WV supports the reporting of 5310 as an aggregate and not by sub recipient. None of WV's 75 5310 sub recipients currently report through the NTD and none are 5307 or 5311 recipeints. It would be difficult informaiton to capture and burdensome on both the State and subrecipients.
Single Unified Reporting
This idea is to have a Quality and Efficiency Champion in every transportation municipality across the country. This Champion would be responsible for the collection, tracking and aggregation of data regarding transportiaotn to seniors and people with disabilities and would be responsible to report said to the local transportation authorities.
This would be a reasonable approach provided that the FTA facilitates information pertaining to the NTD and provides adequate support and education on the utilization of the system. The NTD should also be able to support the inclusion of the Section 5310 program data as its own entity separate from Section 5311, and Section 5307 so as to avoid convoluted statistics. The FTA must also provide reporting and administrative ...more »
Reporting requirements FTA is considering combining the reporting requirements of Section 5335(c) into a single requirement for recipients of Section 5310, using the National Transit Database (NTD) system. In the Bay Area, and likely in other regions as well, there has been relatively little overlap between the recipients of Section 5310 (and formerly New Freedom) funding, and the recipients of other federal funding ...more »
MDOT is strongly opposed to combining all of the performance measure related and asset/ inventory reporting requirements into a single NTD reporting requirement for the Section 5310 program. Section 5310 NTD reporting should be narrow in scope and limited to data directly and exclusively related to the language in Section 5335(c), specifically “transit asset inventory and (if available) condition assessment conducted ...more »
Why can't we just submit comments and suggestions in a "normal" coherent, thoughtful manner? Almost every "idea" that has been submitted evokes a reaction of "yes, but . . ." or "what do you mean?" Some of us try our best to be constructive, or offer ideas for improvement, but this format is seriously counter-productive, and should not be used any more in the future. Please!! And the requirement below to choose from ...more »
I think limited service on weekend will be utilized by many disabled people to attend church or weekend events.
The single unified reporting is not a viable option in the Washington DC region. Designated recipients for Section 5310 that are not currently conducting NTD reporting, such as metropolitan planning organizations, are likely to have limited resources with which to collect, validate, and submit NTD reports. From the National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board (TPB) staff perspective, the number of subrecipients ...more »
As part of the process of coordinating 5307, 5310, and 5311 NTD reporting pursuant to Section 5335, FTA should clarify its intentions per the categories of performance and asset data that will be mandated under the new reporting regime.
It would be useful to have more specific information about the final recipients of Section 5310 funding available at the national level in an aggregated fashion. This would help to identify trends and gaps in services that can be addressed systemically. Utilizing the National Transit Database would help achieve this.
They often need 2 years to fully prove their worth - and one year of results before they can begin the process of soliciting a continuing funding stream.
The United We Ride Federal Interagency program to enhance coordination of Federal resources to breakdown barriers for local communities to utilize various human services transportation funding streams, suggested outcome measures for coordination activities: Measure 1: Increase the # of rides for the same or fewer assets for people with disabilities, older adults, children and youth, and individuals with lower incomes. ...more »