    Transportation Research: Actions Needed to Improve Coordination
    and Evaluation of Research (01-MAY-03, GAO-03-500).

    The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) within
    the Department of Transportation (DOT) is responsible for
    coordinating and ensuring the evaluation of DOT research programs
    to promote the efficient use of departmental research funds,
    which in fiscal year 2002 totaled over $1 billion. RSPA is also
    responsible for conducting multimodal research that cuts across
    different modes of transportation. The House Committee on
    Appropriations directed GAO to examine RSPA's coordination and
    evaluation of research within DOT and the status of its own
    multimodal research.
    -------------------------Indexing Terms-------------------------
    REPORTNUM:   GAO-03-500
        ACCNO:   A06749
      TITLE:     Transportation Research: Actions Needed to Improve
    Coordination and Evaluation of Research
         DATE:   05/01/2003
      SUBJECT:   Federal aid for transportation
    	     Financial management
    	     Internal controls
    	     Program evaluation
    	     Research program management
    	     Transportation research
    	     Funds management
    	     DOT Advanced Vehicle Technologies
    	     Program

    	     DOT Commercial Remote Sensing and
    	     Spatial Information Technologies Program

    	     DOT Infrastructure Assurance Program
    	     DOT Operator Fatigue Management Program
    	     DOT Technology Sharing Program
    	     DOT Technology Transfer Program
    	     DOT University Transportation Centers
    	     Program

    	     Small Business Innovation Research
    	     Program

    ******************************************************************
    ** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
    ** GAO Product.                                                 **
    **                                                              **
    ** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
    ** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
    ** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
    **                                                              **
    ** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
    ** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
    ** document's contents.                                         **
    **                                                              **
    ******************************************************************
    GAO-03-500

                                           A

    Report to the Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives

    May 2003 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH Actions Needed to Improve Coordination
    and Evaluation of Research

    GAO- 03- 500

    Letter 1 Results in Brief 3 Background 5 RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All,
    Legislative or DOT Requirements

    for Coordinating DOT Research Efforts 6 RSPA Has Met Some, but Not All,
    Legislative or DOT Requirements

    to Evaluate DOT Research 16 RSPA Has Conducted Multimodal Research in Four
    Areas but Does

    Not Have a Process to Systematically Evaluate Program Results 19
    Conclusions 32 Recommendations for Executive Action 32 Agency Comments and
    Our Evaluation 33

    Appendixes

    Appendix I: Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by RSPA 35

    Tables Table 1: Information on and Status of Multimodal Research Programs
    Conducted by RSPA from Fiscal Years 1999 to 2003 21 Table 2: Advanced
    Vehicle Technologies Program 35 Table 3: Commercial Remote Sensing and
    Spatial Information

    Technologies Program 38 Table 4: Human- Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue
    Management

    Program 40 Table 5: Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program 41

    Figures Figure 1: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT
    Requirements for Coordinating DOT Research Efforts 7

    Figure 2: RSPA Funding Dedicated to Research and Development Planning and
    Management Activities (Fiscal Years 1999- 2003) 12 Figure 3: Extent to
    Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and

    DOT Responsibilities for Evaluating DOT Research Efforts 16 Figure 4:
    Electric Vehicle at a Recharging Station 22

    Figure 5: Satellite- based Photographic Image of U. S. Interstates 25 and
    40 in Albuquerque, New Mexico 24 Figure 6: Airline Pilots Participating in
    Fatigue Research 25 Figure 7: Global Positioning Satellite 27 Figure 8:
    RSPA*s Multimodal Research Funding (Fiscal Years

    1999- 2003) 29

    Abbreviations

    DOT Department of Transportation FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA
    Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety
    Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration

    FTA Federal Transit Administration GPRA Government Performance and Results
    Act of 1993 MARAD Maritime Administration NASA National Aeronautics and
    Space Administration RSPA Research and Special Programs Administration
    TEA- 21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century TRB Transportation
    Research Board TSA Transportation Security Administration USCG United
    States Coast Guard

    This is a work of the U. S. Government and is not subject to copyright
    protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
    its entirety without further permission from GAO. It may contain
    copyrighted graphics, images or other materials. Permission from the
    copyright holder may be necessary should you wish to reproduce copyrighted
    materials separately from GAO*s product.

    Letter

    May 1, 2003 The Honorable C. W. Bill Young Chairman The Honorable David R.
    Obey Ranking Minority Member Committee on Appropriations House of
    Representatives

    In fiscal year 2002, the Department of Transportation*s (DOT) research and
    development budget totaled more than $1 billion. This sum supported the
    many individual projects undertaken by the Federal Highway Administration,
    the Federal Aviation Administration, and the other operating
    administrations that constitute DOT. This research is vital to meeting the
    department*s key transportation priorities, such as increasing
    transportation safety, enhancing mobility for all Americans, supporting
    the nation*s economic growth, and protecting the environment. The Congress
    has recognized the importance of coordinating and evaluating research
    throughout DOT and established requirements in the Transportation Equity
    Act for the 21 st Century to ensure that those tasks are accomplished. In
    turn, the department has given responsibility to the Research and Special
    Programs Administration*s Office of Innovation, Research, and Education

    (hereafter referred to as RSPA) for coordinating, and ensuring the
    evaluation of, DOT research programs to promote the efficient use of
    research funds. RSPA is additionally responsible for conducting multimodal
    research* research that applies to more than one mode of

    transportation* for the department that contributes to the safe,
    effective, and efficient transportation of people and goods.

    In House Report 107- 722, accompanying the DOT and Related Agencies
    Appropriations Bill for Fiscal Year 2003, the House Committee on
    Appropriations, directed us to examine RSPA*s role in coordinating
    research activities and conducting multimodal research throughout the
    department. Specifically, in subsequent discussions with Committee staff,
    we agreed to address the following questions: (1) To what extent has RSPA
    fulfilled requirements for coordinating DOT research efforts? (2) To what

    extent has RSPA fulfilled requirements for evaluating research within DOT?
    and (3) What types of multimodal research has RSPA conducted since 1999,
    and what have been the results? To address questions regarding RSPA*s
    efforts to coordinate and evaluate the department*s research efforts, we
    examined pertinent legislation, DOT

    policy guidance, and DOT performance reports and plans as well as reports
    and documents provided by RSPA, including the department*s Research,
    Development, and Technology Plan. Although we did not review the
    individual research programs and agendas of each DOT modal administration,
    we reviewed external assessments conducted by us and the

    National Research Council*s Transportation Research Board regarding RSPA*s
    role and efforts in coordinating DOT research. 1 Further, we interviewed
    RSPA officials, including RSPA*s Associate Administrator for Innovation,
    Research, and Education (hereafter Associate Administrator); officials
    from the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center in

    Cambridge, Massachusetts; and all of the members of the department*s
    Research and Technology Coordinating Council (hereafter Coordinating
    Council), to discuss research coordination efforts and identify potential
    improvements. At the time of our review, the council was made up of 15
    members representing the department*s Office of the Assistant Secretary
    for Transportation Policy, Office of Intelligence and Security, Office of
    the Assistant Secretary for Budget, Office of Intermodalism, United States
    Coast Guard, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Highway
    Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, National Highway Traffic
    Safety Administration, Federal Transit Administration, Maritime
    Administration, RSPA, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, Federal Motor
    Carrier Safety Administration, and Transportation Security Administration.
    2 In addition, to determine the types and status of multimodal research
    that RSPA conducted, we (1) reviewed and analyzed

    RSPA budget data from fiscal years 1999 through 2003 and (2) reviewed
    RSPA*s multimodal project plans agreements and published project results
    for the same period. (One of RSPA*s multimodal research programs* the
    Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program* is also the subject of a
    separate GAO review.) 3 1 The Transportation Research Board is a unit of
    the National Research Council, a private,

    nonprofit institution that is the principal operating agency of the
    National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering. The
    board*s mission is to promote innovation and progress in transportation by
    motivating and conducting research, facilitating the dissemination of
    information, and encouraging the implementation of research results.

    2 The U. S. Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration
    were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security in March 2003. 3
    U. S. General Accounting Office, Transportation Security Research:
    Coordination Needed in Selecting and Implementing Infrastructure
    Vulnerability Assessments, GAO- 03- 502 (Washington, D. C.: May 1, 2003).

    We conducted our review from September 2002 through February 2003 in
    accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.

    Results in Brief RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT
    requirements for coordinating departmental research efforts. To meet the
    requirements of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century, RSPA
    developed an

    annual surface transportation research and development plan and holds
    monthly meetings of the department*s Research and Technology Coordinating
    Council to coordinate surface transportation research and technology
    development activities. The council also provides a venue for discussing
    research processes, procedures, and policies as well as a forum for
    networking among the department*s researchers to meet DOT requirements for
    routinely sharing research information. However, RSPA has not met all of
    its legislative and DOT requirements for coordinating

    ongoing research efforts to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort
    because it does not review all DOT research projects. According to RSPA*s
    Associate Administrator, RSPA has not reviewed all DOT research projects

    to identify unnecessary duplication because (1) RSPA does not have ready
    access to information on all research activities across the department
    because efforts to implement a DOT- wide computer- based research tracking
    system have stalled and (2) staff and resources dedicated to research
    coordination activities have declined. The Associate Administrator said
    that he did not believe that unnecessary duplication of research projects
    occurred, and that even if such duplication were identified, RSPA*s
    limited authority within DOT would hinder efforts to eliminate that
    duplication.

    RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements for
    evaluating research within DOT. The Secretary of Transportation delegated
    responsibility to RSPA for measuring the results of federal surface

    transportation research* a legislative requirement* and overseeing and
    developing ways to improve research evaluations throughout the department,
    which is a DOT requirement. Of these requirements, RSPA partially meets
    one: it oversees research evaluation by discussing the issue

    at Coordinating Council meetings. According to RSPA officials, they do not
    measure the results of surface transportation research throughout DOT
    because the operating administrations perform their own evaluations and
    RSPA lacks the resources needed to review the individual research
    evaluation efforts of each of the operating administrations. Because RSPA
    does not oversee specific research evaluation efforts, it cannot ensure
    that

    evaluations are being conducted or assess the quality of DOT*s operating
    administrations* evaluations. Neither RSPA nor DOT has developed a
    strategy to address the resource limitations cited by RSPA officials, and
    our previous work indicates that more specific oversight is warranted. For
    example, we have previously reported that the Federal Highway
    Administration does not have an agencywide systematic process to evaluate
    whether its research projects are achieving intended results and does not
    generally use a peer review approach, 4 consistent with federal research
    best practices. 5 Since 1999, RSPA has conducted multimodal research in
    the following four

    areas: using technology to improve energy efficiency, reduce emissions,
    and reduce transportation dependence on petroleum; using satellite images
    to improve transportation safety and disaster planning; developing more
    effective means to reduce the fatigue of drivers and pilots; and assessing
    key transportation systems* vulnerabilities to damage from disasters or
    terrorist threats. RSPA budgeted about $37 million to conduct these four
    multimodal research programs from fiscal years 1999 through 2003.
    According to RSPA*s Associate Administrator, all four programs have
    resulted or will result in significant contributions and improvements to
    the transportation industry. For example, he said that research aimed at
    advanced vehicle technologies has resulted in the testing and development

    4 Peer review is a process that includes an independent assessment of the
    technical and scientific merit or quality of research by peers with
    essential subject area expertise and perspective equal to that of the
    researchers.

    5 U. S. General Accounting Office, Highway Research: Systematic Selection
    and Evaluation Processes Needed for Research Program, GAO- 02- 573
    (Washington, D. C.: May 24, 2002).

    of components currently used in the production of commercially available
    hybrid electrical vehicles. RSPA officials said they use expert or peer
    review to assess their multimodal research process and status of their

    research programs, an approach that is widely recognized as a research
    evaluation best practice. However, we found that RSPA has not established
    a systematic approach for using peer or expert review to evaluate the
    results of all of its multimodal research programs. For example, RSPA has
    no plans to evaluate the results of its Transportation Infrastructure
    Assurance Program. As a result, RSPA is limited in its ability to
    determine the extent to which these programs are achieving their intended
    goals. This report contains recommendations to the Secretary of
    Transportation

    and the Administrator of RSPA for actions to improve RSPA*s ability to
    meet its legislative and DOT requirements pertaining to research
    coordination and evaluation. In commenting on this draft, DOT officials
    generally agreed with our findings and provided technical comments that we
    incorporated, as appropriate. They did not comment on the report*s
    recommendations.

    Background RSPA has both legislative and departmental responsibilities for
    coordinating and evaluating DOT*s research and development programs,
    which, in fiscal year 2002, amounted to about $1 billion. The
    Transportation

    Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA- 21) 6 made DOT responsible for
    establishing a strategic plan for surface transportation research. The
    plan is to include a discussion of efforts to coordinate federal surface
    transportation research and technology development activities to avoid
    unnecessary duplication of effort. It also is to contain a description of
    program evaluations and a schedule for future evaluations of DOT research

    projects, among other things. DOT policy delegates the responsibility for
    meeting this and other legislative mandates related to research and
    development activities to RSPA*s Associate Administrator as chair of the
    department*s Coordinating Council. Moreover, DOT policy requires RSPA*s
    Associate Administrator, through the Coordinating Council, to coordinate

    all research activities by developing processes for sharing information
    about research and technology and reviewing the status of all research and
    technology projects throughout DOT. 6 Section 5108 codified at 23 U. S. C.
    S: 508.

    RSPA*s Office of Innovation, Research, and Education had nine full- time
    employees and a budget of about $560,000 for fiscal year 2003. In addition
    to coordination and evaluation duties, RSPA manages and supports a variety
    of other programs for the department, including its Technology Transfer
    and Technology Sharing Programs, Small Business Innovation Research
    Program, and University Transportation Centers Program. 7 RSPA also
    conducts research on multimodal issues that affect the U. S.

    transportation system as a whole in contrast to the other operating
    administrations within DOT that focus on specific sectors of the U. S.
    transportation system. 8 In fiscal year 2003, RSPA conducted and managed
    four major multimodal research programs. Participants in RSPA*s multimodal
    research programs include stakeholders from the departments*

    operating administrations; other federal departments and agencies; state
    departments of transportation; private and state universities; private-
    sector partners; and various consortia. 9 (See app. I for a listing of
    project stakeholders and researchers involved in RSPA*s multimodal
    research programs.) RSPA Has Met Some,

    Although RSPA has developed an annual plan and taken other steps to but
    Not All, Legislative

    facilitate research coordination, it has not fully met legislative and DOT
    requirements for coordinating departmental research. Figure 1 summarizes
    or DOT Requirements

    these requirements and the extent to which RSPA has met them. for
    Coordinating DOT Research Efforts

    7 Through the University Transportation Centers Program, DOT supports 33
    university- based research centers to advance transportation research and
    education. In fiscal year 2003, RSPA received almost $30 million in
    reimbursable funds from the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal
    Transit Administration to manage the program.

    8 Operating administrations include the Federal Aviation Administration,
    Federal Highway Administration, Federal Motor Carrier Safety
    Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, Federal Transit
    Administration, Maritime Administration, and National Highway Traffic
    Safety Administration. 9 A consortium focuses on research and development
    of products in a priority area and

    includes technical application and demonstration projects carried out in
    partnership with industries and service providers.

    Figure 1: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT
    Requirements for Coordinating DOT Research Efforts

    RSPA Facilitates Research RSPA has met its legislative requirement under
    TEA- 21 to develop an Coordination by Developing

    annual surface transportation research and technology development plan an
    Annual Plan and

    to coordinate and document research efforts. The plan covers not only
    Conducting Monthly

    surface transportation but also air and maritime. Now in its fourth
    edition, Meetings

    the plan discusses state and local transportation research activities;
    describes each operating administration*s mission; and conveys priorities
    for the department*s research activities, including identifying examples
    of research programs that are necessary to achieve the department*s
    strategic goals. According to the Associate Administrator, the plan is an
    important resource for the department*s budget and program deployment
    processes

    and helps to avoid unnecessary duplication of research among the operating
    administrations. In March 2000, the National Research Council, acting
    through the Transportation Research Board (TRB), assessed DOT*s strategic
    planning process, including the first edition of its research plan,

    and generally commended RSPA*s efforts in coordinating the department*s

    research activities. 10 In September 2001, we reported that the
    department*s research plan achieved a number of important strategic
    functions, including supporting the department's budget and program
    development process, conveying priorities, linking research and
    development initiatives occurring throughout the department to specific
    strategic goals, and focusing on research and technology needs that
    concern the department as

    a whole. 11 However, upon reviewing the fiscal year 2003 research plan, we
    found that it does not summarize results of the previous year*s surface
    transportation research programs. Such a summary is also absent from the
    department*s overall performance plan and reports, where it is required by
    TEA- 21. 12 Since the explicit intent of the research plan is to focus the
    department*s research efforts, and the department is required to gather

    summary information on the previous years* research results, this
    information could provide continuity and context for observations about
    planned research for future years. The research plan is the culmination of
    monthly Coordinating Council

    meetings in which the Associate Administrator meets with members from each
    of DOT*s operating administrations as well as representatives from DOT*s
    Office of Policy, Office of Budget, Office of Intelligence and Security,
    and Office of Intermodalism. These meetings also serve as a means to
    fulfill the legislative requirement to coordinate surface transportation
    research and technology development and the DOT requirement to coordinate

    research across all modes within DOT. Agendas and minutes from these
    meetings indicate that the Coordinating Council*s discussions involve
    research processes, procedures, policy, 13 and presentations from council
    10 TRB study conducted by the Committee for Review of the National
    Transportation Science and Technology Strategy (Washington D. C.: Mar. 28,
    2000) 3. 11 U. S. General Accounting Office, Combating Terrorism: Selected
    Challenges and Related Recommendations, GAO- 01- 882 (Washington D. C.:
    Sept. 20, 2001) 85. 12 According to the Government Performance and Results
    Act of 1993, each federal department is required to submit a performance
    plan to the Congress annually. The TEA- 21 requirement to include results
    of the year*s research in the department*s annual

    performance plan is at 23 U. S. C. S: 508 (c) (4) (A). 13 For example, in
    October 2002, the Coordinating Council was delegated responsibility for
    coordination of all actions related to research misconduct, including
    providing guidance in research misconduct policy implementation. The
    federal policy on research misconduct was released in December 2000 by the
    Executive Office of the President*s Office of Science and Technology
    Policy and directs all federal agencies that conduct or support research
    to implement this policy. In addition, the council is revising DOT Order
    1700.18B dealing with acquisition, publication, and dissemination of DOT
    scientific and technical reports.

    members and guest speakers. According to the Associate Administrator,
    these meetings further provide a forum for networking among DOT
    researchers, a venue for DOT operating administrations to learn about each
    other*s research, and an opportunity for information sharing and
    technology transfer. In addition, in instances where research has
    multimodal applicability, the Associate Administrator said RSPA staff and
    representatives from the other operating administrations have been active
    in sharing information through working groups, such as the Human Factors

    Coordinating Committee, which shares information on research conducted by
    each of the operating administrations focusing on identifying ways to
    better manage human operator fatigue.

