1 Ohio Department of Transportation John R. Kasich, Governor • Jerry Wray, Director Ohio Mobility Improvement Study Mobility Summit March 27, 2012
Dec 24, 2015
1
Ohio Department of Transportation
John R. Kasich, Governor • Jerry Wray, Director
Ohio Mobility Improvement StudyMobility Summit
March 27, 2012
2
Introduction & Welcome
Ohio Department of Transportation
James Barna Assistant Director ofTransportation Policy
Introduction
3
Ohio Department of Aging
Janet Hofmann with Video Remarks from:
Bonnie Kantor‐Burman, Sc.D., Director of the
Ohio Department of Aging
Introduction
4Introduction – Ohio Department of Aging
5Introduction – Ohio Department of Aging
6Introduction – Ohio Department of Aging
7
Ohio Public Transit Association
Mark Donaghy, Presidentand
General Manager,Greater Dayton RTA
Introduction
8
Overview of the Ohio Mobility Improvement Study
Robbie L. SarlesRLS & Associates, Inc.
Study Overview
9
Study Participants
ODOT StudyResearch Section/Office of Statewide Planning & Research
Office of Transit
Study Research TeamRLS & Associates, Inc. (Prime Contractor)
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates (Subcontractor)
Study Overview
10
Key Project Milestones
Project StartApril 18, 2011
Final ReportAugust 18, 2012
Study Overview
11
Ohio Mobility Improvement Study
ObjectivesDevelop a Statewide Approach That Integrates Health and Human Services Transportation (HHST) to Effectively Meet Basic Mobility Needs
Address Duplication or Underutilization of Scarce Resources
Develop Ohio Specific Recommendations For Better Integration of HHST at State and Local Levels
Study Overview
12
Ohio Mobility Improvement Study
Coordination ConceptsNational Best Practices and Policies in Mobility Management That Work
Insights From Ohio’s HHST and Public Transit Operators
Study OutcomePrepare a Detailed Implementation Plan for Ohio’s Coordination Solution
Study Overview
13
Work Program – Phase I
Task 1: State Best Practices1.1: Literature Review/Case Study Reports
1.2: Current Coordination Legislation Summary
1.3: Outreach: Partnering with Key Technical Resource Agencies
1.4: Local Assessment of Statewide HHST Policies
1.5 Assessment of Successful State Models of HHST Coordination and Lessons for Ohio
Study Overview
14
Work Program – Phase I
Task 2: Data Collection/Document Baseline Conditions
2.1: Analysis of Ohio’s Demographic, Political, Bureaucratic, and Economic Conditions
2.2: Identify Key Federal Programs and State Administrative Agencies/Delivery Networks
2.3: State Level Involvement in the Funding or Sponsorship of Health and Human Services Transportation (HHST)
Study Overview
15
Work Program – Phase I/II
Task 3: Coordination Options
Task 4: Implementation Plan Optional (ODOT’s Discretion)
Study Overview
16
Project Deliverables
Interim ReportsNo. 1: Best Practices Report
No. 2: Baseline Conditions Report
No. 3: Options for Coordination in Ohio Report
No. 4: Implementation Plan (optional at ODOT’s direction)
Draft Final Report and Executive Summary
Final Report and Executive Summary
Study Overview
17
Outreach
Coordination ForumsTwelve Sessions Held Throughout State
One in Each ODOT District Office
132 Total ParticipantsLocal Elected Officials
State Agencies
MPOs
Transit Agencies (Urban and Rural)
Human Service Agencies
Private Transportation Providers
National Overview
18
Coordination Forums
Most Beneficial Current PracticesFTA/ODOT Capital Grant Programs Are a Great Resource For Public and Specialized Transportation Systems
Funding For Mobility Managers
Use Of Contract Revenue as Local Match
The Coordination Requirements Contained In SAFETEA-LU For Section 5310, 5316, And 5317 Grant Recipients
National Overview
19
Coordination Forums
Most Beneficial Current PracticesSection 5310 Funding For Capital
Efforts By ODOT To Promote Coordination Were Positive and Helpful To Local Efforts
Established Coordination Efforts Have Been Shown To Result In Cost Savings
National Overview
20
Coordination Forums
Major Impediments to CoordinationReduced and/or Lack Of Funding, In Particular Operating Funding
Agencies Reluctant to Coordinate For Fear of Losing the Specialized Level of Care Their Clients Need
Funding Silos, With Different Eligibility Criteria, Rules and Regulations, Operating Requirements, etc., Which Makes Coordination Difficult
National Overview
21
Coordination Forums
Major Impediments to CoordinationRed Tape
Differing State Requirements on Same Topics (i.e., Vehicle Inspection)
The Lack of Coordination at the State Level
Restrictive Jurisdictional Boundaries
National Overview
22
National Overview of State Level Leadership in
HHST Coordination
Charles DicksonAssistant Director
Community Transportation Associationof America (CTAA)
Study Overview
23
The Community Transportation Association
of AmericaNational Membership Organization That Believes Transportation Should Be Available, Affordable and Accessible In Communities Across the CountryMembers Include More Than 4,000 Transit Systems, State and Local Organizations, and IndividualsProvides Technical Assistance To Members and Non-Members To Help Them Provide High-quality and Cost-effective Mobility ServicesSince 2006 Has Operated the National Resource Center for Human Service Transportation Coordination
National Overview
24
Why Coordination?
Traditionally Human Services And Public Transportation In Our
Country Have Been Viewed As Serving Very Distinct Groups of
People
National Overview
25
Why Coordination 2
On a Federal, State and Local Level, Transportation Has Become
a Complicated, and Sometimes Overlapping, System of Services of Transportation Programs and
Services
National Overview
26
Benefits of Coordination
• Improves Transportation Efficiency
• Lowers Cost of Individual Trips• Provides More Trips for More
Purposes• Offers Better Quality Services• Improves Overall Mobility In
CommunitiesNational Overview
27
Prospects – Federal Government
Since 1978 Coordination Has Been a Priority For Congress And Executive BranchHHS/DOT Coordinating Council Formed In 1986President Bush Signs E.O. In 2004 Creating the Coordinating Council On Access and Mobility (CCAM)
National Overview
28
Members:Department of Transportation
Department of Health and Human Services
Department of Education
Department of Labor
Department of Veterans Affairs
Department of Agriculture
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Department of the Interior
Department of Justice
Social Security Administration
National Council on Disability
National Overview
29
CCAM Accomplishments
Developed Action Plan, Policies and Working GroupsJARC, New Freedom, 5310 – Coordinated PlanningGuidance Statements on Vehicle UsageVTCLI ProgramOne Call CentersState LeadershipMobility Management
National Overview
30
The National Resource Center
Goal
To Foster the Growth of Coordination between Human Service Agencies and Public TransportationPart of the Community Transportation Association’s Information Station – includes Medical, Senior and Employment Transportation
National Overview
31
The National Resource Center
Goal
Collaboration with the FTA and the CCAMResearchTechnical Assistance and Training Strategic Partnerships Communication and Information
National Overview
32
Challenges and Opportunities for Coordination
Mobility ManagementVeteran’s TransportationMedical TransportationState and Local Funding IssuesTransportation Reauthorization (or not)Demographic Changes
Rapidly growing urbanizationRecord-setting numbers of people living at or below poverty, andPopulations of elderly individuals and persons with disabilities continuing to grow at much more rapid rates than the population at large.
National Overview
33
For More Information….
Website: www.NRCtransportation.orgTwitter: @NectarsCharles Dickson, Associate Director Email: dickson @ ctaa.orgPhone: 202.247.8356
National Overview
34
National Overview of State Level Leadership in
HHST Coordination
Rich GarritySenior Associate
RLS & Associates, Inc.
