1
Report to Rapport au:
Transit Commission Commission du transport en commun 20 May 2015 / 20 mai 2015
Submitted on May 7, 2015 Soumis le 7 mai 2015
Submitted by Soumis par: Kent Kirkpatrick, City Manager / Directeur municipal
Contact Person Personne ressource: John Manconi, General Manager / Directeur général, Transit Services / Services du transport en commun 613-842-3636 ext./poste 2111, John.Manconi@ottawa.ca
Ward: CITY WIDE / À L'ÉCHELLE DE LA File Number: ACS2015-CMR-OCM-0009 VILLE SUBJECT: OC TRANSPO ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT FOR 2014
OBJET: RAPPORT ANNUEL DE RENDEMENT D’OC TRANSPO POUR 2014
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That the Transit Commission receive this report for information.
RECOMMANDATION DU RAPPORT
Que la Commission du transport en commun prenne connaissance de ce rapport.
BACKGROUND
The 2014 Annual Performance Report provides both a snapshot of what occurred and a summary of how transit service was planned, operated and managed over the past year. The annual report allows for comparisons over previous years, to see how measures have been evolving. It also highlights key initiatives undertaken by the 2
Department. Since 2007, OC Transpo has been providing this annual summary as a way of improving accountability and transparency to Council and the Transit Commission.
DISCUSSION
OC Transpo will build on the results achieved in 2014 and will move forward with the strategic priorities identified by Council.
Important transit performance highlights from 2014 include:
Increased service availability, exceeding the target of 99.5 per cent;
Increased Para Transpo ridership and fewer un-accommodated requests for trips;
Decreased number of criminal offences per 100,000 customer trips;
High levels of safety felt by our customers across different aspects of their transit experience;
Increased in-service rates of elevators and escalators; and,
Maintained levels of on-time performance for most categories.
Several accomplishments were achieved in 2014 related to accessibility. OC Transpo completed the installation of 43 power doors at 10 Transitway stations, upgraded handrails at 14 stations, and improved lighting at seven stations.
Surpassing all expectations, OC Transpo carried more than 95,000 fans to and from the new TD Place for Ottawa RedBlacks, Ottawa Fury FC and Ottawa 67’s games, as well as other events in 2014. Many important milestones in preparing for operation of the O- Train Confederation Line were met in 2014, including the relocation of LeBreton Station for a necessary construction detour.
The detailed performance measures for OC Transpo in 2014 are grouped into six documents attached to this report. These documents contain measurements of:
1. Customer relations – Overall satisfaction, customer satisfaction with operators, access to electronic information, stop announcements, cleanliness, ride comfort, welcoming aboard; 3
2. Ridership – Annual system ridership, Para Transpo ridership, ridership by fare type, park and ride use;
3. Operations and maintenance – Service availability, on-time performance, Para Transpo on-time performance, scheduling procedures, elevator availability, occupancy, mechanical failure rate and impact on service, vehicle down time, fleet utilization;
4. Safety and security – Safety satisfaction, crime rate, fare compliance, vehicle collisions;
5. Special event service; and,
6. Financial indicators – Revenue-cost ratio, Para Transpo operating costs.
Later in 2015, OC Transpo staff will provide a report to the Transit Commission with recommendations to make changes to the Department’s performance measurement and a revised Annual Performance Report. The updated measures will be based on experience with the current measures and on benchmarking with other transit systems, and will be focussed on service quality from the customer’s point of view. The report will also recommend changes to the form of the annual report.
RURAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no recommendations in this report that specifically affect rural areas.
CONSULTATION
No specific consultation has been carried out on this report.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no legal impediments to receiving this report for information.
RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
There are no risks associated with this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial implications associated with this report.
ACCESSIBILITY IMPACTS
There are no recommendations in this report that affect accessibility. 4
TERM OF COUNCIL PRIORITIES
The recommendations in this report support two of the 2011-14 Term of Council priorities:
Governance, Planning and Decision-Making – Achieve measurable improvement in residents’ level of trust in how the City is governed and managed, apply a sustainability lens to decision making, and create a governance model that compares well to best-in- class cities around the world.
Service Excellence – Improve client satisfaction with the delivery of municipal services to Ottawa residents by measurably increasing the culture of service excellence at the City, by improving the efficiency of City operations, and by creating positive client experiences.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 – Customer Relations
Document 2 – Ridership
Document 3 – Operations and Maintenance
Document 4 – Safety and Security
Document 5 – Special Events
Document 6 – Financial Indicators
Document 7 – Description of Figures
DISPOSITION
Staff will continue to monitor and report on the performance of the OC Transpo system.
