National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: Appendix A - Survey Questionnaire (web only)
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 98
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 104
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 105
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 106
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 107
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 108
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 109
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 110
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 111
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 112
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 113
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 114
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 115
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"Appendix B - Survey Results." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2017. Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/24688.
×
Page 116

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

B-1 Appendix B Survey Results Question 1. What type of agency do you represent? Questions 2–3. What state(s)/region do you represent? TTAP Center LTAP DOT Alaska Eastern Northern Plains Western Alabama Arkansas Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Indiana Kansas Idaho Louisiana Maine Massachusetts Maryland Mississippi Michigan Montana North Carolina North Dakota New York Nebraska New Hampshire Ohio Oregon Puerto Rico South Carolina South Dakota Texas Tennessee Virginia Wisconsin Utah Washington West Virginia Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Illinois Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Michigan Missouri Mississippi Montana Nebraska Nevada New Mexico New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Virginia Vermont Washington West Virginia Wyoming

B-2 Question 4. Is your agency using information and communication technologies (ICT) to support training (e.g., computer software)? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes Alaska Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Kansas Louisiana Michigan Montana North Dakota Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming No Northern Plains Alabama Connecticut Delaware Hawaii Maine Maryland Massachusetts Mississippi Nebraska New Hampshire New York North Carolina Oregon Puerto Rico South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Virginia West Virginia Alabama Illinois Michigan Nevada New Mexico Rhode Island 3 1 14 20 34 6 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Yes No TTAP LTAP State DOT Yes No TTAP 3 1 LTAP 14 20 State DOT 34 6

B-3 Question 5. Why isn’t your agency using ICT to support training? Select all that apply. Reason Not Using ICT TTAP LTAP DOT Agency does not have a budget to develop or deliver ICT- supported training None Alabama Connecticut Delaware Hawaii Maryland New Hampshire North Carolina Oregon South Dakota West Virginia None Agency does not have the hardware or software required to implement ICT-supported training None Delaware Hawaii Maryland New Hampshire North Carolina Oregon Puerto Rico West Virginia None Agency does not have the technical support staff needed to deliver or maintain ICT- supported training None Alabama Delaware Hawaii Maryland New Hampshire North Carolina Oregon Puerto Rico South Dakota West Virginia None Agency does not have a content or learning management system to administer ICT-supported training None Delaware Hawaii Maryland New Hampshire Oregon Puerto Rico South Dakota West Virginia Alabama Agency feels that more traditional methods of training are the most successful Northern Plains Connecticut Delaware Maine Massachusetts Mississippi South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee West Virginia Illinois Nevada New Mexico Other DE - Most of our customer base (at the worker level) do not have computer access. MI - We are currently in the process of trying to identify a department-wideNE - include ICT and do not think clientele want that part of classes, did not work well in the past. NH - I’d never heard of ICT. NY - Have not yet reach the saturation point to make such training sustainable. TN - No demand, clients prefer instructor led classes. TX - We plan to use ICT, but are still a new program getting its feet underneath itself. VA - We are in the process of developing ICT-supported training. Have not developed training to LMS, in which to register employees for courses, deliver course content, and to track training histories. RI - The Agency is in the first phase of implementation of a LMS and have not evaluated ICT-supported training at this point. 1 9 10 10 8 8 7 3 1 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Prefer tradi onal methods of training No budget for ICT-supported training No technical support staff needed No content or learning management system No required hardware or so€ware Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-4 Question 6. ICT was originally adopted/implemented by my agency to . . . Originally Adopted to… TTAP LTAP DOT Conduct training Alaska Georgia Indiana Kansas Michigan Montana Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Arkansas California Florida Hawaii Iowa Kansas Maryland Mississippi North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Utah Virginia Washington Wyoming Facilitate meetings and other types of communication but not to conduct training Eastern Northern Plains Western Arkansas Connecticut Florida Idaho Louisiana New York Alaska Arizona Colorado Connecticut Idaho Louisiana Maine Missouri Montana New York Oregon Pennsylvania Tennessee Vermont Don’t know None North Dakota Kentucky Nebraska West Virginia 1 3 9 6 1 18 14 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Conduct training Facilitate meengs and other types of communicaon but not to conduct training Don’t know A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-5 Question 7. What were the reasons for implementing/choosing to use ICT-supported training at your agency? Select all that apply. Reasons for Implementing TTAP LTAP DOT Reduce the amount of time spent in a classroom Reduce delivery costs (e.g., facility, travel, instructor) Provide employees with more flexibility for accessing and completing training Provide opportunities for geographically diverse audiences to participate in synchronous training sessions Don’t know Other CA - Preserve knowledge and support succession planning. MO - Provide shorter “bits” of training as required by evolving training methodologies and learning trends. PA - Used primarily for meetings. South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Wyoming Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Missouri Montana North Carolina Ohio Oregon Maine Maryland Mississippi Missouri Montana New York North Carolina Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania Missouri Montana Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Maine Maryland Mississippi Missouri Montana New York North Carolina Oregon South Carolina Oklahoma Alaska California Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Iowa Kansas Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Hawaii Iowa Kansas Kentucky Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Connecticut Hawaii Iowa Kentucky Louisiana Indiana Louisiana Michigan Ohio Arkansas Florida Indiana Louisiana Michigan Ohio Utah Wisconsin Arkansas Connecticut Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Kansas Louisiana Montana North Dakota Ohio Washington Connecticut Florida Idaho Indiana Kansas Michigan Montana Ohio Wisconsin None None Alaska Eastern Western Alaska Eastern Western Alaska Eastern Northern Plains None

