TCRP Annual Report of Progress 2019 (2019)

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.

1 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Annual Report of Progress DECEMBER 31, 2019 INTRODUCTION The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) was established in 1992 to pro- vide a continuing program of applied research on transit issues. The program is spon- sored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and carried out under a three-way agreement among the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (the National Academies), acting through its Transportation Research Board (TRB); the Transit Development Corporation, an educational and research arm of the American Public Transportation Association (APTA); and the FTA. TCRP focuses on issues significant to the public transportation industry, with emphasis on developing near-term research solutions to a variety of transit problems involving facilities, vehicles, equipment, service concepts, operations, policy, planning, human resources, maintenance, and administrative practices. TCRP is a unique undertaking. Anyone with an interest in public transportation may play a role in setting the research agenda for the program by submitting research problem statements to TRB at any time. Problem statements are solicited annually from individuals representing the public transportation industry, metropolitan planning organiza tions (MPOs), universities, and federal agencies. In addition, to complement the open solicitation process, conferences are held to address research needs or

2 small consultant studies are commissioned to develop research problem statements on topics of special interest. The selection of research projects is the responsibility of the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Commission. The TOPS Commission consists of industry executives, representing the primary beneficiaries of TCRP research.The TOPS Com- mission functions as the TCRP governing board and sets research priorities. HOW TCRP PROGRAMS ARE FORMULATED The annual research program is the foundation of TCRP. Formulating the annual pro- gram—that is, identifying the highest priority projects to be researched in a given fiscal year—is the primary duty of the TOPS Commission. Projects to be funded are based on the TOPS Commission’s assessment of current problems facing the public trans- portation industry. The programming process encompasses a series of five steps. First, problem statements that describe problems in the industry are solicited annually by TCRP staff, but they may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. Approxi- mately 3,020 research problem statements have been submitted since program incep- tion. Research problem statements are typically submitted by individuals representing the following: • Transit Agencies, • State DOTs, • FTA, • APTA Committees, • TRB Committees, • Industries, • Universities, and • Consultants. Table 1 shows the origin of problem statements submitted to date. TABLE 1 ORIGIN OF PROBLEM STATEMENTS FY 1992–2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 ORGANIZATION NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % NO. % Transit Agencies 725 29.3 3 5.0 8 13.6 8 11.0 3 4.5 State DOTs 158 6.4 1 1.7 1 1.7 1 1.4 2 3.0 FTA 245 9.9 1 1.7 1 1.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 APTA Committees 136 5.5 2 3.4 4 6.8 6 8.2 3 4.5 TRB Committees 236 9.5 17 28.8 5 8.4 19 26.0 25 37.9 Industries 70 2.8 3 3.4 1 1.7 4 5.5 1 1.5 Universities 310 12.5 13 22.0 7 11.9 9 12.3 7 10.7 Consultants 395 16.0 18 30.5 27 45.7 19 26.0 20 30.3 Other 200 8.1 2 3.4 4 6.8 7 9.6 5 7.6 Total 2,475 100.0 59 100.0 59 100.0 73 100.0 66 100.0

3 In addition to this process, the TOPS Committee authorizes special efforts to develop problem statements around specific themes. In 1994, projects to aid in increasing transit ridership were developed by the TCRP Project H-5 workshop, “Identification of Research Needs to Increase U.S. Transit Ridership.” TCRP Project H-4, “Transit Policy-Related Research,” generated five projects in the policy area. Problem state- ments for fiscal years 1997, 1998, and 1999 were developed under TCRP Project J-8, “New Paradigms for Public Transit,” and TCRP Project H-15, “Projects to Support ‘Mobility for the 21st Century.’” In 2001, problem statements were developed on pub- lic transportation security under TCRP Project J-10, “Public Transportation Security Research,” in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001. Consultants have also been retained to develop problem statements in the areas of human resources and transit bus improvements. Second, screening workshops are conducted to evaluate and recommend problem statements for consideration by the TOPS Commission. The screening panels con- sider, in addition to FTA strategic research goals, five strategic priorities adopted in the TCRP strategic plan: 1. Place the customer first, 2. Enable transit to operate in a technologically advanced society, 3. Continuously improve public transportation, 4. Flourish in the multimodal system, and 5. Revitalize transit organizations. TCRP revises its strategic plan periodically and adjusts selection criteria to be consis- tent with the plan. The problem statements are screened to determine the following: • Whether the problem supports the FTA strategic research goals and/or the TCRP strategic plan, • Whether the problem is important to transit agencies, • Whether the problem is researchable, • Whether the contemplated research is timely, • Whether successful research will produce significant benefits, • Whether the probability of success of the proposed study is sufficiently high, • Whether the proposed study can be designed to avoid undesirable duplication of other completed or ongoing research, and • Whether the proposed study is appropriate for TCRP or whether it should be per- formed elsewhere. Third, the short list of problem statements is presented to the TOPS Commission for consideration in formulating each year’s program. Fourth, the technical merits of the problem statements that survive the screening are further evaluated by the TOPS Commission at an annual meeting held for this pur- pose. Based on the comments and discussions, the TOPS Commission selects the projects for the next program year. Finally, each year’s program is referred to TRB for review, acceptance, and execution.

4 RESEARCH PROGRAM TCRP was established by memorandum agreement in 1992. Since then, the TOPS Commission has generally met twice each year, a total of 58 times, to select the research program for the next fiscal year and to review TCRP procedures and performance. Most problem statements selected by the TOPS Commission become research projects, but some are treated as syntheses. Research projects involve original research, which includes data collection, analysis, and preparation of materials for use by the transit industry. Syntheses search out and assemble useful knowledge from all available sources, especially from practitioners, and report on current practices in the subject area. In addition to these two types of studies, TCRP also conducts IDEA (Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis) investigations, legal studies, and quick- response studies. IDEA investigations are intended to develop commercially viable products; legal studies examine legal issues facing the transit industry; and quick- response studies address a variety of issues that require a short-term response. Selection of problem statements at the TOPS Commission meeting in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, June 2019. (Photo: Stephan A. Parker) TOPS Commission meeting in Woods Hole, Massachusetts, June 2019. From left to right, Mortimer L. Downey, Gwen Chisholm-Smith, Paul C. Jablonski, Christopher J. Hedges, Neil J. Pedersen, and Mary Leary. (Photo: Stephan A. Parker)