5
Document 1 – Customer Relations
Overall Satisfaction
Satisfaction scores for OC Transpo remain high. Almost 80 per cent of all respondents gave positive ratings. The satisfaction rating among transit customers decreased slightly to 78 per cent in 2014. The rating for others (people who do not take transit) increased to 79 per cent. This is the highest rating by others the survey has ever measured.
Figure 1: Customer Satisfaction Score
Customer Feedback:
“A passenger would like to commend the operator for being a great driver, kind, and always willing to answer any passenger questions. Excellent work!”
Customer Satisfaction with Operators
The number of compliments given by transit customers about operators increased in 2014 to 18.6 compliments per million passenger trips. The number of complaints raised by transit customers about operator behaviour increased in 2014 to 28.2 complaints per million passenger trips. These rates reflect all emails and telephone calls logged by OC Transpo customer service staff. 6
Figure 2: Customer Satisfaction with Operators
Customer Feedback:
“A passenger would like to commend the operator for ensuring that they reach their destination safely, allowing them to stay on board while deadheading to Elmvale Mall.”
Access to Electronic Information
The number of requests for electronic information from OC Transpo sources made in 2014 surpassed those made in previous years.
Use of established sources of information, such as octranspo.com and the 560-1000 telephone system, decreased in 2014 when compared to 2013. The rate of usage of the online travel planner increased in 2014 when compared to 2013. 7
Figure 3: Rates of Access to Electronic Information Sources
The majority of requests for electronic information from OC Transpo sources in 2014 were through third-party application requests, MyTransit application requests and 560560 text messaging, the three most recent formats of providing information to transit customers. Usage of these sources of information increased in 2014, with over 107 million third party Application Programming Interface (API) requests, almost 43 million MyTransit Application API requests and 24 million 560560 text messages sent. Important to note is that a single customer session usually consists of multiple API requests for live, real-time location data. As such, the results for 2012 to 2014 shown in the following figure should not be compared to figures reported for established sources shown above.
Figure 4: Rates of Access to Electronic Information Requests 8
Stop Announcements
The entire fleet of OC Transpo buses and trains is equipped with the Next Stop Announcement System. Customers are provided with audible and visual stop information in both official languages. The system continues to be reliable, but errors do occur from time to time. In 2014, when audited, the system either worked properly or the operator called out the stops manually 98 per cent of the time.
Figure 5: Percentage of Bus Stops Called Out
Customer Service Experience Program
OC Transpo continued its contract with independent professionals through 2014 to objectively assess and record several factors that directly affect the quality of service provided to customers. In 2014, almost 2100 surveys were conducted onboard OC Transpo buses across the City, with surveyors collecting information at all times of the day and on a variety of routes. Three measures from the Customer Service Experience Program are presented in this report: cleanliness on buses and at bus stops and shelters, ride comfort, and a score for welcoming upon boarding.
Cleanliness 9
The score for cleanliness is based on several observations made through the Customer Service Experience Program. At bus stops and shelters, a rating is made based on the amount of vandalism present, the cleanliness of the surrounding area, the condition of the bus stop flag, and the presence of unauthorized posters. Onboard the bus, a rating is made based on the cleanliness of the seats and the absence of litter.
The rating for cleanliness at bus stops and shelters increased to the highest reported annual score, with a rating of 89 out of 100. All components that make up this score increased in 2014, with the largest change in score being an increase in the cleanliness of the surrounding area. The score for cleanliness on board buses increased to 85 out of 100.
Figure 6: Cleanliness Scores at Bus Stops/Shelters and Onboard Buses
Ride Comfort
The score for ride comfort is made up of three ratings: operators observed waiting for customers with reduced mobility to sit, driving smoothly, and not driving aggressively. In 2014, the score remained at 96 out of 100. 10
Figure 7: Score for Ride Comfort
Welcoming Aboard
The score for welcoming customers aboard the bus was 81 out of 100. The score measures whether operators were observed greeting the surveyor, as well as greeting other customers boarding the bus.
Figure 8: Score for Operators Welcoming Customers Aboard
Twitter Feed: 11
“Thankful for the lady driving @OC_Transpo bus 5034. Her cheerful “Have a good day, guys! Enjoy your day, guys!” just put me in a great mood.”
12
Document 2 – Ridership
Ridership
Ridership across the system was 97.1 million trips in 2014, or 99.3 per cent of the previous year’s levels. The second half of 2014 saw modest increases in ridership compared to the same period in 2013.
