Transportation performance management for system operations : development of processes, tools, measures and targets

GEORGIA DOT RESEARCH PROJECT #19-25 FINAL REPORT
TRANSPORTATION PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FOR SYSTEM OPERATIONS: DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSES, TOOLS, MEASURES AND
TARGETS
OFFICE OF PERFORMANCE-BASED MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH ONE GEORGIA CENTER, 600 W. PEACHTREE ST. NW, ATLANTA, GA 30308
OCTOBER 2020

TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE

1. Report No.

2. Government Accession No.

FHWA-GA-21-1925

N/A

4. Title and Subtitle

Transportation Performance Management for System Operations: Development

of processes, Tools, Measures and Targets.

7. Author(s) Adjo A. Amekudzi-Kennedy, Ph.D., https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4721-9176, Russell Clark, Ph.D., https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1049-1475, Jeffrey Wilson, Ph.D., https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5205-7004, Prerna Singh, M.S., https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2117-6155. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address Georgia Tech Research Corporation, 926 Dalney Street, NW, Atlanta, GA 303320415
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Georgia Department of Transportation (SPR) Office of Performance-based Management and Research One Georgia Center 600 West Peachtree NW, Atlanta GA 30308

3. Recipient's Catalog No. N/A 5. Report Date October 2020 6. Performing Organization Code N/A 8. Performing Organization Report No. N/A
10. Work Unit No. N/A 11. Contract or Grant No. P.I NO. 0016502 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Final Report (March 2019 October 2020) 14. Sponsoring Agency Code N/A

15. Supplementary Notes

Conducted in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration.

16. Abstract This study identifies effective practices for transportation systems management and operations (TSMO) at the strategic,

programmatic and tactical level, assesses Georgia Department of Transportation's status using the TSMO Capability

Maturity Model (CMM), and offers recommendations to move the agency to the next level. The study develops a tool for

calculating transportation system performance metrics using the National Performance Management Research Data Set (NMPRDS) and other databases. We conduct a literature review to characterize effective strategic, programmatic and

tactical TSMO practices; administer a survey to characterize the status of GDOT using the TSMO CMM, and offer recommendations to move GDOT to the next level. Subsequently, we develop a tool to analyze and report on

transportation system performance using the MAP-21 PM3 measures. The PM3 Tool calculates metrics for travel time

reliability on interstate and non-interstate routes on the National Highway System (NHS), truck travel time reliability, and annual hours of peak-hour excessive delay per capita, and reports on percent of non-SOV travel, and total emission

reductions. It uses data from the NPMRDS, GDOT, the U.S. National Census and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Public Access Database. The study highlights the importance of developing TSMO at the tactical, programmatic

and strategic levels simultaneously, integrating TSMO activities with strategic and long range planning and asset

management functions within state DOTs. Using the PM3 tool, state DOTs can calculate PM3 measures and use them in

setting future performance targets, while working at the strategic, programmatic and tactical levels to improve

transportation system performance.

17. Key Words

18. Distribution Statement

Transportation System Management, Operations, Performance No restrictions.

Management, NPMRDS, Python, Data Analytics, MAP-21, GDOT

19. Security Classif. (of this report) Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price

Unclassified

116

Free

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)

Reproduction of completed page authorized

ii

GDOT Research Project 19-25
Final Report
TRANSPORTATION PREFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FOR SYSTEM OPERATIONS: DEVELOPMENT OF PROCESSES, TOOLS, MEASURES AND TARGETS
By Georgia Tech Research Corporation Adjo Amekudzi-Kennedy, Ph.D. (Principal Investigator), Russell Clark, Ph.D. (Co-Principal Investigator), Jeffrey Wilson, Ph.D. (Computer Programmer), Prerna Singh, M.S. (Graduate Researcher)
Contract with Georgia Department of Transportation
In cooperation with U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration
October 2020
The contents of this report reflect the views of the author(s) who is (are) responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the Georgia Department of Transportation or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
iii

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................. 1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................................. 3
PART I: EFFECTIVE TSMO PRACTICES ....................................................................................... 4
OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................ 4 TSMO CLASSIFICATIONS...................................................................................................................... 5 TSMO EFFECTIVE PRACTICES .............................................................................................................. 6
PART II: TSMO AT GDOT ................................................................................................................ 7
OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................ 7 APPROACH ............................................................................................................................................ 7 RESULTS ............................................................................................................................................... 8 TSMO DECISION-MAKING MAP - CURRENT ...................................................................................... 10 NEXT-LEVEL TSMO RECOMMENDATIONS/MAP ................................................................................ 12
PART III: GDOT PM3 TOOL........................................................................................................... 27
PERFORMANCE METRICS .................................................................................................................... 27 DATA SOURCES................................................................................................................................... 30 ARCHITECTURE AND TECHNICAL ISSUES ............................................................................................ 31 DATA ACQUISITION ............................................................................................................................ 31
v

RUNNING THE TOOL............................................................................................................................ 33 SUMMARY ....................................................................................................................................... 34 GLOSSARY OF TERMS .................................................................................................................. 36 REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................. 37 APPENDIX........................................................................................................................................ 39 APPENDIX A: EFFECTIVE TSMO PRACTICES .......................................................................... 40 APPENDIX B: TSMO SURVEY INSTRUMENT ........................................................................... 80 APPENDIX C: MANUAL FOR PM3 TOOL ................................................................................... 92
vi

List of Figures
Figure 1: Operations Performance Management Capability Maturity Model (FHWA 2017a) ........... 4 Figure 2: Current TSMO Decision-Making Map .............................................................................. 11 Figure 3: Iowa DOT TSMO Structure ............................................................................................. 15 Figure 4: TxDOT TSMO Program Components (Atkins 2017) ....................................................... 16 Figure 5: Importance of Considering Operations throughout Project Lifecycle (PennDOT 2018) . 22 Figure 6: Next-Level TSMO Map ..................................................................................................... 26
List of Tables
Table 1: Summary of Survey Results .................................................................................................. 9 Table 2: State DOT TSMO Visions/Missions and Strategic Plan Priorities - Examples .................. 17 Table 3: Iowa DOT's TSMO Strategic Goals and Objectives........................................................... 19 Table 4: Missouri DOT TSMO Goals and Objectives....................................................................... 20 Table 5: Ohio DOT TSMO Goals and Objectives............................................................................. 21 Table 6: TSMO and Access Ohio Goals............................................................................................ 21 Table 7: TSMO Actions and Responsibilities Aligned with various Agency Units.......................... 23 Table 8: Summary of PM3 Metrics and Targets for GDOT .............................................................. 28 Table 9: PM3 Tool Data Sources.................................................................................................... 30 Table 10: PM3 Tool Architecture ................................................................................................... 31 Table 11: Data Acquisition Process for PM3 Tool ............................................................................ 32
vii

Executive Summary
MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century) and FAST (Fixing America's Surface Transportation) legislation formally introduced a performance-based approach to decision making on the nation's surface transportation system, adopting seven national performance goals. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) defines Transportation Performance Management (TPM) as a strategic approach that uses system information to make investment and policy decisions to achieve national performance goals. The FHWA released rules establishing TPM measures in June 2017. All states, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and public transportation agencies must develop plans to document strategies and investments to address performance needs, incorporate these into the transportation planning and decision-making process, establish and report on targets for each measure, and make significant progress toward achieving these targets.
This report presents key findings of a project sponsored by the Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) to accomplish the following: (1) identify best practices for transportation system management and operations (TSMO) in the U.S; (2) assess where GDOT stands using the TSMO capability maturity model (CMM); (3) develop recommendations to move the agency to the next level of TSMO; (4) develop a tool for calculating transportation system performance measures (PM3) for MAP-21 reporting, and, (5) implement the PM3 Analysis and Reporting Tool (i.e., PM3 Tool, for short) in the GDOT environment. The report presents TSMO effective practices at the strategic, programmatic and tactical levels, outlines the results of a survey conducted to characterize the status of TSMO at GDOT, and, offers recommendations to move GDOT to the next level using the TSMO CMM. The report also presents key elements for the development of the PM3 Tool and provides a manual for operating the tool and generating
1

transportation system performance measures to meet the MAP-21 reporting requirements. The PM3 Tool calculates and reports on transportation system performance measures and targets using the data from the National Performance Management Research Data Set (NPMRDS) and other sources. The first section of the report summarizes effective TSMO practices in U.S. State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and MPOs. The effective practices are categorized according to the three critical planning elements of TSMO: strategic, programmatic and tactical, and the six dimensions of a successful TSMO plan: (1) Business Processes, (2) Systems and Technology, (3) Performance Metrics, (4) Culture, (5) Organization and Workforce, and (6) Collaborations. The effective practices are drawn from a wide range of state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) across the country. The second section presents the results of a survey conducted to characterize the nature TSMO within GDOT and recommendations to move from the existing to the next level of TSMO. The third and final section of the report provides key details on the development of the GDOT PM3 Tool. Developed using Python and based on equations developed or endorsed by the FHWA, the tool calculates and reports on six performance measures. It calculates metrics for travel time reliability on interstate and non-interstate routes on the National Highway System (NHS). It also calculates truck travel time reliability, and annual hours of peak-hour excessive delay per capita, and, reports on percent of non-SOV travel, and total emission reductions. The PM3 Tool uses data sources from the NPMRDS, GDOT, the U.S. National Census, and, the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Public Access Database.
2

Acknowledgements
The research project team would like to acknowledge the following Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT) staff for the responsive support and inputs they provided to ensure effective completion of the research and implementation of the PM3 tool in the GDOT environment. Our appreciation goes to the following individuals at the Office of Planning: Mr. Habte Kassa and Ms. Sarah Lamothe, the project's Technical Implementation Managers; and Ms. Trang Mai former Project Manager. We are also thankful to the support from the Office of Performance-based Management and Research, particularly to Mr. Brennan Roney, the Project Manager, and to Mr. Binh Bui, the former Research Implementation Manager. The authors remain exclusively responsible for the contents of this report.
3

PART I: EFFECTIVE TSMO PRACTICES
Overview
The objectives of the project are to: (1) Identify effective practices, including business processes, institutional arrangement, and TSMO strategies for transportation performance management at the agency; (2) Determine the current status (i.e., existing) and establish the desired status (i.e., next level) of GDOT on the Operations Performance Management Capability Maturity Model (OPMCMM) (Figure 1); (3) Develop an analytic tool for calculating transportation system performance metrics and targets using the NPMRDS and other data sets, and, (4) Implement the tools within the OPMCMM framework for GDOT for TSMO.
Figure 1: Operations Performance Management Capability Maturity Model (FHWA 2017a) 4

TSMO Classifications
Transportation System Operations and Management (TSMO) may be classified according to three critical planning elements: (1) Strategic, (2) Programmatic, and, (3) Tactical. In addition, a successful TSMO plan will include the following dimensions: (1) Business Processes, (2) Systems and Technology, (3) Performance Measures, (4) Culture, (5) Organization and Workforce, and (6) Collaborations. We conducted a literature review on effective TSMO practices categorized according to the three critical planning elements of TSMO and the six dimensions of a successful TSMO plan, reviewing practices from a wide range of State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) across the country.
With respect to the three critical elements of TSMO planning, strategic elements relate to the business case for TSMO, vision and program mission, strategic goals and performance objectives, and strategic focus area or priority functions. Programmatic elements relate to leadership and organizational structure, programmatic objectives, staffing and workforce needs, business process and management strategies, TSMO culture in the agency, and financial resource management. Tactical elements relate to prioritized services, activities and projects, implementation policies and guidelines, a multi-year investment plan, and, performance assessment (FHWA 2017a).
With respect to the six key dimensions of TSMO, Business Processes include formal scoping planning, programming and budgeting. Systems and Technology include systems architecture, standards, interoperability, standardization, and, documentation. Performance Measurement
5

includes measures definition, data acquisition, analysis and utilization the main focus of this study. Culture includes technical understanding, leadership, policy commitment, outreach, and program authority. Organization and Workforce includes organizational structure, staff capacity, development, and retention. And, collaboration includes relationships with public safety agencies, local governments, MPOs, and the private sectors.
TSMO Effective Practices
A total of 31 effective practices, distributed across over 20 states, were identified and characterized first by TSMO critical planning elements and then by the dimensions of a successful TSMO plan. Appendix A: Effective TSMO Practices presents the range of effective practices identified. The review results reflect the importance of pursuing an integrated approach to TSMO planning: one that includes well-aligned strategic, programmatic, and tactical elements, for superior outcomes.
6

PART II: TSMO at GDOT
Overview
This section of the report characterizes key features of the existing decision-making process for transportation system operation and management (TSMO) at GDOT and makes recommendations for enhanced next-level decision-making processes.
Approach
To characterize the status of TSMO at GDOT, a survey was developed aimed at characterizing the status of GDOT's performance management, business processes, as well as system and technology practices. We applied the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) TSMO guidance to improve the effectiveness of TSMO programs. This is a web-based self-assessment guidance designed for transportation agency managers responsible for operating and managing the roadway system (AASHTO n.d.). The guidance is based on the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) approach developed for the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2 Project L06), by a team led by ParsonsBrinkerhoff working closely with the AASHTO Subcommittee on TSMO (Transportation Research Board and National Academies of Sciences 2011). The survey questions are included in the Appendix B: TSMO Survey Instrument. The results of the survey were used to determine the maturity levels based on the CMM approach.
The AASHTO guidance recommends the survey be completed by the following positions (AASHTO n.d.):
1. Agency Senior Executive and Deputies - in charge of overall jurisdiction-wide transportation activities/programs (of which operations is but a part)
7

2. Agency TSMO Program Manager/Director - in charge of TSMO activities at agency-wide level (note, senior management of operations may be coupled with another agency program such as maintenance)
3. Agency/Regional Operations Activity Manager - responsible for all or specific TSMO program features at regional/district level (examples: assistant district engineer for operations, TMC manager, incident response manager, MPO or local government staff person with senior management responsibility)
4. Agency/Regional Operations Senior Staff - key individual involved in all or specific dayto-day TSMO program features
The survey was completed by the Assistant State Traffic Engineer, the Traffic Management Central Manager, the Head of Performance-Based Management and Research, and the Asset Project Manager for Performance-Based Management and Research (OPMR), covering the latter three recommended positions. Follow up questions were sent to the Office of Planning (OP) to verify a number of survey questions. The following sections draw from the survey results, and input obtained from the follow up questions on the survey results.
Recommendations for next-level TSMO were then developed based on a review of the TSMO literature conducted as part of this project. These recommendations form the basis for a nextlevel TSMO map for decision making.
Results
Median values from the 2018 survey suggest the agency is at Level 3 in Business Processes (including formal scoping, planning, programming and budgeting), Level 3 in Systems and Technology (including systems architecture, standards, interoperability, and standardization, and
8

documentation), and Level 4 in Performance Measures (including measures definition, data acquisition, analysis, and utilization). Table 5 summarizes the median values and ranges reported for CMM levels under Business Processes, System and Technology and Performance Management in the 2018 survey.

Table 1: Summary of Survey Results

CMM Area Business

System and

Performance

Processes

Technology

Management

CMM Levels: Median (Range) 3 (2-4)

3 (1-4)

4 (2-4)

Explanation of Maturity Levels
Level 1 - Activities and relationships largely ad hoc, informal and champion-driven, substantially outside the mainstream of other DOT activities
Level 2 - Basic strategy applications understood; key processes support requirements identified and key technology and core capacities under development, but limited internal accountability and uneven alignment with external partners
Level 3 - Standardized strategy applications implemented in priority contexts and managed for performance; TSMO technical and business processes developed, documented, and integrated into DOT; partnerships aligned
Level 4 TSMO as full, sustainable core DOT program priority, established on the basis of continuous
improvement with top level management status and formal partnerships

The results of a GDOT self-assessment in a 2013 workshop (Appendix B: TSMO Survey Instrument) indicate the agency was at Level 2 in Business Processes, Level 3 in System and Technology, and Level 3 in Performance Management.
Follow up information obtained from the Office of Traffic Operations through the Office of Planning indicates that a TSMO Plan is currently under development by the Atlanta Regional Commission. While there is an MPO-directed TSMO plan under development, there is at this time no state TSMO Plan. However, there is an informal and internal living Intelligent
9

Transportation System (ITS) document, largely used for tactical decision making by the Office of Traffic Operations. It is a continuously evolving document.1 Budgeting for ITS projects is conducted through the Office of Traffic Operations.
TSMO Decision-Making Map- Current
The TSMO Decision-Making (DM) map shown in Figure 2 was developed based on the survey results and a review of the ITS Document. It reflects a tactical and evolving TSMO approach being led out the Office of Traffic Operations and involving multiple GDOT offices: the Office of Traffic Operations conducts ITS pilot studies and pilot projects on an annual basis in conjunction with the Office of Performance-based Management and Research, the Office of Planning, and the Office of Transportation Data. Budgeting responsibility for TSMO lies within the Office of Traffic Operations, and public input is included on ITS actionable information on an annual basis to prioritize ITS projects. The Office of Traffic Operations and the Office of Planning conduct data monitoring to identify travel hotspots, discover high accident areas, detect congestion hotspots and map trends of travel during incidents/construction as a basis for identifying appropriate ITS solutions. The current Decision-Making Map reflects strong tactical elements in the existing TSMO process, with opportunities to build on the existing processes by augmenting formal strategic and programmatic elements of TSMO within the agency.
1 The Living ITS document is an internal GDOT document managed by the Office of Traffic Operations.
10

Figure 2: Current TSMO Decision-Making Map 11

Next-Level TSMO Recommendations/Map
TSMO focuses on actively managing the multimodal transportation network to deliver positive safety and mobility outcomes. The United States Department of Transportation's Office of Operations in the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) developed the FHWA Primer for Program Planning. The purpose of the primer is to help State DOTs, MPOs, and regional operations organizations understand the rationale for and key elements of successful TSMO program planning. It is intended to help agencies understand (1) Why TSMO planning is important and how it can benefit a transportation agency or region; (2) What are the key elements of TSMO program planning and what steps or activities should be taken; and, (3) What an effective TSMO program plan looks like. It points out a shift from the traditional transportation agency functions - focused on capital project planning, design, construction, and maintenance with limited resources applied to managing and operating transportation systems to TSMO as part of the core mission of Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The Primer notes that this need arises because roadway capacity is largely built out in urban areas and transportation funding is in limited supply. It also notes that in order to be effective, TSMO should be recognized and structured as a core function of a transportation agency more than simply a strategy or ad hoc set of activities, it must be a pervasive and cohesive program across the agency. Importantly, the Primer acknowledges there is no single approach to TSMO program planning nor is a TSMO Program Plan appropriate for every organization (FHWA 2017b).
TSMO Program Planning involves strategic, programmatic, and tactical elements. It involves the organizational business process and discipline of regular assessing, enhancing and documenting:
12

1. The relationship of TSMO to the agency mission and the fundamental reasons or business case for organizational commitment to TSMO;
2. The organizational structure and business processes to administer TSMO as a core program area; and,
3. The services, programs, technologies, and infrastructure that an organization or geographic area commits to implement in order to support achievement of performance outcomes.
The process of TSMO program planning identifies the strategic, programmatic, and tactical elements needed to advance TSMO as a critical part of the agency's mission. A TSMO Program Plan is the documented outcome of this process (FHWA 2017b). Based on the current TSMO Decision-Making Map (Figure 2) and the review and assessment of TSMO programs in the literature (Amekudzi-Kennedy et al. 2019), we propose the following five recommendations for next steps in strengthening the strategic and planning elements of the agency's TSMO Program, with the attendant benefits:
1. Develop, document and disseminate strategic, programmatic and tactical elements of TSMO Program to integrate TSMO well within the agency. Communicate these appropriately to internal and external stakeholders.
2. Develop and document overarching TSMO vision. 3. Develop and document overarching TSMO strategic goals and objectives. 4. Formally integrate TSMO with other DOT programs, with formal document
integration.
13

5. Develop business case for TSMO applications across project lifecycle and multimodal TSMO applications, particularly including passenger and freight mass transportation.
These recommendations will augment the value of TSMO within the agency and to the users of the transportation system as they will align these activities with strategic priorities and planning activity and guide decision makers to a higher return on investment. The recommendations are discussed individually below. Recommendation 1: Develop and document strategic, programmatic and tactical elements of TSMO Program to integrate TSMO well within the agency. Communicate these appropriately to internal and external stakeholders. A review of State DOT TSMO activity reveals clear strategic, programmatic and tactical elements documented as standard practice in evolving TSMO programs in state DOTs (Amekudzi-Kennedy et al. 2019). These elements may be documented separately or in a single, integrated document. Figure 3 shows Iowa DOT's TSMO Plan which includes a TSMO Strategic Plan for all internal stakeholders, a TSMO Program Plan for agency leadership, and TSMO Service Layer Plans for staff involved with TSMO. The strategic elements situate TSMO explicitly within the agency's strategic goals, mission and vision, and make a business case for the particular version of TSMO the agency has chosen to adopt and advance. Among other things, the Program Plan articulates program objectives, a budget and a multi-year improvement program to achieve program objectives. It also articulates how TSMO is integrated with other DOT programs (Lakeside Engineers, LLC and Pat Noyes & Associates 2016).
14

Figure 3: Iowa DOT TSMO Structure Adapted from (Lakeside Engineers, LLC and Pat Noyes & Associates 2016) In Figure 4, TxDOT's TSMO Program components, showcase strategic, programmatic and tactical elements.
15

Figure 4: TxDOT TSMO Program Components (Atkins 2017) Multiple state transportation agencies have documented TSMO strategic, programmatic and tactical elements that are linked with agency strategic goals, including documentation on how TSMO activities are linked with other related formal business processes and plans. Examples include Missouri DOT (Olsson Associate and Cambridge Systematics 2017), Pennsylvania DOT (PennDOT 2018), and Ohio DOT (Gannett Fleming and Burton Planning Services 2017).
Recommendation 2: Develop and document overarching TSMO vision for the agency.
A review of TSMO activity in state DOTs reveals that multiple agencies have adopted and documented TSMO visions in their TSMO plans. The fact that these visions are similar but not
16

identical reflects the importance of a well-thought out vision that aligns well and evolves with the overall strategic vision and priorities of the transportation agency. These visions will shape the kinds of data collected and analytics conducted to support TSMO decision making. Table 2 shows examples of state DOT TSMO visions. To be effective, these visions must properly align with the overall strategic priorities of the agency in order to guide decision makers to the most appropriate projects to secure the highest return on investment for the agency and the general public.

Table 2: State DOT TSMO Visions/Missions and Strategic Plan Priorities - Examples TSMO Visions and Missions/Source Strategic Plan Visions/Missions State

Documents

Improve safety and mobility for all modes of transportation by integrating planning, operations, and maintenance activities. (Vision, TxDOT TSMO Statewide Strategic Plan, July 2018)(TxDOT n.d.)

Through collaboration and leadership, Texas
we deliver a safe, reliable, and integrated transportation system that enables the movement of people and goods. (Mission, TxDOT 2017-2021 Strategic Plan)(TxDOT 2016)

Iowa's transportation system is safe, efficient Getting you there safely, efficiently and Iowa

and reliable, supporting the state's

conveniently. (Mission, Iowa DOT

environmental and economic health as a result 2018-2020 Strategic Plan)(Iowa DOT

of TSMO. (Vision, Iowa DOT TSMO

n.d.)

Program Plan, Feb 2016)(Lakeside Engineers,

LLC and Pat Noyes & Associates 2016)

17

TSMO strategies and principles guide the

To provide easy movement of people Ohio

efficient management of a safe and reliable and goods from place to place, we

transportation system that supports Ohio's

will: (1) Take care of what we have;

economic vitality. (Vision, Ohio DOT TSMO (2) Make our system work better; (3)

Plan)(Gannett Fleming and Burton Planning improve safety, and (4) Enhance

Services 2017)

capacity. (Mission, Ohio DOT

Strategic Plan) (ODOT n.d.)

PennDOT's vision is a less congested, more A better quality of life built on

Pennsylvania

reliable network. The PennDOT TSMO

transportation excellence (Mission).

mission is to move people and goods, from

To provide a sustainable transportation

Point A to Point B, as efficiently, safely and system and quality services that are

reliably as possible. (TSMO Plan for

embraced by our communities and add

Pennsylvania) (PennDOT 2018)

value to our customers. (Vision, 20/20

Strategic Direction Pennsylvania

DOT). (PennDOT n.d.)

MoDOT's TSMO Program applies integrated MoDOT's core values remain safety, Missouri

strategies to optimize infrastructure through service and stability. The department

the implementation of systems, services, real- will promote and provide for the safe

time information and programs designed to operation of a 21st century

preserve capacity and improve safety and

transportation system in Missouri

reliability of transportation systems.

while also keeping MoDOT employees

MoDOT's TSMO program helps get people safe in the field. (Focus, Strategic

safely where they want to go. (Mission,

Initiatives for Continuous

Missouri DOT TSMO. Program and Action Improvement) ("The Case for Change |

Plan) (Olsson Associate and Cambridge Systematics 2017)

Missouri Department of Transportation" n.d.)

18

Recommendation 3: Develop overarching TSMO strategic goals and objectives that are explicitly linked to agency strategic priorities
Developing TSMO strategic goals and objectives designed to achieve the TSMO vision is important to guide the development of the most appropriate projects. Several agencies have articulated and documented TSMO strategic objectives that guide program activity. Some have articulated how these objectives advance the overall strategic objectives of the agency. Tables 3 to 6 show examples of TSMO strategic goals and objectives from Iowa DOT, Missouri DOT, and Ohio DOT.

Table 3: Iowa DOT's TSMO Strategic Goals and Objectives Adapted from (Lakeside Engineers, LLC and Pat Noyes & Associates 2016)

Strategic Goal

Strategic Objective

(1) Safety

Reduce crash frequency and severity

(2) Reliability

Improve transportation system reliability, increase system resiliency,

and add highway capacity in critical corridors

(3) Efficiency

Minimize traffic delay and maximize transportation system

efficiency to keep traffic moving

(4) Convenience Provide ease of access and mobility choices to customers

(5) Coordination Engage all DOT disciplines, and external agencies and jurisdictions

to proactively manage and operate the transportation system

(6) Integration

Incorporate TSMO strategies throughout DOT's planning, design,

construction, maintenance, and operations activities

19

Goals

Table 4: Missouri DOT TSMO Goals and Objectives (Olsson Associate and Cambridge Systematics 2017)
Objectives

Operate MoDOT's existing system

Provide for TSMO deployments statewide

efficiently, reliably and effectively through

the application of TSMO strategies and

programs

Consider TSMO solutions and strategies in Include TSMO proactively rather than

every MoDOT project

opportunistically/reactively

Include TSMO in the planning stages of

Include planning for operations principles in

projects and programs

MoDOT planning process documents

Strengthen TSMO related education and

Provide new and supplement existing TSMO

workforce development

outreach, training, and recruitment resources

for MoDOT staff and partners

Document progress toward meeting each goal Quantify and document TSMO performance

and MoDOT's stated tangible results.

measures

20

Table 5: Ohio DOT TSMO Goals and Objectives (Gannett Fleming and Burton Planning Services 2017)
Table 6: TSMO and Access Ohio Goals (Gannett Fleming and Burton Planning Services, 2017)
21

Recommendation 4: Formally integrate TSMO with other DOT programs, with formal document integration TSMO, when integrated with agency strategic priorities, can add to return on investment at every stage of the project lifecycle. PennDOT articulates this need to move from the status quo where operations are considered more or less separately from other elements of the project lifecycle to one where it is considered throughout the project life cycle (Figure 5). Developing the formal business processes to leverage TSMO in planning, design, construction, maintenance and operations can lead to identifying and taking advantage of existing synergies and augmenting return on investment. MoDOT reflects this intent in their strategic goals: Include TSMO in the planning stages of projects and programs (Table 4) and articulates explicitly TSMO actions and responsibilities aligned with various agency units (Table 7).
Figure 5: Importance of Considering Operations throughout Project Lifecycle (PennDOT 2018)
22

Table 7: TSMO Actions and Responsibilities Aligned with various Agency Units (Olsson Associate and Cambridge Systematics 2017)
With respect to planning, the MoDOT TSMO Program and Action Plan notes the following: "Planning for operations places focus on how TSMO strategies and solutions are incorporated into the planning process in support of improving transportation system reliability and efficiency. The planning process can be defined quite broadly in this context, and it includes the formal planning processes with DOTs and MPOs, and the process that individual projects and programs go through in their executions. It also includes elements of the ITS architecture design and the use of the systems engineering process. Areas of detail in this section include (Olsson Associate and Cambridge Systematics 2017):
Integrating TSMO into the planning and programming processes o STIPs and TIPs o Congestion management processes o Regional concepts of transportation operations (often owned by MPOs) o Performance measurement and management programs 23

o Statewide and regional ITS architecture development and maintenance o Application of the systems engineering process o Advancing operations through the application on CMM.
Recommendation 5: Develop business case for TSMO applications across project lifecycle and multimodal initiatives of regional significance
For several U.S. metropolitan areas, traffic congestion has become something that is managed to reduce the rate of worsening system conditions on the highway network, rather than to reverse directions and actually improve system conditions, because of the relentless growth in metropolitan populations and travel demand. Tactical and reactive TSMO approaches, important because of their urgency in dissipating bottlenecks, are in the critical business of monitoring travel hotspots, discovering high accident areas, detecting hot spots of congestion and developing and delivering TSMO solutions as rapidly as possible. At the same time, there are other opportunities to adopt TSMO as a core business process over the project lifecycle and envision bold, creative and transformative projects of regional significance, involving mass movement of people and freight, which will shift the needle on transportation system performance in notable ways. Such longer-term, creative and strategic initiatives stand to increase the return on investment to transportation agencies and transportation system users in non-incremental and transformative ways.
Intentional innovation and explicit searches for such multimodal solutions, with the development of a business case for pursuing them, will involve leadership from within state transportation and other agencies, and collective efforts from Planning, Operations, Strategic Management and other units. The agencies that recognize the value of these kinds of transformational projects and
24

lead in identifying and implementing them will position themselves to gain competitive advantages over others that are singularly focused on managing toward a slower rate of worsening congestion. It is, therefore, imperative that a business case is developed for TSMO applications across the project lifecycle and to multimodal initiatives of regional significance. It is also important that this kind of innovative thinking becomes a routine part of agency decision making with the intent to reverse the slowly decaying performance of highway systems in several metropolitan areas. A heavily tactical approach to TSMO may not capture strategic-level and planning-level opportunities for augmenting return on investment. Figure 6 captures these recommendations in a next-level TSMO Decision-Making Map reflecting enhanced strategic and programmatic elements, building upon existing tactical elements, and with formal linkages to related business processes and plans within the agency.
25

Figure 6: Next-Level TSMO Map 26

PART III: GDOT PM3 TOOL
In 2012, MAP-21 legislation introduced a performance-based approach to decision making for the nation's transportation system. Transportation Performance Management (TPM) is defined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as a strategic approach that uses system information to make investment and policy decisions to achieve national performance goals. The FHWA released rules establishing TPM measures in June 2017, requiring all states, metropolitan planning organizations, and public transportation agencies to develop plans to document strategies and investments to address performance needs, incorporate these into the transportation planning and decision-making process, establish and report on targets for each measure, and make significant progress toward achieving these targets.
Performance Metrics
Under Section 1203 of MAP-21, as amended by the FAST Act, Congress established seven national goals and directed the FHWA to establish national performance measures for the Federal-aid highway program, promulgated through rulemaking, in support of six out of the seven goals established in MAP21. To meet the new statutory requirements, FHWA pursued a number of significant rulemakings. Collectively, the rules establish performance management requirements that address safety (PM1), infrastructure condition (PM2), system performance, traffic congestion, on-road mobile source emissions, and freight movement (PM3) (FHWA 2018a). This study focuses on the reporting of PM3 metrics, which is the responsibility of the Office of Planning. Per MAP-21, GDOT and other state DOTs are required to set targets for the six performance measures shown in Table 8 (FHWA 2018a).
27

Table 8: Summary of PM3 Metrics and Targets for GDOT
The following section describes the six PM3 measures in more detail and explains how they are calculated (FHWA 2018b) .
(1) Percent of person-miles traveled on the interstate that are reliable See (2) below.
(2) Percent of person-miles traveled on the non-interstate National Highway System (NHS) that are reliable The above two performance measures assess the percent of person-miles traveled on the interstate or non-interstate NHS that are reliable. Level of Travel Time Reliability (LOTTR) is defined as the ratio of the longer travel times (80th percentile) to a normal travel time (50th percentile) over segments of all applicable roads, between the hours of 6am and 8pm each day. The measures are expressed as the percent of person-miles traveled on the interstate or non-interstate NHS that are reliable. Person-miles account for people traveling in buses, cars, and trucks over these roadway segments. 28

(3) Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) Index The TTTR performance measure assess the reliability index for trucks traveling on the interstate. A TTTR ratio is generated by dividing the 95th percentile travel time by a normal travel time (50th percentile) for each segment of the interstate system over specific time period throughout weekdays and weekends. This is averaged across the length of all interstate segments in the state or MPO planning area to determine the TTTR Index.
(4) Annual Hours of Peak Hour Excessive Delay (PHED) Per Capita This measure quantifies traffic congestion per capita on the NHS. The threshold for excessive delay is based on the travel time at 20 miles per hour or 60% of the posted speed limit travel time, whichever is greater. The total excessive delay metric is developed using weekday morning (6am 10am) and afternoon (3pm to 7pm) periods, weighted by vehicle volumes and occupancy.
(5) Percent of Non-Single Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) travel This measure quantifies non-SOV travel in specific urbanized areas. This may include travel via carpool, van, public transportation, commuter rail, walking, or bicycling as well as telecommuting.
(6) Total Emissions Reduction Total emissions reduction is calculated by summing the 2-year and 4-year totals of emissions reductions of applicable criteria pollutants and precursors, in kilograms per day, for all projects funded with CMAQ funds.
29

Data Sources
The data for the tool was obtained from NPMRDS, GDOT, the American Community Survey,
and the CMAQ Public Access Database (Table 9).

23 CRF

Table 9: PM3 Tool Data Sources

Performance Measures Metric

Data Sources

490

*NHPP Travel Time Reliability Level of Travel Time

NPMRDS

(Interstate)

Reliability (LOTTR)

GDOT

Travel Time Reliability

(Interstate)

+NHFP Truck Travel Time

TTTR Index

NPMRDS

Reliability

CMAQ Annual Hours of Peak- Peak Hour Excessive

NPMRDS

Hour Excessive Delay Per Delay (PHED)

GDOT

Capita

American

Community Survey

Percent of Non SOV

Non-Single

American

Travel

Occupancy Vehicle

Community Survey

Travel (SOV)

Total Emission

N/A

CMAQ Public

Reductions

Access Database

*NHPP: National Highway Performance Program +NHFP: National Highway Freight Program

30

Architecture and Technical Issues
Table 10 provides a brief description of the architecture of the PM3 tool.

Element

Table 10: PM3 Tool Architecture Description

Language

Python 3.7 with libraries: numpy, pandas and heapq

Input Data Format

GUI with drop down menus

Output Data Format

Text (CSV) output multiple files

Run Time

24 to 48 hours for 12 months of data

Need for Internet Access (Y/N)

Y to obtain input data, but not to run the tool

Required IT Support

Provide workstation and install dependencies

The PM3 tool has large file storage (at least 500 GB) and long processing time requirements, which makes a dedicated workstation, or server, ideal for running. The tool relies on file caching for storing intermediate processed data, which is helpful for managing re-run times.

Data Acquisition
Table 11 summarizes the data acquisition process for the tool. In each performance metric category, once the data identified in the first row is downloaded from the Internet, all the other data in that category are also downloaded.
31

Table 11: Data Acquisition Process for PM3 Tool

Performance Measure Data Requirements

Source

Acquisition Process

Percent of person-miles Travel time for all traffic

traveled on the interstate (& Non interstate NHS) that are reliable

Segment lengths Annual traffic volume data Average vehicle occupancy

NPMRDS NPMRDS NPMRDS GDOT/FHWA

Web download Web download Web download Built in source code

Truck Travel Time Reliability Index

Travel time for trucks Segment lengths

NPMRDS NPMRDS

Web download Web download

Annual Hours of Peak- Travel time for all traffic

Hour Excessive Delay per Capita

Segment lengths Annual vehicle classification

data

NPMRDS NPMRDS NPMRDS

Web download Web download Web download

Average vehicle occupancy

GDOT

Built in source code

Hourly volume estimates

GDOT

Manual formatting

Posted speed limits

GDOT

Web download

Urbanized area population

Census

Web download

Percentage Non-SOV Travel

Total commuting population Population driving alone

Census Census

Web download Web download

Total Emission Reduction Emission reduction for each pollutant for each applicable project

CMAQ public access system

Web download

32

Running the Tool
The PM3 Manual in Appendix C provides detailed directions on how to run the tool. It presents details on obtaining the data, operating the tool, and generating performance metrics for PM3 reporting.
33

SUMMARY
MAP-21 and the FAST Act have formalized a performance-based planning and decision-making paradigm for transportation, introducing seven national transportation performance goals. This study reviews the literature to identify best practices for Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO) categorized by the three critical planning elements for TSMO (1) Strategic, (2) Programmatic, and, (3) Tactical, and the six dimensions for a successful TSMO plan - (1) Business Processes, (2) Systems and Technology, (3) Performance Measures, (4) Culture, (5) Organization and Workforce, and (6) Collaborations. TSMO practices of State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) across the country highlight the importance of engaging in well integrated strategic, programmatic and tactical TSMO, for effective transportation system performance management.
To this end, the following recommendations were offered to enhance TSMO at GDOT: (1) Develop and document strategic, programmatic and tactical elements of TSMO Program to integrate TSMO well within the agency. Communicate these appropriately to internal and external stakeholders; (2) Develop and document overarching TSMO vision for the agency; (3) Develop overarching TSMO strategic goals and objectives that are explicitly linked to agency strategic priorities; (4) Formally integrate TSMO with other DOT programs, with formal document integration; and, (5) Develop business case for TSMO applications across project lifecycle and multimodal initiatives of regional significance.
A performance management tool, the PM3 Tool, was developed to support PM3 reporting. The PM3 tool, an analytic and reporting tool, takes data from the National Performance Management Research Data Set (NPMRDS), GDOT, the U.S. National Census and the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) Public Access Database to calculate six performance metrics. The
34

PM3 tool calculates travel time reliability on interstate and non-interstate routes on the National Highway System (NHS), truck travel time reliability, and annual hours of peak-hour excessive delay per capita, and reports on percent of non-SOV travel, and total emission reductions. Using the PM3 tool, state DOTs can calculate PM3 measures and use them in setting future performance targets, while working strategically, programmatically and tactically to improve transportation system performance.
35

GLOSSARY OF TERMS
CMM: Capability Maturity Model CMAQ: Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality DOT: Department of Transportation FHWA: Federal Highway Administration FAST: Fixing America's Transportation System GDOT: Georgia Department of Transportation MAP-21: Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century MPO: Metropolitan Planning Organization NHS: National Highway System NHFP: National Highway Freight Program NHPP: National Highway Performance Program NPRMDS: National Performance Research Management Dataset TPM: Transportation Performance Management TSMO: Transportation Systems Management and Operations
36

REFERENCES
AASHTO. (n.d.). "AASHTO: Transportation Systems Management & Operations Guidance Customized Guidance Evaluation." <http://www.aashtotsmoguidance.org/self_evaluation/> (Mar. 12, 2019).
Amekudzi-Kennedy, A., Clark, R., and Singh, P. (2019). "RP 18-29: Transportation Performance Management for System Operations: Development of Processes, Tools, Measures & Targets. Task 2 Deliverable: Best Practices Map. Interactive Power Point Report." unpublished.
FHWA. (2017a). "2016 Urban Congestion Trends: Using Technology to Measure, Manage, and Improve Operations - FHWA Operations." <https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop17010/index.htm> (Mar. 12, 2019).
FHWA. (2017b). "Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization: A Primer For Program Planning - FHWA Office of Operations." <https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop17017/index.htm> (Mar. 12, 2019).
FHWA. (2018a). Transportation Performance Management (TPM) Implementation Plan. 34. FHWA. (2018b). National Performance Measures for Congestion, Reliability, and Freight, and
CMAQ Traffic Congestion - General Guidance and Step-by-Step Metric Calculation Procedures. 41. Gannett Fleming, and Burton Planning Services. (2017). "ODOT Transportation Systems Management & Operations Plan | Plan Summary."
37

Iowa DOT. (n.d.). "Strategic Plan - Iowa Department of Transportation." <https://iowadot.gov/strategicplan/> (Mar. 12, 2019).
Lakeside Engineers, LLC, and Pat Noyes & Associates. (2016). "Iowa Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSMO) Strategic Plan Version 1.0."
ODOT. (n.d.). "ODOT Strategic Plan." Ohio Department of Transportation, <http://www.dot.state.oh.us/policy/ODOTStrategicPlan/Pages/default.aspx> (Mar. 12, 2019).
Olsson Associate, and Cambridge Systematics. (2017). "Missouri Department of Transportation | Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSM&O) Program and Action Plan." MoDOT.
PennDOT. (2018). "TSMO Strategic Framework for Pennsylvania." PennDOT. (n.d.). "PennDOT 20/20." Pennsylvania Department of Transportation,
<https://www.penndot.gov:443/about-us/PennDOT2020/Pages/default.aspx> (Mar. 12, 2019). "The Case for Change | Missouri Department of Transportation." (n.d.). <https://www.modot.org/focus> (Mar. 12, 2019). Transportation Research Board, and National Academies of Sciences, E., and Medicine. (2011). Guide to Improving Capability for Systems Operations and Management. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC. TxDOT. (2016). "Texas DOT | Strategic Plan 2017-2021." TxDOT. (n.d.). "Transportation Systems Management & Operations (TSMO)." <https://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/division/traffic/tsmo.html> (Mar. 12, 2019).
38

Appendix
39

Appendix A: Effective TSMO Practices
40

RP 18-29
Transportation Performance Management for System Operations: Development of Processes, Tools, Measures & Targets
Effective Practices Map
Prepared for: Georgia Department of Transportation TIM: Sarah Lamothe/Habte Kassa | PM: Trang Mai | RIM: Binh Bui
Prepared by: Georgia Institute of Technology PI: Adjo Amekudzi-Kennedy, Ph.D. | Co-PI: Russell Clark, Ph.D. | GRA: Prerna Singh
January 2019
41

Introduction

Three critical elements of TSMO planning:
Strategic Programmatic
Tactical

Six dimensions of a successful TSMO plan:
Business Processes System and Technology Performance Measures Culture Organization & Workforce Collaborations

31 Best Practices identified in the field of TSMO

42

Effective Practices Distribution

Strategic
12

Programmatic
6

Tactical
13

Business Processes
18

System and Technology
6

Performance Measures
6

Culture
10

Organization & Workforce
2

Collaborations
8

43

Three Key Elements of TSMO Planning

Strategic elements

The business case for TSMO Vision and Program Mission Strategic Goals and Performance Objectives Strategic Focus Area or Priority Functions

Programmatic elements

Leadership and Organizational structure Programmatic Objectives Staffing and Workforce Needs Business Process and Management Strategies TSMO Culture in the Agency Financial Resource Management

Tactical elements

Prioritized Services, Activities and Projects Implementation Policies and Guidelines Multi-year Investment Plan Performance Assessment

[FHWA, Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning.

44

September 2017]

Six Key Dimensions of TSMO

Business Processes including formal scoping planning, programming, and budgeting;
Culture including technical understanding, leadership, policy commitment, outreach, and program authority;

Systems and Technology including systems architecture, standards, interoperability, and standardization and documentation;
Organization and Workforce including organizational structure, staff capacity, development, and retention;

Performance Measurement including measures definition, data acquisition, analysis, and utilization;
Collaboration including relationships with public safety agencies, local governments, MPOs, and the private sector.
45

Effective Practices by TSMO Planning Element
Legend: Strategic Programmatic Tactical
Figure 1: Distribution of the Effective Practices by State based on the Three Critical Elements of TSM&O planning 46

Effective Practices by TSMO Dimension
Legend: Business Processes System & Technology Performance Measurement Culture Organization & Workforce Collaborations
Figure 2: Distribution of the Effective Practices by State based on the Six Key Dimensions of TSM&O Planning 47

Effective Practices
48

Arizona DOT TSMO Division

Key Element: Programmatic
Key Dimension: Organization & Workforce
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
Developed a new TSMO division in 2015 Shifted core functions such as roadway safety improvements, ITS operations, traffic signal
systems, pavement conditions, traffic operations center, incident management, emergency management, and innovative technologies under the TSMO division
Reference Documents:
Latest ADOT Organizational chart Related Press Release: ADOT division focuses on efficiencies in operating, sustaining a reliable
transportation system for Arizona, Jan 2016
49

ArkansasNorthwest Arkansas regional ITS architecture

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimensions: System and Technology; Collaborations
Source Document:
Applying a Regional ITS Architecture to Support Planning for Operations: A Primer, FHWA, Feb 2012
Focus Points:
Fayetteville-Springdale, Arkansas (Northwest Arkansas) regional ITS architecture The information from this regional ITS architecture could be used to support the
identification of current and future data sources for tracking operations objectives. The MPO is potentially collecting data from more than 20 different planned data sources
Reference Documents:
Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Council, "Final Northwest Arkansas Regional ITS Architecture" Web Site, March 2007
50

CaliforniaSpecial Event
Cost Management Strategy, Los
Angeles

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimension: Business Processes; Culture; Collaboration
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Special Event Cost Management Strategy Results in Improved Cost Tracking and Asset Allocation in LA
Careful documentation of costs during special events in LA used to justify increase in budget allocation
Contracts with special event venues with recurring events to improve the efficiency of the budget process
Reference Documents:
LADOT Special Events Webpage
51

CaliforniaCaltrans Organizational Integration for TSMO

Key Element: Programmatic
Key Dimensions: Culture, Organization & Workforce
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
Focus on developing a TSMO program on organizational integration Conducting regional operations forums to get planners, operations staff and their
partners to work better together
Reference Documents:
Caltrans TSMO webpage Caltrans regional operations forum
52

CaliforniaCaltrans Corridor System Management
Plan

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimensions: System and Technology; Collaborations
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
The corridor system management plan is unique in its ability to analyze existing corridor conditions, to forecast corridor performance through scenario testing utilizing complex traffic simulation models on a corridor-wide scope, and to recommend consensus-driven long-range implementation strategies.
Reference Documents:
Caltrans, Corridor System Management Plans
53

California and Nevada -
Coordination on Interstate
during winter closures

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimensions: Collaborations; Culture
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Improved Coordination on I-80 - Provides More Advanced Notice to Travelers and Freight Movers of Winter Closures in Nevada and California
Study addresses the following business processes: 1) Defined roles and responsibilities, 2) Framework or agreements for multiagency coordination
Reference Documents:
Interstate 80 Winter Operations Coalition webpage
54

Colorado DOT integration of
TSMO evaluations in
its Project Development
Process

Key Element: Programmatic
Key Dimensions: Business Processes; Culture
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
Focus is on improved traffic operations and on continual process improvements Developed an operations evaluation process as an essential element of the project
development process for new infrastructure projects. Evaluation consists of 1) a safety analysis, 2) an operations analysis, and 3) an ITS analysis.
Reference Documents:
CDOT TSMO Evaluation webpage Case Study in Report FHWA-HOP-16-018
55

Dallas Region Annual
Evaluation of ITS
Priorities

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimensions: Business Process; Culture
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
The North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) reviews its ITS plan annually A stakeholder task force uses performance measurement data to make decisions about
whether to add or remove regional ITS projects and proposed deployments from the plan
Reference Documents:
North Central Texas Council of Governments, North Central Texas Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) Strategic Deployment Plan, May 2016
56

DelawareIdentification of
Strategies to Support TSMO
Goals and Objectives

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimension: Business Processes
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
DVRPC, the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) for the Philadelphia region, developed a Transportation Operations Master Plan outlining a long-range vision for transportation operations for the region.
The plan includes goals, objectives, and strategies to accomplish the regional goals and vision. A financial analysis is conducted to estimate the costs to construct, operate, and maintain these initiatives.
Reference Documents:
DVRPC, Transportation Operations Master Plan, 2009.
57

Denver Regional Council of GovernmentsRegional Concept of Transportation Operations

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimensions: Business Processes; Performance Measures
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
Within the regional concept of transportation operations, strategic goals and associated performance objectives for TSMO are identified
Program initiatives and performance measures are identified to link the objectives with the goals
Reference Documents:
Denver Regional Council of Governments, Regional Concept of Transportation Operations, Adopted August 15, 2012
58

Florida TSMO Strategic Plan

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimensions: Business Processes; Culture
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
The Plan describes Florida's challenges, including population growth, traffic fatalities, and safety for older drivers
Describes the value of TSMO in terms of benefit-cost ratios of intelligent technologies, and the economic benefits associated with ITS and operations investments
Reference Documents:
Florida's Statewide Strategic TSMO Plan. August 2017

59

Florida DOT Rapid Incident
Scene Clearance
(RISC)

Key Element: Tactical Key Dimension: Collaborations Source Document:
Creating an Effective Program to Advance Transportation System Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Public-private partnership that utilizes both incentive payments and disincentive liquidated damages to ensure shortened clearance times for heavy vehicle wrecks.
Program is an implementation of TSM&O strategies and have reduced the average clearance times by 100 percent.
Reference Documents:
FDOT RISC webpage
60

Florida Road Ranger Program
Expansion

Key Element: Tactical Key Dimensions: Business Processes; Collaborations Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Florida Road Ranger Program Expands Using Alternative Funding Sources Business Processes involved: 1) Funding for program and strategies, 2) Contracting and
procurement processes to support programs and strategies.
Reference Documents:
Press Release: FDOT expands Road Ranger service on I-10 in Northeast Florida FDOT Road Rangers Webpage
61

Georgia DOT Towing and Recovery Incentive Program (TRIP)

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimension: Collaborations
Source Document:
Creating an Effective Program to Advance Transportation System Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Public-private partnership that utilizes both incentive payments and disincentive liquidated damages to ensure shortened clearance times for heavy vehicle wrecks.
Program is an implementation of TSM&O strategies and has reduced the average clearance times by 100 percent.
Reference Documents:
GDOT TRIP webpage GDOT TRIP Evaluation, 2011
62

Indiana Maintenance
decision support system

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimensions: Business Processes; Performance Measures; Culture
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Maintenance Decision Support System helps in the development of Winter Maintenance Budget in Indiana
Business Processes focused on: 1) Funding and resource needs identified as part of program budget, 2) Performance outcomes informing program needs.
Reference Documents:
Indiana DOT Research Documentation: Implementing a winter maintenance decision support system, 2009
Indiana DOT Maintenance Decision Support System Final Report, 2009
63

Iowa TSMO Program Plan

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimension: Business Processes
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
A three-tiered approach by Iowa DOT for TSMO program planning served as key basis for recommendations for FHWA TSMO Program Planning primer
The three segments include 1)Strategic Plan, 2) Program Plan, and 3) service layer plans, mirroring the Strategic, Programmatic, and Tactical elements from FHWA primer
Reference Documents:
Iowa Department of Transportation, Iowa Transportation Systems Management and Operations Program Plan, February 2016.
64

Kansas Speedway Special-Event
Traffic Management
Planning

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimension: Business Processes
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Kansas Speedway Special-Event Traffic Management Planning Reduces Patrol Resource Requirements for On-Scene Traffic Management
Business Processes focused on: 1) Planning and program plan, 2) Resource management, 3) Lessons learned to inform programing and resource needs.
Reference Documents:
Volz, M.A. and B.J. Nicholson, "Kansas Speedway Event Management Using ITS, 2002 FHWA, Managing Travel for Planned Special Events: First National Conference Proceedings,
2005
65

Maricopa Association of Governments
(MAG) Procedures for
ITS Project Prioritization

Key Element: Programmatic
Key Dimension: Business Processes
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
MAG's ITS project selection process includes extensive involvement of various policy and technical committees as well as the public
The ITS committee and the transportation review committee review projects for funding and inclusion in the transportation improvement program
Reference Documents:
FHWA, Programming for Operations: MPO Examples of Prioritizing and Funding Transportation Systems Management & Operations Strategies, FHWA-HOP-13-050 (Washington, DC: September 2013).
MAG Regional ITS Architecture webpage
66

Maryland TSMO Strategic
Implementation Plan

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimension: Culture
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
In developing a TSMO program, Maryland DOT SHA clearly defined its TSMO program vision and mission, along with associated goals and objectives to support attainment of that vision.
Reference Documents:
Maryland DOT, Maryland Transportation Systems Management and Operations Strategic Implementation Plan, August 2016.

67

Maryland's Coordinated
Highways Action
Response Team (CHART)

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimensions: Business Processes; Performance Measures; Collaborations, Culture
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Maryland's Coordinated Highways Action Response Team Business Plan and Business Processes Emphasize Implementation-Ready Projects to Improve Freeway Operations
Business Processes focused on: 1) Program plan and priorities, 2) Budget and programming to support program needs, 3) Program alignment to agency mission, goals, and objectives, 4) Coordination among program planning to other key planning activities (that is, long-range plan), 5) Performance outcomes that influence planning and programming
Reference Documents:
Maryland SHA TSMO Strategic Implementation Plan, Aug 2016 Maryland SHA Coordinated Highways Action Response Team (CHART) webpage

68

Maryland Work Zone Performance Management Program

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimension: Performance Measures
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Maryland Work Zone Performance Management Program Uses New Data Sources to Monitor and Analyze Work Zone Impacts
Business Processes addressed: 1) Coordination involving multiple divisions and groups, 2) Program plan and review processes, 3) Performance measures, metrics, and data informing practices and procedures
Reference Documents:
Maryland DOT, Work Zone Analysis Guide, 2008 NCHRP, Best Practices in Work Zone Assessment, Data Collection and Performance Evaluation,
2010
69

Michigan DOT- Work Zone Traffic
Control Modeling

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimensions: Performance Measures; System and Technology
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Work Zone Traffic Control Modeling provides valuable insight to Construction Staging and Scheduling in Michigan
Established processes for using modeling to evaluate the impacts of upcoming work zones and to develop work zone traffic control plan alternatives
Reference Documents:
FHWA, Traffic Analysis Tools Volume IX: Work Zone Modeling and Simulation A Guide for Analysts webpage
70

Minnesota Statewide Regional ITS Architecture

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimensions: Business Process; System and Technology
Source Document:
Applying a Regional ITS Architecture to Support Planning for Operations: A Primer, FHWA, Feb 2012
Focus Points:
Incorporates operations objectives from the transportation planning process into the regional ITS architecture
Minnesota views ITS as a tool to implement the goals and policies of the statewide plan and updates the architecture in coordination with the plan.
Reference Documents:
Minnesota Department of Transportation, Minnesota Statewide Regional ITS Architecture, 2018
Minnesota DOT Regional ITS Architecture update webpage
71

Oregon DOT Transportation
System Planning
Guide

Key Element: Programmatic
Key Dimensions: Business Processes; Collaborations
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
Jurisdictions throughout Oregon are required to prepare and adopt regional or local transportation plans that serve as the transportation element for their comprehensive plans
Developed Transportation System Planning Guidelines, which include best planning practices to strengthen their plans
Reference Documents:
ODOT planning and technical guidance webpage

72

Portland Metro, Regional TSMO Plan, 2010-2020

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimension: Business Processes
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
The plan identifies four key functional area priorities: 1) Multimodal traffic management. 2)Traveler information. 3) Traffic incident management. 4)Transportation demand management.
For each functional area, the plan identifies strategies and projects that improve the operation of the existing infrastructure and manage demand on the transportation system using a 10year planning horizon.
Reference Documents:
Regional Transportation System Management and Operations 2010-2020, Portland
73

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) ITS Architecture

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimensions: System and Technology; Business Process
Source Document:
Applying a Regional ITS Architecture to Support Planning for Operations: A Primer, FHWA, Feb 2012
Focus Points:
SANDAG used its architecture to support the initial definition and development of its Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) program.
The decision support system defined for the ICM program helped the regional ITS architecture better reflect its use to support regional traffic management.
Reference Documents:
California PATH Research Report: San Diego I-15 Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) System: Phase I, 2008
74

Southeast WisconsinRegional Transportation Operations Plan for Short-Range Priorities

Key Element: Tactical
Key Dimension: Business Processes
Source Document:
Developing and Sustaining a Transportation Systems Management & Operations Mission for Your Organization A Primer for Program Planning
Focus Points:
The MPO developed a Regional Transportation Operations Plan (RTOP) as a shortrange plan identifying system operations measures and actions recommended for implementation over a five-year period.
Reference Documents:
Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission, Regional Transportation Operations Plan for Southeastern Wisconsin: 2012-2016.
75

Virginia VDOT Statewide Operations
Program Plan (SOPP)

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimension: Business Process
Source Document:
Creating an Effective Program to Advance Transportation System Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Used the CMM model to develop the new SOPP It provided the framework for both VDOTs Central Office and regional evaluations and
the development of specific actions that are being embodied in both ongoing technical and policy development.
Reference Documents:
VDOT Operations Program webpage VDOT Statewide Systems Operations Program, 2009
76

Washington DOT Gray Notebook

Key Element: Strategic Key Dimensions: Business Processes, Performance measures Source Document:
Creating an Effective Program to Advance Transportation System Management and Operations
Focus Points:
The quarterly Gray Notebook tracks performance based on five legislative goals for the Washington State DOT, including mobility/congestion.
Includes regular updates on progress in the application of operations strategies such as incident management and High-Occupancy Toll (HOT) lanes.
Reference Documents:
WSDOT Navigating Grey Notebook webpage
77

Washington DOT Joint Operations
Policy Statement

Key Element: Strategic
Key Dimension: Collaborations
Source Document:
Improving Business Processes for More Effective Transportation Systems Management and Operations
Focus Points:
Case Study: Joint Operations Policy Statement Encourages Innovative Approaches to Collaborating on Effective Incident Management Strategies in Washington State
The joint agreement between WSDOT and Washington State Police formalized each agency's roles and responsibilities for freeway operations, including incident response
Enhancement of collaboration and accountability for achieving a set of standard, consistent objectives
Reference Documents:
WSDOT & WSP, A Joint Operations Policy Statement (JOPS), 2016
78

For questions and comments, email: prerna.singh@gatech.edu Thank you.
79

Appendix B: TSMO Survey Instrument
80

TSM&O Survey
This survey is administered by Georgia Institute of Technology (PIs: Adjo AmekudziKennedy, PhD and Russell Clark, PhD | Graduate Research Assistant: Prerna Singh) under the auspices of Georgia Department of Transportation Project RP 1829: Transportation Perf ormance Management f or System Operations: Development of Processes, Tools Measures and Targets. The objective is to characterize the current status of GDOT's business processes,systemand technology, and performance management practices using the Capability Maturity Model (CMM) generated by the SHRP II Project. Each of the three survey sections has three levels of questioning. The survey may be completed in 15 to 20 minutes. The results w ill be used to update GDOT's 2014 CMM Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSM&O) self-assessment. * Required
General Information
This section gathers identification information fromthe survey participant. 1. Nam e *
2. Unit w ithin GDOT *
3. Position within GDOT *
4. Num ber of years at GDOT *
Business Processes Section 1
The key elementsof businessprocesses in TSM&O (Transportation SystemsManagement and Operations) are: 1) TSM&O Planning Process 2) Programming/Budgeting 3) Project Development/Procurement The follow ing few sections assess the current level of the agency in these key elements.
81

5. Is there a state TSM&O plan? M ark only one oval.
Yes No After the last question in thissection, skip to question 19. Under Development

6. Are there district level m ultiyear budgets for TSM&O? M ark only one oval. Yes No After the last question in thissection, skip to question 19. Under Development

7. Is there a state ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems) plan? M ark only one oval. Yes
No Skip to question 19. Under Development

Business Processes Section 1 Evidence

8. Select all the areas that have documentation for TSM&O and ITS planning Check all that apply.

1. Freew ay Management
2. Arterial Management 3. Traffic Incident Management 4. Road Weather Management 5. Planned Special Event Management 6. Emergency Transportation Operations 7. Parking Management
8. Work Zone Management

TSM&O Plan ITS Plan

Business Processes Section 2

9. Is the TSM&O plan m entioned in previous section a m ultiyear plan? M ark only one oval.
Yes No After the last question in thissection, skip to question 19.

82

10. Does the TSM&O plan include the following dimensions? (Select all that apply) Check all that apply.
Capital Operating Maintenance

11.Does the plan include im provements and analysis of TSM&O and ITS plans? Select all that apply. Check all that apply.
TSM&O improvements and analysis included
ITS improvements and analysis included

12. Are sustainable funding sourcesavailable for the plans and programs? Mark only oneoval. Yes No After the last question in thissection, skip to question 19.
13. Is a collaboration among state DOT, local governments and MPOs/RTPAs in place? M ark only one oval. Yes No After the last question in thissection, skip to question 19. Under Development

14. Does a m ultiyear statewide TSM&O/ITS itemized program budget exist? (Select all that apply) Check all that apply.
TSM&O itemized programbudget exists ITS itemized program budget exists TSM&O program budget under development ITS programbudget under development None of the above

15. Are there TSM&O and ITS programs in place/operation? Mark only one oval. TSM&O programs in place ITS programs in place ITS/TSM&O programs not in operation

Skip to question 19.

Business Processes Section 2 Evidence

83

16. Select all areas that have TSM&O and/or ITS programs in place/operation Check all that apply.

1. Freew ay Management
2. Arterial Management
3. Traffic Incident Management
4. Road Weather Management 5. Planned Special Event Management 6. Emergency Transportation Operations 7. Parking Management
8. Work Zone Management

TSM&O Programs ITS Programs

Business Processes Section 3

17. Has Statewide Long Range Plan integrated TSM&O component as key dim ension? Mark only one oval. Yes No Information not readily available

18. Does the TSM&O plan have revisions and midcourse assessment options? Mark only one oval.
Yes No Information not readily available

System and Technology Section 1
19. Is Incident Management Process docum ented? Mark only one oval. Yes No

20. How frequently is Incident Management Process documented?

21. What contracting alternativ es are considered during an ITS system procurement?

84

22. Is the re formal guidance for appropriate ITS procurement process? Mark only one oval.
Yes No Information not readily available

23. Approximately what percent of the regions in the state have documentation explaining s ys tems operational concepts and architectures for k ey highway applications?
M ark only one oval.

None of the regions/very few regions(~<25%) Some of them (~ 25%49%) Majority of them (~50%75%) Almost all of them (~75% 100%)

Skip to question 33.

System and Technology Section 1 Evidence

24. Select all areas that have a document explaining systems operational concepts and archite ctures for k ey highway applications
Check all that apply.

1. Freew ay Management
2. Arterial Management
3. Traffic Incident Management
4. Road Weather Management
5. Planned Special Event Management 6. Emergency Transportation Operations 7. Parking Management
8. Work Zone Management

Document explaining system operational concept and architectures

System and Technology Section 2

25. Is the re a s tandard document for Incident Management Process Mark only one oval. Yes
No Under Development

85

26. To w hat extent are the standards applied to Incident Management Processes Mark only one oval. Not at all To some extent In a majority of cases In all cases
27. Are all ITS systems > $1 Million in capital costs developed following the standard rigorous systems engineering process? M ark only one oval. Yes No Information not readily available
28. Is a standard systems engineering method documented for m ajor ITS system development? Mark only one oval. Yes No Skip to question 33. Information not readily available
System and Technology Section 2 Evidence
29. Se le ct all are as where ITS and IM S s ystems are standardized Check all that apply. 1. Freew ay Management 2. Arterial Management 3. Traffic Incident Management 4. Road Weather Management 5. Planned Special Event Management 6. Emergency Transportation Operations 7. Parking Management 8. Work Zone Management
System and Technology Section 3
30. Is the regional ITS system integrated with other authorities and agencies (local transit & MARTA)? M ark only one oval. Yes No After the last question in thissection, skip to question 33.
86

31. Does a `configuration m anagement' plan exist? A conf iguration management plan is a systems engineering process f or establishing and maintaining consistency of a product's performance, functional, and physical attributes with its requirements, design, and operational inf ormation throughout its lif e. M ark only one oval. Yes No After the last question in thissection, skip to question 33.
32. How frequently are systems updated? Mark only one oval. Every year or less 24 years 5 years or more Other:
Performance Measures Section 1
33. Has the DOT identified operations performance output measures for reporting? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development
34. Are the output measures dashboarded? Mark only one
ova l . Yes No Under Development
35. Are the measures used in reporting and im provements? Mark only one oval. Yes No Skip to question 47.
Performance Measures Section 1 Evidence
87

36. Select all areas where output measures are identified and reported Check all that apply. 1. Freew ay Management 2. Arterial Management 3. Traffic Incident Management 4. Road Weather Management 5. Planned Special Event Management 6. Emergency Transportation Operations 7. Parking Management 8. Work Zone Management
Performance Measures Section 2
37. Are outcome level measures identified? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development
38. How frequently are the measures recalculated? Mark only one oval. Every year or less 24 years >4 years
39. Is there a standard storage system for the outcome m easures? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development
40. Are there standard reporting systems for the outcome m easures? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development
88

41. Are these measuresused in decision m aking? Mark only one oval.
Yes No Skip to question 47.

Performance Measures Section 2 Evidence

42. Select all areas where outcome level measures are identified, reported and used in decision m aking Check all that apply.

Outcome measures identif ied
1. Freew ay Management 2. Arterial Management
3. Traffic Incident Management 4. Road Weather Management 5. Planned Special Event Management 6. Emergency Transportation Operations 7. Parking Management 8. Work Zone Management

Outcome measures reported

Outcome measuresused in decision making

Performance Measures Section 3

43. Is there a system to use past output and outcome m easures for future decision m aking? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development

44. Is there documentation of the m easures in a format supporting the accountability of the agency to the public? M ark only one oval.
Yes
No
Under Development

89

45. Are these documents used for new/previous program justification? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development
46. Is the internal reporting of the m easures standardized? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development
Data and Tools
47. What current sources of data are av ailable and in use for TSM&O performance measures?
48. Are there any tools developed to support TSM&O activities? Mark only one oval. Yes No Under Development
49. Please list tools developed internally to support TSM&O activities below, if any.
50. What com mercial software applications are currently used to support TSM&O activities? Please list the names of the software applications/tools.
90

51. What current and anticipated hurdles exist in advancing the TSM&O Program using data driven techniques?
Thank You!
91

Appendix C: Manual for PM3 Tool
92







GDOTPM3TOOL FORTSMOREPORTING
InstructionManual
PreparedforGeorgiaDepartmentofTransportation,OfficeofPlanning
PreparedbyGeorgiaInstituteofTechnology
October16,2020
JeffWilson
jeff@imtc.gatech.edu
93

Overview
Thisdocumentprovidesdetailsoninstalling,configuring,andrunningtheGDOTPM3Tool.This toolcalculatesthefollowingperformancemetrics:
x PercentofpersonmilestraveledontheInterstatethatarereliable x PercentofpersonmilestraveledonthenonInterstateNHSthatarereliable x TruckTravelTimeReliability(TTTR)Index x AnnualHoursofPeakHourExcessiveDelay(PHED)PerCapita x PercentofNonSingleOccupancyVehicle(SOV)Travel,and x EmissionstotalsrelatedtoCMAQ
SystemRequirements
TheGDOTPM3ToolcanrunonavarietyofPC/workstation/serverplatforms.Thetoolrequires aminimumof500GBofstorageifprocessingayear'sworthofdata.TheRAMrequirements areminimalandnoprocessorrequirementsaredefined.ThetoolisimplementedinPython whichiscrossplatformandallowsforrunningonWindows,OSX,andLinuxoperatingsystems. RegardingWindows,anyversionnewerthanNTshouldwork.
Installation
TheGDOTPM3ToolisacommandlinePythontool.Thetoolisprovidedinazipfilethatcanbe decompressedontoanyPC/workstation/serverwithanOSthatsupportsPython3.7(e.g., Windows,OSX,Linux).Thedecompressedzipfileshouldbeplacedinalocationwithreadwrite permissionsandalargeamountoffilestorage(around500GB).Thisisnecessaryduetothe largesizeofinputdataaswellasstoringintermediatedataandfinalresults. Thedirectorystructureshouldlooklikethefollowing: ./cache/storagelocationforintermediateprocessingofdata ./data/configurationandinputdataforthetool ./documents/instructionsandrelevantreferencedocumentation ./output/outputresultsofthetoolarewrittenhere README.mdbasicdescriptionofsoftware VERSION.txtversionnumber gdot.pyexecutablecommandlinescriptforthetool gdot_interactive.pyexecutablegraphicalinterfaceforthetool gdot_data.pysupportscript(notcalledbyuser) gdot_process_monitor.pysupportscript(notcalledbyuser) gdot_util.pysupportscript(notcalledbyuser) gdot_config.pysupportscript(notcalledbyuser)
94

gdot_generate_config_template.pyexecutablescriptthatgeneratesconfigfile heapqfilemerge.pysupportscript(notcalledbyuser) csvsort_updated.pysupportscript(notcalledbyuser) Inordertorunthesoftware,Python3.7.2needstobeinstalledandconfiguredasdescribedin thenextsection.
SetupPythonEnvironment
FirstyouneedtosetupaPythonenvironmentonthemachineyouwishtoruntheGDOT ReportingToolon.Itisrecommendedthatyourunonaserverwithplentyoffilestoragespace fortheverylargedatasets(atleast500GB).ThePythonenvironmentmustbePythonversion 3.7andseverallibrariesmustbeavailable.Themostreliablewaytoaccomplishthisistosetup adedicatedenvironment.Minicondaisrecommendedforenvironmentmanagement. Foranycomputer(Windows,OSX,orLinux) Installminiconda3 Allplatforms(e.g.Windows,MacOSX,Linux)shoulduse64bitversionofminiconda3. https://docs.conda.io/en/latest/miniconda.html
Figure1:condawebsitewithselectionofinstallersavailable.
95

Onceminiconda3(64bit)isinstalled,startaninteractiveshell/commandline.OnaWindows OS,youwillneedtoselecttheAnacondaPromptfromtheStartMenufortheinstalled software.Otherwise,onOSXorLinuxsimplyopenanewterminalshell.
Figure2:ExampleofrunningtheAnacondaPromptinWindowsfromtheStartMenu FromtheAnacondaPrompt,createanenvironmentforthereportingtoolonthecommand line: condacreatengdotpython=3.7.2 Makesuretoanswer"y"whenaskedtoconfirmcreationofthenewenvironment.
96

Figure3:Exampleofcreatingacondaenvironment
Figure4:Exampleofconfirmationquestionforcreatingcondaenvironment,answer"y" Switchtotheenvironment: condaactivategdot
NotethatifyouarenotusingWindows,youmightgetanerrorinwhichcasetrythefollowing: sourceactivategdot,buttrycondaactivategdotfirst
97

Notethatafteractivatingtheenvironmentyoushouldsee:"(gdot)"foryourprompt
Figure5:Exampleofactivatingcondaenvironment. InstallthepackagesdetailedbelowthatarenecessarytoruntheGDOTReportingTool: condainstallngdotnumpy condainstallngdotpandas condainstallngdotpytables condainstallngdotpsutil Note:Besuretoanswer"y"toconfirminstallforeach.

Figure6:Exampleofinstallingpackagedependencies.Repeatedforeachpackage(with varyingpackagename).Answer"y"whenaskedtoconfirm
98


ConfiguringtheGDOTReportingTool
TheGDOTReportingToolcanberunviacommandlineorbygraphicalinterface.Ifusingthe graphicalinterface,onecanperformconfigurationwithintheapplication.However,ifusingthe commandlineinterfaceforexecution,aconfigurationfilemustfirstbeeditedinatexteditor. Bothapproachesforrunning/configuringarediscussedinthe"RunningtheGDOTReporting Tool"sectionsbelow. RegardlessofhowyouchoosetoconfigureandruntheGDOTReportingTool,itisnecessaryto collectandpreparedependentdataandplaceitinanaccessiblelocationonthecomputerthat youareusing.Itisrecommendedthatyouplacethedataunder/datafolderofthedirectory whereyouinstalledtheGDOTReportingTool.Thenextsectiondescribesrecommended processesforobtainingthedata.
CollectingandPreparingData
YouwillneedtocollectdatafromavarietyofsourcesinordertorunthePM3tool.Thesources include:NPMRDS,GDOT,AmericanCommunitySurvey,andCMAQpublicaccessdatabase.
NPMRDS
TheNPMRDSdatacanbeobtainedfromhttps://npmrds.ritis.org/analytics/ Notethatthisrequiresanaccount.Furthermore,foranycalendaryearonewishestoperform analysis,conflationwithAADTdatamustbepresent. TheRITISsiteallowsyoutodownloaddatauptoamonthatatime.Youcandownloadall12 monthsofthesamecalendaryear,orasubset.However,somemetricsmaynotbeaccurate withoutthefull12monthsofdata. Foreachmonthdesired,tworeportsshouldbegenerated:"Trucks"and"Trucksandpassenger vehicles".EachNPMRDSmonthreportshouldbeconfiguredfor15minuteaveraging,seconds fortraveltimeunits,allavailablemeasuresenabled,andnullrecordsenabled.Figure1shows anexampleconfigurationoftheRITISwebreportingtool. Ifrunningareportformorethanonemonth,eachmonth'sdatadownloadwillcontaina TMC_Identification.csvfile.Allversionsofthisfilemonthtomonthwithinthesameyearshould match;however,youshouldstillpreservethemallincaseafutureversionoftheGDOTPM3 Toolmakesuseofthem.Fornow,onlyoneoftheTMC_Identification.csvfileswillbespecified intheGDOTPM3Tool'sconfiguration.
99

ConfirmthatAADTcolumnsarepresentintheTMC_Identification.csvofthedownloadeddata.

Figure7:RITISNPMRDSWebReportingTool
ExampleexpectedcsvformatforconflatedNPMRDSdata:
tmc_code,measurement_tstamp,speed,average_speed,reference_speed,travel_time_seconds,data_density 10107580,2018010100:00:00,66.00,,,435.99,A 10107580,2018010100:15:00,,,,, 10107580,2018010100:30:00,,,,, ...
ExampleexpectedcsvformatforTMC_Identification(accompaniesthecsvabove): (NOTEthefollowinglinesoftextaretoolongtofitsinglelineinthisdocument)
tmc,road,direction,intersection,state,county,zip,start_latitude,start_longitude,end_latitude,end_longitude,miles,road_order,timezone_name,type,country,tmcline ar,frc,border_set,f_system,urban_code,faciltype,structype,thrulanes,route_numb,route_sign,route_qual,altrtename,aadt,aadt_singl,aadt_combi,nhs,nhs_pct,strhn t_typ,strhnt_pct,truck,isprimary,active_start_date,active_end_date 101P13107,10THST,EASTBOUND,US41/US19/GA9/GA3/NORTHSIDEDR,GA,FULTON,30318,33.781555,84.407549,33.781557, 84.407103,0.025613,1,America/New_York,P1.11,USA,,3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2018010100:00:0005:00,2019010100:00:0005:00 101+13107,10THST,EASTBOUND,US41/US19/GA9/GA3/NORTHSIDEDR,GA,FULTON,30318,33.781578,84.411143,33.781555, 84.407549,0.206370,2,America/New_York,P1.11,USA,,3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2018010100:00:0005:00,2019010100:00:0005:00 tmc,road,direction,intersection,state,county,zip,start_latitude,start_longitude,end_latitude,end_longitude,miles,road_order,timezone_name,type,country,tmcline ar,frc,border_set,f_system,urban_code,faciltype,structype,thrulanes,route_numb,route_sign,route_qual,altrtename,aadt,aadt_singl,aadt_combi,nhs,nhs_pct,strhn t_typ,strhnt_pct,truck,isprimary,active_start_date,active_end_date 101+13108,10THST,EASTBOUND,I85/I75/GA401/GA403,GA,FULTON,30318,33.781557,84.407103,33.781551, 84.3916026,0.890083,3,America/New_York,P1.3,USA,,3,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,2018010100:00:0005:00,2019010100:00:0005:00

100



GDOTSpeedLimitsperTMC
GDOTmustprovidespeedlimitdata.TheGDOTPM3ToolexpectsaCSVwithcolumns:TMC, ROAD,DIRECTION,SPEED_LIMIT.TheTMCsshouldmatchtheTMCsfromtheNPMRDSdata. ROADandDIRECTIONaren'tcurrentlyusedbutTMCandSPEED_LIMITare. SarahLamothe(SLamothe@dot.ga.gov)haspreviouslyprovidedafiletitled"TMCs_PSLand OccupancyRate.xlsx".WithinthisExceldocument,thereisatabtitled,"TMCs_PSL".The worksheetofthistabcanbesavedasaCSVfileforthepurposeofusingwiththeGDOTPM3 Tool. Exampleexpectedcsvformatforspeedlimits:
TMC,ROAD,DIRECTION,SPEED_LIMIT ,,, 101+04098,I75,NORTHBOUND,65 101+04099,I75,NORTHBOUND,65 101+04100,I75,NORTHBOUND,65 101+04101,I75,NORTHBOUND,65 101+04102,I75,NORTHBOUND,65 101+04103,I75,NORTHBOUND,65 ...


AmericanCommunitySurvey(ACS)



RefertothefollowingdocumentforobtainingtheappropriateACSdata:



"FHWAComputationProcedureforTravelTimeBasedandPercentNonSingleOccupancy

Vehicle(nonSOV)TravelPerformanceMeasures"(FHWAHIF18024)

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm/guidance/hif18024.pdf



Inparticular,refertoAppendixBandAppendixC.YouwillbesavingtablesDP05andDP03.



NotethatthedatamustbeintheACS5yearformat.



Theexpectedheaderformatis:



forDP03:(abbreviated)





GEO.id GEO.id2 GEO.displaylabel [abunchofHC?_???columns] HC03_VC28

[abunchmoreHC?_???columns]



101

forDP05:(abbreviated)


GEO.id


GEO.id2 GEO.displaylabel[abunchofHC?_???cols]

HC01_VC03

[abunchmoreHC?_???cols]

OnlyGEO.id2andeitherHC03_V28orHC01_VC03columns(dependingonDP03orDP05)need toappear.Theprogramignoresallothercolumns.



CMAQ



CMAQdatacanbeobtainedfrom:

https://fhwaapps.fhwa.dot.gov/cmaq_pub/

Selectthe"Reports"tab.Thenselect"DetailedprojectlistingCMAQEmissionsPerformance

MeasureState"withformat"Excel".Select"ProjectState"asGeorgiaandpickayear. Download,thenadjustthequeryasnecessarytoobtainalldesiredyears.



Finally,useExceltosavethedocumentsasCSVfiles. Theexpectedheaderformatis:



Chart1:AnexampleofCMAQData
102

VehicleOccupancyFactors
VehicleOccupancyFactorsnecessaryformetriccalculationsaredefinedintheJSON configurationmanuallyorbytheinteractivetoolundertheGDOTsection.Recommended defaultsarelistedbelow: (UnitsareIndividualspervehicletype) Cars:1.7usedforbothPHEDandreliabilitymetrics Atlantabuses:10.3usedforPHED Trucks:1.0usedforPHED

UrbanizedAreaPopulation

UrbanizedareapopulationisdefinedintheJSONconfigurationmanuallyorbytheinteractive toolundertheGDOTsection.

RunningtheGDOTReportingTool(GraphicalInterface)
Thebasicstepstoruntheinteractivesoftwareareasfollows: Selectthepreviouslycreatedcondaenvironment.Runthefollowingontheminiconda commandline(shell): condaactivategdot Next,entertherootdirectoryoftheGDOTReportingTool(e.g.cd<some_directory>).Nowyou canrunthesoftware.Thesimplestwaytorunis: pythongdot_interactive.py
103

Figure8:Exampleofrunningtheinteractiveconfigurationandlaunchtoolfromtheconda prompt.Thechangedirectorycommand("cd")willvaryaccordingtoyourfilesystem. Uponsuccessfulexecution,youshouldseeasmallwindowlikeshownbelow:
Figure9:Interactivetoolstartwindow Clickthe"Launch"buttontobeginconfiguration.Youshouldseethefollowingconfiguration window:
104

Figure10:Configurationscreenoftheinteractivetool



Populatethefieldsasappropriateforthereporttoberun.Referto"CollectingandPreparing

Data"sectionabove.The+andbuttonscanbeusedtoadd/deleteadditionallinestothe

CMAQandNPMRDSsection.TheCMAQsectionrequiresthata"latestyear"beselected.

Consecutivelinesafterthe"latestyear"shouldbeCMAQyearlydataindecreasingyeardate

startingfromthedatamatchingthe"latestyear".Notethatonly12monthscanbeenteredfor

NPMRDSdata.



Onceconfigured,choose"Run"toexecutethereportgeneration.Noteyoumayneedtouse

thescrollbartofindthe"Run"button.



Onceexecuted,thisprocesscantakequiteawhile.Potentially24hoursormoredependingon

theamountofdata.



Youcanmonitortheprogressbyobservingthelauncherwindow.Whilerunningyouwillsee

thefollowing:







105

Figure11:Exampleofarunningreportlaunchedfromtheinteractivetool Oncecomplete,youwillsee:
Figure12:Exampleofwhatthewindowlookslikeafterthelaunchedreportiscomplete Theoutputdataiscontainedwithinthe/outputdirectorywithadate/timestampandcanbe navigatedtoviaafileexplorerorshell.Referto"Results"sectionbelowformoredetails.Be preparedtowaitaverylongtime(asmuchas24to48hours)forcompletion.Youmayneedto modifyOSsettingssothatyourcomputerdoesnotgotosleep,shutdowntoinstallupdates, etc.
RunningtheGDOTReportingTool(CommandLineInterface)
TheGDOTReportingToolcanalsoberunviacommandlineprogram.Inthiscase,all configurationisdonecurrentlyviathedata/gdot_config.txtfile. Thisfilemustbeconfiguredwiththeappropriatedataforanalysis.Thedatafilesreferencedin thegdot_config.txtfilecanalsobeplacedwithinthe/datafolder. ThisconfigurationfileisspecifiedintheJSONformat(https://www.json.org).Itis recommendedwhencreatinganewconfigurationtocopytheexamplefiletomakeabackup andsimplyedittheappropriatepathsinthefileasnecessary.Youcanalsousetheinteractive toolforconfiguration.Bothmethodsaredescribedinalatersection. Seesection"CollectingandPreparingData"belowforhowtoobtaindataforanalysis. Note:ThemostlikelycausesofproblemsintheJSONformatare:
1.) Unmatchedopenandclosecharactersofasectionsuchas{and}or[and]ordouble quotes(")atthebeginningandendofstrings
2.) Missingorextraneouscommas(,).Forinstance,the"monthly_logs"sectionofthe NPMRDSdataarearraysofthefilepathsofmonthbaseddata.Theremustbeacomma betweeneachelementofthearray,butnotafterthelastitem.

106

Configurationexample:
{ "American_Community_Survey":{ "TableDP03":"./data/AmericanCommunitySurvey/2017_DP03/ACS_17_5YR_DP03_with_ann.csv", "TableDP05":"./data/AmericanCommunitySurvey/2017_DP05/ACS_17_5YR_DP05_with_ann.csv" }, "CMAQ":{ "MostRecentYear":2018, "YearRecordsDescending":[ "./data/CMAQ/2018_CMAQ.csv", "./data/CMAQ/2017_CMAQ.csv", "./data/CMAQ/2016_CMAQ.csv", "./data/CMAQ/2015_CMAQ.csv" ] }, "GDOT":{ "average_bus_occupancy":10.3, "average_car_occupancy":1.7, "average_truck_occupancy":1.0, "tmc_speed_limits":"./data/TMC_SpeedLimits.csv", "urbanized_area_population":5000000 }, "NPMRDS":{ "TMC_identification":"./data/TMC_Identification2019.csv", "trucks":{ "monthly_logs":[ "./data/untracked/201901Trucks15minutesWithNull/201901Trucks15minutesWithNull.csv" ] }, "trucks_and_passenger":{ "monthly_logs":[ "./data/untracked/201901TrucksAndPassengers15minutesWithNull/201901TrucksAndPassengers15minutesWithNull.csv" ] } } }
IntheaboveJSON,notethattheNPMRDSsectionsfortrucksandtrucks_and_passengerinclude sectionsformonthly_logs.Thesemonthly_logssectionsarearraysandcanvaryinthenumber offilesprovided.However,thenumberoflogfilesreferencedshouldmatchbetweentrucks andtrucks_and_passengerandalsoeachshouldcorrespondtothesamemonths. Torunthetool,beadvisedthatitcantakeaverylongtimetoprocess.Foranentireyear's worthofNPMRDSdata,youcanexpectaround24to48hourstocompletetherun.Becauseof this,youwilllikelyprefertouseaserverthatyoucanleaverunningandnotimpactotherwork youaredoing. Thebasicstepstorunthesoftwareareasfollows:
107

Selectthepreviouslycreatedcondaenvironment.OnaLinuxserverthiswillbetorunthe followingonthecommandline(shell): sourceactivategdot Next,entertherootdirectoryoftheGDOTReportingTool(e.g.cd<some_directory>).Nowyou canrunthesoftware.Thesimplestwaytorunis: pythongdot.py However,ifyouwanttobeabletologoutofaLinuxserverwiththetoolstillrunning(and comebacklater)thenyoumightconsider: nohuppythongdot.py& (The&allowsthetooltoruninthebackgroundandnohupallowsyoutologoutwithoutthe toolstopping.NotethatthisonlyappliestoinstallationonaLinuxmachine) Also,youcanoptionallyspecifyadifferentconfigfileusingthefollowingsyntax: pythongdot.pyi<config_file_path> oronLinuxmachines: nohuppythongdot.pyi<conf_file_path>& Alogfileisavailableunderoutput/<unique_date_time_dir_name>/gdot.log Thislogfilecanbemonitoredforprogress.AlsoonLinuxmachines,commandtopcanbeuseful toquicklycheckifthetoolisstillrunning(justlookforaverybusyprocessnamed"python"). Alternatively,youcanusethecommandps(onLinux)tocheckrunningprocesses.OnWindows, youmightusetheTaskManagertoobservetherunningprocess.
Results
Uponcompletionofthecalculationofthemetrics,youcanfindtheresultswithintheoutput/ directoryintherootdirectoryoftheGDOTReportingTool.Foreachrun,aspecialdatetime nameisassignedtoasubdirectorywithinoutput/. Forexample:output/2019_06_12_10_39_18.668/ Withinthisoutputdirectoryyouwillfindanumberofdifferentfiles:
108

MostUseful: x gdot_config.txtThisfiledetailstheconfigurationthatwasusedtogeneratethereport x gdot.logAlogfromtherunningofthetool x full_report.csvAreportofallmetricsinonefile.Eachcolumndenotesadifferent measure
IndividualMetrics:
x cmaq_result.csv x phed.txt x reliability.txt x sov.txt x PercentSOVTravelByUrbanizedArea.csv RawDatawithIntermediateCalculations: x result_tmcid.csvMetricsassociatedwithTMCsarejoinedwiththe
TMC_Identification.csvfilefromtheinputconfiguration x npmrds_annotated.csvIntermediatecalculationsjoinedwithallprovidedNPMRDS
timestampeddata
OtherConsiderations
TheGDOTReportingToolgeneratesanumberofintermediatefiles.Thesefileshelpreduce memoryrequirementsandalsoreducecomputationonsubsequentrunsofthesoftwarewhen usingsomeofthesameNPMRDSdata.Muchofthisdataisstoredinthecache/directory.You mayperiodicallywishtopurgethecontentsofthecache/directory.Also,someofthedata sortingroutinesusetemporaryfiles.Thesefilesarestoredintheoperatingsystemstemp directoryandshouldautomaticallybepurgedbytheoperatingsystem.
109