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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. Business X Functional Requirements

17. 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

18. 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.

19. 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

20. 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

21. 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.

22. Questions?