value management proposition - land transport new zealand · page 4 of 91 version 4.2, november...

Value Management Proposition

Guide to the KRA Performance Framework

Version 4.2

Guide to the KRA Performance NZ Transport Agency

Framework Network Outcomes Contract

of 91

Version 4.2, November 2017

Document Control

VERSION NO.

AMENDMENT NO.

DESCRIPTION DATE UPDATED BY

EFFECTIVE DATE

1 0 NOC version 1 Value Management Proposition

Jack Hansby

2 0 • Road User Safety and Health and

Safety KRAs separated • Revised KRA measures

08/09/14 David Kelsey

01/07/14

3 0

• Annual performance assessment business rules

• New methodology to calculate score

• RNPG moderation of results • Reporting timetable

• Reporting templates • Minor wording revision for

assessment criteria

10/05/15 David Kelsey

01/07/15

4 0

• Reorganisation and updates across whole document for consistent wording and plain language, for easier interpretation and application

• Clarifications to all sections, to improve consistency of assessments

28/07/16 Emma Harris

01/07/16

4.1 0

• Minor clarifications and corrections to improve consistency of assessments

• Reformatted diagrams that previously did not print correctly

• Embedding of content of framework clarifications issued after Version 4

• Merged content from Section 2

(Stages of using the framework) and Section 4.1 (Report Structure) into Section 4.4 (Report Types) and Section 4.5 (Moderation of Reported Performance)

• Minor changes to align ‘Data required’

Sections throughout Section 8 Individual KPI Details to Reporting Template

28/11/17 Penny Marriott

01/11/17

4.2 0 • Correction of typo in Measure Score

table of KPI Measure 2.1.1 DSI Trend (p43)

30/11/17 Penny Marriott

01/11/17

of 91




Contents

Document Control

Contents

About this Guideline

Overview of the Framework

2.1 Purpose of Framework

2.2 Performance Areas Assessed

2.3 Applying the Annual Performance Assessment Result

Implementing the Framework for a Contract

3.1 Inputs

3.2 Approach

3.3 Outputs

Reporting

4.1 Grace Period before First Reports

4.2 Report Format Decided Jointly

4.3 Reporting Templates

4.4 Report Types

4.5 Moderation of Reported Performance

4.6 Timing of KRA Periods

KRA Structure

5.1 Weighting of Key Result Areas

5.2 KRA Framework Hierarchy

Scoring Approach

6.1 Sources of Measurement Data

6.2 Ranking Performance

6.3 Business Rules for Performance Achieved

6.4 Example of Scoring Calculations

Measuring and Scoring KPIs

7.1 Scores for Performance Rankings

7.2 How the KPIs are presented

7.3 KPI Measurement Types

7.4 Completing Audits to Measure Performance

of 91




7.5 KPIs that Measure Performance of Plans

7.6 ‘Planned’ and ‘Unplanned’ Events

7.7 Trend Line Calculations

Individual KPI Details

KRA 1: Health and Safety

KRA 2: Road User Safety

KRA 3: Customer

KRA 4: Sustainability

KRA 5: Assurance and Value

KRA 6: Network Performance

KRA 7: Health of the Relationship

Appendices

Appendix 1: Performance Assessment Timetable

Appendix 2: Reporting Template

Appendix 3: Scoring Template

of 91




About this Guideline

This section of the guideline describes this document and how to use it.

Purpose

New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) has developed this guideline document.

It supports the framework for assessing Contractors’ performance against the key

performance indicators (KPIs) in Network Outcome Contracts (NOC) for maintaining the

New Zealand network. Using the framework described in this document, all the parties to

these Contracts can measure Contractors’ performance consistently and accurately.

Audience

This guideline is mainly intended for:

Contractors who hold a NOC, when assessing and reporting their performance levels

Network managers and NZTA Maintenance Contract Managers (MCMs), when

assessing performance against key result areas (KRAs) to find overall performance

levels for four-monthly KRA periods and annually

Members of all other groups involved in assessing and endorsing KRAs.

How to use this guideline

The early sections of this document give an overview of the framework for assessing

performance. Users should refresh their understanding of the information in these

sections, as needed, at each KRA period and annual assessment. In particular,

Contractors should study this information carefully at the start of a new Contract, and

whenever it is updated.

The later sections provide the practical tools and specific details needed when completing

each assessment.

Note: This guideline is designed to stand alone, i.e. it should be the only document that

users need, to complete assessments. However, the NOC document always has legal

precedence, and may prove useful to refer to.

Terms used

In general, this guideline uses the same terms as the Network Outcomes Contract

(NOC), with the same meaning, such as ‘Contractor’, ‘Principal’ and ‘Network’.

of 91




In addition, the following table explains some further terms and the most common

abbreviations in this guideline.

Important: These descriptions are provided only for helpful context when using the

information in this document. See the NOC for definitions that hold contractual force.

THE TERM… MEANS…

Assessment year

The period from 1 July to 30 June of the following year, over which a Contractor’s performance under the NOC is measured and ranked.

CB Contract Board, made up of representatives from both the Principal and the Contractor.

CMT Contract Management Team, made up of representatives from both the Principal and the Contractor.

KPI Key performance indicator, each of which is an element of a specific KRA.

KPI score The performance ranking measured for a KPI over a KRA period. See Section 7

‘Measuring and Scoring KPIs’ and Section 8 ‘Individual KPI Details’ for full details.

KRA Key result area.

KRA level

The performance ranking measured for a KRA:

• The score to achieve a KRA level for a KRA period is calculated from KPI scores. • The Annual KRA level is calculated from the KRA scores for each KRA period in the

reporting year.

See Section 6 ‘Scoring Approach’ for full details.

KRA period The four-monthly (tri-annual) period at the end of which the Contractor’s performance is measured against KRAs.

MCM Maintenance Contract Manager, a representative of the Principal.

MCOS Minimum condition of satisfaction – performance ranking of Level 2. See Section 6.2 ‘Ranking Performance’ for more details.

Mitigating circumstances

Mitigating circumstances that could be accepted are:

• Client supplied resources (example includes supply of Melter Aggregate) • Client agreed scope change • Unforeseen ground conditions • Extraordinary events (must be accepted unanimously by the Contract Board), an

example includes a major CIMS weather event with a response level of local or above.

NZTA The New Zealand Transport Agency.

OPM Operational performance measure, a separate (but relevant) measurement framework.

Overall annual

result

The performance ranking measured for an assessment year, calculated from the scores

for the KRA levels achieved. See Section 6 ‘Scoring Approach’ for full details.

PPT Planning & Performance Team, made up of NZTA representatives.

Road user A key ‘customer’, a user of the network (e.g. someone who travels on a state highway).

of 91




Overview of the Framework

This section of the guideline describes the process and general approach for how the

KRA framework is used to manage performance under each NOC.

2.1 PURPOSE OF FRAMEWORK

The key result area (KRA) performance framework is the core of the system that the

Principal uses to:

Measure each Contractor’s performance against their Network Outcomes Contract

(NOC)

Align Contractors’ expected contract outcomes with the Principal’s strategic

objectives

Keep Contractors’ quality, performance and relationship strategies firmly in line with

the Principal’s responsibilities to align with government direction.

2.1.1 Managing Performance Quality

Using this KRA framework provides the parties with a contractual way to work together,

to assess the Contractor’s actual performance in their activities under their tendered

submission for the NOC. The framework measures this against the desired outcomes,

features, or behaviours within the range of specific KPIs. When the Principal has

validated the results:

IF PERFORMANCE MEASURES… THEN THE KRA SYSTEM PROVIDES…

Too low in any area A structured environment in which the parties can, together, address the relevant issues, raising the Contractor’s level of achievement.

Acceptably Encouragement and support for the Contractor to improve further, achieving even better results.

Well

Encouragement and support (as above), plus specific rewards in the form of:

• Financial benefits • Additional contract tenure.

To achieve this objective:

Each KRA defines the:

Data to record and report, to enable the assessment process

Clear, objective scoring criteria for achieving each performance level, using a

mix of qualitative and quantitative measures, and lead and lag indicators where

applicable

The Principal moderates each self-assessment to ensure the outcomes are applied

fairly and consistently to all NOCs.

of 91




2.1.2 Managing Strategic Alignment

Using this framework facilitates a positive culture between the contract parties, which

will offer value for money in the Principal(s)’ use of public funds. These features of the

framework support achievement of the Principal’s strategic objectives for NOCs:

FEATURE HOW THE FRAMEWORK SUPPORTS STRATEGY

Cooperation Each aspect of the KRA framework involves the Contractor and Principal actively and proactively collaborating about performance:

• The parties are expected to be open and honest in all their interactions, and the processes support this.

• The processes make the information transparent and visible to all parties.

• All parties benefit equally from this mutual engagement.

Efficiency • Achievement within each KRA provides the NZ public with significant

value for money. • The framework applies consistently to all Contractors nationwide, and

provides a single source of information. • The processes and results are trusted and reliable. • The guidance is specific, simple and clear. • Contractors are rewarded for consistently achieving well. • The KRAs are structured into a meaningful hierarchy with:

o Clear definitions of the inputs and outputs o Quantitative and qualitative measurement criteria.

Improvement • Successes are made repeatable - the framework rewards Contractors who share their positive ideas.

• The framework is a flexible, ‘living’ system that the Principal can adjust for developments in practices, technology, policy, etc.

• The approach lets the parties see which activities are proving

effective, and whether they have the right people in the right areas at the right times for the right reasons, to achieve the best results.

• The Principal can use the assessment results to benchmark performance, supporting Contractors to adopt learnings and improved practices, which raises the overall standard in all regions.

• Adopting these principles fosters a culture of stewardship, in which all parties take pride, and in which the Contractor takes ownership and

accountability for the quality of the services delivered.

To support the benefits of these features, the Principal publishes an annual national

report that compares how well each Contractor has achieved the various performance

measures for each Contract.

of 91




2.2 PERFORMANCE AREAS ASSESSED

Using this framework, the Contractor measures performance in the following KRAs:

1 Health and Safety

2 Road User Safety

3 Customer

4 Sustainability

5 Value and Assurance

6 Network Performance

7 Health of the Relationship.

Note: For KRA 7, Health of the Relationship, the Principal assesses the effectiveness of

the culture between the contract partners, in working together to deliver the contract

outcomes. However, this is not currently scored.

See Section 5 ‘KRA Structure’ for more details about the measures.

Performance Areas Not Assessed

This framework does not cover the NOC’s at-risk payment mechanism for compliance

with operational performance measures (OPMs). (See KPI 6.1.1 Overall OPM Score for

details on how OPM scores relate to KRA assessments.)

of 91




2.3 APPLYING THE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT RESULT

For each assessment year, the Contractor’s annual performance result for the contract

year is calculated, validated and endorsed. See:

Section 6 ‘Scoring Approach’, for how it is calculated

The first parts of this Section (2), for how it is validated and endorsed.

This final annual performance result determines what contract entitlement the Contractor

is due1, as the following table shows.

Table 1: Performance Result and Rewards

RESULT DESCRIPTION OF PERFORMANCE OUTCOME(S)

1 Poor Performance shows significant failures, and there are serious gaps in service delivery.

Loss of Tenure (when applicable)

2 Minimum Condition of Satisfaction

The Contractor is performing to an adequate standard, improvement is required.

Additional tenure (when applicable)

3 Best Practice

The results reflect consistent performance achievement, underpinned by constructive behaviours that enhance the relationship and

deliver innovative solutions for both parties.

• 50% of KRA Financial Reward

• Additional tenure

(when applicable)

4 Outstanding

The Contractor is exceeding the Principal’s expectations for performance, and has consistently delivered outstanding results.

• 100% of KRA Financial Reward

• Additional tenure (when applicable)

2.3.1 Adjustments for Part Years

Each Contract has a different start and end date. These may not match the four-monthly

reporting cycles or the annual assessment cycle. When assessing the outcomes granted

for the annual result in the first or last year of a Contract. Financial rewards are based

on the number of calendar months the NOC was active during the KRA assessment year.

Tenure outcomes do not apply in the first year (or part-year) of reporting.

Example: A Contract starts on 1 October 2017, and a grace period of five months is

agreed, i.e. to the end of February 2018. The Contractor submits their first annual result

in by the applicable deadline in August 2018. The financial impact is proportional to the

time the Contract has been running. In this case, the Contract has run for nine months

of the KRA assessment year, so the rewards are adjusted by 9/12. If this Contractor’s

annual result made them eligible for a financial reward of $100,000, this would be

adjusted to $75,000. Additional tenure would not be awarded.

See Section 4.6 ‘Timing of KRA Periods’ for more details on the assessment year cycle.

within the limitations specified in the Conditions of Contract (Part B clause 10.8 Contract Period

and Adjustments)

of 91




Implementing the Framework for a

Contract

To achieve the objectives of this framework (see Section 2 ‘Overview of the

Framework’), at the start of each NOC the Contractor must establish systems and

processes that they will implement, to manage their performance in each area covered

by the NOC.

This section of the guideline describes how the Contractor and Principal work together to

implement the KRA performance framework for the Contract.

3.1 INPUTS

The Contractor designates one or more KPI champions, whose role is to coordinate

with the Principal to ensure the KRA performance framework is implemented.

The Principal maintains the KRA Performance Framework Guideline (this document),

processes and templates, and provides these to the Contractor to support them with

their KRA assessments and score calculations.

3.2 APPROACH

The Contractor establishes systems for measuring and monitoring their performance

for each KPI’s measurement, and documents this in their quality management plan

(QMP).

The Principal evaluates the Contractor’s implementation of the framework, to

confirm it is fit for purpose, and will lead to continual improvement. They will look

for the following features:

The implementation is flexible, so the Contractor can learn from each

performance assessment cycle

The implementation takes a structured approach to change management,

education and training, creating opportunities for collective learning about the

application of the framework and providing measurable learning outcomes for

training

The implementation is completed before the Contract commences.

Exception: Certain activities can be implemented after commencement, within

the grace periods specified in the NOC Conditions of Contract. Specifically, this

relates to establishing contract management plans. (See Section 7.5 ‘KPIs that

Measure Performance of Plans’ for more details.)

The Principal provides the Contractor with support to ensure that, using their

implementation of the framework, their ongoing measurement of KPIs will be

consistent with the national standard.

of 91




3.3 OUTPUTS

The Contractor has set up systems and processes that:

Provide the evidence needed to support their KRA assessments

Comply with their quality plan

Are robust enough that the Principal or an independent assessor can evaluate them.

of 91




Reporting

This section of the guideline describes the types of reports submitted under this

framework, and how each is used.

4.1 GRACE PERIOD BEFORE FIRST REPORTS

Within each report type, the Contractor assesses their KRA performance at the required

intervals.

When a new Contract starts, however, the Contractor has a grace period of between

three and six months (depending on the Contract’s commencement date) before they

need to report their first assessment. This gives the Contractor time to implement a

system to score their performance.

This grace period lets the Principal and the Contractor work together to:

Ensure the Contractor’s systems and processes support how they collect and verify

the data and information they need, to evaluate their performance effectively

Implement the systems and processes within the time allowed.

4.2 REPORT FORMAT DECIDED JOINTLY

The Principal and Contractor jointly develop a format for their monthly reports that:

Is consistent with the national framework

Makes the information visible to all parties

Provides a clear assessment of the Contractor’s performance over the KRA period(s).

This report provides many of the key details the Contractor will refer to when they are

self-assessing their KPI performance scores.

4.3 REPORTING TEMPLATES

The Principal provides Contractors with templates to use for each four-monthly report.

These templates makes it easier to:

Create the consolidated report

Make the results transparent and visible

Apply consistency to the performance assessments.

The Contractor must complete the following templates in their reporting for each KRA

period:

of 91




Use the Reporting Template to provide KPI and KRA scores in the report for each

KRA period assessment, and offer summary information to support each score. Email

[email protected] to request the current admissable2 template. See

Appendix 2 ‘Reporting Template’ (page 90) for an example of this template

Use the Score Calculation Template to list the detailed KPI scores and KRA

performance levels for each KRA period assessment, and – calculated from those –

the indicative annual KRA and overall performance levels. See Appendix 3 ‘Scoring

Template’ (page 91) for the layout of this template, which is available upon request

from [email protected]

4.4 REPORT TYPES

The Contractor needs to compile a number of performance reports during the KRA

assessment year.

See Appendix 1 ‘Performance Assessment Timetable’ (page 89) for the timetable of the

reports required in the current annual performance cycle.

4.4.1 Monthly Contract Report

The Contractor compiles a monthly report3 that includes a range of data used to measure

KPI scores. The CMT tracks this information ongoing so that, if needed, they can work

with the Contractor to improve the rankings before it affects the assessment of their

performance levels at the end of the KRA period.

4.4.2 Four-Monthly Contract Board Report

The Contractor, with input from the CMT, compiles a report for their Contract Board (CB)

at the end of each four-monthly KRA period. This report details all KPI scores and KRA

performance levels, and the rationale for how the Contractor arrived at each result. The

Contractor will draw on the CMT for feedback about their report to ensure information

provided supports self-assessed KPI scores and KRA levels. Note: Irrespective of the

scheduled frequency of Contract Board meetings, the four-monthly KRA report must still

be endorsed by the Contract Board.

The Contractor can include additional information in their CB report, on any mitigating

circumstances4 that has constrained the Contractor’s performance level. However, the

performance level must still be based on the KPI scores as measured, even if the

Contractor provides such additional information.

This report should include a summary of the KPI scores on the NZTA scoring template

(see 4.3 ‘Reporting Templates’).

2 Outdated versions cannot be uploaded. 3 The requirements for this report are detailed in section 3.8.4 of the NOC.

4 A description of mitigating circumstances can be seen in the table of terms used (page 6).

of 91




The CB will consider the report and provide feedback about the scoring, including

moderating the results if needed, and agreeing mitigating circumstances where

appropriate, before endorsing the report.

Any Board endorsed KPI score, that is not reflective of the KPI measure score table and

metrics provided, can then be entered into the template; however none of the

underlying measurement values are to be altered.

Once any changes required by the CB have been made, and the CMT and CB have

endorsed this report, the Performance Team collates the KPI scores, ready for the

moderation process.

Note: See Appendix 2: Reporting Template (page 90) and Appendix 3 ‘Scoring Template’

(page 91) for the templates used. These can be requested by emailing

[email protected]

4.4.3 Annual Performance Report

At the end of each annual performance cycle (i.e. in July each year), the Contractor

compiles their Annual Contract Performance Report. This report includes the annual

summary of the KPI scores by period, and the annual result, on the NZTA scoring

template (see 4.3 ‘Reporting Templates’).

This key report summarises the full year’s performance. The report includes:

The scores assessed for each KPI, and the KRA levels and annual result, calculated

from those

The rationale for how the Contractor arrived at this result, including:

An explanation of the result

Supporting evidence that the Contractor has collected for each measure

Details of any financial reward or tenure adjustment due.

The Annual Performance Report requires consultation with the CMT and endorsement

from the CB in exactly the same way as the Four-monthly Contract Board Report.

Note: See Appendix 3 ‘Scoring Template’ (page 91) for the template used to record and

report this information.

4.5 MODERATION OF REPORTED PERFORMANCE

In preparation for moderation workshops, the Planning & Performance Team (PPT)

consider collective reports from all Contractors. If needed, the PPT provide feedback to

the Contractor and MCM about issues with scores or supporting information, e.g. request

more details.

After each KRA period ends, an NZTA moderation team meets, consisting of

representatives from the Planning & Performance and Procurement teams, and

Maintenance Contract Managers (MCMs). In these meetings, the group considers and

validates each Contractor’s self-assessed results within the context of the framework’s

of 91




intent, and compared with all Contractors; moderates them if required, and recommends

the final scores for approval.

In line with Agency delegations, the relevant approver(s) then considers and approves

the collective moderated responses, tenure and financial rewards.

Trends developing across the overall network, and any potential impact on the Principal’s

strategic objectives are identified, as well as confirming consistency of the KRA

framework.

Contractors are advised about any changes to KPI scores and (as a consequence) KRA

levels, e.g.:

Upgrade e.g. from 3 to 4 because performance is in the top percentage group for

the relevant KPI.

Downgrade e.g. from 4 to 3 because scoring measures were applied incorrectly.

The final KPI scores and KRA levels for each KRA period are confirmed to the MCM.

The KRA framework is reviewed and updated as needed, to clarify guidance and ensure

measures and scores accurately reflect levels of Contractor behaviour, e.g.:

Scores of 1 genuinely reflect poor standards of performance.

Scores of 4 genuinely reflect outstanding performance.

See Appendix 1 ‘Performance Assessment Timetable’ on page 89, for the dates of

moderation meetings.

4.5.1 How Moderation is Conducted

The moderation activity focuses solely on checking for consistency between:

How each Contractor is applying the framework to self-assess their KRAs

performance levels

The supporting evidence each Contractor is providing in their self-assessment

reports

The proposed financial rewards or tenure adjustment to be awarded for each

Contract, for the annual performance assessment.

If this process identifies any areas of inconsistency, the Principal will then:

Work with Contractors to correct the inconsistencies during the next KRA period, i.e.

before the Contractor completes their next report

Consider updating this guideline to state the requirements more explicitly for all

Contractors.

The Principal also retains the right to moderate any score, level or result, if it is aware of

issues that are not reflected in the Contractor’s supporting information – for example, if

a Contractor was involved in a major network event reported over national media, but

that event was not included in the audit sample the Contractor used to calculate the

relevant KPI score.

of 91




4.5.2 Moderation Audits

In addition to the formal moderation meetings, the Principal may audit the results of a

Contractor’s self-audits, to validate their self-assessed KPI scores.

4.6 TIMING OF KRA PERIODS

Contractors assess their performance after the end of each four-month KRA period. In

general, a KRA period is either:

Called ‘P1’ (KRA period 1), 'P2' (KRA period 2), ‘P3’ (KRA period 3), or

Referred to by the final calendar month of the period.

The diagram below shows how periods are spread across calendar months.

Note: These KRA periods are consistent and unchanging, across all Contractors and

assessment years, even if they do not match with (for example) the Contractor’s

financial year dates or the date the Contract began.

of 91




KRA Structure

This section of the guideline summarises the KRAs within this performance framework.

5.1 WEIGHTING OF KEY RESULT AREAS

Each of the first six key result areas (KRAs) has equal weight for determining the overall

annual performance level and, from that, determining tenure and financial reward. This

may change if the Principal determines that particular business priorities need a higher

level of focus, e.g. because strategic goals have moved.

Table 2: KRA Weighting

KRA WEIGHTING DESIRED BEHAVIOUR

1 Health and Safety

1 Safety is of paramount importance on the journey to zero harm.

Activities under NOCs show commitment to health and safety

outcomes.

2 Road User Safety

1 Activities under NOCs:

• Provide opportunities to improve journeys for road users. • Contribute to safer journeys through safe roads, speeds

and vehicles, and safe road use.

3 Customer 1 Contractors always:

• Consider road users’ needs for access. • Respond to customers’ requests and their expectations.

4 Sustainability 1 • Contractors contribute to maintaining a sustainable and

engaged contracting market. • Contractors adopt good practice and act in a responsible

manner, which contributes to a transport system that adds positively to New Zealand’s economic, social and environmental welfare.

5 Assurance and Value

1 • Accurate network information and knowledge underpin quality outcomes.

• Contractors make sound investment recommendations and decisions, based on reliable, robust and proven evidence.

6 Network Performance

1 • Activities completed under a NOC provide physical indicators of service quality.

• Contractors deliver on promises made during tendering, and these add value to the network.

• Customers have timely and accurate information that lets them make informed choices.

• Contractors schedule their work to cause minimal disruption for road users.

7 Health of the Relationship

0 The working relationship between the Principal and Contractors:

• Fosters open and honest dialogue and feedback • Involves Sub-Contractors and recognises their value.

TOTAL 6

of 91




Special Approach for KRA 7: Health of the Relationship

The Principal surveys the health of the relationship with the Contractor every six months,

and annually with key Sub-Contractors. The surveys involve staff from the:

Principal

Contractor

Any Sub-Contractors.

This survey measures the Contract’s culture, i.e. how well the parties are working

together. This guideline describes the KPIs used to measure performance in the relevant

areas; however:

The assessments are not expressed as scores

This KRA is excluded from the calculations to determine the overall performance

level.

The Contract Management Team discuss the results with the Contract Board. The survey

results are used to support continuous improvement and behavioural change that

delivers successful Contract outcomes.

of 91




5.2 KRA FRAMEWORK HIERARCHY

The diagram below shows the titles and structure of the KPIs and KRAs within the

framework.

