Vanpool Program Five-Year Strategic Plan Report vanpool strategic... · 2006-10-06 · Five Year Strategic Plan Report DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Page 1 • Nelson\Nygaard

$Page 1: Vanpool Program Five-Year Strategic Plan Report vanpool strategic... · 2006-10-06 · Five Year Strategic Plan Report DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Page 1 • Nelson\Nygaard$
July 2006

Vanpool Program Five-Year Strategic Plan Report

Final Report

Submitted by:

F i v e Y e a r S t r a t e g i c P l a n R e p o r t

D E N V E R R E G I O N A L C O U N C I L O F G O V E R N M E N T S

Page i • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates

Table of Contents PAGE

Introduction.................................................................................................1

Overview ......................................................................................................................1

Study Process ..............................................................................................................1

Regional Vanpooling: A Brief History ...........................................................................2

SWOT Analysis....................................................................................................................................3 Staffing ............................................................................................................................................3

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................4 Fleet .................................................................................................................................................4

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................4 Operations and Management.........................................................................................................4

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................5 Regional Demand and Travel Patterns .........................................................................................5

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................5 Funding and Costs .........................................................................................................................6

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................6 Passenger Fares and Subsidy.......................................................................................................6

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................6 Institutional Location......................................................................................................................7

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................7 Marketing and Outreach.................................................................................................................7

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................8 Partnerships & Coordination .........................................................................................................8

Key SWOT Findings .....................................................................................................................8 Summary .........................................................................................................................................9

Strategic Plan............................................................................................10

Mission.......................................................................................................................10

Core Mission Statement ...................................................................................................................10 Goals and Objectives .................................................................................................10

Goal 1 Expand the DRCOG Vanpool Program in a Fiscally Responsible Manner ......................12 Objective A: Develop a Performance Measurement System for the Vanpool Program..12 Action 1: Establish minimum vehicle capacity standards........................................................12 Action 2: Establish total vehicle capacity standards................................................................13 Action 3: Establish cost/mile, cost/trip, & revenue/trip standards............................................13 Action 4: Establish standards for vehicle trip reduction and environmental impacts ...............14 Action 5: Establish staffing ratio standards .............................................................................15 Objective B: Provide Sufficient Vehicle Capacity to Meet Market Demand .....................16 Action 1: Develop annual growth targets ................................................................................16 Action 2: Develop Five-Year Vehicle Acquisition and Replacement Plan ...............................17 Action 3: Develop financial strategy to grow vehicle replacement fund ..................................17



Page ii • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates

Action 4: Develop vendor contract (as needed) to meet demand that exceeds normal fleet growth.....................................................................................................................................18 Objective C: Maintain Staff Resources to Support Program Growth ...............................19 Action 1: Update vanpool staff job descriptions regularly .......................................................19

Goal 2: Establish Reliable Level of Funding to Support Program Growth..................................21 Objective A: Develop A Long-Term Funding Strategy ......................................................21 Action 1: Develop long-term funding agreement with RTD .....................................................21 Action 2: Identify potential funding partners, (possibly build into FastTracks or include other vanpool providers) ..................................................................................................................22 Objective B: Build and Maintain Appropriate Partnerships to Sustain Financial Stability...............................................................................................................................................23 Action 1: Strengthen relationships with current funding partners (i.e., information sharing, performance reporting, presentations to Board members, etc.)..............................................23 Action 2: Consider initiating employer-subsidized vanpool program......................................24 Objective C: Refine Fare Policy and Instruments to Match Long-Term Funding Requirements for Program Operation ................................................................................25 Action 1: Adjust fare policy ....................................................................................................25 Action 2: Eliminate free fare incentive for drivers....................................................................26 Action 3: Diversify fare categories and payment options .......................................................27

Goal 3: Increase the Visibility and Understanding of the DRCOG Vanpool Program .................29 Objective A: Demonstrate Critical Vanpool Program Outcomes to Customers, Policy Makers and Members of the Public.....................................................................................29 Action 1: Report Program Performance to DRCOG Board and Regional Policy Makers Regularly ................................................................................................................................29 Action 2: Measure Vanpool Performance Against Other Regional Modes..............................30 Action 3: Link to the Regional Travel Demand Management Strategic Plan (DRCOG) ..........30 Objective B: Educate Key Partners about Vanpooling.....................................................31 Action 1: Update and make available information about current routes and seat availability.31 Action 2: Host Vanpool 101 to help TMO/As with marketing vanpool service........................32 Objective C: Simplify program administration and customer experience......................33 Action 1: Improve functionality of vanpool program website ...................................................33 Objective D: Develop focused vanpool marketing program ............................................34 Action 1: Identify target markets for vanpooling......................................................................34 Action 2: Focus marketing on vanpool (separate from other TDM services) ..........................35 Action 3: Set internal staff sales targets and incentives..........................................................35

Goal 4 Promote Regional Transportation Policies That Support Vanpooling.............................37 Objective A: Ensure Vanpool/TDM Projects Receive Consideration in Regional Planning and Funding Processes .......................................................................................37 Action 1: Review TIP to ensure vanpool benefits are represented (i.e., cost/VMT reduction/air quality) ....................................................................................................................................37 Action 2: Participate in regional transportation planning .........................................................38 Objective B: Update DRCOG Rideshare Program Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives38 Action 1: Conduct annual staff-level updates to Vanpool Program goals and objectives........38 Action 2: Conduct Vanpool Program Strategic Plan update every 5 years .............................39



Page iii • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates

Goal 5: Build Strong Working Relationships with TMO/As, Cities, Employers and Other Regional Partners .................................................................................................................40 Objective A: Define Roles and Responsibilities of Regional Transportation Providers (i.e., DRCOG Vanpool, RTD, etc) and Transportation Management Organizations/Associations ................................................................................................40 Action 1: Host regular meetings with TMA/Os, RTD and other transportation providers ........40 Objective B: Develop Vanpool Partner Program that ties TMO/As activities to program outcomes...............................................................................................................................40 Action 1: Review TMO/A role in promoting/selling vanpools..................................................41 Action 2: Develop sales incentive program for participating TMA/Os (if deemed beneficial in Action 1)..................................................................................................................................41 Objective C: Coordinate with VanGO & RideFinders .......................................................41 Action 1: Host regular meetings of regional vanpool program staffs.......................................42 Action 2: Share vanpool route and database information ......................................................42

Table of Figures

PAGE

Figure 1: Goal 1 Action Plan Timeline........................................................................20 Figure 2: Goal 2 Action Plan Timeline........................................................................28 Figure 3: Goal 3 Action Plan Timeline........................................................................36 Figure 4: Goal 4 Action Plan Timeline........................................................................39 Figure 5: Goal 5 Action Plan Timeline........................................................................43



Page 1 • Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates

Introduction Overview In 2005, the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) commissioned an analysis of their RideArrangers vanpool program with the intent to develop a five-year strategic plan for the program. This DRCOG Vanpool Program Strategic Plan Report reviews the findings of the first phase of this study, a detailed technical analysis, recommends a new mission statement for the program and provides a clear framework to meet its mission through a series of goals and objectives. The Vanpool Program Analysis Report provided a detailed assessment of the impacts of regional growth, evaluated opportunities to expand market share, and outlined critical program challenges and opportunities. The Strategic Plan is rooted in that analysis, providing a five-year plan and monitoring strategy for staff to use as a framework for enabling the program to grow and continue to become a more vital part of the region’s transportation systems.

Study Process The DRCOG Vanpool Program analysis is a year-long process that consists of the following phases:

Program Assessment. During this phase the consultant team conducted a detailed analysis of Vanpool program operations, staffing, funding and finances, fleet makeup and other key program elements such as marketing and outreach. The program analysis included a comparative evaluation of peer vanpool programs, outreach interviews with key stakeholders and a detailed Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis. The results of this phase were detailed in the DRCOG Vanpool Analysis Technical Report.

Goal Setting. Following the finalization of the Program Assessment the consultant team met with key DRCOG staff, RTD staff and stakeholders to develop and prioritize goals and objectives for the vanpool program. The results of this meeting were summarized and delivered to DRCOG for review and approval.

Strategic Plan. This Vanpool Program Strategic Plan document is the primary deliverable for this phase of the study. It builds on previous study phases to provide a five-year action plan for the program. Four key goals for the program are identified. Objectives and active directives for meeting each are detailed, including a timeline, costs and staffing requirements.

Final Plan and Delivery: The next and final phase of the study will be to finalize the DRCOG Vanpool Strategic Plan and to deliver a presentation to DRCOG staff and the Board of Directors (if desired).




Regional Vanpooling: A Brief History In 1992 the City of Boulder initiated a vanpool program. The majority of the vanpool funding for this program came from federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. While the program was still operating from Boulder, RideArrangers began providing outreach to help recruit new passengers and develop new vanpools. After four years, the program was operating seven vans. In 1997, RideArrangers began operating its own vanpool program with vans donated by two companies in the Denver metro area. These vans all had high mileage, but were operational at the time. The companies also donated a small amount of money to DRCOG.

Shortly after DRCOG began operating the RideArrangers vanpool program in 1997, Boulder transferred its program and vehicles to DRCOG. The vans from Boulder had already been on the road for six years and also had very high mileage. From its inception, RideArrangers vanpool program was in a difficult capital position as it was burdened with an aging fleet and limited replacement funding.

When the vanpool program became a part of the suite of services offered by RideArrangers, participants were able to benefit from the Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) service operated by DRCOG. This allows carpoolers, bus riders and vanpool riders to feel more comfortable using an alternative mode, as they are guaranteed a taxi ride home in the event that they get sick, have an emergency or have to work late. RideArrangers’ GRH program is oldest and the second largest regional program in the country; it is not supported by federal funds.

