CHAPTER 9

Summary of Survey and Profiles of Alternative Services

Introduction

This chapter introduces and summarizes the research project’s survey of transit agencies that provide an alternative service for ADA paratransit riders. Brief profiles of the 18 alternative services captured in the survey are provided at the end of the chapter, with highlights of the survey responses. Detailed findings of the survey are in Appendix C.

Survey Administration

Following a review and pretest, the survey was revised and formatted for SurveyMonkey. A link to the survey was sent to the 24 transit agencies known to have an alternative service for their ADA paratransit riders. One transit agency requested a hard copy of the survey in Microsoft Word, which was provided. The survey was administered in April and May 2021.

The research team received a response from 18 of the 24 transit agencies (75% response rate). Note that not all respondents answered all questions. Figure 9-1 identifies the responding transit agencies and their location in the country.

Summary of the Survey

Survey findings from the 18 responding transit agencies are summarized in this chapter. The survey sample is relatively small, but the number of transit agencies providing an alternative service for their ADA paratransit riders, as defined by the research project, is also relatively small.

Survey findings have been supplemented with information from interviews with five providers of alternative services.

Among the more significant findings are the following:

• Goals of the program. Three goals were most cited for the transit agencies’ alternative services for ADA paratransit customers:
  1. Reduce overall cost and/or cost per trip
  2. Provide an on-demand or same-day mobility option
  3. Reduce demand for paratransit service
• Challenges in planning and implementing the alternative service. Of 24 possible challenges that were listed as response options in the survey, three emerged as primary:
  1. Ensuring the program is safe for passengers and with safe vehicles
  2. Providing equivalent service, including response times for customers needing a WAV
  3. Concerns about data collection for NTD or transit agency performance monitoring

Several transit agencies added remaining challenges to providing their alternative services:

• From an agency that has set trip limits: “Customers want more alternative service trips.”
• From an agency that identified increased numbers of trips and accompanying increased costs with its on-demand pilot: “Program cost and change in customer usage and behavior.”
• From an agency that gives eligible riders a monthly subsidy: “Expanding funding. This has become a very popular program, especially during COVID since they are not shared rides. Would like to increase amount each month that is allowed on the card.”
• Service design and operation. Survey results show considerable variation in the design and operation of the alternative services; there is no one common design.
  • Most of the programs began as pilots, particularly those using TNCs. Half of the pilots remain pilots.
  • Two-thirds of the programs serve only ADA paratransit-eligible riders, two limit service to a defined subset of ADA paratransit riders, three serve seniors in addition to ADA paratransit riders, and three include veterans among eligible riders.
  • Different provider arrangements are used: TNCs only; taxis only; TNCs and taxis; TNCs, taxis, and NEMT providers; and taxis and other for-hire vehicles. Two programs use a debit card that can be used with a range of ground transportation providers in the community. One uses three apps that broker taxis and other for-hire vehicles.
  • Wheelchair-accessible service is provided in all cases, in varying ways. Taxi companies use WAVs driven by their drivers; TNCs subcontract with national paratransit contractors and NEMT providers; one TNC is just beginning to lease WAVs to its drivers.
  • Half the programs require the rider to pay an initial fare plus the overage beyond a specified dollar amount. Fare payment for the other half varies considerably.

• Data and data sharing. While more than half the transit agencies reported receiving all the requested data from all their alternative service providers, other agencies reported not getting all the data requested:
  • “Uber and Lyft have both refused to provide data to the granularity requested, e.g., exact origin and destination, exact duration of trips.”
  • “Alternative service providers are not able to provide passenger mile data as defined by NTD.”
  • “Do not receive data to the level of detail desired, including data on trip origin and destination, rider’s name, trip duration, and trip miles.”
  • “Data reported by client name. Wait times.”

  Despite these responses from the transit agencies, the providers we interviewed claimed they give their transit agency clients all the data required. One of the providers stated that it understands transit agencies need data on their paratransit riders and that data privacy regarding paratransit customers is less of an issue than data privacy issues for general-public microtransit riders.

