City of Albuquerque Transit Department

**Albuquerque, New Mexico**

ADA Complementary Paratransit Service

Compliance Review

September 12--15, 2005

*Summary of Observations*

**Prepared for**

**Federal Transit Administration**

**Office of Civil Rights**

**Washington, DC**

**Prepared by**

**Planners Collaborative, Inc.**

**with**

**TranSystems Corp.**

**Final Report: February 15, 2007**

**CONTENTS**

1\.

[**Purpose of the Review** 1](#purpose-of-the-review)

2\. [**Overview of the Review** 3](#overview-of-the-review)

3\. [**Background** 8](#background)

4\. [**Summary of Findings** 18](#summary-of-findings)

5\. [**ADA Complementary Paratransit Service Criteria**
26](#ada-complementary-paratransit-service-criteria)

6\. [**ADA Complementary Paratransit Eligibility Determinations**
30](#ada-complementary-paratransit-eligibility-determinations)

7\. [**Telephone Access** 45](#telephone-access)

8\. [**Trip Reservations** 50](#trip-reservations)

9\. [**Service Performance** 58](#service-performance)

10\. [**Resources** 76](#resources)

*Attachment A* City of Albuquerque Response to Draft Report

*Attachment B* On-Site Review Schedule

*Attachment C* Mini Ride Service Policy Information

*Attachment D* Mini Ride Complaint Form

*Attachment E* ADA Paratransit Eligibility Materials

*Attachment F* Sample No-Show Suspension Letters

*Attachment G* January 30, 2004 Memorandum Regarding Placement List

*Attachment H* Driver Interview Form

*Attachment I* Mini Ride Fleet Roster

*Attachment J* Mini Ride Fleet Preventative Maintenance Report

*Attachment K* August 2005 Road Call Tracking Sheet

*Attachment L* Transit Department Proposed FY06 Budget Summary

# **Purpose of the Review**

Public entities that operate fixed route transportation services for the
general public are required by the U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT) regulations implementing the Americans with Disabilities Act of
1990 (ADA) to provide ADA complementary paratransit service for persons
who, because of their disability, are unable to use the fixed route
system. These regulations (49 CFR Parts 27, 37, and 38) include six
service criteria, which must be met by ADA complementary paratransit
service programs. Section 37.135(d) of the regulations requires that ADA
complementary paratransit services meet these criteria by January 26,
1997.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is responsible for ensuring
compliance with the ADA and the DOT regulations. As part of its
compliance efforts, FTA, through its Office of Civil Rights, conducts
periodic reviews of fixed route transit and ADA complementary
paratransit services operated by grantees.

A main purpose of the paratransit reviews is to assist the transit
agency and FTA in determining whether capacity constraints exist in ADA
complementary paratransit services. The reviews examine policies and
standards related to service capacity constraints such as those measured
by on-time performance, on-board travel time, telephone hold times, trip
denials, and any other trip-limiting factors. The reviews consider
whether there are patterns or practices of a substantial number of trip
limits, trip denials, early or late pickups or arrivals after desired
arrival (or appointment) times, long trips, or long telephone hold times
as defined by established standards (or typical practices if standards
do not exist). The examination of patterns or practices includes looking
not just at service statistics, but also at basic service records and
operating documents, and observing service to determine whether records
and documents appear to reflect true levels of service delivery. Input
also is gathered from local disability organizations and customers.
Guidance is provided to assist the transit operator in monitoring
service for capacity constraints.

FTA conducted a review of ADA complementary paratransit service provided
by the City of Albuquerque Transit Department (City) of Albuquerque, New
Mexico, from September 12 to 15, 2005. Planners Collaborative, Inc.,
located in Boston, Massachusetts, and TranSystems Corp., located in
Medford, Massachusetts, conducted the review for the FTA Office of Civil
Rights. The review focused primarily on compliance of the City's ADA
complementary paratransit service with the requirement in the DOT ADA
regulations that this service be operated without capacity constraints
(49 CFR §37.131(f)). The review also examined compliance of the City's
ADA paratransit service with the requirements related to service area,
response time, days and hours, and fares. Sections 37.123 through 37.127
of the regulations require that a process be established for determining
who is ADA paratransit eligible and that determinations of eligibility
be made consistent with regulatory criteria. Section 37.131(a) of the
DOT ADA regulations requires that ADA complementary paratransit service
be provided in all areas where non-commuter fixed route service is
provided. Section 37.131(b) requires that "next-day" service be
provided. Section 37.131(c) requires that ADA complementary paratransit
fares be no more than twice the full fixed route fare. Section 37.131(e)
requires that ADA complementary paratransit service be provided during
all days and hours that fixed route service is provided.

This report summarizes the observations and findings of the on-site
review of the City's ADA complementary paratransit service. First, a
description of the approach and methodology used to conduct the review
is provided. Then, a description of key features of transit services
provided by the City---fixed route, demand responsive, and ADA
complementary paratransit service---is presented. All of the findings of
the review are summarized in Section 4. Observations and findings
related to the service area, days and hours, and fare criteria are
provided in Section 5. Observations and findings related to the
eligibility determination process are presented in Section 6.
Observations and findings related to the response time and capacity
constraint criteria are then presented in Sections 7 through 10. Please
note that findings do not necessarily denote deficiencies, but are
statements of observations made at the time of the compliance review.
Recommendations for addressing some of the findings are also provided.

The City received a draft copy of the report for review and response. A
copy of the correspondence received from the City on January 9, 2007,
documenting its response to the draft report, is included as Attachment
A.

# **Overview of the Review**

This review focused primarily on compliance with the ADA complementary
paratransit capacity constraints requirements of the DOT ADA
regulations. Several possible types of capacity constraints are
identified by the regulations. These include "wait listing" trips,
having caps on the number of trips provided, or recurring patterns or
practices that result in a substantial number of trip denials or missed
trips, untimely pickups, or significantly long trips. Capacity
constraints also include other operating policies or practices that tend
to significantly limit the amount of service to persons who are ADA
complementary paratransit eligible.

To assess each of these potential types of capacity constraints, the
review focused on observations and findings regarding:

-   Trip denials and "wait-listing" of trips

-   Trip caps

-   On-time performance

-   Travel times

Observations and findings related to two other policies and practices
that can affect ADA complementary paratransit use also are provided,
including:

-   Determinations of ADA complementary paratransit eligibility

-   Telephone capacity

The review team assessed ADA complementary paratransit eligibility
determinations to ensure that access to service was not adversely
affected by inappropriate denials of eligibility for the service or
unreasonable delays in the eligibility process. Telephone capacity was
assessed because access to reservations and customer service staff is
critical to the effective use of any ADA complementary paratransit
service.

While on site, the review team also examined public information and
service documents detailing policies for the ADA complementary
paratransit service related to the service area, days and hours of
operation, and fares.

**Pre-Review**

The review first involved the collection and examination of key service
information prior to the on-site visit. This information included:

-   A description of how the ADA complementary paratransit service is
    structured

-   Public information describing the ADA complementary paratransit
    service

-   A description of the City's standards for on-time performance, trip
    denials, travel times, and telephone service

At the request of FTA, the City made additional information available
during the on-site visit. This information included:

-   Copies of completed driver manifests for recent months

-   Six months of service data, including the number of trips requested,
    scheduled, denied, canceled, no-shows, missed trips, and trips
    provided by the City

-   A breakdown of trips requested, scheduled, and provided

-   Detailed information about trips denied in the last six months,
    including origin and destination information, day and time
    information, and customer information

-   Detailed information about trips identified in the last six months
    with excessively long travel times

-   Telephone call management records

-   Records of recent customer comments and complaints related to
    capacity issues: trip denials, on-time performance, travel time, and
    telephone access

In addition to reviewing the above service data and information, the
review team also reviewed one complaint forwarded to the Federal Transit
Administration's Office of Civil Rights alleging violations of ADA
requirements by the City in the provision of ADA complementary
paratransit service.

**On-Site Review**

An on-site review of the ADA complementary paratransit service took
place from September 12 to 15, 2005. The on-site review began with an
opening conference, held at 9 a.m. on Monday, September 12, 2005. City
representatives attending the meeting included:

-   Peter Berman, Transit Department Director

-   Leonard Garcia, Associate Director

-   Donald Marquez, Operations Manager

-   Kenneth Cox, Finance Manager

-   Bill Slauson, Manager of Planning and Marketing

-   Mary Alice Ayze, Customer Service Supervisor

-   Anthony Romero, Management Analyst/Grants Manager

-   Danny Holcomb, Transit Supervisor

-   Ismael Montanez, Assistant Operations Manager

-   Clarence Decker, Security Superintendent

-   Greg Montoya, Maintenance Manager

-   Melvin Chavez, Assistant Maintenance Manager

-   Dennis Stump, Assistant Maintenance Manager

-   Tim Cynova, Facilities Manager

-   Linda Brooks, Administrative Assistant

David Chia of Planners Collaborative, and Russell Thatcher and Rosemary
Mathias of TranSystems, Inc. represented the FTA review team. David
Knight and Linda Craig of FTA's Office of Civil Rights in Washington,
DC, also participated via telephone.

[]{.mark}

David Knight opened the meeting by thanking the City staff for their
cooperation in the review. He noted that the review team would conduct
the review with as little impact on ongoing services as possible. Mr.
Knight described the purpose of the review and emphasized that it was
intended to assist the City in providing effective ADA complementary
paratransit service. He noted that the review team of Planners
Collaborative and TranSystems had worked with FTA on numerous ADA
reviews and had significant expertise with ADA complementary paratransit
services. He indicated that in addition to reviewing the services for
compliance with regulatory requirements, the review team was available
to the City for advice and technical assistance. Mr. Knight then
explained the review process. He noted that:

-   Preliminary findings and an opportunity to respond would be provided
    at a closing meeting on Thursday, September 15.

-   A report would be drafted and provided to the City for review and
    comment.

-   The City's comments would be incorporated into a Final Report, which
    would then become a public document.

Russell Thatcher of TranSystems then presented the schedule for the
on-site review, including the parts of the operation that would be
observed by day. A copy of the review schedule is provided in Attachment
B.

Mr. Berman, the City's Transit Department Director, noted that in many
areas, such as service area, the City exceeded the ADA complementary
paratransit requirements. He said that he and his staff were available
to provide any assistance that was needed.

Following the opening conference, the review team met with City staff to
discuss the service structure and standards and the information
available on site. The team members also reviewed available paratransit
service reports that had been requested in advance.

In the late morning, the review team toured the paratransit call center.
They then began observing the trip reservations and scheduling process
in the afternoon. The team also reviewed telephone service performance
reports, began examining customer comments and complaints related to the
paratransit service, and began gathering information about the City's
eligibility determination process.

In the morning on Tuesday, September 13, the team continued its
observations of the trip reservations and scheduling process. Team
members sat with selected reservationists, listened in on calls from
riders, and recorded the handling of trip requests. Throughout the day,
team members tracked the process used to finalize schedules for the next
day of service. The review team also worked with City staff to develop
several special reports pertaining to on-time performance and travel
times. A review of completed driver manifests was also begun as a part
of on-time performance verification.

In the afternoon on September 13, two members of the team visited the
City's Daytona Road Garage to interview drivers and inspect paratransit
vehicles. The third member of the team began observations of the
dispatch process. Additional information about ADA paratransit
eligibility determinations also was gathered.

Observations of the dispatch process and service control continued on
Wednesday, September 14. The team also met with the Transit Department's
Finance Manager and a staff person from the City's Budget Office to
discuss planning, budgeting, and funding of the ADA paratransit program.
In the afternoon on September 14, the review team visited the City's
Yale Boulevard Garage to meet with maintenance staff. Information about
vehicle availability was gathered.

On Wednesday and Thursday, September 14 and 15, the team used data
collected to develop analysis of on-board travel times and on-time
performance. Estimates of on-time performance were developed using data
from randomly selected driver manifests. These estimates were then
compared to the City's service reports of on-time performance.
Comparisons between paratransit ride times and fixed route ride times
for comparable trips were also developed using data from completed
driver manifests. Additional observations of the reservations and
dispatching processes were also conducted.

The exit conference took place at 1 p.m. on Thursday, September 15.
Attending the exit conference for the City were:

-   Peter Berman, Transit Department Director

-   Leonard Garcia, Associate Director

-   Donald Marquez, Operations Manager

-   Kenneth Cox, Finance Manager

-   Anthony Romero, Management Analyst/Grants Manager

-   Danny Holcomb, Transit Supervisor

-   Greg Montoya, Maintenance Manager

-   Melvin Chavez, Assistant Maintenance Manager

-   Dennis Stump, Assistant Maintenance Manager

-   Tim Cynova, Facilities Manager

-   Linda Brooks, Administrative Assistant

Attending for the review team were David Chia of Planners Collaborative,
and Russell Thatcher and Rosemary Mathias of TranSystems. David Knight
and Linda Craig of FTA's Civil Rights Office in Washington, DC, attended
the exit conference in person.

Mr. Knight opened the exit conference by thanking the City staff for
their cooperation in the review. He then reviewed the process and timing
for developing a draft and final report. It was noted that the Final
Report would include both findings and recommendations, that the City
would need to address the findings, and that the recommendations would
be presented for the City's consideration as possible ways to address
the findings.

The review team members also thanked the City staff for the cooperation
they had received throughout the week. They then presented initial
findings in each of the following areas:

-   Eligibility determinations

-   Telephone access

-   Handling of trip requests and trip denials

-   On-time performance

-   Trip duration

-   Resources (vehicles, manpower, and financial resources)

Several general observations on operating practices, including
reservations, scheduling and dispatch, were also reviewed and
suggestions for improvements in procedures were noted.

Following the presentation of preliminary findings, there was a general
discussion of recent guidance and regulatory interpretations made by
FTA. These included requirements related to trip denials and rider
assistance beyond the curb. Peter Berman, the City's Transit Director,
indicated that the paratransit service had expanded significantly in
recent years and expressed concern about the requirement to budget to
meet all of the expressed demand for the service. He noted a need to
fund other transit projects in the area.

# **Background**

The City of Albuquerque Transit Department, a department of city
government, oversees the provision of public transportation services in
the City of Albuquerque and in Bernalillo County, New Mexico. This
includes operating, overseeing, and administering the provision of fixed
route bus service, bus rapid transit service, ridesharing services, and
ADA complementary paratransit service.

The City's service area covers 124 square miles and serves a total
population of about 398,000.

**Fixed Route Service**

The fixed route bus service, known as ABQ Ride, is operated directly by
the City. Fixed route bus service is provided with a fleet of about 138
buses. About 116 buses are used in peak hour operation. On weekdays, the
City provides service on 22 local routes, 13 commuter (peak hour only)
routes, and one limited stop (Rapid RIDE) route. On Saturdays, 20 local
routes and the Rapid RIDE route are operated. Fourteen local routes
operate on Sundays. About eight million rides are provided each year on
the fixed route system.

The Transit Department operates out of three main facilities.
Administration, customer service, customer information, planning, and
finance are centrally located at the City's Alvarado Transportation
Center located at 100 First Street in downtown Albuquerque. Maintenance
and vehicle operations are then conducted out of two garages. The Yale
Boulevard Garage is located just south of downtown. The Daytona Road
Garage is located in the western suburbs of the City.

Fixed route service is provided seven days a week. On weekdays, buses
are operated from 5:40 a.m. until 10:53 p.m. Saturday service is
provided from 6 a.m. until 10:28 p.m. Sunday service is operated from
5:55 a.m. until 7:49 p.m.

At the time of the on-site visit, the City was also operating a "Rapid
RIDE After Dark" service. This service operated Friday and Saturday
evenings on the one limited stop route that ran from the western
suburbs, through downtown and then to the north along major corridors.
The service was available until 3 a.m. City staff indicated that the
service had been implemented on a trial basis in May of 2005 and would
be ending in September 2005. Plans to operate the service in 2006 were
still being considered.

The one-way adult fare for the fixed route service is \$1.00. Students
and "honored citizens" (which include seniors, riders with disabilities,
and Medicare cardholders) pay 35 cents per ride. One child under the age
of five and riding with a paying adult rides for free. Additional
children under the age of five riding with a paying adult pay a 35 cent
fare. Several discounted fare passes are also offered. These include
monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, and annual passes for full-fare adult
riders, as well as passes for seniors, students, and employment agency
clients (TANF and Job Access).

About 60 percent of the fixed route bus fleet was accessible. At the
time of the on-site visit, the City was still operating some older RTS
buses that pre-dated the ADA.

**ADA Complementary Paratransit Service (Mini Ride)**

The ADA complementary paratransit service provided by the City is known
as "Mini Ride." The Mini Ride service is provided directly by the City.

The City completed a major reorganization of the Mini Ride service in
2005. Prior to February 2005, the Mini Ride service was organized as a
separate operation within the Transit Department. It had its own
operations center, located at the Yale Boulevard Garage. Vehicle
pull-out and pull-in also was managed at the same location.

In February 2005, the service was reorganized to be integrated with the
fixed route operation. The Mini Ride trip reservation function was
integrated with the fixed route customer information call center located
at the First Street Transit Center. Mini Ride schedulers and dispatchers
also were relocated to the Alvarado Transportation Center and integrated
with the fixed route dispatch operation. Mini Ride vehicles and drivers
were then split between the two fixed route garages, with the majority
of the service operated out of the Daytona Road Garage and some service
remaining at the Yale Boulevard Garage. Mini Ride road supervisors also
were split between the two garages, and the duties of fixed route and
Mini Ride road supervisors were combined.

The Transit Department Director explained that the reorganization was
intended to better utilize similar resources within the overall
department. For example, the combining of the Mini Ride reservations
staff with the fixed route customer service staff allowed both functions
to operate out of one call center. This then allowed for an expansion of
Mini Ride reservations hours from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m., since the fixed
route customer service call center operated until 8 p.m. Similarly, the
combining of road supervisors allowed these staff to assist with both
types of service.

It was clear during the on-site visit, though, that some issues remained
with the reorganization. Some staff reported that splitting the Mini
Ride operation by function between the three facilities affected the
level of communications that had existed between reservationists,
schedulers, dispatchers, road supervisors, and drivers when the service
had one central operations site. There also was a concern that the Mini
Ride operation would get "lost" within the larger fixed route operation.
During interviews by team members, some staff stated that assigning
fixed route duties to former Mini Ride staff affected their ability to
adequately manage the Mini Ride operation.

**Mini Ride Service Policies**

The City provided the review team with four documents that detail
current Mini Ride service policies. These included:

-   *City of Albuquerque Mini Ride Paratransit Service: How to Schedule
    a Mini Ride Reservation*

-   *City of Albuquerque Mini Ride Service: Responsibilities of a Mini
    Ride Passenger*

-   *Sun Van Service Rules*

-   *Sun Van and You: A Passenger's Guide to Public Transportation
    Services for Persons with Mobility Impairments*

The first two of these service descriptions are one-page public
information sheets. The third document is an internal City service
policy document. The fourth document was a public document but is no
longer distributed to the public. City staff noted that the one-page
public information sheets were most recent and were developed in 2004.
*Sun Van Service Rules* was last updated in 2000 when the service was
known as Sun Van. The *Passenger's Guide* was an older document dating
to about 1995. It is more detailed than *Sun Van Service Rules* and
contains some policies not mentioned in the later documents. It was
noted, though, that some of the policies in the *Passenger's Guide* are
now outdated and that policies in *Sun Van Service Rules* are the most
recent. All four descriptions of service policies are provided in
Attachment C.

The following paragraphs summarize Mini Ride service policies based on
information in these documents, as well as clarifications provided by
City staff.

**Type of Service**. The *Responsibilities of a Mini Ride Passenger*
public information sheet notes in bolded print that "Mini Ride is a
curb-to-curb not a door-to-door service." The *Service Rules* document
states on page 11 that "Drivers may assist the passenger in and out of
the vehicle, secure mobility devices as needed and assist with seat
belts. However, the passenger is expected to carry and take care of
articles he/she has brought with him/her. Drivers are not permitted to
enter private residences or lose sight of their vehicles at any time."
The *Service Rules* document also states on page 11 that "...drivers
will wait only 5 minutes for the passenger to come to the van and board.
Passengers are expected to watch for the van at the curb during the 30
minute window or wait where they can see the van and board it within 5
minutes."

City staff noted that drivers are instructed when they are trained to
only provide curb-to-curb service. There do not appear to be any
policies or procedures that address how assistance beyond the curb is to
be provided if it is needed by a rider. Ten of the 11 drivers
interviewed as part of the review indicated that, even though their
training was to provide only curb-to-curb service, they do provide
assistance beyond the curb when it is needed.

**Service Area**. The *Service Rules* document indicates on page 3 that
the Mini Ride service "operates throughout most of Bernalillo County,
primarily excluding the East Mountain area." Current public information
does not include a map of the Mini Ride service area. A map also did not
seem to be available from operations staff. Operations staff described
the area, though, as including all of Bernalillo County except for areas
in the Sandia Mountains in the eastern part of the county that were not
accessible by public roadways.

**Response Time**. Mini Ride trip reservations are taken at the combined
fixed route and paratransit call center seven days a week: Mondays
through Fridays from 6 a.m. until 8 p.m.; and weekends from 8 a.m. to 5
p.m. The combined call center is not staffed on six holidays each year
(Christmas, New Year's Day, Memorial Day, July 4, Labor Day, and
Thanksgiving). On these days, Mini Ride calls are recorded in voice mail
and staff review and respond to these calls first thing in the morning
on the day following each holiday.

Trip reservations are accepted up to seven days in advance.

**Days and Hours of Service**. As indicated in the *How to Schedule a
Mini Ride Reservation,* Mini Ride service is provided Monday through
Saturday from 5:30 a.m. until 10 p.m. On Sundays, service is provided
from 7 a.m. until 7:30 p.m.

City staff also indicated that Mini Ride trip requests also are accepted
for travel in the "Rapid RIDE After Dark" corridor until 3 a.m. on the
days that this service is in operation. However, the availability of
late night paratransit service does not appear to have been advertised
to the community and interviews with operations staff indicated that
instructions to provide Mini Ride service until 3 a.m. in the Rapid RIDE
After Dark area had been communicated to staff only in early September
(September 7, 2005).

**Fares**. The one-way fare for Mini Ride service is \$2.00. Fares can
be paid in cash, by check, or by coupon. A discount is offered for
payment by coupon. Coupons cost \$18 for a book of 10.

City staff indicated that personal care attendants (PCAs) accompanying
an eligible rider are not charged a fare.

A special fare policy related to subscription trips is detailed on page
10 of *Sun Van Service Rules*. Subscription riders must provide coupons
for all subscription trips for the week at the time of their first ride.
Any subscription trips for the week must be cancelled by 5 p.m. on the
Sunday of that week. If trips are not cancelled at that time, a full
week's fare must be paid. The City does not refund fares for
subscription trips that are not taken if riders cancel some rides during
the week.

**Trip Purposes**. As indicated on page 8 of *Sun Van Service Rules*,
Mini Ride service is provided for all trip purposes without
prioritization.

**Mini Ride Service Performance Standards**

The City has established the following service performance standards for
the Mini Ride program:

-   City staff indicated in the cover letter transmitting service
    information that it is their policy to "place each trip request
    without a denial."

-   Riders are given a 30-minute "ready window" of time within which
    they are asked to be ready and waiting for vehicles to arrive. This
    window is from 15 minutes before to 15 minutes after the initial
    scheduled time (negotiated time). Pickups are considered "late" if
    made after this 30-minute window (i.e., 16 or more minutes after the
    scheduled time).

-   There is no formal standard defining on-time arrivals.

-   Return trips from medical appointments are sometimes booked on a
    "will-call" basis. That is, riders are not given a set pickup time
    for the return, but must call for a ride when they are ready to be
    picked up for their return trip. Pickups on medical trip
    "will-calls" are considered on-time if made within 60 minutes of the
    time of the call.

-   City staff indicated in the cover letter transmitting service
    information that the travel time standard for the Mini Ride service
    is to perform 100 percent of trips in 60 minutes or less.

-   City staff indicated that the standard for telephone service
    performance is that no call should have a wait time that exceeds
    four minutes.

**ADA Complaints Received by FTA**

In 2004, the FTA Office of Civil Rights received a complaint about the
City's Mini Ride and ABQ Ride services (complaint #04-0228). The
paratransit issues raised in the complaint are summarized below.

-   Next-day service was not provided and that some trip requests made
    on a next-day basis are not served.

-   The complainant sometimes could not get trips scheduled at the times
    she needed.

-   There are long hold times on the telephones when calling to make
    trip reservations.

-   Door-to-door service or assistance beyond the curb is not available.
    Specifically, the complainant indicated that she might have to wait
    outside in the weather, sometimes for 30 minutes. Additionally, it
    was claimed that drivers will not come to the door to alert her that
    the vehicle has arrived and that dispatchers will not call to let
    her know the vehicle has arrived. The complainant indicated that she
    uses a wheelchair and has a vision disability which makes this a
    particular problem. The complainant indicated that if she does not
    see the vehicle waiting or hear the motor running in the street, the
    vehicle will leave and the she will be marked as a no-show.

-   Some of the drivers are very rude.

-   Capacity on the paratransit system is used to provide Job Access
    transportation and that the Job Access service is guaranteed and has
    priority over ADA paratransit service. The complaint stated that the
    Job Access service ties up capacity that is needed for ADA
    paratransit service. It also noted that service policies for Job
    Access riders are superior to those for ADA paratransit riders:
    specifically, that the fares are lower, the service area larger, and
    the companion policies more liberal.

-   Some customer service agents in the call center are rude.

**Consumer Comments**

Prior to the on-site visit, the review team contacted nine riders and
staff of local disability organizations for input on the Mini Ride
program. Each was asked for input on the eligibility determination
process, telephone access to the service, accommodation of trips
requests (trip denials), on-time performance of the service, and
on-board ride times. Each was also asked about driver performance,
vehicle design and condition, and for any other input on their
experiences with the program.

Virtually all riders expressed significant issues with the service.
There also was a general sense that the service had been declining in
quality in recent years and months. A few riders were familiar with the
reorganization of the service in early 2005 and indicated that problems
had become more significant since the reorganization. The following
paragraphs summarize the input obtained from riders and advocates who
were contacted.

Regarding the eligibility determination process, most of the riders and
advocates contacted felt that the process was fair and timely. A few
riders did, however, note some concerns. Three riders indicated problems
with the timeliness of eligibility determinations. One rider said that
in the fall of 2004 she called for an interview in October and nothing
was available until December 9. She had trips she needed to make in the
meantime, but could not take them because she was not yet eligible.
Others also indicated that they have not heard that riders are served if
the process takes more than 21 days. One rider complained that Mini Ride
requires riders to provided their social security numbers and said staff
told her that her application would be considered incomplete without a
social security number. Two of those contacted also said they had heard
that there was a recent effort to require that riders with vision
disabilities reapply and be recertified. They said they believed the
system was denying some riders with vision disabilities in this targeted
recertification process.

Regarding telephone access, several riders indicated that they
experienced long phone hold times. Riders also indicated that the phones
are very busy first thing in the morning with people calling seven days
in advance, the maximum advance reservation time, for their rides. One
advocate indicated that riders say they often leave messages about
cancellations, but that vehicles come anyway and they are marked as
no-shows.

When asked about the trip reservation process and the availability of
trips, several riders stated that reservations cannot be made based on a
desired drop-off time or an appointment time. They must state a pickup
time. Guidance to riders is given to allow at least 60 minutes travel
time and to allow 90 minutes between the initial pickup and any return
trip (or second) requested pickup time---to allow for the 60-minute
travel time plus the 15-minute windows on each side of the two pickups.
According to riders, subscription service also is very hard to get and a
lot of riders who travel regularly must call each week. Several riders
indicated that trip request times are "negotiated" plus or minus one
hour without consideration for trip needs. One person indicated he had
to leave in the middle of a concert because that was the only time
offered. Another person noted times when she had to leave work early
because that was the only time offered. Riders also indicated that many
people call seven days in advance, first thing in the morning, to place
trip requests. This is done to ensure getting a time close to what they
want. Many riders also indicated that they often are offered times more
than one hour from the requested time. They said that they don't think
that the City's system records these as denials.

