Pikes Peak Region Specialized Transportation Plan – 2024 Update: Strategies and Implementation

Introduction

Method for Developing and Prioritizing Strategies

The development, refinement, and prioritization of the Specialized Transportation Plan followed a process aligned with all steps of community and stakeholder engagement and was achieved in conjunction with the RTP. The steps in this process included:

• Existing Conditions Analysis: Existing conditions were analyzed and shared with PPACG, MMT, and project partners as part of the first stakeholder meeting. Feedback was provided on those findings.
• Draft Strategies to Meet Needs and Stakeholder Conversations: The key challenges or needs for specialized transportation in the region, along with draft strategies to meet those needs, were drafted by the consultant team and then presented to PPACG, MMT, and project partners as part of an interactive discussion and presentation during the second stakeholder meeting. Stakeholders voiced their greatest support for systems and databases around the development of a OC/OC center.
• Public Engagement: The strategies were revised and presented to the public at the virtual and in-person open houses. Attendees were asked to vote on which strategies were the highest priority. The most votes prioritized capital projects like bus stop improvements and vehicle purchases, along with the components of a OC/OC center.
• Final Revisions: Strategies were revised to reflect input from the general public, stakeholders, PPACG, and MMT.

The outcome is a set of five recommendations described in this chapter.

List of Strategies

The five recommended strategies listed below (Figure 8) include high-level subject-to-change cost estimates which help contextualize the intensity of resources behind each strategy. It should be noted that this is not a fiscally constrained list.

The legend for cost estimates is as follows:

• $ = Fewer than $750,000 (or less than the FY2024 apportionment of Section 5310 funds).
• $$ = Between $750,000 and $1,500,000.
• $$$ = Greater than $1,500,000.\

Figure 8. List of Specialized Plan Strategies

Strategy Number	Strategy Name	Start-Up and Capital Cost Estimates	Annual Operations and Maintenance Cost Estimates
	High-Priority Strategies
1	Incrementally develop a One-Call One-Click center.	$$$	$
2	Coordinate with providers to help secure funding for right-sized, shared, and well-maintained vehicles that meet ridership needs.	$$$1	$
3	Commission mobility services under improved standards of service.	$	$
	Medium-Priority Strategies
4	Create a program to reimburse people for Uber, Lyft, and taxi rides in situations where there is a critical unmet transportation need based on the time and location of the trip.	$	$
5	Consolidate all resources and explore training options for drivers.	$	$

How to Navigate Strategies in this Plan

The header of each strategy contains the following designations:

• Whether it is High-Priority or Medium-Priority as determined by inputs from the public and stakeholders.
• Whether it is relatively Low-Cost or if Additional Funding is Needed beyond the Section 5310 apportionment.

Each strategy also includes the following components:

• A narrative description and rationale for each strategy.
• List of short-term actions to be taken over the next five years for implementation, including a designated leader for implementation.
• List of considerations to make for actions and plans over the longer term beyond the next five years.
• Descriptions of case studies where this strategy has been implemented elsewhere, and an explanation of how this could be applied in the Pikes Peak region.
• List of start-up and capital resources necessary to consider for implementation.
• List of ongoing operations and maintenance resources necessary to consider for implementation.

Recommended Plan Strategies

Strategy 1 | High-Priority | Additional Funding Needed

Incrementally develop a One-Call One-Click center.

A key problem for current and future specialized transportation riders in the Pikes Peak region is the difficulty in navigating the providers’ network. There are 17 specialized, paratransit, or transit providers across El Paso County. Each provider has its own operating structure, policies, and funding sources. Eligibility requirements also differ. Variations are also tied to each ride and geography served. Navigating the system today requires riders to contact each provider to learn more, costing much time and effort.

A OC/OC center could help reduce the difficulty experienced by riders. It could reduce the amount of time spent by riders in finding the most appropriate ride for their specific trip and location. The development and maintenance of such a call center is a coordinated effort and can help transportation providers in their efforts to share information, identify gaps, and reduce costs.

Implementing a fully integrated one-stop ride booking system, accessible 24/7 for all riders and organizations in the region, is a complex task that will take time. There are also other appropriate stages of OC/OC programs which are relatively intermediate and considerate of the inherent coordination challenges and autonomy of partnering organizations in the context of the Pikes Peak region.

To that end, this strategy is divided into two key parts:

• Part A: Developing a shared intake form and back-end database of riders that can be shared amongst all providers to the greatest extent possible. 
• Part B: Establishing the OC/OC center as a front-end customer-friendly website and hotline for information and referrals.

Each part includes detailed short-term and long-term actions to guide implementation and is summarized with an overall case study example and cost estimates.

Part A: Develop a shared intake form and back-end database that can be accessed by all providers.

