Making the Business Case for Traffic Incident Management

Chapter 4. Formalize

Figure 11. Chart. Formalize section of traffic incident management business case development process.

(Source: AEM Corporation.)

The next important phase in developing a traffic incident management (TIM) business case is to formalize the proposed investment within the organizational structure and processes. Formalization involves activities that help to integrate TIM within and across organizations, prepare the TIM program or strategies for institutionalization, and identify potential funding sources for the program - in essence, activities that help to establish the TIM program as part of the fabric of the agency or agencies. More specifically, formalization should:

• Incorporate TIM into the planning process.
• Establish/maintain relationships with TIM partners.
• Involve and engage the community.
• Work to improve the organization's overall TIM processes/capabilities.
• Identify potential funding sources.

Because the business case development process is not necessarily a sequential process, formalization can begin at any time - the sooner the better. In addition, many of the formalization activities should be conducted on an on-going basis.

Incorporate Traffic Incident Management into the Planning Process

Once the vision, costs, and benefits associated with a TIM program, strategy, or group of strategies have been established, these outputs should be incorporated into various planning documents. Including TIM in the transportation planning process is a good business practice for departments of transportation (DOTs), their planning counterparts, and the regional TIM partners. The business case report in and of itself is not sufficient to make the business case. TIM programs need visibility, support, and funding opportunities; incorporating TIM into the planning process can help. In fact, in some cases, a program must be included in the planning process in order to access certain funding mechanisms. (FHWA, "Traffic Incident Management Gap Analysis Primer," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-15-007, 2015.)

Some common ways that DOTs have successfully incorporated TIM into the planning process include:

• Develop a focused TIM strategic plan.
• Add TIM as an emphasis area or key strategy in planning documents such as the following:
  • Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP).
  • Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP).
  • Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).
  • Congestion Management Plan.
  • Regional Transportation Safety Plan.
  • Metropolitan Transportation Plan.
  • Long range plan (LRP).
• Include TIM as a point of discussion when planning construction and maintenance projects.

A TIM strategic plan presents the vision, goals, objectives, strategies, performance measures, and action items for the program. The documentation of these important factors allows TIM to be more easily integrated into the broader agency transportation strategic plan. (FHWA, "Making the Connection: Advancing Traffic Incident Management in Transportation Planning - A Primer," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-13-044, 2013.) Incorporating TIM into strategic planning helps to strengthen the support and funding for a TIM program, as well as make it more widely known as an important, lower-cost strategy proven to improve safety and mobility. (W. Berman, "Business Process Management Capability Maturity Frameworks - Overview," in Presentation at TRB Workshop, Washington, DC, 2015.)

A number of agencies have successfully incorporated TIM into their planning processes:

• In October 2011, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) developed the I-5 Rogue Valley Corridor Plan to assess the existing and future transportation conditions along 25 miles of I-5 in southwestern Oregon. The plan identified "high performance concepts" to improve safety and capacity along the corridor, one of which was deploying incident response (IR) vehicles to patrol I-5 during peak crash periods. (David Evans and Associates, "I-5 Rogue Valley Corridor Plan," Oregon DOT, Roseburg, OR, 2011.) Having incorporated the importance of dedicated incident response into this plan helped drive the support for the Region 3, District 8 Dedicated IR Pilot Project. Requests for the pilot project had been denied for more than two years; however, the corridor plan gave the champion for the IR Pilot Project a reliable source to reference when seeking approval for the project, and it proved to be key in gaining this approval. (J. Griffin, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - ODOT. [Interview]. 4 February 2016.)
• Maryland began incorporating TIM into the planning process by setting goals for various TIM performance measures, such as response times and travel time reliability, and incorporating them into the SHSP. Including TIM in the SHSP identified the Maryland Coordinated Highways Action Response Team (CHART) program as a priority, established a direction for the program, formalized goals toward which it could work, and helped to gain buy-in and support to improve TIM. (A. Marquess, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - CHART. [Interview]. 30 November 2015.) CHART was also well defined in the Maryland State Highway Administration's (SHA) business plan. The Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) merged and blended the offices of operations, maintenance, and planning, which provided staff in each group with familiarity of the activities of the other groups, such as equipment deployment, project prioritization, and data needs. According to an interview with a representative from CHART, "bringing all of these groups together to discuss incorporating TIM really helped fill gaps and improve internal coordination." (J. Sagal, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - CHART. [Interview]. 7 December 2015.)
• The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (DVRPC) includes TIM in the transportation improvement program, long range plan, and the transportation operations plan. The transportation operations plan is a subset of the LRP that focuses on more specific strategy recommendations for transportation system management and operations (TSM&O) activities, including TIM. While including TIM in the TIP and LRP does not guarantee funding, it shows that the board of directors and the entire region believe that it is important, and it ensures that TIM will be part of the funding discussion. (L. Matkowski, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - DVRPC. [Interview]. 2 December 2015.)
• The Georgia Department of Transportation's (GDOT) traffic operations group works closely with the planning group to ensure that TIM is included in the STIP. Although it does not guarantee funding, the process of partnering with the planning group does help to secure necessary funding for the TIM program. For all major project developments, TIM is considered early in the planning phase, and a working group is established to incorporate TIM into the project. Incorporating TIM on a daily basis through individual projects supports the growth of the overall TIM program. (A. Heath, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - GDOT. [Interview]. 7 December 2015.)

