national smart transportation archive researcher (nstar) · as the nstar archive grows and provides...

National Smart Transportation Archive Researcher (NSTAR)

Technical Memorandum #2: Database User Guide and System Documentation FDOT Project Number: BD549 RWPO#20

Prepared for: Commuter Assistance Program Manager

Florida Department of Transportation, Public Transit Office Michael Wright, Project Manager

Prepared by: Center for Urban Transportation Research

University of South Florida, College of Engineering Nevine Georggi, Co-PI Sara J. Hendricks, Co-PI

Liren Zhou, Graduate Research Assistant

With funding from the National Center for Transit Research

September 2006

Acknowledgements The research team gratefully acknowledges the assistance of several individuals who participated on an expert panel and provided valuable input to the development of the Case Study database including: Kevin Shannon Executive Director, Association for Commuter Transportation Rhonda Danielson Marketing Representative for Portland Tri-Met, Oregon Sandi Moody Executive Director, Bay Area Commuter Services, Tampa Florida Lori Diggins Principal of LDA Consulting and the Chair of the TDM Institute, Washington DC Brian Lagerberg Manager Public Transportation and Rail Division, Washington State Department of Transportation

Table of Contents 1. Study Overview .................................................................................................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Problem Statement ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose of this Research Study..................................................................................................................................................................................................................1 1.3 Study Benefits ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................2

2. Purpose of Tech Memo # 2 ...........................................................................................................................................................................................2 3. Review and Respond to Peer Review Comments and Suggestions ........................................................................................................................3 4. Develop Database System...............................................................................................................................................................................................8

4.1 Washington State CTR Program Background.........................................................................................................................................................................................8 4.2 CTR Database Development Process .......................................................................................................................................................................................................9 4.3 Selection Criteria for the NSTAR Database...........................................................................................................................................................................................9 4.4 Selected CTR Records for Inclusion in the NSTAR Database..............................................................................................................................................................11

5. Permit Users to Select Case Studies.............................................................................................................................................................................15 5.1 Permit Users to Retrieve Data in a Variety of Formats.........................................................................................................................................................................36 5.2 Permit Users to Retrieve Data by Browsing Case Studies.......................................................................................................................................................................42 5.3 Provide a Secure Means for Case Study Submittals................................................................................................................................................................................44 5.4 Other User Services.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................46

6. Develop Graphical User Interface...............................................................................................................................................................................47 7. Develop a Reporting Function to Track Usage and Feedback from Users ........................................................................................................47 8. Enter Data from Previously Identified Sources ........................................................................................................................................................56 9. Actively Recruit Case Study Examples through TMAs, CAPs, Etc......................................................................................................................56 10. Prepare database user guide and system documentation .....................................................................................................................................57 11. Pilot test database, review feedback and modify as necessary.............................................................................................................................61

i

List of Figures Figure 1: National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse Home Page ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Figure 2: Help Desk Home Page............................................................................................................................................................................................ 16 Figure 3: Categories Hierarchy Link in the Helpdesk............................................................................................................................................................ 17 Figure 4: Clickable Category and Subcategory Links from the Helpdesk Qs & As and Case Studies Database................................................................... 18 Figure 5: Case Studies Link from the Categories Hierarchy Screen..................................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 6: Page 1-of-6 Available Case Studies in the NSTAR Database................................................................................................................................. 20 Figure 7: Page 2-of-6 Available Case Studies in the NSTAR Database................................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 8: Page 3-of-6 Available Case Studies in the NSTAR Database................................................................................................................................. 22 Figure 9: -of-6 Available Case Studies in the NSTAR Database................................................................................................................................ 23 Figure 10: Page 5-of-6 Available Case Studies in the NSTAR Database.............................................................................................................................. 24 Figure 11: Page 6-of-6 Available Case Studies in the NSTAR Database............................................................................................................................... 25 Figure 12: Using the Subcategories Pull-Down Menu to Search Case Studies ..................................................................................................................... 26 Figure 13: Selecting Subcategories from the Pull-Down Menu ............................................................................................................................................. 27 Figure 14: Narrowing Down the Search by choosing a type of Education Institute: University............................................................................................ 28 Figure 15: Case Studies Returned after Choosing University under Education Subcategory................................................................................................ 29 Figure 16: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington ..................................................................................................................... 30 Figure 17: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington (continued).................................................................................................. 31 Figure 18: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington (continued).................................................................................................. 32 Figure 19: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington (continued).................................................................................................. 33 Figure 20: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington (continued).................................................................................................. 34 Figure 21: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington (continued).................................................................................................. 35 Figure 22: Available Formats for Retrieving Case Studies: Print and Email Options........................................................................................................... 36 Figure 23: Print Format for Case Study................................................................................................................................................................................. 37 Figure 24: Email Option for Case Study ................................................................................................................................................................................ 38 Figure 25: Confirmation Screen for Email Option................................................................................................................................................................. 39 Figure 26: Example of Email Format Received by User ........................................................................................................................................................ 40 Figure 27: Example of Report Displayed from the Email Option .......................................................................................................................................... 41 Figure 28: The Browse Option in the HelpDesk..................................................................................................................................................................... 42 Figure 29: The Browse Screen in the HelpDesk ..................................................................................................................................................................... 43 Figure 30: Ask-a-Question/Submit-Case-Study Option.......................................................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 31: Secure Identification for Returning Users ............................................................................................................................................................ 45 Figure 32: Option to Notify User When Answer is Updated .................................................................................................................................................. 46 Figure 33: RightNow™ Built-In Feature: The Help Tab ....................................................................................................................................................... 58 Figure 34: RightNow™ Built-In General Help Feature......................................................................................................................................................... 59 Figure 35: RightNow™ Built-In Search Tips Feature............................................................................................................................................................ 60