From 1997 until 2001, the vanpool program operated without subsidy due to internal policy direction. The lack of subsidy translated into limited growth for the program and again facilitated the aging of program fleet. In 2001, the vanpool program began obtaining federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds for capital expenditures.

The year 2001 brought significant change for the RideArrangers vanpool program. After administering the program in-house for six years, DRCOG decided to contract program administration to VPSI; the goal was to reduce the administrative and maintenance burden the program placed on DRCOG. Unfortunately, this relationship lasted less than two years as DRCOG realized that they were still utilizing the same amount of staff to run and manage the program while contracting with VPSI. Thus, the administration of the program was once again brought in-house and continues to be administered internally to this day.

Also in 2001, the Regional Transportation District (RTD) offered a $300,000 subsidy to the RideArrangers vanpool program to expand the program. The Transportation Expansion Project (T-REX1) also provided a new funding source for the vanpool program. As a part of the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) that was completed in 2000 for the Southeast Corridor, $3 million dollars was allocated to Transportation Demand Management (TDM) activities throughout the course of the T-REX Project. Of this amount, $350,000 was

1 See detail of T-REX Project on next page.




allocated to the vanpool program, which included the subsidization of new vanpool riders’ fares as well as the purchase of new vehicles.

Given the DRCOG vanpool program’s relatively short tenure, particularly as a federally assisted program, it should be considered a success. The program has evolved from an 11-van operation in 1997, to a program with 70 vans at the close of 2005. Recent participant surveys show that the program makes an important contribution to regional vehicle trip reduction and provides one of the most cost effective methods for decreasing regional VMT.

SWOT Analysis As part of the Vanpool Analysis Technical Report, a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis was conducted for the Vanpool Program.

SWOT findings were evaluated and summarized in ten primary categories that best characterize DRCOG Vanpool Program operations, financing and institutional relationships. The following is a list of those categories and key strengths (S), weaknesses (W), opportunities (O), and threats (T) under each. In some cases critical findings fall under multiple categories. For example, something that poses a threat to the program under the status quo may become an opportunity if current practices are adapted.

The sections are summarized from more detailed analysis provided in the DRCOG Vanpool Analysis Technical Report. More detail about strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats identified in these sections can be found in that document.

Staffing The Vanpool Program has two staff positions, a Vanpool Program Assistant and a Vanpool Coordinator, dedicated to managing all functions of the program. A TDM Manager oversees the vanpool program along with other RideArrangers services, and reports directly to a division Director.

SWOT Analysis Format S – Strengths • What is the Vanpool Program doing well? • What unique advantages/resources does it have? • What do customers and partners see as strengths? W – Weaknesses • What should the Vanpool Program improve? • What do customers and partners see as weaknesses? O – Opportunities • What good opportunities face the Vanpool Program? • What interesting trends may benefit the program? T - Threats • What obstacles does the program face? • What changes in market or funding threaten the

program?




Key SWOT Findings

S – The vanpool program has room for incrementally large growth at existing staffing levels. The program has approximately 34 vans per FTE, whereas some peers that with in-house programs handled between 50 and 100 vans per administrative staff position.

W – In recent years, frequent vanpool staffing changes have created some confusion about roles and responsibilities for the program, particularly as they relate to external relationships.

O – DRCOG has begun to capitalize on opportunities to create a new staff and division structure and to add senior leadership to the program.

T – The program has had continued difficulty in attracting and retaining qualified staff, which may be affected by the competitive job market created by several major transportation initiatives in the Denver region.

Fleet As of February 2006, there were 70 vehicles in the DRCOG vanpool fleet, sixty-eight of which were operating in-service and two used as back up. The average age of all of the vehicles in the fleet is 34 months.2 DRCOG has a policy to retire vans once they have reached 100,000 miles or have been in service for five years.

Key SWOT Findings

S – DRCOG owns all of the vanpool fleet, and keeps its inventory well maintained.

S – More than three quarters of the vanpool fleet is minivans (79%), which appeals to drivers and helps in creating new vanpools.

S – Vanpool passengers are satisfied with the quality and comfort of vehicles they ride in.

O – RideArrangers is working to modernize their vanpool fleet through replacement of the vehicles (started with out of date fleet) and has developed a vehicle replacement schedule.

T – By phasing out maxivans, RideArrangers has limited the opportunity to consolidate vehicles and improve the efficiency of the vanpools.

Operations and Management The vanpool program had a total of 365 participants at the end of 20053, and has filled approximately 72% of the seats in its minivans and 56% of the seats in its maxivans.4 RTD

2 This includes DRCOG’s latest van acquisitions and is according to Vanpool Annual Report 2005 provided by Kenn Neugart. 3 Based on data from Vanpool Annual Report 2005 provided by Kenn Neugart. 4 This percentage may be skewed upwards since RideArrangers classifies 9 of its maxivans as minivans for fare and RTD-subsidy structure.




has an agreement with DRCOG that they will oversee the reporting of vanpool program mileage and operating statistics to the Federal Transit Administration for inclusion in the National Transit Database (NTD).

Key SWOT Findings

S – Vehicle occupancy rates are reasonable given its fleet makeup, ranging from 5.4 passengers/minivan to 8.5 passengers/maxivan.

S – Some seat availability (vans are not 100% full) allows the addition of new participants and provides higher level of comfort.

W – The Vanpool Program lacks well-developed program goals and performance metrics.

O – A supplemental vendor contract could be valuable if demand exceeds program capacity

O – New vendors such as FlexCar bring new services that could expand the range of services offered by the Vanpool Program.

Regional Demand and Travel Patterns The vanpool program experienced tremendous growth in 2003 and 2004, with the number of operational vans increasing 47.8% and 64.7% in the respective years. Current vanpools average 30-miles in trip length, with the greatest demand originating in the suburban Denver communities, traveling to destinations in Denver or close in communities.

Key SWOT Findings

S – RideArrangers has met significant demand growth in recent years.

O – There is an opportunity for increased coordination with other regional vanpool programs, VanGO and RideFinders.

O – New Light Rail services provide opportunity to expand service models.

O – Opportunities exist to diversify market base.5

T – Many of RideArrangers customers are nearing retirement age.

T – Inability to place customers in vans due to limited vehicle capacity (through 2007) could cause RideArrangers to lose potential customers.

5 Opportunities for market diversification included, outreach to underserved demographic groups, college campuses, large employment sites, new rail station based services, flexible vanpools that allow shared vehicle use midday, etc.




Funding and Costs The vanpool program is funded largely through CMAQ grant funds, with additional support from DRCOG, RTD and other regional grant funds. Through a contract with DRCOG, RTD contributes over $300,000 per year to the vanpool program. The money RTD contributes is used to subsidize fares, remaining funds are used for matching federal CMAQ funds, fleet expansion and fleet replacement. In recent years DRCOG has not been able to make contributions to the vehicle replacement fund required to fund required future fleet replacement.

Key SWOT Findings

S – Vanpool administrative costs measured on a per unit of service basis are slightly higher than the average of peer programs reviewed in this report, but should correct due to “lumpiness” of staffing as the program grows.6

S – Per passenger subsidies are lower than most other regional public transportation modes.

W – Increasing subsidies requirements have limited growth of vehicle replacement fund.

O – DRCOG can negotiate a new contract with RTD for subsidy and vehicle replacement funds.

T- Lack of long-term contract with RTD could lead to sudden elimination of critical funding for passenger fare subsidy and vehicle replacement.

Passenger Fares and Subsidy RideArrangers implemented a new fare structure at the beginning of 2006, which was intended to keep vanpool fares in line with regional bus fares. DRCOG and RTD agreed to set regional vanpool fares in line with RTD’s distance based fare structure. The monthly fare for a trip under 20 miles is $50 for a full sized van, and $60 for a Minivan, with fares increasing based on distance. RTD invoices show that on average, vanpools receive approximately $475 per month in vanpool subsidy.7

Key SWOT Findings

S – Current fares are reasonable and aligned with regional transit fares.

S – Passengers indicated willingness to pay more in a recent on-board survey.

S – Even after a fare increase in the first quarter of 2006, DRCOG is below the estimated price point at which fares will begin to negatively effect passenger demand, particularly in the shortest and longest distance fare categories.

6 Vanpool Administrative Cost Per mile is $0.25 vs. $0.12 peer average. 7 Prior to 2006 fare increase.




W – Subsidies from T-REX mitigation are ending.

O – Projected increases in gasoline prices may decrease sensitivity to vanpool fares.

T – Current funding by RTD is not sufficient to allow DRCOG to continue to maintain vanpool fare equity with regional transit fare pricing.

T - Multiple increases in out-of-pocket costs for passengers caused by increasing regional transit fares and loss of fare subsidies could decrease demand.8

Institutional Location The vanpool program is located within the broader RideArrangers suite of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) services. The program is housed in the Transportation Planning and Operations Division with oversight by a senior program director.

Key SWOT Findings

S – DRCOG is the founding agency for the Vanpool Program. Therefore, its staff has a great deal of pride in its success.

S – Current location allows full integration with RideArrangers TDM programs, outreach and marketing

S – Current location allows continued use of recognized RideArrangers name and logo.

W – Operational program is a difficult fit for planning agency, is not unprecedented.

O – Recent integration in “Transportation Planning and Operations” division will improve relevance to regional initiatives.

Marketing and Outreach RideArrangers provides marketing and outreach for the vanpool program in conjunction with promoting other programs, such as Carpooling. The RideArrangers Marketing Coordinator develops marketing plans, advertising campaigns, collateral materials for the vanpool program and provides outreach for all rideshare programs and activities. In the Spring of 2006, RideArrangers launched its new “Mighty Motorin’ Ride Arrangers” marketing campaign based on the superheroes popularized by comic books of the mid-twentieth century. The campaign includes distribution in nearly every available format (i.e. newspaper, magazine, radio, television, internet, billboards, etc.), including a vanpool-specific public service announcement (PSA).

