National Academies Press: OpenBook

Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged (2004)

Chapter: Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges

« Previous: Chapter 2 - Coordination History
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 17
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 18
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 19
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 20
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 21
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 22
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 23
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 24
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 25
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 26
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 29
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 3 - Current Coordination Trends and Challenges." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2004. Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13784.
×
Page 30

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

17 CHAPTER 3 CURRENT COORDINATION TRENDS AND CHALLENGES This chapter summarizes the key trends and themes that emerged from the case studies of current, innovative approaches to the coordination of transportation services for transportation-disadvantaged individuals. Common challenges faced by coordination practitioners and cross-cutting lessons for organizations considering a coordination initiative are also discussed. A definition of coordination and a framework for classifying coordination strategies are presented first, to pro- vide an overview of the range of actions that may be used to coordinate transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged. DEFINING AND CLASSIFYING COORDINATION STRATEGIES Even when used in the specific context of the provision of transportation services for transportation-disadvantaged indi- viduals, coordination is a term that can have many meanings. Many types of organizations with an interest in such trans- portation services have a role in coordination activities, and the range of actions that can be taken by coordination partners is similarly diverse. Taking a closer look at possible coordi- nation participants and actions may help to define coordina- tion more clearly. Coordination Participants Transportation services for individuals with limited travel options are typically of interest to two types of organizations: (1) those that are charged with providing human services and other types of assistance to such individuals and (2) those whose primary mission is the provision of transportation ser- vices. Organizations in the first category include public and nonprofit human services agencies and advocacy organiza- tions. Organizations such as public transit agencies and pri- vate nonprofit or for-profit transportation providers fall into the second category. The first category of organizations can be broken down further. Because transportation is often a vital link between individuals and health care, employment, and other types of programs and services provided by human services organiza- tions, the organizations may provide transportation services for their transportation-disadvantaged clients in some man- ner, even though transportation is not their primary mission. Some human services agencies operate transportation ser- vices, while others purchase or subsidize transportation ser- vices for their clients. Human services agencies that operate transportation services have more in common with organiza- tions whose primary mission is transportation than human services agencies that purchase or subsidize trips for clients. In addition, coordination activities tend to focus on differ- ent aspects of transportation services. Some types of strate- gies are designed to increase coordination in the way services are planned, funded, purchased, or used. Other types of strate- gies concentrate on improving coordination in the operation and management of services. Therefore, a useful way to distinguish among entities that may participate in coordination activities is on the basis of whether or not the entity directly operates transportation ser- vices. Note that an organization that does not operate service directly may contract for or purchase service from a provider, or it may subsidize its clients’ use of available public or pri- vate transportation services. For example, organizations that do not usually operate transportation services could include the following: • State-level human services agencies • State departments of transportation • Regional or local human services agencies • Advocacy groups • Community organizations (such as United Way or Amer- ican Red Cross) • Faith-based organizations • MPOs or Regional Planning Agencies • Public transit agencies that contract for services Organizations that operate transportation services could include the following: • Public transit agencies • Private nonprofit transportation providers • Private for-profit transportation companies • Regional or local human services agencies • Community organizations • Faith-based organizations

18 Any combination of organizations such as these could work together to plan, implement, or operate coordinated trans- portation services or some other type of coordination strategy. Coordination Actions Coordination among entities in the planning, design, fund- ing, and delivery of transportation services for the transporta- tion disadvantaged has been shown to address the problems that can arise when multiple organizations provide similar transportation services independent of one another. These problems include duplication of services or administrative efforts, inefficient use of vehicles and other resources, poor service quality, and unmet transportation needs. Together, organizations with an interest in transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged can undertake a variety of actions to improve coordination. At one end of the range of coordination activities are steps to improve communi- cation and cooperation among interested parties while leaving separate transportation programs intact. At the other end of the range are actions that significantly change the way in which services are delivered by consolidating transportation programs previously managed or administered by separate organizations. Figure 2 illustrates the types of actions that can be taken by organizations working together in a coordination effort. Within the column, potential actions are listed according to the degree to which they will result in blended, or consoli- dated, transportation programs. Listed in the first block at the top of the column are the coordination activities that might be pursued among organizations that do not operate service directly, by transportation operators, or by a combination of both types of organizations. These are also actions that will not change the separate nature of transportation services or programs. For example, several organizations that do not operate transportation services directly might join together to promote awareness of transportation needs among the gen- eral public and community decision makers, yet continue to purchase or subsidize services for their clients independently. The second block from the top of the column shows the types of coordination activities that might be undertaken between organizations that do not operate transportation ser- vices directly and those that do. They include actions to sub- sidize or facilitate use of existing services by individuals. These actions will affect the way in which transportation ser- vices are provided or the degree to which they will be used by transportation-disadvantaged individuals, but transporta- tion programs will still remain separate. Actions that might be undertaken by several transportation operators to improve coordination between their services are listed in the third block from the top of the column. Note that many of the potential coordination activities that transporta- tion operators might pursue concern the coordination of oper- ational functions as well as the management and administra- tion of services. These types of coordination actions begin to blend transportation services by virtue of centralized func- tions or shared resources. Finally, in the last block at the bottom of the column, coor- dination actions that will result in a change to the structure of transportation services are shown. Like the actions listed at the top of the column, these are actions that might be taken by organizations that do not operate service directly, by trans- portation operators, or by a combination of both types of orga- nizations. These strategies include the collective procurement of the services of a contract transportation operator, hiring of a transportation broker to manage services for the transporta- tion-disadvantaged constituents of a number of agencies, or consolidation of transportation programs. (More information about transportation brokerages and other types of consoli- dated systems is provided in Chapter 4.) SUMMARY OF CASE STUDY FINDINGS As a result of the research team’s review of the coordina- tion literature, Internet searches, and the survey of state offi- cials, a great deal of information about funding sources, types of transportation services, and planning/decision-making processes was compiled. Guidance for organizations inter- ested in initiating or expanding coordination efforts based on that information is presented in subsequent chapters of the Resource Guide. The case studies were conducted to look more closely at recent examples of successful coordination strategies and innovative practices. The case studies illustrate a number of different types of coordination strategies, ranging from state- level efforts and implementation at the local or regional level of federal or state programs to ways of coordinating the plan- ning, funding, or delivery of this type of transportation ser- vice. To place successful strategies in the context of the range of coordination actions, Table 3 shows the types of coordi- nation actions that each of the case studies has undertaken, using the framework of coordination partners and actions that was depicted in Figure 2. An overview of the case studies is provided below. Full case studies can be found in Appendix A on the accompanying CD- ROM. After the introduction to the case study sites, this chapter summarizes the key trends and themes among these recent coordination efforts, as well as some ongoing challenges. Full Case Study Sites A brief description of each of the seven coordinated sys- tems or coordination initiatives that were the subjects of full case studies is provided below. Aaron E. Henry Community Health Center/Delta Area Rural Transit System The Aaron E. Henry Community Health Center (AEHCHC), Inc., is a primary health care provider serving seven counties in northwest Mississippi. In 1993, AEHCHC began provid-