B-6 3 3 3 12 8 9 4 29 29 25 24 3 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Provide employees with training flexibility Reduce delivery costs Geographically synchronous training sessions Reduce me spent in a classroom Other Don’t know A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-7 Question 8. ICT-supported training. Select all that apply. Use of ICT TTAP LTAP DOT Replaces content delivered through traditional means, such as on-the-job or classroom training Western Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Michigan Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Is predominantly used when developing new training courses None Arkansas Arizona California Florida Iowa Kentucky Mississippi Missouri North Carolina Ohio Oregon South Dakota Tennessee Utah Is predominantly used to develop supplemental training for existing training Alaska Eastern Northern Plains Western Connecticut Florida Kansas Louisiana Michigan Montana North Dakota Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maine Maryland Missouri Montana Oklahoma Pennsylvania Tennessee Utah Vermont Washington West Virginia Wyoming 1 4 9 8 1 25 22 13 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Replaces content delivered through tradional means Used to develop supplemental training Used when developing new training A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-8 1 3 5 5 5 4 20 19 16 9 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Other governmental agencies outside of transportaon Private sector companies Other transportaon agencies Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT Question 9. When planning for the implementation of ICT-supported training, my agency used the following as a model. Select all that apply. Model TTAP LTAP DOT Other governmental agencies outside of transportation (e.g., Department of Corrections) None Florida Georgia Idaho Utah Washington Alaska California Connecticut Florida Hawaii Kansas Louisiana Maine Maryland Mississippi Missouri Nebraska New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Tennessee Utah Vermont West Virginia Other transportation agencies, (e.g., transit) None Florida Georgia Kansas Michigan Montana Alaska California Connecticut Hawaii Iowa Maine Maryland Ohio Oregon South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Wyoming Private sector companies Northern Plains Florida Indiana Kansas North Dakota Ohio Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Hawaii Idaho Kansas Louisiana Maine Maryland Missouri Ohio Pennsylvania South Carolina Utah Virginia Washington Other AK TTAP Center - Internal model. Eastern - Original research on online training. Western - Depends on the content, but we have our own models of self-paced courses. AR - University. CT - Other LTAPs. LA - Our DOT has some resources that we have utilized. We are not in general creating training on our own. WI - Other university departments. AK - Universities. AR - University-based systems. CA - Massive Open Online Courses, and educational institutions. We use a media server and Moodle. I don't know how the decision was made. IA - TCCC. KY - Internal needs analysis, instructional design roadmap, and industry best practices. MO - Our own history and business needs. MT - The ICT initiative predates my time in service. NC - NCDOT was one of the first NC Government agencies to move to ICT. Didn’t use anyone as a model to copy, just create one as we went. SD - Networking with other DOTs.

B-9 Question 10. To make ICT-supported training available, my agency had to. Select all that apply. Changes Needed for ICT TTAP LTAP DOT Purchase hardware and software Alaska Eastern Arkansas Florida Idaho Kansas Michigan Ohio Washington Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Hawaii Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Missouri New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Washington West Virginia Wyoming Hire support staff to manage and maintain ICT hardware and software None Arkansas Indiana Michigan Washington Arkansas California Florida Kansas Tennessee Virginia Washington Wyoming Acquire a learning management system Alaska Arkansas Idaho Louisiana Michigan North Dakota Ohio Washington Arkansas California Colorado Florida Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Mississippi Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina South Carolina Utah Virginia Washington Find an ICT training provider with content relevant to my agency’s needs None Arkansas Louisiana California Louisiana Maine Maryland Missouri Nebraska Oregon Pennsylvania Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Other Eastern - Acquire access to LMS/WBT (no charge) Western - We use the Moodle platform and design the self- paced courses in house. GA - Use current staff. LA - Limited use of ICT except webinar and already developed modules. MT - LTAP TTAP Clearinghouse. UT - Used university wide systems. WI - Use our University System. AK - Develop materials. AZ - None. CA - Project Delivery started some effort in converting guidance and manuals to XML, Extensible Markup Language, acquired Adobe Connect to conduct webinars and on-demand training, in addition to started on a Project Delivery e-Learning Center using Moodle, and open source LMS. CT - We gave our existing system a makeover. MT - The ICT initiative predates my time in service. SD - Learn all aspects to create and make it work. VT - In the process of acquiring a learning management system. 2 1 2 7 7 2 5 4 26 17 13 7 8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Purchase hardware and so ware Acquire a learning management system Find an ICT training provider Other Hire support staff A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-10 Questions 11–12. What types of ICT-supported training are you using? Select all that apply. ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT Western Florida Georgia North Dakota Ohio Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Mobile Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Indiana Ohio Florida Kentucky Maryland Missouri Pennsylvania Tennessee Utah Vermont Washington Wyoming VCT None Louisiana Utah Wisconsin Alaska Arizona California Florida Hawaii Kentucky Maryland Mississippi Missouri Pennsylvania South Dakota Utah Vermont Wyoming WBT Eastern Florida Georgia Indiana Louisiana North Dakota Ohio Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Iowa Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Mississippi Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming WCT None Kansas Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Hawaii Iowa Kentucky Maine Maryland Missouri New York South Dakota Utah Vermont Other AK - Responsive website. Eastern - A definition of your abbreviations would be helpful. MT -Adobe Connect. ID – Don’t know. SD - Video/DVD.

