ALC-Highway Commission Review and Advisory Subcommittee

You've been given the reason taste and as well as and there today and okay next that you've been provided is really there as a supplement to help you be able to review that contact and the stand out the lace and related to some of the impact statement that we make in the recommendation. Asian. One. Okay this is going to be familiar to you we have in some version of this slide several times and September of last year and they just want to very quickly kind of walk you through the project where we have been and where we are so you'll recall again my number we gathered together with you man and got a green meant for the okay areas or our review of are not specifically that portfolio planning procurement expenditure information technology organizational structure and people capability if availity easy for me to. after we went through that process we began our ground work review and analysis that included theory in interviews and I know that both with are not employees and other stakeholders Mike federal highway commission or administration as well as utility owners with film are not frequently interact we also reviewed many many documentation reinforce their provided by the department more than eleven hundred of them the employer policies and procedures as well as data act or area that then. Last month we reviewed with you our current state prison Haitian which well and any appellation and he or eighteen that were synthesized from our current the report that we also provided you you all last month it included twenty three he. So today we you provide you with a recommendations report reason patient as we did add with the current state report this is essentially a summary of the old recommendations report although in this case we're touching on all three are all thirteen recommendation. Everything going okay and that we're sorry we're work one sided hero to make there were going to go. Yes. Okay great thank you. All right we don't. My time on the current state because of course we talked about that quite a bit last month but I do again kind of want to read okay where we are because of course our recommendations are fell off our current the opportunities and challenges and so with respect to organizational structure thank you take away is related the reporting and it's a ten cent operational effectiveness and because of the department you need governance structure there's limited reporting to the legislature as compared to you other at the I. T.. With respect to portfolio planning ark you take away is related to communication and customer engagement as well as the use of the or call budget as the foundation for current and future planning. With regard to procurement are key takeaways related to the application of formalized processes and this them or procurement efficiencies out I construction as well as with respect to you alternative on contract and delivery method and contractor contractor performance within construction. Regarding expenditures are key take aways focused on opportunities for additional cost savings and project development and a lack of portfolio and a lack of the portfolio view with respect and maintenance and construction project. With respect that I he or take away for focus on IT government and business alignment and finally with respect to people capability of arc you take aways weren't and knowledge meant of retention and recruitment challenges and the limited human all you men capital programming at the port of the mission that. Okay so as we think about our recommendation we we want to make sure that where and reading that again in a profit then you're aware of how we got you the recommendations that we developed here first I want to stay in our true north for this process to insure their recommendation and tribute to a more effective and efficient are not that was our that that was your call to up from the very beginning and we continue that of our our our north little rock act we thank you true to our scope and focus areas addressing our currency finding in our recommendation and again focusing on those areas that we settled on back in September as as the relevant department functions and operations that we want needed to be paying attention zero and finally we validate our recommendation three leading practice that is an industry standard father's going to walk through our approach to leading practices in our valuation. Thank your. A bill can you hear me well and clearly. So the L. Aaron mentioned taking a look at the meeting practices was a critical component of how we are formulated out some and many of our recommendations frankly and we wanted to approach it in a in a very systematic way and so we primarily focus or posted at three levels at the first level I we wanted to take a look at some comparisons state AEO tees and and the way we identified them was taking a look at their expenditures from an administrative standpoint capital projects construction project standpoint and a maintenance standpoint and really looked at those state that on a per line of per lane mile basis we're spending less money I've been an Arkansas or are not. that being said just taking a look at the actual spend might not necessarily you know yield a a really great robust compares and Cold War and so we also then took a look at narrowing that that down to ten that had performed better generally perform better on the number system condition metrics including pavement condition bridge condition and sexuality rate and and as I mentioned we narrow that and and we started to take a look at some of the practices that those particular DO teased implementing as they relate to the focus areas and the current state challenges that we had identified in our current state reporting presentation to the extent that that would you didn't necessarily yield some specific practice that that that lent itself to our particular review out we also took a look at that and some other I DO cheese as well that had some targeted promising practices and so we we looked at for example California tax rules Pennsylvania Michigan Washington does state that are highlighted yellow as opposed to the that the ten comparison group states which are are highlighted green and then again that to the extent that you know those did necessarily you'll practice some promising practice that we also I took a look at any existing research that was commission commissioned or conducted by either credible Transportation Authority but to the Federal Highway Administration or the national cooperative high reach the research program or from some leading industry authorities such as that the body for human resources management so we took a multi tiered approach to sourcing some of the leading practices and were able to bring that up to bear as we were formulating a recommendation. And on that note at as air invention yeah we are looking to advance thirteen recommendations that are tied to those six focus areas but ultimately as we were considering all thirteen we wanted to be able to deliver a that our portfolio of recommendations that would help our dot really and and but and the state realize a specific vision that was centered around four pillars and so we believe that by adopting this portfolio of recommendations it will help our dot I'll be more strategic in that it would potentially adopt sort of more of a portfolio view of all of its projects from construction and to make men to internal project so that they can think about optimize your better optimizing their investments and resource deployment and ultimately ensuring accountability and so what that looks like is and these are just examples that that of a particular characteristic is that you have a set of performance based and bent investment I you have resource planning that is tied to those investment than that another all ultimately type meeting specific objectives and then you have you know I keep performance indicators to ensure a level of internal accountability. Which the second pillar that there were open that use recommendations Lee to it is that are not become more efficient and so what that means that that it in a little bit more detail is that you know they'd be better at documenting outcomes related to many of their initiative analyzing the transfer what to inform the identification and implementation of the best practices and then standardizing procedures or consistency and so again you know and that you know what that sort of looked like it at the you know what level of detail little bit further and and these are examples of of characteristics is that they are optimizing practices based on data analytics and they're implementing policies and procedures to sustain a fission practices over the long term. We also think that that that a recommendation I will help our dot I'll be more optimized from human capital and FOR and information technology standpoint are in such a way that they a line those platforms to their current and future business needs in a greater way and again you know some characteristics of that would would be that there maintaining their core institutional knowledge they have engaged that the staff members were retained at the department and that I. D. their I. T. service and there are the capabilities re out you know much more than they do now support their business objectives and then finally I we believe that that a recommendations will help the department become more transparent and specifically at the relate to communicating proactively with the G. constituent groups like the traveling public are not that members and other key stakeholders and so what that looks like from a characteristic standpoint is that there is clear visibility into the calls of the department and their profit and keeping the those golden the progress to get those goals making sure that there's increased awareness of decision making priorities and then closing the loop on all public it. So having that that sort of high level contacts for the portfolio recommendations we're gonna dive into each of those recommendations in a little bit more detail and it then Aaron mention their you know where we're present thirteen recommendations I'm gonna take the the vast majority of them that that definitely happened over care to talk about the I. T. specific recommendations and we're to discuss them add up focus area level as well because they they tie quite nicely to each of the focus areas in the first one that we're gonna discuss is the organizational structure and their two recommendations that we wanted to present here and wanted hi two those compete key performance indicators and performance management and any other pieces related knowledge management. So the first recommendation that we have for the department is for them to finalize their key performance indicators and implement and a performance management platform. And so you know as we noted in the current they disbursement the department has has mature KPIs as they relate to system