2019 Traffic Incident Management Capability Maturity Self-Assessment National Analysis Report
Appendix. Summary of 2019 Traffic Incident Management Capability Maturity Self-Assessment Results
Table 16. 2019 Traffic Incident Management Capability Maturity Self-Assessment scores.
| Question |
Mean Score |
Percent Change from Baseline |
Percent Scoring 3 or Higher |
| Baseline |
2019 |
Baseline |
2019 |
| Strategic |
| 1. Is there a formal Traffic Incident Management (TIM) program that is supported by a multidiscipline, multi-agency team or task force, which meets regularly to discuss and plan for TIM activities? |
1.9 |
3.18 |
67.4 |
28.0 |
83.5 |
| 2. Are all disciplines and agencies participating in on-going TIM enhancement activities/efforts? |
1.9 |
3.18 |
67.4 |
28.0 |
83.5 |
| 3. Is the importance of TIM understood by all TIM stakeholders and supported by multidiscipline, multi-agency agreements or memorandums of understanding (MOUs)? |
1.71 |
2.85 |
66.7 |
18.0 |
71.3 |
| 4. Is agency leadership actively involved in program-level TIM decisions (i.e., policy establishment, training, funding, legislation, etc.)? |
1.71 |
2.98 |
74.3 |
18.0 |
76.6 |
| 5. Is there a full-time position within at least one of the participating agencies with responsibility for coordinating the TIM program as their primary job function? |
2.28 |
3.19 |
39.9 |
54.0 |
73.4 |
| 6. Are the TIM response roles and responsibilities of public and private sector TIM stakeholders mutually understood? |
1.71 |
3.23 |
88.9 |
18.0 |
90.4 |
| 7. Is planning to support TIM activities, including regular needs assessments, done across and among participating agencies? |
1.35 |
3.02 |
123.7 |
12.0 |
83.0 |
| 8. Are funds available for TIM activities? |
1.71 |
2.97 |
73.7 |
18.0 |
70.2 |
| 9. Is TIM considered and incorporated into planning efforts for construction and work zones? |
2.47 |
3.37 |
36.4 |
35.0 |
87.9 |
| 10. Is TIM considered and incorporated into planning efforts for special events such as sporting events, concerts, conventions, etc.? |
2.47 |
3.37 |
36.4 |
35.0 |
87.9 |
| 11. Is TIM considered and incorporated into planning efforts for weather-related events? |
2.47 |
3.37 |
36.4 |
35.0 |
87.9 |
| 12. Have stakeholders in the region participated in a second Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP2) National TIM Responder Training Program, or equivalent, Train-the-Trainer (TtT) session and are they actively training others? |
1.26 |
2.88 |
128.6 |
9.0 |
72.3 |
| 13. What percentage (estimated) of TIM responders in the region identified as needing training have received the 4-Hour SHRP2 TIM Responder Training (in-person or via Web-Based Training), or equivalent? |
2.82 |
2.78 |
-1.4 |
57.9 |
56.4 |
| 14. Is the SHRP2 TIM Responder Training being conducted in a multidiscipline setting? |
2.97 |
3.21 |
8.1 |
66.3 |
74.5 |
| 15. Has the SHRP2 TIM Responder Training, or equivalent, been incorporated into the local academy and/or technical college curriculums? |
1.77 |
2.41 |
36.2 |
10.5 |
41.5 |
| 16. Does the TIM program conduct multidiscipline, multi-agency after-action reviews (AARs)? |
1.62 |
2.82 |
74.1 |
18.0 |
60.6 |
| 17. Is Roadway Clearance Time (RCT) being measured utilizing the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) standard definition time between first recordable awareness of an incident by a responsible agency and first confirmation that all lanes are available for traffic flow? |
0.64 |
2.82 |
340.6 |
3.0 |
70.2 |
| 18. Which of the following data collection and analysis practices best align with your region for RCT? |
0.64 |
2.51 |
292.2 |
3.0 |
53.2 |
| 19. Has the TIM program established performance targets for RCT? |
1.16 |
2.48 |
113.8 |
4.0 |
45.7 |
| 20. How does your agency use RCT performance data to influence your TIM operations? |
2.21 |
2.43 |
10.0 |
35.8 |
52.1 |
| 21. Is Incident Clearance Time (ICT) measured and used by your agency? FHWA defines ICT as the "time between the first recordable awareness of the incident and the time at which the last responder has left the scene." |
0.64 |
2.65 |
314.1 |
3.0 |
62.8 |
| 22. Which of the following data collection and analysis practice best aligns with your region for ICT? |
0.64 |
2.43 |
279.7 |
3.0 |
50.0 |
| 23. Has the TIM program established performance targets for ICT? |
1.16 |
2.07 |
78.4 |
4.0 |
34.0 |
| 24. How does your agency use ICT performance data to influence your TIM operations? |
2.21 |
2.20 |
-0.5 |
35.8 |
42.6 |
| 25. Is the number of Secondary Crashes being measured and used? FHWA defines Secondary Crashes as the number of unplanned crashes beginning with the time of detection of the primary crash where a collision occurs either a) within the incident scene or b) within the queue, including the opposite direction, resulting from the original incident? |
1.03 |
2.39 |
