Skip to main content

Fare-Free Transit Evaluation Framework (2023) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:


Pages 27-31

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 27...
... Based on these expectations, the project team should determine the appropriate selection criteria. For instance, they may not support any alternative that has a net cost to the transit agency, requires any additional service, or is not supported by the community.
Read the entire page →
From page 28...
... The transit agency decided on three final scenarios that were fully evaluated as part of the study. High-Level Evaluation of Fare Program Options and Final Fare-Free and Reduced-Fare Scenarios -- DASH *
Read the entire page →
From page 29...
... • Step 10: Select preferred alternative using the selection criteria and appropriate decision making process. Step 9: Estimate Impacts The project team should gather credible evidence across the various performance measures for each alternative and compare the impacts across the alternatives.
Read the entire page →
From page 30...
... Framework in Practice: Link Transit Analysis Process Using fare study goals of attracting ridership, improving operational effi ciency, and reducing the costs of collecting fares, Link Transit completed an evaluation of full fare-free transit across multiple performance mea sures including fixed-route ridership, fixed-route productivity, fixed-route operating costs, paratransit operating costs, foregone fare revenue, fare collection costs, additional funding opportunities, and annual change in operating costs. The project team started by estimating ridership increases on fixed-route transit and paratransit.
Read the entire page →
From page 31...
... 2021, Figure 5-6 Framework in Practice: Ride On Alternatives Comparison The Ride On Zero & Reduced Fare Study (MCDOT 2021) evaluated four fare-free and reduced-fare alternatives across seven goals and respective performance measures including magnitude of benefit to riders with low incomes, increase in ridership from riders without vehicle access, change in net operating support ($NOS)
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • transit agency
  • transit agencies
  • project team
  • selection criteria
  • fare study

  • fare collection
  • low incomes
  • existing conditions
  • credible evidence
  • evaluation plan

  • fare revenue
  • fare program
  • preferred alternative
  • agency staff
  • transit alternatives

  • annual change
  • gather credible
  • stic funding
  • ridership increase
  • collection costs

  • farebox recovery
  • additional funding
  • various performance
  • estimated annual
  • program options

  • study goals
  • link transit
  • operating costs
  • ridership increases
  • farebox revenue


    • This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
    More information on Chapter Skim is available.