Best Practices in Traffic Incident Management
September 2010

APPENDIX C: ADDITIONAL CROSS-CUTTING CHALLENGES AND STRATEGIES

For many of the individual tools and strategies intended to address cross-cutting challenges, a wide range of effectiveness was observed and/or reported by locale, suggesting that local conditions related to the nature and extent of operation, maintenance, marketing, etc. have a significant impact on the perceived or measured success of specific TIM efforts. Because of their potential to be effective under certain implementation scenarios, these additional tools and strategies—infrequently or inconsistently observed to be effective—are included here.

Agency Relations

Table 20 identifies the various tools and strategies that were infrequently or inconsistently observed to be effective in overcoming challenges related to agency relations and identifies select locations where these tools and strategies are in use. Whenever possible, the example locations reflect locales where the various tools and strategies have proven to be both effective and ineffective to support additional information gathering regarding factors contributing to a particular tool or strategy’s performance.

Table 20. Agency relations challenges, strategies, and select implementation locations.

AGENCY RELATIONS STRATEGIES	Different Priorities / Cultures	Institutionalizing TIM	EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS
Viable Agency Career Path in TIM		•	Effective: CA (Windsor), MD (Baltimore); Ineffective: NJ/PA (Delaware Valley Region)

Additional descriptive information regarding the various tools and strategies and select locations where these tools and strategies are in use is provided below.

• Viable agency career path in TIM. As noted previously in the main body of this document under “Cross-Cutting Challenges and Strategies—Program Resources and Funding,” transportation personnel often assigned to TIM duties have other full-time responsibilities in maintenance, traffic engineering, or ITS. Over time, TIM may evolve into a professional subspecialty within the transportation profession, practiced by full-time personnel who have clear responsibilities and accountability through reporting and performance measurement for stable and funded TIM programs. This evolution in TIM will provide a viable career path for TIM personnel, leading to enhanced retention of personnel and associated knowledge and skill sets and more effective, long-term working relationships with other incident responders.

  In 2000, the Tennessee Department of Transportation established an Office of Incident Management with responsibility for the HELP service patrol program and for building a statewide TIM program. In 2001, the Office of Incident Management became a separate unit reporting to the assistant chief engineer for operations. (9)

  Of the participants in this investigation, TIM personnel in Windsor, CA, and Baltimore, MD, rated a viable career path in TIM as “high” to “very high” in effectively institutionalizing TIM, citing the ability to retain qualified personnel as a significant benefit. Comparatively, TIM personnel in the Delaware Valley region in New Jersey and Pennsylvania rated the effectiveness of this same strategy as “low.”

Communications

Table 21 identifies the various tools and strategies that were infrequently or inconsistently observed to be effective in overcoming challenges related to communications and identifies select locations where these tools and strategies are in use. Whenever possible, the example locations reflect locales where the various tools and strategies have proven to be both effective and ineffective to support additional information gathering regarding factors contributing to a particular tool or strategy’s performance.

Table 21. Communications challenges, strategies, and select implementation locations.

COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGIES	Limited Communications	Inefficient Communications	EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS
Common/Interoperable Radio Systems	•		Effective: CA (Windsor), NY (New York), OH (Cincinnati), RI, TX (Austin); Ineffective: NJ/PA (Delaware Valley Region)
Cross Installation of Radios	•		Effective: CA (Stockton), FL, MD (Baltimore), TX (Austin); Ineffective: CA (Redding), NJ/PA (Delaware Valley Region)
Console Patch	•		Effective: MD (Baltimore), NJ/PA (Delaware Valley Region); Ineffective: CA (Redding), UT (Salt Lake City)

Additional descriptive information regarding the various tools and strategies and select locations where these tools and strategies are in use is provided below.

• Common/interoperable radio systems. A permanent communications solution can be achieved by building or procuring a single radio system that serves multiple TIM agencies or taking steps to make existing radio systems interoperable. Under the first scenario, multiple agencies typically share in the system costs, ensuring that their collective performance requirements are met. In particular, trunked systems can be configured to allow agencies to have their own talk groups (i.e., allowing them to communicate as if they had a system dedicated to their agency when appropriate) and allow interagency talk groups to be utilized when interoperability is required.