KRA Performance Management

KRA 1 Health and Safety

KRA 2 Road User Safety

KRA 3 Customer

KRA 4 Sustainability

KPI 1.1.1 Total Reportable Injury Frequency Rate

KPI 1.1.2 Health and Safety Management Plan

KPI 1.2.1 Traffic Control Plan

KPI 2.1.1 DSI Trend

KPI 2.1.2 Loss of Control in Darkness

KPI 2.1.3 Network Safety Trend Report

KPI 3.1.1 Customer and Stakeholder Communications Management Plan

KPI 3.1.2 Communication of Impact of Events and Incidents on Customers

KPI 3.1.3 Customer Satisfaction Survey

KPI 3.2.1 Ability to Respond to Customers

KPI 4.1.1 Enforcement Action

KPI 4.1.2 Regulatory Non Compliance

KPI 4.1.3 CS-VUE Non Compliance

KPI 4.1.4 Environmental Initiatives Adopted or Actioned

KPI 4.1.5 Environmental Training, Workshops and Presentations

KPI 4.1.6 Environmental Hazards or Opportunities

KPI 4.1.7 Environmental and Social Management Plan

KPI 4.2.1 Healthy Market Pledges

KRA 5 Assurance and Value

KPI 5.1.1 Quality Management Plan

KPI 5.2.1 Maintenance Management Plan

KPI 5.3.1 Innovation

KRA 6 Network Performance

KPI 6.1.1 Overall OPM Score

KPI 6.1.2 Compliance with Contractor’s Monthly Programme of Work

KPI 6.1.3 Network Performance Tender Pledges are Delivered

KPI 6.2.1 Network Availability

KPI 6.2.2 Emergency Procedures Preparedness Plan

KPI 6.2.3 Traffic Flow

Environmental

Triangle

KRA 7 Health of the Relationship

KPI 7.1.1 Relationship Survey

KPI 7.1.2 Integrity and Compliance of KRA System

(assessed differently and not scored)

of 91




Scoring Approach

This section of the guideline describes how to determine the performance levels achieved

at each assessment.

6.1 SOURCES OF MEASUREMENT DATA

Each KRA is made up of a group of KPI measures. The assessed KRA level demonstrates

the standard of performance that the Contractor has achieved in that specific area. The

measures are evaluated against agreed criteria such as:

The Contractor’s own records

Network data

Asset condition measures

Customer responses

Stakeholder survey results.

6.2 RANKING PERFORMANCE

The table below shows the four performance rankings, used for the KRA performance

levels (for each KRA period) and the annual performance result. The ranges refer to the

average of the relevant KPI scores – see below in this section for more details.

Table 3: Measure Scoring Table

PERFORMANCE LEVEL SCORE RANGE

1 Poor 1 to less than 2 (<2)

2 Minimum Condition of Satisfaction (MCOS) 2 to less than 2.66 (≥2 and <2.66)

3 Best Practice 2.66 to less than 3.33 (≥2.66 and <3.33)

4 Outstanding 3.33 or more (≥3.33)

Important: See Section 6.3 ‘Business Rules for Performance Achieved' for

important adjustments that may apply, before finalising the above rankings.

Also see Section 2.3 ‘Applying the Annual Performance Assessment Result’ for more

details about how the rankings affect the ongoing Contract.

See the descriptions and examples following in this section, for more details about

how to calculate the scores at each assessment.

of 91




6.2.1 Overview of Calculating Rankings

The overall performance level, and the KRA levels for each four-monthly period and

annually, are based on the averaged KPI scores assessed for each KRA period. This

diagram illustrates the series of calculations – see below for more details.

See Section 6.4 ‘Example of Scoring Calculations’ for a more detailed diagram.

Important: See Section 6.3 ‘Business Rules for Performance Achieved’ for some

important exceptions that are applied before finalising the overall rankings.

The scores to achieve the individual four-monthly KRA levels are also used to

calculate the overall KRA level for the KRA period, but the latter score is not involved

in calculating any other rankings.

6.2.2 Calculating KPI Scores

At each KRA period assessment, use the KPI measures in Section 7 ‘Measuring and

Scoring KPIs’ to find the applicable score for each KPI.

Note: KPI scoring uses the same four-level rankings as the scores to achieve KRAs, e.g.

a KPI score of ‘3’ indicates performance is consistent with ‘Best Practice’.

6.2.3 Calculating Four-Monthly Individual KRA Levels

Once the four-monthly KPI measurements are completed, for each KRA:

Calculate the unrounded average of the KPI scores within the KRA

Look up the resulting score to find the performance level on Table 3: Measure

Scoring Table (see page 21).

The result is the four-monthly performance level for the KRA.

of 91




Note: The Scoring template calculates these levels automatically. See Appendix 3

‘Scoring Template’ (page 91).

6.2.4 Calculating Four-Monthly Overall KRA Level

Once the four-monthly KPI measurements are completed:

Calculate the unrounded average of the scores for the KRAs levels achieved


Scoring Table (see page 21)

Apply the business rules in Section 6.3 ‘Business Rules for Performance Achieved’.

The result is the four-monthly performance level for the KRA.

Note: While the business rules are applied here, this level is only used to give an

indication of the current outlook for the annual result.

6.2.5 Calculating Annual KRA Levels

At each annual assessment, for each KRA:

Calculate the unrounded average of the KRA levels, for the three KRA periods in

the annual assessment cycle


Scoring Table (see page 21), for that annual KRA result.

The result is the annual performance level for the KRA.

Note: The Scoring template calculates these levels automatically. See Appendix 3

‘Scoring Template’ (page 91).

6.2.6 Calculating Overall Annual Performance Result

Once the annual KRA performance levels are assessed:

Calculate the unrounded average of the annual KRA levels for KRAs 1 to 6 (only)


Scoring Table (see page 21), for the annual level of all KRAs

Apply the business rules in Section 6.3 ‘Business Rules for Performance Achieved’.

The result is the overall annual performance result.

Note: The Scoring template calculates this result automatically. See Appendix 3 ‘Scoring

Template’ (page 91).

of 91




6.3 BUSINESS RULES FOR PERFORMANCE

ACHIEVED

Before reporting, apply the following business rules when calculating the overall KRA

level for a period, and the annual KRA result (as described in Sections 6.2.4 and 6.2.6):

1 If any two or more KRAs levels in the calculation are Level 1 (Poor) then the

performance ranking is 1 (Poor).

2 If any one KRA level in the calculation is Level 1 (Poor) then the performance

ranking can be no higher than Level 2 (Minimum Condition of Satisfaction).

3 If neither rule 1 nor rule 2 applies, then the performance level calculated using

Section 6.2 ‘Ranking Performance’ applies.

The annual performance level determines the relevant Contract rewards granted to the

Contractor, as shown on Table 1: Performance Result and Rewards (see page 10). For

the specific effects on Contract tenure, see the Conditions of Contract (Part B clause 10.8

Contract Period and Adjustments).

of 91




Average Average Average

Average

Final

Stage Use measures in

Section 8 to score each KPI

Stage Average scores for

KPIs within each KRA to find

individual KRA level

Stage Average individual KRA

levels across all KRA periods to

find annual KRA level

Stage Average annual

individual KRA levels to find

overall annual performance result

Each KRA period

Each KRA period

Annual assessment Annual assessment

Average

Stage Average individual

KRA levels to find overall

KRA level for the KRA period

Each KRA period

Best Practice

Average

6.4 EXAMPLE OF SCORING CALCULATIONS

The following diagram illustrates the stages in calculating the overall annual performance

level from the individual KPI scores in each KRA period.

In this example, we complete each stage. However, averaging all KPI scores from

stage finds the same result at stage , i.e. skipping stages and .

At stages 3 and 5, the rules in section 6.3 ‘Business Rules for Performance Achieved’

are also applied.

of 91




Measuring and Scoring KPIs

This section of the guideline provides specific instructions for how to go about measuring

the KPI scores detailed in Section 8 ‘Individual KPI Details’.

7.1 SCORES FOR PERFORMANCE RANKINGS

By measuring each KPI, parties evaluate how well the Contractor’s activities are

achieving or progressing toward the relevant intent.

The measurement tables for all KPIs use the same approach to four performance levels

as KRAs.

SCORE PERFORMANCE RANKING DESCRIPTION

1 Poor Contractor has performed below the Principal’s

standard.

2 Minimum Condition of Satisfaction (MCOS)

Contractor’s performance has met the Principal’s standard.

3 Best Practice Contractor’s performance has exceeded the

Principal’s standard.

4 Outstanding Contractor’s performance is among the leaders of those that exceed the Principal’s standard.

Note: See Section 6 ‘Scoring Approach’ for details on using these KPI scores to calculate

KRA levels.

of 91




7.2 HOW THE KPIS ARE PRESENTED

The subsection for each KPI in Section 8 ‘Individual KPI Details’ follows the format

below:

HEADING CONTENTS

Topic heading KPI reference number and title

Intent The desired behaviour that the KPI encourages Contractors to adopt, or the eventual outcome that the KPI drives them to achieve

Definition The area or aspect of Contractor activities that the KPI measures

Business rules Any specific rules to apply when assessing the performance score for the KPI

Process How and when Contractors need to collect and report the data that is used to

assess the performance score

Calculation (Included when relevant) How to calculate the relevant measure

Data required The specific type(s) of data or information needed in reports to support the performance measure, so the Principal can validate the score

Measure score

Depending on the measurement approach for the KPI:

• Quantitative: The ranges of numeric measures to achieve each performance score

• Qualitative: A description of the actions or behaviours demonstrated to earn each performance score

Note: Some measure scores also include a more detailed description of the

behaviour or achievement that each performance score ranking demonstrates.

7.3 KPI MEASUREMENT TYPES

Each KPI measures performance using one of the following approaches:

APPROACH DESCRIPTION

Quantitative Each performance level is measured using a quantitative (numeric) range.

Qualitative Each performance level is measured using a clear description of specific behaviours shown and/or actions completed.

Blended Each performance level is measured using a mix of quantitative and qualitative measures, as above.

Aggregated Each performance level is measured using a quantitative range for a score that is calculated from the results of several other measures.

of 91




7.4 COMPLETING AUDITS TO MEASURE

PERFORMANCE

The Principal expects the Contractor to follow the below guidelines, when measurement

of a KPI requires the Contractor to audit their compliance against specified guidelines or

business rules:

The Contractor details their approach for auditing in their quality management plan

(QMP)

The Contractor audits ideally at least 10% of the relevant activities. Unless

otherwise specified in the framework, for any KPI requiring a data sample, a score of

‘Outstanding’ can only be achieved if the sample size audited is at least 10%

When Sub-Contractors have performed work on the relevant activities, the

Contractor includes Sub-Contractor work in the audit sample.

Note: Requirements for auditing KPIs linked to contract management plans are detailed

under Section 7.5.

7.5 KPIS THAT MEASURE PERFORMANCE OF

PLANS

Seven of the KPIs specifically measure how well the Contractor is using their various

contract management plans and keeping them up to date, linking their delivery of

outcomes to their use of the plan. These KPIs are:

1.1.2 Health and Safety Management Plan

1.2.1 Traffic Control Plan

3.1.1 Customer and Stakeholder Communications Management Plan

4.1.7 Environmental and Social Management Plan

5.1.1 Quality Management Plan

5.2.1 Maintenance Management Plan

6.2.2 Emergency Procedures Preparedness Plan.

7.5.1 Acceptance of plans

Each of the above KPIs includes measuring whether the Principal has accepted the

Contractor’s plan. This is a requirement to achieve performance Level 2 (Minimum

Condition of Satisfaction). This should ideally happen before the Contract commences,

but the Contractor and Principal agree on a reasonable grace period, during which they

work together to establish each plan.

While the plan has not yet been accepted during the grace period, the Contractor should

record a score of NA (not applicable) for the relevant KPI. Entering a score of NA in the

reporting template excludes the KPI from the averaging calculations to find the KRA

level. See Section 4.3 ‘Reporting Templates’ and Appendix 2 (page 90) for more details.

If the Principal does not accept a contract management plan by the time the grace

period has ended, then the KPI linked to that contract management plan will score at

performance Level 1 (Poor) until the Principal can accept it. However, if the Principal has

of 91




not advised a decision or feedback within ten days of the Contractor submitting their

plan for acceptance, the grace period is extended until the Principal can respond.

Once a plan is accepted, each KPI measures how well the Contractor’s activities in each

of these management areas follow the applicable plan, i.e. the Contractor needs to show

they are:

Auditing the related activities, as agreed in their quality management plan, to

confirm these follow the plan (also see the next heading below)

Reviewing the plan regularly, and updating it as needed

Looking for and applying improvements to the plan, to manage the relevant

activities better.

7.5.2 Audits against plans

When auditing activities against a plan, the number of non-compliances are the number

of ways that an activity did not comply with the plan. This means that an audit of one

activity against a plan could result in multiple non-compliances.

The Contractor is expected to begin conducting audits against their plan, after they have

submitted it to the Principal, and are waiting for it to be accepted.

Each KRA period an audit carried out (preferably in conjunction with the MCM) must

cover:

At least 1/3 of all processes within the Maintenance Management Plan must be

audited each period with some of the more important processes being audited

every period. In any KRA year every process contained within the Maintenance

Management Plan must be audited at least once

At least 1/3 of all processes within the Quality Management Plan must be audited

each period with some of the more important processes being audited every

period. In any KRA year every process contained within the Quality Management

Plan must be audited at least once

100% of the processes contained within all remaining plans will be audited every

period, accepting that some processes will not be applicable in every period (eg.

