Ask-NAMS-Canada

Hi, 

I'm interesting in learning about other community's experiences in transparently making available to the public individual asset condition ratings at a more granular level than what is shared within a State of Infrastructure Report or Asset Management Plan approach where categories and groups of assets are rolled up into a readable table of information to provide overall conditions and trends.  In other words, sharing the condition of a specific road segment, underground pipe segment, individual facility, etc.

Does your community do this today or have they done it in the past or are planning to in the future?

What is your experience from a customer service and transparency perspective?  What sort of benefits or challenges did you face as a result of doing so?

Appreciate any feedback, examples, etc. you may have.

Thanks in advance!

------------------------------
Geoff Brown, P.Eng.
Manager, Corporate Asset Management Branch
City of Regina
Regina, SK CANADA
------------------------------

Hi Geoff,

A couple of thoughts or observations on your thread:

• In Ontario, we're increasingly seeing municipalities that are integrating Geographic Information System (GIS) and asset management capabilities to illustrate, at a more granular level, conditions on specific parts of their road networks. Also some interesting work being done to visualize, at an asset-specific level, lifecycle management. Some GIS/AM examples that come to mind: Northumberland County, Town of West Lincoln, Town of Cobourg, Niagara Region, Township of Warwick.  Others on this discussion board can probably cite others. 
• A related, possibly bigger issue, is communicating levels of service not just in terms of condition but also in terms of appropriateness of performance. Most of the GIS/AM work that I've seen addresses the former but not the latter. One of the challenges with 'State of Good Repair' types of reports or reports on 'Infrastructure Deficits' is that they tend to focus on condition and make tacit assumptions about adequacy of performance. The sustainability of services in local communities depends on robust discussions about both. 

Best,

Chris Chen