Visualization of Highway Performance Measures (2022)

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.

105   A P P E N D I X B Survey Responses Question 1 - States who Completed the Survey DOTs Responding to the Survey: AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY Question 2 - What performance measures are visualized for your agency and who are the intended audiences?

106 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures PM1 (Safety) - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, HI, IA, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, MO, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY PM1 (Safety) - Elected Public Officials: AR, DE, IN, KS, KY, MD, MO, NE, NH, NJ, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM1 (Safety) - External Audience: AR, CA, DE, FL, IA, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, MO, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY PM1 (Safety) - N/A: DC PM2 (Infrastructure Condition) PM2 (Infrastructure Condition) - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, CA, CO, DC, DE, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM2 (Infrastructure Condition) - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AK, AR, CA, CO, DE, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM2 (Infrastructure Condition) - Elected Public Officials: CO, DE, HI, IN, KS, KY, MO, MS, NM, OK, OR, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM2 (Infrastructure Condition) - External Audience: CA, CO, DE, FL, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, MO, MS, ND, NH, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM2 (Infrastructure Condition) - N/A: AZ PM3 (System Performance) PM3 (System Performance) - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, HI, IA, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, MI, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM3 (System Performance) - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, HI, IA, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, MI, MO, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM3 (System Performance) - Elected Public Officials: DE, HI, IN, KS, KY, MO, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM3 (System Performance) - External Audience: CA, DE, FL, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MO, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WV, WY PM3 (System Performance) - N/A: none DOT highway performance measures DOT highway performance measures - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, HI, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY DOT highway performance measures - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY DOT highway performance measures - Elected Public Officials: AK, CA, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, IN, KS, KY, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI DOT highway performance measures - External Audience: AK, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NM, OH, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI DOT highway performance measures - N/A: none PM1 (Safety) PM1 (Safety) - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY

Survey Responses 107   Highway network reliability measures - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NH, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Highway network reliability measures - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AZ, CA, CO, FL, GA, HI, IA, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, NC, ND, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Highway network reliability measures - Elected Public Officials: DE, FL, GA, KS, KY, ME, MN, MO, ND, NM, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, UT, WA, WI, WY Highway network reliability measures - External Audience: CA, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, KS, KY, MA, ME, MN, MO, ND, OH, OR, PA, RI, SD, UT, WA, WI, WY Highway network reliability measures - N/A: none Safety (not included in PM1) Safety (not included in PM1) - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, MD, ME, MN, MO, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Safety (not included in PM1) - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, IN, KS, MD, ME, MN, MO, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Safety (not included in PM1) - Elected Public Officials: AR, DC, GA, IA, IN, KS, MD, MN, MO, ND, NH, NJ, NM, OR, PA, RI, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY Safety (not included in PM1) - External Audience: AR, CA, DC, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, MD, MN, MO, ND, NH, NJ, OH, OR, PA, RI, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Safety (not included in PM1) - N/A: KY, MS, OK, SD Winter Ops (Snow and Ice) Winter Ops (Snow and Ice) - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, AZ, DC, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MD, ME, MN, MO, ND, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Winter Ops (Snow and Ice) - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AR, AZ, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MD, ME, MN, MO, ND, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Winter Ops (Snow and Ice) - Elected Public Officials: AR, DE, IN, KS, KY, MN, MO, ND, NH, NM, OK, PA, RI, UT, WA, WI, WY Winter Ops (Snow and Ice) - External Audience: AR, DC, DE, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, MD, MN, MO, ND, NH, OH, OK, PA, RI, UT, WA, WI, WY Winter Ops (Snow and Ice) - N/A: CO, FL, HI, MS, SD Maintenance (not included in PM2) Maintenance (not included in PM2) - Internal DOT Analysts: AZ, CA, DE, GA, HI, IA, IN, KS, MD, ME, MO, ND, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Maintenance (not included in PM2) - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AZ, CA, DC, GA, HI, IN, KS, MA, MD, ME, MO, ND, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Maintenance (not included in PM2) - Elected Public Officials: IN, KS, MO, ND, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, UT, WA, WI Maintenance (not included in PM2) - External Audience: AR, CA, DC, IN, KS, MO, ND, OK, OR, PA, RI, UT, VA, WA, WI Maintenance (not included in PM2) - N/A: CO, KY, MS, SD Environment Environment Highway network reliability measures - Internal DOT Analysts: DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, IN, KS, MD, MN, NM, OH, OR, VA, WA, WI, WY

