Description

Background

State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) play a critical role in the management, maintenance, and development of each state’s transportation systems. Agencies are responsible for allocating billions of dollars in public funds, ensuring that transportation networks are safe, reliable, and sustainable. However, as transportation demands increase and budgets become more constrained, there is growing pressure on state DOTs to operate with maximum efficiency while maintaining high standards of service delivery.

Organizational efficiency at state DOTs is a key factor in ensuring that dollars are used effectively and that transportation projects are completed on time and within budget. Efficiency in this context refers to an agency’s ability to optimize resources—both human and financial—to deliver transportation services in a manner that reduces waste, streamlines processes, and achieves desired outcomes. Despite its importance, measuring organizational efficiency at state DOTs remains a complex and multifaceted challenge.

Current efforts to assess organizational efficiency in transportation agencies are often limited by inconsistent metrics, varying definitions of efficiency, and a lack of standardized methodologies for evaluation. While many state DOTs track performance indicators related to project delivery, budget adherence, and staff productivity, these measures often fail to provide a comprehensive view of overall organizational efficiency. Traditional efficiency metrics may not fully capture the complexities of modern transportation agencies, which must balance competing priorities such as mobility, safety, infrastructure maintenance, sustainability, innovation, and equity.

This research aims to develop a standardized framework for measuring organizational efficiency at state DOTs. By providing clear guidance and best practices, this research will empower transportation agencies to assess their internal processes, identify areas for improvement, and enhance their operational performance. The proposed framework will also align with broader state and federal goals, ensuring that transportation agencies can demonstrate accountability, improve project outcomes, and better manage resources.

Additionally, the research will examine how emerging technologies, such as data analytics, automation, machine learning, artificial intelligence, and digital project management tools, can improve efficiency measurement and foster a culture of continuous improvement. The guidance will also address how state DOTs can incorporate efficiency measures related to sustainability and equity, which are increasingly important components of transportation planning and service delivery.

This research will provide state DOTs with the tools they need to measure and enhance organizational efficiency, resulting in more effective transportation systems that meet the needs of the public and align with long-term strategic goals.

Literature Search Summary

The measurement of organizational efficiency at State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) is a growing area of interest. There has not been significant research in transportation agency organizational efficiency. The following presents resources that are broadly applicable to any organization and resources that are related to transportation.

Guidance and Resources – Not Specific to Transportation

• “The Lean Six Sigma Pocket Toolbook: A Quick Reference Guide to 100 Tools for Improving Quality and Speed” by Michael L. George, John Maxey, David Rowlands, and Mark Price (2004)
• A widely-used guide that provides an overview of Lean and Six Sigma methodologies, offering tools that can improve efficiency and reduce waste in government agencies and other organizations.
• “Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation” by James P. Womack and Daniel T. Jones (2003)
• This book introduces Lean principles and illustrates how organizations, including public sector entities, can streamline operations and increase efficiency.
• "The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement" by Eliyahu M. Goldratt (2004)
• A seminal work in the field of organizational efficiency, focusing on the theory of constraints and how organizations can identify and overcome bottlenecks in their operations.
• “Managing and Measuring Performance in Public and Nonprofit Organizations: An Integrated Approach” by Theodore H. Poister (2014)
• This book provides detailed strategies for developing performance measurement systems and aligning them with organizational goals in public and nonprofit settings.
• “Balanced Scorecard: Translating Strategy into Action” by Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton (1996)
• Introduces the Balanced Scorecard, a popular framework for measuring organizational performance that goes beyond traditional financial metrics to include customer, internal processes, and learning and growth perspectives.
• “Big Data in Practice: How 45 Successful Companies Used Big Data Analytics to Deliver Extraordinary Results” by Bernard Marr (2016)
• Offers real-world examples of how organizations, including government agencies, can utilize big data to enhance efficiency, streamline operations, and make informed decisions.
• “Public Performance & Management Review (Journal)” by Routledge (Ongoing)
• This journal offers peer-reviewed articles on performance management, accountability, and organizational efficiency in the public sector.
• “The New Public Service: Serving, Not Steering” by Janet V. Denhardt and Robert B. Denhardt (2015)
• A book that critiques the "New Public Management" model and promotes a more service-oriented approach to public administration, which also emphasizes efficiency in government services.

Guidance and Resources – Transportation-Related

• NCHRP Report 708: A Guidebook for Sustainability Performance Measurement for Transportation Agencies (2012)
• Outlines various ways to measure efficiency in relation to sustainability goals, providing a foundation for the integration of sustainability metrics into broader organizational efficiency frameworks.
• Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Performance Management Guidebook (2013)
• Emphasizes the importance of linking organizational efficiency to specific performance metrics, such as project delivery times, cost adherence, and customer satisfaction. However, the guidebook also acknowledges the need for more comprehensive measures that capture internal operational efficiency beyond project outcomes.
• NCHRP Report 706: Uses of Performance Measurement to Support Decision Making for State and Local Transportation Agencies (2012)
• Offers detailed insights into how performance metrics, including financial and operational data, can be used to gauge organizational efficiency. This report highlights best practices from leading state DOTs but also points out inconsistencies in metric application and reporting across agencies.
• Lean Deployment in State Transportation Agencies: A Synthesis of Practices (NCHRP Synthesis 533, 2020)
• Documents the application of lean principles in state DOTs, including case studies from departments such as the Ohio DOT and Arizona DOT, which have implemented lean initiatives to reduce bottlenecks, improve project delivery times, and increase productivity.
• FHWA’s Office of Innovative Program Delivery
• Published several reports on process improvement strategies, such as Value Engineering and Process Mapping, which help DOTs streamline operations and achieve cost savings. These techniques are often associated with greater organizational efficiency, though they are typically applied in specific project areas rather than as part of a broader agency-wide efficiency framework.
• TRB Research Circular E-C227: Advancing Performance Management in Transportation (2017)
• Highlights how state DOTs have faced difficulties in aligning organizational efficiency with broader state and federal goals, particularly in the context of constrained budgets and competing priorities.

Objectives

The objective of this research is to develop a comprehensive framework for measuring organizational efficiency at State Departments of Transportation (DOTs). This framework will provide standardized metrics and methodologies to assess and improve the internal processes, resource allocation, and overall performance of state DOTs. By identifying key areas for efficiency improvements and incorporating best practices from both public and private sectors, the research aims to empower transportation agencies to optimize operations, reduce waste, and enhance accountability. Additionally, the framework will address emerging considerations such as technology integration, sustainability, and equity, ensuring that DOTs are better equipped to meet the evolving demands of modern transportation systems while maximizing public value. In addition to the framework the research should produce tools to help state DOTs measure organizational efficiency.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Urgency:

State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) are facing unprecedented challenges, including aging infrastructure, budget constraints, increasing public demand for accountability, and the growing need to incorporate sustainability and equity into their operations. With limited resources, it is essential that state DOTs operate with maximum efficiency to ensure public funds are used effectively and that transportation projects are completed on time and within budget. Despite the importance of organizational efficiency, many state DOTs lack a standardized framework for measuring internal performance, leading to inconsistent practices and missed opportunities for improvement. As the complexity of transportation networks increases, compounded by the demands of advanced technology, climate adaptation, and equity, there is an urgent need for a robust and adaptable framework to guide DOTs in optimizing their operations.

Potential Benefits:

The development of a comprehensive framework for measuring organizational efficiency at state DOTs will offer numerous benefits, including:

1. Optimized Resource Allocation: By identifying areas of inefficiency, DOTs can better allocate their human, financial, and technological resources, leading to cost savings and more streamlined operations.
2. Improved Project Delivery: A standardized efficiency measurement system will enable DOTs to improve project management processes, reducing delays and ensuring transportation projects are completed on schedule and within budget.
3. Enhanced Accountability and Transparency: Implementing clear, measurable efficiency metrics will enable DOTs to demonstrate improved performance and accountability to the public, stakeholders, and funding agencies.
4. Alignment with Strategic Goals: The framework will allow DOTs to align their operational efficiency with broader state and federal priorities, such as sustainability, equity, and resilience, ensuring that they meet modern transportation challenges.
5. Technology Integration: By incorporating data analytics and automation into the efficiency framework, state DOTs will be better equipped to leverage emerging technologies for real-time decision-making and performance monitoring.
6. Long-Term Sustainability and Equity: With sustainability and equity becoming core concerns in transportation planning, the framework will include measures to ensure that efficiency gains also promote environmental sustainability and equitable access to transportation services.

By addressing these urgent needs, this research will provide state DOTs with the tools to enhance operational efficiency, ensure effective use of public resources, and adapt to the evolving demands of transportation systems in the 21st century.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Performance and risk-based approaches for managing curb space when considering adding curbside charging stations are needed by Departments of Transportation and local agencies. Challenges such as mobility resiliency, trip and fall hazards, vandalism, climate resilience, asset life-cycle planning, and comprehensive levels of service are not well understood as the nature of shared curb space is changing. New expectations for increasing transportation options such as pickup/drop-off areas as a tradeoff to parking, bike corrals and electric bike sharing stations, and the potential need to add curbside public EV charging stations add complexity to decisions transportation planners, engineers, and maintenance staff have to make to respond to travel needs.

Curb Management efficiently manages curb space for loading/unloading, ride-hailing and deliveries, and reduces double-parking and illegal stopping. Benefits include improved traffic flow and reduced congestion around busy areas like transit hubs or commercial zones. The use of MaaS and MoD, both affected by curb management, promotes integrating multiple modes of transportation (e.g., public transit, car/bike/scooter sharing, and ride-hailing) which reduces the use of single-occupancy vehicles which, in turn, reduces vehicle miles traveled (VMT), directly mitigating congestion. A performance and risk-based approach to curb management could provide the transportation industry with a good practices and effective methodologies to determine how states manage curb usage.

Literature Search Summary

• NCHRP Report 1090 Risks Related to Emerging and Disruptive Technologies: A Guide covers risks related to increased competition for curb space amongst modes such as MOD, MaaS and the desire to proliferate an EV charging network. 1090 highlights that pickup/drop-off and modal options – including bicycles and scooters – potentially compete for the same space as curbside charging capabilities. The report did not identify specific approaches or good practices for how to manage risks to the curb space when considering adding curbside charging stations. The report provides isolated high-level mitigation strategies for individual areas, but does not look at the risks and trade-offs from a wholistic curb management perspective or the interaction of these uses. The curb management was a small subset of this research and can serve as a starting point for the proposed research.
• NCHRP Synthesis 597 Micromobility Policies, Permits and Practices Reviewed implementation of micromobility and quantified associated risks to other users in the curb space, could serve as a useful starting point for risk assessment on this curb use
• NCHRP 340 Web only Doc. Dynamic Curbside Management: Keeping Pace with New and Emerging Mobility and Technology in the Public Right-of-Way, Part 1: Dynamic Curbside Management Guide and Part 2: Conduct of Research Report (2022). Provides current standards and best practices in curb management including the CurbLR open data spec and Curb Data Specification (CDS) as well as a framework for understanding the goals of curb management. It discusses the trade-offs of EV chargers and other emerging technologies. Some of the largest risks are discussed as considerations but no framework or guidance is provided on how to incorporate risk in the decisions. This document should be a foundation of the proposed research.
• NCHRP Report 1066 Risk Assessment Techniques for Transportation Asset Management and the appendices web only doc 366. Provides techniques for risk assessment of transportation assets, no discussion of “the curb” but some of the techniques and considerations for other assets could be applied.
• Consensus Study Report The Role of Transit, Shared Modes, and Public Policy in the New Mobility Landscape (2021). Extensive discussion of the types of risk associated with a variety of emerging curb uses, no framework for assessment.
• ITE Curbside Management Practitioners Guide – Provides many good considerations for how curb uses and design, minimal consideration of risk or emerging technology
• TCRP report 95 Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 18, Parking Management and Supply provides quantitative data on how people react to changes in parking supply these techniques could be expanded to consider dynamic curb use and the addition of charging infrastructure.
• “Management of the curb space allocation in urban transportation system” Yu and Bayram; 2021; International Transaction in Operations Research; https://doi.org/10.1111/itor.12941. Developed dynamic vs fixed curb allocation optimization models based on max profit and min delay objectives. Could build on this framework with a min risk objective.
• “Curbside Parking Monitoring With Roadside LiDAR” Chen, Xu, Liu; 2023; TRR; https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981231193410. Provides new method for short term deployment and curb monitoring could be a valuable technique during this research.
• “Testing Curbside Management Strategies to Mitigate the Impacts of Ride sourcing Services on Traffic” Ranjbari, Machado-Leon Goodchild; 2020; TRR; https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198120957314. Looked at 2 curb management strategies for their impact on passenger satisfaction, travel speeds and traffic safety.
• “Demystifying Urban Curbside Freight Management: Strategic Incremental Approach from Washington, D.C.” Dey, Perez, Dock; 2019; TRR https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119863773. Focused on pricing strategies and freight operations at the curb.
• “Enabling Factors and Durations Data Analytics for Dynamic Freight Parking Limits” Castrellon, Sanchez-Diaz, Kalahasthi; 2022; TRR; https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981221115086. Looks at factors necessary and algorithms for dynamic parking duration policies, these would be type of policy that needs to be evaluated for the risk as compared to other curb management strategies.
• “Optimal Curbside Pricing for Managing Ride-Hailing Pick-Ups and Drop-Offs” Liu, Ma, Qian; 2022; SSRN; Liu, Jiachao and Ma, Wei and Qian, Sean, Optimal Curbside Pricing for Managing Ride-Hailing Pick-Ups and Drop-Offs. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4068718 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4068718 They modeled travelers make joint choices of modes (driving or ride-hailing) for different curb pricing strategies. This technique could be modeled to include additional mode and uses for Mobility as a services and EV charging options as well.
• “Approximate Optimum Curbside Utilisation for Pick-Up and Drop-Off (PUDO) and Parking Demands Using Reinforcement Learning” Ye, Feng, Qiu, Stettler, Angeloudis; 2022; IEEE; DOI: 10.1109/ITSC55140.2022.9922036. Looks at optimization between Pick up drop off and long-term parking.
• Dynamic Curbside Management: Keeping Pace with New and Emerging Mobility and Technology in the Public Right of Way. This paper provides guidance on dynamic curbside management including the development of performance measures (and potential conflicting goals) for curb use, considerations for data collection and management, potential tools, and considerations of technological advancements including autonomous and electric vehicles.
• Dynamic Curbside Management: Keeping Pace with New and Emerging Mobility and Technology in the Public Right-of-Way, Part 1: Dynamic Curbside Management Guide and Part 2: Conduct of Research Report | The National Academies Press
• Automated Vehicles and Infrastructure Enablers: Curbs and Curbside Management covers design, maintenance, and management approaches for curbs and adjacent infrastructure for passenger pick up and drop off. While this paper discusses curbside infrastructure and alternate mobility methods, the impact and interactivity of EV charging infrastructure is not discussed.
• EPR2024005: Automated Vehicles and Infrastructure Enablers: Curbs and Curbside Management - Research Report (sae.org)
• Estimating and Mitigating the Congestion Effect of Curbside Pick-ups and Drop-offs: A Causal Inference Approach focuses primarily on the effect of PUDOs on curbside utilization and a rerouting method which could be referenced with regard to mobility resilience. This paper addresses aspects of curbside usage, but does not take a wholistic view of curbside performance.
• Estimating and Mitigating the Congestion Effect of Curbside Pick-ups and Drop-Offs: A Causal Inference Approach | Transportation Science (informs.org)
• Community Charging: Emerging Multifamily, Curbside, and Multimodal Practices focuses on identifying existing EV charging station practices and recommends approaches for implementing and maintaining infrastructure for providing charging to individuals without private off-street parking. This paper does not address the risks of curbside charging to other aspects of the curbside.
• Community Charging: Emerging Multifamily, Curbside, and Multimodal Practices (driveelectric.gov)
• Designing a Prototype of a Mobile Charging Robot for Charging of Electric Vehicles discusses the process of designing a mobile charging robot and potential applications. This provides a potential alternative to fixed charging infrastructure, but would not likely be a viable solution in the short term.
• 2024-01-2990: Designing a Prototype of a Mobile Charging Robot for Charging of Electric Vehicles - Technical Paper (sae.org)
• Curbside Management, 2023 Executive Briefing. This document provides a general approach to curbside management that includes consideration of EV charging, passenger pickup/drop-off, and other curbside services. However, the approach does not explicitly provide guidance with respect to risks posed by each potential service: 2023 Executive Briefing Curbside Management (dot.gov)
• Managing the Curb: Understanding the Impacts of On-Demand Mobility on Public Transit, Micromobility, and Pedestrians: https://transweb.sjsu.edu/sites/default/files/1904-Shaheen-Curbspace-Management-Shared-Mobility-Pedestrians.pdf. Examines the needs and management of curb space. This paper highlights concerns over the impact, equity and access, and safety concerns associated with the growing demand for curb space. Some of the concerns highlighted include congestion and competition among users, access to curb space, and the need for clear and safe allocations for pedestrians and cyclists to minimize conflicts. The paper also suggests strategies and provides frameworks to manage curb space, including designated areas, dynamic pricing, and community involvement when planning. The paper also provides performance metrics for the management of curb space such as number of accidents, number of accessible vehicles or devices, among many others. The paper does include high level risks, and performance metrics for curb management, but does not go provide enough detail for states to understand implementation or integration within management decisions.

