HOME MyTRB CONTACT US DIRECTORY E-NEWSLETTER FOLLOW US RSS


The National Academies

ACRP 10-27 [Pending]

Using Collaborative Decision Making to Enhance the Management of Adverse Conditions

  Project Data
Funds: $300,000
Contract Time: 12 months
Staff Responsibility: Theresia H. Schatz

BACKGROUND
 
Collaborative decision making (CDM) is the process whereby airports, airlines, and other stakeholders (including those referenced in ACRP Reports 137: Guidebook for Advancing Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) at Airports and ACRP Report 153: IROPS Stakeholder Communication and Coordination) share information to improve policies, planning, and decisions affecting airport operations. CDM is also about developing procedures to anticipate, prevent, and mitigate potential problems arising from adverse internal and external conditions.
 
CDM has been implemented in the United States for many years, and until very recently this program has mainly focused on cooperation and data sharing between FAA and the airlines.  Airports are now at the threshold of becoming fully active partners in CDM. ACRP Report 137 provides guidance to airport operators about the value of CDM and how to integrate the process into airport operations and planning. This project would expand on the research presented in ACRP Report 137 with a greater focus on the implementation of CDM and all aspects related to the continuum of disruptions [i.e., continuity events, irregular operations (IROPS), emergencies, and incidences, as defined in Special Note B].
 
 
OBJECTIVE
 
The objective of this research is to develop an implementation toolbox to serve as a go-to manual for airports and their stakeholders for effective use of CDM to enhance the management of a continuum of disruptions at a variety of types and sizes of airports.
 
The toolbox should address and /or include at a minimum:
  • A compendium of implementation practices to apply CDM principles and tools as provided in ACRP Report 137 as they apply to the continuum of disruptions;
  • Identification of the benefits of CDM as applied to the mitigation of the continuum of disruptions;
  • The use of data sharing to drive internal and external communication;
  • Techniques for engaging stakeholders with an emphasis on airline partners at the system operations level;  
  • An effective approach to standardization (the 6-step process as outlined in ACRP Report 65 and ACRP Report 153);
  • A consolidated glossary of key and new common terminology;
  • Guidance on how to use CDM to ensure scalability and flexibility across all types and sizes of airports for the continuum of disruptions; and
  • Templates for communication criteria for international operational diversions.
 
RESEARCH PLAN

The ACRP is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research objective. Proposers are asked to develop and include a detailed research plan for accomplishing the project objective. Proposers are expected to describe research plans that can realistically be accomplished within the constraints of available funds and contract time. Proposals must present the proposers' current thinking in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach to meeting the research objective. The work proposed must be divided into tasks and proposers must describe the work proposed in each task in detail.

The research plan should include appropriate deliverables, for ACRP approval, that include at minimum:

1. A qualitative analysis that explores the impact of enablers and challengers to demonstrate the benefit of collaboration;
 
2. An interim report that describes work done in early tasks with an updated work plan for remaining tasks with a draft outline of the implementation toolbox;
 
3. Tools and techniques incorporating effective practices to foster engagement; and
 
4. A proposal for airport and stakeholder certification process(es) to aid in implementation.
 
The research plan should include other appropriate checkpoints with the ACRP panel, including at a minimum (1) a kick-off teleconference meeting to be held within 1 month of the Notice to Proceed and (2) one face-to-face interim deliverable review meeting, as well as web-enabled teleconferences tied to the panel review and ACRP approval of other interim deliverables deemed appropriate. 
 
The final deliverables will include: (1) the implementation toolbox that meets the research objective; 
(2) a presentation of the toolbox that communicates its functions, features and benefits; and (3) a stand-alone technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products.” (See Special Note H.)
 
Note:  Following receipt of the draft final deliverables, there should be 3 months for ACRP review and comments and for contractor preparation of the final deliverables.   For budgeting purposes, proposers should assume that ACRP will provide access to web-enabled teleconference services.  ACRP will pay panel members’ travel costs for the face-to-face meeting. Proposers should assume that the meeting will be held in Washington, DC.
 
SPECIAL NOTES

A. ACRP publications and other relevant industry-related resources should be consulted when conducting this research. It is expected that portions of the following publications and or resources will be discussed or linked into the final publication as appropriate, including but not limited to:
 
  • ACRP Report 65: Guidebook for Airport Irregular Operations (IROPS) Contingency Planning;
  • ACRP Report 93: Operational and Business Continuity Planning for Prolonged Airport Disruptions;
  • ACRP Report 94: Integrating Web-Based Emergency Management Collaboration Tools into Airport Operations – A Primer;
  • ACRP Report 106: Being Prepared for IROPS: A Business-Planning and Decision-Making Approach;
  • ACRP Report 112: Airport Terminal Incident Response Planning;
  • ACRP Report 137: Guidebook for Advancing Collaborative Decision Making (CDM) at Airports; and
  • ACRP Report 153: IROPS Stakeholder Communication and Coordination.
 
B. “Continuum of Disruptions” include:  
 
Continuity event: A planned or unplanned loss of a system that impedes your operation (e.g., baggage system failure, loss of airfield lighting, IT system outages, staffing shortage, etc.)
 
IROPS: Exceptional events that require actions and/or capabilities beyond those considered usual by aviation service providers.
 
Emergency: Any issue that causes a dispatch of first responders and will be managed by the pre-determined (organic) response assets without exceeding airport capabilities.
 
Incident: An occurrence or event, natural or human-caused that requires an additional coordinated emergency response to protect life, property, the environment, or the business operation. Incidents can, for example, include major disasters, large scale emergencies, terrorist attacks, terrorist threats, wildland and urban fires, floods, hazardous materials spills, nuclear accidents, aircraft accidents, earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes, tropical storms, war-related disasters, public health and medical emergencies, and other occurrences requiring an emergency response or an enhanced response by supporting subject matter experts.
 
STATUS: A contractor selection meeting will take place on March 7

To create a link to this page, use this URL: http://apps.trb.org/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=4633