National Overview
35
Preliminary Research Findings
Other State PracticesAn Estimated 27 States Have Some Type of State-Level Coordinating Council Or Working Group
Executive Order - 12 States
Statute - 15
Several Other States Have Strong DOT Involvement Leading Coordination Efforts
Characterized by a Regional or County-Based Coordination Infrastructure, Each With An Advisory/Oversight Council
National Overview
36
Preliminary Research Findings
Coordination FundingAt Least 10 States Have a Dedicated Source of Funding For Coordination or Community Transportation; 2 More In Development
3 Coordination Councils Oversee Federal Funding and/or Advise DOTs On Grant Applications
National Overview
37
Preliminary Research Findings
Coordination Activities
State-Level and Regional Mobility Managers9 States Have a Statewide Mobility Manager
7 States Have A Network of Regional Mobility Managers
13 Have A “Patchwork Quilt” of Regional Mobility Managers
Policies And Practices35 States Have a Coordination Information Repository (State DOT); 13 States Have a Coordination Website
National Overview
38
Preliminary Research Findings
Coordination Activities (Con’t.)Community Transportation Directories
Few Have State-Wide Directories (Regional Directories More Common)
Printed Directories Most Common; Some Have Web-Based Documents
Information And Referral ServicesNo State-Level “One Call One Click” Yet
Some Regional Efforts; Some Tie Into 211/511
Funding For Staff an Obstacle
National Overview
39
Preliminary Research Findings
Coordination Activities (Con’t.)Education Awareness
33 States Have Some Type of Educational Awareness For Coordination
Meetings/Conferences
Outreach/Training Efforts
Regional Technical Assistance6 States Have Centralized Training For Mobility Managers
12 States Have Pilot Projects For Coordination
National Overview
40
Preliminary Research Findings
Lessons Learned #1States With Formal Coordinating Councils Are More Likely To:
Establish Community Transportation Regions, Each With Regional Committees and Regional Mobility Managers
Have a State-Level Mobility Manager
Lead in State-level Activities and Pilot Projects
Lead or Assist With Regional/Local Activities
Lead or Assist With Grant-Writing Efforts
National Overview
41
Preliminary Research Findings
Lessons Learned #2Mechanism For Establishing Coordinating Councils Matters Less Than the Commitment of Agencies Involved
Both Executive Orders and State Statutes Can Be Dissolved, Rescinded, or Ignored
Turfism Can Undermine a State Created Council
A Regional Structure That Covers the State Is Better Than One That Leaves Gaps
National Overview
42
Preliminary Research Findings
Lessons Learned #3There Are Clear Financial Benefits/Incentives For:
Participating State Level Agencies and Associations
Local and Regional Stakeholders
There Is a Stated Political Commitment To Enhancing Mobility
Mandates to Agencies: Coordinate!
Designated Funding Source For Coordination or For Users of Community Transportation
National Overview
43
Preliminary Research Findings
Lessons Learned #4Politics Matter
A New Governor Can Dissolve Former Executive Orders or Alter Funding Streams
Medicaid Regulations Are In Flux; NEMT Managers In Some Coordinated States are Threatening to Dissolve Established Partnerships
Agencies Must Meet With New Leaders and Continue to Send the Message About the Benefits of Coordination
On-Going Marketing Is Critical
National Overview
44
Ohio Legislative Perspective
Senator Peggy LehnerMember – Health, Human Services and
Aging Committee
Legislative Overview
45
Lunch
Lunch
46
“Best Practices” in HHST Coordination in Ohio
Bob Steinbach,Director of Regional Initiatives,
Miami Valley RPC
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
47
Five Ohio Examples
Doug Wagener, Director of Mobility Management, PARTA, Kent, OH
Erica Petrie, Mobility Manager, Area Agency on Aging 3, Lima, OH
Rich Schultze, Executive Director, GreeneCATS, Xenia, OH
Cathleen Sheets, General Manager, Licking County Transit Board, Newark, OH
Lantz Repp, Mobility Manager, Athens Mobility Management Program, Athens, OH
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
48
“Best Practices” in HHST Coordination in Ohio
Doug Wagener, Director of Mobility
Management, PARTA, Kent, OH
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
49
NEORide
What?Real-Time interface that supports true coordinated transportation among disparate transportation providers
Who?PARTA and Geauga County Transit, with support from Trapeze Group and Kotting Consulting
Where?Northeastern Ohio – a rural & urban mix
When?Phase 1 – Feasibility study (2006-08)
Phase 2 – High level systems design document (2009-10)
Phase 3 – Testing / implementation phase (2011-12)Partnering initially with a 170+ contract non-profit social services organization that provides a wide array of services in NE Ohio including soup kitchens, clothing centers, rent assistance, homeless shelters (veterans; domestic violence victims; families), transitional housing, counselling, transportation, and many more.
