5. Evaluation of Coordination Policy Options and Recommendations

North Dakota has not had a history of formal coordination initiatives at the state or local level; however, several providers have developed informal coordination arrangements. Human service agency representatives, transit providers, and state funding agency personnel participating in this study's advisory committee and regional meetings endorse the concept of increased transportation coordination. As indicated in Chapter 4, participants at the regional meetings hoped for the following benefits to derive from increased coordination:

• Better coordination between DOT and Human Services transportation systems,
• Single source of information for local transportation users,
• Expanded hours of service,
• Services that are available to general public,
• Expanded availability of services in rural areas,
• Connections from rural areas into regional centers,
• Connections to commercial transportation providers,
• Connections between regional systems to provide state-wide service, and
• Improved operating efficiencies leading to lower per-trip costs to the governmental funding agencies and the users.

In addition to these benefits from coordination, state funding agency officials also hoped that improved coordination at the local level would result in more efficient grant and contract administration.

The review of the literature and the experience of other states reported in Chapter 2 suggest successful coordination requires actions at both the state and local levels. At the state level, funding agencies for both public transit and human service transportation need to communicate with each other to minimize barriers to coordination at the local level such as overly restrictive rules on the use of assets and operating funds, conflicting data collection and reporting requirements and other administrative burdens. State approaches to promote coordination generally are of two types: mandates (legislative or administrative) that require coordination at the local level and/or combine state funding from a number of sources into a single funding stream available only to a coordinated systems, or incentive programs that provide special funds to coordinated systems that are not available to uncoordinated ones.

At the local level, coordination can be increased in response to the state mandates or incentives or it can be locally generated by programs to increase communication at the local level and by providing training and technical assistance to local providers. Over the past 30 years coordinated systems have been developed throughout the country as the result of local initiatives by groups and individuals that believed that better service at a lower cost was available to their customers and clients through coordination than could be achieved by continuing separate systems.

The best approach to encouraging coordination is to take steps at both the state and local levels to increase the likelihood of successful efforts. Therefore, the options presented in this chapter address policies and actions at both levels. While many options could have been proposed that would increase the likelihood of successful coordination at the state and local levels, the five options presented in this chapter were developed to represent a range of levels of effort and impact so that the advisory committee and state policy makers could consider the benefits and costs of several different options.

5.1 Evaluation Criteria

Any effort to select among a group of options requires the application of evaluation criteria to determine the "best" option, or at least to consider how or whether a particular option helps achieve a particular policy objective. Therefore to provide an evaluation framework for the coordination options proposed here, six evaluation criteria are proposed that were derived from the list of benefits of coordination that the regional forum participants identified and that are summarized at the beginning of this chapter.

The six evaluation criteria proposed for the North Dakota coordination options are:

1. Impact on quality of service to customers defined in terms of the customers' ability to obtain one-stop access to transportation information and ride scheduling,
2. Availability of service - capacity, service area, hours of service, connectivity to other regions and other modes,
3. Administrative efficiency - grants administration, fund raising,
4. Operating efficiencies and economies of scale as measured in terms of cost per unit of service,
5. Implementation cost - start up and ongoing expenses related directly to coordination activities, and
6. Administrative effort to implement - the degree of difficulty in effecting changes in organizations and management both at the state and local levels.

5.2 Coordination Options for North Dakota

After reviewing the literature the discussions of the eight focus group meetings, four coordination options were developed that might be appropriate for North Dakota. These options were presented at the second steering committee meeting in June 2004. The consensus of the committee members was that options three and four both had features that they would support and asked the study team to combine the best features of each into a fifth option. Therefore, the following five options are presented here in order of impact, effectiveness, and implementation cost. The five options and a brief description of each follows:

1. Issue a policy directive from Governor to each state agency that funds transportation that encourages the agency and its grantees to coordinate transportation programs at the local level.

Each of the major funding agencies would issue a policy directive to grantees encouraging them to work with other transportation providers to seek ways to increase service, reduce costs and share resources. No incentives or penalties would subsequently be included in this option.

2. Establish a regional ride-matching program and ride brokerage via Internet-based information sharing

This option would increase customer access to existing services by providing an information link between individuals that need transportation and the many providers of transportation services.

Internet-based approach whereby transportation providers in a region would list their services and contact persons would allow users to make contact with organizations that might be able to provide transportation.

3. Require that all state-funded transit providers be part of a regional coordination organization for management and funding purposes.

