Transit Cooperative Research Program
Transit Cooperative Research Program TCRP Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 Ph: 202/334- 3224 Fax: 202/334 -2006 TCRP Oversight and Project Selection Committee CHAIR Sherry Little Spartan Solutions, LLC MEMBERS Michael Allegra Utah Transit Authority Grace Crunican SF Bay Area Rapid Transit District Ian Jarvis South Coast British Columbia Transportation Authority Ronald Kilcoyne Lane Transit District Ralph Larison HERZOG John Lewis, Jr. LYNX—Central Florida RTA Kris Lyons Lane Transit District Jonathan McDonald Atkins North America Therese McMillan Federal Transit Administration E. Susan Meyer Spokane Transit Authority Bradford Miller Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority Gary Thomas Dallas Area Rapid Transit Matthew O. Tucker North County Transit District Denise Tyler Delaware Transit Corporation Phillip Washington Denver Regional Transit District Patricia Weaver University of Kansas EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Michael P. Melaniphy APTA Robert E. Skinner, Jr. TRB Frederick G. “Bud” Wright AASHTO Gregory G. Nadeau FHWA TDC EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Louis Sanders APTA SECRETARY Christopher W. Jenks TRB December 16, 2014 TO: DISTRIBUTION FROM: Christopher W. Jenks Director, Cooperative Research Programs SUBJECT: Project Panel Nominations for the FY 2015 Transit Cooperative Research Program Immediate Action Requested The purpose of this memorandum is to solicit nominations to serve on project oversight panels for FY 2015 Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) research projects. The TCRP is an applied research program that provides solutions to practical problems faced by transit operators. The primary participants in the TCRP are an independent governing board organized by the Transit Development Corporation and designated the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee; the Transportation Research Board (TRB) as program manager and secretariat for the TOPS Committee; the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) as a vital link to the transit community; and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) as program sponsor. The TOPS Committee met on October 24, 2014, and approved new research projects for Fiscal Year 2015. Descriptions of the new research projects are attached. The purpose of this memorandum is to solicit your nominations for new project panels. We are asking you to nominate individuals with expertise directly relevant to the research proposed, and we would particularly welcome your help in identifying women and minority candidates. Your nominations would be appreciated as soon as possible, but no later than January 26, 2015, so that we may move the program forward in a timely manner. We will begin the panel formation process shortly thereafter. Nominations received after January 26th will not be guaranteed full consideration in the panel formation process. To ensure proper consideration of your panel nominations, we need information on each nominee's affiliation, title, address, approximate age, and, most importantly, professional qualifications related to the particular project. Contacts to determine an individual's interest in serving will be made from this office after we have matched available expertise with that required by the nature of the project. A panel nomination form is attached for your use if a resume is not available. We also encourage submittals via e-mail, which can be sent to [email protected]. The TCRP is sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration; research projects are selected by the Transit Development Corporation, and the Program is managed by the Transportation Research Board. Panels for the new research projects are scheduled to meet during March/April 2015. Panel members are prohibited from submitting or participating in preparation of proposals on projects under their jurisdiction. They serve on the panels without compensation, but are reimbursed for travel and subsistence expenses. Travel insurance is provided at no cost to the members. In many cases, only two meetings are held in the life of a project, and these normally occur in Washington, D.C. The first meeting is to develop a project statement that is used to solicit proposals; the second meeting is to select a research organization from among those submitting proposals. Other meetings may be dictated by project circumstances; however, they are few and usually at least a year apart. Membership for each panel will number approximately eight. Panels operate under the guidance of a permanent chair, and there is liaison representation from the FTA, APTA, and TRB; the TCRP staff serves as the secretariat. We are grateful for your ongoing support of the TCRP in providing nominees. Typically, nominees for panels in the Cooperative Research Programs outnumber the available positions by about four to one. As a result, we have been able to establish panels truly outstanding in their ability to play a fundamental role in the accomplishment of successful research. Attachments: New FY 2015 Research Project Descriptions TCRP Panel Nomination Form DISTRIBUTION: Chair and Members, TCRP Oversight and Project Selection Committee; Executive Director, TDC; Associate Administrator for Budget and Policy, FTA; Associate Administrator for Research, Demonstration, and Innovation, FTA; Director, Office of Research Management, FTA; Liaison Representatives, FTA; APTA Committees; Directors, U.S. DOT University Transportation Centers; Chair and Members, AASHTO Standing Committee on Public Transportation; Board of Directors and State Delegates, Community Transportation Assoc. of America; Executive Secretary, Women's Transportation Seminar; Representatives, Historically Black Colleges; Executive Director, Conference of Minority Transportation Officials; Executive Director, National Transportation Consortium of Minority Colleges & Universities; Executive Director, National Association of Black Engineers; Executive Director, Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers; Executive Director, National Forum for Black Public Administrators; Executive Director, National Association of Minority Contractors; CEO and President, National Urban League; President, National Council of Negro Women; Chair and Members, TRB Executive Committee; Chair, TRB Group Councils and Sections; Chair, TRB Committees (Transit); TRB State Representatives; TRB University Representatives; TRB Transit Representatives; TRB Sustaining Associates; Chair, Subcommittee on NRC Oversight; TRB Staff (Selected) Transit Cooperative Research Program Panel Nomination Form Use this form only when a resume is not submitted. The resume is preferred. Nomination for TCRP Project Number: NOMINEE: First Middle Last Employer: Current Job Title: Address: Phone #: Years at Current Position: Fax #: Email: Years of Experience Relevant to this TCRP Project: Education: Name of Institution Degree Professional Licenses: Fields of Special Knowledge or Interest (e.g., operations, planning, vehicle engineering): Comments: Year TCRP Panel Nomination Form Optional Information on Nominee Please check one: Male Female Date of Birth: Ethnicity (please check one): (A) American Indian or Alaskan Native; origin in any of the original peoples of North America. (B) Black; origin in any of the black racial groups. (H) Hispanic, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Central or South American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. (P) Asian or Pacific Islander; origin in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Pacific Islands. Includes China, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands, Samoa, and the Indian subcontinent. (W) White; origin in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East. (2) Two or more races (not Hispanic or Latino); all persons who identify with more than one of the above five races Name of Nominator: Address: Please return to: Christopher W. Jenks, Director Cooperative Research Programs Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, D.C. 20001 or FAX 202/334-2006 Transit Cooperative Research Program Projects in the Fiscal Year 2015 Program 1 Transit Cooperative Research Program Projects in the Fiscal Year 2015 Program Project No. Title Page A-42 A Guidebook on Improving Bus Transit Reliability ........................................... 3 D-18 Defining the Criteria for Requiring a Secondary Train Control System When Implementing Communications-Based Train Control (CBTC) ............................ 6 E-11 The Relationship Between Asset Conditions and Service Quality……………….. 