B-11 1 1 2 2 8 6 2 3 4 3 30 25 15 14 10 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 WBT CBT WCT VCT Mobile Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-12 Question 13. The following lists training content categories. Indicate which content is being deliv- ered via ICT by your agency. Select all that apply. Training Content Agency State/Region A ss et m an ag em en t Br id ge s a nd st ru ct ur es C on st ru ct io n D es ig n Em er ge nc y m a n a ge m en t En vi ro nm en ta l Fi na nc e an d a dm in ist ra tio n H um an r es ou rc e an d pe rs on ne l M ai nt en an ce M at er ia ls Pe rf or m an ce m a n a ge m en t Pl an ni ng R O W a nd u til iti es Tr an sp or ta tio n sy st em s m a n a ge m en t Tr af fic en gi ne er in g Tr af fic sa fe ty TTAP Eastern X X X X X X X X X Western X X X LTAP Arkansas X Florida X X X X X Georgia X Idaho X X Indiana X X X Kansas X X X Louisiana X Michigan X X X X X X X X Montana X X X X X X X X X X North Dakota X Ohio X X X X X X X X Utah X X X X X Washington X X X X Wisconsin X X X X State DOT Alaska X X X Arizona X X X Arkansas X X X California X X X X X X X X Colorado X X X Connecticut X X X X X X X X X X X X X Florida X X X X X X X X X X X Hawaii X X X X X X X Idaho X X Iowa X X X X X X X X Kansas X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Kentucky X X X X X X X X X X X X Louisiana X X X X X X X Maryland X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Mississippi X X X X X Missouri X X X X X X X Montana X Nebraska X X X X X X X X X New York X X North Carolina X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Ohio X Oklahoma X X X X Oregon X Pennsylvania X X X X X X X X South Carolina X X X X X X X X X X X X X X South Dakota X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Tennessee X X X X Utah X X X X X X X X X X X Vermont X Virginia X X X X X X Washington X X X X West Virginia X X X Wyoming X X X X X X X X X X X Other: TTAP • AK - Still in development mode. • Western - Tribal sovereignty, working with Tribal Governments. LTAP • AR - Low Cost Roadway Safety. DOT • NY - Executive Mandates. • KS - Leadership and IT Technical Training. • AK - Leadership Development. • MT - Most likely several other but I can only speak for HR in this instance. • CA - Project Management, Procurement and Contracts, and Land Surveys. • IA - Railroad Safety. • VT - Safety. • ME - Safety. • OH - Safety and Compliance.

B-13

B-14 Question 14. For each ICT-supported training type used by your agency, indicate the method, or methods, used to develop or acquire the training. Select all that apply. A contractor or consultant is hired to develop training. Agency State/Region CBT Mobile VCT WBT WCT TTAP Center Western X X LTAP Florida X State DOT Alaska X X X X California X X Colorado X Connecticut X X Iowa X Louisiana X X Maryland X X X Mississippi X Oregon X Pennsylvania X X X South Dakota X X Tennessee X Utah X X X X X Vermont X X X X Washington X West Virginia X In-house resources are used to develop training. Agency State/Region CBT Mobile VCT WBT WCT TTAP Center Western X X LTAP Florida X X X Georgia X X Indiana X X Kansas X North Dakota X X Ohio X X X Utah X Washington X X Wisconsin X X X X State DOT Alaska X X X Arkansas X X California X X X Colorado X Florida X X X X Idaho X X Iowa X X X Kansas X Kentucky X X X X X Louisiana X X Maryland X X X Mississippi X X Missouri X X X Nebraska X X New York X X X North Carolina X X Ohio X Oklahoma X Oregon X X Pennsylvania X X South Carolina X South Dakota X X X X Tennessee X X X Utah X X X X X Vermont X X X X X Virginia X X Washington X West Virginia X Wyoming X

B-15 Agency State/Region CBT Mobile VCT WBT WCT LTAP Arkansas X Kansas X State DOT Arkansas X X California X X Connecticut X X X Florida X Hawaii X X X X Iowa X Maine X X Maryland X X X Missouri X X X Nebraska X X New York X X North Carolina X Oklahoma X South Carolina X South Dakota X X X Tennessee X Utah X X X X X Vermont X X X X X Virginia X West Virginia X Wyoming X X Training is developed by an agency partner (e.g., community college). Agency State/Region CBT Mobile VCT WBT WCT LTAP Florida X Louisiana X X State DOT Arizona X X California X X Colorado X Connecticut X X X Florida X Idaho X X Kansas X Kentucky X X X X X Maine X X Maryland X X X X Missouri X X X X Nebraska X X New York X Oregon X X Pennsylvania X Tennessee X X Utah X X X X X Vermont X X X X Virginia X X Washington X X West Virginia X Wyoming X X Training is developed by a third party and purchased by the agency.

B-16 1 1 1 11 1 1 6 3 2 7 2 1 1 1 9 3 5 19 10 7 4 5 12 6 20 5 11 23 11 13 9 3 18 8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 CB T M ob ile VC T W BT W CT CB T M ob ile VC T W BT W CT CB T M ob ile VC T W BT W CT CB T M ob ile VC T W BT W CT Agency partner Contractor or consultant In-house resources Third party/purchased A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-17 Question 15. ICT-supported training content is . . . (clearly aligned/not aligned) . . . with the target audience’s/audiences’ performance criteria or workforce development objectives. Aligned? TTAP LTAP DOT Clearly aligned Alaska Eastern Western Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Montana North Dakota Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Mississippi Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Wyoming Not aligned None Arkansas Kansas Louisiana Michigan Iowa Montana New York Ohio Oregon Washington 3 10 4 28 6 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Clearly aligned Is not aligned A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-18 Question 16. How is alignment with the target audience’s/audiences’ performance criteria or work- force development objectives determined? Select all that apply. Alignment Determination TTAP LTAP DOT The training design plan documents which performance criteria or workforce development objectives are addressed by the training None Georgia Idaho Indiana Ohio Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Idaho Kansas Maryland Mississippi Oklahoma South Carolina South Dakota Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Performance evaluations document specific ICT- supported trainings that must be completed in order to successfully meet each criteria None Florida Indiana Montana Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Kansas Kentucky Missouri Pennsylvania Tennessee Vermont Virginia Don’t know Eastern North Dakota Washington Colorado Hawaii Louisiana Maine Other AK - Still in development mode. Western - Needs assessment survey identifies provides opportunity to identify workforce development objectives. UT – Surveys. MO - We also offer many classes that are not listed specifically out during the performance management process but which allow employees development opportunities to support their personal goals (such as time management, stress management, work life balance, etc.). NE - Employees are consulted and federal resources can be used such as TCCC. NC - All learning events are aligned to one of the department’s six strategic goals, as are all the goals, targets & tasks on each employee’s performance management plan/evaluation. WY - Depends. VCT does a topic selection and committee approves content. WBT is designed by 3rd party vendor and is not aligned with specific DOT objectives. 5 3 3 3 17 11 4 4 0 5 10 15 20 25 Training design plan documents criteria or objecves addressed Performance evaluaons document specific ICT-supported trainings that must be completed Don’t know Other A ge nc ie s LTAP/TTAP State DOT

