<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Integrating Performance-Based Planning into Long-Range Transportation Plans and STIPs</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2384728</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this synthesis is to document current practices of state departments of transportation (DOTs) related to integrating federally required performance-based plans with long-range transportation plans (LRTPs) and statewide transportation improvement programs (STIPs). DOTs must integrate the performance management goals, objectives, performance measures, and targets described in their performance-based plans into LRTPs and STIPs. However, each state DOT has a unique structure and process to meet federal and state requirements. This synthesis gathered information through a literature review, a survey of state DOTs and the District of Columbia, and follow-up interviews with selected DOTs. Four case examples illustrate a range of mature practices by state DOTs to integrate performance-based plans within LRTPs and STIPs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 01 Jun 2024 17:18:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2384728</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Metropolitan Planning Technical Report: Programming ISTEA Funding</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1765041</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This is the fourth in a periodic series of reports issued by the Metropolitan Planning Division, Federal Highway Administration. The two reports in this issue focus on programming Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) funding. The first report provides a description of the multimodal project selection process used by the Capital District Transportation Committee in Albany, NY for its Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). These pages excerpted from the 1993-98 TIP focus on the project selection criteria used in developing its most recent update. The second report provides a detailed discussion of the project selection process used by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. This report is divided into sections based on the following four funding sources: Surface Transportation Program, Transportation Enhancement Activities, Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement, and Federal Transit Act Section 9. Note that a paper comparing and contrasting these two evaluation processes, titled "Multimodal Project Evaluation: A Common Framework - Different Methods" (TRB-940215) was presented at the 1994 Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2021 17:11:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1765041</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Linking Asset Management to Planning and Programming Case Study 2</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1767499</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This is one of seven case studies of practices in the 2019 transportation asset management plans (TAMPs). This case study highlights linkage of asset management to long-range plans, the statewide transportation improvement program (STIP), and State planning and programming practices. Examples are selected from the TAMPs in Missouri, Maine, Utah, Ohio, Wyoming, and Montana.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2021 10:22:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1767499</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Example Practices for Performance-Based Planning and Programming</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1760699</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report shares how State Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) are using their long-range statewide transportation plans, metropolitan transportation plans, statewide transportation improvement programs, and transportation improvement programs to: integrate performance-based plans and processes; evaluate past condition and performance; document performance measures and targets; report progress toward target achievement; link investment priorities to targets; and describe anticipated future target achievement. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is sharing these example practices of State DOT and MPO implementation of performance-based planning and programming (PBPP) to help advance the state of the practice.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Jan 2021 13:56:30 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1760699</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Performance Based Planning Research – Final Summary Report</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1724075</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Alaska Department of Transportation & Public Facilities (DOT&PF) retained Kittelson & Associates, Inc. to research national best practices related to project prioritization for Statewide Improvement Programs and apply them to the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP) funded National Highway System (NHS) project prioritization process. The 12 month-long research project scope included an examination of existing DOT&PF project selection processes and recommendations on how national best practices could be adapted to the unique Alaskan conditions and applied for a more streamlined, consistent and transparent process. A technical advisory committee (TAC) including representatives from Statewide Program Development and each DOT&PF region collaborated with the project team.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 04 Aug 2020 14:38:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1724075</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Exploring an e-STIP Transition and Improving the Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program in Rhode Island</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1670067</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report highlights key recommendations and noteworthy practices identified at a Transportation Planning Capacity Building (TPCB) peer exchange co-hosted by the Rhode Island Department of Administration and the Rhode Island Department of Transportation on September 13-14, 2018, in Providence, Rhode Island. This event was sponsored by the TPCB Peer Program, which is jointly funded by the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration. The two-day peer exchange featured peers from the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, who shared their agencies’ perspectives on using an electronic Statewide Transportation Improvement Program process as well as the Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside Program. A third peer, North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT), provided insights on NCDOT’s processes following the peer exchange.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Dec 2019 09:27:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1670067</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Reconciling Travel Time Saving Estimates in the SPOT Process</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1672443</link>
      <description><![CDATA[With nearly three billion dollars annually of NC taxpayer dollars at stake in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) Prioritization process of ranking highway projects for funding, travel time savings (TTS) constitute a key input into the projects' benefit cost analyses. Yet, estimates of those savings for various competing projects are derived from models that are completely different in scales, both spatially and temporally, including a low-resolution statewide travel demand model, a highly detailed microsimulation model and a manual calculation based on very limited data. The method of reconciling those estimates across projects has varied from no adjustments in some past Prioritization rounds, to prioritizing based on the relative number of project requests (e.g. corridor vs. intersection improvements) as was done in Prioritization 5.0. This research is intended to study the current process and tools, and propose alternative reconciliation methods for the travel time estimates that can improve and make the ranking process more transparent, robust and replicable. The approach adopted in this project will include significant interaction with all the stakeholders involved in the process including the congestion management staff, its consultants along with the STI implementation team. This approach also does not presume that any of the three modeling approaches (Statewide model, TransModeler and CALC) represent the ground truth. The objective is to simply re-align the results generated by the three models in a manner that does not bias the resulting priorities to specific types of projects. Finally, and to enable the testing of the proposed reconciliation  methods with P6.0.0 selected projects and its full implementation as part of the P7.0 process in 2020, the research team requests an early start of this project, no later than July 1, 2019.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2019 15:54:12 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1672443</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Emission Estimates for the Conformity Analysis of the Victoria FY-94 TIP and 2015 Metropolitan Plan</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1600636</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report documents the mobile source emission estimation methodology used for the conformity analysis of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the metropolitan plan for Victoria County. Included in the report are: a brief overview of the emission estimation methodology and the 24-hour traffic assignments used in the analyses; the methods used to estimate the seasonally adjusted time-of-day vehicle miles of travel and associated operating speeds; the estimation of the emission rates using the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) MOBILE5a program; and brief outline of the method used to develop the emission estimates using the MOBILE5a emission rates and comparisons of the emission estimates for the Build and No Build options. An appendix presents the emission rates developed for conformity analysis.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2019 21:16:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1600636</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Emission Estimates for the Conformity Analysis of the El Paso FY-94 TIP</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1600637</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report documents the mobile source emissions estimation methodology used for the conformity analysis of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and the metropolitan transportation plan for El Paso. Included in the report are: a brief overview of the emission estimation methodology and the 24-hour traffic assignments used in the analyses; the methods used to estimate the seasonally adjusted time-of-day vehicle miles of travel and associated operating speeds; the estimation of the emission rates using the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA' s) MOBILE5a program; and brief outlines of the method used to develop the emission estimates using the MOBILE5a emission rates and comparisons of the emission estimates for the Build and No Build options. An appendix presents the emission rates developed for conformity analysis.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2019 21:16:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1600637</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>MDOT Statewide Multimodal Prioritization &amp; Selection Study</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1570829</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study seeks to enhance Mississippi Department of Transportation's (MDOT’s) multimodal project selection process by developing a set of scalable and implementable project selection criteria and improved prioritization methodologies to assist the agency with continuous improvement of their Multimodal Transportation Improvement Program. The implementation of such enhancements can better ensure that key infrastructure investments reflect up-to-date mobility performance measures and meet long-term program objectives.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2018 17:03:57 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1570829</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Interagency Coordination and E-STIP Deployment Support</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1531589</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The primary objective of this project is to establish the electronic Statewide Improvement Program (E-STIP) application to provide interactive tools and protocols for Transportation Improvement Program/Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (TIP/STIP) review and approvals involving several stakeholders, including the New Jersey Department of Transportation (NJDOT), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and NJ Transit. To ensure that all the stakeholders’ design requirements were properly addressed in the E-STIP application, an interagency coordination program was implemented that consisted of organizing focus groups and presentations for intended E-STIP users to obtain their feedback on proposed design of screens and protocols in the E-STIP application; and organizing coordination meetings of relevant stakeholder representatives to ensure seamless transition from the current “pen and paper” practices to an electronic TIP/STIP review and approval process facilitated by the E-STIP application. NJDOT’s E-STIP is an internet-based software that implements electronic submission, processing and approval of New Jersey’s STIP. It is designed to streamline STIP development and the processing of amendments and modifications. The STIP contains transportation projects advanced by three New Jersey MPOs, and NJ Transit. E-STIP is a collaborative tool that allows planners from MPOs and DOT to initiate online requests for changes, and to upload all project related financial information and correspondence. Electronic submission expedites FHWA and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) review time and reduces errors. It also allows for tracking the real-time status of each STIP request which: improves staff productivity across the DOT and MPOs, reducing time for tracking down status of the project; improves process efficiency through automatic email notification to the subsequent reviewer whose action is required on request; facilitates a shared database that enables staff to electronically store and retrieve project-related data; documents correspondence in a central location; reduces data redundancy and input errors; and creates more complete documentation through streamlined data entry and exchange processes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Aug 2018 13:26:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1531589</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Project Cost Estimation for Planning</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1488753</link>
