Metropolitan Transit Authority

of Harris County

Fiscal Years 2012-2015 Performance Audit

Task 3: Transit Operations

January 2017

Contents SECTION 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................. 1 

1.1  TRANSIT PERFORMANCE AUDIT BACKGROUND .................................................................................................................... 1 1.2  TRANSIT PERFORMANCE AUDIT OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................ 2 1.2.1  METRO’S AUDIT PERIOD ACCOMPLISHMENTS WILL ENHANCE SERVICE ................................................................................... 2 1.2.2  CHALLENGES WERE EVIDENT IN PERFORMANCE TRENDS........................................................................................................ 3 1.2.3  METRO’S MANAGEMENT RECOGNIZES THE NEED TO INCREASE RIDERSHIP ............................................................................. 3 1.2.4  METRO’S MANAGEMENT IS TAKING STEPS TO INCREASE SERVICE AND CONTROL COSTS ............................................................ 4 1.3  METRO’S TRANSPORTATION FUNCTIONS .......................................................................................................................... 4 1.4  ORGANIZATION OF THE REPORT ....................................................................................................................................... 7 

SECTION 2. TRANSIT PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW .......................................................................................... 8 

2.1  BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................................................. 8 2.2  SYSTEM‐WIDE AND MODAL PERFORMANCE TRENDS ............................................................................................................ 8 2.2.1  TOTAL OPERATING COSTS AND COST EFFICIENCY INDICATORS .............................................................................................. 10 2.2.2  REVENUE‐BASED PERFORMANCE INDICATORS DEMONSTRATED MIXED TRENDS ...................................................................... 10 2.2.3  SERVICE QUALITY ........................................................................................................................................................ 10 

SECTION 3. BUS OPERATIONS ............................................................................................................................. 12 

3.1  BUS SERVICE .............................................................................................................................................................. 12 3.2  CONSULTANT ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 12 

SECTION 4. RAIL OPERATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 14 

4.1  RAIL SERVICE .............................................................................................................................................................. 14 4.2  CONSULTANT ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 14 

SECTION 5. PARATRANSIT OPERATIONS ......................................................................................................... 16 

5.1  PARATRANSIT SERVICE ................................................................................................................................................. 16 5.2  CONSULTANT ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................................... 16 

SECTION 6. RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 17 

6.1  RECOMMENDATION 1: AUGMENT THE RESULTS OF THE REVIEW OF METRO’S TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS WITH AN EVALUATION 

OF METRO’S GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 18 6.2  RECOMMENDATION 2: IMPROVE FARE RECOVERY RATIO .................................................................................................... 18 6.3  RECOMMENDATION 3: IMPROVE RAIL ON‐TIME PERFORMANCE .......................................................................................... 18 6.4  RECOMMENDATION 4: INCREASE THE NUMBER OF HOV LANES ........................................................................................... 19 6.5  RECOMMENDATION 5: EVALUATE RIDERSHIP TRENDS AND IDENTIFY OPPORTUNITIES TO TARGET NEW TRANSIT MARKETS ............. 19 6.6  RECOMMENDATION 6: ENHANCE RIDERSHIP WITH AN UPDATED MARKETING CAMPAIGN, ALIGNING TO POPULATION TARGETS ....... 20 6.7  RECOMMENDATION 7: TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE OPPORTUNITIES PRESENTED BY THE UPCOMING SUPER BOWL .......................... 20 6.8  RECOMMENDATION 8: FORMALIZE A PLAN TO SHOW THE BENEFITS OF PUBLIC TRANSIT ........................................................... 20 6.9  RECOMMENDATION 9: WORK WITH THE CITY AND SOCIAL SERVICE ORGANIZATIONS TO REDUCE THE IMPACT OF VAGRANCY, 

LOITERING, AND PANHANDLING ON AND AROUND METRO TRANSIT FACILITIES ...................................................................... 21 6.10  RECOMMENDATION 10: MAKE THE AREA AROUND THE DOWNTOWN RAIL LINE A TRANSIT‐ONLY CORRIDOR ............................... 21 

SECTION 7. SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................... 22 

APPENDIX A: OPERATING DATA BY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR ............................................................. 23 

APPENDIX B: PERFORMANCE DATA BY MODE ............................................................................................... 24 

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Section 1

1.1

Section 4Texas traof the pofficials for impro

The Metthereforein associconduct data, whiof the per

The perfo

•

•

•

This repoSeptemboperationservice d

The detaperformabe reviewof two of

While threcognizereviewinfunction METRO

The resuhave bee

1. INTRO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

1. Introduct

Transit P

451.454 of tansit agencieerformance to perform

oving efficie

tropolitan Te retained Miation with Cthe Fiscal Yich was prevrformance st

ormance aud

ComplianceCode (Task

Collection mandated p

Performancoperations, three audit coperations.

ort presents er 30, 2015 ns, focusing delivery.

ailed reviewance auditingwed once in f METRO’s

he scope of es that an ag transportamust be con’s transit ser

ults of the ren provided i

ODUCTION

Performancerations 

tion

Performance

the Texas Tres for munici

audit is to oversight fu

ency and effe

ransit AuthoMilligan & Co

Contract SerYears (FY) 2viously revietatistics repo

dit assessed M

e with applik 1).

and compilperformance

ce in one oor system mcycles (Task

the results for FY 2012on METRO

w of METROg requiremenevery three administrati

f the audit iccurate unde

ation functionsidered alonrvices.

quired perfoin separate re

N

e Audit

e Audit Bac

ransportationipalities withprovide ev

unctions andectiveness of

ority of Harompany, LLrvice Innova2012 to 201ewed as partorted in FY 2

METRO's:

icable state

lation of baindicators (T

of three armaintenance)k 3). The foc

of the trans2, FY 2013,

O’s transporta

O’s bus andnts, which saudit cycles

ive functions

is consistenerstanding oons in isolatng with trans

ormance indeports:

1

ckground

n Code manh a populatio

valuative infd to provide f its operatio

rris County LC to performations, LLC, 15 performant of the FY 22012 have b

law from C

ase statisticsTask 2).

reas (i.e. ad). Each functcus of the fun

sit operationFY 2014, anation functio

d rail transpstipulate thats. The previos: finance an

nt with stateof transit pertion, and thsportation to

icator assess

ndates quadreon of more tformation neuseful infor

ons.

(METRO) m the audit. worked clo

nce audit. T2009 – FY 2een adjusted

Chapter 451

s and meas

dministrationtional area mnctional revi

ns review bend FY 2015.ons and activ

portation fut each of theous performand human res

e requiremenrformance tr

hat the perfoo obtain a co

sment and le

ennial perfothan 1.9 millecessary forrmation to th

meets this Milligan &

osely with MThis audit in2012 quadrend for this rep

of the Texa

surement of

n and manmust be addriew for this a

etween Octo It is an assevities that ar

unctions come three functance audit psources.

nts, METROrends cannoormance of omplete and

egislative co

ormance audlion. The purr state and he transit ag

requirement Company, L

METRO’s stancluded FY nnial audit. Sport.

as Transport

f specified s

nagement, trressed once eaudit is on tr

ober 1, 2011essment of trre responsibl

mplies with tional areas

provided a re

O’s manageot be obtaine

the maintenbalanced vie

ompliance re

dits of rpose local

gency

t and LLC, aff to 2012

Some

tation

state-

ransit every ransit

1 and ransit le for

state must

eview

ement ed by nance ew of

eview

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

•

•

To providof the tre

1.2

The perfoperformaaccompliactivitiesMETRO

To provaccompliimprovemSeptembmoves fothat are c

1.2.1

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

1. INTRO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

Legislative

Performanc

de context fend analysis

Transit P

formance audance. This ishments ans that are ke

to improve

vide a baishments anment. The aer 2015. Sinorward, an ecurrently und

METRO’s

Bus and rai

Texas Medconnectivity

Major bus r

Houston Liv

Mobile tick

Rail Purple

Red Line sCollege

Free transfe

ODUCTION

Performancerations 

Compliance

ce Indicators

for the transiof system-w

Performance

dit is intendefunctional

nd challengeey to the dits operating

alanced pernd positive paudit is a lonce current teffort has alderway at M

s Audit Peri

l announcem

dical Center y from bus to

realignment

vestock and

keting

and Green L

successful e

ers in any dir

N

e Audit

e review (fin

results (fina

it operationswide perform

e Audit Ove

ed to providreview p

es over the delivery of Mg efficiency,

rspective operformanceok back ovtrends, objeso been mad

METRO and t

iod Accompl

ments in Eng

Transit Ceno rail

to improve s

Rodeo succ

Lines succes

xtension to

rection allow

2

nal report dat

al report date

s review, a smance indicat

erview

de a balancedprovides a audit periodMETRO’s s effectivenes

on METROe trends are er the past ctives, and pde to recognto articulate

lishments w

glish and Spa

nter is well

service

cessfully carr

ssfully opene

the Northli

wed within a

ted January 2

ed January 2

ection of thitors.

d and objectdiscussion

d, reviews aservices, andss and/or pro

O’s overalldiscussed

four years, programs arnize and inctheir implic

ill Enhance

anish

designed an

ried over 26

ed

ine Transit

a three-hour w

2017)

2017)

is report disc

tive assessmn of perfoand evaluated suggests oductivity.

l performaas well as from Octob

re more releclude the plaations for M

e Service

nd functiona

,000 people

Center/Hou

window

cusses the re

ment of METormance tres aspects oopportunitie

ance, signifopportunitie

ber 2011 threvant as MEans and activ

METRO’s fut

al with exce

daily

ston Comm

esults

RO’s rends, of the es for

ficant es for rough

ETRO vities ture.

ellent

munity

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

1.2.2

Using sdemonstr

•

•

•

As discuto the inThere is importan

1.2.3

Over theincludingThese enservice ahas shifte

1. INTRO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

Challenge

state-mandatrates declinin

Sales and u

The four co

Operatin

Operatin

Operatin

Fare rec

Service quashowed dec

Average

On-time

Acciden

Miles bpercent,

ussed in the Pnformation pno requirem

nt for METR

METRO’s

e audit perig expanded nhancementsarea and to med to the sou

ODUCTION

Performancerations 

es were Evid

ted key png performa

se tax receip

ost effectiven

ng cost per p

ng cost per r

ng cost per r

covery ratio

ality is goodcline.

e vehicle occ

e performanc

nts per 100,0

between mec, Rail: -32.4

Performanceprovided in

ment for METRO to provide

s Managem

iod, METRrail service

s were implemeet the neeuthwest.