This database would include a profile for each rider registered with a specialized transportation provider and/or ADA complementary paratransit. Each profile would be created or updated upon rider intake. The rider profile would contain essential information such as eligibility certification, recurring destinations, and any assistance needs (e.g., using a mobility device or having a caretaker). Providers could use these profiles to simplify scheduling and efficiently communicate with riders. For example, if a rider calls a service to schedule a ride, the scheduler can view their profile and confirm eligibility or make a recommendation of another service if they do not qualify. The future OC/OC center could also make updates to the database and expedite rider referrals to other services. This streamlined process eliminates the need for riders to make multiple calls or submit additional applications, thus reducing confusion and improving the customer experience. It also helps ensure that eligible subrecipients are referring riders living within the MMT service area to confirm their ability to access the transit network or eligibility to ride ADA complementary paratransit.

The organization responsible for the database must establish and enforce data privacy standards. Providers and schedulers should be notified on how to responsibly handle personal data.

Regularly sharing the database access with providers and reminding riders to update their profile information is also essential. A functioning shared database allows riders to make one call to a provider and have their ride scheduled, whether with that provider or a different one.

Short-Term (Five-Year) Actions

Lead: PPACG, with support from Envida, MMT, Silver Key, and Fountain Valley Senior Center.

• Envida, MMT, Silver Key, Fountain Valley Senior Center, and any other providers, should share all current eligibility forms, criteria, and systems for entry with one another.
• Work with transportation providers to streamline and coordinate intake and eligibility policies, establishing memoranda of understanding as necessary.
• Develop a common eligibility and intake form that covers multiple providers to the greatest extent possible.
• If an existing database or software is not being considered, a new agreement with a software provider for a database may need to be developed.
• Contact each registrant using pre-populated self-addressed stamped postcards to request a signature for consent in incorporating and updating their listing into a consolidated database. The benefits of convenience — and affirmations of privacy — should be conveyed in this communication.
• Share database access among all providers and provide necessary training to designated personnel from specialized transportation providers and other agencies.
• Set a recurring deadline for updating the rider database and training newly participating agencies. 
• Continue promoting database use and raising awareness among providers and riders.

Long-Term Considerations

Lead: PPACG, or the organization ultimately responsible hosting the OC/OC program as determined in the short-term timeline.

• Integrate database with scheduling platforms to streamline updates.
• Coordinate with all agencies on unified policies, including reservations, late cancellations, no-shows, and suspensions.
• Continue with marketing efforts and regularly monitor and report on system performance.
• Develop computer logic or utilize assisting software to determine the most appropriate funding source for each rider and ride based on eligibility and need criteria.

Part B: Phone hotline and website to help direct people to the most appropriate transportation options.

The responsibilities of a new regional phone hotline (or call center) should be right-sized to meet expectations and work within the constraints of the existing system. If the only acceptable outcome is a fully integrated single point of contact to achieve all bookings and dispatching for a rider regardless of their provider or circumstance, that vision will take a very long time to realize. The more reasonable starting point and expectation for a OC/OC center is a one-stop source for information and referrals. Offering both a low-tech option like a call center, complemented by a website or automated option, will ensure that people with differing needs and resources can receive similar outcomes. 

Setting up a hotline and website, even for information and referral purposes, can help save time in different ways:

• Current MMT and HSP customer service representatives and dispatchers may not have the time to answer individual questions or look up answers for the specialized transportation customer base, but a call center and website could be dedicated toward meeting those needs.
• Fewer phone calls on the user end for people without reliable internet services or do not feel comfortable finding information on a website or app. Depending on the circumstances, this service may be expedited for people who agree to be listed and pre-verified in the shared database, which is Part A of this strategy.

Short-Term (Five-Year) Actions

Lead: PPACG, but could switch to another organization responsible for regional transportation demand management. 

• Conduct peer interviews with fellow Colorado agencies implementing OC/OCs to gain further insight and best practices.
• Identify representatives of each transit and specialized transportation service to be the reference point and contact for the mobility managers tasked with directing and referring callers and riders to the most appropriate service.
• Take a full inventory of the software, scheduling, and dispatch capabilities of every operating transportation provider in the region for planning purposes.
• Set standards for desired outcomes and the regular updating of resources.
• Integrate the database. Develop a platform to allow for all providers to regularly provide information.
• Set timelines and conditions for regular updates of information (for example, submitted information from the providers could be conditioned on a confirmed update or check-in every six months).
• Provide ongoing training to and recruitment for call center staff.
• Pilot test all systems with a focus group of riders with the assistance of community stakeholders.
• Coordinate marketing of the platforms when available to the greater community.

Long-Term Considerations

Lead: PPACG, or the organization ultimately responsible hosting the one-call one-click program as determined in the short-term timeline.

• The core of the program should first be a well-functioning call center, website, form for taking in new riders, and series of protocols for referring callers to the most appropriate service. Only then should further improvements be implemented, including incorporating scheduling services and dispatch services. Using the program to reduce redundancy and overhead is a good benefit to continue conferring with partnering organizations and other eligible subrecipients. For example, a fully integrated and coordinated scheduling system would provide cost savings to specialized transportation because it does not require each organization to have a team of schedulers, which reduces the average overhead.
• Invest in the procurement of a technology platform that will integrate all specialized transit providers booking systems and be part of an accessible and user-friendly web platform that allows for updated information. Ensure solicitations for software focus on cross-compatibility between providers.
• As the Colorado Springs region grows, overnight needs will continue to persist – particularly emergency situations. Therefore, a 24/7 system will be important to provide and maintain in the long-term.
• Possible future programs and services in the long-term, such as travel training, may also be good candidates for what riders and callers can be referred towards.

