Transportation Planning

Decision time: software-as-a-Service (SaaS) or custom-built software systems? Part 1

1. Cost

Pay close attention to upfront and ongoing costs for each option, typically, custom solutions will have deceptively low ongoing costs with huge upfront costs that hide the inevitable, massive rebuild cost when the technology becomes obsolete (think of a new car that devalues as soon as it leaves the lot). This is because the low ongoing cost will only cover the basics to maintain the system, not keep it up-to-date with new product features and technology updates. Enter SaaS, typically lower upfront costs but higher ongoing costs for precisely the reason above – constant updates so large fees due to obsolescence never occur and the system continuously improves.

2. Speed

Custom solutions are exactly that, custom – meaning it takes additional time to gather requirements and build from scratch. SaaS solutions typically have out-of-the-box platforms that can be spun-up very quickly while allowing for configurations that would adapt the platform to the client’s specific needs. Within agencies today, as various point solutions are adopted for different functional needs – the idea of interoperable data becomes even more important. 

3. Flexibility

Custom solutions due to initial customization and pricing structure are generally set in stone after they are launched barring minor changes here and there, material modifications are both difficult and costly, SaaS solutions on the other hand, are highly adaptable and generally straightforward to modify by nature of the continuous product and technology updates.  

While it may seem obvious that we feel this way, think on these three points and check out our SaaS solution: ProjectTracker in the meantime if you like, no pressure! Stay tuned for part 2.

Achieving Successful System Integrations on Planning Software

In today’s complex organizations, no single job or the system used to support a job can afford to be a lone island.  

That’s why any software must make sense within the broader technology ecosystem it needs to fit within for its end user.

Take transportation planning or capital programming for example – planners use cloud-based solutions like ProjectTracker to streamline their main workflow of planning and programming capital projects. 


At the same time, planners may also need to integrate programming data with financial system data for budgeting, push or pull FMIS obligation data from FHWA for federal funding updates, pull contract award and letting data from AASHTOWARE for visibility on project delivery status – among other examples of system integration needs for programming.


Here are some some insights we’ve learned from years of work with government agencies on what to consider when choosing a software that needs to integrate with other systems:

1. Identify software with a track record of existing functional connection to your preferred system as much as possible

Often teams with no prior experience on a particular system will underestimate the effort and time it takes to develop a robust integration for the very first time. 

This is an aspect of custom development that always ends up taking longer and more costly than expected. This is especially true when integrating with systems that do not have mature APIs. At one end of the spectrum, a system with well-documented API presents the easiest point of integration. As an example, If ESRI has a well documented API, it’s relatively straightforward for any reputable software company to establish a simple integration. 

However, many legacy or custom built systems do not have APIs – especially in the government space. FHWA’s FMIS is an example. The level of effort to unpack the FMIS data, transform and perform operations on it, build the data pipe in a first integration attempt can be magnitudes of degrees higher than anything else and possibly take years. 

As much as possible – find solutions that have a functional integration already with the system you need. 

2. Develop a robust, centralized data warehouse in the agency

Within agencies today, as various point solutions are adopted for different functional needs – the idea of interoperable data becomes even more important. 

It’s valuable to not only be able to import data from other systems – it also becomes critical to easily export data out of each system so data can be centralized and normalized. 

Enter the centralized data warehouse. 

We’ve seen agencies successfully invest the staff resources in developing and maintaining a comprehensive, centralized data warehouse. 

Such a warehouse pipes in data from all software at the agency, and allows designated technical staff to create complex and custom reports, visualizations and ad-hoc or ongoing queries to extract useful insights from all of the data captured across the whole organization. 

This gives agencies unprecedented transparency and visibility to all of the data generated across all its systems, and augments the reporting capabilities that exist across individual software platforms. 

Centralized data warehouse puts the control back in the hands of the agency of its entire data across the whole work lifecycle of its organization. 

In your procurement process, look for software with an API or direct database connection to easily export data out of the platform for integration with an internal data warehouse. 

3. Consider choosing the path of direct database connection for data warehouse integration

When exploring a software’s capability to work with an internal data warehouse, one option (if available) that can save agencies much time and effort is to choose a live, direct database connection. 

This connection capability allows the client agency to directly tap into another software’s database without having to do essentially any development work. 

