icma leadership team capstone project (1)

City of

July 3, 2014

iCMA Leadership teamCapstone projeCt

T a b l e o f C o n T e n T s

ExEcutivE Summary ...................................................................................................................................1

Central Building Services ...............................................................................................................................................1

Central Vehicle Maintenance .........................................................................................................................................1

ProjEct ovErviEw .......................................................................................................................................3

Project Background .........................................................................................................................................................3

Project Scope ....................................................................................................................................................................3

Process ...............................................................................................................................................................................3

cEntral Building SErvicES .....................................................................................................................4

cEntral vEhiclE maintEnancE ............................................................................................................7

concluSion ...................................................................................................................................................19

aPPEndicES ....................................................................................................................................................20

Appendix A: Lee’s Summit Capstone team ................................................................................................................21

Appendix B: CPM Survey Vehicle Class Definitions ................................................................................................22

Appendix C: Guide to interpreting a “Box and Whisker Chart” ............................................................................24

Appendix D: Benchmark Comparison Charts: Police Vehicles...............................................................................25

Appendix E: Benchmark Comparison Charts: fire Apparatus ...............................................................................26

Appendix f: Benchmark Comparison Charts: EMS Vehicles..................................................................................27

Appendix G: Benchmark Comparison Charts: Light Vehicles ................................................................................28

Appendix H: Benchmark Comparison Charts: Medium Duty Vehicles ................................................................29

Appendix i: Benchmark Comparison Charts: Heavy Duty Vehicles ......................................................................30

Appendix J: Benchmark Comparison Charts: Heavy Equipment ...........................................................................31

Appendix K: Benchmark Comparison Charts: Staffing ............................................................................................32

Appendix L: CPM Comparison Jurisdictions – Key Characteristics ......................................................................34

Appendix M: CPM Comparison Jurisdictions – Jurisdiction Participation by Metric ........................................35

Appendix N: CPM Comparison Jurisdictions – Jurisdiction Participation by Metric (Staffing) ......................40

Appendix o: Sample facilities Customer Service Survey ........................................................................................41

Appendix P: Sample fleet Customer Service Survey ................................................................................................42

Appendix Q: fleet Expense Calculations ...................................................................................................................43

jUne 2014 | 1

in february 2014, the City of Lee’s Summit, Mo engaged the Leadership iCMA Class of 2014 in an effort to complete a performance management review of the Central Building Services (CBS) and Central Vehicle Maintenance (CVM) divisions. Specifically, Lee’s Summit requested an analysis of 1) staffing levels, 2) management and work practices, 3) opportunities for outsourcing, in-sourcing, and reduction of service, and 4) the cost allocation system used to charge back costs to the client departments. Additionally, Lee’s Summit requested the research and identification of leading practices relevant to the operations and services offered by the aforementioned divisions. We hope that the following report fully satisfies each of these requests.

Generally, the process for this management review included on-site interviews of key stakeholders, review of relevant policies and procedures, collection and analysis of performance metrics, and the comparison of operations and practices against industry leading practices. Ultimately, our review resulted in the findings that follow.

central Building Services

We find there is significance evidence to make adjustments to the operations of CBS to improve its effectiveness and efficiencies in facilities maintenance and long range planning. The staffing structure of this division no longer meets the needs or functionality as it was originally created. As a consequence the division has recently not been as effective as desired. A reorganization of the staff would allow senior managers the ability to review, evaluate and make changes to the division’s structure in order to ensure maximized performance outcomes.

Recommendations for CBS are as follows:

• Reorganize the division including removal/reclassification of the City Architect position due to a reduction in future planned capital/construction projects

• Combination of the CBS and CVM divisions to create a new department “General Services” that allows current quality management of fleet to improve efficiency of Building Services

• improve internal customer service to departments that utilize services with better transparency and communication to reduce mistrust in the organization

• improve quality of custodial services and require departments to use the services by implementing a new policy that encourage consistency in the use of the internal services

• Clearly outline leadership and training expectations of the division to ensure staff has the proper guidelines to follow to be successful

• Create a sustainable plan for the BERP Program allowing for proper funding, project identification, and management

central vehicle maintenance

overall, it appears that CVM is functioning both efficiently and effectively. it is evident that the division is committed to keeping pace with industry changes, having integrated several industry best practices into its operations and policies. operationally, when compared against performance benchmarks from a sample of fleet divisions from comparable U.S. jurisdictions, CVM generally compared favorably. finally, the vehicle replacement program (VERP) seems to be achieving its intended purpose of sufficiently funding replacement of the existing fleet while promoting a stable, predictable budget.

e x e C u T i v e s u m m a r y

2 | iCma leadership team Capstone projeCt

Areas identified for potential improvement in CVM include the following:

• Cost of maintenance for emergency vehicles (police patrol, fire apparatus, and EMS vehicles) appears to be higher than expected.

• Cost of outsourced work appears to be increasing.

• Ratio of mechanics to vehicles/equipment appears to be low.

• Customer service expectations of departments sometimes appear to be unmet.

• interdepartmental communication mechanisms appear to be insufficient and varied.

Recommendations for CVM are as follows:

• Add one mechanic position to CVM. This position could potentially be filled by transferring the current parts room manager to a mechanic position. The parts room manager position could be filled through a new hire or, alternatively, the parts room service could be outsourced.

• Explore possible causes for unexpectedly high maintenance expenses for emergency vehicles.

• Establish uniform procedures for departments to request service.

• implement systematic feedback mechanism for ongoing evaluation of customer satisfaction.

• Use existing internal government communication resources to enhance organizational understanding of fleet services, policies, and performance. Ensure that content remains current and accurate.

• Continue maintaining detailed records on fleet and consider collecting additional data to facilitate ongoing benchmark comparisons.

• Evaluate the replacement criteria for emergency vehicles. This portion of the fleet appears more modern and less used than most comparison jurisdictions, and delaying replacement may be an opportunity to reduce costs while maintaining a serviceable fleet.

jUne 2014 | 3

Project Background

included within the Charter of the City of Lee’s Summit is a provision requiring the completion of an “operational management report at least once a year” (Section 3.12 (a)). in meeting this requirement, Lee’s Summit typically completes a management/performance review of one department or division per year, generally cycling through each department to ensure a somewhat regular review for each department. Most recently, the City began reviewing its three internal service departments. Having completed the review of the it department, the City turned its attention to its fleet management and building maintenance divisions, known as Central Vehicle Maintenance (CVM) and Central Building Services (CBS), respectively.

over the years, the performance audit requirement has been satisfied in a variety of ways, including the use of outside management consultants. This year, Lee’s Summit opted to engage with the international City/County Management Association’s young professional leadership development program, known as Leadership iCMA. Ultimately, four members of the Leadership iCMA Class of 2014 (henceforth referred to as the “Capstone team”) volunteered to work with Lee’s Summit to complete this project.

Project Scope

The Capstone team agreed to conduct a performance management review of two of the City’s internal service divisions: Central Building Services (CBS) and Central Vehicle Maintenance (CVM). Specifically, Lee’s Summit requested a review and analysis of the following for both CBS and CVM:

• Staffing levels

• Management and work practices

• opportunities for outsourcing, insourcing, and reductions in service

• Cost allocation systems

• Policy and practice alignment with industry leading practices

The deliverable for this project includes a report which details findings, recommendations for improvement, and suggested strategies for managing these changes.

Process

in order to gain insight into the performance of CVM and CBS, the Capstone team performed multiple tasks.

• Review of division budgets

• Review of relevant city policies

• Review of operations and division characteristics

• interviewing stakeholders via phone and in person (during two, two-day site visits)

• Collecting descriptive and performance metrics and comparing them to benchmarks

• interviewing peer communities in the Greater Kansas City area

• Research of current industry leading practices

P r o j e C T o v e r v i e w


The City of Lee’s Summit currently has several buildings that are served by Central Building Services (CBS), which is a division of the Administrative Services division of the City. CBS is overseen by the City Architect Stephen Aldridge which splits his time between managing CBS and project management for new construction projects for the City of Lee’s Summit. The department is currently served by 5 ftE employees but has 5.5 ftE’s budgeted for 2014. The City has experienced a vacancy in this department that has remained unfilled since the fall of 2013. in the spring of 2014 the existing part-time CBS employee was promoted to full-time to partially fill the vacancy. The City of Lee’s Summit has 25 buildings of which 4 are currently vacant. The City recently completed the construction phase of an addition/renovation at the Law Enforcement – Municipal Court Building in April of 2014 and is in the planning stages for a new Water Distribution facility. Additionally, the City is in discussions to renovate a historic WPA facility for possible lease to intergovernmental agencies.

CBS provides custodial services primarily for City Hall which is the premier showcase building of the City. The costs for providing these services are allocated on a square footage basis per department. CBS does not provide custodial services currently for the Law Enforcement/Municipal Court Building, Water facility, or the fire Stations. The costs for services are calculated by a spreadsheet that was developed internally by staff. included in the calculations are the amount of square footage maintained and/or cleaned by CBS, personnel costs such as labor and benefits and a cost for cleaning supplies. The spreadsheet then determines an individual departmental cost for annual allocation per square foot to be expensed back to the department. This cost changes annually based upon work orders for the department, staff hours to clean facilities, amount of square footage per department and number of employees. CBS provides custodial services and some facilities management services for several smaller areas around the City including the Amtrak waiting area in the downtown, several city parking lots and the courtyard type concrete areas surrounding City Hall.

CBS and Lee’s Summit is currently utilizing a Building Equipment Replacement Program (BERP) to set aside funds for the replacement of large facility maintenance items such as roofs, HVAC systems, etc. There is concern within some city departments that the program is not adequately funded (it is something that in low budget years has been cut/reduced in the past). There does not seem to be a standard for identifying leading practices or proper life cycle for many of the items that are being attributed to the BERP; and funds for this program do not currently meet the existing needs and as such they can’t adequately meet needs in the future.

Challenges that currently face CBS include: having one open 0.5 ftE position that has required existing employees to take on additional work, mistrust within the organization for how the annual allocation is calculated per department and per square foot which seems to reward departments that are able to reduce square footage requirements of used building space (particularly within City Hall), and mistrust within the organization that CBS provides value added services to their department as opposed to contracting out the service. The police department currently has their own custodial and facilities maintenance employees (the maintenance employee does share some time with CBS) however CBS employees currently clean the municipal court section of the Law Enforcement building, this is a duplication of services and the police department is not currently satisfied with the custodial services that they are receiving from their employees and is seeking other options either through contracting or reverting back to CBS for custodial services. The water department has chosen in the past not to use CBS’s services because of the belief that they did not receive an adequate level of service and they did not believe the cost was competitive. They have bid the services out to outside contractors in the past but are currently negotiating with CBS to care for the new water facilities once they are completed. The Water Department’s current concern is that they will be attributed with the need for CBS to add additional staff which would/may increase costs.

Public Works is concerned about the total overhead costs of CBS custodial maintenance costs. The current supervisor in the Public Works department was at one time in charge of the head custodian before CBS was developed. The satisfaction of services from CBS in the Street operations facility according to PW is dependent upon which CBS employee is assigned for the day. The PW Supervisor has spoken to the City Architect about it but the issue was not resolved as of the first quarter of 2014. The fire Department stated that due to changes in staffing (the loss of an employee) the fire department felt there was a significant loss in service. As a result, the fire Department negotiated a new contract to change the areas being cleaned by CBS at the fire Department HQ with CBS only cleaning the office areas, not any of the living areas which they previously had been cleaning just for that building. fire department employees clean and maintain all other fire house facilities as part of their regular duties.

C e n T r a l b u i l d i n g s e r v i C e s

jUne 2014 | 5

Based on staff interviews, there is a perceived internal belief that City Hall, as a building, gets preferential treatment over all other facilities. However, not all departments with space located in City Hall believe they are treated equally – the biggest concern for most departments is with the Parks and Recreation department. Parks and Recreation, while a City service department is overseen by an outside board rather than traditional city staff. to this end, their flexibility in terms of space utilization within City Hall and how costs are allocated to them is different than other City departments. Add to this in 2013-2014 the Parks department made a move to significantly reduce space in City Hall. The space reduction created a vacancy in City Hall and caused other departmental overhead allocations to increase because the total costs did not decrease, just the amount of square footage to allocate against.

A recent change by CBS moving the custodial employees from night shift employees to day shift employees has also created a change in service. There is a concern that certain services that used to be completely daily are not being completed on a regular basis if at all now. These services include vacuuming (can’t do during business hours due to noise), trash is no longer emptied on a daily basis and spills/stains do not get taken care in a timely manner. Additionally, staff believes that over the past 6 months there has been an increase in the number of complaints related to cleanliness and stocking of restrooms.