132.0 |
8.0 |
57.4 |
| 26. How is data for the number of Secondary Crashes collected? |
1.88 |
2.37 |
26.1 |
29.5 |
53.2 |
| 27. Has the TIM program established performance targets for a reduction in the number of Secondary Crashes? |
1.16 |
1.55 |
33.6 |
4.0 |
12.8 |
| 28. How does your agency use Secondary Crash performance data to influence your TIM operations? |
2.21 |
1.94 |
-12.2 |
35.8 |
28.7 |
| Tactical |
| 29. Is an Authority Removal Law in place and understood by TIM stakeholders? |
2.92 |
3.19 |
9.2 |
67.0 |
80.9 |
| 30. Is a Driver Removal Law in place and understood by TIM stakeholders? |
3.01 |
3.02 |
0.3 |
71.0 |
81.9 |
| 31. What activities are in place to outreach to and educate the public and elected officials about TIM? |
2.38 |
2.81 |
18.1 |
46.3 |
72.3 |
| 32. Is there a Safety Service Patrol program in place for incident and emergency response? |
2.73 |
3.29 |
20.5 |
67.0 |
83.0 |
| 33. What level of coverage does the Safety Service Patrol program provide? |
2.73 |
3.29 |
20.5 |
67.0 |
83.0 |
| 34. Do TIM responders routinely utilize the Incident Command System (ICS), specifically Unified Command (UC), while on scene? |
2.55 |
3.24 |
27.1 |
58.0 |
90.4 |
| 35. Are temporary traffic control (TTC) devices (e.g., cones, advanced warning signs, etc.) pre-staged in the region to facilitate timely response? |
2.21 |
2.97 |
34.4 |
41.0 |
76.6 |
| 36. Do towing and recovery procedures/rotation list policies deploy resources based on type/severity of incident? |
3.14 |
3.33 |
6.1 |
74.7 |
89.4 |
| 37. Do towing and recovery procedures/rotation list policies include company/operator qualifications, equipment requirements, and/or training requirements? |
2.86 |
3.09 |
8.0 |
67.0 |
78.7 |
| 38. Do towing and recovery procedures/rotation list policies include penalties for non-compliance of response criteria? |
2.49 |
2.85 |
14.5 |
55.8 |
70.2 |
| 39. Is there a policy in place that clearly identifies reportable types and quantities, and appropriate Hazmat response? |
2.89 |
3.30 |
14.2 |
69.0 |
90.4 |
| 40. Does at least one responding agency have the authority to override the decision to utilize the responsible party's Hazmat contractor and call in other resources? |
3.22 |
3.40 |
5.6 |
89.0 |
91.5 |
| 41. For incidents involving a fatality, is there a procedure in place for early notification and timely response of the Medical Examiner? |
2.53 |
3.18 |
25.7 |
55.0 |
78.7 |
| 42. For incidents involving a fatality, is there a procedure for the removal of the deceased prior to Medical Examiner arrival? |
2.53 |
2.43 |
-4.0 |
55.0 |
48.9 |
| 43. Are there procedures in place for expedited crash investigations? |
2.59 |
2.90 |
12.0 |
72.0 |
64.9 |
| 44. Is there a procedure in place for removal of abandoned vehicles? |
3.47 |
3.45 |
-0.6 |
91.0 |
83.0 |
| 45. Do standardized, documented TIM response procedures/guidelines exist? |
2.73 |
2.83 |
3.7 |
61.1 |
72.3 |
| 46. Do TIM responders routinely utilize temporary traffic control devices to provide traffic control for the three incident classifications (minor, intermediate, major) in compliance with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD)? |
1.93 |
3.18 |
64.8 |
27.0 |
81.9 |
| 47. Do TIM responders routinely utilize traffic control procedures to provide back of traffic queue warning to approaching motorists? |
1.56 |
2.99 |
91.7 |
17.0 |
74.5 |
| 48. Is there a mutually understood procedure/guideline in place for safe vehicle positioning? |
1.28 |
3.18 |
148.4 |
14.0 |
81.6 |
| 49. Are there mutually understood procedures/guidelines in place for use of emergency-vehicle lighting? |
1.28 |
3.18 |
148.4 |
14.0 |
81.6 |
| 50. Are TIM responders following high-visibility safety apparel requirements as outlined in the MUTCD? |
1.28 |
3.18 |
148.4 |
14.0 |
81.6 |
| Support |
| 51. Are TIM stakeholders aware of and actively utilizing Traffic Management Center/Traffic Operations Center resources to coordinate incident detection, notification and response? |
1.98 |
3.53 |
78.3 |
41.0 |
94.7 |
| 52. What TIM data (i.e., number of involved vehicles, number of lanes blocked, length of queue, etc.) is captured via TMCs and/or public safety computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems and is it shared with other disciplines for real-time operational purposes? |
1.43 |
3.14 |
119.6 |
10.0 |
90.4 |
| 53. Is TIM video captured via TMCs and/or public safety CAD systems and is it shared with other disciplines for real-time operational purposes? |
1.43 |
2.96 |
107.0 |
10.0 |
83.0 |
| 54. Are there policies or procedures in place for signal timing changes to support traffic management during incident response? |
1.55 |
2.37 |
52.9 |
18.0 |
45.7 |
| 55. Are there pre-planned detour and/or alternate routes identified and shared between TIM stakeholders? |
1.55 |
2.82 |
81.9 |
18.0 |
68.1 |
|
