<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Research in Progress (RIP)</title>
    <link>https://rip.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://rip.trb.org/common/TRIS Suite/feeds/RSS.aspx?s=PHNlYXJjaD48cGFyYW1zPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJzdWJqZWN0aWQiIHZhbHVlPSIxNzgwIiAvPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJkYXRlaW4iIHZhbHVlPSI3MzAiIC8%2BPHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9InN1YmplY3Rsb2dpYyIgdmFsdWU9Im9yIiAvPjxwYXJhbSBuYW1lPSJ0ZXJtc2xvZ2ljIiB2YWx1ZT0ib3IiIC8%2BPHBhcmFtIG5hbWU9ImxvY2F0aW9uIiB2YWx1ZT0iMTYiIC8%2BPC9wYXJhbXM%2BPGZpbHRlcnMgLz48cmFuZ2VzIC8%2BPHNvcnRzPjxzb3J0IGZpZWxkPSJwdWJsaXNoZWQiIG9yZGVyPSJkZXNjIiAvPjwvc29ydHM%2BPHBlcnNpc3RzPjxwZXJzaXN0IG5hbWU9InJhbmdldHlwZSIgdmFsdWU9InB1Ymxpc2hlZGRhdGUiIC8%2BPC9wZXJzaXN0cz48L3NlYXJjaD4%3D" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>AI Applications for Developing Contractors Prequalification Criteria and Safety Matrix for NCDOT</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2784615</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Different state DOTs have attempted to use safety leading indicators for heavy construction projects. The North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) has contractors’ prequalification guidelines and a formal process for constructability review meetings. However, the safety component is not much considered, which may result in disruption of construction activities due to potential site safety violations. The current prequalification process for contractors requires multiple changes to improve the contractors’ selection process and secure a safe job site. Prequalification process may be revised to incorporate a safety scoring system that considers the contractors history, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) citations, availability of in-house safety plans and safety audits, availability of competent persons and OSHA trainers, and formal safety training attended by the contractor’s company personnel. Similarly, NCDOT formal CR meeting needs to incorporate a safety matrix to be revised by project stakeholders during the meeting. The safety matrix should tie different site activities – listed in NCDOT standard bid template – with the respective OSHA big four construction hazard. Performance-based contractor prequalification allows NCDOT personnel to evaluate contractors past performance on similar work to ensure high-quality work in future projects. Occupational safety and health criteria are somehow included in such prequalification to limit construction site accidents and violations. However, current matrix/safety prequalification criteria have significant shortfalls. In this proposed research (implementation plan), the project research team will focus on utilizing artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) applications to decide on the attributes relevant to job site safety and the most important parameters to be used in contractors’ prequalification procedures. The research tasks will use the developed criteria through the current project phase, collect information from NCDOT, other state DOTs, and OSHA to train a machine learning model to be developed specifically to evaluate the correlation between different attributes and possible “future” performance of the contractor. Attributes include – but not limited to – contractor’s size, budget, safety practices, previous experience, employee turnover, OSHA records, and experience modification rating. Predictive analytics will provide NCDOT personnel with proper algorithm to assess/predict possible contractor’s performance. The outcomes of this research will result in seamless flow of construction site activities, reduced accidents, and avoiding arbitration and litigation. ]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Sep 2026 11:09:05 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2784615</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Broadband &amp; TSMO Integration: Next-Generation Fiber Network for ITS and Asset
Management</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2780487</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project will develop a unified fiber optic network strategy and governance framework to support intelligent transportation systems (ITS), transportation systems management and operations (TSMO), and enterprise communications across the Idaho Transportation Deparement (ITD). The study will evaluate ITD’s existing fiber optic network, communications infrastructure, and asset management practices and review approaches used by other transportation agencies. The results will be used to develop network standards, governance processes, geographic information system (GIS) based asset management practices, and decision making tools to support future communication technology investments and improve network resilience and long term operations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 15:53:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2780487</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Enterprise AI Governance Strategy and Roadmap: Enhancing Operational Efficiency and Data Safety</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2780484</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project will develop an enterprise artificial intelligence (AI) governance strategy and implementation roadmap for the Idaho Transportation Department (ITD). The study will assess current AI applications within ITD, including related risks, opportunities, governance needs, and data privacy considerations. The project will review AI governance practices used by transportation agencies, state governments, and industry organizations. The results will be used to develop an enterprise AI governance framework with policies, accountability structures, risk management procedures, and guidance for responsible AI use, along with recommendations for training, compliance monitoring, and future AI adoption.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 15:18:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2780484</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Best Practices for Structuring and Managing Statewide Resource-Tracking Databases</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2780222</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) is working to modernize its financial tracking systems to improve transparency, compliance, and efficiency in managing federally funded transportation projects. Existing tools, including the Resource Administration database and related systems, operate independently, and require extensive manual data entry, limiting real-time financial coordination.
This study evaluated federal requirements, reviewed ADOT’s current financial management processes, and examined practices from peer state departments of transportation. The research identified best practices in system integration, governance, and automation, and also developed a three-phase framework, covering preparation, procurement, and implementation to guide modernization. The recommendations provide ADOT with a practical roadmap for developing a unified, data-driven resource-tracking system that supports efficient decision-making and regulatory compliance.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2026 13:15:33 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2780222</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Human Performance Risk Assurance through FAA–Industry Collaboration</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778046</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project will develop an evidence-based method for evaluating how the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), air carrier, labor, and peer-support controls collectively manage aeromedical and human-performance risks. Current FAA aeromedical assessments do not consistently account for operator Safety Management System controls or establish when those controls can be credited as effective and reliable safeguards.

