Government Affairs |
 |
LOS ANGELES, CA, LOS ANGELES METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Program Name and Description: MTA [Metropolitan
Transportation Authority] Human Resources and GAIN [Los Angeles County welfare-to-work
program] program collaboration. Through collaboration with the GAIN program, the MTA Human
Resources Department actively recruits GAIN participants to apply for and compete in the
selection process for bus operator position with the MTA. Previous recruitment efforts
prior to November 1997 focused on filling part-time bus operator positions. The positions
available are not specifically set aside for GAIN participants, but are open to the
general public. The unique aspect of the program is the collaboration between GAIN
representatives and the MTA Human Resources Department to identify "job-ready"
recipients to apply and compete for the bus operator positions. |
Location of Opportunity: The bus operator
positions are positions working for the MTA, at MTA facilities. |
Type of Opportunity: The job opportunities for
GAIN participants are for both full-time and part-time positions with the MTA. Bus
operator positions range from 15 to 50 hours per week. GAIN staff is informed of all MTA
job opportunities in monthly meetings that are held with MTA Human Resources staff. |
Duration of Program: This collaborative effort
has been in place since September 1997 to the present, February 1998. |
Success of Program: These efforts have produced
mixed results. The MTA has been able to attract a sizeable number of GAIN applicants for
the bus operator positions. However, given that the selection process for bus operator has
multiple phases, this has substantially reduced the number of individuals who are able to
successfully pass all phases of the process. One very positive aspect of the
program for the GAIN participants who are re-entering the workforce is the experience of
competing in a multi-phase selection process typically required to secure a job in a
public agency. The MTA Human Resources staff is also able to provide feedback regarding
applicants' strengths and weaknesses, in the selection process to GAIN Job Developers who
are attempting to place GAIN participants. |
Difficulties with Program: No. Although the bus
operator positions and other MTA job opportunities are not specifically set aside for GAIN
participants, but are open to the general public, they have provided a great opportunity
for GAIN to work with a major employer and establish in a collaborative fashion employment
opportunities for "job ready" qualified GAIN participants. These efforts have
received strong support from the MTA Board of Directors. |
MINNEAPOLIS, MN, METRO TRANSIT
Program Name and Description: Metro Transit is
working directly with counties and employment referral agencies to encourage referral of
clients to Metro Transit for open driver positions. Internally we have created a mentoring
program in order to extend the relationship between student and instructor. In addition,
Metro Transit provides information to trainees regarding child care referral sources and
other companies offering part-time job opportunities that may work in conjunction with
Metro Transit employment. We have also held commuter services (rideshare) open houses in
each garage to encourage employees to link together to obtain/provide rides to work. |
Location of Opportunity: Jobs are at Metro
Transit. |
Type of Opportunity: Most opportunities are
part-time. |
Duration of Program: 1997. |
Success of Program: Metro Transit has had
minimal success attracting welfare-to-work clients. However, it is also difficult to track
such clients. |
Difficulties with Program: The counties have
indicated reluctance in referring welfare clients for part-time jobs. Concerns raised
include the part-time earnings, hours of work, impact on availability of child care and
the ability to qualify for benefits (welfare-to-work) when accepting a part- versus a
full-time job. |
ORLANDO, FL, LYNX aka CENTRAL FLORIDA REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
Program Name and Description: Our two major
training programs are for our bus operator and customer service positions. LYNX has
positions that require no previous experience and have complete training programs. |
Location of Opportunity: The positions LYNX
recruits for are for our organization. |
Type of Opportunity: Our bus operators are
full- or part-time with training, our CSRs [customer service representatives] are
primarily full-time with training, and we recruit for other positions with training
components. |
Duration of Program: The full-time bus operator
position training has been in place many years, the part-time bus operator training has
just been established, and the CSR training has also been in place for multiple years. |
Success of Program: The programs have been very
successful in that they are providing our new employees with the skills they will need to
be an asset to our community. |
Difficulties with Program: No, these programs
pre-date the WAGES [Work and Gain Economic Self-Sufficiency Program, Florida state
employment program enacted in 1996] plan to move recipients to work. |
NEW YORK, NY, PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF QUADE & DOUGLAS, INC.
