511
America's Travel Information Number
Implementation and Operational Guidelines for 511 Services
Version 3.0
Published by the 511 Deployment Coalition
|
|
|
Version 3.0 |
||
Published by the 511 Deployment Coalition |
||
|
||
On March 8, 1999, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) petitioned
the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to designate a nationwide three-digit
telephone number for traveler information. On July 21, 2000, the FCC designated
511 as the national traveler information number. The FCC ruling leaves nearly all implementation issues and schedules to state
and local agencies and telecommunications carriers. There are no federal requirements
and no mandated way to pay for 511. Consistent with the national designation
of 511, the FCC expects that the transportation industry will provide the traveling
public with a quality service that has a degree of uniformity across the country.
Finally, the FCC stated that it would review progress in implementing 511 in
five years, making the date for review July 2005. In early 2001, mindful of both the opportunity and challenge that 511 presents,
the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO),
in conjunction with many other organizations including the American Public Transportation
Association (APTA) and the Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS
America), with the support of the USDOT, established a 511 Deployment Coalition
(Coalition). An executive-level Policy Committee and a supporting Working Group
were established to conduct the work of the Coalition. Membership of the Coalition
draws from all levels and types of government agencies, various segments of
the telecommunications industry and the fields of consulting, system integration
and information service provision. The goal of the Coalition is that 511 will
be a customer driven multi-modal traveler information service, available across
the United States, accessed via telephones and other personal communications
devices, realized through locally deployed interoperable systems, enabling a
safer, more reliable and efficient transportation system. The Coalition recognizes that 511 services will be developed in a bottom-up
fashion with state and local transportation agencies establishing services in
areas and timeframes determined by them. The Coalition has developed this document,
511 Implementation and Operational Guidelines Version 2.0, to assist
implementers in their efforts to develop quality systems and to increase the
level of operational knowledge throughout the 511 community. The document, which
is an update to the Implementation Guidelines for Launching 511 Services
Version 1.1, improves on the foundation set by the Coalition for ultimately
helping to establish a consistent nationwide 511 service. The document also
includes information beyond guidelines and is designed to give future and existing
deployers insight into key issues. As of July 2003, more than halfway to the FCC's July 2005 review date, nineteen
511 services around the country are operational, serving a resident population
of over 50 million. Eight of the services have been in operation for over a
year, with Cincinnati/ Northern Kentucky's system having two years of operational
experience. The "early deployers" mentioned in this document refers to those
systems that have been operational since early 2003. The individuals and organizations, both public and private sector, that are
making 511 a reality are directly responsible for the success to date and the
future of delivering 511 services to the traveling public across the county. This document provides updated guidelines on content, cross-cutting issues
and lessons learned, an overview of key national policy issues and informational
resources available to support existing and future 511 deployers. Specific
information new to Version 2.0 includes the following: National Vision for 511 the creation and adoption of a national
vision by the 511 Deployment Coalition is a major step in creating a sustainable
service to assist travelers across the country. The national vision for 511
states that:
Executive Summary
What's new for Version 2.0?
511 will be a customer driven multi-modal traveler information service, available across the United States, accessed via telephones and other personal communications devices, realized through locally deployed interoperable systems, enabling a safer, more reliable and efficient transportation system.
The goals of the vision include the following :
By 2005:
By 2010:
Additional Guidelines for Roadway Content including the addition of regional overviews or summaries as a selectable option for the caller.
Guidelines for Transit Information increased understanding of how 511 services should work in conjunction with transit call centers.
Weather Information in the Basic Service adding significant travel-impacting weather information to a 511 service.
Examples and Lessons Learned these important pieces of knowledge and experiences from the early deployers can be found throughout the document, including information on:
Usage Monitoring Guidelines the purpose of measuring a customer-oriented system's usage and performance, and how this will assist in tracking the development of 511.
What Early Deployers Have Taught Us
After more than two years since the first 511 system was deployed, the early deployers have taught the Coalition and others much about implementing 511 services. The most important nationally relevant findings are listed below:
Information on the 511 Deployment Coalition, including Deployment Assistance Reports, educational materials, a marketing toolkit and supporting resource materials, as well as additional useful references for 511 implementers may be found at the following web sites:
Deploying 19 services across the county in three years is a significant achievement. A review of these 511 systems shows that the services in operation are not designed to deliver the same content (due to local options in some cases), in the same manner and are certainly experiencing differing results in system usage. Currently, the majority of the systems use voice recognition software (12), and concatenated speech (10) to interact with the caller. All systems currently provide roadway content, which typically includes information for Interstate and US designated routes. In addition, the majority (16) of deployers have recognized the benefit of the 511 "brand," and have launched a co-branded 511 web site to serve their customers through additional delivery devices, typically personal computers.
These summary statistics suggest that most 511 systems are similar, however there can be great differences. Currently, only eight services provide transit information, about half use roadside signs to promote awareness of a system, seven have touchtone-only commands and one system is bi-lingual.
Appendix B shows a more detailed overview of how existing systems are delivering content, type of content available, data found within roadway content, and how some elements features of user awareness are approached and the average monthly usage of each system since launch. The local and toll-free numbers (where available) for the systems are listed for your convenience and you are urged to use them to familiarize you with the types of services / interfaces currently utilized. Any department or agency planning or enhancing a 511 service should take the time to hear what their neighboring states, comparative metropolitan areas across the country and systems that seem to fit your agency's vision of a 511 service are currently delivering.
On March 8, 1999, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) petitioned the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to designate a nationwide three-digit telephone number for traveler information. On July 21, 2000, the FCC designated 511 as the national traveler information number.
The FCC ruling leaves nearly all implementation issues and schedules to state and local agencies and telecommunications carriers. There are no federal requirements and no mandated way to pay for 511. Consistent with the national designation of 511, the FCC expects that the transportation industry will provide the traveling public with a quality service that has a degree of uniformity across the country. Finally, the FCC stated that it would review progress in implementing 511 in five years, making the date for review July 2005.
While the flexibility provided in the FCC ruling is highly desirable, it also presents a challenge. Although there is a great deal of interest in using 511 throughout the U.S., if not thoughtfully planned, 511 services could devolve into an inconsistent set of services widely varying in type, quality and cost.
As of July 2003, more than halfway to the FCC's July 2005 review date, nineteen 511 services around the country are operational, with seven of the services in operation for over a year and Cincinnati with two years of operational experience. Thirty-five states have requested and received 511 planning and deployment grant funds from USDOT. The individuals and organizations of both the public and private sector that are making 511 a reality are directly responsible for the success to date and the future of delivering 511 to the traveling public across the county.
In early 2001, mindful of both the opportunity and challenge that 511 presents, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), in conjunction with many other organizations including the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) and the Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America), with the support of the U.S. Department of Transportation, established a 511 Deployment Coalition (Coalition).
The goal of the 511 Deployment Coalition is "the timely establishment of a national 511 traveler information service available to a majority of Americans by 2005 that is sustainable and provides value to users." The intent is to implement 511 nationally using a bottom-up approach facilitated by information sharing and a cooperative dialogue through the organizations represented on the Policy Committee, the governing body of this program. The mission of the Policy Committee is to provide guidance on how to achieve this goal.
A Working Group of managers involved in 511 and traveler information service delivery has been supporting the Policy Committee. The Working Group has extensively studied existing 511 and other telephone-based traveler information systems and the experienced and projected technological, political and economic environments in the near future to develop recommendations for guidelines (see http://www.deploy511.org/ for materials developed or used by the Working Group and Policy Committee in its deliberations, as well as the rosters of the Policy Committee and the Working Group).
This document is one of many products developed by the Coalition to support those deploying and considering 511 systems.
The 511 Deployment Coalition recognizes that 511 services have, and will continue to be, developed in a bottom-up fashion with state and local transportation agencies with the close collaboration of the private sector establishing services in areas and timeframes determined by them. The positive benefits of this approach are that it enables resources from many organizations to be harnessed to deploy 511 as well as providing many opportunities for innovation in 511 service delivery. A potential negative consequence of simultaneous independent actions is that the resulting services do not, from a caller's or national policy perspective, resemble a well-planned consistent service.
To reduce the chances of service confusion and inconsistency, the 511 Deployment Coalition is enhancing the established guidelines in the areas of content and consistency, as well as providing additional assistance in other areas deployers should be concerned with. 511 service consistency will be established through implementers continuing to follow these guidelines, and as an increasing number of services are established, a national 511 service will emerge.
The 511 Deployment Coalition is cognizant that the quality of systems developed has varied in content and consistency, mostly due to the availability of information/data and financial constraints. Although 19 systems have been implemented across the country, there is still the possibility that if quality systems do not become commonplace, the transportation industry may lose the privilege of the exclusive use of the 511 number. On the other hand, if guidelines suggest services that are cost-prohibitive and unsupportable, the result could be an invisible cap in the number of operating systems, also leading to losing the privilege of the number. Thus, these guidelines are designed from a customer-centric viewpoint while being sensitive to the issues of those agencies that must gather and prepare information and manage information service provision.
The transportation industry has been afforded a tremendous opportunity to better serve its customers. As with Version 1.1 of the Guidelines, the purpose of Version 2.0 is to assist transportation agencies in establishing this customer service in the best possible manner. The Coalition and its member organizations strongly recommend that implementers carefully review and consider these guidelines in their implementation planning.
The Guidelines document has evolved from a group of "best guesses" and suggestions on what was needed to launch a successful 511 service to a document for those planning, and already operating, 511 services. This change is also reflected in the name of the document, from Implementation Guidelines for Launching 511 Services Version 1.1, to 511 Implementation and Operational Guidelines Version 2.0. The document now provides additional information and background, as well as operational examples and experiences. Any future versions of this document will provide additional specific information, parameters and recommendations as services gain valuable operational experience within their states and/or metropolitan areas.
This document is intended to serve multiple purposes and audiences, which include distributing the updated content guidelines, serving as a basis for developing and planning a 511 system and as a resource document for existing deployers that wish to begin focusing on enhancements, evaluations and other activities that may not have been obvious or possible when 511 systems were first launched.
The primary purpose of the document is to distribute the updated guidelines, Version 2.0, as they have evolved since Version 1.1 was released. These updates are for both the potential deployers and those with operating 511 systems. The document is also intended to be a reference guide highlighting critical issues and noting the successes achieved.
For those new to 511, Version 2.0 should serve as the basis for developing and deploying a 511 system. After reviewing the document a potential deployer should know who the key participants in the 511 field are, the difference between Basic and Optional content, understand the business environment most deployers are operating in, and the importance consumer research, marketing and national consistency play in developing a customer-oriented service. While a potential deployer will not find all of the information it needs to develop a 511 system, the document offers an opportunity to learn from two years of deployment experience and provides additional insight the early 511 deployers did not have the benefit of.
For those organizations and/or individuals that have already deployed a 511 system, the document offers information on some areas that were commonly overlooked or not fully addressed by the initial wave of deployers. This includes, but is not limited to, the elevation of weather information (both forecasted and observed), the addition of regional overviews to quickly disseminate important, top-level, information, as well as experiences with payphone operators, and standards all deployers should be using.
Finally, the document is designed to help make the 511 Vision (discussed in the next section) a reality. If implementers have suggestions for improvements to the Guidelines or 511 services in general, please provide this information electronically to 511feedback@aashto.org.
The creation and adoption of a national vision by the 511 Deployment Coalition is a major step in creating a sustainable service to assist travelers across the country. The Vision helps to focus the Coalition's and deployer's goals, and establishes key milestones for the creation and adoption of a service that will one day become as widely known and commonly used as 411 or the Internet. Attainment of the Vision will help carry 511 from an unknown and misunderstood "frill" or option in a few locations to a mature necessity adopted by the general public.
In 1999, the USDOT envisioned using an abbreviated N11 (phone number where N is a digit from 0 9) dialing code to provide a simple, easy to remember and use telephone number to disseminate multi-modal travel information to the public. It was clear to those in the traveler information sector of the transportation industry that there were too many sources of information for travelers, each having its own ten-digit telephone number. These telephone numbers were rarely known by the casual user and often there were multiple numbers for one metropolitan area or state. The N11 solution was viewed as a way to cut through all of the clutter, and provide one source of information on a multi-jurisdictional or regional basis. In this regard, 511 has been, and continues to be, a success. Unlike many intelligent transportation system (ITS) technologies, 511 is easy to understand and provides a clear service to its users. To provide quality customer service, 511 brings ITS, traffic and incident management, public transportation and weather information all together under one umbrella.
The national vision for 511 adopted by the Coalition consists of a Vision Statement and specific elements and milestones to ensure its attainment.
With more than a year of operational experience by late 2002, and after considering a full range of consumer, business, technical and policy issues associated with 511, the Coalition established a national vision for 511 which states that:
511 will be a customer driven multi-modal traveler information service, available across the United States, accessed via telephones and other personal communications devices, realized through locally deployed interoperable systems, enabling a safer, more reliable and efficient transportation system.
The elements of the Vision can be separated in the three parts: the characteristics of 511 services, specific coverage and operational goals for 2005 and a significant increase in adoption and continued focus on improving customer service by 2010.
The key characteristics of 511 services are:
By 2010:
Continued leadership and active participation from the Associations involved in Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS), the USDOT, state, regional and local government agencies and private firms will be essential in making the vision a reality.
This section of the document is the most extensive, and thus, the most important for potential and current deployers. Potential deployers should pay close attention to the Basic content, as well as the lessons learned throughout the section, especially those that relate to phone systems, all routing and interoperability. Current deployers will notice some changes to the Basic content and new information in most areas, such as standards, business case studies and evaluations.
Several categories of information, or "content", are candidates to be provided via a 511 service. Some of these content categories are typical of what is offered through phone systems in operation today. Other categories are extensions into additional public sector services, while yet others are the likely domains of private service providers. All of these content categories have been examined and considered in developing the guidelines.
The overriding philosophy of the content guidelines is that there are two types of content levels:
In addition, the guidelines include "implementation recommendations" addressing content topics that have been demonstrated to provide value to callers, but are recognized as difficult to uniformly implement. Therefore, while not explicitly part of the basic content package, these levels of content are recommended as part of 511 systems as they are developed and designed, if possible. Further recommendations about specific content may be found in the DARs.
These guidelines recommend that every 511 system deployed in the U.S. should provide, at minimum, the basic content as defined in this document. It is this basic content that consumers will associate as the core of 511.
While planning and developing a 511 service, it is important to remember that 511 is a speed dial or short cut to a telephone system, which has a large base of information available. In the hierarchy of travel information, 511 is the "cherry on top," as depicted in Figure 1. Future deployers should also know that a 511 service does not "create" its own information for callers, and that a service cannot be deployed without first developing a source of information, as well as a robust telephone system.
The majority of operational 511
services with high usage numbers are part of a larger advanced traveler information
system (ATIS) that provides information to travelers via multiple media. The
dissemination tools can include web sites, television stations and push technologies
such as customizable reports via email or pagers. Examples of these comprehensive
ATIS systems include Southeast Florida, San Francisco Bay Area, Cincinnati/Northern
Kentucky and Montana.
