Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutattachmentCity of Oshkosh GO Transit Source: City of Oshkosh Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review Final Report | July 2020 Prepared for the Wisconsin Department of Transportation by SRF Consulting Group SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | i Contents Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Status of Previous Recommendations ................................................................................................................................... 1 Summary Tables .......................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Part I: System Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 5 Fixed-Route Service .................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Demand Response ...................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Fares ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 7 Fleet ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 8 Facilities .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 9 Part II: Analysis of System Performance .................................................................................................................... 10 Peer Groups ................................................................................................................................................................................. 11 Performance Measures: Results ............................................................................................................................................ 12 Performance Summary ............................................................................................................................................................ 22 Part III: Policy- and Decision-Making Processes ..................................................................................................... 25 Organizational Structure ......................................................................................................................................................... 25 Policy Environment ................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................................................. 26 Part IV: Functional Area Review ................................................................................................................................... 28 Transportation Operations ..................................................................................................................................................... 28 Vehicle and Facility Maintenance ......................................................................................................................................... 29 Finance ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 32 Planning and Scheduling ........................................................................................................................................................ 34 Marketing ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 35 Summary ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 36 Part V: Conclusions ......................................................................................................................................................... 38 Appendix A: Completed Questionnaire ..................................................................................................................... 40 SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | ii List of Figures Figure 1. System Map ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2. Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip, 2017 Peers ......................................................................................................... 14 Figure 3. Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 .................................................. 14 Figure 4. Operating Expenses per Revenue Hour, 2017 Peers ......................................................................................................... 15 Figure 5. Operating Expenses per Revenue Hour Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 .................................................. 15 Figure 6. Passenger Trips per Revenue Hour, 2017 Peers .................................................................................................................. 16 Figure 7. Passenger Trips per Revenue Hour Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 ........................................................... 16 Figure 8. Passenger Trips Per Capita, 2017 Peers ................................................................................................................................. 17 Figure 9. Passenger Trips Per Capita Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 .......................................................................... 17 Figure 10. Revenue Hours Per Capita, 2017 Peers .................................................................................................................................. 18 Figure 11. Revenue Hours Per Capita Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 ........................................................................... 18 Figure 12. Average Fare per Passenger Trip, 2017 Peers ...................................................................................................................... 19 Figure 13. Average Fare per Passenger Trip Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 ............................................................... 19 Figure 14. Operating Ratio, 2017 Peers ..................................................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 15. Operating Ratio Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 .............................................................................................. 20 Figure 16. Subsidy per Passenger Trip, 2017 Peers ................................................................................................................................ 21 Figure 17. Subsidy per Passenger Trip Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 ......................................................................... 21 Figure 18. GO Transit Organizational Chart ............................................................................................................................................ 25 List of Tables Fixed-Route Service Summary (Regular Routes) .................................................................................................................. 5 Fixed-Route Fares ........................................................................................................................................................................... 8 GO Plus Demand Response Fares* ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Revenue Fleet ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Performance Objectives and Performance Measures ....................................................................................................... 10 2017 Operating Statistics – Wisconsin Peer Group ............................................................................................................. 11 2017 Operating Statistics – National Peer Group ............................................................................................................... 12 Operating Statistics – GO Transit, 2013-2017 ....................................................................................................................... 12 Performance Measures – GO Transit, 2013-2017 ................................................................................................................ 13 Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip, 2013-2017 Trend Performance ................................................................... 14 Operating Expenses per Revenue Hour, 2013-2017 Trend Performance .................................................................... 15 Passenger Trips per Revenue Hour, 2013-2017 Trend Performance ............................................................................ 16 Passenger Trips Per Capita, 2013-2017 Trend Performance ............................................................................................ 17 Revenue Hours Per Capita, 2013-2017 Trend Performance ............................................................................................ 18 Average Fare per Passenger Trip, 2013-2017 Trend Performance ................................................................................ 19 Operating Ratio, 2013-2017 Trend Performance ............................................................................................................... 20 Subsidy per Passenger Trip, 2013-2017 Trend Performance ........................................................................................... 21 Summary of GO Transit Performance Relative to Peers .................................................................................................. 22 Performance Measures, 2017 – Wisconsin Peer Group ................................................................................................... 23 Performance Measures, 2017 – National Peer Group ...................................................................................................... 24 Summary Assessment of Policy- and Decision-Making Processes ............................................................................... 27 Summary Assessment of Functional Areas ........................................................................................................................... 37 Summary of Recommendations .............................................................................................................................................. 38 SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 1 Introduction Section 85.20 of the Wisconsin Statutes requires the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) to conduct a transit system management performance review (MPR) of all urban mass transit systems receiving state aid at least once every five years. This report summarizes the 2019 MPR for the City of Oshkosh’s public transit system, doing business as GO Transit. GO Transit’s previous MPR was conducted in 2012. The 2019 MPR process consisted of three main activities: performance analysis, review of completed written MPR questionnaire and provided documentation, and an on-site interview and facility review. In September, an electronic MPR questionnaire form was sent to the City’s Director of Transit and Parking (“transportation director”), who leads GO Transit. The review team then conducted a quantitative performance analysis to inform the areas of focus for the on-site review. The on-site review was conducted on October 4, 2019. This report consists of five sections: System Overview; Analysis of System Performance; Policy- and Decision- Making Processes; Functional Area Review; and Conclusions. The Functional Area Review focuses on transportation operations, vehicle and facility maintenance, finance, planning and scheduling, and marketing aspects of the transit system. Status of Previous Recommendations Most recommendations from the previous MPR – conducted in 2012 – have been completed or adequately addressed, as summarized below. Table i: Summary of Recommendations from Previous Management Performance Review (2012) Functional Area Recommendation Status (Presented as Reported by GO Transit Staff) Accounting, Finance, and Purchasing Use the new database to reconcile cash collected to ridership by route to monitor revenue per passenger and identify any fluctuations in these trends. Not feasible with current system and staffing Develop city procedures for allocating a reasonable share of expenses for human resources, accounting, IT, and legal services provided by the City to Oshkosh Transit System (OTS). These expenses should be included in all OTS budgets and reports including the annual National Transit Database report. N/A Make bank deposits 2-3 times a week instead of daily to better match amounts of cash collected and free up staff time for other activities. We continue to make daily deposits consistent with City policy. Personnel and Labor Relations No recommendations -- Transportation Operations Continue implementing marked bus stop program to improve schedule reliability and system visibility, and ease of use. Yes Explore potential for adding five minutes of time to all schedules at 4:00 p.m. to allow for recovery from peak loads at school end. Not feasible w/o schedule change Ensure that someone in a supervisory role trained in drug and alcohol reasonable suspicion is available on Saturday mornings to check drivers in. Yes ADA Paratransit Service No recommendations -- Safety Management and Training Categorize accidents by type using the new database and conduct regular analysis of accident causes. In Progress Planning Continue to pursue APC implementation as part of AVL program to enhance information for planning decision making. Yes SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 2 Functional Area Recommendation Status (Presented as Reported by GO Transit Staff) Explore potential for day pass to maximize ridership potential from existing customer markets. TDP did not recommend Scheduling Continue to monitor driver overtime and explore ways to cut down on overtime in scheduling. Yes, Hired an additional flex position Operator/Shop Laborer Platform hours should be recorded separately from payroll hours in order to monitor the system’s pay-to-platform ratio. Marketing Add translation functionality (such as Google Translate) to website to offer multilingual information. Yes Vehicle and Facility Maintenance No recommendations -- Information Technology OTS should study the costs, benefits, and feasibility of AVL implementation on fixed route vehicles to improve on-road supervision and provide real-time bus arrival capability. Yes Summary Tables Below are summary tables that highlight the findings and recommendations of GO Transit’s 2019 MPR Final Report. Detailed descriptions and analysis accompany these throughout this report. Table ii: Summary of GO Transit Performance Relative to Peers Performance Objective Performance Measure Single Year: 2017 Trend Analysis: 2013-2017 WI Peer Comparison US Peer Comparison WI Peer Comparison US Peer Comparison Cost Effectiveness Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip Cost Efficiency Operating Expenses Per Revenue Hour Service Effectiveness Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour Market Penetration Passenger Trips Per Capita Revenue Hours Per Capita Passenger Revenue Effectiveness Average Fare Per Passenger Trip Operating Ratio Subsidy Per Passenger Trip Key to Symbols Better than peer average Worse than peer average, but within satisfactory range (+/- one standard deviation) Outside satisfactory range SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 3 Table iii: Summary Assessment of Policy- and Decision-Making Processes Criterion Rating The manager has sufficient authority and control to manage in an efficient manner. The lines of authority, responsibility, and accountability are well defined and appropriate. The lines of communication provide for sufficient exchange of information to ensure decision makers are knowledgeable on issues. The current organizational structure is conducive to effective and efficient operation. Key to Symbols Structures and procedures are conducive to effective operations Structures and procedures are adequate with room for improvement Structures and procedures are