The Community Action for Transportation Solutions Final Report and Action Plan April 2004 Denver, Colorado
Contact Person: Nancy Smith 303-805-5719 nancys70@comcast.net
1
Table of Contents
Section Name Introduction The CATS Project Advisory Committee and Staff Pre CATS History A Sketch of the Region Profiles of the Region‟s Main Transportation Providers CATS Needs Assessment Results a. Customer Surveys b. Workforce Center Accessibility Evaluations c. Customer Profiles CATS Goals, Objectives and Activities a. New Developments Pilot Project: The Hub Process Lessons Learned From the CATS Project Website Access Appendices Page No. 3 3 4 5 7 8 9 13 14 22 27 28 32 35 36
2
Introduction
In October 2003 a group of people was assembled in Denver to discuss how to best improve the transportation available for people with disabilities, especially as it relates to them being able to easily commute to and from their work settings. This group, known as the CATS Advisory Committee, was composed of persons working in the fields of transportation, employment and workforce development, vocational rehabilitation, and disability services and advocacy. Members of the group were nearly evenly divided among people with disabilities and those without. There was representation of government, non-profits and the private sector. A number of CATS members are also SMA members. Initially the group was split into two subcommittees: existing transportation services and destinations. Later in the process the group came together to create the major recommendations that will be presented in this plan. (See appendix A for the advisory committee roster). In addition to providing the staff of the project with ideas and contacts, the CATS Advisory Committee took the most significant role in formulating what has become the basis for the action plan presented on these pages.
The CATS Project Advisory Committee and Staff
Easter Seals Project ACTION (ESPA) and the Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) joined together to create a planning grant program aimed at supporting communities who wanted to create specific recommendations and an action plan for increasing the transportation options for people with disabilities 1. The problem stated in the Request for Proposals (RFP) is that "people with disabilities work, play, shop, vote pursue an education, raise families, and volunteer in their communities….. Transportation is an especially critical component for people with disabilities as they transition from school and unemployment to work." The position of the RFP supports the President's New Freedom Initiative in which he says, "The lack of adequate transportation remains a primary barrier to work for people with disabilities: one-third of people with disabilities report that inadequate transportation is a significant problem". Easter Seals Colorado and the Colorado Mobility Coalition applied for and received one of thirteen grants awarded under the Community-Based Planning Grants: Expanding Opportunities for Individuals with Disabilities. The Colorado grant was named Community Action for Transportation Solutions (CATS). The CATS project was to build on over two years of work by a group supported by
1
Definition of disability: we will use the definition of disability that states when an individual’s ability to live life is impeded by significant problems in two or more Activities of Daily Living (ADLs), a disability exists.
3
Rose Community Foundation called the Senior Mobility Alliance (SMA). SMA includes community stakeholders who have been developing strategies for addressing the needs of the senior population. The staff of the CATS project included two people from Easter Seals Colorado (ESC) as well as two from the Colorado Mobility Coalition (CMC), ESC‟s partner in this venture. Responsibilities for the accomplishment of the project‟s goals and objectives were divided among these four people with the majority of tasks being accomplished by Nancy Smith and Donna Schulte. The work of the CATS project included an extensive needs assessment, the development of a string advisory committee whose stakeholders would represent the needs of both riders and providers of transportation, facilitated discussion regarding the most important issues to be addressed regarding improving the transportation for people with disabilities, the development of specific recommendations, and the creation of an action plan to address identified issues and recommendations. In addition, the project would look at its own process, identify problems, and provide a model for other communities to utilize.
Pre CATS History
The items listed below are some of the regional developments leading to the atmosphere in which the CATS Advisory Committee met. 1980s-1990s Regularly scheduled meetings with the major county providers begin and reduced duplication of vehicle and related purchases in the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) region. Purchases made through Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) as well as the federal 5310 and 5311 funds were coordinated each year. 1982 Transportation Associates of the Denver Area (TADA) was formed, followed by Special Transportation Association of Colorado (STAC) in 1984. These organizations allowed people involved with the provision of special transportation to meet, share ideas and form strong working alliances. At the same time the Colorado Association of Transportation (CAT) was formed and included the major fixed route providers in the state. 1989 The Colorado Association of Transit Agencies (CASTA) was formed when STAC merged with CAT. 1998-2000 Easter Seals Colorado received two Project ACTION grants focusing on providing travel training to access-a-Ride (RTD‟s ADA paratransit system) consumers so they could use RTD‟s fixed route system. Other goals of the grants were to provide bus drivers with sensitivity training specific to riders with developmental disabilities and to sensitize RTD regarding the identification and removal of environmental barriers.
4
2000 Easter Seals Colorado contracted with RTD to provide an assessment of access-a-Ride. One of many recommendations was that access-a-Ride collaborate with other transportation carriers to fill gaps in the service they were providing. Spring 2000 Rose Community Foundation (RCF) began work on senior transportation issues, an advisory committee was formed; the goal was to hold a Transportation Summit in October 2000 & issue a report of findings thereafter. The theme selected by the committee was Getting There: Bridging the Transportation Gap for Older Adults. Fall 2000 RCF sponsored the Transportation Summit emceed by CTAA and attended by more than 300 people interested in transportation issues for older adults. Winter 2000-01 RCF issued the report on the Transportation Summit and Senior Transportation Resource Guide. Spring 2001-03 RCF initiated the Senior Mobility Alliance (SMA), a diverse group of stakeholders, to continue discussion on resolving issues in the Summit report. SMA issued its own similar recommendations as well as proposed projects including an information and referral line for consumers and a transportation needs assessment. Summer 2001 the Denver Regional Transportation District selects Easter Seals Colorado to do its assessments for customers who apply for access-a-Ride services.
A Sketch of the Region
The area examined during this pilot planning grant project included nine counties: Adams, Arapahoe, Boulder, Broomfield, Clear Creek, Denver, Douglas, Gilpin, and Jefferson. This area is the same as the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) and the Greater Denver Transportation Planning Region. The DRCOG 2000-2005 Regional Transit Developmental Plan (TDP) accurately describes the commonalities and challenges of the Denver Region. “The nine counties that make up the DRCOG region are drawn together by strong economic ties and commuting patterns. However, the counties differ greatly in total population, economic activities, topography and urbanized area. The City and County of Denver constitutes the metropolitan area‟s primary activity center and is surrounded by the adjoining suburban counties of Adams, Arapahoe, and Jefferson. Boulder County to the northwest and Douglas County along Interstate 25 to the south are farther removed geographically, yet still possess the connections that tie them to the region. The mountain counties of Clear Creek and Gilpin to the west have economies oriented toward gaming, tourism and mining. They also have strong transportation and service connections to the region‟s urban center. (Page 19, DRCOG 2000-2005 Regional Transit Developmental Plan.
5
The CATS project identified many of the existing trends and problems in their grant proposal. It stated that the DRCOG TDP reports that existing transit systems in the Denver metro area are unable to meet the existing demand from older persons and persons with disabilities. The projected increase in the mobility dependent populations will flood existing systems. Further, Colorado’s economy, booming during the high-tech expansion years, has suffered more than almost any other state in this region during the national economic downturn. (Page 3, CATS Grant Proposal) The growth of the population of people with disabilities and older adults is outstripping the capacity of existing transportation sources. Demographic data from the 2000 US Census shows that within the nine county region there are 211,875 people aged 21-64 with disabilities. An estimated 59.4% or 125,854 people are employed and the majority of them need affordable, alternative and/or accessible transportation. The US Census states that 1 out of every 5 people has a disability, thereby increasing the importance to our communities of all people being able to access transportation and become full participants in their communities. Following is information taken from the 2000 U.S. Census regarding people with disabilities within the nine Metro Denver counties.
Counties
Service pop. 2,949,06 1 242,350 336,246 406,180 116,144 371,357 25,843 3,647 6,281
Description of pop. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis. Age 21-64 w/dis.