condition and preservation and specific specifically we noted that the department has approximately forty one I keep performance indicators and total approximate twenty three of them are focused on system condition like fatality on all public roads and your percent of of pavement on the interstate in good condition. But there's approximately eighteen ACT API that are more focused on operational affected that and twelve of those are still under development and when it the operational effectiveness I mean you know percent of their contract that have been completed earlier on time I percentage of employee turnover percentage of are not customers they are satisfied that the service but the department's providing and so by adopting some leading performance management practices it will really allow our dot to expand on those operational effectiveness measures that they that they already have identified but not completely develop you know track and then act on those on those KPIs for you know again greater efficiency and greater you know operational effectiveness and we believe that the anticipated impact around this means that they'll be greater public transparency and accountability for those goal it potentially can at that the legislature and and and specifically the subcommittee as they relate to you know potential policy and and budget positions as you all understand you know how well the department is operating or you know performing from an operational effectiveness standpoint and then in in or a really important anticipated impact your FOR the department itself is that it will yield an actual insight into specific initiatives that they can implement that that are going to increase that operational effectiveness. Now there are some consideration though with with implementing this particular recommendation and and the first one is that it is a long term initiative that that the department should really consider and and approach in phases you if it's going to be very difficult to implement this all at once and expect to an immediate change or it needs to be approached and basins. And as the department consider considers implementing something like this it it read that the focus really need to be on improvement and enhancing collaboration as opposed to necessarily being a punitive in nature and then the last piece again going along with the first consideration and it might requires and change management to help usher in that that implementation and if they approach it and paid that you can get out tag on that change management to help help it become pervasive across the entire organization. In terms of implementation planned we provided it part of the recommendation report I'm more detailed implementation plan for this recommendation and and frankly for all the other one as well but we wanted this summer right that year and and it it has three components at least at a summary level and the first one is related to finalizing their exit thank you performance indicators and establishing a preliminary dash for the again they already have a number of Kate yeah I and so they can they can start to finalize those and then actually starts out to report on them out pretty quickly the second piece is the band establishing to the extent that they haven't done that yet that wishing baseline performance targets for each of those KPIs but also at the same time connected to their strategic plan. And then the last piece is really creating and implementing a roadmap for a much larger and much more comprehensive. Requirements management plan you know that links not only you know performance measures but performance against those measures actual target and then the initiatives objectives and operating plan that will you know steer the department to words achieving those those goals in those benchmark to you know get those key performance indicators and and this is really where the leading practices come into play so the Federal Highway Administration actually offers a comprehensive transportation performance management framework and it does link that strategic planning with performance reporting with engine continuous improvement it it's pretty significant in nature and kind of goes back to that that idea of you know implementing in bay that that that the ultimately it adopted but but the department doesn't necessarily have to create anything from scratch federal highway is one of a number of agencies that that offers them performance management bring words and this one is obviously linked specifically to the transportation sector and to the G. and and we found again taking a look at those comparison DOT's that nine of ten of them actually maintain some sort of performance scorecard that includes measures that are you know exclusively you know practice that them conditions they do speak to operational effectiveness. And then finally we we highlighted this that the G. before they're not a comparison group DOT but Maryland has one of the more mature reporting of performance reporting systems where you know they added on an annual bait that they publish a report of their performance against predefined that the measures and then not only offer an analysis of why their performance the change from year to year but also what the department's going to do to try and improve and and move the needle on their performance as they move over. Our second recommendation here is related to strengthening knowledge management in anticipation of increased retirement and as we mentioned in our current they report there about twenty six percent of our dot staff is within ten years of standard I retirement age and and they you know the department does have effort to address knowledge management but they they have not been fully implemented so examples of that are have been identifying you know at risk positions for future initiatives around being able to collect that information and download that information and I did that usual knowledge from those individuals before they they do depart the department but at the time we conducted the review they it simply identified you know who those those at risk positions where and then also trying to launch a knowledge management platform and they had identified a division system information and research to help launch that but that still was very much in its infancy. But they can align you know they're there these already existing sort of after that are in their infancy just I'm leading practices it would allow them to mitigate some of the knowledge locked that that they're gonna experience due to turn over you know identified some operational efficiencies and then ultimately improve succession planning and training and so the anticipated impacted is really you know again related to minimizing that institutional knowledge we talked about you know the the potential impact of the institutional knowledge from you know that the significant percentage of staff that are eligible to retire but permit operational efficiency standpoint we discussed with a little bit in that meeting practice the speed that there are no knowledge management is the necessarily just or mitigating the loss of institutional knowledge but it also there to help drive the identification of operational efficiencies and so Virginia for example yield about one point four million dollars in cost avoidance of because of resource sharing they realized that they could implement specific practice within the house that the post outsourced amend and so they they actually executed amend house and and avoided you know significant cost. Again there there are some considerations associated with this particular recommendation the first one is that you know new IT systems and software may be required that being that we understand the department is in the process of implementing you know Microsoft teams and that might be a platform to help them with that knowledge my friend but to the extent that that's not suitable they might need to consider new ideas but That being said you know creating a comprehensive inventory of their standard operating procedures and protocols will help them I do you know prioritize their efforts because you know implementing out a comprehensive knowledge mint man house management platform is a significant undertaking and so they understand what the gaps are it can help prioritize and and let the burden and then ultimately leadership support and change management are are going to be critical if they want this change to laugh because this isn't a one time implementation it it needs to be nurtured over time and maintained over time. And so in terms of the implementation and land at at that summary level. You know we think that the first step that that are not potentially have to execute on it they were going to adopt this particular recommendation is really to expand their efforts at identifying at risk positions but also start to identify at risk practices and business properties as well as property inventory and catalog the standard operating procedures and protocols. date in terms of the second step initiating your term succession planning activities you're really identifying and designating staff to be owners of that at risk knowledge so that they can they can actually be recipient there's someone who's going to be a recipient of that information and continue to maintain it in house but then also find pathway to be able to transfer that knowledge in that third step. It's really laying the groundwork for a broader knowledge management system and so it's really designating that you who is going to be responsible for actually get a hearing the creation of this platform and as I mentioned system and information and research from our interviews seems to be that the the division that it's going to this pair had this initiative but potentially also identifying point contact with any to the division as well as the district offices to be able to be at the B. that resource at a more granular level within the organization to ensure that they are actually maintaining knowledge across the entire organization it does despondent group and and to supplement that is maintaining that centralized of to maintain all that knowledge and then lastly to my point about nurturing this particular platform and this particular the implementation of this initiative is not a one time implementation there needs to be some prop that of either an annual review or semi annual review it at some stage to be able to reflect on the knowledge that has been sort of memorialized It within their knowledge management framework and then understand what still remains to be incorporated in what potentially needs to be updated on what those plans look like as well as thinking about how ultimately that knowledge can translate into actual training programs which will we'll talk about a little bit later in terms of our recommendation. Sh in terms of leading practice is the only one that I I wanted to touch on here because we touched on Virginia with the national cooperative highway