Skip to main content

Integration of Paratransit and Fixed-Route Transit Services (2008) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:


Pages 10-15

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


From page 10...
... Feeder services identified in the survey primarily serve riders with disabilities, whereas other integrated services 10 often were open to the general public. Some paratransit programs offer feeder service only to riders with specific eligibility conditions; these are referred to as mandatory feeder in this synthesis.
Read the entire page →
From page 11...
... Because feeder service involves traveling between the registrant's home and a bus/train stop and between a bus/train stop and the destination, it is essential to know approximately how far the individual can travel unassisted, the impact of curb cuts and sidewalk conditions, and terrain and environmental issues. Knowing how far an individual can
Read the entire page →
From page 12...
... Transit agency staff indicate that with the increased use of cell phones and inter-modal radio communication these situations can generally be effectively addressed, particularly since they are rare occurrences. However, it is important that transit agencies that operate integrated services that incorporate transfers develop protocols to address these situations.
Read the entire page →
From page 13...
... Overall, productivities range from just over two in rural areas to almost 10 trips per hour in suburban Broward County, Florida, and where comparative information is available, the productivities of the integrated service almost always exceed that of the paratransit program in that area. Staff Training and Driver Selection Most systems indicate that training provided to integrated services staff is the same as that provided to paratransit staff.
Read the entire page →
From page 14...
... Point/Route Deviation 83,697, disabled 1,314 807,935 7.7 2.5 4 Demand Responsive Connector 19,600 Feeder 8,536 Pierce Transit Point/Route Deviation 120,000 363,000 3 Regional Transportation District (Denver, CO) Demand Responsive Connector 303,323 – 5,000 people with disabilities 596,384 4.7 1.2 3 Sacramento Regional Transit District Circulator/Community Bus Route Deviation 397,311, about 15,000 disabled 12.3 Stockton, CA Hopper service Route Deviation Connector 135,000 84,000 4.6 3 Whatcom Transportation Authority Circulator or Community Bus Route Deviation 1,446 95,754 159,177 2.3 9.6 3.1 UTA, Salt Lake City Feeder N/A 484,000 2.2 Lane Transit District Feeder Service 404 121,074 TransLink Vancouver N/A = not available.
Read the entire page →
From page 15...
... These estimates include both amortized capital as well as operating costs. Fixed-route fare incentives represent another significant cost saving that is not based on service operations, but rather a policy that promotes integration of fixed-route and paratransit services.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • training provided
  • operating cost
  • revenue hour
  • service design
  • vehicle revenue

  • integrated services
  • feeder service
  • demand responsive
  • integrated service
  • regional transportation

  • transportation authority
  • paratransit fare
  • deviation services
  • drivers selected
  • transit agencies

  • responsive connector
  • riding public
  • regional transit
  • king county
  • travel unassisted

  • coordination required
  • productivity thresholds


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