The Administration of The Administration of Federal-aid Projects by Federal-aid Projects by Local Public AgenciesLocal Public Agencies

The Administration of The Administration of Federal-aid Projects by Federal-aid Projects by Local Public AgenciesLocal Public Agencies

Certification WorkshopCertification WorkshopPortland, OregonPortland, Oregon

June 6thJune 6thMike Morrow, FHWAMike Morrow, FHWA

ApplicableApplicableFederal Federal

RequirementsRequirements

Applicable Federal Applicable Federal RequirementsRequirements

49 CFR Part 18- Uniform 49 CFR Part 18- Uniform Administrative Requirements for Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governmentsto State and Local Governments

• 23 U.S.C. § 106(g)(4) 23 U.S.C. § 106(g)(4) [as amended by SAFETEA-[as amended by SAFETEA-LU]LU]

(g) OVERSIGHT PROGRAM.-(g) OVERSIGHT PROGRAM.-(4) RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATES.-(4) RESPONSIBILITY OF THE STATES.-

(A) IN GENERAL.-(A) IN GENERAL.-The States shall be responsible The States shall be responsible for determining that subrecipients of for determining that subrecipients of Federal funds under this title have-Federal funds under this title have-

(i) adequate project delivery systems for (i) adequate project delivery systems for projects approved under this section; projects approved under this section; andand

(ii) sufficient accounting controls to (ii) sufficient accounting controls to properly manage such Federal fundsproperly manage such Federal funds..

Applicable Federal Applicable Federal RequirementsRequirements

FHWA’s National FHWA’s National Review of Locally Review of Locally

Administered ProjectsAdministered Projects

• Number 1 priority area for national Number 1 priority area for national review by FHWA field and program review by FHWA field and program officesoffices

• $6 - $8 Billion per year (approx. 20% $6 - $8 Billion per year (approx. 20% of Federal-aid program)of Federal-aid program)

• 38,000 Local Governments38,000 Local Governments• Identified High Risk AreaIdentified High Risk Area• Proliferation of Earmarks (11,000 in Proliferation of Earmarks (11,000 in

2006)2006)

Why Local Project Why Local Project Administration?Administration?

• FHWA Team formed in February 2006FHWA Team formed in February 2006

• Team’s Charge:Team’s Charge:

““Assess the administration, oversight and Assess the administration, oversight and stewardship of local public agency Federal-stewardship of local public agency Federal-aid projects…aid projects…

Identify areas for improvement that will Identify areas for improvement that will ensure the overall quality and effectiveness ensure the overall quality and effectiveness of local project activities along with any of local project activities along with any needed changes in the oversight needed changes in the oversight requirements.”requirements.”

National Program Review National Program Review TeamTeam

• 7 States7 States• 39 projects 39 projects • 35 local jurisdictions35 local jurisdictions

National Program ReviewNational Program Review

Core AreasCore Areas• Program ManagementProgram Management• Project Development Project Development

– EnvironmentEnvironment– Right-of-WayRight-of-Way– DesignDesign

• Contract AwardContract Award• Construction AdministrationConstruction Administration

– InspectionInspection– BillingBilling

• ROW ROW - (R/W indicated all clear, yet 4 of 37 parcels - (R/W indicated all clear, yet 4 of 37 parcels had not been acquired by end of construction)had not been acquired by end of construction)

• EnvironmentalEnvironmental - (CE based on no R/W - (CE based on no R/W statement, project involved 30 parcels)statement, project involved 30 parcels)

• ConstructionConstruction

– Agency Personnel Coverage Agency Personnel Coverage

– Inspections Inspections – (only one state was performing – (only one state was performing on-site final inspections of projects) on-site final inspections of projects)

• Outcome of ReviewOutcome of Review

Examples…Examples…

• Extreme differences in LPA project activities Extreme differences in LPA project activities –The project risks vary widely – e.g., –The project risks vary widely – e.g., numerous compliance issues numerous compliance issues

• State LPA oversight activities were varied, State LPA oversight activities were varied, limited or non-existentlimited or non-existent

• Earmark projects directed to LPAs are Earmark projects directed to LPAs are particularly problematic – frequently outside particularly problematic – frequently outside the STIP and under-fundedthe STIP and under-funded

• Federal-aid program guidance to LPAs is Federal-aid program guidance to LPAs is lackinglacking

• FHWA oversight of State’s LPA FHWA oversight of State’s LPA administration was inconsistent, varied and administration was inconsistent, varied and often without structureoften without structure

What They SawWhat They Saw

• High risk area that requires particular High risk area that requires particular attention attention

• States must fulfill responsibilities States must fulfill responsibilities regarding local projectsregarding local projects

• Need a systematic approach to fulfill Need a systematic approach to fulfill responsibilitiesresponsibilities

• Develop mechanisms to improve Develop mechanisms to improve stewardship and oversight of local stewardship and oversight of local projectsprojects

What Did the Review Team What Did the Review Team Conclude?Conclude?

• Establishment of a Headquarters level Establishment of a Headquarters level Local Project Oversight CoordinatorLocal Project Oversight Coordinator

• Action by Divisions to assess State DOT’s Action by Divisions to assess State DOT’s existing processes and proceduresexisting processes and procedures

• Local project oversight program Local project oversight program information information

• Web site of Local project oversight Web site of Local project oversight program “Good Practices”program “Good Practices”

• Analysis of need for additional regulationsAnalysis of need for additional regulations

Components of the Local Components of the Local Project Oversight ProgramProject Oversight Program

• Conduct comprehensive review of STA’s Conduct comprehensive review of STA’s procedures, including sampling of LPA projects to procedures, including sampling of LPA projects to validate compliance.validate compliance.