research program I had a study around around you know it's a knowledge management initiatives and practices I you know and and identified G. drivers as well as the value and so those are listed on the bottom right of that of our presentation as I mentioned it it isn't necessarily just about mitigating the law related to you know the departure of some of the most experienced staff as it relates to the institutional knowledge but it the it's about trying to find a different areas in which the the organization can be more efficient and innovative the it also adapting to a potential work toward workforce the dire up for more electronic based learning as opposed to learning through you know direct you know conversation our collaboration with staff and then ultimately and I think we're all aware there is this just the exponential increase in information and so having a knowledge management platform will help manage that that the increased value and as a result of that you some of the value obtained by that is that you know you you really yield a more resilient and active structure to share that knowledge there's more quote unquote intelligent decision making. And then you find a way to craft and implement more effective and and innovative organizational policies and practices. No because their respective that move on to portfolio planning. So in its focus area again we have a two recommendations and those are related to publishing the status of construction and maintenance projects and maintenance activities and then also attending in a more formalized way to customer service. So a recommendation three as I mentioned is really around publishing the data to their construction projects and maintenance activities. And so you know our dot had some existing structures for communication of these projects and maintenance activities but it is this joint and in some cases difficult to navigate so as an example of that you know I drive Arkansas provides information on you to road closures traffic information and constructs you know some construction project information the connecting Arkansas program quarterly reports provide a portfolio view of the projects within that portfolio of a project as well as you know some detailed data on each of those projects. the I. R. P. program does something similar but it it's not as mature or added the portfolio reporting at on the cap or a similar to the to the cap program and then from a maintenance standpoint it it's just not clear that up you know that information on those maintenance activities is is really made available pro proactively out to the public. And so we think that improving that communications structure can yield our lead to what we've identified in the anticipated impact around you know increasing that public visibility an act that the privatization and that of the construction projects but also increasing accountability as you shine a spotlight on your your performance against those against those projects and make more visible and and that in turn is going to help in and project delivery by potentially expediting project delivery time and maintenance activity delivery time. And it ultimately by you know shining a spotlight in making more of that information available if an unnaturally yield you know better data to inform you know you're planning and budgeting process. Moving forward especially as they relate to make an the. In terms of consideration again I mention that there are them existing platforms that the department and take advantage job right now to rapidly enhance their reporting of of data that that is readily available but ultimately if they want to have a a really mature war brain works for publishing that that'd of these construction projects there being an activity they're going to have to take a and enterprise level approach so that you know they can also provide that real time access. From an implementation standpoint again would provide more details in the actual report. It felt. But you know we think it first our top with them inventorying their current reporting infrastructure so again I mentioned I drive Arkansas district office website but also taking a look at some of their underlying data platforms so as examples of that our site manager for example that and include some construction information that may be pertinent to publish or their staff minutes a database that has preconstruction status information again that might be pertinent out the publishers while to the extent that the public wants to have access to that information. And then from there they could potentially identify and implement some short term reporting enhancements so to the extent that I drive Arkansas allows for more reporting on that that a construction project are they could potentially leverage that platform to do that they could from a maintenance standpoint potentially leverage the district office website the again but Bentley published either their maintenance annual maintenance work plan or publish their bi weekly plans and and we understand that those bi weekly plans you know can very and there's a number of things that impact their ability to execute on those but again to the extent that that are not customers and stakeholders want you know some visibility into that that could be a point at which they could they could leverage the district office website to publish those but then again ultimately they want to lay the groundwork for some long term reporting improvements and that really starts with you know potentially using customer surveys maybe some focus groups on and so forth you're truly identify the information needs of the department customers and it he's stakeholders. And then tying that back to their current reporting infrastructure identifying the gaps and ensuring that the things that they're already implemented can scale to address some of the requirement or request from the customer base in terms of of information and so examples of that is you know there the department is considering you know securing a new maintenance management system and so that that have the capability then to be able to report out on the maintenance related information that the customers are are looking for. And to the extent that and what we'll talk about that later that they're implementing a new project management framework for construction well that bring work yield the data again that customers are looking for when they want to understand the status of construction project. From I Leding practice standpoint there's a number of comparison DO DIS that provide you know either a view of current and future construction project or maintenance work planned out so as an example you know Kentucky and North Carolina actively provide you know a during the summer review of their construction for projects but also at a project level provide progress status progress as well as construction percentage progress for their project you can act that that that publicly Virginia I think we reference the number of times provides probably one of the most mature platforms and a one stop shop to locate projects and then act that that'd been so that that it in so the bottom middle column there are leading practices be the screen shot of Brittany Jens sort of dash board a landing page dashboard that allows you to not only be that portfolio view of all the projects and how many there are you'll be completed on time and within budget but you can click through and see that you know every single project individually and the status and a number of data points related to that each of those projects. And then Kentucky and I believe we talked about that during Arkansas a presentation from a maintenance standpoint provide you know publishes an annual analysis of their me and performance not only at the state level but also at the district level and again the number of of. Moving on to recommendation for and this is you know related to implementing a platform that tracks all stakeholder increase not from receipt all the way two resolutions so you know from what we so on our current state assessment are not primarily bandages that customer service by providing a public direct access the staff you know literally picking up the phone and and and calling someone but the department has I think significant potential to improve that customer service while simultaneously reducing the cost of the department and potentially at the same time surfacing you department wide operational efficiencies. So in terms of an anticipated impact we think it'll bring to the department in line with you know some other DO G. that have more mature customer service platforms as well as reporting structures and so that you know I did mention it in the leading practices but no they're they're sick of those comparison DO these that actually measure and report on customer service so tenet the is an example North Carolina the example of that but also in terms of of anticipated impact here is that this you know provide the potential for the department you actually reduce that specific customer service costs as well as long term operating costs and and so it and the former in terms of reducing direct customer service top Fite by thinking about this in a different way the department might be able to drive a lot of customer service enquiries to lower cost avenues for being able to address them so like online bill service for those are potentially a chat Bader something to that nature and then from a long term standpoint by you know having a better understanding of what customers and stakeholders are looking for from the department and and have that in a very quantitative way it might mitigate the need to execute on a number of functions that frankly customers and and stakeholders are not looking for and so long as they're not you know also required by some sort of regulation you know or statutory requirement. And then ultimately you know the research we were able to serve that identified that by improving customer service that also increase the staff engagement and again the research or appoint to read as you know the staff or to realize that they're providing and they there being appreciated for the service that they're providing that only you know sort of increase in that engagement and potentially map morale. That being said are there there are some considerations and and what we've seen from looking at their of analogous approaches through for example Portland in Philadelphia's you know three one one call center implementation is that there are some some lessons learned that will help with potential implementation and so that the first piece is really just having that clear vision and leadership by and at the outset that the customer service is going to be a top priority and this is what it's going to look like it is going to require some up front investment but there will be a future return on investment and some of the up front investment potentially will be as relates to identifying and securing a technology solution. Of the other lessons