Several riders noted that when trip requests cannot be scheduled while
they are on the phone, their requests are put into a "placement list" to
be handled by schedulers later. Riders said they must then call after 4
p.m. on the day before service to find out if the trip was scheduled and
what the pickup time is. They all indicated they do not consider being
on the placement list as a guarantee of service. They also indicated
that if they don't call to get the pickup time and make other
arrangements, the system does not call them, the vehicle will still show
up, and they will be marked as a no-show.

When asked about days and hours of operation, two riders mentioned
issues with the "Rapid RIDE After Dark" program. Both of these riders
said that Mini Ride service was not available past 10 p.m., even though
fixed route service ran in the Rapid RIDE After Dark corridors until 3
a.m. One advocate said that he "tested" to see if Mini Ride service also
was available those hours in that corridor by having an eligible rider
call and make a request. The rider was told that the service did not
operate that late. When the advocate raised this with management, he was
told that Mini Ride service was available until 3 a.m.

None of the riders or advocates contacted expressed any issues with the
availability of rides for any trip purpose. There was general agreement
that all types of trips were served without prioritization.

Several riders expressed concern that Job Access service was being
provided on the Mini Ride vehicles and that those trips were taking
needed capacity away from the ADA complementary paratransit service.
They all felt that the Job Access trips were getting priority during
peak hours and were creating peak hour capacity problems for ADA
paratransit eligible riders. They felt many trip requests were
"negotiated" outside of the peak (some more than an hour) because of the
guarantee given to Job Access trips.

Several riders indicated issues with on-time performance. A particular
concern that was expressed was that they often arrive very early to an
appointment. A few riders indicated issues with times being different on
the driver's manifest from what they were given.

Several riders indicated that when they call to check on a late pickup,
they are often told "five to 10 minutes." After 15 minutes or more they
call again and get a similar response. A few riders said they sometimes
call reservationists rather than dispatchers to get late trip
information and that the reservationists do not seem to spend the time
to actually check with dispatch, so they give a general answer.

Regarding on-board travel times, there was mixed input from riders. Some
felt ride times were excessive and that routing can be circuitous.
Others did not feel this was a problem.

Several riders contacted in advance indicated displeasure with the
complaint process. These issues are discussed in later in this section
of the report.

Riders contacted in advance had many comments about the fleet. Some
riders who use wheelchairs complained that the ride on the newer
minibuses is very rough. One woman who had a spinal cord condition said
that she experiences extreme pain caused by the ride. She much prefers
the minivans. Many of the riders complained about the "96s." They
indicated these vans have a front entrance door that is very low (one
woman who indicated that she is only 5\' 2\" tall said she must duck and
has a problem with the doors). Many riders also indicated these vehicles
are generally in poor condition, are dirty, and have securement systems
that are cumbersome and disliked by the drivers. They also said the air
conditioning systems on these "96" vans do not work. Several riders
indicated that it seems the vehicles break down a lot and that this is
one reason some trips are very late. Two riders who said they travel
with guide dogs indicated that they have had ramp-equipped minivans show
up for them that have another passenger on board who is using a
wheelchair. They indicated that the vehicles then do not have enough
space for them and their guide dog.

Comments on drivers were mixed, but mainly riders felt "some drivers are
good, others are not." Several said "most drivers are very good." The
biggest issue with drivers seemed to be that they did not get out of the
vehicle to look for riders or identify that the vehicle was there.

**Rider Comments on File at the City**

Prior to the site visit, the City provided the review team with written
materials describing the ADA complementary paratransit service complaint
process. According to the passenger guide, *Sun Van and You*, questions,
concerns, and compliments may be made by calling the Community Liaison
between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday. During other times,
customers may call the reservation line and speak with a shift
supervisor. The *Sun Van Service Rules* (dated August 2000) states that,
if needed, the Community Liaison will call the customer to get more
details and then investigate the situation to determine what action is
needed. The liaison will then call the passenger back to inform him or
her about what was done. The guide also indicates that if a passenger is
not satisfied with the action taken, he or she may appeal to the
Paratransit Operations Division Manager. If he or she is still not
satisfied, an appeal may be made to the Mayor's Advisory Committee on
Transit for the Mobility Impaired. Real-time complaints are handled by
the Community Liaison or Shift Supervisor.

The guide indicates that compliments are typed into a compliment form
and posted on the employee bulletin board, and a copy is put in the
employee's permanent file. Departmental "Star Awards" are given
annually.

As noted above, several riders contacted in advance of the on-site
review expressed dissatisfaction with the complaint process. Several
said that complaints made over the phone do not seem to have any
follow-up and that they are told to put complaints in writing. Some even
indicated that they have been told that they must hand deliver
complaints and cannot just mail them in. Several riders also expressed
concerns about retaliation if they complain and indicated that many
people will not complain for this reason. All indicated that there does
not seem to be any formal acknowledgement of complaints and no follow-up
indicating actions taken.

During the on-site review, it was noted that the complaint-handling
process had been changed recently. Staff acknowledged that in the
past---and as recently as late July/early August 2005---the former
Paratransit Division Manager accepted only written complaints and
comments. However, staff indicated that the policy had just been
changed. Customers may call, visit, or write Mini Ride to make a comment
or complaint. They also may call "311," which is the "Customer
Relationship Management" (CRM) group based in the Mayor's Office. All
city vehicles also have bumper stickers with a telephone number staffed
by the City of Albuquerque's Community Contact Center and residents are
encouraged to report poor driving. Reports are forwarded to the transit
agency, as appropriate. Real-time complaints (e.g., late rides,
dangerous situation) are forwarded to a supervisor for immediate
resolution.

For complaints that are submitted in person or on the phone, call center
customer service staff will complete a "Customer Comment Form"
documenting the customer's comment or complaint (see Attachment D). The
information from the form and other written complaints is then entered
into the "Customer Comments/Complaints System" computer database.
Comments and complaints are coded as "SV" (formerly Sun Van) for Mini
Van, "OP" for general fixed route comments/complaints, "MT" for
maintenance-related complaint for both paratransit and fixed route, and
"CS" for customer service. Comments and complaints are assigned a
tracking number and the information is entered in a text format.
Comments and complaints are categorized and typically related to one of
the following issues:

-   Compliments

-   "Customer misbehavior" issues

-   Early pickups or drop-offs

-   "Employee misbehavior" issues

-   Requests for service information

-   Late pickups or drop-offs

-   No-shows

-   Safety or vehicle condition issues

If the customer requests a response, that is noted on the form and the
Customer Service Manager will call to provide a response. Anonymous
complaints are accepted and will be investigated. The goal is to resolve
complaints in seven to 10 days.

The "Customer Comments/Complaints System" is an older DOS-based system
with limited and cumbersome reporting capability. All City staff members
have access to the system and can add comments or information, as well
as change and delete information. At the time of the site visit, the
City was in the process of redesigning the database and was considering
adoption of an Access-based database, with restricted access to
information and editing capabilities. The proposed system would ensure
confidentiality for both customers and employees, and would allow for
better and more specific tracking and responding capabilities.

From January through August 2005, the City received a total of 260
comments and complaints from customers regarding the Mini Ride service.
Of those, 92 percent were recorded as complaints, 5 percent were
recorded as information requests, and 3 percent were recorded as
compliments. Table 3.1 shows a breakdown of types of comments/complaints
by month. Employee misbehavior (95 complaints) and safety (83
complaints) were the most common complaints, followed by complaints
about late rides (28). The other 27 complaints were distributed among
the remaining categories.

It should be noted that the computer database did not appear to include
very many notations indicating that the complaints had been addressed or
resolved. During interviews with various staff supervisors and managers
it was apparent that there was some confusion about where complaints
were to be directed for Mini Ride service. This confusion may have been
compounded by recent management personnel changes.

Table 3.1 --- Mini Ride Complaints/Comments: January to August 2005

<table style="width:100%;">
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 18%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
</colgroup>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Category</strong></td>
<td><strong>Jan.</strong></td>
<td><strong>Feb.</strong></td>
<td><strong>Mar.</strong></td>
<td><strong>Apr.</strong></td>
<td><strong>May</strong></td>
<td><strong>Jun.</strong></td>
<td><strong>Jul.</strong></td>
<td><strong>Aug.</strong></td>
<td><strong>Total</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Employee Misbehavior</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>13</td>
<td>19</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>7</td>
<td>95</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Safety</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>11</td>
<td>18</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>17</td>
<td>8</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>83</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Late</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>5</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>6</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>28</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>No-show</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>9</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Other</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>8</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Customer Misbehavior</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>6</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Early</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Vehicle Condition</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td><strong>Subtotal Complaints</strong></td>
<td><strong>19</strong></td>
<td><strong>28</strong></td>
<td><strong>48</strong></td>
<td><strong>23</strong></td>
<td><strong>26</strong></td>
<td><strong>31</strong></td>
<td><strong>41</strong></td>
<td><strong>22</strong></td>
<td><p><strong>238</strong></p>
<p><strong>92%</strong></p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>Information</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>4</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>3</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>2</td>
<td><p>14</p>
<p>5%</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>Compliments</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>0</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>1</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>2</td>
<td>1</td>
<td><p>8</p>
<p>3%</p></td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong>Total</strong></td>
<td><strong>20</strong></td>
<td><strong>31</strong></td>
<td><strong>53</strong></td>
<td><strong>24</strong></td>
<td><strong>30</strong></td>
<td><strong>34</strong></td>
<td><strong>43</strong></td>
<td><strong>25</strong></td>
<td><strong>260</strong></td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td colspan="10">Source: Customer Comments/Complaints System.</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

#  **Summary of Findings**

This section of the report summarizes the findings made as a result of
the review. Please note that findings do not necessarily denote
deficiencies, but are statements of observations made at the time of the
compliance review. The bases for these findings are addressed in other
sections of this report. The findings should be used as the basis for
any corrective actions proposed by the City. Recommendations are also
included in the report for the City's consideration in developing
corrective actions.

**A. Findings Regarding ADA Complementary Paratransit Service Criteria**

1.  The City's current policy appears to be to provide only curb-to-curb
    service to Mini Ride riders. Policies and procedures do not indicate
    that assistance beyond the curb is to be provided, even if needed.
    This is not consistent with Section 37.129 of the DOT ADA
    regulations. A process to identify riders who may need this
    additional assistance also does not appear to be used. In practice,
    however, most Mini Ride drivers appear to provide door-to-door
    service, as needed.

2.  The City provides Mini Ride service in all areas where it provides
    fixed route bus service.

3.  On weekdays, there are three bus routes (#66, #155, and #158) whose
    service hours extend later than the Mini Ride service hours. On
    Saturday, Route #66's service hours extend later than the Mini Ride
    service hours. On Sunday, Route #66's service hours begin earlier
    than the Mini Ride service hours, and Route #21's service hours
    extend later than the Mini Ride service hours.

4.  The Mini Ride fare is \$2.00, exactly two times the fixed route cash
    fare for ABQ Ride.

5.  Subscription customers for Mini Ride service must pay the fares for
    all their scheduled trips for the week at the time of their first
    trip. If the customer cancels a trip later that week, or if Mini
    Ride has a no-show, the customer has still been required to pay for
    the trip and his or her average fare will exceed two times the fixed
    route fare.

6.  The City operated a "Rapid RIDE After Dark" fixed route bus service
    until 3 a.m. in main corridors from downtown to the west and north
    from May through September 2005. This service appears to have been
    operated without instructions to operating staff to provide
    corresponding expanded Mini Ride service in these areas. Instruction
    to begin offering expanded Mini Ride service appears to have been
    provided to staff in early September 2005. There also does not
    appear to have been any public information indicating that expanded
    Mini Ride service was available.

7.  Public information describing the Mini Ride service, and general
    transit service information, does not indicate that PCAs may travel
    with eligible Mini Ride riders free of charge and that companions
    are to pay the same fare as the eligible rider.

**B. Findings Regarding ADA Complementary Paratransit**

> **Eligibility Determinations**

1.  The City charges applicants a \$2.00 fare each way for rides to and
    from required in-person interviews and for rides to a licensed
    medical professional to get Part III of the application completed.
    The DOT ADA regulations indicate that the process for determining
    ADA paratransit eligible should not impose unreasonable burdens or
    "user fees" on applicants (49 CFR §37.125, Appendix D).

2.  The City requires that applicants provide their social security
    number (SSN) as part of the application process. The provision of a
    SSN is voluntary unless there is a law requiring that it be
    provided. Procedures for processing applications should be developed
    if applicants elect not to provide their SSN.

3.  City policy requires that riders who use wheelchairs have
    wheelchairs with working brakes in order to receive Mini Ride
    service. As part of the in-person eligibility interview, the City
    also appears to check wheelchairs for working brakes. Having working
    brakes on wheelchairs cannot be a prerequisite for receiving ADA
    paratransit service.

4.  City policy requires that applicants who are denied ADA paratransit
    eligibility must wait at least six months before they can reapply.
    While City staff indicated that this policy is not enforced, no
    policy should place a timeframe on reapplication for service.

5.  City policy requires that children under the age of 12 must be
    accompanied on Mini Ride by a "responsible person." A similar policy
    does not appear to exist for the fixed route service. The City
    cannot impose this restriction on Mini Ride passengers if it is not
    a policy that applies to all children under the age of 12 who ride
    the fixed route.

6.  While letters of determination that deny ADA paratransit eligibility
    include information about the right to appeal and instructions for
    appealing the decision, letters sent to riders determined to be
    conditionally eligible or who have a special designation attached to
    their eligibility do not include appeal information.

7.  All letters that inform applicants that they have been denied ADA
    paratransit eligibility appear to contain a similar statement: "The
    health care provider's statement did not reflect a mobility
    impairment that would prevent your using the regular bus at this
    time." The DOT ADA regulations require that more specific reasons
    for denial be included in letters of determination.

8.  One of the individuals who serves on the Review Board and who is
    involved in making initial determinations of ADA paratransit
    eligibility also serves on the Mayor's Advisory Committee on Transit
    for the Mobility Impaired that hears the appeals for eligibility.
    The DOT ADA regulations require that there be a "separation of
    authority" between those involved in the initial determination
    process and those involved in the appeals process (49 CFR
    §37.125(g)(2)).

9.  The City does not have a system for tracking ADA paratransit
    applicants as they go through the determination process. It
    therefore is not possible to easily determine if the process has
    taken more than 21 days and if an applicant should therefore receive
    presumptive eligibility for ADA complementary paratransit service
    until a determination is made. The City also, as a result, does not
    notify applicants of the availability of service, or enter
    applicants into the system as presumptively eligible, if the
    determination process exceeds 21 days. Public information and
    instructions about applying also do not inform applicants of their
    right to service if determinations are not made within 21 days of
    the receipt of a completed application.

10. In the past it appears that the City did not have adequate
    eligibility determination capacity to arrange mandatory in-person
    interviews in a reasonable period of time. In the fall of 2004
    applicants typically had to wait four to eight weeks for an
    in-person interview. Recent records indicate that additional
    determination capacity has been added and that in-person interviews
    are being scheduled in one or two weeks.

11. Some City staff appear to have made ADA paratransit eligibility
    determinations based on applicants' abilities to use fixed route
    service with an attendant. Section 37.123 of the DOT ADA regulations
    requires that eligibility determinations be made based on an
    individual's ability to use the fixed route system independently.

12. Mini Ride Supervisors appear to have overturned several staff
    recommendations to grant ADA paratransit eligibility to applicants
    because a medical professional signed Part III of the application
    form but appeared to rely on the applicant to complete the questions
    in this section.

13. Mini Ride Supervisors denied eligibility to at least three
    applicants, overturning the recommendations of the staff and Review
    Board, without documenting the reasons for the denials.

14. The City no-show suspension policy classifies all cancellations
    after 5 p.m. the day before service as a late cancellation and as a
    type of no-show. The regulations allow transit systems to suspend
    service for a reasonable period for riders who abuse the system by
    regularly "no-showing" for scheduled trips. While transit agencies
    have in recent years also considered "late cancellations" to be an
    abuse of the system and have considered this in their suspension
    policies, to be included the effects of a late cancellation should
    be operationally equivalent to a no-show in terms of the negative
    impact on the service.

15. The City's no-show policy imposes suspensions on riders for
    no-showing three or more times in a 30-day period. Subsequent
    no-shows may lead to longer suspensions. Considering only three
    no-shows in a 30-day period to be excessive and an abuse of the
    service may unreasonably limit service to ADA eligible customers.
    Appendix D of 49 CFR Part 37 states that suspensions of eligibility
    for no-shows are intended to prevent a "pattern or practice of
    'no-shows.'" It is further noted, "a pattern or practice involves
    intentional, repeated or regular actions, not isolated, accidental
    or singular incidents."

16. The City's formal written no-show policy indicates that riders can
    be permanently suspended from Mini Ride service if they have three
    occurrences of three or more no-shows in a 30-day period. As noted
    above, the DOT ADA regulations allow suspensions for a "reasonable
    period of time." Permanent suspensions for no-shows are not
    consistent with the regulations.

17. The City's no-show policy does not account for no-shows that are
    beyond the riders' control. The no-show warning letters and
    suspension letters also do not indicate that riders can contact Mini
    Ride to indicate if no-shows were beyond their control and have
    these removed from their record.

**C. Findings Regarding Telephone Access**

1.  The City has an informal standard for telephone performance of a
    maximum hold time of four minutes, according to its supervisor of
    customer service. However, at the time of the review team's visit,
    the City's transit department managers were not monitoring or
    measuring telephone hold times.

2.  The City appears to have sufficient customer service representative
    (CSR) workstations and telephone line capacity for receiving trip
    requests for Mini Ride service.

3.  CSRs are responsible for taking calls for Mini Ride trip requests,
    other Mini Ride service information calls, and calls about ABQ Ride
    fixed route service. In addition, CSRs at certain workstations have
    to sell tickets and passes and answer question from customers in
    person. While this may make more efficient use of staff, it likely
    hurts telephone performance.

4.  The peak call times for Mini Ride trip requests are from 6 a.m. to 7
    a.m. and 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. The standard work shifts for CSRs are from
    6 a.m. to 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. As a result, neither peak call
    time is covered by peak CSR staffing.

5.  In an analysis of telephone hold times and abandon times during the
    morning and afternoon peak call times for a sample week in August
    2005, the median wait times for CSRs to answer calls was short; the
    maximum wait times were generally short in the morning, but varied
    in the afternoon. On two of the five days analyzed, maximum wait
    time in the afternoon exceeded the City's four-minute standard.
    Maximum wait time in the afternoon on Monday, August 15, 2005, was 7
    minutes and 43 seconds. Maximum wait time in the afternoon on
    Wednesday, August 17, 2005, was 9 minutes and 5 seconds. Also, 45
    percent of callers hung up before reaching a CSR in the morning
    peak, and over 55 percent hung up in the afternoon peak; the median
    wait before callers hung up was usually more than two minutes. This
    indicates that the City serves some callers well, but other callers
    do not get served at all; they either have to make more than one
    call, or they stop trying to call.

**D. Findings Regarding Trip Reservations**

1.  The City does not use explicit trip caps in the operation of the
    Mini Ride ADA complementary paratransit service.

2.  The City does use a type of a wait list when handling Mini Ride trip
    requests. The "placement list" used by the City does not appear to
    be a guarantee of service and is not understood by riders to be a
    guarantee of service. Riders must call back by 4:45 p.m. on the day
    before the day of service to determine if trip requests put on the
    placement list have been scheduled and to receive the actual
    scheduled pickup time. Section 37.131(f) of the DOT ADA regulations
    considers the use of a wait list to be a kind of capacity constraint
    on the service. Firsthand observations of the handling of 119 trip
    requests found that nine requests (7.6 percent of all requests) were
    put on the placement list.

3.  Some trip requests also appear to be denied but not recorded by the
    City as denials. Firsthand observations of the handling of 119 trip
    requests found that no trip offers were made to three callers who
    were requesting rides (2.5 percent of all requests observed). In all
    three cases, CSRs cancelled the trip transaction and did not record
    the transaction as a trip denial.

4.  CSRs also were observed to "open" the two-hour scheduling window in
    the Trapeze system to allow the system to identify trip offers more
    than one hour from the requested time. In three of the 119 trip
    bookings observed (2.5 percent of observed requests), the CSRs
    offered riders pickup times that were more than an hour from their
    requested time. If these were not accepted by riders they were
    recorded as "refusals" rather than trip denials. And, if accepted,
    they were not recorded as a kind of "denial" of the original
    request. These also should be more accurately recorded by the City
    as denials.

5.  The observations of outright denials, plus the observations of trips
    negotiated more than an hour from the requested time suggest that
    the City may be denying about five percent of all Mini Ride trip
    requests.

6.  The City Mini Ride program does not appear to offer reliable
    next-day service and trip denials for requests made one day in
    advance are very high. Only 16 of the 119 trip requests observed
    firsthand (13.4 percent) were placed one day in advance. Only six of
    these 16 trip requests (37.5 percent) were scheduled responsively.
    The rest of the callers were either put on the placement list,
    denied a trip, scheduled more than one hour from the requested time,
    or offered a time that was more than one hour from the requested
    time which did not work for the caller.

7.  A total of 77 of the 119 trip requests observed (64.7 percent) were
    placed by riders a full seven days in advance. When responsive trip
    offers could not be found, CSRs also were observed to tell riders
    that they needed to call seven days in advance. Mini Ride public
    information also encourages riders to call seven days in advance.
    These are clear indications that the Mini Ride system has
    significant capacity constraints and that riders cannot rely on the
    program for next-day service. These capacity constraints and the
    City's instructions to riders to call seven days in advance also
    appear to be causing the long telephone hold times each morning.

8.  CSRs do not appear to consider rider trip needs when negotiating
    trip times. The Trapeze system is set to look for trip offers from
    an hour before to an hour after requested times. Riders are not
    asked if there are constraints to their travel such as the earliest
    time they can depart or the latest time they can arrive to still be
    on-time for appointments. The "Latest Drop-Off" and "Earliest
    Pick-Up" features of the Trapeze system, designed to take these
    needs into consideration, are not used by the City in the trip
    reservation process. Riders are currently given trip offers that do
    not meet their travel needs and if these are not accepted, they are
    recorded as refusals rather than denials.

9.  The handling of trip requests appeared to vary by CSR. Some CSRs
    verified scheduled trip information at the end of each transaction.
    Others did not. A standardized trip reservations "script" was not is
    use at the time of the on-site visit.

**E. Findings Regarding Service Performance**

1.  At the time of the review, the City was not regularly monitoring
    on-time performance or generating regular on-time reports. Regular
    monitoring of on-time performance is vital for ensuring service
    quality and compliance with established service performance goals.

2.  For the selected sample days of August 16 and 17, 2005, about 81 to
    82 percent of scheduled Mini Ride pickups were performed within the
    30-minute on-time window. Another four percent of trips were
    performed early. This level of performance was well below the City's
    stated goal of performing at least 95 percent of pickups on time or
    early.

3.  While 14 to 15 percent of pickups on August 16 and 17, 2005, were
    after the 30-minute pickup window, a detailed analysis of 152
    randomly selected trips performed on August 16, 2005, indicated that
    most late pickups were late by one to 15 minutes. Four of 152
    pickups in the sample (2.6 percent) were 16 to 30 minutes later than
    the window. One pickup (0.7 percent) was made more than 30 minutes
    after the end of the 30-minute pickup window.

4.  The City does not appear to have a staff person dedicated to the
    development and careful review of Mini Ride schedules. The
    individuals assigned to this function had multiple responsibilities
    and indicated an ability to perform only a quick review of Mini Ride
    schedules before they were given to drivers. Senior staff at the
    City appeared to assume that the Trapeze system could generate
    schedules without significant human intervention.

5.  The City does not have an on-time arrival performance standard and
    does not track on-time arrival performance. Riders' appointments are
    not recorded in the trip reservation process or entered into the
    scheduling system. Schedulers and dispatchers therefore are not able
    to ensure on-time arrivals as they manage the delivery of service.
    Mini Ride riders contacted for input on the service expressed
    particular concern about late arrivals to appointments. It is likely
    that the City's lack of attention to rider appointments is resulting
    in riders arriving late for appointments.

6.  The City standard for travel time is that no Mini Ride trip should
    exceed 60 minutes. The City, however, does not regularly track or
    analyze Mini Ride on-board travel times.

7.  A detailed review of trips performed on August 16, 2005, indicated
    that on-board travel times on the Mini Ride service were reasonable
    and comparable to fixed route travel times. The analysis showed an
    average travel time of 29 minutes. For this sample day, 96 percent
    of all trips had an on-board travel time of 60 minutes or less. A
    further review of those trips that took more than 60 minutes showed
    that the Mini Ride travel times were comparable to fixed route
    travel times for similar trips.

8.  The City does not appear to have a formal definition of a "missed"
    trip and does not differentiate between trips that are rider
    "no-shows" and those that should be considered "missed" by Mini
    Ride. Mini Ride dispatchers add notes to the trip file when vehicles
    are late and no-shows are recorded, but the trips are still recorded
    as no-shows and then might be counted against riders for potential
    service suspensions. The DOT ADA regulations (49 CFR §37.131(f))
    also prohibit a pattern or practice of a substantial number of
    missed trips. It therefore is important that missed trips be defined
    and recorded to ensure compliance with this section of the
    regulations.

9.  Mini Ride dispatchers manage between 10 and 20 runs each. This level
    of staffing appears to be adequate.

10. Most drivers interviewed by the review team seemed to have a proper
    understanding of the on-time pickup window and no-show procedures.

11. Ten of 11 drivers interviewed said that they provided assistance to
    riders, as needed, beyond the City's policy of curb-to-curb service.

**F. Findings Regarding Resources**

1.  The shortage of available vehicles on a daily basis appears to be
    the primary factor in the City's ongoing trip denials for Mini Ride
    service.

2.  This shortage of vehicles also appears to be a primary factor in
    Mini Ride's on-time performance.

3.  At the time of the on-site review, the Mini Ride fleet was quite
    old. Thirty-one of the 49 vehicles in the fleet had over 190,000
    miles of service and seven had more than 300,000 miles of service.
    The City indicated that 30 new vehicles were on order and were
    expected in December 2005. These new vehicles would replace 20 of
    the most unreliable vehicles in the fleet. There were no plans,
    however, to replace the 10 oldest vehicles in the fleet, all with
    over 270,000 miles of service.

4.  The age of the fleet appeared to affect vehicle availability.
    Maintenance staff indicated, and pull-out records showed, that on
    many days there were only 36 to 40 available vehicles to meet a peak
    pull-out requiring 38 to 40 vehicles. During the week of the on-site
    review, service was down four vehicles on Tuesday, September 13,
    2005, and one vehicle on another day.

5.  The lack of available vehicles also affected efficient "change-out"
    of vehicles when there were breakdowns. For the 30 breakdowns
    recorded in August 2005, there was no available "change-out" vehicle
    in 24 of these incidents. Other in-service runs had to be used to
    cover the trips of these runs.

6.  Drivers and riders cited the 10 model year 1996 raised-roof vans as
    having a poor design for serving riders with disabilities. These
    vehicles require some riders to walk down the stepwell steps
    backwards when exiting the vehicle because of an extremely low front
    entrance door. Even though these vehicles were 11 years old, had
    over 270,000 miles of service, and were poorly designed, the City
    indicated that it intended to keep these vehicles in service even
    after the delivery of 30 new minibuses in December 2005. Another
    round of vehicles to replace these 1996 vans was not noted.