      <description><![CDATA[For Nevada Department of Transportation (NDOT), there are far too many projects that ultimately cost much more than initially planned. Because project nominations are linked to estimates of future funding and the analysis of system needs, the inaccurate cost estimate lead to overloading the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) with many projects that are underfunded. This often leads to misallocating resources and creating false expectations with the public and other stakeholders. The focus of this study is on improving early project cost estimation to reduce the variance between estimates when projects are initially programmed and the final construction costs. The major objective was to provide recommendations to NDOT to enhance the project cost estimation process for transportation planning documents. An extensive literature review of other agencies' cost estimating practices revealed that the most significant policy decision to improve the planning cost estimation is to make the estimation process a high "priority" for the agencies involved. Investing time and resources in training, tracking cost and schedule changes, updating unit prices, quality control checklists, and developing uniform manuals and practices for cost estimating are all critical to improving early project cost estimates. Based on the review of available documents and interviews with agencies involved in early cost estimation, Sierra Transportation Engineers, Inc. (STE) concluded that many good practices are already in place at various groups and divisions of NDOT and partnering agencies. However, more communication, coordination, and enhancement of the procedures in place are needed.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Nov 2017 16:35:43 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1488753</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Manufacturers’ Perspectives on Minnesota’s Transportation System: A Pilot Study in Southwest and West Central Minnesota</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1465440</link>
      <description><![CDATA[One of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's (MnDOT’s) most important customer segments are Minnesota-based manufacturers that ship their products over Minnesota roads and bridges en route to local, statewide, national and international markets. These businesses rely on the MnDOT to maintain a safe, efficient multi-modal infrastructure for freight transportation. State, regional and local governments rely on these businesses to employ residents and contribute to economic vitality. In short, economic vitality results when economic development and transportation systems are well aligned. In 2013, MnDOT initiated a project in its District 8 region (twelve counties in southwest and west central Minnesota) to better understand freight customers’ transportation priorities and challenges, and to incorporate their input into MnDOT’s planning and project development. Better understanding these customers’ business and transportation needs will enable MnDOT to better align its work to support their success and, by extension, the economic vitality of the region and state. The project’s scope was intentionally focused on soliciting input that would inform low cost/high benefit projects, which can be accomplished in the next one to four years, assuming available resources. The District 8 project piloted a new process for systematically collecting customer information, building relationships among MnDOT staff, manufacturers and carriers in District 8 and regional economic development professionals. Throughout the almost year-long project the project team built in participation opportunities for internal and external stakeholders whose engagement is key to ensuring that the effort does not end as a point-in-time project but rather evolves into a continuous improvement process. This project provided new customer perspectives regarding the transportation system in District 8 and statewide. Respondents offered concrete and often location specific feedback that can inform near term infrastructure, maintenance, operations, and communications and policy improvements. The piloted method was generally successful in further developing relationships among MnDOT and regional customers and partners, and obtaining information for improving regional and statewide transportation systems.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 May 2017 18:52:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1465440</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Manufacturers' Perspectives on Minnesota's Transportation System: District 2 / Northwestern Minnesota</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1465439</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) collected and analyzed manufacturers’ input in MnDOT District 2 to: (1) Better understand their business perspectives and priorities; (2) Build relationships to better align the transportation system with shippers’ needs; and (3) Support continuous improvement at MnDOT with on-going input from this customer segment. The District 2 (northwestern Minnesota) project methodology included interviews with businesses identified by regional cluster analysis that involved collaborative, cross-disciplinary interview teams. These businesses included 54 manufacturers, 13 shippers and distributors, and one hospitality and tourism industry business. Respondents complimented MnDOT’s work in executing road construction and improvement projects and clearing snow and ice from roadways. They also provided feedback on topics that, while not directly under MnDOT’s control, provide context for businesses’ needs and requests as they relate to transportation. Businesses’ shipping priorities included: sound infrastructure and safety; expedience and cost effectiveness; dependability; and access to information. Four broad implementation strategies are either underway or in the planning stages.  These strategies reflect the work of District 2, other districts, and statewide functions to apply the interview findings to ongoing transportation system planning and improvement. Briefly, these implementation strategies are:  (1) Incorporate business feedback into the District 2 short-term and long-term planning processes. Include study findings in the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) and modify upcoming road projects and maintenance plans to address business issues. (2) Identify and develop opportunities to collaborate with communities and continue to cultivate relationships with businesses, city and county engineers, economic development professionals, and other stakeholders. (3) Feedback from District 2 businesses can be assessed and used by appropriate MnDOT statewide functions to improve the system and supporting functions (e.g., communications, materials research, transit and freight planning), and for future statewide planning efforts and development of best practices. (4) Use the combined findings/recommendations from the Manufacturers’ Perspectives Studies in Districts 2, 4, and 8 to better understand business needs to improve the state’s transportation system. Incorporate a continuous improvement approach to the Manufacturers’ Perspectives Studies.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 28 May 2017 18:52:31 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1465439</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Development of Performance Measures for Rural Counties in California</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1439475</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Transportation agencies at all levels are increasingly relying on performance measures to inform decisions on investment and transportation system management. The California Transportation Commission (CTC) recently adopted a set of performance measures that were based mainly on the needs of urban areas in the state. The California Rural Counties Task Force were concerned that these performance measures did not meet their specific needs. The Task Force therefore commissioned a study to develop performance measures applicable specifically to rural areas in the state. This paper describes the development of these performance measures, which were subsequently adopted by the CTC. The study consisted of reviewing existing performance measurement practices in rural counties, assessing available planning resources for data collection and analysis to produce performance measures, establishing criteria for assessing potential performance measures, recommending performance measures, and examining potential future performance measures. The recommended performance measures were adopted in toto by the CTC. What distinguishes this study from most previous efforts in this area is the development of a systematic framework for the selection of performance measures.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 27 Mar 2017 09:32:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1439475</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>