Workshop # 2, Day 1 - February 16, 2010 Presented by · Centralized Fleet Models Model 4: An entity...

Workshop # 2, Day 1 - February 16, 2010

Presented by:

1

&

Overview Second of two workshops:

Workshop # 1 focused on strategies and tools effective in early phases of coordination continuum

Workshop # 2 focuses on the nuts and bolts of implementing more complex coordination projects.

Objective: Turn attendees into Mobility Managers!

The Goal: To Improve Access & Mobility for All

2

Re-Introductions Name Region Something MM related of which you are proud that

has occurred since Oct.

3

The Goal: To Improve Access & Mobility for all!

Opening Discussion What has been helpful since our last meeting?

What new challenges are you facing?

What are your goals/resolutions (MM related) for 2011?

4


Agenda – Day 1 Vehicle Sharing & Cost Allocation Intros, etc. 8:00 a.m. – 8:45 a.m. Vehicle Sharing 8:45 a.m. – 11:30 a.m. Lunch 11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. Detailed Cost Allocation 12:30 p.m. – 4:30 p.m. Debrief 4:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.

5


Agenda – Day 2 Leadership & Marketing Skills Team Building 8:00 a.m. – 10:45 a.m. Break 10:45 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. Gaining Commitment 12:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. Lunch 12:00 p.m. – 1:00 p.m. Negotiations 1:00 p.m. – 2:30 p.m. Break 2:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m. Marketing Skills 2:45 p.m. – 3:45 p.m. Debrief/Wrap-up 3:45 p.m. – 4:30 p.m.


6

7



8

Simple Sharing

Agency A

Agency B

Single Vehicle Sharing

Agency A

Agency B

Agency X

Multi-Vehicle Sharing

Agency A

Agency B

Agency X

v1 v2 Public Exchange

Entity A

Entity B

Agency X

vi vn

Inter-Agency Exchange

Agency A

Agency B

Agency X

vi vn

Inter-Agency Exchange; Administrator Lead

Agency A

Agency B

Agency X

vi vn

Inter-Agency Virtual Exchange

Agency A

Agency B

Key Defining Characteristics Vehicle Ownership: Does one entity own a large fleet

or are a few vehicles owned by many organizations?

Operations: Are vehicle operations centralized and provided by one entity or distributed among multiple entities?

Vehicle users: Do the primary vehicle users own the vehicles? Do they share them with other users (secondary users)?


9

Key Program Elements Vehicle Procurement Insurance Maintenance Coordinated Scheduling Recruiting and Certifying Drivers Record Keeping

Common to all vehicle sharing programs

1/5/2010

10


Centralized Fleet Models Model 4: An entity owns a centralized fleet of vehicles, is the primary

user, and shares them with secondary users.

Model 1: An entity owns a centralized pool of vehicles, assigns them to partner agencies, and coordinates vehicle sharing among partner agencies and secondary users.

Model 2: An entity owns a centralized pool of vehicles, assigns them to partner agencies, and provides program support with no secondary users.

Model 3: An entity that is not a primary or secondary user owns a centralized fleet of vehicles and makes them available to secondary users. The Goal: To Improve Access & Mobility for all!

11

Decentralized Fleet Models • Model 5: Entity transfers vehicle titles to a primary

user and provides technical support.

• Model 6: Entity coordinates vehicle-sharing cooperative and provides direct transportation services with pooled fleet.

• Model 7: Multiple entitles own multiple vehicles, extra capacity is made available to secondary users through coordinated system.


12

Model 4 Entity owns and uses a fleet and is the primary user Entity shares vehicles with secondary user Common among school districts, transit agencies, and

municipalities Addresses need for transportation services where there is

occasional need or limited resources. Arrangements are often found where there are good personal

relationships between agencies/organizations. Where there are informal arrangements, potential for problems

in event of accident/incident.