B-19 Question 17. Who is typically involved in an ICT-supported training development project? Select all that apply. Who is Involved? TTAP LTAP DOT Instructional designer None Florida Indiana North Dakota Ohio Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Idaho Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Missouri New York North Carolina South Carolina Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Subject-matter expert Western Florida Georgia Indiana Kansas North Dakota Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia ICT support staff or technician Western Florida Indiana Kansas Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Iowa Kentucky Maryland Mississippi Missouri Pennsylvania Tennessee Virginia West Virginia Project manager Western Indiana North Dakota Ohio California Colorado Connecticut Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Missouri Pennsylvania Tennessee Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Graphic designer None Indiana California Kentucky Maryland Missouri Utah Web developer Western Georgia Indiana Alaska Arkansas California Kentucky Maryland Virginia Don’t know None None Oklahoma Washington Wyoming Other None None CA - Management sponsor. MO - We have a team, the Employee Development team, who is responsible for producing much of the ICT-supported training offered at MoDOT. Our team includes 5 specialists who are training experts, instructional designers, etc., and they work with our partners (and the target audience) across the agency to produce valuable content. OH - Training staff. OR - HR Training. SD - Training Specialist and Training Coordinator.

B-20 1 1 1 1 9 5 6 3 2 1 27 19 14 14 6 5 5 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-21 TTAP LTAP DOT The training design plan includes a recommendation for delivery method. This recommendation takes into account factors such as audience, budget, and the appropriateness of the content when recommending any delivery method, including ICT. Western Florida Kansas North Dakota Ohio Arkansas Connecticut Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maryland Mississippi New York North Carolina Ohio Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Vermont Virginia West Virginia A subject-matter expert requests training in a certain content area using an ICT-supported method. If money is available to meet the request, the project is completed. None Indiana Washington Wisconsin Colorado Florida Louisiana Nebraska Oregon Utah All of our new training is delivered via one type of ICT, so there is no selection criteria needed. None Utah None Don’t know None Georgia Oklahoma Washington Other None None Alaska - Existing training is modified to meet current business and budget needs - new training is developed for multiple delivery methods. California - Perform a pilot in-class training, then request students’ feedback on what portion can be more efficient as ICT. Both Training design plan and subject matter expert requests options apply. Missouri - Informal. Wyoming - All VCT courses are offered through our partnership with TLN. Question 18. How is it determined that ICT is the best delivery method for each training? 1 4 3 1 1 18 6 4 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 Recommendaon considering various factors Subject-maer expert request for ICT. Approved based on funding availability. Other Don’t know All new training is delivered via one type of ICT A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-22 What is a typical amount spent to develop 1 hour of training for each of the following ICTs? ICT Amount TTAP LTAP DOT CBT $1,000–$5,000 Western Florida Georgia North Dakota Ohio Washington Alaska Connecticut Florida Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Oregon Vermont Virginia $5,000–$10,000 None Wisconsin Oklahoma South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Washington $10,000–$15,000 None None Utah $15,000–$25,000 None None None Mobile $1,000–$5,000 Western Florida Indiana Ohio Florida Kentucky Maryland Missouri Vermont Wyoming $5,000–$10,000 None None Tennessee Utah Washington $10,000–$15,000 None None Pennsylvania Utah $15,000–$25,000 None None None VCT $1,000–$5,000 None Utah Alaska California Florida Kentucky Maryland Mississippi Missouri South Dakota Vermont Wyoming $5,000–$10,000 None Wisconsin Pennsylvania Utah $10,000–$15,000 None None Utah $15,000–$25,000 None None None WBT $1,000–$5,000 None Florida Georgia Indiana North Dakota Ohio Washington Connecticut Florida Idaho Iowa Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Vermont Virginia Wyoming $5,000–$10,000 None Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas Colorado Mississippi Pennsylvania South Dakota Tennessee Utah Washington West Virginia $10,000–$15,000 None None California Utah $15,000–$25,000 None None None WCT $1,000–$5,000 None Kansas Alaska Connecticut Florida Iowa Kentucky Maryland Missouri New York South Dakota Vermont $5,000–$10,000 None Wisconsin Arkansas California Utah $10,000–$15,000 None None Utah $15,000–$25,000 None None None Other $1,000–$5,000 None None South Carolina

