Rural Infrastructure: The Case of Rural Transportation

1
Rural Infrastructure The Case of Rural
Transportation
2
Overview of Presentation

• Brief introduction to transportation issue.
• Focus on rural transportation issues as a way of
  understanding.
• Identify the core problem of rural
  transportation.
• Briefly review several transportation models.
• Highlight the issues we will be facing in the
  future.

3
A Brief History of Transportation

• Before 1864, when the cross-continental railway
  was completed, the primary mode of transportation
  was foot, horse, or buggy.
• The automobile began replacing those and trolley
  systems in the 1920s.
• It wasnt until the 1950s that the automobile
  achieved dominance.
• Urban public transportation became a focus of the
  Federal government in the late 1950s and early
  1960s.
• The Older Americans Act (1965-1974) began
  supporting vehicle acquisition to help senior
  centers serve elderly consumers.
• The deinstitutionalization movement led to the
  recognition that people with disabilities would
  need similar transportation Section 5310
  (1974).
• The availability of these two programs
  highlighted the lack of public transportation in
  rural areas and led to Section 5311 (1978).
• ADAPT led the way in promoting accessible public
  transportation in our larger cities during the
  1980s.
• New Freedom Initiative and TEA-LU (2005) set the
  occasion to address issues that had accumulated
  over 20 years.

4
Urban Transportation

• While those in cities face many problems with
  public transportation, they are more of the
  problems of the responsiveness, and quality of
  public transportation.
• In rural areas, the problem has been the absence
  of any public transportation.

5
The lack of transportation is consistently
reported as one of the most significant problems
in rural areas especially by people with
disabilities and those who serve them.
6
Historical Efforts to Solve

• For many years, advocates and service providers
  assumed that the problem was that there were no
  models for delivering rural transportation.
• They worked hard to develop and demonstrate new
  ways of providing rural transportation.
• Little changed.

7
(No Transcript)
8
Some 12 million people, 41 of the rural
population, live in counties with no public
transportation
9
Consequences of Inequity

• 41 of rural residents live in counties where
  there is no public transportation available
  whatsoever.
• Public transportation subsidizes 955 trips
  annually for urban car-less households.
• Rural transportation programs provide fewer than
  25 trips per year to car-less households

10
A Primer on Public Transportation
Before 2005
After 2005 TEA-LU
Section 5307 Urban Transit
Sections 5307
Section 5310 and NFI 5317
Section 5310 Elderly and Disabled
Section 5311rural and reservation
Section 5340 urban Section 5340 rural
Section 5311 Rural Transit
11
Projected Federal Funding for Selected Public
Transportation Programs Affecting People with
Disabilities from TEA-21 and TEA-LU
12
Communities Vary Significantly and There is a
Need for Transit Models to Fit These Variations
13
Existing Modes and Models for Accessible
Transportation

• Urban Transit (5307 and 5340) fixed routes and
  para-transit.
• Rural Transit (5311) fixed routes, deviated
  routes, demand response.
• Agency-driven transportation (5310) client
  service base.
• Hybrid models like cooperative, coordinated, and
  consolidated programs.
• Volunteer and Faith-Based efforts.
• Voucher models

14
Rural Transportation Agencies
15
Elderly and Persons with Disabilities (5310)
16
Coordination

• Coordinated systems were demonstrated as
  effective and efficient models over 20 years ago
  but have not been widely adopted.
• New Federal guidelines are increasing the
  expectations for local coordination United We
  Ride.

17
Participation in Coordinated Systems

• Overall, we identified 4,836 recipients of 5310
  assistance in the 49 states and the District of
  Columbia.
• 31 participated in a coordinated system
• 11 participated in a brokerage
• 4 participated in a consolidated system
• Most respondents indicated that they did not
  participate in a coordinated system despite
  rating the quality of local transportation
  options as poor.

18
Status and Willingness to Cooperate

• Most respondents indicated that very little
  effort had gone into planning or organizing
  cooperative systems locally (1.2 on 4 point
  scale).
• At the same time, respondents seemed willing to
  participate in such a system (2.13 on 4 point
  scale).

19
(No Transcript)
20
PARTICIPANTS AND ROLES
Sponsoring Organization
Bookkeeper
Provider
CTC
CTC Community Transportation Coordinator
Consumer
21
THE TRAVELERS CHEQUES
Site Name
No.
0001 Site street address City, State ZIP

Date _____________ Site
phone number Pay to the order of
_____________________________________________
miles For (circle one) WORK
MEDICAL SOCIAL/RELIGIOUS SCHOOL
SHOPPING SUBMIT FOR PAYMENT WITHIN 90 DAYS
___________________________

Signature


Duplicate Cheques / Transaction Register /
Miles / Simplicity / Oversize Option
22
RIDES PROVIDED BY PURPOSE
23
RESULTS FOUR YEARS

• 588 Consumers
• 92,587 Trips gt 157 pp
• 1,018,391 Miles gt 1732 pp
• 40.8 trips around the world
• 0.39 per Mile
• 171 Obtained jobs
• Trips 84 for work

24
Faith Based Programs
25
Phase 2 The Sample

• There are 365,312 churches in the United States
  with a phone-book listing. Of those,
  approximately 119,823 are located in
  non-metropolitan counties.
• We identified 2,535 FBOs and selected 717
  randomly to send a survey asking similar
  questions that we asked of the CILs.
• We received a total of 288 (40) responses.
• Most (98.4) respondents reported their faith
  community was based on Christianity.
• Mean of 300 worshiping adult members,
  (median100, range4,994) 10 of whom had a
  significant disability.

26
FBO Vehicle Ownership

• About 1/3 of the respondents indicated that their
  faith community owned one or more vehicles.
• 71 respondents, out of 215 responding to this
  question, reported owning a total of 146
  vehicles.
• 27 vehicles (18.5) were reported to be equipped
  with a lift or ramp that could transport people
  who use wheelchairs, scooters, or other mobility
  devices.

27
Willingness to be Involved in Providing
Transportation
Scale 0Not Willing, 2Neither Willing or
Unwilling, 4Very Willing

• Respondents indicated that they were neither
  willing nor unwilling to become involved in
  providing transportation to people with
  disabilities (1.96) or the general public (1.47).
  
• Nevertheless 32 of respondents said they would
  be willing or very willing to become involved in
  providing transportation to people with
  disabilities and 19 responded affirmatively
  about the general public.

28
Barriers to Providing Transportation to People
with Disabilities who are Not Congregation Members
29
Observations

• Rural faith based organizations do not appear to
  have as many vehicles as might be commonly
  believed.
• About 1/3 are interested and willing to become
  involved in providing transportation, especially
  to people with disabilities.

30
Needs

• For most communities of faith, transportation
  involvement would be greatly facilitated by the
  availability of funds, training, and some form of
  protection from liability.
• Alternatively, clergy may play a useful role in
  facilitating the development of coordinated
  systems of transportation in rural communities
  as exemplified by Sanders County, Montana.

31
Accessible Taxi Cabs
32
Personal Ownership
33
The attention on transportation is now shifting
to the states where new policies and plans are
being developed.
34
Challenges for the Future

• Consumer participation in state and local
  planning.
• Para-transit vs. Mainline Public Services
• Routes, schedules, and coverage.
• Cost to consumers for public transit.
• Cost to agencies for consolidated transit.
• As transit moves to be more public, it serves
  more people but those who had exceptional
  service may not like the change.

35
Come visit us in Montana or virtually at
http//rtc.ruralinstitute.umt.edu or call Tom
Seekins at 406 243-2654