13

Fleet ownership Operations Vehicle Users Centralized Decentralized Primary, Secondary

Model 4 Best Practice Jefferson High School District, Daly City, CA High school district shares vehicles with other districts

and local municipalities District awarded grant to purchase vehicles in

conjunction with Daly City; two entitles share vehicles, but District retains ownership

More formal arrangement (contract) between District and Daly City; informal arrangement when lending vehicles to municipalities


14

Model 1 • Host entity owns the fleet of vehicles • Host entity could be public transit agency or non-profit

organization • Host entity may or may not provide transportation services

directly • Primary vehicle users make vehicles available to secondary

users when they aren’t otherwise being used • Requires that primary and secondary users’ schedules don’t

conflict


15

Fleet ownership Operations Vehicle Users Centralized Decentralized Primary and secondary

Model 1 Advantages: The host retains some control over vehicles and maintains some

leverage over how the vehicles are used. Centralized oversight of the fleet may provide more efficient

approach to maintenance, program administration, insurance provision, and grant administration. May result in cost savings.

Decentralized operations, especially if provided by volunteers, often allows providers to deliver transportation services more efficiently and cost effectively.

Disadvantages: Making vehicles available to secondary users requires an additional

level of administration and coordination, but provides expanded mobility to the community.


16

Model 1 Best Practice Ride Connection, Portland, OR Umbrella agency for 30 service partners providing transportation

to older adults and people with disabilities Applies for funding on behalf of partners, but retains vehicle

ownership Responsible for distributing vehicles to partners, overseeing

driver and fiscal compliance, managing driver training, and coordinating vehicle sharing arrangements.

Primary vehicle users use vehicles throughout the week, but make them available to secondary users (special events, occasional use)

Primary and secondary users sign a Shared Vehicle Agreement


17

Model 1 Best Practice Ride Connection’s Successes Total rides in 08/09: 371,000 Annual estimated cost savings to TriMet: $3.7 Million Active role in coordinating vehicle sharing Centralized fleet allows them to maintain control over how vehicles are

used Proactive approach with driver screening

and training has made obtaining insurance easier

Program has grown incrementally and attracts new partners based on success

Organization is committed to mission and finding solutions to potential vehicle-sharing obstacles


18

Model 2 Host entity owns the fleet of shared vehicles, but does not use

them Host entity could be public transit agency or non-profit

organization May or may not provide additional support (maintenance, driver

training, insurance, etc.) Suitable for situations in which complementary ADA paratransit

can be more effectively delivered by human service providers Similar to Model 1, but no secondary users reduces complexity,

but may result in unused capacity


19

Fleet ownership Operations Vehicle Users Centralized Decentralized Primary only

Model 2 Best Practice King County Metro’s Community Access Transportation Program (CAT) • Public transit and paratransit provider provides used

and new vehicles to non-profit organizations at no cost • Agencies agree to provide 50 trips/month to ADA-

registered customers in addition to their own clients • Agencies provide drivers, scheduling, insurance,

and transportation services. • CAT provides maintenance subsidy for those

providing 100/trips month.


20

Model 2 Best Practice CAT’s Benefits • Agencies benefit by providing clients’ transportation

needs directly and having additional capacity • In 2008, the average cost for a CAT trip was $4.80,

compared to an ACCESS trip of $39.17 • The annual cost savings to Metro is estimated at more

than $1 million annually


21

Model 3 Entity owns a fleet of vehicles and makes them available to

many users through vehicle-sharing structure No primary vehicle users, wider group of secondary users Requires efficient scheduling system to all potential users Centralized oversight of the fleet may provide more

efficient approach to maintenance, program administration, and insurance provision.

Allows for more flexible and inclusive approach to expanding mobility.


22

Fleet ownership Operations Vehicle Users Centralized Decentralized Secondary only

Model 3 Best Practice City CarShare, San Francisco Bay Area City CarShare is a non-profit organization which seeks to provide

convenient access to vehicles to residents so that they can reduce individual car ownership

Organization owns fleet of vehicles that can be rented and reserved by members using an on-line or telephone-based reservation system

City CarShare provides insurance and pays for fuel Two local programs have added special vehicles to fleet:

City of Berkeley (Added lift-equipped vehicles, made available to members on evenings and weekends)

Bay Area Wilderness Training (Retained ownership of minivans, but gave to City CarShare to manage them)


23

Model 3 Best Practice City CarShare Benefits • Enhances mobility within the

community • Centralized oversight provides

effective approach to maintenance, management, insurance, and scheduling

• Most individual and organizational members realize savings compared to owning and maintaining a fleet of vehicles


24

Other programs: Zipcar, UCarShare, Others?

