Customer Service, Operations and Security Committee. Information Item III-A. September 8, 2016

Transcription

1 Customer Service, Operations and Security Committee Information Item III-A September 8, 2016 Vital Signs Quarterly Report Page 3 of 78

2 Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Board Action/Information Summary Action Information MEAD Number: Resolution: Yes No TITLE: Vital Signs Report - /2016 PRESENTATION SUMMARY: As a regional transportation system, Metro s system-wide performance is captured in the Vital Signs Report. The Vital Signs Report provides analysis of a focused set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that monitor long term progress in delivering quality service. PURPOSE: Vital Signs communicates the transit system s performance to the Board of Directors on a quarterly and annual basis. The public and other stakeholders are invited to monitor Metro s performance using a web-based scorecard at wmata.com. Metro s managers measure what matters and hold themselves accountable to stakeholders via a focused set of KPIs that are reported publicly in Vital Signs. The report is organized by the Board-adopted strategic goals that align actions to improve performance and deliver results. Vital Signs is different from most public performance reports in that it provides systematic, data-driven analysis of KPIs by answering three questions: Is Metro achieving its four strategic goals? Why did performance change? What actions are being taken to improve performance? The answers reveal the challenges and complexities of the operation. A balanced scorecard approach is used in Vital Signs, but the focus is on Metro s core business of quality service delivery. Mission critical functions such as safety, security and finance provide in-depth reporting separately to the Board. DESCRIPTION: Key Highlights: The / Vital Signs Report documents results for Metro s KPIs. This report takes a look back at April June compared to established targets. Performance results show that in the area of quality service delivery and safety: Five KPIs met or exceeded target: Rail Fleet Reliability Bus Fleet Reliability Elevator Availability Escalator Availability Crime Rate Page 4 of 78

3 Four KPIs were worse than target: Bus On-Time Performance Customer Injury Rate Employee Injury Rate Customer Satisfaction This is the second quarterly report for the pilot measure rail customer on-time performance ( customer OTP ). Customer OTP includes all aspects of the customer journey every day of the week: wait times, riding the train, and getting around the station. In response to the Board's request, reporting was established to quantify the impact of SafeTrack on customer OTP (June customer OTP would have been four percentage points higher had SafeTrack not occurred). Following completion of the pilot, a target for customer OTP will be set for CY2017. Background and History: Metro has established many of the performance-based planning and programming elements necessary to become a more strategic, accountable and transparent organization. In 2015, the Vital Signs Report was recognized by Transportation Rearch Board s Special Task Force on Data for Decision-Makers as a best practice in communicating performance information. Key to progress in becoming a performance-based organization was the establishment of a standalone Office of Performance in The office is dedicated to expanding the use of performance information to guide decisions, to promote Metro s benefits in the region and to unify employees to accomplish agency goals. Since its inception, the office has developed a range of performance tools that connect day-to-day work of Metro s employees to agency goals. In its most recent long range plan, Momentum, the Board of Directors defined four strategic goals: Build and Maintain a Premier Safety Culture and System Meet or Exceed Expectations by Consistently Delivering Quality Service Improve Regional Mobility and Connect Communities Ensure Financial Stability and Invest in our People and Assets These four strategic goals define where Metro wants to go and provide guidance for decisions across the agency. For each goal, the Office of Performance has worked with departments across the agency to develop business plans with measures and key actions that demonstrate departmental contribution to these goals. Additionally, each fall, the Office of Performance facilitates a work session with the General Manager/Chief Executive Officer (GM/CEO) and executives to determine annual targets for each KPI. In March 2016, the GM/CEO announced a Go Forward strategy for specific actions to improve the KPIs. These actions are reported in the regularly updated Customer Accountability Report (CARe). Some of those actions are discussed below in context with this quarter s results. Page 5 of 78

4 Discussion: The Office of Performance strives for quality and accuracy in the KPIs and seeks to evolve or establish new KPIs that reflect the customer experience and support enhanced transparency. Improvements include: The rail customer on-time performance measure, introduced first in the Q1/2016 report, will soon be available in a personalized view on wmata.com. Metro will launch MyTripTime in July, a tool for customers to measure their personal ontime scores for Metrorail trips. A new measure, bus Crowding, is now included in Vital Signs, a complement to the existing measure of crowding on the rail system, rail passengers per car. The data table now includes monthly results for measures under the strategic goal Ensure Financial Stability and Invest in our People and Assets. Bus Bus on-time performance (OTP) was slightly lower than /2015 due to an increase in late arrivals, particularly in June. SafeTrack began to impact bus OTP in June as rail customers seeking alternate transportation increased bus ridership (adding to bus boarding and alighting time), and customers choosing to drive lead to more congested streets (increasing bus travel times, particularly on downtown routes where bus service is concentrated). /2016 was another strong quarter for bus reliability, performing better than target with the most improved fleet reliability since /2013. This is a result of a number of mitigating and proactive actions taken by Bus Maintenance to improve bus fleet reliability following challenges in 2014 with part manufacturer defects. Rail About 74% of trips made by Metrorail customers were on time in /2016. Performance was highest in April (80%) as track work was limited during the Cherry Blossom season. May saw the lowest performance of the quarter (69%) as track work resumed and unplanned disruptions added to customer travel times. Despite SafeTrack on the Orange, Blue and Silver lines in June, customer OTP rebounded slightly to 71%. Without SafeTrack, customer OTP would have been around 75% in June. Rail fleet reliability demonstrated strong performance in /2016, 35% better than /2015 as 1000, 6000 and 7000 series cars all averaged over 100,000 miles between delays. Mild weather in May contributed to better performance, and parts availability improved compared to last year. Strong reliability translated into good car availability, with the daily car requirement met each day in April and May. Car availability declined in June as car re-balancing for SafeTrack led to more cars in some shops than could be accommodated, creating a backlog of cars needing repairs. To improve performance, Metro has implemented a number of initiatives, improving repair quality through mechanic training, targeted campaigns to drive down the most frequent types of failure, streamlining parts planning and procurement, reducing repair times, and balancing cars by yard. Metro continues to receive and conditionally accept new 7000 series railcars (44 new cars placed in service in /2016). Elevator and Escalator Elevator availability was near target this quarter, and escalator availability exceeded target. Both saw an increase in unscheduled repairs as a more rigorous inspection Page 6 of 78