108 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures Environment - Internal Leadership (decision makers): FL, GA, HI, IA, IN, KS, MD, MN, NM, OH, OR, VA, WA, WI Environment - Elected Public Officials: KS, MN, OR, WA, WI Environment - External Audience: KS, MD, MN, OR, WA, WI Environment - N/A: AZ, CA, CO, DC, KY, MO, MS, OK, RI, SD, TX, UT Resilience/Sustainability/Livability Resilience/Sustainability/Livability - Internal DOT Analysts: DC, DE, FL, HI, IA, IN, KS, MD, MN, NM, OR, UT, WA, WI, WY Resilience/Sustainability/Livability - Internal Leadership (decision makers): DC, FL, HI, IA, IN, KS, MD, MN, NM, OR, UT, WA, WI, WY Resilience/Sustainability/Livability - Elected Public Officials: KS, MN, OR, WA, WI, WY Resilience/Sustainability/Livability - External Audience: DC, KS, MD, MN, OR, WA, WI, WY Resilience/Sustainability/Livability - N/A: AZ, CA, CO, KY, MO, MS, OK, RI, SD, TX, VA Economic Economic - Internal DOT Analysts: DE, FL, HI, IA, IN, KS, MD, MO, NH, NM, OH, OK, OR, SD, TX, WA, WI, WY Economic - Internal Leadership (decision makers): FL, IN, KS, MD, MO, NH, NM, OH, OR, SD, TX, WA, WI, WY Economic - Elected Public Officials: IN, KS, MO, OR, SD, TX, WA, WI, WY Economic - External Audience: DE, IN, KS, MO, OH, OR, SD, TX, WA, WI, WY Economic - N/A: AZ, CA, CO, DC, KY, MA, MS, RI, VA Other Performance Measures included in survey shown by DOT: Audience: Other Performance Measure(s) AK: Leadership, Elected, External: https://omb.alaska.gov/html/performance/program- indicators.html?p=157&r=1 DC: External: Multimodal FL: Analysts, Leadership: Freight/commodity flow GA: Analysts, Leadership: GDOT has around 300 internal performance measures that drive its internal day-to-day operations as well as inform decisions regarding resource allocations and process improvement initiatives/priorities. The measures range from running security updates on IT equipment to delivering projects on time/on budget and within specified quality standards. GDOT is also assessing the response times to its customers as well as training classes delivered to its staff. IA: Leadership, Elected: % of "eligible" shoulders paved; number of oversize/overweight permits issued; Disposal of excess Right-of-Way IL: [audience not identified]: Crash dashboard (current & historical), Getting Around Illinois website (winter road conditions, road construction), TAMP performance (IDOT website) KS: Analysts, Leadership, Elected, External: Other performance measure reporting is available at the below sites. All is publicly available. https://www.ksdot.org/publications.asp https://www.ksdot.org/projects.asp MN: Analysts, Leadership, Elected, External: https://performance.minnesotago.org/ https://www.dot.state.mn.us/sustainability/docs/2019-sustainability-report.pdf https://www.dot.state.mn.us/measures/ MO: [audience not identified]: https://www.modot.org/tracker-measures-departmental-performance Various other items are not listed, such as customer service, employee metrics, ADA compliance, etc. NC: [audience not identified]: I am only involved with mobility and TSMO related measures so I am only answering from that perspective. There are others in NCDOT that deal with infrastructure health and safety metrics. Incident Management: # of service patrol stops Traveler Info: # of customers served ND: Analysts, Leadership, Elected, External: Multimodal, Drivers License, Vehicle Registration

Survey Responses 109   NM: PROJECT DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION Percent of projects in production let to bid as scheduled Percent of final cost-over-bid amount on highway construction projects Percent of projects completed according to schedule HIGHWAY OPERATIONS Number of statewide pavement lane miles preserved Number of combined system wide lane miles in poor condition Percent of non-national highway system lane miles rated fair or better PROGRAM SUPPORT Number of external audit findings Percent of invoices paid within thirty days Vacancy rate in all programs Number of employee injuries Number of employee injuries occurring in work zones MODAL Number of riders on park and ride Percent of airport runways in satisfactory or better condition Number of riders on the rail runner Number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities Number of non-alcohol-related traffic fatalities Number of occupants not wearing seatbelts in motor vehicle fatalities Number of pedestrian fatalities NY: [audience not identified]: We have many internal viewers that show location and condition of assets from consistent, approved data sources. These are useful for analysis, design and situational awareness but they are not performance measures, per se. OH: Analysts, Leadership, External: Traffic/Operations – COVID-19 Mobility performance monitoring/ return to normal congestion – Traffic Monitoring Covid dashboard with traffic count patterns WorkZone Metrics: crashes, mobility, & speed – Internal DOT analysts & leadership OR: Analysts, Leadership, Elected, External: Transit Ridership Rail Ridership Bike and Pedestrian Walkway/Bikeways Construction Projects on Time and on Budget Disadvantaged Business Enterprises Utilization DMV wait times Customer Service RI: Analysts, Leadership, Elected, External: Multimodal/Transit-related measure data are visualized for various audiences/communications SD: [audience not identified]: My responses are as of my knowledge at this time. There likely are other visualizations used within the department and for external communication that I am not involved with or aware of at this time. WI: [audience not identified]: For PM1-3 we have a federal PM page on our performance site that directs people to FHWA's TPM dashboards. Other visualizations are available via our external-facing website.

