Background

Personal mobility is something easily taken for granted. For many people, this means merely starting the car or walking to the subway. However, an increasing number of Americans are unable to get to work, run errands, or access medical care simply because they do not have reliable transportation. In 2000, the number of older adults was more than 30 million, and is expected to double by 2030. Almost 54 million people were reported to have disabilities. Many are among the “transportation-disadvantaged” individuals who cannot operate a vehicle because of medical conditions, disabilities, or other limitations. In addition, there are others who are unable to afford their own automobile, or live in areas without public transportation options.

Implementing the Executive Order

In recognition of the fundamental importance of human service transportation and the continuing need to enhance coordination, President Bush issued an Executive Order on Human Service Transportation (#13330) in February 2004 directing multiple Federal departments and agencies to work together to ensure that transportation services are seamless, comprehensive and accessible. Secretaries from the Departments of Transportation (DOT), Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor (DOL), Education, Interior, Housing and Urban Development (HUD), Agriculture (USDA), Veterans Affairs, the Commissioner of the Social Security Administration, the Attorney General and the Chairperson of the National Council on Disability are members of the new Interagency Transportation Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM) established by the Executive Order. Specifically, the CCAM is tasked with seeking ways to simplify access to transportation services for persons with disabilities, persons with lower incomes, and older adults. The Executive Order requires that CCAM members work together to provide the most appropriate, cost effective services within existing resources, and reduce duplication to make funds available for more services.

In order to effectively implement the Executive Order, an Executive Council was created, consisting of Senior Executive Service and non-career appointees from each agency represented on the CCAM. The Executive Council directs and oversees the work of six interagency workgroups created to implement the Coordinating Council Action Plan, as adopted by the CCAM on September 15, 2004. The six workgroups focus on issues around education and outreach, consolidated access, coordinated planning, regulatory barriers, cost allocation, and useful practices. In addition to their collective work, each Federal agency represented on the CCAM developed a Departmental Action Plan to support the goals of simplifying access, reducing duplication, and improving cost-effectiveness in order to increase service. This report details the collective and departmental actions taken, and makes recommendations for future actions, to help meet the goals of the Executive Order.

Results Achieved and Actions Implemented
The Executive Order calls for identifying those legislative or administrative actions at the Federal, State, Tribal, and local levels that are useful in coordinating human service transportation. To identify trends, the Council conducted an analysis of 81 case studies on useful practices included in recent studies conducted by the Transportation Cooperative Research Program. Trends identified across useful practices include: 1) leadership and partnership; 2) planning; 3) operations; 4) technology; 5) customer service; and 6) policy, program and funding. The Council has also developed a Useful Practice Database, which is an online system that allows users to share information about promising practices, review and learn more about other practices, and search for specific types of practices to find out how they were implemented and to what effect.

The Executive Order also calls for identifying those Federal rules and restrictions that limit coordination. As a result, the Council gathered the statutes and regulations from the 62 programs that support human service transportation identified in a General Accounting Office (GAO) report (June 2003). For the first time, statutes, regulations and guidance from all of the 62 Federal human service transportation programs were assembled in one place and analyzed to get a handle on the scope and nature of regulatory impediments. While previous studies produced lists of impediments to coordination, no previous study garnered information from transportation providers regarding their perceptions of various impediments.

The regulatory review of the 62 human service transportation programs found little uniformity in program delivery, reporting, and eligibility requirements. Many of the programs cited by the 2003 GAO report support human service transportation have uniquely different primary missions such as the provision of employment or health care services. No single law or statute created federal human service transportation programs, meaning that there is no single or uniform requirement on how they are delivered, and each program developed its own idiosyncratic regulations, eligibility requirements, and operating procedures. Because they have developed autonomously, many Federal programs also unwittingly fund the same type of service as other Federal programs. At least 37 programs have been identified that provide reimbursement to consumers for transportation expenses in order to access employment, health care, or other specific types of services. At least 26 programs fund the purchase of vehicles, the operation of vehicles, and/or facilitate contractual arrangements with existing providers. Eight programs provide transportation to school. The problem stems more from a lack of coordination between programs and the resulting gaps, duplications, and inefficiencies in service.

Recommendations

The Executive Order requires the Coordinating Council to make recommendations to simplify and coordinate substantive, procedural and administrative requirements, and to make any other recommendations that would advance the principles of the Executive Order. The CCAM developed five broad recommendations for consideration by the President. These recommendations do not propose or assume fundamental changes in the structure of Federal programs that fund and/or provide transportation services to persons with disabilities, older adults, and low-income individuals. As such, most of the recommendations represent interim, coordination-based solutions that the Council believes will strengthen existing transportation services to be more cost-effective and accountable and help providers become more responsive to consumers. Many of the solutions are supported or can be achieved by employing “Intelligent Transportation Systems” (ITS) technologies.

1) Coordinated Transportation Planning. In order to effectively promote the development and delivery of coordinated transportation services, the CCAM recommends that the Administration seek mechanisms (statutory, regulatory, or administrative) to require participation in a community transportation planning process for human service transportation programs.

2) Vehicle Sharing. In order to reduce duplicative transportation services, as well as idle time for drivers and vehicles, the CCAM recommends that vehicles used in human service transportation be made available to other federally-funded programs, consistent with the Common Grant Rule. Within the next year, each Federal Department should review and modify its policies and procedures to proactively promote the sharing of vehicles with recipients and sub-recipients of other Federal programs.

3) Cost Allocation. In order to ensure that adequate resources are available for transportation services for persons with disabilities, older adults and individuals with lower incomes, and to encourage the shared use of vehicles and existing public transportation services, the CCAM recommends where statutorily permitted that standard cost allocation principles for transportation be developed and endorsed by Federal human service and transportation agencies.

4) Reporting and Evaluation. The Council recommends the development of a method to permit cross agency analysis of the effectiveness, efficiency, and progress of States, communities, and tribes toward improved coordination of transportation programs, as evidenced by improvements in the overall quality and cost-effectiveness of human service transportation.

5) Consolidated Access Transportation Demonstration Program: In order to test the feasibility and cost-effectiveness of a new approach to meeting the full range of transportation needs of persons with disabilities, older adults and individuals with lower incomes, the CCAM recommends that statutory authority be sought to permit the development of demonstration projects in metropolitan, rural and/or tribal areas. In these demonstration projects a single transportation system--not necessarily a single provider-- financed through a consolidated federally funded stream would meet the total mobility needs of transportation-disadvantaged populations.

Top

---

 

II. Introduction

On February 24, 2004, President Bush issued Executive Order (EO) 13330 on Human Service Transportation Coordination, calling for a coordinated effort among 10 Federal Departments and agencies to improve the coordination of federally-supported transportation services for people who are transportation-disadvantaged, particularly persons with disabilities, persons with lower incomes, and older adults who rely on community transportation systems. The full text of the Executive Order can be found at Appendix 1.

This document responds to the Executive Order requirement that a report to the President be submitted no later than February 24, 2005, that:

The Report includes background information on human service transportation needs and previous efforts to address the challenges of providing coordinated transportation services; a description of how the Executive Order was implemented; a summary of accomplishments, as required by the Executive Order; and recommendations.