Winter maintenance)

Each plan will have a separate random selection taken from the list of those

activities deemed relevant to that plan

For each KPI linked to a contract management plan at least 5 examples of these

randomly selected sites/activities must be audited against the plan, and the

results documented

If any selected sites/activities are not suitable (ie the result is too many N/As) an

alternative site/activity should be randomly selected from the same list of

relevant activities.

Within each “Measure Score” table for the KPIs linked to contract management plans,

where reference is made to being ‘up to date’, this means:

The plan has been updated at least within the last 12 months AND

Any improvements identified have been actioned and updated within the plan.

of 91




The following business rules apply to all Contractors’ audits of contract management

plans:

The Contractor must have a system in place to track and record the outcome of

audits against their contract management plans

The Contractor must include both results from the audits of the specific plan, and

any other relevant audits carried out during the KRA period

The Contractor must have all audit reports accepted by the Principal

The Contractor must include information on any Sub-Contractors’ activities

The Contractor must record and report any repeat non-compliances identified, which

include:

Any non-compliances identified in any audit become repeat if not closed by the

next audit or a date agreed with the MCM

Closed during either of the previous two KRA periods, and have recurred in this

KRA period.

7.6 ‘PLANNED’ AND ‘UNPLANNED’ EVENTS

EVENT TYPE DEFINITION

Planned event

An activity that is programmed to occur, for example:

• Contractor’s renewal work or planned maintenance • A third party’s activities.

Unplanned event Any incident on the network for which no programme has been agreed. (See section 5.3.5 and 6.6.1 of the NOC Maintenance Specification for examples.)

of 91




7.7 TREND LINE CALCULATIONS

Several KPIs require measuring the linear regression line of a trend, based on a rolling

average for a specified number of months.

For each of these KPIs, the following steps show an example of how this is expected to

be calculated. It is expected that many Contractors will use Microsoft Excel or a similar

tool to automate this task, particularly the regression analysis.

Note: This example is based on reporting a rolling average for the last 12 months. In

this situation, the earliest month in the reported period needs data back to 23 months

ago, to find the annual average. (See the steps for more clarification.)

STEP CALCULATION EXAMPLE

1 For each month in the reported period

and the 11 months prior, find the relevant monthly value, e.g. the total number of relevant instances or occurrences during that month.

2 For each month in the reported period, find the rolling annual total, i.e. the sum of the values for each month in

the year ending at the month in question.

of 91




STEP CALCULATION EXAMPLE

3 For each month in the reported period,

find the rolling annual average, i.e. divide the rolling annual total by 12.

4 Graph the rolling annual average by month.

5 Plot a linear regression line for the rolling annual average data series, using the formula y=mx+c

Hint: If plotting this online, it is easiest

to have the application display the formula values.

6 Find the m value of regression line.

Multiply this by 100 to express this as a

percentage. (This is the value to report

for the KPI.)

• A positive number shows an increasing trend.

• A negative number shows a decreasing trend.

m(-0.0099) = -0.99%

7 Assess the final value against the relevant KPI measure to find the KPI score.

-0.99% is >-1%

of 91




Applying the Trend Line Calculation

The following diagram shows how the m value of the regression line applies to the

measures shown in the relevant KPIs. Currently, the intent of all such KPIS is to reduce

the occurrences of a particular event, so a negative trend demonstrates improvement.

See each applicable KPI in Section 8 ‘Individual KPI Details’, for the specific percentage

ranges required for each measure score.

Reminder: A number that is less than negative 1 (<-1) is lower than it, e.g.:

-0.25 is less than (<) -0.1

-0.05 is greater than (>) -0.1

of 91




Individual KPI Details

This section of the guideline provides the measures and scoring calculations for the

specific KPIs within each KRA.

KRA 1: HEALTH AND SAFETY

Objectives

Safety is of paramount importance on the journey to zero harm.

Activities under NOCs show commitment to health and safety outcomes.

KPIs in this KRA

1.1.1 Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate

1.1.2 Health and Safety Management Plan

1.2.1 Traffic Control Plan

of 91




KPI Measure 1.1.1 Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate

Intent

Injury rates are below expected levels or reducing, showing that Contractors are

committed to operating an injury-free ‘zero harm’ work environment for their workforce.

Definition

This KPI measures the lag indicators for Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate (TRIFR),

i.e. the rate of recordable injuries for each 1,000,000 work hours.

Recordable injuries include the following categories:

Fatal injuries (FI)

Notifiable injuries (SH)

Lost time injury (LTI)

Medical treatment injury (MTI)

Employees on restricted work duties (RWI).

Business rules

The Contractor must:

Include information on injuries and work hours for any Sub-Contractors

Exclude injuries in the ‘First Aid’ category.

The TRIFR must be based on the last 12 months of data, or part thereof if the

Contract commenced within that 12 months.

The Principal identifies and advises the top performers once all Contractors have

provided their performance assessments for the KRA period. This means the

Contractor can only self-assess a score of 4 if the TRIFR is zero. It can otherwise

only be awarded during moderation. (See Section 4.5 ‘Moderation of Reported

Performance’.)

The Contractor must record all health and safety data in the NZTA Zero Harm online

reporting tool.

Process

The Contractor captures the data monthly on their internal health and safety (H&S)

reporting system and the Principal’s online reporting tool. This information forms part of

the Contractor’s monthly report to the Principal.

Data required

Total work hours completed during the last 12 months

Total recordable injuries for each category during the last 12 months

TRIFR for the last 12 months.

Calculation

The following formula is used to calculate the TRIFR for the KRA period. (The

abbreviations refer to the injury categories listed above.)

of 91




TRIFR = (FI+SH+LTI+MTI+RWI) × 1,000,000

Total Hours Worked in last 12 months

Measure score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 TRIFR is more than 30 (>30).

2 TRIFR is more than 25, but not more than 30 (>25 and ≤30).

3 TRIFR is 25 or lower (≤25).

4 Both of the following:

• TRIFIR is 25 or lower (≤25) • TRIFR is either zero, or within the top 10% for all NOCs for the KRA period.

of 91




KPI Measure 1.1.2 Health and Safety Management Plan

See also Section 7.5 ‘KPIs that Measure Performance of Plans’ for more details.

Intent

Contractors make effective, consistent use of their plan to manage their workplace

health and safety environment by using, auditing and reviewing it regularly.

Definition

This KPI measures non-compliances discovered against the Health and Safety

Management Plan through:

Audit

Accident/near miss investigation

Any other method that the Contractor or Principal uses.

This KPI also measures whether the Contractor has taken action to address any non-

compliances identified.

Business rules

The Contractor must have a Health and Safety Management Plan accepted by the

Principal within the grace period allowed in the NOC.

The Contractor must observe the business rules for auditing their plan, and keeping

it up to date, as listed in Section 7.5.2 ‘Audits against plans’.

Process

The Contractor defines their approach for auditing activities against their plan in their

Quality Management Plan (QMP), and captures the audit data on their internal quality

management system.

of 91




Data required

Most recent date updated (or new) plan has been approved by the Principal

(excluding any updates after the end of the KRA period), and by whom

Date(s) audit(s) completed and by whom

Date(s) audit report(s) accepted by the Principal and by whom

Number of non-compliances (including any repeats) discovered during the KRA

period

Number of repeat non-compliances recognised during the KRA period

Percentage of processes within the plan audited during the KRA period

Total number of sites/activities audited against the plan during the KRA period.

Measure score

SCORE DESCRIPTION MEASUREMENTS

1 Contractor has not taken action to either:

• Agree a plan in the required

timeframe • Audit activities against an

accepted plan5 • Record all non-compliances • Keep the plan current and

accurate.

Any of the following:

• No plan is accepted. • Plan is not up to date.

• Activities are not audited against plan. • Plan is accepted and audit is completed, but any

non-compliances have not been recorded.

2 Contractor is:

• Auditing activities against a current, accepted plan

• Managing actions and learnings.

All of the following:

• Plan is up to date. • Activities in this period are audited against plan

and the Principal has accepted audit report. • All non-compliances in this period are recorded. • All repeat non-compliances are recorded.

3 Contractor is both:


• Achieving a good level of compliance in the audit results.



and the Principal has accepted audit report. • All non-compliances in this period are recorded,

and there are five or fewer (≤5) of these. • No repeat non-compliances.



• Achieving an excellent level of

compliance in the audit results.



and the Principal has accepted audit report.

• All non-compliances in this period are recorded, and there are two or fewer (≤2) of these.

• No repeat non-compliances.

5 See Section 7.5.2 ‘Audits against plans’ for more details on when audits must begin.

of 91




KPI Measure 1.2.1 Traffic Control Plan


Intent

Contractors make effective, consistent use of their traffic control plan to provide a safe

environment for staff and road users by using, auditing and reviewing it regularly.

Definition

This KPI measures non-compliance of activities discovered against the traffic control plan

through:

Audit

Incident investigation

Any other method the Contractor or Principal uses.



Business rules

The Contractor must have a Traffic Control Plan accepted by the Principal before the

Contract commences.


it up to date, as listed in Section 7.5.2 ‘Audits against plans’.

Process



management system.

Data required






period




of 91




Measure score





accepted plan • Record all non-compliances • Keep the plan current and

accurate.





2 Contractor is:


• Managing actions and

learnings.




• All non-compliances in this period are recorded. • All repeat non-compliances are recorded.

















of 91




KRA 2: ROAD USER SAFETY

Objective

Activities under NOCs:

Contribute to safer journeys through safe roads, speeds and vehicles, and safe road

use.

Contract Requirements

The reporting requirements in this section are covered in Section 5.5.3 of the NOC.

Safety Data and Crash Types

Road user safety is generally measured by the number of crashes on the network in

which people were seriously injured or killed. When assessing KPIs for this KRA, the

casualty data comes from the Crash Analysis System (CAS).

CAS records each casualty with a two-letter movement code for the crash type, such as

BD or DA. The details for some KPIs in this section list the relevant movement type

codes to measure. Understanding what these codes mean may be helpful (but is not

essential) when measuring the relevant KPI score.

In summary, the codes relate to how the vehicle was moving and what type of road the

vehicle was on when the crash occurred. For example, code DB refers to crashes where

the vehicle “loses control or leaves the roadway on curves turning left, or when the

vehicle is turning left at an intersection”.

See the Guide for the Interpretation of Coded Crash Reports for the Crash Analysis

System (CAS) for the full descriptions of each movement type, if needed.

Updating Data to Current State

For scoring each KPI in this KRA, Contractors are only expected to include crashes that

have been logged in CAS as at the time they prepare the KRA report. It is acceptable

that crashes occurring late in the KRA period might not yet have been recorded in CAS.

However, the Contractor is expected to account for this in subsequent reports, i.e. to

extract fresh sets of historical data each time, rather than leave the data for the

preceding period(s) as it was reported earlier.

KPIs in this KRA

2.1.1 DSI Trend

2.1.2 Loss of Control in Darkness

2.1.3 Network Safety Trend Report

of 91




KPI Measure 2.1.1 DSI Trend

Intent

Statistics for deaths and serious injuries in crashes on the network are decreasing,

showing that Contractors understand the network’s safety issues and that the activities

they undertake, including improvements they identify and implement, result in a safer

environment for road users.

Definition

This KPI measures the lag indicators of deaths and serious injuries as an indicator of

network safety. The scoring also recognises the Contractor for identifying and

implementing improvements to reduce these statistics.

Business rules

The calculation must include all crashes involving deaths and serious injuries as

reported in CAS. This data must not be filtered.

When claiming safety improvements, the Contractor:

Can include any improvements implemented in this period that they reported as

identified in a previous period. The Contractor may report on these in the period

that they are delivered

Must have had endorsement from the Principal’s Traffic and Safety Engineer for

the safety improvements, and they must have been included in NZTA’s Safety

Improvements Database.

The DSI trend calculation must be based on the:

Current CAS data of deaths and serious injuries for the 35 calendar months

leading up to three months before the end of the KRA period (e.g. for the KRA

period ending June 2016, data would be extracted for March 2016 back to April

2013), regardless of when the Contract commenced

Note: By excluding the most recent three months’ data, CAS is more likely to

include all the relevant statistics.

Process

The Contractor records and reports on trends in CAS crash data of deaths and serious

injuries in relation to vehicle kilometres of travel in their network.

Around July each year, the Principal calculates the annual VKT value for each NOC, and

advises this to each Contractor. This value is based on the annual average daily traffic

(AADT) data in RAMM for the previous calendar year.

of 91




Data required

24 month trend line percentage of rolling average monthly DSIs/annual VKT

Number of safety improvements identified and endorsed by the Principal’s Traffic

and Safety Engineer

Number of safety improvements accepted by the Principal and fully implemented

The initiative names relating to those safety improvements.

Calculation

DSI trend calculation = 12 month rolling average monthly DSI x 10^10

Annual VKT

Note:

For annual VKT, use the most recent value provided by the Principal.

