70 PINE STREET, BRACEBRIDGE, ONTARIO P1L 1N3 Telephone (705) 645-2231 / Fax (705) 645-5319 / 1-800-461-4210 (705 area code) www.muskoka.on.ca

To: Chair and Members Community Services Committee

From: Rick Williams Commissioner of Community Services

Date: March 22, 2017

Subject: Transportation Update

Report: CS-3-2017-4 ______

Recommendation

THAT the 2017 Draft Tax Supported Operating Budget for Community Services – Community Development Initiatives, be amended as outlined in the following table:

Approved Proposed 2017 Proposed 2017 Budget Amendment Budget 630200 Community Initiatives Wages & Benefits 9,681 23,525 33,206 Purchased Services 2,000 17,775 19,775 MTO Grant (11,147) (37,500) (48,647) Miscellaneous Fees (1,000) (3,800) (4,800) 626000 Seniors Programs & Services Wages & Benefits 23,525 (23,525) 0 MSIF Reserve Fund (23,525) 23,525 0 Net Levy Impact 0

Origin

This report was initiated by staff in response to the MTO’s extension of the Community Transportation Pilot Grant Program.

Analysis

Muskoka Extended Transit (The MET)

On February 1, 2017 the District Chair received a letter from the Minister of Transportation informing that the Community Transportation Pilot Grant Program, The Muskoka Extended Transit Managing Our Legacy Together Page 1 (The MET) has been extended for an additional program year, from April 1, 2017 – March 31, 2018. There is extended funding available up to a maximum of $50,000. A portion of the funds carried forward will be used to enhance the Program Information Coordinator position, as outlined in the above table outlining a Budget amendment.

In January 2017, LURA Consulting was contracted to do a project evaluation of The MET. The evaluation is attached. There will be some modifications to the MET program over the course of 2017-18 based on the LURA project evaluation recommendations. These will be communicated to Community Services Committee in Summer, 2017.

Corridor 11 Bus

Corridor 11 Bus continues to be a well-used service, providing service between Huntsville and Barrie, and towns in between. In an effort to increase awareness, the Corridor 11 Bus is in the process of getting a full colour bus wrap, to be easily identified when travelling up and down the highway.

As of March 2017, there will be some modifications to the schedule such as:

• Adding a stop in Port Sydney; • Instead of continuing directly to Barrie, Corridor 11 riders will transfer buses in Orillia at Georgian College to continue on to Barrie, which will stop at the Royal Victoria Hospital and Georgian College. Arrangements have been made to align the stops and times of the connecting buses to ensure a smooth transfer between services using a single Corridor 11 ticket;

Page 2 • There will be slight modifications to the times on different days creating a Monday, Wednesday, Friday schedule, and a Tuesday, Thursday schedule; and • The modification in times on the Tuesday and Thursday schedule will allow for Hammonds to pilot a 2 hour bus loop within the Town of Gravenhurst, connecting residents to local grocery stores and pharmacies – pending discussions with Town officials. There have been suggestions over the years to initiate a “loop” bus system in Gravenhurst, similar to Huntsville and Bracebridge. This trial will shed light on utilization and sustainability. Town officials will be involved in assessing the impact.

Community CarShare Program

Community Services staff continue to investigate the Community CarShare program and an update will be brought forward at a Community Services Committee in the coming months.

Financial Considerations

The new Provincial funding for the MET was anticipated within the 2017 District Budget. All other items (Corridor 11 and investigation of Community CarShare Program) are achieved within existing resources.

The 2017 Tax Support Operating Budget contained a service level change (Community Services page 16) which contemplated additional grant funding and an additional 0.5 FTE to support program initiatives. The grant application has received approval in the amount of $50,000 for the fiscal year April 2017 to March 2018. As such, the amendment removes the use of Muskoka Services Investment Fund reserve funds, adds the grant, ticket sales revenue and transfers staffing costs from Seniors Programs & Services to Community Initiatives. The Net Levy Impact is zero. We are confident that funding will be received and should be confirmed by the Province in the next 30 days.

Communications

As changes occur to either transportation services, marketing and promotional material will be updated and widely circulated, in addition to updates to the websites. www.muskoka.on.ca/Corridor11 www.muskoka.on.ca/TheMET

Strategic Priorities

Click on icons below to view strategies under each priority area:

s 5.3, 5.9

Respectfully submitted,

Original signed by Original signed by

Rick Williams Julie Stevens Commissioner of Community Services Commissioner of Finance and Corporate Services Page 3 \l-035 Ministry of Ministers des Transportation Transports

Office of the Minister Bureau du ministre Ferguson Block, 3rc1 Floor Edifice Ferguson, 3° etage Mj 77 Wellesley St. West 77, rue Wellesley ouest ~ Toronto, Ontario Toronto (Ontario) File II Ontano M7A 128 M7A 128 Copy Action 416-327-9200 416·327·9200 D D www.ontario.ca/transportatlon www.ontario.ca/transports Chair D CAO. O' fg ~,n?.~ce B Corp ::ieN~ 0 M2017-346 - 0 0 JAN 27 2017 p J~ IC 'I/~~~5 Pia,, ng 0 0 Comriun °1 Smv ~ Mr. John W. Klinck 0 0 LCJgaL 0 District Chair Corr;iute • 0 Personnc1 0 0 The District Municipality of Muskoka CEMC D 0 70 Pine Street Land Ambulance 0 0 Cornrn,ttee 0 0 Bracebridge ON P1 L 1N3 Council 0 0 correspondence 0 0 Dear Mr. Klinck: CommentS:

I am pleased to inform the District Municipality of Muskoka that funding for the Community Transportation Pilot Grant Program has been extended for an additional program year, from April 1, 2017 to March 31, 2018. This extended funding opportunity is open to all recipients of the pilot grant program so that their community transportation projects can continue.

Since the launch of the grant program in 2015, all grant recipients have implemented transportation initiatives that are improving transportation service in their communities. This includes providing better coordinated and more frequent service in underserved communities, including rural and remote areas, as well as providing transportation services to targeted groups, such as older citizens, persons with disability and low income families.

The extended funding is for the operating costs of the community transportation service undertaken, such as driver wages and vehicle maintenance, up to a maximum of $50,000. You will receive a letter shortly from the Ministry of Transportation's Transit Policy Branch outlining the process to request funding and next steps. If you have any immediate questions, please contact Steven Ball, Director of Policy in the Minister's Office, 416-327-0806, [email protected].

I want to express my appreciation for your participation in the pilot grant program and your municipality's continuing contribution to improving access to public transportation across the province.

Sincerely,

Steven Del Duca Minister Page 4 RECEIVED FEB lJ 1 2017 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot – Draft Evaluation Report

Prepared for The District Municipality of Muskoka By Lura Consulting

March 2017

Page 5 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

This report was prepared by Lura Consulting, the consulting firm retained by The District Municipality of Muskoka to complete a review of the Muskoka Extended Transit System (THE MET). If you have any questions or comments regarding this report, please contact:

Rick Williams Lily-Ann D’Souza Commissioner, Community Services Planner and Project Coordinator The District Municipality of Muskoka Lura Consulting

70 Pine Street 505 Consumers Road, Suite 1005 Bracebridge, ON P1L 1N3 Toronto, ON M2J 4Z2 [email protected] [email protected]

Page 6 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Table of Contents 1. Introduction ...... 1 1.1. Background ...... 1 1.2. Approach ...... 2 1.3. Report Contents ...... 2 2. The Muskoka Extended Transit System ...... 2 2.1. Pilot Program Model and Preliminary Results ...... 2 2.1.1. Program Objectives ...... 2 2.1.2. Program Partners ...... 3 2.1.3. Program Costs, Funding and Fares ...... 4 2.1.4. Routes and Schedules ...... 5 2.1.5. Communications and Marketing ...... 6 2.1.6. Program Administration, Tracking and Management ...... 9 2.2. Preliminary Pilot Program Results ...... 9 3. Highlights from Discussions with Program Staff, Partners and Passengers ...... 14 3.1. What We Heard ...... 14 3.1.1. Program Components that are Working Well ...... 14 3.1.2. Opportunities for Refinement...... 15 4. Key Findings and Conclusions ...... 19 5. Considerations for Next Steps ...... 20 References Cited ...... 23

Appendix A – Key Informant Interview Summaries

i

Page 7 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

The District Municipality of Muskoka (District) is a vibrant upper-tier municipality located in Central Ontario. The District is comprised of six lower-tier communities – Bracebridge, Gravenhurst, Huntsville, Georgian Bay, Lake of Bays and Muskoka Lakes. Transportation is an ongoing challenge and key priority in the District where several factors complicate efforts to provide transportation options for residents. These include: a vast geographic area with long distances between destinations, a rural road network defined by various landscape features, low population densities in rural and remote settlements, and programs, services and amenities that are centralized in the District’s three largest communities.

In 2011, the District began developing a Community Transportation Strategy with the goal of establishing an affordable and accessible transportation network across the municipality. The Strategy was informed by several research activities as well as stakeholder and community input and is being implemented in three phases:

• Phase One – Establish a daily fixed-route service along Highway 11 between Gravenhurst, Bracebridge and Huntsville to create a north-south link across the District, with connections to regional centres outside the District (e.g., Orillia and Barrie); • Phase Two – Establish a coordinated weekly bus service to rural and remote communities, providing residents in these areas with connections to programs, services and amenities in the District’s larger centres; and • Phase Three – Build on existing volunteer driver programs to increase on-demand driving services and encourage better use of shared agency vehicles through partnerships.

The Corridor 11 Bus was launched in 2012 to fulfill the objectives of Phase One of the Community Transportation Strategy. Ridership levels (100+ passengers/week) exceeded the target established for the pilot phase and supported the transition to a sustainable public transit service (The District Municipality of Muskoka, January 2015).

Following the success of the Corridor 11 Bus, the District initiated a pilot program in January 2016 known as The Muskoka Extended Transit (THE MET) as part of Phase Two to provide weekly bus service in rural and remote areas, enabling residents to access programs and services within the District’s larger communities, while also planning for Phase Three.

The District is currently undertaking an evaluation of THE MET to coincide with the completion of the pilot phase of the program in March 2017. The intent of the evaluation is to review key aspects of the program, assess program results to date, and identify potential enhancements to increase program awareness, improve ridership, and position THE MET as a sustainable rural transit service. This report

1

Page 8 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

presents the results of the evaluation as well as conclusions and considerations relating to next steps for THE MET.

1.2. Approach

The evaluation was informed by the following research activities, which were completed in February and March 2017:

• Review and analysis of existing background information including a grant application submitted to the Ministry of Transportation, staff reports and presentations to Council, as well as data on program costs, revenues and ridership; • A review of communication materials and promotional mechanisms such as brochures, the program website, and route specific information; • A site visit that included riding the Route 7 bus (Honey Harbour to Midland) to experience the service first-hand, and conversations with the bus driver and passengers; and • Interviews with District staff involved in the pilot program, program partners and passengers to identify what is working well, what is not working well and potential improvements to enhance the program. A total of 11 interviews were completed; summaries of each interview are included in Appendix A.

1.3. Report Contents

This report documents the evaluation process and results in the following sections:

• Section 2 – The Muskoka Extended Transit System program profile and preliminary pilot statistics; • Section 3 – Results from the site visit and discussions with program staff, partners and passengers; • Section 4 – Summary of key findings and conclusions; and • Section 5 - Considerations for improving THE MET.

2. The Muskoka Extended Transit System

2.1. Pilot Program Model and Preliminary Results

2.1.1. Program Objectives

Phase Two of Muskoka’s Community Transportation Strategy addresses the need for transportation in the District’s rural and remote communities. The intent was to establish a coordinated weekly bus service connecting residents in these areas to programs, services and amenities centralized in Gravenhurst, Bracebridge and Huntsville. In addition to overcoming physical constraints that have

2

Page 9 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

historically challenged efforts to deliver community transportation in Muskoka’s rural communities (e.g., vast geographic area, road network defined by natural features and low population densities), the bus service was also designed to respond to social and demographic considerations.

Outside the District, Muskoka is known for its iconic Canadian landscape which attracts higher income seasonal residents from surrounding municipalities, the Greater Toronto Area, and the United States. A large segment of Muskoka’s permanent population however consists of low-income residents who face challenges meeting their basic needs. One estimate is “that 40% of residents in Muskoka have incomes less than $30,000” (The District Municipality of Muskoka, January 2015). Seniors, who represent approximately 30 percent of the District’s population, and women are particularly at risk of being unable to meet their basic needs. These percentages tend to be higher than comparable provincial statistics, and are projected to continue growing in the District.

