Chapter 4 Effective management
The OC contracts seek "to encourage innovation and skilful management to maximise trunk road capacity and gain the best use of the network"
Key points
Effective management - financial
The OCs' financial management is monitored by PAG. PAG looks at the amount spent by the OCs and works contractors and compares this to the Department's budget. PAG also looks at the OCs' expenditure profiles to gauge how finances are being managed.
- The total value of work done in 2004/05 was £161.9m, a 30% increase on 2003/04.
- The CCMS in each of the OCs has remained stable, providing a basic level of control and an improving level of information.
- The overall balance between spend and budget was good, however this comprised a mix of overspends in NE and SW and underspends in NW and SE.
- Prompt rebidding and reordering is required to improve the alignment between order and spend.
- The bids/orders process between the OCs and the Department was working well in practice, with effective controls and good communication.
Effective management - technical
Effective management by the OCs ensures a good level of service to road users and delivery of work to specification.
- Structural maintenance operations were carried out well across the network.
- Site supervision and workmanship on works contracts was generally good in all Units.
- The OCs largely fulfilled their winter maintenance obligations. The difference in weather across the network was reflected in the increase in precautionary salt spread in NE and NW compared with 2003/04. By comparison, less precautionary salt was spread in SE and SW this year.
- BEAR's and Amey's RMMSs continued to be compliant and operational. Amey reacted effectively to its default notice for failure to carry out all its detailed inspections.
- Throughout the year the OCs responded professionally to emergencies and hazard notices. BEAR deserves particular praise for its response to the major landslips in NW.
Effective management - quality
The OCs are obliged to maintain records that demonstrate their compliance with the contract. All of the activities by the OCs under the contracts are therefore covered by their QMSs.
- BEAR is making steady progress towards registration of its QMS to BSENISO 9001.
- Amey has strengthened its quality management team and made further improvements to its registered QMS.
- Both OCs have well documented EMSs, but they had not reviewed and revised environmental targets for some time.
- The number of default notices issued this year has reduced.
4.1 Financial
Figure 32 compares the make-up of the total value of work done on the network for the financial year 2004/05 (after adjusting for amounts omitted from payment) with the corresponding amounts for 2003/04.
The highlights are as follows:
- The total value of work done in 2004/05 of £161.9m was significantly higher than that for 2003/04 of £124.5m.
- Excluding contract price fluctuation ( CPF) of £11.8m, the value of work done of £150.1m for 2004/05 was almost the same as the budget of £150.2m.
Figure 32Comparison of work done year on year
| 2004/05 | 2003/04 |
|---|
| OC £m | Works contracts £m | Total £m | OC £m | Works contracts £m | Total £m |
|---|
NE | 21.4 | 15.8 | 37.2 | 14.0 | 8.5 | 22.5 |
|---|
NW | 23.2 | 11.0 | 34.2 | 17.1 | 10.2 | 27.3 |
|---|
BEAR total | 44.6 | 26.8 | 71.4 | 31.1 | 18.7 | 49.8 |
|---|
SE | 18.1 | 20.7 | 38.8 | 17.9 | 8.8 | 26.7 |
|---|
SW | 34.2 | 17.5 | 51.7 | 33.6 | 14.4 | 48.0 |
|---|
Amey total | 52.3 | 38.2 | 90.5 | 51.5 | 23.2 | 74.7 |
|---|
Network total | 96.9 | 65.0 | 161.9 | 82.6 | 41.9 | 124.5 |
|---|
% | 60 | 40 | 100 | 66 | 34 | 100 |
|---|
- BEAR contributed £13.5m of the increase in total value of work done by OCs of £14.3m.
- 40% or £65.0m of total value of work done for 2004/05 was attributable to works contractors (2003/04 - 34% £41.9m).
- NE £7.3m and SE £11.9m were responsible for most of the increase in works contractors of £23.1m.
- There was an increase in CPF (included in total value of work done by OCs) from £7.3m in 2003/04 to £11.8m in 2004/05.
- The CPF increase reflects further year on year inflation adjustments on rates and prices tendered by OCs, prior to the commencement of the contract.
4.1.1 Contract control and management systems ( CCMS)
CCMS
The CCMS is a computer based system for financial management and project control. The system allows PAG and the Department remote access to the OCs' information.
