MPO Staffing and Governance structures<br />2009 AMPO Annual Conference, Savannah, GA<br />Alex Bond & Jeff KramerCenter f...
Research Problem<br />2<br />MPO role is complex and responsibility is broad<br />MPO role and work load have expanded ove...
Project Scope<br />3<br />Document<br />MPO organizational structures<br />Staffing profiles and practices<br />Case studi...
Methodology and Data Collection<br />4<br />Administer on-line survey using custom built tool (www.mposurvey.com)<br />Bet...
Special Thanks<br />5<br />AMPO<br />Beta Test Group<br />Jane Hayse – Atlanta Regional Commission<br />Rich Perrin – Gene...
Eligible MPOs and Participation<br />6<br />374 MPOs were eligible to take the survey<br />11 MPOs ineligible to participa...
Participation Rates<br />7<br />
8<br />Map of Participants<br />
9<br />
Hosting and Administration<br />10<br />
Definitions<br />11<br />An independent MPO provides all of its organizational needs in-house or through contractors<br />...
Hosted vs. Independent<br />12<br />69% of all MPOs are hosted<br />More likely to be hosted if the MPO is a non-TMA<br />...
Types of Hosting<br />13<br />There is a wide varietyof MPO organizationalstructures<br />Regional Council ismost common h...
Other Hosting Observations	<br />14<br />Municipally-hosted MPOs tended to be in small regions (under 200,000)<br />County...
Advantages/Disadvantages – Hosted<br />15<br />Advantages:<br />Lower overall cost<br />Administration<br />Benefits<br />...
Advantages/Disadvantages – Independent<br />16<br />Advantages:<br />Political and administrative autonomy<br />Clarity in...
17<br />
Board Size, Composition and Voting<br />18<br />
Laws/Rules Governing MPO Boards<br />19<br />Federal law<br />Local elected officials<br />Representatives of agencies tha...
Board Size – Voting Seats<br />20<br />2,142 voting board seats in our sample<br />Wide range of MPO Board sizes<br />5 to...
Board Size – By Population<br />21<br />Board size seems to be related to population<br />
Board Composition – Seat Types<br />22<br />
Board Composition – Percent of All Seats<br />23<br />
Board Composition – Voting Rights<br />24<br />One person-one vote is the prevailing voting structure<br />Common for larg...
Board Composition – Non-Voting<br />25<br />Board representation for those without a voting seat<br />63% (84 of 133) have...
Neighboring local govts/MPOs
Federal agencies
Chairs of MPO committees
Private sector
State legislators
Business groups
RTPOs
Modal authorities
School boards
State agencies</li></li></ul><li>Advisory Committees<br />26<br />
27<br />
The MPO Workforce<br />28<br />
Number of Employees<br />29<br />Ranged from 121 to less than one employee<br />Part time employees are found at 73% of MP...
Number of Employees<br />30<br />A dozen high outliers skew the mean higher.  Median is more instructive.<br />Median MPO:...
Median Staff Size by Population Class<br />31<br />
Staff Size Metrics<br />32<br />Analysis shows staff size is correlated to population and planning area square mileage<br ...
Specialties on Staff<br />33<br />MPOs were asked if any staff member spent more than half of his/her time in a specialize...
General Tasks<br />34<br />Time spent on general agency administration<br />Hosted MPOs: 21.3%<br />Independent: 28.1%<br ...
Consultants<br />35<br />Consultants are an important source of MPO labor<br />All but one MPO reported using consultants ...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Staffing And Governance of MPOs

1,534 views

Published on

This presentation was made at the 2009 AMPO Annual Meeting. It contains the preliminary results of a study on MPO Staffing and Organizational Structure funded by FHWA.

Published in: News & Politics, Career
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,534
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
20
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
27
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • 50-100k – 32.6%100-200k – 30.2%200-500k – 38.5%500k-1m – 30.2%1m+ - 52.2%
  • Likely as a result of expansion of the MPO area over time – bringing in new governments
  • Many MPOs reported that if modal agency was part of local government – the agency was considered to be “represented” by elected officials of that local government  
  • Aggregate of all seats in the sample
  • Voting rights becomes an issue when MPO seat availability is constrained or when political dominancy is in play or in question
  • A quarter of MPOs are smaller than 3 people. Three-quarters have less than 11.
  • Some MPOs are so intertwined with the host they are unable to separate who the MPO employees are. Most of the largest MPO staffs in each population class fall into this category
  • 380,000 people in planning area = 8 employees
  • Staffing And Governance of MPOs