Objectives

The objective of this research is to develop performance and risk-based approaches to curb management. The research will provide guidance and good practices to better enable DOTs in managing performance and threats added with transportation features like electric vehicle (EV) charging stations, Mobility as a Service (MaaS), and Mobility on Demand (MOD) as they compete for the same curb space as more traditional physical transportation elements such as pedestrian and vehicle parking/loading usage. The research will include the identification of good practices, necessary data to support performance and risk-based decision making, and a framework for developing performance and risk-based approaches to managing shared curb space.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

There are numerous ongoing funding opportunities that states are actively implementing that demonstrate that implementation is occurring faster than approaches to good management strategies, summarized below:

The National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure (NEVI) Formula Program allocated approximately $4.1 Billion in funding to states to strategically deploy EV charging stations and to establish an interconnected network to facilitate data collection, access, and reliability. Eligible NEVI funding include:

• The acquisition, installation, and network connection of EV charging stations to facilitate data collection, access, and reliability;
• Proper operation and maintenance of EV charging stations; and,
• Long-term EV charging station data sharing.

Although proper operation and maintenance was a funding eligible activity, there was no guidance provided on how to do it, or what levels of acceptable service are.

The Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant Program is allocating approximately $2.5 Billion in funding to deploy publicly accessible electric, hydrogen, propane, and natural gas fueling infrastructure along designated corridors, and within communities, that will be accessible to all drivers. Eligible activities within the Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Discretionary Grant include:

• The acquisition and installation of publicly accessible electric charging, hydrogen, propane, and natural gas fueling infrastructure.
• Operating assistance for 5 years of operations after the installation.
• Install traffic control devices located in the right-of-way to provide directional information to eligible infrastructure acquired, installed, or operated with the grant.
• Projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and to expand or fill gaps in access to publicly accessible electric charging, hydrogen, propane, and natural gas fueling infrastructure.
• Fund educational and community engagement activities to develop and implement education programs through partnerships with schools, community organizations, and vehicle dealerships to support the use of zero-emission vehicles and associated infrastructure.
• The program does define corridor and community eligibility, and does state that traffic control devices must follow the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). There was no guidance on the performance and risk-based approaches to curb management in relation to the installation, operation assistance, or maintenance of these devices.

FHWA just released their National Deployment Plan for Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) Technologies “Saving Lives with Connectivity: A Plan to Accelerate V2X Deployment” in it they discuss the current investments being made in connected infrastructure:

• Invested $61.5 million in V2X technology research and deployment through the FHWA Turner Fairbank Highway Research Program over the last five years, with $12.5 million in follow-on research projects budgeted for FY24
• Identified and promoted funding opportunities made available through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, including awards to seven Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation (SMART) and four Advanced Transportation Technology and Innovation (ATTAIN) grants that include V2X elements. Approximately $200 million in active, grant funded projects are underway now, including earlier Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) grants.

They also set the following goals:

• Top 75 metro areas have 25% of signalized intersections V2X enabled by 2028
• Top 75 metro areas have 50% of signalized intersections V2X enabled and V2X installed in 40% of the nation’s intersections by 2031

The top metro areas will have the largest competition for curb space and connected infrastructure will be located in the curb. Also, Cyber Security is a highly discussed risk, and given the traditional adage that “physical access is total access” and every connected device is a potential physical access point the risks to DOT and city systems needs to be considered.

One of the two primary task for States, Local Governments, Tribes, and Public Agencies in the National Deployment Plan for Vehicle-to-Everything (V2X) Technologies is to Deploy and operate secure interoperable, cybersecure infrastructure-based V2X technologies and applications. Without understanding the risks we cannot provide for security.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Past surveys of state transportation agencies have revealed that the risk register is the most popular tool for prioritizing risks. However, risk registers, and other tools such as heat maps, do not enable an economic analysis of alternative adaptation strategies that might decrease the likelihood or consequence of future risk events. The Pipeline Hazardous Materials and Safety Administration (PHMSA) has asserted that quantitative models provide greater insights into risk and greater support for decision making, but transportation agencies have been reluctant to adopt quantitative models and probabilistic modeling to assess potential consequences associated with risk events. Common barriers include the perceived complexity of the analysis, the lack of trained personnel, and the lack of reliable data.

To help eliminate these barriers, guidance is needed to demonstrate the use of mixed-method research model and quantitative modeling techniques and data in planning investments leading to a more resilient transportation system. Several models that potentially apply including qualitative models, relative assessment/index models, quantitative system and probabilistic models. This project description emerged in part from the roadmap developed under NCHRP Project 23-09, which focuses on developing the scoping study and roadmap to develop an all-hazards risk and resilience model for highway assets.

Literature Search Summary

In addition to NCHRP Project 23-09, other relevant research in this area includes:

• A Guide for Program-Level Risk Management Performance Metrics (NCHRP 23-35 pending), National Cooperative Highway Research Board, Project has not been awarded.
• Incorporating Resilience Concepts and Strategies in Transportation Planning (NCHRP 08-129), National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2022.
• Integrating Effective Transportation Performance, Risk and Asset Management Practices (NCHRP 08-115), National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2021.
• Risk Assessment Techniques for Transportation Asset Management (NCHRP 08-118), National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2021.
• Development of a Risk Management Strategic Plan and Research Roadmap (NCHRP 20-123(04)),National Cooperative Highway Research Board, 2021.
• Consistency Review of Methodologies for Quantitative Risk Assessment, U.S. Department of Transportation, October 26, 2020.
• Implementing NCHRP Report 806: Guide to Cross-Asset Resource Allocation and the Impact on Transportation System Performance, National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2018.
• Managing Risk Across the Enterprise (NCHRP 08-93), National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2016.
• A Systematic Approach to Safety – Using Risk to Drive Action, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2014.
• Guide to Integrated Risk Management, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat, 2014.
• Managing the Risks of Extreme Events and Disasters to Advance Climate Change Adaptation. A Special Report of Working Groups I and II of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, 2012.
• Disaster Resilience: A National Imperative, The National Academies Press, 2012.
• Assessing Criticality in Transportation Adaptation Planning, U.S. Department of Transportation, 2011.
• Executive Strategies for Risk Management by State Departments of Transportation (NCHRP 20-24(74)), National Cooperative Research Board, 2011
• Victorian Government Risk Management Framework, Secretary Department of Treasury and Finance, 2011.
• All Hazards Risk and Resilience, Prioritizing Critical Infrastructure Using the RAMCAP Approach, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Innovative Technologies Institute, 2009
• Guidebook on Risk Analysis Tools and Management Practices to Control Transportation Project Costs (NCHRP 08-60), National Cooperative Highway Research Program, 2009.
• Port Risk Management and Insurance Guidebook, U.S. Department of Transportation Office of Ports and Domestic Shipping, 1998.

Objectives

This research will develop guidance and an enterprise risk model framework-driven process for transportation agency leadership to decide the best course of action in addressing short and long-term enterprise-level risks. This will lead to improvements in the practice of enterprise risk management through right-sizing investments in a wide array of risk mitigation strategies to avoid much higher costs tomorrow. Efforts include:

• Investigate both quantitative and mixed-method research models for estimating vulnerability, likelihood, and both direct/indirect consequences associated with a variety of risks.
• Document the costs to, and assemble a representative catalog of data and information to support the most promising models.
• Develop a methodology for evaluating the potential impacts of risk events and the benefits associated with possible mitigation strategies.
• Demonstrate how the methodology can be applied to multiple planning topic spaces, such as emerging technologies, resilience, equity, and workforce, over a short and long-term investment planning cycle.
• Develop draft problem statement developments for post-research funding mechanisms such as NCHRP 20-123, NCHRP 20-44 and promote the findings through CEO workshops.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

As transportation agencies face wildfires, flooding, and other forms of destruction to the transportation system with more regularity and intensity, there is an increased urgency for methodologies that support modeling future uncertainties and evaluating when risks reach the point that investments in mitigation strategies are warranted to offset the potential for huge economic and social impacts. The guidance developed through this research will lead to the ability for transportation agencies to better analyze potential risks, as actuaries do regularly to support the insurance industry. The results will lead to a more resilient transportation system with fewer disruptions.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

• Communication and Implementation Funding: $150,000 to offer CEO workshops and peer exchanges to support implementation.
• Communication and Implementation Period: 18 months following completion of the research.

Notes

Description

Background

Growing concerns about equity, affordability, public health, safety, congestion reduction and environmental protection support more multimodal transportation planning and transportation demand management. Many jurisdictions have goals to improve and encourage non-auto travel. One major obstacle is the inadequacy of information on non-auto travel demands, including latent demands.

In any community a significant portion of travelers cannot, should not, or prefer not to drive and will use non-auto modes for some, most, or all their trips if those modes are convenient, comfortable, and affordable. Table 1 describes these demands and the costs imposed on users and society if those demands are not served. Communities that improve and encourage non-auto travel often experience significant increases in non-auto travel, indicating latent demands (Litman and Pan 2024).

Table 1 - Types of Non-Auto Travel Demands

In a typical community, 20-40% of travelers cannot, should not, or prefer not to drive and will use non-auto modes if they are convenient, comfortable, and affordable.

• Stephen Brumbaugh (2021), Travel Patterns of American Adults with Disabilities, Bureau of Transportation Statistics (www.bts.gov); at https://bit.ly/3exIvnQ.
• Census (2021), “Commuting (Journey to Work),” American Community Survey, US Census (www.census.gov); at www.census.gov/topics/employment/commuting.html.
• Todd Litman (2024), Evaluating Transportation Diversity, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/choice.pdf.

In practice, transportation planners and modelers often use incomplete data sets, such as the census commute mode share or regional travel surveys, to estimate non-auto travel demands. These surveys tend to underestimate non-auto travel demands, particularly demand for active modes (walking, bicycling and their variants) by overlooking and undercounting non-commute and off-peak trips, travel by children, recreational trips, local trips (those within a traffic analysis zone), and non-motorized links of journeys that include motorized trips. For example, a bike-transit-walk commute is usually categorized as a transit trip, and the trips between a parked vehicle and a destination are generally ignored even if they involve walking many blocks on public roads. U.S. census data indicate that only about 8% of commute trips are by non-auto modes, but more comprehensive surveys such as the National Household Travel Survey indicate that about 17% of total trips are by active modes, with higher rates in urban areas and by lower-income travelers. Because census data ignore non-commute trips, travel by children, and walking or bicycling links of journeys that include motorized trips, these modes are significantly undercounted.

For transit modes, rail and fixed-guideway modes typically have customized ridership forecasting approaches, but ridership forecasting for fixed-route bus and evolving service concepts (e.g., microtransit) can be challenging, especially for rural and small- to medium-sized agencies. Such forecasting often relies on elasticities, sketch tools, and formulas that are dated (e.g., TCRP Synthesis 66, Fixed Route Transit Forecasting and Service Planning Methods, was published in 2006) or newer tools that have not been sufficiently standardized or evaluated (e.g., projections from automatic vehicle location and automatic passenger count data, or big-data tools such as StreetLight Data and Replica).

Serving latent demands for non-auto travel can provide large benefits to the travelers who use those modes, their families and communities. Transportation agencies need better estimates of demand for such travel to incorporate into long-range and scenario plans, short-range and strategic plans, and project prioritization processes.

Literature Search Summary

Various publications analyze some aspects of non-auto demands, such as travel activity by children and youths, people with disabilities, low-income households, zero-car households, visitors, and people who want more physical activity and fitness. Other studies examine demands for specific modes such as walking, bicycling, bike- and car-sharing, and various types of public transit. Some studies examine latent demands for non-auto travel and the benefits of serving currently unmet demands. However, few studies consider overall non-auto travel demands by all groups, total latent demands, and total benefits of serving them, and few documents provide technical guidance for performing such analysis.

As previously described, current analyses often rely on incomplete data, such as commute mode share, which undercounts non-auto trips, and often overlooks or underestimates latent demands for non-auto travel.

Below are some examples of current literature:

• Evelyn Blumenberg, Anne Brown and Andrew Schouten (2020), “Car-deficit Households: Determinants and Implications for Household Travel in the U.S.” Transportation 47, pp. 1103– 1125 (https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-018-9956-6).
• Ralph Buehler and Andrea Hamre (2015), “The Multimodal Majority? Driving, Walking, Cycling, and Public Transportation Use Among American Adults,” Transportation 42, 1081–1101 (doi.org/10.1007/s11116-014-9556-z).
• Caltrans (2020), Vehicle Miles Traveled-Focused Transportation Impact Study Guide, California Department of Transportation (https://dot.ca.gov); at https://bit.ly/3DDSm5H. Also see SB 743 Implementation Resources (https://dot.ca.gov/programs/sustainability/sb-743/sb743-resources).
• Chad Frederick, William Riggs and John Hans Gilderbloom (2017), “Commute Mode Diversity and Public Health: A Multivariate Analysis of 148 US Cities,” International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, pp. 1–11 (https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2017.1321705).
• ITE (2023), Vehicle-Miles Traveled (VMT) as a Metric for Sustainability, Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org); at https://ecommerce.ite.org/imis/ItemDetail?iProductCode=IR-154-E.
• ITF (2017), Economic Benefits of Improving Transport Accessibility, The International Transport Forum (www.itf-oecd.org); at https://bit.ly/3QX64aC.
• ITF (2021), Travel Transitions: How Transport Planners and Policy Makers Can Respond to Shifting Mobility Trends, International Transport Forum (www.itf-oecd.org); at https://bit.ly/3BGJewh.
• Lawson, C.T., Muro, A. & Krans, E. Forecasting bus ridership using a “Blended Approach”. Transportation (48), 617–641 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-019-10073-z
• Todd Litman (2013), “The New Transportation Planning Paradigm,” ITE Journal (www.ite.org), Vol. 83, June, pp. 20-28; at www.vtpi.org/paradigm.pdf.
• Todd Litman (2023), Are Vehicle Travel Reduction Targets Justified, World Conference for Transportation Research (https://wctrs-society.com); at www.vtpi.org/vmt_red.pdf.
• Todd Litman (2024), Evaluating Transportation Diversity, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/choice.pdf.
• Todd Litman and Meiyu (Melrose) Pan (2023), TDM Success Stories, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org); at www.vtpi.org/tdmss.pdf.
• Glen Lyons (2020), The Benefits of a ‘Decide and Provide’ Approach to Transport Planning, Transport for the North (https://transportforthenorth.com); at https://bit.ly/3F8sst3.
• María del Mar Parra López, Jan Anne Annema and Bert van Wee (2022), “The Added Value of Having Multiple Options to Travel: An Explorative Study,” Journal of Transport Geography, Vo. 98 (doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103258).
• WRI (2019), Reducing Demand for Vehicle Trips in Cities – Learning Guide, The City Fix (https://thecityfixlearn.org); at https://bit.ly/3u4qtC1.
• WSL (2008), Adoption of Statewide Goals to Reduce Annual Per Capita Vehicle Miles Traveled by 2050, Washington State Legislature (https://apps.leg.wa.gov); at https://bit.ly/3rdP6KH.
• Fang Zhao, et al. (2013), Transportation Needs of Disadvantaged Populations: Where, When, and How?, Federal Transit Administration (www.transit.dot.gov); at https://bit.ly/3QS7Ut1.

Objectives

Develop guidance for more comprehensive analysis of non-auto travel demands, including latent demands.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

There is an urgent need to better understand non-auto travel demands, including the ability to forecast future demands and the impacts of serving those demands. This study can provide large benefits by better aligning the planning and investment decisions of state DOTs and other transportation agencies with the needs and preferences of transportation system users. Many policy makers and planning practitioners recognize that a significant portion of travelers cannot, should not, or prefer not to drive and will use non-auto modes if they are convenient, comfortable and affordable, and many jurisdictions have mode shift targets, but practitioners lack the data needed to achieve these goals. Current planning practices tend to overlook and undervalue non-auto travel demands, particularly latent demands, resulting in underinvestment. Improving our understanding of non-auto travel demands can make planning and investment decisions more responsive to user and community needs.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

The research would be beneficial to state DOT professionals at any level as well as transportation organization partners and stakeholders who all have a vested interest in better understanding the demand for different modes of transportation. Implementation elements include a communications plan to ensure awareness of the research and TRB, FHWA and AASHTO presentations to share the findings. Venues include workshops, peer exchanges, and committee meetings.

There are several other AASHTO and TRB committees interested in transportation’s contribution toward equity that would likely support this project, including:

• AASHTO
• Committee on Performance Based Management (CPBM) – Christos Xenophontos, Chair
• Committee on Planning
• Council on Active Transportation
• TRB
• Performance Management (AJE20) - Michael Grant, Chair
• Equity in Transportation (AME10)
• Transportation Planning Policy and Processes (AEP10)
• Transportation Planning Analysis and Application (AEP15)
• Public Transportation Planning and Development (AP025) – Peter Ohlms, Chair
• Bicycle Transportation (ACH20)
• Pedestrians (ACH10)
• Communication and Implementation Period: 6 months

AASHTO requirement for interim deliverable review:

• Interim deliverable(s): The results of this research are critically important to the DOTs. As such, an interim deliverable is required to be reviewed by the applicable AASHTO Committee(s). The AASHTO Committee on Performance Based Management has developed and sponsored this needs statement on behalf of member DOTs. Interim deliverables could include literature reviews, surveys, interim reports, and full draft reports.
• Stakeholder engagement: As part of the interim deliverable, the project team and research panel should engage DOT stakeholders for feedback during the project. Engagement could include webinars, workshops, presentations, surveys, user testing of draft tools, and interim reports and literature reviews.

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• Not just the pieces, but the overall functions
• Learn from things like Baldridge, other management systems

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Empathy, culture
Facilitating change management, team functions
Keeping workforce, mitigating staff turnover
Beyond organizational structure

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

The research question seeks to answer what is an effective performance measure for transportation resilience in a community, state, or other jurisdiction? Progress toward solving these questions has been underway for several years, though failing to reach the desired outcome. The need for this research was further reinforced during the December 2022 AASHTO conference in Providence and the January 2023 TRB annual meeting, which included a handful of workshops and sessions that broached this subject. From the perspective of high-quality performance management practice, effective measures of resilience have been elusive.