7.  The 2003 model year minibuses appear to have a very stiff ride. This
    could be an issue for some riders who use wheelchairs. The City
    should examine alternate rear suspension arrangements on future
    vehicle orders to see if a smoother ride is possible on this type of
    vehicle.

8.  About half of the Mini Ride vehicles were equipped with MDTs;
    however, some did not work during the review team's visit. Other
    vehicles had inoperable two-way radios, meaning that dispatchers had
    to rely on drivers having cell phones to communicate.

9.  The City appears to have an adequate number of drivers to provide
    the current level of service.

10. The current driver workforce appears to be very stable and
    experienced. There is only about a 10 percent annual turnover of
    drivers.

11. The Mini Ride driver training program appears to be thorough and to
    adequately prepare drivers for the operating vehicles and accessible
    equipment and assisting riders with disabilities.

12. Even though the Mini Ride service appears to be capacity
    constrained, the Mini Ride Operations Manager has not requested
    increases in operating funding to increase service capacity. This
    appears to be due to the lack of accurately recording trip denials
    and monitoring on-time performance.

# **ADA Complementary Paratransit Service Criteria**

Section 3 of this report describes the fixed route service (ABQ Ride)
and the ADA complementary paratransit service (Mini Ride) provided by
the City. This section of the report compares the fixed route and ADA
complementary paratransit service policies with the regulatory criteria
for ADA complementary paratransit services contained in 49 CFR §§
37.129, 37.131(a), and 37.131(c) through (e). These service criteria
address: type of service, service area, fares, days and hours of
operation, and trip purposes. The remaining service criteria---response
time and capacity constraints---are addressed in other sections of this
report.

**Type of Service**

Section 37.129 of the DOT ADA regulations indicates that ADA
complementary paratransit service must be provided on an
"origin-to-destination" basis. Transit agencies may designate the "base"
level of rider assistance that they provide as either curb-to-curb or
door-to-door. If the base service is curb-to-curb, provision should
still be made to ensure that the service available to each passenger
actually gets the passenger from his or her point of origin to his or
her destination point. Transit agencies should have procedures in place
to provide additional assistance beyond the curb to some individuals, or
at some locations, in a way that goes beyond curb-to-curb service. This
might include assisting riders to and from the front door and may also
include policies and procedures for providing this assistance in a safe
and reasonable way.

The City has designated the Mini Ride service as curb-to-curb. Page 10
of the 1995 *Passenger's Guide* says that special arrangements will be
made with riders who are visually impaired to let them know the van has
arrived. No current policy documents indicate, however, that assistance
will be provided beyond the curb when needed to ensure that riders who
need this assistance are able to utilize the service.

Ten of the 11 drivers interviewed as part of the review indicated that
although the formal policy is for only curb-to-curb service, they will
provide assistance beyond the curb if it is needed. One driver appeared
to strictly follow the current curb-to-curb only policy.

**ADA Complementary Paratransit Service Area**

DOT ADA regulations require a bus transit operator to serve, at a
minimum, all areas within 3/4-mile of all of its bus routes, along with
any small areas within its core service area that may be more than
3/4-mile from a bus route but which are otherwise surrounded by served
corridors (49 CFR §37.131(a)(1)). Albuquerque provides Mini Ride service
in all of Bernalillo County with the exception of the Sandia Mountains
and further east, which are east of Albuquerque. This area exceeds the
required ADA complementary paratransit service area.

**Days and Hours of Service**

DOT ADA regulations require a transit operator to provide service during
all days and times that its fixed route service operates (49 CFR
§37.131(e)). This requirement applies on a route-by-route basis. For
example, an area that has fixed route bus service on weekdays but not
weekends must have ADA complementary paratransit service on weekdays but
not weekends; an area that has bus service until 9 p.m. must have ADA
complementary paratransit service until 9 p.m.

As noted earlier in this report, Mini Ride's service hours are:

-   5:30 a.m. to 10 p.m., Monday to Saturday

-   7 a.m. to 7:30 p.m., Sunday

There are several ABQ Ride bus routes whose service hours extend either
before or after the Mini Ride service hours. Table 5.1 lists some of
these bus routes for the schedules that were in effect at the time of
the on-site review. The times in **bold** indicate the service hours
that extend beyond Mini Ride's service hours.

**Table 5.1 --- ABQ Ride Bus Routes with Service Hours Before or After
Mini Ride**

  ---------------------- --------------- --------- --------------- -----------
  **Route**              **Direction**   **Day**   **Start Time    **End Time
                                                   (a.m.)**        (p.m.)**

  21                     west            Sun       10:00           **7:33**

  21                     east            Sun       10:14           **7:49**

  66                     west            M-F       5:40            **10:53**

  66                     east            M-F       6:00            **10:31**

  66                     west            Sat       6:00            **10:28**

  66                     east            Sat       6:05            **10:21**

  66                     west            Sun       **6:00**        6:16

  66                     east            Sun       **5:55**        6:11

  155                    south           M-F       6:50            **10:39**

  158                    south           M-F       6:24            **10:35**

  158                    north           M-F       6:40            **10:05**

  Rapid RIDE After Dark  NA              Fri, Sat  NA              **3 a.m.**
  ---------------------- --------------- --------- --------------- -----------

City staff also confirmed that they were testing the viability of a late
night "Rapid RIDE After Dark" fixed route service on the limited stop
Rapid RIDE corridors. Fixed route bus service in these corridors was
provided until 3 a.m. on Friday and Saturday nights. The service was
provided from May until early September 2005. A decision on whether or
not to operate the service in 2006 was still being considered. Staff
also confirmed in interviews that similar late night Mini Ride service
had initially not been provided. They noted that the issue was brought
to their attention by riders and advocates, and that instructions had
recently been given to call center staff to accept Mini Ride trips up
until 3 a.m. in this one corridor. Review team interviews with call
center staff also indicated that instructions to begin offering this
service were communicated to them in early September. They indicated
that they had not received any requests for the service in the last few
weeks since this change was made. It was noted, though, that there was
no public information about the extended hours of Mini Ride operation.

**Fares**

DOT ADA regulations allow operators to charge a fare for an ADA
complementary paratransit service trip that is up to twice that charged
on fixed route service for the same origin and destination at the same
day and time (49 CFR §37.131(c)). The cash fare for a one-way trip on
ABQ Ride is one dollar. The fare for a one-way trip on Mini Ride is two
dollars, exactly two times the fixed route fare.

City staff indicated that personal care attendants (PCAs) accompanying
an eligible rider are not charged a fare. They also noted that
companions are charged the same fare as the eligible rider. Observations
of the trip reservation process confirmed this portion of the fare
policy. It was noted, though, that information about PCA and companion
fares is not included in the public information provided or on the
"Fares and Pass prices" page of the City's website.

One concern, however, with Albuquerque's fare policies is its treatment
of subscription riders. Mini Ride customers who have subscription
service are required to pay the fare for all trips planned for the week
when they take their first ride of the week. For example, if a customer
has subscription service for five round-trips per week (ten one-way
trips), the customer must pay \$20 in fares at the time of the first
one-way trip during the week. Subsequently, if the customer cancels a
trip later that week, or if Mini Ride has a no-show, the customer has
still been required to pay for this trip. In addition, the customer's
average fare will then exceed two times the fixed route fare.

**Trip Purposes**

Section 37.131(d) of the DOT ADA regulations requires that there be no
restrictions or priorities based on trip purpose in the provision of ADA
complementary paratransit service.

The City appears to be in compliance with this requirement. Page 8 of
the City's internal policies and procedures document, titled *Sun Van
Service Rules*, states that Mini Ride service is provided for all trip
purposes without prioritization. All riders and advocates contacted in
advance of the on-site visit indicated that all types of trips are
served and that there is no trip prioritization in the scheduling
process. The review team also did not note any trip purpose restrictions
or prioritization while observing the reservations and scheduling
processes.

**Findings**

1.  The City's current policy appears to be to provide only curb-to-curb
    service to Mini Ride riders. Policies and procedures do not indicate
    that assistance beyond the curb is to be provided, even if needed.
    This is not consistent with Section 37.129 of the DOT ADA
    regulations. A process to identify riders who may need this
    additional assistance also does not appear to be used. In practice,
    however, most Mini Ride drivers appear to provide door-to-door
    service, as needed.

2.  The City provides Mini Ride service in all areas where it provides
    fixed route bus service.

3.  On weekdays, there are three bus routes (#66, #155, and #158) whose
    service hours extend later than the Mini Ride service hours. On
    Saturday, Route #66's service hours extend later than the Mini Ride
    service hours. On Sunday, Route #66's service hours begin earlier
    than the Mini Ride service hours, and Route #21's service hours
    extend later than the Mini Ride service hours.

4.  The Mini Ride fare is \$2.00, exactly two times the fixed route cash
    fare for ABQ Ride.

5.  Subscription customers for Mini Ride service must pay the fares for
    all their scheduled trips for the week at the time of their first
    trip. If the customer cancels a trip later that week, or if Mini
    Ride has a no-show, the customer has still been required to pay for
    the trip and his or her average fare will exceed two times the fixed
    route fare.

6.  The City operated a "Rapid RIDE After Dark" fixed route bus service
    until 3 a.m. in main corridors from downtown to the west and north
    from May through September 2005. This service appears to have been
    operated without instructions to operating staff to provide
    corresponding expanded Mini Ride service in these areas. Instruction
    to begin offering expanded Mini Ride service appears to have been
    provided to staff in early September 2005. There also does not
    appear to have been any public information indicating that expanded
    Mini Ride service was available.

7.  Public information describing the Mini Ride service, and general
    transit service information, does not indicate that PCAs may travel
    with eligible Mini Ride riders free of charge and that companions
    are to pay the same fare as the eligible rider.

**Recommendations**

1.  The City should solicit input from riders and from drivers and other
    staff about the current policy regarding rider assistance. Based on
    this input, a revised policy for either door-to-door service or
    curb-to-curb service with additional assistance as needed should be
    adopted and implemented. If a base level of curb-to-curb service is
    provided, a process for identifying riders who need additional
    assistance and for communicating these needs to drivers should be
    developed.

2.  The City should adjust the Mini Ride service hours to meet the
    service hours of its bus routes. Also, if fixed route service is
    expanded in the future, plans should be developed and implemented
    for corresponding Mini Ride service. Public information about the
    availability of corresponding Mini Ride service should also be
    developed.

3.  The City should reconsider its policy of requiring subscription
    riders to pay for all of their week's trip at the time of the first
    trip.

4.  The City should include information about PCA and companion fares
    for the Mini Ride service in public information and on the Transit
    Department website.

# **ADA Complementary Paratransit Eligibility Determinations**

The FTA team reviewed the process used to determine ADA complementary
paratransit eligibility to ensure that determinations are being made in
accordance with the regulatory criteria and in a way that accurately
reflects the functional ability of applicants. The timeliness of the
processing of requests for eligibility was also assessed. The review was
completed as follows:

-   Input about the eligibility determination process was obtained
    through interviews with riders and advocates and a review of rider
    comments on file at the City.

-   An understanding of the handling and review of applications was
    developed through an assessment of current eligibility materials and
    interviews of eligibility determinations staff.

-   Eligibility decisions were reviewed for 504 determinations made
    between May 2004 and September 2005.

-   The application files of 14 recent applicants who had been granted
    conditional eligibility or who had been denied ADA paratransit
    eligibility were reviewed.

**Consumer Comments**

As noted in the "Consumer Comments" portion of Section 3 of this report,
most of the riders and advocates contacted in advance of the on-site
visit felt that the eligibility determination process was fair and that
determinations were made in a timely way. However, three of those
contacted indicated problems with the timeliness of eligibility
determinations. One rider said that in the fall of 2004 she called for
an interview in October and nothing was available until December 9. She
had trips she needed to make in the meantime, but was not able to use
Mini Ride because she was not yet eligible. Others also indicated that
they were not aware that riders should be served if the process takes
more than 21 days. One rider complained that Mini Ride requires
applicants to provide social security numbers and said staff told her
that an application would be considered incomplete without a social
security number. Several riders contacted also said they had heard that
there was a recent effort to require that riders with vision
disabilities reapply and be recertified. They said they believed the
system was denying some riders with vision disabilities in this targeted
recertification process.

The one formal complaint filed with FTA did not mention eligibility
determination as an issue.

**Overview of the Eligibility Determination Process and Materials**

**Initial Determination Process**

Individuals interested in applying for ADA paratransit eligibility call
the City and are sent an application form. The application form is seven
pages long. The first five pages are completed by the applicant. The
last two pages must be completed by a "licensed health care provider." A
copy of the application form that was in use at the time of the review
and a copy of *City of Albuquerque Mini Ride Service*, a one-page
instruction sheet sent with application forms, are provided in
Attachment E.

The one-page instruction sheet indicates that once applicants have
completed the first five pages of the application form, they are to call
to arrange a ride to their "doctor" to have the last two pages
completed. The instructions also indicate that the fare of \$2.00 each
way applies to these trips to and from the doctor to have the
application form completed.

When applicants complete the form, they are instructed to call to set up
a time for an in-person interview appointment. All applicants must
participate in an in-person interview. Applicants are instructed to
bring the completed application form with them to the interview.
Transportation is provided to and from the interview, if needed, again
for a \$2.00 per person per ride fare.

As noted in the "Customer Comments" section of this report, one rider
contacted in advance of the review indicated that applicants must
provide their social security number (SSN) as part of the application
process. This rider indicated that if a SSN is not provided, the
application is considered incomplete. It was noted that the application
form does ask for a SSN. City staff also confirmed that this is not an
optional item and that if a SSN is not provided, the application is
considered incomplete.

The main receptionist for the Transit Department takes calls from
applicants and arranges the in-person interviews. She keeps a log of the
interview dates and times, but does not log or track when applicants
call to arrange interviews. In-person interviews are conducted on
Mondays, Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. About five to seven interviews
are scheduled for each of these days.

In-person interviews are conducted by a City staff person from the
Customer Service Office. This person reviews the completed application
form. If the form is not complete, she will attempt to complete the
application as part of the interview. However, if the applicant has not
had the last two pages completed by a licensed health care provider, the
applicant is informed that this section must be completed before a final
determination can be made.

The interviewer also completes a three-page interview form. A copy of
the interview form is provided in Attachment E. Much of the form is
dedicated to documenting the types of mobility aids used by the
applicant and gathering very specific information about these mobility
aids. For example, if the applicant uses a wheelchair, the interviewer
determines if the wheelchair is "oversized" (i.e., exceeds "common
wheelchair" standards specified in the DOT ADA regulations). The
interviewer also records on the form whether the wheelchair used by the
applicant has "functioning brakes." When asked about this, City staff
indicated that Mini Ride service will only be provided if riders have
wheelchairs with functioning brakes. It was also noted that page 12 of
the *Passenger's Guide* policy document also states that "For safety
reasons, Sun Van can not transport passengers with inoperative mobility
devices or devices with inoperable braking mechanisms."

Aside from information about mobility aids, service animals, and PCAs,
the interview form includes some limited information about the
applicant's functional abilities. Question #4 of the form has the
interviewer record whether applicants can buckle their own seat belt,
pay their own fare, give their name, give their address, give their
telephone number, "converse appropriately," and "function well in an
emergency." There is then a general finding (Question #5) of whether the
applicant can use the fixed route service.

At the time of the interview, a photo is taken of all applicants. This
photo is then used to prepare a photo identification card which is then
sent to applicants determined to be eligible for the service.

Once the interview is completed (and assuming the application form is
complete), the full application file is reviewed by a Review Board. The
Review Board consists of two riders with disabilities. One rider has a
physical disability and uses a wheelchair. The second rider has a vision
disability and also uses a wheelchair. These two individuals meet every
Friday and go through all files for applicants interviewed in the past
week. They then make a recommendation for whether ADA paratransit
eligibility should be granted and the type of eligibility that should be
granted.

Finally, after the interview and the review by the Review Board, the
recommendations for eligibility go to a senior City staff person for
final review. This final review is conducted either by the Customer
Service Supervisor or the Operations Manager.

As noted in the "Customer Comments" section of this report, some
individuals contacted in advance of the review indicated that they had
heard that the City was asking only riders with vision disabilities to
reapply and to be recertified. While on site, the review team asked
staff if this was the case. They indicated that no separate
recertification for riders with vision disabilities had been conducted.
The City was recertifying all riders equally as their current
eligibility was expiring. When reviewing recent application records, the
review team did not notice application files where riders were being
recertified prior to the expiration of their previously granted period
of eligibility.

**Types of Eligibility Granted**

Once the full application file is reviewed, City staff make a
determination of eligibility. All applicants are determined to be in one
of the following determination categories.

**"Permanent" eligibility.** The City uses the phrase "permanent" to
describe individuals who are found to need Mini Ride service all of the
time and who cannot use the fixed route service under any conditions.
This type of eligibility would be analogous to "unconditional"
eligibility. The City grants this type of eligibility on a permanent
basis. Persons who receive this type of eligibility do not have to
reapply for service in the future. They are required, however, to call
the City each year to indicate that they intend to continue to use the
service. When they call each year, they are sent a "renewal sticker"
that continues their eligibility for another year. It was noted by staff
that annual stickers were used as a way to try to make sure that the
database of riders did not include individuals who had moved or who no
longer needed or intended to use the service.

**Conditional eligibility.** This eligibility is granted if it is felt
that the applicant can use the fixed route service for some trips but
requires Mini Ride service for other trips. The City does not identify
any conditions of eligibility, however. Letters of determination just
make the general statement that the person has been found to be
"conditionally eligible." Persons determined conditionally eligible are
also granted this type of eligibility on a "permanent" basis. They do
not have to reapply. They do, however, have to request a "renewal
sticker" each year.

**Not eligible.** This determination is made if the City staff feel that
the applicant is able to use fixed route service and does not require
Mini Ride service for any trips. Page 4 of the *Sun Van Service Rules*
policy document states that people must wait for at least six months to
reapply if they are denied eligibility unless they receive special
permission from the Paratransit Manager. When asked about this, City
staff said that this may have been a policy in the past, but that they
do not impose that restriction now.

For applicants determined to be either "permanently eligible" or
"conditionally eligible," the City may also apply several types of
eligibility designations. These include:

**Temporary designation.** If the licensed professional who completes
part of the application form indicates that the applicant's disability
or health condition is not permanent, but instead indicates that it is
temporary and provides an estimated length of time, the applicant is
made eligible for only that period of time. After the period of
eligibility, these riders must reapply and go through the application
and interview process again. Interestingly, with the terminology used by
the City, it is possible to have people who are recorded as "permanently
eligible" also receive eligibility for only a defined period of time.

**"With Personal Care Attendant" designation.** Applicants who are
authorized to travel with a PCA have the designation "with Personal Care
Attendant" added to their determination letter and to their ID card.
These individuals are not required to travel with a PCA, but can have a
PCA accompany them at no extra fare when needed.

**"Sheltered" designation.** This additional designation is given to
riders with permanent or conditional eligibility who must be met by
someone when being dropped off. These riders do not have to travel with
an attendant, but a "responsible person" must sign for them at a
drop-off location. The City staff indicated that this designation is
made jointly at the time of the interview between the interviewer and
the relative or guardian who typically will accompany the person to the
interview. A *Sun Van Sheltered Responsibility Information Form* must be
completed and signed by a "person responsible for the passenger" at the
time of the interview or at some time prior to the start of service. As
a further refinement of this designation, the City does allow parents or
guardians to identify destinations where "sheltered" riders can be
dropped of without a signature. The responsible person can complete and
sign a *Sheltered Passenger Drop Off Without Signature Permission Form*
that identifies any such locations.

**"Must Travel with Caregiver" designation.** This designation is given
to persons determined either permanent or conditional who are under 12
years of age. As stated on page 5 of the *Sun Van Service Rules* policy
document, riders who have this designation added to their ID cards and
letters of determination must always travel with a "responsible person."
As part of the review, City staff were asked if a similar restriction on
fixed route travel by children under the age of 12 was in place. They
said that a similar policy does not exist for fixed route travel. This
age restriction is only applicable to the Mini Ride service.

**Letters of Determination**

Once City staff makes a final determination, they send a letter of
determination to the applicant, as well as a photo ID that must be shown
to drivers when using the service. The Transit Department receptionist
coordinates the preparation and mailing of these letters.

Section 37.125(e) of the DOT ADA regulations requires that documentation
of eligibility contain the following five pieces of information:

1.  the name of the eligible individual

2.  the name of the transit provider

3.  the telephone number of the entity's paratransit coordinator

4.  an expiration date for eligibility

5.  and any conditions or limitations on the individual's eligibility,
    including the use of a PCA

Section 37.125(d) of the DOT ADA regulations also states that
determinations of eligibility must be in writing and if applicants are
found to be ineligible, the determination must state the specific
reasons for the finding. Appendix D to the regulation indicates that
these reasons cannot be a simple recital that the person has been found
to be able to use fixed route service. Determinations that deny
eligibility or limit eligibility also should be accompanied by
information about the process for appealing the decision.

Team members examined copies of recent letters of determination for each
type of eligibility and each additional designation/limitation described
above. They noted that letters of determination are on City Transit
Department letterhead and do include the phone number of the Mini Ride
service. They also state the individual's name. All determinations of
eligibility that are not "temporary" also note that applicants are
"certified for one year." The letters then state applicants must call at
least four weeks before their eligibility expires to get a renewal
sticker to update their riding privileges.

Letters sent to riders denied eligibility contain language explaining
the right to appeal and providing specific instructions for requesting
an appeal. It was noted, however, that letters of determination sent to
applicants who were determined conditionally eligible, temporarily
eligible, or who had a special designation, such as a "sheltered" rider,
did not indicate that these limitations on their eligibility could be
appealed or provide instruction on how to request an appeal.

Team members also noted that all letters denying eligibility contained
the same statement that "The health care provider's statement did not
reflect a mobility impairment that would prevent your using the regular
bus at this time." These explanations did not appear to be specific to
the reasons in each case for finding the applicant ineligible.

**Appeal Process**

If an applicant appeals the initial eligibility determination, the
appeal is heard by the Mayor's Advisory Committee on Transit for the
Mobility Impaired. All appeals are heard by the full committee as part
of their regular monthly meeting. The committee meets on the first
Wednesday of each month. Applicants requesting an appeal therefore would
not be required to wait more than a month for an appeal hearing.

One of the individuals who is part of the Review Board which reviews
initial applications and makes determination recommendations also serves
on the Mayor's Advisory Committee. Staff indicated that this person does
also participate in appeal hearings and casts a vote on appeals. Section
37.125(g)(2) of the DOT ADA regulations requires that there be a
"separation of authority" between those involved in the initial
determination process and those deciding appeals. The same individual
should not be involved in both determinations.

**Recertification**

As noted above, the City requires all riders to obtain "renewal
stickers" for their ID cards each year. This process requires that
riders call at least four weeks prior to the expiration date on their
prior sticker and request a new sticker. Eligibility is not reviewed or
reconsidered as part of this process and City staff indicated that
renewal stickers are only used as a way to keep the rider database
current.

The only riders who are required to reapply and be recertified are those
who are determined to only be eligible on a "temporary" basis. At the
end of their temporary period of eligibility, these riders are required
to complete a new application and participate in another in-person
interview. A review of records indicated that temporary eligibility is
typically granted for either six months or one year.

**Reported Determination Outcomes**

As part of the review, the review team requested reports showing the
number of applications received, the number of determinations made,
eligibility determination outcomes, and the number of riders eligible
for the service under each eligibility category. City staff indicated,
however, that reports on eligibility determination outcomes are not
prepared and that summary data about the process is not maintained. It
therefore was not possible to determine the number of riders who are
currently eligible for the service, or the number of riders in the
system in each eligibility category.

A team member noted that a rider granted eligibility the week of the
on-site visit was given rider number 10,417. It therefore appears that
this number of individuals have been granted ADA paratransit eligibility
of some type since the inception of the service.

The receptionist, who coordinates the preparation of letters of
determination, does keep a log of the number of letters of determination
sent out each day. This log also indicates the types of letter sent.
Using this log, the review team was able to tabulate the number of
determinations by type for a recent period of time. Entries in the log
were tabulated for the period from May 24, 2004, through September 12,
2005. Table 6.1 shows the results of this tabulation. As shown, a total
of 504 letters of determination were sent out during this 17-month
period. A total of 250 of the 504 determination letters were to
applicants determined "permanently eligible" (unconditional). The
remaining 254 letters were to applicants determined "conditionally
eligible." Additional designations were also noted on 244 of these
determinations. A total of 123 applicants were authorized to travel
"with PCA;" 101 applicants were deemed "sheltered" riders, requiring
that they be met at destinations; 13 applicants were given temporary
eligibility; and 11 riders were designated "must travel with caregiver,"
which indicated they were under 12 years of age.

**Table 6.1 --- Eligibility Determinations by Category and Additional
Designations,**

**Based on Letters of Determination Sent: May 24, 2004 through September
12, 2005**

+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
| * |                                   | **No. of     | **% of All   |
| * |                                   | Dete         | Dete         |
| E |                                   | rminations** | rminations** |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| b |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| y |                                   |              |              |
| C |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| r |                                   |              |              |
| y |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| d |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
|   |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| A |                                   |              |              |
| d |                                   |              |              |
| d |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| E |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| b |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| y |                                   |              |              |
| D |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| s |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| E |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| b |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| y |                                   |              |              |
| C |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| r |                                   |              |              |
| y |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
|   | Permanent (unconditional)         | 250          | 49.6%        |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
|   | Conditional                       | 254          | 50.4%        |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
| * |                                   | **504**      | **100%**     |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| T |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| L |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| r |                                   |              |              |
| s |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| f |                                   |              |              |
| D |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| r |                                   |              |              |
| m |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| S |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| A |                                   |              |              |
| d |                                   |              |              |
| d |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| E |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| b |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| l |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| y |                                   |              |              |
| D |                                   |              |              |
| e |                                   |              |              |
| s |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| g |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| a |                                   |              |              |
| t |                                   |              |              |
| i |                                   |              |              |
| o |                                   |              |              |
| n |                                   |              |              |
| s |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
| * |                                   |              |              |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
|   | *No additional designation*       | 256          | 50.8%        |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
|   | *With PCA*                        | 123          | 24.4%        |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
|   | *Sheltered*                       | 101          | 20.0%        |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
|   | *Temporary*                       | 13           | 2.6%         |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+
|   | *Must Travel with Caregiver*      | 11           | 2.2%         |
+---+-----------------------------------+--------------+--------------+

The log maintained by the receptionist did not include the number of
denial letters sent out each day. She did, however, have a separate file
of recent denial letters and indicated that she had been keeping denial
letters in this file for the past 10 months. The file contained a total
of nine letters. These records and tabulations suggest that about 30
individuals have been certified as ADA paratransit eligible each month
over the past 17 months. In addition, about one applicant per month is
denied eligibility (about three percent of all applicants).

The receptionist indicated that she had not arranged for an appeal
before the Mayors' Advisory Committee on Transit for the Mobility
Impaired in the time that she had been coordinating the process.

Finally, the review team noted that many applicants determined
"conditionally eligible" were also given the designation of "sheltered"
riders. The receptionist's log of determination letters showed that of
the 254 applicants given conditional eligibility between May 2004 and
August 2005, 57 had also been designated as "sheltered" riders. This
would appear to either indicate a possible misinterpretation of what
would constitute "conditional" eligibility or would indicate that the
designation of "sheltered" rider is being applied too broadly. By
definition, an applicant determined to be "conditionally eligible" would
be able to *independently* use the fixed route service for some trips.
It therefore seems inconsistent to consider riders who can sometimes
ride the fixed route system independently as "sheltered."