5 process led to punch-list items that needed additional, often complex repairs by mechanics. Actions to improve performance include continuing the modernization program, enhancing remote monitoring so that outages can be identified and resolved faster, and allocating staff to stations most impacted by SafeTrack to quickly respond to elevator/escalator outages and minimize disruptions. Customer Satisfaction Bus customers satisfaction remained steady and consistent with /2015. Bus customers are reporting improved Metro Transit Police (MTPD) visibility, an important factor in the bus customer experience. Rail customer s satisfaction saw a steady decline as customer perception of reliability was at 42% for /2016. To address this, Metro continues implementation of track, power and railcar improvement plans. Metro is addressing other drivers of customer satisfaction by improving rail station environments (signage, lighting and ceilings) and implementing same station entry/exit 15-minute grace periods to provide customers more autonomy in their transit decision-making. Safety The customer injury rate was above target this quarter, and rose five percent compared to /2016. The rate for MetroAccess rose by 77%, driven by more reported noncollision related injuries (such as slips, trips or falls). MetroAccess is pursuing a number of strategies to reduce these injuries, including augmenting training on better methods to assist customers who have difficulty maintaining balance. The rail injury rate stayed about the same. No customer injuries were reported at rail stations impacted by SafeTrack in June. Platform attendants will continue to monitor crowds at SafeTrackimpacted and transfer stations. The bus customer injury rate fell by about four percent, as fewer customers were injured in collisions and while climbing on/off the bus. Metro will continue to coach Metrobus staff to employ defensive driving tactics and will hold safety blitzes at incident hotspots to reinforce safe behavior and address unsafe conditions. The employee injury rate averaged 5.4, worse than target and about five percent higher than /2015. While slips/trips/falls decreased about 40%, key drivers of the increase this quarter were collisions (20% higher than /2015, mostly non-preventable) and struck by/against injuries (25% higher, not wearing personal protective equipment a contributing factor in about a quarter of the injuries). Physical assaults and stress from witnessing crime more than doubled compared to last year s level (primarily impacting bus operators). Improving personal safety and security for bus operators is a key focus area, including scaling up the pilot SafeWatch program, continuing installation of bus shields across the field and conducting assault prevention workshops. Security The /2016 crime rate was on target at five crimes per million passengers, but was slightly worse than /2015 (4.7 crimes per million passengers). While some crime categories saw decreases compared to /2015 (e.g., snatches down 54%), others were up including parking lot crime (primarily due to more thefts from automobiles in parking garages) and aggravated assaults (arguments between juveniles being the primary cause). To reduce crime in parking facilities, MTPD is partnering with local agencies to step up parking facility patrols and officers are distributing Don t Make It Easy pamphlets to discourage customers from leaving personal items in vehicles. In rail stations, MTPD added 10 uniformed officers to provide high visibility patrols at hot spot stations to deter aggravated assaults and other crimes. Officers are now wearing Page 7 of 78

6 high visibility yellow and navy blue officer uniforms to be a prominent presence and crime deterrent across the system. MTPD will continue to partner with bus to focus officers on routes with high frequency fare evasion, a leading cause of bus operator assaults. FUNDING IMPACT: The actions to improve mentioned in this information item are included in the current year's budget. Project Manager: Andrea Burnside, Acting Chief Project Department/Office: TIMELINE: Assuance Quality and Performance Previous Actions The Q1/2016 Vital Signs Report was presented to the Board in May Launch Customer Travel time individual scores in July Anticipated actions after presentation The next scheduled quarterly Vital Signs Report will be delivered to the Customer Service, Operations and Security Committee in November Page 8 of 78

7 April - June 2016 Vital Signs Report Customer Service, Operations and Security Committee September 8, 2016 Page 9 of 78

8 Safety and Security MetroAccess passenger assistance training Bus operator defensive driver training Continue fleet-wide bus shield installation MTPD parking lot patrols Page 10 of 78

9 Quality Service: Bus Garage pullout monitoring Continued manufacturer collaboration Continued transit police visibility Page 11 of 78

10 Quality Service: Rail Continued to fill the bins for critical parts 7K update 17 trains in service by end of June Monthly updates in CARe (wmata.com/care) Page 12 of 78

11 Quality Service: Elevator and Escalator Modernize escalator and elevator fleet Increase and enhance remote monitoring Allocate staff to stations most affected by SafeTrack Page 13 of 78

12 SafeTrack Progress report Pervasive impact 10% increase in bus ridership Performance outcome monitoring Page 14 of 78

13 MyTripTime Launched July 28, 2016 Enter station and travel to platform Wait for train On-board train Travel to fare gate and exit station Page 15 of 78