    1. 1. MPO Staffing and Governance structures<br />2009 AMPO Annual Conference, Savannah, GA<br />Alex Bond & Jeff KramerCenter for Urban Transportation ResearchUniversity of South Florida<br />1<br />
    2. 2. Research Problem<br />2<br />MPO role is complex and responsibility is broad<br />MPO role and work load have expanded over time<br />MPO staffing and organizational capacity is critical to meeting responsibilities and expectations <br />Few materials comparing strategies are available<br />MPO resources are relatively limited<br />To date, national research on MPO organizational structure and staffing is limited<br />
    3. 3. Project Scope<br />3<br />Document<br />MPO organizational structures<br />Staffing profiles and practices<br />Case studies<br />Sample staffing plan for new MPOs<br />Project completion – March 2010<br />Funded through the FHWA Surface Transportation and Environment Research Program (STEP)<br />
    4. 4. Methodology and Data Collection<br />4<br />Administer on-line survey using custom built tool (www.mposurvey.com)<br />Beta-tested survey instrument (design, content, terminology)<br />Survey in field for 3 months (March-May 2009)<br />61-72 questions, depending on MPO characteristics<br />Ability to save and return<br />Participant recruitment<br />Timely AMPO email blasts<br />Newsletters<br />State association and notable MPO leader solicitation<br />Targeted direct contact<br />
    5. 5. Special Thanks<br />5<br />AMPO<br />Beta Test Group<br />Jane Hayse – Atlanta Regional Commission<br />Rich Perrin – Genesee Transportation Council <br />Harold Barley – METROPLAN Orlando<br />Craig Casper – Pikes Peak Area COG<br />Thera Black – Thurston RPC<br />
    6. 6. Eligible MPOs and Participation<br />6<br />374 MPOs were eligible to take the survey<br />11 MPOs ineligible to participate <br />Single staff for more than one MPO board<br />133 MPOs responded to the survey<br />35% participation rate<br />Statistically significant sample<br />Margin of error: +/- 6.83%<br />Very high participation in FL, WA, NY, GA<br />Likely due to good promotion<br />Unlikely to affect results<br />
    7. 7. Participation Rates<br />7<br />
    8. 8. 8<br />Map of Participants<br />
    9. 9. 9<br />
    10. 10. Hosting and Administration<br />10<br />
    11. 11. Definitions<br />11<br />An independent MPO provides all of its organizational needs in-house or through contractors<br />A hosted MPO meets its organizational needs through another agency which acts as the fiscal agent<br />There are a variety of dependency levels between MPOs and their hosts<br />Some MPOs are so intertwined with the host that MPO employees cannot be identified<br />In other cases, the MPO operates in a segregated fashion, but receives goods and services from the host<br />
    12. 12. Hosted vs. Independent<br />12<br />69% of all MPOs are hosted<br />More likely to be hosted if the MPO is a non-TMA<br />Very large MPOs (1 million +) were the most likely to be independent<br />
    13. 13. Types of Hosting<br />13<br />There is a wide varietyof MPO organizationalstructures<br />Regional Council ismost common host<br />Combined, localgovernments host 40% of all MPOs<br />
    14. 14. Other Hosting Observations <br />14<br />Municipally-hosted MPOs tended to be in small regions (under 200,000)<br />County-hosted MPOs were tightly focused in the 200-500,000 range<br />RC-hosted MPOs were common across all ranges, but were slightly more common at non-TMAs<br />Air quality attainment appears to have little impact on hosting status or host type<br />Other hosting types can be found, but are rare<br />
    15. 15. Advantages/Disadvantages – Hosted<br />15<br />Advantages:<br />Lower overall cost<br />Administration<br />Benefits<br />Office space<br />Sharing of expertise<br />Coordinated programs<br />Employees<br />Capital float<br />Disadvantages:<br />Responsibilities blurred<br />Staff<br />Board<br />MPO subject to host rules, budget and oversight<br />Managerial authority and autonomy<br />Policy interference<br />Unfamiliarity with MPO work<br />
    16. 16. Advantages/Disadvantages – Independent<br />16<br />Advantages:<br />Political and administrative autonomy<br />Clarity in chain of command<br />Staff <br />Board<br />Agency identity<br />Cleaner finances<br />Disadvantages:<br />Cash flow problems<br />Federal reimbursements<br />Matching funds<br />High cost of operation<br />Administrative burdens<br />Staff and administrative versatility is required<br />
    17. 17. 17<br />
    18. 18. Board Size, Composition and Voting<br />18<br />
    19. 19. Laws/Rules Governing MPO Boards<br />19<br />Federal law<br />Local elected officials<br />Representatives of agencies that operate other modes<br />Relevant state officials<br />Silent on:<br />Size<br />Composition<br />Voting rights<br />Advisory committees<br />Some states regulate aspects of board composition<br />
    20. 20. Board Size – Voting Seats<br />20<br />2,142 voting board seats in our sample<br />Wide range of MPO Board sizes<br />5 to 73 voting members<br />Measures of central tendency<br />Median: 14<br />Bottom quarter – 8 or fewer<br />Top quarter – 19 or more<br />High outliers tend to be RCs<br />Mean: 16.1<br />Mode: 9<br />Max: 73<br />Third Q: 19<br />Mean: 16<br />Median: 14<br />Voting Board Seats<br />Mode: 9<br />First Q: 8<br />Min: 5<br />