It was noted in last year's report that while each of the OCs had a fully operational CCMS, there was still a need for them to improve compliance on some controls and procedures to maximise their systems' effectiveness.
2004/05 has seen further improvement and those areas that have continued to give problems are being addressed by the OCs. The specific issues relating to BEAR and Amey were:
BEAR
- Apart from some minor high level differences, the CCMSs for both NE and NW have remained stable during the year. These differences are currently being investigated by the OCs.
- Controls for preventing spend exceeding amounts ordered have been successfully introduced to the CCMSs in NE and NW.
- Despite revision of their procedures, NE and NW continued to experience problems throughout the year with scheme completion and, more recently, the authorisation of costs. The OCs have again reviewed their procedures in an attempt to improve their performance in these areas.
- While some training has been given by BEAR to PAG, the Department has not found it necessary to request any further training during the year. A meeting involving BEAR, the Department and PAG has been arranged to review any outstanding CCMS issues, including training requirements.
Amey
- Regular CCMS progress/user group meetings, involving Amey, the Department and PAG have continued throughout the year. These have helped to address problems as they arise and introduce improvements to the system.
- The areas of procedural weakness identified last year in scheme completion and authorisation of costs ( SE only) have continued to give concern, although the latter has become more of a historical problem. It has now been established that the main reason for the scheme completion difficulties is one of a technical nature in the way the CCMS operates. A solution to overcome the problem has now been agreed with the Department.
- Amey continues to provide adequate training to its staff as well as the Department and PAG.
- The 'user-friendly' reports introduced to the CCMS last year have now been made available to the Department and PAG.
Summary
The CCMS in each of the OCs have remained stable during the year, providing a basic level of control and an improving standard of information.
The development of procedures and tightening of controls have led to a general improvement in the OCs' financial management since last year. Reporting of scheme completion, however, is an area which continues to be a problem in all OCs and is being addressed.
4.1.2 Budgets, orders and spends
Financial management and monitoring process
The Department works closely with the OCs in the financial management and monitoring process required under the contract. It sets the budgets and agrees the 1-year and 3-year programmes with OCs and is assisted by PAG in the monitoring of budgets/orders/spends throughout the year. The relationship of the different stages in the process is set out in figure 33.
Figure 33Financial monitoring process
Budget v spend
Budgets are allocated to the OCs, excluding CPF. Therefore, to give a like for like comparison with the value of work done, in this section, operations carried out by the OCs are also shown net of CPF. This together with work carried out by the works contractors is referred to as 'spend'.
Figure 34 shows budget variance for the years 2004/05 and 2003/04.
Figure 34Budget variance
| 2004/05 £m | 2003/04 £m |
|---|
Total value of work done | 161.9 | 124.5 |
|---|
Less CPF | 11.8 | 7.3 |
|---|
Spend | 150.1 | 117.2 |
|---|
Budget | 150.2 | 123.4 |
|---|
(Under)/over spend | (0.1) | (6.2) |
|---|
Spend/budget % | 99.9 | 95.0 |
|---|
Overall balance between spend and budget was good. However this comprised a mix of overspends ( NE and SW) and underspends ( NW and SE), see figure 35. Nonetheless, all the OCs again performed well in programming works to utilise the additional significant budget allocations made available to them in the latter part of the financial year.
Figure 35Budget v spend in 2004/05
This additional funding was made available by the Department in order to reduce the backlog of needs-based work which has been identified by the Department and the OCs. Whilst all of the work was, therefore, necessary and appropriate, the Department would receive a better guarantee of value for money and programme efficiency if these additional resources were made available earlier in the financial year.
Further details are as follows:
BEAR
- The overspend against budget in NE of £3.6m mostly related to structural maintenance roads, where the main schemes were reconstruction on A90 Westport to Muchalls, M90/A95 Balmanno to Glenfarg and and A90 Starr Farm to Longforgan. By comparison, the underspend in NW of £4.5m was spread across all of the budget categories.
Amey
- In SE there was an underspend against budget of £3.0m. As in NE, this was mostly attributable to structural maintenance roads. The overspend of £3.8m in SW was primarily related to work carried out by works contractors on routine/structural bridges where the main schemes were: A898 Erskine Bridge refurbishment, M74 Raith bridge box strengthening and A78 Inverkip Street railway bridge replacement.
