INFORMATION SHARING FOR TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

3.0 INFORMATION COLLECTION AND DISTRIBUTION PRACTICES THAT MAXIMIZE SAFETY AND FACILITATE QUICK CLEARANCE

Information is vital to providing an effective incident response. With better information collection, incident response is improved by ensuring that the proper equipment and resources are available to the responders at the time when it is needed on scene. Better information dissemination allows travelers to make better decisions regarding departure time, mode choice, and route to take.

Improved coordination and communications between incident responders helps reduce incident impacts. The means and effectiveness through which response agencies collect and distribute incident information affects the duration of the incident, discussed below. Successful agencies use best practices that make use of:

Integrated response
Automation or technology
Strong relationships
Shared command/understanding of how scene command changes
Understanding of roles and responsibilities of involved entities
Ability to debrief, measure, and learn

Two sets of documents that form the basis for this section are the Results of the U.S. DOT CAD-TMC Field Operations Team (Washington and Utah) 13, 14 and the Traffic Incident Management Focus States Initiative on TIM Performance Measurement.15

The Incident Timeline 16

While nomenclature and details can vary from state to state, there are generally five areas recognized as part of the incident timeline. Each step has unique characteristics that allow for performance assessment in after-action reviews. When changes to administrative, operational, or technological processes are implemented, the overall duration of an incident and its impacts can be shortened. Key elements to shorten timeframes are: implementation of intelligent transportation systems (ITS), inter-agency coordination, and improvements derived from after-action reviews.

Incident Detection

The crash or incident occurs, and traffic queues begin to build from lane blockages or “rubbernecking.” The earlier responding agencies are aware of an incident, the more quickly resources can be sent to resolve the situation. Automating this process through the use of detection equipment removes the reliance of human detection, whether by law enforcement/emergency personnel notification or cell phone calls from passing motorists. This is the first time someone in an official capacity learns of the incident and has an opportunity to follow a response plan.

Incident Verification

Once an incident is detected and a response agency (transportation management center [TMC] or law enforcement) is aware of an incident, the location, scope, and impact of the event must be verified quickly so that the appropriate resources can be sent out to the scene. Verification through closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras or video from other sources is extremely useful because it eliminates the time needed to send a person to the scene for verification. Scene images can often be shared with multiple responding partners so that all can take appropriate action.

Incident Response

Incident response resources are called for and then arrive. They can include law enforcement, transportation agency resources, wreckers, hazardous material clean-up specialists, specialty equipment, etc. Having the personnel with appropriate resources and training arrive quickly is critical. Pre-established routes or wrong-way access to a site while following a law enforcement pilot vehicle are examples of ways response vehicles may avoid traffic queues that grow quickly after an incident occurs.

Incident Clearance

Once the area is declared safe for cleanup for responders, motorists, and other personnel on scene (there may be fire or other dangers, loads may be unsafe, etc. that must be addressed first), the incident response team can get to work. The response team must have the right equipment available so that scene clearance and temporary repair work, if needed, can begin so that the roadway can be re-opened to traffic. This time is lengthened if equipment is missing; the full complement of needed equipment must be at the incident scene. Changes to the clearance component of the incident timeline may be addressed during multi-agency sessions (traffic incident management team meetings and workshops) where traffic incident management (TIM) partners discuss and learn from previous and proposed practices. Development of agreements, execution of tabletop exercises, and discussion of after-action reviews are also extremely helpful in reducing incident clearance times. Sharing automated information, clear communication, understanding and agreeing upon roles and authority, and cooperative work efforts go a long way in addressing incident scene needs by minimizing institutional barriers and increasing collaboration. These areas are best addressed away from the incident scene so that interactions between responders are clear and all roles are understood rather than when actions are critical and pressure mounts for the roadway to re-open quickly.

Incident Recovery

When the incident is finally cleared and the roadway is re-opened, time is needed for queues to dissipate. Recovery time is the period from the re-opening of all lanes to the resumption of normal traffic flow. This time is largely dependent upon the length of the queue from the incident; an accepted estimate is that for every minute of lane closure, four minutes of recovery time is needed once lanes are re-opened. If fewer vehicles join the waiting traffic stream and possibly divert to other roadways or modes, they do not become part of the incident queue, in turn shortening the time needed to resume normal conditions. Traveler information services, partnerships with the media, and ITS information dissemination devices placed in advance of the queue help travelers make route decisions that can keep them from driving unwittingly into an incident queue for an unknown period of time. Because travelers themselves have a part in controlling this part of the incident timeline, the information they receive must be accurate, timely, and reliable.