ii

List of Tables Table 1: NSTAR Categories and Subcategories ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Table 2: Selected Employers Categories and Subcategories in NSTAR Database................................................................................................................. 11 Table 3: Service Summary for the month of July .................................................................................................................................................................... 47 Table 4: Service Summary for the month of August................................................................................................................................................................ 49 Table 5: Keyword Searches for July 06 ................................................................................................................................................................................. 51 Table 6: Keyword Searches for August 06............................................................................................................................................................................. 54

iii

1. Study Overview 1.1 Problem Statement Traffic congestion in urban areas is a major cost to society in lost time and productivity as well as the production of green house gases and air pollution. As urban areas continue to grow, building more roads is becoming a less practical option, due to growing expense, environmental impacts, legal issues, land unavailability, and neighborhood opposition. Part of the solution is offering more mobility options and reducing the need to travel. This approach is commonly known as transportation demand management (TDM). This research project, the National Smart Transportation Archive Researcher (NSTAR), ultimately seeks to make TDM strategies more useful and helpful to commuters.

Technical Memorandum #1 summarized the work accomplished covering Tasks 1 and 2 in the Scope of Work. These tasks called for the review of the FSTAR system design, a review of other design options for the database, and the development of recommendations for the case study database system design. This Technical Memorandum summarizes the completed Task 3 as detailed in the Scope of Work and listed in upcoming Section 2 of this memorandum.

1.2 Purpose of this Research Study Over the years, there has been an increase in requests from employers nationwide for information about the use of various combinations of trip reduction strategies at work sites and their effects upon commuter travel behavior. This information has also been sought by transportation professionals for planning purposes and by commuter assistance programs to assist employers. Work site Employee Transportation Coordinators (ETC) have valuable information to share and practical insight and expertise from years of combined experience with running CTR Programs. While ETC networking commonly takes place at the local and regional levels, there remains no central source for such information dissemination nationwide. The purpose of this research study, NSTAR, is to fill this information need by creating a national online, searchable, and updatable database of case studies about trip reduction programs. The NSTAR archive is being offered in response to the 59 percent of respondents to the 2001 Association for Commuter Transportation End-of-Year Survey who requested that TDM-oriented statistics and case studies be developed. We are coordinating with the Association for Commuter Transportation in this study. This archive will be part of the National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse Helpdesk, located at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse.

This database will be used by others to create and modify their own trip reduction programs to make them cost effective and more beneficial to employees. This database contains information from work site annual reports, travel surveys, and in-depth profiles of work sites that have experienced success with their programs. These work site trip reduction programs have demonstrated a consistent trend of reduction in vehicle miles traveled and in the drive alone mode share.

1

1.3 Study Benefits As the NSTAR archive grows and provides more comprehensive information on trends for each case study, the case studies will become increasingly useful to ETCs and transportation professionals. The benefits of this study are twofold. First, by gathering, organizing and providing information about work site commute trip reduction programs, this will enable work site ETCs and other transportation professionals to share nationally what program elements have worked well for their organizations in addition to what circumstances have affected implementation. Second, this database development provides researchers with the information needed to analyze the influence of internal and external factors and to generalize about what yields good results. The results of this project are intended to provide up-to-date information about strategies used to reduce trip making and the results of those strategies within the context of the particular work site.

2. Purpose of Tech Memo # 2 This Technical Memorandum summarizes the completed Task 3 in the Scope of Work on the development of the National Smart Transportation Archive Researcher (NSTAR). Task 3 included the following subtasks:

1. Review and respond to peer review comments and suggestions.

2. Develop database system to: Permit users to select case studies and retrieve data in a variety of formats. Provide a secure means for case study submittals and updates by TDM practitioners and employers.

3. Develop graphical user interface (GUI) to access the data. This must be informed by the interests and business vocabulary of the users. In other words, the GUI must “speak the same language” and accurately anticipate the desired information of the user groups.

4. Develop a reporting function to track usage and obtain feedback from users.

5. Enter data from existing sources identified in Task 1 into the database.

6. Actively recruit case study examples through TMAs, CAPs. Seek the assistance of ACT to support the NCTR database by identifying experienced TDM professionals to develop case studies in other cities.

7. Prepare database user guide and system documentation.

8. Pilot test database, review feedback and modify as necessary.

2

3. Review and Respond to Peer Review Comments and Suggestions The research team received comments from the expert review panel regarding Tech Memo #1. The team asked for review comments with regard to the on three main things:

1. Search categories and subcategories

2. Criteria for rating the usefulness of the case studies

3. Criteria for judging TDM program success

The following details comments received from review panel and present the conclusion reached by research team to develop categories and subcategories that appeal to a wide variety of users. 1. Search categories and subcategories

Originally the research team recommended a set of search categories derived to be consistent with the framework developed by the FHWA Office of Operations, “Mitigating Traffic Congestion: The Role of Demand-Side Strategies” that was based on the following premise:

“A variety of demand-side strategies are implemented in order to impact the travel choices of individuals and organizations, in the context of a wide array of application settings.”

