Docstoc

Subcontractor Taxi

Document Sample
Subcontractor Taxi Powered By Docstoc
					                                                                  HB 1663 Ad Hoc Committee




MEMORANDUM
DATE:            July 14, 2006

TO:              Transition Committee
                 Ad Hoc Committee

FROM:            Kimberly Robb, Accessibility Specialist

RE:              Summary of July 14, 2006 Ad Hoc Committee Meeting

The next Ad Hoc Committee meeting will be held, Thursday, August 17, 2006 from
10:00 to 12:00 a.m. at the RTA offices, located at 175 W. Jackson Blvd., Chicago.
Pease call me at (312) 913-3146 (voice) or (312) 913-3122 (TTY) if you need an
accommodation.

On Friday, July 14, 2006, the Ad Hoc Committee met. Those in attendance are listed at
the end of this memo. This memo is a summary of the items covered. If your recollection
of the meeting differs, please feel free to contact me at (312) 913-3146 (voice) or (312)
913-3122 (TTY).

Approval of Minutes: Kimberly Robb called for the approval of the June 15, 2006
minutes. John Robinson, CTA Customer, made the motion to accept these meeting
minutes. Larry Biondi, of Progress CIL, seconded the motion. There was no discussion
and the committee voted unanimously to approve the June 2006 meeting minutes.

Update on Transition Committee: Kimberly Robb started by reminding the committee
that Pace is now proving the ADA Paratransit service in the city of Chicago. She
preceded to hand the meeting over to Tom Groeninger. He in turn provided the
committee with an update on the transition progress. In his report, He began by thanking
the CTA staff for all their work with respect to the transition.

Mr. Groeninger stated that 30 supervisors were on the road during the initial days of the
transition. This furnished Pace with information regarding “hot spots” and congestion
areas. Staff was also on-site at the carrier offices and available at the Taste of Chicago.

Pace also staffed a command center in their downtown office. The command center was
a site for dispatching vehicles and taking complaints. Several staff called customers who
attended the aldermanic meetings in order to receive feedback on the service.

In closing his report, Mr. Groeninger noted that they have learned a lot in the initial days
of the transition. They are meeting regularly with the carriers and are looking at on-time
performance. He also mentioned that the phones are an issue they are investigating as
well.



C:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\90a8a92d-d562-4c03-aaf3-f68c33a887ea.doc
                                                                  HB 1663 Ad Hoc Committee




Monica Hefner, with Access Living, brought forth three issues that she heard from
Access Living constituents. These issues include the following;

       Monthly passes being available at other locations in the city
       A book listing the guidelines regarding the service be developed
       Pace does not remove the red and blue striping from the vehicles so people with
        visual disabilities can recognize the vehicle

John Robinson asked if Pace will continue with the carrier of choice by customers. Tom
Groeninger stated that for the time being, things will run the same as they had in the
past. However, things will need to change in the future. Mary Beth Clark, with Pace,
reminded the committee that before things would change, Pace expects all of the carriers
to be at the same high level of service quality.

Pearl Matthews, with Access Living, asked if Pace monitors dispatching. Mr. Groeninger
stated that a voice logger system has been installed that records all calls related to
scheduling and dispatching.

John Robinson asked if Pace made any decisions regarding door-to-door verses curb-to-
curb. Mr. Groeninger responded by stating that they are still investigating this issue.

Christopher Lake, Customer, asked if Pace made any decisions regarding the time of
scheduling trips or the possibility of internet scheduling. Mr. Groeninger stated that at
this time they have not made any decisions regarding this issue, although internet
scheduling may be possible in the future.

John Robinson asked if Pace will continue the thrust with inspections. Mr. Groeninger
responded affirmatively.

IDOT/RTA Paratransit Study: Jay Ciavarella, with the RTA, introduced Will Rodman,
the study consultant. Mr. Rodman reviewed the consultant’s accomplishments thus far
with respect to the study, as well as the findings (see attachment).

Both John Robinson and Larry Biondi stated that they appreciated all of the information
Mr. Rodman supplied. He asked how much time was spent with each carrier. Mr.
Rodman replied that one full day was spent with each carrier.

Regional ADA Advisory Committee: Kimberly Robb informed the committee that she
spoke with Commissioner Karen Tamley, from the Mayor’s Office for People with
Disabilities. Ms. Robb stated that Commissioner Tamley suggested that a subcommittee
meeting be scheduled to discuss the formation of the Regional ADA Advisory Committee.
The entire committee agreed. The subcommittee was set for Thursday, August 3, 2006
from 1:00 until 3:00 PM. Both Pearl Matthews and Monica Hefner will attend via
conference call.

Other Issues: Kimberly Robb asked if there was any other business at this time. Since
no other issues were raised, Ms. Robb stated the next meeting would be Thursday


C:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\90a8a92d-d562-4c03-aaf3-f68c33a887ea.doc
                                                                        HB 1663 Ad Hoc Committee




August 17, 2006. She added she will not be present at this meeting; however, Jay
Ciavarella will chair the meeting in her stead.

Attendance List:

Committee Members
Kimberly Robb, RTA                                            (312) 913-3146
Christine Montgomery, CTA                                     (312) 681-4620
Mary Beth Clark, Pace                                         (847) 228-2352
Krista Erickson, Customer – via telephone                     krista@intenex.net
John Robinson, Customer                                       (312) 353-7776 ext. 2671
Larry Biondi, Progress CIL                                    (708) 209-1500
Monica Heffner, Access Living                                 (312) 253-7000
Pearl Matthews, Access Living                                 (312) 253-7000
Christopher Lake, Customer                                    (312) 335-3704

Service Board Staff
Terry Levin, CTA                                              (312) 681-4610
Melinda Metzger, Pace                                         (847) 228-2302
Tom Groeninger, Pace                                          (847) 228-2477
Barbara Lesser, RTA                                           (312) 913-3283
Jay Ciavarella, RTA                                           (312) 913-3252

Consultants
Will Rodman, Nelson Nygaard

Public
Garland Armstrong, Customer                                       (708) 366-7496
Heather Armstrong, Customer                                       (708) 366-7496
Jim Watkins, Customer                                             (773) 773-0546
Bob Jans, CDT                                                     (312) 633-2750
Tim Jans, CDT                                                     (312) 633-2750
Joel Sheffel, WSANA                                               (708) 383-6258




C:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\90a8a92d-d562-4c03-aaf3-f68c33a887ea.doc
                                                                  HB 1663 Ad Hoc Committee




                          RTA ADA Paratransit Funding Plan
                    Status Report for Review by Ad Hoc Committee

Key Study Tasks Completed

       Collect and review CTA and Pace service data and documentation
       Interview CTA and Pace management staff
       Interview and observe carrier management and staff

Tasks Currently Underway - To Be Completed by August 1

       Analyze CTA and Pace service performance data
       Perform a peer review for CTA and Pace paratransit services
       Perform an analysis of trips (origins and destinations)
       Identify and recommend improvements to:
         Operational, administrative, and support functions
         Service policies
         Service design components
       Assess Feasibility and Benefits of Coordination
       Preparation and Submission of Draft Technical Memorandum #1 (for
        review by Ad Hoc Committee)

Tasks to be completed by September 1

       Preparation and Submission of Final Technical Memorandum #1
       Identify and Recommend Alternative Funding Sources
       Preparation and Submission of Draft Technical Memorandum #2 (for
        review by Ad Hoc Committee)

Tasks to be completed by November 15
    Preparation and Submission of Final Technical Memorandum #2
    Preparation and Submission of Draft/Final RTA ADA Paratransit Funding
      Plan (for review by Ad Hoc Committee)

Preliminary Findings to Date: Former CTA Special Services
    ADA ridership on Special Services at 1.7 million in 2005 is 3 rd highest; only
      the systems in NYC and LA are bigger.
    The ridership per capita is similar to the peer systems’ average.
    Cost per trip ($27.76 including admin) is below the peer systems’ average;
      however, increases of 15% to 20% would likely have occurred had CTA re-
      bid the service due to significant increases in carrier costs since 9/11, most



C:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\90a8a92d-d562-4c03-aaf3-f68c33a887ea.doc
                                                                  HB 1663 Ad Hoc Committee




        notably fuel and insurance, and to address prospective risk associated with
        future cost increases.
       Average trip length at 8.5 miles per trip is 2nd shortest among the peers;
        this helps explain low cost per trip.
       Reservation hours from 6am to 9pm on weekdays are the 2 nd longest
        among the peers.
       Special Service’s fare level is in the middle of the pack. Some of the
        higher fare levels among the peers include Dallas ($2.50), Minneapolis/St.
        Paul ($3.50 peak, $2.50 off-peak), and San Jose ($3.50).
       Just as many of CTA’s peers provide door-to-door as curb-to-curb service.
       On-time performance (87%) is slightly lower than other systems with 20
        minute pick-up windows.
       Reported average hold-times are consistently under the 2:30 minute
        standard; however, this does not account for the number of calls that do
        not get through.
       All three carriers are serving trips throughout the service area.
       Trips peak between 7 and 10 am and 1 to 3 pm. The busiest hour is 2 pm.
       Trip making during the mid-day period (between 10 am and 1 pm) is higher
        than at many systems.
       97% of Special Services trips are entirely within CTA’s required ADA
        service area (compared to 96% for Pace).

Key Differences between Special Services and Pace Paratransit
   ADA Ridership: CTA: 1.7 million trips; Pace: 459,000 trips
   Carrier Unit Cost: CTA: $26.84 per trip; Pace: $28.76 per trip
   Service areas: CTA: 1 with 3 carriers; Pace: 8 with 1 carrier per service
      area
   Carrier rate structure: CTA: per trip; Pace: per hour
   User choice: CTA: allowed up to carrier limits; Pace: each customer
      assigned to the carrier for their area
   Reservation hours: CTA: 6 am to 9 pm on weekdays (8 pm on weekends);
      Pace: varies by area
   Same-day trip requests: CTA: not accepted; Pace: accepted on space-
      available basis
   Will-calls: CTA: allowed; Pace: not-allowed
   Primary Method of Assigning Trips to Vehicles: CTA: dispatched; Pace:
      advance scheduled
   Level of Driver Assistance: CTA: door-to-door; Pace: curb-to-curb
   Fare Level: CTA: $1.75; Pace: $2.50/$3.00
   Attendants and Companions: CTA: one attendant rides free, companions
      pay full fare; Pace: first companion rides free.



C:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\90a8a92d-d562-4c03-aaf3-f68c33a887ea.doc
                                                                  HB 1663 Ad Hoc Committee




       Pick-up window: CTA: 0 to 20 minutes (60 min for will-call); Pace: -15/+15
        minutes
       Vehicles: CTA: supplied by carriers; Pace: supplied by Pace
       Coordination: CTA: CDOA and RTA trips served; Pace: RTA trips served;
        Ride DuPage serves agency trips and utilizes taxi subcontractor.

Preliminary Findings to Date: TAP and Mobility Direct
    Ridership of TAP/Mobility Direct has been increased 20%, from 521,000 in
      2004 to 627,000 in 2005.
    CTA subsidized an average of $13.73 per trip in 2005, which works out to
      an average trip length of 5 miles. This included the $2.50 administration
      fee that is split between the taxi company and the driver.
    In Denver and Houston, the average subsidies were $7.00 and $6.80 per
      trip, respectively in 2005.
    75% of customers who use TAP do not use Special Services at all.
    TAP ridership peaks during the middle of the day, suggesting that TAP is
      used more for discretionary trips than is the case with Special Services.
    Frequent TAP users ride Special Services no less than infrequent TAP
      users. Given this, TAP must be viewed more as an additional service with
      its own budget, and less as a strategy of diverting Special Services trips to
      a service with a lower subsidy.
    Peer taxi programs exist in Denver and Houston. As with TAP/Mobility
      Direct, these programs are only available to ADA certified customers;
      however, these services are considered non-ADA paratransit services.
    Vouchers in Denver and Houston are given directly to the taxi companies
      as opposed to the customers, requiring other -- albeit less labor-intensive --
      fraud-control measures.
    In these two cities, the taxi program customers pay cash for their share of
      the fare. The base fare is equivalent to the ADA Paratransit fare.
    In Houston, requests for service are placed with the taxi companies, as is
      done in Chicago. In Denver, requests are placed with the call center
      contractor who also intakes requests for ADA paratransit service.
    On one hand, centralized intake of requests reduces the need for
      administrative audits. On the other hand, this does not accommodate
      hailing well. It is assumed that a significant percentage of TAP customers
      hail cabs.




C:\Docstoc\Working\pdf\90a8a92d-d562-4c03-aaf3-f68c33a887ea.doc

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:159
posted:8/17/2011
language:English
pages:6
Description: Subcontractor Taxi document sample