The research will define how medical, operational, organizational, and peer-support controls should be represented in aeromedical safety assessments. It will identify the evidence needed to demonstrate control effectiveness, determine how operator SMS processes may contribute to pilot performance assurance, and establish appropriate safety-assurance methods, metrics, and leading indicators for human-performance hazards. The research will also evaluate the potential safety contributions and assurance requirements of voluntary reporting and peer-support programs.

Preliminary findings will be delivered in fiscal year 2027, with final recommendations completed by the end of fiscal year 2028. The FAA will use the results to update its Aeromedical Qualitative Hazard Assessment Framework, develop guidance for evaluating operator SMS controls, support pilot performance assurance initiatives, and inform implementation of voluntary reporting and peer-support programs. The resulting framework will provide a more comprehensive and transparent basis for integrating aeromedical, operational, and organizational safeguards while identifying residual risk that remains subject to FAA oversight.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 20:49:23 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778046</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Pilot Performance Assurance System Development and Evaluation</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778045</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project will develop a repeatable Pilot Performance Assurance System method to support modernization of Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) aeromedical certification under Section 411 of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2024. Current aeromedical evaluations generally consider individual medical conditions, treatments, or certification requirements without systematically accounting for the operational, organizational, and regulatory safeguards that also support airline pilot performance.

The research will define how these safeguards should be represented and establish criteria for evaluating their effectiveness, independence, reliability, and supporting evidence. The method will also provide a structured approach for communicating uncertainty, evidence limitations, and differences in expert judgment. Application to selected policy questions will help determine whether identified risks should be managed through medical certification, operational safeguards, or a layered combination of controls.

Beginning in October 2026, the project will produce an initial review and policy-case materials for November 2026 working-group sessions. By September 2027, it will deliver the completed model, assessment tools, case analyses, decision records, and draft findings and recommendations. Approved results will support the Section 411 report and future FAA decisions concerning aeromedical policy, guidance, procedures, analytical tools, and training. The project is intended to make aeromedical safety decisions more transparent, consistent, evidence-based, and responsive to the full system of safeguards protecting Part 121 operations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 20:43:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778045</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Aeromedical Oversight Performance Framework and Measurement</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778044</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This project will develop a performance-based framework for determining whether the 
Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA's) aeromedical oversight system is effectively managing safety risk across the National Airspace System. Existing approaches emphasize compliance activities and rare adverse outcomes, which provide limited insight into whether oversight actions are preventing complex, latent medical and human-performance risks.