Program Name and Description: Although Parsons
Brinckerhoff does not have a formal Welfare-to-Work Program, over the past five years we
have worked with such organizations as the Vocational Foundation and the City Mission
Cadet Corps to create employment opportunities for disadvantaged youths. These are
non-profit organizations which work with young people who have not had the opportunity to
learn the skills they need to become active members of New York City's workforce. They
provide computer training and then work with different companies to place them in either
full-time or part-time positions.
In New York, Parsons Brinckerhoff has also worked with the New York
City Schools Construction Authority, an organization that places high school students for
six weeks in the summer. The students are paid by the Construction Authority. Every year
we have four to five students working in the headquarters office in NYC and generally two
or three are placed on the Parsons Brinckerhoff payroll after the six weeks are completed
to give them employment for the remainder of the summer.
In the Parsons Brinckerhoff office in Herndon, VA, students are hired
on a regular basis from Herndon High School for part-time work. In addition our employment
recruiter for that office has established a relationship with the Chantilly Technical High
School and they expect to hire students from that program. Parsons Brinckerhoff is now in
the process of establishing a formal Welfare-to-Work Program which will enhance the
programs that have already been developed in individual offices. |
Location of Opportunity: Several offices. |
Type of Opportunity: Various, see program
descriptions. |
Duration of Program: Over past five years, with
New York City Schools Construction Authority since 1992. |
Success of Program: We have placed eleven
applicants from the Vocational Foundation in a variety of clerical positions, three of
whom are still working at Parsons Brinckerhoff on a full-time basis, two for over four
years. The success has not been as good with the City Mission Cadet Corps. Two applicants
were hired but neither one is still with the company. Two of the New York City Schools
Construction Authority students are now working for Parsons Brinckerhoff full-time and one
student comes back every summer and during winter break. It has been a very successful
program. |
Difficulties with Program: [No comment made.] |
PORT ARTHUR, TX, PORT ARTHUR TRANSIT
Program Name and Description: Driver Externship
Program B provides on-the-job training to
individuals wishing to drive buses or large vans. (They must possess or be actively
seeking a Commercial Drivers License [CDL].) |
Location of Opportunity: Within the City of
Port Arthur, there are opportunities for people that possess a Class A or B CDL. |
Type of Opportunity: Jobs range from full-time
to temporary, as needed only positions. |
Duration of Program: The Driver Externship
Program, in conjunction with the Tri State Driving School, was implemented in 1992. |
Success of Program: Very successful. |
Difficulties with Program: No. |
NEWARK, NJ, NEW JERSEY TRANSIT CORPORATION (NJ TRANSIT)
Program Name and Description: Community Work
Experience Program [CWEP], a program administered by New Jersey Department of Human
Services as part of the Work First New Jersey Business Link Program. It is designed to
provide welfare recipients with work skills and provide community service. |
Location of Opportunity: Most work as clerical
assistants. |
Type of Opportunity: We provide training
opportunities which could lead to full-time employment. To date, we have hired 4 or 5
individuals for permanent positions. |
Duration of Program: Began September 1996. |
Success of Program: Very few CWEP participants
complete the on-the-job training program and there is tremendous turnover of participants.