110 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures Question 3 - What visualizations have you created for performance measures and who are the intended audiences? Charts - Simple Charts - Simple - Internal DOT Analysts: AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY Charts - Simple - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AK, AR, AZ, CA, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY Charts - Simple - Elected Public Officials: AK, CA, DC, HI, IA, IN, KS, KY, MA, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NH, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY Charts - Simple - External Audience: AK, CA, DC, FL, GA, HI, IA, KS, MA, MN, MO, MS, ND, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, VA, WI, WY Charts - Complex Charts - Complex - Internal DOT Analysts: AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, NC, NE, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WY Charts - Complex - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AZ, CA, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, IN, KS, KY, MA, ME, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WY Charts - Complex - Elected Public Officials: CA, DC, KS, MA, ME, OK, OR, PA, RI, WA Charts - Complex - External Audience: CA, FL, IA, KS, MA, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI

Survey Responses 111   Infographics Infographics - Internal DOT Analysts: AZ, CA, DE, FL, HI, KS, MA, MD, ME, MN, MS, NC, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WY Infographics - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, HI, KS, MA, MD, ME, MN, MS, NC, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WY Infographics - Elected Public Officials: CA, CO, DC, IA, KS, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NE, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WY Infographics - External Audience: AR, CA, CO, DC, FL, IA, KS, MA, MD, MN, MO, MS, NE, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, VA, WY Dashboards Dashboards - Internal DOT Analysts: AZ, CA, CO, DC, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV, WY Dashboards - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AZ, CA, CO, DC, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV Dashboards - Elected Public Officials: CA, DC, DE, HI, KS, KY, MA, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NJ, OK, OR, UT, WA, WV Dashboards - External Audience: AR, CO, DC, DE, HI, IA, ID, KS, KY, MA, MD, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NJ, OH, OK, OR, UT, VA, WV Story Maps Story Maps - Internal DOT Analysts: AZ, DC, FL, HI, KY, MA, MD, ME, OK, OR, TX, UT, WA Story Maps - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AZ, DC, FL, HI, IA, KY, MA, MD, ME, NE, OK, OR, TX, UT, WA Story Maps - Elected Public Officials: DC, DE, IA, KY, MA, NE, OK, OR, WA Story Maps - External Audience: DC, DE, FL, KY, MA, MD, NE, OK, OR, WY Videos Videos - Internal DOT Analysts: DC, HI, MD, TX, WY Videos - Internal Leadership (decision makers): HI, IA, MD, TX, WY Videos - Elected Public Officials: DE, IA, NE, OR, TX, WY Videos - External Audience: DC, DE, IA, KS, MD, NE, OK, OR, TX, WY Maps Geospatial Representations (maps) - Internal DOT Analysts: AK, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WY Geospatial Representations (maps) - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AK, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, NE, NH, NJ, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WY Geospatial Representations (maps) - Elected Public Officials: CA, CO, DC, DE, HI, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NE, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WY Geospatial Representations (maps) - External Audience: AR, CA, CO, DC, DE, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NE, NJ, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TX, UT, VA, WY Publications Publications - Internal DOT Analysts: CA, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, MA, MD, MN, MO, MS, ND, NM, OH, OK, OR, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY Publications - Internal Leadership (decision makers): CA, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, MA, MD, MN, MO, MS, ND, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WI, WY

112 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures Publications - Elected Public Officials: CA, DE, HI, IA, KS, MA, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NM, OK, OR, RI, SD, TN, TX, WA, WI, WY Publications - External Audience: CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, KS, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, RI, SD, TX, WI, WY External Interactive visualizations External Interactive visualizations - Internal DOT Analysts: CA, IA, MD, MN, MS, ND, OK, OR, PA, TX, VA, WA, WI, WY External Interactive visualizations - Internal Leadership (decision makers): CA, MD, MN, MS, ND, OK, OR, PA, TX, VA, WA, WI, WY External Interactive visualizations - Elected Public Officials: CA, DE, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, OK, OR, TX, WA, WI, WY External Interactive visualizations - External Audience: CA, DC, DE, FL, IA, IL, MD, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, OK, OR, PA, TX, VA, WI, WY Internal Interactive visualizations Internal Interactive visualizations - Internal DOT Analysts: AZ, CA, DE, FL, GA, IA, MD, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, TX, VA, WY Internal Interactive visualizations - Internal Leadership (decision makers): AZ, CA, DC, DE, FL, GA, IA, MD, MN, MO, MS, ND, NH, NJ, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, TX, VA, WY Internal Interactive visualizations - Elected Public Officials: CA, MN, MS, OK, WY Internal Interactive visualizations - External Audience: CA, MD, MN, MS, NJ, OK, WY Other AK: https://omb.alaska.gov/html/performance/program-indicators.html?p=157&r=1 GA: Milepost performance measures IL: Charts - Safety, PM2 & PM3 Maps - IROADS (PM2), TAMP downloadable shapefile, Safety Dashboard External Interactive Visualizations - Safety NJ: PM1 are shared through the Annual Safety Report in a tabular form NY: Fact sheets for PM1, PM2 and PM3 federal measures are shared with the MPOs and federal partners RI: Heat-map visualizations made for internal audiences