The inconsistent method of determining if a department or location will utilize CBS or outsource custodial and maintenance services should not continue. it does not allow the city to truly capitalize on economies of scale within the purchasing process for supplies or services. it creates inconsistencies in service levels and continuity of care for facilities. Currently there is no policy in place that provides guidance on when these custodial services are completed with internal staff or outsourced to another agency.

The information we gathered from staff reflected different departments could choose to outsource based on how the department felt about the CBS provided service. A clear policy for this issue would allow clarity for CBS to be considered the first option and a required justification for outsourcing, which would need Senior Leadership team approval.

Creating the position of City Architect while a smart decision for the City of Lee’s Summit during a significant period of growth, is not sustainable long term. The City will not have enough projects in the upcoming years to justify an on staff project manager/architect that has not remained current with new trends in the building, planning and construction fields. The City needs to create a long range project plan which outlines the desired projects for the next five years. This projected plan would confirm that the City Architect position is not needed as much in the past.

recommendations

Due to the small number of ftEs in this division, it would be beneficial to combine them with Central Vehicle Maintenance and create one department called General Services. This department could be managed by fleet Services Manager, Mark Stinson. He has proven that he has established good working relationships in the organization. He also has a strong knowledge of fleet maintenance that could be used towards facility maintenance as well. This reorganization would remove the need for the City Architect position. This position could be reclassified to fit a different need or removed. Another option is to create a fleet and facility Maintenance Division and locate it under the Public Works Department.

The benefits of using the managerial expertise of Stinson would allow him to implement an accountability system. The system would require performance measures and goals. The advantages of creating a General Services Department should be supplemented with a formal strategic planning process with a performance management system. This will allow goals to be set that could increase accountability resulting in more effective and efficient operations. A more strategic and systematic approach will be reflected if performance is in alignment with the mission of the organization. A key measure should be used related to the amount of square feet of space and customer satisfaction. A successful creation of this department will result in cost savings, more operational efficiencies, increased internal and customer service. A new policy for the use of the service and internal partnership agreements will clearly outline the expectations of the department. This will allow spending to remain in the organization and less funds to be expended on external custodial services.


During this potential reorganization, the current staff should be reevaluated to ensure “the right people are in the right seat.” The CBS staff needs to reflect the leadership and training that is expected of all of Lee’s Summit staff. The supervisors should have an improved training and quality assurance program. There should be a high level of accountability for the supervisors to maintain quality staff in order to not allow others to outsource of these services. The custodial service has explored both working during the day and the evening. The primary reason given for not continuing working at night was lack of proper supervision. The supervisor assigned was not good at ensuring the work was completely in a quality and timely manner. in this case, the supervisor should have been examined to see if another person should be supervising. Cleaning during the day has the drawbacks of disturbing staff and decreasing productivity by both custodial staff and the other employees.

During this staffing restructuring process each current member should be given the opportunity to compete to retain their job. There should also be consideration given to adding at least one ftE. The current staff is so small that an absence by one employee creates a burden on the remaining staff. A new ftE would allow the flexibility of allowing the same level of work to continue at an uninterrupted pace.

Creating a high performing staff may require new employees with the energy and desire to achieve excellent customer service. improving internal customer service should be a priority of CBS. The current staff of CBS has not done a good job with communicating information in a clear and transparent way. internal departments should be aware and informed of the cost allocation adjustments as it relates to their budgets. The quality of the work provided also should not depend on which staff member is working that particular day. The consistent application of customer service and providing good services will reduce the amount of mistrust by internal customers.

The BERP needs commitment to long term planning by management in order to continue the program in a meaningful way to Lee’s Summit. The funding should remain at the level needed to accomplish the goals of the program. We believe there is no current BERP policy in place like there is a VERP policy. The VERP policy should be a model for BERP and implemented so that it allows the facility needs of the City to be met. it is strongly recommended that the BERP policy, through various stakeholder groups, be clearly written and communicated along various City channels (Administrative Policy Manual, Budget guidance documents, departmental policy). Clarifying the intent and purpose of the BERP model will accomplish the long-term vision of this specialized funding source.

jUne 2014 | 7

Fleet operations review

it is the mission of the City of Lee’s Summit fleet Division to provide the best service and staff by partnering with departments and vendors to effectively monitor and ensure the most cost effective repair and replacement of vehicles and equipment. Their core values – 100% customer satisfaction, professionalism, and have fun at what you do – help live out this mission.

This report on the use of vehicles by the City of Lee’s Summit is not a comprehensive report on uses of all the City’s approximately 400 vehicles. instead this report focuses on a basic understanding of the policies and practices of the various departments, largely obtained from department self-reporting and existing fleet information. The purpose of the report was to determine if there are serious deficiencies in the area of vehicle fleet management of a general nature and to make recommendations pertaining to the same.

The City of Lee’s Summit has a diversified fleet operation of approximately 400 vehicles, equipment and trailer units. The division coordinates the maintenance operation for a mixed fleet of automotive, trucks, specialty vehicles, commercial construction equipment and ancillary equipment. The division operates a maintenance shop for both heavy fleet and light fleet vehicles at its facility on 1971 SE Hamblen Road. This fleet services not only the City’s emergency departments like Police and fire, but also a utility (water), as well as numerous City agencies like Public Works, Landfill, Parks, Airport, and many others. four departments have over 45 vehicles each and account for more than 72% of the total fleet as shown in the chart below. The utility accounts for nearly 13% of the total fleet inventory.

The fleet Division is responsible for the acquisition – including preparation of written specifications, maintenance, repair and disposal of the City’s motor fleet and equipment with nine full-time employees and a combined operational and Vehicle Equipment Replacement Program (VERP) budget of $7 million. The VERP budget of $6 million accounts for VERP payments, vehicle acquisition and disposal funds. The operations budget of $1 million accounts for all vehicle and equipment insurance yearly payments, fuel and other operation needs. The Division also performs vehicle and equipment repairs and routine maintenance including engine overhauls and tune-ups; brake, clutch and transmission repair and replacement; electrical system repair; hydraulic system repair; acetylene and arc welding; tire mounting and repair.

C e n T r a l v e h i C l e m a i n T e n a n C e

The Fleet Division is responsible for the acquisition – including preparation of written specifications , maintenance, repair and disposal of the City’s motor fleet and equipment with nine full-time employees and a combined operational and Vehicle Equipment Replacement Program (VERP) budget of $7 million. The VERP budget of $6 million accounts for VERP payments, vehicle acquisition and disposal funds. The Operations budget of $1 million accounts for all vehicle and equipment insurance yearly payments. The Division also performs vehicle and equipment repairs and routine maintenance including engine overhauls and tune-ups; brake, clutch and transmission repair and replacement; electrical system repair; hydraulic system repair; acetylene and arc welding; tire mounting and repair.

Additionally, the Fleet Services Division ensures that adequate supplies of fuel, oil, transmission fluid, lubricants, antifreeze and washer fluid are available to operating departments. The division operates four fueling stations located throughout the city.Annually, fuel consumption averages more than 100,000 gallons of diesel and 200,000 gallons of unleaded fuel.

134556789

1316

2329

4347

7599

ITSParks CemetaryParks Grounds

Animal ControlCodes

Building InspectionBuilding Services

FleetWater Support

PW InspAirport

LandfillParks

Water OperationsFire

PW OperationsPolice

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

Equipment Distribution by Department

Fuel Distribution Centers

Location Fuel Type(s) Fire Headquarters (main site) Unleaded & Diesel Water Operations Diesel Public Works Operations Diesel Police Headquarters Unleaded


Additionally, the fleet Services Division ensures that adequate supplies of fuel, oil, transmission fluid, lubricants, antifreeze and washer fluid are available to operating departments. The division operates four fueling stations located throughout the city. Annually, fuel consumption averages more than 100,000 gallons of diesel and 200,000 gallons of unleaded fuel.

fuel usage is tracked by fuelmaster fuel management system. fuelmaster eliminates manual tracking of fuel transactions and increases accountability. The software is able to track abnormal increases in fuel usage and flag out for review. All fueling information is bridged back to the main fleet software system for tracking and evaluation of overall fleet performance and billing requirements. fuel is billed back to user departments on total number of gallons used (diesel or unleaded) for the previous month.

The age of the entire fleet appears to be well within tolerable limits. in fact, the age of the fleet is quite “young” in comparison to other benchmark cities. The overall average age of the Lee’s Summit fleet is 6.56 years. Several vehicles that are not included in the vehicle and equipment replacement program are driving some of the averages higher. The vehicle and equipment replacement program policy certainly is managing the overall age of the fleet as shown in the chart below.

to deliver the mission of Central Vehicle Maintenance, Lee’s Summit employs nine staff – 1 fleet Manager, 1 Administrative Assistant, 1 Maintenance Shop Supervisor and 6 Mechanics. Currently, one mechanic serves as the full time parts room clerk. The fleet manager reports directly to the Assistant City Manager for internal Services, and in turn, to the City Manager.

Combined, the fleet staff has 41 National institute for Automotive Service Excellence (ASE) certifications. The fleet manager is a certified Public fleet Manager through the American Public Works Association (APWA). Additionally, all mechanics are EVt Level ii certified and certified vehicle inspectors through the State of Missouri. two of the mechanics have achieved Master level ASE Mechanics certification, while among the mechanics there are a combined 28 Emergency Vehicle technicians certifications with a total of 56 continuing education hours per year.

FuEl diStriBution cEntErS

location Fuel type(s)

fire Headquarters (main site) Unleaded & Diesel

Water operations DieselPublic Works operations Diesel

Police Headquarters Unleaded

2.62.9

4.25.2

5.55.55.75.85.95.9

6.86.9

7.29.19.3

1216.8

Animal ControlWater Support

PoliceCodes

Parks GroundsPublic Works Inspections

Parks CemetaryBuilding Inspection

Water OperationsPublic Works Operations

LandfillParks

FireBuilding Services

FleetITS

Airport

0 5 10 15 20

Average Age of Equipment by Department

Fuel usage is tracked by Fuelmaster fuel management system. Fuelmaster eliminates manual tracking of fuel transactions and increases accountability. The software is able to track abnormal increases in fuel usage and flag out for review. All fueling information is bridged back to the main fleet software system for tracking and evaluation of overall fleet performance and billing requirements. Fuel is billed back to user departments on total number of gallons used (diesel or unleaded) for the previous month. The age of the entire fleet appears to be well within tolerable limits. In fact, the age of the fleet is quite “young” in comparison to other benchmark cities. The overall average age of the Lee’s Summit fleet is 6.56 years. Several vehicles that are not included in the vehicle and equipment replacement program are driving some of the averages higher. The vehicle and equipment replacement program policy certainly is managing the overall age of the fleet as shown in the chart below.

To deliver the mission of Central Vehicle Maintenance, Lee’s Summit employs nine staff – 1 Fleet Manager, 1 Administrative Assistant, 1 Maintenance Shop Supervisor and 6 Mechanics. Currently, one mechanic serves as the full time parts room clerk.

2.6 2.9

4.2 5.2

5.5 5.5 5.7 5.8 5.9 5.9

6.8 6.9

7.2 9.1 9.3

12 16.8

Animal ControlWater Support

PoliceCodes

Parks GroundsPublic Works Inspections

Parks CemetaryBuilding Inspection

Water OperationsPublic Works Operations

LandfillParks

FireBuilding Services

FleetITS

Airport

0 5 10 15 20

Average Age of Equipment by Department

jUne 2014 | 9

fleet management is all about having relevant information when you need it. Without timely information, maintenance is neglected, replacement is not scheduled and liability to the City increases as break downs lead to poor service delivery. fleet management software helps staff manage a fleet of any size in an efficient manner. Lee’s Summit uses a fleet management software program called RtA (Ron turley Associates) and is sufficiently satisfied with the product.

RtA fleet Maintenance software helps track all fleet activities, enabling the division to account and charge user departmental budgets for maintenance, repair and other operational costs. Many features are included in the standard package with customizable options and reports available upon request. Lee’s Summit utilizes most of the software’s features, most notably: fuel usage and consumption reporting; parts inventory and purchasing tracking; technician accountability and time clock, preventative maintenance and tracking, and total vehicle cost accounting and reporting.

in reviewing other municipal fleet maintenance operations, we studied seven local municipalities within the Mid-America Regional Council area. They ranged in size from 24 to 78 square miles and 35,000 to 173,000 in population. Collectively, they depict a variety of service options, management methods, staffing components and fleet size. individually, they present a unique case to study and compare.

