The document discusses monitoring the performance and quality of bus rapid transit (BRT) systems. It outlines why monitoring is important for management and planning purposes. Some typical criteria that are monitored include ridership, reliability, safety, customer satisfaction, and industrial/supply metrics like operating costs and vehicle maintenance. The document also provides a case study of the Janmarg BRT system in Ahmedabad, India, which transparently monitors and reports over 60 performance indicators each month. This data is used for benchmarking, management oversight, and system improvements.

1. Monitoring BRT
Performance, Quality
By
Sam Zimmerman
Francesco Lay
Google Earth

2. Presentation outline
• Monitoring and linkage to system
planning, operations and management
• Selection of criteria, examples
• Ahmedabad case study
• Lessons learned

3. Why Monitor Quality and Performance?
• PT is a business with products, industrial
processes and customers; Need management
information to meet objectives
• BRT is an integrated system, but may be
operated by different entities (e.g., service
provider, fare collector, facility and
infrastructure maintainer), with oversight and
management by a public entity/SPV
– Need quantitative basis for management, payment
for services rendered, etc.
• BRT services are inherently flexible;
monitoring can provide data for planning
service adjustments and other enhancements

4. Issues in Selection of
Performance Monitoring Criteria
• Utility of criteria
– Need to link criteria to specific performance objectives for
system
• Complexity, cost of collection
– Need to collect on an ongoing basis
– Need to be consistent over time in definition of criteria and
collection methodologies
• Not just academic exercise; Need Linkage to action
– Need linkages among criteria, causes of problems and
corrective actions

5. Different Performance
Monitoring Perspectives
• Industrial/Supply:
– What is the quality of the offering
(product) in all aspects?
– How efficient is the system in
providing planned service?
• Customer:
– How effective is the BRT system
in providing safe, secure, fast
and reliable public transport?
– Does the system meet customer needs
and expectations?

6. Typical Industrial/Supply Criteria
• Revenue V. Km., Hours
• Reliability
• Travel times (e.g., total end-to-end, station dwell times
• Mean Km. between service disruptions
• Percentage of scheduled trips started, completed
• Vehicle/infrastructure/facility cleanliness, state of repair
• Condition of fare collection, passenger information, other IT
Systems and equipment
• Operating & maintenance costs, labor loadings
• Fuel consumption, emissions (e.g., particulate matter)
• Degree of integration, e.g. docking accuracy at stations
and terminals
• Driving

7. Typical Criteria: Customer
• Ridership related
– Total, Max. load point/peak hour/peak direction, by route and
corridor
– By purpose, gender, income, time of day and week
– Trip lengths, travel volumes among key O/D pairs
– Length of time using system, former mode, frequency of use
– Degree of crowding
– Mode of access/egress
• Safety, security
– Incidents by type
• Satisfaction with:
– Operating staff, services, vehicles, facilities
– Access provisions
– Passenger information
– Fares and fare payment

8. Applications of Data
• City to city benchmarking is best used to
determine whether quality and performance is
unusual (better or worse than peers)
• Need more detailed information to determine
causes of problem and identify and evaluate
what to do to fix them
• Within city comparisons over time and from
one corridor or line to another can be helpful in
more detailed analysis and planning
Vrs. Vrs.

9. Ahmedabad JANMARG Case Study*
RTO to Maninagar loop–
(22.5 kms.) – 33 bus stops
Danilimda to Naroda
(16.4 kms.) – 28 bus stops
Bhavsar hostel – Delhi
darwaja
Sabarmati Rly. stn
Naroda (4.5 kms.) – 6 bus stops
Ranip Ahmedabad village
Sola RoB Phase 2 corridors – under
Airport.
Naroda GIDC implementation
RTO
(41kms.)
Naroda
AEC
Delhi
Gujarat University darwaja
Gandhigram
Rly. stn
Kalupur Rly.
Odhav City of A
Bopal Industrial
Stn. estate
Odhav
Shivranjani Nehrunagar Soni ni
chaali
Geeta Maninagar Rly.
Mandir stn.
BRT corridor operational – 45 kms.
Danilimda
BRT corridor under implementation
Vatva
Industrial – 41 kms.
estate
Narol Total no. of Bus stations –67
Total Buses operational –83 (incl 11
AC buses)
Daily ridership – 1,20,473
Ahmedabad information taken from JANMARG’s
25th Monthly Report; Provided by
CEPT University, Ahmedabad

10. Statistics At Glance
Network Length
45 Km
Number of Stations
67
Operational Timings
6:00 AM to 11:30 PM
Peak Hour
8:00 AM – 12:00 PM ; 5:00 PM – 9:00 PM
Bus operated during Peak 83 ( 75 on Diwali Festival)
Total Fleet 88 (11 No. AC Buses included)
Average Daily Round Trips
530
Average Daily Ridership 1,20,473
Average Daily Collection 7,44,384
Ave. Daily Operational Km. 19579 Km. (Schedule Km = 21096)
* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

11. Ahmedabad BRT
• “Janmarg” Limited Corp., SPV in charge of
fully integrated BRT system
– Operating, fare
collection, facility/infrastructure, maintenance
contractors
• Monthly reports
• Analysis highlights changes over time
• Open, transparent dissemination
• Results used for oversight and
management of contractors
• Results provided to
newspapers, radio, TV and
made available on website

12. Ahmedabad Surveys Conducted Monthly
• Bus Docking Survey
• System Operator’s driving Check and bus Check
• Bus stop Checklist including cleanliness
• Average BRTS Speed Check
• User Feedback Surveys
* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