Improving access to transportation can benefit residents’ physical and mental health, social well-being and economic situation by increasing connections to health care services, social activities or employment opportunities. A key objective of the pilot program is to connect rural residents, particularly vulnerable and isolated individuals (e.g., seniors, women, youth and low-income residents) with accessible, affordable and convenient transportation options that meet their every-day needs.

Another key objective of the pilot program is to utilize a model that leverages the excess capacity from an existing transportation system (e.g., school buses) to create a cost-effective community transportation system. These objectives informed the model used to establish THE MET. The resulting bus service utilizes the excess capacity from school buses between 9:00 am and 2:00 pm to provide community transportation on eight distinct routes throughout the District that align with program schedules to encourage ridership.

A Steering Committee was established at the outset of the project to “confirm project objectives and milestones, draft service collaboration agreements, and confirm the pilot evaluation framework” (Community Services, April 2015).

2.1.2. Program Partners

THE MET is an example of a coordinated transportation system where two or more organizations with shared transportation objectives collaborate “to achieve greater cost-effectiveness in service delivery” (Rural Ontario Institute, August 2014). During the detailed design phase of the pilot project, the District’s Community Services Department partnered with two community organizations – Muskoka Seniors and Muskoka Family Focus – which both provide transportation services to their respective target audiences. The intent of the partnership was to build on the existing transportation services to provide cost-effective transportation to more residents than any of the organizations could offer independently.

3

Page 10 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

The program partners secured transportation services through Hammond Transportation Ltd., the same operator used to deliver the Corridor 11 Bus service. The program partners established a centralized control approach to administer THE MET, whereby one partner takes full responsibility as the lead organization. Information sharing and decision-making are coordinated through the project’s Steering Committee.

2.1.3. Program Costs, Funding and Fares

THE MET is being implemented through a combination of resources and funding from the District Municipality of Muskoka, public and private partners and the Ontario Ministry of Transportation (MTO).

In 2015, an application submitted by the District for $100,000 (the maximum amount) in funding to support the implementation of THE MET was approved by MTO through the Provincial Community Transportation Pilot Grant Program. The grant is being used to finance various aspects of the program, as summarized in the table below.

Table 1 - THE MET Program Costs and Funding Allocation

Task Budget ($) Year One (April 2015-March 2016) Marketing, Community Engagement and 2,500 Evaluation Plans Evaluation Tools 4,000 Transportation Services 9,000 Project Coordinator 7,500 Marketing 10,000 Year Two (April 2016-March 2017) Transportation Services 39,000 Project Coordinator 15,000 Marketing 10,000 Pilot Evaluation and Reporting 3,000 Total 100,000

The fare structure for THE MET is age-related as outlined below. Sponsorships were elicited from community partners to offset the cost of fares for low-income households and individuals.

Table 2 - THE MET Fare Structure

Age Fare Adults $3.00 one way or $5.00 return Youth (13-18) $2.00 return trip Children (5-12) $1.00 return trip Preschool (0-4 years) FREE

4

Page 11 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

A target was set to recover 50 percent of the program costs during the pilot program to support the transition to a sustainable community transportation service; the balance would be covered by District and agency resources. Given an average cost of $150 per route per day (8 routes operating once per week over 40 weeks), a minimum of 15 adult passengers purchasing a return fare would need to use each route to reach the cost recovery target.

2.1.4. Routes and Schedules

During the detailed design phase of the pilot program (May-July 2015), the District completed several activities to inform the development of routes and schedules including: a demographic analysis, GIS mapping, stakeholder and community engagement and a review of schedules for community programs and services in all lower-tier municipalities (Community Services, April 2015). This initially resulted in seven routes; an eight route was subsequently added in spring 2016 based on community interest.

Each route was initially offered once per week, however frequency was adjusted based on demand. Routes 3 and 5 were discontinued in January 2017 based on low ridership, while a second weekly run was added to Route 7 at the same time.

Figure 1 – Overview map of current routes (Source: The District Municipality of Muskoka).

5

Page 12 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

The MET utilizes the excess capacity of school buses during school hours and operates between 9:00 am and 2:00 pm. The bus departs from the first stop near a school just after 9:00 am and arrives at the final stop at approximately 10:15 am; the exact schedule for each route varies slightly. Bus stops are typically located near landmarks or venues where possible, with all stops located on the side of the road or highway. The bus begins the return trip mid-afternoon leaving approximately 3.5 hours for passengers to attend programming, appointments or complete errands.

The MET operates on days when school buses are in service, and does not run when buses are cancelled due to bad weather, during scheduled breaks (i.e., Christmas holidays, March break and summer vacation) or on weekends.

2.1.5. Communications and Marketing

A comprehensive Marketing and Community Engagement Strategy was developed between July and October 2015 to raise awareness and promote ridership on THE MET. Meetings with stakeholder organizations and target audiences (e.g., seniors) were held across the District in fall 2016 to introduce THE MET and to obtain input on bus routes, schedules and stops, and marketing approaches.

A suite of promotional materials with a project identity featuring a logo and colour coordinated route information (i.e., route map, schedules and stops) and plain language was developed to support marketing efforts and included: brochures, flyers/posters, retractable banners, and wallet cards. The visuals used in the promotional materials reflect the target audiences (e.g., seniors, women and children) and hint at the activities THE MET could be used to access (e.g., shopping). It should be noted that a key piece of information missing from these materials is the fare price.

These materials were first circulated at a launch event held at the Gravenhurst Opera House in January 2016 to kick-off THE MET pilot program. A media campaign involving newspaper and radio ads featured two routes of the new service. The promotional materials continue to be distributed at community events, via local partner agencies and online through the District’s website. The District also maintains a one-window communications approach to provide program updates or receive comments or inquiries about THE MET:

Email: [email protected] Toll free hotline: 1-844-440-6387 (GGO METS) Website: www.muskoka.on.ca/MET

Clear signs consistent with the project branding and identity were also placed at bus stops and on the buses operating on each route.

Communications materials (i.e., program website, brochures) have been updated throughout the pilot to reflect changes to bus routes, schedules or general program information.

6

Page 13 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Figure 2 – THE MET launch flyer.

7

Page 14 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Figure 3 – THE MET brochure; the overview map with all routes is included on the back.

From a high-level review of the brochures available on the program website, the materials are:

• Visually interesting and make it easy to find information about specific routes through the strategic use of colour; • Informative and convey key information about THE MET (e.g., route schedules, stops, and contact information), what the service can be used for and who it is targeting without specifically referring to vulnerable, isolated or low-income residents; and • Easy to understand and use language that is simple, clear and well suited to a broad audience.

At this time, the brochures for Routes 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8 on the program webpage still list the two routes that have been discontinued and do not include fare prices. The brochure for Route 7 was updated to include information about a second weekly run; this version of the brochure has an updated list of THE MET routes and includes the adult fare price.

8

Page 15 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

2.1.6. Program Administration, Tracking and Management

Hammond Transportation oversees key aspects of the bus service (e.g., vehicles, drivers, etc.), while District or partner agency staff are responsible for administering the program. Day to day administrative and marketing tasks for the pilot (i.e., marketing, communications, responding to inquiries, etc.) have been implemented by a Project Coordinator in the District’s Community Services Department. A part- time Marketing and Community Engagement Coordinator was contracted in November 2016 to support the Project Coordinator.

Several indicators were identified at the outset of the project to measure and track results over the course of the pilot, including:

• Number of rides provided; • Number of new destinations; • Number of clients/passengers served; • Number of municipalities served; • Number of new clients/passengers; • Cost per trip. • Number of rides provided to seniors;

Data for each route is collected by the bus drivers manually, and entered into a database by District staff. The preliminary results of the pilot program from January 2016 to January 2017 are presented in the next section.

2.2. Preliminary Pilot Program Results

The graphs below provide a visual synopsis of the preliminary program results based on data obtained by the District. Between January 2016 and January 2017, a total of 637 passengers used THE MET. Table 4 – 2016-2017 Monthly Ridership provides a breakdown of the ridership results by month. In general, ridership increased gradually from the launch in January 2016 and peaked in November 2016 with more than 100 passengers recorded for this month. The decreases in ridership observed in March and December 2016 and January 2017 are explained in part by scheduled school breaks (i.e., March Break), holidays and snow days. Snow days were also recorded in February and April 2016.

The number of passengers recorded per route is shown in Table 5. The results indicate that more than half of the recorded passengers use Route 6 – MacTier to Bracebridge or Route 7 – Honey Harbour to Midland. As noted earlier, service on Route 7 was increased from once a week to twice a week in January 2017 and may partially explain the ridership levels for this route. From there, the most used routes in descending order are Route 2 – Baysville to Huntsville, Route 4 – Glen Orchard to Gravenhurst and Route 1 – Dorset to Huntsville. Route 3 – Severn Bridge to Gravenhurst and Route 5 – VanKoughnet to Bracebridge were used by less than one percent of the total passengers recorded and were discontinued in January 2017. Route 8 – Ryde/Barkway to Gravenhurst was added in spring 2016 based on community interest, and has been used by only one passenger since then.

9

Page 16 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Table 3 – 2016-2017 Monthly Ridership Results

120 108

100 81 80

63 63 59 58 54 60 50 Riders 46 37 40

18 20

0

Months

Table 4 – Total Ridership by Route Number

250 222

200 165

150

109 Riders 100 73 58 50

9 0 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Route Number

10

Page 17 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Table 6 - Total Ridership by Age Group and Table 7 – Ridership by Route and Age offer another perspective on the ridership results and itemize the total number of passengers by age and route respectively. Adults represent the largest passenger group, followed by seniors, preschoolers, youth and children. The age range of passengers varies across the routes, with Routes 1, 4, 6 and 7 being used primarily by adults. Route 2 is utilized most frequently by seniors followed by adults. The results also indicate that youth who use THE MET typically use Route 7 and Route 2 although less frequently than Route 7. It is important to note that the data provided by the District does not record how many new passengers use THE MET each week; as such the aggregate values presented here may reflect repeat passengers.

Table 5 - Total Ridership by Age Group

500 466 450 400 350 300

250 Riders 200 150 103 100 31 50 13 24 0 Preschoolers Children Under 12 Youth Adults Seniors Age Group

11

Page 18 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Table 6 – Ridership by Route and Age

250

200

150

Riders

100

50

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Route Number

Preschoolers Children Under 12 Youth Adult Senior

The next two tables provide details relating to the fares collected over the course of the pilot program. The total value of revenues collected between January 2016 and January 2017 is $1,259, as shown in Table 8 – 2016-2017 Fares Collected by Month. The fares generally correspond to the ridership results depicted in Table 4 – 2016-2017 Monthly Ridership, except for the months of May and June when THE MET was offered as a free service to promote ridership. While ridership did increase over these months from the previous months, it is does not appear that free service led to a significant increase in ridership.

Table 9 – Fare Collected by Route and Route Costs provides a side-by-side comparison of the revenues and costs for each route. The sum of all fares (i.e., one-way and return adult fares, youth and children) collected for each route is presented. The sum of the costs to operate each corresponding route is also shown and totals approximately $35,550. The fluctuations in costs per route are explained in part by snow days, holidays, and scheduled breaks. As noted earlier, Route 8 was added in spring 2016 which may explain the lower route costs. It is not clear from the data alone why the costs for Route 1 are considerably higher than the costs to operate the other routes. Despite this, the results suggest that

12

Page 19 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

ridership has not yet reached the target to recover 50 percent of project costs established at the outset of the project.

Table 7 – 2016-2017 Fares Collected by Month

$300

$247 $250

$202 $200 $160 $144 $145 $150 $105 $94 $101 $100 Fare Collected ($) Collected Fare $61 $50 $- $- $-

Month

Table 8 – Fare Collected by Route and Route Costs

$8,000 $7,157 $7,000

$6,000 $4,680 $4,733 $4,718 $5,000 $4,350 $4,000 $3,666 $3,598

$3,000 $2,758

$2,000

$1,000 $433 $318 $130 $183 $10 $180 $- $5 $- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Route Number

Sum of Fare Collected ($) Sum of Route Costs ($ before HST)

13

Page 20 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

The results of the interviews with program staff, partners, and passengers summarized in the next section provide insight and help explain the preliminary quantitative results of the pilot program.

3. Highlights from Discussions with Program Staff, Partners and Passengers

3.1. What We Heard

3.1.1. Program Components that are Working Well

Feedback from discussions with program staff, partners and passengers revealed several aspects of the pilot program are working well, benefitting The District, some residents and local businesses. These aspects are described below and organized by theme.