B-23 1 1 5 3 1 6 1 1 1 1 1 17 6 10 17 10 1 6 3 2 10 3 1 2 1 2 10 5 10 15 20 25 CB T M ob ile VC T W BT W CT O th er CB T M ob ile VC T W BT W CT O th er CB T M ob ile VC T W BT W CT O th er $1,000–$5,000 $5,000–$10,000 $10,000–$15,000 A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-24 Question 19. Do you have a plan for updating and maintaining ICT-supported content developed-in house? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes None Florida Indiana Kansas North Dakota Ohio Utah Washington Alaska Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Iowa Kansas Kentucky Maryland Mississippi Missouri Nebraska New York Ohio Oklahoma South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Vermont West Virginia No Western Wisconsin Idaho Louisiana North Carolina Pennsylvania Utah Virginia Washington Wyoming Don’t know None Georgia Colorado Oregon 1 7 1 1 20 8 2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Yes No Don’t know A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-25 Question 20. My agency’s plan for updating ICT-supported content can be described as follows. Select all that apply. Update Plan TTAP LTAP DOT At least once a year, a subject-matter expert or training department employee reviews the course content and provides update recommendations. None None Arkansas Iowa Kansas Kentucky Missouri New York Ohio Vermont West Virginia At least every 2–4 years, a subject- matter expert or training department employee reviews the course content and provides update recommendations. None Florida Indiana Kansas North Dakota Ohio Utah California Florida Iowa Maryland Missouri Ohio South Dakota Course evaluation data is regularly distributed to the course technical contact and training department. If course evaluation scores fall below a certain average, training automatically reviews the course. None Kansas Kansas Kentucky Maryland Mississippi Missouri Vermont West Virginia There is no regular plan for reviewing course content but if a subject-matter expert requests updates to the content, that change is implemented in a timely manner. None Washington Alaska California Connecticut Missouri Nebraska Oklahoma South Carolina Tennessee Other: California - It depends on the subject. I can only speak for my office, and I would say at least once a year for courses that are part of our office catalog. Vermont - Leadership reviews. Missouri - Varies by training course and content requirements. Kansas - We do Quarterly updates for the 3rd party vendor purchased courses. 6 1 1 7 9 8 7 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 At least every 2–4 years, course content is reviewed with update recommendaons At least once a year, course content is reviewed and update recommendaons are provided No regular plan; subject-ma er expert request updates only If course evaluaon scores fall below a certain average, training department reviews the course Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-26 Question 21. When ICT-supported training updates are required for existing content, those changes are implemented. Select all that apply. Implemented by TTAP LTAP DOT In-house agency staff Western Florida Georgia Indiana Kansas North Dakota Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Florida Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Consultant or contractor None Florida Alaska California Colorado Connecticut Louisiana Maryland Missouri Pennsylvania Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming Other None None California - Educational institution. We would have an internal person make our changes. Nebraska - Various. North Carolina - Other (not specified). 1 9 1 28 12 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 By in-house agency staff By a consultant or contractor Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-27 Question 22. What type of in-house staff do you use to maintain or update ICT-supported content? Type of Staff TTAP LTAP DOT Training or Human Resources department employee with sufficient technical skills None Georgia Kansas Ohio Washington Alaska Colorado Idaho Iowa Kansas Louisiana Maryland Missouri New York Oregon South Carolina South Dakota Utah Virginia West Virginia Wyoming Subject matter expert, i.e., professional engineer, with sufficient ICT technical skills None North Dakota Utah California Mississippi Ohio Oklahoma Vermont Washington Information Technology department employee with sufficient technical skills Western Indiana Wisconsin Florida Kentucky Pennsylvania Other None Florida - Both Training or Human Resources and Information Technology department employees. Arkansas - Both subject matter expert and IT staff. North Carolina - Collaborative effort between SME & Training/HR. Tennessee - Really a combination of all three. 1 4 2 2 1 16 6 3 3 0 5 10 15 20 25 Training or HR employee with sufficient technical skills Subject maer expert IT employee with sufficient technical skills Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-28 Question 23. Is the in-house staffer responsible for maintaining or updating ICT-supported content solely responsible for training work or do they have other, non-training related responsibilities? Responsibility TTAP LTAP DOT Solely responsible None Georgia Kansas Ohio Washington Wisconsin Colorado Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi Missouri New York Oregon South Carolina Utah Wyoming Training is part of responsibilities Western Florida Indiana Utah Alaska Arkansas California Florida Maryland North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Pennsylvania South Dakota Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Don’t know None North Dakota Tennessee 1 5 3 1 13 14 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Solely responsible Training dues are part of responsibilies Don’t know A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-29 Question 24. Please list some of the job responsibilities of the in-house staffer, other than maintain- ing or updating ICTs. TTAP LTAP DOT In-house Staffer Job Responsibilities Western - Project management, web design, newsletter editing. Florida - Maintaining web sites; assist with registration calls and functions; perform responsibilities as designated in Ped Bike Safety Resource Center project; vehicle and building maintenance; desktop support. Indiana - On-site training and technical support of locals. Utah - I.S. Alaska - Employee Relations, Labor Relations, Classification, Human Resources. Arkansas - Website and database maintenance, all IT support. California - Support knowledge management, and traditional in-class training. Florida - Multimedia needs. Maryland - ILT instructional design and development. North Carolina - Also system admin for the PM system (we use the same vendor/system for our LMS & PM) and as the department training coordinator my training responsibilities extend far beyond just managing ICTs. Ohio - Multiple Program Management. Oklahoma - Roadway design, Maintenance issues. Pennsylvania - Depends on topic area. South Dakota – Hands-on maintenance training; video filming, editing, production; training manual updates; photography. Vermont - SME. Virginia - Instructor led training, career consulting. Washington - Live training. West Virginia - Managing training programs; designing and delivering face- to-face staff development training.

B-30 Question 25. Which agencies do you partner with to develop or acquire ICT-supported training products? Select all that apply. 1 2 14 14 5 3 3 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 Other TCCC Community college UTC Clear Roads APWA A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT Partner TTAP LTAP DOT Community college None None Florida Maryland Utah Virginia West Virginia University transportation center None Arkansas Kansas Arkansas California Vermont Transportation Curriculum Coordination Council None None Connecticut Iowa Maine Maryland Missouri Nebraska North Carolina South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Wyoming Clear Roads None None Maine Vermont Virginia APWA None None Tennessee Other None Kansas - KDOT, FHWA Kansas Division Connecticut - NHI. Hawaii - DHRD, DAGS, FHWA, AASHTO. Maine - E-Safety. Maryland - NHI. Missouri - Missouri Office of Administration (not transportation-specific topics). Nebraska - Local colleges/university. New York – Governor’s Office of Employee Relations. North Carolina - State Universities. Oklahoma - Oklahoma Office of Management and Enterprise Services - Human Capital Management Division. South Dakota – the National Transportation Training Directors organization. Tennessee - LTAP, Equipment. Utah - University Professional Development. Wyoming - Transportation Learning Network.

