2002 Call for Proposals

Responses Due February 15, 2002

 

General Call for Proposals

 

Capital Preventative Maintenance Proposal

 

Synthesis of Best Practices Proposal

 

Economic Benefits of Maintenance Proposal

 

 

Midwest Regional University Transportation Center

announces a

General Call for Proposals

2002

The Midwest Regional University Transportation Center (MRUTC) is soliciting the research community within USDOT Region 5 for proposals that reflect the focus and vision of the MRUTC.  This is in addition to the specific Request for Proposals posted on the Center’s website (http://www.mrutc.org/rfp2002#Research topic2.htm).

Proposals must combine the concepts of asset management and optimization analyses that may be directly applied toward transportation decision-making processes.

 The Center’s focus and theme is:

Optimization of Transportation Investment and Operations,

emphasizing education, research, and technology transfer of asset optimization and management techniques for transportation facilities.

In accordance with the MRUTC’s Strategic Plan, broad research areas of interest include: Education, System Management & Monitoring, Valuation and Investment, and Multi-modal Systems.  Proposals will be accepted in any of these broad categories.  A detailed discussion follows: 

1)       Education:

This area focuses on establishing standardized courses in asset management for engineering students at the under-graduate level.  During the 4th National Asset Management Workshop, meeting participants indicated that there is a need to develop a standardized transportation asset management course for undergraduate students.  Development of such a course would help to ensure that students are prepared to work in the changing environment currently facing engineers.  Nearly all agreed that students in engineering need to develop an understanding that while the design of a facility is important, the maintenance and preservation needs are equally important.  The future vision for development of engineering and policy professionals is that undergraduate programs include course offerings that make students aware of infrastructure asset management issues. 

2)      System Management and Monitoring:

This area focuses on establishing the framework within which agencies are able to optimize system preservation and operations investments by moving beyond “stovepipe” mentalities and integrating all information from modal asset inventories across operational functions; such as planning, design, construction, and operations to meet multiple system objectives (service, conditions, safety, cost, social-economic, and emergency considerations).

 3)      Valuation and Investment:

Research in this area will focus on achieving two goals.  First, research efforts need to include the development of an analytical framework and integrated measurement system that identifies, quantifies and monitors system performance not only in terms of structural and functional compliance with design expectations, but also in terms of compliance with customer expectations. 

Second, efforts in this area will develop procedures to accurately measure of the costs (past and future) of establishing, maintaining and improving transportation systems in such a way that they continue to meet customer needs.

 4)      Multi-modal Systems:

Multi-modal system planning and programming addresses the tradeoffs decision-making processes between modes, long-term investment strategies, and financial considerations in transportation investment, sequencing modal projects, and reconciling operational conflicts between modes.

Key areas include developing system level methodologies for improved decision-making processes relative to:

  • Determining optimized investments for vehicle and non-vehicle users;
  • Determining and assessing system-level impact analyses and/or assessments on the environment, individual communities, as well as low-income and minority groups; and

·         Identifying and evaluating potential secondary land use impacts at the system-plan, regional, and corridor levels.

(Please note, this Call for Requests for Proposals is intentionally broad to encourage a wider submission of proposals than may be allowed for under the MRUTC’s existing RFPs.)

Deadline and Mailing Information:

Research proposals must be received by 5 p.m. Friday, February 15, 2002.

Mailing Address:

10 hard copies of all research proposals and one electronic copy must be submitted to:

Aileen Switzer, Research Manager

Midwest Regional University Transportation Center

Engineering Hall

1415 Engineering Drive

Madison, WI  53706

 

Questions regarding this General Call for Proposals may be directed to Jason Bittner, Program Manager at 608/262-7246, bittner@engr.wisc.edu or Aileen Switzer, Research Manager at 608/262-2013, aswitzer@engr.wisc.edu.

Criteria for Consideration

Partnerships are Encouraged - Priority will be given to research proposals submitted by universities in partnership with state departments of transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and/or private industry.   

Matching Funds - Budget estimates must include identification of all matching fund sources.  While matching funds are not required on a dollar for dollar basis, matching funds are strongly encouraged.  Proposals including supporting funds will be given higher priority than proposals with only in-kind or soft match dollars.  Hard match dollar sources may include partnerships with State transportation agencies, other public sector agencies, and/or private sector interests.  

