Update on the Accessibility of our Public Transportation Systems. Presenter: Marilyn Golden. >> SHARON: Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to today's webcast. The Current State of Transportation for People with Disabilities. My name is Sharon Finney. I'm with the Disability Law Resource Project at ILRU, your sponsor for today's event. I'll be moderating the webcast and voicing your E-mail questions to Marilyn today. Before we get started, I just wanted to remind you about sending in your questions. In order to submit a question, you can just click the submit question button at the bottom of your RealOne Player screen or you can just address an E-mail to webcast@ilru.org. Please send those questions now or at any point during today's presentation and we'll pose those to Marilyn for her live answers. Additionally, if anyone has a technical problem today, just give us a call at (713)520-0232. Today we'll be discussing the National Council on Disability's report on the current status of disability transportation in the United States. And our presenter today, I'm happy to introduce, is Marilyn Golden. She's a policy analyst with the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, or as some of you know, DREDF, our nation's foremost national law and policy center on disability civil rights. She has been closely involved with the Americans with Disabilities Act throughout all the stages of its proposal and passage and now during its implementation. She's a highly lauded ADA trainer, has directed and led numerous in-depth programs on the ADA, which have given thousands of people comprehensive knowledge on how to make this law a reality. I'm so happy to introduce Marilyn Golden. Good afternoon, Marilyn. >> MARILYN: Good afternoon. Thank you, Sharon, and hello everybody. It's great for me, I appreciate the opportunity to be able to talk to people today about this report that DREDF and -- that DREDF and Richard Weiner from Nelson/Nygaard Consulting Associates drafted for the National Council on Disability. I want to acknowledge NCD and especially my contract officer Julie Carole who is wonderful to work with and was a very positive influence on the report as well. I also want to acknowledge Jeff Rosen, general counsel for NCD, who has also been wonderful and great to work with. The great thing about doing this report was that it gave us the opportunity to look at a lot of interesting things that have developed related to ADA transportation and also areas of -- areas of transportation unrelated to the ADA, issues that came up that really are not answered by the law and regulations and other sort of well known documents. So it really did allow us to look at a lot of new nuances and I'm going to try to hit on some today, as many as we can get to, before I take your questions. I think a lot of you have access to the report, which is on the web in several versions. We had posted for the website the URL for going there. I'm going to assume that everybody has the ability to access that, and Sharon, you should let me know if that's wrong. I think everybody has it, so I'll sort of tell people where I am and I'm obviously not going to go page by page or line by line, but if you want to roughly see where I am, just looking at the table of contents on Page 5 to give you just a general overview of what's in here, after some introductory sections, Section 3 addresses fixed route public transit, both bus and rail. Section 4 addresses paratransit, and as people can imagine, there is a lot of important issues there. Section 5 approaches -- has resulted in service improvements on public transit. We've looked at things like disability community involvement and various enforcement measures that can be taken in connection with the Federal Transit Administration. I'll say more of that in a little while. We looked at -- in Section 6, we have looked at issues for all modes of public transit. In 7 we look at public right of ways, and in Section 8 privately funded transportation. And after that, a few other sections -- smaller sections on various topics including the important topic of rural transportation. And I guess I'll just go into -- I also want to mention that the scope of this paper is really surface transportation. It does not address transportation by air carrier or passenger vessel although those are important areas that merit further examination. Before I go into the fixed route bus section, Sharon, am I right in terms of people having the url? >> SHARON: The NCD report is on the page with today's presentation materials, so they can find it there. >> MARILYN: Okay, good, and I know it's in pdf and pdl as coming soon. We talk about fixed route buses at the beginning and how greatly increased accessible buses are since the ADA, and then start looking at some of the problem areas. And on Page 26 we look at the area of stop announcements. It's generally known that transit agencies have overall had difficulty following the ADA's requirements for calling out stops and people have complained about that and in a lot of locations. In a lot of locales, transit agencies have responded to this problem by purchasing and installing automatic stop announcement technology. In some locations, this solution has worked well and we give examples, but we learned some interesting things looking at cities that have done this because automatic -- excuse me -- automated stop announcement technology should not be seen as a panacea. These systems are subject to problems. For example, drivers on some systems reportedly disable the automated voice system despite directives from management and their union not to do so. And some bus drivers -- particularly in particular cities -- turn the volume down. One visually impaired person told us in an interview in one California city that the trigger boxes related to the mechanism of the automators need to be moved so that they'll activate the announcements at a more proper time. He said that some announcements for the next stop were occurring while the bus is still stopped at the present stop and he pointed out the dangers of this. One disability advocate in North Carolina pointed out that on her system, bus drivers continue to turn off the automatic stop calling systems. Of course not all fixed route buses -- not all city systems are equipped with automatic stop announcement technology. Even for those that are, we found knowledgeable sources that told us the equipment doesn't announce every stop, and because the ADA requires drivers to announce any requested stop, drivers really need to be ready and able to make these announcements themselves. I think it's been a little more of a pattern that when transit systems buy these automated stop calling out systems, they figure, well, the drivers don't have to call out the stops; but actually they still do because, one, the system can be down; and two, the drivers may need to call out any -- do need to call out any requested stop and the systems aren't usually set up to call out every single stop. So the drivers may need to add a stop every now and then. On the other hand, we looked at cities that don't have the equipment and we found that in some cities that don't have the equipment, they've done an excellent job without it. Salt Lake City, Utah is one example where one of the advocates told us that they found their stop announcements worked fine with no technology but a voice. And they estimated that they were up to about 85 or 90 percent compliance which is a very high rate in comparison to what has been found in many cities. So we don't recommend against these systems by any means. As we said, some cities have used them effectively, but we do recommend that drivers be prepared and trained to call out stops anyway, and we have some of the same recommendations that have been around for awhile, but it's not clear that everyone is familiar with them about what advocates can do or try to get their transit agency to do when stop calling is a problem. I'm looking now on Page 29. There is a number of steps they can undertake, including things that are very easy and low tech. For example, involving drivers in identifying the stops, providing drivers with a list of stops, these things seem very basic, but they're not always done. Installing the equipment to facilitate stop announcements could be high tech, but could even be low tech, look a goose neck microphone that makes it easier for the drivers. And the most important thing is undertaking progressive discipline when the stops are not called. Discipline will ideally involve secret monitoring of stop calling, but it's important that the drivers union first agree on that approach for it to work well. Only after monitoring is established and drivers are accustomed to it should the secret monitoring be the basis for progressive discipline. We also point out one very interesting decision made by the Federal Transit Administration in an ADA complaint on the issue of the failure to call out stops. FTA drew the conclusion in one city that where there is a systemic problem with calling out the bus stops and, therefore, a low rate of doing so, that a person with a disability who needs the stops called in order to use the bus must be granted paratransit eligibility, which is a finding that certainly makes sense although as for FTA to have said it, seems to us to be an important advance in terms of enforcement. We also looked at the issue of wheelchair securement on the bus. There are a number of issues that I won't have time to talk about, but I'm just going to hit the high points. And in terms of wheelchair securement, the one area I want to mention today is on Page 36 and it's about the issue of so-called oversized wheelchairs. The ADA of course defines quote-unquote common wheelchairs to be particular dimensions and weight. And at the time that was developed that was an advanced set of dimensions that was sort of bigger than even some bus lifts would allow at that time back in the late '80's and of course in 1990 for the ADA. Increasingly though, as wheelchairs vary over the years and, you know, to be candid, Americans on average are getting larger, the more and more people every year still a minority, but an increasing minority of people have chairs that don't fit this common wheelchair definition and are running into problems with their transit agencies. The report urges the U.S. Access Board to revise the technical standards for the ADA to increase the size that transit agencies are required to carry. To move on to the issue of rail transit, which starts on Page 37, we've looked at the issue of access to train stations. For far too few accessible stations are present in some of the older rail systems even when a rail system is in compliance with the ADA. Because the key station concept -- one leading advocate many of you will know Jim Wiseman who did a lot of work on the ADA, basically told us in an interview that he considers the key station concept out moed and should be eliminated and recommended that all stations should ultimately be made accessible. Since to do otherwise is to permit discrimination. In short, all passenger rail stations should be made accessible, and the report -- NCD has recommended to FTA, the federal transit administration and to DOT its overall agency, the Department of Transportation, that they should provide funding for -- to provide accessibility to all passenger rail stations in the U.S, not only the new ones and the key stations. We also go into the issue of elevator maintenance and information on outages on Page 40, and we have some ideas about systems that can be used to improve elevator maintenance and reliability which is a very important area that is still problematic in some of the big cities, especially in some of the older systems. We also talk about the gap -- the rail gap, the vertical and horizontal gap between car and platform, which is an access problem in some cases still, even though the ADA does require a smaller gap than some locations have. And we talk at the bottom of Page 41 about the issue of commuter rail and platform accessibility. This is an issue that has to do with new commuter rail systems where full platform access is required, although in some cases other options are required if there is extraordinary structural and feasibility in providing platform access and sometimes is used with many high platforms that they are really a second rate solution and the report goes into why and the report recommends that only full platform access be used. It's been something of an issue lately because new systems in Nashville and Salt Lake City, in particular, where there has been a lot of attention on the design of what method will be used to access these new rail systems. Moving on to the area of paratransit, which starts on Page 47, even though the report discusses how even though ADA paratransit is certainly superior to any paratransit services that the law replaced before 1990, and even though there have been very great increases in paratransit ridership and also paratransit spending, paratransit riders in many cities still experience a whole variety of very significant problems. Looking at Page 48, in our interview with Mark Fiedler who was co-founder of the Disability Rights Council of Washington, he pointed out how in the Washington D. C. system the problems extend quite far. It's not just a matter of inconvenience, he says, it's people who may end up losing their jobs because the service over and over and over again isn't getting them to work on time. It's people who miss dialysis appointments, it's people who rely on oxygen whose trips are so circuitous run out of oxygen. Lives are endangered instead of enhanced and we thought that discussion was so compelling that it really merits being in the report and being really in a focal section that underscored the problems we're still finding with this mode of transit. When we explore the policy issues impacting service availability and the quality of paratransit, we start with -- where just about everybody starts who rides paratransit is with eligibility. And talk about how ADA paratransit eligibility determinations are being made stricter in many cities and how they're being made stricter. Usually by the introduction of in-person assessments or at least some individualized element. An interview or sometimes an assessment, and a lot of times the disability community reacts with a lot of trepidation to these changes, sometimes for good reason. The report does not recommend a particular approach to paratransit eligibility, but what we do emphasize in it is that what is important in eligibility determinations and maybe particularly important when transit agencies are revising their procedures is to conduct paratransit eligibility certifications consistent with best practices in the industry. There is a right way to do this, and a lot of wrong ways to do it. And when you do functional assessments or in-person interviews or when you do trip by trip eligibility, you want to be doing it right. Some best practices -- this is started on Page 53 -- and I'll just mention a few of them. Eligibility determinations should consider conditions that could pose barriers to the person's travel throughout the entire bus and/or rail system during every time of year. It should not simply look at conditions in the current weather when the certification is taking place or look just at the applicant's neighborhood or where they work or go to school, but really any her they may need to go. And it's very important to consider any variable conditions experienced by the individual. A lot of people have disabilities that vary over time, and if the determinations only look at a snapshot of the individual, say, on the day of a functional assessment, they may be incorrectly assessed. Any secondary disabilities, such as disorientation or fatigue or difficulty with balance should be looked at. And transit agencies have as their responsibility to know that some disabilities cannot be evaluated by a functional assessment, such as seizure disorders and psychiatric disabilities and variable conditions such as multiple sclerosis. Transit agencies who subject individuals with those disabilities to a functional assessment could very easily misassess them. We have a lot of anecdotal reports on what's happening out there, but we don't have any overall comprehensive data on whether revisions to eligibility certifications are having a significant negative impact on the mobility of people with disabilities although we respect it may be beginning to and we call for research on that point. We move on to the area of trip denials on Page 56. And we talk about how the ADA requires next day service, but not a lot of individuals with disabilities know that. And people in a lot of locations are in a condition where they never can get rides the next day. They always must call several days or more in advance and yet they may be unaware that this is a violation of the ADA and certainly if it happens regularly, that an eligible rider cannot get next day service, it is a violation of the ADA and people are encouraged to file complaints with the Federal Transit Administration over that. We talk about how a second circuit court decision involving the Rochester, New York transit system established a very good standard of when denials are illegal. The court basically said that denials are illegal if they are under the -- are illegal if they are under the control of the transit agency and not if they're not. For example, if a trip is denied or somebody is not picked up because of, say, a truly unusual weather event, that the transit agency had no way of controlling, that's not a violation of the ADA, but if as is more typical, the denial is because the transit agency does not have, say, enough vehicles engaged in serving the paratransit riders who are eligible or enough drivers, or enough phone lines, that is if the shortfall is because of decisions they've made limiting their capacity by just not having enough capacity to serve everyone who is eligible, that's a decision that is under the control of the transit agency and is what, you know, what determines what an illegal denial is. We also discuss something that DREDF has actually talked about before on a DLRP webcast, which is the hidden impact of trip denial rates, on Page 58 we point out how there is a lot of ways that trip denials are counted that makes the average number given -- like if a transit agency says we have 2 percent denials or 4 percent denials, that may sound like every rider who calls for a paratransit ride gets, say, 98 rides out of 100 if the denial rate is 2 percent, but actually the way that figure is calculated even in good faith by transit agency can hide a situation where really the denials affect the rider's life far more than the figure would seem. And we talk about the reasons and in particular the biggest one is averaging, how they a averaged and we talked about certain factors how different rates are averaged to make a number seem stow small when the impact on people's lives is much greater. Another issue in paratransit that we looked at real closely is the issue of on-time performance which starts on Page 61, which is really one of the most problematic issues. It's a significant issue both for the pick-up time and for the time the passenger arrives at their destination and what we were able to do in our work on the report is to in a sense unpackage, untwist all the different reasons for lateness that get wound up together and separate them out in terms of what the causes are and make operational recommendations on reach one. So this section includes a lot of operational recommendations that you can give your transit agency. The first section under the factors affecting on time performance on Page 62, we really talk about the importance of the desired arrival or appointment time. A lot of people know that the transit agency is allowed to negotiate with you up to an hour different from when you want to go, but people don't always know that FTA has recently been pg out documents that emphasize the importance of transit agencies taking into strong consideration the rider's desired arrival or appointment time and we talk about those quotations, so people can show their transit agencies that this is something that FTA is recommending. A letter from Michael Winter from the Office of Civil Rights director to the transit agencies pointed out that significant numbers -- substantial numbers of significantly late arrivals would in fact constitute a capacity restraint under the ADA. There is also the issue, paging through of negotiated vs. scheduled time, and how transit agencies will give a rider a time, but sometimes the transit agencies will change the time in the system and not tell the rider and that can result in all kinds of problems. The rider is outside for what may be a specific pick up window and if the transit agency changes what they designate as the pick up time, even five or ten minutes, it can change the window and it can mean somebody is erroneously not picked up because they've gone back into their house or not come out yet and the transit agencies should really protect the negotiated pick up time in the system and not change it or notify riders of any change before that day. We look at the issue of trip length and this is an area where there has been a lot of complaints from people about trips taking extra, extra long, and suggest a standard for measuring this. Trips really should look -- you can compare it to fixed route, including the time it takes to get to and from the bus stop or the train stop and perhaps add a portion, up to maybe 50 percent, and looking at paratransit rides not taking significantly longer than that. And things like having enough spare drivers, there is all kinds of other operational recommendations. We look on Page 68 at the issue of lengthy telephone hold times which can also be an illegal capacity constraint. We look at the issue of subscription service on the next page, on Page 69, and about how some transit agencies misinterpret the ADA and arbitrarily limit their subscription service where they really don't have to. They may think they can't exceed 50 percent of their capacity with subscription when actually the ADA limits them from going over 50 percent if there are capacity denials of trips, but if they are providing all the trips that their customers want, which is required by the ADA at this point, it is allowed by is the ADA to increase the subscription service to as high a percentage as riders need. Some transit agencies are moving in the direction of calling subscription a premium service, but subscription is a very important service where people who are going to work or to school and go, say, to the same place at the same time every day, can get a ride set up so they don't have to rearrange their ride every single day. It gives a very important schedule consistency and the report recommends that transit agencies provide consistent service. Excuse me, provide subscription service as part of their ADA package and the report not only recommends that to transit agencies, but recommends to the Federal Transit Administration that subscription service should be a required part of ADA service. We look a lot also at no show policies starting on Page 73. It's well known, certainly by paratransit riders, that the ADA allows transit agencies to suspend for a reasonable period of time the provision of paratransit to riders who establish a pattern of missing scheduled trips, also known as no shows. But we found that many transit agencies have no show policies that penalize riders more quickly for fewer no shows than FTA seems to think is appropriate. For example, a lot of transit agencies penalize after three no shoes in a month, although FTA in some public letters that are on their website that they have sent transit agencies state that this may not constitute enough of a pattern or a practice. And FTA has also suggested something that very few transit agencies are doing, which is to consider the frequency of use of paratransit or the percentage of trips missed rather than just an absolute number of no shows. Five no shows in a month by a rider who rides to and from work every day is a very different situation than five no shows in a month where the rider just rides once or twice a week. So the frequency concept is important. Further, the ADA precludes transit agencies from including in the no show tally -- this is on Page 75 -- trips that riders miss for reasons beyond their control. The ADA also guarantees that riders can appeal transit operator's no show decisions, but riders are not always informed of their rights to contest individual no shoes or to appeal. And sometimes the rights are stated, but you can't really reach the person or they don't take your concerns into account about how that no show was not under your control and any suspensions that have taken place without these -- this information being given and really heeded, the report states that those are violations of the ADA's due process requirements. We really recommend that transit agencies focus on not ordinary riders who occasionally miss a ride, but really the true abusers who repeatedly don't show up. It's usually just a very few and we found that some transit agencies have been more punitive in their approach. The report says that that's a very customer unfriendly practice and is disrespectful of the average rider and it really doesn't help very much because most riders are only missing -- you know, are missing as few rides as they can and they can't do a lot better. We talk a lot about late cancellations. Some transit agencies have defined on their own something that's not in the ADA, which is this new animal, late cancellations that can also be penalized. The report looks at things like the paratransit handbook and FTA advice and points -- and also what a lot of transit agencies are doing and the report ends up recommending that a late cancellation really should only be one if a transit agency wants to call it that and penalize people on that basis. It should be at the most sort of one or two, maybe two or three hours before the ride, but to claim that a cancellation that comes in, say, at five o'clock the day before is a late cancellation -- FTA has said that's inappropriate. FTA has said that they're willing to consider late cancellations to be only things that are, as they put it, the functional equivalent of a no show. So it would be something that was, you know, so close to the actual time of the ride that it was the functional equivalent of a no show. We look at door to door versus curb to curb service on Page 79. A lot of transit agencies have established curb to curb service and not been willing to help individuals with disabilities to the vehicle, although many individuals with disabilities -- or at least some individuals really do need door to door service, and the report looks at some of the reasons that transit agencies have this belief that door to door service will be cheaper for them. There is a lot of reasons that that may not necessarily be true. We don't have any data on it either way, and people can read this