BACKGROUND
State departments of transportation (DOTs) and industry partners have experienced internal and external compounding factors that have decreased applications for open positions, with many state DOTs experiencing unprecedented job vacancy rates. The unfilled positions challenge state DOTs in operating and maintaining their systems and implementing planned projects. This has prompted state DOT leadership to refocus on recruiting new talent to the transportation industry. However, difficulties in recruitment are symptoms of an 80/20 problem: 80 percent of recruitment activities focus on recruitment itself, while only 20 percent of efforts address internal and external factors dissuading talent from working at their agencies, or challenging retention efforts. Yet these factors may represent 80 percent of the actual problem.
For example, prior to the pandemic and especially during recessions, state DOTs and industry partners could receive hundreds of applications for a single open position. Accordingly, systems in human resources (HR) were implemented to filter applicants and help hiring managers find the best candidate more readily. Postpandemic, HR efforts may need to shift toward welcoming individuals into the transportation industry even if they do not yet possess certain skills or prior educational requirements, to broaden the available talent pool. Additionally, state DOTs have differences in laws, regulations, policies, and practices that HR must adhere to. Research is needed to provide state DOTs a nuanced understanding of the full problem and to identify context-sensitive actions for state DOTs to attract and retain talent.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this research is to develop a guide for state DOTs and industry partners that identifies actionable and scalable strategies to address the internal and external factors that challenge recruitment and retention.
Accomplishment of the project objective will require at least the following tasks.
TASKS
Task descriptions are intended to provide a framework for conducting the research. The NCHRP is seeking the insights of proposers on how best to achieve the research 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 sequencing of tasks to achieve the research objective and associated deliverables (such as technical memoranda or summary reports) shall be structured in the same cadence as quarterly progress report (QPR) submissions so technical content can be reviewed at the same time as a QPR. The overall research plan must be organized into two phases. At the conclusion of Phase I, the research team shall deliver an interim report and updated Phase II research plan. One month shall be reserved for NCHRP review, approval, and an in-person interim meeting. The research agency shall not proceed to the next phase without NCHRP approval of the interim report and updated research plan.
A clear and concise engagement strategy to achieve the research objective shall be developed and presented in the proposer’s research approach under the header “Engagement Strategy.” This engagement strategy will be considered under the second evaluation criterion described in Special Note F. Engagement should prioritize (1) gaining an understanding of the compounding internal and external factors the transportation industry experiences, (2) cocreating strategies to address the problem, and (3) vetting the identified strategies before preparing the draft final guide.
The strategy should include a workshop (see Special Note L) that is envisioned to help the research team (1) gain deep insights into challenges faced and (2) cocreate with invited guests on potential strategies. The proposer should present a concept for the proceedings in the engagement strategy. This workshop should be conducted in conjunction with the Phase I interim meeting, with the workshop occurring first. The workshop should address the second and third engagement priorities.
The proposer should be creative and inclusive in devising how to engage participants from diverse and multidisciplinary backgrounds, varying geographies and organizational sizes, and from the transportation industry broadly. At other points in the research plan, proposers may consider using virtual focus groups, interviews, or other methods as appropriate. The NCHRP discourages using survey questionnaires for this project.
The research team shall conduct a scan of current practice and a thematic literature review (from academic and gray literature) that identifies and addresses the internal and external factors that make recruitment and retention difficult.
Internal factors may include:
- Legislation, policies, or practices that govern HR activities;
- Agency HR types (hosted by a statewide agency or internal to the state DOT; civil service versus open hire, union versus nonunion, etc.);
- Recruitment and hiring methods by job classification; and
- Organizational, cultural, and structural biases impacting retention and recruitment.
External factors may include:
- Demographic trends in society that impact the workforce and labor availability;
- Generational characteristics that influence job seekers;
- Challenges and opportunities to (1) integrate immigrant talent in workforces and (2) welcome untapped labor markets (justice-impacted individuals, underserved communities, individuals with disabilities, or recent retirees);
- Data and analysis that would inform recruitment or retention efforts; and
- Transportation industry engagement of youth and academia to exhibit the opportunities in the transportation sector.