The 24 month rolling average trend and linear regression line are calculated using an

approach consistent with the steps in Section 7.7 ‘Trend Line Calculations’.

Measure score


1 DSI trend is deteriorating DSI trend shows a linear regression line of more than 1% (>1%).

2 DSI trend is steady DSI trend shows a linear regression line between 0% and 1% (>0% and ≤1%).

3 DSI trend is improving, and improvements are

identified

Both of the following:

• DSI trend shows a linear regression line that is 0% or less

(≤0%). • Contractor has identified one or more improvements that

have been endorsed by the Principal’s Traffic and Safety Engineer as having potential to further improve the network safety trend.

4 DSI trend is improving,

and improvements are implemented


• Requirements for Level 3 are met • DSI trend shows a linear regression line that is 0% or less

(≤0%). • In this period, two or more of the safety improvements

identified have been implemented.

of 91




KPI Measure 2.1.2 Loss of Control in Darkness

Intent

Statistics for crashes that occur on bends during darkness on the network are

decreasing, showing that Contractors understand those assets that have a direct

relationship to driving in darkness, and implement effective measures that improve road

users’ ability to drive safely.

Definition

This KPI measures the instances of loss of control in darkness, as an indication of the

quality of the driving environment at night on the network, such as delineation and

lighting.

Business rules

The calculation must include:

All crashes (injury and non-injury) recorded in CAS with movement codes BB, BC,

BD, BF, DA and DB that occurred during hours of darkness (i.e. the inverse of the

daylight hours)

All crashes (injury and non-injury) recorded in CAS with movement codes BB, BC,

BD, BF, DA and DB.

CAS crash casualty data for each of the most recent 12 months of complete data

available, irrespective of the Contract’s commencement date.

Process

Crash data in CAS for the movement codes above that involve loss of control in

darkness, is assessed and the trend is reported in proportion to all crashes on bends

over the most recent 12 months of complete data available.

Data required

Number of crashes on bends in darkness each month during the 12 month period

Total number of crashes on bends each month during the 12 month period

Percentage of crashes on bends in darkness during the 12 month period

Trend regression line percentage for the monthly totals.

Calculation

Percentage of crashes in darkness

total no. crashes on bends [BB+BC+BD+BF+DA+DB] in darkness6 during the last 12 months

total no. crashes on bends [BB+BC+BD+BF+DA+DB] during the last 12 months

6 Based on the ‘dark / light’ environment attribute within CAS variables for tabulation.

of 91




Trend line

Calculate the trend and linear regression line using an approach consistent with the

steps in Section 7.7 ‘Trend Line Calculations’, using the same 12 months’ worth of data,

plotted on a monthly basis.

Measure score


1 Proportion is high, and trend is deteriorating


• More than 35% of reported crashes occurred in darkness. • Trend shows an increasing linear regression line (>0%).

2 Either proportion is high,

or trend is deteriorating

One of the following:

• More than 35% of reported crashes occurred in darkness. • Trend shows an increasing linear regression line (>0%).

3 Proportion is low, and trend is improving


• 35% or less of reported crashes occurred in darkness. • Trend shows a level or negative linear regression line of

between 0% and -1% (≤0% and >-1%)

4 Proportion is low, and trend is improving significantly


• 35% or less of reported crashes occurred in darkness. • Trend shows a negative linear regression line of -1% or

lower (≤-1%).

of 91




KPI Measure 2.1.3 Network Safety Trend Report

Intent

Contractors demonstrate their understanding of the safety issues on the network. They

are proactively seeking improvement opportunities, implementing improvements, and

monitoring their effectiveness.

Definition

This KPI measures the quality and effectiveness of the Network Safety Trend Report that

Contractors submit to the Principal.

Business Rules

To align the four monthly KRA period with the quarterly safety reporting period, the

Contractor must assess the reports as follows:

IN KRA PERIOD… ASSESS THE SAFETY REPORT FOR THE…

1 Ending October First quarter.

2 Ending February Second quarter.

3 Ending June

Third and fourth quarters.

Note: If these two report results are different, the lower result applies for scoring this KPI.

When claiming safety improvements, the Contractor:

Can include any improvements implemented in this period that they reported as

identified in a previous period. The Contractor may report on these in the period

that they are delivered

Must have had endorsement from the Principal’s Traffic and Safety Engineer for

the safety improvements, and they must have been included in NZTA’s Safety

Improvements Database.

Process

The Contractor captures relevant data, reports their findings, self-assesses performance,

and provides a quarterly Network Safety Trend Report to the Principal.

Data Required

Confirmation that the report was delivered on time

Confirmation that the report was accepted as fit for purpose

Evidence (where applicable) that the report has exceeded the minimum

requirements

Number of safety improvements identified and endorsed by the Principal’s Traffic

and Safety Engineer

Number of safety improvements accepted by the Principal and fully implemented

of 91




The initiative names relating to those safety improvements

Confirmation that the Minor Improvements (Safety) Programme projects agreed for

physical work delivery through the NOC are being delivered on time, or that any

delays have been approved by the CB due to valid mitigating circumstances7.

Measure score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 Either of the following:

• The report(s) are not delivered on time. • The Principal does not accept the standard of the report(s) as ‘fit for purpose’.


• The report(s) are delivered on time. • The Principal accepts the standard of the report(s) as ‘fit for purpose’.

3 All of the following:

• Requirements for Level 2 are met. • The Principal accepts that the standard of the report(s) exceeds the minimum

requirements.

• In this period, Contractor has identified two or more new safety improvements that have been endorsed by the Principal’s Traffic and Safety Engineer (from crash investigations or other means).


• Requirements for Level 3 are met.

• In this period, one or more of the safety improvements identified has been implemented.

• Agreed minor improvement physical work delivery through the NOC is being delivered in line with the agreed Minor Improvements (Safety) Programme for this KRA period, or valid mitigating circumstances have been approved by the CB.

A description of mitigating circumstances can be seen in the table of terms used (page 6).

of 91




KRA 3: CUSTOMER

Objective

Contractors always:

Consider road users’ needs for access

Respond to customers’ requests and their expectations.

KPIs in this KRA

3.1.1 Customer and Stakeholder Communications Management Plan

3.1.2 Communications of Events and Incidents on Customers

3.1.3 Customer Satisfaction Survey

3.2.1 Ability to Respond to Customers

of 91




KPI Measure 3.1.1 Customer and Stakeholder Communications

Management Plan


Intent

Contractors make effective, consistent use of their plan to manage communications with

customers and stakeholders, by using, auditing and reviewing it regularly.

Definition

This KPI measures how well the Contractor is using their customer and stakeholder

communications plan to measure, review and improve the value and effectiveness of

their processes. Non-compliances discovered against the Customer and Stakeholder

Communications Management Plan are captured through:

Audit

Communicating and interacting with Customers and Stakeholders

Any other method that the Contractor or Principal uses.



Business Rules

The Contractor must have a Customer and Stakeholder Communications

Management Plan accepted by the Principal within the grace period allowed in the

NOC.


it up to date, as shown in Section 7.5.2 ‘Audits against plans’.

Process



management system.

of 91




Data Required

• Most recent date updated (or new) plan has been approved by the Principal


• Date(s) audit(s) completed and by whom

• Date(s) audit report(s) accepted by the Principal and by whom

• Number of non-compliances (including any repeats) discovered during the

KRA period

• Number of repeat non-compliances recognised during the KRA period

• Percentage of processes within the plan audited during the KRA period

• Total number of sites/activities audited against the plan during the KRA

period.

Measure score



• Agree a plan in the required timeframe

• Audit activities against an accepted plan

• Record all non-compliances • Keep the plan current and

accurate.


• No plan is accepted. • Plan is not up to date. • Activities are not audited against plan.

• Plan is accepted and audit is completed, but any non-compliances have not been recorded.

2 Contractor is:



learnings.














• Achieving an excellent level of compliance in the audit results.




and there are two or fewer (≤2) of these.


of 91




KPI Measure 3.1.2 Communications of Impact of Events and

Incidents on Customers

Intent

Contractors communicate proactively with customers, giving them timely, reliable

information about planned and unplanned events on the network.

Definition

This KPI measures the quality of the Contractor’s communication to their Customers.

Business Rules

The Contractor and the Principal must agree on:

The monthly audit sample size (ideally at least 10%. See Section 7.4

‘Completing Audits to Measure Performance’ (page 28))

Communication protocols for managing both planned and unplanned events

Events and incidents that are relevant to customers and need to be

communicated. Most routine cyclic operations (eg litter collection) should be

excluded, unless they require communication with customers for any reason.

The Contractor must record all actual communications on the relevant system(s),

such as:

RAMM CAR, TREIS, CRMS

The Contractor’s own system

Information supplied through TOC.

In addition to the randomly selected audit sample, the Contractor must include in

this measure any planned or unplanned events where there was negative feedback

about the communications (rather than about the event).

To increase the consistency of the numbers reported, events and incidents that

occur at the same site over a number of days should be treated as a single event or

incident in the context of defining the list of events from which to take a sample.

Therefore an event or incident that occurs over multiple days at a site should not be

counted more than once in the potential pool of events for sampling, even if the

event or incident is reported daily or weekly within other systems.

If an event or incident occurring over a number of days is selected for inclusion in

the sample, evidence of good communication must be assessed for each event or

incident as a whole. Duration of the event does not form part of the calculation.

Process

Each month, the Principal and Contractor review a randomly selected set of relevant

planned events and unplanned events (e.g. floods, snow, etc.). For each event, they

review and evaluate:

Information loaded into relevant system(s)

Information on incident response and updates provided through appropriate

system(s)

of 91




Notices about road works and other planned events (e.g. sporting events),

evaluating whether these have been provided in a timely and customer-friendly

manner, in accordance with the various plans

Feedback from key stakeholders and community groups, evaluating whether good

levels of collaboration have been demonstrated in responding to relevant incidents

and events.

Data Required

Total number of planned events relevant to customer communication

Total number of unplanned events relevant to customer communication

Number of relevant planned events audited

Number of relevant unplanned events audited

Percentage of audited events that show evidence of good communications

Total number of events where there was negative feedback about the

communications (rather than about the event).

Measure score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 85% or less of randomly selected relevant events show evidence of good

communication.

2 More than 85% (but less than 90%) of randomly selected relevant events show evidence of good communication.

3 90% or more (but less than 95%) of randomly selected relevant events show evidence

of good communication.

4 95% or more of randomly selected relevant events show evidence of good communication.

of 91




KPI Measure 3.1.3 Customer Satisfaction Survey

Intent

Survey results show that road users are satisfied with the services, provided by the

Contractor, that they have used when travelling.

Definition

This KPI measures the levels of road users’ satisfaction with the aspects of the network

covered by the Contractor’s NOC. The Principal conducts a quarterly survey of

customers’ experiences with the New Zealand state highway network, including:

Their opinion of the travel experience

The details of their journey

Any disruptions they encountered

Their travel time.

Business Rules

The NOC customer satisfaction score is based on the NOC related questions of the

NZTA customer survey.

The Principal identifies and advises the top performers once the data is available.

Process

The NZTA survey is conducted quarterly, and the results are mapped to the relevant

Contractor, according to the respondents’ post codes. Each KRA period, the Principal’s

Planning & Performance Team extracts the data from the Customer Survey Portal and

informs the Contractor.

Data Required

NZTA customer survey result(s) for the relevant quarter(s)

Calculation

The survey result is the rolling average of the monthly customer results for the last

12 months.

Measure Score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 Survey results show customer satisfaction of less than 45%.

2 Survey results show customer satisfaction of 45% or more, but less than 50%.

3 Survey results show customer satisfaction of 50% or more.


• Survey results show customer satisfaction of 50% or more. • Survey results are within the top 10% for all NOCs for the KRA period.

of 91




KPI Measure 3.2.1 Ability to Respond to Customers

Intent

Contractors give customers a timely, professional and useful response to all queries,

complaints and correspondence.

Definition

This KPI measures the responsiveness of the Contractor to the customer queries,

complaints and correspondence received during the KRA period.

Business Rules

Contractors must record each customer query, complaint or correspondence as soon

as possible after they receive it, and in sufficient detail to demonstrate compliance

with this requirement.

Contractors must record when they respond to each customer query, complaint or

correspondence.

Contractors can only record a query, complaint or correspondence as closed when

they have responded directly about its substantive content. It is not enough to

simply acknowledge its receipt.

If the response does not resolve the customer’s issue, the Contractor must inform

the customer of the reason for this.

To provide meaningful results for this KPI, this data can only be collated within five

working days of the end of the KRA period.

Contractors must complete callback surveys for a minimum of four customer

contacts received during the KRA period, or 100% of all customer contacts,

whichever is less.

Exception: If the Contractor has pledged in their tendered submission to a specific

number or proportion of customer contacts, the pledged number of surveys apply.