Categories and subcategories were developed for demand-side strategies including: Technology Accelerators Financial Incentives Travel Time Incentives Marketing and Education Mode Strategies Departure Time Route Strategies Trip Reduction Strategies Location/Design Strategies

3

Categories and subcategories were also developed for travel choices including: Mode Choices Departure Time Choices Route Choices Trip Reduction Choices Location/Design Choices

Applications of demand-side strategies influencing travel choices were also identified, including:

Schools Universities Special Events Recreation Tourism Transportation Corridor Planning Construction Mitigation Employer-Based Commuter Programs Airports Incidents and Emergencies Freight Transportation

2. Criteria for Rating the Usefulness of the Case Studies

These evaluate case study quality regardless of program outcome. Proposed criteria for judging reliability and credibility were: Comprehensiveness of work site and employment description and employee profile Level of detail provided Availability of base line travel behavior data Provision of travel behavior data after implementation of the CTR program Duration of CTR program Continuing program measurement, result in development of trend data Selection of appropriate performance measures Quality and combination of CTR program elements

4

Certification of data correctness by employer An identification of external factors and events that may influence travel behavior NSTAR database user rating, based upon feedback regarding case study utility

3. Criteria for judging program success were proposed as:

Stated goals and objectives of the program Presence of external physical infrastructure and services (high quality transit service) Consideration of base line performance level Traveler profile (income, nature of work, trip purpose) Identification of outside events and factors that may have influenced program result (earthquake, transit strike, increasing

gas prices, road closures due to large construction) Identification of internal events and factors that may have influenced program result (layoffs, hirings, company merger,

organizational restructuring, etc)

Based on comments received by peer reviewers, it was decided to organize case studies into categories that users are familiar with and expect. Therefore, the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS)1 was chosen as the basis for the categories and subcategories. Table 1 lists the categories, subcategories, and sub-subcategories.

1 The World Wide Web address for NAICS is http://www.census.gov/naics accessed September 8, 2006.

5

http://www.census.gov/naics

Table 1: NSTAR Categories and Subcategories

Category Sub-category Sub-subcategory

Sma l l

Med ium Pub l i c Schoo l

Large

Sma l l

Med ium Pr iva te Schoo l

Large

Sma l l

Med ium Communi ty Co l l ege Un ivers i t y

Large

Sma l l

Med ium

Educa t ion

Univer s i t y

Large Sma l l

Med ium F inance , Insurance , Rea l Es ta te

Large

Leg i s l a t i ve

Jud ic i a ry

Pub l i c Ut i l i t i e s

Agency

Government

Serv i ces

Hosp i t a l

C l in i c Hea l thcare

Nurs ing Home

Sma l l In fo rmat ion Serv ices/Sof tware

Med ium

6

La rge

L igh t ing L igh t

Other

E lec t ron ics , E lec t ro -mechan ica l , Automot ive , Aerospace

Cab inet s , ca sework and doors Med ium

Other

Truck

Sh ipyard

Manufac tur ing

Heavy

Other

Sma l l

Med ium Pro fess iona l/Persona l Se rv ices

Large

Sma l l

Med ium Re ta i l/Trade

Large

A i r

Land Transpor t a t ion

Sea

Med ia

Adver t i s ing Communica t ions

Other

These categories and subcategories are evolving as the database grows and attracts more users providing feedback. The research team will continue to monitor users’ input and adjust these categories accordingly.

7

4. Develop Database System There are numerous sources of TDM case studies but perhaps none as complete as the database of the Washington State Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program. Described further below, this database is remarkable for several reasons and was selected as a template for the structure and content of the NSTAR archive.

4.1 Washington State CTR Program Background The Washington State CTR Program was created by the 1991 legislature to reduce the economic and environmental degradation caused by the increasing number of commute trips made by employees in Washington State. To accomplish this, the CTR program works with employers to encourage employees to commute without driving alone every day. The program also encourages transportation service providers to expand the opportunities available to employees for commuting in ways other than driving alone. The results of these efforts are demonstrated in the daily choices made by more than 560,000 employees at the 1,114 worksites participating in CTR. Employers affected by the CTR law are required to submit an Employer Annual Report & Program Description form to report the summarized information of the programs they implemented. The affected employers are also required to measure employee commute behavior every two years to measure their progress toward their CTR goals. The employer annual report and employee biennial survey compose two databases that comprise information of employer’s TDM performance and employee’s travel behavior change. Information contained in the annual employer report includes:

Worksite description Employee information Program promotion information, include list of CTR programs implemented or promoted by the employer Worksite characteristics Worksite parking information and parking management Financial incentive and subsidies Site amenities Work schedule policy Other programs availability, include GRH, internal match, fleet vehicle, etc.

Information contained in the individual employee survey includes work schedule, commute trip mode split, compressed workweek schedule, teleworking schedule, travel distance, and employee job title and home zip code. The databases are maintained and managed by Department of Public Transportation, Washington State DOT.

8

4.2 CTR Database Development Process The research team supervised the process of re-entry of over 1,100 Washington State CTR records into an access database. In order to use this rich data source, re-entry was necessary due to widespread electronic file inconsistencies, electronic file corruption, numerous errors found in the original entry of data from the hard copy source plans, and interpretation inconsistencies resulting from changes over the years in the questions asked of employers on the CTR plan application. Electronic data re-entry was an unforeseen necessity that required over five months completing. Acquiring this CTR database was well worth the effort because it is one of the very few large databases available that has baseline performance data, longitudinal data over a period of several years for charting performance trends, detailed and complete information about worksite characteristics and their CTR programs and these both have changed over time, and data that is highly reliable due to quality control measures and certified verifiability. This quality control effort is a significant accomplishment because the resulting database provides a foundation for high quality case study development that goes beyond anecdotal descriptions. As a result, NSTAR will contain case studies that can provide convincing evidence to traffic engineers of the impact of transportation demand management strategies on traffic congestion reduction.