14 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Appendix: Typical Escalator Availability Escalator Availability by Station Available Scheduled Maintenance Unscheduled Maintenance Mt. Vernon Sq. Branch Ave Spring Hill West Falls Church White Flint Tysons Corner Rockville Crystal City Vienna Franconia-Springfield Brookland-CUA Addison Rd Silver Spring Transit Center Suitland Eisenhower Ave U Street Union Station Shady Grove Federal Center SW Judiciary Sq Gallery Place College Park -U of Md Landover Silver Spring Potomac Ave Benning Rd Eastern Market Dupont Circle Braddock Rd Southern Ave Metro Center Virginia Sq-GMU Farragut North Navy Yard-Ballpark Congress Heights Naylor Rd Wheaton Georgia Ave-Petworth Stadium-Armory Grosvenor-Strathmore Minnesota Ave Glenmont Deanwood Smithsonian Farragut West Huntington Elevator/escalator service status by station is available at wmata.com/rider_tools Below 93% target availability Elevator outage subscription alerts are available via elstat.wmata.com Page 16 of 78

15 Performance Vital Signs SAFETY & SECURITY Published: August 2016 QUALITY SERVICE 2 April-June 2016 TABLE OF CONTENTS Bus Rail Elevator/Escalator Customer Satisfaction Safety Security People and Assets Definitions Performance Data Bus On-Time Performance Rail Customer On-Time Performance Elevator Availability Customer Satisfaction Bus 76% 74% 97% 78% Target 79% KPI Pilot Target 97% Target 85% of surveyed customers Bus Fleet Reliability Rail Fleet Reliability Escalator Availability Customer Satisfaction Rail 8,471 82,458 93% 66% Target > 8,000 miles between failures Target 65,000 miles between delays Target 93% Target 85% of surveyed customers Customer Injuries Employee Injuries Crime KEY TARGET TARGET NOT MET 2.1 Target 1.75 per million passengers 5.4 Target 4.5 per 200,000 hours worked Highlights Bus fleet reliability experienced the most improvement since /2013 due to subsystem retrofits, replacement of older buses, and completion of 100 mid-life overhauls. Bus on-time performance (OTP) dropped slightly due to an increase in late arrivals (7%), particularly in June as increased customers due to SafeTrack boarded buses to avoid the rails and buses competed with street traffic. Bus customer satisfaction was slightly higher as a result of cleaner environments, but other experience drivers remained consistent. Rail customer OTP was highest in April at 80%, but saw an overall decline from Q1/2016 as a result of planned weekend, midday, and evening track work as well as speed restrictions and arcing insulators. This inconsistent service delivery reflects the customer perception of reliability and the rail customer satisfaction rate of continued decline. Rail fleet reliability improved over 35% compared to /2015 with three fleets averaging over 100,000 miles between delays. 5.0 Target 5.0 per million passengers TARGET MET NOTE Percentages are rounded to the nearest whole number Elevator availability was very near target for /2016. Availability was impacted by a more rigorous inspection process leading to additional, often complex, repairs. Escalator availability exceeded target with fewer units out for replacement/rehabilitation and small increase in inspectionrequired repairs. Customer injuries saw a marked decline in on-board train injuries, but continued to be most frequently affected by slips, trips and falls for rail and bus collision-related injuries. There were nearly 40% fewer slips, trips and falls to impact the employee injury rate. However, collisions, struck by/against injuries, assaults and stress from witnessing crime contributed to more lost employee time than /2015. Crime met target despite increases in aggravated assaults, particularly between juveniles, and thefts from autos. Page 17 of 78

16 Path to Improved Performance Vital Signs communicates the transit system s performance to the Board of Directors on a quarterly and annual basis. The public and other stakeholders are invited to monitor Metro s performance using a web based scorecard at wmata.com. Metro s managers measure what matters and hold themselves accountable to stakeholders via a focused set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) reported publicly in Vital Signs. Communicate system performance quarterly and annually What actions are being taken to improve? Balanced scorecard approach, but focus is Metro s core business of quality service delivery Why did performance change? What gets measured gets managed, leading to improved performance Is Metro achieving its four strategic goals? Answer three questions... Utilizing systematic, data-driven analysis Targeting that gauges progress and identifies success Chief Performance Officer 2 Vital Signs Page Report CY 18 of

17 KPI: Bus On-Time Performance QUALITY SERVICE Why did performance change? XX/2016 Bus on-time performance (OTP) was slightly lower than /2015 (by 0.4%), primarily as a result of buses arriving late more frequently compared to this same time last year, particularly during the month of June (June late arrivals increased 7%).»» According to the regional Transportation Planning Board (TPB), weekday peak-period traffic congestion increased during SafeTrack; the greatest traffic impacts occurred near alternate routes parallel to lines affected by SafeTrack activity.»» There was a 10% increase in bus ridership on lines near SafeTrack activity, impacting boarding and alighting time.»» TPB also determined increased travel time of 30% or more on many District routes; affecting more than 50% of Metrobus customers. XXIncreased wait times were also experienced in instances were buses were re-routed to supplement additional SafeTrack demands. XXThe effects of SafeTrack were offset by a 20% reduction of other bus-related incidents (e.g. bus detours) that tend to impede on-time performance. Key actions to improve performance XXCommuters will continue to be encouraged to use carpool partners, bicycles, walk, or telework when possible. XXContinue to monitor garage pull-outs through on-thespot verification and pull-out reports. XXContinue to evaluate schedules and implement service adjustments when feasible. XXEvaluate routes where buses are arriving early. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Bus On-Time Performance 76 % Target 79% 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE Bus on-time performance outperformed last year during the months of April and May; however, declined slightly during the June start of SafeTrack activity. Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q J14Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ15Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ16Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N D Metro employees assist customers at shuttle bus stops to get around SafeTrack-affected stations. Chief Performance Officer 3 Vital Signs Page Report CY 19 of