The incorporation of TIM into the planning process benefits all involved parties in some way. In the examples provided, on one hand, the DOT benefits by having a more holistic approach that includes aspects of planning for operations. On the other hand, planners benefit by adding a promising, lower cost strategy to show that progress is being made toward improving safety and mobility with the existing infrastructure. Additionally, incorporating TIM into the planning process provides elected officials, regional leaders, and the general public with increased visibility into the importance and benefits of the program, ideally resulting in increased levels of support and funding. Finally, the communications, collaboration, and data sharing necessary to incorporate TIM into the planning process can result in improved relationships with regional TIM partners, contributing to the overall success and viability of the program. (FHWA, "Making the Connection: Advancing Traffic Incident Management in Transportation Planning - A Primer," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-13-044, 2013; W. Berman, "Business Process Management Capability Maturity Frameworks - Overview," in Presentation at TRB Workshop, Washington, DC, 2015.

Establish/Maintain Relationships with Traffic Incident Management Partners

TIM is good business for a community/region/state, and an effective TIM requires partnerships. Quick incident clearance, efficient movement of people and goods, and the safety of all road users are all community/regional/state efforts. Therefore, the development of a business case for TIM should also be a joint effort. There is strength in numbers; it demonstrates to leadership and decisionmakers that all partners are behind a proposed project and strengthens the business case and the potential opportunities for support and funding. In addition, getting partners onboard and involved will ultimately result in a stronger business case. Another important reason to form partnerships among responder agencies is for data collection. Without data, it is very difficult to make the business case for TIM. In many cases, the agency leading the development of the business case is not the one with the best TIM performance data. Forming partnerships with other agencies allows for the sharing of data, which can be very beneficial to the success of a TIM program.

Examples of how multi-agency relationships have contributed to making the business case for TIM include:

• In Oregon, the Rogue Valley TIM team was created as a part of the Region 3, District 8 Dedicated IR Pilot Project. The goal of this project was to bring together local and state partners to build and promote a robust program throughout the region. ODOT's approach to this pilot project was multifaceted. The project did not simply add a single incident responder to the road; education (providing TIM training for the fire, emergency medical services [EMS], and towing agencies) and building partnerships also contributed greatly to the success of the pilot project. In addition, these partnerships have helped to create opportunities throughout the state to increase outreach and awareness for the TIM program. (J. Griffin, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - ODOT. [Interview]. 4 February 2016.)
• In 2010, it was apparent to the Arizona Department of Public Safety (AZDPS) that it needed not only to improve TIM, but there was also a need for measures to determine if the agency's TIM efforts were working. Further, AZDPS recognized that it needed to be in charge of collecting the data, but in Arizona, the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) is the agency that owns the crash data. While AZDPS and ADOT have a long-standing relationship through planning, AZDPS needed to build a coalition with ADOT on the technical side to collect the data. ADOT promoted electronic crash data, and the coalition selected Traffic and Criminal Software (TraCS) as the data collection tool. Building on a 30-year old agreement and an existing statute to share the crash data, the crash data are now sent electronically from TraCS to ADOT, shortening the availability of the data from about eight months to about eight days. This partnership has led to readily-available data for performance measurement, performance management, and for making the business case for TIM. With the data, Arizona has demonstrated how TIM training and roadway clearance policies have resulted in significant reductions in roadway clearance time (RCT) and incident clearance time (ICT), as well as in the reduction of the number of law enforcement officers involved in secondary crashes. (FHWA, "Process for Establishing, Implementing, and Institutionalizing a TIM Performance Measures Program," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-15-028, 2016 (anticipated).)

