Ancillary Services to Support Welfare to Work. Inadequate Transportation

06/22/1998

INTRODUCTION

Inadequate public transportation, a lack of personal transportation, and the location of suitable jobs in areas inaccessible to welfare recipients--spatial mismatch--each pose a formidable barrier to obtaining and maintaining employment for those seeking to make the transition from welfare to work. The increased concentration of welfare recipients in inner cities, along with a shifting of employment opportunities to the suburbs, has magnified the challenges of job placement for welfare clients. Welfare agencies must develop strategies that overcome such transportation barriers if clients are to become economically self-sufficient.

This section provides information on and addresses the following questions related to the need for transportation among welfare recipients:

  • What can welfare agencies do to assist clients who face transportation as a barrier to employment?
  • What does the evidence suggest about the effectiveness of addressing this barrier?

Definition

Inadequate transportation is a barrier for many welfare recipients trying to make the transition to work. Without reliable, safe, and efficient transportation, welfare clients are unable to obtain needed services, such as child care, or to participate in work or work-related activities. Transportation barriers are defined in the following three ways: (1) inadequate public transportation, (2) lack of personal transportation, and (3) spatial mismatch. Issues of affordability underlie all three.

  • Inadequate public transportation means (1) limited, infrequent, or unaffordable transit service, (2) limited routes covered by transit operation, or (3) security concerns at transit stations during off-peak hours.
  • A lack of personal transportation means there is no privately owned car available for travel to work. This creates a problem particularly for people in areas with limited public transportation. Welfare recipients without cars often face unreliable or untenable alternatives, such as having to rely on transportation provided by a neighbor or having to take three or four buses each way to work.
  • Spatial mismatch, an increasingly serious barrier to employment, refers to the location of suitable jobs in areas that are inaccessible by public transportation (Coulton et al. 1996). This is a result of the recent growth of new jobs in areas outside the city.

Percentage of Welfare Population Facing This Issue

Table 20 in Appendix A provides both national and state/local estimates for several areas as they pertain to welfare recipients: (1) the extent to which transportation is perceived as a barrier to employment, (2) adequacy and use of public transportation, (3) availability of personal transportation, and (4) job accessibility, as a function of location (spatial mismatch). It is difficult to provide a simple range in estimates of the percentage of the welfare population for which transportation is a barrier to employment, but several key estimates from Table 20 provide a very general picture. In one state (Connecticut), 40 percent of welfare recipients report that transportation is a "barrier to employment." Forty-two percent of welfare recipients nationally reportedly rely on public transportation, but 40 percent of rural counties have no public transportation. Forty-three percent of welfare households nationally do not own a car. In terms of spatial mismatch, only between 8 and 15 percent of available jobs in one metropolitan area (Cleveland, Ohio) are accessible by public transportation in less than 40 minutes.

The percentage of people faced with a transportation barrier is difficult to estimate, for several reasons. First, geographic location accounts for much of the variation. Transportation will be a barrier for a large percentage in the 40 percent of rural areas that have no public transportation system, but for a much smaller percentage in urban areas with efficient transportation systems. Likewise, personal transportation varies substantially between rural and urban areas, with only 28 percent of rural households not owning a car but 57 percent of urban households not owning a car. Also, the extent to which spatial mismatch creates transportation barriers because jobs are located outside areas with high concentrations of welfare recipients will vary greatly from one area to another.

What most available estimates do not provide, however, is an analysis of transportation supply and need together. We do not know how many of the 42 percent of welfare recipients who rely on public transportation live in areas with inadequate systems that limit employment opportunities. Similarly, we don't know what proportion of those who do not own cars have access to public transportation as an alternative. Though not national, the Connecticut estimate which reports that 40 percent of welfare recipients feel transportation to be a "barrier to employment" comes closest to defining the extent of the problem. While this percentage will certainly not be found everywhere, it suggests that transportation may be a barrier for a substantial portion of the welfare population.

