Meeting_Body
PLANNING AND PROGRAMMING COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 14, 2026
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
OCTOBER 15, 2026
Subject
SUBJECT: MEASURE M 10-YEAR COMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT EVALUATION FRAMEWORK, METRICS, AND WEIGHTING
Action
ACTION: RECEIVE AND FILE
Heading
RECOMMENDATION
Title
RECEIVE AND FILE the draft project evaluation framework, inclusive of metrics and weighting, for the Measure M 10-Year Comprehensive Assessment (Attachment A).
Issue
ISSUE
Section 7(g) of the Measure M Ordinance requires that, beginning in Fiscal Year 2027, Metro conduct a comprehensive assessment of the projects and programs in the Measure M Expenditure Plan that are completed or anticipated to be completed during the next ten-year period. Measure M Guidelines further establish that the assessments are to be coordinated with Metro’s Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) updates, including LRTP performance metrics, and provide a comprehensive review to assess changes in circumstances affecting the delivery of projects and programs within their schedules as identified in the Measure M Expenditure Plan.
A project evaluation framework, inclusive of metrics and weighting, is an effective tool for preparing a specific evaluation in the Measure M 10-Year Comprehensive Assessment (Assessment), which assesses the performance of Measure M’s Expenditure Plan major capital projects and programs.
The purpose of this report is to receive feedback from the Committee on the draft project evaluation framework this month, before submitting for final approval at the December Board meeting.
Background
BACKGROUND
The Measure M Ordinance establishes an ongoing framework for oversight and accountability of all projects and programs funded through Measure M. At five-year intervals, Metro prepares a comprehensive assessment of all implemented projects and programs to evaluate overall program performance and identify opportunities to improve coordination, delivery, and effectiveness, informed by current practices, best practices, and organizational changes.
The first Measure M Five-Year Comprehensive Assessment and Equity Report was completed in 2023 and evaluated the initial five years of Measure M implementation, from July 2017 through June 2022. The current Assessment will build upon that effort by incorporating both a retrospective evaluation of Measure M program performance and an assessment of Measure M projects and programs completed or anticipated to be completed over the next ten-year period. Upon completion of the Assessment process, a final report will be presented to the Metro Board for consideration. At that time, if the Assessment is approved by a two-thirds vote, the Board may then consider amendments to the Measure M Ordinance and Expenditure Plan within the parameters established by the Ordinance.
At its July 2026 meeting, the Board approved the Assessment objectives and criteria <https://boardagendas.metro.net/board-report/2026-0406/> that describe the entirety of the Measure M 10-Year Comprehensive Assessment, including the retrospective examination of the Measure M program achievements. The project evaluation framework, inclusive of metrics and weighting, provides complementary tools for evaluating Expenditure Plan major projects and programs anticipated to be completed over the next 10-year period.
Discussion
DISCUSSION
The draft Project Evaluation Framework establishes a consistent approach for evaluating the performance and potential benefits of Measure M-funded projects and programs. The framework is designed to support a transparent, data-driven, and policy-aligned evaluation that considers both project delivery and the broader transportation outcomes that Measure M investments intend to advance. The framework will complement the broader Assessment by providing a structured approach to evaluating future major projects, while the Assessment also considers the historical performance and implementation of the Measure M program as a whole.
The draft framework was developed to be consistent with the original goals in Measure M and best practices established in prior Metro evaluation approaches. In developing the draft framework, staff considered the following Metro frameworks: the Measure M Pre-Evaluation (2015) the 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan, the 2023 Measure M Five-Year Comprehensive Assessment and Equity Report, Board actions related to future Measure M assessments, and the 2025 Recommended Goals, Objectives, and Metrics for Metro Cost Benefit Analysis.
The draft Project Evaluation Framework consists of three primary elements: Performance Metrics, Evaluation Categories, and Evaluation Category Weights.
Draft Performance Metrics
The Measure M 10-Year Assessment takes place within a transportation landscape that has evolved since Measure M's adoption in 2016. Changes in travel behavior (largely influenced by the pandemic), emerging technologies, shifting economic conditions, demographic trends, and evolving policy priorities underscore the need to periodically reassess the Measure M investment plan. In developing the performance metrics list for this evaluation, staff have aimed to be consistent with previous frameworks while recognizing that changing conditions and priorities should be taken into consideration when evaluating future projects.
