Institutions for Transportation Operations\
with Recommendations for Reauthorization

![](media/image1.png){width="6.164583333333334in"
height="4.402777777777778in"}

D. Craig Roberts, PBS&J

September 2001

# Introduction

Effective transportation system operations requires functional,
organizational, and interjurisdictional coordination, cooperation,
integration and interoperability in a geographic area. Some of the
biggest payoffs are expected to be achieved through the synergistic
sharing of information and the operation and management of the surface
transportation system as a seamless whole. To effect this vision a
number of institutional and technical challenges must be addressed,
including the creation of an organizational framework for operations and
management.

This issue has been of particular concern as planning for national
deployment of intelligent transportation systems has been undertaken.
There has been speculation that it would be likely that metropolitan
planning organizations would play a significant role because of their
existing role and experience in bringing various jurisdictions together
for purposes of planning. However, during the 1990's it was evident that
many MPOs were often not deeply interested or involved in ITS deployment
activities.

What has been most useful and instructive has been to observe the
institutional and organizational arrangements that have been created in
many parts of the country that have been in the vanguard of ITS and
operations activities. In a dozen or so communities we have seen the
emergence of what we called "New Regional Organizations" and are now
characterized as "Regional Operating Organizations."

# Examples of New Organizations

Examples of such initiatives focus on traffic management, traveler
information, commercial vehicle operations and electronic toll
collection. Geographic scope include metropolitan areas, multi-state
regions or corridors.

**ARTIMIS** stands for the Advanced Regional Traffic Interactive
Management and Information System and serves the Cincinnati and Northern
Kentucky metropolitan area.

**AZTech** was created to provide traffic management and traveler
information in the Phoenix metropolitan area as an ITS model deployment
initiative site.

**CommuterLink** provides traffic management and traveler information to
the Salt Lake City metropolitan area.

**Minnesota Guidestar** is the state's program for research,
development, testing and deployment of intelligent transportation
systems. **Orion** provides traffic management and traveler information
services in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metropolitan areas.

**NaviGAtor** links transportation management, traffic and transit
control centers in Atlanta and surrounding counties to provide
integrated traffic management and traveler information.

**SmartTrek** is the Seattle metropolitan area's ITS model deployment
initiative for providing traveler information, improving emergency
response, managing transit use and managing traffic.

**TRANSCOM** was formed as a regional transportation coalition to serve
as a clearinghouse for transportation incident and construction
information among fifteen agencies in the states of New York, New Jersey
and Connecticut. It has also become the lead organization and
facilitator for a model deployment initiative and other coordinated
traffic management and traveler information activities within the
region.

**TransGuide** is San Antonio's advanced traffic management system. It
monitors traffic conditions, controls traffic signals, enables rapid
response to accidents and emergencies and warns drivers of system
conditions. It also serves as a model deployment site.

Houston's **TranStar** brings the agencies responsible for the planning,
design, operations and maintenance of transportation operations and
traffic emergency management operations together into a single,
integrated, multi-governmental facility.

**TravInfo** provides real-time traffic reports, transit and carpool
information for the San Francisco Bay Area through a regional telephone
number and through service provided by private partners.

**Partners in Motion** involves 26 public agencies and thirteen private
firms in the delivery of traffic and other traveler information to the
Washington D.C. metropolitan area.

**HELP Inc.** stands for Heavy Vehicle Electronic License Plate, Inc.
and is a non-profit partnership between motor carriers and government
agencies whose mission is to engender a cooperative operating and
regulatory environment for commercial vehicle operations. It administers
the PrePass port of entry and weigh station electronic clearance
program.

Other examples include **Lynx (Advantage CVO) and MAPS** commercial
vehicle operations consortia in the I-75 corridor and the northwest
U.S., the **EZ-Pass/Interagency Group** consortia for use of a single
toll payment tag across multiple toll facilities and agencies in the
northeast, and the **I-95 Corridor Coalition** to coordinate freeway
operations in the I-95 corridor from Maine to Virginia.

# Defining Characteristics

Each regional organization is unique in the specific services it
performs, in the way that it is organized and in how it performs its
work. Nevertheless, in examining each across a number of dimensions,
there are many common characteristics or themes that help define a new
category of institution and provide checkpoints for creation of new
ones.

