Click for next page ( 11

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 10
10 CHAPTER THREE SURVEY RESULTS: PUBLIC EMPLOYEE FARE PROGRAMS INTRODUCTION Among agencies that do not offer programs to employers, the most common reason was a lack of interest from employ- This is the first of two chapters presenting the results of a ers. Other reasons cited were (1) too complex or not enough survey of transit agencies regarding fare programs for public staff to administer and reach out to employers; (2) previ- employees. The survey was designed to elicit information on ously tried and failed; (3) lack of interest within the agency; program type, structure, and administration; barriers, con- (4) few large employers within the service area; (5) agency straints, and obstacles to success; and to conduct an assess- policy of not offering fare discounts; and (6) board decision. ment of how well the program met its objectives. A few agencies in this category reported that they do partici- pate in pretax or transit benefit programs. This result high- Thirty-one completed surveys were received from the lights a semantic difference: these agencies do not view the 43 transit agencies in the core sample, a response rate of programs as "theirs," because someone else administers the 72%. Nine agencies not included in the core sample heard program. This result is interesting because most prior stud- about the survey and also participated, for a total of 40 tran- ies related to employer-oriented fare programs have not sur- sit agencies in the final sample. These agencies range in veyed transit agencies, but instead have focused on program size from less than 25 to more than 9,000 fixed-route transit administrators. The one agency that reported a program for vehicles. private-sector employers noted that public-sector employers were not interested. This chapter analyzes survey results related to the types of programs, the impetus for beginning (or not beginning) a The remainder of this chapter focuses on the 28 agencies fare program oriented toward public-sector employees, and with fare programs for public employers and their employ- how the program is administered. Chapter four discusses ees. These 28 agencies provided information on a total of survey results related to the responding agencies' assess- 40 programs. Three agencies offer three types of programs, ment of their programs. seven offer two types, and the remaining 18 offer one pro- gram. The tables in the remainder of this chapter use the 40 programs as the basis for analysis, because respondents TYPE OF PROGRAMS answered questions about a specific program. Table 4 summarizes survey responses regarding fare pro- Table 5 indicates the types of programs that have been grams oriented toward employers. Almost three-quarters implemented. A universal pass program in which all employ- of responding agencies do offer some type of program, ees of a participating public employer receive a pass was the with most of these including both public and private most frequently mentioned program, accounting for 20% of employers. all programs. The 28 agencies who offer some type of fare program Table 4 for public employees provided detailed information about Agencies with Fare Programs Oriented Toward a total of 40 programs. As shown in Table 6, 80% of these Employers programs are not specific to the public sector but also are # Agencies % Agencies open to private-sector employees. Fare Program Responding Responding For public and private-sector 24 60% employers PROGRAM GOALS Public-sector employers only 4 10% Private-sector employers only 1 3% Respondents were asked to identify the three most impor- No program 11 28% tant goals for public employee fare programs. Table 7 shows that the primary goals are to increase ridership and to build Total Responding 40 -- partnerships in support of transit.