To achieve a useful and comprehensive 511 service, as with a full ATIS, deployers need be concerned with data acquisition Where will the data come from?; data quality Is the data timely, accurate and useful?; and, system integration How will 511 deliver information from unlinked systems, or systems another agency operates? Each of these elements is extremely important in achieving the "Traveler Information System" layer of the pyramid in Figure 1. If there is no traveler information, as created through addressing data and integration issues, then there is no need to continue up the pyramid to develop a telephone system or 511 routing.
Deployers must recognize that 511 is a service and that it operates in an overall business environment created by the travel information market and the lead coordinating, or facilitating, agency.
Information content can be broken down into two main types, Basic and Optional. This section discusses the principles, guidelines and recommendations of those two main types, as well as highlighting the key categories of information a 511 service should provide.
Basic content comes in three general categories:
In each of these content categories, the guidelines provide general principles or philosophies and specific guidance on the type of information that should be provided to callers. Note that a key concept in 511 service planning is that 511 systems must be designed to provide information beyond a single agency, mode or content type. While content is organized in different types and categories, one principal carries throughout all content:
Roadway Content (Highways and Arterials)
As the primary means of travel in the United States, roadways (highways and arterials) and information about major roadways should be a principal part of a 511 system. The core of many existing telephone-based traveler information services is highway conditions reporting. As these systems migrate to 511 access and new systems are established, the following guidance should be considered.
There are five key principles associated with roadway content:
The fundamental structure of a telephone system design matches highways very well. Telephone systems are usually accessed through a "menu tree" that is navigated by voice commands or by touching a phone's keypad. Eventually, a caller reaches their desired destination in the system and either gets a recorded or digitized voice message. When seeking highway information, a caller will first find the specific highway or corridor for which they desire information, unless a regional overview is available and selected. The caller will then find the specific segment of highway or corridor that they are interested in, especially if it is a lengthy road.
Segment specification is left to the implementer, but should follow logic with segments defined between major towns, landmarks, roadways or by climatological differences (see DAR #6: Weather and Environmental Content on 511 Services, for more detailed information on weather information provision). In urban areas, segments should be defined between major interchanges and will generally be smaller in length than non-urban segments. Once the 511 service knows the specific section of highway that the caller is interested in, it then provides the caller a report of the relevant basic content. This process is graphically illustrated in Figure 2, with "Regional Overview," "Routes," "Segments" and "Content" serving as the key descriptors of the content guidelines.
For each of these highway content types, it is necessary to provide details that enable callers to assess travel conditions and make travel decisions associated with a route segment. Table 1 illustrates the detailed information needed for each content type.
Table 1 Basic Content Detail Needed for Each Highway Content Type
| Content Type |
Geography |
Content Detail |
||||||||
|
Non-urban |
Urban |
Location |
Direction of travel |
General description and Impact |
Days/ |
Travel time or delay(1) |
Detours/ |
Forecasted weather and road surface conditions |
Current observed weather and road surface conditions |
|
| Construction/Maintenance |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
||
| Road Closures/Major Delays |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
| Major Special Events |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
||||
| Weather and Road Conditions |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
||||
| Incidents/Accidents (Minor)* |
X |
X |
X |
X |
||||||
| Congestion Information* |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|||||
* Major congestion information and
incident/accidents are considered part of the "Road Closures/Major Delays" content
type
1 Desirable if the deployer
has the capabilities to include this information as part of the service
The following "implementation recommendations" address content topics that have been demonstrated to provide value to callers, but are recognized as difficult to uniformly implement. Thus, providing the following content is recommended to be included when launching services if possible, but not explicitly part of the basic content package for highways. As services improve and evolve towards the long-range vision, these items should be incorporated into the service if not done so at the outset.
Regardless of the size and nature of a 511 service area, there are likely to be one or more public transportation service providers in operation. In many cases, these public transportation operators already have established methods of communicating to the public about their services, including websites and customer service centers accessible by telephone. If properly utilized and coordinated with these existing communications methods, 511 can assist public transportation operators in better serving their customers and even attract new customers. The following guidelines should be considered when developing the public transportation information component of a 511 service.
There are many different approaches that public transportation operators could take to implement their portion of 511 services. These guidelines are intended to maintain this implementation flexibility.
Information access via telephone has proven to be extremely important in transit customer service. The principal purposes for these services are for general agency and service information, communicating service disruptions and changes and trip planning. At the basic content level, 511 should assist in providing callers general agency and service information, and communicating service disruptions and changes. Also, callers could be directed to where they can obtain more detailed information and trip planning.
The following five basic principles should be followed:
The
fundamental structure of a 511 telephone system design matches public transportation
operations. Telephone systems are usually accessed through a "menu tree" that
is navigated by voice commands or by touching a phone's keypad. Eventually,
a caller reaches their desired destination in the system and gets either a recorded
or digitized voice message or possibly a live operator. In complex or large
areas, the 511 service area may be segmented in sub-areas to simplify agency
identification. Sub-areas may be dealt with by using voice recognition as described
in San Francisco above.
Once the 511 service knows the specific public transportation agency that the caller is interested in, it then provides the caller a report of the relevant basic content. This process is graphically illustrated in Figure 3, with "Geographic Sub-area," "Agency" and "Content" serving as the three key descriptors of the content guidelines.
The following implementation recommendation addresses a content topic that has been demonstrated to provide value to callers, but is recognized as difficult to uniformly implement. Thus, providing the following content is recommended if possible, but not explicitly part of the basic content package for public transportation.
The Coalition's Implementation Guidelines for Launching 511 Services Version 1.1, succinctly states what information, or "content," should be provided by a basic 511 service and the degree of uniformity and consistency of each service across the country. However, weather information was not described as an integral part of a 511 service or included in the basic level of content that all services should provide across the country.
With a Task Force formed in 2002, the Coalition focused on the guidelines associated with weather content, especially on the impact of weather conditions for travelers. In this section, weather content overall and weather-related principles and quality are covered.
Since traffic, road conditions and weather information are intertwined, and weather conditions and forecasts likely to impact the ability to travel are desired by the 511 callers, the Coalition has included additional guidance and information on weather, which stems from DAR #6: Weather and Environmental Content on 511 Services.
The overriding basic principle for providing weather information is simple: if weather will impact a person's trip, then they should be alerted to that actuality or possibility. Weather information is a basic component of 511 information provision and it is recommended that deployers provide travelers whatever weather information is available to them that may affect travel. This includes weather information (typically forecasts including precipitation, temperature, wind speed) provided by the National Weather Service and private sector weather forecasts, as well as roadway weather or surface conditions, both observations and forecasts, which can be provided by mobile and stationary sensor data information gathered by maintenance and operations personnel.
Ideally, if one is traveling from Point A to Point B, it is recommended that deployers provide the most appropriate transportation information in the shortest amount of time. Travelers needprioritized hazard information for the impacts of both current and changing weather conditions, and if there is weather forecasted along the route that will impact travel. These reports should be segmented by route or trip where appropriate.
It is recommended that 511 services provide information on current and changing travel conditions and forecasts for upcoming weather phenomena that are likely to impact the ability to travel. This also includes the weather impacts on transit operations on guideways, railways, pathways and related passenger information such as wind chill effects on those waiting at bus stops. Deployers may look to various market packages in the National ITS Architecture for the origins for this type of information including: Environment Information Collection; Weather Information Processing and Distribution; Winter Maintenance; Maintenance and Construction Vehicle Tracking; Roadway Automated Treatment; and Maintenance and Construction Activity Coordination.
The gathering of weather data for maintenance efforts can be a prime source of information to be shared with travelers via 511.
As part of an effort to determine road weather observing needs, the FHWA's Road Weather Management Program has stratified the country for weather conditions and by season. Some 511 deployers may believe that there is no "weather" in their area and its impact on roads is not uniform across the country, but indeed there is "weather" in each area of the country. Weather impacts are different in the summer and winter months and a new realization on weather's regional impacts is arising.
The FHWA worked to divide the country by the effects of summer and winter weather by looking at a handful of weather elements within the top 61 metropolitan areas. Summer and winter indices were developed for each and the cities were then ranked. Based on the rankings, the country divided up into categories 5 for winter and 6 for summer. These categories are shown in the figures below with Category 1 being those areas where weather events are likely to have a more pronounced impact on travel. The categories give deployers a good idea as to the priority that weather information should take on their 511 system depending upon their location in the country.
These figures and categories are not finalized as the FHWA continues to revise this effort with its completion later in 2003, but this does give 511 deployers insight as to the necessity of weather information on their system. 511 systems in a Category 1 area of the country will need more detailed, comprehensive weather information provided on a consistent level as weather has a greater impact on travel than those in Category 5. But, weather is also a factor in a Category 5 area, at times, as El Nino rains in Los Angeles provide just as great of an impact on travel as winter storm conditions do in the Midwest.
Because of the highly localized nature of fog and other factors affecting visibility, the factor analysis used to develop the indices was unable to incorporate visibility data.
There may be specific geographic or climatological locations within these stratification categories where weather events have more pronounced or seasonal impacts, such as mountain passes in the winter months. In these cases, it is recommended that the 511 system serving those areas devote particular attention to these localized areas and conditions.
Weather information on a 511 system can range from a regional alert (hurricane, winter storm, etc.) to a route specific observation or alert (low visibility, icy pavement, high winds, etc.). Deployers should include any available weather-related information that could impact a person's travel and attempt to package and deliver the information in a consistent manner. The two keys to weather are relaying impacts and providing navigational references to aid the traveler.
The following recommendations address a content topic that has been demonstrated to provide value to callers, but is recognized as difficult to uniformly implement, and may vary slightly based on local or seasonal need. Thus, providing the following content is recommended for inclusion in the launch of a service if possible. As services improve and evolve towards the long-range vision, these items should be incorporated into the service. It is recommended that 511 weather information be assembled and presented through a 511 system in the following manner:
As stated in Version 1.1 of the Guidelines, the Coalition recognizes that additional content beyond the basic content described in the previous section could be provided by a 511 service. In fact, so long as quality basic content is being provided, the Coalition encourages that 511 implementers consider providing optional content that will benefit callers.
Again, this optional content is up to the discretion of the system implementers and can include additional content supported by the public sector and/or private sector supported services. Based on local demographics or geography, some of these optional content categories would be expected by local callers. Implementers should factor in these expectations into their service planning process.
In providing additional content implementers have essentially two choices:
The following list is representative, but not exhaustive, of the possible optional content categories. Implementers may choose to implement these and other types of content (Please note that the Coalition is not assessing the merits of each of these content options, merely providing them for deployer's consideration):
In examining the addition of optional content, system implementers should be careful to design a system that complements rather than diminishes the impact of the basic content services. Also, each of the options listed above may require extra and complex interactions to provide via 511. As these are intended to be illustrative examples, assessments of the relative practicality or merits of each optional content category are not provided
Across the country, optional content has been limited in its use, to date. The first 511 service to provide optional tourism and travel-related services was the I-81 Region 511 service in Virginia. The service includes information on lodging, restaurants and "things to do" in the 35 county coverage area. On average, 8% of the callers each month access the available travel services section of the menu, with approximately 90% of those callers selecting lodging, which users can be automatically connected to without dialing an additional phone number. The Auto Connect feature is dual purposed: safety and convenience. This system uses voice recognition for the queries and is fully automated using both text to speech and recorded messages.
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), operator of the 511 service for the San Francisco Bay Area, has included optional services that are expected by their callers. Those optional services include information on bicycling and carpools/vanpools. The carpool/vanpool information is provided via a call transfer to a regional or local rideshare operator, depending on the jurisdiction the caller is interested in.
By December 2003, Kentucky also plans to make travel and tourism information available. The Southern and Eastern Kentucky Tourism Development Association (SEKTDA), is designing a service so callers will be able to speak to a live agent. Each agent will have access to a large database of specific information relating to the amenities, attractions, events and other activities found in the 42 county Southern and Eastern Kentucky region.
Arizona DOT, under the 511 Model Deployment project, will add premium services through contractor iNetNow, which will also utilize live operators to provide information to callers. Unlike in Virginia and Kentucky, callers in Arizona will pay for this service.
Other states, such as North Carolina, have a strong desire to provide tourism-related information through their 511 services. Many states see the solution being a call transfer from the 511 service to an existing statewide tourism call center, thus eliminating the need to incorporate outside data feeds or upgrade databases.
The accuracy, timeliness and reliability of information on 511 is an important issue for the 511 community and users as well. In an increasingly advanced information society, callers are generally accustomed to high quality information. 511 content must be no different. In 2001, ITS America, in its national consumer research on 511, determined that "those surveyed said that if they used 511 and found the information to be inaccurate in their first few uses, they would be unlikely to give the service another chance."
Therefore, 511 implementers must focus on the following five quality parameters:
Information quality is a major concern for the Coalition. The quality of basic content information will largely determine the success of 511. This is why the information is recommended to be tailored to the travelers' needs along their route. It is recommended that 511 services give callers the ability to gauge the quality of the reported information to enable them to properly weigh the information in their decision-making (e.g. "There is a report of an avalanche " vs. "An avalanche has occurred "). However, the Coalition has not included specific quality parameters as part of this version of the guidelines. This is for two reasons:
Many of the individuals and agencies early in the 511 development and deployment process found that there was a large misunderstanding common throughout the country that transportation departments and agencies already possessed all of the data and information necessary to provide a quality 511 service. While the concept of dialing an easy to remember telephone number and providing quality decision-level information to the traveling public was easy to grasp, the complexities of the systems behind the service, or the total lack of relevant technologies to assist in providing the service, were not.
The USDOT INFOstructure or Integrated Network of Transportation Information (INTI) initiative has a clear tie to providing quality information to travelers be it through 511, ATIS, or ATMS (Advanced Traffic Management Systems). The deployment of roadside detectors, wireless communication devices and other systems is key to the development of a nationwide 511 service. In fact, many states are presenting 511 as the "face of ITS" to elected officials and the public, and are using 511 as a way to increase the coverage area of detection and systems. The more detection and base-level of technological investment there is, the better the 511 service, and the more consistent the level of information provided can be. If every state or region has a similar level of detection and integrated networks for collection of information, then the products could also be similar.
Since the early deployers launched their 511 services in 2001 and 2002, most have found additional ways to use this valuable resource. Some of these ways include broadcast messages in emergency situations, working in conjunction with traffic and incident management and supplementing AMBER Alerts. 511 is also seen as an additional dissemination tool for Homeland Security needs, although no system has been specifically designed for it.
Broadcast or floodgate messages can be a critical tool for disseminating information to the traveling public during a major incident, be it weather, event or security-related. Broadcast messages can be implemented in various ways, but the two basic types are uninterruptible and interruptible meaning a caller can override or terminate the message.
