Woods, Robert

English

Purdue E-Pubs

Federal Aid Programming and Project Development ProblemsRobert Woods ChiefDivision of Local Assistance Indiana Department of HighwaysFrom  the above title, one w ould th ink  there m ay be some problem s w ith the p rogram m ing  and  project developm ent of local public  agency projects. Som etim es, I like to refer to problem s as job  security. If  there were no problem s w ould our jobs be elim inated? No, b u t it sure would m ake the job  easier. W hat I do w ant to em phasize are some of the p ro ­blem s th a t are occurring . If these can be em phasized w hereby m in im iz­ing fu tu re  problem s, everyone should benefit in com pleting  the ir d e ­sired projects.FED ERA L AID H IG H W A Y  PR O G R A M  AND LO C A L G O V ER N M EN TFirst, w hat is the federal aid  p rog ram  as it relates to local units of governm ent. T he p rogram  sta rted  w ith a very m odest beg inn ing  in 1944 of abou t $1.8 m illion. These funds were allocated  to the 92 In d iana  counties for road  and  bridge construction  on the Federal A id Secondary (FAS) system. T oday, th a t figure has grow n to m ore th a n  $60 m illion and  includes funds for cities, towns an d  counties for projects bo th  on an d  off the federal aid highway system. A long w ith the grow th of avail­able funds there  also has been a grow th of p rocedu ral requ irem ents to utilize these funds. Now there are environm ental considerations, public involvem ent includ ing  hearings, location  and  design studies, right-of- way purchase requirem ents, various perm its, etc. It is no t as easy and  sim ple to construct a needed project today as it was years ago. These are problem s th a t are being overcom e b u t yet it takes longer an d  costs m ore to develop this project.H IG H W A Y  PR O JEC T D EV EL O PM E N T  AND LO CA L R E SPO N SIB IL IT IE ST o  develop a federal aid  highway project w hat are the responsib il­ities of the local un it of governm ent?(a) A selected project m ust be for construction  or reconstruction  (m ain tenance work is not eligible).110(b) Selected project m ust be on an  approved system of roads or streets specified for the fund ing  category.(c) Projects in u rban ized  areas of 50,000 or g rea ter popu la tion  m ust be selected th rough  the 3C p lann ing  process (continuing, coopera tive , com prehensive) w ith  p rio ritie s  d e te rm in e d  th rough  the respective M PO (m etropo litan  p lann ing  o rgan iza­tion) forum .(d) Projects m ust be designed an d  constructed  to design standards equal to or above the m in im um  A A SH TO  approved standards for the class of project in question, unless exceptions are d o cu ­m ented  an d  approved.(e) T he project p lans m ust be p rep ared  by a qualified  engineer, e ither a consulting  firm  or a local public agency em ployee. T he local agency w ould m onito r the progress of the project develop­m ent and  evaluate the perfo rm ance of the project developer bo th  in quality  and  tim e.(f) T he project construction  m ust be u n de r the supervision of a re ­sident project representative em ployed by the local agency, or a representative provided th rough  a special agreem ent w ith the ID O H . A representative em ployed by the local agency m ay be either a consulting firm  or a local public agency em ployee. T he em ployee never the less receives directions from  the ID O H  dis­tric t area engineer.(g) Most projects are  not 100% federally funded . T h e  local un it of governm ent m ust m atch  the non  federal aid  portion  of the p ro ­ject. This includes prelim inary  engineering (design), right-of- way, construction  and  construction  supervision costs. T he  local un it of governm ent m ust have a long range p lan  to finance the ir total share in all phases of a project(s). Do not spend m oney for prelim inary  engineering unless you have a financia l p lan  to pay for the h igher cost of construction  at the la ter date . R em em ber, any federal funds expended  on a project th a t does no t m a te ria l­ize to construction, except for leg itim ate reasons, the local agency is liable for repaym ent of those federal funds.ID O H  AND FED ERA L FU N D IN G  O F LO C A L AGENCY PROJECTSNow, how does the D epartm ent of Highways, Division of Local As­sistance fit in to  the federal aid  fund ing  process for local agency projects.I l lFederal sta tu tes and  regulations m ake the D epartm en t of Highways re ­sponsible for the adm in istra tion  of all federal highway construction  p ro ­gram s. In  this role we are responsible for:(a) Receiving and  acting  on local agency requests for federal aid funds.(b) Advises local agencies on project developm ent p rocedures and  am ount of federal aid  funds available by category.(c) Reviews annual p rogram s, construction  plans, p roject ag ree­m ents, project docum entation , and  processes claim s for federal reim bursem ent by local agencies.(d) Advertises for bids, aw ards construction  contracts, adm inisters construction  and  assures th a t qualified  supervision of construc­tion is perform ed.R em em ber, the D epartm en t o f Highways does not select your p ro ­jects, nor p repare  the construction  p lans an d  requ ired  docum entation , or pay any p a rt of the cost except passing th rough  the reim bursab le fed ­eral funds.A federal aid  funded  pro jected  will norm ally, in m ost cases, cost m ore dollars and  take longer to develop an d  bu ild  th a n  if you funded  a sim ilar project totally w ith local funds. You m ust consider th a t on a fed ­eral aid  project you will only be paying from  25%  to 10% of the total project cost versus all of the cost for a locally funded  pro ject. G enerally speaking, the federal aid  project will be b e tte r designed, b e tte r con ­struc ted  and  will provide m ore and  b e tte r safety features at a lower cost to the local agency th a n  the totally  local funded  project. T his does not always apply for small cost projects. T h e  federal do llar still has 100 cents, the sam e as your local dollar. You m ay be able to spend 25 cents and  receive 75 cents from  federal a id  to construct your needed  road  im ­provem ents. But m ake sure you will have each 25 cents along the way th rough  design, right-of-w ay and  construction.PRO BLEM S IN  PR O JEC T PR O G R A M M IN G  AND D EV EL O PM E N TI w ould like to discuss and  ou tline some of the specific problem s th a t are encoun tered  in our office in the p rog ram m ing  an d  develop­m ent of your projects. I will try to ou tline the m ajo r problem s as I see them  into  the categories of:I. A nnual P rogram m ing  II. Local AgenciesIII. C onsultantsIV. G eneralI m ust em phasize th a t all problem s are not associated to all parties112involved with local federal aid  projects bu t the n a tu re  of the  problem s should be b rough t to the a tten tion  of all.Annual ProgrammingA. Federal-aid  p rogram m ing  requests (FA-2’s) are being  received after the due date  of February  15 for subm ission. R em em ber, you d o n ’t have to wait un til we m ail in form ation  in D ecem ber to sta rt your p lann ing , scheduling and  prelim inary  d rafting  of a federal aid  application . Last year we were receiving late  su b ­m ittals o f FA-2’s in June. T his year so far we have received 865 applications to ta ling  $214,440,256 in federal aid  funds. T he113obligation  ceiling for spending will be abou t $49,500,000 plus the M inim um  A llocation funds of approxim ately  $12,000,000. A lot of work is involved on ou r p a rt in analyzing all subm itted  projects to fit into  a realistic annual p rogram .B. FA-2’s are incom plete a n d /o r  pages are missing.1. Category of funds being requested  are not ind icated .2. T o ta l costs an d  federal share costs for fu tu re  phases are not included.3. P rogram  year incorrectly  labeled.4. C haracter of proposed work incorect, i.e. construction  when phase should be right-of-w ay.C. R equired  a ttachm ents to FA -2’s are missing such as project location m ap  and  R /W  In troduction  form . Some location  m aps are of poor quality  and  difficult to read  —see Exhibit 2. Project location is not ind icated  on the m ap, or is not clearly ind icated . Also, incorrect or w rong m aps are a ttached .114D. Subm ittal of FA-2’s requesting  funds which are no longer avail­able such as PMS, SOS, etc. Categories of available funds are included  each year in the m ailou t in form ation  d istribution .E. An FA-2 is subm itted  for a fund ing  category in which the local agency is in the process of revising the road  classification such as off-system to ru ra l secondary, etc. T he FA-2 cannot be acted  on until the system change is approved by ID O H  and  FH W A . M any tim es the requested  system change is to m ake a desired project eligible for federal funds.F. T he  am oun t of funds being requested  is greatly  in excess of availability. Individual local agencies will subm it up  to ten FA-2’s in the sam e fund ing  category and  not subm it a p riority  