## Organizational genesis

These organizations tend to have been launched in one of three ways:

\(1\) Representatives of a number of agencies choose to come together to
work cooperatively to solve transportation operations problems by
picking specific, immediate term projects or activities that will yield
immediate benefit from interagency coordination. They then build upon
the experience and relationships established to increase the scope of
the functions performed and the participation of additional
organizations. TRANSCOM is an example, in that it was originally created
to share information through faxes and pagers regarding construction and
incidents among a limited number of agencies in New York and New Jersey.
It then became the institutional foundation for a number of ITS and
other operational initiatives, even as it expanded in the number of
agencies participating.

\(2\) A seminal event may generate the need to manage traffic and
transportation through shared information, coordination and technology.
This is establishment of regional operations and intelligent
transportation systems by a "big bang." The interjurisdictional,
cooperative efforts at transportation operations associated with the
Olympic Games in 1994, which later evolved into the Georgia NaviGAtor
program, began in this way.

\(3\) Such new regional transportation operating organizations also may
have been created to undertake ITS operational tests or model deployment
initiatives and then continued in operation after those particular
programs expired.

## Multiple organizations

Regional operating organizations always involve more than one agency,
usually including interagency participation horizontally (similar
agencies from different geographic jurisdictions across a region) and
vertically (involving state, local, special authority and federal
levels) and including multiple functional offices or departments within
agencies.

## Independent identity

It is common for the organization to have its own name or acronym and
logo, which enables and represents joint ownership among the
participating agencies. Banners, brochures or letterhead may include the
logos of the participating agencies.

## Regional vision and role

Participation is based upon recognition that traffic congestion and
mobility within a region are determined by the cumulative condition and
management of many facilities in many jurisdictions.

## Partnership form

Most of these organizations, to date, take the form of interagency
partnerships; they typically are not chartered by legislation or
incorporated. Thus, all actions are undertaken under the legal authority
of one of the partners and the actions of the new organization are done
on the basis of intergovernmental agreements or other partnership
agreements.

## Champions

Success of these organizations is driven by the vision, commitment,
drive and initiative of one or more champions operating at both the
executive and managerial levels.

## Management structure

The specific management structure for each organization is determined by
the history, organizational culture, laws and agreement among the
participants. Typically an executive or policy steering group that
includes the CEOs or CAOs of the participating agencies establishes a
shared vision, sets general policy, commits resources and generally
creates an environment within which action can take place. A managers
group meets more regularly to coordinate the joint actions of the
participants in the organization. Committees are established to work on
specific problems, issues and initiatives. As programs are defined, an
operations management organization structure is defined, with personnel
being employed by one or more of the agency participants and specific
responsibilities delineated.

## State leadership

It is unusual for these new regional operating organizations to be
established and successful without the strong participation and support
of the state department(s) of transportation with facilities in the
region.

## MPO role

Metropolitan Planning Organizations with their history and purpose of
regional, interagency coordination and collaboration would seem to be
the natural venue for these organizations to originate or operate.
Nevertheless, MPOs are not typically where these organizations start.
(One of the exceptions is the Metropolitan Transportation Commission
that operates the TravInfo program in the San Francisco Bay Area.) With
the primary focus on operations and system management rather than
planning and transportation facilities development, most of these
organizations grew out of the cooperative efforts of traffic, transit
and other transportation system management organizations. MPOs usually
play a participating role: their engagement and support is necessary to
utilize federal funding, and they may be especially well equipped to
develop and maintain necessary documentation such as the regional system
architecture.

## Agency and functional collocation - actual or virtual

The key to regional operations is that transportation system management
decisions and actions undertaken by each agency be informed of
conditions on the entire network and the decisions and actions of other
agencies. Such coordination and cooperation is enhanced by the physical
collocation of personnel, communications, system surveillance, control
and information integration into one facility. Thus regional incident
detection and response, freeway management, traffic signal control,
transit dispatch, police dispatch and other functions may be undertaken
from a transportation or traffic management or operations center (TMC or
TOC). On the other hand, a number of agencies and jurisdictions within a
region, or other factors may make physical collocation infeasible. In
such cases, information technology can enable shared surveillance and
control with cooperative system management through similarly configured
workstations, displays, and integrated data and communications. This
becomes *virtual* collocation. Each of the new regional operating
organizations is moving toward some combination of such actual and
virtual collocation.