Top

---

III. Background

Personal mobility gives people the freedom to access employment, health care, education, and basic community services, as well as to enjoy an active life in the larger community. For most people, personal mobility means owning and driving a car, walking, and/or using a taxi, van service, or the bus. For many Americans with disabilities, older adults, or persons with lower incomes, utilizing these simple transportation options is not always feasible. Many Americans are unable to get to work, run errands, access medical care, or participate in community activities simply because they do not have reliable transportation. Some are unable to afford their own automobile because of income. Others may not be able to operate a vehicle because of medical conditions, disabilities, or other limitations. There are also individuals who live in areas without public transportation options. “Transportation-disadvantaged” individuals live in all parts of the country and in all kinds of communities, from urban and suburban to rural.

Access to transportation is also an especially timely and critical issue today, as the ranks of transportation-disadvantaged populations have grown and will continue to grow in the 21st century. The 2000 Census reports that the number of older Americans (people age 65 and older) rose by more than 3 million, or 12 percent, in the last decade. By 2030 their numbers will double to 70 million, and seniors will comprise 20 percent of the total U.S. population. In a recent study conducted by the Harris Poll and the National Organizations on Disability, over 54 million people, almost 20 percent of the population, reported having a disability. Finally, people with low incomes have increased since 1990 by seven percent. Today, more than 34 million people, or 12 percent of the population, lives below the poverty line. For lower-income families, transportation expenses are especially burdensome. The poorest 20 percent spend approximately 40 percent of their take home pay on transportation.

There are as many stories behind these statistics as there are individuals. Joe, who relies on dialysis, needs reliable transportation to and from a medical facility to receive it—otherwise, his health deteriorates and his medical costs will skyrocket. Peggy, a woman with Downs Syndrome, is eager and able to take a job at a local hotel, but she needs a ride to and from work. If she can find it, she can give back to the community and enrich her own life. Kathy, who is moving off of public assistance and into the workforce, has a job opportunity at a local bakery. She does not lack ambition, ability, or responsibility—but she does lack reliable transportation. Each day, in all of our communities, men and women struggle to get a foothold in the economy or community life simply because they lack a ride.

“Human service transportation” means meeting the basic, day-to-day mobility needs of transportation-disadvantaged populations, especially individuals with low-incomes, people with disabilities, and older Americans. The family of human service transportation services supported by Federal programs includes much more than dedicated buses or vans. It includes programs that reimburse consumers for taxi or public transportation use, provide bus tokens, purchase or modify private vehicles, reimburse consumers for gas and vehicle operating costs, operate school bus service, and provide technical assistance for transportation planning.
There are many reasons to be concerned about human service transportation today. Lack of transportation affects an individual’s independence and opportunity. But human service transportation is not just about improving individual lives. It is about improving all facets of our economy, culture, and society that rely on transportation systems to work effectively at the community level. When transportation does not work, other things—our healthcare system, our economy, and our civic culture--cannot work at their best, either. Reliable transportation is both a prerequisite for a healthy economy and often the first step toward independence and opportunity for people with low incomes, older adults, and people with disabilities.

Individuals who are transportation-disadvantaged face different challenges in accessing services depending on whether they live in urban, rural, or suburban areas. The geographic dispersion of transportation-disadvantaged populations also creates challenges for human service programs hoping to deliver transportation for their consumers.

Fortunately, Americans have recognized that transportation is important for healthy communities and personal independence. After a precipitous decline in the number and scope of public transportation systems when personal automobiles became more affordable and available in the 1950s, Congress created a Federal program to help support public transportation in 1964. Federal transit programs, like other Federal transportation programs, have focused primarily on providing capital assistance to support locally selected infrastructure investments. While this assistance has been and continues to be important, Federal transportation policy recognizes that transportation needs are best identified, prioritized, and addressed by communities within the context of local conditions and priorities.
Today, through the Department of Transportation’s Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs, the Federal government provides approximately $7 billion annually to develop new transit systems and improve, maintain, and, in the case of small urbanized and rural areas, operate existing systems. FTA oversees thousands of grants to hundreds of State and local transit providers who are responsible for managing their transit systems and infrastructure projects. Overall, the annual Federal investment in public transportation represents only about 17 percent of all such investments; the remainder comes from State and local government contributions, dedicated State and local tax revenues, and fare box and other revenue generated by local transit systems. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), signed into law by President George H. W. Bush in July 1990, recognized the rights of people with disabilities to the same public transportation service that is available to other Americans. Today, over 90 percent of America’s public transit buses are accessible, and every new bus or transit system must be accessible.
In spite of the significant investment in public transportation services, serious gaps in service still exist in many, if not most, communities. Transportation to the grocery store, a city council meeting, or a parent-teacher conference may simply not be available. These gaps are particularly pronounced in rural areas, where basic public transportation services may be lacking. An estimated 40 percent of rural residents live in communities without public transportation; another 28 percent have very limited public transportation service. These gaps in service, in both rural and urban areas, are particularly burdensome for transportation-disadvantaged individuals, who may not have access to cars or alternative transportation.

Over the years, in response to these challenges, Federal, State and local governments, and community-based organizations created specialized programs to meet particular transportation needs. At the Federal level alone, there are at least 62 separate programs , administered by eight Federal departments, and even more agencies, that provide special transportation services to people with disabilities, low-income individuals, and/or older adults. Most of these are human service programs that fund limited transportation services to provide eligible participants with access to particular services, such as job training, health care, senior centers, or rehabilitation programs.

Just as there are a variety of human service programs, so too are there variations in Federal program requirements across these programs. Most Federal transportation funds are provided to State and local governments and nonprofit organizations that provide human service transportation. Funding may be in the form of a direct grant to the provider, or a block grant to a State agency or local provider for a wide range of approved services. Not surprisingly, the public servants and non-profit organizations trying to administer human service transportation programs face additional challenges. Each discrete Federal program from which they receive funds may require different data to be reported and may operate under a different funding cycle. Coordinating across local agencies is further complicated by the fact that the organizations themselves are likely to use different billing systems – some may reimburse consumers directly, others may reimburse providers, and others may operate their own vehicles with no direct billing required.

“Human Service Transportation: A Complex Web of Providers and Services”

For at least two decades, community, State and Federal leaders have wrestled with these seemingly intractable challenges to reduce the complexity and increase the flexibility of the transportation resources we already have. Almost 15 years ago, the Departments of Transportation and Health and Human Services created the Coordinating Council for Access and Mobility to identify ways to improve and promote the coordination of the transportation services they fund. For example,
the CCAM has developed best practice guides, helped to clarify perceived federal barriers to coordination, and engaged in disseminating information on the benefits of coordination. In 2000, the CCAM published “Innovative State and Local Planning for Coordinated Transportation.” The CCAM has also facilitated the creation of a consortium of national professional organizations and interest groups that now conducts research, and provides education, training, and technical assistance related to the coordination of transportation services for the transportation-disadvantaged. The Council has sponsored a series of regional workshops for representatives of State agencies that administer human service programs, State transportation coordinating councils, and agencies serving individuals with disabilities, older adults, and people with lower incomes to discuss opportunities for improving transportation coordination. In 2003 and 2004, more than 500 people participated in these regional workshops held in Boston, MA; Dallas, TX; Seattle, WA; Philadelphia, PA; New York, NY; Kansas City, MO; Atlanta, GA; San Francisco, CA; Chicago, IL; and, Denver, CO.