8 Current $51 average out of pocket cost is low compared to peers. DRCOG Vanpool raised fares in January 2006 and is considering another fare increase later this year. Both of these increases are tied to RTD fare increases and do not respond directly to the loss of T-REX subsidy funding.




Key SWOT Findings

S – RideArrangers has been cautious in recent years not to “over market” the vanpool program due to limited seat capacity.

W – The uncertainty about growth capacity (fleet availability) for vanpools has limited marketing efforts for the program.

W – Joint marketing with other RideArrangers programs is not an effective strategy, given industry research suggested there is little overlap between vanpool and other non-operational TDM programs.

O – Increasing the fleet capacity will allow for a more comprehensive and effective vanpool marketing campaign.

O – Further develop RideArrangers as “the brand” for vanpooling in the metro area.

Partnerships & Coordination DRCOG has worked collectively with VanGO and RideFinders, the Fort Collins and Colorado Springs vanpool programs. The three Front Range vanpool programs have coordinated effectively to promote and develop of shared ride services in the region. DRCOG and RTD have successfully partnered to support and oversee the RideArrangers program. Improved relationships and stronger partnerships between RideArrangers and regional TMO/A’s is considered a high priority by DRCOG and other stakeholders. While this may not directly impact Vanpool operations, it does have legitimate impact on recruitment potential and outreach opportunities.

Key SWOT Findings

S – Existing relationship between VanGO, RideFinders and RideArrangers is beneficial for information sharing and has resulted in increased coordination of customer database information.

S – RTD provides strong support for RideArrangers program.

W – No clear direction on role of partner organizations (RTD and TMO/As) in promoting vanpool.

O – Work to develop a comprehensive vanpool database for the entire Front Range.9

O – Establish regular communication with local stakeholders (TMA/Os, RTD, etc.) to share information about the vanpool program.

9 Service area boundaries for the three Front Range vanpool programs cross, therefore it is beneficial to each provider to be able to receive information about registrants that may help to fill vacant seats on current services or facilitate the formation of a new van route.




Summary In summary, the DRCOG Vanpool Program is in a good position to continue on a stable growth path and to dramatically improve its relationships with partner organizations. The largest hurdle to program growth is the development of a stable funding plan for program operations that would allow DRCOG security to expand its fleet and program operations.

According to a customer survey, vanpool users are satisfied with service and price point.

DRCOG has made a number of changes in the first two quarters of 2006 that strengthen the program position (organizational, budgeting, staffing).

The relative size of the Denver metro area and projected increases in fuel prices promises strong future demand growth.

Vanpool fare levels are reasonable even after recent increases, but loss of T-REX subsidies could impact out-of-pocket costs for customers.

The limited supply of vans available for new vanpool starts is currently a major obstacle to program growth. The development of a vehicle acquisition and replacement plan is needed to ensure future customers can be served in a timely manner.

The lack of a stable funding limits van growth, since DRCOG is not assured that it will be able to support administration for a growing program.

Low subsidies and high rate of SOV reversion put the program in a strong competitive position for CMAQ funds.

Strained relationship with regional TDM partner organizations have been detrimental to program coordination and marketing. Efforts to improve these relationships are underway and should benefit the Vanpool Program.




Strategic Plan The purpose of the Vanpool Program Strategic Plan is to provide a framework for program growth and development over the next five years.

Mission A mission statement is useful in defining a program’s current charter. The DRCOG Vanpool Program has never adopted a program specific mission, although RideArrangers has a program-wide mission statement. Through the Vanpool Analysis study process, DRCOG staff and stakeholders worked with the consultant team to define a core mission for the program. The mission statement describes the program’s reason for existence in terms of current social need and integration in the broader organization. The recommended mission provides clarity of purpose for relevant stakeholders including customers, the board, and employees. It also drives day-to-day service delivery, giving focus to the agency in terms of daily decisions and actions, ultimately stating what the program does and why it does it.

Core Mission Statement The following is the recommended mission statement for the DRCOG Vanpool Program:

The mission of the Denver Regional Council of Governments (DRCOG) Vanpool Program is to place riders in vanpools, thereby reducing single-occupant commute trips, regional vehicle miles traveled, mobile sources of air pollution and fuel consumption.

Goals and Objectives The SWOT analysis summarized in this report defines the challenges and opportunities that the Vanpool Program must address in the next five years to continue to effectively achieve its stated mission. Based on a review of that analysis and its vision for the program’s future, DRCOG staff and stakeholders developed five primary goals for the program:

Goal 1: Expand the DRCOG Vanpool Program in a Fiscally Responsible Manner

Goal 2: Establish Reliable Level of Funding to Support Program Growth

Hierarchy of the Strategic Plan Mission – defines program charter. Goals – provide policy direction toward realization of program mission. Objectives – relate to the achievement each goal. They are understandable, specific, attainable and program oriented. Performance Measures – provide the mechanism for measuring the achievement of each objective. Measures can be passive (qualitative) or active (quantitative). Standards – set the level of attainment of each performance measure.




Goal 3: Increase the Visibility and Understanding of the DRCOG Vanpool Program

Goal 4: Promote Regional Transportation Policies That Support Vanpooling

Goal 5: Build Strong Working Relationships with TMO/As, Cities, Employers and Other Regional Partners

This section details the Objectives, Performance Measurements and Standards the Vanpool Program should adopt to achieve these Goals.




Goal 1 Expand the DRCOG Vanpool Program in a Fiscally Responsible Manner

Objective A: Develop a Performance Measurement System for the Vanpool Program A concise and active performance measurement system will position the DRCOG Vanpool Program to better track investment in vanpool services and provide clear guidance to staff about how the program is performing against reasonable expectations. This is a critical objective for improving internal functionality of the program and external relationships with key program partners.

Action 1: Establish minimum vehicle capacity standards Purpose: Ensure existing capital resources are being utilized efficiently; Promote consolidation of low-rider vanpools; Maintain high fare to subsidy ratio. Timeline: Establish Standards by 4th Quarter 2006; Ongoing measurement (2006-2011) Measurements - Minimum participants per minivan (after 120 days)

- Minimum participants per maxivan (after 120 days) Minivan 5 (including driver) Standard (Suggested) Maxivan 8 (including driver)

Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none

Like most vanpool programs DRCOG has minimum requirements for the number of registered participants needed to develop and maintain a vanpool. The current minimum requirement for vanpool start-up and continued operation is four participants (3 passengers and a driver). The minimum occupancy rate for a vanpool should be raised to five participants (4 passengers and a driver) over time. DRCOG should include a timeline for the attainment of the minimum number of participants and allow vanpool participants to “buy up” the unsold seat(s) in order to maintain the van if the minimum number of participants is not realized by the timeline goal. This will allow DRCOG to continue to offer start-ups for groups of four, but should require that ridership build to five passengers within 120 days. Maxivan should have a minimum of 8 paying passengers, but allow the same initiation period and fare purchase options.

If the 5th passenger is not enrolled within 120 days and the existing riders do not pay the 5th fare, the vanpool should be terminated after 30 days notice.




Action 2: Establish total vehicle capacity standards Purpose: Ensure existing capital resources are being utilized efficiently; Promote van consolidation; Improve per van revenue return. Timeline: Establish Standard 4th Quarter 2006; Meet standard 4th Quarter 2007; Maintain standard 2008-2011

- Average participants per minivan Measurement - Average participants per maxivan -Minivan 5.5 (including driver) Standard10 (Suggested) -Maxivan 9.0 (including driver)

Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none (revise current Program Assistant job description to monitor)

The average number of passengers per vanpool should be higher than the minimum requirements for a new van start. DRCOG’s current occupancy rates for minivans are good at 5.4 passengers per van. Since seating in these smaller vehicles can be cramped, it is not reasonable to expect average capacity to exceed 5.5 passengers per van. Maxivan occupancy rates should be targeted for improvement to 9.0 passengers per van.

Action 3: Establish cost/mile, cost/trip, & revenue/trip standards Purpose: Track cost-effectiveness; Provide mechanism for comparing cost effectiveness against other regional modes. Timeline: Track annually; Achieve cost standards by 2008.

-Average cost per mile -Average cost per one-way trip

Measurements11

-Percent of annual operating cost recovered through fare revenue -Avg. Cost per mile $0.50 -Avg. Cost per one-way

vehicle trip $4.00

Standards12 (Suggested)

-Operating cost recovered 75% Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none (revise current Program Assistance job descriptions to monitor)

10 As of December 2005 the average number of passengers per van was: minivan – 5.4 and maxivan – 8.5. The standards provided are intended to encourage improvement; however, it is unrealistic to expect that minivan occupancy will exceed 5.5 without reducing passenger comfort significantly. 11 As of February 2005 per mile costs were $1.12 and per trip costs were $5.49. If DRCOG is able to achieve stated growth targets and maintain its current operating costs structure, it should be able to reach these cost standards by 2011. 12 Current program unit costs and revenue intake are provided in Chapter 7 of the DRCOG Vanpool Analysis Technical Report. These standards are intended as five-year targets and likely will not be achievable within the first two years of this plan.




The DRCOG Vanpool Program Analysis Technical Report documents 2005-2006 vanpool unit costs. Cost standards presented in this report are a significant improvement over current operating costs and will only be achieved with program growth and improved economies of scale. In the interim years, DRCOG should track incremental cost relationships and improvement toward the standard.

The most important of these measures is operating cost recovery through fares. Setting a project percentage of total operating costs to be recovered through fare revenue (including subsidies) and tracking it annually will allow DRCOG to better measure the appropriateness of its fare levels.

