Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (19)
Semelhante a DRT Metrics: New Paradigms in DRT and Shared MOD Metrics
Semelhante a DRT Metrics: New Paradigms in DRT and Shared MOD Metrics (20)
Último
Último (20)
DRT Metrics: New Paradigms in DRT and Shared MOD Metrics
- 1. 5M Paratransit System Will Rodman Vice President of Business Development 1Baltimore, MD April 15-17, 2019 International Conference on Demand Responsive and Innovative Transportation Services New Paradigms in DRT and Shared MOD Metrics
- 2. © 2019 TSS Paratransit The Premise NTD DRT data has had limited usefulness for peer comparisons. Consider the following examples… 2
- 3. © 2019 TSS Paratransit Does NTD DRT data provide insight? The differences in productivity and unit cost of: •A DRT service that provides ADA paratransit service vs. •A DRT service that provides ADA paratransit and senior and/or human service agency trips 3
- 4. © 2019 TSS Paratransit Does NTD DRT data provide insight? The differences in productivity and unit cost of: •An ADA paratransit service using dedicated vehicles only vs. •An ADA paratransit service that also used non-dedicated service providers (RVHs measured differently) • that uses taxis for 15% of the trips vs. • that uses taxis for 50% of the trips 4
- 5. © 2019 TSS Paratransit Does NTD DRT data provide insight? The differences in productivity and unit cost of: •An ADA paratransit service with an average trip length of 8 miles vs. 12 miles? •An ADA paratransit service in an area with light traffic congestion vs. very heavy traffic congestion? •An ADA paratransit service that has 15% wheelchair trips vs. 30% wheelchair trips? 5
- 6. © 2019 TSS Paratransit Does NTD DRT data provide insight? The differences in productivity and unit cost of: •A DRT service that provides an ADA paratransit service with no other real options vs. •An ADA paratransit service with an alternative service (taxi-subsidy program) for ADA paratransit customers 6
- 7. © 2019 TSS Paratransit Our Objective for Today To begin an advocacy groundswell to change NTD DRT metrics so that they are more useful to practitioners 7
- 8. © 2019 TSS Paratransit What Does NTD Ask for? DRT Performance Data included in NTD: Revenue Hours & Miles First P/U to Last D/O less breaks For NDSPs measured when passenger is on board Travel miles during lunch break often included Vehicle Hours & Miles Pull-out to Pull-in less breaks For NDSPs vehicle hours & miles = revenue hrs & mi Passengers Unlinked Pass Trips (customers, PCAs, companions) Use for calculation of trip length not accurate Operating Cost Limited use if alternative services cost is included Accidents/Incidents 8
- 9. © 2019 TSS Paratransit What Does NTD Not Ask for? Other Performance Statistics: Other Key Data: On-Time Trips* Direct Trip Length Requested Trips Direct Trip Time Trip Denials* Reserved Trips Other Key Information Scheduled Trips ADA paratransit only or coordinated Cancellations Service mix (DSP vs. NDSP % split) No-Shows Ambulatory vs. wheelchair trip % split Missed Trips* Alternative services trip stats, cost data Trips with Excessive OB Travel Time* Microtransit trip stats, cost data Complaints Hold Times* *Patterns of which may indicate capacity constraints 9
- 10. © 2019 TSS Paratransit What Do Shortcomings Suggest? Part 1 Further breakdown of paratransit statistics (Just DRT is not enough!) • ADA paratransit vs. Non-ADA paratransit? Still too broad. • Non-ADA paratransit would include premium service trips, alternative service trips, coordinated trips sponsored by 3rd parties, and general public trips on microtransit services • ADA paratransit stats for DSP and NDSP still co-mingled. • How about DRT stats by mode / program? • Dedicated fleet: ADA paratransit trips vs. non-ADA paratransit trips • Non-dedicated fleet: ADA paratransit trips vs. non-ADA paratransit trips • Transit-sponsored alternatives services (for ADA paratransit customers) • Micro-transit services 10
- 11. © 2019 TSS Paratransit What Do Shortcomings Suggest? Part 2 For Productivity – three new measures that will aid comparisons: • Direct miles per RVH helps correct for differences in average trip length • Direct travel time per RVH helps correct for differences in local congestion • Number of trips requiring a wheelchair accessible vehicle How difficult to collect? • Fairly easy with software products that dispatch using Google Maps or equivalent • For others, Google Maps or equivalent can be used to obtain this information for a random sample of trips at the time of the trip 11
- 12. © 2019 TSS Paratransit Examples 12 Fleet Trips Dir Miles per Trip Dir Miles per RVH Trips per RVH Shared Trips Shared Ride % On-Time % XOB% DSP 1,658,159 9.6 11.7 1.2 1,037,229 62.55% 91.15% 17.22% NDSPs 1,737,205 12.6 25.3 2.1 1,105,476 63.64% 94.44% 8.60% Total 3,395,364 10.8 16.8 1.6 2,142,705 63.11% 92.83% 12.68% Provider DSP Trips Only Dir Miles per Trip Dir Miles per RVH Trips per RVH Shared Trips Shared Ride % On-Time % XOB% 1 468,200 10.2 11.2 1.1 334,950 71.53% 90.79% 34.00% 2 415,569 10.7 13.9 1.3 259,422 62.43% 91.47% 6.58% 3 371,145 8.1 10.4 1.3 222,559 85.81% 89.60% 19.10% 4 244,218 9.0 10.2 1.1 141,648 58.00% 92.26% 7.57% 5 158,947 9.1 13.7 1.5 78,650 49.48% 93.32% 0.13% Total 1,658,159 9.6 11.7 1.2 1,037,229 62.55% 91.15% 17.22%
- 13. © 2019 TSS Paratransit Next Steps •Immediate – by June 10! Comment on FTA proposed policy revisions for NTD reporting https://www.regulations.gov/document?D=FTA_FRDOC_0001-0840 •To build a consensus among industry practitioners •A fast-track TCRP research effort? 13
- 14. © 2018 TSS Paratransit Thank You! Please visit our website: https://tssparatransit.com And look for related discussions under Will’s Pub on the Blog Tab: 14
Notas do Editor
- Good afternoon, and thank you Lindsey. So, most of you know me from my 40+ years of paratransit design, planning and evaluation, and quite often, I would be asked to prepare a peer review as part of a paratransit service evaluation, and I will tell you that I and other colleagues of mine amassed our own data bases for such evaluations because….
- …the National Transit Database of DRT systems is not particularly useful.
- Here we have two systems: one that provides just ADA paratransit service and one that provides a coordinated service. All else being equal, which service will likely have the higher productivity? My guess is that the coordinated service would have a higher productivity because there will likely be more many-to-few and many-to one trips and the trips will tend to be shorter. And with a higher productivity, there should be a lower unit cost. And yet, organizations “in the know” compare such systems all the time, relying on NTD data. Pioneer Institute: Philadelphia vs. Boston example.
- Here are two more systems. One with a 100% dedicated service and the other with a service mix of dedicated and non-dedicated service. With everything else equal, which will likely have the higher productivity and lower unit cost? The second one. One of the reasons is because NDSP labor will tend to be less expensive (no benefits, for openers), while driver labor costs with benefits have been shown to reflect up to 70% of the operating cost structure of dedicated paratransit services. But whether or not the system uses NDSPs is not particularly evident from the NTD data. Moreover, in cases where they do use NDSPs, the productivity is going to be inflated anyway because the FTA has said its okay to report NDSP revenue hours as just the live passenger time. So, the fewer the hours, the higher the productivity. Thus, comparing the productivity of a 100% dedicated service with a system using NDSPs is an apples to orange comparison. An example of another apples to orange comparison is to compare two systems with very different service mixes, such as a 85%/15% service mix and a 50%/50% service mix. Who would you expect to have the higher productivity and lower unit cost between these two? Right, but this information is not in the NTD data either.
