1 Recent Guidance and Determinations in ADA Transportation: What are the Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administration Saying? Presenter: Marilyn Golden. >> JACQUIE: Good afternoon everyone. Welcome to today's webcast: Recent guidance and determinations in ADA transportation: What are the Department of Transportation and the Federal Transit Administration saying? This webcast is being sponsored by the National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research, NIDRR, who funds your host for today's program, the DBTAC Southwest ADA Center. I'm your moderator, Jacquie Brennan and I'm with the ILRU project Southwest ADA Center. I'll be assisting with today's presentation. Before we get started, I want to go over a couple of housekeeping issues. For those of you on the webcast today, to submit your questions, click on the E-mail button on your screen or you can E-mail them directly to webcast@ilru.org. If you have any technical difficulties today, please feel free to call us at (713)520-0232. I urge you, if you didn't do it before the webcast, to download the material that's on the website that goes with today's webcast. You can do that after the webcast, but it's really great material, great resources to have and those were provided to us by our presenter today who is Marilyn Golden. She is with the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, also called DREDF, and we're really happy to have her with us today. Thanks again everybody for joining the webcast and now I'm pleased to turn it over to Marilyn. We have agreed that I'll be getting in your questions as we 2 go along and I will save them until she's ready to take breaks in the presentation and take your questions. So with that, Marilyn, I'm going to turn it over to you. >> MARILYN: Thank you, Jacquie. I want to thank the DBTAC Southwest ADA Center for arranging with DREDF to do five webcasts, one every month in a row for five months, on the subject of the Americans with Disabilities Act and transportation. Today is the first of the five, and today we're going to focus on the various kinds of guidance coming out of the U.S. Department of Transportation or DOT, and its subdivision, the Federal Transit Administration, or FTA. These are documents that are not regulations but are DOT's and FTA's interpretations of the DOT ADA transportation regulation. They are often great tools for advocates because DOT and FTA regard their guidance not as optional things for transit agencies to do, but as articulating existing ADA requirements. First I want to do two quick notices for ADA transportation advocates. One is an announcement that the American public transit agency or APTA on which is the national association of the public transit agencies, especially the urban public transit agencies in the last year has embarked on a project to develop voluntary industry standards including on things covered by the ADA, like stop announcements on the bus, and paratransit telephone hold times. The working groups include transit industry folks, disability advocates and others. If you want to participate, you can -- you can call or E-mail Cheryl Pyatt at APTA at cpyatt@apta.com. Stands for American Public Transit Association.com or you can call her at (202)496-4875. You're welcome to E-mail me, too, especially if I know you, but the formal 3 way to indicate your interest is to contact APTA for their -- for the APTA standards development program. I want to go over the materials for today and that will include my second notice. The first material is labeled on your list here bus stop improvements. I call it slightly different name which is getting accessible bus stops and I just want to digress for a second on this material. It's not FTA or DOT guidance, but it's something that somebody on the Access Board shared with DREDF and if it's such a relevant topic for ADA transportation that I just thought you all would want to see it. It addresses a problem that many of us have run into which is that since transit agencies have rarely had control over the public right of way, streets and walks, to make them more accessible, even though the vast majority of bus stops also are located there and many of them are not accessible, but the transit agencies frequently have little or no say in how they are constructed. They are usually dependent on the local jurisdiction, but this doesn't have to be the case and this page talks about how Maryland MTA has undertaken a program to improve some of its fixed-route bus stops. This is the transit agency of Baltimore. Even though they are not generally responsible for the public right of way and they've done it by obtaining permits from the localities and the sheet talks about the cost and the extensiveness of their work and how they think that as they gain experience they are going to decrease in cost. And in the final analysis, they figured out that if a person who is currently using paratransit to go to work can now use the fixed route service because the bus stops are accessible, their funding is recovered sometimes in as little as ten weeks and sometimes it takes 18 months, but that's still not such 4 a long time and then of course after that they are saving money. So it's a worthwhile sheet to look at and to talk to your transit agencies about. We may have some transit agencies here, too, today who can take this as something as a project that may help them better improve accessibility to the transit system and provide more access for people with disabilities. Good, the next thing I want to mention, materials 2 through 6 are really things that are directly on guidance documents that I'll talk about later. So I'm going to skip over those for now and go to No. 7. 7 is DREDF's ADA transportation outline and this is not something we're going to particularly look at in depth today. It is, though, the summary outline that DREDF uses to summarize all the ADA transportation requirements and we offer it to you just for your own use if it's of interest. It doesn't give all the details. It's only an outline, but it does have a lot in it and it includes not only information about the ADA requirements and the regulation, but also some of the guidance that DOT and FTA have put out, some of the FTA determinations, I'll talk about those in a few minutes. And even best practices that aren't really required, but that we hope all the transit agencies are aspiring to doing because if they are consistent with best practices in the industry, they will provide a better transportation service, cheaper for themselves and a better public service as well. No. 8 is another thing I want you to be aware of and that we may get to today. The National Council on Disability or NCD published in -- I guess it was wasp 05 the current state of transportation for people with disabilities in the U.S. This was cowritten by myself and Richard and it goes over a lot of what we've learned about ADA transportation since the original regulation came out 5 and it has a lot of best practices, descriptions of the problems and what some different transit agencies have done to solve them and analyzes the problems to help advocates get a handle on them. The links on the website here give you the two versions of it. There is an html version that hopefully is accessible to everyone and then for people that can use it, there is a pdf version as well of the exact same report which people may find a little more convenient. No. 9 is called some ADA transportation resources, that's just a sheet DREDF has developed to make people aware of some of these things that could help advocates. The first thing on that -- I'll just go quickly over it -- is that DREDF offers ADA training including on transportation, although not limited to transportation. We look at the whole law if you want and our trainings are not unfortunately the kind of trainings that you can sign up for as an individual. They are geared to groups and if your group wants to contract with DREDF for a certain fee we will come in and train your group. So feel free to contact me if that's something anybody wants. We will certainly try to work with your budget and you can E-mail our call me. My contact information is on the ILRU website. No. 2 is our ADA training manual which is another very good resource on the ADA that you may wish to look at. 3 is the NCD report that I just spoke about and 4 I think deserves a minute of our time. No. 4 tells you about the ADA website of the Federal Transit Administration. It's a simple url, www.fta.dot.gov and it includes a lot of things, including the guidance documents we'll talk about today, the FTA complaint form, the rider complaint form which is also material No. 10 which is available for you if you want to file a discrimination complaint under the