Transit system ridership levels are affected primarily by employment levels. The Conference Board of Canada noted that the overall decrease in employment observed in 2013 rebounded in part in 2014, with a 1.2 per cent increase. Still, employment in the public administration sector is well below levels last seen in 2012, and is expected to decrease another 1.3 per cent in 2015. The National Capital Region ranked 24th out of 28 Census Metropolitan Areas for economic growth in 2014, up slightly from the previous year.
Ottawa continues to have the third-highest transit ridership per capita among major cities in Canada, after Montréal and Toronto.
Figure 9: Annual Ridership for Conventional Transit
Table 1: Ridership per capita (CUTA Urban Transit Statistics)
Year Calgary Vancouver Edmonton Ottawa Toronto Montréal 2010 88 94 96 124 191 201 2011 88 99 99 124 191 207 2012 91 102 101 120 184 208 13
Year Calgary Vancouver Edmonton Ottawa Toronto Montréal 2013 94 94 104 115 186 213 2014 * * * 113 * * * Not yet reported
Looking Forward
The Conference Board of Canada (CBOC) forecasts for 2015 show a small increase in overall employment growth of 0.4 per cent, but a decrease of 1.3 per cent in the public administration sector. More promising growth rates in overall employment, including increases in the public administration sector, are forecast by the CBOC in 2016 and beyond. OC Transpo system-wide ridership is very sensitive to employment changes in downtown Ottawa, where the federal government is the largest employer.
Para Transpo Ridership
Para Transpo delivered 787,000 trips in 2014. The demand for Para Transpo service, as measured by the number of trips requested, increased by 0.5 per cent in 2014. There were 9,600 fewer un-accommodated trips in 2014, reflecting a 14 per cent decrease from 2013. Para Transpo delivered a higher portion of requested trips in 2014 than in the previous year. The three rural Community Support Service agencies which provide transportation services using City funding were able to deliver four per cent more trips than in 2013.
14
Figure 10: Annual Ridership for Para Transpo
Ridership by Fare Type
Ridership among the four major fare types has shifted over the past year, with an increase in the proportion of regular pass users and single fare users, offset by a decrease in the proportion of discounted pass users. This is attributed to increased usage of the Presto fare payment system, and the phasing-out of the Ecopass program.
Figure 11: Ridership Distribution by Fare Type
Park and Ride Use
The average number of customers using Park and Ride lots increased by one per cent in 2014. On average, 5324 spaces were being used per weekday. The capacity of parking spaces in Park and Ride lots increased in 2014, with the opening of the Nepean Woods Park and Ride lot, and the designation of some spaces at the Ray Friel Recreation Complex. Customers who use Park and Ride lots make up two to three per cent of total OC Transpo ridership. 15
Figure 12: Urban Park and Ride Utilization and Available Spaces
Document 3 – Operations and Maintenance
Service Availability
Service availability is a measure used to explain how well scheduled service hours are delivered as expected to customers. It is defined as the percentage of scheduled hours of bus service that are, in fact, operated. The continuous improvement of processes in bus maintenance and in operator workforce management both contribute to keeping the percentage of service hours delivered at the high level observed over the last several years.
The percentage of scheduled hours of service delivered to customers increased to 99.6 per cent on weekdays, and remained stable at 99.8 per cent on weekends. Both values exceed OC Transpo’s target of delivering 99.5 per cent of planned service hours. 16
Figure 13: Bus Service Availability
On-Time Performance
On-time performance is a key measure that gauges the punctuality of transit service delivered to customers, which affects the confidence customers have in the reliability of the service being delivered to them. Being on-time is defined as not running early and being no more than five minutes past the scheduled time. This measure is not used for routes that operate more frequently than every five minutes during peak periods, such as Route 95.
Efforts are taken, on an ongoing basis, to reduce the amount of earliness and to reflect, as best possible, the effects of construction detours and other long term changes that increase running time. However, heavy construction and cold winter conditions contribute to day-to-day variability of running times and can influence on-time performance in different ways. OC Transpo continues to work on monitoring and improving on-time performance issues through schedule changes.
On-time performance for regular service during the morning peak period increased to 67 per cent in 2014. There was a reduction in the number of regular trips running early. 17
Figure 14: On-time Performance for Regular Routes during the Morning Peak
On-time performance for express service during the morning peak was 81 per cent in 2014.
Figure 15: On-time Performance for Express Routes during the Morning Peak
On-time performance for regular routes in the afternoon peak period was 59 per cent. 18
Figure 16: On-time performance for Regular Routes during the Afternoon Peak
On-time performance for express routes in the afternoon peak period was 68 per cent.
