Chapter 4: Planning Overview: Institutions, Structures and Opportunities

SETTING A CONTEXT FOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

Funding effective coordinated transportation services requires a process that melds service needs, available resources, and agency commitments. Planning for transportation services can typically take two forms. The first is long-range comprehensive planning. For DOT programs, long-range planning is part of the regional metropolitan planning process (that includes a 20-year time horizon) and facility development.

For HHS-funded programs, long-range planning usually reflects a five-year time horizon and varies significantly from program to program. Increasing emphasis on strategic planning processes in human services has encouraged longer term planning, but rarely beyond the five-year horizon.

The second type of planning is service or operations planning, which looks at service changes on a continuing basis over short time spans. Successful coordination planning entails both long-range and service planning. Understanding and implementing both are essential to the implementation of specialized transportation services.

Long-range planning is required by federal statue and DOT regulation. It examines the need for communities to expand its existing transportation system or develop a new capital facility. High rates of population and employment growth normally underlie these efforts. Procedures typically used in long range planning are the traditional comprehensive, cooperative, continuing transportation planning process. (This is known as the Federal Comprehensive Planning Process as required by the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1965). Service or operations planning is an ongoing activity — often on transit routes, intersections or corridors — to improve service efficiency and effectiveness as well as to respond to immediate community concerns. Transportation planners should be involved in both aspects of planning in both urban and rural areas.

HHS-funded programs respond to planning requirements based on the individual health or social service missions of those programs. The planning period, scope and structure of the planning process, and plan review/approval process will vary significantly from program to program. This variation in planning processes reflects the differing statutes authorizing these programs and the wide range of health and social needs addressed by the programs. For example, Head Start agencies submit program reports each year which address their program intentions for subsequent years. The state agencies funded under the Older Americans Act choose a planning period of 3 to 5 years for their service planning process. A number of health agencies participate in a 10-year planning process targeting health outcomes for the general population and for specific target populations.

DOT and HHS program requirements provide states and localities with the flexibility to design transportation systems to meet unique state and local needs. Each state determines how the coordination planning will be administered and which public agencies will be responsible for program development, implementation, and evaluation. Responsibilities for leading or participating in plan development will vary from state to state and community to community with each selecting participant agencies and service delivery options. PLANNING COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION SERVICES IN RURAL AREAS

Transportation can be a special challenge in rural areas, especially for persons without access to private automobiles. Long distances are a hallmark of rural travel, due to low population densities and the relative isolation of small communities. In addition, the wide variety of economic and social types of rural communities suggests that a variety of transportation solutions are needed.

Despite the difficulties, there are now more than 1,200 federally-funded rural public transportation systems in the United States. Other services in rural communities transport human service agency clients and persons with special needs, such as those who are elderly or have disabilities. Almost 60 percent of all non-metropolitan counties have some public transportation services, but many of these operations are small and offer services to limited geographic areas during limited times.

Partly because their resources are so scarce, their needs are so large, and their local officials often know each other, many rural communities have coordinated their transportation services more successfully than their larger more urban counterparts. Human service agencies have often been the leaders in rural communities, first providing trips for their own clients, then helping to meet the needs of other agencies, and then offering services to the general public.

Transportation planning processes are similar in urban and rural areas, but rural transportation more often involves local human service agencies working in conjunction with state agencies, such as Departments of Transportation and inter-agency coordinating councils. A number of states have established multi-year (often, four- to five-year) local transportation development planning procedures that identify travel needs and resources, design and assess alternative delivery systems, and prepare implementation plans for the duration of the planning period. Other states do not offer planning guidance or assistance. The state-to-state variations in rural transportation planning are likely to be larger than the differences in urban areas.

Rural communities may have more need for specialized technical assistance than their urban counterparts, where planning institutions and procedures are more established. State departments and regional agencies may more often need to assist rural communities in quantitatively assessing needs and identifying resources (such as the Federal programs discussed in Chapter 3) and in obtaining expert evaluations of alternative transportation programs. Once such issues are resolved, prospects for implementing new transportation services in rural communities are excellent.

IMPACTS OF CURRENT PROCEDURES ON COORDINATED TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

Implications of DOT Procedures for Coordination Planning

The planning and coordination requirements for FTA transit programs in DOT are specified by statute. The 1998 reauthorization of highway and transit legislation, the Transportation Equity Act for the Twenty-first Century (known as TEA-21), creates a context for establishing FTA's procedures at the state and metropolitan level for planning, designing, and delivering transportation services that are coordinated with services provided by non-DOT agencies.

The new provisions in TEA-21 create a much stronger basis for coordinated planning and service delivery between recipients of DOT and HHS funds. DOT-funded recipients must include "the non-DOT agencies with planning functions to the maximum extent practicable," and non-DOT-funded transportation providers are "to participate and coordinate with DOT recipients to the extent feasible." Such language is the clearest expression to date of Congressional interest in the coordination in the planning and delivery of specialized transportation services.

The Federal legislative requirements in the planning programs (prior to TEA-21) are supported by regulations (for example, the FTA/FHWA Joint Planning Regulations). Operating and reporting procedures are transmitted to funding recipients and operating agencies through FTA Circulars (for example, the grant procedures for the Section 5307 program).