18 KPI: Bus Fleet Reliability QUALITY SERVICE BUS Reliability (complete year) Why did performance change? XX Consistent with industry trends, bus fleet reliability began to experience its share of challenges in 2014, as a result of numerous bus and part manufacturer defects. Bus maintenance implemented a number of mitigating and proactive actions to improve bus fleet reliability. XX Overall bus fleet reliability improved by 22% compared to /2015, which means buses (with the exception of Clean Diesel) went out of service less frequently as a result of mechanical failure. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Bus Fleet Reliability 8,471 XX Examples of contributing factors to improved fleet reliability:»»the retrofits of various subsystems and parts like the Cummins engines and HVAC P-clamp 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE Bus fleet reliability not only continued to perform better than target, but it is the most improved fleet reliability since /2013. Target > 8,000 miles between failures»»replacement of older less reliable buses (180 of 295 new buses are in service)»»completing 100 mid-life overhauls each year (64 completed YTD) and consistently completing in-depth failure analysis to resolve other manufacturer-related defects XX Transmission-related improvements have also been a primary contributing factor to improved fleet reliability Q1 Q Q4 Q1 Q Q4 Q1 Q Q4 J14Q1 F M A M J JQ3 A S OQ4 N D J15Q1 F M A M J JQ3 A S OQ4 N D J16Q1 F M A M J JQ3 A S OQ4 N D Key actions to improve performance XX Continue to work with manufacturers to test and evaluate reliability-related components like: coolant hoses to determine which perform best, measure engine and sub-compartment temperatures to identify specific components exposed to temperatures outside of designed operating range, perform in-depth electrical analysis on each sub-fleet of buses to identify parasitic drain (power consumed when a bus is turned off) and replace low coolant sensors on all buses with 2013 EPA engines. XX Replace defective oil coolers on the 2012 Clean Diesel fleet. XX Continue to retire less-reliable, older buses, and complete mid-life overhauls annually. XX Continue to work with manufacturers to complete retrofits on parts like defroster valves, as well as replace energy storage systems on 2006 and 2008 hybrid models. Chief Performance Officer 4 In-depth failure analysis contributes greatly to improved fleet reliability. 20 of Vital SignsPage Report CY

19 Bus Crowding QUALITY SERVICE XXMax load factor measures customer crowding on buses. XXAutomatic passenger counter data (for all routes and time periods) are used to calculated the max loads calculated in the table below. XXCrowding appears to be problematic on many high ridership routes across all times of day and particularly in DC and MD. /2016 TOP 10 MOST CROWDED ROUTES BY JURISDICTION Service Code DC MD Route Name Time Period Highest Passenger Load Load Factor Line Name 16th Street 108:S2 PM Peak th Street 52:53 PM Peak th Stret Limited 112:S9 AM Peak Georgia Avenue Limited 107:79 PM Peak th Street 108:S2 AM Peak th Street Potomac Park 109:S1 AM Peak Benning Road H Street 14:X2 Midday Deanwood Alabama Avenue 95:W4 PM Peak Mount Pleasant 81:42 PM Peak Georgia Ave 7th Street 118:70 PM Peak New Carrollton Silver Spring 97:F4 PM Peak Fairland 147:Z8 Midday Greenbelt Twinbrook 13:C4 Midday Greenbelt Twinbrook 13:C4 PM Peak Calverton Westfarm 146:Z6 Midday New Carrollton Silver Spring 97:F4 Midday Annapolis Road 9:T18 AM Peak New Hampshire Avenue Maryland 85:K6 PM Peak Performance Thresholds Max Load Factor Below Threshold <.3 Standards Compliant.3.5 Occasional Crowding.6.7 Recurring Crowding.8.9 Regular Crowding Continuous Crowding > 1.3 /2016 TOP 10 MOST CROWDED ROUTES BY JURISDICTION Service Code MD VA Line Name Route Name Time Period Greenbelt Twinbrook 13:C4 AM Peak Georgia Avenue Maryland 53:Y7 PM Peak Ballston Farragut Square 12:38B AM Peak Ballston Farragut Square 12:38B PM Peak Columbia Pike Farragut Square 522:16Y PM Peak Columbia Pike Farragut Square 522:16Y AM Peak Lee Highway Farragut Square 138:3Y AM Peak DC Dulles 129:5A PM Peak Lincolnia North Fairlington 70:7Y PM Peak Leesburg Pike 5:28A PM Peak Richmond Highway Express 131:REX PM Peak Lincolnia North Fairlington Highest Passenger Load Load Factor 70:7Y AM Peak Highest Passenger Load = the average of all the highest max loads recorded by route, trip and time period Max Load Factor = highest passenger load divided by actual bus seats used YEAR-OVER-YEAR Bus Crowding DC PERFORMANCE DC TALLER AM Early AM Early AM Peak AM Peak Midday Midday PM Peak YEAR-OVER-YEAR PERFORMANCE MD AM Early AM Peak Midday PM Peak YEAR-OVER-YEAR PERFORMANCE VA PM Peak For all graphs: 1.0 = all bus seats occupied Early Night Early Night Early Night Late Night Late Night Late Night Chief Performance Officer 5 Vital Signs Page Report CY 21 of

