National Academies Press: OpenBook

ADA Paratransit Service Models (2018)

Chapter: Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles

« Previous: Chapter 3 - Service Design Archetypes and Contracting Strategies
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 35
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 36
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 38
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 39
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 40
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 43
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 44
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 45
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 46
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 47
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 50
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 76
Page 77
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 77
Page 78
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 78
Page 79
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 79
Page 80
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 80
Page 81
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 81
Page 82
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 82
Page 83
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 83
Page 84
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 84
Page 85
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 85
Page 86
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 86
Page 87
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 87
Page 88
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 88
Page 89
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 89
Page 90
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 90
Page 91
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 91
Page 92
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 92
Page 93
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 93
Page 94
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 94
Page 95
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 95
Page 96
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 96
Page 97
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 97
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Chapter 4 - Survey and Service Profiles." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2018. ADA Paratransit Service Models. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/25092.
×
Page 98

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.

35 Survey Participants Based on the literature review and the synthesis team’s knowledge of the industry, and in conjunction with the panel, the team identified and sought the participation of 32 transit agen- cies that collectively represented a wide range of ADA service models and geographic diversity. These 32 transit agencies are located on the map in Figure 6, and are listed in Figure 7 on the fol- lowing page. Note that 28 (or 88%) of the 32 transit agencies fully completed the SG-14 survey, while one transit agency partially completed the survey. Three of the transit agencies invited to participate in the survey elected not to participate. Under the premise that most small-to-medium sized systems either directly perform all call center, operational, and support functions in-house or retain a turnkey contractor to perform all or most functions, this research effort and the underlying survey focused on larger systems, as well as systems that collectively brought a rich diversity of service models and contracting nuances, including some that have recently undergone, or were in the midst of, a service model change. This is not to say that small-to-medium size transit agencies will not benefit from this synthesis, as there is no reason why lessons learned cannot be harnessed by all sizes of systems. Survey Process and Instrument The survey was administered via SurveyMonkey and was also available via a fillable PDF. Survey participants were given the opportunity to take the survey online, to fill it out manu- ally, or to complete the survey during an interview with the study team. Survey Introduction The survey for this service and contracting analysis was initially sent out on February 27, 2017, to 30 agencies that had agreed to take part in the survey. The participants were asked to complete the survey within 2 weeks; the deadline, however, was pushed back as various agencies requested more time. The survey was left open to allow agencies to change their answers as needed, and the study team followed up with individual agencies to complete the survey or clarify the answers provided. The survey was designed to provide a comprehensive view of how an agency delivers its para- transit service, with a focus on the different responsibilities taken on by transit agencies, brokers, and contractors in delivering the service, and many questions related to how these different groups interact and work with one another. A list of the themes covered by the survey appears here. Please note that a complete list of questions can be found in Appendix C. C h a p t e r 4 Survey and Service Profiles

36 aDa paratransit Service Models Context and Background The survey asked the agencies for various pieces of information intended to provide a broader understanding of the service, including service area size, other types of service offered, annual trips, and funding sources. Service Model To provide a better view of what roles are performed by a given agency or contractor, the sur- vey asked the respondents to list which paratransit service delivery responsibilities were handled by which stakeholder. These responsibilities covered oversight and contracting; call center func- tions, including dispatch; road supervision; service delivery; training; and fleet maintenance. Surveyed agencies were also asked to explain how the various service elements were integrated, particularly where different entities were responsible for various roles. Service Organization Survey respondents were asked how various roles within each area of responsibility were split up. With regard to service providers, the survey asked about the number of service providers, how their service areas were organized, and the number of facilities that were used for opera- tions and maintenance. Respondents that used call center contractors were asked to discuss what functions were performed by their staff, and how those functions were split up, including the roles of dispatchers and schedulers. Source: Nelson\Nygaard, 2017. Figure 6. Locations selected for the synthesis.

Survey and Service profiles 37 Service Assets Responsibility to provide and maintain service assets, including vehicles, software, radios, and other equipment necessary for service delivery, is an important part of paratransit service delivery. The survey asked respondents to explain who was responsible for providing these vari- ous elements, and had a detailed breakdown of the types of vehicles provided by different parties involved in service delivery. Use of Non-Dedicated Providers In an effort to better understand how non-dedicated service providers were used to deliver ADA trips, the survey asked agencies that used taxis to describe how these trips were assigned, the types of training and vehicles required, and what service requirements are expected of non- dedicated providers. Figure 7. Transit agencies answering the SG-14 survey. Location Transit Agency Service Name Ann Arbor, MI AAATA A-Ride Atlanta, GA MARTA MARTA Mobility Austin, TX Capital Metro MetroAccess Boston, MA MBTA The RIDE Broward Co., FL Broward County Transit Transportation Options Chicago, IL Pace ADA Paratransit Columbus, OH COTA Mainstream Dallas, TX DART Mobility Management Denver, CO RTD Access-a-Ride Houston, TX* Metro METROLift Kansas City, MO KCATA RideKC Freedom Las Vegas, NV RTC of Southern Nevada RTC Paratransit Los Angeles, CA LAMTA+46 Transit Agencies/Access Services Access Paratransit Milwaukee, WI MCTS Transit Plus Nashville, TN Nashville MTA AccessRide New Jersey NJ TRANSIT Access Link New York, NY NYCT Access-a-Ride Oakland/E ast Bay, CA AC Transit /BART East Bay Paratransit Orange County, CA OCTA ACCESS Orlando, FL LYNX ACCESS LYNX Philadelphia, PA SEPTA CCT Connect Phoenix, AZ Valley Metro ADA Paratransit Pierce County, WA Pierce Transit SHUTTLE Pittsburgh, PA Port Authority of Allegheny County ACCESS Portland, OR TriMet LIFT Salt Lake City, UT UTA UTA Paratransit San Francisco, CA SFMTA San Francisco Paratransit Seattle, WA King County Metro Access Transportation Washington, DC WMATA MetroAccess * Partially completed survey.

38 aDa paratransit Service Models Contract Structure The survey asked respondents about how contractors are procured, the number of contrac- tors, the reasons for selecting multiple contractors, the contract terms, the involvement of unions, wages and benefits, liquidated damages and incentives, mobilization costs, and the dif- ferent ways contractors and brokers are paid. Contract Oversight In order to understand how the contractors are managed, the survey asked respondents to describe what methods are used to audit and monitor contractors, as well as to share the number of full-time employees dedicated to monitoring the contractors and how disputes are handled. Service Performance Agencies were asked to provide their actual and service standards for performance on a variety of measures including on-time performance, no-show rate, missed trip rate, and average call hold time. Agencies were also asked to include their incentive and penalty triggers for contrac- tors, where applicable, as well as to define how they measure these assorted key performance indicators. Agency Perceptions Finally, agencies were asked to share their thoughts on the successes and limitations of their service model, how it has recently changed (or might change in the future), what these changes were intended to address, and whether the intended outcome was achieved. Transit Agency Profiles Profiles of each of the 29 survey respondents follow, presented alphabetically by location. Each of the profiles uses the following format: • A graphic that portrays the type of management structure; whether dedicated service is provided by a single operator or multiple operators, and if the latter, whether zones are employed; and lastly, the service mix, noting that this graphic is missing if non-dedicated service providers (NDSPs) are not used to serve ADA paratransit trips. • A summary description of the division of primary functions related to service provision. This also includes who is responsible for providing assets such as facilities, vehicles, software, radio system, in-vehicle equipment [mobile data terminal/automated vehicle locator (MDT/AVL), telephone system], and the like. (Note: While the team did collect data on whether the transit agency or an eligibility con- tractor performed ADA paratransit eligibility certification, this information is not presented in these profiles, as it is largely independent of the service model.) • Basic statistics on ridership, service productivity, and cost per trip from calendar year (CY) or fiscal year (FY) 2016, and service performance standards adopted. The provision of ridership statistics serves as a surrogate for size of the program, and for the sake of comparisons. • A background section on the transit agency and the ADA paratransit service. • A description on how service is requested and delivered. • A detailed discussion of how the transit agency uses and retains contractors to perform some or all of the call center functions and/or for operations. • The perspectives of the transit agency staff and lessons learned relative to maintaining or changing the service model.

Survey and Service profiles 39 Ann Arbor, MI A-Ride Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority (AAATA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, advanced reservations, scheduling, software, trip reconciliation, training, and fleet maintenance Contractor Responsible for: Same-day reservations, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 87,600 ADA Trips (customers and companions/PCAs) Revenue Service Hours: 8,700 Productivity: Lift Van 1.5, Sedan 2.0 Operating Cost per Passenger: $28.08 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $28.16 Operating Cost per RVH: $39.00 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trip Rate 46,700 senior trips Excessively Long Trips Complaint Freq. Ratio 97% 0% <5% 0.5% of trips per day Background A-Ride is the ADA paratransit service provided by the Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority. The AAATA also provides paratransit service to seniors (under the Gold-Ride brand), noting that ADA and senior customers are commingled. A-Ride further provides “premium service” to ADA paratransit customers: it provides rides beyond the three-quarter- mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor, takes reservations beyond normal business hours, and allows same-day trip requests without limits. A-Ride contracts out its service deliv- ery with one dedicated service provider, which also handles same-day reservations and same- day issues. How It Works Customers book advanced reservations for the service with AAATA, which performs all advanced reservations and scheduling. Other call center functions are handled by the contrac- tor, including same-day trip requests, dispatching, and same-day issues. Advanced scheduling and run construction are conducted by AAATA. All service delivery functions are handled by the

40 aDa paratransit Service Models contracted provider. Training is provided to the contractor on a “train the trainer” basis, with direct employee training handled by the contractor. Contracting The contract has a 3-year base term, with two 1-year options. Payment is based on a split rate reflecting fixed and variable costs, respectively. The “fixed cost” is a monthly fee reflecting fixed costs, while the “variable cost” rate is based on service hours. Liquidated damages are tied to performance metrics (on-time performance, missed trip rate, excessively long trips, productivity, complaint frequency ratio, average call hold time, and percent of shared rides). The provider is obligated to maintain a shared-ride threshold of 50% or higher per month or face liquidated damages. The contract does not provide any incentives for exceeding service standards. Results Previously, A-Ride contracted out its advanced reservations but changed its service model to provide in-house reservations. The previous service model relied on a local turnkey taxicab provider to deliver service; however, because of contract compliance issues, A-Ride selected a new contractor beginning in 2015 and retained some service elements in the call center. AAATA reports that through the new service model it has been able to create greater con- nection to its riders, possess better control over service quality and trip productivity, have greater flexibility to respond to service quality issues, and minimize risks to the agency as well as the contractor. The new model’s success has created limitations on flexibility of growth because of the contractor’s need to purchase vehicles to keep pace with demand, and the long- term sustainability of the program’s costs. That said, A-Ride altered its service model in order to gain greater control over service quality and to better manage demand, both of which the agency claims to have accomplished. Lessons Learned • Commingling ADA and senior trips increases productivity. • Maintaining a portion of the call center functions helps maintain high levels of service quality. • Using in-house advanced reservations enhances service quality control and improves service demand management. • Owning the vehicles and performing the reservations provides the agency greater flexibility to respond if there are problems with the contractor. • In-house reservations process gives the service regular contact with customers, allowing the service to use an additional method to monitor contractor performance.

Survey and Service profiles 41 Atlanta, GA MARTA Mobility Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations, software, and vehicles Dedicated Service Contractor Responsible for: Scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 659,321 Total Annual Passengers Productivity (Trips per Revenue Hour): 1.31 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trips Median Distance Between Failures 90% 0% 15,000 Miles 141,426 Companion and PCAs Customers 517,895 ADA Paratransit Background MARTA Mobility is the ADA paratransit service provided by the Metro Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA), which serves three metro area counties (Clayton, DeKalb, and Fulton), and includes Atlanta. MARTA Mobility operates only within the three-quarter-mile ADA comple- mentary paratransit corridor. For years, MARTA provided all functions associated with MARTA Mobility in-house. Largely as a service quality improvement strategy, MARTA in 2015/2016 switched to a new service model with MARTA staff continuing to provide reservations and with a single contractor (MV Transportation) performing all other call center and service delivery functions. How It Works All elements of MARTA Mobility, whether performed by MARTA or MV, are based at MARTA’s facilities, with all call center functions co-located in one facility. All service assets are provided by the agency, with the exception of in-vehicle tablets. Contracts The current contract has a 3-year base term with two 1-year options. MARTA pays MV based on a per-revenue-vehicle-hour rate, although fuel costs are reimbursed separately. The contract bases incentives and liquidated damages upon on-time performance, missed trip rate, complaint

42 aDa paratransit Service Models frequency, and service interruptions. Each of these liquidated damages and incentives is per- formed as a percentage of monthly revenue, typically in 0.5% increments. Additionally, the contractor is tasked with fleet maintenance, with incentives and liquidated damages tied to the general maintenance and mean distance between failures. MARTA has set a mean distance goal of 15,000 miles per vehicle between service interruptions, with payment reduced or increased by 0.5% for every 1% below or above that goal. Mobilization costs were reimbursed as a fixed cost paid in equal monthly payment over the first 3 contract months, while capital costs incurred by the contractor are amortized over the base contract term. Results Prior to the new contract, MARTA Mobility provided on-time trips for 80%–85% of rides, but under the new contract, on-time performance has increased to 90% of trips. Due to the local union’s grievance with the outsourcing, the current contract may be re- negotiated. Given the uncertain status of the outcome of the arbitrator’s decision and the ongoing negotiations with the local union, the MARTA Mobility service model may change in the near future. There are two potential outcomes: return to in-house service for operations and main- tenance, or provide a hybrid model that would provide service using a combination of in-house and contracted operations (similar to Pierce Transit). MARTA staff believes that the latter model would allow MARTA greater flexibility in how the service is provided, the ability to maintain control of the service, and greater leverage in improving service quality to its customers. Lessons Learned • If call center functions are split between the agency and the contractor, it is more effec- tive if all these responsibilities are performed in the same building to allow for improved cooperation. • Internal IT control of software limits the effectiveness of the software if the IT department doesn’t understand the needs of paratransit or have the resources to provide daily support.