ADA 6 for a publicly funded transit system. And it also has the FTA ADA compliance reviews. FTA does compliance reviews of different transit agencies across the country throughout the year on the paratransit and the fixed route and sometimes on the rail system and they are excellent tools for advocates. These are good, very detailed thorough reports. FTA contracts with very solid contractors who we think really do a good job analyzing whether there is compliance with the ADA and in as much detail as you could ever want. And to know that information is a lot of power. And it's also useful to read those if you're having a problem, you can read them and in the same area that you're having a problem and see what FTA has said about that area in other cities. These compliance reviews are also a source of the determinations that we see that FTA is making on various ADA transportation topics. Good, so that's the materials. I wanted to start with what may be really the most important piece of DOT guidance in terms of its impact on the advocacy that we do and on the problems that we've run into in a lot of cities and that's material 2, DOT guidance on origin-to-destination service. That's DOT's name for it, the Department of Transportation's name for it. I would probably call it -- in our terms it's really DOT's guidance on paratransit door-to-door service. And I'll go over it in summary passion. We know that -- and DOT reminds us that ADA paratransit is what they call origin-to-destination service and they discuss in the regulation a question was often asked did that mean the transportation was curb to curb and the rider had to come to the curb to the vehicle, or is it door to door, will someone help you to and from your durned to and from the door of the facility your trip is going to? DOT made it an option for transit agencies to pick, but this guidance 7 clarified when it came out in September of 2005 that where curb-to-curb service is the service that a transit agency provides, the transit agency still must ensure that the service available to each passenger actually gets the passenger from his or her point of origin to his or her destination. And to meet this requirement, service may need to be provided to some people or at some locations in a way that goes beyond curb-to-curb service. For instance, the nature of a person's individual disability or adverse weather conditions may prevent him or her from negotiating the distance from the door of his or her home to the curb. A physical barrier, such as sidewalk construction, may prevent the person from traveling from the curb to the door. And in these and similar situations, to ensure the service is actually provided from origin to destination, the service provider may need to offer assistance beyond the curb. And then skipping down to the last couple of paragraphs, drivers would not have to go beyond the doorway into a building to assist a passenger, nor would they for lengthy periods of time have to leave their vehicles unattended or lose the ability to keep their vehicles under visual observation. Because doing those things would really go beyond what the ADA requires. The ADA does not require this kind of accommodation if it's a fundamental alteration or if it poses an undue burden and DOT has decided that these things would mean that. And there may be other things that would meet those limits. And if they do, they are not required; but if they don't, then the transit agency does have to do it. And then in the last paragraph, it's not appropriate for a paratransit provider to establish an inflexible policy that refuses to provide service to 8 eligible passengers beyond the curb in all circumstances. In other words, a transit agency cannot just say we do curb to curb -- we do curb service only and then back to the guidance on an individual case-by-case basis, paratransit providers are obliged to provide an enhancement to service when it is needed. Again, not necessarily just if somebody wants it, but when it is needed by the person. That's a summary of this requirement, and it's such an important one that I want to go ahead and stop now and see if there are any questions. >> JACQUIE: I haven't gotten any yet. The process of them getting to me is they come into an E-mail and they are printed and brought to me so I usually don't get any for the first few minutes. So carry on for now and then we'll go back to those questions. >> MARILYN: Okay. Well, good, I want to move on to something that is actually a more general rule that what we just talked about is an example of, and that is the Department of Transportation's proposed regulation on the modification of policies, practices and procedures. That is material No. 3 or at least DREDF comments on that proposed regulation is material No. 3. It will take you to the DREDF website. DOT proposed going on I believe about two years ago to add to its regulation a provision requiring ADA transportation providers to make reasonable modifications to policies, practices and procedures when necessary to avoid discrimination on the basis of disability unless the transit agency can show that the modifications would fundamentally alter the nature of the service or activity or would result in an undue or administrative or financial burden or a direct threat to the health or safety of others. And the DREDF comments gave as an example if there is a no eating policy on the subway train, the transit 9 agency must allow a modification of the policy in case of someone with diabetes who needs to eat on a particular schedule. Now, this provision as a proposal to be added to the DOT regulation may strike some of you who are familiar with the ADA as very, very odd. Because it's familiar and it may not seem at all new and that is in fact accurate. The provision did not appear in the original DOT ADA -- the original DOT ADA regulation because DOT expected transit agencies funded by the FTA and by the way DREDF's comments explain all of this if you go through them. I'm now in my printing is the second page. The provision did not appear in the DOT ADA regulation because DOT expected that FTA funded transit agencies to recognize that they were covered by a similar provision in the Department of Justice regulation for Title II of the ADA since it is there, they are covered by it and since DOT's 504 regulation expressly requires transit agencies to look to the DOJ rule, that there was an appellate court decision that disagreed with whether or not transit agencies have to follow that DOJ Title II regulation. And because of that, DOT proposed to adopt the provision into its own regulation in order to clarify that it covers publicly funded transit agencies. We expect that DOT hopefully will adopt this provision and clear up the matter once and for all. And I think, you know, at one point they said they would do it before -- they were hoping that that would come out this calendar year. I don't believe that it. >> JACQUIE: It's late in the calendar year now. >> MARILYN: But we expect it to come out soon. DOT is a lot speedier than some agencies and even though it seems like a long time, we appreciate DOT's historic promptness in looking at and dealing with regulations affecting 10 the ADA. So that was an important provision that, again, we think is already covered and it would -- and DREDF's comments what it means to modify policies, practices and procedures and addresses some of the concerns that transit agencies had and responded to them. Again, we think that this is a requirement that's already there, but it's important for people to know that, you know, DOT thinks that, too, and that DOT is proposing to add it just to clarify everything. Is there anything else, Jacquie, now, on any of these topics? >> JACQUIE: I've got one question here or actually I've got two now. My paratransit allows me three minutes to get to the van once it arrives or they will leave. Sometimes this is difficult especially when the weather prevents me from waiting outside. Coming outside, locking my door and then navigating the walkway from my apartment to the front of the apartments where the paratransit picks me up is -- sometimes takes longer than three minutes and they will leave. Is that okay? >> MARILYN: I have seen five minutes. There is not an ADA guidance document on this that I am aware of. There may be ADA determinations that have been made on this. I think that if your disability makes their rule something that you can't meet even if you're coming with due diligence, if you're truly ready to go and you have a way to see them come and you can't get there, then I think they would have to reevaluate that three minute policy in light of the fact that individuals with disabilities who are doing their very best at a home that, say, doesn't present an