The research will adapt the FAA’s broader oversight strategy to the aeromedical environment. It will define the populations and activities subject to oversight, clarify the objectives of the FAA’s regulatory, guidance, approval, surveillance, and corrective functions, and trace how these activities are expected to influence safety. Researchers will identify operational signals, data sources, outcome pathways, and indicators that collectively demonstrate whether oversight is working as intended.

The project will produce an aeromedical oversight performance framework, an implementation-ready metrics dictionary, and a phased integration roadmap. These products will support continuous monitoring, earlier identification of emerging risks, and more informed decisions regarding medical certification policy, surveillance priorities, and resource allocation. By making preventive performance more visible, the framework will help the FAA transition from measuring oversight activity to evaluating its safety effects and managing aeromedical risk as an adaptive system.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 20:32:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2778044</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Coordinating the Airport Workforce Across Multiple Employers</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772537</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Airport operators are increasingly held accountable for operational and customer service outcomes that depend on a workforce they do not directly employ. Passengers interact with employees from numerous organizations operating at an airport—including airport staff, airlines, concessionaires, contractors, ground handlers, TSA, and other federal agencies—while generally viewing the airport as a single entity. Although airports have limited direct authority over many of these employees, they are expected to provide a consistent customer experience and coordinate expectations, standards, training, and performance across this multi-employer environment.

The objective of this research is to develop practical, airport-controlled coordination mechanisms that help airport sponsors improve workforce outcomes without relying on policy changes or new technology. The research will develop governance and influence models, best practices and template language for workforce coordination agreements, and tools for aligning training, service standards, and performance expectations across multiple employers to support a consistent organizational culture across the airport community. The project will also produce an implementation toolkit with templates, playbooks, metrics, and case studies to help airports of varying sizes coordinate a fragmented workforce, including airports that have limited resources to support these efforts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Sep 2026 08:36:49 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772537</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Guide for Establishing Project Management Offices at Airports</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772545</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Airports are managing increasingly complex and capital-intensive portfolios of projects that span airside, terminal, landside, technology, sustainability, and regulatory initiatives. These programs often involve multiple funding sources, extensive stakeholder coordination, and significant operational constraints. While many airports are exploring the use of Project Management Offices (PMOs) to improve project delivery, there is limited airport-specific guidance on when a PMO is an effective strategy, what functions it should perform, how it should be structured, or how its costs and benefits should be evaluated. As a result, airports lack practical information to help determine whether a PMO is appropriate for their organization and how it can best support project governance and delivery.

The objective of this research is to develop a practical guide to help airports evaluate the value of establishing a Project Management Office. The guide will provide direction on PMO structures, roles, costs, and benefits, and help airports determine when a PMO is appropriate based on airport size, governance, geography, and mission. It will include a decision framework, implementation guidance, cost-benefit considerations, and tools to support executive decision-making. The guidance should be applicable across airports of different sizes, as well as address differences between airside and landside capital programs and the relationship between project management offices and project delivery methods.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 17:16:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772545</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Best Practices for Airport Administrative Cost Allocation</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772551</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Airport managers operating within larger governmental organizations often face challenges in documenting and reviewing administrative costs charged by parent organizations or other governmental entities. These costs may include legal services, procurement, human resources, finance, and other shared services. Airports organized under authorities, municipalities, counties, and other governmental structures also encounter challenges in allocating direct and indirect costs, documenting cost allocation practices, supporting cost recovery, auditing administrative charges, and understanding airport revenue diversion considerations. Research is needed to identify and document effective practices for allocating, reviewing, and supporting administrative costs and shared-service charges across different airport governance structures.

The objective of this research is to develop a guidebook describing industry practices for airport administrative cost allocation. The research should address direct and indirect charges, methods for allocating administrative and shared-service costs, auditing of shared services, documentation supporting cost recovery, and relevant airport revenue diversion considerations. The research should also include examples of current airport practices, where appropriate, to provide airport managers with a practical resource for discussing administrative charges and cost allocation methodologies with governing organizations.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Sep 2026 16:40:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772551</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Best Practices for Combined ARFF and Airport Operations Departments</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772558</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Many medium, small, and non-hub airports use staffing models that combine Aircraft Rescue and Fire Fighting (ARFF) and airport operations functions to improve staffing efficiency while maintaining required emergency response capabilities. Personnel in these roles are often responsible for multiple operational functions, creating challenges related to balancing emergency response readiness with routine airport operations, maintaining regulatory compliance, supporting a consistent safety culture, and managing competing operational priorities. Airports operating with combined staffing models require practical guidance to address these operational challenges while complementing existing FAA regulatory requirements.