4.3 Selection Criteria for the NSTAR Database Not all of the work sites in the Washington State CTR database have been initially used in the NSTAR archive. The objective was to select those work sites whose programs provide the best information about how to effectively reduce trips. Work sites were selected using several criteria progressively applied and summarized below. The size of the database provided the luxury of focus on those that were most successful. Work sites were first selected under Criteria A based upon availability of data for the most recent study years. These included work sites for which there were surveys completed in 2003 and annual reports completed in 2004. Work sites without this information were excluded under the assumption that these work sites are no longer participating in the trip reduction program. These criteria reduced the eligible work sites from over 1,100 before the criteria were applied to 776. Second, work sites were selected further based on the availability of at least five survey records and at least four annual report records, in order to demonstrate a performance trend. This reduced the sample of work sites to 408. Next, we selected those work sites for which the trend line slope of vehicle miles traveled (VMT) is negative, in other words, the number of vehicle miles traveled by commuters from a work site is decreasing over time. This reduced the sample of work sites to 217. The R2 for VMT was calculated and work sites were further selected based upon an R2 Q CAH. This means that there is greater confidence that the downward slope in VMT is not a random occurrence. This further reduced the number of work sites to 72. Additionally, the trend line slope for driving alone was graphed, further reducing work sites to 59 whose trend line slope was negative, meaning that the mode share for driving alone by commuters from those work sites is decreasing over time. The R2 was again calculated to find that 33 work sites under Criteria A indicated an R2 Q 0.5. There is greater confidence that the decrease in drive alone mode share over time is not random or due to chance. This same process of elimination was also used under Criteria B and Criteria C below.

9

Selection Criteria A

1. The last year survey available: 2003 (Number of worksites: 993)

2. The last year annual report available: 2004 (Number of worksites: 776)

3. Number of survey records available: at least 5 (Number of worksites: 442)

4. Number of annual report records available: at least 4 (Number of worksites: 408)

5. Trend line slope of VMT is negative (Number of worksites: 217)

6. R2 of VMT Q 0.5 (Number of worksites: 72)

7. Trend line slope of driving alone is negative (Number of worksites: 59)

8. R2 of driving alone Q 0.5 (Number of worksites: 33) Selection Criteria B

1. The last year survey available: 2003 (Number of worksites: 993)

2. Number of survey records available: at least 4 (Number of worksites: 662)

3. Trend line slope of VMT is negative (Number of worksites: 331)

4. R2 of VMT Q 0.5 (Number of worksites: 102)

5. Trend line slope of driving alone is negative (Number of worksites: 83)

6. R2 of driving alone Q 0.5 (Number of worksites: 49)

7. Primary business is not “Government”, “Education”, “Military”, “Transportation” (26)

8. Total number of employees less than 500 (21)

9. Does not include all records selected by criteria A (9) Selection Criteria C

Delete the restriction #6 from criteria B and did not include all records selected by criteria B and A. (15)

10

The total number of selected worksites is 57, including 33 selected from criteria A, 9 selected from criteria B, and another 15 selected from criteria C.

4.4 Selected CTR Records for Inclusion in the NSTAR Database The following table includes selected CTR employers, the category, and subcategory as classified in the database, and the number of employees at each employer worksite.

Table 2: Selected Employers Categories and Subcategories in NSTAR Database

Employer Category Specific Category Number of Employees

Pub l i c i s Communica t ions Adver t i s ing 209

KOMO 4 Te lev i s ion Communica t ions Med ia 220

Nor th Sea t t l e Communi ty Co l l ege Educa t ion Communi ty Co l l ege 572

South Sea t t l e Communi ty Co l l ege Educa t ion Communi ty Co l l ege 465

Spokane Communi t y Co l l ege/Dis t r i c t Educa t ion Communi ty Co l l ege 1283

The Ar t Ins t i tu t e o f Sea t t l e Educa t ion Communi ty Co l l ege 311

The Evergreen S ta te Co l l ege Educa t ion Communi ty Co l l ege 425

Spokane Pub l i c Schoo l Educa t ion Pub l i c Schoo l 340

Un ivers i t y o f Wash ington Educa t ion Univer s i t y 23108

GE Cap i ta l -Bus ines s Asset t Fund ing F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e F inance 225

US Bank Nat iona l Assoc i a t ion F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e F inance 110

Bank o f Amer ica F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e F inanc ia l/ Insurance 2097

Acord ia Northwes t Inc F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e Insurance 170

Guard ian L i fe Insurance of Amer ica F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e Insurance 526

Wash ington Mutua l Bank F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e F inance 3649

Wash ington Trus t Bank F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e F inance 389

MSC/Premera B lue Cross F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e Insurance 246

Regence B lueSh ie ld F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e Insurance N/A

Guy Carpenter and Company Inc F inance/Ins/Rea l Es ta t e Re insurance 198

Depar tment of Genera l Admin Government Admin i s t r a t ive 260

11


DSHS Med ica l Ass ' t Admin Government Admin i s t r a t ive 702

Nor thwes t F i sher i e s Sc i ence cente r Government Admin i s t r a t ive 250