N

e Audit

dent in Perfo

performanceance trends o

pts which me

ness/efficien

passenger in

revenue hour

revenue mile

fell 14.4 per

, however, t

cupancy incr

ce decreased

000 total mil

chanical roadpercent)

e Indicatorsmonthly re

TRO to use te informatio

ent Recogni

RO implemee, extended emented to aeds of MET

3

formance Tre

e indicatorsover the FY 2

easure reven

ncy measures

ncreased 10.7

r increased 1

e increased 1

rcent

two of the fo

reased 1.4 p

d an average

les decreased

d calls decre

report, the ports to MEthe state defn that is mea

izes the Nee

ented severabus service

address the rRO’s patron

ends

s, METRO2012 – FY 2

nues received

s reflect incr

7 percent

11.7 percent

11.4 percent

our service p

ercent

e 7.8 percent

d an average

eased an ave

results reporETRO’s Bofinitions for aningful to i

d to Increas

al enhancem, and an exrelocation ofns as the pop

O’s perform2015 audit pe

d increased b

reased costs.

productivity/

e 5.1 percent

erage 23.0 pe

rted here areard during tits internal rits stakehold

se Ridership

ments to itsxtensive marf major trip pulation cen

mance geneeriod.

by 22.1 perc

/quality mea

t

ercent (Bus:

e not compathe audit pereports; it is ders.

p

s transit syrketing proggenerators i

nter of the re

erally

ent

asures

+9.4

arable eriod. more

stem, gram. in the egion

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

METRO rail mileunnecessweekendefforts, sridershipchallengedowntowMETRO inspire tMETRO enhance

METRO service m

1.2.4

Over the increase increase expansio

Bus opergleaned f

METROLresult, opMETRO the increa

In additiofare struccomparatauthorizedeclined under Tecommon

1.3

METRO services municipacounties.buses. M

1. INTRO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

expanded ites to approsary bus routd. With thessuch as spec projectionse is amplifie

wn in 2017, ashould cre

heir fellow with one-o

the public tr

should contmeets the nee

METRO’s

audit periodwas for MEin rail open of the Red

rating costs from the red

Lift operatinperating cosincreased M

ase in operat

on to the inccture to incrtively low foed under Texto 13.7 at th

exas Transpamong simi

METRO’

operates fover a 1,30

alities, porti METRO’s

METRO bus s

ODUCTION

Performancerations 

ts Red Line oximately 2tes in favor se changes, ial school p. However, ted by businalthough it wate new maresidents t

on-one interransit experie

tinue to evaeds of the pu

s Managem

d METRO’s ETRORail serating cost,

d Line and th

grew relativesigned syst

ng costs grest per passe

METROLift ting costs.

crease in the rease fare reor a transit axas Transpohe end of thortation Codilarly situate

’s Transpor

fixed-route 03-square mons of uninbus routes

services curr

N

e Audit

and opened22. METRO

of extendedMETRO p

rograms andthere is a ch

nesses, such will still be arketing inco ride MET

raction with ence.

aluate serviceublic.

ent is Takin

system-widervice at ap

can be dirhe addition o

vely more slotem.

ew 43.9 perenger increafares in FY

METROLifecovery rati

agency of MEortation Codhe audit peride 451, in o

ed transit sys

rtation Func

bus, light rmile service ncorporated are operatedrently provid

4

d the new GrO also realid service to arojected incd special far

hallenge of loas Shell Oiwithin the Mentives and TRO. Benef

commuters

e changes un

ng Steps to In

de operating pproximatelyrectly attribuof the Purple

owly at 10.6

rcent due toased by a m

Y 2016 from

ft fare, METos and averETRO’s cali

de 451. Consod. While inother parts ostems.

ctions

rail (METRarea that inHarris Coun

d using a 10de about 84 m

reen and Purigned its bareas with pcreased ridere free days,ow ridershipil Company

METRO servuse employ

fits of this s, in additio

ntil ridership

Increase Ser

costs increay 192.6 percuted to incr

e and Green L

6 percent as

o the servicmargin of 2a base fare

TRO would brage fares. Miber, althougsequently, Mn line with oof the count

RORail), anncludes the nty, and sm

00-percent amillion boar

rple Lines inus network

population grership. Throu, METRO stp in downtow, moving itsvice area. Toyees that liinitiative in

on to unfette

p goals are

vice and Co

ased 17.8 percent. The larreased rail Lines.

an indicatio

e population26.5 percenof $1.15 to

be served weMETRO’s $gh in line wi

METRO’s faother transit try, rates of

nd paratransCity of Ho

mall portionsccessible fle

rdings per ye

ncreasing itsk by eliminrowth and ough its outrtrived to mewn Houston.s offices weo offset thisve downtownclude provered feedbac

achieved an

ontrol Costs

rcent. The large, but expservice with

on of the su

n increase. nt. Conseque

$1.25 to ad

ell to redesig1.25 base faith other ageare recovery

agencies crf 25 or mor

sit (METROouston, 14 s of surrouneet of over 1ear.

total nating on the reach

eet its This

est of loss,

wn to viding ck to

nd the

argest ected h the

ccess

As a ently,

ddress

gn its are is encies

ratio reated re are

OLift) other nding 1,427

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

METRO operates approxim

METROLnavigate qualified(ADA) oservices uthe thirdoperates most signtransport

For this rfixed-rou

Chief Ex

Deputy C

Superinte

ExecutivSafety, an

Director Evaluatio

Chief Fin

General M

Chief Op

Vice Pre

Director

Senior DVanpool

Director

Director

Superinte

1. INTRO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

inauguratedprimarily a

mately 22 mi

Lift provideMETRO’s a

d for serviceof 1990. Servuse 156 ME

d-party cont272 dedicatnificant addtation.

review, interute bus, rail,

xecutive Offi

Chief Execut

endent of Ra

ve Vice Presind Custome

of Service Pon

nancial Offic

Manager of

perating Offi

sident of Hu

of Grant Pro

Director of Co

of Drug and

of Paratrans

endent of Tr

ODUCTION

Performancerations 

d its light raat street grailes.

es service taccessible fi

e based on pvices are sc

ETRO-ownedtractor Greated wheelchaition to this

rviews wereand paratran

icer

tive Officer

ail Transport

ident, Operar Service

Planning, Sch

cer

First Transit

icer

uman Resour

ograms

ontracted Pa

d Alcohol Pr

sit (METROL

ransportation

N

e Audit

ail service iade in a sem

to persons ixed-route bparameters eheduled in rd vans operaater Houstoair accessiblservice is th

e conducted nsit transpor

tation

ations, Public

heduling, an

t - Northwes

rces

aratransit, an

ograms

Lift) Service

n - Kashmere

5

in January 2mi-exclusive

with disabilus and rail sestablished bresponse to ated by Firstn Transportle minivans he Taxicab b

with the startation functi

Direc

Direc

Direc

c ExecEngi

nd LeadPolic

Direc

st Direc

MET

Chie

Exec

nd Senio

Senio

es Chie

e Supe

2004. It is ae right of w

lities who aservices. MEby the Amespecific cust Transit. Mitation Compleased by drbackup serv

aff who are kions. Key sta

ctor of Healt

ctor of Safet

ctor of Right

cutive Vice Pneering, and

d Managemecy

ctor of Labo

ctor of Staffi

TROLift Serv

f of Signals

cutive Vice P

or Director o

or Director o

f Safety Off

erintendent B

a double tracway serving

are unable ETROLift cuericans withstomer requeinivan servicpany (Yellorivers from Y

vice that allo

knowledgeabaff include:

th, Pension,

ty

t of Way

President, Pld Constructio

nt Analyst o

or Relations

fing and Dive

vices Operat

and Commu

President of

of Bus Main

of Transport

ficer

Bus Mainten

cked systemg 24 station

to board austomers are

h Disabilitiesests. METROce is provideow Cab), wYellow Cab

ows for same

ble of MET

and Wellnes

lanning, on

of Revenue/F

ersity

tions Superv

unication

Administrat

ntenance

ation

nance - Kashm

m that ns for

and/or e pre-s Act OLift ed by which . The e day

RO’s

ss

Fare

visor

tion

mere

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

The perftransit op

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

Addition

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

1. INTRO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

formance auperations, su

Safety Prog

Capital and

Monthly Bo

Operations

METROLif

METROLif

Operator Ti2015

Monthly Su

Databases rgrievances,

METRO’s l

Performanc System

nal key docum

METRORa

Rail Operat

FY 2012 – F

FY 2012 – F

Rail Operat

Accident Re

Constructio

METRORa

ODUCTION

Performancerations 

udit also incch as:

gram Plan fo

d Operating B

oard Busines

and Transpo

ft Goals and

ft Service Co

ime Keeping

ummary of C

related to accmanpower,

labor agreem

ce Managem

ments review

ail Performan

tions Organi

FY 2015 Ra

FY 2015 Ra

tions Compla

eporting For

on Safety Pro

ail Standard O

N

e Audit

cluded exten

r Metropolit

Budgets, FY

ss Reports, F

ortation Goa

Objectives,

ontracts

g System, H

Complaints/C

cidents, discand incentiv

ment with the

ment, Appra

wed included

nce Statistics

zation Chart

ail Objective

ail On-Time

aint Statistic

rms

ogram Guide

Operating Pr

6

nsive review

tan Transit A

Y 2012 – FY

FY 2012 – F

als and Objec

FY 2012 – F

History Oper

Commendati

ciplinary active payments

e Transport W

isal and Co

d:

s

ts

s and Accom

Performance

cs

e

rocedures

ws of docum

Authority of

2015

Y 2015

ctives, FY 20

FY 2015

rator Utilizat

ions/Comme

ions, schedus for the revi

Workers Un

ompensation

mplishments

e

ments and d

Harris Coun

012 – FY 20

tion Reports

ents, FY 201

ling informaew period

nion

n Policies an

ata pertainin

nty (Bus & R

015

s, FY 2012 –

2 – FY 2015

ation, compl

nd Procedur

ng to

Rail)

– FY

5

aints,

res –

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

The consRail OpEmergenFacility.

1.4

The rema

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

•

1. INTRO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

sultant visiteerations Ce

ncy ManageThe consulta

Organiza

aining sectio

Section 2:operations ris a discusindicators d

Section 3:delivering boperations pperformanc

Section 4: Rof rail opera

Section 5: METROLifof ADA. Mpeople with

Section 6:improving tfunctions.

Section 7: METRO’s s

Appendix Aas well as th

Appendix Bservice efferevenue miltransit indu

ODUCTION

Performancerations 

ed two of Menter, Transment Centeant also rode

ation of the R

ons of this re

Transit Preview. Thisssion of MEduring the au

Bus Operbus services,planning suce, as well as

Rail Operaations planni

Paratransift is a compl

METROLift ph disabilities

: Recommthe efficienc

Summarysystem and t

A – providehe annual pe

B – providefectiveness ile) that are fstry.