Expenditure profiles
The contractual requirement to produce expenditure profiles for the financial year and update them on a monthly basis is designed to promote effective financial management of the OCs' business. 2004/05 has seen further improvement by all the OCs in producing their profiles, although much of the information is not being directly produced from the CCMS.
BEAR
- An internal review of its procedures in the early part of the year resulted in NW having a much more reliable expenditure profile during the year. Nevertheless, updating the profile for actual expenditure and ensuring that budget headings were fully profiled were areas that had to be addressed during the year.
- NE's expenditure profile continued to meet the requirements of the Department. This, however, included additional spend on schemes, over and above the budget, in anticipation of a further budget allocation later in the year.
Amey
- The problems identified in last year's report with the accuracy and late submission of SW's expenditure profile, were successfully resolved.
- Apart from some minor problems in updating the profile for actual expenditure and profiling the additional budget allocation later in the year, the profiles in SE and SW worked satisfactorily.
- Development work by Amey is underway to allow more of the expenditure profile information to be produced directly from the CCMS.
Orders, operations instructions and spend
As can be seen from figure 31, for work to be carried out on the network it has to be bid, ordered and instructed. The method of doing this varies:
- For operations carried out by OCs - The Department orders the work as necessary in response to bids submitted by the OCs. The OCs then issue operations instructions ( OIs) to instruct the work to proceed. On completion of the work, the costs are collated by the OCs and charges are raised through their monthly statements.
- For work carried out by works contractors - This is bid by the OC, but instructed under another mechanism based on programmes agreed with the Department. The work is certified in stages by the OC, acting as engineer, and is invoiced directly to the Department by the works contractors.
Operations instructions
To give some context it should be noted that the OCs dealt with about 35,000 OIs in 2004/05. In last year's report, reference was made to the OI process audits carried out by PAG during 2003/04. Following these audits, the OCs undertook a revision of their financial procedures. Follow-up audits were carried out by PAG in each of the OCs during September and October 2004.
BEAR
- In NW, apart from its electrical department and one of its depots, the revised procedures had been successfully rolled out. Subsequent audits have confirmed that this has now been completed and improvements in the OI process have been evident.
- At the time of the follow-up audit, it was found that the revised procedures in NE had still to be implemented. A further audit has been arranged to assess the extent to which this has been achieved.
Amey
- Improvements were noted in SW, and to a lesser extent in SE, following the introduction of measures suggested at the previous audits. It was also noted that Amey staff had given a clear commitment to the successful implementation of the revised procedures.
- It was therefore disappointing an audit carried out in SW in early 2005 revealed standards in the processing of OIs had slipped. Amey is currently reviewing its procedures as a result.
Orders v spend ( OCs only)
The comparison of spend (work done less CPF) against amounts ordered relates only to operations carried out by the OCs and their sub-contractors. Spend relating to work carried out by works contractors is not ordered and is therefore not included in the comparison.
Spend in 2004/05, for this purpose, has therefore been reduced to £85.1m ( OC -£96.9m less CPF of £11.8m). This is £13.1m (13%) less than the amount ordered by the Department of £98.2m.
As can be seen from figure 36, although all of the OCs have contributed to the shortfall, £10.6m was attributable to BEAR. As in 2003/04, NW was the largest contributor at £6.9m - 25% (2003/04 - 29%), with SW being the lowest at only £0.5m - 2% (2003/04 - 9%).
Figure 36Order v spend in 2004/05
In previous years the shortfall tended to disguise instances of where spend on certain schemes exceeded the corresponding amount ordered. This has been largely eliminated since the OCs introduced further controls in their CCMSs.
Despite further promptings from the Department and PAG during the year, NE, NW and to a lesser extent SE, still had some difficulty with re-bidding schemes where the spend is significantly different from the amount ordered.
Comparison with budget v spend
Figure 37Comparison of budget v spend
Figure 37 shows that although spend ( OCs and works contractors) for the network as a whole of £150.1m is almost 100% of the budget of £150.2m, that part of the spend attributable to the OCs, i.e. £85.1m represents just 87% of the amounts ordered of £98.2m ( OCs only, as works contractors are not ordered).
As in previous years, figures 38 and 39 demonstrate, separately for BEAR and Amey, the disparity between the budget v spend and order v spend comparisons in 2004/05.
Figure 38Comparison of budget v total spend against order v OC spend for BEAR in 2004/05
Figure 39Comparison of budget v total spend against order v OC spend for Amey in 2004/05
The difference is more noticeable in BEAR, where the spend of £39.1m was only 79% of the amounts ordered of £49.7m. This compared with 95% in Amey, where the spend was £46.0m against amounts ordered of £48.5m.
Had the CCMS been fully used to manage budgets in accordance with the contract, it is likely these percentages would have been much closer to each other.
While it is acceptable for operational reasons, e.g. allow for variations on site, to order work slightly in excess of anticipated spend, it is necessary in exercising good budget management for the OCs to re-bid work as soon as they are aware of any likely variation in final costs. With prompt rebidding by the OCs and reordering by the Department, it is likely that orders will be more closely aligned to the corresponding amount of spend, as was the case in SW in 2004/05.
A bids/orders process audit was carried out in each of the OCs during the year to identify any procedural weaknesses in this area. The outcome of these audits is discussed more fully in section 4.1.3. The Department and PAG are continuing to liaise with BEAR to seek further improvement in 2005/06.
4.1.3 The bids/orders process
Bids/orders process
The bids/orders process is a fundamental link between planning operations and carrying them out on the network. It is important for the delivery of a robust financial cycle that this area works effectively. Almost £100m was ordered by the Department through this process in 2004/05.
Background
The process audits referred to in section 4.1.2 examined the effectiveness of the key controls in the bids/orders process in both the Department and the OCs, for each of the Units. The areas in which the controls applied were:
OCs
- Generating and cancelling bids.
- Receipt of orders.
- Issue of further detailed enquiries ( FDEs) related to orders.
- Receipt of further detailed directions ( FDDs) related to orders.
- Financial management of orders.
The Department
- Receipt and review of bids.
- Valuation and issue of orders.
- Receipt of FDEs related to orders.
- Issue of FDDs related to orders.
Comments
The main points highlighted in the audits were:
- Although working well in practice, the processes being followed by the OCs and the Department were not always reflected in their procedures. Both parties committed themselves to revising their procedures where necessary.
- Generally controls were seen to be effective. This was particularly noticeable in the receipt and review of bids in the Department.
- Problems with the re-bidding of operations, as soon as the OC is aware of any variation in final costs. This has been giving problems in the financial management of orders since the beginning of the contracts.
However, Amey's performance improved during the year. It is likely this was aided by the OCs introducing protocols, as agreed at the audit.
BEAR has not always found it practical to exercise the requirements of the contract in this area of its operations and, following the audit, proposed a draft relaxation protocol in consultation with the Department. A meeting is being arranged for the Department, BEAR and PAG to consider this proposal.
- There was good communication between the OCs and the Department. The Department was given a wide range of information by the OCs to enable it to review bids, prior to issuing orders.
- While administration of FDEs and FDDs was comprehensive, their usage extended beyond that intended by the contract. Nevertheless, the Department and the OCs were content this assisted them with the audit trail for tracking the progress of an order.
- There is a timetable set out in the contract for the authorisation of variations on site by the OCs. Although this was rarely adhered to, the Department accepted it was being updated by the OCs, as soon as possible.
Feedback from the OCs and the Department regarding the audits was positive, as they drew attention to examples of good practice, as well as areas that required further attention.
4.2 Technical
4.2.1 Reports by the OCs
The OCs are required to deliver monthly reports on many aspects of their activities. In addition, they are also required to produce weekly programmes of intent ( WPI) which detail proposed and current works on the network and any traffic restrictions. These WPIs should also confirm information recorded by the OCs in the NADICS roadworks diary facility. The WPIs are circulated to the Department, PAG and other interested parties such as local authorities, police, media, and transport organisations.
Monthly reports
The OCs showed good performance in delivering reports:
- As can be seen from figure 40 all the OCs produced their required number of monthly reports covering March 2004 to February 2005.
- The previous year's improvement by Amey and BEAR has been maintained, with all of the monthly reports delivered on time.