This option calls for the state to mandate coordination in each region. Each state funding source would require its grantees to be part of a local coordination organization. The details of the structure of these coordination organizations would be prescribed by the state agencies. Each regional organization would support a transportation coordinator whose duties would be to apply for and administer all state public and human service transportation funds and seek opportunities to improve service in their region through cooperative efforts among providers. The regional coordination body would write the job description and hire the regional coordinator. Federal and state funds that flow through the state to local agencies for purchasing vehicles and operations for both the Departments of Transportation of Human Services would pass through the regional coordinator who would be the regional grantee with a responsibility to maximize the amount of service provided with the funds and minimize the cost of providing that service. The agencies and projects would have their own managers and compete for regional funds by proving they could provide cost-effective services.

4. Establish and fund transportation coordinators in each of the state's eight regions.

This option calls for the establishment and funding of a transportation coordinator in each of the state's eight regions. To avoid unnecessary administrative overhead, a two-tiered approach to the regional coordinators should be adopted whereby four coordinators in the regions with the larger urban areas would be senior coordinators and assist the coordinators in one of the four adjacent rural regions. Each of the eight regions would have coordinators, but the rural regional coordinators would look to their urban counterparts for assistance with grant preparation, recordkeeping, procurement, and other administrative activities. Coordinators would encourage coordination, information sharing, resource and ride sharing, and seek additional funding from traditional and non-traditional sources.

Each region would be required to prepare a coordination plan and provide annual updates to the state. This plan would document transportation services provided in the region by state grantees and indicate what steps were taken or would be taken to increase service and/or reduce costs through coordination activities. The state would assist and support the coordination efforts in the regions through funding, education, and reducing regulatory barriers hampering the coordination effort.

5. Establish and fund eight regional coordinating councils and coordinators

This options calls for the establishment of a state-level coordinating council and eight regional coordinating councils that include representation of providers and users of all publicly funded transportation programs. State funds will support a regional coordinator and necessary expenses. All state-managed transportation funds will flow through the regional coordinating councils. The state-level coordinating council will advise state agencies on funding allocations and barriers to increased coordination and will oversee the activities of the regional councils.

5.3 Evaluation of the Coordination Options

Table 5.1 presents an evaluation matrix that rates the five coordination options based on the six evaluation criteria. These ratings are somewhat subjective, but they are informed by a review of the impact of similar options implemented by other states or local agencies. This matrix provides a starting point for further discussion and evaluation of the best option for North Dakota.

As can be seen from Table 5.1, options such as one and two that are relatively easy to implement are also not likely to be very effective in achieving the service and cost-savings goals of coordination. However, the last three options that put some teeth into coordination by devoting administrative resources to the effort and tying funding to successful coordination efforts will likely produce the intended outcomes. Therefore, Option 5, the most comprehensive approach to achieving coordination at both the state and local levels, is the one recommended based on current conditions in North Dakota and the apparent willingness of state agencies and local transportation providers and funders to strive for increased coordination as a way to provide more rides at an affordable cost. The remainder of this chapter outlines an implementation plan to accomplish these coordination activities during the next year.

Table 5.1 Coordination Options Evaluation Matrix

5.4 Recommended Implementation Plan

The recommended coordination option (Option 5) calls for active promotion of cooperation among transportation providers and funding agencies with a goal of improving service and reducing costs. To implement this option requires a five-action implementation process that is described below along with details on the state and regional coordinating bodies and a timetable for implementation.

Regardless of which coordination option is chosen for implementation, it is recommended that all public transportation services which receive state or federal funding support from the North Dakota Department of Transportation become enrolled with the North Dakota Department of Human Services to provide Medicaid-related transportation services. A cross-check of the public transit operations listed in Appendix A and the operations which have received transportation-related reimbursement from Medicaid since 2002 (Appendix F) indicates that many service providers have apparently not enrolled with the Department of Human Services to become eligible to receive Medicaid reimbursement for services provided. Becoming enrolled to provide these services and seeking related reimbursement for services provided may be financially beneficial for these service providers, reducing operating deficits or permitting enhanced services.

5.5 Actions Required for Implementing the Recommended Coordination Option

1. Issue a Governor's Directive

The first step to implementing this coordination plan is the issuance a directive from the Governor to administrators of state agencies that fund transportation (Departments of Transportation, Human Service, Education, and Job Services) to appoint a member to the North Dakota Personal Mobility Council (NDPMC), assist in staffing the NDPMC, and encourage local grantees to participate in coordination efforts. The purpose of this executive policy directive is to indicate support for coordination from the highest level of state government and to assure that all departments give the proposed coordination activities the high priority that guidance from the Governor's office suggests. The directive would also authorize the formation of the required state and regional coordination bodies.