19 ing general public transportation as the Delta Area Rural Transit System (DARTS) using 5311 funds. Over the last 10 years, DARTS has proactively collaborated with a num- ber of area partners and developed consortia arrangements with other transportation providers. Greater Twin Cities United Way Since a survey of United Way Vision Councils identified transportation as a barrier for clients of many human services agencies in the region several years ago, Greater Twin Cities United Way has been funding pilot transportation projects to advance a twofold agenda: to help individuals who would benefit from car ownership and to encourage informal trans- portation systems to work together in a more coordinated way. United Way has partnered with the Center for Trans- portation Studies at the University of Minneapolis for assis- tance in evaluating its efforts and assessing results. United Way’s goal is a coordination model that includes a network of four to five experienced nonprofit transportation providers that are able to provide needed services throughout the region and are supported by services such as centralized Blended Transportation Programs Separate Transportation Programs Transportation advocacy, Coalition building Information and referral Joint planning, decision making Coordinating council Sharing technical expertise Use or subsidize services for client travel Travel training Mobility management Provide vehicles Provide technical assistance Joint grant applications Joint driver training Shared vehicle storage/maintenance facilities Joint procurement of vehicles, insurance, maintenance, fuel, hardware, software, technology Vehicle sharing Centralized functions (reservations, scheduling, dispatching) Purchase or contract for service Transportation brokerage Consolidation of transportation programs Organizations that operate service working together Organizations that do not operate service working with transportation operators All types of coordination partners working together All types of coordination partners working together Figure 2. Coordination participants and actions.

20 driver training and vehicle maintenance. Coordination will be assisted by use of a software system for rider management that United Way helped to create. Full implementation of a coordination network is estimated to be about 2 years away. Dakota Area Resources and Transportation for Seniors (DARTS) and American Red Cross of the St. Paul Area (ARC) are the first of those experienced providers. DARTS is pro- viding support to United Way agencies in the areas of oper- ations support (where a focus will be coordination), technol- ogy, driver training, and vehicle maintenance. Red Cross has taken vehicles from other agencies and has assumed respon- sibility for transporting their clients. Case Studies Transportation Advocacy/ Coalition- Building Information and Referral Coordinating Council Joint Planning, Decision Making Use/Subsidy of Service Standardized Requirements Travel Training Mobility Management Aaron E. Henry Community Health Center/Delta Area Rural Transit System • Greater Twin Cities United Way • • • King County Metro Community Partnerships Program • • Maricopa Association of Governments Regional Action Plan on Aging and Mobility • • • Massachusetts Human Service Transportation Office • • Michigan Welfare to Work Program and Midland County • • RIDES Mass Transit District • Space Coast Area Transit • • • Baldwin Rural Area Transit System (BRATS) • • Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitation Services • • Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments (TMACOG) • • St. Louis Transportation Management Association • Ottumwa Transit Authority Alliance for Transportation Research Institute, University of New Mexico • • ACCESS Transportation Systems • • Cross County Transit • DuPage County Taxi Subsidy Program • • Flint MTA • MichiVan – Nontraditional Vanpool Program Transportation Options Project (TOP) • • • Washington State Agency Council on Coordinated Transportation and Thurston County • • York County Transit Authority/rabbittransit • Separate Transportation Programs Organizations That Do Not Operate Service, Working with Transportation Operators Both Types of Coordination Partners: Transportation Operators and Organizations That Do Not Operate Service TABLE 3 Coordination actions illustrated by case studies

