TPF-5(181) Research Management Database Business Analysis RAC Briefing — July 24, 2018

TPF-5(181) History Caltrans RPMD TPF-5(181) Initiated Cambria Contract WSDOT RPMD WSDOT Survey & Analysis RAC Report Out SPP Business Analysis Contract Project Completion This presentation focuses on the SPP contract for Business Analysis – started in December 2016 and wrapped up in 2018. 2007 2008 2010 2011 2014 2015 2016 2018

Project Goal Establish a clear understanding of business needs and potential Research Program Management Database (RPMD) functions to manage research programs and projects across their entire lifecycle

Scope What this IS What this ISN’T A compilation of requirements for building or updating a state DOT research database system Research management business requirements and system support functions Data that could be included – 3 levels Transition process What this ISN’T A proposal to create a centralized national database to manage all state DOT research information A research database for you to use

Anticipated Project Outcomes States looking to enhance their RPMDs have a starting point for requirements development – saving time, effort and cost There is a foundation for moving to common data standards to enable further benchmarking or aggregating information across states Common RPMD functions are identified for future collaborative development across DOTs

Who Might Be Interested? State DOT Research Managers & Staff State DOT Information Technology/Application Development Staff (and their contractors) FHWA SP&R Program Managers TRB Research Information Managers AASHTO RAC PM&Q Task Force AASHTO RAC Coordination & Collaboration Task Force

What are the Products? State DOT Practice Survey Update Research Report RPMD Requirements Spreadsheet Data Models

Survey – Software Platforms 17 states using spreadsheets 16 using MS Access 14 using other platforms 47 responses; fairly evenly split across excel, MS Access, other platforms (SQL Server, Oracle, .NET, SharePoint, etc.) – diversity of RPMD solutions out there. Note also that several states indicated multiple platforms in use – for different aspects of project/program management. Source: WSDOT RAC Member RPMD Survey 2018

Survey- Customization 12 states – off the shelf or light customization 13 states – moderate to heavy customization 12 states – “from scratch” 37 responses to this – 25 of which had systems developed either from scratch or with significant customization. Indicates that (1) states have invested effort into building these systems and (2) while some are using off the shelf systems, a majority have seen the need for a custom solutions for research project management. Source: WSDOT RAC Member RPMD Survey 2018

Survey- Satisfaction 14 states interested in RPMD improvements (11 using Excel/Access) 8 states satisfied with current system 22 responses to this question. Indicates at least 14 states are interested in improving their RPMD capabilities. These 14 states represent an audience for this research. There may be more - not clear why the other 25 states didn’t respond to this. Source: WSDOT RAC Member RPMD Survey 2018

Research Report Business Requirements Functional Requirements What do Research Offices need to do? Functional Requirements What should a RPMD do to support the business requirements? Data Requirements What data elements should be maintained in a RPMD? Transition Requirements What will it take for DOTs to implement enhanced a RPMD? Recommendations Options for using the project results

Business Requirements What DOT research offices need to do With or without an RPMD Foundation for developing RPMD functional and data requirements

Business Requirements for DOT Research Management Research Planning, Coordination and Scoping Identify and Investigate Research Needs Scope Research Projects Identify and Pursue Research Collaboration Opportunities Manage Research Staffing Track Research Stakeholders Research Prioritization and Funding Manage and Track Research Funds Develop Annual SP&R Research Work Program Develop non SP&R Research Projects Research Project Management Procure Research Services Manage Technical Review of Research Deliverables Manage Research Scope, Schedule and Budget Track and Report on Research Project Status Manage Pub. And Dist. Of Research Products Report includes examples of how different state DOTs carry out these functions, based on review of research manuals and interviews. Research Implementation and Evaluation Manage & Track Technology Transfer Activities Manage and Track Research Implementation & Outcomes Report on Accomplishments and Value Evaluate Conduct of Research

Functional Requirements What an RPMD needs to do to support the business requirements But recognize that: Not all of these functions are needed in every DOT Some of these functions may be incorporated in existing DOT systems Some of these functions can be provided by other software

Functional Requirements for DOT Research Management Information Tracking Data Entry (see data reqmts) Permissions Internal Interfaces Document Links Search and Query Workflow Support Research Needs Collection Review & Comment Balloting/ Voting Notifications Other Surveys Task Management Reporting and Information Delivery Research Problem Statement Reports Project Reports Management Status Accomplishments Project Web Pages Program Financial Reports External Interfaces RiP, TRID In addition to these RPMD functions, the report acknowledges the several national research information tools that support DOT research management requirements: RiP, RNS, TRID, TPF Website, TRB and AASHTO Directories, TRB Research Funding Websites, AASHTO RAC High Value Research website, AASHTO RAC Research Program and Project Management website. Analysis Support Performance Measure Computation Program Budget Tracking Management of Coded Values

Business X Functional Requirements

Data Requirements What data an RPMD should include This is a comprehensive list – most RPMDs will not incorporate all of these elements Data elements are classified as: Required (for RiP, TRID, SP&R Reporting) Recommended (to meet internal DOT management needs) Optional

Data Model A set of RPMD data models were developed by a WSDOT data analyst (Julia Ragasa) based on the data requirements created for this project. They can be used by IT staff to inform the design a new or A DOT starting from scratch could use these – but would still need to build a user interface and reports to have a functional system. But these data models provide a significant leg up in the development process.

Transition Requirements What DOTs need to do to make changes to their existing RPMD solution Research report includes two standard processes: Implementing a new RPMD Making modifications to an existing RPMD

Business Case RPMD Benefits Costs – vary based on Time savings for research staff compiling reports Improved tracking – reduced overruns and delays Improved information on research project status, products and outcomes Costs – vary based on Type of application (desktop versus enterprise) Scope – functions and data Interfaces – number and complexity Users – number with update responsibilities versus read only access

Recommendations Actively disseminate project results Create and adopt a research project data exchange standard Design and test research project data mart Develop a basic, web-based RPMD The first item is recommended for immediate implementation. The other three are recommended for serious consideration in order to build on project results and improve research data management capabilities within and across DOTs. Several supporting initiatives have also been identified to improve national research data management resources (see report). 1. Minimum: make DOTs aware of this resource so that it can be used for planning/implementing RPMD updates. 2. Report provides foundation for a data exchange standard – could help with aggregation of information across DOTs to better tell the SPR story and assist with benchmarking. 3. Data mart concept – recognizes that much of the RPMD info may be stored in project management/financial systems – supports integration (as opposed to duplication) across systems. Might be something one DOT could do and then share with others. 4. With 14+ states seeking improvements and 17+ managing their info in spreadsheets, appears to be enough of a critical mass for a basic web-based system to be developed using the “required” or “recommended” data model from this project. Could be pursued through another pooled fund, through AASHTOWare, or done through informal collaboration across states.

Questions?