2. Establish the North Dakota Personal Mobility Council (NDPMC)

The Governor's directive would call for the formation of a state-level coordinating body to promote coordination and communication among state agencies that fund personal transportation, and between the state agencies and local transportation coordinating groups. The Department of Transportation should convene its first meeting within two months of the issuance of the Governor's directive and then the NDPMC should meet at least quarterly for the first year of two of its operation. Once the regional boards are functioning fully and the NDPMC has been through a funding cycle following the new review approach then the Council should meet at least twice a year.

Membership

Membership on the NDPMC should include from 10-15 members. The following departments and groups should be asked to name members to the Council:

• Department of Transportation,
• Department of Human Services (one or more members representing Aging, Head Start, Long-term care, developmental disabilities facilities, Medicaid programs)
• Job Service North Dakota,
• Department of Public Instruction,
• One or two representatives of user advocacy groups, and
• A representative of the private sector transportation providers

The Department of Transportation should be responsible for convening the NDPMC, staffing it, and naming the first chair. After a year's operation the Council should elect its own chair.

Duties of Council

The North Dakota Personal Mobility Council should be charged with the following duties:

• Promote cooperation among programs that fund transportation,
• Identify policies of non- transportation agencies that impact ability to provide mobility,
• Encourage enhanced customer access to transportation services,
• Identify barriers to coordination including duplicative or restrictive regulations or requirements,
• Establish eight regional coordinating councils and prescribe roles and responsibilities for these councils,
• Review and approve regional coordination plans,
• Review and recommend annual funding levels to regional coordinating councils for all state-administered transportation programs, and
• Report annually on the performance of transportation providers in North Dakota and on the progress in accomplishing the duties listed above.

3. Establish Regional Transportation Coordination Boards and Employ Regional Transportation Coordinators

One of the first tasks of the North Dakota Personal Mobility Council will be to develop and approve guidelines for the formation of regional transportation coordination boards in each of the state's eight planning regions. These regional bodies will be responsible for planning and implementing coordinated transportation programs and are the key to success of this coordination plan. The initial meetings of the regional transportation coordinating boards should be held within three months of the start of this plan's implementation.

Membership of Regional Transportation Coordination Boards

The regional transportation coordination boards (RTCB) are designed to promote coordination and communication among parties involved in personal mobility within a region and with activities that promote high-quality and cost-effective transportation through better use of resources. Therefore, all interested parties should have the opportunity to participate in the regional boards. Nevertheless, care must be taken to limit the size of the boards to allow efficient administration and communication among board members. At a minimum, the following groups and organizations should be represented on the RTCB:

• Fixed-route bus systems,
• Public paratransit operators,
• City mayor(s),
• County commissioner(s),
• Regional human services center,
• County social services office,
• Head Start programs,
• Long-term care facilities,
• Developmental disabilities facilities
• Chamber of commerce or other business representative,
• Consumer advocate, and
• School districts

Duties of the Regional Transportation Coordination Boards

Each of the eight regional coordination boards will be responsible for the following activities:

• Develop a coordination plan that identifies needs, users, present and potential service providers, funding sources, and a strategy for improving the quantity and quality of information and services in the region while improving the cost-effectiveness of state-funded transportation services. The plan should also include a three-year capital and operating expense budget for a coordinated system, as well as recommendations for joint purchasing and training programs.
• Develop a job description and screening criteria for the position of regional transportation coordinator.
• Solicit applications from individuals and organizations to be the regional coordinator and select best option for the region.
• Develop a regional information system that allows users and providers to obtain information about transportation services and arrange rides.
• Prepare grant applications and administer state and federal transportation funds.
• Develop an evaluation procedure to measure the performance of transportation services in the region and prepare an annual report that documents progress toward coordination.
• Solicit input from private-sector transportation companies (taxi, bus, non-emergency ambulance) on plans and on opportunities for them to coordinate with participate in the regional system.
• Review annual applications for operating funds and capital grants for all state-and federally-funded transportation programs in the region and make recommendations to the North Dakota Personal Mobility Council concerning funding levels and specific grants.
• Identify barriers to coordination that should be addressed by the NDPMC.