8 F-22 Identifying Best Practices and Sharing Resources for Transit Technical Training………………………………………………………………………... 9 Projecting Workforce Replacement Needs for Benchmark Transit Occupations/Knowledge Management as Part of Transit Agency Strategic Workforce Development……………………………………………………….. 10 F-24 Frontline Workforce Training: Moving from Past Practice to Best Practice...... 13 G-15 Applicability of Public-Private Partnerships for Smaller-Scale Transit Projects………………………………………………………………………… 16 Understanding Changes in Demographics, Preferences and Markets for the Transit Industry……………………………………………………………….. . 18 Toolkit for a Sustainable Transit Agency………………………………………. 20 F-23 H-51 H-53 2 Summary of Approved Research Projects ■ Project A-42 A Guidebook on Improving Bus Transit Reliability Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Operations $250,000 Stephan Parker Bus service unreliability is a key quality-of-service issue for passengers and an important driver of bus operations costs for transit agencies. From the passenger point of view, unreliable service means that customers must allow extra time for their trip to make sure of arriving at their destination by a particular time—time that could have been used more productively in other ways. Although a typical rule of thumb is that passengers perceive wait time as being twice as onerous as in-vehicle time, recent research indicates that transit passengers perceive unexpected wait time as being 3 to 5 times as onerous as invehicle time. In contrast, automobile travelers value travel time unreliability (i.e., unexpected delay) at approximately the same level that they value travel time, suggesting that transit service is at a competitive disadvantage with the automobile with respect to unreliable travel times. From the transit agency point of view, travel time unreliability impacts a route’s cycle time and, ultimately, operating cost. In a best-case scenario, the reduced cycle time resulting from reduced travel time variability allows a bus to be removed from a route while maintaining the scheduled headway. Conversely, if reliability issues are not addressed, a transit agency eventually needs to add buses to a route (increasing costs) or decrease bus frequency (risking a vicious cycle of ridership decline and/or worsening unreliability). The Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual (TCQSM) lists the following factors as influencing reliability: traffic conditions and road construction, vehicle and maintenance quality, vehicle and staff availability, transit preferential treatments, schedule achievability, evenness of passenger demand, variations in bus operator experience, wheelchair lift and ramp usage, route length and the number of stops, and operations control strategies. Weather—particularly snow and extreme temperatures—also plays a role. These factors have been addressed individually by research to some degree—for example, operations control strategies, scheduling, bus operator experience, route length, and applications of Automatic Vehicle Location Technology—but no comprehensive research has yet been conducted that addresses all these factors in combination. Transit operators require guidance on measuring and valuing reliability from the passenger point of view; the effects of potential operational, technological, and physical measures to improve reliability in particular situations; and the potential benefits and costs of those measures. Accurately estimating the benefits of reliability-improvement measures is necessary for bus operators, both to gain the acceptance of roadway-owning agencies to implement certain treatments (e.g., bus stop relocation, traffic signal priority, queue jumps) and to compete for scarce transportation funds to implement improvements on a large scale (e.g., along an entire route or throughout a city). A guidebook on improving bus transit reliability would identify cost-effective techniques for improving bus reliability, thereby helping to improve ridership and provide more cost-efficient bus service. The objectives of this research are to (1) develop a toolbox of measures to identify, diagnose, and treat bus reliability issues; (2) quantify the benefits and costs of each measure on reliability; and (3) prepare a comprehensive guidebook for bus operators to use to improve their service reliability. 3 The proposed research could include the following potential tasks: Task 1—Literature Review. Critically review and summarize existing North American and international literature on the causes of unreliability; the impacts of unreliability on transit operations, costs, and ridership; methods of measuring reliability; service standards relating to reliability; and actions that transit operators and roadway managers have taken to improve bus reliability. Both Transport for London and the Association of Train Operating Companies have conducted work on the topic in the U.K. Task 2—Transit Agency Outreach. Identify and interview transit agencies that have undertaken steps to measure and improve travel time reliability. This outreach should endeavor to obtain unpublished before-and-after studies and/or performance monitoring reports that document reliability improvements and benefits and costs of the agency actions. A variety of bus-operating agencies should be contacted, ranging from large city urban systems to agencies providing low-frequency bus service in small cities and rural areas. Particularly effective programs could be included as case studies in the final guidebook. Task 3—Measuring Reliability. Evaluate existing performance measures used to measure bus reliability (e.g., on-time performance, travel time variation, headway variation, excess wait time, punctuality, value of travel time), including ease of data collection, typical applications, typical agency service standards, and compatibility with reliability measures used by other transportation modes (to allow apples-toapples comparisons of reliability across modes). Recommend performance measures for quantifying the impacts of actions or treatments on bus reliability. Task 4—Causes of Bus Travel Time Unreliability. Based on the results of Task 1 and 2, document the causes of bus unreliability, their relative magnitude, and potential operational, technological, and physical measures that can be used to treat unreliability. Develop a prioritized list of measures to test based on the documented or likely magnitudes of their impacts on reliability or perception of reliability, cost, ease of implementation, and similar factors. Task 5—Interim Report. Develop a detailed work plan for the Task 6 work, including identifying any transit agencies proposed to be used as partners in testing particular measures. Prepare an initial outline of the guidebook to be developed during Task 7. Compile the results of Tasks 1 through 4 in a draft interim report. Task 6—Test Impacts of Measures to Improve Bus Reliability. Conduct a series of before-and-after evaluations of each of the approved reliability-improvement measures. It is anticipated that this effort will include both field studies and simulation, as appropriate for the particular measure being evaluated, the availability of transit agencies willing to test particular measures, and the constraints of the project budget. Each evaluation should quantify the change in reliability (or perception of reliability) that occurred and describe the changes in before-and-after conditions. These evaluations should include studies relevant to daily bus operations, bus service planning and scheduling, and allocation of roadway right-of-way and traffic signal timing. Task 7—Guidebook. Prepare a guidebook written for transit agency staff across a variety of functions (e.g., planning, operations, supervision, management) that describes the causes of unreliability; recommends methods for measuring, diagnosing, and treating bus unreliability; quantifies the benefits and costs of reliability-improvement measures; and describes processes for successfully implementing projects to improve bus reliability. 