The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About800833.tiff LARIMER - WELD REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS PHONE (303) 667-3288 ROOM 201 201 EAST 4th STREET LOVELAND, COLORADO 80537 January 2, 1980 WM MINTY CSY!MSIONEAS JAN'? °Op GREELEY. COLO. Commissioner Norman Carlson Chairman, Weld County Commissioners P.O. Box 758 Greeley, CO 80631 Dear Commissioner Carlson: At its March 1 , 1978 meeting the COG Board directed its staff to prepare a scope of work and pursue federal funding for the purpose of preparing Transit Dev€1_opmnt_Prams (TDP's) for the communities in the Region. The Board felt that TDP's would be necessary to allow many communities to become eligible for federal and State mass transit grant programs. This, in fact, has turned out to be the case. The recent requirement by the State Department of Highways for TDP's as a condition of receiving Section 18 transit grants is one example. Approximately $120,000.00 per year has been set aside for use in the Region over the next three years. All funds requested will have to be based on priorities listed in the applicant community's TDP. Additionally, the developed and developing areas associated with Greeley and Fort Collins (significant portions of which will probably be outside the respective city limits) will become officially recognized as "urbanized areas" by the U.S. Department of Transportation shortly after the 1980 census. These communities will become eligible for increased amounts of mass transit assistance starting in October of 1981 . A TDP will be required in order to receive their assistance. Pursuant to the March directive of the Board, an application was forwarded to the U.S. Urban Mass Transit Administration and funding to complete TDP's in the Region was secured. A committee was formed to select a consultant to assist in doing the work. Mr. Larry Timm of your staff participated in the selection process. The study has been underway about 10 months and preliminary products are beginning to emerge. For the most part, these products are TDP's for specific communities (i .e. Loveland, Greeley, and Fort Collins). However, some of the work has been done on a county-wide basis. Specifically, UMTA requires that the transportation needs of the elderly and handicapped must be addressed. Since the existing providers of this type of service operate on a more or less county-wide basis, an element of the Regional 800833 k /4 F.; /- 9—trY- Commissioner Norman Carlson January 2, 1980 Page 2 TDP has been prepared for Weld County. The element has been prepared to allow these operators maximum leverage in obtaining federal funds. A copy of this element has been enclosed for your review and comment. Please review the report critically. I would then like to arrange a meeting with you and your staff to discuss your comments. Very ruly yours, Larry Pea , CP Director of Planning LP:sks cc: Walt Speckman UMTA CDH & Region IV Sam Sasaki , Planning Director Barb Huner, City Traffic Engineer Wayne Smyth, County Engineer ' a l W4[bur Smith and A33ocia!ei WILSMITN SUITE 550 Ngff5 WRITERS CENTER III 1750 SOUTH BELLAIRE STREET 2ERwF, L.OIOPOI{B 80222 PHONES(5011 757-7SIA December 27 , 1979 Mr. John Derrick Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments 201 Fourth Street Loveland, Colorado 80537 Dear John : Enclosed is the original of the preliminary report, Transportation for the Elderly and Handicapped, Weld County Summary. As previously agreed, I have retained a copy for our files. You will retain the original and make copies for the E & H service providers, Weld County Commissioners, City Councils, UMTA, the Department of Highways, and other appropriate parties. You will note the similarities between this report and the Larimer County E & H Summary. In light of time and budget constraints as well as actual similarities between the two counties, we determined that this common format and approach produces the most satisfactory result for both counties. The County Commissioners would be the most appropriate governmental body to formally adopt the plan, after endorsement by appropriate communi- ties. We will be available to meet with the County Commissioners to discuss the preliminary report and to attend (on the same day) the public meeting that you will schedule for citizen participation. After the County Commissioners approve the plan, we will complete the final report. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments concerning the preliminary report. Sincerely, WILBUR SMITH & ASSOCIATES, INC. iltwu---- Phil Hoffm Project Director PH/mds ALLIANCE.OH- BRISBANE-CAMDEN.NJ-COLUMBIA.SC-DENVER CHU RCN.VA-HONG KONG-HOUSTON•KNOXVILLE-LOS ANGELES MELBOURNE-MIAMI• NEW HAVEN-NEW YORK-PERTH-PITTSBURGH-RICHMOND-SAN FRANCISCO•SINGAPORE-TORONTO•WASHINGTON.DC f TRANSPORTATION FOR THE ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED WELD COUNTY, COLORADO SUMMARY PRELIMINARY DRAFT DECEMBER, 1979 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1 Purpose and Scope of Study 1 Goals for Improved Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Study Design 2 CHAPTER 2 INVENTORY OF EXISTING ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED TRANSPORTATION SERVICES 3 Study Area 3 Existing Transportation Services for the Elderly and Handicapped 4 Public Transportation/Elderly & Handicapped Service 4 Direct Elderly & Handicapped Transportation Services 4 Ancillary Transportation Services for the Elderly & Handicapped 4 Total Elderly& Handicapped Transportation Currently Provided 7 CHAPTER 3 SURVEY RESULTS 9 CHAPTER 4 ASSESSMENT OF SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION DEMAND 12 Population Estimates 12 • Target Groups 14 Elderly Target Group 15 Transportation Handicapped Target Group 15 Potential Passengers (Primary Target Groups) 18 • TH Primary Target Group 18 Non-Handicapped Elderly Target Group 19 Existing Trip Demand 21 Trip Rate Analysis 21 Potential Trip Demand 23 Potential (Theoretical) versus Realistic (Practical) Transit Demand 23 n n TABLE OF CONTENTS CONT'D PAGE CHAPTER 4 CONT'D Existing Supply/Demand Relationship 27 Levels of Transportation Required 30 TH 1. Severely handicapped 30 TH 2. Moderately handicapped 30 TH 3. Slightly handicapped 31 CHAPTER 5 DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES 35 Definition of Coordination 35 Communication 36• Cooperation 36 Coordination 36 Consolidation 36 Expectations of Coordination 36 Reasons for Coordination 37 Benefits of Coordination 38 Reduced Overlap and Duplication 38 Increased Service Capacity 39 Improved Vehicle Productivity in Operating Efficiency 39 Cost. Reduction in Purchases 39 Barriers to Coordination Efforts 40 User or Eligibility Restrictions 41 Franchise and Labor Problems 42 Regulations 42 Accountability 43 Lack of Knowledge of Transportation Costs 43 Turf Protection 44 Preferential Treatment to Clients 44 Public Transit 45 Mixing Clients 45 Discontinuity of Funding 46 Staged Approaches to Coordination 46 f TABLE OF CONTENTS CONT'D PAGE CHAPTER 5 Referral and Information CONT'D Coordination 47 Maintenance Coordination 47 Purchasing Coordination 49 Operations Clearinghouse 49 Centralized Dispatcher 50 Consolidation 50 Organizational and Functional 52 Alternatives Alternative 1: Continuation of Existing Systems 52 Alternative 2: City/County Government E & H Services 52 Alternative 3: Transit Authority E & H Service 53 Alternative 4 : Nonprofit Corporation E & H Service 54 Alternative 5: Private Operator E & H Service 55 Alternative 6: Consortium Structure or Clearinghouse for E & H Service 56 Summary of Alternatives 57 CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDED PROGRAM 58 Program Structure 58 Existing E & H Service Improvements 60 E & H Service Expansion 64 n f TABULATIONS TABLE NUMBER PAGE 1 Inventory of Existing Transportation Services for the Elderly and Handicapped, Weld County, Colorado 5 2 Elderly and Handicapped Transportation Provided in Weld County 8 3 Population Estimates 1970 - 1984 , Weld County 13 4 Population Estimate Breakdown Weld County Communities 14 5 Elderly Target Groups by Community, Weld County 16 6 Transportation Handicapped Target Groups, Weld County 17 7 Transportation Modes of Transportation Handicapped Persons (Ages 16 and Over) Weld County 20 8 Target Group Summary Weld County 22 9 Average Trip Rates Elderly and Transportation Handicapped (TH) Persons Weld County 24 10 Weld County Potential Annual Trip Demand by Area - Elderly and Transportation Handicapped (TH)Persons 25 11 Realistic Annual Trip Demand by Area 28 12 Realistic Annual Trip Demand by Area 29 13 Mobility Need Levels Elderly and Transportation Handicapped Target Groups - Weld County 32 14 Trip Demand by Mobility Level - Weld County 33 15 Summary of Implementation Characteristics Coordination/Consolidation Concepts 48 16 Development Stages Steps to Improve Paratransit Services 51 i 17 Replacement Vehicle Requirements Weld County E & H Service 63 18 Weld County E & H Service Improvement and Expansion Capital and Operating Costs 66 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Purpose and Scope of Study Weld County has initiated this county-wide Elderly and Handi- capped Summary as part of efforts to complete Transit Development Programs (TDP's) for the region. Weld County is cooperating with the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments in this effort, which is partially funded by a grant under Section 9 of the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 , as amended. Weld County is lo- cated in north-central Colorado as illustrated in Figure 1. The TDP is a five-year working plan which aids communities in identifying transportation needs, priorities, and funding sources. A TDP was prepared for the community of Greeley which addresses general public transportation. This report will: 1) identify the transportation needs of the elderly and handicapped ( E & H ) persons in Greeley and in the rural areas of Weld County; 2) analyze alternative methods of addressing those transportation needs; 3) sug- gest a staged program for improving E & H transportation services; and 4) identify available resources to meet capital and operating expenses. This Weld County E & H Summary is intended to complement the TDP completed for the City of Greeley as indicated above. This report is based upon a comprehensive collection of existing planning data, household and operator surveys, research, evaluation of existing E & H transportation services in the County and input from local officials and citizens. The intended result of this study is an integrated transportation system that effectively serves the elderly and handicapped residents of Weld County in a cost-efficient manner. The actual result will be determined by the people and the local officials of Weld County. -1- L _,,_ _._ __ T. Goals .for Improved Elderly and Handicapped Transportation The following goals are intended to guide the development of this report, and reflect the goals included in the Larimer-Weld Area Plan on Aging Services: Goal I: To meet 100% of the demand for transportation ser- vices by the elderly and handicapped. Goal II: To modify the system of transportation services so that the minority elderly and handicapped have easy access to these services. Goal III: To provide transportation services to the elderly and handicapped residents of nursing homes and other institutions to enable them to remain active in the general community. Goal IV: To coordinate general public and E & H transporta- tion services in a manner which provides the highest level of transportation service for the elderly and handicapped in Weld County. Study Design Based on the goals listed above, this study examines the existing transportation services for the elderly and handicapped in Weld County in Chapter 2. Community attitudes regarding trans- portation are reviewed in Chapter 3 and the demand for E & H transportation services is examined in Chapter 4 . Chapter 5 pre- sents alternative methods of providing adequate, comprehensive transportation service to meet the needs of the elderly and handi- capped. And finally, this report provides a five-year program of transit improvements for the elderly and handicapped in Weld County. -2- CHAPTER 2 INVENTORY OF EXISTING ELDERLY AND HANDICAPPED TRANSPORTATION SERVICES An understanding of existing conditions in the study area helps in determining transportation needs as well as in developing viable alternative services. Study Area As illustrated in Figure 2, Highways 25, 34, 36, 52, 76, and 85 represent the major travel corridors in Weld County. Greeley is the largest community and population center, comprising 48.3% of the total County population. The County has experienced substantial growth during the past twenty years, with a population increase of 48% during the period 1970 to 1979. Most of the urban growth is occurring in Greeley and along the major travel corridors indicated above, primarily in west-central Weld County. Awareness and interest in the transportation needs of the elderly and handicapped ( E & H' ) market segments have grown to public support and assistance. Numerous federal funding programs were established in the 1960's and 1970's to address E & H mobility. A wide variety of "social service" agencies began to provide trans- portation for clients as an ancillary service, and several agencies were established for the sole purpose of providing E & H transporta- tion, often with federal, state, and/or local funding assistance. More recently, public transit operators have begun to address the transportation needs of the elderly and handicapped, either by providing service directly or by contracting with "social service" agencies to provide the service. This evolution occurred in Weld County as well as the rest of the country. The remainder of this chapter examines the supply of transporta- tion services currently offered in the County for the elderly and handicapped. The following chapters examine E & H demand for -3- f C transportation services and deficiencies in the existing services. Existing Transportation Services for the Elderly and Handicapped All identified agencies in Weld County which serve the elderly and handicapped were contacted to determine the types and scope of existing transportation services. The consultant, in conjunc- tion with the Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments staff, conducted an inventory survey as well as personal interviews with the service providers to obtain the information summarized in Table 1. A copy of the inventory survey form and a list of the agencies contacted are included as Appendix A and Appendix B respectively. Public Transportation/Elderly & Handicapped Service - Greeley is the only community in Weld County which operates a public transportation system. The fixed-route, fixed-schedule bus ser- vice meets the transportation needs of a large portion of the elderly and handicapped population in the City. The City bus system currently provides approximately 31,000 passenger trips per year for the elderly and handicapped based on the results of the on-board survey conducted during the Spring, 1978. The City is attempting to improve the utility of the public bus system for the E & H by pur- chasing accessible vehicles in the future as indicated in the Greeley Transit Development Program. Direct Elderly & Handicapped Transportation Services - Currently this is no public or private agency (like. CARE-A-VAN in Larimer County) with the sole function of providing transportation services for the elderly and handicapped in Weld County. The agency which most closely approaches this type of service provision is the Weld County Division of Human Resources, which is described in the next section. Ancillary Transportation Services for the Elderly & Handicapped - A wide variety of agencies provide transportation as a supplemental service to their clients. These agencies generally provide "program specific" transportation services for their own clients rather than for the general elderly and handicapped population in the County. -4- i • ta a 0: o IL o xa o w uoi .