It is no secret that the emergence of so many separate transportation options tied to specific programs, or available only to specific population subgroups, has created a complex, often duplicative, web of transportation services in our communities. Each program is likely to have different eligibility rules, different destinations, its own reservation system and rules, and unique travel routes. Merely figuring out what services are available to a particular destination can be an enormous challenge for consumers. This chart graphically depicts the complicated web of human service transportation providers and services.

In the fall of 2003, the CCAM launched United We Ride (UWR), a five-part initiative that included:

A Framework for Action. Created by a panel of experts from around the country, this publication is a self-assessment tool that States and communities can use to identify areas of success and highlight the actions still needed to improve the coordination of human service transportation.
State Leadership Awards. Five States (Florida, Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, and Washington) have been recognized for leading the way toward building and implementing transportation infrastructure, policies and programs that facilitate human service transportation coordination. These States, and many others nominated for the awards, have already made great progress in tracking the issue of coordinating transportation services by implementing strategies such as transportation brokerages, Medicaid transit pass programs, and joint planning efforts.

National Leadership Forum on Human Service Transportation Coordination. In late February 2004, Governor-appointed leadership teams from 47 States and Territories came together in Washington D.C. to advance transportation coordination. The forum provided an opportunity for teams representing transportation, education, human services, and labor to identify ways to improve transportation for people who are transit-dependent by changing State funding practices, policies and regulations, and reporting requirements. Almost universally, the State teams indicated in post-conference evaluations that they recognized the important role that States must play in making transportation coordination easier, and that they planned to use the Framework for Action to conduct a State-level assessment in order to expand their collaborative relationships and develop an action plan.

State Coordination Grants. A total of nearly $1 million in grants was awarded to 43 States, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands to assist them in conducting Framework for Action self-assessments or implementing plans resulting from such self-assessments.

Help Along the Way. Building on the work of the Community Transportation Association of America, Project ACTION, and other stakeholder groups, the Federal partners of the CCAM are providing hands-on technical assistance to States and communities in coordinating human service transportation programs. Through coordination “ambassadors” assigned to 30 States, the resources of the various technical assistance agencies have been combined to provide a “coordinated” helping hand. For the first time, States and communities do not have to figure out whom to call among the many technical assistance centers and providers. Instead, through the coordination ambassadors, the technical assistance providers are working together to bring cross-agency technical assistance teams to them.

In 2003, the Transportation Cooperative Research Program estimated that improved coordination of human service transportation and transportation services could generate combined savings of more than $700 million per year to human service and transportation agencies in the United States (TCRP Report 91).

 

The President’s Executive Order has provided an important additional impetus to expand participation in the efforts of the CCAM to include every Federal department that supports human service transportation as part of its programs. While it recognizes that there is much that can be done at the Federal level to clear the way and encourage coordination, the Executive Order is grounded in an understanding that real progress will only happen through hard work, collaboration, and consensus-building at the State and local level as well. Community organizations, transportation providers, and stakeholder groups must work together to provide more transportation service, more customer-responsive service, and less expensive service by sharing vehicles and other physical resources, financial resources, and customer service technologies.

Top

---

IV. Implementation of the Executive Order

In the spirit of the President’s Management Agenda, the Executive Order establishes expectations for Federal agencies to become more citizen-centered, results-oriented, and customer-focused. It recognizes the need to coordinate the efforts of the full panoply of Federal agencies that fund transportation services, charging ten Federal departments and agencies with the tasks of identifying useful practices, eliminating duplication and overlap among federally-funded programs, and improving the coordination of federally-supported transportation services at all levels.

To accomplish these goals, the Executive Order created an expanded Federal Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (CCAM), under the leadership of Secretary of Transportation Norman Y. Mineta. In addition to the Secretary of Transportation, members of the CCAM include the following Cabinet-level appointees: the Secretaries of Health and Human Services, Education, Labor, Veterans Affairs, Agriculture, Housing and Urban Development, and the Interior; the Attorney General; the Commissioner of Social Security; and the chairperson of the National Council on Disability, who was appointed by Secretary Mineta, as permitted under the Executive Order.

In order to effectively implement the Executive Order, an Executive Council was created, consisting of Senior Executive Service and non-career appointees from each agency represented on the CCAM. Summaries of the proceedings of the meetings of the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility and the Executive Council can be found at Appendix 2

.

The Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments: Coordination at Work In the late 1990s over 20,000 people in the Toledo, Ohio area were moving from welfare to work, and suburban sprawl was creating new job locations far from the urban areas where entry-level workers lived. Toledo had the need for more human service transportation, but not the means to achieve it. In March of 1999 the Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments (TMACOG) created Northwest Ohio CommuterLINK with different funding resources. The Toledo regional council developed an ambitious plan that included a demand-response, door-to-door service (including day care stops). The Council set up transportation services with local taxi and van companies, and grouped customers with common destinations. To encourage true independence and opportunity for individuals with lower incomes, TMACOG also initiated a Car-Buy program that would provide vehicles for individuals with lower incomes at reasonable rates. Today, CommuterLINK has almost 3,300 riders and has delivered 266 cars, 169 that have been paid off. Not only has the TMACOG delivered better transportation options and services, their efforts have also benefited the community as a whole.

 

The Executive Council directs and oversees the work of six interagency workgroups that were created to implement the Coordinating Council Action Plan, as adopted by the CCAM on September 15, 2004. A copy of the Action Plan can be found at Appendix 3. The six workgroups are:

Education and Outreach. This interagency team is enhancing customer access to the broad range of services and resources available. They are developing an education campaign that includes fact sheets, talking points, a regular newsletter for stakeholders, and a new web site that will be a user- friendly “one-stop shop” for information on human service transportation. The goals are to:

Consolidated Access. This team is developing tools that will enable communities to offer a single point of access to consumers who need transportation services, within the context of their existing human service delivery system. The goals are to:

Regulatory Barriers. The third workgroup is tackling the problem of regulatory barriers – one of the most challenging tasks identified in the Executive Order. The team has compiled the statutes, regulations, and guidance associated with the 62 Federal programs that offer transportation assistance. The workgroup is in the process of analyzing this information. The goal of the workgroup is to:

Coordinated Planning. This workgroup is focused on helping States and communities use the Framework for Action to work together to make sense of their transportation webs. The UWR State Grant program is just one example of the work they oversee. The goals are to:

Useful Practices. This workgroup is compiling and disseminating useful practices for States, communities and tribal authorities. The goal is to:
Identify and widely disseminate practices and ideas that will help make transportation services work for customers.