Information Collection

When a traffic incident occurs, it must be detected and verified before any response activities can begin; incident details are needed for effective, efficient response and management of traffic. This information can be collected by on scene personnel, ITS information detection field devices, or a combination of these elements. It must then be shared between agencies that handle various components of the response. This type of information exchange does not always occur easily; information collected may go back to a TMC or public safety/law enforcement dispatch center that is not integrated or does not allow for other forms of information exchange. No matter which means is used to collect the information; it must be shared across jurisdictions and organizations in order to realize improvements in overall safety and operations.

CAD and ATMS

CAD systems are used to track incident information with a focus on managing public safety or law enforcement responses. Many existing CAD systems are proprietary and do not easily share information with systems with different interfaces. Between themselves, CAD systems often work in independent frameworks with inconsistent standards and formats. Most major metropolitan areas in the United States (U.S.) have some type of ATMS to manage their transportation operations and incident response from some type of centralized TMC. They tend to use different data, message formats, and standards in their ATMS, further complicating integration efforts with law-enforcement CAD systems.

There is widespread agreement that these two types of information should be shared, but exactly how this is to be done is not always clear. For example, there are concerns about the type and amount of data potentially exchanged between agencies. Some CAD information is sensitive and, if inappropriately released, could compromise law enforcement activities. There are concerns about overwhelming incident response partners with too much information. However, these challenges have been successfully overcome when institutional and technical challenges were met and operational procedures amended to make best use of this newly shared information. These results are realized in two recent Field Operational Tests (FOT) performed in the states of Utah and Washington.

State of Utah

Utah’s integrated CAD-TMC system was intended to include the following elements:

Create common message sets
Support inter-agency service requests via data specification sets (DSS)
Select commonly used operating system and language
Develop legacy system interfaces between state, county, and municipal government systems
Integrate transit
Develop event tracking to manage and update planned events

While the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and Utah Highway Patrol (UHP) staffs were previously co-located, integration of the systems eliminated the need for operators of either agency to observe multiple computer terminals. The result of this inter-agency cooperation has enhanced field operations and real-time information exchange from the earliest notification of an incident through its eventual resolution. Field device information from cameras, loop detectors, and other ITS applications were available to all staffs and provided more accurate and reliable incident location data. Incidents were documented more efficiently and with better data. Staffs from different agencies were able to work together more effectively because they were receiving and responding to the same information. They were able to achieve much improved inter-agency working relationships, both during the management of an incident and during non-incident planning/debriefing sessions.

A system performance study was designed to describe the FOT environment in a way that could transfer the CAD-TMC integration concept to other locations, identify system performance measures to comparative results, identify limitations in the deployed system, and identify other factors affecting the system’s performance. Key to this FOT’s success is that the State of Utah had a well-established incident response program prior to the information exchange enhancements. Results of the CAD-TMC FOT from the Final Evaluation Report are given in Table 2.

Table 2. System Performance Test Results Summary 14

Evaluation Objective	Hypothesis	Test Results
Objective #1: Document the system component performance.	The system meets functional specifications.	Achieved.
	The CAD and TMC systems will be able to link data on an incident.	Achieved.
	Using the system improved incident response procedures.	To a significant extent, achieved through prior projects. Project specific impact not measurable.
Objective #2: Automate the seamless transfer of information between traffic management workstations and police, fire, and EMS CAD systems from different vendors.	The system meets functional specifications.	Achieved.
	The FOTs will decrease the reliance on manual methods for exchanging information.	Preliminary result - achieved.
	The FOTs will increase the extent and reliability of information exchanges.	Preliminary result - achieved.
Objective #3: Extend the level of integration to include secondary responders such as utilities, towing and recovery, public works, and highway maintenance personnel.	Improved integration of secondary responders will reduce incident recovery time by getting required recovery personnel to the incident site as quickly as possible to begin recovery operations.	Secondary responders (ambulance, utilities, etc.) were not included in the project.

The CAD-TMC FOT also looks at whether or not the integration improved efficiency and productivity of incident response, reduced delays and improved mobility, enhanced incident-specific response plans, improved responder safety and reduced secondary crashes, and improved incident information for travelers. System impact test results from the CAD-TMC FOT are given in Table 3.