The draft evaluation Performance Metrics, highlighted in Table 1 below, aim to be consistent with five previously approved Metro frameworks and guiding documents. These include:
• Measure M Pre-Evaluation (2015): These metrics, approved in 2015 by the Board, were used to evaluate projects for inclusion in the 2016 Measure M ballot measure
• Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) (2020): The 2020 LRTP calculated the existing and future performance of the LA County transportation system across a range of metrics, many of which are applicable for project performance evaluations
• The Measure M Five-Year Comprehensive Assessment and Equity Report (2023) and Related Board Amendments: The first five-year assessment focused on past project performance, and quantified system-wide performance for many metrics that are meaningful project evaluation metrics
• Board Amendments: amendments adopted by the Board with the approval of the Measure M Five-Year Comprehensive Assessment and Equity Report (2023)
• Recommended Goals, Objectives, and Metrics for Metro Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) (2025): This Board adopted framework provides a series of metrics that could be used to evaluate the benefits of major capital projects
Table 1 below highlights the proposed Assessment performance metrics and their alignment with previously established frameworks and studies.
Table 1. Proposed Project Evaluation Performance Metrics
*Access to Opportunity, including the precise destination definitions, is currently being defined.
Draft Evaluation Categories
In 2015, Metro established evaluation categories based on the Measure M Ordinance goals. The draft Assessment evaluation categories mirror the framework previously used to evaluate major capital projects in the Measure M Expenditure Plan.
The proposed evaluation categories include:
• Mobility
• Accessibility
• Transportation Safety
• Sustainability and Quality of Life
• Economy
Table 2 illustrates how the goals established in the Measure M ordinance are consistent with these draft evaluation categories.
Table 2. Measure M Goals and Draft Project Evaluation Criteria
Draft Evaluation Category Weights
The proposed evaluation category weights are consistent with previous Metro frameworks, including the Measure M Pre-Evaluation(2015) framework and the more recent CBA methodology. Table 3 shows the two previously adopted weighting frameworks, as well as the proposed weighting for the Assessment.
Table 3. Draft Evaluation Categories and Weights
Table 4 below shows the complete draft evaluation framework, which ties together the performance metrics, evaluation categories, and category weights. The proposed weighting is consistent with the previous frameworks, prioritizing Mobility and Accessibility the most and maintaining the importance of the other categories.
• Mobility (40%): This category evaluates how effectively a project improves the movement of people and goods throughout the transportation system. Metrics such as average vehicle occupancy, travel time reliability, person throughput, travel time improvements, and reductions in vehicle hours of delay measure whether investments increase system efficiency, reduce time spent traveling, and maximize the use of available transportation capacity.
• Accessibility (20%): This category assesses how well the transportation system connects people to destinations, services, and travel options. The included metrics measure access to opportunities, active transportation usage, system connectivity, non-single-occupancy vehicle mode share, and transit ridership to determine whether a project expands mobility choices and improves access for a broad range of users.
• Transportation Safety (12.5%): This category focuses on reducing the risk and consequences of transportation-related incidents for all users. Metrics related to fatal and severe-injury collisions, conflict point reduction, and emergency system redundancy evaluate how projects enhance safety, improve network resilience, and provide reliable transportation access during emergencies.
• Sustainability and Quality of Life (12.5%): This category explores the extent to which projects support environmental goals, equitable outcomes, and livable communities. Metrics such as access to destinations that enhance everyday life, investment in Equity Focus Communities, potential for transit-oriented development, greenhouse gas emissions, and vehicle miles traveled assess how projects contribute to healthier, more sustainable, and more inclusive communities.
• Economy (15%): This category evaluates a project's contribution to regional economic vitality and prosperity. Through metrics that measure impacts on gross regional product and job creation, as well as access to employment and shopping centers, this category assesses how projects support workforce access and economic growth.
Table 4. Proposed Assessment Evaluation Framework
Results from the project evaluations, coupled with data gathered in the Assessment and forthcoming stakeholder engagement, will inform staff recommendations, including consideration of any proposed amendments to the Measure M Ordinance and Expenditure Plan.
Determination_Of_Safety_Impact
DETERMINATION OF SAFETY IMPACT
There is no safety impact associated with the information contained in this report. This action would establish the evaluation framework, metrics, and weighting to guide the Measure M 10-Year Comprehensive Assessment.