The interagency workgroups are broadly representative of the Federal agencies and programs that are subject to the Executive Order. (The membership of each workgroup can be found at Appendix 4.) The workgroups meet and communicate regularly to share information, develop and refine strategies and action steps, and formulate recommendations for consideration by the Executive Council and the CCAM. The workgroups, Executive Council, and the CCAM are supported by a team of professional and administrative staff in the FTA, which consists of five FTA employees, as well as three full-time staff on detail from the Departments of Agriculture, Education, and Veterans Affairs.

In addition to their collective work, each Department identified in the Executive Order has developed a Departmental Action Plan to ensure independent progress toward the goals of the Executive Order. Copies of each Departmental Action Plan can be found in Appendix 5.

Top

---

 

V. Accomplishments

This section responds to the Executive Order’s request for information on useful practices and an analysis of statutory and regulatory barriers. Also included is a summary of results achieved by the CCAM and each agency and program in simplifying access, providing the most appropriate cost-effective service, and reducing duplication in order to expand services.

A. Useful Practices

Throughout the country, States, communities, and local organizations have taken the initiative to improve the coordination of human service transportation. The Executive Order requires the CCAM to identify useful practices in coordinating transportation services in order to harness this experience and practice.
To provide broad access to information about useful practices, the CCAM has developed a web-based system for the ongoing collection, analysis, and dissemination of useful practices. This database, which is hosted on the CCAM web site (www.unitedweride.gov), invites users to share information about promising practices, review and learn more about the practices of other communities, and to search for practices to address specific issues. It is available to anyone with Internet access, and the information is provided in a user-friendly, menu-driven format.

The Useful Practices database currently includes 81 case studies organized by six broad practices describing the category or type of activity. The primary source of the information provided is a series of “useful practice” reports published under the auspices of the Transportation Cooperative Research Program , which is funded by the U.S. Department of Transportation, along with other published materials and interviews with key stakeholder groups. For each practice, the web site provides a title and brief description of the practice; identifies the lead agency, partners and target populations; and provides a short historical account of the development of the practice. A brief description of each practice and some examples included on the web site are provided below.

Customer Service Strategies help ensure that transportation services are consumer-driven, and that consumers are included in the planning, development, implementation, and evaluation of human service transportation. Useful practice strategies include incorporating customer feedback into program management, providing centralized customer information and travel training, and improving the quality of services.

Transportation Options Program The Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission, in partnership with public transportation and human service providers, has implemented the Transportation Options Program (TOP). TOP is a customer friendly central source of information about all transportation services available for people with disabilities in 70 rural communities. Through TOP, local transit providers draw upon a menu of transportation options to develop individualized transportation plans for people with disabilities.

Operations Strategies are intended to improve customer mobility. Such strategies may address agency routes, create brokerages for area transportation providers, develop subscription programs, and develop and implement transit pass programs. Services affected may include fixed route, demand response, or volunteer transportation systems.

ACCESS In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, ACCESS is responsible for coordinating human service transportation services, including approximately two million trips annually for 120 agencies. ACCESS is an example of a decentralized paratransit brokerage system, where one-stop reservations and scheduling are handled by a network of 10 for-profit and not-for-profit transportation providers. Providers are paid on a per-hour basis and are assigned to specific geographic zones. Including the administrative cost of the brokerage, the average cost per trip is approximately $15 for the agency. ACCESS promotes efficient fixed route transit options by offering transit passes to some paratransit riders. Travel training on how to use existing services is also available.

 

Planning Strategies improve coordination and planning at the administrative and organizational level among different agencies, organizations, and stakeholders. Examples of useful practices include community transportation planning, developing joint opportunities for quality assurance and review, information sharing, and coordinated standards for planning.

Ohio Works First Program In response to the Federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, Holmes County, Ohio, developed a plan that brought together government, business, school, social service, and religious organizations to implement the Ohio Works First program and help move welfare recipients into the mainstream workforce. The county established a transportation work plan with an inventory of existing transportation providers, unmet transportation needs, a transportation strategy, and resources required to implement this strategy. Using this guide, committee members identified strategies to improve transportation for the community and reduce transportation barriers to citizens seeking to obtain work.

 

Partnership and Leadership Strategies involve coordination and cooperation among private and public transportation providers, human service agencies, consumers, and others to improve the efficiency and quality of service provision.

Washington State Agency Council on Coordinated Transportation In 1998, the Washington State legislature formed the Washington State Agency Council on Coordinated Transportation (ACCT). An advisory council of State agencies was created to provide guidance to ACCT, and local community forums were established to develop community transportation coordination plans in accordance with ACCT guidelines. Demonstration projects were funded with $1 million appropriated by the legislature in 1997. Successes include Thurston County, where the metropolitan planning organization, transit agency, and health department have teamed with the State’s welfare agency to implement the “Village Vans” service, which provides transportation to work for consumers of welfare programs. In the first year of service, the Village Vans program helped more than 70 people find and keep jobs.

 

Policy, Program and Funding Strategies are geared toward improving effectiveness, efficiency, and accountability. Policy, programs and available funding are typically implemented as mandated by legislative bodies or administrative offices.

Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged Florida, by law, created coordinated human service transportation systems. The Florida Commission for the Transportation Disadvantaged designates and oversees Local Coordinating Boards (LCB) in each of the state’s 67 counties. The LCB selects a local Community Transportation Coordinator (CTC) to coordinate the provision of transportation for older adults, persons with disabilities, individuals with lower incomes, and children at risk. All State and local agencies are required to participate in a coordinated system if they receive federal, State, and local funding.

 

Technology Strategies automate or simplify administrative processes and procedures. Technology strategies are generally designed to increase the efficiency of reservations, scheduling, dispatching, reporting, and billing. In addition, consumers may benefit from the adoption of assistive technology to plan trips, identify stops, and recognize landmarks.

Client Referral, Ridership and Financial Tracking System To help bridge the gap between human service agency and rural transit system cultures, the New Mexico Departments of Labor, Human Services, and Highway and Transportation worked with the Alliance for Transportation Research Institute to develop and implement a web-based software program, the Client Referral, Ridership, and Financial Tracking Transit Management System. This system integrates human service client transportation referral and service delivery with daily rural public transit operations; enhances customer access to transportation services; generates financial and client tracking reports; decreases the administrative burdens on small transit systems; and provides funding agencies with planning, administrative and fiscal accountability tools.

 

B. Statutory/Regulatory Analysis

The CCAM, for the first time, compiled the entire set of statutes and implementing regulations for the 62 programs that provide funding for transportation services to transportation-disadvantaged populations. In its preliminary analysis, the CCAM has identified consistencies and differences among the programs with respect to (1) eligibility requirements; (2) types of transportation service provided; (3) trip destinations permitted; and (4) reporting requirements.

