You asked for a description of the basis upon which the Department of Transportation (DOT) recently informed transit operators providing paratransit services pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of its position on "curb-to-curb" versus "door-to-door" service and its proposed policy to restrict any services in which DOT participates to "curb-to-curb" service. This report provides a brief explanation of the background and the basis for DOT's recent interpretation of ADA requirements. We can provide more detailed information should you require it.

SUMMARY

Since 1990, the ADA has required public transportation entities operating fixed route transit service to provide comparable specialized or "paratransit" services as a compliment to the fixed route service to anyone who qualifies under the act's definition of disability. Following inquiries from the Greater New Haven Transit District regarding several workers compensation claims made by drivers injured while helping riders in situations not involving boarding or leaving the vehicle (such as assisting a rider to or from his residence), DOT determined that there were significant differences in the passenger-assistance levels being provided by different operators of ADA services throughout the state.

In March, DOT informed the service operators that its position with regard to ADA-required services was that it would support only passenger assistance activities consistent with "curb-to-curb" service, thus limiting driver assistance to helping a user board or leave the vehicle. DOT maintains the position that ADA-mandated services are meant to be comparable to the fixed route service being provided, not to exceed it. DOT indicates that driver assistance inside residences or destinations is not consistent with the concept of public transportation to the extent that fixed route transit drivers do not provide such assistance. It maintains that ADA-mandated services are not required to provide any higher level of service or assistance than the public transit system at large. It informed operators that if they are providing service under direct contract to the DOT or as a subcontractor where the DOT is the responsible fixed route operator (eight systems in all), driver assistance must be limited to helping riders on or off the vehicle and the vehicle cannot be left unattended at any time.

It also informed all independent transit districts that are themselves the legally responsible fixed route operator in their region that they can provide the level of driver assistance that they choose but that (1) their insurance coverage may not extend to injuries sustained away from the vehicle and (2) the DOT must not be billed for any incremental costs incurred that are related to activities occurring away from the vehicle.

ADA COMPLIMENTARY PARATRANSIT SERVICE REQUIREMENTS

Among the ADA's many requirements are several intended to make public transportation services accessible to people with disabilities eligible for protection under the act (P. L. 101-336). Government entities are prohibited from discriminating against someone with a disability (defined by the act) in connection with provision of transportation service, and they must make their general transportation services available and accessible to those who qualify under the ADA. One of the ADA requirements is that any public entity providing fixed route transit service must also provide paratransit or other transportation services as a compliment for eligible people with service that is comparable to its regular fixed route service. Federal regulations specify eligible recipients, service area, service criteria, and other matters (42 U. S. C. § 12143; 49 CFR Part 37, Subpart F).

"CURB-TO-CURB" VERSUS "DOOR-TO-DOOR" SERVICE

The issue the DOT recently addressed in a March 5, 2002, memorandum to all transit operators providing ADA paratransit service relates to whether these operators should provide "curb-to-curb" or "door-to-door" service. Although there are no formal or legal definitions of these terms, the former (curb-to-curb) is generally understood to mean service from the point of boarding the vehicle to the point of disembarking from the vehicle and the latter (door-to-door) is understood to encompass assistance beyond the vehicle that could include, for example, helping the person into their home or their destination, meeting them in the medical office or business, or providing some other personal assistance beyond actual use of the transit vehicle itself.

According to Michael Sanders, DOT's transit and rideshare administrator, the memorandum followed a review of service policies on passenger assistance for various ADA service providers throughout the state. The review resulted from inquiries made by officials of the Greater New Haven Transit District (GNHTD) regarding several workers compensation claims resulting from personnel providing assistance to passengers of the New Haven ADA paratransit system ("My Ride").

Since DOT owns and operates the fixed route bus service (CT Transit) in New Haven, Hartford, Stamford, Waterbury, Meriden, Wallingford, New Britain, and Bristol it is the legally responsible entity for meeting ADA mandates in these areas. It uses five contractors to provide these services. In New Haven, the GNHTD is the DOT's contractor. (Sanders indicated that until about two years ago, GNHTD subcontracted with a private service provider for this service, but has since taken over providing the service itself. ) DOT also provides operating assistance for ADA service to eight other transit operating agencies elsewhere in the state that must also meet the ADA mandates.

Apparently, the GNHTD operates a "door-to-door" type service. DOT's review of passenger assistance policies following the GNHTD inquiries on its workers compensation claims showed variation in how different providers assisted passengers. Some apparently included assistance in getting to the door of a destination, pulling wheelchairs up stairs, helping to carry shopping bags into the residence, and going into doctor's offices or shopping areas to look for their riders, among other things.

