1. NHTS 2008-09 in Dallas Fort Worth ARASH MIRZAEI, 000KATHY YU, BEHRUZ PASCHAI NCTCOG TRB PLANNING APPLICATION CONFERENCE 2015

2. Background  While NCTCOG has set aside about $2 million to update its 1996 HH survey, through coordination with TxDOT, state purchased 20,000 samples of NHTS. It would have looked inefficient to move forward with a new HH survey without taking advantage of about 6000 HH samples provided through NHTS. This project was designed to understand, examine, and re-expand NHTS 08-09 survey dataset for real application in the region. NCTCOG 1

3. Project Design 1. Understand the design, sampling, recruitment, and data collection 2. Data checks 3. Data cleanup and imputation if necessary 4. Sample re-expansion 5. Report and final dataset creation 6. Sample adequacy analysis for 1. Understanding present trip pattern [what does this mean!] 2. Development of analytical techniques for forecasting [models? What else?] NCTCOG 2

4. Data Checks (284)  Non-response checks (83)  If the responses are provided or blank  Range checks (57)  Accuracy and logic checks(38)  Ex: verify the derived values  Consistency checks(106)  Values from different files NCTCOG 3

5. Records excluded from NCTCOG NHTS Dataset In order to create the best dataset for use in the NCTCOG Travel Model, it was decided to remove records from the original set of households. Households in 2009 NHTS Database for NCTCOG Area 5,943 Households which are not 100% Complete (Each person had to complete post-survey interview) -920 Households with Weekends Travel Day -1,450 Households with Travel Day on Federal Holidays, Thanksgiving Break, Winter Break -330 Households which did not specify Household Income -220 Final Records in NCTCOG NHTS Dataset 3,023 NCTCOG 4

6. Expansion – Target and Variables  Target: American Community Survey 2011 5-Year  Household Variables (133)  Household Income by Geography (35)  Worker Count by Household Vehicles by Geography (51)  Household Size by Worker Count by Geography (47)  Person Variables  Sex by Age by Geography (54) NCTCOG 5

7. Expansion - Cells  Original NHTS data was expanded to population of the state of Texas.  NCTCOG NHTS data was expanded to local geography  Ideally wanted to breakdown each variable into 12 counties  Where there were not enough records(minimum 20), NCTCOG followed the following collapsing strategy 1. Collapsed counties into 7 county groups: individual Core counties (Collin, Dallas, Denton, Tarrant) and 3 other county groupings(South, West, East) 2. Collapsed counties into 5 county groups: individual Core Counties and a Non-Core grouping of remaining seven counties. 3. Collapsed counties into 2 county groups: Core and Non-Core NCTCOG 6

8. HH Variable – Household Income by Geography  Sample Breakdown from NCTCOG NHTS Database County Name0K-25K25K – 50K50K – 75K75K – 100K100K+TOTAL Collin 33565767174 387 Dallas 189237149133219 927 Denton 29626152114 318 Tarrant 131233159144274 941 South (Ellis, Johnson) 4338322625 164 West (Hood, Parker, Wise) 2946241835 152 East (Hunt, Kaufman, Rockwall) 3141292637 164 Total4857135114668783,053 NCTCOG 7

9. HH Variable – Household Income by County Income County Name0-25K25K – 50K50K – 75K75K – 100K100K+TOTAL Collin 30,18448,54245,99740,131111,380 276,234 Dallas 200,603227,787155,22690,620166,427 840,663 Denton 30,63545,91143,53131,34179,937 231,355 Tarrant 128,021157,506122,96382,670152,757 643,917 South (Ellis, Johnson) 17,28724,40120,76515,31722,683 100,453 West (Hood, Parker, Wise) 15,10419,34315,89311,54220,608 82,490 East (Hunt, Kaufman, Rockwall) 17,45318,96617,84313,81022,283 90,355 Total439,287542,456422,218285,431576,0752,265,467 Target Cells from ACS 2011 5-Year NCTCOG 8

