Transportation Planning Capacity Building Program

- Peer Program Report -

Michigan/Pennsylvania: HPMS Workshop

Building Partnerships with Metropolitan Planning Organizations

September 24-26, 2002

This report summarizes a Peer-To-Peer exchange sponsored by the Metropolitan Capacity Building (MCB) Program. Representatives from Michigan’s state DOT, three metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and the Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) met with representatives from PennDOT and other MPOs in Pennsylvania to share best practices on the maintenance of database management systems and Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data collection techniques. The Michigan team presented PennDOT with an overview of their Geographic Framework Interagency Geographic Information System (GIS), which centralizes the statewide maintenance of asset data across multiple actors and institutions across the state. The Michigan team then participated in PennDOT’s Third Annual HPMS workshop and observed how PennDOT coordinates data collection techniques with its MPOs, The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and PennDOT’s Engineering Districts. The peer exchange was held in Hershey, PA.

In 1978, the Highway Performance and Monitoring System (HPMS) was developed as the national highway transportation system data base which includes limited data on all public roads such as length, lane-mile and travel data. The purpose of HPMS is to provide data that reflects the extent, condition, performance, use and operating characteristics of the Nation’s highways. This information is important because it is used for assessing highway system performance under FHWA’s strategic planning process and for apportioning Federal-aid funds. The data collected is used to support the Biennial Condition and Performance Reports to Congress and the development of national highway policy and programs. HPMS is an annual highway data reporting program mandated by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The state DOTs provide HPMS information to FHWA with the assistance of the Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) and other local agencies.

State DOTs and MPOs have been struggling with how to ensure accuracy and uniformity in data collection techniques, as well as how to maintain data management systems to enhance the quality of asset data for purposes such as the (HPMS). The peer exchange between MDOT and PennDOT provided an opportunity for information sharing about a) a framework to maintain a centralized asset management database across multiple institutions and local agencies, and b) how to increase uniformity in the HPMS data collection process.

The exchange began with a presentation made by the MDOT Asset Management Team to representatives of the PennDOT Bureau of Planning and Research, followed by a question and answer period. MDOT along with other stakeholders have addressed the issue of maintaining a statewide data management system for their assets by creating the Michigan Geographic Framework Interagency GIS. As the “official” digital GIS base map for the state of Michigan, the Framework operates as a linear referencing system (LRS) that manages the data from different agencies within a centralized database. The Framework is designed to keep the GIS base map and all associated data current, as well as to maximize usability among all data collection agencies.

• Coordination: Field agencies retain responsibility for tracking data relevant to their agency (e.g., number of vehicles on the roadway, but can refer to data from different agencies across the state through the Framework.
• Usability: The software for the Framework is easy to distribute and use quickly without requiring GIS expertise, while providing opportunities to upgrade to systems planning.
• HPMS/Framework connection: The Physical Road (PR) referencing system is the LRS used by both the Framework and HPMS, thus allowing HPMS data to be mapped in the Framework and Framework data to be used to update HPMS.
• Buy-in: A diverse group of agencies at all levels of government support the Framework program, with the Michigan Central Budget Agency administering funds and other contributions from state, regional and county agencies.
• Neutrality: The traditional operation and maintenance of the Framework has been relocated from MDOT to the Center for Geographic Information – an organization that is perceived to be more neutral than political tensions that existed historically between the DOT and other agencies.

The discussion concluded with an overview of the benefits derived from Michigan’s Geographic Framework.

In order to improve standardized collection and reporting of HPMS data among MPOs and local divisions, PennDOT hosts an annual HPMS Workshop to provide training to MPOs, The Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission and PennDOT's local Engineering Districts. Representatives from MDOT, three Michigan MPOs and the Michigan Local Technical Assistance Program (LTAP) participated in this year's HPMS workshop to observe how Pennsylvania interacts with their local agencies to address issues of data collection standardization. Approximately 58 participants, including the Michigan delegation and one representative from DelDOT participated in the 2002 HPMS Workshop.

The first part of the workshop began with an optional HPMS software training course meant to provide the basics of how to use and input data. The training provided basic technical assistance on how to import the HPMS software and data files from a CD provided by PennDOT, and how to find specific data using various search functions. Overall, the session oriented the participants to the data files, and familiarized them with what types of information are needed by PennDOT to fulfill HPMS categories.

The general session began with statewide updates related to HPMS and other traffic count data relevant to Pennsylvania. Gaye Liddick, HPMS Coordinator for PennDOT, provided an overview of the widespread impact of Pennsylvania’s HPMS data for various publications such as the Pennsylvania Highway Statistics Report, biannual reports to congress, and FHWA allocations of funding to Pennsylvania.

According to Liddick, PennDOT’s Bureau of Planning and Research PA gives their MPOs a major role in HPMS data collection. Penn DOT has tried to ensure standardization and quality data by providing software to its HPMS partners throughout the state, as well as provide trainings such as the annual HPMS workshop. The accuracy of HPMS data has improved steadily since 1996.

PennDOT attributes much of the improved data quality to the proactive training they provide to their partners in the field.

Other updates included urbanized boundary changes within Pennsylvania due to the 2000 Census, as well as statewide counting contracts for outsourced traffic counts.

Laine Heltebridle, HPMS contact for eastern Pennsylvania, gave a quiz on data collection methods (i.e., how to code scenarios for the database) through a powerpoint slide presentation. After each participant had marked his or her answers on the answer sheets provided to each individual, the answers and corresponding resource look-up in the HPMS field manual were discussed. Each slide/question provided an opportunity for questions, clarifications and dialogue on how to different districts approach ambiguous situations.

The remainder of the workshop consisted of team data collection in the field, and an evaluation of each team’s methodology and HPMS coding designation for a particular scenario. Eight teams were sent out to collect data for eight nearby sites pre-determined by PennDOT workshop facilitators. After an afternoon of data collection, the teams regrouped to compare results and discuss discrepancies. The post-field work gathering provided a forum to discuss, debate, and agree upon a way to handle other situations that field staff may encounter in the future. For each site, PennDOT had prepared a powerpoint slide to visually aid the discussions.