Figure 17: On-time performance for Express Routes during the Afternoon Peak
Para Transpo On-Time Performance
Para Transpo maintained a reliable level of on-time performance in 2014, with 95 per cent of trips being picked up within the promised window of time. 19
Figure 18: On-time Performance for Para Transpo
Scheduling Procedures
Following recommendations from an audit conducted in 2011, OC Transpo uses two measures to show the effect of implemented changes in scheduling processes and rules on overall system performance.
The first of these two measures is guarantee hours as a percentage of paid hours. Guarantee hours are hours of work where operators are not in-service but for which OC Transpo is contractually obligated to pay them. For example, if an operator’s work is 7 hours and 22 minutes long, OC Transpo is contractually obligated to pay the operator for 7 hours and 30 minutes. OC Transpo strives to minimize the number of guarantee hours paid to operators. In 2014, 1.8 per cent of paid hours were for guaranteed time, up slightly from 1.7 per cent in 2013.
The second measure is the ratio of paid hours to planned service hours. Paid hours are the total number of hours that were paid to operators. Guarantee time, as outlined in the previous paragraph, is included in the calculation of paid time. Planned service hours represent the time from when the bus leaves a garage to when it comes back to the garage after a day in service. This includes the time when a bus travels in between trips and also when a bus is in layover. OC Transpo endeavours to maintain the ratio of paid hours to planned service hours as near to 1:1 as possible. In 2014, the ratio of paid hours to planned service hours was 1.09:1, up slightly from 1.08 in 2013. 20
Elevator/Escalator Availability
Elevators and escalators may not operate from time to due to planned maintenance, including system modernization, or due to breakdowns. The availability of escalators and elevators increased notably in 2014, from 91.6 per cent in 2013 to 96.1 per cent in 2014, the highest rate of availability since being measured for annual reports.
Figure 19: Elevator and Escalator Availability
Occupancy
Occupancy measures how much of the transit service capacity provided to customers on each trip of each route is used. Historically, this has been measured in units of passenger-kilometres (utilization) per seat-kilometre (capacity).
Following the major investment made by Council to acquire double-decker buses, in order to carry transit customers at a lower operating cost, the indicator that had been reported in previous years is no longer appropriate. Double-decker buses have a higher proportion of seats included in the service capacity than do other bus types, making comparisons of this measure from year to year less meaningful.
Staff are developing suitable methods to properly track and report occupancy and will make recommendations to the Commission later in 2015.
21
Impact on Service of Mechanical Failures and Fleet Reliability
The mechanical failure rate measures the rate at which a bus breaks down while assigned for service and needs to be pulled out of service. In 2014, a rate of 24.8 mechanical failures per 100,000 vehicle-kilometres was measured, up slightly from 24.6 in 2013. It remains one of the lowest annual rates since the measure was introduced in 2008. One advantage that helps keep this rate low is the young age of OC Transpo’s fleet, with an average age of a bus being 5.5 years.
Figure 20: Mechanical Failure Rate
Vehicle Down Time
The average length of time that a bus is unavailable for service due to unscheduled maintenance is another important measure of transit fleet efficiency. In 2014, there was a small drop in the proportion of same-day repairs, offset by a small increase in the proportion of repairs that took between 2 and 7 days.
As with previous reports, on-street defects are not included in the measure of vehicle down time. Typically, on-street defects are minor and have a very fast return-to-service rate. 22
Figure 21: Unscheduled Maintenance by Vehicle Down Time
Fleet Utilization
OC Transpo ensures that its fleet is sized appropriately to meet the required demands of daily service. In 2014, OC Transpo used 81.7 per cent of the overall bus fleet for operating peak period service.
Figure 22: Fleet Utilization 23
Document 4 – Safety and Security
Safety Satisfaction Index
OC Transpo measures, each year, the perception of safety across different aspects of a customer’s transit experience. After several years of index scores between 6.4 and 6.7, 2013 and 2014 both showed increased scores of 7.4.
The safety satisfaction index is made up of three questions of the customer survey. The first and second questions asked customers to rate if the presence of uniformed law enforcement personnel and video surveillance on a scale from 1 (“does not make you feel safe and secure”) to 10 (“makes you feel safe and secure”). The third question asked customers if they agreed (10) or disagreed with the statement that if an incident occurred, they were confident they could get help quickly. There was a minor change in the way the first two questions were asked starting in 2013 when compared to earlier years; therefore, some of the change in the index may be attributable to that.
Figure 23: Safety Satisfaction Index
Customer Feedback:
“A passenger would like to commend the operator for ensuring the safety of a passenger who had fallen in the snow while exiting the bus, taking them to a nearby fire station to be looked after.”
