Paratransit - The Trojan Horse in Transit's Stable
Most think of transit as a bus or train running on a fixed route on a fixed schedule. Service that goes where the request is made and deploys when its made (or a certain time thereafter) is associated with taxis or lately with Uber and Lyft. Mini buses that provide a hybrid service, half bus half taxi, are popular in South America or Turkey ("dolmus") but in the US most know such service only from hotel shuttles or the airport service Super Shuttle.
Few know that almost all US transit agencies provide such a hybrid demand responsive service every day and on a pretty big scale, although many may have wondered about the growing number of vans and sedans with the transit agencies logo on it. The reason that most don't know about it is that only a few qualify for the service. Para-transit. as this service is called, is mandated by law. It has the noble purpose of providing transit to the mobility impaired. But transit agencies had no practice in providing demand based service before.
Now agencies face a double challenge: Demand for para-transit is growing faster than any other mode of service transit operators provide and takes a bigger and bigger chunk of their operating budget. The combination of lack of experience and rapid growth brings about a brew of unpleasant outcomes, both on the provider as well as on the rider side. Transit agencies, used to criticism for slow and unreliable service have a whole new complaint column from riders that are even more dependent on reliability.
A 2015 survey of para transit providers illuminates how much agencies landed in a spot that is best described as "between a rock and a hard place":
Regardless of how the provider chooses to deploy the system, for users para-transit has become an essential part of their lives in which disabilities prevent them from using mass transit and make them eligible for para-transit. Those disabilities mean restrictions in many aspects of life that others take for granted, making smooth transportation even more important. Frequent trips to health care providers, for example, for dialysis represent a large number of requested trips.
Users are a relatively small group of transit riders overall, but a group with now well established rights. Transit providers cannot lawfully suppress demand, nor can they charge fares beyond a small regulated margin. Still, the way the law is applied varies widely. The process of determining eligibility of applicants to use the service brings about hugely different results: Some in the industry report just under 50% approvals and others over 80% approvals. It is hard to say what comes from controlling abuse of the system and what from a hidden attempt to control cost. Regardless, the pool of eligible riders and the trips totals on para transit grow by significant margins across the board. Demographic shifts towards an overall larger proportion of older people and continued poor health outcomes in disadvantaged communities contribute to growing demand.
More and more people with disabilities reside in their own home and need transportation for work and recreational purposes, life expectancy continues to rise adding end of life years often experienced in fragile condition, all factors boosting demand further. Agencies are trying to cope in various ways, with technology for online booking, managing demand, and with outsourcing the service. How much para transit has become an important piece in the transit menu of transit operators can be illustrated with Maryland's MTA. This is their definition of the service:
The exploding cost of para-transit has diverted funds away from agencies to provide regular fixed route transit in a satisfactory manner. The disproportionate cost of para-transit in relation to ridership has caused many investigations of alternative methods of ADA compliance. The high cost is exacerbated by the high intensity of para-transit service in which the operator is almost like a social worker who frequently has to leave the vehicle to provide assistance to the rider not only for boarding but all the way to the door of the origin or destination. This type service intensity adds to para-transit being unreliable and slow, possibly more so than fixed route transit. Even though the rides have to be ordered a day in advance, the ride may still show up late or not at all and the trip may take excessive time because other riders may be picked up along the way.
There are many papers and advice booklets how agencies can cope with the problem. The purpose of this article isn't to add additional management tips but to step back and look at the bigger picture of mobility and transportation and how it may develop in the next few years.
Several factors point into a direction in which demand-based para-transit would not be that orphan service run on the side because it is mandated by ADA, but it would become an integral part of a comprehensive mobility menu in which the difference between fixed-route, fixed-schedule and demand-based transit would become blurred. One would think that the current phase of gaining experience with para-transit, no matter how painful, would be a good thing for the journey that lies ahead were it not that agencies seem to have settled in making para-transit a parallel universe either entirely outsourced or with its own operation centers, maintenance shops and operators, i.e. the opposite of integration.
The revolution of demand-based mobility has already happened with Uber pushing into the taxi market. Taxis are, at least in principle, an acceptable solution to the para-transit conundrum, provided they can accommodate the mobility impaired. Taxi cost per trip is significantly lower than transit agency provided para-transit. Would one consider Uber for para-transit, the cost could be further reduced, assuming once again that those privately owned fleets would have sufficient vehicles that are accessible. Many people with disabilities would choose the taxi, which permits spontaneous travel, rather than deal with a demand‐response, advanced-reservation para-transit system. In New York City, for example, para-transit rides cost the transit system about $60 per ride, certainly more than the average cab ride.