While the community has established measures of resilience for specific infrastructure, organizations, or supply chains, the metrics and definitions are lacking for community mobility. This research will focus on how best to measure it, from a state-of-the-art performance management perspective, not just the easy but low-value event or activity tallies. Consider an agency or community investing in preparedness work, infrastructure hardening, or implementing a policy shift – what is the most effective, objective, outcome-based evidence for whether the jurisdiction is now more resilient than it was a year ago? While there are seeds of ideas, questions linger and have been raised by multiple agencies, PIARC, AASHTO committees, TRB committees, and surely others.

Literature Search Summary

While there are several published resources referring to resilience performance, there remains a gap in effective performance measurement that this proposed research seeks to close.

• Disaster Resilience Framework Workshop, 2015, San Diego. The workshop notes (unpublished) includes a section about Community Resilience Metrics.
• Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Framework (VAAF), 2017, FHWA HOP (link). An important go-to guide for anybody working on transportation resilience.
• Integrating Resilience into the Transportation Planning Process, White Paper on Literature Review Findings, 2018, FHWA HOP (link). A good resource for background and context, including a history of Federal rules on resilience. This document correctly places performance measure formulation after goals but before solutions.
• Investing in Transportation Resilience: A Framework for Informed Choices, 2021, NAS/TRB (link). This also included a Committee on Transportation Resilience Metrics. The document includes some relevant points but is generally of limited value for performance management given its focus on project-specific evaluations and benefit-cost analysis.
• Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide, 2021, NAS/TRB (link). Follows on a 2018 resilience summit in Denver. A wealth of information about resilience, but measurement appears limited to project-specific risk reduction.
• Developing Transportation System Climate Resilience Performance Measures, 2022, Minnesota DOT (link). A survey showed most states do not have resilience performance measures. Those that do are not outcome-based.
• A Perspective on Quantifying Resilience: Combining Community and Infrastructure Capitals, 2023, Gerges et al (link).
• Measuring Impacts and Performance of State DOT Resilience Efforts, 2022-2024, NCHRP 23-26, underway (link). Potentially valuable for this proposed research, but measures are not defined until after solutions and appear to focus only on monitoring project effects.
• Transportation Asset Risk and Resilience, 2023-2026, NCHRP 23-32, pending/underway (link). A relatively large effort to generate new guidance, which may or may not include performance.

There are many laws, rules, references, and guidance documents going back many years, and right up to the current PROTECT Program guidance. The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act (2020), H.R.1865, calls on the “Secretary of Transportation to enter into an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study through the Transportation Research Board on effective ways to measure the resilience of transportation systems and services to natural disasters, natural hazards, and other potential disruptions.”

Be wary of two tangents in literature: those focused solely on infrastructure and others about operational/organizational resilience, which are mostly unhelpful and distracting. Apart from published guidance, this research project will include a scan of select agencies to gather more evidence and examples, including efforts to integrate transportation resilience with broader initiatives like communication and energy infrastructure.

Objectives

This research seeks to clarify and refine what it means to have an effective, outcome-based, high-level performance management approach to resilience. Toward this end there are three essential parts:

1. Confirming definitions. For example, is resilience an inverse of vulnerability? Or does it imply an inverse of sensitivity and adaptive capacity (e.g., per the Vulnerability Assessment Scoring Tool [VAST])? If resilience is infinite, is exposure irrelevant? Consistent with the VAAF, is there consensus on the definitions for risk, criticality, consequence, and other essential terms? Through these definitions, resilience measures will be compared and contrasted with risk and related performance areas.
2. Community mobility, or mobility and destination access across a jurisdiction of any size, for all users and modes. This is distinct from infrastructure-focused resilience for a specific asset, e.g., a bridge. For a community subject to natural or human-caused disasters, how can they know whether they are more or less resilient? Is there a role for the broader 4R concept of Robustness – Redundancy – Resourcefulness – Rapidity?
3. Effective performance measures. Define performance measures for the resilience community. Agency leaders need relevant, feasible, and quantifiable evidence of improved resilience that is outcome-based and trackable over time. These metrics should measure continuous data in the form of substantive change and performance in resilience as opposed to activity metrics already in play or project-specific evaluations. Performance measures should also reflect disparate impacts to mobile communities or disadvantaged areas and populations.

In addition to developed guidance, this project will pilot the implementation of a high-quality resilience performance measure into existing performance management frameworks for up to five agencies. Not only states, but MPOs, e.g. Los Angeles and San Diego have promising initiatives already developed.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Transportation resilience continues to grow in importance and this gap in practice needs to be addressed. Beyond natural hazards, this work should address increasing system demand (e.g., growing or shifting populations), technology and mobility advancement risks (e.g., new or changing modes), and institutional issues such as risk appetites and scarce resources.

This is proposed as an implementation project for NCHRPs 23-26 Measuring Impacts and Performance of State DOT Resilience Efforts, planned to be completed by the end of 2024. It may also be done in parallel with the new 23-35 Developing New Performance Metrics for Risk Management.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

This research would primarily be used by transportation agencies and others responsible for implementing resilience performance measures and management systems and build on some of the research conducted on other projects. Recently completed NCHRP Project 23-09 established a framework and research roadmap for assessing risk to agency assets and the traveling public from extreme weather, climate change, and other threats and hazards. Follow-on NCHRP Project 23-32 Asset Risk & Resilience will develop the technical resource in three phases, including planning, execution, and final product development. As described above, this research should be conducted along a parallel and complementary timeline. Critical implementation elements include a communication plan to ensure awareness of the research products and TRB, FHWA, and AASHTO webinars to share the findings. As this work emphasizes resilience measures that are outcome-based and trackable over time, implementing organizations that are expected to monitor performance over time may benefit from collaboration.

A subsequent phase of this research funded through NCHRP 20-44 may be helpful to disseminate the research findings more broadly and develop case studies showing the use of the research guidance. There are several other AASHTO and TRB committees interested in resiliency that would likely support this project, including:

• AASHTO
• Committee on Performance Based Management (CPBM) Task Force on Emerging Performance Measures - Deanna Belden, Minnesota DOT and Kelly Travelbee, Michigan DOT, Co-Chairs
• CPBM Subcommittee on Risk Management
• Committee on Transportation System Security and Resilience (CTSSR)
• Committee on Planning
• Highways and Streets Council
• Subcommittee on Asset Management
• TRB
• Strategic Management (AJE10) - Steve Woelfel, Massachusetts DOT, Chair
• Performance Management (AJE20) - Michael Grant, Chair
• Asset Management (AJE30)
• Risk Management (ATO40)
• Critical Infrastructure Protection (AMR10)
• Extreme Weather and Climate Change Adaptation (AMR50)
• Transportation Planning Policy and Process (AEP10)

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

i. What portion of travelers cannot, should not, or prefer not to drive and would use non-auto modes if they are convenient, comfortable and affordable.

(combined with elements of the omissions and biases in the planning process idea as appropriate. from symposium 1:

Research that combines the following two ideas:
Better understanding of non-auto travel demands. What portion of travelers cannot, should not, or prefer not to drive and would use non-auto modes if they are convenient, comfortable and affordable. This will require more detailed and targeted travel surveys, and case studies which measure the travel changes that result from non-auto improvements and incentives.
Omissions and biases in the planning process. A number of studies indicate that current planning tends to overinvest in automobile facilities and underinvest in non-auto improvements, TDM programs and Smart Growth development policies compared with what is fair and efficient. Some of these reflect the previous-describe omissions and others result from funding biases that make it much easier for public agencies to invest in highways and mandate off-street parking than to improve other modes. We need research that identifies these biases and provides a roadmap for more efficient and equitable transportation planning.)

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

While many states have committed to transportation equity, a critical gap exists in understanding how programs of projects contribute to achieving transportation equity. Currently, most programming uses an asset management lens, which assumes the existing system continues to meet evolving needs. However, newer state and federal goals reflect a holistic, bigger picture focus than asset management. Recent statewide multimodal transportation plans reflect this shift with ambitious safety, equity, and sustainability targets. Maintaining the current programming approach may hinder the ability to achieve these goals.

Recently, the federal government committed to the Justice 40 program which states that 40% of benefits from specific federal programs will go towards disadvantaged communities. This new federal initiative has increased interest from state DOTs in how to measure equity in transportation.

Literature Search Summary

Literature exists on equity in transportation focused on policy and project decisions, or specifically federal grant programs. Research is needed that focuses on incorporating equity into broader programming decisions at state DOTs. (Note: we can add short summaries about these in further revisions to this RNS).

Existing literature about transportation equity includes:

• Elevating Equity in Transportation Decision Making: Recommendations for Federal Competitive Grant programs (2024) https://nap.nationalacademies.org/catalog/27439/elevating-equity-in-transportation-decision-making-recommendations-for-federal-competitive-grant-programs
• NCHRP Project 20-05 Synthesis Topic 53-01 Practices to Promote Equity in Transportation Funding (2023) https://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/53-01/FinalReport.pdf
• NCHRP 20-123(19) A Research Roadmap for Institutionalizing Transportation Equity [Active] Support for AASHTO Committees and Councils https://trid.trb.org/view/2011425
• Tools to Integrate Equity into Active Transportation and Safety Investments http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=5128
• Transportation Equity Project Prioritization Criteria (2020)

Objectives

The objective of this research is to understand how programs of projects contribute to achieving transportation equity and determine how to adjust current programming processes to achieve more equitable outcomes.

The following research tasks will support the main objective:

• Task 1: Define program equity. Review literature and conduct targeted outreach to state DOTs to identify current definitions of equity and performance measures related to equity.
• Task 2: Evaluate current system performance against equity outcome-based programming principles. Determined potential equity-based outcome measures. Use a case study to evaluate existing system performance measures compared to an equity outcome-based measure.
• Task 3: Identify programming processes that advance transportation equity. Develop a list of potential improvements and propose specific additional tools, analytical methods and other information that would be needed to meet the needs of state DOT more fully.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Equity is increasingly a key goal for state DOTs and the federal government. In addition to the federal commitment to Justice 40, many state DOTs are coming to terms with their past actions that have caused harms in disadvantaged communities throughout the country and are seeking remedies. States and local communities have adopted commitments to transportation equity to address on-going inequities in transportation. The social unrest in 2020 following the murder of George Floyd showed the impact that entrenched inequities can have on the population. The resulting outrage fueled the desire for a greater focus on equity across the country.

State DOTs spend billions of dollars every year on transportation projects across the country. This investment has the ability to greatly benefit disadvantaged communities and reduce existing inequitable outcomes if DOTs and other transportation providers are able to evaluate and measure their program in regards to equity. Transportation access is necessary for employment and improved transportation access greatly improves job opportunities and access to other important destinations.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

The research would be beneficial to state DOT professionals at any level as well as transportation organization partners and stakeholders who all have a vested interest in improving equity in transportation and overall. Implementation elements include a communications plan to ensure awareness of the research and TRB, FHWA and AASHTO presentations to share the findings. Venues include workshops, peer exchanges, and committee meetings.

There are several other AASHTO and TRB committees interested in transportation’s contribution toward equity that would likely support this project, including:

• AASHTO
• Committee on Performance Based Management (CPBM) – Christos Xenophontos, Chair
• Committee on Planning
• TRB
• Committee on Equity in Transportation (AME10)
• Performance Management (AJE20) - Michael Grant, Chair
• Strategic Management (AJE10)
• Transportation Planning Policy and Processes (AEP10)
• Transportation Planning Analysis and Application (AEP15)
• Communication and Implementation Funding: $20,000
• Communication and Implementation Period: 6 months
• AASHTO requirement for interim deliverable review:
• Interim deliverable(s): The results of this research are critically important to the DOTs. As such, an interim deliverable is required to be reviewed by the applicable AASHTO Committee(s). The AASHTO Committee on Performance Based Management has developed and sponsored this needs statement on behalf of member DOTs. Interim deliverables could include literature reviews, surveys, interim reports, and full draft reports.
• Stakeholder engagement: As part of the interim deliverable, the project team and research panel should engage DOT stakeholders for feedback during the project. Engagement could include webinars, workshops, presentations, surveys, user testing of draft tools, and interim reports and literature reviews.

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

i. Research objective is to understand how owners and travelers can use AI and massive data sets during events and understand the appropriate use of the datasets (reliability, risks) *TO REFINE

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Predictive maintenance
Possible synthesis?

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

i. The research objective is to develop a guide to identifying and managing EV, CAV risks to roadway safety infrastructure.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Changes in freight
How infrastructure moves with advancements in technology.
Implications on infrastructure

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• When to determine if it is maintenance or engineering activity
• Lifecycle considerations
• BC/ROI considerations for maintenance vs engineering treatments
• Possible synthesis?

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Transportation Performance Management (TPM) is a strategic approach that uses system performance data to guide decision-making and optimize the planning, operation, and maintenance of transportation networks. As states, regions, and local governments increasingly face challenges like budget constraints, aging infrastructure, population growth, and the need for sustainability, effective performance management becomes essential in ensuring that transportation investments deliver maximum value.

In the United States, federal legislation, such as the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) and the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, has established a national framework for performance-based transportation management. These mandates have encouraged state departments of transportation (DOTs) and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to adopt a performance-driven approach to managing transportation assets, reducing congestion, improving safety, and advancing environmental sustainability.

The Transportation Performance Management Blue Book is proposed as a comprehensive guide that will standardize and document best practices, metrics, methodologies, and case studies to help transportation agencies effectively implement TPM frameworks. This Blue Book will serve as a critical resource for state and local transportation agencies to benchmark their performance management efforts, identify gaps, and integrate performance management into long-term planning and investment strategies.

In addition to addressing current best practices, the Blue Book will explore emerging trends such as the integration of advanced data analytics, smart technologies, and real-time data collection systems that enhance TPM. It will also examine challenges faced by transportation agencies, such as data interoperability, funding limitations, and the need for cross-agency collaboration.

By creating this guide, the project aims to equip transportation agencies with a practical, user-friendly resource that will promote more consistent and effective transportation performance management nationwide. The Blue Book will ultimately support the development of more efficient, safe, and sustainable transportation systems.

Background

Transportation Performance Management (TPM) is a strategic approach that uses system performance data to guide decision-making and optimize the planning, operation, and maintenance of transportation networks. As states, regions, and local governments increasingly face challenges like budget constraints, aging infrastructure, population growth, and the need for sustainability, effective performance management becomes essential in ensuring that transportation investments deliver maximum value.

In the United States, federal legislation, such as the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) and the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, has established a national framework for performance-based transportation management. These mandates have encouraged state departments of transportation (DOTs) and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to adopt a performance-driven approach to managing transportation assets, reducing congestion, improving safety, and advancing environmental sustainability.

The Transportation Performance Management Blue Book is proposed as a comprehensive guide that will standardize and document best practices, metrics, methodologies, and case studies to help transportation agencies effectively implement TPM frameworks. This Blue Book will serve as a critical resource for state and local transportation agencies to benchmark their performance management efforts, identify gaps, and integrate performance management into long-term planning and investment strategies.

In addition to addressing current best practices, the Blue Book will explore emerging trends such as the integration of advanced data analytics, smart technologies, and real-time data collection systems that enhance TPM. It will also examine challenges faced by transportation agencies, such as data interoperability, funding limitations, and the need for cross-agency collaboration.

By creating this guide, the project aims to equip transportation agencies with a practical, user-friendly resource that will promote more consistent and effective transportation performance management nationwide. The Blue Book will ultimately support the development of more efficient, safe, and sustainable transportation systems.

Literature Search Summary

By creating this guide, the project aims to equip transportation agencies with a practical, user-friendly resource that will promote more consistent and effective transportation performance management nationwide. The Blue Book will ultimately support the development of more efficient, safe, and sustainable transportation systems.

Guidance, Documents, Research, and Resources:

NCHRP Report 1035: Guide to Effective Methods for Setting Transportation Performance Targets

• Designed to help state DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations identify effective methods for setting transportation performance targets based on established national measures.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) - Performance-Based Planning and Programming Guidebook (2013)

• This guide provides best practices for implementing TPM and the processes used to comply with federal requirements.

FHWA Transportation Performance Management (TPM) Toolbox

• An online resource containing tools, examples, and strategies for agencies to implement performance-based programs.

FHWA: Transportation System Performance Monitoring (2015)

• Addresses issues in performance data collection, data management, and interoperability challenges in transportation agencies.

AASHTO - Transportation Performance Management Portal

• A resource portal with tools and documents that support the implementation of performance-based transportation management across state DOTs.

FHWA Performance Management Guidebook (2016)

• A detailed guide that provides step-by-step instructions on how to design and implement a TPM system.

Transportation Research Board (TRB) Special Report 329: Adapting Transportation to Climate Change (2019)

• Discusses the integration of resilience and sustainability into transportation performance metrics, particularly in the context of climate adaptation.

NCHRP Synthesis 532: Emerging Trends in Transportation Performance Management (2019)

• Reviews the latest advancements in TPM, such as smart infrastructure and real-time data analytics.

National Academies Press: Improving Transportation Resilience through Performance Management (2020)

• Examines how performance management frameworks can be adapted to address transportation system resilience and climate change mitigation.

Urban Institute: Equity in Transportation Performance Management (2019)

• This study investigates how transportation performance measures can incorporate equity considerations, particularly in underserved communities.

World Resources Institute (WRI): Inclusive Transportation Planning and Performance Management (2020)

• Provides insights on how equity-focused metrics can be integrated into transportation performance measures, especially for transit services and accessibility.