S t a t e o f Wash ington At to rney Government Admin i s t r a t ive 277

US Env i ronmenta l Pro tect ion Agency - Reg ion 10 Government Agency 634

Wash ington S t a t e Depar tment o f Eco logy Government Agency 1028

At to rney Genera l ' s Off i ce Government Jud ic i a ry 244

Depar tment of Correct ions Government Jud ic i a ry 400

Depar tment of Correct ions Government Jud ic i a ry 114

Wash ington S t a t e Sena te Government Leg i s l a t i ve 371

C i t y o f Sea t t l e Government Pub l i c Ut i l i t i e s 260

Tacoma Pub l ic Ut i l i t i e s Government Pub l i c Ut i l i t i e s 1200

Wash ington Ut i l i t i es and Transpor ta t ion Commiss ion

Government Pub l i c Ut i l i t i e s 164

C i t y o f Med ica l Lake Government Se rv i ces 27

C i t y o f Sea t t l e Government Se rv i ces 122

Div i s ion o f Ch i ld Suppor t Government Se rv i ces 242

Employment Secur i t y and Depar tment of Soc ia l and Hea l th

Government Se rv i ces 273

Lake l and V i l l age Government Se rv i ces 564

Nat iona l Pa rk Serv ice Government Se rv i ces 102

US Government - Depar tment o f Hea l th and Human Serv ices

Government Se rv i ces 266

Franc iscan Hea l th Sys t em Hea l thcare Admin i s t r a t ion 668

Minor & James Med ica l , PLLC Hea l thcare C l in i c 347

Eas te rn S ta te Hosp i t a l Hea l thcare Hosp i t a l 650

Prov idence S t . Pe ter Hosp i t a l Hea l thcare Hosp i t a l 2299

Prov idence Mt . S t . V incent Hea l thcare Sen io r care/Ret i r ement Communi t y

478

IDX Sys t ems Informat ion Serv ices/Sof tware

Sof tware 523

12


Microsof t Corpora t ion Informat ion Serv ices/Sof tware

Sof tware 2732

Ver t a fo re Informat ion Serv ices/Sof tware

Sof tware 102

Avaya Inc Informat ion Serv ices/Sof tware

Te lecommunica t ions 121

Honeywe l l Manufac tur ing ae rospace , automot ive , au tomat ion product s

1041

Westmark Produc ts Manufac tur ing cab ine t and casework 203

Canyon Creek Cab ine t Company Manufac tur ing cus tom cab ine t s 533

Huntwood Indus t r i e s Manufac tur ing cus tom cab ine t s 731

Legacy Manufac tur ing dba Wes t Coas t Door Manufac tur ing doors 63

ELDEC Corpora t ion Manufac tur ing e l ec t ron ic , e lec t romechan ica l 600

Korry E lect ron ics Manufac tur ing e l ec t ron ics 504

Ag i l en t Techno log ies Manufac tur ing l i f e s c i ences and chem. ana ly s i s 379

Co lumbia L igh t ing Manufac tur ing l i gh t ing 561

Spokane Indus t r i e s Manufac tur ing meta l p roduct s , s t ee l ca s t ing , 186

Cascade Des igns Inc Manufac tur ing outdoor , camp ing gear 331

Todd Pac i f i c Sh ipyards Corpora t ion Manufac tur ing sh ipyard 700

PACCAR Inc Manufac tur ing t rucks 430

HNTB Corpora t ion Pro fess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

a rch i t ec ture/eng ineer ing/p lann ing 145

URS Profess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

a rch i t ec ture/eng ineer ing/p lann ing 280

West in Sea t t l e Pro fess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

Eng ineer ing 700

Weyerhaeuser Company Pro fess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

Fores t p roduct s 193

Weyerhaeuser Company Pro fess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

Fores t p roduct s 557

Mercer Human Resource Consu l t ing Pro fess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

Human Resource 195

13


Garvey Schuber t Barer Pro fess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

Law f i rm 149

S toe l R ives LLP Profess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

Law f i rm 178

A l sco Pro fess iona l/Persona l s e rv i ces

Tex t i l e 180

REI Re ta i l/ t r ade Outdoor , camping gea r 612

Nor thwes t A i r l ines , Inc . Transpor t a t ion A i r l ine 206

14

5. Permit Users to Select Case Studies As seen in Figure 1, an announcement of the availability of case studies was posted on the Helpdesk portion of the Clearinghouse home page. The link is clickable and takes the user to the Helpdesk home page, Figure 2.

Figure 1: National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse Home Page

New - Over 100 case studies added to the Help Desk. Sponsored by FHWA, FTA, ACT, and FDOT.

15

http://www.nctr.usf.edu/helpdesk/

Figure 2: Help Desk Home Page

Features of the Helpdesk and how the case studies can be searched and retrieved in different formats is described in the following section using screen pictures of the actual web application.

16

To view all categories the user can click the to reveal the hierarchy of the categories in the helpdesk including the case studies, Figure 3.

Figure 3: Categories Hierarchy Link in the Helpdesk

17

The user can scroll down to browse through all available categories in the helpdesk including the case studies. It only takes a few seconds to go from the top to the bottom of the categories, Figure 4.

Figure 4: Clickable Category and Subcategory Links from the Helpdesk Qs & As and Case Studies Database

18

Clicking on the Case Studies link, Figure 5 will lead the user to select all related records categorized under Case Studies, Figure 6.

Figure 5: Case Studies Link from the Categories Hierarchy Screen

19

Figure 6 represents Page 1-of-6 comprising the 115 case studies included in the NSTAR database as of September 8, 2006. It should be noted that the database will continue to grow and more case studies will be added as they become available. Figures 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 represent pages 2-, 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-of-6 respectively. Clicking the top or bottom “ ” gets the user to the next page.

Figure 6: Page 1-of-6 Available Case Studies in the NSTAR Database

20


21


22


23


24


25

Another method of searching the case studies database is selecting a subcategory from the pull-down menu as seen in Figure 12.

Figure 12: Using the Subcategories Pull-Down Menu to Search Case Studies

26

There is more detail in the pull-down menu of the subcategories if the user wants to narrow down the search. For example, if Education is selected from the subcategory menu as seen in Figure 13, the user can still select one of four types of education institutions to further narrow down the search criteria.

