DGreport.com

The program that cost the village $150,000 will be trimmed back to $100,000.

I asked Cliff for a head and shoulder shot. I guess I wasn't specific enough...

One time commenter and stat driller extraordinaire Cliff Grammich came up with these stats, which he publicly posted and require the following bibliographical acknowledgment:

ACS data source:  Steven Ruggles, Matthew Sobek, Trent Alexander, Catherine A. Fitch, Ronald Goeken, Patricia Kelly Hall, Miriam King, and Chad Ronnander.  Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 4.0 [Machine-readable database]. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota Population Center [producer and distributor], 2009. http://usa.ipums.org/usa/

The American Community Survey shows 11 percent of seniors live in poverty. This is high compared to the village as a whole, where only 3 percent live in poverty. Yet one in three village households with seniors also has an annual income of more than $60,000.

The village “car-less” rate is nearly as low as its poverty rate. Only 6 percent of all village households have no vehicle. Among single-person households where much of the senior population is concentrated, only 15 percent of households have no vehicle.

Now poverty and car-less households could be so concentrated among seniors that their need is stronger than may be immediately apparent. Unfortunately, there are no data available for public analysis that can precisely identify transportation need for seniors in the village. Nevertheless, ACS microdata on Downers Grove Township may provide some indication of local need.

These show that, among township residents at least 65 years of age, only 13 percent are car-less: that is, their household has no vehicle or they live in an institution. Even among township seniors living in poverty, only 46 percent are car-less; 32 percent live in a household with one vehicle and 22 percent live in a household with two or more vehicles.

While these data suggest a means test would be appropriate, such a test may be more trouble than it’s worth for the village. Still, a higher age limit might better target those truly in need of transportation. For example, among township residents 65 to 74 years of age, only 2 percent are car-less. But among those at least 75 years of age, 23 percent are car-less; among those at least 80 years of age, 32 percent are.

Would a higher age limit for the village program help it better address the real transportation need that some seniors have?

Sandack and Beckman already had discussed Grammich’s post on Facebook (as I keep reminding my two boys,  deal with it kids, Facebook is ours…).  I sent the taxi data on to the rest of council.  I’ve always found CG’s data drilling impeccable.

Commissioner Bill Waldack provided this analysis of the program:

“I have presented some ideas to staff along with some experience from the IAPCC which established the Pilot II Taxi Program and Ride DuPage – which last October reached 10,000 rides in a month.  The County has wrestled with this for almost 15 years.

“Based on past census data, we have almost 50,000 residents and based on the percentage of over 65, that leaves us with about 7,500 – about 15%.  Of the 7,500, only about 500 are registered for the taxi program, about the 6% you mentioned.  Not all the 500 are regular users, just registered.  About 2% of the population is disabled which does not include people who can work but can’t drive (epilepsy etc).

“Income tests are difficult since income does not tell the whole story and would involve administrative efforts.  Also, people who CAN drive do so, cab-usage, especially in the suburbs, is not convenient and is expensive compared to auto use. Also, non-auto transportation options are so poor, people who should not be driving continue to do so at the peril of the rest of us.  These are the months when Grandpa comes to lunch because it’s dark at dinner time and he doesn’t want to drive at night. There is a reason to be scared.

“Last October, there were 1440 rides recorded and given the state of the records, I would say 1500 rides at an average of $10.45 per trip.  That is less than 5 roundtrips per month per senior.  The Ride DuPage costs are about $18 per trip and there are considerable rules, staff time, billing processes, and a call center.  The cost of a Pace paratransit bus has skyrocketed from about $41 per hour to $61 per hour.  Cabs are much cheaper but do not serve disabled that cannot get in/out of cabs.

“I have suggested some actions that might cut down on abuse and hope to present them.”

Which Waldack did.  The comparative cost efficiencies are interesting.   The steps taken to equalize the cost at 50/50 are logical.  Seniors can still get the assistance.  The expiration date has it’s own issues, as existing coupons are out there.

How big is the program? (Source DG Monthly Statistical Reports)

• YTD thru 9/09: 159,717 coupons purchased, 150,271 redeemed.  Cost to village $105,189.70.
• YTD thru 9/08: 168,707 coupons purchased, 155,601 redeemed.  Cost to village$108,920.70.
• 2008 calendar year total: 226,967 coupons purchased, 222,295 redeemed.  Cost to village $155,606.50.

At a 50/50 cost share (instead of the current 70/30 split), the 2008 village program costs would have been $111,147.50, a savings of $44,459 for the village, and senior costs would have risen from $68, 090.10 to $113,483.50, and increase of $45,393.40.  Spread over the 500 seniors that seem to use the program, their costs would have been about $90.79 higher each for the year.  Note that costs and savings don’t match because the number of coupons sold and redeemed differ.

Waldack showed statistical evidence that the taxi program was more cost efficient than other forms of public transportation.  Making wider use of Ride DuPage or similar programs might actually raise our end of the costs, so keeping the taxi program may actually save taxpayers some money.  I don’t know if that was a motive creating the program.

Taken to the extreme, it might be significantly cheaper for the state to offer a taxi coupon program than to provide public transportation.  The CTA, METRA, and PACE combine to roughly a $2.3 billion state expense.