ASBO Presentation Transportation advisory & Consulting Services

ASBO Presentation Transportation advisory & Consulting Services
Schoolsource Technologies, llc. Transportation advisory & Consulting Services ASBO Presentation School transportation efficiency March 17, 2017 Presented by: John Robertson – Managing Director

AREAS DISTRICTS CAN EVALUATE TO REDUCE COSTS AND IMPROVE SERVICE:
Run/Route Building Planned vs Actual Analysis Bell schedule/critical tier analysis Per Head Route Analysis/Displaced Student Assignments NAPD Shared Services Effective Use Of Routing Software Data Integration COMPLIANCE McKinney Vento EDUCATION LAW 3624 & NYCRR 156.3

Efficient Run/Route Building Flow Chart
Mission Statement: To use a routing process and theory that creates a Safe and On-Time District Transportation System while utilizing the least # of vehicles at the lowest # of billing hours. Data Collection - Current, Clean, & Accurate Student Data - Current & Actual Ridership Data (“Headcounts”) Key Components Computerized Routing System Up-to-date Map Current Schools Serviced Locations Bell Times Arrival/Departure Times Accurate Transportation Non-Eligibility Zones & Hazard Streets Updated Vehicle File (including. capacities) Key Components Identify Students & Schools That Can Ride Together Build Runs Goal As close to Max Ridership & Max Time as Possible Build Routes by Combining Runs on vehicles (“Schematic”) Utilize the least # of vehicles at lowest possible # of billing hours. Build Routes Route Creation Schematic Optimization Assign a Cost to Each Route Review Complete Schematic & Costs For Max Efficiency Routes Servicing only 1 School. Identify “Single Tier” Routes Look for Sharing Opportunities for Single Tier Routes Finalize Schematic & Determine Cost / Transported Student

Router Requirements Route Building Run/Route Building
Routers Must Be Familiar with: How runs are billed according to bus company or district driver contracts. AM drop off and PM pick up procedures at all buildings including out of district schools. Which runs require a bus matron. Head Count Data: Know the % of actual riders by school/tier and know which tier has the highest %. District specific Routing Rules. Route Building Build runs first then create routes. *Always build PM routes first. Matron Utilization Efficiency: Combine matron required runs on the same route/vehicle whenever possible to reduce the total # of matrons required and cost to the district. Multiple School Combination Runs: Look to combine 2 or more schools on one run to reduce vehicles needed. Be sure they are age appropriate. (High School students riding with Elementary age students?) When combining Sp Ed. Students - review with the District Sp. Ed Administrator. Overall Schematic Review: – Large bus and Van – Identify opportunities to capture savings by placing private/parochial schools that are scheduled on vans onto underutilized Large bus routes. Consider non-mirrored solutions - Especially for out of district routes- Does it reduce vehicles- billing hours? McKinney-Vento Students: Be sure all Mc Kinney–Vento students are considered when constructing routes . There may be buses in the area or heading to the area with the ability to pick up or drop off displaced students without adding buses specifically for these students.

Planned vs Actual Analysis
Head Count Data Education Law section 3635-c Whenever possible, buses should be filled to capacity. NYSED encourages school districts to gather information on the capacity use of their transportation fleets. School districts should instruct drivers to take an actual count of pupils riding the bus periodically on each route and should maintain records. NYSED encourages school districts to have an available seat only for those students who are expected to ride the bus. Districts may wish to survey parents on their intentions but in no case can a parent's response be seen as waiving their right to transportation for their child. It is advisable to have an additional 10 percent of the seats available in case of unanticipated riders, in relation to the district’s own routing calculations based on the students transported (not the posted capacity). It is not prudent to have buses with 50 percent of the seats empty in order to accommodate every possible student. School districts are encouraged to have a back up plan as part of their emergency management practices for pupil transportation in the event that a bus is filled beyond capacity.

Head Count Data assign HIGH SCHOOL (30) MIDDLE SCHOOL (23) ELEM 1 (9) ELEM 2 (15) ELEM 3 (13) load 17 18 19 AM PM A 41 35 25 30 20 29 26 23 21 31 27 24 B 13 11 12 15 43 34 C 47 22 14 28 16 D 48 32 46 37 E F 38 36 G 9 8 5 7 44 57 33 42 H 10 49 I 51 55 45 h 50 K 40 69 39 L M N O P 58 Q R S T U V W X Y Z AA AB 52 AC AE AG AH AJ AK AL 1313 736 664 647 521 560 604 840 527 469 427 585 565 629 351 240 238 221 262 261 267 590 418 390 396 407 394 445 492 342 317 355 301 353 380 AVG

Head Count Data It is Important for the District to Establish “Routing Rules” to Effectively Apply the Results of the Planned vs Actual Information Establish maximum load by grades transported - Loads for HS students should be different than Elementary students Establish maximum ride time - Loading to your target ridership may increase runs to unacceptable ride times for Private schools with low % of riders - Loading Public School large buses to target ridership may extend run times beyond time allotted between tiers- **Consider bell analysis for possible savings** Fleet utilization - Are you using a Large Bus when you could be using a less expensive Van LARGE BUS HEADCOUNT ANALYSIS /2014 ACTUAL actual runs actual headcounts actual avg ridership / run proposed runs proposed avg ridership / run % riding -actual vs planned run reduction HS 28 735 26 24 31 56% 4 MS 23 690 30 81% ELEM 1 9 347 38 90% ELEM 2 15 511 34 14 37 82% 1 ELEM 3 13 439 12 85% PLANNED planned headcounts 1279 46 53 854 382 42 618 41 515 40 LARGE BUS HEADCOUNT ANALYSIS /2015 % riding (actual vs planned) 736 25 629 27 75% 267 76% 445 32 380 29 77% 1313 44 51 840 36 351 35 590 39 492