insufficient Table iv: Summary Assessment of Functional Areas Functional Area Rating Transportation Operations Vehicle and Facility Maintenance Finance Planning and Scheduling Marketing Key to Symbols Structures and procedures are conducive to effective operations Structures and procedures are adequate with room for improvement Structures and procedures are insufficient Table v: Summary of Recommendations – 2019 Management Performance Review Functional Area Recommendation Priority Policy- and Decision-Making Processes 1 Continue to monitor employment market conditions for transit operators; consider adjusting recruitment and work assignment policies as needed to fill open positions Low Transportation Operations - No recommendations - Vehicle and Facility Maintenance 2 Consider electric vehicle charging infrastructure when designing the new transit center Medium Finance 3 Closely monitor UWO student ridership and monthly pass sales; work with UWO to pursue a new contract that enables UWO students to ride fare-free in exchange for a fixed annual payment Medium 4 Pursue a formal, longer-term funding agreement with the Oshkosh Area School District to enable fare-free rides for students High 5 Pursue mobile and/or electronic fares. Medium 6 Count and secure fare revenue daily High 7 Document off-board cash handling and counting procedures to ensure consistency and effectiveness High Planning and Scheduling 8 Evaluate demand for evening service; if warranted, consider piloting an on-demand evening service, perhaps through a contracted operator Medium SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 4 Functional Area Recommendation Priority Marketing 9 Promote the GO Transit app via the GO Transit website and social media, in printed materials, aboard vehicles, and at facilities Medium 10 Consider adding scheduled posts on Facebook and Twitter that can be uploaded throughout the year to reduce the need for detailed daily/weekly posting; this could apply to most posts aside from those for time-sensitive service alerts and updates. Medium SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 5 Part I: System Overview A service of the City of Oshkosh, GO Transit provided over 900,000 passenger trips in 2017. GO Transit provides fixed-route bus service, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit, and supplemental specialized demand response services. The GO Transit fleet includes 16 heavy-duty buses. Fixed-Route Service Shown in Figure 1, GO Transit offers ten regular fixed routes, from approximately 6:15 a.m. to 6:45 p.m. Monday through Saturday. There is no service on Sundays. Seven of ten fixed routes meet for timed transfers at the Downtown Transit Center. Routes operate on 30-minute headways, except Route 10, which is available every 90 minutes (Table 1). Route 10 travels between downtown Oshkosh and downtown Neenah, connecting the GO Transit and Valley Transit fixed-route networks; this is the only route operated by a contract provider (currently Kobussen Buses, Ltd.). Fixed-Route Service Summary (Regular Routes) Service Days Service Period (Approx.) Routes Frequency Monday-Friday 6:15 a.m. – 6:45 p.m. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 30-minute 6:30 a.m. – 6:30 p.m. 10 90-minute (approx..) Saturday 6:15 a.m. – 6:45 p.m. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 30-minute 7:30 a.m. – 6:30 p.m. 10 90-minute (approx..) SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 6 Figure 1. System Map Source: GO Transit SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 7 Demand Response GO Transit provides a variety of demand response services throughout its service area to customers meeting specific eligibility requirements. These include the following: • GO Plus ADA Paratransit: GO Transit’s ADA complementary paratransit service (offered under the brand GO Plus) is available to certified riders residing in the city within ¾-mile of fixed routes during the same hours as the fixed-route service (24/7 service is available for an additional fee). This service, operated through a contract with Running, Inc., offers several service levels: Basic (curb-to-curb), Premium (door-through-door), and After-Hours (trips provided outside transit operating hours). Same-day reservations are accommodated for an additional fee. • GO Plus Senior Dial-a-Ride: GO Transit offers a curb-to-curb shared-ride taxi service for seniors age 60 and older who have obtained an identification card from the Oshkosh Seniors Center (available at no cost). Senior Dial-a-Ride service is part of the GO Plus family of programs and intended for use only on trips when GO Transit fixed-route buses are not available. The service is operated through a contract with Oshkosh City Cab. • Rural Over 60/Rural Under 60: GO Transit offers two programs to rural residents through a partnership with Winnebago County. Rural residents age 60 and over have access to the Rural Over 60 program, which provides sedan service for trips throughout the county, limited to 10 one-way rides per month. Rural residents with a qualifying disability are eligible for the Rural Under 60 program, which offers both sedan and lift-equipped van service for trips throughout the county, also limited to 10 one-way rides per month. The service is operated through contracts with Oshkosh City Cab (ambulatory users) and Cabulance (non-ambulatory users). • Access to Jobs (ATJ): In addition to the above programs for seniors and customers with disabilities, GO Transit offers Access to Jobs (ATJ), a demand response cab service for use by low-income individuals on trips to and from work. Eligible residents must live and work within the City of Oshkosh, work at least 30 hours per week, and use GO Transit fixed-route buses for work trips when possible. ATJ allows individuals who must travel outside regular fixed-route operating hours, or whose home or work locations are inaccessible via bus, to utilize cab service for work purposes only. The service is operated through a contract with Oshkosh City Cab. Fares In addition to cash fares, GO Transit sells 20-packs of tokens, punch passes, and unlimited monthly and 3- month passes (Table 2). The current cash fare, monthly, and 3-month pass prices reflect increases that the city implemented effective January 2019, consistent with recommendations contained in the City of Oshkosh 2018 Transit Development Plan (TDP). Discounted (half) fares on fixed-route buses are available for seniors, people with disabilities, and veterans. The ADA paratransit fare is set at $3.00, double the regular fixed-route base fare (Table 3). Route 10, a long-distance route connecting Oshkosh and downtown Neenah, has twice the fare of GO Transit’s regular local fixed routes. GO Transit provides fare-free rides to Fox Valley Technical College (FVTC) students per a revenue agreement between FVTC and the City of Oshkosh. The Oshkosh Area School District (OASD) purchases transit passes for students in need at a current cost of approximately $19,000 per year. Transit passes are available at a variety of community facilities, including GO Transit headquarters, City Hall, Oshkosh North and West high schools, Oshkosh Public Library, Associated Bank, and several nonprofit SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 8 organizations. Punch passes are sold on buses; all passes and tokens are available at GO Transit’s headquarters facility. Fixed-Route Fares Group Cash* Punch Pass (20)^ Token (20 Pack)^ Monthly Pass 3-Month Pass Adult $1.50 $30.00 $35.00 $35.00 $90.00 Senior (60+) $0.75 $15.00 People with Disabilities $0.75 Disabled Veterans Free -- -- -- -- Children Under 6 Free -- -- -- -- *Fares double for Route 10 to Neenah. ^One punch/token for City routes, two for Route 10 to Neenah. GO Plus Demand Response Fares* Group During Regular Bus Hours After Hours Agency Fare ADA Paratransit $3.00 $6.00 -- Senior Dial-a-Ride $4.50 $6.00 $8.50 Access to Jobs (ATJ) $4.00 $4.00 -- Rural $7.00 $7.00 $22.50 *$1.00 convenience fee added to the one-way fare for trips scheduled less than 24 hours in advance; does not apply to return trips from medical facilities or any agency ticket rides. Fleet Summarized in Table 4, the GO Transit revenue fleet consists of 16 heavy-duty buses for fixed-route service. Typically, 9 of the 16 heavy-duty buses are operated in peak service – a spare ratio of 78 percent. Per Federal Transit Administration (FTA) useful life benchmarks (ULB), buses have a default useful life of 12 years.1 As of October 2019, three (19 percent) of GO Transit’s fixed-route buses are at or beyond the ULB of 12 years (Table 4). Agency staff note that GO Transit received three new buses in 2019 to replace these three model-year 2003 vehicles. Once the three older vehicles are replaced and retired from the fleet, all GO Transit buses will be within FTA useful life benchmarks. Revenue Fleet Vehicle Numbers Quantity* Year Make/Model Length Average Life Miles* Age (years) 301, 303, 304 3 2003 New Flyer Low Floor 35’ -- 16 1001-1004 4 2010 New Flyer Hybrid 40’ -- 9 1305-1306 2 2013 Xcelsior Low Floor 35’ -- 6 1807-1808 2 2018 Xcelsior Low Floor 35’ -- 1 1809-1813 5 2018 Xcelsior Low Floor 40’ -- 1 TOTAL 16 -- -- -- -- 6.4 As of October 2019. *Vehicle mileage was not provided. 1 Federal Transit Administration. Circular 5010.1E: Award Management Requirements. 2017. Page IV-25. https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/Grant%20Management%20Requirements%20Circular_5010-1E_1.pdf. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 9 Facilities GO Transit has two primary facilities: the Downtown Transit Center, located at 110 Pearl Ave. (on the edge of downtown Oshkosh), and the administrative and maintenance facility, located at 926 Dempsey Trail. The latter is where administrative and operations staff are based, and where buses are stored and maintained. It includes two repair bays with bus lifts, parts and tire storage rooms, and a bus wash. Most GO Transit fixed routes serve the transit center, which features sheltered waiting areas, benches, maps and route information. Constructed in 1989, the facility is in fair condition. The 2018 TDP recommends redesigning or replacing the Downtown Transit Center, given its lack of crucial amenities, age, and isolation from downtown activity. Downtown Transit Center. Source: SRF Staff Photo. The administration and maintenance facility was constructed in 1968 and entered into transit use in 1983. This facility houses GO Transit’s administrative, maintenance, and bus storage functions. GO Transit administration and maintenance facility. Source: SRF Staff Photo. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 10 Part II: Analysis of System Performance Part II of this report examines, quantitatively, GO Transit performance over the last several years. Since there are no recognized industry standards for most measures of transit system performance, widespread practice is to compare the performance of a system to the average values of a peer group of systems. The following peer analysis compares GO Transit fixed-route bus performance to a Wisconsin peer group and a national peer group in five categories using eight specific measures (Table 5). As part of its Cost Efficiency Report and MPR initiatives, WisDOT measures transit system performance using at least six core measures, (Table 5), in accordance with section 85.20 of the Wisconsin Statutes. Performance Objectives and Performance Measures Performance Objective Performance Measure WisDOT Core Measure Cost Effectiveness Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip X Cost Efficiency Operating Expenses Per Revenue Hour X Service Effectiveness Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour X Market Penetration Passenger Trips Per Capita X Revenue Hours Per Capita X Passenger Revenue Effectiveness Average Fare Per Passenger Trip Operating Ratio (Passenger Revenues Per Operating Expenses) X Subsidy Per Passenger Trip This peer performance analysis excludes data from demand response or other modes; analyzing GO Transit fixed-route bus data alone allows for a more direct comparison with peer transit systems in Wisconsin and around the Midwest. Each measure in Table 5 is used to assess GO Transit fixed-route performance in two ways: • Single Year: Comparison to peer average for the most current year. Year 2017 National Transit Database (NTD) data are used. This is the most recent year for which NTD data were available for all peer systems at the time of analysis. Consistent with the WisDOT approach, performance is considered “satisfactory” within one standard deviation of the peer average. The system’s performance is considered “outside the satisfactory range” (unsatisfactory) if it falls more than one standard deviation from the peer average. • Multi-Year Trend Analysis: Comparison to peer average for annual rate of change. NTD data from 2013 to 2017 are used. The annual rate of change from 2013 to 2017 is calculated as follows: Annual rate of change = (Value2017/Value2013) ¼-1 For the trend analysis, the system’s annual rate of change is compared to that of the average of the peer group. Again, the system’s trend performance is considered “satisfactory” within one standard deviation of the peer group average. Beyond one standard deviation from the peer group average, the system’s trend performance is considered “outside the satisfactory range.” SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 11 Peer Groups The selection of the peer groups for GO Transit was based on a review of small urban bus systems in NTD. NTD was used because its data are readily available and consistently reported. Two peer groups were selected for comparison: a Wisconsin peer group and a national peer group (Table 6, Table 7). Systems’ fixed-route bus data (excluding any other modes operated) were used in the selection of peers and the subsequent analyses. Table 6 contains 2017 operating statistics for GO Transit and the selected Wisconsin peer systems. This review recognizes the limitations of using other Wisconsin bus systems for peer comparison. Each system operates in a different environment, serves different markets, and has a unique management structure. However, Wisconsin peer systems also provide context for operating conditions within the state. Because it is customary in this review to compare medium bus systems to others in Wisconsin, the Wisconsin peer comparison is included in this review. 2017 Operating Statistics – Wisconsin Peer Group System Name City Revenue Hours Passenger Trips Operating Expenses Passenger Revenues Service Area Population Eau Claire Transit Eau Claire 48,127 865,260 $4,261,637 $803,452 75,828 Fond du Lac Area Transit Fond du Lac 13,047 157,952 $1,148,987 $128,047 49,167 Janesville Transit System Janesville 28,899 488,726 $3,367,524 $485,956 64,159 Kenosha Transit Kenosha 78,080 1,268,399 $6,242,092 $692,799 99,894 MTU La Crosse 58,801 999,955 $5,153,871 $610,973 71,201 RYDE Racine 76,737 1,128,650 $6,353,802 $1,024,246 112,100 Shoreline Metro Sheboygan 37,679 529,726 $3,163,112 $463,324 59,490 Metro Ride Wausau 27,324 498,902 $2,680,463 $391,313 39,302 GO Transit Oshkosh 37,514 901,710 $3,438,057 $476,005 66,083 Average 41,184 45,134 759,920 $3,978,838 $564,013 GO Transit as Percent of Average 91% 83% 119% 86% 84% Source: National Transit Database, 2017. In the development of the national peer group, an attempt was made to select peer systems in cold-weather states in the Midwest; specifically, those with relatively similar service area and transit service mix provided. The Urban Integrated National Transit Database (Urban iNTD) was used to develop an initial list of national peers.2 This initial list was filtered to include only the most applicable peers, based on the criteria listed above and previous MPR peer analyses. The national peer group includes systems in Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, and Montana. Table 7 contains 2017 operating statistics for GO Transit and the selected national peer systems. 