learned offered you know that guy did that you know how passionate project manager should be identified if this recommendation is to be adopted and implemented someone who is is truly truly passionate and cares about customer service I should lead this particular effort and then lastly to the extent because this is a this is again a sort of a long term time horizon for the express at extent the recommendation it is implemented in a phased approach the department should think about phasing and services as opposed to sectioning off a particular division in transitioning back to the new customer service five point. From an implementation standpoint you know the the first at a high level the first step years really understanding you know customers the in the way you talked about that just a little bit earlier but the department can use some of the existing resources they already have so the data and the agreed that are coming and dry drive Arkansas any call logs from the public information office you know potentially conducting a target server target there being a focus group with with staff members to understand you know their perspective on on what customers are looking for I but then the second piece it is probably one of the most critical one is really defining a new customer experience vision so really trying to understand how the department customers and stakeholders want to interact with the department and then using that then to lay that groundwork for a new a new customer service approach and that might mean taking a look at business properties and maybe retailing the retailer in those are tailoring those to this new customer experience journey taking a look at the current process for customer service intake thinking about metrics that they can use to actually measure customer service even taking a look at the website the current website right now to think about while how can we potentially redesign that website to attend to the needs of our customers so for example of customers are really you know saying Hey we really want to be able to very quickly understand how to access the data so I construction project or maintenance activity is there for example a link right on their website that'll be able to take them right there as opposed to navigating a number of other things that I will get them to that to that point. And on the last pieces you know what they've identified all of that is really creating an and executing on an implementation plan and and some of that is it's going to be related to you know identifying quick when but then also having a a longer term planned that that might involve a phased approach. In terms of leading practices but just want to call it up a couple things one eight you see in the bottom right there from you know the research we found Portland for example I'm looking at at a different approach in implementing you know it's for the new you platform for their three one one call centers were able to identify potential cost savings again at the lectern mentioned before in terms of a different approach to customer service and drive me out permit service from some of these high cost transaction for example answering an actual phone or meeting someone in person to an online bill service approach or potentially even and and you know a consolidated email account that you have a number of folks actually is ending June responding to which they can really drive down the cost there and that would their estimate at the time in terms of how that how much they get they went up transaction basis and then from a you know measuring customer service standpoint Missouri for example you know not only on a quarterly basis but also on a bi annual basis measures customer service but also then take a look at it customer needs and then things about the strategies are and how they can improve your experience. Moving out to procurement we have a couple recommendations again year one but the big to some you know some some chief procurement efficient the and the second one are related to are you know contractor performance management. Our fifth recommendation here. Is related to implementing a fission the in our procurement. And purchasing and so you know currently are not prioritizes cost savings but lacks the data to demonstrate what works. And when and so by optimizing and standardizing some of their procurement and purchasing procedures. I think maybe in a position to more effectively use you know use the resource that they happen maximize updating. Including you know within the construction sort of domain but even beyond construction and so what I'm talking about here you know the on construction is just you know procurement of of goods and services but then within the construction domain it it's also you know policies and procedures around some alternative construction sorry alternative contracting and delivery method but just you know eight plus the such as you know lien rental disincentives. But then there also might be some other potential areas other relates to to change orders as well on how to potentially minimize those costs and and that really speaks to the first anticipated. Impact mention this right at the beginning and indicated that you also had in the appendix but the supplements around somebody adoption on how we calculated the anticipated impacts for some of our recommendations and so where we've done that we sort of you know aspect that at the top of that anticipated impact fees. To provide some detail. But at that around how we made these calculation but at a high level. as it relates to this recommendation you know we we identified that tax dot it actually instituted a policy right around two thousand seven where they they you know put a heart that they put a cap on the number of change orders that they would actually issue as it relates to projects and they know that eight you know in the period two thousand four two thousand eleven or a change in the number of change orders or indirect and direct costs related to changes in the project after they didn't do that policy and they'd they'd yielded about a re to pull four percent a reduction in those costs and so in taking a look at our dog change orders and they they spend approximately forty million and change orders annually and splitting the difference between that three and four percent three and a half percent would yield them about one point one million dollars you know again if they were going to apply a policy the Miller to what ACT audit done in a again this is an after amended it's going to change depending on the design of a quality if they're going to implement that and then ultimately how it you know how it plays out. From a procurement and and purchasing of of goods and services you know we had talked about how are dot you know the spent about twenty two a little over twenty two million dollars in small order purchased is annually and then approximate the twelve point eight million in competitive bid purchases so those are between twenty and and seventy five K. and you know assuming you know somewhere between a five to twenty percent savings rate by ducting a spend the knowledge that the taking a look at their expenditures analyzing trends identifying out of sorts and procure from from you know the the most efficient or in the most efficient way you know they can apply you know that five to twenty percent of a flight that that those expenditures could yield anywhere from one point eight to seven point one million again those are estimate that all depends again on the design and and how the yes something like that would be implemented. You know there there are some some considerations related to implementing yeah the the recommendation that are are detailed you know and I'm much more granular level in our actual recommendation reports in and one of them is the latest I keep that them that'll help but bill data collection and tracking of that date and also the the an outfit and and you know our dot is actually implementing obvious in the middle of implementing and you oracle platform and that'll that'll hopefully provide them the functionality to conduct that that spending now on that but but it is a consideration that and I think that that will help facilitate that. With that being said they're still have to be a level of staff to pass the N. expertise related to actually conducting that and now that the understanding what the right framework to conduct that spend announced that the guild the cost savings that that might exist. And at the same time the department may need to realign some responsibility between districts and division at the relate to how they procure or specific goods and services and that might be a ship the culture from low bit about the value it might mean you know purchasing from specific vendors or contract that yield you know department level cost savings but again that that's something to consider. H. from an implementation standpoint. You know. Three high level steps here one of them in designing and and implementing you know data driven approach like spending now that then and life cycle costing that will help inform those you know procurement of purchasing decisions but it really is centered on you know right off the bat identifying those particular areas that that need to be explored body data driven approach it is that you know procurement and purchase of goods and and equipment to the change orders at the time of the alternative contracting and delivery method. And for that last point it then you know standardizing some of the policies around these you know project acceleration techniques around some of these project or procurement method. And then potentially driving some of those are not driving but adopting some of those policies and procedures maybe at the district office level where it makes sense and where will yield department level saving. And and to that point the the one thing that I just want to call out from a leading practice standpoint and and specifically at at the relate to some of those alternative contracting in project delivery of brain works so the transportation construction manager and that this consortium of DOT then asked so and federal highway administration and some other researchers commission the guide book and and we have an excerpt of of the profit there but really outlined a process through which the department can really formalized its policies and practices around alternative project delivery and potentially around procurement so that they can understand and start to make sure the efficacy of each of those methods to continue just to continue that identifying and continue practices that will yield either bar you know a more efficient you're just a more effective implementation. The second recommendation. In this. In this particular focus area in procurement is related to implementing construction contractor performance measurement platform. So right now are not lack that comprehensive tool to screen for contractor quality during that procurement during