• overland Park, KS, has a decentralized fleet management and the fleet division only works on maintenance for the facilities, fire and Public Works departments, accounting for approximately 260 vehicles. The overall budget for the fleet Division is $1.0 million. five mechanics, an assistant supervisor, fleet analyst, parts clerk and assistant parts clerk support the fleet Division operations for those vehicles. The Parks department has their own shop and mechanic. Police Department has their own crew and outsources most of their work. There is a vehicle replacement fund that resides in the City Manager’s office but departments do not pay into it yearly as a true vehicle replacement fund. The fleet Division keeps a minimum amount of parts stocked in inventory and usually will not inventory items that are available within an hour drive of their facility. Either the vendor or parts runner will shuttle parts back to the fleet garage to make repairs. overland Park has looked at outsourcing their parts operation with NAPA and fMP in the past, but the numbers never worked out for the vendor or the city (vendor needed more volume to offset the cost of a full time employee - or the city could pay more than they currently do).

• olathe, KS, fleet Maintenance division is located within the City’s Public Works Department. The Vehicle Maintenance division is responsible for maintaining 1078 city vehicles and equipment.

• independence, Mo, fleet Maintenance division housed in the Public Works Department, is responsible for maintaining approximately 560 automobiles, pickup trucks, heavy trucks and construction equipment. They handle acquisition, repairs, preventative maintenance and fuel management. They also maintain an inventory of maintenance manuals and parts for all City equipment. Central Garage has a $2.1M budget including fuel purchase. They do charge a 20% fee for parts inventory and control management. Staff includes the Garage Supervisor, Clerk, Parts inventory Clerk, two Auto Mechanics and four Heavy Equipment Mechanics. They work out of the Central Garage.

• Shawnee, KS, fleet Division, within the Public Works Department, oversees approximately 300 vehicles and equipment, including Police and fire. The Parks Department handles most of their repairs for their vehicles and all small engine work. There are six employees in the division – 1 supervisor, 3 mechanics, 1 utility person and 1 inventory control clerk. Parts are in-house with the one clerk. The division also manages the fueling stations and fuel contract for the City. They are working on a funded vehicle equipment replacement program but are several years away from being fully implemented. Parts are billed directly to user departments with labor rates being absorbed by the department.

• Blue Springs, Mo, fleet Maintenance Division, within the Public Works Department is responsible for a fleet of more than 177 vehicles and 166 pieces of equipment. They are responsible for maintenance, repair, support, and retirement of those assets, as well as creating specifications for new assets. They also purchase and supply fuel for the entire City fleet. They are an internally funded department, billing each City department for services provided on their individual vehicles and equipment.


• Lenexa, KS, fleet Maintenance Division maintains and repairs nearly 375 city vehicles, including police cars and fire engines as well as heavy equipment. Additionally, fleet maintains more than 250 small engines such as weed-eaters, mowers and chainsaws with nine full time employees. The division also performs towing and recovery services, welding and fabrication and operates a body and paint shop for city vehicles. The division has the responsibility for overseeing all vehicle and equipment purchasing for the city.

• Leavenworth, KS, has a centralized fleet management program housed in the Central Service Center. The department manages approximately 130 vehicles including light duty, police patrol and heavy duty equipment. They do not service light equipment (mowers, trimmers, etc.) or tractors. The division is operated as an enterprise fund. The staff of 4 (foreman, 2 mechanics, 1 parts clerk) deliver all services for the division with occasional outside support for specialty items/equipment. They manage and utilize a vehicle equipment replacement program to purchase vehicles from the City’s capital fund, or in the case of Wastewater and Solid Waste, from their enterprise funds. Police cruisers are replaced on average every three years. other equipment/vehicle types are replaced approximately every ten years. All costs are billed monthly to user departments with an end of year budget adjustment to balance, if necessary. Parts are marked up 20% to offset the cost of the parts clerk and inventory management.

Communication with user Departments

The fleet Advisory Board was established in 2008 and is made up of seven members from the major user departments (Police, fire, Public Works operations, Solid Waste Division, Public Works Administration, Parks Department and Codes Administration), and representatives from Administration and Purchasing Division. The board gives guidance and future direction for the fleet Division, especially in the area of operations and budgeting.

The board meets once each quarter and has addressed such issues as operational budgets, staffing concerns, monthly charge back to departments (and responsibility for those charges), services provided by CVM, development of an “observation” program, and of course overall vehicle replacements within the City. Additionally, the board has discussed cost savings related to fleet repairs and operations, including alternative fuels, proper vehicle selection (to reduce fuel usage), and oil additives that claim to reduce fuel cost. for those that attend, information and the opportunity to provide feedback to improve fleet operations is welcomed and strongly encouraged.

Additionally, the fleet Manager meets with customer departments above and beyond the fleet Advisory Board meetings on a regular basis to discuss vehicle order and delivery dates/process and check on other operational issues they may be experiencing. The fleet Division has employed the use of a satisfaction survey that is sent on a sporadic, but nearly yearly, timeframe.

in conversation with various user departments, there appears to be a constant tension and misunderstanding, confusion or lack of understanding regarding:

1. time lost by user departments in taking items in for repair,2. The end of year allocation of overhead3. The rates that fleet charges for labor

Central Vehicle Maintenance has surveyed departments about their expectations but the results have not been tabulated. Previously, anonymous surveys were used to gauge the responsiveness and service delivery of the division. The responses from that survey method yielded critical results without providing any means to resolve the problem.

Communication with user departments by CVM appears to be adequate but not necessarily penetrating to all equipment users. With the measures listed above, we recommend developing a formal, systematic process for soliciting feedback from departments. Additionally, we recommend a timely and methodical sharing of tracked performance metrics for review by users. A sample satisfaction survey has been added as an example in the appendix.

jUne 2014 | 11

outsourcing

While CVM services most of the equipment within the City it does outsource some pieces of equipment, such as heavy engines, specialized work (fire apparatus), generators at the Water treatment Plant, and onsite landfill equipment. There appears to be adequate equipment and staff to manage most of the current fleet with the exception of specialized or customized equipment where it makes sense to outsource to a specialty shop. There is no direct or specific recommendation to look at outsourcing the overall fleet maintenance function.

Parts Room options

At present, Lee’s Summit inventories nearly $128,000 of parts in stock. The division processes over $250,000 worth of outside parts per year (ordering, receiving, disbursing, and tracking). All parts are billed back to user departments at cost (no upcharge). With the current use of a mechanic in the parts room (part-time), tracking and inventory control/management is a difficult task when pressed with the operational demand on the shop floor.

it is important to note that the mission of the parts room is to provide the right part at the right time in the most efficient manner. to increase productivity and vehicle turnover the mechanic assigned to oversee the parts room should return full-time to actual wrench-turning. to accommodate such a move, two options should be considered to increase the fleet maintenance output. These parts management options are common and greatly debated among industry professionals. outlined below, are the two schools of thought.

first, is the creation of a full-time stores clerk-type position. This position would benefit the City of Lee’s Summit by assisting in the maintenance of adequate supplies inventory – issuing maintenance supplies as needed; load, unload, move and store materials; order and receive stock, and provide inventory of current assets. This position would also be called on to arrange for parts and equipment to be picked up/delivered and fill-in in basic maintenance needs in the shop. one added, and often not considered, functionality of an employee versus contractor is the ability to call back and have onsite during emergency operations like winter events. An in-house, city employee option also offers additional control of the quality of parts and current inventory management.

in a look at stores clerk/parts clerk positions in the region, a starting salary of approximately $25,000-$30,000, with 30% benefits ($7,500-$9,000) for a total, loaded average salary of $35,750, might be considered as a starting point. Central Vehicle Maintenance could look to request this position and budget during the next fiscal year budget process, to be recovered through the overhead cost allocation formula. Alternatively, and in tandem with many other jurisdictions, Lee’s Summit might consider a parts surcharge of 15% to cover the handling, inventory and management of the parts room function. This parts markup would nearly account for the direct and indirect costs associated with parts purchases and management.

Second, outsourcing the parts room operation or partnering with an onsite parts store can provide a managed contractual approach to keeping Lee’s Summit mechanics doing wrench-turning work and focused on delivering the mission of fleet, not supporting the fleet mission. Due to the variety of fleet equipment, the administrative costs associated with establishing and administering contracts with all the necessary suppliers, and management of inventory, outsourcing is certainly something to consider. As with any outsourcing consideration, development of very detailed specifications is critical to maintaining a balance between quality and cost.

There are many RfPs available online to review and help build those detailed specifications. it is the intent of the Request for Proposal to establish a contract with one supplier, and by doing so the City hopes to reduce parts procurement and related parts room operation costs, achieve an overall increase in productivity, and have savings result from economies of scale parts discounts. The contracted service would include personnel, management, parts and supplies necessary to run an efficient and effective on-site parts operation that must cover all hours worked by the facility, including emergency events. All parts necessary to maintain, repair and operate fleet vehicles and equipment would be covered by the resulting contract. When contracting with a parts supplier, shrinkage, surplus, duplication and obsolescence should be minimalized, resulting in savings to the City.


The City explored parts room outsourcing in the past. Through conversation, vendors that have proposed supply chain solutions required a staffing surcharge to augment the overall contract cost. Meaning, in addition to the parts contract cost, there was “some amount” of cost-sharing for personnel staffing the parts room. to determine which option is financially and operational best, it would be prudent for the City to develop and put out a comprehensive request for proposal and evaluate the response compared to an enhanced (adding a parts room ftE) in-house solution.

Whether the City opts to outsource or build internal capacity, effective management of vendors and asset control is paramount. it is recommended that Central Vehicle Maintenance immediately reduce the current inventory of obsolescent parts – either from vehicles or equipment that has been retired or parts that have been damaged or show wear. obsolete parts should be returned, if possible, or sold online through auction.

Policy Review

At the core of good management practices are good policies. The City of Lee’s Summit employees several fleet management policies including the fleet Division internal Services fund Policy (inclusive of the Vehicle Equipment Replacement Program), Energy Conservation Policy for vehicles/equipment (Anti-idling policy), Use of City Vehicles, and Motor Pool Policy.

Admittedly, City staff has recognized the need for review and updating of the “Personal Use” section (414.2) in the personnel manual. We believe it significantly exposes the City to possible litigation. A stronger, more defined, personal use section should be created, limiting all personal use of a City vehicle other than for commuting to and from work (if classification/job demands on-call or rapid response). Provisions in the new policy should be made for use of unmarked police vehicles for purposes which are incidental to law enforcement functions.

vehicle Equipment replacement Program and chargeback mechanism

Currently, Central Vehicle Maintenance bills user departments on a monthly basis for all services rendered during the previous month. At that time, departments pay only the cost of parts (with no markup). At the end of the fiscal year, the CVM division’s overhead costs are calculated and the total is divided by the billable hours accrued throughout the year. This determines the hourly billing rate. The hourly billing rate is then applied to each work order completed during the year and charged to the corresponding department. This process ensures that the CVM division covers all of its expenses and that departments are billed equitably. Some option for alternative costs allocation procedures may be limited by state law and the finance department.

The City’s vehicle and equipment needs appear to be adequately managed through the Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Program, or VERP. Annually, departments using the services of the fleet Division are assessed a charge for direct labor and overhead costs based on time spent servicing their equipment. All departments pay an annual fee for their vehicles, which are then set aside to provide funding for subsequent vehicle replacements. This system allows the City’s operating departments to evenly fund their capital outlay expenses. By leveling each department’s capital expenditures over the long term, the variability of large sums of capital expensed in a given fiscal year due to a concentrated replacement need can be eliminated.

and charged to the corresponding department. This process ensures that the CVM division covers all of its expenses and that departments are billed equitably. Some option for alternative costs allocation procedures may be limited by state law and the finance department.

The City’s vehicle and equipment needs appear to be adequately managed through the Vehicle and Equipment Replacement Program, or VERP. Annually, departments using the services of the Fleet Division are assessed a charge for direct labor and overhead costs based on time spent servicing their equipment. All departments pay an annual fee for their vehicles, which are then set aside to provide funding for subsequent vehicle replacements. This system allows the City’s operating departments to evenly fund their capital outlay expenses. By leveling each department’s capital expenditures over the long term, the variability of large sums of capital expensed in a given fiscal year due to a concentrated replacement need can be eliminated. The VERP program for Lee’s Summit was established in 1988.