Figure 40OCs' delivery of monthly reports
WPIs
There was also good performance by the OCs in this area:
- WPIs should be delivered by noon each Thursday. The OCs maintained the previous year's improvements in delivering the WPIs on time.
- Regular updates were also received by the Department, PAG, and other interested parties as required by the contract.
- The OCs are also required to report the actual works and restrictions which were on the network. Amey produced all 53 required retrospective reports for SE and SW. BEAR delivered 52 out of 53 retrospective reports in NE and 48 out of 53 in NW. These results represent an improvement over the previous year for all except NE, which remained the same.
- The NADICS roadworks diary facility should be updated daily by the OCs. This information is then made available to the travelling public using the media and NADICS website. It is therefore important that this information is accurate and up to date. PAG monitors the accuracy of the roadworks diary facility and raises ORIs where there are discrepancies. Over the past year 14 observations resulting from inspections ( ORIs) have been issued to NE for NADICS roadworks diary issues, one each to NW and SE, and two issued to SW. Figure 41 shows the number of ORIs issued relating to NADICS roadworks diary queries over the period of the Contract. PAG will seek improvement in NE in the coming year.
Figure 41ORIs issued for NADICS roadworks diary queries
4.2.2 Structural maintenance
Structural maintenance operations
Structural maintenance operations are carried out on both roads and bridges. Roads maintenance typically comprises areas of overlay, carriageway reconstruction, resurfacing, machine laid patching, surface dressing, anti-skid, specialist concrete carriageway repairs, road markings and studs. Bridges maintenance includes joint replacement, parapet replacement, bearing refurbishment and water proofing.
These operations are valued at less than £150,000 per scheme and carried out by the OCs. The OCs are paid on the basis of the tendered rates and prices with adjustments for inflation ( CPF).
Comments on use of sub-contractors and performance issues relating to structural maintenance operations by the OCs are given below.
Procurement
BEAR
- The majority of structural maintenance operations in NE were carried out by BEAR, with specialist sub-contractors undertaking bridge works and landscaping works.
- In NW, the work was shared between BEAR and its sub-contractors, as in previous years.
Amey
- Work in SE and SW was undertaken by Amey and its sub-contractors. Typical work by Amey included traffic management, safety fence work, drainage and signs. Machine laid patching, road markings, bridge waterproofing and bridge joints were generally sub-contracted.
Workmanship
BEAR
- A good level of workmanship was sustained in NE.
- In NW, workmanship was broadly satisfactory and improved from last year. There were a number of issues with the performance of one sub-contractor, which BEAR successfully resolved.
Amey
- In SE, the standard of workmanship was good.
- Overall, workmanship in SW was good
Supervision
BEAR
- Early in the year, concerns were raised in NE regarding the inadequacy of supervision levels leading to poor performance. BEAR made a concerted effort to improve the levels of supervision, with training and extra resources. This was successful, with a continuing trend of improved supervision and quality of workmanship. This should also reduce the future need for remedial works.
- Supervision levels in NW have improved from last year. However, there was still too much reliance by BEAR on sub-contractors supervising their own works.
Amey
- In SE, the standard of supervision continued to improve. There were still occasions when defects were being identified that should have been prevented by satisfactory levels of supervision.
- In SW, the supervision of sub-contractors was of a good standard. Amey representatives were frequently seen on site.
Completion of works and records
BEAR
- In NE, there was a significant improvement in record keeping in 2004/05, although there are still some minor issues to resolve. There were also some delays to the replacement of road markings and studs. This led to PAG issuing ORIs.
- BEAR instigated a procedure in NW to improve record collection, which improved performance. There were some delays in the completion of road markings and studs after carriageway patching. Some repairs to vehicle safety fences were late and many potholes tended to have numerous temporary repairs prior to a permanent repair. These areas of concern were highlighted through ORIs and the NEI process. They will be closely monitored by the Department and PAG in the coming year.
Amey
- Amey completed works satisfactorily in SE. However, works often took longer than originally programmed. Record keeping has improved to a good standard.
- Works were completed satisfactorily in SW. Record keeping was good, with information available on site for PAG's review. There were limited occasions when overnight resurfacing works overran, causing major traffic delays on busy parts of the Unit. This problem was addressed by Amey, with the successful implementation of new management procedures.
