US Department of Transportation
FHWA PlanWorks: Better Planning, Better Projects
Partner Portal
Overview
Partners are granted decision making authority either through legislation or by specific designation within a plan or project. Primary partners include, but are not limited to:
Metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
State departments of transportation (DOTs)
Resource agencies
Public Transportation Operator(s)
Federal legislation grants these partners the power to block transportation decisions. For this reason, collaboration with these partners is essential to making decisions that stick. However, in your region, other partners may also exist. Collaboration with designated partners is equally important.
Three areas of information support partner collaboration:
- It is critical that each agency understands what other partners care about. Use Partner Interests to learn more.
- There are four possible roles for partners at each Key Decision. Go to Partner Roles to find out what they are.
- To designate a partner for a particular plan, program, or project, See Adding Partners for guidelines and how-to advice.
Essential Information
The Integrated Ecological Framework is a step-by-step technical process guiding the integration of transportation and ecological planning.It supports collaboration among resource and transporation agencies.
The Partner Collaboration Assessment is a survey used to pinpoint where process or team dynamics are obstructing collaboration and to find strategies to help.
Partner or Stakeholder
Stakeholders are agencies, organizations, or individuals that do not have a mandated or designated role in decision making. (Please note that in your region, additional decision makers may exist beyond those listed here – please see Adding Partners tab.) However, stakeholder input and support are essential for successful projects and plans.
Visit the StakeHolder Portal for information on collaborating with stakeholders.
Partner Interests
Each partner's interests guide their involvement in transportation decision making. Some interests are shared by all partners and others relate to the agency's specific mission and authority. To collaborate it is essential for partners to understand and build from each other’s interests.
All partners share the common interests that transportation decision making:
- Is collaborative and inclusive
- Is based on factual information and realistic assumptions
- Meets all legal requirements
|
MPO
|
Transportation plans and projects reflect the values, goals, and priorities of the region. |
|
FHWA/FTA
|
Transportation plans and projects are developed in accordance with current laws and regulations. |
|
State DOT
|
Statewide transportation system interconnectivity and goals are supported across both urban and rural areas. |
|
Resource Agency
|
Transportation decisions value and support high priority resources. |
|
Public Transportation Operator(s)
|
Transportation plans and projects reflect transit priorities of the region. |
| Partner | Example |
|---|---|
|
MPOs want to ensure that the process and plan support political, geographic, and social equity; reflect the region’s vision and goals; explore all possibilities; are fiscally constrained; and are consistent with growth, land use, and economic development plans and patterns. |
|
FHWA/FTA wants to ensure that the process and plan reflect the community’s vision and goals, are fiscally constrained, meet air quality conformity standards, and wisely use public funds. |
|
DOTs want to ensure that the process and plan are consistent with the TIP/STIP; do not adversely impact design, maintenance, and operations; consider interconnectivity; and meet air quality conformity standards. |
|
Resource agencies want to ensure that the process and plan incorporate and document large scale avoidance and minimization, consider indirect and cumulative impacts, and consider land use issues. |
|
Public Transportation Operators want to ensure that the process and plan incorporate transit considerations. |
| Partner | Example |
|---|---|
|
MPOs want to ensure the TIP and STIP are consistent with the long range plan, are fiscally constrained, meet project selection criteria and performance measures, and address the needs of the region. |
|
FHWA/FTA wants to ensure programming and the TIP and STIP are fiscally constrained, accurately reflect the plans of the state/MPO, incorporate the TIP in the STIP, and include only projects that are eligible as programmed. |
|
DOTs want to ensure the TIP and STIP are in agreement, use all available funding sources, meet project selection criteria and performance measures, and are fiscally constrained. |
|
Resource agencies want to ensure programming and the TIP and STIP consider environmental issues, provide a project description that clearly indicates when resource agency input is needed, and accurately reflect the plans of the state and MPO. |
|
Public Transportation Operators want to ensure programming and the TIP and STIP reflect transit considerations. |
| Partner | Example |
|---|---|
|
MPOs want to ensure that the process and plan provide a clear statement of the problem, result in a range of improvements in multiple projects and with various modes, establish a common understanding among partners about implementation responsibilities, and are built on the foundation of the LRTP. |
|
FHWA wants to ensure that the process and plan are consistent with other accepted plans and involve potentially affected federal and state agencies. |
|
DOTs want to ensure that the process and plan are conducted such that information can be transferred to the NEPA process, integrate transportation and land use, and build on the foundation of the LRTP where applicable. |
|
Resource agencies want to ensure that the process and plan are consistent with any agreements made in long range planning and can inform NEPA, provide clear expectations of how the results of environmental review will be be used, and use broad-scale geographic information. |
|
Public Transportation Operators want to ensure that the process and plan provide a clear statement of the problem, result in a range of improvements in multiple projects and with various modes, and establish a common understanding among partners about implementation responsibilities. |
| Partner | Example |
|---|---|
|
MPOs want to ensure that the environmental review process and document consider the TIP, LRTP, land use plans, and economic development patterns; and are well-documented in order to inform planning processes. |
|
FHWA/FTA wants to ensure the environmental review process and document are accurate, build on the foundation of previous phases, and are based on meaningful participation. |
|
DOTs want to ensure the environmental review process and document build on previous processes, are comprehensive and fully disclosed, are based on meaningful participation, meet both budget and schedule, and have agreement from all partners. |
|
Resource agencies want to ensure the environmental review process and document address a true need/deficiency, are based on an agreement among all partners, follow an appropriate sequence (avoid, minimize, mitigate); and are coordinated with permitting requirements. |
|
Public Transportation Operators want to ensure that the environmental review process and document consider transit |
Partner Roles Example
The role of each partner changes from one Key Decision to another. Understanding partner roles and how they change throughout the process is essential to successful collaboration. The Decision Guide describes the four possible roles for partners at each Key Decision:
Decision Maker
Mandated to take action at the Key Decision. Has the authority to block the process.
Advisor
Provides input and feedback at the Key Decision, including support or opposition, to help avoid revisiting issues or decisions later.
Observer
Does not provide substantive input or direction at the Key Decision, but is invited to participate and is kept updated.
No Role
Does not participate because the resulting action is outside the agency’s interests and requirements.
Explore the graphic below to learn more about partner roles.
Render Permit Decision and Approve Avoidance and Minimization
Adding Partners
The list of primary partners may not include all of the decision makers in your region, and a plan or project may require approval from more than the primary partners. For example, a tribal government, a local government agency, a financing partner, or an implementing partner may need to be designated as a partner in decision making in order to avoid the risks.
To determine whether a stakeholder should be designated a partner in this situation, consider if their approval is required to move forward at any decision.
To add a new partner to decision making using PlanWorks:
- Identify the new partner's interests for each phase in which they will participate
- Establish the partner's role at each Key Decision based on these interests
- Identify the questions, data, tools and technologies that are necessary for their interests to be considered and addressed
- Reach consensus with all partners on this change in decision making authority
- Alert other stakeholders to this change in the partnership as soon as practical
The information regarding Partner Roles within the Decision Guide can be saved from the applicable Key Decision guide page and edited off-line to reflect the specific requirements within your region.