Connecting Rural Residents to Larger Centres in the District Respondents agreed that THE MET is being used by some residents, notably adults, younger seniors and youth. These passengers typically use the service to get to medical appointments, go shopping, fill prescriptions, and visit the post office, generally in larger centres in the District. Discussions with one passenger, who is a high school student, revealed that he uses Route 7 occasionally to get to school if he misses his regular scheduled school bus, or if his first class is later in the day. Another passenger explained that THE MET enables her to get to medical appointments without relying on her husband, who is a taxi driver and would lose fares if he had to driver her himself. The third passenger explained that she prefers using THE MET over her car for long distance journeys for economic, health and environmental reasons. Several respondents iterated that passengers want this initiative to be successful, noting they appreciate the effort the District has gone through to create THE MET, and emphasized the importance of community transportation.

Program Responsiveness Recurring feedback from respondents indicated that THE MET has been generally responsive to residents’ needs where feasible. For instance, Route 8 was added to the pilot program and an additional stop on Route 7 was added in response to community interest. Route 7 was also modified from its original route that travelled from Honey Harbour to Gravenhurst, changing the endpoint to Midland (which is outside the District) based on feedback from residents about where they go shopping, run errands and make excursions. Respondents also identified other adjustments that were made to enhance ridership once preliminary results became available (e.g., increasing weekly service to twice a week, and offering free service in May and June 2016).

Reasonable Fare Prices Feedback from discussions with passengers and several program staff indicated that the fare price is reasonable. These passengers agreed that THE MET is an affordable service that provides a cost- effective alternative to using a taxi service, particularly for seniors on fixed-incomes or students. One passenger explained that lack of awareness is likely a bigger barrier to using THE MET than the fare

14

Page 21 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

price, and pointed out that it is unclear if the free service offered in May and June 2016 resulted in higher ridership.

Collaboration and Partnerships Feedback from program staff and partners conveyed that the collaborative approach between the District and partner agencies to create and implement THE MET has been beneficial for the following reasons:

• Being able to reach and inform more residents overall as well as specific audiences about THE MET; • Building on and strengthening existing relationships established through other projects; • Leveraging each other’s strengths, knowledge, and expertise, thereby producing a better program; • Promoting the effective use of resources; and • Offering a program with a service level that none would have been able to offer independently.

Several respondents highlighted the need to strengthen these partnerships and foster more collaboration through leadership to enhance ridership and make the service sustainable.

Communications and Marketing Multiple comments conveyed that the pilot program was supported by well-designed and professional- looking marketing materials (e.g., brochures, flyers, wallet cards) that were circulated through a variety of channels (e.g., newspaper and radio ads, program website, bus stop signs, social media, partner agencies, community events, etc.) to increase awareness. Discussions with THE MET passengers revealed they each learned about the service from a different source (i.e., road sign, newspaper and word of mouth). The marketing materials contain most of the information passengers seek out about THE MET (e.g., routes, schedules and fares), although as noted earlier fare information is not included on all brochures.

3.1.2. Opportunities for Refinement

While respondents generally agree that THE MET addresses a key issue by bringing transportation to the District’s rural and remote communities, recurring comments also highlighted the need to review other aspects of the program, revealing opportunities to enhance THE MET and increase ridership. These aspects are described below and organized thematically.

Alignment with Community Programming and Schedules Several District staff and program partners noted that the intent at the outset of the pilot program was to align THE MET routes and schedules with community programming and services targeting seniors and young families offered in the District’s largest centres, giving residents a reason to use the bus service. Many respondents were unclear as to whether this was in fact carried out and conveyed uncertainty regarding service alignment. Although only three passengers were interviewed, two of whom are

15

Page 22 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

seniors, none of these use THE MET to access community programs; one respondent does use THE MET to access the library in Bracebridge.

Feedback from District staff suggests that there may be some alignment between THE MET schedules and early years programming in Huntsville, MacTier and Gravenhurst. However, the ridership from women with children or young families has been lower than anticipated. Two respondents added that while there may be some alignment, other factors may be affecting ridership. For instance, residents may also be able to access early years programming locally in some areas of the District without using THE MET.

Respondents were generally unsure whether THE MET schedules coordinate with any seniors programming. One respondent suggested completing an audit to confirm if service alignment did in fact occur.

Accessibility Accessibility emerged as a recurring issue in conversations with multiple respondents. They explained that some bus stops are difficult to get to in remote areas of the District (i.e., located at junctions on the side of the road, not within walking distance of residences, etc.), particularly during the winter months, which is a key issue for residents without access to a car and specifically older seniors. A few respondents explained that residents in remote areas likely already have some form of transportation or have other supports in place to enable getting around (e.g., family, friends, and volunteers). This is true of all the passengers who were interviewed – one had her own car, another relied on her husband, while the third passenger used a regular scheduled school bus. Although two of the passengers interviewed reside within a five-minute walk of a bus stop, one passenger explained that she drives 10 km from her home to get to the closest bus stop on Route 6, which is on the west side of Port Carling. She noted that she approached the District to add a stop on east side of Port Carling, about 5 km closer to her home, but was unable to get a definitive answer. It was also noted by another respondent that during the detailed design phase of the pilot, the District’s Accessibility Advisory Committee advised that the routes should be accessible; however this was not feasible on all routes and bus stop locations given the decision to use the excess capacity of school buses.

Another issue in terms of accessibility identified by respondents is the ability or inability of individuals with mobility devices or age-related physical constraints to board the school buses. In relation to this, program staff indicated that seniors have also voiced concerns about getting around without support once they are in town. One respondent noted that these individuals require a more customized transportation service (e.g., door-to-door service). Another respondent highlighted the need for accessible buses or transportation options and noted that the District has an obligation to support or ensure transportation is accessible if it is provided, specifically by 2025 to meet Provincial AODA requirements.

16

Page 23 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Transportation Model Although respondents generally support THE MET concept, they noted that the model, which utilizes the excess capacity of school buses, has some limitations. Multiple respondents conveyed that service reliability and consistency may be deterring residents from using THE MET given that it does not operate during scheduled school breaks, holidays, weekends, professional activity days, or when there are school bus cancellations. They suggested that enhancing the service to make it consistent and reliable (i.e., offered year-round, longer service hours, etc.) may attract more riders and different demographics (e.g., youth, high school students). This was countered by feedback from another respondent who explained that THE MET would not be feasible from a financial perspective if it did not “piggy back” on the school bus service.

Another limitation identified by multiple respondents is that the transportation model is based on routes with designated stops and does not include the flexibility to pick- up/drop-off passengers at or close to their homes. Program staff conveyed that they have received multiple inquiries and requests from seniors, who are unable to get to the bus stops, to be picked-up or dropped off from their homes. A few respondents did explain that MTO regulations prevent the bus operator from leaving the designated route. At least one respondent questioned whether THE MET is an appropriate model for isolated or elderly populations, and suggested that the type of transportation these individuals need is more of a dial-a-ride or door-to-door service.

In relation to this, one respondent explained that if individuals within the target audience do not own a car, there may be other reasons why they need a service like THE MET and therefore require more support to learn about and use it. This respondent highlighted the need to think about the service from the passenger’s point of view and also suggested that perhaps the model needs to be modified to suit the needs of people who really need it, rather than using a generic approach.

Feedback from another respondent conveyed that a few people have inquired whether some of the funding spent on THE MET could be used to support local volunteer driver programs (e.g., Red Cross) or off-set the cost of using a taxi, given the low ridership on some of the routes.

Lack of Awareness A few respondents noted that while a strong and comprehensive marketing strategy supported the implementation of THE MET, there may still be a lack of awareness among residents. One respondent stated that the District is quite large and while a specific marketing approach may be efficient, it may not be effective. This respondent also noted that Route 5 received the most promotion but had the lowest recorded ridership and was discontinued. Another respondent, who is a senior and uses THE MET every few weeks, agreed that there is a need to inform more people about the service. In her experience, 8 or 9 out of 10 people she speaks to hear about it from her for the first time. Discussions with another passenger agreed that word of mouth is the most effective way to promote THE MET, particularly in small towns. Another respondent also advised that program staff should keep in mind that residents will not be interested in the service until they need it. Feedback from respondents suggested developing a more customized approach to promoting the service by:

17

Page 24 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

• Circulating program information through other networks, agencies or service clubs targeting the same audiences; • Considering a mail drop to residents along each route – a program partner noted that her organization observed the highest attendance rates in their programming following a direct mail drop; • Adding program information to ODSP and Ontario Works communications; • Updating marketing materials to include customized information about which programs and services are accessible by each route or what to do in town; and • Ensuring marketing materials for seniors are accessible and use a minimum of 14 font.

Perceptions about Community Transportation Discussions with program staff, partners and passengers also raised several issues related to using community transportation in general. Multiple respondents explained that it takes time to establish confidence in a new service and build a client base. They agreed that residents, particularly seniors, in Muskoka are likely not familiar with the concept of community transportation and face barriers, whether real or perceived, that prevent them from using THE MET (e.g., how to get to a bus stop; where to park their cars; what happens if they miss the bus or if it is cancelled; how will they get around town on their own; what to do in town; what do they do in an emergency situation, etc.). Discussions with one program partner and one passenger noted that it may take a while to see consistent ridership given that it takes a long time for people to adapt their behaviour and routines (e.g., reorganize their schedules, coordinating errands, etc.) in order to use community transportation compared to driving which requires little forethought.

Route Design and Undefined Bus Stops Multiple respondents noted that the difference in ridership results between routes can be explained in part by different population densities in the communities being served. They explained that the routes with most the most ridership are the ones that service larger areas with denser populations, and noted that individuals who live in more remote areas would have had to solve their problem of transportation a long time ago. One respondent explained that there are few communities along Routes 2, 3 and 4 and advised that the number of riders decreases the further away one travels from denser settlement areas. This is consistent with the quantitative results presented in Section 2.2.

In addition to being accessible, recurring comments from respondents highlighted that the routes that are attracting the most riders have well defined stops (i.e., bus stops with clearly marked bus stop signs), whereas routes with low ridership are on rural routes that typically do not have defined stops that are near shelter or seating. One respondent did note that the current bus stop signs were designed to be temporary, are not visible from a distance and do not contain information about the route, schedule or fares. Undefined stops were also observed on the site visit which included riding the Route 7 bus. One respondent explained that unless an individual has already used an undefined stop, they would not know THE MET stopped there. These respondents suggested clarifying where stops are located on each route given that only street names are listed in promotional materials (e.g., add signs to each designated

18

Page 25 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

stop), and emphasized the importance of making it easy for residents to use the bus, noting that they will not necessarily take time to seek out information.

Program Administration, Data Tracking and Management Respondents generally feel that the pilot program received adequate resources to support implementation, and noted that the program would not have come this far if it did not receive sufficient human or financial resources. One respondent also emphasized that lower than expected ridership is not necessarily a result of a lack of planning and can be explained by many other factors. Recurring comments from program staff, partners and one passenger did however suggest that changes in project management during the pilot program may have impacted program administration. While respondents acknowledged that changes in personnel cannot always be controlled, having a consistent and dedicated project manager would benefit the program (e.g., build momentum, retain knowledge, strengthen relationships with partners, provide timely response to inquiries, etc.). A few respondents also agreed that the program has benefited from contracting an outreach coordinator in November 2016 – which may explain with the observed peak in ridership for this month – and suggested that the contract should be extended with more hours per week if the pilot continues.

In terms of data tracking and management, one respondent noted that the statistics recorded by bus drivers provide some insight regarding ridership (e.g., riders per route, etc.), but they do not indicate who would use THE MET if the service was modified, or who is not using the service and why. Another respondent agreed, noting that a key question is how to reach the hard to reach population. These respondents suggested program staff and partners should cross promote THE MET with agencies that have a shared interest in improving the wellbeing of THE MET target audiences, or modifying communication materials to target audiences more specifically. In relation to this, one respondent acknowledged that robust tracking of outreach and community engagement efforts should have been recorded from the outset of the project and will need to be done going forward.

4. Key Findings and Conclusions

Several key findings have emerged from the review of quantitative and qualitative data during the evaluation of THE MET pilot program. These findings are summarized below.

• In general, ridership has increased gradually from the launch in January 2016 to the end of January 2017. There was a notable peak in ridership in November 2017. • Route 6 – MacTier to Bracebridge and Route 7 – Honey Harbour to Midland have the highest ridership, followed by Route 2 – Baysville to Huntsville. Adults represent the largest passenger group, followed by seniors (likely younger, physically fit seniors), preschoolers, youth and children. • Several notable refinements have been made to improve the pilot program (e.g., adding an eighth route, adding a bus stop and modifying the endpoint of Route 7).