Traditional transit hasn't seen yet the same type revolution as the taxi world. But attempts of modernizing the way how buses are deployed and how bus transit is run are underway. Transit agencies are currently trying to make their bus services more efficient by simplifying their routes and spacing them out in high-frequency networks, an attempt to do more with the same resources in terms of fleet and drivers. The focus on simpler, shorter high-frequency routes compromises coverage and cuts off the highly customized inefficient portions of routes which cater to specific demands as they may arise during a typical service day.
In this manner high-frequency networks exacerbate the "the last mile" problem i.e. how to get from the one's door to the nearest bus stop or vice versa. Some bus companies are experimenting in engaging taxi operators and the ride-share companies Uber and Lyft in providing coordinated last mile services.
The overlap between the growing last mile issue and the growing demand to provide para-transit for the mobility impaired is obvious. Can those two demand groups be merged, could there be a single type service provided for both? It appears logical to combine the two and see if demand based service cannot be deployed to serve last mile issues and the community of mobility impaired riders at the same time, no matter whether the actual vehicle and service is outsourced or provided by the transit operators themselves. Looking at demand based service through the lens of drastically modernizing traditional transit would make it actually desirable that transit agencies learn how to deploy a demand based fleet themselves without losing their shirt in the process.
Fleet-based on-demand service provided by the private sector(Super Shuttle, Uber) and on-demand service offered by transit providers become almost indistinguishable if one considers Uber's latest ride model Uber Pool. It is exactly what transit agencies do when they offer their mobility rides, except that Uber works with much better deployment algorithms that allow users to request service on short notice and get reliable, direct and prompt service even though the ride is shared with others.
Add to the mix a transit future with autonomous buses, vans and sedans and one can see once again the overlap with the private developments currently underway with Uber already running driverless cars in Pittsburgh. Although transit agencies would potentially save their largest cost factor, the operator by using autonomous vehicles, there is little evidence that transit agencies grapple with that inevitable future. It is still quite open how the transportation future will play out. The volatility requires an open mind and experimentation, research and clear policies. Transit agencies and the Federal Transit Administration could see opportunity here for a true transformation of the way transit is delivered, instead of the unimaginative tinkering on the margins in light of today's para-transit problems. The industry making the buses and vans for transit Bus-makers are far ahead of transit agencies. The first full size driverless buses are already in circulation for test purposes, autonomous vans and pods are already in service.
In the not too distant future it seems likely that fixed-route, fixed-schedule high-frequency and high-capacity transit and demand-based smaller vehicle (last mile) transit will operate in a continuum in which boundaries between the two systems shift depending on the size and population density of a service area, the time of day and the speed in which private car ownership will decrease.
Likely, demand-based service models will take the growing part of the pie in an agency's given service area while fixed-route high-frequency trunk lines will see their share shrink. Paratransit, then, really is a Trojan horse, not because an adversary rode unrecognized into town, but because paratransit mobility service harbors the solutions for the transit model of the future.
Klaus Philipsen, FAIA
2015 Paratransit Survey
Few know that almost all US transit agencies provide such a hybrid demand responsive service every day and on a pretty big scale, although many may have wondered about the growing number of vans and sedans with the transit agencies logo on it. The reason that most don't know about it is that only a few qualify for the service. Para-transit. as this service is called, is mandated by law. It has the noble purpose of providing transit to the mobility impaired. But transit agencies had no practice in providing demand based service before.
Now agencies face a double challenge: Demand for para-transit is growing faster than any other mode of service transit operators provide and takes a bigger and bigger chunk of their operating budget. The combination of lack of experience and rapid growth brings about a brew of unpleasant outcomes, both on the provider as well as on the rider side. Transit agencies, used to criticism for slow and unreliable service have a whole new complaint column from riders that are even more dependent on reliability.
 |
| Typical van paratransit vehicle deployed by many agencies. |
A 2015 survey of para transit providers illuminates how much agencies landed in a spot that is best described as "between a rock and a hard place":
Growing demand for service topped the list for the greatest challenge with providing the service overall, with 31% reporting. Costs and funding were the second-highest issue cited by operations at 23%. Next in line at 10% were “Other” concerns, which ranged from maintaining aging fleets to on-time performance and moving customers to fixed-route service. (Metro Magazine)Para-transit run by transit agencies started with the American with Disabilities Act, a civil rights law that is customarily known as ADA. Unbeknownst to many it includes the following basic mandates for transit agencies:
- all new vehicles for use in mass transit, which include buses, rail cars and vans, have to be accessible;
- key rail stations on both rapid rail systems and commuter rail systems have to be made accessible;
- a para-transit system must be established by operators of rapid rail and bus systems to ensure that transportation is provided to those who cannot use mass transit;
- all new rail systems and facilities such as stations have to be built accessibly
 |
| MTA large mobility fleet uses many regular taxi sedans |
- No artificial restraints on para-transit demand were permitted.