Table 3. System Impact Test Results Summary 14

Evaluation Objective	Hypothesis	Test Results
Objective #1: Productivity –To determine if the CAD-TMC integration improves the efficiency and productivity of incident response.	CAD-TMC integration enhances communications among responders.	Achieved - Key issue to be addressed is that of refining information exchange to meet agency specific requirements.
	CAD-TMC integration improves efficiency of on-scene operations.	Not measured during the evaluation.
	CAD-TMC integration enhances efficiency in documenting incident management.	Achieved.
	CAD-TMC integration reduces incident clearance times.	Not measured during the evaluation.
Objective #2: Mobility - To determine if the CAD-TMC integration improves mobility and reduces delays during incidents.	CAD-TMC integration enhances mobility during incident management (IM) activities.	No impact measured during the evaluation.
Objective #3: Capacity/ Throughput -To determine if CAD-TMC integration enhanced incident-specific traffic management plans.	CAD-TMC integration enhances incident-specific traffic management plans.	Not measured during the evaluation.
Objective #4: Safety - CAD-TMC integration will reduce exposure of response personnel and secondary crashes during incident response activities.	CAD-TMC increases safety for response personnel.	Not measured during the evaluation.
	CAD-TMC increases safety to the traveling public.	Not measured during the evaluation.
Objective #5: Traveler Information - To determine if CAD-TMC integration will improve incident management information available to travelers.	CAD-TMC integration enhances customer satisfaction and mobility during incident management activities by improving traveler information.	Qualitative assessment: Improved ability to post incident information for public access via 511, Web site.
UTA Objective: To determine if the integration of the UTA CAD system improves UTA’s ability to respond to incidents.	The CAD-TMC integration will enable UTA to more effectively implement reroute decisions in response to an incident.	CAD-TMC integration provided real-time information on unplanned incidents and complemented existing UTA incident management procedures. Additional benefit from system is information provided on planned incidents, such as road closures and/or construction activities.

State of Washington 13

The Washington Department of Transportation (WSDOT) resources have had tremendous value in incident response and, therefore, a strong relationship exists between WSDOT and the Washington State Police (WSP). A Joint Operations Policy Statement (JOPS) encourages WSP CAD dispatchers and WSDOT TMC operators to exchange incident information and share response data. Prior to the FOT, WSP would begin the process to share information since emergency calls are received by their dispatch center, making it the primary incident information source. WSDOT TMC operators would sometimes note incident information from ITS field devices and record it in their Condition Acquisition and Reporting System (CARS). In either situation, information was typically shared between agencies verbally via telephone or radio or by monitoring read-only remote data terminals. While effective, these methods were time and labor intensive. The FOT was done in conjunction with the implementation of a new WSP CAD system with a common platform for all dispatchers and an improved ability to capture and record incident data.

Washington’s integrated CAD-TMC system has three primary elements:

PRIMARYALERT CAD Interface to filter data from WSP CAD and push it to WSDOT CARS, intended to be seamless and automatic through software code, filtering non-traffic information, and facilitating data sharing
RESPONSE SUPPORT Web Interface to provide WSDOT traffic information to WSP CAD dispatchers to facilitate response efforts, such as traffic, construction, or other activities that could impact emergency response
SECONDARY ALERT CAD Interface to push WSP CAD information to secondary responders such as local emergency medical service (EMS) providers, tow truck dispatchers, and local utility companies

Information exchange was based on use of the latest ITS and internet industry standards using open hardware and software platforms, institutional agreements based on agency operating requirements, and use of commercial, off-the-shelf technology and standard data exchange mechanisms.

A system performance study was design to describe the FOT environment in a way that could transfer the CAD-TMC integration concept to other locations, identify system performance measures to comparative results, identify limitations in the deployed system, and identify other factors affecting the system’s performance. Key to this FOT’s success is the strong existing relationship between WSDOT and WSP, leading to a well-established incident response program prior to the information exchange enhancements. Results of the CAD-TMC FOT from the Final Evaluation Report are given in Table 4.

Table 4. System Performance Test Results Summary 13

Evaluation Objective	Hypothesis	Test Results
Objective #1: Document the system component performance.	The system meets functional specifications.	Achieved.
	The CAD and TMC systems will be able to link data on an incident.	Achieved.
	Using the system improved incident response procedures.	To a significant extent, achieved through prior projects. Project-specific impact not measurable.
Objective #2: Automate the seamless transfer of information between traffic management workstations and police, and EMS CAD systems from different vendors.	The system meets functional specifications.	Achieved.
	The FOTs will decrease the reliance on manual methods for exchanging information.	Achieved previously through placement of CAD terminals at TMCs. Enhanced through project.
	The FOTs will increase the extent and reliability of information exchanges.	Preliminary result - achieved.
Objective #3: Extend the level of integration to include secondary responders such as utilities, towing and recovery, public works, and highway maintenance personnel.	Improved integration of secondary responders will reduce incident recovery time by getting required recovery personnel to the incident site as quickly as possible to begin recovery operations.	Not achieved during the evaluation period.

