Paratransit Eligibility Screening Has Become a Critical Tool in Managing ADA Paratransit Demand

Since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the number of paratransit trips provided in the U.S. has more than doubled, dramatically expanding the mobility options for people with disabilities who are unable to ride fixed-route transit. Concomitant with this ridership increase has been an even greater increase in paratransit operating costs. The ADA clearly states that all capacity constraints (such as late or lengthy trips and trip denials) are prohibited, and provides some guidance on how these constraints are defined. The one tool allowed under the ADA that can be used to manage paratransit demand is the establishment of accurate eligibility screening processes. Until the passage of the ADA, many paratransit services were based on the social service model that allowed individuals to ride based on age or fairly loose disability-related criteria. Since transit agencies did not want to take on the political repercussions that could occur as a result of tightening their eligibility screening processes, many focused on implementing ADA-compliant paratransit services rather than address this politically charged issue. Since ADA paratransit was expected to mirror fixed-route services to the greatest extent possible, many new possibilities were opened up for people with disabilities and ridership began to climb steadily. This occurred despite the improvements in fixed-route accessibility, which some had hoped would slow the trends of increased paratransit ridership. In order to address spiraling costs, transit agencies, particularly those in the larger cities, began to explore different means of increasing the accuracy of their eligibility screening processes, usually with the introduction of an in-person element in the assessment. This process has been escalated in recent years, and even those in smaller communities are weighing the extra initial costs of more accurate screenings with the potential savings that may be accrued from reduced ridership bases. This trend has significant ramifications for people with disabilities and for the transit agencies that serve them. This paper will address this critical issue as well as the following questions: (1) What are the ADA paratransit eligibility requirements? (2) How can the lessons learned concerning more accurate eligibility screenings be applied in a non-U.S. context where eligibility requirements are either not explicitly addressed in accessibility legislation or vary from ADA legislation? (3) What are the strengths and weaknesses of the four main eligibility screening models? (4) What are the arguments for and against in-person versus paper applications? (5) What is a 'functional assessment' and should transit agencies use this method versus interviews? (6) Should assessments be conducted in-house or contracted out? (7) How should people whose eligibility has expired be recertified? (8) What are the real cost savings that may be realized from more accurate screenings? (9) What impact would more accurate screenings have on the mobility of people with disabilities and older adults?