20 KPI: Rail Customer On-Time Performance (Pilot) QUALITY SERVICE RAIL OTP 2016 (complete) Why did performance change? XX Rail customer on-time performance (OTP) was highest in April, at 80%. Planned midday and weekend track work was limited during the Cherry Blossom season. XX On-time performance was lowest in May (69%). Planned weekend, midday and evening track work resumed, affecting customers on all lines. Customers traveling during peak periods were also hard hit by unplanned disruptions, including fires at Federal Center, track problems at Stadium-Armory, and arcing insulators at Medical Center and Woodley Park. Slow speed restrictions on the Orange, Blue and Silver Lines at McPherson Square created further delays. For example, during the two week period speed restrictions were in place, almost 75% of Orange Line riders were late each morning. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Rail Customer On-Time Performance 1-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE 100 About 74% of trips made by Metrorail customers were on-time in /2016. About 5% of trips were more than 10 minutes late % KPI Pilot XX Despite SafeTrack on the Orange, Blue and Silver lines in June, customer OTP rebounded slightly to 71%. Without SafeTrack, customer OTP would have been around 75%. Many customers impacted by the SafeTrack work found alternate means of travel. Midday, weekend and evening track work outside of the SafeTrack areas was limited and there were fewer significant, unplanned, track-related disruptions J16Q1 Q1 F M A M J JQ3 Q3 A S OQ4 Q4 N D 2016 Key actions to improve performance XX Reduce wait times and speed restrictions.»»implement track, power and railcar improvement plans to reduce delays and offloads.»»better schedule track work to minimize overall adverse impacts. From June 4 16, trains on the Orange and Silver lines single-tracked between East Falls Church and Ballston. About 20% of customers boarding at stations west of Ballston found alternate ways of travel. Those who continued riding Metrorail saw their travel times increase by about 12 minutes on average. Only about 11% were on-time.»»develop tools and strategies to help Control Center better manage train spacing. XX Repair escalators, elevators and fare gates to enable smooth flow of passengers through station. Chief Performance Officer 6 22 of Vital SignsPage Report CY

21 KPI: Rail Fleet Reliability Why did performance change? XXRailcar reliability improved by over 35% compared to /2015, as 1000, 6000 and 7000 series cars all averaged over 100,000 miles between delays. XXMild weather (May average highs were 12 degrees cooler than 2015) led to better performance, particularly for propulsion and brakes systems that are prone to failure in high temperatures. Parts availability also improved compared to last year as staff continued to fill the bins for critical parts series reliability was boosted by the retirement of the poorest performing cars in the fleet (26 cars were retired this quarter). XXStrong reliability translated into good car availability in April and May, as staff consistently provided the 954 cars required for daily service. As a result, there were over 25% fewer missed dispatches this quarter compared to /2015. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Rail Fleet Reliability 82,458 Target 65,000 miles between delays XXAvailability declined in June as cars were rebalanced across yards to align with SafeTrack service patterns. While there is some space to accomodate more cars in yards, shop capacity at yards is fixed. This leads to a backlog in repairs at yards that saw an increase in their car counts. Key actions to improve performance XXImprove railcar availability and reduce breakdowns while railcars are in service.»» Streamline parts planning and procurement to sustain recent improvements: develop guidance documents, begin establishing long-term contracts, and initiate new demand-forecasting process.»» Implement reliability campaigns targeting the most frequent types of failures, including doors and brakes.»» Improve repair quality through new mechanic training: 24 mechanics enrolled this quarter.»» Reduce repair times through better shop planning and reallocating staff: piloting new planning process at Alexandria yard, reallocating staff to weekend shifts, and shifting preventive maintenance schedules to free up shop space for corrective repairs.»» Pilot new rebalancing strategy on Red line to ensure yards have sufficient cars to meet maintenance and service requirements. XXEnsure timely and quality delivery of 7K rail cars: receive and conditionally accept new cars per month (44 new cars placed in service in /2016). 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE QUALITY SERVICE RAIL Reliability (complete year) Rail fleet reliability surpassed target, reaching a 3-year high this quarter with performance consistently above 80,000 miles Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q J14Q1 F M A M J JQ3 A S OQ4 N D J15Q1 F M A M J JQ3 A S OQ4 N D J16Q1 F M A M J JQ3 A S OQ4 N D Car maintenance has been working to pilot a new shop planning process to help reduce the average time it takes to repair cars. The process includes new steps to triage incidents that come into the yard and plan repairs farther in advance. Chief Performance Officer 7 Vital Signs Page Report CY 23 of

22 Rail Crowding QUALITY SERVICE Metro had more instances of overcrowding during this three-month period than last year at the same time, with Rosslyn and Foggy Bottom continuing to be above the optimal passengers per car. XXCrowding levels on railcars is monitored in accordance with Board standards. Why Did Performance Change? XXWhile average weekday rush period ridership at maximum load points was down from the same period last year, fewer railcars available for service led to crowded railcars at some locations. Key Actions to Improve Performance XXMetro platform monitors were strategically assigned to help navigate customers at stations with increased crowding due to SafeTrack. XXMonitor effectiveness of test decals on the platforms at Metro Center, Gallery Place, L'Enfant Plaza, and Union Station that show where a six-car train will be positioned. The decals are intended to help customers re-position on the platform to avoid congestion and reduce the safety risk of running for the last door of a train. Optimal passengers per car (PPC) of 100, with minimum 80 and maximum of 120 PPC AM Rush Max Load Points Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 Feb-16 Mar-16 Apr-16 Gallery Place Red Dupont Circle Pentagon Rosslyn Blue L'Enfant Plaza Court House Orange L'Enfant Plaza Pentagon Yellow Waterfront Green Shaw-Howard Rosslyn Silver L'Enfant Plaza PM Rush Max Load Points Metro Center Red Farragut North Rosslyn Foggy Bottom-GWU Blue Smithsonian Foggy Bottom-GWU Orange Smithsonian L'Enfant Plaza Yellow L'Enfant Plaza Green Mt. Vernon Sq Foggy Bottom-GWU Silver Smithsonian Chief Performance Officer 8 Vital Signs Page Report CY 24 of