This approach works especially well for agencies using advanced BI tools like Tableau or Power BI, and wish to add another data source from a software in a manner requiring zero work outside of credentials to establish the connection for the first time. 

Once established, the live direct database connection allows your BI tool to “see” instant changes to the dataset in the connected system – and utilize those updates right away in your reporting. 

These days, government departments are increasingly seeing the benefit of choosing the best-in-class point solution for specific needs, vs. using an all-encompassing heavy software that does everything but meeting various specific needs only half-way. The fact that many modern software has configuration capabilities to display different types and layouts of data from other systems makes the choice even more compelling. 

We hope the above suggestions can help any transportation programmer or planner wrestling with how to ensure a technology transformation will achieve successful integrations with other internal tools.

What is in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act 2021?

How does it impact transportation planning and program management over the next five years?

In November 2021, President Biden signed into law the largest infrastructure bill of the last decade – the Infrastructure and Investment Jobs Act (IIJA). This bill will deliver a historic infusion of public spending on infrastructure improvements totaling nearly $973 billion over five years. 

The bulk of the IIJA funding will be directed through USDOT to invest in transportation infrastructure upgrades:


States and the District of Columbia will see an immediate financial windfall in December 2021 with a 30% increase in Highway Formula Funding vs. FY2021. The largest % increases in FHWA funding went to STGBP set-aside for transportation alternatives, HSIP, Metropolitan Planning, and Ferry Boats and Terminals:

Breakdown of Highway Formula Funding


It is encouraging to see greater funding for MPOs – agencies that shoulder particularly heavy responsibilities for investing a large portion of FHWA’s transportation dollars. To fulfill their important mandate of responsibly investing public funding, transportation agencies such as MPOs, DOTs, cities, counties and transit agencies should take stock of their current agency needs from a tools, team and infrastructure perspective to ensure they can successfully plan, track and execute a well-organized vision for investing DIJA’s new infrastructure spending. 

Of IIJA’s $550 billion increase in new investments across various programs (i.e., above what the federal government already spends today), the majority of new funds is directed towards transportation programs. Within transportation, a large portion of funds will be spent on roads & bridges, followed closely by rail and transit: 


There are a few noteworthy provisions for transportation planners at MPOs, states, counties and cities under changes from IIJA:

  • A new $40 billion Bridge Investment Program ($12 billion competitive direct to USDOT) that allows for the repair, replacement and rehab of off-system bridges as well. 50% federal share on large projects and 80% on any other project

  • A new competitive grant program for local governments to close, separate or upgrade at-grade rail crossings and reduce collisions

  • New population band within STBG for communities between 50K and 200K pop. for more equitable distribution of funds

  • $330 million increase to off-system, bridge set-aside annually

  • A new $2 billion Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program for highway and bridge projects in an area outside of urban areas with pop >200K. 80% federal share

  • MPOs are required to consider equity and proportional representation when designating representatives or officials

In addition, a slew of new programs – many of which are competitive and allow local governments to apply directly to USDOT – include significant funding for a wide range of projects (“*” indicates a program where local governments can apply directly to USDOT ):

  • Climate Change programs: $8.7 billion PROTECT Grant Program for infrastructure resiliency*,  $6.42 billion Carbon Reduction Formula Program, $2.5 billion for Charging and Fueling Infrastructure Grants*, $500 million Healthy Streets Program* for reducing urban heat via pavement improvement or tree covers, $250 million for reduction of truck emissions at port facilities

  • Rail programs: $10 billion for Mega projects*, $2.5 billion for eliminating at-grade rail-highway crossings*, $4 billion for new culvert removal, replacement and restoration*

  • Public Transit programs: 30% funding increase to $15 billion for the Capital Investment Grant (CIG) Program, 43.5% increase in contract authority for mass transit FY2022-FY2026, increases in rural set-asides for bus grants and requirements on purchasing low-to-zero emission vehicles, and new requirements for recipients of federal funding such as including agency safety plans

There is a ton to fully digest in the new IIJA bill, and with that – a wide range of opportunities for state, regional and local governments to take advantage of new funding programs, competitive grants and policy changes to make infrastructure upgrades and improve transportation planning in a way that most benefits their communities.

DOT STIP Software Considerations

The Statewide Transportation Improvement Programs (STIP) process is an on-going process with updates and amendments consistently occurring. Since STIPs are on-going programs, all Departments of Transportation (DOTs) must have a system in place to track and manage the STIP update and amendment process.  DOTs follow a regular STIP update and amendment process and utilize management software to track the STIP, whether through a Microsoft Access database, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, a customized database developed in another software program or a combination of those three along with supporting documentation in emails, reports and documents.  