4.2.3 Works contracts
The delivery of works contracts to programme and budget is important in providing a good service to road users. This represents a significant investment in maintaining the condition of the network (see also section 3.3). The OCs have a direct impact on the process prior to the work going out on site, through the quality of their design of the works and their tender documentation. Once on site, the OCs' supervision of the activities provides assistance in completing the work to the required specification and to the programme.
As can be seen from figure 42, the majority of works contracts are for the structural maintenance of roads and minor improvement schemes. Other works contracts can also cover specialist work, such as bridge maintenance and safety fence renewal.
Figure 42Proportion of tender documents received in 2004/05 for different types of works contract
A detailed value for money study into works contracts is contained in section 3.3 of this report.
Tender documents
Part of PAG's role is to review and comment on a percentage of the tender documentation for works contracts produced by the OCs. PAG has a KPI to review at least 25% of all tender documents received during the year. The OCs produced 64 sets of tender documents in 2004/05 of which 19 (30%) were reviewed. This level of review is broadly comparable with last year. The details on the number of documents received and reviewed for each OC are given in figure 43.
Figure 43Draft tender documents reviewed by PAG in 2004/05 (target 25%)
PAG's sample review covers:
- Whether documents meet contract standards.
- Consistency of approach across the network.
- Identifying serious omissions or errors.
BEAR
There was a balanced distribution of tender document production between the first and second halves of the year in NE and NW.
Amey
In SE and SW, 66% of tenders were issued in the second half of 2004/05. This is related to an increased budget being made available by the Department. By comparison, in NE and NW the increased budget was absorbed by increasing the scope of planned schemes.
Execution of works contracts
Figure 44 provides a comparison by OC on the number of contracts awarded and completed during the course of 2004/05. However, not all contracts awarded were programmed for completion by the end of the year.
Figure 44Progress of works contracts in 2004/05
BEAR
- In NE, works contracts sites were well resourced and there was realistic programming of contracts, which assisted delivery.
- Two contracts let in NW for bilingual signing had problems with workmanship, supervision and programming. A more detailed assessment of contractors applying to tender for this type of work will be applied in the future to prevent a recurrence of the problems experienced. There were delays on the A828 Creagan to Invernahyle maintenance scheme contract due to problems with a service diversion which was outside BEAR's control. The other works contracts were completed satisfactorily.
Amey
- In SE, out of the 11 contracts tendered and completed, eight were carried out on a lane rental basis, helping to minimise delays to traffic. A works contract for reconstruction work on M80, which started this year, was delayed due to unforeseen drainage problems that were outside Amey's control. The contract will be completed in 2005/06.
- The execution of the works contracts was successful in SW, with schemes being completed to programme.
Figure 45Surfacing works on A90 at Laurencekirk in NE
Supervision and workmanship
BEAR
- A good level of supervision by BEAR was noted in NE. PAG's inspections indicated site diaries and records were being updated as appropriate. In general, there was good workmanship on these works contracts.
- In NW, BEAR's site supervision continued at a satisfactory level. Workmanship was to a consistently good standard, with the exception of the bilingual signing contracts.
Amey
- In SE, the site supervision of works contracts by Amey improved and was generally good. Amey provided more site inspectors to oversee and supervise the works. Workmanship was within specification, having a better standard of finish and supervision on single carriageway routes.
- In SW, site supervision on works contracts sites continued to be of a high standard, with a strong emphasis on health and safety issues. Amey representatives were seen on site on a regular basis in a supervisory role. Overall workmanship was good with any minor defects being dealt with through remedial works.
4.2.4 Investigation and prevention of accidents
Accident investigation and prevention ( AIP)
The OCs help the Department by monitoring trunk road safety. The information is then used to identify sites and routes across the network that would benefit from AIP schemes.
AIP can include:
- New signing and road markings.
- Anti-skid treatments.
- Traffic signals including pedestrian crossings.
- Traffic calming measures.
- Speed limit reductions.
- Route accident reduction plans.
Identifying AIP schemes
Accident data is analysed using a moving cursor programme ( MCP) provided by the Department. The OCs use the programme to assess accident clusters for possible common causes. This enables the OCs to identify sites and prioritise suitable AIP schemes.