Life cycle estimates are made for each vehicle when it is purchased. The calculated life span of the equipment is plugged into the VERP model for optimal budgeting and forecasting, enabling departments to budget accordingly and have sufficient funds available at the time of replacement purchase. Additionally, beyond a static number as a life span prediction, maintenance and history reports are used to update and

1 1 1 1 1 2 2 35

2

6 6 7 7

14

18

10

14

18

28

43

34

3841

33

44

13

1950

1974

1985

1989

1990

1992

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Equipment Distribution by Model Year

jUne 2014 | 13

Life cycle estimates are made for each vehicle when it is purchased. The calculated life span of the equipment is plugged into the VERP model for optimal budgeting and forecasting, enabling departments to budget accordingly and have sufficient funds available at the time of replacement purchase. Additionally, beyond a static number as a life span prediction, maintenance and history reports are used to update and establish replacement criteria. Such an approach allows CVM and the user department to adjust life span predictions based on actual service and repair history.

The City of Lee’s Summit has significant documentation regarding the VERP. The program is clearly outlined in the City’s Policy Manual in section 809 (fleet Division internal Services fund Policy). The City, through this policy, has articulated the purpose of the fund, how they receive vehicles and mobile equipment, make new capital purchase through VERP replacement (including basic funding assumptions), established replacement formulas and fleet overhead payments, and charges for parts and supplies. The policy is definitive and in need of no additional changes.

central vehicle maintenance Benchmark comparisons

one important way in which organizations gain insight into their efficiency and effectiveness is by comparing their performance against peer organizations. As such, the Lee’s Summit Capstone team sought to compare the performance of Central Vehicle Maintenance to peer departments across the country.

The data for this comparative analysis was graciously made available by the international City/County Management Association’s Center for Performance Measurement (CPM). CPM has been collecting descriptive and performance data for a broad range of local government services for over ten years. This data is self-reported by member jurisdictions spread throughout the United States. CPM develops the surveys used to collect data, receives and aggregates self-reported data from member jurisdictions, and makes efforts to ensure the reliability and validity of the data. Data is collected once per year and covers one fiscal year of service provision.

data characteristics and notes

Comparison Sample: The comparison sample is comprised of CPMs member jurisdictions participating in the fleet services survey. These jurisdictions vary in many ways including population, area, density, and income. Though each comparison metric includes only a portion of the entire sample (those jurisdictions responding to the given survey question), the key characteristics of the total sample are as follows: median population of 38,394, median area of 20 square miles, and median density of 1,814 population per square mile. for comparison, Lee’s Summit has a population of 92,468 (as of 2012, according to the US Census Bureau), area of approximately 66 square miles, and a population density of approximately 1,404. in other words, Lee’s Summit is larger in terms of population and area, and less dense than the comparison sample as a whole. While a comparison limited to jurisdictions with similar characteristics as Lee’s Summit would have been preferable, the resulting sample size would have been unreliably small for even a rudimentary statistical analysis. Therefore, all participating CPM jurisdictions were included.

Time Frame: CPM members submit data covering one full fiscal year. The most current data available for comparison jurisdictions was from fiscal years 2011 and 2012 (two years were included to increase the sample size). one fiscal year was used for each comparison jurisdiction—either 2011 or 2012. for Lee’s Summit, we used data from fy2013 to ensure the most current information while meeting the full fiscal year criteria.

Vehicle Categories: The CPM dataset divides fleet vehicles and equipment into several distinct categories: police vehicles, fire apparatus, EMS vehicles, light vehicles, medium duty vehicles, heavy duty vehicles, and heavy equipment. Note that while CPM does collect limited data for light equipment (such as trailers and light mowers) as well, light equipment was excluded from this analysis. A brief explanation of each class is as follows (detailed descriptions are included in the Appendix):

Police vehicles : only “marked” vehicles used solely by uniformed patrol personnel. fire apparatus : only heavy fire equipment (ex. ladder trucks, pumper trucks, etc.). EMS vehicles : All types of ambulances. Light vehicles : Vehicles under 10,000 lbs. (ex. sedans, SUVs, light trucks and vans). Medium duty vehicles : trucks, vans, and buses between 10,000 and 20,000 lbs. Heavy duty vehicles : trucks and buses over 20,000 lbs.


Heavy equipment : off-road and construction equipment over 10,000 lbs. (ex. loaders, backhoes, bulldozers, pavers, rollers).

Included Vehicles: only vehicles and equipment that were owned on the final day of the reporting period (fy13 for Lee’s Summit, fy11 or fy12 for the comparison jurisdictions) are included in this analysis, in keeping with CPM’s reporting requirements. At the conclusion of fy2013, Lee’s Summit’s fleet was comprised of the following (excluding light equipment):

Police vehicles : 57 fire apparatus : 11 EMS vehicles : 7 Light vehicles : 138 Medium duty vehicles : 38 Heavy duty vehicles : 29 Heavy equipment : 23 total : 303

Replacement Criteria: Many members of the CPM sample group indicated that they had formal replacement criteria for all or some of their fleet. These criteria may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. for example, a five year old vehicle with 50,000 miles may exceed replacement in one jurisdiction but not in another. Comparisons based upon replacement criteria made in this analysis do not account for this variance.

Expenses: to ensure valid comparisons, CPM determines what types of expenses should be included for fleet services (see Appendix for a full list of allowable expenses). Lee’s Summit’s expenses were calculated for each vehicle by adding parts costs to labor costs. to arrive at labor costs, labor hours were multiplied by the Lee’s Summit hourly labor rate. Hourly labor rates were determined by dividing allowable fleet department expenses (in accordance with CPM specifications) by the total number of hours billed.

Maintenance: Unless otherwise specified, the term maintenance is used to include both preventative and unplanned maintenance. it does not include accident/body damage repair.

comparative Performance analysis Findings

The comparative performance analysis yielded a great deal of insight into the Lee’s Summit fleet Services Division. While the key findings for each class of vehicles will be presented within the body of this report, additional charts and figures are included in the appendix.

Police vehicles – conclusions

Lee’s Summit appears to have a very young police fleet when compared to the CPM sample. With the typical Lee’s Summit police vehicle being only two years old, it is one year and eight months younger than the average police vehicle from a typical comparison jurisdiction. While Lee’s Summit’s police vehicles do tend to cover about 1,000 more miles per year than the police vehicles of a typical comparison jurisdiction, the difference would likely have little impact on the life expectancy of the vehicles. The data suggests that the average Lee’s Summit’s police vehicle, at an average age of two years and an annual mileage of 15,455, has 30,910 miles logged. Using the same assumptions for the comparison group (44 months old and 14,586 miles per year), the average police vehicle mileage of a typical comparison jurisdiction is 53,482.

Even with one of the youngest fleets in the sample, Lee’s Summit has one of the highest percentages of police vehicles exceeding replacement criteria (again, note that each jurisdiction may have different replacement criteria). Given the young age of its police fleet, it would appear that Lee’s Summit’s replacement criteria for this class is very aggressive.

The maintenance costs associated with Lee’s Summit’s police fleet appears to be slightly higher than expected. Given the relatively young age and low mileage of the fleet, one could reasonably expect maintenance costs to be at or below the typical comparison jurisdiction with older, higher mileage police vehicles. interestingly, Lee’s Summit’s preventative maintenance expenditures per vehicle appear significantly lower than the typical comparison jurisdiction.

jUne 2014 | 15

Fire apparatus – conclusion

Lee’s Summit’s fire apparatus fleet appears to be significantly younger than the fleet of the typical comparison jurisdiction. There is questionable evidence (validity is questionable due to a small sample size) that suggests that Lee’s Summit’s fire apparatus fleet may be more heavily used than the comparison jurisdictions (hours per year). However, this additional use would likely have minimal impact on life expectancy. in fact, hours of use is not listed as a condition in Lee’s Summit’s replacement criteria for fire apparatus.

The maintenance expense of the Lee’s Summit fire apparatus fleet appears to be higher than expected. The younger age of the fleet would perhaps suggest that maintenance expenses should be similar to, or less than the typical comparison jurisdiction. if, however, Lee’s Summit fire apparatus fleet does indeed receive more use than the comparison jurisdictions (as discussed above), greater use may explain some of the variance. in fact, when compared to the small sample of jurisdiction reporting apparatus hours used, Lee’s Summit had a lower than expected maintenance expense per hour.

EmS vehicles – conclusion

The Lee’s Summit EMS fleet appears to be very young relative to the comparison jurisdictions. There is no indication that the EMS fleet is used more heavily than the fleets of the comparison jurisdictions, although it is possible – the sample size for jurisdictions reporting hours used was very small. As of fy13, none of Lee’s Summit’s EMS vehicles exceeded the adopted replacement criteria.

The expense for maintenance of this fleet appears to be significantly higher than expected. Given the relatively young age of the fleet, it could reasonably expect maintenance costs to be at or below the typical comparison jurisdiction.

light vehicles – conclusions

Lee’s Summit’s fleet of light vehicles is very young compared to the comparison jurisdictions – nearly two years younger than the median. However, it also appears that Lee’s Summit’s light vehicles tend to drive a greater distance per year than the majority of comparison jurisdictions, covering about 1,400 more miles per year than the typical jurisdiction. Given the average age and mileage of the light vehicle fleets of both Lee’s Summit and the typical comparison jurisdiction, Lee’s Summit’s light vehicles are 28% younger but have only 13% fewer miles. in other words, Lee’s Summit’s light vehicles appear to be younger in both age and mileage.

While maintenance expense per light vehicle is slightly higher than the norm, the maintenance expense per mile driven is slightly lower than the norm. This is important given the higher than average usage of the Lee’s Summit light vehicle fleet.

finally, accident/body repair expenses per vehicle appear to be significantly higher than the typical comparison jurisdiction.

medium duty vehicles – conclusion

Lee’s Summit’s medium duty vehicle fleet appears to be significantly newer than the typical comparison jurisdiction – over two and a half years younger. However, it also appears that Lee’s Summit’s medium duty vehicles travel a greater distance (3,300 miles more) per year than the typical comparison jurisdiction. Given this information, it is likely that Lee’s Summit’s typical medium duty vehicle has over 2,000 more miles logged than the older medium duty vehicle of the typical comparison jurisdiction. Ultimately, this indicates that while the Lee’s Summit medium duty vehicles may be more modern, they are more aged in terms of mileage. Note that this conclusion is drawn based on mileage data from only about half of Lee’s Summit’s medium duty vehicles—those for which mileage data was available (instead of hours).

Lee’s Summit appears to have low maintenance costs at $0.20 per mile. This is $0.27 less per mile than the typical comparison jurisdiction.


heavy duty vehicles – conclusion

Lee’s Summit’s heavy duty vehicle fleet appears to be significantly newer than the typical comparison jurisdiction – over three and a half years younger. However, it also appears that Lee’s Summit’s heavy duty vehicles experience more intensive use per year than the typical comparison jurisdiction (223 hours more, or 169% of the typical jurisdiction’s use). Given this information, it is likely that Lee’s Summit’s typical heavy duty vehicle has similar hours logged than the older heavy duty vehicle of the typical comparison jurisdiction. Ultimately, this indicates that while the Lee’s Summit heavy duty vehicles may be more modern, they are similarly aged in terms of mileage.

Lee’s Summit appears to have significantly lower maintenance costs at $15.46 per hour of use. This is nearly $15 less per hour than the typical comparison jurisdiction.

heavy Equipment – conclusion

Lee’s Summit’s heavy equipment fleet appears to be significantly newer than the typical comparison jurisdiction (six years younger). However, it also appears that Lee’s Summit’s heavy equipment fleet experiences significantly more intensive use per year than the typical comparison jurisdiction (441 hours more, or 325% of the typical jurisdiction’s use). Given this information, it is likely that Lee’s Summit’s typical heavy duty vehicle has more hours (almost 600 more) logged than the older heavy duty vehicle of the typical comparison jurisdiction. Ultimately, this indicates that while the Lee’s Summit heavy duty vehicles may be more modern, they are more aged in terms of hours of use.

Lee’s Summit appears to have significantly lower maintenance costs at $15.46 per hour of use. This is nearly $15 less per hour than the typical comparison jurisdiction. This is a positive finding for Lee’s Summit, especially given the fact that Lee’s Summit’s heavy equipment appears to be more heavily used than most other jurisdictions. Based on the high usage, one could reasonably expect higher than average maintenance costs – in fact, the opposite is true for Lee’s Summit.