NCHRP 08-127 Emerging Issues: Impact of New Disruptive Technologies on the Performance of DOTs

• Provides a guide for state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation planning agencies to understand, predict, plan for, and adapt to the potential impacts of emerging disruptive technologies.

NCHRP Report 991: Guidelines for the Development and Application of Crash Modification Factors (2022)

• Guidance on provide transportation professionals with the kind of quantitative information they need to make decisions on where best to invest limited safety funds.

NCHRP Web-Only Document 335: A Guide to Computation and Use of System-Level Valuation of Transportation Assets (2021)

• Guidance on calculating the value of assets as an indicator of asset management needs.

Case Studies and Best Practices:

Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Gray Notebook

• A quarterly performance report that tracks WSDOT’s progress in key performance areas.

Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Smart Scale Program

• An initiative that prioritizes transportation projects based on performance metrics like congestion mitigation, safety, and economic development.

Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) - Performance Dashboard

• A digital platform that provides real-time performance data related to traffic, safety, and infrastructure conditions.

Objectives

The objective of this research is to develop a comprehensive Transportation Performance Management (TPM) Blue Book that standardizes best practices, performance metrics, and methodologies for transportation agencies across the United States. This guide will provide actionable insights to help agencies effectively implement TPM frameworks, improve decision-making, optimize resource allocation, and align with federal requirements. By addressing challenges such as data management, funding constraints, and equity considerations, the TPM Blue Book aims to support the development of more efficient, safe, and sustainable transportation systems.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Urgency:

The need for effective Transportation Performance Management (TPM) has never been more critical. With the increasing strain on transportation systems due to aging infrastructure, growing populations, and heightened demand for sustainable solutions, transportation agencies are under pressure to make more informed, data-driven decisions. Additionally, federal mandates such as MAP-21 and the FAST Act require transportation agencies to adopt performance-based management systems, adding urgency to the implementation of TPM frameworks. However, many agencies face challenges in developing standardized metrics, managing vast datasets, and aligning performance goals with long-term strategic plans. Without a comprehensive and accessible guide to TPM, agencies risk inefficient use of resources, missed performance targets, and delays in addressing critical infrastructure needs.

Potential Benefits:

The TPM Blue Book will provide transportation agencies with a standardized, user-friendly resource to guide the implementation of performance management frameworks. Key benefits of this research include:

1. Improved Decision-Making: By offering clear methodologies and best practices, the Blue Book will help agencies make informed, data-driven decisions that optimize resource allocation and improve system performance.
2. Increased Accountability and Transparency: The Blue Book will enable agencies to establish clear performance metrics and reporting processes, fostering greater accountability to stakeholders and the public.
3. Enhanced Safety and Efficiency: Prioritizing safety and congestion reduction as key performance measures will lead to safer, more efficient transportation systems.
4. Alignment with Federal Requirements: By synthesizing federal performance management mandates into a practical guide, the Blue Book will help agencies meet compliance requirements, reducing the risk of funding penalties or missed opportunities for federal aid.
5. Sustainability and Equity: The Blue Book will incorporate emerging trends in sustainable transportation and performance measures that address equity, ensuring that transportation investments benefit all communities and reduce environmental impact.

By equipping agencies with the tools to implement effective TPM systems, this research will contribute to the development of more resilient, sustainable, and responsive transportation networks.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

To successfully develop and implement the Transportation Performance Management (TPM) Blue Book, several key considerations need to be addressed throughout the research and dissemination phases:

1. Stakeholder Engagement and Collaboration
2. Data Collection and Analysis
3. Customization and Adaptability
4. Technology Integration
5. Funding and Resource Allocation
6. Training and Capacity Building
7. Continuous Improvement and Updates
8. Equity and Sustainability Considerations

Note: More can be added to the above list.

By addressing these implementation considerations, the TPM Blue Book can be successfully developed, adopted, and utilized across diverse transportation agencies, ensuring it provides maximum value in improving transportation system performance.

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

i. define organizational efficiency
ii. offer varying frameworks depending how an organization/agency works (5-6 differing
iii. agency scenarios
iv. get specific metrics for organizational/agency efficiency
v. offer a toolbox that different agencies can use
vi. develop guidelines on how efficiency measures/KPIs can be used/applied

Urgency and Potential Benefits

The Reason Foundation produces a ranked list of state agencies
Are there better ways to measure agency effectiveness such as data envelopment analysis
Come up with ways other ways to add value such as wanting to be able to find peer agencies to learn from?
How much money are we actually spending to manage programs?
What is the effectiveness of the funds allocated?
Want to have state legislatures understand when they are underfunding an area and know the impact of it.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• Knowledge capture of retirees and other employees
• Best practices, case studies, tools (downloadable), experts
• Practical assistance that can quickly be understood and applied (simple)
• Identifying core business functions (knowledge interviews of outgoing employees, e.g.)
• Beyond procedural documentation

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

i. Recommendation of strategies to address changes in workforce.
ii. Strategies on identifying issues in workforce expectations.
iii. Framework to assess organizational culture/values – Bridging gap between agency culture and new workforce hires.
iv. Comparison of public vs. private organization approaches.

from symposium 1:

How to ensure the work gets done
Understand changing demographics
Training, transition plans
Tools - best practices (broadly)
Turnover and ability to aim employees, including leadership bench strength (transitioning into leadership positions)
Scan of practice
Broadly, look at other sectors
Mindset shifts - "farm team" approach - mentoring, training, non-traditional recruitment

Urgency and Potential Benefits

High urgency

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

c. Research Objectives:
i. Learning how organizations can optimize the use of technologies.
ii. Leveraging technological advances to organizational needs.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Urgency: Mid to high priority over a long timeframe.

Potential Benefit: Creating an adaptable workforce, streamline/improve efficiency, technology leverages the skillsets of a workforce.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

i. Genesis/imperative for this topic: There's a lot of turn-over occurring. Losing one key player can take down an agency's TAM strategy. How to build the bench?
ii. look at agencies where AM is integrated in the business processes as examples. Policies, documents, etc. org structure
iii. how to plan for management to come?

Urgency and Potential Benefits

The greatest challenge we have is changing the culture, which is something we don't do very well as engineers and planners. Is there a way to outline the process to change the culture of the organizations with regards to implementing TAM. Talk to states that have done it— what worked and didn't work? States that need culture changed are least likely to read a report on this.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Transportation Asset Management (TAM) approaches have been instrumental in maintaining and improving the performance of transportation systems. Over the years, state DOTs and decision-makers have benefited from a large body of knowledge generated and disseminated by peer agencies and generated refined approaches to managing their transportation systems. However, the effects of recent changes observed in external conditions may require re-orienting the strategic goals of these TAM implementations.

Climate change is threatening the resilience of our transportation network, especially in coastal and urban areas. Rising sea levels, changes to land use, deterioration of stormwater infrastructure, and changing storm and weather patterns increase the risks associated with inundation of transportation infrastructure, bridge scours, and premature pavement failures. Rural areas can also be impacted by the lack of connectivity and relatively poor conditions of bridges in these areas.

Mobility changes in traffic patterns, the vehicle fleet, and methods to pay for the system may also have an impact on decision-making within TAM. The increasing emphasis on the use of Electric Vehicles (EV) s may result in changing loading conditions due to heavier vehicle weights and reducing the availability of funds to manage transportation infrastructure. Changing vehicle loads may accelerate deterioration of assets, not yet studied broadly within the transportation sector.

As another external condition, the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in long-lasting impacts in terms of shifting travel patterns and higher demand placed on e-commerce. In some cases, services may have been reduced or eliminated requiring further assessment of how these changes in service may impact investment strategies for TAM. These changes may affect the validity of deterioration models and user cost calculation methods that are currently in use. Decision support systems for maintenance, repair, and replacement of transportation infrastructure may need major revisions in light of these changes.

In addition, consideration for the use of new methods to fund the needs of the surface transportation system through methods such as Road User Charging (RUC) or congestion pricing may influence anticipated demand for the system or distribution of travel over the same 24-hour period.

Conventional approaches to managing infrastructure may fall short in accomplishing broader goals while addressing challenges imposed by such external conditions. Therefore, there is a need for a new research effort, which will aim to conduct a nationwide scan of existing and exemplary efforts in addressing mobility and climate resilience objectives, and to develop new approaches to improving existing TAM efforts to achieve better alignment with these broader objectives.

Literature Search Summary

• NCHRP 20-83(05): Climate Change and the Highway System: Impacts and Adaptation Approaches (NCHRP Report 750, Volume 2, Climate Change, Extreme Weather Events, and the Highway System: Practitioner's Guide and Research Report.)
• NCHRP 08-129: Incorporating Resilience Concepts and Strategies in Transportation Planning (NCHRP Research Report 1052)
• NCHRP 15-80: Design Guide and Standards for Infrastructure Resilience
• NCHRP 23-26: Measuring Impacts and Performance of State DOT Resilience Efforts (Active Project, Start Date: 10/26/2022)
• NCHRP 23-32: Transportation Asset Risk and Resilience (Active Project, Start Date: 11/28/2023)
• NCHRP 08-36/Task 147: Strategic Mobility Research: Enhancing Mobility, Stimulating Economic Activity, Saving Lives

Objectives

The objectives of this project are:

• To identify state DOTs approach to assessing and improving mobility and climate resilience,
• To identify challenges experienced by state DOTs in improving their performance in terms of achieving mobility and climate resilience
• To develop new approaches to incorporating mobility and climate resilience considerations into transportation asset management plans (TAMPs),
• To generate guidance for aligning existing asset management efforts with these new approaches.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Recent trends observed in the increasing frequency and severity of natural disasters and extreme weather- and climate change-related issues experienced by state DOTs increased the urgency of incorporating climate resilience into TAM strategic goals. Concerns related to satisfying mobility demands and reducing user impacts further exacerbate the urgency of these issues.

This study will provide state DOTs with theoretical and practical knowledge to align their TAM efforts with the broader objectives of improving mobility and climate resilience in their regions.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

The research developed through this study will support agencies increase resilience considerations in their asset management practice. A cursory review of DOTs latest TAMPs revealed a basic incorporation of resilience considerations by agencies often noting identified threats to the system that could undermine system resilience, but lacking in tracking resilience improvements over time or methods to measure the current system resilience. This research will move toward further integrating resilience into asset management as well as decision-making.

Notes

Description

The desired outcome and expected final product of this research is to develop a technical
memorandum that summarizes findings from a research scan of existing TSMO plans and current
emerging technology research to identify interdependencies and relationships. The goals of this
research is to: 1) provide a resource for integrating emerging transportation technologies into
TSMO planning; and 2) integrating performance management and systems impacts analysis around
emerging transportation technologies into TSMO planning. (This Research Needs Statement was drawn from a Systems Management and Emerging Technologies Research Roadmap because of its overlap with performance management.)

Background

Literature Search Summary

Current research around TSMO plans looks at feasibility, resiliency, asset management, and how some
states are integrating technology into their TSMO plans. This does not address performance measures
of technology or how TSMO plans are assessing the integration of technology. Further, existing
research in emerging transportation technologies is focused on impacts on data, workforce training,
best practices, and asset management. There is no research about determining performance measures
for these technologies or how to apply those to existing state agency efforts. There are two gaps
addressed by emerging technologies into the context of performance measurements and one that uses TSMO plans to inform that process.

Objectives

Research focus areas include current standards research and emerging technology management tools, task forces, and regulations. To successfully complete this research, the following key tasks will need to be completed:
• Conduct a national scan of state TSMO plans
• Review best practices for how TSMO plans can integrate emerging transportation technologies
• Look at existing case studies of how states use their TSMO plans to test or deploy emerging transportation technologies
• Synthesize and merge research around performance metrics and management for emerging transportation technologies
• Identify applicable research conducted by USDOT and AASHTO/TRB committees
• Develop 5-6 case studies showcasing the relationship between TSMO plans and existing research

Urgency and Potential Benefits

States have a clear interest in integrating TSMO plans into existing agency functions. TSMO plans are becoming core functions of transportation agencies and to permanently accommodate these programs, agencies are developing TSMO plans that outline strategic, programmatic, and tactical visions with the necessary steps to achieve this vision. This includes outlining business cases, program performance measures and goals, organizational structure, staffing and workforce needs, leadership needs, and policies for implementation. TSMO plans can build on existing research from USDOT, and AASHTO/TRB committees addressing these elements in the context of performance measures for emerging technology.
Conducting this research is important to ensure emerging technologies can be incorporated into state plans for updating transportation systems. As TSMO plans are designed to be forward thinking and implementation focused, they are well equipped to address emerging technologies from the standpoint of developing and integrating performance measures. Not conducting this research may leave a gap around implementation and require state DOT’s to evaluate proposed programs, products, and policies without an established base of metrics or guidance. Transportation agencies at the state and local levels will rely on this body of research to build out TSMO plans that quantify impacts, and eventually all road users can benefit from TSMO plans that address performance measures for emerging transportation technologies. This will also benefit the larger community of practice and merge a key focus area of state DOTs with emerging transportation technologies.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Within a state DOT, departments focused on the evaluation and integration of emerging technologies
into the transportation system will likely be responsible for using the research results. Some
state DOTs have dedicated staff focused on transportation and innovation while other DOTs have
merged this into their departments focused on Intelligent Transportation Systems.

State DOTs can use the body of research developed by this statement to modify existing TSMO plans
or develop new plans that integrate performance measures for emerging transportation technologies.
The findings from this research are also anticipated to support needed coordination across
departments when considering the evaluation and implementation of emerging technologies, including
coordination around staff working on TSMO plans and evaluating emerging transportation
technologies.

Existing venues for further discussion around the project and the findings will include AASHTO
meetings, SMET joint-subcommittee, and meetings of the Transportation Research Board. There will
also be opportunities to coordinate findings with other national organizations and the Federal
Highway Administration.

Notes

Description

The purpose of this research is to: 1) conduct a scan of state and local agencies with documented and quantified performance measures related to the integration of technology; 2) develop a summary of such performance measures; and 3) propose a set of synthesized draft standards for CAV, ITS/TSMO, EV, SM/MoD/MaaS, and UAS/UAM projects that also align with federal requirements. (Note: This RNS has been drawn from a System Management and Emerging Technologies (SMET) research roadmap because it overlaps with Transportation Performance Management.)

Background

Literature Search Summary

Existing research in emerging transportation technologies is focused on impacts on data, workforce training, best practices, and asset management. There is some research to date around quantifying the impact of emerging technologies or determining performance measures for these technologies. Research around performance management looks at integrating performance management into processes rather than developing metrics for performance. This project will build off existing research and support development of performance measurements for emerging transportation technologies and support development of process for quantifying and evaluating impacts with considering of existing performance measure requirements, and one that develops performance measurements.

Objectives

The desired outcome and expected final product of the research is to develop a technical memorandum that summarizes findings from the scan, maps the relationships and interdependence among the organizations developing and leading use of performance measures related to technology, synthesizes and recommends performance measures that align with integration of emerging transportation technologies, and identifies and recommends future research focused on use of performance measures to support continued integration of emerging technologies.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

As emerging transportation technologies are deployed on public roads, state DOTs are presented with a new challenge because the impacts of these technologies are still being evaluated. Further, the ability to evaluate impacts is hindered by the fact that many emerging technologies are still in the development stage and commercial use cases that will be scaled nationally are not yet known.
As road users in different jurisdictions are exposed to the safety issues presented by emerging transportation technologies, state DOTs are looked at to answer how these technologies will be regulated, monitored, and assessed. Part of this includes quantifying their impact on the transportation
system both at a local level and a federal level. Understanding how these technologies will transform transportation and road usage is integral to protecting the safety of road users while also understanding how proposed use cases may or may not impact the transportation system.
This research can be used to guide state DOTs in implementing emerging transportation technologies in a safe way that is based on the quantitative effects of the technologies on the transportation system. The benefits of this research will be the ability to provide guidance about the impacts of emerging transportation technologies to State DOTs and local agencies, which can then be used to steer the deployment of these technologies via standards development. Further benefits include understanding how these technologies will change the transportation system and developing performance measures for emerging technologies that are accessible to state and local governments.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Within a state DOT, departments focused on the evaluation and integration of emerging transportation technologies into the transportation system will likely be responsible for using the research results. Some state DOTs have dedicated staff focused on transportation and innovation while other DOTs have merged this into their departments focused on Intelligent Transportation Systems.
State DOTs can use the body of research developed by this statement to modify existing standards or develop new standards for the testing and deployment of emerging transportation technologies. The findings from this research are also anticipated to support needed coordination across departments when considering the evaluation and implementation of performance measures, including coordination around staff working on emerging technologies and staff supporting modeling.
Existing venues for further discussion around the project and the findings will include AASHTO meetings, SMET joint-subcommitee, and meetings of the Transportation Research Board. There will also be opportunities to coordinate findings with other national organizations and the Federal Highway Administration.

Notes

Description

In February 2024, TAM Webinar 67 presented the findings from a research effort to understand "How Pavement and Bridge Conditions Affect Transportation System Performance." (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop22077/fhwahop22077.pdf) Among the paper's findings were that (1) "A TAMP program manager is likely to focus on IRI values, rutting, cracking, and faulting because those relate to the measures and targets the TAMP must address. However, research indicates that in many cases, it is friction and not those metrics that drive pavement-related crash reduction," and (2) "[D]ata from Continuous Pavement Friction Measurement (CPFM), combined with crash data and road characteristics, provide significant insight regarding whether friction improvements may reduce crashes." The authors call on stakeholders to use "today's unparalleled access to data" to deliver a risk-based TAMP development process that can optimize and "simultaneously enhance asset conditions and system performance." CPFM is still an emerging method of measuring and monitoring pavement friction within the United States despite being the dominant method of managing pavements for safety outside of the United States. Accordingly, there are benefits to providing the US TAMP community with guidance, tools, and best practices on how to effectively link pavement management and safety using CPFM. Specifically, TAMP staff considering whether to pursue the findings highlighted TAM Webinar 67 may benefit from strategies to set pavement friction measurement targets and determine appropriate pavement friction performance measures, guidance on various treatments’ dual impacts on pavement condition and safety, as well as tools and strategies to coordinate effective pavement friction management implementation in partnership with an agency’s safety and pavement management programs.