In times of emergencies, uninterruptible broadcast messages can deliver a brief, important message at / or after the greeting of a 511 service and terminate the call, thus creating a 511 system that has short call durations and is able to disseminate the most critical information to all callers and nothing else. This will alleviate some of the peak capacity issues that deployers are experiencing. The uninterruptible message relating to a lesser service disruption with a large impact requires a caller to hear the whole message before they may continue to additional, selectable information. Other forms of the message type are broadcast by service, mode or geographic area. Interruptible messages can be placed in the same areas of the system, but are typically used for less important information.
Virginia DOT (VDOT) found that 511 is a welcome asset during incident and traffic management situations. The 511 service is being used in conjunction with permanent and portable changeable message signs (CMS) to relay critical information to travelers during major incidents, typically hazardous material spills that can close an Interstate. Because CMS are limited to three lines of text on three panels, multiple detour listings and describing complex situations is generally not possible. The CMS convey the necessary information as they normally would in these situations, but they also prompt travelers to dial 511 for additional information. In one situation, VDOT used CMS up to 100 miles from an incident to alert drivers to dial 511 where they received information on up to three detours depending on their desired destination. VDOT has documented that by using the CMS and 511 together, call volumes to the service double almost immediately.
The AMBER Alert is a child abduction response system that uses radio, television, changeable message signs and emergency broadcast systems to disseminate information about kidnapping suspects and victims soon after the crime is committed. The system is designed to solicit aid from the public to look for victims by providing known details such as descriptions of vehicles and individuals. In recent months, 511 services have become an additional tool for disseminating AMBER Alert information quickly and completely. In fact, many states have realized a significant increase in unsafe driving from the amount of information displayed on the message boards, which seems to be supported by University of Minnesota research that recommended changes to the Minnesota AMBER Alert messages on CMSs, including referring drivers to other information sources to retrieve more detailed informatin. As a solution, Utah DOT is using less detailed AMBER Alert messages on its CMSs and prompting drivers to dial 511where they can receive accurate detailed information about the situation. This process was recognized by the AMBER Alert representatives in Utah with the designation of the 511 system as a "certified" source of AMBER Alert information.
Caller expectations are for timely information. Providing a time/date identifier to provide callers with a sense of reliability and accuracy of the information provided is desired by some deployers and some customers. If a 511 system provides basic content quality as defined in the guidelines, then time stamping the information is unnecessary and undesirable. If a system knowingly provides information that is updated not as conditions change, but based upon a periodic schedule, then the schedule should be communicated to callers in association with the particular message.
The I-81 Region service in Virginia provided Travel Alerts to callers for a year before enhancing the service to add timestamps. Upon evaluation of the service in spring and summer of 2003, research revealed that callers wondered how relevant the Alerts were. However, after adding the timestamp, this was no longer an issue and provided an additional level of assurance that the information was timely.
A Travel Alert in Virginia as it is now heard by the caller:
"As of 1:02 pm, accident clean up on I-66 eastbound at mile marker 11 near Front Royal. Expect delays."
While this feature works for the current service in Virginia, it is not needed. DAR #7 Roadway Content Quality recommends that quality content is updated when conditions change, and not based on a regular time interval, are sufficient and that a timestamp then becomes redundant and superfluous.
With varying opinions on the issue, it is likely that the application of a timestamp will continue to be a local option stemming from customer input and requests (or a lack thereof).
The tailoring of content to telephonic media poses some issues. Often, the data available for inclusion in a 511 service is from a traffic management center software package or data available on an agency web site. Reading information on a web site or looking at a graphical user interface (GUI) is a much different experience than listening to the same information over the telephone.
To convert these types of data into usable information for dissemination through the telephone, a deployer should try to eliminate the use of free form text. This may require a database modification forcing operators to use pull-down menus where blank text boxes used to be. Since most operational 511 services deliver information using concatenated speech or text to speech technologies, Voice eXtensible Markup Language (VXML) has become the de facto standard for interpreting and delivering the information. This means that most data feeds to 511 are being provided in an XML format.
Another way that deployers have provided content via telephone is to treat the medium as if it were an on-demand radio report, complete with recordings made by professional voice talent. The Orlando 511 service covering I-4 disseminates its information in this manner. Most travelers are accustomed to hearing radio-style traffic reports and have made the system one of the most heavily used in the country.
The design of the system and how the caller will interact with the menu options must also be taken into consideration. This issue should not be taken lightly, for a poorly designed system will lead to unhappy users and a decline in usage. A quality design is best achieved by using experienced personnel and thorough system testing. It is difficult to design a comprehensive, easy to use automated phone system, however, it can be achieved.
Striving for a consistent 511 service across the United States is very important to the Coalition and was also clearly stated in the FCC report and order designating 511 for travel information. While consistency is vital, meeting a travelers' needs should always be the top priority. However, those needs change from place to place and from caller to caller. Variations in systems are shown in the Attributes of Existing 511 Services table in the Executive Summary. Sometimes variations are by a deployer's choice and other times are due to a lack of quality information or resources available.
Another reason why variations exist, or why information need varies, is that the same caller may have completely different needs depending on the trip type, season or geography.
For example, Joe, a daily commuter in the San Francisco Bay area may dial 511 regularly to check on his commuting routes to and from work. On the weekend he may need to know information on available transit service to Pac Bell Stadium. The following week, while driving through northern Arizona on vacation, Joe may be most interested in the weather-related road conditions. While daily commuting and transit service to a baseball stadium may not be relevant in northern Arizona, early-spring road conditions are. In comparison, research by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) shows that most callers have little desired need for weather-related information in the San Francisco Bay Area.
Many deployers are in the process of adding additional content to their existing systems, or plan to improve the quality of content they already have. Arizona and Florida, both recipients of separate competitive funding awards from USDOT, are expanding the depth and breadth of the information available to their users.
In Arizona, ADOT, under the 511 Model Deployment, is adding the following new content elements, or enhancements:
Florida DOT (FDOT), through iFlorida, the Surface Transportation Security and Reliability Information System Model Deployment project, is enhancing the content of the existing Central Florida 511 service that covers I-4 through Orlando to points east. The primary change is the addition of travel times or delay information on all of the limited access highways and most of the major arterials in Central Florida. FDOT will achieve this by using toll tag readers on the limited access highways in the region and also by deploying license plate readers to provide segment travel times for about 128 miles of seven principal arterials.
The iFlorida project will also provide current weather information and time-slice (starting and ending time) forecasts for defined road segments. This will be achieved by deploying additional roadway weather information systems (RWIS) and incorporating current and forecast information from private partner Meteorlogix. Projected conditions from 15 minutes to two or three days out will be provided for each identified roadway segment.
Telecommunication systems are the access and delivery points of all 511 services. Guidelines for these systems are more general than the content guidelines, since each telecommunication system can be established differently behind-the-scenes and still deliver identical information in a near identical manner to the user. These guidelines tend to be more "rules of thumb" for now, but will likely evolve based on additional customer and user input over time.
The key telecommunication elements of a 511 service allows the system to accept calls, interact with the users, process queries and commands and provide useful information back to the callers. Each of these system elements must be properly planned and must function consistently to have a successful 511 service.
The service should be capable of accepting calls from both wireless and landline phones, and do so without extensive delay to the caller. The call should go through and be routed to the proper answering point, be it a local or toll-free number. See additional related information on System Access Quality and Call Routing in later sections.
To most callers, the user interface is the system. For most 511 services today, the interface is a voice recognition system, ideally with a touchtone back up. If the interface does not work properly (does not recognize commands), consistently or is cumbersome to use, then the 511 service is not meeting the needs of the caller, no matter how good the underlying information is. The User Interface Guidelines can be found in a later section.
Data for 511 systems is typically stored in one or more computer servers, which can be located on-site at the implementing agency or off-site with a contactor. Both system arrangements have proven to work effectively. Currently, there is no specific guideline for how data is stored or how commands should be processed. However, the system should be designed to minimize the delay in processing the command to reduce the amount of time the caller is required to stay on the phone. Most of the 19 systems deployed typically process a command within one to three seconds. Any delay longer than ten seconds is noticeable to the user and may prompt them to terminate the call.
Information should be provided in a succinct message, which conveys all the necessary information to allow the caller to determine if an action needs to be taken on the caller's part to improve the quality of their trip (reduce delay, avoid hazardous conditions, etc.). The result of the command, or query, should be delivered in a consistent voice and manner and should be of high-quality.
Based on focus groups around the country, the initial greeting should be very short, such as "Welcome to (metro area's, state's, or program's name) 511 for Travel Information." Customers expect a short verification that they dialed correctly, but comment that they do not want a lengthy introduction or long formal enunciation of agency names. Supplemental information such as website addresses or complete help instructions should not be included in the initial greeting, but provided through menu selections. Some services name the sponsoring departments or agencies to add credence to the information being distributed. In the cases of major emergencies, an uninterruptible emergency message may be provided prior to, in place of, or just after the normal initial greeting.
It is recommended that implementers use voice recognition as the primary user interface. For voice activated systems, the following top-level commands should be used when a system has the relevant information available: "Highway Information", "Transit Information", "Airport Information", "Rail Station Information," "Ferry Information" and "Help." Top-level menu commands beyond the basic services are acceptable. Care should be taken when adding additional top-level commands to select descriptive terms and not to conflict with the basic terms noted here. It is possible that the specific top-level menu commands may change in future updates of the guidelines based on information collected through user input and system evaluations. For example, "Highway Information" may be changed to "Roadway" or "Traffic Information".
Although discouraged as a primary user interface means, systems that utilize keypad entry for navigation should use the following top-level menu tree: 1 for "highway information", 2 for "transit information" and 9 for "help using the system". Although not defined as part of the basic content package, 3 should be reserved for "airport and other major terminal and transportation facility information." Systems that use both keypad entry and voice activation should allow callers to press or say the top-level number ("press or say 2 for transit information").
Overly complicated menu trees should be avoided. Systems should not require the user to make more than 3 entries or replies before providing the desired information. At each level, no more than 6 options should be listed. Systems should allow users to request messages be repeated and to "go back" in the menu tree.
"Shortcuts" are used often by repeat callers who know what element of information they are seeking. The use of shortcuts is encouraged and has been employed in many systems. It is possible that a future update of these guidelines could include specific guidance on shortcut methods if some are clearly better than others.
The quality and availability of the 511 service is important to attracting and retaining users. Users receive no benefit from a service that contains accurate, timely and relevant content, but is inaccessible. These guidelines address the system access quality and the hours of operation of a 511 service.
In order for the telephone system to have the ability to reliably and quickly answer calls, a 511 service should be sized to accept all calls for the 90th percentile peak hour load [1] . If live operators are utilized or connected to as part of a 511 service, the 90th percentile wait time should not exceed 90 seconds, and callers should receive indications that they are on hold. 511 services should have an availability to callers of 99.8%. This translates to the system being out of service less than 18 hours a year.
System performance against these parameters should be measured and monitored. Most implementers are meeting these guidelines by employing an application service provider (ASP) that operates the telephone answering ports (phone lines) and uses a voice recognition software package, which is all located off-site (even across the country in some cases). By contracting this portion of the 511 service, or all of it, an implementer can benefit from the ASP's existing infrastructure, allowing the system to easily handle enormous peaks in call volumes.
Most deployers have seen a 300 500% increase in call volumes simply by converting an existing 7 or 10-digit travel information line to 511. For example, Southeast Florida experienced a significant increase in call volumes by converting an existing travel information phone number to 511. The system used to receive 15,000 per month, however, with 511 as the access number, the system now receives more than 100,000 calls per month an increase of over 650%. For some 511 systems, major events (weather, incidents, etc.), especially in conjunction with peak travel times, can cause call volumes in a single day to exceed the call volumes of an average month.
511 services should be available to travelers 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. It is recognized that systems will not always be "operated" 24/7. In instances when the system is providing static, pre-recorded messages, systems should inform the caller that it is outside normal operating hours.
In the mid and late 1990s, consumer research and anecdotal information showed that traveler information systems solely designed for the weekday commuter and only operated during specific business hours were found to have limited use and applicability. Travel information is just as important, or possibly more so, to someone traveling late at night or during the weekend than to a daily commuter. With an automated system, receiving inputs from multiple sources and using non-recorded messages, a 511 service can operate around-the-clock. To date, all 511 services deployed are accessible 24 hours a day.
The 511 Deployment Coalition asks that 511 deployers report usage statistics from their system each month. This usage information is valuable to the Coalition, other deployers and in marketing and outreach activities. As part of its National 511 Performance Measures, the Coalition reports on: 511 coverage for states, Top 60 metropolitan areas and population, quarterly total 511 usage and for systems operational for more than one year. These, and other, usage statistics help deployers gauge the consumer response to their service and enable comparisons between like systems.
The list of statistics tracked were developed by querying deployers, the 511 Working Group and telecom providers which statistics were being, and should be, tracked. All deployers should forward usage data via email to Pete Costello at petecostello@pbsj.com. The usage statistics that are tracked by the Coalition on a monthly basis are:
Currently, all 511 deployments report usage information to the Coalition. Only a few are able to report all the information desired above and with the release of this version of the Guidelines more of this information should be available in the future. The following describes the type of information needed and a rationale for providing it:
Additionally, some deployers like the I-81 Region in Virginia, are able to track where users' telephones are registered giving VDOT a monthly snapshot of where its users live (by area code or state). This is very useful information for VDOT, but is also useful for the private companies who have advertised with the 511 Virginia service. If a deployer plans to include travel services, tourism and / or premium services for its users, it should have the ability to track this useful information.
Deployers should report their usage statistics to the Coalition no later that the 15th of the subsequent month, e.g., July's statistics should be transmitted by August 15. This will allow for the Coalition to continue to track usage statistics as they are of interest to many 511 stakeholders. In the future, the Coalition may request that deployers gather additional statistics based on changing needs.
Call transfers can play an important role in providing a comprehensive and useful 511 service. There are multiple reasons to provide such transfers, including cell tower and switch location issues, cross-border travel, and services not typically provided by the implementing department or agency. For example, a state DOT may be the lead developer and operator of a 511 service and desire to provide information on city-based transit systems, coastal ferries or tourism information. Instead of adding functionalities to the DOT database, the callers requesting such information can be transferred to the responsible agency or service provider capable of maintaining accurate and timely information. MTC is operating this type of service in the San Francisco Bay Area.
While it is technically feasible to transfer a 511 call to a 911 call center, implementers should examine a number of key issues that must be considered before choosing to do so. Any region considering this capability must research the liability and privacy issues associated with 911 call processing. The liability protection currently offered the telecommunications industry and 911 call centers does not apply to transportation agencies or their contractors. Also, there would be both non-recurring and recurring costs to the implementer of this capability. To date, no 511 services offer a direct linkage or call transfer capability to any 911 call centers. The DAR on this topic may be found at: http://www.its.dot.gov/511/511to911.htm
Transferring calls across regional coverage areas or state lines between 511 services is one way to offer callers additional relevant information. Some states have chosen to eliminate the issue entirely by banding with bordering states and seeking a single service provider. This allows the call to be transferred internally within the structure of the overall, multi-state service. However, other states, especially some of the earliest deployers, are working with bordering states to determine the best way to handle call transfers. This issue is further addressed later in III.F.i Call and Data Transfer Issues
Having the ability to transfer to other call centers or service providers is important in providing a comprehensive 511 service and meeting user's needs. These transfers can be to other modal agencies, tourism centers or enhanced or premium services.