that that leading and and getting phase I mean that there there are some components are related to performance bonds but that that really anticipate you know completion of the project and and and again they they do prevent contractors were in liquidated damages from from bidding and so there there is something there but they don't have a comprehensive tool to you know screen for contractor quality and so implementing a more of a performance based pre qualification may lead to improved project delivery I reward high performing contracted and really encourage local performers to improve and and deliver just that a better quality product bottom boat to the department from construction projects standpoint. And so what we saw based on a federal highway administration study and the national cooperative highway research program study thank you very similar studies and in fact on contractor and vendor performance management was that the the deal cheese that had been implementing them Endate surface for example Florida Michigan of Oklahoma. Virginia Washington and I believe Utah were reported that by implementing such a system there was improvements in safety and timely work completion and cooperation with those with those contractors. And their the the their actual what with when they were surveyed and their reports around those particular measures so safety timely work completion and contractor could work cooperation identified in the bottom right hand corner in terms of the percentage of those DOT's but actually reported that in in every single case there was no either five or six or six the six that reported I in you know improve safety or time to work completion contractor cooperation but again there are some considerations in in adopting and implementing such a framework. And and that there might be some different impact on contractors are of very very sizes and so that does need to be considered what that means for a larger contractor versus a smaller one of smaller size or maybe modifies. There should really be an emphasis on one a quantitative approach because this could minimize you know the appearance of of subjectivity in scoring and substitute a not very qualitative more objective approach at the same time contractors should have a clear path to raise or appeal there's course you don't wanna do not contractor to a particular school or in perpetuity and then to the extent that you know the department already implemented a policy of preventing contractors and liquidated damages up from from bidding a precedent exists or upon which they can build on to implement a more comprehensive tool to you know screen for contractor quality you know as a part of the pre qualification process. And so in terms of a high level implementation I think the the first step is really identifying some of those you know performance quality indicators so that past performance I repeated disincentives are to delaying managerial abilities state the potentially cooperation with the department to the extent that they've had a relationship in the past or done business with the with our dot and then using you know existing research similar to what we've surface or you know practices from the D. O. T. that have been identified in that research. To develop a scoring system and then actually public side thing that and securing stakeholder input. And then from that point it's actually tracking performance against that scoring system so collecting that baseline that of data and then updating that scoring system you know per you know what they're seeing from from actually tracking and monitoring that data and then ultimately finalizing. And integrating that within their pre qualification that them and then potentially at some level repeating the cycle because you want to continue to. At a rate and continuously improve that system. I think I already touched on a lot of the leading practices that we identified at the bottom so I I might actually move on. Q. expenditures. Again there's at your recommendation in this particular focus area one related to project portfolio management and then the last related to some additions these within the project design phase for construction projects. Water. So our our seventh recommendation here is around implementing. Project and portfolio planning frameworks. So are not current you know preconstruction construction maintenance project portfolio management systems very in maturity and so at examples of that is you know department has the fairly a robot system to identify and prioritize construction projects. Then it's a little bit unclear at the how that translates into resource requirements during the preconstruction phase so you know what that them do you need what resources do you need budget so on and so forth to actually start the preconstruction work and execute the preconstruction work for those projects you know there is then though an algorithm around how those projects potentially translate into the the creation of the construction crew resources so how many people need to be honest construction crews I believe the department and in the process of updating back right now and and then from a maintenance standpoint you know we had talked about earlier how meet and project. and resource requirement the budgets are based on you know you know historical precedent. And so you know enhancing some of these systems may allow the department to more effectively budget plan execute and then ultimately communicate on it construction and and and maintenance projects. And so from an anticipated impact standpoint again the the assumptions that detailed adoption or embedded in the appendix but we think that the or estimate that a more mature just project management framework may allow the department to realize about three point eight million dollars in annual savings related to their internal preconstruction and construction cost and and just at a high level some of the the assumptions behind that are as we were taking a look at the department's expenditure data their five year annual average for their internal preconstruction and right of way utility and a construction and engineering costs were approximately three thirty eight point two million dollars per year and and that that you know five year five year average. And and based on some existing research round what implementing a more per you know mature project management framework what will allow on a project basis you know we were able to identify that by by moving from you know a lower but surely in project management you will you know what maybe even average maturity in project management would yield a marginal increase of ten percent savings on a on a per project basis and so you know out from an estimation standpoint you know ten percent of that thirty eight point two million deal about three point eight two million in annual savings I get an estimate and it all depends on how the the profit that the dollar recommendation and bind and then ultimately implemented but this provide the directional estimate for the dating and that's just in the preconstruction construction phase you know we don't even take a look at you know what the potential savings can look like from a mate and standpoint by having a more robust project and and or polio management system and and the department as we reported the current state report and presentation spent about a hundred and ninety million dollars a year in terms of our operating budget on being infected with this. By being at like with some of these other recommendations Implementing such a system are such a recommendation will require a department wide efforts because your unifying a number of despair it initiative that they already have in place to build out this this spring mark. And you know at the outset it it might be perceived as as overhead but ultimately some of the research we're able to identify indicate that it will yield some long term benefits and it frankly been template you know project management has been implemented by number of DOT's and then ultimately requires and change management and maybe from U. I. T. applications to facilitate the actual implementation but again there might be some there might be some existing told that the department can use broadly across the entire department to maybe a defray some of the cost there from from potentially securing and U. I. T. opposition. Amend implementation standpoint and this sort of speaks to my last point here is is you know starting out person just really catalog cataloging any a the thing an in flight four billion project management capabilities and identifying where they are the baseline and ultimately where the department I don't want to be from a target state related to project and portfolio management. And so you know examples of things the coupon that cataloguer that maintenance management system. Instruction true algorithm we understand that the department is secure in the process of securing and you I can service management tool that might have a project management component to it so that might get the department may be able to leverage that but that's part of that first step in that second step it's really identifying some of the gaps in their current system and so again from all right now what we were revealed that it looked like there might have been as an example a gap in resource planning related to preconstruction activities of work for the identified and prioritized construction projects but there there that you know there are some other gaps as well and so fully cataloging those then establishing a project management office and governance to really build on existing strength and capabilities of the department as a related project management but then potentially establish some standards across the dock of department around how they manage projects and then ultimately fading deployment developing tools and and training staff members at this is that yeah could be a significant undertaking so maybe targeting some specific areas and then piloting of those you know and you the implementation of a project management bring mark and tools with you know those divisions first. There is from a leading practices standpoint you know what a president around you know. Using project and portfolio management tools so six of the ten comparison DOT's have project management bring work or offer some sort of training so for example Virginia and North Carolina have project management bring what's already the thing and so department doesn't necessarily need to build anything from scratch they could potentially lift and ship them Taylor from some other departments because they make that information publicly available and and so the department of the again doesn't have to build you know thank you scratch. At seven DO keys have some sort of performance based man it I mean it's management systems I yeah we already talked about Kentucky when we're talking about the current status as we talked about Wisconsin as well and then at from a like a very much mature