4 In the current financial climate, where many transit agencies are facing difficult choices about cutting service, it is more important than ever to identify low-cost ways to improve reliability, which can result in increased ridership and reduced operating costs. By operating more efficient bus service, agencies can stretch scarce operating dollars. There is no single source of information agencies can turn to when seeking to improve reliability. This research would generate this guidance. Although some limited work has been done in this area, there is no single source of information agencies can turn to when seeking to improve reliability. Reliability is a significant customer satisfaction issue for passengers. Some agencies have voter-mandated reliability goals, while others report on-time performance to the public on a regular basis. Existing reference documents, such as the TCQSM, identify the importance of reliability to passengers, but acknowledge the lack of available techniques to quantify how reliability may improve given a particular action. 5 ■ Project D-18 Defining the Criteria for Requiring a Secondary Train Control System When Implementing Communications-Based Train Control (CBCT) Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Engineering of Fixed Facilities $200,000 Stephan Parker CBTC systems have been developed and deployed with the objective of not only providing for the highest levels of train protection but also to enable the maximum return on the investment into rail transit infrastructure through optimized line capacity and passenger throughput and reduced operating/ maintenance costs. One of the fundamental operational benefits of CBTC systems is that movement authority limits are no longer constrained by physical fixed-block boundaries but are established through train position reports that can provide for “virtual block” or “moving block” control philosophies. With today’s increasing demands on transit coupled with increases in customers, such control philosophies can allow trains to operate safely at shorter headways and permit system operations to recover more rapidly in the event of service delays; all of which can offer a more regular and improved passenger service which can translate into increased line capacity constrained only by the performance of the rolling stock and the limitations of the physical track alignment. These benefits can be achieved without requiring track circuits for train detection. CBTC systems are available from multiple suppliers and have been operating in revenue service for over 25 years with more than 100 installations world-wide. CBTC is not a single product, but rather a concept in train control and train management that can be implemented in many different forms across a range of rail transit modes. Deployment of CBTC technology within the United States (US) has been limited, however, due at least in part to a perception of higher costs associated with the implementation of this technology are problematic. This perception of higher costs is driven in part by a perception that CBTC systems required a secondary track circuit-based or axle counter-based “fall-back” system to detect and protect trains in the event of CBTC system failures. It is estimated such secondary systems can increase the cost of a CBTC system implementation by at least 30%. The objective of this research is to develop guidelines to enable a transit agency to establish to what extent track circuit or other secondary train detection/protection equipment would need to be retained or provided when implementing a CBTC system. In developing guidelines for the need for secondary train control systems with CBTC, the proposed research should include consideration of the following through an assessment of a representative range of in-service, in-progress and planned CBTC system implementations in North America, Europe and Asia, and through discussions with suppliers of service-proven CBTC systems: 1) Operational Requirement; for example: a. Is there a requirement to support “mixed-mode” operations, i.e., simultaneous operation within CBTC-equipped territory of passenger trains that are protected by the CBTC system and passenger trains that are not protected by the CBTC system (i.e., “unequipped” trains)? b. What Grade of Automation (per IEC definitions) is the CBTC system required to support? c. What level of System Availability is the CBTC required to achieve? 6 2) Rail Network Factors; for example: a. Could an “unequipped” train be inadvertently or intentionally routed into CBTC-equipped territory, for example from a maintenance yard or from an adjoining non CBTC-equipped line? b. Are CBTC-equipped trains regularly required to transition between non-equipped and CBTCequipped territory as an element of their scheduled route? 3) CBTC Failure Recovery Considerations 4) Work Train Considerations 5) Broken Rail Detection Considerations 6) Other Safety Considerations (e.g., hazards to track workers) 7) Overall Systems Availability Considerations 8) Maintenance Considerations 9) CBTC Technology Evolution Considerations 10) Capital Cost estimates associated with recommendations. Avoiding unnecessary use of secondary train control systems can reduced the cost of CBTC system implementations by an estimated 30%, which may encourage more widespread consideration of this technology with associated safety, operations, life-cycle cost benefits to rail transit operations, and reduced capital cost. 7 ■ Project E-11 The Relationship Between Asset Conditions and Service Quality Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Maintenance $350,000 Dianne Schwager FTA reports to Congress on transit conditions and performance in a biannual report that provides relative condition ratings for major asset categories on a national level. Recent editions have also attempted to report the impact of these conditions on operating costs and vehicle reliability. This occurs in the context of discussions of the impact of different scenarios for investing in transit infrastructure. Reviews of this report consistently ask what the benefits of reinvestment in existing infrastructure (as opposed to expansion investments) are for those who consume transit services. The Transit Economic Requirements Model (TERM) used by FTA to project the impact of transit investment on transit system physical conditions (and capacity) directly estimates the physical condition of transit assets that would result from a given level of reinvestment in existing assets. This represents the first level of evaluating the return on this kind of investment. The second level would be to link these asset conditions to the resulting maintenance costs and failure rates. The highest level of investment evaluation would be to extrapolate from the second-level effects to determine what the impact on customer service would be. This research will consider what data, assumptions, and analysis would be needed to make it possible to estimate the impact of reinvestment on improved performance through lower maintenance costs and reduced failure rates, and then ultimately on the transit customer experience. The objective of this research is to develop a methodology for estimating the impact of different scenarios for reinvesting in transit assets on characteristics of the transit operations that matter to transit systems and their customers. The starting point would be the condition estimates, ideally estimates that are consistent with the outputs of TERM. Customer impact, system reliability, and maintenance cost metrics will be identified and data gaps for calculating these metrics will be defined. The research should develop a strategy for establishing quantitative relationships between asset condition estimates and operating characteristics that are of concern to transit systems and their customers. Metrics will be selected based on credible relationships with infrastructure conditions and data availability. Research to quantify these relationships will be proposed and a methodology to extend TERM to estimate impacts from deteriorated asset conditions will be proposed. 