Process

The Contractor maintains information about customer interactions as they are

received.

Each month, the Contractor reports on:

Number of customer interactions in CRMS for response within the reporting

period, and the response times to them

Number of callback surveys completed, and whether these show the customer

interactions were satisfactorily dealt with.

Around the end of the KRA period, the Contractor collates customer interaction data

from CRMS for each month, to calculate their KPI score.

of 91




Data Required

CRMS data on customer complaints and interactions assigned to the Contractor,

including:

Number of complaints that were responded to:

Within two days

Outside two days

Number of other interactions that were responded to:

Within ten days

Outside ten days

Total number of customer interactions

Number of customer interactions resolved

Number of callback surveys completed

KPI score for previous KRA period.

Calculation

Sum the following points to find the Contractor’s total response score for all customer

contacts received during the KRA period:

DETERMINE IF… BY CALCULATING… AND IF SO, ADD…

complaint response ratio is more than 0

complaint response ratio = no. complaint responses within two days – (no.

complaint responses outside two days × 5)

1 point.

interaction response ratio is more than 0

interaction response ratio = no. interaction responses within ten days – (no. interaction responses outside ten days × 5)

1 point.

resolution ratio is more than 0

resolution ratio = no. customer interactions resolved – (no. customer interactions not resolved ×10)

1 point.

Contractor completed callback surveys for a sample of closed customer interactions in this KRA period

1 point.

Contractor achieved a KPI score of 3 or more for this KPI in the previous KRA period

1 point.

Measure score

SCORE DEFINITION MEASUREMENTS

1 Contractor’s responses to customers have

been untimely or unprofessional.

Total response score is 0 or 1 points.

2 Contractor’s responses to customers have been adequately timely and professional.

Total response score is 2 or 3 points.

3 Contractor’s responses in this period have been consistently timely and professional.

Total response score is 4 points.

4 Contractor shows a consistent history of timely, professional responses.

Total response score is 5 points (or more).

of 91




KRA 4: SUSTAINABILITY

Objectives

Contractors contribute to maintaining a sustainable and engaged contracting market.

Contractors adopt good practice and act in a responsible manner, which contributes

to a transport system that adds positively to New Zealand’s economic, social and

environmental welfare.

KPIs in this KRA

Environmental Triangle:

4.1.1 Enforcement Action

4.1.2 Regulatory Non Compliance

4.1.3 CS-VUE Non Compliance

4.1.4 Environmental Initiatives

4.1.5 Environmental Training, Workshops and Presentations

4.1.6 Environmental Hazards or Opportunities.

4.1.7 Environmental and Social Management Plan

4.2.1 Healthy Market Pledges

of 91




KPI Measures 4.1.1 to 4.1.6 Environmental Triangle

Intent

The Contractor demonstrates commitment to environmental and social responsibility

throughout their activities under the NOC.

Definition

This group of KPIs measures environmental sustainability through the parties’:

Impact of works

Ability to meet commitments

Actions taken to improve how they work.

The environmental triangle formula combines measures of several indicators to give an

aggregated KPI score.

Business rules

Contractors must maintain a system for capturing information to support the

measurement of each indicator within this KPI

For KPI 4.1.5, the Contractor may only count an individual attending the identical

course more than once as one attendance. An ‘individual’ is a person who is an

employee or Sub-Contracted person, who undertakes work related to the NOC.

Indicator weightings

The following diagram and table show the relative weightings of each type of event

whose environmental impact these KPIs measure.

SCORE INSTANCES

OF…

AS… I.E. …

KPI 4.1.1 -20 -20 × no.

Negative im

pact

KPIs 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 -10 -10 × (no. +

no.)

KPI 4.1.4 +20 20 × no.

Positiv

e im

pact

KPI 4.1.5 +1 1 x no.

KPI 4.1.6 +0.5 0.5 × no.

See the KPI descriptions below for details on measuring and scoring each element, and

the calculation after those, for details on finding the aggregated total score.

Enforce-

ment Action

Non-Compliance

Environmental Initiatives Adopted or Actioned

Environmental Training, Workshops & Presentations

Environmental Hazards or Opportunities Actioned

of 91




Measure 4.1.1 Enforcement Action

This KPI element counts the number of enforcement orders (under section 314) and

abatement notices (under section 322) of the Resource Management Act 1991 that are

relevant to the NOC area.

Process

For each KRA period assessment, the Contractor captures and totals the number of

enforcement orders and abatement notices issued under the above legislation.

Impact

-20 points per enforcement order and/or abatement notice issued

Data Required

Number of orders and notices issued during the KRA period

Measure 4.1.2 Regulatory Non-Compliance

This KPI element counts the number of regulatory monitoring non-compliances issued

against the Contractor. (It excludes regulators’ minor non-compliances.)

Process

For each KRA period assessment, the Contractor captures and totals the number of non-

compliances issued against them.

Impact

-10 points per non-compliance issued

Data Required

Number of non-compliances issued during the KRA period

Measure 4.1.3 CS-VUE Non-Compliance

This KPI element counts the number of non-compliances in NZTA’s CS-VUE system.

Process

Within five (5) days of the end of each KRA period, the Contractor extracts a snapshot of

the ‘compliance status bar graph’ from the dashboard tab of CS-VUE for the contract

area.

Impact

-10 points per CS-VUE non-compliance recorded

Data Required

Number of non-compliances recorded during the KRA period

of 91




Measure 4.1.4 Environmental Initiatives

This KPI measures how many environmental initiatives the Contractor has adopted or

actioned within the KRA period that:

Meet the Principal’s environmental plan objectives

Are over and above meeting legal compliance.

Process

Whenever an initiative is put forward, the Contractor prepares a summary detailing it

using the prescribed template. The Environment and Urban Design Team assesses the

initiative and advises the Contractor whether the initiative has been agreed and can be

included in the KPI scoring.

Impact

+20 points per initiative assessed and agreed by the Principal

Data Required

Number of initiatives agreed

Measure 4.1.5 Environmental Training, Workshops and Presentations

This KPI element counts the number of attendances at formal environmental related

training workshops and presentations the Contractor has held. (This does not include

toolbox or tailgate activities.)

Process

For each KRA assessment period, the Contractor captures from their own relevant

systems the number of individual trainees attending relevant courses workshops and

presentations.

Impact

+1 point per individual attendance

Data Required

Number of courses in the KRA period and number of attending individuals

of 91




Measure 4.1.6 Environmental Hazards or Opportunities

This KPI element counts the number of environmental near misses, hazards and

opportunities the Contractor has reported.

Process

The Contractor maintains an ongoing register of all environmental hazards and

opportunities identified, recording for each one the:

• Number of staff who reported it

• Names of each staff member who reported it

• Type of near miss, opportunity or hazard reported.

Impact

+ 0.5 points per near miss, hazard or opportunity reported during the period, multiplied

by the number of discrete individuals that reported it

Data Required

Number of reports of near misses, hazards or opportunities identified

Calculation of Aggregated Score

The table below shows how the value for each individual KPI is calculated to find the

aggregated environmental triangle score for the KRA period.

MEASURE CALCULATION

4.1.1 Enforcement Action No. of instances × -20

4.1.2 Regulatory Non-Compliance No. of instances × -10

4.1.3 CS VUE Non-Compliance No. of instances × -10

4.1.4 Environmental Initiatives No. of instances × 20

4.1.5 Training Workshops and Presentations No. of attendances × 1

4.1.6 Hazards or Opportunities No. of reports × 0.5

Aggregated environmental triangle score Sum of the above scores

Measure Score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 Aggregated environmental triangle score is less than zero (<0)

2 Aggregated environmental triangle score is between zero and ten (≥0 and ≤10)

3 Aggregated environmental triangle score is more than ten, but not more than 20 (>10 and <20)

4 Aggregated environmental triangle score is 20 or more (≥20)

of 91




KPI Measure 4.1.7 Environmental and Social Management Plan


Intent

Contractors make effective, consistent use of their plan to manage the impact of their

activities on the physical and social environment by using, auditing and reviewing it

regularly.

Definition

This KPI confirms how well the Contractor’s activities comply with their Environmental

and Social Management Plan8.



Business Rules

The Contractor must have an Environmental and Social Management Plan accepted

by the Principal within the grace period allowed in the NOC.



Process



management system.

8 The requirements for this plan are covered in Section 4.4 of the NOC Maintenance Specification.

of 91




Data Required






period




Measure score





• Record all non-compliances

• Keep the plan current and accurate.


• No plan is accepted. • Plan is not up to date. • Activities are not audited against plan. • Plan is accepted and audit is completed, but any


2 Contractor is:















• Achieving an excellent level of compliance in the audit results.




and there are two or fewer (≤2) of these. • No repeat non-compliances.

of 91




KPI Measure 4.2.1 Healthy Market Pledges

Intent

Contractors are consistent and timely in meeting the pledges in their tendered

submission, and implement ongoing value-for-money opportunities to ensure that Sub-

Contractors have fair access to the market for providing services on the network.

Definition

This KPI assesses how well the Contractor is meeting their responsibilities to ensure a

sustainable and healthy Sub-Contracting market. They are expected to deliver at least:

The minimum percentage of Sub-Contractor work agreed in their NOC

Any other healthy market related pledges agreed to in their NOC

Any other healthy market pledges agreed to that they identify during the term of the

NOC.

The Contractor may choose to increase the capability of their Sub-Contractors through

systems and training. The Principal will recognise these activities as value-for-money

opportunities.

Business Rules

The Contractor must deliver on all healthy market pledges they have made in their

tendered submission. If they cannot deliver or must delay delivery, they must

provide evidence of mitigating circumstances9 agreed unanimously by the Board.

The Contractor must identify all healthy market pledges from their tendered

submission, agree a schedule with the Principal for when they will deliver these, and

maintain this schedule.

The Contractor must have a system to record all initiatives that improve the

capability of their Sub-Contractors.

The Contractor can only claim identification and implementation of value-for-money

opportunities under this KPI for value delivered over and above their scheduled

healthy market pledges.

The Contractor should calculate the individual and overall Sub-Contractor spend

percentages for this KPI in all periods, however they are only to be included in

evaluation of scoring in Period 3 of each KRA assessment year. In other KRA

periods, the Contractor must report the equivalent year-to-date percentages,

however they are to be excluded from evaluation of scoring. Scoring in Periods 1

and 2 is to be based on all other healthy market pledges due for delivery, and any

value-for-money opportunities identified.

To meet the pledged percentage of Sub-Contracted work, the Contractor must both

achieve the overall percentage pledged, and the pledged percentages for any

individual Sub-Contractors.


of 91




If the Contractor claims under this KPI for a Sub-Contractor initiative that has added

value for money, they can potentially also claim it under KPI 5.3.1, if it is a genuine

innovation.

The Principal must have accepted a value-for-money opportunity, for the Contractor

to claim it under this KPI.

Process

At the start of the Contract, the Principal and Contractor agree a schedule of the healthy

market pledges made by the Contractor in their tendered submission, including the

specific planned actions and when they will be delivered. In reporting for each KRA

period, the Contractor demonstrates that they have delivered as scheduled and added

value on the promises made during tendering.

The Contractor also identifies and implements additional value-for-money opportunities

ongoing, and maintains records of these.

Sub-Contractor spend must be detailed by individual Sub-Contractor, showing

percentage pledged, percentage achieved for the current year, overall annual contract

expenditure and any comments to explain the variance. Where mitigating

circumstances10 are put forward these must be agreed by both the MCM and the

Contract Board and explained within the KRA submission.

Data Required

When the schedule of healthy market pledges was accepted, and by whom

Number of healthy market pledges due during the KRA period

How many of the healthy market pledges due were delivered

How many of the healthy market pledges due were not delivered but mitigating

circumstances were unanimously agreed by the Board

Details of any mitigating circumstances recognised by the Board

Year-to-date pledged and actual percentage of overall Sub-Contractor spend (note

this will only affect scores in Period 3. In Periods 1 & 2 it is for information only)

Year-to-date pledged and actual percentage of individual Sub-Contractor spend

(note this will only affect scores in Period 3. In Periods 1 & 2 it is for information

only)

Number of value-for-money opportunities identified

Number of value-for-money opportunities fully implemented

The details relating to those value-for-money opportunities, including how they

increase Sub-Contractor capability and provide ongoing benefit to the Sub-

Contracting market.


of 91




Measure Score


1 No schedule agreed, or scheduled healthy market pledges not

delivered

Either of the following:

• No schedule has been accepted • Contractor has not delivered on healthy market pledges due

within this KRA period, and has not had mitigating circumstances11 agreed.

2 Scheduled healthy market pledges delivered

For each healthy market pledge due in this KRA period, Contractor has either:

• Delivered as scheduled

• Had mitigating circumstances agreed.

