• Some microtransit services will have different stop types and general public eligibilities depending on the time of day or area within the microtransit zone the customer is looking to travel to or from. For instance, service for some programs may only be available after regular fixed-route service hours, or limited to designated stop points in denser areas. In these cases, it is critical for the software platform to be able to look at the customer type and their service eligibilities in making these automatic determinations.
• Many transportation organizations commingling paratransit and general public trips will prioritize available capacity to prescheduled paratransit trips first. This is a policy decision to ensure that there are no trip denials for paratransit customers due to added ridership from the general public on the day of service. The consequence of this alignment is that the service may not have much day-of-service capacity remaining for on-demand trip requests.

Barriers and Challenges

• For municipalities and counties that are neither direct recipients nor subrecipients or federal funding apportionments (or also state funding, if applicable), maintaining microtransit service programs beyond a pilot period can be challenging.
• Increasing the paratransit-eligible service area beyond the ADA-required boundaries is a great benefit for customers seeking increased mobility options, but this can strain the available service capacity of the dedicated vehicle fleet through increased trip demand and longer travel distances.
• Similarly, general public service zones that are too expansive can strain available service capacity. Some transit agencies design their microtransit service zones to overlap with their fixed-route network, which then cannibalizes ridership from the fixed-route network due to the convenience preferences of customers.

Notable Practices and Lessons Learned

• Reducing the coverage area of general public service zones in microtransit to be focused upon (rather than making the service available throughout city/county boundaries) can help make the service more manageable with available fleet and driver resources. Similarly, targeting the microtransit service zone so that it doesnʼt duplicate fixed-route service coverage helps with application of agency resources and directing general public trip demand.
• Starting small in a commingling pilot may be a useful strategy for some agencies in cases when service demand is uncertain, or in order to prove the capability of the service design to accommodate service demand needs while still prioritizing paratransit trips.

Booking and Communication

Key Findings

• Many integrated or consolidated services offer multiple means or methods for customers to schedule new trips or make modifications to existing trip reservations; these include mainly calls by phone, smartphone apps, and online web portals. Agencies vary on whether they permit paratransit customers to book and manage subscription trips through additional methods.
• Agencies also vary on whether they allow advanced reservations for general public customers and/or same-day scheduling of paratransit trips. Allowing too long of an advanced reservation window for general public trips can take up available day-of-service capacity. When ADA paratransit customers are allowed to book a paratransit trip on the day of service, or even on-demand, it is on a space-available basis with no guarantees of accommodation (since such trips are not required by the ADA).

• Some agencies have found that creating uniform pick-up windows for both general public and paratransit trips helps simplify communication with all involved parties. Customers and drivers alike understand that the expectations of service delivery are the same regardless of whether a trip has been booked as general public or paratransit.
• Virtual stops are often programmed within the microtransit software platform so that general public trip requests can be served in an efficient manner at nearby intersections or points of interest. These virtual stop points are not necessarily known to the customer prior to booking, though a few transit agencies offer customers information on available virtual points.

Barriers and Challenges

• The microtransit serviceʼs ability to accommodate same-day trip requests may be limited if the advance booking windows for paratransit and/or general public customers are too long; the result may be that the microtransit service does not have much functional availability for same-day service.
• Mobile ticketing is often handled through a separate system rather than in the same software platform used for trip bookings and communication. Transit agencies with existing mobile ticketing systems in place find the level of integration necessary for a joint system to be too complex. Separate mobile ticketing might be a minor barrier for customers depending on their preferences.
• Some transit agencies offering separate coordinated or sponsored trip types receive reservations through means other than the microtransit software platform channels (e.g., veteransʼ trips may originate from a sponsored contract). In these cases, schedulers or dispatchers must manually input the trip information into the microtransit software platform, or an integration between two platforms (if applicable) is required.

Notable Practices and Lessons Learned

• Working with local partner organizations (such as hospital emergency rooms, medical clinics, social services, etc.) to establish microtransit booking web portal access for staff members can increase service accessibility for paratransit customers, as staff are enabled to make trip requests for on-demand travel on behalf of the customer.
• Transit agencies can assist paratransit customers in setting up their user profile in the microtransit system and teaching them how to use the smartphone app/web portal for trip bookings. This helps ensure that the customersʼ eligibility for paratransit service is attached to their profile at the outset and may help customers become more comfortable in using the microtransit service and associated resources.