5 FINANCING THE PROGRAM TCRP funding was authorized by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) for fiscal years 1992 through 1997; by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) for fiscal years 1998 through 2005; by the Safe, Account- able, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) for fiscal years 2006 through 2012; by the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) for fiscal years 2013 through 2015; and by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act for fiscal years 2016 through 2020. Funding for each year of the program is provided below: • FY 1992 $8.92 M • FY 1993 $7.75 M • FY 1994 $8.475 M • FY 1995 $8.475 M • FY 1996 $7.61 M • FY 1997 $8.25 M • FY 1998 $4.00 M • FY 1999 $8.25 M • FY 2000 $7.15 M • FY 2001 $6.73 M • FY 2002 $8.25 M • FY 2003 $8.196 M • FY 2004 $8.196 M • FY 2005 $8.184 M • FY 2006 $8.91 M • FY 2007 $9.30 M • FY 2008 $9.30 M • FY 2009 $10.00 M • FY 2010 $10.00 M • FY 2011 $9.98 M • FY 2012 $6.50 M • FY 2013 $3.50 M • FY 2014 $3.00 M • FY 2015 $6.00 M • FY 2016 $5.00 M • FY 2017 $5.00 M • FY 2018 $5.00 M • FY 2019 $5.00 M • FY 2020 $5.00 M (anticipated)

6 HOW TCRP IS ORGANIZED TO ADMINISTER RESEARCH PROGRAMS Nine research fields and 45 problem areas are used to classify TCRP research. RESEARCH FIELDS PROBLEM AREAS RESEARCH FIELD A Operations Scheduling Vehicle Operations Control Systems Fare Collection User Information Systems Safety and Security RESEARCH FIELD B Service Configuration System Planning Specialized Service Planning Service Performance Marketing RESEARCH FIELD C Engineering of Vehicles and Equipment Buses Vans Heavy Rail Cars Commuter Rail Vehicles Light Rail Cars People-Mover Vehicles Vehicle Components RESEARCH FIELD D Engineering of Fixed Facilities Buildings Rail Operating Facilities Passenger Stations and Terminals Bus Stop Facilities RESEARCH FIELD E Maintenance Vehicle Servicing Vehicle Inspections and Maintenance Vehicle Corrective Repairs Overhaul and Rebuilding Non-Vehicle Maintenance Maintenance Management RESEARCH FIELD F Human Resources Recruitment Training Employee Reviews Job Classification Salary Administration Labor Relations Performance Improvement Programs

7 The distribution of all projects and syntheses through December 2019 is shown in Table 2. RESEARCH FIELD G Administration Financial Management Procurement and Inventory Control Risk Management Law Management Information Systems Transit Organizations RESEARCH FIELD H Policy and Planning Policy Analysis Planning Economics Environmental Analysis RESEARCH FIELD J Special Projects Areas Not Covered Elsewhere

8 TABLE 2 DISTRIBUTION OF PROJECTS AND SYNTHESES BY FIELD THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2019 RESEARCH FIELDS NUMBER OF PROJECTS NUMBER OF SYNTHESES Operations 61 50 Service Configuration 56 32 Engineering of Vehicles and Equipment 28 9 Engineering of Fixed Facilities 19 6 Maintenance 15 7 Human Resources 28 21 Administration 21 18 Policy and Planning 73 20 Special Projects 11 0 PROJECT PANELS Each project is assigned to a panel appointed by TRB. Panel membership must be balanced in terms of professional qualifications, geography, age, gender, and ethnicity. Table 3 displays panel composition by affiliation, race, and gender. Nominations for members of new panels are solicited through an annual solicitation process. Informa- tion about panel nominations is also available on the TCRP website. For most panels, more than four nominees are received for each available slot. Emphasis on selec- tion of well-balanced panels has resulted in membership that reflects the diversity in the transit industry. To ensure that research is relevant to the industry, approximately 35 percent of the members of most panels are employed by transit systems. TCRP Project G-18 Panel Meeting in Washinton D.C., August 2019. From left to right, Larry Goldstein, John Levin, Brendon Hennily, Sandra Martin-Boehm, and Diana Love. Back to the camera, Catherine Vanderwaart. (Photo: Heidi Willis)

9 TABLE 3 PANEL COMPOSITION OF ACTIVE PROJECTS* (67 Project Panels, 566 Members) PANEL COMPOSITION NO. % AFFILIATION Transit System State Government Local Government/MPO Consultants/Private Sector University Association Federal Agency Other 186 47 65 166 51 11 2 38 32.9 8.3 11.5 29.3 9.0 1.9 0.4 6.7 RACE White Minorities Abstentions Members/Chairs 433/47 150/15 22/0 Members/Chairs 76.5/70.1 26.5/22.4 3.4/0.0 GENDER Male Female Members/Chairs 388/43 217/19 Members/Chairs 69.0/66.2 38.3/28.4 * Totals presented here reflect only panel members who choose to share race and gender data. Data also include individuals who serve on multiple panels. Panels have four important responsibilities: 1. Defining the scope of the study in a research project statement (request for proposals), 2. Selecting a contractor from among the agencies submitting proposals, 3. Monitoring the research over the duration of the contract, and 4. Reviewing the final research deliverables. HOW PROJECTS ARE PLACED UNDER CONTRACT TCRP concentrates on applied research projects. The program is directed at problems of an immediate, near-term nature that can be undertaken with moderate research funds. TCRP project funding levels are typically approximately $250,000 per project. As TCRP initiates each year’s program, the panels meet for the first time to write research project statements based on the problem statements referred by the TOPS Commission. Research project statements are only available on the Internet. Propos- als are submitted according to fixed deadlines; extensions are not granted. An aver- age of six to eight proposals are received per project. It is important to note that the opportunity to propose is open to anyone. Agency selec- tion is based on the following factors: (1) understanding of the problem, (2) research approach, (3) experience of the research team, (4) application of results and imple- mentation plan, (5) plan for participation by disadvantaged business enterprises, and (6) facilities and equipment. Note that the fifth factor was added in 1997 to supplement ongoing TCRP outreach efforts to encourage greater participation in the program by disadvantaged business enterprises. Staff and panel members evaluate all proposals based on these criteria.

