1. RELATED TO AGENDA ITEM W1
Peer Review Update
February 20, 2014

2. Purpose
To provide NCTD Board Members with a summary of NCTD service performance in comparison to industry peers for the latest data available (FY 2012).

3. Background
Every transit agency and the area that it serves is unique in terms of:
Geography
Demographics
Business and Political Culture
Land use/Development patterns
Cost of living

4. Background (cont’d)
NCTD is unique in terms of the number and variety of modes it operates for an agency of its size
It is unusual for an agency with an annual operating budget of $95 million to operate:
Fixed-route bus (BREEZE)
Hybrid-rail Diesel Multiple Unit (SPRINTER)
Commuter rail (COASTER)
Demand response (LIFT)
60 miles of railroad with Class 5 track (90 mph operations)

5. Source Data National Transit Database – NTD
Established by Congress in 1974
Primary national database for public transit
Collects annual transit performance and financial data, monthly ridership, and safety and security data
Summarizes data in various annual reports
Integrated National Transit Database System (INTDAS)
Database created by the Florida Transit Information System to provide quick and easy data retrieval, visualization, and analysis of NTD data files.

6. NCTD Services
Based on the number of vehicles operated during maximum service, NCTD size compares to the transit industry as follows:
NCTD is 1 of 676 bus operators in the United States (84th largest)
NCTD is 1 of 4 hybrid-rail (DMU) operators in the United States (2nd largest)
NCTD is 1 of 24 commuter rail operators in the United States (17th largest)

7. Peer Review Analysis of Transit Systems
Not an exact science –goal is a reasonable apples to apples comparison
NCTD’s uniqueness in terms of modes operated results in peer transit systems that are significantly larger in terms of vehicles operated and population served.

8. Comparison Metrics Cost and Financial Efficiency: Cost Effectiveness:
Operating cost per revenue mile
Operating cost per revenue hour
Cost Effectiveness:
Operating cost per passenger trip
Farebox recovery
Average fare per passenger
Service Effectiveness:
Passenger trips per revenue mile
Passenger trips per revenue hour

9. Motor Bus
Service area comparisons:

10. Motor Bus
Cost and financial efficiency comparisons:

11. Motor Bus
Cost effectiveness comparisons:

12. Motor Bus
Service effectiveness comparisons:

13. Hybrid Rail
Service area comparisons:

14. Hybrid Rail
Cost and financial efficiency comparisons:

15. Hybrid Rail
Cost effectiveness comparisons:

16. Hybrid Rail
Service effectiveness comparisons:

17. Commuter Rail
Service area comparisons:

18. Commuter Rail
Cost and financial efficiency comparisons:

19. Commuter Rail
Cost effectiveness comparisons:

20. Commuter Rail
Service effectiveness comparisons:

21. Conclusions
NCTD is performing well especially in terms of cost and financial efficiency. This was also consistent with the TDA audit findings.
NCTD performance related to cost and service effectiveness is driven by geography, land use, and population.
Peer review analysis is a reminder of the significant transportation assets that this region has invested in to support transportation, economic development, and environmental goals—most regions can only dream of the assets that we have in operations today!

22. Questions/Comments