Commingling Processes

Key Findings

• Agencies take various approaches on the types of trips that they commingle together in microtransit service. Some commingle all trips together regardless of customer type or circumstances. Others will commingle paratransit trips only if they do not have specific accommodation needs. An additional consideration is whether trips are travelling to farther-out locations that could not be easily commingled with shorter trips.
• CDO in the software platform is usually applied to all trips scheduled in microtransit service, both before the day of service and on the day of service itself, to allow the platform to create the most efficient vehicle run schedules. Agencies report that CDO is able to take into account specific parameters of adherence for paratransit trips, particularly the originally confirmed pick-up and drop-off windows.

• Software platforms typically have both raw data and report download options available for transit agency staff to obtain information they need for performance measurement and for compliance reporting purposes. Some transit agencies have worked with their software vendor to develop specific report options needed for ADA paratransit compliance and NTD reporting.
• Many transit agencies use the same software platform for both their general public microtransit service and ADA or coordinated paratransit trips, whether or not the services are completed consolidated or merely integrated in some fashion. A minority of agencies commingling trips in microtransit use separate software platforms between their two (or more) services, mainly to protect and prioritize ADA paratransit.

Notable Practices and Lessons Learned

• Matching prescheduled paratransit trips to vehicles first in the software platform before the day of service ensures that paratransit trips are prioritized in integrated or consolidated service delivery with commingled trips.
• Transit agencies may choose not to commingle paratransit trips that have particular customer mobility aid needs, accommodations and assistance notes for drivers, or specific trip purposes (i.e., appointment times); instead, these trips can either be scheduled to a separate vehicle in the dedicated fleet that does not serve on-demand trips or dispatched to a non-dedicated service provider.

Similarly, longer trips travelling outside the city limits may be better served by non-dedicated service providers for service efficiency purposes. The software platform can automatically not commingle such trips based on embedded service parameters.

Customer Considerations and Accommodations

Key Findings

• Paratransit-eligible customers often receive additional pick-up accommodations and assistance from drivers for all of their commingled trips, including those booked as general public trips. Software platforms are able to automatically determine appropriate accommodations based on customer profile information and provide it to the driver.
• In cases where a single software platform is being used for both services, the customer typically has a single user profile that contains information on their eligibility for different types of service and accommodations. This can be helpful on multiple fronts, including by simplifying the booking process for customers and making data analysis efforts by agency staff easier.

Barriers and Challenges

• Adding minutes to allowable dwell/wait times at pick-ups for paratransit customers can be valuable but can also delay vehicle schedules in real time. While CDO can make adjustments to trip vehicle assignments before the pick-up occurs, trips that have already been boarded and are underway may experience longer on-board ride times as a result.
• Infrequently, paratransit customers will have more PCAs and/or companions with them upon boarding beyond the number confirmed at scheduling. This customer behavior can constrain the service due to a lack of seating capacity, either for the additional companions trying to board or for trips later in the schedule. In these cases, dispatchers are often required to manually intervene to reassign trips and vehicles.

Notable Practices and Lessons Learned

The ADA does not require ADA paratransit customers to bring a PCA or companion for their trips. However, for some riders, suggesting that a PCA accompany them on commingled trips can help to ease any challenges arising from customer attitude or behavior.

Fleet Mixture and Dispatching

Key Findings

• Smaller vehicles are the norm for microtransit service. Agencies may use either uniform fleets composed of WAVs or a dedicated fleet with a mixture of vehicle. Software platforms are able to identify which trip requests require available spaces in WAVS to secure wheelchairs or other mobility devices.
• Non-dedicated service providers can be a useful supplement to service capacity for dispatching overflow trips or specific trip types. Many microtransit software platforms can be made to dispatch trips to non-dedicated service providers through automatic settings or manual interventions.

Barriers and Challenges

• Hiring and retaining drivers is a challenge throughout the transit industry. This phenomenon affects both larger and smaller microtransit services, meaning transit agencies may not be able to staff enough drivers to operate the number of vehicles necessary to provide service equal to demand.
• During a power or network outage, CDO functionality in microtransit software platforms becomes unavailable and vehicle runs are no longer updated in real time. In these situations, it would become the driverʼs responsibility to use either a phone or printed manifest as a backup for the vehicle run schedule, though their mobile tablet or MDT may have information displayed on the next couple of scheduled stops to assist.

Notable Practices and Lessons Learned

• Organizations that are launching microtransit services for the first time need to be sure to plan for an adequate spare ratio for their dedicated fleet. Vehicle breakdowns will inevitably occur, meaning backup vehicles will need to be put into service and continue to meet trip demand.
• When non-dedicated service providers are readily operating in the transit agencyʼs service area, these providers can be a great supplemental resource to fleet capacity provided they can meet the parameters of the microtransit service. Another consideration to keep in mind when incorporating non-dedicated service providers into microtransit is consistency of service branding and appearance to the customer.