Action 4: Establish standards for vehicle trip reduction and environmental impacts Purpose: Track positive environmental impacts; Track impacts on regional congestion mitigation. Timeline: Establish Standards by 4th Quarter 2006; Annual (2006-2011) Measurement -Annual VMT reduction

-Air pollution eliminated (tons/lbs. of particulate) -Annual vehicle trips reduced (one-way) -Fuel consumption reduced (gallons) -VMT Reduced Establish standard -Emissions Reduced13 Establish standard -Vehicle Trips Reduced Establish standard

Standard (Suggested)

-Fuel Consumption Reduced Establish standard Associated Costs: minimal – research and materials for staff to establish a method through which current program levels for each area and set reasonable standard based on projected program growth. Additional Staffing: none

Vanpool program funding is based in part on the program’s effectiveness in mitigating negative environmental impacts associated with single-occupant vehicle commuting and related congestion. To that end, it is important that the program be able to clearly illustrate its commitment and success in reducing VMT, air pollution and fossil fuel consumption. Since year end passenger surveys provide the basic information needed to calculate VMT and related benefits, we suggest that DRCOG be seek to achieve a higher rate of return for this survey. This will provide a more accurate sample and the baseline information by which to establish reasonable targets and resulting standards for each of the suggested measurements.

13 Official formulas for calculating emissions reduction can be found in the CMAQ Report at http://denver.c-b.com/CMAQ/.




Action 5: Establish staffing ratio standards Purpose: Establish program growth benchmarks for adding administrative staff capacity. Timeline: Establish Benchmarks 4th Quarter 2006; Phased based on van growth Measurement -Administrative staff per operational vans

-Up to 100 vans 2.0 Admin FTE -101 to 125 vans 2.5 Admin FTE -126 to 150 vans 3.0 Admin FTE

Standard14 (Suggested)

-151 + vans 4.0 Admin FTE Associated Costs: none (actual staffing costs are addressed in Objective B, Action 1) Additional Staffing: none

Administrative staffing requirements associated with the vanpool program should not be expected to increase significantly as the program grows over the next five years. At certain increments of growth, the program will need to add additional staff capacity to handle ongoing administrative tasks. This action provides benchmarks by which DRCOG can assess staffing levels against relevant industry standards. The standards provided here assume that the program will continue to be managed and operated in-house. Staffing for new or supplemental programs are not included in these standards.

14 Administrative staffing standards based on peer operations with in-house program administration. FTE per van numbers are based on in-house van operations, additional vans operated through a supplemental vendor contract should not be counted.




Objective B: Provide Sufficient Vehicle Capacity to Meet Market Demand For the DRCOG Vanpool Program to continue to grow and thrive, it is critical that it can provide vans for every eligible group that requests a vanpool. Long waiting lists for van service will ultimately discourage participation and cause potential customers to revert to SOV commuting. Therefore, a primary objective is to plan effectively for demand growth; acquire the vehicles needed to meet that growth; and be prepared to accommodate demand for vanpools that exceeds internal projections. The following action items position the DRCOG Vanpool Program to meet this objective.

Action 1: Develop annual growth targets Purpose: Set growth estimates/targets for use by Vanpool Program; Provide mechanism for effective fleet planning; Provide staff targets for customer recruitment. Timeline: Establish Targets 4th Quarter 2006; Annual (2006-2011) Measurement - Net new vans in operation each year15

- Increased customer registration (names in database) -15 net new vans Standard - Net increase of 20% per year

Associated Costs: ($60,000 at each new increment of staffing required to support van growth - see Objective A, Action 1) Additional Staffing: none

Vanpool growth is based on demand projections developed in the DRCOG Vanpool Analysis Technical Report. These estimates are based on recent demand trends and on an analysis of regional travel patterns. DRCOG may wish to phase vehicle acquisitions or use a supplemental vendor contract to avoid overbuying fleet capacity.

The fact that the Denver vanpool market is underdeveloped, compared with comparable urban areas, combined with other factors affecting the transportation market, such as increasing energy costs and increased congestion, point to a growth rate that could reach nearly 100% in the next five years if driven by aggressive marketing and outreach.

15 Net new vans is the total vans gained less vans lost during a calendar year. See DRCOG Vanpool Analysis Technical Report for more detail on projected demand growth.




Action 2: Develop Five-Year Vehicle Acquisition and Replacement Plan Purpose: Track capital fleet inventory; Ensure future fleet resources are in line with projected and targeted ridership growth/demand. Timeline: Develop and adopted by 2nd Quarter 2007, Update Annually (2007-2011) Measurement - Vehicle Acquisition and Replacement Plan (VARP) developed and

adopted, including up-to-date inventory of vehicle mileage, condition, retirement date

-Dates identified for new vehicle acquisitions and vehicle replacements based on current demand and growth projections

Standard - Developed -VARP updated by end of each fiscal year

Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none (revise current Program Coordinator job description to handle)

In 2006 DRCOG created a basic, but effective spreadsheet to track vehicle age, mileage and retirement benchmarks. This tool should be expanded to include a detailed van retirement policy and adopted as an official program document. This plan will provide an important tool for annual budget development and development for input into the regional TIP. The plan should be updated each year.

Action 3: Develop financial strategy to grow vehicle replacement fund

Purpose: Ensure that financial reserves for vehicle replacement grow annually in a manner consistent with the vehicle acquisition and replacement fund. Timeline: Funding strategy developed by 4th Quarter 2006 Measurement -Identification of stable annual funding source(s) for vehicle replacement

fund -Annual growth in vehicle replacement fund in line with VARP

requirements Standard - Yes

- Yes Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none The primary intent of this action is to identify and budget dedicated funding for the vanpool vehicle replacement fund. DRCOG is working to develop a new contract with RTD that would increase the annual contribution to the vanpool program. DRCOG and RTD should consider setting aside a portion of the annual contribution to the vehicle replacement fund, eliminating potential competition with passenger fare subsidies. Other sources should also be sought out to provide local matching funds for CMAQ and other Federal capital funds.

Securing additional operating subsidies through employer contributions or transportation project mitigation funds could help to ensure that funds are available annually to contribute to the vehicle replacement fund (See Employer Subsidy, Goal 2, Objective B, Action Item 2).




Action 4: Develop vendor contract (as needed) to meet demand that exceeds normal fleet growth Purpose: Determine if feasible and develop flexible vendor contract to provide supplemental van service, particularly when demand exceeds available fleet capacity; Increase program flexibility and responsiveness. Timeline: Establish contract by 3rd Quarter 2007 Measurements -Determination of vendor contract feasibility

-Cost competitiveness with in-house service -Responsiveness to new customers

Standard -Vendor contract in place or no-go determination made -Per unit operating cost no more than 15% higher than in-house -Provides ability to roll out new van 10 business days

Associated Costs: vendor contract costs Additional Staffing: none (Existing staff can handle program administration)

A key issue identified in the analysis of the Vanpool Program was the program’s inability to respond to potential customers. A significant waiting list for service is a clear sign that the program is not able to meet growing demand. Likely outcomes of delaying interested customers are reversion to SOV commuting or carpooling and/or loss of interest in vanpooling.16 Developing van capacity will also allow DRCOG to consider secondary program objectives, such as providing van service to underserved bus markets identified by RTD.

A supplemental vendor contract could help to meet demand that exceeds available in-house van capacity. The feasibility and cost effectiveness of developing such a contract should be reviewed. DRCOG should recognize that per unit costs may be higher than in house operations. Slightly higher costs per mile may be needed to buy the added flexibility; however, a cost cap should be imposed.

16 A December 2005 survey of DRCOG Vanpool passengers asked how respondents would make commute trips if the vanpool program were discontinued -69% of riders said they would revert to driving alone, 19% said they would begin carpooling, and 10% said they would take transit.




Objective C: Maintain Staff Resources to Support Program Growth Continued vanpool program growth will require staffing levels to grow incrementally and for staff positions to be restructured to support current program features. Vanpool staffing needs do not have a linear relationship to van growth, since many of the administrative functions are unchanged despite program size. Additional marketing, sales and regional planning and coordination efforts will require additional staff be added over time.

Action 1: Update vanpool staff job descriptions regularly Purpose: Ensure stated staff responsibilities are in line with current program needs; Be prepared for staff turnover, hiring; Ensure new hires meet required qualifications. Timeline: Prior to any new hire; Every 2nd year during 4th Quarter Measurement -Revised job descriptions at time of additional staff hires

- Staff job descriptions reviewed on semi-regular basis Standard -Director level review and revisions complete prior to new hire

-Bi-annual review regardless of hiring activities Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none

The stability and efficiency of program administration is critical to future success. Developing clear job descriptions and regularly reviewing their relevance to changing conditions is the intent of this action. When DRCOG hits van growth milestones that trigger the need for additional administrative staff (See Goal 1, Objective A, Action 5) the allocation of programmatic responsibilities should be reviewed. Additional staff positions should allow for more specialization in job duties.