Educational Focus - Proposals should reflect strong consideration for educational missions of academic institutions.  Private research institutes will not be permitted to submit proposals except in partnerships with academic institutions.

Proposals will be submitted for review to peers at other University Transportation Centers and other State Departments of Transportation.  At least two peer reviews on each project proposal will be conducted.

Proposal Format and Organization

Proposals may not exceed 10 pages in length, and should include a detailed description of the following:

1.     Cover Page

with project title; name and address of the performing organization; the name, title and mailing address of the principal investigator; and date of proposal submission.

 2. Problem Statement

 3. Research Objectives

 4. Qualifications, Accomplishments and Other Commitments of the Research    Team

 5. Equipment and/or Facilities

 6. Time Requirements to Complete the Research

 7. Proposed Budget with Description of Matching Funds

            Budget Description

Provide a summary tabulation indicating staffing plans, and estimated person-hours specific to each operational phase.  Budget estimates should include salaries, overhead, indirect costs, travel, computer time, equipment (purchase and/or rental), expendable materials and supplies, report printing, special services (as applicable), and other related budgetary expenses.  

            Matching Funding

Budget estimates must also include identification of all matching fund sources.  Proposals submitted to the MRUTC that include hard match dollars will be given higher priority than proposals with soft match dollars.  As a result, the MRUTC encourages researchers to partner with their State transportation agencies, other public sector agencies, and/or private sector interests.  

8. Descriptions of Cooperative Features and/or Partnerships (if applicable)

Letters of support must be included from each team member, if multiple institutions and researchers are involved.

9. Reports and other Deliverables (if applicable) 

10. Appendices

Other Information

Researchers will be required to meet twice with the Advisory Committee sponsoring this research or MRUTC Staff.  A preliminary report on the status of the project will be due three months after the start of the project.  Brief quarterly reports will also be required, electronic submittal is acceptable.

Eighty (80) paper copies (one unbound for duplication) of the final report should be submitted, in addition to an electronic version provided in Microsoft Word or Corel WordPerfect format.  

 

 return to top

Research Topic #2

Transportation Asset Management Research Program, USDOT Pooled Fund project number TPF 5(036)

Proposals due Friday, February 15, 2002 5:00pm

Estimated Budget: $100,000

Capital Preventative Maintenance

Subject: Develop the business case that defines the institutional, managerial, analytic, and educational methods and processes to ensure that routinely performed capital preventive maintenance activities extending the life of a transportation facility are performed in a timely manner, consistent with short and long term asset management strategies.

Background: Transportation professionals would generally agree that carrying out capital preventive maintenance measures do extend the life of a transportation facility. Pavements will generally last longer if cracks are filled through crack sealing, seal coating or minor resurfacing. Bridges will last longer if decks are washed and sealed, bearings are adjusted and joints are replaced.

Despite this understanding, needed maintenance activities are often left undone for any of several administrative and management reasons. The cause may be a budgeting process that lumps these capital maintenance activities with highway operations, so that in a year of heavy snowfalls, snow removal consumes the budget that might have been used for capital maintenance. They may be deferred because of a reluctance to reduce the capacity of a facility at a time when the problem is not readily apparent to the traveling public. The pressures for miles of added lanes or other high cost projects sometimes squeeze the capital maintenance budget. These pressures are often linked to political issues related to the need for “credit” and “ribbon-cutting” opportunities within the term of a particular party or political leader. Finally, maintenance activities that extend the life of a facility are often not done because the responsible manager simply cannot see clearly into the future. Is an expenditure that adds eight years to the life of a pavement a good investment in light of growing congestion or clear safety problems? Will the taxpayers receive the full life from this investment?

As industry knowledge of pavements and structures grows, the problem of ensuring that capital maintenance is done in a timely manner also grows. Corrosion resistant steels make bridges and pavements last longer, increasing the need for capital preventive maintenance, so that the total structure or pavement attains the maximum life provided by the new materials. Techniques like partial depth asphalt recycling and concrete pavement repair strategies allow specific problems to be treated without dealing with total pavement structures. These techniques must be used in a timely manner and other actions must be taken to protect the total pavement structure if they are to be successful.