•pa' obi o W 4 a'H M y.ao n l� a11t� oo 1 a< W el m H N 1 CO ;13 m0 • dI " 44 Di g20 > D. 01 W 44 tD 0 01 al CO CO CO DJ 1G� 4J I a q�� py .1-i .7 W O O W N H N N 1 a 0. tL H li as O al b1 ri M el el O1 14 x N 01 10 b1 (sg 434) .Oy a/ N NO) W eT Y1 V1 11 w NN On1 O O O in N A C0/ wi 011 - 001W T H D M CO HQ Z U E c3 E E H M D r4 H .-i 0 O O ' o Zrunn H 14 a kO 'i >t • E4 CO Pi 14 H U a s 0 a0 I �el g 01 pa H 0 O H at i .-i w > H U P W 1 E av m• 0 w 6. 14 Z W b1 E• O IT O1 I O COa o m 4 H W 8"bi 4• o isi o 4 )4 * 0 0 O as 10+1 W 6 �,1 a r a H E1 a a W .7110 71 .71 al 0 >p. ?1 W Q �y • .y O ",t. . V O 2 O 0'. M OW £ W a P. 7F. co.. a 77C• w u1 H O. w % W o x a g 11 H a a w x 2 >1 >13 a43 rl .-4 H v-I v-f 0 W al 0 co is al .4-i dP tlP O O O $ 10 M O U W 1, W ri ?1 W W W .1 ?1 14 al o _ii 0 0 O 01 N o 44 01 H wd ,°, "aW 0 09 0 4 a O CO u• O a) 1 g al 00 w S W a a Z0 al U d U 0 U 0 . i to (w9 W W ra) 0 10 al V 6-4 0 r-I LC N 3 a 3 N 3 0 -5- ._. _ _ m.__....,...„v-r' r___.. ._, -...... __,,......, _ _ .,, ._.... Ww. ._r1 O. to x a 'rl A 41 H Za In w �/xJ g.N Z H .rk pp� m a' a N � (Hsi Z 0 o Al to r-I E Z A• PI p i H O. ? C U H O o •vt-• 3 W H as W ri 1 • i o 1 m IT q1 � mrii MIWgqM 01 CO 44 �W 10 C (� 'O •3 W N m H o n ,yqq� N 1 ; ;u � � m Ai ri BUJ 6 A omOm ri mNii (6 N H a m x O1 CO W C .-1 41 43 m Os MP +1 m it a) si • r W ri g M '> .-Ib U OS N C ri H C m C ri m t�G W .1C� > i x ORE N U U> 8 R a M U Z W W ID L1 W CO UJ�y E.1 H 1 O.A Z a 6 O � 0 N 0 .i ►010 w N W 0 Napa HW 4. a as � w y1011 o E D OAO +bi0 .i x SWv1 'OH • VI M .i ri W 4. to 4 0 01 a' 34 43 H E 4 u 5 OH H UO a 'd to W0 N W Co x RC ta x 6 E SiW H C 8' (0 N e N M*el m a D. u m w a m C4 4-1H �.>1 0 0 3 i' a IS c o .. 0 A 7 o > D. MI z t..) Di W .4 x O rbi C N CO 0 a 3 0E 8umi � w -6 M ..rr I Churches, nursing homes, the Weld County Community Center Foundation, School District 6, the University of Northern Colorado, the Board of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) , the Weld Information Referral Service (WIRS) , Weld County Mental Health, and the County Departments of Social Services and Human Resources are included in this category of E & H transportation providers. The taxi operator in Greeley also serves the elderly and handicapped but specific ridership information is not available. The Weld County Division of Human Resources is the largest E & H transportation provider in the County, with a fleet of ten vehicles, one of which is equipped for wheelchairs. The Human Resources Mini-Bus has been operating since 1973. Although it serves mainly the elderly and handicapped or disabled, its services are not limited to these groups. The only real requirement is that users must have some special need for transportation not satisfied by other available services. Most persons who use the Mini-Bus become regular users. Because of the high demand for service placed upon the Mini-Bus system, requests for service must be made two or three days in advance and priority is given to medical needs. The service is approximately 50% subscription and 50% demand-responsive, and is now operating at capacity. The total 1979 budget is approximately $120,000; 90% of its support comes from federal government programs, 5% from the state, and 5% from other community service organizations through cooperative arrange- ments. The potential role of the Division of Human Resources and other operators in E & H transportation service provision will be examined in the development of alternatives. Total Elderly & Handicapped Transportation Currently Provided - As indicated in Table 2, approximately 152,330 passenger trips per year are being provided for the elderly and transportation handicapped (TH) in Weld County, as reported by the survey respondents. In many cases, a precise breakdown of ridership by area was not available, but estimates were determined through discussions with service providers. The service providers also identified shortcomings of the existing services and suggested potential improvements. These comments are addressed in the analysis of alternative E & H transporta- tion improvements. -7- TABLE 2 ELDERLY & HANDICAPPED TRANSPORTATION PROVIDED IN WELD COUNTY PASSENGER TRIPS PROVIDED IN 1979 AREA ELDERLY TH TOTAL Greeley 64,230 45,285 109,515 Balance of County 22,780 20,035 42,815 TOTAL 87,010 65,320 152,330 SOURCE: Wilbur Smith & Associates -8 • CHAPTER 3 SURVEY RESULTS In order to obtain general information from the elderly and handi- capped community concerning their transportation needs and opinions re- garding service availability, a variety of surveys have been conducted throughout Weld County in recent :years. The Larimer-Weld Regional Council of Governments, the Area Agency on Aging, the City of Greeley, and the Weld County Division of Human Resources have been involved in the various surveys and needs assessments. The results of these surveys have provided valuable insights into the E & H transportation picture in the County, and have been used to guide the development of demand estimates and program alternatives. Several of the most relevant survey results are discussed below. • Transportation ranks as the number one service priority con- - cern of elderly and handicapped persons in Weld County. Trans- portation ranks second in Larimer County after Health Care/Medi- cal concerns. • Approximately 48% of the E & H have never used transportation services but would consider doing so. A large proportion of the E & H population seem to have established transportation resources to meet their current needs. However, the lack_ of transportation services limits their participation in additional activities. • Approximately 35% of the E & H rely mainly on family and friends to meet their transportation needs. • Overall ridership on the various E & H transportation services has been increasing by more than 10% per year and the systems are approaching capacity. The Weld County Division of Human Resources has ex perienced ridership increases of 900 passengers in 1972, to 18,000 passengers in 1975, to 75,000 passengers in 1977, to over 100,000 passengers in 1979. -9- • • The primary trip purposes for which the E & H utilize trans- portation services are shopping, medical, and social/recreation activities. • Approximately 65% of the respondents to one survey use the Weld County Human Resources Mini-Bus on a weekly basis, and 35% use , the service on a monthly basis. A high level of satisfaction with..the Mini-Bus service was expressed by the respondents. • Survey respondents indicated the need for weekend service to satisfy more shopping and church trips. The need for additional vehicles was also identified. •Approximately 52% of the respondents to the City of Greeley survey indicated that they would use additional special trans- portation services if they were made available. • According to a citizen task force formed in 1977 to make recom- mendations regarding the needs of senior citizens and the handi- capped, an adequate system of transportation for these persons is one which: 1. Provides service to those who need it at the time it is required, i.e. , "demand-responsive"; 2. Is accessible to the physically handicapped; 3. Includes both an improved public transit system and improved pedestrian access; 4. Is adequately publicized to all persons who might benefit from it; and 5. Is able to provide service regardless of ability to pay. • Approximately 4% of the respondents to the City of Greeley survey indicated the need for wheelchair lifts on buses, and an addi- tional 14% indicated the need for other kinds of assistance in using transit. It is readily apparent that the elderly and handicapped in Weld County have special transportation needs, some of which can be satisfied by general public transportation services. Chapter 4 examines more specifically the demand for various types of E & H transportation service, -10- T in terms of demand which is currently being satisfied and latent demand or demand which is unsatisfied. -11- n CHAPTER 4 ASSESSMENT OF SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION DEMAND With the review of social service agencies and the inventory of existing transportation for the elderly and handicapped, the next step toward analyzing the supply and demand for elderly and handicapped (E/H) transportation services is the estimation of the number who need such a service. This chapter will include the development of "target groups" within Weld County, the levels of transportation needs, the identification of trip demand for special transportation, and estimate of the unsatisfied demand above that currently provided in the study area. Population Estimates In 1970, Weld County had a population of 89,297 with 8.8 percent of the residents (7,894) age 65 or over. Since then, the county has had a very high growth rate, and in 1979 total population is estimated to be 131,720, a 48 percent increase in 9 years. At the same time, the proportion of elderly persons is estimated to have decreased. For example, the proportion of the total popula- tion age 65 and over is estimated to have decreased from 8.8 per- cent in 1970 to 8.3 percent in 1979 and will stabilize at 8.38 through 1984. This is true for all age groups age 55 and over and will create an impact on the overall numbers of potential clients for special E/H transportation and trip demand which can be antici- pated. A summary of population projections and associated elderly age groups is shown in Table 3. For purposes of future identification of Target Groups in cer- tain Weld County communities, a general population breakdown is given in Table 4. This generally reflects the continuing concentra- tion of population in the larger urban areas and a decline in the proportion of population in the rural and smaller urban areas. -12- TABLE 3 POPULATION ESTIMATES WELD COUNTY 1970 1979 1984 TOTAL POPULATION(1) 89,297 131,720 156,611 Percent age 65+(2) 8.8% 8.3% 8.3% Number age 65+ 7,894 10,962 12, 969 Percent age 60+(2) 12.6% 12.1% 11. 8% Number age 60+ 11,255 15, 887 18,445 Percent age 55+(2) 16.8% 16. 5% 15.8% Number age 55+ 14,985 21,716 24,758 (1) U. S. Bureau of Census for 1970; estimates by LWRCOG (2) U. S. Bureau of Census for 1970; estimates from "Colorado Population Projections", Colorado Department of Local Affairs, 1976. -13- T n n TABLE 4 POPULATION ESTIMATE BREAKDOWN WELD COUNTY COMMUNITIES PER PER PER 1975 CENT 1979 CENT 1984 CENT 7bta1 County population '112,901; 100.0% 131,720 100.0% 156,611 100.0% Greeley 53,500 47.8% 63,500 48.2% 75,760 48.4% Other In- oorporated Areas 26,589 23,8% 37,458 28.4% 49,151 31.4% Lnincor- porated Areas 31,812 28.4% 30,762 23.4% 31,700 20.2% 90i1RCE: Lariner-Weld Regional Council of Governments Target Groups As included in this analysis, "target groups" will be used to identify those persons who, because of age and/or incapacity, belong to specific population sub-groups most appropriate for the need of special transportation services. Because both "elderly" and "handicapped" persons can be defined in many different ways, or with many different age ranges, it is important to define the target group classifications as appropriate for this report. • Elderly - persons age 60 or over. Many federal and local government programs have age eligibility levels which vary greatly from 55 to 65. Age 60 was chosen because of its closer relationship to local needs. Adjustments can be made -14- to the target group, if necessary, to reflect a different age assumption based on percent relationships shown in Table 3. • Handicapped - Persons 5 years of age or over with a trans- portation handicap, defined as, "someone who, because of a specific permanent or temporary (less than six months but more than one month) problem or incapacity including aging, experiences more difficulty in using public trans- portation than a person without the problem but can go outside the home at least once a week with or without the help of another person." (1) Elderly Target Group - As identified earlier, the elderly (age 60+) population in Weld County accounts for_12.1% of the total population in 1979. This is projected to decrease to 11.8% in 1984 , resulting in a total elderly target group of 15,887 in 1979 and 18,445 in 1984. The proportionate location of where the elderly reside within the County is shown in Table 5. These estimates reflect the increasing residence of elderly in the urban area of Greeley, and by 1984 over 50 percent of the County's total elderly population will reside in Greeley. Transportation Handicapped Target Group - The national survey report nbtea earlier reveals that the "transportation handicapped" (TB) make up about 5 percent of the total population. Using this relationship, there are approximately 6,586 individuals in Weld County in 1979 with a TH, increasing to 7,830 by 1984. This survey and others have also in- dicated that about 57 percent of those with a TH are 60 years old and over, while 43 percent are below that age. Based upon these assumptions applied to the County and urban area population, the breakdown of the total transportation' .handicapped population is as shown in Table 6. (1) Summary Report of Data from The National Survey of Transportation Handicapped People, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, U. S. Department of Transportation, June, 1978. (2) • ibid. -15- f ril N in e en V' ri il' • col M co ,-1 sN H 01 ri H 01 01 OD ri 0 PS CO Eli OP 84 r• O 01I o OD aD 0 on o CO CO N le 4 i H co r La H at ,p A 2 4.1 CO O XI •-4 Z N a 1 10 0 v 0 Z H o a D p in Tr o A Aa' in 10 O. C.) .