RAC TKN Task Force
June 4, 2015
Meeting Notes
Present: Andy Everett, Ann Scholz, Betty Ambler, Carol Paszamant, Enid White, Curtis Bradley, Dawn
Vanlandingham, Jane Minotti, Skip Paul, Jessica VanDenBogaert, Karen Perrin, Sue Sillick, Laura Wilt,
Mary Moulton, Renee McHenry, Lynn Matis, Peggi Knight, Leighton Christiansen, Louise Rosenzweig.
Leni Oman, Chair; Kathy Szolomayer, Notes
Agenda
1. Roll call
2. Review/Approval of minutes from May – no further comments; approved for posting
3. July Meeting/National RAC Meeting – Portland, OR, July 27-30
Attendance at this point: Leni, Enid, Sue, Skip, Renee, possibly Laura (for part, anyway)
If anyone else finds out they will be going, please let Leni know.
Tentative topics:
a. Technical Page guidance document
b. Distribution guidance document
c. Open data education/training needs and options
Mary Moulton and Lisa Loyo will address this at the RAC meeting.
d. Calendar discussion
e. Brainstorm on networking needs? Probably not at this time . . .
f. Research management terms – lessons from the Research Project Management
Database review indicate that a taxonomy of research management terms is shaping up.
g. Something else?
4. Task Updates:
a. Research reports:
i. Technical Page guidance update – – Sue distributed the current form with
instructions and examples to this group this morning before the meeting (they
are also attached at the end of these notes). She thanked Renee for doing most
of the heavy lifting to complete these forms, along with FAQ/guidance
document, and the modified form with instructions and an example. There was
some discussion of next steps and general agreement that the documents are
ready to be distributed to RAC leadership now, before the RAC meeting in July.
ii. Report Distribution– Leni displayed the recent FHWA letter that amends the
requirements for where State Planning & Research reports are to be distributed
(attached at the end of these notes). The main changes are that a couple of
recipients have been removed (UC-Berkeley and Volpe) and that electronic
copies are required, with additional print copies being optional.
The draft guidance document for distribution of state DOT research reports
(also attached below) was pulled up and Leni went over the review comments.
There was discussion about how expansive the section on recommended
distribution should be, plus when to update RiP (Research in Progress) records.
Leni made some edits as the group talked and will send out the revised version
to us, plus to RAC, as a “near final” draft.
Both of the above research report topics will be discussed at the TKN TF
meeting at RAC, as well as the Coordination and Collaboration TF meeting.
b. Data survey findings – Andy
Andy commented that he didn’t have much to add to his summary (see below), other
than to reiterate that there is a lot of confusion and concern about data management
issues.
Mary said that the survey is going to be very helpful to USDOT as they prepare outreach
around data management and curation, per the OSTP memo. Andy asked her when the
USDOT implementation plan would be released. Although USDOT had their plan in to
OSTP on time, apparently there have been some problems at OSTP and the review
process has been delayed. As a result, the deadline for compliance will be adjusted,
probably to January 2016 (from October 2015). Mary surmises that they will be
answering questions about this at the TRB Annual Meeting.
There was some discussion on the definition of data and data management, and Enid
cited a report entitled U.S. DOT Roadway Transportation Data Business Plan (Phase
1). In it, data management and governance are defined and after the meeting Enid
supplied those references, which are posted at the end of these notes (thanks, Enid!).
Laura asked if the NTL repository would be available to the states for their data, and
that looks likely, especially for data that are “nationally significant”. Dawn asked about
limitations on dataset file sizes and Mary replied that the repository will most likely
contain metadata about data because it is not set up to handle huge data files. NTL is
looking at changing platforms to have a more stable and accommodating environment.
Mary also reported that CENDI created a web page that inventories and links to public
access plans of U.S. Federal agencies. The page will be continuously updated as
agencies publicly release their implementation
plans. http://www.cendi.gov/projects/Public_Access_Plans_US_Fed_Agencies.html
c. Calendar beta test – Laura
Laura reported that beta testing has not started, nor has the calendar been migrated to
the WTKN website. The calendar designer has provided the working group with a link to
the product, and that revealed there was still work to be done to implement some of
the required elements. Natassja Linzau has been very helpful in getting some of the
needed modifications accomplished. Maggie Sacco will be presenting on the calendar at
the GTRIC workshop at the Special Libraries Association (SLA) annual conference on
6/13. The expectation now is that the calendar will be on the WTKN website, with beta
testing in progress by the time RAC meets in late July.
5. Acronyms
a. Is it agreeable to the SCOR/RAC website team to link to the NTL acronyms list?
Mary reported on efforts at NTL to corral all known transportation acronym lists onto a
spreadsheet, and she is currently going through the many entries looking for duplicates.
She hopes to have this done this summer, and emphasized the final product will be a
flat list (not a dictionary/glossary/thesaurus) that should aid in searching and that
should be a useful “lookup tool”. When that is done, the SCOR/RAC website review
team will review this document and determine any further direction.
b. Is there news on whether the acronyms brochure is needed?
Will wait to see what NTL comes up with before deciding this, per Sue.
6. Regional TKN news
Lynn reported that ETKN continues to market their recently released Sustainable Transportation
LibGuide. It is being favorably received locally.
WTKN is creating a Sustainable Public Transportation LibGuide with a western focus, according
to Laura and Kathy. Katy Callon had also sent Leni a note that another LibGuide, on bike/ped
counting, will be started soon. WTKN also hosted a webinar in May featuring Ken Winter of
Virginia DOT Research Library, who talked about ebooks. It was well-attended and well-received.