Staffing – conclusions

Based on the comparison data, it appears that Lee’s Summit’s fleet staff is responsible for maintaining a greater number of vehicles per ftE than the typical comparison jurisdiction. When accounting for mechanics only, Lee’s Summits mechanics are responsible for maintaining an even more significant number of vehicles per mechanic ftE than the mechanic ftEs of a typical comparison jurisdiction. Based on hours available for billing (mechanics) compared to total hours paid (all staff, including mechanics, administrative, and support staff), Lee’s Summit appears to have a lower percentage of employees who provide billable services (mechanics).

Lee’s Summit appears to use a greater amount of overtime per ftE than the typical comparison jurisdiction. Whereas overtime comprised about 2% of mechanic’s time in the comparison jurisdiction, it accounted for 7% of the average mechanic’s time in Lee’s Summit.

finally, it appears that Lee’s Summit’s mechanics are being used efficiently when compared to the typical comparison jurisdiction. With billed hours equal to 74% of hours available for billing, Lee’s Summit’s mechanics were nearly 10% more efficient than the typical comparison jurisdiction.

jUne 2014 | 17

Final conclusions of the Benchmark comparison analysis

vehicle and Equipment age and usage

As a rule, Lee’s Summit has a significantly newer, more modern fleet than the vast majority of comparison jurisdictions. However, many of Lee’s Summit’s vehicles classes appear to experience significantly higher than average annual usage than comparable vehicles from the typical comparison jurisdiction. The higher annual usage is almost certainly attributable to Lee’s Summit’s larger than average area. The typical comparison jurisdictions in each class comparison ranged between 26 and 29 square miles, whereas Lee’s Summit has an area of 65.87 square miles (over double the size in each subsample).

Even at a significantly younger age, due to higher than average annual usage it appears that Lee’s Summit’s average medium duty vehicles and heavy equipment pieces have more mileage or hours than the equivalent classes in comparison jurisdictions. Similarly, Lee’s Summit’s heavy duty vehicles, though younger than the norm, appear to have experienced similar usage to the older vehicles of the typical comparison jurisdiction.

Lee’s Summit’s greatest share of vehicles are light vehicles (138 of 303). Though Lee’s Summit’s light vehicles are indeed significantly newer than the typical comparison jurisdictions in terms of years, the difference in mileage is less pronounced. overall, however, it appears that Lee’s Summit’s light vehicle fleet is both newer and less used than the comparison jurisdictions.

Lee’s Summit’s emergency vehicles (marked police vehicles, fire apparatus, and EMS vehicles) are also significantly newer than the typical comparison jurisdiction. in the case of police vehicles, it appears that these vehicles experience similar annual use as comparable vehicles in the typical comparison jurisdiction. There is little to no evidence suggesting Lee’s Summit’s fire apparatus and EMS vehicles experience greater than average use – though it is a possibility (the data sample for this comparison was quite small). Ultimately, the data suggests that Lee’s Summit’s emergency vehicles are significantly younger, both in terms of years and use, than the comparable vehicles in the typical comparison jurisdiction. There may be an opportunity to safely extend the life of the emergency vehicle fleet in order to reduce capital expenses. in addition to capital savings, considerations for this decision should include estimated impacts on maintenance expense, salvage value, and perceived quality of the fleet (for example, by members of the public, city council, and police officers).

maintenance Expense

The majority of Lee’s Summit’s fleet seems to be maintained at relatively low cost when compared to the sample. Light vehicles, medium duty vehicles, heavy duty vehicles, and heavy equipment pieces, which make up 75% (228 of 303) of Lee’s Summit’s vehicle fleet, all appear to have lower average maintenance costs per mile or hour than comparable vehicles in the typical comparison jurisdiction, with the later three categories maintenance expense being significantly lower. Given the fact that most of these vehicles have logged similar or more miles/hours then comparable vehicles in the typical comparison jurisdiction, this is a positive sign for Lee’s Summit. These vehicles combined accounted for $664,807 (63%) of the vehicle maintenance expense incurred by Lee’s Summit during fy13.

Lee’s Summit’s emergency vehicles appear to have higher than expected maintenance costs. This is especially alarming given the significantly younger age of these fleets when compared to the typical comparison jurisdiction. As referenced above, there is little to no evidence suggesting these vehicles experienced higher levels of use than normal – they appear young in both age and use. These vehicles combined accounted for $386,013 (37%) of the vehicle maintenance expense incurred by Lee’s Summit during fy13. Maintenance of emergency vehicles appears to be an area which needs to be studied further as it may be an opportunity to realize significant reductions to maintenance expense. it should be noted that both police vehicles and fire apparatus had higher total maintenance expenses per vehicle than most comparison jurisdictions, but lower preventative maintenance expenses per vehicle. This may be an area to examine further in order to determine if a correlation exists between preventative maintenance expense and overall maintenance expense.


if possible, it would be useful to begin tracking the mileage (in addition to or in lieu of hours) for fire apparatus, EMS vehicles, medium duty vehicles, and heavy duty vehicles. This would enable the comparison of usage and maintenance expenses to a larger sample of comparison jurisdictions (most jurisdictions track mileage instead of hours for these classes).

Staffing

Lee’s Summit appears to have a slightly smaller staff than the typical comparison jurisdiction as indicated by the number of vehicles per ftE. This variance is made even more significant when comparing the ratio of vehicles to mechanics. in fy13, mechanics comprised only 60% of the fleet department ftEs, compared to 74% in the typical comparison jurisdiction. taken together, this information suggests that Lee’s Summit could add an additional mechanic and move closer to the norm with regards to vehicles per ftE, vehicles per mechanic, and mechanics as a percentage of total staff. Simply transferring one member of the administrative/support staff to the mechanic staff would not reduce the number of vehicles per ftE, but it would reduce the vehicles per mechanic and increase the ratio of mechanics to total staff.

Given the higher than average number of vehicles per mechanic, it is expected that Lee’s Summit’s mechanics would have a higher ratio of billed hours to hours available for billing. This is indeed the case, with Lee’s Summit’s mechanics providing billable services 74% of their available time, compared to the typical comparison jurisdiction’s ratio of 68%. This is a positive sign for Lee’s Summit, indicating that the staff is working efficiently. it should be noted that adding an additional mechanic could reduce this efficiency, though it would likely remain in an acceptable range when compared to the typical comparison jurisdiction. An additional mechanic may, however, improve the quality of service received by the departments by reducing the wait time for vehicles in the shop. further, an additional mechanic could potentially reduce the number of hours of overtime worked in Lee’s Summit’s fleet department, which appear to be higher than the norm. However, it is unclear what the driving force behind Lee’s Summit’s overtime is. While it is possible that overtime is driven primarily by higher than average typical work load, it could also be driven by events such as snow storms. While adding an additional member to the mechanic staff may relieve the overtime requirements of the former, it would likely have less of an impact on the latter.

Summary

overall, Lee’s Summit’s fleet operations appear to compare favorably to the sample of comparison jurisdictions.

Lee’s Summit has a newer than average fleet all around, although some classes of vehicles are on par with the benchmark data in terms of usage accrued (likely due to Lee’s Summit’s large area). The emergency vehicles, most notably the police fleet, appear to be young in both age and usage. Prolonging the life of these vehicles may be an opportunity to reduce capital expenses while maintaining a serviceable fleet.

The strengths of the fleet operation lie in the efficient maintenance of the light, medium duty, heavy duty, and heavy equipment classes of vehicles (the majority of the fleet), while the weaknesses appear to lie in the maintenance of the police, fire apparatus, and EMS classes.

The staffing, while efficiently operating, appears to be a little low, and the data suggests that adding an additional mechanic may be warranted. Adding the full-time parts room position would enable the City to shift the additional mechanic back to fleet operations.

jUne 2014 | 19

The Lee’s Summit Capstone team believes that the City is in a good position to continue its goal of becoming a high performing organization. The management staff that we encountered displayed a high level of desire to improve upon the current operations and provide quality programs and services for the internal customers as well as the external customers. This ability to look at the organization and accept feedback from an outside source reflects the openness of management for improvement. Commitment of the management is the most important factor to institute effective change in the organization.

The Executive Leadership team should create a strategy and a timeline to institute changes that align with the budget process. The recommendations and conclusions presented in this report will take a strategic approach with an emphasis on resources to put an effective plan into effect. This leadership team has displayed buy-in to the continuous improvement process of the local government profession. This passion will be important to the rest of the organization during the recommended shift in the culture.

The Lee’s Summit Capstone team has made many quantitative and qualitative conclusions. our recommendations are based on staff interviews, City information from staff, and relevant industry research. The recommendations are made with the sole purpose of improving the operations of the City. We appreciate the opportunity to work the staff and look forward to seeing the improvements the City will make in the near future.

C o n C l u s i o n


a P P e n d i C e sAppendix A | Lee’s Summit Capstone team

Appendix B | CPM Survey Vehicle Class Definitions

Appendix C | Guide to interpreting a “Box and Whisker Chart”

Appendix D | Benchmark Comparison Charts: Police Vehicles

Appendix E | Benchmark Comparison Charts: fire Apparatus

Appendix f | Benchmark Comparison Charts: EMS Vehicles

Appendix G | Benchmark Comparison Charts: Light Vehicles

Appendix H | Benchmark Comparison Charts: Medium Duty Vehicles

Appendix i | Benchmark Comparison Charts: Heavy Duty Vehicles

Appendix J | Benchmark Comparison Charts: Heavy Equipment

Appendix K | Benchmark Comparison Charts: Staffing

Appendix L | CPM Comparison Jurisdictions – Key Characteristics

Appendix M | CPM Comparison Jurisdictions – Jurisdiction Participation by Metric

Appendix N | CPM Comparison Jurisdictions – Jurisdiction Participation by Metric (Staffing)

Appendix o | Sample facilities Customer Service Survey

Appendix P | Sample fleet Customer Service Survey

Appendix Q | fleet Expense Calculations

jUne 2014 | 21

a P P e n d i x a : l e e ’ s s u m m i T C a P s T o n e T e a m

The team members from the Leadership iCMA Class of 2014 have a diverse set of skills and knowledge which allowed us to perform the necessary project research. Collectively we have over 48 years of professional experience in local government. The group applied quantitative problem solving techniques to arrive at some of the conclusions and recommendations. The group members are not consultants and completed the project using information gathered during two separate site visits, leading practices, and benchmarking data from peer or comparable jurisdictions. The majority of the information used to make the recommendations was gathered from one-on-one interviews with staff, as well as information provided by staff. We believe that based on the high level of cooperation from staff, the group has been able to obtain enough information to make reasonable recommendations that address the concerns of Lee’s Summit.

jerome Fletcher (Lead facilitator) is currently the Special Assistant to the City Manager for the City of Alexandria, Virginia. He graduated from North Carolina A&t State University with a Bachelor of Science degree in Accounting and completed his Master of Public Administration program with the University of Phoenix in June 2014. As a member of the City Manager’s office Leadership team, he manages the office of Civic and Community Engagement which duties include; city-wide civic engagement, management of Alexandria’s Customer Engagement Center, city council docket management, budget preparation, performance measurement analysis, as well as providing leadership to various city departments to achieve the outcomes of the City’s Strategic Plan and the City Manager’s Guiding Principles. He has over 15 years of local government experience which includes working with fleet Services and General Services which contain the same responsibilities of the internal services divisions outlined for assessment in this project.

tom Quist (team Member) currently serves as Budget Analyst for the Unified Government of Athens-Clarke County, Georgia. He previously served for five years as the Assistant to the City Manager for the city of Cartersville, Georgia. While serving Cartersville, he developed expertise in the areas of performance measurement and project management. He earned his Master of Public Administration from the University of Georgia’s School of Public and international Affairs in June 2008. Upon graduation he was selected as an iCMA Local Government Management fellow and was the recipient of the Georgia City/County Management Association’s Harold f. Holtz Scholarship.

lynne ladner (on-Site facilitator), is currently the City Manager for the City of South Lyon, Mi. She previously served as the City Administrator for the City of Hiawatha, Kansas where she oversaw day to day operations, researched and administered grant applications, managed human resources, and managed budget operations. She received her Bachelor of Science in Political Science from Grand Valley State University and a Master of Public Administration from Grand Valley State University. She is an iCMA credentialed manager. Lynne brings general management experience to the project.

