OF THE
HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
*******
MARCH 7, 2000
Presented By
William W. Millar
President
American Public Transportation Association
1201 New York Avenue, N. W.
Washington, DC 20005
(202) 898-4000
APTA is a nonprofit international association of over 1,270 member organizations including transit systems; planning, design, construction and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions; transit associations and state departments of transportation. APTA members serve the public interest by providing safe, efficient and economical transit services and products. Over ninety percent of persons using public transportation in the United States and Canada are served by APTA members.
Mr. Chairman, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA)
appreciates this opportunity to testify on the Fiscal Year (FY) 2001 Labor, Health and
Human Services, Education and Related Agencies Appropriations bill.
About APTA
APTA’s 1,270 member organizations serve the public interest by
providing safe, efficient and economical public transportation service, and by working to
ensure that those services and products support national transportation, energy,
environmental, community, and economic goals. APTA member organizations include transit
systems; design, construction and finance firms; product and service providers; academic
institutions, and state associations and departments of transportation. More than ninety
percent of the people who use transit in the U.S. are served by APTA member systems.
On the first day of this year, after a year-long strategic planning
effort, APTA adopted a new name to reflect the broader role that APTA member organizations
play in addressing the diverse transportation needs of our nation’s citizens –
The American Public Transportation Association. Our members chose "public
transportation" in lieu of "public transit" to better convey the full range
of transportation services that APTA members are engaged in -- managing mobility demands,
and delivering a range of transportation services in a number of ways, including
demand-response service, which is often not thought of as "transit." One thing
that has not changed however, is our basic message: public transportation can and does
make a difference in people’s lives, providing people with access to jobs, health
care, education, and other community services.
This is APTA’s third appearance before the Labor, Health and Human
Services, and Education Subcommittee. We testify before this Subcommittee again to make
the point that public transportation can make a difference in how people get to jobs,
health care, training, and other social services. According to the Federal Transit
Administration (FTA), 32 million senior citizens rely on transit as their driving ability
decreases with age; 27 million people with disabilities depend on transit to maintain
their independence; 37 million people living below the poverty level often cannot afford a
car and use transit to reach jobs. There are 56 million children under driving age, many
of whom use transit to travel to and from school and for after-school activities. Transit
ridership has grown by more than 16% over the past four years and annual ridership exceeds
the 9 billion mark.
Overview
Mr. Chairman, today we bring a message about the role public
transportation can and does play in providing services to millions of Americans. We ask
that the Subcommittee consider three issues of particular importance to public transit.
First, APTA requests that the Subcommittee direct the Department of Transportation (DOT)
and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to complete overdue joint
coordination guidelines on human services transportation as soon as possible. Second, we
urge the Subcommittee to highlight the role that public transportation can play in
providing cost-effective access to health care and to work—made better by improved
coordination. Finally, we urge the Subcommittee to continue to provide and encourage
flexibility with regard to HHS funding being used to pay for the transportation costs of
HHS clients—especially those individuals with special transportation needs. Transit
agencies have the expertise and infrastructure to provide transportation and we think that
social service agencies could save money on transportation service by working with transit
agencies. The federal government has already invested in public transportation. Let’s
not pay twice by allowing separate special purpose systems to be built and subsidized.
And transit is delivering, Mr. Chairman. U.S.
transit ridership was up 4.9% through the first nine months of 1999. Ridership is on the
rise in every mode, including nearly a 4% increase in demand response service. Moreover,
Mr. Chairman, these vital services, which provide the only source of mobility for
individuals with disabilities and our elderly population, are seeing a dramatic increase
in areas all across America—both rural and urban. Through last September, demand
response services were on the rise in places like Springfield, Illinois; Milwaukee,
Wisconsin; Pensacola, Florida; Waco, Texas; Fort Myers, Florida; Dallas, Texas; Miami,
Florida; Baltimore, Maryland; and Los Angeles, California.