24
Crime Rate
OC Transpo’s Special Constables are present across the transit system each day to ensure visibility and contact with customers on buses and trains, at stations and on other transit property.
The number of employed special constables increased in late 2011. The crime rate increased in 2012, but has decreased since then, with 0.91 offenses per 100,000 customer trips reported in 2014. This is the lowest crime rate reported since 2008.
Figure 24: Crime Rate
Twitter Feed:
“So far, my driver has made two #SafeStop on my local route. Really glad pax are aware of this program! #safeinitiative #octranspo”
Fare Non-compliance
Over 217,000 customers were requested to provide proof of payment in 2014. The overall rate of fare non-compliance was 4.1 per cent. The largest change to previous years was the increased rate of verbal warnings given to customers. During the transition period, as customers have been converting to the Presto fare card as their means of fare payment, some leniency was given. 25
Figure 25: Fare Non-compliance Rates by Type
Vehicle Collisions
In 2014, OC Transpo started a project to review the processes for reporting on and assessing collisions. As part of this project, it was identified that process improvements needed to be implemented to ensure data consistency, improve data quality and reduce the amount of time between a collision and the data entry associated with a collision. OC Transpo is taking into consideration these changes and will make recommendations to the Commission on how collisions will be reported later in 2015. 26
Document 5 – Special Events
Special Events
At its meeting of June 15, 2011, the Transit Commission directed staff to report annually on the special events for which special service was provided, and what revenues, if any, were generated as a result of sponsorship/partnership involvement.
The table which follows lists the events in 2014 for which special service was provided. (This list excludes events for which all customers rode regular service and also excludes charter operations, where buses operated as directed by the organizing group and for which all of OC Transpo’s costs were reimbursed.)
Table 2: Special event service in 2014
Cost of Net Cost of Event and Additional Special Special Special Service Type Fare Revenue Revenue Service Service
Winterlude – $30,000 $46,500 - $16,500 Special route Sponsorship
Canada Day – $332,500 - - $332,500 Additional trips
Bluesfest – $357,000 $153,000 - $204,000 Additional trips
New Year’s Eve – $12,500 $25,500 - $13,000 Free fares Sponsorship
27
Document 6 – Financial Indicators
Revenue-Cost Ratio
The revenue-cost ratio for OC Transpo was 53 per cent in 2014, the same level as reported for 2013. This measure indicates that 53 per cent of operating costs were funded from customers’ fares, with the remainder funded primarily from property taxes, as well as from provincial gas tax transfers.
Figure 26: Revenue-cost Ratio
Para Transpo Operating Costs
Para Transpo operating expenses per vehicle-kilometre were $3.74 in 2014. 28
Figure 27: Para Transpo Operating Costs per Vehicle-kilometre
29
Document 7 – Description of Figures
Figure 1
Shows the overall customer satisfaction, by year, from 2010 to 2014, illustrating the percentage of respondents who gave a positive rating. Positive ratings are broken down into two categories. The first category shows the percentage of transit customers who gave a positive rating. Results for this category show 73 percent in 2010, 59 percent in 2011, 73 percent in 2012, 80 percent in 2013, and 78 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percentage of other users who gave a positive rating. Results for this category show 56 percent in 2010, 58 percent in 2011, 61 percent in 2012, 73 percent in 2013, and 79 percent in 2014.
Return (Customer Satisfaction Score)
Figure 2
Shows customer satisfaction with operators, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The rate per million passenger trips is broken down into two categories. The first category shows the rate of compliments. Results for this category show 14.5 in 2010, 19.3 in 2011, 17.3 in 2012, 13.7 in 2013, and 18.6 in 2014. The second category shows the rate of complaints. Results for this category show 30.1 in 2010, 26.7 in 2011, 20.1 in 2012, 26.2 in 2013, and 28.2 in 2014.
Return (Customer Satisfaction with Operators)
Figure 3
Shows access to electronic information sources, by year, from 2012 to 2014. The access to electronic information by rate per hundred passenger trips is broken down into three categories. The first category shows access by travel planner sessions. Results for this category show 6.0 in 2012, 5.7 in 2013, and 6.0 in 2014. The second category shows access by 560-1000 system calls. Results for this category show 11.9 for 2012, 12.3 for 2013, and 7.1 in 2014. The third category shows access by other website visits. Results for this category show 6.5 for 2012, 6.5 for 2013, and 5.9 in 2014.