Kurt Fenstermacher (team Member) is the Deputy Director of the Environmental Services and Code Enforcement department at the City of El Paso, texas. He has worked with the City of El Paso since January, 2007, serving one year as Acting Director of the department. Previously he served as the Solid Waste & Recycling Manager for the County of Lehigh, PA and the operations Director for the Lehigh Valley Zoo, Schnecksville, PA. He is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a Bachelor of Arts in English and Government and Syracuse University with a Master in Public Administration from the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs. He brings day-to-day operational experience with a keen emphasis on leadership/management.


a P P e n d i x b : C P m s u r v e y v e h i C l e C l a s s d e f i n i T i o n s

Police/law enforcement vehicles

• include only “marked” vehicles (sedans, 4x4s, sports utility vehicles, motorcycles, etc.), that are used solely by uniformed patrol personnel.

• Exclude » Detective and other police support vehicles. These should be entered into either the light, medium, or heavy vehicle

classes depending on weight. » Helicopters, boats, and airplanes.

Fire apparatus

• include only heavy fire equipment.• Exclude fire department sedans, pickups, etc. These should be entered into either the light, medium, or heavy equipment

classes, depending on weight.

EmS vehicles

• include all kinds of ambulances, regardless of weight or configuration.

Solid waste packers

• include automatic side-, front-, and rear-loaders, transfer trailers, roll-offs, trash collector trucks, brush and bulky item vehicles, and knuckle-boom vehicles.

light vehicles (<= 10,000 pounds gross vehicle weight or ‘GVW’)

• include motorcycles, automobiles, vans, pickups, SUVs, and straight trucks less than 10,000 pounds GVW (e.g., on -road vehicles with NAfA codes 1xxx and 2xxx).

• Exclude » Marked law enforcement vehicles (e.g., NAfA codes 1112, 1324, 1338, 1348, 1548, 1648, 2548, 2648). » EMS vehicles (ambulances) (e.g., NAfA code 2724). » Bicycles (NAfA code 1130) and carts (NAfA codes 12xx), even though these units are included in NAfA codes 1xxx. » Small engine or off-road vehicles/equipment.

medium-duty vehicles (10,001–19,500 pound GVW)

• include vans, pickups, SUVs, straight trucks and buses of 10,001–19,500 pound GVW (e.g., vehicles with NAfA codes 3xxx, 4xxx, 5xxx).

• Exclude marked law enforcement vehicles, fire apparatus, ambulances, and solid waste packers. These vehicles should be reported according to their function.

heavy-duty vehicles (>= 19,501 GVW)

• include vans, straight trucks, truck tractors and buses >= 19,501 pounds GVW (e.g., vehicles with NAfA codes 6xxx, 7xxx, 8xxx).

jUne 2014 | 23

• Exclude marked law enforcement vehicles, heavy fire apparatus, ambulances, and solid waste packers. These vehicles should be reported according to their function.

heavy equipment

• include » off-road and construction equipment >10,000 pounds, e.g., loaders, backhoes, bulldozers, pavers, rollers (e.g.,

equipment with NAfA codes 91xx–94xx). » only equipment at or over 10,000 pounds.

• Exclude » Stationary equipment (e.g., boilers, pump stations). » Aviation equipment and watercraft (e.g., NAfA codes 97xx and 98xx). » Light equipment <= 10,000 pounds.

light equipment

• include » Motorized off-road vehicles/equipment <= 10,000 pounds, e.g., mowers and carts. » Equipment <= 10,000 pounds, e.g., attachments, skid- and vehicle-mounted equipment, and trailers (e.g., equipment

with NAfA’s Non-Self-Propelled codes 0xxx).• Exclude

» Equipment >10,000 pounds. » Stationary equipment (e.g., plumbing, HVAC).


a P P e n d i x C : g u i d e T o i n T e r P r e T i n g a “ b o x a n d w h i s k e r C h a r T ”

Note: in some instances, the chart scale was adjusted in order to improve readability. This sometimes resulted in the exclusion of one or more of the highest values from the visualization.

Min

imum

Lee’

s Sum

mit

25th

Per

cent

ile

Med

ian

75th

Per

cent

ile

Max

imum

jUne 2014 | 25

a P P e n d i x d : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : P o l i C e v e h i C l e s

Police Vehicles ‐ Average Age (months) of Vehicles Lee’s Summit 24 Lee’s Summit Percentile 5% Median 44 Mean 45 Sample Size 96 Police Vehicles – Percent of Fleet Exceeding Formal Replacement Criteria Lee’s Summit 37% Lee’s Summit Percentile 90% Median 6% Mean 12% Sample Size 83 Police Vehicles – Average Miles Driven Lee’s Summit 15,455 Lee’s Summit Percentile 57% Median 14,586 Mean 15,827 Sample Size 137 Police Vehicles – Average Maintenance Expense Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $3,091 Lee’s Summit Percentile 68% Median $2,718 Mean $2,907 Sample Size 109 Police Vehicles – Average Preventive Maintenance Expense Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $396 Lee’s Summit Percentile 22% Median $569 Mean $801 Sample Size 60 Police Vehicles – Average Accident/Body Repair Expense Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $59 Lee’s Summit Percentile 17% Median $352 Mean $422 Sample Size 59

0 20 40 60 80 100

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000

0 $500 $1,000 $1,500

0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000


a P P e n d i x e : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : f i r e a P Pa r aT u s

Fire Apparatus – Average Age (months) of Apparatus Lee’s Summit 86 Lee’s Summit Percentile 22% Median 111 Mean 119 Sample Size 78 Fire Apparatus – Percent of Fleet Exceeding Formal Replacement Criteria Lee’s Summit 18% Lee’s Summit Percentile 65% Median 9% Mean 15% Sample Size 61 Fire Apparatus – Average Hours Used Lee’s Summit 678 Lee’s Summit Percentile 64% Median 633 Mean 675 Sample Size 13 Fire Apparatus – Average Maintenance Expense Per Apparatus Lee’s Summit $13,339 Lee’s Summit Percentile 71% Median $9,694 Mean $11,430 Sample Size 53 Fire Apparatus ‐ Average Maintenance Expense Per Hour Lee’s Summit $19.67 Lee’s Summit Percentile 36% Median $21.81 Mean $30.91 Sample Size 12 Fire Apparatus ‐ Preventive Maintenance Expense Per Apparatus Lee’s Summit $1,511 Lee’s Summit Percentile 39% Median $1,686 Mean $2,026 Sample Size 45

0 50 100 150 200 250

0% 20% 40% 60%

0 200 400 600 800 1,000

0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000

$‐ $10 $20 $30 $40 $50

0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000

jUne 2014 | 27

a P P e n d i x f : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : e m s v e h i C l e s

EMS Vehicles – Average Age (months) of Vehicles Lee’s Summit 46 Lee’s Summit Percentile 18% Median 69 Mean 75 Sample Size 46 EMS Vehicles – Percent of Fleet Exceeding Formal Replacement Criteria Lee’s Summit 0% Lee’s Summit Percentile 0% Median 0% Mean 15% Sample Size 38 EMS Vehicles – Average Hours Used Lee’s Summit 789 Lee’s Summit Percentile 50% Median 789 Mean 920 Sample Size 9 EMS Vehicles – Average Maintenance Expense Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $9,013 Lee’s Summit Percentile 71% Median $6,100 Mean $7,247 Sample Size 25 EMS Vehicle ‐ Maintenance Expense Per Hour Used Lee’s Summit $11.42 Lee’s Summit Percentile 86% Median $7.99 Mean $8.81 Sample Size 8 EMS Vehicle ‐ Preventive Maintenance Expense Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $1,364 Lee’s Summit Percentile 52% Median $1,309 Mean $2,223 Sample Size 26

0 50 100 150

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000

0 $5 $10 $15 $20

0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000 $5,000


a P P e n d i x g : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : l i g h T v e h i C l e s

Light Vehicles – Average Age (months) of Vehicles Lee’s Summit 58 Lee’s Summit Percentile 8% Median 81 Mean 86 Sample Size 67 Light Vehicles – Percentage of Vehicles Exceeding Replacement Criteria Lee’s Summit 10% Lee’s Summit Percentile 49% Median 10% Mean 14% Sample Size 75 Light Vehicles – Average Miles Driven Lee’s Summit 7,612 Lee’s Summit Percentile 74% Median 6,250 Mean 6,405 Sample Size 89 Light Vehicles – Average Maintenance Expense Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $1,321 Lee’s Summit Percentile 58% Median $1,228 Mean $1,219 Sample Size 74 Light Vehicles – Average Maintenance Expense Per Mile Lee’s Summit $0.17 Lee’s Summit Percentile 43% Median $0.18 Mean $0.20 Sample Size 68 Light Vehicle – Accident/Body Damage Repair Expense Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $129 Lee’s Summit Percentile 70% Median $91 Mean $108 Sample Size 54

0 50 100 150 200

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

0 5,000 10,000 15,000

0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000

0 $0.10 $0.20 $0.30 $0.40 $0.50

0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250

jUne 2014 | 29

a P P e n d i x h : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : m e d i u m d u T y v e h i C l e s

Medium Duty Vehicles – Average Age (months) of Vehicles Lee’s Summit 56 Lee’s Summit Percentile 14% Median 88 Mean 88 Sample Size 89 Medium Duty Vehicles – Percentage of Vehicles Exceeding Replacement Criteria Lee’s Summit 8% Lee’s Summit Percentile 49% Median 9% Mean 16% Sample Size 73 Medium Duty Vehicles – Average Miles Driven Lee’s Summit 8,399 Lee’s Summit Percentile 94% Median 5,035 Mean 5,167 Sample Size 82 Medium Duty Vehicles – Total Maintenance Costs Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $3,728 Lee’s Summit Percentile 87% Median $2,630 Mean $2,723 Sample Size 57 Medium Duty Vehicles – Total Maintenance Costs Per Mile Lee’s Summit $0.20 Lee’s Summit Percentile 8% Median $0.47 Mean $0.58 Sample Size 49 Medium Duty Vehicles – Preventative Maintenance Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $599 Lee’s Summit Percentile 70% Median $452 Mean $547 Sample Size 58

0 50 100 150 200

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000

0 $0.20 $0.40 $0.60 $0.80 $1.00

0 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000


a P P e n d i x i : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : h e a v y d u T y v e h i C l e s

Heavy Duty Vehicles – Average Age (months) of Vehicles Lee’s Summit 64 Lee’s Summit Percentile 10% Median 108 Mean 105 Sample Size 90 Heavy Duty Vehicles – Percentage of Vehicles Exceeding Replacement Criteria Lee’s Summit 7% Lee’s Summit Percentile 42% Median 16% Mean 19% Sample Size 75 Heavy Duty Vehicles – Average Hours Used Lee’s Summit 546 Lee’s Summit Percentile 86% Median 323 Mean 349 Sample Size 15 Heavy Duty Vehicles – Total Maintenance Costs Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $8,440 Lee’s Summit Percentile 70% Median $5,222 Mean $5,907 Sample Size 57 Heavy Duty Vehicles – Total Maintenance Costs Per Hour Lee’s Summit $15.46 Lee’s Summit Percentile 14% Median $30.02 Mean $51.15 Sample Size 22 Heavy Duty Vehicles – Preventative Maintenance Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $719 Lee’s Summit Percentile 59% Median $616 Mean $846 Sample Size 57

0 50 100 150 200

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0 200 400 600 800

0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000

0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100

0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000

jUne 2014 | 31

a P P e n d i x j : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : h e a v y e q u i P m e n T

Heavy Equipment – Average Age (months) of Vehicles Lee’s Summit 49 Lee’s Summit Percentile 5% Median 120 Mean 120 Sample Size 60 Heavy Equipment – Percentage of Vehicles Exceeding Replacement Criteria Lee’s Summit 9% Lee’s Summit Percentile 51% Median 9% Mean 20% Sample Size 48 Heavy Equipment – Average Hours Used Lee’s Summit 594 Lee’s Summit Percentile 90% Median 183 Mean 250 Sample Size 32 Heavy Equipment – Total Maintenance Costs Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $4,175 Lee’s Summit Percentile 58% Median $3,777 Mean $4,662 Sample Size 46 Heavy Equipment – Total Maintenance Costs Per Hour Lee’s Summit $7.03 Lee’s Summit Percentile 10% Median $19.55 Mean $20.68 Sample Size 22 Heavy Equipment – Preventative Maintenance Per Vehicle Lee’s Summit $1,102 Lee’s Summit Percentile 81% Median $601 Mean $815 Sample Size 38

0 50 100 150 200 250

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0 200 400 600 800 1,000

0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000

0 $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00

0 $1,000 $2,000 $3,000 $4,000


a P P e n d i x k : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : s T a f f i n g