    RSPA Has Not Reviewed All RSPA does not fully meet its legislative
    requirement to coordinate surface DOT Research Projects to

    transportation and technology development activities because it does not
    Identify Unnecessary

    review all surface transportation research projects to determine whether
    Duplication

    surface transportation researchers within DOT are unnecessarily
    duplicating research efforts. A similar DOT requirement broadens this
    responsibility to make RSPA responsible for reviewing the status of all
    research projects throughout DOT for the same purpose. In its March 2000
    report, TRB reported the absence of information on the current status of
    all DOT research programs in the department*s annual research plan. 14 We
    discovered that this information also remained absent from DOT*s fiscal

    year 2003 research plan. The Associate Administrator said that RSPA lacked
    (1) readily accessible data on the research activities of other parts of
    DOT and (2) the staff and resources to review all research projects across
    the department to, at a minimum, identify and report on the extent of
    unnecessary duplication, if any, across the department. He also said that
    even if RSPA reviewed all of the department*s research activities and
    identified any unnecessary duplication of effort, RSPA does not have the
    program and budget authority to direct changes in other operating
    administrations* research activities.

    14 TRB study, 13.

    RSPA*s Associate Administrator explained that RSPA does not have readily
    accessible data on the research activities of other parts of DOT because
    efforts to develop a computer- based tracking system to share DOT research
    program and budget information have stalled. RSPA*s 1998 strategic plan

    discussed the need to create and deploy such a system to meet its
    strategic goal for coordinating research and technology. In fiscal year
    1999, RSPA planned to allocate $200, 000 annually for 4 years to develop
    and implement a system. According to the Associate Administrator, as of
    January 2003, RSPA had spent about $500,000 of its allocation and
    completed development of a prototype database. He said that implementing
    the centralized information system would (1) make basic project
    information (such as project methodologies, funding levels and sources,
    schedules, and

    planned products) across the department more accessible; (2) provide
    greater levels of organization and clarity on historical research; (3)
    facilitate strategic planning and coordination; and (4) improve the
    department*s annual research plan by providing decision- makers with more
    complete, accurate, and timely information on all DOT research activities.
    According to the Associate Administrator and Coordinating Council members,
    some operating administrations do not support implementation of the system
    because they believe that the system would put additional demands on
    limited resources and would produce little in terms of tangible results.
    Coordinating Council members also said it would duplicate existing
    information systems already in place at some operating administrations and
    the new system would not be integrated into their

    other, modal- unique information systems (such as budget and accounting
    information systems). According to the RSPA official in charge of
    developing the database, each operating administration would require up to
    approximately 2 full- time employees for up to 1 year to input the
    historical research project data going back 5 years, and an additional
    1/2 to 1 full- time employees per year to manage and update the database.

    The Associate Administrator also said that RSPA did not review the status
    of all operating administrations* research projects to identify any
    unnecessary duplication because his office lacks sufficient staff and
    resources to do so. He noted, for example, that RSPA*s total research and
    technology budget for fiscal year 1999 was about $3.7 million* of which
    $2.2 million was allocated for research and development planning and
    management activities 15 *and 13 full- time employees. However, in fiscal
    year 2003, this decreased to a total budget of about $2.9 million* of
    which $560, 000 was allocated for research and development planning and
    management activities* and 9 full- time employees. The Associate
    Administrator said that the decline in RSPA*s staff and resources* the
    only such staff and resources in the department for conducting long- term
    transportation research planning and coordinating research plans and
    programs* has also severely limited RSPA*s efforts to coordinate with

    transportation research stakeholders outside of DOT, such as state, local,
    and other federal agencies. Figure 2 shows RSPA*s funding levels for its
    research and development planning and management activities from fiscal
    years 1999 through 2003.

    15 According to RSPA, research and development planning and management
    includes funding for transportation research and development strategic
    planning, DOT research facilitation, coordination and partnerships, DOT
    technology transfer and technology sharing programs, National Science and
    Technology Council activities, Small Business Innovation Research Program
    support, and international research and development activities.

    Figure 2: RSPA Funding Dedicated to Research and Development Planning and
    Management Activities (Fiscal Years 1999- 2003)

    RSPA*s Associate Administrator said he believes that little or no
    duplication of research activities occurs. He said that, because the
    monthly Coordinating Council meetings provided a forum for discussing
    ongoing and planned research, unnecessary duplication of research efforts
    would be identified. Also, he said that most DOT operating administrations
    have discrete research programs and budgets that support their mode-
    specific regulatory and safety mandates. For example, the Federal Highway
    Administration research focuses on public roads and highways, and its
    primary users are state and local transportation departments that seek
    better ways to repair the public infrastructure and find improved
    materials for pavements. Similarly, the Federal Railroad Administration
    focuses on the rail industry*s privately owned infrastructure and these
    owners* freight

    railroads, Amtrak, commuter railroads, and shippers* look to Federal
    Railroad Administration to conduct research that will reduce track
    failure, equipment failure, and human error. According to members of the
    Coordinating Council, apparent duplication

    in research programs might reflect a number of conditions* for example,
    research that was intended to validate previous research results, expand
    research applications, and address different needs (such as pavement

    research for airport runways and highways)* or an effort to explore
    alternative approaches before selecting one for further development. None
    of the council members, however, could provide us with specific examples

    of research projects that reflected these conditions. Other Coordinating
    Council members with whom we spoke, however, said that the council should
    take further steps to more effectively coordinate DOT research. For
    example, one member said the Coordinating Council should review all of the
    current projects across the department to improve the level and quality of
    the department*s research coordination efforts. Another member said that
    the primary functions of the Coordinating Council should be to universally
    review DOT research projects to eliminate

    unnecessary duplication of effort and to provide opportunities for joint
    research partnerships on similar work. Such opportunities might include
    research focusing on safety, environmental, training, and human factor
    issues. However, Coordinating Council members said that DOT support for

    the council and research coordination in general had declined in recent
    years (e. g., lower ranking members of the operating administrations
    attend the meetings, instead of the more senior personnel that had once
    attended, and meetings were shortened from 2 hours to 1 hour per month),
    and that

    greater departmental support for this effort was warranted. The Associate
    Administrator said that RSPA did not have the program and budget authority
    over the department*s operating administrations* research activities to
    direct changes in research programs, even if opportunities for greater
    joint efforts or elimination of unnecessary duplicative research were
    found. In a 1996 report examining the status of the department*s
    coordination of surface transportation research, we identified RSPA*s lack

    of internal clout within the department as an obstacle to its ability to
    function effectively as its research strategic planner because it had no
    direct program or budget authority over the department*s operating

    administrations* research activities. 16 Although DOT proposed the
    creation of such an organization to have budgeting and program authority
    for DOT research in its fiscal year 1996 budget submission, the Congress
    did not approve the agency*s proposal. According to the Associate
    Administrator, there are no current legislative or budget initiatives to
    pursue this proposal.

    16 U. S. General Accounting Office, Surface Transportation: Research
    Funding, Federal Role, and Emerging Issues, RCED- 96- 233 (Washington, D.
    C.: Sept. 6, 1996).

    Although DOT*s earlier effort to overcome RSPA*s lack of internal
    authority was not implemented, neither the department nor RSPA has
    developed alternative approaches to overcome this obstacle as well as to
    address the information and resource limitations that continue to hinder
    RSPA*s efforts

    to meet legislative and DOT requirements for coordinating departmental
    research. Developing a strategy that incorporates information about the
    costs involved in reviewing research projects throughout DOT to ensure
    that unnecessary duplication does not occur, and that determines whether
    finalizing the development and implementation of the DOT- wide research
    tracking system database could serve this purpose, is an important first
    step for RSPA to meet the legislative and DOT requirements entrusted to
    it. A strategy is also critical for communicating to the Congress and the
    Secretary of Transportation the challenges RSPA faces, and the specific
    actions it can take, in meeting the requirements with the resources it
    possesses.

    RSPA Has Not Developed RSPA has not established performance measures to
    systematically Performance Standards

    document the results and benefits of coordinating DOT research activities.
    17 In the absence of systematically gathered data on research Against
    Which to Measure activities across the department and associated
    performance measures, it Its Coordination Efforts

    is difficult to determine RSPA*s overall success in coordinating DOT*s
    billion- dollar research program. Demonstrated successes could garner
    greater departmental support for RSPA*s research coordination efforts. In
    its fiscal year 2003 budget submission, RSPA cited the difficulty in
    defining and measuring the effectiveness of research coordination
    activities. According to RSPA, it is because of this difficulty that it
    relies upon

    external program assessments to provide independent evaluation of its
    research and coordination activities. 18

    17 In RSPA*s fiscal year 2003 budget submission to the Congress, it
    reported one quantifiable performance measure. This measure is aimed at
    gauging RSPA*s progress in administrating the University Transportation
    Centers Program and focuses on the number of students graduating with
    advanced degrees from universities funded under the program. For fiscal
    year 2003, RSPA*s performance goal is 1,228 students.

    18 TRB conducted such an assessment in March 2000.

    Although we support the use of external assessments, we have reported that
    quantifiable measures are necessary to assess agency performance to meet
    the intent of the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA).
    19 Among the stated purposes of GPRA is the improvement of federal program
    effectiveness and public accountability. For agencies to successfully
    become high- performing organizations, their leaders need to foster
    performance- based cultures, find ways to measure performance, and

    use performance information to make decisions. A fundamental element in an
    organization*s efforts to manage for results is its ability to set
    meaningful goals for performance and, using performance information,
    measure performance against those goals. High- performing, results-
    oriented organizations establish a set of measures to gauge progress over
    various dimensions of performance. In crafting GPRA, the Congress
    expressed its interest in American

    taxpayers* getting quality results from the programs they pay for as well
    as its concern about waste and inefficiency in federal programs. The
    fundamental reason for collecting information on a program*s performance
    is to take action in managing the program on the basis of that
    information. By using performance information to assess the way a program
    is conducted, managers can consider alternative approaches and processes
    in areas where goals are not being met and enhance the use of program
    approaches and processes that are working well. Performance information

    also allows program managers to compare their programs* results with goals
    and thus determine where to target program resources to improve
    performance. When managers are forced to reduce their resources, the same
    analysis can help them target the reductions to minimize the impact on
    program results.

    GPRA*s emphasis on results implies that federal programs contributing to
    the same or similar outcomes should be closely coordinated to ensure that
    goals are consistent and complementary, and that program efforts are
    mutually reinforcing. Thus, measuring the effectiveness of RSPA*s
    coordination of DOT research is a critical element of fulfilling its
    legislative

    and departmental coordination responsibilities* an element RSPA has not
    yet addressed.

    19 GPRA requires federal agencies to set strategic goals and establish
    performance measures for management.

    RSPA Has Met Some, RSPA has not fully met all legislative and DOT
    requirements for evaluating

    but Not All, Legislative research within the department. RSPA does not
    meet a legislative

    requirement for measuring the results of federal surface transportation or
    DOT Requirements

    research and partially meets a related DOT policy requirement to oversee
    to Evaluate DOT

    and develop ways to improve research evaluations throughout the Research

    department. Figure 3 summarizes these requirements and the extent to which
    RSPA has met them.

    Figure 3: Extent to Which RSPA Meets Selected Legislative and DOT
    Responsibilities for Evaluating DOT Research Efforts

    Although the department has delegated to RSPA the responsibility for
    meeting legislative and DOT requirements for evaluating research projects
    throughout the department, RSPA*s oversight of DOT research evaluation is
    limited to facilitating exchange of information on evaluation approaches.
    As delegated by the Secretary of Transportation, RSPA is responsible for
    measuring the results of federal surface transportation research
    activities and how these results impact the performance of the surface

    transportation systems of the United States, as stated in TEA- 21. 20
    Also, TEA- 21 calls for a strategic planning process 21 that includes
    information on research program evaluations conducted and a schedule of
    future evaluations. 22 RSPA has not taken steps to meet these legislative
    responsibilities for measuring the results of DOT surface transportation
    research, describing research program evaluations, and establishing a
    schedule for future evaluations. 23 In terms of DOT policy, RSPA is
    responsible for overseeing and developing

    more efficient, effective, and participative ways to evaluate and measure
    research program effectiveness and progress across all operating
    administrations. 24 RSPA has taken steps to develop and communicate more
    effective means of evaluation by discussing this issue at monthly
    Coordinating Council meetings. For example, in October 2002, the council
    provided a forum for discussing four different agency approaches to
    research evaluation. In addition, according to RPSA officials, the council
    has discussed criteria established by the Office of Management and Budget
    for federal investment in research and how these criteria can have an
    impact on performance evaluation. RSPA, however, does not oversee
    operating administrations* research evaluation efforts and therefore
    cannot ensure that steps are being consistently taken to improve
    evaluation approaches.

    20 23 U. S. C. S: 508 (a) (3) and (b) (3). 21 As defined at 5 U. S. C. S:
    306. 22 23 U. S. C. S: 508 (a) (1). 23 We noted that the department*s
    performance plan for fiscal year 2003 contained an appendix detailing DOT
    program evaluation methods, results, and schedule for future evaluations
    for programs that represent significant DOT activities (other than
    research) that

    contribute to its strategic goals. 24 DOT Order 1120.39.

    The Associate Administrator said that RSPA does not measure the results of
    federal transportation research activities or provide oversight of the
    operating administrations* research program evaluation processes for the
    following two reasons: (1) the operating administrations have
    responsibility for performing and measuring their own research programs
    and (2) the resource constraints that have limited RSPA*s ability to
    coordinate DOT- wide research also limit the agency*s ability to oversee
    research program evaluations across the department.

    Coordinating Council members said that increased oversight of DOT- wide
    research programs would be beneficial. Our previous work examining DOT*s
    research activities also indicates that such oversight is

    warranted. For example, in reviewing the Federal Highway Administration*s
    research program, which accounts for almost half of DOT*s research budget,
    we found that the Federal Highway Administration lacked a systematic
    process for conducting research evaluations, and that

    the processes it used were not always consistent with federal research
    best practices because it generally did not use a peer review approach. 25
    Thus, without oversight, RSPA and the department have no assurance that,
    at a

    minimum, operating administration research programs are routinely
    evaluated or that approaches to evaluations are consistent with
    established best practices. DOT and RSPA also have not developed a
    strategy to meet the requirement

    to measure the results of federal transportation research activities and
    how they impact the performance of the surface transportation systems of
    the United States. Developing such a strategy that incorporates
    information about the costs involved in ensuring that evaluations are
    completed and performed according to best practices is an important first
    step for DOT and RSPA to meet the requirement. A strategy also is critical
    for communicating to the Congress and the Secretary of Transportation (1)
    the challenges that RSPA and the department face and (2) the specific
    actions

    that can be taken to meet this requirement given available resources.
    After we raised these issues to senior RSPA officials as a result of our
    review, they developed a proposed model for reorganizing the Coordinating

    Council to provide an opportunity for RSPA to meet legislative and
    departmental requirements to oversee DOT research evaluation. They said
    they were still considering the proposal when we completed our review.

    25 GAO- 02- 573.

    RSPA Has Conducted Since 1999, RSPA has conducted four multimodal research
    programs*

    Multimodal Research advanced vehicle technologies, commercial remote
    sensing and spatial

    information, operator fatigue management, and transportation in Four Areas
    but Does infrastructure assurance. According to RSPA*s Associate
    Administrator, Not Have a Process to these four programs have resulted or
    will result in significant contributions

    Systematically and improvements to the transportation industry. For
    example, he said that

    research aimed at advanced vehicle technologies has resulted in the
    testing Evaluate Program

    and development of components currently used in the production of Results

    commercially available hybrid electrical vehicles. Nonetheless, RSPA does
    not have a process to systematically evaluate the results of all its
    multimodal research programs. In the absence of such a process, RSPA
    manages its multimodal research programs by monitoring research

    contract agreements and using expert or peer review panels to assess the
    quality and relevance of ongoing research. By not systematically
    evaluating program results, however, RSPA is limited in its ability to
    determine the

    extent to which its multimodal research programs are achieving their
    intended goals. Status of RSPA*s Multimodal

    Since 1999, RSPA has conducted four multimodal research programs, of
    Research Programs

    which two were congressionally mandated. Specifically, TEA- 21 required
    DOT to conduct research on using (1) technology to improve energy
    efficiency, and reduce emissions and transportation dependence on
    petroleum, and (2) satellite images to improve transportation safety and

    disaster planning. Transportation research experts within DOT developed a
    third RSPA research program to develop more effective means to increase
    the endurance and reduce fatigue of drivers and pilots. Finally, the
    catalyst

    for research in a fourth area that assesses key transportation system
    vulnerabilities to damage from disasters or terrorist threats came from
    the National Research Council*s TRB. 26 26 TRB, Improving Surface
    Transportation Security, A Research and Development Strategy (1999).

