Appendix A: Samples of TMIP Webinar Announcements and Evaulation Reports

3.0 Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) Using Activity-Based Models-TMIP Webinar Evaluation Report

3.1 Summary

On December 13, 2012, Travel Model Improvement Program (TMIP) sponsored a webinar highlighting Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) experience developing and applying their activity-based model. The webinar was titled "DRCOG Experience Using Activity-Based Models."

The webinar session was presented by Erik Sabina (Regional Modeling Manager at DRCOG) and Tom Rossi (Principal at Cambridge Systematics). They discussed DRCOG's activity-based travel model called 'Focus'. A range of topics were covered during the webinar including:

• Development of the initial version of the model;
• Design of the model's theoretical and software structures;
• Calibration and validation of the model;
• Uses of the model during the two years since completion of its initial version.

A total of one hundred and thirty four (134) individuals and agencies (some with more than one participant) from academia, private consulting firms, local, state, and federal governments attended the webinar. A majority of these participants worked for large MPOs (>1 million population), state governments, or private sector consulting firms.

In a post-webinar evaluation, more than 90% of the respondents agreed that the webinar was relevant to their day-to-day jobs and that the format of the webinar was just right as is. None of the participants experienced any major technical problems with the audio or video quality or service. As part of the open comments, a few attendees suggested that more MPOs or government agencies should present on how they are using advanced modeling techniques (such as activity-based models) in guiding their policy decisions.

The following sections provide a detailed evaluation of the TMIP webinar on DRCOG's Experience Using Activity-Based Models.

3.2 Promotions

This webinar was promoted via an email message sent to the individuals and institutions who have signed up to receive TMIP news and updates (approximately 2000 subscribers). The promotional email was sent using GovDelivery, FHWA's news and email delivery service, on December 7, 2012. A reminder email was also distributed using GovDelivery on December 12, 2012, one day prior to the webinar. The webinar announcement and reminder distributed via email can be found in Appendix B.

3.3 Participation

Of the 134 unique attendees (meeting connections), 57% attended the webinar from start to finish (approximately 120 minutes). Figure 12 below presents a temporal profile of all the webinar participants.

Figure 12: Temporal Profile of DRCOG Agency Experience with ABM Webinar Participation

During the webinar, attendees were encouraged to submit questions via the meeting room chat pod. Eight (8) questions on the content of the presentations were asked in the chat. These questions are as follows:

• How are the candidate point/parcels (for Monte Carlo disaggregation from TAZ) updated for use in future scenarios?
• How do you deal with model result variations due to Monte Carlo simulation?
• Can you elaborate on what your VBA-enabled spreadsheet queries while the model is running? What is the goal of that effort (e.g., to check inputs are correct and/or model estimated finish time, other?)
• Do you run your ABM and land use model sequentially into horizon year with feedback between the two models?
• I would like to learn your program, what is the license agreement here? GPL, Opensource, or closed?
• What kind of model run times is DRCOG seeing with what kind of computer hardware?
• What non-motorized accessibilities do you use in the mode choice model, without an explicit bike/ped network?
• What will you have to do to make Focus acceptable to FTA? Has using an ABM resulted in better validation of transit in the base scenario?

These questions were answered once the presentation by Mr. Sabina and Mr. Rossi was complete.

3.4 Polling Questions

Five (5) polling questions were administered as part of the webinar. The first question regarding the number of participants at each location was administered prior to the start and again at the end of the presentation. This was done to capture any additional participants that might have joined in during the course of the webinar. The remaining four questions were answered at the end of the presentation. The results of these questions are listed below.

Question 1

How many participants are there at your location?

Table 18: DRCOG Agency Experience with ABM Evaluation Poll Question-Number of Participants

The response to this question was used to assign a weight to all of the other responses provided by the attendees except the final question. The final question inquired about the role of the attendee himself/herself or the head of the group that was attending at the organization to which s/he (they) belonged and thus did not need to be weighted.

Question 2

How relevant was this webinar to your day-to-day job?

Table 19: DRCOG Agency Experience with ABM Evaluation Poll Question - Webinar Relevancy

A majority of the respondents found the webinar to be very useful at their current job.

Question 3

What changes would you like to see in the format?

Table 20: DRCOG Agency Experience with ABM Evaluation Poll Question - Webinar Format

A vast majority of the participants agreed that the webinar format does not need to be changed in any way.

Question 4

What type of organization do you work for?

Figure 13: DRCOG Agency Experience with ABM Evaluation Poll Question-Type of Organization

As stated earlier, a majority of the attendees of this webinar were from large MPOs, state government, or the private sector consulting firms.

Question 5

Which of the following best describes you?

Table 21: DRCOG Agency Experience with ABM Evaluation Poll Question - Role at Organization

3.5 Participant Feedback and Recommendations

Participant response to the webinar was generally very positive. As indicated by the unedited comments below, the participants hoped that more MPOs and government agencies would continue to present these policy and procedural overview and other advanced modeling (especially activity based modeling) webinars. Some of the other primary recommendations from the participants were:

• Provide more details as part of the agency overview webinars;
• Agency presentation on additional areas of focus such as transit, bike and pedestrian models;
• Check audio quality and connection strength of all speakers before the webinar.