-i 0. µ 0 8 .1 N 0 0 W » a to a 0 o o 1{kl a u El F N r• • I U E w P x ZVP4 ' ei 44 O is o aaa 0 R H El 0 U4 0 aE El 4 CO a cW� a ui R O 01 . I 4-4N H Y O H w af 4-1 0 al yy O O 0 r El ri 0 '- a 01 W H 0 a o O W W at coO -16- I n O a � a ,4 >4 zo a U +4 Rf Uco 'a M M t0 t0 a i[1 N co CO V CO g a 0 0 a t0 M N N V' CO 0•0 yin. tug .0x to O a O 0 rn roro ri a 0 14 1 co M 134 W OO U Ic! 0 Z, i-4 V' t0 ,7y.' V' O Cr)% H U w w p% c1 b'U .i ri V al u1 0 0 CO V a W 44aoo 441rte-. `D I ►{ M M H 44 i M N el F 0 w g 4 0 0 4 H '+a ' y :.2 to N HA 141 Mt W 0 O 0. -- O0 04 0 id � x � w M � (4 � H A E '0 411 C x ro g x 0 .0 C4 ° n 40 a " x H 4 a H 4'ot 0 O 0 ro 3 O. 0 ro 3 rt 4 srl .0 41 E4 W 41 —I-I H W .0 � H CO .D7 a w a Si o s a v O >+ its O >4 '0 w CO 0 w w tO w t UU ro '0 a ro '0 a 3 D $4 H 0 W 14 W Z U) -17- Potential Passengers (Primary Target Groups) As noted in the previous section, the total target group of per- sons in the County with transportation handicaps has been identified for 1979 and 1984. However, many of these persons take care of their own transportation needs, primarily as driver and/or passenger in the private automobile, but also by walking, bicycle, taxi, conventional transit, etc. In study after study in urban and rural areas across the United States, it appears that the automobile is the most frequently used mode of transportation for the transportation handicapped, and it is the mode which most respondents feel will best meet their needs in making trips for many different purposes. There are obviously degrees of handicap or limiting conditions and these factors affect the mode choice. The private vehicle is the most preferred for all purposes almost regardless of the disability. However, there is a tendency for modes other than the private auto to be preferred as the severity of the disability increases. (3) In general, however, those individuals who have access to an automobile, and can use it, do use it for most trip purposes. (4) In order to establish a primary target group of those persons most oriented toward special transportation services for realistic demand estimation, it is necessary to investigate anticipated unmet travel needs. TH Primary Target Group - Those handicapped children under the age of 16 years are not considered prime potential passengers for a public transportation system because their travel needs are usually taken (3) Transportation Issues: The Disadvantaged, The Elderly, and Citizen Involvement, Transportation Research Record 618, 1976. (4) Transportation for the Poor, The Elderly, and The Disadvantaged, Transportation Research Record. 516. -18- care of by parents, social workers on a one-to-one basis, or by other non-public means. Experience on several other existing public systems for the handicapped shows that very few children use the service. (This experience excludes service such as the Weld County Division of Human Resources, Head Start Program in which children are transported on a group basis for program specific purposes ) The TH under 16 years of age make up approximately 3.5 percent of the total TH population, reducing the total transportation handi- capped target group of potential passengers to 6,355 in 1979 and 7,556 in 1984. (5) Of these persons over the age of 16 with a TH, approximately 30 percent are drivers, 30 percent are passengers in a private auto- mobile, and the remaining 40 percent do not have their own transporta-;7 tion needs met by the private automobile. (6) These relationships are shown in Table 7. It is estimated that in Weld County in 1979, there are about 3,814 of the transportation handicapped who satisfy all or most of their trip needs by the automobile, and approximately 2,541 persons who take care of few, if any trips by the automobile. This number increases to over 3,000 persons by 1984. As shown in Table 7, estimates have been prepared for Greeley as well, using the same relationships previously established. These groups, therefore, become the Primary Target Group for evaluation of special transportation needs. Non-Handicapped Elderly Target Group - The total elderly (age 60+) in Weld County totals 15,887 in 1979, but as shown in Table 6, only 3,754 (23. 6%) are deemed to have a transportation handicap. There remains over 12,100 persons, age 60 and above, who have no significant mobility restrictions, but may have varying degrees of mobility needs (5) Op.cit. , Summary Report of the National Survey of Transportation Handicapped People. (6) Ibid. -19- Q OO t1(1 ln0tr0 N it 01 01 M N N O tf1 i .-7,4 N 10 i N a M r: p 1: . lai 1 001 001 M N el el 1inch oNat (1 co grl M .4.4 .-7 M N paaa iC 0 0+ N 1O p :§IR . H i 01 01 1(1 MpONr M rH Cil 0rf Om1 N O 00 v tokt M 'I O a el. M rl rl rl .-7 M co 44 6� E�u 0 F O 14 El 0 a il � jN M M '0P4 CP O M M C O i--17+MWM rl ri r.3ii ; t 3 $4 1 g n . a 9,0 W i K "Pig N N 311 V M 4-1 g n 4i 111101 0 ri MA 1 i r 1144 B4., ,to 0. a ti 0 F 8 N, i0 Ps P -20- 1 which are not being met. In order to estimate the base of required transportation need in this group, investigations were made of the level of current travel demand being accommodated by the private automobile in the area. Sur- vey results discussed in Chapter 3, as well as national and regional relationships developed from other work were used. Other studies have indicated that an average of about 49 percent drive the auto as their primary mode of transportation, and 18 percent ride as passengers. About one-third do not have, or use, an automobile for transportation and rely primarily on other modes of transportation (walk, Greeley Bus, Weld County Division of Human Resources, taxi, etc. ) for meeting their needs, if, in fact, the trips are made at all. Using these relationships, Table 8 summarizes the analysis and indicates that there are approximately 4 , 004 non-handicapped elderly in the County who do not have use or availability of an auto for basic travel needs. This table also summarizes target group development which will be used for future demand estimations. Existing Trip Demand Based upon the estimated target group population developed in the preceeding sections, trip desires (or trip demand) of these groups can be estimated. These data can then be compared to exist- ing levels of service to determine the degree of demand currently unsatisfied. Data and relationships on propensity to travel, mode of travel, and travel needs were developed based on an extensive literature review and evaluation of incident rates and travel relationships from other studies and areas across the United States. Data gathered in local surveys and interviews 'were applied and used as appropriate. Trip Rate Analysis - A wide variety of data sources were reviewed and evaluated for relevance to the purposes of this study. Types of data related to trip demand analysis which were reviewed included trip purposes, trip rates, incident rates, auto usage, and travel mode rates. -21- TABLE 8 TARGET GROUP SUMMARY WELD COUNTY WELD GREELEY BALANCE COUNTY Tbtal FIAPrly (60+) 1979 8,007 7,880 15,887 1984 9,333 9,112 18,445 Fl early with TTH 1979 1,809 1,945 3,754 1984 2,16O 2,303 4,463 Non E1fPr1y with TH 1,467 2,832 1979 1,365 1984 1,630 1,737 3,367 Total Ti! Persons 1979 3,174 3,412 6,586 1984 3,790 4,040 7,830 Primary TH Target Group - Nb Auto 1979 1,225 1,316 2,541 1984 1,463 1,559 3,022 Elderly without TH Target Group • No Auto Avail- RDA 1979 2,045 1,959 4,004 1984 2,367 2,247 4.614 -22- [C Based upon appropriate secondary data sources, adjusted by avail- able local data and this study' s local interviews, it is clear that the elderly and transportation handicapped persons would like to make more trips than they currently do. Under ideal (and therefore hypothe- tical) conditions, it is estimated that the transportation handicapped persons (on average) desire to take approximately 1.00 trips per day. Elderly persons (age 60+) with no physical limitation generally exhibit a trip demand slightly higher than those with a transportation handicap. In general, this rate approximates 1. 27 per day. Trip rates to be used for this analysis are shown in Table 9 and reflect the best estimates based on available data. Two points should be made about these trip rates. 1. They are substantially below the 3.0 to 3.5 trips per day rate of the general population normally associated with those with no mobility restrictions. 2. These trip rates are average trip desire rates based on a range of actual experience and behavior. Results computed using averages of rates are sensi- tive to small changes, but these qualifications do not invalidate the figures. The concern is for an "order of magnitude" of demand, not a precise quantity; The rates and demand are the best that can be estimated and draw upon both local and other areas' experience. Potential Trip Demand - Based upon the assigned trip rates and target group population estimates, it is possible to compute the total potential (theoretical) trip demand for the elderly and trans- portation handicapped in Greeley and the balance of Weld County. These projections represent trips that persons believe they would like or need to make if "adequate" transportation were readily available. These estimates of total potential trip demand, by geographic area and by target group, are shown in Table 10. Potential (Theoretical) versus Realistic (Practical) Transit Demand Ridership on public transit programs offering daily service is generally very low, particularly in relationship to the trips accom- modated by the automobile. Data from all sources indicate that only a small fraction of the potential ridership actually make it a practice -23- n TABLE 9 AVERAGE TRIP RATES ELDERLY AND TRANSPORTATION HANDICAPPED (TH) PERSONS WELD COUNTY 1979 1979 TOTAL EESIRID TRTpS TARGET GROUP DAILY TRIPS TARGET GROUP PER DAY POPULATION DESIRED/GROUP(1) TH without Auto 1.00 2,541 2,541 TH--Auto Passengers for primary trips .50(2) 1,907 954 Elrinrly without TH and no access to auto 1.27 4,004 5,085 E1& rly without 1H- auto passengers for primary trips .35(2) 2,184 764 • (1) Daily trip desires by target group population not acocmplished by the automobile. (2) Not total trips. This reflects only those ,.&iitional trips desired above those made as an auto passenger. -24- n O TABLE 10 WELD COUNTY POTENTIAL ANNUAL TRIP DEMAND BY AREA ELDERLY AND TRANSPORTATION HANDICAPPED (TH) PERSONS (Trips expressed in 000's) 1 9 7 9 GREELEY BALANCE WELD COUNTY TH without Auto 447.2 480.3 927.5 TH-Auto passengers for primary trips 167.7 180.3 348.0 Rlaarly without TH and no access to auto 948.0 908.0 1,856.0 Elderly without TH auto passenger for tripsprimaryprimary142.5 136.5 279.0 POTENTIAL ANNUAL TRIP DEMAND BY AREA (Trips expressed in 000's) 1 9 8 4 GREELEY BALANCE WELD COUNTY TH without Auto 534.0 569.0 1,103.0 TH--Auto passengers for primary trips 200.2 213.5 413.7 Elderly without TH and no access to auto 1,097.2 1,041.6 2,138.8 Elderly without TA auto passenger for primary trips 164.9 156.6 321.5 NOTE: Annual demand estimates were derived by taking the appropriate Target Group population for each area, multiplied by the daily trip rate established for that group, and multiplied by 365 days. -25- O • to ride buses, minivans, or other systems set up under various private organizations, social agencies, or government auspices. Yet those are constant reminders that the transportation disadvantaged account for a large portion of the population and they are severely restricted in overall mobility. In many feasibility studies, ridership often has been anticipated to amount to several hundred percent more than that which actually materializes when the program is implemented. Why is this so? How is it possible to avoid the dangers which develop from such over- estimation? The approach of potential trips per person per day based on broad averages may, in fact, offer a reasonable estimate of total theoretical trip desires, but does not account for the many physical, economic, social and psychological differences which exist. This approach to latent demand assumes a homogeneity in trip generating characteristics, trip desires and trip behavior of differing populations as simply not reconcilable with actual practice. Another factor which leads to inappropriate measures of latent demand is that which results from population surveys in which they ask, "Would you use new transit service if it were set up?" Since most research studies use this approach, and since most respondents readily assert that they would use the service, using these relationships can result in significant overestimation of practical ridership goals. In actual practice, persons will delay or adjust the trip to use a different mode, or not make the trip altogether, rather than use the transit mode they had indicated they would use. There is, therefore, a wide gulf between the number of people who say they will use transit, or who have a need to use transit, and those who actually do use the service. Although the full reasons for this have not been identified and the quantification of the discount necessary to estimate actual tendencies to ride transit cannot be established, there may be several partial explanations; the level of service and convenience may not be what they envisioned, travel times may be longer, rides uncomfortable, etc. -26- C