Table 5. System Impact Test Results Summary 13

Evaluation Objective	Hypothesis	Test Results
Objective #1: Productivity - To determine if the CAD-TMC integration improves the efficiency and productivity of incident response.	CAD-TMC integration enhances communications among responders.	Achieved with WSDOT and WSP.
	CAD-TMC integration improves efficiency of on-scene operations	Not measured during the evaluation.
	CAD-TMC integration enhances efficiency in documenting incident management.	Partially achieved; further reductions will enhance results.
	CAD-TMC integration reduces incident clearance times.	Not measured during the evaluation.
Objective #2: Mobility - To determine if the CAD-TMC integration improves mobility and reduces delays during incidents.	CAD-TMC integration enhances mobility during incident management activities.	No impact measured during the evaluation.
Objective #3: Capacity/ Throughput - To determine if CAD-TMC integration enhanced incident-specific traffic management plans	CAD-TMC integration enhances incident-specific traffic management plans.	Not measured during the evaluation.
Objective #4: Safety - CAD-TMC integration will reduce exposure of response personnel and secondary crashes during incident response activities.	CAD-TMC increases safety for response personnel.	Not measured during the evaluation.
	CAD-TMC increases safety to the traveling public.	Not measured during the evaluation.
Objective #5: Traveler Information - To determine if CAD-TMC integration will improve incident management information available to travelers.	CAD-TMC integration enhances customer satisfaction and mobility during incident management activities by improving traveler information.	Not directly measured. Increased number of incidents posted to traveler information systems indicates improved flow of information to public.

Improving Information Dissemination Between Incident Responders

Improving the level of coordination and collaboration between incident responders helps to reduce the impact of incidents. Better information dissemination can facilitate this coordination and collaboration. Table 6, adapted from the Safe, Quick Clearance TIM in Construction and Maintenance Work Zones Primer17, provides several strategies and techniques that have been used to assist with information dissemination about incident response policies, procedures, and guidelines between incident responders.

Table 6. Strategies and Techniques for Information Disseminations Between Responders 17

Strategies and Techniques	Description	Pros	Cons
Incident Response Manual	This strategy involves developing an incident response manual that collects all the policies, procedures, and guidelines for managing incidents.	All information needed by incident responders Contains contact information for responders in different response agencies	May be difficult to keep contact information up-to-date
Communication Protocols / Frequency List	This strategy involves developing a listing of predetermined radio frequency assignments that incident responders can use to communicate with each other on scene.	Provides a quick reference of all radio frequencies for responders	May be difficult to keep contact information up-to-date
Identification Vests	This strategy involves adopting the use of identification vests to be used by incident command and emergency personnel.	Makes it easier for late arrivals to identify individuals in charge at incident scene Can be used to limit access by individuals within certain perimeter areas Vests that follow National Incident Management System Incident Command Structure (ICS) can be purchased from private vendors	Multiple vests may be required for same agency to accommodate shifts
Personnel Resource List	This strategy involves developing a comprehensive contact list of response personnel.	Provides a quick reference for notifying responders Usually part of incident response manual	May be difficult to keep up-to-date
Incident Management Reviews / Debriefings	This strategy involves establishing regular meetings between incident responders to review and discuss coordination and tactical issues associated with responding to incidents.	Many locations already have a process for doing incident reviews/debriefings Allows agencies to discuss issues that affected response Allows agencies to collaborate on modifications to improve responses Facilitates dialogue between responders	Some responders may view this as a personal attack on performance May be difficult to get all field personnel together at same time because of shifts
Media Packets	This strategy involves developing packets that can be distributed to media to disseminate information during incidents.	May include contact information for agency public information officer Contains maps showing staging areas, detour routes, etc.	Information may not be relevant for all incident conditions Strategy valid for major incidents only

Information Dissemination

Once an incident is detected and verified, incident responders must share and disseminate this information, both amongst themselves and with the motoring public, for the incident timeline phases of response, clearance, and recovery. As previously discussed, public safety and transportation agencies can share information with via remote voice, electronic text, or other media, such as integrated CAD systems. They must also disseminate incident information to the public. While public safety personnel may be limited to Web site updates, transportation agencies can make use of their ATMS and advanced traveler information systems (ATIS). With greater automation and integration, they have an opportunity to provide the most accurate, reliable, and timely information available as incident scene and congestion conditions change.

Identification of Relevant Stakeholders

Incidents occur on different scales and have varying impacts depending on time of day, location, and other factors. As such, the agencies involved and the impacts to the public vary. For example, a vehicle crash in an urban location can quickly cause congestion, impeding the ability of responders to reach the scene. In a rural location, a vehicle crash may not cause the same congestion, but will have issues surrounding site access. Information dissemination must, therefore, be adjusted accordingly, both in terms of which response agencies are notified and what type of information is provided to the public. A few elements to consider when identifying stakeholders include:

Time of day
Location
Degree/seriousness of incident (property damage/injury/fatality)
Scene safety (fire, hazardous materials)
Impact to roadway facility (damage, environmental concerns, spill)
Agency responsibilities (jurisdictional issues)
Response protocols

These issues are best addressed in TIM team or other planning meetings so that when needed, resources and personnel can be effectively engaged.

Coordination between Public Safety and Transportation Agencies

Information dissemination is most effective when a centralized location, such as a TMC, is used as an information clearinghouse for response efforts. This reduces redundant notifications, improves accuracy, and keeps on scene responders from being distracted by repeated requests for information that detract from activities that require their attention. It allows responders to focus on their mission and adjust as scene conditions warrant until the roadway is finally reopened.