These coordination activities will require significant human and financial resources to accomplish and therefore state funding above and beyond current operations should be provided to each regional board. Preliminary estimates of these costs are presented in the next section.

4. Provide State Funding to Support Start-up and On-going Operations of Regional Boards

After more than 30-years of experience with coordinated transportation systems, research has concluded that properly implemented coordinated systems result in more and better transportation services at lower per-unit costs. This research also concludes that coordination, especially at the start, costs money for not only planning and start-up costs, but also on-going operations. Therefore, to advance personal transportation in North Dakota, additional resources will be required. At this point, the exact funding level required to implement this plan is not known; a better estimate will result from the regional coordination planning efforts of the regional boards. However, to give some guidance to decision makers reviewing this study, estimates of start-up and operating funding needs are provided.

Start-up Costs

To carry out their duties, the regional transportation coordination boards will need funding to prepare their plans, hire a coordinator, and set up the customer and user information systems needed to improve service. Because the need for transportation in each region is so great and the total funds now expended on public and human service transportation are so limited, care must be taken to minimize expenditures on planning and other administrative tasks so as to maximize funds available for service delivery. Therefore, grants to regional boards will be small and represent the minimum level needed to accomplish the duties prescribed.

The proposed start-up grants will be used by the RTCBs to develop a plan, hire a coordinator, and develop an information system for internal use and for use by customers. These funds are not designed to pay for on-going operations. The funding provided to a regional board will vary and will be determined by the size of transportation programs in the region. For planning purposes an average of $50,000 per region is suggested, recognizing that individual regions may receive from $25,000 to as much as $75,000 for these start-up activities. The total cost to the state would then be about $400,000 for one-time start-up expenses.

Because the needs of the region may not be identified until after the planning process is underway, perhaps a two-stage start-up grant program could be considered with each region receiving $10,000 to develop a plan and hire a coordinator, and then a second-phase grant to fund other start-up expenses.

Funding for On-Going Coordination Activities

One way to encourage increased coordination among existing transportation providers is to assure them that the costs of coordination will not be paid for by reduced services and that coordination activities will receive their own funding. Further, by providing categorical funding for just coordination, the state will be assured that these activities are given priority at the local level.

As was the case of the start-up funds, on-going coordination expenses will vary by region and should be considered for funding based on the coordination plan that each region submits to the NDPMC. Nevertheless, for discussion purposes an average of $50,000 per region may be adequate to provide planning guidance.

The funding levels proposed here represent a significant increase in resources devoted to public and human service transportation. Though funding is scarce, an opportunity exists to advance the quality and quantity of transportation available to North Dakota citizens as a result of these coordination activities. Funding may be available to do so once the surface transportation authorization at the federal level is enacted. Within the next year the federal government will reauthorize highway and public transportation programs and all of the current versions of the proposed legislation include a significant increase in federal funding for rural public transportation. A portion of this increase could be devoted to funding this coordination initiative.

5. Provide Training and Technical Assistance to Regional Boards

Successful coordination efforts require technical and interpersonal skills that may not be currently present in all regions. Further, activities such as data collection, development of information systems, cost allocation plans, etc, require significant commitments of effort by the transportation coordinators and other personnel in each region. To help train members of the regional transportation coordination boards, the regional coordinators, and other local personnel, the Department of Transportation should assist with related regional activities. This function could be fulfilled either with department personnel or on a contractual basis with an entity such SURTC. The purpose of this funding would be to provide support to the regions as they prepare their plans and to develop training and other resources that could be used by each region to accomplish its mission.

In addition to training, this support could include the development of internal scheduling and customer information systems and the preparation and tracking of annual performance reports.

Time Table

The five-task implementation plan outlined above could be accomplished in one year if the following schedule is applied. This schedule may need modification once the process begins. However, a tight schedule should be maintained to encourage meaningful efforts rather than endless planning and discussions.

5.6 Next Steps

Discussions with local and state officials throughout this North Dakota coordination study indicate strong support for increased coordination efforts on the part of public and human service transportation systems as a way to improve service and stretch limited budgets. This enthusiasm combined with the data and other background information presented in this report should help state and local decision makers refine the recommendations presented in this chapter and start the coordination process. Following a review of this report by study participants, the next step in the process should be to take the actions necessary to create the North Dakota Personal Mobility Council and the regional transportation coordination boards and then begin the detailed work of creating coordinated transportation systems in each of the state's eight regions.