Survey Responses 113   Data Management Internal Review 508 Compliance Other None Internal External Formal Informal None Internal External Formal Informal None Internal External Formal Informal None Internal External Formal Informal Question 4 - Does your agency have processes for developing visualizations that ensure consistent and repeatable guidance for communication?

114 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures Data Management Data management – None: AK, AR, CA, CO, FL, HI, IL, KY, ND, NH, WV, WY Data management - Applies to internal visuals: DC, IA, IN, KS, MD, MO, NE, NJ, NM, OK, PA, SD, TN, VA, WA, WI Data management - Applies to external visuals: DC, IA, IN, KS, MD, MO, NE, NM, NY, OK, PA, SD, TN, TX, VA, WA, WI Data management - Formal (written): DC, KS, NE, NJ, NH, TN, WI Data management - Informal (e.g., peer review): AZ, DC, DE, IA, ID, IN, MA, MD, ME, MO, NC, NJ, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, WA, WI Internal Review Internal review – None: AK, AR, CA, CO, FL, HI, IL, KY, ND, NH, WV, WY Internal review - Applies to internal visuals: DC, GA, IN, NH, MD, MO, MS, NE, NJ, NM, OH, OK, PA, TN, TX, WA, WI Internal review - Applies to external visuals: DC, IA, IN, KS, MO, MS, NE, NH, NJ, NM, OH, OK, PA, TN, TX, VA, WA, WI Internal review - Formal (written): DC, KS, MO, NJ, NM, TX, WI Internal review - Informal (e.g., peer review): AZ, DC, DE, GA, IA, ID, IN, MA, ME, NC, NH, OH, OK, PA, RI, WA, WI 508 Compliance 508 Compliance – None: AK, AR, AZ, CO, FL, HI, IA, IL, IN, MO, NH, NE, NH, NY, OH, PA, RI, WV, WY 508 Compliance - Applies to internal visuals: KS, OK, TX 508 Compliance - Applies to external visuals: DC, KS, MA, ND, NH, OK, OR, TX, VA, WI 508 Compliance - Formal (written): CA, KS, NH, OK, OR, TX, WI 508 Compliance - Informal (e.g., peer review): ID, KY, MA, NH, OR, WI Other (please specify) CO: presentation, memo, and letter design standards DC: DDOT has branding guidelines. GA: GDOT has a team of internal reviewers who are responsible for maintaining and editing internal visuals. The process varies slightly depending on visual needs but follows consistent branding and formatting for a smooth user experience. IN: We are developing data governance rules and process and asset business rules will be done this FY. MN: We do have requirements/process to assure 508 compliance. There is definitely an internal peer review within our unit before anything is published. MS: There could be formal written processes within Information Systems that I am not aware of. RI: No formal documented processes, though public communications materials undergo Communications and/or Leadership review, which includes informal evaluation of content for accuracy and ease-of- understanding. WA: We have high standards for consistent and external reporting, following Tufte type of principles. WSDOT created the Performance Journalism concept and methods and we were regarded as leader in performance management and visualization.

Survey Responses 115   Question 5 - What software tools does your agency use, and approximately how many users in your office create visualizations of performance measures that use that software? Adobe Acrobat: Adobe Creative Suite: CO, DC, FL, IA, KS, MA, ME, MN, MO, NH, NM, OK, RI, UT, VA, WA AK (6-15), AR (16+), CA (16+), CO (16+), DC (16+), DE (16+), FL (16+), IA (16+), ID (1-5), IN (6-15), KS (6-15), KY (16+), MA (1-5), MO (16+), ND (1-5), NH (16+), NJ (16+), NM (16+), OH (1-5), OK (16+), PA (1-5), RI (16+), SD (1-5), TN (1-5), TX (16+), UT (16+), VA (16+), WA (1-5), WY (6-15) Domo: none Dundas: IA (1-5) ESRI: AK (1-5), AR (16+), AZ (16+), CA (1-5), CO (16+), DC (16+), DE (16+), FL (16+), HI (16+), IA (6-15), ID (16+), IL (6-15), IN (16+), KS (6-15), KY (16+), MA (16+), MD (16+), ME (6-15), MO (1 - 5), NC (1-5), NE (1-5), NH (16+), NJ (1-5), NM (1-5), NY (16+), OH (6-15), OK (16+), OR (16+), PA (1-5), RI (1-5), SD (1-5), TN (6-15), TX (16+), UT (16+), VA (16+), WA (1-5), WV (1-5) IBM: none