More research needs to be done--both nationally and locally--to determine the ways in which inadequate transportation, as defined above, is a barrier to employment. Analyses of spatial mismatch are an important step in this direction, because they hold promise for a much clearer understanding of the extent to which jobs, people who need employment, and availability of transportation interact.

Relationship to Welfare Receipt and Employment Status

  • The spatial mismatch factor has intensified in recent years, with more welfare recipients concentrated in inner-city areas and with economic restructuring that has caused a shift of employment from the inner city to the suburbs. Nationally, more than 41 percent of jobs were in the suburbs in 1990, up from 37 percent in 1980 (Reid 1996). As a result, the number of job opportunities for which welfare recipients qualify, are paid a sustainable wage, and have reasonable access is rapidly diminishing. This will directly affect welfare recipients' employment prospects.
  • The Welfare Research Group of the University of Connecticut School of Social Work conducted a study in which participants repeatedly identified the cost of public transportation, the hours that buses are available, and limited bus routes as factors that make job search difficult (Welfare Research Group 1997).

Welfare Agency Approaches

  • What can welfare agencies do to assist clients who face transportation as a barrier to employment?
  • What does the evidence suggest about the effectiveness of addressing this barrier?
  • What do we know about program costs?
  • What do we know about program implementation?

The two critical components of an agency's approach in addressing transportation barriers to employment are (1) identifying which clients are in need of what services, and (2) determining the type of program or service to provide.

Client Identification

Agency approaches to identifying which clients need what services can range from one that places the burden of finding transportation directly on the shoulders of the welfare recipient, with assistance provided only upon explicit request, to an approach that uses manual or electronic systems to map and match job locations with transportation systems tailored to meet individual client needs.

Program Strategies

In the face of time limits imposed by welfare reform, state and local agencies are quickly recognizing the need to address the formidable barrier that lack of transportation can pose to employment. In response, agencies throughout the country are rapidly going beyond the traditional programs that provide gas vouchers and bus passes, for example, and are developing innovative efforts to address this issue. Our review of these efforts suggests that there are at least three broad program strategies agencies currently use to address transportation barriers to employment. Strategies are largely a function of which of the transportation barriers discussed at the outset (under Definition) an agency has decided to address: inadequate public transportation, lack of personal transportation, or spatial mismatch. Our review of programs does not include policy-based initiatives, such as revision of TANF eligibility rules to exempt the value of a car or development of more-flexible insurance policies.

We categorize these strategies below. The distinctions drawn are not intended to suggest that agencies design programs around a single strategy or that these strategies are necessarily mutually exclusive. They are provided instead to foster thinking about the range of programmatic objectives possible, to help agencies define their own service needs, and to classify the programs described at the end of this section for agencies interested in pursuing further information. The three broad program strategies are categorized as follows:(1)

Service Coordination. Programs with this strategy entail some level of coordination between a welfare agency and the local public or private transportation system(s), for services such as discounted fares for clients or caseworker training by the local transit authority on available transit routes, or that have developed a computer-based mapping system to coordinate client needs with available services. The emphasis of these programs is on improving access to and increasing use of existing transportation systems.

Enhanced Service Capacity. Programs with this strategy aim to increase the supply of either (1) personal transportation, or (2) a public or private system of transportation. Those that aim to increase the supply of personal transportation are efforts such as vehicle leasing or purchase programs or arrangements for discounted repairs. Those that aim to increase the supply of a public or private system of transportation are efforts designed to expand routes or increase the hours of operation of the public transportation system or to contract with a private provider for specific, dedicated transportation. Those aimed at enhancing an area's existing public transit system are the most ambitious, as they can entail extensive coordination among multiple service agencies and address large-scale issues of infrastructure. All these programs are designed to provide new or expanded transportation options.

Employment Integration. Programs with this strategy are more explicitly tied to employment through, for example, some level of employer cooperation or participation in a shuttle service to a job site, a van providing reverse commute service, or transportation assistance to employees in exchange for an employer tax deduction. These types of programs are often designed to address directly the issues of spatial mismatch by helping welfare recipients get to otherwise inaccessible jobs. Other programs included here, increasingly common among welfare agencies, are those that create employment opportunities for welfare recipients by training them to become transportation providers themselves. (This in turn creates enhanced service capacity.)