Survey and Service profiles 43 Background MetroAccess is the ADA paratransit service offered by the Capital Metropolitan Transporta- tion Authority, which serves Austin, Texas, and the surrounding area. MetroAccess provides service only in the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor, and only pro- vides ADA paratransit trips. Capital Metro contracts with two dedicated service providers to deliver ADA transit in the area, and a third non-dedicated service provider to handle overflow paratransit trips. How It Works All call center functions are performed by MetroAccess, while nearly all service delivery func- tions are the responsibility of the providers. Trips are assigned by MetroAccess to providers on a contractual basis, and are delivered via north and south bases of operation. All providers operate throughout the entirety of the service area, and are not organized by zone. By contract, about two-thirds of trips are delivered from MetroAccess’s south base, from which MV Trans- portation operates, while approximately one-third of trips are delivered by a second carrier, Ride Right, which operates out of the north base. A greater number of trips are assigned to the Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, training, vehicles Dedicated and Non-Dedicated Contractors Responsible for: Service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 544,759 Annual Passengers: 661,977 Revenue Service Hours: 377,935 Productivity (Total Trips per Service Hour): 1.4 Operating Cost per Passenger: $48.00 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $54.00 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Passenger Accidents Complaint Freq. Ratio 92% <0.3 per 10,000 trips <0.8 per 1,000 trips Dedicated Trips: 531,387 Overflow Trips: 13,372 Dedicated Passengers: 646,923 Overflow Passengers: 15,054 Austin, TX MetroAccess Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Capital Metro)

44 aDa paratransit Service Models south base because MV operates accessible vehicles supplied by MetroAccess, while Ride Right uses self-supplied inaccessible vehicles. No more than 3% of trips are assigned to the non- dedicated provider, LeFleur, a contractor that primarily provides non-emergency medical trans- portation (NEMT) for the state of Texas. The ADA paratransit trips provided by LeFleur are mostly peak overflow trips. Capital Metro allows these ADA paratransit trips to be commingled with NEMT trips. Capital Metro operates the main call center and dispatch functions, where the agency adjusts and manages the schedules, as well as handles same-day issues. Each service provider has an on-site dispatcher who is responsible for matters such as lost drivers, passenger disruptions, and vehicle breakdowns. In cases such as a vehicle breakdown, the agency and contractor dispatch operations communicate so that Capital Metro dispatchers can move the trips to a different run, but the service provider’s dispatch coordinates the road supervisor response and all other activities. For the trips delivered via the non-dedicated provider, Capital Metro handles the same-day issues, including the trip status calls, with the ability to view the real-time vehicle loca- tion, though they must communicate directly with the Ride Right’s dispatchers to verify more specific information. Contracting Capital Metro’s fixed-route service routes are adjusted three times per year, and the ADA service area and run structure/driver shifts change three times per year as a result. As of March 2017, the first contractor provided 68% of all trips, the second provided 30% of all trips, and the non-dedicated company provided 2% of trips. Capital Metro provides nearly all service assets to the larger dedicated contractor, MV, while the smaller dedicated contractor, Ride Right, and the non-dedicated contractor, LeFleur, pro- vide their own assets with the exception of the eligibility facility, call center, scheduling software, IVR, and radio base station, which are provided by MetroAccess. The current contracts have different term lengths, as follows: • Dedicated Service Provider 1 (MV): 3-year base plus two 3-year options • Dedicated Service Provider 2: (Ride Right) 5-year base plus one 5-year option • Non-Dedicated Service Provider (LeFleur): 3-year base plus two 1-year options The contracts are staggered based on vehicle and facility ownership, and replacement schedules. The dedicated providers are paid per service hour. Fixed costs, however, are paid separately from variable costs and split into equal monthly payments, although fuel costs are reimbursed sepa- rately. Payment is also contingent on performance incentives and liquidated damages, which are tied to on-time performance, missed trip rate, complaint frequency, accidents, and miles between road calls. The agency plans to add trip productivity to its list of key performance indicators for the next south-base contract. The non-dedicated provider is reimbursed via a predetermined rate based on triangulated mileage as determined by the service’s scheduling software. Results Overall, Capital Metro has found that the existing service model has led to enhanced control over productivity, as well as more flexibility to handle service quality issues more effectively. Additionally, the current model allows the use of a separate provider in the event of an emer- gency, while the incentives and liquidated damages have been key to help enforce the contract requirements. Despite these benefits, contracting out service may lead to a loss in service qual- ity, as the contractors are primarily profit driven. The introduction of MDTs and digital dash- boards have improved the service monitoring on the road and in the call center, which has helped improve the customer experience and improve control over field operations. Finally, the

Survey and Service profiles 45 inclusion of a non-dedicated provider has allowed for greater service flexibility and more cost- effective service because it is only called upon when needed. Lessons Learned • Periodic evaluation and adjustment of service can be an effective means of motivating con- tractors to perform at a higher level of service. • Using contractors may in fact be more expensive overall due to the additional service monitoring costs. • The introduction of MDTs and digital dashboards has improved the service monitoring on the road and in the call center, which has helped improve the customer experience and improve control over field operations. • Contracting out service may lead to a loss in service quality, as the contractors are primarily profit driven. • Contracts can allow for the use of a separate provider in the event of an emergency. • Incentives and liquidated damages can help enforce contract requirements. Boston, MA The RIDE Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Policy development and planning, contractor procurement and oversight, invoice processing, contractor compliance, service and cost monitoring, vehicle procurement (majority of fleet) and insurance, risk management, software licensing and support contract, T-1 lines, fare media distribution, complaint management, public outreach and surveys, reporting Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Operations facilities, reservations, scheduling, radio dispatching, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, vehicles (a smaller portion of the fleet) and insurance, vehicle maintenance, fueling, and storage, radio system, in-vehicle MDCs and AVL equipment, and the telephone system and support Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 2,187,785 Productivity (Total Trips per RVH): 1.4 Miles per Trip: 10.47 Operating Cost per Trip: $46.91 Operating Cost per RVH: $62.12 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trips Excessively Long Trips Avg. Call Hold Time Complaint Freq. Ratio 90% 0.5% <2.0% <90 sec 2 per 1,000 trips

46 aDa paratransit Service Models Background The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) contracts with three dedicated service providers to deliver trips for its ADA paratransit service, called The RIDE. Though The RIDE only provides ADA paratransit, the service does provide premium trips, i.e., beyond the three-quarter-mile fixed-route service corridor, as well as some same-day trips if space is avail- able. Each of the three providers performs roughly an equal number of trips, and each is assigned into one of three geographic zones. The three zones overlap in a core area that includes the city of Boston and some neighboring cities. All service assets are provided by the MBTA, save for the eligibility facility, and a portion of the vehicles. The current service model is in its final year and is scheduled to transition to a centralized call and control model in 2017. Starting in 2016, the MBTA piloted an alternative taxi subsidy program and an alternative TNC subsidy program. How It Works The RIDE customers book all their trips through their “home” service provider. Customers living in the core area book their trips with the service provider assigned to the area in which their destination lies. If booking an intra-core area trip, customers may contact any of the three providers. All four primary call center functions, including reservations, scheduling, dispatch- ing, and handling customers’ same-day issues, are undertaken by each individual provider. Transfers are required for some inter-zone trips with destinations beyond a buffer area between two adjacent zones, as well as for trips to/from neighboring transit systems. Contracting Service provider contractors are retained for a 5 + 2 contract period and are paid based on a fixed monthly fee that covers fixed costs, and a per-trip rate that covers variable costs, with re-negotiation possible if trip rates vary more than ±10% of the forecast trip estimates. Signifi- cant liquidated damages include a late trip fee equivalent to the per-trip payment rate (after a grace of 10% late trips) and a missed trip fee equivalent to double the per-trip payment rate for all missed trips. Results Service quality over the years has been very good, evidenced by a recent customer survey in which customers gave The RIDE high marks in almost every area. However, this comes at a cost, with The RIDE comparing unfavorably with many of its peers in terms of unit cost. Largely as a cost-reduction strategy, The RIDE service model is undergoing a transition to a centralized call and control model. While previously the three dedicated service providers performed the call center functions themselves, beginning in mid-year 2017 all three contractors transferred their four primary call center functions to a third-party call center contractor (Global Contact Ser- vices). In addition, once fully transitioned, there will be no more need for the three zones, and so intra-RIDE transfers will be eliminated. In addition to offering a more consistent customer experience and fewer transfer trips, the potential benefits include improved service productivity, stemming from more optimally aligned run structures and less service duplication in the core area. With dispatching centralized and the majority of vehicles supplied by the MBTA, mid- contract adjustments to the volume of work assigned to each carrier, based on performance, can be realized. With a call center manager, there is more objectivity in the use of non-dedicated service providers, for additional savings, and there is enhanced disruption insurance in the event a service provider defaults. Lessons Learned • Multiple service providers result in competitive pricing. • Splitting rates to cover fixed and variable per-trip costs respectively reduces contractor risk if trips decrease substantially, and reduces agency risk if trips increase substantially.

Survey and Service profiles 47 • Using per-trip rates for providers where integrated non-dedicated service is in use makes sense, but severe liquidated damages for late and missed trips must be included to thwart tight scheduling. • Using per-RVH rates for providers under a centralized system reduces risk on both sides, but must include productivity incentives/liquidated damages to accompany service quality incentives/liquidated damages. Centralized control of run structure and daily run changes is essential. • Under either model, having the same software eases reporting and comparisons. • Changing software concurrent to a service model change is not advised; wait until after things have settled down (after the service model change) before seeking new software. • Contracting process can include multiple bids (for different package sizes); agency must weigh reduced costs as a result of economies of scale with less competition and increased challenge of responding to contractor failure. Broward County, FL Transportation Options Broward County Transit (BCT) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, vehicles Call Center Contractor Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, handling customers’ ETA calls, and training Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Dispatch, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 531,963 Total Passengers Revenue Service Hours: 410,114 Productivity (Total Trips per RVH): 1.51 Operating Cost per Passenger Trip: $29.44 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $31.82 Operating Cost per RVH: $39.25 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trip Rate Excessively Long Trips Trip Productivity Complaint Freq. Ratio Average Call Hold Time 92% 0% 2.0% 1.7% 2.0% <2 min 484,162 ADA Customers 47,801 Companions and PCAs Background Transportation Options (TOPS) is the ADA paratransit service provided by Broward County Transit (BCT), which serves Fort Lauderdale and many of the cities and towns in the eastern part

48 aDa paratransit Service Models of the county, and with connecting service to neighboring transit systems. TOPS provides service beyond the three-quarter-mile fixed-route service corridor and service for older adults, which are commingled with ADA paratransit trips. How It Works BCT contracts most of its service delivery functions. Reservations and scheduling are per- formed by a contracted call center manager, while service delivery is provided separately by two private carriers, each performing 50% of trips. Fully eligible ADA customers may also book trips through TOPS’s online trip scheduling, though at this point only 1.7% of all trips are reserved via this portal. Service assets are split between the agency and the contractors, with the former providing vehicles for both contractors. While dispatch is handled by the service provider con- tractors, the call center contractor provides some dispatching oversight and assistance, further allowing them access to vehicle location in order to assist in same-day issues. Contracting The call center contractor has been retained for a 3-year base term, with two 1-year options. The call center contractor is paid based on a flat per-service-hour rate. The service providers are contracted using a 5-year base term, with two 1-year options. The contracts’ start dates are not staggered; each begins on the same date. The service providers are paid based on a per-completed-customer-trip rate covering vari- able costs, with fixed costs paid separately from variable costs and split into equal monthly payments. The providers’ payment is tied to performance incentives, and liquidated damages based upon on-time performance, missed trip rate, excessively long trips, complaint frequency ratio, equipment failure in service, accidents, vacancy of management positions, and uniform infractions. Results BCT changed its service model in recent years so that the agency provides the vehicles and fuel rather than the contractors, and also altered its procurement process to emphasize tighter qualitative standards and higher levels of required experience through the RFP. These changes were designed to improve cost efficiency and to better balance service quality and costs. Mean- while, centralized call center functions have led to greater utilization of resource efficiencies by utilizing schedule software to maximize routing and ride share possibilities. The use of multiple service contractors has also led to lower labor costs and greater flexibility in respond- ing to hiring needs to cover ridership fluctuations, as well as lower risk by having single point of failure. BCT reports that the changes made to its service model, as well as increased vehicle reliabil- ity, helped improve on-time performance from 82% to 92% in just 1 year, with an additional 105,000 trips served over that time. Additionally, 75% of BCT’s fleet now operates using pro- pane, which is believed to have reduced operating expenses by $1.6 million in FY 2016. Despite the apparent benefits, BCT acknowledges their service model is costly, though it does create cost efficiencies through competition and economies of scale. Lessons Learned • The agency owning the vehicles lowers risk to the county if the vendor fails to perform. • Given current market conditions, propane conversion can lead to considerable savings on fuel over diesel or gasoline. • Use of central call centers improves efficiency by using central routing, scheduling, and ride sharing.

Survey and Service profiles 49 Chicago, IL ADA Paratransit Pace Suburban Bus Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, vehicles Call Center Contractor Responsible for: Scheduling and handling customers’ ETA calls Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Reservations, dispatch, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 3,103,008 Total Trips Productivity (Customer Trips per RVH): 1.44 Operating Cost per Passenger: $41.98 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $44.56 Operating Cost per RVH: $70.18 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trip Rate Trip Productivity Complaint Freq. Ratio Average Call Hold Time 95% 0% 1.7 0 <150 sec 437,755 Companions and PCAs 2,665,253 ADA Customers Background Pace Suburban Bus is the regional transit provider for the suburban parts of metropolitan Chicago, and provides all ADA paratransit in the area including within the city of Chicago. Pace provides ADA paratransit to suburban Cook County, DuPage County, Kane County, Lake County, McHenry County, and Will County; however, this model assessment focuses only on the service provided in the city of Chicago. In addition to ADA paratransit service, customers in Chicago have access to a taxi subsidy program and also may make same-day requests for ADA paratransit service as available. How It Works Pace contracts out the call center and service delivery functions separately, but with a hybrid approach. The service area that includes the city of Chicago and some of the nearby suburban areas is split into three zones, with one dedicated service provider identified as the point of con- tact for people living in that area. Each provider takes the reservations for people who live in any particular zone until 6 p.m. the day before. All the reservations are then batched and scheduled by the call center contractor (SCR), who creates a series of runs and allocates them to the three