10 The funds available for a project are specified in the research project statement, and contract awards cannot exceed this amount. Cost-proposal line items are examined to determine the reasonableness of the allocation of funds and staffing to the various tasks. The unit costs of the research proposed and elements such as compensation for key personnel, distribution of effort for key tasks, overhead rate, size of any fixed fee, and those expenditures included in direct costs are evaluated. Agency selection is made when the panels meet for the second time, typically about 30 days after the panel members have received the proposals. Panel members candidly discuss all aspects of each agency’s known performance on other research projects. These panel deliberations are privileged. Agency selection is made by all panel members exclud- ing staff and liaison representatives. Successful proposals are retained by the panel members for use in monitoring the research. Following the selection meeting, TCRP staff notifies the selected agency. After the National Academies’ Office of Contracts and Grants completes a financial investiga- tion, a contract between the National Academies and the agency is executed, and the research commences. The policy of TCRP is to provide a debriefing to unsuccessful proposers upon request. The debriefing is intended to indicate to the proposers the strengths and weaknesses of their proposal based on the panel review. The National Academies’ research contract is normally one of the following types: • Cost reimbursement, • Cost reimbursement plus fixed fee, or • Fixed price. The National Academies decides, in agreement with the agency, which type of con- tract will be executed in each case. The research agency’s proposal is made a part of the contract with the National Academies. Thus, in addition to the specific objectives outlined in the contract, the research agency’s cost estimates are also recognized as being part of the agreement. However, the principal investigator does have flexibility in conducting the research, if it is consistent with the general scheme of the proposal. MONITORING RESEARCH IN PROGRESS Once research begins, TCRP staff monitors the administrative and technical progress of the project in accordance with the approved proposal and amplified work plan to ensure conformance with contractual obligations. The project panel maintains con- trol over the research process during execution of the study. Its first involvement is the approval of the researcher’s amplified work plan. This amplified plan is due 15 days after the contract start date. It provides a detailed expansion of the research plan and furnishes a complete description of the activities to be pursued in conducting the research. The purpose of the amplified plan is to assist the staff in its monitoring activi- ties and to provide further technical panel guidance to the researcher. TCRP staff reviews quarterly progress reports and monthly progress schedules and maintains contact with the principal investigators. TCRP project managers visit their assigned research agencies throughout the contract period and discuss with each prin-

11 cipal investigator the project’s status to learn whether the research is being pursued in accordance with the approved research plan. Finally, the project manager and the corresponding project panel evaluate the completed research to determine the degree of technical compliance with the contract. PROMOTING DISSEMINATION AND APPLICATION OF RESEARCH RESULTS In an applied research program such as TCRP, research results must not only be accu- rate but also usable. In “Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals,” available at onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/crp/docs/ ProposalPrep.pdf, proposers are encouraged to include a section in their proposals on the applicability of their research results to tran- sit practices. This section should clearly describe how the anticipated research results can be used to improve transit practices and should indicate the expected audience. This measure is taken to ensure that final research reports are presented in language that is understandable to transit managers, professionals, and administrators. Thus, research agencies for TCRP are required to report their results in a form that succinctly summarizes the findings for the busy administrator and likewise informs the transit practitioner of the application of the findings. The program specifies style and organization of all research reports so that maximum use by the practitioner may be obtained. In addition to publication, measures are taken to ensure that useful research results are made immediately available to the appropriate personnel. After publication, products are distributed through TRB’s distribution system. Announce- ments of their availability are included in TRB’s weekly electronic newsletter, which is distributed to more than 70,000 individuals. All TCRP publications are available on the Internet in PDF (portable document format) for immediate and free electronic access. Further dissemination of the research reports and support products is carried out accord- ing to the Dissemination Plan developed by APTA under TCRP Project J-1, “Dissemina- tion and Implementation of TCRP Research Findings.” The purpose of Project J-1 is to ensure that TCRP products reach the appropriate transit industry audience. For each product, APTA identifies a target audience and ensures that these individuals receive the material. APTA staff also promotes the program and disseminates products at 10 major conferences each year, including the Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) Annual Meeting, the Conference of Minority Transportation Officials (COMTO) Annual Meeting, and the TRB Annual Meeting. Announcements of products are routinely published in Passenger Transport. APTA includes sessions on research in its conferences, and researchers are encouraged to present findings at the APTA, TRB, CTAA, and other conferences. To aid in the dissemination of findings, APTA’s web- site (www.apta.com) includes a section listing and describing TCRP research products (click on the “Research Technical Resources” tab and scroll down the menu to “TCRP.”) Under TCRP Project J-1, a TCRP Ambassador Program has been established with the assistance of COMTO to create a network of geographically distributed transit profes- sionals who are briefed on TCRP products and who represent TCRP at transit agencies and at national, state, and regional conferences. Participants in the TCRP Ambassador Program are identified through a nomination process and are selected by a designated

12 panel. Each TCRP ambassador serves a 2-year term. In any given year, there are typi- cally 16 ambassadors available to represent TCRP at various functions. Requests for nominations are issued to the transit industry on a periodic basis. TCRP publications, starting with Report 166, Synthesis 111, Legal Research Digest 45, and Research Results Digest 109, are only published electronically as PDFs. However, TRB provides a “print-on-demand” option for a fee to cover expenses for those prefer- ring a hard copy. CURRENT STATUS In the period from August 1992 (when the first TCRP grant was received) through December 2019, approximately 803 study activities have been authorized and over 699 publications have been issued. Tables 5 through 13 provide a summary of the status of each project authorized. In addition, Table 4 lists all TCRP publications issued to date. ACCOMPLISHMENTS IN 2019 In June 2019, the second annual TCRP Day was held to enhance awareness of the program and the invaluable research it provides to the public transportation industry. More than 35 transit organizations hosted events, full details of which are available at https://www.apta.com/research-technical-resources/tcrp/tcrp-day/. Publications In FY 2019, TCRP produced 11 publications, including 5 research reports and 6 syntheses, bringing the total to more than 699 publications since the inception of the program. These publications are all available at http://www.trb.org/ Publications/PubsTCRPPublications.aspx. The following TCRP publications of particular interest were completed during the year. Maintenance TCRP Research Report 206: Guidance for Calculating the Return on Investment in Transit State of Good Repair provides guidance for calculating the return on investment for a specific investment or a program of investments to achieve and maintain transit assets in a state of good repair (SGR). All transit agencies, large or small, regardless of region of the country or modes operated, face challenges in maintaining their physical assets in good repair, and many are in a situation where the funds available for rehabilitating and replacing existing capital assets are insufficient for achieving SGR. A key product of the research is a spreadsheet tool intended for transit agency use. The tool is available for download on the TRB website and Guidance for Calculating the Return on Investment in Transit State of Good Repair TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 206 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration

13 can be found by searching for “TCRP Research Report 206.” This tool is not a detailed life-cycle cost calculator to be used in developing project alternatives but rather a high- level tool useful for communicating the benefits of SGR investment and comparing investments in improving or maintaining SGR to other types of transit investments. Operations TCRP Synthesis 140: Comprehensive Bus Network Redesigns provides an overview of the current state of practice of bus network redesigns. The study examines practices among transit agencies of different sizes, geographical locations, and modes. The research presents the reality and complexity of conducting bus network redesigns. Case examples of five transit systems provide in-depth analysis of the processes, considerations, challenges, lessons learned, and keys to success. This synthesis will help transit agencies who are considering redesigning their bus networks to determine whether a redesign is feasible and to make better decisions. Service Configuration TCRP Research Report 203: Dialysis Transportation: The Intersection of Transportation and Healthcare documents the issues and concerns related to transportation for kidney dialysis, a treatment that is saving the lives of approximately half a million Americans annually whose kidneys have failed. These issues and concerns are a result of the intersection of transportation and healthcare—two industries that have their respective roles and requirements in the process. The study presents (1) end stage renal disease and its prevalence and treatment options in the United States; (2) current and projected demand and costs associated with transportation for kidney dialysis in the United States; (3) healthcare initiatives that aim to reduce end stage renal disease, improve access to healthcare, and increase the accountability of healthcare providers; and (4) effective practices and new strategies implemented by public transportation agencies for funding and providing transportation for kidney dialysis. The research report includes a “forecasting tool” for communities to estimate the (1) current and projected demand for transportation to kidney dialysis facilities, (2) current and projected costs for this transportation, and (3) potential decreases in the demand for transportation if home dialysis increases. The research report also includes two “info briefs” that capture the key findings of the research. The “forecasting tool” and the “info briefs” are available on the TRB website and can be found by searching for “TCRP Research Report 203.” TCRP SYNTHESIS 140 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration A Synthesis of Transit Practice Comprehensive Bus Network Redesigns Dialysis Transportation: The Intersection of Transportation and Healthcare TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 203 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration

14 Policy and Planning TCRP Research Report 205: Social and Economic Sustainability Performance Measures for Public Transportation: Final Guidance Document is designed as a practical tool to help transit agencies develop and use social and economic sustainability performance measures to plan, evaluate, and report on social and economic sustainability. This guidance document (1) presents key findings from the literature review and transit agency interviews; (2) identifies 57 social and economic sustainability performance measures and 56 transit service measures; and (3) provides transit agencies with guidance on how to set goals, deter- mine objectives, establish measures, implement and evaluate the measures, and report progress on social and economic sustainability. The companion Excel workbook can be used by transit agencies to develop their own initial list of performance measures. TCRP Research Report 207: Fast-Tracked: A Tactical Transit Study presents the current state of the practice with regard to what are called Tactical Transit projects, specifically for surface transit (bus and streetcar). These are both physical and operational strategies that improve the delivery of surface transit projects using this methodology. Tactical Transit projects, operational and physical Quick-Build projects that uniquely focus on transit, have evolved as a way for municipal governments to improve the way they respond to rider needs and increased demand for service. These projects use lower cost, temporary materials, and short-term tactics as a way of pilot testing or expediting projects while longer term planning takes place. The audience for this report includes transit agencies, local governments, and citizens seeking ways to improve existing transit services and add new ones. Many people and communities are using this methodology not only to accelerate transit projects but also to support safer and more efficient use of streets. Workforce Development TCRP Synthesis 143: Managing the Transit Scheduling Workforce provides an overview of the practices transit agencies employ to manage their transit scheduling workforce. The study compares the state of practice in transit agencies of different sizes, geographical locations, and modes and examines how these agencies are recruiting, training, developing, and retaining schedulers. In cases where transit agencies use third parties to create schedules, this study shows how the agencies are managing these third parties. Case examples of five transit systems are presented, which provide Social and Economic Sustainability Performance Measures for Public Transportation: Final Guidance Document TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 205 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration Fast-Tracked: A Tactical Transit Study TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 207 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration

15 in-depth analysis of various performance management strategies. Transit schedules provide the blueprint for fixed-route transit—they affect operating and capital costs, safety, customer satisfaction, and operator well- being and health. Although scheduling has moved from a largely paper-based practice to one that now uses scheduling software and data collected from automated systems, transit scheduling is still a human process that is merely assisted by software and data. Knowledgeable people are needed to perform most scheduling tasks, supply direction, and provide quality control. The scheduling process is labor intensive, • The MBTA Builds a Safety-First Culture from the Ground Up • Coordinated Transportation Serves Veterans in Western Montana • Metra Invests in a Sustainable Workforce with Targeted Training, Capacity-Building • State of Good Repair Research Methods Support an MPO’s Quest to Improve Travel Demand Forecasting • Awareness is the Cornerstone of Safety at the St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission TCRP SYNTHESIS 143 TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM Sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration A Synthesis of Transit Practice detail driven, and ripe with opportunities for errors; to be done well, scheduling requires qualified and talented transit schedulers. This synthesis analyzes how transit agencies are evolving their practices to adapt to industry and technological changes and will provide transit agencies with new ideas and strategies to retain good schedulers. Webinars Communicating results is a necessary first step to facilitate the research-to- practice pipeline. Webinars offer a resource-efficient and interactive environment where attendees can hear directly from authors, ask clarifying questions, and receive feedback that might make a proposed solution more relevant to their particular environment. In addition to publication downloads from the National Academies Press website, webinar attendance is a key indicator of how many people are accessing TCRP products. Webinar attendance in 2019 was as follows: 656 people attended TCRP Research Report 203: Dialysis Transportation: The Intersection of Transportation and Healthcare, 303 people participated in TCRP Research Report 200: Contracting Commuter Rail Services, Volumes 1 and 2, 108 people attended TCRP Synthesis 131: College Student Transit Pass Programs, and 99 people attended TCRP Synthesis 127: Addressing Difficult Customer Situations. Impacts on Practice TRB’s recently developed and produced Impacts on Practice series is designed to provide examples of how public transportation industry practitioners are using TCRP research results to assist them in their work. TCRP also developed five “Research in Action” case studies to help demonstrate the effectiveness of TCRP research in practice. These are shown on pages 16 to 25. Managing the Transit Scheduling Workforce - i -

