Accuracy of Statewide Pavement Surface Evaluations and Ratings Performed by Local Agencies

Abstract

The passage of state legislation has promoted and encouraged the development of pavement management plans at the local level. A widespread response to such legislation in some states has been the assessment of pavement condition using the pavement surface evaluation and rating (PASER) method. The specific objectives of this research were to: 1) assess the accuracy of statewide local agency PASER raters; 2) identify PASER values that are difficult to rate; and 3) propose a standard tolerance to be used in statewide quality control evaluations. Statewide PASER condition data collected by local agencies in Indiana were statistically subsampled and rated by PASER-certified Indiana Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) personnel. The local agency ratings were then compared with the LTAP ratings using four agreement tolerances: 1) complete agreement; 2) within-1-rating agreement; 3) within-2-ratings agreement; and 4) “good/fair/poor” category agreement. Local agencies tended to overrate the middle-to-low PASER values (1–6) and slightly under-rate the upper PASER values (7–10). This means that budget needs based on data collected by local agencies are likely underestimated. Pavements in poor condition (PASER 1–4), particularly PASER 4, were assigned the correct “good/fair/poor” category the least often. Since the “good/fair/poor” category agreement was the most rigorous tolerance after complete agreement and has the potential to capture significant funding differences appropriate to each category, it is recommended for use as a statewide quality control standard.