50 aDa paratransit Service Models mentioned providers, as well as a fourth dedicated provider that does not take reservations and is the designated carrier for longer trips and overflow trips. The dedicated providers can review their scheduled runs and ask to renegotiate trips that do not fit into their run structure. The call center contractor, who can view all availability and run structures across the four providers, can then reallocate trips as needed. Though reservations are taken according to a geographic zone, all providers serve the entirety of Chicago, with the fourth service provider taking most overflow and longer distance trips. The trip distribution is shared between the four providers via a 42%/36%/14%/8% split. The call center manager monitors system performance and may reassign trips that are likely to be late to a non-dedicated taxi service (representing less than 1% of all trips). Similarly, ADA paratransit–eligible customers are also eligible to use an alternative taxi sub- sidy program through the city of Chicago that allows riders to make same-day trip requests. Same-day issues are handled by the regional call center, which has access to the scheduling and reservations for all the carriers. The call center has two-way voice communication with the pro- viders’ dispatchers for ETA or trip status information, for dedicated van service, and for taxis. Transfers are not required among the providers that serve Chicago; however, they are still required for most rides that begin or end in the suburban service area. The service delivery assets are split among the different participating groups, with the reservations, operations, and main- tenance facilities provided by the dedicated service provider, in addition to most of the vehicles. Pace provides a small portion of the vehicles (typically accessible paratransit buses), scheduling software and hardware, and IVR. Contracting Service contract terms vary, with the call center contractor operating under a 10-year contract. Payment for the call center manager is based on hourly rates per function for approved staffing structure, with fixed costs paid separately from variable costs, and are split into equal monthly payments. The call center contractor has liquidated damages held to wait times, with the trigger set at over 75% of calls on hold over 150 seconds. The service provider contracts are set with 5-year terms, and are not staggered, although the agency plans to stagger contracts beginning with the next RFP process in 2017. Providers are paid based on revenue vehicle hours, with liquidated damages and incentives based upon the missed trip rate, on-time performance, productivity, and the complaint frequency ratio. Regard- ing productivity, their service standard for the agency is 1.7 eligible customers per revenue hour; however, the trigger for liquidated damages or incentives is set at 1.65. Pace contracts with one non-dedicated taxi provider to deliver ADA transit trips, and reim- burses the taxi company based upon each meter fare, with the rate of each trip precalculated using GIS mileage based on a negotiated rate, and a zone rate matrix. The driver collects the service fare in these instances. Results The current model was introduced in 2016. Whereas under the older model, the zones cor- responded not only to a provider’s reservations but also to their service area, today all providers serve the entirety of Chicago, helping to improve service efficiency by lowering the amount of deadheading. Pace and its service providers have recently confronted an issue related to a lack of available drivers. In order to overcome this problem, Pace has relaxed the requirement that all drivers pos- sess a commercial driver’s license (CDL), and allowed for drivers without a specialized license to operate vehicles for ADA service that do not require a CDL. A second strategy has been to use more taxi services for overflow and late trips. This has been welcomed by local taxi companies

Survey and Service profiles 51 that have been losing business to TNCs, and who are already providing services to ADA paratransit–eligible customers via Pace’s alternative Taxi Access Program, which requires all taxi providers in the city of Chicago to accept the programs vouchers as payment. These efforts have helped Pace improve cost efficiency with greater productivity, offer better service quality, and better manage demand for the service. Lessons Learned • Centralized scheduling enhances control over service quality, and improves productivity by reducing inefficient deadheading. • Having a dedicated overflow/long-distance trip provider helps manage service demand peaks and increases the productivity of the primary contractors. • Multiple contractors create cost efficiency by fostering competition. • Alternative services help to reduce cost by diverting trips from high-cost paratransit to a lower subsidy mode, while offering a mobility option for customers. • Providing customers an alternative taxi option rather than having them wait for a late vehicle helps manage customer frustration, and avoids induced demand. • Some driver requirements may hinder service capacity, without improving service overall. Columbus, OH Mainstream Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight and quality assurance, contracting, software, vehicles Contractor Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 278,360 Total Trips Revenue Service Hours: 274,000 Productivity (Total Trips per RVH): 1.44 Operating Cost per Passenger: $32.00 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $35.00 Operating Cost per RVH: $29.00 Tracked Standard On Time Performance Average Call Hold Time 93-95% <85 sec 250,387 ADA passengers 27,973 PCAs

52 aDa paratransit Service Models Background Mainstream is the ADA paratransit service offered by COTA, which serves the Columbus, Ohio, metropolitan area. COTA contracts with one dedicated service provider who provides all call center and service delivery functions. The contractor additionally subcontracts with a disadvantaged business enterprise to provide approximately 15% of all drivers. In addition to the ADA paratransit service, COTA also provides trips for older adults, which are commingled with ADA trips. How It Works The contractor, First Transit, provides all call center and service delivery functions, while the transit agency is responsible for oversight, contracting, and quality assurance. COTA provides all capital and software assets used to deliver the service, and the contractor provides all call center and maintenance functions within a COTA facility. Reservation agents handle all requests for general information, as well as trip confirmations, cancellations, and trip time negotiations. Most trip scheduling is done the day before the trip, and subscription trips are scheduled with demand trips into runs. Dispatchers handle trip status calls. Customers may make trip reserva- tions 1 to 7 days in advance, but may also make reservations online. Currently, 2% of trips are booked online. Contracting The contract uses a 2-year base term and has three 1-year extension options, with contractor payment split by function. The call center and administrative costs are treated as a fixed cost, and are paid out into equal monthly payments. The service delivery payment, however, is per revenue vehicle hour, and is tied to performance incentives and liquidated damages based on the following metrics: on-time performance, missed trip rate, excessively long trips, productivity, complaint frequency ratio, and call hold time. COTA retains a third-party auditor to assess the safety and security of the service, fleet maintenance, service quality, and contract compliance, and to verify the key performance indicators. Results The service delivery model from COTA has been in place for several years, without any changes to the service model over the last contract signed in March 2017. COTA reports that the current service model is effective in enhancing control over service quality, as well as over productivity and operating costs. The proximity of the contractor to the agency allows for easy monitoring and control on-site, while the largely turnkey capacity of the service allows COTA to work with a single point of contact for all functions. The agency’s risks are further minimized under the conditions of the service model. Lessons Learned • Hosting call center and service operations in agency-owned facilities allows greater oversight of contractor. • Establishing call center and administrative costs within the contract allows for more predict- able annual expenses. • Use of a full-service provider can lower overall costs. • Single full-service contractors limit the ability to improve cost efficiency, enhance service faculty, and strike a balance between the two.

Survey and Service profiles 53 Dallas, TX Mobility Management Services Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, road supervision, and training Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Non-Dedicated Taxi Subcontractor Responsible for: Service delivery Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 816,212 Total Trips Productivity (Total Trips/Service Hour): 1.36 Contract Cost per Trip: $30.26 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trips Average Ride Time Capacity Denials Accidents Complaint Freq. Ratio Reservations and WMR Calls Answered 95% <1% <34 min 0 <2 per 100K miles <3 per 1,000 trips 95% <3 min 99% <5 min 67,215 Companions and PCAs 748,997 ADA Customers Background Mobility Management Services is the ADA paratransit service offered by Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), which provides public transportation to the greater Dallas area and many of the surrounding towns and cities. ADA paratransit is provided throughout the service area, with trips allowed to anywhere within the 13 cities served by DART as well as to Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. Mobility Management Services also provides limited transportation for older adults. DART also provides a limited taxi alternative for residents outside of the DART service area in Collin County, who qualify for the service based on age and disability, and has recently begun a TNC-based alternative service.

54 aDa paratransit Service Models How It Works Mobility Management Services has contracted out both its call center and service delivery functions to the same firm, MV Transportation, which functionally operates as a turnkey opera- tion. The dedicated contractor subcontracts out service to taxi providers. MV is responsible for all call center functions, including reservations, scheduling, dispatch, and same-day issues, which are handled by dispatchers for all trips regardless of whether they are served by the dedi- cated provider or its subcontractor. MV delivers about 30% of all the rides taken using Mobility Management Services, with the remaining 70% provided by taxis. MV schedules runs for trips that they serve, as well as for taxi trips. Trips are organized by the schedulers, with the service providing approximately 100 runs a day including taxi trips. DART keeps 20 field supervisors on staff to oversee the contract and check rides, and provide assistance and training oversight. Customers may make reservations up to 4 days in advance via the web portal, or 2 days in advance over the phone. Mobility Management Services also uses an online trip tracker (MOBI) that is available to all of its customers. MOBI allows riders to view all scheduled trips, and to see an estimated arrival time for any trip that is scheduled for pickup within 90 minutes. MOBI also displays on a map the location of the vehicle to which the trip has been assigned, again within that 90-minute period. Contracting MV has been retained via a 2-year pilot base, with a 5-year option. Payment is based upon each completed customer trip served, with liquidated damages tied to on-time performance, missed trip percentage, average ride time, capacity denials, accidents, and complaints. There are additional call center metrics tied to the percentage of trip status calls handled within 3 minutes, to the percentage of trip status calls handled within 5 minutes, percentage of reservations calls handled within 3 minutes, and percentage of reservations calls handled within 5 minutes. Administrative and call center costs are treated as a fixed cost only, with fixed costs paid for separately from vari- able costs and split into equal monthly payments. As the basis of payment is trips served, all taxi trips are passed through to DART by MV, regardless of whether it is served via van or taxi. Results DART recently changed its service model from in-house reservations, scheduling, and dis- patch with one service provider contractor, to contracted call center functions, and additionally implemented the use of taxis for a share of the trips taken rather than relying only on vans. The agency reports that the current model has led to greater cost efficiency through fostered com- petition, enhances control over productivity and cost, and minimizes risks for DART, though it also eliminates options for how the service is provided. DART further reports that the current service model also helps to better manage demand for the service, and enhances service qual- ity, as the agency only has to hold one contractor accountable for all functions of the service. The agency further explains that the ability to use taxis for some of the service assists in meet- ing demand and on-time performance. The model itself (paying per trip over revenue service hours) has contributed to improvements overall, particularly for trip demand and service qual- ity. Finally, the use of contractors has been cost efficient, allowing DART to explore technology during the contract, and allows for a proof of concept pilot. Online trip tracking meanwhile has led to a drop in trip status calls fielded by the call center, helping to lower call volumes and wait times. Lessons Learned • Customer access to ETAs based on real-time location of vehicles through online tools (like MOBI) can greatly improve call center functions by lowering overall call volumes.

Survey and Service profiles 55 • Using a taxi company to serve the majority of trips can enhance service flexibility. • The current service model also helps to better manage demand for the service and enhances service quality, as the agency only has to hold one contractor accountable for all functions. • Payment per trip has allowed the agency to better manage cost. • With one contractor, new technologies can be implemented more easily. Denver, CO Access-a-Ride Regional Transportation District (RTD) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, vehicles Call Center Contractor Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, and handling customers’ ETA calls Dedicated Service Provider Contractors Responsible for: service delivery, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 718,922 ADA trips Productivity (Total Passengers/RVH): 1.25 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Productivity Call Hold Time 96% 2.0 <2 min 46,777 SeniorRide and SeniorShopper Rides 449,191 General Public Transportation Trips Background Access-a-Ride is the ADA paratransit service offered by the Regional Transportation District (RTD), the public transportation provider for seven counties in the greater Denver area. Access- a-Ride operates only within the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor; however, the service also provides senior transportation and general public transportation via other services. How It Works RTD contracts out its call center and service delivery functions separately. The call center contractor (First Transit) is responsible for reservations, scheduling, and dispatch, while service delivery is handled by three dedicated service providers that are responsible for 90% of all trips

56 aDa paratransit Service Models taken via Access-a-Ride. The remaining 10% of trips are provided by taxicabs. The call center handles same-day issues and trip status calls for van and taxi service, as well as for Access-A-Cab, the RTD’s alternative service for ADA paratransit customers. The call center has access to the vehicle locations of the taxi and van providers. The call center contractor assigns trips to the taxi fleet during peak hours, allowing the con- tractor to use their vehicles as cabs during other times. Contracting Due to RTD’s preference to work with multiple providers, RTD bids out the dedicated service work in 25% increments, with one contractor allowed to bid for as much as 50% of the total work. Currently, RTD contracts with three providers, one that serves 50% of trips, while the other two serve 25% of trips each. The dedicated service providers are paid per revenue vehicle hour with fixed costs paid out separately, and liquidated damages and incentives tied to on-time performance and productivity. The call center operator meanwhile has fixed costs payments, with incentives and liqui- dated damages tied to phone performance and productivity. The contracts for both the call center operator and the dedicated service providers have a 3-year base term with two 1-year options. Results RTD altered its service model in 2014 in order to include non-dedicated service providers, however the rest of the service model has been in place for 10 years. The agency reports the current model provides flexibility to deal with service quality issues, driven in part by the short base contracts. This same short contract base improves cost-effectiveness, and helps create cost efficiency through fostering competition as well as economies of scale, all the while lowering the risk for the transit agency. RTD however reports that there has recently been a lack of avail- able contractors that can perform as sub-operators, due at least in part to wage competition in the area at large. RTD further reports that having centralized call center functions separate from the operators helps the agency maintain control of the service. Lessons Learned • Multiple carriers yields competitive prices. • Shorter contract terms promote agency flexibility. • Wage competition with other companies or industries can make staffing a problem; contract limitations could further exacerbate this issue.

Survey and Service profiles 57 Houston, TX METROLift Metropolitan Transit Authority (METRO) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, road supervision, vehicles Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Service delivery, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 1,901,026 Total Trips Revenue Vehicle Hours: 1,129,740 Productivity (Total Trips per RVH): 1.68 Operating Cost per RVH: $49.29 Operating Cost per Passenger: $28.99 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $34.05 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Call Hold Time 90% <3 min Background METROLift is the ADA paratransit service offered by the Metropolitan Transit Authority, which is the public transportation provider in Houston. In addition to serving trips beyond the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor, METROLift serves same-day trips via an ADA alternative taxi service. How It Works The MTA provides all call center functions for METROLift, with all service provided by two dedicated contractors, First Transit and Yellow Cab. METROLift operates without zones, and instead service providers are given trips based on scheduled runs. Though there are no zones for the service, First Transit operates METROLift-provided accessible vans, while Yellow Cab oper- ates accessible minivans. First Transit serves about 40% of the trips, operating dedicated service while Yellow Cab serves about 60% of the trips, operating a mixture of dedicated and non- dedicated service. Approximately 11% of the trips—mostly peak overflow trips—are served on non-dedicated taxis. METROLift’s contract with the taxi company requires the same level of driver training, insurance, background checks, and other measures, as the van-service drivers and vehicles. In addition to staffing the reservations function Monday to Friday, METROLift also provides an automated calling system and online booking via its MACS system, both of which are available

58 aDa paratransit Service Models 24 hours a day, though for next-day trips, reservations are only accepted up to 5 p.m. the day before. METROLift customers can automatically book trips via these portals, as well as track reservations and estimated arrival times or cancel a trip. Contracting The dedicated providers are contracted on a 5-year base term, and are paid via a lump sum, as well as per service hour (gate to gate). The providers’ payment is tied to on-time performance, complaint frequency, mean distance between failures, and collisions. All capital costs incurred by the providers are amortized over the base contract term, and after the carriers are fully reim- bursed for capital assets, the transit agency has the option to assume ownership of the assets. Results The agency only partially completed the survey. Kansas City, MO RideKC Freedom Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations (weekday), and road supervision Call Center Contractor Responsible for: Reservations (evenings and weekends), scheduling, dispatch, and handling customers’ ETA calls Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Non-Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 215,568 ADA paratransit customers Revenue Service Hours: 158,290 Productivity (Customer Trips per RVH): 1.66 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $35.00 Operating Cost per RVH: $33.19 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Trips per Hour Missed Trips Accidents Customer Feedback Excessively Long Trips Average Call Hold Time 92% 1.65 0.05% Not reported Not reported 0 1m 30s 239,920 Total Passengers 24,352 Companions and PCAs 64,667 Other Trips