19

Page 26 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

• The total value of revenues collected between January 2016 and January 2017 is $1,259, while the sum of costs to operate each route is approximately $35,550. These results indicate that ridership has not yet reached the target to recover 50 percent of project costs established at the outset of the project. • Discussions with program staff, partners and passengers highlighted several aspects of the program that are working well. These include: o Connecting rural residents to larger centres in the District; o Adjustments to the program to enhance ridership based on preliminary results and input from residents; o Fare prices that are reasonable and cost-effective; o Collaboration between the District and partner agencies; and o A broad and comprehensive communications and marketing strategy. • Lower than expected ridership can be attributed to multiple factors that also present opportunities to refine the program: o Misalignment between THE MET and community programming schedules; o Accessibility in terms of being able to get to bus stop locations as well as getting on and off the school buses; o The transportation model selected for THE MET which utilizes the excess capacity of school buses to provide transportation via defined routes; o Route design, population densities and undefined bus stop locations; o Lack of awareness and difficulty reaching members of the target audience; o Perceptions about and unfamiliarity with the use of community transportation; and o The need for more dedicated staff hours to administer the program.

5. Considerations for Next Steps

Transportation remains a key issue for The District Municipality of Muskoka. Discussions with program staff, partners and passengers emphasized that THE MET is an innovative approach to providing community transportation in the District’s rural and remote areas. They unanimously expressed a desire to see the service continued, but recognize that “tweaks” or adjustments are needed to enhance the program and encourage ridership to make it more sustainable. Key considerations for next steps are presented below and are based on the preliminary program results as well as discussions with program staff, partners and passengers.

Short-Term Considerations

• Increase THE MET program coordinator’s hours to provide a dedicated resource and renew the outreach coordinator’s contract with the addition of more hours. • Maintain the current fare structure and explore other approaches (described below) to increase ridership through program enhancements.

20

Page 27 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

• Update brochures on the program website, removing references to routes that have been discontinued and adding fare information. • Create an inventory of District and partner agency programs that target seniors, women and young families and compare them to current THE MET schedules and routes to confirm if there is alignment or the need for adjustments. Use this as an opportunity to strengthen relationships with agency partners. • Review MTO regulations to identify instances when flexible pick-up/drop-off options are feasible, and ensure they are applied consistently. • Customize existing marketing material to target specific audiences (e.g., seniors, women, young families), and use the results of the inventory and discussions with MTO to provide information about how and what to use THE MET for. • Continue marketing THE MET broadly and consider the strategies recommended by respondents to increase awareness among target audiences: o Circulate program information through other networks (school board, churches, Simcoe County, libraries, community centres, local businesses), agencies (e.g., Public Health Unit, Children’s Aid, Seniors Services Planning Table, Sustainable Severn Sound, environmental organizations, etc.) and service clubs (e.g., Lions Club, Seniors Maintaining Active Roles Together), targeting the same audiences; o Consider a mail drop to residents along each route; o Add program information to ODSP and Ontario Works communications; o Update marketing materials to include customized information about which programs and services are accessible by each route or what to do in town; and o Ensure marketing materials for seniors are accessible and use a minimum of 14 font. • Examine the feasibility of adding or modifying bus stop locations (e.g., Georgian Bay District High School, east of Port Carling), particularly if a request has been made. • Update the data tracking form to include more indicators (i.e., new passengers) to help refine program results. • Consider utilizing smaller school buses to increase accessibility and reduce program costs.

Medium-Term Considerations • Update the District’s Community Transportation Strategy to determine the future of THE MET and explore whether other transportation models (i.e., dial-a-ride programs) may be more appropriate and cost-effective for providing rural residents, particularly older seniors and other vulnerable individuals, accessible transportation. • Define bus stop locations by adapt marketing materials to create bus stop signs with information about schedules, fares and routes for each route, or routes selected for continuation as part of the pilot. • Undertake research to develop materials or strategies to address perceptions to using community transportation.

21

Page 28 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report

Long-Term Considerations

• Consider piloting enhanced service (e.g., during scheduled school breaks and holidays) on routes that are approaching or reach sustainable ridership levels to increase consistency and reliability. • Undertake a follow-up evaluation, if THE MET is continued, to assess the impact of modifications to the program.

22

Page 29 Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Draft Evaluation Report References Cited

Community Services. (April 2015). Community Transportation Pilot Project, Report CS-5-2015-2. District Municipality of Muskoka.

Rural Ontario Institute. (2014). Accelerating Rural Transportation Solutions - Ten Community Case Studies From Ontario.

Rural Ontario Institute. (August 2014). Towards Coordinated Rural Transportation: A Resource Guide. The District Municipality of Muskoka. (January 2015). Community Transportation Pilot Grant Program Application Form. The District Municipality of Muskoka;.

23

Page 30

Appendix A – Key Informant Interview Summaries

1

Page 31

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Outreach Coordinator Friday, February 17, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

Residents in certain areas are using it to get to doctors’ appointments and do things like grocery shopping. I don’t think many children have used THE MET; we had hoped more families would be using THE MET.

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently? 3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program? 4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

Did not ask – Outreach Coordinator began working on the project in November 2016.

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

Some bus stops are difficult to get to in remote areas of the District (i.e., located at junctions on the side of the road). Based on the few conversations I have had, residents in these areas would likely already have some form of transportation. It is generally difficult to find accessible stops in remote areas.

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

There are a few issues that may prevent residents from using the service, including:

• Accessibility in terms of getting on and off the buses may be difficult for older residents. Muskoka Family Service has volunteer drivers that drive seniors to appointments and or other daily needs. • More coordination may be needed between the routes and programs for families with young children. For example, although Route 8 runs on Thursdays, the same day early years programming is offered in Baysville, there is also a program offered locally so residents would

2

Page 32

not need to use THE MET. It might also be a good idea to coordinate the bus schedule with the food bank schedule; it is open on Wednesdays in Honey Harbour. • Service reliability and consistency may be an issue; the routes don’t run during school holidays, but may attract more users if it is more consistent.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

See question 1.

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

I was contracted in November 2016 to do outreach for THE MET; I have about 7 hours a week for this task. I have handed out flyers at various community events (e.g., Winter Carnival, Santa Claus parade) which I would be going to anyways to do outreach for Muskoka Family Focus. I have also been reaching out to other service agencies and organizations. We also have a pullout sign that is displayed at community events and draws attention to our booth.

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

Residents typically want to know how much the fare is, when THE MET runs. Most people I’ve spoken to say it is not a service they need, but they will pass information about THE MET to others who might be interested. Residents in Baysville have also noted that they “take care of their own”; they have developed a local coping strategy and drive their neighbours into town, etc.

It is hard for people to know where to find the information about THE MET. There are posters throughout the community; we also have information online (e.g., website, Facebook, etc.).

Muskoka Family Focus typically uses the following tools for outreach and communication:

• Facebook (used heavily); • Program facilitators (they spread the word about THE MET, as well as other programs and services); and • Website (developing new website, which could include information about THE MET).

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET?

3

Page 33

A key strength of the collaborative approach is the opportunity to reach and inform more people about THE MET. A weakness or challenge is consistency in information (e.g., route information); it can be difficult to coordinate information between the program partners and ensure it is up to date.

11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET?

I’m not sure; it would have been beneficial to do community outreach from the beginning.

12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

The program coordinator has been doing a good job at getting updated information out to program partners.

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

We track the number of people spoken to at outreach events. It is possible that the target audience that would benefit from THE MET does not attend events or use the communication channels that we promote the program through. We will be trying to circulate information through health hubs next week; I’m not sure if any programming/schedules could be coordinated there too.

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes? 15. What factors explain the observed results?

It is difficult to reach lower-income individuals and inform them about THE MET. The key question is how do we reach the hard to reach population? We have discussed mailing out flyers with ODSP and Ontario Works communications.

16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program? 17. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes? 18. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program? 19. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents?

Did not ask.

20. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

Two routes are working fairly well; I would love to see the program continue. It really is a fantastic service and a great way to start offering transportation in rural communities, but there is so much to consider and many little kinks to work out.

4

Page 34

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Bus Operator Friday, February 17, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

There is ridership on some routes (e.g., Routes 1, 4, 6, and 7); Route 7 is perhaps the most successful.

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently? 3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program?

The program model was tweaked a few times during the pilot:

• The frequency of some routes was increased (e.g., service that ran every other week was increased to weekly); • An additional route was added (i.e., Route 8); and • Free service was offered during May and June 2016 to promote and encourage ridership.

4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

THE MET is working to address the needs of some rural residents, but it is not clear if the people who need the service know about it.

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

Population density is a key difference; the routes with most the most ridership are the ones that service larger areas with denser populations. Individuals who live in rural areas likely have a car and do not rely on THE MET to get around; they wouldn’t be able to survive without one. In other words, a rural community with a population of 600 residents has a greater need/want for the service compared to a stop on a county road. The number of riders decreases the further away one travels from denser settlement areas.

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

5

Page 35

There are a few issues that may be preventing these individuals from using THE MET, including:

• The weather – there have been several winter storms this season, such that the District has exceeded its snow removal budget for this year. Snow banks 2-3 feet high may be blocking some bus stops locations. • Bus stop conditions – these are typically located at the side of the road without shelter or benches. Many bus stops are also not marked or identifiable (i.e., no signs); unless you have already used the service you would not know a bus stopped at a designated place. • Route design – There are no communities along Routes 2, 3 and 4 which run along district roads and stop at concession intersections.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

Not sure.

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

Bus stop signs are the least effective at attracting new riders; not all bus stops have a sign, those that do are small and marked with a temporary sign.

Although some marketing has been done to promote the program, overall awareness of THE MET is not widely known. The District can opt to market the program, but should keep in mind that residents are not interested until they need the service. In addition to traditional marketing approaches (e.g., buses websites, etc.) another option would to be share information about THE MET through other networks or agencies targeting the same audiences.

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

Riders or interested residents typically want to know if the bus will stop directly in front of their house, or why there isn’t a stop at a particular location – people have a tendency to want a service tailored to their needs or particular situation. Bus drivers are instructed not to defer from the official route, but can stop at a house if they would be passing directly by it anyway. The bus drivers want the service to be successful and continued long-term and may end up stopping multiple times on a route.

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET?

6

Page 36

We work collaboratively with the District on several other projects. We already have a working relationship and rely on each other’s strengths, knowledge and expertise. The synergy of this partnership grows over time as the working relationship is strengthened and program knowledge increases.

11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET?

Yes.

12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

If THE MET as a service is going to continue, we (program administrators) need to find a way to increase ridership – it is a shared responsibility. It is not clear to me how questions to the hotline are being answered. We know THE MET is a great idea, but it is underused.

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

The ridership numbers tracked by bus drivers are the hard numbers, but they do not tell us who would use the service if some variable changed. The current method of gathering information also does not tell us about the people who are not using the service. We need to go to the places where THE MET target audiences visit (e.g., doctors’ offices, pharmacies, gym, banks, etc.).

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes?

I thought more people would have used the service, but I am not surprised that some routes did not attract any riders or had to be cancelled. More research is needed to understand why this happened, and focus outreach on people who need the service.

As far as I know, no public transit system covers its cost through fares or ticket sales alone, but I do not think the program model could afford running THE MET if it did not piggy back school bus service.

15. What factors explain the observed results? 16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program?

Several factors may explain the observed results:

• It takes time for a service to get established and build a client base. This may require a change in behaviour from people who are used to getting into their cars and driving (i.e., planning their trips and coordinating errands, etc.).

7

Page 37

• Background research may have focused or placed too much emphasis on certain variables or factors. • It is possible that if individuals within the target audience do not own a car there may be other reasons they need a service like THE MET and therefore more support to learn about it and use it; we need to think about their needs from their point of view. These individuals likely do not use social media. Perhaps the service model needs to be modified to suit the needs of people who really need it, rather than using a “shot-gun” approach.

17. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes?

Consider the following changes:

• Identify users who need the service and bring the service to them; tailor the service based on their needs (i.e., bus stop locations). • Consider modifying the program based on the needs of target audiences (i.e., scale back the program).

18. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program?

Did not ask.

19. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents?

Take the current model and change it to work better for the people who need the service.

20. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

THE MET benefits riders, bus drivers, local businesses and the District of Muskoka. I would like to see the program enhanced so it continues over the long-term.

8

Page 38

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Communications Officer February 24, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

THE Met offers transportation to rural and isolated residents, specifically seniors and young families.

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently?