Total target pop. 406,740 (15.9%) 42,188 (19.6%) 42,922 (14.5%) 70,306 (20.3%) 8,609 (7.9%) 43,806 (13.6%) 2,711 (11.6%) 387 (11.6%) 946 (15.1%)
Colorado Adams Arapahoe Denver Douglas Jefferson Broomfield Gilpin Clear Creek
% Emp’ d. 61.9 % 61.9 % 67.5 % 58.9 % 74.7 % 68.6 % 64.7 % 65.6 % 72.7 %
Descriptio n of pop. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis. Age 65+ w/dis.
Total target pop. 159,289 (40%) 12,246 (44.4%) 15,073 (37.6%) 25,053 (41.7%) 2,189 (31.5%) 17,327 (35.5%) 814 (31.8%) 88 (28.1%) 2,189 (31.5%)
6
Across the nation, the older population (65 +) numbered 35 million in 2000, an increase of 3.7 million or 12% since 1990. By the year 2030, the older population will more than double to about 70 million. In Colorado, these percentages are even higher, with the older population increasing by 26.3%. (Source: Administration on Aging 2001 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.) As the Baby Boomer generation reaches age 60, the numbers of older citizens will revolutionize the priorities of our society. By the year 2020, the number of persons age 60+ will more than double in the region. Between 1996 and 2020, the 60+ population in the Denver metropolitan region will increase by 139.8 percent. It is essential that planning for future transportation needs for this population begin now. (Source: Demographic Portrait of Older Denver Metropolitan Residents, DRCOG) Due to the increasing health and longevity of older citizens it is reasonable to expect older citizens to utilize public transportation well beyond traditional working years. According to a statistically representative survey published by DRCOG in 1994, older residents in the Denver metropolitan area try to remain actively engaged in their communities. DRCOG reports that in 1994 15% of the region‟s elders were employed working an average of 24.4 hours per week. This percentage is expected to increase sharply in the next decade. More than onefourth reported doing volunteer activities averaging seven hours per week.
Profiles of the Region’s Main Transportation Providers
Although many companies and organizations provide transportation in the Denver region, five stand out as the major providers. Brief descriptions of these providers follow. For a graphic representation of the first four, please see Appendix B for a map created by DRCOG. Regional Transportation District (RTD) “The Ride.” RTD is the largest provider of public transportation in the state of Colorado. Its region covers over twenty-five hundred square miles and it serves more than half the state‟s population. RTD‟s mission is “To meet our constituents‟ present and future transit needs by offering safe, clean, reliable, courteous, accessible and cost-effective service throughout the region.” Services include bus and light rail, as well as ADA complementary paratransit, call „n rides, park „n rides, commuter service, and special event transportation. In 2003, RTD provided 78,898,851 rides through its bus and light rail services, as well as 437, 835 rides on its ADA paratransit service, access-a-Ride. Special Transit (ST). Special Transit is a private nonprofit organization located in Boulder, Colorado. They provide a variety of transportation options that improve the quality of life for the people they serve. ST‟s mission is “We believe that all people are entitled to live as independently as possible within their circumstances; we believe that freedom of movement is a fundamental necessity
7
in our society; and we believe that everybody counts, regardless of age, health or income, and has a contribution to make to the community in which they live.” Their services include the fixed route Hop, a Call „n Ride contract with RTD serving Brighton, an access a Ride contract with RTD, and the ST paratransit service which covers Boulder County, Broomfield and parts of Larimer County.. Passenger trip numbers for 2003 are: 946,784 for the Hop, 102,350 for the ST paratransit service, 90,586 for the Call „n Ride contract, and 65,000 for the access a Ride contract. Seniors Resource Center (SRC). Transportation is only one of the services offered by SRC. SRC works in partnership with older persons and the community to provide centralized and coordinated services, information, education and leadership to assist seniors in maximizing their independence and personal dignity. Community Wheels is its transportation service which serves frail elderly and people of all ages with disabilities. It provides service to Jefferson, Denver, and Adams Counties. It is working in Clear Creek County to establish some transportation service there. Community Wheels provides 85,000 rides per year. Arapahoe County Transportation Services (ACTS). ACTS brokers transportation services in eight counties within the Metro Area. Depending upon the funding source, ACTS provides transportation by acting as a broker/case manager for all trips, and as such coordinates its service with all other municipal and nonprofit agencies within the counties it serves. Their major contract is to provide Medicaid transportation services. ACTS utilizes a number of small independent private transportation providers to deliver service to customers. Last year it booked 691,762 rides Metro Taxi. Metro taxi has Denver‟s largest and most modern computerdispatched fleet. They provide late model sedans and minivans as well as accessible vehicles. Service is available 24 hours per day and reservations are also accepted. Fares are calculated by use of a meter. No figures are currently available for Metro‟s 2003 rides. There are many other providers of transportation in the Denver Metro region. They include taxi companies like Yellow Cab as well as other small providers and providers limited to serving a specific population. Many of these providers are included in the RCF Getting There Resource Guide, which will be provided as a reference in the hard copy version of this report.
CATS Needs Assessment Results
An important part of the CATS project was completion of a needs assessment process. The transit customer needs assessment facilitated by the CATS staff includes three sections: customer surveys, workforce center accessibility assessments, and customer profiles. Gaps most frequently reported related to
8
finding the right source of transportation for individual needs and means. The length of time a trip might take is another barrier or challenge to many people with disabilities. The process and results of these sections follow. 1. Customer Surveys. Survey Purpose and Distribution In order to obtain a random sample of opinions of people with disabilities regarding their transportation usage, a survey was developed. The stated purpose of the survey was to obtain input from people with disabilities which would help the grant recipients make specific recommendations to improve their transportation services. The survey (see Appendix C) asked how people with disabilities get to and from work, school, medical and other appointments, recreational or other activities and shopping. In each of the above categories survey respondents were asked about specific problems they encounter and were given the opportunity to make comments. Three thousand (3000) surveys were delivered to forty-three agency locations (some agencies have multiple locations) serving people with disabilities in the nine county region. Agencies included State of Colorado Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, Community Centered Boards (the State organizations that serve people with developmental disabilities), Independent Living Centers, Workforce Centers, dialysis treatment facilities, rehabilitation hospitals, national disabilities organizations including Goodwill Industries, Easter Seals, United Cerebral Palsy, as well as SHALOM Denver and many other local organizations that serve people of disabilities in their vocational, residential and other needs. In addition, the Colorado Business Leadership Network (CBLN) e-mailed the survey to four thousand five hundred (4500) persons or organizations in their database including individuals with disabilities, service agencies and companies that employ people with disabilities. It was hoped that the overall return might be greater if the agencies receiving the CBLN e-mails were many of the same ones that already had surveys delivered to them by Easter Seals Colorado. Three hundred ninety-three (393) surveys were completed. The majority of them were picked up at the locations to which they were delivered. Other surveys were mailed, faxed or e-mailed. A few people telephoned and requested staff assistance to complete the surveys over the phone.
