Creating Improved Performance Measures That Evaluate Public Transit as a Ladder to Opportunity Saeed Reza Ramezanpour Nargesi, Kris Hohn, Sheida Khademi, Vivian Miller, Lubia Gwak, Stephen Mattingly, Courtney Cronley, Noelle Fields University of Texas at Arlington Fifth Annual Summer Conference on Livable Communities June 2018

Introduction Current typical public transit performance measures (PMs) Do not emphasize important issues for environmental justice populations Employment Access to healthcare Other opportunities Healthy food Green space Family/social Transit agencies typically focus on Management/Efficiency Attracting choice riders Community-based participatory research (CBPR) used to create new PMs

Literature Review The selected performance measures should be: Measurable Understandable for non-transportation experts Viable for transportation professionals Related to an actual system operations Based on statistical measurement techniques Consistent with other systems’ measures Suggest the most appropriate cost-effective ways of data collection

Literature Review – Agency Perspective The recommended performance measures need to ensure: Riders and stakeholders recognize the performance aims of the system Accurate data collection gives more information than ridership alone Technicians are well informed for evaluating the system Modifications in system use objective standards to support changes Protect the transit provider’s interests from personal requests for changes in the system which are not reasonable

Literature Review-Goals The Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA): Increase Ridership While Maintaining Service Efficiency (Ridership/Efficiency) Operate Reliable Transportation Services (Reliability/Quality) Sustain a Customer-Focused Service Environment (Customer Focus) Ensure a Safe and Clean Environment for Both Customers and Employees (Safety/Security)

Literature Review Sample Performance Measure Categories Sample Transit Agency APTA KCATA BRATS Lebanon Transit DC Circulator TDP MATA FAST MTA FRTS PART FTA RTD Great Greenville area Transit PRT (Pocatello Regional Transit) HCM Spokane Transit Sample Performance Measure Categories Cost Effectiveness/Efficiency Customer Focus/Community Environmental Operation Reliability Safety and Security Service quality

Literature Review Results Categories for Agencies PM Category % of agencies consider this PM Category Cost Effectiveness/Efficiency 72 Customer Focus/Community 39 Environmental 17 Operation Reliability 28 Safety and Security 44 Service quality

Literature Review Results PM Category PM % of Repetition Cost Effectiveness/Efficiency cost efficiency 10 cost per hour 13 cost per mile cost per passenger-trip 23 fare recovery Customer focus/Community complaints 14 Operation (Service Coverage) passenger miles/trip 42 vehicle miles Operation (Service Hour) travel time 22 dwell time hours of service 17 passengers per hour vehicle hours Safety and Security accidents per 1000 miles 19 crash rate 25

Key Findings – Existing PMs Service area PMs could be improved Little consensus among agencies Primarily Operations Cost Effectiveness/Efficiency Transit agencies need new PMs to measure: Accessibility Connectivity Service quality

Community Advisory Board (CAB) Comprised of transportation experts, partners and other stakeholders (mostly from DFW area) Meetings are led by social workers using zoom software Literature review results presented in the first meeting Tailor best strategies from the literature and select examples from other communities for DFW region

Community Advisory Board (CAB) Will ensure the data collection process includes community engagement in the second meeting Review summary findings from the community engagement data collection process in the final meeting Inputs from CAB meetings will be used to conduct focus groups, semi structured interviews and surveys

Community Engagement Collect data with 3 focus groups, approximately 20 in-depth, semi- structured interviews, and surveys EJ communities and a broad array of stakeholders are surveyed regarding their perspectives on the first/last mile Focus groups and interviews will be conducted in-person; surveys will be administered online and in-person to maximize response rate

Focus Group Questions 1. Briefly describe your position, the length of time you have been in it, and what you do in your job that is related to transportation. 2. What does “transportation disadvantage” mean to you? 3. What do you think we can do to better plan for transportation in our community? 4. Identify any barriers to improving fair access to transportation opportunities? 5. What do you believe is important to close the gap in equitable transportation?

Focus Group Questions 6. Do you use public transportation? Why or why not? If yes, how often? What’s it like? How about Uber or Lyft? Would you feel more inclined to use public transportation if the system was different in some way? Incentives Ease of use (number of stops, convenience, comfort, etc.)

Future Roadmap Develop and evaluate transit performance measures Transit system’s economic viability/sustainability Equity Health Access to opportunity Evaluate candidate PMs Reliability Availability Complexity of interpretation Costs related to collection Timeliness

Case Study Application Evaluate First/Last Mile Alternatives Case Studies EJ communities Non EJ-communities Access to opportunity Evaluate candidate PMs Prioritize recommendations Review findings with CAB