2.6 Sampling of States where Coordination is Legislated

2.6.1 Texas

Texas is a much larger (geographically as well as population) state than North Dakota, but its transit coordination efforts are relevant given their focus on the departments of Health and Humans Services and Transportation. The Texas Legislature created the Office of Community Transportation Services (OCTS) in 1991. The purpose was to develop ways to coordinate community transportation across the state. OCTS is responsible for developing a statewide plan for coordinated transportation and collecting information about client transportation needs, services, and expenditures. As a result of 1999 legislation, the two departments were mandated to enter into a memorandum of understanding concerning coordinated transportation programs and services. They must also collect and share data that will assist in developing a statewide transportation plan.

The Texas Human Resources Code 131.003 and 131.005, authorized the OCTS to establish a standardized system of accounting and reporting and any Health and Human Service program that provides transportation services or funds for transportation is required to comply with the established standardized system.¹² The objectives of the plan include fostering operational efficiencies at the local level, streamlining administrative operations, improving client access to health and human services, and enhancing client transportation opportunities through collaboration with agencies external to Health and Human Services.¹³

2.6.2 Iowa

Iowa has been a pioneer in coordinating publicly funded passenger transportation services. In 1984, Iowa's General Assembly amended the Iowa Code to require that any entity spending public funds to provide passenger transportation within the state must coordinate with designated urban or regional transit systems in the area. Chapter 324A of the Iowa Code governs the transit system.¹⁴ To advance the coordination process, the law lists prerequisites to attaining funding. These prerequisites include such things as

1. Elimination of duplicative and inefficient administrative costs, policies and managements,
2. Elimination of duplicative and inefficient transportation services, and
3. Coordination of planning for transportation services at the urban and regional level by all agencies or organizations receiving public funds that are purchasing or providing transportation services.

Iowa has a transit manager's handbook which provides numerous guidelines for operating coordinated transit in Iowa. These guidelines include items such as funding sources, coordination planning and reporting requirements, training, and drug and alcohol testing guidelines. Iowa has an eight-member coordinating council with two support staff. The primary goal is to get decision makers together from various agencies that fund transportation to determine how to best coordinate services. While it is reportedly challenging to get decision makers from various department/agencies to be active participants.¹⁵ Iowa has created a political environment that encourages and provides structure for the coordination of transportation services.

2.6.3 Washington

Washington's State Legislature created the Agency Council on Coordinated Transportation (ACCT) in 1998. The ACCT provides a structure for advancing coordination and improving transportation options for older citizens, people with low incomes, people with disabilities, and children. In 1999, the Legislature amended the ACCT statute, expanding the responsibilities of the Council and the role of ACCT. Washington became the first state to define coordination by statute.¹⁶

Revised Code of Washington, RCW 47.06B, outlines a complex and ambitious work agenda for ACCT to achieve coordination at the local and state levels. According to this statute, ACCT must facilitate a statewide approach to coordination and support the development of community-based coordinated transportation systems. Prescribed characteristics include:

• Organizations serving persons with special transportation needs share responsibility for customers accessing services,
• There is a single-entry process for customers to have trips arranged and scheduled,
• There is flexibility in using the available vehicles in a community so that the ability to transport people is not restricted by categorical claims to vehicles, and
• The system must be user-friendly.

Washington's system is supported by a multitude of programs and agencies with different eligibility requirements, contracting, service delivery options, payment, and funding structures. It does not negatively affect the customer's ability to access service.¹⁷ Its goals are aggressive and are reportedly difficult to accomplish due to agency regulations and "turfism."

The Council has been operating for six years and has identified key roles for each participant. Council members provide direction and oversight for coordination at the state and local level. The Council guides staff work, approves seed money for demonstration projects, and recommends legislative changes to remedy barriers to coordination.¹⁸ It works with all forms of transportation including schools, transit systems, Medicaid, and other smaller programs including Older American Act, Work First, Washington DOT, Developmental Disabilities, Community Block Grant, etc.

2.6.4 South Dakota

In South Dakota coordination is encouraged through legislated incentive funding. For local projects to acquire FTA and state funding, they are required to describe their coordination activity. Up to 50 percent of the points awarded on an application are earned by these coordination efforts. Consequently, those transit entities not coordinating in their local areas are the last to get funded and receive funds only if there is money remaining.