BEAR
- In NE, 29 road safety studies were identified from the MCP. BEAR subsequently took forward these investigations, with a large proportion relating to junctions on A92 and A985. A further 24 additional AIP studies were instructed by the Department during the year.
Figure 46Village gateway AIP work completed on A9 Golspie in NW
- BEAR's AIP team in NW carried out a similar number of studies from the MCP, together with 47 individual studies instructed by the Department. Village gateway works were completed at a number of locations on A9 and A99 (see figure 46).
Amey
- In SE, Amey has a dedicated resource which successfully completed the reporting of all 27 schemes identified in its programme. 26 AIP schemes were constructed in SE in 2004/05. This included a number of schemes identified from last year's programme. A further eight additional studies were instructed by the Department during the year with five of these being constructed. 14 schemes reported in 2004/05 are programmed for construction in 2005/06.
- In addition, Amey in SE developed a new AIP methodology review to overcome the limitations of the existing MCP, which only considers accident cluster sites. This new approach identifies similar accident types occurring throughout a route and, with the support of the Department, has now been adopted by all four OCs.
- The Scottish trunk road remedial treatment monitoring database ( STRUM) initiative was also developed by Amey in SE. It offers a system which will monitor the effectiveness of schemes in terms of statistical significance, accident and financial savings. Implementation of this database in 2005/06 will enable development of a reference guide containing expected accident reductions on the network due to proposed AIP measures.
- Amey investigated 31 sites in SW following analysis of the MCP, with 11 sites being identified for accident reduction measures. A number of schemes are programmed for completion early in 2005/06. Amey is closely involved in the A77 safety group, established by the Department to focus on road safety issues affecting communities and road users on A77 between Ayr and Stranraer in SW. The group includes the Department, local police forces, and local authorities. Amey carried out an in-depth review of the route characteristics and accident trends. Measures identified include trials of high PSV surfacing at a site and a point to point safety camera system.
4.2.5 Minor improvement schemes
The OCs are responsible for the investigation, design and supervision of minor improvement schemes, with the construction being carried out by works contractors. Land purchase, other statutory procedures, and consultation with the public, local authorities, community councils, statutory undertakers, and other interested parties, which are outwith the control of the OCs, can affect the delivery of minor improvement schemes.
BEAR
- In NE, two junction improvement schemes, A90 at Durris and Maryculter and a watercourse realignment/embankment stabilisation scheme on A96, were completed during 2004/05. The construction of a further three schemes is ongoing, with completion expected early in 2005/06. In addition, the investigation and design of a number of schemes were progressed by the OC. This included A90 Hatton Bends scheme, a major off-line realignment anticipated to start on site in 2005/06.
- In NW, a number of schemes were delayed pending completion of statutory procedures for land purchase. This contributed to a significant underspend of the minor improvements budget. Schemes that were completed included bend improvements, and strategic and bilingual signing. A further bilingual signing scheme is ongoing at this time.
Amey
- Amey's minor improvement programme in SE comprised the construction of nine schemes including safety barrier installation, junction improvements, and installing village gateways. As planned, six of the nine schemes were completed within 2004/05, with the remainder to be completed early in 2005/06. Amey also progressed the design of a number of other minor improvement schemes which are programmed for construction in 2005/06.
- In SW, scheme investigations and designs were progressed, including a number of junction improvements. In total, eight schemes were constructed, including the next phases of the gantry refurbishment and high mast lighting replacement schemes on the motorway network. Figure 47 shows an improvement scheme on A78. A number of schemes on the original programme are pending completion of statutory procedures and further investigations.
Figure 47Cloch Road Roundabout complete on A78 in SW
4.2.6 Materials and workmanship testing
Materials and workmanship testing form part of the contract. PAG audited and observed the OCs' activities to verify compliance with their responsibilities.
Defined testing was carried out by the OCs' suppliers under the relevant Sector Scheme, where certificated bituminous materials suppliers operate to quality criteria.
PAG audited works contract testing documentation across the OCs. Records were comprehensive and all expected registers and testing requirements information were found to be satisfactory. In general, good workmanship was observed on works contracts.
Workmanship on operations with a value of less than £150,000 was generally good throughout the four OCs, although materials testing varied slightly.