Model 5 Vehicle fleet owner transfers vehicle title to another organization

(primary difference between this model and Models 1 & 2) Appropriate for transit agencies that would like to supplement

complementary paratransit and need to dispose of older vehicles A benefit of this model is that it relieves sponsor organization of

liability issues A challenge is maintaining control over how vehicles are used Decentralized operations may allow providers to deliver

transportation services more cost effectively than can be done by host organization


25

Fleet ownership Operations Vehicle Users Decentralized Decentralized Primary only

Model 5 Best Practice Contra Costa County’s Community Connection Program, Contra Costa County, CA Manage demand for ADA trips Vehicles competitive application process to four social

service agencies Each organization agreed to provide at least 50 trips per

month CCCTA provides maintenance reimbursement Agency signed a contract with each organization, but

retained no legal rights to vehicles and how they are used The Goal: To Improve Access & Mobility for all!

26

Model 5 Best Practice Program is a Win-Win CCTA dramatically lowered cost of ADA trips, saving

approximately $366,000 since program initiation. Cost per trip to CCCTA: 79 cents/trip vs. $26.13/trip (cost

for CCCTA paratransit trip) Social service organizations provide higher level of service

to clients. Program benefited from strong

local relationships and active support from contracted service provider, which provided technical assistance.


27

Model 6 Entity operates transportation services using fleet

partially or wholly comprised of vehicles from a cooperative vehicle-sharing agreement

Fleet ownership is decentralized Operations are centralized Requires active role by a coordinating body Requires significant number of underutilized vehicles


28

Fleet ownership Operations Vehicle Users Decentralized Centralized Primary

Model 6 Best Practice Ride-On Transportation, San Luis Obispo County, CA Private non-profit organization provides a wide variety of

transportation services Ride-On formed cooperative to access larger fleet; approximately

40% of fleet comes from transportation cooperative Vehicles are owned by other agencies Ride-On serves as broker, scheduler, and administrator; it hires,

trains, and pays drivers; pays for fuel, registration fees and insurance; responsible for fuel and maintenance

Ride-On “rents” vehicles from agencies for 25 cents/mile Requires that participating members have vehicles with

sufficient downtime; however, Ride-On has developed menu of participation levels and variety of contracts


29

Model 7 Multiple entities share vehicles with multiple users Arrangement requires a centralized administrator and

vehicle-sharing structure No examples of this model were found, although may

still be viable option for Southwest Idaho


30

Fleet ownership Operations Vehicle Users Decentralized Decentralized Secondary

Best Practices | Findings Significant benefits were identified for vehicle-

sharing partners, both hosts and recipients of vehicles and their clients

Centralized fleet oversight/ownership may provide more efficient approach to maintenance, program administration, insurance provision, and grant administration. May result in cost savings.

Strongest and most established programs have a relatively large fleet that can be shared, as well as sufficient resources for administration and oversight.


31

Best Practices | Findings • A strong program coordinator that can identify

willing partners and broker agreements between them is essential for success.

• Making vehicles available to secondary users requires an additional level of administration, but provides expanded mobility to the community.

• Decentralized fleet ownership models can work, but it requires some degree of central administration and coordination.


32

Key Program Elements Vehicle Procurement Insurance Maintenance Coordinated Scheduling Recruiting and Certifying Drivers Record Keeping

Common to all vehicle sharing programs

1/5/2010

33



34

Breakout Groups Small-Group Discussions Organize by region or model type Facilitated by Will, Rich & Ross Objective: Identify an opportunity & discuss how to

pursue it. Think about your local resources. Are vehicles being used as

effectively as possible? What immediate opportunities are there? What is the optimal arrangement? What intermediate steps are necessary to get there? What are your next steps? Who do you need to contact?


51

Return at 12:30

52


Link to Rich’s Presentation

53



54

Discussion Questions Are there commonalities among regions? Are there opportunities for inter-regional vehicle

sharing or cost allocation developments? What role does your existing infrastructure play in

facilitating implementation of vehicle sharing & cost allocation? Cost Sharing, Joint Procurement, Training, Insurance

Pooling?


55

Workshop # 2, Day 1 - February 16, 2010 Presented by · Centralized Fleet Models Model 4: An entity...

Documents

Transcript of Workshop # 2, Day 1 - February 16, 2010 Presented by · Centralized Fleet Models Model 4: An entity...