King County Metro Community Partnerships Program (CPP) Metro provides public transit service in the City of Seattle and King County, Washington, and participates in the deliv- ery of regional transit service with other providers. 21 Metro also works with other local organizations to develop transportation options for human services agency clients through the CPP. Particularly interesting elements of this program include the following: (1) the provision of retired paratransit vehi- cles, free vehicle maintenance, and limited operations fund- Provide Vehicles Provide Technical Assistance Joint Grant Applications Joint Driver Training Joint Procurement of Vehicles, Equipment Vehicle Sharing Centralized Functions Purchase or Contract for Service Brokerage Consolidation of Transportation Programs • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Blended Transportation Programs Both Types of Coordination Partners: Do Not Operate Service Transportation Operators Working Together TABLE 3 (Continued)

ing to local nonprofit human services agencies that can pro- vide service directly for clients who are ADA-eligible; and (2) the provision of retired vanpool vehicles to agencies that need vans to provide limited transportation for clients. Massachusetts Human Service Transportation Office In 2001, Massachusetts consolidated the purchase and man- agement of transportation services for the clients of a number of human services agencies in a new state-level Human Ser- vice Transportation Office (HST). Transportation managers from the state’s Medicaid, Public Health, Mental Retarda- tion, and Job Access agencies, among others, jointly drew new district boundaries, standardized procurement proce- dures, and began to contract with RTAs for the brokerage of coordinated client transportation services. Michigan Welfare-to-Work Program and Midland County Welfare reform began in the state of Michigan several years before efforts at the national level were initiated. From the out- set, identifying and resolving transportation issues was a high priority. Project Zero, a program aimed at eliminating house- holds on public assistance without earned income, was initi- ated in July 1996. Six pilot sites were selected for efforts to identify and remove barriers to employment, which included transportation. Midland County was one of the original Project Zero pilot sites; it also received funds from Michigan’s JARC grant. Prior to the job access initiative, service consisted of demand- responsive service in the City of Midland only. Funding was used to extend days and hours of service and to provide trans- portation to jobs at a large casino in a neighboring county. Services were so successful that a local millage, or additional dollar per $1,000 of taxable property value, to fund county- wide service was recently passed. RIDES MTD The RIDES MTD, based in Harrisburg, Illinois, has been so successful at providing transportation service to human service agency clients that it has been able to (1) increase its service area from two counties to nine, (2) offer service for the general public, and (3) persuade legislators to amend Illinois’ MTD-enabling legislation, which originally autho- rized the creation and funding of MTDs in urban areas, so that RIDES and another rural provider are now able to receive state operating assistance. Space Coast Area Transit (SCAT) SCAT has a long history of providing nontraditional and innovative transportation services. SCAT evolved from a sys- 22 tem serving primarily people who were transportation disad- vantaged to providing services for the entire community. Included in its array of services are fixed routes, ADA para- transit, paratransit service for transportation-disadvantaged individuals (part of the Florida Coordinated Transportation System), a bus pass program, a Medicaid brokerage, and a Commuter Assistance Program. SCAT also provides Con- tracted Routes using its bus fleet to serve several not-for- profit agencies with contracted, demand-responsive service, and manages an innovative Volunteers in Motion program to provide rides for seniors by using volunteer drivers. Clustered Mini–Case Study Sites Groups of mini–case studies were conducted on the themes of (1) building coalitions to support coordinated transporta- tion initiatives and (2) the use of technology to coordinate transportation operations and other functions. Each cluster of mini–case studies is described below. Coalition Building: Baldwin County Public Transportation Coalition, Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitative Services, and TMACOG The Baldwin Rural Area Transit System (BRATS), a rural public transportation provider, has a history of successful coordination. Its funding base is FTA Section 5311, matched with local funds (Alabama provides little or no funds for pub- lic transportation). Most recently, BRATS worked with resort areas (Gulf Shores, Alabama) to fund transportation for resort employees. A public transportation coalition has been formed to address expansion needs. The coalition includes BRATS, faith-based organizations, and the economic development alliance. The rehabilitation services provided by the Department of Rehabilitative Services involve accessing medical services, training, and employment, all of which require a client to have a means of transportation. With the goal of working with the state legislature to increase the scope and quality of community-based transportation for all residents, the depart- ment has made a concerted effort over the past year to form a multiagency transportation coalition in order to establish a unified approach. Efforts to date have included a statewide survey, Public Ser- vice Announcements, and a statewide conference/workshop on transportation and employment for those with disabilities. TMACOG has been instrumental in a number of trans- portation coordination initiatives in the Toledo area. For exam- ple, the CommuterLINK program, operated by TMACOG’s Commuter Services Council, is a transportation brokerage for clients of the Ohio Works First and Prevention, Retention and Contingency programs and other low-income individuals. Lucas County Job and Family Services contracts with Com- muterLINK to identify transit, vanpool, and taxi options for clients who need to travel to work, training, and child care.