undue obstacle course, but just an ordinary thing that a person with a disability may take more time to navigate than somebody else, it seems to me that they have to really look at that again and it may not 11 be okay. The question of whether they need to come to the door is whether you need that due to your disability, and it may be that you need that to meet their three minute limit due to your disability, and if that's true, they may need to either come or reevaluate that limit. >> JACQUIE: Here is another one. Are there established federal standards on how long a client with a disability must ride on one paratransit ride? I'm a METRO access user for at least 17 years now and recently my rides from northern Virginia to Washington D. C. are taking two or three hours. In the past, these same rides have averaged 30 to 60 minutes tops. I understand that this is a shared ride service, however, the length of the rides are really getting to be what I think most would consider unfair. >> MARILYN: FTA has made determinations on this in some of their compliance reviews, and my understanding is that the current way to evaluate that -- than is discussed actually in the NCD report on Page 65 -- or under the general topic is on-time performance with an on time -- it's hyphenated if you want to serve for it, and then the specific section that it's in is a subsection called factors affecting on-time performance. And it's almost at the end of that subsection. Oh, actually, I'm sorry. It's in a subsection called trip lengths and it's the second of two paragraphs in that subsection. It's about the way it's usually looked at is to make a comparison to the fixed route system and how long it would take to navigate the fixed route system on the same trip, but you have to consider the additional time that's needed to get to and wait for the bus or train and then of course take the bus or train and to go from the final bus or 12 train stop to the destination. And if you add that altogether, if it's significantly longer than that, it may be too long. So if the total fixed route time is 60 minutes, including the time on each end of the ride to get to and from the bus stops, a paratransit that's more than 20 or 30 minutes longer might be considered excessive. >> JACQUIE: All right, it sounds like this one is. Okay, one last one that just now came in. Some paratransit vehicle drivers are calling people on their cell phones to let them know that the ride has arrived. >> MARILYN: Jacquie, can I make one more comment on that last one that just occurred to me that you commented like it sounds like that one is. It does sound like that one is taking longer than it used to, but what we don't know is how long it would take on the fixed route system which may be different than, say, driving a car on that route at that time of day. >> JACQUIE: Right. Yeah, that's true I guess. Three hours -- >> MARILYN: It's likely to not be anywhere near three hours, but we don't know. And so people just have to try to get that information. Sorry, go ahead. >> JACQUIE: Some paratransit vehicle drivers are calling people on their cell phones to let them know that their ride has arrived. Are they required to do that by law or is it just a policy to make a phone call like that? >> MARILYN: They are not required to do that by law. Some transit agencies are doing it through automation. If your transit agency -- and this is true of many of the biggest urbanized transit agencies -- if your transit agency has mobile data terminals that the drivers have, it's almost like the version of 13 a computer screen that the driver has and there could be that kind of communication with the dispatcher, and if there is also global positioning and things that allows the transit agency to know where the vehicle is, then you know some of the system have this way they can do an automated call out to the person an estimated five minutes or something like that before they arrive. I know that at one time in Los Angeles you could opt to get that or not, and a lot of people did and it's very helpful. But it is not required. You know, transit agencies have given this pick-up window that really shouldn't be longer than 30 minutes and they can come any time during, and another thing that's important -- I was going to talk about on-time performance later just because we're going to do an entire webcast on on-time performance and no-shows because there is so much to that topic, but I'll throw in that FTA has made determinations that the pick-up time that's agreed on with the driver needs to be on -- with the rider, needs to be available to the driver on the driver's manifest. That may seem awfully basic, but the problem has been that the pick-up time can mig great a little bit sometimes. In a passenger is given a pick up time of two o'clock and the computer systems ends up moving pick-up times around a little bit and the transit agency moves it to 2:10, and if they don't tell the rider that it's changed, of course it seems like well it's only ten minutes, but it affects that you think your pick-up window is one thing when the transit agency thinks it's something else and you may not have come out yet because it may not have begun and vehicle may have come and they think they have come in the pick up window and you weren't there and it's a no show and you have to fix it and that's a problem. So just making sure that the pick-up time is protected in the system, that it's not changed at all -- at all -- that is certainly a best practice. 14 Not changed at all unless the passenger knows and it has to be on the driver's manifest. We would argue that it's required that it not be changed unless the passenger is informed. Those are all important things. >> JACQUIE: You mentioned a 230 minute window, Marilyn -- a 30 minute window, Marilyn. Some have windows considerably longer than that. Are they required to not have more than a 30 minute window? >> MARILYN: There may be recent compliance reviews that I have not read that did. I don't know for sure. I think and hope that a window that is longer than 30 minutes, FTA will say is too long if it's longer than 30 minutes. I cannot point to a document, but I think -- I think I believe that is the general thinking. Certainly that's the thinking in terms of best practices. I think and hope that that's also FTA's thinking and that before too long we'll have a place to point to to say that. People who have longer windows can submit complaints about them to FTA and FTA then may rule on those complaints and then we have a place to hang our hat. >> JACQUIE: That's a good idea. >> MARILYN: There is no downside in making these complaints because, you know, if you find out that it's not a violation of the ADA and in the eyes of FTA you haven't lost anything, FTA likes complaints to be filed informally and people can just call FTA and sometimes they will, you know, sort of negotiate with your transit agency on an informal basis and they like to do that and they welcome those calls. That's noteworthy in itself. I don't know too many other civil rights offices, even though arguably this is their job, that are willing to go around saying they really are interested in hearing from people. Give us more work and it's commendable. 15 The one draw back to having the complaints resolved informally though is that a formal resolution of a complaint submitted on their form is something that is more public and it can be pointed to, you know, as a determination that can be shown to others whereas an informal resolution, there is really no way to make it known beyond the particular place that it occurs. So it might be faster though, so I think there are benefits to both informal and formal complaint resolution. If people want to call them (202)366-4018. (202)366-4018. and I believe that's on their website. You can also get it there. >> JACQUIE: Okay. All right, that's all the questions I have. >> MARILYN: Okay, good. That's a good discussion on some of the issues that we spoke of. I want to talk about one other important part of the DOT proposed change in regulations that the modification of policy was in, and that is meaning we're still on document 3. And that is DOT's proposed regulation regarding level boarding on rail platforms. So in that same document, if you search for the phrase rail station, it will bring you to a discussion of that issue. I print it out and it's on Page 11. But I don't know if it would have been the same if I printed it from the web. So search for rail station and it says issue, commuter and inner city rail station platform accessibility. DOT's proposal would require level entry boarding at new commuter and inner city rail stations. And I'll pause there -- commuter rail is like the marked train near Washington D. C., the Cal train near San Francisco, the Long Island Railway, those are commuter trains and inner city rail is really Amtrak. New stations would need to have a level entry boarding from a fully accessible high platform with a ramp or bridge plate if necessary, which would avoid, if at all possible, the use of 16 many high platforms to provide disability access allowing them only as a last resort. And looking further down at the fourth paragraph in that section, only if the rail system determines with the concurrence of not only FTA but also FRA, so the federal railway administration and the Federal Transit Administration, if the rail systems determines with the federal agencies that meeting this requirement is operationally or structurally infeasible, which is a high test, a difficult test to meet. I mean, it has to really not be more expensive, but it has to be not possible, only then could the rail system use some other approach than level entry boarding. They could use, say, a mini high platform or a lift, one or more lifts, but even in those cases, the rail system would be required to ensure that access is provided to every accessible car on the train. DOT was not proposing to change the current requirements for rapid rail which is subways, such as the METRO in Washington, D. C. and the BART in San Francisco. Those are examples of subways and those requirements would not change. They usually have level boarding. Nor is the light rail rules changed. That's like the street car. And the reason for this is that many high platforms are a very poor form of access to commuter and inner city rail. They put the person with the disability who needs access who can't climb up the steps on the train out of the general public way, sometimes in the rain or snow, and they necessitate that if people are on more than one car to get off, say, the train has to move in small increments to a line its cars one by one with the mini high platform. This is called double stopping and it's very difficult and time-consuming and passengers don't like it and the rail system doesn't like it. And if they are not going to do that, they have to confine people with disabilities to only one carrot train, 17 although the ADA properly requires access to all accessible cars. A transit agency objections to doing level boarding as we call it are usually due to oversize freight, but in fact the use of oversized freight is often very rare and even if it was not rare there is often technological solutions that will allow both. And those are explained in the comments if people want to read further. This issue doesn't affect everyone. It affects you mostly if you are in a city where they are going to do some more commuter or Amtrak rail stations or possibly if they are going to modify them. We hope if there are modifications that they would meet the standard to the maximum extent feasible., but it is important for people to know if they do face this issue and if they come to the disability community and say am will you approve these mini high platforms or will you approve these cardboard lifts or station-based lifts, we really encourage transit agencies to do a better solution which is raising the entire platform to a level boarding situation. FTA and also FRA has in many cases done well to try to ensure this solution is met, but it can be politically very difficult with a lot of pressure to do the thing that really constrains access permanently to a solution that is much less good than level boarding. And so we really encourage people not to buy into those other systems. Good. Did anything else come in? >> JACQUIE: Yes, a few. >> MARILYN: Good. >> JACQUIE: Okay, what about picking people up in alleys and locations that do not have curbside places to park? I thought there was some 18 guideline put out that para systems aren't required to do alley pick ups in places where there aren't safe locations for pick ups, for example, downtown locations with no parking place except in the street or lift would be let out into traffic. And that's the question. I know there was a court case about this, but I don't know if there is actually -- >> MARILYN: In your very state. Yeah, there was an important lawsuit in the Fifth Circuit that actually had to do with alleys, and that was the lawsuit that said that transit agencies don't have to meet the modification of policy requirement and the reason that DOT is proposing to incorporate it into its own regulation. We would have hoped that the transit agency didn't make the broader argument about the modification of policy requirement, but just would have made the argument that making the particular alley pickup that was requested in this case was a fundamental alteration of what they do or an undue burden. And it may have been able to make that determination because FTA has said that a lot of alley pickups are not required, and so -- but they made the broader argument. It really does depend on the individual circumstance because I think there are some alleys that may be called an alley or it may have a formal name, alley may be in the name of the street, but it's actually a small street that goes in a certain lane that isn't problematic. And so it really should be a case by case determination. I have not heard, you know, that downtown pickups are a problem because while it's true that that's going to pose more parking issues, that's a huge bite out of where people could be picked up. Certainly if it's a particularly difficult place, I think the transit agency should agree with the rider that they be at a nearby place where it's easier to park or they should be willing to 19 come escort them under the origin-to-destination service requirement if they can't -- if the person with a disability can't get to where the vehicle is otherwise. I mean, I do think there are legitimate exclusions of some pickup places. There may be some dwelling units that may be on very steep, tiny, winding roads and if the transit agency is using large vehicles, there may be legitimate constraints, but to just say busy downtown locations are off limits, I do not think that it is at all considered a best practice that transit agencies don't have to make those pickups. I think that good best practice in the industry, this may be one of those situations where there is a lot of ways to skin a cat. >> JACQUIE: And that question was from a transit agency in Alaska. You're right, I've never heard anything about the downtown locations. That really would take a big chunk of where people are. Okay, this one is from Missouri. Back in April -- it actually says back on April 11th 2007 the Access Board and the Federal Register issued for public comment draft proposed revisions for the ADA Accessibility Guidelines for buses and vans. That comment period closed on June 11th. Based on the comments received, has the Access Board indicated which specific revisions to bus and van accessibility features they will propose? >> MARILYN: I do not know of any such indication. That was a great proposal and I thought it was -- I thought the Access Board did a really good job on it. And I hope it follows into any proposed rule, but I haven't seen anything since then. Rule-making is time-consuming and the board -- the Access Board is another organization that has done it's best to move as quickly as they can in their rule-making. 20 These drafts are always very good voluntary guidance documents and they really lay out what a transit agency can follow in a voluntary way before they are required. >> JACQUIE: All right. Okay, this one is from a small but growing town. During periods of paratransit ridership growth, our transit agency is often pressed to perform all needed medical, employment, educational and recreational trips. Given that the scheduling of trips is done diligently without denying passenger trips, could you offer some measures that our transit agency can implement within the ADA guidelines that might be able to assist us during these periods that would enable a little breathing room? >> MARILYN: Could you read the beginning of that again. >> JACQUIE: During periods of pair paratransit ridership growth, our transit agency is often pressed to perform all the needed, medical, employment, educational and recreational trips. >> MARILYN: Keep going? Please do. >> JACQUIE: Given that the scheduling of trips is done diligently, without denying passenger trips, could you offer some measures that our transit agency can implement within the ADA guidelines that might be able to assist us during these periods to would enable a little breathing room? >> MARILYN: This raises the question of trip denials I believe, and that is also -- >> JACQUIE: They don't deny trips. >> MARILYN: Well, yeah, but I'm not sure -- I hear that, but I'm not sure what else they -- I guess I'm not sure