10. HH Variable - Worker by HH Veh by Geography #Workers \ # Veh 01234+Total 0 All Counties 77 Collin34Collin24 Core50 All Counties 24 Dallas157Dallas94 Denton33Denton23 Tarrant142Tarrant90 South35South18 Non-Core21 West21West20 East27East20 TOTAL449TOTAL289TOTAL71 1 All Counties 17 Collin31 Collin80 Core123 All Counties 52 Dallas169 Dallas143 Denton75 Tarrant165 Denton29 South28 Non-Core28 West22 Tarrant113 East24 Non-Core33 TOTAL349TOTAL563TOTAL151 2 All Counties 26 Collin105 Collin35 All Counties 98 Dallas137 Denton73 Dallas50 Tarrant167 South26 Denton22 West21 East26 Tarrant72 Non-Core38 TOTAL555TOTAL217 3+All Counties20 All Counties 58 All Counties 37 Total 3,053 NCTCOG 9

11. HH Variable – HH Size by Worker by Geography HHPERS \ WRKCOUNT 0123 Total 1 Collin26Collin23 Dallas166Dallas124 Denton32Denton32 Tarrant119Tarrant98 Non-Core81Non-Core28 TOTAL424TOTAL305 2 Collin40Collin62Collin70 Dallas131Dallas138Dallas123 Denton35Denton40Denton44 Tarrant140Tarrant145Tarrant127 South28South22South24 West31West19West22 East31East25East31 TOTAL436TOTAL451TOTAL441 3 All Counties50 All Counties 154 Collin41 All Counties 51 Dallas47 Denton25 Tarrant79 Non-Core21 TOTAL213 4+ Core182 Collin46 All Counties 65 Dallas50 Not-Core36 Denton41 Tarrant75 Non-Core33 TOTAL218TOTAL245 Total 3,053 NCTCOG 10

12. Person Variable – Sex by Age by Geo. SEX\AGE <55-1718-2930-4950-6465+ TOTAL Male Collin37 Collin91 Core160 Collin150Collin123Collin76 3,373 Dallas141Dallas189Dallas259Dallas220 Dallas43 Denton90Denton111Denton94Denton55 Tarrant182Tarrant261Tarrant269Tarrant225 Denton26 South30 Non- Core 28 South39South43South39 West23West40West49West45 Tarrant49 East19East38East60East41 Non- Core 28 TOTAL183TOTAL576TOTAL188TOTAL828TOTAL897TOTAL701 Female Collin31 Collin96 Core202 Collin142Collin154Collin69 3,829 Dallas147Dallas217Dallas344Dallas298 Dallas36 Denton60Denton128Denton107Denton61 Tarrant174Tarrant284Tarrant310Tarrant275 Denton41 South36 Non- Core 28 South46South50South64 West30West40West54West49 Tarrant54 East22East41East62East52 Non- Core 25 TOTAL187TOTAL565TOTAL230TOTAL898TOTAL1,081TOTAL868 Total 3701,1414181,7261,9781,5697,202 NCTCOG 11

13. Person Variable– Sex by Age by Geo. AGE SEX <55-1718-2930-4950-6465+ TOTAL Male Collin29,980Collin82,038 Core481,900 Collin126,301Collin60,059Collin25,117 3,122,375 Dallas99,350Dallas232,970Dallas348,788Dallas177,013Dallas84,704 Denton25,457Denton66,045Denton102,918Denton48,573Denton19,074 Tarrant72,479Tarrant182,391 Non- Core 57,195 Tarrant258,302Tarrant142,737Tarrant66,283 Non-Core27,868 South20,480South25,919South18,719South11,242 West34,692West46,714West30,583West17,492 East26,288East35,968East23,866East12,870 TOTAL255,134TOTAL644,904TOTAL539,095TOTAL944,910TOTAL501,550TOTAL 236,78 2 Female Collin28,603Collin78,678 Core479,445 Collin131,693Collin64,080Collin32,039 3,203,571 Dallas94,649Dallas223,140Dallas345,531Dallas190,832Dallas 119,09 5 Denton24,236Denton63,114Denton105,531Denton51,683Denton24,763 Tarrant69,860Tarrant174,560 Non- Core 54,603 Tarrant266,502Tarrant151,156Tarrant90,627 Non-Core26,852 South19,261South26,958South19,416South13,690 West32,614West47,168West31,323West21,412 East24,767East36,406East24,068East15,216 TOTAL244,200TOTAL616,134TOTAL534,048TOTAL959,789TOTAL532,558TOTAL 316,84 2 Total 499,3341,261,0381,073,1431,904,6991,034,108553,6246,325,946 NCTCOG 12