16 RESEARCH IN ACTION: A CASE STUDY Transit CHALLENGES Practical SOLUTIONS TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD The MBTA Builds a Safety-First Culture from the Ground Up The Challenge T HE MBTA IN MASSACHUSETTS is one of the largest and oldest legacy transit systems in the United States, carrying 1.3 million passengers daily on commuter rail, heavy rail, light rail, BRT and underground bus, ferry, and paratransit. It is no secret that a decade ago, the MBTA’s safety culture across all modes was considered “very poor,” says MBTA Chief Safety Officer Ronald Nickle, who was brought in to make transformational changes. The agency has had its work cut out for it, given the necessity of coordinating with 27 separate unions, reversing a punitive culture that discouraged incident reporting, and winning top management’s support for critical initiatives. Nickle and his team have spent the last several years implementing (and laying the groundwork to implement) many of the concepts and best practices discussed in TCRP Report 174: Improving Safety Culture in Public Transportation. The report offers a rich trove of research on the elements that make up and influence safety culture within public transportation and other industries. It identifies proven methods and tools for assessing safety culture, performance indicators and reporting practices, and guidelines for building a successful safety program. Support for Safety at All Levels ONE OF THE OVERARCHING conclusions of TCRP Report 174 is that it is not possible to establish an effective, sustainable safety culture within a transit organization without meaningful support from the top, middle, and bottom (front line) layers of the organization. The MBTA has made measurable progress with top and senior management, and continues to develop strategies for improving safety-related engagement with union employees. At the top of the organization, a standing committee that includes the safety team and the COO, Chief Engineer, Assistant General Manager of Capital Delivery and other senior executives meets regularly to review safety objectives.

17 Visit trb.org Support for Safety at All Levels (continued) The committee “provides us funding we did not have before,” Nickle says. For example, the senior leadership team and the MBTA Board approved a multimillion- dollar investment for a train protection system to be retrofitted on the aging Green Line light rail system. The Board has also funded, as a strategic priority, the agency’s efforts to adhere to OSHA workplace safety standards. And senior management has approved a written policy prohibiting retaliation against employees who bring safety concerns forward. As TCRP Report 174 notes, “Leaders must walk the walk, fight for adequate resources to be budgeted to support safety and safety culture programs, hire and promote managers and superisors who are similarly minded, and be willing to support innovative ideas…that will positively affect safety culture.” The MBTA has also made progress in building trust at the employee level, although the work is ongoing. The report drives home the point that “Even the most committed leadership will not succeed in improving safety culture without significant employee involvement and buy-in.” To this end, over the last six months, some of the MBTA’s unions have appointed chief safety officers for each facility within the system. This has opened the door to bottom-up reporting on issues needing attention. For example, the old Quincy Garage, originally built as a barn to move horse- drawn trolleys, needed extensive infrastructure upgrades to function as a modern bus barn. The union identified the needs and the MBTA’s safety team went to work organizing improvements. “That really started to build confidence,” Nickle says. Tracking Performance Indicators and Attitudes ANOTHER HIGHLY recommended practice documented in TCRP Report 174 is the need for performance indicator tracking. Specifically, “[M]onitoring trends in leading performance indicators as a function of time may provide insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a particular safety culture and may show the direction in which the state of safety culture is going.” The MBTA is tracking roughly 6,000 incidents and near-misses annually and assigns a hazard classification to each. One upshot is “an increase in the volume of safety concerns reported to us—better reporting and better data capture,” says Holly Durso, MBTA’s Director of Transportation Safety. The other side of the measurement coin is assessing employee knowledge and perceptions about safety. TCRP Report 174 recommends a combination of surveys and interviews as an effective approach. The MBTA is planning both an across-the- board perception survey and a smaller-scale set of interviews with a cross-section of employees. The MBTA is on track to implement and integrate many of the key best practices and recommendations embodied in TCRP Report 174, whereby “a positive safety culture [is] characterized by communications founded on mutual trust, by shared perceptions of the importance of safety, and by confidence in the efficacy measures.” • Visit trb.org/tcrp for reports, syntheses, legal research digests, web-only documents, and additional program information. #TCRP

18 Transit CHALLENGES Practical SOLUTIONS Coordinated Transportation Serves Veterans in Western Montana The Challenge I DENTIFYING FLEXIBLE, cost-effective ways to meet the transportation needs of America’s military veterans has been a source of debate, discussion, and federal legislation for well over a decade. In rural Western Montana, where aging Vietnam veterans comprise roughly 40 percent and the most recent Gulf War veterans nearly 12 percent of the two largest counties’ populations, meeting the wide-ranging mobility needs of geographically dispersed veterans and their families (including those living on Tribal lands), has been particularly challenging. Addressing the Coordination Challenge OVER THE LAST DECADE, the Montana Transit Association (MTA), led by Executive Director Lyn Hellegaard, has been developing and implementing solutions to improve mobility for veterans in Missoula and Ravalli counties. To this end, Hellegaard and the MTA are tapping into the practical information contained in TCRP Report 164: Community Tools to Improve Transportation Options for Veterans, Military Service Members, and Their Families. For communities that want to improve and expand their local transportation resources, this report provides guidance, with an TCRP Report 164: Community Tools to Improve Transportation Options for Veterans, Military Service Members, and Their Families TCRP Report 164 finds that high levels of coordination—especially at the local level—increase the overall level of mobility services available to military veterans. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD RESEARCH IN ACTION: A CASE STUDY