N

e Audit

METRO’s bussit Police Oer, and METe the bus and

Report

eport provide

Performancs section proETRO’s perudit period.

rations – d, including tch as schedus customer fe

tions – descing, includin

it Operationlementary pprovides curwho cannot

endations cy, effective

y – providethe recomme

es the annualerformance m

s the performindicators (pfrequently re

7

s operating fOperations, TROLift opd light rail sy

e the results

ce Overviewvides a backrformance r

discusses Mthe organizauling, manpoeedback on s

cribes METRng performan

ns – discusaratransit serb-to-curb, ot use the fixe

– discussesness and pro

s a synopsendations.

l data used imeasures.

mance indicpassengers eported as a

facilities (KHouston T

perations at ystems.

of the transi

w – providkground for tesults and t

METRO’s sational structower planninservice deliv

RO’s organiznce.

ses METROervice designor door-to-ded-route syst

s and recooductivity o

is of the c

in calculatin

cators by moper revenu

a basis for ev

ashmere andTranStar Tra

the Frist T

it operations

des contexttransit in thetrends for k

ystems andture and resung, dispatchivery and serv

zational stru

O’s service ned to meet

door service tem.

ommends of METRO’s

consultant’s

ng the perfor

ode, includine hour andvaluating pe

d Northwestansportation

Transit Oper

review:

t for the tre service arekey perform

d proceduresults of METing, and opevice quality.

ucture and as

for the disathe requiremupon reques

opportunitiess service del

observation

rmance indic

ng two additd passengerserformance i

t), the n and rating

ransit a and

mance

s for RO’s erator

spects

abled. ments st for

s for livery

ns of

cators

tional s per in the

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Section 2

2.1

AccordinCity is tgrowing the perionation in

•

•

•

•

•

2.2

System-wefficiencythat has efficiencyactivitiesoperation

System-wperformagenerallyperiod.

The meatax receip

2. TRAN

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

2. Transit P

Backgrou

ng to a studythe fastest gmetropolita

od. From 20 population

As of 2011Hunters CrVillage.

Among the and third in

The Univeeconomy eqjobs.

Greater HouIt is on the diversity an

Multiple unthe Universnearly 40,0area include

System-w

wide and my of METRObeen used ay, effectiven

s behind thens sections o

wide and moance trends. y demonstrat

sure of regiopts per passe

SIT PERF

Performancerations 

Performance

und

y conducted growing metn area nume00 to 2030, growth as ev

, Greater Hoeek Village,

ten most pon the United

rsity of Hoquates to $1

uston is knolist of 65 m

nd business.

niversities arsity of Houst00 students es the histori

wide and Mo

modal perforO's transit opas a starting ness, and p

em, are discuof this report

odal performUsing state

tes some dec

onal subsidizenger increas

FORMANC

e Audit

e Overview

by Woods atropolitan arerically durithe Housto

videnced by

ouston includ, Bunker Hi

opulous areaStates in the

ouston scho1.1 billion in

own for its emost importa

re located wton is a natioon a 667-ac

ically black

odal Perform

rmance trenperations. Thpoint for th

productivity ussed at a m.

mance indica-mandated kclining perfo

zation of MEsed by 14.7 p

CE OVERV

8

and Poole Ecrea in the Uing 2013 – 2n metropolithe followin

des four of till Village, W

as in the Unite “Best Place

ool system’sn new funds

ethnic diversant world cit

within the Honally recogncre campus icollege, Tex

mance Tren

ds were revhe discussio

he functionaltrends, alon

more detaile

ators have bkey performormance tren

ETRO transpercent.

VIEW

conomics IncUnited State2014, with 1tan area is png statistics.

the ten wealWest Unive

ted States, Hes for Busine

s annual ims each year,

sity and stroties – it is n

ouston metrnized Tier Oin southeast xas Southern

nds

viewed to aon provided hl review of ng with theed level in t

een validatemance indicat

nds during th

it service wh

c. of the Cityes. The area156,371 peopprojected to

thiest commersity Place,

Houston rankess Careers.”

mpact on th, and genera

ong internatinumber 35. I

ropolitan areOne research

Houston. Mn University.

assess the ehere is a higtransit opera

e practices, the bus, rail

ed as a basistors, METRhe FY 2012

hich equates

y of Houstona was the faple added drank fifth i

munities in Tand Piney

ked first in T”

he Houston ates 24,000

onal commuIt is a magne

ea. Among tuniversity;

METRO’s se.

effectivenessgh-level overations. Operprocedures,

l, and paratr

s for determRO’s perform

– FY 2015

s to sales an

n, the astest

during in the

Texas: Point

Texas

area local

unity. et for

them, it has

ervice

s and rview rating , and ransit

mining mance

audit

d use

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

The four 2015 aud

•

Trends inservice im

•

Each of calculatedservices.

Performadefinitionperformaappendic

2. TRAN

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

cost effectivdit period.

Cost effecti

Operatin

Operatin

Operatin

Fare rec

n service qumprovement

Service qua

Average

On-time

o Bus

o Rail

Acciden

o Bus

o Rail

Miles b

o Bus

o Rail

these indicad for METR

ance indicatns, and genance statistices to this rep

SIT PERF

Performancerations 

veness/effici

iveness/effic

ng cost per p

ng cost per r

ng cost per r

covery ratio:

uality showet.

ality, measur

e vehicle occ

e performanc

: -2.7 percen

l: -12.8 perce

nts per 100,0

: -2.7 percen

l: -7.4 percen

etween mech

: +9.4 perce

l: -32.4 perce

ators is discRO services s

tors were cnerally demoics used toport.

FORMANC

e Audit

iency measu

ciency, meas

passenger: +

revenue hour

revenue mile

-14.4 perce

ed small im

red as:

cupancy: +1

ce

nt

ent

000 miles

nt

nt

hanical road

nt

ent

cussed furthystem-wide

calculated bonstrated de

o calculate

CE OVERV

9

ures reflected

ured as:

+10.7 percen

r: +11.7 perc

e: +11.4 perc

ent

mprovements

.4 percent

d calls

er in this sas well as se

based on veeclining perthe perform

VIEW d increased c

t

cent

cent

in custome

section. Costeparately for

erified dataformance dumance indic

costs over th

er satisfactio

t-based indicbus, light ra

, in compliuring the aucators are p

he FY 2012

on, and room

cators have ail, and paratr

iance with udit period.provided in

– FY

m for

been transit

state The

n the

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

2.2.1

Both totaconsume

•

•

2.2.2

Among Mand use t

•

•

2.2.3

There are

•

•

2. TRAN

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

Total Ope

al operating d increased

Total operaMETRO’s c

Operating crevenue millargest increthe growth audit period

Bus revrevenue

METRO

METRO

Revenue-

METRO’s ktax receipts p

Sales and subsidizatiogrowth in th

METRO’s fcompared tooperating cofrom 16.0 icreated undaround the higher fare that requirecurrent rate

Service Q

e four state-m

Average ve

On-time per

SIT PERF

Performancerations 

erating Cost

costs and oover the aud

ating costs control is lim

costs adjustele. Both of thease betweein operating

d:

venue hourse miles incre

ORail servic

OLift service

-Based Perfo

key performaper passenge

use tax recon, increasedhis indicator

fare structuro peer transiost that is rein FY 2012 der Texas T

country averecovery ra

e higher reco is low.

Quality

mandated pe

hicle occupa

rformance

FORMANC

e Audit

ts and Cost E

operating codit period, fr

include thomited (e.g. fu

ed for servichese costs inn FY 2014 t

g costs, whic

s grew 184,ased 1,081,0

e added 67,1

e has grown

formance Ind

ance indicater trip and th

ceipts per pd 14.7 percer is attributab

re is complexit systems. Tecovered fro

to 13.7 in Transportatioerage fare r

atios are subovery rates.

erformance i

ancy

CE OVERV

10

Efficiency In

osts adjustedom FY 2012

ose costs ofuel, insuranc

ce include oncreased 11.7to FY 2015.ch exceeded

249 hours f075.

118 hours an

by 190,552

dicators Dem

ors are two he fare recov

passenger trent over the ble to a signi

x and deeplyThe fare recoom passengeFY 2015. W

on Code 451recovery ratebject to state

Nevertheles

ndicators tha

VIEW Indicators

d for the lev2 to FY 2015

f delivering ce, mandated

operating co7 and 11.4 p The increasthe growth

from FY 20

nd 727,747 r

hours and 1

monstrated M

that measurvery ratio.

rip, a measaudit perio

ificant increa

y discountedovery ratio, r fare paym

While in line1, similar syes of 25 or

e or local mass, compared

at pertain to

vels of servi5.

transit servd benefits an

ost per revenpercent, respeses in these in service le

012 to FY

revenue mile

,920,316 rev

Mixed Tren

re revenue tr

sure of MEd, from $7.2ase in tax rec

d. The $1.25which measents, decreae with otherystems of M

more. Ofteandates or ind to the ind

service qua

ice delivered

vice over wnd programs)

nue hour andectively, witindicators reevels. Durin

2015, while

es.

venue miles.

ds

rends: sales

ETRO’s reg27 to $8.34ceipts.

5 base fare issures the shased 14.4 perr transit age

METRO’s caen, agencies nternal stand

dustry, MET

lity:

d and

which ).

d per th the eflect

ng the

e bus

.

gional . The

s low are of rcent, encies aliber with

dards RO’s

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

•

•

Two of toccupanc

•

•

The rema

•

•

2. TRAN

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

Accidents p

Miles betwe

the four mecy and accid

Average veincreased slmiles, whicpassenger briders.

Accidents pan average focus on implementemaintenanc

aining two m

On-time peon-time perperformanc12.8 percenmechanical replace the

Mileage int2012 to 9,8reaching a h9,855. Resupractices, fbetween mein FY 2015system men

SIT PERF

Performancerations 

per 100,000 v

een mechani

easures of sedents per 100

ehicle occuplightly by 1ch measure boardings. T

per 100,000 tof 5.1 perceimproving

ed since Fce.

measures of s

rformance imrformance dee decreased nt decline failure of th

signal interf

tervals betwe55 miles in Fhigh of 10,2ults like thefleet compoechanical ro. This decre

ntioned abov

FORMANC

e Audit

vehicle mile

ical road cal

ervice qualit0,000 vehicle

ancy, an ind.4 percent a

the length These result

total miles int between Fsafety, the

FY 2012,

service quali

mpacts the recreased sligfrom 97.3 p

in rail on-the axle coun

face system w

een bus mecFY 2015. Th

261 miles. Sise reiterate

osition, sparad calls has

ease is due inve.