49
5050
FUNDING
Federal Transit AdministrationUnited We Ride
Mobility Services for All Americans
ODOT/Ohio Office of TransitOhio Coordination Program
Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (MPO)
JARC - Job Access-Reverse Commute Program
New Freedom
Vendors: Trapeze Group and Kotting ConsultingRTA commitment of resources
5151
What the Stakeholders Told Us:
If you read the goals of the Ohio Transportation Partnership, you’ll find a great deal of similarity between these and them. ODOT/Ohio Office of Transit
NEORide Family of ServicesRide scheduling
Information (real time, accurate, and useful)
Reporting – automatic billing
Cooperative purchasing (potentially)
Supplier of IT infrastructure (On-board computers; GPS; etc.)
Standard Setting Body (cooperatively determined)
Travel Training
52
“Best Practices” in HHST Coordination in Ohio
Erica Petrie, Mobility Manager, Area Agency on Aging 3, Lima, OH
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
53
Area Agency on Aging 3 Serves a 7 County Area in Northwest Ohio
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
54
Formed May 2010 thru Accessible Transportation Coalitions Initiative Grant, Easter Seals Project Action
24 Transportation Stakeholders
Mission: “Dedicated community partners driving forward to provide transportation”
Meet Quarterly to address coordination issues
Growing in numbers and service area
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
55
Transportation Call Center
Part of Aging and Disability Resource NetworkInformation and Referral Service Provided to All
FIND A RIDE Program availableUnder 60 With a Disability
Over 60
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
56
“Best Practices” in HHST Coordination in Ohio
Rich Schultze, Executive Director, GreeneCATS, Xenia, OH
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
57
GREENE COUNTY TRANSIT BOARD: COORDINATION
Name of Project/Location: Greene County Transit Board (Greene CATS), Xenia, OH
Date Initiated: • First phase: Fall 1997 – 2000• Second phase: Fall 2008 – current
Coordination and Mobility Management Partners/Funding Sources: • First phase: ODOT coordination grants and Greene County Board of
Developmental Disabilities for local match; approximately 25 coordination partners
• Second phase: JARC and New Freedom grants (via MVRPC) and Greene CATS Board for local match; approximately 10 coordination partners
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
58
HIGHLIGHTS/SUCCESSES
Active in Coordination Efforts
Mobility Manager Housed at Greene CATS Public Transit, But With Sufficient Autonomy So As Not Be Viewed As an Extension of Greene CATS
Some Social Services Agencies Contract Out to The Transit System to Provide Or Broker Service, Based on Fully Allocated Costs
Provides Wide Range of Services for Disabled and Elderly Using New Freedom Funding
Provides Wide Range Of Services for Low-income Persons Using JARC Funding
Provides Flex Route And Demand Responsive Inter-County Connections – A Big Problem Noted In The MPO Coordination Plan; GDRTA Allows Greene CATS Vehicle To Stop At A Bay At Its Wright Stop Plaza; Wright State University Allows the Use of Its Student Union GDRTA Bus Stop As a Convenient Way For Riders To Transfer Between Greene CATS nd The GDRTA
Greene CATS Has Privatized Its Operations, and Has Contracted Out Its Day-to-Day Operations and Maintenance
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
59
LESSONS LEARNEDCoordination Is “Whatever Works”; Each Participating Organization Will Have Its Own Needs
Coordination Is All About Trying To Improve the Transport Options of the Players; If It Is Too Much About the Transit System, It Will Scare Off Everybody Else
Coordination Is Not About the Mobility Manager and His/Her Ego; It Is About the Success of the Participants
Need To Embrace the Concept Of “Turfism” In Social Services Transportation; They Are Right To Be Proud Of What They Have Done and Are Right To Want To Protect Their Clients
Social Services Agencies Do Want Options Instead of Just Transporting Their Clients
Some Love To Operate Transportation, and They Should Be Helped To Do So; Some Hate To Operate Transportation, and They Should Be Given Options To Do So