Deployers should use call transfers to provide a comprehensive 511 service when appropriate and/or necessary either functionally or financially. When transferring the caller out of the 511 service, either to another state's service or a call center or some type, the caller should be notified that they will not be able to return to the 511 service. As an option, the system could be designed so that the caller can be transferred back from the receiving service's menu tree. This applies to transfers across borders or between modal systems and service providers.
For example, because North Carolina DOT and VDOT share a long contiguous border and have multiple wireless carriers with switch and cell tower location issues, the two states have agreed to offer their 511 callers the opportunity to transfer to the neighboring state's 511 service. Virginia will be a menu option in the NCDOT 511 service and North Carolina will be a menu option in the existing Virginia service and eventual statewide service.
A successful 511 service has seamless and reliable call routing and these should go virtually unnoticed by the user. Simply put, the call goes through and the call gets answered. The early deployers have taught the rest of the country that call routing and carrier coordination is not a trivial matter, be it for wireline or wireless carriers.
The routing of the 511 dialing code is completed in two basic ways wireline and wireless. When 511 is dialed on a wireline phone, the call is received by the telephone company central office and translated into a 7 or 10-digit number, where the call is answered by an automated 511 system.
For wireless calls when 511 is dialed at the handset, the call is received by a cellular tower and carried to a switch where the 511 code is translated into a 7 or 10-digit number, where the call is answered by an automated 511 system. Each of these routings have various cost implications associated with them.
In either of the above cases, the translation should be seamless to the caller. The caller dials 511 and the call is routed to whatever number will take the call to the information service.
Routing charges associated with translating one phone number to another for the purposes of connecting a call to the 511 service generally come in two varieties:
Call routing coordination primarily consists of number allocation and service coordination. Implementing the 511 dialing code is based on negotiations with the local carriers and (as necessary) the Public Utilities or Public Service Commission. Costs for "turning on" a 511 code are highly variable and depend on, amongst other things: whether there is a tariff in place for 511; the implementer's use of a local number, a toll-free number or both; the implementer's ability to work with local wireless carriers to match landline carriers in implementing the 511 code; and, perhaps, using a separate "back-door" number for wireless calls in order to avoid any toll-free or tariff charges based on the configuration deployed[2] .
The Public Utilities Commission (PUC) or Public Service Commission (PSC) in your state can be a tremendous asset when planning a 511 service. These Commissions can assist the deployer in identifying all of the carriers in the state and is typically knowledgeable on what role they play in delivering 511. However, 511 deployers have experienced a wide range of interest from Commissions ranging from interested observer, or advisor to an active partner in the process characterized by attending meetings with carriers and reviewing telecommunication-related materials.
The Commission can also determine if: any formal documents need to be filed; the 511 number has to be officially assigned to a particular state agency; or the FCC order is sufficient. The early deployers experienced all of these extremes.
Contacting all of the wireline and wireless carriers within a state is a large undertaking. The deployer should be prepared to communicate directly with three individuals per carrier to reach the appropriate person to provide the call translation. An average state may have 40 wireline and wireless carriers. The number of payphone operators in a state can be in the hundreds. See Section III., D, iii below for additional discussion.
Carrier coordination is one area where most deployers experience their biggest delays in developing a 511 service. Many deployers discovered that a carrier can require up to six months to complete the necessary discussions, paperwork and perform the required programming to properly route calls. Some deployers have been forced to launch systems without having all major carriers on-board. While business decisions made by some carriers have impacted access timelines, deployers have also run into issues due to underestimating the time and level of effort required to incorporate all carriers into the 511 service.
Another element to the number allocation process is determining if any entity or business is already using the 511 code, typically through a wireless provider. If the deployer discovers that the 511 code is being used, then the entity must be allowed an appropriate amount of time (typically 6 months, as allowed by the FCC) to migrate to a new number.
While most deployers have not run into this issue, the Southeast Florida 511 service did. During the planning stages it was determined that the 511 code was being used by a dating service in the Miami area. In addition, the 511 number in Louisiana is currently being used by an ambulance service. Instead of asking the company to vacate the number, Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development (LaDOTD) is researching the possibility of allowing the company to remain as a menu choice on 511; in effect, sharing the number.
Access to a 511 service is made through a telephone of some type wireline, wireless, Private Branch Exchanges (PBX) or payphone. For many potential users, access to 511 can depend on how the deployer addresses key regulatory issues, including access for those with disabilities, limited English skills and environmental justice principles. All of these access-related decisions need to be considered in the planning stage and implemented when and where appropriate.
Wireline and wireless phone services are the primary access points to 511 systems, and will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Deployers should also be prepared to handle issues specific to PBX and payphones.
Most deployers assume that their 511 service will be used primarily by people on the move utilizing wireless phones. In reality, the limited data available shows the contrary, therefore making access via wireline phones very important. The ARTIMIS system in Cincinnati/ Northern Kentucky and 511 Virginia consistently report the percentage of calls made from wireline and wireless phones by month to the Coalition. Even though ARTIMIS is an urban, commuter-focused system and 511 Virginia is a 35-county regional system running through a predominantly rural corridor, both services consistently report that calls from wireline phones make up about 55% of the calls each month. Based on this limited data, a deployer should recognize that choosing to launch a wireless-only service will greatly reduce the utilization of the system and, if left in that access mode too long, may discourage people in the future from placing a wireline call to the system once the system can receive those calls. Engaging both wireline and wireless carriers as early as possibly in the planning process is critical.
Many businesses, and some home offices, have their own telephone systems or PBX. These systems switch calls between internal users and external telephone lines and are very common. Implementers have taken various strategies in handling PBX systems, which are often require the caller to dial an access code (typically a "9" or "8") to reach an outside line. For callers to dial 511 directly, without entering the access code, a change must be made in the PBX's dialing rules. Since 511 is a new service, it is to be expected that some businesses will need time to enable 511 calls to be made directly by their employees. In the meantime, callers may still dial 511 or the 800 number, if available and published, after entering their access code. While the reprogramming of a PBX is an issue, most implementers have not addressed it in a formal manner. As an option, some have placed programming information on a 511-related web site while most others have addressed PBX questions as they arise.
To date, most 511 services have not aggressively pursued payphone providers to translate the 511 dialing code to a 7 or 10-digit number. The main reasons for this are: the unknown return on investment, and the sheer number of providers in any given state. In the telecommunications industry, payphones are a dying breed. There was a time, as recent as 10 years ago, when payphones were seen as the primary way to keep in contact while away from the home or office, or a way to link to family and services in case of an emergency.
Today, due to the ubiquitous availability of cellular phones across all socioeconomic groups, many payphones are being removed from public places. However, just because they are being removed does not mean there are not numerous providers. For example, Kentucky determined that there are over 350 registered payphone operators in the state. After having its 511 services operational, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) sent a letter to all of the payphone operators in the state, which produced mixed success. Some carriers agreed to perform the call translation for free (just dial 511) while others still require the caller to deposit $0.50, thus causing a consistency issue. To date, KYTC is unable to determine how many calls are made from payphones, but believes the number is minimal. Additional ways to reach payphone providers may be through a statewide association, having the dominant ILEC for the region provide 511-related information to staff who deals directly with payphone providers, or having ILECs send informational letters to the payphone operators they serve.
Given the issues, most deployers are spending their time and resources on working with the wireline and wireless carriers first.
When designing a service for the general public, the lead agency must be cognizant of the various federal and state legislative mandates and requirements to ensure access to transportation information by all citizens. This includes reviewing any legislation or policies (some are departmental) that will impact the service's architecture and design. Such consideration should include, but not be limited to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), multi-lingual needs and environmental justice issues.
To comply with accessibility laws and regulations, implementers need to consider that under Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, carriers and equipment manufacturers must provide access to, and make their services and products usable by, individuals with disabilities "if readily achievable." Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act prohibits public entities (states, local governments and any department, agency or other instrumentality of state or local government) from discriminating against those with disabilities in all services that they provide to the public. 511 implementers should include in their design plans how they intend to provide access to these services to the disabled community, such as through the carriers' existing TRS or TDD capabilities. In many states, this means making the public aware that they can access the travel information service by dialing 711 for text relay and ask to be connected to 511.
To address ADA-related concerns in developing the 511 service and co-branded web site for the San Francisco Bay Area, MTC hired an ADA consultant and used input from its Elderly and Disabled Advisory Committee (EDAC), staffed by volunteer citizens. MTC was able to make some enhancements to the system while still in development, but plans on making additional improvements and system modifications based on additional comments received by EDAC members.
Deployers must be mindful of not only the ADA requirements, but also of how those with disabilities are impacted by the design of a 511 system. This includes using the appropriate tones, voices that are easier to hear and building in an allowable delay for those using text relay services. These issues will be addressed by the Coalition in a subsequent document.
Access to 511 services for Limited English Proficient (LEP) callers should be considered when planning a system. 511 implementers should review Executive Order 13166, signed by President Clinton on August 11, 2000 and the supporting "Guidance to Recipients on Special Language Service to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Beneficiaries" issued by U.S. DOT on January 22, 2001 to determine its applicability. To date, the only service that is bi-lingual is the Southeast Florida service (see System Attributes chart in Appendix B). Smart Route Systems, which operates the service in this region, achieves this by providing instructions to the users in English or Spanish, then subsequently provides recorded messages for key routes, selectable via touchtone, in the selected language.
Regarding environmental justice, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and a 1994 Presidential Executive Order address the Federal government's responsibilities to assure that programs or activities receiving federal financial assistance adhere to environmental justice principles that prevent discrimination against minority and low-income populations. 511 services that use Federal funds must adhere to these rules.
The business environment that was developed for Version 1.1 of the Guidelines remains intact. Basic services should be no more than the cost of a local call and the deploying agencies should expect to fully fund the 511 service and its level of information for the foreseeable future. Advertising and sponsorship are acceptable, as long as they do not interfere with the user's primary intent for calling the service. Fee-generating premium or enhanced services are also acceptable, though a market for these services has not been established yet.
In 2001, the Coalition established the guideline that when accessing the basic services of a 511 system, the call should be no more than the cost of a local call. This does not mean that the call is "free." Instead, this means that a caller would pay exactly what they would normally pay to make a local call in that area. For example, if one was calling from home on a landline phone then the call would be included in the monthly local phone bill, typically a monthly fee or message unit. If it were a person from out of state calling 511 on their wireless phone, but physically in the local area when placing the call, then the time of the call would be applied to their monthly calling plan (typically deducted from a large number of minutes) and roaming charges may apply depending on the service plan and/or the carrier.
Most importantly, for the user, there is a consistent business environment for the basic services available from 511 whether it is in Miami or Nebraska and that there is no "cost" (additional per usage fee like 411) to use the 511 service.
The implementing agency (or agencies) should expect to cover the full cost delivering the basic level of service on a 511 system. Historically, ATIS-based revenue sharing models and other creative funding approaches have not been successful. DAR #1: Business Models and Cost Considerations, covers issues salient for migrating a planned or existing traveler information service to utilize the 511 dialing code, including a review of business models and cost recovery, and is available at http://www.its.dot.gov/511/511_Costs.htm.
Commercial advertising and sponsorship of 511 services, either in an initial greeting or in conjunction with a specific element, such as a message or content category heading, of a 511 service is acceptable. However, care should be given to ensure that the length of advertising messages does not overly inconvenience callers and that the content of these messages is consistent with the public service nature of 511. This guidance applies to the initial greeting and messages prior to the caller getting the information that they are seeking.
As of August 2003, the only 511 service collecting any revenue from advertising or sponsorships is the I-81 Region in Virginia. Virginia has not placed advertisements or sponsorships in the initial greeting or in category headings. Instead, advertising revenue is generated from listings, by location and category, under the Travel Services menu choice of individual listings of commercial establishments. The keys to being able to provide this type of a service are having a field staff establishing contacts within the business community, making sales, and having the systems in place to track usage of the 511 service down to the lowest sub-level data request, as well as being able to perform all necessary accounting activities. In Virginia's case, these activities are all performed under contract. See the sections below for additional details on Virginia's business model.
Fee-generating premium services are allowed and can be a way to provide additional services for the caller and possibly off-set costs for the deployer. As of August 2003, a premium service market has not been clearly identified or established and no 511 system has implemented premium services. However, the Arizona 511 service, is working with iNetNow to develop a host of premium services offered to the caller. See the next section for additional details about Arizona.
In the fall of 2002, MNDOT asked 511 users to rank five fee-based services that they would be interested in having on 511. Minnesota's 511 users top 3 choices were: driving directions to a specified location; information about local tourist attractions, tourist centers or visitors bureaus; and personalized travel reports for problems on the usual route of travel.
The majority of 511 services across the country operate under one of three general business arrangements: operated in-house; fee for service contract; or a blend of the two some features and services performed in-house and some contracted. However, there are two 511 systems that operate, or plan to, under some slightly different business rules.
VDOT has entered into a fee for service contract to provide 511. Virginia's 511 system is unique in that it offers businesses the opportunity to be listed under specific travel service categories (e.g., lodging and restaurants) and by location (city and/or exit number). To be listed, these businesses pay the prime contractor, Shenandoah Telecommunications (Shentel), as they would pay to be listed in the Yellow Pages. There are no more than six entries listed under a service category for a given city or exit and entities listed at the top pay more than those below it.
The contract between VDOT and Shentel was structured such that VDOT has committed to funding the full operation of the service for the period of performance. However, the contract also provides for a split of the monthly revenue collected (80% VDOT, 20% Shentel). The VDOT share is used to reduce the known cost of the monthly invoice from Shentel, thus reducing the full contract amount to VDOT each month. As an incentive, Shentel keeps their 20%. The contract is structured so that VDOT will never profit from the system, but should enough revenues be collected each month, it has the contractual feasibility to operate at no cost to the public. This arrangement does create some unique customer dynamics: VDOT is focused on the end user; and Shentel is concerned with VDOT, the end user and advertisers who continuously provide feedback about the performance and structure of the system.
In Arizona, ADOT has entered into a contract with iNetNow, a private company with the ability to provide personalized full concierge services for a fee. The fees will be collected though subscriptions and a la carte usage of the service. iNetNow believes that there is a market for personalized services through 511 and expects to collect enough revenues to sustain operations and make a profit. Therefore, ADOT is not providing iNetNow any funding to develop and deploy the enhanced service. The contract does have a revenue sharing element to it and ADOT plans to use the funds for marketing and additional service enhancements of the system. It should be noted that ADOT received over two hundred requests from parties interested in the Request for Proposals for the premium service and much to ADOT's surprise, only two proposals were received.
The 511 Deployment Coalition considers many issues surrounding the successful development, deployment and operation of a 511 service to be important. However, there are four overarching guidelines that each deployer must give serious attention to: system interoperability, privacy, standards, and evaluation.