CE OVERV

11

es (directly o

ls (directly o

ty improvede mile.

dicator of cus passenger

of passengs show the

s an indicatoFY 2012 and

effectivenealong with

ity declined

riders’ willinghtly, from 7percent in FYtime performnter signal iwhich will im

chanical roadhis indicatorince that timthe importa

re ratios, andecreased f

n part to a fa

VIEW operated serv

operated serv

d over the a

ustomer satismiles increa

ger trips, alwork MET

or of system d FY 2015. Tess of the h METRO’

over the aud

ngness to re73.3 percent Y 2012 to 8mance can interface sysmprove serv

d calls increr showed gre

me, performaance METROnd reportingfrom 24,744ailure of the

vices only)

vices only)

audit period,

sfaction withased significlso correlate

TRO is doin

safety. The This trend re

programs ’s commitm

dit period.

ely on METRto 71.3 perc

84.8 percent be directly

stem. METRvice quality f

ased from 9eat improvemance has fallO places ong consistenc in FY 2012axle counte

, average ve

h service qucantly. Passee with trendng to attract

accident rateflects METthat have

ment to sy

RO servicescent. Rail onin FY 2015

y attributed RO is workinfor this mode

,006 miles iment in FY 2len 4.0 percen its maintency. Rail mi2 to 16,724 mer signal inte

ehicle

uality, enger ds in t new

te fell RO’s been

ystem

. Bus n-time . The to a

ng to e.

in FY 2014, ent to nance leage miles

erface

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Section 3

3.1

METRO carries ov(BOFs) Fallbrooktransit ceand the d

The mostNew BusAfter thrMETRO route in i

In its selwas that with a dresidencedesignedeverywhemonth coto determwere a nreliably.

The netwevery 15 of the citfrequent are moniservice ipatrons, the New

3.2 C

The consand trainincluded comfortaansweredaround Hpercentag

3. BUS O

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

3. Bus Oper

Bus Servi

operates buver 86 millithat are owk) and 29 Paenters. METdisabled.

t significant s Network. Tree years of launched it

its system ov

lf-assessmenpeople wer

downtown emes and jobs w

d to take pere. To begionversation wmine what senew system

work is headminutes or

ty so that monetwork is s

itored for fus operated hso there areBus Networ

Consultant A

sultants spenns in downtow

eight routeable, timely d questions Houston. Buge was not c

OPERATIO

Performancerations 

rations

ice

us service wion passengewned and oark and RideRO offers a

change in bThe New Buf planning, cs New Bus Nvernight as d

nt, METRO re moving awmployment were movin

people downin assessing with the leadervice was ndesigned to

dlined by 22better, seven

ost common supported byuture upgradhourly to lowe more optiork, METRO

Assessment

nt five weekswn areas, to

es taken at vand effici

from patronus stops had clean.

ONS

e Audit

within the Citers a year. Soperated bye facilities. T

50 percent

bus service dus Network wcountless meNetwork in Adiscussed bel

determined way from thcenter surro

ng away fromntown, but the direction

ders of all afneeded. The o take peopl

2 routes (up n days a weetrips can be

y a few dozedes to frequew-ridership

ons for gettinincreased se

s riding the s park and ridvarious timeent. Announs and were

signage (so

12

ty of HoustoService is opy METRO There are 75

discount on

during the auwas a signifieetings, pubAugust 2015low.

that a majohe city. In thounded by dm the centra

today peopn of change ffected comm

results of the from their

from 11 on ek. This servmade witho

en routes thaent service wareas. The s

ng to work, ervice in FY

system in mode lots, and es (see Cha

uncements we knowledgeome were no

on and fourtperated from(Polk, Westlocal and 32bus and rail

udit period wcant realignm

blic hearings5. The New

or reason forhe 1970s, thdense resideal business dple are travfor the bus

munities, elehese conversr origin to t

weekdays avice forms aout connectioat operate evwhen ridershservice nowschool, and2016.

ost areas of outside of th

art below). Bwere in Eneable about ot updated w

teen other mm five bus op

t, Kashmere2 commuter rl service to

was the implement of the s and help fBus Networ

r a decline ihe city was ential neighbdistrict. The veling fromservice, ME

ected officialsations and their destina

and one on a grid acrossons and shorvery 30 minuhip increases

w matches thd recreationa

service. Thehe city. The Buses appeaglish and Sroutes and

with new sig

municipalitieperating facie, Hiram Croutes servinseniors, stud

ementation olocal bus syfrom consultrk changed e

n bus boardmore centra

borhoods. Toold network

m everywherETRO held als, and businultimate cha

ation quickly

Sunday) thas the busiest rt wait timesutes or bettes. The rema

he destinatioal activities.

e team rode bsampling of

ared to be cSpanish. Drlocations ingns) and a s

s and ilities

Clark, ng 20 dents,

of the stem. tants, every

ding’s alized oday, k was re to a six-

nesses anges y and

at run parts

s. The er and aining ns of With

buses f trips clean, rivers n and small

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Bus servthe wait disembarpassengemorning particularminutes, traffic co10) was 1

During tstakeholdnew systservice oRoute 14Route 98every 60 three blolow, but

Bus operper revenOn-time The Newnot reflec

3. BUS O

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

ice connectetime for a

rking one roers at the tra

routes travr afternoon approximat

ongestion du10 minutes l

the five-weeders. Many tem was conon weekends4 bus, where8, which ranminutes. As

ocks. When athat the new

rating cost penue hour greperformance

w Bus Netwocted in the cu

OPERATIO

Performancerations 

ed well withpassenger

oute to boardansfer centeveling on s

trip to the tely 30 minue to highwalate due to do

ek period, mwere delighnvenient ands. Though the a patron con every 15 ms a result, theasked if the

w service mee

er passengerew 3.4 perce decreased ork was launurrent perfor

R

ONS

e Audit

h other routesbetween trading the other. Bus servchedule. Onairport from

nutes more tay constructowntown tra

Chart 1 –

members ofhted with thd comfortab

he overall feeomplained aminutes, proe patron nowridership onets their nee

r increased bcent and ope

2.7 percent.nched near thrmance mea

Route No.

10 Wil

14 Hira

49 Chi

50 Bro

10 Wil

14 Hira

30 Clin

49 Chi

102 Bus

14 Hira

32 Ren

96 Vet

Afte

Mo

N

13

s at transit cansfers was her; many ofvice in total n two occam downtownthan the expion. The oth

affic congest

Sample Bus

f the consuhe New Bus ble. They exedback was

about missingovided transpw takes the Rn the bus wads.

by 9.3 percenerating cost . These meahe end of thsures.

Destinati

lowbend

am Clarke

mney Rock/S

oadway

lowbend ‐ LA

am Clarke

nton/Ella

mney Rock/S

sh IAH Express

am Clarke

nwick/San Fel

terans Memor

ernoon Trips

orning Trips

Night Trips

centers and aminimal, a

f the connecwas genera

asions afternn Houston pected one her afternoontion during r

s Trips

ultant team Network. T

xpressed satipositive, theg the old Roportation to Route 14 to was satisfactor

nt during theper revenuesures reflect

he audit perio

on

. Post Oak

ATE

. Post Oak

s ‐ LATE

ipe

rial

at train statioaveraging fivcting buses ally on-timenoon buses (Route 102)hour. Theren trip to Wirush hour.

met with aThey commuisfaction wiere was one oute 98. The

work, but nwork, but mry, the patro

e audit perioe mile increat that serviceod; therefore

ons, meaningve minutes were waitin

e, with all owere late.

) spanned ne was signifillowbend (R

approximatelunicated thaith the additencounter o

e reason wasnow it only

must walk an on stated tha

d. Operatingased 7.7 pere is less effice, its benefit

g that from

ng for of the

One ninety ficant Route

ly 50 at the tional on the s that runs extra

at it is

g cost rcent. cient. ts are

S

SECTION 4

FY 2012Task 3: T

Section 4

4.1

METROThe Red the Nortinclude dLine proheadwayWeekendheadway

METRO Line has through tThe portUniversitMagnolia

METRO has 10 struns throSouthernwith the Red Line

4.2

The consfrom endcrowded capacity into and car delay

The statAnnounchaving dinclude fwhen theplatform

4. RAIL O

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

4. Rail Oper

Rail Serv

’s 13-mile RLine was e

thline Transdowntown, thvides six-m

ys between 7d service is pys from 8:42

opened the nine station

the historic Etion of trackty of Houstoa Park Trans

also openedtations and tough one ofn University Green Line,

e at Central S

Consultan

sultants roded to end. Se

conditions approximatout of the ho

yed the train

tions were cements on difficulty buyfeatures for tey are apprdesign enha

OPERATIO

Performancerations 

rations

vice

Red Line opxpanded in it Center/Hohe Museum inute headw

7:47 pm and provided witpm to 12:00

3.3-mile Grns and traveEast End to k closest to on’s central sit Center wh

d the 6.6-miltravels downf Houston’s

and the Un, which enabStation Main

nt Assessme

e the rail syervice is freon the trainely 200 patrospital parkifor approxim

clean, welthe train w

ying a metrothe visually oaching the

ances METR

ONS

e Audit

pened in 200December 2ouston ComDistrict, the

ways between9:00 pm, an

th 12-minute0 am.

reen Line exels along Haa variety of downtown campus and

hen the Harr

le Purple Linntown southoldest Africiversity of Hbles riders ton.

ent

ystem almostquent; there

n itself at throns. In adding garages. mately three

ll-lit, and ere clear an

o card; but wimpaired. S

e exit and toRO’s accessib

14

04 and now 2013, offerinmmunity Coe Texas Medn 3:35 am tnd 18-minute headways f

xtension duriarrisburg Strdowntown eis shared wd the Palm risburg Bridg

ne during thheast along Ccan AmericaHouston. Tho transfer do

t every day efore, there e Medical C

dition, there One car stal minutes.

contained snd in Engliswere aided bSuch patronso identify thbility and cu

carries overng fast and cllege to Fan

dical Center ato 7:47 pm de headways from 4:29 am

ing the auditreet from Maentertainmen

with the PurpCenter. The

ge is comple

he audit perioCapitol and an communi

he last sectioowntown. Ri

for five weis no need

Center area; were many

lled on the tr

signs in bosh and Spanby METRO s can use theheir destinaustomer serv

r 45,000 paconvenient rnnin South. and NRG Stduring the wfrom 9:00 p

m to 8:42 pm

t period in 2agnolia Parknt and businple Line an

e Green Lineted.

od in 2015. TRusk to the ities and con

on of the traciders can als

eks. Each lifor a scheduone car wacars crossin

racks in fron

oth Englishnish. There employees. em on the ra

ation. Both tvice.

ssengers a yrail service f

Featured stadium. The week, 12-mipm to 11:24 m and 18-mi

2015. The Gk Transit Ceess destinati

nd travels toe will go to

The Purple LPalm Cente

nnects to Teckway is sh

so transfer to

ine was travule. There w

as almost fung the rail lnt of a train.

h and Spanwere customOther amenail cars to kthe rail car

year. from stops Red nute pm. nute

Green enter ions. o the o the

Line er. It exas

hared o the

veled were

ull to lines The

nish. mers nities know

and

S

SECTION 4

FY 2012Task 3: T

The consthat theyand on-tiand arouin downtto stationpayment Wheeler METRO situation.they use

During timplemenAs operameasurinif the degrew at measuremresult, mto FY 20increasedrecovery service qindicatorpercent a

The asseimprovemsystems sthe servictime perfthese effo

4. RAIL O

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

sultant teamy were generime. The onlnd the syste

town Houstons and often

from sociaStreet Stathas deploy

. Neverthelethe system.

the audit pentation and/

ating cost is ung the effectinominator d192.6 percements such

many of the p015. The cod by 44.2 p

ratio decreaquality also rs saw the band rail mile

essment of ment. Overastrive to attace area, throformance. Sorts.