  Close to half the survey respondents said they include data on their alternative service in their NTD report. However, NTD 2020 indicates that such service can be reported only if it is regular and continuing (i.e., not a pilot); is shared-ride (most TNC services are not); and meets the FTA’s definition of purchased transportation.

• Program evaluation. Survey findings show that the transit agencies’ evaluation of their alternative service is most focused on total costs of providing transportation to ADA paratransit customers (including the cost of the alternative service). Specifically, the most frequently reported metrics include the overall cost per passenger trip, overall cost of the ADA paratransit program, and overall customer ridership. Correspondingly, all the responding transit agencies report tracking data on alternative service costs and all but one track total passenger trips on the alternative service.

The focus of the programs’ evaluation aligns with the reported primary goals for the programs, according to survey results. However, program evaluation is less aligned with addressing key challenges the transit agencies reported when planning and implementing their alternative service program.

The research team looked closely at the issue of service equivalency for riders who require a WAV. Not only is this one of the most frequently reported barriers, risks, and legal considerations to planning and implementing an alternative service, it is also one of the core questions for the research project.

To examine the issue, the team asked several questions of the survey data:

1. How many of the 11 transit agencies that reported that service equivalency for WAV customers was a key challenge have as a performance metric “number of passenger trips requiring a WAV”? Four.
2. How many of these 11 transit agencies track and require data on passenger trips by vehicle type (sedan versus WAV) for their alternative service? Five.
3. How many of these 11 transit agencies track and require response time or on-time performance data broken down by sedan trips versus WAV trips? Three.

Despite the lack of on-time-performance or response-time data provided in the survey, the alternative service providers the research team interviewed said they have these data and data specifically categorized by trips for ambulatory riders versus trips for WAV riders. Two of the providers noted that they provide response time data to their transit agency clients, specifically between WAV and non-WAV trips.

• Method for estimating cost reductions from the alternative service. Eight of the transit agencies gave a brief explanation of their method of estimating cost reductions from the alternative

service. The reported methods vary, and it is not clear to what extent these methods effectively account for how much new demand is created by the alternative service.

To effectively estimate cost reductions for ADA paratransit, the method should determine if the savings from riders using the alternative service instead of ADA paratransit exceed the additional subsidies needed to pay for the new alternative service trips. Scrutinizing the new trips is important given demand is likely to increase with an on-demand mobility option.

• Lessons learned. Surveyed transit agencies were asked for comments and words of wisdom that might be useful to other transit agencies considering alternative services. Responses were:
  • Develop relationships with local taxicab providers.
  • Demonstrate the viability of establishing a program/service and the financial benefits.
  • On-demand service with local TNCs and taxis gives riders greater mobility (they will love the service) and can reduce overall and per-trip costs to the agency. However, riders will take more trips with the new service which could cancel out cost savings.
  • On-demand programs will not work for all riders; some will need a higher level of care than these contractors can provide.
  • Overall, the Uber Pilot program has been a success and is liked by almost all customers.
  • Recommend that agencies considering these programs run a pilot and analyze all data from service providers to observe how usage trends change for existing customers with more flexible programs.
  • Alternative services such as TNCs often don’t provide shared rides and productivity efficiencies are lost.
  • Agencies should add a security component to app-based TNC options to ensure they can confirm services are provided to the intended recipient.
  • Clients really like the card system. They like the freedom to choose any provider. With [paper] vouchers, clients had to fill in the amount by hand, which was challenging for people with visual impairment.
  • It is evident that our Rider’s Choice program is designed very differently than others based on the way many questions in this survey are asked. We designed a program giving customers choices, being a net zero cost to the county and not having a new program with mandated oversight requirements.
  • Start as a rider’s choice with three providers so you will be able to lose one and keep the program.
  • Fare pricing is crucial. Our fares are relatively steep at $1/mile, but this was designed to protect our overall budget without having to impose arbitrary restrictions on how many trips people can take; there’s no way to do this fairly. Set the price and let people decide if it’s worth it to them. In our local experience, our fares have moderated demand well without restricting growth.
  • Accessibility questions are a big deal when considering TNCs. Using NEMT subcontractors at least gets you the capacity, but equivalent service is a challenge. This is likely the biggest challenge blocking expanded use of TNC contractors beyond non-ADA work.
  • Software integration isn’t a solved problem, because TNCs all have their own bespoke platforms. One approach is to separate the reservation functions for ADA and alternative service and have two separate platforms.
  • Have as many alternatives as possible, so as not to burden one with an influx of trips.
  • Encourage the use of alternatives for short trips, less than 8 miles, to maximize savings.
  • Have the flexibility to suspend or reduce access to the alternative during periods when demand for dedicated service drops significantly.
  • Get involved with your rider advocacy groups early and often as you begin to think about these sorts of service; it’s not useful if it’s not something customers want.
  • Have a firm idea who you are trying to support by implementing this type of program and what you are trying to get out of the program.