Return (Rates of Access to Electronic Information Sources)
Figure 4 30
Shows access to electronic information requests, by year, from 2012 to 2014. The access to electronic information by rate per hundred passenger trips is broken down into three categories. The first category shows access by 560560 requests. Results for this category show 9 for 2012, 14 for 2013, and 25 for 2014. The second category shows access by the MyTransit API requests. Results for this category show 19 for 2012, 28 for 2013, and 44 for 2014. The third category shows access by third party application API requests. Results for this category show 54 for 2013, and 111 for 2014. Third party application requests were not tracked in 2012.
Return (Rates of Access to Electronic Information Requests)
Figure 5
Shows the percent of bus stops called out, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The results show 83 percent in 2010, 97 percent in 2011, 99 percent in 2012, 98 percent in 2013, and 98 percent in 2014.
Return (Percentage of Bus Stops Called Out)
Figure 6
Shows the score for cleanliness, out of 100, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The cleanliness score is broken down into two categories. The first category shows the score for cleanliness at bus stops/shelters. Results for this category show 81 in 2010, 80 in 2011, 78 in 2012, 86 in 2013, and 89 in 2014. The second category shows the score for cleanliness onboard buses. Results for this category show 86 in 2010, 87 in 2011, 89 in 2012, 84 in 2013, and 85 in 2014.
Return (Cleanliness Scores at Bus Stops/Shelters and Onboard Buses)
Figure 7
Shows the score for ride comfort, out of 100, by year, from 2010 to 2014. Results show 96 for 2010, 95 for 2011, 98 for 2012, 96 for 2013, and 96 for 2014.
Return (Score for Ride Comfort)
Figure 8
Shows the score for welcoming aboard out of 100, by year, from 2010 to 2014. Results show 87 for 2010, 87 for 2011, 89 for 2012, 83 for 2013, and 81 for 2014.
Return (Score for Operators Welcoming Customers Aboard) 31
Figure 9
Shows the annual ridership for conventional bus service, by year, from 2010 to 2014, illustrating linked passenger trips in millions. Results show (in millions), 99.3 in 2010, 103.5 in 2011, 101.0 in 2012, 97.8 in 2013, and 97.1 in 2014.
Return (Annual Ridership for Conventional Transit)
Figure 10
Shows the annual ridership for Para Transpo, by year, from 2010 to 2014, illustrating thousands of passengers excluding companions and attendants. The results are broken down into three categories. The first category shows ridership for mini bus service. Results for this category show 455 for 2010, 471 for 2011, 483 for 2012, 450 for 2013, and 418 for 2014. The second category shows ridership for taxi service. Results for this category show 292 for 2010, 312 for 2011, 297 for 2012, 314 for 2013, and 361 for 2014. The third category shows ridership by community support services. Results for this category show 4 for 2012, 7 for 2013, and 8 for 2014. The total Para Transpo ridership by year is as follows: 747 for 2010, 784 for 2011, 785 for 2012, 771 for 2013, and 787 for 2014.
Return (Annual Ridership for Para Transpo)
Figure 11
Shows ridership by fare type, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The percentage of ridership by fare type is broken down into four categories. The first category shows ridership by single fare (cash, tickets, e-purse, daypass). Results for this category show 25 percent in 2010, 22 percent in 2011, 22 percent in 2012, 25 percent in 2013, and 28 percent in 2014. The second category shows ridership by discounted passes (senior, community, regular Ecopass, U-Pass). Results for this category show 29 percent in 2010, 36 percent in 2011, 35 percent in 2012, 31 percent in 2013, and 25 percent for 2014. The third category shows ridership by regular passes (monthly adult/student). Results for this category show 36 percent in 2010, 33 percent in 2011, 34 percent in 2012, 35 percent in 2013, and 39 percent for 2014. The fourth category shows ridership by express passes (adult, student, Ecopass). Results for this category show 10 percent in 2010, 10 percent in 2011, 9 percent in 2012, 9 percent in 2013, and 8 percent in 2014.
Return (Ridership Distribution by Fare Type)
Figure 12 32
Shows the utilization of urban park and ride spaces, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The utilization is broken down into two categories. The first category shows the number of parking spaces used. The results for this category show 4,683 out of 5,665 in 2010, 5,035 out of 6,198 in 2011, 5,179 out of 6,953 in 2012, 5,273 out of 7,154 in 2013, and 5,324 out of 7,459 in 2014. The second category shows the number of parking spaces available. The results for this category show 982 out of 5,665 in 2010, 1,163 out of 6,198 in 2011, 1,774 out of 6,953 in 2012, 1,881 out of 7,154 in 2013, and 2,135 out of 7,459.