OPERATIO

Performancerations 

m spoke withrally satisfiely negative f

em. METROon presents an on trains al service ation is inunyed its poliess, patrons s

eriod, METR/or expansionused as the biveness in sedoes not keent. This levas: passenge

performance ost per passpercent, the ased by 58.5declined, b

barometer ms between m

METRO’sall, METROain. METROough initiativSection 6 of

ONS

e Audit

h many rail ped with the rfeedback rec

O is aware tha challenge. T

as they areagencies. Thndated with ce departmestill express

RO continun of any tranbasis (numerervice, thereep pace. In tvel of growther trips, reveindicators s

senger increacost per re

5 percent. Fbut not at th

moving downmechanical ro

service efO’s rail serviO is workingves to increathis report

15

patrons. Therail system aceived was ihat the homeThe homelese generally the consultan

the homeleent and othconcern abo

ued its expansit service, rator) for cale will be a dithe case oveh does not enue hours, howed decliased by 116evenue mile

Following thhe same ratnward: rail oad calls dec

fficiency anice meets th

g to implemease visibilitypresents rec

e consensus and it is comn regards to

eless populatss can be foutransit depent team obsess populatiher METROout being ap

ansion plansthere will b

lculating perirect correlaer the audit correlate wirevenue mi

ines in servi6.6 percent, e increased

he trend of dte. Only twon-time per

clined by 32.

nd quality he needs of ent strategiesy, address sacommendati

received frmfortable, cl the numbertion on trainund on the stndent and c

served that ion. To add

O personnel pproached by

for rail sebe increased rformance in

ation with serperiod, rail

ith the growiles, and farice efficiency

the cost peby 50.4 pe

declining serwo of the forformance d.4 percent.

presents opf its patrons s that can ta

afety issues aons to MET

rom patrons lean, convenr of homeles

ns and at stattreets leadincan receive the Red Li

dress this isto manage

y panhandler

ervice. Withoperating co

ndicators uservice efficie operating c

wth in efficiee revenue. Ay from FY 2er revenue hercent, and rvice efficieour performadeclined by

pportunities – a goal m

ake advantagand increaseTRO to assis

was nient ss on tions g up fare

ine’s ssue,

the rs as

h the osts. ed in ency, costs ency As a 2012 hour fare

ency, ance 12.8

for many ge of e on-st in

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Section 5

5.1

METROLdoor to dvan, mini

•

•

•

•

5.2

Due to ththereforethe METday servi

Though indicatorMETRO operatingover the and operthese mehas alreaThe expeoperationdemand t

5. PARAT

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

5. Paratrans

Paratran

Lift is the cdoor service ivan, taxi ca

Van service156 vans wmaintenanc

Minivan serCab), whicprovided bytraining, ma

Taxicab bacare wheelchpassenger tcannot acco

METROLifsame-day seby METROYellow CabCab $8.00 fare.

Consultan

he uniquenese make no asTROLift service. Most oth

the assessmrs and interv

projectionsg costs increaudit period

rating cost pasures indic

ady begun adected effect nal cost indito ensure tha

TRANSIT

Performancerations 

sit Operatio

sit Service

complementafor people w

ab backup an

e is providedwhich are proce for the pro

rvice is provch operates y Yellow Caintenance, r

ckup servicehair accessitraining. Taommodate.

ft Taxi serviervice, same

OLift van, mb for servicefor a total tr

nt Assessme

ss of this serssessment onvice, it is coher transit sy

ment of paraviews of ME. Service is g

eased 43.9 ped of 26.5 peper revenue ate that the eddressing the

on this paricators. MEat costs keep

OPERATI

e Audit

ons

ary paratranwith disabili

nd taxi cab se

d by a third-ovided by Mogram.

vided by the272 dedicat

Cab. In addiradios and T

e is also provible. The Yaxicab backu

ice is taxi ce-day trip chminivan, or te. The patronrip cost of $

ent

rvice, the con a firsthandonsidered verystems do no

transit serviETROLift stgrowing fastercent contrercent. Opermile increa

efficiency anese trends byrticular initia

ETRO is expp pace with b

IONS

16

nsit service. ities. There ervice.

-party contraMETRO. Fir

e Greater Hoted wheelchtion to the

Trapeze (disp

vided by YelYellow Cab

up service

ab service fhanges, and/otaxicab backn pays Yello$9.00. The p

nsultant teamd basis. Howry capable bot offer same

ice is limitetaff, the trenter than expeibuting to thating cost psed by 28.4nd effectiveny increasingative is to inpected to cobudget goals

METROLiftare four mo

actor, First Trst Transit p

ouston Transhair accessibvehicles, Y

patching soft

llow Cab. Aldrivers in tis provided

for METROor last minutkup service. ow Cab $1.0patron then p

m was unablwever, when because of the day.

ed to interprnds observeected as demhe operating er revenue h percent. As

ness of the seg fares in FYncrease para

ontinue to ms.

ft provides codes of MET

Transit. Firstprovides driv

sportation Cble minivan

Yellow Cab ptware) mobil

ll the cabs uthe program

d for trips t

Lift patronste changes thTo book a

00 and METpays any co

le to use thecompared whe convenie

retation of td appear to

mand increascost per pas

hour increass with bus aervice is dec

Y 2016 fromatransit reve

monitor para

curb-to-curb TROLift serv

t Transit opevers, training

Company (Yens. The vanprovides drile data termi

sed in the sem all have Athat METRO

s who wouldhat cannot betrip, patrons

TRO pays Yest over the $

service andwith systems

nce of the s

the performabe in line w

ses. METROssenger incrsed 19.1 perand rail servclining. MET

m $1.15 to $1enue and redatransit cost

and vice:

erates g and

ellow s are ivers, inals.

ervice ADA OLift

d like e met s call ellow $9.00

d can like

same

ance with

OLift rease rcent vice, TRO 1.25. duce and

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Section 6

Findings performaThis secopportunagainst Mthrougho

Recommperformarequiremassessmeperforma

Audit reamong thanother a

•

•

•

6. RECO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

6. Recomme

documenteance as wellction inclu

nities. RatherMETRO’s p

out this repor

mendations oance trends

ments are prent. Additioance indicato

commendatihe recommearea, they are

Performanc

Recommoperatio

Recomm

Recomm

Recomm

Ridership

Recommnew tran

Recommaligning

Recommupcomin

Transit Ima

Recomm

Recommthe impfacilitie

OMMENDA

Performancerations

endations

d in previoul as opportu

udes detailer than viewipositive perrt.

offered for s. Recommrovided in aonal recommor trends.

ions are theendations sue broadly cat

ce measures

mendation 1ons with an e

mendation 2

mendation 3

mendation 4

mendation 5nsit markets

mendation 6g to populati

mendation ng Super Bo

age

mendation 8

mendation 9pact of vagras

ATIONS

e Audit

us sections unities for imed recomming the recorformance r

METRO’s mendations a separate rmendations

e results of uch that a retegorized as

: Augment tevaluation o

: Improve fa

: Improve ra

: Increase th

5: Evaluate r

6: Enhance on targets

7: Take adowl

: Formalize

9: Work withancy, loiterin

17

of the opermproved eff

mendations tommendationresults durin

consideratconcerning

report summare also i

findings in ecommendati follows:

the results of METRO’s

are recovery

ail on-time p

he number of

ridership tre

ridership w

dvantage of

a plan to sho

h the city anng, and panh

ations reviefectiveness, to capitalizns as negating the aud

ion addressg complianmarizing theincluded in

four key arion in one a

of the review goals and o

rate

performance

f High Occu

ends and ide

with an up

f the oppo

ow the benef

nd social serhandling on

ew indicate efficiency a

ze on thesive, they shodit review p

s opportunince with se results of the report

reas. While area may als

w of METROobjectives

upancy Vehic

entify oppor

pdated mark

ortunities pr

fits of public

rvice organizn and around

areas of posand productse improveould be balaperiod, as n

ties to impstate legisl

f the complt on MET

there is ovso be releva

O’s transport

cle (HOV) la

rtunities to t

keting camp

resented by

c transit

zations to red METRO tr

sitive tivity. ement anced noted

prove lative iance RO’s

verlap ant to

tation

anes

target

paign,

y the

educe ransit

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

•

For eachexpected

6.1

Issue antransportefficiencymade in o

To fully agency wevaluatioevaluatiocontrol su

Recommgoals andproductiv

Expectedimproved

6.2

Issue anaudit pertrip cost p

Recommridership

Expected

6.3

Issue an97.3 perc

6. RECO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

Safety-relat

Recommcorridor

h of the abod results are p

RecommeTransporObjective

nd Opportutation functioy, effectivenother operati

analyze perwould augmeon of a servon of pull ouuch as road

mended Actid objectives vity and serv

d Result. Ad performanc

Recomme

nd Opporturiod from FYpaid by the p

mended Acti to fill empty

d Results. M

Recomme

nd Opportucent in FY 20

OMMENDA

Performancerations 

ted

mendation 1r.

ve recommeprovided in t

endation 1rtation Opes

unity. METons can onlyness, productional areas,

rformance reent a performvice availabuts, vehicle conditions, e

ion. METROto determin

vice quality.

A comprehence measures

endation 2:

nity. METRY 2012 to FYpassenger.

ion. Reviewy seats on bu

METRO’s far

endation 3:

nity. METR012 to 84.8 p

ATIONS

e Audit

10: Make the

endations, ththe remainde

1: Augmenerations w

TRO’s many partially extivity and seas well as in

esults and tomance audit bility measu

and operatoetc.

O should unne if there ar

nsive evaluas.