Background
According to the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO), federal
efforts to streamline the delivery of human services transportation by DOT and HHS began
as early as 1986 with the establishment of a Coordinating Council. Over a course of years,
the Council successfully identified numerous barriers standing in the way of
transportation coordination. However, due to jurisdictional problems, the Council was
unable to fully respond to these barriers. Moreover, even when the Council reached out to
the States in the mid 1990’s, the majority of barriers that were identified were too
general to be acted upon with any significant federal response.
In FY 1997, report language first appeared in both the Transportation
and Related Agencies and Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations bills, calling
for the development of joint planning guidelines to specifically address the use of public
transportation in the delivery of human services transportation. APTA, having worked with
Congress to encourage this collaboration, was pleased that the bills directed DOT and HHS
to develop joint guidelines for coordination of transportation services, including joint
identification of human services client transportation needs and the appropriate mix of
transportation services to meet those needs; the expanded use of public transit services
to deliver human services program transportation; and cost-sharing arrangements based on a
uniform accounting system for HHS program recipients transported by paratransit systems.
Unfortunately, the guidelines have still not been completed. According
to GAO, DOT and HHS have engaged an outside contractor to move the process along.
In response to the extensive delays at the regulatory level, every DOT
appropriations bill between FY 1997-2000 has contained language directing the Council to
develop these joint guidelines. The most recent information we have indicates that the
guidelines are still in draft form, and may not be ready for release until FY 2001—a
full five fiscal years from when this Subcommittee first called for their development.
GAO Report Cites the Value of Transportation Coordination
The report issued by the GAO notes that transportation coordination can
have numerous benefits. It also recommends a number of ways that DOT and HHS can better
coordinate their activities. They include:
- requiring the Coordinating Council to issue a prioritized strategic plan by a specific
date.
- charging the Council with developing an action plan with specific responsibilities.
- requiring an annual report from the Council on its major initiatives and
accomplishments.
Mr. Chairman, APTA fully agrees with the recommendations made in the
GAO report. During this period of tight budget caps, every dollar dedicated to human
services transportation by transit agencies can be stretched further if coordination is
implemented at the federal level and encouraged at the State and local level. These long
overdue joint guidelines will be invaluable in providing policy guidance for coordination
activities by transportation agencies and human service providers at the local level. If
we can’t get the necessary guidance at the federal level, how can we expect
coordination at the local level? We again urge this Subcommittee to direct HHS and DOT to
complete their joint coordination guidelines as soon as possible, and to consider the
feasibility of involving other federal agencies, such as the Department of Labor, in the
process.
TEA 21 Planning Provisions
Mr. Chairman, we are pleased to note that the principal federal surface
transportation infrastructure investment law, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century (TEA 21), includes numerous provisions that deal specifically with the importance
of coordination of transportation activities. First, the bill requires DOT to encourage
metropolitan planning organizations in developing local transportation plans to coordinate
the design and delivery of transportation services by all entities receiving federal funds
for transportation purposes. Another TEA 21 section requires government agencies and
nonprofit organizations receiving assistance from government sources other than DOT for
non-emergency transportation services to coordinate the design and delivery of
transportation services. The law also requires transportation plans to be consistent with
air quality goals under the Clean Air Act. Clearly, transportation services are
coordinated with many federal programs to improve overall efficiency.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION PROVIDES AFFORDABLE ACCESS TO NON-EMERGENCY HEALTH CARE
Mr. Chairman, we continue to stress the importance of coordinating
transit service with other government functions because of the great potential for saving
tax dollars at all levels of government. To lower costs, non-driving outpatients may
travel to health care by transit. The alternative may be expensive taxi or ambulance
service. Rather than using paratransit services (which can cost 10 times the amount of
traditional transit fares), physically able clients can save themselves and human services
agencies significant money by taking other types of public transportation. For example,
across the nation, transit vans carry thousands of people to and from dialysis treatment,
saving as much as $200 to $400 per trip as compared to specialized medical transportation
services.
During the past decade, transit systems have made it
increasingly possible for transit services to be available to all Americans.