Number of Vehicles per FTE Lee’s Summit 34.1 Lee’s Summit Percentile 65% Median 28.7 Mean 32.0 Sample Size 50 Number of Pieces per FTE Lee’s Summit 44.9 Lee’s Summit Percentile 42% Median 47.5 Mean 56.5 Sample Size 46 Hours Available for Billing as a Percentage of Total Hours Paid Lee’s Summit 60% Lee’s Summit Percentile 29% Median 74% Mean 72% Sample Size 52 Number of Vehicles per Mechanic FTE Lee’s Summit 57.0 Lee’s Summit Percentile 82% Median 38.1 Mean 43.6 Sample Size 39 Number of Pieces per Mechanic FTE Lee’s Summit 75.1 Lee’s Summit Percentile 54% Median 73.4 Mean 75.9 Sample Size 36 Vehicles and Heavy Equipment as a Percentage of All Pieces Maintained Lee’s Summit 76% Lee’s Summit Percentile 69% Median 67% Mean 65% Sample Size 62

0 20 40 60 80 100

0 50 100 150 200

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0 20 40 60 80 100 120

0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120%

jUne 2014 | 33

Overtime Hours Worked as a Percentage of All Hours Paid Lee’s Summit 4% Lee’s Summit Percentile 85% Median 1% Mean 3% Sample Size 76 Overtime Hours Worked as a Percentage of Hours Available for Billing Lee’s Summit 7% Lee’s Summit Percentile 90% Median 2% Mean 3% Sample Size 52 Hours Billed as a Percentage of Hours Available for Billing Lee’s Summit 74% Lee’s Summit Percentile 65% Median 68% Mean 68% Sample Size 52 Hours Billed per Vehicle (including Heavy Equipment) Maintained Lee’s Summit 26.8 Lee’s Summit Percentile 38% Median 33.6 Mean 49.7 Sample Size 43 Hours Billed per Piece (Vehicle, Heavy Equipment, and Light Equipment) Maintained Lee’s Summit 20.4 Lee’s Summit Percentile 53% Median 19.5 Mean 20.3 Sample Size 41

0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

0 50 100 150 200

0 20 40 60 80

a P P e n d i x k : b e n C h m a r k C o m Pa r i s o n C h a r T s : s T a f f i n g ( C o n T ’ d. )


a P P e n d i x l : C P m C o m Pa r i s o n j u r i s d i C T i o n s – k e y C h a r a C T e r i s T i C s

Jurisdict ion ST Pop Area Jurisdict ion ST Pop Area Jurisdict ion ST Pop Area

Airway Heights WA 6,114 5.0 Hamilton OH 69,677 0.5 Port of San Diego CA NR 4.5

Albany OR 50,520 17.7 Henderson NV 269,243 NR Port land OR 585,845 NR

Algonquin IL 30,046 12.0 Highland Park IL 27,763 12.5 Prince William VA 419,006 339.0

Alpharet ta GA 57,551 Hopkinton M A 15,000 28.0 Prince William County VA 402,002 338.0

Andover M A 33,201 31.0 Howard WI 17,728 18.4 Purcellville VA 7,727 3.0

Annapolis M D 38,394 7.0 Islamorada Islands FL 6,119 6.0 Ramsey M N 23,668 27.0

Arlington TX 365,438 95.0 Johnson City TN 63,152 43.0 Rancho Cordova CA 65,502 38.0

Ashland VA 7,225 NR Kansas City M O 463,202 315.0 Richland WA 49,090 37.9

Auburn AL 54,566 56.6 Kennesaw GA 29,742 9.6 Richmond VA 204,214 60.1

Aurora CO 335,688 NR King William County VA 15,935 275.0 Richmond Heights M O 8,603 2.3

Baker City OR 9,890 7.0 Kirkwood M O 27,540 9.2 Rock Hill SC 67,423 36.7

Bedford M A 14,503 13.7 Kitsap County WA 253,900 396.0 Rohnert Park CA 41,194 6.0

Bellevue WA 124,600 32.0 La Vista NE 17,330 4.5 Rolla M O 19,560 12.0

Belmont M A 23,819 5.0 Lake County IL 703,462 448.0 Sahuarita AZ 25,760 30.5

Bernalillo County NM 662,564 Lake M ills WI 5,735 4.0 Salisbury M D 30,343 14.0

Blue Ash OH 12,114 8.0 Lakewood WA 58,163 16.4 Sammamish WA 45,780 18.1

Bowling Green KY 58,894 38.4 Lancaster County SC 76,652 549.0 San Antonio TX 1,327,407 460.9

Brownsburg IN 21,285 11.1 League City TX 85,652 51.7 Santa Barbara County CA 434,481 2,774.0

Burleson TX 38,130 26.1 Leawood KS 32,389 14.7 Sarasota County FL 379,448 572.0

Casa Grande AZ 48,571 109.5 Libertyville IL 20,742 9.0 Savannah GA 139,491 78.0

Casper WY 55,316 NR Livermore CA 82,400 NR Scot tsdale AZ 217,965 184.5

Cedar Rapids IA 126,323 70.0 Los Alamos County NM 17,950 112.0 Shelton WA 9,834 6.0

Cherryvale KS 2,374 2.0 Loveland OH 12,292 NR Shorewood IL NR NR

Chesterf ield County VA 316,236 426.0 Lunenburg M A 10,086 27.0 Show Low AZ 11,058 47.0

Chula Vista CA 246,496 50.0 M ahomet IL 7,258 9.0 Sioux City IA 82,684 873.0

Clayton M O 15,939 2.5 M anhattan KS 52,135 19.0 Smyrna GA 51,271 15.1

Columbia M O 110,438 63.8 M ankato M N 39,624 18.1 Snellville GA 18,242 10.0

Coventry CT 12,435 37.0 M ason M I 8,252 5.0 Sparks NV 92,302 36.0

Crestwood M O 11,912 4.0 M c Allen TX 132,338 48.6 St. Cloud M N NR NR

Crystal Lake IL 40,743 18.7 M cAllen TX 133,978 49.4 Starkville M S 23,888 0.2

Dallas TX 1,223,229 340.5 M edway M A 13,877 12.0 State College PA 42,034 4.6

Dartmouth M A NR NR M esa AZ 446,498 137.0 Sugar Land TX 84,511 34.0

Decatur GA 19,335 4.3 M iami-Dade County FL 2,496,435 1,897.7 Surprise AZ 117,517 88.0

Dedham M A 24,729 10.0 M ilwaukee WI 952,532 242.0 Suwanee GA 15,541 10.8

DeLand FL 27,700 18.0 M onroe OH 13,875 20.0 Sylvania Township OH 29,522 28.5

Delray Beach FL 60,831 15.0 M onterey CA 27,810 8.5 Tacoma WA 199,600 50.1

Dover NH 29,987 28.0 M ontgomery OH 10,251 5.2 Tracy CA 83,900 23.0

Dublin OH 41,751 24.0 New Baden IL 3,349 2.0 Tumwater WA 17,570 14.0

Durango CO 16,887 10.9 New Lenox IL 24,394 15.0 University Park TX 23,068 3.6

Eau Claire WI 66,060 32.0 New Orleans LA 360,740 169.0 Upper Arlington OH 33,771 9.7

Edina M N 47,941 16.0 Newburgh NY 28,866 4.0 Upper M erion T'ship PA 28,395 NR

Elk Grove CA 155,937 42.1 Noblesville IN 51,969 31.0 Weslaco TX 35,670 15.0

Fairfax County VA 1,081,726 395.0 O’Fallon M O 80,860 30.0 West Carrollton OH 13,143 NR

Fairf ield OH 42,730 NR Oklahoma City OK 591,967 607.0 West Chester PA 18,461 1.8

Farmers Branch TX 29,523 NR Olathe KS 127,211 59.6 Westerville OH 36,120

Floyd County GA 96,317 508.6 Oshkosh WI 64,592 24.0 Weston M A 11,478 17.0

Fort Collins CO 148,700 53.8 Palo Alto CA 65,544 1.9 Wichita KS 384,445 157.0

Fort Lauderdale FL 165,521 33.0 Park City UT 7,558 17.7 Williamsburg VA 14,256 9.0

Fox Point WI 6,665 3.0 Peoria AZ 156,780 165.5 Windsor CT 29,060 29.0

Fredericksburg VA 24,286 11.0 Peoria County IL 186,494 Worthington OH 13,575 5.6

Gahanna OH 33,262 NR Peters Township PA 21,378 19.0

Gardner KS 19,123 10.2 Phoenix AZ 1,456,397 NR

Germantown TN 38,844 NR Pickerington OH 18,291 10.0

Goodlet tsville TN 15,921 14.0 Piqua OH 20,522 11.6

Granby CT 11,300 41.0 Plano TX 261,900 72.2

Greenwich CT 61,171 48.0

Greer SC 25,515 21.0

*Population and area reported by jurisdiction

jUne 2014 | 35

a P P e n d i x m : C P m C o m Pa r i s o n j u r i s d i C T i o n s – j u r i s d i C T i o n Pa r T i C i PaT i o n b y m e T r i C ( 1 o f 5 )

