Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation in the interest of information 

exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use 

of the information contained in this document.

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report 

only because they are considered essential to the objective of 

the document.

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides highquality information to serve Government, industry, and the public 

in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and 

policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, 

utility, and integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews 

quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure 

continuous quality improvement.
Contents

1. Introduction and Overview .......................... 1

2.  Integrating Financial Plans into Planning, 

Programming and Budgeting ......................... 4

The State Budgeting Process ..................... 9

The Planning, Budgeting ‘Architecture’ 

for Asset Management ........................... 10

Florida DOT’s Linkage of Asset Performance 

and Financial Planning ........................... 12

FDOT Summary.............................. 19

How Financial Plans Can Influence the Planning, 

Budgeting Process ............................. 20

Minnesota’s Investment Plan’s Impact on 

Metropolitan Planning............................ 21

Washington State DOT Asset Management Analysis 

in the Planning, Budgeting Processes ............. 28

Expanding MPO Involvement in Asset 

Management................................... 35

Reno MPO Pavement Management Process .... 35

Southeast Michigan Council of Governments Asset 

Management Efforts ............................ 39

Bay Area MTC Pavement Management 

Process .................................... 42

California Statewide Local Asset Assessment ... 45

3. Summary ........................................ 49

4. Endnotes ....................................... 52
ii Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Figures

Figure 1. The relationship between long-range plans, 

asset management plans, TIPs and State budgets. ....... 8

Figure 2. Flexible pavement conditions in Florida from 

1996 to 2014. ....................................... 14

Figure 3. WSDOT’S Estimate of Long-Term Highway 

Maintenance and Preservation Needs. .................. 31

Figure 4. RTC area pavement conditions. .............. 38

Figure 5. Percent of poor pavement by selected 

communities........................................ 45
Report 4 1

1. Introduction and Overview 

Transportation agencies have the responsibility and the 

challenging task to maintain, preserve and improve infrastructure assets for current and future generations. While 

maintaining existing assets is an overriding concern for 

transportation agency officials, most agencies are grappling 

with funding issues. Considering the fact that assets such as 

pavements and bridges have long useful lives, a sound asset 

management practice will necessitate the development of 

long-term asset management plans. Practices and experiences from other countries with mature asset management 

processes and also from transportation agencies within the 

U.S. show that implementing 

and sustaining the performance and condition of assets 

requires long-term financial 

plans that support and are 

linked to long-term asset 

management strategies. 

Comprehensive transportation 

asset management plans 

(TAMP) could show the 

expected and desired projections of asset performance 

and condition for ten or 

more years in to the future. 

A pragmatic TAMP would address the amount of investment 

required each year for the rehabilitation, preservation and 

maintenance of assets during their useful life. The associated 

financial plan can be linked to the targeted performance and 

conditions of the assets identified in the TAMP. 

The financial plan can show the expected and desired 

funding projected for the future, often for ten or more years. 

Considering the fact 

that assets such as 

pavements and bridges 

have long useful lives, 

a sound asset management practice will 

necessitate the development of long-term asset 

management plans.
To be useful to decision-makers, the financial plan can 

establish how the agency will address the resources needed 

to achieve and sustain the long-term asset management 

objectives. It could clearly illustrate the financial State of the 

agency and express the financial needs for the plan period, 

shedding light on the gaps, and the funds needed to bridge 

the gaps between the current conditions and those established in the asset management plan to sustain and cost 

effectively extend the useful life of the assets. The elements 

of the financial plan can succinctly highlight the actions that 

need to be taken over the long-term to maintain the health, 

performance and condition of the assets. The financial plan 

also can address financial risks. It could enable the agency to 

monitor and compare the funding available to the expected 

funding projections throughout the life of the plan, make 

tradeoffs, and take corrective 

actions to accomplish the 

agency’s asset management 

objectives. The financial plan 

is thus critical to the successful implementation of the 

agency’s TAMP. Finally, well 

developed financial plans 

would allow agencies to 

communicate with the public 

and the stakeholders the value of transportation assets, the 

current, projected and desired performance and condition 

of assets, the funding required to support the projected and 

desired performance and condition targets, the financial risks 

and the level of performance and condition that stakeholders 

can expect. It also can summarize any changes in strategy 

that may be required to address changing financial realities.

This fourth in the five part series addresses the role of 

the asset management financial plan in the larger Federal 

planning, programming and State budgeting processes. 

2 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

The State budgeting 

process continues to 

be as strong, if not 

a stronger, influence 

on investment decisionmaking than the Federal 

planning process. 
Report 4 3

The financial plan will not stand in isolation. It will be 

introduced into an already mature Federal-aid planning 

and programming process involving the States, metropolitan 

planning organizations (MPOs), elected officials, the public, 

and local communities. Also, the State budgeting process 

continues to be as strong, if not a stronger, influence on 

investment decision-making than the Federal planning 

process. To be most effective, the asset management financial plan will need to complement the agency’s budgeting 

process which involves the governor and legislature. 
4 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

2. Integrating Financial Plans 

into Planning, Programming, 

and Budgeting

The great diversity between State transportation agencies 

and MPOs makes it difficult to generalize how they will 

incorporate asset management financial plans into the 

planning, programming and budgeting processes. Fifty 

States plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico interact 

with more than 420 MPOs. However, it appears that the 

focus upon asset management is growing in the planning, 

programming and budgeting processes, and will play an 

increasingly important role in the years ahead. Insights into 

how asset management financial plans are likely to integrate 

into the planning, programming and budgeting processes 

can be gleaned from examples where asset management 

already is a strong planning and budgeting influence.

In the past, State transportation agencies and metropolitan 

planning organizations, with some key exceptions, did not 

focus extensively upon asset management in the State and 

metropolitan planning process. Instead, they concentrated 

upon regional mobility and congestion, air quality conformity, land use planning, livable communities, environmental 

justice, and other key social objectives emphasized by 

Federal, State and regional agencies. The physical condition 

of transportation assets in many cases was left primarily to 

the State transportation agency, the regional transit provider 

or the individual owners of local assets. Projects to repair, 

maintain and preserve assets were included in long-range 

transportation plans (LRTPs) and transportation improvement programs (TIPs) but they were often incorporated at 

sponsors’ requests and were not in response to specific 

planning objectives.
Report 4 5

Pre-MAP-21 Federal regulation required MPOs to develop 

financial plans, but they tend to be more generalized 

than anticipated for asset management financial plans. 

Pre-MAP-21 MPO financial plans are required only to contain 

system level estimates of costs and revenues.[1] Also, financial 

plans were optional for State agencies, although agencies 

did have to demonstrate “fiscal constraint.” Pre-MAP-21 

regulations do not require condition or performance targets, 

and therefore, financial plan expenditure levels are not 

required to be tied to those targets. An asset management 

financial plan likely will be more specific. It will focus upon 

the expenditures necessary to sustain for at least 10 years 

condition targets for bridges, pavements and other assets.

The focus upon capacityrelated issues such as land 

use planning and congestion 

derived from the origins 

of the “three C” planning 

process in the early 1960s. 

Then the comprehensive, 

cooperative and continuing 

metropolitan planning 

process arose to coordinate 

construction of the Interstate 

Highway System and to bring 

more local input into the planning of such major facilities. 

Then with the passage of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990 and the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 

Act of 1991 (ISTEA) the air quality conformity process was 

strengthened. MPOs and States need to model the emissions 

produced by their transportation programs to ensure they do 

not exceed emission targets. MPOs developed sophisticated 

demand models to measure congestion and alternatives 

to it that focused much of the planning effort upon the 

performance of assets, not necessarily their condition. 

The focus upon asset 

management is growing 

in the planning, programming and budgeting processes and will 

play an increasingly 

important role in the 

years ahead.
6 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Then with the July 2012 enactment of the Moving Ahead 

for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) a new era 

of performance and asset management was codified. The 

planning process now will include a focus upon achieving 

asset condition targets as well as emission targets and the 

other traditional planning factors. State departments of 

transportation (DOTs) and MPOs always addressed the 

physical condition of assets with policies such as “fix it first” 

or making preservation of the system their number one goal. 

Now, planners and budgeters are increasingly focused upon 

allocating funds, developing long-range programs and 

selecting projects to achieve and sustain specific infrastructure conditions. For example, 

in 2015, 13 States failed to 

meet the MAP-21 target of 

having no more than 10 

percent of the bridge area on 

the NHS structurally deficient.

[2] A review of those State’s 

planning processes shows 

that many of them are actively 

developing processes and 

programs to reduce their 

deficiencies and to achieve the target. In the past, the planning process may have had more general goals, such as 

“preservation.” Now, it has more precise targets to achieve. 

The physical condition of assets is likely to become more of 

a driver as transportation agencies update long-range plans 

and TIPs. In States and regions where condition targets 

already are met, the targets may serve as benchmarks to 

ensure that conditions do not deteriorate. Where targets are 

not yet met, they serve as interim milestones to which the 

region strives.

A comparison of the pre-MAP-21 Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) long-range planning rule versus the language 

in MAP-21 shows the evolution that is occurring. The planning 

The physical condition 

of assets is likely to 

become more of a 

driver as transportation 

agencies update longrange plans and TIPs
Report 4 7

rule adopted in 2007[3] says that the State long-range 

transportation plan should include “capital, operations, and 

management strategies, investments, procedures, and other 

measures to ensure the preservation and most efficient use 

of the existing transportation system.” For metropolitan 

plans, pre-MAP-21 rules only say that they shall include an 

assessment of the capital investments and other strategies 

to preserve the existing infrastructure. In contrast, MAP-21 

amended U.S.C. Title 23 Sec. 119 (a) (b) to direct the U.S. 

