Arizona 511 Model Deployment Matt Burt – Battelle Talking Operations Webcast Rural Issues: 511 and Traveler Information July 27, 2005

- 2 - Organization of the Presentation Arizona 511 Background Evaluation Finding Highlights Statewide/Rural Issues Next Steps

- 3 - Arizona 511 Background Originated as a statewide system in 1998, based on ADOT Highway Condition and Reporting System (HCRS) Operated “in-house” by ADOT Converted to “511” in March types of info: –Roadways (route-based) –Call transfers to transit Touch-tone user interface Little system data available for performance monitoring No formal marketing No user input (did focus groups for Model Deployment)

- 4 - Arizona 511 Background, cont. Arizona awarded $1 million competitive grant in 2002 by U.S. DOT for National 511 Model Deployment ADOT-led coalition of agencies statewide Battelle conducted evaluation on behalf of FHWA Timeline: –Planning - Fall 2002 –Design & Implementation phase – 2002 and 2003 (enhanced system roll-out December 18, 2003) –One year operational phase (for eval.) Jan. - Dec. 2004

- 5 - Arizona 511 Background, cont. Model Deployment enhancements : –User Interface -Voice recognition, roadway segment based reporting –New data -Segment weather -Arterial street travel times (Phoenix demo) -Neighboring state data (Utah) -2-minute voice recording capability for transit, airports, Grand Canyon -Estimated bus arrival times (Phoenix) -Tucson and Phoenix traffic input by local agencies –Premium service partner –Marketing and data quality enhancements

- 6 - Arizona 511 Background, cont. Evaluation analyses: –Usage -Looked at overall patterns and patterns during a major incident, wildfire, winter storm and week-long DMS ads -511 server log files primary source (U of A led) –User Survey -410 surveys completed in November 2004 –Enhancement Process -511 Task Force interviews and workshops –Costs -Fully document costs by enhancement and type (planning, implementation, O&M)

- 7 - Evaluation Finding Highlights Several incomplete enhancements Generally positive reaction from users –Increase in call volumes (74%) –70% (survey) satisfied with information content –90% + (survey) would use again and recommend –~ 20% (survey) cite specific benefits 35% of surveyed users dissatisfied w/voice recognition Very little usage of new information (less than 10% of total menu selections) 57% (survey) say no better or worse than radio traffic as go

- 8 - Evaluation Finding Highlights, cont. Identified a wide range of lessons learned, including: –Invest in formal planning and design documents –Solicit user input during design and refinement –Assume voice recognition implementation will be resource- intensive –Conduct marketing targeted to potential users of new information types –Consider DMS marketing for reaching roadway info. users –Don’t assume regional 511 will replace transit info. lines –Vigorously build support among local agencies for data entry.

- 9 - Statewide/Rural Issues Hard to get new partners to enter data Lack of major border town works against state-to- state sharing Challenges in equating NWS weather data to AZ segments Rural transit helped ID coverage gaps DMS marketing campaign effective for statewide interstate exposure (20x increase) Capacity exhausted during events; use of floodgate message is helpful

Next Steps Continue to work on voice recognition Move ahead with unimplemented model deployment enhancements: –Arterial street travel times –Estimated bus arrival times –Neighboring states Continue to work with local agencies on data entry (traffic, Tucson airport and transit) Install 50 static road signs statewide and continue to build name recognition through marketing

For Further Information Contact: Model Deployment Evaluation: –Matt Burt, Battelle: , Arizona 511 Operations and Model Deployment Project: –Tim Wolfe, ADOT: , –Rick Schuman, PBS&J: (407) x4511,

Perspective on Texas 511 Issues Costs –ADOT shoulders costs for “basic service” (no viable premium service partner found) –Costs to expand/enhance system ($1.4M) were 3 times greater than cost of original system Evolution to statewide system –Started statewide (ADOT) but there have been challenges in adding new metro areas as active partners –Impact of future call volume increases from Tucson and elsewhere uncertain; could necessitate decentralization of phone system

Perspective on Texas 511 Issues, cont. Relationship to highway closure system –System build around HCRS; HCRS is heart of the system –Challenges in getting local agencies inputting to HCRS; some see as redundant with their own systems

Cost Data - Implementation Deployment Cost Component Pre-Model Deployment 511 System Enhanced (Model Deployment) 511 System Design & Development $ 270,000 $ 406,508 Implementation $ 62,520 $ 1,005,752 Hardware $ 48,370 $ 60,069 Software & Engineering $ 14,150 $ 903,546 Marketing $ - $ 42,137 Total $ 395,040 $ 1,412,260

Cost Data – Operation & Maintenance Annual Operations Cost Component Pre-Model Deployment 511 System Model Deployment Year of Operations Future Years of Operation ADOT staff $ 270 $ 11,770$ 8,658 Consultant support $ 9,400 $ 104,773$ 25,100 HCRS $ 3,000 $ 11,250$ 7,500 IVR $ 6,400 $ 18,714$ 17,600 Program Management $ - $ 74,809$ - Phone charges $ 102,464 $ 139,577 T-1 Line Rental $ 27,600 $ 36,458 Total $ 139,734 $ 292,578$ 209,793