Because of these factors and the tendency to overestimate latent transit demand using potential trip desires and relationships, it is necessary to recognize the differences between Potential Unsatisfied Trip Demand and Realistic Transit Demand expectations for system development. Although not precisely quantifiable, these considerations will be included in the ranges of transit system development. In studies of regular fixed-route transit systems and special transit services across the country, those who actually ride represent between approximately 10 percent and 20 percent of the theoretical (potential) demand. For purposes of this analysis and reflecting the levels of satisfaction of various alternative concepts, an average practical (expected) trip demand of 15 percent of potential demand for transportation handicapped and elderly persons will be used. In summary, Tables 11 and 12 show the derived practical demand estimates which could reasonably be expected in Weld County within the next five years and against which demand satisfaction of alternatives will be measured. Existing Supply/Demand Relationship As identified in the previous sections, a large portion of current transportation needs of the transportation handicapped are being met by the private automobile. However, as detailed in Chapter 2, there are certain entities or groups which are currently providing quasi-public transportation to certain transit dependent groups. During the data collection phase, information was gathered through a survey of all agencies providing such transportation on the level of demand they are currently satisfying. Each entity was asked the total number of transportation trips provided through their service. These are represented as one-way trips, or total boardings, and include owned and leased vehicles, as well as volunteer private and staff auto drivers. Of these total trips, each agency was asked to estimate the proportion of those trips they believed to have been provided for the elderly and those provided to persons with a transportation handicap. As shown in Chapter 2, various organizations in Weld County reported providing a total of over 150, 000 annual trips to clients and others • -27- n u 'd a D dP dP do ro Q M M ri O M O N M CO 0 U W ri in V' lD O h h M OA 'd C-1 Ot V) PI N N CO N M N a rl ri M N H (rS7 RS U vi i•1 W H O W i.i PI dP dP a Q• V rI O N ri n CO 4O ON r -i• 071 CW i OOt N N r in N ri M r•1 i•1 H H N W 1` CO i H • -1 O a R. x NOt 44 W W W f.' b y -�c • - W 0 O.94 0 H dp dP dP dP 0 a g ".4 W N co ri Ch b NN V' CD CL r-1 C1-4 WHO W N v) Ot tO M VIM CI; CV M fra W W ON V' V' V' r�•t tD M ON V' r•i P7 Ei M OCD P4 4) •ri W 0 z W E4 4ro H H W 0 Zia) w W H ro '1 43 I H EH., 94 co W U Pt 94 V e0 H 9-1 4400 'd H01 al H OS 94 W °mro Mel a CO 0 ca v IJ 94'd w Vw W C ro•r1 W a W W V W W 0 ro W W V co W d 0 O 94 W Cl •ri 0 O C4 •r1 W W •rl r4 H C'd •ri ri v •r1 i.1 .0 ri Cl •r1 i•1 ro H gal 0441 p,•rl W ro MO C Cirri W ro +1 "a as O. -r1 ro CA > W CO •rl •rl O 0. > W W O U 0 Si i) i H •ri C H Z -rl d H 94 C H OH H 14 60 MO) +1 DV El i•1 CO W i) D 'd 'd W W 0 W w C C >4ro w ro C 44 C W > CL w v OI >t U O ri 44 >, co U O ro .CO -.4 co GL r1 ri b1 • a .i4 $4 $4 ri bt ri E 0 E'd 4 C ro 4 C +) +1 W +) W O a C 11 .F1 0 i) W W C 0 C•'i C W q W 'd W C•ri C W A C D •ri H•ri W i) W •r1 -r1 ri W W 43 W •ri W •• ri H V H W U ri CL ri W 0 $ W O el CL 0 Qt W ro C 14•••1 H ro•r1 ro ro H -ri H C I •ri H-.4 El W@ >Iro 0 W W H W >tH 0 W @@ 14 ME-4W1-1 0 M 0303 U W C4 1 El %m El OW W P. f O b a z 0 O N f+1 N 0 0 0 'O U N N N O1 N N -� N 1O 10 W 00 00 r•1 CI a N HPi N al U •rl d•1 d ►1 O 0 er +1 H 0 03 14 •rl C U sr o 'e N co O1 C O ''yy • • 01 co Q' 1. O N O1 N \O 0 14 ri OCI4 H N O1 rr4 N 11-1 H 0 1 43 01 �-1 .. w >1 R7 -•- 0 a- +1 a 04 CD 0 0o 0 H 0 17 n-i A N 0•r1 0.r-I H I N 14 ''•I M 00 M N H in 1 al C4 C in 1 o it; q w ell in N14 'd 0 W H v CO 10 N 0 E ••0 fat H 44 O N m• a 10 H at 94 H 43 COHH U H •r1 Is 43 ai N 4) >1 '0 1O 43 0 H H V C 'U 14 41)•)a' >4H aH CO 0 °q a 14 14 10 • CC el z 0 C C 0 0� 0 al A E M C in 0E 0m 10 O O A pC H O +1 Q 44 H 00 4 r"CO •p' 0 0. >p ai •°1' 0 0.a m i° 0 14 •04 311 C 11 .C O $4 0 0H El a) w0 D 'O E +1 U10 0 1 010 W G. q •PO 0A WH U C •r4 as l 1100 •rl 01 0 41 •r1 _I H•r1 0 •11 •r1 HO 140 HO' HN 'O 1101 HO. b b 11•r1 b •rl b T1 0 14 •r1 b •r1 aH ow OW 111 ZN 03 Ow a" H Z -29- requiring transportation. About 65,320, or 42. 9 percent, were for persons with a transportation handicap and 87 ,010, or 57.1 percent were for elderly persons not exhibiting a transportation handicap. Based upon data provided by transportation providers in surveys, interviews and telephone conversations, estimates of the number of trips currently satisfied by geographic area, for both transportation handicapped and elderly were estimated. Again referring to Table 11 for 1979 data and Table 12 for 1984 projections, we see the estimated realistic unsatisfied trip demand for each relevant geographic area and for both target groups. These estimates of unsatisfied demand for special transportation services will be the basis for development and evaluation of alternatives. Although there are apparent gaps in service to handicapped and/or elderly groups in Greeley and rural Weld County, it appears that the rural area (Balance of County) is the most severely lacking in total ser- vices, with only about 17 percent of the practical demand estimate being satisfied by current services. Levels of Transportation Required Within overall target groups, : persons exhibit different degrees of mobility restriction, and within overall travel demand estimates, differing levels of demand will be experienced by each group. These degrees of mobility impairment are important in programming the type of service and/or equipment needed to most cost-effectively meet the demand. For purposes of service evaluation, three broad levels of mobility restriction/service type for transportation handicapped persons are satisfactory: These levels are: TH 1. Severely handicapped; requiring special vehicles and special equipment, usually a wheelchair lift, and door-to-door service with assistance. Most are in wheelchairs or walkers and have no alter- native means of transportation. TH 2. Moderately handicapped; unable to walk to or from a bus stop, wait, or climb steps on conventional bus, thereby requiring door-to-door service; but able to get in and out of small van or auto with -30- fl limited difficulty; no special equipment required. TH 3. Slightly handicapped; would be able to use con- ventional transit with some difficulty if available; can walk short distances and get around without assistance; this would include some elderly who merely have difficulty in getting around but do not require special equipment. The non-handicapped elderly target group is considered to be generally able-bodied with no significant mobility restrictions. They can walk reasonable distances, are mobile and ambulatory and could use conventional transit with very little difficulty if it were avail- able. Since no conventional transit is yet available in areas other than Greeley, these persons will be included in the TH 3 group defined above for projection of transportation needs and service. In planning and developing transportation system improvements which are most compatible with existing and future demands, it is important to develop demand estimates related to service types and system usage. As shown in Table 13, recognition of the proportion of each mobility level and the trip rates associated with each level is necessary to determine the degree of unsatisfied demand for each level of service. The most severly handicapped group, TH 1, is estimated to repre- sent 19 percent of the transportation handicapped target group. (It must be remembered that this target group is primarily composed of those TH persons who do not drive or ride as a passenger in an auto- mobile; it does not include all TH persons. ) Because this group has a lower propensity to travel than the less severely handicapped groups, total trips taken by the group represent only 12 percent of total trip desire by the TH target group. When including in total trip demand under study those trips desired by the non-handicapped elderly, the proportion of trips by the TH 1 group drops to only 4 percent of total trip demand. With this determination of proportionate trip demand by level of mobility need, estimates have been made of total unsatisfied trip de- mand within each level, as shown in Table 14. In 1979, based on current levels of service provision, approximately 14 , 000 trips of -31- • A H ! J (-)c; O a zH • la co dP OP dP do dP OP va' � H sr O r-I N N In O CO 0iO Ea-I •-i • 14 ] 'e 4 . 4) 01 .C it H 4.1 C) a •r1 a co 0 H 0) V 0 ra H O) A 0) Z Di H Q E CO PSH N 1/40 N O 0 A '.a7 woH r4 N el r tO 1 1 T A O a V 14 10 • 0 C, CO x a .IJ 0 CO 10 U 0 b 0 In •.i I.l .ri H 4 A V It N 01 C H aw 14 Z 03 x 0 0) a' fl N N In O1 N 1-- a >I V la W - CIE sf O1 r-4 a' co en 10 ) 0 a it . N en in 01 0 0 a Dr H 0 >1 H ra b .0 14 en rl ro 0 • 0 U) W X14 �a"31 U el F >r Coh W 0 10 a 04 E1 H +I W RC K 1 in W 01 1 0T '1 14 it 41 H7 M S OHM • • • •45 o y ►a P14 HO O 14 H 0 >1 w O w g V -� 4 0 co el 14 S CO > H Z C 14 a C M z V 10 0 In v O% ao ao 1O 0 b +0 1H0 V en w s' 00 in H c 43 D P4 co M N sF el 1O 44 N +i >1 l z r l N Sr ID -1 S 00 Oro 0) 10 14 V 0 i1 H .-1 • el ta ON CI.• 0 01 A) N > 41 H 14 14 PH H 114 \O W !Z-la UP tIP cOP OP Hat H en el 0 0 MN 0 4 V W HrH-1 a 0 H 3 ro 0>I • 14 >I•rl 0 ]0 • 0 0 •O U 010 0 Ha V 0 D U 04 y g f+1 0 00 4.) H A H ra H co U r4 0A v E y cW ON t —32— I TABLE 14 TRIP DEMAND BY MOBILITY LEVEL WELD COUNTY TOTAL PERCENT OF wpm, REALISTIC UNSATISFIED TRIPS.APPROPRIATE TRIP DEMAND MOBILITY NEED FOR THIS n)BUJTY LEVEL 1979 1984 IIH 1. Special vehicles, special egui ent, door-to-door service (vehicles with lifts and/or wheelchair provisions) 4% 14,372 17,768 TH 2. Door-to-door service, but no special equipment using standard van. or auto - (taxi- type operation) 10% 35,930 44,420 TH 3. Senior Center bus, conventional and bus when available," (conventional- NM- type bus system) 86% 308,998 382,012 TH R1r»rly 100% 359,300 444,200 —33— 1 n the type associated with TH 1 mobility needs are not being made. Additionally, nearly 36,000 potential trips requiring TH 2 mobility considerations are not being met because of cost, capacity, client status, unfamiliarity, inconvenience, or other factors. The majority (86%) of potential trips (359,300) for these primary target groups in Weld County which are not being accommodated by present services can be addressed by TH 3 service types. For those who are eligible, an expanded or reorganized senior citizens' :.:bus service could help until general public transit. service is expanded in Greeley. In the interim, however, many of these trips will have to be accom- plished, if at all, by TH 2 service types. • -34- C CHAPTER 5 DEVELOPMENT AND ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES Transportation services for the elderly and handicapped include a variety of functional and organizational types. As indicated in Chapter 2, several different transportation services are provided in Weld County which meet a substantial portion of the E & H de- mand. However, as indicated in Chapter 4, the elderly and handicapped. in the County have indicated significant latent demand for transit, i.e. , the desire to make more trips if adequate service were avail- able. This chapter examines several alternative methods of providing sufficient transportation services to meet the needs of the elderly and handicapped in Weld County in functional and organizational terms. One general concept that has been strongly encouraged during recent years is the coordination of E & H transportation services. The terms coordination and/or consolidation are often threatening to many social service agencies that provide some form of transporta- tion. Therefore, a discussion of transportation service coordination is provided as background to the development of alternatives. Definition of Coordination Coordination has been interpreted as everything from telephone conversations to transfers of vehicle ownership. There are in reality different phases or levels of the coordination effort with regard to the mutual use and efficient operation of paratransit equipment and facilities. Four specific levels are apparent, and these four concepts are related to differences in freedom of action with respect to pro- viding transportation. These levels are defined below. (7) { (7) Adapted from paper by Joseph S. Revis, Institute of Public Administration, "Coordinating Transportation for the Disadvantaged. " -35- 1 C (1) Communication. The recognition and understanding of the problem and agreement upon the possibilities for solution. The improving of working relationships among various bodies that are in a position to influence transportation develop- ments within their particular jurisdiction. (2) Cooperation. The active working together of individuals in some loose association in a cooperative way, with individuals or individual agencies retaining their separate identities. • (3) Coordination. The bringing together of individuals or individual agencies for common action or to act together in a concerted way, in order to provide for a smooth interaction of separate units of a program or system. In coordination, the primary concern is in expanding the benefits of the entire system through joint action as a group. Coordination may come in the form of common funds equipment, facilities, or operations; but members or agencies preserve their identity. (4) Consolidation. The joining together or merging for mutual advantage; in the case of transportation services, and in the context of this report, consolidation will be used in reference to a fully integrated transportation system in which all individual units or individuals have been combined or consolidated into one integrated system, and individual agency identity for the purpose of transportation is no longer maintained. Expectations of Coordination Unless the objectives of coordination are kept in mind, the current popularity of the concept will decline. Coordination is a means to an end, nothing more. While there is no firm fix on the degree. to which coordination can be achieved or its relative costs