Improve Fa

RO’s fare reY 2015. Fare

w the cost struses and trai

re recovery

Improve R

RO’s rail onpercent in FY

18

e area aroun

he context, er of this sec

nt the Reswith an Ev

nagement rexplain the auervice qualityn transportati

o provide ansuch as this,

urement likeor availabili

ndertake a rere opportunit

ation of goa

are Recover

ecovery ratioe recovery is

ructure and ins on existin

ratio will mo

Rail On-time

n-time perforY 2015.

nd the down

specific impction.

sults of thvaluation o

ecognizes thudit period pey indicators ion.

n accurate pi, with practice on-time peity, and othe

eview of the ties to impro

als and objec

ry Ratio

o is 13.7; it s a standard m

discounts fong service.

ore closely a

e Performan

rmance decr

ntown rail li

plementation

he Review of METRO

hat an auderformance treflect the re

icture of opecal evaluatioerformance er factors be

rail and buove efficienc

ctives could

fell 14.4 pemeasure of t

or METRO

align with in

nce

reased by 12

ine a transit

n steps, and

of METRO’s Goals

it of METtrends. Operesult of deci

erations, a trons. For exam

may includeyond MET

s service intcy, effective

d lead to bro

ercent durinthe portion o

service. Inc

ndustry stand

2.8 percent

t-only

RO’s and

RO’s rating isions

ransit mple, de an RO’s

ternal eness,

oader

ng the of the

crease

dards.

from

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Recomminterface

Expected

6.4

Issue anHOV lanencourag

RecommHouston.

Expectedincreasedcongestio

6.5

Issue andrelocationthe city rthe fastedowntowCompanyservice adowntowcapacity. to have potential

Recommbasis. ThMETROcongestioshould aimplemen

Expecteddowntow

6. RECO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

mended Actsystem.

d Result. Im

Recomme

nd Opportunes provide ge ridesharin

mended Act.

d Result. Ind ridership fon.

RecommeTarget Ne

d Opportunn of work ceremains onest growing

wn and the y will be marea. To add

wn with its NAttracting n

a clear undtransit users

mended Actihis includes ’s control ason, conveniealso evaluatnt transit ext

d Result. Mwn.

OMMENDA

Performancerations 

ion. Improv

mproved serv

endation 4:

unity. METRefficiency

ng and transit

tion. METR

ncreased on-from stakeho

endation 5:ew Transit

nity. METROenters and ride of the natio

regions in tpopulation

moving its ofdress this s

New Bus Nenew ridershiperstanding o

s.

ion. METROconsidering

s well as thoence, land ute opportunitensions and

METRO will

ATIONS

e Audit

ve the reliab

vice reliabilit

Increase th

RO has chalby moving

t use.

RO should in

time performolders who

Evaluate RMarkets

O’s ridershipdership popuon's fastest gthe country.center of th

ffices west ohift, METR

etwork. Consp is one of Mof the cause

O staff shoula full range

se that METuse patternsities to targd service imp

increase the

19

bility of trai

ty and increa

he Number o

llenges with more peop

ncrease the

mance for busee buses m

Ridership T

p downtown ulation withingrowing citi. Work centhe region hof downtow

RO has beensequently, raMETRO’s pres of ridersh

ld analyze ane of possible

TRO can con, etc., and t

get new traprovements.

e potential ri

in service b

ased on-time

of HOV lan

h traffic conple in fewer

number of

us service, gmoving whil

Trends and

fell during thn the METRies, and the ters are nowhas shifted

wn, but still n improvingail cars and brimary goals

hip loss and

nd explain rie factors (inntrol), such athe insights

ansit market

idership pop

y fixing the

e performanc

nes

ngestion on r vehicles.

f HOV lane

greater servie they are d

d Identify O

he audit periRO service ar

Harris Counw located noto the southremains wit

g service webuses downtos. It is impor

d amenities n

idership pattncluding thosas the weathe

they can pts, especiall

pulation and

e rail axle s

ce.

major highwHOV lanes

es in and ar

ice reliabilitydelayed in tr

Opportuniti

iod because orea. Neverthnty region oorth and wehwest. Shelthin the MEest and souown operatertant for MEneeded to a

terns on a rese that are oer, service le

provide. MEy with plan

overall ride

signal

ways. also

round

y and raffic

ies to

of the eless, ne of

est of ll Oil

ETRO uth of e with ETRO attract

egular out of evels,

ETRO ns to

ership

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

6.6

Issue anuniversitygraduatio

Recomm75 millionew gradmost trad

METRO recent doby ridersMETRO

Expecteddowntowto increas

6.7

Issues anBowl wila festivalSuper Bothe entirethe event

Recommtransit syopportun

Expectedexperiencand reput

6.8

Issue anMETRO living, an

Recommuse. Ther

6. RECO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

RecommeAligning

nd Opportuy students, aon.

mended Action people wduates from ditional mark

should anaownward trehip, such as in designing

d Result. Mwn. Downtowsed ridership

RecommeUpcomin

nd Opportull be hosted l associated owl LIVE ise city to expet.

mended Actiystem. With nity to reach

d Result. Ince riding MEtation will b

Recomme

nd Opportuis one of th

nd helps save

mended Actire is unique

OMMENDA

Performancerations 

endation 6: to Populatio

unity. The at well over

ion. METROworldwide, is

the universketing effort

alyze ridershends in bus r

service cong programs t

METRO wiwn Houston p.

endation 7:g Super Bow

unity. On Fein Houston. with the Su

s a free evenerience the S

ion. METRover one mpotential rid

ncreased rideETRO firsthe shared all

endation 8:

unity. In 20he best transie the environ

ion. METROopportunity

ATIONS

e Audit

Enhance Ron Targets

Greater Ho70,000 peo

O should targs the largest ities. They

ts.

hip trends toridership andsumption anto attract rid

ill experiencwill become

: Take Advwl

ebruary 5, 2The game w

uper Bowl thnt with food,Super Bowl.

O should usmillion peoplders from all

ership on MEhand, while eover the wo

Formalize a

015 and perit systems innment as we

O should creto inspire th

20

Ridership w

ouston area ple, are prim

get marketingeneration

are sophistic

o provide dad the other p

nd fare recovdership and m

ce increasese the desirab

vantage of

017, the 51s

will be playehat will run f music, ente More than o

se the platfole attending over the wo

ETRO. Potenenjoying therld.

a Plan to Sh

r the Amerin the United ell as money

eate a campahe next gener

with an Upda

is home tome candidate

ng to Millennsince the Bcated, techn

ata and insigperformance

very ratios. Tmeet targets r

s in the nuble place to

the Oppor

st National Fed at NRG Sfrom Januaryertainment, aone million p

orm of the the Super B

orld.

ntial riders ie Super Bow

how the Ben

ican Public States. Publ.

aign that focuration of tran

ated Marke

o multiple ues for downt

nials, which Baby Boomernology savvy

ghts into thee measures tTrend data anrelated to rid

umber of Mlive, work a

rtunities Pr

Football LeagStadium. Supy 28, until Fattractions anpeople are e

Super BowlBowl, METR

in and arounwl activities.

nefits of Pub

Transportatlic transit en

uses on the bnsit users.

eting Camp

universities.town living

at approximrs. These ary and immu

e reasons fothat are impnalysis will adership.

Millennials land play equ

resented by

gue (NFL) Sper Bowl LIVFebruary 5, 2nd more to a

expected to a

l to showcasRO has a un

nd Houston gMETRO’s n

blic Transit

tion Associancourages he

benefits of tr

aign,

The post-

mately re the une to

or the acted assist

living uating

y the

Super VE is 2017. allow attend

se its nique

get to name

ation, ealthy

ransit

S

SECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Expectedopportunefficient transit.

6.9

Issue anrail is likMETRO more holaddress t

Recommimpact th

Expected

6.10

Issue anservice. IMaking access to

Recommeliminate

Expectedthere are

6. RECO

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

d Result. Unity to promo

and investe

RecommeReduce tMETRO

nd Opportunkely impacte

has launchlistic and cothe underlyin

mended Actihis issue has

d Result. M

Recommeonly Corr

d OpportunIt is an efficithe rail line

o the rail line

mended Acte access by o

d Results. Iobstructions

OMMENDA

Performancerations 

Using publiote longevit

ed in the env

endation 9:the Impact Transit Fac

nity. In obseed by vagranhed initiativeost effectiveng issues.

ion. Work won rail rider

ETRO’s ride

endation 10ridor

nity. The doient and relie downtowne.

tion. Make other motoriz

Improve rails on or close

ATIONS

e Audit

ic transit iny. People wvironment. M

: Work witof Vagran

cilities

ervations anncy, loiteringes to addrese approach c

with the cityrship.

ership impro

0: Make the

owntown raiable service

n a transit o

the Red Lized vehicles

l safety by ee to the rail r

21

n Houston who use publMETRO wil

th the City ncy, Loiterin

nd interviewsg, and panhas this issue could be to

y and social

oves and the

Area aroun

l line (Red Loperating w

only corridor

ne downtows.

eliminating right of way.

will be prolic transit will change th

and Sociang, and Pa

s with ridersandling on an

with its poengage soc

service agen

cost of poli

nd the Dow

Line) is the with six-minur will increa

wn corridor

potential ac.

omoted as ill be seen a

he perception

l Service Oanhandling

s, METRO’snd around th

olice departmcial service

ncies to add

cing the syst

wntown Rail

focal point oute headwayase safety a

a transit on

ccidents that

the only vas smart, hean of using p

Organizationon and aro

s ridership ohe transit syment; howevagencies to

dress the neg

tem reduces

l Line a Tra

of METRO’ys during theand aid cust

nly corridor

can occur w

viable althy,

public

ns to ound

on the stem.

ver, a help

gative

.

ansit-

’s rail e day. tomer

r and

when

SSECTION

FY 2012Task 3: T

Section 7

METRO to stakehservice tenhance opportundirectly outreach of studenMETRO and panhagencies,to addres

7. SUMM

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

7. Summary

has an exceholders in ano meet the the system

nity in Houscorrelate to and build re

nts attendingneeds to be

handling on , churches anss this challe

MARY

Performancerations 

y

ellent transit nd around Hneeds of the

m. As one oton’s downtincreased r

elationships g become tra

a part of theand around

nd the city tenge could st

e Audit

system. It prHouston and

e communitof the fastetown area foridership. Twith Housto

ansit patronse discussion d the transit to address thtem the loss

22

rovides safethe 14 mun

ty. The recoest growing or METRO o do so, M

on’s many un. In 2017, Hand ultimatesystem. ME

his issue. Theof ridership

, efficient, renicipalities inommendation

cities in tto capitalize

METRO needniversities to

Houston will e solution reETRO shoule ultimate ou.