Return (Urban Park and Ride Utilization and Available Spaces)
Figure 13
Shows bus service availability as a percentage of scheduled service hours placed into service, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The percent of scheduled service hours placed into service is broken down into two categories. The first category shows the percentage of scheduled service hours place into service for weekday service. Results for this category show 99.2 percent in 2010, 99.6 percent in 2011, 99.6 percent in 2012, 99.4 percent in 2013, and 99.6 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percentage of scheduled service hours placed into service for weekend service. Results for this category show 99.8 percent in 2010, 99.8 percent in 2011, 99.8 percent in 2012, 99.8 percent in 2013, and 99.8 percent in 2014.
Return (Bus Service Availability)
Figure 14
Shows on-time performance results, by year, from 2010 to 2014, for regular service routes in the morning peak period. Performance is broken down into four categories. The first category shows the percentage of service that operated over two minutes early. Results for this category show 9 percent in 2010, 6 percent in 2011, 5 percent in 2012, 6 percent in 2013, and 6 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percentage of service that operated between zero and two minutes early. Results for this category show 28 percent in 2010, 22 percent in 2011, 20 percent in 2012, 19 percent in 2013, and 18 percent in 2014. The third category shows the percentage of service that operated on-time. Results for this category show 58 percent in 2010, 65 percent in 2011, 67 percent in 2012, 65 percent in 2013, and 67 percent in 2014. The fourth category shows the percentage of service that operated late. Results for this category show 5 percent in 2010, 7 percent in 2011, 7 percent in 2012, 10 percent in 2013, and 9 percent in 2014. 33
Return (On-time Performance for Regular Routes during the Morning Peak)
Figure 15
Shows on-time performance results, by year, from 2010 to 2014, for express service routes in the morning peak period. Performance is broken down into four categories. The first category shows the percentage of service that operated over two minutes early. Results for this category show 1 percent in 2010, 1 percent in 2011, 0 percent in 2012, 0 percent in 2013, and 1 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percentage of service that operated between zero and two minutes early. Results for this category show 7 percent in 2010, 6 percent in 2011, 4 percent in 2012, 3 percent in 2013, and 4 percent in 2014. The third category shows the percentage of service that operated on-time. Results for this category show 86 percent in 2010, 87 percent in 2011, 86 percent in 2012, 83 percent in 2013, and 81 percent in 2014. The fourth category shows the percentage of service that operated late. Results for this category show 6 percent in 2010, 7 percent in 2011, 9 percent in 2012, 13 percent in 2013, and 14 percent in 2014.
Return (On-time Performance for Express Routes during the Morning Peak)
Figure 16
Shows on-time performance results, by year, from 2010 to 2014, for regular service routes in the afternoon peak period. Performance is broken down into four categories. The first category shows the percentage of service that operated over two minutes early. Results for this category show 8 percent in 2010, 6 percent in 2011, 6 percent in 2012, 6 percent in 2013, and 6 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percentage of service that operated between zero and two minutes early. Results for this category show 21 percent in 2010, 17 percent in 2011, 16 percent in 2012, 16 percent in 2013, and 17 percent in 2014. The third category shows the percentage of service that operated on-time. Results for this category show 55 percent in 2010, 58 percent in 2011, 58 percent in 2012, 59 percent in 2013, and 59 percent in 2014. The fourth category shows the percentage of service that operated late. Results for this category show 15 percent in 2010, 19 percent in 2011, 19 percent in 2012, 19 percent in 2013, and 18 percent in 2014.
Return (On-time performance for Regular Routes during the Afternoon Peak)
Figure 17 34
Shows on-time performance results, by year, from 2010 to 2014, for express service routes in the afternoon peak period. Performance is broken down into four categories. The first category shows the percentage of service that operated over two minutes early. Results for this category show 13 percent in 2010, 14 percent in 2011, 6 percent in 2012, 6 percent in 2013, and 6 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percentage of service that operated between zero and two minutes early. Results for this category show 12 percent in 2010, 10 percent in 2011, 9 percent in 2012, 11 percent in 2013, and 12 percent in 2014. The third category shows the percentage of service that operated on-time. Results for this category show 60 percent in 2010, 57 percent in 2011, 65 percent in 2012, 69 percent in 2013, and 68 percent in 2014. The fourth category shows the percentage of service that operated late. Results for this category show 16 percent in 2010, 19 percent in 2011, 20 percent in 2012, 14 percent in 2013, and 13 percent in 2014.
Return (On-time performance for Express Routes during the Afternoon Peak)
Figure 18
Shows on-time performance results for Para Transpo, by year, from 2010 to 2014. Performance is evaluated by the percent of customers picked up within the promised window time frame. Results show 93 percent for 2010, 95 percent for 2011, 95 percent for 2012, 95 percent for 2013, and 95 percent in 2014.