and benefits, work done to date suggests several reasonable expectations for results of coordination attempts. While some expectations will prove more accurate than others, all are worth considering. A list of such reasonable expectations would include: ($) (1) Perceptions of statutory and administrative rules are (8) Burkhardt, Jon E. , "The Providers of Coordinated Transportation Services: Characteristics and Problems. " -36- a more significant obstacle than the rules themselves. (2) Agencies will be encouraged to cooperate and coordinate by: (a) expectations of cost saving (b) expectations of resolving the problem of funding continuity for transportation projects and (c) the influence of certain persuasive, dynamic, committed individuals. (3) The agencies will be reluctant to coordinate because of (a) fear of reduced service for the clients, (b) a loss of agency identity, and (c) difficulties in working cooperatively due to agency officials concern for the internal and/or external power (commonly referred to as turfism) . (4) Coordinated/consolidated transportation systems create demonstrable benefits vis-a-vis uncoordinated specialized transportation. (5) For service areas with similiar size target group popu- lations, the greater the coordination, the greater the savings. (6) Consolidated systems are most cost effective. (7) Transportation needs of clients are better met by coordinated systems. (8) An aggregate of agencies rather than their clients will get more direct, short run benefit from coordina- tion. (9) The largest transportation systems will receive the smallest benefits from coordination. Reasons for Coordination The extent to which any of the four levels of joint effort des- cribed above will be successfully achieved will depend to a considerable extent upon a variety of statutory, regulatory, and administrative practices, as well as the perception of participants of all levels of government and in the private sector. The difficulties are further compounded by the fact that coordination can occur at a variety of levels. A joint action to provide transportation services is possible at many different points ranging from intra-governmental levels to joint efforts between levels of the government and private sector. This obviously does not include the potential need for joint action within a single agency or group or between the various agencies' levels (state, federal, and local) . Many of these barriers and constraints will be discussed in the remainder of this chapter. -37- (1 In the face of so many problems and complexities, the value of coordinating services will have to be substantial. Th e advan- tages of more cooperative transportation efforts can be identified in terms of (1) more or better quality transportation services for the same costs (2) the same transportation services at lower costs (3) more and better transportation services at lower costs. If one or more of the latter does not result from coordination, no one is going to be persuaded to coordinate. Benefits of Coordination Operators of coordinated paratransit services and state Agencies on Aging which were surveyed by the Institute of Public Administration (9) did perceive coordination as desirable and identified reduced overlap and duplication, more service capacity, greater productivity and operating efficiency, and reduction in the cost of supplies and materials as the major benefits derived. Reduced Overlap and Duplication - Reduced duplication of project management and administrative costs is one of the potential benefits of transportation project coordination most often emphasized. Anywhere from 10 to 50 percent of total project expenditures are dispensed for the fixed cost items of general supervision, administra- tion and overhead. Much of this effort must be expended to a fixed minimum level for the smallest uncoordinated project, including such things as grant application and monitoring, public relations, clerical record keeping, bookkeeping, payroll and cost accounting, renewal of licenses and contract, etc. Marginal costs of these items for project expansion are small and the potential cost savings by eliminating duplication through the coordination of project administration (9) Op.cit. , "Coordinating Transportation for the Disadvantaged. " -38 is considerable. Increased Service Capacity - Increased service capacity was identified as a benefit of coordination by project operators and state agencies. The surveyed transportation providers defined coor- dination as expansion of service to more clients, agencies, trip purposes, and larger areas of operation. Expansion of capacity was seen as a prerequisite rather than a result of coordination, that is, many projects believed that additional available capacity must be already in operation in order to draw in other agencies and sponsors. Improve Vehicle Productivity in Operating Efficiency - Increased operating efficiency in terms of vehicle utilization and scheduling is another potential benefit of coordination which is generally iden- tified. There are small and uncoordinated transportation projects in the area that use their vehicles only afew operating hours per day or week, and coordination could improve the level of vehicle utilization by spreading the use of the vehicles over many social service programs. Whether increased vehicle utilization can be translated consistently to increased load factor (average vehicle occupancy) depends to a con- siderable extent on the pattern of peak loads, the time distribution of trip demands, and the trip purposes allowed by the project. In general, coordination usually permits a broader market of trip demands and pro- vides for greater utilization and higher vehicle occupancies. Cost Reduction in Purchases - Finally, cost reductions in the pur- chase of supplies, materials, or equipment is another potential benefit reported for coordinating transportation services. Cost reductions in the purchase of supplies and materials result from discounted prices for large quantity purchasing. Gasoline, oil, tires, centralized maintenance, repairs and purchase of replacement parts are particularly susceptible to this cost savings advantage. Many projects achieve this benefit by combining their demands for supplies and materials and purchasing them -39- from a central supplier, often a municipal or county garage or a commercial service station. Insurance discounts were identified as available for large volume coverage but some projects expressed doubt of this benefit. Insurance rates setting for social transportation projects is not universally established at this time and some projects report insurance increases for combination of clients with multiple disabilities. Projects which transport elderly and handicapped and exceptional clients (mentally retarded and epileptic persons for example) report excessive insurance premiums, in some cases. Barriers to Coordination Efforts As quoted from the report from the Institute for Public Adminis- tration in 1976, (10) "The most striking observation to be made about the barriers of coordination identified in this report is that so few of the barriers are directly linked to some type of statutory or legal inhibition, such as user eligibility and franchise conflict. Eighty per- cent are primarily associated with regulations, rules, administration, funding, operating problems and the "perception" of the coordination. Any of these barriers are susceptible to change providing there is appropriate leadership in the systems, especially at the Federal level. " At this point, a brief review of the major barriers to the coordination and consolidation of transportation services can be pointed out. These types of barriers generally fall into two categories: (1) statutory and regulatory barriers, and (2) administrative, institutional and perceptual barriers. Within the category of statutory and regulatory barriers fall the inhibiting effects of (1) user or eligibility restrictions and (2) fran- chise and labor problems. (10) Transportation for Older Americans - 1976: Progress, Prospects and Potentials. Institute of Public Administration. -40- C (1) User or Eligibility Restrictions - Efforts to combine social programs or to pool transportation facilities are frequently frustrated by user eligibility restrictions. Many social agency programs cannot serve all groups, and legislation is frequently designed to serve only special groups, so that merging the transportation demands of the number of agencies and programs is difficult. Differences in age, income, or locational requirements may make agencies resistant to any combination of effort with other agencies because of the difficulties of allocating costs and designing an operational system. Though no statutory prohibitions may exist, the categorical nature of the programs coupled with the regulations certainly inhibits coordination. Federal support for and interest in the concept of coordinated/ consolidated human transportation service systems has been intermittent and, in some cases, contradictory. Some attempts to address these issues have been made. For example: (A) A joint working agreement was signed in September, 1975 by principals of the Agency on Aging, Urban Mass Transportation Administration, Federal Highway Adminis- tration, and the Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Environment, Safety and Consumer Affairs. This agreement pledged, among other things, to work toward the pooling of health and social service program resources available to states and communities for transportation, in- cluding the resources available under the Titles III and VII of the Older Americans Act, Titles XIX, XX of the Social Security Act, and the Rehabilitation Act, to pay the operating costs associated with special transportation for the elderly and handicapped. (B) The Older Americans Act of 1975 authorized state or area Agencies on Aging to enter into agreements with agencies administering programs under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Titles XIX and XX of the Social Security Act for purposes of developing and implementing plans for meeting the common needs of transportation services of persons receiving benefits under such acts and older persons participating in programs under Titles III and VII of the Older American Act. -41- f 7 It may well be that the way statutory and administrative require- ments are perceived at the local and state level is more of a barrier to coordination than the actual requirements themselves. (2) Franchise and Labor Problems - If projects are run by public transit companies, project costs will be higher than if they are run by agencies independently, primarily due to wage level differences. . In addition, many times the operation of a transportation service for the elderly or other transportation disadvantaged persons on public transit facilities requires franchise modifications or they may face legal conflict with taxi operators, especially if demand responsive services are being contemplated. These difficulties become more important when fares are being considered because fare approval and franchise authority for specific services and routes are likely to be required from a Public Service Commission or equivalent body. In addition to the statutory and legal barriers discussed above, a number of administrative, institutional, and perceptual barriers are identified. These are summarized below: (1) Regulations - Federal and state grant restrictions and regulations are additional barriers to coordination. Administrative rulings appear to have had more actual impact on potential coordina- tion than the Federal statutes or regulations, especially when rulings were restrictive or inconsistent. In general, the major problems about regulations are that they were being interpreted in a variety of ways, especially by the state. More specifically, these problems include the following: A. The regulations were being interpreted very narrowly, thereby providing a very limited scope of coordination activity. B. There was fear of "bending" the rules especially on local levels, which also tended to inhibit the coordination activity, and -42- _._, ;._._._. .._ _._ �.. ._. _..._. C - C. State and Federal interpretations were often in- consistent. Perceptions of program eligibility restrictions seem to inhibit coordination primarily in the development stage of a coordinated system; problems of conflicting restrictions seem to get re- conciled or out-manuevered, for once a system is going there is a commitment to its survival and success. (2) Accountability - One of the most frequently identified pro- blems in coordination; sometimes experienced as a barrier to getting a coordinatedisystem going and sometimes to extending that coordina- tion. This refers to the accounting problems of servicing the pro- grams with differing eligibility restrictions. All sorts of com- plex maneuvers are necessary. Separate books, separate bank accounts, daily posting of charges on estimated ridership under different programs, and others have been used. There is a concern about problems of the varying audit interpretations and the need to keep elaborate records for accountability requirements. (3) Lack- of Knowledge of Transportation Costs - Social service agencies usually have very little idea of their total costs for transportation, so there is very little impetus to participate in a coordinating system where the charges are spelled out and may seem higher than independent provision of service. Many participants at work shops confirm that the lack of any real understanding on the part of agencies of the transportation costs is a major barrier to coordination efforts. There are two primary elements to this barrier. (a) Agencies underestimate the real cost of trans- portation and if they understood what those costs were they would be more willing to cooperate to lower them; (b) Most agencies do not know how much they are actually spending on transportation because it is merged with other activities making it difficult to develop cost-sharing agreements or arrangements with other groups. -43- (4) Turf Protection - The concern about the protection of turf is a frequently identified barrier to coordination. Most people are concerned with the preservation of the identity of their