Case Study and Resourcing Examples 

Case Study Example

Applicability to the Pikes Peak Region

North Front Range MPO (NFRMPO) of Fort Collins, CO: After identifying an information and awareness need for older adults’ transportation, it was decided that NFRMPO was best equipped entity to set up the program (now known as RideNoCo), as it was seen as a neutral third-party, unlike entities that directly provided the transportation. The NFRMPO Planning Council set aside funds to match startup costs received through a successful application of State MMOF funds. Initial startup costs included $1.2 million. Section 5310 funds were used to cover initial program operations. Setting up the center and website were relatively easy steps. However, concerns emerged about the extent to which all systems would be fully integrated. Providers did not want to relinquish the relationships and trust they had built with existing clients. Providers were also already well acquainted with their scheduling and dispatch software, some of which was not consistent across the region. Therefore, the steering committee decided that enabling the center to perform ride scheduling was going to be too difficult. Instead, a more incremental step was taken. RideNoCo pivoted towards making referrals and providing accurate information to callers, so they wouldn’t need to go to multiple entities to figure out which service would cover them depending on the location, trip purpose, and funding source. Once questions were answered by the call center and referral was made, the next interaction would be scheduling directly with the provider itself. Energy was put towards supporting transactional data supply (TDS) data specifications. Demonstrating value back to project partners and funders went beyond simply reporting back the number of engaged callers and customers. NFRMPO pointed to new services that were brought into the regional program, their ability to use data to identify gaps, and overall telling a compelling story about where the program had been and where it was headed. Following these demonstrations, the City Council approved another $600,000 to fund program operations from 2025 to 2027.

Fort Collins demonstrates success with a OC/OC as a smaller city with many specialized transportation providers for riders to navigate. The Pikes Peak region may be larger, but it should consider a similar tact that recognizes the solid foundation and relationships of local transportation providers and human services by first making it easier for people to navigate the specialized transportation system. Collaborative efforts like these can help expand the reach and effectiveness of any program. Then, after a successful demonstration, there is a foundation to consider other one-stop services in the long-run, like scheduling. Ultimately, this case study is a lesson in being gradual and open to how to demonstrate value. Steps for the Pikes Peak region need to consider taking, include: Securing funding from sources beyond Section 5310, including the State’s Multimodal Transportation and Mitigation Options Fund (MMOF). Focusing on getting the easy components complete first, like setting up the hotline. Adopting a TDS data specification for all providers to use.

Start-up and Capital Resources

• Estimated costs for program startup (including software and hardware acquisition) and an initial pilot period may be $1,848,000.²
• For the initial roll-out and program preparation, at least 0.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) of staff resources will be needed to coordinate providers on identifying a common standardized intake form and communications protocol, along with working with marketing teams to increase awareness.
• At least one FTE of staff resources will be needed to assist in contacting riders, developing software agreements, and updating a consolidated database.
• Additional consultation may be needed for some steps around planning and assessment.

Annual Operations and Maintenance Resources

• Estimated annual costs for call center and website operation is approximately $462,000.³
• One FTE should be available to answer the phone hotline during business hours, make referrals, update rider databases based on intake over the hotline, and make website updates.
• Staff resources dedicated to program start-up would pivot to maintaining quality control, improve database entry, and update practices.
• There may be an agreement with a software provider for continued training, technical assistance, and data privacy protections.

Strategy 2 | High-Priority | Additional Funding Needed

Coordinate with providers to help secure funding for right-sized, shared, and well-maintained vehicles that meet ridership needs.

Purchasing and maintaining vehicles is a significant expense for specialized transportation and ADA complementary paratransit. When purchasing new or used vehicles, it is important to consider community needs, procurement constraints (such as being limited to a purchasing catalog when using traditional Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) funds), and the service context of the acquired vehicles.

Plan feedback from riders and project partners highlighted the following aims:

• Diversify fleets to include smaller, comfortable vehicles with capabilities like ADA complementary paratransit service. This particular aim could be a best practice for Metro Mobility’s operations and future fleet planning.
• Match vehicle size to the trip planned and the number of riders.
• Reduce noise for sensory-sensitive riders.
• Reduce costs associated with maintenance and the ability to find parts.

Vehicle size should be based on factors like ridership numbers, route distance, and accessibility.

Vehicles can also be shared between transportation providers through various types of agreements and partnerships, enhancing efficiency and service coverage.

Short-Term (Five-Year) Actions

Lead: PPACG, with technical expertise from MMT and other operators.

• PPACG should confer with eligible subrecipients to understand current opportunities and limitations around coordinating the operation and maintenance of vehicles.
• PPACG, in consultation with MMT and CASTA, could identify vehicles in other regions that could be refurbished for HSPs at a lower cost than a new purchase.
• Organizations applying for new vehicles should demonstrate they have actively taken reasonable steps to coordinate with other transportation providers in the area, such as planning to share vehicles, other resources, or reduce duplication of service coverage.