Interoperability deals with how 511 services with adjacent operating borders interrelate to give callers seamless information. This issue is relevant primarily to roadway and weather content as it is not uncommon for callers to seek information on what is happening over a state border on a certain roadway. Without either being able to incorporate information on those roadways or transferring the caller to the neighboring state's 511 service, the caller is essentially "traveling blind." Without system interoperability there is merely a patchwork of unconnected 511 systems scattered around the country And this is not what the FCC envisioned and it does not meet the national vision for 511.
N11 systems, by design, are not national in scope. Only 411 gives the appearance of being national in scope and that is accomplished with an integrated database behind the systems which its business model supports. With the overlap and varied boundaries of agencies, regions, travel patterns and the unknowns of cellular routing, 511 deployers need to look beyond their borders to make 511 a success with the traveling public. If 511 developers, deployers and operators accomplish regional interoperability through data sharing, then we may achieve national interoperability ultimately as well. This national interoperability may ultimately yield a 511 system where the caller may be asked, "City and state, please," like the 411 system. DAR #4 - 511 Regional Interoperability Issues addressing this issue may be found at http://www.its.dot.gov/511/511inter.htm.
Many factors must be addressed when dealing with the issue of interoperability and determining which type of transfer best fits the needs of a particular 511 service. Most of these factors determine how a system would work and/or which standards are in use or available to make the transfer seamless to the user.
Below is a list of recommendations for the implementers that include the following general system design considerations:
More specific recommendations include the following factors relating to call transfers and data sharing need to be considered:
If an implementer determines data sharing is preferred, then the following items need to be considered:
If an implementer determines that call transfers are preferred, then the following items need to be considered:
In the United States, state and national legislators have heard the complaints of individuals who are tired of their privacy being invaded without their knowledge or permission. Evidence of this is the recent establishment of the national "Do Not Call List" that has prompted millions of Americans to submit their name and telephone number in hopes of reducing the number of telemarketing telephone calls, typically to their residence.
People calling a 511 service are accessing the system, typically, through a home or office wireline phone or a wireless phone. It is the duty of the implementing agency(ies) to protect this newly created database of information. Callers using a 511 service expect the deploying entities to protect their individual privacy. If their privacy is invaded, or even perceived to be, the users' confidence in, and comfort with, using the service will wane and the overall usage will drop.
To prevent any privacy issues from arising, 511 services should adhere to ITS America's Fair Information and Privacy Principles, which can be found on the ITS America web site at http://www.itsa.org/committe.nsf/0/82d672ca035826558525620e006901c4?OpenDocument. Some states have included the statement via a link on their co-branded 511 website.
The National ITS Architecture is the framework for deploying an integrated Intelligent Transportation System. This framework identifies the stakeholders and interrelationships involved in ITS, the activities or functions required to deliver the ITS User Services, and the interdependencies between different systems the interfaces. In support of 511 and the advent of sophisticated voice portals, the traveler information portion of the National ITS Architecture has been updated to include a new entity, the Telecommunications System for Traveler Information (TSTI) and connecting information flows.
This entity represents the caller interface and voice processing (voice recognition/synthesis) that supports voice-enabled traveler telephone information systems. It lays on the boundary of the National ITS Architecture where a call is received and processed. Implementations of this TSTI could include voice portal capabilities in scenarios where a distinct voice portal exists between ITS Centers and telecommunications provider(s) and uses this information to support voice-based interactions with the traveler. The TSTI also supports voice-based alert notification to the traveling public regarding major emergencies such as natural or man-made disasters, civil emergencies, severe weather or child abduction. These capabilities are reflected in two market packages: Interactive Traveler Information and Wide-Area Alert.
The new TSTI entity and voice-based architecture flows can be used in regional or project ITS architectures to represent the 511 voice system interface to the transportation information service provider (ISP). Additional details on the Telecommunications System for Traveler Information, the corresponding information flows, and market packages can be found on the National ITS Architecture website at http://www.its.dot.gov/arch/arch.htm, click on "National ITS Architecture".
Significant resources have been invested to develop ITS standards that will simplify and expedite the deployment of interoperable systems. 511 implementers should review the full range of standards available and consider using those that will aid in cost-effective system development and/or inter-system interoperability. The ITSrelated national standards are designed to facilitate the efficient exchange of information and as a result, have developed standard data elements and standard messages.
Some of these standards, consistent with the national ITS architecture, are quite beneficial to system implementers by reducing the time and resources required to share information between transportation management systems and the 511 support systems. Existing standards that should be examined include:
Not all of these standards have been fully tested in the field and some may experience changes in the future. However, increasingly more transportation agencies are choosing to use these standards in 511 systems. An example of a system using multiple standards is the San Francisco Bay Area, which uses TMDD, MS/ETMCC and ATIS XML in various places within the overall system.
In order for 511 to be a "customer driven multi-modal traveler information service," as stated in the national vision, implementers will need to periodically evaluate their systems. Users' expectations may change over time, much like they have for cellular phones and the Internet. Evaluations will help deployers meet their customer's needs and determine how successful and useful the service is to the callers.
To date, only a handful of systems have completed or are performing evaluations. These services include Minnesota, Virginia, Arizona, MTC and Montana. These deployers are using various techniques to evaluate their systems, including on-line surveys, phone surveys, adding questions to statewide quality of life or similar "omnibus" surveys and convening focus groups.
Arizona was awarded 511 Model Deployment funds by the USDOT to enhance its existing 511 service. The enhancements will be evaluated to determine their benefits and the evaluation will focus on system performance, usage, customer satisfaction and institutional and technical issues.
System performance will include:
The Usage portion will focus on:
Customer satisfaction will be documented through:
Technical and institutional issues addressed include:
Additional information on 511 evaluations, as well as agency contacts can be found at www.deploy511.org.
The vision for 511 services has clear goals related to Customer Satisfaction and Awareness:
By 2005
By 2010
The awareness of 511 was first measured in the ITS America consumer research conducted by the Gallup Organization in the fall of 2001. Deployers also should gauge awareness of 511 when doing surveys and evaluations locally by asking:
Minnesota in the summer of 2002, determined:
To date, gauging Customer Satisfaction has not been an activity that many deployers have undertaken. Part of the Arizona 511 Model Deployment evaluation effort is includes the creation of an evaluation template or survey questions that all implementers can use in their evaluations. By providing the template of questions and procedures, USDOT and the Coalition hope to collect similar data across the country regardless of the 511 system or content available. This will allow the Coalition to better monitor the progress of deployments and the overall customer satisfaction and acceptance. Version 1.0 of the Core Survey Questions can be found in Appendix D. The draft questions cover the following areas:
The questions will be piloted in Orlando in the fall of 2003 and then used in the Arizona evaluation. The 5-point scales used will allow satisfaction to be compared from service to service on an "apples to apples" basis.
Deployers are encouraged to assess Customer Satisfaction and Awareness, in the manner above, with their deployments and report the findings to the 511 Deployment Coalition.
Many of the 19 operational 511 services have learned valuable lessons on deploying and operating systems. Some lessons take a year to learn, while others are immediate and obvious. While not all lessons are applicable to all existing and future implementers, all of the key lessons are important and this section discusses the major cross-cutting issues.
A 511 service needs to be thought of as an evolving product designed to attract and retain users. Telematics is to the automobile industry as 511 is to transportation operating agencies. Both are based on customer relationship management (CRM) which entails all aspects of interaction that a company (or agency) has with its customer, whether it be sales or service related. Both also provide users with features and services that are focused on safety and convenience.
Automobile manufacturers offer optional telematics packages in the hope of learning more about their customer throughout the life of the vehicle. It gives the automaker a window into what is important to their customer, as well as a direct link to the buyer to enhance his or her experience with the vehicle and company. The buyer expects quality service and assistance (of various types) from the telematics system.
The most successful 511 services are, and will be, the ones that listen to their customers and predict, or react to, their needs. One way of offering this interaction opportunity regularly is by having a comment line on the 511 menu tree. A standard customer feedback mechanism allows the deployer to track user's needs regularly, instead of only through irregular, but necessary, evaluations, which may include various surveys.
In the mid-1990s, ATIS projects were developed around the country with the goal of providing travelers information that would assist them in their daily travels. For most of these systems, the focus was on using new technologies and hoping that the users would discover the service and continue to use it after some initial marketing efforts. Typically, as discovered by TravInfo in the San Francisco Bay Area, about 10% of the area residents knew about the service and fewer used it. The ITS America consumer research conducted by the Gallup Organization also found that about 10% of the nation had heard of 511. In a survey by Penn State University, only 13% of the respondents had heard of the SmarTraveler telephone and website ATIS services in Philadelphia.
Part of the issue for ATIS deployers was creating a brand awareness and while the names of the services and corresponding logos were always carefully selected, often the message was not simple or short enough to remember. With the abbreviated dialing code of 511, the brand awareness is built in by association (a phone number like 411 or 911) and the marketing message is simple, easy to remember and is similar, or the same, across the country.
Because the brand is the same 511 deployers can easily benefit from each others' marketing campaigns and materials. An example of this is the incorporation of the national logo into the roadside signs to create awareness. Roadside sign design specifications and siting policies were shared by deployers through the Coalition. Interim system evaluation results from Virginia show that roadside signs work in generating 511 usage and are how most users found out about the service. Research performed by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute in 2003 as part of the 511 Virginia evaluation revealed the following results for brand awareness and usage:
This compares favorably to pre and post marketing campaign research performed by Minnesota DOT in the summer of 2002, which showed that:
By using a consistent brand and offering the same access methodology to the service everywhere, an South Dakota resident traveling in Washington State would know the basic information available by seeing the familiar logo and phone number on a roadside sign.
Marketing assistance can be found at http://www.deploy511.org/marketing.htm . The web site offers deployers examples of marketing and awareness tools used across the country, including billboards, rackcards, posters, decals and launch materials.
The majority of 511 services across the country experience usage driven by specific events. These events can be weather-related, incidents or special events. As evidenced in the Figure 4 below, highlighting call volumes in Nebraska, the increase in calls related to an event or series of events can be dramatic.
For the first five months of operation, the Nebraska 511 system, which replaced the existing #SAFE number and is focused on weather-related roadway information, experienced a steady growth in usage as the winter of 2001-02 progressed. From October 2001 through February 2002, the system averaged 25,000 calls per month. However, March brought significant snow storms to the entire state and the system recorded over 103,000 calls, a 400% increase over the monthly average. For the next 15 months, the system never had to meet that demand again, but due to careful planning, the system has proven itself capable of handling extremely large call volumes.
Much like Nebraska, in December 2002 the Arizona 511 system experienced an enormous growth in calls due to specific events. For the first ten months of operation, 511 Virginia averaged almost 21,000 calls per month. Early in December, severe winter storms began to affect the northern part of the state and calls to 511 increased. The trend of spikes continued throughout the remainder of the month, with each major increase in calls being directly related to weather; clearly not habitual use. For the month, ADOT received almost 5 times its average monthly calls to that point, with slightly over 100,000 calls received. The ADOT system continues to experience similar event-related spikes.
The Coalition and implementers have invested significant resources to determine what customers want from 511 services. While 511 services are still relatively new to consumers, several clear trends are emerging.
In late 2001, ITS America conducted the first national 511 market research, through a nationwide telephone survey and multiple focus groups across the country. At the time, there was only one operational 511 service in Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky so the findings can be considered a "before" baseline. These baseline results included the following item:
The results of this research effort are often echoed in local research efforts and are reflected in the design of many of the 19 systems in operation.
Some implementers have performed their own consumer research to determine what potential users want in a 511 service, how the users will react to the service and what benefits people expect to get out of the service. Consumer research is most effective when performed during the planning stage, once a demonstration system is available, or six months to one year after the service is implemented and then every 12 to 18 months.
An early example of consumer research can be attributed to Utah DOT, which held focus groups to gauge consumer reaction to the system that UDOT envisioned. One of the strongest reactions that the focus group provided was to the thought of using an automated system. The majority of the participants thought the only way to deliver the information in a quality, easy to use manner would be through live operators. However, after hearing a demonstration of what a voice activated system with concatenated speech outputs would sound like, the participants found it more than acceptable and were surprised at the system's quality and ease of use. This is the type of system that Utah has in place today.
In Minnesota, a statewide travel information survey was performed to determine user awareness and the likelihood of use. MnDOT received the following results to two key questions reflecting usage and customer satisfaction:
These results suggest that the users of Minnesota's 511 service are satisfied with what they have today and are willing to use it in the future. However, survey results should also be balanced with continuous feedback loops, or comment lines, like the one offered as a menu item in Minnesota's service.
Virginia DOT, primarily through the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute, has incorporated consumer research into the development of the system and its enhancements. Before the 511 system was implemented, potential users were asked to review and rank a series of potential 511 signs. The signs had various layouts (horizontal vs. vertical) and contained slightly different phrases in an attempt to display what potential callers would see on the highways. By far, the focus groups across the state recommended using: a vertical sign alignment; the word "travel" instead of "traveler," and "dial" instead of "call" or other variations. The results reinforced the ITS America-led research effort discussed above and the roadway signs located in Virginia's 511 service coverage area reflect this direct consumer input.
Deployment costs are variable and are based on the: size of the system; the number of calls estimated or received; the duration of the call; number of transfers made between answering points (e.g., transit, tourism call centers); and routing of calls. Some general costs for various types of 511 services are listed below:
Plus:
Non-recurring and per call costs can be minimized with proper planning and execution.
The Coalition recognizes the need to normalize the costs to assist future deployers and plans to undertake this activity in a future Deployment Assistance Report.
As shown in Section IV, C, 511 is a capable tool in assisting in the management of major events. While most major events around the country tend to be weather-related, or incident related, some are planned events, like the Winter Olympics held in Salt Lake City, Utah in 2002.
Utah DOT developed the 511 service with special content features designed specifically for the Olympics. These features included driving directions to venues, event schedules and tips for commuters. The service also offered a link to transit services and provided roadway conditions for the area. In all, the Olympics were a significant and immediate successful test for the system as it handled almost 40,000 calls for the month of February 2002.
Major events, such as bridge collapses that completely shut down roadways also offer an opportunity to use 511 in conjunction with traffic and incident management tools familiar to DOTs.
As discussed in DAR #3 511 and Homeland Security, 511 systems offer the potential to become a valuable medium to provide travel information in support of homeland security emergency management. This potential is likely to increase in the coming years as more systems are deployed and familiarity with such systems continues to grow across the nation. Put simply, 511 has the potential to be a national asset in the event of homeland security emergencies. While the text below is not a "lesson learned, " the integrity of the 511 service during a homeland security event will require a deployer to consider the following passages.
Guidelines for 511 operation during a national security event include:
As the number of 511 services available increase in many areas of the country, it is believed that users will have an expectation that information relating to areas outside of their region will be available in a single call. In years past, calling Directory Assistance (411) allowed telephone users to access only local directory information. As the Information Age has matured, users dialing 411 are now able to request information for any city and state in the country. It is believed that this type of expectation may pervade 511 services as well.