Survey and Service profiles 59 Background RideKC Freedom is the ADA paratransit service provided by the Kansas City Area Transpor- tation Authority (KCATA), which also provides other senior transportation, Medicaid NEMT, as well as other human service transportation in the area. KCATA provides ADA service to Kansas City, Missouri, only within the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor, but offers an alternative service to the entirety of the city, as well as a few destina- tions in neighboring communities. The latter service bases the fare on total mileage of the trip, whereas the ADA service has a fixed fare. In addition to providing service to Kansas City, Missouri, RideKC Freedom provides inter-city trips to and from Kansas City, Missouri, to Kansas City, Kansas, and to Independence, Missouri. Separate ADA providers operate in the latter two cities for intra-city trips; however, RideKC Freedom provides inter-city, evening, and weekend trips within Kansas City, Kansas. ADA and other trips are commingled together. KCATA contracts with several groups to provide eligibility, call center functions, and service delivery. How It Works KCATA contracts nearly all call center functions and service delivery, with the exception of reservations. KCATA takes all service reservations on weekdays, while the primary dedicated service provider, Transdev, handles all reservations calls on weekends and holidays. Scheduling and dispatch however are handled by a separate call center contractor, RMS, which also handles the software and same-day issues. For service delivery, KCATA contracts with two dedicated service providers, however one of these providers performs 99% of the trips. The other provider is retained to provide all fixed-route and demand response service in the neighboring Indepen- dence service area, and handles a small amount of additional trips on the eastern edge of the RideKC Freedom service area. Additionally, Transdev operates a non-dedicated taxi service that is contracted by KCATA, and for which a reported 17% of total trips are assigned. Trips assigned to taxis are typically used for peak period overflow, as well as trips to low demand areas or times. Dispatch has the ability to see trips assigned to taxis in the dispatch software. Customers calling to check the status of their rides can get an estimated time of arrival on trips assigned to taxis, as KCATA requires taxis assigned to the service to use tablets. Contracting The call center contractor, Reveal Management Service (RMS), is retained on a base 5-year term, with a 5-year option, and paid based on fixed costs separate from variable costs and are split into equal monthly payments. The dedicated service providers are contracted on a 5-year term and also have a 5-year renewal option. Service providers are paid a per-revenue-vehicle-hour rate that covers vari- able costs, with fixed costs paid separately and split into equal monthly payments. The agency provides fuel for its primary service provider. Fuel expenses incurred by the agency’s supple- mental service provider are reimbursed separately. The service contractors’ payment is further based on incentives and liquidated damages tied to on-time performance, no-show rate, missed trip rate, excessively long trips, productivity, complaint frequency ratio, call hold time, quality assurance checks including driver qualification, on-time accident reporting, and wheelchair incidents. All service assets are provided by the dedicated service providers including the evening and weekend call center facility, operations facility, maintenance facility, vehicles, scheduling soft- ware and hardware, telephone system, IVR, radio base station, and in-vehicle equipment. KCATA provides the eligibility facility, its own call center facility, call center for dispatch for RMS,

60 aDa paratransit Service Models workstations, and the telephone system. The non-dedicated providers (taxi service) provide their own maintenance facilities and vehicles. Results The current model was adopted in order to improve a better balance between cost efficiency and service quality, and has resulted in higher productivity and improved on-time performance. This was done in part by adding a second service provider 2 years into the 5-year contract with the first provider, and allowing for a re-balancing of trip assignments. KCATA reports they have found this model to be an effective means of fostering competition among providers, and thereby increasing cost efficiency. The agency has also found it helps to enhance control over service quality, and productivity, but concedes that the current model (which has a 5-year term and one 5-year option) does not provide much flexibility in altering the way service is provided. Additionally, the split call center functions have allowed the agency to retain institutional knowl- edge by continuing to employ experienced personnel. Finally, the use of new scheduling software provided by RMS has led to much more efficient routing for the service, which further helps to lower costs. Lessons Learned • Allowing for the addition of more service providers can provide an effective tool to improve service efficiency and productivity. • Flexible service models may be able to provide more efficient service and coverage to more areas as well. • The use of a call center contractor that uses its own software allows for more effective service delivery, because the call center contractor is more adept at using the software.

Survey and Service profiles 61 Background RTC is the regional public transportation agency serving southern Nevada, including Las Vegas. RTC provides ADA paratransit trips via its Paratransit Service, which operates 24 hours a day, every day of the year. It operates within the urbanized area of Clark County via the three-quarter- mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor. RTC also provides transportation for older adults, Medicaid NEMT, and other human service transportation in addition to general public transportation. How It Works RTC contracts out most of its service delivery functions to one dedicated service provider (Transdev), and does not provide any trips via the use of non-dedicated taxis or other services. RTC handles the reservations for customers, as well as schedules any requests on runs, while Transdev handles run construction and the remaining scheduling. Call center functions with the exception of trip status calls remain with the agency. Trip status calls are handled by Transdev because they employ the dispatch staff that has direct communication with the drivers. Custom- ers may make reservations over the phone up to 3 days in advance. Customers may additionally make reservations, as well as confirm or cancel trips, online via the IVR system. Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, reservations, software, trip reconciliation, vehicles Dedicated Service Contractor Responsible for: Contracting, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 1,140,543 ADA customers Tracked Standard Productivity (Monthly) On-time Performance (Monthly) Call Hold Time 1.74 95% 90% answered in 2 minutes Las Vegas, NV RTC Paratransit Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC)

62 aDa paratransit Service Models Contracting The service provider is contracted out with a 5-year base term, with a 3-year option followed by an additional 2-year option. Payment is based per service hour, with fixed costs paid sepa- rately from variable costs and split into equal monthly payments. The contract also has liqui- dated damages and incentives tied to on-time performance, no-show rate, and productivity. Results RTC recently transferred its scheduling from an in-house function to having the service pro- vider handle scheduling, with the hopes of better controlling the balance between cost efficiency and service quality. While RTC had previously monitored only the provider’s on-time perfor- mance, RTC began to monitor the trips per service hour as well. Though the overall costs for the contractor dropped between FY14 and FY15, the service quality did not improve according to RTC. RTC reports that its current model improves control over service quality and productivity; however, the agency acknowledges that scheduling and dispatch improvements have been dif- ficult to improve upon. Lessons Learned • Transferring scheduling to the provider is not an effective tool to improve service quality by itself. • Allowing providers to handle scheduling increases the need for performance incentives and liquidated damages.

Survey and Service profiles 63 Los Angeles, CA Access Paratransit Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Agency/Access Services Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, road supervision, training, vehicles Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Non-Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Service delivery and vehicles Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 4,334,872 Total Passengers Productivity (Trips/RVH): 1.45 Operating Cost per Passenger: $26.70 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $34.77 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Average Call Hold Time Calls on Hold > 5 minutes 91% <2 min <5% 3,351,612 ADA Customers 983,260 Companions and PCAs Background Access Services is a public entity that provides ADA paratransit service on behalf of the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Agency and 44 other public fixed-route transit operators in Los Angeles County. Access also serves as the Los Angeles County Consolidated Transportation Services Agency (CTSA), a state-mandated facilitator charged with the devel- opment and implementation of regional coordination of social service transportation to older adults, persons with disabilities, the young, and the low-income disadvantaged for Los Angeles County. How It Works Access contracts out its eligibility and assessments to one contractor, and its reservations call center and service delivery functions to six contractors. Each of the six contractors operates within a specific zone, handling reservations, scheduling, dispatch, same-day issues, and service delivery for their regions. All contractors are responsible for road supervision, though Access provides additional road supervision. Contractors are responsible for all training; however,

64 aDa paratransit Service Models Access offers some train-the-trainer sessions. Finally, the dedicated contractors are responsible for fleet maintenance, though Access provides oversight for fleet maintenance. Each of the pro- viders operates within one of the six zones and some trips to other zones. Transfers are required only for trips to or from the Santa Clarita or Antelope Valley. In addition to the dedicated providers, a total of nine taxi companies are also subcontracted for service. The dedicated providers subcontract with non-dedicated taxis for overflow, peak times, and out-of-the-way trips, as well as trips in low-demand areas or that occur during low- demand times. In total, 39% of the all trips are assigned to taxi subcontractors, although this percentage is closer to 50% for the four contractors who do use taxi subcontractors. (Two of the six contractors do not use taxi subcontractors.) ETA calls are handled by the call agents of the dedicated service providers, and if the taxi company is not part of the trip status data feed, then the agents have to call the taxi dispatch. It is also interesting that two pairs of contractors, owned by the same entity, have a combined call center where reservations and scheduling for the two zones are performed. Another pair of contractors also has unified their reservations functions. Contracting The service providers are contracted using a 5-year base term, with four 1-year options. Each of the six service provider contracts is staggered. For each of the contractors the payment is per completed customer trip served, with fixed costs paid separately from variable costs and split into equal monthly payments, and fuel costs are included in the variable costs rate. The service provider liquidated damages are assessed quarterly upon on-time performance, call hold time, and excessively long trips. The administrative and call center costs are treated as a fixed cost, with liquidated damages and incentives tied to average hold time, and calls on hold over 5 minutes. For the non-dedicated services, the contractors pay these groups via a subcontract agreement. Mobilization costs are reimbursed based on proposed costs, and paid out monthly during the mobilization period. All capital costs incurred by contractor are amortized over base contract term. After a contractor is fully reimbursed for capital assets, the agency has the option to assume ownership of assets. If the contract is prematurely terminated or not renewed, the contractor is required to transfer any leases to the transit agency, if requested by the transit agency. For asset transfers, an inspection of assets is performed prior to contract termination by a third party and any defects noted are corrected by the outgoing contractor. Results Due to the size of the Access service area, the agency has needed to contract with several providers in order to cover the entire region. Access reports that its service design has been ben- eficial in creating costs efficiencies through fostered competition and economies of scale. Given that the agency pays its contractors per trip, the model incentivizes contractors to be as efficient as possible, hence the high use of non-dedicated taxi use. The agency has maintained a cost per trip under $35 for the last 5 years. Lessons Learned • Paying providers based on trips served encourages more efficient delivery of service; however, checks on service quality degradation must be contractually invoked. • Use of non-dedicated fleets lowers the need for more maintenance and operations facilities, which is valuable given the large service area for Los Angeles. • The use of multiple providers that share a service area can foster higher levels of competition, particularly when coupled with payment per trip.

Survey and Service profiles 65 Milwaukee, WI Transit Plus Milwaukee County Transit System (MCTS) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight and quality assurance, contracting, software, and trip reconciliation Dedicated and Non-Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, radio dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 433,152 Total Trips Revenue Vehicle Hours: 227,823 Productivity (Trips per RVH): 1.93 Total Operating Cost: $15 million Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $26.70 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trip Rate Excessively Long Trips Trip Productivity Average Call Hold Time 92% <0.5% 47 min (avg.) 1.93 <2 min 392,125 ADA Paratransit Customers 41,027 Companions and PCAs Background Transit Plus is the ADA paratransit provider for the Milwaukee County Transit System in Wisconsin. The service operates slightly fewer than 400,000 annual ADA trips. Transit Plus con- tracted with two dedicated service providers that split service provision within two geographic zones. Additionally, Transit Plus provides service throughout Milwaukee County, and is not limited to the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor. In addition to the two dedicated providers, MCTS provides a taxi subsidy for Transit Plus eligible riders using one non-dedicated service taxi company that can provide rides to anywhere in the county. How It Works Transit Plus customers are assigned to either the north or south service zone according to their home address, and use the corresponding dedicated service provider for all of that cus- tomer’s trips. A customer will use the assigned provider to be picked up or dropped off in either part of the overall service area, whether that location is in the zone primarily served by a given provider or not. Using this model, customers are not required to transfer to another service.

66 aDa paratransit Service Models Contracting Transit Plus contracts with two ADA paratransit van providers that split service between the north and south geographic zones using a 5-year contract with three 1-year options. The first, Transit Express, operates in the north zone, and is responsible for approximately 55% of all trips. First Transit, which operates service in the south zone, provides approximately 45% of all trips. These operators, as well as the alternative taxi provider, provide all capital equipment for res- ervations, scheduling, and service delivery functions, while the agency provides the scheduling software and hardware. Transit Plus pays the dedicated providers by the service hour, and uses a variety of key performance indicators to penalize substandard service, and incentivize better operations including: on-time performance, missed trip rate, excessively long trips, productiv- ity, call hold time, complaint resolution, accidents, vehicle demand repairs, denial rate, and drug and alcohol testing. Poor performance leads to reductions in compensation, depending on the type of performance indicator not met. Additionally, the contract reserves the right for the agency to make contract changes, including changes to the service area; thus, the service volume for the two providers may be amended in order to balance demand between providers, or to reward more cost-effective providers. Finally, under the contract, administrative and call center costs are included in the service’s unit rate. MCTS also provides a taxi-based alternative service, contracted separately from the dedicated providers on a shorter-term contract basis, with the agreement term staggered from the van services term. Taxi providers are reimbursed based on each meter fare, with a contractual negoti- ated flat rate for administrative fees. The meter fare is reimbursed at a capped subsidy amount, with an additional flat $5 administrative fee per trip. Results Transit Plus has continued to use this service model for several years. The agency believes that the current contracting model has assisted in improving service efficiency by encouraging competition between the two dedicated providers. Additionally, the service model has been effective at maintaining control over service quality, managing demand and the encouragement of bus use, and minimizing the risk for the agency. Despite these successes, the current model offers less flexibility to implement changes. Though the agency reserves the right to make con- tractual changes in order to improve service, this would be a time- and resource-consuming endeavor. Lessons Learned • Multiple contract providers can prove effective in encouraging competition. • A taxi subsidy alternative can help to offset costs. • Contract terms that allow for flexible service areas can allow agencies to reward providers that more reliably provide service; this can be more effective than liquidated damages.

Survey and Service profiles 67 Nashville, TN AccessRide Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Non-Dedicated Contractor Responsible for: Dispatch, software, service delivery, training, vehicles Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 441,903 Total Trips Productivity (Passengers per RVH): 2.5 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $48.00 Tracked Standard Complaint Freq. Ratio No-Show Rate <1.33 per 1,000 trips <5% 342,186 ADA Customers 99,717 Companions and PCAs Background AccessRide is the ADA paratransit service provided by the Nashville MTA. Access Ride pro- vides service throughout Davidson County, and provides service beyond the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor any time that the MTA’s fixed-route bus service is in operation. Only ADA trips are provided by AccessRide. How It Works MTA provides all call center and service delivery functions for AccessRide, as well as all the service assets, except for the 20% of the trips served by MTA’s non-dedicated service provider, Taxi USA. The trips assigned to this provider mostly consist of long, out-of-the way trips and peak-period overflow trips. MTA staff begin the batch scheduling process on the day before the trip date, assigning unscheduled trips and trips longer than 16.5 miles to the taxi company. The evening before, trips to be serviced between 4:45 a.m. and 11:00 a.m. are sent to the non- dedicated contractor. On the day of service, any remaining trips are sent to the taxi company by 11:00 a.m. MTA reserves the right to cancel or “pull back” trips that have been assigned, should MTA have capacity to deliver these trips using in-house resources. Under the terms of the con- tract, AccessRide can do this with as little as 1-hour notice. The taxi company provides its own software, dispatching system, and IVR. MTA’s Customer Care has access to Taxi USA’s web portal and can track same-day trips. For in-house provided service, Customer Care can track vehicles using the AVL Monitor tool in Trapeze PASS.

68 aDa paratransit Service Models Contracting MTA contracts with Taxi USA provider on a 3-year term (set to expire in 2018), with per- trip payment based on completed passenger trip served (including companions or PCAs). The contract ties payment to the complaint frequency ratio, with the standard set to no more than one complaint per 750 passengers, which is calculated each month. Failure to meet this standard results in a 2.5% reduction in the contractor’s invoice. Results The agency reports that the current service model employed by MTA allows for greater flex- ibility to respond to service quality issues. The non-dedicated service provider allows for MTA to use their own in-house drivers more efficiently, while utilizing the contractor to handle longer and peak overflow trips, thereby increasing the productivity of the dedicated fleet. The taxi ser- vice provider allows the MTA to offer more service capacity when needed, while also allowing MTA to more ably respond to service demands caused by re-emerging no-shows, breakdowns and incidents, or just shifting a trip from a late-running dedicated run to the taxi provider to get a dedicated run back on time. This allows for greater control over service quality and productiv- ity. Finally, the agency reports that using a “one-stop” call center has allowed their customers that can use fixed-route service to share route information at the time of their call, helping to improve reservations and integrate paratransit with fixed-route more ably. Lessons Learned • Non-dedicated taxi services can allow the agency to respond more flexibly to service needs. • MTA manages demand for the taxi cab service by controlling the trips they receive. • In-house call centers more easily integrate paratransit with fixed-route services for customers that are able to use either service.

Survey and Service profiles 69 Background NJ TRANSIT is the statewide public transportation provider in New Jersey, and provides ADA paratransit via its Access Link service. Access Link provides ADA paratransit within three- quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor, with over 1.5 million annual passen- gers. The service is broken up into six regions across the state, with one dedicated provider in each area. How It Works NJ TRANSIT administers and monitors the statewide ADA paratransit program. The agency operates the Access Link support functions including its Operations Center, Certification Unit, Customer Service Group, and Scheduling Group. The Access Link Operations Center handles all direct telephone contact with customers regarding individual trips and service delivery. The reservations section of the call center handles all reservations calls, and books trips into runs via its scheduling software. NJ TRANSIT also operates a centralized scheduling unit, which controls each region’s run structure, manages customer subscriptions, and controls scheduling-related software parameters. Service providers are then responsible for optimizing the final scheduling, dispatching, and delivering the service. The service monitoring section of the call center handles all calls from customers regarding the trips on the day of service, e.g., cancellations and trip sta- tus, and communicates with service provider dispatchers, who are in direct communication with vehicle operators. The Certification Unit handles applications and eligibility determinations, Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations, scheduling, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, training, vehicles Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Oversight, scheduling, dispatch, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 1,550,591 Total Passengers Productivity (Customers Trips/RVH): 1.58 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Trip Productivity Varies by Region: 92%-97.75% Varies by Region: 1.31-1.79 1,403,439 ADA Customers 147,152 Companions and PCAs New Jersey Access Link NJ TRANSIT

70 aDa paratransit Service Models utilizing the services of local community agencies that provide individual in-person assessments for every applicant. NJ TRANSIT provides the sole point of contact for customers aside from service delivery. The dedicated providers oversee and provide quality assurance of their service as well. Regarding call center staffing, NJ TRANSIT uses a mix of direct employees as well as contract employees, who are employed through local employment agencies. This gives NJ TRANSIT the flexibility needed to add and remove agents in a much more timely fashion than could be done otherwise. The contract employees also have the same functions as the NJ TRANSIT employees. Contracting The Access Link service area is split into six regions. Each current contract has a full term of approximately 7 years. The most recently procured contract has an approximate 3-year base period and two subsequent approximate 2-year option periods. Currently one dedicated pro- vider (First Transit) serves five of NJ TRANSIT’s service regions and represents 96% of Access Link trips, with a second provider (Easton Coach) serving the remaining 4% of trips in the sixth service region. Each region is contracted separately with a full term of 7 years (3-year base plus two 2-year options), with contracts staggered to avoid overlapping start-up and shutdown peri- ods. Service Provider contracts are procured through a competitive RFP process. For the most recent procurement, cost was 45% of the score valuation. Contractors are paid per revenue vehicle hour that covers variable costs, and with fuel and fixed costs paid separately. Performance assessments are applicable for failures to meet required thresholds of on-time performance, as well as for missed trips, service disruptions, and poor productivity. Incentive payments are earned for high levels of on-time performance, productiv- ity, service excellence by drivers, and for low rates of confirmed complaints. The agency owns the revenue service fleet that is leased to, operated and maintained by the contracted dedicated service providers. Results NJ TRANSIT has maintained its current service model for several years, which the agency believes provides an optimal balance of service quality and cost efficiency, while creating cost efficiencies through competition and economies of scale, while also minimizing risks. The agency concedes, however, that the service is costly, and with one company (First Transit) providing service in all but one of the regions, has considerable vulnerabilities including a lack of competi- tion. With regard to call center staffing, the main challenge is turnover, which is mitigated to some extent by the employment opportunities that arise within the agency for which outsourced agents readily qualify. The service has seen regular growth in annual ridership of about 10%, and the agency believes that contracting with providers offers much great flexibility when it comes to acquiring facilities, personnel, and technology, which becomes more valuable as the service demand grows. Lessons Learned • An in-house call center enhances control over service quality and productivity/cost. • Using contract employees alongside employees in the call center helps with cost and staffing flexibility, but turnover is still a problem. • Using contractors for service delivery allows the service to remain more flexible over the short term, which is valuable for the agency as it has consistently experienced annual increases in demand of 10%. • Staggering the procurement of regional providers helps avoid any service gaps.

Survey and Service profiles 71 • Using multiple providers creates cost efficiency by fostering competition. • Five of the six regional contracts are with the same company; the lack of competition among providers is one reason the service is costly. • Vulnerabilities include lack of competition, challenges in obtaining suitable facilities, and limited pool of qualified management talent. New York, NY Access-A-Ride New York City Transit Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, scheduling, software, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles Call Center Contractor Responsible for: Reservations, same-day issues, and training Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Dispatch, service delivery, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance NDSP Brokers Responsible for: Assignment of unscheduled trips to non-dedicated service providers Non-Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Service delivery, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 8,938,140 Total Passengers Revenue Service Hours: 5,643,143 Productivity (Total Trips/RVH): 1.58 Operating Cost per Passenger: $52.25 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $57.42 Operating Cost per RVH: $54.12 Tracked Standard On-Time Performance No Show Rate 92% 0.3% of assigned trips Background Access-A-Ride (AAR) is the ADA paratransit service offered by New York City Transit, which provides public transportation throughout NYC, as well as to some neighboring areas, and is

72 aDa paratransit Service Models the largest provider of ADA paratransit trips in the United States. ADA paratransit is provided throughout the service area, with trips allowed anywhere within the 300+ square-mile service area served by NYCT. The agency also has provided a taxi-based subsidy program for years, and has recently added a similar TNC-based subsidy pilot program, both providing alternative services for ADA paratransit customers. How It Works NYCT contracts out both its call center and service delivery functions separately to different contractors. Reservations functions are performed by a single call center contractor, GCS, which additionally handles same-day issues. Trips are assigned to one of 13 different dedicated service providers with 17 overlapping zones. Approximately 70% of AAR trips are delivered using these dedicated service providers, with the remaining 30% of trips served by non-dedicated providers. NCYT is responsible for scheduling trips onto vehicle runs operated by the dedicated service providers, and for sending unscheduled trips to the two NDSP brokers, which provide both sedan and accessible vehicle service. Contracting The call center contract retains GCS on a 5-year term. Payment is based upon call volume, with incentives and liquidated damages tied to call center performance. The dedicated service providers have staggered contracts with a 10-year base, with payment based per service hour and fixed costs paid separately from variable costs and split into equal monthly payments. The providers’ payment is additionally based on incentives and liquidated damages tied to on-time performance and no-shows. While the brokers have a 5-year contract with NYCT with their payment based per customer trip served, the non-dedicated taxi providers’ payment is based on a zone rate matrix, with the driver collecting the service fare. Results Overall, NYCT reports that their current model creates cost efficiency through economies of scale, enhances control over service quality, helps manage demand and encourage the use of alternatives, and minimizes the risk for transit agencies. Conversely, the agency reports that the service is costly and it has indirect or poor control over service quality. To address these issues, NCYT recently changed its service model—by adding in NDSP brokers, and by expanding the alternative service to include TNCs—in order to improve cost efficiency and customer service. With regard to contracting with a call center manager, NYCT’s reported primary objectives were to improve service through better reservations and though dispatch coordination; correct live in-progress problems with Customer Information Agents performing dynamic customer service assistance; save money by increased vehicle productivity and central staffing; improve accountability through the centralization of functions under direct NYCT management; and promote excellent customer service. The agency reports that call-taking accuracy and perfor- mance was improved by hiring a call center contractor to perform these responsibilities. NYCT also reports that the use of service provider contractors is less costly to operate than performing the service in-house, while the retention of multiple contractors encourages com- petition and improved capacity. The number of providers was selected to meet the current and future demand for the service. Additionally, the use of non-dedicated providers has reduced overall trip costs, as trips using non-dedicated providers are less than half the cost of dedicated per trip. Despite these successes, the agency is considering adopting new technologies such as real-time Computer Aided Dispatch in order to increase capacity and flexibility, and improve service, as well as to modify the payment structures for dedicated contractors to move from vari- able and fixed costs to all in-vehicle service hour costs.

Survey and Service profiles 73 Lessons Learned • The increased use of non-dedicated service providers can have a disproportionate impact on the cost of delivering paratransit service. • Overlapping service areas helps eliminate service gaps in the area. • Separating call center functions from service providers can help improve overall service qual- ity, lower costs, and improve accountability and accuracy. • Many service contractors requires many staff dedicated to management and monitoring of service and compliance. Oakland/East Bay, CA East Bay Paratransit Consortium AC Transit and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting Operations Broker Responsible for: Contracting, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Dispatch, software, service delivery, road supervision, training, vehicles fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 731,299 Total Passengers Productivity (Passengers per RVH): 1.48 Operating Cost per Passenger: $50.52 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $58.14 Operating Cost per RVH: $65.54 Tracked Standard Productivity On-time Performance Excessively Long Trips 1.51 91.5% <0.2% 635,391 ADA Customers 96,908 Companions and PCAs Background The East Bay Paratransit Consortium (EBPC) is an ADA paratransit service provided jointly by AC Transit and Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), and serves the communities in Western Alameda and Contra Costa counties. In addition, due to BART, EBPC provides regional trip coordination and transfers to adjacent service providers. EBPC provides ADA paratransit trips via a brokerage firm (Transdev), who in turn contracts with three private service providers who deliver the trips. Trips are shared among the three providers via a 31%/34%/35% split. Trips to other regional

74 aDa paratransit Service Models destinations, however, require transfers to other providers, with the exception of trips to or from San Francisco, where the passenger is taken to his or her destination. EBPC has historically used limited zones, but in the last 6 months has implemented zoning for all scheduled trips. How It Works Trips are booked and scheduled through the broker, who assigns runs to each of the service contractors. The broker additionally makes use of two non-dedicated taxi services for fewer than 2% of ADA paratransit trips to cover peak period overflow, or breakdowns. The broker occu- pies a centralized office with the eligibility facility, call center, scheduling, centralized dispatch, accounting, and IT services. In addition, the broker manages the scheduling software and vehicle mobile data computer, phone system and IVR. Three dedicated service providers are responsible for operations and maintenance facilities, drivers, vehicles, and fueling. Providers have access to the brokers scheduling software, and provide the in-vehicle equipment. In addition, communi- cation between the broker staff and drivers is via cell phone and push-to-talk. Contracting The current contract with the broker is 5 years, with one 5-year option; the same term is used for the service provider contractors. The last RFP required the broker have a minimum of two providers under contract. The broker invoices monthly for both fixed and reimbursable direct costs. Incentives and liquidated damages are based on on-time performance, excessively long trips, productivity, and an annual customer satisfaction survey. The providers are paid by the service hour (gate to gate), while fuel costs are reimbursed separately. The contractor’s payment however is tied to on-time performance, missed trip rate, and excessively long trips. Meanwhile the non-dedicated providers, which are all taxis, are reimbursed on a metered rate less cash fares collected. Results EBPC reports the current system creates improved cost efficiently by fostering competition among the providers, while enhancing control over service quality and productivity, and enabling more flexibility with less risk for the transit agency. Despite these advantages, EBPC’s providers currently are operating below the service standards for on-time performance, and trip productivity. EBPC converted to a centralized dispatching system several years ago at the broker’s office, to improve service quality, manage demand, and provide access to the entire fleet to the central dispatchers. Previously each provider did its own dispatching and had visibility to only their own vehicles. This change initially led to a dip in trip productivity, which has recently improved but not fully recovered to its original levels. The movement to a central dispatch was a bigger change than originally anticipated and required considerable re-training of dispatchers. At FY13/14 year-end, total productivity was 1.75 and trip productivity was 1.50. This dropped to 1.71 and 1.48 by the end of FY15/16. Performance has started to improve in FY16/17 as additional soft- ware changes were tested and implemented. Despite the drop in productivity, the agencies believe the concept of centralized dispatch is still a sound one. Between FY13/14 and FY15/16, there were challenges that affected EBPC’s perfor- mance outside of centralized dispatch; some of these were high employee turnover at both the providers and the broker. Management also was in flux at two of the three providers and at the broker’s office. The effects of moving to centralized dispatch upon the system’s software param- eters were also poorly understood. Significant work has been done to overcome these challenges and the agencies believe productivity will ultimately return to or exceed FY13/14 levels. In addition to the changes mentioned, EBPC also implemented IVR into their service delivery. Riders overall are very happy with the IVR system. In the next 2 years, the agency