    According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA identified and selected
    individual projects for these multimodal research programs by obtaining
    input from experts within and outside DOT. For example, RSPA, in
    conjunction with other DOT operating administrations, published a plan in
    June 1999 to guide the selection of human fatique- related projects. In
    addition, in April 2000, RSPA issued a strategic multimodal research and

    development program plan to help focus advanced vehicle technology
    research. Also, in December 2000, RSPA and TRB held a conference on remote
    sensing and spatial information research to, among other things, discuss
    and define issues and possible research needs with representatives

    from academia, transportation agencies, remote sensing businesses,
    consulting firms, and other groups. 27 (See app. I for a list of project
    stakeholders and researchers involved in RSPA*s multimodal research
    programs.) Table 1 provides summary data concerning the scope, funding,
    and status of RSPA*s four multimodal research programs.

    27 See GAO- 03- 502 for a discussion of the coordination issues involved
    in developing and implementing RSPA*s Transportation Infrastructure
    Assurance Program.

    Table 1: Information on and Status of Multimodal Research Programs
    Conducted by RSPA from Fiscal Years 1999 to 2003

    Dollars in thousands

    Direct and Number of

    Multimodal research Reasons for initiating Fiscal

    reimbursable projects

    Program status as of program programs year

    funding initiated January 14, 2003

    Advanced Vehicle TEA- 21, section 5111 1999 $9,908 21 In process: 12 of 55
    Technologies Program 2000 5,000 15

    projects still ongoing* planned program 2001 0 11

    completion, end of 2004. 2002 0 8 2003 0 0

    Total $14,908 55

    Commercial Remote TEA- 21, section 5113 1999 $4,000 0 In process: 14 of 18
    Sensing and Spatial

    2000 6,000 9 projects still ongoing*

    Information Technologies planned program

    Program 2001 8,000 6

    completion, end of 2003. 2002 0 3 2003 0 0

    Total $18,000 18

    Human Centered Generated by research

    1999 $750 0 In process: 2 of 4 projects Systems: Operator Fatigue

    experts within DOT 2000 0 4 still ongoing* planned Management Program

    program completion, end of 2001 300 0

    2004. 2002 0 0 2003 0 0

    Total $1,050 4

    Transportation Identified in TRB*s 1999 0 0 In process: all 4 of the
    Infrastructure Assurance

    Improving Surface

    2000 0 0 projects still ongoing*

    Program

    Transportation Security, A

    planned program

    Research and

    2001 $1,000 2 completion, end of 2003.

    Development Strategy 2002 1,000 2 (1999).

    2003 1,000 0

    Total $3,000 4

    Source: GAO presentation of RSPA data.

     The Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program was mandated in 1998 under
    section 5111 of TEA- 21. This program combines transportation technologies
    and innovative program elements to produce new vehicles, components, and
    infrastructure for medium- and heavy- duty transportation needs. Since
    1999, approximately $15 million has been allocated toward 55 separate
    research projects, 43 of which have been

    completed, with the goal of improving energy efficiency and U. S.
    competitiveness while reducing emissions and transportation dependence on
    petroleum. According to the Associate Administrator, the program has
    resulted in (1) the testing of components that are being

    used in the development and production of commercially available hybrid
    electrical vehicles and (2) the development and implementation of electric
    vehicle recharging stations in Hawaii. A picture of an electric

    vehicle at a recharging station is shown in figure 4. RSPA plans to have
    all of the projects completed by the end of 2004.

    Figure 4: Electric Vehicle at a Recharging Station

     The Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies
    Program was mandated in 1998 under section 5113 of TEA- 21. The joint
    program between RSPA and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration
    (NASA) began in 1999. This research program focuses in part on using
    satellite images to assess transportation hazards and improve disaster
    recovery; provide opportunities to monitor and evaluate regional traffic
    flow, including the movement of freight; plan for improvements in the
    maintenance and security of transportation infrastructures; and aid in
    transportation corridor planning. Figure 5 shows an example of satellite-
    based photography of interstate highways. According to the Associate
    Administrator, RSPA has also supported transportation security technology
    project activities

    in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. For
    instance, according to RSPA officials, the Remote Sensing Program
    reoriented two unmanned aerial vehicle projects toward monitoring for
    security as well as traditional transportation applications. RSPA has
    allocated $18 million to this research program since it began in 1999 and
    has disseminated program information; results to date have been
    disseminated through Web sites, publications, 28 workshops, and
    conferences. Eighteen separate research projects constitute the program; 4
    have been completed, and RSPA plans to complete the remaining 14 projects
    by the end of 2003.

    28 In April 2002, DOT and NASA issued Achievements of the DOT- NASA Joint
    Program on Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies:
    Application to Multimodal Transportation, which presented 3- year
    accomplishments from the program.

    Figure 5: Satellite- based Photographic Image of U. S. Interstates 25 and
    40 in Albuquerque, New Mexico

     The Human Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program was
    conceived by DOT researchers and experts with the primary goal to develop
    techniques that transportation operating companies can employ to ensure
    endurance and fatigue- free performance of their workforces. Since fiscal
    year 1999, approximately $1 million has been allocated to the Human
    Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program. According to the
    Associate Administrator, this program has resulted in significant benefit
    to the

    varied DOT transportation community stakeholders. For example, in January
    2003, the program resulted in the production of the Commercial

    Transportation Operator Alertness Management Handbook, which describes
    measures to better manage driver and pilot fatigue. According to RSPA*s
    Associate Administrator, this handbook has been in high demand by the U.
    S. Coast Guard, the Maritime Administration, and the Federal Transit
    Administration. Two of the four projects being conducted are ongoing. RSPA
    plans to complete the program by the end of 2004. In figure 6, airline
    pilots participate in NASA research in this area.

    Figure 6: Airline Pilots Participating in Fatigue Research

     The Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program 29 consists of
    assessments on four separate transportation vulnerabilities. These include
    assessing the (1) relationship between the safety and security of the
    nation*s transportation infrastructure and some of the nation*s other
    critical infrastructures, such as energy, e- commerce, banking and
    finance, and telecommunications; (2) transportation and logistical
    requirements for emergency response teams in response to terrorist attacks
    using biochemical, nuclear, and explosive weapons of mass destruction; (3)
    costs, benefits, and practicality of alternative backup systems for the
    global positioning system; and (4) trade- offs between

    the different modes of transportation and security for hazardous
    materials. Since fiscal year 2001, the Congress has appropriated $3
    million to conduct these assessments. In total, RSPA plans to publish 11
    formal reports on the four vulnerabilities being assessed and develop a
    series of presentations and workshops to further disseminate the
    information. Figure 7 shows a picture of a global positioning satellite.

    29 GAO- 03- 502.

    Figure 7: Global Positioning Satellite

    From fiscal years 1999 through 2003, RSPA budgeted about $37 million to
    conduct these four major multimodal research programs. Of this $37
    million, about 9 percent, or $3.3 million, came to RSPA from direct
    congressional appropriations. For example, in fiscal year 2001, the
    Congress appropriated $1 million for the Transportation Infrastructure

    Assurance Program and $300,000 for the Human Centered Systems: Operator
    Fatigue Management Program; in fiscal years 2002 and 2003, RSPA received
    an additional $1 million for the Transportation Infrastructure Assurance
    Program. The remaining $33.7 million for these programs was provided
    through reimbursable funding from other DOT administrations. 30 Figure 8
    summarizes RSPA*s annual budget for multimodal research from fiscal years
    1999 to 2003.

    30 RSPA conducts and manages its multimodal research programs, excluding
    the Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program, almost exclusively
    using reimbursable funds provided by the DOT administration sponsoring the
    research* that is, the Federal Highway Administration, Federal Railroad
    Administration, Federal Transit Administration, and National Highway
    Traffic Safety Administration.

    Figure 8: RSPA*s Multimodal Research Funding (Fiscal Years 1999- 2003)

    According to the Associate Administrator, RSPA*s current multimodal
    research programs are scheduled for completion by the end of fiscal year
    2004. He added that RSPA has made budgetary and legislative proposals to
    undertake future multimodal research to, among other things, further
    examine applications of unmanned aerial vehicles for commercial remote
    sensing or examine infrastructure safety issues in hydrogen energy
    systems. He noted, however, that there are no approved plans for future
    multimodal research, pending the President*s budget proposal for the
    department and the reauthorization of TEA- 21, which might affect RSPA*s
    multimodal research roles and responsibilities.