Some do take it seriously and obtain jobs on their own or at NJ Transit. |
Difficulties with Program: The difficulty is
that there are not enough entry level opportunities and the CWEP workers must compete with
more skilled candidates. |
SAN DIEGO, CA, SAN DIEGO TRANSIT CORPORATION
Program Name and Description: The GAIN [San
Diego County welfare-to-work] program through County of San Diego, Job Training Unit
working with recipients of AFDC [Aid to Families with Dependant Children]. GAIN provides
referrals and screening. Job Start, County of San Diego subsidized training for TANF
[Temporary Assistance for Needy Families] recipients. |
Location of Opportunity: At San Diego Transit
primarily as bus operators. |
Type of Opportunity: Full-time, part-time and
training in the bus operator job category. |
Duration of Program: GAIN Program referrals
have been in operation six months. Job Start, the subsidized training program, is in
implementation phase. |
Success of Program: GAIN Program has been
successful, 19 applicants hired, 19 retained. (These statistics are preliminary.) |
Difficulties with Program: No significant
barriers. |
ST. LOUIS, MO, BI-STATE DEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Program Name and Description: Futures. We work
closely with the local office of Futures to make all jobs available. |
Location of Opportunity: Jobs are within our
organization. |
Type of Opportunity: All of the above
[full-time, part-time, jobs, training]. Retail store representatives and parking garage
attendants. |
Duration of Program: Almost one year. |
Success of Program: We have hired 17 welfare
applicants since inception. |
Difficulties with Program: None. |
ORANGE, CA, ORANGE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Program Name and Description: Avenues to
Success: Provides welfare recipients and other economically disadvantaged persons with
employment and training opportunities ranging from coach operators, maintenance, and
administrative support. |
Location of Opportunity: Jobs provided are
through the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA). |
Type of Opportunity: Most opportunities are
full-time and normally offer benefits. |
Duration of Program: The program began October
1997. |
Success of Program: Avenues to Success has
experienced very positive results in the employment of welfare recipients and economically
disadvantaged persons. At present OCTA has hired eleven persons in this target group. OCTA
is committed to employing many more of these motivated and willing individuals. |
Difficulties with Program: OCTA has received a
great deal of support and recognition from various community and government agencies
providing assistance and services to welfare recipients and economically disadvantaged
persons. |
SEATTLE, WA, KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION/METRO
Program Name and Description: (1) Attempted to
create operator training/employment for ADA [Americans with Disabilities Act] contractors
who hire welfare-to-work employee. Proposing (exploring) similar operator
training/employment program with the Private Industry Council. |
Location of Opportunity: Jobs are with
contracting ADA paratransit operators. |
Type of Opportunity: Full-time with contractor.
Part-time if agency provides and trains operators. |
Duration of Program: Less than one year. |
Success of Program: Program with operators and
Private Industry Council identified eleven possible clients. Two successfully completed
training and are currently driving. |
Difficulties with Program: The primary
difficulties are: (1) base location (they are difficult to access), (2) hot employment
market makes getting/retaining operators very difficult, (3) with regular system, the
bargaining agreement only guarantees 2.5 hours, this makes it difficult for TANF clients,
and (4) some bases lack child care. |
SURVEY PARTICIPANTS
The American Public Transit Association would like to thank the
following organizations which participated in this survey:
AC Transit, Oakland, CA
Albany Transit System, Albany, GA
Altamont Commuter Express/San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission,
Stockton, CA
Ames Transit Agency, Ames, IA
Ann Arbor Transportation Authority, Ann Arbor, MI
Anoka County Transit, Anoka, MN
AppalCART, Boone, NC
Arvin Ride Control Products, St. Charles, IL
Athens Transit System - The Bus, Athens, GA
Battle Creek Transit, Battle Creek, MI
Bay Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Bay City, MI
Birmingham-Jefferson County Transit Authority, Birmingham, AL
Bi-State Development Agency, St. Louis, MO
Blue Water Area Transportation Commission, Port Huron, MI
Boise Urban Stages, Boise, ID
Bombardier Transit Corporation, Barre, VT
Broward County Mass Transit Division, Pompano Beach, FL
Buckeye Steel Castings GSI Engineering, Columbus, OH
California Department of Transportation Mass Transportation Program,
Sacramento, CA
Capital Area Transit Authority, Lansing, MI
Capital District Transportation Authority, Albany, NY
