
Criteria
Objective
Type
Target
Jul FY 12- Aug
13
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
(LAPAS - Obj 9.4) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
80% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
87.55%)
--
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
(LAPAS - Obj. 9.1) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
97% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
98.09%)
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
(LAPAS - Obj. 9.2) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
Engineering Division
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
Engineering Division
Engineering Division
Nov
Dec
84.86 -%
--
84.91
%
--
96.57 -%
--
96.57
%
95% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
95.30%)
--
93.49 -%
--
93.54
%
(LAPAS - Obj. 9.3) Effectively Divisional
maintain and improve the State
Highway System so that the
system stays in its current or
better condition each FY.
80% (FY -11-12
Yearend =
96.46%)
--
95.19 -%
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
Increase the number of
Divisional
Engineer’s Estimates that are in
the range -25% to +10% of
award cost to 70% of all HQ let
projects
50% (FY 26.9%
11-12
yearend =
41.6%)
30.0% 34.9% 40.7% 48.0% 51.3%
Continually
improve the
performance of
DOTD
To deliver 25% of active
Divisional
projects without Type 1 change
orders or addenda due to
plan/design errors each fiscal
year
25%
--
--
Sep
Oct
84.5% --
95.40
%
95.8%
Annual Performance Reviews Tie to
Performance Measures
Performance Management
of Staff Linked to Strategic
and Operational Planning
DOTD Pay for Performance Pilot Program
Pay for Performance – Pilot I*
 Pilot was project based and tied to DOTD special
initiatives
 One in a headquarters/district function


Bid 100% of 116 surplus funds projects by commitment date Successfully achieved
Improve on-time bidding on the overall program by 10% - Failed
to achieve
 One in a district function

Design and bid an interstate cable barrier project by targeted
dates - Successfully achieved
* Approved By Civil Service November 2007
Pay for Performance – Pilot I
Managers Feedback




Heightened level of project ownership
Change from traditional rewards program needed
Increased teamwork
Challenges – timeliness, communication, inclusiveness
Participants feedback
 Pleased with extra pay in amount to incent performance
 Incentives caused employees to work harder on the project
 Team members were more cooperative
 Projects linked to PFP were given highest priority
Pay for Performance – Pilot I
Decisions
 No expansion of project based PFP
 Difficulty in including all employees
 Not tied to performance of normal work
 Allows for a concentration on PFP project to the
detriment of normal operations
 Proceed with a Phase II PFP pilot
 Tied to unit/section operational objectives
 Tied to DOTD strategic & operational plans
 Allows expansion to all employees
Pay for Performance – Pilot II*
 Utilized the unit/section objectives and annual
performance review
 Tied to core work objectives rather than projects
 Performance must clearly exceed quantifiable targets
 Incentives would be a pre-determined amount
 Involve each of DOTD’s five Offices
 Systems Preservation Section - Engineering
 Procurement Section – Management & Finance
 Aviation Section – Public Works & Intermodal
 Traffic Monitoring Section – Planning & Programming
 Bridge Tender Gang in District 02 - Operations
* Approved by Civil Service Commission January 2009
Pay for Performance – Pilot II
Performance Management Incentives
 Performance review
 30% of rating tied to section/gang performance
 Rating of “3” on all factors to be eligible for pay
 Pay for Performance Reward
 Exceed 25% of objectives by more than 10% - $500
 Exceed 50% of objectives by more than 10% - $1000
Results
 3 of 5 sections/gangs exceeded objectives for pay
 Bridge tender gang exceeded
Pay for Performance – Pilot II
Survey results
 Participants believed the objectives were achievable
 Participants believed that the program and possible
reward caused them to work harder
 Participants believed that since the program was
teamwork-based it made them work more like a team
Pay for Performance – Pilot II
Participant comments
 “I believe as a whole, we worked harder to achieve the
goals needed to receive our reward. I know working
together things were better as far as work quality and
our relationship as employees.”
 “I would love to participate in such programs in the
future.”
 “I believe this pilot program fostered additional team
effort to complete the objectives…”
Pay for Performance – Pilot II
Agency actions
 Presentation to Civil Service Director
 Presentation to DOTD Standing Committee on
Human Resources
 Presentation to DOTD Executive Committee
 Refine agency recommendations
 Present SCHR recommendations to DOTD Execs
 Present results and recommendations to Civil
Service Commission
Pay for Performance – Pilot III*
 Voluntary agency wide participation
 Refine/develop SMART objectives in FY11
 Collect data in FY12 and use data to validate
objects and set targets
 Tie objectives to pay incentives for FY2013

Actual payments made in FY14
 Participation


All Office of Management and Finance Sections
10 Sections & district gangs participating
 1 District gang withdrew after validation year
* CS Commission & administration authorization to proceed
Performance Management of Staff Linked
to Strategic and Operational Planning
 Strategic and operational planning can be tied to
individual performance
 Through performance expectations and reviews
 Though pay-for-performance mechanisms
 Individual performance can be affected
 Through accountability via performance ratings
 Through pay incentives