How is Utah’s Operations Management
System (OMS) really working?
20
10
WA
SH
TO
CO
MM
ITT
EE
ON
M
AIN
TE
NA
NC
E
UDOT Organization• 1,750 employees• 5,887 miles of road• 16,520 lane miles• 24,700 surface
areas
• Central Office• 4 Regions, each split
into 2 Districts• $1.5 billion in
construction this year
Maintenance Organization• 580 employees• 85 maintenance stations statewide• Central Maintenance
– Maintenance Engineer and 14 core staff• Trans-Tech (construction/maintenance)• Approx $97 million in maintenance budget (fy10)
– $21 million in snow removal– $17 million in hard surface
• Zero Based Budget process to develop budgets
Maintenance System Upgrade• Replace existing MMS system
– Originally launched in 1993– Mainframe/Desktop application
Maintenance System UpgradeKey Business system
– 21 interfaces
OMS RFP Development• Began preparing RFP in 2004• Advertised in 2005• 4 companies responded, two start
from scratch, and two with COTS software.
• Refined questions and sent out a second RFP.
• Again same four vendors.• Contract awarded to AgileAssets in
2006
Implementation Project• Kicked off November 2006• Exercised contract options
– User Familiarization Area– On-site project manager– Train-the-Trainer approach to training
• Visited Wyoming July 2007 to get their input on what worked and what didn’t.
• “Go Live” November 2008
Rolling our System Training
• “Train-the-Trainer” approach– Adult teaching skills
• Three weeks of system training– Week 1: System Basics
• Practice after training
– Week 2: Advanced features• Practice after training
– Week 3: Review
• 28 trainers in two groups
Go-Live
• “Flip the Switch”– November 15, 2008– End of Pay Period
One Year Later2
01
0 W
AS
HT
O
CO
MM
ITT
EE
ON
M
AIN
TE
NA
NC
E• Feature Inventory
– Still an Achilles Heel for complete system integration.
• MMQA– Realizing our need to tie condition
assessment to feature inventory– Re-evaluate what we measure
• Understanding the implications of Owning vs. Renting the code
• Pavement Management Module implemented
How are we going forward? (1 of 2)
• Most employees accept the system, but don’t use it to its full potential
• Better integration with other business data. (State Financials, GIS)
• Field Data Collection Pilot project– LiDar vs. handheld
• GPS equipped mobile workforce– True cost reporting and performance
measurement
• Reporting to Legislature/Taxpayer
20
10
WA
SH
TO
CO
MM
ITT
EE
ON
M
AIN
TE
NA
NC
E
• Hired a retired maintenance analyst– Focus on getting system operating to its full
potential.– Help with training.– Lucky to have been able to hire the best of the
best.
• Develop our Zero Based Budget Process– Improve MMQA reporting– Complete Feature Inventory– Develop local Activity Standards– Work with Construction to update changes.
• Better GIS/GPS tools– Some in OMS, some in-house developed.
How are we going forward? (2 of 2)
• Feature Inventory– Finding the right methodology, and getting
resources for it– Link to MMQA, and to work order creation– Using feature inventory in budgeting process
• MMQA– Making it useful for station supervisors– Making snow log reporting easy and useful
• System enhancements– Weaning ourselves from AgileAssets– Creating our own reports
• Cost of support and maintenance
Outstanding Issues
Questions?Lloyd Neeley, P.E.Deputy Maintenance Engineer
801-965-4789
Recommended