A review team member discussed this apparent inconsistency with the City
staff. Based on that discussion, it appears that the staff had been
considering whether or not applicants could use the fixed route system
***with an attendant*** as part of the determination. If an applicant
could sometimes use the fixed route system when accompanied by an
attendant, these trips were considered not ADA paratransit eligible and
the rider was considered conditional rather than
permanent/unconditional. Section 37.123 of the DOT ADA regulations
requires that eligibility determinations consider an applicant's
independent ability to use the fixed route system.

**Process Observations and Reviews of Recent Determinations**

As part of the review, team members reviewed recent determinations of
eligibility with City staff. This included five recent determinations of
applicants who had been made "conditionally" eligible with the added
designation of "sheltered." It also included a review of all nine
denials of eligibility that were on file for the period from December
2004 through August 2005.

The review of the five conditional/sheltered determinations indicated
that all five files did indicate types of disabilities where the riders
likely should not be left at destinations unattended. The "sheltered"
designations therefore appeared to be appropriate. However, the
determinations of "conditional" did not appear appropriate. In each
case, the Review Board had recommended permanent/unconditional
eligibility. The Customer Service Supervisor had then changed this to
conditional. When questioned about the changes, the Supervisor indicated
that she felt the applicants could use the fixed route system when
assisted by an attendant. She was not considering the applicants'
independent ability to use the fixed route system.

This review suggests that many riders who are in the system as
"conditional" may in fact need Mini Ride service on an unconditional
basis. As noted previously, however, the City is not doing trip-by-trip
eligibility or asking those riders who are conditionally eligible to use
the fixed route service for some of their trips.

The review of the recent denials of eligibility indicated that four of
nine denials over the past 10 months appeared to be appropriate.
Information in the files seemed to support the determinations that the
applicants could use the fixed route system under all conditions. All of
the people involved in the determination (the City interviewer, the
Review Board, and the City supervisor) also reached consistent
decisions.

Two of the decisions, however, seemed to be inappropriate and three were
questionable. Details of these five cases are provided below:

-   In one case, the application indicated that the applicant was
    mentally retarded. The interviewer recommended
    permanent/unconditional eligibility based on the interview. The
    Review Board also agreed. The City Supervisor had overturned the
    recommendations because it appeared that the applicant had answered
    questions on the last two pages of the application form (intended
    for the health care provider) and then had the medical professional
    sign the form.

-   A second case was similar. The application indicated that the
    applicant had a stroke, had a lower spine injury, and used a walker.
    The interviewer and Review Board had recommended temporary
    eligibility with annual review (to see if there might be improvement
    with treatment). Again, the Supervisor overturned these
    recommendations and denied the application because the applicant had
    completed the last two pages of the application and then had the
    doctor sign the form.

-   In a third case, the application indicated a back fracture and
    severe back pain. The medical professional had indicated limited
    ability to walk distances over 1/4-mile. The interviewer and Review
    Board recommended conditional eligibility. The Supervisor had
    overturned these recommendations and denied the application. No
    notes or reasons for the change were included in the file.

-   The fourth case was similar. The application indicated arthritis and
    low vision and the medical professional had indicated an inability
    to use fixed route service. The interviewer and Review Board
    recommended conditional eligibility. The Supervisor denied
    eligibility without adding any additional notes to the file.

-   The fifth case also was similar. The application indicated a back
    injury and the professional noted an inability to walk any distances
    or to climb stairs. The interviewer and the Review Board had
    recommended permanent/unconditional eligibility and the Supervisor
    had overturned the recommendation without adding any notes or
    explanation.

For the applications where the forms were not filled out by the
professional (but were signed by the professional), the more appropriate
way for the City to handle the applications might have been either
contacting the professional or asking the applicant to have that portion
of the application redone. In the other three cases, the Supervisor's
decision appears to be somewhat arbitrary without some explanation or
notes explaining her actions.

**Review of Application Processing Times**

Reviewing the timeliness of eligibility determinations proved to be
difficult. While the receptionist keeps a log of interview dates and
times, she does not log or track when applicants call to arrange for
interviews. The only date entered into the master rider file is the
final date when the applicant was certified as eligible. There was no
organized application tracking system that captured and compared dates
when applicants called to schedule interviews, when interviews were
conducted, and when final determinations were made and letters sent.
There also was no easy way for the review team to cross-check rider
files with the date of the interviews and the final determination dates.

Based on staff interviews, there did appear to have been issues in the
recent past with the timely processing of applications. The receptionist
indicated that until recently (the last few months prior to the on-site
review), interviews were conducted only one day a week. She said that
most riders had to wait four to six weeks on average for an interview.
The longest time between a request and the date offered for an interview
that she could recall was about eight weeks. She said that in the last
few months, the City had begun to conduct interviews four days a
week---Mondays, Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. Five to seven
interviews are scheduled each day, allowing about 24 interviews to be
scheduled each week. The receptionist reported that the City has slowly
been catching up on the backlog of requests for interviews and that the
maximum wait now was about two weeks. A review of the interview schedule
log did indicate that some dates were still available for interviews
within a week and that the second week in the book also had several open
dates.

Page 4 of *Sun Van Service Rules* indicates that if an eligibility
determination is not made within 21 days, the applicant is automatically
made eligible. However, the receptionist indicated in the interview that
there was no process in place to notify applicants that they could
request service after 21 days or to enter applicants into the system to
allow them to then request rides. The right to service after 21 days
also is not mentioned in the cover instructions or in other public
information about the ADA paratransit eligibility determination process.
Riders interviewed in advance of the review also indicated that
eligibility is not offered if determinations take more than 21 days.

**No-Show Suspension Policy**

Section 37.125(h) of the DOT ADA regulations states that transit
agencies "may establish an administrative process to suspend, for a
reasonable period of time, the provision of complementary paratransit
service to ADA eligible individuals who establish a pattern or practice
of missing scheduled trips." The City's policies and practices regarding
no-show suspensions were reviewed as part of the assessment.

The *How to Schedule a Mini Ride Reservation* public information sheet,
provided in Attachment C, states that passengers must call and cancel
any rides they do not intend to make by 5 p.m. on the day before the day
of service. Failure to cancel by 5 p.m. the day before will result in a
rider being charged with a no-show.

Riders who fail to appear at a boarding location for a scheduled ride
are also marked as no-shows. Page 10 of *Sun Van Service Rules*, as well
as the *Responsibilities of a Mini Ride Passenger* public information
sheet, states that drivers are to wait a minimum of five minutes within
the 30-minute pickup window for riders to board. If the rider does not
appear to board, drivers must check with dispatch before leaving and
marking a rider as a no-show. Page 10 of the *Sun Van Service Rules*
also states that return rides are automatically cancelled if the "going"
portion of a trip is no-showed, unless the rider calls within 30 minutes
of the no-show to request that the return trip not be cancelled.

The public information also notes that "three (3) no-shows in a thirty
(30) day period will result in a temporary suspension of service." Page
10 of *Sun Van Service Rules* indicates that suspensions can be "up to
30 days." It also states that three or more 30-day suspensions for the
same rider "could result in a permanent ridership suspension for that
passenger." The *Service Rules* indicate that riders are to be notified
of their right to appeal a proposed suspension. Suspensions are to be
heard and decided by the full Mayor's Advisory Committee on Transit for
the Mobility Impaired.

City staff indicated that while the formal policy calls for a suspension
for three no-shows in a 30-day period, in practice they have recently
been sending a warning letter to riders for a first occurrence of three
no-shows. If a rider subsequently has another 30-day period with three
or more no-shows a suspension is proposed. Copies of a recent warning
letter and a suspension letter indicating this approach are provided in
Attachment F.

Also, staff indicated that while the policy is that suspensions can be
"up to 30 days," in practice the first suspension is for four days, the
second is for five days, and the third suspension is for 10 days.

City staff also indicated that while not part of the formal written
policy, they informally implemented a different way of counting no-shows
in February 2004. Starting at that time, "late cancellations" (made
after 5 p.m.) were assessed 0.75 points and no-shows at the door were
assigned 1.0 points. Warning letters and suspension letters were then
sent to riders who accumulated more than 3.0 points in a 30-day period.
It was noted, though, that the warning and suspension letters still
reference the old policy.

A review of recent warning and suspension letters also identified an
issue with the timing of these letters. For second occurrences of three
or more no-shows in a 30-day period, riders are sent both a warning and
a suspension letter. Typically, the suspension letter goes out two days
after the warning letter. This therefore results in riders first being
warned that if there is another occurrence they will be suspended and
then two days later getting a letter proposing a suspension. This is
shown in the sample letters in Attachment F. Both letters were sent to
the same rider. The warning letter was sent on June 11, 2005, and the
suspension letter was sent on June 13, 2005.

In addition, the City no-show material does not appear to indicate that
riders will not be charged with no-shows for circumstances beyond their
control, or that riders will be given an opportunity, prior to a formal
appeal, to indicate if any no-shows they have been charged with were due
to circumstances beyond their control. This information does not appear
to be included in the *Sun Van Service Rules*, the one-page public
information sheets, or the warning and suspension letters sent to
riders.

A few riders contacted in advance expressed some concern about being
charged incorrectly for no-shows. One advocate noted that riders
indicate that they often leave messages about cancellations, but that
vehicles come anyway and they are marked as no-shows. A rider with a
vision disability also indicated that it is difficult for her to know
when vehicles have arrived to pick her up and that some drivers do not
come to the door or get out of the vehicle to announce that the vehicle
has arrived.

Records indicated that the City has been actively tracking no-shows and
implementing the no-show suspension policy. Special reports listing
no-shows and late cancellations by rider are prepared each month.
Letters are then sent out based on these reports. Records for November
2004, December 2004, and June of 2005 were checked to determine the
number of no-show suspensions proposed. These records showed that 27
riders were suspended for no-shows recorded in November 2004, 31 riders
were suspended for no-shows recorded in December 2004, and 13 riders
were suspended for no-shows recorded in June of 2005.

**Findings**

1.  The City charges applicants a \$2.00 fare each way for rides to and
    from required in-person interviews and for rides to a licensed
    medical professional to get Part III of the application completed.
    The DOT ADA regulations indicate that the process for determining
    ADA paratransit eligible should not impose unreasonable burdens or
    "user fees" on applicants (49 CFR §37.125, Appendix D).

2.  The City requires that applicants provide their social security
    number (SSN) as part of the application process. The provision of a
    SSN is voluntary unless there is a law requiring that it be
    provided. Procedures for processing applications should be developed
    if applicants elect not to provide their SSN.

3.  City policy requires that riders who use wheelchairs have
    wheelchairs with working brakes in order to receive Mini Ride
    service. As part of the in-person eligibility interview, the City
    also appears to check wheelchairs for working brakes. Having working
    brakes on wheelchairs cannot be a prerequisite for receiving ADA
    paratransit service.

4.  City policy requires that applicants who are denied ADA paratransit
    eligibility must wait at least six months before they can reapply.
    While City staff indicated that this policy is not enforced, no
    policy should place a timeframe on reapplication for service.

5.  City policy requires that children under the age of 12 must be
    accompanied on Mini Ride by a "responsible person." A similar policy
    does not appear to exist for the fixed route service. The City
    cannot impose this restriction on Mini Ride passengers if it is not
    a policy that applies to all children under the age of 12 who ride
    the fixed route.

6.  While letters of determination that deny ADA paratransit eligibility
    include information about the right to appeal and instructions for
    appealing the decision, letters sent to riders determined to be
    conditionally eligible or who have a special designation attached to
    their eligibility do not include appeal information.

7.  All letters that inform applicants that they have been denied ADA
    paratransit eligibility appear to contain a similar statement: "The
    health care provider's statement did not reflect a mobility
    impairment that would prevent your using the regular bus at this
    time." The DOT ADA regulations require that more specific reasons
    for denial be included in letters of determination.

8.  One of the individuals who serves on the Review Board and who is
    involved in making initial determinations of ADA paratransit
    eligibility also serves on the Mayor's Advisory Committee on Transit
    for the Mobility Impaired that hears the appeals for eligibility.
    The DOT ADA regulations require that there be a "separation of
    authority" between those involved in the initial determination
    process and those involved in the appeals process (49 CFR
    §37.125(g)(2)).

9.  The City does not have a system for tracking ADA paratransit
    applicants as they go through the determination process. It
    therefore is not possible to easily determine if the process has
    taken more than 21 days and if an applicant should therefore receive
    presumptive eligibility for ADA complementary paratransit service
    until a determination is made. The City also, as a result, does not
    notify applicants of the availability of service, or enter
    applicants into the system as presumptively eligible, if the
    determination process exceeds 21 days. Public information and
    instructions about applying also do not inform applicants of their
    right to service if determinations are not made within 21 days of
    the receipt of a completed application.

10. In the past it appears that the City did not have adequate
    eligibility determination capacity to arrange mandatory in-person
    interviews in a reasonable period of time. In the fall of 2004
    applicants typically had to wait four to eight weeks for an
    in-person interview. Recent records indicate that additional
    determination capacity has been added and that in-person interviews
    are being scheduled in one or two weeks.

11. Some City staff appear to have made ADA paratransit eligibility
    determinations based on applicants' abilities to use fixed route
    service with an attendant. Section 37.123 of the DOT ADA regulations
    requires that eligibility determinations be made based on an
    individual's ability to use the fixed route system independently.

12. Mini Ride Supervisors appear to have overturned several staff
    recommendations to grant ADA paratransit eligibility to applicants
    because a medical professional signed Part III of the application
    form but appeared to rely on the applicant to complete the questions
    in this section.

13. Mini Ride Supervisors denied eligibility to at least three
    applicants, overturning the recommendations of the staff and Review
    Board, without documenting the reasons for the denials.

14. The City no-show suspension policy classifies all cancellations
    after 5 p.m. the day before service as a late cancellation and as a
    type of no-show. The regulations allow transit systems to suspend
    service for a reasonable period for riders who abuse the system by
    regularly "no-showing" for scheduled trips. While transit agencies
    have in recent years also considered "late cancellations" to be an
    abuse of the system and have considered this in their suspension
    policies, to be included the effects of a late cancellation should
    be operationally equivalent to a no-show in terms of the negative
    impact on the service.

15. The City's no-show policy imposes suspensions on riders for
    no-showing three or more times in a 30-day period. Subsequent
    no-shows may lead to longer suspensions. Considering only three
    no-shows in a 30-day period to be excessive and an abuse of the
    service may unreasonably limit service to ADA eligible customers.
    Appendix D of 49 CFR Part 37 states that suspensions of eligibility
    for no-shows are intended to prevent a "pattern or practice of
    'no-shows.'" It is further noted, "a pattern or practice involves
    intentional, repeated or regular actions, not isolated, accidental
    or singular incidents."

16. The City's formal written no-show policy indicates that riders can
    be permanently suspended from Mini Ride service if they have three
    occurrences of three or more no-shows in a 30-day period. As noted
    above, the DOT ADA regulations allow suspensions for a "reasonable
    period of time." Permanent suspensions for no-shows are not
    consistent with the regulations.

17. The City's no-show policy does not account for no-shows that are
    beyond the riders' control. The no-show warning letters and
    suspension letters also do not indicate that riders can contact Mini
    Ride to indicate if no-shows were beyond their control and have
    these removed from their record.

**Recommendations**

1.  The City should provide trips to and from in-person interviews, and
    to and from medical appointments to have ADA paratransit application
    forms completed, without charging a fare to the rider. Also, the
    City should revise its public information and policy documents to
    indicate that transportation associated with completing the
    application process is provided free of charge.

2.  The City should develop procedures to handle situations where
    applicants elect not to release their social security numbers. If an
    applicant elects not to provide this information, the City should
    simply assign a random, unique number to the application.

3.  The City should amend its policy that Mini Ride service can be
    denied to riders who use wheelchairs that do not have working
    brakes.

4.  The City should revise its policy that requires applicants to wait
    at least six months before reapplying for ADA paratransit
    eligibility if they have been denied. Applicants should be allowed
    to reapply at any time if they believe their functional abilities
    have changed or if they believe they are better able to document
    their inability to use the fixed route system.

5.  The City should make its Mini Ride policy that requires children
    under the age of 12 to be accompanied by a "responsible person"
    consistent with any policy regarding use of the fixed route service
    by children.

6.  The City should include information about the appeal process in all
    letters that deny or limit eligibility in any way, including
    conditioning eligibility or placing additional designations of
    eligibility.

7.  The City should include detailed and specific reasons for denying
    eligibility in letters of determination, rather than a standard
    statement.

8.  The City should not have the individual who serves on both the
    Review Board and Mayor's Advisory Committee on Transit for the
    Mobility Impaired take part in any ADA paratransit eligibility
    appeals that come before the Mayor's Advisory Committee.

9.  The City should create and maintain a system for tracking
    applications through the eligibility process. The City should inform
    applicants that if determinations take more than 21 days, applicants
    will be presumptively eligible and will receive service until a
    final decision is made. The City should include this information in
    the instructions in the application form, as well as in other public
    information describing the eligibility process.

10. The City should ensure that it has the capacity to arrange in-person
    interview in a reasonable period of time, e.g., a maximum of one or
    two weeks from the time an applicant calls to request an interview.

11. The City should instruct staff involved in the ADA paratransit
    eligibility determination process to only consider the ability of an
    applicant to independently use the fixed route system. Ability to
    use fixed route service with the assistance of an attendant or
    companion should not be a reason to provide conditional eligibility
    or to deny eligibility.

12. The City should revise its policy of denying applicants if a medical
    professional signs the application form but fails to personally
    complete the questions on the form. In these cases, the City might
    more appropriately follow up by phone with the professional to
    verify the answers provided, or ask the applicant to resubmit this
    part of the form.

13. Supervisors should document the reasons for overturning the
    eligibility recommendations of City staff and the Review Board,
    particularly for service denials. This documentation would be
    crucial during any appeals by the applicant.

14. The City should reconsider its policy of suspending persons who do
    not cancel by 5 p.m. the day before service and should ensure that
    its definition of a "late cancellation" is operationally equivalent
    to a no-show in terms of its impact on the service (e.g., not
    canceling one or two hours before the scheduled pickup time).

15. It is recommended that the City revise its no-show suspension policy
    to consider the frequency with which riders no-show rather than just
    the absolute number of no-shows incurred during a specified period
    of time.

16. The City should revise its no-show suspension policies to provide
    for suspensions of "a reasonable period" and not a permanent
    suspension.

17. The City should revise its no-show suspension policy so that
    no-shows and late cancels that are beyond the riders' control will
    not be counted against them. This information also should be added
    to public information describing the no-show policy and to warning
    and suspension letters sent to riders.

18. The City should revise its practice of sending both a warning letter
    and a suspension letter for the same no-show occurrences. The
    current policy can lead to riders being warned that future
    violations will result in suspensions and then receiving a
    suspension letter two days later.

# **Telephone Access**

The review team collected information about telephone access to the
City's Mini Ride service. Telephone access for placing or changing trip
reservations or checking on the status of a ride is an important part of
ADA complementary paratransit operations. Experiencing significant
telephone delays to place trip requests or to check on rides could
discourage people from using the service and could therefore be
considered a form of capacity constraint.

Team members collected the following information:

-   Consumer input gathered through telephone interviews with riders,
    advocates, and agencies

-   Standards for telephone answering performance

-   Design of the phone system and the staffing of phones

-   Practices for handling of calls in both reservations and dispatch
    through direct observation

-   Phone system monitoring reports (Automatic Call Distribution
    reports)

**Consumer Comments**

As noted in the "Consumer Comments" portion of Section 3 of this report,
most of the riders and advocates contacted for input in advance of the
on-site visit cited problems with telephone access. Several riders
indicated that they regularly experienced long phone hold times when
placing trip requests of calling to check on the status of scheduled
rides. Riders indicated that the phones are very busy first thing in the
morning with people calling seven days in advance, the maximum advance
reservation time, for their rides. One advocate also indicated that
riders say they often leave messages about cancellations, but that
vehicles come anyway and they are marked as no-shows.

The formal complaint filed with FTA also noted that there were long
telephone hold times on the trip reservation line. The complaint also
claimed that some call center staff were rude.

**Phone Service Standards and Performance Monitoring**

According to the Customer Service Supervisor, the City has an informal
performance standard for telephone hold times of four minutes maximum.
However, at the time of the review team's visit, City transit managers
stated that they were not monitoring or measuring telephone hold times.
The Customer Service Supervisor has her office next to the customer
service representatives' (CSRs) room. She can view phone activity and
queue length information from her computer screen. She can also view
firsthand the activities of the CSRs.

The CSRs are located at the ground level of Albuquerque's transit
center. Several of the CSR workstations are located at windows open to
the public. They handle ticket and pass sales for the fixed route, along
with information queries from the public. According to several CSRs, the
sale of passes occupies much of the time of those CSRs who sit at these
front workstations. During the review team's site visit (which took
place in the middle of the month), team members often observed that CSRs
would place callers on hold while they handled business with in-person
customers. One of the workstations is located in the lobby of the
transit center. This location can be problematic when the CSR is having
a telephone conversation that contains personal and/or sensitive rider
information.

In addition, all CSRs take calls for Mini Ride reservations and
information, as well as fixed route information.

**Phone System Design**

The customer service call center has a total of 12 workstations, plus a
workstation in the supervisor's office. Three workstations are located
at the windows to the outside and another is in the lobby of the transit
center. There is one telephone number that customers use to make a trip
request for Mini Ride service by voice (505-243-7433). There is a
separate TTY telephone number (505-724-3183).

The City's three transit facilities (Alvarado Transportation Center,
Yale Boulevard Garage, and Daytona Road Garage) collectively have a
total telephone capacity of 92 lines (four T1 lines of 23 lines each).
Incoming and outgoing calls can be distributed among any or all of the
"trunk groups"; customer service is one of the trunk groups. Depending
on the phone lines in use throughout the transit department, all 12
customer service workstations can have a call. Furthermore, the maximum
number of calls that can be in queue for customers equals:

92 -- \[number of all other lines in use\]

> -- \[number of all other calls in queue for other trunk groups\]

This telephone line capacity does not appear to be a capacity constraint
for customers to make trip requests.

**Reservations Staffing**

The City accepts requests for Mini Ride service from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. on
weekdays and 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. on weekends. The cut-off for next-day
reservations is 4:45 p.m. The peak call times are from 6 a.m. to 6:30
a.m. on weekdays and again from 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. on weekdays. However,
the two standard work shifts of the CSRs on weekdays are: 6 a.m. to 3
p.m.; and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. This means that neither peak call time is
covered by peak CSR staffing. Table 7.1 presents a more detailed
analysis of the CSRs on duty on weekdays, based on CSR shift schedules
at the time of the review team's visit. The numbers in the table account
for CSRs on rest or meal breaks.

**Table 7.1 --- Work Shifts of Customer Service Representatives (CSRs)**

  ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------
  **Day**           **CSRs Working**                    

                    **6 to 7 a.m.**   **11 a.m. to 3    **3 to 5 p.m.**
                                      p.m.**            

  **Monday**        5                 ranges, 9 -- 12   ranges, 4 -- 7

  **Tuesday**       5                 ranges, 8 -- 11   ranges, 3 -- 7

  **Wednesday**     5                 ranges, 7 -- 11   ranges, 3 -- 7

  **Thursday**      5                 ranges, 8 -- 13   ranges, 3 -- 8

  **Friday**        5                 ranges, 9 -- 13   ranges, 4 -- 8
  ----------------- ----------------- ----------------- -----------------

The City is aware of the early morning rush to make reservations. While
CSRs do not take calls until 6 a.m., the phone system is turned on at
5:45 a.m. so that customers can get in the phone queue and wait for the
6 a.m. opening.

The peak call times are compounded by the need to serve the customers at
the windows. The divided attention of the CSRs at those three
workstations was quite noticeable from 3 to 5 p.m., when many students
and workers visit the transit center to get information or passes.

In summary, it appears that the City may have sufficient CSR staffing to
handle the calls for Mini Ride service. However, the CSRs have several
responsibilities and their shifts do not match the peak hours of
incoming telephone calls.

**Telephone Service Performance Reports**

Review team members analyzed data compiled by the City's Taske
Technology ACD tracking and reporting software for the week of August 15
to 21, 2005. The reports provide call data in 15-minute increments for
answered and abandoned (caller hangs up before the call is answered)
calls. Table 7.2 presents highlights of this analysis for Monday to
Friday of that week for the City's morning peak call period, 6 a.m. to 7
a.m. Table 7.3 then presents highlights for those days' afternoon peak
call period, 3 p.m. to 5 p.m.

**Table 7.2 --- Telephone Wait and Abandon Analysis for Morning Peak (6
to 7 a.m.):**

**August 15 to 19, 2005**

  --------------- ----------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ---------- -------------
  **Day**         **Total     **Answered                  **Abandoned              
                  Calls\***   Calls**                     Calls\***                

                              **Median Wait **Maximum     **Number**    **%**      **Median Wait
                              (min:sec)**   Wait                                   (min:sec)**
                                            (min:sec)**                            

  **Monday**      176         0:05          0:50          91            51.7       4:48

  **Tuesday**     163         0:05          0:32          78            47.9       2:20

  **Wednesday**   112         0:05          0:36          39            34.8       2:48

  **Thursday**    37          0:01          0:02          16            43.2       1:30

  **Friday**      133         0:05          0:54          55            41.3       2:40
  --------------- ----------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ---------- -------------

\* excludes calls abandoned in 0 to 6 seconds

**Table 7.3 --- Telephone Wait and Abandon Analysis for Morning Peak (3
to 5 p.m.):**

**August 15 to 19, 2005**

  --------------- ----------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ---------- -------------
  **Day**         **Total     **Answered                  **Abandoned              
                  Calls\***   Calls**                     Calls\***                

                              **Median Wait **Maximum     **Number**    **%**      **Median Wait
                              (min:sec)**   Wait                                   (min:sec)**
                                            (min:sec)**                            

  **Monday**      355         0:05          7:43          202           56.9       1:16

  **Tuesday**     313         0:05          3:23          180           57.5       2:12

  **Wednesday**   331         0:06          9:05          194           58.6       2:35

  **Thursday**    303         0:06          1:22          167           55.0       1:53

  **Friday**      294         0:06          0:54          166           56.5       2:38
  --------------- ----------- ------------- ------------- ------------- ---------- -------------

\* excludes calls abandoned in 0 to 6 seconds

The data in both tables indicates that, for the calls that are answered,
the wait time is generally short ("median wait" represents the time for
which half the calls have a shorter wait time and half have a longer
wait time). For these days, the morning maximum wait times also tend to
be small. The afternoon maximum wait times varied greatly by day.

However, there are large numbers of abandoned calls in both time
periods---even after removing the calls abandoned by the callers very
quickly, in six seconds or less. In the afternoon peak, the proportion
of abandoned calls was consistently between 55 and 60 percent. In the
morning peak, 45 percent of all calls were abandoned over this five-day
period. The "median wait" for abandoned calls represents the median time
for callers on hold before they hung up (for example, on Monday morning,
half of the callers on hold that hung up waited at least 4:48 before
hanging up). The median wait for abandoned calls was greater than two
minutes in four of the five mornings and three of the five afternoons,
with Monday morning having the poorest performance. What this indicates
is that the City serves some callers well, but other callers do not get
served at all; they either have to make more than one call, or they stop
trying to call.

**Findings**

1.  The City has an informal standard for telephone performance of a
    maximum hold time of four minutes, according to its supervisor of
    customer service. However, at the time of the review team's visit,
    the City's transit department managers were not monitoring or
    measuring telephone hold times.

2.  The City appears to have sufficient customer service representative
    (CSR) workstations and telephone line capacity for receiving trip
    requests for Mini Ride service.