In addition, the CCAM is continuing its review of the statutes and regulations with regard to three issues that have been identified as particularly challenging by a group of 23 State agency representatives, transportation brokerage coordinators, and transit and human service providers – a group brought together by the National Consortium on the Coordination of Human Service Transportation at the request of the CCAM. These issues are related to the lack of Federal statutory and/or regulatory guidance on:

Participant/Consumer Eligibility Requirements. The CCAM analysis of laws and regulations demonstrates that the personal characteristics of consumers (i.e., age, income, veteran status, disability or health status, etc.) are a key determinant of the range of transportation options available to each individual. Of the 62 programs that fund transportation services, most are human service programs specifically targeted to people with low incomes, persons with disabilities, children/youth, or older adults. The vast majority of program funding is also directed to people with these characteristics. The chart below illustrates the number of available programs and total program funding by participant characteristic; the total number of programs exceeds 62 because some are available to more than one category of participants.

 

Types of Transportation Assistance Available. For those people who are eligible for services, the types of transportation assistance provided also can vary widely by program. Transportation services may include:

Reimbursement for Travel Costs. At least 37 of the 62 Federal programs reimburse a transportation provider or a customer for the cost of transportation. For example, the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s Supportive Housing and the Department of Labor’s Workforce Investment Act Adult and Youth Formula Program both provide bus tokens or taxi vouchers to customers to access their services. The Department of Agriculture’s Food Stamp Program, on the other hand, reimburses for gasoline expense and bus fare to access education, job training, and employment opportunities that might lead to reduced dependence on food stamps.

Purchase/Operation of Vehicles. Approximately 26 of the programs provide transportation services by funding the purchase of vehicles and/or contractual arrangements with transportation providers to provide either dedicated or shared-ride transportation services. These include some of the largest Federal programs in terms of dollars spent on transportation. For example, HHS’s Supportive Services and Senior Centers program provides funding to local organizations to contract for transportation services for older adults to access their programs, medical services, and other necessary trips. The HHS Head Start Program, which had the second highest annual expenditure for transportation in 2001, provides funds to purchase and operate vehicles. Many Head Start providers operate transportation services solely for their participants. At the same time, within the Department of Transportation, the Elderly Persons and Persons with Disabilities Program provides funding for State and local human service organizations to either purchase vehicles or contract for services to meet the transportation needs of older adults and persons with disabilities.

Purchase or Modify Private Automobiles. Only a few Federal programs fund the acquisition, maintenance or modification of automobiles owned and operated by customers to access human service programs or other needed services. Of the 62 Federal programs, only three support privately-owned automobile travel. For example, the Department of Veterans Affairs’ Automobiles and Adaptive Equipment for Disabled Veterans and Members of the Armed Forces Program funds both the purchase of personal vehicles and the modification of vehicles to meet the needs created by the customer’s particular disability. Some States and localities have also established innovative car ownership programs for transportation-disadvantaged individuals (primarily low-income persons) to facilitate access to jobs, especially in rural areas where public transportation is not available.

A summary of the types of transportation expenses covered by the 62 Federal programs is illustrated in the chart below.

 

The largest number of programs (37) reimburses clients for transportation expenses. In terms of funding, however, this category is dominated by the Medicaid program, which according to the GAO 2003 Report expends less than 1% of its total $183 billion budget on reimbursement for transportation services. The operation of vehicles – typically, vans – is an eligible expense under 23 programs, which have collective annual budgets of over $200 billion. This category of programs is dominated by three programs in HHS: Medicaid, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, and Head Start; the U.S. Department of Education’s special education program; and some of the U.S. Department of Transportation formula grant programs. Although a variety of programs provide funding for other types of services and expenses, funding for these programs is relatively low compared to that available to programs that provide client reimbursement for transportation or fund the purchase of vehicles to transport clients.

 

Trip Destinations Permitted. Most of the 62 Federal programs under study are human service programs that provide transportation services only to destinations related to the underlying purpose of the program itself. The chart below illustrates the variety of trip purposes or destinations for which Federal programs provide transportation funds.

Although a significant number of programs fund transportation to general client-determined destinations, educational services, social services and employment services, the bulk of the funding is available for transportation to medical care. As is the case with eligible expenses, this category of programs is dominated by the HHS Medicaid program, which reimburses eligible low-income clients for transportation to medical services. The vast majority of programs that offer transportation to services other than medical care do not track how much of their total budget is spent specifically on transportation, but with the exception of programs administered by the FTA, the percentage of the budgets expended for transportation is estimated to be relatively low.

When combined with participant eligibility requirements, limitations on trip destination or trip purpose can significantly constrain the availability of transportation for some groups. An analysis of this cross-program effect is ongoing.

Reporting Requirements. CCAM has conducted a preliminary analysis of transportation reporting requirements for 34 human service programs administered by the Departments of Transportation, Veterans Affairs, HHS, Agriculture, and Education. Of the programs examined thus far, 14 collect no customer, service, or expenditure data with regard to transportation services at the Federal level. Four of the programs collect aggregate expenditure data that permit the agency to report the total amount spent on transportation services; four others include transportation expenditures in a broader category of support service expenditures, which precludes a calculation of the amount spent on transportation. Two programs require providers to report the number of trips provided by purpose/destination; seven require providers to report the number of trips, mileage, and cost per trip; and four require providers to report the average amount spent on transportation per customer.

Despite the fact that many programs require no transportation data to be reported, the issue of Federal reporting requirements was raised as a significant barrier to coordination across programs. Even slight variations in reporting requirements create the need for multiple data collection protocols and reporting systems, which can be compounded by variations in the timing of reporting requirements (i.e., monthly, quarterly, annually by calendar year, or annually by fiscal year). The CCAM is continuing its analysis of this issue, and has made a related recommendation on Reporting and Evaluation in the “Recommendations” section of this report.

Lack of Statutory and Regulatory Guidance. The lack of guidance on coordinated human service transportation planning, vehicle sharing, and cost allocation has been identified as a significant impediment to coordination. CCAM has undertaken a preliminary analysis of these issues, which is summarized below, and has proposed further Federal action on each in the “Recommendations” section of this report.

Coordinated Planning. The Department of Transportation proposed in its surface transportation reauthorization draft legislation to require a coordinated human service transportation plan for any community that seeks funds for FTA programs that are targeted for transportation-disadvantaged populations. However, no Federal programs currently require the development of a coordinated community-wide plan for human service transportation. In many communities today, each human service agency makes independent decisions about routes, schedules, reservations systems, and other matters. As a result, Federal program funds may be spent on vehicles that remain idle for long periods of time or redundant routes and services, while other important transportation needs in the community remain unaddressed.

Vehicle Sharing. The Common Grant Rule, applicable to all recipients of Federal funds, clearly supports vehicle sharing among human service transportation providers. Such arrangements can enhance transportation services by increasing the pool of transportation resources, reducing the amount of time that vehicles are idle, and reducing or eliminating duplication of routes and services in the community. The CCAM’s preliminary analysis has identified approximately 26 Federal programs that support the purchase and/or operation of vehicles for human service transportation. Most of these programs do not impose restrictions on the use of these vehicles for consumers of other federally supported programs, provided that such use does not compromise services to their own program participants. Yet the practice of sharing vehicles among grant recipients of these programs appears to be minimal. The CCAM believes that a proactive approach that encourages vehicle sharing is required. This proactive approach may include guidance regarding logistics or user fees, or goes beyond guidance to include program-funding incentives.