23 KPI: Elevator and Escalator Availability QUALITY SERVICE Why did performance change? XX Elevator availability was near target this quarter and slightly exceeded the /2015 result. The improvement was due to a decrease in scheduled modernizations, which offset an increase in unscheduled maintenance. A more rigorous inspection process led to punch-list items that needed additional, often complex, repairs by mechanics (average hours to repair these inspection items increased from about 22 hours/unit to 44/hours unit). Additionally, a number of units were out of service awaiting scheduled support from other Metro maintenance offices (e.g. lighting, flooring, communication repairs). XX Escalator availability reached 93.4% this quarter, better than target. This quarter s result was almost identical to /2015 (93.5%) and also similar to the result for Q1/2016 (93.8%). The mix of work shifted slightly from /2015 as planned replacements/rehabilitations were down slightly (5 fewer units out for replacement/rehabilitation) and a small increase in unscheduled maintenance as inspections led to punch list items needing repairs. Key actions to improve performance MODERNIZE ESCALATOR AND ELEVATOR FLEET XX Replace 137 of the system s 618 escalators by 2020 and rehabilitate up to an additional 144 escalators. Modernized units will be more reliable and energy efficient. XX Rehabilitate 100 of the system s 318 elevators (in stations and maintenance/administration facilities) by 2021.»» In 2016, replace 23 escalators and rehabilitate 8 escalators and 20 elevators. INCREASE AND ENHANCE REMOTE MONITORING OF SYSTEM S ELEVATORS AND ESCALATORS XX Remote monitoring allows for quicker identification of outages and dispatch of technicians in order to return the equipment to service faster. Currently, 217 of the 278 (78%) public-facing elevators and 550 of the 618 (89%) escalators can be monitored remotely. ALLOCATE STAFF TO STATIONS MOST AFFECTED BY SAFETRACK XX Technicians have been strategically assigned to stations with increased crowding due to SafeTrack in order to minimize any disruptions due to vertical transportation. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Elevator Availability 97 % Target 97% CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Escalator Availability 93 % Target 93% 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE ELEVATOR Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q J14Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ15Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ16Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N D 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE ESCALATOR Q1 Q3 Q Elevator availability was near target this quarter. Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q Escalator availability surpassed target this quarter due to fewer units out of service for replacement/rehabilitation. Q1 Q3 Q J14Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ15Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ16Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N D Chief Performance Officer 9 Vital Signs Page Report CY 25 of

24 KPI: Customer Satisfaction QUALITY SERVICE Customer Satisfaction (complete) Why did performance change? XX Bus customers satisfaction remained the same statistically due to customer perception of consistent service delivery. With the exception of customers saying bus stops were significantly cleaner, all other experience measures stayed consistent. XX Rail customers' satisfaction steady decline is largely attributed to inconsistent service delivery customer perception of reliability was at 42% for /2016. Additionally, frustrations with retapping of SmarTrip cards nearly doubled this quarter compared to last year. Station cleanliness improved compared to last year at this time. Key Actions to improve performance XX Improve customer satisfaction of rail service.»»reliability continues to be the primary driver of satisfaction continue implementation of track, power and railcar improvement plans to improve reliability.»»continue to improve rail station environments, including signage, lighting and ceilings.»»implementation of same station entry/exit 15-minute grace period policy is a step in providing customers with more autonomy in their transit decision-making. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Customer Satisfaction Bus 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE 100 Bus customer satisfaction slightly increased compared to /2015 but not significantly. Rail customers satisfaction significantly decreased compared to the previous year at this time % 80 Rail Bus 70 Target 85% of surveyed customers 60 CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Customer Satisfaction Rail 50 0 Q1 Q Q4 Q1 Q Q4 Q1 Q Q4 Q1/2014/2014Q3/2014Q4/2014Q1/2015/2015Q3/2015Q4/2015Q1/2016/2016Q3/2016Q4/ % XX Improve customer satisfaction of bus service.»»address bus customers' feeling of safety by continuing MTPD patrols on routes with high frequency fare evasion. Bus customers are reporting improved MTPD visibility, an important factor in the bus customer experience. Target 85% of surveyed customers Increased scheduled track work led to customers' perceptions of decreased rail service reliability. Chief Performance Officer of Vital SignsPage Report CY