what you can do except not do them all. I want to just let advocates know that because it's not a DOT guidance or 21 FTA guidance, but the whole issue of trip denials which this raises -- let me try to do my best to address it more specifically in a minute -- but trip denials is addressed on Page 56 of the NCD report, and it talks about how another federal case which was decided in '03 about -- up in Rochester, New York -- that basically that you can't deny trips with the denial is a decision by the transit agency -- is the result of a decision by the transit agency to not have adequate capacity, enough vehicles, enough drivers, enough phone lines to take all of the requests of ADA-eligible paratransit riders. And they also pointed out in the decision that transit agencies are responsible for anticipating predictable increases in demand. So if demand is steadily going up, they need to be steadily ramping up their capacity. And if it goes up, you know, let's say you're a big college town and it goes up in the fall and goes down in the summer, or you know whatever your particular local conditions are, you know, that has to be developed. If there is something that happens that's truly outside anything that could be predicted, then it's not an ADA violation. And that's the context I think in which this kind of question comes up. You know, when transit agencies try to provide more trips than they really have capacity for, the hits usually comes in terms of longer waits and longer rides and just other kinds of service problems. And every transit agency battles those, but I don't have any recommendations and I think I may be missing the point of the question. And if the agency wants to sort of give examples of what they mean. Certainly a transit agency that is diligent -- and you know, we appreciate the diligence that the question indicates they have. And there is no question that, you know, it can be challenging to administer ADA paratransit 22 programs and sometimes it's a funding issue, but sometimes it isn't a funding issue. Sometimes it's the challenge of good administration of these very complex programs and, you know, ten years ago -- which was still already a number of years after the requirements were out -- you know, we found that there was -- we saw across the country a real lack of administrative expertise to run these programs and I think in the last ten years that situation has improved a lot, but it ain't perfect and every system has problems and they vary from city to city. Transit agencies that really are being very diligent should be applauded and hopefully your diligence also means you have good relationships with the disability community and what we've said to all covered entities under the ADA, not only transit agencies, but to public accommodation, stores and restaurants and government agencies and all covered entities who are worried about, say, lawsuits and other enforcement actions, that if you, you know, really do diligence, if you really make the best faith effort you can to comply, that, you know, nobody can completely predict that you won't be the place hit with an enforcement action, but you certainly improve your chances of avoiding, you know, an onerous enforcement action by having that kind of diligence. It doesn't work all the time, but having good relations and having diligence can make a big difference. Other than that, I'm not sure operationally what else to say. Is there any thoughts you have, Jacquie in. >> JACQUIE: No, it would be helpful if the person would send us a little bit more information to narrow the question a little more I think. Okay, but I have others. >> MARILYN: Okay, I think I may go back to some of the guidance documents. Is that -- 23 >> JACQUIE: Sure. Let me know when you want to take some more. >> MARILYN: I want to move now into FTA determinations regarding actually another issue that people may really care about which is the telephone hold time. I don't have a document to point you towards, but the Federal Transit Administration has several ADA paratransit compliance reviews, and in some cases, the hold times were too long. DREDF's sense is that this is a very common problem when people call up to reserve a paratransit ride or even just ask where their ride is, that these hold times can be very long. And the question is often asked what would comply? Well, FTA has not given like specific acceptable numbers that I'm aware of. The kind of numbers they have indicated are acceptable would include, I think, things that have come out in some other documents. For example, the NCD report had a recommendation that transit agencies providing paratransit should reduce lengthy telephone holds -- hold times to a maximum average of two minutes. And our sense is that FTA would find that compliant although they prefer not averages, but the measure to be just the hold times and how long are they . Project action has a booklet called innovative practices in paratransit services that you can get at their website at projectaction.org. Again, it's innovative practices in paratransit services. And it has a paragraph about this which says -- I'll just read it: Answer all calls within five rings or less, no more than 10 percent of all calls within any 30 minute period on hold for more than two minutes. No more than 5 percent of all calls within any 30 minute period on hold for more than three minutes. No calls in any 30 minute period on hold for more than five minutes. And though this booklet is not, you know, 24 explicitly what's required, but it is bringing together innovative practices, we think that those numbers are consistent with the kinds of numbers that FTA would probably say would comply with the ADA. So why don't we take a few more. >> JACQUIE: Okay. I understand the ADA regulatory requirements regarding route and stop announcements on fixed route buses. Is there any information about the mean and median compliance rates in the country's Transit Authorities? Does the data distinguish between those authorities with automated announcement equipment and those depending only on bus operators? Why hasn't the FTA enforced these requirements? >> MARILYN: I do not know the data. I think that FTA would enforce these requirements. It's important to -- you know, I don't know what the questioner is coming from in terms of the FTA not enforcing it. I would hope that if this is an issue in litigation or if there is a compliance review that shows the stop announcements are not right, which is common, it has been tough to implement this part of the ADA, but that's not an excuse. There are cities that are doing a good job., but I think if there is a complaint for example that FTA would work with the transit agency over time to improve it. And I would love to hear if that's not the case. It is complicated. There needs to be a lot in place to make it work well. You know, you need to either train drivers if you have automated equipment, it needs to be set up 'well and the volume and programming what's announced and unfortunately they have to be driver-proof. Because -- I mean I don't want to take it lightly, but it's so frustrating and in a way laughable, but also very important that some drivers have turned off the automated enunciators or have 25 tampered with them. You know, we hear about sort of tampering and defacing by the public of facilities, but you know you certainly hope that your own employees aren't going to do it. And you know then there has to be monitoring, like a secret program of monitoring the drivers if this driver is doing it and also of the automatic enunciators to make sure they are set up right. You know, you have to discipline staff and so all these things have to be in place, but I don't think that FTA is shrinking from doing everything they can to get transit agencies to do it. So I would not be happy with any percentage that's lower than real high -- there is certainly no acceptable lower number that anyone has come out with and the disability community would really oppose it if it did. Some transit agencies -- I know that Salt Lake city has an extremely high rate of stop calling even though it is individual drivers doing it manually rather than the automatic enunciator or it has been to date. I think they are looking towards making that change. You know, there are transit agencies all over the map in terms of their numbers, but it is not impossible to do it right. There are best practicing in the industry. The NCD report and closer to the beginning has a good section on stop announcements and it has some hints that transit agencies can follow and maybe I'll just quickly find them and say them. And this assumes no automatic enunciators, but things the transit agencies can do are involving drivers -- this is on Page 29 -- involving drivers