standpoint Caltrans has probably the most mature project management framework and and they do they do that and and it it's expressly expressly stated within their you know project management document that they they use it or they believe that it is valuable help constrain their preconstruction and project development costs as well as their administration and that that chart in the bottom right is it simply an excerpt from that particular bring work that that speaks of a high level two you know the components of their project management. The second recommendation in this expenditures. Okay areas really implementing some leading practices in construction project design and so are not does and so what they do implement some of the leading project as I practices and and what I'm talking about here is practical design and value engineering that I think we we discussed during the the current state assessment they they really lacked the the formal bring works to ensure you know consistent Houston and we think that by adopting these procedures and formalizing them they're they're not really going to strengthen that institutional knowledge but reduce project costs and and but then she approves of achieving a subsystem target that they're that they're looking for alternately. In terms of anticipated impact here again within that appendix supplement we provide some detail the functions that how we arrived at these. At the message me. And so in the first one. We took a look at as an example Missouri that it saves about thirteen percent and cop in their first year of implementation of of practical design. I know we look at the our dog average contract between twenty fourteen and twenty nineteen and applying it up about five point one million dollars again based on the data that we were looking at and thirteen percent of that is you know approximately six hundred sixty four thousand again an estimate that direction all but I think speaks to potential cost savings by formalizing you know they're cracked and and consistently than their their practical design approach and then the second Senate stating that as it relates to value engineering and again the detailed assumptions are included within the appendix document but at at a high level you know what we saw with the exception of of twenty nineteen where the number of value engineering projects jump you know much higher than what it was in in prior years the average number of studies that the value engineering studies that the department conducted what about one point seven five with the total project cost of about a hundred eighty one million and yielding about point seven percent savings and so if the department was going to you know simply just increased the number of value engineering study to the national average which is three point three but maintain the same savings rate they could yield an additional one million dollars the radically in in savings. That they kept the number of studies that one point seventy five but increase the savings rate to five percent which is the national average that could yield about seven point seven million dollars and and additional cost savings and if they were going to implement both so increase the number of value engineering studies and the cost saving percentage study that would yield that approximate the you know sixteen million again you know the that the Mets are directional in nature. Again there there are some consideration as with all the other recommendations the first one is that not all project projects are well suited or potentially could benefit from you know these approaches and so obviously the the the department and have to be prudent about which one date they they select and and this recommendation is the necessary to require the creation of any new. Actress is but it's really formalizing and expanding the practice is that they are currently implementing and so that leads right into You know the implementation summary around developing at perceptive all being that formal framework around the use of performance based practical design potentially thinking about their value engineering process and conducting that earlier in the process and more often and then as an additional piece here are around thinking about best practices in construction projects to bind is taking a look at the data related to you know the gaps between the original bill that amount for a project and final payment you understand if there are some potential areas in which project design can be implemented and or a sorry improved and enhanced and doing that in a formalized way that you know maintained that feedback loop you know the the district office is and that can you know staff that are conducting a construction monitoring all the way back to project designed so that they're getting in a formalized way insight into how to you know optimize the proof project design. Page from a leading up practice standpoint you know on a current state assessment you know we we we had identified how this you know a number of DOT's that obviously are are conducting value engineering studies and and the Federal Highway Administration actually mandate I'm for projects over a certain threshold. And again there's several state that are you know seeing considerable cost savings through you know formalized go about practical design protocols so we you know we pulled out here Wisconsin and their flexible design approach including this lease because methodology and you know when they took a look at the apple of about ten project they they realized about a forty percent paving average savings amount about twenty one point five million. And we also highlighted in in our current state presentation Minnesota's afterwards in this regard and and we you know obviously highlighted Missouri earlier. And with that I'm gonna pass it over to Erin to discuss our three recommendations and the ice you folks there if. Father in the room. So good to go. Okay okay all right so with respect the information technology there's really three recommendation here establishing govern and I'm getting to understand arising in rationalizing and I the applicant finally putting something proper that the plate that the for the first you recommendations so everything within the IT recommendation by Senate very quietly both and. You may find that it is hard to separate one from another I'm gonna do my best to talk through that independently but I'm I'm likely going to be harking back from one to another as the doctor does. Give me. First one is to build and IT governance structure he died are not AT and that. within our guard today there are structured simply or I the purchase approval however it's not clear that they really are at an enterprise level that there's enterprise request in decision making and evaluation of IT purchases across the organization and that there a collaboration between at nine I the division and the other divisions department in terms of how you that optimize the IT asset and expenditures that they are making and to meet frankly the business and strategic means our agency. So we're not there's there's really kind of you element to establishing a governance framework for IT that there's actually two A lacks a and I the governance structure so there are a lot that well published I. T. framework I do governance framework including I kill and covet those are both reference and our recommendations report and again widely published and good resources or the department to drop on in terms of developing a structure IT governance but additionally thinking about I the again as a If you send that will rely on portfolio to decision making that is evaluating I purchases and the view and a reference of the entire enterprise and so that the request divisions within the agency in apartment the for the agency and I. T. are collaborating on that decision making and prioritizing investment the right way and thinking. The under. So I do think about the anticipated impact or establishing a governance framework for the I. T. program I'm really thinking about it improve business out today I again there A distributed purchased I. T. access that are based on. We you know maybe independent media and or or maybe not fully evaluated with the I. T. team to make decisions about the port capability is meant for things and so when you think about the performance of the IT team and being able to actually manage and maintain their their you know I'm I'm going to read to them with respect to those that is capabilities when you think again about IT the performance and capability the more systems that you maintain and the higher level of complexity of those four things your report says are cold and to so many different directions that makes it very difficult for them to actually provide reliant availability you understand the nuances of that the thumb and to understand integration that are part of an eye the. And then again because there is there are so many different and and some of the some of which are hosted out within and IT because of them some of which are hosted at all on local machines within the department you are automatically increasing your security and the doctor recovery rate. being able to number one track without that though your limitation and know how many points they have and know what potential recovery objectives there aren't reach those is extraordinarily complex and so putting and infrastructure systems and processes use the court management of the purchase and standardization and on going support of those that then become really important. And you look at at under the leading practices on the bottom half of things what you see is that when you get to good solid I the government program your business leaders actually start to really by in the process sometimes it's very difficult for them to you under your fan why it some point you know you the I. T. department might be saying you know we can't do that right now but over time they start you understand the cost and risk perspective on it and over to the office are you the. Group performance that coming out of an eighty program that has all of government and when we think about the consideration there obviously if the real change and the delivery method or the I. T. program at are not while are not does have an interpreter today we talked about that or your P. employment use another doing we are not seeing the little that again bill is quite in the distribution of At least a request for purchase and forty two you are purchased and. Again not necessarily with with I toward entered property click ability and thank. So the ICC emit need began to consistently track and communicate how. These governance structures are actually impacting the organization they need to be tracking availability improvement they need to be tracking early have project delivery they're going to need a lot of support from the leadership team are not to improve these things as they ask people you for go and investment again in the interest of the enterprise as compared