A growing number of 511 systems share boundaries and / or have significant travel in-between them. This is also true along major travel corridors throughout the country. Callers in one metropolitan area may wish to dial 511 to find information not just for their local travels, but for their entire trip, which might include traveling through other metropolitan areas or regions and crossing state borders.
Currently, interoperability is being approached in different ways by deployers. This will help provide the 511 services still in the planning stage with insight and lessons as to the best, most applicable, solution given a certain set of technical and financial circumstances.
Since interoperability is such an important issue to the Coalition, DAR #4 - 511 Regional Interoperability Issues, was published in July 2003 and can be found at http://www.its.dot.gov/511/511inter.htm.
This topic is also addressed in Section III, F, i.
The financial commitment that a lead agency makes to a 511 service is critical to the continued success of the system. For this reason, the department or agency must not rely on costs being significantly offset or wholly absorbed by the private sector or through revenue sharing partnerships. While those business models have had some limited success in the past, the majority have failed, leaving the lead agency unprepared to accept the additional financial burden of operating a system (historically a metropolitan area ATIS). This has resulted in the service reducing its content, hours of operation or even completely shutting down, as with the Partners In Motion ATIS for the Washington, DC region.
The lead agency also should recognize that, much like providing transit service, 511 does not get cheaper with more usage unless costs are being significantly offset by revenue sharing that was not counted on. While a significant usage increase may reduce the cost per call or per minute, the overall cost of providing the service should be expected to rise.
Along with providing quality, timely, decision-level content, 511 services, like any customer service, need to be reliable and consistent. Consistency and reliability begin with a financially sound, multi-year funding program.
Since 511 is a collective product of many separate services, national performance measures are needed to gain an understanding nationally of the full scope, impact and effectiveness of 511. Recently the Coalition has focused on the establishment and monitoring of a few key measures, so that the Policy Committee and Working Group can assess the nation's overall progress towards meeting the 511 Vision described previously in this document. The Coalition has chosen to focus on Coverage, Usage, Awareness and Customer Satisfaction as national measures and is currently developing a process to collect and present the necessary data. Many of the specific elements are discussed earlier in the Usage Monitoring Guidelines section of this document.
Although performance measures need to be compiled on a national level, the collection will be a bottom-up effort. Each local 511 deployer will assist in the process of collecting and providing the relevant information. While some of the information is fairly easy to collect and can be achieved through the proper design of a telephone dissemination system, other collection efforts will be more sporadic and more dependent on funding.
For example, of the 19 services in operation today, four deployers have designed and employed a comprehensive evaluation of the service. The evaluations typically cover topics such as awareness, customer satisfaction, applicability of service and other elements critical to providing a customer-oriented service. However, due to the complexity of the evaluations and the financial commitment that they take, many deployers envision only being able to perform such evaluations every two to three years.
On the national level, additional information on awareness and customer satisfaction may be collected through national surveys and techniques, like those used in 2001 by the Gallup Organization for ITS America.
One of the main functions of the Coalition is to address the national policy issues surrounding the deployment of a nationwide 511 service. The key policy issues that implementers currently address are the availability of resources, primarily funding to deploy and operate a quality 511 service, and the associated funding issues to instrumenting the coverage area to meet the customers' data / information needs. Other policy issues facing deployers and the Coalition are interoperability and deployer support, assistance and networking.
Given the current status of most transportation agencies' funding sources, there are some uncertainties surrounding future 511 deployments. Many state DOTs are scrambling to cover operating and maintenance costs, let alone funding new construction and services and additional funding concerns are tied to the next round of federal transportation legislation. While Coalition members pushed to include 511 as a worthwhile and successful ITS effort, the amount and timing of any funds available under the new legislation are unknown.
Agencies with a strong desire to improve customer service will continue to find the funds to support 511. There will also be a group of potential deployers who recognize that spending some of the known, limited funds on a useful, and much appreciated, service can help span the gap between larger transportation projects that will now have to wait years to receive their proper level of funding.
The Coalition will continue to look for creative ways to fund 511 services and expand the 511 footprint to achieve the goals set in the national vision.
Outside of locating the funding to develop and deploy 511 services, interoperability is the most important and potentially complex issue implementers, and the Coalition, face. As stated in Section IV, G, as the number of 511 systems grows, services are beginning to border one another. These border systems are discovering the need for interoperability between adjacent systems, either by sharing information behind the scenes, so that a caller in one service area can learn about conditions over the border or along a travel corridor outside their service's coverage area or by transferring calls between systems. Issues associated with call routing are also being explored, particularly calls placed from wireless phones at coverage boundaries. DAR #4: Regional Interoperability Issues was developed by the Coalition to aid implementers in understanding and addressing these issues.
The Coalition will track the various methods that deployers are using to address this issue and expects to provide more precise recommendations in future updates to the Guidelines.
The ITS Joint Program Office, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) have been tremendous supporters of 511. Beginning with the original petition to the FCC for a three digit phone number, USDOT has contributed significant staff expertise and resources to 511. In addition to being principal financiers and active participants of the Coalition, USDOT's contributions to, in the FCC's words, "to facilitate ubiquitous deployment of 511," have included state planning grants, a National 511 Model Deployment Initiative and research and technical assistance.
In July 2001, FHWA established a 511 Planning Assistance Program to provide states up to $100,000 each to work with the appropriate public sector agencies to develop a 511 implementation plan, or if such a plan already exists, to assist with the implementation of the plan. Through July 2003, 43 states and the District of Columbia have received assistance.
Above all, the networking and information exchange opportunities borne out of the Coalition have led to the largest advances in the rapid deployment of 511 systems. Without Coalition leadership, countless public and private sector members volunteering their time and expertise and support staff, every state desiring to deploy a 511 service would have to perform and/or fund their own research to determine the "How To's" and would do so in a vacuum with no guidelines or levels of consistency to strive for.
Since the completion of the Version 1.1 of the Guidelines, several new reports and resources have been published by the Coalition or its sponsoring organizations. This section identifies key items that can be used as resources by implementers.
The establishment of the Coalition and the activity of its volunteer members have led to the development of a very important national resource. The Coalition members are the best source for 511 planning, deployment, operation, marketing, and evaluation information and experience. The Coalition continues to provide a venue for all parties, public and private, interested in providing 511 services to share information and exchange experiences, ideas and foster the promotion and growth of this important service.
The Coalition has published seven Deployment Assistance Reports (DAR):
These reports resulted from focused efforts of Coalition volunteers from both the public and private sector. The reports attempt to address the most pressing issues that Coalition members have dealt with, and are dealing with, in their effort to develop and deploy quality 511 services around the country. Each volunteer effort has concluded its activity by electronically publishing an information report available online at www.deploy511.org, which is the most comprehensive source of information for active and potential 511 deployers. Additional online sites are referenced below.
In March 2002, the 511 Deployment Coalition sponsored a national 511 deployment conference entitled Answering America's Call for Travel Information. The conference provided implementers the opportunity to learn about the Coalition's progress as well as share implementation experience. The conference began with a four-hour 511 "101" introductory session. In addition, proceedings of the conference have been published electronically that include links to the presentations provided at the conference. The USDOT and ITS America sites referenced below have links to the 511 "101" charts and the conference proceedings at http://www.its.dot.gov/511/PDF/511intro.ppt and http://www.itsa.org/resources.nsf/Files/511DeploymentConferenceProceedings/$file/511ConferenceProceedings.doc respectively.
Effective marketing of 511 is an essential element to successful 511 deployment. To assist implementers with this task, the Coalition's Marketing and Outreach Committee has made available a toolkit of resources that will help implementers plan more effective and efficient marketing programs while promoting a "national brand" image for 511.
The following marketing tools are currently available:
In addition to providing marketing tools, the Coalition's Marketing and Outreach Committee supports implementers by promoting communication and networking. Through workshops and conference sessions, e-mail networks and conference calls, the Committee brings together the public information officers who are working to make the public aware of 511 service.
The toolkit can be accessed at http://www.deploy511.org/marketingtools.htm.
Below is a list of the 18 operating 511 services across the country and the local or toll-free access numbers, as well as related or co-branded web sites.
Table 2. 511 Systems Local Numbers and Web Sites
| City/Region/State |
Telephone Number |
Related
or Co-branded |
| Cincinnati/ No. Kentucky |
513-333-3333 |
|
| Nebraska |
800-906-9069 |
|
| Utah |
866-511-UTAH |
|
| I-81 Region in Virginia |
800-578-4111 |
|
| Orlando (I-4) |
866-510-1930 |
|
| Arizona |
888-411-ROAD |
|
| Minnesota |
800-542-0220 |
|
| Southeast Florida |
866-914-3838 |
|
| Washington |
360-570-2301 |
|
| Iowa |
800-288-1047 |
|
| South Dakota |
866-MY SD 511 |
|
| Kentucky statewide |
866-RDREPORT |
|
| San Francisco/Oakland |
866-736-7433 |
|
| Montana |
800-226-7623 |
|
| North Dakota |
866-MY ND 511 |
|
| Alaska |
866-292-7577 |
|
| Maine |
866-282-7578 |
|
| New Hampshire |
866-282-7579 |
|
| Vermont |
800-ICY-ROAD |
Information on the Coalition, its supporting resource materials and additional useful references for 511 implementers may be found in Table 3.
Table 3. 511 Internet Resources
| Host Agency/Organization |
Internet address (URL) |
| 511 Deployment Coalition |
|
| U.S. Department of Transportation |
|
| ITS Joint Program Office Federal Highway Admin. |
|
| Intelligent Transportation Society of America (ITS America) |
|
| American Public Transportation Association (APTA) |
http://www.apta.com/services |
| American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) |
511.transportation.org |
The Coalition will continue to monitor the issue of the implementation and operation of 511 services. If implementers have suggestions for improvements to the Guidelines or 511 services in general, please provide this information electronically to 511feedback@aashto.org.
| AASHTO |
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials |
| ADA | Americans with Disabilities Act |
| ADOT | Arizona Department of Transportation |
| APTA | American Public Transportation Association |
| ARTIMIS | Advanced Regional Traffic Interactive Management & Information System for the Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky Region |
| ASN.1 | Abstract Syntax Notation Number One |
| ATIS | Advanced Traveler Information Systems |
| ATMS | Advanced Traffic Management System |
| CMS | Changeable Message Signs |
| CRM | Customer Relationship Management |
| DAR | Deployment Assistance Report |
| EDAC | Elderly and Disabled Advisory Committee of MTC |
| ERM | Event Report Message |
| ESS | Environmental Sensor Stations |
| FCC | Federal Communications Commission |
| FDOT | Florida Department of Transportation |
| FHWA | Federal Highway Administration |
| FTA | Federal Transit Administration |
| GUI | Graphical User Interface |
| IEEE | Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers |
| INTI | Integrated Network of Transportation Information |
| ISP | Information Service Provider |
| ITE | Institute of Transportation Engineers |
| ITS | Intelligent Transportation Systems |
| ITS America | Intelligent Transportation Society of America |
| KYTC | Kentucky Transportation Cabinet |
| LaDOTD | Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development |
| LEP | Limited English Proficient |
| MPO | Metropolitan Planning Organization |
| MS/ETMCC | Message Sets for External Traffic Management Center Communications |
| MTC | Metropolitan Transportation Commission (San Francisco Bay Area) |
| NCDOT | North Carolina Department of Transportation |
| NHS | National Highway System |
| NTCIP | National Transportation Communications for ITS Protocol |
| PBX | Private Branch Exchanges |
| PSC | Public Service Commission |
| PUC | Public Utilities Commission |
| RWIS | Roadway Weather Information Systems |
| SAE | Society of Automotive Engineers |
| SEKTDA | Southern and Eastern Kentucky Tourism Development Association |
| TCIP | Transit Communications Interface Profiles |
| TMC | Traffic Management Centers |
| TMDD | Traffic Management Data Dictionary |
| TSTI | Telecommunications System for Traveler Information |
| UDOT | Utah Department of Transportation |
| USDOT | United States Department of Transportation |
| USGS | U.S. Department of the Interior, Geologic Survey |
| VDOT | Virginia Department of Transportation |
| VXML | Voice eXtensible Markup Language |
| XML | eXtensible Markup Language |
Please make use of the toll-free or "back door" phone numbers . At a minimum, this will provide a feel for the introduction, menu and system interface. If you wish to "test" a system further, a caller unfamiliar with the service's coverage area (state or metro) will find that having a map of the area accessible generally provides key landmarks and roadways, thus allowing you to explore the system to its fullest extent.
Appendix F contains the available contact information for each of the 511 deployers.
Attributes of Existing 511 Services
(as of August 1, 2003)
| Vitals |
User Interface |
Type of Content |
Type of Roads Covered |
Type of Data |
Awareness |
Notes |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Commands1 |
Messages |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| System |
Date Operational |
"Back Door" Number |
Touchtone |
Voice |
Bi-lingual |
Text to Speech |
Concatenated |
Recorded |
Bi-lingual |
Roadway |
Transit |
Ferries |
Car /van pool |
Tourism |
"Ports" |
Interstate |
Other Ltd Access |
US Routes |
State Routes |
Weather |
Road Cond. |
Construction |
Incidents |
Congestion |
Travel Times |
Roadside signs |
VMS/CMS |
511 web site |
Market Research |
Evaluation |
Other Advertising |
Other |
| Statewide |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Nebraska |
10/01 |
800-906-9069 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
X |
CO, WY, IA interstate corridors |
||||||||||||||||||
| Utah |
12/01 |
866-511-UTAH |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
X |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
SLC Main Arterials |
||||||||||||
| Arizona |
3/02 |
888-411-ROAD |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
X |
X |
|||||||||||||||
| Minnesota |
7/02 |
800-542-0220 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
X |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
X |
||||||||||||
| Washington |
9/02 |
360-570-2301 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
Phased launch |
||||||||||||||||||
| Iowa |
11/02 |
800-288-1047 |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
some |
x |
X |
X |
x |
x |
X |
|||||||||||||||||
| South Dakota |
11/02 |
866-MY SD 511 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
X |
ND, SD, NE, MT, MN |
||||||||||||||||
| Kentucky |
11/02 |
866-RDREPORT |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
X |
||||||||||||||||||
| Montana |
1/03 |
800-226-ROAD |
x |
x |
x |
x |
NA |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
X |
ND, SD |
||||||||||||||
| North Dakota |
2/03 |
866-MY ND 511 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
X |
SD, MT, MN |
||||||||||||||||||
| Alaska |
4/03 |
866-282-7577 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Maine |
5/03 |
866-282-7578 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
x |
||||||||||||||||||
| New Hampshire |
5/03 |
866-282-7579 |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Vermont |
800-ICY ROAD |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
||||||||||||||||||||
| Metro Area |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Cincinnati/ Northern Kentucky |
6/01 |
513-333-3333 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
few |
few |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
transfer to statewide Kentucky services |
|||||||||||||
| Central Florida(Orlando and points east along I-4) |
6/02 |
866-510-1930 |
x |
x |
x |
I-4 only |
x |
x |
x |
D |
x |
X |
May cover information on other roadways, but only selected via I-4 commands |
|||||||||||||||||||
| SE Florida |
7/02 |
866-914-3838 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
|||||||||||||
| San Fran/Oakland |
12/02 |
866-736-7433 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
|||||||||||||
| Corridor |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| I-81 (Virginia) |
2/02 |
800-578-4111 |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
x |
X |
X |
||||||||||
|
Total |
out of 19 services |
10 |
12 |
1 |
5 |
13 |
3 |
1 |
19 |
8 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
19 |
8 |
18 |
12 |
15 |
15 |
18 |
16 |
8 |
3 |
9 |
1 |
16 |
4 |
5 |
14 |
||
|
Notes and definitions: 1 - when a system has both command types, touchtone is typically a backup interface command mode or for speech impaired Text to Speech - uses
software to convert typed text into audible words |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Frequently Asked Questions | Section of Document |
| Why do 511? | II. Vision |
| Should 511 link to 911? | III. Guidelines |
| What is regional interoperability? | IV and V. Cross-cutting Issues & National Policy Issues |
| What are the benefits to transit providers? | III. Guidelines |
| Will 511 significantly increase call volumes to transit customer service centers? | III. Guidelines |
| What type weather information should be included? | III. Guidelines |
| Is there a 511 logo? | VI. Resources |
| How have other deployers marketed their 511 systems? | VI. Resources |
| Do any 511 services have "other" information? | III. Guidelines |
| Has any deployer provided Premium Services yet? | III. Guidelines |
| Are deployers using 511 with AMBER Alerts? | III. Guidelines |
| Is Homeland Security an issue? | IV. Cross-cutting Issues |
| Are any systems bi- or multi-lingual? | Appendix B |
| How do I contact a deployer? | Appendix F |
Many general answers of the FAQs can be found in Appendix B in the System Attributes Chart.
