Overview

How do you measure success? Is Mobility Management cost effective? How was cost effectiveness benchmarking developed in California? How was it used in San Diego, Los Angeles and San Luis Obispo? Lessons from MOST in Europe

Measuring Success
How do you measure success?
awareness requests for information use of services offered switches to sustainable modes political acceptance

Measuring Success
Mobility Management will ultimately be judged on its ability to change individuals travel behavior from driving alone to more sustainable modes and do so in a cost effective manner relative to other mobility solutions

U.S. Example
National TDM Guidebook from 1993 estimated that it cost society (in US$):
$6.75 per one-way trip to accommodate an automobile with new road capacity; $4.10 per trip with new public transport service;

But, it cost employers only $1.33 to reduce a trip via Mobility Management.

Evolution of Methodology
Several grant programs in southern California desired to know how funded projects were performing Ultimately resulted in almost 60 project evaluations with comparative findings on impacts and cost effectiveness

Basic Performance Measures

New users of sustainable modes
Vehicle trip reduction

Vehicle miles of travel reduction

Automobile emission reduction

Cost per trip, mile or emission reduced

Application of Methodology
Standardized methodology applied in:
Coronado, CA

Los Angeles County

San Luis Obispo, CA

Coronado TMA Evaluation

1999 study of MM services operated by Transport Mgmt Association
Focused on bicycle club and vanpool and pubic transport fare subsidies Compared cost per trip, mile and pound of emissions reduced to range of impacts from 60 projects and to regional averages

Coronado TMA Evaluation

Example of Benchmark Comparison:
TMAs bicycle club reduced a vehicle trip for $0.16, as compared to $0.43 $4.04 for other projects around California and $3.10 for other bicycle measures in the San Diego region

LACMTA Rideshare Evaluation

Performance evaluation of countywide rideshare support programs
Evaluated ridematching, vanpool subsidies, and financial incentive for new users of sustainable modes

Data collected via user surveys

LACMTA Rideshare Evaluation

Example of Benchmark Comparison:
Vanpool subsidy was most cost effective among programs evaluated Cost per trip reduced from vanpool subsidy was $0.54, as compared to $1.33 - $20.49 for other vanpool programs in southern California

LACMTA Rideshare Evaluation

Comparison to other mobility solution:
Daily cost to place commuter in a sustainable mode = $0.82; the cost per trip reduced = $2.80 for all programs Cost per daily rider on new tram line = $9.60 - $10.76 (incl. capital) or $2.66 - $2.76 for operating cost only

Cuesta Grade TDM Evaluation

Evaluation of TDM program to mitigate impacts of highway reconstruction project Program coordinated by San Luis Obispo Council of Governments
Evaluated increased public transit service, vanpool formation, and carpool incentive

Cuesta Grade TDM Evaluation

Program removed 300 cars from highway each day
Carpool incentive was most cost effective ($3.36 per trip reduced)

Benchmark Comparison:
Cost per trip and mile was within range of California experience, but not emissions

MOST Evaluation Experience

30 partner MM demonstration projects MET Toolkit to assist with evaluation Travel behavior impacts assessed for only half of the projects Car reduction of 7-15% measured for three projects Also documented increases in public transport use, bicycling and walking

MOST Evaluation Lessons

Need to build evaluation into planning and budgeting Need consistent method to derive comparative findings Need cost data to assess cost effectiveness Need buy-in from project managers

Conclusions
MM being demonstrated in Europe to show its value and benefits Desire to implement on broader scale Policy-makers will ultimate demand accountability for public funds spent Consistent evaluation methods and cost effectiveness benchmarking can provide this information