BACKGROUND
Converting intersections from two-way stop control (TWSC) to all-way stop control (AWSC) has been shown to significantly reduce traffic crashes. Recent initiatives by the Delaware Department of Transportation (DOT) and North Carolina DOT reported substantial reductions in fatal and injury crashes at treated intersections, particularly for front-impact crashes. To help reverse a nationwide upward trend in traffic fatalities, and based on successes from these two programs, other states have expressed interest in developing AWSC programs. State DOTs are looking for guidelines to effectively build on the successes in Delaware and North Carolina.
OBJECTIVE
The objective of this research is to develop a guide and outreach materials for converting intersections from TWSC to AWSC.
RESEARCH PLAN
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 subaward 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.
Accomplishment of the project objective will require at least the following tasks.
PHASE I
Task 1. Compile and review findings and recommendations from previous research, industry reports, and manuals regarding conversion of TWSC intersections to AWSC. The literature review shall identify and summarize studies that evaluated the safety and operational performance of TWSC to AWSC conversions.
Task 2. Develop a data collection and analysis plan for conducting new research in Phase II. The plan should aim to:
1. Collect information from multiple state DOTs and local agencies from diverse geographic areas with experience converting TWSC to AWSC in urban, suburban, and rural settings, to document their processes, experiences, and outcomes. At a minimum, collected information should include:
- The decision-making processes on how agencies choose to convert intersections to AWSC.
- Specifications on what infrastructure changes are typically included as part of AWSC conversions.
- Steps that can be taken to address concerns from the public and elected officials.
2. Identify reliable estimates of safety outcomes (e.g., crash effects) and operational performance (e.g., level of service, delay) of TWSC to AWSC conversions, including any available data regarding long-term (e.g., 5-year) crash effects.
Task 3. Develop outlines for (1) the guide to be developed under Task 7 and (2) outreach materials to be developed under Task 8.
The guide should include:
1. Criteria for selecting intersections for conversion from TWSC to AWSC, as well as conditions under which AWSC may not be advisable.
2. Information on how different applications of AWSC (e.g., frequency of AWSC intersections along a corridor, different applications of traffic control devices) affect safety and traffic operations.
3. Recommendations for effective traffic control devices and other measures (e.g., enforcement, public engagement) to promote driver compliance for AWSC intersections and associated costs.
4. Strategies to support implementation of TWSC to AWSC conversions, including alignment with the Safe System Approach.
The outreach materials should provide (1) a high-level summary of the guide and (2) information that can be referenced or shared by transportation agencies with stakeholders to explain benefits and nuances of converting intersections from TWSC to AWSC.
Task 4. Prepare an interim report that documents the work completed in Tasks 1 through 3. Update the work proposed for Phase II.
Note: Following a 1-month review of Interim Report No. 1 by the NCHRP, the research team will be required to meet via videoconference with the NCHRP project panel to discuss the interim report, if necessary. Work on Phase II of the project will not begin until authorized by the NCHRP.
PHASE II
Task 5. Execute the data collection plan according to the approved Interim Report No.1.
Task 6. Prepare an interim report that documents the work completed in Task 5 and updates the work proposed for Phase III.
Note: Following a 1-month review of Interim Report No. 2 by the NCHRP, the research team will be required to meet in-person in Washington, DC with the NCHRP project panel to discuss the interim report, if necessary. Work on Phase III of the project will not begin until authorized by the NCHRP.
PHASE III
Task 7. Prepare and submit draft final deliverables. The draft guide shall be submitted at least 6 months prior to the subaward end date.
Task 8. Final deliverables should include:
1. A guide.
2. A final report that documents the entire research process.
3. Outreach materials.
4. Prioritized recommendations for future research.
5. A PowerPoint presentation with speaker notes summarizing the research findings.
6. A technical memorandum on implementation (see Special Note J).
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. Revisions to the Information and Instructions for Preparing Proposals for the Transportation Research Board’s Cooperative Research Programs are highlighted in yellow within that document.
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 IV 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 Subawardees. The proposer recommended by the project panel will be required to submit an Investigator Conflict of Interest and Disclosure Form as a prerequisite for subaward 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/7208. 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; and, if relevant, (5) the adequacy of the facilities. A recommendation by the project panel is not a guarantee of a subaward. 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 subaward negotiations continue.
G. Copyrights - All data, written materials, computer software, graphic and photographic images, and other information prepared under the subaward and the copyrights therein shall be owned by the National Academy of Sciences. The subawardee and lower-tier subawardees 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 subawardee and lower-tier subawardees will not be allowed to sell the project material without prior approval by the National Academy of Sciences. By signing a subaward with the National Academy of Sciences, subawardees accept legal responsibility for any copyright infringement that may exist in work done for TRB. Subawardees 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 Subawardees.
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 Subawardees 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 selected proposers are considered subawards to the National Academy of Sciences, the parent organization of TRB. TRB Cooperative Research Program subawards 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) or audited indirect rates shall be subject to a maximum allowable indirect rate of 15% of Modified Total Direct Costs (de minimis rate). Modified Total Direct Costs include all salaries and wages, applicable fringe benefits, materials and supplies, services, travel, and up to the first $50,000 of each lower-tier subaward. 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 in excess of $50,000.
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 subawardee 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 subawardee will ensure adequate communication and coordination with their lower-tier subawardees 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.