in identifying the stops, providing drivers with a list of the stops -- doesn't that seem basic -- but that doesn't mean it's always done, installing equipment to facilitate the announcements. It can be just a goose neck mic. Some agencies are using a lapel microphone or sleep microphone and the other thing is 26 using discipline with drivers in combination with incentives which will ideally involve secret monitoring, but it's important that the driver's union first agree on the approach and only after monitoring is established and drivers are accustomed to it should the secret monitoring be the basis for progressive discipline. I also want to point out an FTA resolution to a complaint a few years back said when there is a systemic problem calling out the stops and therefore a low rate of doing so, somebody who has a disability who needs the stops called in order to use the bus must be given paratransit eligibility because the bus system isn't accessible to them. And that was a really good complaint determination that FTA made that we hope would give transit agencies incentive to ensure that the stops are called in order not to increase the paratransit burden. DREDF is not in any way opposed to automatic enunciators and in Chicago know is one the champion the community said it has made a big difference in a beneficial way. We have not felt that automatic enunciators are something that every transit agency necessarily has to do in order to comply with this requirement. We are sometimes regarded as a bit old fashioned in holding on to the fact that drivers can do this themselves, but we're concerned that small systems can't necessarily afford automatic enunciators and our other concern is that even though automatic enunciators have sometimes been just the thing, it's not okay if transit agencies sort of throw the technology into the bus as a panacea and then don't do the hard work the make sure it's set up right and that the text of the announcements is proper and consistent and that the timing is correct and the volume is correct and that they are not interfered with by 27 drivers and that drivers are disciplined if they do. And the big thing that often doesn't happen is that there are automatic enunciators when they are not functioning, when it's broken, the drivers have to announce the stops anyway, and that is something that people -- that transit agencies have really fallen down on. It also needs to be pointed out that the ADA requires any requested stop to be announced and these automatic enunciators often don't call out every stop which might be okay. The ADA doesn't require every stop, and there could conceivably be downsides to calling out every stop. And so when a person needs a stop that's not -- when a person needs a stop announced that's not on the stops that are announced, the ADA gives a number of characteristics. You know, stops with a lot of traffic and other particular characteristics, end stations and places where routes converge, there is a number of characteristics that is are in the regulations and also here in the NCD report I think a few pagers earlier. Anyway, if you want one that's not announced even if the stops that are being announced complies with the ADA, the transit agency has to announce it if you request it and that means the driver has to do it. And so it's important that they know how and I think that some agencies that have gotten enunciators seriously enough. And if there is a break down it's, if all the stops aren't being announced if the drivers aren't doing it, we would like to remind transit agencies if you're going to go automatic enunciator, don't think you have to do the hard work with the drivers any way. >> JACQUIE: Right. This E-mail that came in is actually a response to the question about demand and tips for that. >> MARILYN: Okay. 28 >> JACQUIE: It's from another transit agency that says I would suggest the agency look at the NTI course on managing ADA demand and also the TCRP library has a document on demand management. My No. 1 tip would be to establish one hour trip negotiation. Also are you providing more than ADA minimum requirements, like going beyond the three-quarter mile fixed route corridors, are your hours comparable? If you're going beyond the ADA requirements and having difficulty keeping up with the demand, you aren't supposed to go beyond ADA minimums until and unless the minimums are met. >> MARILYN: That's certainly a good point. If they still have capacity constraints and a denial is a capacity constraint, if to not have denials you need to cut back on things that aren't required by ADA, that's one thing to think about. We don't like to encourage transit agencies that are doing things that people need and want to cut back, but that is something. I want to comment on their first -- I think a lot of what they wrote is good, but I want to comment on the first thing they said having to do with on-time performance and again we're going to talk about that a lot in a future webcast. But it said something about a one hour negotiation, and as many people know, it's true that the ADA allows transit agencies to give people a pickup time of an hour before or after their requested time. We wish that -- you know, when the ADA regulation came out, we sort of didn't really know how a loot of this would come down because this ADA paratransit requirements that were created, a lot of it was very new and I think DOT did a good job guessing, but one thing that would have been great is not talking about pickup time, but drop off time. That's what a lot eve people care about is when they get where they 29 are going. It is true there is the one hour window. We talked about a pickup window which is a different thing. There is a reservation window, you want a ride at 2 and they can give you one at 1 or 3 and I want to just make a little P.S. there because what happened in a lot of locations is this rigid one hour that completely ignored the person's appointment time and as is discussed on Pages 62 and 63 in the NCD report, there have been a lot of determinations that transit agencies must consider appointment times. So let's say you are going to work and your building opens at 8:30 in the morning and it's in the middle of winter and the weather is bitter cold, if your paratransit ride gets you there at 7:45 and you have to be 45 minutes out in the cold waiting for your building to open that's not -- you know, the transit agency has to consider factors like that in terms of how they are going the time your ride. Or let's say an earlier ride can be as that example shows if that is a late arrival. Also true for a doctor's appointment and another example, let's say you're going home from work and let's say you get off at 5 and you ask for a ride for 5:15 or you ask for a ride at 5:30 and the transit agency says we'll give you a ride at 4:30 and we'll wait five minutes and then leave. I don't think there is a lot of supervisors that are going to be happy with the person leaving at 4:30 when they are supposed to work until 5 and this is an example of the kind of thing the transit agency can't simply be a rigid one hour without taking into account the phrasing is usually the person's appointment time, but it can also be things like your other time needs, when you're off of work and when the building opens and those kinds of things. We don't have a determination from FTA that you have to, you know, give you 30 the exact time, but considering your appointment time, it's certainly at this point an FTA determination that it's a requirement of the ADA. So I wouldn't want to have transit agencies take that one hour window too far and too rigidly. >> JACQUIE: Okay, we are working with a paratransit system that does not require medical or other certification of disability, yet it serves people in three cities and a county who are 60 years of age or older, people with disabilities and in limited areas the general public. As expected, the demand exceeds the supply. The provider purchased routing software, yet it does not seem designed in its current configuration to track denied ride, negotiated rides and refused rides nor does it seem to allow the system to retroactively determine how many during a given time. Do you know of software that will allow us to monitor the FTA rules and compliance? We've been working with the fixed route and paratransit system, any suggestion short of filing complaints or lawsuits? This is from Iowa. >> MARILYN: First of all, I don't think -- well, it almost doesn't matter if it's ADA paratransit. Was it ADA paratransit? >> JACQUIE: It doesn't say. >> MARILYN: It sounds like it might not be and that's fine. I am not an expert on software at all. But it is my understanding that there are systems that can track those things or that the