Arizona 511 Model Deployment

Matt Burt – Battelle

Talking Operations WebcastRural 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 2002

• 2 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

- 10 -

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

- 11 -

For Further Information Contact:

• Model Deployment Evaluation:– Matt Burt, Battelle: 480-753-1511, burtm@battelle.org

• Arizona 511 Operations and Model Deployment Project:– Tim Wolfe, ADOT: 602-568-2164, twolfe@azdot.gov

– Rick Schuman, PBS&J: (407) 647-7275 x4511, rickschuman@pbsj.com

- 12 -

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

- 13 -

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

- 14 -

Cost Data - Implementation

Deployment Cost ComponentPre-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

- 15 -

Cost Data – Operation & Maintenance

Annual Operations Cost ComponentPre-Model Deployment 511

System

ModelDeployment Year of

OperationsFuture 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 $ 139,577

T-1 Line Rental $ 27,600 $ 36,458 $ 36,458

Total $ 139,734 $ 292,578 $ 209,793