Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center (ACJIC)

Alabama Department of Public Safety (DPS)

Center for Advanced Public Safety (CAPS)

Proposal to

TheFederal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

MCSAP High Priority Grants Program

Advanced Computer Tablet Technology (ACTT)

to Expedite CMV Inspection Data Collection

Phase 2

(Approximate period of performance: 7-1-2013 through 9-30-2014)

Srinivas Javangula, Grants Manager, ACJIC

Capt. Tim Pullin, DPS

Allen Parrish, Director, CAPS

September 1, 2012

Advanced Computer Tablet Technology (ACTT)

To Expedite CMV Inspection Data Collection

Phase 2

Proposal to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Lead Agency: Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center

CONTACT INFORMATION

Srinivas Javangula, IT Projects and Program Manager

Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center

201 South Union Street, Suite 300

Montgomery, AL 36130

Phone: 334-517-2416

E-mail:

Capt. Tim Pullin, Commander

Motor Carrier Safety Unit

Alabama Department of Public Safety

P.O. Box 1511

Montgomery, AL 36102

Phone: 334-353-8383

E-mail:

Allen Parrish, Director

Center for Advanced Public Safety

The University of Alabama

Box 870290

Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0290

Phone: 205-348-3749

Fax: 205-348-5044

E-mail:

Advanced Computer Tablet Technology

To Expedite CMV Inspection Data Collection

Phase 2

Project Narrative

INTRODUCTION

With existing MCSAP High Priority funding, Alabama has been developing a prototype inspection application for low-cost tablets. There are two primary motivations for this work. First, with many of these tablets in the $300 - $500 range, it is hoped that a tablet platform will be identified where the hardware cost is considerably less than a standard PC-based laptop. And second, with the ability to carry a tablet and work while standing, it is hoped that the ergonomics of a tablet might provide new work flow benefits not available with more stationary laptops.

For this project, we propose to extend the existing prototype project into a deployable application suite that can be fully utilized in the field. The existing prototype project has been geared toward evaluating the utility of various platforms and approaches. The project proposed here will involve completing all necessary functionality, as well as conducting full field testing and final deployment of the application suite.

While the planned start date/duration of the project is July 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014, a 15-month duration, this proposal will remain valid until the date of award, and the start date will be adjusted accordingly. Generally, the first 9 months will be focused heavily on development, while the last 6 months will be a combination of test deployments, feedback and eventually a production-quality release.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

It is essential that the state address its enforcement personnel shortage by utilizing the most effective technology available and thus making its enforcement process as efficient as possible. Past and ongoing efforts, discussed in Appendix A, have proven their value in increasing the force effectiveness. The following remains if these ongoing efforts are to not only produce their effects in Alabama, but provide a model for other states:

  • The proven prototype must be enhanced based on feedback from the first phase of this project (MCSAP 2012) in order to attain full functionality and production quality;
  • The production quality systems must be deployed, including rollout, training, and local installations;
  • Measures of effectiveness must be applied in order to establish the value of the new approach, not only for extension to other agencies but for continuous improvement of these systems in the future;
  • Continuous data quality improvements must be implemented and measured as essential components of the process control system.

PROJECT GOAL(S) AND OBJECTIVE(S)

The ultimate goal of this project is to reduce CMV crashes and improve CMV compliance by making law enforcement officers more effective and efficient in their activities by their use of Advanced Computer Tablet Technology (ACTT) in the inspection process. The rationale is that the time saved by these devices, and their many additional features will enable a major increase in law enforcement productivity in accomplishing all of their goals.

This project will complete and roll out the ACTT-based systems(e.g., iPads and Android platforms) that are currently being prototyped as part of a MCSAP High Priority Grant awarded to Alabama in 2012 (which we refer to as “MCSAP 2012”).Over the longer term, these systems will serve as prototypes for even more advanced systems. Inspection data systems are being developed for both iOS and Android operating systems, andthe resulting systemsare currently being compared as part of MCSAP 2012. The outcome of this comparison will be used to establish the optimal platform for deployment of this technology, which is the ultimate goal of MCSAP 2012.

The outcome of the MCSAP 2012 project will be used as input to this proposed project for MCSAP, which we would anticipate a possible award around July 2013 (based on previous award schedules). For this project, which we will refer to as MCSAP 2013, we propose to conduct a Phase 2 to the MCSAP 2012 project. In this Phase 2 (MCSAP 2013), we will utilize the lessons learned from Phase 1 (MCSAP 2012) to develop an ACTT-based field application suite for inspectors. At the end of Phase 2, we will roll out a full tablet-based production application suite.