Inter-agency communication is critical to achieving effective on scene traffic incident management. Issues with intra- and inter- agency communications become more critical when the incident response is complex or spread out over a large area. Strategies used to improve communication include the following:

Conducting traffic incident management preparedness training exercises,
Adopting common communications and data transmission standards,
Adopting and using ICS practices to manage traffic incidents,
Establishing electronic paging or an email alert system for notifying incident responders, and
Developing a matrix of radio frequencies used by scene incident responders.

One way to achieve coordination between agencies is to make use of a public information officer (PIO) as described in the National Incident Management System (NIMS). This person is a central point of contact, reducing redundant information requests made by the public, news media, and other entities regarding incident-related information. As shown in the ICS Organizational Chart in Figure 6, the PIO reports to the Incident Commander and communicates with the public, media, or other agencies regarding incident-related information. These efforts are critical to effectively help the response and public community as they navigate around the incident scene.

Key steps that a PIO (or other individual designated as a point of contact) follow are:

Gather information from the Incident Commander and general staff who comprise the source of official outgoing information on response efforts
Verify information by consulting with response specialists
Internally coordinate the information
Disseminate the information externally to the public, affected jurisdictions, private sector, media, and other impacted groups

Figure 6. ICS Organizational Chart 4

ICS Organizational Chart

Another aspect to consider when coordinating between agencies is public outreach during non-incident situations. PIO staff can assist with education efforts about traffic incident management procedures, motorist assistance or courtesy patrols, “Move-It,” or quick clearance policies, etc., through public education campaigns and press releases. These activities can greatly enhance compliance with “Move-It” laws and, thereby, enhance responder safety.

The media should also be considered a partner in disseminating information about incidents and TIM procedures and policies as they can be a fast, reliable means of disseminating information about incident conditions and travel alternatives to the traveling public.

Institutional Arrangement and Agreements

Memoranda of Understanding/Agreement (MOU/MOA) provide the framework for incident operations and define responder roles and responsibilities. This framework helps to keep everyone involved in incident response clear and informed, especially when a response plan grows in complexity or is influenced by external factors. TIM becomes a cooperative and collaborative effort between multiple agencies and entities with a solid foundation of trust. Participants in the process know and understand their roles and responsibilities. A sample agreement between parties is Florida’s Open Roads Policy, 18 signed by FDOT and FHP, in which the parties commit to quickly restoring the safe, orderly flow of traffic following an incident; an excerpt is shown below in Figure 7.

Figure 7. State of Florida’s Open Roads Policy 18

State of Florida’s Open Roads Policy

Mutual aid agreements, common between fire and emergency medical responders, permit incident responders to provide emergency assistance to each other in the event of disasters or emergencies. 19 Similar types of agreements can be used to allow other governmental agencies to provide incident management functions outside their own jurisdictions.

Training and Debriefings

Training and debriefing sessions allow responders to share knowledge on practices and techniques and are, therefore, important aspects of developing and implementing TIM plans. Transportation and law enforcement agencies can partner with other incident responders to develop field exercises that allow responders to become familiar with various types of traffic incidents. TIM team meetings are an effective forum for such discussions as continuous improvement is a recurring theme at these meetings. TIM team members can gauge current TIM performance and then establish strategies for on scene operations, inter- and intra- agency protocols, communications, and outreach and training that meet and exceed performance expectations. As they learn from prior responses and one another, incident responders build relationships and trust that facilitate the refinement of incident response practices.

Improving Information Dissemination to the Public

Improving incident dissemination to the public helps to reduce the impact of incidents. Better information dissemination can facilitate this coordination and collaboration. Table 7, adapted from the Safe, Quick Clearance TIM in Construction and Maintenance Work Zones Primer, 17 provides several strategies and techniques that have been used to assist with information dissemination about incident response policies, procedures, and guidelines to the public.

Table 7. Strategies and Techniques for Information Dissemination to the Public 17