Central Connecticut Regional Planning Agency, Bristol, CT
Central New York Regional Transportation Authority, Syracuse, NY
Central Ohio Transit Authority, Columbus, OH
Centre Area Transportation Authority, State College, PA
Charlotte Department of Transportation, Charlotte, NC
Chelan-Douglas Public Transportation Benefit Area, Wenatchee, WA
Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago, IL
Chittenden County Transportation Authority, Burlington, VT
Citizens Area Transit, Las Vegas, NV
City and County of Honolulu Department of Transportation Services,
Honolulu, HI
City of Albuquerque Transit Department, SunTran, Albuquerque, NM
City of Charleston Transit Administration, Charleston, SC
City of Detroit Department of Transportation, Detroit, MI
City of Fairfax CUE Bus, Fairfax, VA
City of Philadelphia Mayor's Office of Transportation, Philadelphia, PA
City of Phoenix Transit Department, Phoenix, AZ
City of Visalia, Visalia City Coach, Visalia, CA
City Utilities of Springfield, MO, Springfield, MO
Clallam Transit System, Port Angeles, WA
Clark County Public Transportation Benefit Area Authority, Vancouver,
WA
Clemson Area Transit System, Clemson, SC
Clinton Municipal Transit Administration, Clinton, IA
Coastal Rapid Public Transit Authority, Conway, SC
Colorado Department of Transportation, Denver, CO
Connecticut Department of Transportation, Newington, CT
Connecticut Transit Hartford System, Hartford, CT
Contract Compliance, Inc., Villanova, PA
Controlled Power Corporation, Canton, OH
Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc., San Diego, CA
Dallas Area Rapid Transit, Dallas, TX
Dan Peter Kopple and Associates, Philadelphia, PA
DART First State, Dover, DE
Detroit Diesel Corporation, Detroit, MI
DigiMetrix. Inc., Santee, CA
Drummac, Inc., Jacksonville, FL
DuPont Advanced Glazing Products, Circleville, OH
Dynamic Engineering, St. Louis, MO
Eastern Contra Costa Transit Authority, Antioch, CA
El Paso Mass Transit Department - Sun Metro, El Paso, TX
Escambia County Area Transit, Pensacola, FL
Excel Industries, Inc., Elkhart, IN
Fargo Metropolitan Area Transit System, Fargo, ND
Florida Department of Transportation, Tallahassee, FL
Fond du Lac Area Transit, Fond du Lac, WI
Foothill Transit, West Covina, CA
Fort Wayne Public Transportation Corporation, Fort Wayne, IN
Fort Worth Transportation Authority, Fort Worth, TX
Fresno Area Express, Fresno, CA
Fresno County Rural Transit Agency, Fresno, CA
Glendale Transit, Glendale, AZ
Golden Empire Transit District, Bakersfield, CA
Grand Rapids Area Transit Authority, Grand Rapids, MI
Greater Bridgeport Transit District, Bridgeport, CT
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, Cleveland, OH
Greater Hartford Transit District, Hartford, CT
Greater Lafayette Public Transportation Corporation, Lafayette, IN
Greater Richmond Transit Company, Richmond, VA
Greensboro Transit Authority, Greensboro, NC
Guam Mass Transit Authority, Agana, GU
Hillsborough Area Regional Transit, Tampa, FL
Housatonic Area Regional Transit, Danbury, CT
Huntsville Shuttle Bus System, Huntsville, AL
ICF KAISER ENGINEERS, INC., Fairfax, VA
Idaho Transportation Department, Boise, ID
Indiana County Transit Authority, Indiana, PA
Indianapolis Public Transportation Corporation, Indianapolis, IN
Intercity Transit Authority, Olympia, WA
Iowa City Transit, Iowa City, IA
Jackson Public Transportation Co, Inc. (JATRAN), Jackson, MS
Kalamazoo Metro Transit System, Kalamazoo, MI
Kansas City Area Transportation Authority, Kansas City, MO
KFH Group, Incorporated, Bethesda, MD
King County Department of Transportation/Metro, Seattle, WA
Kitsap Transit, Bremerton, WA
KKO and Associates, Inc., Andover, MA
Krapf's Coaches, Inc., West Chester, PA
LaCrosse Municipal Transit Utility, LaCrosse, WI
LAKETRAN, Paineville, OH
Laredo Municipal Transit System, Laredo, TX
Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority, Allentown, PA
Livermore/Amador Valley Transit Authority, Livermore, CA
LKG-CMC, Inc., Los Angeles, CA
Long Beach Transit, Long Beach, CA
Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles,
CA
Loves Park Transit System, Loves Park, IL
LUMINATOR, A MARK IV INDUSTRIES Company, Plano, TX
LYNX - Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, Orlando, FL
Madison Metro Transit System, Madison, WI
Manatee County Area Transit, Bradenton, FL
Mass Transit Administration of Maryland, Baltimore, MD
Mass Transportation Authority, Flint, MI
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, Boston, MA
Massachusetts Executive Office of Transportation and Construction,
Boston, MA
Matra Transport International Corporation, Maywood, NJ
McDonough Associates, Inc., Chicago, IL
Memphis Area Transit Authority, Memphis, TN
Metra, Chicago, IL
METRO Regional Transit Authority, Akron, OH
Metro Transit, Minneapolis, MN
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Atlanta, GA
Metropolitan Transit Authority, Nashville, TN
Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County, Houston, TX
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, New York, NY
Metropolitan Tulsa Transit Authority, Tulsa, OK
Miami Valley Regional Transit Authority, Dayton, OH
Miami-Dade Transit Agency, Miami, FL
Michigan Department of Transportation, Lansing, MI
Mid Ohio Regional Planning Commission, Columbus, OH
Mid-County Transit Authority, Kittanning, PA
Mid-Ohio Valley Transit Authority, Parkersburg, WV
Milwaukee County Transit System, Milwaukee, WI
Montebello Bus Lines, Montebello, CA
MTA, Incorporated - Consulting Engineers, Chicago, IL
MTA Long Island Bus, Garden City, NY
MTA Long Island Rail Road, Jamaica, NY
MTA New York City Transit, Brooklyn, NY
MTA Metro-North Railroad, New York, NY
Muncie Public Transit Corporation, Muncie, IN
New Jersey Transit Corporation, Newark, NJ
Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority, Buffalo, NY
Northeast Transportation Co., Inc., Waterbury, CT
Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District, Chesterton, IN
Northern Virginia Transportation Commission, Arlington, VA
Nova BUS Corporation, Roswell, NM
OMNITRANS, San Bernardino, CA
Orange County Transportation Authority, Orange, CA
Palm Tran - Palm Beach County Surface Transportation Department, West
Palm Beach, FL
Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc. New York, NY
Parsons Brinckerhoff Tudor-Turner Associates, Atlanta, GA
Pee Dee Regional Transportation Authority, Florence, SC
Peninsula Transportation District Commission, Hampton, VA
Pierce Transit, Tacoma, WA
Pioneer Valley Transit Authority, Springfield, MA
Port Arthur Transit, Port Arthur, TX
Port Authority of Allegheny County, Pittsburgh, PA
Port Authority Trans-Hudson Corporation, Jersey City, NJ
Red Rose Transit Authority, Lancaster, PA
Regional Transit System, Gainesville, FL
Regional Transportation District, Denver, CO
Riverside County Transportation Commission, Riverside, CA
Rock Island County Metropolitan Mass Transit District, Rock Island, IL
Rockford Mass Transit District, Rockford, IL
Sacramento Regional Transit District, Sacramento, CA
SAFT America Inc., Cockeysville, MD
Saginaw Transit System, Saginaw, MI
Salem Area Mass Transit District, Salem, OR
San Diego Transit Corporation, San Diego, CA
San Diego Trolley, San Diego, CA
San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District, Oakland, CA
San Francisco Public Transportation Commission, San Francisco, CA
San Luis Transit, San Luis Obispo, CA
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority, San Jose, CA
Santa Clarita Transit, Santa Clarita, CA
Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District, Santa Cruz, CA
Santee Wateree Regional Transportation Authority, Sumter, SC
Sarasota County Area Transit, Sarasota, FL
SG Associates, Annandale, VA
Skagit Transit, Burlington, WA
Smart Shuttle, Inc., Los Angeles, CA
Snohomish County Public Transportation Benefit Area Corporation,
Lynnwood, WA
South Coast Area Transit, Oxnard, CA
Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, Philadelphia, PA
Southern California Regional Rail Authority, Los Angeles, CA
Southwest Metro Transit Commission, Eden Prairie, MN
Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority, Cincinnati, OH
Space Coast Area Transit, Melbourne, FL
Spokane Transit Authority, Spokane, WA
Springs Transit, Colorado Springs, CO
Stark Area Regional Transit Authority, Canton, OH
St. Joseph Transit, St. Joseph, MO
Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation, Detroit, MI
Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO
Tapeswitch Corporation, Farmingdale, NY
Temple Transit/City of Temple, Texas, Temple, TX
Texas Department of Transportation, Austin, TX
The Transit Authority, Huntington, WV
Tidewater Transportation District Commission, Norfolk, VA
Toledo Area Regional Transit Authority, Toledo, OH
Topeka Metropolitan Transit Authority, Topeka, KS
Transit Authority of Lexington-Fayette Urban County Government-LexTran,
Lexington, KY
Transit Authority of Northern Kentucky, Fort Wright, KY
Transit Express, Milwaukee, WI
Transit Management of Tucson, SunTran, Tucson, AZ
Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District of Oregon, Portland, OR
Tyler Transit, Tyler, TX
Ventura County Transportation Commission, Ventura, CA
VIA Metropolitan Transit, San Antonio, TX
Virginia Transit Association, Richmond, VA
Waco Transit System, Waco, TX
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority, Washington, DC
Waukesha Metro Transit, Waukesha, WI
Westmoreland County Transit Authority, Greensburg, PA
Whatcom Transportation Authority, Bellingham, WA
Williamsburg County Transit System, Kingstree, SC
Winston-Salem Transit Authority, Winston-Salem, NC
Worcester Regional Transit Authority, Worcester, MA
York County Transportation Authority, York, PA
CONCLUSION
The APTA Access to Work Task Force and Jobs Task Force conducted a
Welfare-to-Work Survey in the winter and early spring of 1998. Two hundred and eighteen
organizations participated in the survey, including 180 transportation providers and 38
businesses and other organizations that do not operate transportation service.
