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.
3BACKGROUND The goal of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is to promote the independence, integration, and self-sufficiency of people with disabilities. Consistent with these goals, ADA complementary paratransit services were intended to serve as a safety net for individuals who, even when the fixed-route tran- sit service in their area is fully accessible, are not able to fully utilize this service owing to a disability. As such, promoting the integration of fixed-route and paratransit services, besides ac- complishing cost-efficiencies, is fully congruent with the prin- ciples of the ADA (see Appendix A for the ADA regulatory language pertaining to feeder service). And yet, 18 years after the passage of the ADA, almost all transit systems in the United States continue to provide service based on the binary model of separate fixed-route and paratransit services. This study is intended to highlight the experiences of those systems that have attempted to depart from this model, by seeking a variety of ways to integrate their services. These in- clude the provision of paratransit feeder services, community bus or circulators, connectors, fixed-route fare incentives, and route deviations. Since a previous synthesis study focused on the operational experiences with flexible transit services (Koffman 2004), this study places greater emphasis on feeder services and community circulators. However, where agen- cies have included other approaches to shifting potential para- transit riders to less costly modes, these also are discussed. For the purposes of this synthesis, it is important to care- fully define the terms included in the scope of the study to avoid duplication of previous efforts and examine more thoroughly those services that have thus far received limited attention. At the outset of the study it became clear that even commonly used terms such as paratransit required further clarification. In this study, paratransit service is defined as demand-response service that primarily serves people with disabilities as opposed to the general public. The study is focused on examples of integration that serve people with disabilities and general public riders, but the compelling rea- son for setting up the integrated service has been the need to manage paratransit costs or reduce the need for separate para- transit service. Examples of integration in which a shift in paratransit ridership has occurred, even when that was not the initial impetus for setting up the new service, also have been included. The study addresses the following key issues: ⢠What cost savings can be accrued from the provision of feeder service and other alternatives to regular ADA paratransit service? ⢠What policies are associated with the effective imple- mentation of feeder service? ⢠How have associated program features, such as travel training, fare incentives, and special amenities at transfer locations, facilitated the implementation of integrated services? ⢠Are feeder and other integrated services generally found in communities that share similar demographic and geo- graphic features? ⢠What operational management approaches and policies have been adopted in those systems that have developed successful integrated services? ⢠How are transfers from paratransit to fixed-route service most effectively accomplished? ⢠Is specific technology required to implement service that requires transfers between modes? ⢠What barriers have prevented a greater integration of paratransit and fixed-route services? This synthesis aims to help transit systems understand how appropriate use of integrated services may help them accom- plish their mission. This has been accomplished through a review of the relevant literature in the field, surveys of transit agencies, telephone interviews with key stakeholders to obtain more in-depth information for case studies, and a site visit to an area of Oregon rich with examples of integrated service that are operating successfully. This report concludes with the key lessons learned from these efforts, and the presentation of suggestions for further research. In the preliminary phases of the study, a search was con- ducted through the online version of the Transportation Re- search Information Service (TRIS). In addition to the nine articles and reports identified through this TRIS research, examples of integrated service were obtained from the study panel, previous studies that had been conducted by the study consultant, and a series of telephone interviews with leaders in the paratransit field. In addition to developing a list of likely candidates of transit agencies that provide integrated services, the consultant was CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
assisted by APTA in the dissemination of the survey tool (Appendix B). The survey was placed on the web and a letter with a link to the website was sent via e-mail to members of the following APTA committees: ⢠Access ⢠Bus & Paratransit CEOs ⢠Bus Operations ⢠Human Resources ⢠Policy and Planning ⢠Small Operations In total, the e-mail was sent to more than 346 committee members, covering a broad range of transit and paratransit operators and consultants. Follow-up reminders were sent two weeks after the initial e-mail. In addition, personal tele- phone calls were made to dozens of transit agency contacts to broaden the reach of the survey dissemination effort. Hard copy mail-outs also were offered as an alternative to the online version. Despite these efforts, a limited number of agencies (21) completed the survey. Additional responses were received from a number of transit systems, but their responses indicated that they did not provide integrated services as de- fined in the survey tool. The literature review and direct contact with a small number of transit agencies that had not completed the survey but nevertheless provide integrated 4 service, expanded the number of examples that have been included in this study to 46. REPORT ORGANIZATION ⢠Chapter two begins with an overview of the current status of integrated services, including the types of integrated services, lengths of experience, and the reasons for the limited application of services or the discontinuation of existing services. ⢠Chapter three describes design decisions that transit planners have made to assure the successful implemen- tation of integrated services. ⢠Chapter four describes marketing efforts and the use of technology in the provision of integrated services. ⢠Chapter five presents case studies of successful inte- grated services. ⢠Chapter six provides conclusions and suggestions for additional study. The appendixes contains the ADA regulatory language per- taining to feeder service (A), the survey tool that was used to obtain information about integrated services throughout North America (B), a brief summary of services reported by survey respondents (C), and the methodology used in one system to explore the feasibility of introducing feeder service (D).