Juris

dict

ion

STP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HE

Cla

yton

MO

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Ric

hmon

d He

ight

sM

OX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Phoe

nix

AZ

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Plan

oTX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Farm

ers

Bra

nch

TXX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Cry

stal

Lak

eIL

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Uni

vers

ity P

ark

TXX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Leag

ue C

ityTX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Siou

xIA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Alb

any

OR

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Col

umbi

aM

OX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Live

rmor

eC

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Ced

ar R

apid

sIA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

John

son

City

TNX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Ric

hlan

dW

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Aur

ora

CO

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Bur

leso

nTX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Scot

tsda

leA

ZX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Upp

er A

rling

ton

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Cas

a G

rand

eA

ZX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Hend

erso

nN

VX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Trac

yC

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Bow

ling

Gre

enKY

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Man

kato

MN

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Ola

the

KSX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Sylv

ania

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Ger

man

tow

nTN

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Taco

ma

WA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Wic

hita

KSX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Milw

auke

eW

IX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Mes

aA

ZX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Roc

k Hi

llSC

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Fairf

axV

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Surp

rise

AZ

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

% U

sing

Alte

rnat

ive

Fue

lA

vera

ge A

ge o

f V

ehic

les

Ave

rage

M

iles/

Hou

rs D

riven

%Ex

ceed

ing

Rep

lace

men

t C

riter

ia

Mai

nten

ance

Per

V

ehic

le

P: Police Ve

hicles

F: Fire App

aratus

E: EM

S Veh

icles L: Light Veh

icles M

: Med

ium Duty V

ehicles H: H

eavy Duty V

ehicles HE: Hea

vy Equ

ipmen

t

Mai

nten

ance

Per

M

ile/H

our

Pre

vent

ive

Mai

nten

ance

Per

V

ehic

le

Acc

iden

t/B

ody

Dam

age

Rep

air p

er

Veh

icle



Juris

dict

ion

STP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HE

Wor

thin

gton

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Bel

levu

eW

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

McA

llen

TXX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Peor

iaA

ZX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Sara

sota

Cou

nty

FLX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Sava

nnah

GA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Dal

las

TXX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Dub

linO

HX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Okl

ahom

a C

ityO

KX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Fairf

ield

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Mia

mi-D

ade

FLX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Prin

ce W

illia

m C

ount

yV

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Siou

x C

ityIA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Sylv

ania

Tow

nshi

pO

HX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

La V

ista

NE

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Stat

e C

olle

gePA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Sant

a B

arba

ra C

ount

yC

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Gar

dner

KSX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

High

land

Par

kIL

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Port

of S

an D

iego

CA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Port

land

OR

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Kans

as C

ityM

OX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Piqu

aO

HX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Smyr

naG

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Wes

t Car

rollt

onO

HX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Arli

ngto

nTX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Kits

ap C

ount

yW

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Dec

atur

GA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Wes

terv

ille

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Leaw

ood

KSX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Pick

erin

gton

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Spar

ksN

VX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Peor

ia C

ount

yIL

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Peor

ia C

ount

yIL

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Ave

rage

Age

of

Veh

icle

s

%Ex

ceed

ing

Rep

lace

men

t C

riter

ia

Ave

rage

M

iles/

Ho

urs

Driv

enM

aint

enan

ce P

er

Veh

icle

Mai

nten

ance

Per

M

ile/H

our

Pre

vent

ive

Mai

nten

ance

Per

V

ehic

le

P: Police Ve

hicles

F: F

ire Ap

paratus E: EM

S Ve

hicles

L: Light V

ehicles M

: Med

ium Duty V

ehicles H: H

eavy Duty V

ehicles HE: Hea

vy Eq

uipm

ent

Acc

iden

t/B

ody

Dam

age

Rep

air p

er

Veh

icle

% U

sing

Alte

rnat

ive

Fue

l

jUne 2014 | 37


Juris

dict

ion

STP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HE

San

Ant

onio

TXX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Mon

tere

yC

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

St. C

loud

MN

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Lake

Cou

nty

ILX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Ric

hmon

dV

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Gah

anna

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Palo

Alto

CA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Park

City

UT

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Kirk

woo

dM

OX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Suw

anee

GA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Bed

ford

MA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Ber

nalil

lo C

ount

yN

MX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Wes

t Che

ster

PAX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Ash

land

VA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

How

ard

WI

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Mon

tgom

ery

OH

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Sam

mam

ish

WA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Wes

laco

TXX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

New

Orle

ans

LAX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Sahu

arita

AZ

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Cas

per

WY

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Che

ster

field

Cou

nty

VA

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

New

Len

oxIL

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Bro

wns

burg

INX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Shor

ewoo

dIL

XX

XX

XX

XX

XX

Floy

d C

ount

yG

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Lake

woo

dW

AX

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Fort

Col

lins

CO

XX

XX

XX

XX

X

Upp

er M

erio

n To

wns

hip

PAX

XX

XX

XX

XX

DeL

and

FLX

XX

XX

XX

Mon

roe

OH

XX

XX

XX

X

Alp

hare

tta

GA

XX

XX

XX

Los

Ala

mos

Cou

nty

NM

XX

XX

XX

Love

land

OH

XX

XX

XX

Aub

urn

AL

XX

XX

X

Aub

urn

AL

XX

XX

X

% U

sing

Alte

rnat

ive

Fue

l

P: Police Ve

hicles

F: F

ire Ap

paratus E: EM

S Ve

hicles

L: Light V

ehicles M

: Med

ium Duty V

ehicles H: H

eavy Duty V

ehicles HE: Hea

vy Eq

uipm

ent

Ave

rage

Age

of

Veh

icle

s

%Ex

ceed

ing

Rep

lace

men

t C

riter

ia

Ave

rage

M

iles/

Ho

urs

Driv

enM

aint

enan

ce P

er

Veh

icle

Mai

nten

ance

Per

M

ile/H

our

Pre

vent

ive

Mai

nten

ance

Per

V

ehic

le

Acc

iden

t/B

ody

Dam

age

Rep

air p

er

Veh

icle



Juris

dict

ion

STP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HE

Star

kvill

eM

SX

XX

XX

Fort

Lau

derd

ale

FLX

XX

X

Will

iam

sbur

gV

AX

XX

Airw

ay H

eigh

tsW

AX

XX

Alg

onqu

inIL

XX

X

Bak

er C

ityO

RX

XX

Bel

mon

tM

AX

XX

Blu

e A

shO

HX

XX

Che

rryv

ale

KSX

XX

Chu

la V

ista

CA

XX

X

Cre

stw

ood

MO

XX

X

Dar

tmou

th

MA

XX

X

Del

ray

Bea

chFL

XX

X

Dov

erN

HX

XX

Eau

Cla

ireW

IX

XX

Edin

aM

NX

XX

Fox

Poin

tW

IX

XX

Fred

eric

ksbu

rgV

AX

XX

Goo

dlet

tsvi

lleTN

XX

X

Gre

enw

ich

CT

XX

X

Gre

erSC

XX

X

Hopk

into

nM

AX

XX

King

Will

iam

Cou

nty

VA

XX

X

Lake

Mill

sW

IX

XX

Lanc

aste

r Cou

nty

SCX

XX

Libe

rtyv

ille

ILX

XX

Lune

nbur

gM

AX

XX

Mah

omet

ILX

XX

Man

hatt

anKS

XX

X

Mas

onM

IX

XX

New

Bad

enIL

XX

X

New

burg

hN

YX

XX

O’F

allo

nM

OX

XX

Osh

kosh

WI

XX

X

Pete

rs T

owns

hip

PAX

XX

Purc

ellv

ille

VA

XX

X

Ave

rage

Age

of

Veh

icle

s

%Ex

ceed

ing

Rep

lace

men

t C

riter

ia

Ave

rage

M

iles/

Ho

urs

Driv

enM

aint

enan

ce P

er

Veh

icle

Mai

nten

ance

Per

M

ile/H

our

Pre

vent

ive

Mai

nten

ance

Per

V

ehic

le

Acc

iden

t/B

ody

Dam

age

Rep

air p

er

Veh

icle

% U

sing

Alte

rnat

ive

Fue

l

P: Police Ve

hicles

F: F

ire Ap

paratus E: EM

S Ve

hicles

L: Light V

ehicles M

: Med

ium Duty V

ehicles H: H

eavy Duty V

ehicles HE: Hea

vy Eq

uipm

ent

jUne 2014 | 39


Juris

dict

ion

STP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HEP

FE

LM

HHE

PF

EL

MH

HE

Ram

sey

MN

XX

X

Ran

cho

Cor

dova

CA

XX

X

Rol

laM

OX

XX

Salis

bury

MD

XX

X

Shel

ton

WA

XX

X

Snel

lvill

eG

AX

XX

Suga

r Lan

dTX

XX

X

Wes

ton

MA

XX

X

Elk

Gro

veC

AX

X

Kenn

esaw

GA

XX

Dur

ango

CO

X

And

over

MA

X

Ann

apol

isM

DX

Cov

entr

yC

TX

Ded

ham

MA

X

Gra

nby

CT

X

Ham

ilton

OH

X

Isla

mor

ada

Isla

nds

FLX

Med

way

MA

X

Nob

lesv

ille

INX

Roh

nert

Par

kC

AX

Show

Low

AZ

X

Tum

wat

erW

AX

Win

dsor

CT

X

P: Police Ve

hicles

F: F

ire App

aratus

E: E

MS V

ehicles L: L

ight Veh

icles M: M

edium Duty Ve

hicles

H

: He

avy Du

ty Veh

icles HE: Hea

vy Eq

uipm

ent

Ave

rage

Age

of

Veh

icle

s

%Ex

ceed

ing

Rep

lace

men

t C

riter

ia

Ave

rage

M

iles/

Hou

rs D

riven

Mai

nten

ance

Per

Ve

hicl

eM

aint

enan

ce P

er

Mile

/Hou

r

Pre

vent

ive

Mai

nten

ance

Per

V

ehic

le

Acc

iden

t/Bod

yD

amag

e R

epai

r per

V

ehic

le

% U

sing

Alte

rnat

ive

Fuel


a P P e n d i x n : C P m C o m Pa r i s o n j u r i s d i C T i o n s – j u r i s d i C T i o n Pa r T i C i PaT i o n b y m e T r i C ( s T a f f i n g )

Jurisdiction ST 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Jurisdiction ST 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Richmond Heights M O X X X X X X X X X X X X Kitsap County WA X X X X X

St. Cloud M N X X X X X X X X X X X X Santa Barbara County CA X X X X X

Westerville OH X X X X X X X X X X X X M cAllen TX X X X X X

Leawood KS X X X X X X X X X X X X Sioux City IA X X X X X

La Vista NE X X X X X X X X X X X X Richmond VA X X X X X

Burleson TX X X X X X X X X X X X X Sarasota County FL X X X X X

Crystal Lake IL X X X X X X X X X X X X Port land OR X X X X X

Gahanna OH X X X X X X X X X X X X Fairfax County VA X X X X X

Brownsburg IN X X X X X X X X X X X X Kennesaw GA X X X X

Fairf ield OH X X X X X X X X X X X X Park City UT X X X X

Kirkwood M O X X X X X X X X X X X X Palo Alto CA X X X X

University Park TX X X X X X X X X X X X X New Orleans LA X X X X

Casa Grande AZ X X X X X X X X X X X X West Chester PA X X

Livermore CA X X X X X X X X X X X X Upper Arlington OH X X

Germantown TN X X X X X X X X X X X X M aui HI X X

Farmers Branch TX X X X X X X X X X X X X M onroe OH X

Richland WA X X X X X X X X X X X X Lakewood WA X

Durango CO X X X X X X X X X X X X Shorewood IL X

League City TX X X X X X X X X X X X X Elk Grove CA X

Peoria AZ X X X X X X X X X X X X Arlington TX X

Dublin OH X X X X X X X X X X X X Starkville M S X

Rock Hill SC X X X X X X X X X X X X Williamsburg VA X

Bellevue WA X X X X X X X X X X X X Sylvania Township OH X

Plano TX X X X X X X X X X X X X Hamilton OH X

Columbia M O X X X X X X X X X X X X Casper WY X

Prince William VA X X X X X X X X X X X X Bernalillo County NM X

Aurora CO X X X X X X X X X X X X Ashland VA X

M ilwaukee WI X X X X X X X X X X X X Bowling Green KY X

Tacoma WA X X X X X X X X X X X X Coral Springs FL X

Scottsdale AZ X X X X X X X X X X X X Decatur GA X

M esa AZ X X X X X X X X X X X X Fort Lauderdale FL X

Kansas City M O X X X X X X X X X X X X Henderson NV X

Dallas TX X X X X X X X X X X X X M ankato M N X

Phoenix AZ X X X X X X X X X X X X M iami-Dade FL X

Johnson City TN X X X X X X X X New Lenox IL X

Cedar Rapids IA X X X X X X X X Oklahoma OK X

Worthington OH X X X X X X X Olathe KS X

M onterey CA X X X X X X X Sparks NV X

Auburn AL X X X X X X X State College PA X

Surprise AZ X X X X X X X Tracy CA X

Gardner KS X X X X X Twin Falls ID X

Port of San Diego CA X X X X X

Peoria County IL X X X X X

jUne 2014 | 41

a P P e n d i x o : s a m P l e f a C i l i T i e s C u s T o m e r s e r v i C e s u r v e y

Question Please rate on a scale of 5-1 with 5 being Excellent and 1 being Needs Significant Improvement

5 4 3 2 1 The last time that you placed a work order was the work fulfilled in a satisfactory and timely manner?

How would you rate our communication regarding the work order?

How would you rate the customer service provided by our team?

How would you rate our overall performance?

How can we improve our services?

Survey questions provided by: www.officespacessoftware.com/blog/survey-your-way-to better-facilities-management


a P P e n d i x P : s a m P l e f l e e T C u s T o m e r s e r v i C e s u r v e y

In answering the following questions, please consider your most recent experience receiving services from Central Vehicle Maintenance.

Please rate on a scale of 1-5 with 1 being “strongly disagree” and 5 being “strongly agree.”

1 2 3 4 5

The staff members were professional and courteous.

The staff members were knowledgeable.

The staff kept me informed of the status of my vehicle/equipment.

The service was provided within a reasonable amount of time.

The work was completed to my satisfaction.

How would you rate our overall performance?

Please provide any further comments that describe your experience:

jUne 2014 | 43

a P P e n d i x q : f l e e T e x P e n s e C a l C u l aT i o n s

cPm definition of Expenses

include:

• in house expenditures for work performed by jurisdiction staff, including supervisors and managers whose primary areas of responsibility include fleet maintenance activities.

• Contractual expenditures for work performed by contractors paid by the jurisdiction.• Salaries and fringe benefits, supplies, materials, and parts.• Expenditures for the maintenance of regular and reserve vehicles and equipment.• Expenditures that meet these definitions regardless of the source of funds.

Exclude:

• Expenditures for overhead activities: » Management staff not directly involved in the supervision of fleet maintenance personnel or activities. » facilities management (custodial/repair, building depreciation). » finance/payroll. » Human resources. » information technology (and all telephone calls and system administration). » Purchasing. » Risk management (and all workers’ compensation).

• Expenditures for fuel, depreciation, and building leases. • Expenditures for vehicle purchase/replacement or any related annual accruals.• Expenditures for light equipment maintenance.• offsets to expenditures via revenues received from the state or federal government as a rebate or distribution of sales tax,

GSt, or other funds.

total eligible expenses from Lee’s Summit’s fy13 fleet operations Budget were $646,744. The total number of hours billed by Central Vehicle Maintenance was 8,131.59. As a result, the hourly labor rate was calculated to be $79.53/hour.

This page left blank intentionally

City of lee’s sUmmit220 SE Green

Lee’s Summit, Mo 64063816.969.1000

www.cityofls.net

icma leadership team capstone project (1)

Documents