Counties Surveys completed by counties:
9
Adams 41 Denver 159
Arapahoe 51 Douglas 26
Boulder 32 Gilpin 1
Broomfield 11 Jefferson 69
Clear Creek 3
Disabilities The survey asked the nature of the respondents' disabilities. The following were reported: Cognitive 73 Cognitive/Hard of Hearing/ Physical 6 Cognitive/Physical 26 Hard of Hearing/Physical 21 Physical/Mental Health 9 Visual/Mental Health 10 Cognitive/ Mental Health/Visual 4 Cognitive/Visual 12 Mental Health 52 Physical/Visual 9 Other 21
Cognitive/Mental Health 23 Hard of Hearing 15 Physical 68 Visual Impairment 16 Unknown 28
Transportation Used By Those Who Are Employed Of those who responded, 149 or 38% stated that they are employed. These are the modes of transportation used to commute to and from work: 61 ride the fixed-route system of the Regional Transit District (RTD) 37 use access-a-Ride (RTD‟s ADA paratransit system) 5 use taxi service. 5 drive their own vehicles. 6 walk to work. 17 are driven by family, friends or vehicles owned by disability organizations where they work 5 carpool. 3 use other transportation companies. 3 use RTD some of the time and at other times they drive. 4 carpool and use RTD. 3 use RTD and walk home when they work later than the buses run. "The last bus from the Pepsi Center leaves at 10:06 pm. I sometimes work later than that, and then I have to walk home." 4 use RTD during the week and another transportation company on Saturdays. Transportation to Other Destinations
10
Fifty respondents said they attend school. Thirty use RTD to go to and from school. Five use access-a-Ride, five are driven by family or friends and two drive. Of the respondents who indicated how they get to medical or other appointments, 144 said they use RTD, 25 use access-a-Ride, 72 are driven by family, friends or paid staff, 60 drive and 17 take a taxi. Fewer respondents gave information about recreational activities. Sixty-four said they use RTD, three use access-a-Ride, seventy-three reported family, friends or paid staff take them and thirty-nine said they drive. Of those who reported on shopping, 61 said they use RTD, four use access-aRide, fifty-one said family, friends or paid staff take them, thirty-six drive, six use taxis and 16 walk. Problems Reported By All Who Responded to the Surveys Time Issues (74 Reported) The problem area most often checked and/or commented upon in the survey regarded time issues. Seventy-four people checked one or more of the following areas: RTD bus does not run at times I need transportation. Transportation service does not run on time Transportation service takes too long to get to my destination. Four people said transfers take too long. Six people reported that they have to arrange for access-a-Ride too far in advance. Of the 74 responses 20 referred to access-a-Ride, 38 referred to RTD, ten referred to both and six were unclear.
Affordability of Service Forty-three people checked the box saying they cannot afford the cost of the transportation service for RTD and/or access-a-Ride. The fee for a regular bus ride on RTD is $1.25. The fare for people with disabilities and seniors is 60 cents. The fee to ride access-a-Ride is $2.50. RTD management report that their cost to provide a ride on RTD is $3.51 and their cost to provide a ride on access-a-Ride is $44.94. Problems Regarding Bus Drivers There were twenty-nine negative comments regarding bus drivers. Respondents complained of rudeness, drivers not able to speak English and drivers that are not sensitive to their disabilities. Broken Lifts
11
Twenty-three individuals checked the box that says the RTD lift is sometimes broken. No Bus Stop No bus stop by home or destination was checked by 21 people. Bus Stop Issues Nineteen people checked the not accessible bus stop category. Another said, “Should have a heater in the bus shelter” Stops Aren't Called Out Ten persons reported that stops were not called out either due to driver error or because the PA system was not working. Accessible Equipment Needed Two individuals who are deaf commented that people who are deaf or hard of hearing have no way to know what the stops are being called by the bus drivers. No Public Transportation Available Eight people reported there is no bus service where they live. Clear Creek and Gilpin Counties do not have RTD or other fixed route service. A respondent reported, “the only transportation service in Clear Creek County is operated for seniors by Project Support and Volunteers of America. They state they cannot include anyone else due to funding source (Older Americans' Act) and insurance prohibitions. A countywide task force has worked for more than two years to develop public transportation for other Clear Creek County citizens with mobility issues. But at this time no transportation system exists that will serve persons with disabilities or those needing a public system. There is no local taxi service either." Other Comments Twenty-two people wrote a positive comment about the transportation service they use. Many were similar. A few samples: "Special Transit is great. They are helpful picking you up at the door and bringing you right through the door of your appointment." "I like the access-a-Ride drivers because they‟re good to me.” "access-a-Ride is very efficient." "access-a-Ride has been good. Sometimes a little late, however they always come." "Senior Resource Services are great/they take you into Lakewood, Denver, and Conifer." "With RTD, I feel that anyplace I need to go I can get to." "RTD has always been beneficial to Denver. I have no complaints".
12
Conclusions Clearly, people with disabilities are grateful to be able to use existing or known transportation to participate in the life of their communities. Many people reported difficulty with getting to their destination due to timing issues and reduced service or no service on nights and weekends. Peoples‟ residences and work places make a great deal of difference in the difficulty of their commute. Issues involving drivers and equipment were mentioned often enough to point to significant problems with these matters. People with disabilities need to be able to find affordable alternate transportation when RTD or another major provider isn't available. The survey indicates that some people with disabilities walk to and from work when buses do not run at times they need them. People with disabilities are typically more vulnerable than the general populace and walking alone, especially at night, is not safe for anyone.
2. Workforce Center Accessibility Evaluations The Workforce Centers represent important sites for learning about job opportunities and as such should be easily accessible by all of the community they serve. Since this project was specifically interested in work-related transportation, we looked at whether or not the Workforce Centers were accessible to people with disabilities seeking employment. The seventeen workforce centers (WFC) in the nine counties of the Denver Metro Area were evaluated for fixed route accessibility. The criteria for whether or not the center was accessible included distance from a bus stop (two blocks or less), the presence of or condition of the sidewalks leading to the bus stop, the presence of curb cuts, possible street crossings and whether or not the crossing has a signal, the amount of traffic between the center and bus stop and the condition of the waiting area immediately surrounding the stop. The majority of the workforce centers were accessible by one or more fixed routes, however; for some WFCs travel to and from the bus stop appeared very difficult. The center at 3508 Peoria St. in Aurora did not have sidewalks in front of the complex. Peoria is a heavily trafficked street and someone using a wheelchair would most likely have to travel in the street either to reach the bus stop or to travel to the corner in order to cross the street at a light. The northbound stop is approximately one block from the center. There is a slight incline and one must pass over railroad tracks surrounded by broken up terrain. The southbound stop is also one block's distance and, as previously mentioned, traveling to the corner to in order to cross the street may be difficult and even impossible for some people due to the lack of sidewalks.
13
The center in Longmont is approximately four blocks from the nearest bus stop. The sidewalks are wide and even but there is a set of railroad tracks to pass over. Once a person reaches the corner of Ken Pratt Blvd and S. Sunset St. they must cross the intersection in order to reach the southbound bus stop. The corners of the streets at this intersection do not line up with each other and the person must walk diagonally to reach the curb cut on the opposite side of the street. Unless someone with a visual impairment is aware of this diagonal intersection, it could be very dangerous for him or her to attempt crossing without assistance. It is near this vicinity that Ken Pratt Blvd turns into Highway 119 and it is a heavily trafficked area. The southbound bus stop itself is located on a three-foot (approximate) strip of grass that is in front of the sidewalk, making it difficult for someone using a wheelchair to get in the appropriate place to board the lift. The northbound bus stop did not appear to have barriers preventing travel to and from the center. The workforce center in Jefferson county is located on a hill that may prevent someone using a manual wheelchair from traveling to and from the southbound bus stop across the street. The northbound bus stop is alongside the center and is easily accessible. The workforce centers in both Gilpin and Clear Creek counties do not have fixed route service. Conclusion Twelve of the seventeen Workforce Centers are accessible according to the standards mentioned above. Two Workforce Centers are in counties where there is no public transportation: Gilpin and Clear Creek. Three Workforce Centers: TriCounty in Jefferson County, the center in Longmont, Boulder County, and the Adams County Workforce Center need some modifications to become accessible or safer for people with disabilities. Considering that these locations are major sources of employment possibilities for any citizen in the region, their accessinbility was an important factor in this project. It is hoped that where modifications can be made, those problems should be addressed as soon as possible. Note: The Grants Manager of the Workforce Development Council has said that she can be a liaison with the proper city, county or State government entities to insure the modifications needed to make the Workforce Centers accessible. She served on the CATS Advisory Committee.
3. Customer Profiles
Following the data obtained from the customer surveys, as well as their comments we questioned how to use them during our planning process. Since it was not feasible for us to map customer departures and destinations, we created
14
some fictitious profiles based upon some of the information gathered and comments gleaned from both the surveys and the Advisory Committee discussions. The profiles illustrate how easy or difficult it may be to get from one place to another in the Denver region if one has a disability. The CATS staff searched for a way to use the results of the survey to provide a picture of how easy or difficult it might be to get to and from workplaces. Instead of mapping, which became impossible due to the plethora of possible departure and arrival sites, we fashioned instead snapshots of typical customers of the Denver Metro system. Transit Customer Profiles Joan Joan, aged 35, is a recently divorced mother of two children, aged seven and three. Joan is a paraplegic who uses a Quickie power chair. She has just accepted a fulltime customer service job at an insurance company near DTC. She begins work in two weeks. She lives in Evergreen, has no car and has never ridden a bus. Joan is researching ways to get her children to and from day care and herself to and from work. Joan's new job is Monday through Friday from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00p.m. She has found a day care that will watch her three year old all day and the seven year old before and after school. Joan needs to be at the Evergreen Park-n-Ride at 6:20 a.m. and will need to have her children dropped off at day care before that time. Joan's address is 963 S. Wagon Trail Rd., Evergreen and the job is located at 8400 E. Prentice Ave., Englewood. She needs to travel nearly five miles from her home to the closest bus stop, a Park-n-Ride. Mountain W heels or RTD Call-nRide are services that might have been able to transport her to drop her children off at day care and then take her to the Park-n-Ride but neither is capable of scheduling this trip for her prior to 6:00 a.m. No other transportation services can accommodate this need and there is no taxi service in Evergreen. The only remote solution would be to find a private individual who could drive her but very few private citizens could accommodate her wheelchair. Joan's return trip in the evening will take approximately two hours. Essentially, this single mother would need to leave her home prior to 6:00 a.m. and would return to the Park-n-Ride about 7:00 p.m. From there she would need to get some kind of transportation to day care (assuming it stays open after 6:00p.m.) and then home. Her workday and commute would be about 14 hours per day, which would be difficult for anyone and especially someone with a disability. It is highly unlikely that Joan will be able to take the job she has been offered. She may be faced with needing to move to the Denver area to be able to work and support herself and her children. Carolyn
15
Carolyn is a single woman, aged 55, who has lived in Idaho Springs, Clear Creek County all her life. She has cerebral palsy with marked spasticity and communication difficulties. Carolyn uses a manual wheelchair and communication device. Carolyn's family owned and operated an antique store in town from 1953 until her father passed away in 1991. At that time Carolyn's mother sold the store and retired. Carolyn had been involved in all aspects of the family business would like to find a job in retail management but she has been unemployed since 1991. Job opportunities are few in a small community like Idaho Springs. She collects SSI and still lives with her eighty-year-old mother. Carolyn would like to pursue a job in retail management in Denver but she is unable to drive and there is no public transportation in Clear Creek County. The only transportation available in Clear Creek County at this time is called Project Support. It is a collaboration of the Volunteers of America and the Older Americans Act (OAA) administered through DRCOG. Project Support is a nonprofit entity that serves people 60 years and older, so Carolyn does not qualify for their services. If she were old enough to qualify for services, there are no daily scheduled trips outside of Clear Creek County. The VOA thirteen passenger van that delivers Meals on Wheels is also used to transport seniors for planned trips for shopping and limited entertainment trips. Project Support also utilizes Clear Creek County citizens who volunteer to take seniors for oneon-one trips to doctor appointments. The citizens of Clear Creek County would have to vote to increase property taxes to be eligible for RTD services. The manager of Project Support states that citizens have discussed this matter for at least twenty years. A planning committee for transportation in the county has been working to create some public transportation planning in the area, but has not completed its work. Unfortunately, Carolyn has no means to get to and from work at a job in Denver from her home in Idaho Springs at this time. She does not want to move away from her mother so her employment possibilities look bleak. Joel Joel is a 42 year old man who has a developmental disability and an unsteady gait. He uses a cane for balance. Joel's I.Q. is 55 and he receives services through the State Division for Developmental Disabilities. Joel has been working a part-time job during the second-shift (7:00 p.m. until 11: 00 p.m.) in the laundry at the Westin Hotel Tabor Center in downtown Denver for six years. His job was found by an agency that contracts with the State to provide vocational services. Joel's Job Coach trained him to do his job at the hotel and still provides followalong services with Joel and the hotel management so he can help with any work related issues; thus Joel can maintain his job. Joel works twenty hours per week and earns $7.50 per hour.
16
Joel has been living with a host home provider who is paid with State funds to provide him with room and board. The host home provider has given 30 days notice that he will no longer be able to serve Joel. Host home providers are difficult to find, as are group homes, which are the only choices for Joel's residential needs. Joel's case manager has found only one host home provider, a husband and wife, who have agreed to serve Joel in their home beginning next week. Joel was trained by his Job Coach six years ago to take RTD to get to work at 7:00 p.m. and his current host home provider had been willing to pick him up at 11:00 p.m. from work each night. Unfortunately Joel's new host home is further from work and his host home "Mom and Dad" are unable to transport him. The man works nights and his wife has to be at home with their three year old child. Unfortunately, the only route available to him is a Limited route that runs from early morning until noon. Joel could probably take a taxi part of the way to work and a bus into downtown close to the hotel but his 11:00 p.m. departure home means his only choice would be to take a taxi the entire way home at a cost of $31.00. Joel's gross pay per day is $30.00. Joel is undoubtedly going to be forced to quit his job since transportation costs are greater than his pay. Henry Henry is a 72 year old gentleman. He and his wife of 48 years retired seven years ago and moved to a town home in Highlands Ranch. Soon after the move, Henry took a part-time evening job at a McDonalds. Last year Henry had a stroke, leaving him with hemiplegia and some memory problems. Henry wants to return to work and McDonalds would welcome him back working 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. three nights per week. The problem is Henry no longer feels safe driving and his wife has never driven. Henry wants to go back to work and his doctor thinks it would be good for him so he asked a friend to check out RTD for him and found the route would require over one hour or travel each way plus having to transfer twice on the way to work and three times on the way home. This is much too intimidating for Henry who now has memory problems and has never ridden a bus before. Henry's friend checked out the cost of taking a taxi (the distance is 22 miles) and it would be more than $39.00 one-way. Henry will be unable to return to his job and may need to check a location closer to home. Tanya Tanya is a 17 year-old High School student in Adams County. She has just gotten her first job at King Soopers. She works from 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. weekdays and every other Saturday from 6:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. Tanya has mild mental retardation. She doesn‟t drive. She lives with her grandmother who does not drive or own a car and she has no other family or friends to help get her to or
17
from work. She wants to take RTD and her school can provide her with a travel trainer to help her learn the route. During the weekdays the route is straightforward, requires only a short commute to and from her home and the trip less than 20 minutes. No bus near her runs early enough to get her to work by 6:00 a.m. on Saturdays. She would have to walk 7 blocks to the bus stop and would arrive approximately 10 minutes late to work. Hopefully Tanya, and her special education teacher who helped get her get the job, can convince King Soopers that she will be a valuable employee and that they should make special accommodations to adjust her work schedule by ten minutes at night in order to allow her to catch her bus and also allow her to arrive for work on Saturday fifteen minutes later than the regular shift. Even if King Soopers can adjust her schedule, the Saturday morning ride is far from ideal. Walking seven blocks prior to 6:00 a.m. when it is dark and cold to get to the bus stop may not be safe for a 17 year old girl with mental retardation. Janet Janet is a 54 year-old woman who is divorced and living alone with her 16 yearold daughter. Janet has end stage renal disease (ESRD) and needs to go to dialysis three times per week. She lives near Himalaya Rd & Smokey Hill Road in Aurora and she goes to the East Aurora Dialysis Center. She is unable to use the fixed route due to fatigue and weakness. She is also too weak to drive. She has very limited access-a-Ride service because the fixed route in her area only runs a couple hours in the morning and then a couple of hours in the afternoon. She is able to schedule rides with access-a-Ride to go to dialysis but unable to schedule rides to go home because access-a-Ride can only operate during the hours that RTD fixed route service runs. Medicaid used to pay for her trips to dialysis but that ended several months ago with a ruling that Medicaid will no longer pay for medical appointments. Janet has a neighbor who has been picking her up from her dialysis appointments but she is moving out of state next month. Her daughter is in school and cannot transport her and she has no friends, neighbors or family that can help her. A taxi costs $17.60 per trip or $206.00 per month. Janet is living on Social Security Disability and her ex-husband seldom pays child support. She has difficulty paying the rent each month so she doesn't know how she can afford to go to dialysis, which she must do in order to survive. Mindy Mindy is a 46 year-old woman who has MS. She uses a manual wheelchair but is having some difficulty propelling it independently. Mindy has not been able to work for the last six years and receives SSI. Mindy is married. Her husband is a cross country truck driver who is often gone on the weekends.
