Public Transit Route Performance Reviews Annual Report for State Fiscal Year (SFY) 2017 February 2018 Prepared for VTrans by: Public Transit Route Performance Reviews SFY 2017 KEY OF VERMONT TRANSIT SYSTEMS AND DIVISIONS AT Advance Transit GMCN Green Mountain Community Network, Inc. GMT-Rural Green Mountain Transit-Rural (previously GMTA) GMT-Urban Green Mountain Transit-Urban (previously CCTA) MVRTD Marble Valley Regional Transit District RCT Rural Community Transportation, Inc. SEVT-The Current Southeast Vermont Transit-The Current (previously CRT) SEVT-The MOOver Southeast Vermont Transit-The MOOver (previously DVTA) TVT-ACTR Tri-Valley Transit, Inc. ACTR (previously ACTR) TVT-Stagecoach Tri-Valley Transit, Inc. Stagecoach (previously STSI) VABVI Vermont Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired 2 Public Transit Route Performance Reviews SFY 2017 Figure 1 illustrates the service areas of Vermont’s public transit providers. The areas previously served by ACTR and STSI are now shown as Tri-Valley Transit (TVT). Figure 1: Service Areas of Vermont’s Public Transportation Providers Source: VTrans, December 2017 3 Public Transit Route Performance Reviews SFY 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Public Transit Route Performance Report for state fiscal year (SFY) 2017 presents the results of VTrans’ annual performance evaluations for public transit services across Vermont. VTrans manages Vermont’s public transit program including monitoring transit performance. This report helps to ensure that public investment in transit is well spent by regularly conducting transit performance evaluations. For this annual evaluation, VTrans grouped public transit routes and services throughout the state in like categories, such as Urban, Small Town, and Demand Response. Peer-based performance measures for each category were applied to assess the productivity of the services in terms of ridership and the cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per ride provided. VTrans also evaluated the Elders and Persons with Disabilities (E&D) Transportation Program and the local share of transit operating budgets. In SFY 2017 Vermont’s public transit systems provided 4.69 million In SFY 2017 trips. Just under half of those rides were provided in the Chittenden Vermont’s public County region, and the other half was spread throughout the rest of transit systems the state. Statewide public transit ridership had steadily increased provided 4.69 million from SFY 2012 through SFY 2015, but in SFY 2016 experienced a 6% trips. This past year decrease, namely due to a poor 2015/2016 winter ski season and a saw a 1% decrease in modest decrease in GMT-Urban’s ridership following a route ridership. redesign. Tourism routes that saw significant declines in ridership in SFY 2016 recovered in SFY 2017. In fact, the tourism services saw a 32% increase in overall ridership from the previous year. Most tourism routes experienced double-digit percentage increases in ridership. Other types of services also showed significant increases in ridership, in particular the Volunteer and Demand Response services. While the statewide local share percentage remained stable at 28%, six of ten transit systems/divisions increased their local share in SFY 2017. SFY 2017 was the first-year local funding for the rural providers combined, reached the statewide goal of 20% of the transit operating budget. Policy regarding underperforming routes was established in the most recent Vermont Public Transit Policy Plan (2012). Where routes are shown to be underperforming through the analysis in this report, VTrans works proactively with the subject public transit provider to determine what, if any, strategies may result in increased performance for the route. VTrans also used the results of this performance evaluation to implement the first-year pilot of its Transit Incentive Program. 4 Public Transit Route Performance Reviews SFY 2017 INTRODUCTION This report is developed annually to document the results of performance evaluations for public transit services across Vermont. The results are presented to the Legislature of the State of Vermont as part of VTrans’ consolidated transportation system and activities report to the House and Senate Committees on Transportation. The Vermont Agency of Transportation’s Policy, Planning, and Intermodal Development (PPAID) Division, specifically the Public Transit Section, is responsible for managing the state’s Public Transit Program. This report documents the Public Transit Section’s monitoring efforts to ensure that public investment in transit is well spent. Vermont’s transit agencies have undergone some organizational changes in the last few years. On July 1, 2017, ACTR and STSI formally merged and now operate under the name Tri-Valley Transit (TVT). Services provided by ACTR are shown as TVT-ACTR and the services provided by STSI are shown as TVT-Stagecoach. In this report, SEVT continues to operate two divisions, The MOOver and The Current. Green Mountain Transit continues to operate two divisions; GMT-Urban and GMT-Rural. For the purposes of this annual performance evaluation, the divisions for GMT, SEVT, and TVT are analyzed separately. Therefore, while the public recognizes seven transit systems in Vermont, this performance evaluation covers ten transit systems and divisions, plus the Volunteer Driver services provided by VABVI and the Intercity bus services provided by Greyhound and Vermont Translines. Only the Intercity routes that receive financial assistance from VTrans are reviewed in this report. Other Intercity services (e.g., Megabus and Greyhound’s Montreal to Boston route) operate in Vermont and cover their costs through fare revenue, arguably making them the most productive transit routes in the state. However, the private carriers do not provide data on these routes to VTrans. The SFY 2017 performance evaluation methodology did not include any significant revisions. This report continues to: • Assess Vermont’s transit services among nine service categories: Urban, Small Town, Demand Response, Rural, Rural Commuter, Express Commuter, Tourism, Volunteer Driver, and Intercity. • Identify performance trends over the past five years at the state, transit agency, and route levels. • Provide information on fare recovery and local share. • Provide an overview of the Elders and Persons with Disabilities (E&D) Transportation Program. Trips provided with E&D funds are examined as part of the Demand Response and Volunteer Driver categories, but the overall effectiveness of the program is reviewed under a separate heading. 5 Public Transit Route Performance Reviews SFY 2017 METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW VTrans conducts monitoring of transit services by evaluating statewide trends as well as route-level performance. Several data sources were used to develop this annual report: • The transit systems provide route-level performance data to VTrans in §5311 – Rural Transit Program Monthly Service Indicator Reports (SIRs). • VTrans collects data on the E&D Programs and volunteer driver trips from the transit providers annually. • VTrans monitors operating budget data by funding source (federal, state, and local) in its Grant Tracking spreadsheets and the transit systems provide their profit and loss statements to analyze local share. • GMT-Urban’s route statistics and budget data were provided directly by GMT. VTrans groups public transit routes and services throughout the state in like categories, described below. Peer-based performance measures for each category are applied to assess the productivity of the services in terms of ridership and the cost-effectiveness in terms of cost per ride provided. Transit Service Categories The service category descriptions below serve as guidelines; some routes or services may not meet every criterion. VTrans may also consider ridership and cost data to group similar services together. 1) Urban: Routes operating primarily in an urbanized area with all-day, year-round service. The city served by the route has a population of at least 17,500 people and high-density development. 2) Small Town: Routes operating in towns with 7,500 to 17,500 people with all-day, year- round service. The route typically stays within one town or two adjoining towns and does not run through long stretches of rural areas. 3) Demand Response1: Primarily service that does not operate on a fixed schedule nor on a fixed route; also includes routes that are “rural” in nature but operate less than once a day (i.e., service operates only once a week or a few times a month). 4) Rural: Routes operating in towns with fewer than 7,500 people or connecting two small towns running through undeveloped areas. These routes operate year-round with all- day service, but the frequency may be low (more than one hour between trips). 1 Excludes ADA complementary paratransit service, Medicaid transportation, and trips by human service organizations where the transit providers have no control over scheduling or the transportation provided. 6 Public Transit Route Performance Reviews SFY 2017 5) Rural Commuter: Routes that are similar to the Rural category above, but operate primarily during peak commute periods. These routes usually connect several small towns or villages with intermediate stops and operate primarily on state routes in rural areas. Some routes connect outlying areas to the nearby city, with a significant portion of the mileage in rural areas. 6) Express Commuter: Routes that operate primarily during peak commute periods and often include express segments. These routes