Return (On-time Performance for Para Transpo)
Figure 19
Shows vehicle and station accessibility, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The results show the percent of days that the elevators and escalators were in service. Results show 91.8 percent for 2010, 94.4 percent for 2011, 91.3 percent for 2012, 91.6 percent for 2013, and 96.1 percent in 2014.
Return (Elevator and Escalator Availability)
Figure 20
Shows the mechanical failure rate and impact on service, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The rate of mechanical failures per 100,000 vehicle-kilometres is broken down into three categories. The first category shows the rate at which mechanical failures had no interruption to service. Results for this category show 17.0 in 2010, 15.0 in 2011, 12.5 in 2012, 12.7 in 2013, and 12.7 in 2014. The second category shows the rate at which 35 mechanical failures had some interruption to service. Results for this category show 5.8 in 2010, 5.2 in 2011, 4.5 in 2012, 4.6 in 2013, and 4.7 in 2014. The third category shows the rate at which mechanical failures fully cancelled service. Results for this category show 12.6 in 2010, 7.8 in 2011, 7.0 in 2012, 7.4 in 2013, and 7.3 in 2014.
Return (Mechanical Failure Rate)
Figure 21
Shows the percent of unscheduled maintenance by vehicle down time, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The results are broken down into four categories. The first category shows the percentage that was repaired the same day. Results show 45 percent for 2010, 46 percent for 2011, 51 percent for 2012, 44 percent for 2013, and 42 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percentage that was repaired the next day. Results show 28 percent for 2010, 30 percent for 2011, 29 percent for 2012, 29 percent for 2013, and 28 percent in 2014. The third category shows the percentage that was repaired in 2-7 days. Results show 21 percent for 2010, 19 percent for 2011, 18 percent for 2012, 22 percent for 2013, and 25 percent for 2014.The fourth category shows the percentage that was repaired in more than 7 days. Results show 6 percent for 2010, 5 percent for 2011, 3 percent for 2012, 5 percent for 2013, and 5 percent in 2014.
Return (Unscheduled Maintenance by Vehicle Down Time)
Figure 22
Shows the percent of the total fleet which is utilized during peak period service, by year, from 2010 to 2014. Results show 80.0 percent in 2010, 79.6 percent in 2011, 79.9 percent in 2012, 81.1 percent in 2013, and 81.7 percent in 2014.
Return (Fleet Utilization)
Figure 23
Shows the safety satisfaction index score out of 10, by year, from 2010 to 2014. Results show 6.5 for 2010, 6.7 for 2011, 6.4 for 2012, 7.4 for 2013, and 7.4 for 2014.
Return (Safety Satisfaction Index)
Figure 24
Shows the crime rate, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The results show the number of offenses per 100,000 customer trips. Results show 0.95 in 2010, 0.94 in 2011, 1.26 in 36
2012, 0.94 in 2013, and 0.91 in 2014. Results showing the year 2012 are higher due to a 14 percent increase in the number of Special Constables.
Return (Crime Rate)
Figure 25
Shows fare non-compliance, by year, from 2010 to 2014. The rate per passengers checked is broken down into three categories. The first category shows the percent of provincial offence notices issued. Results for this category show 1.9 percent in 2010, 1.9 percent in 2011, 2.1 percent in 2012, 1.9 percent in 2013, and 1.5 percent in 2014. The second category shows the percent of written warnings issued. Results for this category show 0.4 percent in 2010, 0.5 percent in 2011, 0.4 percent in 2012, 0.3 percent in 2013, and 0.4 percent in 2104. The third category shows the percent of verbal warnings issued. Results for this category show 0.4 percent in 2010, 1.4 percent in 2011, 1.0 percent in 2012, 1.4 percent in 2013, and 2.2 percent in 2014.
Return (Fare Non-compliance Rates by Type)
Figure 26
Shows the operating cost recovery, by year, from 2010 to 2014, illustrating the percent of direct operating expenses which are covered by the total revenue. The results show 50 percent in 2010, 52 percent in 2011, 51 percent in 2012, 53 percent in 2013, and 53 percent in 2014.
Return (Revenue-cost Ratio)
Figure 27
Shows the operating efficiency for Para Transpo, by year, from 2010 to 2014 illustrating the dollars per vehicle-kilometre. Results show $3.20 for 2010, $3.20 for 2011, $3.39 for 2012, $3.63 for 2013, and $3.74 for 2014.
Return (Para Transpo Operating Costs per Vehicle-kilometre)