Long-Term Considerations

Lead: PPACG, with technical expertise from MMT and other operators.

• Adopt right-sized fleets that are suitable for the specific services being provided.
• Use real-time monitoring of specialized transit ridership statistics to inform more right-sized decisions in the future. For example, if a cutaway vehicle regularly averages one rider at any given time, a minivan should be used.
• Work with technical experts to continue understanding opportunities and constraints of the existing specialized fleet based on the volume of needs.

Case Study and Cost Examples 

Case Study Example

Applicability to the Pikes Peak Region

Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT): Section 5310 project selection criteria include point values assigned to “the amount of demonstrated use vehicles receive, based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) or one-way vehicle trips per day,” the “ability to preserve and maintain vehicles throughout their useful life,” and the “willingness and ability to coordinate with other service providers at a local and/or regional level.”

With increasing costs of vehicles, labor, and other goods and services, the Pikes Peak region should seek the greatest possible utilization out of their next purchases. After discussing and receiving feedback from eligible subrecipients, PPACG could adopt similar criteria to encourage more coordination around the utilization of fleets.

Start-up and Capital Resources

• Staff resources would help propose and set these standards as part of updates to the Section 5310 management plan.
• All-wheel drive minivans (e.g., Toyota Sienna) converted to be wheelchair-accessible assumed in the cost range of $80,000 – $95,000 per unit.
• Wheelchair-accessible cutaway buses (e.g., Ford E-450) should be in the cost range of $120,000 – $230,000 per unit, depending on the age of the vehicle⁴.

---

Annual Operations and Maintenance Resources

• Staff resources would maintain and oversee the application of these standards.
• Staff responsible for procurement or asset management at all transportation providers throughout the region could also be a resource to one another by sharing their research for vehicles if compliance with CDOT or Buy America standards is necessary. This may be a shared resource that is collected along with other training materials or information systems as laid out in Strategies 1 and 5.
• Existing specialized staff resources may be responsible for vehicle maintenance, but knowledge sharing and coordination around contracting maintenance services in the community should be encouraged.

Strategy 3 | High-Priority | Low-Cost

Commission mobility services with improved standards of service.

There are several characteristics of a high-quality specialized transit service, including:

• Reliable on-time service with minimal cancellations or delays.
• Universally accessible and regularly maintained vehicles and information systems that meet the needs of all ages and abilities.
• Safety as the primary focus of all driver and staff training.
• Professionalism from all staff when interacting with riders.
• Flexibility in the form of allowing people to book rides closer to the date of their appointment, which may also reduce last-minute cancellations by clients.

Specialized transportation services must aim to meet such standards if they are to effectively serve older adults and people with disabilities in the region. If these standards are not being met, the riders’ experience may be negatively impacted and the use of limited resources may be inefficient. Measurable outcomes and objectives for providing mobility services will help providers in meeting standards. The following metrics, among others, could be used in assessing that quality of specialized transportation service:

• On-time performance.
• Customer wait times.
• Vehicle dwell times.
• Number of riders making connections to other transportation services.
• Number of customer/rider comments by category.
• Number of customer/rider complaints by category.
• Number of riders reporting that the specialized transportation service provided is their only mobility option for the trip purpose and/or location.

This strategy ultimately aims to ensure that riders of specialized transportation services feel confident, satisfied, and safe on their full journey to access vital healthcare, employment, education, and community resources. Encouraging providers to meet and maintain this level of quality service is also important. Establishing clear expectations and guidelines for service delivery can elevate the quality of specialized transit services, enhance the customer experience, and improve transportation access for various communities throughout the region.

Short-Term (Five-Year) Actions

Lead: PPACG.

• As current direct recipient of such funds, PPACG will contract providers to provide services.
• HSPs should disclose all their program requirements to PPACG to help support more efficient management, monitoring, and reporting out to funders.
• PPACG and HSPs will collaborate to develop more outcome-driven and remedy-focused standards for future project solicitations.
• PPACG will confirm regional service standards or performance measures for specialized transportation are consistent with funding-related measurements set by Federal guidelines (e.g., “Gaps in Service Filled” and “Ridership” for Traditional Section 5310 Projects).
• PPACG will confirm definitions of specialized transportation service terms and parameters, such as vehicle accessibility, timing of service (e.g., same day or pre-scheduled), applicable limits on trips or use, days and hours of operation, eligibility requirements, service area, and whether a service is fixed-route, door-to-door, or door-through-door.
• PPACG may consider offering technical expertise or assistance to HSPs around the procurement and deployment software needed to coordinate and book rides.
• Following the implementation of new service standards, providers can expect to continue meeting riders’ needs and complying with laws and regulations such as the ADA.

Long-Term Considerations

Lead: PPACG.

• PPACG will continue to monitor eligible subrecipients’ performance of contracted mobility services and, if necessary, update definitions of specialized transportation service parameters.