There have been a few changes in project management, which have impacted the program (i.e., focus, implicit knowledge, relationships with partners, etc.), although this cannot be controlled. Having a consistent project manager may have made a difference.

3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program?

I was involved in writing the grant application, but not very much during implementation. There was a very short window of time to prepare the application, which was framed to utilize the excess capacity of school buses to provide transportation in rural areas. The concept was presented by MTO to school bus operators. We used the concept as a starting point and tried to integrate the results of various needs assessments (i.e., aligning with programs and services). We also tried to model it after the Corridor 11 bus route which has been successful. I am not sure if the routes and schedules were in fact aligned with programs and services. The short application window did not give us a chance to consider other options for rural transportation.

The target audience and objectives did shift over time to include rural residents in general and provide access to amenities, not just programs and services.

4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

Not aware of the ridership numbers.

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

Note sure.

9

Page 39

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

The target audiences are not familiar or used to taking public transportation and likely have other supports in place to enable getting around. The Corridor 11 bus service has been successful, but it targets a different audience; students travelling to Orillia became key users.

It’s not clear if this is the right service for isolated or vulnerable populations. The type of transportation they need is more of an on demand service and would need to be accessible. The Accessibility Advisory Committee maintained that the routes should be accessible, but the model was based on using the excess capacity of school buses.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

I imagine they would use it to get to programs and services (i.e., health care, shopping larger centres, etc.).

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

Marketing has been a challenge. From internal discussions, I have heard that it is difficult for people to imagine themselves using the bus, particularly if they are used to traveling by car.

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

Not sure.

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET?

A key strength of working with partners is being able to reach out to a broader audience. We also worked with program partners to design the routes, rather than planning in silos.

11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET?

Yes. The challenge was the change in project management, although this cannot be controlled. Projects lose momentum when there is a change in leadership.

10

Page 40

12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

There is a need for more support to build partnerships. Each route is unique and has distinct audiences. Working with partners (e.g., agencies like Muskoka Seniors, Muskoka Family First) to cross-promote programming might be a more effective approach to marketing the service.

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

Did not ask.

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes?

There was some discussion about making one of the routes accessible. I am not sure if that was realized.

15. What factors explain the observed results?

It is a challenge for people to understand what they could do with the bus (i.e., where to go). Most people likely have a means of transportation that is more on demand. The MET would be an alternative to what they already use.

16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program? 17. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes?

The presentation from MTO pitched a specific model that focused on using the excess capacity of school buses. The application window was short; we did not have the time to think about different options (i.e., on demand service or building a volunteer network).

Transportation remains a massive issue for Muskoka – there is a need for more on demand service. Other opportunities for quick wins should also be explored.

18. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program? 19. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents? 20. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

Did not ask.

11

Page 41

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Manager, Children’s Programs February 23, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

The program has brought transportation options to rural areas of the District and is supported by strong marketing. There is also political support; in general politicians and senior management believe it is a valuable service for isolated rural residents.

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently?

The program was designed to have designated stops instead of picking up riders at their homes. Some riders may not be able to get to the designated stops. This is a big barrier. The bus operator cited that MTO regulations prevent them from doing a door-to-door service. THE MET may also be missing other demographics or the opportunity to enhance ridership by not providing service during the summer months. Another approach would have been to create connections with the Corridor 11 bus and making THE MET a network service.

3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program?

The program was implemented as planned; adjustments were made to enhance ridership as results started coming in.

4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

The ridership levels may be indicative of how well the service is working. The model of using school buses places limitations in terms of scheduling.

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

I would imagine that denser areas or areas with concentrated populations have more ridership. People living off county roads would have had to solve the problem of transportation a long time ago.

12

Page 42

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

A key challenge, particularly for seniors and young parents, is the inconvenience of walking to a bus stop versus being picked up at home. I agree that accessibility is also a challenge for some people.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

The intent was to coordinate THE MET routes and schedules with programs and services for seniors and young families. It would be great to do an audit or evaluation to determine if this actually happened.

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

I can’t speak to the success of specific marketing materials, but the materials that were developed were clear and professional looking (i.e., brochures, bus stop signs, radio ads, newspaper ads, etc.). They ticked all the boxes.

Our clients typically get information from a variety of sources (e.g., early years programs, District website, word of mouth, community facilitators, The Nest [family resource centre], Children’s Aid, Public Health, and other agencies).

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

Not sure.

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET?

Not sure.

11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET?

Yes – It would not have come this far if it didn’t receive the human or financial resources it did. The lack of ridership is not necessarily a result of a lack of planning or forethought.

12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

13

Page 43

More funding is needed to continue the service. There is also a need to address the issue with pick-up and drop-off locations, and make sure THE MET routes and schedules align with programs and services. Perhaps riders should be surveyed to find out more information about where they would like to go and get a sense as to whether the right routes were created in the first place.

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

Not sure.

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes?

Ridership is much lower than anticipated and participation seems to have dropped off.

15. What factors explain the observed results?

While it is recognized that THE MET buses cannot visit every house, more flexibility is needed (i.e., flag down the bus system, pre-book a pick-up) to meet the needs of the target audiences.

16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program?

I’m not sure if the program was executed as was originally planned. It may be possible to increase ridership if the service could be expanded beyond school months and hours.

17. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes?

If the intent of the program is to attract parents with young children make sure that bus schedules and routes align with programs and services targeted toward this demographic, or make sure they connect with the Corridor 11 bus.

18. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program? 19. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents? 20. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

Did not ask.

14

Page 44

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interviews Feedback – Member of Council (Tay Township) Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

There is no public transit for residents in these communities. THE MET provides transportation for rural residents in particular to access services for everyday needs (i.e., shopping, banking, health care). THE MET also opens up opportunities (e.g., volunteering, employment, social programs and activities, etc.) for residents who do not have access to a car.

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently?

THE MET schedule is tied to the school calendar; buses do not operate during scheduled school holidays and breaks, or Mondays and Fridays when there are holidays or Professional Activity Days. Although the financial considerations are certainly important, running the buses during breaks and holidays to provide consistent and reliable service may have resulted in a different outcome. The general public may not know when schools are open (i.e., March Break, Christmas Break).

3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program?

I joined the project in September 2015, after receiving an email from the Georgian Bay Chamber of Commerce, when planning for the pilot was well under way. Consider reaching out to partners in Simcoe County to increase awareness and support for the program.

4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

THE MET is an essential service – individuals who use THE MET would otherwise not be able to get into town or meet their daily needs. The bus routes have changed a few of times based on information and feedback from drivers to improve them; having consistent drivers has been valuable to the program.

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

15

Page 45

Although the stops are working well, the rural character of some routes may explain the difference in ridership. As an example, there two locations in Tay Township (i.e., Waverly and Daisy) where bus stops could be added, however there is only one stop due to the way the route was designed.

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

Accessibility and aging in place are two broader issues facing seniors. There is a need for accessible buses. The Township/District also have an obligation to support or ensure transportation is accessible if it is provided, specifically by 2025 to meet AODA requirements. Accessible transportation is available through Community Reach North Simcoe; however there is a two-month wait list for the service.

Many seniors cannot drive (for a variety of reasons), making aging in place in Tay Township or the District of Muskoka challenging.

I would be delighted if THE MET continued as a long-term program.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

See Questions 1 and 4.

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

Print materials like flyers and pamphlets are essential and should be circulated where residents gather (e.g., food banks, schools, etc.). Advertising in local newspapers on a weekly or monthly basis should be considered, although it is recognized that these are expensive options.

We recently hired a communications person that also does communications for the Township of Georgian Bay, who will help promote THE MET using tools like Twitter and Facebook.

The piece that is missing is getting the word about THE MET out through the school board and local schools so students can take the information back home to their families. It has been difficult to get the school board on side, we need to highlight how they might benefit from a partnership (i.e., servicing families, enabling parents to volunteer, supporting the community).

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

Riders typically want to know the bus schedule, route and cost per trip; information about fares was not included in the initial pamphlet.

16

Page 46

The temporary bus stop signs should be replaced with larger signs that include information about the bus route, schedule and fare at each bus stop location if the intent is the continue THE MET. This would also increase awareness among passersby.

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET?

The partnership between Tay Township and the District of Muskoka has been beneficial and is valued; Tay Township could not have offered a service comparable to THE MET on its own. Anytime municipalities work together creates a positive springboard effect and promotes the effective use of resources. There is a need to foster more of this collaborative spirit through leadership, and specifically someone to champion THE MET.

It can be difficult to get support from other service providers in the community (e.g., post office, laundry mat) due to bureaucracy or concerns about people loitering if they are waiting for the bus.

11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET? 12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

A dedicated program coordinator can support THE MET by building relationships with program partners, and accumulating knowledge about the program over time. There is a need to invest in people and understand what they need.

It was not possible to consider expanding the initial bus routes or schedules due to the higher associated costs. This makes it difficult for potential riders to plan their trips; it takes time for residents to build trust and confidence in a service, especially if it is a pilot; it needs to be consistent and reliable. There is some concern that rural residents will be forced to move into town, or elsewhere, to access programs and services; the rural areas provide affordable housing options, but there are no services in these areas.

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

There is a need to determine what kind of numbers are required to make THE MET an ongoing service, what would constitute a success, and how the future of the program will be decided.

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes?

17

Page 47

I am delighted to hear that a high school student is using THE MET; this is an unintended outcome. Promoting THE MET through the school board or local schools could help increase ridership and tap into/serve another audience.

15. What factors explain the observed results?

Did not ask.

16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program?

Public transit is an expensive service, but it is important to find a way to make the service available. Many residents are choosing to locate in the Township/District because of housing affordability, but there are no services to support them in many of the communities. We need to think about a how to attract new residents and keep the ones that are here. There is a need to consider the bigger picture; think longer-term and build for tomorrow.

17. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes?

Several one-off or complementary changes should be considered, including:

• Schedule bus service during school breaks (e.g., March Break, summer holidays, etc. – there is so much opportunity if ridership can be bridged through the summer); • Add more bus stops in communities where there is currently only one stop (i.e., Victoria Harbour); • Add a third run after school to provide more flexibility or options to students/residents (i.e., participate in extra-curricular activities – even two car families can seldom accommodate this); • Consider adding bike racks to the buses to support connections to active transportation/trails (i.e., trail from Tay to Waubaushene); • Consider using passes instead of cash for fares; • Explore opportunities to partner with Midland/Simcoe County to provide public transit (e.g., fare integration). • Partner with agencies that support aging in place (i.e., public health unit, Sustainable Severn Sound). • Ensure ongoing outreach and marketing of the program through libraries, legions, community centres, community partners, etc.

18. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program?

Be clear from the outset about the program timelines, how decisions will be made and opportunities to advocate for the program. Consider partnering with agencies that have a mandate or interest in supporting aging in place/age friendly communities, and ensure councillors, Township and District staff are aware of the program to build political will and support. There is also a need to reach out and work with other community partners (e.g., post office, school board, etc.).

18

Page 48

19. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents?

The County of Simcoe has developed a long-term public transportation plan, which has funding. The plan includes developing hub to hub transportation services between Midland, Barrie and Orillia. This could mean big savings for the District Municipality of Muskoka if THE MET is continued, particularly if residents can get to Waubaushene, and provides inter-regional service/connections.

20. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

Did not ask.

19

Page 49

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Former Seniors Program Coordinator and Seniors Wellness Outreach Coordinator Tuesday, February 28, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

The marketing approach and materials for THE MET were well designed (e.g., brochures – seniors have a preference for hard copy materials). The pilot also used various strategies to encourage ridership (e.g., free passes given out at events and programs).

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently?

Before the service was launched, eight focus groups were held in communities across Muskoka to engage seniors about potential routes and bus stop locations. The seniors (at the focus group I attended) expressed interest in being picked up from their driveways or nearer their homes – the concern was being able to get to the bus stop in the first place – but were told that this was not an option at the time. Some seniors felt like they did not have a say in designing the service to meet their needs.

3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program?

Route 8 was added to the pilot program based on feedback from the community. An additional stop on Route 7 was added in response to a request from two seniors, and it was also modified from its original route from Honey Harbour to Gravenhurst to Honey Harbour to Midland (which is not in the District) based on feedback from residents about there they do shopping, errands, etc. From what I have heard, these individuals felt like they were listened to. Two routes were also removed from the pilot program due to low ridership.

4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

Based on conversations with a few seniors, THE MET is not meeting the needs of this demographic. They have many concerns about using THE MET (e.g., how to get to a bus stop, particularly in the winter; where to park their cars; missing the bus; how to get around town on their own; what to do in an emergency situation, etc.). Many seniors have not used public transit and in general have uncertainties about using this type of transportation.

