Training Materials to Implement Context Classifications (2026)
Chapter: 2 State DOT Identification
Chapter 2: State DOT Identification
INTRODUCTION
The primary objective of Task 1 was to identify three state DOTs that were interested in applying context classification but that needed help implementing it in their policies, processes, and guidance. The selected state DOTs’ implementation experiences were then used to create training materials relevant to agencies across the country.
DOT IDENTIFICATION
To identify potential state DOTs to participate in this project, the research team:
- reviewed the agency surveys initially conducted to prepare NCHRP Research Report 1022, Context Classification Application: A Guide; NCHRP Web-Only Document 320, “Aligning Geometric Design with Roadway Context”; and NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 21-02, “Leading Approaches to Implementing Context-Based Classification of Roadways in Planning and Design”; and
- identified agencies that have existing context-based design policies, that adopted context classification/area types/roadway environments, and that have requested and/or received context-based technical assistance through the State Smart Transportation Initiative/Smart Growth America programs.
To assist with identification of State DOTs the research team identified five tiers of agency familiarization or implementation related to context. These tiers include the following:
- No policy, leadership directive, or expressed interest
- Adopted policy or leadership directive without set context classifications
- Adopted context classifications that have not been implemented yet
- Initials stages of context classification implementation
- Fully implemented context classification
The research team focused on identifying agencies in Tiers 2 to 4 to make the most meaningful progress during the project. A preliminary list of state DOTs considered for the research project, shown in Table 2-1, was shared with the NCHRP panel during the kickoff meeting.
Table 2-1. Initial List of Potential State DOTs
| State | Interest/Relevancy |
|---|---|
| Kansas | Expressed interest in NCHRP Web-Only Document 320. |
| Nevada | Expressed interest in NCHRP Research Report 1022. |
| New Jersey | Identified contexts in Smart Transportation Guide. |
| Caltrans | Adopted context classifications and participated in NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 21-02. |
| Utah | Expressed interest in NCHRP Research Report 1022, identified contexts in Utah Street Connectivity Guide, and requested technical assistance from Smart Growth America. |
| Virginia | Expressed interest in NCHRP Research Report 1022, participated in NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 21-02, and identified contexts in the Multimodal System Guidelines. |
| Texas | Expressed interest in NCHRP Web-Only Document 320 and was in the process of updating design guidance. |
| Maine | Recently updated Complete Streets Policy and participated in NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 21-02 (added based on NCHRP panel comments). |
EVALUATION CRITERIA AND SELECTION
To further evaluate each state DOT’s potential for participation in the project, the research team established a primary criterion requiring selected DOTs to have a leadership directive or policy supporting context-based design. Other factors the team considered included geography and climate, population density, lessons applicable to other states, stage of adoption/implementation, and participation in national research. Table 2-2 summarizes the state DOT evaluation, which was refined based on input from the NCHRP panel.
Based on discussions with the NCHRP panel, the research team prioritized states with a strong internal champion and support from leadership. Ultimately, the NCHRP panel selected Kansas, Maine, and Nevada DOTs to participate in the project.
Table 2-2. State DOT Evaluation Summary
| State | Policy/Directive | Interest in Context Classification | Adopted Context Classification | Geography | Population Density | Lessons Applicable to Others | Tier | Internal Champion | National Research/TRB Involvement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California (Caltrans) |  | | | Pacific West | High | | 3/4 |  | |
| Kansas | | |  | Central | Low | | 2 | | |
| Maine | | | | New England | Low | | 4 | | |
| Nevada | | | | Mountain West | Low | | 2 | | |
| New Jersey | | | | Northeast | High | | 3 | | |
| Texas | | | | South Central | Moderate/High | | 2 | | |
| Utah | | | | Mountain West | Low | | 2 | | |
| Virginia | | | Southeast/Mid Atlantic | High | | 2 | | |
Meets the Criteria Somewhat Meets the Criteria Does Not Meet the Criteria
EXTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS
State DOTs rely on partnerships with external stakeholders to identify, prioritize, and implement projects. These same stakeholders can be called upon to support context classification implementation. The research team compiled a list of these stakeholders for state DOTs’ use:
- Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Resource Center Safety and Design Team
- FHWA division offices
- Metropolitan planning organizations
- Planning commissions/councils
- Cities and counties
- Community redevelopment agencies
- Transit agencies
- Rail and utility companies
- Leaders of diverse or underserved communities
- Professional organizations (Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE], American Trucking Association [ATA], Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals [APBP], American Public Transportation Association [APTA], American Public Works Association [APWA], etc.)
- Local businesses
The research team encouraged state DOTs to engage these external stakeholders during the survey further discussed in Chapter 3 and to consider them as partners in their action plan development.
REFERENCES
1. Ray, Brian, Hermanus Steyn, Julia Knudsen, Jennifer Musselman, Nikiforos Stamatiadis, Adam Kirk. 2022. NCHRP Web Only Document 320: Aligning Geometric Design with Roadway Context. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
2. Stamatiadis, Nikiforos, Adam Kirk, Laura Wright, Hermanus Steyn, Mary Raulerson, Jennifer Musselman. 2022. NCHRP Research Report 1022: Context Classification, A Guide. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
3. Capers, Harry A. 2022. NCHRP Project 20-68A, Scan 21-02, “Leading Approaches to Implementing Context-Based Classification of Roadways in Planning and Design”. Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC.