Strategies and Techniques	Description	Pros	Cons
Dynamic Message Signs	This strategy involves using permanent or movable dynamic message signs to provide motorists with information in advance of, or at, the scene of an incident.	Information provided directly to motorists affected by incident Many locations will have devices as part of Transportation Management Plan (TMP) Motorist familiar/expect to receive information from these devices	Message content restricted to a relatively few characters Does not reach travelers outside immediate vicinity of sign Cannot display complex messages
Highway Advisory Radio	This strategy involves using a low-powered AM or FM radio system to provide travelers in the immediate vicinity with information about incidents.	Allows operators to provide more detailed messages Reaches a broader range of travelers in corridor	Drivers must tune to radio station to receive message Requires signing to alert motorists that a message is available
Broadcast Radio and Television Media	This strategy involves developing agreements with broadcast radio and television stations to provide incident information in a pre-established format for a specified period of time.	Has potential to reach travelers before they enter corridor or begin trip Can impact mode choice, routing, and departure time decisions	Accuracy of information being disseminated difficult to control Media agreement to information format may be difficult to obtain
Traffic Reporting Service	This strategy involves utilizing traffic reporting services to disseminate traffic and travel information for incorporation in in-vehicle displays	Information can be tailored by traffic reporting service for specific users Information can be integrated with in-vehicle travel information displays	Agency does not control/influence diversion route of traveler Agency does not control accuracy of information being disseminated
Email /Fax Alerts or Mobile Web Site	This strategy involves deploying a system whereby incident alerts are automatically distributed through electronic means, such as emails, faxes, pages, etc.	Has potential to reach a wide distribution of travelers Technology relatively easy to deploy Users would need to subscribe to service Many urban areas have systems already in place	Requires staff to manage system
Web Sites/ Kiosks	This strategy involves using Web sites and information kiosks in public areas to disseminate information about incidents	Has potential to reach travelers prior to initiating trip Can impact mode choice, routing, and departure time decisions	Does not reach motorist already in area of incident Requires integration with other systems
Dedicated Information Phone Number / 511 System	This strategy involves disseminating incident information through either a dedicated telephone call-in number or an existing 511 service.	511 services available in many metropolitan areas Has potential to reach travelers prior to initiating trip as well as drivers who have already started trip	Dedicated telephone number requires operator to staff Requires driver to initiate call to obtain information

Performance Measurement and Continuous Improvement Best Practices

TIM Program-Level Performance Measures Focus States Initiative

Monitoring and measuring TIM strategy effectiveness is essential to continually evaluate progress and identify improvements. Through the efforts of the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) TIM Program-Level Performance Measures Focus States Initiative 15 participating states developed ten candidate freeway operations objectives through a series of regional workshops relative to TIM:

Reduce incident notification time (defined as the time between the first agency’s awareness of an incident and the time to notify needed response agencies)
Reduce roadway clearance time (defined as the time between awareness of an incident and restoration of lanes to full operational status)
Reduce incident clearance time (defined as the time between awareness of an incident and the time the last responder has left the scene)
Reduce recovery time (defined as the time between awareness of an incident and restoration of impacted roadway(s) to “normal” conditions)
Reduce time for needed responders to arrive on scene after notification
Reduce number of secondary incidents and severity of primary and secondary incidents
Develop and ensure familiarity with regional, multi-disciplinary TIM goals and objectives and supporting procedures by all stakeholders
Improve communications between responders and managers regarding the status of an incident throughout the incident
Provide timely, accurate, and useful traveler information to the motoring public on a regular basis during an incident
Regularly evaluate and use customer (road user) feedback to improve TIM program assets

At the December 2005 National Workshop, objectives 2 and 3 were selected as candidates whose definitions were further defined for candidate performance measures. From 2005 through 2007, the participating states tested these two measures and discussed results at another national workshop help in October 2007.

All ten objectives have some relationship to information sharing; however, objectives 8 and 9 place particular emphasis on communications measurement and improvement. The concepts inherent in these measures require well-developed communications between response agencies as well as a strong commitment to an integrated TIM program. In addition to allowing agencies to track their progress toward meeting multiple agency goals, they may identify

Areas where improvements are being made
Areas where improvement is still needed
Highly effective practices

This information can then be provided to decision makers to

Improve allocation of existing resources to improve TIM practices
Justify allocation of additional resources for future needs
Assess how well agency goals and objectives are being met

Florida Results 20

When reporting at 2007’s National Workshop, Florida’s TIM program highlighted its multi-tiered TIM teams and their commitment to improved communications between incident responders. One sub-team concentrates specifically on recommendations to ensure effective, accurate, and timely communications among incident response agencies and the public. In addition to reviewing past response actions, members explore ways that incident management can be improved. Florida TIM team members have identified challenges in collecting and archiving the data needed to support their communications objectives; however, they continue to strive for multi-agency and multi-level communications improvements.

Wisconsin Results 21

Wisconsin discussed its Traffic Incident Management Enhancement (TIME) program at the October 2007 National Workshop. TIME members regularly conduct multi-discipline training sessions for transportation and public safety personnel. They produce a monthly report that provides performance measurement information on

Total incidents
Response time
Incident clearance times
Travel rate index
Hours of delay
VMS usage
Maintenance average service time
Freeway service and safety patrol assists
High occupancy vehicle ramp lane usage

While not always easy to quantify, effective communication between response partners is crucial for TIME partners’ success.

