Laserfiche WebLink
<br />7B <br />Page 37 <br /> <br /> <br />egories of budgets and the work plan items into the four <br />recommended program areas. <br /> <br />Action Items: <br /> <br />I. Work with funders to revise the work plans to <br />reflect the four recommended Program Areas. <br />Discuss the recommended objectives. strategies <br />and measures of effectiveness and incorporate <br />them as appropriate into the work plans. <br /> <br />2. Revise the budget categories into the four recom- <br />mended program areas. <br /> <br />3. Determine a methodology for a sample time and <br />motion analysis to allocate administrative costs <br />to program areas for existing programs. Segrega- <br />tion of costs should include commuter incentives. <br />school incentives, employer support services. <br />employer based-shuttles, and commuter-based <br />shuttles. <br /> <br />Priority Recommendation #2: Reallocate resources in order to <br /> <br />meet Alliance goals and objectives in the following order of <br /> <br />priority: <br /> <br />I. Outreach to large employers to use ridesharing <br />and try transit incentives. <br /> <br />2. Campaigns aimed at medium and small employers <br />in targeted geographical areas to provide rideshar- <br />ing and try transit incentives. School Pool carpool <br />incentives are included in this category. <br /> <br />3. Employer-based shuttle programs. <br /> <br />4. Employer-based support services: emergency ride <br />home. <br /> <br />5. Community based shuttles. <br /> <br />6. Bicycle parking incentives. <br /> <br />Rationale for the above prioritization is as follows: Ben- <br />efit/ cost information is not available. Cost-effectiveness <br />data is available only at the aggregate level and not by <br />individual Alliance program. Therefore, the ranking of <br />effectiveness is based on available cost-effectiveness data, <br />the prioritization framework described above, stake- <br />holder input and professional judgment of the consulting <br />team. <br /> <br />As new state initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emis- <br />sions such as AB 32 and SB 375 are implemented, there <br />may be additional resources available to develop addi- <br />tional innovative Alliance programs. This may require a <br />re-thinking of the order of six priorities presented above. <br /> <br />Ridesharing and Incentives: The Alliance incentive pro- <br />grams were found to be highly effective programs. In <br />order to achieve an additional market penetration of <br />30,000 additional employees in San Mateo County over <br />a three-year period, significant resources will be required <br />to achieve this objective. A proportion of Alliance ef- <br />forts have been historically targeted at large employers. <br />and the Alliance also has devoted some resources to the <br />small employers. Additional staff resources would need <br />to be allocated in employer outreach to small and medi- <br />um employers as well as directly to commuter themselves <br />if the 30,000 commuter threshold is to be achieved by <br />2013. <br /> <br />Employer-based shuttles: The employer-based shuttles <br />were very popular with stakeholders and provide high <br />visibility results to the Alliance and help to generate <br />additional ridership on CalTrain and BART. Available <br /> <br />35 <br />