    21. 21. Board Size – By Population<br />21<br />Board size seems to be related to population<br />
    22. 22. Board Composition – Seat Types<br />22<br />
    23. 23. Board Composition – Percent of All Seats<br />23<br />
    24. 24. Board Composition – Voting Rights<br />24<br />One person-one vote is the prevailing voting structure<br />Common for larger jurisdictions to have more than one seat<br />Weighted voting<br />13.5% of MPOs in the sample<br />Most commonly weighted by population<br />Many MPOs with weighted voting have never used it<br />“Rotating” voting seats<br />27% of MPOs in the sample have a “rotating” voting seat<br />Typically between smaller local governments<br />More common among larger MPOs<br />
    25. 25. Board Composition – Non-Voting<br />25<br />Board representation for those without a voting seat<br />63% (84 of 133) have non-voting board members<br />Mean of 5 seats at MPOs providing non-voting seats<br />Examples include:<br /><ul><li>Small local govtswithin MPO boundary
    26. 26. Neighboring local govts/MPOs
    27. 27. Federal agencies
    28. 28. Chairs of MPO committees
    29. 29. Private sector
    30. 30. State legislators
    31. 31. Business groups
    32. 32. RTPOs
    33. 33. Modal authorities
    34. 34. School boards
    35. 35. State agencies</li></li></ul><li>Advisory Committees<br />26<br />
    36. 36. 27<br />
    37. 37. The MPO Workforce<br />28<br />
    38. 38. Number of Employees<br />29<br />Ranged from 121 to less than one employee<br />Part time employees are found at 73% of MPOs<br />Mean MPO: 11.7 full-time and 2.2 part-time employees<br />
    39. 39. Number of Employees<br />30<br />A dozen high outliers skew the mean higher. Median is more instructive.<br />Median MPO: 5 full-time and 1 part-time employees (6 total)<br />Three-quarters of MPOs have less than 11 total staff<br />A quarter of MPOs have 3 or fewer total staff<br />Max: 121<br />Third Q: 11<br />Median: 6<br />Total Employees<br />First Q: 3<br />Min: 1<br />
    40. 40. Median Staff Size by Population Class<br />31<br />
    41. 41. Staff Size Metrics<br />32<br />Analysis shows staff size is correlated to population and planning area square mileage<br />One employee per 47,963 people<br />OR<br />One employee per 665 square miles<br />Approximately 4,200 MPO employees nationwide<br />About 860 (20%) work at non-TMAs<br />51% of MPOs are non-TMAs<br />Large MPOs employ a large majority of MPO workers<br />
    42. 42. Specialties on Staff<br />33<br />MPOs were asked if any staff member spent more than half of his/her time in a specialized area<br />*Only selected results are shown*<br />
    43. 43. General Tasks<br />34<br />Time spent on general agency administration<br />Hosted MPOs: 21.3%<br />Independent: 28.1%<br />More than 20 employees: 12.5%<br />Less than 3 employees: 29.6%<br />Time spent on public involvement- 15.3%<br />Time spent on committee management- 21.7%<br />
    44. 44. Consultants<br />35<br />Consultants are an important source of MPO labor<br />All but one MPO reported using consultants <br />25% of all UPWP funds are spent on contractors<br />$1 spent internally : 40¢ to contractors<br />Non-attainment areas spend more money on consultants<br />MPOs over 500,000 population spend more money on consultants than smaller MPOs<br />The LRTP/MTP is the only “core” document that frequently is authored by consultants<br />
    45. 45. Consultant Tasks<br />36<br />SpecializedLabor<br />SupplementalLabor<br />SubstituteLabor<br />
    46. 46. Position Creation<br />37<br />Over the period 2007-2008,a third of MPOs created positions<br />Some MPOs reported:<br />Technology tasks were moved in-house<br />Increased emphasis on certain planning areaslike bike/ped, transit, or safety<br />
    47. 47. Employee Turnover<br />38<br />MPOs with smaller staffs experienced higher rates of employee turnover<br />MPOs in smaller regions experienced higher turnover rates<br />MPO universe experiences 12.5% turnover/year<br />Twenty or more employees: 4.1% <br />Less than three: 20.1%<br />
    48. 48. Is MPO Pay Competitive?<br />39<br /><ul><li>Most say yes
    49. 49. All sizes of MPOs respondwith similar answers
    50. 50. Narrative responses indicate:
    51. 51. MPO competitive interms of total compensationpackage
    52. 52. Competitive with other transportation agencies
    53. 53. Unable to match offers due to fixed pay scales</li></li></ul><li>Where Employees Go<br />40<br />188 professional staffdepartures 2007-2008<br />40% left transportationsector<br />Just over a quarterwent to consulting firms <br />
    54. 54. New Employers of Specialists<br />41<br />Engineers and modelers tend to stay in transportation<br />Engineers and modelers are more often hired by consultants<br />Planners tend to land at other transportation agencies<br />Other professionals often leave transportation entirely<br />
    55. 55. Other Topics in the Survey<br />42<br />Salary Scales<br />Employee Benefits<br />Organization Funding<br />State Governance<br />MPO Directors<br />Aging Workforce<br />Intergovernmental Efforts<br />Indirect Rate<br />Employee Tenure<br />
    56. 56. 43<br />
    57. 57. Contact Us<br />44<br />Report due for release around March 2010<br />Alex Bond Jeff Kramer<br />(813) 974-9779 (813) 974-1397<br />ALBond@cutr.usf.edu Kramer@cutr.usf.edu <br />

    ×