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

In February 2024, TAM Webinar 67 presented the findings from a research effort to understand "How Pavement and Bridge Conditions Affect Transportation System Performance." (https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop22077/fhwahop22077.pdf) Among the paper's findings were that (1) "A TAMP program manager is likely to focus on IRI values, rutting, cracking, and faulting because those relate to the measures and targets the TAMP must address. However, research indicates that in many cases, it is friction and not those metrics that drive pavement-related crash reduction," and (2) "[D]ata from Continuous Pavement Friction Measurement (CPFM), combined with crash data and road characteristics, provide significant insight regarding whether friction improvements may reduce crashes." The authors call on stakeholders to use "today's unparalleled access to data" to deliver a risk-based TAMP development process that can optimize and "simultaneously enhance asset conditions and system performance." CPFM is still an emerging method of measuring and monitoring pavement friction within the United States despite being the dominant method of managing pavements for safety outside of the United States. Accordingly, there are benefits to providing the US TAMP community with guidance, tools, and best practices on how to effectively link pavement management and safety using CPFM. Specifically, TAMP staff considering whether to pursue the findings highlighted TAM Webinar 67 may benefit from strategies to set pavement friction measurement targets and determine appropriate pavement friction performance measures, guidance on various treatments’ dual impacts on pavement condition and safety, as well as tools and strategies to coordinate effective pavement friction management implementation in partnership with an agency’s safety and pavement management programs.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

I think we should look again at how DOTs support and coordinate with local agencies in developing asset management capabilities. For example, MI has their AM Council, and in Iowa the state provides pavement data for ALL paved roads to local agencies to support pavement management. Would like to learn what other states/locals are doing and how we can encourage broader TAM efforts.

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

I think we should look again at how DOTs support and coordinate with local agencies in developing asset management capabilities. For example, MI has their AM Council, and in Iowa the state provides pavement data for ALL paved roads to local agencies to support pavement management. Would like to learn what other states/locals are doing and how we can encourage broader TAM efforts.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Nathaniel Vogt – Ohio DOT: we are working on Carbon Reduction Strategy and Resiliency Improvement Plan. We’ve had a few questions come up about how to measure performance and goals on resiliency and reducing emissions from the transportation system.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

The perennial question remains: what is an effective performance measure for transportation resilience in a community, state, or other jurisdiction? Progress toward good answers has been underway for several years, though desultory and usually off-target. The need for this research was further reinforced during the December 2022 AASHTO conference in Providence and the January 2023 TRB annual meeting, which included a handful of workshops and sessions that broached this subject. From the perspective of high-quality performance management practice, effective measures of resilience have been elusive. Our colleagues are very good at measuring resilience for specific infrastructure, an organization, or a supply chain, but not for community mobility. This research will tease out how best to really measure it, from a state-of-the-art performance management perspective, not just the easy but low-value event or activity tallies. Consider an agency or community investing in preparedness work, infrastructure hardening, or implementing a policy shift – what is the most effective, objective, outcome-based evidence for whether the jurisdiction is now more resilient than it was a year ago? There are some seeds of ideas, but the same questions are shared by multiple agencies, PIARC, AASHTO committees, TRB committees, and surely others.

Literature Search Summary

While there are several published resources referring to resilience performance, there remains a gap in effective performance measurement that this proposed research seeks to close.

Disaster Resilience Framework Workshop, 2015, San Diego. The workshop notes (unpublished) includes a section about Community Resilience Metrics.

Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Framework (VAAF), 2017, FHWA HOP (link). An important go-to guide for anybody working on transportation resilience.

Integrating Resilience into the Transportation Planning Process, White Paper on Literature Review Findings, 2018, FHWA HOP (link). A good resource for background and context, including a history of Federal rules on resilience. This document correctly places performance measure formulation after goals but before solutions.

Investing in Transportation Resilience: A Framework for Informed Choices, 2021, NAS/TRB (link). This also included a Committee on Transportation Resilience Metrics. The document includes some relevant points but is generally of limited value for performance management given its focus on project-specific evaluations and benefit-cost analysis.

Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide, 2021, NAS/TRB (link). Follows on a 2018 resilience summit in Denver. A wealth of information about resilience, but measurement appears limited to project-specific risk reduction.

Developing Transportation System Climate Resilience Performance Measures, 2022, Minnesota DOT (link). A survey showed most states do not have resilience performance measures. Those that do are not outcome-based.

A Perspective on Quantifying Resilience: Combining Community and Infrastructure Capitals, 2023, Gerges et al (link).

Measuring Impacts and Performance of State DOT Resilience Efforts, 2022-2024, NCHRP 23-26, underway (link). Potentially valuable for this proposed research, but measures are not defined until after solutions and appear to focus only on monitoring project effects.

Transportation Asset Risk and Resilience, 2023-2026, NCHRP 23-32, pending/underway (link). A relatively large effort to generate new guidance, which may or may not include performance.

There are many laws, rules, references, and guidance documents going back many years, and right up to the current PROTECT Program guidance. The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act (2020), H.R.1865, calls on the “Secretary of Transportation to enter into an agreement with the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to conduct a study through the Transportation Research Board on effective ways to measure the resilience of transportation systems and services to natural disasters, natural hazards, and other potential disruptions.”

Be wary of two tangents in literature: those focused solely on infrastructure and others about operational/organizational resilience, which are mostly unhelpful and distracting. Apart from published guidance, this research project will include a scan of select agencies to gather evidence and examples

Objectives

This research seeks to disentangle attempts to date and clarify what it means to have an effective, outcome-based, high-level performance management approach to resilience. Toward this end there are three essential parts:
1. Confirming definitions. For example, is resilience an inverse of vulnerability? Or an inverse of just sensitivity and adaptive capacity (e.g., per the Vulnerability Assessment Scoring Tool [VAST])? If resilience is infinite, is exposure irrelevant? Consistent with the VAAF, is there consensus on the definitions for risk, criticality, consequence, and other essential terms?
2. Community mobility, or mobility and destination access across a jurisdiction of any size, for all users and modes. This is distinct from infrastructure-focused resilience for a specific asset, e.g., a bridge. For a community subject to natural or human-caused disasters, how can they know whether they are more or less resilient? Is there a role for the broader 4R concept of Robustness – Redundancy – Resourcefulness – Rapidity?
3. Effective performance measures. Pin down for the resilience community what that means. Agency leaders need the most relevant, feasible, and quantifiable evidence of improved resilience that is outcome-based and trackable over time. These are not the abundance of output or activity metrics already in play, nor project-specific evaluations.
In addition to developed guidance, this project will pilot the implementation of a high-quality resilience performance measure into existing performance management frameworks for up to five agencies. Not only states, but MPOs, e.g. Los Angeles and San Diego have promising initiatives already developed.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Transportation resilience has grown in importance and this gap in practice needs to be addressed.
This research should be completed in parallel with the NCHRP 23-32 Risk & Resilience guidance development to be able to inform those products.
[to be expanded]

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

This research would primarily be used by transportation agencies and others responsible for implementing resilience performance measures and management systems. Recently completed NCHRP Project 23-09 established a framework and research roadmap for assessing risk to agency assets and the traveling public from extreme weather, climate change, and other threats and hazards. Follow-on NCHRP Project 23-32 Asset Risk & Resilience will develop the technical resource in three phases, including planning, execution, and final product development. As described above, this research should be conducted along a parallel and complementary timeline. Critical implementation elements include a communication plan to ensure awareness of the research products and TRB, FHWA, and AASHTO webinars to share the findings.

A subsequent phase of this research funded through NCHRP 20-44 may be helpful to disseminate the research findings more broadly and develop case studies showing the use of the research guidance. There are several other AASHTO and TRB committees interested in resiliency that would likely support this project, including:

• AASHTO
  • Committee on Performance Based Management (CPBM) Task Force on Emerging Performance Measures - Deanna Belden, Minnesota DOT and Kelly Travelbee, Michigan DOT, Co-Chairs
  • CPBM Subcommittee on Risk Management
  • Committee on Transportation System Security and Resilience (CTSSR)
  • Committee on Planning
  • Highways and Streets Council
• TRB
  • Strategic Management (AJE10) - Steve Woelfel, Massachusetts DOT, Chair
  • Performance Management (AJE20) - Michael Grant, Chair
  • Asset Management (AJE30)
  • Risk Management (ATO40)
  • Critical Infrastructure Protection (AMR10)
  • Extreme Weather and Climate Change Adaptation (AMR50)
  • Transportation Planning Policy and Process (AEP10)
• a. Communication and Implementation Funding: [to be completed]
• b. Communication and Implementation Period: [to be completed]

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Brief Description
Maybe an implementation project for Report 985 (Integrating Effective Transportation Performance, Risk, and Asset Management Practices)
Champion
Chris Whipple (UDOT)
Team
Spencer Wagner (DCDOT)

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

One of the key inputs to transportation asset management systems is the unit cost of each treatment. Costs associated with improving an asset consist of three components:
• Direct treatment costs: Cost of the treatment itself. This component includes just the pay items required to complete the treatment, such as the hot-mix asphalt (HMA) in a HMA overlay, or the concrete and reinforcement needed to construct a replacement concrete pavement.
• Direct project costs: Costs incurred as part of the construction project. These costs include traffic control, mobilization, ancillary features such as traffic signals and guardrail, etc.
• Indirect costs: Costs in advance of the project. This component includes Phase I studies, Phase II plan development, as well as any environmental investigations that may be needed. Also included in this component are utility relocations and land acquisition, and possibly costs associated with railroads.
The accuracy of the unit cost data is imperative to accurately managing a transportation system. If the costs are underestimated, the agency will program more work than can be accomplished. Anticipated conditions over time will be overstated as a result. This synthesis seeks to determine how transportation agencies are quantifying the direct and indirect treatment costs associated with improving assets, and the corresponding impact on their capital program as a whole.

Literature Search Summary

Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Practices. Topic 54-22, Practices for Capturing Costs of Maintenance Operations in Maintenance Management Systems (Transportation Research Board), is similar but focuses on the maintenance side of asset management, particularly maintenance performed by the transportation agencies themselves.

Incorporating Cost Uncertainty and Path Dependence into Treatment Selection for Pavement Networks (Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, Volume 110, pp 40-55), begins at the next step after treatment unit costs have been developed and looks at the effect of uncertainty in cost on the cost-effectiveness of pavement network planning.

NCHRP Report 545, Analytical Tools for Asset Management, notes that a translation process is required to develop unit costs that are usable by most management systems. The proposed synthesis will be an important step toward closing that gap.

NCHRP 02-26, Implementation of Life-Cycle Planning Analysis in a Transportation Asset Management Framework, acknowledges the importance of treatment unit costs as an input to life-cycle planning, but does not go into detail on the development of the treatment costs themselves.

Objectives

The objective of this research is to determine how transportation agencies are quantifying the direct and indirect treatment costs associated with improving assets as an input to their asset management systems, and the corresponding impact on their capital program as a whole.

Information to be gathered includes (but is not limited to):
• The components of an asset improvement project included in the budgets used in the asset management system, such as the construction project itself, preliminary engineering, land acquisition, etc.
• The source of treatment cost data, such as contract lettings, final design estimates, programming estimates, etc.
• The frequency of updating the treatment costs in the asset management system.

Proposed Research Activities: Information will be collected through a review of the 52 state agencies’ 2022/2023 Transportation Asset Management Plans, a survey of DOTs and other transportation agencies, and follow-up interviews with selected agencies for more detailed information. Information gaps and suggestions for research to address those gaps will be identified.
Susan Lime

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Very little detailed information on best practices related to treatment costs used in asset management systems exists, as noted below in the literature search summary. Yet the accuracy of treatment costs is of paramount importance in programming the proper amount of work that can be accomplished within given budgets and therefore in predicting asset performance into the future. The potential benefits of the research include agencies learning more accurate means of determining treatment unit costs, as well as identifying additional research needs to improve best practices nationwide.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

The asset management engineer and others in an asset management section will be responsible for using the research results. Anyone involved in configuring the inputs to the asset management system, particularly with an eye toward getting the best possible outcomes, would be interested in the results of this research. The implementation would likely involve an improvement to existing processes rather than creating new processes.
a. Communication and Implementation Funding:
b. Communication and Implementation Period:

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Brief Description
As we have more new techniques for managing assets using trenchless technology, do we know the expected life and subsequent treatments for these assets.
Champion
Susan Lime, NM DOT
Team
Baris Salman
Stephanie Dock

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Brief Description
TBD
Champion
Aimee Flannary
Team
TBD

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

As the United States moves toward a fleet comprised of more EV and hybrid vehicles, important questions impacting the design and management of critical assets must be considered in future practice and policy making. For instance:

• Are heavier EV’s and hybrid vehicles deteriorating our bridges, pavements, and other assets before the end of their design/service lives due to their heavy loads?
• Will the live load increases to bridges and axle weight distribution from heavier EVs and hybrids impact asset lifecycle needs and level of service performance?
• Are new design standards needed for the engineering design of transit and freight roadways and bridges to reflect the increased live load changes?
• How is the accelerated rate of deterioration impacting asset lifecycle needs?

Answering these questions is critical as the types of vehicles using state and local transportation facilities transition to the next generation of vehicles.

Since asset management (AM) is a business process and decision-making framework using economic and engineering modeling over an extended time horizon, it can help inform many aspects of designing and planning for and implementing the expected service levels of roadways and structures to support adoption of next-generation vehicles. Developing guidance that reflects changes associated with EV and hybrid vehicles will lead to updated design models, more reflective deterioration rates, and improved planning for the preservation, improvement, and operation of road and bridge assets while protecting them from shorter lifecycles.

Single occupancy vehicles, while a major cause for congestion, do not appear to provide measurable impacts to load weighting. Therefore, the next-generation vehicles considered under this study will include a comprehensive mix, including transit, garbage trucks, and freight. For bridge analysis, this research would evaluate existing data and account for the battery weight to develop a design load model for gross vehicle weight. Pavement analysis utilizes equivalent single axle load (ESAL) ratings.

The figure linked below, provided by the City of Seattle, illustrates the tremendous load impacts that buses and trucks have on pavements and bridges:

https://www.tam-portal.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2023/10/Picture1.jpg

The City estimated that it would take about:

• 1,500 cars to equal the damage of the typical 18-wheeler on a Washington State Highway
• 2,500 cars to equal the damage of the average empty bus
• 5,000 cars to equal the damage of the average full bus
• 8,000 cars to equal the damage of an average full 60’ Articulated Hybrid

WSDOT, in its pavement design guide, advises that the average 18-wheel, double unit truck on a state highway has a total ESAL factor of 1.00 to 1.35 on average, a figure reached through their different studies of truck weights (at weigh stations, etc.). As the picture shows, the design loading is significantly lower than those being applied by buses, especially those with heavy batteries.

Transit buses have a federal exemption from axle weight limits that dates to the ISTEA transportation legislation in the early 1990s. Buses have gotten increasingly heavy over the last two decades with new equipment like hybrid powertrains, yet the number of axles remains the same because of the exemption. Furthermore, transit agencies are often not the owners of the roadways and bridges so they may not consider infrastructure conditions and design into their decision making.

The average bus empty is more damaging than the typical truck on a state highway. Add passengers, the exponential relationship between axle weight and fatigue, and the damage factor per bus increases to almost six times for the heavy articulated hybrids.

The figure hints at why agencies are struggling to maintain roads and bridges. As the transportation system is expected to carry heavier vehicles than they were designed for, it is critical to update design models and develop new deterioration factors to be used in asset lifecycle planning.

In addition to design and maintenance issues, the study will also consider environmental and social impacts and potential risks associated with next-generation vehicles. The inclusion of these factors enables asset management cross-asset trade-offs to be evaluated in terms of both positive and negative impacts. A comprehensive, triple bottom line study will pull from existing sustainability and economic lifecycle cost analyses on EVs and infrastructure construction along with societal factors such as increases in travel time from driving on deteriorated infrastructure assets.

Literature Search Summary

• ISO 15686-5:2017: Buildings and constructed assets — Service life planning — Part 5: Life-cycle costing
• Whole life carbon assessment (WLCA) for the built environment (rics.org)
• Bus weight summary from the California Air Research Board: https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/bus/busaxleweightlimit.pdf
• Truck Platooning Impacts on Bridges https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/loadrating/pubs/hif21043.pdf
• FHWA Sustainable Pavements Program: Sustainability - Pavements - Federal Highway Administration (dot.gov)

Objectives

The objective of this study is to develop a guidebook with suggestions for updating asset management models used in pavement and bridge design and preservation. The guide will be developed from research to determine:

• The impacts of EVs and hybrid vehicles on typical pavement and bridge (component and element) deterioration rates and their potential impact on lifecycle planning strategies.
• Environmental and societal impacts associated with the use of EVs and hybrid vehicles to support a triple-bottom line analysis and cross-asset tradeoff assessments.
• Suggested modifications to pavement and bridge load models used in design activities.
• The feasibility of establishing battery weight limits, increased road user fees, or other strategies for addressing asset management impacts.

