Criterion Examples
Criterion Examples are user-submitted examples to showcase how an agency or project accomplished points within a particular criterion.
Use the filtering below to look for Criterion Examples pertinent to your project or program. Please also visit the Submit Criterion Example page to share your INVEST experiences with other users!
The ability to share and review Criterion Examples within INVEST Version 1.3 hopes to create an open-forum and sharing of ideas. Criterion Examples can be submitted by anyone. Criterion examples are only reviewed by FHWA in the context of appropriateness. Submittal gives consent for FHWA to publish the example online; publishing online does not imply consent, approval, or endorsement by FHWA.
With the submittal of a criterion example, FHWA reserves the right to share your example on the INVEST website. The agency name will be shared, but name and contact information of the person who submitted the criterion will NOT be shared on the website, but will be visible to FHWA. FHWA may elect to review and provide feedback on your example, but is not obligated to do so. FHWA may elect to share contact information provided with criterion examples to other users who request that information.
While use of the INVEST website is private, and information about projects/programs and scores is not available to FHWA or other users, if a user selects to submit a criterion example, the information provided within that submittal is not considered private. The purpose of this is to ensure that examples are carefully considered by users and to provide a "forum" for ideas and examples to be shared among transportation practitioners. The scoring for any projects/programs registered by a submitter of a criterion example stays private; only the information pertaining to the criterion examples is shared.
Arizona Department of Transportation Sustainable Transportation Program - OM-05- OM-05: (V1.2)
- ADOT used INVEST 1.2 to review its current safety management operations and maintenance activities and determine how well it is maximizing the safety of its existing roadways. ADOT compared its current safety management practices to the best practices included in the Safety Management criterion (OM-05) and used any deficiencies identified to determine methods of improvement, where needed.
Arizona Department of Transportation Sustainable Transportation Program - OM-07- OM-07: (V1.2)
- Using the INVEST OM module in 2015 and 2016, ADOT assessed the state of its operations and maintenance activities. Through the use of INVEST, ADOT has been able to expand its knowledge of current and evolving sustainability best practices, move its Sustainable Transportation Program and related activities forward, and foster intra‐agency collaboration. Even though ADOT received all the points available for OM‐07, it identified additional areas for improvement including further implementing sustainable pavement solutions, such as using Ultra‐Thin Bonded Overlay in areas with high turning movements.
Arizona Department of Transportation Sustainable Transportation Program - OM-09- OM-09: (V1.2)
- Using the INVEST OM module in 2015 and 2016, ADOT assessed the state of its operations and maintenance activities. In scoring criterion OM‐09, INVEST allowed ADOT to systematically assess the strengths and limitations of its maintenance management system (MMS). Stemming from the INVEST evaluation, ADOT identified ways the current MMS can be expanded and improved such as adding automated short‐term work scheduling and using the MMS to define projects and exchange information with the agency’s Pavement Management System (PMS) and Bridge Management System (BMS).
George V. Voinovich Bridge- PD-08: (V1.0)
- INVEST helped ODOT improve the sustainability of the largest project in ODOT history, the replacement of the Cleveland Innerbelt Bridge on I‐90, now called the George V. Voinovich Bridge. The project has two phases – the first was construction of the westbound bridge, completed in 2013; the second phase, design and construction of the eastbound bridge, began in 2014. ODOT used the pilot version of INVEST to score the first phase to see if the project was meeting its goals. ODOT found the process so valuable, that for the second phase of the project, the agency stipulated in its request for proposals that the contractor use INVEST to demonstrate sustainability. The George V. Voinovich Bridge project provides an example of scoring and documenting the INVEST stormwater management criterion.
Mobility 2035: The Metropolitan Transportation Plan for North Central Texas- SP-01: (V1.0)
- North Central Texas Council of Governments (NCTCOG) serves as the council of governments for a 16-county region centered on Dallas and Fort Worth. NCTCOG, one of the agencies that pilot tested INVEST, assessed its adopted long-range transportation plan (LRTP), Mobility 2035, using INVEST’s System Planning module. NCTCOG, scored well on the SP-01 criterion, but found through the INVEST self-evaluation that there was room for enhancing their work in this area in such a way that would both improve sustainability outcomes, and help the agency take more credit for the good work it was already doing.