Bell schedule/critical tier analysis (SAMPLE DIST 1)
Review your existing schematic and determine which tier is creating the need for the most number of buses route # hrs cost per/mo 6:40 AM 7:00 AM 7:20 AM 7:55 AM 8:00 AM 10:30 AM 11:30 AM 2:30 PM 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:45 PM 4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:30 PM 1 6 $7,488.80 HS 50 MS 7 HS 300 2 HS 51 MS 14 HS 301 3 4 $7,076.52 MS 341 HS 52 MS 342 HS 53 5 MS 343 HS 54 MS 344 HS 55 7 MS 346 HS 56 8 ELE 1 HS 57 9 MS 11 HS 60 10 MS 15 HS 61 11 MS 1 12 MS 2 MS LATE- MILBURN 13 $5,836.13 MS 3 14 MS 4 15 MS 5 MS 345 16 MS 6 17 MS 8 18 MS 9 19 MS 10 20 MS 12 21 MS 13 22 MS 16 23 MS 17 24 MS 18 25 MS 19 26 ST CHRIS 112 27 ST CHRIS 113 28 ST AGNES 88 MS LATE-GRAND 29 ST AGNES 89 30 ST AGNES 90 (matron) 31 LIL 86 LIL LATE 32 LIL85 33 $7,364.48 SH83 SH LATE 34 CHAM 84 CHAM LATE 35 HT 79 HT LATE 36 HT 80 37 HT 81 38 KELL 77 KELL LATE 39 KELL 78 40 KELL 40 (76) 41 BOCES 42 BOCES-WB 43 BOCES - SYOSSET 44 ST MARY 82N ST MARY LATE 45 ** ST MARY 82S 46 47 176 $312,604.54 matron $1,777.65 (rt #30) ** #44 & #45 billed as (1) 6hr route Chart 1 current 14-15 nov invoice $314,382.19 Chart 1-Current Bell Schedule and route Schematic Chart 1 was developed using information from the XXXXX UFSD Transportation office and then matched to the Nov.2014 invoice. The cost of this scenario using (47) buses is: $314, per mo. / $3,143, per yr.

Make necessary run/route adjustments based on headcount data route # hrs cost per/mo 6:40 AM 7:00 AM 7:20 AM 7:55 AM 8:00 AM 10:30 AM 11:30 AM 2:30 PM 3:00 PM 3:15 PM 3:45 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:30 PM 6:00 PM 6:15PM 1 $0.00 delete route 2 3 4 $7,076.52 MS 341 HS 52 MS 342 HS 53 5 MS 343 HS 54 6 MS 344 HS 55 7 MS 346 HS 56 8 MS 345 ELE 1 HS 57 9 $7,488.80 MS 11 HS 60 HS 300 MS LATE- MILBURN 10 MS 7 HS 61 HS 301 MS LATE-GRAND 11 MS 1 12 $5,836.13 MS 2 13 MS 3 14 MS 4 15 MS 5 16 MS 6 17 MS 8 18 MS 9 19 MS 10 20 MS 12 21 MS 13 22 MS 14 23 MS 17 24 MS 18 25 MS 19 26 ST CHRIS 112 27 ST CHRIS 113 28 ST AGNES 88 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX 29 ST AGNES 89 30 ST AGNES 90 (matron) 31 LIL 86 XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX LIL LATE 32 LIL85 33 $7,364.48 SH83 SH LATE 34 $4,410.49 CHAM 84 move to 30 passenger van CHAM LATE 35 HT 79 HT LATE 36 HT 80 37 HT 81 38 KELL 77 KELL LATE 39 KELL 78 40 41 BOCES 42 BOCES-WB 43 $3,828.79 move to BOCES - SYOSSET 44 ST MARY 82N ST MARY LATE 45 ** ST MARY 82S 46 47 152 $270,483.62 matron $1,777.65 ** #44 & #45 billed as (1) 6hr route eliminate HS 5:30 late bus and insert MS 5:30 late bus $272,261.27 #### invoice $314,382.19 Chart 2 14-15 run/route changes monthly savings $42,120.92 annual $421,209.20 Chart 2-Current Bell Schedule with Run/Route adjustments Chart 2 was developed after a review of the headcount data. We were able to completely reassign the students from HS runs #50 & 51(both am/pm), reassign all students from MS runs #15 & 16, reassign the students from Kellenberg HS #40 (96 students registered/ 80 riders), move MS #345 (0 period) to a different route. We identified that Chaminade HS, which has only 19 registered students should be assigned to a 30 passenger van at a cost savings of over $30,000 per year with no reduction of service. We also reduced the number of HS late bus trips from 4 to 3 and fit the MS late runs onto those routes. By doing this we reduced the billing hours from 4hr to 2hr on 2 routes saving over $24,000 per year. The cost of this scenario using (42) buses (incl.30 pass van) is $272,261.27per mo./ $2,722, per yr. Savings: monthly: $42,120.92 school year: $421,209.20