Figure 1: Goal 1 Action Plan Timeline

Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4 Q 1 Q 2 Q 3 Q 4

O b je c tive B : P ro v id e S u ffic ie n t V e h ic le C ap ac ity to Me e t Marke t D e m an d

A c tio n 1: D e ve lo p a n n u a l g ro wth ta rg e ts

A c tio n 1: U p d a te va n p o o l s taff jo b d e s c rip tio n s re g u la rly

A c tio n 2: D e ve lo p F ive -Y e ar V e h ic le A c q u is itio n an d R e p lac e m e n t P la n

A c tio n 3: D e ve lo p fin a n c ia l s trate g y to g ro w v e h ic le re p lac e m e n t fu n d

A c tio n 4: D e ve lo p ve n d o r c o n trac t (as n e e d e d ) to m e e t d e m an d th a t e xc e e d s n o rm al fle e t g ro wth

O b je c tive C : Main ta in S ta ff R e s o u rc e s to S u p p o rt P ro g ram G ro wth

2009 2010 2011G o al/ A c tio n Ite m

2006 2007 2008

Ma in ta in /T rac k A c h ie ve

K e y :

G o a l 1 E xp an d th e D R C O G V an p o o l P ro g ram in a F is c a lly R e s p o n s ib le Ma n n e rO b je c tive A : D e v e lo p a P e rfo rm an c e Me as u re m e n t S ys te m fo r th e V an p o o l P ro g ram

A c tio n 1: E s ta b lis h m in im u m ve h ic le c ap ac ity s ta n d ard s

A c tio n 2: E s ta b lis h to ta l ve h ic le c ap ac ity s ta n d ard s

A c tio n 3: E s ta b lis h c o s t/m ile , c o s t/trip , & re v e n u e /trip s tan d ard s

A c tio n 4: E s ta b lis h s ta n d ard s fo r ve h ic le trip re d u c tio n an d e n v iro n m e n ta l im p a c ts

A c tio n 5: E s ta b lis h s ta ffin g ra tio s tan d ard s

Meet Standard by Q4 2007 Maintain Standard 2008-2011

Ongoing Measurement 2006-2010

Track Annually Achieve Cost Standards by 2008

Establish Standards by 4th Quarter 2006

Phased Based on Van Growth (Number of Active Vans)

Developed and Adopted by 2nd Quarter 2007 Update Annually (2007-2011)

Funding Strategy Developed by 4th Quarter 2006

Establish Contract by 3rd Quarter 2007

Prior to any New Hire; Bi-Annually during 4th Quarter

Establish Standards by Q4 2006

Track Annually 2006-2011

Establish Standards by 4th Quarter 2006 Track Annually 2006-2011




Goal 2: Establish Reliable Level of Funding to Support Program Growth

Objective A: Develop A Long-Term Funding Strategy A critical reason DRCOG is undertaking this strategic planning effort is to develop a sustainable financial plan to support program growth. This requires developing a long-term funding strategy that can guide more immediate programmatic activities, such as setting fares and planning for vehicle acquisition. As an important step toward this goal, DRCOG should continue to work toward securing a multi-year funding agreement with RTD.

Action 1: Develop long-term funding agreement with RTD Purpose: To develop a long-term funding agreement with RTD; To ensure the continued receipt of Federal formula monies (5307) tied to reporting of annual vanpool mileage; To ensure future program growth has adequate financial support. Timeline: Hold discussions 3rd Quarter 2006, Finalize Agreement 4th Quarter 2006 Measurement - Developed five-year funding program proposal for RTD

- Negotiated five-year funding agreement with RTD Standard - Proposal developed and presented to RTD

- Binding funding agreement in place Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none

While RTD has provided DRCOG Vanpool with important funding support for several years, the contractual basis for this support is temporary (year-to-year) and provides no assurance of continuation. Colorado’s Tabor Law prohibit the two agencies from establishing multi-year contracts, making it impossible to create a binding long-term funding agreement with RTD to allow for more accurate financial planning. However, the two agencies should work to establish an agreed upon method for determining annual funding that would, at minimum, provide a nexus between funding received through FTA’s 5307 grant program for the reporting of vanpool mileage. The intent is to provide DRCOG with a financial mechanism to help ensure that some normalized portion of operating cost increases associated with increased vanpool activity are met through Federal formula funding.




Action 2: Identify potential funding partners, (possibly build into FastTracks or include other vanpool providers)

Purpose: Continue to identify and secure funding partnerships; Provide value for customers by securing fare subsidies; Maintain funding base needed to grow program. Timeline: Annually during 4th Quarter (2006-2011) Measurement - Identified and prioritized potential funding partners and sources (i.e.,

FasTracks, major employers, university/colleges, etc.) - Developed funding proposals for top ranked partners

Standard - Established and renewed annually/biannually - Yes


DRCOG’s ability to provide fare subsidies for vanpool customers has contributed greatly to the growth of the program in recent years. The elimination of temporary subsidies from the T-REX project threaten program growth and could cause some level of regression to SOV commuting. DRCOG should work to secure long-term agreements to maintain existing subsidies and examine new opportunities to provide customers with discounts on base fares. For example, FasTracks construction mitigation funds may be available to support vanpool use in certain corridors during light rail construction.




Objective B: Build and Maintain Appropriate Partnerships to Sustain Financial Stability Partnership with RTD, which provides funding support and functions as a partner in policy development, is critical to the success of the vanpool program. Clear lines of communication with RTD and other funding partners are needed to ensure current funding support is continued and to promote new funding partnerships.

Action 1: Strengthen relationships with current funding partners (i.e., information sharing, performance reporting, presentations to Board members, etc.)

Purpose: Ensure continued financial support from current partners, particularly RTD; Share critical performance information with staff and policy makers at partner agencies. Timeline: Report format by 3rd Quarter 2006; Reporting Quarterly (2007-2011) Measurement - Quarterly performance report format developed and institutionalized

-Quarterly reports developed and delivered to RTD Standard -Format developed and approved by DRCOG and RTD

-Yes Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none (revise current Program Coordinator job description to handle)

The continued success and growth of the Vanpool Program at DRCOG is reliant on a strong funding and administrative partnership with RTD. DRCOG should build information sharing and review protocols for RTD into its own program/staffing responsibilities to ensure that RTD is comfortable continuing to invest staff time and financial resources in the program. DRCOG is already required to provide RTD with data required for FTA Section 15 reporting; however, more detailed information about program budgeting and vehicle replacement fund status should be shared with RTD. Results of annual performance measurement processes discussed in Goal 1, Objective A should be shared with RTD and other potential funding partners. This information should be shared with the DRCOG and RTD Boards of Directors at minimum once annually, but could be reported more frequently if information is deemed of interest to Board Members.




Action 2: Consider initiating employer-subsidized vanpool program Purpose: Encourage large employers or worksites to fund or subsidize employee vanpooling. Timeline: Evaluation by 2nd Quarter 2007; Outreach strategy by 4th Quarter 2007; Implement by 2nd Quarter 2008. Measurement -Evaluation of employer-subsidized vanpool opportunities

- Development of outreach strategy and collateral materials - Net number of employer-subsidized vans added each year

Standard - Go/no go decision - Outreach strategy and materials developed - Minimum net five employer subsidized vans added per year

Associated Costs: $3,000-$5,000 for collateral materials and marketing; $15,000 - $20,000 for staffing (it may be possible for current outreach staff to absorb these responsibilities) Additional Staffing: 0.25 FTE for program outreach

DRCOG has identified the opportunity to increase financial participation by large employers who may benefit from increasing participation in vanpooling and other commute programs. Staff is currently exploring opportunities to initiate employer subsidy programs. DRCOG should prioritize this program given the potential financial benefits, and continue to develop and market employer-subsidized vanpools. Collateral materials for such a program could include educational pieces on the cost of subsidizing employee parking and the potential benefits of introducing a wider mix of commute options for employees. If the program is unable to generate five additional vanpools each year, it may not be worth the added administrative and outreach expense.




Objective C: Refine Fare Policy and Instruments to Match Long-Term Funding Requirements for Program Operation Simplicity is a key strength of DRCOG Vanpool Program fare structure. While DRCOG should strive to retain a fare structure that is easy to understand, there is opportunity to increase revenue by creating more diverse fare offerings that appeal to a broader range of potential customers. Additionally, existing fare equity agreements established with RTD may only continue to make sense if a long-term funding agreement is established to recover lost revenue potential (difference between maximum fare tolerance and actual fares).

Action 1: Adjust fare policy Purpose: To establish a sustainable long-term funding policy that includes fare revenue as a critical component. Timeline: Set policy by 1st Quarter 2007, Implement fare changes (if necessary) annually. Measurement - Fare policy developed based on projected five-year revenue

requirements for program operation (and RTD funding agreements if applicable)

- Five-year fare increase phasing program developed and implemented Standard - Yes

- Yes Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none

In the recent past, DRCOG has used regional public transit zone fares as a point of reference for setting vanpool fares. While this policy is attractive to customers, because it keeps fares low, it prevents DRCOG from maximizing fare recovery and keeping fares in line with changing fuel costs. Maintaining a price structure that is artificially low when compared with program operating costs requires public subsidy be available to fund any operating cost balances. FTA Section 5307 Grant Program funds are available to the region through the RTD; funds are allocated by formula based on reporting of annual vanpool miles traveled. DRCOG also uses CMAQ funds to support vanpool staff positions, which are a significant element of program operating costs. These funds do not, however, increase in proportion to operating costs as the program grows. Therefore, DRCOG should set vanpool fares based on a set ratio of fare revenue to operating costs (75% is recommended).

The Vanpool Analysis Technical Report shows that there is customer tolerance for fare increases, particularly in 20 to 40 mile and 40 mile plus categories. Phased fare increases that do not exceed 5% to 10% per year over the next five years are likely tolerable with limited customer loss due to pricing.




Action 2: Eliminate free fare incentive for drivers Purpose: To increase fare revenue return as a percent of total operating costs; Develop a more self-sustaining fare system and reduce reliance on temporary subsidies. Timeline: 3rd Quarter 2007 Measurement - Developed strategy for phasing out free ride incentive for drivers and

replacing with reduced fare/vehicle use incentive program - Developed and implemented program for diversifying and rewarding

customer duties (fare collection, reporting, maintenance, etc.) Standard - Yes

- Yes Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none

DRCOG provides a fare free incentive for drivers who in return volunteers to drive, track maintenance, submit paperwork and collect fares. This means that somewhere between 15 and 20 percent of DRCOG passengers pay no fare. Many agencies have moved away from this approach, by proving smaller fare discounts to drivers and spreading reporting and fare collection responsibilities to other passengers. These duties can carry a minimal fare discount, such as $5 to $10 per month. In Chicago, Pace invoices vanpool passengers on a monthly basis payable by check, money order or certified check to eliminate customer participation in this process. Web payment options could also be implemented.