  Response agencies are heavily invested in existing radio systems; it may be extremely difficult to persuade agencies to abandon these investments for new systems. In many cases however, public safety agencies already utilize common/interoperable radio systems, effectively limiting the investment required to achieve commonality to transportation and other support agencies. Rhode Island is currently in the process of procuring an 800-MHz radio system to allow statewide radio access among TIM responders. (6)

  As an alternative to building or procuring a single radio system, steps can be taken to make most existing radio systems interoperable. The National Task Force on Interoperability developed an informational guide entitled Why Can’t We Talk? Working Together to Bridge the Communications Gap to Save Lives—A Guide for Public Officials. (127) The guide examines the critical barriers to interoperability (the ability of different systems to exchange both voice and data communications), provides guidelines for assessing a jurisdiction’s interoperability, and suggests interim technology strategies to close gaps.

  Of the participants in this investigation, TIM personnel in the Delaware Valley region in New Jersey and Pennsylvania rated common radio systems as “low” in effectively enhancing en-route and on-scene communications. Conversely, TIM personnel in Windsor, CA, New York, NY, Cincinnati, OH, and Austin, TX, rated the effectiveness of this same strategy as “moderate” to “very high” in effectively enhancing en-route and on-scene communications.

• Cross installation of radios. Cross installation of conventional radios in response vehicles provides a less costly approach to improving communication among TIM responders from different agencies (i.e., a transportation radio is installed in a police vehicle in addition to the police radio and vice versa). Resources can usually be made available to allow for the installation of one agency’s radio in another agency’s vehicle; both agencies benefit if the swap of radios is equal. The cross installation of radios is only effective at improving communication between a few agencies; cross installation of radios is limited by physical space in the vehicle and the ability to simultaneously monitor and operate several different radio systems. Hence, to be most effective, cross installation of radios requires the identification of the most critical communication links.

  The Florida Department of Transportation has recently secured authority to utilize the Statewide Law Enforcement Radio System for all Road Ranger Safety Service Patrols. The use of these 800-MHz radios allows direct communications with the regional law enforcement dispatch centers, TMCs, and Florida Highway Patrol incident responders. The Florida Department of Transportation has purchased these radios and is in the process of distributing them to the districts. (6)

  Consistent with Florida’s perceived effectiveness of this strategy, TIM personnel in Stockton, CA, Baltimore, MD, and Austin, TX, rated the cross installation of radios as “moderate” to “high” in effectively enhancing en-route and on-scene communications in their respective locales. Comparatively, TIM personnel in Redding, CA, and the Delaware Valley region in New Jersey and Pennsylvania rated this same strategy as “low,” noting that not all TIM responders were sufficiently trained in the use of outside agency radios.

• Console patch. A more temporary measure is to deploy a console patch or gateway interface device that receives a transmission from one radio system and rebroadcasts it on another radio system. One disadvantage of this approach is that it ties up a frequency (channel) for each different radio system when in use. However, given the relatively low cost of retransmission devices and the achievable deployment with little or no changes required to existing radio systems, this approach has significant potential, particularly as a near-term solution or as part of a transitional strategy toward more complete communications capabilities. (95)

  Of the participants in this investigation, TIM personnel in Redding, CA, and Salt Lake City, UT, rated the use of radio console patches as “very low” to “low” in effectively enhancing en-route and on-scene communications. Conversely, TIM personnel in the Delaware Valley region in New Jersey and Pennsylvania rated the effectiveness of this same strategy as “high.” Incident management personnel in Baltimore, MD, rated the effectiveness of radio console patches as “moderate” in enhancing en-route and on-scene communications but noted that this effectiveness rating was based on infrequent use.