- To be eligible for ADA complimentary para-transit service, a person with a disability must be unable to use mass transit for the trip requested and must live within the para-transit catchment area (i.e. within ¾ mile from a fixed bus route or rapid or light rail station).
- Transit operators were prohibited from placing priorities or restrictions on trip purposes,
- the hours of operation of para-transit must be identical to those of mass transit.
- the regulation allows para-transit fares to be double mass transit fares
While the regulation requires paratransit, what it exactly is may still be unclear.
The Transportation Research Board’s Committee on Paratransit states that “paratransit” means alongside transit. It includes all public and private mass transportation in the spectrum between private automobile and conventional transit. Paratransit modes are usually demand responsive and provide shared rides. (Florida Dept. of Transportation Research Center)This wide ranging definition shows that agencies have some leeway on how to provide service to those who cannot use the ADA compliant buses and trains on the fixed route standard system. Agencies can provide the service themselves or they can outsource it to contractors. They can use buses, vans, or sedans, even taxis. The provider can chain trips and can require that trips are ordered the day before they are needed, which allows the bundling of rides to create some efficiency. It is easy to see that the efficiency depends on density of eligible persons, the frequency in which they make trips and on the methods the agency or providers use to dispatch trips. Dispatch may simply be done manually by a dispatcher or it could be the result of a complex computer algorithm.
 |
| American made accessible taxi: Modeled after the London Cab |
Regardless of how the provider chooses to deploy the system, for users para-transit has become an essential part of their lives in which disabilities prevent them from using mass transit and make them eligible for para-transit. Those disabilities mean restrictions in many aspects of life that others take for granted, making smooth transportation even more important. Frequent trips to health care providers, for example, for dialysis represent a large number of requested trips.
Users are a relatively small group of transit riders overall, but a group with now well established rights. Transit providers cannot lawfully suppress demand, nor can they charge fares beyond a small regulated margin. Still, the way the law is applied varies widely. The process of determining eligibility of applicants to use the service brings about hugely different results: Some in the industry report just under 50% approvals and others over 80% approvals. It is hard to say what comes from controlling abuse of the system and what from a hidden attempt to control cost. Regardless, the pool of eligible riders and the trips totals on para transit grow by significant margins across the board. Demographic shifts towards an overall larger proportion of older people and continued poor health outcomes in disadvantaged communities contribute to growing demand.
More and more people with disabilities reside in their own home and need transportation for work and recreational purposes, life expectancy continues to rise adding end of life years often experienced in fragile condition, all factors boosting demand further. Agencies are trying to cope in various ways, with technology for online booking, managing demand, and with outsourcing the service. How much para transit has become an important piece in the transit menu of transit operators can be illustrated with Maryland's MTA. This is their definition of the service:
Mobility/Paratransit service is for citizens who are unable to use Local Bus, Metro/Subway or Light Rail service. Mobility/Paratransit service is provided by the MTA via contracts with Veolia Transportation, MV Transportation, and First Transit Inc. Certified Riders may click here for more information or to use PASS Web.The MTA provides almost all public transit in the Baltimore region. It has just under 800 regular 40' and articulated buses but operates a fleet of 447 mobility vehicles; 325 cut away buses and 120 sedans, in total 892 vehicles, larger than the fleet of standard buses. The MTA moves about 230,000 riders a day on their standard buses, but only 500,000 riders in an entire year as part of their mobility services. The regular bus fare is $1.70, the mobility one way fare is $1.90. MTA's core bus operating expenses in 2015 were $4.57 per rider. Para-transit costs for the MTA were not readily available but typically fall into the range of $60 per rider (New York MTA). The entire core bus service has an operating budget of about $300 million, para-transit of $19.3 million (2015).
 |
| Central Ohio Transit (COTA) paratransit facility with "state of the art assessment center" |
The exploding cost of para-transit has diverted funds away from agencies to provide regular fixed route transit in a satisfactory manner. The disproportionate cost of para-transit in relation to ridership has caused many investigations of alternative methods of ADA compliance. The high cost is exacerbated by the high intensity of para-transit service in which the operator is almost like a social worker who frequently has to leave the vehicle to provide assistance to the rider not only for boarding but all the way to the door of the origin or destination. This type service intensity adds to para-transit being unreliable and slow, possibly more so than fixed route transit. Even though the rides have to be ordered a day in advance, the ride may still show up late or not at all and the trip may take excessive time because other riders may be picked up along the way.