2 Urban iNTD is a tool developed by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), based on Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) research. http://www.ftis.org/urban_iNTD.aspx. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 12 2017 Operating Statistics – National Peer Group System Name City, State Revenue Hours Passenger Trips Operating Expenses Passenger Revenues Service Area Population MET Transit Billings, MT 34,925 455,583 $3,497,440 $360,464 109,869 Decatur Public Transit Decatur, IL 68,524 1,208,742 $5,641,361 $483,781 82,155 The Jule Dubuque, IA 34,814 455,959 $2,194,916 $224,941 60,140 Muncie Indiana Transit Muncie, IN 55,714 1,377,416 $5,399,284 $184,133 70,085 Pueblo Transit System Pueblo, CO 38,540 819,660 $3,747,123 $666,808 108,249 Sioux City Transit System Sioux City, IA 44,585 901,989 $4,057,320 $724,877 122,128 Topeka MTA Topeka, KS 60,116 1,197,319 $5,866,545 $960,567 127,473 GO Transit Oshkosh, WI 37,514 901,710 $3,438,057 $476,005 66,083 Average 46,842 914,797 $4,230,256 $510,197 93,273 GO Transit as Percent of Average 80% 99% 81% 93% 71% Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Performance Measures: Results This section summarizes GO Transit service relative to peer groups over the five-year period, as well as the results of the single-year (2017) and multi-year (2013-2017) analyses for each of the eight performance measures reviewed in this MPR. Table 18 summarizes GO Transit’s performance relative to peer systems across all measures. GO Transit Five-Year Summary Table 8 and Table 9 show GO Transit operating statistics and performance measures, respectively, for 2013 through 2017. The average annual rate of change for the five-year period is calculated for each statistic and measure. Operating Statistics – GO Transit, 2013-2017 Operating Statistic 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Annual Rate of Change Revenue Hours 37,828 38,114 37,805 37,653 37,514 -0.2% Passenger Trips 913,185 907,276 898,507 914,364 901,710 -0.3% Operating Expenses $3,090,931 $3,235,548 $3,156,046 $3,141,795 $3,438,057 2.7% Passenger Revenue $489,277 $484,387 $460,926 $462,812 $476,005 -0.7% Service Area Population 66,083 66,083 66,083 66,083 66,083 0.0% Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 13 Performance Measures – GO Transit, 2013-2017 Performance Measure 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Annual Rate of Change Operating Expense Per Passenger Trip $3.38 $3.57 $3.51 $3.44 $3.81 3.0% Operating Expense Per Revenue Hour $81.71 $84.89 $83.48 $83.44 $91.65 2.9% Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour 24.1 23.8 23.8 24.3 24.0 -0.1% Passenger Trips Per Capita 13.8 13.7 13.6 13.8 13.6 -0.3% Revenue Hours Per Capita 0.57 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.57 -0.2% Average Fare Per Passenger Trip $0.54 $0.53 $0.51 $0.51 $0.53 -0.4% Operating Ratio 15.8% 15.0% 14.6% 14.7% 13.8% -3.3% Subsidy Per Passenger Trip $2.85 $3.03 $3.00 $2.93 $3.28 3.6% Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 14 Cost Effectiveness Cost effectiveness addresses transit use in relation to the level of resources expended. The primary measure for comparison under this area is operating expenses per passenger trip. The lower the cost per passenger trip, the more cost effective the service. Figure 2. Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 3. Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh 3.0% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group 8.3% 11.7% ≤ 20.0% Better than average National Peer Group 5.2% 3.8% ≤ 9.0% Better than average Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. $3.81$4.92$4.93$5.15$5.37$5.63$5.97$6.89$7.27$3.81$3.92$4.50$4.57$4.67$4.81$4.90$7.68$5.55 $6.55 $5.59 $7.91 $0 $2 $4 $6 $8 $10 $12 WI US Average Average + 1 Standard Deviation $3.38 $3.57 $3.51 $3.44 $3.81 $4.38 $4.67 $5.02 $5.16 $5.55 $4.02 $4.12 $4.23 $4.42 $4.86 $0.00 $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00 $6.00 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 15 Cost Efficiency Cost efficiency examines the amount of service produced in relation to the amount of resources expended. Operating expenses per revenue hour is the measure used to assess service efficiency. Figure 4. Operating Expenses per Revenue Hour, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 5. Operating Expenses per Revenue Hour Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Operating Expenses per Revenue Hour, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh 2.9% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group 5.7% 11.3% ≤ 17.0% Better than average National Peer Group 1.9% 1.4% ≤ 3.2% Worse, but within satisfactory range Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Note: Any differences in Satisfactory Range numbers are due to rounding. $79.94$82.80$83.95$87.65$88.07$88.55$91.65$98.10$116.53$63.05$82.33$91.00$91.65$96.91$97.23$97.59$100.14$90.80$101.17 $92.67 $105.87 $0 $20 $40 $60 $80 $100 $120 WI US Average Average + 1 Standard Deviation $81.71 $84.89 $83.48 $83.44 $91.65 $78.73 $82.55 $85.49 $89.20 $90.80 $83.57 $86.63 $86.92 $86.47 $89.99 $70 $75 $80 $85 $90 $95 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 16 Service Effectiveness Service effectiveness is a measure of the consumption of public transportation service in relation to the amount of service available. Passenger trips per revenue hour is the measure used to assess service effectiveness. Figure 6. Passenger Trips per Revenue Hour, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 7. Passenger Trips per Revenue Hour Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Passenger Trips per Revenue Hour, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh -0.1% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group -2.3% 3.4% ≥ -5.7% Better than average National Peer Group -3.1% 2.8% ≥ -5.9% Better than average Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. 24.018.318.017.016.916.214.714.112.124.724.021.320.219.917.613.113.016.8 13.6 18.2 13.3 0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 24.0 28.0 WI US Average Average - 1 Standard Deviation 24.1 23.8 23.8 24.3 24.0 18.6 18.6 17.7 17.7 16.8 22.2 22.3 22.0 20.5 19.2 0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 17 Market Penetration Passenger trips per capita is an indicator of overall usage of the transit system in the service area. This measure can be interpreted as the average number of times each service area resident uses the transit service each year. Figure 8. Passenger Trips Per Capita, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 9. Passenger Trips Per Capita Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Passenger Trips Per Capita, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh -0.3% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group -1.0% 2.9% ≥ -3.9% Better than average National Peer Group -3.3% 4.1% ≥ -7.5% Better than average Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Note: Any differences in Satisfactory Range numbers are due to rounding. 14.013.612.712.711.410.18.97.63.219.714.713.69.47.67.67.44.110.5 7.2 9.9 5.0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 WI US Average Average - 1 Standard Deviation 13.8 13.7 13.6 13.8 13.6 11.0 10.9 10.9 10.7 10.5 12.4 12.5 12.2 11.2 10.5 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 18 Revenue hours per capita is the performance measure used to assess service availability, and the second of three measures of market penetration. Figure 10. Revenue Hours Per Capita, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 11. Revenue Hours Per Capita Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Revenue Hours Per Capita, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh -0.2% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group 1.4% 4.0% ≥ -2.6% Worse, but within satisfactory range National Peer Group -0.3% 1.8% ≥ -2.1% Better than average Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. 0.830.780.700.680.630.630.570.450.270.830.790.580.570.470.370.360.320.62 0.45 0.53 0.35 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 WI US Average Average - 1 Standard Deviation 0.57 0.58 0.57 0.57 0.57 0.59 0.58 0.61 0.60 0.62 0.54 0.55 0.54 0.54 0.54 0.48 0.50 0.52 0.54 0.56 0.58 0.60 0.62 0.64 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 19 Passenger Revenue Effectiveness Passenger revenue per passenger trip, or average fare per passenger trip, measures the amount each passenger is paying to use the service. The higher the average fare, the more cost is being borne by the passenger. Generally, a higher average fare – within certain limitations – is a positive finding for a public transit system. Figure 12. Average Fare per Passenger Trip, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 13. Average Fare per Passenger Trip Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Average Fare per Passenger Trip, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh -0.4% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group 7.6% 18.6% ≥ -11.1% Worse, but within satisfactory range National Peer Group 5.2% 7.1% ≥ -2.0% Worse, but within satisfactory range Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Note: Any differences in Satisfactory Range numbers are due to rounding. $0.99$0.93$0.91$0.87$0.81$0.78$0.61$0.55$0.53$0.81$0.80$0.80$0.79$0.53$0.49$0.40$0.13$0.78 $0.61 $0.68 $0.36 $0.00 $0.20 $0.40 $0.60 $0.80 $1.00 $1.20 WI US Average Average - 1 Standard Deviation $0.54 $0.53 $0.51 $0.51 $0.53 $0.67 $0.70 $0.80 $0.76 $0.78 $0.53 $0.52 $0.53 $0.52 $0.60 $0.00 $0.10 $0.20 $0.30 $0.40 $0.50 $0.60 $0.70 $0.80 $0.90 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 20 The ratio of revenues to operating expenses measures the level of operating expenses that are recovered through passenger fare payment. This measure is also simply referred to as the operating ratio or farebox recovery. Figure 14. Operating Ratio, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 15. Operating Ratio Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Operating Ratio, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh -3.3% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group -1.2% 5.6% ≥ -6.8% Worse, but within satisfactory range National Peer Group 0.1% 7.8% ≥ -7.7% Worse, but within satisfactory range Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. 18.9%16.1%14.6%14.6%14.4%13.8%11.9%11.1%11.1%17.9%17.8%16.4%13.8%10.3%10.2%8.6%3.4%14.1% 11.7%12.2% 7.7% 0.0% 2.0% 4.0% 6.0% 8.0% 10.0% 12.0% 14.0% 16.0% 18.0% 20.0% WI US Average Average - 1 Standard Deviation 15.8%15.0%14.6%14.7% 13.8%14.9% 14.4%15.8%14.8%14.1% 13.2%12.8%12.6%12.0%12.3% 0.0% 4.0% 8.0% 12.0% 16.0% 20.0% 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 21 Net expense (subsidy) per passenger trip is used to measure the cost of each passenger trip that is paid for by public operating subsidy. Subsidy per passenger trip is calculated by subtracting passenger revenues from total operating expenses and dividing by total trips. The higher the operating subsidy, the more local, state, and federal resources are required to cover expenses. Figure 16. Subsidy per Passenger Trip, 2017 Peers Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Figure 17. Subsidy per Passenger Trip Compared to Peer Averages, 2013-2017 Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. Subsidy per Passenger Trip, 2013-2017 Trend Performance Peer Group Annual Rate of Change Average Std. Dev. Satisfactory Range Oshkosh Relative to Peer Group Oshkosh 3.6% -- -- -- Wisconsin Peer Group 8.5% 10.7% ≤ 19.2% Better than average National Peer Group 5.6% 4.2% ≤ 9.8% Better than average Source: National Transit Database, 2013-2017. $3.28$4.00$4.38$4.54$4.59$4.72$5.10$5.90$6.46$3.28$3.69$3.76$3.79$4.10$4.27$4.32$6.89$4.77 $5.67 $4.91 $7.00 $0.00 $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00 $6.00 $7.00 $8.00 WI US Average Average + 1 Standard Deviation $2.85 $3.03 $3.00 $2.93 $3.28 $3.71 $3.97 $4.22 $4.40 $4.77 $3.49 $3.60 $3.70 $3.90 $4.26 $0.00 $1.00 $2.00 $3.00 $4.00 $5.00 $6.00 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Oshkosh WI Peer Avg. US Peer Avg. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 22 Performance Summary Table 18 indicates the measures for which GO Transit was better than average, worse than average but satisfactory, or outside the satisfactory range. Table 19 and Table 20 display GO Transit’s 2017 performance measure results relative to all Wisconsin and national peers in greater detail. Summary of GO Transit Performance Relative to Peers Performance Objective Performance Measure Single Year: 2017 Trend Analysis: 2013-2017 WI Peer Comparison US Peer Comparison WI Peer Comparison US Peer Comparison Cost Effectiveness Operating Expenses Per Passenger Trip Cost Efficiency Operating Expenses Per Revenue Hour Service Effectiveness Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour Market Penetration Passenger Trips Per Capita Revenue Hours Per Capita Passenger Revenue Effectiveness Average Fare Per Passenger Trip Operating Ratio Subsidy Per Passenger Trip Key to Symbols Better than peer average Worse than peer average, but within satisfactory range (+/- one standard deviation) Outside satisfactory range In 2017, GO Transit performed better than average or within the satisfactory range in seven of eight measures compared to its Wisconsin peer group, and ever better compared to its national peer group (Table 18). GO Transit performed particularly well in 2017 in three measures: • Operating expenses per passenger trip: GO Transit was more cost effective than all 15 of its state and national peers (Figure 2). • Passenger trips per revenue hour: GO Transit service was more effective than 14 of 15 state and national peers (Figure 6). • Subsidy per passenger trip: GO Transit had a lower per-trip subsidy than all 15 of its state and national peers (Figure 16). Moreover, GO Transit’s trend performances for all three of these measures exceeded peer averages (Table 10, Table 12, Table 17). The review team attributes GO Transit’s excellent standing among its peers in these measures to its relatively high ridership, fixed-route network design, and appropriately managed operating costs. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 23 Performance Measures, 2017 – Wisconsin Peer Group System Name City Cost Effectiveness Cost Efficiency Service Effectiveness Market Penetration Passenger Revenue Effectiveness Operating Expense Per Passenger Trip Operating Expense Per Revenue Hour Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour Passenger Trips Per Capita Revenue Hours Per Capita Average Fare Per Passenger Trip Operating Ratio Subsidy Per Passenger Trip Eau Claire Transit Eau Claire $4.93 $88.55 18.0 11.4 0.63 $0.93 18.9% $4.00 Fond du Lac Area Transit Fond du Lac $7.27 $88.07 12.1 3.2 0.27 $0.81 11.1% $6.46 Janesville Transit System Janesville $6.89 $116.53 16.9 7.6 0.45 $0.99 14.4% $5.90 Kenosha Transit Kenosha $4.92 $79.94 16.2 12.7 0.78 $0.55 11.1% $4.38 MTU La Crosse $5.15 $87.65 17.0 14.0 0.83 $0.61 11.9% $4.54 RYDE Racine $5.63 $82.80 14.7 10.1 0.68 $0.91 16.1% $4.72 Shoreline Metro Sheboygan $5.97 $83.95 14.1 8.9 0.63 $0.87 14.6% $5.10 Metro Ride Wausau $5.37 $98.10 18.3 12.7 0.70 $0.78 14.6% $4.59 GO Transit Oshkosh $3.81 $91.65 24.0 13.6 0.57 $0.53 13.8% $3.28 Average $5.55 $90.80 16.8 10.5 0.62 $0.78 14.1% $4.77 Standard Deviation $1.00 $10.37 3.2 3.3 0.16 $0.16 2.4% $0.90 Satisfactory Range ≤ $6.55 ≤ $101.17 ≥ 13.6 ≥ 7.2 ≥ 0.45 ≥ $0.61 ≥ 11.7% ≤ $5.67 GO Transit Relative to Peer Group GO Transit as a Percent of Average 69% 101% 143% 130% 92% 68% 98% 69% Key to Symbols Better than peer average Worse than peer average, but within satisfactory range (+/- one standard deviation) Outside satisfactory range Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Note: Any differences in Satisfactory Range numbers are due to rounding. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 24 Performance Measures, 2017 – National Peer Group System Name City Cost Effectiveness Cost Efficiency Service Effectiveness Market Penetration Passenger Revenue Effectiveness Operating Expense Per Passenger Trip Operating Expense Per Revenue Hour Passenger Trips Per Revenue Hour Passenger Trips Per Capita Revenue Hours Per Capita Average Fare Per Passenger Trip Operating Ratio Subsidy Per Passenger Trip MET Transit Billings, MT $7.68 $100.14 13.0 4.1 0.32 $0.79 10.3% $6.89 Decatur Public Transit Decatur, IL $4.67 $82.33 17.6 14.7 0.83 $0.40 8.6% $4.27 The Jule Dubuque, IA $4.81 $63.05 13.1 7.6 0.58 $0.49 10.2% $4.32 Muncie Indiana Transit Muncie, IN $3.92 $96.91 24.7 19.7 0.79 $0.13 3.4% $3.79 Pueblo Transit System Pueblo, CO $4.57 $97.23 21.3 7.6 0.36 $0.81 17.8% $3.76 Sioux City Transit System Sioux City, IA $4.50 $91.00 20.2 7.4 0.37 $0.80 17.9% $3.69 Topeka MTA Topeka, KS $4.90 $97.59 19.9 9.4 0.47 $0.80 16.4% $4.10 GO Transit Oshkosh, WI $3.81 $91.65 24.0 13.6 0.57 $0.53 13.8% $3.28 Average $4.86 $89.99 19.2 10.5 0.54 $0.60 12.3% $4.26 Standard Deviation $1.13 $11.45 4.1 4.7 0.18 $0.23 4.8% $1.04 Satisfactory Range ≤ $5.98 ≤ $101.44 ≥ 15.1 ≥ 5.8 ≥ 0.35 ≥ $0.36 ≥ 7.5% ≤ $5.30 GO Transit Relative to Peer Group GO Transit as a Percent of Average 78% 102% 125% 130% 106% 89% 113% 77% Key to Symbols Better than peer average Worse than peer average, but within satisfactory range (+/- one standard deviation) Outside satisfactory range Source: National Transit Database, 2017. Note: Any differences in Satisfactory Range numbers are due to rounding. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 25 Part III: Policy- and Decision-Making Processes This section contains a description of the policy- and decision-making processes in place at GO Transit and the City of Oshkosh as they relate to transit service. Organizational Structure GO Transit is a division of the Transportation Department of the City of Oshkosh. The Director of Transportation, Jim Collins, manages day-to-day operations of GO Transit and leads decision-making processes for the service. He reports directly to the city manager, who in turn reports to the Oshkosh City Council. The Transportation Director is supported by an administrative assistant (Marlene Binder), a transit operations manager (Steve Tomasik), and a maintenance supervisor (Brian Griesbach), in addition to subordinate staff who aid in dispatch, operations, supervision, and maintenance. When fully staffed, GO Transit employs approximately 32 full-time equivalent staff, including 18.5 full-time equivalent drivers, one dispatcher, two operator/mechanics, three full-time mechanics, and one service technician. The current organizational structure, summarized in Figure 18, is conducive to effective and efficient operations. Figure 18. GO Transit Organizational Chart Source: City of Oshkosh As a municipal transit agency, GO Transit benefits from constructive relationships with other city departments, including the following: SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 26 • City Attorney Office – provides transit-related legal (for easements, etc.) • Human Resources Department – manages hiring, employee disciplinary actions, etc. • Finance Department – provides accounting and grant management services • Police Department – develops and implements safety initiatives • Public Works Department – installs shelter pads, performs surveying, ensures facility ADA compliance, coordinates with GO Transit during road reconstruction projects GO Transit appears to be weathering employee recruitment and retention challenges better than most transit agencies across Wisconsin and the nation. GO Transit staff report that in the past six years, only one person has left the agency for reasons other than retirement. However, GO Transit will face a wave of retirements in the next several years as experienced staff reach retirement age, and the agency has had difficulty filling its vacant part-time driver position. GO Transit driver salaries start at $24.06 per hour, while driver salaries at nearby Valley Transit (Appleton) and Fond du Lac Area Transit start at $19.58 per hour and $20.84 per hour, respectively. While it should continue to monitor the competitiveness of its wages, the City of Oshkosh should also consider its policies related to recruitment and work assignments, including for part-time drivers. Recommendation 1: Continue to monitor employment market conditions for transit operators; consider adjusting recruitment and work assignment policies as needed to fill open positions. Priority: Low. Policy Environment The transportation director is the primary decision maker for GO Transit, playing a critical role in developing policy and setting strategic direction. While the city council has final responsibility for budget-related decisions, the transportation director has sufficient autonomy to conduct day-to-day operations. The City Council, in turn, receives advice from the Oshkosh Transit Advisory Board (TAB) on transit policy topics. The TAB meets monthly or quarterly depending on transit agency needs. TAB members are appointed by the mayor and currently consist of two transit-dependent riders, one city council member, representatives from Oshkosh Area School District (OASD), University of Wisconsin – Oshkosh (UWO) and county health system, and one private citizen advocate. The transportation director typically attends TAB meetings and reports ridership, revenue, and other relevant statistics for fixed-route and demand response services. The current city council and mayor support transit in the community. GO Transit participates in citywide strategic planning efforts, which include a 5-year strategic plan updated every 2 years. Transit is included under a focus area called “Maintain and Improve Infrastructure.” GO Transit and other departments report on key performance measures as part of this planning process. Conclusions The policy- and decision-making processes in place at the City of Oshkosh and GO Transit appear to be functioning well. Table 21 summarizes the review team’s assessment of GO Transit based on the four criteria used to measure the effectiveness of its policy- and decision-making processes. Overall, the structures and processes in place at GO Transit and the City of Oshkosh support the effective provision of transit services. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 27 Summary Assessment of Policy- and Decision-Making Processes Criterion Rating The manager has sufficient authority and control to manage in an efficient manner. The lines of authority, responsibility, and accountability are well defined and appropriate. The lines of communication provide for sufficient exchange of information to ensure decision makers are knowledgeable on issues. The current organizational structure is conducive to effective and efficient operation. Key to Symbols Structures and procedures are conducive to effective operations Structures and procedures are adequate with room for improvement Structures and procedures are insufficient SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 28 Part IV: Functional Area Review Part IV of this report contains a review of the following functional areas: • Transportation Operations • Vehicle and Facility Maintenance • Finance • Planning and Scheduling • Marketing These areas were chosen because they have an impact on long-term capital requirements as well as short-term financial resources needed for daily operations and short-term capital planning. The transportation director completed a detailed MPR questionnaire prior to the on-site review, conducted on October 4, 2019. GO Transit staff answered all questions and provided extensive supporting material, as requested by the review team. The on-site review process consisted of discussions with the transportation director and other GO Transit staff responsible for specific functional areas. Transportation Operations The structures and procedures pertaining to the transportation operations function at GO Transit are conducive to effective operations. Still, despite several exemplary practices described below, the review team has identified recommendations that would improve transportation operations in the long term. For more details about this function, see Appendix A for staff’s full response to the review team’s MPR questionnaire. Operator Supervision and Communications GO Transit management staff have proven successful at establishing and communicating operations procedures and expectations with front-line employees that translate into effective service delivery. Policies and procedures are well-documented in the agency’s employee handbook and work rules documents. Supervisory staff communicate frequently with front-line employees. Supervisory staffing level is sufficient for the current level of service. At least one supervisor is present during nearly all hours of operation. GO Transit’s operations supervisor and/or operations manager oversee weekday operations. On Saturdays, the operations supervisor oversees service until 1:30 p.m., after which he is on call. While the transportation director is available to oversee day-to-day operations as needed, the current organizational structure is such that he can delegate this function to the operations manager. This allows him to focus on overall system management, including grant management, regulatory compliance, strategic initiatives, planning, and coordination. Service Procedures and Tools All drivers start and end their shifts at the administrative and maintenance facility, where they receive assignments and conduct pre- and post-trip procedures. Collectively, the maintenance supervisor, operations supervisor, and operations manager check each driver’s fitness for duty before the driver begins operating her or his assigned bus. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 29 GO Transit revenue vehicles have tablets mounted near the driver, which collect mileage, hours, boardings, vehicle location, and schedule adherence data. This data feeds into GO Transit’s operations software, Express Transit. GO Transit staff use Express Transit software to review historical passenger boardings by fare classification and on-time performance data, and to track vehicle location in real-time to understand current conditions and more efficiently address any service issues. GO Transit customers also benefit from this data. Real-time vehicle locations, route schedules, stop-level timepoints, and service alerts are available to the public via the GO Transit mobile app. GO Transit allows passenger boarding and alighting at posted bus stops only. Free transfers are available at the downtown transit center, with a paper transfer slip good for one hour only. Buses can hold for up to 3 minutes upon request to facilitate transfers, but transfer connections are not guaranteed. GO Transit has maintained impressive fixed-route service on-time performance – regularly above its goal of 95 percent of scheduled timepoints. Safety and Training GO Transit’s driver training program – led by the operations supervisor – is thorough, consistent, and well- documented. The several-week program consists of an appropriate mix of classroom, out-of-service, and in- service training for new drivers. Training protocol for new drivers is standardized but tailored based on the competence of the trainee. Materials for the training program are gathered from several sources, including the Smith System. Upon successful completion of the training program, new drivers are typically placed on lower-ridership routes and receive feedback from other drivers as needed. GO Transit’s current operations supervisor is also proactive regarding safety issues and accident analysis. Drivers are retrained following all accidents and as needed based on staff observations from check rides. GO Transit drivers participate in regular safety meetings. GO Transit coordinates with other Wisconsin transit agencies to maintain best practices and proactively pursue safety improvements. The agency is writing its own Public Transportation Agency Safety Plan (PTASP). In all, GO Transit has a well-designed and administered training program – among the best of similarly sized transit systems in Wisconsin. Vehicle and Facility Maintenance The structures and procedures pertaining to the vehicle and facility maintenance functions at GO Transit are conducive to effective operations. For more details about this function at GO Transit, see Appendix A for staff’s response to the review team’s MPR questionnaire. Vehicle Maintenance GO Transit’s maintenance supervisor oversees three full-time mechanics and one service technician, and is responsible for the vehicle maintenance function. All fixed-route GO Transit vehicles are owned by the City of Oshkosh, stored indoors, and maintained at the administration and maintenance facility. GO Plus vehicles are owned and maintained by contracted operators. At least one GO Transit mechanic or service technician is on duty during all hours of operation. During its site visit, the review team examined GO Transit vehicle and facility maintenance procedures, and toured its facilities. Based on its review of GO Transit’s Maintenance Department Manual and associated documents, the review team concludes that, overall, maintenance staff are guided by well-documented policies and procedures. Repairs are completed both in-house and with outside vendors. Fleet maintenance SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 30 and parts inventory are tracked using TransFleet software. Staff shared and demonstrated maintenance records, standard procedures, and parts inventories upon the review team’s request. The team judged the facilities to be clean and orderly. The maintenance manager and lead mechanic oversee all parts purchasing and inventory for the transit system. Parts withdrawals are documented using TransFleet. Parts are not barcoded, but a physical inventory is completed annually. GO Transit has established targeted inventory and reorder levels for common and high usage items. Vehicle Replacement GO Transit’s revenue fleet is in very good shape, with nearly all vehicle within their minimum useful life (Table 4). In 2019, GO Transit acquired three new model-year 2019 diesel buses, which had yet to be placed into service as of the writing of this report. These new buses will replace GO Transit’s three model-year 2003 buses, which have become unreliable and expensive to maintain. At that point, none of GO Transit’s revenue vehicles will require immediate replacement. However, the transportation director expects to replace three of GO Transit’s four model-year 2010 hybrid-electric buses in 2021 and 2022. The City of Oshkosh continues to be a reliable source of local matching funds for GO Transit vehicle replacement. Local matching funds are typically made available through city bonding. The city informed the review team that GO Transit has no present plans to use all-electric buses. Instead, staff intend to monitor electric bus technology developments and pending statewide implementations, and then will evaluate the extent to which electric buses are a feasible mid-term option for GO Transit. Staff told the review team that, longer term, they expect electric buses will be part of GO Transit’s revenue fleet within decades. Model-year 2018 Xcelsior low-floor 40-foot bus. Source: SRF Staff Photo. Facilities Maintenance GO Transit’s maintenance staff maintain the administrative facility. Facility maintenance procedures are documented in GO Transit’s Maintenance Department Manual. The building was constructed as an incinerator in 1968 and began use as a transit facility in 1983. While old, the facility is adequate in terms of space, lighting, heating, cooling, and ventilation. It has clearly been well-maintained. Recent improvements to SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 31 the facility include a key fob door access system; addition of an external security gate; new ceiling tiles and interior lighting; new paint; office area renovations; and new heating, ventilation, and air conditioning systems. Planned improvements include replacement of the fueling system and underground fuel storage tank, which are located outdoors near the facility’s northwest corner. GO Transit will seek FTA Section 5339(b) Buses and Bus Facilities Infrastructure Investment Program funds for this project. Buses stored in the clean, well-lit GO Transit maintenance facility. Source: SRF Staff Photo. GO Transit’s fuel system, which is planned for replacement in the near term. Source: SRF Staff Photo. The Downtown Transit Center is cleaned daily through a contracted service. While well-maintained, the facility is old and no longer meets the needs of transit staff and customers. As noted in Part 1, GO Transit’s recent TDP recommends redesigning or replacing the facility. The city has initiated a process to replace it by retaining East Central Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission (ECWRPC) to complete a facility site and scoping study. The study is being funded through an FTA Section 5304 Statewide Transportation Planning grant. In particular, the study will explore the feasibility of building a mixed-use facility that serves as an activity hub in downtown Oshkosh and better integrates transit with the local community. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 32 While GO Transit has no immediate plans to operate all-electric buses, its facility planning efforts should consider the potential for future electrification of GO Transit’s fleet. As such, facility siting and design should lend themselves to future electric vehicle charging and storage needs. Recommendation 2: Consider electric vehicle charging infrastructure when designing the new transit center. Priority: Medium. GO Transit’s existing transit center. Source: SRF Staff Photo. Finance The structures and procedures pertaining to the finance function at GO Transit are conducive to effective operations. The transportation director works collaboratively with city accounting staff to complete day-to- day finance functions. The city does not charge GO Transit an administrative fee for its support services. The transportation director develops annual operating and capital budgets with the assistance of the transit operations manager and city finance director. See Appendix A for staff’s full response to the review team’s MPR questionnaire, which includes more details about the finance function. Partner Contracts GO Transit currently has service contracts with Winnebago County and FVTC. A previous contract with UWO ended on January 1, 2019. The City of Oshkosh and OASD had begun discussing the possibility of initiating a contract that would enable OASD students to ride fare-free at the time this report was written. Winnebago County pays the local share of Route 10 and GO Plus demand response services. This payment comprises about 35 percent of GO Transit’s annual local share requirement. FVTC pays the city $29,000 annually in exchange for unlimited free rides for its students on GO Transit fixed routes. The city’s past service agreement with UWO allowed the university’s students to ride fixed routes for free in exchange for approximately $70,000 annually. UWO terminated the agreement as a cost saving measure. Now, UWO students wishing to ride GO Transit must acquire a (free) monthly bus pass through it’s the UWO Parking Services office. UWO Parking Services purchases the passes from GO Transit on an as-needed basis. GO Transit staff indicate that UWO student revenue and ridership have remained stable since the change. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 33 However, this change adds administrative complexity for both parties and, more importantly, adds a barrier to UWO students’ regular use of GO Transit. Recommendation 3: Closely monitor UWO student ridership and monthly pass sales; work with UWO to pursue a new contract that enables UWO students to ride fare-free in exchange for a fixed annual payment. Priority: Medium. GO Transit fixed routes serve over a dozen K-12 schools, including several within the Oshkosh Area School District. The school district and area advocates have identified free public transit to and from school as a high priority, and school bussing was an important topic in the 2018 TDP. As of the review team’s site visit, the city and OASD were exploring how to best address service gaps and enhance access to public schools via GO Transit. Subsequently the City of Oshkosh, OASD, and a coalition of benefactors (including the Boys & Girls Club of Oshkosh) agreed to jointly fund fare-free GO Transit rides for all school district students for the two- year period beginning September 1, 2020. Each of the three parties committed to paying GO Transit $30,000 per year for the service. While the new service agreement is in force, the city should pursue further negotiations with OASD to establish a more enduring service agreement covering student rides to and from school. Such an agreement would contribute to GO Transit’s financial stability sustain improvements in student access to their schools and help build a new generation of transit riders in Oshkosh. Formal agreements between cities/transit providers and school districts for free or discounted transit rides for students are relatively common in Wisconsin, but their terms vary greatly. Relevant examples can be found in Appleton, Green Bay, Kenosha, Racine, and Sheboygan. Generally, the most effective agreements: 1) reflect fair payment for foregone fare revenue and/or the operating and capital costs of providing the transit service; 2) specify a detailed methodology for establishing the annual contract cost, and 3) span multiple years (with optional annual adjustments) to provide greater funding stability. Recommendation 4: Pursue a formal, longer-term funding agreement with the Oshkosh Area School District to enable fare-free rides for students. Priority: High. Fare Collection and Revenue Control GO Transit buses are equipped with non-registering, locked fareboxes. This configuration works well for collecting and securing cash but does not enable passengers to use (and drivers to verify) other media types, including refillable “smart cards” (“contactless” cards), bus passes, or mobile phone payments. The transportation director expressed interest in introducing an advanced fare collection system with such features, while continuing to use the existing non-registering, locked fareboxes for cash collection. This strategy is being pursued by other Wisconsin transit agencies and should help to reduce driver and staff time spent on fare collection. Recommendation 5: Pursue mobile and/or electronic fares. Priority: Medium. During the on-site visit, staff indicated that fare revenue, including cash, is counted just one day per week, corresponding with scheduled weekly bank deposits. Instead, GO Transit should remove fare revenue from all vehicles at the end of each service day, store it in a secure location, and be counted by multiple staff the following day. Recommendation 6: Count and secure fare revenue daily. Priority: High. Aside from the frequency issue noted above, GO Transit seems to have appropriate revenue control procedures in place, which were explained to the review team while on-site. However, off-board cash SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 34 handling and counting procedures have not yet been documented. FTA requires recipients to have policies and procedures in place that address internal control practices to prevent waste, loss, and misuse of federal funds; in most instances, FTA expects recipients to have written documentation of such. The City of Oshkosh is working on a formal cash handling policy. Recommendation 7: Document off-board cash handling and counting procedures to ensure consistency and effectiveness. Priority: High. Planning and Scheduling The structures and procedures pertaining to the planning and scheduling functions at GO Transit are conducive to effective operations. In terms of strategic and service planning, GO Transit is among the more sophisticated agencies in its Wisconsin peer group. The review team attributes this to GO Transit staff’s attention to service design and quality. GO Transit’s transportation director leads the planning function, with help from the transit operations manager and transit operations supervisor. Staff use data collected via the tablets aboard GO Transit buses to regularly track system performance relative to key performance measures; results are well-documented and shared with the Oshkosh TAB. See Appendix A for staff’s full response to the review team’s MPR questionnaire, which includes more details about the planning and scheduling functions at GO Transit. Strategic Planning GO Transit has a good working relationship with ECWRPC, which is the designated Oshkosh Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). ECWRPC provides ongoing support to GO Transit and aids the transit system’s long-range and strategic planning efforts. Indeed, over the course of 2017 and 2018 ECWRPC led the effort to update the City of Oshkosh TDP. The plan resulted in policy and service recommendations, most of which have since been implemented. Notably, the most recent TDP revealed broad community interest in running transit service later into the evening. Today, GO Transit service is only available until 6:45 p.m. The Oshkosh community has expressed interest in having later service later available for many years but GO Transit has not yet pursued this type of service expansion. A greater span of service would improve GO Transit’s appeal and grow the pool of potential users. More specifically, later service would benefit retail, service, and manufacturing sector workers; and would provide more mobility options for students and those who rely on transit as their primary means of transportation. GO Transit staff should closely gauge demand for extended evening service and consider piloting service to test whether it is warranted and feasible. For example, piloting an on-demand evening service with a contracted operator may reveal whether additional investment in fixed-route or on-demand evening service is warranted in the long-term. It should be noted that Access to Jobs already fulfills some of the after-hours service needs. Recommendation 8: Evaluate demand for evening service; if warranted, consider piloting an on-demand evening service, perhaps through a contracted operator. Priority: Medium. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 35 Marketing The structures and procedures pertaining to the marketing function of GO Transit are conducive to effective operations. GO Transit’s online and printed materials are clear and informative. Staff conduct regular outreach with area schools, businesses, and transportation advocates to market the transit service. GO Transit contracts with Lutheran Social Services to provide its travel training and mobility management services. Customer contacts and complaints are logged and addressed in a systematic and appropriate manner via GO Transit’s Express Transit database. Market research and surveying are conducted primarily during TDP preparation. However, GO Transit surveys its passengers every few years, and the City of Oshkosh conducts an annual resident survey that includes questions about transit service. See Appendix A for staff’s full response to the review team’s MPR questionnaire, which includes more details about the marketing function at GO Transit. Marketing Plan Consistent with a recommendation in its latest TDP, GO Transit created a marketing plan in 2019 intended to identify opportunities to increase fixed-route bus ridership and promote the system’s public image. The plan identifies market segments and includes marketing objectives and tactics, a marketing budget, and guidance GO Transit employees can use to aid in marketing efforts. Website & Online Tools GO Transit has a consistent brand identity that is reflected on its buses and in all its marketing materials. The city’s webpages devoted to GO Transit contain all essential service information, and all can be translated to languages other than English. The website includes a useful system map; individual route maps and schedules; and a general transit feed specification (GTFS)-enabled trip planner. GO Transit’s GTFS schedule data enable customers to plan trips via the website or Google Maps. The GO Transit mobile app provides real-time vehicle location, route schedules, stop-level timepoints, and service alerts. Riders value such app features, and thus they are becoming increasingly important to transit providers. However, there is little mention of the mobile app on GO Transit’s website, social media pages, or printed materials. Recommendation 9: Promote the GO Transit app via the GO Transit website and social media, in printed materials, aboard vehicles, and at facilities. Priority: Medium. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 36 Screenshots from the GO Transit mobile app. Source: Google Play App Store GO Transit maintains Facebook and Twitter account, managed by the agency’s transit operations manager. The pages are used to communicate time-sensitive service alerts and updates, share information about initiatives and events, highlight the good work of GO Transit employees, and promote the benefits of transit service in the community. But maintaining an effective social media presence requires time and effort, which can be difficult for transit systems lacking dedicated marketing staff. One way to maximize the value of Facebook and Twitter as communication tools even without marketing staff is to pre-schedule regular posts for predictable events and communications themes throughout the year. GO Transit’s neighbor and peer system Fond du Lac Area Transit does this with great success. Recommendation 10: Consider adding scheduled posts on Facebook and Twitter that can be uploaded throughout the year to reduce the need for detailed daily/weekly posting; this could apply to most posts aside from those for time-sensitive service alerts and updates. Priority: Medium. Summary Table 22 summarizes the review team’s assessment of each functional area. Ratings are based on the degree to which the function’s structures and procedures are conducive to continued effective operations. Part V summarizes the review team’s conclusions and specific recommendations for each functional area. SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 37 Summary Assessment of Functional Areas Functional Area Rating Transportation Operations Vehicle and Facility Maintenance Finance Planning and Scheduling Marketing Key to Symbols Structures and procedures are conducive to effective operations Structures and procedures are adequate with room for improvement Structures and procedures are insufficient SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 38 Part V: Conclusions GO Transit is a high performing system with many progressive policies and practices. Compared to its Wisconsin and national peer systems, GO Transit performs better than average or within a satisfactory range in nearly all performance measures (Table 18). GO Transit excelled in 2017 in three measures: operating expenses per passenger trip, passenger trips per revenue hour, and subsidy per passenger trip. The agency’s performance is attributable to relatively high ridership, an effective fixed-route network design, and appropriately managed operating costs. Performance trends are largely positive and do not reveal any areas of concern. GO Transit staff are skilled and professional. Importantly, GO Transit is a forward-looking organization. Leadership staff are continually looking for ways to improve their service’s performance, safety and customer experiences. The review team identified the following as some of GO Transit’s strengths and recent successes: • The organizational structure is conductive to effective service and provides staff opportunities to succeed in the near-term and contribute to planning efforts. • GO Transit’s driver training program is very well designed, documented, and administered, especially for a transit system of its size. • The GO Transit revenue fleet is in very good shape, with about half of buses having been on the road just a few years. • Facilities are well-maintained and frequently upgraded and improved. • Staff embrace technology to improve operations and customer experience (e.g., trip planning tools and real-time vehicle location systems). • Ridership and service data are collected in fine detail, enabling staff to appropriately analyze and address issues. • GO Transit management works proactively to create and maintain partnerships in the community. Despite these and other successes, GO Transit still has areas for improvement, summarized in Table 23. Principally, GO Transit should review and update its practices and procedures related to fare revenue collection, and adopt more efficient marketing and customer communication practices. Summary of Recommendations Functional Area Recommendation Priority Policy- and Decision-Making Processes 1 Continue to monitor employment market conditions for transit operators; consider adjusting recruitment and work assignment policies as needed to fill open positions Low Transportation Operations - No recommendations - Vehicle and Facility Maintenance 2 Consider electric vehicle charging infrastructure when designing the new transit center Medium Finance 3 Closely monitor UWO student ridership and monthly pass sales; work with UWO to pursue a new contract that enables UWO students to ride fare-free in exchange for a fixed annual payment Medium 4 Pursue a formal, longer-term funding agreement with the Oshkosh Area School District to enable fare-free rides for students High 5 Pursue mobile and/or electronic fares. Medium 6 Count and secure fare revenue daily High SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 39 Functional Area Recommendation Priority 7 Document off-board cash handling and counting procedures to ensure consistency and effectiveness High Planning and Scheduling 8 Evaluate demand for evening service; if warranted, consider piloting an on-demand evening service, perhaps through a contracted operator Medium Marketing 9 Promote the GO Transit app via the GO Transit website and social media, in printed materials, aboard vehicles, and at facilities Medium 10 Consider adding scheduled posts on Facebook and Twitter that can be uploaded throughout the year to reduce the need for detailed daily/weekly posting; this could apply to most posts aside from those for time-sensitive service alerts and updates. Medium SRF Consulting Group 2019 Transit System Management Performance Review | 40 Appendix A: Completed Questionnaire The following are sheets from the completed MPR questionnaire, as submitted by GO Transit staff. These responses were reviewed and used to develop discussion items for the October 4, 2019 on-site review and this MPR final report. GO Transit # Functional Area from Prior MPR Recommendation Has this recommendation been implemented? If not, (a) why has it not been implemented and/or (b) what steps have been taken toward completing it? Use the new database to reconcile cash collected to ridership by route to monitor revenue per passenger and identify any fluctuations in these trends. Not feasible with current system and staffing Develop city procedures for allocating a reasonable share of expenses for human resources, accounting, IT, and legal services provided by the City to Oshkosh Transit System (OTS). These expenses should be included in all OTS budgets and reports including the annual National Transit Database report. N/A 2 Personnel and Labor Relations No recommendations Continue implementing marked bus stop program to improve schedule reliability and system visibility, and ease of use. Yes Explore potential for adding five minutes of time to all schedules at 4:00 p.m. to allow for recovery from peak loads at school end. Not feasible w/o schedule change Ensure that someone in a supervisory role trained in drug and alcohol reasonable suspicion is available on Saturday mornings to check drivers in. Yes 4 ADA Paratransit Service No recommendations 5 Safety Management and Training Categorize accidents by type using the new database and conduct regular analysis of accident causes. In Progress Continue to pursue APC implementation as part of AVL program to enhance information for planning decision making. Yes Explore potential for day pass to maximize ridership potential from existing customer markets. TDP did not recommend Continue to monitor driver overtime and explore ways to cut down on overtime in scheduling. Yes, Hired an additional flex position Operator/Shop Laborer Platform hours should be recorded separately from payroll hours in order to monitor the system’s pay-to-platform ratio. 8 Marketing Add translation functionality (such as Google Translate) to website to offer multilingual information. Yes 9 Vehicle and Facility Maintenance No recommendations 10 Information Technology OTS should study the costs, benefits, and feasibility of AVL implementation on fixed route vehicles to improve on-road supervision and provide real-time bus arrival capability. Yes Scheduling 1 3 6 7 RECOMMENDATIONS FROM PRIOR MPR (2012) Accounting, Finance, and Purchasing Transportation Operations Planning Page 3 of 22 # Question Yes No Response X X …. GENERAL 1 How does the transit system interact with WisDOT on this topic (policy)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 2 How does the transit system interact with other public transit systems on this topic (policy)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. STAFFING & ORGANIZATION 3 How does the transit system fit into the overall local government framework? Is it a stand-alone entity, or is a division of the city / county government? Go Transit is a division of the city of Oshkosh If the transit system is a city department , does the city provide the following? Please note if duties are shared between the city and transit system. Human Resources x Operations x Maintenance x Finance x Legal x Other (please note) 5 How do labor costs (wages and benefits) impact the overall cost of operations? Has this changed significantly in the last few years? If so, how? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 6 Does the transit system offer a retirement benefit program? If so, describe. Yes, WRS 7 Is there a distinction between benefits offered to part-time and full-time employees? If so, please describe briefly. 8 Have transit operations or administration been adversely impacted by high turnover or recent retirements? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 9 What actions does the transit system undertake to improve employee retention? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. How many of the following workers does the system employ? Full-time management/administrative employees 6 Part-time management/administrative employees 0 MANAGEMENT 11 Who does the transit manager report to?Transit Director, Transit Director reports to the City Manager Who is responsible for the following management activities? Please include names and/or job titles. Preparing capital / operating budgets Transit Director, input from Transit Ops. Mgr. and Maint. Mgr. Providing input on staffing levels All Supervisors/managers Administering discipline Direct supervisor Hearing grievances Transit Ops. Mgr./Transit Director Negotiating labor contracts Asst. City Mgr, human resources manager input from Transit Director and Ops. Mgr. 13 How often does management hold regular staff meetings? Weekly 14 How often do you (transit manager) meet with your supervisor?Daily, weekly staff meeting 15 What training has management staff received in the past year?Triennial review training, Title 6 training, EMC and EOC training GO Transit 12 4 POLICY- AND DECISION-MAKING PROCESS 10 Page 4 of 22 # Question Yes No Response GO TransitPOLICY- AND DECISION-MAKING PROCESS 16 What training is planned for management staff in the next year?NTD training upcoming, procurement training 17 As transit manager, are you satisfied with the level of management training available to you? x POLICY BOARD / TRANSIT COMMISSION 18 Is there a governance board / transit commission in place? If yes, complete questions 20-27. If no, skip to question 28. x 19 What are the responsibilities of the board / transit commission? 20 How many members are on the board? 21 What is the term of members? 22 Are any members elected officials? 23 How frequently does the board meet? 24 Are board meetings open to the public and publicized? 25 Are board meeting agendas and minutes posted online? If so, please provide a link. 26 Do management and staff regularly attend board meetings? 27 Do management and staff prepare regular updates for board and committee meetings? If so, what reports are prepared? 28 If there is not a transit commission in place , what body is responsible for making decisions? Oshkosh Common Council with advice from Transit Advisory Board and Staff ANNUAL GOALS 29 Do you, as transit manager, have general goals for the transit system in 2019 (or 2020)? If so, please list briefly. Yes, successful triennial review, complete the procurement of 3 new transit buses and the disposal of 3 2010s, implement real-time bus tracing app. 30 Has the transit system adopted annual performance goals (quantitative) for 2019? If so, describe them briefly. Who is responsible for establishing them?yes, KPIs. Transit Director along with managers 31 Do you regularly review and evaluate system progress toward annually-established goals? How? How often? Yes, quarterly reports and weekly meetings POLICY-MAKING PROCESS Who is involved with setting local policy on: Operations Transit Director, Manager and Supervisor Service planning and changes Staff and Transit advisory board, council Specifying / procuring equipment and rolling stock Maint. Mgr, Transit Director and Ops. Mgr along with lead mechanic Fare structure Staff and Transit advisory board, council 33 How are policy changes communicated to system users?Notices on buses and at the transit center, GO Transit Website, Facebook and Twitter. 34 Do you evaluate the effectiveness of policy changes? If yes, how, and how often? x No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 35 Does the board review the results of policy evaluation? x 36 Does the community have access to the results of policy evaluation? x 32 Page 5 of 22 # Question Yes No Response GO TransitPOLICY- AND DECISION-MAKING PROCESS COMPLIANCE 37 Did the system have any deficiencies, corrective actions, or findings in the most recent FTA Triennial Review/WisDOT Compliance Site Review? If yes, describe. x 2 minor administrative findings, FTA clauses need to be sent with all small purchases including fuel. Davis Bacon clauses need to be sent with painting contracts (considered construction). Need to have 60 days for paratransit suspension appeals. Page 6 of 22 # Question Yes No Response X X …. GENERAL 1 How, and how often, do transit management staff interact with system users? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 2 Describe the reliability of the system. What aspects impact reliability of the system? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 3 Currently, what is the most important operational issue the system is experiencing? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 4 How does the transit system interact with WisDOT on this topic (operations)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 5 How does the transit system interact with other public transit systems on this topic (operations)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 6 For each mode (or service type) operated, how many vehicles are operated in maximum service? City Directly Operated - 9 / Intercity - 1 / ADA Nonambulatory - 8 / ADA Ambulatory - 20 How many of the following workers does the system employ? Full-time drivers 19 Part-time drivers 3 Full-time dispatchers 1 Part-time dispatchers Full-time operations/street supervisors 1 Part-time operations/street supervisors OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION 8 Is there an operations manager? If yes, who (name and title)?x Steve Tomasik, Transit Operations Manager 9 Are operations supervisors scheduled and present during all hours service is operated? 10 Please decribe the typical staffing configuration to provide operations supervision throughout the service day on weekdays and weekends. 1 - Manager M-F (08:00-16:30) 1 - Operations Supervisor T-Sa (0600-13:30) 1- Maintence Mgr. M-F (0500-0800) 11 Are any supervisors on call at home? If so, when?X Saturday afternoons 1:30 - 7 12 What are the principal duties of the supervisor? Scheduling, driver supervison, administer D&A policy, driver payroll, training, hiring and performance management 13 Is at least one dispatcher (or reservationist) on duty for all hours of service? If no, describe when. X Saturday afternoons 1:30 - 7 14 Please decribe the typical staffing configuration for dispatchers (or reservationists) throughout the service day on weekdays and weekends. 1 - Manager M-F (8-16:30) 2 - Admn M-F (8am - 16:30) 1 - Street Supervisor / Dispatch T-Sa (06:00-13:30) 15 Who are the first employees to report to work on weekdays? What time do they arrive? Do they have specific first-to-report tasks to open up the facility? Maintenance Mgr and Mechanic 0500 yes 16 Does the system retain the daily bus and run assignment sheets? If yes, how long are sheets retained? X Electronincally in eXpress Transit Data Base DRIVER COMMUNICATIONS How are route and service changes communicated to drivers? Bulletins x Memos/Special notices x Verbal announcement x Staff meetings x Other (please describe) GO Transit 17 TRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS 7 Page 7 of 22 # Question Yes No Response GO TransitTRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS 18 Are drivers required to sign for, and acknowledge, memos/special notices and bulletins? If so, how is this done? X 19 Is there a specific employee guidebook for operations or a specific driver’s manual?X 20 Is there a cellular phone / digital device usage policy for drivers?X 21 Is there a defined, progressive disciplinary policy for drivers? X 22 Are job performance evaluations completed regularly for all driver staff? If so, how often, and what do they entail? x Difficult due to union however; feedback is given after observations 23 Are there any incentive programs in place for driver performance? If so, what are they? x City wide logevity program DRIVER: PRE-TRIP / POST-TRIP 24 Where do the majority of drivers report to? Transit Office 926 Dempsey Trail 25 How far in advance of pullouts (in minutes) do drivers report? 