• Make sure you start slowly so the provider is not overwhelmed.
• Be sure to spell out the data you want to evaluate the service and hold providers to their commitment to provide that data.
• A formal agreement with providers is important to establish responsibilities and to protect the transit agency.
• Provide as many transportation options as possible for your customers to help ensure consumer choice.

Transit Agencies’ Alternative Service Profiles

The 18 transit agencies that responded to the research project’s survey are listed in Table 9-1 alphabetically by location (city or county). Profiles of each, based on the respective survey responses, are found on the following pages. Note again that several of the agencies did not answer all the survey questions.

Table 9-1. Transit agencies that responded to the survey.

Boston, MA: MBTA

The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), known as the T, is a division of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation. The MBTA provides subway, bus, commuter rail, ferry, and paratransit service in eastern Massachusetts and parts of Rhode Island.

In addition to its ADA paratransit service (The Ride), the MBTA provides on-demand service for its ADA paratransit-eligible customers. The MBTA’s alternative service was among the first in the country to partner with TNCs to provide service for its ADA paratransit riders.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Providing equivalent service, including availability or information and reservation capability, to customers without smartphones
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to some of the data required.

Reporting challenge: “Uber and Lyft have both refused to provide data to the granularity requested (e.g., exact O/D [origin and destination], exact duration of trips).”

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes: “For customers who have signed up for the program, we project out what their future usage of ADA paratransit would be post-signup for the pilot if the pilot wouldn’t have existed, and then evaluate induced demand and how many trips are shifted from paratransit to the TNCs and apply average costs per trip to all modes.”

Comments and Lessons Learned

1. Get involved with your rider advocacy groups early and often as you begin to think about these sorts of services—it’s not useful if it’s not something customers want.
2. Have a firm idea of what you are trying to get out of the program and who you are trying to support by implementing this type of program.

Broward County, FL: BCT

Broward County Transit (BCT) is the major public transportation provider in Broward County in southeastern Florida. BCT also has service to downtown Miami and southern Palm Beach County.

The transit agency, part of Broward County’s Department of Transportation, operates fixed-route bus, express bus, and paratransit service, and coordinates community shuttle services in partnership with 18 cities in Broward County.

BCT’s alternative service program subsidizes same-day trips for eligible ADA paratransit customers, who may schedule trips with more than 15 taxi companies as well as TNCs licensed to operate in Broward County.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Concerns related to Title VI requirements
• Limited number of local taxi companies in the area with wheelchair-accessible taxicabs
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring
• Burdens of compliance with state or local agencies that regulate taxis, TNCs, and the services they provide
• Additional challenge: “all ‘stand in the shoes’ requirements for a directly contracted service”

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes: comparing ridership pre-pilot to during pilot.

Comments and Lessons Learned

“It is evident that our Rider’s Choice program is designed very differently than others based on the way many questions in this survey are asked. We designed a program giving customers choices, being a net zero cost to the county, and not having a new program with mandated oversight requirements.”