    RSPA Oversees Research RSPA oversees its multimodal research programs by
    monitoring research

    Contracts and Assesses the contract agreements. Specifically, the
    Associate Administrator said that

    Status of Its Ongoing RSPA assesses project progress against contractual
    milestones to ensure

    Research but Lacks a that the research is being completed on time and
    within cost, while meeting

    research objectives. He added that researchers must meet or exceed
    Systematic Process for

    contractual expectations, or corrective actions are taken. These actions
    Evaluating the Results of Its

    may include project cancellation. RSPA provided a recent example of the
    Multimodal Research

    impact of its monitoring efforts that dealt with a project being conducted
    under its Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies
    Program. The evaluation focused on an unmanned aerial vehicle application
    to real- time traffic flow monitoring, a demonstration project with the
    Ohio Department of Transportation and several universities and industry
    partners. Due to a technical problem, the scheduled demonstration could
    not be conducted. The Remote Sensing Program Manager, working with the
    Federal Highway Administration Project Manager assigned to the project,
    pulled together a technical team to assess the state of the project. The
    technical team became convinced that the contractor could remedy the
    technical situation, allowed 3

    additional months to make the milestone, and successfully encouraged the
    project partners to cover the costs of the delay. According to the
    Associate Administrator, these actions resulted in a demonstration to a
    state partner

    with no cost increase to RSPA. In addition to providing this contractual
    oversight, RSPA uses the principles of expert or peer review through the
    use of multimodal and multiagency program oversight panels to assess the
    status, quality, and relevance of its ongoing multimodal research
    programs, according to the Associate Administrator. For example, in
    December 2000, TRB and RSPA held a conference on remote sensing and
    spatial information research with

    representatives from academia, transportation agencies, remote sensing
    businesses, consulting firms, and other groups. During the conference,
    participants met in breakout sessions to discuss and assess research
    progress and interim results. As we have reported, expert or peer review
    is

    a particularly effective means to evaluate federally funded research. 31
    The Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy has also reported
    that expert review is widely used to evaluate the quality of current
    research as compared with other work being conducted in the field and with
    the

    relevance of research to the agency's goals and mission. 32 However, RSPA
    has not established a process or policies for systematically using peer or
    expert reviews to evaluate the results of all its multimodal research. For
    example, RSPA has no plans to evaluate the results of its Transportation
    Infrastructure Assurance Program.

    We, among others, recognize that federal agencies that support research in
    science and engineering have been challenged to find the most useful and
    effective ways to evaluate the performance and results of the research
    programs. For example, since GPRA was passed in 1993, some questions have
    been raised about its applicability to the research activities of
    government agencies. Because the process required by GPRA is based on a

    5- year strategic planning horizon, concerns exist that GPRA constrains,
    and perhaps prohibits, the long- term thinking and planning that
    characterize the federal role in research. This concern is particularly
    relevant for basic research, but even successes from highly applied
    research (the type sponsored by DOT) can require 5 to 10 years before
    achieving widespread recognition. 33 Nonetheless, as we noted in our
    report examining DOT

    highway research, 34 without systematic program evaluation, it is unclear
    as to whether research efforts are having the intended results. Such a
    systematic approach to evaluation, according to best practices used in
    other federal research programs, includes review of all ongoing and
    completed research on a regular basis and in accordance with GPRA
    principles. 31 U. S. General Accounting Office, Federal Research: Peer
    Review Practices at Federal Science Agencies Vary, GAO/ RCED- 99- 99
    (Washington, D. C.: Mar. 17, 1999) 2.

    32 Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy, Evaluating
    Federal Research Programs: Research and the Government Performance and
    Results Act (Washington, D. C.: February 1999) 39. The Committee on
    Science, Engineering, and Public Policy is a joint committee of the
    National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the
    Institute of Medicine.

    33 Applied research is original work undertaken to develop new knowledge
    with a specific, practical application in mind. 34 GAO- 02- 573.

    RSPA*s Associate Administrator acknowledged that a documented process for
    systematically evaluating the results of its multimodal research programs
    would be beneficial, but that the process should be tailored to

    match the type of research and its objectives. He added that RSPA had not
    developed and implemented a process for systematically evaluating the
    results of its multimodal research because of a lack of funding and
    staffing resources. For example, he estimated that an external evaluation
    to assess

    the results of its multimodal programs could cost as much as $100,000 for
    each program. Nonetheless, without establishing and implementing a process
    for systematically evaluating the results of its research, RSPA cannot
    ensure that its multimodal research programs are achieving their

    intended goals. Conclusions To its credit, RSPA has taken steps in recent
    years to meet its legislative

    and department responsibilities for coordinating and overseeing the
    evaluation of the department*s transportation research activities.
    Nevertheless, ensuring that no unnecessary duplication of research

    programs occurs and that research programs* including the ones that RSPA
    conducts* are evaluated for results are critical responsibilities, given
    the importance of, and amount of money spent on, DOT research.

    Without a strategy to meet legislative and DOT requirements to coordinate
    and oversee evaluation of departmental research, RSPA may not be able to
    meet these responsibilities, particularly given its lack of authority
    within the department and resource limitations. In addition, a lack of
    performance standards against which to measure coordination efforts limits
    RSPA*s ability to identify areas where coordination is working effectively
    and areas

    that could be improved upon. With a strategy and performance measures in
    place, however, RSPA and DOT should be in a better position to assure the
    Congress that the department is making the most of its significant
    research dollars through effective coordination and evaluation of its
    research programs.

    Recommendations for To better meet legislative and DOT requirements for
    coordinating and

    Executive Action evaluating transportation research within the department,
    we recommend the Secretary, in conjunction with RSPA*s Administrator, work
    with DOT

    operating administrations to:

     Develop a strategy for reviewing all DOT research projects to identify
    areas of unnecessary research duplication, overlap, and opportunities for
    joint efforts. The strategy should address time frames for implementing
    this review as well as discuss the extent to which finalizing the
    development and implementation of a DOT- wide research tracking system
    database could serve to facilitate this process. Once this

    strategy has been developed and implemented, the results of this effort
    should be incorporated in the department*s annual research plan and
    reported to the Congress on an annual basis.

     Develop and apply quantifiable performance measures to assess the
    effectiveness of research coordination efforts (once a strategy for review
    has been developed and implemented), and document the results of these
    efforts in the department*s annual research plan. These measures could
    include the number of research projects identified as possible candidates
    for joint effort or elimination and/ or the associated reduction in the
    department*s research spending.

     Develop a strategy to ensure that the results of all DOT*s
    transportation research activities are evaluated according to established
    best practices. This strategy should include estimates of the costs for
    ensuring that evaluations are completed. Once the strategy has been
    developed and implemented, the results of these efforts should be
    incorporated in the

    department*s annual research plan and reported to the Congress on an
    annual basis.

     Include in the department*s annual research plan a summary of all
    research program evaluations conducted and a schedule of future
    evaluations. In addition, we recommend that the Secretary direct RSPA*s
    Administrator to document RSPA*s process for systematically evaluating the
    results of its own multimodal research programs, and apply this process to
    any future multimodal research programs that RSPA conducts.

    Agency Comments and We obtained oral comments on a draft of this report
    from RSPA officials,

    Our Evaluation including the Associate Administrator for Innovation,
    Research, and

    Education. These officials generally agreed with the contents of the draft
    report but did not comment specifically on the report*s recommendations.
    They also provided technical comments that we incorporated as appropriate.

    Regarding RSPA*s evaluation of its own multimodal research, the officials
    said that RSPA had conducted evaluation activities* peer and expert
    reviews of the progress of three of its four multimodal research programs
    and had no plans to evaluate the fourth. We acknowledge that RSPA has used
    peer and expert review to evaluate the status of at least one of its
    ongoing multimodal research programs* commercial remote sensing and
    spatial information technology* and we describe this example in this
    report. Nevertheless, we continue to believe that our recommendation for
    documenting and applying a process for systematically evaluating the
    results of any future multimodal research programs conducted by RSPA is

    warranted to ensure that such evaluations are consistently conducted in
    accordance with established best practices.

    We are sending copies of this report to congressional committees and
    subcommittees with responsibilities for transportation, the Secretary of
    Transportation, the Research and Special Programs Administration
    Administrator, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

    We will make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the
    report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http:// www.
    gao. gov.

    If you have questions about this report, please contact me at (202) 512-
    2834 or siggerudk@ gao. gov. Other key contributors were Colin Fallon,
    Christopher Keisling, Bert Japikse, Steve Morris, and Jason Schwartz.
    Katherine Siggerud Acting Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues

    Appendi xes Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by

    Appendi x I

    RSPA Table 2: Advanced Vehicle Technologies Program Project Project title
    Project performer( s) stakeholders

    Model Park Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/ Boston Edison FTA Hybrid
    School Bus Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/ Solectria FTA Extended
    Hybrid Electric Heavy Duty Vehicle

    Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/ MJ Bradley FTA Emission Test
    Certification Jet Vapor Deposition for Catalyzing Fuel Cell

    Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium/ Jet Process FTA

    Membranes Corporation AV 900 Cycler for a 600- 900 Volt System for Heavy
    Electricore/ Allison Transmission Division of General Motors

    FTA Duty Hybrid Electric Vehicles Corporation Installation of Capstone
    Microturbines into AVS

    Electricore/ Advanced Vehicle Systems, Inc. FTA Passenger Trams Novel
    Silicon Carbide JFET- Gated Thyristor Electricore/ Rutgers University FTA

    Electric Vehicle Ready State Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project
    FTA Zero Emission 100- Passenger Electric Tram for

    Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project/ U. S. FTA, FAA Airports
    Electricar Battery Life Cycle Prediction Hawaii Electric Vehicle
    Demonstration Project/ Hawaii

    FTA Natural Energy Institute/ University of Hawaii/ SOEST Extension of the
    Hybrid Electric HMMWV Power

    Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation/ PEI FTA

    Train Development Program Electronics Optimization of Hybrid Electric
    Vehicles Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced FTA Compression
    Ignition Auxiliary Unit Control Strategy Vehicles/ Navistar International
    Transportation Corporation for Emissions Reduction and Improved Fuel
    Economy

    Integrated Simulation and Testing System for Mid Atlantic Regional
    Consortium for Advanced FTA

    Electric Vehicle Batteries Vehicles/ Pennsylvania Transportation Institute
    Smaller Better Inverters with Polymer Multi- Layer Mid Atlantic Regional
    Consortium for Advanced FTA Capacitors Vehicles/ Sigma Technologies
    International, Inc. NiMH Battery System Development for an Electric

    Sacramento Municipal Utility District/ Ovonic Battery FTA Vehicle Bus
    Advanced PLI Hybrid Electric Vehicle Battery Sacramento Municipal Utility
    District/ Compact Power FTA

    Reliable Electric Propulsion System for Medium and CALSTART/ Santa Barbara
    Electric Bus Works FTA

    Heavy Duty Vehicles All- Purpose Electric Tractor CALSTART/ ISE Research
    Corporation FTA, FAA Development of Advanced Electrochemical

    CALSTART/ University of California, Davis FTA Capacitors Using Carbon and
    Lead- Oxide Electrodes for Hybrid Vehicle Applications

    Hybrid Transit Bus with Flywheel CALSTART/ Trinity Flywheel Power FTA
    Auxiliary Power Unit Project Using Fuel Cell CALSTART/ Freightliner
    Corporation FTA Technology

    (Continued From Previous Page)

    Project Project title Project performer( s) stakeholders

    Caterpillar Heavy Duty Powertrain Applicable to Northeast Advanced Vehicle
    Consortium FTA Heavy Duty Machines Design/ Integrate/ Test Auxiliary Power
    Units/ Hybrid Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium FTA

    Electric Vehicles for Deployment in Commercial Delivery Fleet

    Low Cost, Modular, Highly Reliable, Universal Electricore FTA

    Propulsion Inverter for Heavy- Duty Commercial and Military Hybrid
    Vehicles

    Design and Fabrication of 4H- SiC Hybrid JBS Electricore/ Rutgers
    University FTA

    Diode for High Temperature and High Efficiency Inverters for Medium and
    Heavy Duty Applications

    Electric Vehicle Ready State (Phase II) Hawaii Electric Vehicle
    Demonstration Project FTA Hybrid Drive System for Heavy Duty Transit Buses

    Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project/ Hawaii FTA

    and Trucks (Phase I) Technology Development Corporation Georgia 1 -
    Design, Manufacture and Test a Low Southern Coalition for Advanced
    Transportation FTA Speed Industrial Motor System in Heavy- Duty Vehicles

    Texas 1 - Enhanced Safety and Risk Reduction for Southern Coalition for
    Advanced Transportation FTA

    University of Texas Demonstration Program Simulation and Field Test Hybrid
    Ultra- Capacitor Mid Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced FTA Battery
    Energy Storage System for Electric Transit Vehicles/ Pennsylvania
    Transportation Institute Vehicles

    Development of Scalable Direct- Methanol Fuel Cell Mid Atlantic Regional
    Consortium for Advanced FTA

    Stacks Vehicles/ GATE Center for Advanced Energy Storage Zebra Battery
    Demonstration in an Electric School Sacramento Municipal Utility District/
    Santa Barbara Electric

    FTA Bus Bus Works Fuel Cell Auxiliary Power Unit Demonstration in a

    Sacramento Municipal Utility District/ ISE Research FTA

    Heavy- Duty Truck Corporation DOT Center for Climate Change and
    Environmental CALSTART/ WestStart Corporation All modes Forecasting
    Conference Support Hybrid Electric Prototype Truck, Phase II Program
    CALSTART/ ISE Research Corporation FTA 150 kW Traction Drive/ Hybrid
    Auxiliary Power Unit

    CALSTART/ Unique Mobility, Inc. FTA System for Large Electric or Hybrid
    Electric Vehicle Applications

    Hickam Air Force Base Project Development Hawaii Electric Vehicle
    Demonstration Project FTA, Department of the Air Force Rapid Chargers
    Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of the Air
    Force Electric Bus Conversion Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration
    Project FTA, Department of the Air Force

    U. S. S. Arizona Memorial Tour Boat Study Hawaii Electric Vehicle
    Demonstration Project FTA, Department of the Navy, National Park Service

    (Continued From Previous Page)

    Project Project title Project performer( s) stakeholders

    Advanced Vehicles for Great Smoky Mountains Mid Atlantic Regional
    Consortium for Advanced FTA, National Park National Park Vehicles/
    Electric Power Research Institute Service

    Plug- In Hybrid Vehicles Energy Control System Mid Atlantic Regional
    Consortium for Advanced Vehicles FTA Phase I Fast Track Fuel Cell Bus
    Project Sacramento Municipal Utility District/ Sacramento Electric

    FTA Transportation Consortium/ CALSTART/ WestStart Development of NiMH
    Battery System for

    Sacramento Municipal Utility District/ Sacramento Electric FTA

    Application in Heavy Duty Hybrid Electric Vehicles Transportation
    Consortium Lightweight Hybrid Electric Transit Bus Program CALSTART/ NOVA
    Bus Incorporated FTA Airport Clean Fuel Vehicle Outreach -- Targeted

    CALSTART/ WestStart Corporation FTA, FAA Project Development Phase I, Fast
    Track Fuel Cell Bus Project CALSTART/ WestStart/ Sacramento Electric
    Transportation

    FTA Consortium National Conference on Climate Change Northeast Advanced
    Vehicle Consortium All modes

    Development and Fabrication of a PEM Fuel Cell Northeast Advanced Vehicle
    Consortium/ University

    FTA Power Plant for Heavy Duty Vehicle Applications Transportation Centers
    Fuel Cells Drive Line Development Team and Industry Work Northeast
    Advanced Vehicle Consortium FTA

    Group Route- Ready Fuel Cell Component Testing Northeast Advanced Vehicle
    Consortium/ Concurrent FTA Technologies Corporation Hybrid Electric Bus
    (Phase II) Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department
    of the Air Force

    Multi- Vehicle Charging System Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration
    Project FTA, Department of the Air Force Data Acquisition Systems Hawaii
    Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA, Department of the Air Force
    Aircraft Loader Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project FTA,
    Department of the Air Force Source: RSPA.

    Legend FAA Federal Aviation Administration FTA Federal Transit
    Administration

    Note: This program is performed in partnership with seven major consortia
    consisting of (1) Sacramento Electric Transportation Consortium; (2)
    Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium; (3) CALSTART- WESTSTART; (4)
    Electricore, Inc.; (5) Mid- Atlantic Regional Consortium for Advanced
    Vehicles; (6) Hawaii Electric Vehicle Demonstration Project; and (7)
    Southern Coalition for Advanced Transportation.

    Table 3: Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technologies
    Program Project Project title Project performer( s) stakeholders

    Airborne Sensor Fusion: A Fast- Track Approach to NCRST- E/ Earthdata
    Int'l of NC FHWA

    National Environmental Policy Act Streamlining and Environmental
    Assessment

    Remote Sensing of Environmental Parameters for NCRST- E/ ICF Consulting
    FHWA

    Use in National Environmental Policy Act Documentation in Support of
    Highway Corridor Studies

    Remote Sensing Applications in Transit NCRST- F/ Bridgewater State College
    FHWA, FTA Airborne Ground- Penetrating Radar to Support NCRST- H/ Aeris
    Inc. RSPA/ Office of Monitoring of Pipeline Safety and Performance
    Pipeline Safety

    Environmental Impact and Risk Modeling of NCRST- H/ EarthWatch, Inc. RSPA/
    Office of Petroleum and Gas Transmission Lines Using Pipeline Safety

    Interferometry and High Resolution Imagery from Satellite and Airborne-
    based Remote Sensing Systems

    Facilitating the Operation Efficiency and Growth of NCRST- I/ ASL
    Consulting Engineers (Tetra Tech Corp.) Office of the

    Intermodal Freight Traffic: Application of Remote Secretary of

    Sensing Technology to the Alameda Corridor, Los Transportation/

    Angeles, CA Office of

    Intermodalism Remote Sensing Applications Supporting Regional

    NCRST- F/ Veridian System Division (formerly Veridian FHWA, FTA Database
    for Transportation Planning ERIM) Road Network Planning Tool NCRST- F/
    Technology Service Corp. FHWA

    Impact of Instant Imagery Access on a Regional NCRST- I/ Orbimage FHWA
    Database for Transportation Planning Development of Regional Databases for

    NCRST- E/ Veridian Systems Division FHWA, FTA Transportation Planning
    Remote Sensing for Airport Development and NCRST- F/ Grafton Technologies,
    Inc. FAA, FHWA

    Transportation Planning Remote Sensing of Invasive Aquatic Plant NCRST- F/
    TerraMetrics, Inc. MARAD Obstruction in Navigable Waterways Using an
    Unmanned Airborne Data Acquisition NCRST- F/ GeoData Systems, Inc. FHWA

    System (ADAS) for Traffic Surveillance, Monitoring, and Management

    The Application of Remote Sensing NCRST- H/ ImageCat, Inc. All modes

    Technologies in Post- Disaster Damage Assessment

    Long- Term Monitoring of Changes in Transportation NCRST- I/ University of
    Massachusetts FHWA

    and Land Use Associated with the Central Artery/ Third Harbor Tunnel in
    Boston, MA.