section if they wish and look at our analysis of how door to door may be as cheap as curb to curb and it certainly helps a lot more people. The report does recommend that transit agencies provide door to door service for people who need it. The report also looks at travel training, and there is a lot about travel training here that I -- and fare incentive programs also that I encourage you to look at. We talk about another area on Page 85 which is something a few transit agencies have done which is equalizing pay between fixed route drivers and paratransit drivers. And the report hypothesizes that's eliminating the discrepancy between pay and benefits between drivers in those two different components of the system could resolve some or perhaps many of the chronic difficulties with paratransit that we have tended to see. A few transit agencies have done this and have seen significant service benefits as a result. And we give some examples and discuss where this kind of thing has been done and what it has looked like. I want to move on to the section that starts on Page 97, approaches that have resulted in service improvements on public transit. We look at the issue of disability community involvement and how critically important that is in making changes on the public transit system. We give one example -- we give a number of examples and I'll mention one on Page 98, which is I think was very dramatic. Strong advocacy by the disability community succeeded last year in persuading the Chicago Transit Authority to retract at least for a time and hopefully for a long time or maybe permanently to retract a vigorously opposed doubling of the ADA paratransit fares. This was interesting because that increase was not going to be illegal. It would have been something allowed by the ADA, but it was so high because general fares have gotten so high in that transit agency and many transit agencies, actually, that the community advocated for something beyond what was required by the ADA and had an important victory. We also look at ADA administrative complaints to the federal transit agency, and how FTA has been coming out with decisions on administrative complaints that are good in their vigorous enforcement level. Something that earlier reports had criticized actually and so we have really seen an improvement and we -- you know, DREDF has been optimistic and encouraging of people who think that their transit agency is violating the ADA to submit complaints. It's easy to do. It's not too hard to find the complaint form on the web. I know that in the last webcast we did with DLRP, the complaint form url was actually on your website. So Sharon, it's on a previous webcast website and that url may -- did change at one point, but if people go to the Federal Transit Administration website and I think if they just search for complaint form, it comes up in the first one or two listings, that ADA complaint form. So it's just a short kind of questionnaire. It's easy to do. There is an address right to FTA where you send it in. It's really good for complaints to be very thoroughly documented, if you possibly can. Don't worry about too much detail. That's one place to just go whole hog and be really thorough and, you know, there is no guarantee that FTA will get to it quickly or will do what you want them to do, but we have seen enough encouraging results that we are encouraging people to utilize that process. And we give some good examples. One of them is actually repeated from an earlier section which I already gave because I like it so much about how when you don't call the out the stops that could trigger paratransit eligibility which is something we hope will get transit agencies to cleanup their act in terms of calling out stops. We also look on Page 101 at FTA's ADA assessments. FTA has been doing about six assessments a year out of different transit agencies, mostly in paratransit, but some in fixed route as well. We've always recommended that it be both, and we've heard from advocates in a number of cities where assessments have been done that there have been real improvements in their wake. And anywhere an assessment is done, the assessment report, which is done by very solid consultants that FTA sends in to do the analysis, that report becomes a good advocacy tool for you and FTA has been pretty good about establishing cities for assessments where they know trouble spots are. So if there is a lot of difficulties where you live, sending in complaints and, you know, perhaps having multiple people sending complaints, you know, calling FTA, just doing whatever you can, sending them articles in your newspaper, just bringing to their attention that you have a lot of issues can mean that over time they will schedule an assessment there.it's a good tool for people. We also look at litigation in the section starting on Page 103, and we talk about how litigation really has been a choice -- a last choice for a lot of people. Nobody is litigating in transportation from a frivolous perspective. It's too hard. It's too sort of fact intensive. These can be complicated cases. It's not like, you know, a public accommodation that doesn't have a ramp. It's a little more involved than that, and it's a tool that when these suits have been brought -- not always, but in some cases -- they've been very effective at changing the system. We spend a lot of time talking about what happened in Atlanta. In 2003, they had a suit that revamped all of MARTA's bus and rail services. There have been some really horrific things there. We talk about not only some of the logistical or I should say service problems, but also the attitudinal problems that accompanied them were in some cases really compelling. We quote how, you know, not only sort of blind individuals and wheelchair users who are often disadvantaged in public transit, but people with dyslexia and other learning disabilities and people with short stature were also having problems. This was across disability lawsuit which is of course a good strategy to have. Tim Willis, who we interviewed in depth who worked on the MARTA suit, told us some of the poor customer service people had faced and we have an anecdote here about how, for example, somebody with short stature would need the lift to get on the bus which the ADA gives them the right to, and the drivers would say, oh, you don't need a lift, walk up those stairs, you know, showing attitudes that really were deplorable. And Tim also told us how the impact of the case has been strong and how people riding today are much more likely to have stops called out and to have Braille schedules and to do their own paratransit and also this was the first legal decision of any kind under the ADA to require a publicly funded agency to make its website accessible under the ADA. So that was a really important decision. Let's see, moving on -- I want to talk a little bit on Page 109 about the section on issues for all modes of public transit, and we start with something very important which is the Department of Justice's ADA requirements and their relationship to public transportation. As many of you will know, really we could say probably most of the requirements of the ADA for public transportation are in, of course, the Department of Transportation ADA regulations; but some of them are given in another regulation, that put out by the Department of Justice under Title II of the ADA where we have requirements such as the requirement to modify policies, practices and procedures. A lot of transit agencies are not aware that the Department of Justice requirements also apply to them, but they can be very important. The requirements say to modify policies unless it would fundamentally alter the service, which for example enable an individual with diabetes who rides the subway, if the subway has a no eating policy, to have the right to eat on the schedule they need to due to their disability. And there is all kinds of ways that modification of policies is important in every service covered by the ADA, not just transportation. But there had been one court decision recently actually in the circuit covered by the DLRP that has said that this requirement does not apply to paratransit, and in general to more transit agencies and that was just less than a year ago. It was last fall, and it was a very discouraging decision. One thing we did in preparing the report is do a lot of legal research and we really found how there is a very significant amount of legal authority that's at odds with that Fifth Circuit decision saying that the Department of Justice regulations absolutely do apply to transit agencies. I don't want to go into a lot of detail over the legal authority, but it is laid out here in detail. I'll just say what the different documents are -- Department of Transportation's 504 regulation there on the bottom of Page 110 is quoted and you can see in italics the regulations of the Department of Justice implementing Titles II and III is something funded -- transit agencies funded by the federal government, which they all are, they're required