Adjust bell times to reduce the # of vehicles in the critical tier identified in Chart 1 Chart 3 HS MS MS "0" / "X" Elementary Current 7:42am-2:34pm 8:30am-2:37pm 7:50am-3:22pm 8:40am-3:00pm New 7:23am-2:15pm 8:43am-2:50pm 8:03am-3:35pm route # hrs cost per/mo 6:40 AM 7:23 AM 8:03 AM 8:40/8:43:00 AM 9:15 AM 10:30 AM 11:30 AM 2:15 PM 2:50 PM 3:00 PM 3:35 PM 3:45 PM 4:30 PM 4:45 PM 5:30 PM 6:15 PM 1 4 $7,076.52 HS 57 MS 341 MS 11 2 HS 60 MS 342 MS 7 3 HS 56 MS 343 MS 1 HS 54 MS 344 MS 2 5 HS 55 MS 345 MS 3 6 HS 53 MS 346 MS 4 7 $7,488.80 HS 52 MS 5 HS 300 MS LATE- MILBURN 8 HS 61 MS 6 HS 301 MS LATE-GRAND 9 $5,836.13 MS 8 10 MS 9 11 MS 10 12 MS 12 13 MS 13 14 MS 14 15 MS 17 16 MS 18 17 MS 19 18 ELE 1 19 ST CHRIS 112 20 ST CHRIS 113 21 $0.00 delete route 22 23 24 25 26 27 7:00 AM 7:20 AM 7:55 AM 8:00 AM 2:30 PM 3:15 PM 5:00 PM 6:00 PM 28 ST AGNES 88 XXXXXXXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXXX 29 ST AGNES 89 30 ST AGNES 90 (matron) 31 LIL 86 XXXXXXXXX XXXXXXXXXX LIL LATE 32 LIL85 33 $7,364.48 SH83 SH LATE 34 $4,410.49 CHAM 84 move to 30 passenger van CHAM LATE 35 HT 79 HT LATE 36 HT 80 37 HT 81 38 KELL 77 KELL LATE 39 KELL 78 40 41 BOCES 42 BOCES-WB 43 $3,828.79 move to BOCES - SYOSSET 44 ST MARY 82N ST MARY LATE 45 ** ST MARY 82S 46 47 130 $233,860.63 matron $1,777.65 ** #44 & #45 billed as (1) 6hr route eliminate HS 5:30 late bus and insert MS 5:30 late bus $235,638.28 Nov-14 invoice $314,382.19 Chart 3 14-15 run/route & bell chng hs/ms monthly savings $78,743.91 annual $787,439.10 Chart 3-Bell Schedule Change HS & MS with Run/Route adjustments (as described in chart 2) Chart 3 was developed by changing the start/end times of the HS and MS. These allowed for greater opportunity to multi-trip buses and break the critical tier (2:30PM (25) HS & MS buses). The cost of this scenario using (37) buses is $235, per mo. / $2,356, per yr. Savings: monthly: $ 78,743.91 school year: $787,439.10

Current Schedule with runs identified for contraction based on headcounts # Route 7:20am 8:00am 8:30am 9:05am 10:15am 2:15pm 2:50pm 3:20pm 3:40pm 4:10pm 5:25pm hrs cost 1 A HS MS ELE 1 6 $ ,700.00 2 B ELE 2 Early 2 ELE 1 Late1 3 C 4 D 5 E F MS/HS Late 1 8 $ ,470.00 7 G **HS ELE 1 Late 2 H ELE 1 Late 3 9 I ELE 1 Early 1 ELE 2 10 J **ELE 1 11 K ELE 3 12 L ARBOR 13 M **ELE 3 14 N 15 O ELE 2 Early 1 ELE 3 Late 1 16 P MS/HS Late 2 17 Q 18 R 19 S 20 T 21 U ITC St. Anthony's 22 V ELE 2 Late 1 23 W ELE 2 Late 3 24 X ELE 3 Early 3 ELE 3 Late 2 25 Y ELE 1 Early 3 ELE 3 Late3 26 Z ELE 2 (Y) ELE 2 Late 2 27 AA MS/HS Late 3 28 AB 29 AC 30 AE St. Patricks ELE 1 Late 4 31 AG 32 AH ELE 1 Early 2 MS/HS Late 4 33 AJ St. Anthonys AK ELE 3 Early 1 ELE 3 Late 4 35 AL ELE 3 Early 2 Per Month $ ,350.00 Annual (scl. Yr) $ ,733,500.00 ** based on headcounts these runs are identified for contraction in proposed bell schedule change schematics

Proposal 1 is a straight 4 tier alignment. The bell time for tier 1 (HS) begins/ends 20 minutes earlier than current bell time and tier 4 (ELE 3) begins 15 minutes later. ELE 1 has been moved from the last tier to the 3rd tier (8:45) with ELE 2. The ELE 1 students will have a school start time 20 minutes earlier than current year and the ELE 2 students will start school 15 minutes later. Also the Elementary early run for ELE 1 and ELE 2 will be moved to the PM (4:00). ELE 3 will remain in the AM (8:30). Arr. / Dep.1 7:00 7:35 7:50 8:20 8:35 9:10 1:45 / 2:03 2:25 / 2:38 3:05 / 3:18 3:40 / 3:53 Bell Times 7:10 7:45 7:55 8:30 8:45 9:20 10:15 1:55 2:20 2:30 2:55 3:10 3:30 3:45 4:00 5:00pm hrs cost 1 HS MS ELE 2 ELE 3 6 $ ,700.00 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 ELE 1 ELE 2 late 1 12 ELE 2 late 2 13 ELE 2 late 3 14 ELE 1 late 1 15 ELE 1 late 2 16 ELE 1 late 3 17 ELE 1 late 4 18 MS/HS late 1 19 MS/HS late 2 20 21 22 ELE 3 - E 23 $ ,470.00 24 25 MS/HS late 3 26 MS/HS late 4 27 **** St. Pats $ ,000.00 28 ITC St. Anthony's 29 St. Anthony's (Hook-up with HS Arrival) St. Anthonys 30 D R 31 E O 32 L U 33 T 34 35 S Per Month $225,450.00 Move to 30 passenger van (approx $ savings p/mo.) Annual (scl. Yr) $2,254,500.00 ELE 3 EARLY-ELE 2/ELE 1 LATE ARE 50 MINUTE SESSIONS