Cost Allocation. Another major challenge for agencies that wish to share federally supported transportation resources is the lack of explicit Federal guidance on how transportation costs should be allocated among programs. The Federal government has general cost allocation guidance developed in OMB Circular A-87, but these principles must be translated into practical cost allocation models that encompass the wide variety of potential program relationships. At present, the FTA and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid are working together to develop cost-sharing guidance that is specific to Medicaid providers and transit agencies. However, a much broader effort is needed.

C. Results Achieved and Activities Initiated

Based on the extensive research and analysis of the interagency workgroups, as well as the outcomes of a focus group of stakeholders representing transportation and human service providers at the State and local level, significant progress has been made at both the Federal departmental and program level to improve coordination. Perhaps most importantly, in addition to the comprehensive CCAM Action Plan, each Federal agency represented on the CCAM has developed an action plan to support the goals of simplifying access, reducing duplication, and improving cost-effectiveness in order to increase service. Copies of the Departmental Action Plans can be found at Appendix 5.

In addition to the development of the Useful Practices database and the regulatory analysis previously discussed, a summary of the accomplishments and activities in progress by CCAM follows:

United We Ride Web site. A new web site was created to facilitate coordinated planning and implementation among human service transportation providers and stakeholders. Visitors to the web site can obtain up-to-date information on Federal programs and related information in a user-friendly, menu-driven format. Tools and strategies for enhancing human service transportation are also available on the site. For example, the Framework for Action and related materials can be accessed at the CCAM web site (http://www.unitedweride.gov). The Framework for Action, and Facilitators Guide, enables leaders to guide community participants, including human service agencies, public and private transportation providers, and stakeholder groups, through a transportation coordination assessment and action planning process. A Resources for Action guide was developed to provide easily accessible information related to each of the core elements of a fully coordinated transportation system, including leadership and planning, needs and resource assessment, funding strategies, service delivery, technology, and mobility management.

Framework for Action. The Council is actively working with States and communities on the implementation of the Framework for Action. During the past year, approximately 45 States have either completed the Framework for Action or are in the process of implementation. In addition, these States are actively working on developing statewide action plans in human service transportation coordination.

Telephone Based Information and Access. The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Volpe Center is analyzing and will make recommendations for integrating information regarding human service transportation with two important telephone-based general access numbers -- “211” for information about human services and “511” for information about transportation services.

Methods to Encourage Cost Sharing. To promote resource sharing and collaboration, equitable cost sharing among human service transportation providers is being encouraged by the publication of:

Individualized Transportation Plan. This tool has been developed to help social workers, rehabilitation counselors, therapists, transition coordinators, and other professional social service providers link an assessment of community transportation options with their functional assessment of a customer’s mobility capability.

Mobility Services for All Americans Project. This project is working to leverage information technology and intelligent transportation systems to achieve improved cost-effectiveness and efficiency of human service transportation. The first major deliverable is a study that establishes a national baseline from which progress in the growth of intelligent transportation systems will be measured.

The CCAM is also developing a national education and training campaign for consumers, families, and providers to improve awareness and understanding of human service transportation options. In addition to the collective accomplishments and actions highlighted in the CCAM Action Plan, individual departments and agencies are reporting the following progress on improving human service transportation programs and services:

D. Simplifying Access

Department of Education

The Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Service (OSERS) is developing and disseminating information on how Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (IDEA) funds can be utilized to support travel training for children and youth with disabilities. One of the primary purposes of IDEA is to ensure that eligible children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for employment and independent living.

OSERS is coordinating with the DOT-funded technical assistance center (Project ACTION) and the National Center on Secondary Education and Transition to facilitate the dissemination of transportation-related information to transition coordinators across the country.

Using the Technical Assistance and Dissemination Network, the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) is identifying, developing, and disseminating information on travel training curriculum for use with youth who are transitioning from school to post-school activities, such as post-secondary education, employment, and independent living.

OSERS is compiling a list of national organizations and stakeholders who will assist in the dissemination of fact sheets and other human service transportation education and outreach materials.

The Rehabilitation Services Administration will work with centers for independent living to include transportation training. In July 2004, the Rehabilitation Services Administration distributed copies of the Project Action report based on Regional Dialogues, and a Community Transportation Assessment booklet to all centers for independent living in the country.

OSEP provided to schools a “Buses and Trains for Everyone” travel-training curriculum, developed by Project ACTION, for grades K-8.

Department of Health and Human Services

The Administration on Aging (AOA) embarked on a technical assistance endeavor to disseminate information on useful practices associated with transportation coordination and how to leverage a myriad of funding sources in order to increase the availability of transportation for older adults.

Over the last year, AOA identified 14 community-based agencies successful in coordinating transportation services across multiple programs and for multiple populations, including older adults. The publication “Seniors Benefit from Transportation Partnerships: Case Studies from the Aging Network” illustrating these successful coordination efforts will be disseminated to all members of the aging services network in early 2005. AOA will make technical assistance available to help local communities implement these best practices. In 2005, AOA plans to focus on how these practices help local communities achieve measurable benefits for senior transportation.

The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) programs commonly require grantees to provide transportation to underserved clients to assure their access to preventive and primary health care. Transportation is provided through a variety of means by community-based grantees that often have a transportation coordinator. Grantees utilize the most cost-effective means of transportation, including but not limited to: direct provision of transportation, vouchers, bus tokens, client reimbursement, subcontractors, and referrals to locally-based organizations. HRSA programs providing transportation services include:

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) engaged in several agency-wide activities to increase access, appropriateness, and availability of transportation to individuals with mental illness and substance abuse disorders. A central goal of the President’s New Freedom Initiative is the full participation in all areas of society for people with disabilities. Access to transportation is critical to achieve this goal.

The SAMHSA Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) provided funding for the development and publication of “Getting There: Helping People with Mental Illness Access Transportation.” This report delineates specific transportation barriers and outlines strategies to address them for mental health consumers. CMHS will be implementing a strategic distribution plan of this document over the coming year.

In 2005, the SAMHSA Center for Substance Abuse Treatment (CSAT) implemented the new Access to Recovery (ATR) Program where substance abuse clients may choose among clinical treatment options and recovery support services. Transportation to and from treatment is identified as a critical recovery support service and States will be permitted to use ATR funding to support transportation needs of clients.

Department of Transportation

The FTA has provided funding and supported the development of the National Consortium for the Coordination of Human Services Transportation to promote education and outreach to stakeholders who must be involved with coordination if it is to be successfully implemented at the State and local levels. The Consortium is comprised of national public interest associations, transportation and human service professional organizations and human service advocacy groups, including the National Governors Association, National Conference of State Legislators, the American Public Human Services Association, the American Public Transportation Association and AARP. The National Consortium has produced:

The National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration (NHTSA) and FTA are working collaboratively to integrate information and educational resources on alternative transportation options into pamphlets and other materials provided to individuals with medical conditions and/or older adults who can no longer drive.

Department of Housing & Urban Development

HUD is developing transportation guidance for grantees to reduce or eliminate the duplication of transportation services between the Department and other Federal agencies.