15 26 Is there a method for dispatch to communicate with maintenance to ensure that all routes have been assigned vehicles that are in good repair?X 27 Are all drivers required to personally check-in or report to a supervisor, dispatcher, or some other management person before going on duty? If so, describe. X Drivers report to Bus Assignment Board to get pretrip paperwork and get bus assignment 28 Prior to the start of her/his shift, how is a driver's fitness for duty determined? Observed at the Bus Assignment Board in the Shop 29 Do any drivers begin work at remote start points? If yes, what is the procedure for checking in and getting to remote locations?X 30 When does the first bus on weekdays pull out? On weekends? 6 am M-Sat 31 Is a pre-trip inspection required before a bus goes in service?X 32 Do drivers have a post-trip checklist?X 33 If no, what functions do drivers complete at the end of the shift? N/A 34 Is there a drivers’ room? If so, where? X But they have a hallway with lockers adjacent to the garage and have access to the breakroom 35 Who locks up the garage at the end of the service day, and at what time? Is a security system used when no one is present? Last Mechanic/shop laborer for the day / NO however we have controlled access, card readers for doors and gates DRIVER: IN-SERVICE Do drivers record the following information throughout the day? If so, how do they report it (e.g., a paper form, farebox, MDT, tablet)? Passengers by classification X TABLET Special fares X TABLET Timepoint arrivals X ELECTRONICALLY VIA TABLET Start/end vehicle mileage X TABLET Other (please specify) 37 Do drivers handle cash or tickets in any way?X 36 Page 8 of 22 # Question Yes No Response GO TransitTRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS 38 Do you track on-time performance for your demand response service? If yes, how? How often? X Monthly 39 Do you track on-time performance at the start or end of a route? If yes, how? How often?X Montly 40 Do you track on-time performance at mid-points along a route? If yes, how? How often?X Twice a month 41 Is there an adopted on-time performance standard (e.g., % of trips on time) for each mode (or service type) you provide? If yes, what are the standards? x 95%+ fixed route 42 In 2018, what was the actual level of on-time performance for each mode (or service type) you provided (e.g., % on-time)? ADA - 92% 43 Do you regularly review ridership boarding and alighting patterns on existing routes? If so, how? How often? x monthly TRAINING 44 Are drivers, dispatchers, and supervisors given training in how to respond to accidents / medical emergencies?X 45 If yes, is the training specifically included in a driver’s manual/operations manual?X 46 Are drivers given training and direction in how to respond to passenger incidents?X 47 Do you have an accidents per mile goal (e.g., fewer than 2.7 accidents/100,000 miles)? If yes, what is it? x zero 48 In 2018, how many miles were there between preventable accidents? 49 How is the driver training program documented and administered? Through the Operations Supervisor 50 Have the drivers been through specialized driver safety courses (e.g., Smith System, WI RTAP, TSI, CTAA)? If so, please note the course and describe how it is applied. x How long is your driver training program? Number of total hours Number of classroom hours Number of behind-the-wheel hours 52 Who are the instructors? 53 Does the Maintenance staff have any role in training new drivers? 54 Do you provide or arrange for initial training of inexperienced drivers?x 55 Do you provide or arrange for ongoing training for drivers? If yes, describe. x ops supervisor does refresher training after any accident, offers training needed following observations 56 Is there a retraining program for drivers with poor safety or complaint records? If yes, describe. x Ops. Superisor does refresher training 57 Does your safety program offer incentives and recognition to drivers with good records? If yes, describe. X Do you have regular safety meetings with the following staff? If yes, how often? 51 58 Page 9 of 22 # Question Yes No Response GO TransitTRANSPORTATION OPERATIONS Drivers X Mechanics X Administration X 59 Does the system do driver ride checks ("ride alongs") with management, supervisors, or other drivers? If yes, how often? X 2X / MONTH MIMIMUM 60 Are drivers given specific training in the use of a passenger lift and how to properly secure a wheelchair?X 61 If yes, is this procedure specifically covered in the driver’s manual or guidebook?X 62 Who conducts safety training for maintenance workers? Main. Mgr, City Risk Manager, lead mechanic 63 What is the starting wage for drivers (part-time and full-time)? How, if at all, does this change in the first year? Start $24.06/Hr. - 6mo. $24.47 / Hr - 1 Yr. 24.88 WORK AND VEHICLE ASSIGNMENTS 64 Briefly describe the methods / processes / tools used for run cutting. We currently run a set schedule 65 Do you use specialized scheduling (e.g. HASTUS) or other software to maintain a schedule database? If so, briefly explain. X 66 Do drivers choose route assignments based on seniority? X 67 How often do drivers select work assignments? The bid / fixed schedule is posted every 2 months 68 Are there rules/guidelines about the types of work completed by part-time employees? If yes, please describe. X Currenty N/A, but yes in terms of order of call to fill open work, and when they can be used. Limits hours they can work. 69 Are there requirements for driver breaks? If yes, describe. X On 12 hour scheduled days, drivers take a one hour lunch, No fixed break time allotted in bids other than that, but short breaks can be taken when possible to avoid running hot. 70 Does the system employ standby drivers who report to work but are not assigned to a route (extra board)? X 71 Does the system employ on-call drivers who are available for work, but do not report to work unless called in (on-call)? X Page 10 of 22 # Question Yes No Response X X …. GENERAL 1 In your opinion, is the maintenance program operating efficiently? Is your maintenance program able to effectively keep facilities and vehicles in safe and working order? What are the major challenges facing your maintenance program? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 2 How does the transit system interact with WisDOT on this topic (maintenance)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 3 How does the transit system interact with other public transit systems on this topic (maintenance)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. How many of the following workers does the system employ? Full-time mechanics 3 Part-time mechanics 0 Full-time maintenance supervisors 1 Part-time maintenance supervisors 0 Full-time other maintenance employees 1 Part-time other maintenance employees 2 5 Is there a maintenance manager? If yes, who?x Brian Griesbach 6 Is a maintenance lead or supervisor always on duty in the shop? If yes, describe who and how this is scheduled. x 7 Is there a mechanic on duty during all hours of revenue operation? If not, describe. x We have a mechanic or shop laborer on duty during operation hours. 8 Are buses stored, maintained, and dispatched from the same facility? If not, please describe. x Are the following repairs performed in house or are they contracted? Routine maintenance In house Body work Both Engines Both Transmissions Both A/C In house Paint Contracted 10 Have mechanics had specific training on vehicles they are maintaining? x 11 What type of maintenance training is offered? Training provided thru New Flyer, Cummins 12 Who in the organization develops vehicle, equipment, and contracted services specifications? Transit director, Maintenance manager, Operations manager, Lead mechanic DAILY VEHICLE SERVICING 13 Is the fueling system automated? x 14 How often are buses fueled and fluid levels (oil, torque fluid, water) checked? Daily 15 How often is mileage recorded for each vehicle? Daily 16 Is there a monthly report (summary) showing by vehicle its total mileage, and consumable consumption, miles per gallon, miles per quart on fluids? If yes, how is it analyzed? x Trans fleet, Work orders, Milage inspection form 17 How often are bus exteriors washed? When ever needed. Winter more often than Summer 18 How often are vehicle interiors swept and/or wiped down? Each bus that goes out on route gets swept and mopped that night. 9 4 MAINTENANCE GO Transit Page 11 of 22 # Question Yes No Response MAINTENANCE GO Transit INSPECTIONS AND PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE 19 Are reports generated for pre- and post-operation inspections? x 20 At what mileage intervals are inspections performed? 6,000 21 What work is done at each mileage interval? Explain briefly. See PM inspection form 22 Percent inspections performed on time in 2018: 100% 23 What is the typical mileage interval between brake relining / reconditioning? Drum brakes 150.000. Disc brakes 50-60 thousand miles 24 Is there an internal standard for the amount of time it should take to complete PM inspections? If yes, what is it? x Depends on what PM they are doing and what they find needs repair. 25 How are road calls tracked? Trans fleet REPAIRS 26 Is any type of software used to track work? If so, which? Trans fleet 27 Is there a system for prioritizing repairs and assigning work to mechanics? x 28 Is there a procedure to ensure that unsafe buses aren’t used? If yes, explain briefly. x Dead line bus 29 Is there a procedure to ensure that the most critically needed types of vehicles are repaired first? If yes, explain briefly. x Buses take priority over service vehicles. 30 Do mechanics complete a work order form showing the nature of the repair, the hours (labor) required, and the parts used? x 31 If yes, is this information kept on file for each vehicle? x 32 Does a maintenance lead or supervisor review driver defect reports? x 33 Does the system monitor mechanic productivity? x SHOP 34 Does the vehicle maintenance and storage area have a sprinkler or other fire suppression system in place? x 35 Is there a separate room for the storage of hazardous/explosive materials? x 36 Is there a separate room for battery storage? NA x 37 What is the date of the most recent fuel-oil storage tank inspection? 8/23/2019 38 Does the system have a program for disposing of recyclables and hazardous materials? x Are the following required in the shop? Eye protection x Safety shoes x Other (please list)x Hearing 40 Is there an office area for maintenance staff and recordkeeping? x PARTS 39 Page 12 of 22 # Question Yes No Response MAINTENANCE GO Transit 41 How do you determine from where and how often you purchase parts? Tans fleet tracks are inventory & gives reorder points 42 How do you determine from where and how often you purchase fuel? Fuel monitor system. Put out for bid 43 How do you determine from where and how often you purchase (or lease) tires ? Put out for bid. Keep track of inventory 44 Is there a computerized parts inventory control process? x 45 Are parts barcoded?x 46 Is there a method of confirming the inventory? If yes, describe. How often? x We do a physical inventory count each year. 47 Is there a stock keeper in charge of the parts room? If yes, who? x 48 If not, who supervises parts withdrawals? Maintenance manager & Lead mechanic 49 Are all parts withdrawals documented? If yes, how? x 50 Have targeted inventory and reorder levels been established for common or high usage items? x 51 How many stock outs occurred in 2018 that resulted in a vehicle being held out of service? What was out of stock? Nothing that caused the bus to be out of service for a prolonged period. FACILITIES MAINTENANCE 52 If the system has bus shelters, or a transit center, is it responsible for maintaining them? If yes, how frequently are they cleaned? x The transit center is cleaned daily by are cleaning contractor. Shelters are cleaned by are Bus driver/Shop person a few times per year we also will clean if they are reported to be dirty. 53 Does the system have a facilities maintenance plan? If yes, what does it entail? x We have a monthly inspection forms that covers the Lifts,Bus wash,fuel tanks,garage doors. We also contract out sevice for the heating/AC 54 Are facility management responsibilities clearly assigned within the system? x Page 13 of 22 # Question Yes No Response X X …. GENERAL 1 How are things working right now? Are there any problems with the way the accounting/ finance function works for your system? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 2 How does the transit system interact with WisDOT on this topic (finance)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 3 How does the transit system interact with other public transit systems on this topic (finance)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 4 Do you have complete control over all financial systems or are you part of another agency’s financial system? Yes Which staff are involved with the following: Payroll Supervisors review, city payroll department administers Purchasing Transit staff and city procuement staff Accounts payable Transit staff submits, accounting department pays Accounts receivable Transit staff submits, accounting department receives General ledger Accounting department User fare revenues Transit staff deposits and reports, accounting department does accounting 6 Does the system or its parent organization have an internal audit function? x 7 If yes, does management and/or the governing board provide input to the annual audit work plan? ? ACCOUNTING AND PAYROLL 8 Are security and backup systems in place for your computerized accounting system? x 9 Is there a secure database of employee records, pay rate, benefit elections, and other data? x 10 Are payroll checks approved/signed by someone other than the person who prepares them? x REVENUE CONTROL 11 Do you have a written policy for cash handling procedures? If yes, please provide documentation. 12 Are fares collected in a locked fare box? x 13 Are registering fare boxes used? x 14 Who is responsible for removing money from the bus? 15 Who counts the money? Transit maintenance manager, customer service cleck and transit ops. Mgr 16 Is there an activated security camera in the money counting room? x 17 What is the average daily amount of cash collected? 18 Who reconciles money with the passenger count? Accounting staff 19 Who is responsible for making the bank deposit? Transit Ops. Mgr 5 FINANCE GO Transit Page 14 of 22 # Question Yes No Response FINANCE GO Transit 20 How often are deposits made? weekly 21 Are bank deposits reconciled back to driver or fare box revenues? x 22 Are banking records reconciled to bank statements? x 23 Are cash receipts for pass sales reconciled back to the number of passes issued? x 24 Are fare and pass sale cash receipts counted in a secure area? x 25 Are paper transfers issued? If yes, what are the transfer rules for passengers? x Good for one hour 26 Do you track how transfers are used? If yes, how? x Tablet tracking 27 When was the last time fares were increased? What were they changed from? Jan. 1 2019 cash fare from $1 to $1.50, monthly pass from $25 to $35 BUDGETING AND GRANTS 28 When does the annual local budgeting process get started? June 29 Which staff members are involved in the budgeting process and how? Transit Director prepares with input from maint. Mgr. and ops. Mgr., buget is reviewed with city manager and finance director, workshops are help with council and then the budget is ultimately approved in November by council30 Who prepares annual funding application to WisDOT? Transit director or transit ops. Mgr. 31 Are there established service, funding, or fare agreements with local partners (i.e., municipalities, educational institutions, etc.)