EVOLUTION OF TRANSIT INVESTMENT MEASURES IN MINNESOTA
The Office of Transit Administration (OTA) of the Minnesota Department of Transportation has been administering state funds for transit services since 1977. Since the programs started, a data base has been maintained so that OTA could monitor and evaluate system performance. Monitoring involves checking expenses, revenues, and operating statistics monthly so that systems remain in accordance with a formal management plan. Evaluation work is geared to an annual review of the system prior to grant renewal and identifying potential areas of improvement. The evaluation work, which uses a five-year time horizon study and a peer group review, has produced results appropriate to measuring system performance only against local goals. Two levels of performance measures are applied to all systems. An aggregate measure review looks for potential trouble areas, and a disaggregate measure review confirms the source of concern. A very detailed disaggregate review may follow to pinpoint troubles. In order to rationalize and justify the state expenditure of funds, OTA has developed transit investment measures. Benefit and cost measures are used to evaluate the performance of all systems. The measurement systems used by OTA are identified, and reasons why the transit investment measures evolved are discussed.
DEVELOPMENT OF PERFORMANCE INDICATORS FOR TRANSIT
The objective of this research is to establish a rationale for the development of performance indicators for transit; to analyze potential indicatiors; and to apply a limited set of indicators to data collected from transit properties in the states of California and Washington. The focus herein is on the federal and state levels of government. The procedure is designed to develop and test criteria for the evaluation of performance of transit properties in different locations, of differing size, and with different operational procedures. This report presents the rationale and developmental structure for the evaluation of transit performance through quantitative performance indicators. It specifies efficient and effective transit service as appropriate goals to be encouraged by federal and state governments and identifies three efficiency and six effectiveness indicators which focus on significant aspects of performance. Using operating and financial data collected from 47 public transit operators in California and 5 operators in Washington, the selected performance indicators are analyzed for comparability of values between different modes of transit, different service area population densities, and different organizational types. The performance indicator values for selected transit properties are individually interpreted to demonstrate the analytic use and limitations of indicators. Potential uses of performance indicators are identified and areas requiring additional research described. The Appendices include: a literature search; a listing of properties; operating and financial data; and a glossary.
Performance indicators for transit management
Transit performance can be evaluated through quantitative indicators. As the provision of efficient and effective transit service are appropriate goals to be encouraged by federal and state governments, these goals are used to develop performance indicators.Three efficiency and four effectiveness indicators are described, together with two overall indicators. These nine indicators are analyzed for comparability utilizing operating and financial data collected from public transit agencies in California.Performance indicators selected for this study should not be viewed as final. Twenty-one performance indicators proposed by previous studies were reviewed. Theoretical considerations and unavailability or unreliability of data caused omission of several useful measures like passenger-miles. Circumstances such as improved data, emphasis upon goals other than efficiency and effectiveness, and local conditions might warrant the inclusion of indicators deleted from this research.