Guidebook for Rural Demand-Response Transportation: Measuring, Assessing, and Improving Performance (2009)

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.

1. Carsey Institute, Demographic Trends in Rural and Small Town America, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 2006. 2. Rural Policy Research Institute, Rural by the Numbers, cited in Bellamy, G. R., R. Turner Gions, and R. J. Ham, “Overview: Definitions, Clinical Issues, Demographics, Healthcare and Long-Term Care,” in Best Practices in Service Delivery to the Rural Elderly, A Report for the Administration on Aging, W. Virginia University Center on Aging, March 2003. 3. Kirschner, A., E.H. Berry and N. Glasgow, “The Changing Demographic Profile of Rural America,” Policy brief by Western Region Multi-State Project. Retrieved December 2, 2008, from www.ncrcrd.iastate.edu/ resources/Kirschner_Berry_GlasgowV3.pdf. 4. “Status of Rural Transit 2007,” prepared by the National Rural Transit Assistance Program and the Community Transportation Association of America, April 2008. 5. Kittelson and Associates, Urbitran, LKC Consulting Services, MORPACE International, Queensland Univer- sity of Technology, and Yuko Nakanishi, TCRP Report 88: A Guidebook for Developing a Transit Performance- Measurement System, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington, DC, 2003. 6. Miller, J., “Shared Ride Paratransit Performance Evaluation Guide,” prepared for University Research and Training Program, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Washington, DC, Pennsylvania Trans- portation Institute, September 1989. 7. Billheimer. J.W., R.E. Lave, P. Jones, C. Fratessa, D. Newman, M. Holoszyc, and G. Fondahl, (Systan, Inc.), Paratransit Handbook: A Guide to Paratransit System Implementation, Vols. I and II, prepared for U.S.DOT, 1979. 8. Operating data obtained for selected DRT systems managed and operated by DAVE Transportation Services, Inc., during 1995. 9. Spielberg, F. and R. Pratt, TCRP Report 95: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, “Chapter 6: Demand Response/ADA,” Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington, DC, 2004. 10. Kirby, R.F., Transportation Research Board Special Report 164: Paratransit: A State-of-the-Art Overview, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1976. 11. Burkhardt, J., B. Hamby, and A. McGavock, TCRP Report 6: Users’ Manual for Assessing Service-Delivery Systems for Rural Passenger Transportation, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1995. 12. The Canadian Transit Handbook, 3rd Ed., Canadian Urban Transit Association, Toronto, Canada, 1993. 13. Lave, R., R. Teal, and P. Piras, TCRP Report 18: A Handbook for Acquiring Demand-Responsive Transit Soft- ware, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 1996. 14. Fu, L. “Simulation Model for Evaluating Intelligent Paratransit Systems,” Transportation Research Record No. 1760, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington DC, 2001. 15. KFH Group, Inc., TCRP Report 127: Employee Compensation Guidelines for Transit Providers in Rural and Small Urban Areas, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington, DC, 2008. 16. Mathias, R. “Innovative Practices in Paratransit Services,” Easter Seals Project ACTION, Washington, DC, 2002. 17. Simon, R., TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 31: Paratransit Contracting and Service Delivery Methods, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington DC, 1998. 18. Palmer, K., M. Dessouky and T. Abdelmaguid, “Impacts of Management Practices and Advanced Technolo- gies on Demand Responsive Transit Systems,” Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA in Transportation Research Part A 38, 2004. 86 References

19. Chira-Chavala, T. and C. Venter, “Cost and Productivity Impacts of a ‘Smart’ Paratransit System,” Trans- portation Research Record 1571, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington DC, 1997. 20. Stone, J., J. Baugh, S. Chakravarty, and M. Surasky, “Winston-Salem Mobility Manager-Data Collection, Val- idation, and Performance Evaluation,” Transportation Research Record No. 1760, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington DC, 2001. 21. Pagano, A., P. Metaxatos, and M. King, “How Effective Are Computer-Assisted Scheduling and Dispatch- ing Systems in Paratransit? Results from a Sample of Operators,” Transportation Research Record No. 1760, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington DC, 2001. 22. Kessler, D., TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 57: Computer-Aided Scheduling and Dispatch in Demand- Responsive Transit Services, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington, DC, 2004. 23. Higgins, L., J. Laughlin, and K. Turnbull, “Automatic Vehicle Location and Advanced Paratransit Schedul- ing at Houston METROLift,” paper presented at 79th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, January 2000. 24. Spring, G., J. Collura, and K. Black, “Evaluation of Automatic Vehicle Location Technologies for Paratransit in Small and Medium-Sized Urban Areas,” Journal of Public Transportation, Vol.1, No. 4, 1997. 25. Fu, L. and Y. Xu, “Potential Effects of Automatic Vehicle Location and Computer-Aided Dispatch Tech- nology on Paratransit Performance—A Simulation Study,” Transportation Research Record No. 1760, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington DC, 2001. 26. SAIC with Multisystems, Inc. and KFH Group, Inc., Rural Transit ITS Best Practices, prepared for the U.S.DOT, March 2003. 27. The Beverley Foundation, “Supplemental Transportation Programs for Seniors,” Pasadena, CA, July 2004. 28. Hosen, K. and E. Fetting, TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 65: Transit Agency Participation in Medicaid Transportation Programs, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington, DC, 2006. 29. McGlothin Davis, Inc., and Corporate Strategies, Inc., TCRP Report 77: Managing Transit’s Workforce in the New Millennium, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2002. 30. Moffet, G., A. Ashton, and D. Blackburn, TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 40: A Challenged Employment System: Hiring, Training and Performance Evaluation, and Retention of Bus Operators, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2001. 31. Center for Transportation Education and Development, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, “Paratransit Scheduling/Dispatch Workshop,” for Maryland’s Mass Transportation Administration, Baltimore, MD, May 1996. 32. Schweiger, C., “Intelligent Transportation Systems for Rural Transit: Not Just for Urban Systems Anymore,” in TR News No. 225, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, March–April 2003. 33. Mathias, R., TCRP Synthesis of Transit Practice 60: Practices in No-Show and Late Cancellation Policies for ADA Paratransit, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington DC, 2005. 34. KFH Group, Inc, and A-M-M-A, TCRP Report 70: Guidebook for Change and Innovation at Rural and Small Urban Transit Systems, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2001. 35. KFH Group, Inc., Littleton C. MacDorman, and Laidlaw Transit Services, Inc., TCRP Report 61: Analyzing the Costs of Operating Small Transit Vehicles, User’s Guide to STVe, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2000. 36. Fu, L., and G. Ishkhanov, “Fleet Size and Mix Optimization for Paratransit Research,” Transportation Research Record No. 1884, Transportation Research Board, National Academies, Washington DC, 2004. References 87