The guidebook will be supported by case studies from a variety of agencies (state and local, urban, and rural) illustrating the potential impact the resulting deterioration rates would have on pavement and bridge designs, maintenance strategies, and lifecycle costs.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

This project would benefit the entire bridge and pavement community by helping them to prepare for future EV and hybrid applications. Having quantifiable AM models that predict accelerated deterioration rate, will help to inform design considerations, transit and freight routes, future funding needs, and support conversations between DOTs and Transit agencies for future service level planning.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

The report would benefit from case studies for each pavement and bridge category including local, state, and county agencies representing high and low volume roads / bridges along with rural and urban settings.

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

- Organizational strategies for improvement
- Innovation challenges
- Thinking outside the LSS, Lean methodologies
- Office of competition at the federal level - mechanism exists at the - - - federal level
- Crowdsourcing improvement efforts

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Potential benefit if you can align political and departmental alignment
Always need to balance top-down and bottom-up, operationalization of it
**Involvement of those doing the work is critical to long-term success - what are the contributing factors to make large-scale efforts successful?
https://sites.google.com/state.co.us/process-improvement/tools-resources/cascades-how-to-create-a-movement-that-drives-transformational-change
How do you build a movement in transportation
Customer-, Environment- centric momentum for organizational change - What are the key components needed to make process?
Related organizational changes needed to make it happen?
Dave - Brene Brown - “Clarity is Kindness” in all that we do, find tools that help break down barriers.
Ties in with KM, OM, Risk, etc.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

(Of the ones recommended, Gary and Gehan support this one the most)

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Infrastructure
Changing over the fleet

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Incorporating uncertainty into forecasting, target-setting, and monitoring - low /high matrix - inflation, funding,
performance, modeling uncertainty envelope (synthesis/peer exchange in lieu of research project?) (Risk as a
band of uncertainty v. a number) - Charles Pilson
There was a recent research idea on how to visualize/communicate uncertainty. Maybe a TAM conference
idea?

The RMS also has "ERM - Improving Risk Visualization and Communication Internally and Externally"
in the candidate pool. Not sure if that's related to the idea of communicating uncertainty? - Matt Haubrich

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

(please add clarifying details and topic title suggestions)
Many states and local jurisdictions have deployed some level of automated technologies , such as low speed shuttles, and or have partnered with private agencies or research institutions to do so
Little performance or other information is available in a consolidated and organized fashion about the results of these pilots, test cases and or deployments
Policy makers have become guarded about investing in pilots and similar deployments, especially given the recent disillusionment with technology potentials such as AVs, CVs and CAVs and want to understand what benefits and results have been achieved.
Challenges may include the availability of data, data agreements (which often preclude external data sharing) and or lack of sufficient data in cases of short term pilots.
What kind of data is available, can be analyzed and summarized into a consolidated report to understand 1. what pilot shave been conducted (over past x/3 years? ) and 2. What is the performance of these pilots and or deployments in terms of safety and system efficiency and operation? (Similar interest exists in understanding equity impacts but those would be even harder to quantify and are not included , unless data is available).
Potential partnership with Eastern Corridor Coalition

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

please add clarifying details and topic title suggestions)
More cross-modal (other than vehicle) data; specifically: pedestrian, bicycle and certain transit data is needed for various applications and needs including Complete Streets, We need more and better quality, verified data for transit, bikes, peds, and non-car users.
Includes examining options for data availability, quality, validity, analytics.
Stephanie Dock, Daniel Hulker, and Daniela Bremmer were interested in further defining/developing this research concept and invited other CPBM and subcommittee members to join.
Potential partnership with Eastern Corridor Coalition's-data group (working on methodologies for assessing and standardizing cross-modal non-vehicular data)?

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Jun Liu of U of Alabama suggested this at the first COPlanning Research Symposium, but it has SMET implications. (I,e EV fires , other )
Should SMET be lead? Partnering with COP, CTSO, others? Options? (Should we pursue this? Reach out to Planning? Add more context description?)

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Focus on critical transportation planning issues and better addressing resilience, access, environmental protection, and financial limitations.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Focus on new infrastructure needs, air quality, and transportation revenue

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

To be able to adjust for demographic changes, transformational technologies, and other uncertainties.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

note: this also falls under the Equity (E) category

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Note: this research is also in the Governance and Decision Making (G/DM) category

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Note: short term need

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

What is it, is there a common definition, why is it important, is it different from various stakeholder perspectives, and how to achieve it through DOT infrastructure and program investments

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Research to improve DOTs capability and capacity for data-driven decision making.

Background

Research to improve DOTs capability and capacity for data-driven decision making.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Research to advance the discipline of data-driven decision making within State DOTs

Literature Search Summary

NCHRP Project 23-27 Strategies to Strengthen Data-Driven Decision Making Details here.

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

This research would produce an updated guidebook of current and emerging performance
measures used and for use by State DOTs.
NCHRP 20-24(37)G – Technical Guidance for
Deploying National Level Performance Measurements was completed in 2011. This project
would update this valuable guidance.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Update products of NCHRP 20-24(37)G – Technical Guidance for
Deploying National Level Performance Measurements.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• Seek better data from the private sector and third parties, and fuse this data with DOT data to generate new comparisons and insights.
• Collect and develop datasets for mobility and traffic.
• Explore the availability of new datasets and identify ways to use datasets with DOT data for calibration of QA/QC.
• Compare the scope, availability, reliability, and accuracy of privately available transportation mobility and traffic datasets sold by companies such as INRIX, Teralytics, Streetlight, etc.
• Update and improve data definitions, especially for traffic. (State DOTs often measure traffic in discrete measures like AADT, but people are increasingly using a blend of modes to move from origin to destination, and traffic data should reflect that.)

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• Understand state DOTs' rules governing their data sharing agreements and intellectual property
• Explore agency methods and examples for monetizing data
• Identify what IP exists for sharing and selling data
• Find and highlight best-practices in multi-state data agreements
• Understand what agencies and organizations are doing to support their data sharing agreements
• Recognize what data should be collected, sought, and shared

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Create a best practices guide for using data to inform equitable deployments of AVs and shared mobility.

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• Identify the best locations for AV deployment which would deliver equity for all communities
• Understand the elements of equity surrounding AV and shared mobility deployment

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Risk communication is the act of sharing information about potential threats to people and infrastructure with the objective of saving life and property. This covers a wide range of information, including asset condition, mobility, safety, economic impacts, environmental impacts, and others. Effective verbal, visual, and written communication promotes the recovery of disrupted systems while maintaining public confidence in these systems. This requires that all communication tracks be congruent and effective.
Barriers to effective risk communication exist, both internally and externally. One major barrier to internal communication is organizational “siloing”. Staff working within different functional areas (such as safety, operations, and emergency management) may feel little incentive to collaborate if they believe their missions are independent of other departments. Organizational silos result in duplication of effort and inefficiency, and lack of various perspectives in approaching problems.
Another major obstacle is delivering the appropriate message at the right time with clear language that speaks to all audiences. If not properly delivered, communication may inadvertently create hysteria, unease, and confusion. Barriers to external communications with outside agencies stem from a lack of established two-way communications channels, dissimilar language, and varying definitions of risk. Communications with the public and others need to eliminate rumors, lack of expert consensus, over-hyped reporting, failure to understand of ethnic differences, and so on. Ultimately, overcoming these obstacles requires:
• Leadership direction including a reality-based vision, the "path forward", and incentives to interact
• Organizational support from multiple groups
• Clear definition of both Inter- and intra-agencies including:
- What collaboration may look like
- The reason and importance of the collaboration
- How and when collaboration takes place
• Partnerships with community organizations
• Defined and appropriate language for messaging that effectively outlines the hazards, severity, location, affected population, and uncertainty of risk
• Alignment of verbal, visual, and written communications to relay complementary messages.
• Selection of appropriate messaging vehicles (email, variable message sign, web site, etc.)
These efforts require research to identify the best methods and current examples of how to implement such communication at a DOT. As many options exist for internal and external risk communication, and various agencies and organizations have their own communication requirements, effective research will provide a path forward to establishing effective risk visualization and communication at a DOT.

Background

Risk communication is the act of sharing information about potential threats to people and infrastructure with the objective of saving life and property. This covers a wide range of information, including asset condition, mobility, safety, economic impacts, environmental impacts, and others. Effective verbal, visual, and written communication promotes the recovery of disrupted systems while maintaining public confidence in these systems. This requires that all communication tracks be congruent and effective.
Barriers to effective risk communication exist, both internally and externally. One major barrier to internal communication is organizational “siloing”. Staff working within different functional areas (such as safety, operations, and emergency management) may feel little incentive to collaborate if they believe their missions are independent of other departments. Organizational silos result in duplication of effort and inefficiency, and lack of various perspectives in approaching problems.
Another major obstacle is delivering the appropriate message at the right time with clear language that speaks to all audiences. If not properly delivered, communication may inadvertently create hysteria, unease, and confusion. Barriers to external communications with outside agencies stem from a lack of established two-way communications channels, dissimilar language, and varying definitions of risk. Communications with the public and others need to eliminate rumors, lack of expert consensus, over-hyped reporting, failure to understand of ethnic differences, and so on. Ultimately, overcoming these obstacles requires:
• Leadership direction including a reality-based vision, the "path forward", and incentives to interact
• Organizational support from multiple groups
• Clear definition of both Inter- and intra-agencies including:
- What collaboration may look like
- The reason and importance of the collaboration
- How and when collaboration takes place
• Partnerships with community organizations
• Defined and appropriate language for messaging that effectively outlines the hazards, severity, location, affected population, and uncertainty of risk
• Alignment of verbal, visual, and written communications to relay complementary messages.
• Selection of appropriate messaging vehicles (email, variable message sign, web site, etc.)
These efforts require research to identify the best methods and current examples of how to implement such communication at a DOT. As many options exist for internal and external risk communication, and various agencies and organizations have their own communication requirements, effective research will provide a path forward to establishing effective risk visualization and communication at a DOT.

Literature Search Summary

Review of existing literature on developing effective communication techniques, risk visualization, and implementing these initiatives in transportation agencies reveals that there are studies into aspects of these topics, but this proposed research will combine these aspects into a single topic. Previous research includes studies into project improvements through effective communication and its results, the relationship between collaboration and performance across regional safety coalitions, study into the issues of effectively conveying risk, especially among multiple assets, and the use of visualization and modelling to communicate ideas and facilitate communication among transportation planners and agencies. Literature on these topics and others provide information on aspects of communication that are useful to agencies. This research will combine the focus of these previous studies into specifically identifying how to effectively develop communication of risk visualization both within a DOT and with its partner agencies, as well as the public at large. This effort will provide specific inquiry into this subject, providing DOT’s and their partner agencies with valuable information on combining effective communication strategies with risk visualization techniques. This builds on previous study, which covered aspects of communication at DOT’s, risk communication, and other related topics, while not combining such study into a specific project.

Objectives

The objectives of this research are to develop guidance in the following initiatives which can be used to develop effective risk visualization communication within DOT’s, with external agencies, and the public in the by performing study into the following initiatives:
1. Establishing intra-agency communication.
2. Establishing external partnerships and two-way communications channels with community organizations.
3. Crafting an effective visual, verbal, and written communication strategy with materials (ie., metrics, dashboards, regular reports) with a clear explanation of uncertainty.
4. Determining the appropriate message vehicle.
This research will examine current strategies and methods of risk visualization communication at various DOT’s. Internal communication, two-way communication channels with external organizations, associated strategies, and other aspects of communication in relation to risk visualization will be extensively explored.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Ineffective communication on Risk Visualization at DOT’s may lead to incomplete risk management and a lack of understanding of potential risks associated with DOT projects. This understandably can create severe issues that impact multiple people. Ineffective communication may cause breakdowns of information between agency departments internally, and with external parties. Lack of understanding of potential risks may lead to projects which do not mitigate these risks and create dangerous situations for users. Significant financial investment may be required to mitigate dangers that were missed due to ineffective risk management communication, or to ensure that missed information is eventually communicated. Ensuring that risk visualization is properly communicated and understood among DOTs, related departments, and the community, more effective lines of communications within an agency lead to effective understanding of potential risks, and the mitigation of these risk to create safe situations across transportation systems.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Within a DOT, it is expected that employees and directors associated with Risk Management departments will be the most likely to utilize the results of this research. Any departments within a DOT associated with Risk Management through project work would also utilize this information. After research is complete, a DOT will be able to implement study findings by developing or strengthening their current risk visualization communication strategies based on the reported study results. Training, any required updating of systems, and development of new processes may be required. Presentation of study findings to risk management managers, and other project managers within the DOT could be an effective method of creating awareness of new techniques for improving communication related to risk visualizations. Communication of findings can be relayed to departments associated with risk management, to ensure that communication strategies can be implemented across multiple levels (and in order to prevent departmental ‘siloing’).

Notes

Description

Need to understand and demonstrate risk-tolerance associated with decision-making within agencies. This relates to both potential threats and opportunities. 

This proposal builds on the draft problem statement outlined in the NCHRP 20-123(04). The background has been acceptably defined. The objectives should be modified to further emphasize risk perception and development of ways to assess and communicate risk tolerance.

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Emphasis on developing tools and methodologies to document risk tolerance and acceptance parameters associated with taking risks. 

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

State departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agencies are working to deliver greater resiliency in their transportation systems. Agencies are changing established business processes, technical methodologies, tools, and systems to build resiliency. In order to achieve sustainable change and have lasting improvements in resiliency, agencies need to also address organizational culture in order to bring about greater enthusiasm and focus on resiliency building.

Organizational culture is defined as the underlying beliefs, assumptions, values and ways of interacting that contribute to the unique social and psychological environment of an organization. It focuses on building shared values to achieve the organization's goals and objectives. When transportation agencies have good organizational culture, employees know how agency executives want them to respond to any situation, employees believe that the expected response is the proper one, and employees know that they will be rewarded for demonstrating the organization's values.

Background

State departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agencies are working to deliver greater resiliency in their transportation systems. Agencies are changing established business processes, technical methodologies, tools, and systems to build resiliency. In order to achieve sustainable change and have lasting improvements in resiliency, agencies need to also address organizational culture in order to bring about greater enthusiasm and focus on resiliency building.

Organizational culture is defined as the underlying beliefs, assumptions, values and ways of interacting that contribute to the unique social and psychological environment of an organization. It focuses on building shared values to achieve the organization's goals and objectives. When transportation agencies have good organizational culture, employees know how agency executives want them to respond to any situation, employees believe that the expected response is the proper one, and employees know that they will be rewarded for demonstrating the organization's values.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Greater understanding of the elements of good organizational culture and how it can be applied to transportation agencies to achieve greater resiliency is needed. This research project would include identification of agencies that have had success in building resiliency and examine what elements of organizational change supported the successful resilience building. Research on sectors outside of transportation where resilience is important would be conducted to understand the organizational culture elements. The ingredients for building organizational culture to achieve greater focus on building resilience will be created for transportation agencies.

The proposed research be composed of the following components:
• Conduct a literature/practice review of the relevant information
• Identify organizational practices and determine how they can be generalized to support guidance
• Develop guidance for agencies
• Demonstrate/evaluate guidance through at least one case study
• Produce a final report including an executive summary

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Both federal and recipient agencies have the goal of maximizing the public benefits from investment of the limited transportation funding. Additionally, there is a cost and/or risk to every activity or inaction related to program delivery. Whenever an available dollar is moved from physical or operational improvements on the system to program administration, the public loses the benefit of that dollar. Similarly, every dollar that is lost from the system because of fraud or diverted away from the program goals due to whatever form of mismanagement, the public loses the intended benefit of that dollar. Therefore, the goal of all agencies should be to minimize the negative risks and costs associated with administering the funding programs, even if that means the occasional dollar is lost to fraud or mismanagement when the cost to prevent that loss is greater than the cost of the loss itself. It seems especially important to avoid duplicative administrative costs generated from the various governmental levels. The essential issue is determining the end-user public return on investment (ROI) from adding program requirements for both the federal agency and the recipient agency.

Background

Both federal and recipient agencies have the goal of maximizing the public benefits from investment of the limited transportation funding. Additionally, there is a cost and/or risk to every activity or inaction related to program delivery. Whenever an available dollar is moved from physical or operational improvements on the system to program administration, the public loses the benefit of that dollar. Similarly, every dollar that is lost from the system because of fraud or diverted away from the program goals due to whatever form of mismanagement, the public loses the intended benefit of that dollar. Therefore, the goal of all agencies should be to minimize the negative risks and costs associated with administering the funding programs, even if that means the occasional dollar is lost to fraud or mismanagement when the cost to prevent that loss is greater than the cost of the loss itself. It seems especially important to avoid duplicative administrative costs generated from the various governmental levels. The essential issue is determining the end-user public return on investment (ROI) from adding program requirements for both the federal agency and the recipient agency.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Develop a means of determining the balance between program requirements that minimize the risks of fraud and/or of not meeting program goals with maximizing the benefits to the end users (i.e., the public).

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

In many cases, states and other local government agencies have performance measures developed through the extensive public outreach in the various federally and internally required strategic planning efforts. Not surprisingly, these “local” performance measures are often related to but different from the federally mandated performance measures.

For example, freight mobility in an urban area often means travel time (i.e., traditional congestion), similar to the federal system performance measures (PM3); however, in a rural area, it means the system’s ability to carry the desired loads (i.e., height, width, and load restrictions not meeting expectations causing loads to be rerouted over longer distances). In either case, the results are wasted time, money, and fuel, and more greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Reducing this waste is really the goal of the federal measures above. Therefore, the same goal is being monitored, whether using the federal measures or the state and local (hereinafter, local) performance measures. This is just one example of many similarly developed local performance measures related to a national goal area but with different metrics and definitions than the national measures.

