INDUSTRY CONNECTIONS: SPECIAL REPORT 3D SCREENING WRITTEN BY MICHELLE FISHER I
n this month’s Superintendents Survey, more than a third of participants said their transportation departments use key performance indicators (KPIs) to
measure performance and track costs, yet only a few are applying them to school bus replacement — the costliest budget item of all (see survey results on the next page). While fleet managers may consider fac- tors like life-cycle cost and average fleet age when making purchasing decisions, industry veterans point out that quantifying these KPIs is another story. Tis is one reason why NAPT decided
last fall to rename its KPI Program “NAPT 3D,” which stands for Data-Driven Deci- sions. KPI Project Committee Chair Steve Simmons, also NAPT’s Region 3 director, told STN the association rebranded the program to stress the importance of making informed decisions based on concrete data. Te committee is currently focusing on
creating key KPI terms and definitions to ensure everyone is using the same language. For example, a seemingly simple question on average daily miles must be broken down further to “live miles” (when students are onboard) and “deadhead miles.” Even cal- culating the number of student passengers involves categorizing eligible versus actual riders as well as public, non-public and charter students, he explained. “When someone asks a question, you
have to check the definition to make sure you are answering it correctly,” said Sim- mons, who is also transportation director at Columbus City Schools in Ohio. “We have to make definitions very, very clear so you don’t have a lot of skewed data out there and everyone understands a term exactly the same. Definitions are difficult because of differences of opinion.” Te KPI Project Committee has evolved since its launch in 2011 but retained three of its original members: longtime trans- portation directors Michael Shields of Salem-Keizer (Ore.) Public Schools and Peter Lawrence of Fairport (N.Y.) Central School District, as well as John Fahey, the
42 School Transportation News April 2014
NAPT KPI COMMITTEE MEMBERS DISCUSS HOW METRICS CAN STREAMLINE THE RFP PROCESS FOR NEW SCHOOL BUS PURCHASES
Versatrans consultant for Tyler Technologies and the retired assistant superintendent at Buffalo (N.Y.) Public Schools. Simmons said 2014 marks the next phase of NAPT 3D and the current development of a new website,
yellowbuskpi.com. “We hope to have it up and running very
soon. You will be able to input data on your operation, and the goal is to get comparative data with other districts. It will also give you a dashboard to see where you stand month- to-month or year-to-year,” Simmons shared. “You can’t make informed decisions without having data in front of you.”
A TEAM APPROACH Shields agreed the KPI Project is making
strides by establishing goals along with a timeline. Tere are no longer four working groups, he explained, as transitions in membership led to changes in assignments and direction. But interest remains high — and so did the attendance at several KPI- related workshops at the 2013 Summit. “We’re at a point where we are asking:
How are we going to put this to work?” Shields said. “I think we’re seeing a growing interest in KPIs. People want to know how to use them without adding more work to what they already do. Te easy answer is to use the information you already have. I’ve
been using KPIs in every operation I’ve run since 1980.” At Salem-Keizer, the second-largest
school district in Oregon, Shields manages a transportation staff of 300, as well as 200 in other departments, so he is constantly collaborating. While he said he doesn’t use KPIs specifically with his RFPs, he does use metrics based on a point system he created with his management teams. Shields meets with the various teams,
such as bus drivers, mechanics and driv- er trainers, to obtain requests and make adjustments before developing the bus specifications. “Within the specs, we decide what is
going to be a requirement and what is an al- ternate,” he said. “Ten we establish a value point system. What’s most important to us? If it’s 100 points, we distribute those points based on a value for each category.” Tey may find that warranties or fuel
economy, for example, deserve more points. Te next step is meeting with each of the district's vendors, and even checking out specific products, to avoid writing an “exclu- sionary” specification. “Once we establish the point system,
we go into an RFP, and often the vendor brings by a school bus. We have teams with a scoring sheet and they get to look at their
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68