Program Outcomes

There is no doubt that the many transportation efforts welfare agencies have launched have made a difference in the lives of their clients. Whether a handful purchasing vehicles or a large number using public transit, welfare recipients have been enabled to get to places they previously could not--from child care providers to jobs. The available evidence concerning program outcomes, however, is limited, and because so many local variables influence the design and operation of each transportation initiative, outcomes cannot be compared. The information that is available generally tells us only about the number of clients served and nothing about the comparative effectiveness of one approach over another, the cost-effectiveness of the approach, or how the outcomes for those who receive transportation services might compare to the outcomes for a group that does not.

Service coordination efforts may hold the promise of providing services to large numbers of welfare clients, but they are not always designed for direct provision of transportation. Programs that train caseworkers to learn more about local transit routes, for example, theoretically will translate into a service for all of agency's clients, but they will do much less to expand transportation to recipients whose needs cannot be met by existing services. In general, these programs focus on improving access to transportation rather than on expansion of available options.

Enhanced service capacity programs, which focus on expansion of available options, can range from very small to quite large, but those that target personal transportation serve few welfare clients. The CARING program in Wytheville, Virginia, for example, has provided vehicles to just under 10 welfare recipients per year through its lease purchase program. Programs that aim to create new private transportation systems can range in size but will most likely serve fewer clients than programs that aim to create enhanced services, such as extended hours or additional routes, within the existing public transit system. These initiatives for enhanced service capacity can potentially provide services to a very large number of both welfare recipients and nonrecipients.

Employment integration efforts can also range from quite small to fairly large. The AdVANtage program in Anne Arundel County, Maryland, for example, has trained slightly less than ten welfare recipients to become van company owners. The Job Ride program in Wisconsin, a very different employment integration initiative, has provided reverse commute or some other form of transportation to job sites for more than 500 welfare recipients and enabled them to obtain full-time employment.

Program Costs

Not surprisingly, the costs of addressing transportation barriers to employment vary widely across different types of projects. Depending on the level of service and number of clients served, overall program costs can range from almost nothing to more than $10,000 per client. Direct costs to the welfare agency can also range considerably, depending upon the program and the extent to which an agency has arranged to share costs with others or obtained funding through sources beyond the TANF block grant.

While actual cost figures are sparse, it appears that the employment integration programs that seek to train welfare recipients to become owners or operators of their own transportation services have the highest per-client costs. In Anne Arundel County, Maryland, the program spends about $10,500 for each client it trains.

Enhanced service capacity programs that provide transportation through privately operated systems can spend anywhere from less than $10 to more than $100 per client per ride (Applied Management and Planning Group 1997). The Job Ride program in Wisconsin falls close to the low end of this range, reportedly spending about $19 per client per ride. Enhanced service capacity programs that provide transportation through helping a person obtain personal transportation, such as programs that lease vehicles or distribute donated vehicles, are very inexpensive, since costs are either donated or covered by the welfare recipients themselves. In Wytheville, Virginia, for example, cars are purchased at low cost through the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of General Services Division of Purchases and Supply, and in Ventura County, California, cars are purchased at public auction. For six vehicles, Wytheville officials paid $9,450, and Ventura County agency officials pay from $1,500 to $2,000 for each car--minimal short-term costs. Both programs enter into monthly payment plans with their welfare clients so that the lease or loan repayment can be expedited and the welfare agency can recycle the recovered vehicle costs for future lease purchases. In Wytheville, all repayment funds are used to purchase future surplus vehicles for lease.

Service coordination programs, because they generally provide services to the largest number of clients, will tend to have the lowest per-client costs. The Work Pass Program in New Jersey, which involves coordination with the state's transit system (New Jersey Transit), costs on average about $50 to $60 per month per client, or about $600 to $720 per year (further details on this program are provided under Program Models). Administrative costs are donated by the transit authority. The program reportedly costs the New Jersey Department of Human Services less than was spent previously on client transportation assistance.