19 Visit trb.org organized process to identify unmet and under-met transportation needs, as well options to better meet those needs. The MTA is tackling three crucial challenges addressed in the report: (1) coordination among service providers; (2) strategic leadership; and (3) data-informed decision making. With respect to coordination, TCRP Report 164 notes: “Time spent developing support, resources, and a framework for coordination will pay off in the long run, in terms of future growth and stability of the effort.” One approach, reflected in the report and adopted by the MTA, is the use of an Emergency Transportation Assistance voucher. If the federal Veterans Transportation Service (VTS) based in Helena can’t get a veteran to where he or she needs to go, but a local MTA provider member can, then that member transit provider can be reimbursed for providing that ride through the voucher program. This approach eliminates requiring the VA to directly approve each local transportation vendor. Today, the voucher program successfully serves more than veterans—including, for example, battered women, who obtain rides through the voucher- approved crime victim’s advocate in the county attorney’s office. On MTA’s “punch list,” says Hellegaard, is another coordination strategy recommended by TCRP Report 164—providing feeder service to existing VTS and Disabled Veterans of America (DAV) pick-up locations. For Montana veterans, strategically arranged bus feeder service could significantly shorten overnight commutes many veterans now endure when traveling from their rural county homes to Helena for morning medical appointments. Leadership is Key to Mobility Solutions A S TCRP REPORT 164 notes, “Like almost every other community effort, strong local leadership is essential for successful implementation of improved and coordinated community transportation.” Hellegaard adds that a well- coordinated mobility strategy requires “somebody passionate about this area of transportation, who will keep coming back to the table, despite frustrations.” The MTA puts this into practice by bringing many different stakeholders to the table, including the VTS’ mobility manager; managers at small rural transit systems; Tribal transit managers; county senior centers; volunteer DAV drivers; and others. Working together, these providers are able to deliver rides that take veterans where they really need to go, when they need to, whether it is to get to school, get a haircut, or shop for groceries. Data Guides Service DATA-INFORMED DECISION making is highlighted in TCRP Report 164 as a foundational component of a sound mobility strategy. As the report notes, “data can illuminate issues raised by partner organizations…help document the location and characteristics of need [and] help target resources to areas of greatest…need.” The MTA has put this into practice by acting on the “denial” reports it receives from dispatchers at all the transit operators serving Missoula and Ravalli counties. Specifically, when a transit operator denies service to a veteran requesting a ride to a particular destination, MTA uses that data to determine where service gaps need to be addressed. The upshot is that mobility service to two dialysis centers has been expanded to meet demand. Using state funds, Saturday service has been added to reach some of these clinics. This ensures that rural dialysis patients have transportation access to a clinic. • Visit trb.org/tcrp for reports, syntheses, legal research digests, web-only documents, and additional program information. #TCRP

20 RESEARCH IN ACTION: A CASE STUDY Transit CHALLENGES Practical SOLUTIONS TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD Metra Invests in a Sustainable Workforce with Targeted Training, Capacity-Building The Challenge O NE OF THE NATION’S largest rail transit systems, Metra, oversees all commuter rail operations in the 3,700-square-mile northeastern Illinois region. The system comprises 11 separate lines radiating out from Chicago’s Loop, and serves more than 100 communities at 241 rail stations. Implementing effective, in- depth employee training programs is needed and challenging for a system of this size. In recent years, Metra has absorbed a wave of retirements among skilled older workers. These retirements particularly affect Metra’s mechanical and engineering divisions, which include roughly 1,200 workers (electricians, car-men, sheet metal workers, machinists, track workers, and others). Localized Training Delivery C AROL TAYLOR, Metra’s Director of Operations Training for the mechanical and engineering divisions, participated on the project oversight panel that helped shape the scope and content of TCRP Report 162: Building a Sustainable Workforce in the Public Transportation Industry—A Systems Approach. The report serves as a guidebook that addresses contemporary issues in workforce development, retention, attraction, and public transportation image management, while offering practical tools on a variety of workforce issues. Taylor’s exposure to research on other transit agencies’ efforts to tailor effective strategies into workforce practices—a focal point of the report—informed her own thinking about Metra’s workforce training challenges. The report makes a strong case for the value of integrating workforce training and development, and capacity building, as lynchpins in workforce retention. Metra’s “learning center” training reflects TCRP Report 162’s recommendations on • improving recruitment • retention • training and development, and • professional capacity-building practices

21 Visit trb.org Localized Training Delivery (continued) Taylor recognized from her TCRP-related research and prior experience in training development that bringing training directly to employees was critical to success. Taylor devised a pilot program in 2014, whereby one single district would focus on a single training issue. “We bring [the training] to them, in their environment, using their equipment, using their tools.” This approach offered greater flexibility for managers and minimized downtime for employees. For the initial pilot, the Metra Electric District, which covers a route with over 20 stops across Chicago, was chosen. This district was selected because operations employees there faced challenges in efficiently troubleshooting train car door issues, especially when responding to delays. Taylor and district management staff identified a half-dozen specific door issues that could be mitigated or repaired, given effective training. Four rail cars, tagged as Learning Centers, were set up, with each one used to address a topic related to door troubleshooting. In Learning Center 1, car-men, machinists and electricians learned the theory of operation normal door operation and troubleshooting/repair safety practices). In Learning Centers 2 and 3, car-men and electricians (respectively) participated in door demonstrations and determined solutions to a bank of troubleshooting scenarios. In Learning Center 4, employees were challenged to demonstrate their ability to quickly and correctly resolve two door problems, under a time constraint. Over a five-day period, more than 34 car-men, machinists, and electricians went through the pilot training. Other learning events have covered event recorders, HVAC systems, air brakes, and more. These learning events are now held annually at different sites each year. In 2018, for example, the Rock Island District initiated Metra’s first Positive Train Control (PTC) Revenue Service Demonstration, devoted to PTC topics for electricians, supervisors, and foremen. Between 2014 and 2018, 370 employees participated in mechnical learning events. This intensive approach to effective, localized training is in line with the core findings in TCRP Report 162, which notes that one of the key building blocks to developing a sustainable transit workforce involves teaching “the knowledge and skills required to effectively perform a specific job while orienting employees and reinforcing on an ongoing basis the mission, vision, goals, and culture of the public transportation organization.” TCRP Report 162 also advocates for the importance of post-training knowledge and skill testing. To that end, Taylor ensures that detailed learner feedback and evaluation is obtained for each training. In particular, she says, “We want to know what their confidence level is in performing specific tasks.” Conversations with district managers are ongoing, so that Taylor is continuously identifying new topics where site-specific training is needed to improve on- the-job competence, especially among the newer employees and apprentices coming up to speed. • Visit trb.org/tcrp for reports, syntheses, legal research digests, web-only documents, and additional program information. #TCRP

