The Barrier Free Memphis Society
				MATAplus.com
				The REAL Rider's Guide
				Letters of Betty Anderson BFMS President

Table of Contents

Title Page

I. Abstract

II. Summary

• One: Telephone response

• Two: Findings

• Three: Single response

III. Recommendations

IV. Conclusion

Abstract

The Memphis Center for Independent Living conducted a two-week survey to determine the quality level of service provided by MATAplus. The 27 respondents of the survey were contacted every day by surveyors; uniform questions concerning their interaction with MATAplus were recorded that day. Although 81% of respondents were satisfied with the service of their MATAplus dispatcher, on average, 19% of those with a reservation (both subscription and on-demand) failed to reach their destination on time. Dispatchers gave their names to the respondents about three-quarters of the time, and 84% of the time, the dispatcher could make the first reservation asked for. It should be noted that many eligible riders do not pursue service from MATAplus.

Purpose: To determine the level of service that MATAplus offers to the citizens of Memphis.

Method: Telephone survey of selected riders every day of the two-week survey period, April 1 to April 15, 1997. Trained surveyors made the calls and administered uniform questionnaires recording and reporting findings daily.

Sample size and response rate: 378 contacts were made with 27 respondents during the two weeks of the survey.

Findings:

• 27% respondents reported the dispatcher did not give his or her name.

• 81% of callers were satisfied with the service of the dispatcher when making reservations.

• 84% reported that the dispatcher could make the first reservation that was requested.

• 19% of survey respondents reported the bus being late.

• 23% of respondents said they did not reach their destination on time.

• 39% reported they did not cancel more than two hours before the scheduled pick-up.

• 52% found that service had improved since March 17, 1997.

• 44% reported that they had not been re-certified.

Summary

The Memphis Center for Independent Living (MCIL) undertook this survey as a response to a request by the Barrier Free Memphis Society (BFMS). The Barrier Free Memphis Society is working for total accessibility for all the citizens of our community. BFMS is composed of Memphians that are dedicated to:

• Eliminating architectural barriers imposed on a large segment of the population (elderly citizens and small children, deaf and hearing impaired, blind and visually impaired and mobility impaired citizens).

• Explaining the benefits of full accessibility.

• Increasing public awareness through education about accessibility laws and standards.

• Providing sensitivity training for government and business organizations.

MATAplus provides a subscription service to a limited number of riders as well as on- demand service to those who are certified. The study attempted to include both of these types of riders. No effort was made to make the respondent group match the overall ridership make-up because all certified riders are potentially on-demand riders, and the focus was on service, not on a particular group served.

The questions were determined by a committee of BFMS and MCIL staff. A yes / no format was selected and the questionnaire was intentionally kept short to incorporate the wide variety of respondents cognitive abilities. Four single-response questions were added for the final contact.

The final group of respondents was selected from known MATAplus riders. Around 30 respondents were chosen for the sample size. The survey technique was explained to all respondents and they were asked if they would like a written explanation. One respondents explanation was made available in Braille. (The written explanation is Appendix 1)

For confidentially and security reasons, the responses were not associated with any names. The surveyors were instructed to record responses on a page separate from that of the respondents' names. Regardless of these procedures, some respondents refused to give their home address. No explanation was mailed to those respondents that did not supply their address, although the information was made available through MCIL.

Three days before the start of the survey, the telephone surveyors were trained in the specific details of the questionnaire. Sample surveys were made, recorded and tallied to test the feasibility of the survey procedure. Surveyors were instructed to drop anyone from their calling list that could not be contacted over three consecutive days. One respondent was eliminated for this reason. The surveyors were paid for their time.

The survey began April 1 and ended April 15 at 9:30 PM. Every day the respondents were telephoned by a surveyor and asked questions relating to their contact with MATAplus that day. Surveyors were trained to skip irrelevant questions (i.e. When a respondent did not call on that day, the surveyor would not ask: "Did the dispatcher give their name?") The tallied results were collected at the Memphis Center for Independent Living.

The first question asked respondents was if they had called to make a reservation with MATAplus. The sum of all calls gives a total for the two weeks of contacts made by telephone (86). These findings do not reflect interaction with subscription riders. The average calls per day of the two- week survey was 6. This total ranged from 13 calls on Monday April 14 to 3 calls on April 2, 5, 6 and 12.