Involve the Community

Another important aspect of formalizing the business case is to involve and engage the traveling public. While quantitative data are necessary to make the business case, qualitative information can also be very persuasive, especially with the general public and public officials. A good story that includes moving anecdotes from people who have benefited from TIM complements quantitative metrics to complete the business case. When TIM programs develop requests for funding increases, they must use data to justify the additional costs, but they also typically use anecdotal information, such as written comments and feedback from the traveling public. Strategies to involve and engage the community include public awareness programs, public information and outreach campaigns, public education, and training efforts. (Florida DOT, "Florida Traffic Incident Management Program Strategic Plan," Prepared by PB Farradyne, 2006; and Connecticut DOT, "Connecticut Strategic Highway Safety Plan," 2010, Revised 2013; and Arizona DOT, "Toward Zero Deaths by Reducing Crashes for a Safer Arizona - Arizona 2014 Strategic Highway Safety Plan," 2014.)

The Maryland CHART program provides a great example for successfully engaging the community and getting the public to embrace the program. The CHART program placed significant effort toward engaging the community and sharing information on the life-saving service that the program provides. As a result, the media uses CHART data for real-time reporting and newscasts, and public safety professionals rely on CHART as incident responders in their communities. With all the popularity that the program has with the public, if there were to be a decline in CHART's ability to respond to incidents quickly, the public would likely voice their objections to decisionmakers. (J. Sagal, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - CHART. [Interview]. 7 December 2015.)

The ODOT Region 3, District 8 Dedicated IR Pilot Project essentially had two years to make the case for the dedicated responder, and the project champions approached the project from many different angles to ensure its success. One of the priorities was to conduct community events sponsored by the Rogue Valley TIM Team. The team conducted open houses to build relationships and partnerships with other TIM responder agencies and to provide outreach and education for the general public. The district used these relationships with partners and stakeholders to support its business case for the dedicated responder beyond the two-year pilot project.

Work to Improve the Organization's Overall Traffic Incident Management Processes and Capabilities

The Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) annual Traffic Incident Management Self-Assessment (TIM SA) provides a formal process for state and local transportation, public safety, and private sector partners to collaboratively assess their TIM programs and to identify opportunities to improve TIM processes and capabilities. FHWA facilitated the initial assessments in the largest 75 U.S. urban areas in 2003. Each year, the new assessments are compared against the baseline assessments and the previous year's assessments. At a national level, the assessments enable FHWA to evaluate TIM progress and identify national TIM program initiatives. (FHWA, "Traffic Incident Management Self Assessment," [Online]. [Accessed 25 October 2015].)

In addition, FHWA worked closely with the Transportation Research Board (TRB) and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) to develop a series of documents and tools to help transportation agencies identify what changes in processes and organization are needed to move their operations and management programs in the direction of improved effectiveness and efficiency. (FHWA, "Traffic Incident Management Gap Analysis Primer," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-15-007, 2015.) A key element of this effort was developing the Capability Maturity Framework (CMF), which is based on self-evaluation of the key processes and institutional capabilities required from a transportation agency (or group of agencies) to achieve effective operations and management. (AASHTO, "Transportation Systems Management & Operations Guidance," American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington D.C., 2014.) The term "maturity" relates to the degree of formality and optimization of the processes, from ad hoc practices to active optimization of processes. The methodology describes a four-level evolutionary path of increasingly organized and systematically more mature processes.