• Determine whether or not STA’s processes and Determine whether or not STA’s processes and procedures reliably result in LPA projects being procedures reliably result in LPA projects being administered in accordance with the Federal administered in accordance with the Federal requirements.requirements.

• Where deficiencies are found, STA must develop Where deficiencies are found, STA must develop corrective action plans.corrective action plans.

• Also, the Division should strongly consider Also, the Division should strongly consider imposing additional requirements on the STA and imposing additional requirements on the STA and LPA to demonstrate that Federal requirements LPA to demonstrate that Federal requirements until the deficiencies are properly addressed until the deficiencies are properly addressed

• If the situation warrants, consideration should be If the situation warrants, consideration should be given to declaring a LPA or STA “high risk” under given to declaring a LPA or STA “high risk” under the authority of 49 C.F.R. 18.12.the authority of 49 C.F.R. 18.12.

Review of STA’s Existing Review of STA’s Existing Processes and ProceduresProcesses and Procedures

• Stewardship and Oversight Agreement Stewardship and Oversight Agreement for locally administered projects.for locally administered projects.

• Dedicated Staffing Dedicated Staffing

• Oversight and Monitoring ProgramOversight and Monitoring Program

• Qualification Program for Local Qualification Program for Local AgenciesAgencies

• Local Agency Guidance ManualLocal Agency Guidance Manual

Components of Components of Program InformationProgram Information

• Supplement to the overall Supplement to the overall Stewardship/ Oversight agreement Stewardship/ Oversight agreement

• May take the form of an Appendix or May take the form of an Appendix or an Addendum to the agreementan Addendum to the agreement

• Include such topics as monitoring, Include such topics as monitoring, qualifications, staffing, and qualifications, staffing, and technical manualstechnical manuals

Local Project Stewardship Local Project Stewardship AgreementAgreement

• Focus is on both project level oversight by the Focus is on both project level oversight by the State DOT as well as program level oversightState DOT as well as program level oversight

• Include a description of the staffing Include a description of the staffing dedicated to monitoring subrecipients of dedicated to monitoring subrecipients of Federal fundsFederal funds

– General description of the organization of the General description of the organization of the subrecipient monitoring staff, along with the subrecipient monitoring staff, along with the relationship to the overall State DOT organizationrelationship to the overall State DOT organization

– May include number, location, titles, and duties of May include number, location, titles, and duties of the State staff.the State staff.

Dedicated StaffingDedicated Staffing

• Include a combination of quality Include a combination of quality assurance, project reviews, program assurance, project reviews, program reviews and evaluationreviews and evaluation

• State DOT provides engineering State DOT provides engineering expertise, technical assistance, expertise, technical assistance, technology deployment, program technology deployment, program assistance, and program delivery assistance, and program delivery

Oversight and Monitoring Oversight and Monitoring ProgramProgram

• Sets specific evaluation criteria that is Sets specific evaluation criteria that is used to determine the ability of the used to determine the ability of the local agencies to adequately local agencies to adequately administer various aspects of Federal-administer various aspects of Federal-aid programaid program

• Should include a training component Should include a training component to assist local agencies in obtaining to assist local agencies in obtaining the necessary skills and knowledgethe necessary skills and knowledge

Qualification Program for Qualification Program for Local AgenciesLocal Agencies

• Describes development requirements Describes development requirements and outlines procedures for obtaining and outlines procedures for obtaining approvalapproval

• May be organized to reflect the flow of May be organized to reflect the flow of a project through the major phases of a project through the major phases of development and to incorporate the development and to incorporate the differing developmental needs of differing developmental needs of different projects different projects

• Manual may be referenced in project Manual may be referenced in project specific agreementspecific agreement

Local Agency Guidance Local Agency Guidance ManualManual

• California Department of Transportation – California Department of Transportation – “Local Assistance Home Page” “Local Assistance Home Page” www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LocalPrograms/

• Colorado Department of Transportation – Colorado Department of Transportation – “CDOT 2006 Local Agency Manual”: “CDOT 2006 Local Agency Manual”: www.dot.state.co.us/DesignSupport/Local%20Agency%20Manual/2006%www.dot.state.co.us/DesignSupport/Local%20Agency%20Manual/2006%20Local%20Agency%20Manual/2006%20Local%20Agency20Local%20Agency%20Manual/2006%20Local%20Agency%20Manual.htm%20Manual.htm

• Florida Department of Transportation - “Local Florida Department of Transportation - “Local Agency Program” Agency Program” www.dot.state.fl.us/projectmanagementoffice/LAP/default.htmwww.dot.state.fl.us/projectmanagementoffice/LAP/default.htm

• Iowa Department of Transportation - Guidance Iowa Department of Transportation - Guidance on the administration of local projects on the administration of local projects www.dot.state.ia.us/local_systems/index.htmwww.dot.state.ia.us/local_systems/index.htm

• Ohio Department of Transportation – “Office of Ohio Department of Transportation – “Office of Local Projects Home Page”: Local Projects Home Page”: www.dot.state.oh.us/local/www.dot.state.oh.us/local/

• Washington State Department of Washington State Department of Transportation – “Highways and Local Transportation – “Highways and Local Programs” Programs” www.wsdot.wa.gov/TA/Operations/LAG/LAGHP.htmwww.wsdot.wa.gov/TA/Operations/LAG/LAGHP.htm

Good PracticesGood Practices

Questions?Questions?Questions?Questions?

Mike Morrow, Field Operations EngineerFederal Highway Administration530 Center, St NE, Suite 100Salem, OR 97301(503) 587-4708mike.morrow@FHWA.dot.gov