Post-Course Assessment and Reporting Tool for Trainers and TIM Responders Using the SHRP 2 Interdisciplinary Traffic Incident Management Curriculum (2014)

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.

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2015 www.TRB.org The Second S T R A T E G I C H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M REPORT S2-L32C-RW-1 Post-Course Assessment and Reporting Tool for Trainers and TIM Responders Using the SHRP 2 Interdisciplinary Traffic Incident Management Curriculum Zongwei Tao, Jeffrey SpoTTS, and eliZabeTh heSS Weris, Inc. Reston, Virginia

Subject Areas Highways Operations and Traffic Management

SHRP 2 Reports Available by subscription and through the TRB online bookstore: www.mytrb.org/store Contact the TRB Business Office: 202-334-3213 More information about SHRP 2: www.TRB.org/SHRP2 SHRP 2 Report S2-L32C-RW-1 ISBN: 978-0-309-27405-0 © 2015 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Copyright Information Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copy- right to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. The second Strategic Highway Research Program grants permission to repro- duce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, or FHWA endorsement of a particular prod- uct, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing material in this document for educational and not-for-profit purposes will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from SHRP 2. Note: SHRP 2 report numbers convey the program, focus area, project number, and publication format. Report numbers ending in “w” are published as web documents only. Notice The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the second Strategic Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical committee selected to monitor this project and review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical committee and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the second Strategic Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. The Second Strategic Highway Research Program America’s highway system is critical to meeting the mobility and economic needs of local communities, regions, and the nation. Developments in research and technology—such as advanced materials, communications technology, new data collection tech- nologies, and human factors science—offer a new opportunity to improve the safety and reliability of this important national resource. Breakthrough resolution of significant transportation problems, however, requires concentrated resources over a short time frame. Reflecting this need, the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2) has an intense, large-scale focus, integrates multiple fields of research and technology, and is fundamentally different from the broad, mission-oriented, discipline-based research programs that have been the mainstay of the highway research industry for half a century. The need for SHRP 2 was identified in TRB Special Report 260: Strategic Highway Research: Saving Lives, Reducing Congestion, Improving Quality of Life, published in 2001 and based on a study sponsored by Congress through the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). SHRP 2, modeled after the first Strategic Highway Research Program, is a focused, time- constrained, management-driven program designed to com- plement existing highway research programs. SHRP 2 focuses on applied research in four areas: Safety, to prevent or reduce the severity of highway crashes by understanding driver behavior; Renewal, to address the aging infrastructure through rapid design and construction methods that cause minimal disruptions and produce lasting facilities; Reliability, to reduce congestion through incident reduction, management, response, and mitigation; and Capacity, to integrate mobility, economic, environmental, and community needs in the planning and designing of new trans- portation capacity. SHRP 2 was authorized in August 2005 as part of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). The program is managed by the Transportation Research Board (TRB) on behalf of the National Research Council (NRC). SHRP 2 is conducted under a memo- randum of understanding among the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and the National Academy of Sciences, parent organization of TRB and NRC. The program provides for competitive, merit-based selection of research contractors; independent research project oversight; and dissemination of research results.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achieve- ments of engineers. Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. (Dan) Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisci- plinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transporta- tion, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

SHRP 2 STAFF Ann M. Brach, Director Stephen J. Andrle, Deputy Director Neil J. Pedersen, Deputy Director, Implementation and Communications Cynthia Allen, Editor Kenneth Campbell, Chief Program Officer, Safety JoAnn Coleman, Senior Program Assistant, Capacity and Reliability Eduardo Cusicanqui, Financial Officer Richard Deering, Special Consultant, Safety Data Phase 1 Planning Shantia Douglas, Senior Financial Assistant Charles Fay, Senior Program Officer, Safety Carol Ford, Senior Program Assistant, Renewal and Safety James Hedlund, Special Consultant, Safety Coordination Alyssa Hernandez, Reports Coordinator Ralph Hessian, Special Consultant, Capacity and Reliability Andy Horosko, Special Consultant, Safety Field Data Collection William Hyman, Senior Program Officer, Reliability Linda Mason, Communications Officer David Plazak, Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability Rachel Taylor, Senior Editorial Assistant Dean Trackman, Managing Editor Connie Woldu, Administrative Coordinator ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration in cooperation with the American Asso- ciation of State Highway and Transportation Officials. It was conducted in the second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP 2), which is administered by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies. The project was managed by Reena Mathews, SHRP 2 Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability. Zongwei Tao, Founder and President of Weris, Inc., was the principal investigator. Other contributors were Elizabeth Hess and Jeffrey Spotts, also from Weris, Inc.

This report will be of interest to agencies and responders—from transportation, police, fire, towing, and dispatch—charged with managing highway incidents. It supports three SHRP 2 projects developed to broaden responders’ understanding of their roles and responsibilities for faster and safer clearance. Project L12, Training for Traffic Incident Responders, developed a classroom-training curriculum for traffic incident management (TIM). Train-the-Trainer Pilot Courses for Incident Responders and Managers (L32A) and e-Learning for Training Traffic Incident Responders and Managers (L32B) were also developed. This research proj- ect designed a process and developed a tool to assess the effectiveness of the SHRP 2 TIM training. Needs were analyzed, business requirements were established, and a TIM assess- ment tool was specified, designed, developed, and tested. Agencies invest time and money in an effort to train their staff, and they want to under- stand the impact of their investment. In the short term, organizations conduct and receive feedback on training materials from attendees and work to improve the content delivered. However, the long-term effectiveness of training on the individual and organization is often not evaluated. Long-term evaluation requires a mechanism to contact students after their training, elicit feedback from their supervisors, and compare selected performance measures to see if improvements have occurred. This report addresses how agencies can evaluate the effectiveness of the SHRP 2 TIM train- ing. This training was designed to help decrease the impacts of crashes on both responders and travelers. It helps responders understand and implement the national unified goal for traffic incident management: responder safety; safe, quick clearance; and prompt, reliable, and interoperable communications. To develop a TIM assessment tool, the research team and an advisory panel of subject matter experts selected the Kirkpatrick Model evaluation methodology, conducted litera- ture reviews, and synthesized best practices. The findings of the research established the business and technical feasibility of developing a TIM assessment tool, using readily avail- able, cost-effective technologies focusing on customer management, survey management, and reporting and analysis. The final product is a scalable tool that agencies can use in evaluating a variety of trainings beyond traffic incident management. F O R EWO R D Reena Mathews, SHRP 2 Senior Program Officer, Capacity and Reliability

C O N T E N T S 1 Executive Summary 2 CHAPTER 1 Background 3 CHAPTER 2 Research Approach 3 Collaborative Nature of Project L32C 3 Conceptual Model for Training Evaluation 4 System Development Methodology and Approach 6 CHAPTER 3 Findings 6 Needs Analysis 11 Literature Review 11 Synthesis of Best Practices 11 Recommended Business Model 17 Requirements Analysis 17 Architecture 23 Functional Specifications 43 System Test and Pilot 45 CHAPTER 4 Conclusions, Recommendations, and Summary 45 Conclusions 45 Recommendations 46 Summary 47 References 48 Appendix A. External Input Data Requirements