The TIM CMF is available as a web-based tool on the FHWA Office of Operations' Web site and has been integrated with FHWA's annual TIM SA. The CMF tool enables users to conduct the self-assessment, record the discussion and consensus building around each question, and identify and prioritize actions. The outcomes that can be expected from using the CMF tool include the ability to: (W. Berman, "Business Process Management Capability Maturity Frameworks - Overview," in Presentation at TRB Workshop, Washington, DC, 2015.)

• Jumpstart the improvement process at a program-level.
• Provide justification for actions and program support.
• Improve consistency and collaboration between jurisdictions.
• Continue program improvement.

The CMF complements and intersects the business case for a program, and completing the process will help prepare a TIM program to develop a strongly articulated business case.

Identify Potential Funding Sources

In order to establish, maintain, and improve TIM programs, adequate and ongoing resources to support operations are needed. Program administrators must not only understand the funding process at the Federal, state, and local levels, but they must also be able to identify specific sources of monetary support appropriate for TIM and successfully compete for these funds. It can be a significant challenge to obtain and maintain funding for TIM. To overcome this challenge, the benefits of the existing TIM investments or efforts must be marketed internally and externally. Additional funding cannot be viewed in isolation as a panacea to address TIM challenges; however, adequate funding can help to support incremental improvements in TIM efforts by providing program equipment, personnel, or further research. (FHWA, "Best Practices in Traffic Incident Management," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-10-050, 2010.)

Traditional Funding Sources

One important potential funding source for TIM programs is the Federal-Aid Highway Program under which Congress authorizes Federal funding to specific transportation categories, such as safety and congestion management. It is then up to the discretion of each state, in coordination with their partner metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), to decide how the Federal-aid dollars are spent. The sources of Federal-aid funding that have been used to support TIM include: (FHWA, "Best Practices in Traffic Incident Management," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-10-050, 2010; and FHWA, "Making the Connection: Advancing Traffic Incident Management in Transportation Planning - A Primer," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-13-044, 2013.)

• National Highway System (NHS) Program.
• Interstate Maintenance Program.
• Surface Transportation Program (STP).
• Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Program.
• Research and Technology Innovation.
• Highway Safety (402) Programs.
• National Highway Performance Program (NHPP).
• Metropolitan Planning Programs.

During the mid to late 1990s, much of the funding for intelligent transportation systems (ITS), advanced traffic management systems (ATMS), and other traveler information systems came from Federal sources, including congressional earmark funding for ITS infrastructure such as dynamic message signs (DMS), closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras, and other equipment. For many TIM programs, including the Maryland CHART program, this era provided an opportunity to build-out the ITS infrastructure to support traffic and incident management and to capitalize on the program's proven success over the preceding decade. More recently, however, Federal funding has become more difficult to obtain, and many States have found ways to fund their TIM programs using State funds.

Examples of how agencies have identified funding for their TIM programs include:

• CHART is funded with CMAQ and STP Federal-aid funding. Since the Statewide Operations Center (SOC) was constructed in 1995, the Office of CHART has worked closely with its local Federal-aid office to plan for and request the appropriate funding for the program. Because the CHART program is slated in the Maryland SHA business plan, it does not have to compete for funding each year and is not subject to district-level budget cuts. In addition, in 2000, CHART created an iterative six-year program plan for initiatives and programs, as well as a 20-year non-constrained deployment plan. The six-year program plan iterations only specifically designate funding for the first two years, but funding for the program is guaranteed during those years. ( M. Zezeski, Interviewee, TIM Business Case Interview - CHART. [Interview]. 11 December 2015.In addition, the University of Maryland supports the CHART program by tracking performance measures and conducting an annual benefit-cost analysis, and the results have helped contribute to the increase of funding for the CHART program in recent years. In 2014, the benefit-cost analysis showed that the $10 million investment in CHART operations could result in a reduction in delay of 36.3 million vehicle-hours, resulting in $1.26 billion of direct benefit savings. (G. Chang and E. Igbinosun, "Performance Evaluation and Benefits Analysis for CHART in Year 2014," Coordinated Highways Action Response Team, 2015.)
• Similarly, GDOT funds many of its operational efforts, including its TIM program in the Atlanta metropolitan area, through the Federal-aid programs. Georgia's Highway Emergency Response Operators (HERO) program and the Traffic Incident Management Enhancement (TIME) Task Force are funded at 80 percent through Federal STP and CMAQ funds. GDOT provides a 20 percent State motor fuel match. All the Federal-aid funding flows through the STIP and requires a match. GDOT receives about $1.2 billion in Federal funding and match each year. GDOT's TIM program works with the planning group annually to incorporate TIM into the STIP to make sure the program has funding for the following year.
• The TIM program in Florida began through the funding of one specific project - expanding a major highway - and has since evolved into the comprehensive statewide program it is today. The TIM program is funded only from State funds as part of the Florida Department of Transportation's (FDOT) Five Year Work Program, which includes all projects that have been approved for funding in the upcoming five years. In the past, when funding was short, the legislature continued to provide funding for TIM but capped the amount to be spent. More recently, as FDOT has shown many statistics and strong justification for the value of the program, the legislature designated a minimum amount that must be spent on the program. (M. Wilson, P. Clark and J. Frost, Interviewees, TIM Business Case Interview - FDOT. [Interview]. 11 December 2015.) FDOT receives a lot of support from the legislature and receives money to fund the TIM team, the Rapid Incident Scene Clearance (RISC) program, as well as other components of the TIM program. As a result, FDOT plans to deploy ITS equipment statewide by 2017. FDOT is also working to expand the Road Ranger program due to a new demand area on I-95. The University of Florida is developing a needs analysis that will result in a methodology that uses actual data to help determine where to expand and when (M. Wilson, P. Clark and J. Frost, Interviewees, TIM Business Case Interview - FDOT. [Interview]. 11 December 2015.)
• The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) also uses only State funds for its IR program. WSDOT is required to make the case to the State legislature regarding how the funding for the program is used. In the early days when WSDOT was getting started with IR, it used Federal funding (e.g., earmarks, grants) for testing and initial demonstrations. This funding was helpful when WSDOT needed to determine if certain approaches or technologies made a difference. For example, the Washington State legislature provided $346,000 in 2007 to fund a 2-year pilot program to implement an incentive program to expedite the clearance of heavy-truck collisions. The program was designed to target the most challenging heavy-truck collisions. It was funded for approximately 40 activations a year and remains funded to date. (WSDOT, "Proposal to Expand Major Incident Tow Program (MIT) Coverage - Executive Summary," Washington State Department of Transportation, 2008.)

Because freeway service patrol (FSP) programs are able to operate in a more stand-alone fashion, they are often included as separate line items in State or local budgets and may draw from multiple funding sources. Funding for service patrol programs can come from fuel taxes, fees from departments of motor vehicles, and/or a percentage of State or local sales taxes. When States choose to use Federal funding for service patrol programs, it generally comes from CMAQ funds, construction funds, or highway safety funds. In some cases, the funding is sponsored by private agencies. (L. Hagen, Z. Huaguo and H. Singh, "Road Ranger Benefit Cost Analysis," Florida Department of Transportation, 2005.) For example, in Georgia, State Farm Insurance provides sponsorship with partial funding of the program through logos placed on the HERO trucks. (FHWA, "Best Practices in Traffic Incident Management," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-10-050, 2010.)

In several areas of the country, service patrol programs are jointly funded by the State transportation agency and the MPOs. In other areas, State patrol agencies have assumed the dispatching and administrative costs associated with the program. These cost-sharing arrangements divide the costs among agencies that also benefit from the program. (FHWA, "Freeway Safety Service/Motorist Assistance Patrol Sponsorship Programs Memorandum," 23 April 2008. [Online]. [Accessed 20 October 2015].) Cost-sharing is a good business practice because it reduces a particular agency's resource requirements. (FHWA, "Traffic Incident Management Handbook," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-10-013, 2010.)

Some State DOTs use contractors to operate their service patrol programs. FDOT's Road Ranger program is one example. The State-funded contracts are competed every five years in each region except Orlando. In Orlando, the MPO provides the services through its own contract and the large Value Pricing Pilot Program (VPPP) projects, where the Road Rangers are incorporated into the specific projects. (M. Wilson, P. Clark and J. Frost, Interviewees, TIM Business Case Interview - FDOT. [Interview]. 11 December 2015.)

One way to prevent cutbacks or elimination of a service patrol program is to develop a public-private partnership between the transportation agency and an appropriate private sector partner. Several State agencies have authority granted under State statute to enter into contract or license agreements for the sale of business opportunities to provide additional revenue to the agency. These States use this authority to supplement the costs of operating a service patrol program. By carefully choosing sponsors with a strong commitment to highway safety and customer service, the transportation agencies are able to maintain the highest level of integrity. One example is the agreement between the Pennsylvania Turnpike and the State Farm Safety Patrol program. (FHWA, "Freeway Safety Service/Motorist Assistance Patrol Sponsorship Programs Memorandum," 23 April 2008. [Online]. [Accessed 20 October 2015].)

New Potential Funding Sources - The Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act

The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, signed on December 4, 2015, is "…five-year legislation to improve the Nation's surface transportation infrastructure, including our roads, bridges, transit systems, and rail transportation network. The bill reforms and strengthens transportation programs, refocuses on national priorities, provides long-term certainty and more flexibility for States and local governments, streamlines project approval processes, and maintains a strong commitment to safety." (Transportation Infrastructure Committee, "Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act," U.S. House of Representatives, December 2015. [Online].)

SEC. 6004 of the FAST Act amends Section 503(c) of title 23, United States Code by adding "Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment." In general, this addition provides that the Secretary of Transportation shall establish an advanced transportation and congestion management technologies deployment initiative to provide grants to eligible entities to develop model deployment sites for large scale installation and operation of advanced transportation technologies to improve safety, efficiency, system performance, and infrastructure return on investment. Criteria for selection of an eligible entity to receive a grant under this paragraph include (but are not limited to) the following:

• Reduce costs and improve return on investments, including through the enhanced use of existing transportation capacity.
• Deliver environmental benefits that alleviate congestion and streamline traffic flow.
• Measure and improve the operational performance of the applicable transportation network.
• Reduce the number and severity of traffic crashes and increase driver, passenger, and pedestrian safety.
• Collect, disseminate, and use real-time traffic, transit, parking, and other transportation-related information to improve mobility, reduce congestion, and provide for more efficient and accessible transportation.
• Deliver economic benefits by reducing delays, improving system performance, and providing for the efficient and reliable movement of goods and services.
• Accelerate the deployment of vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V), vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I), autonomous vehicles, and other technologies.

Within one year after the date of enactment of this initiative, and for every fiscal year thereafter, the Secretary shall award grants to no less than five and no more than 10 eligible entities. A grant recipient may use funds awarded under this initiative to deploy advanced transportation and congestion management technologies. The Secretary is required to set aside $60,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2016 through 2020 for grants awarded for this initiative, and the maximum Federal share of the cost of a project for which a grant is awarded shall not exceed 50 percent of the cost of the project.

Based on the objectives and criteria for selection of grants under this initiative, there could be good opportunities for TIM programs to secure funding for multiple fiscal years to improve the programs through the use of technology, specifically leveraging/optimizing existing regional advanced transportation technologies, such as ATMS, transportation management centers (TMC), ITS infrastructure, and computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems. The development of state-of-the-art interoperable systems; deployment of vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) or vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) technologies to improve safety and communications; and collection, integration, and use of incident information in real-time to improve incident response and clearance are just a few of the potential projects that might be funded under this initiative.

Other Funding Sources

Traditional funding is not the only source that should be considered for funding TIM. Agencies also make use of grants as well as local and state funding, often in innovative ways. While grants are often useful to jump-start multi-agency efforts to achieve interoperability, grants alone cannot usually sustain a program for an extended period of time. Therefore, any initial achievements made through grant funding must be sustained using agency funds. Participating agencies should develop a memorandum of understanding (MOU), encourage additional agencies to participate, and seek legislative support on interoperability issues to sustain funding resources. (FHWA, "Traffic Incident Management Handbook," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-10-013, 2010.)

The Grants.gov Web site is the main source of Federal grant information and a source for identifying potential funding for TIM activities. A comprehensive search of this Web site was conducted of all past and present grants, along with important information associated with the grants (e.g., agency, title, synopsis, funding method, date, amount, and grant identification number). In all, data on 34,208 grants dating back to 2007 were reviewed with a search and query tool and a list of pertinent terms. As a result, 174 potential funding opportunities were identified and reviewed. Based on this review only seven grants were identified as possible sources of funding for some TIM activity.

Of the seven identified grants, the majority were funded by FHWA, but other grants were also identified through National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), National Institute of Justice (NIJ), and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The grants covered various topics that were either directly related to TIM - research and development to reduce the number of law enforcement officers killed at traffic incidents and assisting local EMS systems - or that could potentially be related to TIM - to enhance advancing technology systems, promote highway safety plans, and deploy integrated corridor management (ICM). These grants also had a wide variety of award ceilings - from $115,000 for individual projects to $6,800,000 for a full program operation. It should be noted that none of these grants would likely provide continuous funding to a TIM program.

An increased awareness of funding opportunities coupled with creativity can serve to maximize potential investments. A major mindset shift is necessary to move from one-time funding for capital projects to ongoing funding for critical operations. A need exists to better inform elected leaders at MPOs on the value to look outside the traditional silos when developing multi-agency initiatives such as TIM. The current funding and organizational structures have created many barriers to progress. MPOs can play a critical role to help advance TSM&O solutions in urban areas. Selling the benefits of TSM&O to MPO boards requires much preparation and patience. (S. Joshua, "Seeking Support & Funding for TIM at the MPO: Lessons Learned, Maricopa Association of Governments," in Presentation at TRB Workshop, Washington, DC, 2015.)

Cranberry Township, a suburban Pittsburgh community, provides a good example of leveraging a variety of local funding sources for its TIM program. The sources that have been used include local taxation, the Municipal Pension Plan and Funding Standard and Recovery Act (for volunteer fire companies), Pennsylvania State Fire Commissioners Grant (yearly up to $15,000), and public support (e.g., fund raisers). (J. Schueler, "Leveraging Local Funding Sources - A Webinar Exploring Local Funding Options to Support TIM Practitioners - Cranberry Township Pennsylvania," Presentation for TIM Network Webinar, 2015.)

Another unique example is in California, where service patrols are supported with combined Federal, state, and local funds, with local funds originating from a one-dollar annual vehicle registration fee in participating counties and are contracted out by the regional MPO. (FHWA, "Best Practices in Traffic Incident Management," U.S. Department of Transportation, Publication FHWA-HOP-10-050, 2010.) In the San Francisco Bay area, a one-dollar per year fee on motor vehicle registrations for the participating nine counties is collected by the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) and then transferred to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission Service Authority for Freeways and Expressways (MTC SAFE) program. While the program only initially included a service patrol and a call box program, MTC SAFE was expanded to include a comprehensive Incident Management Program & Traveler Information System. R. Victor, "MTC's Role in Traffic Incident Management, Washington D.C. - Regional Traffic Incident Management and Transportation Planning: Creating Crucial Connections, Part 1, Successful Approaches Used by MPOs to Include TIM in Planning," Transportation Research Board 94th Annual Meeting, 2015. (R. Victor, "MTC's Role in Traffic Incident Management, Washington D.C. - Regional Traffic Incident Management and Transportation Planning: Creating Crucial Connections, Part 1, Successful Approaches Used by MPOs to Include TIM in Planning," Transportation Research Board 94th Annual Meeting, 2015.) Similarly, funding for the Metro Freeway Service Patrol Big Rig Tow Service comes from the Los Angeles Service Authority for Freeway Emergencies (LA SAFE) annual one-dollar vehicle registration surcharge assessed on each vehicle registered in LA County. (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority, "Los Angeles Meets the Future," Metro Quarterly, vol. Winter 2007, 2007.)