DOT'S INTERPRETATION OF ADA REQUIREMENTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

The ADA requires paratransit services provided for ADA-eligible recipients to be "comparable" to the fixed route service the transit operator provides. Under the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) implementing regulations, for a complimentary paratransit service to be considered comparable to fixed route service it must, among other things, (1) be "origin-to-destination" service (unless it takes the form of a feeder service to an accessible bus route); (2) be provided within corridors with a width of three-quarters of a mile on each side of the fixed route; (3) be provided to an eligible person at any requested time on a particular day in response to a request for service made the previous day; (4) charge a fare that is not more than twice the full fare that would be charged for a trip of similar length at a similar time of day on the fixed route system; and (5) be available throughout the same hours and days as the operator's fixed route service (49 CFR § 37. 131).

The FTA regulations also prohibit the operating entity from limiting the availability of the complimentary paratransit service through restrictions on the number of trips someone will be provided, waiting lists for service access, or any pattern or practice that significantly limits availability. Substantial numbers of untimely pickups, trip denials or missed trips, or trips of excessive length are explicitly identified in the regulations as among the actions that are considered unacceptable patterns or practices.

Based on the information Sanders provided, and our discussions of the ADA requirements with him, it appears to be DOT's position that the complimentary paratransit service ADA requires is meant to be comparable to the fixed route public transportation service, not to exceed it. DOT's position appears to be based on both a strict reading of the explicit wording of the ADA and the FTA regulations and an interpretation of their intent to guarantee public transportation service to eligible recipients that is "comparable" to fixed route service provided in the same corridor. Thus, DOT believes that comparability requires the service levels to be the same.

DOT also maintains that the ADA and the FTA regulations, in addition to speaking directly only to the requirement that vehicle operators provide assistance to riders who need assistance in boarding or disembarking from a vehicle, address the contingency that someone might require additional assistance getting to and from the vehicle's boarding point by allowing for a companion or personal care aide to have access to the service as well as the eligible recipient. The regulations do not refer to the driver providing this type of assistance. This position appears to be consistent with the explicit requirements of the law and regulations.

Since a fixed-route bus driver does not help riders into their home or go into a residence or destination to find a rider, DOT argues that any such service a paratransit vehicle driver provides places the service level beyond comparability with the fixed route service and beyond what DOT is obligated to support.

DOT has raised several issues of concern with drivers providing assistance beyond boarding and disembarking from the vehicle. Specifically, these include:

1. While the driver is helping the rider to the door or into a building, the vehicle is being left unattended, sometimes with other riders in it.

2. Operators have begun to identify incidences of workers compensation claims involving drivers who may have sustained injuries while providing service beyond the explicit ADA requirements.

3. Insurance provided through the transit district consortium only covers activities involved in curb-to-curb service. (We were informed that the insurance carrier has provided this interpretation to at least one transit district. We have requested and are awaiting receipt of documentation of any specific wording of the agreement to this effect. )

4. Drivers providing services beyond those comparable to fixed route service affects vehicle and overall system productivity and, since system demand is significant and growing and service cannot be restricted, puts the ADA paratransit program under both operational and financial burdens that are difficult to control.

5. Some users who require significant assistance beyond boarding or leaving a vehicle should probably be getting it through the private sector, which is capable of providing such help, rather than through public transportation, which is not designed to provide it. This would make the pubic transportation service more available to others.

DOT also indicated that the passenger-assistance issue is complicated by the fact that five areas, including New Haven, had door-to-door paratransit services before the ADA law was passed. In effect, these areas were already providing service levels to riders that exceeded ADA requirements. The programs have been providing the same level of service to all riders regardless of whether or not they were ADA service eligible.

DOT MEMORANDUM TO ADA PARATRANSIT SERVICE PROVIDERS

In its March 5, 2002 memo to the service providers DOT stated that it "encourages only Curb-to-Curb service. " It stated that if the operator is under direct contract to the DOT or as a subcontractor where the DOT is the legally responsible fixed route operator, service must be limited to the curbside. Drivers can pull into a driveway if that is the safest way to pickup or discharge the passenger but cannot leave the vehicle unattended.

The DOT memorandum also states that if the operator is an independent transit district and the legally responsible fixed route operator, it has the option of deciding the type of service it will provide, but it must be aware that the consortium insurance coverage does not extend to activities beyond the curbside. This might require additional insurance coverage for which the DOT cannot be billed.

Finally, the memorandum stated that the DOT must not be billed for any additional service costs associated with door-to-door transportation, including driver time, operating hours, accidents, or driver compensation of any kind where an injury occurred away from the vehicle.

Information supplied to our office by DOT indicates that it intends to do a "soft" implementation of this policy following public meetings and consideration of exceptions. Apparently, after this process is completed, it intends to issue a directive that will clearly state its policy on driver assistance and explain any exceptions it will recognize. It expects that this final policy will apply strictly only to the eight ADA services areas the state owns. The policy would not apply to non-ADA services offered locally by towns or transit districts or services funded locally without DOT financial assistance. However, pending the final policy, DOT may not allow incremental costs for the extra services as eligible costs for reimbursement from its bus operations or handicapped access appropriations.

JF: ts