116 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures iPeMS: FL (1-5), GA (6-15), NC (1-5), OR (1-5), UT (6-15) Java: DE (16+), HI (1-5), ID (1-5), KY (6-15), MA (1-5), NM (16+), OK (6-15), UT (16+), WA (1-5) Microsoft Excel: AK (6-15), AR (16+), AZ (16+), CA (16+), CO (16+), DC (16+), DE (16+), FL (16+), HI (16+), IA (16+), ID (6-15), IL (16+), IN (16+), KS (16+), KY (16+), MA (1-5), MD (16+), ME (16+), MI (16+), MO (16+), MS (1-5), NC (1-5), ND (1-5), NE (16+), NH (16+), NJ (16+), NM (16+), NY (6-15), OH (16+), OK (16+), OR (16+), PA (6-15), RI (16+), SD (16+), TN (16+), TX (16+), UT (16+), VA (16+), WA (1-5), WY (6-15) Microsoft Power BI: AR (1-5), CO (16+), DC (1-5), FL (6-15), IA (1-5), IL (1-5), IN (16+), KY (6-15), MA (1-5), MD (6-15), MO (1-5), MS (1-5), ND (1-5), NE (16+), OH (6-15), OK (6-15), OR (16+), PA (1-5), RI (6-15), SD (1-5), TN (6-15), UT (16+), VA (16+) Tableau: AR (1-5), AZ (16+), CA (16+), CO (6-15), DC (16+), DE (16+), FL (16+), IN (16+), KY (6- 15), MA (6-15), MD (6-15), MN (1-5), MO (1-5), NH (1-5), NJ (1-5), OR (16+), RI (1-5), TN (1-5), TX (16+), VA (16+), WA (1-5), WI (1-5) Oracle: CO (16+), DE (6-15), GA (6-15), HI (16+), ID (1-5), KY (6-15), MD (16+), ME (16+), MS (1- 5), ND (1-5), NH (16+), OK (16+), OR (6-15), TN (1-5), UT (16+), VA (16+), WA (1-5), WY (6-15) Qlik: MD (16+) RITIS: AR (1-5), CO (1-5), DC (6-15), DE (1-5), FL (16+), GA (16+), HI (1-5), IA (1-5), IL (1-5), MA (16+), MD (16+), MI (16+), MO (16+), MS (1-5), NC (1-5), NH (1-5), NJ (1-5), NM (1-5), OH (6- 15), OK (6-15), OR (6-15), PA (6-15), RI (6-15), TN (16+), VA (6-15) SPSS Statistics: DC (1-5), MD (1-5), WA (1-5) SAS: IA (1-5), ID (1-5), KS (1-5), MD (6-15), OR (6-15), VA (6-15) Lookr: OK (1-5) R: AZ (1-5), DC (1-5), FL (1-5), HI (1-5), IA (1-5), ID (1-5), MA (1-5), MD (1-5), NY (1-5), OK (6-15), TN (1-5), VA (16+) Workday: IA (1-5), OR (16+) Other Off the Shelf App: MD (16+), NM (16+), UT (16+) Custom Apps: CA (16+), DC (16+), GA (16+), MA (16+), MD (16+), NJ (1-5), NM (16+), OH (1-5), SD (1-5) Other (please specify): AZ: Google Analytics GA: ATSPM (16+), MARK 1 (16+) IA: Our university partners use Tableau IL: I know we have some of the other software, but this says specifically to create visualizations for performance measures IN: Thoughtspot KY: VAMIS (Deighton Cloud BA) MA: .NET and JavaScript MS: There could be others behind the scenes that I am unaware of NC: SAP NJ: New Jersey Congestion Management System (a.k.a. CMS-21), Big Data analysis using a programming language APL, w/ Excel for visualization of results NM: CUSTOM - EGIS Viewer eSTIP; OFF THE SHELF Primavera P6 Site Manager BrMS Agile Assets Maintenance and Pavement Management System OH: GIS Software (1-5); R, Python to prepare data for visualization (1-5) RI: Arcgis on-line, Adobe In-Design, Inrix