DRCOG should develop a phased program for eliminating free fare incentives for drivers and replacing it with a hierarchical program that provides smaller incentives for drivers and other passengers who participate in van management activities. These strategies should include options for automating van management activities.




Action 3: Diversify fare categories and payment options

Purpose: To evaluate, develop and introduce (if viable) additional passenger fare categories and options that would encourage additional patronage and more efficient use of vanpools; increase fare revenue as a percent of total operating costs. Timeline: 3rd Quarter 2007 Measurement - Developed list of potential new fare products

- Evaluated and implemented new fare products with potential to increase patronage/ van utilization

Standard - Yes - Yes

Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none Vanpool fares often take one-size fits all approach, but in reality there are a multitude of transportation needs and schedules for today’s commuters. For example, someone who works just two days per week may be discouraged from joining a vanpool where they pay the same price as a customer who travels 5 days per week. DRCOG should consider introducing new fare options that would entice customers for whom vanpool does not currently make economic sense. DRCOG should avoid providing new fare products that would provide a lower cost alternative for current passengers. Simply changing how fare products are offered (but not the rate) can generate new customers, for example a vanpool seat that is sold at $80 per month could be promoted at four weekly payments of $20. This may make a difference to individuals who are paid weekly. Another alternative fare product that some agencies offer are single ride tickets like a transit system. Here the vanpool driver (or a passenger) can collect or sell single ride tickets and turns in ticket funds to DRCOG. This allows for people with more limited travel needs to join vanpools with seat capacity.






K e y : Ma in ta in /T ra c k A c h ie v e

A c tio n 1: D e ve lo p lo n g - te rm fu n d in g ag re e m e n t with R T D

A c tio n 2: Id e n tify p o te n tia l fu n d in g p artn e rs , (p o s s ib ly b u ild in to F a s tT ra c ks o r in c lu d e o th e r van p o o l p ro v id e rs

A c tio n 1: A d ju s t fare p o lic y

A c tio n 2: E lim in ate fre e fa re in c e n tiv e fo r d rive rs

A c tio n 3: D ive rs ify fare c ate g o rie s an d p a ym e n t o p tio n s

G o a l/ A c tio n Ite m

O b je c tive B : B u ild a n d Main ta in A p p ro p riate P artn e rs h ip s to S u s ta in F in an c ia l S ta b ility

A c tio n 1: D e ve lo p lo n g - te rm fu n d in g ag re e m e n t with R T D

A c tio n 2: C o n s id e r in itia tin g e m p lo ye r-s u b s id iz e d v an p o o l p ro g ra m

O b je c tive C : R e fin e F a re P o lic y a n d In s tru m e n ts to Matc h L o n g -T e rm F u n d in g R e q u ire m e n ts fo r P ro g ra m O p e ratio n

G o al 2: E s tab lis h a S o u n d B as is fo r D e te rm in in g a R e liab le L e ve l o f F u n d in g to S u p p o rt P ro g ram G ro wth

O b je c tive A : D e v e lo p L o n g -T e rm F u n d in g S trate g ie s

2010 20112006 2007 2008 2009

Hold discussions 3rd Quarter 2006

Annually during 4th Quarter (2006-2011)

Report Format by 3rd Quarter 2006

Outreach Strategy 4th Quarter 2007

Set Policy by 1st Quarter 2007

3rd Quarter 2007

3rd Quarter 2007

Quarterly Performance Report to RTD (2007-2011)

Evaluation 2nd Quarter 2007

Implement by 2nd Quarter 2008

Implement Fare Changes Annually (if needed)

Finalize Agreement 4th Quarter 2006




Goal 3: Increase the Visibility and Understanding of the DRCOG Vanpool Program

Objective A: Demonstrate Critical Vanpool Program Outcomes to Customers, Policy Makers and Members of the Public DRCOG Vanpool Program long-term success will rely, in part, on relationships with other regional agencies and a strong understanding of program benefits by regional policy makers, including its own Board of Directors. This objective promotes better communication to these critical parties.

Action 1: Report Program Performance to DRCOG Board and Regional Policy Makers Regularly Purpose: Report results of performance monitoring to those who influence transportation policy and funding; Improve communication with DRCOG Board about vanpool program benefits. Timeline: Annually during 4th Quarter Measurement - Performance report developed and delivered to DRCOG Board including

measures of costs effectiveness, SOV trip reduction, VMT reduction, air pollution impacts and savings in fuel consumption

Standard - Yes Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none (revise current Program Coordinator job description to handle)

Through the goal setting process for this Vanpool Analysis, DRCOG staff identified the need to more clearly communicate the benefits of vanpooling to its own board members and other regional policy makers. A survey of DRCOG vanpool customers show that almost 80% would regress to driving alone if vanpool service was not available. While vanpool may not make up a large percentage of total regional commute activity, its effectiveness in reducing peak hour SOV travel should be emphasized. Performance measures developed through Goal 1, Objective A and through Goal 3, Objective A will support this action.




Action 2: Measure Vanpool Performance Against Other Regional Modes Purpose: Measure and record the value of investment in vanpooling vs. other regional transportation programs Timeline: Ongoing monitoring; report annually Measurement -Cost/Trip and Cost/Mile for Vanpool vs. Other Modes

-Drive Alone Regression Rate vs. Other Modes (survey) -Cost per VMT reduced vs. Other Modes

Standard -25th Percentile or lower when compared to other modes -75th Percentile or higher when compared to other modes -25th Percentile or lower when compared to other modes


This Action supplements Action 1 by tracking and reporting the cost effectiveness of vanpool as it compares to other non-SOV modal strategies. Since the cost of operating vanpools is very low in comparison to other public transit offerings, relatively small capital investments can have a proportionally significant impact in reducing regional VMT growth.

DRCOG should coordinate with RTD, which already tracks and develops clear policy reports that illustrate cost effectiveness by mode (operating cost per passenger trip).

Action 3: Link to the Regional Travel Demand Management Strategic Plan (DRCOG) Purpose: Ensure coordination with regional TDM goals and initiatives outlined in the Regional Travel Demand Management (TDM) Strategic Plan. Timeline: Following Regional TDM Plan Update Measurement -Vanpool Strategic Plan is up to date with Regional TDM Strategic Plan Standard -Update within 2 months of Regional TDM Strategic Plan update Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none

The Regional Travel Demand Management (TDM) Plan is an important regional tool designed to facilitate transportation programs and strategies to reduce single-occupant-vehicle travel and improve mobility options for area residents. Vanpooling, along with ridesharing, transit, bicycling, and walking are covered in the TDM Strategic Plan. The most critical goals and activities outlined in the Vanpool Program Strategic Plan should be incorporated into the Regional TDM Plan to ensure they are considered as part of the long-term metro area vision and to ensure vanpool capital requests are given high priority in the regional TIP.




Objective B: Educate Key Partners about Vanpooling Providing partners with a better understanding of vanpool program administration and operations will help DRCOG work more effectively with TMO/As as well as other regional service providers.

Action 1: Update and make available information about current routes and seat availability Purpose: Provide public and stakeholders with information on vanpool routes; Facilitate the development of regional vanpools; Improve vanpool database breadth and currency. Timeline: Develop by 3rd Quarter 2006 Measurement - Web information available on routes, seat availability on existing routes

and potential routes seeking customers Standard - Yes Associated Costs: Cost included in Objective C, Action 1 (following) Additional Staffing: none

The ability to store and share information about current and potential vanpool routes that can accept additional customers is critical to operating efficiently. With the ubiquity of web access and improved tools for real-time sharing of information, DRCOG should consider introducing new web-based tools for sharing route and seat availability information with other regional vanpool programs and customers.




Action 2: Host Vanpool 101 to help TMO/As with marketing vanpool service Purpose: Increase knowledge of Vanpool Program among key partners, particularly TMO/As; Educate partners about vanpool recruitment, subsidies, marketing, and funding. Timeline: Host in 4th Quarter of 2006; Continue annually if successful (2008-2011) Measurement - Prepare and host half day workshop on vanpooling (general and local)

for TMO/As Standard - Completed Associated Costs: $1,000 to prepare and host workshop Additional Staffing: none

The SWOT analysis identified a need to improve the understanding of vanpool program activities and administration among partner agencies and organizations, particularly the TMA/Os. These groups have expressed interest in marketing and even selling vanpools directly to their clients; however, there is a lack of common understanding about how vanpool is administered, how vans are formed, what fare and subsidy levels are, and how vehicles are stored and maintained. DRCOG vanpool staff should develop a 3- to 4-hour educational workshop for the TMO/As and other interested parties. The workshop would also provide a forum to discuss appropriate TMO/A roles in marketing and selling vanpools. The workshop could include talking points for TMO/A staff to pass on to employers in their area, such as:

• Vanpools help employers bring employees to work. • Vanpools reduce the need for additional parking. • Employer-organized vanpools are a valued employee benefit. They improve employee morale

and employee relations. • Shared rides increase productivity. They also reduce absenteeism and tardiness.




Objective C: Simplify program administration and customer experience Readily available web technologies can benefit the vanpool program by increasing ease of registration/participation for customers, simplifying reporting requirements for drivers and automatically collecting and storing data to improve administrative functionality for staff.

Action 1: Improve functionality of vanpool program website Purpose: Create an effective web portal for the Vanpool Program; Automate vanpool application and subsidy forms; Improve database information and staff capabilities. Timeline: Phased improvements completed 2nd Quarter 2007 Measurement -Develop matching/database input via the website

-Create web input option for all vanpool forms -Create web input for driver activities/reporting

Standard - Developed and maintained - Developed and maintained - Developed and maintained

Associated Costs: $6,000 for website update; $5,000 per year for staffing/contract Additional Staffing: 0.1 FTE or contract for website maintenance

Given the demographic breakdown of DRCOG vanpool customers, we can assume most customers have high speed Internet access.17 Improving the functionality of the vanpool webpage is an important step in improving customer satisfaction, providing better access to information and facilitating the ease with which new customers can register. The vanpool webpage should be developed into its own series of linked pages (vs. a single informational page today) that include:

• An automated customer inquiry form that will deliver name and contact information to a database;

• Automated mapping of routes for seat availability options; • Secured on-line credit card payment option; • Web based versions of all the input forms now provided via .pdf files that need to be printed,

filled out by hand and returned; and • A driver reporting and system allowing drivers to submit logs, maintenance requests or other

comments.