Phase 2 will be conducted by the Alabama Criminal Justice Information Center in collaboration with:

  • The University of Alabama Center for Advanced Public Safety (UA/CAPS), who developed the Phase 1 prototypes, and has also participated in the development of a number of nationally recognized applications, including the SENTRI system currently supported by FMCSA; and
  • Alabama Department of Public Safety Motor Carrier Safety Unit, who will provide field testing and will receive the production application for future utilization.

By collaborating with actual users and utilizing the expertise of UA/CAPS, we are developing a rich knowledge base for developing a future National model for future ACTT applications. At the same time, the test and roll-out of these units withinAlabama will provide an immediate benefit to the state once they are field tested to assure that the systems meet all law enforcement and ASPEN requirements.

While size is an important advantage,ACTT platforms are not just smaller version of laptops. The following summarizes the objectives that will accrue from using these units for inspection data entry:

  1. To roll out ACTT platforms (hardware and software) to 100% of the DPS/MCSUand to make the software available to all law enforcement statewide.
  2. To determine if the size of the units improves their usefulness in enabling them to be easily taken out to the vehicle being inspected, not only to collect the basic ASPEN data elements but also to take advantage of all of the other capabilities of these machines.
  3. To assess the overall software design being applied, e.g., potentially driven by a series ofordered drop-down checklists that is intended to enable officers to quickly and accurately document the inspection process.
  4. To minimize the use of narrative fields; i.e., fields that are currently narrative are being further classified into categories so that the use of narrative will be minimized even though theACTT systems support the generation of necessary narratives.
  5. To assess the extent to which, and the effectiveness of, the ACTT units being used to read and parse the barcodes on vehicle registrations and driver licenses, i.e., prepopulating any fields that require data from these documents.
  6. To determine the effectiveness of validating input data through Nlets and variousAlabama law enforcement databases.
  7. To evaluate the value of usingACTT to take pictures, e.g., of defective equipment brakes, undercarriage, etc., as well as the load itself in situations that are considered to be unsafe. [While such pictures cannot be uploaded to ASPEN, they will be retained at the state level to provide a valuable and definitive documentation of any visible issues.]
  8. To assess the value of using ADVANCE (see Appendix A) to process and display these data and objects, e.g., giving inspection officers and supervisors access to both summaries and drilldowns to specific records, including photos.
  9. To test and validate the ability of the systems developed to support and upload to the current ASPEN entry system so that there will be no disruption in the current method and use of ASPEN in transmitting the information to FMCSA.
  10. In summary, to create and implement the various interfaces as depicted in the figure below for the creation, use and disposition of the data.

PHASE ONE: MCSAP 2012

We are currently engaged in the Phase 1 (MCSAP 2012) project. For this project, our objective is to determine the optimal hardware platform and develop a prototype inspection application that is targeted toward providing maximum benefit to the field inspector. This application will be fielded on competing hardware platforms to establish the best platform for the intended uses. We are designing experiments to determine the most useful functionalities to automate, as well as the best user interface design for inspection functions.

The current working schedule for Phase 1 is as follows:

  • Tablet hardware device selection – Complete by September 1, 2012
  • Inspection scope and UI definition – Complete by October 15, 2012
  • Development Cycle #1 – Complete by December 15, 2012
  • Development Cycle #2 – Complete by February 15, 2013
  • Development Cycle #3 – Complete by April 30, 2013
  • Evaluation Plan – Complete by April 30, 2013
  • Field evaluation results – Complete by June 30, 2013

The lessons learned from Phase 1 will provide input to Phase 2. In particular, the hardware platform, user interface design and prototype tools and functionalities developed during Phase 1 will be used to determine an appropriate scope and platform for the production product to be developed during Phase 2.

PHASE 2: PROPOSED PROJECT

In this project, we propose to develop a production system based on the lessons learned from Phase 1. The specifications for the proposed system will be developed from those lessons learned as part of the initiation of Phase 2. In this section, we outline the general process for completing Phase 2.

The following general subject headings will serve to further organize the task categories within this project:

  • Project Governance and Guidance
  • Systems Assessment and Design Updates
  • Systems Development
  • Beta Testing and Rollout
  • System Evaluation

Project Governance and Guidance

A group of CMV officers as well as FMCSA representatives within the state will form the basis for a steering committee that will provide guidance to the project team throughout the project. Most of these individuals, including several DPS CMV Unit officers originally requested that CAPS investigate development in the direction of ACTT. Being generally familiar with tablet operation, they saw a tremendous advantage in porting their current data collection from the laptop to a tablet-based platform.

