APPLYING A TRAVEL TRAINING COST BENEFIT
MODEL FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
2011 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD
ANNUAL MEETING: WASHINGTON, DC
Karen Wolf-Branigin
Easter Seals Project Action
Washington, DC
Michael Wolf-Branigin
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA
Kevin Welch and JD Culver
Paratransit, Inc.
Sacramento, CA
APPLYING A TRAVEL TRAINING COST BENEFIT MODEL FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
2011 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD ANNUAL MEETING: WASHINGTON, DC
Purpose
Travel training services exemplify livable communities through accessibility. Public transportation providers
agree that solutions must be identified to curb the high cost of specialized services to people with disabilities.
Simultaneously avoiding costly ADA paratransit services and increasing the independence and mobility of
people with disabilities through travel training services provides everyone with a mutual win. We designed
1)
2)
3)
a budget template with line item expenses
a formula to ascertain distinct travel training costs
A method to determine the benefits of travel training services and ascertain the degree to which
travel training services saved or diverted costs for public transportation providers (funders)
In this first attempt at applying the replicable model, we sought to understand the costs and benefits of travel
training to public transportation providers.
APPLYING A TRAVEL TRAINING COST BENEFIT MODEL FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
2011 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD ANNUAL MEETING: WASHINGTON, DC
Method
Using the method provided by Wolf-Branigin & Wolf-Branigin (2010), three cities receiving travel training
services from Paratransit, Inc. were studied. The initial cost/benefit model included methods for estimating a
benefit/cost ration and net benefits from three perspectives; the travel trainee, the public transportation
provider (funder), and the community. For the purpose of this study, we focused solely on the public
transportation provider perspective. The specific calculation included
Cost of vehicles and equipment to provide travel training services (a)
Cost of travel training personnel (b)
Cost of supplies, equipment and occupancy (c)
Projected savings to the public transportation provider (funder) (x)
Projected trainee taxes (from wages) paid to support local transit agency (y)
Cost avoidance (difference in cost of an ADA paratransit trip minus a fixed route trip) (z)
Benefit & Cost Calculations – Public Transportation Provider
Benefits = (x) + (y) + ( z)
Costs = (a) + (b) + (c)
`
B/C Ratio = ((x) + (y) + (z)) / ((a) +(b) + (c))
Net Benefit = ((x) + (y) + (z)) – ((a) + (b) + (c))
APPLYING A TRAVEL TRAINING COST BENEFIT MODEL FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
2011 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD ANNUAL MEETING: WASHINGTON, DC
Results
The calculations for the three cities were:
City
1
2
3
B/C Ratio
$389,561/$187,739
$1,101,817/$760,517
$589,000/$148,082
= 2.07
= 1.45
= 3.98
Net Benefits
$201,822
$341,300
$440,918
Conclusions
Applying a cost benefit model to travel training services appears to
1) Measure improvements in community livability for people with disabilities
2) Assist public transportation providers improve their decision making
3) Save public transportation providers financial resources
4) Contribute to the sustainability of local transportation systems
Given the assumption that the public transportation provider (funder) will garner the lowest benefit/cost ratio,
compared to the trainee and community, these findings suggest that travel training services provide an effective
and efficient alternative for public transportation providers seeking to reduce or avoid ADA paratransit costs
APPLYING A TRAVEL TRAINING COST BENEFIT MODEL FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
2011 TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD ANNUAL MEETING: WASHINGTON, DC
Recommendations
Public transportation providers funding travel training services should
1) Require that those delivering travel training services submit the necessary information in order to
improve decision making
2) Analyze the data from these internal or contract travel training personnel
3) Use the results as a decision tool and rationale to expand travel training services, if cost savings are
derived
4) Share knowledge about the benefits of travel training services with other public transportation
providers
To improve the cost-benefit model for multiple year projections, we suggest
1) Developing estimates for the proportion of trainees who complete travel training and remain users of
the fixed route systems
2) Including discounting rates into the model
3) Improving the method for obtaining individual trainee benefits that may include sampling