Performance Measurement Tool Box and Reporting System for Research Programs and Projects (2008)

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.

36 BIBLIOGRAPHY 2003 Research Peer Exchange, notes from a meeting October 8-9, 2003, Iowa Department of Transportation, Ames, Iowa (2003). American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, “User Benefit Analysis for Highways Manual” (2003). Arditi, D. and Messiha, H. M. “Life Cycle Cost Analysis (LCCA) in Municipal Organizations.” Journal of Infrastructure Systems, (March 1999). Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, “Implementing the Government Performance and Results Act for Research – A Status Report,” National Academy of Sciences, National Academy Press, Washington DC (2001). Concas, S., Reich, S. L. and Yelds, A. T., “Valuing the Benefits of Transportation Research: A Matrix Approach,” Report No. 2117-463LO, Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida (2002). Deen, T. B. and Harder B. T., NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 280: Seven Keys to Building a Robust Research Program, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC (1999). Ellis, R. D., Jr., Degner, J., O’Brien, W. and Peasley, G., Review, Analyze and Develop Benefit Cost/Return on Investment Equations, Guidelines and Variables. University of Florida - Gainesville, Department of Civil and Coastal Engineering (2003). Kaplan, R. S. and Norton, D. P., “The Balanced Scorecard – Measures That Drive Performance,” Harvard Business Review, January – February 1992. Long, R., Performance Measurements for Research Programs Workshop notes from a meeting of AASHTO RAC members on December 11-13, 2002, Orlando, FL. McFarland, W. F., “Method for Evaluating the Benefits of Research Projects”, Report No. 1137-1F, Texas Transportation Institute, College Station, TX (1988). Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Public Affairs Branch, Treasury Board of Canada, “Program Evaluation Methods: Measurement and Attribution of Program Results, Third Edition.”

37 Osborne, David, “Refining State Technology Programs”, Issues in Science and Technology 6, No. 4 (1990). Pickrell, S. and Neumann, L. “ Use of Performance Measures in Transportation Decision Making,” Conference Proceedings 26, Performance Measures to improve Transportation Systems and Agency Operations, National Academy Press, Washington DC (2001). Poage, J. L., “Developing Actionable Performance Measures for Government Programs,” Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA, (2000). Ruegg, R. and Feller, I. “A Toolkit for Evaluating Public R&D Investment – Models, Methods, and Findings from ATP’s First Decade,” NIST GCR 03-857, U. S. Department of Commerce (2003). Stockton, W. R., Walton, C. M., Goodin, G. D., Turner, S. M., Martello, M. T., Collier, T. S., Wiles, P. B., Wang, Z., Gupta, A. and Hernandez, Z., “Estimating ITS Benefits: Guidelines for Evaluating ITS Projects, Research Report 0-1790-5, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX (2003). TransTech Management, Inc. and AASHTO, “Strategic Performance Measures for State Department of Transportation – A handbook for CEOs and Executives,” NCHRP Project No. 20-24(20), American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington D. C., (2003). Trauner Consulting Services, Inc., NCHRP Research Results Digest 225: Putting Research Into Practice – A Synopsis of Successful Strategies and Case Histories, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, (1998). U. S. General Accounting Office, “HIGHWAY RESEARCH, Systematic Selection and Evaluation Processes Needed for Research Program,” Washington DC (2002). Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, “Cost, Benefit, and Risk Assessment Guidelines for RE&D Investment Portfolio Development,” Report No. WP-43-FA82F-98-1, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA, (1998). Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, “Sample Benefit and Cost Assessment with Explanations – Companion Document to Cost, Benefits, and Risk Assessment Guidelines for R,E&D Investment Portfolio Development,” Report No. WP-43-FA82F-98-2, Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, Cambridge, MA, (1997).

38 Williams, D. and Hedges, C., Performance Evaluation Mechanisms for Transportation Research Programs. Synthesis of Practice No. 4, Ottawa: Transportation Association of Canada, Ottawa (1996).