Proposal 2 is also a straight 4 tier alignment but with the HS being moved to the last tier (9:30-4:15). The MS moves to tier 1 (7:10-1:55) with ELE 1 and ELE 2 going into tier 2 (8:20-2:45) and ELE 3 to tier 3 (9:00-3:25). The Elementary early runs also remain the same with ELE 3 in the AM (8:20) and ELE 1 and ELE 2 in the PM (3:25). This proposal reduces the Elementary early/late sessions from 50 minutes (prop.1) to 40 minutes. This proposal also creates changes in the current methods of shuttling the St Anthony HS and ITC students who ride in on the current HS buses. In this proposed alignment they will need to be shuttled on MS runs. In this proposal I anticipate the actual ridership at the HS to increase due to the late start time. The current start time allows for greater opportunity for parent drop off. The planned 26 runs can accommodate an increase in actual ridership of an additional 30%. Arr. / Dep. 7:00 8:00 8:10 8:50 9:20 1;45/2:05 2;40/2:50 3:15/3:25 3:20/3:30 4:10/4:20 Bell Times 7:10 8:20 9:00 #### 9:30am 10:15am 1:55 2:45 3:15 3:25 4:15 4:45pm 5:45pm hrs cost 1 MS ELE 2 ELE 3 HS 6 $ ,700.00 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 ELE 1 12 13 14 15 ELE 2 late 1 16 ELE 2 late 2 17 ELE 2 late 3 18 ELE 1 late 1 19 ELE 1 late 2 20 ELE 1 late 3 21 ELE 1 late 4 22 ARBOR 23 ELE 3 - E MS/ late 1 MS/HS late 1 HS late 1 $ ,470.00 24 MS/ late 2 MS/HS late 2 HS late 2 25 MS/ late 3 MS/HS late 3 HS late 3 26 MS/ late 4 MS/HS late 4 HS late 4 27 St. Patricks **** $ ,000.00 28 ITC (shuttle on MS buses) St. Anthony's 29 St. Anthony's (shuttle on MS buses) St. Anthonys 30 D R 31 E O 32 L U 33 T 34 35 S Per Month $ ,450.00 Move to 30 passenger van (approx $ savings p/mo.) Annual –schl yr $ ,254,500.00 ELE 3 EARLY/ELE 2-ELE 1 LATE ARE 40 MINUTE SESSIONS #### Moving HS to last tier may increase the ridership due to the late start time (parent drop-off will decrease)

Bell Schedule Change/Per Head Route Analysis /Displaced Student Assignments
SAMPLE DIST 3 Large Bus Listed below are the changes necessary to achieve greater efficiency and substantial cost reduction in the large bus schedule for the XXX UFSD Public Schools. These changes will open the schedule for a complete re-route of all of the large buses. The current fleet utilization will be reduced from the (30) buses to (23) buses. The district will save $481, This new bus schedule will also create a reduction in fuel expenditures. Adjust the bell schedule for the MS, and all 4 elementary schools to the following times: MS: 8:10 am – 2:55 pm ELE 1 8:10 am – 2:55 pm ELE :55 am – 3:40 pm ELE :55 am – 3:40 pm ELE :55 am – 3:40 pm Included are detailed routing schematics of the schedule (chart 1) and the proposed schedule for (chart 2). Due to the bell time change in the public schools I was able to create more efficient routes for All Saints Regional which in was scheduled on (8) buses in the AM and (7) buses in the PM. In ASR will run on (3) buses in both the AM and PM. There is a similar change for St. Dominic’s has this school scheduled on (5) buses in the AM and (4) buses in the PM. In St. Dom’s will run on (3) buses AM and PM. It is important to note that some students will have longer ride times but well within reason (ASR all 30 mins or less and St. Dom’s all are 45 mins or less). I have reduced the 3:00 PM Greenvale dismissal to (1) bus when in it is scheduled for (2) buses. The biggest change from to is moving ELE 1 Elementary up to the 2nd tier along with the Middle School which has been adjusted by 10 minutes. This provided the flexibility to reconfigure the entire schedule and reduce the large bus fleet by over 20%.

SAMPLE DIST 3 Current Bell Schedule CRITICAL TIER

Large Bus Schematic w/adjusted bell times
SAMPLE DIST 3 Large Bus Schematic w/adjusted bell times Chart 2 PROPOSED BELL TIMES MS: 8:10 am – 2:55 pm ELE 1 8:10 am – 2:55 pm ELE 2 8:55 am – 3:40 pm ELE 3 .8:55 am – 3:40 pm ELE 4 8:55 am – 3:40 pm

Main Contract Bus Company. $ 2,813,297.40
SAMPLE DIST 3 Mini Bus After a thorough review of the mini bus schedule. XXX UFSD in is expensing $1,058,803 on per-head transportation and an additional $690,900 on mini bus transportation with their main contractor. The per-head students are assigned through a number of different ways, some through the Countywide BOCES bid and others are assigned using the Co-op bid. It has been my experience that districts are convinced that this is a more cost efficient way to provide transportation to the out of district schools. When properly analyzed it is actually more expensive and in some instances there is even a diminished level of service. XXX UFSD was using 5 different bus companies to service the per-head students. Using the District’s main contractor and the prices established in the current RFP (May 2009) I created mini bus routes that are either multi-tripped or have combinations with other nearby schools. I have utilized open slots in the large bus schedule to place 5 non-special education schools and added Lutheran HS AM and PM. I was able to schedule $926,303 of per-head transportation onto routes provided by the main contractor for $669,662. This routing model will save the district $256,681 and reduce the per-head cost to $132,500. These projections are based on the student assignments of the current school year. Private school and Special Education placements change each year so the costs will vary. Using the method of building routes before putting students out to bid will provide much better service for the students at a lower cost to the district. I have included a complete route schematic for both large bus and mini bus that includes the new route schedule and combinations. (chart 3) Proposed Savings $738,603.70 : Main Contract Bus Company $ 2,813,297.40 Per-Head (contractor A1, B2, C3, D4, E5) $ 1,058,803.20 $ 3,872,200.60 with bell schedule change: Main Contract Bus Company $ 3,001,096.90 Per-Head (contractor A1, B2, C3) $ ,500.00 $ 3,133,596.90