8 ■ Project F-22 Identifying Best Practices and Sharing Resources for Transit Technical Training Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Human Resources $300,000 Gwen Chisholm Smith Public transportation strives to achieve customer satisfaction by providing safe, efficient, accessible and reliable service. Technical training has played an important role in how public transportation agencies accomplish this mission. The current economic climate has forced many larger transit agencies to reduce their technical training opportunities, while a significant number of small and medium-size agencies have limited access to technical training opportunities. The shortage of training comes at a time when the technical complexity of transit vehicles and infrastructure is at its greatest and increasing each year. Keeping these complex technologies operational requires skilled technicians. Further, transit faces historic technical workforce challenges arising from several causes: The loss of skilled “baby boomer” technical workers now retiring in large numbers; An increased demand for technical workers in other trades; The ability of the private sector to offer training and higher wages; The increasing maintenance requirements of an aging capital stock with a growing lack of state of good repair; A rapidly changing cycle of technology where new and increasingly complex equipment is introduced at a fast pace; and Rapidly increasing ridership–up 38 percent from 1995 to 2008, with projections for continuing increases in the future. Effective technical training programs exist for the operation and maintenance of transit vehicles and facilities infrastructure. However, there is a need to maximize the benefits of transit’s existing capacity by identifying and sharing the available technical training resources at little or no cost. Research is needed to identify the best way to provide access to these training resources. The objectives of this research are to: (1) document the best models of technical training programs serving U.S. and international transportation agencies, and related industries; (2) develop an electronic, sharable training resource catalog of available training materials; and (3) identify procedures for disseminating the training resources to the transit community at large. This research will be useful to transit managers and learning professionals. This research should be relevant to a cross-section of transit agencies. For the purpose of this research, technical training includes that for transit vehicle operators, vehicle maintenance technicians, and facilities and infrastructure technicians. 9 ■ Project F-23 Projecting Workforce Replacement Needs for Benchmark Transit Occupations/Knowledge Management as Part of Transit Agency Strategic Workforce Development Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Human Resources $300,000 Dianne Schwager Transit leaders agree that the industry is experiencing a growing number of challenges related to organizational development and human resources management. Pressure to make agencies more efficient and more accountable, shrinking revenues, and shifting population demographics are some of today’s biggest external drivers for organizational change. At the same time, the retirement of the “baby boomer” generation has been cited as one of the greatest challenges facing transit organizations internally. The retirement issue has been downplayed in recent years due to the recession and the delay of many departures; however, the fact remains that a bubble of retirement-eligible employees is growing and a significant number of senior-level employees will be exiting agencies over the next 5-10 years. Those eligible to retire, in many cases, are the individuals who possess specialized knowledge and unique experiences that are critical for efficient operation of the organization. As a result of these internal and external pressures, transit agencies are increasingly looking to strategic workforce development practices borrowed from other transportation modes, different industries, and the private sector for best practices. As the transit workforce evolves demographically and organizations strive to become more efficient, agencies are at a critical risk of experiencing knowledge loss at a time when they most need swift access to current and historical knowledge. Thus, moving forward, it will be essential for the transit industry to proactively invest in knowledge management (KM) and related workforce development efforts. KM emerged in the late 1980s and early 1990s as a response to the realization that valuable organizational knowledge, the collective knowledge that makes a company unique, was at risk and that the loss could compromise a company’s ability to compete or operate in an increasingly-complex environment. KM is the identification, collection, organization and dissemination of critical knowledge within an organization. The goal is to identify what knowledge is needed now and in the future, where that knowledge is located (e.g., people, systems, artifacts, culture, standard operating procedures), who needs it, and how to best disseminate or transfer it. Knowledge management systems can range from simple electronic library and file systems, to search engines and query tools, to decision-making tools. One of the key aspects of the success of any knowledge management system is the ability of a novice to use the system successfully and add to it in an efficient and effective manner. Organizations facing turnover of employees due to retirements, new demands, budget constraints, and other unforeseen circumstances are at risk for large amounts of critical knowledge walking out the door unless steps are taken to preserve it within the organization. Organizational support of knowledge transfer mechanisms that address both the tacit (unwritten experience) and explicit (codified) knowledge is vital to avoid this loss and to quickly on-board new employees. Tacit knowledge originates with the individual and it is necessary for that knowledge to transfer from person to person to be useful to the organization. Once the knowledge is codified and made explicit, it no longer belongs solely to the individual but rather the organization owns it and can make it available to all employees, which benefits the organization through increased efficiency and effectiveness. Industry-level research needed is to advance knowledge management practices across the transit agencies and to describe KM’s relationship to strategic workforce development. The objective of this research is to advance knowledge management practices across the transit industry and to describe KM’s relationship to strategic workforce development. The results will provide guidance 10 on knowledge management practices in many fields; context and resources for effective use of such practices by transit agencies; and the specific tactics likely to be effective in addressing the types of knowledge loss transit agencies experience. The proposed research may comprise five main phases. Phase 1: Literature Review to Understand Critical Knowledge Management Challenges/ Functions and Define Relationship to Strategic Workforce Development. The goal of the literature review would be to develop a deeper and broader understanding of the challenges related to knowledge management and workforce development in transit agencies as well as the practices currently being employed to address these issues. For example, the review would aim to uncover best-practices in: gaining employee support for KM systems, facilitating knowledge transfer and mapping, capturing fleeting institutional knowledge, dealing with the perceived cost of KM, and updating information within systems once it is captured. Results would also describe how to: create people-focused knowledge management systems, implement communities of practice, use job rotation, engage employees in knowledge transfer, and link knowledge management to succession planning efforts. Phase 2: Benchmarking Study to Gain Detailed Understanding of Workforce Challenges and Current Strategies. The objective of Phase 2 would be to build on the literature review results by collecting qualitative data. This would involve conducting focus groups with professionals who make knowledge management and workforce decisions both inside and outside of the transit industry. Through this process, more detailed information regarding the challenges facing agencies, current strategies and techniques, and practical tools that may be applied by transit agencies would be identified. Specifically, this phase would define the principles and strategies used by organizations to identify (e.g., knowledge audits, etc.), collect (e.g., interviews, videos, communities of practice, etc.), organize (e.g., mapping and storing strategies, etc.), preserve (e.g., technology systems, etc.), disseminate (e.g., communications, etc.), and apply critical knowledge. Phase 3: Market Analysis to Identify KM Technology Options Available. The market analysis would be used to identify categories of KM technology options available to small, medium, and large transit agencies. The analysis would include a review of off-the-shelf products as well as solutions that were developed in-house. Phase 4: Case Study Analysis of Successful Practices. To fully understand the intricacies of implementing and managing the practices, in-depth cases studies would be conducted of the best-practices identified in Phases 1 through 3. The case studies would be organized into six broad topic areas: 1. Organizational and Interviewee Background Information, 2. Practice Background, 