In Aberdeen, for example, Aberdeen Ride Line coordinates with a number of local agencies to provide local transportation services. Assisted transportation is provided for low-income commuters, residents with developmental disabilities, children going to and from daycare, senior volunteers, etc.

River Cities Public Transit (RCPT) in Pierre coordinates with the local Head Start program to acquire and operate buses. The vehicles are used for Head Start and the public. Both parties benefit. Head Start spends less for purchasing the vehicle and does not need a driver, and RCPT has the use of another vehicle during parts of the day and full-time employment for the driver. RCPT also coordinates with the Lower Brule Sioux Tribe to purchase vehicles and subsidizes operations. The tribe pays the local match for purchasing the vehicle, permitting lower fares. RCPT provides transportation for work, medical appointments, and trips to Pierre (65 miles north of the tribal community).

2.7 States Where Coordination Evolved from Grass Roots

2.7.1. Ohio

Ohio has encouraged coordination by disseminating information and making funds available to coordinated groups through a competitive application process. To disseminate information, two volumes of "A Handbook for Coordinating Transportation Services" were published by the Ohio Department of Transportation's (ODOT) Office of Public Transportation and sent to Ohio counties.

Funding for coordination of human services transportation began in 1988 with funds from an oil overcharge.¹⁹ Since then, Ohio has used a number of funding sources to continue encourage coordination at the local level. Between 1996 and 2002, 35 different projects received $5.1 million in related funds. Ohio's DOT has entered into memorandums of understanding with other state agencies to encourage coordinated transportation in counties where public transportation is not available.

In 1998, the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission gave money to the Department of Transportation (DOT) to support coordinated transportation services. The Ohio Legislature also passed laws to create a statewide transportation coordination task force and require all counties to develop a work plan detailing the needs of all low-income residents in the counties. More recently, ODOT began sponsoring bi-monthly round-table-discussion meetings for those involved with coordination to discuss marketing, developing contracts, dealing with difficult people, and other topics pertinent to transit operators. Ohio has expanded and improved its transit services to rural counties by encouraging voluntary participation in expanded coordination efforts. Ohio was one of the first five states in the nation to receive a leadership program award under the "United We Ride" federal initiative.

2.7.2 Montana

Montana's Transportation Assistance for the Disabled and Elderly (TransADE) program offers about $300,000 per year in grants to expand or coordinate transportation services.²⁰ The TransADE grant program offers operating assistance to eligible organizations providing transportation to the elderly and persons with disabilities. The state pays 50 percent of the programs' operating costs, the remaining 50 percent (cash, no "soft" match) must come from the applicant. The program was started in 2001 and eligible applicants include counties, incorporated towns and cities, transportation districts, and non-profit organizations.

Montana has a Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) in each county. The TAC manages the funds that are awarded to the county, advises, and monitors the coordination in that county. In some counties, TACs meet once a month while in other counties they are less active, meeting only once a year.

2.7.3 North Dakota

Other than federal mandates to coordinate local services, there are no legislative or state regulatory mandates to coordinate public transportation services in North Dakota. However, there are several grass roots efforts in place or in the planning process to promote coordination within North Dakota's public transportation system. There are 45 public transportation systems in operation around the state. In 1981, there were 55 such systems. Those that no longer exist have, for the most part, been merged into larger, multi-county operations. These operations will be discussed more fully in Chapter 4.

As will also be discussed in Chapter 4, many of the public transportation services in operation in the Devils Lake region (Region 3) are affiliated with a brokerage system which coordinates participants' grant applications and performs various administrative functions.

In the Bismarck region (Region 7), urban fixed route and paratransit services are under one parent organization and the services are operated by the local taxi company, thereby coordinating all local transit services. These services are also located in a facility with two intercity bus companies and the offices of the region's primary multi-county paratransit operator.

Coordination efforts are also underway in the Dickinson region (Region 8). Discussions may ultimately lead to all of the region's public transportation services being coordinated to increase efficiency and service to area residents.

Despite these voluntary coordination efforts, there are still numerous public transportation systems in North Dakota that do not coordinate their operations with other area services. Some of this lack of coordination is because of lack of awareness among the systems concerning the operations of other area services. In other instances, the lack of coordination is simply an unwillingness to cooperate with other area service providers - "turfism." In either case, this lack of coordination may contribute to less efficient operations and unmet public and client-specific transportation needs.