3 Scheduled healthy market pledges delivered and

opportunities to add value identified


• Requirements for Level 2 are met • Contractor has identified four or more additional

opportunities to add value for money.

4 Scheduled healthy market pledges delivered and opportunities to add value implemented


• Requirements for Level 3 are met • Contractor has fully implemented three or more additional



of 91




KRA 5: ASSURANCE AND VALUE

Objectives

Accurate network information and knowledge underpin quality outcomes.

Contractors make sound investment recommendations and decisions, based on

reliable, robust and proven evidence.

KPIs in this KRA

5.1.1 Quality Management Plan

5.2.1 Maintenance Management Plan

5.3.1 Innovation

of 91




KPI Measure 5.1.1 Quality Management Plan


Intent

Contractors make effective, consistent use of their plan to manage the quality of their

activities by using, auditing and reviewing it regularly.

Definition

This KPI measures how well the Contractor is using their quality management plan12 to

measure, review and improve value and effectiveness of their quality management

process. As part of their plan activities, the Contractor is expected to:

Identify and acknowledge any quality issues, log them in an issues register and put

a response in place

Make any changes required to the process in the quality management plan.



Business Rules

The Contractor must have a quality management plan accepted by the Principal

within the grace period allowed in the NOC.



The quality management plan must include the Contractor’s data quality plan.

Process



management system.

Data Required






period




12 Requirements for the Quality Management Plan are covered in Section 4.2 of the NOC Maintenance Specification.

of 91




Measure Score





• Record all non-compliances

• Keep the plan current and accurate.


• No plan is accepted. • Plan is not up to date. • Activities are not audited against plan. • Plan is accepted and audit is completed, but any


2 Contractor is:

• Auditing activities against a

current, accepted plan



• Plan is up to date.

• Activities in this period are audited against plan


















of 91




KPI Measure 5.2.1 Maintenance Management Plan


Intent

Contractors make effective, consistent use of their plan to manage their maintenance

activities by using, auditing and reviewing it regularly.

Definition

This KPI measures how well the Contractor is using their maintenance management

plan13 to measure, review and improve the value and effectiveness, of their maintenance

management process.



Business Rules

The Contractor must have a maintenance management plan accepted by the

Principal within the grace period allowed in the NOC.



Process



management system.

Data Required






period




13 Requirements for the Maintenance Management Plan are covered in Section 4.8 of the NOC Maintenance Specification.

of 91




Measure Score






accurate.





2 Contractor is:



learnings.





















of 91




KPI Measure 5.3.1 Innovation

Intent

Contractors’ organisational culture actively values innovation, efficiency and continuous

improvement, which they share across any of the Principal’s Contracts.

Innovation encourages continuous improvement and results in demonstrable benefits.

This KPI is intended to encourage an ongoing attitude that activities can be done better.

Definition

This KPI counts the number of innovations that are either common to the industry or

created within the Contracts, and which result in demonstrable benefits to delivery of the

NOC.

A proprietary innovation is a new practice that the Contractor has created within the

NOC, which has not yet been used by other suppliers or generally within the

industry.

A common innovation is a practice that the Contractor has adopted within the NOC,

which is used by other suppliers or generally within the industry.

Note:

While innovation generally offers value for money, not everything that offers value

for money necessarily qualifies as innovation

The feature must be new to the NOC.

Business Rules

The Contractor must have a system to record and capture the data required to

assess this KPI.

If the Contract has dual Principals (e.g. NZTA and a local authority), the Contractor

can claim an innovation that provides value to either Principal – or both.

The Contractor cannot claim an innovation:

For any activity that is listed as a pledge in their tendered submission

As proprietary that has been previously agreed as a tender pledge by any

Contractor (under KPIs 4.2.1 or 6.1.3)

As common that they have previously claimed as proprietary.

The Principal is responsible for keeping a register of all proprietary innovations that

are claimed in KRA assessments.

As part of the moderation process (see 4.5 ‘Moderation of Reported Performance’),

the collective group will determine the validity of the initiative or practice as an

innovation.

of 91




Process

The Contractor maintains their system ongoing, documenting all innovations from all

sources.

When considering the KRA assessment, the moderation groups specifically consider

and validate each innovation claimed, and advises the Contractor of the outcome.

Data Required

Evidence of implementing improvements to service delivery, including:

Date implemented

Description of nature of innovation

Whether proprietary or common

If shared, contract name(s) and number(s) where innovation is being used.

Measure Score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 Contractor has introduced no innovations.

2 Contractor has introduced one or more new innovations.


• Contractor has introduced one or more new common innovations. • Contractor has, in addition, introduced two or more proprietary innovations.


• Requirements for Level 3 are met. • A proprietary innovation introduced by the Contractor is being used by at least two

of the Principal’s other Contracts.

of 91




KRA 6: NETWORK PERFORMANCE

Objectives

Activities completed under a NOC provide physical indicators of service quality.

Contractors deliver on promises made during tendering, and these add value to the

network.

Customers have timely and accurate information that lets them make informed

choices.

Contractors schedule their work to cause minimal disruption for road users.

KPIs in this KRA

6.1.1 Overall OPM Score

6.1.2 Compliance with Contractor’s Monthly Programme of Work

6.1.3 Network Performance Tender Pledges are Delivered

6.2.1 Network Availability

6.2.2 Emergency Procedures Preparedness Plan

6.2.3 Traffic Flow

of 91




KPI Measure 6.1.1 Overall OPM Score

Intent

Contractors understand all the relevant aspects of their network, so they consistently

manage the operational levels of service within acceptable parameters, avoiding any

penalties.

Definition

This KPI measures the Contractor’s achievement in delivering the Operational

Performance Measures (OPM)14 for the NOC during the KRA reporting period.

Business Rules

The Contractor is responsible for maintaining a system to capture and report their

OPM results.

To determine their score for this KPI, the Contractor must refer to the lower and

upper non-compliance limits defined in the NOC.

The measurement for this KPI must include the most recent four months of OPM

data reported.

A score of 4 can only be achieved once the Contractor has completed 12 months of

OPM reporting.

Process

The Contractor collates and analyses the monthly OPM performance evaluations for the

KRA period.

Data Required

Number of occasions where the monthly OPM score exceeded the lower non-

compliance limit in:

This KRA period

The last 12 months

Number of occasions where the monthly OPM score exceeded the upper non-

compliance limit in this KRA period

Number of non-compliances with Key and Safety OPMs in this KRA period

Total value of financial penalties incurred during the KRA period

Outputs from OPM reporting for last 12 months, where applicable.

Calculation

Calculate the trend and linear regression line using an approach consistent with the

steps in Section 7.7 ‘Trend Line Calculations’.

14 The requirements for evaluating and analysing OPM results are covered in Section 2.3.4, and Table 2.3.2 OPM Monthly Evaluation Weightings, of the NOC Maintenance Specification.

of 91




Measure Score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 In this KRA period, either:

• Two or more monthly OPM scores have exceeded the lower non-compliance limit • One or more monthly OPM scores have exceeded the upper non-compliance limit.

2 One monthly OPM score exceeded the lower but not the upper non-compliance limit within this KRA period

3 No monthly OPM score has exceeded the lower non-compliance limit in this KRA period.


• Contractor has had no non-compliances within Key and Safety OPMs within this KRA period.

• No monthly OPM score has exceeded the lower non-compliance limit in the last 12 months.

• Contractor’s OPM score shows a steady or improving trend over the past 12 months.

of 91




KPI Measure 6.1.2 Compliance with Contractor’s Monthly

Programme of Work

Intent

Contractors plan realistic, achievable monthly programmes of work, and consistently

deliver the activities as scheduled.

Definition

This KPI measures how the timing of the Contractor’s actual work complies with the

monthly planned schedule, in alignment with their annual programme of work15.

Business Rules

KPI 6.1.2 will continue to be scored at the end of each reporting year (instead of each

reporting period)

Process

A score of ‘NA’ is to be entered into the KRA reporting framework in Periods 1 and 2

of each KRA reporting year.

The Performance team will continue work with industry representatives to confirm

the end of year KPI scoring criteria. Once this has been agreed, Contractors will be

notified by NTC.

Data Required

To be confirmed

Calculation

To be confirmed

Measure Score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 To be confirmed

2 To be confirmed

3 To be confirmed

4 To be confirmed

15 Requirements for programmes of work within the Monthly Report are covered under Section 3.8.2 of the NOC Maintenance Specification.

of 91




KPI Measure 6.1.3 Network Performance Tender Pledges are

Delivered

Intent

Contractors are consistent and timely in meeting the network performance pledges in

their tendered submission and implement ongoing value-for-money opportunities to

deliver services on the network, adding value to the Contract’s performance.

Definition

This KPI measures how well the Contractor is meeting their responsibilities to deliver on

the schedule agreed with the Principal of the network performance pledges in their

tendered submission.

The Contractor is expected to deliver on all network performance pledges they have

made in their tendered submission, and demonstrate how these have added value.

Contractors are expected to deliver at least:

All the network performance related pledges agreed to in their NOC

Any other network performance pledges agreed to that they identify during the term

of the NOC.

The Contractor may choose to improve their service delivery or network performance

through further initiatives, and assessment of this KPI recognises these as value-for-

money opportunities.

Business Rules

The Contractor must deliver on all network performance pledges they have made in

their tendered submission. If they cannot deliver or must delay delivery, they must

provide evidence of mitigating circumstances16 agreed unanimously by the Board.

The Contractor must identify all network performance pledges from their tendered

submission, agree a schedule with the Principal for when they will deliver these, and

maintain this schedule.

The Contractor must have a system to record all initiatives that improve network

performance.

The Contractor can only claim identification and implementation of value-for-money

opportunities under this KPI for value delivered that are over and above their

scheduled pledges.

If the Contractor claims under this KPI for an initiative that has added value to

network performance, they can potentially also claim it under KPI 5.3.1, if it is a

genuine innovation.


of 91




The Principal must have accepted a value for money opportunity, for the Contractor

to claim it under this KPI.

Process

At the start of the Contract, the Principal and Contractor agree a schedule of the network

performance pledges made by the Contractor in their tendered submission, including the

specific planned actions and when they will be delivered. In the reporting for each KRA

period, the Contractor demonstrates that they have delivered as scheduled and added

value on the promises made during tendering.

The Contractor also identifies and implements additional value-for-money opportunities

ongoing, and maintains records of these.

Data Required

When the schedule of network performance pledges was accepted, and by whom

Number of network performance pledges due during the KRA period

How many of the network performance pledges due were delivered

How many of the network performance pledges due were not delivered but

mitigating circumstances17 were unanimously agreed by the Board

Details of any mitigating circumstances recognised by the Board

Number of value for money opportunities identified

Number of value for money opportunities fully implemented

The details relating to those value for money opportunities, including how they

provide ongoing benefit to network performance.

Measure Score


1 No schedule agreed, or scheduled network performance pledges not delivered

Either of the following:

• No schedule has been accepted • Contractor has not delivered on network performance

pledges due within this KRA period, and has not had mitigating circumstances agreed.

2 Scheduled network performance pledges delivered

For each network performance pledge due in this KRA period, Contractor has either:

• Delivered as scheduled • Had mitigating circumstances agreed.

3 Scheduled network

performance pledges delivered and opportunities to add value identified


• Requirements for Level 2 are met • Contractor has identified four or more additional


4 Scheduled network performance pledges

delivered and opportunities to add value implemented


• Requirements for Level 3 are met

• Contractor has fully implemented three or more additional opportunities to add value for money.


of 91




KPI Measure 6.2.1 Network Availability

Intent

Contractors understand how planned events will disrupt the network’s availability, and

take appropriate action to limit the impact of that disruption.

Definition

This KPI measures the proportion of occurrences where the actual disruption for planned

events is greater than predicted.

For measuring this KPI, a “planned event” includes:

Any event that requires a traffic management plan (TMP), such as renewals

Contractor’s works

Third party works.

Business Rules

The Contractor must have a system in place to capture:

The predicted and actual disruption of each event, including when the prediction

is for no disruption

Negative media coverage and customer feedback about network availability

around planned events.

To increase the consistency of the numbers reported, events that occur at the same

site over a number of days should be treated as a single event in the context of

defining the list of events from which to take a sample. Therefore an event that

occurs over multiple days at a site should not be counted more than once in the

potential pool of events for sampling, even if the event is reported daily or weekly

within other systems.

If an event occurring over a number of days is selected for inclusion in the sample,

evidence of measurement criteria relating to disruption18, is expected to to be

assessed on a daily basis, across the full duration of the event. The daily information

for all events in the sample will need to be amalgamated so that relevant

measurement criteria can be assessed as a whole for the sample, using the following

calculation:

= Total days criteria failed in the sample x100

Total sum of days of events in the sample

The Contractor is expected to audit a sample of events (ideally at least 10%. See

Section 7.4 ‘Completing Audits to Measure Performance’ (page 28)), selected

randomly from the list of those expected to affect network availability.