Figure 13: Selecting Subcategories from the Pull-Down Menu

27

To follow with the example of Education as the selected subcategory, and choosing University as the worksite setting the user is looking for; Figure 14 shows the drill down into the subcategories.

Figure 14: Narrowing Down the Search by choosing a type of Education Institute: University

28

Figure 15 shows the results of searching employer worksites related to a university setting, 5 case studies were found and are displayed for user to browse through all or any of them.

Figure 15: Case Studies Returned after Choosing University under Education Subcategory

29

Clicking on the first case study listed, NSTAR University of Washington, the details of the case study report are displayed as seen in Figure 16. Figures 17 to 21 are screen shots of the entire case study report showing the wealth of information retrieved from the CTR data.

Figure 16: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington

30

Figure 17: Example of Case Study Report - NSTAR University of Washington (continued)

31


32


33


34


35

5.1 Permit Users to Retrieve Data in a Variety of Formats Highlighted in Figure 22 are the different formats available for retrieving a case study from the NSTAR database, print and email formats.

PRINT ANSWER

EMAIL ANSWER

Figure 22: Available Formats for Retrieving Case Studies: Print and Email Options

36

Figure 23 is a picture of the print screen for the case study. The print out will follow the user on-line format of printing the frame in the webpage. This particular example was printed out in four 8 1/2 x 11 pages.

Figure 23: Print Format for Case Study

37

Figure 24 displays the screen for the email option. The users can email the case study to themselves or to others.

Figure 24: Email Option for Case Study

38

After the message is sent, there will be a confirmation screen, Figure 25.

Figure 25: Confirmation Screen for Email Option

39

Figure 26 displays an email received from the Helpdesk with a link to the NSTAR University of Washington case study.

Figure 26: Example of Email Format Received by User

40

Figure 27 shows NSTAR University of Washington case study report after clicking on link provided in the email.

Figure 27: Example of Report Displayed from the Email Option

41

5.2 Permit Users to Retrieve Data by Browsing Case Studies Figure 28 highlights the Browse option in the HelpDesk

Figure 28: The Browse Option in the HelpDesk

42

Figure 29 displays the browse screen after that option is selected.

Figure 29: The Browse Screen in the HelpDesk

43

5.3 Provide a Secure Means for Case Study Submittals There is a built-in option in the Helpdesk to provide feedback or ask a question. This option will be used to submit case studies by TDM practitioners. Figure 30 displays the Ask a Question tab link. In the future, the wording of this tab can be changed to reflect Submit Case Study option. There is a window to identify the participant and to attach files as needed.

Figure 30: Ask-a-Question/Submit-Case-Study Option

44

Figure 31 shows how secure and user-friendly this application is by providing a window for returning users.

Figure 31: Secure Identification for Returning Users

45

5.4 Other User Services Permit Users to be Notified when Case Studies are Updated

Note in Figure 32 the option to click on Notify Me by Email if Answer is Updated. That is a built-in feature of the RightNow™ Helpdesk as well.

Figure 32: Option to Notify User When Answer is Updated

46

6. Develop Graphical User Interface Please refer to Tech Memo #1, page 16, Section 5.5: Developing NSTAR using RightNow™, (more information on this software can be found at http://www.rightnow.com/). Some of the advantages of using the software addresses the user interface aspect of the database was detailed in tech Memo#1 and is repeated in the following list:

The software is administered, updated, and maintained by USF Academic Computing, which provides expert around the clock support in monitoring and support of large databases. The estimated cost and effort necessary to create a custom system with desired functionality would by far exceed any costs necessary for licensing the RightNow™ system.

RightNow™ is a commercial product that has undergone lengthy testing and troubleshooting procedures and is currently used by major corporations serving thousands of customers such as Siemens, British Airways, Ben and Jerry’s, and Blue Cross Blue Shield of Montana. Therefore, the reliability of RightNow™ is considered much greater than a custom-developed solution.

RightNow™’s web interface is user-friendly and is designed to provide the user with high-quality search results with minimal required input.

7. Develop a Reporting Function to Track Usage and Feedback from Users Usage statistics can be periodically generated so that the performance of the NSTAR system can be monitored and improved if necessary. Tables 3 and 4 provide an example of service summary statistics received monthly (July and August 2006 respectively) from USF academic computing. The statistics are a feature of the RightNow™ software and provided to CUTR as a part of the contract with academic computing.

Table 3: Service Summary for the month of July

Month/Day/Year Searches Answers Viewed Sessions Hits Web Questions Email Assists

7/01/2006 0 2 21 26 0 0 7/02/2006 2 1 19 41 0 0 7/03/2006 3 3 13 27 0 5 7/04/2006 0 0 31 41 0 1 7/05/2006 0 0 73 87 1 0 7/06/2006 2 1 68 79 0 3 7/07/2006 7 1 31 46 0 3

47

http://www.rightnow.com/)

Month/Day/Year Searches Answers Viewed Sessions Hits Web Questions Email Assists

7/08/2006 0 0 18 37 0 0 7/09/2006 0 0 65 70 0 0 7/10/2006 4 5 27 48 0 1 7/11/2006 10 14 26 68 0 11 7/12/2006 30 13 17 72 0 6 7/13/2006 10 5 118 154 0 7 7/14/2006 18 12 30 71 0 9 7/15/2006 0 0 11 11 0 0 7/16/2006 0 0 5 5 0 0 7/17/2006 26 11 10 47 0 3 7/18/2006 8 4 23 45 0 9 7/19/2006 2 2 38 50 0 4 7/20/2006 21 14 36 83 0 4 7/21/2006 18 8 29 65 0 2 7/22/2006 0 0 28 54 0 0 7/23/2006 7 15 19 45 0 0 7/24/2006 21 16 25 73 1 7 7/25/2006 18 8 17 44 0 2 7/26/2006 10 4 19 49 0 1 7/27/2006 10 3 8 21 0 0 7/28/2006 3 1 13 29 0 2 7/29/2006 0 0 16 29 0 0 7/30/2006 0 0 14 14 0 0 7/31/2006 18 6 20 59 0 0