Technology

Table 22 identifies the various tools and strategies that were infrequently or inconsistently observed to be effective in overcoming challenges related to technology and identifies select locations where these tools and strategies are in use. Whenever possible, the example locations reflect locales where the various tools and strategies have proven to be both effective and ineffective to support additional information gathering regarding factors contributing to a particular tool or strategy’s performance.

Table 22. Technology challenges, strategies, and select implementation locations.

TECHNOLOGY STRATEGIES	Lack of Standards	Limited Integration / Interoperability	Inadequate Life-Cycle Costing	EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS
Regional ITS Architecture		•		Effective: MD (Baltimore), TX (Austin); Ineffective: CA (Bishop), NJ/PA (Delaware Valley Region)
Life-Cycle Cost Requirements for State Procurement			•	Ineffective: CA (Redding), TN (Chattanooga)

Additional descriptive information regarding the various tools and strategies and select locations where these tools and strategies are in use is provided below.

• Regional ITS architecture. The National ITS Architecture provides a common framework for planning, defining, and integrating technology-based systems and components. The architecture defines the system functions that are required, the locations where these functions reside (e.g., the field or the vehicle), and the information and data flows that connect these functions and physical subsystems together into an integrated system. The National ITS Architecture can be used to develop a regional ITS architecture, tailored to address local conditions and investment needs. Subsequent technology-based project requests are then compared for adherence to the regional ITS architecture.

  Of the participants in this investigation, TIM personnel in Bishop, CA, and the Delaware Valley region in New Jersey and Pennsylvania rated a regional ITS architecture as “very low” to “low” in effectively encouraging technology integration and interoperability in their respective locales. Incident management personnel in Austin, TX, rated the effectiveness of this same strategy as “moderate.” Conversely, TIM personnel in Baltimore, MD, rated the effectiveness of a regional ITS architecture as “very high,” noting resulting benefits related to information and resource sharing.

  The range in effectiveness may be further explained by the timeliness of regional architecture development (i.e., older architectures may not adequately reflect local conditions that have changed over time) and the level of input originally obtained from diverse TIM response agencies.

• Life-cycle cost requirements for State procurement. Typical costs for a system over its life span may include design, development, and acquisition costs; operating and maintenance costs; and disposal costs. Design, development, acquisition, and disposal costs are generally deterministic, but operating and maintenance costs can vary significantly based on the complexity of the system and the random nature of system failures. Consequently, agencies may be surprised by the magnitude of operating and maintenance costs associated with technology deployment and be ill prepared to cover these costs without sacrificing some other aspect of service. By requiring life-cycle costing as part of the State procurement process, agencies can better anticipate and plan for comprehensive technology costs at the time of procurement.

  Incident management personnel in Redding, CA, and Chattanooga, TN, consistently rated life-cycle costing requirements for State procurement as “low” in effectively enhancing the use of technology. This low rating may suggest a sufficient level of technology deployment experience by TIM program administrators to successfully anticipate life-cycle costs without State procurement requirements. It may also suggest a lack of confidence in life-cycle cost estimates, particularly related to the operation and maintenance of technology-based systems.

Performance Measurement

Table 23 identifies the various tools and strategies that were infrequently or inconsistently observed to be effective in overcoming challenges related to performance measurement and identifies select locations where these tools and strategies are in use. Whenever possible, the example locations reflect locales where the various tools and strategies have proven to be both effective and ineffective to support additional information gathering regarding factors contributing to a particular tool or strategy’s performance.

Table 23. Performance measurement challenges, strategies, and select implementation locations.

PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT STRATEGIES	Inconsistent Definitions	Lack of Consensus / Data	Limited Data Sharing / Accessibility	EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS
State Traffic Records Coordinating Committee Partnerships		•		Ineffective: CA (Bishop)
Dedicated TIM Database		•		Effective: OH (Cincinnati); Ineffective: NJ/PA (Delaware Valley Region), NY (New York)

Additional descriptive information regarding the various tools and strategies and select locations where these tools and strategies are in use is provided below.