18 As opposed to measurement criteria relating to media coverage or customer feedback.

of 91




The Contractor and the Principal must agree on what constitutes actual disruption

and how the Contractor will forecast this. Disruption includes situations such as

when:

Time taken to get through the work site is 15 minutes instead of the predicted

ten minutes

The work area needs speed restrictions for five days instead of the predicted

three days, etc.

It should be noted that assessment of planned vs actual disruption at major capital

work sites that are beyond the control of the NOC supplier can, with agreement of

the Contract Board, be excluded when assessing this KPI. Any negative media

coverage relating to those same sites should be noted in the KRA submission, but

should not be included when assessing the Contractor’s score.

Technology that becomes available during the Contract may influence what

information is used in the measure of disruption.

If any event was predicted to have no adverse effect on network availability, but did

have an effect, this event must also be included in the selection of events audited, in

addition to the random sampling.

Process

The Contractor records relevant planned events and their predicted disruption to network

availability when these are identified.

In each KRA period assessment, the Contractor:

Extracts data on the actual disruption for each planned event

Self-audits to compare this data to their predicted disruption.

Data Required

Number of all planned events during the period, regardless of whether any

disruption was predicted for them

Number of all planned events expected to affect network availability during the

period

Number of events audited (including any events added to the random sample as

a result of unpredicted adverse effects on network availability)

Percentage of total days within audited events where actual disruption was

greater than predicted (including any events added to the random sample as a

result of unpredicted adverse effects on network availability)

Brief description of any negative media coverage and customer feedback about

network availability during the KRA period

of 91




Measure Score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 Either of the following:

• Planned events were not audited. • Audits show that more than 20% of planned events caused greater actual disruption

than predicted.


• Audits show that more than 10% but not more than 20%, of planned events caused greater actual disruption than predicted (>10% and ≤20%)

• No negative media coverage reported about network availability during the KRA

period, as a result of the Contractor’s related action or inaction.


• Audits show that more than 5% but not more than 10% of planned events caused greater actual disruption than predicted (>5% and ≤10%)

• No negative media coverage reported about network availability during the KRA period, as a result of the Contractor’s related action or inaction.


• Audits show that 5% or less of planned events caused greater actual disruption than predicted.

• No negative media coverage reported • No justifiable negative customer feedback received about network availability during

the KRA period, as a result of the Contractor’s related action or inaction.

of 91




KPI Measure 6.2.2 Emergency Procedures Preparedness Plan


Intent

Contractors make effective, consistent use of their plan to ensure they are ready to react

to incidents on the network, and continuously improve their management of incidents by

using, auditing and reviewing the plan regularly.

Definition

This KPI measures how well the Contractor is using their Emergency Procedures

Preparedness Plan19 to define the roles, practices and procedures in preparation for, and

during, an incident response event.



Business Rules

The Contractor must have an Emergency Procedures Preparedness Plan accepted by

the Principal before the NOC commences.

The Contractor must have a system in place to track and record the outcome of

audits against their contract management plans.



Process



management system.

Data Required






period




19 Requirements for the Emergency Procedures and Preparedness Plan are covered in Section 4.2 of the NOC Maintenance Specification.

of 91




Measure Score






accurate.





2 Contractor is:



learnings.





















of 91




KPI Measure 6.2.3 Traffic Flow

Intent

Contractors take effective action to engage with the community and stakeholders on any

planned events that may have adverse effects on traffic flow. They identify and

implement mitigating measures to minimise these effects.

Definition

This KPI measures:

How the Contractor has engaged with the community and stakeholders about

planned events

What mitigations they have identified to reduce the impact on traffic flow

What mitigations they have implemented to reduce the impact on traffic flow

How effective the implemented mitigations were.

For measuring this KPI, a “planned event” includes:

Any event that requires a traffic management plan (TMP), such as renewals

Contractor’s works

Third party works

Other public events that might impact network availability, e.g. a sports event within

the network area that does not require a TMP.

Business Rules

The Contractor must have a system in place to capture the predicted and actual

disruption of each event, including when the prediction is for no disruption.

To increase the consistency of the numbers reported, events that occur at the same

site over a number of days should be treated as a single event in the context of

defining the list of events from which to take a sample. Therefore an event that

occurs over multiple days at a site should not be counted more than once in the

potential pool of events for sampling, even if the event is reported daily or weekly

within other systems.

The Contractor is expected to audit a sample of events (ideally at least 10%. See

Section 7.4 ‘Completing Audits to Measure Performance’ (page 28)), selected

randomly from the list of those expected to have an adverse effect on traffic flow.

If any event was predicted to have no adverse effect on traffic flow, but did have an

effect, this event must also be included in the selection of events audited, in addition

to the random sampling.

Process

Ongoing during the Contract, the Contractor reviews all planned events, and

records:

Whether the events are expected to impact traffic flow

Who they engaged with to inform, and when

What mitigations they identified to minimise the expected impact on traffic flow

of 91




The Contractor selects an audit sample (of ideally at least 10%) of the identified

events and, as these events take place:

Monitors the events to observe and record the actual adverse effects on traffic

flow

Considers how effective the mitigations were, in minimising impact.

If an event occurring over a number of days is selected for inclusion in the sample,

engagement with stakeholders and community, mitigations identified or

implemented and adverse effects on traffic flow must be assessed for each event as

a whole. Duration of the event does not form part of the calculation.

Data Required

Number of relevant parties engaged with

Number of planned events predicted to have an adverse effect on traffic flow

Number of mitigations identified

Number of mitigations implemented

Number of events audited

Number of planned events predicted to have an adverse effect on traffic flow and did

have an adverse effect

Number of planned events predicted to have no adverse effect on traffic flow, but

did have an adverse effect

Details of those events that had an adverse effect on traffic flow.

Measure Score

SCORE MEASUREMENTS

1 Any of the following:

• Contractor has not identified any events with adverse impact on traffic flow during the KRA period

• Contractor has not engaged with stakeholders or the community during the KRA period

• Contractor has not audited any events.

2 Audit shows the Contractor has both:

• Identified events during the KRA period with adverse impact on traffic flow • Engaged with relevant stakeholders and communities about these events.

3 Audit shows both of the following:

• Requirements for Level 2 are met.

• Contractor has identified opportunities to mitigate abnormal traffic flow for planned events.

4 Audit shows all of the following:

• Requirements for Level 3 are met. • Contractor has implemented opportunities to mitigate abnormal traffic flow for

planned events.

• The planned events had no adverse effect on traffic flow.

of 91




KRA 7: HEALTH OF THE RELATIONSHIP

Objective

The working relationship between the Principal and Contractors:

Fosters open and honest dialogue and feedback

Involves Sub-Contractors and recognises their value.

KPIs in this KRA

7.1.1 Relationship Survey

7.1.2 Integrity and Compliance of KRA System

of 91




KPI Measure 7.1.1 Relationship Survey

Intent

Survey results show that the relationship between the parties is healthy, and the parties

are collaborating effectively.

Definition

This KPI monitors the general health of the relationship between participating parties

(including Sub-Contractors) in the context of this Contract, and the opportunities they

are taking to improve the level of collaboration.

Business Rule

The results of evaluating this KPI are not shown as a score. It is excluded when

calculating the Contractor’s performance level for KRA period and annual

assessments.

The Principal uses the results of this survey in ranking Contractors with equal

results, to produce a leaderboard.

Process

Every six months, NZTA’s Contract Management Team carries out a Network Outcomes

Contract Relationship Survey of all parties to each Contract, then presents the results to

the Contract Board.

The Contract Board then:

Assesses the results to identify opportunities to improve relationships between the

Parties

Engages with the Contractor (and Sub-Contractors, as relevant) to work jointly

toward achieving improvements.

Data Required

Outputs from survey

of 91




KPI Measure 7.1.2 Integrity and Compliance of KRA System

Intent

Audit results show that the KRA Framework’s system has integrity, and is fit for its

purpose, i.e. Contractors are achieving good compliance.

Definition

This KPI evaluates whether the Principal’s audits of KRA assessments results show that

the KRA performance management system demonstrates integrity and compliance.

Business Rule

The results of evaluating this KPI are not shown as a score. It is excluded when

calculating the Contractor’s performance level for KRA period and annual assessments.

Process

The Principal undertakes an annual audit of the KRA system as required, to confirm that

KRA assessment results continue to be effectively measured under this framework. The

Principal uses the audit results to:

Assess whether the KRA system continues to be fit for its purpose

Identify and implement a timely resolution for any problems with the system

Identify and implement any opportunities for improvement in the system.

Data Required

All KRA assessment results at and since the last evaluation

of 91




Appendices

Appendix 1: Performance Assessment Timetable

The timetable outlined in the table below applies to each KRA year.

ACTION RESPONSIBILITY DATE – PERIOD 1

DATE – PERIOD 2

DATE – PERIOD 3

Assessment period ends (Not applicable) 31 October 28 February 30 June

Prepare NOC performance report

Contract

Management Team

Before board meeting

Before

board meeting

Before board meeting

Meet to consider NOC performance report

Maintenance Contract Manager

1 – 30 November

1 – 31 March

1 – 31 July

Contract Management Board consider and endorse NOC performance report, and send to Performance & Planning

Team

Maintenance Contract Manager

By 1 December

By 1 April By 1 August

Meet for moderation session to consider consolidated KRA results and recommend final scores.

Planning & Performance Team

1 – 31 December

1 – 30 April 1 –31 August

Present consolidated

performance report and CB recommendations to the relevant approver, for consideration

Planning & Performance Team

(Not

applicable)

(Not

applicable)

By mid –

September

Inform MCMs of outcomes Planning & Performance Team

By 31 January

By 30 May 30

September

Publish performance assessment results externally

Planning & Performance

Team

(Not applicable)

(Not applicable)

By 30 November

of 91

Version 4.2, November

2017



Appendix 2: Reporting Template

NZTA provides a spreadsheet template for Contractors to complete in Microsoft Excel, in the format below. (See Section 4.3 ‘Reporting

Templates’ for more details, and Section 7.5 ‘KPIs that Measure Performance of Plans’ for an exception.)

NB: Tempate versions are validated, and out of date templates cannot be uploaded. To prevent rework, please contact

[email protected] to obtain the current admissible template version.

KRA KPIMeasurement

#Description Measurement Value Score Comment

1Health and Safety

1 1.1.1 Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate

1 1.1.1 1 Total work hours completed during the last 12 months

1 1.1.1 2 Fatal injuries in last 12 months (FI)

1 1.1.1 3 Notifiable injuries in last 12 months (SH)

1 1.1.1 4 Lost time injuries in last 12 months (LTI)

1 1.1.1 5 Medical treatment injuries in last 12 months (MTI)

1 1.1.1 6 Employees on restricted work duties in last 12 months (RWI)

1 1.1.1 7 Total recordable injury Frequency Rate (TRIFR) #DIV/0!

1 1.1.1 8 Has the score above been adjusted with agreement of the board. (If yes please

provide details in the comment field)

No

mailto:[email protected]

of 91

Version 4.2, November

2017



Appendix 3: Scoring Template

NZTA provides a spreadsheet template in Microsoft Excel, in the below format, for the Contractor to calculate their self-assessed KRA

levels for each assessment period and annually, and the annual result. (See Section 4.3 ‘Reporting Templates’ for more details.)

2017/18 KRA Assessment KRA Score Rating Score Rating Score Rating

KRA KRA Description KPI Measure Description Oct Feb Jun 1

1 Health and Safety 1.1.1 Total Recordable Injury Frequency Rate 2

1.1.2 Health and Safety Management Plan 3

1.2.1 Traffic Control Plan 4

2 Road User Safety 2.1.1 Crash Trend 5

2.1.2 Loss of Control in Darkness 6

2.1.3 Network Safety Trend Report Overall

3 Customer 3.1.1 Customer and Stakeholder Communications Management Plan

3.1.2 Communication of Impact of Events

3.1.3 Customer Satisfaction KRA Score Rating

3.2.1 Ability to Respond to Customers 1

4 Sustainability 4.1.1 Environmental Triangle 2

4.1.7 Environmental and Sustainability Management Plan 3

4.2.1 Healthy Market Pledges 4

5 Assurance and Value 5.1.1 Quality Management Plan 5

5.2.1 Maintenance Management Plan 6

5.3.1 Innovation

6 Network Performance 6.1.1 Overall OPM Score

6.1.2 Compliance with Monthly Programme of Work

6.1.3 Network Performance Tender Pledges

6.2.1 Network Availability

6.2.2 Emergency Planning and Preparedness Plan

6.2.3 Traffic Flow

Oct Feb Jun

Annual KRAs

Annual Performance Assessment

Score Rating

NOC Input

value management proposition - land transport new zealand · page 4 of 91 version 4.2, november...

Documents