Total 248 149 888 1590 2 80

Usage statistics can be periodically generated so that the performance of the NSTAR system can be monitored and improved if necessary. Case studies can be scored by different criteria and pertinent ones put at the top of the returned list after a search. The scoring can be done

48

based on how data of that case study was completed. The scoring also can be based on the known performance measures of TDM, for example, vehicle miles traveled, vehicle trips reduced, etc.

Table 4: Service Summary for the month of August

Month /Day/ Year Searches Answers Viewed Sessions Hits Web Questions Email Assists

2006/08/01 6 1 10 30 0 6

2006/08/02 32 11 15 57 0 5

2006/08/03 10 6 23 51 0 12

2006/08/04 2 1 21 27 0 5

2006/08/05 0 0 11 11 0 1

2006/08/06 0 0 13 16 0 1

2006/08/07 20 12 39 78 0 0

2006/08/08 10 32 44 81 0 1

2006/08/09 13 8 29 51 0 0

2006/08/10 10 3 16 29 0 2

2006/08/11 60 65 47 206 0 1

2006/08/12 1 11 8 27 0 0

2006/08/13 0 22 39 46 0 0

2006/08/14 10 14 19 47 0 0

2006/08/15 0 3 42 48 0 5

2006/08/16 13 3 10 24 0 1

49

Month /Day/ Year Searches Answers Viewed Sessions Hits Web Questions Email Assists

2006/08/17 14 11 19 53 0 0

2006/08/18 31 16 25 101 0 1

2006/08/19 0 49 87 92 0 0

2006/08/20 0 0 20 20 0 0

2006/08/21 25 11 18 65 1 1

2006/08/22 0 1 20 28 0 0

2006/08/23 70 5 23 97 0 0

2006/08/24 2 1 28 31 0 2

2006/08/25 11 4 15 38 0 0

2006/08/26 1 1 18 20 0 0

2006/08/27 2 10 18 41 0 0

2006/08/28 24 11 14 58 0 0

2006/08/29 8 2 22 32 0 1

2006/08/30 0 2 21 26 0 0

2006/08/31 0 0 20 26 0 8

Total 375 316 754 1557 1 53

Although these totals reflect the NCTR TDM and Telework Clearinghouse HelpDesk statistics of utilization, and although the TDM case studies database has not been promoted, statistics show that for the month of July, answers viewed from the case studies database were 30

50

(Table 3) and 58 case studies (Table 4) were viewed by HelpDesk users throughout the month of August. The database had 82 and 105 case studies for July and August 2006 respectively.

In addition to the service summary, a list of all keywords searched during the month is provided. As seen in Table 5 and Table 6, this list identifies the “hot searches” of that month. In addition, the list can be used as a guide to users information needs for future research topics and products.