Survey Responses 117   Question 6 - Do you have a method for evaluating the effectiveness of your performance measure visualizations? NO: AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, SD, TN, TX, UT, WV, WY YES: GA, NE, RI, VA, WA, WI DC: We seek feedback from our internal and external stakeholders. Some visualizations we have our Communication Team review and feedback towards their approval. GA: We intend to survey our internal customers to evaluate the effectiveness of our dashboard. We are also considering evaluating the number of dashboard page views. NE: Internal Performance Management group that works with various owners on effectiveness of dashboards. RI: Internal feedback channels with data consumers. Leadership, Communications Office, etc. Feedback provided by advisory committees and working groups. VA: General feedback on the effectiveness from agency leadership. WA: Public response and reactions (media, press, public officials), number of web hits, printed distributions, etc. WI: We do internal reviews and work with our web and Business Intelligence teams. We also monitor web analytics.

118 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures Question 7 - What are the purposes of performance measure visualizations? Internal - Document current status: AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WI, WV, WY Internal - Show trend over time: AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY Internal - Communicate progress towards a target: AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY Internal - Help tell a performance story: AK, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, ID, IN, MD, ME, MI, MN, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY

Survey Responses 119   Internal - Support a policy: CA, CO, DC, DE, GA, IA, ID, IN, KS, KY, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NE, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, WA, WY Internal – Other: GA, WA External - Document current status: AK, AR, CA, CO, DC, DE, GA, HI, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NH, NJ, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WI, WY External - Show trend over time: AK, AR, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IL, IN, KS, KY, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY External - Communicate progress towards a target: AK, AR, CA, CO, DC, DE, FL, GA, HI, IA, ID, IN, KS, MA, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WY External - Help tell a performance story: AK, AR, CA, CO, DC, DE, GA, IA, ID, IN, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, ND, NE, NJ, NM, OH, OK, OR, PA, RI, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, WA, WI, WV, WY External - Support a policy: CA, CO, DC, DE, GA, IA, IN, KS, MD, ME, MN, MO, MS, NE, NM, OK, OR, PA, RI, TN, TX, WA, WY Other (please specify): FL, GA, IL, WA The Other specific performance measures included in survey: IA: % of "eligible" shoulders paved; number of oversize/overweight permits issued; Disposal of excess Right-of-Way IL: Crash dashboard (current & historical), Getting Around Illinois website (winter road conditions, road construction), TAMP performance (IDOT website) WI : For PM1-3 we have a federal PM page on our performance site that directs people to FHWA's TPM dashboards. Other visualizations are available via our external facing website FL: Freight/commodity flow GA: GDOT has around 300 internal performance measures that drive its internal day-to-day operations as well as inform decisions regarding resource allocations and process improvement initiatives/priorities. The measures range from running security updates on IT equipment to delivering projects on time/on budget and within specified quality standards. GDOT is also assessing the response times to its customers as well as training classes delivered to its staff AK: https://omb.alaska.gov/html/performance/program-indicators.html?p=157&r=1 MN: https://performance.minnesotago.org/ https://www.dot.state.mn.us/sustainability/docs/2019-sustainability-report.pdf https://www.dot.state.mn.us/measures/ MO: https://www.modot.org/tracker-measures-departmental-performance Various other items are not listed, such as customer service, employee metrics, ADA compliance, etc. NC: I am only involved with mobility and TSMO-related measures so I am only answering from that perspective. There are others in NCDOT that deal with infrastructure health and safety metrics. Incident Management: # of service patrol stops; Traveler Info; # of customers served DC: Multimodal ND: Multimodal, Drivers License, Vehicle Registration RI: Multimodal/Transit-related measure data are visualized for various audiences/communications KS : Other performance measure reporting is available at the below sites. All is publicly available. https://www.ksdot.org/publications.asp https://www.ksdot.org/projects.asp NM: PROJECT DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION Percent of projects in production let to bid as scheduled Percent of final cost-over-bid amount on highway construction projects Percent of projects completed according to schedule

120 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures • HIGHWAY OPERATIONS Number of statewide pavement lane miles preserved Number of combined system wide lane miles in poor condition Percent of non-national highway system lane miles rated fair or better • PROGRAM SUPPORT Number of external audit findings Percent of invoices paid within thirty days Vacancy rate in all programs Number of employee injuries Number of employee injuries occurring in work zones • MODAL Number of riders on park and ride Percent of airport runways in satisfactory or better condition Number of riders on the rail runner Number of alcohol-related traffic fatalities Number of non-alcohol-related traffic fatalities Number of occupants not wearing seatbelts in motor vehicle fatalities Number of pedestrian fatalities OH: Traffic/Operations: COVID-19 Mobility performance monitoring/ return to normal congestion – Traffic Monitoring Covid dashboard with traffic count patterns; WorkZone Metrics: crashes, mobility, & speed – Internal DOT analysts & leadership OR: Transit Ridership; Rail Ridership; Bike and Pedestrian Walkway/Bikeways; Construction Projects on Time and on Budget; Disadvantaged Business Enterprises; Utilization: DMV wait times; Customer Service NY: We have many internal viewers that show location and condition of assets from consistent, approved data sources. These are useful for analysis, design and situational awareness but they are not performance measures, per se

