Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee
Executive Summary
ELDERLY TRANSPORTATION SERVICES
Adequate transportation is important to the well-being of elderly persons. Dial-a-ride programs provide transportation to seniors for a variety of activities including medical appointments, personal shopping, and nutritional programs. Dial-a-ride transportation are typically provided using vans or minibuses, require advance reservations, and offer pick-up and drop-off transportation directly at a person’s home. These programs are important for individuals who cannot use more traditional means of public transportation and lack more informal sources of transportation.
The Legislative Program Review and Investigations Committee voted to conduct a study of elderly transportation services in March 1998. The study examined access and availability of publicly funded dial-a-ride programs targeted to the elderly and provided by transit districts and municipalities. Overall, the committee found:
no state agency has responsibility for program oversight because there is no state mandate for dial-a-ride programs for the elderly;
no single funding source exists, instead funding is a patchwork of federal, state, and local monies;
multiple delivery models exist making identification of programs problematic; and
the provision of dial-a-ride services for the elderly is largely driven by local concerns and delivered by municipalities or transit districts.
The committee found no regional approach to funding or delivery of dial-a-ride services could be mandated because although there are 15 transit districts in the state, not all towns belong to a district. Furthermore, many are not involved in delivering paratransit services beyond the mandates of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and they apply only in certain areas. The committee found of the 15 transit districts, only eight play an important role in delivering dial-a-ride services to the elderly. Furthermore:
not all towns that belong to a district participate in all of the transportation services a district may provide (thus some members of a transit district operate their own dial-a-ride programs even though the district also offers a program);
some transit districts let towns that are not members purchase services; and
transit districts are not required to accept municipalities seeking membership.
The way in which elderly transportation services are provided also varies. An extensive survey conducted by the committee shows transit districts provide dial-a-ride in 62 towns, 97 towns operate their own programs, and 10 towns do not offer a publicly funded dial-a-ride program to their elderly residents.
The committee also found the Connecticut Department of Transportation (ConnDOT) provided financial support to some towns and transit districts, for the operation of elderly dial-a-ride programs, while other towns must rely solely on their own funds. Although the use of federal and state transportation funds for dial-a-ride programs in some towns is based on historical funding patterns, this has led to broad funding inequities among towns in Connecticut. Specifically, 90 Connecticut towns benefit in some way from federal or state transportation dollars to operate dial-a-ride, while 79 towns do not.
Further complicating the funding picture is the loss of federal transit operating assistance for large urban areas under the latest reauthorization for public transportation programs (the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st century). To compensate for the elimination of those federal dollars to five of Connecticut’s large transit districts, the state legislature passed Special Act 98-6, which included a $2.5 million state appropriation for FY 99. Each of the five districts was allocated a share – ranging from about $128,000 in Milford to about $850,000 in Greater New Haven – to directly offset the losses in federal dollars.
There was no requirement that the transit districts use the state allocation for elderly dial-a-ride. In fact, the committee’s study finds the new appropriation of state funds is intended to maintain whatever services would have been impacted by the cuts in federal funds in each transit district, which was not elderly dial-a-ride in two of the districts. Although the money was not earmarked for elderly dial-a-ride, the $2.5 million appropriation signifies a greater share of elderly dial-a-ride financing is coming from state dollars.
In the absence of a single funding or service delivery model, the committee believes the only viable mechanism to distribute elderly dial-a-ride funds is on a town-by-town basis. The committee’s proposal concludes that funding for such a program would have to come from a new legislative appropriation, since state funding already allocated supports a wide variety of transportation services, and could not be redirected to fund elderly dial-a-ride without disrupting services currently in place. In fact the appropriations for those programs will likely have to continue into the future and increase if the state wants to maintain public transportation at the current level of services.
The committee determined that the recommended state/town matching grant program would also allow towns the flexibility to deliver new or additional elderly transportation services as they wish. Towns may provide the program themselves, pool funding with other towns to provide or purchase services jointly, or purchase them through a transit district.
The committee concluded it would be premature to recommend a state-coordinated service delivery model for elderly dial-a-ride because of the lack of progress made by ConnDOT toward coordinating services in its Waterbury pilot program. It is the only one of three statutorily mandated pilot programs that is operational, and that is in a very limited way, currently serving just ADA-eligible clients. Until the effectiveness of the Waterbury coordination program can be evaluated, it is not possible to determine if that model is the most effective way to deliver services to the elderly. Also, the lack of a transportation delivery structure that covers all towns does not currently exist, thus regional coordination of dial-a-ride is not an option to a great many Connecticut towns.
The committee also found several other legislative mandates giving ConnDOT broad authority over transportation planning and oversight have never been implemented. For example, the commissioner of ConnDOT is required to certify state agencies’ expenditures for paratransit services but has not done so. Also, ConnDOT was mandated to conduct a statewide survey of special transportation services and report the results to the committees of cognizance of the Connecticut General Assembly. The committee found although a draft report was written, a final report was never issued.
The recommendations of the committee are aimed at establishing a state/town matching grant program to provide new or additional elderly transportation services in all towns that wish to participate. The proposals also are targeted at improving ConnDOT’s planning and oversight of public transportation, especially in the area of paratransit services. Finally, administrative recommendations are made to formalize the selection process for the Section 5310 program, which funds the purchase of vehicles used in paratransit transportation programs, and improve ConnDOT’s oversight of the program.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Connecticut Department of Transportation should identify public transportation needs statewide, especially those needed by special populations, update transit district membership annually, and determine the type and geographic network of services provided by a transit district, either to members or nonmembers under contract. In addition, the department, as part of its public planning process shall establish statewide objectives for providing paratransit services.
2. The Department of Transportation shall provide a report on progress made in implementing the requirements of C.G.S. Sections 13b-4c and 13b-38n by July 1, 1999 and semi-annually thereafter to the committees of cognizance. The report shall include:
a detailed statement on the implementation status of each statutory mandate;
a methodology to evaluate the effectiveness of the current and any future pilot program;
any financial savings generated as a result of the pilot; and
ridership statistics as generated and maintained by the contracted broker or transit district.
In addition, beginning with the January 2000 report, using the evaluation methodology established, the report shall include the results of the effectiveness of the current and any future pilot program.
3. The Citizens’ Transportation Advisory Council established under C.G.S. Section 13b-38l be merged with the Connecticut Public Transportation Commission established under C.G.S. Section 13b-11a. C.G.S. Section 13b-11a shall be amended to incorporate the functions of the Citizens’ Transportation Advisory Council into the Connecticut Public Transportation Commission’s functions. In addition, the commission’s voting membership shall be expanded from 18 to 19 appointments and include one person aged 60 or older.
4. The commissioner of transportation, upon application by a town, shall, within available annual appropriations, make a state-matching grant. The grant shall be expended for demand-response transportation programs available to persons who are aged 60 or older.
The DOT commissioner shall determine the maximum amount of any such grant a town may be eligible to receive using the following formula:
90 percent of appropriated funds shall be apportioned on the basis of the share of the population aged 60 and older in a municipality relative to the state’s total population aged 60 and older, as defined in the most recent census or in estimates provided in the five-year interim by the Office of Policy and Management; and
10 percent shall be apportioned on the basis of a municipality’s square mileage relative to the state’s total square mileage.
Each town making such application shall provide a 50 percent match to the state’s funds. If a town does not apply for funding, that town’s portion shall revert to the General Fund.
Not later than 30 days after the Department of Transportation determines the grant amount, the department shall notify towns of the availability of grant funds.
Each town receiving a grant shall submit to the Department of Transportation the following information annually:
the number of unduplicated riders;
the number of trips (defined as one-way);
the number of miles traveled;
the number of trip denials; and
the number of hours vehicle is in use annually.
The department shall establish a standard form for the submittal of such information from towns.
5. Section 7-273n of the Connecticut General Statutes be repealed and replaced with a dial-a-ride grant program as proposed in the previous recommendation.
6. The Department of Transportation should require regional planning agencies to formalize the evaluation process to a ranking system and the department should communicate to the regional planning agencies how to implement it.
7. DOT shall not award future grants to any agency that has not complied with the reporting requirements; DOT shall inform all eligible agencies of this in the notifications of funding availability; and
DOT shall conduct a random sample of field audits of grantee agencies annually.
Go To Top
Return to 1998 Studies
Return Home