13. Use of Output in Benchmarking
• Two main applications
1. comparisons of past Ahmedabad BRT
quality and performance with current
Ahmedabad quality and performance
2. Comparison of performance of one
corridor/line or operating contractor with
others
• Peer-to peer comparisons across
cities much more difficult to do
correctly, but EMBARQ/Volvo BRT
Center of Excellence effort likely to
be highly useful

14. System Indicators and Comparison (CEPT U.)
13rd Month (Previous Year) 24nd Month 25th Month
Month/ Year
(16 Oct– 15 Nov ’10) (15 Sept’11- 14 Oct’ 11) (15 Oct ’11- 14 Nov’ 11)
R.T.O-Man., RTO to CN
R.T.O-Man., R.T.O to Naroda R.T.O-Man., R.T.O to Naroda
Route
Anjali – Naroda .,Narol to Naroda
Anjali – Naroda, N to N,RTO-SLP Anjali – Naroda, N to N,RTO-SLP
Operation Timings 6:00 AM - 11:30 PM 6:00 AM - 11:30 PM 6:00 AM - 11:30 PM
Total Kms/day 13800 KM 20208 KM 19579 KM
Total Pax. 2538618 (373%) 4040794 (593.71%) 3730308
Total fare collection (INR) 14352963 (471%) 23318700 (765.22%) 23052197
Avg. pax/day 81,891 (373%) 1,34,693 (613.50 %) 1,20,473
collection/day (INR) 463,000 (471%) 804093 (817.99 %) 814170
Avg. Pax./bus/day 1678 (74%) 1721 ( 177.75 %) 1462
Avg. Collectn/bus/day 9468 (110%) 10274.23 ( 232.70 %) 9035
Avg. Trip Length
Week day 6.74 7.6 6.6
Weekend 6.64 7.05 6.2
fppk
Week day 0.88 1.044 1.1
Weekend 0.88 0.94 0.96
Operating Ratio for Bus 1.09
0.89 1.1
Operator
Breakdown/ 10000 km 2.01 2.3 2.04
Accidents / 100000 Km 0.72 1.65 1.53
Avg.Speedof BRTS 24.2 Km/Hr 24.0 Km/Hr 23.58 Km/Hr

15. Sample Size: 472
Modal Shift*
100%
9.13%
90%
2.76%
9.55%
80%
4.10%
70% 31%
60%
50%
40%
39.91%
30%
20%
10%
0%
AMTS Shared Rickshaw Rickshaw 2-Wheeler 4-wheeler Cycle Walk Drop
* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

16. JANMARG Miss Trips/ Incidents Analysis*
Total No. Of Miss Trip During this month :139 ,Out of that following are the major cause for that:-
25 22 22
20 17
15
10 11
8 9
10 7
5 6
3 3 4
5 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1
0
Total No. Of Miss Trip During Last month :147 ,Out of that following are the major cause for that:-
18
16
14 16
Problem No.
15
12
13 13
10 12 12
8 10
9
6 8
4 6 6 6
5
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 4
0
Total Loss Due Loss Due Loss Due
Total Run Total Km. % of loss Loss Due
Schd. To S.O. % % To % To Bus % Extra kms
Kms. Loss Km. To Traffic
Kms. staff Accidents Defect
24th
632885 628174 5423 0.86% 1578.4 29.11% 1014.7 18.71% 315.9 5.83% 2513.8 46.36% 636.9
Month
25th
Month * Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

17. Speed Analysis*
on Route based on ITS Real Time information dated 9th Nov. 2011
Route Line Speed (KMPH)
RTO-
1 23.47
Maninagar
Anjali -
2 25.60
Naroda
RTO-Naroda 3 24.08
RTO - SLP 4 22.56
Janmarg System Average Speed for all the
routes are 23.58 Km/Hour
* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

18. Bus Docking Survey (Morning)* Samples: 4 per bus
100.00%
90.00%
80.00%
70.00%
60.00%
50.00%
40.00%
30.00%
20.00%
10.00%
0.00%
6912 1242 5823 8172 9172 9466 9302 8001 9072 4365 9109 4302
Perfect Almost Perfect Slighty far Far
* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

19. Sex and Occupation Distribution of BRTS Users*
Sex Distribution Occupation Distribution Sample Size: 472
3% Sevice
7%
Business/Professional
28%
36%
Casual Worker
Male
Female Student
64% 42%
7%
Housewife
13% Retied
Average Household Monthly income Private Vehicle Ownership
3%
(in Rs.)
9% 14%
Less than 7,500
41%
7500- 20,000
48%
20,000-40,000
40,000- 80,000
Greater than 80,000
39% 35% N/A
11%
2-Wheeler 4-Wheeler N/A
* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

20. JANMARG User Feedback Survey (Opinion of BRTS Users)*
24th Month
Staff in Uniform
Ticket payment easy
Stops clean
Prices fair
Service is reliable and comfortable
Behaviour of staff is good and helpful
Behaviour of driver is good and helpful
Driven safely
Clean buses
Good frequency
Safe to cross road
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes No
25th Month
Staff in Uniform
Ticket payment easy
Stops clean
Prices fair
Service is reliable and comfortable
Behaviour of staff is good and helpful
Behaviour of driver is good and helpful
Driven safely
Clean buses
Good frequency
Safe to cross road
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
* Op. Cit, JANMARG, CEPT University

21. Lessons Learned
• Public transport is, in effect, a business;
– Cannot run well without information on;
• product quality, efficiency of business processes
• customer number/characteristics/satisfaction
• Monitoring of particular importance for BRT:
– Integrated high quality system sensitive to
performance of a number of elements
– Usually operated/maintained by several separate
entities with a single independent system
integrator/manager
• Most important use of information is internal city
specific benchmarking
• Credibility and customer good will are enhanced
by transparency and openness