2.8 Models for Achieving Coordination

As stated earlier, coordination is not a project or a product, it is an ongoing process. Therefore, to help individuals and groups that have not been involved in successful coordination efforts, the federal government and some state agencies have sponsored reports and studies to provide a road map for how to achieve coordination.

Several models have been proposed to develop coordinated transportation programs. The common thread in the models is to start by identifying needs that exist, convening a variety of interested stakeholders, and talking and planning for coordination. The planning process is crucial because it identifies unmet needs, potential benefits, and participating parties. Leadership is required to develop an appropriate coordination plan. Coordination options are progressive in nature as they move from cooperation, to joint use agreements, to collaborative ventures. After the planning process is complete, implementation and evaluation begins. Evaluation is ongoing for as long as the coordinated efforts exists. Coordination does not just happen, it must be planned.

A document that embodies this philosophy, "The Planning Guidelines for Coordinated State and Local Specialized Transportation Services" was published by the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM) in 2001. This booklet defines coordination, explains why it is beneficial, and suggests ways to plan for state-level coordination. CCAM suggests an 11 step process towards coordination:

• Identify stakeholders
• Organize initial meeting
• Establish commitments and form partnerships
• Specify goals, objectives, and constraints
• Jointly identify client needs
• Identify transportation resources
• Design detailed service and financial options
• Select and recommend a plan of action
• Confirm agency and community commitments
• Develop implementation and funding plan for the selected alternative
• Measure performance, monitor and evaluate.

Another related resource document, "Coordinating Transportation Services: Local Collaboration and Decision Making" was published by Easter Seals Projection Action, in 2001. This study outlined a five-step process for coordination and identifies clear and concise goals for each step in the process. Coordination steps and related goals include:

• Getting Started
  • Provide tools to establish key contacts
  • Bring individuals and groups together to begin dialogue
  • Gather information on concerns, resources, and needs
• Moving Forward
  • Bring people together to think creatively about coordination
  • Discover multiple viewpoints
  • Build understanding and trust
  • Collaborate with leaders to build trust and consensus
• Up and Running
  • Organize and implementation plan
  • Create a business plan for each facet of the coordination process
  • Service and operation plan
  • Capital plan
  • Financial plan
  • Marketing and public relations plan
  • Evaluation plan
  • Develop a marketing and public relations program for the coordinated system
• Dealing with Rough Spots
  • Recognize problems will arise in spite of good planning
  • Define the problems and list option for solutions
• Looking Back
  • Recognize the need for evaluation
  • Evaluation becomes part of the reporting process
  • Identify the key ingredient in the evaluation
  • Design the evaluation process that meets the needs of participating agencies.

In Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 91, "Economic Benefits of Coordinating Human Service Transportation and Transit Services," Jon Burkhardt identifies strategies that can provide substantial benefits from coordination. These strategies include:

• Tapping currently unused sources of funding,
• Decreasing the direct costs of providing transportation,
• Increasing the productivity and utilization of vehicles,
• Capturing opportunities available from multiple providers and modes of travel, and
• Instituting transportation services in areas lacking services.

For the purpose of this study, the process outlined in the Easter Seals coordination study was selected as the model for North Dakota's coordination effort. This process prescribes a structure that is well-suited for a large geographical area such as North Dakota's. "Getting Started" identified a process for utilizing focus group and surveys as a planning process for the state's eight planning regions. It called for introducing the concept into the local region and understanding the local setting for things such as recent local history of coordination, the transportation resources, and local political economy. This type of information gathered at focus group meetings is discussed in Chapter 3 and 4 of this report. It was also shared at the project's steering committee and provided a basis for a number of the study's recommendations.

In summary, this chapter clarified the meaning of a coordinated transportation service. A review of the barriers, costs, and effectiveness showed coordination does not benefit all communities in all situations. It noted that coordination does not just start, but evolves over time through either legislative mandates from the state and federal government, or grass-roots movements from the local transit operators. The federal government has encouraged coordination through dissemination of information and incentives for more than 30 years. Iowa, Texas, and Washington are examples of legislated coordination. Montana, North Dakota, and Ohio have used incentives and education to encourage the growth of coordination. The next chapter will provide detail about North Dakota Department of Transportation and Department of Human Services transportation services and the extent that they are coordinated.