    (Continued From Previous Page)

    Project Project title Project performer( s) stakeholders

    Implementing Remote Sensing Applications to NCRST- E/ FHWA/ Mississippi
    Department of Transportation FHWA, FRA Develop and Environmental Impact
    Statement and Decision Options to Relocate the Current CSX

    Railroad from Mississippi Gulf Coast townships to the I- 10 Right of Way
    Remote Sensing Applications for

    NCRST- E/ Washington State Department of Transportation FHWA Environmental
    Analysis in Transportation Planning

    Highway Features and Characteristics Database NCRST- I/ Florida Department
    of Transportation FHWA Development Using Commercial Remote Sensing
    Technology, Combined with Mobile Mapping, GIS and GPS. Source: RSPA.

    Legend FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway
    Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit
    Administration MARAD Maritime Administration RSPA Research and Special
    Programs Administration

    Note: This program is performed in partnership with four major consortia
    consisting of (1) the National Consortia for Remote Sensing in
    Transportation - Environmental Assessment/ Application (NCRST- E); (2) the
    National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation - Traffic Flow
    (NCRST- F); (3) the National Consortia for Remote Sensing in
    Transportation - Safety, Hazards, and Disasters (NCRST- H); and (4) the
    National Consortia for Remote Sensing in Transportation - Infrastructure
    Management (NCRST- I).

    Table 4: Human- Centered Systems: Operator Fatigue Management Program
    Project Project title Project performer( s) stakeholders

    Framework for Multimodal Synthesis and Cost ORC Macro All DOT modes

    Benefit Analyses through the Human Factors Coordinating Committee

    Work Schedule Representation Analysis Software XIMES GmbH All DOT modes
    through the Human Factors Coordinating Committee

    Development of a Fatigue Management Reference Battelle Memorial Institute,
    Columbus Operations All DOT modes

    Handbook through the Human Factors Coordinating Committee

    Fatigue Analysis Systems for Transportation Science Applications
    International Corporation All DOT modes

    Operations: Railroad Applications through the Human Factors Coordinating
    Committee

    Source: RSPA. Legend DOT Department of Transportation

    Table 5: Transportation Infrastructure Assurance Program Project title
    Project performer( s) Project stakeholders

    Interdependency of the Transportation System with Volpe National
    Transportation

    Office of Intelligence and Security, TSA, FAA, Other Critical
    Infrastructures Systems Center Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, TRB.
    Transportation and Logistical Requirements for

    Volpe National Transportation DOT Maritime Academy, FAA, Federal

    Emergency Response Teams in Dealing with Weapons Systems Center Emergency
    Management Adminstration,

    of Mass Destruction FHWA, MARAD, RSPA*s Office of Emergency

    Transportation. Feasibility of Alternative Backup Systems for the

    Volpe National Transportation Booz- Allen Hamilton, DOT Office of the
    Global Positioning System Systems Center Secretary, FAA, FRA, Northrop-
    Grumman,

    USCG. Options to Transition Hazardous Materials

    Volpe National Transportation TSA, American Association of Railroads,

    Transportation Security Guidelines to Security Systems Center American
    Chemistry Council, Bureau of

    Requirements Transportation Statistics, DOT Office of the

    Secretary, FMCSA, FRA, GAO, TRB, RSPA*s Office of Hazardous Materials
    Safety, RSPA*s Office of Pipeline Safety, and USCG, American Institute of
    Chemical Engineers, the National Transportation Safety Board, the Inland
    Rivers, Ports and Waterways

    Association, the Bureau of the Census, the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers,
    and Vanderbilt University.

    Source: RSPA. Legend DOT Department of Transportation FAA Federal Aviation
    Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor
    Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration MARAD
    Maritime Administration RSPA Research and Special Programs Administration
    TRB Transportation Research Board

    TSA Transportation Security Administration USCG United States Coast Guard

    (542013)

    GAO*s Mission The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and
    investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
    constitutional responsibilities

    and to help improve the performance and accountability of the federal
    government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public funds;
    evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
    recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed
    oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to good
    government is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity,
    and reliability.

    Obtaining Copies of The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO
    documents at no cost is

    through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
    and fulltext GAO Reports and

    files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older
    Testimony

    products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate
    documents using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in
    their entirety, including charts and other graphics.

    Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
    correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
    Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
    To have GAO e- mail this

    list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov and select *Subscribe to
    GAO Mailing Lists* under *Order GAO Products* heading.

    Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
    Additional copies are $2 each. A check or money order should be made out
    to the Superintendent of Documents. GAO

    also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more copies mailed to
    a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should be sent to:

    U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington, D. C.
    20548

    To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000 TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax: (202)
    512- 6061

    To Report Fraud, Contact:

    Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm

    E- mail: fraudnet@ gao. gov Federal Programs

    Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202) 512- 7470 Public
    Affairs Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512-
    4800

    U. S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 Washington, D.
    C. 20548

    a

    GAO United States General Accounting Office

    RSPA has met some, but not all, legislative and DOT requirements
    pertaining to the coordination of departmental research efforts. For
    example, while RSPA develops an annual plan and meets monthly with other
    DOT research officials, RSPA does not review the status of all DOT
    research activities. Thus, it cannot determine whether duplication of
    research efforts within

    DOT does or does not occur. Additionally, RSPA has not developed standards
    against which to measure its performance in coordinating research within
    DOT. Moreover, RSPA has not fully met all legislative and DOT requirements
    to measure research results and oversee research evaluations across DOT.
    RSPA officials cited a lack of ready information on DOT research
    activities budget constraints and a lack of authority over other DOT
    agencies as reasons why they served primarily an information- sharing
    role, rather than as an overseer and manager of the coordination and
    evaluation processes.

    Extent to Which RSPA Meets Coordination and Evaluation Requirements

    Since 1999, RSPA has budgeted $37 million to conduct four major research
    programs with applicability to more than one mode of transportation* for
    example, using technology to improve energy efficiency and reduce
    emissions and transportation dependence on petroleum. According to the
    Associate Administrator for Innovation, Research, and Education, RSPA*s
    current multimodal research programs are scheduled for completion by the
    end of fiscal year 2004 and have had a variety of positive results.
    However, RSPA does not have an evaluation process to systematically
    evaluate the

    results of its multimodal research programs. TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH

    Actions Needed to Improve Coordination and Evaluation of Research

    www. gao. gov/ cgi- bin/ getrpt? GAO- 03- 500 To view the full report,
    including the scope and methodology, click on the link above. For more
    information, contact Kate Siggerud at (202) 512- 2834 or siggerudk@ gao.
    gov. Highlights of GAO- 03- 500, a report to the

    Committee on Appropriations, House of Representatives

    May 2003

    The Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) within the
    Department of Transportation (DOT) is

    responsible for coordinating and ensuring the evaluation of DOT research
    programs to promote the efficient use of departmental research funds,
    which in fiscal year 2002 totaled over $1 billion. RSPA

    is also responsible for conducting multimodal research that cuts across
    different modes of

    transportation. The House Committee on Appropriations directed GAO to
    examine RSPA*s coordination and evaluation of research within DOT and the
    status

    of its own multimodal research. GAO is recommending that DOT and RSPA
    develop strategies to identify potential research duplication and ensure
    that the

    results of all DOT transportation research activities* including those
    conducted by RSPA* are evaluated. Further, GAO recommended that RSPA
    assess

    the effectiveness of its research coordination efforts by developing
    appropriate performance measures.

    DOT reviewed a draft of this report and generally agreed with its contents
    but did not comment on the report*s recommendations.

    Page i GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Contents

    Contents

    Page ii GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 1 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research United States General
    Accounting Office

    Washington, D. C. 20548 Page 1 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    A

    Page 2 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 3 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 4 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 5 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 6 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 7 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 8 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 9 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 10 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 11 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 12 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 13 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 14 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 15 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 16 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 17 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 18 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 19 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 20 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 21 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 22 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 23 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 24 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 25 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 26 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 27 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 28 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 29 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 30 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 31 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 32 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 33 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 34 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Page 35 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Appendix I

    Appendix I Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by RSPA Page 36 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Appendix I Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by RSPA Page 37 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Appendix I Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by RSPA Page 38 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Appendix I Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by RSPA Page 39 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Appendix I Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by RSPA Page 40 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    Appendix I Stakeholders and Researchers Involved in the Four Multimodal
    Programs Conducted by RSPA Page 41 GAO- 03- 500 Transportation Research

    United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548- 0001
    Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 Address Service Requested

    Presorted Standard Postage & Fees Paid

    GAO Permit No. GI00
    *** End of document. ***