Case Study and Cost Examples 

Case Study Example	Applicability to the Pikes Peak Region
Durham – Chapel Hill – Carrboro (North Carolina) Metropolitan Planning Organization: When assessing applications for Section 5310 projects, the MPO requires a defined service operations plan, procurement plan, specific implementation steps, key personnel responsible for implementation, and demonstrated institutional capability to carry out service delivery. Partnerships with other non-profit or private entities receive higher points. In addition to listing out “clear, measurable outcome-based performance measures”, applicants are also expected to provide a plan for monitoring, evaluation, and remedies if performance standards are not achieved.	HSPs around Colorado Springs face multiple streams of funding and requirements and adding more performance measures may be perceived as burdensome and ineffective. Allowing eligible subrecipients to propose some of their own outcome-based measurements, along with a plan for monitoring and reporting, may be an opportunity to augment the compliance work already being carried out. Section 5310 applicants could also be asked to justify how their proposed measures meet RTP goals.
Montana Department of Transportation (MDT): Compliance and good practice reviews are conducted on Section 5310 recipients as “part of a technical assistance effort” in which “technical assistance is provided to improve deficient areas and to document exemplary performance to share with other transit systems.”  The three main categories reviewed include 1) administration and management, 2) operations and service provision, and 3) service planning and marketing.	Quality service is the aim for improved standards and reporting, but skepticism and trust among the Pikes Peak transportation providers could persist. Offering technical assistance instead of punitive measures for deficient performance would help foster trust and support improvements. PPACG may have limited resources to directly provide the technical assistance needed to remedy certain deficiencies in specialized transportation performance, but providers could utilize the CASTA network for potential support, expertise, and even possible coordination with other service providers.
Michiana Area Council of Governments (MACOG) in South Bend, IN: MACOG uses Section 5310 scoring criteria to evaluate whether an applicant has shown evidence of “coordination with other non-profit, for-profit and public transportation providers” along with the documented coordination anticipated with each vehicle. Examples include “service agreements, resource sharing, referral arrangements, coordinated vehicle dispatch, memorandum of understanding, coordination action plans, joint training.”	After discussing and receiving feedback from eligible subrecipients, PPACG could incorporate scoring criteria providing additional points to applications identifying clear performance measures (to track service effectiveness) and including well-defined project planning and implementation steps. Applicant organizations can also be scored on their technical capacity and organizational preparedness to provide services.

Start-up and Capital Resources

• PPACG mobility staff time would be focused on the development and communication of these standards with eligible subrecipients.
• Temporary additional staff time may be necessary to assist in change management and/or communications with eligible subrecipients.

Annual Operations and Maintenance Resources

• PPACG mobility staff time would be focused on the refinement and continued communication of these standards.
• Costs may be affected by future annual Section 5310 apportionments and matching amounts.

Strategy 4 | Medium-Priority | Low-Cost

Create a program to reimburse people for Uber, Lyft, and taxi rides in situations where there is a critical unmet transportation need based on the time and location of the trip.

A common barrier to people using public transportation is what to do in an emergency if you need to travel somewhere fast and do not have a personal vehicle nearby. Therefore, one of the main reasons people choose to drive to work, school, errands, etc., is the convenience of having quick access to a car. A guaranteed ride home program can mitigate these concerns by providing the assurance that, in case of a personal emergency, they will be reimbursed for the faster direct ride through a ridehailing service or taxi. Guaranteed ride home programs incentivize and encourage people to walk or ride transit, specialized transportation, or vanpools because riders know they have a free ride home in case of an emergency.   A guaranteed ride home can also provide equity to riders who solely rely on transit or specialized transportation for their mobility needs and may be relatively lower-income or part of a marginalized community.

A guaranteed or emergency ride home program can have several components chosen for the agency’s needs. There are different methods for registration, procedures, and usage limits that can be customized based on what would work best for the overall rider base. For example, the reimbursement method could be in the form of rideshare credits or a cash subsidy. The program could also be specifically for low-income households or older adults.

A partnership with ridehailing services or taxis could also serve riders who may use ADA complementary paratransit or specialized services, but could also use an Uber, Lyft, or taxi if it is a convenient, reliable, and accessible option.

For riders who solely rely on specialized transportation services or ADA complementary paratransit, sending some of their on-demand trips to be serviced by transportation network companies (TNCs) or taxis could help save costs and reserve resources.

Ultimately, the program must ensure the users’ barriers to entry are reduced to the fullest extent possible and people must be reminded that they have access to this program. To ensure it is not abused, there should be set limits on the maximum number of rides, distance covered, or amount reimbursed. Documentation of a personal emergency could be required depending on the trip purpose, circumstance, and user.

There are multiple ways to customize a program, depending on the intended audience:

• A broad audience with a focus on regional transportation demand, in which customers submit information for reimbursement after a ride.
• A specialized focus for qualifying individuals, in which people with disabilities are given a stipend or limited number of trip vouchers in advance of using such rides.

A well-organized, utilized, and marketed guaranteed ride home program can provide peace of mind, cover service gaps when needed, and encourage riders to keep choosing transit and specialized transportation for their trips.

Short-Term (Five-Year) Actions

Lead: PPACG, with support from MMT, TNCs, and local taxi companies.