Survey Responses 121   Questions 8–11 - Please provide a specific example of a performance measure visualization from your agency. See Appendix C for visual examples from each state DOT. Appendix C is available on the National Academies Press website (www.nap.edu) by searching for NCHRP Synthesis 584: Visualization of Highway Performance Measures. 0 10 20 30 40 50 Document current status Show trend over time Communicate progress towards a target Help tell a performance story Support a policy Long-Term Planning Medium-Term Programming Day-to-Day Operations

122 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures Question 12 - Is a dashboard used by analysts only available inside your agency? What purpose(s) does the dashboard serve? Not Applicable Show trend over time Communicate progress towards a target Help tell a performance story Support a policy Long-Term Planning Medium-Term Programming Day-to-Day Operations

Survey Responses 123   Internal Dashboard Purpose(s) - Not Applicable: AK, CO, FL, IL, MD, MI, MN, MO, ND, NM, NY, WA, WI, WY Dashboard Purpose(s) - Show trend over time: AZ, CA, DC, DE, GA, HI, IN, MA, MD, MS, NC, NE, NJ, OR, SD, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV Dashboard Purpose(s) - Communicate progress towards a target: AZ, CA, DC, DE, GA, IN, MD, MS, NC, NE, NJ, OR, RI, TX, UT, VA, WA, WV Dashboard Purpose(s) - Help tell a performance story: AZ, CA, DC, DE, GA, IN, MD, MS, NJ, OR, PA, UT, VA, WA, WV Dashboard Purpose(s) - Support a policy: CA, GA, IN, MD, OR, RI, SD, UT, WA Dashboard Purpose(s) - Long-Term Planning: DE, GA, IN, MS, OR, PA, RI, SD, WA Dashboard Purpose(s) - Medium-Term Programming: AZ, CA, DE, GA, IN, NE, NJ, OR, RI, SD, TX, VA, WA Dashboard Purpose(s) - Day-to-Day Operations: AZ, DC, GA, MD, NE, NH, TX, VA, WA Dashboard Description CA: Basic Tableau BI tool used for Budgeting and Performance visualization. CO: In development DC: Multiple Tableau dashboards on DDOT’s 311 service request closure. GA: Yes, the dashboard is used internally only. Besides for all of the above indicated purposes, the dashboard is also used every quarter to assess each office/district's performance against set targets with the members of executive leadership. HI: MAP21 pavement report card, Plan for every Section (PFES), Safety in Numetric

124 Visualization of Highway Performance Measures IN: We are rebuilding our website and adding more of these items right now we are using this data for work in; I can send files of examples we are working on at the end. MD: MDOT SHA CHART Incident Reporting Tool MS: It is called the Planning for Performance tool which was developed by our LRTP consultant. The platform is Excel. NC: Will send images from NCDOT internal performance dashboard. NJ: www.saferoadsforallNJ.com OH: Will send an email with Excel chart for all Ohio Examples and include links/attachments OR: Oregon Transportation Commission Legislative Key Performance Measure Update PA: PennDOT’s congestion pie chart tool is used for internal partners to get an understanding of the causes of congestion on PennDOT’s core roadway network. It can break down congestion causes by region/district/route/county. RI: Dashboard currently under development relating to travel time reliability, which will allow users to evaluate the level of travel time reliability and per-person delay on specific roadway segments. SD: A custom web application is used to determine trade-offs of funding distribution between assets. VA: We have an internal performance report with multiple dashboards connected together in a cascaded manner. WA: We use our external dashboards internally too, there are a few internal only types associated with our strategic plan progress but we generally focus/rely mostly on those on externally reported ones. WI: We will begin working on developing dashboards for our internal performance measures soon. Question 14 - Does your agency have a compelling story featuring visualizations? Compelling Story Yes: AZ, CA, DC, OH, OR, PA, RI, TN, VA, WA, WI Partial: IA, ID, MN No: AK, AR, CO, DE, FL, GA, HI, IN, KS, KY, MA, MI, MO, MS, NC, ND, NE, NH, NJ, NM, OK, SD, TX, WV, WY Comments AZ: Pre-pandemic adaptive ramp meter implementation Winter storm operations after action review CA: Caltrans is very large, and each district (12) and HQ division has done this many, many times for many, many purposes over several decades. DC: Our PaveDC site allows residents to track the construction progress of the annual paving plan and it was well accepted by residents, community organizations, and utility companies. Internally it serves as a performance management dashboard and pushes teams to collaborate and complete a record-high number of miles of asset repairing. The PaveDC site has a very high visitor volume. IA: Our "track a plow" map was one of the first to show real-time snowplow locations, and we also added "plow cam" imagery to allow people to see the road conditions that plow drivers were seeing. This was hugely popular and is frequently used by local news stations in their weather forecasts. I would say it improved our reputation. ID: Memorable visualization experience occurred a few years ago when one of our district offices used an ArcGIS Story Map to 'tell a story' about a corridor plan. It was well received and even though it was very manually created, it illustrated a multidisciplinary swath of data that hitherto was never really collected all in one spot. It helps show stakeholders and the public the desirability of the proposed planned improvements. However, it created a false sense of hope that our agency would actually be in a position to carry through with the proposed improvements. So, in the end, we learned how to better cast the message to manage expectations.