- And here are three more comparisons: The first compares two systems with very different average trip lengths: which do you think will have the hire productivity and lower unit cost? Now, in this case, NTD does provide some mileage clues but you have to know to do this, and because the ridership figures include PCAs and companions, you really don’t wind up with an accurate stat for average miles per trip. The second compares two system serving areas with very different traffic congestion. Which will have the higher productivity and lower unit cost? Does the NTD data account for this? No. The third compares two systems with different demands from customers who use wheelchairs. Which will have the higher productivity and lower unit cost? Does the NTD data account for this? No as well.
- And here’s another comparison: An ADA paratransit system where customers really do not have any options. Vs. An ADA paratransit system where the transit agency is also providing an alternative service, like an taxi-subsidy program, or even a microtransit service which would be included in DRT stats, as well. My guess would be that the latter system probably has a lower unit cost, never mind how the productivity is being calculated, but here again, this significant difference is not being tracked in the NTD data. So, you get the idea. During my years at Multisystems and then at Nelson\Nygaard, I would have loved to have this kind of information readily available so that I could pick true peers when doing a peer evaluation, and because of these shortcomings, the only way to do it was to amass the data your self, by surveying systems, asking the right questions, and maintaining your own database, which I did. But it used to drive nuts when I would see somebody’s else’s peer comparison who just used NTD data and ended up comparing apples and oranges.
- So, what we can do about it? We can start to seriously push for more disaggregated and way more useful data to be collected.
- 8
- 9
- So, I have finally gotten to the “so what” slide and for those who know me well, one slide won’t do it, so I have two. A Part 1 and a Part 2. Some of suggested that we split off ADA paratransit from the other DRT services, and that alone would be helpful. Yes it would, but that alone doesn’t do it for me because there are so many other non-ADA paratransit/DRT services offered by transit agencies. So, my first suggestion, kind of as a point of departure, is to report DRT stats by mode/program: Stats and costs for dedicated service, splitting out ADA and non-ADA paratransit trips Ditto for non-dedicated service Stats and costs for alternatives services Stats and costs for micro-transit service Many may think this would be an imposition, but virtually all software systems in use today can generate this split out of stats and costs
- And my pet peeve, in case you hadn’t noticed, was productivity and for all these reasons that I laid out, trips per RVH which has been used for years by all of us is fine for trend analyses but is not particularly useful as a metric of comparison among peers unless you truly have similar peers, and even then, differences in trip length and traffic congestion and wheelchair trips % can sink you. So, the latter is easy, just ask for the percentage or number of trips that require a wheelchair accessible vehicle. But for the other two, I recommend two new productivity metrics which our software product 5M already tracks and which are also being used in Europe: direct miles per RVH, which helps correct for differences in average trip length. And Direct travel time per RVH, which helps correct for differences in local traffic congestion. And for these two metrics, paratransit software systems that use Google Maps or an equivalent in the dispatch functions can get 100% reporting for both of these, and in cases where you don’t have that kind of a system, you can go onto Google with a statistically relevant sample and do your own.
- Here’s some examples of what I am taking about. The top table splits out stats for the NDSPs, and you’ll notice the much higher productivity as previously explained. The bottom table reports stats for five different providers in five different areas , each with different average trip lengths, and you see that the trips per RVH are kind of similar, but then you go over to the direct miles per RVH and you are able to see who the better performers truly are.
- So, what I want to do and what I hope happens, if we collectively push for this, is to reach an industry-wide consensus on more useful data to track for DRT NTD reporting and help the FTA put this new requirement in place. And maybe the best way to reach a reach that consensus is to fast-track a TCRP research effort. So, if anybody from the FTA is or TRB is here, please think about this. It’s important.
- I have written about this in my blog, which is on our company website. It’s called Will’s Pub, as in Public House where all are welcome. And there have already some very thoughtful comments from some industry stalwarts in response to my blog. I didn’t even have to beg them. But I invite you all to come on by the pub and have a pint. And If you think I’m on the right track, let me know, and if you have any similar or new ideas, let’s hear ‘em. Thank you.