Core Survey Questions - Version 1.0
Deployers should consistently use the following core survey questions when collecting information about the usage, customer preferences and satisfaction of a 511 system.
About your use of 511:
1. How did you hear about 511? (don't prompt) saw highway sign, from friend/coworker, newspaper, TV, radio, DOT website, transit signage or pass, billboard, fliers, phone bill insert, employer program, etc.
2. Do you know where 511 is available? (don't prompt) "in this area," "statewide," "nationwide"
3. When did you first call 511? this is first time, in the past 3 months, between 3 and 6 months ago, between 6 and 12 months ago, 1 to 2 years ago, I can't remember
If Q.3 indicates that the respondent is not a first-time caller:
4. How many times have you called 511 in the past 4 weeks?
5. Have you ever called 511 in a different state or metro area?
{"don't know" and "can't remember" are OK responses for these questions)
For the specific trip that you were calling 511 about this/that time: [questions 4, 8, and 9 require administering the survey with a follow-on call, rather than via an intercept at the beginning of the user's call]
1. What was the purpose of this trip? commuting to/from work or school, other work-related travel, personal appointments, visiting friends and relatives, driving children to/from school or activities, shopping, travel to/from airport, recreation, vacation
2. (If necessary, follow up with) Were you making this trip as the driver of a commercial vehicle? What kind of commercial vehicle was this? truck, taxi, limousine, etc. (check FMCSA categories)
[use answers to questions 1 and 2 as basis for skip patterns later]
3. What kind of information were you looking for when you called 511? roadway-related weather conditions, traffic congestion, road construction schedules, public transit information, airport information, pedestrian/bike information, food/lodging/gasoline, shopping, tourism, emergency services, border crossing, CVO information, parking availability
4. And how satisfied were you with the information you got? 5-point scale
5. From what kind of telephone did you call 511? cellular phone, landline phone
6. Where were you when you called 511? home, workplace, in car, in transit vehicle, along the wayside, other place
7. Did you make your call just prior to setting out, once you were already en route, or were you calling well in advance to plan a future trip? just prior, en route, in advance
8. Did you consult any other sources when planning or taking this trip? If yes, probe for sources: radio, TV, dedicated cable TV channel, website, transit schedules, friends and relatives, travel guide, travel agent, atlas/maps, commercial vehicle fleet office or dispatcher, other telephone-based service
9. Did you make any change to your travel plans as a result of the information you got from 511? Decided to leave earlier; decided to leave later; chose to travel by a different means; decided to take a different route; chose to make stops on the way that you wouldn't otherwise have made; slowed down/changed speed; stopped along the way and waited, or waited overnight
About your satisfaction with 511:
1. On a scale from [ ] to [ ], how satisfied are you with 511's available information about (using a 5-point scale)
[adjust these questions based on the specifics of the deployment and include a "don't use this" or "no opinion" option]
[for traffic info users]: weather-related roadway conditions, traffic incidents and accidents, traffic congestion, parking availability, roadway construction projects, route planning
[for public transit info users]: schedules, fares and passes, planning an itinerary, "how to ride," real-time operations updates, accessible transit/paratransit, park-and-ride, rideshare services, vanpools, airport transportation options, weather-related changes to transit operations
[for commercial vehicle operators]: weather-related roadway conditions, traffic incidents and accidents, traffic congestion, truck parking availability, inspection and weighing posts, roadway construction projects
[for all]: food, lodging, and gasoline; shopping; tourism; emergency services; special events; border crossings; pedestrian & bike travel; information about 511 itself
2. Please rate your level of agreement to each statement on 5-point scale
[for traffic info users]:
[for public transit info users]:
[additional transit statements, as applicable for the deployment]:
[for all users]:
3. What do you like best and least about 511? open-ended
4. All in all, how would you rate your satisfaction with 511? 5-point scale
5. Are you likely to phone 511 again? Yes/no If not, why not? open response or pre-codes such as: too costly, not useful, not accurate, not current, not specific enough, doesn't cover my routes/modes, I'm no longer traveling, just don't need it
6. Would you recommend 511 to a friend? Yes/no
7. What benefits, if any, did you obtain from 511? (prompt?) open response or pre-codes such as: reduced travel time, on-time arrival, improved safety, peace of mind/reduced stress, avoid problems, better-informed travel decision (mode, route, timing), ability to inform someone of late arrival, saved money
About the improvements you'd like to see to 511: [these will
vary a lot by deployment, but could look something like this]
1. If you could improve or add new features to 511, which would you find most useful? Rank order 1 through 3: speech recognition, touchtone shortcuts, adding coverage of a certain route, more transit coverage, etc.
About you and your travel patterns:
1. Are you male/female (record without asking)
2. How old were you on your last birthday? __ years
3. What is the zip code where you currently reside?
4. What was the last level of school or college that you completed? grade school (through grade 8), some high school (no degree), high school graduate or GED, technical or vocational school graduate, some college or junior college graduate, college graduate, postgraduate degree
5. In [last calendar year] what was the total annual income of your household, before taxes or other deductions from pay? Less than $10,000, 10-15k, 15-25, 25-35k, 35-50k, 50-75k, 75-100k, 100-150k, 150-200k, 200k+, can't say; household members don't share income
6. Do you personally use the internet at work or school at least once a week, on average? (if the respondent goes to a workplace or school at all, that is)
7. Do you personally use the internet at home at least once a week, on average? If yes, Is that home internet connection via a phone line, or is it via a high-speed connection such as DSL or cable? dial-up, high speed, both
8. Which of the following devices do you carry with you at least 10 times a month, on average? Which do you use to obtain travel information while traveling in a vehicle? mobile phone; two-way pager/PDA/Blackberry; laptop computer with wireless communications; none of these
9.[For each trip type] Have you made a trip of this type in the past 4 weeks? Did you use 511 for most, some, or none of your trips of that type? commuting and other work-related travel; medical and other personal appointments; shopping; visiting friends and relatives/recreation/dining; driving children to/from school or activities
10. (If Q.9 indicates commute trips are taken): What modes of travel do you use for your commute trips in a typical week?
11. (For trips other than commuting,) what modes of travel do you use in a typical week?
DAR #1: 511 Business Models and Costs Considerations (January 2002)
The Business Models and Cost Sub-committee prepared this document to educate the other members of the 511 Working Group and the members of the 511 Policy Group on issues salient for migrating a planned or existing traveler information service to utilize the 511 dialing code. In addition, it is understood that this document may be used to educate other entities (public and private) interested in deploying the 511 dialing code for ATIS.
In March 2001 a 511 Policy Committee Retreat took place in Palm Harbor, Florida. The Policy Committee directed the 511 Working Group to investigate plausible business models and the appropriateness of their application to 511. It was agreed that attempts would be made to bring public and private enterprise together to work cooperatively on 511 solutions. It was also agreed that a basic 511 service should be available to the end user at no more than the cost of a local call, and that an extended 511 service could be available typically through the private sector, at an additional cost to the consumer. It is these underlying principals that are incorporated into exploration of the business models and cost considerations for enabling these partnerships, and creating the recommendations herein.
Business models and cost recovery are the critical factors for determining the sustainability of the traveler information service, and 511. In the context of 511, the service will be regarded as new from the perspective of callers who previously haven't been exposed to traveler information services. With this in mind, it's important that 511 be sustainable for the long term so that market acceptance and usage can be assured.
DAR #2: Transfer of 511 Calls to 911 (March 2002)
Introduction
There has been considerable discussion about the desirability and implications of 511 traveler information systems having the ability to transfer true emergency calls made to 511 in error. In order to implement this call transfer requires that certain capabilities exist within the 511 system. This paper will define how such a call could be transferred; the technical and cost implications of this implementation; and the potential legal issues that might be involved.
Summary
The transfer of 511 calls to 911 is not a difficult technical problem. However, there are legal issues that must be overcome in the areas of liability protection for the 511 center operator, and privacy considerations. There is no question that a 511 center that implements the ability to transfer calls to 911 will incur liability for the successful completion of that call. Even if the center only recommends that the caller hang up and dial 911, there is potential liability. It is clear that state and local governments that wish to explore this transfer must seek legal council to examine the local laws pertaining to their liability exposure, and the local laws governing the use of caller identification information from the landline carriers for 911 purposes. The wireless carriers are governed by a different set of laws and in general view that caller location is private information not available to anyone but a 911 center. Therefore, it will be a challenge to obtain the callers location from the wireless carriers to enable the transfer to 911.
To effect the transfer, the telephone equipment in the 511 center must be upgraded to perform the necessary functions. In addition, the 511 center must have three special lines to support the transfer, usually leased from the local wireline carrier. The cost for these features is estimated to be a one-time charge of about $150,000. In addition, there will be monthly charges of about $15,000 plus a charge of about $0.40 per emergency call to be transferred.
The task force attempted to determine how frequently such erroneous calls might be received by a 511 call center. However, there is no data from the other N11 (211, 311, 411, 611, 711, and 811) numbers that would indicate how many people might dial 511 when intending to dial 911. Further, no other N11 service currently routes misdialed calls to 911. Should the subject of transferring errant 911 calls arise, this document will provide a starting place for that discussion.
The Problem
A concern has been voiced that there will be times when a caller intending to call 911 will inadvertently call 511. The 911 community has done an excellent job of educating the public. Their recent "Report Card To The Nation" indicates that 99% of the public understands what 911 is intended for. However, it will take time for the 511 community to reach a similar level of awareness with the public.
However, it is unclear how many errant calls might be captured by a model 511 system. There is not a reliable source of empirical data that would support a finding that the calls would be substantial, or that the calls would be negligible. The lack of these data then, suggests that planners of 511 systems should not assume that there will be a large volume of calls to 511 that should have been placed to 911, no historical data currently exist that suggest this to be the case. There is a foreseeable possibility however, that there will be some degree of misplaced calls to 511 that should be placed into the 911 system.
Conclusion
While it is technically feasible to transfer a call made to 511 to a 911 call center, there are a number of key issues that must be considered before proceeding down that path.
Any region considering this capability must research the liability and privacy issues associated with 911 call processing. The liability protection currently offered the telecommunications industry and 911 call center operators does not apply to transportation agencies or their contractors. Thus, each state and region should consider these issues. The actual implementation of the transfer of calls is technically straightforward. There would be both non-recurring and recurring costs to the implementer of this capability.
DAR #3: 511 and Homeland Security (June 2002)Prior to September 11, the U.S. homeland had been mostly spared from terrorist attacks. Today, transportation agencies are beginning to address the need for threat and vulnerability assessments, and re-examine how existing emergency management plans will be implemented during a homeland security emergency or alert. Travel information is an important component of emergency management, and the telephone is one of many delivery mechanisms. As 511 systems become more widely deployed, it is reasonable to askwhat role should 511 systems play during homeland security emergencies and alerts, and what are the organizational, technical, cost, and other impacts of doing so?
This White Paper discusses the challenges and opportunities for 511 systems, their designers, and their operators, arising from the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Neither location had a 511 system, but relevant lessons were learned. While it does not provide the solutions, this White Paper highlights the issues and suggests related guidelines, for consideration by the 511 Deployment Coalition Policy Group at its meeting on February 26, 2002.
The 511 Deployment Coalition Working Group established the 511 and Homeland Security Task Force at its December 2001 meeting, with the purpose of developing a White Paper to examine both the role 511 can play in assisting in homeland security efforts and the impact that homeland security preparedness could have on 511 services. This White Paper is the result of that initiative. The volunteer Task Force members are listed in section 7.
Linkage between 511 and Homeland Security
It is important to acknowledge the existing relationships between the transportation and emergency management communities with regard to major incident response. These relationships formed the basis for the responses to the September 11 attacks. Among the many stories of human tragedy and heroism on September 11, transportation agency staff guided hundreds of thousands of travelers to safety in the minutes and hours following the attacks. Given the disruption caused by the attacks, this effort continued for days and weeks. Providing accurate, timely information to travelers was critical to safety and mobility, not just in the New York and Washington D.C. regions but also throughout the eastern seaboard.
Under 'normal' conditions there are multiple media for dissemination of information to travelers. However, on September 11, the need for a rapid exodus on foot from the affected areas precluded the options to use the Internet, television, or even radio. For many, cell phones became the primary means of communication in the hours following the attacks. Just as transportation agencies responded to that need, it is apparent that had a 511 system been available it too would have contributed to support emergency management and evacuation.
Today there are a handful of 511 systems across the nation. As the number of systems multiplies in the years ahead, familiarity with 511 as the telephone number for travel information may become as commonplace as 911 is today for emergencies. People from a city, region, or state with 511 systems may not hesitate to dial 511 for travel information when traveling on business or visiting unfamiliar locations, including for homeland security emergencies.
While a homeland security emergency has many parallels to a major incident in terms of detection, response, and recovery, there are differences as well. Perhaps the most troubling is the combination of:
The potential for large numbers of people to be the target of an attack, or to be impacted by its immediate aftermath, creating a spike in demand for travel information, or related news;
This combination of circumstances leads to challenges for a broad spectrum of emergency responders, law enforcement, and transportation agencies. This in turn will impact how travel information is gathered and disseminated. Where 511 systems exist or are planned, it appears prudent that their designers and operators take account of such challenges.