Survey and Service profiles 75 will also introduce new MDC/AVL units that are more compatible with EBPC’s scheduling software, leading to further improvements. Lessons Learned • Using a broker has lowered administrative costs. • Centralized dispatch creates a systemwide perspective; enhances control over service quality and productivity/cost; and enhances flexibility to respond to service quality issues. • Contracting with multiple providers minimizes system failure and creates cost efficiency by fostering competition. • Contractually required high insurance coverage makes incorporating alternative delivery options difficult. • Conflicts can arise between broker and providers because the broker does the scheduling. Orange County, CA ACCESS Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, vehicles Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Non-Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 1,445,677 Total Passengers Revenue Vehicle Hours: 521,103 Productivity (Passengers per RVH): 2.11 Operating Cost per Passenger: $31.85 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $36.74 Operating Cost per RVH: $67.13 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Trip Productivity Complaint Freq. Ratio 94% 2.2 <1.5 per 1,000 trips 1,163,940 ADA Customers 281,737 Companions and PCAs

76 aDa paratransit Service Models Background ACCESS is the ADA paratransit service provided by southern California’s Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). In addition to ADA paratransit service, ACCESS Paratransit also provides other human service transportation. Though ACCESS only operates in the three- quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor, the agency also provides a same-day taxi service for ACCESS-eligible customers. How It Works OCTA contracts out its call center and service delivery functions to one dedicated service provider, which handles all reservations, scheduling, dispatch, and service delivery functions. In addition to call center and service delivery responsibilities, the dedicated service provider also contracts with a local taxi company to provide non-dedicated service. Taxis are used for approximately 23% of all ACCESS trips, and are assigned by schedulers to handle peak period overflow trips, trips in low-demand areas and during low-demand times, for re-emerging no- shows, and to handle trips that cannot be fit into dedicated runs or that have been impacted by breakdowns or accidents. The dedicated fleet is limited to operations during specific day sand hours of the week, with taxis providing all rides on Saturdays after 3 p.m. and all day on Sundays. The contractor also uses taxis for short trips in order to minimize the costs of using the service. Taxi drivers and vehicles are held to the same standards as paratransit vans and drivers, and use MDTs and Trapeze software. Though the dedicated contractor can view the taxi location, any further information regarding same-day issues are handled by the taxi dispatch. In addition to the scheduled taxi trips, ACCESS has an alternative same-day taxi program for ADA eligible customers. OCTA subsidizes up to 5 miles for a same-day taxi trip. Cus- tomers pay the ACCESS base fare of $3.60 for a five-mile ride; any additional costs above the 5-mile trip are paid by the customer in addition to the base fare. The service is creating a new mobile application to allow same-day taxi requests to be made via a smartphone, addition- ally allowing for the estimated wait time to be provided, as well as vehicle tracking and fare estimation. Contracting OCTA currently contracts with one dedicated provider, MV Transportation, using a 4-year base term and two 2-year options. The dedicated provider also subcontracts trips to a taxi pro- vider. OCTA reimburses the carrier on a fixed and variable rate (monthly fixed cost plus variable rate based on # RVH provided) for service provided on the dedicated fleet plus the cost of the supplemental taxi trips based on mileage. The current contract uses a variety of performance incentives and liquidated damages tied to on-time performance, missed trip rate, excessively long trips, productivity, complaints per 1,000 boardings, accident frequency, call hold time, and miles between road calls. All cost proposals are scored by the agency’s finance division, with the lowest bid price scoring the highest and other bids scoring proportional to that bid. During the RFP release process, the board of directors approves the weighting for evaluation criteria. Expected costs are typically weighted from 20% to 30%, which the finance division would then use during the overall scor- ing process. Results OCTA believes that the use of non-dedicated services helped to manage (decrease) the capital costs of acquiring and maintaining the dedicated fleet as it lowered vehicle requirements. The agency also reports their service model creates cost efficiencies by fostering competition and

Survey and Service profiles 77 through economies of scale, while enhancing control over service quality and minimizing the risk for the contractor. The relationship with the contractor, and the fact that they provide a turnkey operation, has allowed the agency to try different things. For example, the agency has tested increasing the use of supplemental service from low-demand weekday periods to week- ends, testing the relationship between OTP and productivity, and its tolerance for changing these standards, as well as the introduction of new technologies associated with the reservation process (IVR, Trapeze Web, etc.). Despite these advantages, the agency is looking for new ways to lower its overall cost per trip, while trying to reduce its capital costs. OCTA reports that the use of non-dedicated services helped to manage (decrease) the capital costs of acquiring and maintaining the dedicated fleet as it lowered vehicle requirements. Lessons Learned • For agencies looking to lower their overall costs, the extension of vehicle life through regular maintenance and the use of non-dedicated services can provide for lower overall capital costs. • Contractors can provide an effective means of testing out new strategies as the agency looks to improve performance and cost metrics. • The relationship with the contractor, and the fact that they provide a turnkey operation, has allowed the agency to try different things. For example, the agency has tested increasing the use of supplemental service from low-demand weekday periods to weekends, testing the relationship between OTP and productivity, and its tolerance for changing these standards, as well as the introduction of new technologies associated with the reservation process (IVR, Trapeze Web, etc.)

78 aDa paratransit Service Models Orlando, FL ACCESS LYNX Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (Lynx) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, road supervision, vehicles Dedicated Service Contractor Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 383,461 Total Passengers Revenue Service Hours: 492,052 Productivity (Trips per RVH): 1.27 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $27.85 Operating Cost per RVH: $33.05 Tracked Standard On-time Performance No Show Rate Missed Trip Rate Excessively Long Trips Trip Productivity Complaint Freq. Ratio Average Call Hold Time 92% 5% 1% 0% 1.3 1 per 1,000 trips <2 min 338,085 ADA passengers Background The Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, known as LYNX, is the primary pub- lic transportation service for Orange, Seminole, and Osceola counties, which include Orlando, Kissimmee, and Sanford, respectively, as well as small portions of Polk and Lake Counties. The agency provides ADA paratransit via ACCESS LYNX, which additionally provides senior trans- portation and other human service transportation. ACCESS LYNX also operates beyond the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor. How It Works The ACCESS LYNX dedicated provider, MV Transportation, performs all call center and service delivery responsibilities for the service, while the agency is tasked with oversight, con- tracting, and eligibility, as well as taking a role in road supervision. Contracting LYNX contracts with one dedicated service provider to deliver trips, with the agency pro- viding all service assets except for the telephone system and radio base station. The dedicated carrier’s payment is based on revenue hours (first pick-up to last drop-off), with variable costs handled separately from fixed costs. The service provider contract has incentives for call hold

Survey and Service profiles 79 time in the call center, and liquidated damages for poor on-time performance, missed trips, productivity, and dirty vehicles. Results LYNX believes that its current service model is effective at creating cost savings through labor costs and minimizing the risk for the transit agency, but not for mitigating risks overall. Further, they have found that the current model is relatively costly, and it is difficult to alter the existing model in order to implement changes. LYNX has also found that the current service model does not allow them to take advantage of emerging technologies in order to lower costs and improve the customer experience. Lessons Learned • Contractors provide the agency cost savings by way of lowering agency salary payments, as well as fringe benefits. • Contracts may inhibit the adoption of emerging technologies among providers. This may, how- ever, allow agencies more time to prepare for major industry changes once their contracts expire. Philadelphia, PA CCT Connect Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles Call Center Contractor Responsible for: Reservations, same-day issues Dedicated Service Contractors Responsible for: Service delivery, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 1,055,126 Total Passengers 737,201 Senior Trips Revenue Service Hours: 1,101,034 Productivity (Passengers per RVH): 1.63 Operating Cost per Passenger: $32.77 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $32.45 Operating Cost per RVH: $48.58 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Mean Distance Between Failures 85% 14,000 miles 926,034 ADA Customers 129,092 Companions and PCAs

80 aDa paratransit Service Models Background Customized Community Transportation (CCT Connect) is the ADA paratransit service pro- vided by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (SEPTA), and which serves Philadelphia and the surrounding areas including Bucks, Chester, Delaware, and Montgomery counties. ADA paratransit service is provided within the three-quarter-mile ADA complemen- tary paratransit corridor. In addition to providing ADA service, CCT Connect also provides a door-to-door, advance-reservation, ride-sharing service for older adults funded by the state lottery called the Shared-Ride Program (SRP). Nearly half of all trips provided by CCT Connect are for senior trips funded by this program, and the ADA and other trips are served together. How It Works The CCT Connect service area is composed of five counties: Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Mont- gomery, and Philadelphia. CCT Connect serves each of these counties as its own zone, each with one dedicated service provider. The exception to this is Philadelphia, which is served by four contracted dedicated service providers. In total, there are six dedicated service providers, with two operating in the suburbs as well as in Philadelphia. Trips within Philadelphia are assigned on a contractual volume. SEPTA maintains a centralized call center, wherein reservations, scheduling, and dispatch are handled by a mix of agency and contract staff. Contract employees take all reservations and trip status calls, while SEPTA employees handle scheduling and dispatch, as well as same- day issues. Contracting SEPTA’s contract for the contract employees has a 5-year term, with payment based on hours used by different reservations center job classification titles negotiated as hourly contractual rates. Liquidated damages for reservation call centers are exercised on an as-needed basis. The dedicated service provider contracts are also on 5-year terms, and are staggered according to when service expansion occurred. Contracted service providers are paid per revenue vehicle hour, with performance liquidated damages tied to late trips. The providers are also expected to maintain a mean distance between failures of 14,000, with increased oversight and corrective action if the goal is not achieved. All service assets are provided by SEPTA, save for the opera- tions and maintenance facilities, which are provided by the dedicated carriers. Results SEPTA has maintained its current service model over the years, as it believes it is an effective means to better control the balance between cost efficiency and service quality, and provides flexibility to respond to service quality issues while minimizing risk for the transit agency. By keeping the call center functions independent of the providers, SEPTA believes it can main- tain greater data input reliability. With the call center functions split between the agency and a reservations center manager, SEPTA also maintain a balance of cost-effectiveness and cost control. Recently SEPTA has begun to use MDTs and vehicle cameras, and credits these tech- nology updates with improved on-time performance. Contracting with multiple service provid- ers meanwhile has helped ensure costs competition, particularly since contractors can apply to service multiple zones. Despite these advantages, CCT Connect has had difficulty ensuring that contractors comply with the contract specifications. Lessons Learned • Maintaining call center functions internally enhances data input reliability. • Splitting the call center and service delivery functions helps keep costs under control.

Survey and Service profiles 81 • Technology improvements can have a notable improvement on service delivery quality. • Multiple contractors can make it more difficult to make certain all contract elements are being properly followed. Phoenix, AZ ADA Paratransit Regional Phoenix Transportation Authority (Valley Metro) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, and trip reconciliation Non-Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Oversight, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 325,000 ADA Trips Productivity (Passengers/RVH): Not available Operating Cost per Registered Customer: $32.00 Operating Cost per Regional Trip: $49.00 Tracked Standard Missed Trip Rate Call Hold Time 1% <2 min 115,000 Other trips for older adults, general public, and other human services transportation Background Valley Metro is the primary public transportation service for the Phoenix metropolitan area. Service is provided under the Valley Metro brand by the City of Phoenix (through a turnkey contractor) and by the Regional Phoenix Transportation Authority (RPTA) outside of the city. The city of Phoenix has a turnkey contract with MV Transportation, while RPTA has five con- tracts with the cities of Glendale and Peoria, which use their own dial-a-ride programs to serve ADA paratransit trips, and three contracts with Total Transit: one in the East Valley, one in the Northwest Valley, and one that provides interregional trips. This model summary focuses on the services contracted by RPTA. How It Works ADA paratransit–eligible customers contact the local ADA paratransit service that serves the areas wherein the customer will be traveling, be it local or interregional. Total Transit is

82 aDa paratransit Service Models responsible for the trips booked for the East Valley, Northwest Valley, and regional ADA para- transit services. Total Transit in turn has several subcontracts with taxi companies. Total Tran- sit is responsible for all call center and service delivery elements. The contractor handles all advance reservations, same-day requests (as available), trip confirmations and cancellations, as well as trip-status calls and same-day issues. Some semi-dedicated clusters of trips, particularly subscription trips, are scheduled onto runs; however, most trips are served by whichever cab is available in an area at any given time. Trip assignments are received by the driver via MDT and cell phone, but the driver is not obligated to accept the trip. Approximately 10% of the vehicles in the current taxi fleet are accessible vehicles. Contracting As mentioned above, RPTA contracts service with Total Transit to handle interregional trips, and those in the East Valley and the Northwest Valley. The East Valley contract has a 2-year base term with a 3-year option, which was fully exercised. The Northwest Valley contract (which also covers regional service) is a 10-year contract with no options. The latter contract, however, is terminating early after year 7 in order to implement the consolidated new contract. The new contract has a 5-year base with a 3-year option and a 2-year option, for a potential 10-year term. Both contracts included incentives and liquidated damages for on-time performance, for acci- dent frequency, for complaints, for missed trips, and for excessive trip lengths. The East Valley contract also included liquidated damages for technology failures, and it included incentives for trip-sharing/productivity. The service contract, which expired in June 2017, pays the providers per trip based on a com- bination of drop fees, mileage, and type of vehicle. The payment per trip is structured as follows: Region Vehicle Type Drop Charge Mileage Fee East Valley Sedan $0 $2.73 per mile Wheelchair Van $20.26 $2.73 per mile Northwest Valley/ Regional Trips Sedan $4.88 $2.44 per mile Wheelchair Van $20.26 $2.44 per mile The current contract holder additionally subcontracts out service to several providers, most of whom are NEMT providers. Results The existing service model offers considerable service flexibility at a low cost per trip. The agency reports that it also enhances control over productivity, minimizes risk, and helps man- age demand while encouraging the use of alternatives. Additionally, the current model has no capital requirements or fuel costs. Despite these advantages, the service is costly overall due to the volume of trips, and also eliminates options and opportunities to alter or improve the model directly. One of the key disadvantages of the service is that taxi drivers operate as independent contractors, and are not obligated to be available at any given time. Thus, drivers may be inclined to work during more profitable hours, but this window may not be during peak ADA paratransit service demand. Drivers of wheelchair vehicles tend to prefer to work in the morning and early afternoon, making trips that require these vehicles more difficult to schedule at other times of day. Finally, the ability of drivers to decline trip requests can have a negative impact on service capacity, particularly during large events wherein drivers may be serving more trips for the general public.