Table 5: Keyword Searches for July 06

Phrase Stem Search Count Answers

U K 7 1 9

CON S T R UCT 4 2 8

L O C K E R 4 6 6

C O N S U L T 4 7 5

S U B S ID I 3 9 7

N S T A R 3 1 1 0

T E L E W O R K 3 1 1 0

B I C Y C L L O C KE R 3 1 2 5

B I K E R A CK B U S E 3 2 1 3

T I M E 3 2 2 2

C A R F R E E D A Y 3 2 8 7

M I S S IO N S T AT E M E N T 2 2 4

V A N P O O L 2 2 0 7

P A R K CA S H 2 2 7 2

51


T R A N SI T O R IE N T 2 3 3 6

C O M M U T P RO F I L 2 3 5 9

T R A N SP O R T D E M A ND M AN A G 2 5 0 3

B L O G 1 0

C O M P A N I F O C U S 1 0

C O M P A N I S PE C I F 1 0

M U R A L I K R I S H N A D E V A RA K O N D A 1 0

M U R A L I 1 0

I N T E R N RI D E 1 0

M I N I V AN 1 1

Q U E S T I ON A IR 1 2

S T A T U T 1 6

U R B A N T R AN 1 7

W A S H I NG TON 1 1 2

R E T A I L 1 2 1

R E G U L L E G IS L 1 6 5

S T A T U T R EG U L L E G I S L 1 6 7

T M A 1 1 0 7

R I D E M A T C H 1 1 0 9

52


W A L K 1 1 1 3

B I C Y C L 1 1 1 9

S H O P 1 1 2 6

B I K E P A T H 1 1 6 7

M I N I V AN P OO L 1 2 0 7

R I D E S H A R STA T U T R E G U L L E G I S L 1 2 2 4

G U A R A N T E RI D E H O M E 1 2 3 7

C A R F R E E 1 2 3 9

W O R L D C A R F R E E 1 2 4 8

B U S I CO M M ER CI D I S T R I CT 1 2 4 9

T R I P R E D U CT S T AT U T R EG U L L E G I S L

1 2 6 6

W A L K I N CE NT 1 3 0 0

V A N P O O L INS U R R E Q U I R 1 3 0 2

M A R K E T M I NI V A N P O O L 1 3 1 2

T M A S U R V E Y F I N A L R E P OR T A P R I L 2 0 0 4

1 3 3 8

C O M M U T P RO F I L 2 0 0 5 1 3 7 5

7 P A S S EN G V E H I C L C O M M U T 1 4 2 5

53

Table 6: Keyword Searches for August 06


J O B 9 5 0

L A U N C H P R OG R A M 7 4 2 6

N S T A R 6 1 1 0

S T U D I 5 2 2 3

T D M E F F E C T L O N G- T E R M 5 3 3 3

C O M M U N TDM P L A N 5 4 1 3

T E L E CO M M U T 4 4 1

C O M M U N 2 3 0

S H U T T L 2 7 8

J O B D E S C R I P T 2 1 3 5

M A R K E T I N C E N T S U C C E S S 2 3 2 1

P R I Z E C A R P O O L V A N P OO L 2 4 0 3

P R I Z E C A R P O O L V A N P OO L R I D E S H AR S I G N U P 2 4 5 3

F I N AN C T D M P R O G R A M 2 4 5 5

B U S F U ND 1 0

B Y L A W 1 0

S L O G AN 1 0

L A W 1 0

S H U T T L F UND 1 1

S E N I O R O UTR E A CH S P E CI A L I S T 1 2

R F P 1 6

54


S A L A R I 1 1 8

F I N AN C 1 1 9

F L E X T I M 1 2 0

R E Q U E S T P RO P S A L 1 5 6

S A M P L R FP 1 6 2

T E L E W O R K 1 1 1 0

F U N D 1 1 2 0

T M A S A L A R I 1 1 2 1

I N C E N T R E S U T L 1 1 5 1

M A R K E T T HE M E 1 1 7 6

P R O M O T 1 2 0 8

A N N U A L CO ST 1 2 2 1

I N C E N T R E S U L T 1 2 2 5

J O B E X E C U T D I R E C T O R 1 2 3 0

T M A S U R V E Y 1 2 3 7

M A R K E T E V E N T 1 2 5 5

A V E R A G C O S T 1 2 7 0

A CT T M A S UR V E Y 1 2 7 1

P A R K CA S H 1 2 7 7

T M A S U R V E Y R E P O R T 1 3 2 5

P A R K C A S H P O L I C I 1 3 3 0

55


L O N G- T E R M T D M E FF E C T 1 3 3 3

T D M S A L A R I 1 3 3 3

C O M M U T F OL L O W - U P S UR V E Y 1 3 8 3

E M P L O Y E C O M M U T 1 3 9 6

R I D E H O M E T R A N SI T 1 3 9 9

E M P L O Y E C O M M U T E X T EN S D A Y 1 4 0 4

M O N T H A V ER A G C O M M UT C O S T 1 4 3 7

8. Enter Data from Previously Identified Sources This subtask is covered in the next section.

9. Actively Recruit Case Study Examples through TMAs, CAPs, Etc. At an early stage in the development of the NSTAR Case Studies archive, it was decided to concentrate initially on a database structure and search function that would accommodate the information needs of those specifically looking for case studies of TDM strategies applied to work sites. This is because a large part of congestion management is aimed at peak hour commuting and much of the efforts of TDM professionals, such as those working in TMAs, are engaged in outreach to employment sites for promoting TDM. For quality control, it was also decided to select case studies based upon the quality of information provided, with preference given to those with baseline data and performance results after TDM program implementation.

Much of the response to our solicitation for work site case studies yielded information and leads that were about TDM programs at the TMA level or citywide services, such as downtown trolleys. If there were results associated with these programs, they were often provided for work sites aggregated across a larger service area. This is all valuable information and will be used to develop future case studies. For now, the NSTAR archive contains case studies at the individual work site level. In the near future, the NSTAR archive is envisioned to expand to provide case studies for a greater variety of TDM commuter and non-commuter programs in different geographic locations. A good source of information for this will be other municipalities with trip reduction ordinances that keep records of program performance by work site. Eventually, the archive expansion is envisioned to be organized to accommodate case studies focused upon the evaluation of programs as applied to the following:

56

Different kinds of geographic service areas, such as corridor programs, downtown programs, and regional programs One or a combination of TDM strategies, such as the results of a guaranteed ride home program, applied to a defined

service area Applications other than commuting to work sites, such as special events and construction mitigation

To develop this archive, all Florida commuter assistance programs and TMAs were contacted, as well as North American TMAs from a list of participants in the 2003 TMA Survey for the Association for Commuter Transportation (ACT). ACT provided support for this project through the assistance of two graduate student interns from the Goizueta Business School. As of the date of this Tech Memo, the archive is composed of case studies from the following sources:

Washington State Department of Transportation, Commute Trip Reduction Program Association for Commuter Transportation EPA Best Workplaces for Commuters FHWA South Florida Commuter Services UK Department of Transport

10. Prepare database user guide and system documentation In addition to this technical memo that details how to search the NSTAR database, generic help is available on the Helpdesk screen as seen in Figure 33. Figures 34 and 35 display the General Help and Search Tips tabs available as built-in features of the Helpdesk.

57

Figure 33: RightNow™ Built-In Feature: The Help Tab

58

Figure 34: RightNow™ Built-In General Help Feature

59

Figure 35: RightNow™ Built-In Search Tips Feature

60

11. Pilot test database, review feedback and modify as necessary The TDM case studies database had been up and running for a few months. As seen by service summaries received from RightNow™ for July and August 2006, it has been searched and utilized. Until now, it has been a soft rollout with little promotion. In October 2006, focused efforts to promote the database will be undertaken. Not only will the availability of national and international case studies be advertised, but also submittals of success stories in TDM efforts will be encouraged.

61

national smart transportation archive researcher (nstar) · as the nstar archive grows and provides...

Documents