## Project focus

The payoffs of interagency and interjurisdictional cooperation are
limited in the abstract. A common successful strategy has been to
identify a specific problem requiring cooperative effort to solve, solve
it, and build upon the patterns of cooperation, relationships and trust
to then tackle other specific problems. As the organization evolves, its
projects become more complex and involve an increased number of
participants.

## Participants do not relinquish responsibility or authority

Each agency retains its legislative mandate, authority or
responsibility; rather it chooses to execute its responsibility through
cooperative, contractual relationships with other agencies through the
regional enterprise.

## Growth and development

These organizations typically are continually seeking opportunities for
improving regional transportation operations by refining tools and
processes and by adding functions and participation by additional
organizations.

## Sustainability

These organizations view themselves as continuing enterprises rather
than efforts to solve a particular problem or deal with a particular
event and then go home. Nevertheless, sustainability ultimately will
require a continuing, reliable, predictable funding base and probably
establishment of a more formal structure beyond a partnership based upon
intergovernmental agreement.

## Regional integration framework (architecture)

Although not necessary to get started, rational growth and development
of these organizations ultimately requires a framework for organizing
functions, relationships and information flows based upon a vision of
the ultimate scope of service and geography that the organization might
expect to address.

# Private Sector Role?

All these organizations utilize private firms as contractors. They vary
as to the degree they establish public-private partnerships. Public
private partnerships may be defined as arrangements wherein both public
and private parties benefit other than the private firm working merely
as a contractor for the public agency. Such arrangements include those
where no funds are conveyed from one partner to the other, where fees or
other compensation are paid by the private firm for the use of public
facilities, services or information, or where the public agency provides
some funding support to the private firm, but not enough to fully
compensate the private firm for its investment or contribution to the
project activity. It is important to note that in creating a
public-private partnership, the public agency must establish the
procedures and the framework for defining and negotiating the
relationship. The public agency must do so in the context of its
statutory authority and the procurement rules and other legal
requirements that control its expenditures.

# 

# Recent Developments

## New name: Regional Operating Organizations (ROOs)

When the phenomenon of these organizations was identified, they were
labeled "new regional organizations." This seemed appropriate and useful
until discussion regarding the concept began with representatives of
MPOs. They expressed concern that creation of new regional organizations
was being proposed in competition to the existing framework of regional
planning organizations. The name Regional Operating Organization (ROO)
was then advanced to distinguish these organizations, which have already
emerged, from traditional regional or metropolitan planning
organizations.

## National Dialogue on Operations

The National Dialogue on Operations is a cooperative effort among FHWA,
AASHTO, APTA, ITE, ITS America, TRB and a number of other organizations
and individuals. Its purpose is to generate interest and support at
national, state and local levels in transportation system management and
operations and to define a framework and scope for a federal/national
operations initiative. The phenomenon of Regional Operating
Organizations needs to be thoroughly vetted as part of this National
Dialogue. The policy framework for encouraging the establishment and
sustenance of such organizations should be one of the more significant
results of the dialogue.

## Additional research

More thorough case studies of these organizations have been commissioned
by FHWA along with guidebooks based upon the conclusions of the case
studies. More work is needed, based upon practical experience and theory
regarding means and mechanisms for making these more permanent,
"institutionalizing" them in terms of their organizational or corporate
form and regarding continuing bases of funding.

## ITS America/TRB Joint Subcommittee

ITS America and the Transportation Research Board are sponsoring a joint
subcommittee on Regional Operating Organizations. This group has
formally sanctioned the change in nomenclature to ROOs, is sponsoring
symposia to further explore the implications of these institutions and
establish a dialogue with individuals and organizations that represent
metropolitan planning organizations. It will review work that has been
undertaken in the area, and develop recommendations for further
research.