to what might be immediately or what might appear to be a more immediate and then they're going to need to continue to re evaluate the processes and strength in the gold and communicate again out there over within the agency that they can see the benefits of those as after. When we think about and implementation process for that there's a few things one is you again she was the governance framework and what you're going to operate and again there are many IT governance framework that that are not could avail themselves out of the including I feel so that your other. They're probably the two most widely adopted and particularly I feel I would say within and public sector government. Secondarily don't want to establish the Oct section of IT and business now you actually at the yeah and if you will the I. E. R. purchase decision making and portfolio management and really as with as with other element of the agency think about the investment that are not is making in terms of and and I. T. portfolio and thinking through the enterprise needs of the and after he that objective of the agency in terms but in terms of purchase and implementation as compared to you again might be a more immediate need and are distributed the and then of course they're gonna need to document that roadmap and communicated out you there thank over within the department. And I. Some meeting back the the workers get. All right. Thing is really do you think through some of the. Mid term objectives again they're pretty hi eight you that governance structure so part of developing the governance structure in to thank about enterprise need within the Asian the. Secondary that is the think about developing standards are processed and rationalization process for are not IT. And so when we talk about that if you look at the current eight today or are not your spending about five point three million dollars on software application and they have about three hundred database that there may be there may be more that than that and so when you think about getting the next day and IT government government program is to really think through standardization IT application and organization of operating system and a data management capability four data standardization frankly. And so I do think about the impact of that kind of standardization and rationalization you're going to the natural cost saving and so going back to that appendix that we provided to you recommendation number and there is and oracle report that actually quote that Gartner ninety that it basically says that you can and and then we can expect about a twenty percent cost saving by doing software rationalization and while we don't necessarily have the that data from the office providing are not they when you do and and where ideal life and management and I rushed off where IT rationalization we can't necessarily draw one for one correlation again based on the data that we have you we could still you know directionally apply that that twenty percent saving the five point three percent million or five point three million dollars and come up with about one point oh six million dollars in savings or the department which street that to the software rationalization and and and frankly licensed management eventually. We can expect that you know there's there's well actually frankly the department already shown caught with respect to data management and so the more data management that they feel the The last distribution of data that they have the more stating that they're going to recognize with master data management. data analytics obviously are part and and and frankly a good data management program are foundational you many of the objective and recommendations that we put forward and up otherwise in our report and so having a good it data management plan is really going to be a foundation and and help move along some of the recommendations that we that we got that here and then finally opening data to others and you understand what your affect are and what you understand how to protect them and or how you and publish them you can't really I'm not and innovation with your constituents and within the private sector and some of that get down really quickly and and look at one of the leading practices so there is likely across the country across public sector institutions across the country and including the us here like urging AT and Kentucky these entities are opening up data on their website and allowing other people the bill and pollution or them so as we think about some of those communications minister does that are with talking about earlier you open up that that data you can allow constituent business is etcetera to take advantage of your data and build new things up with that and maybe it the traffic maps and the the the maintenance project progress and maintenance project mapping those things can be made available and be built by others using that exposed data as appropriate and want to understand what's actually available. You think. I'm a consideration per second I'm obviously there's some work to be done in terms of up front investment you have to you you out of latent management inventory you're gonna have to do that that master data management plan so there there definitely is of work to be done in terms of that in that up front investment yeah you about those long term savings. the implementation plan obviously is going to require over time. Possibly terminating earth this application and database the that thank older within the department have been using this support their act their their activity and so it's going to take from transition to get them to adopt you using alternative solution and also we would have that that the the office is going to require an IT service management to all the nice thing is that we understand that the department is in the process of procuring a I the reading will most of which are extension of larger IT service management tool and so you know provided that there procuring the the beginning to the extent of all you know the larger IT service management product they'll be able to take advantage of that bill for the purposes helping them rationalize their data as well as inventory and manage their software applications. Amend from an implementation summary obviously we we we talked about putting in place a tool to help manage that but they also just frankly need you bill A and application and database inventory they need to really actually just like any other app that they need to treat the thing as hard after that and that they need you have a tracking capabilities for those in need to score and evaluate each application and database and they need to evaluate where there may be overlap one that the more solution to another and then identify the target a long talk about the target date really talking about is this system going to meet the retired because if you have something else or at the end of life or some other state or we're gonna keep it because it is invaluable to us and and we have to have that over time you're gonna need to build a road map that you get through that migration prop up though going back that consideration and talking through the process and communicating view that they ordered within the department A we're turning off an application United coming and you. So let's think about what that actually looked like an art manage that change around at. Okay. Thing is to establish the necessary colors that are affected make that are required to make IT and effective partnered with everybody else within are not in including constituent bright those within a stakeholder internally and externally so we talked a little bit about talk about a hundred and we talked about under the Asian and rationalization and and really the third that is you will implement the processes and that that under in those shin so when we talk about those we're talking about thank you know really taking the next step in adopting those icy governance framework so she was saying the fact that that capability is that you're going to adopt and processes that you're going to adopt and make the appropriate changes you that and then also think about your project management requirements and capability or IT project and then finally the end of the school that the court noted that the Jack and so when we think about the impact of those of those things were really thinking about improving internal customer service we talked about how you know once we get through the governance process and people understand the objective of government and they get the I. T. decision making is part of the enterprise like everything else in it are the portfolio they're going and when they understand the capabilities that I see is actually able to provide and within one time frame they're going to be happier with the services that the I. T. department is is providing we can also obviously think about review rest and reduce costs as we think about applying the other element these other pillars. Are the I. T. management framework. When you think about considerations obviously that thing to deal with with a big change is you think about quick wins that you can communicate out your customer quickly and and with high impact and so on we recommend to consideration perspective coming up with a real quick answer catalog and we talk about their catalog we're talking about what. The what what where will the IT department support what operating system well they support what network capabilities and phones and all those kinds of things what are the things they can report and how quickly can they turn them around for adoption by the they call them within the agency so I'm very quick communication of what to expect and how to manage that the that ninety the end and I'm going to be important. obviously in order to you under and the capabilities and and the speed with which I see and distribute a service they're going to need to be some measurement and and and likely are and he and infrastructure project management capability going to be necessary to be able to actually evaluate that and to separate those project through from required you implementation and as with so many things that we talked about here today communication and training we got through that change management process and financial resistant to change are going to be required. Give me. So the thing about implementation strategy obviously we're gonna need to think through that policies and procedures that that the governance framework have recommended that the government team is requiring and that but I the department is capable of delivering with the resources available to them. Under any to develop that service catalog we we really talk about what that is already and then implement the appropriate tools that are that are underneath that and support that and and again we we did mention that that are not of the process procuring and or at this point essentially implementing and I. T. ending on a leash and many of those solutions also include