CTR Performance 2015/2016 Cycle Aggregate Report I’m Robert Gibson, Performance Analyst in the Practical Solutions Engineering and Planning group. Today, Present analysis of the performance of the CTR program, informed by the 2015/2016 Aggregate report Robert Gibson Performance Analyst Roger Millar Secretary of Transportation CTR Performance WSDOT Nisqually Board Room April 28, 2017

The Source – Aggregate Report Collects the results of the individual surveys and aggregates on a site by site basis, where we can then analyze it in different ways Fifth consecutive survey cycle conducted with consistent methodology – 10 years of data From the efficiency act 955 Sites counted towards goal If you have any questions about HOW that report is produced, Michael will be available for questions at the end, but I’m going to jump to the analysis. Michael is available for questions at the end of the presentation

The Calculations 2007/2008 2015/2016 Approach: We have used the same approved methodology as previous years. Approach: Replicate the approved methodology used for previous cycles

The Calculations A Brief Overview: Compare baseline (2007/2008) results to current 2015/2016 results (at the jurisdiction level) Non-Drive Alone Rate Total Weekly Trips Total Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per Employee per Trip Convert the weekly survey results into annual numbers Add up and report the reductions in: Trips VMT Use a conversion equation to convert VMT into a Greenhouse Gas (GHG) reduction The methodology we use compares a jursidiction’s baseline NDAT and VMT, with their current NDAT and VMT

Participation This graph shows number of surveys distributed in each cycle. This is where we were.

After a decrease in the number of surveys distributed in the 2013/2014 cycle, back to average in 2015/2016 Participation And this is where we are. After a reduction in the number of sites surveyed in the 12/13 cycle, we’ve regressed to the mean at about 500,000 surveys distributed. Keep in mind that for these two survey periods the pilot programs were in affect, which influences the function of the different programs

Participation This line is the number of surveys returned. The percentage is the response rate for all sites.

Participation Increase in surveys returned. Slight reduction in response rate. This cycle, about 320,000 surveys returned A slight dip in response rate. A reminder that the goal response rate is 70%. But also that this data includes sites where we allow sampling, which drives down the % *Suggests that the dip in surveys distributed might have represented a shift in focus to get response rate up, which is still paying dividends

Participation This line is the number of worksites, so far that has tracked pretty closely to the number of surveys distributed.

Participation Slight reduction in worksites counted towards goal This cycle we have broken that trend, with the number of worksites decreasing slightly. How can this be? The number of employees per worksite has been increasing. In previous cycles the average number of employees per worksite was between 460 and 480, this cycle it’s up to nearly 520 Probably a sign of economic recovery, businesses staffing up. Also a few individual sites, Microsoft added 3 or 4 thousand employees and that has a real effect. Consider the median last cycle was about 230, this cycle it’s nearly 250

Non-Drive Alone Trip Rate In the baseline cycle, the non-drive alone rate was 34.3%. Our goal is 6% greater than that, 40.3% In subsequent cycles, the rate has been about 37% Non-Drive Alone Trip Rate The goal is represented by the dotted line

Non-Drive Alone Trip Rate In the baseline cycle, the non-drive alone rate was 34.3%. Our goal is 6% greater than that, 40.3% In subsequent cycles, the rate has been about 37% This cycle the rate increased to 39.1%, within 1.2% of our goal Non-Drive Alone Trip Rate This cycle the NDAT has improved to 39.1%, within 1.2% of our goal Why did this happen? I’ll present some more data before we start speculating.

Vehicle Miles Traveled and Greenhouse Gases The blue line is VMT per employee. The red line is GHG per employee Previously we’ve been content that in a rising economy, the rate has been fairly stable after an initial reduction

Vehicle Miles Traveled and Greenhouse Gases After a period with a growing economy and adding more and more employees, the vehicle miles traveled per person has improved, decreasing by about 7.4% from the baseline. in VMT and 12.9% in GHG. This cycle we’ve seen a reduction in VMT and GHG About 7.4% in VMT and 12.9% in GHG. GHG has decreased faster because one of the constants in the equation to convert from miles to GHG changed. The EPA releases a constant that represents the fuel economy of the vehicle fleet. Each year it has increased a little, but this cycle it increased by significantly more. Equates to about 79 million fewer miles annually.

Surveys Returned Composition Each cycle some sites enter or leave the program. These sites do not perfectly substitute for each other, creating a changing composition of survey population Sites tend to drop out without any clear patter, randomly, but they are not added randomly This is the full population surveyed each cycle

Changing Population and Cohorts Surveys Distributed as before Every site that participated the program in 2007/2008 is in the 2007/2008 cohort. You can think of them as the class of 2007/2008

Changing Population and Cohorts In the next cycle the total surveys distributed is made up of 2007/2008 and 2009/2010 About 100 dropped off from the 07/08 cohort. If they ever came back to the program they would still be in that cohort Added nearly 200, this is the 09/10 Cohort

Changing Population and Cohorts And again we add the 2011/2012 cohort. Dropped about 100 from 07/08, about 30 from 9/10, added 180 from 11/12 Net gain.

Changing Population and Cohorts And so on 13/14 and 15/16 added fewer Remember as we continue that the bulk of the program still started in 07/08 CLICK

Cohort Response Rates Survey response for each cohort. Speaks to the improvement in administering the program. And developing engagement. This is the thing we have direct control over.

Cohort NDAT Rate NDAT rate for each cohort 11/12 was much more Thurston County than previous (25% rather than 5%), less King (50%rather than 58%) 13/14, 15/16, much more King (68%, 75% respectively) could explain high baselines. Important to note that they are baselining at an already higher rate. Could be engaged already by advertising etc. Could be low hanging fruit, prime candidate for a CTR Plan. The UP group is about 15% of the population Remember that the 07/08 has an much larger impact on the statewide statistics VMT and GHG tell a similar story to NDAT since they are related. The bottom line is that every cohort is doing better than their baseline, and better than last cycle.

Thank you Any Questions? In Conclusion 955 Sites NDAT Rate 31.9%, up 4.8% above baseline Daily VMT 10.1 miles per employee, down 7.42% from baseline Daily GHG 18.8 pounds per employee, down 12.9% from baseline 79 million fewer miles annually Thank you Any Questions? Bring it back to the highlights