INFORMATION SHARING FOR TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT
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