• Engage with TNCs and/or local taxi companies to offer a pilot program, with the agency subsidizing trips for customers.
• Ensure participating providers can offer wheelchair-accessible services on request and that they pass insurance and training standards.
• Determine and place ride/distance-covered caps and other policies for the program.
• MMT could support program marketing by placing promotions in vehicles, transit centers, and bus shelters.
• TNCs and taxis would support program implementation by ensuring that receipts and documentation for program users and all riders are regular practice. 
• MMT and specialized transportation providers would support program implementation by preparing a standard and easily produced documentation of a qualifying event (e.g., a vehicle breakdown, a denied ride due to capacity, etc.) that a rider can use to justify reimbursement for the ride.

Long-Term Considerations

Lead: PPACG or another organization responsible for regional transportation demand management.

• Explore unique transportation demand management (TDM) program funds to sustain the project, such as transportation management organization (TMO) funds via CDOT Office of Innovation.
• Measure awareness of travel options, including the Emergency Ride Home program, using internet traffic analytics, media engagement, or a regional survey.
• The management of the permanent program goes to a new locally financed organization dedicated to mobility management, trip coordination, and TDM.
• Consider scaling in customer service for this program into the staffing roles and responsibilities alongside the OC/OC center operation.

Case Study and Cost Examples

Case Study Example

Applicability to the Pikes Peak Region

South Florida Commute Services (Florida Department of Transportation) defines an emergency as one of the following: · Regular transit service is unavailable or inaccessible · Illness of the rider or an immediate family member · Unscheduled overtime or extended work hours · A carpool driver’s inability to make the scheduled trip home due to an unexpected work schedule or illness   ACHD Commuteride (Idaho) caps annual emergency ride home reimbursements per registered user as six times or $300 in value, whichever comes first. Additionally, commuters need to be registered in the system and have logged their commuting days to qualify for a free ride home.   ABQ Ride (New Mexico) provides a guaranteed ride home to commuters who use transit, bike, walk, etc. to work or school at least three times a week. Commuters are limited to five rides per calendar year. Commuters can register online or via mail-in paper form and get a Guaranteed Ride Home ID card to use for scheduling a ride.

Colorado Springs and its surroundings are susceptible to a variety of natural disasters. A guaranteed ride home program does not have the funding, capacity, or scope to meet natural disasters which affect most every person. Specific criteria for a guaranteed ride home program in terms of what constitutes an emergency will ensure that funds are limited to being used for personal emergencies, ensuring that resources aren’t exhausted on this program alone and that limited budgets can be efficiently utilized. In its own program policy, the Pikes Peak region could simply write and draft definitions and guidelines – similar to what is used by South Florida and other programs.

Start-up and Capital Resources

• Staff time would be focused on the development and communication of program guidelines.
• There may be initial set-up fees for a TDM platform (e.g. a third-party transportation technology platform and/or a contractor to administer the program.

Annual Operations and Maintenance Resources

• Anticipated workload and effort for the management of the program, including customer service, program administration, reimbursement processing and annual monitoring, is approximately 0.5 FTE.
• Annual costs, including platform and database hosting, in coordination with other TDM platforms, budget for reimbursements, annual reporting, and marketing and is approximately $55,000 a year⁵.

Strategy 5 | Medium-Priority | Low-Cost

Consolidate all resources and explore training options for drivers.

Centralizing all relevant information and training materials for bus drivers can enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of transportation agencies, solidify more consistent standards in training, and foster a culture of continuous learning and improvement among bus drivers. This approach also enhances communication and customer satisfaction. As all providers in the Pike’s Peak region will be pulling from the same resources, riders can be assured that their drivers will have been trained consistently each time on the same key topics. 

There are multiple transportation providers in the Pikes Peak region, each with its own set of drivers and operators and potentially overlapping credentials and requirements. This need manifested itself during a Specialized Transportation Plan stakeholder meeting, in which one attending provider connected with another over training materials.

This strategy is a continuation of current opportunities to consolidate training with the specialized transportation service providers so that customers in the region experience consistency with drivers.

Short-Term (Five-Year) Actions

Lead: PPACG, supported by specialized transportation providers, MMT, and any other transportation providers interested in partnering and sharing resources in the public interest.

• PPACG should coordinate with HSPs immediately identify other training needs which may be applicable to all drivers, including drug/alcohol, defensive driving, sensitivity to people with disabilities, small vehicles, first aid administration, safe technology use, conflict management and de-escalation tactics.
• Identify a training site with classroom space along with the necessary capacity for vehicle parking and demonstrations.

Long-Term Considerations

Lead: A third-party organization responsible for standardizing and consolidating driver and staff training for specialized transportation operations.

Case Study and Cost Examples 

• Coordination with CASTA on identifying resources may be beneficial, especially if such efforts have already begun in other parts of the State.
• MMT may maintain separate contractors for training drivers for fixed-route and ADA complementary paratransit.
• Continue diversifying training curriculum based on operational needs and rider feedback.
• Continue marketing, monitoring, and reporting.
• Consider partnering with agencies in helping to pool resources to develop a single year-round site that would train drivers regardless of which provider they serve.