B-31 Question 26. Is the training product obtained through this partnership “owned” by you once the development is complete? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes None Arkansas Kansas California South Dakota Utah Vermont No None None Connecticut Florida Hawaii Iowa Maine Missouri New York North Carolina Oklahoma South Carolina Tennessee Virginia West Virginia Wyoming Don’t know None None Arkansas Maryland Nebraska 2 14 4 3 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 No Yes Don’t know A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-32 Question 27. Is content obtained through this partnership copyrighted? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes None None California No None Arkansas Kansas South Dakota Utah Vermont Don’t know None None None 2 3 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 No Yes A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-33 Question 28. Does the partnering agreement (either for a single or multiple ICT-supported training developments) include a plan for the updating and maintenance of the content after the project is complete? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes None Arkansas California Florida Iowa Maine Maryland New York North Carolina Oklahoma Virginia West Virginia Wyoming No None Kansas Arkansas South Dakota Tennessee Utah Don’t know None None Connecticut Hawaii Missouri Nebraska South Carolina Vermont 1 1 11 6 4 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Yes Don’t know No A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-34 Question 29. From which third-party vendors do you acquire ICT-supported training products? Select all that apply. Third-Party Vendor TTAP LTAP DOT Community college None None Maryland Utah Virginia West Virginia NHI None Florida Louisiana Arizona Connecticut Florida Idaho Kansas Maryland Missouri Nebraska Pennsylvania Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia University transportation center None None California Connecticut APWA None Florida Louisiana None AASHTO None Florida Louisiana Arizona Connecticut Idaho Kansas Maine Maryland Missouri Nebraska Pennsylvania Tennessee Utah Vermont Washington West Virginia TRB None Louisiana Arizona Maine Maryland Pennsylvania Washington Other Louisiana - ITE. Kentucky - Assorted third party vendors Oregon – Don’t Know Kansas - LearnSmart, Microsoft Products Tennessee - LTAP, ASTM, Various Equipment Vendors Utah - Other Content Providers such as, skill soft, BLR, Red Vector Pennsylvania - Private consultants Colorado - Regis California - Sacramento State University Wyoming - Skillsoft Florida - Florida Department of Transportation; FHWA. New York - SkillSoft 2 2 2 1 2 15 14 10 5 4 2 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 NHI AASHTO Other TRB Community college UTC APWA A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-35 Question 30. If the course content is updated by the vendor, how does your agency acquire the latest version? Acquired Method TTAP LTAP DOT Purchase at full price None Louisiana Arizona Connecticut Idaho Maryland New York Oregon Pennsylvania Vermont Washington West Virginia Purchase at discounted rate None None Tennessee Acquire free of charge None Florida California Colorado Florida Kansas Kentucky Maine Missouri Nebraska Utah Virginia Wyoming 1 1 11 10 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Acquire free of charge Purchase at full price Purchase at discounted price A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-36 1 1 11 6 5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Don’t know Yes No A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT Question 31. Does purchase of this content entitle your agency to any support services related to the product? For example, will the vendor troubleshoot problems encountered by users? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes None Florida Connecticut Kansas Maine New York Utah Wyoming No None None California Colorado Idaho Pennsylvania West Virginia Don’t know None Louisiana Arizona Florida Kentucky Maryland Missouri Nebraska Oregon Tennessee Vermont Virginia Washington

B-37 Question 32. Select the type of support services received from the vendor. Select all that apply. Support Services TTAP LTAP DOT Initial deployment None None Connecticut Kansas Utah Wyoming Customer support for users None None Connecticut New York Wyoming Troubleshoot technical issues, such as integration with LMS None None Kansas Maine Utah Records maintenance and reporting None None None

B-38 Question 33. Do you have a learning management system? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes Alaska Eastern Western Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Kansas Michigan North Dakota Ohio Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina Tennessee Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia No None Arkansas Louisiana Montana Utah Florida Hawaii Mississippi Montana South Dakota Vermont Wyoming 3 10 4 27 7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Yes No A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-39 Question 34. Does your agency track completion of ICT-supported trainings? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Kansas Michigan North Dakota Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming No Alaska Louisiana Montana South Dakota 2 1 12 2 33 1 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Yes No A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-40 Question 35. How do you track completion of ICT-supported training? Select all that apply. Completion Tracking TTAP LTAP DOT Through agency’s learning management system Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Kansas Michigan North Dakota Ohio Wisconsin Alaska Arizona California Colorado Hawaii Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina Tennessee Utah Virginia Washington West Virginia Through third-party learning management system None None Alaska Arkansas California Hawaii Maine Missouri New York North Carolina Oklahoma Utah Washington Wyoming Participants send evidence of completion to their HR department None Washington Arkansas California Connecticut Hawaii Maine Missouri Montana New York Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Participants send evidence of completion to their supervisor None Idaho Utah Alaska California Missouri North Carolina Tennessee Utah Vermont Other Eastern - Internal staff track attendance and completion. Wyoming - Different tracking methods by District, department. Some are centralized in Training database system. Vermont - In-house tracking system, moving to LMS. Florida - In-house database. approved New York - Supplemental learning is input into the LMS by the learner and by the supervisor. Utah - We have created an in-house tracking system which we are migrating to the recently purchased LMS. 2 1 10 1 2 24 13 12 7 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Through agency’s learning management system Parcipants send evidence of compleon to their HR department Through third-party learning management system Parcipants send evidence of compleon to their supervisor Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-41 Question 36. What does your agency use to evaluate participants’ mastery of content for ICT- supported training? Select all that apply. Evaluation Method TTAP LTAP DOT Online exams Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Georgia Indiana Ohio Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Idaho Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Oklahoma Pennsylvania Tennessee Utah Virginia West Virginia Wyoming Printed exams None None Arkansas Idaho Louisiana Mississippi Nebraska Oklahoma Tennessee Wyoming Performance-based evaluations None None Alaska Arkansas California Connecticut Kansas North Carolina Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia No exams Eastern Michigan Utah Washington Arkansas Hawaii Iowa Oklahoma Pennsylvania Washington Other Idaho - First courses this spring. Kansas - Knowledge check sent by pdf after the webinar. North Dakota - Knowledge checks are provided at the end of the training. Arkansas - Depends on the course. California - I believe there are internal checks for learning. Florida - In-house testing software. Kansas - Level II & Level III Evaluations. Montana - Each training is different. Nebraska - Combination...depends on the course. Ohio - Compliance training has testing throughout the course. Oregon - Combination of online and only completion. South Carolina - Knowledge checks within online training that you must get right to move on. Vermont - In system test. 2 1 6 3 3 23 10 11 6 8 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Online exams Other Performance-based evaluaons No exams Printed exams A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-42 Question 37. What types of evaluations does your agency use to evaluate participants’ satisfaction with the ICT-supported training experience? Select all that apply. Evaluation Type TTAP LTAP DOT Online evaluations Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Georgia Indiana Ohio Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Idaho Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Nebraska North Carolina Ohio South Carolina Utah Virginia West Virginia Wyoming Printed evaluations None Idaho Indiana Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Connecticut Idaho Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri Oklahoma Oregon Tennessee West Virginia Wyoming Informal solicitation None Michigan Utah Alaska Arkansas Connecticut Florida Kansas Maryland Missouri Oklahoma Utah No evaluations None North Dakota Washington Hawaii Maine New York Pennsylvania Washington Other Kansas - Survey Monkey evaluations are emailed to participants after the webinar. California - We are beginning to develop courses in our office. I do not know the specifics for other areas. Kansas - Supervisors are contacted for observing new skills and behavior changes. Missouri - Survey Monkey. Montana - Some have evaluations, some do not. Vermont - Depends on content and if testing is required. 2 6 3 2 2 1 19 14 9 5 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Online evaluaons Printed evaluaons Informal solicitaon No evaluaons Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-43 Question 38. Are evaluations administered for both mandatory and non-mandatory training? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Georgia Idaho Indiana Kansas Michigan Ohio Utah Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina Utah Vermont Virginia Wyoming No None None Florida Idaho Don’t know None None Tennessee West Virginia 2 10 24 2 20 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Yes No Don’t know A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-44 Question 39. For each audience below, indicate which ICT-supported training method is the most effective. ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT None Florida Idaho Michigan Montana Alaska Colorado Kansas Kentucky Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina Utah Vermont Mobile None Arkansas Montana VCT None North Dakota Pennsylvania WBT Alaska Eastern Western Georgia Indiana Louisiana Ohio Washington Wisconsin Arizona California Connecticut Hawaii Idaho Iowa Louisiana Maine Mississippi New York Ohio Tennessee Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming WCT None Kansas Utah Arkansas Florida Maryland South Dakota Engineers ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT Western Florida Idaho Montana Arizona Colorado Florida Kansas Kentucky Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Oklahoma South Carolina Utah Vermont Virginia Mobile None Arkansas Arkansas Montana VCT None Louisiana Michigan North Dakota California Louisiana Mississippi Pennsylvania Wyoming WBT Alaska Eastern Georgia Indiana Ohio Washington Wisconsin Hawaii Idaho Iowa Maine New York Ohio Oregon Tennessee Washington West Virginia WCT None Kansas Utah Alaska Connecticut Maryland South Dakota Regional or District Managers