25 KPI: Customer Injury Rate Why did performance change? XXThe bus customer injury rate fell by about 4% compared to /2015. Fewer customers were injured in collisions and while climbing on/off the bus. Still, over 60% of injuries were collision-related, two-thirds of which were considered non-preventable. Another 10% of injuries occurred when customers fell as the bus pulled away from or approached a stop. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Customer Injuries 2.1 XXThe rail injury rate stayed about the same compared to /2015. No customer injuries were reported at rail stations impacted by SafeTrack in June. As in prior quarters, slips, trips, and falls on escalators and in stations were the most frequent type of injury, accounting for over 75% of the total. This quarter saw an 80% decrease in Target 1.75 per million passengers customer injuries that occurred on-board trains, such as getting caught in closing train doors, balanced by an increase in customers getting caught in elevator doors and struck by fare gates (which accounted for 6 and 8% of all rail injuries, respectively). XXThe rate for MetroAccess customers rose by 77%, driven by more reported non-collision related injuries (door-to-door passenger assistance). Key actions to improve performance XXEnhance safety features.»» Introduce platform attendants at transfer stations to monitor crowds.»» Install public safety radio systems and cabling for cell phone service in tunnels.»» Improve station lighting.»» Augment MetroAccess operator training with better methods to assist customers who have difficulty maintaining balance; this will be facilitated through a working group that will include an Occupational Therapist. XXCoach staff.»» Emphasize defensive driving tactics during bus operator training and develop weekly safety tips around frequent accident types.»» Schedule safety blitzes at incident hotspots to reinforce safe behavior and address unsafe conditions.»» Improve train operator response to passenger intercom calls. XXSubmit for closure all FTA and NTSB safety recommendations Q1 Q3 Q SAFETY AND SECURITY 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE Q1 Q3 Q The customer injury rate was above target this quarter, and rose 5% compared to the same time last year. Q1 Q3 Q J14Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ15Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ16Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N D Platform attendants, dressed in purple caps and vests, assist customers to safely exit and board trains. Chief Performance Officer 11 Vital Signs Page Report CY 27 of

26 KPI: Employee Injury Rate SAFETY AND SECURITY Why did performance change? CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE XXCollisions were the leading injury type and increased by 20% over /2015; most were non-preventable. Employee Injuries 10 XXStruck by/against injuries were the second leading injury type and increased by about 25%. Not wearing appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) was identified as a contributing factor in about a quarter of the injuries. XXCompared to /2015, over twice as many employees received medical treatment and/or had time away from work due to physical assaults and stress from witnessing crime. Most injuries occurred among bus operators, followed by station managers The employee injury rate averaged 5.4, worse than target and about 5% higher than /2015. XXSlips/trips/falls decreased by almost 40%, with fewer trips on uneven ground. Target 4.5 per 200,000 hours worked 4 Key actions to improve performance XXImprove personal safety and security for bus operators.»» Scale up pilot SafeWatch program.»» Continue to install bus shields across the fleet.»» Conduct assault prevention workshops and Town Hall meetings. XXTrain employees to identify hazards that may lead to injuries. XXEnsure coordination of safety issues among departments as required in the System Safety Program Plan Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q Q1 Q3 Q J14Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ15Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N DJ16Q1F MAM JJQ3A SOQ4N D PPE, such as safety glasses, play an important role in keeping employees safe. Chief Performance Officer 12 Vital Signs Page Report CY 28 of

27 KPI: Crime Rate SAFETY AND SECURITY Crime (complete) Why Did Performance Change? XX Parking lot crime, primarily thefts from auto, drove the crime rate up in /2016. Aggravated assaults also increased, with arguments between juveniles being the primary cause. XX Many crime categories were on par with /2015 such as robberies, while other categories decreased (snatches down 54%). CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Crime 10 Although on-target (5 crimes/ million riders), the crime rate was up slightly from /2016 (4.7) due to increase of theft from automobiles in parking lots XX Bus operator assaults were down 17% from /2015 as MTPD partnered with Bus to focus officers on routes with high-frequency fare evasion, a leading cause of bus operator assaults. Key actions to improve performance 2-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE Target 5.0 per million passengers XX Along with local police agencies, MTPD will step up patrols at targeted parking lots to deter thefts from auto and increase outreach with customers, distributing Don t Make It Easy pamphlets to discourage customers from leaving personal items in vehicles Q1 M A M J JQ3Q3 A S 2015 J15Q1 F Q4 DJ16Q1Q1 F M A M J JQ3Q3 A S 2016 OQ4 N Q4 D OQ4 N XX Increase afternoon rush patrols, adding 10 uniformed officers to provide high visibility patrols at hot spot stations to deter aggravated assaults and other crimes in rail stations. XX Introduce new high visibility yellow and navy blue officer uniforms. Transit and local police deter thefts from autos by monitoring parking lots. Chief Performance Officer of Vital SignsPage Report CY

28 Capital Funds Invested PEOPLE AND ASSETS Capital Funds Investment FY (complete) SSMetro is budgeted to spend more than $1.2 Billion capital funds in fiscal SSThis measure tracks the rate at which these funds are invested. SSCapital expenditures were at 85% of budget for the fiscal year, which is significantly better than the performance of FY15, but still below the target of 95%. 2-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE (FISCAL YEAR) % of Funds Expended FY FY 2015 JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY Q1 Q3 Q4 JUN Operating Expense Variance SSThe measure calculates the cumulative year to date percentage variance between actual and net budgeted expenses. SSThe target for this measure is a range between 0% and 2% under budget. SSOperating expenditures started the fiscal year well under budget and began to approach target toward the end of the fiscal year. SSNet budgeted expense for fiscal 2016 was $1.783 Billion (Gross of $1.814 Billion minus $31 million for preventive maintenance expenses transferred to Capital Budget). Operating Budget Variance FY (FLIPPED) 2-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE (FISCAL YEAR) Over budget Under budget APR MAR FEB JAN DEC NOV OCT SEP AUG JUL -5 5% Target = 0% to 2% of budgeted expenses 0 0% FY % JUN MAY 10% 15% 20% FY % JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY Q1 Q3 Q4 JUN Chief Performance Officer 14 FFY 2015Vital Signs Page Report CY 30 of