eliable cost en the servicens provided the United e on that grods to expano ensure thatbe hosting t

egarding vagld work witutcome of an

effective sere area. It adj

are intendeStates, therowth which

nd its market the generatthe Super B

grancy, loiterth social serny collabora

rvice justs

ed to re is

can eting tions owl. ring, rvice ation

A

APPENDIX

FY 2012Task 3: T

Performan

KPI

Operating 

Operating 

Operating 

Sales and u

passenger

Fare recove

Average ve

On‐time pe

On‐time pe

Number of

miles 

Number of

100,000 mi

Number of

mechanica

Additional 

Operating 

Passenger 

Unlinked P

Revenue V

Revenue V

Total Vehic

Passenger 

Accidents*

Mechanica

For Calcula

Sales Tax R

NTD Passen

Rail ‐ DO

NonRail‐CB

NonRail ‐ C

NonRail‐DR

NonRail‐DT

NonRail‐M

NonRail‐M

NonRail‐VP

* N/A ‐ Not

was at the 

** NTD rep

Appendi

Informatito calculbeen calclight rail,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The  opertransportaHOV/HOT

X A. OPE

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

nce Indicators pe

cost per passen

cost per revenu

cost per revenu

use tax receipts

ery rate

ehicle occupanc

erformance Bus

erformance Rai

f Bus accidents 

f Rail accidents 

les 

f miles between

l road calls 

Data

Cost

Fare Revenue

Passenger Trips

Vehicle Hours

Vehicle Miles

cle Miles

Miles

**

l Roadcalls

ations Only

Receipts

nger Miles

B‐DO

CB ‐ PT

R‐PT

T‐PT

MB‐DO

MB‐PT

P‐PT

t Available; in F

time responsib

portable acciden

ix A: Opera

ion in the talate the nineculated at th, paratransit)

rating  expenation  includeT  Lane  and 

RATING D

Performancerations 

er Transportatio

Cod

nger 451

ue mile 451

ue hour  451

s per  451

451

cy 451

s  451

l  451

per 100,000 451

per  451

n  451

LR

CB

CB

DR

DT

M

M

VP

FY2014 there is o

ble for collecting

nts including rai

ating Data b

able below ine state-mand

he mode leve), as well as

nses/revenueses  rail,  bus, vanpool  rev

DATA BY

e Audit

on Code Sec 451

de Sec

1.454 (c) (3) (A)

1.454 (c) (3) (A)

1.454 (c) (3) (A)

1.454 (c) (3) (B)

1.454 (c) (3) (C )

1.454 (c) (3) (D)

1.454 (c) (3) (E) 

1.454 (c) (3) (E) 

1.454 (c) (3) (F) 

1.454 (c) (3) (F)

1.454 (c) (3) (G)

RDO

BDO

BPT

RPT

TPT

BDO

BPT

PPT

only OTP data a

g this data.  This

il and bus opera

by Performa

ncludes bothdated perforel for each oat the system

s  used  to and  paratra

venue  and  e

PERFORM

23

1.454 (c ) (3) (A‐

FY2012

5.11                    

7.30                    

108.34               

7.27                    

16.0%

9.43                    

73.3%

97.3%

0.73                    

3.65                    

9,664                  

FY2012

414,014,072     

66,371,822       

80,941,271       

3,821,567         

56,684,878       

64,319,413       

534,369,113     

175                     

4,323                  

588,278,273     

534,369,113     

24,960,750       

98,265,706       

33,177,914       

17,543,948       

1,305,541         

235,148,457     

54,461,474       

69,505,323       

available for two

s function was s

ated by METRO

ance Indicat

h operating srmance indiof the three sm-wide level

calculate  thansit  as  repexpenses  hav

MANCE IN

‐G)

FY2013

1 5.0                    

0 7.2                    

4 109.8               

7 7.5                    

% 16.4

3 9.8                    

% 73.0

% 97.7

3 0.6                    

5 3.5                    

4 9,93                  

FY2013

2 423,778,25     

2 69,308,17       

1 84,461,05       

7 3,858,49         

8 58,608,51       

3 66,929,70       

3 574,228,41     

5 18                     

3 4,19                  

3 635,541,98     

3 574,228,41     

0 26,539,38       

6 111,621,45     

4 36,610,45       

8 17,653,45       

1 1,589,42         

7 254,630,33     

4 56,169,99       

3 69,413,91       

o months due to

subsequently b

tor statistics andicators. Eachservices thatl.

he  performanorted  in  theve  not  been 

NDICATOR

FY2014

02 5.                    

23 7.                    

83 110.               

52 7.                    

4% 15.

80 10.                  

0% 71.

7% N/A*

69 0.7                  

53 3.2                  

32 10,4               

FY2014

59 443,667,7     

72 69,664,9       

53 85,396,2       

91 4,006,9         

15 60,357,3       

07 68,595,3       

12 606,140,2     

80 1                     

98 3,8                  

81 677,912,3     

12 606,140,2     

82 33,086,5       

54 113,922,4     

57 36,879,5       

56 18,415,3       

20 2,385,1         

31 277,366,2     

97 54,511,6       

15 69,573,4       

o problems wit

brought in‐hous

d performanch performant METRO op

nce  indicatoe  National  Tincluded  in

R

FY2015

20 5                    

35 8                    

72 121               

94 8                    

.7% 13

04 9                    

.6% 71

84

750 0                    

220 3                    

493 9,                  

FY2015

743 487,907,     

941 66,959,       

225 86,142,       

936 4,030,         

393 59,983,       

384 71,938,       

282 573,489,     

155                      

890 4,                  

303 718,386,     

282 573,489,     

541 40,873,       

475 104,341,     

518 37,675,       

314 18,303,       

192 2,779,         

204 249,047,     

638 48,976,       

400 71,491,       

h a contractor w

e.

ce measures nce indicatoperates (i.e.,

ors  by  modeTransit  Datab  this  worksh

5

5.66

8.13

1.06

8.34

3.7%

9.56

1.3%

4.8%

0.75

3.38

568

5

171

131

484

235

144

298

760

163

116

911

760

954

266

477

305

128

779

992

859

who 

used r has , bus,

e  of base. heet.

A

APPENDIX

FY 2012Task 3: T

Appendi

The perfomodes th

In additiindicatorper reven

The operatrail, bus, aexpenses h

Fare Reco

METRORa

Fare Re

Operat

Recovery 

Bus

Fare Re

Operat

Recovery 

METROLif

Fare Re

Operat

Recovery 

NTD Repo

CBDO ‐ Co

CBPT ‐ Co

DRPT ‐ De

DTPT ‐ De

LRDO ‐ Lig

MBDO ‐ M

MBPT ‐ Mo

NTD Repo

CBDO ‐ Co

CBPT ‐ Co

DRPT ‐ De

DTPT ‐ De

LRDO ‐ Lig

MBDO ‐ M

MBPT ‐ Mo

X B. PER

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

ix B: Perfor

formance indhat METRO

ion to the nrs are includnue hour and

ting expenses/and paratransit have not been

very Ratios

il

evenue

ting Cost

Ratio

evenue

ting Cost

Ratio

t

evenue

ting Cost

Ratio

orted Op Exp (F

ommuter Bus D

mmuter Bus Pu

mand Response

mand Taxi Purc

ght Rail Directly

Motor Bus Direc

otor Bus Purcha

orted Rev (F‐10)

ommuter Bus D

mmuter Bus Pu

mand Response

mand Taxi Purc

ght Rail Directly

Motor Bus Direc

otor Bus Purcha

FORMANC

Performancerations 

rmance Dat

dicators incluoperates (i.e

nine state-med that are o

d passengers

/revenues usedt as reported inincluded in this

‐30)

irectly Operate

urchased Transp

e Purchased Tra

chased Transpo

 Operated

tly Operated

ased Transport

)

irectly Operate

urchased Transp

e Purchased Tra

chased Transpo

 Operated

tly Operated

ased Transport

CE DATA

e Audit

a by Mode

uded in this e., bus, light

mandated peoften reporteper revenue

Fare R

d to calculate tn the National s worksheet.

d

portation

ansportation

rtation

ation

d

portation

ansportation

rtation

ation

BY MOD

24

appendix arrail, paratran

erformance ed as a basise mile.

Recovery Rat

the performancTransit Databa

FY2012

3,978,767       

17,365,999     

0.2291            

60,302,288     

334,021,714  

0.1805            

1,524,759       

40,594,214     

0.0376            

FY2012

36,913,400     

7,209,288       

37,663,281     

2,930,933       

17,365,999     

245,851,608  

44,047,418     

FY2012

22,207,584     

5,492,565       

1,265,876       

258,883          

3,978,767       

26,243,497     

6,358,642       

E

re reported bnsit).

indicators, s for evaluat

tios

ce indicators base. HOV/HOT

FY2013

7 4,483,44       

9 18,385,54     

1 0.243            

8 63,001,22     

4 352,301,59  

5 0.178            

9 1,595,11       

4 46,189,79     

6 0.034            

FY2013

0 40,081,83     

8 7,314,72       

1 42,434,90     

3 3,754,89       

9 18,385,54     

8 260,699,06  

8 44,205,97     

FY2013

4 23,006,18     

5 5,878,85       

6 1,345,18       

3 249,92          

7 4,483,44       

7 27,365,41     

2 6,750,76       

by mode of

two additioting perform

y mode of tranT Lane and va

FY2014

44 4,735,30       

44 37,852,11     

9 0.125            

3 62,950,67     

1 341,877,09  

8 0.184            

0 1,606,54       

2 48,994,15     

5 0.032            

FY2014

0 45,737,79     

1 9,452,73       

00 44,356,46     

2 4,637,69       

44 37,852,11     

69 232,201,66  

1 54,484,89     

FY2014

84 23,828,69     

7 6,029,88       

85 1,324,31       

5 282,22          

44 4,735,30       

8 26,590,78     

64 6,501,31       

each of the

onal performmance: passen

nsportation inclanpool revenue

FY2015

04 4,830           

11 50,817         

51 0.0                

72 60,221         

97 369,542      

41 0.                

40 2,001           

59 58,419         

28 0.0                

FY2015

95 49,705         

38 9,620           

60 52,380         

99 6,039           

11 50,817         

69 254,417      

95 55,799         

FY2015

90 23,193         

81 6,867           

16 1,655           

24 345              

04 4,830           

87 25,189         

14 4,970           

three

mance ngers

ludes e and

5

0,770

7,373

0951

1,925

2,750

1630

1,173

9,757

0343

5

5,091

0,651

0,394

9,363

7,373

7,334

9,674

5

3,847

7,337

5,191

5,982

0,770

9,892

0,849

A

APPENDIX

FY 2012Task 3: T

The operatrail, bus, aexpenses h

Operating C

Total Opera

% change

Bus

% change

Rail

% change

Paratransit

% change

Total Passen

% change

Bus

% change

Rail

% change

Paratransit

% change

Total Opera

% change

Bus

% change

Rail

% change

Paratransit

% change

NTD Data

CBDO ‐ Com

CBPT ‐ Com

DRPT ‐ Dem

DTPT ‐ Dem

LRDO ‐ Light

MBDO ‐ Mo

MBPT ‐ Mot

VPPT ‐ Van P

X B. PER

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

ting expenses/and paratransit have not been

Cost per Passeng

ating Cost

e

e

e

e

nger Trips

e

e

e

e

ating Cost/ Passen

e

e

e

e

mmuter Bus Direc

mmuter Bus Purch

mand Response Pu

mand Taxi Purchas

t Rail Directly Op

otor Bus Directly O

tor Bus Purchased

Pool Purchased T

FORMANC

Performancerations 

/revenues usedt as reported inincluded in this

ger

nger

ctly Operated

ased Transportat

urchased Transpo

sed Transportatio

perated

Operated

d Transportation

Transportation

CE DATA

e Audit

Operating C

d to calculate tn the National s worksheet.

