11 Travel Behavior Panel Surveys: Measuring the Impacts of Road Pricing in Seattle and Atlanta Travel Survey Methods Committee Meeting January 25, 2012

2 Project Background USDOT Urban Partnership Agreement (UPA)/Congestion Reduction Demonstration (CRD) programs fund selected cities/ regions to implement a comprehensive, integrated approach to reducing congestion –The four T’s: Tolling; Transit; Technology; Telecommuting –Recipients: Atlanta, Seattle, Miami, Minneapolis, Los Angeles, San Francisco National Evaluation being conducted by Battelle FHWA funds Volpe Center to perform household panel survey 2 Source: Wikipedia

3 Seattle and Atlanta

4 Evaluation Questions How did travel times, vehicle miles traveled, and daily travel budgets change at the individual/household level? Were there shifts in departure times or modes? In origin-destination patterns? For those who used the priced facility less, where did the reduced trips go? Telework? Combined errands? Route diversion? Atlanta: How do 2-person carpools adapt to the new occupancy requirements? What are the equity impacts of the road pricing policies?

5 Overall Study Approach Household Panel Study: same households before and after road pricing Seattle wave 1 survey Nov April/May 2011 Atlanta Wave 1 survey Atlanta Express Lanes open Oct Dec Seattle tolling starts Atlanta Wave 2 survey April/May 2012 Seattle Wave 2 survey

6 Overview of Study Population Peak hour corridor drivers: sample through license plate capture with match to registered address Seattle: SR-520 and I-90 Atlanta: I-85 and Buford Highway Peak hour corridor transit users: In-person intercept Seattle: bus stops, transit centers; park & rides; on-board buses Atlanta: park & rides in corridor: MARTA stations Corridor vanpool members: send to vanpool participants

7 Atlanta Sample Development (Drivers) 52, 901 plates captured: Feb , 2010/ 6-10 AM & 3-7 PM 39,527 on I-85;13,374 on Buford Highway Clean out unusable records, duplicates, commercial, out-of state 46,245 plates sent to State for matching 91.6% match rate: 42,379 addresses returned Final quality check (e.g., remove businesses) 35,455 Survey invitations mailed out 765 undeliverables 34,690 addresses in final sample

8 Sample Development for Transit/Vanpools Seattle: in-person intercept October 18-21, 2010 –on-board intercept (ipad) on buses crossing Lake Washington –Postcard handout: Redmond and Bellevue Transit Centers; South Kirkland and Eastgate Park & Rides; on-board buses; downtown bus stops Atlanta: in-person intercept March 21-25, 2011 –Postcard handout only: Discover Mills, Indian Trail, Mall of Georgia, and I-985 Park and Rides, Doraville and Lindbergh MARTA Stations Vanpool recruitment: Georgia Regional Transportation Authority/King County sent an to registered vanpoolers who use the corridor inviting them to participate (~500)

9 Survey Materials Advance notification postcard Introductory letter FAQs Memory Jogger Reminder postcards and s

10 Online survey tool Household survey on demographics (completed by one person) 2-day travel diary completed by all adult (18+) household members Additional survey questions: typical commute behavior; typical use of the facility; trip satisfaction; attitudes and values Phone option available; Spanish version of materials in Atlanta

11 Pilot Study Purpose: Test all steps of survey administration –Recruitment method (license plate capture and transit intercept; effectiveness of materials; incentive structure) –Online tool: questionnaire design and functionality, survey duration –Obtain estimate of response rate 11 Modal Segment Seattle Response Rate Atlanta Response Rate Auto9.6% (N=175)8.9% (N=176) Transit18.3% (N=119)14.7% (N=49) 294 households225 households NOTE: “Completion” defined as all adult members of the household complete their travel diary

12 Pilot Study, continued Findings: Overall, no major issues or problems –Cut survey questions due to comments on length –Clarify several error messages/instructions –Add response categories for some questions Trip purpose: “exercise/gym” –Increase automation Pre-populate starting point for day 2 trip roster with ending point from day 1 –Utilize $15 gift card incentive (resulted in 9.4% response) $10 gift card: 7.0% response rate $10 gift card with enclosed $1 bill: 9.8% response rate $15 gift card with enclosed $1 bill: 11.8% response rate

13 Incentives and Panel Maintenance Each household receives $15 gift card after wave 1 completion; $30 after wave 2 completion Approximately 3 contacts per household –graphic display of findings (~3 months after wave 1) –Seattle only: letter about wave 2 survey delay –After pricing: mini-survey to engage respondents and obtain initial feedback on tolling –Household update survey (several weeks prior to wave 2 survey)

14 Wave 1 Response 14 Modal Segment Wave 1: Total invitations distributed Wave 1 Completions Percent completed Auto31, % Transit 2, % Vanpool % Total37, NOTES: “Completion” = All adult members of the household completed all surveys Household Completion Rates by Recruitment Mode Seattle (November 2010) Atlanta (April/May 2011) Household Completion Rates by Recruitment Mode Modal Segment Goal for Wave 1 Goal for Wave 2 Auto Transit + vanpool Total Modal Segment Wave 1: Total invitations distributed Wave 1 Completions Percent completed Auto35, % Transit 2, % Vanpool % Total38,

15 Wave 1 Methodology Notes Respondent Burden –Rough estimates come from RSG data on respondents’ web-based survey times –This does not include time for filling in Memory Joggers or other work –Averaged 4 minutes per household for initial screener –Approx. 10 minutes per person per day for diary and related questions –44 minutes total for a typical 2-adult household Item Non-Response: –Essentially none due to design of online survey –~10% selected “prefer not to answer” on income question Survey medium: –At least 95% of respondents used online tool, but telephone option was available and used

16 Methodology Notes, continued Non-response Bias: –Analyzed via comparison of completed surveys against partial completions and external benchmarks (including other corridor studies, Census, and Acxiom data) –Household size appears to be the only key variable with a bias – the achieved sample has fewer large households

17 Lessons Learned Pilot your survey Spend the extra time needed to develop a high quality online survey; provide clear, concise directions –Pop-up windows, map of corridor Advance planning is critical –License plate capture process differs by state Be flexible –Added travel days in Atlanta to boost response rate –Enhanced panel maintenance with “mini-survey” to engage respondents

18 Next Steps Focus groups in Seattle (February 2012) Panel maintenance “mini-survey” in Seattle and Atlanta (January/February, 2012) Final version of wave 2 surveys Household update and wave 2 survey administration

19 Comments? Questions? Margaret Petrella, Social Scientist The Volpe Center