respective agencies and do not like losing control over their vehicles. Private agencies are identified as being particularly reluctant to pool because of concern about loss of identity. For example, in 1974, an Area Agency on Aging in North Carolina awarded funds to each County Council on Aging located within its planning service area for purchase and maintenance of a minibus to provide transportation to older persons. In one county, the Council on Aging minibus was the only form of transportation, for any age group, in the county, other than the private auto. In 1975, even though the service was experiencing severe operating deficits, the Council on Aging membership refused to open the service up to the general public on a fare for service basis or to coordinate with other health or social service programs in order to expand and main- tain the service. It was the Council's contention, supported strongly by members participating in the service, that they would lose their identity as an aging program if they attempted to expand the service to those other than the elderly. It should be emphasized however, that turf ism in some respects is a good thing. It is appropriate that agencies be concerned about their clients and assured that they get appropriate transportation services. Agencies are right to be concerned about giving over the transportation responsibilities to someone else who might not provide service in a form appropriate to their clients' needs. This will be even more true if the third party is new and untried. (5) Preferential Treatment to Clients - Support for the coordi- nation concept is generally related to size of the agency. Small social service agencies are often willing and enthusiastic to coordinate especially if they have little or no service of their own. The larger operators, on the other hand, express fear that they will lose con- trol of their project or service will be unreliable. -44- There is considerable concern that the prime or lead coordinating agency might give preferential transportation treatment to its own clients. They may indicate that a social service agency may not be the best institution to assume the lead agency role in providing coordinated transportation. Many operators and state agencies feel that third party providers offer greater impartiality in operation and that such arrangements generate less skepticism about possible lost transportation services from agencies. In general, therefore, it is suggested that coordinated transportation project operators should not be directly involved with the delivery of a social ser- vice, and that independent and comprehensive authorities should pro- vide the necessary qualifications to function as third party operating entities for coordinated social service transportation. (6) Public Transit - Public transit agencies are usually not terribly interested in serving as a third party for either planning or operation of elderly and handicapped services. There is generally opposition to public transit serving as a third party provider of service because of the perceived problems of reduction in the social service nature of the special transportation and increased costs of service. Small cities are usually not receptive to the idea of absorbing the subsidy share that such a project entails. Sometimes, transit authorities are confined to specific boundaries, and there- fore, cannot service many clients who may be living beyond the authorized operating boundaries of the transit authority. In addi- tion, if transit becomes an operator or a participant in such pro- jects they become subject to 13c labor clause of the UMTA Act. That would sharply raise the project costs. (7) Mixing Clients There are sometimes problems which arise about mixing clients. Coordination may not be considered to be universally applicable. A number of programs may have clients who should not readily be mixed. There are also programs in which transportation plays a special role in the primary service. In some other systems, it has been observed that the elderly are unwilling to mix, but it has not been possible to determine whether it was the -45- n elderly or the elderly' s advocates who were concerned. There is a consensus, however, that sensitivity training will help solve the problem, if in fact it is a barrier. For example, a coordinated transportation project in Houston, Texas was confronted with the reluctance of certain groups to ride the buses together. The older persons (from senior centers) who were participating, refused to ride with children who were to have been transported to the Day Care center on the same route. Eventually, an education process for all involved helped overcome the problem. The start of the service was delayed for two months. According to the project report, (11) "Local program people appeared afraid to try new approaches to old problems; transportation people failed to contact local program directors; Day Care was hard to pin down at the local level. All of these things, when added together, resulted in co-mingling of clients for a number of weeks. " (8) Discontinuity of Funding - Many agencies are concerned over the possible discontinuation of funding that may be available to their program, or programs of other agencies with whom they are cooperating. Of particular importance to the question of continuity of funding was the problem that a whole system could be jeopardized by the dropping out of a single funding source. Staged Approaches to Coordination All functions of an agency transportation program can be divided into two major groups - management and operations. Management functions include all those activities which support vehicle operation, including information services, transportation planning, maintenance, and reimburse- ment of volunteers or staff. Operation functions include scheduling, dispatching, purchase of transportation, and actual service delivery on the vehicles. Total integration of both management and operation functions is defined as "consolidation" , whereas other concepts are (11) Final Report - Social Service Transportation Demonstration Project, June 30, 1974. -46- fl "coordination. " The coordination concepts (12) are summarized in Table 15, giving the probably time required for implementation, preferred lead agency, relative ease of implementation, and relative levels of costs and benefits. Each concept is applicable to large and small urban rural areas and is described in the following paragraphs. A. Referral and Information Coordination - Referral and information func- tions of participating agencies are combined into one office with a cen- tralized telephone number. A prospective client who has a problem obtain- ing transportation would then have one place to contact to determine which agency could provide the most appropriate transportation. The referral given to the client would depend on their eligibility group, residence, income, purpose of travel, and other factors established by the agencies. Development may take anywhere from one to three months. The concept's major benefit is a broader range of information to persons who call for service. Implemented alone, the concept would not affect either the management or operation functions for the participating agencies. It can be combined with other coordination concepts. B. Maintenance Coordination - Under this concept, the vehicle/equipment maintenance services required by the participating agencies are merged. A contract would be placed with a private firm or public agency experi- enced in maintenance. This concept could reduce maintenance costs (be- cause of the larger volumes) and result in high-quality maintenance, which will, in turn, lead to more reliable service and longer vehicle life. This concept lends itself to combinations with other coordination concepts. It would take about 3-6 months to fully implement a maintenance coordination concept, depending on the number of agencies and the (12) Concepts discussed in this section are adapted from an article in Transportation for the Elderly and Handicapped, Programs and Problems, U. S. Department of Transportation. "Models for Coordi- nation/Consolidation of Transportation Programs" by Diogo Teixeira, Applied Resource Integration, Ltd. -47- r"1 1 AAA () 1 I A A A m 44 ;i1 ligild tO El a u a 0 in 0El Q 111111141 E U 1 E4 1 W Z7. O H .N P U COD ;Ili la a Enel 1O V ..0 i g l a 1 Prg -48- a as 0 a cS w w _z, n C contractor selection process. This concept will have limited value where agencies have a wide variety of vehicles, such as vans, station wagons, and buses, which must be serviced in different places due to the warranty situation" or the need to use special tools and equipment. The'concept lends itself to combining with the purchasing coordina- tion concept described below. A substantial gain in maintenance efficiency can be achieved if this arrangement eventually leads to the purchase of common vehicles from one manufacturer. C. Purchasing Coordination - This concept encourages the bulk pur- chase of parts, supplies, or vehicles by the participating agencies, thus realizing discounts and cost savings, and should be implemented in combination with the maintenance coordination concept. Vehicle bulk purchases could lead to standardization of agency fleets. In government may bring relief from gas addition, the participation of or sales taxes. The estimated implementation time is 1-4 months, depending upon the number of agencies involved.. D. Operations Clearinghouse - The operations clearinghouse acts as a central information repository for each agency' s operations. As a result, this concept implies the addition of a new operations layer in addition to agencies' existing operations. An existing agency would have to be fair, impartial, and responsive to the needs of all. A standard agreement for reimbursement should be developed. The funding flow could go directly between agencies, or could go directly through the clearinghouse. The major advantage is that ride-sharing and vehicle-sharing could take place without agencies giving up direct control of their vehicles. Thus, the concept might be the first of a series of steps leading to more commitment. The disadvantage is that this concept is somewhat redundant, re- quiring a duplication of the dispatching and scheduling work previously carried out at the individual agencies. -49- E. Centralized Dispatcher - In this concept, participating agencies maintain direct operational control over their own vehicles, but a central dispatcher can assign extra passengers to their vehicles (ride-sharing) or arrange vehicle time-sharing. The central dispatcher receives trip requests directly from agency clients or the agency itself and keeps a log of all vehicle operations, including regular routes and free vehicle time. This concept cannot succeed without willingness to ride- share and a reasonably substantial capacity for service increase. Dis- patching riders to other agencies' vehicles would require the utmost in sensitivity to users' needs and agencies' capabilities. Quality control is essential. Each agency will want assurance that its level of service will not decrease when it (1) puts its own clients on others' vehicles, and (2) allows the central dispatcher to direct its vehicles. Common dispatching can promote ride-sharing which in turn can decrease costs. Preferably, each agency should continue to carry most of its own clients on its own vehicles, especially during the start-up of the coordination program. However, as time goes on, additional clients -- either new or persons increasing their trip-making -- should be assigned by the central dispatcher to the vehicle which can carry them the most efficiently. Eventually, clients will be able to make direct trip requests of the central dispatcher when the client is making an agency eligible trip. F. Consolidation - Under this concept, a complete consolidation of all transportation operations into one organization takes place. All agencies actually transfer ownership and operation of their vehicles to the consolidation agency. In return for this, the consolidation agency agrees to provide each agency with transportation service. The purchase rate can be fixed on a per-trip basis or a per-vehicle-hour- basis. The consolidation agency arranges for transportation on a shared-ride pool of vehicles or, when appropriate, subcontracts to a taxicab company, chair-car carrier, or volunteer. The vehicle pool comes from those vehicles that the agencies transferred to the consoli- dation agency or from other vehicles the consolidation agency purchases -50- C d ILI N 1~ 0 23 C 0 H •1.1 Hi 0 04 0 110 0 H n43 TO 0W O'0 4 NCCtr CO Cl to•r4 0 4.1 a) 0 Dmo• H .-I d d ri•rl i1 N 0 0 rl tT el 44 0 4 ED Cgdb0N•O1 ZO 0•rl 0 •rI 'd 0 • II' • O to O C .[ I C-rI 44 i MO H •g •N1 R . W r 01• U C • -WA 4•1 ri 14 •1 H 0 OW aC0C14 ;II El 44 as •rl0110 "A010 >i 0 d •-1 C d R1 HI r.) d 44 HI 1 0 H N•r1 N C N 4 •r1 O• •-I O ►1 .0•4 10 14 N 0 i1 43 fd trC '0.CC W0 `O 0, 0 > t0i a 14 •ri U m a ro E O• W 0 CO E O "4 H N b4•1 • d d N DI Ul N E • 00 10 O •.i ► ra i P4 R H +1 0 \ b O a.,1 w tr tr E 0 > 4 .0 rid C 14 Iii0 Cis ON 0 .0 a 41 0w 0 1'00 111 El 0 0 0 0 14 to H CD (0 H -N b+-N N •di m Q1 ri C d 1 ri d +N•r1 ri•r1 •r1 N 14140041kN W 4) N•r1CC +1 8 C 0 .O000 OH0tP'd0 U UU > 4 -IA U I M 01 O N .2 rl W N .0OO • 00. 3 0. 