The industries’ problem is the lack of institutional, management, and educational tools that will enable and encourage capital maintenance activities to be done in a timely manner consistent with short and long-range asset management strategies.

Research Tasks: The researcher(s) will be asked to deliver the following items, primarily focusing on the institutional issues surrounding each of these concepts:

  • Building on the work of the SHRP task force, a clear definition and discussion of the continuum between capital, preventative, and routine maintenance. The researchers then should specify what types of activities are included within capital preventative maintenance portion.

     
  • A determination, based on the literature and case studies, of when commonly used preventive capital maintenance activities should be done.

 

  • Documentation of the benefits to be derived, or costs to be avoided, when timely capital maintenance is done. This information should be presented in terms that would be understandable and compelling to the non-technical reader. Documentation should also include analytic methodology, so that practitioners can apply the methods to their agency’s data.

     
  • A brief review of the potential benefits of private sector contractual relationships in this arena. For example, the researchers might evaluate whether those agencies that have employed design-build-maintain-warranty strategies have better experience in carrying out capital maintenance. (i.e. Koch industries)

     
  • A review of capital budgeting strategies that may include those found in a best practices review including ones that may better support capital maintenance practices.  Researchers should look at long term capital scheduled maintenance plans for large capital investments. (20-25 year strategies)

     
  • A review of barriers, including both legal and institutional issues, that may exist in federal laws, regulations, guidance and practices that might inhibit or foster the use capital maintenance strategies.

 

  • A summary of practices to be derived from a literature review and a detailed review of not less than three states in the cold weather region of the country. (Pennsylvania, Minnesota, Michigan, Colorado and Montana might be candidates for this review.) This review should document budgeting and programming processes, relevant contractual processes, appropriate use and structure of life cycle analysis and relevant educational and outreach activities.
     

All of the information gathered in the listed tasks should be presented in the final report in the form of a guidebook or handbook that would be useful for State DOT program development personnel as they develop programs, budgets, and strategies.

Researchers should consider Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) activities. 

Partnering Arrangements: Given the breadth of the subject, proposals that include partnering arrangements between disciplines, for example, engineering and public policy, will be considered favorably. Joint proposals between institutions are also encouraged.

Format: Researchers should use the following format for submitting proposals:

 

Proposal Organization

 

10 copies of the proposal and supporting documents should be prepared.  Proposals may not exceed 10 pages in length, and should include a detailed description of the following:

 

Cover Page

with project title; name and address of the performing organization; name, title and mailing address of the principal investigator; name, title, and mailing address for the contracting officer for the institutions; and date of proposal submission.

 

Problem Statement

 

Research Objectives

 

Qualifications, Accomplishments and Other Commitments of the Research Team

 

Equipment and/or Facilities

 

Time Requirements to Complete the Research

 

Proposed Budget with Description of Matching Funds

            Budget Description

Provide a summary tabulation indicating staffing plans, and estimated person-hours specific to each operational phase.  Budget estimates should include salaries, overhead, and indirect costs, travel, computer time, equipment (purchase and/or rental), expendable materials and supplies, report printing, and special services (as applicable). 

 

            Matching Funding

Budget estimates must also include identification of all matching fund sources.  Proposals submitted to the MRUTC that include hard match dollars will be given higher priority than proposals with soft match dollars.  As a result, the MRUTC encourages researchers to partner with their State transportation agencies, other public sector agencies, and/or private sector interests. 

 

Descriptions of Cooperative Features and/or Partnerships (if applicable)

Letters of support must be included from each team member, if multiple institutions and researchers are involved. 

 

Reports and other Deliverables

 

Appendices

 

Additional Requirements   

Proposals should reflect strong consideration for educational missions of academic institutions.  This should include the preparation of materials for use in course development, funding of graduate students, and other similar activities.  Private research institutes will not be permitted to submit proposals except in partnerships with academic institutions.

Proposals will be submitted for review to peers at other University Transportation Centers and other State Departments of Transportation.  At least two peer reviews on each project proposal will be conducted.