Transportation providers provided descriptions of new transportation services that include
85 supplemental work trip service programs, 63 reverse commute programs, 41 new special
transportation services programs, and 43 vanpool programs. Other transportation service
providers noted that their current system is highly adapted to welfare-to-work type
services and that they are concentrating on information provision, fare subsidization, and
improvements to their existing transit services before implementing totally new services.
Fifty-three participants included detailed descriptions of training and job creation
programs designed to train and employ welfare-to-work candidates. Additional transit
systems and businesses noted that they make specific efforts to provide employment
opportunity information to welfare offices and to employ qualifying candidates, but do not
have formal programs.
Among ideas that were frequently noted to be important for successful
programs:
Coordination and cooperation with other agencies is essential to
maximize success. Agencies included in programs were government welfare and employment
agencies, social service agencies, other transit systems, metropolitan planning
organizations, private transportation service providers, community agencies such as
neighborhood organizations and churches, and private service providers such as day-care
providers.
Build on the services your agency already provides to make sure that
existing service is fully utilized for welfare-to-work travel. Information, cooperation,
and travel subsidies may improve transportation opportunities more quickly than new
services.
Travel education and information are basic. Welfare caseworkers and job
counselors need to be familiar with transit options before they can direct their clients.
Many systems are working to make interactive travel information available to caseworkers
and clients in order to establish travel plans before going to job interviews.
Putting services together in a single accessible location has been
noted to be very successful. These locations often include training services, welfare
services, employment services, and day care.
The biggest difficulty for many systems is funding. The systems have
proposals that would greatly improve welfare-to-work transportation services but cannot
implement them until funding is available.
The addition of new services is very important to fill voids in
existing services. Frequently described new services include new routes to employment
locations outside the existing service area, more direct service to reduce very long trip
times where current service is indirect, service later at night and earlier in the morning
to meet extended hours of many entry-level service jobs, increased service in the opposite
direction of existing peak service, and shuttles from rail stations and the ends of bus
routes to dispersed employment locations.
APPENDIX: SURVEY FORMS
Two survey forms, Part A: Transit Agency Activities to Provide
Transportation to Work and Part B: Transit Job Creation and Training Activities, were sent
to APTA members as described on the first page of each survey. An initial request was
mailed in January 1998 and a follow up form in March 1998.
The survey forms are reproduced below with the following changes from
the originals in order to improve readability in this format: the typesize is reduced, the
original pagination is deleted, extra lines provided in the originals for written comments
are removed, and mailing and other process information is deleted.
SURVEY FORM PART A: Transit Agency Activities to Provide Transportation
to Work
Welfare-to-Work Survey
Part A: Transit Agency Activities to Provide Transportation to Work
An APTA Access-to-Work Task Force and an APTA Jobs Task Force have been
formed by the Executive Committee of the American Public Transit Association (APTA). These
task forces, composed of APTA members, have been asked to determine the extent of transit
efforts to improve access-to-work service and to determine transit efforts to increase job
opportunities for currently unemployed persons. This survey, Part A, is for APTA Transit
System Members only and asks questions concerning transportation to work. A separate Part
B, which is for both APTA Transit System Members and Business Members, asks questions
about transit system and business employment and training opportunities. Copies of both
parts of the survey are being sent to all APTA members for their information and any APTA
member should feel free to complete both Parts A and B if they are involved in
welfare-to-work activities. Please complete and return Parts A and B by February 20, 1998
to the address on the final page.
