top of page

Data Standards

Fields
  • Location - must be a geocode or geocodable location

  • Starting Time - must be a proper time (e.g. 9:00AM, not 9:00), may be combined with date for date and time stamp

  • Ending Time - same requirements as starting time

  • Date - must include day, month, and year

  • Name (optional) 

  • Role - law enforcement officer, adult crossing guard, parent/student patrol (from MUTCD)

  • Supervising Agency

  •  Controlling municipality

  • School(s) - includes all schools within walking distance of crossing guard location that are within the boundaries of the controlling municipality

  • Distance from school - closest walking distance from crossing guard location to school

  • Intersection traffic count (optional, if available)  - any official relevant traffic counts for that specific crossing guard location

  • Expected number of pedestrians (optional) - supplied as an official count or estimate; make clear method of collection

 

This data format will create one record per crossing guard location per shift.  There are two complications in this data standard:

 

  • multi-way intersection geometries

  • multiple staffed crossing guard location

For multi-way intersections with different crossing guards at each crossing, the standard would require more specific location information to specify the crosswalk.  Including staffing patterns (e.g. relief of shift) is optional, with the exception of discontinuities in shift.

Purpose

The purpose of the data requirement is to provide a minimum, consistent set of data that can uniquely identify the time and location of a single crossing guard operation.  The data is intended for public consumption, so it will not contain private, confidential information.  I have also produced a set of optional fields that can significantly enhance the amount of information available for analysis.  The intent behind the optional fields is to aid in the development of crossing guard placement policies based on objective risks to traffic safety, actual pedestrian exposure, and the general infrastructure requirements of the neighborhood.

Stakeholders

Data providers

  • Agency that supervises crossing guards for crossing guard data

  • State GIS office for school location data and road maps

  • City public website for display and data publication

Data consumers - public

  • Engineering

  • Enforcement

  • Education

Data consumers - private

  • Technology developers

  • Community groups

  • Researchers

Intents

The intents of making the data available are:

 

  • to encourage students to use crossing guard staffed intersections by enhancing awareness of their locations

  • to caution motorists by making them aware of crossing guard time and location

  • to allow technology developers to incorporate these data into apps that promote transportation safety

  • to promote transparency by making crossing guard utilization data available to the community

  • to allow policy makers in different communities to compare crossing guard trends and policies

  • to allow researchers to understand effect of crossing guard locations on root causes of traffic safety

Standardization is especially important to allow for a data collection effort that can scale across municipalities and can produce comparable data.  Since crossing guard placement is a municipal function, the data are highly fragmented right now.  A top down standardization approach could result in better coordination of traffic safety efforts and more efficient deployment of crossing guard resources.

 

Crossing Guard Location Data

bottom of page