Researchers will be required to meet twice with the Advisory Committee sponsoring this research or MRUTC Staff.   A preliminary report on the status of the project will be due three months after the start of the project or May 1, 2002, whichever is earlier.  Brief quarterly reports will also be required, electronic submittal is acceptable.

Eighty (80) paper copies (one unbound for duplication) of the final report should be submitted, in addition to an electronic version provided in Microsoft Word or Corel WordPerfect format.  

This project is issued under the Transportation Asset Management Research Program, USDOT Pooled Fund project number TPF 5(036).

 return to top

Research Topic #3

 

Proposals Due: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:00 p.m.

 

Estimated Budget: $50,000- $75,000.00

 

Estimated Timeline: 12 months

 

Synthesis of Best Practices

 

Subject:

Synthesis of Best Practices for the Development of an Integrated Data and Information Management Approach

 

Research Objective:

The objectives of this research effort include defining what an integrated data and information management approach may include, and a synthesis of best practices from both the public and private sectors that demonstrate an integrated data and information management approach.  This effort will also provide an analysis of the factors that may have combined to provide for the successful implementation of the approach. 

 

Background:

Data and information management represent a key step in the asset management process.  Recognizing that data is a corporate asset of significant value to an organization is an important first step toward the successful implementation of an asset management program.  The TRB Asset Management Task Force defines data and information management and analysis to include the wide range of activities necessary to collect, store, manipulate, analyze and use data.  Typically, transportation agency data includes an inventory of assets and their condition, operational characteristics and their use in the overall transportation system.  Additional data stored by agencies includes modeled projections of the future including use, condition, and operational characteristics. 

 

Current data management approaches used by state DOTs are generally not integrated.  Several agencies appear to have successfully developed approaches which individually or together have contributed to their successful acquisition and issue specific management of data; An integrated data management approach is needed to streamline available data within an agency and offer a consistent and effective approach that can be transformed into useful data for decision making processes.  An integrated data management approach can mean organizing management system data, financial data, customer data, asset data (condition and quality), policies, expectations and outcomes into one corporate data set to be used in decision making processes.

 

Given current budgetary constraints and concerns being addressed by transportation agencies at all levels, existing data inventory systems are valuable resources that should be relied on in any efforts to develop an integrated data management approach.  For example, existing management systems provide a wealth of data and decision support tools that are used by nearly every state agency to monitor performance of their transportation infrastructure and facilities.  Efforts to integrate existing management systems will allow states to focus on customer needs using performance programming.   

 

Research Tasks:

Task descriptions are intended to provide a framework for conducting the research.  The MRUTC is seeking the insights and expertise of the proposers on how best to achieve the research objective.  Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can be realistically accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time.  Proposals must present the proposer’s current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objective. 

 

The researcher(s) will be asked to deliver the following items: 

  • A review of available literature and different transportation agencies, both public and private, to develop a working definition of what an integrated data and information management approach is and should include.  The subject of the review should include examples of data management approaches studied in the literature, and case studies of agency approaches that incorporate the approach into their management and decision making structure.  
  • A summary of best practices from both the public and private transportation agencies related to integrated data management and a synthesis of how specific agencies have developed integrated approaches to data and information management. 
  • A synthesis of any metrics being used by transportation agencies to determine the overall performance of their efforts to manage data and what, if any, plans are in place to update and refine current efforts.  
  • A summary of factors, either within the agency culture or in the method of conducting integrated data management approaches that might explain the greater success of one agency versus others.
  • A proposed model and set of guidelines to help transportation agencies implement an integrated data and information management approach within their organizations.

 

 All of the information gathered in the listed tasks should be presented in the final report in the form of a guidebook or handbook that would be useful for practitioners as they confront this issue. 

 

Deadline and Mailing Information:

Research proposals must be received by 5 p.m. Friday, February 15, 2002.

Mailing Address:

10 hard copies of all research proposals and one electronic copy must be submitted to:

Aileen Switzer, Research Manager

Midwest Regional University Transportation Center

Engineering Hall

1415 Engineering Drive

Madison, WI  53706

 

Questions regarding this RFP may be directed to Aileen Switzer, Research Manager at 608/262-2013, aswitzer@engr.wisc.edu.