One of the most interesting features of the efforts in the Toledo area is the leadership role that TMACOG, the region’s MPO, has played. Responding to guidance from the National Association of Regional Councils and federal agencies on the role of MPOs in welfare reform activities, top staff at TMACOG took the initiative to become actively involved in a significant welfare-to-work planning effort, spearhead the development of solutions to transportation problems, and secure JARC funding. Today, TMACOG continues to admin- ister transportation programs and services and to collaborate with a number of human services and business organizations in the region. Use of Technology: CRRAFT, State of New Mexico; Ottumwa Transit Authority (OTA), and St. Louis Transportation Management Association (TMA) In 2000, spurred by welfare reform and the corresponding need to better manage transportation being provided to wel- fare clients, the Alliance for Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) at the University of New Mexico began to develop a web-based software application to coordinate rural trans- portation funding. The CRRAFT system is an interagency effort that includes the New Mexico DOL, the New Mexico Human Services Department, the New Mexico State High- way and Transportation Department’s Public Transportation Programs Bureau (PTPB), and rural transit service providers. OTA provides both fixed-route and demand-responsive services in the City of Ottumwa, Iowa, and the surrounding 10 counties. A significant amount of coordinated client trans- portation is also provided under contract to human services agencies. OTA has implemented several important Intelligent Trans- portation Systems (ITSs) components to enhance the opera- tion of its coordinated services, which can be difficult due to the size of the service area and its low population density. ITS components include a new two-way radio system, an Automated Vehicle Location (AVL) system, a scheduling and dispatch software component, and Mobile Data Termi- nals (MDTs) for the transfer of data between dispatchers and drivers. A number of paratransit providers serving St. Louis City and County are participating in a joint effort led by a TMA created for this purpose, East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, and Metro (formerly known as Bi-State Development Agency). Metro; OATS, Inc.; Medical Transportation Management (MTM); and Care Cab Transportation Service are key mem- bers of the TMA. These four organizations provide service to ADA-eligible individuals, seniors, the general public in rural areas, individuals with developmental disabilities, and Medicaid recipients (MTM operates a Medicaid brokerage throughout Missouri). 23 The call centers and radio dispatch centers of these four large paratransit providers have been joined by means of a new communications network. This network, together with paratransit reservations and scheduling software, enables the agencies to book trips for their customers on vehicles oper- ated by the other providers, thereby filling empty seats. Mini–Case Study Sites Each of the nine subjects of mini–case studies is described below. ACCESS Transportation Systems ACCESS Transportation Systems, Inc., has been providing brokerage services for PAT, which is the Pittsburgh area’s public transit provider, since 1979. ACCESS has sponsorship agreements with over 120 local agencies, including Penn- DOT, which provides state lottery revenues for senior trans- portation, and the County Office of the Bureau of Federal Programs, which is responsible for Medicaid transportation. PAT provides funding for ADA paratransit trips and the local match for the senior transportation program. For these 120 agencies, ACCESS is responsible for the provision of over 2 million trips annually through the net- work of eight for-profit and not-for-profit transportation pro- viders it has under contract. The system is known for its high levels of efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Cross County Transit Cross County Transit, based in Asheville, North Carolina, is an effort to coordinate nonemergency, out-of-county med- ical transportation that has been in operation since 1999. Coordination is achieved by means of a database accessible via a website on which the general public can request a trip, transit systems can notify the public and other transit systems of upcoming trips scheduled to regional medical centers, and health care providers can view scheduled trips. The project has grown from a regional application to coor- dinate nonemergency medical transportation in the Asheville area to now include a second site in the Piedmont Triad, with plans to develop the database to include statewide coverage. DuPage County Taxi Subsidy Program In order to address countywide transportation needs that ADA paratransit and municipal Dial-A-Ride services were not able to meet, a group of municipalities and human services agencies in DuPage County, Illinois, formed an Interagency Paratransit Coordinating Council to oversee the implementa- tion of two pilot projects. One of those was a user-side subsidy taxicab program open to any entity interested in subsidizing

transportation for clients or customers, particularly seniors and people with disabilities. The taxi subsidy program is an example of an extremely flexible and cost-effective coordination alternative, since lev- els of subsidy, eligibility requirements, and other service poli- cies can be easily tailored to meet the needs of the individual municipalities and agencies that are participating. Flint MTA Flint MTA provides transit service for a three-county area around the city of Flint, Michigan. In addition to traditional fixed route and paratransit, Flint MTA provides student trans- portation, service for human services agencies, and job access transportation. Student transportation provided by the MTA may be of particular interest to organizations in other areas. Service is combined with general public service; the MTA initiated an educational program for its traditional riders, particularly seniors, when it took over school transportation. MAG Regional Action Plan on Aging and Mobility MAG, the MPO for the Phoenix, Arizona, region, recently completed its Regional Action Plan on Aging & Mobility, which is likely to serve as a model for other transportation efforts for older adults. The comprehensive plan included active participation by more than 75 community stakehold- ers and focused on four key issues: (1) older driver compe- tency, (2) alternative transportation modes, (3) infrastructure and land use, and (4) education and training. Public involve- ment was a key component of the effort. Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission: TOP The Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission’s TOP is aimed at identifying affordable transportation for people with disabilities to get to work, school, or training. The initiative cov- ers over 70 rural communities in three regions across the com- monwealth of Massachusetts. The primary purpose of the proj- ect is to help identify transportation resources for people with disabilities, to identify unmet transportation needs, and then move these needs into transportation solutions. Through TOP, local transit providers develop an individualized transportation plan for people with disabilities; the plan can include a variety of public transit, paratransit, and ridesharing services. Travel training, information about transportation voucher and auto ownership programs, and itinerary planning are also provided. MichiVan—Nontraditional Vanpool Program The Michigan DOT administers the MichiVan program. In addition to traditional vanpool services, the private vanpool 24 operator leases vehicles to the City of Detroit’s Department of Employment and Training to provide shared rides to con- nect city residents with suburban employment opportunities. Traditional vanpool services require members of the vanpool to assume responsibility for driving the vehicle and providing insurance. Many of the residents that the city aimed to assist with this service had been unable to participate in these pro- grams due to the lack of a driver’s license or funds to con- tribute toward insurance. Using funds from a JARC grant, the city paid for the leasing of the vehicles, while community and faith-based organizations provided the drivers and insurance. Washington State ACCT and Thurston County The Washington state legislature formed ACCT, a state- wide forum on coordination, in 1998. An advisory council of state agencies was established to provide guidance to ACCT, and local community forums were set up to develop local coordination plans in accordance with ACCT guidelines. Demonstration projects were funded with $1 million that was appropriated by the legislature in 1997. Thurston County provides an example of a successful local effort to coordinate, in accordance with priorities established by ACCT at the state level. The county’s MPO, transit agency, and health department have teamed up with the state’s wel- fare agency to implement Village Vans service, which pro- vides work trips for welfare clients. York County Transit Authority/rabbittransit York County Transportation Authority, or rabbittransit, is known as a leader in the field of public transportation coordi- nation, providing a variety of services ranging from traditional fixed-route to demand-responsive service, as well as flexible services, such as route and point deviation, and park-and-ride shuttles. It also is well known for its coordinated approach to program funding, utilizing a wide range of funding sources. Coordination Trends While each of the case studies has unique features and illustrates a particular coordination issue or approach, some underlying themes or trends emerged. The themes cover the following topics: • Coalition-building • Leadership • Lead agencies • Federal programs as catalysts for coordination • State-level coordination initiatives • The importation of planning • Coordination at the regional level • Nontraditional funding sources • Use of technology