3. Practice Maintenance, 4. Evaluation of Practice, 5. Transferability to other Agencies, and 6. Conclusions. Phase 5: Guidebook of Effective Strategies. Based on the research described above, a guidebook of effective workforce strategies would be created. The guide would summarize all research conducted, described the methodology employed in all project tasks, provided project results, and offer effective strategies for building a capable transportation workforce through the use of KM practices. The field of KM is rapidly attracting attention due to its importance in the workforce development lifecycle of any organization. However, organizations are sometimes underfunded or so big and complex that it is difficult to know how to assess if a new KM solution is needed, where to begin, and how to align KM processes to specific human capital objectives. This research will offer strategic guidance to agencies in implementing KM efforts and better managing their institutional knowledge as well as their workforce development initiatives. In addition to research described above, as part of the Administration’s Ladders of Opportunity initiative, FTA has developed a robust workforce development program, which seeks to train new recruits and 11 improve the skills of current transit workers, particularly in key maintenance and technical occupations. According to several industry reports, these professions are expected to experience a large turnover during the next few years, due to both normal attrition and retirements among the baby boom generation. However, no precise data on this turnover exists. Having this data will allow FTA and its industry partners to develop a more targeted workforce development effort and better determine the amount of resources that should be allocated to it. An additional objective of this research would be to develop accurate data on projected turnover for key transit occupations over a 10-year period (2015-2025). The occupations in question include: bus mechanics; rail car and track maintenance personnel; bus drivers; and subway and streetcar operators. The researcher would survey the top 50 transit agencies that employ the majority of the industry’s workforce, to determine projected turnover rates and hiring in key transit occupations over a 10-year period (2015-2025). While the US Department of Transportation’s (US DOT) Bureau of Transportation Statistics projects a 50 percent retirement rate for the transportation industry as a whole over the next 10 years, many transit agencies have said in informal surveys that their numbers will be even higher. At least one has said they are looking at 70 percent replacement for rail maintenance technicians. Some have characterized this expected wave of departures as a “silver tsunami”. Moreover, many transit agencies, particularly rail agencies, are planning for significant expansion over the next few years, and have a critical need to identify and train workers in the occupations and specialties that will be required to operate and maintain their growing systems. Also, for occupations with high exit rates, bus operators in particular, agencies must develop better programs for recruiting, training and retaining workers. Precise and reliable data on workforce turnover is needed to guide these efforts. 12 ■ Project F-24 Frontline Workforce Training: Moving from Past Practice to Best Practice Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Human Resources $300,000 Gwen Chisholm Smith Innovative training methods of proven effectiveness for transit’s frontline workforce continue to lag in implementation. This continuing gap between past practice and best practice represents an important drain on industry resources that could be remedied by effective strategies to support implementation of best training practices. Best training practices for the front-line workforce have been well documented. For nearly two decades, TCRP, TRB, DOT/FTA, and US DOL have sponsored a number of important research programs to better define best practices in training for the frontline workforce. Subject matter experts (SMEs) from over forty different transit agencies and local unions have worked together to develop consensus industry-wide training standards. When implemented, standards-based training resources for the technical maintenance workforce have shown very large improvements in equipment reliability and costs of operations and maintenance. These innovations and standards-based training approaches have saved agencies many millions of dollars and allowed them to save money and improve responsiveness by in-sourcing work that had previously been contracted out. However, in spite of these proven advantages, these innovations in frontline maintenance and operations training remain the exception, not the norm, across the industry. Barriers to broader implementation are undoubtedly numerous. Many medium-sized and smaller agencies have not been able to adopt many of the standards-based training programs because they typically have very limited training resources. This can limit their capacity for implementation – even if they understand that quality training practices could provide significant benefits. One way to address this barrier would be to make it possible for agencies to go beyond just sharing practices and find innovative ways to utilize and implement best practices within their stretched training budgets. In recent years, the industry has continued, particularly on the local level, to innovate in ways that can make frontline workforce training more effective for both operations and maintenance personnel. This research could evaluate the effectiveness of face-to-face networks, regional and national consortia, technology-enhanced learning (such as YouTube videos and e-learning), and web-based courseware sharing. Programs like the Keystone Transit Career Ladder Network (that provided training to 40 agencies and maintenance workers in all 67 of Pennsylvania’s counties), the regional operator training network in Pennsylvania, the Southern California Regional Transit Training Consortium, and the Santa Clara Valley operator mentorship training program could be evaluated for effectiveness, while also exploring the feasibility of using the Internet to leverage instructor capacity at larger agencies to provide instructor-led training to smaller agencies. In addition, the feasibility of using the Internet to leverage the instructor capacity at larger agencies and provide real time, instructor-led training to smaller agencies and the effectiveness of a web-based courseware sharing mechanism could be explored. Recognizing that budget and resource constraints sometimes limits an agency’s ability to provide quality training, effective training programs could be evaluated for their return on investment and effect on areas such as absenteeism/turnover, equipment reliability and safety, and customer satisfaction. The industry needs to understand and address the barriers that are keeping less effective past practices locked in place. What can be done to close the gap between average practice and best practice? This research would provide transit agencies with a variety of options to explore when trying to implement a more effective training program within an often constrained training budget. Giving transit agencies the ability to share and alternative ways to implement training within their agencies could be the catalyst to propel transit agencies from past training practices to best practices. 