Criteria for Consideration

Partnerships are Encouraged - Priority will be given to research proposals submitted by universities in partnership with state departments of transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and/or private industry.   

Matching Funds - Budget estimates must include identification of all matching fund sources.  While matching funds are not required on a dollar for dollar basis, matching funds are strongly encouraged.  Proposals including supporting funds will be given higher priority than proposals with only in-kind or soft match dollars.  Hard match dollar sources may include partnerships with State transportation agencies, other public sector agencies, and/or private sector interests.  

Educational Focus - Proposals should reflect strong consideration for educational missions of academic institutions.  Private research institutes will not be permitted to submit proposals except in partnerships with academic institutions.

Proposals will be submitted for review to peers at other University Transportation Centers and other State Departments of Transportation.  At least two peer reviews on each project proposal will be conducted.

Proposal Format and Organization

Proposals may not exceed 10 pages in length, and should include a detailed description of the following:

1.     Cover Page

with project title; name and address of the performing organization; the name, title and mailing address of the principal investigator; and date of proposal submission.

 2. Problem Statement

 3. Research Objectives

 4. Qualifications, Accomplishments and Other Commitments of the Research    Team

 5. Equipment and/or Facilities

 6. Time Requirements to Complete the Research

 7. Proposed Budget with Description of Matching Funds

            Budget Description

Provide a summary tabulation indicating staffing plans, and estimated person-hours specific to each operational phase.  Budget estimates should include salaries, overhead, indirect costs, travel, computer time, equipment (purchase and/or rental), expendable materials and supplies, report printing, special services (as applicable), and other related budgetary expenses.  

            Matching Funding

Budget estimates must also include identification of all matching fund sources.  Proposals submitted to the MRUTC that include hard match dollars will be given higher priority than proposals with soft match dollars.  As a result, the MRUTC encourages researchers to partner with their State transportation agencies, other public sector agencies, and/or private sector interests.  

8. Descriptions of Cooperative Features and/or Partnerships (if applicable)

Letters of support must be included from each team member, if multiple institutions and researchers are involved.

9. Reports and other Deliverables (if applicable) 

10. Appendices

Other Information

Researchers will be required to meet twice with the Advisory Committee sponsoring this research or MRUTC Staff.  A preliminary report on the status of the project will be due three months after the start of the project.  Brief quarterly reports will also be required, electronic submittal is acceptable.

Eighty (80) paper copies (one unbound for duplication) of the final report should be submitted, in addition to an electronic version provided in Microsoft Word or Corel WordPerfect format.  

 

return to top

 

Research Topic #4

Proposals Due: Friday, February 15, 2002 5:00 p.m.

Estimated Budget: $75,000.00 - $100,000.00

Estimated Timeline: 12 – 18 months

Economic Benefits of Maintenance 

Subject:           An Analysis of the Economic Benefits of Conducting Maintenance.

 

Research Objective(s):

This research effort will seek to define both the quantifiable and potentially qualifiable economic benefits derived from conducting maintenance activities within a transportation agency. 

 

Background:

While maintenance encompasses a wide range of elements, the definition of maintenance for this research effort is narrowed to focus only the issues related to the preservation of the quality or extending the lives of both pavements and bridges.  Using this narrowed focus; maintenance may include any effort that may be used to prolong the life and quality of the riding surface.   

 

First generation maintenance management systems were oriented toward establishing a rational, objective basis for planning and tracking maintenance efforts and costs, and delivering services more efficiently.  In recent years, transportation agencies have shifted their focus from new construction efforts to preservation and maintenance of the existing system, in part because of TEA-21 but also due to the increased interest and attention from the executive and legislative levels on understanding what the maintenance budget buys.  While most will agree that maintenance is important to the overall preservation of a transportation facility, little is understood about the economic benefits derived from investments into maintenance budgets of state, regional and local transportation agencies. 

 

Research Tasks:

Task descriptions are intended to provide a framework for conducting the research.  The MRUTC is seeking the insights and expertise of the proposers on how best to achieve the research objective.  Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can be realistically accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time.  Proposals must present the proposer’s current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objective. 

