1 / 16

Roadside Inspections - Using Data to Identify Who to Inspect: ISS and Query Central

This article discusses the background, development, and benefits of inspection systems for roadside inspections. It explores the use of data to improve accuracy, focus resources, and provides information on inspection software and systems.

jakewilliams
Télécharger la présentation

Roadside Inspections - Using Data to Identify Who to Inspect: ISS and Query Central

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Roadside Inspections - Using Data to Identify Who to Inspect:ISS and Query Central Brenda Lantz (Brenda@ugpti.org) August 2002

  2. Overview • Background of Inspection Systems • The Inspection Selection System • Query Central

  3. Inspection Systems • Development • Improve data accuracy and timeliness • Help focus resources • ASPEN – inspection software • Collects inspection details, prepares report, & transmits data • ISS – Inspection Selection System • Provides inspection recommendation & carrier snapshot with census and safety data

  4. Inspection Systems (continued) • PIQ – Past Inspection Query • Retrieves inspection reports from last 60 days • CDLIS Access – Commercial Driver License Information System Access • Retrieves driver status & conviction history • QC – Query Central • Combines the functions of ISS, PIQ, & CDLIS Access, plus more • For more information: http://infosys.fmcsa.dot.gov/

  5. ISS - Motivation • Relationship between OOS rates, compliance ratings, and accident rates • OOS rate indicator of safety problems, but need reasonable number of inspections to calculate • 40% of carriers with zero inspections • 28% with one or two inspections • 152 carriers with more than 1,000 inspections • Conclusion: Need to better allocate resources to carriers with worst safety performance, and to better distribute inspections among carriers

  6. ISS – Development and Testing • Development guided by a Roadside Technology TWG • Included representatives from Alabama, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Kansas, Michigan, Nebraska, New Mexico, Ohio, Ontario, Virginia, Washington, D.C., and Wyoming • ISS integrated into ASPEN, and first distributed in 1995 • Results: 60 percent increase in the number of vehicles and/or drivers put OOS when the ISS recommended an inspection • ASPEN/ISS is currently in use in 47 states

  7. ISS2 – Development and Testing • Development of SafeStat • ISS2 safety and insufficient data algorithms • Every carrier in MCMIS has an ISS2 value • First distributed in 1999 • Results illustrate just as effective as original ISS

  8. Development of Query Central • Motivation • Carrier, vehicle, and driver information retrieval via the Internet • Single input retrieves data from multiple sources • Provides data analysis & summarization • Data is real time, & generally from the authoritative source

  9. QC – Carrier Search

  10. QC – Carrier Summary

  11. QC – Past Inspections

  12. QC – Vehicle Search

  13. QC – Vehicle Summary

  14. QC – Driver Search

  15. QC – Driver Summary

  16. Questions??

More Related