Program Implementation

The transportation services an agency provides clearly need to reflect local needs--they must be built upon knowledge of existing resources and designed to fill current gaps. In a rural area with no public transit system, for example, a small shuttle service program may the only option. To address welfare recipients' transportation barriers, welfare agencies throughout the country have launched innovative and diverse programs, from small-scale efforts that serve a limited number of specified clients to large-scale efforts that seek to expand the local infrastructure. With such a diverse set, implementation issues will certainly vary. The summary below discusses broad implementation issues that those operating programs have faced, and those planning to operate programs will likely face, in three areas: (1) local needs assessment, (2) coordination, and (3) program funding. Along with the discussion, we recommend steps welfare agencies should take to develop successful programs in this area.

Local Needs Assessment

If programs are to be effective, they must be designed to address the specific transportation barriers an agency's clients face. Welfare agencies with experience in developing transportation initiatives have indicated that effective implementation requires a clear understanding of what clients need. Because of the wide range of options in designing programs to address transportation barriers (from improved information about the existing transit system to electronic mapping of routes, shuttle services, and expansion of the existing transit system), welfare agencies need to begin with an assessment of their clients' needs and follow with an inventory of existing transportation services. This should lead to a clear understanding of the real source of transportation gaps and to the design of a program that addresses these gaps directly. Welfare agencies should seek to participate and provide input, even in cases where initiatives are directed by others.

This process of needs assessment applies not only to the design of a new transportation initiative, but to the day-to-day interactions between caseworkers and clients as well. Caseworkers need to address clients' individual transportation barriers through this same process of understanding needs, reviewing existing options, and addressing gaps in services.

Coordination

If program implementation is to be successful, welfare agencies must devote the time necessary to develop coordinated partnerships. Many transportation initiatives rely upon coordination between two or more agencies or groups, from the local public transit authority to local public and private nonprofit organizations, insurance providers, employers and other community representatives. Unless agencies devote resources to developing smooth procedures for coordination, the transportation program is likely to be undermined by misunderstanding, inappropriate or unnecessary services (often through duplication of effort), insufficient funding, or unnecessarily high coordination costs.

Program Funding

If program implementation is to be successful, welfare agencies must identify funding sources and ensure that funds will meet program needs. A by-product of effective coordination among stakeholders is both increased funding and the opportunity to serve larger numbers of clients. A number of sources are available for funding local transportation initiatives, from the Federal Transit Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation to the Community Transportation Association of America. In addition, federal tax law has established the Transit Benefit Program, which allows employers to claim a tax deduction if they provide employees with transportation assistance. Local planners and service providers should be certain they understand all available sources of funding (see Further Information section for sources) and optimize their opportunities by combining federal, state, and local resources. In addition, planners and service providers need to assess all program costs carefully before implementing a program. Because transportation initiatives can be expensive to operate and can entail unforeseen costs (such as for marketing), program operations can be adversely affected without careful assessment.

Program Models(2)

  • What are welfare agencies doing to address this issue?
  • Whom can I contact?

The following programs are presented alphabetically by state. The reader can determine the relevance of a program by noting its primary program strategy and geographic location and then refer to the brief descriptions and contact information on the subsequent pages. We have used primary objective(s) to assign program strategies, though a program may have many objectives.


Job Opportunity Transportation Program

Human Services Agency

County of Ventura

Ventura, California

Program strategy: Enhanced service capacity

Location: One suburban county


Community Self-Sufficiency Grant

Transportation Initiative in Scott County

Iowa Department of Human Services

Des Moines, Iowa

Program strategy: Service coordination

Location: One urban county


AdVANtage Van Service Entrepreneurs Project

Anne Arundel County Department of Social Services

Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Program strategy: Enhanced service capacity