There are several considerations for DOT STIP Software:

  • Ease connection with statewide DOT Plan / Programs – processes to move projects, project phases, and on-going programs from larger DOT programs and standalone DOT programs
  • Ease of connection with performance measurement – processes to connect projects with various performance measures
  • Need for a public facing site with project listings, locations, funding sources and amounts
  • Need for a connection to the Federal Management Information Systems (FMIS) 
  • Need for system to standardize a process and document project changes
  • Need for routine reporting (fiscal constraint, amendment/update summary, funding balances)
  • Need for Advance Construction (AC) functionality
  • Need for communication flows to / from Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) (i.e. amendment requests, review, approvals, and changes)
  • Expectations of governing body and FHWA/FTA
  • Hardware and software needs
  • Staff knowledge and experience with the overall STIP process and requirements and with the management software/system
  • Degree of maintenance required and support available for on-going product upgrades
  • Ease of implementation
  • Total cost (staff time + initial software implementation cost + on-going costs)

When EcoInteractive Project Tracker is a Good Fit for DOTs and When It’s Not

Good Fit

  • DOTs that are looking to make their online STIP more accessible and transparent to their governing body, committees and general public (as compared to a .pdf document posted on their website)
  • DOTs that want a better way to document changes made to STIP projects by DOT staff and project sponsors
  • DOTs looking to enhance and streamline  workflows for staff assigned to STIP Administration
  • DOTs looking to transition away from a system designed by a staff member that is soon to retire
  • DOTs that don’t have dedicated IT support for their current system
  • DOTs that would like direct access to the financial obligation system used by FHWA for their STIIP administration processes.
  • DOTs that experience frequent turnover in TIP Administration staff
  • DOTs looking to streamline the MPO Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) insertion process and the FHWA/FTA review process

Bad Fit

  • DOTs with a robust eSTIP tracking system complete with: version control, validation checks, ad hoc reporting, public website and centralized data management.

Ultimately, each DOT will weigh all of the considerations when evaluating its STIP Software of choice and STIP Administration approach and will decide which consideration is most important.  We believe EcoInteractive’s ProjectTracker SaaS solution is a strong candidate for many DOTs to consider

TIP Software Considerations for MPOs

The Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) process is an on-going process with updates and amendments consistently occurring. Since TIPs are on-going programs, all Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) must have a system in place to track and manage the TIP update and amendment process.  MPOs follow a regular TIP update and amendment process and utilize management software to track the TIP, whether through a Microsoft Access database, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet, a customized database developed in another TIP software program or a combination of those three along with supporting documentation in emails, reports and documents.

There are several considerations for MPOs evaluating a change to their TIP management system:

  • Ease of connection with the Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) – processes to move projects from the MTP to the TIP and tools to assess consistency
  • Ease of connection with performance measurement – processes to connect projects with various performance measures
  • Need for a public facing site with project listings, locations, funding sources and amounts
  • Need for a connection to the Federal Management Information Systems (FMIS)
  • Need for project sponsor communication (i.e., amendment requests, MPO review, approvals, and changes)
  • Need for routine reporting (i.e., fiscal constraint, amendment / update summary and funding balances)
  • Need for Advance Construction (AC) functionality
  • Need for communication flows to / from Department of Transportation (DOT) for Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) insertion
  • Expectations of Board, Member Governments, DOT and FHWA/FTA
  • Hardware and software needs
  • Staff knowledge and experience with the overall TIP process and requirements and with the management software / system
  • Degree of maintenance required and support available for on-going product upgrades
  • Ease of implementation
  • Total cost (staff time + initial software implementation cost + on-going costs)

When EcoInteractive Project Tracker is a Good Fit for MPOs and When It’s Not

Good Fit

  • MPOs that are looking to make their online TIP more accessible and transparent to their Board, committees and the general public (as compared to a .pdf document posted on their website)
  • MPOs that handle many transportation projects
  • MPOs that want to free up some of the TIP Administrator’s time to assist with other projects
  • MPOs that want a better way to document changes made to TIP projects by staff and project sponsors
  • MPOs that have relatively inexperienced staff assigned to TIP Administration
  • MPOs looking to transition away from a system designed by a staff member that is soon to retire
  • MPOs that do not have dedicated IT support for their current system
  • MPOs that would like direct access to the financial obligation system used by FHWA
  • MPOs that experience frequent turnover in TIP Administration staff
  • MPOs that award suballocated funding and want to improve their suballocated funding accounting practices

