Click for next page ( 4


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 3
uncertain funding sources also contribute to reluc- portation Plans by the Volpe Center for the Fed- tance in setting statewide transit goals. Additional eral Highway Administration (FHWA) and Fed- peer information and support, especially coming eral Transit Administration (FTA) (2005); and the from federal partners, would encourage states and more recent NCHRP-sponsored National Forum transit providers to integrate their planning and pro- on Performance-Based Planning and Programming mote setting statewide transit goals. in September 2010. The research team found little literature specifically focused on statewide transit goal setting. Most literature addressed the broader CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION issues of performance-based planning at state DOTs. Purpose of Report Where transit is discussed, it is often in relation to transit agency-established goals and transit agency State departments of transportation (DOTs) performance-based planning. are gradually incorporating a performance-based approach to their transportation planning. Today, Web Survey of Statewide Transit Goal Setting state DOTs are likely to include performance-based planning elements, such as goals and objectives for The research team followed the literature review the state's transportation network, in their long-range with an online survey of state DOTs on their transit statewide transportation plans (LRSTPs). As DOTs goal setting. To achieve a higher response rate, this provide direction for a state's transportation network, survey was conducted in conjunction with NCHRP they set statewide goals for the network's different Project 20-65, Task 29, "Public Transportation Per- systems. However, this does not always extend to formance Measures." After receiving input from the a state's public transportation system. State DOTs NCHRP 20-65 panel, the research team invited have limited influence over individual transit agen- DOTs from all 50 states and the District of Colum- cies. Transit systems are often built, operated, and bia and Puerto Rico to take the survey. The research maintained by local/regional agencies that are sep- team identified survey participants based on their arate from the state DOT. Only a few DOTs operate membership in the American Association of State transit systems, limiting state DOT influence over Highway and Transportation Officials' (AASHTO) transit decisions. This limited influence creates chal- Standing Committees on Public Transportation, Plan- lenges for DOTs when setting statewide transit goals. ning, and Performance Measurement. The research This digest addresses the need for a better under- team asked each jurisdiction contacted to specify the standing of current and best practices in statewide individual(s) best suited to complete the survey. transit goal setting by state DOTs. The research team contacted 238 representatives via email, approximately four to five representatives per jurisdiction. The research team received a response Research Approach from 43 DOTs--a response rate of 83%. The survey The findings in this report are drawn from three used conditional logic to inquire about DOT use of lines of research conducted over the summer and fall statewide transit goals. The research team asked re- of 2010, as described below. spondents a set of questions depending on whether or not their DOT had transit goals. If they had tran- Literature Review of Statewide Transit sit goals, the research team followed up about their Goal Setting Practices development, use, and impact. If the DOT did not have transit goals, the research team asked whether The research team conducted a literature review they were considering having them in the future. of statewide transit goal setting practices. The re- Thirty states indicated they had transit goals and search team researched LRSTPs and statewide tran- four indicated they were developing transit goals. sit plans around the country to understand current practices of transit goal setting. The research team Interviews with Selected State DOTs reviewed existing literature about state DOT multi- modal goal setting practices and performance-based Based on the literature review and survey, the planning, including NCHRP Report 446: A Guide- research team identified six DOTs that illustrate book for Performance-Based Transportation Plan- how states are setting statewide goals for transit. ning (2000); Analysis of State Long-Range Trans- The research team contacted representatives of the 3