These themes, discussed below, provide insight into the strategies and approaches that have helped the case study sites successfully coordinate transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged. Coalition-Building Building a coalition organized around transportation issues is an effective way to achieve a number of goals: pursuing funding opportunities, increasing public awareness of trans- portation issues and support for solutions, and influencing state/federal actions. The concept of building transportation coalitions has become more prominent in recent years, so one of the mini–- case study clusters focused on this topic in relation to efforts to coordinate transportation services for the transportation dis- advantaged. However, the theme arose repeatedly throughout other case studies, as it became clear that other case study subjects had established coalitions as part of a larger coordi- nation strategy. Moreover, the success of those strategies was often due at least in part to the coalition’s endeavors. The experiences of the case study subjects indicate a trend toward looking beyond the transportation providers and human services agencies that are the typical partners in a coordina- tion effort and enlisting the support of other stakeholders— businesses, local elected officials, faith-based organizations, educational institutions, and others. In some cases, a coalition has been used to plan or manage a coordination effort. MAG is noted for its development of a multifaceted and multidisciplinary community response to the mobility needs of the rapidly growing population of older adults in Maricopa County, Arizona. MAG effectively used coalition-building as a tool for creating its Regional Action Plan on Aging and Mobility. In Midland County, Michigan, organizations that partnered to provide a successful job access transportation service were able to bring local human services agencies, businesses, and politicians into their coali- tion, resulting in passage of a county millage to fund a county- wide service for the general public. Seattle’s King County Metro has strengthened its CPP—a collection of programs and services designed to help community organizations fill service gaps and create cost-effective options to Metro’s ADA Complementary Paratransit Service—by making outreach to the communities and involving a variety of stakeholders in the review and development of transportation services for people with disabilities. In other cases, a coalition has been established for a broader purpose. The Oklahoma Department of Rehabilita- tion Services has taken the initiative to form a coalition whose goal is to collect data and speak with a unified voice to the state legislature and local communities about the transporta- tion needs of people with disabilities. Other coalitions were established to pursue job access fund- ing or respond to welfare reform, but have since broadened 25 their focus. In Alabama, the Baldwin County Public Trans- portation Coalition was established in response to welfare reform, but is now working to develop expanded public trans- portation services for seniors, tourists, and employees. Sim- ilarly, a coalition of agencies working together in the Toledo area, under the guidance of TMACOG to obtain JARC fund- ing for welfare-to-work transportation is now tackling issues related to improving housing for disadvantaged families in addition to transportation services. The experiences of the case study sites suggest the fol- lowing lessons for coalition-building efforts: 1. A broad-based coalition has the highest chance of achiev- ing its goals. In order to attract a wide range of partici- pants, the transportation services advocated by the coali- tion should be available to as many rider groups as possible. 2. Funding and sponsorship are critical coalition-building tools. Early on, partners should identify a means of underwriting expenses for resources such as meeting space, transportation, administrative tasks and items, and information dissemination. 3. A key element is the existence or development of trust among coalition participants and with potential part- ners. Building trust involves investing time, developing an effective means of communication, and listening to the needs and concerns of partners with an open mind, so that a balance between special interests and group goals can be attained. 4. The support of state and local elected officials and rep- resentatives of federal agencies is also extremely help- ful. Adequate research and data are needed in order to enlist the cooperation and assistance of such individu- als. Decision makers have many competing demands for their limited time. 5. Building trust, enlisting additional coalition partici- pants, gathering data, and planning actions all require an investment of time, but are critical elements of a fruitful coalition. Leadership Strong leadership—at local, regional, and state levels—is a key to the success of a transportation coordination initiative. The success of coordination efforts continues to be linked to the involvement of a local champion, at least in the initial stages of development and implementation. The vision, ded- ication, perseverance, and hard work of such an individual (or individuals) were noted in many case study interviews as invaluable contributions to the implementation and success of a coordination strategy. Leadership at the state level was also identified by a num- ber of case study sites as a crucial factor. State leadership may take several forms:

• Encouragement and support. The Mississippi DOT offers an increased level of assistance to Section 5310 applica- tions that can demonstrate coordination, and encourages organizations to apply for 5310 grants through Section 5311 recipients. This has made it easier for providers like the Delta Area Rural Transit System (DARTS) to add to its coordination partners. • A state-level coordination initiative. Efforts such as North Carolina DOT’s sponsorship of the development of the Cross County Transit system to coordinate out-of- county medical trips, or the centralization of the purchase and management of human services client transportation in the new Massachusetts HST, can change the manner in which transportation services for the transportation dis- advantaged are delivered or offer real opportunities for coordination. • Policy or procedural changes to make coordination more feasible. The New Mexico DOT has encouraged trans- portation providers to use CRRAFT and now requires recipients of Section 5311, 3037, or TANF funding to use the system. This has increased the number of pro- viders that have coordinated their trip reservations, billing, and record-keeping. • Funding to implement or operate coordinated services. In Michigan, the DOT, the Family Independence Agency, and the Department of Community Development all contributed funds that were used to establish the County Connection service in Midland County. Lead Agencies Successful coordination initiatives are led by all types of entities—transit providers, state or local-level human ser- vices agencies, MPOs, state DOTs, and private nonprofit organizations. The experiences of a number of the case study sites sug- gest that coordination efforts do not need to be initiated by transit providers. In fact, in some cases, efforts are more suc- cessful when an entity other than the local transit agency takes the lead role. With the transit agency as an equal partner to other partic- ipants or, as in the case of the Baldwin County Public Trans- portation Coalition, an advisory member, a coalition can more easily broaden both its agenda and support for its efforts among decision makers. When a human services agency or planning organization leads a coordination effort, the mistrust that participants may have of the transit provider—based on fears that it will encroach on other agency functions besides transportation, promote its own agenda, or transfer responsibility for pro- viding transportation services to other entities—can be neu- tralized. Finally, coordination partners may be more willing to discuss transportation needs if by doing so they do not appear to be criticizing existing services. Even when the local transit agency is the administrator or manager of a coordination program, as is the case with King 26 County Metro and its CPP, the creation of an advisory group headed by another entity (in King County, the Key Partners in Transportation group, led by the Area Agency on Aging, advises Metro on the CPP) can provide similar benefits of impartiality, openness, and inclusion. Federal Programs as Catalysts for Coordination Federal mandates or programs can be leveraged to help build transportation infrastructure and expand customer bases. Many recent successful coordination strategies were imple- mented in order to address the transportation needs of indi- viduals making the transition from welfare to work. The degree of coordination that has been achieved is due in large part to the joint efforts of the federal DHHS, DOL, and DOT to make it possible for states and communities to respond to the transportation challenges of welfare reform. These efforts have included joint guidance from all three agencies on the coordinated use of funding sources and the FTA’s require- ment for coordinated planning and funding of services to be supported by its JARC grant program. The case studies provided several examples of areas in which coordinated services that began as a means to provide access to jobs were expanded to become more comprehen- sive systems. The most striking example occurred in Mid- land County, Michigan. A coalition of human services agen- cies used pilot project funding from Project Zero, Michigan’s long-standing welfare reform program, and Michigan’s JARC grant to implement a countywide demand-responsive service for transitioning welfare recipients in 1996. The County Connection service became so successful that a local millage was passed in 2000 to expand the service and open it to the general public. Between 1998 and 2002, the number of vehi- cles in operation increased from 6 to 19, and ridership dou- bled to 69,000 trips per year. Spot surveys conducted by the Education and Training Connection, the community-based nonprofit educational organization that operates the service, indicate that only about one-half of the trips taken on the County Connection today are work-related. Similarly, King County Metro developed its CPP in order to find a cost-effective way to meet its ADA Complementary Paratransit service requirements. As a result of three differ- ent programs through which Metro provides retired but ser- viceable paratransit vehicles and limited operating subsidies to community-based agencies, transportation options have been created for seniors and people with disabilities as well as for ADA-eligible individuals. In 2003, nearly one-half of the 100,000 trips provided on 45 vehicles operated by 21 local agencies were taken by non-ADA eligible riders. State-Level Coordination Initiatives Formal state programs that require or encourage local organizations to coordinate contribute greatly to coordina-