20

Page 50

A lot of younger seniors have stated that they do not need the service because they still drive, but it would be a great option for down the road when they can no longer drive. These individuals agree THE MET is a good idea and were also willing to try it, but stated they did not need the service.

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

Route 3 was heavily promoted however there was no ridership and it was discontinued in January 2017. There is a trailer park along this route with a population of low-income seniors – it is not clear if a bus stop was added near the trailer park.

There is also a large population of seniors in VanKoughnet, however Route 5 did not have any riders either and was also discontinued. At one point, a stop on this route was requested near the fire house to provide parking options and draw on a larger catchment area.

Route 6 is used by more families with young children.

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

There are several barriers that have prevented seniors from using THE MET:

• Getting to the bus stop without assistance or some other form of transportation, particularly during the winter months; • Waiting at bus stops during the winter months (some seniors are frail); • Moving around town once they are there; a few have noted that using a cab service is too expensive; • Waiting in town to be picked-up on the return run (if they have an early morning appointment, they face a long wait for the return trip, particularly if they are not able to get around without assistance); • Getting on and off the bus, especially if they are carrying shopping (i.e., will someone be able to assist them); and • Knowing where the bus stops are (some locations are not marked by a sign), and if the bus is running on a particular day.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

Not sure – I don’t think a lot of seniors have used THE MET.

21

Page 51

District staff have made an effort to align programming in smaller centres (e.g., MacTier and children’s programs, etc.) with THE MET schedule; it is not clear if this was done for programming offered at seniors centres in Huntsville, Bracebridge and Gravenhurst.

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

The marketing program was well designed and included radio advertising, posters, etc. in each community, and spreading information through partner agencies. The previous Program Manager piggy backed on many of our own outreach initiatives to promote the service. That said it is not clear if the target audience was reached.

Seniors programs and activities are advertised through a variety of channels (e.g., District website, Seniors Services Planning Table [which constitutes 40 organizations] email distribution list; District-wide email, word-of-mouth during programming, and informing other agencies [e.g., Victoria Order of Nurses, Seniors Maintaining Active Roles Together, etc.]).

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

Seniors typically want to know:

• If the bus will stop at their house, or if they can wave down the bus; • Who to call if the bus is running on time or to schedule a pick-up; and • Where they can leave their car near a particular stop.

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET?

Partnering to engage seniors during the planning stages of the pilot was strength as we were able to reach more seniors through a collaborative approach.

It is not clear if external programs were aligned with THE MET schedules.

11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET?

There was one Program Manager, and at one point there may have been some discussion to hire a Program Coordinator; the program may have been a little understaffed.

22

Page 52

12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

There is a need to ensure any changes are communicated as quickly as possible, sometime it can take a while for things to filter through to different partners. Transparency and openness are also important.

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

Did not ask.

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes?

Discontinuing two routes due to low ridership was perhaps an unanticipated outcome.

I heard about a group of ladies who wanted to start a weekly lunch gathering using THE MET, although I do not know if this happened THE MET inspired the idea of more social interaction among seniors.

15. What factors explain the observed results?

Did not ask.

16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program? 17. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes?

More customized information about which programs and services are accessible by taking THE MET/each route, or what to do in town could encourage more ridership. Ensure that communication materials for seniors are accessible and use a minimum of 14 font – the wallet card was a great idea, but the font was too small.

We observed the highest attendance rates in our own programming following a direct mail ad/mail drop. It is a more expensive option, but can be effective to get to the hard to reach individuals.

Another option would be to provide a more flexible service (i.e., picking up seniors at their homes, scheduling a pickup/drop off).

It is also important to clarify where stops are located on each route since mostly street names are listed in promotional materials (e.g., add signs to each designated stop). It is important to make it easy for people to use the bus – they won’t take time to seek out that information.

18. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program?

23

Page 53

Did not ask.

19. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents?

Given the low ridership on some of the routes, a few people have inquired whether some of the funding spent on THE MET could be used to support local volunteer driver programs (e.g., Red Cross) or off-set the cost of using a taxi. An incentive could also be offered to encourage carpooling – many younger seniors who are still active already check on their neighbours, and could be incented to drive them to appointments, etc.

20. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

The fact that there are riders is a sign of success. Overall seniors and residents want this initiative to be successful; they appreciate the effort the District has gone through to offer this service, particularly given that the need for transportation is ongoing.

24

Page 54

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Program Coordinator Wednesday, February 22, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

The routes are that are attracting riders have well defined stops (i.e., bus stops with clearly marked bus stop signs). The routes that are not doing as well are on rural routes that typically do not have defined stops. Investing money to put up more stop signs was discussed, but we were not sure if they would have made a difference. The routes that have been attracting riders, specifically seniors, have accessible stops.

The rates are another positive aspect of the program – they are reasonably priced.

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently?

There are a few things that could have been approached differently:

• The ability or flexibility to stop at driveways – This is something that is requested on rural routes. There has been some pushback from the operator regarding this that may be related to provincial regulations. • Program ambassadors – The vision was to have individuals from the local community ride each bus route to help riders get on/off, provide information, and serve as a familiar face.

3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program?

Yes – THE MET has been implemented differently than originally planned. The intent was to align bus routes and schedules with seniors/family programs and services offered by other agencies to give residents a reason to go into town – it’s not clear whether that actually happened on all the routes.

4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

Some routes do coordinate well with programs and services offered in town. As an example, Route 1 – Dorset to Huntsville is aligned well with early years programming on Tuesdays which includes a free lunch, but there has been little ridership. It’s not clear whether there are enough young moms or if there is early years programming already happening in Dorset. I’m not sure if the route is well aligned with seniors programming on that day.

25

Page 55

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

Based on conversations from residents calling to the hotline, some routes are much more rural than others with stops located on back/side roads. Other routes travel through communities with denser populations, and stops that are easier to get to.

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

THE MET is a great concept, but the buses and some bus stop locations are not accessible – this is a key barrier for seniors. We have discussed the need for accessible buses with the bus operator; accessible buses are not available to serve the routes. If the service is continued, that is something that will need to be addressed.

More youth or high school students would use THE MET if the schedules were different.

I’m not aware of any issues facing young moms that would prevent them from using THE MET.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

Based on the stops riders get on/off at, they typically use THE MET to go into town to access programs and services, such as shopping and medical appointments, and get to local community centres and libraries.

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

The MET was launched through a variety of communication channels including a radio campaign on the Moose which is still running, brochures, newspaper advertising and word of mouth. There has been some discussion as to whether the right marketing campaign/approach was used, and perhaps a more individualized approach is needed to promote the service. The District is quite large and while one marketing approach is efficient, it may not be effective. We are considering doing a mail drop for the routes that are kept after the pilot. Engagement and outreach was also done prior to the launch through seniors programming and presentations to service clubs (e.g., Lions Clubs).

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

26

Page 56

We typically receive calls about:

• Route/stop information and requests (27) • Marketing materials (6) • Fare price/purchasing tickets (3)

There have been a few complaints too. The initial project manager was able to successfully add a stop; we connect with the bus operator to determine if the requested stop location is feasible and safe. We had to deny two other requests based on safety concerns. We began tracking calls in a message book recently; they were not tracked by the initial program coordinator.

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET?

The project started off as a collaborative initiative. We work internally with Muskoka Family First; bringing them formally back into the picture by contracting their Outreach Coordinator to do outreach for THE MET has been beneficial to resuming a more collaborative approach.

The program is not as collaborative as it was intended to be specifically in terms or aligning bus schedules and routes with agency programs and other services.

11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET?

Adequate resources were allocated at the outset of the project when there was a dedicated project manager. The program has been taken over by the Program Coordinator who has not been able to focus on the project as much as she would like due to other tasks and responsibilities. Bringing on an Outreach Coordinator has been beneficial; the program could use more attention.

12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

A dedicated Outreach Coordinator is needed to help promote THE MET. The current Outreach Coordinator is contracted through Muskoka Family First, but that is set to expire in March 2017. Funding is available; the constraint is in part her capacity in light of other tasks and responsibilities.

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

Statistics for each route (e.g., riders, demographics, stops) are tracked thoroughly by the bus drivers and passed on to Muskoka Community Service. Robust tracking of outreach and community engagement efforts should have been recorded from the outset of the project; this will need to be done going forward.

27

Page 57

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes?

We did not expect Route 7 to have the most ridership – this could be explained by residents from rural areas travelling to access programs and services in Midland (which is outside the District). The most outreach was done to promote Route 5, which received interest and support, but no riders between January and December 2016. Route 8 was added in September 2016 due to demand from residents, but there has only been one rider to date.

15. What factors explain the observed results?

It is possible the break in service over scheduled school holidays derails some people. There are also things that we cannot avoid such as snow days – hardly any of the routes were ran as scheduled in January due to the weather.

16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program?

Did not ask.

17. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes?

If the service is continued, it should be marketed heavily to service clubs, churches, community organizations, etc. More engagement overall, and research (e.g., focus groups) could be done to find out what is preventing residents from using the service.

18. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program?

I would suggest permitting direct stops and making it more of a flexible service to promote ridership. Another consideration is ensuring that it is an accessible service.

19. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents?

One alternate solution that has been discussed is partnering with a cab company in Bracebridge to provide door-to-door service to residents who need more personalized service.

20. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

I do love the concept of THE MET; it does work in some areas, but it is not a perfect service. The pilot program revealed many things that need to be tweaked.

28

Page 58

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interviews – Feedback from Program Staff and Drivers Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Thinking about the objectives of THE MET to make it easier for residents in rural areas to access programs and services …

1. Which aspects of the pilot program are working well?

The service helps connect rural residents to services in local towns.

2. Which aspects could have been approached differently? 3. Was THE MET implemented as planned? What, if anything, changed during the implementation of the pilot program? 4. How well is THE MET responding to the needs of rural residents and connecting them to programs and services?

Did not ask.

Thinking about THE MET bus routes, bus stops, and bus stop locations…

5. Are there any major differences between the bus routes (i.e., land use, location, landscape features, population densities, etc.) that would explain why some routes have more riders than others?

Did not ask.

6. Are you aware of any challenges or barriers preventing seniors, youth, or other target audiences from using the service?

The driver noted that she is not aware of any challenges, but did add when prompted that she has observed older riders climb the bus stairs with difficulty, although none of them have complained about it.

7. What programs and services do rural residents typically use THE MET to get to?

The driver explained that riders typically use THE MET to get to Mountainview Mall, WalMart, Midland/Georgian Bay Hospital or downtown Midland. She noted that Honey Harbour is very rural and riders use THE MET to get groceries, prescriptions/drug store items, do banking, etc.

Thinking about the communications, marketing and community engagement undertaken to promote THE MET…

29

Page 59

8. Which materials (i.e., radio, flyers, posters, road signs, etc.) and engagement activities have been the most successful at promoting THE MET? How are these recorded or tracked?

Did not ask.

9. What kind of information do residents typically want to know about THE MET?

The driver noted that most of the riders are regulars and already know the route and schedule information. She added that she has been asked if Route 7 travels to Penetanguishene.

Thinking about what is involved in administering THE MET…

10. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the collaborative approach between the District and community partners to implement THE MET? 11. Were adequate resources allocated to support the pilot implementation of THE MET?

Did not ask.

12. What kind of tools or resources do staff or community partners need to continue providing THE MET?

The Driver noted that it is difficult to manoeuvre large school buses through parking lots and narrow drive ways (e.g., Mountainview Mall and Midland/Georgian Bay Hospital) to get to bus stops; she agreed that small buses would be easier to manoeuvre and would be sufficient for the number of kids on her route. The smaller buses are also lower to the ground and slightly easier to get on and off. The driver also commented that the times between the stops are tight; it would be difficult to stick to the schedule of there were riders at each stop (due to required record keeping).

13. How are program statistics tracked and reported? Are the right indicators being used to report the program results?

Each driver records which stop riders get on and off and what kind of fare they pay (one-way or return).

Thinking about the program results one year later…

14. Were there any unanticipated or unintended outcomes?

The driver explained that she does occasionally pick up riders in the afternoon who did not take THE MET in the morning, noting that they got to the destination by other means earlier in the day.

15. What factors explain the observed results? 16. What lessons can be learned based on the results to date of THE MET pilot program? 17. Are the program results worth the resources invested?

30

Page 60

Did not ask.

18. What key changes should be made to enhance THE MET and increase ridership on the remaining routes?

Consider adding a stop at Georgian Bay District High School; the bus route passes right by the school and can use the existing loop to avoid disrupting traffic on the street. The driver also suggested doing more outreach and advertising at areas where residents congregate (e.g., schools, community centres, libraries, etc.). She noted that at least one rider has asked to be dropped off at her home which is on the way to the nearest bus stop on the return trip, as it would be easier for her to carry her shopping.

