Panel Maintenance Acvies • All households contacted by preferred email address • All contacts included tailored informaon to household, as well as study website, 1.800 telephone number & project email address • Year 2 final project incenve was a $30 giſt card Final Panel Composion: Atlanta • Met project goal of 1,500 households • “Before” and “Aſter” surveys conducted exactly 1 year apart • Panel members able to update their household informaon in early April 2012 • Survey closed early May 2012 • Many Atlanta panel members appeared movated by strong dislike of I-85 HOT lanes Future Panels: Recommendaons & Lessons Learned 1. Tips for Panel Engagement: a. Share basic results with your panel members i. You’re giving back to them (not asking them to take another survey) ii. They see they are part of panel, what other panel members think and learn more about why the project is important iii. But, be mindful of what you share so you don’t impact/bias future surveys b. Panel Maintenance via Emails: Restrain Yourself! i. Over mul-year projects – keep electronic contacts (e.g. emails) to less than monthly ii. Ask about communicaon preferences (do they want text message reminders?) iii. Carefully design and test emails for all environments (Gmail, Outlook, etc) iv. Mix and clearly differenate emails that share info, invite oponal parcipaon, and request parcipaon v. Avoid contact during school vacaon and holiday periods c. Connually convey support and appreciaon for their panel membership i. Every contact with panel members invites free-form feedback for doing beer ii. Every contact with panel members reiterates why project is important iii. Re-issue giſt cerficate electronically to those who haven’t cashed it yet – as a means of staying in touch and reminding panel members to connue parcipang iv. Give long-lead mes – such as a month for providing informaon about changes to household informaon (new vehicles, new child, etc) v. Provide reminders for assigned travel dates and stagger emails by me of day, day of week, and looking at employment informaon 2. Lessons Learned/Confirmed a. Have a conngency plan for your meline: i. All states have drascally different melines and permission needs regarding license plate capture ii. The ming of the implementaon of tolling, new transit service, and other programs can be delayed by six months or longer b. Subject maers that solicit passionate opinions (e.g. tolling) further encourage panel engagement i. Over 93% of panel parcipants requested to keep taking surveys about tolling in their region c. Make the survey do the work, not the panel member i. Design survey quesons that will be asked in future years at the project start in order to focus on analysis goals ii. Have the survey (behind the scenes) calculate behavior change and then only ask quesons about why travel behavior has changed 3. Next Steps For Analysis & Project a. Considering opons for addional research funding to connue the panel b. Volpe Center leading next steps for analysis of all evaluaon quesons (see intro) Final Panel Composion: Seale • Almost 700 more parcipang households than project goal • “Before” and “Aſter” surveys conducted 18 months apart • Panel members able to update their household informaon in early April 2012 • Survey closed early May 2012 • Almost 70% panel retenon with very high engagement and parcipaon Notes: * Retenon rate is defined as households where every adult member answered every single queson in both Year 1 and Year 2 surveys. Year 2 paral surveys and paral households are not included. ** The survey was closed early and with half the reminders in Seale due to very strong response and much larger than expected panel size Overview of Panel Maintanance Figure 4. Household Compleon Rates by Recruitment Mode Atlanta: Sharing Basic Study Results with Panel Members 2010-2012 Longitudinal Household Travel Diary Study: Seale & Atlanta Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA)/Congeson Reducon Demonstraon (CRD) Sean Peirce & Margaret Petrella, USDOT Volpe Center with Elizabeth Greene, Resource Systems Group, Inc. Type of Contact Pilot of Year 1: “Before” 2-day House- hold Travel Diary Survey Year1: “Before” 2-day Household Travel Diary Survey Provision of Basic Study Results to Panel Members Resend panel members who haven’t used their original Amazon.com giſt cerficate their incenve info (funcons to remind the panel member that the project is ongoing and they haven’t yet used their incenve) Email Noficaon that Year 2 “Aſter” Survey Being Delayed due to post- ponement to start of tolling Tolling Begins in Study Corridor Focus Groups about Experiences/Impacts of Tolling Oponal Mini-Survey About Impact of Tolling Pilot of Year 2 “Aſter” 2-day Household Travel Diary Survey Year 2 “Aſter” 2-day Household Travel Diary Survey Seale August 2010 November 2010 March 2011 Quarterly October 2011 December 2011 February 2012 February 2012 March/April 2012 April/May 2012 Atlanta January 2011 April 2011 September 2011 Quarterly N/A September 2011 N/A February 2012 March/April 2012 April/May 2012 Time Period U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration Volpe National Transportation Systems Center Overall Study Approach and Methodology 1. Household Panel Study: survey same households before (in 2010) and aſter (in 2012) the implementaon of road pricing • Household informaon survey for demographics – including changes to household composion and employment details over 2 years • 2-day travel diary (log all trips) completed by all adult (18+) household members • Addional survey quesons: typical commute behavior; telework behavior; atudes and values • In “aſter” survey – quesons obtained changes to travel behavior post road pricing, as well as reasons for changes and sasfacon/experiences with road pricing 2. Sample development • Sample drivers who use the corridor via a license plate capture during peak hours • Intercept transit users in person at Park & Rides and MARTA staons • Send survey invitaon to vanpool parcipants via email 3. Other key features of methodology • Pilot Study • Panel maintenance, including oponal quick poll • Incenves ($15/$30 Amazon giſt card) • Focus groups to gauge experiences with road pricing in the corridor Project Background 1. USDOT Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA)/Congeson Reducon Demonstraon (CRD) programs fund selected cies and regions to implement a comprehensive, integrated approach to reducing congeson • The four T’s: Tolling; Transit; Technology; Telecommung • Recipients: Atlanta, Seale, Miami, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, San Francisco 2. Major UPA/CRD evaluaon being conducted by Baelle Memorial Instute 3. Federal Highway Administraon sponsored this 2 year longitudinal panel where travelers in Seale and Atlanta completed “before” and “aſter” 2-day household travel diary surveys 4. Evaluaon Quesons • How did pricing affect travel mes, vehicle miles traveled, and daily travel budgets at the individual/household level? • Were there shiſts in departure mes or modes? In origin-desnaon paerns? • Does pricing result in route diversion? • In Atlanta, how do 2-person carpools adapt to the new occupancy requirements of the HOT lane? • What are the equity impacts of the road pricing policies? Figure 1 of SR-520 in Seale, WA: Electronic tolling of all lanes of SR 520 floang bridge over Lake Washington. Variable tolls to maintain 45+ mph. Major transit upgrades in corridor. Figure 2 of 15 mile stretch of I-85 NE of Atlanta, GA: HOV-2 to HOT-3 conversion on 15-mile stretch of I-85 northeast of Atlanta. Variable HOT lane pricing; electronic collecon & auto- mated enforcement. Enhanced express bus service & 3 new park-and-rides. Year 2 Travel dates April 24-25, 2012 April 25-26, 2012 April 30-May 1, 2012 May 1-2, 2012 Panel Segment A B C D Overall Number of Households 342 384 425 371 1522 Panel Retenon Rate from Original Survey* 61% 63% 58% 55% 58% Year 2 Travel dates April 23-24, 2012 April 24-25, 2012 May 1-2, 2012 May 2-3, 2012 Panel Segment A B C D Overall Number of Households 554 662 559 399 2174 Panel Retenon Rate from Original Survey* 68% 69% 53%** 49%** 59%