22 RESEARCH IN ACTION: A CASE STUDY Transit CHALLENGES Practical SOLUTIONS TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD State of Good Repair Research Methods Support an MPO’s Quest to Improve Travel Demand Forecasting The Challenge T HE METROPOLITAN Transportation Commission and Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) are the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) and council of governments (COG), respectively, for the San Francisco Bay Area, a region with nearly eight million residents. The Bay Area has over two dozen multimodal transit operators serving a diverse geographical area. One of the roles MTC/ABAG plays is providing technical assistance for transit asset management to transit operators. This entails creating a consistent asset inventory across all the transit operators and developing systems-wide performance management requirements. For its Plan Bay Area 2040 planning effort, MTC/ABAG developed an approach to measure and assess the performance of state-of-good- repair (SGR) investments and determine the cost-benefit ratios for improving SGR for rail, bus, and roadways. Importantly, the analysis needed to allow for consistent comparison across modes and between state of good repair, modernization, and expansion investments. Collecting and analyzing the necessary data in a way that would contribute to making informed projections of financial need associated with SGR—and doing that on a regional level—posed significant methodological challenges. “Without the research in TCRP Report 157, it would have been very difficult for us to do the analysis that we needed for our long-range planning.” – Dave Vautin, Principal Planner & Analyst, MTC/ABAG

23 Visit trb.org Asset Rating Leads to Deeper Analysis MTC/ABAG TURNED to the research and methodological guidance contained in TCRP Report 157: State of Good Repair: Prioritizing the Rehabilitation and Replacement of Existing Capital Assets and Evaluating the Implications for Transit. The report reviews literature related to evaluation of transit capital asset rehabilitation and replacement. It also provides a summary of sample transit asset management practices drawn from a set of agency interviews. In addition, the research describes the impacts of investments in asset rehabilitation and presents a framework for evaluating and prioritizing these investments. Dave Vautin, a principal planner with MTC/ABAG, used TCRP Report 157 as a starting point that is enabling the organization to break new ground by integrating asset management requirements with longer range travel demand forecasting. For example, the report reviews various applications of the Federal Transit Administration’s Transit Economics Requirements Model (TERM), which rates asset conditions on a scale from poor to excellent. The MPO has implemented a form of TERM Lite, which, as the report notes, allows for “an existing asset clarification system [to] be used as a guide for establishing or enhancing a capital asset inventory.” Using TERM Lite as a starting point across the multimodal systems under review, the MPO developed methodologies on its own. Taken together, “We were able to determine not just the age of an asset but the potential impact to service to transit customers,” Vautin says. To reach this point, Vautin and his team spent months developing formulas and methodologies. He says that TCRP Report 157 is valuable because, using TERM Lite, “it allowed us to forecast the future failure rates of transit assets.” Without the research and case study materials in this report, “it would have been very difficult for us to do this type of analysis.” TCRP Report 157 states that “The determination of exactly what costs are included in an analysis depends in large part upon what options the decision maker is weighing.” This is precisely the reason that MTC/ABAG pursued innovative methodologies that allowed them to score investments programmatically, so that it’s clear how asset condition affects actual operations. For instance, does the model show that certain rail cars or buses are going to break down occasionally, or all the time? Will a system-wide shutdown be likely, or a five-minute delay? The upshot of this work is that the MPO will have methodologies that allow them to do a better job of funding long-range planning, and to make the case for additional SGR investments. An ability to show the cost-effectiveness of maintaining and upgrading existing systems is baked into the analysis. Vautin says the MPO is one of the first in the country to integrate SGR data into a travel demand model. TCRP Report 157 has served as a foundation for this ongoing work, and new versions of the methodology are being tested on several systems.• Visit trb.org/tcrp for reports, syntheses, legal research digests, web-only documents, and additional program information. #TCRP

24 RESEARCH IN ACTION: A CASE STUDY Transit CHALLENGES Practical SOLUTIONS TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD Awareness is the Cornerstone of Safety at the St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission The Challenge IN THE SUMMER OF 2017 , the St. Cloud Metropolitan Transit Commission, operating as Metro Bus, was ready to re-vamp its approach to safety training. Metro Bus operates 17 routes serving about two million riders annually in St. Cloud, including St. Cloud State, as well as the neighboring communities of Sartell, Sauk Rapids, and Waite Park. At that time, Training and Safety Manager Scott Stark wanted to “figure out how to change things” in order to reduce accidents and create a better safety culture, overall. The challenge lay in deciding how to change the current safety training program to get the outcomes Metro Bus was looking for—not just a reduction in incidents, but also a sustainable change in operators’ behaviors. The agency found helpful guidance in TCRP Report 66: Effective Practices to Reduce Bus Accidents. The report analyzes practices in transit agencies across the country that are used to prevent accidents and promote safe driving in three categories— human resources, management, and operations. The report’s research culminated in a directory of effective practices used to prevent bus accidents. In particular, Stark was struck by TCRP Report 66’s summary of the Duluth Transit Authority’s safety practices. Duluth approximates Metro Bus in size and is relatively nearby, operating in an environment that handles a great deal of cold and potentially hazardous weather. The report highlighted three things in particular that Metro Bus wanted to emulate, based on Duluth’s experience. The first was TCRP Report 66: Effective Practices to Reduce Bus Accidents TCRP Report 66 highlights components of a system safety program: • full commitment and support of top management to system safety • inclusion of all departments in the process • designation of one individual as the responsible safety authority • identification and definition of the safety roles and responsibilities of all departments and key individuals • a proactive safety program that identifies and resolves hazards prior to their causing accidents.