There are many papers and advice booklets how agencies can cope with the problem. The purpose of this article isn't to add additional management tips but to step back and look at the bigger picture of mobility and transportation and how it may develop in the next few years.
Several factors point into a direction in which demand-based para-transit would not be that orphan service run on the side because it is mandated by ADA, but it would become an integral part of a comprehensive mobility menu in which the difference between fixed-route, fixed-schedule and demand-based transit would become blurred. One would think that the current phase of gaining experience with para-transit, no matter how painful, would be a good thing for the journey that lies ahead were it not that agencies seem to have settled in making para-transit a parallel universe either entirely outsourced or with its own operation centers, maintenance shops and operators, i.e. the opposite of integration.
The revolution of demand-based mobility has already happened with Uber pushing into the taxi market. Taxis are, at least in principle, an acceptable solution to the para-transit conundrum, provided they can accommodate the mobility impaired. Taxi cost per trip is significantly lower than transit agency provided para-transit. Would one consider Uber for para-transit, the cost could be further reduced, assuming once again that those privately owned fleets would have sufficient vehicles that are accessible. Many people with disabilities would choose the taxi, which permits spontaneous travel, rather than deal with a demand‐response, advanced-reservation para-transit system. In New York City, for example, para-transit rides cost the transit system about $60 per ride, certainly more than the average cab ride.
 |
| autonomous small buses are tested or even operated in many settings around the world |
Traditional transit hasn't seen yet the same type revolution as the taxi world. But attempts of modernizing the way how buses are deployed and how bus transit is run are underway. Transit agencies are currently trying to make their bus services more efficient by simplifying their routes and spacing them out in high-frequency networks, an attempt to do more with the same resources in terms of fleet and drivers. The focus on simpler, shorter high-frequency routes compromises coverage and cuts off the highly customized inefficient portions of routes which cater to specific demands as they may arise during a typical service day.
In this manner high-frequency networks exacerbate the "the last mile" problem i.e. how to get from the one's door to the nearest bus stop or vice versa. Some bus companies are experimenting in engaging taxi operators and the ride-share companies Uber and Lyft in providing coordinated last mile services.
The overlap between the growing last mile issue and the growing demand to provide para-transit for the mobility impaired is obvious. Can those two demand groups be merged, could there be a single type service provided for both? It appears logical to combine the two and see if demand based service cannot be deployed to serve last mile issues and the community of mobility impaired riders at the same time, no matter whether the actual vehicle and service is outsourced or provided by the transit operators themselves. Looking at demand based service through the lens of drastically modernizing traditional transit would make it actually desirable that transit agencies learn how to deploy a demand based fleet themselves without losing their shirt in the process.
 |
| Self driving full size Mercedes bus |
Fleet-based on-demand service provided by the private sector(Super Shuttle, Uber) and on-demand service offered by transit providers become almost indistinguishable if one considers Uber's latest ride model Uber Pool. It is exactly what transit agencies do when they offer their mobility rides, except that Uber works with much better deployment algorithms that allow users to request service on short notice and get reliable, direct and prompt service even though the ride is shared with others.
Add to the mix a transit future with autonomous buses, vans and sedans and one can see once again the overlap with the private developments currently underway with Uber already running driverless cars in Pittsburgh. Although transit agencies would potentially save their largest cost factor, the operator by using autonomous vehicles, there is little evidence that transit agencies grapple with that inevitable future. It is still quite open how the transportation future will play out. The volatility requires an open mind and experimentation, research and clear policies. Transit agencies and the Federal Transit Administration could see opportunity here for a true transformation of the way transit is delivered, instead of the unimaginative tinkering on the margins in light of today's para-transit problems. The industry making the buses and vans for transit Bus-makers are far ahead of transit agencies. The first full size driverless buses are already in circulation for test purposes, autonomous vans and pods are already in service.
 |
| autonomous last mile transit |
Likely, demand-based service models will take the growing part of the pie in an agency's given service area while fixed-route high-frequency trunk lines will see their share shrink. Paratransit, then, really is a Trojan horse, not because an adversary rode unrecognized into town, but because paratransit mobility service harbors the solutions for the transit model of the future.
Klaus Philipsen, FAIA
2015 Paratransit Survey
Comments
Post a Comment