0 0 O 4' 0 • 0 oral H w E 'd•r1 H A o 0 0 0 H i•10 • O Z my U1.44 11•r1 d •1.1 '0'0 d r-4 0 RI r4 114 . -51- I O separately. The essential differences between this concept and the central dispatcher are the vehicle ownership and the integration of all management and operations functions. Table 16 summarizes the development stages to improve paratransit services in terms of the coordination concept. Organizational and Functional Alternatives The existing transportation providers in Weld County have accomplished some elderly and handicapped service coordination. Efforts have included communication and cooperation among the various providers. The result of these efforts has been the provision of significant transportation services for the elderly and handicapped, to the extent of more than 150, 000 passenger trips per year. However, as indicated in previous chapters, the existing services are reaching (or have reached in some cases) capacity and latent demand for service is in- creasing. The following alternative concepts offer a variety of organizational and functional methods with which Weld County could address the transportation needs of the elderly and handicapped. Alternative 1: Continuation of Existing Systems - This "status quo" alternative involves the continuation of existing transportation services for the elderly and handicapped in Weld County. However, this alternative would do nothing to improve the level of service for the E & H or to meet their latent demand for additional services. Under the existing structure, several of the programs and vehicles which are available suffer from low productivity and are not used as efficiently as they could with additional coordination. The operating costs asso- ciated with this alternative would essentially remain at current levels and capital costs would be limited to vehicle replacement. However, other alternatives offer potential cost savings through additional coor- dination and levels of service which would satisfy the latent demand for transit estimated in Chapter 4. Alternative 2: City/County Government E & H Services - When a transit service is a division or department of a city or county govern- mental agency, it usually implies direct operation by the city or county government and direct support of the city council or county } -52- commissioners. This means local support of the system from a political standpoint and in terms of local taxing and local revenue sharing for funding requirements. In addition to philosophical disadvantages relating to government intervention and ownership, costs can sometimes escalate, public input may be minimized, and local government involve- ment in private and private nonprofit activities is increased. Currently, the City of Greeley and Weld County provide E & H transportation services under this alternative structure. The Greeley system provides valuable service but does not address the special trans- portation needs of the elderly and handicapped. The Larimer County Departments of Human Resources and Social Services support two distinct types of transportation services, but neither satisfies the latent demand for transit throughout the County. This alternative suggests the need for coordination and expansion of County-sponsored E & H services throughout the County and/or establishment of City-sponsored specialized E & H services in Greeley patterned after systems in other communities such as the City of Loveland in Larimer County. This would result in duplication of existing services and incur higher costs to provide the service, as well as increase government competition with private operators in the provision of E & H transportation services. Alternative 3: Transit Authority E & H Service - A transit authority or district is a legal structure which directs, provides, or contracts for transit services within a specific geographic area. Authorities are, either by their enacting authority or by franchise, restricted to specific geographic areas, but those areas may encompass an entire county or several counties in order to provide a broader, regional approach to transportation. This broader service approach generally provides a broader resource base to support the E & H transportation services. Often, however, the elderly and handicapped populations tend to be concentrated in urbanized areas. This, combined with the limitation of service for restricted market segments ( the E & H) , may place an inequitable burden on the other residents within the authority to support the cost of the service. In other words, a person who is not elderly or handicapped may -53- d taxes for a transportation paying incr eased P resent (and not support) P Y 9 system which that person would not be eligible to use. The transit authority concept is more applicable in the provision of transportation for the general public. Establishment of this type of structure for Weld County E & H transportation services could offer a clearinghouse for service providers, but would increase overall service costs (primarily in terms of administration) , would not necessarily increase the level of service, and would create an inequit- able and undesirable tax burden on the non-E & H residents living within the authority. Alternative 4 : Nonprofit Corporation E & H Service - A nonprofit corporation also represents a legal entity but one which is not designed to make a profit. Most social service agencies, especially community action agencies, are established as nonprofit corporations. The establishment of paratransit services under a consolidated format could involve the utilization of an existing nonprofit corporation or the development of a new nonprofit corporation specifically for the purpose of providing transportation services. Many of the conflicts over scheduling priorities and preferential treatment of certain target groups can be overcome by the establishment of an outside or new nonprofit corporation. This also has the potential for establishing a centralized and consistent accounting and reporting procedure, uniformity in operat- ing procedures, and equity in scheduling and dispatching. The provision of service by a single nonprofit corporation is most applicable in a relatively small, concentrated area. Attempting to provide service coverage that is too broad, over long distances, can offset the economic advantages of centralization. In Weld County, there currently is no example of a nonprofit corporation established sole]: to provide E & H transportation services. Establishment of such an agency may not be the most practical means of addressing the latent demand for transit in Weld County. -54- fl Alternative 5: Private Operator E & H Service - Private for-profit operators such as bus companies, taxi companies, and emergency vehicle companies can become involved in the provision of E & H paratransit services in a number of ways. One way would be for the private corporation, seeing a potential market, to contact various social agencies, contract for their services, and provide services at an overall rate lower than the agencies can currently provide their own services. This acts as an incentive to private corporations to solicit business from the various agencies and an incentive for the agencies to provide transportation to their clients in a more cost-effective way than is currently being done. In some cases, a private nonprofit corporation can be established as a "broker" to coordinate all social service agency transportation. This nonprofit corporation could be set up by independent interests or by private enterprise representatives themselves. The nonprofit corporation could then contract with the private taxi and emergency vehicle companies for services to meet all agency needs. Private corporations can also become involved by merely providing independent contract services on an "as needed" basis as contracted by individual social service agencies. In this case, it is not necessary for the agencies to pool their resources, but merely to recog- nize that the provision of occasional service to their clients through private operators is more cost-effective than the purchase and expanded operation of vehicles within their own agencies. Another option is known as "subsidized taxi" service for the E & H. Under this arrangement, a governmental body (such as a county or munici- pality) can establish a contract-for-service arrangement with the local taxi company to provide E & H transportation service at a fixed (and generally reduced) cost to the user. Records are kept of the number of tripsprovided, and the county or municipality subsidizes the difference P P Y between the normal full cost of the services and the amount paid by the E & H users. All of these suggested approaches promote the continued solvency of private operators, rather than encourage unnecessary and costly ex- pansion of social service agency transportation services which compete -55- with private enterprise. Although limitations do exist for private operators in terms of the level of personal service they may be willing to provide or service area boundaries prescribed by PUC regulation, they can provide a high level of supplemental E & H services to address the latent demand which currently exists in Weld County. Alternative 6: Consortium Structure or Clearinghouse for E & H Service - A consortium structure, or clearinghouse, is a loosely structured, non-legal association of persons or organizations involved in a common endeavor. For example, several agencies may join together to coordinate delivery of transit service. It would have a central council that would consist of one or two members of each member agency and, the member agencies would, to the maximum extent possible, make their vehicles available to a central dispatch unit for demand-respon- sive or semi-scheduled passenger transportation services. Each organiza- tion can collect data in a standardized manner and provide this in a coordinated and consolidated report for evaluation of the total clear- inghouse transportation operations. The clearinghouse concept involves many of the coordination efforts described at the beginning of this chapter. An important ad- vantage is the joint control of operations by member agencies without the loss of agency identity. Appropriately, some consolidation of agencies may occur, as the intended result is the provision of a higher level of service in the most efficient manner. This type of structure allows more emphasis on local community needs than transit authority operations which provide more of a "broad brush" approach. At the same time, the clearinghouse encourages efficient operations by shifting vehicles and resources as necessary to meet demand and provide a high level of service. Another advantage of the clearinghouse alternative is the potential for including a variety of existing providers, such as city and county services, for-profit operators, and nonprofit providers. Such broad representation can result in an improved forum for public input and the articulation of service needs, as well as the opportunity for expansion and improvement of services in a coordinated manner. -56- Summary of Alternatives The six alternatives presented above offer a variety of methods to address the transportation needs of the elderly and handicapped. Alter- natives 1, 2, and 3 do not address the latent demand for transit identified in Chapter 4 and do not encourage additional service coordi- nation. Alternatives 2 and 3 require new or additional levels of administration without a directly corresponding improvement in service provision. Alternative 4 alone cannot meet all of the service demand in Weld County primarily because of the size of the service area and differences in local needs as well as the difficulty of establish- ing a new agency. Alternative 5 has been partially implemented through the use of the Greeley taxi operator by various Weld County agencies in terms of cost reimbursement to clients. However, these services are provided on an occasional basis and without a coordinated effort toward improvements and expansion which would address the current latent demand. In addi- tion, the taxi operator can provide optimum supplemental services as needed in the local urbanized area of Greeley, but costs become prohi- bitive when service is offered throughout the County. Alternative 6 offers a means to build upon and improve the coordi- nation efforts which have been made in recent years in Weld County. Elements of Alternatives 1 and 5 can be combined under the clearinghouse structure of Alternative 6 to provide coordinated, comprehensive E & H transportation services in Weld County. Based on the development and analysis of alternatives presented above, Chapter 6 presents a recommended program to address the transpor- tation needs of the elderly and handicapped in Weld County. -57- C CHAPTER 6 RECOMMENDED PROGRAM The existing transportation operators in Weld County provide a significant level of service for the elderly and handicapped. However, as indicated in previous chapters, the elderly and handicapped in the County would make more trips if additional transportation services were available to them. This chapter provides a recommended program to improve the existing services and to expand them in a coordinated manner in order to address the needs of the elderly and handicapped. The recommendations include: • Establishment of a clearinghouse with member agencies including all providers of elderly and handicapped transportation services in Weld County. • Increased coordination among providers to improve existing service. • Improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of existing services by increasing vehicle utilization by 50% and by extending service hours by one-fourth. • Expansion of existing services to address the E & H latent demand for transit. These recommendations are discussed below in more detail. Program Structure As indicated in Alternative 6 in the previous chapter, the clearing- house is a loosely structured, non-legal association of persons or organi- zations involved in a common endeavor, such as the delivery of transit service. The clearinghouse is the program structure recommended for Weld County E & H transportation services. Membership in the clearinghouse would be open to all existing E & H transportation providers including the County, cities, nonprofit agencies, nursing homes, and private operators such as the taxi companies. The primary goals of the clearinghouse would be: 1) Maximize coordination of all E & H transportation services in the County; 2) Maximize effective and efficient transit service delivery; -58- 1 O 3) Address the latent transit demand of all E & H residents in the County; and 4) Minimize the establishment or continuation of independent, disparate, and uncoordinated E & H transit services. • A central council would be established and consist of one repre- sentative of each member agency. The council would jointly determine the best methods to coordinate E & H services and address the latent demand for transit in the County. Under one option, the Weld County Division of Human Resources would be the lead administrative and service agency of the clearinghouse and all other E & H transportation providers in the