Financial_Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Approval of the Measure M 10-Year Comprehensive Assessment evaluation framework, metrics, and weighting does not directly impact the agency's finances.
Equity_Platform
EQUITY PLATFORM
The proposed evaluation framework, metrics, and weighting for the Measure M 10-Year Comprehensive Assessment will guide a broad analysis of Measure M’s impacts through Metro’s Equity Platform framework. Metro serves riders throughout the Los Angeles region. The Assessment will consider the impacts of Metro’s investments on the people of Los Angeles County by analyzing demographic disparities in ridership, mobility choices, and investments. Work on the Assessment also includes the development of an Access to Opportunity tool that will be used to deepen understanding of how Measure M investments have shaped access to opportunity in Los Angeles County.
Findings from the Assessment will be shared widely with stakeholders across the region to validate and contextualize the quantitative analyses. Through this engagement process, stakeholders will have the opportunity to provide perspectives on how the findings reflect or differ from their experiences with the Metro system. This input will help ground the data in the lived experiences of our riders and strengthen the overall assessment.
Vehicle_Miles_Traveled _Outcome
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED OUTCOME
VMT and VMT per capita in Los Angeles County are lower than national averages, the lowest in the SCAG region, and on the lower end of VMT per capita statewide, with these declining VMT trends due in part to Metro’s significant investment in rail and bus transit.* Metro’s Board-adopted VMT reduction targets align with California’s statewide climate goals, including achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. To ensure continued progress, all Board items are assessed for their potential impact on VMT.
As part of these ongoing efforts, this item is expected to contribute to further reductions in VMT. This item supports Metro’s systemwide strategy to reduce VMT through comprehensive planning activities that will benefit and further encourage transit ridership, ridesharing, and active transportation. This aligns with Metro’s Board-adopted VMT reduction targets, which build on the success of existing investments.
*Based on population estimates from the United States Census and VMT estimates from Caltrans’ Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data between 2001-2019.
Implementation_of_Strategic_Plan_Goals
IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
The Assessment supports Strategic Plan Goal #5, which seeks to “Provide responsive, accountable, and trustworthy governance within Metro.” The Assessment will provide transparency and accountability in the delivery of the Measure M program and seek to ensure its effective delivery over the next decade.
Alternatives_Considered
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The Board may choose not to proceed with the recommended evaluation framework, metrics, and weighting; however, the proposed evaluation framework maintains continuity with the frameworks used to develop Measure M and is consistent with more recent Board actions to establish a consistent evaluation process.
Next_Steps
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval of the evaluation framework, metrics, and weighting, staff will begin the technical work to evaluate the Measure M major capital projects and programs completed or anticipated to be completed in the next ten years.
In spring 2027, staff will present a status update of the Assessment to the Board, including a discussion on implications of potential amendments. Based on the feedback received, staff will revise and release the completed Assessment and potential proposed amendments for public review. The Assessment and proposed amendments will subsequently be presented to the Measure M Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (MMITOC) for comment on the Assessment and to make requisite findings on amendments in summer 2027. The final Assessment and recommended amendments will be presented to the Board for consideration in fall 2027. At that time, if the Assessment is approved by a two-thirds vote, the Board may then consider amendments to the Measure M Ordinance and Expenditure Plan within the parameters established by the Ordinance.
Attachment
ATTACHMENT
Attachment A - Project/Program Evaluation Metrics
Prepared_by
Prepared by: Paul Backstrom, Senior Director, Countywide Planning and Development, (213) 922-2183
Rena Lum, Deputy Executive Officer, Countywide Planning and Development, (213) 922-6963
Michael Cano, Executive Officer, Countywide Planning and Development, (213) 418-3010
Craig Hoshijima, Executive Officer, Countywide Planning and Development, (213) 547-4290
Laurie Lombardi, Senior Executive Officer, Countywide Planning and Development, (213) 418-3251
Avital Barnea, Senior Executive Officer, Countywide Planning and Development, (213) 547-4317
Kimberly Houston, Deputy Chief Auditor, (213) 922-4720
Tim Mengle, Executive Officer, Finance (213) 922-7665
Reviewed_By
Reviewed by: Ray Sosa, Chief Planning Officer, (213) 547-4274
Sharon Gookin, Deputy Chief Executive Officer, (213) 418-3101
