1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND

Reducing traffic-related fatalities and improving emergency response capabilities are two primary goals of the U.S. Department of Transportation's (USDOT) Joint Program Office (JPO) Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Public Safety Program. To help achieve these goals, the ITS Public Safety Program has implemented a number of initiatives with specific objectives toward:

Improving incident detection and notification.
Reducing emergency response times.
Improving information flows between emergency response agencies (real-time wireless communications links, integration of systems).⁴

Currently, most major metropolitan areas in the United States rely on some type of Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS) to help manage mobility, congestion, and incident response. Many states have installed an extensive infrastructure of remote cameras, loop detectors, and other ITS applications that provide traffic management services. These systems are operated from centralized Traffic Management Centers (TMC), where traffic-related information is received and processed, and appropriate remedial actions are deployed and coordinated. However, to date, many of these systems are not integrated with the CAD systems used by law enforcement agencies.⁵

1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT

The USDOT-funded Computer-Aided Dispatch Traffic Management Center (CAD-TMC) integration and data exchange Field Operational Test (FOT) is one of many initiatives implemented to meet the ITS Public Safety Program goals. The objective of this FOT was to improve information flows between emergency response agencies and improve incident response capabilities. The intent was to develop the technical capability to exchange information as well as to identify and resolve the institutional barriers that can arise when multiple agencies are involved in this type of project.

To achieve these objectives, the USDOT sponsored two FOTs that integrated CAD-TMC systems in Washington State, and Utah, respectively. Both states have well-established incident response programs and have developed the institutional relationships needed to support multiple agency information exchange.

The rationale for this effort was stated in the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the CAD-TMC Integration FOT evaluation:

To date there has been little effort to integrate highway traffic management with public safety systems. Nor have systems supporting public safety operations been developed in the context of a regional ITS architecture or ITS standards. Most existing CAD systems are proprietary and not equipped to easily share information with systems with dissimilar interfaces. Further complicating integration are various data, message formats, and standards used by public safety agencies and transportation agencies. Nevertheless, CAD and ATMS systems can be integrated and data can be shared, provided that a number of related institutional and technical challenges are addressed. New procedures and methods of response that capitalize on the availability of the shared information must also be developed.⁶

It is important to understand the baseline conditions in Utah before discussing the FOT or the evaluation. The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) and Utah Highway Patrol (UHP) have cultivated a long-standing relationship for sharing details of incidents that occur on the freeway system. UHP has provided UDOT with a CAD listing of incidents since the opening of its joint center with UDOT in 1999. The Incident Management Program that began in 1994 was moved to this joint center where the DOT field responders are dispatched by the UHP. The TMC monitors both the UHP CAD log and the radio frequencies used by UHP troopers and the Incident Management Team (IMT) specialists.

The IMT program was expanded in 2000 to Regions 1 and 3 (the regions immediately north and south of the Salt Lake City region) in anticipation of the Winter Olympics. These IMT specialists have direct mobile to mobile communications with the maintenance personnel in their regions. The IMT specialists respond to incidents to provide a full range of incident management services to prevent secondary crashes, reduce congestion, and restore normal traffic as soon as possible. Figure 1 presents a map of Utah delineating the three regional areas (Regions 1 - 3) served by the IMT program.

Given the nature of this well-established program, many of the benefits that might be expected from this type of FOT have already been realized, in particular, the resolution of institutional barriers. Due to the existing procedures as defined, it is a recognized challenge for the CAD-TMC integration FOT to show substantial improvement in accuracy and timeliness of incident reporting and response. To further improve the overall performance of incident response in the field is also a major challenge because of the stringent performance standards put in place for the 2002 Winter Olympic Games. UHP and UDOT emphasized quick clearance of incidents. They tracked each aspect of incident management to ensure they are keeping closures to an absolute minimum. Follow up training and after action review meetings were used for improved performance prior to and after the Games to ensure better response and clearance of all types of incidents. However, the FOT did address a key gap in the program - the ability of the agencies to exchange incident data electronically on a real-time basis using common formats and standards.

Map of Utah's Department of Transportation Maintenance Regions. D
Figure 1. Utah Area Map Showing Regions 1-3 Served by the Incident Management Program. ⁷

UDOT served as the lead agency of the FOT. In addition to UDOT, the other Government agencies that participated in the CAD-TMC integration FOT included:

SLC Police Department (SLCPD).
SLC Fire Department (SLCFD).
Utah Department of Public Safety (DPS).
Valley Emergency Communications Center (VECC).
Utah Transit Authority (UTA).
USDOT's ITS JPO.

1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATION

The USDOT determined that the Utah CAD-TMC integration FOT should be evaluated under the Joint Program Office's National ITS Assessment Program. This final report presents the evaluation findings of the FOT.

The remainder of this report is structured as follows:

Section 2 - Implementation Results: This section summarizes the results of the FOT implementation. The summary includes information on project components that were successfully implemented and project components that were not implemented or not completed at the time the evaluation was completed.
Section 3 - Evaluation Strategy: This section summarizes the strategy developed for the evaluation and how this strategy was implemented. This includes a discussion of data collection, both quantitative and qualitative, and the mid-term modification to the evaluation scope and schedule.
Section 4 - Test Results: This section presents the detailed results for two of the tests conducted as part of the evaluation:
- System Performance Study - An assessment of how well the system met technical specifications, including as assessment of the standards used for system deployment.
- System Impact Study - An assessment of what impact the integration had on incident response procedures, operations, and system mobility.
Section 5 - Evaluation Findings: This section discusses the findings of the evaluation. Findings are presented in support of each test component discussed in section 4 plus the results of the following study:
- Institutional and Technical Issues - How these issues are identified, what the specific issues are, and how the issues have been resolved.
Section 6 - Conclusions and Recommendations: This section discusses overall conclusions and recommendations, and presents the following results:
- General and transit-specific recommendations for technical and institutional lessons learned: What are the lessons learned, and how are they useful to ITS JPO and other states considering similar deployments.
- Benefits Summary: A summary of the quantitative and qualitative benefits identified during the evaluation.

⁴ Excerpted in part from the UDOT ITS Program Safety Web site: <http://www.its.dot.gov/pubsafety/index.htm> (February 7, 2006).

⁵ USDOT, ITS JPO, ITS Public Safety Program article, "Utah, Washington State Projects Will Demonstrate Integration of Intelligent Systems and Computer-Aided Dispatch," accessed from: <http://www.itspublicsafety.net/law_fldtest.htm> (February 7, 2006).

⁶ USDOT, ITS JPO-sponsored RFP, "National Evaluation of the Computer-Aided Dispatch - Traffic Management Center Integration Field Operational Test Request for Proposals," March 7, 2003, page 1.

⁷ Source: Utah Department of Transportation.

Previous | Next