River Valley Regional Commission



River Valley Regional Commission Human Services Transportation (HST) WorkshopThursday, June 3, 2010, 10:30AM – 2:30PMPope Center, South Georgia Technical College, Americus, GAAttendee ListAmanda Hughes, Alzheimers AssociationAngela Alford, Region 8 DFCSDonna Tennison, Marion and Chattahoochee County DFCSEmma Chatman, Taylor County Senior CenterJana Beavers, MFCOA Vienna/Dooly CountyLinda Waters, DFCSLinda Lewis, Americus Senior CenterMary Day, River Valley AAA Mary Little, Rescare HomeCare CordeleMichael Erwin, RMS, IncMickey Tucker, Direct Service CorpRichard Hollins, MCARoger Williams, Region 8 DHSSekema Harris Harmm, Talbot/Taylor County DFCSTina Rust, RVRCZonia Tate, Columbus Housing AuthorityTerri Taylor, Bryan County BOCHandoutsAgendaRegional Assessment ToolWorkshop PresentationHST Fact SheetParticipant SurveyFindingsDiscussion during the Coordination Workshop in River Valley Region covered the transportation support and transit services currently provided in the region. The majority of those attending represented agencies that referred people to transit services or provided transportation support, and they reported that the problems that face the region, such as a lack of employment, literacy issues, and the provision of adequate health care also affect its ability to provide transportation to those who need it. The region is interested in beginning the coordination of its services as a way to cut costs and provide more benefits to residents from the assets already present in the region.Workshop SummaryAfter thanking those present for their attendance and participation, and conducting introductions, Randy Farwell with the consultant team explained the purpose of the meeting, ground rules and the agenda items. Mr. Farwell then opened the meeting to a facilitated group discussion, described below. He also presented on the various ways other areas have coordinated their transportation systems and resources before breaking for lunch. Group Discussion Mr. Farwell reviewed ground rules for discussion and led the group through discussion of the following questions:Question: What transportation needs are most often communicated to you by your client base?Getting to and from doctor’s office and other medical tripsMental health, substance abuse and counseling appointmentsCan be daily, weekly or monthly.Visitation of children and parents for children in foster care.Employment Non-traditional hours and shift work.Job training.Shopping – grocery and mallsOne county lost its grocery storeRecreation – kids to football and soccer games and practices, other eventsTo and from senior center and other program tripsDisabled and developmentally disabledTo services like haircuts, hairdressersHow well does the transportation system respond to these needs in the region currently?This region does not have adequate resources to provide transportation for everyone’s needsColumbus has service for the general public (paid service)Case managers fill in, providing rides when needed, even though it is beyond scope of jobMany rides are provided via informal service for fee DHS provides transportation support to aging and family services in 16-county region via TANFDFCS doesn’t have funding for social service. There’s no transportation funding, and yet the people it serves don’t qualify for “aging” funds, so there is a gap in service.Gap in service for trips that go outside the region.For some trips, like weekly trips to Mitchell County and field trips to Atlanta, TANF funding is not available, so agencies do own transportation.Medicaid provides vans to medical appointments and needy adults, but specific strings are attached.Are there unmet transportation needs? Why?Appropriate funding sources can be confusing and restrictive.Geographic restrictions are placed on service.GDOT region boundaries do not match the RC boundary – there are two GDOT regions in the RC.The judicial circuit and mental health regions, which healthcare providers interviewed were familiar with, do not match boundaries for transportation service provider agencies.Persons who are not eligible for TANF or Medicaid riders, especially men, face lack of service.Seniors are doing okay, because there is consistent service to and from senior centers and, for most, to health care.The Department of Labor coordinates with local agencies for vocational rehabilitation, but they sponsor a lot more programs in Columbus, which the unemployed in the surrounding rural areas cannot access. It remains expensive to be employed, as jobs are located at a distance that requires car ownership. Shift work, which makes up a lot of the available jobs, takes place outside the hours transit is available. Children in foster care are allowed by law to continue attending their old school to avoid disruption, but arranging transportation for them to do so is difficult.Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) integrates people and public transportation resources.Program restrictions, “pockets” related to funding restrict service.Eligibility determined by each program.Columbus has public transit via small urban 5307. 