The requirement for DOT-funded transportation projects to be included in local Transportation Improvement Plans (TIPs) and State Transportation Improvement Programs (STIPs) carries with it the implication that these projects will be planned and coordinated with related programs on a metropolitan area or statewide basis, as applicable. The focus of these programs is the provision of transportation services. They are all authorized by statute, and the planning and operating procedures of the recipients of Federal funds are all well developed in FTA/FHWA Joint Planning Regulations and FTA Circulars. These features — statutory authorization, regulations, and circulars — help to reinforce the concept and practice of comprehensive and consistent planning.

Implications of HHS Procedures for Coordinated Planning

Applications for funding for eight of the 12 HHS programs that fund transportation services are submitted to federal officials at the regional or headquarters level from the state level. For grants for Native Americans, Head Start, Community Services Block Grants, and Community Health Centers, the local agency or tribe is the recipient and is responsible for detailed program planning. The Administration on Aging uses a more detailed planning process that begins with the local area agencies on aging, feeds into a state plan and ends with submission to the Federal office.

In contrast, the actual delivery of transportation services (and their coordination, when practiced) occurs at the local level. Usually, coordination for human service agencies requires local agencies to plan together to find ways to meet their transportation needs using the full range of transportation resources available in the community, not just those resources that they control. To be able to link planning to delivery and coordination of services at the local level, then, depends upon:

• local agency or community planning and operations,
• the ability of local human service and community agencies to coordinate to better allocate their scarce transportation resources,
• accurate data on available services and needs,
• the planning and operational support provided by the state, and
• the conditions and constraints under which the programs and agencies operate.

The state agencies, in turn, exercise their planning, program management, and oversight responsibilities over local agencies either supporting or hindering local transportation coordination. Experience has shown that states generally support coordinating transportation services, but that financial assistance to plan and implement coordinated human service transportation may be difficult to obtain. With the recent pressures on transportation services that have been created by welfare reform (including pressures on states to meet Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) participation rates), some states are becoming more proactive in providing planning support. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS

Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) and Councils of Governments (COGs) often have responsibility for regional transportation planning. An MPO is an organizational entity with lead responsibility for developing long-range transportation plans and programs for Transportation Management Areas (TMAs) in urbanized areas of 200,000 or more in population. In some states, MPO’s provide technical assistance to small urban areas (populations of 50,000 –100,000) and rural communities on transportation planning. In some areas, MPOs also lead other types of planning such as human services and housing.

MPOs and COGs are appropriate organizations to prepare plans, collect and analyze data, develop strategies, and allocate funds. MPOs participate in the prioritization of projects that span over a variety of highway, transit, mobility and coordination needs in a given region. They can play a significant role in stimulating regional cooperation among agencies and help minimize the fragmentation of services provided in a community or region. MPOs and COGs often take a multi-jurisdictional approach to coordination planning and problem solving, engaging a wide range of groups including human service and transit providers. Therefore, MPOs play a lead role in coordinating specialized transportation services in a metropolitan area. LOCAL TRANSIT AGENCIES

The public transit operator or public transportation authority provides fixed-route transit services. The transit operator may be responsible for "special efforts services" and may have a demand-responsive system that could be included in the coordination plan. The operator may work with other agencies to develop interim accessible services leading to program accessibility. STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS

State DOTs play a role in the delivery of specialized transportation services and/or program funding for specific areas. DOT staff provide knowledge of the industry and assist in partnering activities. State DOTs are considered stakeholders in coordination planning.

TEA-21 statewide planning provisions assist state DOT planners in organizing, gathering input, and presenting information about transportation need, impacts, and investment choices. In doing so, stakeholders can influence their State's decision-makers about coordinated specialized transportation needs, impacts and investment choices. State DOTs must balance urban and rural coordinated transportation needs and differing demands of the various other forms of transportation. This is important because most transportation funding is provided by State governments or (in the case of Federal funds) through them.

The statewide planning process produces two products: statewide transportation plans and statewide transportation improvement programs (STIPs). Statewide transportation plans present a future vision for mobility that considers those factors that may impact or be impacted by transportation investments. STIPs are short-term documents that list the projects to be advance in the next three years with Federal Transit Administration or Federal Highway Administration funding. The selection of projects for inclusion in the STIP is based upon a cooperative decision-making process between the state and MPOs in metropolitan areas, and the state and local officials in non-metropolitan areas.

In non-metropolitan areas, the implementing agency (usually the state or transit operator) is responsible for scheduling projects for implementation once included in the STIP. Therefore, it is important that the relevant stakeholders involved in coordinated transportation planning provide input at this stage to ensure that coordinated service plans are included in the prioritization process.

In coordinated transportation planning, statewide transportation planning is a cooperative venture in which those responsible for the performance of the transportation system and the stakeholders in coordinated specialized transportation services work together to define the best solution for human services transportation needs in the State.

The role of the state DOT staff is to ensure that the transportation plan is coordinated with planning undertaken by MPOs, transit agencies, private-and public-sector groups, and others that have or could have an impact on the transportation system. Furthermore, state DOT staff should consider public input and involvement in the decisions public officials make on future investments. This includes planning done at the local level for coordinated specialized transportation services. Lastly, DOT staff should provide technical assistance in rural areas. They play a significant role in stimulating cooperation among agencies and help minimize the fragmentation of services provided in a community. FTA AND FHWA FIELD OFFICES

There are ten FTA Regional offices: Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Chicago, Fort Worth, Kansas City, Denver, San Francisco and Seattle. As a part of ongoing oversight and assistance, FTA Regional Office staff provide leadership, financial and technical assistance to FTA grantees.

FHWA Division Offices are located in every state, including Puerto Rico. FHWA Division Office staff provide technical assistance and education, support transportation infrastructure through investments, and strives to achieve technological advances in transportation systems.

Both FTA and FHWA field staff look for opportunities for local agencies to partner with human service providers. They also look for opportunities for including funding to support coordination planning at the local level.

States and MPOs engage in legislatively required program reviews. Both of these entities have regularly conducted Federal certifications to demonstrate that they are meeting Federal planning requirements. Every other year a state’s planning efforts are reviewed jointly by FHWA and FTA in the "State Planning Findings." Every third year an MPO’s planning activities are reviewed in the "Certification Review."

Within the context of the above oversight activities, FHWA and FTA field staff (DOT "Certification Review" Team), in cooperation with HHS, will work to monitor the planning process to encourage the following activities:

• Organizing meetings with State and local agencies
• Establishing task forces or other committees to implement the coordination plan
• Developing a memorandum of agreement or similar formal agreement among participating parties
• Partnering with an MPO, in urban and some rural areas
• Developing a joint service plan outlining goals, objectives and constraints
• Establishing an analytical process for identifying transportation service markets
• Designing a detailed service and financial operation plan to include service characteristics, operational system characteristics, and administrative features
• Establishing an evaluation criteria for choosing best service design
• Developing an implementation and funding plan
• Establishing a process for participant agencies to identify individual budget expenditures on transportation

Local health services providers and human services agencies often become involved in arranging transportation services to ensure that clients have access to these services. These agencies obtain transportation services in several ways, including purchasing of transportation services through vouchers or tokens, contracting for services on an individual or bulk basis or, less frequently, actually providing the service themselves with agency-owned vehicles. In each of these situations, the health or human service agency brings several roles to the coordination effort. The primary role is as a funder of services, and the agency has resources to expend in order to secure access for their clients. However, the amount of funding available for transportation is usually driven by state and local priorities, not federal direction.

Another important role is as a source of information on transportation needs in the community. The health or human service agency clients are frequently transportation disadvantaged due to lack of resources, physical or mental disability, or illness. As these agencies prepare service plans and reports on services provided, they aggregate information on the numbers of clients served, types of services provided, frequency of service, and, sometimes, the barriers that exit to providing appropriate service. In estimating the demand for transportation services, much of the information compiled by these agencies can assist local and state transportation planners to create more accurate estimates as a greater range of potential users and their needs are identified.

Health and human service agencies may also be a source of existing vehicles, drivers and equipment if these agencies have been providing their own transportation in the past and then choose to join a coordinated community transportation effort.

It is important to remember that these agencies are funded through different legislative authorities with differing reporting requirements and eligibility criteria. There are few, if any, requirements for coordination. Congress has increasingly stressed that grantees of HHS-funded programs not be burdened with reporting requirements beyond those indicated in legislation. STATE HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AGENCIES

Most local health and human service agencies participate in some type of planning process to identify resources and services to be needed for the coming year. This information is most often aggregated to the state level. Head Start programs, Community Action Agencies, and certain Native American programs report directly to the federal level with no state level agency involved. State-level health and human service agencies represent significant resources for data on services usage and need. Most of these programs do not have federal requirements to report specific information related to transportation expenditures and usage. However, research indicates that state health and human service agencies frequently compile data on program service-related transportation that is maintained and used at the state level. With few federal requirements for reporting this information, there is little consistency across states on the data compiled or its usage. Establishing state-level coordination mechanisms that involve health and human service agencies provides the opportunity to further enhance state transportation planning.

State health and human service agencies set priorities and identify state-wide or sub-state regional initiatives. These agencies can have significant influence in the participation of local health and human service agency in the development, implementation and continuation of coordinated services. REGIONAL HHS OFFICES

There are ten HHS Departmental regional offices: Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Kansas City, Denver, San Francisco and Seattle. They each provide leadership and guidance to HHS grantees in between four and eight states and territories. However, some of the HHS operating divisions use a hub-concept of regional representation, resulting in offices in bi-regional settings. The Indian Health Services organizes their efforts through service areas that do not overlap the HHS regions. The programs of the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), which include community drug and alcohol treatment programs as well as state and local mental health agencies, are primarily funded through block grants overseen from federal headquarters rather than the regional offices.

Each HHS Regional Office, led by a Regional Director, participates in a regional transportation work group with regional FTA representatives and, often, other federal agencies.