Wheelchair accessible buses increased from 40% of the fleet in 1990 to 77% of the fleet in
1999. Similarly, commuter rail operators reduced the number of non-accessible rail cars by
more than half over the same period. Moreover, virtually all fixed route bus service is
now accessible to individuals with disabilities.
In 1997, the Health Care Financing Administration estimated that it was
spending approximately $1.2 billion annually in non-emergency medical transportation.
Since then, many state Medicaid offices have found waste, fraud and abuse within their
transportation systems and have improved the delivery of transportation services at a
reduced cost by coordinating with local public transit operators. In fact, 20% of the
nation's Medicaid rides are now on public transit. According to the FTA, in four major
programs – Medicare, Medicaid, Food Stamps, and Unemployment Compensation – each
dollar invested in low-cost mobility services reduces the transportation cost of these
programs by approximately 60%.
PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION DELIVERS PEOPLE FROM WELFARE TO WORK
Transit Provides American’s Access to Jobs; Employers Gain Access
to New Talent
During the late 1990’s, Congress and the 50 States took positive
steps to get people off welfare and into the workforce. At the same time, a healthy
economy has created thousands of new jobs. However, due to America’s changing
landscape and the growth of suburban sprawl, many of these new jobs are located in the
suburbs. How can we bring people who live in central cities, many of whom have no
automobile, out to where the jobs are? Public transportation agencies, in coordination
with State and local social service agencies and the private sector, have responded to the
challenge.
One of the best examples of a successful access to work program (and
the value of coordination) is New Jersey Transit’s "WorkPass"
Program—a comprehensive transportation service and educational program developed to
assist public and non-profit agencies in their efforts to move people from welfare to
work. The program has provided assistance to more than 50 public and non-profit
organizations, including county welfare agencies, Medicare agencies, and other social
service organizations who offer public assistance for transportation to jobs, medical
assistance and childcare. Partnering with the New Jersey Department of Transportation as
well as the State’s human services agency, New Jersey Transit was able to have a
working program within one month, and more than 5,000 monthly passes and one-way tickets
are purchased by WorkPass members each month. The transit agency notes that the success of
the program is due to the partnerships it has formed and its ability to adapt to the
different agencies seeking its services.
WorkPass is more than just a pass sales program—it has a
comprehensive training program which has trained more than 500 welfare and other social
service agency representatives. These representatives are taught to read schedules,
determine fares and accessibility and provide special transportation services to their
clients. New Jersey Transit provides each member with a resource center stocked with
schedules, maps, fare charts and other transit information. WorkPass provides participants
with access to job training and education, employment opportunities, medical visits, and
childcare—all while learning the valuable commuting skills they need to succeed when
employed.
And, Mr. Chairman, the cost savings as a result of this program have
been tremendous. Under the WorkPass Program, instead of providing their clients with a $6
per diem, welfare agencies reduce transportation costs by using bus and rail monthly
passes. County welfare agencies are saving between 50%-60% on each WorkPass
participant—an estimated $2 million saved in transportation costs for its members.
More Coordination Needed To Deliver People from Welfare to Work
Mr. Chairman, the successful New Jersey program is representative of
the commitment the entire U.S. transit industry has put forth in the effort to assist
individuals making the difficult transition from welfare to work. In October 1998, an APTA
Access to Jobs Task Force was created to help coordinate and assess APTA member welfare to
work activities. New services include new routes to employment locations outside the
existing service area; more direct service to reduce very long trip times; late night and
early morning service; so-called reverse commute service; and shuttles from rail stations
and the ends of bus routes to dispersed job locations. The negative impact that these
extra efforts may have on transit budgets is easily outweighed by the changes the programs
have made in people’s lives.
APTA believes that an awareness of problems encountered by
organizations in their welfare to work activities may help other agencies avoid the
pitfalls that could reduce the effectiveness of their welfare to work programs. Therefore,
we asked our member organizations to describe some of the most common problems that they
have encountered in implementing welfare to work activities. Not surprisingly, APTA’s
1999 Access-To-Work Best Practices Survey Summary Report reveals that throughout
America, the lack of coordination is the number one reason that some well intentioned
welfare to work projects have fallen short of goals.