3.  CSRs are responsible for taking calls for Mini Ride trip requests,
    other Mini Ride service information calls, and calls about ABQ Ride
    fixed route service. In addition, CSRs at certain workstations have
    to sell tickets and passes and answer question from customers in
    person. While this may make more efficient use of staff, it likely
    hurts telephone performance.

4.  The peak call times for Mini Ride trip requests are from 6 a.m. to 7
    a.m. and 3 p.m. to 5 p.m. The standard work shifts for CSRs are from
    6 a.m. to 3 p.m. and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. As a result, neither peak call
    time is covered by peak CSR staffing.

5.  In an analysis of telephone hold times and abandon times during the
    morning and afternoon peak call times for a sample week in August
    2005, the median wait times for CSRs to answer calls was short; the
    maximum wait times were generally short in the morning, but varied
    in the afternoon. On two of the five days analyzed, maximum wait
    time in the afternoon exceeded the City's four-eminute standard.
    Maximum wait time in the afternoon on Monday, August 15, 2005, was 7
    minutes and 43 seconds. Maximum wait time in the afternoon on
    Wednesday, August 17, 2005, was 9 minutes and 5 seconds. Also, 45
    percent of callers hung up before reaching a CSR in the morning
    peak, and over 55 percent hung up in the afternoon peak; the median
    wait before callers hung up was usually more than two minutes. This
    indicates that the City serves some callers well, but other callers
    do not get served at all; they either have to make more than one
    call, or they stop trying to call.

**Recommendations**

1.  The City should establish a formal standard for telephone hold
    times.

2.  The City should regularly monitor its telephone hold times. With
    this information, managers can better decide if they need additional
    staff or other resources, or if they should re-allocate the existing
    staff and resources.

3.  When monitoring telephone performance, managers should be aware of
    abandoned calls, as many of these calls represent callers who have
    to make more than one call, or stop trying to call.

4.  The City should consider revising its procedures for CSRs who are
    assigned to the workstations by the public windows so that they
    serve their customers---both callers and in-person---in an efficient
    manner. In particular, any CSR who works at the workstation in the
    transit center lobby might be limited to taking calls that do not
    involve discussing information about Mini Ride riders.

5.  The City should review its overall staffing plans and make
    adjustments as needed to address periods of time with hold times
    that exceed its standards or which have a high percentage of
    abandoned calls.

# **Trip Reservations**

In this portion of the compliance review, the team examined how the City
handled trip requests from riders. Particular attention was given to the
City's policies regarding trip reservations, and whether the City uses
any form of trip caps or waiting lists. The review also considered
whether there was a pattern or practice of denying a significant number
of trip requests. The review team gathered and analyzed the following
information:

-   Input from customers and advocates through telephone interviews, and
    through a review of comments and complaints on file at the City and
    at FTA

-   Reservations policies and performance standards

-   Service reports prepared by the City showing the number of trips
    served and the number of trips denied for the past three years

-   Direct observations of the handling of trips by review team members,
    and interviews with staff about the ability to accommodate trip
    requests

**Consumer Comments**

As noted in the "Consumer Comments" portion of Section 3 of this report,
several riders and advocates contacted expressed concerns with the
handling of trip requests. Several riders stated that reservations
cannot be made based on a desired drop-off time or an appointment time.
A caller must provide a pickup time. CSRs advise riders to allow at
least 60 minutes travel time and to allow 90 minutes between the initial
pickup and any return trip (or second) requested pickup time---to allow
for the 60-minute travel time plus the 15-minute windows on each side of
the two pickups. According to riders, subscription service is very hard
to get and a lot of riders who travel regularly must call each week.
Several riders indicated that trip request times are "negotiated" plus
or minus one hour without consideration for trip needs. One person
indicated he had to leave in the middle of a concert because that was
the only time offered. Another person cited instances when she had to
leave work early because that was the only time offered. Riders also
indicated that many people call seven days in advance, first thing in
the morning, to place trip requests. This is done to ensure getting a
time close to what they want. Many riders also indicated that they often
are offered times more than one hour from the requested time. They said
that they do not think that the system records these requests as
denials.

Several riders noted that when trip requests cannot be scheduled while
they are on the phone, these requests are put into a "placement list" to
be handled by schedulers later. Riders said they must then call by 4:45
p.m. on the day before service to find out if the trip was scheduled and
what the pickup time is. They all indicated they do not consider being
on the placement list as a guarantee of service. They also indicated
that if they don't call to get the pickup time and make other
arrangements, the system does not call them, the vehicle will still show
up, and the customer will be marked as a no-show.

The formal complaint on file with FTA also noted that trips are not
always scheduled at the times requested or needed. The complaint also
claimed that next-day service was not provided and that some trip
requests made on a next-day basis are not served.

**Trip Reservation Policies, Practices and Performance Standards**

Mini Ride trip reservations can be placed seven days a week. On
weekdays, trip reservations are accepted from 6 a.m. until 8 p.m. On
weekends, riders can call to place trip requests from 8 a.m. until 5
p.m. The call center is not staffed on six holidays each year
(Christmas, New Year's Day, Memorial Day, July 4, Labor Day, and
Thanksgiving). On these days, Mini Ride calls are recorded in voice mail
and staff review and respond to these calls first thing in the morning
on the day following each holiday.

Trip reservations are accepted up to seven days in advance. *How to
Schedule a Mini Ride Reservation* states that "We strongly encourage
passengers to schedule rides seven days in advance." This information
sheet also advises riders to allow one hour traveling time when placing
their trip requests. It also states that a minimum of 90 minutes must be
allowed between pickups.

A maximum of three roundtrips or six one-way trips may be scheduled per
phone call. Repetitive trips to the same place at the same time are
considered one trip.

For regular, ongoing trips, riders can request subscription service.
Page 9 of the *Sun Van Service Rules* indicates that to be considered
for subscription service, trips must be made two or more times each
week. City staff noted that subscription service was limited to 50
percent of all trips scheduled and that limited subscription service was
available for new requests.

All trip reservations are entered into the system based on a requested
pickup time. This includes going trips and return trips. Appointment
times or desired drop-off times are not considered in the trip
reservation process or entered into the scheduling system. According to
the City's policies, CSRs may negotiate the trip times with the caller
from one hour before to one hour after the requested pickup time.

Riders are allowed to make reservations for medical trips on a "call
when ready" basis. This means that the return portion of the trip is
entered into the system without a set pickup time. Riders then call when
their medical appointment is completed and ask to be picked up. For
trips booked on a "call when ready" basis, the City's policy is to make
the pickup within 60 minutes of the time when rider calls.

As indicated in its cover letter transmitting service information in
advance of the review, the City's stated goal is to place each trip
request without a denial. The City staff also indicated that they do not
use any trip caps.

City staff also noted that if customer service representatives are not
able to place trips on runs at the time that riders call, the rider will
be asked if they would like to be put on a "placement list." If riders
agree to be added to the placement list, the Mini Ride scheduling
supervisor will manually place these trips onto runs. Riders who agree
to have their trip requests placed on the placement list are instructed
to call back by 4:45 p.m. on the day before the day of service to see if
the trip had been scheduled and to get an exact pickup time.

As noted above, riders contacted in advance of the review indicated that
they did not interpret being on the placement list as a guarantee of
service. An internal City memorandum from the marketing manager to the
customer service staff dated January 30, 2004, also indicates that the
placement list is not a guarantee of service. This memorandum
reinstructs CSRs in the use of the placement list. It states, "It is
your responsibility to inform the client that a trip placement is not a
guarantee of service." The memorandum also implies that at that time
there also was an issue with CSRs properly coding trips as denials when
they could not be added to the schedule and if the trip was not put on
the placement list. Based on this information, it appears that the
placement list is a type of waiting list. A copy of the memorandum is
provided in Attachment G.

**Reported Trip Denials**

In advance of the review, the City provided Mini Ride trip statistics
for FY 2003 and FY 2004, and for part of FY 2005. This included
information about the total number of trips provided each year, as well
as the number of trips denied each year. This information is summarized
in Table 8.1. The City's fiscal year runs from July 1 through June 30.

As shown, the City reported that 182,711 one-way ADA complementary
paratransit trips were provided in FY 2003. This number increased to
185,226 one-way trips in FY 2004. For the first nine months of FY 2005,
from July 2004 through March 2005, a total of 188,473 one-way trips were
provided. Throughout this 33-month period, the City reports showed no
trip denials.

**Table 8.1 --- Reported ADA Complementary Paratransit Trips Provided
and Denied,**

**FY 2003, 2004, and 2005**

  ---------------------- ------------------------ -----------------------
  **Fiscal Year**        **Total One-Way Trips    **Total One-Way Trips
                         Provided**               Denied**

  FY 2003                182,711                  0

  FY 2004                185,226                  0

  FY 2005 (9 months)     188,473                  0
  ---------------------- ------------------------ -----------------------

**Observations of the Handling of Trip Requests**

For several hours while on site, review team members sat with several
different customer service representatives (CSRs) and listened in on
conversations with callers. The team members recorded the CSRs' handling
of trip requests.

CSRs use the windows-based Trapeze PASS computer software (upgraded
earlier in 2005 from an older DOS version) to take and schedule Mini
Ride trip requests. The CSRs had no trip reservation "script" or formal
set of guidelines for how to handle reservation requests. In general,
the CSRs asked for the person's ID number, the date and time of the
requested pickup, and the origin and destination addresses. Most CSRs
also asked whether the person was traveling alone (or with a companion
or personal care attendant). Some CSRs also inquired about what mobility
aids the person would be using for the trip. This was somewhat
inconsistent among CSRs, however.

Team member observations verified that CSRs did not ask for or enter
appointment or desired arrival times into the Trapeze system and that
the "latest drop-off" feature in Trapeze is not used when booking
"going" trips. Team members also noted that CSRs did not use the
"earliest departure" feature in the Trapeze software when booking trips.
The "earliest departure" feature is meant to ensure that the software
does not generate pickup times that are earlier than the time that a
rider is able to leave (e.g., work trips where someone cannot leave
before the end of work). CSRs entered requested pickup times and allowed
the system to generate trip offers from an hour before to an hour after
the requested time, regardless of appointment times or earliest
departure times. It was the caller's responsibility to know that times
might be negotiated an hour each way and to request times that would
still meet their trip needs.

If riders asked for advice on what pickup time to request to ensure that
they could get to appointments on-time, CSRs typically instructed them
to request a time that was 60 minutes before their appointment time.
This advice, however, could be misleading. If riders request pickup
times that are only 60 minutes before their appointment times, these
times could be negotiated up to an hour before or after the time
requested. A rider's on-board travel time also could be up to 60
minutes. It is therefore possible that if riders follow the instructions
of a CSR and request pickup times only 60 minutes before appointment
times, they could easily end up being late for appointments. As
indicated in the "Consumer Comments" portion of Section 3 of this
report, several riders contacted in advance of the review did indicate
problems with arriving late for appointments.

CSRs were able to retrieve addresses from both trip history files and
from a common destination file in Trapeze. However, some staff members
noted that the new Trapeze software system did not include as many
common addresses as the old DOS version, which made it slower to book
trips. Also, customer service representatives indicated that some
geocodes were still missing for certain common addresses, such as in
Kirtland Air Force Base.

Team members observed that CSRs first attempted to schedule trips within
the one-hour negotiation time. If no trip offers were generated by the
Trapeze system, CSRs would then "open up" the trip negotiation parameter
(i.e., toggle off the "within window" setting) and allow the Trapeze
system to search for trip times that were more than one hour from the
requested time. If a trip option was found with this broader search, the
CSR would schedule the trip and would not record the request as a
denial.

The review team observed a few cases when Trapeze generated potential
trips within an hour of the requested times, the CSR offered the trips,
but the riders decided not to take the offer. In these cases, the CSRs
cancelled out the trip requests rather than recording the transactions
as "refusals." The review team also observed two instances when no trip
offer was generated, riders did not want to be added to the placement
list, and the CSRs cancelled out the trip request rather than coding
these as denials.

The review team observed several instances when no trip offers were
available and riders were asked if they would like to be added to the
placement list. The CSRs did not always remind the customers put on the
placement list about the callback process. This could lead to
miscommunication about expected pickup times and could cause no-shows
for customers.

If a call ended without the customer accepting a trip offer from the
CSR---whether the trip offer was outside of the one-hour negotiating
window (denial), inside of the negotiating window (refusal), or the
customer turned down being put on the placement list---the CSR would
typically end the call by telling the customer that he or she should try
to make the reservation seven days in advance.

CSRs were inconsistent about confirming trip information once trips were
booked. Some CSRs confirmed the basics of the trip, including the date,
scheduled pickup time, and origin and destination information, but
others did not.

Team members asked CSRs about the "Rapid RIDE After Dark" service and
their understanding of the hours of Mini Ride operation. The Customer
Service Supervisor noted that she received an official notice of
expanded hours of operation in a memo dated September 7, 2005. In August
2005, a service area buffer was added to the computer to allow trips to
be scheduled during late hours in that designated section of the service
area.

The team members observed the CSRs' handling of a total of 119 trip
requests during the week of September 12, 2005. Table 8.2 shows the
results of these observations. The "Days in Advance" column refers to
the number of days in advance of the day of service that the trip
request was placed. "Responsive Trip Offers" refers to trips scheduled
at times that were within an hour of the time requested. "Placements"
refers to trip requests for which no trip offer was generated and which
were added to the placement list. "Cancelled (Refused)" refers to cases
where a trip offer within one hour of the requested time was generated,
the time was offered to the rider, the rider refused the offer, and the
CSR cancelled the trip request. "Cancelled (Denied)" refers to instances
where no trip offer was found, the rider declined to be added to the
placement list, and the CSR cancelled the transaction rather than
recording the requests as denials. "Scheduled \> 60 Minutes" refers to
observations where trip times more than 60 minutes from the requested
time were identified and taken by the rider. As noted above, these were
scheduled and were not noted as a form of trip denial.

As shown, 98 of the 119 trip requests observed (82.4 percent) were
scheduled within one hour of the requested pickup time. No available
trip times could be found for nine trip requests (7.6 percent) and
riders in these cases agreed to be added to the placement list. In six
cases (5.0 percent), trip times were offered to riders, the riders
refused the offers and the trip requests were cancelled rather than
recorded as "refusals." For three of the trip requests observed (2.5
percent), no trip offers were available and the transaction was
cancelled out rather than being recorded as a denial. And, for another
three requests (2.5 percent), times more than an hour from the requested
time were offered, taken by the rider, and not recorded as denials.

**Table 8.2 --- Observations of the Handling of 119 Mini Ride Trip
Requests,**

**Week of September 12, 2005**

+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| **Days | **Re     | **Plac   | **Ca    | **Ca    | **Sc    | **TO   |
| in     | sponsive | ements** | ncelled | ncelled | heduled | TALS** |
| Adv    | Trip     |          | (Ref    | (De     | \> 60   |        |
| ance** | Offers** |          | used)** | nied)** | Mi      |        |
|        |          |          |         |         | nutes** |        |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| 1      | 6        | 4        | 3       | 2       | 1       | 16     |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| 2      | 11       | 1        | 1       | 0       | 0       | 13     |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| 3      | 6        | 1        | 0       | 1       | 1       | 9      |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| 4      | 0        | 0        | 0       | 0       | 0       | 0      |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| 5      | 0        | 0        | 0       | 0       | 0       | 0      |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| 6      | 3        | 0        | 1       | 0       | 0       | 4      |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| 7      | 72       | 3        | 1       | 0       | 1       | 77     |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+
| **TO   | **98**   | **9**    | **6**   | **3**   | **3**   | *      |
| TALS** |          |          |         |         |         | *119** |
|        | *        | **7.6%** | *       | *       | *       |        |
|        | *82.4%** |          | *5.0%** | *2.5%** | *2.5%** | **     |
|        |          |          |         |         |         | 100%** |
+--------+----------+----------+---------+---------+---------+--------+

As shown in Table 8.2, the majority of trip requests, 77 of the 119
observed (or 64.7 percent), were placed a full seven days in advance.
Only 16 trips (13.4 percent) were requested one day in advance. And,
"responsive offers" were made for only six of the 16 trips requested one
day in advance. The rest were either denied, scheduled more than an hour
from the time requested, added to the placement list, or offered at a
time that did not work for the rider (and were refused).

The City does not request or enter into its scheduling system
information about riders' appointment times, or information about the
earliest time that riders are able to depart. While the Trapeze
scheduling system used by the City has features to allow responsive trip
reservations and scheduling, these features are not used in the Mini
Ride system. Trip requests are negotiated plus or minus one hour without
considering these important potential travel constraints. As a result,
even trips that are "on time" may get riders to appointments late and
may require riders to leave work or other engagements earlier than
desired in order to get Mini Ride service.

**Findings**

1.  The City does not use explicit trip caps in the operation of the
    Mini Ride ADA complementary paratransit service.

2.  The City does use a type of a wait list when handling Mini Ride trip
    requests. The "placement list" used by the City does not appear to
    be a guarantee of service and is not understood by riders to be a
    guarantee of service. Riders must call back by 4:45 p.m. on the day
    before the day of service to determine if trip requests put on the
    placement list have been scheduled and to receive the actual
    scheduled pickup time. Section 37.131(f) of the DOT ADA regulations
    considers the use of a wait list to be a kind of capacity constraint
    on the service. Firsthand observations of the handling of 119 trip
    requests found that nine requests (7.6 percent of all requests) were
    put on the placement list.

3.  Some trip requests also appear to be denied but not recorded by the
    City as denials. Firsthand observations of the handling of 119 trip
    requests found that no trip offers were made to three callers who
    were requesting rides (2.5 percent of all requests observed). In all
    three cases, CSRs cancelled the trip transaction and did not record
    the transaction as a trip denial.

4.  CSRs also were observed to "open" the two-hour scheduling window in
    the Trapeze system to allow the system to identify trip offers more
    than one hour from the requested time. In three of the 119 trip
    bookings observed (2.5 percent of observed requests), the CSRs
    offered riders pickup times that were more than an hour from their
    requested time. If these were not accepted by riders they were
    recorded as "refusals" rather than trip denials. And, if accepted,
    they were not recorded as a kind of "denial" of the original
    request. These also should be more accurately recorded by the City
    as denials.

5.  The observations of outright denials, plus the observations of trips
    negotiated more than an hour from the requested time suggest that
    the City may be denying about five percent of all Mini Ride trip
    requests.

6.  The City Mini Ride program does not appear to offer reliable
    next-day service and trip denials for requests made one day in
    advance are very high. Only 16 of the 119 trip requests observed
    firsthand (13.4 percent) were placed one day in advance. Only six of
    these 16 trip requests (37.5 percent) were scheduled responsively.
    The rest of the callers were either put on the placement list,
    denied a trip, scheduled more than one hour from the requested time,
    or offered a time that was more than one hour from the requested
    time which did not work for the caller.

7.  A total of 77 of the 119 trip requests observed (64.7 percent) were
    placed by riders a full seven days in advance. When responsive trip
    offers could not be found, CSRs also were observed to tell riders
    that they needed to call seven days in advance. Mini Ride public
    information also encourages riders to call seven days in advance.
    These are clear indications that the Mini Ride system has
    significant capacity constraints and that riders cannot rely on the
    program for next-day service. These capacity constraints and the
    City's instructions to riders to call seven days in advance also
    appear to be causing the long telephone hold times each morning.

8.  CSRs do not appear to consider rider trip needs when negotiating
    trip times. The Trapeze system is set to look for trip offers from
    an hour before to an hour after requested times. Riders are not
    asked if there are constraints to their travel such as the earliest
    time they can depart or the latest time they can arrive to still be
    on-time for appointments. The "Latest Drop-Off" and "Earliest
    Pick-Up" features of the Trapeze system, designed to take these
    needs into consideration, are not used by the City in the trip
    reservation process. Riders are currently given trip offers that do
    not meet their travel needs and if these are not accepted, they are
    recorded as refusals rather than denials.

9.  The handling of trip requests appeared to vary by CSR. Some CSRs
    verified scheduled trip information at the end of each transaction.
    Others did not. A standardized trip reservations "script" was not is
    use at the time of the on-site visit.

**Recommendations**

1.  The City should either discontinue the use of the placement list or
    treat trips placed on this list as guaranteed. In other paratransit
    systems that cannot schedule trip requests at the time of the call,
    these trip requests are entered into the scheduling system at the
    time requested and riders are told that the trips will be provided
    at the times requested. Schedulers then manually place these trips
    on runs based on the requested times. If the trip times must be
    adjusted to fit on runs, the schedulers call riders back to
    negotiate a revised pickup time. This practice is not considered to
    be a wait list since riders have the understanding that the trip
    will be provided and will be provided at the time requested unless
    they are called back. If the City continues to use the placement
    list, it could follow a similar procedure.

2.  The City should more closely monitor CSRs to ensure that trip
    denials are properly recorded. This should include outright denials
    (when no trip offers are available), as well as trip offers
    scheduled more than an hour from the requested time. The City could
    monitor CSRs by regularly listening in on how ethey each handle
    calls. Mini Ride managers could monitor service by printing special
    reports that show trip requests that are coded as "cancelled" and
    then by analyzing these trip requests to identify instances when the
    trip was never booked because a responsive trip offer was not made.

3.  The City should increase service capacity to reduce service denials.
    Increased capacity would likely also remove the need for riders to
    call seven days ahead to reserve a trip, thereby addressing the
    telephone hold time issues. Sections 9 and 10 of this report provide
    further discussion of increased capacity.

4.  The City should immediately begin requesting information about
    appointment times and earliest departure times as part of the trip
    reservation process. The City should also begin using the "Latest
    Drop-Off" and "Earliest Pick-Up" features in the Trapeze system to
    ensure that responsive offers are given in rider requests for
    service.

5.  The City should develop a standardized trip reservations script and
    provide training to CSRs in its use.

# **Service Performance**

The DOT ADA regulations for ADA complementary paratransit service
indicate that poor service quality can be viewed as a capacity
constraint. Specifically, the regulations note that missed trips or the
provision of a substantial number of untimely trips or excessively long
rides can constitute capacity constraints. Consequently, the review team
examined the on-time performance and on-board ride times of the City's
Mini Ride service. The review team conducted the following activities to
assess service quality:

-   Reviewed consumer input regarding each issue through telephone
    interviews and through a review of complaints filed with FTA and
    with the City

-   Reviewed the City's service policies, procedures, and standards in
    these areas

-   Observed the scheduling and dispatch functions and interviewed
    schedulers and dispatchers

-   Interviewed drivers about schedules provided and dispatch support
    received

-   Reviewed the City's on-time performance and travel time reports

-   Tabulated actual pickup and drop-off times recorded on completed
    manifests for a selected day and compared the results with reported
    performance

-   Reviewed a sample of driver manifests to assess average trip length

-   Conducted a comparison of travel times between ADA complementary
    paratransit trips and comparable fixed route trips

**Consumer Comments**

As noted in Section 3 of this report, riders and advocates contacted in
advance of the on-site review had mixed comments concerning Mini Ride
service quality. Several riders indicated issues with on-time
performance. A particular concern that was expressed by riders was that
they often arrive very early to appointments. A few riders indicated
issues with pickup times being different on the driver's manifest from
what they were given.

Several riders indicated that when they call to check on a late pickup
they are often told "five to 10 minutes." After 15 minutes or more they
call again and get a similar response. A few riders said they sometimes
call reservationists rather than dispatchers to get late trip
information and that the reservationists don't seem to spend the time to
actually check with dispatch, so they give a general answer.

There was mixed input from riders regarding on-board travel times. Some
felt ride times were excessive and that routing can be circuitous.
Others did not feel this was a problem.

The formal complaint on file with FTA did not cite on-time performance
or travel time issues. It did indicate, though, that some drivers were
rude.

Of the 338 complaints recorded by Mini Ride from January through August
2005, eight percent (28 complaints) related to late pickups and less
than one percent (2 complaints) related to early pickups.

**City Service Policies and Standards**

**On-Time Performance Policies and Standards**

Riders are given a 30-minute "ready window" of time within which they
are asked to be ready and waiting for vehicles to arrive. This window is
from 15 minutes before to 15 minutes after the initial scheduled time
(negotiated time). The City considers a pickup as on-time if it occurs
within this 30-minute window. In addition, Albuquerque considers pickups
that occur before the beginning of the pickup window as on time.

The Operations Manager for the Transit Department indicated that the
City's goal is to make at least 95 percent of pickups on time or early.
This appeared to be an informal goal. The goal was not formally adopted
or summarized in any of the City's service rules or policies.

The Operations Manager indicated that the City does not have standards
or a goal related to on-time arrivals. As noted in Section 8 of this
report, the City does not record rider appointment times or track
performance related to on-time arrivals.

**Travel Time Policies and Standards**

Mini Ride's policy regarding on-board travel time is that no trip should
take longer than one hour.

**Scheduling Procedures**

Most trips are scheduled during the reservation process, except for
subscription trips, which are managed separately by the transit
supervisor. Subscription trips are batched by the transit supervisor
eight days in advance to set a skeleton or template schedule. Demand
trips are inserted into the template as capacity allows.

Placement trips are inserted manually by the transit supervisor the day
prior to service. As described in Section 8 of this report, customers
are expected to call to confirm the pickup time; however, this policy is
not conveyed consistently to passengers. For Tuesday, September 13,
2005, there were 23 (one-way) trips on the placement list, which were
not assigned runs at the start of the day. On Wednesday, September 14,
2005, there were 30 trips on the placement list. Although one of the
transit supervisors indicated that he sometimes tries to call to verify
pickup times for placement list trips, he is not always able to do so.
Mini Ride staff stated that plans were underway to address this concern.

There is no formal scheduler position assigned to handle final schedule
reviews. Instead, two transit supervisors manage subscription trips,
placement list trips, and basic schedule clean-up in addition to a
variety of other duties related to scheduling, dispatching, driver
management, and road supervision.

Late in the day before trips are to be provided, the transit supervisors
quickly review the schedules and perform "level 2 scheduling," which
allows them to override trip booking violations in order to insert or
move trips, including those on the placement list. Customer service
representatives do not have "level 2 scheduling" privileges.

The transit supervisors who handle Mini Ride scheduling are also
responsible for overseeing fixed route operations. They indicated that,
as a result, little time is available to do a detailed review of the
Mini Ride schedules or to do Mini Ride schedule "clean-up" on an ongoing
basis. Among their fixed route and paratransit duties are:

-   Assigning placement trips for ADA and Job Access

-   Monitoring placement trips for ADA and Job Access

-   Calling passengers to confirm placement trips, as time permits

-   Managing subscription trips

-   Handling agency closures, holiday closures/trip cancellations (Mini
    Ride)

-   Geocoding (about five to 10 addresses per week)

-   Updating common destination files

-   Printing driver manifests and sign-on sheets

-   Providing dispatch oversight (fixed route and Mini Ride)

-   Covering for dispatchers during lunch, breaks, and days off

-   Running Crystal Reports for cab rides (Job Access after-hours trips)

-   Handling vouchers and faxing cab rides to taxis at 5:30 p.m. for
    taxi trips for Job Access

-   Compiling data for FTA National Transit Database reports

-   Handling driver bid (fixed route and Mini Ride, every four months)

-   Handling scheduling and dispatching bid (fixed route, every four
    months)

-   Preparing biweekly payroll for dispatchers (fixed route and Mini
    Ride)

-   Preparing some driver payrolls (Mini Ride)

-   Handling driver union bid (Mini Ride)

-   Managing requested time off (Mini Ride)

-   Scheduling drivers and monitoring driver sign-on sheets (Mini Ride)

-   Supervising a group of drivers (part of a new team management
    program)

-   Serving as road supervisors three days a week

Review team members discussed the issue of a lack of a dedicated Mini
Ride scheduler position with the Transit Department's Operations
Manager. The Operations Manager, who formerly oversaw fixed route
services and had recently been assigned to manage both fixed route and
paratransit services, indicated that he had been led to believe that the
software would be able to handle all trip requests without human
intervention.

Based on the experience and observations of the review team, schedulers
remain a crucial component in developing and finalizing paratransit
schedules. Schedules created by current computer software still benefit
from review and adjustment from schedulers.

**Dispatch Procedures**

Team members observed Mini Ride's dispatch operation several times
during the on-site visit. Team members sat with dispatchers during peak
operating hours on Tuesday afternoon, September 13, 2005, and Wednesday
morning, September 14, 2005.

Fixed route bus and Mini Ride service is dispatched from a joint control
center located at the Alvarez Transportation Center in downtown
Albuquerque. The office is on the second floor of the administration
building (customer service is located in another building at the
Transportation Center). Fixed route and Mini Ride each have their own
dispatch staff that share space in the same room and cover for one
another, if needed.

The two transit supervisors (who also are responsible for scheduling)
are also located in the dispatch office. Driver pull-out and vehicle
assignments are handled by window dispatch supervisors at each of the
two garages, Yale Boulevard and Daytona Road.

Dispatchers communicate with drivers via two-way radios and mobile data
terminals (MDTs). Drivers check in with dispatch before starting their
runs. At that time, a radio check is performed and the MDT is activated
if there is one. If the driver has a cell phone, the number is provided
to dispatch. During the radio check-in, the dispatchers update drivers
about any changes since the manifest was printed, including trip
cancellations or trip reassignments.

Mini Ride dispatches over its own channel (called "Sun Van") and has a
second channel for off-line communication with supervisors. Fixed route
buses are dispatched using another radio channel. Cell phones are not
given to drivers although some drivers have cell phones and use them to
contact dispatch if their radios are not working. Drivers are given
paper manifests and use them to record trip pickup and drop-off times,
odometer readings, add-ons, and trip reassignments.

About half of the vehicles have MDTs and automatic vehicle location
(AVL) systems. None of the 2300 series vehicles have MDTs. During the
on-site visit, seven of the MDTs were not working, according to
dispatch, along with two of the two-way radios. MDTs, where installed
and when working, are used to record vehicle arrivals and departures for
pickups and drop-offs, and no-shows, and to transmit trip reassignments
and cancellations to drivers.

Drivers are required to perform trips using the MDTs if they have them.
If not, they perform trips by calling dispatch periodically to provide
updated pickup and drop-off times, which are entered into the system by
dispatch. This updated information is used by dispatch to track on-time
vehicle status throughout the day and to reassign trips to keep runs on
time if needed. Dispatch indicated that drivers were good about keeping
them updated on their trip status and notifying dispatch if they were
running late.

In the event of an apparent passenger no-show, drivers are instructed to
wait five minutes within the on-time pickup window and then to contact
dispatch for approval to leave. If the passenger has a vision
impairment, dispatch attempts to call them. Otherwise, dispatch makes a
note of the no-show in the dispatch notes and marks the rider as a
no-show, authorizing the driver to continue the run.

Dispatchers indicated that drivers typically code all trips for which
the rider does not show up to board or does not make the trip as
no-shows. This includes situations where the vehicle shows up after the
30-minute pickup window. The City did not use the idea of a "missed"
trip and does not appear to code situations where the vehicle is late
and the rider does not make the trip as "missed" trips rather than
"no-shows." In these cases, dispatchers indicated that they add a note
to the trip file indicating that the vehicle was late.

Even with the note in the trip file, situations for which the vehicle
arrives late and the rider does not take the trip do still end up being
recorded in the system as no-shows. The monthly no-show reports that are
generated for use in the no-show suspension policy do include incidents
that should have been recorded as "missed trips." The Customer Service
Supervisor noted that staff does go back to look at dispatcher notes to
verify no-shows before suspensions are implemented.

"Call when ready" (will call) return trips from medical appointments are
requested through the customer service center. When a rider makes a
"call when ready" request, the customer service representative changes
the scheduled pickup time for that rider from 29:00 (a dummy time) to
the current time. The request is then electronically transmitted to
dispatch. There is no pop-up screen, so dispatchers must periodically
refresh their screens to see new "call when ready" requests.

"Where's my ride?" questions also are placed through the customer
service representatives. They first look at real-time information in the
computer to determine whether the vehicle has been updated via the MDT
or dispatch to calculate an estimated time of arrival (ETA) based on the
vehicle's current location. If the vehicle run information has not been
updated, the CSR calls dispatch and ask them to provide an ETA. Dispatch
then calls the driver to determine his or her whereabouts and to
calculate an ETA.

Mini Ride generally schedules 38 to 40 runs during the morning weekday
peak. On weekends, there are 10 to 11 scheduled runs. Dispatchers noted
that sometimes they may be short one or more vehicles in the afternoon
if there is a delay or breakdown prior to the afternoon peak. During the
site visit, two vehicles were out of service late Tuesday afternoon (one
breakdown and one minor accident), and there were no spare vehicles
available to continue one of the runs. The dispatchers had to reassign
the remaining trips and call the customers to advise them that their
vehicles would be late.

**Dispatch Staffing**

Mini Ride has six full-time dispatchers who cover operations between
4:30 a.m. and 11 p.m. on weekdays; 5 a.m. to 11 p.m. on Saturday; and 5
a.m. to 8 p.m. on Sunday. On weekdays, there are at least two
dispatchers between 5 a.m. and 10:30 p.m., with a third dispatcher
backing up from 10 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Prior to the review team's site
visit, there was one vacant position, which left the third dispatcher's
seat open. With a weekday peak pull-out of 38 to 40 runs, each
dispatcher manages about 20 runs on weekdays. Three dispatchers work on
Saturday, with two on duty from 9:30 a.m. to 6 p.m. Two dispatchers work
on Sunday, with their shifts overlapping between 11:30 a.m. and 2:30
p.m. On Saturday and Sunday, peak service is generally 10 or 11 runs.
When needed, the two supervisors are also available to dispatch.

Table 9.1 presents the dispatcher and supervisor schedule that was set
to go into effect on October 15, 2005. It reflects a full complement of
dispatchers after one vacancy was filled in September 2005.

**Table 9.1 --- Mini Ride Dispatch Schedule Effective October 15, 2005**

  ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------
  **Name**     **Sat.**     **Sun.**     **Mon.**     **Tues.**    **Wed.**     **Thurs.**   **Fri.**

  Shift 1      OFF          OFF          4:30a--1p    4:30a--1p    4:30a--1p    4:30a--1p    4:30a--1p

  Shift 2      5a--2:30p    5a--2:30p    5a--2:30p    5a--2:30p    5a--2:30p    OFF          OFF

  Shift 3      OFF          OFF          2p--10:30p   2p--10:30p   2p--10:30p   2p--10:30p   2p--10:30p

  Shift 4      2:30p--11p   OFF          OFF          2:30p--11p   2:30p--11p   2:30p--11p   2:30p--11p

  Shift 5      9:30a--6p    11:30a--8p   2:30p--11p   OFF          OFF          5:30a--2p    5:30a--2p

  Shift 6      OFF          OFF          10a--6:30p   10a--6:30p   10a--6:30p   10a--6:30p   10a--6:30p

                                                                                             

  Supervisor   OFF          OFF          8:30a--7p    8:30a--7p    8:30a--7p    8:30a--7p    OFF

  Supervisor   8:30a--7p    OFF          OFF          OFF          8:30a--7p    8:30a--7p    8:30a--7p
  ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------

**Driver Interviews**

[]{.mark}

While on site, the review team interviewed 11 Mini Ride drivers at the
Daytona Road Garage. Drivers were randomly selected as they finished
their runs. A mix of new and long-term drivers were interviewed, with
the shortest tenure being one year and the longest tenure being 15
years. Several questions were asked about schedules and dispatch
support, training, and understanding of service policies. Attachment H
includes a copy of the form and questions used in the interviews.

When asked about the schedules they were given, nine of the 11 drivers
responded that they felt many of the schedules were too tight. The other
two drivers said that schedules were sometimes too tight, but most were
okay. One driver felt that the schedules had become particularly hard to
perform over the past few months.

Five of the nine drivers noted that they ran late for several trips each
day. These drivers typically said they were late for two to three
pickups each day (out of about 20). The other four drivers said they
were occasionally late ("once a day" or "several times a week"), but
indicated that they were mainly able to work the schedule and remain on
time.

Drivers said that dispatchers were generally as helpful as they could
be, but often did not have many options for helping them if they were
running late. Six of the 11 drivers said that about half the time
dispatchers would report that there were no other options for
reassigning late trips and would instruct them to "do the best you can."
One driver said that dispatchers needed to be able to focus on the
paratransit operation rather than splitting their time between fixed
route and paratransit.

Because the schedules were tight, almost all drivers indicated that they
tried to be a bit early for their pickups, if possible. Several drivers
mentioned, though, that it was policy to not arrive before the beginning
of the pickup window. If they were early, they would be in the 15-minute
early side of the pickup window. Two drivers noted that the former Mini
Ride manager had been very strict about not allowing arrivals before the
on-time pickup window.

Eight of the 11 drivers indicated that riders frequently reported that
the times they were given were different from the pickup times that the
driver had on the manifest. Five of these drivers said the times could
be different by 30 to 60 minutes. One driver said differences were
mostly 10 to 15 minutes. Three drivers said this happened sometimes, but
not a lot. One driver said there seemed to be a problem with "placement
trips." He felt that riders put on the placement list still had the time
they requested in their minds and did not always understand that the
times could be changed as these trips were manually scheduled. He said
this needed to be explained better to riders or the time changes needed
to be communicated to riders.

All 11 drivers interviewed had a very good understanding of the
30-minute on-time pickup window. Seven of the 11 drivers also felt that
most riders had a good sense of the pickup window and were ready when
they arrived. Four drivers felt that only "some" riders knew the on-time
window, while others did not seem to know that they should be ready up
to 15 minutes before their scheduled pickup time.

All 11 riders also seemed to have a very good understanding of the
no-show policy and what to do if riders did not show up to board the
vehicle. All knew they were to wait at least five minutes within the
pickup window and then contact dispatch. Most noted that dispatchers
would try to contact riders and, if contact could not be made, the
dispatchers would then authorize the no-show. There was some
inconsistency, though, on efforts that were made to locate riders before
dispatch was contacted. Four of the drivers interviewed indicated that
they would "look around" and "knock on the door." The other seven,
though, indicated that they typically did not leave the vehicle to look
for riders. These drivers said they would just wait in the vehicle for
the five minutes. A couple said they would "honk the horn," and one said
he put the vehicle in reverse so the backup beeper would go off to alert
the rider the vehicle was there. Three drivers said that the notes on
the manifests indicating which riders needed to be alerted to the
vehicles' arrival were pretty accurate and good.

Ten of the 11 drivers interviewed knew that the official policy was that
the service was "curb-to-curb," but indicated that they provided
assistance to the door if needed. One driver said he followed the
service policy and provided only assistance in and out of the vehicle.

When asked the general question, "What is the most difficult part of the
job?" seven of the 11 drivers cited the "tight schedules" and "trying to
stay on time." Three drivers also cited "traffic" and trying to avoid
road construction as difficult issues. One driver said that irate
passengers (mainly mad about late trips) was the hardest thing to deal
with. One driver said working with inexperienced dispatchers was most
difficult.

When asked for "Other issues" and general input, four of the 11 drivers
said that the service had suffered since the consolidation with fixed
route. These drivers said that the system has "lost the communication
with drivers that used to be there," that there is now "less supervision
of drivers," that there were "not enough supervisors now," and that
"many supervisors now don't understand paratransit operations." One
driver said that most of the focus now seemed to be on fixed route
service. One driver said that overall he felt the service was "pretty
good."

**Reported On-Time Performance**

The City does not tabulate or track on-time performance. At the request
of the review team, Mini Ride staff generated on-time reports for
specified days from Trapeze.

**Calculated On-Time Performance for Sample Days**

The City can generate on-time performance reports using the Trapeze
software reporting module. At the request of the review team, City staff
provided these reports for August 16 and August 17, 2005 (Tuesday and
Wednesday). Table 9.2 summarizes Mini Ride on-time performance, based on
data in the system, for these two days.

**Table 9.2 --- On-Time Performance for Mini Ride Pickups: August 16 and
17, 2005**

  ---------- --------- ------------ --------- ------------ ------- ------------ --------
  **Date**   **Total   **On Time              **Early**            **Late**     
             Trips**   (in                                                      
                       window)**                                                

                       **Number**   **%**     **Number**   **%**   **Number**   **%**

  August 16  609       501          82.3      22           3.6     86           14.1

  August 17  626       506          80.8      27           4.3     93           14.9
  ---------- --------- ------------ --------- ------------ ------- ------------ --------

On both days, the percentage of on-time and early pickups was about 85
percent. This is well below the 95 percent informal goal communicated to
the review team by the City's Operations Manager. In practice, the
on-time performance may be slightly better, as the late pickups include
the "call when ready" trips, for which the pickup times stored in the
database would not be accurate reflections of the actual negotiated
pickup times. But such trips comprise only a few percent of the total,
so the adjusted on-time performance (assuming that, in fact, the "call
when ready" pickups were on-time) would be perhaps a few percent higher.

In order to develop an independent estimate of on-time performance, the
review team reviewed a sample of Mini Ride trips completed on August 16,
2005 (Tuesday). The review team created a 25 percent sample, selecting
each fourth trip listed on the completed set of driver manifests for
August 16. This yielded a total of 152 passenger trips. For each trip in
the sample, the team recorded the scheduled pickup time printed on the
manifest. The team also recorded the actual pickup arrival times, pickup
departure times, and drop-off times written on the manifests by the
drivers. Using the pickup window of -15/+ 15 minutes, the team analyzed
the on-time performance of these sample trips. Table 9.3 presents a
summary of this analysis for pickups.

**Table 9.3 --- On-Time Distribution for Mini Ride Pickups,**

August 16, 2005

  -------- --------------------- -------------------- --------------------
                                 **Number**           **%**

  Total                          152                  100.0
  Sample                                              

  \% in                          132                  86.8
  Window                                              

  \% in                          137                  90.1
  Window                                              
  or Early                                            

  All                            5                    3.3
  Early                                               
  Trips                                               

           1-15 mins             4                    2.6

           16-30 mins            0                    0.0

           \> 30 mins            1                    0.7

  All Late                       15                   9.9
  Trips                                               

           1-15 mins             10                   6.6

           16-30 mins            4                    2.6

           \> 30 mins            1                    0.7
  -------- --------------------- -------------------- --------------------

The review team's analysis of on-time performance shows that Mini Ride
did not achieve its 95 percent goal on this sample day. Only 90.1
percent of trips had pickups that were in the window or earlier. If one
considers only trips within the -15/+15 minute pickup window, then only
86.8 percent of trips were on time. These estimates developed from
driver manifest data were consistent with the performance estimated
using Trapeze data.

[]{.mark}

Nevertheless, based on the review team's sample, it does not appear that
Mini Ride has a substantial number of significantly late pickups. Four
of 152 pickups in the sample (2.6 percent) were 16 to 30 minutes later
than the window. One pickup (0.7 percent) was more than 30 minutes later
than the window.

As mentioned above, the City does not record the requested appointment
times of trips. As a result, it does not measure performance for on-time
drop-offs. This measure would be very useful, as many riders,
particularly on "going" trips, are more concerned with getting to a
destination on time and less so with getting picked up on time. Riders
contacted in advance of the review also indicated particular problems
with late arrivals for appointments.

**Analysis of On-Board Ride Times**

For this analysis, the review team first generated and reviewed a
special "Ride Length Report" for August 16, 2005. This report listed all
600 trips provided on that day, including information about the origin,
destination, pickup time, and arrival time. This report was used to
calculate the average ride time for all trips as well as to identify
trips with ride times from: 0 to 15 minutes; 16 to 30 minutes; 31 to 45
minutes; 46 to 60 minutes; and longer than 60 minutes. Table 9.4 shows
that the average travel time for all trips was 29 minutes (three trips
did not have travel times recorded) and that 96 percent of all trips
were 60 minutes or less. As noted above, the City's stated goal is to
perform all trips in 60 minutes or less.

Table 9.4 --- Ride Length Report Travel Times for August 16, 2005,

Using Data in the Trapeze System

  ------------------------------------ --------------- ------------------
                                       Mini Ride       

  Total                                600 trips       

  Average Travel Time                  29 minutes      

                                       \# Trips        Percent

  0-15 Minutes                         124             20.6

  16-30 Minutes                        259             43.1

  31-45 Minutes                        125             21.0

  46-60 Minutes                        68              11.3

  61-90 Minutes                        23              3.8

  91-120 Minutes                       1               0.2

  \>120 Minutes                        0               0.0
  ------------------------------------ --------------- ------------------

Next, the sample of 152 trips that was drawn from the completed driver
manifests for August 16, 2005, (and used in the on-time performance
analysis) was used to cross-check and verify the information in the
Trapeze system. Table 9.5 shows travel time information for this sample
of trips. As shown, the average travel time for the sample trips was 27
minutes. For the sample, 94.7 percent (144 trips) were 60 or fewer
minutes. In addition, 4.6 percent (7 trips) were between 61 and 90
minutes and 0.7 percent (1 trip) was between 91 and 120 minutes. No
trips were longer than 120 minutes. This analysis of primary data from
the completed driver manifests correlated very closely to the data in
the Trapeze system.

Table 9.5 --- Travel Time for 152 Randomly Selected Trips on August 16,
2005,

Taken from Completed Driver Manifests

  ------------------------------------- ---------------- ----------------
                                        Mini Ride        

  Sample Size                           152 trips        

  Average Travel Time                   27 minutes       

                                        \# Trips         Percent

  ≤ 60 Minutes                          144              94.7

  61-90 Minutes                         7                4.6

  91-120 Minutes                        1                0.7

  \>120 Minutes                         0                0.0
  ------------------------------------- ---------------- ----------------

Third, the 24 trips identified in the Ride Length Report for August 16,
2005, that exceeded 60 minutes were reviewed to determine whether these
ADA complementary paratransit trip lengths were significantly long
relative to making the same trip on fixed route service. It is presumed
that, in most cases, ADA complementary paratransit trips that are
shorter than 60 minutes will not be significantly long relative to the
fixed route. The review team worked with an experienced customer service
representative to generate comparable fixed route itineraries based on
the origin and destination addresses and time of day for each
paratransit trip. Fixed route itineraries were developed to minimize
distance to the nearest stop, minimize transfers, and to closely match
the actual paratransit travel times for each trip. Table 9.6 shows the
results of this analysis. The table includes:

Table 9.6 --- August 16, 2005 -- Mini Ride Trips \> 60 Minutes

<table>
<colgroup>
<col style="width: 5%" />
<col style="width: 13%" />
<col style="width: 7%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 9%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 6%" />
<col style="width: 8%" />
</colgroup>
<thead>
<tr class="header">
<th colspan="2"><strong>ADA Complementary Paratransit Trip</strong></th>
<th><strong>Map Quest</strong></th>
<th colspan="3"><strong>Paratransit Travel Time</strong></th>
<th colspan="6"><strong>Fixed Route Equivalent</strong></th>
<th></th>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<th><p><strong>Trip#</strong></p>
<p><strong>/</strong></p>
<p><strong>Run#</strong></p></th>
<th><p><strong>PU/DO Address</strong></p>
<p><strong>(rounded to 100 block)</strong></p></th>
<th><strong>Direct Drive Mile-age (miles)</strong></th>
<th><strong>Trip Type</strong></th>
<th><p><strong>Actual PU/</strong></p>
<p><strong>DO Time</strong></p></th>
<th><strong>Actual Ride Time (mins)</strong></th>
<th><strong>Itinerary (routes/ trans-fers)</strong></th>
<th><strong>Start/ End Time</strong></th>
<th><strong>On-Board Time (mins)</strong></th>
<th><strong>Distance to Stop: Origin/ Desti-nation</strong></th>
<th><strong>Walk/ Wait Time</strong></th>
<th><strong>Total FR Travel Time</strong></th>
<th><strong>Para- transit Travel Time - FR Travel Time
(mins)</strong></th>
</tr>
</thead>
<tbody>
<tr class="odd">
<td>1</td>
<td>8300 Vina del Sol Dr NE</td>
<td>8.5</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>7:56</td>
<td>73</td>
<td>2, 8</td>
<td>7:59</td>
<td>59</td>
<td>7 blocks</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>99</td>
<td>-36</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>101</td>
<td>1000 Candelaria Rd NE</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>9:09</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 transfer</td>
<td>8:58</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>2</td>
<td>8400 Gordon Sindow Ct NE</td>
<td>12.2</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>6:20</td>
<td>61</td>
<td>31, 8, 50</td>
<td>6:23</td>
<td>97</td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>122</td>
<td>-61</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>102</td>
<td>2200 Yale Blvd SE</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>7:21</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>8:00</td>
<td></td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>3</td>
<td>8400 Mendocino Dr NE</td>
<td>13.6</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>6:12</td>
<td>65</td>
<td>2, 8, 50</td>
<td>6:19</td>
<td>101</td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>126</td>
<td>-61</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>102</td>
<td>2200 Sunport Blvd SE</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>7:17</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>8:00</td>
<td> </td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>4</td>
<td>1200 Countryside Lane NW</td>
<td>17.5</td>
<td>Add</td>
<td>9:38</td>
<td>79</td>
<td>36, 66, 141</td>
<td>9:39</td>
<td>48</td>
<td>3 miles</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>73</td>
<td>6</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>104</td>
<td>1500 San Pedro Dr SE</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>10:57</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>10:27</td>
<td> </td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>5</td>
<td>5000 San Mateo Blvd NE</td>
<td>15.5</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>14:15</td>
<td>64</td>
<td>141, 66, 53</td>
<td>2:17</td>
<td>110</td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td>10</td>
<td>120</td>
<td>-56</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>108</td>
<td>6300 Isleta Blvd SW</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>15:19</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>4:07</td>
<td> </td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>6</td>
<td>10700 Snow Heights Blvd NE</td>
<td>9.7</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>7:45</td>
<td>80</td>
<td>8, 10</td>
<td>7:44</td>
<td>42</td>
<td>4 blocks</td>
<td>35</td>
<td>77</td>
<td>3</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>111</td>
<td>1500 4th St NW</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>9:05</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 transfer</td>
<td>8:26</td>
<td></td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>7</td>
<td>2700 Indian Farm Lane NW</td>
<td>7.4</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>8:32</td>
<td>61</td>
<td>36, 66, 140</td>
<td>8:29</td>
<td>70</td>
<td>8 blocks</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>95</td>
<td>-34</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>116</td>
<td>5400 San Mateo Blvd NE</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>9:33</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>9:39</td>
<td> </td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>8</td>
<td>4900 Jefferson St NW</td>
<td>9.7</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>15:15</td>
<td>73</td>
<td>140, 66, 53</td>
<td>15:17</td>
<td>76</td>
<td>8 blocks</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>116</td>
<td>-43</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>116</td>
<td>2000 Arenal Rd SW</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>16:28</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>16:33</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>9</td>
<td>3300 Truman St NE</td>
<td>14.6</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>13:26</td>
<td>66</td>
<td>141, 66, 162</td>
<td>14:43</td>
<td>111</td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>131</td>
<td>-65</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>116</td>
<td>7100 Montecito Ct NW</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>14:32</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>16:34</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>10</td>
<td>9600 Reba Ave SW</td>
<td>12.7</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>7:45</td>
<td>78</td>
<td>54, 11</td>
<td>7:38</td>
<td>56</td>
<td>7 blocks</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>96</td>
<td>-18</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>122</td>
<td>1000 Stanford Dr NE</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>9:03</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 transfer</td>
<td>8:34</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>11</td>
<td>4900 San Pedro Dr NE</td>
<td>3.0</td>
<td>Add</td>
<td>10:05</td>
<td>73</td>
<td>8, 141</td>
<td>10:17</td>
<td>51</td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>81</td>
<td>-8</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>122</td>
<td>8000 Academy Dr NE</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>11:18</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 transfer</td>
<td>11:08</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>12</td>
<td>5400 Valley Park Dr SW</td>
<td>15.9</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>9:30</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>158, 66, 140</td>
<td>9:22</td>
<td>96</td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>126</td>
<td>-58</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>123</td>
<td>5400 San Mateo Blvd NE</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>10:38</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>10:58</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>13</td>
<td>1000 Candelaria Rd NE</td>
<td>8.5</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>13:49</td>
<td>65</td>
<td>8, 2</td>
<td>14:13</td>
<td>78</td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>118</td>
<td>-53</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>126</td>
<td>8300 Vina del Sol Dr NE</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>14:54</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 transfer</td>
<td>15:31</td>
<td></td>
<td>7 blocks</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>14</td>
<td>5400 San Mateo Blvd NE</td>
<td>14.8</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>14:35</td>
<td>75</td>
<td>141, 66, 54</td>
<td>14:39</td>
<td>102</td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>117</td>
<td>-42</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>129</td>
<td>1600 Corriz Dr SW</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>15:50</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>16:21</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 blocks</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>15</td>
<td>5400 San Mateo Blvd NE</td>
<td>13.9</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>14:35</td>
<td>93</td>
<td>141, 66</td>
<td>14:39</td>
<td>67</td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>92</td>
<td>1</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>129</td>
<td>400 Morning Dew St SW</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>16:08</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 transfer</td>
<td>15:46</td>
<td></td>
<td>1.5 miles</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>16</td>
<td>900 Crane Dr SW</td>
<td>14.0</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>7:53</td>
<td>61</td>
<td>54, 66, 141</td>
<td>7:57</td>
<td>92</td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td>25</td>
<td>117</td>
<td>-56</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>132</td>
<td>5000 San Mateo Blvd NE</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>8:54</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>9:29</td>
<td></td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>17</td>
<td>5000 San Mateo Blvd NE</td>
<td>9.6</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>14:45</td>
<td>65</td>
<td>140, 66, 1</td>
<td>14:27</td>
<td>70</td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>90</td>
<td>-25</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>135</td>
<td>700 Stagecoach Rd SE</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>15:50</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>15:37</td>
<td></td>
<td>4 blocks</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>18</td>
<td>6700 Mariposa Pl NW</td>
<td>14.0</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>8:09</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>162, 66, 50</td>
<td>7:44</td>
<td>76</td>
<td>7 blocks</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>106</td>
<td>-38</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>140</td>
<td>2300 Alamo Av SE</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>9:17</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>9:00</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 blocks</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>19</td>
<td>7900 Golden Spike Dr NW</td>
<td>18.7</td>
<td>Sub</td>
<td>9:15</td>
<td>85</td>
<td>158, 66, 31</td>
<td>9:16</td>
<td>88</td>
<td>7 blocks</td>
<td>30</td>
<td>118</td>
<td>-33</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>142</td>
<td>20300 G Blvd SE-Kirtland AFB</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>10:40</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>10:44</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>20</td>
<td>400 94th St SW</td>
<td>12.1</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>8:27</td>
<td>85</td>
<td>66, 140</td>
<td>8:30</td>
<td>65</td>
<td>1 mile</td>
<td>40</td>
<td>105</td>
<td>-20</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>142</td>
<td>4900 Jefferson St NW</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>9:52</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 transfer</td>
<td>9:35</td>
<td> </td>
<td>8 blocks</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>21</td>
<td>2300 Stoneham Pl NW</td>
<td>12.3</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>8:48</td>
<td>89</td>
<td>162, 66, 50</td>
<td>7:44</td>
<td>76</td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>96</td>
<td>-7</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>142</td>
<td>2300 Alamo Av SE</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>10:17</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>9:00</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 blocks</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>22</td>
<td>2300 Alamo Av SE</td>
<td>12.7</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>14:30</td>
<td>76</td>
<td>50, 66, 158</td>
<td>14:30</td>
<td>83</td>
<td>2 blocks</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>103</td>
<td>-27</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>145</td>
<td>5600 Taylor Ranch Rd NW</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>15:46</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>15:53</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>23</td>
<td>2300 Alamo Av SE</td>
<td>14.4</td>
<td>Dem</td>
<td>14:30</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>50, 66, 158</td>
<td>14:30</td>
<td>91</td>
<td>2 blocks</td>
<td>20</td>
<td>111</td>
<td>-43</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>145</td>
<td>4600 Snapdragon Rd NW</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td>15:38</td>
<td> </td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>16:01</td>
<td> </td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td>24</td>
<td>5400 Gibson Blvd SE</td>
<td>17.3</td>
<td>Rover</td>
<td>15:08</td>
<td>68</td>
<td>140, 66, 155</td>
<td>15:14</td>
<td>73</td>
<td>&lt; 1 block</td>
<td>15</td>
<td>88</td>
<td>-20</td>
</tr>
<tr class="even">
<td>153</td>
<td>10700 Coors Blvd NW</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td>16:16</td>
<td></td>
<td>2 transfers</td>
<td>16:27</td>
<td></td>
<td>1 block</td>
<td></td>
<td> </td>
<td> </td>
</tr>
<tr class="odd">
<td><strong> </strong></td>
<td><strong> Average</strong></td>
<td><strong>12.6</strong></td>
<td><strong> </strong></td>
<td><strong> </strong></td>
<td><strong>72</strong></td>
<td colspan="2"><strong>1.6 transfers</strong></td>
<td><strong>78</strong></td>
<td><strong> </strong></td>
<td><strong>27</strong></td>
<td><strong>105</strong></td>
<td><strong>-33</strong></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>

-   Origin and destination for each trip (rounded to the nearest 100
    block)

-   Direct drive mileage calculated using "MapQuest" website

-   Trip type (Dem=demand, Sub=subscription, Add=add-on (reassigned),
    and Rover=trip provided by a rover)

-   Start (pickup) and end (drop-off) paratransit times recorded by
    drivers

-   Actual travel times on ADA complementary paratransit service

-   Fixed route itinerary (bus)

-   Fixed route ride time (including transfer/wait time between routes)

-   Distance to/from bus stop based on origin/destination addresses

-   Fixed route walk/wait time allowance at each end of the trip (five
    minutes wait time plus walk time allowances based on distance)

-   Total fixed route travel time including walk/wait, on-board, and
    transfer time

The last (right-hand) column compares the ADA complementary paratransit
service with the fixed route travel times. A minus sign (-) means that
the ADA complementary paratransit service travel time would be *less*
than the fixed route travel time.