B-45 ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT Western Florida Idaho Louisiana Montana Washington Colorado Hawaii Idaho Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Nebraska North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Mobile None Arkansas Wisconsin Florida Montana Tennessee VCT None North Dakota Missouri Wyoming WBT Alaska Eastern Georgia Indiana Kansas Michigan Ohio Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Connecticut Iowa Maine Maryland Mississippi New York Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota West Virginia WCT None Utah None Foremen ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT Western Florida Idaho Louisiana Montana Washington Arizona Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Idaho Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Mississippi Nebraska North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Mobile None Arkansas Indiana Kansas Wisconsin Montana Tennessee Washington VCT None North Dakota Alaska Maryland Missouri Wyoming WBT Alaska Eastern Georgia Ohio Arkansas California Maine New York Ohio Pennsylvania South Dakota WCT None Michigan Utah Iowa Equipment Operators

B-46 ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT None Florida Idaho Louisiana Montana Washington Arizona Colorado Connecticut Kansas Kentucky Mississippi Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina Utah Vermont Virginia Mobile Western Arkansas Indiana Kansas Montana Pennsylvania Tennessee Washington VCT None None Alaska Wyoming WBT Alaska Eastern Georgia North Dakota Ohio Wisconsin Arkansas California Idaho Iowa Louisiana Maine Maryland New York Ohio West Virginia WCT None Michigan Utah Florida Hawaii South Dakota Inspectors ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT None Florida Idaho Kansas Louisiana Montana Washington Colorado Connecticut Florida Kansas Kentucky Missouri Nebraska North Carolina Oklahoma Oregon South Carolina Utah Vermont Mobile Western Arkansas Montana Pennsylvania Tennessee VCT None North Dakota Maryland Wyoming WBT Alaska Eastern Georgia Indiana Ohio Wisconsin Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Idaho Iowa Louisiana Maine Mississippi New York Ohio Virginia Washington West Virginia WCT None Michigan Utah Hawaii South Dakota Technicians ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT Western Florida Georgia Idaho Kansas Montana Arizona Colorado Connecticut Florida Kansas Kentucky Missouri Nebraska North Carolina South Carolina Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia Mobile None Arkansas Wisconsin Montana VCT None North Dakota Pennsylvania Wyoming WBT Alaska Eastern Indiana Louisiana Ohio Washington Alaska Arkansas California Hawaii Idaho Iowa Louisiana Maine Maryland Mississippi New York Ohio Oklahoma Oregon South Dakota Washington West Virginia WCT None Michigan Utah None All Employees

3 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2 4 1 1 6 2 3 1 3 5 2 5 2 1 5 1 5 4 1 2 2 5 3 4 2 6 1 1 4 2 5 2 1 4 2 12 1 1 16 4 13 2 5 10 4 15 3 2 14 19 3 4 7 1 15 4 2 10 3 13 3 2 14 2 14 1 2 17 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 C B T M o b i l e V C T W B T W C T C B T M o b i l e V C T W B T W C T C B T M o b i l e V C T W B T W C T C B T M o b i l e V C T W B T W C T C B T M o b i l e V C T W B T W C T C B T M o b i l e V C T W B T W C T C B T M o b i l e V C T W B T W C T Engineers Regional or District Managers Foremen Equipment Operators Inspectors Technicians All Employees A g e n c i e s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-48 Question 40. In the next 3 to 5 years, my agency intends to . . . Intention TTAP LTAP DOT Acquire ICT Northern Plains Alabama Delaware New Hampshire West Virginia Alabama Arizona Illinois Michigan Rhode Island Acquire or develop training delivered by ICT None Connecticut Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts Mississippi Nebraska Puerto Rico South Carolina South Dakota Texas Virginia Idaho Wyoming Expand the number of courses offered using ICT Alaska Eastern Western Arkansas Florida Idaho Indiana Kansas Montana North Dakota Ohio Utah Washington Wisconsin Alaska Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Hawaii Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Missouri Nebraska New York North Carolina Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Vermont Virginia West Virginia Maintain the number of courses offered using ICT None Georgia Hawaii Maine Michigan New York North Carolina Oregon Mississippi Montana Nevada New Mexico Washington Reduce the number of courses being offered using ICT None Tennessee None 3 1 11 11 7 4 1 28 2 5 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Expand the number of courses offered using ICT Acquire or develop training delivered by ICT Maintain the number of courses offered using ICT Acquire ICT Reduce the number of courses being offered using ICT A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-49 Question 41. What types of ICT delivery systems does your agency plan to acquire? Select all that apply. Delivery TTAP LTAP DOT Computer hardware None West Virginia Illinois Mobile devices Northern Plains None Arizona Video conference system None Delaware New Hampshire Arizona Web conference system None Delaware New Hampshire Alabama None Other Alabama - No current plan. Michigan - We are currently in the process of trying to identify a department-wide Learning Management System, in which to register employees for courses, deliver course content, and to track training histories. Rhode Island - Under future evaluation. 1 2 3 1 1 3 1 1 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 Video conference system Web conference system Other Computer hardware Mobile devices A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-50 Question 42. What types of ICT-supported training does your agency plan to acquire or develop? Select all that apply. ICT TTAP LTAP DOT CBT None Maryland Massachusetts Puerto Rico Texas Virginia None Mobile None Connecticut Massachusetts Texas None VCT None Maryland Puerto Rico South Dakota None WBT None Connecticut Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts Mississippi Puerto Rico South Dakota Texas Virginia California Idaho WCT None Connecticut Maryland South Dakota Wyoming Other Nebraska - In class training. South Carolina - Question 5 had no option to say we have no current plan to acquire or develop ICT. 9 5 3 3 3 2 2 1 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 WBT CBT WCT Mobile VCT Other A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-51 Question 43. Provide a reasonable estimate of the number of ICT-supported trainings (courses, not individual sessions of a course) your agency intends to add in the next 3 to 5 years. Number of Courses TTAP LTAP DOT 1–5 Western Arkansas Idaho Indiana Wisconsin Arkansas Hawaii Nebraska West Virginia 5–10 Alaska Eastern Kansas North Dakota Utah Connecticut Louisiana New York Oklahoma Oregon Tennessee Vermont 11–20 None Washington Alaska Colorado Iowa Maine Maryland Missouri Ohio Pennsylvania 21–30 None None Kansas South Carolina Virginia 31–50 None Florida Montana Ohio California Florida Kentucky North Carolina South Dakota Utah 1 2 4 3 1 3 4 7 8 3 6 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 1–5 5–10 11–20 21–30 31–50 A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-52 Question 44. For what reason(s) does your agency intend to reduce its ICT-supported training offerings? Select all that apply. Reason TTAP LTAP DOT Agency perception that this type of training has not been effective None Tennessee None Evidence that this training has not been effective for some, or all, audiences None Tennessee None Budget restrictions require us to reduce the number of training courses offered None None None Budget restrictions require the agency to withdraw from training consortiums/partnerships that had previously provided training courses to employee None None None 1 1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 Agency percepon (training not effecve) Evidence (training not effecve) Budget requires reduced number of courses Budget requires withdrawal from consorums/partnerships A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

B-53 Question 45. The synthesis will include five to ten case examples to illustrate different ICT- supported training program practices being used. Would your organization be interested in participating in a 1-hour interview, the results of which would be developed into a case study in the synthesis report? Yes/No TTAP LTAP DOT Yes Alaska Western Alabama Connecticut Delaware Indiana Kansas Maryland Massachusetts Mississippi New York Ohio Texas Washington Alaska Arkansas California Connecticut Florida Iowa Kansas Maryland Missouri Nevada Oklahoma South Dakota Tennessee Utah No Eastern Northern Plains Arkansas Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Louisiana Maine Michigan Montana Nebraska New Hampshire North Carolina North Dakota Oregon Puerto Rico South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Utah Virginia West Virginia Wisconsin Alabama Arizona Colorado Hawaii Idaho Illinois Kentucky Louisiana Maine Michigan Mississippi Montana Nebraska New Mexico New York North Carolina Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wyoming 2 2 22 12 26 14 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 No Yes A ge nc ie s TTAP LTAP State DOT

Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (2015) FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005) TCRP Transit Cooperative Research Program TDC Transit Development Corporation TEA-21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (1998) TRB Transportation Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration U.S.DOT United States Department of Transportation

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 5 0 0 F ifth S tre e t, N W W a s h in g to n , D C 2 0 0 0 1 A D D R ESS SER VICE R EQ UESTED NO N-PRO FIT O RG . U.S. PO STAG E PA ID CO LUM BIA, M D PER M IT NO . 88 ISBN 978-0-309-38990-7 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 3 8 9 9 0 7 9 0 0 0 0 Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency W orkforce Developm ent and Training NCHRP Synthesis 503 TRB

Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Synthesis 503: Leveraging Technology for Transportation Agency Workforce Development and Training documents how state and local transportation agencies are using information and communication technologies (ICT) to train their workforce. The report explores the planning and resources required to implement and maintain a training and development program and assists agencies that are considering ways to implement, improve, or expand ICT-supported training programs.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!