Chicago, IL: Pace

Pace Suburban Bus, formally the Suburban Bus Division of the Regional Transportation Authority, provides transportation in the Chicago suburbs, serving 284 cities in six suburban counties. Pace provides fixed-route bus, express bus service, a vanpool program, and paratransit service.

Pace provides ADA paratransit service for riders with disabilities unable to use its fixed-route services as well as for the fixed-route services in Chicago operated by the Chicago Transit Authority. Pace also provides a taxi subsidy program for trips that begin in the City of Chicago. This program has been operating for many years.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Uncertainty as to requirements for drivers or other alternative service employees to participate in drug and alcohol testing
• Other concerns related to requirements for drug and alcohol testing

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

No.

Comments and Lessons Learned

This survey is not really applicable to what Pace does.

Columbus, OH: COTA

The Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA) is the regional public transit provider for the greater Columbus area and central Ohio. COTA provides fixed-route bus and paratransit service.

COTA’s paratransit service predates the ADA, starting in 1970 and transitioning to ADA paratransit in the 1990s. ADA paratransit is branded as Mainstream, with service provided within ¾-mile corridors of COTA’s fixed routes. Service beyond the ¾-mile corridors is provided on a space-available basis. COTA’s alternative service for ADA paratransit customers is known as Mainstream On-Demand.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Providing equivalent service, including availability of information and reservations capability to customers without smartphones
• Providing equivalent service, including availability of information and reservations capability to customers without Internet access
• Providing equivalent service, including fare collection for unbanked customers (e.g., providing a cash payment option)
• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Other concerns related to requirements for drug and alcohol testing beyond drug and alcohol testing for drivers and other of the provider’s employees

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Alternative Service Data 2019 (8 Months of Operation)

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes: “We’ve compared whether aggregate per-client travel increased or decreased over time (trips per month) for each service, but the goal with On-Demand was unit cost reduction more than overall cost reduction (we want to increase capacity per dollar).”

Comments and Lessons Learned

“Fare pricing is crucial. Our fares are relatively steep at $1/mile, but this was designed to protect our overall budget without having to impose arbitrary restrictions on how many trips people can take—there’s no way to do this fairly. Set the price and let people decide if it’s worth it to them. In our local experience, our fares have moderated demand well without restricting growth.

Accessibility questions are a big deal when considering TNCs. Using NEMT subcontractors at least gets you the capacity, but equivalent service is a challenge. This is likely the biggest challenge blocking expanded use of TNC contractors beyond non-ADA work.

Software integration isn’t a solved problem either, because TNCs by definition all have their own bespoke platforms. One approach is to separate the reservation functions for ADA and alternative service and have two separate platforms—that’s what COTA did to get the service rolling.”

Contra Costa County, CA: Tri Delta Transit

Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority (ECCTA) provides fixed-route bus and paratransit service in the eastern portion of Contra Costa County in California, operating as Tri Delta Transit. Contra Costa is Spanish for “opposite coast,” referring to the county’s location on the other side of the San Francisco Bay from San Francisco.

In addition to ADA paratransit-eligible customers, ECCTA’s ADA paratransit service also serves people aged 65 and over and provides Medicaid NEMT trips.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Limited number of taxi companies in the area
• Limited number of local taxi companies with WAVs
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring
• Concerns about tort liability to the transit agency
• Additional challenge: insurance coverage from the TNCs

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to some of the data required.

Reporting challenge: alternative service providers do not provide passenger mile data as defined by the NTD.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes: match cost per passenger ($35 for paratransit, $12 for Mobility on Demand)

Comments and Lessons Learned

“Start as a riders’ choice program with three providers so you will be able to lose one but still keep the program.”

Dallas, TX: DART

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) is a regional transit agency created by voters in 1983, serving Dallas and 12 surrounding cities in a 700-square-mile service area in North Texas.

DART operates fixed-route bus, light rail, commuter rail, and streetcar service as well as paratransit service.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Uncertainty as to requirements for drivers or other alternative service employees to participate in drug and alcohol testing
• Other concerns related to requirements for drug and alcohol testing
• Uncertainty as to need for more than one alternative service provider (to give user choice per the FTA’s taxicab exemption)
• Concerns about the impact or perceived impact to employees represented by unions
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring
• Concerns related to the effect alternative service providers would have on the reputation and goodwill of the transit agency
• Additional challenge: inability to charge fare (currently) and access to accessible vehicles with TNCs

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to some of the data required.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Not applicable. This will be considered before making TNC services a permanent part of the paratransit program.

Comments and Lessons Learned

“Responses provided for ‘alternative services’ were given for our TNC Pilot program. We do have taxi service that operates trips for us, but those are considered ADA paratransit service. Overall, the TNC pilot program has been a success and is liked by almost all customers. DART is now testing same-day trips for WAV service.”

Denver, CO: RTD

The Regional Transportation District (RTD), based in Denver, CO, provides public transportation in eight Colorado counties, covering a service area of 2,342 square miles. RTD provides a range of services, including bus, rail, shuttles, ADA paratransit, vanpools, and special event services.

RTD’s Access-a-Cab is one of the country’s early alternative services for ADA paratransit riders.

Alternative Service

Flagstaff, AZ: Mountain Line

The Northern Arizona Intergovernmental Public Transportation Authority (NAIPTA), doing business as Mountain Line, is the public transit agency in northern Arizona, operating fixed-route bus service (Mountain Line), paratransit service (Mountain Line Paratransit), and high-frequency bus service linking key destinations (Mountain Link).

Mountain Line, based in Flagstaff, AZ, was established in 2001 and now transports over 2 million riders a year. In addition to its ADA paratransit service, Mountain Line provides an alternative service for ADA paratransit-eligible customers that began more than 10 years ago as a voucher program and transitioned to a reloadable debit card in 2017.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Limited number of taxi companies in the area
• Limited number of local taxi companies with WAVs
• Limited number of TNCs in the area or portions of the area
• Additional challenge: “Expanding funding. This has become a very popular program, especially during COVID since trips are not shared rides. Would like to increase amount each month that is allowed on the card.”

Data Reporting

Some alternative services providers are providing access to some of the data the transit agency requested: “We track customers’ usage on the card, so number of trips and the average cost of a trip are known. Taxi and TNC providers do not provide any data. We do not have contracts/agreements with them.”

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

No.

Comments and Lessons Learned

“The clients really like the card system. They like the freedom to choose any provider. With [paper] vouchers, clients had to fill in the amount by hand; this caused challenges for people with a visual impairment.”

Houston, TX: METRO

The Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County (METRO) began service in 1979, serving the City of Houston, much of unincorporated Harris County, and 14 smaller cities with a service area of 1,303 square miles.

METRO provides fixed-route bus, rail, and vanpool service as well as ADA paratransit, which is branded as METROLift. METRO’s alternative service for ADA paratransit riders predates the ADA, using a taxi-based subsidy program.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues When Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

“Note: These issues were concerns decades ago when the program was in its infancy and are no longer concerns. The MSP service is a viable, reliable transportation option for paratransit riders.”

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Uncertainty as to requirements for drivers or other alternative service employees to participate in drug and alcohol testing
• Other concerns related to requirements for drug and alcohol testing
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

No.

Comments and Lessons Learned

“Develop relationships with local taxicab providers. Demonstrate the viability of establishing a program/service and the financial benefits.”

Las Vegas, NV: RTC

The Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada (RTC) is a regional entity that oversees public transit, transportation and regional planning, traffic management, and roadway construction funding for southern Nevada.

RTC provides fixed-route bus, paratransit service, and specialized service for veterans and seniors. In addition to RTC paratransit, the agency provides an on-demand pilot service for ADA paratransit-eligible customers.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Providing equivalent service, including availability or information and reservations capability to customers without smartphones
• Providing equivalent service, including availability or information and reservations capability to customers without Internet access
• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Uncertainty as to requirements for drivers or other alternative service employees to participate in drug and alcohol testing
• Concerns related to Title VI requirements

• Limited number of local taxi companies willing to participate in the program, e.g., reluctance due to high insurance coverage requirements or other transit agency requirements or issues
• Concerns about impact or perceived impact to employees represented by unions
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring
• Burdens of compliance with state or local agencies that regulate taxis, TNCs, and the services they provide
• Concerns about tort liability to the transit agency
• Concerns related to the effect alternative service providers would have on the reputation and goodwill of the transit agency
• Additional challenge: customers want more alternative service trips

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to some of the data required.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes: “We report cost savings of both the TNCs in comparison with ADA paratransit on a monthly basis.”

Monterey County, CA: MST

Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST), formed in July 2010, serves Monterey County and 13 cities in the county. MST provides fixed-route bus service with a fleet of 132 buses and paratransit service, known as MST Rides, with a fleet of 39 vehicles.

MST has provided a taxi subsidy program for more than 10 years, serving ADA paratransit-eligible individuals, seniors, and military veterans.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Limited number of local taxi companies with WAVs

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

No.

New York, NY: NYCTA

The New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) is one of the six operating agencies of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, based in New York City.

NYCTA manages, maintains, and operates subway and bus service as well as ADA paratransit, known as Access-A-Ride, in New York City. It also provides an on-demand pilot service for a selected number of ADA paratransit customers, allowing e-hail trip bookings on taxis and for-hire vehicles. This includes yellow (street-hail) or green (outer-borough) taxicabs or for-hire vehicles (dispatched from a base) on demand.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Other concerns related to ADA requirements (beyond service equivalency related to response time and service for those who are unbanked, without smartphone or Internet access)
• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Burdens of compliance with state or local agencies that regulate taxis, TNCs, and the services they provide
• Additional challenge: “Program cost and change in customer usage and behavior.”

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes: “We continue to review this program; we have seen trends, most notably induced demand due to the flexibility, where trip levels exceed previous usage.”

Comments and Lessons Learned

Agencies considering these programs might benefit from running a pilot and analyzing all data from service providers to see how existing customers’ usage trends change with more flexible programs. Alternative services such as TNCs often don’t provide shared rides, so productivity efficiencies are lost.

Agencies should add a security component to app-based TNC options to ensure they can confirm services are provided to the intended recipient.

Phoenix, AZ: Valley Metro

Valley Metro Regional Public Transportation Authority (Valley Metro) is the regional public transportation agency serving metropolitan Phoenix, providing a range of services from regional bus, light rail, and paratransit service to alternative commuter solutions. Among its paratransit services is RideChoice, a specialized on-demand mobility option available for eligible riders in participating jurisdictions.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Providing equivalent service, including availability or information and reservations capability to customers without smartphones
• Providing equivalent service, including availability or information and reservations capability to customers without Internet access
• Providing equivalent service, including fare collection for unbanked customers (e.g., providing a cash payment option)
• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Uncertainty as to need for more than one alternative service provider (to give user choice per the FTA’s taxicab exemption)
• Limited number of taxi companies in the area
• Limited number of local taxi companies willing to participate in the program, e.g., reluctance due to high insurance coverage requirements or other transit agency requirements or issues
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring

Pinellas County, FL: PSTA

The Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) became the public transit provider for Pinellas County, FL, in 1984. PSTA is headquartered in St. Petersburg on Florida’s gulf coast. PSTA operates fixed-route and demand-response service, including ADA paratransit and an on-demand mobility option branded as Access on Demand.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Providing equivalent service, including fare collection for unbanked customers (e.g., a cash payment option)
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Other concerns related to requirements for drug and alcohol testing (beyond requirements for drivers and other provider employees to participate in drug and alcohol testing)
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring
• Burdens of compliance with state or local agencies that regulate taxis, TNCs, and the services they provide
• Concerns about tort liability to the transit agency
• Concerns related to effect alternative service providers would have on the reputation and goodwill of the transit agency

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to some of the data required.

Reporting challenge: the transit agency would like data on trip origin/destination, rider name, trip time, and trip miles; it doesn’t receive these metrics to the level of detail it would like to have.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Comments and Lessons Learned

On-demand service with local TNCs and taxis provides riders greater mobility (riders love the service) and can reduce overall and per-trip costs to the agency. However, riders will take more trips with the new service which could cancel out cost savings. On-demand programs will not work for all riders; some will need a higher level of care than these contractors can provide.

Richmond, VA: GRTC

The Greater Richmond Transit Company (GRTC) is a public transit agency owned jointly by the City of Richmond and Chesterfield County in central Virginia. The agency was founded in 1860 and has operated consistently since then, with one temporary suspension during the Civil War.

GRTC operates fixed-route and express bus services as well as specialized services including ADA paratransit, branded as CARE, and an alternative service known as CARE On-Demand.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Providing equivalent service, including availability or information and reservations capability to customers without smartphones
• Providing equivalent service, including availability or information and reservations capability to customers without Internet access
• Ensuring vehicles are safe
• Ensuring passenger safety
• Concerns related to Title VI requirements
• Limited number of TNCs willing to participate in the program, e.g., reluctance due to high insurance agency requirements, reporting challenges versus data privacy issues, or other transit agency requirements or issues
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring
• Burdens of compliance with state or local agencies that regulate taxis, TNCs, and the services they provide

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested. No data reporting challenges.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes; GRTC calculates the cost if provided by the paratransit service minus the actual cost of the alternative service.

Comments and Lessons Learned

It’s important to start slowly so the provider is not overwhelmed.

San Antonio, TX: VIA

VIA Metropolitan Transit (VIA) is a public transportation authority serving 14 member cities and the unincorporated portion of Bexar County in south-central Texas. Based in San Antonio, VIA operates fixed-route and express bus service, a general public on-demand service in northeast San Antonio, vanpool service, and ADA paratransit service (VIAtrans).

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

• Providing equivalent service, including service response times for customers requiring WAVs
• Limited number of taxi companies in the area
• Limited number of local taxi companies with WAVs
• Limited number of local taxi companies willing to participate in the program, e.g., reluctance due to high insurance coverage requirements or other transit agency requirements or issues
• Concerns about data collection for NTD reporting or transit agency performance monitoring

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Alternative Service Data 2019

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

No.

San Bernardino County, CA: Omnitrans

Omnitrans is the public transit agency serving the San Bernardino Valley in Southern California. The transit agency provides service for 15 cities and portions of unincorporated San Bernardino County, an area of 480 square miles. Omnitrans provides various specialized services, including the Taxi RIDE and Lyft RIDE program.

Alternative Service

Comments and Lessons Learned

• It’s important to spell out the data desired to evaluate the service and hold providers to their commitment to provide that data.
• A formal agreement with providers is important to establish responsibilities and to protect the transit agency.
• Provide as many transportation options as possible for customers to help ensure consumer choice.

Washington, DC: WMATA

The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) provides transportation service in the greater Washington, DC, area, with fixed-route bus, rail, and paratransit service operating in the District of Columbia, Northern Virginia, and suburban Maryland.

ADA paratransit service, known as MetroAccess, began in 1994 and provides more than two million trips per year.

Alternative Service

Identify Barriers, Concerns, or Issues when Planning and Implementing the Alternative Service

There were some concerns about tort liability to the transit agency.

Data Reporting

All the alternative services providers are providing access to all the data the transit agency requested.

Method for Estimating Cost Reductions from Mode Shift?

Yes: based on the consistency of passengers taking their regularly scheduled trips, e.g., work, dialysis, to the alternative services, the transit agency can confidently use fewer dedicated vehicles and save money on the difference.

Lessons Learned

• Have as many alternatives as possible so as to not burden one with an influx of trips.
• Encourage the use of alternatives for short trips, less than 8 miles, to maximize savings.
• Have the flexibility to suspend or reduce access to the alternative during any period when demand for dedicated service drops significantly.

This page intentionally left blank.