Paratransit is a critical form of transportation for mobility-impaired, low-income, and small and medium-sized communities. Paratransit systems face many challenges that restrict how well they can serve their communities, including limited funding, aging fleets, limited to no service standard assessments, and few practical modeling and planning practices. This paper discusses a transferable paratransit microsimulation analysis tool for patron accessibility designed to address these challenges. The tool calculates paratransit patron accessibility (defined as paratransit patrons’ perceived ease of access to reach desired activities and destinations) by simulating and measuring daily paratransit patron travel patterns on the basis of service fleet and region information. The tool further allows providers to evaluate patron accessibility for any combination of population groups, travel purposes, and times of day. Transit providers can use the tool to determine how well paratransit patrons are served and the most efficient ways to improve service. The microsimulation framework, including the system of simulation models, the supporting data, and application to Brownsville, Texas, are described in detail.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SpielbergF., and PrattR. H.TCRP Report 95: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, Chapter 6: Demand Responsive/ADA.Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004.
2.
SimonR. M.Synthesis of Transit Practice 31: Paratransit Contracting and Service Delivery Methods.TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 1998.
YimY. B., and KhattakA. J.Personalized Demand Responsive Transit Systems. Working Papers, California Partners for Advanced Transit and Highways, Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Berkeley, Oct. 2000.
5.
Northeast Midwest Institute.Rural Population as a Percent of State Total By State, 2000.2002. http://nemw.org/poprural.htm. Accessed June 15, 2008.
6.
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.,Boston Logistics Group, Inc., and A. E. Pisarski.The Transportation Challenge: Moving the U.S. Economy.National Chamber Foundation, Washington, D.C., 2008.
7.
KesslerD. S.TCRP Synthesis 57: Computer-Aided Scheduling and Dispatch in Demand-Responsive Transit Services.TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2004.
8.
KFH Group, Inc., and A-M-M-A.TCRP Report 70: Guidebook for Change and Innovation at Rural and Small Urban Transit Systems.TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2001.
9.
KFH Group, Inc.TCRP Report 79: Effective Approaches to Meeting Rural Intercity Bus Transportation Needs.TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2002.
10.
ConklinJ., SchweigerC., MarksB., WigginsW., and TimponeK.Rural Transit ITS Best Practices.FHWA, U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2003.
11.
SandlinA. B., and AndersonM. D.Serviceability Index to Evaluate Rural Demand-Responsive Transit System Operations. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1887, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2004, pp. 205–212.
12.
DavenportN. S., AndersonM. D., and FarringtonP. A.Development and Application of a Vehicle Procurement Model for Rural Fleet Asset Management. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1927, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 123–127.
13.
SchoferJ. L., NelsonB. L., EashR., DaskinM., YangY., WanH., YanJ., and MedgyesyL.TCRP Report 98: Resource Requirements for Demand-Responsive Transportation Services.Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003.
14.
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.,Urbitran, Inc., LKC Consulting Services, Inc., MORPACE International, Inc., Queensland University of Technology, and Y. Nakanishi.TCRP Report 88: A Guidebook for Developing a Transit Performance-Measurement System.Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2003.
15.
BhatC. R., BrickaS., LaMondiaJ., KapurA., GuoJ., and SenS.Metropolitan Area Transit Patron Accessibility Analysis Tool. Prepared for the Texas Department of Transportation, Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas at Austin, 2006.
16.
PottsJ. F., and MarshallM. A.TCRP Synthesis 71: Paratransit Manager's Skills, Qualifications, and Needs.TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., 2007.
17.
Easter Seals Project ACTION.Innovative Practices in Paratransit Services.Washington, D.C., April 2002.
18.
KFH Group Inc.TCRP Report 124: Guidebook for Measuring, Assessing, and Improving Performance of Demand–Response Transportation.Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2008.
19.
Victoria Transport Policy Institute.Rural Transportation Management: Improving Transportation Efficiency and Diversity in Rural Areas.2008. http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm87.htm. Accessed Dec. 1, 2007.
HansonS., and GiulianoG.The Geography of Urban Transportation, 3rd ed.Guilford Press, New York, 2004.
22.
McIntyreR. J., MahmassaniH. S., WaltonC. M., and MachemehlR. B.Rural Public Transportation Demand: Characteristics and Estimation Methodology. Technical Study Report 1080-1F. Texas Department of Transportation, 1986.
23.
KoffmanD., LewisD., ChiaD., BurkhardtJ., and BradleyM.TCRP Report 119: Improving ADA Complementary Paratransit Demand Estimation.Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007.
24.
PainterK., JessupE. L., GossardM. H., and CasavantK. L.Demand Forecasting for Rural Transit: Models Applied to Washington State. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1997, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2007, pp. 35–40.
25.
SouthworthF., VogtD. P., and CurleeT. R.Rural Transit Systems Benefits in Tennessee: Methodology and an Empirical Study.Environment and Planning A, Vol. 37, No. 5, 2005, pp. 861–875.
26.
FuL.A Simulation Model for Evaluating Advanced Dial-a-Ride Paratransit Systems.Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 36, No. 4, 2002, pp. 291–307.
27.
StommesE. S., and BrownD. M.Moving Rural Residents to Work: Lessons from Eight Job Access and Reverse Commute Projects. In Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, No. 1903, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, Washington, D.C., 2005, pp. 45–53.
28.
BlumenbergE., and ShikiK.How Welfare Recipients Travel on Public Transit, and Their Patron Accessibility to Employment Outside Large Urban Centers.Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 57, No. 2, 2003, pp. 25–37.
29.
BhatC. R., SrinivasanS., GuoJ., and SivakumarA.Activity-Based Travel Demand Analysis for Metropolitan Areas in Texas: A Microsimulation Framework for Forecasting. Prepared for the Texas Department of Transportation, Center for Transportation Research, University of Texas at Austin, 2003.