• State traffic records coordinating committee partnerships. At the State level, traffic records coordinating committees represent multiple agencies involved in traffic records initiation, storage, transmission, and dissemination with the intent of improving the accessibility, timeliness, accuracy, and completeness of statewide traffic-related information. These committees strive to maximize utilization and functionality; improve data accuracy, timeliness, and linkages; advance electronic data collection; protect privacy; and minimize redundancies in related systems, allowing agencies to better accomplish individual goals.

  TIM personnel in Bishop, CA, reported utilizing partnerships with State traffic records coordinating committees but rated their effectiveness in reaching consensus and supporting TIM performance measurement as “low.”

• Dedicated TIM database. As an alternative to integrating distinct agency databases with companion data exchange protocol, a dedicated database may be specifically developed to accommodate TIM performance measurement needs. Such a database should support monitoring of multi-agency TIM goals and objectives, be accessible to all key TIM agencies, and not be burdensome with other single-agency data collection and reporting duties.

  Of the participants in this investigation, TIM personnel in the Delaware Valley region in New Jersey and Pennsylvania and New York, NY, rated the effectiveness of a dedicated TIM database in reaching consensus and supporting TIM performance measurement as “low.” Personnel in New York, NY, noted, however, that such a database exists only in select State regions. Conversely, TIM personnel in Cincinnati, OH, rated this same strategy as “high.”

Program Resources and Funding

Table 24 identifies the various tools and strategies that were infrequently or inconsistently observed to be effective in overcoming challenges related to program resources and funding and identifies select locations where these tools and strategies are in use. Whenever possible, the example locations reflect locales where the various tools and strategies have proven to be both effective and ineffective to support additional information gathering regarding factors contributing to a particular tool or strategy’s performance.

Table 24. Program resources and funding challenges, strategies, and select implementation locations.

PROGRAM RESOURCES AND FUNDING STRATEGIES	Limited Resources / Funding	Inadequate Outreach to Executives	EXAMPLE APPLICATIONS
Cost Recovery Mechanisms/Databases	•		Effective: CA (Stockton, Windsor), MD (Baltimore), UT (Salt Lake City), WA; Ineffective: CA (Redding), NJ/PA (Delaware Valley Region)
TIM Requirements in New Construction Contracts	•		Ineffective: CA (Redding), MD (Baltimore)

Additional descriptive information regarding the various tools and strategies and select locations where these tools and strategies are in use is provided below.

• Cost recovery mechanisms/databases. States commonly collect and maintain various TIM data to provide historical operational performance information (i.e., changes in response or clearance times), ensure ongoing operational improvement, and justify program continuance. Select States, such as Washington, collect and maintain data with a broader focus: to allow departments of transportation to recover more of the costs of the incident response effort from the insurance companies of the parties at fault, and to improve agency budget and planning forecasts.

  Of the participants in this investigation, TIM personnel in Stockton, CA, Windsor, CA, Baltimore, MD, and Salt Lake City, UT, rated cost recovery mechanisms/databases as “moderate” to “high” in effectively enhancing limited program resources and funding. Comparatively, TIM personnel in Redding, CA, and the Delaware Valley region in New Jersey and Pennsylvania rated the effectiveness of this same strategy in enhancing limited program resources and funding as “very low.”

  The range of reported effectiveness may be explained, in part, by differences in the nature and extent of cost recovery and the level of effort required to maintain such a recovery system.

• TIM requirements in new construction contracts. Major construction events present an opportunity for securing additional program resources and funding to support TIM efforts. A portion of construction project funding may be required to be set aside for traffic management operations, such as TIM in construction zones, which may continue even after a project has been completed. Eligible traffic management activities may include traffic signal control, freeway surveillance, DMS, HAR, and temporary service patrols.

  Of the participants in this investigation, TIM personnel in Redding, CA, and Baltimore, MD, rated this strategy as “very low” to “low” in effectively enhancing limited program resources and funding. Incident management personnel in Baltimore, MD, noted an infrequency of use, contributing to its low reported effectiveness ratings.

September 2010
FHWA-HOP-10-050