Survey and Service profiles 83 RPTA is planning to provide service using a mix of dedicated and non-dedicated providers beginning in the summer of 2017. The agency decided to alter its service in order to enhance service quality, to better balance cost and service quality, and to better manage demand for the service. Under the future service model, RPTA will use a dedicated service for approximately two-thirds of its service, and one-third of trips will be provided by non-dedicated carriers. Lessons Learned • Using non-dedicated providers for all trips may have lower unit costs, but may create higher costs overall because of a lack of trip sharing. • A reliance on non-dedicated services makes the agency more vulnerable to demand spikes. • Non-dedicated providers have no capital costs for the agency, and no fuel costs. • Taxi drivers, who are effectively independent contractors even within a taxi company, are not compelled to take any particular trip. Pierce County, WA SHUTTLE Pierce Transit Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Contractor Responsible for: Service delivery, road supervision, training, fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 348,202 Total ADA Passenger Trips Revenue Vehicle Hours: 163,458 Productivity (Passengers per RVH): 2.13 Operating Cost per Passenger: $34.30 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $40.41 Operating Cost per RVH: $73.08 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Productivity No Show Rate Missed Trip Rate Avg. Call Hold Time 90% 2.2 5% 0% <150 sec 295,606 ADA passengers 52,596 Companions and PCAs

84 aDa paratransit Service Models Background Pierce Transit is the public transportation agency serving Pierce County, Washington, and provides fixed-route bus service throughout much of the western part of the county, including Tacoma, Lakewood, and Puyallup. The service area also includes some parts of the Kitsap Penin- sula across the Puget Sound, including Gig Harbor and Purdy. SHUTTLE is the ADA paratransit service provided by Pierce Transit, and operates in the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor only during fixed-route transit service hours. How It Works Pierce Transit provides all call center functions for SHUTTLE, including reservations, sched- uling, dispatching, and handling customers’ same-day issues. Service, however, is delivered via a combination of in-house capacity and contracted service providers. Currently, approximately 80% of service is contracted out to a dedicated service provider, while SHUTTLE provides 20% of trips in-house. All service assets, including vehicles, are provided by Pierce Transit. There is no particular method of differentiating which trips are performed by the agency, and which are served by the contractor other than when each set of runs are operated. The in-house supplied runs all are operated on weekdays between 5:15 a.m. and 5:45 p.m. The in-house runs also serve a higher incidence of standing orders on in-house routes at this time. Pierce Transit has elected to use in-house staffing resources during the most attractive hours of the week, while using the contractor resources in the evenings and on the weekends. Contracting The contractor, who is currently in the middle of a 5-year contract, is reimbursed based on service hours, with fuel costs paid separately. Pierce Transit monitors contractor performance based on on-time performance, trip productivity, and passenger complaints. Despite these mea- sures, the current contract does not have any enforceable liquidated damages or incentives. While the contract language does allow for liquidated damages, the liquidated damages are either unrelated to the performance of the contractor or are too low to have any value. There- fore, they are almost entirely unenforceable. Results Pierce Transit has had success with its current model, particularly with regard to its in-house call center functions. The existing model allows for improved customer service, and more direct control over the customer service functions. Additionally it provides a direct connection to customers, and allows the agency to directly understand any customer needs, while the con- tractor’s resources are helpful in leveraging national assets against local abilities, which in turn allows the agency to be more responsive to needs that arise. Although Pierce Transit reports that the current model enhances control over service quality, they have begun to review the current contract for significant changes to be made to improve the service. Among these changes, Pierce Transit is considering eliminating the split provision of trips, and instead would deliver all trips using in-house resources or contracted service. The existing service delivery model is inefficient and costs vary considerably between the in-house and contracted provider. Regardless of any changes made to the service model, any new balancing or allocation of service would also require the involvement of the local union representing the in-house service staff. Lessons Learned • Cost disparities between in-house and contracted providers create scheduling and budget planning problems. The bifurcation of service delivery via time and scheduling availability creates service inefficiencies. • Maintaining call center functions in-house allows the agency to better understand customer needs.

Survey and Service profiles 85 • Contract liquidated damages and incentives should be vetted by operations staff in order to better understand their value and applicability. Pittsburgh, PA ACCESS Port Authority of Allegheny County/ACCESS Transportation Systems, Inc. Division of Responsibilities Broker Responsible for: Oversight and service monitoring, contracting, software, technical assistance, trip reconciliation, reporting, substance abuse programs, fare media, customer service, public participation, planning Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, road supervision, training, vehicle procurement, maintenance, and insurance, risk management, vehicles, fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 1.55 million Total Trips Tracked Standard Productivity (Passengers/RVH): 2.24 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $23.25 On-time Performance Pick Up Arrivals Early Trips No Show Rate Missed Trip Rate Excessively Long Trips Trip Productivity Complaint Freq. Ratio Avg. Call Hold Time 94% 95% <=2% <3% <1% <5% 2.19 <75 per 100,000 trips <1 min 132,921 ADA paratransit trips Background ACCESS is a coordinated, decentralized paratransit brokerage system serving Pittsburgh and Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. ACCESS provides ADA paratransit and senior shared-ride service as well as trips made by clients of over 100 human service agencies, including Medicaid

86 aDa paratransit Service Models non-emergency medical transportation. ACCESS is also available to the general public, as a shared-ride service. ACCESS has been managed by ACCESS Transportations Systems since 1979 under contract to Port Authority of Allegheny County. ACCESS Transportation Systems is pres- ently a subsidiary of Transdev Services, Inc. ADA paratransit service is provided throughout Allegheny County as well as, at a minimum, to destinations within 1.5 miles of the county line in the surrounding areas and beyond as required by the ADA. As the broker, ACCESS Transportation Systems contracts with six service providers operating from seven locations assigned to zones in the county, with each provider serving 10%–20% of all trips. Each provider performs reservations, scheduling, dispatching, maintenance and service delivery, and provides virtually all of the assets required to provide service. How It Works ACCESS customers book all their trips with their “home” zone service provider. Longer trips may require transfers. In addition, ACCESS is one of the few systems that has operationalized conditional eligibility and provides feeder trips to an accessible bus stop or station for some conditionally eligible persons. ACCESS employs a zoned fare system and an electronic-purse fare system (the system is cash- free). The fare charged for any given trips is based on the origin and destination of a trip and the level of subsidy, which is based on trip type (e.g., ADA, senior shared-ride, agency client trip, or general public). The exception is some of the larger human service agency sponsors for whom a per-trip rate, based on a costs analysis of characteristics of their specific trips, is calculated on an annual basis. Contracting The Port Authority of Allegheny County has retained ACCESS Transportation Systems under a series of 5-year competitive contracts since 1979. ACCESS Transportation Systems in turn con- tracts its service providers, albeit on an annual basis, which is fairly unusual. Annual contract- ing terms allows the broker to periodically adjust the market share provided by any individual service provider. Carriers are paid hourly rates for dedicated service. Service is provided with over 300 vehicles. Results ACCESS is one of the standards of excellence in providing ADA/coordinated paratransit, evidenced by high service quality, high service efficiency (noting this is a coordinated system and not just an ADA paratransit service), and cost efficiency. The system has also evidenced how conditional eligibility can be operationalized and how the shared-ride service can provide feeder service to the fixed-route system. Lessons Learned • Competitive multi-carrier marketplace yields superior cost containment and superior service quality. • Brokerage structure also allows broker to involve/grow/groom local carriers, especially DBE/ WBE and nonprofit organizations. • Annual contracting term allows the broker to periodically adjust the market share provided by any individual service provider. • Having multiple carriers creates cost efficiency by fostering competition and economies of scale, and enhances flexibility to respond to service quality issues.

Survey and Service profiles 87 Portland, OR LIFT Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon (TriMet) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, vehicles Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, and training Separate fleet maintenance contractor performs fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Trips: 1,100,000 Productivity (Passengers/hour): 1.79 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $31.64 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Trip Productivity 94.5% 2.0 Dedicated Vans: 980,000 Taxi Trips: 120,000 Background LIFT is the ADA paratransit service provided by TriMet, which serves as the public transpor- tation provider for the three counties that make up the Portland, Oregon, metropolitan area. LIFT provides service only for ADA paratransit, and in the three-quarter-mile ADA comple- mentary paratransit corridor. How It Works TriMet has separately contracted out all call center and service delivery functions; however, both areas of responsibility are performed by a single dedicated contractor, First Transit. Trips are scheduled by the contractor into runs; the service also uses a local taxi company as a non- dedicated service provider to perform approximately 10% of trips. Taxis are used to provide a variety of trips including peak-period overflow, out-of-the-way trips, and those in low-demand areas or during low-demand times. All taxi drivers belonging to the contracted company are certified to serve ADA paratransit trips. The service area is separated into three areas, with dif- ferent fleets run out of different garages so as to minimize deadheading.

88 aDa paratransit Service Models Contracting The call center and control functions and the service delivery functions are handled by a single contractor. Though the area is split into different regions, service responsibilities are retained under one contract. The same contractor, First Transit, has been retained for the entire area. The service delivery contract has a 2-year base term with four 1-year options. Payment is based on revenue vehicle hours, and is inclusive of all costs. The contract additionally ties payment to on-time performance as well as trip productivity, while the call center contract (also held by First Transit), provides a straight reimbursement for actual costs incurred. Within the service area, there are three separate collective bargaining agreements, and so TriMet defers to the most stringent standard for the service. Non-dedicated taxis are paid by the meter rate. Aside from service delivery, TriMet contracts with Penske in order to provide fleet maintenance. Results TriMet believes their current service model is effective at creating cost efficiency through economies of scale, and enhancing flexibility to respond to service quality issues while minimiz- ing risk for the agency. Shared responsibility by the same firm, however, can lead to internal conflict, particularly when standards are not met, or when duties are unclear. Lessons Learned • Having the same company responsible for call center functions and service delivery—all three zones (under separate contracts) creates cost efficiency through economies of scale. • Shared responsibility for reservations, scheduling, dispatch, and trip provision can create con- flicts between groups within the contractor organization.

Survey and Service profiles 89 Salt Lake City, UT UTA Paratransit Utah Transit Authority Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Dispatch, service delivery, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Operating Cost per Passenger: $23.64 Revenue Vehicle Hours: 195,345 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trip Rate Excessively Long Trips 90% 2% <1% Background The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) is the public transportation provider for six counties in north central Utah, and in that capacity serves Salt Lake City, as well as Ogden, Provo, and Tooele County. UTA provides ADA paratransit in five of the six counties within the three- quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor for local bus as well as rail service. How It Works UTA has three operational regions: northern, central, and southern. UTA performs all res- ervations, scheduling, and same-day issues for the three service regions, as well as performs dispatching and operates service for the central region. For the other two regions, UTA contracts with MV and United Way to deliver trips. Contracting The current service contracts have a single base year plus four annual optional renewals. These contracts have no incentives tied to them, and while there are a variety of liquidated damages available for UTA to utilize, none has been enforced under the current contract. The private providers are paid a monthly fixed fee that covers fixed costs and a per-revenue- vehicle-hour that covers variable costs. Though no liquidated damages have been exercised, the service contract does allow for liquidated damages tied to on-time performance, missed

90 aDa paratransit Service Models trip rate, trip refusal, excessively long trips, customer complaints, and vehicle cleanliness. The contract also has provisions for vehicle inspections and preventative maintenance, as well as liquidated damages based on inadequate staff to meet demand. This latter category is based upon a $200 penalty per run plus the difference between UTA’s actual cost, and the contractor’s hourly wage. Results UTA believes that this joint service model enhances control over service quality and produc- tivity, while also providing the agency greater flexibility to address service quality issues. Since the agency schedules and builds the service runs for the contractors, they control the hours that the contractor operates. By operating the call service functions themselves, UTA is able to use conditional trip-by-trip eligibility, and also to directly receive feedback for service improve- ments, as well as ensure quality service delivery and responsiveness to the customer. This feed- back also works with UTA’s relationship with the contractors, whose knowledge of the service area assists in routing trips, and providing feedback for service improvements. Finally, under the current model, UTA has seen the cost per trip drop from $27.53 in 2013 to $23.64 in 2016, with incremental drops in service price each year. Lessons Learned • Maintaining internal call center functions allows the agency to enforce and operationalize conditional eligibility. • Annual contracts allows the agency to be more flexible and to rely less on service liquidated damages or incentives. • Maintaining the call center functions allows UTA to maintain contact with customers for direct feedback; communications with the providers also allows UTA to deliver service more effectively.

Survey and Service profiles 91 San Francisco, CA San Francisco Paratransit San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, service delivery, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Dedicated Service Provider Subcontractor Responsible for: Operations Alternative Taxi Providers Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, software, service delivery, road supervision, training, vehicles, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 732,129 ADA paratransit trips Productivity (Customer Trips/RVH): 1.57 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Complaint Freq. Ratio 90% <2 per 1,000 trips 10,150 senior transportation 40,126 other human service transportation Background SFMTA’s San Francisco Paratransit operates throughout San Francisco, Treasure Island, and to the northern most part of Daly City in San Mateo County. The Daly City service area is held to three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor for any San Francisco MUNI route. SFMTA retains an administrative broker, Transdev, to organize and monitor ADA paratransit services, an alternative taxi-based service for ADA paratransit customers, and senior transporta- tion services. When the turnkey ADA paratransit dedicated service contractor was performing in a substandard fashion, SFMTA gave permission to Transdev to replace that service provider. In the last procurement, SFMTA allowed the possibility of the same company performing both the administrative brokerage function and the turnkey service provider functions, and Transdev was selected, under one contract, to do both.