13 The objectives of this research would be to: (1) Identify and characterize effective innovative programs and practices in transit frontline workforce training and demonstrate their effectiveness using existing data sets that measure variables such as elevating worker skills, improving customer satisfaction, reducing turnover, and increasing safety and equipment reliability; (2) Identify, analyze, and evaluate alternative effective and affordable methods for overcoming barriers to implementation and for achieving broader effective application of these proven innovations, including: a. Consortium models for reducing costs of implementation through use of shared resources, both through face-to-face regional networks and through Internet and computer-based delivery systems leveraging existing training at larger agencies for delivery to workers at medium and smaller agencies. b. Potentially effective mechanisms (including Internet-based systems) for cataloging and sharing existing industry training resources, including curriculum, course materials, training standards, etc. (3) Pilot a test program to utilize existing training resources at large agencies (or elsewhere) for realtime delivery to frontline employees at smaller agencies. The product of this research would be: Analysis of effective innovative frontline training programs including: o Innovative approaches to developing an overall training program based on adherence to national training standards, stakeholder engagement, and nationally consistent standardsbased curriculum development and courseware. o Barriers to implementation of effective innovative approaches. o Innovative training delivery techniques such as the combination of classroom instruction with hands-on exercises to engage students and appeal to young learners; mentoring from experienced operators and mechanics; virtual regional training networks or consortiums; distance learning. Report on effective programs identified above including existing data to: o Provide background including the processes used to create and implement the programs and the stakeholders involved, including any barriers that were overcome. o Identify key features of the programs. o Determine the programs’ direct outcomes. o Determine the programs’ effect on: worker knowledge and skills and career ladder advancement; transit agencies’ ability to recruit and retain qualified workers; customer satisfaction; turnover and absenteeism; equipment reliability and safety; agency costs and savings from the program; and other related measures with available data. A test program to utilize existing training resources at large agencies (or elsewhere) for realtime delivery to frontline employees at smaller agencies. 14 Potential research tasks may include: Task 1. Perform a literature search and review of innovative training programs at U.S. and international public transportation agencies. This research would identify different training models and assess their effectiveness in addressing the specific learning needs of transit operators and technicians. It will highlight barriers of implementation for those different training models and highlight strategies that were used to overcome those barriers. Task 2. Conduct detailed surveys and follow-up interviews and data collection of current frontline training programs existing at public transportation to achieve five key objectives: (1) identify barriers to implementation of training programs, (2) identify ways to overcome those barriers to implementation, (3)identify training programs where outcomes in terms of enhancing worker skills and knowledge have been proven and quantified, (4) identity training courseware and other resources available from public transit agencies and private vendors that could be shared with other agencies nationally, and (5) identify non-traditional approaches to training such as e-learning where results have been quantified. Task 3. Based on the survey results, develop a best practices report on training approaches, barriers, methods, and techniques that agencies and groups of agencies could use to guide and enhance their existing programs. Task 4. Identify the technical requirements for a real time Internet-based transit training network, connecting trainers at large agencies with frontline employees at medium and smaller agencies. Design and organize two pilot networks with volunteer “source” agencies that can provide both the trainers and the originating location equipment (cameras, internet feed etc.) and a network volunteer recipient agencies with receiving-end equipment (video screens and phone lines) and a commitment to developing local mentors to support their learners. The pilot delivery would focus on training using nationally available training standards and curriculum. Customer satisfaction, safety, and the state of good repair of the nation’s public transit system depend on a well-trained workforce. Given the talent loss of experienced transit employees due to retirement, a high rate of turnover (operators), the need to keep abreast with more complex technologies, and the current economic environment, it is imperative that transit expand its training capacity in the most costeffective manner possible. Failure to do so not only expands the opportunity for human error and accidents, but jeopardizes an agency’s ability to sustain and improve customer satisfaction. Adoption of a cost-effective approach to disseminate best training practices along with training resources and materials can greatly benefit transit agencies, especially small to medium-sized organizations that currently lack the capacity for training. One major change occurring in the transit industry involves a transition between two different generations of workers within the same craft. Older workers came aboard when technology was basic and where an informal process of skills training was sufficient. In contrast, younger workers coming into the crafts today are generally more comfortable with adapting to new technology and tend to be more visual with better motor coordination, having grown up in environments where computer-based education and social activities have been the norm. Using traditional training techniques where instructors lecture and students listen is not an effective learning solution for today’s generation of workers. The research provided here will introduce instructors to training methods better suited to younger workers, the type of worker currently replacing retiring baby boomers and those actively being sought by other transportation industries. Methods that fail to engage these students to learn will likely result in them seeking skills training offered by other, more progressive organizations outside public transit. 15 ■ Project G-15 Applicability of Public-Private Partnerships for Smaller-Scale Transit Projects Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Administration $150,000 Dianne Schwager Over the past decade, there has been a growing interest in developing creative solutions to inadequate funding for transportation systems, including transit. Funding constraints at all levels of government mean that public source funds are no longer sufficient to meet the backlog and sustain needed levels of investment going forward. To address this reality, a number of entities have tried using non-traditional planning and financing for transportation projects to support bridge, roadway, transit system, and transit station projects. For example, public-private partnerships (P3s) have been used by agencies across the country to help move deserving projects forward. The USDOT defines the term “public-private partnership” as “a contractual agreement formed between public-and private-sector partners, which allows more private-sector participation than is traditional.” These arrangements usually involve a government agency contracting with a private company to renovate, construct, operate, maintain, finance, and/or manage a facility or system. While the public sector usually retains ownership of the facility or system, the private party will be given additional decision rights in determining how the project or task will be completed. The literature related to P3s documents successful examples of public-private approaches and highlights why P3s may or many not be successful for transit projects. While this information is helpful, it is limited because many of the case studies tend to be for large projects. There are likely smaller P3 projects that have been successful, but these are not well documented. This creates a void in the literature for small- to medium-sized communities who may be interested in considering alternative methods of funding for their transit projects. Furthermore, these communities, public agencies, and transportation authorities appear to lack the “roadmap” needed to realistically consider a P3 arrangement to support their project. Little information exists that either identifies smaller P3 projects or offers “best practices” that could be useful to other communities. Because it is often these smaller communities that are reliant on limited state and local funding and competing with larger projects for these minimal funds, better understanding when and how to implement a P3 is particularly critical. This research is intended to develop a library of case studies documenting small- to medium-sized P3 transit successes and, if particularly noteworthy, failures. It will also support development of a guidebook offering practical approaches to identifying projects that may be suitable for a P3, as well as tried-and-true methods for initiating, planning and implementing P3 for small- to medium-sized transportation projects. The research will build on existing reports, studies, and research, but also involve case study development of successful smaller-scale P3 projects. Projects that are part of a larger, community and livability enhancing effort will be a specific focus. It is recommended that research be conducted that relates to smaller-scale P3 projects that have been planned and implemented effectively. A case study of these P3 projects for transit would facilitate the determination of factors that appear to support P3 success. Documenting best practices for small- to medium-sized P3 projects would also help communities determine whether their project is well suited for P3, offer them some assurance that they do work on a smaller scale, and provide information that would assist those communities in planning for and implementing their project using a P3 method. 