Department of Transportation to establish a national highway 

performance program to, among other things, ensure that 

Federal-aid funds support progress toward achieving performance targets in an asset management plan for the National 

Highway System (NHS). Sec. 119 goes on to ensure that the 

States develop asset management plans that make progress 

toward achieving the National performance goals, and the 

State performance targets.

MAP-21 also amended the State and metropolitan planning 

statutes in U.S.C. Title 23 Section 135 (2) to make them 

specifically performance based to support the national goals 

and State targets. MAP-21 requires State long-range plans to 

include performance measures and targets evaluating the 

condition and performance of the transportation system 

rather than pursue general objectives such as “preservation.” 

The statewide transportation improvement program (STIP), 

according to Sec. 135 (4) shall “to the maximum extent 

practicable” address its effect upon the performance targets 

in the State plan and link the STIP’s investment priorities to 

those targets.

These changes create a more direct linkage between 

achievement of specific asset condition targets and the 

decisions made in long-range plans, the projects selected 

within TIPs and STIPs, and the decisions on how to allocate 

funds between major categories such as bridges, pavements, 

safety, mobility and so forth.
8 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Figure 1 illustrates how the asset management plan fits into 

the planning process. The long-range plan continues to set 

the vision and broad goals for a State or region. It includes a 

forecast of changing economic, demographic, financial and 

environmental trends that provides the context for the plan’s 

goals and vision. In the long-range plan, asset conditions are 

one of many considerations along with safety, mobility, 

accessibility, environmental sustainability, livable communities, economic prosperity, and others.

The asset management plan serves as a bridge between the 

general goals of the long-range plan and the projects and 

programs funded in the shorter-term STIP or TIP. The TAMP 

and financial plan include at least three major components 

that directly influence the planning and programming 

processes: Specific 10-year asset condition targets, asset 

management strategies stressing a lifecycle approach, and 

recommended 10-year investment levels. The projects in the 

STIPs and TIPs will execute the asset management strategies 

from the asset management plan. If the asset management

Figure 1. The relationship between long-range plans, asset 

management plans, TIPs and State budgets.
Report 4 9

plan calls for a “mix of fixes” balancing replacement, 

reconstruction, rehabilitation, maintenance, and preservation 

of assets, the STIP projects would reflect those strategies. 

The STIP could be more than just a listing of projects. It 

could be a tactical collection of projects to execute a fouryear component of the 10 year asset management strategy.

The ten year horizon is long enough to support key asset 

management approaches such as managing for lower 

lifecycle costs and encouraging preservation. The benefits 

of these strategies are not apparent in the short term but 

reduce costs and improve asset performance over the 

longer term. 

Asset management plans will not be the only strategic 

documents influencing the long-range plans or the shortterm STIPs and TIPs. The Strategic Highway Safety Plan, 

the Highway Safety Improvement Plan, the congestion 

plan, freight plan, and others could be inserted into Figure 1. 

All of them also are critical to the performance-based 

Federal program. They provide more specific strategies to 

achieve their program’s objectives while, hopefully, linking 

the broad goals in the long-range plan to the projects in the 

STIPs and TIPs. They are not addressed here in more detail 

only because they are beyond the scope of this report. 

The State Budgeting Process

Figure 1 also illustrates how the State budgeting process 

relates to the plans, and STIPs/TIPs. Although legislators are 

bound by Federal-aid eligibility rules they still have broad 

discretion to shift funds, programs and projects in agency 

budgets. In some States, most projects are line items in State 

budgets. This legislative action can either override the asset 

management strategy or support it.
10 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Figure 1 illustrates that the overarching goals in the longrange plan, the strategies in the TAMP, the execution of 

projects in the STIPs and TIPs depend upon the decisions 

made in both the planning process and the State budgeting 

process. These decisions are made by many stakeholders 

including asset owners, MPO boards, State agency leaders, 

transportation commissions, legislators and governors. This 

pluralistic decision-making process complicates the asset 

management process. Some programs such as basic bridge 

and pavement preservation require steady, sustained investment and regular application for decades. The long-term 

consistency of investment requires consensus and understanding of asset management strategies not only in the 

transportation agency but also among the MPOs, local asset 

owners and to some extent legislators and governors. Each 

budget enactment can either perpetuate the 10-year asset 

management strategy or complicate it.

The Planning, Budgeting ‘Architecture’ 

for Asset Management

With the requirements of MAP-21 still relatively new, it is too 

early to predict how asset management plans and financial 

plans will affect the Federal transportation planning and 

programming process and State budget processes. However, some insights into how the processes could evolve 

may be found in selected examples of State DOTs and 

MPOs that already emphasize asset conditions and asset 

management. These examples are discussed in the 

remainder of this report. 

A consistent asset-management focus in the planning, 

programming and State budgeting process may be enhanced if the following attributes exist. They can be thought 

of as the “architecture” for supporting asset management 

in the planning, programming and budgeting processes.
Report 4 11

Asset Management Policies and Goals—The State and 

regional agencies that are incorporating asset management 

into the planning and programming process exhibit clearly 

stated policy objectives, and asset-management goals. Their 

policies and goals explicitly state their commitment to asset 

management, and to achieving and sustaining specific asset 

condition levels. 

Specific Asset Targets—Many of these agencies are comfortable setting targets for the conditions of pavements, bridges, 

and transit assets. The targets become the benchmark 

against which progress is measured. In the past, plans may 

have generally supported “sound infrastructure” or “fix it 

first.” In the post-MAP-21 era it may be more common for 

those general objectives to be matched with specific bridge, 

pavement and other asset targets that define “sound infrastructure” or “good roads.”

Supporting Data and Information—The agencies have data 

collection, data analysis, and data dissemination processes to 

support their asset management objectives. For the MPOs 

that are heavily involved in asset management these data 

currently relate primarily to pavements, and to some extent 

transit assets. The agencies say they expect over time to 

expand their data collection to additional assets. For State 

transportation agencies heavily invested in asset management, data on pavements, bridges, and other asset elements 

figure prominently in planning and programming decisions.

Analysis Tools—State and MPO planners are providing 

pavement modeling tools to local governments, and relying 

on models themselves, to set asset-expenditure levels. 

Project-Selection Linkages—Project-selection criteria favor 

projects that execute the asset-management strategies or 

achieve the asset-condition targets.
12 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Long-Term Perspective—To the extent possible, the agencies 

focus upon not only short-term asset-condition objectives 

but also long-term ones. This longer focus encourages 

preservation and not only worst-first priorities. 

Florida DOT’s Linkage of Asset Performance 

and Financial Planning

The first example of how asset management and assetconditions are integrated into the planning, programming 

and budgeting processes is from the Florida Department 

of Transportation (FDOT). The agency’s practices illustrate 

many of the attributes of the asset management “architecture” summarized above. Also, the agency publishes financial 

forecasts and expenditure histories that contain many of the 

elements of a MAP-21 financial plan. Its current practices and 

publications are similar to what may become common when 

asset management financial plans are developed nationally.

Policy and Target Focus

On Dec. 22, 2014, the FDOT enacted a formal policy linking 

its performance measures to the planning and programming 

decision process.[4] The policy notes that the linkage informs 

decisions, and provides feedback to transportation system 

performance, agency operations and program outcomes. 

It includes asset management as a form of performance 

management, and it reflects the agency’s priority for 

accountability and stewardship of resources. 

The policy complements State statute[5] that requires the 

agency to develop a five-year financial plan and to include 

a detailed work program including projects intended to 

achieve the State objectives. Among those objectives are 

State minimum condition targets of 80 percent of pavements 

on the State Highway System meeting department standards, 90 percent of department-maintained bridges meeting standard and 100 percent of maintenance targets being 
Report 4 13

met.[6] Another statute,[7] requires a 20-year plan including 

both 10-year and 20-year financial plan components for the 

Strategic Intermodal System, which is a multi-modal network 

of key corridors and facilities.

While achieving and sustaining MAP-21 asset condition 

targets is a concern for some agency officials around the 

country, the Florida DOT officials say they are confident 

they will not only meet the targets but will exceed them 

and sustain their high conditions. Soon after enactment of 

MAP-21, the FDOT published 

a MAP-21 performance report 

and distributed it to the 

Florida Congressional delegation.[8] The 2015 MAP-21 

Transportation Performance 

Report represents the third 

consecutive iteration. FDOT 

reports that in 2014, 90 

percent of Interstate Highway 

System pavements were in 

“good” condition, 9 percent 

“fair” and only 1 percent 

“poor.” On the non-Interstate 

State Highway System, 

77 percent of pavements 

are “good,” 20 percent “fair” 

and 3 percent “poor.”

The department emphasizes proactive bridge maintenance 

that is cost-effective at maintaining bridges in good condition over their lifecycle.[9] Preventive maintenance repairs are 

performed to prevent bridges from deteriorating to the point 

that more costly repairs or replacement are needed. It says 

the approach ensures that bridges meet or exceed their 

design life, resulting in lower frequency of expensive bridge 

replacements. The FDOT reports that less than 3 percent of 

Preventive maintenance 

repairs are performed to 

prevent bridges from 

deteriorating to the 

point that more costly 

repairs or replacement 

are needed. [FDOT] says 

the approach ensures 

that bridges meet or 

exceed their design 

life, resulting in lower 

frequency of expensive 

bridge replacements. 
14 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

the total deck area of its NHS bridges are on structurally 

deficient bridges, compared to the 10 percent MAP-21 target. 

It also reports that only 2 of its 787 NHS culverts are structurally deficient. By deck area for all bridges it reports that 

91.5 percent are good or excellent, 6.7 percent fair, and only 

1.8 percent poor.

Data for Decision Making

In addition to its high profile summary reporting which is 

primarily for external audiences, it also tracks more detailed 

district pavement data to improve project-selection and 

pavement maintenance efforts. It reports statewide and by 

each district distress data going back to 1996 for flexible 

pavements and to 1997 for rigid pavements. It tracks 10 

defects and ride rating for rigid pavements and for flexible 

pavements it tracks ride rating, cracking and rutting. It notes 

that for rigid pavements its conditions have remained good 

since 1997 with little variation in overall conditions. Similarly 

for flexible pavements as seen in Figure 2 conditions have 

remained high and stable. In Figure 2, higher values indicate

Figure 2. Flexible pavement conditions in Florida from 1996 to 2014. 

SOURCE: FDOT 2014 FLEXIBLE PAVEMENT SURVEY
Report 4 15

better conditions. The change in ride rating in 2004 was 

the result of a change in data-collection processes.[10]

FDOT plans to sustain pavements through continued 

preservation practices to extend pavement life and reduce 

maintenance costs, continuing to focus on truck weight 

enforcement, facilitate pavement maintenance training 

with local governments, and to plan on resurfacing at 

least 4 percent of the system annually.

A paper published by current and former FDOT pavement 

engineers reported that through the use of the Florida 

Analysis System for Targets (FAST) pavement model the 

agency has been able to calibrate investment levels to 

achieve its condition targets.[11] Based on 2012 pavement 

data and forecasts from the FAST model the agency could 

confidently reduce the percentage of the statewide arterial 

roadways to be resurfaced over the 2014-2018 period from 

27.3 percent to 20 percent. That represented a savings of 

over $1 billion over the five year work program. In 2013, 

further improvement in system conditions led to another 

FAST forecast that pavement investments could be further 

reduced while still meeting targets. That reduction in spending resulted in a total savings of $3 billion from the initial 

10 year baseline.

An important element of FDOT’s asset-condition efforts 

is reliable project delivery. It tracks project-development 

milestones closely, and has done so for more than 20 years. 

Reliable project delivery ensures that the level of asset 

maintenance, repair, rehabilitation and replacement that 

is needed to sustain conditions occur in a timely manner. 

FDOT set a target for 2015 of letting to bid 95 percent of its 

planned resurfacing projects during the year. It achieved a 

96 percent delivery rate in 2014, resurfacing 2,176 of the 

planned 2,403 lane miles.[12] For bridges, it surpassed its 

target of 95 percent on-time delivery of bridge repair 
16 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

projects by delivering more projects than originally planned. 

It achieved 117 percent of its bridge repair target in 2014.

Long-Term View

The first three reports in this series emphasized the importance of long-term planning and budgeting. Because infrastructure is long lived and requires a life cycle approach, it 

is important to plan for years of consistent preservation, and 

to plan years in advance for when to appropriately time the 

rehabilitation and replacement of assets.

A noticeable element of the FDOT performance and asset 

reporting is its long-term perspective. It has met its basic 

roadway maintenance condition targets since 1994.[13]

For many of its asset conditions and for its programming 

decisions it takes a multi-decade view. This perspective 

supports an attitude of not only achieving short-term asset 

condition targets but of sustaining them into the future. 

Also, the long history of documenting expenditures and 

the resulting asset conditions increases confidence in future 

forecasting. Forecasts are based on many years of actual 

past data. After decades of consistent asset treatment and 

resulting consistent asset conditions, the department has 

increased confidence that continuing the efforts into the 

future will result in sound, sustained asset conditions. 

Pavement conditions have been measured since 1973. In the 

early years, districts collected pavement data but since 1985 

data collection has been a centralized statewide effort.[14]

The agency’s 2014 performance report tracks pavement 

conditions back to 2003, and notes steady, long-term 

improvement. In 2003, 80 percent of pavements met target, 

while 93 percent did in 2014. It predicts that its pavements 

will remain well above the minimum target threshold of 

80 percent of pavement lane miles meeting target. It notes 

that 7 percent of the system in 2014 merits rehabilitation 
Report 4 17

based upon conditions. It plans to continue funding at 

adequate levels to address those pavements, and to 

continue achieving its pavement condition targets.

Program expenditures are 

tracked back to 1983 in more 

than 100 categories including 

not only highways but transit, 

aviation, rail and intermodal 

facilities.[15] Construction 

expenditures are reported 

as are those for preliminary 

engineering, right of way, 

and administration. For instance, bridge expenditures 

are shown since 1983/84 

for “repairs on system”, 

“replacement on system”, 

“local bridges” and turnpike 

bridges. For 2013/14, the 

$280.7 million in reported bridge expenditures include 

$73.4 million for repairs, $108.5 million for replacements, 

$78.1 million for local bridge replacement and $700,000 for 

turnpike bridges. Resurfacing expenditures in 1983/84 were 

$142.8 million, rising to a peak of $856.5 million at the height 

of the price increases in 2006/07 and were at $455.8 million 

in 2013/14. Expenditures are reported by the Interstates, 

arterials and other freeways, off system routes, and Turnpikes. 

The long-term perspective allows budgeters, planners and 

programmers to understand the magnitude of investment 

needed to sustain today’s current sound asset conditions 

into the future. Once agency executives are certain of how 

much is needed to sustain asset conditions, they have more 

confidence in deciding how much, if any, to commit for other 

types of projects. Agencies face constant requests for new 

capacity highway projects, to shift flexible Federal-aid funds 

Because infrastructure 

is long lived and requires 

a life cycle approach, 

it is important to plan 

for years of consistent 

preservation, and to plan 

years in advance for 

when to appropriately 

time the rehabilitation 

and replacement 

of assets.
18 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

to transit, to provide more transportation alternatives, and to 

continually increase investments in safety. Once the amount 

of future revenue can be estimated with some confidence, 

and once the amounts needed to sustain conditions are 

known, executives can make commitments to other types of 

projects with more confidence. The FDOT reports that for its 

2016-2020 Work Program 71 percent of expenditures will be 

for capacity improvements and only 11 percent for bridges 

and 15 percent for resurfacing.[16] Yet, it is on track to surpass 

the MAP-21 condition targets and far surpass its State 

minimum targets.

The summary of past FDOT expenditures is matched by a 

forecast of planned program expenditures for the next 10 

years. The Program and Resource Planning Summary from 

2104/15 to 2023/24 extrapolates expected expenditures for 

the next decade. While the historical report showed total 

resurfacing expenditures of $455.8 million in 2013/2014, the 

planned 2014/15 expenditures were $636 million and rise 

slightly in 2015/16 before remaining in the mid-$550 million 

range through 2019/20 and rising slightly to about $590 

million from 2020/21 to 2023/24. Similar forecasts of planned 

expenditures are made for bridges, safety, interstate construction, other roads, rights-of-way, aviation, transit and rail. 

Similarly, expected budget amounts are forecast for preliminary engineering, construction inspection, environmental 

mitigation, planning and other support functions.

Further detail is provided in the five year Program and 

Resource Plan. It explains the linkage from the long-range 

plan, to the agency’s goals and how those are pursued 

through the projects to be delivered in the next five years.[17]

It describes the major agency programs, paraphrases the 

goals and objectives that underlie each program, and 

explains the budget allocations to achieve those goals and 

objectives. District summaries provide budget amounts by 

category for each of the districts for the five years of the 
Report 4 19

Program and Resource Plan period. Further detailed lists 

include the planned projects.

Reflecting a risk-based approach, the Work Plan includes an 

emphatic notice that although it is developed using the best 

forecasting tools available, the plan is subject to uncertainty 

caused by:

 Changes in Federal or State revenue estimates

 Increased inflation rates

 Changes in bond market conditions

 Changing federal regulations

 Difficulty in acquiring rights-of-way

 Ecological and environmental factors

 Extraordinary increases in right-of-way costs

 Unanticipated contract litigation

 Other economic forces impacting State transportation 

revenues

 Changes in MPO/Local priorities 

FDOT Summary

The FDOT example provides many insights into how asset 

management can be integrated into the planning, programming and State budgeting processes. First, is the policy basis 

both in State statute and in agency policy embracing asset 

and performance management as planning and programming objectives. Second, the agency uses specific targets 
20 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

as the benchmark for infrastructure adequacy. When targets 

are exceeded, funds can be transferred to other uses. When 

targets are not met, they become the investment focus. 

Third, the voluminous data allow understanding of how 

assets have performed and what types of investments are 

needed to sustain them. Fourth, project-selection decisions 

are linked closely to the asset condition targets. Fifth, the 

long-term perspective supports long-term strategies for 

sustaining assets. Sixth, the asset management process is 

not divorced from the State budgeting process, but rather 

provides the framework for setting key investment levels.

How Financial Plans Can Influence the 

Planning, Budgeting Process

Reports one and two in this series list several reasons for 

developing a 10-year financial plan including:

 The financial plan allows agencies to identify how much 

revenue they need to sustain asset conditions and how 

these needs compare to forecasted revenues.

 The financial plan enables an agency to make more 

sophisticated projections to forecast the funding needs 

and timing for cost-effective treatments to sustain 

asset conditions.

 The financial plan can communicate realistic levels of 

service that can be achieved with the expected funding. 

The following examples describe how asset management 

plans, or asset management reports, are becoming integrated into the planning and budgeting processes.
Report 4 21

Minnesota’s Investment Plan’s Impact on 

Metropolitan Planning

The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) 

published a 20-year financial plan, the Minnesota State 

Highway Investment Plan 2014-2033 known as MnSHIP, 

followed by a draft asset management plan.[18] The draft 

transportation asset management plan explains the 

substantial savings accruing from the agency’s approach to 

managing assets on a lifecycle 

basis that emphasizes timely 

preservation and maintenance. 

It documents the savings 

over the future decades by 

investing in preservation and 

contrasts that to much higher 

lifecycle costs the State would 

face if it pursued only a worstfirst approach. The MnSHIP 

financial plan forecasts future 

revenues and contrasts that 

against the inflation-adjusted need to sustain assets and 

meet mobility and other needs from 2014 through 2033. 

It notes that the asset condition targets generally can be 

met in the first decade of the planning period. However, the 

effects of inflation and stagnant revenues combine in the 

second decade to force a lowering in condition targets and 

a substantial reduction in investments for mobility and other 

projects. In fact, it predicts the State will not have any money 

for new capacity projects in the second decade of the plan if 

the forecasted trends of stagnant revenues and increasing 

inflation come to pass.

Soon after their publication, the two documents contributed 

substantially to the Minnesota metropolitan planning process 

and to some degree to the State budget discussion.

The MPO plan says its 

first capital investment 

priority is to rebuild, 

replace and otherwise 

preserve the principal 

arterial and minor 

arterial system.
22 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

The Metropolitan Council is the MPO for the MinneapolisSt. Paul metropolitan area. It adopted in January 2015 the 

2040 Transportation Policy Plan that reflects the asset 

management analysis of the MnDOT asset management 

and financial plans.[19]

The MPO long-range plan 

reviews two investment 

scenarios, one based on existing revenues and the other on 

additional, as yet unidentified, 

revenues. “It’s clear that we 

cannot build the transportation 

system our region needs by 

relying solely on currently 

identified resources, 97% of 

which are dedicated to either 

roadways or transit and may 

not be used for other purposes.”[20] It notes that the 

majority of expected highway funds will need to be dedicated 

to maintenance and repair of the existing system, and lessthan-desired amounts are available for enhancing the system. 

The plan notes the “uncertainty and limitations” affecting 

transportation funding continue to be major issues facing the 

region. Under the existing revenue scenario the performance 

of the highway system will decline because revenues will not 

meet the needs to operate, maintain and preserve the existing system. It says that the transit system’s preservation 

needs are likely to be met but that the regional goals of 

growing and improving the bus and transitway systems 

cannot be achieved.

The MPO plan incorporates much of the MnDOT asset management financial analysis and bases its constrained revenue 

forecasts upon the MnDOT analysis. The MPO plan forecasts 

Key issues that were 

emphasized in the 

TAMP such as the age 

profile of the highway 

system, minimizing 

lifecycle costs and the 

concept of remaning 

service life were 

emphasized in State 

budget discussions.
Report 4 23

that highway revenues will grow only by 1.2 to 1.4 percent 

annually but that inflation for operations and capital spending will grow at 2.5 percent, eroding purchasing power. It 

also assumes that in the first 10-year plan period, MnDOT 

will be able to meet its system operations and capital asset 

preservation needs but has only $700 million over the ten 

years for mobility and access projects. In the second decade, 

MnDOT will not have any revenues available for capital 

mobility or access projects. MnDOT will, however, be positioned to meet the Federal asset targets of MAP-21. The MPO 

plan also warns that over time, MnDOT will have to invest a 

larger proportion of its revenues on the NHS leaving fewer 

highway funds to spend on the more local, non-NHS system.

The coordination between the MPO long-range plan and the 

MnDOT asset and financial plan also is evident in how the 

MPO developed its enhanced revenue scenario. It was based 

upon 2012 work of the Minnesota’ governor’s Transportation 

Finance Advisory Council (TFAC)[21] which was developed in 

tandem with the MnDOT financial plan. The MPO’s enhanced 

revenue analysis was based on the TFAC analysis that concluded that the statewide highway system faces a $12 billion 

funding gap, or a gap of $600 million annually for capital 

asset management and expansion projects. For the urban 

region, the shortfall was estimated at $2 billion to $2.5 billion 

for capital asset preservation and $4 billion to $5 billion for 

mobility expansion. In addition, the MPO used figures from 

the MnDOT Highway Systems Operations Plan 2012-2015 to 

estimate the shortfall in needed funds to operate the system, 

such as managing congestion and incidents.

The MPO also incorporated investment scenarios from the 

MnSHIP 2014-2033 financial plan when it identified projects 

and program levels for asset programs in the first decade of 

its long-range plan. Inclusive in those projects are the ones 

from the 2015-2018 TIP. This inclusion shows the linkage from 

the State asset management and financial plan to the MPO 
24 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

plan, to the projects included in the regional TIP. The MPO 

plan notes that the projects for the 2019-2024 program are 

less certain and will be refined as project development progresses. However, those planned projects also are consistent 

with the MnDOT asset management plan. Specific projects 

were not identified beyond 2024, only projected spending 

levels by programs.

The MPO plan says its first capital investment priority is to 

rebuild, replace and otherwise preserve the principal arterial 

and minor arterial system. It says that projects to preserve 

these assets are important in their own right but also provide 

opportunities to implement system-wide safety and congestion-relief improvements. These improvements can include 

bike lanes, handicap accessibility ramps or improved pedestrian facilities which can be 

incorporated into the rehabilitation of existing assets.

The MPO’s long-range plan 

highway investment conclusions 

further reflect the close linkage 

of the MnDOT asset management plan and the regional 

long-range plan. It notes that 

MnDOT, and as a result the 

inclusive MPO region, are likely 

to be able to meet their highway asset rebuilding and replacement needs but that high priority, unmet needs exist 

in other investment categories such as operations, maintenance, safety, and regional mobility. Operations, maintenance, program support, reconstruction and replacement are 

to consume between 76 percent and 94 percent of revenue 

under the baseline, Current Revenue Scenario over the life 

of the plan.

The MPO plan says its 

first capital investment 

priority is to rebuild, 

replace and otherwise 

preserve the principal 

arterial and minor 

arterial system.
Report 4 25

Plan Involvement in State Budget Discussions

In addition to influencing the long-range plan and TIP, 

the MnDOT asset management plan and financial plan also 

contributed to extensive discussion in the Minnesota State 

Legislature in 2015. The legislative discussion illustrates how 

the asset management and financial plan issues can inform 

the State budgeting and political process. Key issues that 

were emphasized in the TAMP such as the age profile of 

the highway system, minimizing lifecycle costs, and the 

concept of remaining service life were emphasized in 

State budget discussions.

During the 2015 legislative session, the Minnesota legislature 

considered additional transportation revenues, in part but 

not wholly, based upon the asset management financial plan. 

The plan development occurred within a larger discussion of 

infrastructure investment needs that stretch back to at least 

2012 with the Governor’s TFAC effort. It would be incorrect to 

say that the asset management plan alone drove the legislative discussion but it was one of several contributing factors.

The Minnesota governor proposed in February 2015 an 

$11 billion transportation funding package that included a 

wholesale fuel tax increase and a half-cent sales tax increase 

in the metropolitan region for mass transit. The plan included improving 2,220 miles of pavement and repairing or 

replacing 330 bridges, in addition to new capacity projects, 

more investment in Safe Routes to Schools and increases in 

transit spending.[22]

A component of the MnSHIP financial plan was the focus 

of legislative and political discussion when the increased 

transportation spending was debated. The MnSHIP and 

TFAC analysis assumed 5 percent annual inflation during 

the 20 years of the plan.[23] Compounded over the 20-year 

period, that assumption had a significant effect upon the 

projected purchasing power and resulting investment 
26 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

shortfall. The Minnesota Chamber of Commerce commissioned its own study during the legislative session and 

contracted with the accounting firm Accenture to critique 

that assumption.[24] Narrowly, the Chamber/Accenture 

analysis focused on the governor’s TFAC analysis but the 

inflation assumption in TFAC was the same as that used in 

the MnSHIP financial plan. 

The Accenture critique validated many of the key assumptions including finding that the processes used by the 

MnDOT bridge and pavement management systems to 

forecast needs were credible.[25] It also found the process for 

estimating current revenues was sound. Accenture, however, 

said the 5 percent inflation assumption “may or may not be” 

sound and concluded it was at the upper limit of other 

construction inflation forecasts. Accenture concluded that 

the TFAC’s estimate for the operations and maintenance 

budget may have been underestimated because it did not 

consider inflation.

It is important to note that Minnesota Chamber of Commerce 

and Accenture were not critiquing the asset management 

plan or MnSHIP, rather a related report prepared earlier by 

the TFAC gubernatorial task force. However, the episode 

shows that key assumptions shared in an asset management 

and financial plan can become scrutinized during the political process. Occasionally, State transportation agencies find 

their technical analysis questioned during debates in the 

environmental review, permitting or right-of-way appropriation cases. Sometimes they are even challenged in court. The 

Minnesota example and another that will be discussed later 

regarding the Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) show that technical and political debate can 

surround asset management analyses as well. As the asset 

management and financial plans intersect with the political 

process, the assumptions surrounding needed investment 

levels can face scrutiny and debate.
Report 4 27

In the end of the legislative 

session, the transportation 

funding increase was not 

enacted.[26] Late in the session, 

legislators could not agree on 

a funding package and passed 

a budget based on current 

revenues. The issue was expected to return in the next 

legislative session.

Minnesota Summary

The Minnesota asset 

management and financial 

plan clearly affected the 

metropolitan planning process. 

It helped to clarify for the regional planning process the 

long-term direction of the State’s transportation finances, 

and the investment levels needed to sustain asset conditions. MnDOT and the MPO coordinated closely to integrate 

asset management needs and analysis into the long-range 

plan and short-range project-selection processes. Officials 

from the MPO and MnDOT agree that the asset management and financial plan provided more detail and specificity 

regarding long-term asset management needs than existed 

before. The asset management plan also clarified a baseline 

of expenditure needed to sustain assets over the next 

two decades and created a positive influence on the 

long-range plan.

The Minnesota experience also showed how the asset 

management plan assumptions may come under scrutiny 

during the political and budgeting process. The plan catalyzed debate over the needs for adequate asset investment 

which spurred review of the plan assumptions. 

Occasionally, State 

transportation agencies 

find their technical 

analysis questioned 

during debates in 

the environmental 

review, permitting 

or right-of-way 

appropriation cases. 

Sometimes they are 

even challenged 

in court.
28 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Washington State DOT Asset Management 

Analysis in the Planning, Budgeting Processes 

Similar to the Minnesota example, the asset management 

financial analysis of the Washington State Department of 

Transportation (WSDOT) influenced both the metropolitan 

planning process and the State budgeting process. The 

Puget Sound Regional Council is working with WSDOT to 

increase the focus of asset management in the metropolitan 

planning process. Also, WSDOT’s asset management analyses played a significant role in the State legislature’s discussion of increased revenue during the 2015 legislative session. 

And as in Minnesota, the legislative reaction was not to 

immediately accept the analyses at face value but to subject 

them to further scrutiny. Eventually, the legislature enacted 

a substantial revenue increase but only after conducting its 

own analysis of the State’s asset management need. This 

could indicate the asset management and financial plans 

stimulate legislative discussion but they don’t necessarily 

settle them.

By way of background, the WSDOT has one of the most 

mature and detailed asset management, performance 

management and risk 

management processes in the 

country. Its Grey Notebook 

has been cited frequently as 

an exemplary performance 

management report. Although 

WSDOT has not yet produced 

a MAP-21 asset management 

plan, its extensive performance 

reporting and asset management analyses provide many 

of the elements found in an 

asset management plan. 

Although WSDOT 

has not yet produced 

a MAP-21 asset 

management plan, its 

extensive performance 

reporting and asset 

management analyses 

provide many of the 

elements found in an 

asset management plan.
Report 4 29

Annually, the Grey Notebook includes a comprehensive 

pavement performance report.[27] The February 2015 version 

summarizes the long-term trends in pavement conditions, 

compares that to past expenditures, documents pavement 

strategies, and forecasts a significant shortfall in pavement 

investment. The report documents the department’s 

extensive efforts to preserve pavements through low-cost 

strategies such as using inlays, chips seals and other 

cost-effective strategies. It estimates that over six years 

it will have converted 2,270 lane miles to chip seals with 

a cumulative savings of $100 million. It aggressively uses 

chip seals and has consistently increased their use on higher 

volume routes to the point that now 39 percent of its lane 

miles are chip sealed. It also uses other preservation strategies such as crack sealing and inlays to sustain pavement 

surfaces and to postpone the need to resurface. It notes 

that every year it extends the life of an asphalt or chip 

sealed lane mile the cost savings average 8 and 15 percent 

respectively. 

Despite the active preservation approach, WSDOT reported 

that pavement conditions will decline significantly without 

increased investment. Its pavement model forecasted 

$1.5 billion in unmet pavement investment through 2024. 

It illustrates future conditions using several leading indicators 

include an asset sustainability ratio, remaining service life, 

and deferred preservation backlog. 

In addition to the on-going pavement performance reporting 

and needs assessment through the Grey Notebook, the 

department also produced other more in-depth updates 

requested by legislators. In 2010 it produced a comprehensive 180 page report to the legislature on its pavement 

preservation strategies. In 2013 and again in 2015, it produced 

an Unfunded Priorities Summary that included programmatic 

needs for maintenance, operations, and preservation as well 

as new capacity and operations projects. 
30 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

The department also produces in the Grey Notebook an 

annual bridge report that summarizes condition trends, 

investment strategies and forecasts of future investment 

needs. It summarized the department’s prioritization process 

for bridge investments, and documented the extensive 

preservation approach used to extend structure life.[28]

With this and other analysis provided, the State’s governor 

introduced in December 2014 a $12 billion investment 

package that called for a $1.2 billion increase in maintenance 

and preservation over the next 10 years.[29] The remaining 

investments were for multi-modal products, new highway 

capacity and local projects.

The legislature initiated its own review of the asset management analyses and produced two reports prior to voting on 

new revenue (see Figure 3). The first report was conducted 

by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee 

(JLARC) which reviewed WSDOT’s procedures for estimating total needs for highway maintenance and preservation. 

It noted an oft-repeated observation from these reports 

that long-term maintenance and preservation needs are not 

reflected in agency budgets that are limited to short-term 

receipts and expenditures. The report noted that estimates 

for maintenance and preservation in the biennial budget are 

limited to the expected amount of available revenue. While 

the budgeting process is well established, the procedures 

for estimating other needs such as maintenance and total 

future preservation are not documented as thoroughly.[30]

The legislative office report said that WSDOT followed a 

“systematic and rigorous” process to identify maintenance 

backlogs. In 2013, WSDOT documented to the reviewers’ 

satisfaction that $414 million was needed over 10 years to 

eliminate the maintenance backlog. The legislative study 

group also looked at capital preservation need estimates 

by WSDOT and found them to be logical.
Report 4 31

Figure 3. WSDOT’S Estimate of Long-Term Highway Maintenance 

and Preservation Needs.

A second phase of the study involved hiring outside 

consultants to review WSDOT’s process for bridge and 

pavement preservation. The legislative intent was to ensure 

that estimates for long-term preservation were sound and 

based upon best practices.[31] That study praised the WSDOT pavement management process saying its pavement 

management system reflected best practices and that the 

department was exceptional in its incorporation of risk 

management. It reviewed the pavement management and 

preservation processes against industry best practices 

and validated them. The bridge preservation program was 

commended for the quality of its data and for its abovenational-average bridge conditions. However, the report 

recommended a more robust use of computerized bridge 

management systems and the incorporation of lifecycle 

cost analysis into the bridge management process. 
32 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

On July 1, 2015, the legislature approved an 11.9 cent motor 

fuel increase for a $16.1 billion 10 year transportation program.[32] Included in the package was $1.225 billion over 

10 years for State highway system preservation and 

$8.2 billion for highway improvements.[33]

While the State asset management analyses contributed to 

the legislative action, it also is becoming an increasing focus 

in the Washington metropolitan planning process. The Puget 

Sound Regional Council (PSRC), the MPO for the greater 

Seattle region, is actively evaluating how it can incorporate 

asset management into its regional planning process. The 

agency commissioned a survey of other MPOs and produced 

a report of how other MPOs are addressing asset management.[34] The agency’s board directed staff to enhance the 

approach to estimate the State of Good Repair needs in the 

planning process with the goals of being data driven and 

outcome oriented. 

PSRC produced a long-range 

plan appendix focusing upon 

the state of good repair.[35]

The appendix says that state 

of good repair projects and 

programs rarely receive the 

attention as major expansion 

projects but they are as critical, 

if not more so, to the region. 

It says that projects such 

as fiber-optic cable repair 

updates, seismic retrofits and 

paving projects may be behindthe-scenes projects but they 

make the transportation 

network safe and useable. Failing to invest in preservation 

can have economic, environmental, performance, safety, 

and financial consequences in later years.

Local governments 

are placing considerable emphasis on 

re-investing in existing 

assets which is reflected 

in the regional planning framework that 

identifies keeping the 

region’s infrastructure 

in a state of good 

repair as its top priority. 
Report 4 33

The planning agency notes that WSDOT and FHWA are 

placing increased emphasis upon preservation. It also says 

that local governments are placing considerable emphasis on 

re-investing in existing assets which is reflected in the regional planning framework that identifies keeping the region’s 

infrastructure in a state of good repair as its top priority. 

PSRC is developing a regional transportation monitoring 

program that will serve as the foundation for a regional 

performance-based planning process to satisfy MAP-21 

requirements but also to increase public accountability. 

Performance measures are being refined and eventually 

targets will be established to analyze system performance 

relative to regional goals and objectives. It says this 

represents a paradigm shift in planning that will be used 

in future efforts such as the next plan update and 

programming decisions.

For its long-range plan update, a state of good repair 

subcommittee identified as priority areas stormwater 

maintenance, pavement preservation, local signal operations, 

and intelligent transportation system (ITS) assets. The state 

of good repair effort identified a net increase of approximately $5.2 billion needed in future city and county investments. The report says this need estimate is a more accurate 

reflection of costs to maintain the system in a state of good 

repair than are historic expenditure levels. Next steps include 

working with transit agencies to estimate their state of good 

repair needs, developing specific estimates of transit ITS and 

maintenance needs, and developing approaches to collecting 

city and county maintenance needs that are not based on 

historic expenditures but upon amounts needed to sustain 

a state of good repair.

The MPO staff and board are evaluating the breadth of 

the agency’s eventual asset management efforts. They are 

evaluating whether and how to collect asset condition data. 
34 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

The data could build from WSDOT processes or the agency 

could work with local communities to develop a regional 

asset-data collection and cost-estimating process. Also the 

size of the network to monitor and which assets are still to 

be determined. The agency plans to “start simple” and focus 

on key assets, perhaps pavements, to begin the process. 

Already the agency policy is to set aside a quarter of its 

Federal funds for preservation projects that are chosen 

by county-wide selection committees.

The region has 82 cities and four counties so data collection 

and analysis will be a challenge. However, the focus upon 

asset management and maintaining a state of good repair 

are expected to become an ever-increasing emphasis for 

the planning process.

Washington Summary

The Washington experience shows that many years of asset 

management analysis and documentation may need to precede legislative action to increase investment in preservation. 

The Washington experience shows that legislators may not 

take a State’s needs analysis at face value but may require 

additional analysis and verification. However, in the Washington State example the agency’s asset management processes 

and analysis were validated and served to justify increased 

preservation investment. In some cases, the production of 

asset management plans and analysis may only start the 

legislative discussion. They may not be the end of the analysis.

The agency’s asset management focus also is supporting 

increased interest in asset management by regional planners 

and local governments. The State’s asset management 

processes and data are being examined as examples to be 

copied at the regional and local level. The long-time focus on 

preservation and maintaining a state of good repair that have 

been common in the State DOT also are now of increasing 

focus in the regional planning process. 
Report 4 35

Expanding MPO Involvement in Asset 

Management

An increasing number of metropolitan planning organizations 

are expanding their asset management efforts. Many are 

starting with pavement management as pavements represent 

one of the largest cost items. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) in the Bay Area of California has 

been coordinating a regional pavement management program since the 1990s. The Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) in the Reno, Nevada, region has been active since 

the 2000s, as has the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments, SEMCOG. Others such as the Cleveland and some 

Massachusetts MPOs have been 

more recent with pavement 

management programs starting 

after 2010. Collectively the 

trend seems to be that MPOs 

are increasingly adding asset 

management, or at least pavement management, efforts to 

their planning programs. 

Although the efforts are diverse, 

agency officials report that the 

regional planning programs are 

increasing an understanding among local governments of 

how to manage pavements. By beginning with pavements, 

agency officials say it is likely that eventually the programs 

will expand to additional assets. At the very least, seeing the 

regional pavement management programs may trigger a 

wider appreciation among local officials for how other assets 

such as bridges, traffic signals, facilities, and water and sewer 

systems can be sustained through asset management.

Reno MPO Pavement Management Process

The Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County 

is the transportation planning organization for the Reno, 

Collectively the trend 

seems to be that MPOs 

are increasingly adding 

asset management, 

or at least pavement 

management, efforts 

to their planning 

programs.
36 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Nevada, area. Unlike many transportation commissions, 

it is not just a planning organization but also has authority 

for regional pavement and transit services. As a result, it 

implements as well as plans transportation services.

In 2002 after years of rapid population growth and 

deferred maintenance, regional leaders recognized the 

need for a regional, systematic approach to managing 

its road network.[36] Pavement conditions were poor 

and both citizens and elected officials were concerned. 

A RTC Blue Ribbon Committee was organized with more 

than 40 community leaders to find solutions to the-then 

current and, even greater, future backlog in transportation needs. Preventive maintenance was recognized as 

a critical missing element in the efforts to eliminate 

an estimated $300 million backlog in pavement 

reconstruction needs.

Community leaders worked with RTC to put an issue on the 

ballot in 2002 to increase local taxes for transit and highway 

improvements. Soon thereafter, the RTC began a pavement 

management program that used preventive maintenance and 

reconstruction treatments to gradually improve local road 

and street conditions. The 2002 fuel tax had an escalator 

clause tied to the consumer price index (CPI) which was 

flat while construction prices increased substantially after 

2002. In 2008, voters approved linking the escalator to the 

Producer Price Index which more closely tracks construction 

cost changes. Both were passed by voter initiative, and then 

validated by the legislature. The legislature even overrode 

a gubernatorial veto of the escalator clause.

The RTC and local governments use a pavement management system to create a regional pavement preservation 

program. The management system provides a regional 

assessment of pavement conditions and investment 
Report 4 37

needs. It also helps prioritize projects. The regional process 

emphasizes preventive maintenance strategies such as 

slurry seals to keep pavements in good condition. It also 

provides a pavement reconstruction program for pavements 

that are beyond the point of benefiting from preventive 

maintenance.

The region has seen a steady increase in its pavement 

conditions. The goal is to have an average regional pavement 

condition index (PCI) rating of 70, but it has achieved a 

regional PCI of 87.[37] The region has moved into a preventive 

maintenance mode because of its high condition levels, 

allowing some funds to be transferred to other uses for 

several years. 

The wide use of slurry seals allows the incorporation of 

“complete street” improvements into preservation projects. 

The surface treatments allow for the economical reconfiguring of lanes to put streets on a “road diet” and to accommodate increased bicycle lanes. RTC reports crash reductions 

from 24 percent to 45 percent on its regional roads that 

have been treated in this fashion.

A Pavement Preservation Committee within RTC meets 

monthly to focus on:

 Maintaining an integrated regional PMS to ensure 

pavement assets are current, and inspected regularly 

and consistently throughout the region.

 Develop the Pavement Preservation Program to 

ensure the right treatments are provided to the right 

pavements at the right time; including a Preventive 

and Corrective Maintenance Program to keep good 

pavements in good repair.
38 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

 Development of the Pavement Preservation project 

selection process, utilizing data from the Regional PMS 

to ensure projects are selected on a needs-based 

system.

 Discussion of general issues to improve service and 

processes.

Over the years, RTC has continued to improve its pavement 

management processes. It has sponsored university research to develop improved pavement deterioration curves 

and to better reflect the benefits of maintenance activities. 

As seen in Figure 4, roadway conditions remain good across 

all of the network.

Pavement Condition Index by System

Figure 4. RTC area pavement conditions.

The RTC example illustrates that a region can recognize the 

need for a systematic asset management approach to drive 

its investment decision making. The regional leaders organized an effort that has steadily invested in its pavements, 

eliminated most of its backlog and put the region on a path 

to sustainable pavement conditions. The consideration of 

sound asset conditions, at least for pavements, remains a key 

planning objective along with improving mobility, accessibility, and environmental sustainability. 
Report 4 39

Southeast Michigan Council of Governments Asset 

Management Efforts

The title of the long-range plan for the Southeast Michigan 

Council of Governments (SEMCOG) is Creating Success with 

Our Transportation Assets. The title reflects a strong emphasis upon asset management in the planning process of the 

Detroit-area MPO. The MPO has focused upon asset management for more than 15 years and originally was prompted to 

do so by a State statute supporting asset management. Over 

the years, the agency has coordinated pavement data collection and supported local governments with pavement management analysis. It also incorporates pavement management strategies into its project-selection priorities.

The long-range plan summarizes the region’s declining asset 

conditions and documents the shortfall in investment to 

achieve desired condition levels. It notes that to raise 

the region’s percentage of pavements from the current 

70 percent good and fair to 90 percent would consume 

three fourths of all the region’s transportation funds. Such 

a degree of underfunding requires the MPO, State DOT 

and local governments to make tradeoffs and to use asset 

management to slow the rate of decline in the region’s 

asset conditions.

The State’s Asset Management Council is unique in the 

country and coordinates asset management efforts with 

State, regional and local agencies. The council’s and MPO’s 

asset management program promote the use of asset management principles among local agencies. The focus on asset 

management is incorporated into the MPO’s program efforts, 

project-selection priorities, and to the technical assistance 

provided to local agencies.

In its long-range plan, SEMCOG modeled different scenarios 

forecasting needed levels of investment to achieve desired 

pavement conditions. The scenarios examined different 
40 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

investment levels and different allocations to capital 

preventive maintenance, rehabilitation and reconstruction.[38]

Pavement modeling indicated the region could achieve 

95 percent of its pavements in good or fair condition if it 

spent $714 million with 50 percent dedicated to capital 

preventive maintenance. However, reducing capital preventive maintenance to only 5 percent of the pavement program 

caused the cost to achieve the 95 percent target to rise to 

$993 million, or $279 million more. The plan says decisions 

about how to distribute funds to manage road conditions 

have enormous consequences. Up to twice the benefit can 

be achieved when available funding is properly distributed 

between three categories: capital preventive maintenance, 

rehabilitation, and reconstruction. The modeling showed that 

for its region over the 20-year 

period the optimized investment mix to sustain pavements 

at the lowest life cycle cost was 

an approximate one-third split 

for each of capital preventive 

maintenance, rehabilitation 

and reconstruction. 

The MPO established planninglevel program allocations 

through 2035 by conducting 

analysis of program needs for 

transit, pavements, bridges, 

highway capacity, safety, 

nonmotorized, and road operations needs.[39] It used 

programs such as the Michigan DOT’s pavement and bridge 

forecasting tools, the FHWA Highway Economic Requirements System—State Version (HERS-ST) and spreadsheet 

tools. It analyzed different investment levels and their impact 

upon system condition and performance. Then based upon 

The plan says decisions 

about how to distribute 

funds to manage road 

conditions have enormous consequences. 

Up to twice the benefit 

can be achieved when 

available funding is 

properly distributed 

between three categories: capital preventive 

maintenance, rehabilitation and reconstruction. 
Report 4 41

tradeoff analysis using both quantitative and the qualitative 

judgment of the MPO board the agency settled on a final 

funding scenario. It formally adopted a long-range funding 

scenario with the following allocations of expected revenues.

 Transit—23%

 Pavement—21%

 Bridge—6%

 Highway capacity—10%

 Safety—.5%

 Non-motorized—5%

 Road operations—41%

The asset management focus carries into the STIP 

development and project-selection processes where the 

asset-condition data influence project selection priorities. 

The MPO coordinates collection of pavement condition data 

on the region’s entire Federal-aid network. MPO committees 

review the pavement condition data and use it to prioritize 

pavement projects requested by members. The MPO has a 

general goal of trying to balance investments in pavement 

funds between one-third reconstruction, one-third rehabilitation and one-third for capital preventive maintenance in 

keeping with the pavement modeling recommendations. 

Those splits are general, regional planning benchmarks and 

may vary based upon the pavement conditions in an individual community. However, the intent reflects the objective 

of supporting a balanced mixed of treatments. The deteriorated state of many pavements limits the number of 

sections that could benefit from preservation treatments.
42 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

As in the Reno, Nevada, region and the Bay Area as will be 

described below, SEMCOG assists local decision makers by 

providing pavement management models, mapping and 

support. A software package called Roadsoft is made 

available for free to Michigan local road agencies through 

support from the Michigan Department of Transportation.

SEMCOG has supported training sessions, called “universities”, in which it helps local governments understand and 

benefit from pavement management practices. It emphasizes 

that a key first step in managing assets is understanding 

what assets agencies have and what condition they are in.

Bay Area MTC Pavement Management Process

The Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) 

is the MPO for the greater San Francisco-Oakland region. It 

provides one of the longest-running local government asset 

management programs in the country. It first started in 1982 

with a study of local street and road maintenance needs and 

the shortfall in funding local street networks faced.[40] That 

led the MPO to develop a pavement management system to 

help local governments assess the conditions of their roads 

and streets. It also led to the MPO’s adoption of asset 

management and the incorporation of it into the regional 

planning program.

The long history of the MTC asset management effort may 

provide insights into how regional asset management programs may evolve elsewhere. A committee of public works 

directors began in the 1980s to develop a simplified pavement management data-collection and modeling process 

to meet the needs of local governments. That has evolved 

until today when the MTC provides a full suite of support 

products to help local governments better manage their 

assets. The Pavement Management Technical Assistance 

Program (PTAP) provides local governments assistance and 

expertise in maintaining pavement management systems. 
Report 4 43

The MPO has invested nearly $11 million in Surface Transportation Program funds to 520 PTAP projects to assist cities 

and counties with pavement management needs. The program funds projects that implement or upgrade pavement 

management databases, provides local decision makers 

with accurate pavement-condition data, supports design of 

pavement preservation projects, and supports management 

of nonpavement street and road assets.

The MTC says that every local government in the Bay Area 

now uses a pavement management system. To be eligible for 

MPO funding, a pavement project must derive from a certified pavement management system and must be recognized 

as a cost-effective treatment.[41] The certification ensures that 

the local pavement management systems use complete, 

updated data, can assess distresses, and can calculate 

budget needs for maintaining pavements for at least the 

next three years. 

To help local governments operate effective pavement 

management systems, the MPO provides the following 

support services:

 A pavement management system called StreetSaver, 

which is in its ninth version

 A StreetSaver Plus that includes maintenance needs 

modules

 A software support plan that provides technical 

assistance for using the software

 An online course for how to organize and maintain 

a road or street inventory and explains how data is 

collected and the process for calculating budget needs 

and maintenance and rehabilitation treatments
44 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

 Another course on pavement condition assessment

 A smart phone app for collecting pavement 

distress data

 A pavement distress collection manual

 Mapping assistance

 Pavement management training.

The MPO also releases annual updates of pavement conditions on the local street and road network. Its 2014 report 

says that the Bay Area’s 43,000 lane miles of local streets 

remain stuck in the “fair” condition with a pavement condition index average rating of 66 out of a possible 100. It is the 

fifth consecutive year that the conditions remained at 66, 

and the overall conditions have not changed substantially 

since 2006. The MPO goal is to get the average network 

score to 75.

The MPO commends local governments that have improved 

their pavement management processes or raised their 

pavement conditions. It also publishes conditions by 

community as seen in Figure 5. It seeks to create collaboration among local public service departments, local mayors, 

managers and elected officials to support the management 

of locally owned assets.

The emphasis on asset management at the project and local 

asset level is also reflected in the MPO’s long-range plan, 

called Plan Bay Area. It dedicates 87 percent of all available 

funding to sustaining the existing assets.[42] The MPO plan 

notes that the Bay Area is relatively built out and the region 

supports increased preservation of the core urban area. 

These factors plus the age of many of the region’s assets 

lead the MPO to focus on preserving existing assets and to
Report 4 45

Figure 5. Percent of Poor Pavement by Selected Communities.

SOURCE: MTC 2014 PAVEMENT REPORT

devote fewer resources to system expansion. The long-range 

plan estimates that available and committed funds will be 

adequate to sustain the region’s average PCI condition of 66 

but will not be adequate to achieve the desired target of 75. 

The plan also assumes that a $1 toll increase will be needed 

in 2019 to sustain the condition of the region’s bridges.[43]

Although the region’s pavement management system focuses 

on roadways, the long-range plan embraces asset management for all of its transportation network including the 

region’s extensive rail and transit systems. It supports a 

transit sustainability initiative that seeks to keep the transit 

network in a state of good repair as an essential component 

of meeting ridership demand.

California Statewide Local Asset Assessment

A focus on local road, bridge and other asset conditions 

spread across California and results in a biennial report 

produced by the California State Association of Counties, 

the League of California Cities and the regional transportation planning agencies. The California Local Streets and 

Pavement Deficiencies by Community
46 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Roads Needs Assessment 2014 Update seeks to increase 

attention on asset management and asset investment 

needs in the State, regional, and local budgeting and 

planning processes.[44]

The 2014 report surveyed 

California’s 58 counties and 

482 cities and captured data 

from more than 99 percent of 

the State’s local streets and 

roads. It reports that 85 

percent of the agencies that 

provide data to the statewide 

survey collected their data 

through a pavement management system, increasing the 

report’s confidence level. 

The report emphasizes that 

every trip begins with a city 

street or country road making 

their condition critical to a 

sustainable, well-functioning 

multi-modal transportation network. The city-and-countysponsored report says while there is a significant focus 

on climate change and building sustainable communities, 

there needs to be recognition that sustainable communities 

cannot function without a well-maintained local street and 

road network.

The report notes that prior to its first edition in 2008, no 

statewide data existed about the condition of local streets 

and roads, although individual cities or counties may have 

analyzed their local conditions. The biennial assessment provides an important piece of policy information for decision 

makers evaluating the condition of the state’s infrastructure. 

The report says that historically State transportation funding 

The city-and-countysponsored report 

says while there is a 

significant focus on 

climate change and 

building sustainable 

communities, there 

needs to be recognition 

that sustainable 

communities cannot 

function without 

a well-maintained 

local street and road 

network.
Report 4 47

investment decisions were made without local pavement 

condition data.

The report characterizes California’s local streets and roads 

as “rolling toward a cliff’s edge.” It says that the average 

Statewide Pavement Condition Index (PCI) score has 

deteriorated to 66 out of 100 which it categorizes as 

“at risk.” Fifty-four of 58 counties are either in the “at risk” 

condition or worse. Based on the modeling summarized 

in the report if current funding remains unchanged the 

unfunded backlog will grow from the current $40 billion 

level to $61 billion by 2024.

The report says the goal is to get the average PCI to 80, 

the point at which lower-cost best management practices 

such as thin overlays and seals can be used to sustain 

sound conditions for a lower cost. However, with the average 

condition deteriorating, agencies’ ability to rely on low-cost 

preservation treatments slips further away each year. The 

report estimates it is 12 times less costly to maintain a 

pavement with best management practices than through 

resurfacing or rehabilitation. 

The report summarizes modeling that says based on the 

current $1.657 billion per year that local governments spend 

on pavements by 2024 the average PCI will fall from 66 to 

55. It would take a spending increase to $3.328 billion annually through 2024 just to sustain today’s conditions. Spending up to $7.275 billion annually will be needed statewide 

on local streets and roads to achieve an average PCI of 

84 by 2025.

The local governments also assessed investment needs for 

“essential components” including curb ramps, sidewalks, 

storm drains, streetlights and signals. It estimates that over 

20 years those will require $31 billion by local governments, 

of which $20.9 billion is not currently available. For bridges, 
48 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

the report estimates the 11,863 local bridges face a $1.3 billion 

shortfall.

The report emphasizes that while the current average pavement condition is not yet poor, the majority of lane miles are 

at the point of the pavement deterioration curve where they 

will decline rapidly in the next decade. The report tries to 

galvanize decision makers to invest now to avoid higher 

costs in future years to restore pavements to their current 

level. The report estimates that if the pavements could be 

brought to a State of good condition, a preventive maintenance program would cost only $2.4 billion annually, slightly 

more than current expenditures. However, to reach that 

condition substantial upfront investment is needed to 

eliminate the backlog of poor pavements.

The local government report intends to spur state, local 

and regional decision makers to better understand the 

investment needs for the local street and road network. 

It concludes that streets and roads will deteriorate rapidly 

in the next decade and that the cost of restoring conditions 

will increase sharply.
Report 4 49

3. Summary

The State and metropolitan planning process as well as 

the State budgeting process are likely to evolve as a result 

of MAP-21’s emphasis on long-term asset management and 

financial plans. MPOs already are beginning to include the 

achievement of asset condition targets as a major consideration in their plans and TIPs along with traditional considerations of mobility, accessibility, air quality, and economic 

competitiveness. The focus upon asset condition targets is 

likely to drive the planning process to increase efforts to 

collect asset condition data, to prioritize projects based upon 

conditions, and to encourage long-term asset management. 

The MPO focus on asset management may well encourage 

closer coordination with State transportation agencies in 

terms of sharing asset condition data, developing bridge 

and pavement models, and in selecting projects that achieve 

asset-condition targets.

The focus on asset management also seems to be growing to 

include more local agencies. As local agency officials engage 

in the planning process and understand how asset management can help achieve condition targets on the NHS, it also 

increases their appreciation for how asset management can 

help them manage their locally owned assets. As seen in the 

Bay Area, metropolitan Detroit, in Reno and Washington 

State, local governments are becoming more aware of asset 

management and how it can help their communities. 

The common elements that seem to be developing in the 

planning agencies that are embracing asset management 

include:

Policies and goals that officially adopt asset management 

as the means by which the region will achieve its asset condition targets and sustain them into the future are likely to 

become more common.
50 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

Asset condition targets are likely to become explicit and be 

the benchmarks by which progress is measured. Projects 

that help achieve the targets are likely to receive priority in 

the project-selection process.

Encouragement of a lifecycle approach that relies on timely 

preservation and cost-effective treatments is likely to become more common. This encouragement may come in the 

form of project-selection and funding priority for treatments 

that are based on asset management principles. 

Supporting data and information are likely to be emphasized 

in the planning process. As seen in the Bay Area and in the 

greater Detroit area, the MPO is likely to become another 

source of information, training and assistance for local governments to help them adopt asset management practices.

A long-term perspective that emphasizes not just current 

asset conditions but whether the region is tracking to 

sustain its conditions into the future is likely to become a 

prominent part of the planning process. The financial plans 

support this long-term perspective by comparing forecasted revenue with the amounts needed to sustain condition 

targets. Future gaps in funding will be identified years in 

advance and may well influence the programming and State 

budgeting decisions.

Beyond the Federal planning process, the asset management 

and financial plans are likely to intersect at least occasionally 

with the State budgeting process. If the financial plans and 

asset management plans are to be meaningful, the program 

amounts they call for need to be appropriated in the State 

budgeting process. To date, the State budgeting process and 

the Federal planning process operate on separate cycles, 

with separate rules, and separate decision makers. However, 

if States identify needed investment amounts in their asset 

management and financial plans those amounts will need to 
Report 4 51

be appropriated by State legislatures for the plans to be 

meaningful. This intersection provide States and MPOs with 

a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge will be to 

make the asset management plans understandable and 

convincing to complement the State budgeting process. 

The opportunity is that the asset management plans and 

financial plans may provide new insights which allow 

legislators to better understand the long-term investment 

needs of transportation assets.
52 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management

4. Endnotes

[1] Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23 Sec. 450.3222 (10) (i)

[2] FHWA Table 13 Deficient Bridges by State and Highway System 

2014 from the National Bridge Inventory site.

[3] Code of Federal Regulations, Title 23, Sec. 450.214—

Planning Assistance and Standards

[4] Florida Department of Transportation Performance 

Management/Measurement Policy, Topic No: 000-525-052-a

[5] Florida Statute 339.135 

[6] Florida Statue 334.046

[7] Florida Statute 339.64

[8] Florida DOT MAP-21 Transportation Performance Report, 

A report to Florida’s Congressional Delegation, February 2015.

[9] Florida Department of Transportation, Transportation 

Performance Report, 2015

[10] Florida Department of Transportation 2014 Flexible Pavement 

Condition Survey Facts and Figures

[11] Cunagin, W., J.Mussellman, R. Taylor, B. Deitrich, Florida’s Return 

on Investment from Pavement Research and Development, 

Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting 2014.

[12] Florida Department of Transportation 2014 Maintenance and 

Operations Report, p 205

[13] Florida Department of Transportation, Maintenance and 

Operations 2014 Performance Report, at http://www.dot.State.

fl.us/planning/performance/2014/2014MaintenanceOperations.

pdf accessed July 20, 2015

[14] Florida Department of Transportation, History of Florida 

Pavement Condition Survey, 1973-2015, accessed at http://www.

dot.state.fl.us/statematerialsoffice/pavement/performance/pcs/

pcshistory.pdf

[15] Florida Department of Transportation, Program and Resource 

Plan Summary Fiscal Years 1983/84 to 2013/14, accessed 

July 20, 2015 at http://www.dot.State.fl.us/OWPB/pra/

ProgramAndResourcePlanHistory.pdf

[16] Florida Department of Transportation Five Year Work Program 
Report 4 53

[17] Florida Department of Transportation Program and Resource 

Plan, 2013/14 through 2018/19, April 2014, pp 4-6

[18] Minnesota DOT Minnesota State Highway Investment Plan: 

2014-2033, accessed at http://www.dot.State.mn.us/

assetmanagement/pdf/tamp/tamp.pdf July 20, 2015

[19] Metropolitan Council, Transportation Policy Plan, Thrive MSP 

2040 accessed at http://www.metrocouncil.org/Planning/

Projects/Thrive-2040.aspx July 15, 2015

[20] Metropolitan Council, Thrive 2040 p 5

[21] Metropolitan Council section 4.19

[22] Fact sheet on Governor Dayton’s proposal by the Office of 

the Governor accessed at http://mn.gov/governor/images/

transportation_plan_fact_sheet.pdf

[23] MnSHP executive summary p.ES-0

[24] Minnesota Public Radio, MN Chamber raises doubts about road 

funding, April 24, 2015 accessed at http://blogs.mprnews.org/

capitol-view/2015/04/mn-chamber-raises-questions-aboutroad-funding/

[25] Review of Assumptions in the Report—Minnesota Moving 

Ahead: Transportation Funding and Financing for the Next 20 

Years, Accenture, April 2015

[26] Minneapolis StarTribune, May 28, 2015 at http://

www.startribune.com/senate-approves-17-billion-educationbudget-bill-heads-to-dayton-who-vows-veto/304140701/

[27] Washington State DOT Grey Notebook, February, 2015 pp 6-13

[28] Washington State DOT, The Grey Notebook 54, August 2014

[29] Governor Inslee’s Transportation Improvement Package, Dec. 

2014, accessed at http://www.governor.wa.gov/sites/default/

files/documents/Transportation_Investment_Package_2014.pdf

[30] State of Washington, Joint Legislative Audit and Review 

Committee (JLARC), Total Highway Maintenance and 

Preservation Estimates are Available, Phase I Briefing Report, 

Jan. 7, 2014

[31] Scanlan Consulting, WSDOT’s Estimate of Long-Term Highway 

Maintenance and Preservation Needs, Sept. 2, 2014

[32] Associated Press, July 2, 2015, accessed at http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/legislature-passes-16-1-billion-transportation-revenue-bill/
[33] Legislative Evaluation and Accountability Program (LEAP) 

Transportation Document 2015 NL-1 accessed at http://

leap.leg.wa.gov/leap/Budget/Detail/2015/STLEAPDoc2015NL-1_0227.pdf

[34] Puget Sound Regional Council, Regional Asset Management 

Program Peer Review May 2014

[35] PSRC Transportation 2040 Update, Appendix S State of Good 

Repair

[36] Regional Preventive Maintenance Program, 2004, a report by 

the RTC

[37] Personal communication with RTC staff

[38] SEMCOG, Creating Success with Our Transportation Assets, 

2040 Regional Transportation Plan for Southeast Michigan, 

table 11

[39] SEMCOG, Transportation Investment Prioritization Process, 

Technical Report, June 30, 2009

[40] Metropolitan Transportation Commission website at 

http://www.mtcpms.org/aboutus/index.html

[41] MTC resolution 4035 (Project Selection Policies and 

Programming the STP and CMAQ funds)

[42] Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Plan Bay Area, p 14 

[43] Plan Bay Area p 75

[44] California State Association of Counties, League of California 

Cities, accessed at https://www.cacities.org/MemberEngagement/Professional-Departments/Public-Works-OfficersDepartment/California-Statewide-Local-Streets-and-RoadsNeeds.aspx

54 Financial Planning for Transportation Asset Management
Report 4 55

Nastaran Saadatmand

Asset Management Program Manager

Office of Asset Management, Pavements, and Construction

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC, 20590

(202) 366-1337

nastaran.saadatmand@dot.gov

Stephen Gaj

Leader, System Management & Monitoring Team

Office of Asset Management, Pavements, and Construction

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

(202) 366-1336

stephen.gaj@dot.gov

Prepared by:

Gordon Proctor

Gordon Proctor & Associates, Inc. 

and

Shobna Varma

StarIsis Corporation

Administrative and Contract Support by:

Greenman Pedersen Inc. 




Office of Asset Management, Pavements and Construction

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE • Washington, DC 20590

FHWA-HIF-16-001

ASSET MANAGEMENT FINANCIAL REPORT SERIES