Bad Fit

  • MPOs that handle relatively few transportation projects
  • MPOs with a robust eTIP tracking system complete with: version control, validation checks, ad hoc reporting, public website and centralized data management

Ultimately, each MPO will weigh all of the considerations when evaluating its TIP Software of choice and TIP Administration approach and will decide which consideration is most important.  We believe EcoInteractive’s ProjectTracker SaaS solution is a strong candidate for many MPOs to consider.

Guide to Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs)

Kristen Z, Transportation Planner

[<5 Minute Read]

What is a TIP?

One of the core planning initiatives for Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), the “Transportation Improvement Program” (TIP) is an important ongoing program for MPOs.  TIPs have a lot of information, but the most popular information is usually the transportation project listings.  TIPS list all of the projects (and their funding sources) taking place in the metropolitan area transportation system for the next four years.

Projects are listed as individual projects (i.e. a modernization project to re-configure an arterial intersection) or as “bucket projects/programs” (i.e. ongoing transit operations funding program).  TIPs include projects funded with federal funding, state funding and local government funding. In fact, federal funding cannot be obligated for any particular project unless it is listed in the TIP.  TIPs project list total hundreds of millions of dollars and include hundreds of projects. These projects must be “fiscally constrained”, which means they must demonstrate that the sum total cost of all of the projects in the TIP is less than or equal to the estimated revenues over the same time period. EcoInteractive’s Project Tracker is an industry standard software MPOs use to administer their TIP programs.

Why is a TIP Developed?

TIPs are developed for several reasons.  For one, they are required.  For several decades now, federal transportation legislation has required MPOs to develop and maintain TIPs.  They also serve as a means for MPOs to be transparent about how the federal funding and state funding they administer is invested across the metropolitan area and its many modes.  Effectively, TIPs are a way for the MPO to demonstrate its priorities to the public, to the media and to regulators.  EcoInteractive’s Project Tracker software comes standard with a public facing portal to view the projects in the TIP.

Why Is the TIP Important?

As a federal requirement, the TIP is very important! Development and maintenance of a TIP is a requirement for MPOs and is often reviewed during the Certification Review.   In addition, the TIP is an important document in a MPO’s efforts to inform local governments and the general public as to how federal, state and local tax dollars are being spent on transportation in the metro area.

Who Participates in the TIP Process?

Many different people and organizations participate in the TIP process. Depending on how the MPO is organized, there could be one TIP Administrator or staff from multiple MPO departments involved in the TIP process.  Additionally, the general public has an opportunity to participate because during each update and amendment cycle, most MPOs offer opportunities for input from the general public.  After each TIP update / amendment is approved by the MPO’s governing body (i.e. its Board), the MPO staff sends the adopted TIP to the DOT for inclusion in the “Statewide Transportation Improvement program” or STIP.

Who Benefits from the TIP?

The TIP benefits the MPO by ensuring it stays compliant with federal regulations.  It also benefits the MPO by providing a means of demonstrating its investments across the state to legislators, the general public and local governments.  The general public benefits by seeing how their state and federal tax dollars are being invested.

What is the difference between the TIP and the STIP?

The TIP is produced and maintained by an MPO, and it includes projects that are taking place within the MPO area.  The STIP is produced and maintained by the State DOT and it includes projects that are taking place across the entire state.  The STIP includes (without changes) the current TIP from each MPO in the state.

Best Practice for Managing TIPs

The “Best Practices In Managing STIPS, TIPS, And Metropolitan Transportation Plans In Response To Fiscal Constraints” provides a very good summary of the best practices and examples of overall STIP management from several DOTs.  It covers TIP development and implementation practices, revenue estimating techniques, cost estimating techniques, and overall guidance on how to meet the federal “year of expenditure” requirement.   It was compiled as part of NCHRP Project 20-68A, the U.S. Domestic Scan program. This program was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), with funding provided through the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP).

Loved this post and want to learn more? Check out what we’ve done for some of our customers and see how transformative a modern database can be when it comes to managing transportation data!


How can we
HELP?