Employment integration

Location: One urban/rural county


WorkPass Program

New Jersey Transit and New Jersey Department of Human Services

Trenton, NJ

Program strategy: Service coordination

Location: Statewide


CARING (Cars Assist Recipients in New Growth) Program

Wythe County Department of Social Services

Wytheville, VA

Program strategy: Enhanced service capacity

Location: One rural location


Job Ride

State of Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development

Madison, Wisconsin

Program strategy: Service coordination

Enhanced service capacity

Employment integration

Location: Statewide


Program Name/Contact

Human Services Agency

Job Opportunity Transportation Program

County of Ventura

Ventura, California

Jim Becker

Human Services Agency

805-652-7835

Program strategy: Enhanced service capacity

Location: One suburban county

Brief Program Description

The Human Services Agency (HSA) of the Ventura Department of Social Services operates the Job Opportunity Transportation Program, a self-funding program that provides people enrolled in California's welfare program (CalWORKs) with reliable transportation for work. The initiative's primary goal is to assist CalWORKs families in obtaining reliable transportation to maintain employment, get off welfare, and achieve long-term financial self-sufficiency.

The program operates as an auto loan initiative which purchases economy vehicles that fleet operators (such as local government or large private employers) plan to dispose of because of age or mileage or as surplus. The vehicles obtained are inspected, and all necessary repairs are completed by a private sector auto repair facility or by auto repair classes at local community colleges. The vehicles are then sold at minimal cost to prescreened welfare families to be used to get to and from work. The Ventura County Federal Credit Union will be providing loans to these families to purchase the vehicles.

Evaluation

This program has not been evaluated.

Program Name/Contact

Iowa Department of Human Services

Community Self-Sufficiency Grant Transportation Initiative in Scott County

Des Moines, Iowa

David Perret, Coordinator

Community Self-Sufficiency Grant

Iowa Department of Human Services

(515) 281-4187

Program strategy: Service coordination

Location: One urban county

Brief Program Description

The Division of Economic Assistance of the Iowa Department of Human Services and the Iowa Workforce Development Department approved the Community Self-Sufficiency Grant Scott County Transportation Initiative to respond to an identified need for transportation to employment in Scott County. The program's goal is to remove the employment barrier of transportation for PROMISE JOBS (TANF) participants.

The Scott County transportation initiative has two main objectives: (1) to establish a database to serve as a transportation resource and referral system for PROMISE JOBS participants, and (2) to link PROMISE JOBS participants with the proper transportation for obtaining and maintaining employment. The transportation database will contain information on PROMISE JOBS participants' employment history, area transportation services, and area employers in order to link them to jobs and training. The database will store and retrieve this information. To link PROMISE JOBS participants to adequate transportation services, agency caseworkers will supply local transportation providers with written referrals that describe participants' specific transportation needs. In addition, neighborhood organizations will coordinate PROMISE JOBS participants who live near each other so that they can share car or van transportation. Participants will be supplied with the necessary training and information regarding their assigned transportation mode(s) and how to access them. To facilitate the process, the Welfare Reform Coalition (a cooperative partner) will establish a centralized transportation project office to overcome the transportation barriers of 40 to 70 PROMISE JOBS participants in the service area. The centralized office will serve as the main hub for providing PROMISE JOBS transportation solutions, as well as the liaison office for area agencies, employers, service providers, and other active participants in the effort. The program is funded at $32,798 by the Iowa legislature.

Evaluation

Program coordinators plan to contract with an independent vendor for the initiative's evaluation. The project will be evaluated with criteria that are consistent with the objectives of the Community Self-Sufficiency Grant. These will include the number of PROMISE JOBS participants served by the transportation project, the percentage of PROMISE JOBS participants retained in employment as a result of this project, and the satisfaction of participants and employers with the project as expressed in surveys and focus groups. The evaluation will also examine the number of participants placed on waiting lists for service and the number who cannot be served, so that the program can improve the availability of transportation resources in the area.

Findings

Findings from the evaluation are not yet available.

