Bureau of Materials and Research 2014 AASHTO RAC/TRB Annual Meeting

1. Bureau of Materials and Research 2014 AASHTO RAC/TRB Annual Meeting From Research Needs to Implementation Glenn Roberts, P.E., Chief of Research groberts@dot.state.nh.us

3. Small State Perspective • NHDOT Research - Pre-ISTEA • No formal research program or processes • All SPR funds controlled by Planning • Occasional ad-hoc research project • Research Engineer position was established 6 months prior to ISTEA

4. 25% SPR Research Requirement NHDOT Research Advisory Council Established 1993 SPR Part I and II independent since 1994 Research Program Certified 1995 ISTEA, TEA-21, SAFETEA-LU, MAP-21, …??

5. NHDOT RESEARCH PROGRAM

6. NHDOT RESEARCH PROGRAM New Hampshire’s SPR - $800K/year Fed.

7. Focus on Practical, Applied Research Small projects are typical How do we remain relevant at only $800,000/year ?? 5% 20% 70%

8. Use In-house Resources for Support Research Staff Salaries not SPR funded Supplement and Leverage SPR Funding Other NHDOT funds Pooled-Fund partnerships New England Transportation Consortium FHWA Grant Programs Other Fed/State Agency Partnerships NCHRP How do we remain relevant at only $800,000/year ??

9. Ongoing through Research Website and Word of Mouth Announcement 3-4 Months Prior to RAC Meeting NHDOT Intranet & Newsletter, Direct Email, Posters Better Exposure through Showcases, Posters and Newsletter Articles Solicitation Process

10. NHDOT Research Advisory Council (RAC) • Generally on 2-year Cycle • ~85% of Research Projects go through RAC Process • ~60% of Problem Statements Funded • Problem Statements Received: 2004 – 12 2006 – 11 2008 – 11 2010 – 13 2013 – 22

11. Strengths RAC is Predisposed to Practical, Applied Research RAC Members Enjoy the Process. Excellent Attendance Record Brings Credibility to the SPR Work Program Challenges/Opportunities Process does not Always Produce Policy or Commissioner-Level Ideas Heavy Skew toward Traditional Topics Problem Statement Volume is Relatively Low Submittal Success Rate too High? NHDOT Identification/Prioritization Process

12. Materials – 29% Pavements – 18% Maintenance – 13% Structures – 11% Design – 8% Aeronautics – 8% Environment – 8% Traffic/Safety – 5% Distribution 2004 - 2010 • More Recently, Projects Initiated to Address: • Industrial Engineering – Review of an NHDOT Bureau’s Business Practices • Statewide Strategic Transit Assessment (includes FTA $) • Statewide Freight Plan (includes SPR Part 1 $) • Mileage Based User Fee

13. Implementation Keys • Engage the “Right” Personnel • Beginning/Middle/End • Project Champion & Sponsor • Clarify Deliverables • Where will we be at the end of this project? • Require Implementation Plan for all Projects

14. Require Project PIs to Engage in Technology Transfer Presentations Posters, etc.. Periodic Review of Implementation Status of All Projects Need to Institutionalize Provide Seed Funding for Implementation Implementation Keys (cont’d)

15. Implementation Obstacles • Pet Projects, Projects with Insufficient Buy-In or Perceived Benefits • Good Projects Tend to be Self-Implementing • Unclear Objectives or Deliverables • Insufficient Oversight during Project

16. Strengths Size of Agency allows for Close Relationship with other NHDOT Offices Focus on Applied Research Control & Flexibility of Program Good Rapport with FHWA Division Many Success Stories Challenges/Opportunities Not Always Perceived as Core Element of Agency. Need to Continually Demonstrate Value Competing Workload & Priorities – Internal & External Personnel Inability to Say “No”. Doing Too Many Things, Not Necessarily Well Completing Projects in Timely Manner NHDOT Research in Summary

17. Thank you!