14. Expansion Weight Freq. Distribution AvgStd.Dev 2009 NHTS383.89415.6768 NCTCOG NHTS742.05415.696 NCTCOG 13

15. Sample Output- Trip Rates by Income NCTCOG 14

16. Household Survey Comparison 15 1996 HHS2009 NCTCOG NHTS 2009 National NHTS Households3,3943,053 150,147 Persons7,6587,202 - Trips31,92827,066 - NCTCOG

17. Trip Rates by Purpose Household Survey Comparison 16 Trip Rate NCTCOG 1964 NCTCOG 1984 NCTCOG 1996 NCTCOG NHTS 2009 National NHTS 2009 HBW1.912.291.991.39 - HNW5.424.324.845.75 - NHB1.792.072.313.08 - Total9.128.689.1510.259.50 22% 53 % 25 % 100 % 27% 48 % 25 % 100 % 21% 59 % 20 % 100 % 14 % 56 % 30 % 100 % NCTCOG

18. Person Trip Rates by Gender Household Trip Rates by Mode Household Survey Comparison 17 Trip Rate1996 HHS 2009 NCTCOG NHTS 2009 National NHTS Motorized8.199.36 8.51 Non-Motorized0.600.820.99 Unspecified0.360.08 - Gender1996 HHS 2009 NCTCOG NHTS 2009 National NHTS% Male3.52 3.74 Female3.503.823.83 TOTAL3.513.67 3.80 Due to waterfall method of expansion The person table gets a different weight Than the HH of that record. In this table The results are from HH table to be Comparable with other surveys that did Not have person level expansion. Using person weights, 3.67 is 3.94. Person trip rates in 1964 and 1984 was 2.73 and 3.40. NCTCOG

19. Household Survey Comparison 18 1996 HHS2009 NCTCOG NHTS 2009 National NHTS* Persons Per Households**2.452.79 2.50 Workers Per Households1.311.27 1.34 DL Driver Per Households1.741.81 1.88 Vehicles Per Household1.691.82 1.86 Vehicles Per DL Driver 0.97 1.00 0.99 Vehicles Per Worker 1.29 1.43 1.39 *Source: Summary of travel trends, 2009 NHTS, FHWA June 2011 **based on NCTCOG HH surveys in 1964 and 1984, these values were 3.22 and 2.55 NCTCOG

20. Household Survey Comparison  Reconciliation of HBW trip percentage differences 19 Gender 2009 NCTCOG NHTS1996 HHS Original Survey Results14%22% Direct Work Trips14%18.1% Includes Work-related15.2%18.1% Correction for Work from Home15.2%16.1% NCTCOG

21. Points of Discussions  Uses of the HHTS are predictable and should be documented prior to the design in a formal manner. Future introspection of expectation provides valuable lessons both in design and application of the survey.  Usual HHTS does not produce useful trip tables but it can be very useful for quantification the underlying travel behavior, such as trip rates and length by market segments. These can be used to expand a sample seed trip table from other sources to create a trip table for short term forecasting.  Expansion method usually focuses on HH characteristics but application of the data uses person and trips extensively. Attention to person, trip, and vehicle tables in creation of expansion method is practical and necessary for comparative analysis. 20 NCTCOG