17 According to National Science Foundation research, approximately 80% of households with combine income levels of $75,000 or higher had high-speed internet access in 2000. Over 60% of households between the $50,000 and $75,000 income level had high speed access. http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind02/c8/fig08-14.htm.




Objective D: Develop focused vanpool marketing program This objective promotes a marketing program for vanpool that is separate from other RideArrangers programs allowing a stronger focus on optimal customer markets.

Action 1: Identify target markets for vanpooling Purpose: Identify and prioritize potential customer markets; Guide program outreach and marketing activities; Ensure best use of limited marketing resources. Timeline: Determine target markets – 1st Quarter 2007; Prioritize – 2nd Quarter 2007 Measurement -Review of customer surveys and demographic trends to determine

primary target markets (demographic) -Review of service gaps to determine primary target markets

(geographic) -Prioritization of target markets

Standard - Updated annually - Updated annually - Updated annually

Associated Costs: $5,000 - $10,000 to hire marketing firm to do market analysis Additional Staffing: none (revise current Program Coordinator & Marketing position job descriptions to handle)

Vanpool program staff should continue to implement its annual customer survey, including the additional questions added as part of the Vanpool Analysis study, on an annual basis. Survey results provide an important tool for defining target markets; however, a more detailed market analysis conducted by an outside marketing firm is merited. Other underserved or high potential customer markets that may be revealed through the survey should also be identified and considered.




Action 2: Focus marketing on vanpool (separate from other TDM services) Purpose: Ensure that vanpool marketing activities target markets identified in Action 1, which differ from other RideArrangers TDM program target markets. Timeline: Plan and Budget by 4th Quarter 2007 Measurement -Separate Vanpool Program Marketing Plan and Budget developed

-Vanpool market activities tied to highest priority target markets (Action 1)


Associated Costs: none to develop plan; marketing strategy rollout may require additional marketing budget Additional Staffing: none

The SWOT analysis identified historic program marketing techniques that grouped vanpool marketing material with other RideArrangers’ programs as a weakness. Vanpool customers have a very different profile than most other RideArrangers program customers and therefore are not likely to respond to the same marketing messages. Recent efforts, such as the latest vanpool PSA, are more effective in directly targeting potential vanpool customers. Future marketing investments for vanpool should continue to be tied directly to vanpool target markets.

Action 3: Set internal staff sales targets and incentives Purpose: Provide incentives for vanpool sales staff; Optimize use of available van fleet; Meet program growth targets. Timeline: Develop incentive program by 2nd Quarter 2007 Measurement -Increased focus on employer relationships

-Development of internal incentive program for vanpool sales Standard -Marketing strategy/pitch for major employers developed

-Monetary reward program for vanpool sales implemented Associated Costs: $2,500 - $3,500 per year for incentive payments Additional Staffing: none DRCOG should consider an internal incentive program for outreach staff who successfully develop new vanpools. The program should provide a monetary bonus tied directly to employee performance, with bonus amounts in the range of $50 to $100 per new van. This will require some restructuring of current RideArrangers program policies and outreach staff job descriptions. The program could be implemented by offering the incentive program in lieu of future raises for existing staff and/or providing slightly lower base salaries for new outreach staff. Given program growth potential, vanpool outreach staffing should be structured to focus on product sales, getting more people into vans. Performance based compensation is a hallmark of effective sales and other Strategic Plan actions support this be suggesting a more diverse set of fare products.

Alternatively, non-monetary incentives could be used as staff incentives. Other agencies have used donated gift certificates to restaurants, local coffee shops or stores. DRCOG should not implement this program until it has adequate vehicles available to support new vanpools.






K e y : Main ta in /T rac k A c h ie v e

A c tio n 3: S e t in te rn a l s taff s a le s ta rg e ts an d in c e n tive s

A c tio n 1: Im p ro ve fu n c tio n a lity o f v an p o o l p ro g ram w e b s ite

O b je c tive D : D e ve lo p F o c u s e d V an p o o l Marke tin g P ro g ra m

A c tio n 1: Id e n tify targ e t m ark e ts fo r v an p o o lin g

A c tio n 2: F o c u s m ark e tin g o n v an p o o l (s e p a rate fro m o th e r T D M s e rv ic e s )

G o al 3: In c re as e th e V is ib ility an d U n d e rs tan d in g o f th e D R C O G V a n p o o l P ro g ra m

2009 2010 2011G o a l/ A c tio n Ite m

2006 2007 2008

O b je c tive A : D e m o n s tra te C ritic a l V a n p o o l P ro g ram O u tc o m e s to C u s to m e rs , P o lic y Ma ke rs a n d Me m b e rs o f th e P u b lic

A c tio n 1: R e p o rt P ro g ra m P e rfo rm a n c e to D R C O G B o a rd a n d R e g io n a l P o lic y Ma ke rs R e g u larly

A c tio n 2: Me a s u re V an p o o l P e rfo rm a n c e A g a in s t O th e r R e g io n a l Mo d e s

A c tio n 3: L in k to th e R e g io n a l T rav e l D e m an d Ma n ag e m e n t S trate g ic P lan (D R C O G )

O b je c tive B : E d u c a te K e y P a rtn e rs a b o u t V a n p o o lin g

A c tio n 1: U p d a te a n d m ak e a va ila b le in fo rm atio n ab o u t c u rre n t ro u te s an d s e a t a va ila b ility

A c tio n 2: H o s t V a n p o o l 101 to h e lp T MO /A s with m ark e tin g v an p o o l s e rv ic e

O b je c tive C : S im p lify P ro g ram A d m in is tra tio n an d C u s to m e r E xp e rie n c e

Annually during 4th Quarter

Ongoing Monitoring Report Annually


Ongoing Monitoring Report Annually


Ongoing Monitoring

Following Regional TDM Plan Update

Develop by 3rd Quarter 2006

Host in 4th Quarter of 2006

Phased Improvements Completed 2nd Quarter 2007

Determine Target Markets – 1st Quarter 2007

Plan and Budget by 4th Quarter 2007

Develop Incentive Program by 2nd Quarter 2007

Continue Annually if Successful (2008-2011)

Report Annually

Prioritize – 2nd Quarter 2007




Goal 4 Promote Regional Transportation Policies That Support Vanpooling

Objective A: Ensure Vanpool/TDM Projects Receive Consideration in Regional Planning and Funding Processes The Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) identifies all the federally funded transportation projects in the Denver region for a six-year period. This initiative would develop a more detailed analysis of vanpool benefits to the region to be included and considered in the TIP process.

Action 1: Review TIP to ensure vanpool benefits are represented (i.e., cost/VMT reduction/air quality)

Purpose: To ensure Vanpool benefits are fully realized in the regional TIP process Timeline: Annual (2007-2011) Measurement -Conducted detailed analysis of Vanpool Program VMT, Emissions and

Trip Reduction benefits -Included in future TIP conformity reports and documentation

Standard -These measures tracked and reported annually -Included in TIP Conformity Report

Associated Costs: none if completed in house; $10,000 - $15,000 if contracted Additional Staffing: none

The Conformity of the 2005-2010 TIP Report, does not specifically quantify benefits of the DRCOG Vanpool Program, only program-wide estimates of congestion and air quality benefits of the RideArranagers suite of services are made. RTD programs, such as EcoPass, have a much more detailed analysis of beneficial impacts on the region’s traffic and air quality. Providing this same level of analysis for the Vanpool Program will strengthen its position to received priority in future TIP ranking and selection. This action recommends DRCOG develop an analysis method and benchmarking plan for VMT, emissions, fuel consumption and other benefits associated with vanpool influenced trip reduction.




Action 2: Participate in regional transportation planning Purpose: Provide DRCOG staff the opportunity to review major regional transportation plans to evaluate the impact on vanpooling and potential opportunities to expand vanpool programming; Develop vanpool activities that are consistent with the regional plan. Timeline: Ongoing Measurement -Director-level involvement in major regional transportation plans (i.e.,

Metro Vision Regional Transportation Plan, TDM Strategic Plan, Regional Transportation Improvement Plan, Central Denver Transportation Plan, RTD Long-Range Plan, etc)

Standard -Participation in process and/or Draft Plan Review Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none The 2006 reorganization that moved RideArrangers under a division with broader transportation planning and management function was an important step for the program. Both the Division Director and RideArrangers Manager should maintain a list of critical planning processes and coordinate to ensure representation and review roles are sought where appropriate.

The RideArrangers programs including Vanpool, must also be responsive to regional plans such as the 2030 Metro Vision Regional Transportation Plan. The integration of RideArrangers into the Transportation Planning and Operations Division should help to ensure that vanpool’s mission and activities are in line broader regional objectives.

Objective B: Update DRCOG Rideshare Program Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives This objective ensures that this Vanpool Program Strategic Plan is updated regularly and that a major update to the plan is conducted during its final year, if not sooner.

Action 1: Conduct annual staff-level updates to Vanpool Program goals and objectives Purpose: Ensure that the DRCOG Vanpool Program Strategic Plan is maintained as a relevant guide for program activities Timeline: Annual (2007-2011)

Measurement -Staff meeting held annually to review Vanpool Program Goals and Objectives

-Consensus develop on needed updates Standard -Staff meeting held

-Updates included in Strategic Plan by end of fiscal year Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none This action is intended to keep the Vanpool Program Strategic Plan relevant and useful for administrative staff and TDM program management. The success of this initiative is measured through the completion of an internal review process and consensus based updates to the Strategic Plan actions. Broader mission and goal statements do not need to be addressed during annual updates, but may be if changes in program dynamics require.