SAMPLE DIST 3 Complete Schematic Re-Assigned Per head Students to Main Bus Contractor Chart 3

Mini-van Transportation – Routing and Cost Efficiency Analysis
(SAMPLE DIST 1) Mini-van Transportation – Routing and Cost Efficiency Analysis SECTION I Estimated-Possible Savings Summary SECTION II Proposed Schools Riding Together SECTION III Proposed Multi-Trip Routes SECTION IV Proposed Per Head Routes to be Assigned to District Contractor SECTION I – ESTIMATED-POSSIBLE SAVINGS SUMMARY

SECTION II - PROPOSED SCHOOLS RIDING TOGETHER (Combination Routes) :
(SAMPLE DIST 1) SECTION II - PROPOSED SCHOOLS RIDING TOGETHER (Combination Routes) : 1. Combine HEBREW ACADEMY OF NASSAU (HANC) & ST MARTIN DE PORRES (STMA): Current: Route School Bell Times Students Ride Time Monthly Costs In Out Van D/A Total Bus Co A 439 / 484 HANC 8:20a – 3:55p 3 0:22 0:21 $ 3,990.77 - $3,990.77 20P 4HR Van Bus Co A 451 STMA 8:10a – 3:30p 19 0:41 0:42 TOTAL CURRENT 22 $ 7,981.54 *Proposed* HANC & STMA 0:55 1:02 $ 4,043.34 30P 4HR Van Estimated Monthly Savings $ 3,938.20 Estimated Annual Savings $ 39,382.00 2. Combine HOLY CHILD ACADEMY (HCA) & GREENVALE SCHOOL (GVS): Current: Route School Bell Times Students Ride Time Monthly Costs AM PM Van D/A Total Bus Co A 6 / 7 GVS 8:25am – 4:20pm 4 0:56 0:57 $ 3,990.77 - 20P 4HR Van Bus Co C -865 HCA 8:00am – 4:00pm 6 0:50 0:49 $ 1,962.72 P/P/P/M TOTAL CURRENT 10 $ 5,953.49 *Proposed* GVS & HCA 1:05 1:19 Estimated Monthly Savings Estimated Annual Savings $ 19,627.20

SECTION II - PROPOSED SCHOOLS RIDING TOGETHER: (Cont.)
(SAMPLE DIST 1) 3. Combine MILL NECK MANOR SCHOOL (MILLN) & HARMONY HEIGHTS (HARH): Current: Route School Bell Times Students Ride Time Monthly Costs In Out Van D/A Total Bus Co A 921 MILLN 8:50am – 3:00pm 1 1:00 $ 3,990.77 $ 1,777.65 $ 5,768.42 Bus Co A 436 HARH 9:00am – 3:15pm 2 0:59 1:02 - TOTAL CURRENT 3 $ $ 9,759.19 *Proposed* MILLN & HARH 1:22 1:16 Estimated Monthly Savings Estimated Annual Savings $ 39,907.70 4. Combine CARMEN ROAD SCHOOL (CMRD) & SEAMANS NECK MS (SEA) Current: Route School Bell Times Students Ride Time Monthly Costs In Out Van D/A Total Bus Co C - 724 CMRD 8:45am – 2:45pm 5 0:51 $ 3,572.12 $ 2,524.47 $ 6,096.59 2 WC Bus Co B SEA 8:30am – 2:30pm 4 0:39 0:40 $ 2,035.05 $ 1,998.54 $ 4,033.59 TOTAL CURRENT 9 $ 5,607.17 $ 4,523.01 $ 10,130.18 *Proposed* CMRD & SEA (4HR W/C VAN) 1:01 1:11 $ 4,043.37 $ 1,777.65 $ 5,821.02 Estimated Monthly Savings $ 4,309.16 Estimated Annual Savings $ 43,091.60 5. Combine FERNCLIFF MANOR (SAI) & LAVELLE SCHOOL FOR THE BLIND (LAV) Current: Route School Bell Times Students Ride Time Monthly Costs In Out Van D/A Total Bus Co A 975 SAI 8:30am – 2:30pm 1 0:51 0:52 $ 4,410.47 $ 1,777.65 $ 6,188.12 Bus Co C - 14 LAV 8:00am – 3:00pm 0:41 0:43 $ $ 2,200.00 $ 3,067.00 TOTAL CURRENT 2 $ 5,277.47 $ 3,977.65 $ 9,255.12 *Proposed* SAI & LAV (30P 6HR VAN (INCL. TOLLS)) 0:56 0:58 Estimated Monthly Savings Estimated Annual Savings $ 30,670.00

SECTION II - PROPOSED SCHOOLS RIDING TOGETHER: (Cont.)
(SAMPLE DIST 1) SECTION II - PROPOSED SCHOOLS RIDING TOGETHER: (Cont.) 6. Combine SACRED HEART ELEM. (SHES), ST JOACHIM & ANNE (SJA), & SUMMIT SCHOOL (SUMS) - QUEENS SCHOOLS Current: Route School Bell Times Students Ride Time Monthly Costs In Out Van D/A Total Bus Co A 916 SHES 7:45am – 3:15 pm 2 $ 3,990.77 - Bus Co A 963 SJA 8:10am – 2:10pm Bus Co A 913 SUMS 8:45am – 3:00pm 1 TOTAL CURRENT 5 $ 11,972.31 *Proposed* SHES & SJA – (AM) 4 0:39 *Proposed* SHES & SUMS (PM) 3 0:52 TOTAL PROPOSED $ 7,981.54 Estimated Monthly Savings Estimated Annual Savings $ 39,907.70 7. Combine OUR LADY OF MERCY (OLOMA) & SOLOMON SCHECTER (SOLSC) Current: Route School Bell Times Students Ride Time Monthly Costs In Out Van D/A Total Bus Co A 984 OLMA 8:00am – 3:00pm 1 0:51 $ - PPPM Bus Co A 976 SOLSC 8:00am – 3:15pm 4 0:46 $ 3,990.77 TOTAL CURRENT 5 $ 4,691.31 *Proposed* SOLSC & OLMA 1:05 1:04 Estimated Monthly Savings Estimated Annual Savings $ 7,005.40

