Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 74
A P P E N D I X B State DOT Process and Institutional Interviews Table B.1. SHRP 2 L06 Systems Operations State-of-Play State DOT Survey: Questions and Prompts Indicators as Observed in State DOTs (Bulleted Items Are Prompts for Interviews) L-1: Architecture Supporting Transition L-2: Architecture Supporting Transition Dimensions: from Ad Hoc to Managed from Managed to Integrated General Questions (Activities Initiated on Agencywide Basis) (Establishment of Integrated Program) Background ˇ Number of districts ˇ Number of districts with TMC (big vs. little) ˇ Number of TMCs with full range of strategies A. Culture ˇ The potential service leverage (value) of ˇ The value of operations is widely operations is not widely appreciated in understood in the DOT ˇ Is operations mainstreamed as a key DOT the DOT ˇ DOT commitment to operations is clear at mission? ˇ Operations is not yet specifically identified in the agency level and made public in a ˇ Where does operations stand in the mind standard public DOT policy documents policy document that shows it as equally of agency management in terms of its along with capacity improvements, safety, important as construction, safety, and relative importance as an activity and as a and maintenance maintenance (such as mobility responsibility? ˇ There is no DOT dashboard--or if there is, management) In terms of public documents traffic level-of-service is not publicly ˇ There is a dashboard and operations per- In terms of dashboard reported on the dashboard formance reported as outcomes In terms of mobilization ˇ Systems operations is not yet recognized as (reductions in delay due to operations) a specific discipline but is done by mainte- ˇ Systems operations is recognized nance or other staff as a distinct discipline (job specs, ˇ TMCs and safety service patrols (SSP) do training) not exist--or not in all metro areas and/or ˇ Incident management and SSP operate 24/7 not 24/7 B. Leadership ˇ There is no champion of ITS and ˇ The CEO is a champion of ITS and ˇ Is there a leader or champion of ITS/ operations in central office (at either the CEO operations as evidenced in public operations--within the central office or at or first-tier division head level) statements and memos to staff the district level? ˇ District administrators/engineers are not or ˇ Is the district engineer/administrator held champions for operations, nor are they ˇ A division head in the central office is the responsible for progress in improving accountable to the central office regarding champion operations? systems performance ˇ Some or all districts have operations programs ˇ District engineers held accountable for improving operations program in reporting to CEO C. Authorization ˇ There is not a defined (published) operations ˇ There is a defined (published) operations ˇ Does the state budget have a formal program for systems operations at the program for systems operations at the operations program? statewide level statewide level ˇ Does the state DOT have the authorities ˇ The state does not have a driver move-it law ˇ The state has driver move-it law and DOT needed for incident management? or quick clearance authority has quick clearance authority (continued on next page) 74
OCR for page 75
75 Table B.1. SHRP 2 L06 Systems Operations State-of-Play State DOT Survey: Questions and Prompts (continued) Indicators as Observed in State DOTs (Bulleted Items Are Prompts for Interviews) L-1: Architecture Supporting Transition L-2: Architecture Supporting Transition Dimensions: from Ad Hoc to Managed from Managed to Integrated General Questions (Activities Initiated on Agencywide Basis) (Establishment of Integrated Program) D. Resource Allocation Process ˇ There is no statewide plan for operations at ˇ There is an up-to-date document describ- the statewide level that indicates specific ing the statewide operations program-- ˇ Is the budget for operations mainstreamed strategies to be developed a statewide systems operations plan on the same terms as the budgeting for ˇ Funding is ad hoc and unpredictable. There (please send) construction and maintenance (needs is no statewide operations budget. Budget ˇ ITS/operations have a separate multiyear development, allocations based on need, resources for operations are an ad hoc budget (at least for some activities) that is visible in the normal process)? process from year to year, with funds com- part of the normal agency budgeting ˇ Has the central office made slots available ing out of maintenance and construction process--and visible as a line item (tell me to build operations staff? budgets, federal earmarks, etc. what it is). Operations funds are allocated ˇ Staffing is a problem for lack of slots statewide by central office. ˇ Staffing slots are available to add opera- tions staff to central office and districts E. Organization ˇ Highest level central office manager with ˇ Highest-level manager with 100% respon- 100% SO&M responsibility is two or three lev- sibility for operations reports directly to ˇ Are previously fragmented activities els down from the CEO (and not responsible CEO, chief engineer, or COO related to systems operations (ITS, for maintenance or project development). ˇ Within the central office, operations, traffic systems, TMCs, traffic engineering) now ˇ Within both central office and districts, ITS, engineering, and ITS have been consoli- consolidated with the central office? operations, and traffic engineering are sepa- dated into systems operations ˇ Is the responsibility/authority for systems rate responsibilities ˇ At district level, there is coordinated operations a second-, third-, or fourth-tier ˇ District level operations activities are the planning, budgeting, and maintenance responsibility within the central office responsibility of a manager two or three related to ITS/operations under a single (as compared with the counterpart levels down from the district engineer/ manager who reports to the district maintenance and project development/ administrator engineer construction responsibility)? ˇ Core capacities for operations have not been ˇ Core capacities have been identified in ˇ At what level within the district hierarchy identified, nor job specs developed terms of an integrated staff capability for is the highestlevel, full time operations ˇ Some but not all of the incidents and emer- systems operations planning, design, manager (Assistant DE, deputy assistant gencies at the district level are handled in implementation, and maintenance DE, or lower)? a TMC ˇ All regional real-time operations, including ˇ Have core capacities for operations staff emergencies, are handled out of the TMCs been formally identified (and job spec'd)? F. Technical Capacities/Processes ˇ Technical expertise rests principally in a few ˇ Core capacities have been identified in a individual champions (without any clear suc- document. Job specs, training, and certifi- ˇ Has each major district developed and cession) cation exist for key operations positions at documented (key) operations for IM, ˇ Operational concepts, procedures, and pro- central office and districts. traveler information? tocols for incident management, traveler ˇ Documented, formal operational concepts ˇ Have statewide standards and existing information, and freeway operations are not exist for all the operations activities architectures? documented at the district level or standard- ˇ Technology for communications and con- ˇ Are procedures and protocols ized by central office trol devices has been standardized documented for each major SO&M ˇ Districts do their own thing regarding selec- statewide activity (standardized)? tion of technology ˇ Has technology for communications and field devices been standardized? ˇ Do the major districts report incident clearance times by type? Do any districts report incident first response time? G. Partnerships ˇ DOT has informal working relationships with ˇ DOT has formal co-training, written agree- (public service agencies, local government, police and fire entities--principally at the dis- ments with police and fire entities regard- private sector) trict level--regarding incident management ing basic incident management (not written) procedures and targets ˇ Do formal written agreements exist ˇ DOT outsources some operations functions ˇ DOT is in its second/third generation of between PSAs and DOT for incident (TMC, SSP) but doesn't really have a outsourcing some operations functions management (for clearance time targets performance-based contract (TMC, SSP) and has evolved a performance- and for on-site and office procedures)? based contract ˇ Where TMC or SSP functions are outsourced, has the concept of performance management been adopted?