listing of the projects. C ould the local agency fund  the m a tc h ­ing if all projects were approved, or w ould some be delayed or deleted.G. Scheduled dates for d ifferent phases of project are not realistic, i.e. all phases of P .E .,R /W , an d  construction  in the sam e p ro ­gram  year. Projects are being p rogram m ed  for construction  w hereas the cu rren t project status is early in the P.E . phase. Some of these are m ajo r projects on relocation  w ith consider­able R /W  to purchase.H. Local agency desires to substitu te  a new or d ifferent project for one already p rogram m ed  and  approved. T h e  local agency changes m ind  entirely an d  stops project in progress, and  in some cases concentrates on ano ther project. T h ere  are projects approved, consultan t agreem ents reviewed an d  executed, funds ob ligated , local agency given notice to p roceed bu t the local agency never authorizes the consultant to proceed. Local agency program s project for construction  letting, notifies area engineer to schedule project for letting, p lans are u p d a ted  by ID O H  and  then  local agency desires to let ano ther p roject th a t is not p rogram m ed .I. Subm itted  FA-2’s do not have p roper signatures or accom pany­ing release of u rb an  funds from  the m ayor of the u rbanized  area . FA-2’s for projects in u rban ized  areas over 50,000 in p o p ­u la tion  m ust be subm itted  th rough  the respective M PO .J. T here  are subm ittals of FA-2’s in February  listing costs for P .E . and  construction, then  a L P A /co n su ltan t agreem ent is su b ­m itted  in May w ith P .E . and  construction  costs 70%  higher th a n  in February . How can  our office system atically approve an annual p rogram  with this variance of costs in just three m onths.Local AgenciesA. T h e  indecision of local agencies of using funds and  project115priority  is a p rob lem . It is poor p lann ing  by local agencies w ith­out a long or short range p rog ram  of m atch ing  the priority  needs versus available local and  federal funds. M any projects are developed w ithout due consideration  of how or when they will be funded . Projects in the developm ent stage which will not be built or funded  for years are delaying o ther projects from  b e ­ing com pleted  in a reasonable tim e.B. Most local agencies do not un de rstan d  the tim e and  steps re ­qu ired  to develop a federa l-a id  project. A singular local agency expects the ID O H  to process a project in a very short tim e116period  w ithout consideration  of all o ther local agency and  ID O H  projects.C. A greem ents are lost a t the local level necessitating the ID O H  to re-start the agreem ent process. A greem ents are not fully exec­u ted  and  m ust be re tu rn ed  to the local agency to com plete.D. Local agencies do not adm inister or m onito r the progress and  developm ent of the ir projects. T he  paym ents an d  schedules of the projects are conta ined  in their consultan t ag reem ent. They do no t read  a n d /o r  u n derstan d  agreem ents before signing. T he agreem ent contains a provision th a t the consultan t is to inform  the local agency each m on th  of the project progress.E. T he  local agency allows the consultan t to com pletely hand le  the project inc lud ing  p rep arin g  claim  vouchers for the local agency. T h ere  is no correspondence betw een local agency and  consultan t includ ing  transm itta ls  to ID O H  by consultan t ra th e r than  from  local agency. No interest in project by local agency un til they w ant it for letting.F. M aterial and  instructions m ailed  to local agencies and  consult­ants are not followed and  com plied w ith. Consequently, local agencies are  not aw are of w hat is going on or u n derstan d  the ir role and  responsibility. T h ere  p robably  is not a cen tral location at the local level where this m ate ria l is filed, or the interested  people are not inform ed o f the location.G. Project priorities are constantly  being revised by political co n ­siderations or adm inistrative changes.H. In  some cases, the local agencies are very slow in acqu iring  the necessary right-of-w ay. R eluctance to acquire  R /W  by con ­dem nation , or sta rt acqu iring  R /W  until fund ing  is available delays the project.I. Local agencies, after alm ost com pleting  a p roject, decides against construction  phase either th rough  a change of political office, public disinterest, or lack of funds. This is a lack of inpu t by the populace, no m aster p lan  to insure