Click for next page ( 67

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

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 66
66 Improving Safety-Related Rules Compliance in the Public Transportation Industry Review Process After submittal, the report will go through a multistep process before it reaches the attention of the report review team (Figure 14). The safety reporting program liaison or an appointed report analyst managed by the liaison must perform several intermediary steps. These include coding the report with respect to the event and report taxonomies, clarifying any vagaries during a callback with the reporter and de-identification. The analyst needs to be a subject-matter expert familiar with the transit operations he or she will be reviewing. The taxonomy presented in Chapter 3 can be used as an initial prototype classification system for a pilot safety reporting system. The taxonomy may be modified based on the types of reports and comments received from the results of a pilot safety reporting system. Just as the reporting process needs to occur in a timely manner, the review process needs to be expedited to ensure that the review team's corrective actions and recommendations are relevant. Timely feedback will be a testament to the system's effectiveness and therefore promote system trust among public transit agency employees. Therefore, team meetings should be scheduled as often as possible. Report review teams should meet either weekly or monthly depending on the number of reports they must review. Some recommendations for the review process include the following: Reports should only be reviewed when sufficient/required information is available for the review team to deliberate on. Review old reports first to close them out then review the newer ones. Prioritize the new reports by risk level, if possible. Corrective actions and recommendations should be the end-product of risk assessment and root cause analysis. Maintain complete records of the report review process. Follow up with appropriate persons to make sure recommendations have been implemented and are successful; examine trends from reports before and after implementation to judge success. Disseminating Safety Reporting System Information To fully realize the benefits of a safety reporting system, there must be a process for the data to be disseminated to the reporting employees, the workforce in general, and transit management. To accomplish this, the data management system must have a user-friendly way to provide mean- ingful analyses. There are two levels of analyses: (1) the report level containing the narrative, which informs corrective actions for individuals and (2) the event level, which informs organizational improvement. It is important to summarize the data to identify trends. Important ways to summarize the data include the following: Event characteristics Causal and contributing factors Risk assessment Corrective actions and recommendations The following are common ways data are disseminated from safety reporting systems: Newsletters Report of the month Reports to enhance training and safety drills Periodic reports of data trends Periodic reports to management by the review team