Survey Responses 125   MN: We have been doing the basic visualizations for years, so I'm not sure there is a compelling story other than supporting performance-based planning for a very long time. We are relatively new to more complex visualizations and infographics. Time will tell if these more advanced visualizations are compelling. OH: In the past, Ohio DOT has had success using the RITIS "Trend Map" feature to determine unexpected congestion and use this to plan for maintenance work which might require detours. For example, there was a crash a few years back that closed the Brent Spense Bridge, which carries NB/SB traffic across the Ohio River between the KY and OH state lines along I-71 and I-75. We were able to use this visualization to determine where vehicles re-routed during the crash closure. A medium to long-term maintenance project with expected lane restrictions and closures was planned for a few months later. We were able to use the trend map (a moving visual of traffic congestion - kind of in a map video format) to see how traffic was impacted and build these detour routes into our plans. We were also able to complete some needed widening and repair projects to those routes which were going to see an increase in traffic. OR: We used congestion data to show the impact of interstate bridge lift wait times. The short answer is that the US Coast Guard did not use the data to alter the bridge lift restriction times and therefore congestion during bridge lifts did not improve. The primary reason was because businesses that transit up and down the river expressed their concern with any changes (despite historical data that showed any changes would have a negligible impact)…and elected officials became involved. In my very personal opinion, this was a classic case of being informed by the data not using the data. The glass half full version of this is that the decision was a data informed decision, but not a data driven. As you know frequently businesses and most especially governments make decisions that preclude operations that are the most efficient or effective (overall) and they know this because they have the data, but these less-than-optimal decision mollify the loudest voices, or those most affected. I cannot prove that moving a bridge restriction 30 minutes will be the difference of whether a business will not make it, but I can show historically would have only affected one or two trip in the last 12 months, or a tenth of a percent of the trips. PA: In our first performance report, there was a graph showing the number of heavy congestion crashes by time of day in the coverage area for each of our traffic management centers. The graph demonstrated that one of District TMC’s operating hours meant that it was standing down prior to the heaviest period for crashes in the PM peak. The TMC’s operating hours were expanded to cover that time period. RI: Vulnerability of Municipal Transportation Assets to Sea Level Rise and Storm Surge Report has driven investment decisions: http://www.planning.ri.gov/documents/sea_level/2016/TP167.pdf TN: Our COVID-19 Daily Report currently goes to State Government Leadership and has help us reconnect to the purpose and need of our Radar Detection System. VA: VDOT's creditability was rebuilt around our ability to develop and deliver projects on time and on budget. In 2002, only 20% of projects were completed on time. VDOT has consistently met its performance target of 77% for most of the last ten years. VDOT's performance has been critical to instilling confidence in the agency and the success of several funding initiatives. Because of the transparency that the Dashboard provides, VDOT's ability to deliver has not been questioned in almost 20 years. WA: Yes, quarterly Gray Notebook; annual Corridor Capacity-Congestion Report and other web-based tools, like Dashboards; Story Boards etc. most current Gray Notebook. WI: We publish a quarterly report available below: https://wisconsindot.gov/Documents/about- wisdot/performance/mapss/perf-report.pdf Question 15 - Would your agency be interested in participating in a case example? Yes: AR, AZ, CA, DC, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KY, MD, MN, NC, ND, NH, NJ, OH, OR, PA, SD, TN, VA, WA No: AK, CO, DE, HI, ID, KS, MA, ME, MO, MS, NE, NM, NY, OK, RI, TX, WI, WV No Response: MI, UT, WY

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

Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED ISBN 978-0-309-68702-7 9 7 8 0 3 0 9 6 8 7 0 2 7 9 0 0 0 0