19. What should be considered if you want to repeat this or conduct a similar pilot program? 20. Are there alternative solutions or programs that might address the needs of rural residents? 21. What are some of the positive outcomes that have resulted from the program?

Did not ask.

31

Page 61

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Route 1 Passenger Friday, February 24, 2017

Knowledge and Awareness Purpose: Assess current awareness of THE MET.

1. What are your favourite places in Muskoka? How do you usually get to these places?

Did not ask.

2. How many cars are available for you to use at home?

We are a one car family. My husband is a cab driver and uses the car for work.

3. Have you used The Muskoka Extended Transit System (THE MET) to visit these places? a. Yes [continue to Question 3] b. No [skip to Question 22]

Yes.

4. How did you first hear about THE MET? a. Flyer b. Route posters c. Road side sign d. Radio e. Television f. Newspaper g. Social media h. Word of mouth ______i. Other ______

My husband told me about THE MET, but I don’t know how he first heard about it. I was able to get more information from the post office.

5. Which THE MET bus route do you use? a. Route 1 – Dwight/Dorset to Huntsville b. Route 2 – Baysville to Huntsville c. Route 4 – Glen Orchard to Gravenhurst d. Route 6 – MacTier to Bracebridge e. Route 7 – Honey Harbour to Midland f. Route 8 – Ryde/Barkway to Gravenhurst

I use Route 1 – Dwight/Dorset to Huntsville about once every two months to get into Dorset.

32

Page 62

Understanding Community Needs Purpose: Understand how THE MET benefits residents.

6. Do you use THE MET to get to programs and services (i.e., doctor’s appointments, clubs, classes, etc.) offered in your community? a. Yes [continue to Question 6] b. No [skip to Question 8] 7. Which programs and services do you use THE MET to get to? When are where are they offered?

I use THE MET to get to medical appointments in Dorset and coordinate my appointments with the bus schedule. The doctor’s office knows that I use the bus and schedules my appointments for late afternoon. There isn’t much else in Dorset except for a few nice restaurants.

8. How has THE MET helped you?

THE MET has helped me tremendously. I don’t need to depend on my husband to get to my appointments. He loses clients if he has to drive to Dorset.

9. Are there other programs and services you would like to use but cannot get to?

Did not ask – respondent mentioned that she does not get out much.

Understanding User Experiences Purpose: Understand how users experience THE MET.

10. Is the closest bus stop on your route in a convenient location? If not, please explain. 11. How do you get to the bus stop on your route?

Yes – it’s right across from the post office, which is about a five minute walk from my house. It couldn’t get any better unless the driver picked me up at my house. But that actually wouldn’t work because the bus is too large to manoeuvre off the highway, don’t change it.

12. Do you feel comfortable and safe at the bus stop?

Yes, it’s right in front of the seniors’ home. I’ve never had a problem waiting for the bus. I may need to stand on the street so the driver sees me from time to time.

13. In your experience, are the buses typically on time?

Yes, the driver sticks pretty close to the schedule. There were two occasions where I waited for half an hour and the bus did not come. They were very apologetic when I called about it.

14. Do you find the buses comfortable and easy to use?

33

Page 63

It’s a school bus – there isn’t much that can be done to make them more comfortable.

15. When you use THE MET, do you buy a one-way fare or a return fare? a. One-way [continue to Question 15] b. Return [skip to Question 16] 16. How do you get home if you buy a one-way fare?

I buy a one way fare. My husband picks me up in Dorset because THE MET doesn’t run late enough for the return trip.

17. The current fare for adults is $3.00 one way and $5.00 return, $2.00 for a return trip for youth, and $1.00 for a return trip for children. In your opinion, is the fare an appropriate price?

Three dollars is an excellent fare. I am on a pension and cannot afford a $50 dollar cab ride to Dorset.

18. Would changing the fare encourage more people to use THE MET? 19. Do you receive any subsidies to lower the cost of THE MET fare? a. Yes, please specify ______b. No

Did not ask.

20. Is the level of customer support for THE MET sufficient? Would you recommend any changes?

Yes, they usually call back when I have questions or want to remind them that I will be using the bus the next time it is scheduled.

21. What are the most challenging aspects, if any, of using THE MET?

There are none really.

Understanding Barriers to Participation Purpose: Understand barriers, real or perceived, to using THE MET.

22. Why haven’t you used THE MET?

Not applicable.

Communications and Marketing Materials Purpose: Understand the types of communication and marketing materials and channels that are most effective.

23. What kind of information about the MET would be most helpful to you or your neighbours?

34

Page 64

The brochure contains all the information I need, specifically the schedule.

24. Where do residents like you typically get information about District programs and services from?

Probably the post office – there are pamphlets, brochures and information about various things there. Barb who works at the post office is also very helpful. My husband hears everything when he’s in town.

25. What are the best ways to share information about THE MET with residents like you?

Word of mouth is the best way to share information. Dorset is a small town, if you talk to one person about something everyone will know about it.

26. What would you do differently to reach more people in the community and tell them about THE MET?

I would recommend the service, but I don’t get out much.

I live on the side of the highway; most of the neighbouring families have more than one car and don’t need a service like THE MET.

35

Page 65

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interview Feedback – Route 6 Passenger Thursday, March 2, 2017

Knowledge and Awareness Purpose: Assess current awareness of THE MET.

1. What are your favourite places in Muskoka? How do you usually get to these places?

I travel to Bracebridge and Huntsville for errands (e.g., shopping, to use the internet at the library, etc.) that I am unable to do in Port Carling. I usually drive.

2. How many cars are available for you to use at home?

I have one car which is almost 20 years old, and I live on my own.

3. Have you used The Muskoka Extended Transit System (THE MET) to visit these places? c. Yes [continue to Question 3] d. No [skip to Question 22]

Yes.

4. How did you first hear about THE MET? a. Flyer b. Route posters c. Road side sign d. Radio e. Television f. Newspaper –Noticed g. Social media h. Word of mouth ______i. Other ______

I saw an ad about THE MET in the local newspaper and then called around to get more information about routes and times. I did see brochures at the Port Carling township office (Port Carling) when I was paying my taxes.

5. Which THE MET bus route do you use? a. Route 1 – Dwight/Dorset to Huntsville b. Route 2 – Baysville to Huntsville c. Route 4 – Glen Orchard to Gravenhurst d. Route 6 – MacTier to Bracebridge e. Route 7 – Honey Harbour to Midland f. Route 8 – Ryde/Barkway to Gravenhurst

36

Page 66

I use Route 6 – MacTier to Bracebridge and get on the bus at Port Carling.

Understanding Community Needs Purpose: Understand how THE MET benefits residents.

6. Do you use THE MET to get to programs and services (i.e., doctor’s appointments, clubs, classes, etc.) offered in your community? a. Yes [continue to Question 6] b. No [skip to Question 8] 7. Which programs and services do you use THE MET to get to? When are where are they offered?

Yes, I use THE MET to get to appointments, do errands (e.g., banking, groceries, shopping, use the library) and visit friends, once maybe sometimes two times a month.

8. How has THE MET helped you?

I believe that public transit helps saves our environment and will use the bus instead of driving when possible. My car is over 20 year old and I am on a fixed income, so I am trying to extend the car’s lifespan as much as possible. Using THE MET helps maintain my household budget. I am also not able to drive long distances due to health problems, if I take the bus, I can relax on the journey.

There is another woman who uses the bus for medical appointments a lot, and does not have a car; THE MET makes a difference in her situation. You get to know people’s stories when you see them on the bus. A number of people who ride the bus are seniors and a lot of them live on a low-income. It is serving the people who need it.

9. Are there other programs and services you would like to use but cannot get to?

No, as I am still able to use my car.

Understanding User Experiences Purpose: Understand how users experience THE MET.

10. Is the closest bus stop on your route in a convenient location? If not, please explain. 11. How do you get to the bus stop on your route?

Not exactly – the closest stop to me is on the west side of Port Carling. I drive to the bus stop which is 10 km away at the community centre.

I did try to get a stop added on the east side of Port Carling, which would be a 4-5 km drive. There is a public parking lot on the east side of Town that is ploughed regularly in the winter. I spoke to Hammond Transportation and staff at the District but was not able to get a definite answer about a closer stop,

37

Page 67

even though I followed-up several times over a the course of a few months. My impression is that the District does not have enough staff to run this project.

12. Do you feel comfortable and safe at the bus stop?

Yes.

13. In your experience, are the buses typically on time?

Yes. I only waited for a long time once when it was a snow day, but did not know. Since then, I do make it a point to check if there is a snow day if I am planning to use THE MET.

14. Do you find the buses comfortable and easy to use?

Yes – school buses are not built for comfort. It can be a bit rough, but that’s OK.

15. When you use THE MET, do you buy a one-way fare or a return fare? a. One-way [continue to Question 15] b. Return [skip to Question 16] 16. How do you get home if you buy a one-way fare?

I purchase a return fare.

17. The current fare for adults is $3.00 one way and $5.00 return, $2.00 for a return trip for youth, and $1.00 for a return trip for children. In your opinion, is the fare an appropriate price?

It’s fair and reasonable.

18. Would changing the fare encourage more people to use THE MET?

I think the focus should be on getting the word out about THE MET so more people know about it. The most number of people I have seen on the bus is 10. Ridership is not heavy yet. When I mention it to people, they often do not know about it. My experience has been that 8 or 9 out of 10 people hear it from me for the first time. Educate people about why this is an important service.

I know it was free for two months, but I’m not sure if there was a difference in ridership. It could take a long time to see consistent ridership. It took me a long time to change the way I do things in order to take the bus (e.g., reorganize my schedule, coordinate errands, etc.) and I was motivated to take transit. That takes time! Don’t expect that change in behaviour to happen over a year. The break in service of the summer did impact this as I had to re-adapt myself to start using the bus again.

19. Do you receive any subsidies to lower the cost of THE MET fare? a. Yes, please specify ______b. No

38

Page 68

Did not ask.

20. Is the level of customer support for THE MET sufficient? Would you recommend any changes?

The District staff need to follow-up with residents if they have a question. Perhaps more staff are needed. My impression is that someone came on very late in the pilot. Public transportation is a high priority that warrants an experienced person to work at it and help address the issue.

21. What are the most challenging aspects, if any, of using THE MET?

It can be challenging to get all my errands done between the time I am dropped off and picked up. Another hour would be plenty. I do have to walk more than I normally would once I am in town, which is a challenge, but it helps me get some exercise. Accessibility is not an issue for me specifically. The bus driver is very helpful if I do need assistance carrying bags onto the bus. I haven’t met anyone with a real disability riding the bus, but that could be why.

Adding a second run during the week would be more valuable than adding another run on the same day, although a later bus could benefit youth or students.

Understanding Barriers to Participation Purpose: Understand barriers, real or perceived, to using THE MET.

22. Why haven’t you used THE MET?

Not applicable.

Communications and Marketing Materials Purpose: Understand the types of communication and marketing materials and channels that are most effective.

23. What kind of information about the MET would be most helpful to you or your neighbours?

When I first learned about THE MET, I wanted to know about the routes, schedules and fares.

24. Where do residents like you typically get information about District programs and services from?

I get information mostly from the local newspaper and through word of mouth.

25. What are the best ways to share information about THE MET with residents like you?

39

Page 69

All of the townships should have information about THE MET on their websites. I know that almost every business or store I visit plays The Moose radio station. I don’t personally use social media, but it could be an incredible marketing tool.

26. What would you do differently to reach more people in the community and tell them about THE MET?

Circulate information about THE MET at community centres in Port Carling and Milford Bay as they get a lot of traffic. Other suggestions include the Legion, libraries and community bulletin boards.

There are many organizations with shared interests that the District could approach to promote THE MET through their networks (e.g., agencies, community organizations). There are also other organizations that would be interested in the environmental benefits of THE MET that also have incredible networks (e.g., Muskoka Field Naturalists, Muskoka Heritage Foundation, Muskoka Watershed Council, and Friends of Muskoka Watershed, Muskoka Natural Food Market).

Huntsville has a local bus system that the District should look at to see what has worked well or as a resource.

40

Page 70

Muskoka Extended Transit Pilot Evaluation Key Informant Interviews Feedback – Student (Route 7) Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Knowledge and Awareness Purpose: Assess current awareness of THE MET.

1. What are your favourite places in Muskoka? How do you usually get to these places?

Victoria Harbour and Midland – everything [you need] is located there.