to follow that. Also another court decision interpreting the ADA out of the D. C. circuit, in the Burkhart case addressed this point and said that the DOJ regulations apply. Department of Justice in that very case expressed a friend of the court brief stating that the DOJ regulations applied to transit agencies and finally, FTA's own administrative decisions in complaints starting on Page 113 is where we talk about that, have also reflected the legal conclusion that the Department of Justice regulations apply to transit agencies. So we want to encourage advocates not to be dismayed by the Melton decision and that there is really a preponderance of legal authority saying very clearly that these regulations do apply to transit agencies and advocates should operate accordingly. Let's see, what other sections do we want to talk about? Let's see, the service animal section starting on Page 115 has something interesting in it. Certainly there have been a lot of issues with service animals and that's well known, particularly in taxis. Another issue that we raised in the form of a policy nature, starting on Page 116, there is a new handout from Easter Seals Project Action which provides a new formulation of the questions that transit providers can ask about animals accompanying people with disabilities. Not very different, but just a tiny bit different than the Department of Justice had previously said. This handout says that providers can ask if the animal is a pet. Previously DOJ has said they can ask if the animal is a service animal. The brochure goes on to say that if the customer responds that the animal is a service animal, you can ask what task the animal has been trained to perform. That's all well and good, but we point out that there could be a civil rights issue with it. If transit agencies ask somebody if this animal is a pet and people don't know to say back it's a service animal. If transit agencies are waiting for those particular words, service animal, as some articles have implied, that, you know, should not be a requirement of the ADA. Most disabled people, including many, if not most service animal users, may not be familiar with the ADA's terminology and no magic words so to speak should be required for somebody to get their civil rights. We give an example, that's hypothetical on the bottom of Page 117. Let's say a driver -- a bus driver, for example, asks somebody if this is your pet. If the person goes she is my pet and I need to take her everywhere because I may have a seizure and I would need her help. Even though the individual has said the animal is a pet, which is not legally correct, but so what, the person has still made it clear that they have the animal because of the disability and so it would be illegal for a transit operator to exclude service to the individual with their animal in such a case. Let's see, we go on and we talk about the barriers to people with multiple chemical sensitivity and there are many, and that's an important issue on transportation, on all forms of transportation. Another area that I'll talk about is the issue of accessible taxi service which starts on Page 125. The ADA does not require wheelchair accessible taxi vehicles unless the taxi service uses particular types of vans. An arrangement that is unusual but not unheard of. In the absence of a more comprehensive ADA requirement for accessible taxis, there has been a great deal of non-ADA activity across the country aimed at putting wheelchair accessible taxi cabs into circulation and we've seen a lot of wheelchair accessible taxis in a variety of cities and even more cities are trying to get them, but we don't always see really good service. And in analyzing this in the report, we've basically listed -- first of all, we've listed case studies in about eight or ten different cities. How who has worked on the accessible taxis and how they've gotten them and how they've set them up. You know, in some cases, transit agencies have been instrumental in helping because transit agency staff recognized the importance to reducing the demand for paratransit in having accessible taxis and that's been a nice dimension of this issue. After going through the various cities, some of which have done great and we talked about some cities that have had problems getting this and we give a long list on Page 132 of other locations where work has been done to get these, and I'm sure we left out cities because there is just a lot of cities that have worked on this. After that, and starting at the bottom of Page 132, we look closely at what are the problems and issues in providing accessible taxi service with a goal towards giving people a handle on how to set it up so that they can avoid the problems. It's not easy, and it's certainly not down to a science yet, there is no guide book, but at least we have identified some of the issues. I'll look a little more closely at one of the first quotes here starting on the bottom of Page 132 that instead of just mandating some kind of taxi access, it's best when all stakeholders buy into the plan and package incentives along with sanctions or regulatory involvement along with enforcement. And that incentives must be structured so that both the driver and the company see the advantage of providing accessible taxi service. Sometimes incentives have gone to the company, but they don't accrue to the driver, and in many places, you know, increasingly over the last decade or two, drivers are more not employees of taxi companies but are independent contractors and must have their own incentives to really go for having accessible taxis and wanting to use them. On the bottom of Page 133, we go into some of the problems, for example, when accessible taxi are purchased. There are a lot of challenges just keeping them in use. Sometimes they sit on the lot. A lot of times they're the first vehicles taken out of service and the last ones put into service. Even if they're in service, they're not necessarily providing service to people who need an accessible vehicle. We've also found in some locations overuse of accessible taxis as ADA paratransit contract providers. Now, that doesn't mean they shouldn't do it at all. For the ADA paratransit system to offer a contract to taxi providers, it could be advantage us for everybody for the provision of rides on paratransit and it's a form of incentive for the taxi company, but then if 100 percent of the taxi's capacity is used in the paratransit system, they're not available for individual riders and that's happened who aren't paratransit users. That's happened in some cities. So there really needs to be a balance and we talk a little bit about the numbers of that and some guidelines to look for and ways to monitor or at least a suggestion of monitoring. Down towards the bottom of Page 134, other demands for accessible vehicles can also pose problems in keeping the vehicles for use available for use. For example, in big cities, a lot of times accessible vehicles sit at the airport because they are called to the front of the line for people who are in large groups or carrying golf clubs or other bulky equipment and if the accessible taxis are all at the airport, they can't be taking individuals where they need to go in the neighborhoods. So regulatory involvement may be needed here to make sure these taxis are actually in use. It's also recommended that localities adopt the ADA nondiscrimination standards and the vehicle design standards into their local ordinances and maybe to even improve upon them because a lot of theme these local enforcements aren't aware of these federal requirements. And as in just about every other dimension of disability rights, we talk about training at the bottom of Page 135, how training is a very essential part of a comprehensive program and yet today in a lot of accessible taxi programs there is little or no training. And then we move on to discussing enforcement and a little bit about the different kinds of vehicles that can be used for accessible taxis. And that's an important area that we want to keep following. I'll just take -- I want to move very quickly to your questions. I'll maybe just take one more minute or two to talk about one or two other important things in the report. On Page 138, we look at the issue of Greyhound and other inner city bus service. Now we're of course in the overall section of privately funded transit. Of course Greyhound was a target for demonstrations in civil disobedience at one point in the '80's by ADAPT and actually I had intended to mention, but I don't think I did mention that the report also talks about crediting ADAPT for their work on getting the fixed route buses into shape leading up to the passage of the ADA. And here, too, ADAPT had been important on targeting Greyhound when their service was very poor in the '80's leading up to the ADA and continued to be poor. It talks a little bit about the political history of this issue which was dramatic and there weren't strong requirements for ADA structural access requirements for these over the road buses gray hoped