From the total number of calls we determined the percentage of the time that respondents reported that the MATAplus dispatcher gave his or her name (73%). Further, the percentage of calls the respondents reported in which they were able to arrange their primary reservation was 84%. Respondents reported that of the 86 calls, they were dissatisfied by the service of the MATAplus dispatcher during 16 of those calls (18%).

Only 3 callers reported not being offered alternatives following failure to make the primary reservation. This question did not receive a large enough response for it to be examined by the survey.

One: Telephone Response

The next area of questioning dealt with riding on MATAplus. 108 respondents reported riding on the MATAplus vehicle during the course of the survey. 81% of respondents reported that the bus was on time. 23% said they did not reach their destination on time.

23 respondents recounted cancelling service with MATAplus during the course of the survey. 9 (39%) failed to cancel two hours before the scheduled pick-up time. One respondent reported the bus arriving at the pick-up site despite having cancelled more than two hours prior.

Two: Findings

Four questions were added to the surveyors list for the final day of calls. The additional questions relate to impressions of the respondents and information that is not necessary to track over the 14 days of the survey.

On the final day the respondents were asked if they had received a recertification packet from MATA. 17 (68%) said they had. Respondents were further asked if they had been re-certified since September 1, 1996. 14 of 25 respondents (some respondents did not know), said they had been re-certified. 60% of respondents reported that the two weeks of the survey had been typical of the service of MATAplus, and 52% said they felt that service had improved since March 17, of this year.

Three: Single Response

Recommendations:

Because of the strong desire for those who were involved in this survey to have a quality run paratransit system, it is critical that MATAplus reevaluate its management capability in supplying a quality service that complies with the ADA. To accomplish this goal, Barrier Free Memphis and the Memphis Center for Independent Living recommend:

• Continue to report compliance to the ADA every January.

• Report progress toward the mandated 50% subscription ridership each quarter to the MATA board, Mayor's Advisory Council for Citizens with Disabilities, and the Mayor's Office.

• Re-certify current MATAplus customers and certify others interested in using MATAplus. Create a current customer list of ADA eligible persons to receive paratransit services.

• Use existing evaluation data-collection systems to evaluate the service of MATAplus. Report trips denied, on-time service, and general satisfaction of riders to the MATA board and the Barrier Free Memphis Society.

• Undergo an evaluation of the telephone reservation system by a customer relations professional.

• Include people with disabilities in all aspects of training and in-service training.

Conclusion:

This survey and results will be furnished to the Federal Transportation Administration (FTA). BFMS intends to ask for consultation on pursuing federal funds relating to civil rights violations concerning transportation.

Although the paratransit system is under no federal obligation to evaluate and report service, BFMS was shocked to discover that no evaluation of service takes place. It seems only logical that a service organization would find it advantageous to routinely review itself. Evaluation of service is an effective management tool to providing quality transportation.

There is a much more compelling reason, however, for including service evaluation in the regular operation of MATAplus. Since 1992, MATAplus has failed to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Paratransit Plan for Memphis, which calls for a reduction of the subscription ridership rate to 85%.

It is not the purpose of this survey to determine the impact of the mismanagement and inability of MATAplus to comply with the ADA Paratransit Plan. Nevertheless, a competently run system that operates within its implementation guidelines would be better suited to provide quality service to Memphis.

July, of last year was the deadline for subscription ridership to reach the ADA-mandated 50%. Again, poor management of MATAplus ruined its recertification plan that was to be completed on January 1, 1997. Clearly, MATAplus has demonstrated a complete inability to honor the commitments of the Memphis Paratransit Plan.

In light of the mediocre compliance to the ADA, the survey was undertaken to determine the level of service that MATAplus provides to the community. Obviously, if the paratransit system provided a quality service to everyone, than strict adherence to the ADA Paratransit Plan would not be so critical an issue.

We feel the findings of this survey justify exploration of stronger methods to ensure compliance with the ADA. Compliance does not necessarily mean that service would improve, however, Barrier Free Memphis urgently believes that continuing to ignore the obligations of the ADA Paratransit Plan for Memphis can only have a disastrous effect on the service of MATAplus.

The Memphis Center for Independent Living
1633 Madison Avenue, Memphis, TN 38104
(901) 726-6404 v/tty (901) 726-6521 fax
mcil@mcil.org 

MCIL is a United Way of the Mid-South member Agency

Return to the top of this page

MCIL would like feedback on the accessibility of this website.  Please send your comments and concerns to webmaster@mcil.org

© 2006 Tim Wheat