Washington Results

Published quarterly, WSDOT’s Measures, Markers, and Mileposts (aka “Gray Notebook”) 22 provides details regarding department management and transportation programs. The Notebook reports, in detail, on WSDOT’s and WSP’s joint efforts to

Reduce incident response program clearance times
Debrief lane-blocking incidents exceeding 90 minutes in duration

A new feature includes analysis of Washington’s new Major Incident Tow Program, a pilot incentive-based project intended to encourage local tow operators to respond more quickly to incidents. While details regarding information sharing are not discussed explicitly, the strong foundation for communications between incident response partners is the Joint Operations Policy Statement executed between WSDOT and WSP. 23

Evaluation and Lessons Learned

When incident responders assess their communications effectiveness, as well as the results of their overall traffic incident management strategies, they may find it difficult to quantify specific metrics. Baseline information or data specific to information sharing can be extremely limited. Additional reporting capabilities and resources may need to be developed, so responders must be careful when working toward measures that exceed their current data collection and reporting system capabilities. Instead, they find may find it easier to qualitatively assess their actions regarding improved communications by answering a series of questions:

Were resources engaged more quickly?
Were proper resources brought to the incident scene?
Was the incident investigation process improved?
Was the response effort improved?
Were traffic disruptions minimized?
Were safety improvements realized, including secondary crashes
Did traffic congestion recover more quickly?
Was roadway customer satisfaction improved?

Most officials support information sharing and the use of multi-agency teams as they result in improved coordination and cooperation between incident response stakeholders. This finding, however, tends to be anecdotal. Most locations do not yet have enough data to quantify their results. As agencies take steps to improve TIM practices, they must also work to document the effectiveness of their actions under the framework provided by the TIM Program-Level Performance Measures Focus States Initiative. 15

Information Sharing Best Practices

This subsection highlights various best practices for information sharing between incident responders. Information sharing between multiple agencies clearly has advantages in the improved management of incidents as responders are aware of what is happening, and debriefing sessions allow for learning, improvement, and relationship building. Other successful practices include the development of TIM strategic plans that address communications and technical issues with the objective of improving overall traffic incident management through better communications and collaboration. Successful information sharing initiatives cut through organizational boundaries to involve entities from traditional public sector agencies as well as response partners from the private sector and other stakeholders such as insurance divisions, coroners’ and medical examiners’ offices, hazardous materials contractors, and the media.

Real-Time State Police CAD Data and Richmond District TMC – Virginia

In 2005, Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) documented integration issues encountered between the Richmond District Smart Traffic Center (STC) traffic management system (“OpenTMS”) and the Virginia State Police (VSP) CAD system. The project, known as “VSP-CAD Implementation Effort,” 24 had two components:

Integrate data arriving from VSP into OpenTMS
Customize the OpenTMS incident management subsystem to use the integrated data

This project was seen as having significant benefits to integrating VDOT and VSP information; STC staff would be able to use VSP-initiated traffic incidents as part of their operations. The open exchange of ideas and information between the involved organizations (FHWA, VSP, VDOT, and their private contractors) was critical to the project’s success. VSP and VDOT had an established common commitment for the systems’ integration built upon prior relationships that led to rapid resolution of conflicts. They developed a common understanding of the project through the Richmond Regional Data Sharing Concept Study 24 that established goals that were then shared with new agency members as they were added to the team.

During the project, VSP and VDOT identified lessons learned relative to

Data exchange standards for the VSP-VDOT interface
Publish/subscribe services to distribute the CAD data to other state agencies
Issues surrounding data availability and consistency
Security of sensitive (non-traffic) data
Deployment strategies and prototyping for quick implementation

Throughout the integration project, VSP and VDOT were able to identify and resolve information issues relative to incidents that were not meeting the project’s intent. STC operators were then able to track more traffic incidents and there were significantly fewer redundant calls between VSP dispatchers and VDOT STC operators. Through the joint efforts of VSP and VDOT, this successful project was recommended for expansion into other traffic management facilities in Virginia.

Integrated Incident Management System – New York City

The Integrated Incident Management System (IIMS) 25 was deployed for freeways in the five-borough area of New York City to facilitate information exchange, data sharing, and coordination of incident response management activities. Results were also reviewed to document lessons learned, analyze “before” and “after” data, and identify benefits realized during field operational tests. The following table, taken directly from the Evaluation Final Report, summarizes IIMS’s goals, hypotheses, and findings relative to activities undertaken by project participants, namely

New York State DOT
- Headquarters and Region 11
New York City
- DOT
- Police Department
- Office of Emergency Management
- Fire Department
- Emergency Management Services
- Department of Sanitation
- Department of Environmental Protection
- Metropolitan Transportation Authority Police