Program Name/Contact

Anne Arundel County Department of Social Services

AdVANtage Van Service Entrepreneurs Project

Anne Arundel County, Maryland

Vesta Kimble, Deputy Director

Anne Arundel County Department of Social Services

410-269-4603

Program strategy: Enhanced service capacity

Employment integration

Location: One urban/rural county

Brief Program Description

The Anne Arundel County Department of Social Services, in collaboration with the Community Transportation Association of America and the YWCA of Annapolis and Anne Arundel County, has designed the AdVANtage Van Service Entrepreneurs Project to address the transportation needs of welfare recipients in the area. The program's goal is to help welfare recipients become van company owners in Anne Arundel County.

The AdVANtage program offers two services: (1) microenterprise development, and (2) fully subsidized transportation. The microenterprise development program, the AdVANtage Van Service Entrepreneurs Project, trains welfare recipients to become van company owners. The YWCA conducts business training, helps negotiate lease-purchase agreements and insurance policies, develops rate schedules and routes/areas, and assists entrepreneurs in obtaining Public Service Commission and Minority Business Enterprise certification. Subsidized transportation is provided to any clients enrolled in job search. Once they find a job, the program provides a copayment based on their income.

The program costs $90,000 (approximately $10,500 per entrepreneur). The research and development funding was provided by the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Evaluation

Applied Management and Planning Group (AMPG) is conducting an evaluation of this program.

Findings

Findings from the evaluation of the AdVANtage program are not yet available.

Program Name/Contact

New Jersey Transit and New Jersey Department of Human Services

WorkPass Program

Trenton, New Jersey

Lou Capadona

Director of Sales

973-491-7109

Program strategy: Service coordination

Location: Statewide

Brief Program Description

New Jersey Transit, in cooperation with the New Jersey Department of Human Services, designed the WorkPass Program to help welfare recipients use mass transit (either bus or rail) to get to their work-related activities. The goal of WorkPass is to make it simple for welfare clients to receive monthly bus and rail passes at various facilities.

The WorkPass program supplies Work First New Jersey participants with monthly New Jersey Transit passes so that they can get to their jobs. Each county will manage its own WorkPass program, responding to the distinct needs of its clients. A caseworker reviews individual clients' circumstances to determine the following: (1) the client's starting point and job destination, and (2) whether the client should use bus or rail transportation.

To help participants gain access to transportation, NJ Transit will provide training to county Work First agency staffs on reading bus schedules, determining fares and transit availability, and ordering bus/rail passes and transit scrip tickets for their clients. In addition, NJ Transit will conduct research to determine the transit availability of different work sites and work activities and will set up resource centers at each county Work First Agency, displaying transit timetables, maps, guides and informational brochures on special services.

Evaluation

Evaluation information on the WorkPass program is not yet available but is forthcoming.

Findings

Findings from the evaluation of the AdVANtage program are not yet available.

Program Name/Contact

Wythe County Department of Social Services

CARING (Cars Assist Recipients in New Growth) Program

Wytheville, Virginia

A. Michael Hall

Director, Wythe County Department of Social Services

540-228-5493

Program strategy: Enhanced service capacity

Location: One rural location

Brief Program Description

The Wythe County Department of Social Services in Wytheville, Virginia, has designed the CARING (Cars Assist Recipients in New Growth) program to help the area's welfare recipients overcome transportation barriers to employment and self-sufficiency. The program's goal is to address what it sees as the most formidable barrier to the successful outcome of welfare reform in its community transportation. CARING is averaging six or seven welfare recipients a year. To date, they have a total of 14 vehicles, and about half the recipients own their own vehicles.

The intent of the CARING Program is to provide qualified welfare participants with a vehicle through a lease purchase program. The length of the lease agreement is negotiated with each potential lessee. A monthly vehicle maintenance fee established for each vehicle is deposited in an account for reimbursement of maintenance or repair costs, on presentation of an appropriate invoice. Any unutilized maintenance funds are reimbursed to the lessee at the end of the lease agreement or are used, at the participant's option, to reduce the final installment payment.

The initial purchase of vehicles was financed through planning and administrative funds from Virginia's welfare reform program, the Virginia Initiative for Employment not Welfare (VIEW). In May 1996, six vehicles were purchased for $9,450, and in June 1997, seven more for $11,650. Costs to the department are minimal. Cars are purchased at public auction for prices ranging from $1,500 to $2,000.