uses until 1998. We talked to people and look at what others have found and it does seem that people with disabilities agree -- we didn't find really any discouraging words that Greyhound these days is providing good accessible services with the kind of notice that's needed at this stage is employed, needed and provided in the ADA regular. There are still some problems with smaller carriers. We've found in a quote -- you know, we found some information that we didn't actually from Greyhound that we tried to check out. We didn't really see any different -- anything to combat -- excuse me -- to contradict this conclusion, so we went ahead and quoted absent evidence to the contrary that there do appear to be some other, you know, many of the carriers are doing their best to come up to speed or are coming up to speed, but there appear to be a new group of discount curbside inner city bus carriers, city to city carriers, that aren't complying with the ADA and so these out laws are on out there and it's important that they -- you know, all these companies do comply and people act in a way to make that happen. We also talk -- moving on to Page 141 -- about airport travel. There is all kind of different airport related transit systems, many of which are not doing a good job. Some are, some aren't, and we give some examples. In closing, I'll just talk a little bit about some recommendations. Of course the recommendations in the record are scattered throughout. We also at the end have two appendices. The first appendix lays out all the recommendations in the order they're given, but only the recommendations and then Appendix B, which starts on Page 177, talks about the recommendations organized by who they are to. First we talk about publicly funded transit agencies, and I actually mentioned a number of those. I want to go on and mention some of the key recommend dangs the report makes to the federal government and those start on Page 188. As I said, the report recommends subscription service be required in paratransit. Towards the bottom of Page 188, the report recommends a significant increase in transportation in rural areas. I did not spend a lot of time on this section on transportation in rural areas. We do examples of innovative and excellent programs in rural areas, but also point out that the big lack is real I funding lack and that should be greatly increased for everyone and also especially for people with disabilities. In the rail area on Page 189, we talk about how the report, as I mentioned, recommends making all passenger rail stations accessible. And for access in all commuter rail systems. Also the U.S. Access Board recommendation I gave and also on the next page we are recommending that municipal leaders play a role in accessible taxi programs. Those are some of the big highlights I'm now really happy to take some questions. Sharon, I bet you have a bunch by now. >> SHARON: I do, Marilyn. I have a large pile of papers forming on my desk. You just mentioned the rural issues and so I'll go ahead and ask that question first. >> MARILYN: Sure. >> SHARON: This person is stating obviously that transportation equity is a problem in the dollar allocation for transit services in our nation, and they're addressing rural states. Since we know that rural states don't receive an equitable share of public transit dollars -- I'm sorry -- is Congress planning to add correct this any time soon? >> MARILYN: I wish I could say that they are. I'm unaware of a movement for that. It's desperately needed though and I think it's important that it be advocated for. There are authorization bills now actually in the conference committee for transit funding and the disability community has been part of the lobbying for increase in those. The report in an overall basis talks about -- in the introduction -- how really the funding as well as other kinds of advantages that the government gives in the area of overall transportation in this country is very skewed to automobile transit. And how people who must rely on public transit, including but not limited to people with disabilities, are extremely disadvantaged by comparison in the report in an overall sense recommends a must vaster sums should be given in had country to all forms of public transit and if that was happening, rural areas, paratransit, which can be said to be under funded and all the different kinds of funding issues we have would be addressed by this more global recommendation, but I can't tell you that there is an imminent translation of that recommendation into policy any time soon. >> SHARON: All right. Another question comes that is just tough to answer and they're asking what assistance is available, financial, advisory, for developing statewide transportation collaboratives and coordination systems in this station? >> MARILYN: in rural areas or in general? >> SHARON: Actually thar ea talking across the country. This person is in the northeast. >> MARILYN: That's a big question. Certainly for rural and areas -- and for areas that are other than the large urban areas, so cities and towns that aren't large and other kinds of, you know, lower density areas, I recommend people to two different sources, and not in any particular order of priority. One is the trade organization of the smaller providers, which is an organization -- a great organization that has a lot of good resources for people. It's the Community Transit Association of America or CTAA. You can certainly find them on the web. Community Transit Association of America, CTAA, and their website and also their staff have a lot of information on resources and the other real experts in this field is April, the association of programs for rural independent living. Which is an important resource also. There is a lot of very interesting rural programs that follow a lot of different models and project action is right now funding a project that I'm on the advisory committee of that's looking at disability access to rural transit and is looking at all the different kinds of programs and it will describe them and when that report comes out, it will be a real resource, too. >> SHARON: Now we have a little bit simpler question. This person is a trainer. They train operators in the transit system and they say they -- when they deal with trainers, they work from the heart in terms of the ADA mandate and its intent and they want to know from the report what would you say is the most important training point that they need to make in today's environment when training operators and those industry workers? >> MARILYN: Well, that's a huge question. And I don't know if I have one. I think that really off the cuff, and I haven't thought about it and I may kick myself later for not thinking of something better, but the one that jumps to mind is certainly stop calling in affixed route bus system. The emphasis on that requirement because it's consistently something that even transit agencies that want to do better, you know, haven't done better. And attitudes continue to be very important. In the section of the report that I pointed out on equalizing salary between fixed route and paratransit drivers, salary and benefits, we give one example of a transit agency that did this and we quote its director in saying about how crucial driver -- he says that drivers really understand better disability transportation when they rotate between the two systems which they do in addition to equalizing the funding. You sort of have to do that before you have drivers rotate, and it really improves attitudes on the fixed route system that people in that city have moved from paratransit to fixed route more easily because the bus driver is often somebody they know because all the drivers rotate. And he really swears by how attitudes are a key issue in getting people to move from fixed route to paratransit. Driver attitude, and if that's true, certainly it underscores the importance of driver attitude everywhere. >> SHARON: Thanks so much for that, Marilyn. We have some questions regarding the requirement of securement devices for wheelchairs on both fixed route and paratransit. And they want to know what, I guess, is reported in the NCD report in terms of the requirement for wheelchair securement devices on fixed and paratransit and then we have a question that is also from a separate individual that relates to that. What should a bus driver do should a rider refuse to be restrained? >> MARILYN: Okay. In terms of what's required -- I mean, I should say that the report really doesn't give the ADA's requirements -- certainly not completely. I mean, not all of them because we would just not have any room for the report. We give some of them when in context if needed to explain a point, but if I remember from the top of my head, I believe it's a three point securement that is required and it's a performance standard which is within -- I think it's an inch of movement. And again, that's just a memory. So I could be slightly off, but -- and what was the second question? Oh, what should you do if a driver -- oh, if somebody