tion successes, especially when incentive funding is an ele- ment of the program. Experience has shown that coordination efforts have the greatest chance of success when supported by a formal coor- dination policy or program at the state level, with or without a legislative mandate. Incentive funding at the state level fur- ther increases the chances of successful implementation of coordination efforts. Several case study sites illustrate the effectiveness of state- level guidance and leadership. In 2001, Massachusetts con- solidated the purchase and management of transportation services for clients of a number of human services agencies in a new state-level HST. Transportation managers from the state’s Medicaid, Public Health, and Mental Retardation agen- cies jointly drew new district boundaries, standardized pro- curement procedures, and began to contract with RTAs for the brokerage of coordinated client transportation services. This joint effort has already resulted in common service stan- dards and standardized reporting requirements that are fol- lowed by all brokers. Most of the entities involved in the pro- gram feel that the brokerage system will ultimately result in cost savings, due to grouped trips, use of more cost-effective modes of transportation, monitoring of service providers, and competitive procurements. Pennsylvania provides another example. The state’s Shared Ride Program, funded with lottery revenues, subsidizes shared ride demand-responsive service for seniors 65 years of age and older. In York County, rabbittransit uses its large base of Shared Ride Program riders as the foundation for an inte- grated system of paratransit services that provide mobility for younger seniors, people with disabilities, Medicaid recip- ients, ADA-eligible individuals, low-income residents, cur- rent and former welfare recipients, and the general public. The Importance of Planning Transportation planning typically encompasses a range of activities, including the assessment of mobility needs, design of appropriate services or strategies, identification of resources, estimation of expected benefits and costs, devel- opment of implementation plans and schedules, and evalua- tion of programs and services. The experiences of the case study subjects highlight sev- eral planning issues of which organizations considering a coordination initiative should be aware. 1. Transportation and human services agencies need to become involved in the various planning processes that are used to make transportation decisions. It is not unusual for human services agencies, advo- cates, and other organizations that have an interest in transportation but are not primarily transportation pro- viders to have little input into transportation planning processes and planning decisions. Similarly, transporta- 27 tion providers are not always involved in human ser- vices decisions regarding transportation or related issues such as the location of programs or facilities. One rea- son that planning efforts continue to proceed in paral- lel is that the planning processes that recipients of fed- eral transit funding are required to follow are often unfamiliar to human services agencies, while the plan- ning requirements associated with health and human services programs are diverse and usually unfamiliar to transportation providers. The case studies, however, illustrate the value of joint transportation planning to a successful coordina- tion effort. The majority of the case study subjects par- ticipate in joint planning activities with their partner organizations or other stakeholders. In some instances— in Midland County, Michigan, and the metropolitan Toledo area, for example—coordination partners are involved in the planning process required at the federal level for projects that utilize funds from federal trans- portation agencies. These and other coordination ini- tiatives grew out of job access planning efforts. In other instances, the planning process in which coordination partners participate is led by a human services agency, such as Greater Twin Cities United Way or the Okla- homa Department of Rehabilitation Services. The Phoenix area offers an example of the value of institutionalizing joint planning efforts by transportation and human services agencies. MAG, the region’s MPO, is charged with helping to coordinate human services programs as well as transportation. This close connec- tion between the two types of programs has helped to facilitate the exchange of information and to advance the region’s mobility agenda through cooperative efforts. 2. Adequate planning is a necessary foundation for a successful coordination initiative. A number of case study organizations recommended a solid planning effort as one of the first steps in a coordination initiative. Data collection and outreach to transportation-disadvantaged groups, advocates, and stakeholders are necessary in order to identify and doc- ument mobility needs. A clear definition of needs can help to ensure that the solutions that are developed are effective. In addition, assembling data to document needs and make the case for suggested actions must precede attempts to raise awareness of transportation issues among decision makers. If the coordination initiative involves the deployment of a technology system, early research and planning to identify the steps necessary for implementation are espe- cially important. Without such preparation, it can be difficult to implement a project effectively within the desired timeframe. For example, unanticipated aspects of the federal procurement process caused implemen- tation delays and difficulties with equipment integra- tion for the Ottumwa Transit Authority and its AVL/ MDT project.

3. Program evaluation is essential. King County Metro staff involved with the CPP sug- gested collecting data from the beginning of a coordi- nation effort in order to document success and measure accomplishments is essential. Essential elements and evaluation criteria should be identified at the start, and reporting processes should be designed to be as simple as possible. Coordination at the Regional Level Coordination is a key strategy for addressing needs for interregional service and providing that service efficiently. As residential and commercial development continues to sprawl and the trend toward the provision of services on a regional basis persists, destinations for many transportation- disadvantaged individuals may lie beyond county, state, or transit service area boundaries. For example, regional med- ical centers may draw patients from multicounty regions. Sim- ilarly, major employment centers are no longer located exclu- sively in downtown areas of major cities, but may be dispersed throughout suburban or rural areas. In order to access health care or travel to work, individuals may need to identify avail- able service options, evaluate schedule and price information, and, assuming that options are available from origin to desti- nation, arrange trips with multiple providers. Centralizing services through one provider can fill regional service gaps and streamline the processes of identifying options and planning trips for customers. For example, the RIDES MTD serves nine mostly rural counties in southeast- ern Illinois with a combination of demand-responsive and deviated fixed-route services. Initially providing service in 1974 as part of the Golden Senior Citizens Council, RIDES expanded service into five counties by 1989 and formed the first rural MTD in the state in 1990. Today, in addition to serving the general public, RIDES contracts with approxi- mately 50 federal, state, and local agencies, providing access across the nine-county region and beyond to a wide range of rider groups. By developing creative solutions to requests for transportation services, designing efficient routes and vehi- cle runs, and coordinating trips for multiple agencies, RIDES has been able to keep the cost of its service close to what it was in the late 1980s. An alternate approach is coordination among multiple transportation operators in a region. This approach has been adopted in North Carolina, where a web-based system is used to coordinate out-of-county nonemergency medical trips. The system, known as Cross County Transit, features a database accessible via the Internet through which individual riders can request a trip, transit systems can notify the public and other providers of upcoming trips scheduled to regional med- ical centers, and health care providers can view trip sched- ules when arranging appointments with patients. Developed 28 and operated with funding from the North Carolina DOT, Cross County Transit is currently in use in the Piedmont Triad (Winston-Salem, Greensboro, and High Point) and in the western portion of the state in and around Asheville, but will eventually be in place throughout the state. Nontraditional Funding Sources Nontraditional funding sources exist and should be explored. In addition to the major grant programs administered by transportation and human services agencies at the federal and state levels, public and private foundations and other nontra- ditional funding sources can be resources for local organiza- tions that are planning or implementing coordination activi- ties. For example, Greater Twin Cities United Way relies on both traditional and nontraditional funding sources to sup- port its series of pilot transportation coordination projects. Traditional sources include FTA, Medicaid, Older Ameri- cans Act funds, and welfare-to-work grants. Nontraditional sources include the contributions it receives from individu- als and corporations and the McKnight Foundation. Use of Technology Technology can be used to coordinate operations, manage information, and enhance customer service. The use of technology systems in transit and paratransit services is the focus of other studies and research projects, and it was not the intent of this study to duplicate that work. How- ever, several mini–case studies were conducted to highlight ways in which technology can be used to increase or support coordination. The case studies included the following: • The New Mexico CRRAFT system developed by the ATRI. The web-based CRRAFT system is used to enable 27 rural transportation providers to certify human services clients, schedule trips, track riders, prepare invoices, and generate reports in a standardized way. • The use of AVL/MDTs by the OTA in the services it provides under contract to the 10-15 RTA, which cov- ers the ten counties of the Iowa DOT Region 15. The technologies are intended to improve communications with drivers, identify the location of vehicles, increase the safety and security of drivers and passengers while onboard vehicles, and manage vehicle inspections and maintenance at remote locations. • The use of linked trip reservations and centralized reservations/scheduling software by the St. Louis TMA, which comprises St. Louis Metro (formerly known as Bi-State Development Agency) and two large paratran- sit providers. The systems enable the agencies to assign