29 Vacancy Rate PEOPLE AND ASSETS Vacancy (complete) Why Did Performance Change? XX The overall vacancy rate remains unfavorable to target at 7.1% and has increased from the Q1/2016 result with 80 additional vacancies due to employee separations and additional positions being added in the Office of Safety and in support of SafeTrack. Vacancy Rate unfavorability was also driven by talent acquisition activities being impacted by the Q1/2016 hiring freeze, increasing the overall time to recruit in /2016. XX Operations critical vacancy rate remains unfavorable to target at 10.8% but did improve from the Q1/2016 result with 18 critical hires being made in the Chief Engineer office, Metro Transit Police Department, and Rail Services department. Improvement was partly offset by an increase in critical vacancies within the COO Support Services department for Elevator & Escalator and within the Rail Services department for Track & Structure positions. Key actions to improve performance XX Prioritizing hiring actions based on executive level direction to fill the most critically-needed positions first. XX Reviewing recruitment processes and developing internal measures to identify opportunities to fill vacancies quicker. XX Regularly providing office directors and senior management reports on vacancies and status of recruitment efforts. XX Engaging external partners, such as federal and state employment agencies, technical schools, and universities, to assist with candidate sourcing. XX Continue completing a compensation market analysis of pay ranges to remain a competitive employer. CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Overall Vacancy Rate 2-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE % 7 6 The overall vacancy rate continues to exceed target at 7.1% and has increased 0.6% from Q1/ Target 6% 4 CURRENT QUARTER PERFORMANCE Operations Critical Vacancy Rate 3 0 Q1 M A M J JQ3Q3 A 2015 J15Q1 F Q4 DJ16Q1Q1 F M A M J JQ3Q3 A S 2016 S OQ4 N Q4 D OQ4 N 11% Target 9% The hiring of MTPD recruits such as these improved the operations critical vacancy rate over Q1/2016. Chief Performance Officer of Vital SignsPage Report CY

30 Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Contracts PEOPLE AND ASSETS DBEs are for-profit small businesses wherein socially and economically disadvantaged individuals (including ethnic minorities, women, and other individuals evaluated on a case-by-case basis) own at least a 51% interest, control management and daily business operations, and possess a DBE certification from the relevant state generally through the state Uniform Certification Program (UCP). The measure for DBE awards, the DBE Participation Rate, calculates thepercentage of contract dollars awarded to DBEs. Each Federal Fiscal Year (FFY), Metro sets a target for thepercentage of contract dollars to be awarded to DBEs. XXIn recent Federal Fiscal Years (FFY), the target has been 25%. XXFor the first reporting period in FFY16, which covers October 1, 2015 March 31, 2016, Metro fell short of target, at 15.4% DBE participation. DBE results are updated semi-annually in the Vital Signs Report to align with semiannual federal fiscal year reporting. The next DBE report will be included with the Q4/2016 Vital Signs Report. 2-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE DBE participation fell short of target this reporting period, and results were also lower than the same reporting period in FFY Oct-14Q1 Nov-14 Dec-15 Jan-15 Feb-15 Mar-15 Apr-15 May-15 Q3 Jun-15 Jul-15 Aug-15 Q4 Sep-15 Oct-15 Nov-15 Q1 Dec-15 Jan-16 Feb-16 Mar-16 APR-16 MAY-16 Q3 JUN-16 JUL-16 AUG-16 Q4 SEPT-16 FFY 2015 FFY 2016 Chief Performance Officer 16 Vital Signs Page Report CY 32 of

31 Energy and Water Usage Why did performance change? XXTraction power usage was down by about 2% compared to /2015. This was largely due to a 4.8% decrease in total railcar revenue miles from /2015, stemming from a decrease in railcar availability. XXMetro used 4% less non-traction power compared to /2015, largely driven by a decrease in chiller plant energy consumption. XXNatural Gas and Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) consumption both increased by about 2% compared to /2015. More than twice as many heating degree days (HDD) in the region occurred in /2016 than in /2015. HDDs are days with an average temperature below 65 degrees Fahrenheit below which buildings need to be heated; Metro is more likely to use CNG to heat bus facilities during these days. XXTotal gallons of water consumption for Metro decreased by 19% from /2015 to /2016, and decreased by 16.7% per vehicle mile. A key reason for the decreased usage was the repair of a leak at Gallery Place station which had resulted in nearly one million gallons of water leakage in April Other factors contributing to the decreased consumption included a water conservation initiative at certain chillers, and cooler temperatures from late May to early June Key actions to improve performance PEOPLE AND ASSETS 3-YEAR Energy TREND IN PERFORMANCE Energy (complete) Usage Energy consumption met target, and slightly increased compared to /2015 due to higher consumption of natural gas and compressed natural gas (CNG) at bus facilities. 14Q Q3 14Q4 15Q Q3 15Q4 16Q Q3 16Q WATER (complete) 3-YEAR TREND IN PERFORMANCE Water Usage 2016 ADVANCE ENERGY EFFICIENCY XXComplete an energy audit. XXImplement an Authority-wide energy management program. XXReplace data center infrastructure at support facilities Water consumption met target, and decreased 19% compared to /2015 due to the repair of a significant leak at Gallery Place and reduced consumption at chiller plants. GENERATE OWN POWER XXInstall solar canopies at Phase 1 parking lots. 0.9 REDUCE WATER CONSUMPTION XXEvaluate pilot locations for facility rainwater harvesting Q Q3 14Q Q Q3 15Q Q Q3 16Q Chief Performance Officer 17 Vital Signs Page Report CY 33 of