TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
6.0 COMPANION COST-SHARE STRATEGIES
With an anticipated overall cost savings per incident (attributable to the hypothetical and observed examples of potential improvements in traffic incident management [TIM] resource management), but potential cost increases and decreases for individual disciplines or agencies, a multi-disciplinary, holistic approach to resource management may require various companion cost-sharing strategies to support implementation and widespread acceptance.
Historically, multi-disciplinary and multi-jurisdictional mutual aid agreements that support the sharing of personnel and equipment resources between agencies and/or jurisdictions at no cost to the recipient (i.e., each jurisdiction or agency is responsible for its own costs incurred in the performance of duties, and does not receive reimbursement from any other jurisdiction), at like-kind or negotiated costs to the recipient, or through third party reimbursement were first introduced in response to larger-scale emergencies, but have migrated into TIM practice to largely support expeditious operational response at jurisdictional boundaries.
Likely following the same evolutionary implementation, multi-disciplinary cost-share agreements have proven effective in establishing the financial responsibility for resources used in response to larger-scale emergencies, but are, at present, less commonly used in TIM. Known examples of cost-share agreements in TIM include the operation, maintenance, management, and sometimes development of joint traffic management centers (TMC) and the performance of TIM services provided by one agency, but procured by a second distinct agency.
Several joint TMCs exist in urban areas across the nation, most often occupied by law enforcement and transportation agencies. Some include a broader set of agencies representing fire and rescue, emergency medical, transit and others. Each of these agencies, co-located at the TMC, often enter into a cost-share agreement to support ongoing facility operation, maintenance, and management and, in some cases, may agree to share facility development costs. As an early example, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the California Highway Patrol (CHP) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to support the development and operation of a joint TMC. Similarly, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) have a MOU that encourages TMC co-location with the intent of enhancing cost-effective statewide operations. Partnering agencies need to secure funding commitments to support their share of recurring operations and maintenance expenses as well as initial design and construction costs.
A second example of a type of cost-share agreement in TIM relates to the performance of TIM services provided by one agency, but procured by a second distinct agency. As part of a pilot project, the FDOT procured the services of the FHP to quickly clear incidents along a 53-mile stretch of urban interstate and improve the overall operation of the facility. Similar arrangements may result when a particular agency is constrained in providing these services in-house due to personnel caps (i.e., limits on the number of full-time employees), but has the fiscal means to procure these services from another public agency or private contractor.
The remainder of this chapter considers the various levels and applicability of cost-sharing strategies as they relate to a multi-disciplinary, holistic approach to TIM resource management.
Cost-sharing Levels
In general, three levels of multi-disciplinary, multi-jurisdictional cost-sharing have been defined, ranging from less formal to more formal:17
In-kind |
Individuals commit to periodic meetings to address issues of regional significance. Agencies assign staff members and other resources (i.e., equipment, facilities) to support collaboration efforts on an ongoing basis. |
|---|---|
Pooled Resources |
Jurisdictions and public and private organizations pool funds, personnel, equipment, and other resources to sustain collaboration. Agencies and jurisdictions commit resources to be used in regional operating activities (i.e., mutual aid agreements) |
Funded Entity |
Jurisdictions and public and private organizations allocate funds to support a regional entity responsible for regional collaboration. Entities are formed and funded to own and operate resources (i.e., maintenance vehicles, emergency response equipment) on behalf of multiple jurisdictions. |
At the most basic level (i.e., in-kind cost-sharing), public agency operations personnel can begin to affect efficient and effective resource management by assigning existing personnel and resources to certain TIM functions and tasks for which they are appropriately trained and designed, respectively. An example includes the consistent use of existing transportation personnel to provide temporary traffic control at the scene of an incident, releasing law enforcement personnel to perform other duties for which they are uniquely trained. In-kind contributions can generally be administered by a single agency on behalf of all participants. As a next step in cost-sharing evolution, law enforcement, fire and rescue, and emergency medical agencies and/or private towing and recovery industries—who value the scene protection provided through adequate traffic control—may opt to pool funds to support and ensure rapid and consistent dispatch and response of transportation personnel and equipment to the scene. Ultimately, metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) may support a broader multi-disciplinary approach to TIM through their distinctive role in facilitating regional planning and programming decisions, providing a forum for cooperative decision-making, working towards regional consensus, developing regional and institutional agreements, serving as a repository for comprehensive data, etc.
Costs Shared and Borne by Each Agency
Based on cost-sharing guidance for large-scale emergencies,18 the types of TIM costs that can be shared include the following:
- Personnel costs associated with assigned incident response personnel;
- Equipment costs associated with response equipment used to support the incident;
- Incident cache costs associated with refurbishing, replacing, or restocking supplies and materials; and
- Transportation costs associated with movement of resources to and from an incident.
Under a cost-share agreement, personnel generally receive wages, salaries, and any and all other compensation (i.e., contributions for insurance and retirement) for mobilization, hours worked, and demobilization and have all the duties, responsibilities, immunities, rights, interests, and privileges related to their usual employment regardless of the funding source. The costs of operating equipment under a cost-share agreement generally include fuels, other consumable supplies, and maintenance, service, and repairs necessary to keep the equipment in a state of operational readiness.
The types of TIM costs that should be borne by each agency include the following:18
- Accountable and/or sensitive property, as defined by each agency, that is purchased by the agency and becomes property of that agency;
- Administrative overhead costs that include normal operating expenses (i.e., basic utility costs, buildings and facilities rent, administrative support, and personnel);
- Claims or extraordinary settlement costs;
- Additional costs over and above base salary of “backfilling” agency personnel to meet agency-specific staffing requirements; and
- Waste, fraud, and abuse costs.
Eligible costs can be shared proportionately based on the level of resources or responsibility at the incident scene, or through a more direct means of measured incident response and reimbursement.
This Primer directly supports the identification of candidate costs to be shared,.through the identification of potential TIM resource management improvements related to the:
- Utilization of personnel who are best qualified (i.e., capable but not over-qualified) for the various tasks,
- Utilization of appropriate equipment by function (i.e., use of the least costly equipment capable of performing the function),
- Utilization of appropriate technology capable of supporting various on-site resource tasks, and
- Reduction in overall resources required through reduced redundancy across disciplines.
A change in perspective regarding TIM resource management from the traditional, intra-agency approach to a multi-disciplinary, holistic approach—combined with supporting implementation strategies (i.e., cost-share agreements)—will help to ensure that the tangible benefits attributable to the most efficient and effective use of TIM resources will be realized across all responding public agencies combined.