2. How many cars are available for you to use at home?

Student does not have access to parents’ cars during the week.

3. Have you used The Muskoka Extended Transit System (THE MET) to visit these places? e. Yes [continue to Question 3] f. No [skip to Question 22]

Yes; student was interviewed on the Route 7 bus. Student explained that he occasionally uses THE MET to get to school. Regular school bus transportation is early; if he misses the bus or his first class is later in the day he will use THE MET if he cannot get a ride with friends.

4. How did you first hear about THE MET? a. Flyer b. Route posters c. Road side sign d. Radio e. Television f. Newspaper g. Social media h. Word of mouth ______i. Other ______

First heard about THE MET via a road-side sign near Waubaushene and subsequently visited the program website to learn about routes and schedules.

5. Which THE MET bus route do you use? a. Route 1 – Dwight/Dorset to Huntsville b. Route 2 – Baysville to Huntsville c. Route 4 – Glen Orchard to Gravenhurst d. Route 6 – MacTier to Bracebridge e. Route 7 – Honey Harbour to Midland

41

Page 71

f. Route 8 – Ryde/Barkway to Gravenhurst

Route 7 – Honey Harbour to Midland. The student got on at Waubaushene and off at Midland/Georgian Bay Hospital; he walked to Georgian Bay District High School from there.

Understanding Community Needs Purpose: Understand how THE MET benefits residents.

6. Do you use THE MET to get to programs and services (i.e., doctor’s appointments, clubs, classes, etc.) offered in your community? a. Yes [continue to Question 6] b. No [skip to Question 8]

The student noted that other riders typically get off at Mountainview Mall or Walmart in Midland; other riders get off the bus after him.

7. Which programs and services do you use THE MET to get to? When are where are they offered?

The student uses THE MET to get to Georgian Bay District High School located near the Midland/Georgian Bay Hospital.

8. How has THE MET helped you?

THE MET provides an alternate way to get to school (i.e., if he misses the bus, cannot get a ride with friends or has a late start).

9. Are there other programs and services you would like to use but cannot get to?

Did not ask.

Understanding User Experiences Purpose: Understand how users experience THE MET.

10. Is the closest bus stop on your route in a convenient location? If not, please explain. 11. How do you get to the bus stop on your route?

Yes, it is within walking distance from home.

12. Do you feel comfortable and safe at the bus stop?

Typically, yes. On the day the student was interviewed, there was a 3-4 foot high snow bank between the sidewalk and street that required walking around and on the street to get on the bus. The student noted that he preferred to stand on the sidewalk behind the snow bank rather than on the street.

42

Page 72

13. In your experience, are the buses typically on time?

Did not ask.

14. Do you find the buses comfortable and easy to use?

Did not ask. Did not observe any issues or difficulty using the bus.

15. When you use THE MET, do you buy a one-way fare or a return fare? a. One-way [continue to Question 15] b. Return [skip to Question 16] 16. How do you get home if you buy a one-way fare?

The student typically buys a one-way fare, and takes his regular school bus service home or gets a ride with friends.

17. The current fare for adults is $3.00 one way and $5.00 return, $2.00 for a return trip for youth, and $1.00 for a return trip for children. In your opinion, is the fare an appropriate price?

Yes; the student also noted that taking THE MET is less expensive than taking a cab which costs approximately $20 for his trip.

18. Would changing the fare encourage more people to use THE MET? 19. Do you receive any subsidies to lower the cost of THE MET fare? a. Yes, please specify ______b. No 20. Is the level of customer support for THE MET sufficient? Would you recommend any changes? 21. What are the most challenging aspects, if any, of using THE MET?

Did not ask.

Understanding Barriers to Participation Purpose: Understand barriers, real or perceived, to using THE MET.

22. Why haven’t you used THE MET?

Not applicable.

Communications and Marketing Materials Purpose: Understand the types of communication and marketing materials and channels that are most effective.

23. What kind of information about the MET would be most helpful to you or your neighbours?

43

Page 73

Did not ask.

24. Where do residents like you typically get information about District programs and services from? 25. What are the best ways to share information about THE MET with residents like you?

He suggested using online tools to inform residents about THE MET as he initially accessed information about Route 7 on the program website.

26. What would you do differently to reach more people in the community and tell them about THE MET?

The student suggested doing more outreach at local secondary schools and noted that he is surprised that more students do not use the service. He did not feel that increasing bus service (i.e., daily) would be beneficial at the moment because very few people use the bus.

Additional Notes • Not all bus stops had THE MET signs; those that did were small and not visible. Suggestion to make the signs bigger and to include route and schedule information by adapting route flyers. • Ask drivers or Scott Hammond about refining bus stop locations based on local needs/context (e.g., traffic patterns, available loops; stopping at local high school etc.). • Observed that many streets do not have sidewalks.

44

Page 74 Georgian College RV Hospital Barrie Lakehead Univ. Georgian College SM Hospital Orillia Hotel Washago 141 Main St. Gravenhurst Georgian College The Nest Dollarama Plaza Olivers Coffee SMM Hospital Bracebridge Smith’s Ultramar Port Sydney 1 King William St. Huntsville

D www.corridor11bus.ca 2017 SCHEDULE Effective April 1, 2017 = drop off only

ROUND TRIP Fares: THE 8:45 AM 8:40 AM 8:15 AM 8:10 AM* 8:00 AM 7:40 AM 7:20 AM 7:05 AM 7:00 AM 6:45 AM 6:30 AM OT OT OT OT OT NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH Corridor 11 Huntsville BracebridgeGravenhurstWashago Orillia Barrie D MONDAY, WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY 8:15 AM 8:30 AM 9:10 AM 9:25 AM 9:35 AM 9:35 AM 9:40 AM 9:45 AM 10:00 AM 10:15 AM Huntsville $15 $21 $27 $33 $43 Bracebridge $15 $12 $18 $22 $34 BUS

D Gravenhurst $21 $12 $13 $19 $28 * 12:05 PM 11:50 AM 11:45 AM 11:40 AM 11:35 AM 11:30 AM 11:15 AM 11:00 AM Transfer with Barrie Orillia line run, southbound and northbound passengers @ Georgian College Washago $27 $18 $13 $7 $11 Orillia $33 $22 $19 $7 $20 Barrie $43 $34 $28 $11 $20

1:50 PM 2:05 PM 2:10 PM 2:15 PM 2:20 PM 2:25 PM 2:40 PM 2:55 PM Children 12 years old and younger are half price

5:05 PM 4:50 PM 4:10 PM 3:55 PM 3:50 PM 3:45 PM 3:40 PM 3:35 PM 3:20 PM 3:05 PM ONE WAY Fares:

Huntsville BracebridgeGravenhurstWashago Orillia Barrie 4:40 PM 4:45 PM 5:05 PM 5:10 PM* 5:40 PM 5:55 PM 6:10 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM

Huntsville $8 $11 $14 $17 $22 Bracebridge $8 $7 $10 $12 $18 8:15 AM 8:10 AM* 8:00 AM 7:40 AM 7:20 AM 7:05 AM 7:00 AM 6:45 AM 6:30 AM 8:45 AM 8:40 AM Gravenhurst

OT OT OT OT OT NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH $11 $7 $8 $11 $15 Washago $14 $10 $8 $4 $6 Orillia $17 $12 $11 $4 $10 D

8:15 AM 8:30 AM 9:10 AM 9:25 AM 9:30 AM 9:35 AM 9:40 AM 9:45 AM Barrie $22 $18 $15 $6 $10 Children 12 years old and younger are half price Huntsville TUESDAY AND THURSDAY D

10:30 AM 10:15 AM 10:10 AM 10:05 AM 10:00 AM Bracebridge Gravenhurst 2:30 PM 2:45 PM 2:50 PM 2:55 PM 3:00 PM Washago Orillia 5:05 PM 4:50 PM 3:55 PM 3:40 PM 3:35 PM 3:30 PM 3:25 PM Barrie

4:40 PM 4:45 PM 5:05 PM 5:10 PM* 5:40 PM 5:55 PM 6:10 PM 6:15 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 PM Medical Appointments, Education & Training, Recreation, Employment,Page 75 Connect with Family & Friends The Corridor 11 Bus runs Monday to Friday, from Huntsville to Barrie and THE back, making stops along the way in Bracebridge, Gravenhurst, Washago Corridor 11 and Orillia. The Corridor 11 Bus does not run on BUS weekends or holidays. The Corridor 11 bus does not run Dec. 22, 2017 – Jan. 8, 2018.

Seats can be booked ahead by calling Hammond Transportation at 705-645-5431 or tickets can be purchased directly from the driver.

Supported by The District of Muskoka

Huntsville Bracebridge Gravenhurst Washago Orillia Barrie

www.muskoka.on.ca/Corridor11 Schedules and OnlinePage Info! 76 2017 SCHEDULE Effective April 1, 2017 ROUND TRIP Fares: THE

Huntsville BracebridgeGravenhurstWashago Orillia Barrie Huntsville $15 $21 $27 $33 $43 Corridor 11 Bracebridge $15 $12 $18 $22 $34 Gravenhurst $21 $12 $13 $19 $28 Washago $27 $18 $13 $7 $11 Orillia $33 $22 $19 $7 $20 BUS Barrie $43 $34 $28 $11 $20 The Corridor 11 Bus runs Monday to Friday, Children 12 years old and younger are half price from Huntsville to Barrie and back, making stops ONE WAY Fares: along the way in Bracebridge, Gravenhurst, Washago and Orillia.

Huntsville BracebridgeGravenhurstWashago Orillia Barrie Huntsville $8 $11 $14 $17 $22 The bus does not run Dec. 22, 2017 – Jan. 8, 2018, Bracebridge $8 $7 $10 $12 $18 or on weekends. Gravenhurst $11 $7 $8 $11 $15 Washago $14 $10 $8 $4 $6 Seats can be booked ahead by calling Orillia $17 $12 $11 $4 $10 Hammond Transportation at 705-645-5431 Barrie $22 $18 $15 $6 $10 or tickets can be purchased Children 12 years old and younger are half price directly from the driver.

D = drop off only MONDAY, WEDNESDAY AND FRIDAY TUESDAY AND THURSDAY Huntsville SOUTH NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH NORTH SOUTH NORTH 1 King William St. 6:30 AM 10:15 AM 11:00 AM 2:55 PM 3:05 PM 6:45 PM 6:30 AM 6:45 PM Port Sydney Smith’s Ultramar 6:45 AM 10:00 AM 11:15 AM 2:40 PM 3:20 PM 6:30 PM 6:45 AM 6:30 PM Bracebridge SMM Hospital 9:45 AM 11:30 AM 2:25 PM 3:35 PM 9:45 AM Olivers Coffee 7:00 AM 9:40 AM 11:35 AM 2:20 PM 3:40 PM 6:15 PM 7:00 AM 9:40 AM 10:00 AM 3:00 PM 3:25 PM 6:15 PM Dollarama Plaza 9:35 AM 11:40 AM 2:15 PM 3:45 PM 9:35 AM 10:05 AM 2:55 PM 3:30 PM The Nest 9:35 AM 11:45 AM 2:10 PM 3:50 PM 9:30 AM 10:10 AM 2:50 PM 3:35 PM Georgian College 7:05 AM 9:25 AM 11:50 AM 2:05 PM 3:55 PM 6:10 PM 7:05 AM 9:25 AM 10:15 AM 2:45 PM 3:40 PM 6:10 PM Gravenhurst 141 Main St. 7:20 AM 9:10 AM 12:05 PM 1:50 PM 4:10 PM 5:55 PM 7:20 AM 9:10 AM 10:30 AM 2:30 PM 3:55 PM 5:55 PM Washago Hotel 7:40 AM 5:40 PM 7:40 AM 5:40 PM Orillia * Transfer with Barrie Orillia line run, southbound and northbound passengers @ Georgian College SM Hospital 8:00 AM 8:30 AM 4:50 PM 8:00 AM 8:30 AM 4:50 PM Georgian College 8:10 AM* 5:10 PM* 8:10 AM* 5:10 PM* Lakehead Univ. 8:15 AM D 8:15 AM D 5:05 PM 5:05 PM 8:15 AM D 8:15 AM D 5:05 PM 5:05 PM Barrie RV Hospital 8:40 AM 4:45 PM 8:40 AM 4:45 PM Georgian College 8:45 AM 4:40 PM 8:45 AM 4:40 PM

Huntsville Bracebridge Gravenhurst Washago Orillia Barrie

www.muskoka.on.ca/Corridor11 Page 77 Schedules and Online Info!