 

Research proposers will be asked to provide the following as part of this study:

  • Researchers should review available literature and study several different transportation agencies, potentially at different levels of combined state, regional and/or local, as well as private agencies to research maintenance activities and related economic benefits.  The subject of the review should include examples of maintenance activities, budgetary resources applied toward the activity, and an analysis of impacts and benefits to the overall infrastructure.  
  • An analysis of current maintenance practices within transportation agencies and related analysis of how those practices are impacting (both positively and negatively) efforts to preserve and maintain transportation systems for the long term. 
  • A synthesis of any metrics being used by transportation agencies to determine the overall performance of their efforts to maintain their transportation infrastructure.  
  • A summary of factors, either in the agency culture or in the method of conducting maintenance that might explain the greater success of one agency versus others.
  • An assessment of the economic benefits derived from conducting maintenance both defined as part of the case study effort, as well as from the literature and any related economic calculations.
  • A model and set of guidelines to help transportation agencies to understand the benefits of conducting maintenance.  

Deadline and Mailing Information:

Research proposals must be received by 5 p.m. Friday, February 15, 2002.

Mailing Address:

10 hard copies of all research proposals and one electronic copy must be submitted to:

Aileen Switzer, Research Manager

Midwest Regional University Transportation Center

Engineering Hall

1415 Engineering Drive

Madison, WI  53706

 

Questions regarding this RFP may be directed to Aileen Switzer, Research Manager at 608/262-2013, aswitzer@engr.wisc.edu.

Criteria for Consideration

Partnerships are Encouraged - Priority will be given to research proposals submitted by universities in partnership with state departments of transportation, the Federal Highway Administration, and/or private industry.   

Matching Funds - Budget estimates must include identification of all matching fund sources.  While matching funds are not required on a dollar for dollar basis, matching funds are strongly encouraged.  Proposals including supporting funds will be given higher priority than proposals with only in-kind or soft match dollars.  Hard match dollar sources may include partnerships with State transportation agencies, other public sector agencies, and/or private sector interests.  

Educational Focus - Proposals should reflect strong consideration for educational missions of academic institutions.  Private research institutes will not be permitted to submit proposals except in partnerships with academic institutions.

Proposals will be submitted for review to peers at other University Transportation Centers and other State Departments of Transportation.  At least two peer reviews on each project proposal will be conducted.

Proposal Format and Organization

Proposals may not exceed 10 pages in length, and should include a detailed description of the following:

1.     Cover Page

with project title; name and address of the performing organization; the name, title and mailing address of the principal investigator; and date of proposal submission.

 2. Problem Statement

 3. Research Objectives

 4. Qualifications, Accomplishments and Other Commitments of the Research    Team

 5. Equipment and/or Facilities

 6. Time Requirements to Complete the Research

 7. Proposed Budget with Description of Matching Funds

            Budget Description

Provide a summary tabulation indicating staffing plans, and estimated person-hours specific to each operational phase.  Budget estimates should include salaries, overhead, indirect costs, travel, computer time, equipment (purchase and/or rental), expendable materials and supplies, report printing, special services (as applicable), and other related budgetary expenses.  

            Matching Funding

Budget estimates must also include identification of all matching fund sources.  Proposals submitted to the MRUTC that include hard match dollars will be given higher priority than proposals with soft match dollars.  As a result, the MRUTC encourages researchers to partner with their State transportation agencies, other public sector agencies, and/or private sector interests.  

8. Descriptions of Cooperative Features and/or Partnerships (if applicable)

Letters of support must be included from each team member, if multiple institutions and researchers are involved.

9. Reports and other Deliverables (if applicable) 

10. Appendices

Other Information

Researchers will be required to meet twice with the Advisory Committee sponsoring this research or MRUTC Staff.  A preliminary report on the status of the project will be due three months after the start of the project.  Brief quarterly reports will also be required, electronic submittal is acceptable.

Eighty (80) paper copies (one unbound for duplication) of the final report should be submitted, in addition to an electronic version provided in Microsoft Word or Corel WordPerfect format.  

return to top