refuses securement. Well, the ADA makes it optional for the transit agency in this respect. Transit agencies are allowed to establish a policy that securement is required or they are also allowed to establish a policy that securement is optional. If they establish a securement -- if they establish a securement is required policy, they're allowed to refuse transportation to someone who refuses to allow their chair to be secured. Although they are not allowed to refuse transportation to someone whose chair cannot be secured once they try to secure it. If they have a policy that securement is optional, then somebody who doesn't want to be secured, then they won't secure them; but the report recommends that securement should not be optional in small vehicles such as paratransit vans or any vans because the physics are different than on a big bus and it's dangerous. And people really should be secured on smaller vehicles. That's our recommendation. >> SHARON: Great. Could a city council vote to exclude paratransit service in an area where services are provided by fixed bus route? >> MARILYN: No. No. That's not a way to get out of ADA requirements. Paratransit is a required part of the ADA pursuant to any publicly funded fixed route bus or train system for people who cannot use the fixed route system and what cannot use means is elaborate, but there is resources that go into exactly what eligibility means. There is one exception for a commuter bus or train system, but that just doesn't mean a system commuters use, commuters use every bus and train system because the commuter exception is a very -- has specific characteristics. It's really for, say, you know, bus systems that start in the suburbs and go only into town in the morning and out of town in the afternoon and use multiride tickets and have very long distances between stops. It doesn't apply to a normal bus system. That really is used sometimes and sometimes the transit agency providing paratransit pursuant to a commuter -- to a bus system using that exception when they shouldn't and if people think that's happening, we encourage them to file a complaint with FTA. >> SHARON: We have a question in relation to the eligibility. May a par paratransit authority deny eligibility to a disabled applicant because that applicant resides near affixed bus route and what would be the determining factor in determining eligibility based on that applicant's distance from a fixed bus stop? >> MARILYN: You know, there is still a lot of confusion about the difference between paratransit eligibility and the service requirements. Paratransit eligibility is solely about one's ability to use the fixed route system. If you can use -- if you can use the bus or train, you know, the ADA is really in a sense favors -- not in a sense. The ADA favors fixed route and if you can use fixed route system, the ADA says you should be on it. Paratransit eligibility is if you can't. Where you live is completely irrelevant. Where you live is kind of relevant to is a different issue which is once you're eligible, will they serve you? And they're allowed to limit service -- limit pick ups and drop offs in paratransit to a very particular service area. And if you're not in the service area, they don't have to pick you up. But it doesn't matter where you live. You may be able -- you may live five miles from the service area, but if you can get a ride into the service area from a friend, and you want to be picked up by paratransit within the service area, they have to pick you up. Plus it seems like in the question the questioner's transit agency is doing it backwards. Somebody close to a bus route would more tend to be in the service area and could be picked up. Now, if they're using -- if they say that you're -- oh, actually it just occurred to me how this could be more legitimate under the ADA. It could be that they're saying physically you can use the bus system and since you live so close to the bus stop, you can get to the bus and so, therefore, you're not eligible. And in that sense if your proximity is an aspect of their analysis of your ability to use the bus system, it could be part of the reason that you're denied eligibility. Yes, it could. >> SHARON: Okay, we have some more questions on eligibility which is no surprise. This person is saying, may an applicant be required to pay their medical costs to determine eligibility even though the applicant claims to be poor? And would an applicant then be deemed ineligible if they failed to provide medical certification? >> MARILYN: They may be deemed that way, but it's not legal. The ADA require that there not be fees for paratransit eligibility. This has been an issue in some locations because the transit agency doesn't want to give you a ride to your intern assessment which should be provided and no they are fee, even if it's not an explicit fee, but if the cost of providing documentation is like -- I mean, if you have to spend money to apply for eligibility, it's like a fee. And it shouldn't be required and we really encourage people to complain to the federal transit administration in those situations. It really needs to be stopped. It's not fair. It certainly is not consistent with nondiscrimination under the ADA. >> SHARON: You had talked earlier about trip denials. >> MARILYN: Yes. >> SHARON: and this is an advocacy organization. They have two cities that they're dealing with that say -- the cities say they do not keep records of paratransit trip denials. Will FTA require them to do so if this organization should complain? >> MARILYN: Well, the ADA used to require records to be kept when more elaborate reports needed to be sent in. It's true that the requirement for those elaborate reports was changed. There is two situations in which FTA will look for records of this nature. One is when -- I believe when the transit agency goes through its triannual review which it gets once every three years based on being federally funded. One of the things that will be looked at are these kinds of records, although that is such a thorough assessment that happens relatively often to every transit agency, it isn't super in depth. And I'm not familiar with exactly how kind of firmly they push to see those exacts records in the triannual review. But under the ADA -- and that triannual review is not related specifically to ADA or disability. They are looking at a broad sweep of questions about every aspect of what they do. And then secondly, under the ADA, if a transit agency is getting assessed by FFA, and again they do about six assessments a year, they have for the last few years and hopefully will continue. In an assessment certainly if paratransit is assessed, which we hope it is. We encourage FTA to do both when they assess. They don't always. Sometimes they do just one or the other, but if paratransit is being assessed, definitely the assess sores will look at complaint records and they'll need to see them. Transit agencies should calculate this because they need to know it to know if they're come playing with the ADA. How do they know if they're not counting? >> SHARON: Exactly. We have a question -- it's in regards to emergency procedures. Has the FTA considered mandating paratransit services to have emergency procedures in place in transporting persons with disabilities to shelters in the event of a terrorist or attack or a natural disaster? >> MARILYN: This is certainly nothing that is quite that specific that I am aware of, but one can certainly make the point that under Title II of the ADA, not specifically in transportation, but in general, under the part of the ADA that covers state and local governments, that any state or local government that does disaster planning and we certainly hope they are all doing it. I don't know that that means they are, but they certainly should be, they may be saying it's not funded or whatever, but that's a separate issue. Any disaster planning that's going on should include people with disabilities and special attention to how our demographic, if you will -- you know, there are barriers to general procedures that should be accounted for and provided for in terms of accommodations to overcome those barriers in their disaster planning. So where disaster planning is being done, I think you can use the ADA to make sure the needs of people with disabilities are included in it, and what the state or local government should do is then consult with organizations or individuals representing people with disabilities to give input on the plan and then that input can give the kind of specifics that the questioner said. I don't know of a requirement that they all be doing anything aspect specific as was in the question. Although that is not my area of expertise in particular. >> SHARON: Well, thank you. We have a question in regard to are there consequences for, say, for instance, public transportation workers or individuals who work in the public transportation systems, what would happen to those individuals should they not follow the ADA laws regarding the disabled? Are there any consequences for, I