transit agencies using software can track those things. APTA, the American Public Transit Association which I talked about earlier in a different context, might be a place to find out about software that people are using. I didn't comment on this, but a previous transit agency question addressed the national transit institute courses which are very good and transit 31 agencies are encouraged to go to the ADA-related courses. There is one on eligibility. There is one that I think they may be shifting around, but they are good and are done by great folks, so far anyway, and the other resource they mentioned are -- I don't know if it was NTI, but another source for excellent written documents is TCRP, the Transit Cooperative Research Program under the Transportation Research Board which I think is trb.org. And there is a lot of reports that have operational advice on some of these issues. Transit agencies may have good reason to feel frustrated because this is a field that changes rapidly. You know, a lot of the things we have today both in terms of FTA determinations and in terms of good advice on operational best practices, we didn't have five years ago, so if you were up to date five years ago, there may be a lot out there that you're not up to date on anymore. And so hopefully somebody will have the time to look at the courses, look at the documents. Let's take one more and then I think I want to do a few more things. >> JACQUIE: Okay, go ahead. >> MARILYN: I can do that now. I want to look -- there is a few that won't apply to everybody, but it's pg advocates should be aware of and that is the DOT guidance on paratransit in rural 5311 systems. And that is document No. 4. So I encourage you to go to that and I will, too. This is something that has to do with rural public transportation and the number 5311 applies to the section of the laws -- of the safety law that funds transit. There is a section for rural transportation and it's often operated by private nonprofits. This guidance basically recognizes that there is a lot of fixed route publicly funded systems that are not providing complementary paratransit under the ADA though it is required and they are required to provide it. Even though an organization is 32 a private nonprofit as opposed to say a classic urban transit it agency that we're familiar with in the big cities, if it is getting funded from a public entity, usually the state, and it's a fixed route system, complementary paratransit is required and it's something that will affect a lot of these small systems. So that's a guidance for people to be aware of. I also want to talk about another one that is not very new but may not be well known and it's No. 5 on the materials list. It's the FTA guidance on paratransit premium services. And it basically addresses actually something that we talked about a few minutes ago regarding the ADA minimums. A transit agency is allowed to provide service beyond the minimum ADA level, such as to individuals who don't meet the eligibility criteria, operating paratransit service beyond the fixed route service area, providing service where the fixed route system doesn't go or by exceeding the next day service requirements, for example, by providing same day service and there is other ways, too, to exceed. And the transit agencies can charge more for this and some are and they are calling it premium service. So sometimes it's been a question of what can be considered premium service because sometimes things are called premium service that really shouldn't be. One thing is the transit agencies have to ensure that any proposed changes are consistent with the basic ADA requirements. They must meet the applicable public participation requirements, which I'll talk about more in a minute. For example, they have to have an ongoing mechanism for participation of people with disabilities. They have to -- and they certainly have to do public participation for changes to the reservation system. So if there is any changes to the reservation system, they have to comply with the public participation which requires outreach to people with disabilities, 33 consultation with individuals and organizations of people with disabilities, making an opportunity for public comment, having a public hearing, and then the creation of a mechanism for ongoing participation of people with disabilities in the development and assessment of the transit agency's services. They still have to meet the basic ADA paratransit service criteria and finally they must avoid any practice by which eligible riders are steered or should avoid any practice by which eligible riders are steered into premium service. In other words, you can't set up premium service that riders in a sense have to take or are steered into it just to be able to get their ADA paratransit needs met. And so that's an important thing to keep track of. And the other one that I wanted to look at is the DOT guidance on Segways which is No. 6. The Segway is a two-wheeled, gyroscopically stabled battery-powered personal transportation device and it's made it's way into some movies and T. V. shows. For example, I know a few years ago there was an episode of Frazier where Niles rode a Segway. They are not primarily designed for people with disabilities, nor are they used primarily by people with disabilities, but some people may use them because of their disabilities, usually people with sort of a partial mobility impairment. And they may use a Segway as opposed to a more traditional device like a wheelchair or a scooter or a walker. And there has been some controversy. It's not a huge number of riders, but there are some disabled riders using the Segway for mobility to deal with their mobility impairment, and when it's used by a disabled person that way, it's not considered a wheelchair. So it's not gauged by the wheelchair rules or three to four wheeled vehicles, but it is part of the broad class of mobility aids that the ADA regulation intends will be accommodated, just like a 34 cane or a walker and so transit agencies feel if they are dangerous, they have to really make that case if they want to exclude them. They need to allow them, and if something important -- DREDF feels it's important because there are sometimes -- and there certainly will in the future be other nontraditional mobility devices -- and we don't want every single one to be a big policy issue, is it required, and so in this Segway guidance, DOT has laid out, you know, what it means to look at these and what tests does the transit agency have to jump through and if they can't show certain things they need to be accommodated. Any other questions? >> JACQUIE: So many. We won't get to them all, but I'll start reading them in the order they came in, but if you send a question that doesn't get answered on the webcast, we'll make sure to respond to you after the webcast. Okay, this is from a transit agency in Texas. Operation funding is a huge problem for transit agencies, the ADA has dramatically increased transportation funding costs and FTA has not added funding to offset these costs. In addition to stagnant federal funding, state public transportation funding in Texas has reduced over the past couple of years and will continue to be reduced over the next five years. People want service but at the end of the day, bills must be paid. What work is being done to address the funding problem? >> MARILYN: My understanding is that first of all the more recent transportation authorization and appropriations were increased. Also there are many states that augment and there are localities -- I mean, where I live there have been taxes on a county basis established in part that pay for paratransit. I can't wave a magic wand, but I know that in many states the disability 35 community works with the transit industry to go to the state for additional funding and there could be other jurisdictional levels at which that happens, too. That's a great thing for the disability community to do because it really will help everyone. I don't have additional -- mean I'm not a funding expert, but I know that sometimes problems are funding. Sometimes problems are not having best administrative practices and sometimes they are both. So I'm not sure I have a lot more to say about that. I do respect funding problems. I don't mean to minimize those problems or to dismiss them, but I don't know that I'm in a position that I'm the best person to address them, as I'm not part of the transit industry. I don't think that we would ever advise the disability community to compromise on trying to get ADA compliance because there are problems with funding. We need to look to the transit agencies that are really modeling, you know, both. And there needs to be a dialogue around these issues, and