Public Transportation Excellence Index FATİH CANITEZ Manager of Business Intelligence and Project Management, İETT, Istanbul, Turkey

Public Transportation Excellence Index (PTE-Index) is a model to foster excellence culture and increase service quality for public transport providers, authorities and operators. Objectives of this performance assessment model: 1- To measure the quality level of public transport services in cities in an objective and comparable way, 2- To generate a benchmarking database of all cities involved, 3- To motivate public transport providers by rewarding the best practices or the best performing city in any category of the model.

Project Steps Design of Public Transport Excellence Index Application of the Model in the 34 Cities of Turkey Analysis and Publishing the Results Rewarding the Best Performing Cities in Each Category

1- Design Phase Specifying the Dimensions and related KPIs (Key Performance Indicators) in a workshop welcoming the public transport professionals from several cities around Turkey. KPIs getting highest votes are selected for measurement criteria. This process ensured the participation every city in model development. Scope of dimensions and definitions of KPIs, data sets to be collected are decided by a core expert group, representing different dimensions in the model.

PTE-Index Dimensions The relative weights of all dimensions are all determined by AHP methodology (Analytical Hierarchy Process) by core expert group among workshop participants. The model includes the land, rail and sea public transport modes together.

2- Application of the Model in the Cities of Turkey 17 Metropolitan and 17 Non-Metropolitan Cities from every region of Turkey, Sending in Excelsheet format the data sets to cities with a duedate, Collecting all the answers, Analysis according to the model parameters, Determining the best performing city for each dimension, Publising the result report to the participant cities.

Infrastructure and Investment KPIs KPI Code Infrastructure and Investment KPIs Weight in deimension Total Weight II1 Proportion of public transportation line length to total proportion of trips 8,9% 1,8% II2 Proportion of bicycle path network to total public transportation lines 6,9% 1,4% II3 Proportion of public transportation vehicles to total proportion of trips 9,4% 2,0% II4 Proportion of road network allocated only to public transportation to total road network 8,2% 1,7% II5 Training hour per employee 7,6% 1,6%   II6 Physical integration or integration in terms of ticket payment or passenger information of a public transportation mode with other mass transportation modes 11,6% 2,4% II7 Proportion of stop services having passenger information II8 Proportion of stops with bicycle stands and car parks II9 Proportion of use of public transportation (mode share) 11,8% II10 Share of public transportation in total budget of the city 9,6% II11 Proportion of public transportation trips to total proportion of trips 10,2% 2,1%

Energy and Environment KPIs KPI Code Energy and Environment KPIs Weight in group Total weight EE1 CO2 emission value resulting from public transportation 8,5% 1,0% EE2 Rent a bike system level 5,9% 0,7% EE3 9,5% 1,2% EE4 NO2 concentration resulting from public transportation 9,0% 1,1% EE5 PM10 concentration resulting from public transportation 9,2% EE6 Average of age of vehicle fleet EE7 Proportion of emission per trip in public transportation 8,2% EE8 Fuel consumption per kilometer 8,0% EE9 Waste Management System 8,8% EE10 CNG consumption per kilometer (L) 7,9% EE11 Proportion of vehicles fulfilling the emission category of Euro V and above EE12 Presence of works directed to creating environmental consciousness 7,4% 0,9%

Financial Attractiveness KPIs KPI Code Financial Attractiveness KPIs Weight in Group Weight in Total FA1 Average fee for an adult per kilometer 21,1% 2,8% FA2 Total operation cost per passenger 18,7% 2,4% FA3 Total operation cost per kilometer FA4 Peak hour charges 13,1% 1,7% FA5 Balance of income and expenses 17,3% 2,3% FA6 Proportion of free tours of transportation 11,1% 1,4%

2.4- Service Quality KPIs KPI Code Service Quality KPIs Weight in Group Weight in Total SQ1 Use of smart cards 10,0% 2,2% SQ2 Air-conditioned vehicles 10,9% 2,4% SQ3 Schedule punctuality 12,4% 2,8% SQ4 Wheelchair accessible public transportation vehicles 11,3% 2,5% SQ5 Wheelchair accessible public transportation stops 10,6% SQ6 Proportion of Ticket Sales Points to Total Population SQ7 Percentage of Fleet in service during peak hours 10,4% 2,3% SQ8 Customer satisfaction rate 12,8% 2,9% SQ9 Proportion of premium services for special groups like disabled people 11,1%

Operational Efficiency KPIs KPI Code Operational Efficiency KPIs Weight in Group Weight in Total MP1 Average kilometer covered by vehicles 8,3% 0,9% MP2 Proportion of income-generating kilometer to total kilometer covered by vehicles 14,0% 1,6% MP3 Annual average of vehicle working hours 8,9% 1,0% MP4 Average proportion of drivers per vehicle 11,0% 1,2% MP5 Employee satisfaction rate 13,3% 1,5% MP6 Having a vision and mission statement (1 or 0) 8,7% MP7 Capacity usage rate of public transportation capacity 13,1% MP8 Average distance between major vehicle failures 12,4% 1,4% MP9 Average distance between minör vehicle failures 10,3%

Health and Security KPIs KPI Code Health and Security KPIs Weight in Group Weight in Total HS1 Proportion of traffic accidents 14,7% 2,3% HS2 Proportion of accidents involving injuries and fatalities 15,2% 2,4% HS3 Proportion of stops having security measures 10,3% 1,6% HS4 Emergency management system (1 or 0) 10,8% 1,7% HS5 Proportion of occupational accidents per million kilometers 13,8% 2,2% HS6 Average safe driving trainings (1 or 0) 11,9% 1,8% HS7 Occupational health and safety quality standards like ISO 14001 (1 or 0) 11,0% HS8 Employing high technology to improve traffic safety ( 1 or 0) 12,3% 1,9%

Technology Utilization KPIs KPI Code Technology Utilization KPIs Weight in Group Weight in Total UT1 Proportion of smart stops 12,5% 0,6% UT2 Proportion of vehicles with passenger information screen and announce system 13,4% 0,7% UT3 Available call centers, websites, schedules and such information 14,2% UT4 Proportion of stops with announce system 11,8% UT5 Information on tours of transportation 12,7% UT6 Utilization of NFC technology in payments 8,5% 0,4% UT7 Use of mobile applications 12,0% UT8 Utilization of systems such as control center or fleet management 14,9%

3- Analysis and Publishing Results For every participant city, a results report is given with the following information: Its score in all dimensions, and total score for its Public transport excellence, Its relative rank among the cities for each dimension, Its relative score for each dimension rated for the best performing city for that dimension.

4- Award Ceremony Huge Media Coverage Across Turkey !! AWARD CITY Excellence Award ISTANBUL Accessibility Award KONYA Sustainability Award ANKARA Financial Performance Award TRABZON Service Quality Award GAZİANTEP Operational Efficiency Award KAYSERİ Secure Service Award ERZURUM Technology Award ŞANLIURFA Huge Media Coverage Across Turkey !!

THANK YOU... QUESTIONS AND SUGGESTIONS? POLICY MESSAGE: You can all develop your own version of a Public Transport Excellence Model to foster learning and growth across the cities. Our model and methodology can be a good example! THANK YOU... QUESTIONS AND SUGGESTIONS?