16 One of the goals of this research effort will be to identify the variety of P3s that are available to support transit investments. Something as simple as signage on a local bus to support operations is an example of a P3, as is establishing a finance plan that involves a significant share of private local funding or employing a design-build delivery system. The goal of the effort will be to identify different types of P3s that communities are utilizing to support their transit investment, and publicize these examples to communities that may not be aware that these are options that could work for them. While large and small P3s may be similar in some ways, it is expected that there will be differences related to the number of private partners, the public funding sources available, the role of the private sector in the operation of the transit facility, and so forth. The research could potentially include the following steps: Review existing studies related to P3 funding, focusing on any that highlight smaller-scale infrastructure investment. Review experiences of communities and agencies that have utilized P3 approaches to fund and implement their project. Identify the types of smaller transportation projects that might benefit from consideration of P3. Interview communities or agencies that have used P3 to help fund their projects. It is expected that the interviews will involve collection of information related to: o Project type, size and scope o Whether the project is part of a larger planning effort o Funding that was pursued but unsuccessful prior to P3 o Community/agency approach to determining what public and private partners might be interested in funding the project o Method for engaging those potential partners and documentation of successes and failures o Explanation of P3 shares by each partner. Is the involvement simply division of the costs or are some in-kind services part of the arrangement? o Identification of the benefit to each of the partners. Why were they willing to become involved? o Legal and financial considerations o Institutional impediments that were overcome and how The outcome of this research would be a P3 guidebook and library of case studies that may be applicable to a variety of agency projects that may not otherwise consider public-private partnerships feasible or understand how to initiate a P3. The emphasis will be on smaller scale P3 projects, particularly those that are part of a larger community improvement effort. 17 ■ Project H-51 Understanding Changes in Demographics, Preferences and Markets for the Transit Industry Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Policy and Planning $350,000 Dianne Schwager There is general agreement that demographic and psychographic shifts in the American population are occurring that could have major (positive) impacts for the transit community. To date, however, no single source document has been created for transit managers, advocates, and elected officials that examines how these changes might impact transit markets over the coming decades. The present literature documents the way different generations make decisions about their residential location, auto ownership, scale of vehicle miles of travel (VMT), and, perhaps most importantly, the changing role of the private auto as it reflects these behavioral changes. That literature provides a setting that improves the ability of analysts and practitioners to understand how changes in demographics and, more specifically, changes in attitudes and preferences associated with different age groups and other demographic categories influence transportation behavior. It is therefore proposed that a systematic research effort be undertaken to bring the subject of both demographic change and change in attitudes and preferences by demographic subgroup to the study of transit services and associated patterns of walking and biking. The proposed handbook would help the leaders of the transit industry design specific services for specific market segments. Throughout the last 60 years, continuous growth in automobile reliance (as measured by vehicle ownership and VMT) was simply taken for granted. A wide variety of data sources now suggest that VMT per person has flattened and recently declined for a variety of reasons. Questions exist in the transportation research community as to whether this change is permanent or merely reflects a profound impact on mobility caused, at least in part, by changing economic conditions. Some believe, for example, that even an empirically documented propensity by younger Americans to decrease their reliance on private automobiles is something which will erode as they enter later phases of the life cycle. Alternatively, others believe that the preference for a lifestyle based on walking, biking and transit is creating an altered transportation behavior that will persist over the changes in life stages. Researchers are now challenging an older model of residential choice in which the desire for more residential space overwhelms concerns about longer commuting trip distances, resulting in near automatic pro-sprawl transportation behavior. Rather, an altered form of equilibrium may be taking hold in American cities. Recently, a 2013 study reports that 61% of those sampled would not increase auto commute times to facilitate the choice of a bigger house, consistent with a general pattern where Generation Y members express more interest in compact neighborhoods than those of older generations (Urban Land Institute, 2013). The proposed research would place larger demographic trends and concepts in terms relevant to the managers and proponents of public transportation and examine in some detail product and service preferences of the emerging groups. A proposed analytical framework would allow alternative scenarios for the future to be examined in terms of the likely impact on future markets for transit ridership. While predicting the future is impossible, strategically preparing for alternative futures is something the transit industry can and should address proactively. The objective of this research would be to provide the transit community with information about how transportation markets are (and are not) shifting in terms of their attitudes, preferences and behaviors. Armed with this information, transit managers and administrators can better plan for the needs of an evolving market. The products from the research would be based on a national 18 data collection effort to specifically translate demographic generalizations into actionable strategies for those supportive of the transit-oriented lifestyle. While a major focus of the research would be on the transportation behavior of younger age cohorts, the research would also gather information about changes in attitudes and preferences for older groups, including those facing the decision to give up driving and surrender their driver’s license. Other demographic patterns to be observed include similar variation relative to such issues as family formation (size), and population composition in terms of race and ethnicity. The final deliverable of this research would be a handbook that (1) would set the recent developments in applied demographics into the context of evolving transit markets; (2) would document how variation in attitudes and preferences for transportation behaviors vary by demographic group, focusing particularly on generational changes associated with the age of the cohort, and its life stage; and (3) would present an analytical framework that relates alternative future demographic scenarios to predicted impact upon transit ridership. This research would build directly upon other research applying these concepts in a manner aimed at managers in the transit industry. This research will incorporate known demographic trends into the planning and analysis of public transportation in a systematic and disciplined manner. 