Systems Assessment and Design Updates

Throughout the project the current prototypes and their improved counterparts will be assessed to assure that they are meeting user needs in the most effective way, and that they are doing so in a reliable manner. In particular, each of the data elements currently recorded and transmitted through the ASPEN system will be evaluated to see how it can best be displayed and captured on the ACTT units. Separate considerations at this point might be required, since the approach to optimizing the iOS and Android operating systems could be different. The systems analysis will also cover aspects of converting the data obtained from the ACTT units and moving it into the format currently being used to store inspection data for ASPEN. In essence, the system will not know whether the records are coming from the ACTT units or traditional ASPEN data entry. The identical supervisory approval and data storage processes will apply. This will enable the uploading to proceed as it currently does with no disruption to the ASPEN process. It will also enable the ACTT units to be rolled out incrementally, causing the minimal disruption as the system gains acceptance.

System Development

Based on the updated design, aredevelopment of the prototypes will take place. It is recognized that the early rapid prototyping was performed not only to break through some of the development issues, but also to present users with a concrete example upon which they could base their recommendations for improvement. Any conflicting issues will be evaluated by the steering committee and adjustments will be made based on their recommendations. Two or three design-development reiterations are expected in order to produce the final production-quality components. Unit, integration and system testing will be part of the development. The development will also include a component to cover the translation of the data collected into the ASPEN format.

Beta Testing and Rollout

The systems (iOS and Android) will be subjected to intensive beta testing in order to assure that they are totally functional. A comparison will be made at this point as to whether either has the advantage over the other, and under which conditions that advantage would hold. Any adjustments that are determined during the beta testing will be addressed, and all faults will be corrected. Once the beta test processes are completed a planned rollout of the system will be performed.

System Evaluation

All of the processes above will be accompanied by rigid evaluation of both the resulting systems and the development processes so that information can be obtained for the potential of developing a national model for the use of ACTT-based systems. This evaluation process will be further elaborated in the Evaluation/Monitoring Plan section below.

Task List and Timeline

The following is a list of tasks that will define the tasks for the project time line that is given in the Gantt chart following this list:

  1. Project Governance. Establish project governance from top- or mid-level administrative personnel who are currently involved with CMV aspects of eCite and ADVANCE; no major changes are expected from Phase 1.
  2. User Group. Establish a user group from current CMV eCite users and ACTT beta testers. This group has been quite useful in generating input as to the requirements for the ACTT system, and no major changes are expected from Phase 1 other than the addition of beta testers to validate that the system is ready for final roll-out.
  3. Evaluation of Phase 1 Results. A critical review of all of the prototypes and documentation developed in the 2012 project (Phase 1) will be conducted with a view toward using the lessons learned in Phase 1 to ultimately develop a dramatically improved production quality system.
  4. Hardware Evaluation. This will result in an analysis to update the hardware requirements. It is critical that the systems be developed on the most advanced hardware available, and in this regard it is important that hardware not be acquired until it is ready to be used. Hardware that was acquired during Phase 1 could be obsolete at this point. Both the hand-held ACTT hardware to support the effort and the centralized servers will be evaluated at this point to determine if their specifications should be upgraded.
  5. Software Gap Analysis. The purpose here is to crystallize the difference between what currently exists from Phase 1 and what will exist at the end of Phase 2. This will lead to a fuzzy set of requirements that will be given additional cost-benefit considerations to assure that the requirements that will be used for developing the system are sound and feasible within the time and financial constraints of the project.
  6. Requirements Specifications. The software gap analysis as well as the software testing and feedback from beta testers from Phase 1. will lead to a specification of those requirements that are considered to be feasible to include in the design of the target production quality system.
  7. Software Design Update. The two ACTT systems designs will be updated based on the requirements specifications. This will update the data structures to be used, the user interfaces, any language variations, integration with MOVE and other software specifications.
  8. Experimental Design. The experimental design will be motivated by the data requirements for verifying whether the objectives stated above have been met. Also, at this point enough experience will be gained to enable alternatives to be proposed for each of the operating systems. The comparisons envisioned will go beyond just the comparison of the two operating systems. Within each, it is expected that a number of alternative approaches will be tried to determine the best approach. This will include user interface options, such as the style of drop-down menus and the use of the keyboard. It will also consider hardware and network options, such as the approach in using the camera to scan barcodes and uploading the data. Statistical tests will be designed for analyses requiring sampling.
  9. Survey Design.