The research team shall identify actionable and scalable strategies to overcome internal and external factors that present recruitment challenges. The strategies need to be presented according to estimated implementation timelines (immediate, short-term, and long-term), and matrixed against the different variables a state DOT may encounter (e.g., agency HR type, demographic trends, etc.). This matrixed approach is intended to help practitioners identify what strategies will work in their context. Further, the research team shall identify gaps in training and leadership development of HR staff and hiring managers who are most likely to implement the strategies. Educational and training materials shall be developed to address these gaps.
The strategies and associated educational and training materials shall be assembled into a user-friendly guide. The guide shall provide a brief description of the overall problem, succinctly describe the factors challenging recruitment and retention, and then present the strategies and associated educational and training materials. Accompanying the guide shall be an executive brief that provides a succinct overview of the contents of the guide. This deliverable shall be more robust than an executive summary, but not as long or detailed as the main guide.
The final deliverables shall include:
- A guide in the NCHRP WebResource format (See Special Note Q),
- An executive brief for chief executive officers of state DOTs,
- A conduct of research report that documents the entire research effort,
- A PowerPoint presentation with speaker notes that summarizes the project and distinctly illustrates for the audience how the research can be applied in their organization, and
- An Implementation Plan (see Special Note M).
Note: Following receipt of the draft final deliverables, the remaining 3 months shall be for NCHRP review and comment and for research agency preparation of the final deliverables.
SPECIAL NOTES
A. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs were revised in May 2023. Please take note of the new and revised text which is highlighted in yellow.
B. Proposals must be submitted as a single PDF file with a maximum file size of 10 MB. The PDF must be formatted for standard 8 ½” X 11” paper, and the entire proposal must not exceed 60 pages (according to the page count displayed in the PDF). Proposals that do not meet these requirements will be rejected. For other requirements, refer to chapter V of the instructions.
C. The Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs have been modified to include a revised policy and instructions for disclosing Investigator Conflict of Interest. For more information, refer to chapter IV of the instructions. A detailed definition and examples can be found in the CRP Conflict of Interest Policy for Contractors. The proposer recommended by the project panel will be required to submit an Investigator Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form as a prerequisite for contract negotiations.
D. Proposals will be rejected if any of the proposed research team members work for organizations represented on the project panel. The panel roster for this project can be found at https://www.mytrb.org/OnlineDirectory/Committee/Details/7028. Proposers may not contact panel members directly; this roster is provided solely for the purpose of avoiding potential conflicts of interest.
E. Proprietary Products - If any proprietary products are to be used or tested in the project, please refer to Item 6 in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals.
F. Proposals are evaluated by the NCHRP staff and project panels consisting of individuals collectively knowledgeable in the problem area. The project panel will recommend their first choice proposal considering the following factors: (1) the proposer's demonstrated understanding of the problem; (2) the merit of the proposed research approach and experiment design; (3) the experience, qualifications, and objectivity of the research team in the same or closely related problem area; (4) the plan for ensuring application of results; (5) how the proposer approaches inclusion and diversity in the composition of their team and research approach, including participation by certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprises; and, if relevant, (6) the adequacy of the facilities. A recommendation by the project panel is not a guarantee of a contract. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS - the contracting authority for the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) will conduct an internal due diligence review and risk assessment of the panel’s recommended proposal before contract negotiations continue.
Note: The proposer's approach to inclusion and diversity as well as participation by Disadvantaged Business Enterprises should be incorporated in Item 11 of the proposal.
G. Given the topic of this research, equity is paramount consideration, and proposers are strongly encouraged to identify a certified Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) on their proposed research team.
H. Copyrights - All data, written materials, computer software, graphic and photographic images, and other information prepared under the contract and the copyrights therein shall be owned by the National Academy of Sciences. The contractor and subcontractors will be able to publish this material for non-commercial purposes, for internal use, or to further academic research or studies with permission from TRB Cooperative Research Programs. The contractor and subcontractors will not be allowed to sell the project material without prior approval by the National Academy of Sciences. By signing a contract with the National Academy of Sciences, contractors accept legal responsibility for any copyright infringement that may exist in work done for TRB. Contractors are therefore responsible for obtaining all necessary permissions for use of copyrighted material in TRB's Cooperative Research Programs publications. For guidance on TRB's policies on using copyrighted material please consult Section 5.4, "Use of Copyrighted Material," in the Procedural Manual for Contractors.
I. The text of the final deliverable is expected to be publication-ready when it is submitted. It is strongly recommended that the research team include the expertise of a technical editor as early in the project timeline as possible. See Appendix F of the Procedural Manual for Contractors Conducting Research in the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Program for technical editing standards expected in final deliverables.
J. Proposals should include a task-by-task breakdown of labor hours for each staff member as shown in Figure 4 in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals. Proposals also should include a breakdown of all costs (e.g., wages, indirect costs, travel, materials, and total) for each task using Figures 5 and 6 in the brochure. Please note that TRB Cooperative Research Program subawards (selected proposers are considered subawards to the National Academy of Sciences, the parent organization of TRB) must comply with 2 CFR 200 – Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. These requirements include a provision that proposers without a "federally" Negotiated Indirect Costs Rate Agreement (NICRA) shall be subject to a maximum allowable indirect rate of 10% of Modified Total Direct Costs. Modified Total Direct Costs include all salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and up to the first $25,000 of each lower tier subaward and subcontract. Modified Total Direct Costs exclude equipment, capital expenditures, charges for patient care, rental costs, tuition remission, scholarships and fellowships, participant support costs and the portion of each lower tier subaward and subcontract in excess of $25,000.
K. NCHRP wishes to award this contract for a fixed price of $400,000; this amount will not be subject to any adjustment by reason of the contractor's cost experience in the performance of the contract.
L. For budgeting purposes, proposers should plan for an in-person meeting with NCHRP for a joint interim meeting and a workshop to be executed at the end of Phase I. The costs for the workshop, including invitational travel for at least 25 attendees (not including members of the research team), should be included in the detailed budget for the research. For estimating these costs, assume that the workshop will be held at a TRB facility (Keck Center in Washington, DC, or the Beckman Center in Irvine, CA). NCHRP will cover costs associated with NCHRP panel member travel. Catering services for all participants (including panel members, research team members, and NCHRP staff) should be included in the detailed budget for the research.
M. The required technical memorandum titled “Implementation of Research Findings and Products” should (a) provide recommendations on how to best put the research findings/products into practice; (b) identify possible institutions that might take leadership in applying the research findings/products; (c) identify issues affecting potential implementation of the findings/products and recommend possible actions to address these issues; and (d) recommend methods of identifying and measuring the impacts associated with implementation of the findings/products. Implementation of these recommendations is not part of the research project and, if warranted, details of these actions will be developed and implemented in future efforts.
The research team will be expected to provide input to an implementation team consisting of panel members, AASHTO committee members, the NCHRP Implementation Coordinator, and others in order to meet the goals of NCHRP Active Implementation: Moving Research into Practice, available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/docs/NCHRP_ActiveImplementation.pdf
N. If the team proposes a Principal Investigator who is not an employee of the Prime Contractor, or if the Prime Contractor is proposed to conduct less than 50% of the total effort (by time or budget), then section five of the proposal should include: (1) a justification of why this approach is appropriate, and (2) a description of how the Prime Contractor will ensure adequate communication and coordination with their Subcontractors throughout the project.
O. All budget information should be suitable for printing on 8½″ x 11″ paper. If a budget page cannot fit on a single 8½″ x 11″ page, it should be split over multiple pages. Proposers must use the Excel templates provided in the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs.
P. The National Academies have an ethical and legal obligation to provide proper attribution whenever material from other sources is included in its reports, online postings, and other publications and products. TRB will review all Cooperative Research Programs draft final deliverables using the software iThenticate for potential plagiarism. If plagiarized text appears in the draft final deliverable, the research team will be required to make revisions and the opportunity to submit future proposals may be affected.
Q. CRP’s WebResources multi-site is hosted within an open-source content management system called WordPress. CRP manages two instances of WebResources: (1) UAT used for development and review, and (2) PROD is CRP’s live production site. A list of approved WordPress plug-ins can be found here: https://crp.trb.org/approved-plugins/. WordPress plug-ins not listed in the approved list can be evaluated, but may not be approved. Contractor is responsible for lifetime subscription (if available) costs of new plug-ins, and must transfer the license to CRPs to ensure that the functionality from the plug-in will continue to operate correctly in the future. The selected contractor will be working within the UAT site for all updates.
