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 9
Background 9
is probably one of the best known examples. The ACCESS program predates the ADA by more
than a decade and has evolved to incorporate ADA paratransit into its service mix. Designed
as an administrative paratransit brokerage, ACCESS is responsible for coordinating the pro-
vision of approximately 2 million trips annually for 120 agencies through a network of about
a dozen for-profit and non-profit transportation providers. General public customers also
may use ACCESS services, but must pay a fare that covers the full cost of their trip.
· Cost-sharing. Another reason for commingling was the need for public transit and local
human service agencies to cooperate, particularly related to managing costs and cost-sharing for
paratransit service. Prior to passage of the ADA, many human service agencies were responsible
for their own program participants' transportation. With implementation of the ADA, many
of these program participants were determined ADA eligible, but rather than just shifting their
riders and the associated transportation costs to the public transit authority as some human
service agencies have done, these organizations worked together to coordinate service and
develop agreements for equitable cost-sharing.
In contrast, some transit agencies decided not to commingle or to discontinue commingling
their ADA and non-ADA riders (e.g., Maryland Mass Transit Administration and Broward
County in Florida). Factors contributing to a transit agency's decisions not to commingle
tend to focus on cost allocation or service quality/control issues.
· State-level commitment to coordination. In some cases, coordination requirements and
incentives at the state level may influence or require commingling of ADA and non-ADA rid-
ers. A 2005 report published by the National Conference of State Legislatures found 21 states
with specific legislation related to human service transportation coordination and another 16
states that require human service coordination but not specifically in public transportation.
Governors have executed executive orders in 9 states, and at least 27 states and the District of
Columbia have attempted local coordination initiatives without a state requirement (Sundeen
et al. 2005). It is clear that transit agencies in states such as Florida and Pennsylvania, with des-
ignated funding set aside for coordinated transportation efforts, tend to provide services in a
commingled fashion.
ADA Complementary Paratransit
Regulatory Requirements
It is important to remember that fixed route public transit agencies must maintain their ADA
complementary paratransit services in accordance with U.S. DOT regulations under the ADA.
As long as a transit system meets the ADA regulatory criteria without capacity constraints,
it is free to tailor its operations in response to the needs of the community it serves, including
commingling ADA and non-ADA riders if desired. However, if there are capacity constraints for
ADA riders, the transit agency must make that aspect of the service compliant.
Public entities operating non-commuter fixed route transportation services for the general
public are required by the U.S. DOT regulations that implement the ADA to provide ADA
complementary paratransit service for individuals who are unable to use the fixed route system
because of their disability. The FTA is responsible for ensuring compliance with the ADA and
the U.S. DOT regulations. In addition to the ADA paratransit eligibility standards described
in 49 CFR §37.123, these regulations include service criteria, which must be met by ADA
complementary paratransit service programs as outlined in 49 CFR §37.131. These criteria are
meant to ensure that paratransit service is comparable to service that is provided by the fixed
route system. These criteria state that the ADA complementary paratransit service must, at a
minimum
· Operate in the same service area as the fixed route system, which generally includes a 3/4-mile
corridor on either side of a fixed route as described in 49 CFR §131(a).
