Skip to content

Insights

Understanding Communities Through Quantitative and Qualitative Data

Understanding Communities Through Quantitative and Qualitative Data

Infrastructure planning is often described as data-driven, but in practice, that usually means relying heavily on quantitative datasets like traffic volumes, crash records and system performance metrics. These datasets are critical, but they only tell part of the story. They show us where issues exist, but not always why they matter or how they are experienced by the people using the system every day.

This is where qualitative data becomes critical in capturing lived experiences. 

Together, they create a more complete understanding of how infrastructure functions and how users perceive it, which is essential when the goal is to develop practical, publicly supported solutions.

Why Blending Data Matters

Quantitative data provides a measurable foundation

Quantitative data plays a critical role throughout the analysis process, providing a transparent and objective foundation for understanding your system. It establishes measurable baselines, reveals patterns, and highlights locations with known safety or operational concerns.

These indicators enable teams to efficiently narrow large datasets into a manageable framework for deeper study. This allows teams to direct time and resources strategically and provides a clear starting point for collaboration with stakeholders.

Qualitative data fills the gaps

Qualitative data plays an equally important role in the analysis process, adding important context and shaping how the analysis is conducted. Feedback gathered through conversations, surveys, workshops, and mapping tools can surface concerns, preferences, and lived experiences that are not captured in numerical datasets. Leaving out the people who use these systems every day can create blind spots that technical analysis alone cannot identify. Treating public engagement as a genuine source of insight, rather than a box to check, guides the analysis in meaningful ways and reveals areas where expectations or daily realities deviate from what the data suggests. This input helps clarify why certain conditions matter to the community, where user expectations differ from actual experience and where communication or design gaps may exist.

Incorporating these perspectives ensures that the analysis reflects both performance and lived experience while also helping teams understand potential barriers to acceptance. When paired with quantitative measures, the result is a more balanced, people-focused foundation for decision-making. 

Case Study: Clark County Roundabout Study­­­­

Clark County, the City of Springfield and ODOT District 7 partnered with the Clark County-Springfield Transportation Coordinating Committee to evaluate more than 5,000 intersections and prioritize future single-lane roundabout locations that could improve safety and mobility across the county. B&N served as the prime consultant, developing a comprehensive evaluation process that integrated quantitative screening, qualitative public input and stakeholder guidance into a unified framework.


The team combined statistical analysis, GIS-based review, machine learning tools and sentiment analysis to identify the top 14 priority intersections and provide preliminary layouts and cost estimates for each. This study represented Ohio’s first countywide roundabout evaluation and established a scalable, data-informed model for large-system prioritization.

With this framework established, understanding the county’s experience with roundabouts helped shape how the findings were interpreted and communicated.

Historical context

Clark County, Ohio, had a history of discussion surrounding roundabouts. An early attempt to implement a roundabout in 2011 faced significant public resistance and was cancelled, but more recent roundabout installations contributed to a gradual shift in public perception. This evolving history provided important context for the countywide study, as stakeholders sought a clear, data-supported process for identifying locations where roundabouts could improve safety and operations.

Survey influences findings

Public engagement significantly influenced the study’s findings. A countywide survey and interactive mapping tool generated more than 400 responses, revealing that a majority of participants supported roundabouts, and many concerns were addressable through design or communication. The geospatial feedback also highlighted specific locations where residents perceived safety issues, including areas that did not initially appear in the quantitative screening. These insights broadened the analytical lens and helped ensure the study reflected both performance data and user experience.

Blended methods change outcomes

As part of the study, a four-lane corridor was excluded during the first technical screening because it did not meet predetermined criteria. Public comments referenced safety concerns, prompting engineers to reexamine the corridor. A secondary review showed that traffic volumes did not require four lanes and that a two-lane configuration could support single-lane roundabouts.

A Clearer Path for Implementation

The blended framework used in the Clark County Roundabout Study is both modern and scalable. As analytical tools such as machine learning continue to advance, teams can process large, complex datasets more efficiently and dedicate more time to interpreting findings in a community context. Viewing quantitative and qualitative data as complementary elements strengthens decision-making, builds public trust and creates a clearer path for implementation. By approaching analysis as an ongoing dialogue between technical performance and lived experience, agencies can deliver solutions that better reflect the needs and priorities of the communities they serve.

We Can Help

B&N supports agencies nationwide in developing data-informed, community-centered transportation strategies that are practical, scalable and grounded in real-world needs.

If you're looking to build a more complete picture of system performance, strengthen public trust or create solutions that reflect lived experience as much as measured conditions, our team can help.

Bryan O'Reilly, Data Scientist

Bryan O'Reilly 
Data Scientist