Evaluation

This program has not been evaluated.

Program Name/Contact

Job Ride

State of Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development

Division of Economic Support

Madison, Wisconsin

Leonor Rosas DeLeon

Bureau of Welfare Initiatives

Division of Economic Support

608-267-9022

Program strategy: Service coordination

Enhanced service capacity

Employment integration

Location: Statewide

Brief Program Description

The State of Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development designed the Job Ride program as an employment transportation assistance program to address the transportation needs of the area's welfare applicants and participants. The program's goal is to help job seekers gain access to transportation to employment. From July 1, 1997, through December 31, 1997, 517 people were served, with 250 to 300 riders at a time, for a total of 21,173 work trips.

Job Ride provides reverse commute services in Milwaukee and provides transportation support in other parts of the state. Job Ride seeks to do the following: (1) expand transit service (including route extensions, increased evening and weekend service hours, feeder-shuttle service, and evening shared-ride taxi service); (2) provide new transit service (including express service, reverse commute van service, shuttle service or other services to specific job sites, or purchased service); (3) create employer initiatives (such as employer-sponsored van service, car pool, or shuttle service); (4) provide volunteer driver programs; and (5) improve coordination, clearinghouse, and central dispatch among existing public and private providers of employment transportation, social services, and specialized transportation.

The Job Ride program has been consistently funded at $579,000 per year. Program officials also report that the average cost per one-way passenger trip is $19.21 and that the average cost per job placement is $805.17. This year, Wisconsin has chosen to allocate an additional $200,000 out of the TANF Block Grant for expansion of services (for a total of $770,000 in 1998).

Evaluation

This program has not been formally evaluated. However, the state will do a year-end analysis.

Further Information

Further information on issues related to transportation is available from the following

Organizations

American Public Transit Association (APTA)

Washington, DC

(202) 898-4000

The American Public Transit Association (APTA) is a nonprofit international association that includes transit systems; planning, design, construction, and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions; and state association and departments of transportation. APTA serves the public by providing safe, efficient, and economical transit services and products.

Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA)

Washington, DC

(202) 628-1480

or (800) 527-8279

The Community Transportation Association of America (CTAA) is an association of organizations committed to improving mobility for all people. CTAA conducts research, provides technical assistance, offers educational programs, and serves as an advocate for available, affordable, and accessible community transportation.

Federal Transit Administration (FTA)

Washington, DC

(202) 366-4043

Website: www.fta.dot.gov

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) provides financial assistance for transit planning, operations, and capital programs. The FTA also provides technical assistance in the form of guidance in meeting federal requirements; training needs; and support of research, development, and demonstration of innovative concepts and technology.

Further information on issues related to transportation is available in the following

Documents

Federal Transit Administration. Access to Jobs: Best Practices in Welfare-to-Work Transportation: A Planning Guide. Washington, DC: FTA, 1997.

This document provides an in-depth look at the welfare-to-work transportation strategies of several states, metropolitan planning organizations and transit agencies. In addition, it details the most pertinent research relating to welfare transportation and highlights the current technical assistance efforts on the subject.

Kaplan, April. "Transportation and Welfare Reform." Washington, DC: Welfare Information Network, 1997.

This document is a fact sheet that provides background on inadequate transportation and discusses policy issues, research findings, and innovative transportation program practices across the country.

Tweedie, Jack, et al. "Meeting the Challenges of Welfare Reform: Programs with PROMISE." Denver, CO: National Conference of State Legislators, 1998.

This document reviews the issues of employment transportation through the discussion of the transportation dilemma, transit innovations, and transit alternatives. It also discusses the policy implications of transportation and welfare reform and offers recommendations for the future of transportation in a work-based system.

 

1. Several of these programs are designed to provide support to potential welfare recipients in an effort to prevent a need for cash assistance. As such, they overlap with other efforts described in the "Financial Emergency" section.

2. For an explanation of how programs were selected, please refer to the discussion included in the Introduction under the paragraph heading "Program Models."