SECTION III – PROPOSED MULTI-TRIP ROUTES
(SAMPLE DIST 1) SECTION III – PROPOSED MULTI-TRIP ROUTES Multi-Trip CCA Rosemary Kennedy & Mosaic… Current: Route School Bell Times Monthly Costs Van D/A Total Bus Co C – 46-1 CCA Rosemary Kennedy 8:00am – 2:00pm $ 3,327.98 $ 1,998.54 $ 5,326.52 PPPM Bus Co A Mosaic School 9:00am – 4:00pm $ $ 1,777.65 $ 2,342.55 TOTAL CURRENT $ 3,892.88 $ 3,776.19 $ 7,669.07 *Proposed* 30P 6 HR VAN $ 4,410.47 $ 6,188.12 Estimated Monthly Savings $ 1,480.95 Estimated Annual Savings $ 14,809.50 Multi-Trip HS W/C (From #491) & ELE 1 W/C (From #473)

(SAMPLE DIST 1) SECTION IV – PROPOSED PER HEAD ROUTES TO BE ASSIGNED BACK TO DISTRICT CONTRACTOR UCP Roosevelt (W/C) Current: Route/Contractor Monthly Costs Van D/A Total Current Bus Co A RT #439 / 440 (Per Head) $ 6,311.17 $ 5,048.94 $ 11,360.11 2 Matrons? Proposed Bus Co A – 4HR WC VAN $ 4,043.37 $ 3,555.30 $ 7,598.67 Estimated Monthly Savings $ 3,761.44 Estimated Annual Savings $ 37,614.40 Henry Viscardi School (W/C) Current: Route/Contractor Monthly Costs Van D/A Total Current Bus Co B 24-1 (Per Head) $ 4,519.85 $ 1,998.54 $ 6,518.39 Proposed Bus Co A – 4HR WC VAN $ 4,043.37 $ 1,777.65 $ 5,821.02 Estimated Monthly Savings $ Estimated Annual Savings $ 6,973.70 Long Beach Catholic Current: Route/Contractor Monthly Costs Van D/A Total Current Bus Co C– 721/537 (Per Head) $ 4,462.02 - Proposed Bus Co A – 20P 4HR VAN $ 3,990.77 Estimated Monthly Savings $ Estimated Annual Savings $ 4,712.50

(SAMPLE DIST 1) SECTION IV – PROPOSED PER HEAD ROUTES TO BE ASSIGNED BACK TO DISTRICT CONTRACTOR (Cont.) PREMM LEARNING Timber Point Elementary Current: Route/Contractor Monthly Costs Van D/A Total Current Bus Co B 20-1 (Per Head) $ 4,628.20 $ 2,419.28 $ 7,047.48 DA & Nurse Proposed Bus Co A – 4HR WC VAN $ 4,043.37 $ 2,198.39 $ 6,241.76 Estimated Monthly Savings $ Estimated Annual Savings $ 8,057.20 Rosemary Kennedy & Rosemary Kennedy Current: Route/Contractor Monthly Costs Van D/A Total Current Bus Co B 78-1 / 69-2 (Per Head) $ 4,253.52 $ 8,236.84 $ 12,490.36 1 Group,+ 4 Individual, 1 Nurse Proposed Bus Co A – 30P 4HR WC VAN $ 4,043.37 $ 7,531.34 $ 11,574.71 Estimated Monthly Savings $ Estimated Annual Savings $ 9,156.50

NAPD – Non-Allowable Pupil Decimal
When considering efficiencies in the area of Transportation it is important that the staff responsible for Route building understand the impact of the routes on State Aid. For Districts with eligibility limits less than 1.5 miles mixing “allowable” & “non-allowable” students on runs will have a dramatic effect on the overall cost of pupil transportation. Routers need to be aware of all students that have transportation as a related service (CSE) and any approved child safety zones. The Non-Allowable Pupil Decimal (NAPD) is applied to aidable transportation related capital expenses (bus purchases), district operating expenses and contract expenses to determine a nonallowable pupil deduction for Transportation Aid purposes. The lower the NAPD, the lower the deduction to aidable expenses. A small change in routing can have a dramatic effect on NAPD and aid. In order to minimize the deduction in aid, a review of the calculation of NAPD is necessary. The Non-Allowable Pupil Mile Radius is measured by the nearest available route, not the route the bus actually travels. Eligibility is based on miles with an exception provided for special education students and K-8 students in approved child safety zones. A bus route that contains only nonallowable pupils must use the length of the bus route in determining NAPD. A district with a mix of allowable and nonallowable pupils will use the 1.5-mile multiplier in determining NAPD. NAPD calculations may be done using actual ridership on the district selected day in March, April, or May or using the district transportation software using scheduled ridership. Districts are required to submit a Nonallowable Pupil Decimal Worksheet at least once every 3 years or any time the district experiences one of the following conditions: A) change in transportation eligibility policy B) school district reorganizes with other district(s) C) opening/closing of a school building D) an error made by either SED or the school district in the calculation of the non-allowable pupil decimal E) change in district policy to provide transportation of eligible universal pre-k pupils (only if such transportation results in additional bus routes, trips, vehicles or increase in expenses)