Use A Fully Allocated Cost Model To Compare Options, and For Contracts
Need To Focus On Carrying Each Other’s Riders For A Fee, Sharing Vehicles, Reducing Duplication And Filling Service Gaps
Need To Focus On “Back Office” Functions, Such As Vehicle Purchases, Vehicle Maintenance, Scheduling, Dispatching, Call Taking, Insurance, Fuel
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
60
“Best Practices” in HHST Coordination in Ohio
Cathleen Sheets, General Manager, Licking County Transit
Board, Newark, OH
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
61
(740) 670-5185
763 East Main Street
Newark, Ohio 43055
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
62
COORDINATED SERVICES MEMBERS/SUPPORTERS
Licking County Transit BoardAmerican Cancer SocietyBehavioral Healthcare Partners of Central OhioCatholic Social Services Center for DisabilityCity of Heath, OhioCity of Newark, OhioFood Pantry Network of Licking CountyGranville Fellowship LEADSLICCO Licking County Aging Program, Inc. Licking County Area Transportation Study (LCATS) – MPO Licking County CommissionersLicking County Board of DD
Licking County Center for the Visually Impaired
Licking County Coalition for Housing Licking County Department of Jobs and Family Services
Licking County Family YMCA
Licking County Health Department
Licking/Knox Goodwill Industries, Inc.
Licking Memorial Health Systems
Newark Resident Homes
Northview Senior Living Center
Pathways of Licking County
Salvation Army
Sharon Glyn Village
St. Vincent DePaul
United Way of Licking County, Inc
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
63
2010 2011
Passengers 77,703 126,287
Passenger Per Hour 2.23 2.48
Cost Per Passenger $20.02 $19.23
RIDERSHIP EFFICENCY
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
64
“Best Practices” in HHST Coordination in Ohio
Lantz Repp, Mobility Manager, Athens Mobility Management
Program, Athens, OH
Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
65Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
66Best Practices in HHST Coordination in Ohio
67
“Town Hall”
Will Rodman, Nelson\NygaardRoland Mross,
Region V Coordination Ambassador
Town Hall
68
Ohio Department of TransportationTown Hall Input
State to provide technical assistance to rural areas on site – provide options and assistance to implement.
Reactivate State Agency Partnership to focus on:
Use of volunteers/insurance consortium to cover volunteers.
Better use of existing vehicles at local level.
Town Hall
69
Ohio Department of TransportationTown Hall Input
Think regionally/seamless transportation.
Combine/standardize 5310/5316/5317 grant requirements.
Merge all transportation funding and reporting requirements at the state level; establish regions/mobility managers, but with local county involvement (3 levels).
Expand State Partnership membership to include other (local) stakeholders.
Town Hall
70
Ohio Department of TransportationTown Hall Input
Consolidate/coordinate transportation information and scheduling practices among counties/regions to facilitate mobility among the counties/regions and address trips for those who “fall through the cracks” e.g., under 59 with medical needs.
Invest transportation dollars in services for all transportation needs, not for individual populations.
Town Hall
71
Ohio Department of TransportationTown Hall Input
Investigate technologies for expanding access to transportation (local/regional/statewide) by all transportation users.
Work to bring transportation (non-highway) issues to the attention of the appropriate General Assembly committees.
Expand State Term contract pricing to private nonprofit agencies who are actively coordinating (those that do not receive 5310 funding and whose county will not purchase)
Town Hall
72
Ohio Department of TransportationTown Hall Input
Expand # of non-medical trips available under Passport.
Investigate dedicated source(s) to pay for transportation (cannot use Ohio gas tax funds for non-highway projects).
Explore partnerships with AAAs for Mobility Management and coordination.
Town Hall
73
Ohio Department of TransportationTown Hall Input
Explore incentives to using private nonprofit providers in Medicaid transportation services.
Town Hall
74
Ohio Department of TransportationTown Hall Input
Town Hall