The objective of this research is to evaluate the operational, safety, and regulatory implications of combined ARFF/Operations staffing models and develop practical, data-driven guidance for airports. The research should examine implementation approaches for combined ARFF and operations functions, training practices, task saturation, operational staffing models, and the use of emerging technologies that support airport operations and emergency response. The project will produce best practice recommendations, staffing frameworks, risk assessment tools, and decision-making guidance to assist airports that currently use or are considering combined ARFF/Operations departments while complementing, rather than interpreting or replacing, existing FAA regulatory requirements.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Sep 2026 11:51:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2772558</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Safety Academy Phase II: Refinement, Deployment Planning, and Evaluation</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768422</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Researchers previously developed a Safety Academy that addresses inconsistencies in safety knowledge across Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) Districts as well as the disconnect between mid-level management and the employee safety and health program. Course modules have been piloted, however, early deliveries of the training revealed aspects of the curriculum that need refinement before agencywide deployment. Currently, KYTC lacks a structured deployment plan and the internal capacity to sustain the Safety Academy long term. Addition-ally, an evaluation framework should be developed to measure the academy's effectiveness in improving safety knowledge, managerial engagement, and workplace safety outcomes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 17:04:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768422</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Department of Vehicle Regulation Fraud Identification and Mitigation Study</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768420</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Administrators in the Divisions of Driver Licensing (DDL), Motor Vehicle Licensing (DMVL), and Motor Carriers (DMC) lack sufficient time to research possible forms of fraud. Nevertheless, administrators are aware of various forms of fraud impacting the operations of each division. DDL has contended with the production of illegal driver’s licenses, while DMVL has confronted issues with rebuilt title fraud, use of fraudulent personal IDs to apply for certificates of title, and non-payment of motor vehicle registration fees, along with misused temporary tags and stolen vehicles. DMC has to negotiate challenges associated with International Registration Plan (IRP) credentialing fraud, use of counterfeit International Fuel Tax Agreement (IFTA) decals, and underpayment/non-payment of Kentucky Weight Distance (KYU) taxes. Because these issues present a significant challenge to the Department of Vehicle Regulation (DVR), administrators need timely data-driven insights into the types of fraud occurring in areas over which DVR has statutory or regulatory responsibility.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 17:04:26 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768420</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Changing Motor Carrier Safety and Credentialing Violations to Civil Penalties</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768419</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers are often cited for tax, credentialing, and permitting violations even though they are generally the responsibility of the motor carrier. If convicted, drivers may have misdemeanor violations added to their criminal record. This dynamic creates confusion among CMV drivers and potentially results in hardship. It also makes it difficult to adjudicate violations fairly. A potential solution lies in reclassifying these violations as civil penalties. Before this could be done, however, the Kentucky Transportatin Cabinet (KYTC) needs to understand how other states approach the adjudication of CMV violations, determine the fiscal implications of fines and court fees, and a develop a proposed policy or legislative framework for enacting changes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 17:04:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768419</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Lean Pilot for Improving KYTC Processes</title>
      <link>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768418</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Many state departments of transportation (DOTs) have successfully adopted lean methods to identify waste, reduce inefficiencies, and improve services delivered to the public. Originally designed for application in manufacturing environ-ments, lean methods hold significant promise for improving government processes but may not be uni-versally applicable to public agency workflows. The Kentucky Transportation Cabinet (KYTC) wants to evaluate the lean systems approach to determine what methods can be used to improve agency operations. A small-scale pilot project guided by subject-matter experts within a single section would let the Cabinet assess lean concepts in a controlled setting, demonstrate their feasibility through an incremental pilot approach, and establish a foundation for broader implementation in the future.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Aug 2026 17:04:24 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://rip.trb.org/View/2768418</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>