so, you know, I don't know what else to say in general. I did want to comment on one thing, Jacquie, that you mentioned before you read the question which is left over questions that we don't get to today could possibly be things we'll address in a future webcast. We're going to cover a lot of things on ADA transportation. So people can always come in again and hopefully we can help. >> JACQUIE: In the past, the city of Fresno had an agreement to take riders into an adjoining town within the same county, but they recently determined that after the first year they will no longer cross into the other city which is a maximum of ten miles away. Is this legal? And if so, what can 36 we do to have this law reviewed? >> MARILYN: Transit agencies -- the ADA encourages adjacent localities to coordinate their paratransit systems so that paratransit will take people across jurisdictional boundaries, but they are not required to do it, and this is a problem when they don't. Hopefully it's something that political pressure can help. It's not a violation of the ADA. You know, there are some things being done in certain cities, and Los Angeles County is probably the most well known example where in an extremely large county people can cross sometimes a great many jurisdictional boundaries on one paratransit vehicle and it's too bad that sometimes in other big cities those boundaries really do limit people's paratransit, but whatever jurisdiction a provider serves, that's the one they serve and they are not required to go further. >> JACQUIE: When is the commuter bus -- when does the commuter bus become a fixed route bus? Does it depend on the number of stops? >> MARILYN: That's a good question. I think behind this question is the fact that the DOT ADA regulation exempts commuter bus service from ADA paratransit, and it is DREDF's view that this definition has been abused. The DOT regulation gives certain characteristics for what they mean by commuter bus, and it is certainly not a bus commuters ride on. It's things like buses that run sort of into town in the morning hours and then out from town in the afternoon, but they have multiride tickets that they don't have very many stops and there is others. I don't have my list open right in front of me, but they are in the outline -- I could look that up -- but there is a test that we like to use that is a quick way that we think you can tell which is does the bus make periodic stops all the way along its route or at the beginning and end? If it 37 makes periodically all the way along its route, that was not the kind of bus that was envisioned by DOT to be a commuter bus in the sense of having the paratransit exception. Those systems should be providing complementary paratransit and we encourage people who are finding this problem to make an ADA complaint to FTA. >> JACQUIE: Okay, this is from a transit agency that is in a rural area in Illinois. And she has three questions and I'll lump two of them together. Our agency has a habit of putting phones on hold whenever we have an urgent meeting or other information that needs to be passed along. They also close down service for staff meetings. I see this as poor customer service and shouldn't be allowed. Are there any regulations that I can point to for my higher ups to read so they can stop this practice? >> MARILYN: If they mean paratransit reservation telephone holds or other paratransit holds such as where is my ride questions? >> JACQUIE: It does look like that and I say that only because of the first question which I haven't read yet, but it does look like it's paratransit. >> MARILYN: Well, you know, it's not okay to do that because paratransit is an entitlement. People should be able to call up and get an answer. So it's not okay to just put the calls on hold definitely. You know, as I said, the hold times -- I don't have a document to point to from FTA or DOT. You know, you can get the NCD report. Can you look at the project action document that I looked at earlier, but we just can't imagine -- it's not okay to just put people on hold. Oh, I know, the ADA requires that your reservation service take reservations during your open hours, and it even goes to the point of pointing out that if your open hours -- your regular business hours that 38 you're open, and if you don't have open hours the day before somebody needs to ride, for example, you're closed on Sunday and people want a Monday ride, then you have to be open -- there has to be a way on Sunday for people to turn in their reservations because remember paratransit is a next day service. We haven't talked much about that particular requirement today, but you know, if people are unable to get next day rides, that is a violation of the ADA. If you can only get next week rides where you live, that's an ADA violation. And so when the ADA says you have to take calls during your reservation hours, that means you have to take them and not have people on hold. I pulled open the outline and the commuter bus exemption, the regulations say service predominantly in one direction during peak periods. This is a previous question. Limited stops, use of multiride tickets and routes of extended lengths usually between the Central Business District and the outlying suburbs, but again we encourage people to just think about are there stops all along the way, in which case it's not a commuter bus. Jacquie, go on. >> JACQUIE: I'm going to ask this one last question even though it's probably going to make us go over a minute or two, and then I will respond to these other questions that have come in and at least let the people know we did get them because I really have a stack here. This obviously is an important topic for a lot of people. But this last question I'm going to ask says that when a driver calls in sick, their common practice is to cancel all nonmedical ride appointments. Is this not allowed according to what you said about nondenial of rides? And also did I understand that I'm not allowed to turn away rides when I'm full? >> MARILYN: If you're ADA paratransit, that's right. Those two 39 things would be violations of the ADA. Canceling rides or not giving people rides, if you're some other kind of program, then these rules don't apply to you, but if you are ADA complementary paratransit, which is paratransit provided because there is a fixed route service and the paratransit is provided by the -- either directly by or funded by the agency that provides the fixed route service in order to give disabled people who can't use it a way they can avail themselves of this public service, then you are required not to deny people. A legal -- one of the service criteria that the ADA has is that capacity constraints are illegal and capacity con is a longer discussion and one important aspect of capacity constraints is significantly, you know, number -- a assistant number of denials or missed trips or missed trips meaning the vehicle doesn't show up. Certainly cancellations would count in there. And again, we don't know exactly what significant number is, but then the Rochester case made it clear that it was about the actions of the transit agency. If it's an ADA complementary paratransit service it needs to establish the capacity to serve the demand that is there. And so, yeah, canceling trips or not giving people trips if you're quote-unquote full, if they call, you know, the day before, the same day, you don't have to, but the day before which is what the ADA requires, yeah, they need to be served. >> JACQUIE: All right. Thanks so much, Marilyn, for taking so many questions. And I look forward to the rest of your series. I do want to Mike sure that everybody knows this was part one of a five part series. We'll have one webcast with Marilyn every month. And the next one if you want to mark your calendar now is January 30th. So be sure and tune back in thin. And of course please feel free to share the archives of today's 40 presentation with your colleagues. They will be a salable tomorrow at ilru.org and please don't forget to complete the evaluation on the webcast page. We are all interested in receiving your feedback. >> MARILYN: Jacquie. I just wanted to say what the next one is on. >> JACQUIE: Go ahead. >> MARILYN: On-time performance and no show late cancellation issues, but a lot off they are things including best practices. >> JACQUIE: Good, we have a lot of questions around that today. So that will be great. The opinions and views expressed today are those of the presenter and no endorsement of the sponsoring agency should be inferred and finally this webcast would not be possible without the efforts of our webcast team: Rob Dickehuth for his technical expertise and our wonderful captioner Marie Bryant. Thanks again for joining us everybody. Have a dazzling day.