Further Research Suggestions

• The variety of resources and sales material from companies that serve the microtransit industry can be confusing for transit agencies trying to make informed decisions about software platform (and potentially also contracted service) procurements. Additionally, the capabilities and functions within software platforms are not static and sometimes seem to change frequently. More guidance and resources are needed for transit agencies and local governments to objectively compare different software platform options for their potential microtransit service implementation; especially critical is information about the service parameters and

• compliance requirements for ADA paratransit and other specific types of trips that microtransit can serve.
• As of this report writing, the study team has not identified a large metropolitan transit authority that is integrating ADA or coordinated paratransit service with general public microtransit on a large scale. TriMet in Portland, Oregon, is set to pilot an integrated service with commingled trips for a small microtransit zone (as discussed in their case example in Chapter 4), and a few other large agencies have procured microtransit software platforms specifically for scheduling and dispatching paratransit trips exclusively. Once more of these agencies with significantly larger ADA paratransit programs decide to implement commingled trips in their service design, further research about their implementations and lessons learned will be valuable for the transit industry.
• It is unclear whether all microtransit software platforms providing paratransit trips are fully adhering to the originally scheduled pick-up and drop-off windows that are confirmed with customers at the time the trip reservation is made. Additionally, the study team did not find that every transit agency surveyed was clear about whether the original windows are used from service dispatching, customer communication, and OTP calculation perspectives. To ensure clarity for operations managers, it is critical that further analysis is conducted to determine whether software platforms use the originally confirmed windows in compliance with ADA paratransit service requirements.
• Similarly, further research would be helpful on how well transit agencies are able to measure other ADA compliance criteria beyond OTP for commingled trips in microtransit service. Nearly all of the agencies surveyed in this state of the practice research did not report experiencing compliance issues with their service. However, beyond the scope of study was information on how the agencies measure capacity constraints of their ADA paratransit programs that are integrated or consolidated with microtransit service.
• Related to microtransit service planning and ADA complementary paratransit requirements, some transit agencies are using microtransit service to replace low-performing fixed routes. Presently, reducing fixed-route service stops or times would subsequently reduce the minimum required ADA service area and service times as well. While equivalent on-demand microtransit service for persons with disabilities is required under the ADA, microtransit service does not have the same compliance and reporting requirements as ADA complementary paratransit service (until the transit agency integrates their ADA paratransit service into the microtransit service). Further clarity on ADA paratransit obligations for transit agencies would be helpful in the event that fixed-route service is replaced with on-demand microtransit service.
• Some of the case example agencies and survey respondents used microtransit to expand the availability of service either into new areas within their jurisdiction previously unserved or in addition to fixed-route service already in operation. This often resulted in higher levels of service demand than anticipated from general public and paratransit customers due to the convenience of the service or the serviceʼs expanded geographic availability, but limited the serviceʼs ability to accommodate same-day trip requests due to lack of remaining seating capacity. Guidance for transit agencies and other transit providers is needed to right-size microtransit services and service area footprints for different types of commingled trips to meet demand while not cannibalizing ridership or sacrificing service goals.
• The research project did not identify any examples of fare policies with premium fares for advanced reservation general public trips in microtransit service. Transit agencies that allow for advanced reservations for general public trips may begin to explore premium fares in order to dampen demand and reserve capacity for same-day service and/or prescheduled paratransit trips. If so, further research on these implementations will be useful for transit agencies considering different fare policy options.
• Software platforms typically have both raw data and report download options available for transit agency staff to obtain information they need for performance measurement and

• compliance reporting. Some transit agencies have worked with their software vendor to develop specific report options needed for ADA paratransit compliance and NTD reporting. Further dissemination of these tools and reports that help agencies ensure compliant service delivery and meet reporting requirements would be greatly beneficial for the transit industry.
• Presently, NTD only has full and reduced reporting agencies report data by specified travel modes, such as Demand Response. There is not a further mechanism in NTD reporting for agencies to report by service type within the Demand Response mode (e.g., general public, ADA paratransit, etc.). Reporting by service type within certain travel modes would help identify which transit agencies are offering different types of services and perhaps indicate those with commingled trips in microtransit.
• Fare payment integration with microtransit software platforms is not yet common, due to the technical challenges of integrating systems and the fact that many transit agencies already offer mobile or online fare payment for other services that do not involve paratransit or microtransit. Further industry guidance and development could help simplify these integrations and improve fare payment access for transit customers.