? If yes, please list with who and, generally, for what. x FVTC revenue agreement, Winnebago County fund rural programs 32 Are annual capital and operating budgets part of local TIP elements? x 33 Does the transit system compare actual revenues and expenses against budgeted revenues and expenses throughout the fiscal year? If so, please describe your process, including frequency. x Through Munis Live multiple times per week, look at total quarterly at a minimum 34 What is the policy for excess revenue (relative to the annual budget)? Never had any, if we did it would be properly reported and accounted for 35 Does the transit system routinely convey post- grant application annual budget changes to WisDOT? If so, how and when? x IF it happened, we would let them know immediately 36 Is there a fleet replacement fund in place? If yes, please describe. x 37 Is there a genral capital replacement fund in place? If yes, please describe. x 38 How does the transit system seek out capital grant opportunities? 5339 direct through feds and through state WisDOT allocation, discretionary as available/needed 39 Have you worked with your MPO/RPC to seek grant opportunities for vehicle replacement and capital investment? If yes, which grants? x 5339 40 Have you had to turn back grant funds in the past 5 years? If yes, what might prevent this in the future? x Page 15 of 22 # Question Yes No Response X X …. GENERAL 1 What do you want to accomplish in the next few years? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 2 In the past, has there generally been success in implementing planning recommendations? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 3 How does the transit system interact with WisDOT on this topic (planning)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 4 How does the transit system interact with other public transit systems on this topic (planning)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. PLANNING FUNCTIONS / LONG-RANGE PLANNING 5 Are any staff dedicated exclusively to service planning? If yes, how many? If not, who is responsible for the service planning function? No 6 When was the last transit development plan (TDP) or other strategic plan completed? 2018 7 Who led the last TDP and what was the system's role in the process? Did any other local agencies participate? Please list. East Central Wisconsin Planning Commision. GO Transit worked hand it hand with them. Many local agencies were represented on the steering committee see TDP for listing 8 Is the TDP incorporated into local long-range transportation plan for the community? x 9 To what extent is the system following the recommendations in the TDP? (estimated % recommendations implemented) 75% Does the system survey riders regarding the following? If yes, how and how often? Frequency of use x Every five years minimum but try to do so every 2-3 years Transportation alternatives/mode choice x Origin and destination x Trip purpose x Level of satisfaction with service x Demographics x PLANNING DATA / PERFORMANCE EVALUATION 11 What performance data is regularly reviewed (i.e., weekly or monthly)? Ridership and revenue, montly, Maint. Schedule and records weekly, on time service monthly 12 What performance data is occasionally reviewed (i.e., monthly, quarterly, or annually)? Ridership by revenue types and routes monthly 13 Who is responsible for monitoring daily performance data? Transit Ops. Manager and Transit Ops. Supervisor 14 Does the system use automatic passenger counters (APCs)? 15 Do you conduct passenger counts by stop location? If yes, how and how often? x We have APCs 16 Do you monitor maximum loads on fixed routes? If yes, how and how often? 17 Does the system use an automatic vehicle locator (AVL) system? x 18 Do you use standards / performance measures to evaluate your service (individual routes, trips, stops, etc.)? If yes, describe. x We evaluate vs. peers 19 Are there established standards or policies for minimum acceptable ridership and performance levels on particular services? If yes, describe. Kind of PLANNING GO Transit 10 Page 16 of 22 # Question Yes No Response PLANNING GO Transit 20 Does the system have stated annual ridership growth goals? If yes, please state goal for 2019. x Ridership has been declining due to a good economy and more options TNC. Our goal is to maintain ridership SERVICE CHANGES 21 When was the last significant service change? What did it entail? 2013 - route restructuring 22 When was the last time you evaluated your service area? Please describe the process. 2018 TDP 23 What is the process used to propose and evaluate service changes? Evaluate APCs, get input from TAB, notice and obtain public feedback, follow our policies as well as FTA policies 24 Do you evaluate the effectiveness of service changes? If yes, how? x APCs and driver and rider feedback 25 Generally, how often are routes and/or schedules updated? Infrequently 26 Have you instituted any new or substantially expanded programs or service (new mode or type of service) within the last 5 years? If yes, explain briefly. x 27 Is there a policy concerning a start-up period for new routes or services before ridership is considered stable and an evaluation is made? If yes, explain briefly. N/A 28 If yes, have you set goals and objectives which are specific to the new / changed services? Please describe. 29 If yes, have you reviewed and evaluated the results of the new / changed services? Please describe. FIXED ROUTE SCHEDULES 30 Are fixed route schedules arranged to have routes meet at transfer points? x 31 Are buses “held” for late arriving buses at transfer points? If yes, briefly state the policy . x 3 minute window 32 Are there situations in which a bus is permitted to go off route to make a pick-up or drop-off? If so, explain briefly . x 33 Is layover time or recovery time incorporated into schedules? If not, how is recovery time accommodated? x Fit is as can some routes have more time than others 34 Is layover time or recovery time taken at transfer points? x 35 Is layover time or recovery time taken at the end of the line? x 36 Are trippers operated (i.e., additional scheduled trips for schools or workplaces)? If yes, briefly describe. There are 2 route deviations during school release however; they are normal routes that stay on their normal schedule 37 Are schedules checked on a regular basis to determine if running time adjustments are warranted? If yes, how is this completed? x Route observations PUBLIC INPUT 38 How does the system engage the public in planning decisions? Briefly describe. See our PPP, TAB meeting public comments, phone and emails 39 When was your last public input meeting? What was the focus? Last TAB meeting July 40 Is there a citizens' advisory board or similar body in place to allow input? If yes, describe. x 41 What guidelines are used to determine when a public meeting / hearing is needed? FTA guideleins Page 17 of 22 # Question Yes No Response PLANNING GO Transit 42 Does the system conduct formal public hearings before adopting route changes or changes to service hours? x 43 How are comments received at public hearings incorporated into service changes? They are considered and documented CAPITAL PLANNING 44 Does the system have a fleet replacement/expansion plan? x 45 How many, if any, vehicles are on order but have not yet arrived or been introdced to revenue service? Please describe, including funding source and which vehicles are being replaced. zero 46 Has the system analyzed whether the current fleet mix is most appropriate relative to existing/future demand? x 47 Does the system have a facilities replacement/expansion plan? x 48 What types of facility improvements have been made in the last three years? Office renovated with local funding, downtwon transit center was cleaned and painted. The bus garage was cleaned and painted, ceiling tiles were replaced. 49 What types of facility improvements do you expect to make in the next few years (that you have secured funding for)? N/A 50 What types of unfunded facility improvements do you expect you will need to make in the next three years but have not yet secured funding for? Possibly construct a downtown transit center 51 What type of steps, if any, has the system made to improve energy efficiency and become more environmentally friendly?Renovated the offices, new HVAC system with new boilers in the office and garage in 2015, 2016 and complete in 2019 52 Is facilities planning conducted as part of annual budgeting or separate from other budget process? Part of annual budget 53 `250 bus stop signs 54 How many, if any, bus stop benches are part of the transit system? 9 55 How many, if any, bus shelters are part of the transit system? 29 56 Does the system or its parent agency have an ADA Transition Plan, or similar plan to guide ADA accessibility improvements? If yes, describe. x We make ADA improvements as new shetlers are put in COORDINATION 57 How does the system coordinate with service area communities regarding development decisions? We only serve the city of Oshkosh. Transit director is on the development review committee which meets bi-weekly 58 How does the system communicate with planning and zoning agencies? Transit directior is on the development review committee which meets bi-weekly 59 How frequently does the system contact peer transit agencies to discuss planning initiatives / potential service changes? Regularly Page 18 of 22 # Question Yes No Response PLANNING GO Transit 60 Is the system directly involved in updating the transportation element of local planning documents? x Page 19 of 22 # Question Yes No Response X X …. GENERAL 1 What are the overall goals of marketing, and where do you get information on how to market your service? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 2 What are some successful marketing activities you've completed? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 3 What are some unsuccessful marketing activities you've done? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 4 What is the perception of the system within the communities served? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 5 How does the transit system interact with WisDOT on this topic (marketing)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. 6 How does the transit system interact with other public transit systems on this topic (marketing)? No written response is needed for this question, but please take time to think about it as we will discuss this during the on-site visit. MARKETING FUNCTIONS 7 What percent of your total annual budget goes to marketing? 1% or less 8 Does the system have any dedicated marketing staff? If yes, how many staff work in marketing? If no, who is responsible for the marketing function? x 9 Does the system have a marketing plan? If yes, how is it used and when was it last updated? x Updated this year, it is used throughout the year 10 Do you contract for any marketing / customer information services from an outside vendor? If yes, briefly describe. x Looked into this didn't see a cost/benefit 11 What are your three largest marketing expenditures? Route Maps, advertising, promotional items MATERIALS Did the transit system use, create, or conduct the following in the last year? If yes, who, generally, leads or is charged with the effort? System map x Transit Ops. Mgr/Admin Asst, Telephone information x Website updates x Staff/IT developer Social media updates x Staff Route schedules x Staff Rider guide x Ops. Mgr video Advertising themes x Ops. Mgr video Media contacts/press releases x Staff Customer surveys X TDP Alternative language materials x Community outreach x TDP Business outreach X Staff School outreach x Staff Board updates x Director, Mgr Public meetings x Director, Mgr 13 Does the system provide marketing materials in languages other than English? If yes, list. x Google translate on website 14 If yes, how did you determine which languages to use? Google translate on website 15 Do you have a printed transit system map? If yes, when was the map last updated? x Dec. 2018 MARKETING GO Transit 12 Page 20 of 22 # Question Yes No Response MARKETING GO Transit 16 Does your system provide customers with information about other transit options in the community (e.g. human services transportation, specialty services, intercity bus services)? If yes, briefly describe. x Website and brocures WEB PRESENCE 17 Who is responsible for maintaining the system website? Ops Mgr works with IT Which of the following are available on the system website? System map x Route maps and schedules x Fare information x Rider guide x Real-time bus location information x Trip planner x 19 Does the system maintain route / schedule data in General Transit Feed Specifications (GTFS / Google Transit) format? If yes, who creates and maintains it? x Ops. Mgr 20 Does the system maintain Facebook, Twitter, and/or other social media pages? If yes, briefly describe how and how often each is used, and who maintains them. x Ops. Mgr/Supervisor weekly 21 Are policies in place to guide the use of social media as a marketing tool? If yes, briefly describe. x city policies 22 Is social media use being measured or evaluated? If yes, briefly describe. x Number of engagements and likes MARKETING AND PROMOTIONS 23 Does the system have seasonal marketing or fare promotions? If yes, briefly describe. x Free fare day 24 Does the system provide special or incentive fare programs, other than monthly passes? If yes, briefly describe. x 3 month pass 25 Is there a consistent marketing theme or brand in place connecting materials, facilities, and equipment? If yes, briefly describe. x Logo standards and color scheme, we have published guidelines that are followed 26 Does your system have local spokespeople that are recognized transit advocates? If yes, who are they? x Staff and transit advisory board 27 In 2018, did the system conduct any advertising or promotional campaigns (other than publishing a schedule)? If yes, briefly describe . x Advertising on UWO campus, in Senior Center newsletter 28 Do you communicate regularly with schools and employers to promote transit services? x CUSTOMER CONTACTS AND COMPLAINTS 29 How often do you receive questions regarding service (e.g., daily, weekly, monthly, occasionally)? Daily 30 How often do you receive comments or complaints regarding service (e.g., daily, weekly, monthly, occasionally)? weekly 18 Page 21 of 22 # Question Yes No Response MARKETING GO Transit 31 How many customer complaints were received in 2018? 3 32 How are complaint trends analyzed? By reviewing data. We look at complaints, and compare to see if any common cause / issue re occurs, and address as such. 33 Do you maintain a database of customer contacts / complaints? If yes, briefly describe the format (e.g., spreadsheet, database, etc). x database 34 Is there an established procedure for investigating and responding to passenger complaints? If yes, briefly describe. x Yes, complaint is logged in database and shared with staff, Ops. Supervisor or mgr. reviews the complaints, pulls video determines if they are valid, reponds to the customer and records the response 35 How are complaint trends analyzed? By reviewing data. We look at complaints, and compare to see if any common cause / issue re occurs, and address as such. 36 Do complaint reports go to the governing board?if needed Page 22 of 22