Table 9.6 shows an average travel time of 72 minutes for the ADA
complementary paratransit trips and an average direct drive travel
distance from origin to destination of 12.6 miles for these trips, based
on MapQuest mileages. The table also shows an average total travel time
of 105 minutes for comparable fixed route trips (including an allowance
for traveling to/from the stop, wait time at the stop and transfers),
which is 33 minutes longer than comparable ADA complementary paratransit
trips. The actual on-board fixed route travel time including transfer
time (but without travel time to/from the stops and wait time) was 78
minutes, which is six minutes longer than comparable ADA complementary
paratransit trips. On average, 1.6 transfers would be required to
complete a fixed route trip; seven trips would require one transfer and
17 would require two transfers.

Table 9.6 also shows that 87.5 percent (21 of 24) of the trips included
in this sample would have *shorter* travel times on ADA complementary
paratransit when compared to total fixed route travel times. The Mini
Ride trips with longer travel times compared to total fixed route travel
time included trip #4, which was six minutes longer; trip #8, which was
three minutes longer; and trip #15, which was one minute longer.

These results indicate that travel times on the Mini Ride service are
reasonable when compared to the ABQ Ride bus service, and they do not
contribute to a capacity constraint for the ADA complementary
paratransit service.

**Findings**

1.  At the time of the review, the City was not regularly monitoring
    on-time performance or generating regular on-time reports. Regular
    monitoring of on-time performance is vital for ensuring service
    quality and compliance with established service performance goals.

2.  For the selected sample days of August 16 and 17, 2005, about 81 to
    82 percent of scheduled Mini Ride pickups were performed within the
    30-minute on-time window. Another four percent of trips were
    performed early. This level of performance was well below the City's
    stated goal of performing at least 95 percent of pickups on time or
    early.

3.  While 14 to 15 percent of pickups on August 16 and 17, 2005, were
    after the 30-minute pickup window, a detailed analysis of 152
    randomly selected trips performed on August 16, 2005, indicated that
    most late pickups were late by one to 15 minutes. Four of 152
    pickups in the sample (2.6 percent) were 16 to 30 minutes later than
    the window. One pickup (0.7 percent) was made more than 30 minutes
    after the end of the 30-minute pickup window.

4.  The City does not appear to have a staff person dedicated to the
    development and careful review of Mini Ride schedules. The
    individuals assigned to this function had multiple responsibilities
    and indicated an ability to perform only a quick review of Mini Ride
    schedules before they were given to drivers. Senior staff at the
    City appeared to assume that the Trapeze system could generate
    schedules without significant human intervention.

5.  The City does not have an on-time arrival performance standard and
    does not track on-time arrival performance. Riders' appointments are
    not recorded in the trip reservation process or entered into the
    scheduling system. Schedulers and dispatchers therefore are not able
    to ensure on-time arrivals as they manage the delivery of service.
    Mini Ride riders contacted for input on the service expressed
    particular concern about late arrivals to appointments. It is likely
    that the City's lack of attention to rider appointments is resulting
    in riders arriving late for appointments.

6.  The City standard for travel time is that no Mini Ride trip should
    exceed 60 minutes. The City, however, does not regularly track or
    analyze Mini Ride on-board travel times.

7.  A detailed review of trips performed on August 16, 2005, indicated
    that on-board travel times on the Mini Ride service were reasonable
    and comparable to fixed route travel times. The analysis showed an
    average travel time of 29 minutes. For this sample day, 96 percent
    of all trips had an on-board travel time of 60 minutes or less. A
    further review of those trips that took more than 60 minutes showed
    that the Mini Ride travel times were comparable to fixed route
    travel times for similar trips.

8.  The City does not appear to have a formal definition of a "missed"
    trip and does not differentiate between trips that are rider
    "no-shows" and those that should be considered "missed" by Mini
    Ride. Mini Ride dispatchers add notes to the trip file when vehicles
    are late and no-shows are recorded, but the trips are still recorded
    as no-shows and then might be counted against riders for potential
    service suspensions. The DOT ADA regulations (49 CFR §37.131(f))
    also prohibit a pattern or practice of a substantial number of
    missed trips. It therefore is important that missed trips be defined
    and recorded to ensure compliance with this section of the
    regulations.

9.  Mini Ride dispatchers manage between 10 and 20 runs each. This level
    of staffing appears to be adequate.

10. Most drivers interviewed by the review team seemed to have a proper
    understanding of the on-time pickup window and no-show procedures.

11. Ten of 11 drivers interviewed said that they provided assistance to
    riders, as needed, beyond the City's policy of curb-to-curb service.

**Recommendations**

1.  The City should consider adding service capacity to improve on-time
    performance.

2.  The City should resume regular monthly monitoring of Mini Ride's
    on-time performance. On-time performance is a key measurement of
    service quality. Poor on-time performance may potentially be a
    capacity constraint for Mini Ride service. By analyzing the patterns
    of late trips, Mini Ride managers would be able to make better
    decisions about adjusting operations and allocating resources. Given
    the data and reports available to managers through the paratransit
    software, monitoring on-time performance should be a regular and
    straightforward activity.

3.  The City should begin allowing riders to book going trips based on
    appointment or desired arrival times, record appointment times, and
    undertake scheduling and dispatching to ensure on-time arrivals as
    well as on-time pickups.

4.  The City should adopt a standard and goal for on-time arrival
    performance. Some transit systems consider arrivals to be on time if
    riders arrive at appointments no later than the appointment time and
    no earlier than 30 minutes before the appointment time. The City may
    wish to consider this or a similar standard to avoid a substantial
    number of significantly early drop-offs.

5.  The City should consider having a dedicated full-time scheduler (or
    equivalent) plus part-time schedulers to assist on weekends or as
    backup schedulers. Typically, transit systems of the size of the
    Mini Ride system have at least one full-time equivalent dedicated
    scheduler. Initial trip placements made by automated systems such as
    the Trapeze system require ongoing and regular review by schedulers
    to ensure good schedules. This human oversight is important for
    service quality as well as service efficiency.

6.  The City should review on-board travel times for the Mini Ride
    service to ensure that travel times continue to be reasonable.

7.  The City should adopt a formal definition of a "missed" trip and
    begin utilizing the features available in the Trapeze system to
    properly code missed trips. Proper coding of these trips is
    important to ensure that riders are not incorrectly charged with a
    no-show. It also will save customer service staff time that now is
    spent looking up trip notes to verify that no-shows are valid.
    Riders should only be recorded as no-shows if the vehicle shows up
    within the 30-minute pickup window and the rider fails to take the
    trip (i.e., is not there or refuses to go). If a vehicle arrives
    outside the 30-minute on-time window and the rider is not there or
    refuses the trip, these situations should be recorded as "missed"
    trips.

# **Resources**

The review team collected and examined information about resources
available to provide the ADA complementary paratransit service. This
included:

-   Input on vehicles and driver performance from riders

-   Information on the vehicle fleet and the availability of vehicles to
    cover scheduled runs

-   The number of drivers and the availability of drivers to cover
    scheduled runs

-   Information about driver training

-   The operating budget for the service and the process used to
    estimate funding needs

Following is a summary of observations in each of these areas.

**Consumer Comments**

Riders contacted in advance had many comments about the Mini Ride fleet.
Some riders who use wheelchairs complained that the ride on the newer
minibuses is very rough. One woman who had a spinal cord condition said
that she experiences extreme pain caused by the ride. She much prefers
the minivans. Many of the riders complained about the "96s" (the 1996
raised-roof vans). They indicated these vans have a front entrance door
that is very low (one woman who said that she is only 5\' 2\" tall said
she must duck and has a problem with the doors). Many riders also
indicated these vehicles are generally in poor condition, are dirty, and
have securement systems that are cumbersome and disliked by the drivers.
They also said the air conditioning on these "96" vans does not work.
Several riders indicated that it seems the vehicles frequently break
down and that this is one reason some trips are very late. Two riders
who said they travel with guide dogs indicated that they have had
ramp-equipped minivans show up for them that have another passenger on
board who is using a wheelchair. They said that these vehicles then do
not have enough space for them and their guide dog.

Comments on drivers were mixed, but mainly riders felt "some drivers are
good, others are not." Several said, "most drivers are very good." The
biggest issue with drivers seemed to be that they did not get out of the
vehicle to look for riders or identify that the vehicle was there.

Several riders expressed concern that the City was proving Job Access
service on the Mini Ride vehicles and that those trips were taking
needed capacity away from the ADA complementary paratransit service.
They all felt that the Job Access trips were getting priority during
peak hours and were creating peak hour capacity problems for ADA
paratransit eligible riders. They felt many trip requests were
"negotiated" outside of the peak (some more than an hour) because of the
guarantees given to Job Access trips.

**Vehicle Fleet and Vehicle Availability**

At the time of the on-site visit, the City had a fleet of 49 vehicles
that were used to provide Mini Ride service. This included 10
raised-roof vans (model year 1996), 28 ramp-equipped minivans (model
year 2000), and 11 body-on-chassis minibuses (model year 2003).
Maintenance staff indicated that there were two other 2000 model year
ramp-equipped minivans on the fleet list, but that one had been retired
and one was used only for JARC service since the ramp on the vehicle was
inoperable. A fleet roster is provided in Attachment I.

As noted in Section 9 of this report, weekday peak pull-out for the Mini
Ride program required between 38 and 40 vehicles at the time of the
on-site review. On weekdays, this means that there are nine to 11 spare
Mini Ride vehicles: a spare ratio of 18 to 22 percent.

The fleet roster provided in Attachment I shows the mileage of all
vehicles at the time of the on-site review. As shown, many of the
vehicles in the fleet had very high mileage. The 10 model year 1996
raised-roof vans (nine years old at the time of the review) had mileages
that ranged from 270,337 to 325,987. Seven of these vehicles had more
than 300,000 miles of use. The 28 model year 2000 minivans also had
significant mileages for light-duty vehicles of this type. Mileages on
these 28 minivans ranged from 165,186 to 207,903. Twenty-one of these
vehicles had more than 190,000 miles of use. The 2003 model year
minibuses had mileages ranging from 68,215 to 93,054.

Maintenance staff at the Yale Boulevard Garage indicated that with the
age of the fleet, they often are pressed to meet peak pull-out
requirements. They noted that often they are able to have only 36 to 40
vehicles available for service. On some days, this means that Mini Ride
does not have vehicles for all scheduled runs. Dispatchers then have to
close runs and have to same-day dispatch trips scheduled on those runs.
On one day during the week of the on-site visit (Tuesday, September 13,
2005) dispatch and maintenance staff reported being down four vehicles.
The service also was down one vehicle on another day that week.
Maintenance and dispatch staff noted that the service often operates
with one or no spare vehicles.

Maintenance and dispatch staff also noted that the lack of available
spares also affected afternoon pull-outs. It was reported that at least
one run each weekday typically pulled out late because the morning run
was running late and there were no spares to assign to the afternoon run
in the interim.

Maintenance staff at the Yale Boulevard Garage also noted that the age
of the fleet and the lack of available spares also was impacting
preventative maintenance. A copy of the preventative maintenance
schedule for all Mini Ride vehicles is provided in Attachment J. The
schedule shows that, as of September 13, 2005, 13 of the 49 Mini Ride
vehicles were more than 2,000 miles overdue for regular preventative
maintenance. Staff indicated that maintenance may be scheduled, but
sometimes has to be deferred in order to put vehicles on the street.

As mentioned in the previous section of this report, about half of the
vehicles had MDTs. During the review team's visit, seven MDTs were not
working and two of the radios (installed in vehicles without MDTs) were
not working. As a result, Mini Ride had to rely on drivers' having cell
phones to communicate with drivers in these vehicles.

Finally, maintenance staff at the Yale Boulevard Garage noted that the
lack of available spares affected the ability to respond to breakdowns
and accidents. They indicated that typically there is no spare vehicle
to send to the site of the breakdown or accident as a "change out"
vehicle in order to allow the run to continue. Dispatchers must
reschedule riders on those vehicles or on those runs later in the day to
other runs. Team members reviewed Mini Ride road call records. A copy of
the "Road Call Tracking Sheet" for the month of August 2005 is provided
in Attachment K. Based on these records, there were 30 breakdowns in
that month. In 24 of those cases, the tracking sheet shows that there
was no "change out" vehicle available.

The above issues identified with vehicle availability and fleet
maintenance were confirmed in driver interviews. Nine of the 11 drivers
interviewed indicated problems with vehicle condition and with
maintenance. Six indicated significant issues and three gave a mixed
review. Drivers noted, in particular, that the condition of the minivans
and raised-roof vans was poor. Drivers also confirmed that the design of
the 1996 raised-roof vans was problematic. They explained that these
vehicles do not have a full-height front ambulatory entrance door and
riders must bend over when entering. When exiting, riders often walk
backwards down the stairs because of the very low door height. Drivers
also noted that problems are not always fixed when raised in the vehicle
inspection process and that it seemed that maintenance was not always
done thoroughly. Two of the drivers said that the maintenance was
"pretty good" and had no concerns.

The Mini Ride fleet also has problems with two-way mobile
communications. While observing dispatch, the review team noted that
five of the 1996 vehicles that were in service were reported to not have
working two-way radios. Dispatchers indicated that one vehicle had a
functioning MDT and that the other four did not. The drivers on these
vehicles were communicating with mobile phones provided at pull-out by
the garage.

As noted previously, one rider with a spinal cord injury noted that the
minibuses had a very rough ride. As part of the review, team members
rode for several miles on one of the 2003 model year minibuses. The ride
was extremely stiff. Even when sitting in the padded passenger seats,
there was significant jarring when the vehicle hit a bump or pothole.
For riders with disabilities who use wheelchairs and have minimal seat
padding and seat suspension, the ride would be even more jarring. The
suspension on these vehicles did seem to be stiffer than on other
minibuses that the team was familiar with.

City staff noted that additional vehicles were on order. Thirty new
body-on-chassis minibuses were expected to arrive in December 2005. The
City planned to replace and retire 20 of the 2000 model year minivans
once they received these new vehicles. They planned to keep the 1996
vans in service, though, so that some of the new order could be used for
expansion and for a better spare ratio.

The shortage of available vehicles on a daily basis appears to be the
primary factor in the City's ongoing trip denials for Mini Ride service.

**Driver Availability, Training, and Turnover**

At the time of the on-site review, Mini Ride had a total of 72 approved
driver positions. Managers noted that five positions were vacant and
that they were in the process of filling three of those positions. That
gave them 67 drivers at the time of the review. Given the run structure
that was in place in September 2005, this allowed for 14 to 15
extra-board drivers. This seemed to be adequate to meet daily pull-out.
A review of pull-out records for August 2005 did not indicate uncovered
runs due to a lack of drivers. In fact, there are enough drivers so that
Mini Ride could operate several more runs each day without having to
hire more drivers.

The driver workforce also appeared to be quite stable and experienced. A
review of driver employment records showed an annual turnover rate of
only about 10 percent (about seven new drivers each year). Over half of
the drivers had more than five years of experience with the Mini Ride
service.

The stability and experience of the drivers is partly due to the fact
that they are part of the same union as fixed route drivers and have an
almost identical compensation package. Paratransit drivers are paid only
\$1.00 less per hour than the fixed route drivers. City staff noted that
the paratransit drivers had chosen to be paid \$1.00 per hour less so
that they could be in a separate employment category and have their own,
separate seniority list.

Training for Mini Ride drivers is coordinated by the Transit
Department's full-time driver trainer, who manages training for both
fixed route and paratransit drivers. Mini Ride driver training includes
eight days of classroom training and a minimum of 10 days of on-the-road
training with a supervisor or senior driver. Additional on-the-road
training is provided if needed.

Classroom training covers:

-   ADA regulatory requirements

-   Mini Ride program policies and procedures

-   Passenger assistance techniques

-   Disability awareness training

-   Defensive driving

-   Use of MDTs

-   Map reading

-   Mini Ride forms and paperwork

-   Emergency evacuation procedures

-   Employment policies

A detailed driver training manual has been prepared and is in use. The
training manual and related materials include:

-   Copy of PowerPoint presentation, "ADA Training for ABQ Ride
    Employees"

-   "Sun Van Drivers Manual 2000"

-   Operator workbook for defensive driving (National Safety Council,
    1989)

-   "Defensive Driving Course -4" (National Safety Council, 1994)

-   Response book for "Transporting Passengers with Special Needs"
    (National Safety Council, 1993)

-   Pocket handbook, "ADA Training Program for Motorcoach Companies"
    (Easter Seals Project Action)

-   Handbook (1991) on evacuating elderly and disabled from vehicles

-   A common address list

-   Various administrative forms

-   Vehicle inspection form

-   Sample manifest

-   Instructions on using MDTs

Drivers who were interviewed as part of the review expressed
satisfaction with the training. When asked if the training they received
adequately prepared them for the job, 10 of 11 drivers interviewed felt
it had. One driver, who indicated he had been driving for 13 years, said
the initial training was "too long ago to remember." Nine of the drivers
who provided a response said the training was good or very good. Only
one driver indicated that additional training would have been helpful.
This driver suggested a more complete review of ADA regulations and
requirements.

Drivers also noted that refresher training was provided periodically.
Most indicated that refresher training is provided about every two
years.

**Planning, Budgeting, and Funding**

The review team met with the Transit Department's Finance Manager and an
Executive Budget Analyst from the City's Office of Management and Budget
to review planning, budgeting, and funding of the Mini Ride service.

Staff explained that the City operates on an "incremental budgeting"
basis. A five-year budget forecast is updated each year. The update
assumes level funding of current programs, allowing for inflationary
increases. Managers in each department must submit requests for any
increases in service beyond inflationary increases.

The five-year budget forecasts are typically completed in October of
each year for the next fiscal year. In November of each year, the City
develops a forecast of salaried positions for current levels of service
reflected in the five-year budget plan. Forms to be used to request
increases beyond current service levels are distributed to each
department in December of January each year. Incremental funding
requests for increases are due in February. The incremental requests are
reviewed and a final budget is developed by April 1. The budget for the
next fiscal year is adopted in mid-May each year.

Table 10.1 shows annual appropriations for Mini Ride operations and
actual operating expenses for FY 2003 through FY 2005.

**Table 10.1 --- Mini Ride Operating Cost Appropriations and
Expenditures,**

**FY 2003 through FY 2005**

  -------------------- --------------------------- ----------------------
                       **Annual Appropriation**    **Annual Expenses**

  **FY 2003**          \$4,010,000                 \$3,836,722

  **FY 2004**          \$4,331,000                 \$3,911,942

  **FY 2005**          \$4,303,000                 \$4,425,054
  -------------------- --------------------------- ----------------------

The Finance Manager and Budget Analyst indicated that the Mini Ride
program had been basically level-funded in recent years. In the winter
of 2005, the Transit Department submitted a small \$27,000 incremental
request for new handheld radios for use in the Mini Ride service. No
requests for increases in operating capacity had been submitted.

The review team received a copy of the City's proposed FY 2006 budget.
The Transit Department portion of that proposed budget is provided in
Attachment L. The FY 2006 budget includes a 12.4 percent increase in
overall Transit Department funding. The increase is attributed mainly to
increased operating costs associated with the new Rapid Ride
limited-stop service and to costs associated with the new Daytona Road
Garage. For the Mini Ride program, the proposed budget shows only the
\$27,000 increase for replacement of 30 handheld radios.

The Transit Department Finance Manager said that he was under the
impression, based on discussions with the Operations Manager each year,
that the Mini Ride program was meeting demand and had no trip denials.
Increases in service levels therefore did not appear to be needed. Based
on the review team's observations, Mini Ride staff has not been
accurately recording trip denials and has not been monitoring on-time
performance, so managers have not been aware of the full extent of unmet
demand for ADA complementary paratransit service.

**Findings**

1.  The shortage of available vehicles on a daily basis appears to be
    the primary factor in the City's ongoing trip denials for Mini Ride
    service.

2.  This shortage of vehicles also appears to be a primary factor in
    Mini Ride's on-time performance.

3.  At the time of the on-site review, the Mini Ride fleet was quite
    old. Thirty-one of the 49 vehicles in the fleet had over 190,000
    miles of service and seven had more than 300,000 miles of service.
    The City indicated that 30 new vehicles were on order and were
    expected in December 2005. These new vehicles would replace 20 of
    the most unreliable vehicles in the fleet. There were no plans,
    however, to replace the 10 oldest vehicles in the fleet, all with
    over 270,000 miles of service.

4.  The age of the fleet appeared to affect vehicle availability.
    Maintenance staff indicated, and pull-out records showed, that on
    many days there were only 36 to 40 available vehicles to meet a peak
    pull-out requiring 38 to 40 vehicles. During the week of the on-site
    review, service was down four vehicles on Tuesday, September 13,
    2005, and one vehicle on another day.

5.  The lack of available vehicles also affected efficient "change-out"
    of vehicles when there were breakdowns. For the 30 breakdowns
    recorded in August 2005, there was no available "change-out" vehicle
    in 24 of these incidents. Other in-service runs had to be used to
    cover the trips of these runs.

6.  Drivers and riders cited the 10 model year 1996 raised-roof vans as
    having a poor design for serving riders with disabilities. These
    vehicles require some riders to walk down the stepwell steps
    backwards when exiting the vehicle because of an extremely low front
    entrance door. Even though these vehicles were 11 years old, had
    over 270,000 miles of service, and were poorly designed, the City
    indicated that it intended to keep these vehicles in service even
    after the delivery of 30 new minibuses in December 2005. Another
    round of vehicles to replace these 1996 vans was not noted.

7.  The 2003 model year minibuses appear to have a very stiff ride. This
    could be an issue for some riders who use wheelchairs. The City
    should examine alternate rear suspension arrangements on future
    vehicle orders to see if a smoother ride is possible on this type of
    vehicle.

8.  About half of the Mini Ride vehicles were equipped with MDTs;
    however, some did not work during the review team's visit. Other
    vehicles had inoperable two-way radios, meaning that dispatchers had
    to rely on drivers having cell phones to communicate.

9.  The City appears to have an adequate number of drivers to provide
    the current level of service.

10. The current driver workforce appears to be very stable and
    experienced. There is only about a 10 percent annual turnover of
    drivers.

11. The Mini Ride driver training program appears to be thorough and to
    adequately prepare drivers for the operating vehicles and accessible
    equipment and assisting riders with disabilities.

12. Even though the Mini Ride service appears to be capacity
    constrained, the Mini Ride Operations Manager has not requested
    increases in operating funding to increase service capacity. This
    appears to be due to the lack of accurately recording trip denials
    and monitoring on-time performance.

**Recommendations**

1.  The City should increase the size of the Mini Ride vehicle fleet to
    allow all of the 2000 model year minivans, as well as all of the
    1996 vans, to be replaced as soon as is possible.

2.  The City should seek input from its mechanics and work with minibus
    manufacturers to see if the rear suspensions on the Mini Ride
    minibuses can be improved. This might involve adjusting the
    wheelbase and overhang. Or, it may require a different type of
    suspension.

3.  The City should ensure that all vehicles used for Mini Ride service
    have an operable MDT and/or two-way radio.

4.  The City should accurately track trip denials to estimate the
    additional capacity needed to meet full demand for ADA complementary
    paratransit service. Based on this estimate of full demand, the City
    would be able to better determine the resources it needs for Mini
    Ride. The City should also consider the additional funding needed
    for other service improvements recommended in this report to improve
    on-time performance and telephone access.

5.  The City should establish an ongoing process to track Mini Ride
    service performance and ridership each year. The information
    gathered through this process should then be used to estimate the
    capacity and funding needed each year to continue to operate the
    Mini Ride service without capacity constraints. The City also should
    expect that the demand for Mini Ride service will increase once
    capacity constraints are eliminated. This information should be used
    to request additional funding to expand Mini Ride capacity.