By definition, the local measures are important to the end users of the transportation system by virtue of being developed through public input. Therefore, local policymakers often want or require these measures to be used in the decision processes and to tell the local story of transportation performance, safety, condition, etc. (hereinafter, performance). It would reduce waste and improve public transparency if these local measures could also be used to tell the national system performance story. This would avoid potentially conflicting messages from local and national sources and avoid the duplicate work of collecting, monitoring, and analyzing similar measures related to the same basic goal. Additionally, the collective of local measures could be used to tell a more comprehensive and complete story of the nation’s overall movement toward its shared transportation goals through a “drill down” approach of providing greater and greater detail from the national level through the regional, state, and local community levels.

Background

In many cases, states and other local government agencies have performance measures developed through the extensive public outreach in the various federally and internally required strategic planning efforts. Not surprisingly, these “local” performance measures are often related to but different from the federally mandated performance measures.

For example, freight mobility in an urban area often means travel time (i.e., traditional congestion), similar to the federal system performance measures (PM3); however, in a rural area, it means the system’s ability to carry the desired loads (i.e., height, width, and load restrictions not meeting expectations causing loads to be rerouted over longer distances). In either case, the results are wasted time, money, and fuel, and more greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Reducing this waste is really the goal of the federal measures above. Therefore, the same goal is being monitored, whether using the federal measures or the state and local (hereinafter, local) performance measures. This is just one example of many similarly developed local performance measures related to a national goal area but with different metrics and definitions than the national measures.

By definition, the local measures are important to the end users of the transportation system by virtue of being developed through public input. Therefore, local policymakers often want or require these measures to be used in the decision processes and to tell the local story of transportation performance, safety, condition, etc. (hereinafter, performance). It would reduce waste and improve public transparency if these local measures could also be used to tell the national system performance story. This would avoid potentially conflicting messages from local and national sources and avoid the duplicate work of collecting, monitoring, and analyzing similar measures related to the same basic goal. Additionally, the collective of local measures could be used to tell a more comprehensive and complete story of the nation’s overall movement toward its shared transportation goals through a “drill down” approach of providing greater and greater detail from the national level through the regional, state, and local community levels.

Literature Search Summary

Keyword searches in the Transportation Research Board’s (TRB’s) TRID and Research in Progress (RIP) systems were performed for research related to:
• Performance Measures, Communicating
• Communicating Performance
• “National Performance”
Several projects were found related to but not overlapping this proposed topic, with the newest one being a 2015 document specific to State Department of Transportation (DOT) performance story telling. The most relevant document was a 2011 periodical article titled “Measuring Infrastructure Performance: Development of a National Infrastructure Index.” However, not only is that article dated, but it does not address the underlying research question of if and how local measures, important to the public, can be used to tell a national story about national goals.

Objectives

Develop a means of consolidating the many related local measures into a set of national measures that describes and monitors how well the national transportation system is meeting (or not meeting) the traveling public’s needs as related to Congress’ strategic goals for the nation’s transportation system.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

The current system of detailed nationally-defined measures monitored and reported by States and MPOs, along with locally-mandated and -defined measures, yields state, local, and national messages to the public that are often conflicting or at least are not readily understandable to the public. Additionally, collecting data on related but different measures is a duplicative burden to States DOTs and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) that is wasteful of scarce resources. Therefore, if measures that are developed with close input from the transportation system end users could be collectively used to monitor the national system’s ability to meet strategic goals, the messages to the public would be more understandable and would come at a lower cost. On a national scale, that lower cost is likely to be a very substantial savings over the current framework, given the sheer number of reporting entities (i.e., State DOTs, MPOs, transit agencies, highway safety offices, etc.).

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Complete implementation would likely require Congressional action through the transportation bill reauthorization because some federal measures are dictated in the current Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law). However, in most cases, implementation could be accomplished through the federal administrative rulemaking processes.

Notes

Description

As funding for resource allocation increase and decrease each year it is critical for agencies to ensure that they are spending the resources the best they can and meeting as many needs as possible. The challenge of meeting condition needs vs operational needs vs quality of life is increasing each year for agencies. Thus, as agencies work each year to make resource allocation decisions for multiple service areas, and analysis the impacts of these decisions are often difficult to captured with performance measures. For example, condition measures for physical asset classes (pavements, bridges, etc.); performance measures for system operations (snow and ice control, traffic operations, emergency response) and quality of life measures (safety, accessibility, equity) are used by agencies to evaluate these resource allocations. State agencies generally have flexibility to adjust the level of investment of these categories, yet evaluation of the tradeoffs or optimization of these decisions are often limited to similar measures (bridge condition vs pavement condition). Is there potential benefit in expanding the scope of these analyses to include performance measures and investment classes of less similar nature. What tools do agencies use for this cross-asset allocation; How are the tools used for asset resource allocations to include services and quality of life investments?

Background

As funding for resource allocation increase and decrease each year it is critical for agencies to ensure that they are spending the resources the best they can and meeting as many needs as possible. The challenge of meeting condition needs vs operational needs vs quality of life is increasing each year for agencies. Thus, as agencies work each year to make resource allocation decisions for multiple service areas, and analysis the impacts of these decisions are often difficult to captured with performance measures. For example, condition measures for physical asset classes (pavements, bridges, etc.); performance measures for system operations (snow and ice control, traffic operations, emergency response) and quality of life measures (safety, accessibility, equity) are used by agencies to evaluate these resource allocations. State agencies generally have flexibility to adjust the level of investment of these categories, yet evaluation of the tradeoffs or optimization of these decisions are often limited to similar measures (bridge condition vs pavement condition). Is there potential benefit in expanding the scope of these analyses to include performance measures and investment classes of less similar nature. What tools do agencies use for this cross-asset allocation; How are the tools used for asset resource allocations to include services and quality of life investments?

Literature Search Summary

Keyword searches in TRB’s TRID and RIP systems were performed for research related to:
• “Resource Allocation”
• “Cross Resource Allocation”
• “Cross Investment”

A search was also conducted on the Transportation Performance Management (TPM) Portal :
• Tools>Featured Tools>MODAT
The National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 806: Cross-Asset Resource Allocation and the Impact on Transportation System Performance developed a cross-asset resource allocation framework, a spreadsheet tool and guidance.
A subsequent project culminated in NCHRP Report 921:Case Studies in Cross-Asset, Multi-Objective Decision Analysis , which updated the NCHRP Report 806 spreadsheet tool and developed case studies illustrating multi-object decision analysis (MODA) applications. The Multi-Objective Decision Analysis Tool (MODAT) developed as part of this project helps prioritize candidate projects on a range of different objectives. MODAT can be accessed at: https://multiobjective.org/.

The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) also developed a web-based training (WBT) training curriculum for performance-based prioritization using Multi-Objective Decision Analysis (MODA). This training is intended to educate and expose practitioners to the use of MODA.

Indiana DOT is scoring all of their projects based upon 7 categories including safety, congestion, environment, regional and state economic contribution, Intermodal connectivity, and total cost of ownership. This synthesis would be an extension of the research started here, specifically providing additional case studies of states implementing cross-investment allocation and considering investment categories other than physical assets.

1. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Transportation Performance Management (TPM) Portal. https://www.tpm-portal.com/. Accessed June 2022.
2. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2015. NCHRP Report 806: Guide to Cross-Asset Resource Allocation and the Impact on Transportation System Performance. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/22177.
3. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine 2019. NCHRP Report 921: Case Studies in Cross-Asset, Multi-Objective Resource Allocation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25684
4. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. MODAT Tool. https://multiobjective.org. Accessed June 2022
5. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. “Performance-Based Prioritization Using Multi-Objective Decision Analysis (MODA). Web-Based Training. AASHTO Store. Washington DC. https://store.transportation.org/Item/TrainingDetail?ID=4506. Accessed June 2022

Objectives

Investigate, compile, and categorize examples of organizations’ efforts of using performance measures and data supported tools for cross resource allocation and goal-oriented decisions.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

As agencies make tough resourcing decisions every year, this synthesis would be useful to capture how the research products and tools described above are being used, along with any other methods state DOTs are using to make multi-objective resource allocation decisions. Research has shown that multi-objective resource allocation can be done. This synthesis could answer “Is it being done?” and if so, “How is it being done?”

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

The product of this research would be a synthesis of the practice, facilitating knowledge transfer to performance management practitioners.

Notes

Description

Transportation agencies traditionally had a very steady workforce. The combination of changes in young people’s work patterns and the economic changes that drive workforce availability requires that agencies need to act more proactively on how to deliver transportation programs. Research is needed to understand the behavioral patterns and mechanisms to both mitigate variability in workforce availability and what can be done proactively to benefit the agency.

With the increased funding states are receiving based on the IIJA and BFP. One agency has identified the fact that they may run into contractor availability to meet the needs of the upcoming projects.

Changes in economy. Changes in young people's work styles. With IIJA money, how are agencies going to be able to spend it, manage it? NMDOT is getting $45M for bridge projects, they have to identify the projects and it will strain the workforce to meet the requirements.

Background

Transportation agencies traditionally had a very steady workforce. The combination of changes in young people’s work patterns and the economic changes that drive workforce availability requires that agencies need to act more proactively on how to deliver transportation programs. Research is needed to understand the behavioral patterns and mechanisms to both mitigate variability in workforce availability and what can be done proactively to benefit the agency.

With the increased funding states are receiving based on the IIJA and BFP. NMDOT has identified the fact that we may run into contractor availability to meet the needs of the upcoming projects.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• Understand changes in transportation workforce behavior
• Understand the economic forces that change transportation workforce behavior
• Determine ways that transportation agencies can better manage with these forces
• Recommend steps that agencies can take to work within these forces

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Several states have established offices to implement continuous improvement processes such as Lean, Design Thinking, or Change Management. Over 30 of these offices participate in the Transportation Lean Forum (TLF), an informal group that operates in association with the AASHTO Subcommittee on Organization Management. In addition to formal offices, some states make less formal “grass roots” efforts to improve their processes. A synthesis would conduct a side-by-side study of the states’ efforts, including efforts in states that are not participating in the TLF, find what is working and what is not, assist states to identify improvements that they might implement, and set a baseline of the current “state of the art” that could inform future research on the outcomes of these efforts.

Background

Several states have established offices to implement continuous improvement processes such as Lean, Design Thinking, or Change Management. Over 30 of these offices participate in the Transportation Lean Forum (TLF), an informal group that operates in association with the AASHTO Subcommittee on Organization Management. In addition to formal offices, some states make less formal “grass roots” efforts to improve their processes. A synthesis would conduct a side-by-side study of the states’ efforts, including efforts in states that are not participating in the TLF, find what is working and what is not, assist states to identify improvements that they might implement, and set a baseline of the current “state of the art” that could inform future research on the outcomes of these efforts.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Lean Improvement research questions:

1. Are there other states and countries with Lean Improvement or similar offices?
2. In what types of work are they achieving success?
3. Are there difference in focus between the DOTs?
4. Are there lessons to be learned by DOTs about how they might best improve their improvement efforts? (e.g., the Lean effort in England focuses mainly on the application of Lean principles in construction, but US States have not yet adopted Lean Construction to any great extent.)

Efficiency research questions:

1. Are there other states and countries with efficiency reporting requirements?
2. How do the reported efficiencies compare?
3. Are there types of efficiency that are reported in some states but not others?
4. Are there lessons to be learned by DOTs about how they might best improve their efficiency?

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

Performance measurement and performance-based management have a long history in state DOTs as a discipline to track progress toward goals and optimize resource decisions. However, transportation agency goals are evolving from a pure operational focus to a focus on broad societal goals and creating value for the public. The value created by transportation investments spans not only transportation but also education, human services, land use, environment, and economy. A broader view of value and methods are needed to account for not only quantifiable value but also qualitative value. Another challenge is time horizons - how to value and manage investments today to deliver benefits in the much longer term. This research would develop and test measures of wider societal benefits deriving from the delivery of transportation investments.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Transportation agencies are required to use asset management systems, including pavement and bridge asset management systems, to comply with Federal requirements for developing asset management plans. These systems are valuable for supporting a number of business functions, including: analyzing the existing asset inventory and its condition; developing effective asset lifecycle strategies; determining resources required to maintain assets in good repair; and recommending priorities for asset treatments. However, a major challenge transportation agencies face is in using their asset management systems is in trying to develop realistic projects that utilize management system recommendations. The systems generally recommend specific treatments, but do not scope realistic projects. Thus, significant manual effort is required to review management system treatment recommendations, often from multiple systems, and combine these into candidate projects. Research is needed to determine how to extent existing asset management systems to better develop projects from the treatment recommendations these systems generate. Such research will help agencies better comply with Federal requirements, save staff time, and result in development of projects that best support agency asset lifecycle strategies and best practices.

Background

Transportation agencies are required to use asset management systems, including pavement and bridge asset management systems, to comply with Federal requirements for developing asset management plans. These systems are valuable for supporting a number of business functions, including: analyzing the existing asset inventory and its condition; developing effective asset lifecycle strategies; determining resources required to maintain assets in good repair; and recommending priorities for asset treatments. However, a major challenge transportation agencies face is in using their asset management systems is in trying to develop realistic projects that utilize management system recommendations. The systems generally recommend specific treatments, but do not scope realistic projects. Thus, significant manual effort is required to review management system treatment recommendations, often from multiple systems, and combine these into candidate projects. Research is needed to determine how to extent existing asset management systems to better develop projects from the treatment recommendations these systems generate. Such research will help agencies better comply with Federal requirements, save staff time, and result in development of projects that best support agency asset lifecycle strategies and best practices.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Research is needed to determine how to extent existing asset management systems to better develop projects from the treatment recommendations these systems generate.

The proposed research would include the following tasks, at a minimum:
• Review of existing transportation asset management systems and the approaches agencies use for developing projects from management system treatment recommendations.
• Development of a framework for transportation asset project development. The framework should incorporate: asset lifecycle strategies, other investment objectives that may lie outside of existing asset management systems, such as improve equity, accessibility and mobility; major constraints and parameters related to development of projects; and other factors.
• Gap assessment to identify issues in current practice and opportunities for improvement.
• Development of prototype tools that supplement existing management system treatment recommendation to better support project development.
• Piloting the framework and tools with one or more transportation agencies.
• Development of a research report documenting the results of the research effort.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

This research will help agencies better comply with Federal requirements, save staff time, and result in development of projects that best support agency asset lifecycle strategies and best practices.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Background

All states are taking on resiliency in their asset management plans this year, and there are additional resilience-focused programs available from FHWA.

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

• Explore current state of practice to establish a baseline.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

In July 2012 MAP-21 established requirements that each state developed a Transportation Asset Management Plan (TAMP) that, at a minimum to include pavement and bridge assets on the National Highway System (NHS) (23 USC 119). This requirement was further detailed, in October 2016, through the issuance of 23 CFR 515, that encourages but dos not require State DOTs to include all NHS infrastructure assets in their TAMPs, (23 CFR 515.9(c)). This can include major asset classes such as tunnels or “ancillary” asset classes, such as:
• Guardrail
• Sidewalks
• Small Culverts
• Sign Structures
• Retaining Walls
• ITS Equipment
• Traffic Signals
While many states are including these assets in their TAMPs, many others manage these assets outside their federal TAMPs in an effort to right-size the associated workload and costs.

Background

Information To Be Gathered: To further the implementation of asset management beyond pavements and bridges, there is a desire to understand how different agencies are approaching the management of these assets.
• What data is being collected?
• What techniques are being used to collect the data?
• How is the data stored and managed?
• What programming decisions are being made with the data and who in the agency is making those decisions.
• How are these efforts tied to broader asset management, maintenance management, and capital programming within the agency?

How the Information Will Be Gathered: Information will be gathered through a literature review, a survey of state DOTs, and follow-up interviews with selected DOTs for the development of case examples. Information gaps and suggestions for research to address those gaps will be identified.

Literature Search Summary

• FHWA’s Handbook for Including Ancillary Assets in Transportation Asset Management Programs (2019)
• FHWA’s Case Study 7 – Managing Assets Beyond Pavements and Bridges (2020)
• HIF-20-067 Case Study 7-Managing Assets Beyond Pavements and Bridges (TAMP Practices on Other Assets) (dot.gov)

Objectives

Recent research has documented approaches to performing this work and several states have developed programs of differing levels of maturity. A Synthesis project at this time will enable agencies to understand the current state of the practice and identify leading practices that can be adopted to advance their own programs.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Reimagine the DOT Organizational and Decision Making Paradigm from - one that is driven by planning, design and construction – to one driven by the need to maintain and operate an established system based on principles of asset management and transportation system operations

Background

The purpose of this study is to research best practices and case studies of Transporta-tion Agency Organizational and Decision-Making Structure to shift from processes driven by planning, design, and construction to organizational structures driven by the need to maintain and operate an established, integrated system based on principles of asset management and transportation system operations.