5311 provided by counties, mostly.Are county or regional activities coordinated? How?Providers have Trapeze, but call it expensive. No agencies have it currently. Volunteer drivers are not used by agencies.Taxi subsidies not used in this region.Overview of CoordinationMr. Farwell provided an overview presentation on the definition and benefits of coordinating human service transportation. Her presentation included a series of success stories from across the country highlighting a range of coordination concepts, presented in order from less complex to more complex. The group then broke for lunch. Upon their return, they broke into two groups for discussion facilitated by Audra Rojek and Jenny Lee of Jacobs-JJG.Breakout Group DiscussionQuestion #1: What coordination activities do you currently participate in and are you interested in participating in?Group One: Pooling drivers and sharing insurance might keep drivers busy and vans full. Drivers are working split shifts, and staggering rides would maximize their use and make the job more attractive. Hard to train and retain. Driver position could be used as part of job-training efforts. Transportation issue could be framed as a health issue, since people missing appointments or having to wait three days for an appointment can compromise their health. It can also be framed as an employment and anti-poverty issue, as lack of reliable transportation is a barrier to steady employment, and jobs in local transit would be local job opportunities.Using off-season or off-hour school buses would maximize some of the only transit vehicles in these counties. Could offer bus drivers year-round jobs.Bus routes in Columbus provide a challenge to rural riders, who don’t understand bus schedules, and may have literacy issues. There is also discomfort with “urban” style service. So, just providing connections to the Columbus bus service won’t work for most transit riders in region. Need door to door, flexible service.Unreliability in pick-up and drop-off times discourages use of existing system.There are gaps in coverage among grass roots groups.There are barriers to the state agencies even entering into coordination discussions with other providers in region, if they are not also state agencies.Transit seems to be based on what can be funded, not as a response to area’s needs.Region should form a standing committee with regular meetings to address coordination and begin communication among services.Many would-be transit rides are done informally, and are unknown to state and other agencies.Group Two:Transportation service for the counties in the RVRC is covered by Sec 5307, Sec 5311, or private contractors.Harris, Chattahoochee, Macon, Schley Counties do not have Sec 5311 fundingUnder DHS coordinated transportation system, the following counties fall under DFCS/MHDDAD - Talbot, Schley, Webster and QuitmanCurrently half of the counties in the region are covered by Middle Flint Behavior HealthCare CSB and the other half are covered by New Horizons CSB. There are plans for the RVRC to take over for New Horizons services in the future. Per recommendations from a study by the RC, there are plans for a centralized operations facility to house and maintain vehicles to be located in Randolph County using Sec 5311 and 5307 funds.DHS board applies for FTA grants. DHS board is made up of client representatives, RVRC, Human Services representatives, officials. They recently received 5317 funding for mental health.Columbus Metra Transit System recently applied for funding to operate two buses for night owl service for general public and DFCS. A major challenge is coordinating with the Columbus MPO which crosses state border into Alabama.There is a disconnect in the transportation service provided in the 40-county DCH service area. Columbus should play a greater role in providing transportation service in the region. However, Columbus has different challenges than the surrounding rural areas It is important to have consistent boundaries among DOT, DCH, DHS and RC service areasFlexibility in service is needed; there are too many program restrictions General comments related to the potential scenarios:Insurance sharing would be a huge benefit. Currently, providers can purchase private vehicle insurance through state at reduced costSharing maintenance would be a huge benefit. The recent rural transit study by the RC determined the benefits of implementing an integrated transportation system in the 4-county area of Clay, Quitman, Stewart and Randolph. The proposed centralized operation and maintenance facility would be located in Randolph County.DHS has standard service characteristic in place, along with driving training. Providers can buy fuel from city of Columbus and WEX (state) at reduced costCurrently, shared vehicles practice is implemented within DHS with 180 vehicles in operation. However, DHS wishes to no longer own and maintain vehicles to save on costs. Question #2: What are your reactions to these potential coordination scenarios? What are potential barriers to implementing these types of solutions?Group OneConcept 1: Do you agree with this statement? (1-10) A centralized call center, where customers can make one telephone call to find out about all transportation options, is needed for the River Valley region. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored an “11” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:Riders would need to give their information only the first time they called.Could be used to also spread awareness of other current services that could help callers beyond just transportation services.Potential barriers:Unless the intended clients know that this service will work, and trust it to work, they won’t use it.Some people don’t show up for their transit appointments.Many trips scheduled by providers anyway; and many people don’t have phones.Concept 2: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? The use of technology, such as scheduling software and automated vehicle locators, would increase efficiency for local service providers. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored a “10” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:Shared scheduling of bus shuttle service to Macon and ColumbusAllows for tracking and accountability.Recommended that this study talk to shuttle providers in the area, as they do a steady business.Potential barriers:Funding it.IT issues – whatever is implemented would have to be very simple for the end users. A lot of the population is illiterate.Would require extra training and even job training for potential drivers and users of software.Some roads are dirt roads, or unnamed, and are only locally known.Concept 3: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? Human service agencies and transit providers should coordinate the shared purchase and use of vehicles. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it “5” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:Other agencies – grass roots and smaller AAA agencies, for example, may want to look into this away from the state initiative.Could be a way to save money, if practicable.Potential barriers:DHS won’t purchase vehicles, and would not purchase for joint use.Concept 4: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? Human service agencies and transit providers should coordinate to schedule multiple agency trips to a single vehicle. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it “7” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:Effective and efficient use of resources.For arranging shuttle or longer trips would work wellPotential barriers:Could result in prolonged time on a vehicle for those that have to wait for other pick- ups and drop-offs along the route. Delays from additional riders already hurt the dependability of transit in the Americus area.Delays and unreliability of transit hurt the employability of the transit-bound.Many trips are not to urban centers but to locations spread throughout rural area, so routes may be hard to coordinate.Concept 5: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? Human service agencies and transit providers should establish a regional fare system and regional eligibility for services. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it “10” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:Establishing shared eligibility and rates would allow quality control and begin coordination process.Could open doors to sliding scale for transit fees based on ability to pay.Potential barriers:Diversity of income levels across region –some very well off counties and five of the state’s poorest counties—means populations from different counties face differing challenges in terms of need, frequency of use, age, and literacy, to name a few. Group Two:Concept 1: Do you agree with this statement? (1-10) A centralized call center, where customers can make one telephone call to find out about all transportation options, is needed for the River Valley region. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it an “10” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:This would be helpful if River Valley RC would take the lead.Potential barriers:General lack of computer accessConcept 2: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? The use of technology, such as scheduling software and automated vehicle locators, would increase efficiency for local service providers. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it an “10” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:Flexible rural service could benefit from having software to track and monitor Great pay off for rural transitPotential barriers:Software is very expensive. Would it provide enough benefit for the cost?Navigation system can’t pick up rural collectors. Concept 3: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? Human service agencies and transit providers should coordinate the shared purchase and use of vehicles. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it an “10” on the 1 to 10 scale. Benefits: Would be great if possible.Potential barriers: State is pushing to get out of owning vehicles.Many of the state-owned vehicles are old and not well maintained. It would be safer to use 5311 and private vehicles.Providers can’t realistically share cost of insurance and gas.Concept 4: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? Human service agencies and transit providers should coordinate to schedule multiple agency trips to a single vehicle. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it “10” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits: Already being done to some degree - currently, DHS trips have mixed clientsConcept 5: Do you agree with this statement (1-10)? Human service agencies and transit providers should establish a regional fare system and regional eligibility for services. Why / why not? Potential barriers?Scored it “10” on the 1 to 10 scale.Benefits:Could be used to expand some eligibility to more peopleColumbus already has all requirements in one standard sheet – need to expand that to the region.Open Forum / Closing CommentsThe group reconvened to share the highlights of each group discussion and to offer final thoughts regarding future coordination activities that the state may be able to facilitate. Mr. Farwell reminded the group to complete the Regional Assessment Tool questionnaire. Participant Surveys were collected and will be used to improve the format and content of future workshops. Mr. Farwell thanked the participants for their time and. The meeting concluded at 2:30PM.AttachmentsSign-In SheetsParticipant Surveys ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download