BEAR
- In NE, testing on operations had improved and complied with the contract. However, PAG audits identified that these testing records were sometimes missing or incomplete. BEAR is addressing this.
- PAG audits in NW identified a lack of records to confirm if requirements for testing were being met. BEAR is introducing 'gang packs' to inform operatives and to prevent recurrence of this problem.
Amey
- In SE, schemes audited by PAG identified a significant improvement in record keeping for materials testing. Test failures identified were addressed by Amey.
- Deficiencies identified by previous PAG audits in SW were successfully addressed by Amey, who had put in place new systems and management. These addressed the findings previously raised regarding testing requirements and record keeping.
4.2.7 Winter maintenance
As in previous years, the OCs' winter maintenance activities generated wide public, media and political interest. This included discussion at a session of the parliamentary Local Government and Transport Committee in March 2005, where senior representatives from the Department and the OCs answered detailed questions on a range of winter-related matters, among other issues.
Reflecting the importance of this topic, PAG's audit strategy contained a series of audits examining the OCs' compliance with their winter maintenance obligations. The eight audits confirmed all four OCs had largely fulfilled their contractual obligations.
Winter treatment
The contractual winter maintenance period runs from 1 October to 15 May. The prime winter maintenance activities carried out by the OCs are precautionary and reactive salting and snow ploughing.
Weather conditions
The 2004/05 winter had two distinct halves. The first period up to the turn of the year was relatively mild, although there was a cold spell in mid to late December. The second period was considerably colder, with significant snow falls across NE and NW, see figure 48. There was also localised heavy snow in SE west of Edinburgh in early March 2005.
Figure 48BEAR gritter ploughing on 18 January 2005 on A82 near Bridge of Orchy in NW
Road closures
A north-south divide was reflected by road closures. All four of the 2004/05 winter road closures were in the north, with three in NW and one in NE. Figure 49 gives details of winter-related major incident road closures.
Figure 49Number of winter-related major incident road closures over the last four years
Winter period | No. of road closures |
|---|
2004/05 | 4 |
|---|
2003/04 | 11 |
|---|
2002/03 | 4 |
|---|
2001/02 | 4 |
|---|
Precautionary salting
As identified in section 3.2, compared with last year there was an increase in precautionary salt spread in NE and NW, with a reduction across SE and SW. In addition, across all four Units, there were less 10g/m 2 actions and more 20g/m 2 actions compared with the previous winter. This is shown in figure 50. This may be as a result of an increase in marginal conditions, together with an increase of longer periods of snow, primarily in the north.
Figure 50Precautionary salting actions over period 1 October to 31 March for winters 2003/2004 and 2004/2005
The move from less 10g/m 2 actions to more 20g/m 2 actions is much more pronounced in NE and NW than in SE and SW.
Overall, the 2004/05 winter was less onerous for SE and SW than the previous winter, with less salting actions implemented and a lower tonnage of salt spread. BEAR on the other hand, implemented a higher number of actions with heavier spread rates which in turn led to more salt used than last winter.
Winter conditions are shown in figure 51.
Figure 51Conditions on the morning of 23 February 2005 on the southern end of M90 in NE
PAG audits and investigations into winter operations
During 2004/05, PAG undertook detailed investigations into two aspects of winter maintenance. The outcomes of these investigations are summarised below:
Winter maintenance audits
There were a total of eight compliance audits across all four OCs. Two areas of winter activities were audited. Firstly, gritter calibration, salt certification, data logger downloading and operation training records were reviewed. Secondly, the logic and integrity of decision making related to specific events were retrospectively examined. Issues identified in the decision-making audits prompted follow-up meetings between the Department, the OCs and PAG, analysing the logic on which these decisions were made. This deeper scrutiny will continue with the activity audits PAG will use in its 2005/06 winter investigations.
The winter audits confirmed the OCs had largely fulfilled their contract obligations.
Value for money - salt usage
The VFM exercise reviewed the amount and location of salt spread across the network. Full details of this study are contained in section 3.2.
Summary
PAG's investigations into the 2004/05 winter identified a larger north/south divide in precautionary salting than the previous winter. Amey in SE and SW experienced less onerous conditions than BEAR in NE and NW.
Overall, the OCs continued to broadly meet their contract requirements.