HUD is identifying topics for future research and data analysis with the Department of Transportation on housing and transportation issues.

Department of Justice (DOJ)

DOJ is helping the CCAM disseminate information and conduct outreach to consumers and stakeholders. The Civil Rights Division has compiled a comprehensive list of more than 1,000 organizations of and for people with disabilities at the local, tribal, State and national levels. Targeted disability constituencies include those with physical, developmental, psychiatric, and learning disabilities. Attention is also given to people with disabilities from diverse ethnic communities. The list encompasses outreach to leaders from all 50 States, the District of Columbia, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the Marianas Islands.

Department of Interior

The National Indian Ironworkers Training transportation program has received $250,000 from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to provide graduates of the program resources to obtain transportation to their new place of work, usually off the reservation in large urban areas, and for other purposes.

Social Security Administration

The Social Security Administration is funding cooperative agreements with 41 public and private organizations through the Homeless Outreach Projects and Evaluation (HOPE) initiative, which is focused on assisting eligible, chronically homeless individuals in applying for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits. Many of these projects include transportation assistance to help applicants get to medical appointments and address other needs critical to the application process.

SSA plans to conduct a survey of these projects and other SSA demonstration projects focusing on employment and youth transition to learn more about the transportation needs of applicants for Social Security benefits and Social Security beneficiaries. SSA will analyze the data to determine how it might facilitate coordination of transportation services and simplify access to such services for individuals with disabilities, older adults and individuals with lower incomes who are applicants for Social Security benefits and Social Security beneficiaries.

Department of Labor

The Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP) is establishing a link to the United We Ride web site from DisabilityInfo.Gov, a comprehensive web site with one-stop access to government disability information that services more than 5.800 customers each day.
The Office of Workforce Investment in the Employment and Training Administration added a transportation link to the National Locator section of America’s Service Locator (www.servicelocator.org). The link connects directly to the American Public Transportation Association one-stop information site for public transportation authorities in communities across the country.

E. Enhanced Cost-Effectiveness

Department of Transportation

FTA has established technical assistance program resources to provide States and targeted communities with technical assistance for pursuing the development of coordinated human service transportation plans and transportation delivery systems. Technical Assistance Ambassadors drawn from existing FTA technical assistance programs are assigned to work with States on developing human service coordination plans.

Department of Health and Human Services

HHS’s Medicaid program allows the purchase of transit passes for consumers of Medicaid services to get to and from health care appointments using fixed route public transportation options (i.e., the bus or subway). Transit passes are a less expensive alternative to demand-response rides for individuals who have the skills and functional ability to use public transportation. In July 2003, Medicaid worked with the National Consortium on Human Service Transportation and the Federal Transportation Administration to develop and disseminate educational materials related to the Transit Pass program. At this time, approximately 26 States are implementing the Medicaid Transit Pass program.

Department of Education

The Department of Education’s Independent Living program has developed new performance measures for FY 2006, including a new measure on transportation-related services. The new measure will provide a solid assessment of the performance of centers for independent living in addressing the transportation needs of individuals with disabilities. The Independent Living program will use the information gathered from this measure to improve the centers’ transportation training and advocacy.

Department of Housing and Urban Development

HUD is in the process of reviewing current regulations regarding barriers to coordinating HUD funded transportation services with other federally funded transportation services.

Department of Labor

The Division of Disability and Workforce Programs in the Employment and Training Administration will disseminate information on outcomes and effective practices of the six communities that received Work Incentive Grants in March 2004. Grants targeted the transportation barriers for individuals with disabilities who use the One-Stop Career Center for employment and training services. Grantees proposed such activities as conducting needs assessments, conducting mobility training for persons with disabilities, building partnerships to coordinate transit services with persons with disabilities, providing mobility management training to local disability groups and training workforce staff to be transportation brokers. The grants’ goal is to facilitate innovative practice in the One-Stop Career Center system.

F. Reducing Duplication

Department of Transportation

The FTA has issued United We Ride coordination grants to 43 States, the District of Columbia, and the Virgin Islands to develop or implement State coordination plans that will increase coordination and reduce duplication, increase service efficiency and simplify access to service for transportation disadvantaged populations.

The FTA, the Administration for Children and Families (HHS) and the Employment and Training Administration (DOL) issued joint guidance on how the DOT Job Access, the HHS Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and the DOL Welfare to Work program funding can work together to serve the needs of low-income persons for transportation connections to jobs and employment support services such as training and child care services.

The Department of Transportation’s surface transportation reauthorization proposal included authority for FTA human services transportation programs to use Federal transportation funding from non-DOT human service programs as match for transportation projects. This would mean that funds from several Federal programs could be more easily combined to meet the needs for human service transportation, reducing the likelihood that duplicative services and increasing the overall availability of service.

Department of Interior

The Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) program, jointly administered by the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Federal Highway Administration through an interagency agreement, expands transportation activities available to tribes and tribal organizations and provides guidance for planning, designing, constructing, and maintaining transportation facilities. The program coordinates activities to avoid duplication and conflict among statutes and regulations. Revised administrative solutions have been initiated for transportation on Indian lands through revised regulations, effective November 13, 2004 (25 CFR Part 170). The new regulations will help tribal governments implement a transportation program to include opportunities, within available funding, to coordinate with State/local governments and other Federal agencies.

The Indian Employment, Training and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992 (Public Law 102-477) allows participating tribes to use a portion of their existing funds to provide transportation to and from work, school, training, and related activities. Tribes can purchase vans and provide transportation vouchers or public transportation tickets for tribal members. The purpose of this initiative is to demonstrate how Indian tribal governments can integrate the employment, training, and related services they provide in order to improve the effectiveness of those services. The Department of Interior is actively working to coordinate existing transportation resources and services.

Department of Agriculture

USDA is taking steps to integrate the Food Stamp Employment & Training Program with the ongoing efforts by DOT, HHS and DOL to issue joint guidance on how Job Access, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families and Welfare to Work program funding can be combined to serve the needs of low-income persons for transportation connections to jobs and employment support services.

Top

---

VI. Recommendations

The President’s Executive Order asks the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility to make recommendations to simplify and coordinate substantive, procedural and administrative requirements, and to make any other recommendations that would advance the principles of the Executive Order. In response, the Coordinating Council has developed five broad recommendations for consideration by the President. These recommendations do not propose or assume fundamental changes in the structure of federal programs that fund and/or provide transportation services to persons with disabilities, older adults, and low-income individuals. As such, most of the recommendations represent interim solutions that the CCAM believes will strengthen the current network of transportation services and help providers become more responsive to consumers, more cost-effective, and more accountable to the public. Recommendation 5, regarding a proposed demonstration program, is intended to test the feasibility of a broader solution to cost-effectively meeting the needs of transportation-disadvantaged populations. All five recommendations will seek solutions utilizing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) technologies to simplify access and enhance cost effectiveness.

Recommendation 1 – Coordinated Transportation Planning: In order to effectively promote the development and delivery of coordinated transportation services, the CCAM recommends that the Administration seek mechanisms (statutory, regulatory, or administrative) to require participation in a community transportation planning process for human service transportation programs.