customer trips to vehicles operated by the other pro- viders, thereby filling empty seats. The lessons learned at these sites relate directly to the intro- duction of an advanced technology—for instance, sufficient technological resources and ongoing technical support are necessary for a successful implementation. Current Challenges Most of the themes or trends that emerged from the case studies dealt with effective strategies or key ingredients for a successful coordination effort. Two themes, however, spot- light challenges faced by many organizations that have been involved in recent efforts to coordinate transportation ser- vices for the transportation disadvantaged—sustainability and building trust. Sustainability Sustaining a coordination effort over the long term—espe- cially after a local champion departs or a primary funding source is no longer available—can be a major challenge. Several of the case study sites encountered such circum- stances. In Midland County, the County Connection service sur- vived the retirement of the director of the local Family Inde- pendence Agency, one of its earliest and most committed supporters, as well as the reduced role of that agency in day- to-day operations (due to changes in funding flows following the passage of the local millage to support the service). Its continued success is attributed to the broad base of support that was created as part of efforts to ensure that the millage was approved by voters and to the quality and reputation of the system. The RIDES MTD also recently saw the retirement of its founder and long-time champion. RIDES was able to ensure its continued success by relying on a similar reputation for high-quality service and for customizing transportation ser- vices to meet the needs and available funding of agencies and communities. Flexibility can also help to sustain a coordination effort. The St. Louis TMA, which has centralized reservations, scheduling, and dispatching among several large paratransit providers, experienced the loss of state funding for job access transportation but was able to shift its focus away from job access transportation to providing service for developmen- tally disabled individuals and to restructure parts of its oper- ations accordingly. Another key factor that can contribute to the sustainability of a coordination effort is the existence (or establishment) of a legal or institutional framework for coordination. King County adopted a formal county ordinance and policies that 29 ensure that ADA complementary paratransit service is pro- vided in compliance with federal law and regulations and also that services beyond the minimum ADA requirements will be provided as funding allows and as desired by King County. This structure formalizes Metro’s CPP, among other programs and services. In Massachusetts, the creation of an office specifically focused on coordinating transportation resulted in a level of formality that helped the effort move forward. An even higher level of formality appears to be on the horizon for the HST office. As of the beginning of calen- dar year 2004, the Massachusetts Executive Office of Health and Human Services has decided to bring the HST office directly under its umbrella. Under the new arrangement, staff will be dedicated to the HST office, rather than spending only part of their time there. The management fee provided to the RTA brokers will be pooled for all participating agencies. The agencies will also negotiate contracts together, rather than each having their own contract with the RTAs. Building Trust The other major challenge that was mentioned in nearly every case study was the development of trust among coor- dination partners. Trust among potential or actual coordina- tion partners and concerns about control over client services or funding continue to be obstacles to coordination. The organizations that were successful in developing good relationships with partners cited a number of important fac- tors. Ongoing communication is critical, and this can be accomplished through regular meetings, the development of some mechanism for disseminating information, and work- shops or summits on particular topics. Individual meetings with organizations that may have concerns about control over services for their clients or funding, for example, can help to neutralize those fears. While communicating with partners, it is essential to listen to their needs and concerns with an open mind, so that a balance between special inter- ests and group goals can be attained. Developing relation- ships takes time, often more time than the case study sites anticipated, but it is well worth the investment in terms of the success of the coordination effort. Another factor is identifying all potential stakeholders at the beginning of the process and involving them from the start. They are more likely to be supportive if this is done and will also have the chance to contribute ideas or information that can improve the coordination strategy that is adopted. Trust also develops when the lead agency in a coordination effort makes sure that services and programs are tailored to the particular needs of partner organizations or communities. King County Metro, RIDES MTD, and Midland County’s County Connection are all recognized locally for such flexi- bility and responsiveness. Finally, case study sites mentioned the value of doing ade- quate research and collecting data to share with partners or

potential participants to enlist their participation—to identify transportation needs in the beginning of a coordination effort, for example, or to document coordination successes as they are achieved. Cross-Cutting Lessons Lastly, the case studies offered several lessons for organi- zations that are interested in the coordination of transporta- tion services for the transportation disadvantaged, no matter what particular strategy they may adopt: 30 • An incremental or phased approach to implementing coordinated services can increase the likelihood that the services will be successful. • Communication among entities considering or engaged in coordination activities is vital. • Time and effort will need to be devoted to developing trust among partners and addressing concerns about control. • The time spent in developing support, resources, and a framework for coordination will pay off in terms of future growth and stability for the effort. Benefits may not appear in the short term.

Next: Chapter 4 - Transportation Services and Operations »
Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 105: Strategies to Increase Coordination of Transportation Services for the Transportation Disadvantaged examines strategies for initiating or improving coordination of local and regional publicly funded transportation services for the transportation disadvantaged.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!