Case Study Example

Applicability to the Pikes Peak Region

The Miami Valley Greater Regional Mobility Council’s biggest priority is a standardized training curriculum for drivers, covering first aid, defensive driving, fundamentals of transporting older and disabled passengers, safe technology use, and conflict management.

Like many regions, Colorado Springs has a driver shortage and ensuring that new drivers can be sufficiently and effectively trained will be an important priority for all forms of transportation, including specialized transportation. A standardized training approach is worth considering as an effective program that can provide an affordable (or free) opportunity for people, potentially alleviating labor shortages and improving service quality. Miami Valley’s focus on sensitivity and dignity to riders who are older or disabled is relevant, as Pikes Peak focus group feedback observed a need for improved customer service among specialized transportation drivers compared to ADA complementary paratransit drivers.

Start-up and Capital Resources

• Staff resources from all partners to find sites, pool resources, contact transportation providers, apply for grants, and market training opportunities as needed.

Annual Operations and Maintenance Resources

• Scaling beyond the consolidation of resources may require additional costs, including the acquisition and maintenance of a training facility, FTEs for dedicated training, and incentives and events for trainers and students.

Implementation and Supportive Policy for Strategies

Short-Term (Five-Year) Implementation Steps

The following actions should be seriously considered in the implementation and management of the recommended strategies for the Pikes Peak region.

Hire mobility managers with a clearly defined role.

“Mobility Management is about bringing people together.  Bringing together the people who need transportation, with the people who provide transportation and the people who can pay for transportation to address community transportation needs. It’s making the most of existing resources, creating new services when needed and looking at the issues through the lens of the rider.”⁶

The previous update to the Specialized Transportation Plan called special attention to the role of mobility manager as the catalyst for action and coordination to improve transportation conditions for target populations. The essential role and responsibility of a mobility manager continue to be crucial for the implementation of this plan. As public entities, PPACG, MMT, and CDOT would be the primary organizations hiring mobility managers. Key responsibilities of a mobility manager responsibilities include:

• Convening, leading, and attending all future stakeholder meetings, including the Regional Coordinating Council, and ensuring regular representation and attendance of those meetings.
• Becoming familiar with all available transportation services, providers, funders, human services, and unmet need throughout the region.
• Continue identifying and analyzing trends, gaps, and opportunities in specialized transportation services throughout the region.
• Monitoring progress, budgets, contract compliance with federal guidelines, and timelines.
• Securing strong partnerships for the benefit of being competitive for grants and enhancing coordination.
• Researching and applying for transportation grants.
• Ensuring compliance with local, state, regional, and federal regulations and policies as applicable.
• Answering inquiries from organizations on specialized transportation options.
• Corresponding with peers in the CASTA network and beyond to exchange lessons learned and build a knowledge base of third-party vendors, operators, and technologies.
• When speaking on behalf of a provider, serving as a good faith representative of organizational efforts to improve access to transportation for the most vulnerable communities and populations in the region.
• Travelling throughout the region and state to meet partners, stakeholders, and community members at their respective locations to better understand needs and build trust, empathy, and collaboration.
• Being the primary point of contact and owner of all future updates to the Specialized Transportation Plan, committing to facilitating transparent and regular communications between stakeholders, government agencies, and consultants for the full process.

Qualifications should include multiple years of experience in program management, project management, and/or transportation planning with a background knowledge in transportation policies, regulations, and finance.

Responsibilities that should not fall under a mobility manager include:

• Direct operation and maintenance of any transportation service, including dispatch and driving responsibilities, or the training of people in those roles.
• Leading marketing campaigns related to transportation services and programs.
• Executing emergency response protocols.
• Physically assisting passengers with their access needs.

Given the current size and future projected growth of the Pikes Peak region, a single FTE mobility manager is insufficient. A minimum of three FTE staff is the combined need identified in this plan. If should be noted, for example, the NFRMPO, which serves a region with a significantly smaller population, has a mobility-centered staff of three people. Mobility managers may be assigned responsibilities specific to their strengths (e.g., one may be more focused on grants while another may be more focused on coordination activities).

Revamp the Mobility Coordinating Committee by splitting it into more specialized areas of expertise.

The regional mobility coordinator or mobility manager has historically been responsible for facilitating the convening of the Mobility Coordinating Committee as overseen by PPACG. It remains a good opportunity to exchange perspectives across multiple institutional silos.

However, conflating the perspectives and experiences of all participants in the universe of coordinated transit may not make for a useful or productive conversation. Thus, the Pikes Peak region should consider holding more specialized meetings and discussions. Two proposed focuses are described below.

Planning and administration focus

Meaningful progress and attendance during the stakeholder meetings and open houses during the Specialized Transportation Plan process are a positive sign that people want to have conversations about improvements to the current system and putting riders first. The group of stakeholders that convened twice over the period of this plan’s development is the logical choice for the next team of people responsible for sharing information and assisting program implementation. This group should ideally meet on a quarterly basis and no fewer than two times a year. Some benefits from such convenings would include:

• Learning about new funding opportunities with representatives at the state, federal, and non-profit levels.
• Committing to standards of quality transportation service.
• Tracking and reporting progress.