92 aDa paratransit Service Models So, with respect to just ADA Paratransit, Transdev serves as the turnkey contractor for two services: • SF Access is a pre-scheduled, ADA-compliant van service providing door-to-door transporta- tion for ADA-eligible customers. • The group van service provides rides for groups of ADA-eligible customers heading to the same location, including Adult Day Health Centers. The taxi service is an alternative service offering same-day, on-demand trip requests or even street hailing for ADA-eligible customers who choose to use this service instead of SF Access. San Francisco Paratransit also provides a service for older adults participating in certain pro- grams, as well as offering same-day trip accommodation according to availability and medical needs. This profile will focus on the two ADA paratransit services but will also include additional information about the alternative taxi service. How It Works SF Access customers call Transdev to request trips. Transdev intakes the requested trips, and performs scheduling, dispatching, and handles ETA calls. Customers may request same-day trips but on a space-available basis only. For the group van service, the agency being served must contact their service provider for res- ervations and scheduling. The agency must communicate to the service provider the frequency in which the rider will need the service (e.g., 3 days a week on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday). Based on the availability of the existing routes, the service provider will then communicate back to the agency whether or not they can fit the rider onto an existing route. If they are able to accommodate them, the service provider will let the agency know the times in which the carrier can pick up and drop off the rider; afterwards, the agency must communicate this information to the rider. If the service provider is unable to accommodate the rider, then the agency can call to make a reservation 1 to 7 days in advance with the SF Access service. Transdev also operates about 80% of the group van service. The remaining 20% is operated by a nonprofit provider, under contract to Transdev. Transdev performs day-to-day administrative and call center func- tions for the group van program, and is responsible for monitoring service quality, including conducting field monitoring and fleet maintenance. With regard to the taxi program, the city’s transportation code requires all taxis operating in San Francisco to participate in the city’s paratransit program, and these represent 30% of all San Francisco Paratransit trips. Taxi services are mostly same-day requests with limited prior reservations. A subset of taxi drivers are certified to provide wheelchair trips; taxi drivers at large are not required to have the same training, background checks, insurance, or other require- ments as ADA van-service drivers. The service works by allowing riders to use a San Francisco Paratransit–issued debit card wherein the agency credits $30.00 for every $6.00 the customer adds to the account. SFMTA has also incorporated TripInfo, which provides riders with the option to receive an IVR call to either remind them of their reserved trip the day before or provide them with an estimated van arrival time on the day of the trip. The service is also launching a web-based pro- gram to allow users to check their taxi trip history and purchase value for their taxi debit card. SFMTA is also working to procure software that will allow users to reserve, make changes, cancel as well as check their vehicle’s ETA via smartphone or web-based program. For the older-adult transportation service, Transdev contracts with three nonprofit providers.

Survey and Service profiles 93 Transdev is also responsible for their administrative functions (including eligibility and fare media sales) and overseeing contracting of all the other San Francisco Paratransit programs. Contracting SFMTA contracts with Transdev to perform administrative broker services and turnkey con- tractor services. Both elements have a 5-year base term with an additional 5-year option. The broker’s administrative costs are paid at cost plus fixed fee based on a negotiated annual budget, and reimbursement for actual costs plus the fixed fee. Additionally, there are incentives and liquidated damages tied to on-time performance, customer satisfaction, and safety. The admin- istrative incentives/liquidated damages are conducted quarterly, while operating incentives/ liquidated damages are conducted monthly. Payment to Transdev for turnkey services for call center functions and for dedicated service provision (whether operated by Transdev or the subcontractor) is based on a negotiated cost per trip, with performance incentives and liquidated damages applied monthly. Most of the capital costs, such as vehicles, are purchased by SFMTA. Any capital costs incurred by the contractor are passed through to SFMTA. Capital purchases are budgeted and approved by SFMTA prior to purchase. If a contract is prematurely terminated or not renewed, the contractor is required to transfer any leases to the SFMTA, if requested. SFMTA owns all the capital assets acquired by the contractor and will maintain possession during any transition of contractors. Payment to the taxi companies for the alternative service is based on each meter fare. Results SFMTA reports that their current model creates cost efficiency through economies of scale, while enhancing control over service quality and productivity. Overall cost efficiencies are also created by providing the taxi-based alternative service. The service model also helps SFMTA respond to service quality issues. SFMTA has also been more involved in employee compensation and benefit discussions, and is a party to all decisions that have a material effect on the cost of service. According to SFMTA, allowing for one company to provide both the paratransit administrative brokerage and oper- ations has allowed for more communication and cooperation between the two entities, and facilitated solutions that have led to improved service quality. Additionally, having the service provider manage the call center allows for better cooperation between scheduling and reserva- tions, and dispatch and operations, which allows for better scheduling and routing of clients. Despite these successes, the service structure requires regular hands-on monitoring by agency staff with review of detailed invoices and service-quality monitoring. Since the service model change in 2014, ambulatory SF Access riders showed an uptick in the satisfaction of service, according to the most recent customer satisfaction survey. In 2015, 94% rated their most recent trip as “excellent” or “good,” compared to 91% in 2013. In addi- tion, the on-time performance for the SF Access service has improved by 3%, from 83% in FY14 to 86% in FY16. In addition, the inclusion of taxis as an alternative mode of transportation for ADA para- transit riders has allowed SFMTA to have a cost-effective alternative for ADA paratransit riders and allows facilitates easily absorbing additional demand for service. This partnership with the city’s taxi companies benefits all parties, providing riders with same-day service and direct rides while providing a stable customer base for taxi companies and allowing SFMTA to better man- age the cost of providing ADA paratransit services. Over the same period of time, the overall unit cost for ADA paratransit has maintained relatively stable, despite the change in the reimburse- ment model for the SF Access service, increasing slightly from $26.66 in 2014 to $32.20 in 2017.

94 aDa paratransit Service Models Lessons Learned • Involvement of local government can enhance the effectiveness of ADA paratransit alterna- tives by requiring taxi participation. • Small information access improvements can greatly enhance call center functions. • The more functions are contracted out, the more oversight responsibility the agency must employ. Seattle, WA Access Transportation King County Metro Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, software, vehicles Call and Control Contractor Responsible for: Reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, trip reconciliation, and training Dedicated Service Providers Responsible for: Service delivery, trip reconciliation, road supervision, training, and fleet maintenance Basic Statistics (CY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 961,476 Total Passengers Revenue Service Hours: 609,786 Productivity (Total Trips/RVH): 1.58 Operating Cost per Passenger: $54.87 Operating Cost per Customer Trip: $60.27 Operating Cost per RVH: $86.51 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Trip Productivity Road Calls Preventable Accidents 90% 1.72 <2 per month 0 875,350 ADA customers 86,126 companions and PCAs Background Access Transportation (Access) is the complementary ADA transportation service provided by King County Metro, which serves Seattle and most of the western part of the county including Vashon Island in the Puget Sound, as well as some areas in neighboring Pierce and Snohomish counties. Access provides service beyond the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary para- transit corridor, though the service area is limited to a set area more heavily on the west side of the county. In addition to ADA service, Access also provides Medicaid NEMT trips, which are commingled with ADA paratransit trips, and human service transportation.

Survey and Service profiles 95 How It Works King County Metro contracts out its call center and service delivery functions separately. The call center operator (First Transit) handles reservations and scheduling, as well as dispatch- ing and same-day issues. Access currently uses two dedicated service providers, which provide roughly 91% of all trips. Separately, the call center contractor allocates about 9% of all trips to six non-dedicated taxi companies that typically handle peak-period overflow, long or out-of- the-way trips, or those in a low-demand area. Taxis are also used to cover for breakdowns and accidents, and to accommodate trips that cannot be fit into dedicated runs. For taxi trips, trip status calls are handled by the call center manager; however, they typically must make a call to the actual provider for the ETA information. The agency has experimented with some web-based applications from the taxi companies, but it is a separate system and not integrated with the service’s software. Trips are shared among the providers via general geographic zones. The agency defines geo- graphic areas in the scheduling system, with runs assigned to these areas. Providers generally serve the closest geographic areas to their operating facilities. The geographic assignments are not exclusive, so a trip or run may be served by an agency that typically does not operate in that area. This is particularly important, as the various providers do not operate at the exact same hours. In practice, and due to ridership and vehicle service hours, the two dedicated providers have a 66%/25% split in trips, with 9% of trips provided by taxis as overflow trips. Regarding trips on Vashon Island in the Puget Sound, the agency has rented a small storefront for drivers to pick up vehicles and manifests. The agency does not staff the office other than with drivers. Contracting The dedicated service provider contracts have 5-year base terms, with five 1-year extensions. The contracts for the providers are not staggered. The providers are paid per service hour, with fuel costs reimbursed separately. The contracts include incentives and liquidated damages tied to on-time performance, the no-show rate, the missed-trip rate, and service productivity. With regard to assets, all capital costs incurred by the contractors are amortized over the base term and option years. After the contractor is fully reimbursed for capital assets, the agency has the option to assume ownership of assets, and if the contract is prematurely terminated or not renewed, the contractor is required to transfer any leases to King County Metro, if requested by the agency. The call center contractor is retained via a 5-year base term, with five 1-year extensions, and with payment based on vehicle service hours, fixed costs, and pass-through costs. The taxi com- panies are subcontracted to the call center manager, with payment based on a flat fee plus mile- age. Taxi companies contractually may invoice the agency an extra charge for trips that require an accessible vehicle; however, customer fares are unaffected. Results Access reports that the greatest advantage of their current operating model is that it mini- mizes risk for the agency; however, it is costly, difficult to implement changes, and eliminates options for improvement. The agency believes that the contracted call center functions have allowed for improved stability and economies of scale, while the contracting with multiple service providers has led to improved stability and control with lower risk. Satellite offices can be employed to allow for service delivery in more comparatively remote service areas, which helps lower deadheading. Despite these advantages, King County Metro is exploring options to lower costs and further enhance flexibility. With the number of service providers reduced to one primary contractor and one smaller provider, King County Metro has decided to switch to a turnkey contract model, recognizing that they no longer have a need for a separate call center contractor.

96 aDa paratransit Service Models Lessons Learned • The use of multiple contractors for different functions minimizes the risk for the agency, despite the loss of flexibility. • Satellite offices can be employed to allow for service delivery in comparatively remote service areas, which helps lower deadheading. • The reliance on dedicated providers has limited the ability to implement service change and is expensive. • With one dominant service provider, there is no reason to have a separate call center contractor. Washington, DC MetroAccess Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) Division of Responsibilities Agency Responsible for: Oversight, contracting, soft ware, vehicles Call Center Contractor Responsible for: Oversight, reservations, scheduling, dispatch, handling customers’ ETA calls, trip reconciliation, and training Dedicated Service Provider Contractors Responsible for: Oversight, dispatch, service delivery, road supervision, training, fleet maintenance Non-Dedicated Service Provider Responsible for: Service delivery, training, vehicles Basic Statistics (FY 2016) Performance Standards Annual Trips: 2,280,730 Total ADA passengers Productivity (Total Trips per RVH): 1.13 Operating Cost per Passenger: $52.00 Tracked Standard On-time Performance Missed Trip Rate Excessively Late Trips Trip Productivity Complaint Freq. Ratio 92% <0.75% <0.75% 1.1 <5 per 1,000 trips Background MetroAccess is the ADA paratransit service for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). MetroAccess uses three dedicated service providers for ADA paratran- sit trips only, and employs separate contractors for the call center and for quality assurance. The service area for MetroAccess consists of the District of Columbia, the suburban Maryland counties of Montgomery and Prince George’s, the Northern Virginia counties of Arlington and

Survey and Service profiles 97 Fairfax, and the cities of Alexandria, Fairfax, and Falls Church. Customers may only make trips that begin and end within the three-quarter-mile ADA complementary paratransit corridor. Trips for the service may be booked online, and currently about 14% of total reservations are booked online. Note also that there is a taxi-based alternative service within the District of Columbia with program eligibility restricted to MetroAccess customers. This program, called TransportDC, is managed not by WMATA but by the District’s Department of For-Hire Vehicles. How It Works WMATA contracts out call center responsibilities, including reservations and scheduling, though customers may make reservations or cancel trips via the Metro website. Scheduling among providers is based on the service capacity of the dedicated service providers. The three dedicated service providers for MetroAccess are Transdev, First Transit, and Diamond. Transdev and First Transit mainly provide services in the District of Columbia and Maryland, while Dia- mond primarily provides service in Northern Virginia. These providers have a 50%/35%/15% service split, respectively. Communications between dispatchers and service operators are per- formed through Push-to-Talk (PTT) devices. Alternatively, drivers can use onboard Mobile Data Terminals (MDTs) for real-time communications. Trips are split according to a contracted volume of work. Approximately 5%–7% of total trips are assigned to non-dedicated taxis, which are contracted by one of the dedicated service providers (Transdev). These non-dedicated pro- viders assist with overflow trips, out-of-the-way trips, trips in low-demand areas, and for all trips that cannot be fit into a dedicated run. WMATA requires that driver training and service standards for taxis be equal to that of dedicated fleet drivers. An independent quality assurance contractor monitors and assesses the performance of all other contractors. Contracting The call center manager (MV Transportation) currently operates under a 5-year base contract, with one 5-year option. The dedicated service providers currently use the same contract term lengths. The call center contractor is paid per call and tracks the percentage of telephone response times that are less or more than 2 minutes. MetroAccess does not track average hold time. The service providers are paid per revenue vehicle hour, with payment of liquidated damages and incentives tied to on-time performance, missed trip rate, service productivity, complaint frequency ratio, and safety measures. WMATA provides all service delivery assets to the dedicated service providers (except for the operations and maintenance facilities), which includes the eligibility and call center facil- ity, scheduling software and hardware, the telephone, IVR, and radio systems, as well as the in-vehicle equipment. The non-dedicated service provider, however, furnishes its own vehicles. In addition to the call center and dedicated service provider, WMATA contracts with a third- party contractor (MTM) to assess service quality and performance, contract compliance, as well as safety, security, and fleet maintenance. Results In 2013, WMATA transitioned from a single contractor model (where the call center con- tractor was also allowed to operate service) to the current service model to emphasize and better control service quality, while also maintaining a balance with cost efficiency. Additionally, MetroAccess altered the service model in order to ensure operational transparency. WMATA believes these goals have been met by the new model. By moving to a model that uses multiple dedicated providers, the robust specialization of the providers have helped lead to improved service delivery.

98 aDa paratransit Service Models WMATA reports that its new service model creates cost efficiency through competitions and economies of scale, enhances control over service quality and productivity, and helps manage demand for the service. The agency reports, however, that the current model does not mitigate risks, and ensuring contractor compliance with the agreement can be difficult. That said, the agency reports that the separation of the call center from service delivery improved passenger productivity per hour by 28%. Lessons Learned • Isolating call center functions enhances control over service quality and productivity/cost, and will facilitate encouraging use of alternatives. • Working directly with contractors, rather than through a single prime contractor, enhances system transparency and can promote small business participation. • Online reservations can lower the need for more call center capacity. • Having multiple service provider contractors leverages competition, enables the transit agency to be more agile in shifting service volume to high performers, and prevents being limited by the constraints of a single company and its personnel. • The use of independent quality assurance and call center contracts separates functions that would otherwise have conflicting priorities and interests. This has produced better focus and more objective feedback on the performance of both functions. • Separation of call center functions from service delivery greatly improved service. • Separation of quality assurance from service delivery enabled attainment of the customer service performance objective.

Next: Chapter 5 - Survey Analysis Summary »
ADA Paratransit Service Models Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB's Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Synthesis 135: ADA Paratransit Service Models provides information about current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant paratransit service models and the underlying reasons why specific transit agencies have opted to keep or change their service model. ADA paratransit demand continues to grow while resources are dwindling. For that reason, transit agencies nationwide are exploring service models to more effectively meet present and future demand. This synthesis study explains available service delivery models to date, and documents the way various elements of the service and contracts are structured to enhance the likelihood of achieving certain results related to cost efficiency, service quality, or the balance of the two.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!