1. Security/Emergency Management Survey Results
AASHTO Special Committee on Transportation Security & Emergency Management
Summary of
2010 State DOT
Security/Emergency Management Survey
Results
Final Contractor’s Report
May 2011

2. Study Requested By:
AASHTO Special Committee on Transportation Security & Emergency Management
Study Prepared By:
Joe Crossett, High Street Consulting Group Under Contract NCHRP (29)
Acknowledgments
This study was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), and was conducted as part of National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 20-59(29). The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contributions from the state Departments of Transportation. Project is intended to fund quick response studies on behalf of the AASHTO Special Committee on Transportation Security and Emergency Management. The work was guided by a task group that included Chief Joseph C. Bober, Mr. John M. Contestabile, Mr. David S. Ekern, Mr. Randall H. Iwasaki, Mr. Mark Krentz, Mr. Herby Gerard Lissade, Ms. Eileen M. Phifer, Mr. Bryan D. Smith, Mr. Jeffrey L. Western, Mr. Robert A. Younie, Mr. Steven L. Ernst, Mr. Ernesto L. Acosta, Mr. William Brownlow, Mr. Mark S. Bush, Ms. Georgia M. “Gia” Harrigan, Mr. Vincent P. Pearce, LTC Gregory A. Pickell, Mr. Charles Sikoff, Ms. Joedy W. Cambridge, Ms. Sheila Rimal Duwadi, Mr. Dan Ferezan, Ms. Laurel J. “Laurie” Radow, and Mr. Chuck Runyon (chair). The project was managed by Stephan. A. Parker, CRP Senior Program Officer. The report was prepared by Joe Crossett of High Street Consulting, LLC.
Disclaimer
The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied are those of the research agency that performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board or its sponsors. This report has not been reviewed or accepted by the Transportation Research Board's Executive Committee or the Governing Board of the National Research Council.

3. Responding DOTs Alabama Nevada California North Dakota Florida Ohio
Idaho
Iowa
Kansas
Maryland
Michigan
Mississippi
Missouri
Nevada
North Dakota
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Tennessee
Vermont
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

4. Response Rate Comparison
2007 Survey
2010 Survey

5. Top All-Hazards Security Priorities (Each respondent asked to list up three priorities; chart shows share of respondents that mentioned the most commonly cited priorities)
*Author developed categories to summarize DOTs’ individual responses

6. Background of DOT Leader for Emergency Management/Security Issues

7. Agency-wide ‘All Hazards’ Emergency Management Plan
Plan in Place or Underway:
Mass Transit Integrated into Plan:
2010
2007
Year Emergency Management Plan last exercised: 2009/10 (average of 12 responses)

8. Coordination of Emergency Management Plans
Coord. with Nat. Incident Mgmt. Sys.
Coordinated with regional plans
Coordinated with statewide plans
Coordinated with local govt. plans

9. Awareness about National Incident Management System Compliance Assistance Support Tool

10. Infrastructure Security Plan
Year Infrastructure Security Plan last exercised: 2008 (average of 3 responses)

11. Continuity of Operations Plan (COOP Plan)
Year COOP last exercised: 2009 (average of 14 responses)

12. Frequency of Collaboration with Neighbor States

13. Internal Radio Communications Interoperability Capabilities

14. Training Priorities (Share of respondents who indicated “more training needed” in key focus areas)

15. Primary Training Delivery Method

16. Completion of Incident Command System Training

17. Completion of ICS Training by Staff Type

18. Preferred Capacity Building Approaches (Number of respondents that report they are “very likely to use” general capacity building mechanisms described below)

19. Awareness about Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP)