BACKGROUND

Since knowledge management (KM) was introduced to American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) over 20 years ago, it has continued to gain support among state departments of transportation (DOTs). AASHTO created a Committee on Knowledge Management in 2018, and TRB created the Committee on Information and Knowledge Management in 2019. A growing number of state DOTs and other transportation agencies have begun to implement various aspects of KM, and there is heightened awareness of workforce-related challenges and risks. However, many state DOTs do not have active and sustained KM programs yet. 

Stakeholder outreach activities conducted as part of NCHRP Project 23-14, "Research Roadmap for Knowledge Management," found that while NCHRP Report 813: A Guide to Agency-Wide Knowledge Management for State Departments of Transportation is viewed as a valuable resource, more detailed and practical guidelines are needed for organizing and coordinating KM in state DOTs and integrating KM practices into agency functional areas. State DOTs and other transportation agencies are also seeking an agency-specific maturity model for KM implementation and a way to benchmark and track their KM implementation progress. Research is needed to integrate KM practices within different state DOT functions and make KM more sustainable by expanding the breadth, coordination, and reach of KM implementation within their organizations.

OBJECTIVE 

The objective of this project is to create a KM manual to help transportation agencies at any stage of KM maturity retain and institutionalize knowledge, address workforce challenges, gain operational efficiencies, and improve resilience to meet changing transportation needs. 

RESEARCH TASKS

The NCHRP is seeking 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 described in sufficient detail to demonstrate their understanding of the issues and the soundness of their approach in meeting the research objective. 

PHASE I

Task 1. Conduct preparations for stakeholder outreach. 

Task 1a. Conduct a literature review. The review should focus on current practices in KM as part of different agency business areas and situations. Determine which state DOTs and agencies have developed KM practices and resources relevant to this research. However, the review should not be limited to state DOTs and should consider KM implementation practices in other sectors than transportation. 

Task 1b. Develop a stakeholder outreach plan. Focus outreach on agencies with known KM practices and resources. Also engage agencies that have not developed such resources to gain insight on barriers. At minimum, the outreach plan should reflect diversity in agency size, mission, and location. Submit a technical memorandum containing the literature review and draft outreach plan. NCHRP approval of the memorandum is required before work on subsequent tasks begins. 

Task 2. Conduct stakeholder outreach. Identify stakeholders interested in participating in a virtual workshop in Phase II.    

Task 3. Prepare an annotated outline for the manual and research plan for Phase II. Based on findings from Tasks 1 and 2, prepare an annotated outline of the manual and a research plan for developing the different sections of the manual according to the research plan. At minimum, the manual should:  

• Include a KM implementation maturity model and framework. The framework should examine and adapt existing KM frameworks and models for application within a diverse set of transportation agencies.  
• Address KM implementation activities in multiple functional areas pertinent to transportation agencies.
• Illustrate KM strategies that can help agencies prepare for situations such as new legislative mandates, introduction of new technologies, workforce changes, turnover, and changes in work policies.
• Consider resources needed for agency-wide implementation, sustainability, and scalability.
• Emphasize visual format to facilitate use by a broad cross-section of staff for planning, resourcing, coordinating, and carrying out KM strategies and techniques.

Task 4. Prepare Interim Report No. 1 that documents Tasks 1 through 3 and includes potential participation from stakeholders in Phase II. The report shall provide an updated and refined work plan for the remainder of the research in Phase II. 

Note: Following a 1-month review of Interim Report No. 1 by NCHRP, the research team will be required to meet with the project panel in person to discuss the interim report. Work on Phase II of the project will not begin until authorized by NCHRP. 

PHASE II

Task 5. Develop a draft manual according to the approved Interim Report No. 1 and a communications plan for promoting dissemination and use of the manual. The draft manual and communications plan should be submitted at least 12 months before the contract end date. NCHRP approval of the draft manual and communications plan is required before work on subsequent tasks may begin. 

Task 6. Conduct a stakeholder workshop. After NCHRP approval of the draft manual, conduct a stakeholder workshop to obtain feedback from stakeholders on the draft manual. Revise the draft proposed manual and workshop materials according to the feedback gathered during the workshop. 

Task 7. Prepare final deliverables. Deliverables shall include (1) a conduct of research report summarizing the research effort; (2) the KM manual; (3) the communications plan; (4) an implementation plan for state DOTs and other transportation agencies (see Special Note J); and (5) the workshop materials with a slide summary introducing the manual. 

Note: Following receipt of the preliminary draft final deliverables, the remaining 3 months shall be for NCHRP review and comment and for research agency preparation of the revised 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/7101. 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. 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.  

H. 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. 

I. 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. 

J. 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

K. 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. 

L. 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. 

M. 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.