19 ■ Project H-53 Toolkit for a Sustainable Transit Agency Research Field: Allocation: TCRP Staff: Policy and Planning $300,000 Dianne Schwager TCRP has funded two closely related Syntheses of Practices in the past several years: Synthesis 84: Current Practices in Greenhouse Gas Emission Savings in Transit, and Synthesis 106: Energy Saving Strategies for Transit Agencies. Both reports synthesize existing research on strategies that transit agencies can use to reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and thereby improve their sustainability. Both syntheses collected information from transit agencies about their experiences analyzing and implementing such strategies. The syntheses identified two research needs for transit agencies wishing to improve their sustainability, of which reducing energy consumption and GHG emissions is a major component: 1. More systematic and comprehensive research is needed on the most appropriate strategies for transit agencies in a variety of contexts. 2. A study on best practices, opportunities, and challenges for integrating climate change into transit planning. Many large North American transit agencies, such as Los Angeles Metro, SEPTA, Sound Transit, and New York MTA, have established sustainability programs, and provide solid examples of how to structure a program, develop a plan, and implement strategies. Other agencies have a high level of interest in improving their sustainability, but have not yet established a robust program. And even agencies that have sustainability programs already are in a constant state of improvement. A toolkit dedicated to establishing and improving sustainability programs at transit agencies would provide a central resource for sustainability managers, and would supplement the resources provided by APTA. In fact, as APTA’s sustainability commitment grows (from 40 signatories originally to 100+ signatories today), the need for tools to establish and promote sustainability programs also grows. As TCRP Synthesis 84 notes: “Several recent studies have focused on how metropolitan planning organizations and state departments of transportation integrate climate change into planning objectives and practices. There has been no parallel research on transit agencies and transit planning.” However, several agencies have made significant strides in the area, and could serve as case studies. Key questions include: What are key elements of sustainability planning at transit agencies? How are sustainability plans best structured, developed, and applied? What are the best staffing and management structures for sustainability programs, and integration of sustainability into transit agency operations? Some models and factors include: o Sustainability committees or working groups within each department. o Creating a dedicated position for managing sustainability. o Assigning responsibility for sustainability to one department. o Impetus for sustainability coming from top-level management or the board of directors. How do individual governance structures affect the sustainability agenda, for example when transit agencies reside within larger government agencies, and when transit agencies are almost entirely managed and operated by contractors? How are existing sustainability tools, such as Environmental Management Systems and Environmental & Sustainability Management Systems, best applied? 20 Which metrics for assessing strategies (e.g., lifecycle cost, cost effectiveness) are most important to promoting strategies internally? What strategies are most effective at reducing energy and resource use and saving money for transit agencies? What internal outreach, education, and consensus-building techniques are most successful to the sustainability agenda? What approaches for funding sustainability programs are most consistently successful? What are key steps to establishing a sustainability program, such as data collection and monitoring, development of working groups, and sustainability plans? These research needs are further highlighted by transit agencies’ responses to a recent survey as part of the development of TCRP Synthesis 106. When asked to describe their specific needs around energy saving strategies, respondents answered: Information on how EMSs are working to implement sustainability strategies Successful decision-making strategies that work for small agencies or even at a department level Simple, adaptable, toolkit for best practices that can be applied by users without specific staff/departments in planning, engineering and sustainability The primary objective of this research is to develop a best practices toolkit for transit agencies to develop and implement a sustainability program from the ground up, or improve components of their existing sustainability programs. The toolkit should present best practices and case studies in a way that is visually engaging, with a graphical ‘wayfinding’ system for the reader. Text should be organized in brief paragraphs with frequent headings and subheadings, in order to make it as easy as possible to navigate to sections of interest. The toolkit should be appropriate for agencies facing a range of challenges, and for agencies of all sizes and organizational structures. As a secondary objective, the research should capture as much information as possible about the effectiveness of different types of sustainability strategies (such as vehicle fuel efficiency retrofits, alternative fuels, water saving strategies, etc.) in different transit agency contexts, in order to include that information in the toolkit. Research to address the primary objective above, developing a toolkit for best practices in sustainability management, could include the following: Literature review of agency experiences and techniques Outreach to agencies working on sustainability Interviews with and case studies of transit agencies Peer exchanges and/or workshops to foster further discussion among interested agencies Development of problem-solving toolkit Testing of recommendations and/or toolkit with transit agencies Additional research to address the secondary objective above, gathering information about strategy effectiveness, could include the following: Limited original data collection on strategy impacts Establishment of analysis parameters and key metrics The topic of sustainability is an expansive one. It is suggested that this research initially address internal use of energy and water and other resources and production of GHG emissions and waste. These are relatively new topic areas for transit agencies. However, to the extent possible based on the resources available, it is hoped that this research can address sustainability on a more holistic level. 21 Transit agencies surveyed for TCRP Synthesis 106 expressed both an interest in how best to integrate sustainability into their governance structures and some of the challenges of doing so. For example, 48 percent of survey respondents found internal expertise to be a barrier to strategy implementation and 23 percent said that achieving decision maker/stakeholder support was an issue. An improved understanding of how to manage for sustainability could help agencies to overcome these barriers. The suggested research could provide agencies with several possible models that they could adapt to their particular situations (e.g., depending on agency size, level of experience with sustainability, analytical capabilities, and existing organizational structure, etc.). Having an understanding of the main options for how to integrate sustainability would save each agency from having to “reinvent the wheel.” In addition, the research would provide valuable information that any transit agency can use to prioritize sustainability strategies. Although the research will not take the place of detailed studies tailored to an individual agency, it will provide a more advanced starting point for all agencies. The results of this research will therefore provide opportunities for transit agencies to economize on staff time and money spent on sustainability planning, while also enhancing their ability to plan for sustainability. Sustainability programs for transit agencies payoff through savings on energy and resources as well as improved reputational capital in their communities. Several transit agencies have sustainability programs that are cost neutral, including SEPTA and WMATA, and most transit agencies are able to demonstrate cost savings from individual sustainability strategies implemented. 22
© Copyright 2024