    **Attachment A**

**City of Albuquerque Response to Draft Report**

+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| F  | Corrective       | Pla  | Ac   | Current Status     | Contact  |
| in | Action           | nned | tual |                    | Person   |
| di |                  |      |      | (on-time/          |          |
| ng | Identified       | Co   | Co   | delayed/completed) | Phone    |
| Nu |                  | mple | mple |                    | Number   |
| mb |                  | tion | tion | (Explanation of    |          |
| er |                  |      |      | delays)            |          |
|    |                  | (e   | (e   |                    |          |
|    |                  | nter | nter |                    |          |
|    |                  | d    | d    |                    |          |
|    |                  | ate) | ate) |                    |          |
+====+==================+======+======+====================+==========+
| A. |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| S  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| er |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| vi |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ce |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| Cr |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| it |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| er |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ia |                  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 1  | ABQ ride has     | Dece |      | Several driver     | Op       |
| \. | already          | mber |      | meetings have been | erations |
|    | instructed       | 2006 |      | held and they were | Manager  |
|    | drivers of the   |      |      | told of the need   | Annette  |
|    | importance of    |      |      | to change the      | Paez     |
|    | exceeding the    |      |      | policy of curb-to  | Phone    |
|    | curb-to-curb     |      |      | cub.               | Number   |
|    | service and will |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | issue a memo to  |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | all employees    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | instructing them |      |      |                    |          |
|    | if a passenger   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | needs additional |      |      |                    |          |
|    | service, the     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | driver will be   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | expected to      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | provide the      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | service.         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 2  | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 3  | ABQ Ride has a   | Dec. |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | new driver bid   | 2006 |      |                    | erations |
|    | expected to take |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | over in Dec.     |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | 2006 and will    |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | adjust the       |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | paratransit bid  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | to provide       |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | service during   |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | hours that the   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | fixed route      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | service          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | operates.        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 4  | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 5  | Beginning with   | Dec. |      | ABQ Ride currently | Op       |
| \. | the December     | 2006 |      | has a memo that    | erations |
|    | 2006 Drivers     |      |      | was issued Jan.    | Manager  |
|    | bid, ABQ ride    |      |      | 2006 that allows   | Annette  |
|    | will no longer   |      |      | passengers to pay  | Paez     |
|    | accept           |      |      | for their rides    | Phone    |
|    | subscription     |      |      | individually       | Number   |
|    | payments for     |      |      | rather than        | (505)-   |
|    | more than 1 ride |      |      | weekly.            | 764-6111 |
|    | at a time. The   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | current policy   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | of requiring     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | full payment for |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the week will be |      |      |                    |          |
|    | changed.         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 6  | During the       | Su   | Su   | Completed.         | Customer |
| \. | summer of 2006   | mmer | mmer |                    | Service  |
|    | ABQ Ride did     | 2006 | 2006 | Rapid After Dark   | Manager  |
|    | operate the      |      |      | ran smoothly       | Danny    |
|    | Rapid After dark |      |      | during the summer  | Holcomb  |
|    | Service and it   |      |      | of 2006. There     | (505)-   |
|    | was advertised   |      |      | were no requests   | 724-3156 |
|    | to all           |      |      | for this service   |          |
|    | passengers       |      |      | by any paratransit |          |
|    | including        |      |      | passengers.        |          |
|    | paratransit      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passengers. All  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | staff was told   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | that should a    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | paratransit      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passenger        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | request the      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | service it would |      |      |                    |          |
|    | be provided.     |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 7  | ABQ Ride will    | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | republish the    | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | "Sun Van and     | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | You" document    |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | that is issued   |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | to all           |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | prospective      |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | clients and      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | issue this       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | brochure to      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | clients upon     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | request.         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| B. |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| A  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| DA |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| C  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| om |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| pl |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| em |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| en |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ta |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ry |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| P  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ar |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| at |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ra |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ns |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| it |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| E  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| li |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| gi |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| bi |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| li |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ty |                  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 1  | ABQ Ride will    | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | discontinue this | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | practice of      | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | charging for     |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | these rides. In  |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | fact in the      |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | current Sun Van  |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | and You brochure |      |      |                    |          |
|    | that is handed   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | out to           |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passengers does  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | indicate that    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | rides to and     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | from             |      |      |                    |          |
|    | certification    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | interviews are   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | free.            |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 2  | Although there   |      |      | Completed          | Customer |
| \. | is a place on    |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | the              |      |      | ABQ Ride will not  | Manager  |
|    | certification    |      |      | delay or deny      | Danny    |
|    | form asking for  |      |      | certification to   | Holcomb  |
|    | a SSN. We are    |      |      | any passenger who  | (505)-   |
|    | not aware of any |      |      | chooses not to     | 724-3156 |
|    | passenger being  |      |      | release their SSN. |          |
|    | denied service   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | for failing to   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | provide a SSN.   |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 3  | ABQ Ride has in  | Dece |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | the past,        | mber |      |                    | erations |
|    | required that    | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | all wheelchairs  |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | have working     |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | brakes for       |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | safety reasons.  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | If this review   |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | does not feel    |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | this is          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | appropriate, the |      |      |                    |          |
|    | practice can bee |      |      |                    |          |
|    | discontinued     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | immediately.     |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 4  | All applicants   | Nove |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | may re-apply for | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | certification at |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | any time.        | 2006 |      |                    | Danny    |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 5  | ABQ Ride will    | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | revise the       | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | policy of not    | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | allowing         |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | children under   |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | 12 to ride with  |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | another person.  |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 6  | ABQ ride will    | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | revise its       | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | policy to advise | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | conditionally    |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | certified        |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | passengers the   |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | opportunity to   |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | appeal the type  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | of certification |      |      |                    |          |
|    | they have        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | received.        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 7  | On all denial    | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | letters ABQ Ride | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | will be more     | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | specific on the  |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | reason for       |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | denial.          |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 8  | ABQ Ride no      | Su   | Su   | Completed          | Customer |
| \. | longer uses      | mmer | mmer |                    | Service  |
|    | anyone to review | 2006 | 2006 |                    | Manager  |
|    | applications     |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | other than the   |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | Customer Service |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Supervisor.      |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 9  | ABQ Ride has     | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | changed it's     | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | certification    | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | process by       |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | adding           |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | additional       |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | certification    |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | days to insure   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | all applicants   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | are certified    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | within 21 days   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | if they are      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | eligible for     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | service. ABQ     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | ride will add    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | comments into    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | public           |      |      |                    |          |
|    | information to   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | notify           |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passengers of    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | presumptive      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | eligibility if   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the process      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | exceeds 21 days  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 10 | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 11 | If ABQ Ride has  |      |      | Complete           | Customer |
| \. | done this in the |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | past, this       |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | practice will be |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | stopped          |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | immediately.     |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 12 | Since Part III   |      |      | Complete.          | Customer |
| \. | specifically     |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | states that a    |      |      | Since ABQ Ride no  | Manager  |
|    | Health Care      |      |      | longer uses anyone | Danny    |
|    | Provider must    |      |      | other than a       | Holcomb  |
|    | fill it out, we  |      |      | Supervisor to      | (505)-   |
|    | feel this is our |      |      | review             | 724-3156 |
|    | only opportunity |      |      | applications this  |          |
|    | to learn the     |      |      | should not be an   |          |
|    | Health Care      |      |      | issue.             |          |
|    | Providers        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | medical          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | diagnosis of the |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passenger's      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | disability.      |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 13 | ABQ ride has     |      |      | Complete.          | Customer |
| \. | followed and     |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | will continue to |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | follow the       |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | review board or  |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | appeals          |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | committee        |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | recommendations  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | in regards to    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | denied           |      |      |                    |          |
|    | certification    |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 14 | ABQ Ride has     |      |      | Complete.          | Customer |
| \. | recently changed |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | its no-show      |      |      | Change in policy   | Manager  |
|    | policy to allow  |      |      | effective          | Danny    |
|    | anyone calling   |      |      | September 2006.    | Holcomb  |
|    | in the day       |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | before to be     |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | considered       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | cancellations.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | In fact, ABQ     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Ride has changed |      |      |                    |          |
|    | it to not        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | consider anyone  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | a no show if     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | they call at     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | least 2 hours    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | before their     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | scheduled ride   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | to cancel the    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | ride.            |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 15 | ABQ ride will    |      |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | review it's no   |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | show policy and  |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | check with other |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | agencies in the  |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | area to see what |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | the standard     |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | practice is.     |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 16 | Although the no  | No   |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | show policy does | Ac   |      |                    | Service  |
|    | state that a     | tion |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | passenger may be | ne   |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | suspended for up | eded |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | to 30 days there |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | is nothing       |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | indicating a     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passenger may be |      |      |                    |          |
|    | suspended        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | permanently for  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | no shows.        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 17 | Although this is | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | the current      | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | practice, ABQ    | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | Ride will        |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | rewrite the      |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | letters to       |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | provide          |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | passengers the   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | ability to       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | contact Sun Van  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | regarding no     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | shows beyond the |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passengers       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | control          |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| C. |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| T  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| el |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ep |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ho |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ne |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| Ac |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ce |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ss |                  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 1  | ABQ Ride does    |      |      | Complete           | Customer |
| \. | have a report    |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | produced that    |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | indicates what   |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | the hold times   |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | were for the     |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | previous week.   |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | In addition, all |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Customer service |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Supervisors      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | regularly        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | monitor the      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | phone system to  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | insure wait      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | times are at a   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | minimum.         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 2  | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 3  | ABQ Ride has     |      |      | Complete           | Customer |
| \. | increased        |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | staffing to      |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | address this     |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | issue. In        |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | addition, ABQ    |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Ride is planning |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | to determine a   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | way to separate  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | these 2          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | functions. For   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | example, ABQ     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Ride is planning |      |      |                    |          |
|    | to have          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | dedicated        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Customer Service |      |      |                    |          |
|    | personnel for    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Para transit and |      |      |                    |          |
|    | dedicated        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Customer Service |      |      |                    |          |
|    | personnel for    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Fixed route.     |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 4  | ABQ Ride has     |      |      | Complete           | Customer |
| \. | already adjusted |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | work schedules   |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | to better        |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | accommodate peak |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | call times.      |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 5  | Again, ABQ Ride  |      |      | Complete           | Customer |
| \. | has increased    |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | staffing and has |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | adjusted work    |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | schedules to     |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | better meet the  |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | demand of        |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | callers at all   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | times.           |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| D. |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| Tr |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ip |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| Re |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| se |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| rv |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| at |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| io |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ns |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| a  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| nd |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| Sc |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| he |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| du |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| li |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ng |                  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 1  | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 2  | ABQ Ride does    | [    |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | currently still  | ]{.m |      |                    | Service  |
|    | use placements   | ark} |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | to accommodate   |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | requests from    |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | passengers.      |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Customer Service |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | personnel have   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | been instructed  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | to insure that   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | placements are   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | offered to all   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passengers who   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | cannot be        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | scheduled        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | through the      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | normal           |      |      |                    |          |
|    | scheduling       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | process. In      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | addition, they   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | are to explain   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | to the passenger |      |      |                    |          |
|    | that although    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the time         |      |      |                    |          |
|    | requested may    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | change, the ride |      |      |                    |          |
|    | is guaranteed.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | []{.mark}        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 3  | All passengers   |      |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | requesting a     |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | ride will get    |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | their ride,      |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | however a        |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | placement is put |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | in to allow the  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | Scheduling       |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Supervisor to    |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | place the ride   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | on the best      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | available route. |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 4  | If a passenger   | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | requests a ride, | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | the CSR's do     | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | have the ability |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | to pick a ride   |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | within a hour    |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | window of the    |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | requested time   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | but should not   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | offer times to   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passengers that  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | are more than an |      |      |                    |          |
|    | hour after the   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | requested time.  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | If an offer is   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | made to          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passengers       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | within the hour  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | and the          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passenger refuse |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the offer it is  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | recorded as a    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | refusal and      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | cancelled. ABQ   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | ride will train  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | CSR's to insure  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | rides are coded  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | correctly.       |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 5  | ABQ Ride makes a |      |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | commitment to    |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | insure that      |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | anyone           |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | requesting a     |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | ride gets a      |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | ride.            |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 6  | As stated above, |      |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | ABQ Ride still   |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | uses the         |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | placement list   |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | to accommodate   |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | passenger's      |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | requests for a   |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | ride.            |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 7  | ABQ Ride has     |      |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | always           |      |      |                    | Service  |
|    | recommended that |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | callers call as  |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | far in advance   |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | as possible to   |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | schedule their   |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | rides but has    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | never required   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | this.            |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 8  | ABQ Ride will    | Dece |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | re-train all     | mber |      |                    | Service  |
|    | CSR's to use the | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | "latest          |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | Drop-off" and    |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | "earliest        |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | pick-up" options |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | that the Trapeze |      |      |                    |          |
|    | software offers. |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 9  | ABQ Ride has     | Oct  |      | Complete           | Customer |
| \. | begun using a    | ober |      |                    | Service  |
|    | "script" when    | 2006 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | answering calls  |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | to provide more  |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | consistency to   |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | callers.         |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| E. |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| S  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| er |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| vi |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ce |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| P  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| er |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| fo |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| rm |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| an |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ce |                  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 1  | Prior to leaving | E    |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | ABQ Ride in June | arly |      |                    | erations |
|    | 2005 ABQ Ride's  | 2007 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | Manager Annette  |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | Paez ran 100 %   |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | six-day surveys  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | to insure on     |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | time performance |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | was monitored.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | In returning to  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the position of  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Manager Ms. Paez |      |      |                    |          |
|    | will resume the  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | six-day report   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | monitoring.      |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 2  | Prior to leaving | E    |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | ABQ Ride in June | arly |      |                    | erations |
|    | 2005 ABQ Ride's  | 2007 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | Manager Annette  |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | Paez ran 100 %   |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | six-day surveys  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | to insure on     |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | time performance |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | was monitored.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | In returning to  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the position of  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Manager Ms. Paez |      |      |                    |          |
|    | will resume the  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | six-day report   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | monitoring.      |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 3  | Prior to leaving | E    |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | ABQ Ride in June | arly |      |                    | erations |
|    | 2005 ABQ Ride's  | 2007 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | Manager Annette  |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | Paez ran 100 %   |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | six-day surveys  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | to insure on     |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | time performance |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | was monitored.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | In returning to  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the position of  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Manager Ms. Paez |      |      |                    |          |
|    | will resume the  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | six-day report   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | monitoring.      |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 4  | ABQ Ride has     |      |      | Complete           | Op       |
| \. | added a full     |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | time Supervisor  |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | to regularly     |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | monitor Sun Van  |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | schedules to     |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | insure they are  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | running as       |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | efficient as     |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | possible.        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 5  | ABQ Ride will    | E    |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | re-train all     | arly |      |                    | Service  |
|    | CSR's to use the | 2007 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | "latest          |      |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | Drop-off" and    |      |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | "earliest        |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | pick-up" options |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | that the Trapeze |      |      |                    |          |
|    | software offers. |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 6  | Prior to leaving | E    |      |                    | Op       |
| \. | ABQ Ride in June | arly |      |                    | erations |
|    | 2005 ABQ Ride's  | 2007 |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | Manager Annette  |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | Paez ran 100 %   |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | six-day surveys  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | to insure on     |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | time performance |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | was monitored.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | In returning to  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the position of  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Operations       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Manager Ms. Paez |      |      |                    |          |
|    | will resume the  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | six-day report   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | monitoring.      |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 7  | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 8  | If a passenger   | No   |      |                    | Customer |
| \. | schedules a trip | ac   |      |                    | Service  |
|    | and the van      | tion |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | arrives within   | requ |      |                    | Danny    |
|    | the scheduled    | ired |      |                    | Holcomb  |
|    | window and for   |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | whatever reason  |      |      |                    | 724-3156 |
|    | the passenger    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | doesn't take     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | this trip it is  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | considered a No  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Show.            |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Conversely, If a |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passenger        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | schedules a trip |      |      |                    |          |
|    | and the van      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | arrives late the |      |      |                    |          |
|    | ride is then     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | considered a     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | cancellation.    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Prior to any     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | passenger being  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | sent either a    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | warning letter   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | for no shows or  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | a suspension     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | letter, these no |      |      |                    |          |
|    | shows are        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | researched to    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | insure their     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | accuracy.        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 9  | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 10 | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 11 | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| F. |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| R  |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| es |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| ou |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| rc |                  |      |      |                    |          |
| es |                  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 1  | In early 2006    |      |      | Complete           | Op       |
| \. | ABQ Ride         |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | increased it's   |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | seating capacity |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | by replacing the |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | older 2000       |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | series van with  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | a larger 2006    |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Ford Candidate   |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | II model van.    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | This van has     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | double the       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | seating capacity |      |      |                    |          |
|    | of the van it    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | replaced.        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 2  | In early 2006    |      |      | Complete           | Op       |
| \. | ABQ Ride         |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | increased it's   |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | seating capacity |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | by replacing the |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | older 2000       |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | series van with  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | a larger 2006    |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Ford Candidate   |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | II model van.    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | This van has     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | double the       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | seating capacity |      |      |                    |          |
|    | of the van it    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | replaced.        |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 3  | In early 2006    |      |      | Complete           | Op       |
| \. | ABQ Ride         |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | increased it's   |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | seating capacity |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | by replacing the |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | older 2000       |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | series van with  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | a larger 2006    |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Ford Candidate   |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | II model van.    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | This van has     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | double the       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | seating capacity |      |      |                    |          |
|    | of the van it    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | replaced. A new  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | bid for vehicles |      |      |                    |          |
|    | to replace the   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | 10 oldest        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | vehicles was     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | received in      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | November 2006.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | Upon award of    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | bid ABQ Ride     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | should have      |      |      |                    |          |
|    | these new vans   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | in place in late |      |      |                    |          |
|    | spring or early  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | summer 2007.     |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 4  | ABQ Ride has     |      |      | Complete           | Op       |
| \. | addressed this   |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | problem with the |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | acquisition of   |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | the 2006 model   |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | vans and will    |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    | improve the      |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    | situation even   |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | further with the |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
|    | vans expected in |      |      |                    |          |
|    | 2007             |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 5  | Since the        |      |      | Complete           | ABQ Ride |
| \. | purchase of the  |      |      |                    | A        |
|    | new vehicles in  |      |      |                    | ssistant |
|    | 2006 ABQ Ride    |      |      |                    | Mai      |
|    | Maintenance      |      |      |                    | ntenance |
|    | Division has the |      |      |                    | Managers |
|    | vehicles         |      |      |                    | Dennis   |
|    | available to     |      |      |                    | Stump    |
|    | send out for     |      |      |                    | (505)    |
|    | vehicle          |      |      |                    | 764-6170 |
|    | incidents.       |      |      |                    | and      |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | James    |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | Bird     |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | (505)    |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | 768-6071 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 6  | These 1996 model |      |      | Complete           | Op       |
| \. | Dodge vans will  |      |      |                    | erations |
|    | be replaced with |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | the new vehicles |      |      |                    | Annette  |
|    | expected in      |      |      |                    | Paez     |
|    | 2007.            |      |      |                    | Phone    |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | Number   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    |                  |      |      |                    | 764-6111 |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| [  | Unfortunately    |      |      |                    | ABQ Ride |
| 7. | with the new     |      |      |                    | Fleet    |
| ]{ | 2600 model       |      |      |                    | Sp       |
| .m | vehicle that is  |      |      |                    | ecialist |
| ar | now in use the   |      |      |                    | Wayne    |
| k} | issue of a       |      |      |                    | Shepard  |
|    | better or        |      |      |                    | (505)    |
|    | smoother         |      |      |                    | 764-6127 |
|    | suspension was   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | not addressed.   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | For the newest   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | vehicle expected |      |      |                    |          |
|    | in 2007 a        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | smoother         |      |      |                    |          |
|    | suspension and a |      |      |                    |          |
|    | different        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | seating          |      |      |                    |          |
|    | arrangement are  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | planned to       |      |      |                    |          |
|    | better serve     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | riders who use   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | wheelchairs.     |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 8  | A bid for new    | 2007 |      |                    | ABQ Ride |
| \. | equipment is     |      |      |                    | Inf      |
|    | expected to go   |      |      |                    | ormation |
|    | out for bid in   |      |      |                    | Tech     |
|    | late 2006 or     |      |      |                    | nologies |
|    | early 2007 to    |      |      |                    | Manager  |
|    | address the      |      |      |                    | Joe      |
|    | issue of MDT'S   |      |      |                    | Saraphon |
|    | in vehicles.     |      |      |                    | (505)-   |
|    | Once the bid is  |      |      |                    | 724-3113 |
|    | awarded ABQ Ride |      |      |                    |          |
|    | expects all vans |      |      |                    |          |
|    | to have working  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | MDT's and 2-way  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | radios by 2007.  |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 9  | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 10 | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 11 | NO RESPONSE      |      |      |                    |          |
| \. | REQUIRED         |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+
| 12 | ABQ Ride has a   | 2007 |      |                    | ABQ Ride |
| \. | new Operations   |      |      |                    | Director |
|    | Manager in place |      |      |                    | Greg     |
|    | that is very     |      |      |                    | Payne    |
|    | knowledgeable in |      |      |                    | (505)    |
|    | the operation of |      |      |                    | 724-3178 |
|    | a paratransit    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | systsem. During  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the FTA review   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | of 2005 ABQ Ride |      |      |                    |          |
|    | did not have a   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | person in place  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | with the         |      |      |                    |          |
|    | experience and   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | expertise to     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | fully address    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the concerns     |      |      |                    |          |
|    | expressed during |      |      |                    |          |
|    | the review. All  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | necessary        |      |      |                    |          |
|    | monitoring will  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | be resumed to    |      |      |                    |          |
|    | determine what   |      |      |                    |          |
|    | changes need to  |      |      |                    |          |
|    | occur.           |      |      |                    |          |
+----+------------------+------+------+--------------------+----------+

**Attachment B**

**On-Site Review Schedule**

**ADA Complementary Paratransit Compliance Assessment**

**Albuquerque, NM, September 12--15, 2005**

**PROPOSED SCHEDULE**

+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| **T   | **Activity**                | **Who**             | **      |
| ime** |                             |                     | Where** |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| **Mo  |                             |                     |         |
| nday, |                             |                     |         |
| Sept  |                             |                     |         |
| ember |                             |                     |         |
| 12,   |                             |                     |         |
| 2     |                             |                     |         |
| 005** |                             |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 9:00  | Opening Conference          | FTA, Albuquerque    | 100     |
| a.m.  |                             | Transit Dept.       | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | staff, All          | Street, |
|       |                             | Assessment Team     | SW      |
|       |                             | Members             |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 9:30  | Review Mini Ride System     | All Assessment Team | 100     |
| a.m.  | Design; Service Policies,   | Members             | 1^st^   |
|       | Procedures and Standards;   |                     | Street, |
|       | Service Statistics; Service | Paratransit Manager | SW      |
|       | Monitoring Procedures;      | and other           |         |
|       |                             | appropriate staff   |         |
|       | Tour Mini Ride Operations   |                     |         |
|       | center                      |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 10:30 | Review Eligibility          | Russell Thatcher;   | 100     |
| a.m.  | Determination Process and   |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | Records; Review No-Show and | Albuquerque Transit | Street, |
|       | Service Suspension Policies | Eligibility         | SW      |
|       |                             | Coordinator         |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
|       | Review Phone System Design; | David Chia;         | 100     |
|       |                             |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | Review Staffing Information | Paratransit         | Street, |
|       | in Reservations, Scheduling | Manager;            | SW      |
|       | and Dispatching;            | Re                  |         |
|       |                             | servations/Customer |         |
|       | Review Phone Performance    | Service Manager     |         |
|       | (ACD) Reports               |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
|       | Review Customer Comment     | Rosemary Mathias;   | 100     |
|       | Process and Records         |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | Staff who           | Street, |
|       |                             | coordinate          | SW      |
|       |                             | complaint process.  |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 3     | Observe Trip Reservations   | All Assessment Team | 100     |
| p.m.  | Process                     | Members             | 1^st^   |
|       |                             |                     | Street, |
|       | (using phone splitters if   | Reservationists     | SW      |
|       | possible)                   |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 5     | Review and Observe          | Rosemary Mathias;   | 100     |
| p.m.  | Scheduling Process          |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | Lead Scheduler and  | Street, |
|       |                             | other Schedulers    | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| **Tue |                             |                     |         |
| sday, |                             |                     |         |
| Sept  |                             |                     |         |
| ember |                             |                     |         |
| 13,   |                             |                     |         |
| 2     |                             |                     |         |
| 005** |                             |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 6     | Observe Reservations        | David Chia          | 100     |
| a.m.  | Process                     |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | Russell Thatcher    | Street, |
|       | (using phone splitters if   |                     | SW      |
|       | possible)                   | Rosemary Mathias    |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 9     | Continue Discussions with   | Rosemary Mathias    | 100     |
| a.m.  | Schedulers; Run Structure;  |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | System Parameters; Handling | Schedulers          | Street, |
|       | of Negotiated Times         |                     | SW      |
|       |                             |                     |         |
|       | Generate Long Ride Sample   |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 9     | Review Trip Offers (Special | Russell Thatcher    | 100     |
| a.m.  | Run of Requested and        |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | Scheduled Times);           | MIS staff           | Street, |
|       |                             |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 9     | Review Sample Manifests for | David Chia          | 100     |
| a.m.  | On-Time Performance         |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             |                     | Street, |
|       |                             |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 1-5   | Interview Drivers; Review   | Russell Thatcher;   | 601     |
| p.m.  | Pull-out Records; Inspect   | David Chia          | Yale    |
|       | Vehicles; Review Maint.     |                     | Blvd.   |
|       | Records                     | Pull-out Coord.;    | SE      |
|       |                             | Maint. Super        |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 1-3   | Begin Travel Time Analysis  | Rosemary Mathias    | 101     |
| p.m.  |                             |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | Fixed Route Cust.   | Street  |
|       |                             | Service Staff       | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 3-5   | Observe Dispatch Process    | Rosemary Mathias    | 101     |
| p.m.  |                             |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | (using phone splitters if   | Lead Dispatcher     | Street  |
|       | possible)                   |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| **    |                             |                     |         |
| Wedne |                             |                     |         |
| sday, |                             |                     |         |
| Sept  |                             |                     |         |
| ember |                             |                     |         |
| 14,   |                             |                     |         |
| 2     |                             |                     |         |
| 005** |                             |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 7     | Observe Dispatch Process    | Russell Thatcher    | 100     |
| a.m.  |                             |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | Rosemary Mathias    | Street, |
|       |                             |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 7     | Service Area and Days and   | David Chia          | 100     |
| a.m.  | Hours Analysis              |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             |                     | Street, |
|       |                             |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 10    | Review Planning and         | Russell Thatcher    | 100     |
| a.m.  | Budgeting Process and       |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | Recent Annual Financial     | Transit Manager;    | Street, |
|       | Records;                    | City Budget staff   | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 10    | Continue On-Time            | David Chia          | 100     |
| a.m.  | Performance Analysis;       |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | No-Show Analysis            |                     | Street, |
|       |                             |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 10    | Generate Comparable Fixed   | Rosemary Mathias    | 100     |
| a.m.  | Route Travel Time           |                     | 1^st^   |
|       | Information                 | Customer Service    | Street, |
|       |                             | Staff               | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 1-5   | Interview Drivers           | Russell Thatcher    | 601     |
| p.m.  |                             |                     | Yale    |
|       |                             | David Chia          | Blvd.   |
|       |                             |                     | SE      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 3-5   | Observe Dispatch            | Russell Thatcher    | 100     |
| p.m.  |                             |                     | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | David Chia          | Street, |
|       |                             |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| *     |                             |                     |         |
| *Thur |                             |                     |         |
| sday, |                             |                     |         |
| Sept  |                             |                     |         |
| ember |                             |                     |         |
| 15,   |                             |                     |         |
| 2     |                             |                     |         |
| 005** |                             |                     |         |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 8     | Tabulate and Analyze Data   | All Assessment Team | 100     |
| a.m.  |                             | Members             | 1^st^   |
|       |                             |                     | Street, |
|       |                             |                     | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+
| 1     | Exit Conference             | FTA, Albuquerque    | 100     |
| p.m.  |                             | Transit Dept.,      | 1^st^   |
|       |                             | Assessment Team     | Street, |
|       |                             | Members             | SW      |
+-------+-----------------------------+---------------------+---------+

**Attachment C**

**Mini Ride Service Policy Information**

**Attachment D**

**Mini Ride Complaint Form**

**Attachment E**

**ADA Paratransit Eligibility Materials**

**Attachment F**

**Sample No-Show Suspension Letters**

**Attachment G**

**January 30, 2004 Memorandum Regarding**

**Placement List**

**Attachment H**

**Driver Interview Form**

**Attachment I**

**Mini Ride Fleet Roster**

**Attachment J**

**Mini Ride Fleet Preventative Maintenance Report**

**Attachment K**

**August 2005 Road Call Tracking Sheet**

**Attachment L**

**Transit Department Proposed FY06 Budget Summary**