Literature Search Summary

NCHRP 08-138
www.agencycapability.com/library/nchrp-20-07-task-408-transportation-system-management-and-operations-tsmo-workforce-skills-positions-recruitment-retention-and-career-development/
www.tamguide.com/chapter/3-organization-and-people
www.trb.org/NCHRP/Pages/Report_to_AASHTO_TSO_775.aspx
· SHRP 2 Report S2-L06-RR1 “Institutional Architectures to Improve Systems Opera-tions and Management”
· FHWA-HOP-17-017 “Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Man-agement and Operation Mission for Your Organization: A Primer for Program Plan-ning”
· NCHRP 08-138 (Pending) Guide to the Integration of Transportation Systems Management and Operations into Transportation Asset Management

Objectives

To rethink how a transportation agency should be organized to maintain and operate an existing system in real time. That includes a focus on preservation and maintenance of existing assets, responding quickly and effectively to incidents and emergencies, and operating the system at an optimized level of service given funding constraints. The research will consider what systems and processes need to be in place to monitor conditions and operations, the role of maintenance and asset management in programming and project development, effective use of agency forces, budgeting for maintenance and replacement over the lifecycle, and how to manage risk as a compliment to resource constrained asset management strategies. The research will look at various public and private sector models that look at organizational structure, element driven contracting, funding allocation models, and the role of in house vs contract resources to maximize the cost effectiveness of resource investments.
Project objectives envision developing a synthesis using the following guidance:
1. Identify organizational practices that integrate maintenance and operational needs into capital planning processes.
2. Perform a domestic and international scan of how and what transportation agencies do organizationally to implement effective Asset Management and TSMO practices for holistic decision-making throughout the asset lifecycle.
3. Identify decision-making, communication, and organizational practices to in-clude all stakeholders in the lifecycle of the assets.
4. Identify project criteria and business practices that can be used for realizing improved transportation system performance over time. This includes how or-ganizations take into account maintainability, sustainability, resiliency and functional performance in the development, design and construction of pro-jects.
5. Develop case studies on how capital transportation projects are delivered and the problems that occur across functional areas. Agencies will be interviewed to determine root cause analysis of projects to evaluate both successes and problems with the long term lifecycle management of assets arising from poli-cies, organizational practices, and knowledge transfer and how that impacts an agency’s ability to maintain a state of good repair for new and existing assets.
6. Evaluate how federal funding mechanisms could be employed to fund mainte-nance needs of new and existing asset types arising out of capital project prior-itization.
7. Evaluate how agencies integrate performance targets and measures into their maintenance, operations, program management and asset management pro-cesses to drive decision making.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Asset management and transportation systems management and operations have become cornerstones of how transportation agencies prioritize how they maintain, op-erate and make capital improvements to their transportation systems. These have driven agencies to rethink how to develop their capital programs, how decisions are made and who is involved at various levels of decision making. The goal of this re-search is to share effective practices within agencies for the benefit of the overall in-dustry.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

The purpose of this is to research case studies to help agencies improve their own de-cision-making processes with regards to asset management and TSMO.

Notes

Description

Financial risks can threaten the strategic objectives of transportation agencies - e.g., the safe and reliable and efficient movement of people and goods. For example, the Highway Trust Fund is tied to taxes on gas and diesel. However, the recent COVID-19 pandemic greatly reduced American consumption, thus dramatically reducing revenues. State DOTs have seen their budgets slashed by 30% or more, forcing delays in some projects. Furthermore, external mandates can impose both risks and opportunites. A well-funded mandate could mean state DOTs have additional funding for enhancing resilience, while an unfunded mandate could force a DOT to choose between maintenance and projects. The objective of this project is to help transportation leaders with decision-making tools for allocating limited resources when subjected to unpredicatable financial conditions.

Background

Financial risks can threaten the strategic objectives of transportation agencies - e.g., the safe and reliable and efficient movement of people and goods. For example, the Highway Trust Fund is tied to taxes on gas and diesel. However, the recent COVID-19 pandemic greatly reduced American consumption, thus dramatically reducing revenues. State DOTs have seen their budgets slashed by 30% or more, forcing delays in some projects. Furthermore, external mandates can impose both risks and opportunites. A well-funded mandate could mean state DOTs have additional funding for enhancing resilience, while an unfunded mandate could force a DOT to choose between maintenance and projects. The objective of this project is to help transportation leaders with decision-making tools for allocating limited resources when subjected to unpredicatable financial conditions.

Literature Search Summary

This research need was recommended and prioritized through multiple stakeholder engagements during the 20-123 project. No related literature was found that incorporated financial risk at the enterprise and program levels. In addition, the recent COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the consequences of income and financial instability in transportation agencies.

The importance of incorporating risk at the enterprise and program levels has been recognized, and AASHTO published a guide summarizing how DOTs can establish and benefit from an enterprise risk management (ERM) program (AASHTO Guide for Enterprise Risk Management, 2016). This guide divides risk into four levels: enterprise, program, project, and activity. Risks to the enterprise are identified as the risks that affect the organization and its strategic objectives; while risk to the program includes risks that are “common to group of projects that achieve strategic goals” or those that “could affect the performance of major programs such as safety, pavements, bridges, maintenance, information technology, local programs, project delivery, finance, and human resources”. The guide provides an overview on what enterprise risk management is, highlights the benefits, and also includes information of how to identify, assess and manage those risks. However, further guidance and methodologies on how to assess and manage financial risks at the enterprise and program levels are still needed.

Objectives

The purpose of the proposed research project is to provide state DOTs with the necessary tools to assess and manage financial risk at the enterprise and program levels.

The specific research tasks to accomplish the main objective include:

• Task 1 – Conduct an in-depth literature review of all studies related to assessment and management of financial risks in transportation agencies, especially at the enterprise and program levels, including national and international examples as available.
• Task 2 – Conduct a gap assessment of the state of practice to determine what is still needed to incorporate financial risk at the enterprise and program levels.
• Task 3 – Develop a methodology for identifying and quantifying financial risks at the enterprise and program levels.
• Task 4 – Develop metrics and performance indicators for evaluating effectiveness of financial risk countermeasures.
• Task 5 – Develop decision-making tools for resource allocation under conditions of financial uncertainty.
• Task 6 – Develop methodology and guidance on consideration of program and potentially project-level financial risk within the enterprise.
• Task 7 – Pilot test the developed processes with multiple state DOTs and revised methodology as needed.
• Task 8 – Develop an implementation guide to help state DOTs to incorporate these processes into existing agency programs and projects.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

The recent COVID-19 pandemic greatly reduced American consumption, thus dramatically reducing revenues. State DOTs have seen their budgets slashed by 30% or more, forcing delays in some projects and reductions in workforce. A well-funded mandate could mean state DOTs have additional funding for enhancing resilience, while an unfunded mandate could force a DOT to choose between maintenance and projects. Not having the necessary funding for certain programs or projects may have a short or long term negative impacts on agency mission (e.g., lack of funding to continue or improve safety programs).

This project aims to provide transportation leaders with the necessary decision-making tools for allocating resources when subjected to unpredicatable financial conditions in order to reduce risks and increase the return on investment (ROI).

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

In order to implement financial risk assessments at the enterprise level, senior executives and policy makers need to take the lead and champion these initiatives.
Similarly, program managers need to take the major role on encouraging the implementation of financial risk assessments into program level.
It is key that senior executives, policy makers and program managers need to have a communication plan to communicate with peers on their areas in order to assess the financial risks to multiple programs and/or projects that may affect each other. In addition, providing staff training on the subject of financial risk, especially at the enterprise and program levels, is a key factor on successful implementation. Training material (including guidance, workshops, peer exchanges, etc.) to help implementation champions should be developed and used to create awareness and facilitate assessments.

Notes

Description

Started from War Games topics, planning to submit to the Domestic Scan Program
• Focused on how do we integrate accepted best practice learnings and revisit our organizational mission across sectors to create a more safe, equitable society?
• Currently researching organizational missions, emerging performance areas, and equity plans within organizations before next meeting

Areas we may want to include:
- Organizational components that have been successful (for example)
- Organizational factors
- Risk management approaches
- Innovative strategies
- Stakeholder partnership (more than engagement)
- Successful support systems
- Strategic frameworks - organizational missions
- Performance management systems
- Equity plans, etc.
- Types of leadership exhibited in high-performing agencies
- Process
- I.D. promising practices
- Assess likelihood of reproducing these results
- Investigate issues, assess tech transfer opportunities and methods
- Document results

Also consider barriers to addressing societal needs, how leading agencies have overcome these challenges (for example):
- Rapid pace of change
- Complex, sometimes conflicting social pressures
- Funding
- Politics
- Other?

Background

Started from War Games topics, planning to submit to the Domestic Scan Program
• Focused on how do we integrate accepted best practice learnings and revisit our organizational mission across sectors to create a more safe, equitable society?
• Currently researching organizational missions, emerging performance areas, and equity plans within organizations before next meeting

Areas we may want to include:
- Organizational components that have been successful (for example)
- Organizational factors
- Risk management approaches
- Innovative strategies
- Stakeholder partnership (more than engagement)
- Successful support systems
- Strategic frameworks - organizational missions
- Performance management systems
- Equity plans, etc.
- Types of leadership exhibited in high-performing agencies

Also consider barriers to addressing societal needs, how leading agencies have overcome these challenges (for example):
- Rapid pace of change
- Complex, sometimes conflicting social pressures
- Funding
- Politics
- Other?

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Process
- I.D. promising practices
- Assess likelihood of reproducing these results
- Investigate issues, assess tech transfer opportunities and methods
- Document results

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Notes

Description

Emerging technologies, such as the use of drones for inspections, LiDAR field data collection, and continuous monitoring of real-time sensor data (among others), hold the promise of transforming asset data collection for transportation asset management. As this technology has been evolving and improving, federal regulation, specifically, MAP-21 and the FAST Act, has pushed many agencies to collect and utilize a detailed inventory of infrastructure assets and transportation data. With the collection of high-volume asset inventory and condition data, such as LiDAR point cloud data, the accessibility and affordability of data collection has become a clear issue for agencies, particularly as they aim to manage and visualize collected data for both strategic and operational transportation asset management planning purposes. Therefore, research and guidance on the benefits and applications of these emerging technologies as well as how frequently that inventory and condition data need to be collected or assessed is necessary.

The focus of this research would be on the following:
• Address the adoption and practical application of these emerging collection technologies and the rapid pace of technological advancement.
• Provide guidance on the level of detail and frequency interval necessary for data collection to support TAM at both the state and local levels.
• Determine how condition assessment can be applied to the performance measures of both pavement and non-pavement assets.
• Further investigate and recommend tools capable of visualizing asset extraction layers, as well as presenting data to stakeholders in powerful GIS formats with standardized TAM graphics for universal interpretation.
• The research should consider any refinements that would need to occur in network level asset management data collection to make the data useful for compliance (i.e. ADA), safety (i.e. bridge clearances) or engineering (design or construction) purposes.

Background

 Emerging technologies, such as the use of drones for inspections, LiDAR field data collection, and continuous monitoring of real-time sensor data (among others), hold the promise of transforming asset data collection for transportation asset management. As this technology has been evolving and improving, federal regulation, specifically, MAP-21 and the FAST Act, has pushed many agencies to collect and utilize a detailed inventory of infrastructure assets and transportation data. With the collection of high-volume asset inventory and condition data, such as LiDAR point cloud data, the accessibility and affordability of data collection has become a clear issue for agencies, particularly as they aim to manage and visualize collected data for both strategic and operational transportation asset management planning purposes. Therefore, research and guidance on the benefits and applications of these emerging technologies as well as how frequently that inventory and condition data need to be collected or assessed is necessary.
The focus of this research would be on the following:
• Address the adoption and practical application of these emerging collection technologies and the rapid pace of technological advancement.
• Provide guidance on the level of detail and frequency interval necessary for data collection to support TAM at both the state and local levels.
• Determine how condition assessment can be applied to the performance measures of both pavement and non-pavement assets.
• Further investigate and recommend tools capable of visualizing asset extraction layers, as well as presenting data to stakeholders in powerful GIS formats with standardized TAM graphics for universal interpretation.
• The research should consider any refinements that would need to occur in network level asset management data collection to make the data useful for compliance (i.e. ADA), safety (i.e. bridge clearances) or engineering (design or construction) purposes.

Literature Search Summary

• PROJECT: Best Practices on Collecting Asset Information from the Construction Stage, South Carolina Department of Transportation, 2021, Proposed 2021-10-01
• PROJECT: Automated Guardrail Inventory and Condition Evaluation, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, 2021, Active 2021-01-18
• Highway Asset and Pavement Condition Management using Mobile Photogrammetry, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2021
• Automated Real-Time Roadway Asset Inventory using Artificial Intelligence, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Volume 2674, Issue 11, 2020, pp 220-234, 2020-11
• Computer Vision for Rapid Updating of the Highway Asset Inventory, Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, Volume 2674, Issue 9, 2020, pp 245-255, 2020-09
• GIS Tools and Apps—Integration with Asset Management, 2020, 155p, 2020-02
• PROJECT: A Method for Pavement Marking Inventory and Retroreflectivity Condition Assessment Using Mobile LiDAR, Massachusetts Department of Transportation, $200,000, 2019, Active, 2019-10-21
• SCDOT Asset Data Collection Assessment, 2019, 99, 2019-08
• PROJECT: GIS Tools and Applications: Integration with Asset Management, Minnesota Department of Transportation, $59,021.12, 2019, Completed, 2019-04-19
• Novel Cloud and Mobile Technology for Road Asset Management in Saint Lucia, 26th World Road Congress, 2019, 9, 2019
• Implementation of Road Asset Management System in Saint Lucia, 26th World Road Congress, 2019, 16, 2019
• Innovative Approaches to Asset Management, 2019, 110, 2019
• Machine Learning Powered Roadside Asset Extraction using LiDAR, TAC 2018: Innovation and Technology: Evolving Transportation - 2018 Conference and Exhibition of the Transportation Association of Canada, 2018
• Life-Cycle Approach to Collecting, Managing, and Sharing Transportation Infrastructure Asset Data, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Volume 143, Issue 6, 2017-06
• Highway Asset Inventory Data Collection Using Airborne LiDAR, Transportation Research Board 96th Annual Meeting, 2017, 15
• Evaluation of High-Speed Mobile Technologies for Sign Inventory and Maintenance, Transportation Research Board 96th Annual Meeting, 2017, 13, 2017
• Implementation of Aerial LiDAR Technology to Update Highway Feature Inventory, 2016, 133, 2016-12
• Guide for Efficient Geospatial Data Acquisition using LiDAR Surveying Technology, 2016, 12, 2016
• LEVERAGING CONSTRUCTION INSPECTION AND DOCUMENTATION FOR ASSET INVENTORY AND LIFE CYCLE ASSET MANAGEMENT Transportation Research Board 95th Annual Meeting, 2016, 20, 2016
• Handbook For Including Ancillary Assets in Transportation Asset Management Programs, Federal Highway Administration, 2018

Objectives

Working backward from the key decisions that need to be made across stakeholder groups over an asset’s lifecycle, this project seeks to identify current practices and recommend ongoing improvements in relation to collecting, storing, sharing, and maintaining asset inventory and condition data (“data management”). With a focus on implementation, the project will build on existing research by identifying the pros and cons of different data management methods and technologies, so that decision makers across departments can collaborate more effectively when planning and investing in data management approaches. The practice of data management is evolving at a rapid pace, given the proliferation of new technologies that are being used increasingly alongside traditional approaches. In parallel, agencies are recognizing the multi-stakeholder nature of asset management, as departments such as compliance, safety, engineering, operations and environmental begin to see the benefits of access to reliable, accurate asset information. This project will answer key data management questions such as: What data should be collected to address all stakeholder needs? How, when, and how often? Using which technologies and platforms? At what cost? And why?
It will also provide guidance to agencies on the most appropriate approaches to collecting, storing, sharing and maintaining asset data, based on the needs of the various stakeholders involved in data-based decision-making.

Urgency and Potential Benefits

Inventory and condition data collection and data management are continuously changing in response to changing demands of state and local agencies. However, despite these changing demands, inventory data is constantly being used by multiple stakeholders to make decisions (planning, operations, safety, contractors). While the inventory data may not necessarily be accurate or timely due to these agency constraints or because the agency’s collection processes lack maturity (i.e. ancillary assets), this data is still being used to make decisions at all levels within an agency, yet there is little consensus on how to manage data related to those assets.
The benefits of this research are that it will provide a complete view of inventory and condition issues across asset classes; support agencies with lessons learned from others (from data collection to post-processing/extraction and related decision making) and enable collaboration on new approaches, particularly for secondary asset data management; support implementation of TAMPs by helping to ensure data is reliable and accurate; support preparation for emerging technologies such as CAVES, which will be dependent on secondary assets, such as striping, roadside units (RSUs) and signals.

Primary Author

Implementation Considerations

Methods to incorporate products into practice:
- Web-based training for agency staff
- Case studies from peer agencies
- Assessment of existing technologies including functionalities, pros/cons, and costs
Intended audience:
- Decision makers at all organizational levels and across departments/disciplines
- Contractor and consultant community

Notes

Description

Background

Literature Search Summary

Objectives

Emerging technologies hold the promise of transforming asset data collection for transportation asset management such as the use of drones for inspections, LiDAR field data collection, continuous monitoring of real-time sensor data, and more. While the technology has been transforming, MAP-21 and the Fast Act jump started at many agencies in attaining an inventory of infrastructure assets and transportation data. At the same time, accessibility and affordability to collect high volumes of asset inventory data, such as LiDAR point cloud data, present the problem of how agencies can visualize and manage such large amounts of data and integrate the many layers for each transportation asset management plan. Now that the need for such data is federally recognized, further research is needed to understand what the latest technologies for asset analysis can offer an agency as well as how frequently that information needs generated.

Research is needed in the following areas:
• Address the adoption and practical application of these technologies and the rapid pace of technological advancement.
• What level of extraction detail and frequency interval is needed to support TAM at both the state and local levels and how can the condition assessment be applied to the performance measures of both pavement and non-pavement assets?
• Further investigate what tools are capable of visualizing asset extraction layers, as well as presenting such data to all stakeholders in powerful GIS formats with standardized TAM graphics for universal interpretation.

Urgency and Potential Benefits