Definitions: Allowable pupil or “quota pupil” – K-12 Pupil who resides greater than 1.5 miles from school. Students with disabilities are considered allowable if transportation is recommended as a related service by the Committee on Special Education (CSE). Students in a qualifying Child Safety Zone are also considered allowable for purposes of determining the non-allowable pupil decimal. Non-allowable pupil or “non-quota pupil” – Pupil who resides within 1.5 miles of school. Example 1: Number of students on route Number of quota students Length of bus route miles NAPM: (non-allowable pupils) x 5 (miles) = 300 NAPM If the afternoon route is the same, the daily total is: 300 NAPM x 2 = 600 NAPM Since this route contains no quota pupils, all 600-pupil miles are nonallowable. Calculation: Example 2: Number of students on route Number of quota students Length of bus route Miles Allowable Pupil Miles (APM): 1 (allowable pupils) x 5 (miles) = 5 Allowable Pupil Miles Nonallowable Pupil Miles (NAPM): 59 (non-allowable pupils) x 1.5 = 88.5 NAPM The addition of just one allowable pupil to this route reduces the round trip NAPM to 177 (88.5 x 2), a decrease of 423 NAPM, increasing the district’s Transportation Aid. NAPD is calculated as follows: Total NAPM Total Pupil Miles (APM + NAPM) This ratio is then applied to transportation expenditures to calculate a nonallowable pupil mile deduction. For example, if the NAPD deduction ratio is 0.05, then 5% of the district transportation expenditures will not be eligible for aid.

By Moving Just 2 Stops with (5) Allowable Students to Middle School Runs #143 & #155 the Increase in Transportation Aid is Nearly 2% TRIP NAME BUS KIND OF DISTANCE STUDENTS ALLOWABLE NON-ALLOWABLE MULTIPLIER PUPIL PUPIL MILES NUMBER TRIP TRANSPORTED PUPILS PUPILS MILES ALLOWABLE NON-ALLOWABLE MS 143 AM IN 143 3.67 49 1.5 MS 143 PM OUT 2.67 50 MS 155 AM IN MS 155 PM OUT Number of Trips: , , , OVERALL NONALLOWABLE PUPIL DECIMAL (SUM COL H/ (SUM OF COL G + H)): MS 143 AM IN 143 3.67 49 5 44 1.5 MS 143 PM OUT 2.67 50 45 MS 155 AM IN MS 155 PM OU Number of Trips: , , , OVERALL NONALLOWABLE PUPIL DECIMAL (SUM COL H/ (SUM OF COL G + H)):

Balance runs ensuring all runs have “allowable students”
NAPD – Non-Allowable Pupil Decimal Create “walk out 1.5 miles for quick inspection of runs prior to finalizing stop assignments Balance runs ensuring all runs have “allowable students” 1.5 mile walkout Runs with ALL stops contained in zone negatively affect State Aid Stops from the runs Outside the walk out zone Need to be mixed with those Inside the zone

Shared Services Shared Services
Shared services contracts are permitted under the law. A shared service may exist when a neighboring school district has the need to send pupils to the same nonpublic school as another school district. Thus school district B may contract with school district A to pay for their pupils to ride the bus that school district A owns and operates to transport their pupils to the same nonpublic school. Shared services may only exist when one of the school districts is actually providing the services. A shared services agreement does not exist when school district B requests school district A to add a bus/child/route to an existing contract that school district A has with a pupil transportation services contractor. That would be considered “piggybacking”, which is not permissible under the law. School district B did not bid the services and has no legal authority to accept services from the contractor. They may not enter into a contract with school district A to permit their pupils to ride the contractor bus and make payment to school district A to cover the expense. The key is who is providing the services, a neighboring school district or a contractor? The first is shared services, the latter is piggybacking. Cooperative Transportation Contracts School districts and BOCES may procure services by cooperatively preparing specifications, advertising for and opening bids or requesting and reviewing proposals, and awarding contracts. Add shared service language to any new RFP or negotiate sharing within the existing contract. Be sure to inform NYSED of any changes to previously approved contract specifications.

Establish Cost Per Transported Student-Cost Per Route
It is important to perform an annual cost analysis of Transportation Services: Determine the cost of each route – If your District is providing their own services it is a good practice to compare costs with Contractor provided services and vice versa. Determine the cost of your transported pupils. Evaluate them in (3) categories: Large Bus Private/Parochial Van Special Ed Van Review your fleet utilization. Be sure to be providing transportation on the appropriately size/price vehicle. Analyze per head costs every year – Many Districts renew these contracts year after year without determining if this is the most cost effective method of providing service. Example 1: Student count has increased causing the per head cost to exceed the cost of a van from the District’s main contractor Example 2: District schematic has had a school drop for the upcoming school year. Determine if students on per head contract can be brought back at a cost savings

Effective Use Of Routing Software, Data Integration, and GPS
District owned Routing Software used effectively has a direct correlation to savings. Training is very inexpensive and will provide the district with long term savings. A proficient user will be able to: Build runs and routes that maximize the fleet utilization. Minimize the overall # of routes. Reduce route miles travelled. Reduce vehicle fuel consumption. Reduce vehicle maintenance costs. Maximize State Aid. Data Integration from the District SMS to the routing software also provides an avenue for cost reduction. Many Districts are still scheduling transportation for students that have graduated or no longer reside in the District. An accurate student database is critical to efficient run/route building. There is also efficiency with parent notification (bus pass mailing) for those Districts utilizing a parent portal. GPS - Most District owned fleets and bus contractors are utilizing GPS. This is an invaluable tool for efficient run/route building, payroll analysis/verification and invoice analysis.