The APTA Task Forces would also like to provide APTA members with
information on successful access-to-work initiatives and new employment and training
activities by transit agencies and businesses. Please include with your survey responses
any currently available brochures or reports that describe your current access-to-work and
job creation programs so that we may share information on your successful programs with
other APTA members. Please coordinate your enclosures with the person who completes Part B
of this survey.
This survey is intended to obtain information on any efforts by your
agency to provide transportation between home and work other than your regular fixed route
scheduled service and your regular demand-responsive service. The service may be called
"welfare-to-work service," "access-to-jobs service,"
"reverse-commute service," or some other name. Please feel free to provide
additional information or to explain your response on additional sheets or in marginal
notes.
I. Respondent ID Information:
Transit System Name _____________________________________________
City___________________________State____________________________
Person Completing Survey _________________________________________
Telephone Number _______________________________________________
II. Transit System Activities to Provide Access-to-Work
A. Name and telephone number of contact person for additional
information about Part A.
Name ____________________________________ Telephone _____________________
B. Has your agency added supplemental work travel oriented service
on pre-existing regular routes? Yes ___; No ___. If "Yes," please answer the
following (if more than one mode, please answer on a separate sheet for each mode):
1. Mode of service, e.g., bus, demand response, etc.
______________________________
2. When was extra service first added: before 1995___; 1995___;
1996___; 1997___; 1998___; planned for the future ___.
3. Is service operated in cooperation or coordination with another
agency or entity?
Yes ___; No ___.
If "Yes," mark all that apply:
a. ___ Human Services agency that does not operate transportation
b. ___ Human Services agency that does operate transportation
c. ___ Other agency (describe) ____________________.
4. Is service financially supported, in whole or in part, by another
government agency, non-profit agency, or private company? Yes ___; No ___. If
"Yes," list agencies or types of agencies:_____________________
5. Current approximate daily ridership on all new supplemental service:_______________
C. Does your agency operate reverse commute programs, i.e., new
services not operating in the peak commute travel direction or operating to sites not
previously served by transit?
Yes ___; No ___. If "Yes," please answer the following (if
more than one mode, please answer on a separate sheet for each mode):
1. Mode of service, e.g., bus, demand response, etc.
______________________________
2. When was reverse commute service first started: before
1995___; 1995___; 1996___; 1997___; 1998___; planned for the future ___.
3. Is service operated in cooperation or coordination with another
agency or entity?
Yes ___; No ___.
If "Yes," mark all that apply:
a. ___ Human Services agency that does not operate transportation
b. ___ Human Services agency that does operate transportation
c. ___ Other agency (describe) ____________________.
4. Is service financially supported, in whole or in part, by another
government agency, non-profit agency, or private company? Yes ___; No ___. If
"Yes," list agencies or types of agencies:_____________________
5. Current approximate daily ridership on all reverse commute
service:_______________
D. Does your agency operate new special services such as
subscription services that provide dedicated service to single employers or groups?
Yes ___; No ___. If "Yes," please answer the following (if more than one mode,
please answer on a separate sheet for each mode):
1. Mode of service, e.g., bus, demand response, etc.
______________________________
2. What type of special service? _____________________________________________
3. When was new special service first started: before 1995___;
1995___; 1996___; 1997___; 1998; planned for the future ___.
4. Is service operated in cooperation or coordination with another
transportation agency?
Yes ___; No ___.
If "Yes," mark all that apply:
a. ___ Human Services agency that does not operate transportation
b. ___ Human Services agency that does operate transportation
c. ___ Other agency (describe) ____________________.
5. Is service financially supported, in whole or in part, by another
government agency, non-profit agency, or private company? Yes ___; No ___. If
"Yes," list agencies or types of agencies:_____________________
6. Current approximate daily ridership on all new special
service:_______________
E. Does your agency operate or coordinate new vanpool services
for journey-to-work trips?
Yes ___; No ___. If "Yes," please answer the following:
1. Does your agency own the vans? ___ Coordinate service but not own
the vans? ___
2. When was new vanpool service first started: before 1995___;
1995___; 1996___; 1997___; 1998___; planned for the future ___.
3. Is service operated in cooperation or coordination with another
agency or entity?
Yes ___; No ___.
If "Yes," mark all that apply:
a. ___ Human Services agency that does not operate transportation
b. ___ Human Services agency that does operate transportation
c. ___ Other agency (describe) ____________________.
4. Is service financially supported, in whole or in part, by another
government agency, non-profit agency, or private company? Yes ___; No ___. If
"Yes," list agencies or types of agencies:_____________________
5. Current approximate daily ridership on all new vanpool
service:_______________
F. Have you had any unexpected non-transportation problems,
i.e., legal problems or political problems, in providing any the above services? Yes ___;
No___. If "Yes," please enclose any material describing how they were resolved
that you think would be beneficial to share with other systems.
G. Have you established performance measures to determine if any
of the above programs are successful or not successful? Yes___; No___. If "Yes,"
please include documentation describing the performance measures.
H. Have you received work trip service funding from the private
sector? Yes___; No___. If "Yes," Please describe the type of funding:
____________________________________________
I. Do you have a program to promote the "transit pass"
commuter benefit, e.g., transit passes or other fare media provided to employees by
their employers as a tax free fringe benefit?
Yes___; No___.
J. Do any of your transportation services include provisions to
transport workers and children to work-related activities, e.g. day-care facilities,
en route to work or any other provisions dealing with day care? Yes___; No___. If
"Yes," please describe:
K. Are access-to-work services coordinated or planned in conjunction
with your metropolitan planing organization (MPO)? Yes___; No___. If
"Yes," please describe: _________________
L. Are Geographic Information System (GIS) or Intelligent
Transportation System (ITS) applications used in provision of your access-to-work
services? Yes___; No___. If "Yes," please describe:
III. Additional Information. Please enclose existing brochures,
reports, or other documents to supplement your answers.
SURVEY FORM PART B: Transit Job Creation and Training Activities
Part B: Transit Job Creation and Training Activities
An APTA Jobs Task Force and an Access-to-Work Task Force have been
formed by the Executive Committee of the American Public Transit Association (APTA). These
task forces, composed of APTA members, have been asked to determine the extent of transit
efforts to improve access to work and to determine transit agency and business efforts to
increase job opportunities for currently unemployed persons. This survey, Part B, which is
for APTA Transit System Members and Business Members, asks questions about transit system
and business employment and training opportunities. A separate Part A, for APTA Transit
System members, asks questions concerning transportation to work. Copies of both parts of
the survey are being sent to all APTA members for their information and any APTA member
should feel free to complete both Parts A and B if they are involved in welfare-to-work
activities. Please complete and return Part B, along with Part A if your agency is a
Transit System, by February 20, 1998, to the address on the final page.
The APTA Task Forces would also like to provide APTA members with
information on successful access-to-work initiatives and new employment and training
activities by transit agencies and businesses. Please include with your survey responses
any currently available brochures or reports that describe your current access-to-work and
job creation programs so that we may share information on your successful programs with
other APTA members. Please coordinate your enclosures with the person completing Part A of
this survey if your agency is a Transit System.
I. Respondent ID Information:
Transit System or Business Name _________________________________________
City_______________________________State______________________________
Person Completing Survey _______________________________________________
Telephone Number _____________________________________________________
II. Activities of your organization to provide work opportunities for
welfare recipient persons.
A. Name and telephone number of contact person for additional
information about Part B.
Name ____________________________________ Telephone ____________________
B. Has your organization made any efforts to create employment
opportunities, including providing jobs or training opportunities for welfare recipients
other than services that provide transportation to work? Yes___; No___.
If "Yes," please describe these programs or include
literature that describes them. Please include the following information, if appropriate,
for each program and use additional sheets if necessary:
1. Program name, if any, and
description:_______________________________________
2. Are the jobs or other opportunities at your organization or another
organization?
3. Are the opportunities full-time jobs, part-time jobs, training, or
other opportunities? List or describe:
4. How long have the programs been in operation? _______________________________
5. How successful have the programs been? ____________________________________
6. Has your organization encountered difficulties or criticism in
creating these employment opportunities? Describe:
III. Additional Information. Please enclose existing brochures,
reports, or other documents to supplement your answers.
For a copy of the Welfare to Work Survey Summary Report, please email
your request to info@apta.com.
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.