25 Visit trb.org The Challenge (continued) acknowledging that, as the report states, “safety practice permeates each department, including the recruiting and training of new employees, maintenance, training and retraining of bus operators,” and more. Second was the importance of “recruiting the proper individual to fill the position of bus operator.” And third was providing retraining for operators having problems or who had been away from the job for an extended period of time. Creating a New Safety Mindset WORKING with the agency’s Human Resources Department, Metro Bus set out to create a safety mindset that begins when a potential operator first comes in for a job interview. TCRP Report 66 emphasizes that the personal interview is an integral part of the screening process for the selection of suitable bus driver candidates. For Metro Bus, driver safety training now centers on the operator’s own outlook, awareness, and capacity to recognize how to operate a bus in a safe manner at all times. This mindset needs to be adopted by operators hired with widely different experiences, ranging from those who had no commercial driving experience to those with 20 years or more as CDL professionals. The agency’s goal is to hire the best candidates capable of understanding that safety is the agency’s top priority, and that they are a customer- service-oriented organization. Stark notes that large-vehicle experience is a plus, but if a candidate is willing, they can coach him or her to success. “We needed to get the operators to understand that they’re professionals and they need to be aware of what’s going on around them,” Stark says. “This really is more than just driving a bus.” Currently, Metro Bus trains between 18 and 25 operators a year. The five-week training courses maintain an instructor- trainee ratio of 1:4, on average. Overall, the training is meant to meet the needs of the newest operator-employees and those who have been on the job for years. To that end, refresher training courses take place twice a year. All of these efforts have paid off. Incident rates are down year over year between 2016 and 2018. Operator retention over the same period has risen by 4 percent across 65 new hires. Metro Bus attributes this, in part, to operators feeling confident and well trained. And although liability claims are up as well, they are up for the right reason. Operators are now reporting major and minor incidents with greater consistency, especially involving collisions with fixed objects and non-collisions. The data offer proof that operators “are taking this information to heart, and they’re making some changes,” Stark says.• Visit trb.org/tcrp for reports, syntheses, legal research digests, web-only documents, and additional program information. #TCRP For the latest research about public transportation safety, visit trb.org/tcrp and download Report 174 - Improving Safety Culture in Public Transportation.

26 FY 2020 PROGRAM In October 2019, the TOPS Commission allocated funds for fiscal year 2020. Table 14 lists the new projects, continuations of existing projects, and special projects that were selected, contingent on available funding. POLICIES ON BIAS AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST TOPS Commission In the administration of TCRP, it is essential to maximize both the substance and the appearance of fairness in the selection and management of contractors while simul- taneously ensuring the quality of and expanding the number of potential researchers as much as possible. It is in the interest of TCRP to use the expertise of the best-qualified individuals and organizations available to conduct research while avoiding actual or apparent conflicts of interest. However, conflicts may arise or appear to arise if members of the TOPS Commission or the organizations with which they are affiliated submit proposals on projects. To prevent such problems in the administration of TCRP, members of the TOPS Com- mission are not permitted to serve concurrently as principal investigators on any TCRP projects. Additionally, the following rules will apply to all members of the TOPS Com- mission for the duration of their terms of appointment: • A TOPS Commission member is not permitted to be involved in the selection pro- cess for TCRP contractors in which the individual member or an affiliated organiza- tion is being considered. • No involvement by a TOPS Commission member is permitted in TRB’s adminis- tration of a contract in which the individual member or an affiliated organization is involved. • No involvement by a TOPS Commission member is permitted in setting or modifying administrative policies that would directly or materially affect either the administra- tion of existing contracts with the individual TOPS member or affiliated organization or the ability of the member or affiliated organization to submit proposals. Because of the special position of the TOPS Commission Chair, the following addi- tional rules also will apply during the Chair’s term: • Neither the TOPS Commission nor the immediate administrative unit of which the Chair is a part may propose on any TCRP projects. • The Chair may not be involved in the preparation of a proposal for a TCRP project. • The Chair may not work on a TCRP project as a member of the research team or as a consultant to the team.

27 When a newly appointed Chair of the TOPS Commission or other member of the Com- mission has existing activities or commitments covered in the foregoing lists of rules on a TCRP project at the time of appointment, those circumstances will be disclosed without delay to the Executive Commission of TOPS, and recommendations will be made by the Executive Commission on a case-by-case basis. All issues arising out of the need to interpret these rules will be resolved by the Executive Commission, with the affected members standing aside as appropriate. TCRP Project Panels TRB, as a unit of the National Academies, accords special importance to the policies and procedures established by the institution for ensuring the integrity of the research reports and, hence, public confidence in them. Extensive efforts are made to ensure the soundness of research reports issued by the institution by selecting highly qualified members. Yet, if a research report is to be not only sound but also effective, as mea- sured by its acceptance in quarters in which it should be influential, the research report must be and must be perceived to be (1) free of any significant conflict of interest, (2) not compromised by bias, and (3) untainted by allegations of scientific misconduct. To address questions of potential bias and conflict of interest for the protection of both the individual involved and the institution, individuals participating in studies and other activities are asked to complete a Potential Sources of Bias and Conflict of Interest form to be submitted to and reviewed by the institution. In addition, project panels are asked to discuss the general questions of bias and conflict of interest and the relevant circumstances of their individual members at each panel meeting. The question of potential sources of bias ordinarily relates to views stated or positions taken that are largely intellectually motivated or that arise from the close identification or association of an individual with a particular point of view or the positions or perspec- tives of a particular group. Such potential sources of bias are not necessarily disqualify- ing for purposes of panel service. Indeed, it often is necessary, in order to ensure that a panel is fully competent, to appoint members in such a way as to represent a balance of potentially biasing backgrounds or professional or organizational perspectives. It is also essential that the work of panels not be compromised by a significant conflict of interest or, in some circumstances, the significant appearance of conflict of interest on the part of any member of a panel or anyone associated with the work of a panel (e.g., consultants, staff). For this purpose, the term “conflict of interest” means any financial or other interest that conflicts with the service of an individual because it (1) could impair the individual’s objectivity or (2) could create an unfair competitive advantage for any person or organization. The existence of a significant conflict of interest ordinarily disqualifies an individual from service.

28 SUMMARY TCRP focuses on issues significant to the public transportation industry, emphasiz- ing the development of near-term research solutions to a variety of transit problems involving facilities, service concepts, operations, policy, planning, human resources, maintenance, and administrative practices. TCRP processes ensure maximum exposure of the research efforts while they are in progress in the hope that research results will find their way more quickly into prac- tice in the form of policies, procedures, and specifications by the public transportation industry.