COMPLIANCE McKinney – Vento Education Law 3624 - 8 NYCCR 156.3
Routing and Efficiency only make sense when your District is compliant. I have included information on these two areas because I have found that not all Districts have sufficient procedures in place. McKinney – Vento Education Law NYCCR 156.3

McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Act
The McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Act is a federal law that protects the educational rights of students in temporary housing. It defines “homeless children and youths” as any student who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. Transportation staff including directors, dispatchers, and drivers all contribute to the success of students in temporary housing by ensuring school stability (e.g. busing students to and from their school of origin) and student confidence (e.g. starting the day off on a positive note). POLICIES & PRACTICES Ensure your district’s transportation policy includes transportation of students in temporary housing to/from: The school where they were last permanently housed (up to 50 miles away) The school where they are living temporarily (if it is provided to other students) Transportation should be arranged within 3 business days Ensure that all transportation staff members are familiar with the rights of students in temporary housing. Train transportation staff on how to identify students who may be experiencing homelessnessand on trauma-sensitive transportation procedures (e.g. For students who are staying in shelters, is there a pickup/drop-off point near where they are staying so that students are not stigmatized by their peers?) ***First On-Last Off*** *** Ensure that the local Department of Social Services arranges transportation for students it places in emergency housing outside of the school district boundaries who are eligible for Emergency Assistance for Families.

McKinney-Vento Homeless Education Act
DRIVERS Be discreet about the student’s living situation. Avoid words like “homeless” or “shelter” FUNDING Track all expenses and explore all funding sources. For example: Make sure all transportation expenses for students in temporary housing are submitted to the State Education Department. They are “aidable.” Explore whether Title I funds could be used to help pay for transportation expenses for students in temporary housing. Seek reimbursement from the State Education Department for transportation expenses related to students in Runaway and Homeless Youth (RHY) shelters. Develop billing system with the local Department of Social Services for transportation expenses related to students placed in temporary housing by the Department of Social Services outside of the school district boundaries.

New York Education Law § 3624.
Education Law NYCRR 156.3 New York Education Law § 3624. The commissioner shall determine and define the qualifications of drivers, monitors and attendants and shall make the rules and regulations governing the operation of all transportation facilities used by pupils which rules and regulations shall include, but not be limited to, a maximum speed of fifty-five miles per hour for school vehicles engaged in pupil transportation that are operated on roads, interstates or other highways, parkways or bridges or portions thereof that have posted speed limits in excess of fifty-five miles per hour, prohibitions relating to smoking, eating and drinking and any and all other acts or conduct which would otherwise impair the safe operation of such transportation facilities while actually being used for the transport of pupils. The employment of each driver, monitor and attendant shall be approved by the chief school administrator of a school district for each school bus operated within his or her district. For the purpose of determining his or her physical fitness, each driver, monitor and attendant may be examined on order of the chief school administrator by a duly licensed physician within two weeks prior to the beginning of service in each school year as a school bus driver, monitor or attendant. The report of the physician, in writing, shall be considered by the chief school administrator in determining the fitness of the driver to operate or continue to operate any transportation facilities used by pupils and in determining the fitness of any monitor or attendant to carry out his or her functions on such transportation facilities. Nothing in this section shall prohibit a school district from imposing a more restrictive speed limit policy for the operation of school vehicles engaged in pupil transportation than the speed limit policy established by the commissioner.

Superintendent Approval of School Bus Drivers
It is important that the District have procedures in place to be compliant with 3624 and NYCRR 156.3 Prior to School opening: Review driver files for all drivers assigned to your District (NYAPT has a form or develop your own) Submit all drivers for approval to the School Superintendent (Sample letter from PTSI ) During the School Year: Have a procedure in place for the review and approval of new/replacement Drivers Superintendent Approval of School Bus Drivers 8 NYCRR (b)(1),(6) requires that each applicant for the position of school bus driver shall at the time of initial hire, and when subsequently required, provide at least three statements from individuals not related either by blood or marriage pertaining to the moral character and reliability of the applicant. The approval for employment of applicants as a school bus driver shall be in writing on a form prescribed by the Commissioner of Education. The licensure, testing, training and criminal history of the applicant(s) listed below have been compiled and reviewed for compliance with law and regulation by the school district. Based upon the requirements of Education Law 3624, 8 NYCRR (b)(1),(5) and Article 19A of Vehicle & Traffic Law, the following individual, ____________ (name of driver) _____________________, has been approved for hire as school bus driver for the ___(school year)___school year. Signature of Superintendent of Schools: ______________________________________ Signature Date _______________

SCHOOL DISTRICT DRIVER FILE REVIEW
NYAPT SCHOOL DISTRICT DRIVER FILE REVIEW SCHOOL YEAR____________ District: ____________________ DRIVER NAME: ____________________________________ DRIVER LICENSE: (#/CLASS/ENDORSEMENT/RESTRICTION) DRIVER SIGNATURE: _______________________________ ________________________________________________________ (my signature confirms my attendance at this file review) Date & Time: ________________________________________ Physical Performance Test: _________________________________ Date of Hire: ________________________________________ Employment Recommendations (3) _________________________ Drug Testing Pool (Dot/ Non-Dot): ______________________ TRAINING RECORDS Driver Application Date: ______________________________ Basic Course Certificate: ___________________________________ Driver Activation: ___________________________________ Pre-Service Certificate: ____________________________________ Qualifying Letter Date: _______________________________ Special Need Training Cert: ________________________________ DMV - 19A RECORDS Wheel Chair Training: _____________________________________ Abstract: ____________________________________________ Last Refresher Date: _______________________________________ Annual Review: ______________________________________ Defensive Driving: ____________________________________ Comments/Questions: _______________________________________ Medical Certification Date: ____________________________ __________________________________________________________ Behind-The-Wheel Road Test: __________________________ __________________________________________________________ Written Test: _________________________________________ __________________________________________________________

Thank You. Questions? John Robertson – Managing Director
Transportation advisory & Consulting Services Schoolsource Technologies, LLC. 1393 Veterans Memorial Hwy Suite 315n Hauppauge NY 11788 Tel:

ASBO Presentation Transportation advisory & Consulting Services

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "ASBO Presentation Transportation advisory & Consulting Services"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

ASBO Presentation Transportation advisory & Consulting Services

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "ASBO Presentation Transportation advisory & Consulting Services"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback