Transportation Asset Management Case Studies

MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: DRIVING PERFORMANCE

A Glance at Data-Driven Decisionmaking Practices

Presented by
©iStockphoto / The-Tor
1

Note From the Directors 

With factors such as an aging national infrastructure, increasing 

congestion, and limited funds weighing heavily on transportation 

agencies, State departments of transportation are looking for innovative ways to manage and maintain their transportation assets.

One tool that continues to provide great benefits is transportation 

asset management (TAM), a strategic approach that strives to provide 

the best return for each dollar invested. A TAM approach can provide 

valuable information for planning, programming, and overall management of the transportation network. Information from management systems is essential in transportation decisionmaking to establish realistic agency goals; set investment levels across assets, including 

transportation system safety, operations, preservation, and maintenance; and select priorities for Statewide Transportation Improvement Program preparation. In general, TAM uses information from 

management systems to form a performance-based approach for 

managing the network.

TAM endeavors vary from State to State and include efforts in 

areas of pavement and bridge management, network preservation, 

economics in asset management, life-cycle cost analysis, highway 

safety and operations, among others. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) believes that transportation agencies work more 

efficiently when information about one another’s successes is shared. 

Recognizing that each State’s experience is unique, FHWA’s Office of 

Asset Management is continuing its series of TAM case study reports, 

which began in 2002.

On behalf of FHWA’s Office of Asset Management and Office of 

Planning, we are pleased to present this case study on the application of management systems for planning and programming. Information from management systems with engineering and economic 

analysis is an important element of planning, programming, and 

decisionmaking. We believe that this and other case studies will 

help transportation agencies meet the increasingly complex challenges facing them today.

J.B. “Butch” Wlaschin, P.E. Harlan Miller

Director, Office of Asset Management Acting Director, Office of Planning

July 2009
2

Note to the Reader

The Transportation Asset Management Case Study Series is 

the result of a partnership between State departments of 

transportation and the Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) Office of Asset Management. FHWA provides the 

forum from which to share information, and the individual 

States provide the details of their experiences. For each case 

study report, FHWA interviewed State transportation staff, 

and the resulting material was approved by the State. As such, 

the reports rely on the agencies’ own assessment of their 

experience. Readers should note that the reported results may 

or may not be reproducible in other organizations. n
3

Executive Summary 

In recent years, the transportation community has shifted its 

emphasis from building and expanding the transportation 

system to preserving and better managing the transportation 

system. With an aging infrastructure, increasing congestion, 

and limited financial resources, sharing, understanding, and 

adopting innovative best practices are the keys to maximize 

system performance, improve the customer’s experience, and 

minimize life-cycle costs. 

Asset management is an efficient and cost-effective management approach that allows for strategic decisions as to 

how specific resources should be deployed. Asset management is a true value added to transportation planning and 

programming, which has become a challenging task due to 

limited funding. Planners and programmers who face budget 

constraints are to prioritize and select candidate projects from 

a pool of needed work throughout their States or local jurisdictions. Information from various management systems, 

including highway pavements, bridges, safety, traffic congestion, public-transportation facilities, and other assets, are 

extremely valuable to transportation agencies that are under 

increasing pressure to balance their budgets while responding 

to public demands for quality services. 

Another important aspect of asset management is that it 

allows for the implementation of performance-based goals. It 

is clear that that current public and political sentiment in the 

United States demands greater accountability from the infrastructure owners and operators. Planning and programming 

decisions made based on asset management and performance 

management are key to such accountability. n ©iStockphoto / LyaC
4

©iStockphoto / W A Britten
5

TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT 

TO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

Transportation asset management (TAM) is a strategic and systematic 

process of allocating resources for the preservation, operation, management, upgrade, and expansion of the Nation’s transportation infrastructure. Through the use of management systems and other tools, such as 

engineering and economic analyses, transportation agencies can strive to 

ensure the proper use and performance of those assets. TAM provides a 

holistic framework for agencies to maximize the return on investment, 

improve system performance, and increase customer satisfaction.

Transportation planning is a decisionmaking process. To make an 

informed decision, tools are needed to measure, assess, and forecast the 

impacts of transportation-planning alternatives. As a range of investment 

options are considered during the planning process, information-management systems that provide timely analyses and information to evaluate 

the cost and performance of various options and scenarios become quite 

important. 

In this light, TAM is a true value added to transportation planning. 

TAM provides a link between policies and plan implementation within 

the decisionmaking framework and ensures that services and performance 

are aligned to customer’s expectations. TAM relies on data and data analysis to optimize the planning, preservation, improvement, and replacement 

of assets. Instead of simply accounting for existing infrastructure and a 

series of individual projects, TAM looks at the whole network and makes 

strategic decisions as to how specific 

resources—money and staff—should be 

deployed. TAM serves as a critical link 

to connect the people who create the 

systems to those who manage and/or 

monitor the systems.

Transportation Asset 

Management relies on 

data and data analysis to 

optimize the planning, 

preservation, improvement, 

and replacement of assets.
6

APPLICATION OF MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS 

FOR VARIOUS ASSETS

In recent years, the transportation community has shifted its emphasis 

from building the transportation system to managing and enhancing the 

performance of our transportation system. As the transportation community moves from a program philosophy of being reactive and utilizing the 

worst-first approach, to that of developing a more strategic approach to 

asset management, more State transportation agencies are using many of 

the TAM principles to preserve the system and maximize its performance. 

A phrase commonly used is “Keep the good road good.” Several States 

even have legislation that requires the implementation of TAM principles 

linked with funding to their management programs. Legislation can be 

helpful in setting a clear statewide vision and preserving revenues for 

important asset preservation. 

Information from management systems for highway pavements, bridges, safety, traffic congestion, public-transportation facilities, and other 

assets are valuable as transportation agencies are under increasing pressure 

to balance their budgets and at the same time respond to public demands 

for quality services. The use of management-systems information provides 

a framework for cost-effective decisionmaking that emphasizes enhanced 

service at reduced life-cycle costs. The primary outcome of transportation-management systems is improved system performance and safety. 

There are many different TAM information-management systems, and 

although the number and types of 

these systems do vary from State-toState, benefits can be reaped from 

understanding the structure of existing 

information-management systems in a 

way that improves data analysis, tradeoff 

analysis, and decisionmaking. 

The use of managementsystems information 

provides a framework 

for cost-effective decisionmaking that emphasizes 

enhanced service at 

reduced life-cycle costs. 
7

COLLABORATION, INTEGRATED PLANNING, 

AND ASSET MANAGEMENT DECISIONMAKING

Federal planning regulations are codified in 23 CFR 450. According to 

§450.208(e), each State may apply asset-management principles and techniques in establishing planning goals, defining statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (TIP) priorities, and assessing transportationinvestment decisions, including transportation-system safety, operations, 

preservation, and maintenance. Likewise, with the metropolitan transportation-planning process under §450.306(e), metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), States, and public-transportation operators may apply 

asset-management principles and techniques in establishing planning goals, 

defining TIP priorities, and assessing transportation-investment decisions. 

These include transportation-system safety, operations, preservation, and 

maintenance, as well as strategies and policies to support homeland security and to safeguard the personal security of all motorized and non-motorized users.

©iStockphoto / Kenneth Sponsler
There are various management 

approaches used by organizations to 

manage their assets. Asset management 

is an efficient and cost-effective approach 

that strategically targets resources. The 

concept of asset management covers a 

broad range of activities and functions. 

It touches nearly every aspect of the business functions of a transportation agency, 

including planning, engineering, finance, 

programming, construction, maintenance, and information systems. Asset 

management includes investment decisions, prioritization, relationships 

with different stakeholders and partners, long-range transportation planning, capital-project development, and more. 

Many State departments of transportation are beginning to integrate 

asset management into their business practices. They are moving from a 

program philosophy of being reactive to developing a more strategic 

approach. As State transportation agencies continue to deal with limited 

funding, they are moving toward performance measures for budgeting and 

capital programming to focus their resources on key strategic business 

plans or goals and to improve their accountability to the traveling public. 

Several States even have legislation that requires the implementation of 

performance-based goals associated with asset management. 

When programming and planning transportation, investment opportunities must occur in a coordinated and collaborative manner. The challenge for any organization is to ensure that it has sufficient funding to preserve the road system, while still meeting the infrastructure needs of the 

region it serves. The selection of different projects to be included in a 

planning budget is constrained by available funding and usually requires 

some type of prioritization. By linking strategic performance measures to 

assets, operations, and maintenance, a connection between the policies and 

plan implementations can be established. The condition data and future 

performance data provide feedback and updates to the decisionmaking 

process and verifies whether the system satisfies transportation and landuse goals or requires major capital improvements.

8

TAM covers a broad range 

of activities and functions. 

It touches nearly every 

aspect of the business 

functions of a transportation agency, including 

planning, engineering, 

finance, programming, 

construction, maintenance, 

and information systems. 
9

EXAMPLES OF MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS 

FOR VARIOUS ASSETS IN TRANSPORTATION 

PLANNING

Montana Department of Transportation (MDT): 

Performance Planning Process

Montana is a large, rural, and sparsely populated State. Its extensive 

highway system plays a central role in connecting its residents and 

communities to each other and the world. The transportation system 

is the largest single capital investment in Montana. The challenge for 

the Montana Department of Transportation (MDT) is to identify the 

most effective strategies for preserving and maintaining the system.

TranPlan 21, MDT’s long-range transportation policy plan, commits 

to establish a process for setting overall priorities for resource allocation. 

This process is called the Performance Programming Process (P3

), which is 

an iterative trade-off analysis that uses management systems to generate a 

funding level that best meets performance goals. The P3 process emphasizes equity of conditions per functional class road among each of their 

five districts. The analysis relies on the best available conditions data and 

©iStockphoto / Meppu
10

trade-off scenarios to ensure that dollars are allocated based on the general 

public’s travel priorities. P3 enables MDT to select those projects that will 

yield the biggest benefits to the users of the highway system. Montana 

refines this process by continually modifying P3

’s predictive analysis tool 

to more closely reflect actual results and trends in the field. 

P3 uses the outputs from MDT’s pavement-, bridge-, and congestionmanagement systems to assess alternative investments and strategies that 

contribute to system-performance goals. P3 allocates resources to systems, 

districts, and the different categories of projects to meet or exceed performance goals. Project selection is usually made among projects that belong 

in the same asset class. Many States are looking to integrate the individual 

management systems into a statewide management process, but currently 

most States analyze the management systems separately. In the overall 

process that transportation agencies go through for setting priorities— 

funding, performance measures, budgets, and planning—many identify 

information from their management systems as key inputs to statewide 

planning and operation.

When TranPlan 21 was completed in 1995, it set a direction for the 

agency to use output from the management systems in the P3. It linked 

project selection with policy and planning goals, with an emphasis on 

©iStockphoto / aimintang
11

improving pavement conditions on the 

State’s arterial highways. A dedicated 

funding source for pavement preservation since 1997, along with guidelines 

for project selection that emphasize a 

balanced program, it has provided for a 

broader array of projects. This includes 

preservation, minor and major rehabilitation, and reconstruction projects that are implemented in a timely and 

effective manner. The result is a trend for all State roadway systems to sustain a gradual improvement in their conditions. In 2000, 64 percent of 

Interstates were classified in good condition; by 2007, 91 percent were 

classified in good condition. This trend continues across all State roadway 

systems. MDT’s success in meeting its performance goals serves as a model 

for others. Its pavement-preservation program is a team effort that crosses 

many departments, including engineering, planning, operations, and 

maintenance within MDT.

Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans): Planning Initiative

Vermont is a small State with an aging infrastructure that must be preserved. The Vermont Agency of Transportation (VTrans) is one of the few 

State agencies that have asset management and performance measures 

written into statute. 

In 2005, VTrans developed a quantifiable project prioritization method 

that assigns a numeric score to projects listed in the annual budget. These 

scores help explain why one project is chosen over another. Per statute, the 

scoring system must include “asset-management–based factors, which are 

objective and quantifiable” including:

• Safety.

• Traffic volume.

• Availability of alternate routes.

• Future maintenance and reconstruction costs.

• Priorities assigned by the regional planning commission or the 

Chittenden County MPO.

Many States are looking to 

integrate the individual 

management systems into 

a statewide management 

process, but currently most 

States analyze the management systems separately. 
12

VTrans incorporates local project priorities from their MPO and 

regional planning commissions into the overall priority for projects listed 

in the capital program. These quantitative scores drive the transportationproject choices within asset classes. The entire process is transparent, with 

local and VTrans project scores available for anyone to see. 

In addition, VTrans developed strategic performance measures that 

focus on programs and asset classes. These measures track and analyze 

investments with a single type of asset, such as pavement, bridges, safety, 

and maintenance. 

Decisions on where to budget money for assets depend on the priority 

scores and associated performance measures, as well as on the current asset 

condition and institutional knowledge. This same information assists decisionmakers as they evaluate among different asset classes to determine the 

relative program size. VTrans continues to enhance the process as they 

advance its statewide TAM effort.

There are many factors used by VTrans to prioritize projects. In the paving section, information is collected about pavement surface conditions 

with a specially equipped van, which measures rutting, cracking, pavement 

roughness, and more. Historical data is factored into the analysis to calculate estimated future pavement conditions at different funding levels. This 

data is analyzed for the entire State highway network to determine the optimum treatment to maximize the pavement’s life expectancy. These factors 

are combined with regional priorities to develop the VTrans annual paving 

program. The factors for paving include the pavement condition index 

(based on 20 points), benefit–cost (60 points), and regional priority 

(20 points). The results from these analyses are summarized for the 

three program funding categories: Interstate, State highways, and town 

highways.

For comparison purposes, VTrans also ran a worst-first scenario to 

measure the benefit of using an asset-management approach that applies 

the right treatment at the right time. Figure 1 shows two $55-million scenarios: One scenario uses asset management and the other uses a worstfirst scenario. 

Asset-management analysis is also used as part of the VTrans preservation-first program, which began in 2006 and is called “The Road to 

Affordability.” This program postpones a number of highway-capacity 

projects in order to shift the focus to preserving pavements, bridges, and 
13

culverts. To help support this effort, VTrans formed an asset-management 

unit in the roadway section. At present, their focus is on culverts, signs, 

and substandard sections of roadway. 

VTrans has started a long-term effort to integrate data from the independent asset-management systems into an improved data warehouse. The 

objective is to improve decisionmaking for transportation-program managers and to help evaluate among asset classes. 

State of New Jersey: Statewide Capital Investment Strategy 

(SCIS)

New Jersey’s Statewide Capital Investment Strategy (SCIS) is a decisionmaking tool used to develop investment options for transportation categories based on goals, objectives, and performance measures. Of note, it 

includes transportation investments in common categories across agencies 

rather than in separate strategies for each agency. This integrated approach 

allows the public to better understand the total State investment needed for 

roads, bridges, and public transportation. This overview permits and fosters 

a collaborative approach to make the best use of available transportation 

funding in order to provide the most efficient and effective use of resources.

Figure 1. Graph. Future travel weighted pavement conditions at different funding levels. 

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019

Pavement Condition

Good

Fair

Poor

Very

Poor

$55 Worst First $55m $77.5m $100m

Target >70

Year
14

The SCIS is an asset-management approach for maintaining, upgrading, and operating physical-asset costs effectively. This effort involved the 

New Jersey Department of Transportation, New Jersey Transit, the New 

Jersey Turnpike Authority, and the South Jersey Transportation Authority, as well as the State’s three MPOs. The SCIS links broad goals and policies to the specific investment choice by allocating resources into major 

transportation-asset categories, which are based on various investment 

options guided by investment targets and clear policy goals. 

The SCIS shows the total infrastructure and other investment needs 

associated with each category and establishes 10-year-target annual investment levels for each category based on predicted revenue levels. It is 

important to understand that each agency’s revenues are independent. 

Capital work done by each transportation agency is classified into program 

categories along with associated goals, objectives, and performance measures for each. These categories include bridges, road, mass transit, airports, safety, congestion, multimodal, transportation-support facilities, and 

local support. Various alternative investment scenarios are evaluated to 

select investment targets within the constrained budget. The outcome is 

the desired investment target amount that is connected to a level predetermined to achieve performance objectives. SCIS improves the State’s ability 

to prioritize transportation programs and projects related to system objec-

©iStockphoto / Natalia Bratslavsky
15

tives and performance measures. This 

process is a collaborative approach to 

making the best use of available transportation funding in an efficient and 

effective manner.

 SCIS has the ability to link the selection of projects for capital funding with 

broad program objectives. On the basis 

of pavement-preservation goals, a performance analysis is conducted to determine how well various alternative 

investment scenarios perform over time. This identifies the trade-offs 

and outcomes that are to be expected from the resulting project mix. 

In New Jersey, the goal was to eliminate one half of the backlog of 

deficient pavements over the next 10 years. On the basis of the State’s 

findings, recommendations were made to increase the funding level 

for highway resurfacing, highway capital maintenance, and highway 

rehabilitation and reconstruction programs to achieve these objectives. 

The significant funding increased enough to set in motion a comprehensive pavement program that consisted of various treatments for highway 

problems in order to prevent the constant downward trend. These treatments include both (a) expensive rehabilitation and reconstruction projects 

and (b) less-expensive resurfacing projects that extend service life and 

improve smoothness, with a wide range of lower cost and often innovative, 

preventative maintenance-repair techniques. With competing transportation needs and limited funding, the SCIS focuses on producing better 

system-wide pavement quality, as opposed to focusing only on worst-first 

recommendation projects.

Tucson, AZ: Pima Association of Governments (PAG) 

Pima Association of Governments (PAG) is the MPO for the Eastern 

Pima County and the Tucson, AZ, urbanized area. Planning for PAG’s 

Regional Transportation Plan and TIP includes a focus on cross-jurisdictional planning issues, such as air quality, water quality, transportation, 

and population growth. Candidate projects are evaluated by using 

established criteria set by the TIP. The principle criteria consist of 

the following eight items: 

In New Jersey, the significant funding increased 

enough to set in motion a 

comprehensive pavement 

program that consisted of 

various treatments for 

highway problems. 
16

• Safety benefits. 

• Congestion benefits. 

• Accessibility improvements. 

• Volume of use. 

• Environmental benefits. 

• System preservation. 

• Regional significance.

• Improved system continuity. 

The goal of the process is to develop a TIP that makes optimum use 

of available Federal, State, and local funds and resources to serve the 

region’s multimodal transportation needs. Each member agency or jurisdiction can use its own capital improvement projects’ process to determine which projects to propose; however, to preserve and enhance the 

existing transportation system, priority projects also are identified through 

regional management systems, including pavement-, safety-, congestion-, 

and bridge-management systems. Although decisions at this level are usually more project-oriented than program-oriented, the actions conducted 

at the project level do allow for easy feedback into the decisionmaking 

process, specifically on how performance measures are being met. Strong 

emphasis is placed on gathering data for these project-level decisions; 

thus, with a continuous increased knowledge base and asset-management 

data inventories, PAG continues to enhance its regional transportationplanning process. 

A prime example of enhancing the regional transportation-planning 

process is PAG’s Regional Pavement Management Program, which has 

allowed the region to quickly identify ready-to-go pavement-preservation 

projects for the Federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) 

of 2009. Pavement-preservation projects represented 9 out of the top 10 

transportation priorities for the region’s ARRA list. Although PAG owns 

no roadway infrastructure of its own, the agency coordinates the program 

to ensure that all PAG-member agencies have the capability to understand 

pavement conditions and rehabilitation needs for their pavement assets. 

PAG coordinates regional pavement data collection among its member 

agencies through the use of a shared-resource, pavement-management van. 

The van collects consistent and accurate data about particular roadways, 
17

such as pavement condition, the ride 

quality of the roadway, and the precise location information of specific 

features on or near the roadway. PAG 

has taken this program one step further by providing its jurisdictions 

with the capability to prioritize and 

forecast their pavement needs; thus, 

funding can be sought through local 

agency sources as well as through the 

TIP. Accurate management of the 

multibillion-dollar roadway infrastructure is essential for allocating 

and optimizing the impact of available transportation funding. 

Seattle, WA: Puget Sound Regional Council 

To help quantify the need for additional funding, a number of MPOs are 

looking at data-driven approaches for documenting the condition and 

investment needs of routes that serve as major corridors for commerce and 

traffic. The Puget Sound Regional Council, the MPO for the Seattle, WA, 

urbanized area, is creating a database that includes pavement conditions 

for local major and minor arterials throughout the four-county region. 

This database (a) is designed to help decisionmakers understand the magnitude of investment needed to maintain the region’s local arterial network, (b) incorporates pavement data collected by Washington State 

Department of Transportation, and (c) is linked to a geographic information system. The geographic information system includes information on 

responsible jurisdiction, number of lanes, segment lengths, functional classification, and pavement type.

 This database will provide the Puget Sound Regional Council a means 

to characterize local arterial needs and expenditures over the life of its metropolitan transportation plan (MTP) for all municipalities and jurisdictions therein, while providing the State legislature with an accurate and 

meaningful data set that illustrates future funding needs dedicated to system preservation.

©iStockphoto / EGDigital
18

Albany, NY: Capital District Transportation Committee (CDTC) 

The Capital District Transportation Committee (CDTC), the MPO for 

the Albany, NY, urbanized area, places a strong emphasis on maintaining 

the region’s transportation infrastructure. CDTC’s MTP for the region, 

the New Visions Plan, uses a performance-based management strategy that 

instructs to paint bridges before they corrode, build long-lasting pavements, and match treatment to road function. Projects selected to be on 

the TIP are screened to ensure the greatest life-cycle benefit. Public transit, 

sidewalks, and bicycle facilities are included in the consideration.

Both MTP and TIP rely on extensive pavement- and bridge-condition 

data, and since 1983, CDTC has conducted regular surveys of the condition of the region’s non-State, Federal-aid roads and portions of the local 

non-Federal aid system. The condition survey information collected is 

used to determine system-level condition, estimate overall deterioration 

rates, calculate costs to rehabilitate the system, and determine the effects of 

various repair strategies on pavement serviceability. Together with similar 

surveys conducted by local municipalities and by the New York State 

Department of Transportation, these surveys help form a complete picture 

of the condition of all roads in the region. 

CDTC also maintains a congestion-management system plan that 

insists on demand management and local land-use management agreements as a prerequisite to capacity work. The development of a regional 

safety-management system, now underway, not only supports the continued use of traditional countermeasures, but also encourages the use of 

innovative design treatments that reduce the risk for the region’s most 

vulnerable users, namely cyclists, walkers, children, and the elderly.
19

CONCLUSION

A TAM approach can provide valuable information for the planning, 

programming, and overall management of the transportation network. 

Information from management systems is essential in transportation 

decisionmaking to establish realistic agency goals, thus setting investment 

levels across assets, which include transportation system safety, operations, 

preservation, and maintenance, and selecting priorities for State TIP 

preparation. To successfully manage transportation assets, transportation 

organizations that include planning organizations should have a clear role 

in understanding and utilizing the information provided by management 

systems to make informed decisions. 

©iStockphoto / blackred
20

Further Information

Montana

Paul Johnson

Project Analysis Bureau

Rail, Transit, & Planning Division

Montana Department of 

Transportation 

P.O. Box 201001

Helena, MT 59620-1001

406-444-7259

paujohnson@mt.gov

Vermont

Bart Selle

Policy & Planning Division

Vermont Agency of Transportation 

(VTrans)

1 National Life Drive

Montpelier, VT 05633-5001

802-828-2757

bart.selle@state.vt.us

New Jersey 

David Kuhn

Executive Director

Capital Investment Strategies

New Jersey Department of 

Transportation

1035 Parkway Avenue 

P.O. Box 600

Trenton, NJ 08625 

609-530-5228

david.kuhn@dot.state.nj.us

Arizona

Paul Casertano

Pima Association of Governments

177 Church Avenue, No. 405

Tucson, AZ 85701

520-792-1093, ext. 511

pcasertano@pagnet.org 

Washington

Benjamin Brackett

Puget Sound Regional Council

1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500

Seattle, WA 98104 

206-971-3280

bbrackett@psrc.org

New York

David Jukins 

Capital District Transportation 

Committee

One Park Place

Albany, NY 12205-1606

518-458-2161

djukins@CDTCMPO.org

FHWA

Nastaran Saadatmand, P.E.

Office of Asset Management

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

202-366-1337

nastaran.saadatmand@dot.gov

This document was prepared by the U.S. Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) with expert guidance provided by Patricia A. Cazenas, P.E., L.S., and 

Nastaran Saadatmand, P.E.
For more information on planning and asset management, 

please visit the following Web sites:

AASHTO Asset Management Self Assessment Guide

http://www.tfhrc.gov/focus/dec03/04.htm

Performance Measures and Targets for Transportation Asset Management

http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_551.pdf

Integrating Asset Management into the Metropolitan Planning Process: 

A Peer Exchange 

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/state/intassetindex.htm

Congestion Management Systems

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/resourcecenter/teams/planning/cms.cfm

GIS and Transportation Planning

http://www.gis.fhwa.dot.gov/reports.asp

Transportation Planning and Capacity Building

http://www.planning.dot.gov/default.asp

Traffic Management Systems

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/tms.htm

FHWA Office of Asset Management

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt/

FHWA Office of Planning

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality 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.
Office of Asset Management

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

HIAM

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E.

Washington, DC 20590

Telephone: 202-366-0392

Fax: 202-366-9981

Web site: www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt

FHWA-HIF-09-021

©iStockphoto / Alex Nikada