Innovating Transportation Research Collaboration in New York State

1. NYSDOT and NYSERDA Breaking out of our silos Or….

2. When Pigs Fly…. In New York ….

3. Why Change? • Research program evaluation fall of 2003 • Conventional SPR funding • Limited research avenues • Limited interest from management • Conservative research projects • Research process - too long • No focus or priorities • None of the seven keys

4. How ? Pull out the keys! • Empowered myself – leveraged old relationships • Marketed the program • Asked for suggestions and needs • Asked how we could help • Made a few deals • When opportunity knocked we opened the door….. • C-05-05 Universal Real Time Highway Information System (04/05)

5. Who is NYSERDA? New York State Energy Research and Development Authority • public benefit corporation created in 1975 in response to the energy crisis • four primary focus areas: energy, environment, economy, & education • ~ 350 employees, four NYS locations, • Albany, NYC, Buffalo, West Valley • ~ $600M annual budget FY10/11 • NYSERDA.org

6. How We Met • TIRC – Transportation Infrastructure Research Consortia (2001 – 2009) • Letters of support for various PONs (Program Opportunity Notice) • Conversations started • They were calling us for input on projects • We were talking about upcoming PONs • We own the infrastructure • They have money….

7. Started Getting Serious • Discussions at internal SPR monthly coordination meetings • Discussions with NYSERDA on ways of working together • Discussions with FHWA • Asking why not? • Saying so what….old rules old news… • We made it work

8. Making It Happen • Pitch to Executives • Commissioner is on the NYSERDA Board • Leverage ITS NY and ITS America • Leverage funding, Department goals, etc • Worked with our Contract folks • Sign off on funding by Executives • Sign off by the State Comptroller • Work with program areas on the PON • Be flexible, don’t give up, be realistic

9. The Good • Leverages our funding • Assists in meeting State goals • Different research than our typical program • Allows researcher to perform the research • Shorter time to contract – their process • Higher profile research • Target responses to the PON • Some Funding for implementation

10. The Not So Good • Takes funding from other parts of our research program • Not all projects are high priority • Takes time from other work • Not all program areas are involved • Higher Profile Research • We don’t get final vote on the projects

11. Overall • The good outweigh the not so good • Variety in our research • Additional funding is always welcome • Together our programs are stronger

12. Looking forward… • Continue to work together (trust) • Their funding is growing (economics) • Using NYSERDA funding for the 20% state match (making deals) • Using some of their funding in support of the State Energy Plan (policy research) • Continue to let the world know (marketing) • Deliver usable products (accountability) • Increase interaction with researchers (empower staff)

13. Project Opportunity Notice Examples

14. Past Program Opportunity Notices • 2006 - support the development, validation or demonstration of innovative products and systems that “improve the efficiency, performance and reliability of the existing transportation systems in NYS” • 2007 - “improve the sustainability (energy and environmental performance) of the existing transportation systems in New York State”

15. Past Program Opportunity Notices • 2008 - “reduce greenhouse gases and petroleum consumption by reducing vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in New York State without adversely affecting the State’s economy or quality of life” • 2009 - “development or demonstration of strategies and/or technologies that have the potential of improving the overall system efficiency of existing NYS transportation corridors”

16. PON 2074 Low Carbon Transportation Alternatives • “$1.5 million - developing and/or demonstrating strategies and/or enabling commercial technologies that have the potential of reducing the carbon intensity of the existing multi-modal transportation system in New York State” • $ 15K Workshops, Guidebooks & Outreach • $ 75K Policy Research & Feasibility Studies • $ 150K Underutilized Strategies & Policies • $ 250K Underutilized, Commercial Technologies • Proposals due August 25, 2010

17. PON 2045Advanced Transportation Technologies • $3M available in 2010 to support the development, demonstration, and commercialization of innovative transportation products, systems and services. Announcement in July with proposals due in August. • $ 50K Initial Feasibility Studies • $ 150K Bench-Scale Product Development • $ 500K Prototype Product Development (< 3 years)