Portland Milwaukie Light Rail Transit Project- PD-15: (V1.0)
- TriMet utilized INVEST 1.0 to evaluate and score the PMLR Transit Project. PMLR is a 7.3‐mile light rail corridor providing access for residents of Portland and Clackamas County. TriMet used the custom scorecard by building upon the required 19 core criteria and adding seven more criteria to provide a more rigorous and well‐rounded analysis of the project and to better reflect the goals, achievements, and gaps specific to a transit project.
Transportation Agency For Monterey County - SPR‐01- SPR-01: (V1.2)
- TAMC is the regional transportation planning agency for Monterey County, California, responsible for developing and updating a long-range vision of the regional transportation system. TAMC used the INVEST System Planning for Regions (SPR) module to review a broad spectrum of its planning efforts – including its 2014 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) – and evaluate how well-defined and comprehensive its sustainability efforts have been. TAMC attained a perfect score for SPR-01 showcasing the agency’s ability to integrate transportation planning with economic development and land use. TAMC modeled the Policy Element of its current RTP on the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Smart Mobility Framework, which emphasizes the integration of transportation and land use planning. This element is also consistent with the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) Monterey Bay 2035: Moving Forward plan. In the future, TAMC plans to build upon its current approach for integrating economic development and land use plans to achieve even greater sustainability in this area.
Transportation Agency For Monterey County - SPR‐02- SPR-02: (V1.2)
- TAMC is the regional transportation planning agency for Monterey County, California, responsible for developing and updating a long-range vision of the regional transportation system. TAMC used the INVEST System Planning for Regions (SPR) module to review a broad spectrum of its planning efforts – including its 2014 Regional Transportation Plan – and evaluate how well-defined and comprehensive its sustainability efforts have been. INVEST 1.2 enabled TAMC to evaluate its progress in integrating ecological considerations into the transportation planning process. Overall, TAMC scored 10/15 for SPR-02 by developing goals and objectives for integrating transportation planning with natural resource planning, working collaboratively with natural resource and regulatory agencies, and integrating ecological planning into its Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). The agency did identify a few areas for improvement, and in the future plans to expand its habitat planning, develop sustainability-related ecological performance measures, and monitor progress towards long-term ecological goals.
Transportation Agency For Monterey County - SPR‐03- SPR-03: (V1.2)
- TAMC is the regional transportation planning agency for Monterey County, California, responsible for developing and updating a long-range vision of the regional transportation system. TAMC used the INVEST System Planning for Regions (SPR) module to review a broad spectrum of its planning efforts – including its 2014 Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)– and evaluate how well-defined and comprehensive its sustainability efforts have been. The agency scored 10/15 for SPR-03. TAMC’s INVEST 1.2 evaluation helped to determine the agency’s strengths and weaknesses in integrating transportation planning with the community’s vision and goals and identifying potential improvements for the future.
Utah Department of Transportation Statewide Highway System- OM-07: (V1.0)
- Using the pilot version of INVEST in winter 2011-2012, UDOT developed specific recommendations for sustainability improvements to its operations and maintenance program. UDOT then performed a new self-evaluation in the summer of 2014 using INVEST 1.0 to measure progress and identify room for improvement. UDOT found that it had made sustainability progress in a number of areas, including OM-07. UDOT scored well on this criterion, as it has a mature pavement management system (PMS) in place, but also found through the INVEST self-evaluation process that UDOT could further improve its PMS by integrating LIDAR data into the system to enhance the quality of the data.
Washington State Department of Transportation Corridor Studies- SP-06: (V1.0)
- The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) used the INVEST System Planning module to score three completed corridor studies in the Seattle/Tacoma metropolitan area: SR 516 Corridor Study (SR 167 in Kent to SR 169 in Maple Valley), SR 520 Multi-modal Corridor Planning Study, and US 2 Everett Port / Naval Station to SR 9 Corridor Planning Study. These studies represented a variety of contexts, including the type of highway and surrounding land use, different commute patterns and availability of transit, and varying scope, schedule, budget, and stakeholder participation levels. Even though the evaluations focused on the corridor studies, as part of the scoring process, WSDOT officials also noted agency-wide efforts. For SP-06, WSDOT found that while they would have scored well on some of the scoring requirements at the agency level, they did not score as well at the corridor level due to the specificity of the scoring requirements.