FY

3           

3           

             

             

             

             

             

             

FY

             

tion              

ortation              

on              

             

2           

n              

             

BY MOD

25

Cost Per Pa

the performancTransit Databa

Y2012

391,981,927       

334,021,714       

17,365,999       

40,594,214       

78,443,377       

65,461,887       

11,309,468       

1,672,022   

5.00

5.10

1.54

24.28

Y2012

36,913,400       

7,209,288          

37,663,281       

2,930,933          

17,365,999       

245,851,608       

44,047,418       

13,119,035       

E ssenger

ce indicators base. HOV/HOT

FY2013

416,876,927     

6.35%

352,301,591     

5.47%

18,385,544       

5.87%

46,189,792       

13.78%

81,793,775       

4.27%

68,601,927       

4.80%

11,440,171       

1.16%

1,751,677

4.76%

5.10

1.99%

5.14

0.64%

1.61

4.66%

26.37

8.61%

FY2013

40,081,830       

7,314,721          

42,434,900       

3,754,892          

18,385,544       

260,699,069     

44,205,971       

9,213,857          

y mode of tranT Lane and va

FY2014

428,723,3           

2.8

341,877,09           

‐2.9

37,852,1             

105.8

48,994,1             

6.0

82,839,3             

1.2

68,190,29             

‐0.6

12,783,8             

11.7

1,865,1

6.4

5

1.5

5

‐2.3

2

84.2

26

‐0.3

FY2014

45,737,79             

9,452,7                

44,356,4             

4,637,69                

37,852,1             

232,201,6           

54,484,89             

10,692,50             

nsportation inclanpool revenue

FY2015

67 478,77           

4% 1

97 369,54           

6%

11 50,81             

8% 3

59 58,41             

7% 1

57 83,44             

8%

93 66,26             

0% ‐

77 15,28             

5% 1

187 1,9

8%

.18

4% 1

.01

7% 1

.96

4% 1

.27

8% 1

FY2015

95 49,70             

38 9,62                

60 52,38             

99 6,03                

11 50,81             

69 254,41           

95 55,79             

05 10,93             

ludes e and

5

79,880

11.68%

42,750

8.09%

17,373

34.25%

19,757

19.24%

49,998

0.74%

67,956

‐2.82%

80,311

19.53%

901,731

1.96%

5.74

10.86%

5.58

11.23%

3.33

12.32%

30.72

16.95%

5

05,091

20,651

80,394

39,363

17,373

17,334

99,674

34,421

A

APPENDIX

FY 2012Task 3: T

The operatrail, bus, aexpenses h

Operating C

Total Opera

% chang

Bus

% chang

Rail

% chang

Paratransit

% chang

Total Reven

% chang

Bus

% chang

Rail

% chang

Paratransit

% chang

Total Opera

% chang

Bus

% chang

Rail

% chang

Paratransit

% chang

NTD Data

CBDO ‐ Com

CBPT ‐ Com

DRPT ‐ Dem

DTPT ‐ Dem

LRDO ‐ Light

MBDO ‐ Mo

MBPT ‐ Mot

VPPT ‐ Van P

X B. PER

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

ting expenses/and paratransit have not been

Cost per Revenue

ating Cost

e

e

e

e

nue Hours

e

e

e

e

ating Cost/ Rev H

e

e

e

e

mmuter Bus Direc

mmuter Bus Purch

mand Response Pu

mand Taxi Purchas

t Rail Directly Op

otor Bus Directly O

tor Bus Purchase

Pool Purchased T

FORMANC

Performancerations 

Op

/revenues usedt as reported inincluded in this

e Hour

our

ctly Operated

ased Transportat

urchased Transpo

sed Transportatio

perated

Operated

d Transportation

Transportation

CE DATA

e Audit

Operating Co

d to calculate tn the National s worksheet.

FY

3           

3           

             

             

             

             

             

             

FY

             

tion              

ortation              

on              

             

2           

n              

             

BY MOD

26

ost Per Reve

the performancTransit Databa

Y2012

391,981,927       

334,021,714       

17,365,999       

40,594,214       

3,624,856          

2,646,859          

65,203               

912,794             

108.14

126.20

266.34

44.47

Y2012

36,913,400       

7,209,288          

37,663,281       

2,930,933          

17,365,999       

245,851,608       

44,047,418       

13,119,035       

E nue Hour

ce indicators base. HOV/HOT

FY2013

416,876,927     

6.35%

352,301,591     

5.47%

18,385,544       

5.87%

46,189,792       

13.78%

3,813,336          

5.20%

2,833,629          

7.06%

64,900               

‐0.46%

914,807             

0.22%

109.32

1.09%

124.33

‐1.48%

283.29

6.37%

50.49

13.53%

FY2013

40,081,830       

7,314,721          

42,434,900       

3,754,892          

18,385,544       

260,699,069     

44,205,971       

9,213,857          

y mode of tranT Lane and va

FY2014

428,723,3           

2.8

341,877,0           

‐2.9

37,852,1             

105.8

48,994,1             

6.0

3,876,5                

1.6

2,752,1                

‐2.8

85,0                     

30.9

1,039,4                

13.6

110

1.1

124

‐0.0

445

57.1

47

‐6.6

FY2014

45,737,7             

9,452,7                

44,356,4             

4,637,6                

37,852,1             

232,201,6           

54,484,8             

10,692,5             

nsportation inclanpool revenue

FY2015

67 478,77           

84% 1

97 369,54           

96%

11 50,81             

88% 3

59 58,41             

07% 1

71 4,06                

66%

13 2,83                

88%

14 13                   

99% 5

44 1,10                

62%

.59

6%

.22

08%

.25

7% ‐1

.13

65% 1

FY2015

95 49,70             

38 9,62                

60 52,38             

99 6,03                

11 50,81             

69 254,41           

95 55,79             

05 10,93             

ludes e and

5

79,880

11.68%

42,750

8.09%

17,373

34.25%

19,757

19.24%

66,772

4.91%

31,105

2.87%

32,321

55.65%

03,346

6.15%

117.73

6.45%

130.53

5.08%

384.05

13.75%

52.95

12.33%

5

05,091

20,651

80,394

39,363

17,373

17,334

99,674

34,421

A

APPENDIX

FY 2012Task 3: T

The operatrail, bus, aexpenses h

SignificaIn FY 20In FY 20

Operating C

Total Opera

% change

Bus

% change

Rail

% change

Paratransit

% change

Total Reven

% change

Bus

% change

Rail

% change

Paratransit

% change

Total Opera

% change

Bus

% change

Rail

% change

Paratransit

% change

NTD Data

CBDO ‐ Com

CBPT ‐ Com

DRPT ‐ Dem

DTPT ‐ Dem

LRDO ‐ Light

MBDO ‐ Mo

MBPT ‐ Mot

VPPT ‐ Van P

X B. PER

– FY 2015 Transit Oper

ting expenses/and paratransit have not been

ant Events 014 the Red L015 the Green

Cost per Revenue

ating Cost

e

e

e

e

nue Miles

e

e

e

e

ating Cost/ Reven

e

e

e

e

mmuter Bus Direc

mmuter Bus Purch

mand Response Pu

mand Taxi Purchas

t Rail Directly Op

otor Bus Directly O

tor Bus Purchased

Pool Purchased T

FORMANC

Performancerations 

O

/revenues usedt as reported inincluded in this

Line expansn and Purple

e Mile

nue Mile

ctly Operated

ased Transportat

urchased Transpo

sed Transportatio

perated

Operated

d Transportation

Transportation

CE DATA

e Audit

Operating Co

d to calculate tn the National s worksheet.

ion opened fe Lines open

FY

3           

3           

             

             

             

             

             

             

FY

             

tion              

ortation              

on              

             

2           

n              

             

BY MOD

27

ost Per Reve

the performancTransit Databa

for revenue ned for reven

Y2012

391,981,927       

334,021,714       

17,365,999       

40,594,214       

56,328,032       

39,702,012       

769,903             

15,856,116       

6.96

8.41

22.56

2.56

Y2012

36,913,400       

7,209,288          

37,663,281       

2,930,933          

17,365,999       

245,851,608       

44,047,418       

13,119,035       

E enue Mile

ce indicators base. HOV/HOT

service; incrnue service;

FY2013

416,876,927     

6.35%

352,301,591     

5.47%

18,385,544       

5.87%

46,189,792       

13.78%

57,800,386       

2.61%

41,185,677       

3.74%

766,205             

‐0.48%

15,848,504       

‐0.05%

7.21

3.64%

8.55

1.67%

24.00

6.38%

2.91

13.84%

FY2013

40,081,830       

7,314,721          

42,434,900       

3,754,892          

18,385,544       

260,699,069     

44,205,971       

9,213,857          

y mode of tranT Lane and va

reasing operaincreasing o

FY2014

428,723,36           

2.8

341,877,09           

‐2.9

37,852,1             

105.8

48,994,15             

6.0

58,551,14             

1.3

40,100,20             

‐2.6

1,059,79                

38.3

17,391,14             

9.7

7

1.5

8

‐0.3

35

48.8

2

‐3.3

FY2014

45,737,79             

9,452,73                

44,356,46             

4,637,69                

37,852,1             

232,201,66           

54,484,89             

10,692,50             

nsportation inclanpool revenue

ating costs. operating cos

FY2015

67 478,77           

4% 1

97 369,54           

6%

11 50,81             

8% 3

59 58,41             

7% 1

43 60,05             

0%

04 40,78             

4%

92 1,49                

2% 4

47 17,77             

3%

.32

2%

.53

3%

.72

5% ‐

.82

4% 1

FY2015

95 49,70             

38 9,62                

60 52,38             

99 6,03                

11 50,81             

69 254,41           

95 55,79             

05 10,93             

ludes e and

sts. 

5

79,880

11.68%

42,750

8.09%

17,373

34.25%

19,757

19.24%

57,169

2.57%

83,087

1.70%

97,650

41.32%

76,432

2.22%

7.97

8.88%

9.06

6.28%

33.93

‐5.00%

3.29

16.65%

5

05,091

20,651

80,394

39,363

17,373

17,334

99,674

34,421