Operations focus

There is another group – specifically the schedulers, operations managers, customer-facing individuals, and technical experts who make the real-time decisions as to when, for example, a taxi completes somebody’s requested ride when real-time resources and demands are tight.  These individuals should also be getting to know one another across the institutional silos. Benefits from such convenings would include:

• Sharing experiences working with the specialized transportation customer base.
• Identifying coordination opportunities for utilizing shared fleets.
• Discussing the development and implementation of new technologies to enhance service delivery for riders.
• Discussing best practices for improving driver satisfaction and retainment.

This group should ideally meet on a quarterly basis and no fewer than two times a year. The operational demands may be more challenging for scheduling, but the importance of holding such meetings is crucial. Experts with this focus need to provide first-hand information to build trust between organizations and support more realistic service enhancements in the region.

Find funding. 

The full implementation of all the recommended Specialized Transportation Plan strategies is conditioned on sufficient, sustainable funding streams beyond the Section 5310 allocation. As previously noted, the mobility manager’s role should include pursuing grants. It will also be critical for mobility managers and specialized transportation providers to demonstrate to funders that there are strong partnerships and flexible expectations for a program or service.

Do some quick deployment of programs.

With an infusion of funds, pilot programs may be developed. These should be nimble and responsive to performance measures, such as ridership, engagement, and cost-savings. The lack of a long-term funding source will be an inevitability in many pilot programs, but it should not be seen as a hindrance. Instead, pilot program managers should regularly remind users of the limited timeframe to help encourage feedback, future support, and program modifications.

Additional Long-Term Policy Considerations

As implementation of the 2050 RTP continues, critical partnerships are built, the Pikes Peak region continues to grow, and new funding sources are sought over the long-term timeline beyond the next five years, specialized transportation will need to continue to be a part of the conversation. Burdens on the existing specialized transportation network and ADA complementary paratransit service increasing the physical accessibility of transit will continue to grow, and a vision for how to leave no person behind will continue to be realized.

Help people access bus stops more safely, including sidewalks, safer crosswalks, shelters, and lighting.

As noted in the RTP, the infrastructure for making MMT bus stops more easily and safely accessible for passengers will continue to be an important focus of improvements over the long run. If the fixed-route network is more accessible to riders currently reliant on ADA complementary paratransit and specialized transportation services, the cost burdens on those demand-response services may be reduced. Lifting this barrier to cost-effective fixed-route transit can, in turn, promote greater mobility, independence, and quality of life for riders of all ages and abilities. This may be especially important in areas of high transit need where there is a high proportion of people with disabilities.

Consider organizational structures in the context of a growing region and long-term funding commitments.

Although efforts exist to coordinate among various transit providers, each agency has unique specialties, responsibilities, and limited resources. Expanding long-term transportation options for a diverse group of riders requires the continued partnership between PPACG, MMT, and HSPs, as no single entity can lead alone.

There is an added imperative to be flexible and creative in the long-term as growth and development continues into the fringes of the Pikes Peak region, and trips to and from other regions in Colorado increase as well. The implementation and development of Specialized Transportation Plan recommendations like an emergency ride home program and a OC/OC center, for example, may need to scale up to meet these growing demands after building a successful foundation for a more basic operation.  

PPACG, MMT, and the HSPs should be coordinating with CASTA and other trade organizations to be open to future organizational structures and relationships. Some examples to consider:

• Setting up the Mobility Coordinating Committee (or future subcommittees) for the Pikes Peak region to become a future El Paso County representative in the Denver Regional Mobility and Access Council (DRMAC)’s network of coordinators. This would be a means to facilitate services and programs to meet inter-regional and inter-county specialized transportation needs.
• Creating independent organizations with a mission centered around mobility management, trip coordination, and transportation demand management for the Colorado Springs UZA. Responsibilities could include relieving entities from the burden of managing certain programs that no longer fit within their original organizational framework, revamping dormant programs, or sharing administrative responsibilities among specialized transportation providers such as procurement, scheduling, training, compliance, and accounting.
• Continuing to actively participate in the CASTA network to help advocate on behalf of the region for reforms to policies occurring at the state and/or federal levels, like NEMT.

Footnotes

1. Assumes new vehicle purchases to full backfill existing combined number of vehicles that specialized transportation providers reported to be at the end of their life.
2. Adjusting the $1,200,000 in initial start up costs for the Fort Collins region, multiplied by a 1.4 factor to account for population differences, followed by a 1.1 factor to account for cost of living differences.
3. Adjusting the $300,000 in recently approved annual costs for the Fort Collins region, multiplied by a 1.4 factor to account for population differences, followed by a 1.1 factor to account for cost of living differences.
4. Range of base prices for Cutaway/Body purchases on chassis buses and vans as reported to CDOT, March 2024. 
5. Adjusting the reported $220,000 in annual costs for a program in Baltimore, MD, multiplied by a 0.25 factor to account for population differences.
6. A. Simmons, “New Mobility Managers: An Introduction”, National Center for Mobility Management, 2020, https://nationalcenterformobilitymanagement.org/blog/new-mobility-managers-an-introduction-part-1/ accessed 2024.