For example, lack of coordination has hampered programs in Missouri. In
St. Louis, there has been a lack of meaningful cooperation with the training staffs of
human services agencies. Also, City Utilities of Springfield has experienced difficulty in
coordinating information from all the various social service agencies involved with their
welfare to work program. In fact, in order for them to put together a comprehensive
regional plan, the assistance of an outside consulting company was required to gather all
information. Moreover, in Texas, transportation coordination with human services agencies
is sorely needed in the Fort Worth Transportation Authority’s (The T) attempt to
identify employers willing to hire welfare recipients, and to find strong candidates for
certain jobs. Moreover, the transit agency says that coordinating various funding sources
has been quite difficult—local social services partners are burdened with the task of
tracking separate data from separate Federal agencies, including DOL and HUD. This
requirement has been a major barrier in streamlining funding for Tarrant County’s
welfare to work initiatives.
Some 94% of welfare recipients attempting to move into the workforce do
not own cars and must rely on public transportation to get to work. And while 60% of
welfare recipients live in central cities, the majority of new jobs are in the suburbs. If
we as a nation wish to continue the positive trends in getting more people into decent,
productive employment, we must provide the necessary coordination and guidance at the
federal level to get them there. In the TEA 21 section authorizing the Job Access and
Reverse Commute Program, DOT is required to "coordinate activities with related
activities under programs of other federal departments and agencies." Eligible Access
to Jobs projects financed under that section must be "part of a coordinated public
transit-human services transportation planning process." Mr. Chairman, we need the
help of the Coordinating Council’s joint guidelines in order to fully implement this
provision.
Mr. Chairman, we’ve come so far in the last ten years with respect
to providing people on public assistance with access to decent jobs. But without a
concerted effort to improve coordination at the federal level, there’s a limit on the
amount of services our transit agencies and state DOT’s can provide. Coordination is
absolutely crucial to the future success of the welfare to work initiative. We urge you to
direct HHS and DOT to finalize the long-overdue guidelines that can take the Job Access
Program to the next level.
INCREASED FUNDS ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN ADA COMPLIANCE STANDARDS
Since the enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act,
transit agencies have made huge progress in their effort to ensure that all forms of
public transportation are accessible to individuals with disabilities. But public
investment for further on-vehicle lift, ramp and station improvements must keep pace in
order for transit agencies to maintain Federal standards. More than 100 million trips were
provided on demand responsive public transit in 1999, at an estimated total capital and
operating cost of $1.4 billion. Accordingly, APTA urges this Subcommittee to continue to
provide and encourage flexibility with regard to HHS funding being used to pay for the
transportation costs of HHS clients. This is also an area where the joint guidelines would
go far in ensuring HHS programs retain their commitment to making adequate transportation
resources available.
CONCLUSION
In closing, Mr. Chairman, we again thank you for this opportunity to
appear before your Subcommittee to bring our message about the critical role public
transportation can and does play in providing services to millions of Americans. We ask
that in developing the FY 2001 Labor, Health and Human Services and Education bill, the
Subcommittee direct the Department of Transportation and the Department of Health and
Human Services to complete overdue joint coordination guidelines on human services
transportation that have been requested by Congress since FY 1997. Second, we urge the
Subcommittee to highlight the role that public transportation can play in providing
cost-effective access to health care and to work—made better by improved
coordination. Finally, we urge the Subcommittee to continue to provide and encourage
flexibility with regard to HHS funding being used to pay for the transportation costs of
HHS clients—especially those individuals with special transportation needs.
Once again, thank you for this opportunity to testify before the Labor,
Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee. We would be pleased to provide you
additional information to assist you in your deliberations.
Some of these pages may include links to documents in the Adobe PDF format. Please download the Adobe PDF reader if you have not already done so.
