1990Unpublished venueRequires access

PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR RURAL TRANSIT OPERATORS

D N Carter, T J Lomax, Jenson

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Despite the increased interest in performance indicators for large transit systems, there has not been an equal effort at establishing similar techniques for small and rural systems. In response to this problem, this project developed a methodology to evaluate the relative performance of the Section 18 operators. It was found that the agencies could be compared using measures of cost efficiency, cost effectiveness, service utilization, vehicle utilization, quality of service, labor productivity, and accessibility. The transit agencies and the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation can use these measures for analysis of performance trends, evaluation of overall system performance, transit planning, and technical assistance. The procedure uses a standard score methodology to compare the performance of individual agencies to the mean of all rural transit operators in Texas. It was determined that the use of peer groups of similar agencies would not significantly change the conclusions regarding agency performance. Peer groups would, however, increase the time to prepare a performance evaluation and the agencies within each peer group would change annually, making trend comparisons more difficult.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Despite the increased interest in performance indicators for large transit systems, there has not been an equal effort at establishing similar techniques for small and rural systems. In response to this problem, this project developed a methodology to evaluate the relative performance of the Section 18 operators. It was found that the agencies could be compared using measures of cost efficiency, cost effectiveness, service utilization, vehicle utilization, quality of service, labor productivity, and accessibility. The transit agencies and the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation can use these measures for analysis of performance trends, evaluation of overall system performance, transit planning, and technical assistance. The procedure uses a standard score methodology to compare the performance of individual agencies to the mean of all rural transit operators in Texas. It was determined that the use of peer groups of similar agencies would not significantly change the conclusions regarding agency performance. Peer groups would, however, increase the time to prepare a performance evaluation and the agencies within each peer group would change annually, making trend comparisons more difficult.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Despite the increased interest in performance indicators for large transit systems, there has not been an equal effort at establishing similar techniques for small and rural systems. In response to this problem, this project developed a methodology to evaluate the relative performance of the Section 18 operators. It was found that the agencies could be compared using measures of cost efficiency, cost effectiveness, service utilization, vehicle utilization, quality of service, labor productivity, and accessibility. The transit agencies and the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation can use these measures for analysis of performance trends, evaluation of overall system performance, transit planning, and technical assistance. The procedure uses a standard score methodology to compare the performance of individual agencies to the mean of all rural transit operators in Texas. It was determined that the use of peer groups of similar agencies would not significantly change the conclusions regarding agency performance. Peer groups would, however, increase the time to prepare a performance evaluation and the agencies within each peer group would change annually, making trend comparisons more difficult.

Key concepts: Public transport, Transit (satellite), Agency (philosophy), Transport engineering, Business, Service (business), Productivity, Operations management

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR RURAL TRANSIT OPERATORS — Research Paper | ScholarLens