Kathy said the webinar will eventually be posted on the WTKN website.
Sue suggested the TKNs coordinate in regards to creating LibGuides/resource guides.
Leni asked what kind of outreach should be happening to get the word out about LibGuides, and
suggested that perhaps a “show-and-tell” at the RAC TKN TF meeting would be useful. We’ll talk
more about that and coordination next month.
7. Other news of note
The SLA annual conference is coming up in just over a week, and Laura reported that there will
be a number of data management sessions, including one the Transportation Division has put
together: “Data Management Development and Implementation”. Leighton Christiansen is on
the panel for that, as well as 2 university science librarians plus a librarian from the Medical
Research Council UK.
Another session the Division is co-hosting is “Scientists’ Data & Information Practices: Critical
Roles for Information Professionals to Promote Data Management & Open Sharing”. These
sessions and others attended by folks in this group will provide useful information to share.
Presentation materials will be available after the conference on the SLA Transportation Division
website: http://transportation.sla.org/

Projects in hiatus: Research management networking needs – no update. This is one of the
projects included as a potential task under the support for RAC Task Forces.
NEXT MEETING: Scheduled for 7/2. Leni asked if we should cancel, in favor of our TKN TF
meeting at RAC on 7/29. It was suggested, however, that we keep the meeting on 7/2, also meet
on 7/29, and cancel the August meeting scheduled for 8/6. At our next meeting we will discuss
and plan RAC meeting activities.
==============================================================================
Open Data Survey summary:
In a nutshell the survey can be briefly summarized as:
1) There is not a good understanding of what constitutes a data management plan. I conclude that
more education is needed. I’ve attached a document with two Sample outlines, their
instructions and a list of available templates from DMPtool.org - one example is from NSF and
the other from IMLS (see below). Generally DMP templates are written by the funding source
and may differ depending on the discipline. NSF has 12 different templates. It seems to be that
USDOT should develop a data management plan outline like the ones in the attached document
for State DOTs to use. RAC TKN may want to offer USDOT assistance in developing one or more.
2) 60 % of respondents indicated awareness of the OSTP mandate. There is concern on the lack of
direction from USDOT with the deadline looming close.
3) There is concern on where the research data will be stored. I know from discussions with Mary
and Amanda that the choice is either in a repository available to the State DOT or in the NTL
repository. But little about the options is currently known to the State DOT.
Attachments:
1972_TRDP-W-INSTR
UCTIONS.DOCX
1972_TRDP-W-EXAM
PLE.DOCX
Revision to SPR
Report Distribution.pdf
Guidance for
Sample Data
Distribution of State DOT Research Reports
Management
DRAFT 4-1-15.docx
Plans.docx
Additional information cited by Enid at the meeting:
The U.S. DOT DBT defines data management as “the development, execution, and oversight of architectures, policies,
practices, and procedures to manage the information lifecycle needs of an enterprise in an effective manner as it
pertains to data collection, storage, security, data inventory, analysis, quality control, reporting and visualization.” [1],
[2]
Data governance is defined as the execution and enforcement of authority over the management of data assets and
the performance of data functions.[3]
[1] Vandervalk, A., D. Snyder, and J.K. Hajek. U.S. DOT Roadway Transportation Data Business Plan (Phase
1). Publication FHWA-JPO-13-084. FHWA 2013, p. 38.
[2] NCHRP 666, Volume II: Guide for Target-Setting and Data Management, Chapter 2: Guide for Data Management,
p. II-31
[3] NCHRP 666, Volume II: Guide for Target-Setting and Data Management, Chapter 2: Guide for Data Management,
p. II-31
More FHWA and USDOT data management and data business plan information from Enid (that
she mentioned at today’s meeting):
In 2010, the FHWA Office of Operations, Office of Transportation Management (HOTM) commissioned a white paper,
Data Capture and Management: Needs and Gaps in the Operation and Coordination of U.S. DOT Data Capture and
Management Programs. The white paper focused on infrastructure, travel and climate, and looked at data capture
and management activities across various U.S. DOT program areas, and identified gaps and potential opportunities for
filing the gaps and managing program activities. The paper recommended that HOTM develop a data business plan
(DBP) to address the gaps and to improve coordination among real time data capture programs within U.S. DOTs.
In 2011, the HOTM commissioned a DBP study to address gaps; serve as a prototype for other U.S. DOT offices; and to
provide leadership by offering or suggesting best data collection practices. In 2012, the FHWA Data Governance
Council signed a charter that provided strategic review and oversight of all FHWA data collections efforts. The council
signaled the need for improved data management within FHWA and its programs and allowed stakeholders to benefit
from data programs.
In 2013, U.S. DOT Roadway Transportation Data Business Plan (Phase 1) (U.S. DOT DBP), was written and focused on
roadway travel mobility data, but also looks the above mentioned papers and their recommendations and
conclusions. The U.S. DOT DBP sets out practices and recommendations for U.S. DOT based on experiences of other
national and state agencies data management plans. The recommendations follow best practices set out in NCHRP
666, Volume II: Guide for Target-Setting and Data Management, Chapter 2: Guide for Data Management.
The U.S. DOT DBT defines data management as “the development, execution, and oversight of architectures, policies,
practices, and procedures to manage the information lifecycle needs of an enterprise in an effective manner as it
pertains to data collection, storage, security, data inventory, analysis, quality control, reporting and visualization.”
[1]
[1] Vandervalk, A., D. Snyder, and J.K. Hajek. U.S. DOT Roadway Transportation Data Business Plan (Phase
1). Publication FHWA-JPO-13-084. FHWA 2013, p. 38.