TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM
TCRP SYNTHESIS 171
Third-Party Contracts for Fixed-Route
Bus Operations and Maintenance
PERFORMANCE METRICS
A Synthesis of Transit Practice
Michael J. Walk
Kelly Blume
James P. Cardenas
TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
Austin, TX
Paul Anderson
TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
San Antonio, TX
Zachary Elgart
TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
Houston, TX
Luis David Galicia
TEXAS A&M TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
El Paso, TX
Subject Areas
Administration and Management • Operations and Traffic Management • Public Transportation
Research sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the American Public Transportation Association
TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM
The nation’s growth and the need to meet mobility, environmental, and energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Current systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating problems, adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and introduce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it.
The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213—Research for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration—now the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem-solving research. TCRP, modeled after the successful National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of transit service providers. The scope of TCRP includes various transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices.
TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Proposed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was authorized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement outlining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three cooperating organizations: FTA; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB); and APTA. APTA is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Commission.
Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the TOPS Commission to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Commission defines funding levels and expected products.
Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. The panels prepare project statements (requests for proposals), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation.
Because research cannot have the desired effect if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on disseminating TCRP results to the intended users of the research: transit agencies, service providers, and suppliers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other supporting material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, training aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are implemented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners.
TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs.
TCRP SYNTHESIS 171
Project J-07, Topic SG-20
ISSN 1073-4880
ISBN 978-0-309-69864-1
© 2023 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the graphical logo are trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
COPYRIGHT INFORMATION
Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein.
Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, APTA, FAA, FHWA, FTA, GHSA, or NHTSA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP.
Cover image credit: Microsoft Office stock image.
NOTICE
The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.
The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors.
The Transportation Research Board does not develop, issue, or publish standards or specifications. The Transportation Research Board manages applied research projects which provide the scientific foundation that may be used by Transportation Research Board sponsors, industry associations, or other organizations as the basis for revised practices, procedures, or specifications.
The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Transit Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names or logos appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.
Published reports of the
TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM
are available from
Transportation Research Board
Business Office
500 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
and can be ordered through the Internet by going to
https://www.mytrb.org/MyTRB/Store/default.aspx
Printed in the United States of America
The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, nongovernmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president.
The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president.
The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine.
Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org.
The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation.
Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS
CRP STAFF FOR TCRP SYNTHESIS 171
Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Waseem Dekelbab, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs
Gwen Chisholm Smith, Manager, Transit Cooperative Research Program
Mariela Garcia-Colberg, Senior Program Officer
Emily Griswold, Program Coordinator
Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications
Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications
TCRP PROJECT J-07 PANEL
Elizabeth Presutti, Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority (DART), Des Moines, IA (Chair)
Jameson Auten, Lane Transit District, Eugene, OR
Mallory Avis, Battle Creek Transit, Battle Creek, MI
Raymond Chan, Greater Dayton RTA, Dayton, OH
Roderick B. Diaz, Southern California Regional Rail Authority, Los Angeles, CA
Mark Donaghy, Petersburg, KY
Rachel Dungca, Metro Transit, Minneapolis-St. Paul, St. Anthony, MN
Christian T. Kent, Christian T. Kent, Transit Management Consulting, LLC, Virginia Beach, VA
Beverly Neff, San Diego Metropolitan Transit System, San Diego, CA
Edward F. Watt, WattADR, Rockaway Park, NY
David C. Wilcock, VHB, Boston, MA
Tara Clark, FTA Liaison
Arthur L. Guzzetti, APTA Liaison
William Terry, National Transit Institute Liaison
TOPIC SG-20 PANEL
Jeff Bernstein, InfraTrends, LLC, Teaneck, NJ
Ryan I. Daniel, St. Cloud Metro Bus, St. Cloud, MN
Krish Inbarajan, Preteckt, Weston, FL
Ronald J. Kilcoyne, TMD, Walnut Creek, CA
David L. Miller, Foursquare Integrated Transportation Planning, Washington, DC
Alma D. Salinas, Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART), Dallas, TX
David C. Wilcock, VHB, Boston, MA
Matthew Gleason, FTA Liaison
Tamalynn Kennedy, FTA Liaison
ABOUT THE TCRP SYNTHESIS PROGRAM
Transit administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which information already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and practice. This information may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem.
There is information on nearly every subject of concern to the transit industry. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day-to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evaluating such useful information and to make it available to the entire transit community, the Transit Cooperative Research Program Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Committee authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, TCRP Project J-07, “Synthesis of Information Related to Transit Practices,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute a TCRP report series, Synthesis of Transit Practice.
This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems.
FOREWORD
By Mariela Garcia-Colberg
Staff Officer
Transportation Research Board
Transit agencies typically utilize three basic models to provide fixed-route bus transit services to the public. These models are fully in-house operations and maintenance by the transit agency; fully contracted operations and management by a third party; or a hybrid model, in which certain services or functions are contracted out and the remainder are run in house. An understanding of the service models is clearly relevant for the potential to maximize operational efficiencies and manage costs.
The synthesis continues the work of TCRP Synthesis 136: Contracting Fixed-Route Bus Transit Service and documents current performance metrics used to contract out bus operations and maintenance in North America. The synthesis looks at all situations where operations and management services are contracted out (i.e., the entire network is contracted out or divisions or sections of the network are contracted out). The synthesis documents the reasons for outsourcing and the metrics used by agencies for evaluating whether to self-operate or contract out bus operations and maintenance in North America. In addition, the synthesis ascertains how agencies are holding their third-party providers accountable against contractual terms as well as methodologies that agencies use to monitor and oversee contractors.
The synthesis presents a literature review and results of a survey of transit agencies that contract services or previously contracted services. Thirty-seven completed responses were received from the 83 invited agencies in the survey sample. Five case examples of different transit systems are also provided. These present an in-depth analysis of the process, including the nature of contractual arrangements; reasons and analyses for starting and continuing to outsource; contractor accountability; and benefits, challenges, and lessons learned.
The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on page iv. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records the practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand.
AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thank you to the many individuals who contributed to this report, including the transit agency employees who spent their time completing the survey. And a special thank you to the staff of the case example transit agencies, including:
- Nassau Inter-County Express (NICE Bus),
- MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA),
- San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (San Diego MTS),
- The City of Tucson (Sun Tran), and
- Escambia County Area Transit (ECAT).
Without the involvement of the survey participants and case example transit agencies, this synthesis (and many like it) would not be possible.
In addition to the authors listed on the title page, thank you to those who helped with this report, especially Philip Randall, who contributed to the analysis of survey data.
CONTENTS
Contracting Out in the United States
Chapter 3 Transit Agency Survey
Nassau Inter-County Express (NICE Bus)
MetroWest Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA)
San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (San Diego MTS)
Escambia County Area Transit (ECAT)
Chapter 5 Conclusions and Future Study
Appendix A Definitions of Contractual Relationships Terms
Appendix B Excerpts from Performance Measures and LDs
Appendix D Survey Questionnaire
Appendix E Details of San Diego MTS Incentives and Penalties
This page intentionally left blank.