A recurring theme throughout the White Paper is that many issues apply to traveler information systems in general, of which 511 systems are but one delivery medium.
DAR #4: 511 Regional Interoperability Issues (March 2003)
The purpose of DAR #4 is to offer 511 implementers technical advice on how to deal with callers who logically want information on transportation facilities and services outside of the area served by your 511 system. Callers to 511 may not know which jurisdiction they are in nor where the boundary for the next jurisdiction is they just want information about the travel conditions ahead of them. This is an issue of interoperability between state borders and within states where there may be a metropolitan 511 system(s) and a statewide system as well.
A real world example: since December 2002, the metropolitan Cincinnati system (ARTIMIS) has been successfully passing Kentucky suburban incident information into the Kentucky statewide Condition Acquisition Reporting System (CARS-511) using Traffic Management Data Dictionary (TMDD) ITS standards, implemented in Traveler Information Markup Language (TIML) / eXtensible Markup Language (XML). Kentucky traffic events reported in ARTIMIS are imported to the CARS-511 system for fully automated reporting without any manual data re-entry. Although the two 511 systems were developed at different times and independently, the standards are allowing seamless data exchange as no call transfers or manual processing are necessary. This DAR will provide information on how you may also achieve this kind of interoperability.
N11 systems, by design, are not national in scope. Only 411 gives the appearance of being national in scope and that is accomplished with an integrated database behind the systems which its business model supports. With the overlap and varied boundaries of agencies, regions, travel patterns and the unknowns of cellular routing, 511 deployers need to look beyond their borders to make 511 a success with the traveling public. If 511 developers, deployers and operators accomplish regional interoperability through data sharing, then we may achieve national interoperability ultimately as well. This national interoperability may ultimately yield a 511 system where the caller may be asked, "City and state, please."
DAR #4 addresses many technical topics, including:
Data transfer / sharing issues -
Call transfer issues -
The DAR also investigates many factors that must be addressed when dealing with issue of interoperability, and determining which type of transfer best fits the needs of a particular 511 service. Most of these factors determine how a system would work and/or which standards are in use or available to make the transfer seamless to the user.
Finally, the document offers a list of recommendations for the implementers that include the following general system design considerations:
Identify travel corridors, other regions and neighbors and consider how to include their information for callers to your system either through data sharing or call transfer.
Recognize that your neighbors are also dealing with this issue and engage them in a two-way, or in some cases, multi-way dialogue.
Use the SAE ATIS (J2354) standard when developing and upgrading information databases and system communications to facilitate the exchange of information.
Examine and understand wireless calling areas at the boundaries of your system and develop a plan for dealing with misrouted calls. Especially be mindful of the placement of signage near a border which may lead to someone calling 511 and not getting through because they are being handled by a switch where 511 is inactive or are routed to another state's 511 system
More specific recommendations include the following factors relating to call transfers and data sharing need to be considered:
If an implementer determines data sharing is preferred, then the following items need to be considered:
If an implementer determines that call transfers are preferred, then the following items need to be considered:
DAR #5: Public Transportation Content on 511 (June 2003)
The Coalition recognizes that 511 services will be developed in a bottom-up fashion with state and local transportation agencies with the close collaboration of the private sector establishing services in areas and timeframes determined by them.
The purpose of this DAR is to share information regarding the types of public transportation data that can be provided via 511 and the issues associated with this provision. This DAR's main audience is the transit community, 511 planners and implementers.
The rationale for this DAR is to produce a "511 basics" guide for transit agencies to both address getting started with 511 and also planning for enhancing basic services as experience and demand warrant. It is about providing the public with information about your agency and its services so that travelers may make informed decisions as they travel through the transportation system.
The transit community is very interested in playing an important role in 511 without increasing the number of calls to already busy customer service centers. There may be some misconceptions about what 511 has to be to be considered "successful." Some agencies may believe that if they cannot provide certain types of information, then they cannot participate in 511. 511 and the provision of public transportation information on it is not only about real-time information.
There is hope of reducing the number of calls to transit customer service centers and 511 is another outlet for the information required by those callers. 511 may not reduce the number of calls to customer service centers overall, but it may enable transit agencies to provide their public transportation information to a new audience. With the increasing coverage of 511 systems, more sophisticated marketing, growing brand awareness and continually improving content, overall usage of 511 is likely to soar in the future.
DAR #6: Weather and Environmental Content on 511 Services (June 2003)
The Coalition recognizes that 511 services will be developed in a bottom-up fashion with state and local transportation agencies with the close collaboration of the private sector establishing services in areas and timeframes determined by them.
The purpose of this DAR is to share information regarding the types of weather and environmental information that can be provided via 511 and the issues associated with this provision. This DAR's main audience is the public and private providers of weather data, 511 planners and implementers. The term "weather" is used in a variety of means throughout this report, at times we are referring: to atmospheric information; to road weather (e.g., a pavement temperature forecast); or to road conditions (e.g., icy). The term "data" is used throughout as that data that weather and environmental systems generate, while the term "information" is meant as that information created from the weather and environmental systems data.
The rationale for this DAR is to produce a recommendation to deployers on "basic" 511 weather and environmental content and to provide for "consistency" of weather and environmental information content and presentation across 511 systems. The Task Force feels that exception reporting is what 511 callers want travel conditions are good except for black ice between mileposts 10 and 14 as an example. It is recommended that the 511 weather and environmental information provided be actionable, so that travelers will slow to 20 miles per hour due to icy conditions if pavement temperature readings report this.
A recent analysis of weather impacts by Mitretek shows that an average of 6,500 fatalities and 450,000 injury accidents occurred annually during adverse weather between 1995 and 2001. There have been activities in the road weather arena for many years trying to reduce the above impacts and provision of weather information to travelers via 511 is another means of accomplishing this.
The Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorological Services and Supporting Research (OFCM) produced the Weather Information for Surface Transportation (WIST) National Needs Assessment Report, which examines weather information needs for roadways, railways, transit, marine transportation, pipelines and airport ground operations. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has prepared: a Weather-Responsive Traffic Management Concept of Operations that begins to define the needs and activities of freeway and arterial transportation managers and how these needs change or differ during adverse weather; the Maintenance Decision Support System (MDSS) project, which is a multi-year effort to prototype and field test advanced decision support components for winter road maintenance; and the Weather in the Infostructure white paper that discusses the fundamental data needs of the weather Infostructure component and provides an estimated aggregate cost for national deployment of road weather data collection systems. The above activities are documented in this report's Appendix.
There were also many activities throughout the years by the private sector as well in this area. One of note is the Advanced Traveler Weather Information System (ATWIS) was developed by the University of North Dakota from 1995 to the present. ATWIS resulted in the #SAFE (the number to dial on cellular phones for this information) technologies that have been successfully deployed in 5 of the 9 statewide 511 systems above.
The Task Force has a vision that all segments used to provide information to the public via 511 would have sufficient climatological and meteorological homogeneity. Practically, this type of segmentation would prove to be a daunting task for a 511 deployers today. The Task Force realizes this and therefore encourages deployers to determine their segments with sufficient climatological and meteorological homogeneity, but understands that this may not be possible.
Traffic, road conditions and weather information are intertwined weather restrictions affect traffic and determination of road conditions depends on weather information. There are different requirements for different segment definitions, such as local vs. long distance travel or synoptic scale vs. micro scale in meteorological terms.
Weather conditions may change dramatically with fog, storm, wind, etc. and it is recommended that consumers be provided with options before encountering these hazards. The quality and utility of weather information provided to callers is critical if we are to continue to provide a valuable service via 511.
DAR #7: Roadway Content Quality on 511 Services (June 2003)
The first 511 service became operational in the Cincinnati/Northern Kentucky area in July 2001. Less than two years later, over a dozen services are operational across the country serving more than 40 million people who, in total, are currently calling 511 nearly 1 million times a month. Every service in operation provides some form of information associated with roadway conditions. And while early feedback from 511 users has been positive, there is recognition within the Coalition that the ultimate quality and utility of information provided via 511 is a critical part of providing a valuable service to callers.
With many of the services likely to have their preponderance of callers interested in roadway conditions, the quality of roadway-related content will in many cases dictate overall satisfaction with 511. The 511 roadway quality 'levels' discussed in this DAR are for the basic 511 telephone travel information service. Roadway data quality needs vary greatly by application: traffic incident detection, long-range system-wide planning / modeling, oversize truck permit routing, construction project report analysis, long-range impacts of suburban development, etc. It is understood that all of these activities may need different levels of data disaggregation and quality.
The purpose of this DAR is to provide, in a single document, the most up-to-date information on guidelines, state-of-the-practice, state-of-the-art, implementation experience and lessons learned related to gathering and providing quality roadway content over 511 services.
511 Technical/Project Manager Contacts
|
Alaska |
Minnesota |
| Arizona Tim Wolfe Arizona Department of Transportation 2302 W. Durango Street Maildrop PM02 Phoenix, AZ 85009 Phone: 602-712-6622 Fax: 602-495-9013 twolfe@dot.state.az.us |
Missouri Steven McDonald State Traffic Engineer Missouri Department of Transportation 2211 St. Mary's Blvd. PO Box 270 Jefferson City, MO 65102 Phone 573-526-0117 Fax 573-526-0120 mcdons@mail.modot.state.mo.us |
| Boston Michelle Maffeo Massachusetts Highway Department 10 Park Plaza Room 7441 Boston, MA 02116 Phone: 617-973-7315 Fax: 617-973-7065 Michelle.maffeo@MHD.state.ma.us |
Montana Mike Bousliman Montana Department of Transportation PO Box 201001 Helena, MT 59620 Phone: 406-444-6159 Fax: 406-444-7684 mbousliman@state.mt.us |
| California David Lively Senior Transportation Planner California Department of Transportation Traveler Information Systems Branch 1120 N St. Sacramento, CA 95815 (916) 653-4575 david_lively@dot.ca.gov |
Nebraska Jaimie Huber |
| Florida Statewide Contact Gene Glotzbach Florida Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street Mail Station 90 Tallahassee, FL 32399-0450 Phone: 850-410-5616 Fax: 850-410-5502 Gene.glotzbach@dot.state.fl.us |
New Hampshire Subramanian Sharma Bureau of Transportation Planning New Hampshire DOT 1 Hazen Drive P.O. Box 483 Concord, NH, 03302-0483 Phone: 603-271-1625 Fax: 603-271-8093 SSharma@dot.state.nh.us |
| Orlando Region Anne Brewer Florida Department of Transportation 719 S. Woodland Blvd. MS 3-562 DeLand, FL 32720 Phone: 386-943-5319 Fax: 386-736-5349 anne.brewer@dot.state.fl.us |
New Mexico Terry Doyle New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department District 3 ITS Program 3393 Pan American Freeway N.E. Albuquerque, NM 87109 Phone: 505-841-4891 Fax: 505-841-4346 Terrence.doyle@nmshtd.state.mn.us |
| South Florida Rene de Huelbes Florida Department of Transportation 1000 NW 111 Avenue Room 6202 Miami, FL 33172 Phone: 305-470-5341 Fax: 305-470-5815 Rene.dehuelbes@dot.state.fl.us |
North Carolina Kelly Hutchinson ITS Operations Engineer North Carolina Department of Transportation Phone: 919-233-9331 khutchinson@dot.state.nc.us |
| Tampa Jerry Karp Florida Department of Transportation Phone: 813-975-6413 jerry.karp@dot.state.fl.us |
North Dakota Ed Ryen, P.E. North Dakota DOT 608 E. Boulevard Ave Bismarck, ND 58505-0700 Phone: 701-328-4274 FAX: 701-328-4623 eryen@state.nd.us |
| Illinois David Zavaterro Illinois Department of Transportation Office of Planning & Programming 120 Center Court Schaumburg, IL 60195 Phone: 847-705-4800 Fax: 847-705-4803 zavatteroda@nt.dot.state.il.us |
Oregon Galen McGill ITS Manager Oregon Department of Transportation 355 Capitol St. NE Salem, OR 97301-3871 (503) 986-4486 galen.e.mcgill@dot.state.or.us |
| Iowa John Whited Iowa Department of Transportation Research and Technology Bureau 800 Lincoln Way Ames, IA 50010 Phone: 515-239-1411 Fax: 515-239-1766 John.whited@dot.state.ia.us |
San Francisco Michael Berman Travinfo Manager Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth St. Oakland, CA 94607-4700 (510) 817-3218 mberman@mtc.ca.gov |
| Kansas Barbara Blue Kansas Department of Transportation Bureau of Transportation Information 915 SW Harrison, Room 754 Topeka, KS 66612-1568 Phone: 785-291-3818 Fax: 785-296-0287 bblue@ksdot.org |
Utah Bryan Chamberlain 4501 South 2700 W Box 148270 Salt Lake City, UT 84119 Phone: 801-965-4222 Fax: 801-965-3882 bchamberlain@utah.gov |
| Kentucky Leon Walden Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Dept. of Highway, Division of Operations Room 705 Frankfort, KY 40622 Phone: 502-564-4556 Fax: 502-564-6640 Leon.Walden@mail.state.ky.us |
Vermont Daniel M. Grahovac, P. E. Vermont Agency of Transportation Operations Division National Life Building Drawer 33 Montpelier, VT 05633 Phone: 802-828-5751 Fax: 802-828-2848 Dan.grahovac@state.vt.us |
| Las Vegas Richard Sheldrew Nevada Department of Transportation 1263 South Stewart Room 312 Carson City, NV 89712 Phone: 775-888-7000 Fax: 775-888-7305 rsheldrew@dot.state.nv.us |
Virginia Scott Cowherd 511 Program Manager Virginia Department of Transportation 1401 E. Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219 Phone: 804-786-2451 Fax: 804-786-9748 Scott.Cowherd@VirginiaDOT.org |
| Maine Russell D. Charette Maine Department of Transportation Office of Passenger Transportation 16 State House Station Augusta, Maine 04330 Phone: 207-624-3238 Fax: 207-624-3251 Russ.Charette@maine.gov |
Washington Eldon Jacobson Washington State Department of Transportation Phone: 206-685-3187 eldon@u.washington.edu |
| Michigan Jim Schultz Michigan Department of Transportation 1050 Sixth Street Detroit, MI 48226 Phone: 313-256-9880 Fax: 313-256-9036 Schultzj3@michigan.gov |
|
[1] 90% of the time (21.6 hours of the day, 7884 hours of the year, etc.), a 511 system should have the system capacity to handle 100% of incoming calls. This guideline recognizes that extreme conditions will occur periodically that will increase demand well beyond "normal peak" calling. In those circumstances, it is in not unreasonable to ask callers to re-dial to access the service.
[2] The use of a Back-Door number is only beneficial when a wireless carrier's calling plans allow for local calling over a wider area than a landline carriers. For example: In the San Francisco Bay Area, landline calls from Oakland to San Francisco are considered toll calls. For wireless callers, however, these calls and those for a considerably wider area as well, are considered local calls and no toll charges apply. Using a Back Door number for wireless can thus alleviate some of the local 511 tariff (per call) charges, as well as any toll-free charges that might apply.