guess, what they're saying -- are there consequences? >> MARILYN: I wonder if the questioner wants there to be or wants there not to be. I would have to say that -- I don't know that there are specific consequences in the sense of are they fined or do they lose their job or are they punished. The kind of civil cases that are brought under the ADA may name particular individuals as well as organizations, and, you know, there is certainly perhaps some nonconcrete consequence if you are named that way. People who complain and have -- people who file complaints and have a resolution in their favor might result in the transit agency taking action against certain employees, but there isn't, to my knowledge, a specific requirement or procedure anywhere that that will always happen. So I think I would have to say that it can happen, but it doesn't necessarily always happen. >> SHARON: Okay. We have a question regarding demand response systems specifically designed for the disabled and the poor. This program is not a complimentary paratransit service. >> MARILYN: Okay. >> SHARON: Because there are no fixed bus routes services provided. >> MARILYN: Right. I understand. >> SHARON: This pertains to the eligibility of riders to stay solely on their medical need despite a state statute that states trips may be requested for other purposes, therefore, can a special transportation program such as this change in eligibility criteria against its enabling laws and would they be subject to Title II of the ADA and regulations? >> MARILYN: I think they would be more subject to whatever the mechanisms are to enforce the state law that made these particulars in it that you read. There would certainly need to be a look at what the different, you know, a little bit of legal research into that law and does it have any regulations and does it prohibit anything and are there sanctions? And it would be, you know, a factual inquiry into that specific situation. Would it trigger ADA liability? Maybe. I mean, it's another legal theory and people can try it. I don't know if it would be successful. You know, there is also advocacy strategies to amend that law to get enforcement mechanisms for the law or to just make enough of a hub you been that the law is more complied with or that the policies on the transit system are changed back. But those kinds of systems can, you know, sort of decide -- you know, I don't know how closely the entity's actions would be held to the law. It would depend a lot on the situation that I don't know about. Sorry about that. >> SHARON: That's all right. I think this individual wants to find out in your research, is there a system that stands out as having creatively addressed some of the issues with fixed route regarding maintenance of accessible elements like wheelchair lifts and maintenance of corresponding paratransit systems like improving reservations policy? Is there anything that you would say stands out as having really a creative answer to some of these issues? >> MARILYN: Well, I can certainly say that keeping the buses running in terms of lifts, keeping lift and lift equipment running and running a paratransit system such that -- what was the aspect of the question singled out? >> SHARON: Actually, what they wanted to know is -- >> MARILYN: the paratransit one. >> SHARON: That creatively addressed some of the issues with fixed route regarding maintenance of accessible elements, wheelchair lifts and paratransit systems. They are wanting to know -- >> MARILYN: I heard that part. I thought they may have singled out a part of the paratransit system. The things that they stated, you know, just a lot -- you know, just good procedural running of the paratransit system and also keeping the lift working, these are things that, you know, a number of transit agencies have achieved. You don't have to be sort of unusually creative to get it right, especially maintenance. Maintenance of lifts should not be something that is still difficult. Now, we know that sometimes it is. The report talks about what's happening in the city of Detroit where there is litigation now over really deplorable situation in terms of lift maintenance, but many cities have done well on that by now and part of it is having modern equipment, but if you have a lot of old equipment, then there is other steps you had should be taking. If you're keeping buses in service with old lift equipment, then on your periodic rehabing of those buses, you should be replacing the lift equipment so that it is modern enough to be able to be kept functioning. In terms of paratransit functioning well and I don't remember if they mentioned lateness or which ever aspect of it, there is all kinds of operational issues -- of operational steps that are involved in running a good paratransit system. And we encourage people to, for example, go to the FTA website and look at some of the reports on FTA assessments. Those reports give all kinds of suggestions on operational procedures. I can't name one, but there is a lot of cities that have paratransit systems that run fairly well. Pittsburgh is one that's often mentioned. They have very good eligibility, for example, and they do a lot of trip by trip eligibility. That's one model that's pointed out. And if I had a little bit of preparation, I could name sort of cities that are regarded as doing pretty well in keeping paratransit organized. I mean, for example, I know cities that don't have a lot of denials anymore. And there are probably other cities that excel in on time performance. There is reach now by the transit cooperative research program to look at paratransit demand estimation and they're looking at some of these issues. And so I don't think it's rocket science, or we don't need sort of an Einstein, we just need sort of a good hard -- it is complicated to run paratransit systems, but there is really an increasing amount of good information in the field. There are courses by the National Transit Institute in running these systems, and people who think their system isn't good should try to get their transit agency to send the people running their systems to their courses. There are best practices that the field has -- that have evolved in the field. Every agency should be following and you can find out what they are. >> SHARON: Well, thank you, Marilyn. I have one last question that is kind of in a wrap up today's presentation. And that is what would you like to see happen with the recommendations that appear on the NCD report, like what changes would you like to see take place to reflect the concerns on the report? >> MARILYN: Well, we would certainly like to see -- we would like to see the recommendations to the federal government implemented and I named some of those. I would like to see transit agencies follow the recommendations in the stop announcement section, in the on time performance section. We would like to see transit agencies schedule rides that are responsive to riders appointment and arrival times. We would like to see them not change the pick up time. We would like to see them make sure that the pick up time is not any further than the ride -- than an hour from the rider's request. We would like to see them ensure that the pick up window appears to the drivers manifest which is just one of many operational suggestions we give in paratransit to make sure things operate in a more timely manner we would like to see transit agencies monitor paratransit as well as they monitor fixed route. Often they don't because paratransit is a contracted service and they monitor what they do more than what they contract out, but it really should be the same. We would like to see subscription service available to everyone who needs it for free and every transit agency without special charge. We would like to see ride times within the standards that we recommend. So these are at least a few of the more obvious things. And thanks for a lot of great questions. >> SHARON: Well, Marilyn, thank you. You've done a wonderful job giving us the highlights of the NCD report and answering our audience questions, which were many. We do apologize for those that we didn't get to address today. And I hope you all have learned from today's webcast. It will be archived on the ILRU website along with the pdf version of the NCD report. The FTA complaint form that Marilyn mentioned, that is in our archives from a webcast that Marilyn did for us in February of 2003 that is archived along with her presentation materials regarding transportation and the ADA. Also in our archives is a presentation she did on service animals, the ADA and transportation in June of 2004 that you'll also find in our archives. So feel free to peruse those. I'd like to thank and acknowledge NIDRR who funds your host today for today's program, the Disability Law Resource Project, and I'd like to thank those who have made today's presentation possible at ILRU, Marj Gordon, Dawn Heinsohn, Vinh Nguyen, and Rob Dickehuth, our realtime captioner Marie Bryant, thank you so much, and thank you all for joining us today. Have a great afternoon.