continuity  from  one adm in istra tion  to ano ther, or an  unrealistic un dertak in g  from  a financial s tandpo in t. T his is a waste of h u m an  resources and  funds.ConsultantsA. T h e  n u m b er of projects a n d /o r  w orkload of some consultants is m ore th a n  can be developed in a reasonable length  of tim e. C onsequently, projects are delayed in the developm ent stage. If the local agency exerts pressure to the consultan t for the ir p ro ­jects, those are the projects th a t receive priority  by the consult­ant.117B. Some consultants do not correspond or inform  the local agency of the status or problem s w ith the ir projects.C. Some consultants do not follow known sta n d ard  procedures of project developm ent. Some try short cuts in the developm ent, p articu larly  if the project is being funded  with local funds. This only causes delays in the project developm ent by having to back up  to com plete earlier requ ired  item s.D. Some consultants do not analyze and  engineer a p ro ject. They will subm it a p rob lem  to the ID O H  and  ask w hat should the solution be. T he  consultan t should analyze an d  determ ine dif-118ferent solutions to the prob lem  and  m ake a recom m endation  to the ID O H .E. Some consultants are not fam iliar w ith the federal aid  process, procedures, and  stand ards/d esig n  d ep artm en t requirem ents for a p roject developm ent process. Some m ust be gu ided th rough  the developm ent process step by step, inform ing  them  of w hat has to be accom plished next, inc lud ing  furnishing sam ples.F. Plans are not reviewed an d  checked by the consultan t before subm itting  to the ID O H  for review and  approval. C onsultan t is not acq u ain ted  w ith p roper design and  detailing  procedures, or does not know the solution to a problem  area , and  therefore relies on ID O H  to check, m arkup  the plans and  re tu rn  to the consultan t for the corrections or solution.G. E nvironm ental is not com pleted  and  approved in the early stages of p lan  developm ent thereby delaying the progressive d e ­velopm ent of project design plans.GeneralA. C hanges in the fund ing  categories and  fund ing  levels.B. C hanges in the regulations, procedures and  requ irem ents of en- vironm entals.C. Processing of m ore projects of increasing com plexity an d  cost than  available construction  funds. This increases the work load, resulting  in add itiona l tim e fram e w ith the available m a n ­power.D. T he  n u m b er of projects being  processed concurren tly  w ithout firm  schedule for construction. T h ere  is no p riority  system am ong all local agencies for scheduling of these projects. Ex­h ib it 5 details the n u m b er of projects and  do llar volum e for known projects. This exhibit will not reflect any projects being developed at the local level w hich have no t been subm itted  to this office for review.E. T he  local agency should evaluate the perfo rm ance of the con ­su ltan t on each local project in the design and  construction  phase. T h e  ID O H  is doing this for fu tu re  in form ation  in the se­lection process of consultants.I arb itra rily  selected three b ridge rep lacem ent projects th a t were on a construction  le tting  last year. Progress charts were developed from  history of ou r p roject files.119Exhibit 5.120Exhibit 6.T his p roject was funded  in  the P .E . phase w ith federal funds. T h e  p ro ­ject agreem ent schedule is as shown by the do tted  line on the progress chart. T h e  actual progress of the project is as shown by the solid line. T h e  local agency evaluated  the consultan t perfo rm ance of this project. Tw o o f the ra tin g  item s were evaluated  as follows:121— A ctual progress com pared  to schedule =  4— A greem ent com pliance, em phasis on work sequence and  a p ­provals =  4where: 4 =  Good perform ance as desired and  expected (a full credit ra ting)Exhibit 7.122Exhibit 8.123These two projects were developed in the P .E . phase w ith local funds in the sam e county by two d ifferent consultants. T his office doesn’t have dates for the sta rt of the projects, only the dates a first subm ission of p lans were received. N ote the differene in perfo rm ance by the two co n ­sultants.124

Federal Aid Programming and Project Development Problems

https://docs.lib.purdue.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3382&amp;context=roadschool

Federal Aid Programming and Project Development Problems

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Purdue E-Pubs