project management IT change management at the end man and and and configuration management all in one place that make it a lot easier to support these object and can't catalog availability and and and. We think about Leding practices breaks the and we again we talked about widely published I think the framework of the Texas department of transportation and the second argument of information resources out them great resources that we documented in our recommendations report as potential IT solutions project management and IT service management solutions or the department and and I'm with the government impact you can we were we can expect that there's some that just completely greater satisfaction within the agency four IT services delivered and reduce. At risk with respect to security all of those things become less complicated when we Establish the framework the standardization than ever and act that is in IT environment. All right and I think I'll take it back up from Aaron. So we have two more recommendations specific to people capabilities as it relates to career development and also training and actually quite related and so we could potentially could I hope moved to them really quickly as as we discuss some. So the the twelve recommendation of the first one of this particular focus area is related to ensuring that staff can develop in their careers at the department so you know on the survey data we we saw approximately half of a department staff you know definitively agree or appointed definitive you agree that they have backed your careers at the department and turn over is right thing is with notice noted in the and the current state report about six percent to nine percent and obviously this is all within or the creek coal bid environment and an economy. That being said you know if the department you know strength and and and really develops some career ladders and lattices they may increase retention and reduce those turned over related costs and then strengthen their their talent pipeline and then ultimately improve are out. So I anticipated impact again the assumptions are identified in the appendix supplement but there's the potential or increasing some the cost of Borden's related to improving and retention by about five billion dollars uh per year and and a detailed write it could get pretty complex and I don't want to monopolize anymore of art I'm here this but basically the the way that we are live at this estimate was taking a look at an estimate or turned over and so the transportation consortium of south central state I believe are not as part of I had reported that turnover costs can be up to about one hundred percent of the staff members compensation and so what we did was we took a look at how the turnover rate FOR the department had increased you know from six percent to nine percent Over number of years and if if you know continue to increase at that rate calculated what the cost would be assuming a hundred percent of your over because of the hundred percent of the staff members compensation and then we we compare that with what that cost would be if the retention rate essentially stayed the same at a flat ninety percent yeah and what we found is that the the difference between those with about twenty five million dollars or about five million dollars per year per looking over the next five years and then that the increase of staff retention by approximately five percent was based on a Harvard Business Review around About increasing a career opportunities score and again the detailed assumptions are provided in the appendix. You know there are some considerations as it relates to developing and and formalizing somebody's career ladders and and one is you know potentially considering career ladder he went forget but traditional career ladders are are inaccessible and and so what that means is in some cases it's just simply not necessarily going to be a place for someone to advance she will give and yet the folks that that are in in positions you know for lack of a better term the bird about that individual so we're to that potential person go laterally to continue to advance in their careers and after that idea of a career as and then and this relate to the the next recommendation and is making sure that career development activities aligned with training and knowledge management which we talked about right at the beginning of of of this presentation. Which the implementation summary here actually the the implementation plan four recommendation twelve and recommendation thirteen there's there's so interrelated are actually combined in the recommendation report but we wanted to call out a few things here one was just you know again continue to verify that you're well that are high risk of turn over the department is is you already moving on that but obviously that's important succession planning to the extent that it makes sense you know conducting a compensation study and then developing and publicizing those careers skill and salary progressions and then at the same time promoting by and with that with that career and still in salary progression as well as the performance based compensation structure the department has and its performance evaluation process. We found from our leading practices that you know workforce development strategy that interventions are most effective when they're very specifically tailored your obvious to the skills and cultures and goal of of the organizations on the date are not and again like with some of or many of her other recommendations you know there are some leading practices the department can can leverage and and we've highlighted a few of them to the right in terms of Oklahoma and Texas and Montana specifically at the relates to our career development four staff members. In the thirteen recommendation again closely aligned with number twelve is aligning staff capabilities with current and future organizational needs and again based on the the the staff survey yes staff and and supervisors were you know definitively sort of agree that that training resources you are necessarily aligned to their needs and and that's not to suggest that are not doesn't provided to get monitoring to do. but by strengthening you know those does that training and and and and get out tailoring it to the needs not only of the department but also with that they may be able to prove that job satisfaction retention increase productivity and instill a confident that that gonna be required for staff members take on greater responsibility especially in in light of other significant percentage of of current staff members that are going to be eligible to retire. And so in terms of anticipated impact. Very much aligned to what I just mentioned you know implementing citizen Leding practices around. Opportunities to learn and grow we talked about job satisfaction retention. Stop confidence and ability to take on more responsibility. Again there are some considerations that training is is gonna have to be updated over time at programs change equipment changes technology changes you know training it you know should be provided at all levels not just that you know sort of those entry level will. and and again that you know that the department provides a lot of training and and so you know considering you know what your tailoring that training program right now the potential considered you know prioritize the area which I training will have the greatest impact and again you know pulled out from that larger implementation plan that that these together recommendation twelve and thirteen we just one of the call out a few things one aligning those training job descriptions and career planning activities and then billing any training gaps are consider reinstituting manager training that are used to have a a target manager training and so potentially institute reinstituting that. Not attention finding training of this part of the performance evaluation not that and then consider you know a more formalized cross training process in those high turnover positions and potentially divisions and and districts. I we talked a little bit about you know leading practices related to the cost of a turnover but just wanted to draw I like you you know has been a DOT that that as we understand it is implementing Barker standardized approach to go identifying skills knowledge knowledge and competency for each component of a wall and then identifying your training opportunities that then you know provided that the suggested curriculum and and that that chart to the right to get Justin. from one of their documents related to their their training programs. And so with that that does that thank you for. bearing without that that with a fairly link the pre than station but we can we can definitely turn it over the question but I think the one thing I think we want to acknowledge though this one just before we get the question it and and and appreciate is during the current state review we do want to appreciate and acknowledge that cooperation and of of the department as Aaron mentioned that our approach we reviewed a significant number of documents interview that a significant number of people at as part of that current state analysis from about the number to bribery and and I think without the cooperation of the department that was possible so we just want. That. Where we're able to question. Before we take questions I've got a couple things first the thank you Aaron and thank you are for the report also want to thank the commissioners and the members of our daughter here today with us I want to go over a couple things here. that might get some questions answered Our meetings are topics are going to be combined into four sections we're going to our next meeting will be July the fifteenth that'll be organizational structure people capabilities. August the fifth portfolio planning August twenty six expenditure September sixteenth procurement information technology. And I remotely meetings. God help will present a summary of each recommendation are not presented response regarding each recommendation of the chair of Alaska for any interest from subcommittee members to move forward with the recommendation whether through a bill draft a request for more information or inclusion in the draft report if there is a request to any parties who have signed up in advance will be allowed to speak and we will repeat this that for each recommendation. And I thank all the members of got a Copy of the the process and the date so we're going to meet but the. The confidentiality of is most of the draft and reports are going to be released to the public so when I keep that in mind when you're talking about bill. Giving you have anything care to design do we have any questions. We're today. If we don't have any questions on to die like that our next meeting and the art all will be be here to address the recommendation on our part and that will be July the fifteenth. So if there's nothing else meeting is adjourned. Thank you.