18
Mindy and her husband recently moved to Commerce City. Mindy wants to continue participating in the same MS support group that she has been going to for years that is located in Arvada and meets the 1st and 3rd Saturday of every month. She has no access-a-Ride service near her home on Saturdays and she is unable to use the fixed route. Mindy cannot afford taxi fare and will be unable to attend the support meetings that have been so helpful to her for years. Randy Randy is a 27 year-old man with developmental disabilities. His IQ is reported as 51. Randy lives with his mother, a single mom, and two brothers ages sixteen and fourteen. Mom works two jobs and many hours as a waitress to support her family. Randy lives in Lakewood and receives services through Developmental Disabilities Resource Center (DDRC), the Community Centered Board of Jefferson County. Randy worked in a workshop for five years with door-to-door transportation provided but Randy has expressed a desire for several months to work in an integrated job setting. Randy's interdisciplinary team from DDRC and his mom agreed that Randy is ready to become more independent and work in the community rather than continue at the sheltered workshop. Staff at DDRC found a job for Randy at a McDonald's in Lakewood. Randy has been working 25 hours per week for the past two weeks as the DDRC staff teach (job coach) him to perform the tasks of cleaning tables, sweeping floors and emptying trash. Randy is learning his job and it seems to be a perfect match for him. He is personable and polite with the general public and he takes pride in having what he calls, "a real job". The hours and days that Randy works vary each week. He can be scheduled any five days Sunday through Saturday and his hours vary from noon to 5:00 p.m. or 5:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. Randy is not able to take RTD's fixed route system due to a lack of street safety skills. He has been certified to use access-a-Ride and has been doing so with the help of staff who have helped to arrange for his rides. Randy is easily confused by dates and times and he cannot read his work schedule, which is posted every Saturday morning for work the following Tuesday through Monday. Staff instructed Randy and his mother that they must give access-a-Ride at least 24 hours notice to arrange rides to and from work. They can schedule no more than three days in advance so Randy's mother cannot simply call access-a-Ride when Randy gets his schedule to arrange rides for the following week. They must also request that Randy be picked up an hour before his shift begins to be certain he is not late to work. If Randy starts work at noon, his ride needs to be
19
requested for 11:00 a.m. and Randy must be ready by 10:30 a.m. A window of 30 minutes on either side of a pick-up time must be allowed for access-a-Ride so Randy can expect to be picked up between 10:30 a.m. and 11:30 a.m. when he makes a request for 11:00 a.m. Once Randy and his mother called at 4:00 p.m. the night before he wanted an 11:00 a.m. pick-up but they were unable to schedule a ride because they did not give 24 hour notice. In that instance staff picked him up and took him to work, but once his job coaching is completed staff will not be available to transport him. Another time Randy's mother had requested 4:00 p.m. pick-up so Randy could be at work at 5:00 p.m. but she was at one of her waitress jobs when Randy started getting ready for work. Unfortunately, Randy was taking a shower at 3:35 p.m. and did not see or hear access-a-Ride when they came. Randy does not tell time and his mother forgot to call him to remind him to get ready for work. That day staff picked him up and got him to work by 5:00 p.m. Staff are concerned that Randy cannot arrange his rides himself and that his mother, who does her best raising two teenage boys and caring for Randy, will not be consistent in arranging his rides and that Randy will miss work and lose his job. Another real concern for Randy being able to keep his job is that when Randy is scheduled for work on the weekends he cannot take access-a-Ride because the bus does not run near his home on the week-ends and access-aRide is only available when RTD is available. Last Saturday Randy was scheduled to work from 5:00 p.m. until 10:00 p.m. His mother had difficulty getting permission to leave her waitress job for an hour to go home and get Randy and take him to work. He was 45 minutes late. The manager was unhappy. Randy could lose his job if his mother can't find dependable transportation for him on the weekends as well as being consistent about calling for rides during the week and calling Randy to prompt him to be ready when access-a-Ride arrives. Helen Helen is a 58 year-old single woman who lives in Boulder and works at University Hospital, Denver in the dietary department. Until six months ago she took RTD to and from work. Six months ago Helen was in an automobile accident and suffered a head injury that has left her with short-term memory problems. Helen no longer drives her car due to her head injury. Helen has no family in the area and few friends. She relies on Special Transit to take her to the supermarket on Saturdays and to church on Sundays. She is also suffering from anxiety regarding the effects of her head injury. She has received help from the Division of Vocational Rehabilitation, which has provided her with a Job Coach to help retrain her as a dietary aide. Unfortunately
20
it is unlikely that Helen will be able to ride the fixed route bus system again. She has tried to do so with the help of her Job Coach but she gets confused and forgets how and when to transfer buses. Helen now uses access-a-Ride to go to and from work. She has a friend who helps her remember to call in for a ride no less than 24 hours and no more than three days in advance of the needed ride. The difficulty she encounters is that she can often get from her home to work in 80 to 90 minutes, but she must allow for two hours one way because access-a-Ride states that their service may take as long as twice the time RTD fixed route would take. She requests pick-up at 6:00 a.m. and can usually get to work by 8:00 a.m. On days when she is picked up at 6:30 a.m. (access-a-Ride has a thirty-minute window from the requested pick-up time) she is sometimes late to work. Her employer is being flexible about the times she is late. In the evening she cannot leave work early since the employer allows her to be late in the mornings. She gets off work at 5:00 p.m. but she cannot request a 5:00 p.m. pick-up because access-a-Ride could arrive thirty minutes early. Therefore, she requests a 5:30 p.m. pick up. Some days access-a-Ride arrives at 5:00 p.m. Other times it is 5:30 p.m. or 6:00 p.m. The RTD ride used to take 1 hour 25 minutes and can now take as long as two hours 50 minutes. Although it seldom takes that long, Helen realizes that she may be picked up at 6:00 p.m. and arrive home as late as 8:50 p.m. Helen usually gets picked up between 6:00 and 6:30 a.m. and usually arrives home between 7:30 and 8:00 p.m. but that is a long day for her. She tires more easily since her accident and often gets home, eats a light dinner and is in bed by 8:30 p.m. so she can arise the next morning at 5:00 a.m. Suzanne Suzanne is a 47 year-old lawyer who is deaf. She uses American Sign Language and lip reading to communicate. Suzanne lives in Littleton with her husband and twin sons, aged thirteen. The family has only one car which Suzanne's husband drives daily for his job as a salesman. Suzanne utilizes RTD‟s Light Rail to go to and from her job at a downtown law firm. There are no buses running between her home and the Light Rail station so her husband drives her to and from the station each day, which is just over a mile from home. Her travel time is under 30 minutes on light rail. She walks three blocks to and from the law firm. Suzanne's husband is able to take her to the Light Rail Station most mornings with no difficulty, however there are times that he is unable to pick her up at 5:30 p.m. due to his sales appointment schedule. Often Suzanne must wait until 6:00 p.m. or later and in some cases when her husband has a late appointment she must walk a mile home.
21
When riding light rail Suzanne cannot hear the stops being called out and there is no bus driver that she can sit close to, as on a bus, to request he motion to her when approaching her stop. Signage in the light rail informing passengers of upcoming stops would be helpful to Suzanne. During the workday when Suzanne has appointments outside her office she utilizes the 16th St. Mall Shuttle, Light Rail and RTD. In all cases Suzanne has difficulty knowing when she is approaching or has reached her stop. She is unable to hear and there is no signage in buses, Light Rail or the Mall Shuttle Bus. When using the shuttle bus it is often so crowded with passengers sitting and standing that Suzanne has difficulty seeing out the window to determine when she is approaching or has reached her stop. Signage inside would help Suzanne and others who are deaf or hard of hearing. Conclusions The desire to work and make a contribution to one‟s community is a basic need of most people. In the case of people with disabilities their desire is sometimes dampened by the challenges of getting to and from the workplace or other locations that are important to them. As these illustrations indicate, while “you can get most places from here”, it cannot be done without a great deal of time, effort and in some cases personal risk.