County would be members. The role of Human Resources as lead administrative agency would be to provide an objective, county-wide perspective on the E & H transpor- tation problem and to encourage logical, practical solutions; As a governmental body, the County Division would avoid "turf" and "empire building" problems, as well as coordinate funding sources among member agencies. The role of Human Resources as lead service agency would be the actual delivery of service in the most effective and efficient manner. The Division is the largest agency providing E & H transportation in the County and the one with the most experience in dealing with these issues in Weld County. The Division has made significant inroads in coordinating services throughout the County as well as in securing revenue for capital and operating expenses. The Division of Human Resources would have no greater voice in clearinghouse council decisions than any other member j agency. However, the Division would be charged with coordinating services throughout the County, with the cooperation of all member agencies, to meet E & H transit demands. • The Division of Human Resources has indicated an interest in providing E & H transportation services only in the rural areas of the County, outside of the City of Greeley. Under this scenario, the role of lead agency in the clearinghouse, as well as the provision of E & H service in Greeley, might then be assumed by School District 6 which is a large transportation provider. However, the School District is limited by state law in the scope of transportation service it can provide beyond trans- porting school children, and therefore the District may have difficulty -59- in assuming the role of lead agency in the E & H clearinghouse. But this scenario does represent a second option in the structure of the clearinghouse which may be pursued in coming years if desired. A third option would be the division of lead agency responsibilities between School District 6 and the Division of Human Resources. The School District would be responsible for all E & H service coordination in the City of Greeley and Human Resources would be responsible for the rest of the County. However, this option may tend to limit opera- tional coordination efforts between operators in Greeley and operators in the rural areas. A fourth option would involve the establishment of a new, private nonprofit agency as described under Alternative 4 in the previous chapter for the following purposes: 1) the primary function of the agency would be to provide E & H transportation services throughout Weld County (similar to CARE-A-VAN in Larimer County) ; and 2) to assume the role of lead agency in the E & H clearinghouse. Implementation of this option may result in substantial consolidation of existing E & H transportation services, but does represent a "new" provider and may require several years to organize. Considering the realities of the current situation, the consultant recommends that the Weld County Division of Human Resources take the lead role in organizing the clearinghouse and initiating expanded coordi- nation efforts. Changes in structure as described in the options above can be determined as necessary in coming years. Existing E & H Service Improvements Once the clearinghouse is established, the first task is to explore methods of coordinating various agency services and determining responsibilities of agency members by service area. Initially, all agency members would maintain distinct identities and operations. Over time, some agency resources and operations would be pooled or consolidated under the lead agency. This would allow the shifting of resources throughout the County to meet specific demand at various points in time. For example, through coordinated trip scheduling, the lead agency might determine that transit demand is low during the -60- hours of 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. in Windsor and Evans, and demand is high during that period in Greeley. Consolidated resources would allow the shifting of vehicles to meet the demand in Greeley and avoid the need for a larger fleet in Greeley. This would result in better utilization of vehicles and lower overall operating costs. Consolidation of services is not intended as the goal of the clearinghouse. Rather, consolidation would be used, to the appropriate extent, as a tool to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of E & H transportation services throughout the County. Consolidation would apply primarily to nonprofit social service agencies, which historically have tended to approach E & H transportation service as an ancillary but necessary service. This has resulted in a wide variety of indepen- dent agencies providing duplicative (and expensive) services. Consoli- dation of operations would occur only to the extent agreed upon by the member agencies. Coordination efforts short of consolidation would include: client referral and information coordination; scheduling and dispatching coordi- nation; purchasing coordination in terms of vehicles, parts, supplies, fuel, and insurance; maintenance coordination; and operations coordina- tion. Such efforts through the clearinghouse would increase the efficiency of existing vehicle utilization, encourage greater use of private operators such as taxi operators, reduce the need for fleet expansion, lower overall capital and operating expenses, and improve the effectiveness of the services in meeting the needs of the elderly and handicapped. The current efficiency of the existing E & H providers can be mea- sured in terms of passenger trips per vehicle per hour of operation. This measure ranges from 1. 5 - 5. 0 passenger trips per vehicle per hour among the various providers, and averages 3-4 passenger trips per vehicle per hour. The coordination efforts described above can result in efficiency improvements of 50% or more during the next five years. Consequently, through coordination, the existing operators may be able to achieve an -61- average efficiency of 4-6 passenger trips per vehicle hour. In effect, by increasing service efficiency (i.e. , serving more people per hour, on the average) the existing operators will expand their fleet capacity and improve the effectiveness of their services by satisfying more of the latent demand of the E & H. Based on survey results, the elderly and handicapped have indicated a desire for service on weekends. Extending service hours would increase service effectiveness, i. e. , make the service more effective in meeting the needs of the E & H. Currently, services are provided an average of 46 hours per week per agency or 2,400 hours per year per agency. The consultant recommends extending hours of service to an average of 55 hours per week per agency (which includes Saturday and Sunday service) or 2,860 hours per year per agency. The maintenance of the existing services will require vehicle re- placements during the next five years. Table 17 provides a breakdown of replacement vehicle requirements based on the remaining useful life of the existing fleet. The table indicates the number of vehicles required each year by agency and the approximate replacement cost. This is in- tended to facilitate vehicle procurement by individual agencies if neces- sary to meet federal, state, or local funding requirements. There are other agencies in Weld County which provide E & H transportation ser- vices, which did not respond to the inventory survey. There may be a 1 need for additional replacement vehicles of which the consultant is not presently aware. Any of these replacement requests should first be directed through the clearinghouse to see if demand can be satisfied with existing vehicles. If not, additional replacement vehicle require- ments should be made part of this plan by means of an update. All vehicle procurement may be possible (in time) through the lead agency. The UMTA Section 3 and 16 (b) (2) programs are only two sources of capital funds. The clearinghouse, through the lead agency, will explore all other potential funding sources at the federal, state, and local levels for both capital and operating expenses. -62- 44 1 x 0 a1 al M g to O m C O, 1 1 1 U VII ri w o g 0 01 ri {1 t m 1 Ino a 10 4.1 0 CO N N C 0 Cl CO > 0 W l0 01 ri. riI M > y K to ro b 0i i 0 0 43 d 7 i-) 01 C .C H O�gy1 m OT 0-IC C H .i 01 0 Z ,0 a 0 H 01 00.1 14 0 H W N . . A •.U1 AU' >i D O 01 1 1 1 'i > N .1 14 m '-I s0 a a m � 'or y N i ri 14 a W r 07 11 N U I 0 b/ ri 43 01 el 4 H Z b y b 10 0 u )4 0 0 o CC�i E' q > ,qo > > 1 > OO4 M O N w Y W Cl 0wN 4.1 in N0 tip 4UVi LqOO 01 0 W U EV -et W [1 ping 4/1. 12i H 0 H 3 0 0 0 01 b C x U 3 HI 0 C CN � NAb in 0 v1 0 ,003 m 1 i1 N 1 i-3 01 Cl 0 a i., 0 I i4 10 +1 N 10 •rl •O1 n 1/1 r•1 W 01 111 14 ri HI 3 b ri t? HI 3 i1 is 40100• H 41 11 O3 II c� ll a 001.'40 t 3wCg, co m O 0 COO 0 Cw1yo m >i Cch O C v a 0 00 0 0 0 44 a 01 01 IN� 00• N O 0 0 It O > 000 vv-1 to CC r 0O 0 u-i CO 4J N E a 01 ri in > N 00• HI 0/} HI Id V H tit % A& O a .44 F IA TS 0 0 U C of •r/ eaw �, '0U1 0 14 El CO I .-I E U 14 8 •° > N •a�1 0 El to 1n � a .C o o C s O 143 •.1. y 0 0 �a7 0 tea+ w U N C O r O 'i+ a 0 >I E :31 U D "- QNQ 01 }},1 > •.i 7 q g .-. y a .-. C O A Z x 70 b C M .OI U C riiO0' �F`! Ucri kOiH :r w ,C A rrC�� yyy0100 0 r01eCU� _� ^ V' [R�C ,{C�.y7 ,��Q]j!N0C Nw 0 0 O 14OH C5 rl 3 a -- 3 0 -- 3 m a -fi 3- E & H Service Expansion As indicated in previous chapters, the existing operators are pro- viding significant transportation services for the elderly and handicapped in Weld County. By increasing coordination efforts as described in the previous section, they should be able to improve the level of service and provide a larger number of passenger trips per year. However, coordination efforts alone will not increase service provision to a high enough level to satisfy all of the realistic latent demand for transit estimated in Chapter 4. Consequently, system expansion will be necessary. The consultant recommends the concept of system expansion based on the high level of latent demand for transit. The level and extent of service expansion is primarily dependent upon the availability and commitment of federal and local funding. The following scenario describes the ramifications of system expansion in Weld County and one approach to accomplishing the expansion in a coordinated manner. Under the clearinghouse structure, all service expansion would occur within the lead agency. This will facilitate further coordination/conso- lidation efforts and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the services. The lead agency, with the support of the clearinghouse council, would place additional vehicles and provide additional services as appropriate in various demand areas in the County. This arrangement allows flexibility for shifting resources as necessary to meet travel demands. In 1984, the total realistic trip demand by the E & H in Weld County is estimated to be 596, 500 passenger trips. Based on: 1) a 50% improvement in the efficiency of existing services (to 6 passenger trips per vehicle per Amur) : 2) extension of service hours to a total of 2,860 hours of operation per year; and 3) the provision of additional E & H trips by Greeley Bus (through public bus service improvements) and by private taxi operators (through participation in the clearinghouse) , the consultant estimates that a total of 263, 000 E & H passenger trips will be provided in 1984. This will result in latent demand for 333,500 additional passenger trips. Approximately 20 additional vehicles will be -64- required to meet 100% of the latent demand for transit by 1984. The fleet would then total 33 vehicles to directly serve the elderly and handicapped. In addition, the vehicles of private taxi operators and the Greeley bus system would provide supplemental E & H transportation services. In the case of Greeley (and other communities which may initiate public transportation services) it is essential to note the importance of coordination between general public and E & H transportation services, in terms of operations and funding support. Table 18 indicates the capital and operating costs associated with implementation of this approach to E & H service improvement and expan- sion. One role of the clearinghouse is to examine potential funding sources which will allow system expansion. Because of bulk purchasing and other coordination efforts, the system capital and operating costs may be less than indicated in Table 18. The clearinghouse will maintain a realistic perspective and monitor actual costs and the availability of funds, as well as actual demand for expanded services. Thus, the staging or timing of service improvements and expansion will be based on the factors listed above, particularly the availability of local resources. The responsibility for providing local resources to meet the E & H transit demand lies with each community and with the County as a whole. In summary, this recommended program suggests a means to achieve a comprehensive and coordinated system of transportation to serve the needs of the elderly and handicapped in Weld County. The implementation of a program and its scope, structure, and timing will be determined by the County's citizens, existing service providers, and elected officials. -65- W .i 0 CO 4•1 OD O 0 00 O co .0 00 CO O 0 CO N to ID O in N 0% 1 ri 0m .i H N CO >4 _ Pi 4.- e•1 H it VI-In. V} V} 1A} M • V 0 +•1 4i m m •••Im a B al 00 O .O: o OO O N O la fl '• N co d' N N 7 OD Ea 01 CO ri CO On O rl N N •rl • V}V}V} V} V} V} CA O co to N O ai Z 0 0 0 m z m E a , Y • 10 w m ooh o o 0 o 03 Si 2 u ca rn ro 4 CO ION N CO P1 rl .CJ •.i 0 01 ri p0 in r- N 'V' O N E Z ri V} V} N V} V} CO- N •-1 0 0 H 2 E4 r4 U CO `T+ .4.' a'i .-I O 14 C4 4 4 a U 0 o 0 r�l Co1 W H 0 m O! .4 f0 a. m 0 ist b0 0 DIN C H 1 4 0 0 0 U O 0 O o d m+t 0 'J El 000 •rt O O O O g. 04 H iO 0 1 .C 01 0 o p0% INi} m b+ y a coI NON D N o sM l r0 en ,O 0 m •.O dp 4 N O m ri to .i V}IS II} ice.} N H N 10 w WI > m 0 vs ri >. 14 N . O rl iV+ w fit to 0 • 0 0 0 o 4 o o o o tia oI o > O 10 d' o V}V} .-1 N N N C: . . ri el M 4.1 H0 .tCu •.Oi H� c� x U N d0ili h. 1C ^ U m m Eo.Rm g E.8N0�jp Irl 14 : ?.3 g@p+ o R 8, c my.7 }�aabHN Iil1F�IAw0E¢�a �Upf H 00 00 C HaR7 ta]' riOHNOni Caa G'g1 O NI 8 Pi SS O O ow Cu 0C° w d � a r « z -66- Hello