Action 2: Conduct Vanpool Program Strategic Plan update every 5 years Purpose: To maintain an up-to-date Vanpool Program Strategic Plan; Ensure management and staff have a clear directive for the vanpool program. Timeline: Full update by 4th Quarter 2010

Measurement - Vanpool Program Strategic Plan updated within last 5 years Standard - Update complete at end of each 5th fiscal year Associated Costs: none if conducted in house; $50,000 - $70,000 for program assessment and comprehensive Strategic Plan update if consultant hired Additional Staffing: none

The scale and operating dynamics of the DRCOG Vanpool Program are likely to change significantly over the next five years. Annual updates will help update actions needed to achieve Strategic Plan goals and objectives; however, a broader review of the program’s mission and overarching policy goals should be conducted before the end of the 2010 fiscal year.

This process could be conducted in house, although it may be difficult to accomplish in a timely manner using existing staff resources; alternatively, the update could be facilitated/conducted by an outside party or consultant.



K e y : Main ta in /T ra c k A c h ie ve

G o a l 4: P ro m o te R e g io n a l T ran s p o rtatio n P o lic ie s T h at S u p p o rt V an p o o lin g

2009 2010 2011G o a l/ A c tio n Ite m

2006 2007 2008

A c tio n 1: C o n d u c t an n u a l s ta ff-le ve l u p d a te s to V an p o o l P ro g ram g o a ls an d o b je c tive s

A c tio n 2: C o n d u c t V an p o o l P ro g ram S trate g ic P lan u p d ate e ve ry 5 ye ars

O b je c tive A : E n s u re V an p o o l/T D M P ro je c ts R e c e ive C o n s id e ratio n in R e g io n a l P la n n in g an d F u n d in g P ro c e s s e s

A c tio n 1: R e v ie w T IP to e n s u re van p o o l b e n e fits a re re p re s e n te d ( ie , c o s t/v m t re d u c tio n /a ir q u a lity )

A c tio n 2: P artic ip ate in re g io n a l tran s p o rtatio n p la n n in g

O b je c tive B : U p d ate D R C O G R id e s h are P ro g ram S trate g ic P lan G o a ls an d O b je c tive s

Annual (2007-2011)

Ongoing

Annual (2007-2011)

Full update by 4th Quarter 2010




Goal 5: Build Strong Working Relationships with TMO/As, Cities, Employers and Other Regional Partners

Objective A: Define Roles and Responsibilities of Regional Transportation Providers (i.e., DRCOG Vanpool, RTD, etc) and Transportation Management Organizations/Associations A lack of definition of program roles and responsibilities has been an issue for regional TDM agencies, service providers and TMO/As. A critical goal of the Strategic Plan is to bring greater definition to lead roles and partnerships in the Denver TDM arena.

Action 1: Host regular meetings with TMA/Os, RTD and other transportation providers Purpose: Develop a Regional Vanpool/TDM Working Group; Improve and maintain relationships between the Vanpool Program and TMO/A’s; Establish agreement on roles and responsibilities. Timeline: Develop Regional Vanpool/TDM Working Group – 3rd Quarter 2006; Workshop by 1st Quarter 2007; Meetings held quarterly (2006-2011) Measurement -Development of Regional Working Group

-Host facilitated workshop to establish agency and TMO/A roles and responsibilities

-Host quarterly meetings Standard - Yes

- Completed - Meeting schedule developed/maintained and meetings held

Associated Costs: $2,000 per year for facilitator, $15,000 for staffing requirements Additional Staffing: 0.25 FTE for organization, meeting planning, and coordination This initiative would form an official regional Vanpool/TDM Working Group consisting of DRCOG, RTD, local TMO/As and possibly representatives from other government agencies such as the City and County of Denver. DRCOG should take responsibility for organizing and setting agendas for quarterly meetings. If possible, DRCOG should hire an impartial facilitator to run these meetings.

The committee would provide a forum for discussing key issues, such as:

• Are the needs of our customers being met? • How to improve regional coordination of vanpool program databases and information and the

potential for more comprehensive program integration in the future. • Whether there is a role for vanpool services in providing feeder service to the region’s growing

rail network or other potential new markets.

• Whether the DRCOG Vanpool Program should play a larger role in meeting RTD need to respond to requests for service in small markets where commuter bus service is not yet viable?

Objective B: Develop Vanpool Partner Program that ties TMO/As activities to program outcomes




This objective focuses on using regional partnerships to increase marketing and sales capacity, while minimizing the need to add staff and incur significant additional staffing costs.

Action 1: Review TMO/A role in promoting/selling vanpools Purpose: Evaluate benefit of performance based financial incentives for outside parties interesting in marketing the vanpool program. Timeline: Review and make determination by 2nd Quarter 2007 Measurement - Go/No Go determination on financial incentive program Standard - Determination made and documented Associated Costs: none Additional Staffing: none

DRCOG staff should conduct an internal analysis to determine whether it is politically feasible and economically viable to provide financial incentives to program partners who market and successfully form vanpools or place new passengers in vanpools. While this program could be beneficial in growing the regional vanpool fleet, DRCOG must ensure that fleet vehicle capacity is sufficient to meet additional growth potential created through this program. Ultimately, developing strong relationships with partner organizations that allow them to promote and create vanpools will reduce DRCOG staffing requirements and limit program operating cost increases.

Action 2: Develop sales incentive program for participating TMA/Os (if deemed beneficial in Action 1) Purpose: Develop performance based financial incentive program for partner organizations interested in marketing the vanpool program. Timeline: 1st Quarter 2007 Measurement -Financial incentive program developed and offered to partners

-Financial incentive per new vanpool created (meets min. occupancy standard) established


Associated Costs: $15,000 - $20,000 for staffing to provide coordination Additional Staffing: 0.25 FTE for coordination with partner organizations

If DRCOG staff determines that a partner incentive program is viable, it should move forward in developing an incentive program that rewards TMO/As for developing new vanpools that meet minimum occupancy requirements and/or for placing new individual customers in existing vanpools.

Objective C: Coordinate with VanGO & RideFinders




This objective encourages coordination and data sharing among DRCOG, VanGO and RideFinders vanpool programs and promotes the evaluation of long-term integration of the three programs.

Action 1: Host regular meetings of regional vanpool program staffs Purpose: Improve communications between vanpool program staffs in the Denver region; Improve coordination and eliminate duplication/overlap of efforts; Create regional vanpool agenda for service, marketing and funding. Timeline: Quarterly (2006-2011) Measurement - Regional vanpool agenda established, in coordination with DRCOG

Vanpool Program Strategic Plan - Quarterly meeting hosted by DRCOG


Associated Costs: $1,000 -$2,000 to host quarterly meetings Additional Staffing: Included in staffing in Objective A, Action 1

As a subgroup of the broader Regional TDM Working Group (see Objective A), the DRCOG, RideFinders and VanGO vanpool program staffs should convene to develop a more focused regional vanpool agenda.

Action 2: Share vanpool route and database information Purpose: Share route and passenger database information with other regional vanpool providers; Increase vanpool occupancy; Enable new interregional vanpool routes. Timeline: Develop data integration plan by 1st Quarter 2007, Integrate databases by 2nd Quarter 2008 Measurement -Development of mechanism for sharing route and database information

with VanGO and RideFinders -Ability for all three providers to cross check database every week (at

minimum) Standard - Completed

- Yes Associated Costs: $2,000 - $4,000 for database/web development Additional Staffing: none

This initiative would develop a more systematic method for sharing customer database information between regional vanpool providers. Consensus from VanGO and RideFinders as to the value of this action will be required.






K e y : Main ta in /T rac k A c h ie ve

G o a l 5: B u ild S tro n g W o rk in g R e la tio n s h ip s with T MO /A s , C itie s , E m p lo ye rs an d O th e r R e g io n a l P artn e rs

2009 2010 2011G o a l/ A c tio n Ite m

2006 2007 2008

O b je c tive A : D e fin e R o le s an d R e s p o n s ib ilitie s o f R e g io n a l T ran s p o rta tio n P ro v id e rs ( ie , D R C O G V an p o o l, R T D , e tc ) an d T ran s p o rtatio n Man ag e m e n t O rg a n iz atio n s /A s s o c ia tio n s

A c tio n 1: H o s t re g u lar m e e tin g s with T MA /O s , R T D an d o th e r tran s p o rtatio n p ro v id e rs

O b je c tive B : D e ve lo p V an p o o l P artn e r P ro g ram th at tie s T MO /A s ac tiv itie s to p ro g ram o u tc o m e s

A c tio n 1: R e v ie w T MO /A ro le in p ro m o tin g /s e llin g van p o o ls

A c tio n 2: D e ve lo p s a le s in c e n tive p ro g ram fo r p artic ip atin g T MA /O s ( if d e e m e d b e n e fic ia l in A c tio n 1)

O b je c tive C : C o o rd in ate with V an G O & R id e F in d e rs

A c tio n 1: H o s t re g u lar m e e tin g s o f re g io n a l van p o o l p ro g ram s taffs

A c tio n 2: S h are van p o o l ro u te an d d atab as e in fo rm atio n

Develop Regional Vanpool/TDM Working Group – 3rd Quarter 2006

Review and Make Determination by 2nd Quarter 2007

1st Quarter 2007

Quarterly (2006-2011)

Develop Data Integration Plan by 1st Quarter 2007

Workshop by 1st Quarter 2007

Meetings held quarterly (2006-2011)

Documents

Vanpool Program Five-Year Strategic Plan Report vanpool strategic... · 2006-10-06 · Five Year Strategic Plan Report DENVER REGIONAL COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Page 1 • Nelson\Nygaard