CATS Goals, Objectives and Activities
Following several months of meeting and the completion of the needs assessment elements, the CATS Advisory Committee formulated major recommendations. The following four goals reflect their direction. Goal 1. Make the best use of existing transportation sources. The CATS Advisory Committee noted that there are a plethora of resources available for transporting people in the Denver Region. Unfortunately, many of those resources are not known to all of the major providers, let alone the customers. Rationale: Using resources efficiently and effectively is more easily done if those resources are known and identified to the public needing to use them, as well as other providers. The Committee thinks this is best done by an entity that can encourage coordination of said resources. Colorado has no mechanism for facilitating coordinated communications and decision making regarding limited transportation resources. The Committee recommendation is that an office of state transportation coordination be created to provide a focal point and the development of simple solutions to people‟s transportation problems, as well as creative new ideas. Objective 1.1 Create a Colorado State Transportation Coordination office. This office connects the state together in a pattern of transportation coordination and will control decisions made regarding funding designated for coordination
22
purposes as well as managing transportation resources statewide. Authority for the establishment of this office will be given by the Governor in perpetuity. The State Transportation Coordination Office will also have the authority to negotiate and create solutions based upon coordination of resources. The office would evaluate methods used to broaden the utilization of transportation resources, as well as creative methods for funding these ideas. Decision-making will be held cooperatively between the State Transportation Coordination Office and a group of advisory committee members chosen for fixed terms who represent various aspects of the transportation community in the state. Actions: Create the State Transportation Coordination Office. Build relationships with executive directors of relevant state departments as well as program directors under them that will support an executive order mandating a coordination office for the state. Receive gubernatorial authority for this office. Develop the business plan for beginning and maintaining an office that would facilitate and mandate coordinated transportation statewide. Locate initial funding as well as developing the long-term funding plan. Identify major partners in the transportation community throughout the state, as well as those involved with employment, health and housing services for person dependent upon public transportation. Develop the Advisory Committee and write voluntary member position descriptions plus a policy handbook for the committee. Develop a 3 year pilot project coordination office in the Denver area that will go statewide incrementally after the first two years of the pilot project. Goal 2. Develop and Implement Comprehensive Training and Public Awareness for All Coloradoans. This category includes Life Choice Training, Travel Training 101 for any and everybody needing to use or curious about using public transit; individualized travel training including effective and safe use of vehicle accessibility equipment and how to safely travel to and from stops; transportation driver training; public works employee training; and targeted public awareness campaigns. Rationale: An informed public as well as trained and aware employees will increase the success rate of utilizing public transit for many of one‟s traveling needs. Training needs to be varied, customized in some cases, and pervasive. Objective 2.1 Build a coordinated and sharable system of mobility management. A member of the CATS Advisory Committee, Boulder‟s Special Transit, is a model for customer training. Their Mobility Management program works with certified trainers who assist customers in learning how to make full use of all appropriate available systems. Their mobility management program provides certified trainers who assist customers in learning how to make full use of all the transit options available in the community, including the region‟s biggest public transportation system (RTD). The program works with individual passengers to locate the transportation option from among all choices that will best suit the individual's need and his or her abilities while allowing maximize
23
utilization of all the transit resources in the community. It allows people to have more individual freedom over how and when they can travel and also opens up capacity on Special Transit's paratransit services for those unable to use other transit alternatives. Training will be customized to suit the individual‟s needs and abilities. In some case only the Travel 101 course might be necessary. In other cases, a person would work with a certified trainer until there was the assurance that the person felt competent, confident and safe while traveling independently. Actions: Examine and choose from available models of customer-focused training those most appropriate for each area of the state. Provide train the trainer experiences for those administering the training in the future. Provide supplies necessary to start the training process in each area. Identify ways to fund the training process into the future. Evaluate the success of the training semiannually. Objective 2.2. Create a curriculum for and offer Life Choice Training. This program would teach people with disabilities whether quite young or much older to make choices based upon their reality. Such choices would include living near the major sources of transit and/or employment centers and including such considerations in determining where to move. Actions: Search existing resources for similar types of training that may be adaptable for this purpose. Work with interested parties to develop the curriculum. Train trainers for the curriculum. Identify prime target audiences for the training and establish a schedule for completing 6 trainings in one year. Identify sources of future steady funding. Evaluate semiannually and adjust he curriculum as needed. Objective 2.3 Provide regularly scheduled training in disability awareness for transportation, public works employees, and related government employees. Employee training will include curricula designed to increase the sensitivity of public works employees regarding everyday accessibility issues for people with disabilities who may be impacted by how these employees do their jobs. For example, public works employees may unknowingly operate snow plows in ways that eliminate curb cuts and bus stop access, and create obstacles in the path of unsuspecting citizens with disabilities. Transit and related staff need continuing opportunities to learn or update their knowledge of how the ADA impacts their work. Actions: Research existing models of similar training. Work with public employees in human resources to create the curriculum. 24
Identify and schedule target groups throughout the state. Identify and secure steady future funding. Evaluate the progress of training semiannually and make necessary changes.
Objective 2.4 Develop sensitivity training and policy guidelines that would be included in all state/city/county employee training courses and policy handbooks. Employees are not always aware of how their completion of a task may negatively impact someone else‟s‟ life. Providing specific training and guidelines to all government personnel in the state will make progress toward insuring that all are adequately informed about their responsibilities. Actions: Research existing policies and curricula that may be similar or applicable at least in part to this training. Working with human resource managers, create a curriculum and policy guidelines. Train the trainers Schedule 6 targeted training throughout the state in one year. Identify sources of future secure funding. Evaluate progress semiannually and adjust curriculum accordingly. Objective 2.5 Create and provide targeted public awareness campaigns throughout the state. An informed public will both understand the impact of public transit on their lives as well as the tremendous impact it has upon the lives of people who are transit dependent. Create winning campaigns through a competitive process that identify the best ways to reach various parts of the state with the transit message. Actions: Identify a source of funding for the competition and campaigns. Present a competition to locate companies and individuals who can build outstanding campaigns. Judge entries using a non-partial group of judges. Award contracts to several companies to create campaigns. Distribute campaigns throughout state. Evaluate their effectiveness semiannually. Enter winning campaigns in the APTA AdWheels competition. Goal 3. Provide a method for consumers, especially those who are deaf, hard of hearing or blind, to suggest accessible equipment to be ordered for new transit equipment. This goal asks that specific recommendations be made to transit and transportation providers regarding accessibility features to be ordered on new equipment. The crucial questions of how and when to make the recommendations are also important. In particular, members of the CATS Advisory Committee note that bus or train car features currently available to make buses and trains more accessible to those who are deaf or blind are not being implemented. Adaptations at stops and stations that will increase 25
accessibility for persons who are deaf and blind are also encouraged. The Advisory Committee and CATS project are not recommending adapting or retrofitting current equipment because such solutions are not practical as well as being expensive and difficult to do for either a large transit system or small company. Rationale: Many consumers on the CATS Advisory Committee expressed their wish that a new and improved method for suggesting accessible equipment be created. This goal would build a mechanism for consumers to do that. Objective 3.1 Create a small consumer advisory committee to determine how to reach this goal Actions: Consumers especially from the deaf, hard of hearing and blind communities will meet with transit representatives to determine what existing mechanisms might serve this purpose or if additional methods need to be established. If an existing mechanism will work, ensure that members of the committees or similar groups include people, possibly from the consumer advisory committee, who can make the recommendations needed. If no appropriate mechanism exists, work in conjunction with the transit providers and the state coordination office to create a vehicle to meet this need. Advise as agreed and evaluate the results every quarter. Goal 4. Connect riders with all available resources. The CATS Advisory Committee identifies a need for increased information sharing and resource coordination among various transportation modes resulting in more solvable transportation issues for customers. Customers often have difficulties with one leg of a trip or the return trip. If information was shared and existed in a format easily accessible to customers at any time, then customers might be able to resolve their own transportation problems. Currently, only a fraction of the available information on transportation resources is readily known to the riding public. If this were drastically increased and people knew how to access and use such a resource, they could create solutions through the information source. The enhanced ability to schedule and facilitate multi-modal trips might also eliminate some problems, such as a rider navigating longer distances from bus or train stops. The Advisory Committee suggested that employers might be willing to pay for short trips between a bus or train stop and their building. Another issue for riders was working past the regular hours of a transit service. Multi-modal trips can be used to fill the gap between what fixed route transit can provide and another provider can offer, especially for the after-hours trips that were identified by our survey as particularly problematic. This is another opportunity for a major employer, like the Pepsi Center, to provide a transportation benefit to employees. Trips that cross jurisdictional boundaries can also make use of multi-modal