By promoting shared responsibility for transportation services, joint planning promises increased cost-effectiveness and increased access for consumers by eliminating duplicative efforts and wasted resources. Currently, regional transportation planning is undertaken by metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) or regional councils, the majority of which do not engage in coordinated planning activities around human service transportation. For FY 2005, the FTA and the FHWA have included human service transportation coordination as a Planning Emphasis Area, which will drive additional focus in this arena. However, it does not compel human service program agencies to participate in the transportation planning effort.

In addition, the Administration’s proposal for reauthorization of the surface transportation law (SAFETEA) included a provision that requires a community to engage in a comprehensive transportation planning effort as a condition of receiving grant monies from FTA under the Elderly and Disabled Program, the Job Access and Reverse Commute Program, and the proposed New Freedom Program. The provision requires each community to include human service organizations, consumers, and public and private transportation providers. Although the reauthorization of this legislation was not completed, this provision was incorporated in both the House and the Senate bills in the last Congress. Reauthorization bills will be re-introduced in the 109th Congress.

This proposed provision in transportation law would ensure that agencies seeking funds for vehicles through one of the enumerated transportation programs participate in a coordinated transportation planning process. However, it cannot require other human service agencies that provide transportation services to participate. Statutory, regulatory or administrative changes for those programs would be necessary to require their participation. Both FHWA and FTA could accomplish enforcement of these provisions managed through the planning certification process with little, if any, additional oversight burden placed on human service program administration at the State or Federal level.

Recommendation 2 – Vehicle Sharing: In order to reduce duplicate transportation services as well as idle time for drivers and vehicles, the CCAM recommends that vehicles used in human service transportation be made available to other federally funded programs, consistent with the Common Grant Rule (OMB Circular A-102). Within the next year, each Federal agency should review and modify their policies and procedures to proactively promote the sharing of vehicles with recipients and sub-recipients of other Federal programs. Existing flexibility in the permitted uses of federally funded equipment such as buses and/or vans can make more transportation available to more federally funded human service programs without fundamental changes in programs.

The Common Grant Rule provides that “the grantee or sub grantee shall also make equipment available for use on other projects or programs currently or previously supported by the Federal Government, providing such use will not interfere with the work on the projects or program for which it was originally acquired. First preference for other use shall be given to other programs or projects supported by the awarding agency. User fees should be considered if appropriate.”
As originally conceived, the Common Grant Rule clearly supports vehicle sharing. Such arrangements can enhance transportation services by increasing the pool of transportation resources, reducing the amount of time that vehicles are idle, and reducing or eliminating duplication of routes and services in the community. It is not uncommon to have federally supported vehicles sitting idle because the sponsoring program may only use the vehicles for a limited purpose. The proactive promotion of shared use of federally supported vehicles among the various community programs receiving Federal funding ensures an enhanced use of Federal assets.

The Council has identified a significant obstacle to vehicle sharing is that many State, tribal and local transportation grant recipients do not know that vehicle sharing is permitted and, in fact, believe that only consumers of their specific programs can be transported in their vehicles.

The Council’s preliminary analysis has identified approximately 26 Federal programs that support the purchase and/or operation of vehicles for human service transportation. Most of these programs do not impose restrictions on the use of these vehicles for consumers of other federally supported programs, provided that such use does not compromise services to their own program participants. Yet, the practice of sharing vehicles among grant recipients of these programs appears to be minimal. It is appropriate and understandable that Federal programs fund transportation services specifically for targeted participants in order to facilitate access to program services (e.g., mental health, rehabilitation, employment training, etc). Sharing vehicles with other consumer groups and organizations, however, need not detract from that goal.

Recommendation 3 – Cost Allocation: In order to ensure that adequate resources are available for transportation services for persons with disabilities, older adults and individuals with lower incomes, and to encourage the shared use of vehicles and existing public transportation services, the CCAM recommends where statutorily permitted that standard cost allocation principles for transportation be developed and endorsed by Federal human service and transportation agencies.
Of the 62 Federal programs that permit the funding of transportation services for transportation-disadvantaged individuals, 37 reimburse for transportation services and an additional 23 operate transportation services. Historically, a major obstacle to sharing transportation resources has been the difficulty of reaching agreements at the local level about the appropriate allocation of costs to each agency. Grant recipients have been especially concerned that the Federal agencies that fund their programs would not accept any local agreement. Often, the programs have different eligibility requirements, different billing rules, and different service policies that not only complicate the mechanics of cost allocation, but cloud the issue of whether any particular methodology would be acceptable to all of the oversight agencies involved. The development of a standardized methodology built on accepted cost allocation principles would encourage local agencies to share transportation vehicles and resources.

Some States, communities, and tribal organizations have successfully tackled this problem without Federal assistance, and could serve as models for this effort. In Lane County, Oregon, for example, the Lane Council of Governments (which serves as the region’s metropolitan planning organization) initiated an effort with several Oregon Department of Human Resources agencies to establish an equitable cost sharing arrangement. In 1992, the Council of Governments determined the total cost of providing transportation services to transportation-disadvantaged individuals and developed a methodology to fully allocate these costs. A percentage of the total cost is now paid by the Council of Governments as the local match, with the remaining amount allocated to each participating agency under an interagency agreement.

The issue of allocating costs among programs is challenging when individuals qualify for multiple types of transportation services through a variety of programs (e.g., Medicaid, aging, employment, etc). The issue is often exacerbated because the fare for a one-way ride for a consumer may only be $2.00; but the cost of providing that ride may be as high as $30.00. Frequently, it is the local transportation agency that absorbs the cost difference. This can make it difficult for the local transportation agency to handle the surge in consumers that may previously have used services directly provided by Medicaid, aging, or other human service programs within its current budget or with its current vehicle fleet, drivers and facilities. As a result, service deteriorates for all consumers, including those with disabilities, older adults, and low-income individuals who depend on public transportation for their mobility. Determining equitable cost arrangements is a shared responsibility for all Federal programs supporting human service transportation. Without this coordinated approach to cost sharing, Federal agencies perpetuate separate, uncoordinated systems for the delivery of important transportation services.

Recommendation 4 – Reporting and Evaluation: The Council recommends the development of a method to permit cross agency analysis of the effectiveness, efficiency, and progress of States, communities, and tribes toward improved coordination of transportation programs, as evidenced by improvements in the overall quality and cost-effectiveness of human service transportation.

The President’s Management Agenda calls for a Federal government that is more customer-focused and results-oriented. In order to achieve these goals, one must first define the desired results and collect the data necessary to measure performance. The Council recognizes that transportation is critical to the effective provision of human services. If consumers cannot get to these services, they cannot get these services. Further, to the extent that the transportation provided is more costly than it could be, it diverts funds from important human service program needs.

However, many human service programs with a primary responsibility to deliver job training, health care, education or social services, do not collect information about the cost and quality of the transportation services they provide. Those that do collect transportation-related information often utilize different reporting cycles and different data points. There is no single mechanism in place across Federal programs to understand the benefits for programs that are coordinating human ser