Table 8. IIMS’s Goals, Hypotheses, and Findings 25

Goal	Hypothesis	Finding
Evaluate the incident management effects of the IIMS	IIMS will result in improved incident response.	Finding 3: The IIMS case studies successfully identify situations where the use of IIMS has the potential to improve incident response operations.
	IIMS will result in improved communications.	Finding 8: IIMS improves the post-incident assessment/evaluation process.
	IIMS will result in improved coordination of resources.
Evaluate the transportation system Performance effects of the IIMS	IIMS will result in improved mobility.	Finding 4: The case studies identify how the use of IIMS has the potential to substantially improve mobility.
Evaluate the energy and environmental effects of IIMS	IIMS will result in energy and environmental benefits.	IIMS will result in energy and environmental benefits.
Evaluate the safety effects of IIMS.	IIMS will result in increased traveler safety.	Finding 5: IIMS has the potential to improve traveler and responder safety.
Evaluate the safety effects of IIMS.	IIMS will result in increased worker safety.
Assess the process improvements and institutional impacts of the IIMS.	IIMS will result in better incident management documentation.	Finding 7: The use of IIMS has resulted in better Incident management documentation.
	IIMS will improve evaluation and assessment of the process and its performance.	Finding 1: IIMS has been considered a successful deployment (by stakeholders). Finding 2: IIMS was deployed in a cost-effective manner.

Through the efforts of the various stakeholders, IIMS has been integrated into normal and sustainable operations for several years. In addition to requiring high-level management support, system users were regularly asked for feedback to allow for continuous improvement. Regular communications were maintained, ensuring the system would meet all users’ needs and ultimately lead to a high-level of system usage by all stakeholders. IIMS deployment benefited from inter-agency collaboration and strong relationships between users. IIMS began with a more an informal organizational structure to allow for greater flexibility, and as system enhancements were tested and accepted, stakeholder buy-in allowed for definition of a more formal organizational structure defined in various MOUs.

The final system evaluation report noted the following conclusions:

IIMS provides interoperable real-time communications that allows stakeholders to communicate directly and use the system to coordinate incident response activities
IIMS is a successful deployment that is used by multiple users from multiple agencies to managed thousands of incidents annually
IIMS has been “mainstreamed” as an operational system whose operations and maintenance support have dedicated sources of funding and technical support

Combined Transportation, Emergency, and Communications Center – Texas

The Austin District of Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) has implemented a Combined Transportation, Emergency, and Communications Center (CTECC) as part of its evolving ITS. This facility has three primary purposes:

911 and 311 (non-emergency) call-taking and dispatch for City of Austin and Travis County
Transportation management for TxDOT and Capital Metro area
Emergency Operations for City of Austin and Travis County

In 2005, TxDOT reported on the progress of the CTECC to the CAD-ITS User Group at a meeting in Seattle, Washington. 26 The facility’s key objective related to real-time, inter-agency traffic information sharing have accomplished

Reduced congestion
Improved response routing recommendations
Enhanced coordination
Earlier incident detection, notification, and response

TxDOT has performed significant ITS integration work to standardize TMC and center-to-center communications to allow multiple users to access and respond to traffic information. Continuing efforts include sharing video images and addressing conflicts in emerging/conflicting communications standards.

Portland Dispatch Center Consortium – Oregon

Portland, Oregon’s Dispatch Center Consortium CAD Integration Project 27 was undertaken to address issues of interoperability, quality of service, performance, and manageability between nine agencies in the Portland area:

Oregon DOT
Oregon State Police
City of Portland
Clackamas County
Washington County
Lake Oswego Communications
Clark Regional Emergency Services Agency
Airport Communications Center
Columbia 911 Communications District

The project integrated state and local traffic information centers and seven metro area CAD systems. By migrating to a standards-based, secure system, Consortium members were able to ensure a highly reliable, accurate, and scalable system that effectively shares incident and road condition information between its members.

CAD – CARS Integration – Washington

Before the project to integrate CAD and TMC information, WSP and WSDOT communicated primarily via telephone or radio by transferring data to read-only monitors in the northwest region radio room. There was no linkage between the CAD and TMC systems. Through a highly collaborative effort, this project has created an automated link to WSDOT’s Condition Acquisition and Reporting System (CARS). 28 TMC operators are now alerted to every crash reported in WSP’s CAD system; they are then easily able to include these crashes into the CARS. In addition to demonstrating a successful technology integration effort, this on-going operational project has had specific benefits and results:

Proven use in urban and rural settings
Rapid operator response through minimized keystrokes and ability to quickly update system
Virtual functionality wherein operators can view, edit, and accept events statewide

Through the detailed FOT, clear goals and objectives were established by participants in this project that related to system performance, system impact, institutional and technical challenges, lessons learned, and benefits. The evaluation found that functional specifications were met, with the linked data and improved integration decreasing reliance on prior methods for data exchange. Communication between responders, both on scene and within the TMC/dispatch facilities, increased and became more effective.

This project demonstrated not only how integrated CAD and TMC systems could improve response capabilities, but also how institutional barriers could be overcome. This project resulted in an integrated transportation and public safety incident management information network that allowed enhanced information-sharing between multiple agencies across multiple jurisdiction.

Previous | Table of Contents | Next