26
solutions. A provider in one area or county can meet another at a boundary and allow passengers to easily transfer. Rationale: Increasing communication and resource sharing between and among both providers of transportation and the customers should result in more solutions and more efficient use of resources. Customers will be happier as well. Objective 4.1 Complete a systems needs assessment of the Denver Region to ascertain both what existing transportation resources are and the barriers to accessing them by providers or customers. Actions: Identify the scope of work to be pursued and a timeline for completion Identify funders for the project. Identify a group to examine the needs of the state. Identify contractors to complete the work and award the contract. Acquire copies of the Framework for Action from the Federal Transit Administration and utilize these tools for the group assessment process. Plan to start with the Denver Region and spread outward to the entire state in stages Disseminate the results to identified partners in the process of changing problems with the systems. Objective 4.2 Prioritize changes to be made and a process for making them. Actions: Using the Coordination Taskforce now convened, carefully prioritize tasks and create plans for implementing each of them. Identify avenues of funding for each task Identify current members as well as new partners, possibly from the private sector, that will help us to complete the tasks Evaluate the process after 6 months. Objective 4.3 Work with a diverse provider group and the state office of coordination to build the possibility for more multi-modal trips in the region. Actions: Identify current problems, such as no RTD buses being available after certain hours on certain routes Identify a practical solution within the means of the riders Identify and commit to the solution partners needed Create funding sources Notify the riders Evaluate the success of new options after 6 months and one year Provide the model to other regions in the state
27
New Developments Following six months‟ of CATS Advisory Committee meetings, the Colorado Mobility Coalition initiated a meeting among members of this group and two others to form a Coordination Taskforce for the purpose of moving forward with similar recommendations and action plans being developed by all three groups. The other groups represented were the Senior Mobility Alliance and the Medicaid Transportation Group. The Taskforce includes representatives of the four major transportation providers, as well as other providers; state agencies involved with coordination of transportation at the federal level; Rose Community Foundation, Health One Foundation; FTA Region 8; the Colorado Association of State Transit Agencies (CASTA); the Colorado Mobility Coalition; and others with a strong interest in maximizing the use of transportation resources. Together they are investigating and acting on plans to apply for funding through private foundations, CDOT or other state agencies, as well as the federal United We Ride program. They are going to the Governor‟s transportation specialist to seek an Executive Order on Coordination for the State, and facilitating a statewide systems and coordination assessment process using the FTA Framework For Action tools.
Pilot Project: The Hub
The CATS Advisory Committee and staff present this plan for a Denver Metro Region coordination center as a method for achieving some of the goals and objectives outlined above.
Statement of Purpose
The Denver Metro Region Transportation Coordinating Hub will provide the structure, technology and know-how to work with transportation providers to create more efficient and effective use of the many forms of transportation now available to persons with disabilities in this region. Specifically, the following services will be funneled through the Hub to allow sharing and joint use of such services. 1. Travel/Mobility Training 2. Employee Customer Service Training 3. Scheduling trips across county boundaries or during off-hours for a specific provider, and 4. Utilizing multi-modal trips as regular forms of transportation for destinations more difficult to reach. This increased level of customer service will be possible because of the open-ended, cooperative, and supportive relationships established among the providers and the Hub, as well as increased education and training of customers.
28
Description of the Business The Denver Metro Region Transportation Coordinating Hub (referred to as “The Hub”) will offer customers complete and current information about major transportation providers in the nine county Denver Metro Region. Highly skilled and customer-focused Hub personnel will interface via database information, phone, e-mail and facsimile transmissions with transportation provider personnel to form an action center for the provision of more trips to persons with disabilities, as well as other transit dependent people. These trips will become possible through teaching more current customers or potential customers how to use existing accessible public transportation; utilizing the resources of more than one provider per trip, and constantly searching for underutilized modes of transportation already existing in this region. It is anticipated that The Hub will become a model for other regions of the State to use when creating coordinated transportation services. Another function of The Hub will be to act as a liaison between potential providers or funders of some transportation services (employers, for example) and the existing partners of The Hub. New relationships will be built which extend the transportation possibilities for persons with disabilities and other transit dependent people. The Hub will also function as a conduit for information. Providers and other Partners will be able to promote opportunities for training employees or customers. Customers may report inaccessible pathways to bus routes or construction or weather-related obstacles that temporarily block access to a bus stop. Municipal authorities and outside sources for resolving such issues will be contacted. Customers may report inadequate service from a provider which will then be funneled to the provider for corrective action. Providers can report noshow customers or other customer situations that require corrective action. Providers may also need a place in which they can discuss relational issues with other providers in a confidential manner. The Hub can provide all of these services. How does it work for customers? A customer will call The Hub requesting service. Perhaps this person has not been able to get to her destination via public transportation or cannot return from a destination during the normal hours of operation for that provider. The Hub staff will find alternatives that work for this individual through use of up-to-date information and communication with providers. The exact details of the trip including departure and arrival times, type of vehicle, and cost will be provided to the customer. The customer selects the option that works best for them and can ask that a reservation be made in their name with the providers. How does it work for providers? Providers of transportation services and other types of services to the disability community, such as employment, will form
29
partnerships through The Hub. A partnership entails agreeing to be willing to seek innovative solutions and to support the use of multiple modes of transportation to be used for a single trip. Partners will support the work of The Hub through contributing an established amount of funding plus other in-kind services such as software sharing or office space. In return, the partners will acquire more ways to satisfy customer needs, access to expanded training options for customers and employees, as well as stronger and more mutual relationships with other providers and with the disability community and its advocates.
Marketing The Hub will be a service that makes it more feasible for people with disabilities to live the kinds of full and active lives most of us take for granted. They are the target market, whether young or old, in school, employed, wanting to be employed, or needing more opportunities to participate in the life of the community. The CATS Advisory Committee does recognize that although our focus has been on people with disabilities, an improved transportation system for all people will certainly improve the transportation options for people with disabilities. Therefore, the marketing will be for all riders with specific outreach planned for people with disabilities. The Hub will be marketed through use of print ads targeting both customers and potential partners. All ads will also be available in alternate formats, such as Braille or large print. Wherever possible the ads will also be available in Spanish. Advertising will also be incorporated into the existing advertising of Hub Partners, whenever possible and publications that cater to the needs and wants of the disability communities in the Denver Metro region. Another important aspect of marketing this service is to take the concept to providers of services for persons with disabilities, including housing, employment, advocacy, medical and health care, transportation, rehabilitation facilities, vocational counselors, and equipment. Hub personnel will create opportunities to present the service to people with disabilities as well as their families and the people who serve them where they congregate for other services and activities. The Hub will be listed through information sources such as the 211 and 411 information numbers. Opportunities to distribute materials and tell people about The Hub will be utilized. Whether it is the Nine Health Fair, Senior Health Fairs, or other public educational forums, materials and promoters of The Hub will be there. If any agency or company is providing training to its employees or customers with disabilities, that will be another opportunity for informing them about The Hub.