## Dialogue with AMPO

AMPO is the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations. To date,
many MPOs have had limited interest in intelligent transportation
systems or transportation operations, having greater interest in longer
range capital planning and in satisfying the many obligations added to
the metropolitan planning function by ISTEA and TEA 21 that must be
fulfilled as a condition of federal funding eligibility. A number MPO
professionals have expressed concern that the discussion of new regional
organizations in the context of operations and ITS in forums involving
federal participants indicates a federal endorsement for establishment
of such organizations, and perhaps an intent to urge Congress to mandate
their creation across the nation. They fear that such new organizations
may be competitive with MPOs regarding mission or available funding.
Discussions and jointly sponsored forums with AMPO, such as the recently
scheduled but postponed Regional Operating Organizations conference in
Atlanta, are needed to educate MPOs about these concepts, identify and
address their concerns, and enlist their support for institutional
innovation to support operations.

# Obstacles

Developing institutions and organizing for operations face a number of
obstacles. In most metropolitan areas, a continuing effort supporting
interagency and interjurisdictional cooperation and integration,
horizontally and vertically for transportation system management is not
business as usual. Regional operating organizations are difficult to
fund and promote politically. Each local jurisdiction tends to place
greater priority in internal issues and needs, often resisting efforts
to subordinate local concerns for greater regional welfare. The benefits
associated with expending resources for coordination may not be as
visible as a facility development with its "ribbon-cutting" opportunity.

Unless built upon a base of cooperative experience and benefit, creation
of even an ad hoc new organization may be viewed as a threat by existing
institutions. Moreover, resistance or non-participation of key agencies
or jurisdictions may seriously compromise the regional efforts of
others.

# Challenges

There are weaknesses associated with the emergence of the new Regional
Operating Organizations.

Most of these regional organizations rely upon special (and purportedly
temporary) federal funding. Many have become effective at securing
earmarks through the appropriations process. Unless there is a
substantial increase in the amount made available for such earmarks,
this does not represent an effective model or template for use by
others. An effective mechanism for continuing, predictable funding is
needed.

Most of these organizations are ad hoc in their organizational form. As
noted above, they take the form of intergovernmental partnership. To
date, this has been a strength, allowing such organizations to evolve,
adding new participants and functions, and encouraging creativity on the
part of the partners. However, such organizations may be dependant on
the energy and initiative of a few champions, and may not be able to
count on continuation of such support when the incumbent champions in
the partner agencies retire or move on to other responsibilities.
Ultimately, a more permanent form of governance structure may be needed.

If the vision and benefits of establishing Regional Operating
Organizations in areas where they do not presently exist are to be
realized, then the following challenges must be addressed:

-   Incentives must be established to encourage agencies responsible for
    transportation system management and performance to work in
    cooperative and integrated arrangements.

-   Means of "institutionalization" for these embryonic organizations
    must be found.

-   Stable, continuing and predictable funding bases will be required.

## 

# Next Steps

In understanding, refining and advancing the concepts and development of
institutions for fostering, managing and operating our transportation
resources for optimum system performance, the following immediate
actions and activities are recommended:

-   Incorporate the concept of need for Regional Operating Organizations
    as part of the National Dialogue discussions.

-   Analyze and document the history of the emergence of multimodal
    planning organizations as a matter of federal transportation policy
    to inform discussion regarding policy support for creation of
    regional organizations for operations.

-   Metropolitan Planning Organizations should continue to be engaged in
    discussions regarding the need and appropriate evolution of their
    own organizations regarding operations along with examination of new
    institutions or organizational arrangements.

-   Methods and practices for establishing such arrangements should be
    studied and guidelines and resource materials developed.

# Reauthorization Proposals

The following provisions for the next transportation reauthorization
bill are recommended:

## Statement of Policy

First, a statement of national policy should be promulgated calling for
the establishment of interjurisdictional and multimodal arrangements
within and across the regions that encompass our transportation systems
so that a region's transportation system is managed in a seamless,
integrated fashion to optimize traveler satisfaction and system
performance.

## Set aside

Second, a percentage of all Federal highway and transit funding
apportioned to states and metropolitan areas should be set aside for
operations. This would be analogous to the percentage set-aside that is
currently administered to support transportation planning. It would be
used to pay for:

-   Establishment of and the ongoing support for regional transportation
    operating or integrating organizations,

-   Core Intelligent Transportation System infrastructure, and

-   System operations and management activities and costs.

## Demonstration

Third, a program of operational tests or pilots should be established to
demonstrate the benefit and viability of area or corridor initiatives
that combine road pricing with cross subsidies for high occupancy
transportation modes such as transit and ride sharing along with support
for organizational arrangements to create seamless transportation system
management and operations.