30
The Founding Partners The nine county Denver Metro Area does not have a coordination center or centralized mechanism for encouraging coordination in transportation provided. However, due to the extremely large geographical area covered by RTD, the Metro Region already exhibits a fairly high degree of coordinated transportation. The ability to coordinate access-a-Ride service with the service of other providers would extend transportation options for many people with disabilities. In addition, both Special Transit (ST) and Seniors Resource Center (SRC) have incorporated many ways of ensuring customers get quality service into their operations. ACTS provides a brokerage service that utilizes and works with many providers in the metro area. These three providers see themselves as mobility managers, making use of other providers who conform to their service standards to serve their customers in a number of service areas. Special Transit has also moved to a mobility management model including customized training of customers in the use of transit. These four agencies are not competitors but resources to the region. If their experience and expertise can be more fully shared and new findings supported, the Metro Region will be much better regarding transit and related issues. We would add Metro Taxi as well as other taxi services to this list of major providers because cab service has been an important alternative to other forms of transportation in the region. Other providers in the region are too numerous to name. They range from small individual- or family-owned car or limo services, to van services, to large taxi operations, to ambulance and medical transport, to company-owned vans for moving employees to and from parking facilities, to over the road bus companies, to airport transportation services, and to vans or buses owned and operated by nonprofits, churches or housing units. Many of these services could be useful and probably have been tried by some percentage of the disability community in the Denver Metro Region. If there was a method for more fully utilizing them region-wide, perhaps on the order of how Arapahoe County Transportation Services (ACTS) works within its county and for its contractual obligations, they would better serve to fill any gaps in existing transport services. Some of the other providers in the Metro area would require some negotiating and customer service training to be excellent providers to the disability community. The hardest groups to reach are the independent contractors such as taxi services, because their drivers are not employees and not as reachable as other transport staffing arrangements. In many cases taxi drivers have limited English skills and not much general understanding of how persons with disabilities fit into this culture.
31
Operating Procedures The services of The Hub would have to be started incrementally and built over time. Specifically, the relationships necessary between providers who are partners and Hub Staff, as well as the customers need to be carefully established and nurtured. A suggested list of start-up activities follows. 1. Establish working relationships and procedures among founding of the Hub. 2. Begin compiling data on founding and other providing partners for inclusion in the database for the Hub. 3. Initiate other activities in which the partners can easily share resources. For example, all of the major providers in the Metro area do various types of training for their employees and customers. What types of training could be shared? The partners could promote events jointly, could hold spaces in their classes for partners to fill, and could develop and pilot different ways of training customers or staff together. 4. Decide on the necessary shape and structure for the Hub. Does it require office space? Can space be found among the current organizations? How will the communication among partners and staff be accomplished? What is the final budget projection and how will it be funded? 5. Locate sources of initial and ongoing funding. 6. Identify other community links and partners to notify about and include in the effort. 7. Promote the services through media, disability community sources and agencies, and publications. 8. Begin full operations. Personnel The partners will be the final arbiters of the staffing decisions for The Hub. It is anticipated that the Hub would need to be initially staffed shorter hours but ultimately staffed around the clock. Starting from a bare bones operation to whatever the final form will be will require from one person up to an indeterminate number.
Process Lessons Learned From the CATS Project
Recruitment of Members The process began in August 2003 with Nancy Smith's attendance at the kick-off meeting in Chicago. Recruitment of members began as well. The objective was to have the committee comprised of fifty percent people with disabilities and fifty percent people from disability advocacy organizations, workforce centers, public
32
and private transportation companies and other governmental and private disability organizations. The recruitment process took longer than anticipated; the difficulty was finding people with disabilities who were willing or able to serve on the committee. Many state and private organizations that serve people with disabilities were contacted but very few were able to help identify consumers who might be candidates to serve on the committee. Although the process took time to make many contacts, the committee members were finalized in September with nearly half the members being persons with disabilities. Committee Meetings The first meeting was held in October with all members present. The committee proved to be an excellent combination of twenty-six persons with knowledge of transportation issues and enthusiasm for the CATS project. The committee members were divided into two groups initially, the Existing Services group and the Destinations group. These two groups accomplished a lot the first couple of meetings. After that the committee worked more efficiently working as one unit. The committee broke into smaller discussion groups to achieve the objectives of some meetings. The committee worked extremely well together and for the project goals. Most members attended the meetings regularly and gave valuable input that became the basis of the action plan. Transportation Surveys of People with Disabilities The development of a survey to obtain input from people with disabilities regarding their use of transportation and their specific problems, issues and recommendations was discussed by the Destinations group at the first committee meeting in October. Committee members gave suggestions for the content of the survey and places to distribute them. Surveys were developed and e-mailed to committee members for additions, corrections, comments and/or approval two weeks later. The final draft was approved the end of the month. Three thousand surveys were distributed early in November to forty-three locations of agencies, governmental and private, that serve people with disabilities. (see Appendix – for a copy of the survey form). Several problems were encountered regarding surveys. According to the work plan of the grant, the information from the surveys should have been gathered, analyzed and reported on early in November. That was not an adequate amount of time to accomplish all of the tasks involved. Probably the first mistake, and lesson learned for future surveys, was that a deadline date for the completion and return of the surveys was not printed on the surveys. When those responsible for the surveys made return trips to pick up completed surveys at the end of November, they were dismayed at how few had
33
been completed. They picked up the completed surveys, left the rest and again asked for assistance from the agencies to distribute the surveys to persons with disabilities. This process caused another delay. Trips were made to the agencies the second and third weeks of December to again collect completed surveys. In the meantime, the Director of the Colorado Business Leadership Network sent 4500 surveys via e-mail to individuals, agencies and employers of persons with disabilities. With unbelievably bad timing, the server at Easter Seals Colorado crashed two days later so no completed surveys could be e-mailed back to Easter Seals. Easter Seals got new equipment and new e-mail addresses but it took nearly three weeks, therefore another delay. The Director of the Colorado Business Leadership Network again sent 4500 e-mails with the new e-mail address to return the surveys. Ultimately 393 surveys were completed and returned. Many were personally picked-up from agencies; others were mailed, faxed, e-mailed or telephoned in. The process of analyzing and computing the results was lengthy. Due to all of the delays, an initial verbal report of completed surveys was presented to the committee in January and the written report was submitted in February. Mapping The most frustrating problem encountered during the grant project process was that of mapping. The intention of the grant writer was that maps would be made showing existing transportation services and destinations desired by people with disabilities such as employment sites, workforce centers and schools. Overlays of maps would illustrate gaps between services and destinations. Many attempts at mapping or locating an agency willing to do the mapping were made and much time was spent in the process. Unfortunately attempts failed due to people's lack of knowledge of what type of mapping software might work for this task, their lack of time to pursue the task, lack of funding to complete the task, or technical problems encountered. An attempt was made to map destinations by hand on a map. Workforce centers were easily done but work sites presented a real problem. An attempt was made to map the work sites listed in the random sample surveys but it seemed a futile project and was abandoned. A map generated by DRCOG for this report shows the service boundaries of the four major providers in the Denver Metro Region. This map illustrates the breadth of coverage available as well as some overlap. (See Appendix B for the map). The irony of our quest for the perfect map illustrated one truly positive note. To indicate all employers in the nine county region where people with disabilities work, or may become employed, would be impossible. Virtually all places of employment are potential places for people with disabilities to work and it would be impossible to map every place of employment in the nine county region.
34
Conclusion Lessons learned were: to put return deadlines in writing on any future surveys; to allow more time if planning a project involving the development, distribution, collection and analysis of surveys; and to research the feasibility of the performance of a task if it involves technical knowledge before including it in a grant. In spite of the problems encountered, the process and outcome of the CATS project was positive. The committee presented excellent ideas to improve transportation in a nine county area; gaps were identified and recommendations have been made.
Website Access
An overview of the completed CATS project will be listed on Easter Seals Colorado website, www.eastersealscolorado.org, within four weeks of the submission of the final report to CTAA/Project ACTION. There will be a link on Easter Seals' website and the State of Colorado, Office of Workforce Development. The entire CATS report will be available at this address: www.state.co.us/owd. The entire report will also be available at the Colorado Mobility Coalition‟s website: www.comobility.org
35